Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1883-06-20
Presiding Elder Noe on the Boundary
Question.

X
Elder Noe and the comments thereon
from the Vermont Christian Messenger.
Presiding Elder Noe of Burlington
district sends the following. with request
for its publication. We have no desire TO
open the columns of the MESSENGER for
the discussion of the boundary question
and admit tho article because ii has
already been published in other papers as
though it were conclusive in refutation of
the report of the committee of reference
appointed by the conference, and is now
forwarded to the MESSENGER for publica-
ton on the ground that as matter of
justice it should appear in answer to said
report.
Editor Vermont Christian MeSScnger:-
There seems 10 be such a misapprehersion
of facts in the report of the committee
appointed at the late session of the Yer.
mont conference, TO which was referred
the question of the boundary between the
Vermont and the Troy conferences, and
which report was published in the Messen-
ger ; and us said report fatly contradicts
the most reliable statements made on the
floor of the Vermont conference by such
men as Samuel Huntington, Judge Carney.
Hon. l.. Ii. Kellogg. G. d. Thrall and
other laymen as well as several ministers,
men who live in the territory in question,
and who know the actual condition of the
churches, and is made in the face of a
memorial which was before the committee
signed by large proportion of the official
men of the district. 1t seems TO me that
truth, justice and fairness demand that q
sta ement be made of known facts.
1t should also be stated, that the COM
mittee which prepared this report was
made up of the most partisan men of the
conference in this boundary question ;
and that the conference refused to give
the Burlington district single man on
the committee, although the custom of
the conference is to make up all commit
tees with representative from each dis
trict. And when request was made
that strong and influential committee
appointed by the district stewards of
Burlington district who bore memorial
signed by large body of the official men
of the district, have the privilege of ad-
dressing the conference on the subject for
which they had been appointed, the con.
ference endeavored to send the whole
matter to this cast.iron committee; and it
was only after a struggle that the privi-
lege of being heard before the conference
was granted them.
The committee in their published report
referred to, used the following language: :
"It has been stated in the public press,
and in debate upon this conference floor
that the former union of Burlington dis
trict with the Vermont conference from
1860 to 1868 was disastrous to that district; ;
while the official statistics show the con-
trary to be true in relation to the spiritual,
numerical and financial condition in 1868
as compared with 1867
am not aware that statistics show the
spiritual condition of district except
indirectly by the numerical increase or
decrease. Statistics do not speak of the
intense excitement which shook the dis
trict, of conventions held, of newspaper
controversies, which necessarily checked
the tide of prosperity which the district
had enjoyed for years.
At the conference session of 1868, the
presiding elder, Rev. Bennett Eaton, a man
| of precious memory, candid, fair and
noble minded, stated in his report, ms
published in the conference minutes "It
was an unfortunate day for the district
when it was severed from its former con.
necton and attached to the Vermont
conference. This was the statement of
the presiding elder Of the district at the
close of the eight years; and no man was
in position to know as we'll as he the
exact state of things. In regard TO the
statistics of church property, had there
been no church built or improvements
made the natural rise of property between
1860 and 1868 was large. The fairest
showing of statistics is the report ol
members and probationers. Here are the
figures. The charges transferred from
the Troy to the Vermont conference in 1866
as printed in the Troy conference min
utes of that year reported 2lGl members
and 247 prObationers. The same charges
in 1868 reported 20G5 members and 3jG
probationers; 100 Of those probationcrs
being in the Burlington church. Thus
after eight years the district had So less
members and 100 more probationers
while the same district had gained in ten
years previous 10 1860, 5Sl members and
probationers. The St.Alhans district, which
was also transferred to the Vermont confer
ence in 1860, during the same eight
years to 1868, lost Ill members and 1O3
probationers. The greater loss of the
st. Adams district may have been owing
to the fact that presiding elder and
ministers from the old Vermont conference
were stationed on the district during the
eight years, while the Burlington district
successfully resisted such changes. The
two transferred districts in 1868, after
eight years of enforced connection with
the Vermont conference had an aggregate
of 2lO less members and probationns thar
they had in 1860. If it be said: "Thest
| were years of war; how does if hammer
, that the remaining districts left il
the Troy conference, during the same
years made an aggregate gain of 273s
members and probatoners? 1t is alsC
: fact, as shown by the official records
that while the St. Adams district in ter
, years from 1850 to 1860 gained in member
ship 283 more than the Burlington distric
did in the same time, yet the Burlington
district during twelve years of restored re
lation to Troy conference from 1868 to 1880
, gainod 22o more members than the St
a Albans district did in 20 years from 1866
TO 1880. 1t is evident to any but th