The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-05-05
THE NJ. L. CONFERENCE.
A Proposition to Leave the Woman Question
to the Annual Conferences.

New YORK, May 4-Bishop c. d. Foss, Of
Minneapolis. presided at to-day's session of the
General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal
Church. Rev. II. j. Liebhardt, of the Central
German Conference, opened with prayer. The
order of the day. continued from yesterday, was
the debate on the report Of the committee on
eligibility of women az lay delegates to the con-
ference There was large audience present
The debate was opened by Rev. Dr. AsB.
Leonard, Of Cincinnati Conferences. An effort
was made to close the debate at II, but failed
Rev. DR.. Leonard began by saying he had re-
ceived a number Of anonymous letters warning
him not to speak in favor Of admitting women.
He was a strong advocate of the admission
of women. Replying to DR.. Buckley's speech,
he cited the laws of the church, and argued that
they favored the women's side of the case. He
said that certain insinuatons in the address Of
the bishops were surprising Women have
been regarded laymen from the beginning.
They are allowed to vote in the lay conferences
for delegates, and If they are entitled to vote
they are entitled to seats. 1t Was understood
in 1872, whom it was agreed TO admit lay dele
gates to the General Conferences, that the door
was open for the admission of women. DR..
Leonard claimed that DR.. Queal had made GER
tain statements about the law of the church
which proved the stand he the speaker had
taken was correct
DIR. Queal arose and said that DR.. Leonard
had misrepresented the case. DIR. Leonard
closed by saying that If women were not to he
recognized they should not be allowed to vote
for the election Of lay delegates.
Rev. John Miley, president of Drew Theologi-
CO.. Seminary. of the New YORK Conference.
spoke against the admission OF women. He
said If the laws of the church were properly in
terpreted they would prove that women are not
eligible, and then. besides, no one wanted them
in the General Conference. If the question Of
the admission OF women were submitted to a
vote of the women in the church, nine out OF
ten would vote against the admission OF women
delegates.
Rev. J. r. Day, of New York Conference,
argued against the admission Of women. When
the law was passed for the admission Of lay
delegates. he said, il was never intended that
women should be delegates TO the General Con-
ference. 1t was proposed to-day to make one OF
the most stupendous pieces OF legislation
that has been known 70 Christendom. He was
not opposed to women doing the work that she
Is capable of doing. but he did not think that
she should ntrude upon the General Conference.
The question had never been submitted to
general vote of the church. But the question
vas not settled, and it should be submitted to
vote. Nothing should be done incautiously.
occupy. II women are admitted. just 90 many
men will be displaced and the force OF the lay
delegation would be weakened. Woman has not
the necessary experience. If she 10 admitted
she should come in as an added force, aud not
as a weakening force.
Gen. Samuel Fl. Hurst, dairy and food CON-
commissioner, of Ohio. the first layman TO gain
the floor. defended the right of women to adj
mission. He alluded to the opponents of the
women as 'old fogies.' He criticised the bish-
OBS address The episeopacy be said, does
not interpret the law of the church, but the
General Conference does. The conference Is to
be considered as the Supreme Court sitting as .
body to interpret the law. Woman does not
come here as q strong minded person demanding
admittance, but she comes as the representative
Of the lay conference. The word ''laymenD was
interpreted to mean all members Of the church
not represented in the ministry. That 10 the
law. and IL women are "laymenn they are en-
titled to admission. 'sWomsn,' he continued
do more work IN the church than msn. They
are more numerous than men, The spirs OF