The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-05-05
Her Eligibility as Lay Delegate
Still the Theme Of the Methodist
Episcopal General Conference.
DR., Leonard Replies to the Argu-
ments Of DR.. Buckley.
He Takes Their Right to Seats as q
Matter of Course.
Another Reverend Gentleman Says II
Women are Admitted Just So Many
Men are Displaced. Which
Would Be Unfortunate.


New York, May 4.-Bishop @. d,
Foss, OF Minneapolis, presided at today's
session of the general conference of the
Methodist Episcopal church. The Rev.
ii. J. Liebhart, 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 lay delegates TO
the conference. There was a large audience
present. The debate was opened by the
Rev. DIR. A. II. Leonard, of the Cincinnati
conference. An effort was made to pass
resolution closing the debate at II o'clock,
but it failed. The Rev. DIR. Leonard began
by saying he had received number OF
anonymous letters warning him not TO
speak in favor OF admitting women. Re
plying 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 insinuations in the
address OF the bishops were surprising.
| hbill lllNt iffH INktiAl''l nl'll Hhill
the beginning. They are allowed 10 vote
in the lay conference for delegates, and il
they are entitled TO vote they are entitled
10 seats II was understood in 1872
when il was agreed 10 admit lay
delegates TO the general conference that
the door was open for the admission Of
women. DIR. Leonard claimed that Dr.
| Queal had made certain statements about
/ the law Of the church which proved the
stand he (the spoaker) had taken was cor
rect. Dr. Queal aruse and said that DIR.
| Leonard had misrcprcscntcd. DIR. Leonard
closed by saying that II women were not
20 be recognized they should not be
! allowed 10 vote for the election OF lay dele
/ gates. The Rev. John Miloy. president oi
the Drew Theological seminary, Of the
New York conference, spoke against the
admission Of women. lie said II the laws
of the church were properly interpreted
they would prove that women were not
eligible, and then, besides, no one wanted
them In the general conference. II the
! question of the admission Of women were
submitted 10 vote of the women In the
church nine out Of ten would vote against
! the admission OF women delegates.
The Rev. j. II. Day, Of the New York
conference, argued against the admission
of women. When the law was passed
Tor the admission Of lay delegates, hc said,
IL was never intended that women should
be delegates 30 the general conference IL
| was proposed today 10 make Que Ol the
most slupcndous pieces OF legislation that
las been known 10 Christcndom. lie
was not opposed 10 woman doing the work
that she h capable Of doing. lie did not
think that she should intIudc upon the
| general conference. The question had
never been submitted % n general vote oi
the church. Before thc question was set.
! tied il should be- submitted to vote.
Nothing should be- done incautionsly.
We do not know what place We want
women "a occupy. II women arr admit
ted lust NJ many men will be displaced.
The force oi the lay delegation would be
weakened. Women have not the ncccs-
snry experience. II she IL admitted she
should come IN as an added force aud not
a. a weakening force.
Gen. samuel IL. IIurst, dairy and
food commissioner II Ohio, the iirlt
layman 10 gain the ilo0r, defended
the right Of women b. admission. III
alluded TO the opponents Of the women
as cold iogics." lie criticised the bish.
ops address. The EpiscOpacy. hc said,
darcs not interpret the law Of the church,
but the general conference does. The
conference Il b. b. considered ~ the ~.
prcmc court sitting as a body 10 interpret
the law. Woman docs not come here q,
strong minded person demanding al
mitiancc. but she comes as the representa-.
tive Of the lay conference. The worl
"laymcn" was interpreted 30 mean al
members Of the church not represented
Ia the ministry. That h the law, and i
women are "lnymon' thoy are entitled g
admission. Women, he continued, dC
morc work in the church than the men
The spirit oi the ago is against the oppo
nonts oi woman aud the law h against
them. Tho general conference OF 1871
settled The question of the rights oi tlI,
slave aud today the ChuIch will settle the
rights Of the women.
Prof q. J. Little, oi Syracuse university
followed Mr.. llurt. lie said be- was mol
Ia favor oi the admission Of women NJ ih,
present TING, because the church NJ larrC
had not expressed an opinion on the sub
jcct. lie wanted women ~ NJ there, bu
when they came be- wanted them 10 con
siituiionally and by the consent Of th'
| MnulN tuuttUs 80
The Rev. y. II. Nealy, Of Philadelphia
said he WIS In iavurol submitting the qucs
ton 10 the annual conferences. lie Olcw,
the following amendment ~ the report o
the committees
But since there II great interest IN thi
question. and since thc church generally
should be consulted IN regard ~ such ~
, important matter, therefore
Resolved, That We submit 30 The annua
. conferences the proDosition 10 amend thl
second restrictive rule by adding the word
"and slil delegates may bo men q
Z women" after the words two lay dele
/. gates for an annual conference" ~ that
will rcadi "Nor Of more than two lay del
cgatcs Tor an annual conference, and Eiil
delegates may BE- men or women
3 The amendment was seconded by Dr
b Payson, and will be voted " al the clos
/. Of the debate.
4 leslie NJ. shaw, a lawyer from Dc
AlOincs, argued that women arU eligible
lie urgcd that they should be seated q
p the present general conference, and ih
F. question of their eligibility submitted :
+. the annual conferences aiicrward.
r Alden spcgro, of New Englfnd, spok
a In favor u DR.. Ncaly's amendment, an
1 Louis Il. fiskc, Of Detroit, president Of Al
= bion college. opposed u.
Gov. L. G. Lounsbury, VI Connecticut