The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-05-13


Dr. Lsnahan offered q resolution provid-
Ing that the bishops might. In follow
ing the rules already in vogue, count
five years IN every ten for the appointmen mt
OF the itinerant ministry. That is to per-
init minister to return to q charge after
the lapse Of five years. This is simply to
make tho rule more definite.
resolution was introduced by the book
|! agents Of the church calling for revision
OF the church law relating To the manage
ment of the publishing = houses. On account
OF the fact that part Of the law had be-
come obsolete. DIR. Hunt wanted the COM
mittee on the book concerns to make the
revision and then report the action to the
referred 10 the committee on revisals. lt
went TO the committee on book concerns
Several freedman's aid resolutions were
introduced. and then the regular order was
suspended for the purpose OF resuming the
discussion OF the constitutional revision.
DIR. J. A. Gouchcr. of Baltimore, first took
the floor. Speeches were limited TO ten
minutes. DR.. Goucher did not agree with
the conclusion of the constitutional COM
mission.
DIR. r. r. Bristol, of Chicago, the next
speaker. held that there was no such thing
as the constitution of the General Confer
ence apart from the constitution of the
Methodist Episcopal Church. The confer
ence was the creature of tho church, not
the church the creature of the con florence.
What the conference shOnld do was to de-
was. and that would settle the whole Ques-
ton. Applause. THE laymen at this
conference hold their seats hero by statu-
tory enactment" said DIR. Bristol This
conference can at any time. by statutory
enactment. admit the equal lay representa-
tion." Applause.
WOULD NOT LET HIM FINISH.
Judge Lawrence. of Ohio. now got the
floor. He was given the most profound at
ua Oh Of Oh;
discussion was to determine what the con-
stitution of the Methodist Episcopal Oh urch
was. He agreed with DR.. Bristol in the
statement that the constitution of the
church embraced the constitution of the
General Conference, but he held that the
plan of lay represen tation did not depend
upon statutory enactment, for one OF the
restrictive rules had been changed consti-
tutIonally to admit the laymen. They held
their seats by constitutional right, not by
statutory amendment. Judge Lawrence
was caught In the midst OF . long sentence
by the sound of tho gavel calling time.
A motion was made 10 extend his time, but
it was defeated.
Dr. Kynett wanted to contradict state
ment made by Judge Lawrence with re-
Of Indiana, had the floor by right of prior.
| ity in springing into the arena, A heated
| contest followed between DIR. Kynett and
several Others. who thought he should not
allow himself To catch fire because some
one had said that his speech of the pro-
| vI0us day was revolutionary. DR.. kynett
| was shut out for the time being.
DR.. Medley, Rev. Douglas. Row. Fl. Ridge
way of the Rock Riye Conference, Dr.
trois and Mr.. j. Fl. Murray 20 of Pennsylva-
MIA were each given voice In the discus
sion. Mr.. Murray is n lawyer with n voice
that reaches away ont into tho vestioule.
Il do not share" said he. "in that fear
which some of my ministerial brethren
have with regard TO the safety of the lay
| men in this body. Laughter. We are
here To stay. Applause. II our seats
are In danger the seats of the minis
tiers are also In danger. because there has
been no legislation on this particular ques-
ton since 1872, and the rights of the minis
tiers in this body rest upon exactly the
same act that the seats of the laymen rest
upon. We are with yon. brethren. Great
applause.l do not hold that the act was
CONSTITUTIONAL exactly. but it is stable
enough to stand all the same. The plan
may have lacked some of the elements of
constitutIOnnlity. but il 10 q legislative
law. 1t can be amended. Ii is capable Of
Improvement; all human law IA. The lay
men should and will be given equal repre-
sentation in the General Conference" tAp-
pl1use.
When DR.. Kynett finally succeeded in
curing recognition he was greeted with ap-
plause. lie proceeded to q refutatiOn of
the remarks that had been made the day
| inconsistent attitude and he also replied
to the speech of Judge Lawrence
who had characterized DR.. Kynett's
opinion as being revolutionary.
DO such thing as the constitution of the
General Conference. 1t was the constitu-
| tion of the NJ. T.. Church. If this docu-
ment was simply the constitution of the
| General Conference then there were thou
sanGs of ministers Who were not held by
any constitutional enactment because they
were not members of the General Confer
| ence. Applause.
p. BUCKLEY AND KYNETT AT WAR.
DR.. j. NJ. Buckley created laugh by
witty sallies. and then declared that he
had no sympathy with the statement that
| there WAS no such thing as a constitution
| OF the General Conference. Prior to 1850
| every thing in the Discipline was the con-
| stitution of the church. Since that time
many root ideas had been added. DR..
! Buckley again affirmed that DR.. Kynett
| had made statements In the conference of
| 1872 that he now contrAdicted. A sharp
alteration between the two gentlemen
| then took place.
| DIR. J. B. Graw, of New Jersey, said he
| was weary of the discussion, and he moved
tho previous question. The previous ques-
ton was called. That was tho mendlnent
| offered by DR.. Bridgemont TO amend the
motion of the report The amendment was
| tabled.
| Dr. Goucher offered substitute. knock
| ing out nearly al of the preamble and de-
| ciarIng that the section OF enactment with
| relation to lay representation partook of the
! nature of legislative enactment. but the
| principle was constitutional. The substi-
| tute Was adopted by an overwhelming vote.
| DR.. Medley spran q TO his feet and NOV ed that
| further consideration of the report be post
poned until Friday before taking further
| action.
Dr. Buckley moved. as q 81 bstitute, to
| postpone consideration Of the subject in
| definitely, and that the report be printed
| III the church papers TO be reported by the
commission at the next General Confer
| once. great wrangle then followed IN
which several Sneakers tried to get the
1loor DR.. Buckley's motion to indefinitely
| POSTPONE tho constitutional question was
carried. DIR. Kynett called for q vote by
orders. but 1t was not granted by the con-
| ference. The vote on indefinite postpone
| ment of the whole IF the subject of the
constitutional report stood as follows:
| Yeas, a:sS: nays. 100. The result was greeted
by applause. The entire conference seemed
| tn take q deep breath of relief when this
| question had been thus disposed of.
Following Ia the full text of tho substi-
tute for the report of the constitutional
| commission, which was adop pied by the con-
feronoe:
The section of the General Conference in the
| Discipline of lS0S. as adopted by the General
| Conference of lSoS, has the nature and force OF
| notifications as have been adopted since that
| time IN accordance with the provisions for