New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-05-14
ST. ANDREWS STATEMENT.
THE DIFFICULTY BETWEEN THAT PAR
IsH AND ST. PAULs EXPLAINED.
REASONS WHY ST. ANDREWS PEOPLE OBJECT
TO RIVAL CONGREGATION IN THEIR
NEIGHBoRHooD-MEETI OF
TRUSTEES DESCRIBED
TRUSTEES DESCRIBED.


NEIGHBoRHooD-MEET OF
TRUSTEES DESCRIBED.
Touching upon the differences of st. Pauls
and ST. Andrews Methodist Episcopal churches,
arising out of the change Of site of st. Pauls
Church. the following formal statement has been
issued
During the year 1888 St Andrews Methodist Epis-
copai Church then located in West Seventy -frst-st
resolved TO meet the demands. prospective and I'm.
medate on the West Side. by erecting new and
slxth-st between what are now known Column
bus and Amsterdam ayes. The undertaking was a
bold one. the membership at that time was only
about one hundred but, generously aided by mem
bers Of the denomination outside Of ST. Andrew s. as
nation an outlay Of S2$pgN was made, involving
mortgage loan OF $4,000 In proyidng a PAT
sondge this loan was necessarily increased but the
annual outlay for rent. before, ceased. Less than
eighteen months after the dedication of the church,
and while the Development OF me congregatlon ana
church life was progressing satisfactorily 81. Paurs
Methodst Episcopal Church iocaied at Fourth aye aye
loose upon the community what time has proved 70
to spend the money derived from the sale or the
property. but having regard for the interests OF
Gated. In November. 1891. IL came TO the knowledge
OF the officers of St. Andrews that 81. Paus trus-
Eighty-sixth-st.. within ten minutes wax of St
Andrews. and near the residences Of many Of It's
members was held and resolutions kindly, but en-
phatlcal.y protesting against ST. PauPs locating at
ana a copy sent to the trustees OF that church.
This was followed by an invitation from the then
conference with the trustees of st. Paui;s. and a
meeting Of the two boards was he'd on November
question Of location was fully discussed, and the
should not buid a church unencumbered with debt.
at the very threshold OF 4 church which. b. Incur
ring Indebtedness had provided for the needs of
the denomination In ell that vicinity for many years
to come.
AN ATTEMPT TO COMBINE THE CHURCHES
Soon after this a meeting Of the officers of the
two boards held to arrange. II possible. a COM
bination Of the ,wO societies. but st. Pau.s con-
senting to nothing which did not involve the prac-
teal destruction Of ST. Andrews the meeting ended
with nothing accomplished. Thereafter the people
OF st. Andrews rested In the belief that nothing
more was to occur to menace their peace and pros
cation in The Evening Post" the day after the
meeting mentioned OF an interview with Judge Il.
l.; Fancher presiden, OF the board Of s.. Paurs In
which he says We do not wish to interfere with
Ing. The trustees OF s. Paufs are looking Tor
site that Will be Objectionable to no Other church
9fYIo One p or near F,hav T 'e "0'' ''
In January. 1898. after an interval Of more than a
the same Site and last resort ~. Andrews
appealed to the District Board Of Church Loca-
interests from a rivalry calculated to arrest the
growth and progress Of this church. and 70 dIscour-
opmcnt Of this organization"
This board has advisory powers only but by a
mtted by St PauYs. in Eighty -sixth-st.. among
the rest but strongly recommended the selection of
action was taken Then followed series Of ne
gotlations Tith 81. James Harlem ana Grace
result. We now come down TO the recent and fnal
rently reported to have selected location at West
End-ave. and Elghty-slXth-st Convinced that that
@ gSqa a G VERY hoa s. R of
gregaiion an ignoble failure for St Pau.s. and
therefore disaster to Methodsm on the West Side.
would result. the intimatOn Of possible consOli-
dalton Of the two societies was unofhcially made
hy the president Of one board resulting In an inyi-
tation from St Pau's board TO meet 1t and DIS
cuss the matter. This invitation was accepted In
good faith ana the purpose expressed By us to
The presidents ~ the two boards At the very open
Ing al the discussion OF tho basis OF union Mt the
1ee;ng he'd or re ith Inst. II was proposed by
~. Anlrews trustees thtt from the Jay or va
eating their church and the opening Of the new
Xndew ' then not OF ds66sel ofhod Be o upon on
the new corporation, OF which st. Andrews peo-
This condition. we submit was perfectly equitable.
because st. Andrew would then cease indi-
aad Sa rScg ' c6ns ~ net the ps2Rs T04 o
deffaynS the expenses OF the new corporation and
an endowment fund for the new society.
This proposal met with the gracious response 81
the chairman. III you come TO 81. Pauls with in
d .h.cin'ss YOU VIII not be received
These words were written down when uttered |
ceivel" into St paurs Church. but Consolidation |
tieraice strongly impressed US that the disposition
t. make nutlai concessions cyinceI by the pres- |
iae had oa M or o tSe presc .2t Of 81 s' pan ff
given way 10 spirit Of arrogance and dctation. |
wholly at variance Win The spirit Of fraternity ana
harmony Al this juncture We retired Tor confer
cnce. returning soon 10 reaiirm our Views respect
word pro OF con from the other gentlemen present.
his dictum could be made. whereupon withdrew.
EFFORTS TOWARD HARMONY FRUSTRATED.
Thus sincere effort on our par, to harmon!ze
differences. and 20 find common ground upon
which 81. Andrews could stand with self-respect
and the appreciation OF the community. was frus
tratcd. apparently. by man. and not, be-
eve. with the unanimous approval OF his fellow
trustees.
Il Is IN lniisputable fact that from November
1891. until comparatively recent period but two
ne nlbers OF that board bent upon going 10
+ lehty-slxth-st and but six of the nine favored
I when We on their invitation met them to effect
As ann 5umced By The Tribune on the Sth inst. we
'Xth-st. and West End-avc. approved whether |
y unanimous vote or, not was not stated. and a
he Board OF Trustees to form at the proper time;
ions having ended. this resolution. II adopted as
eported. manlfestly meant to conciliate pub
&. Paul's statement of the Sth inst concludes
is follows The new site selected will meet ap-
lardy know how to characterlze this statement for
t Is fact that scarcely single layman Of inhu-
nee in the denomination can listen without indig-
aton 10 the suggestion Of such invasion Of the
arsh OF St Andrews This question not only
ppeals to every thoughtful Methodist Of this city
'ut to every lover OF fair play. irrespective OF de-
lines. our contention is not that the
tatute OF the State the discipline of the Church
as been violated, but that in choosing a site
ear to St. Andrews Church St. Paurs trustees
ave committed an unbrotherly and unjust act A
tsum6 Of the facts vii, conclude our statement
!. ". Andrews by prior occupancy is entitled
the territory for which she has amply provid-
a. and which she needs for the successful work
lg out OF her plans.
9 ST. Pnu's has practically no constituency resld-
lg IN that territory and H. therefore, not sup
lying urgent demand.
, The territory between Central Park and the
ver and between sixty -eighth-s and One-hundred-
ndsixth-st s already supplied with some eighteen
rOtestant churches more than sufficient for the ,
eeds OF that community for many years to come.
l. 81. Andrews desires union with St Pauls | ,
nj asks only to he left alone but rather than
q ve disastrous riyalrV thrust uDOn her nv |