The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-09-27

probability will the pulpit for the en-
suing year.
Those who heard DR.. Jeffrey's SER
mons last Sunday went away surprised
with his earnestness and there is now
a general expression of satisfaction,
that should be hattering to- the new
pastor, considering the somewhat tur-
bulent experience incident upon his ap-
poinfment
lne Herald'S account published over
a week ago Of the trouble existing in
the First church has been a topic Of
discussion in NJ. E. church circles, the
greatest stir, of course, being among
Ehe worshippers at that particular
church.
So far as it related to the troubled
condition of affairs in that congrega-
ton, which was the main feature of it
all, the report was generally pro
nounced correct by the church mem
bers, while many said that the feeling
was stronger than stated in the paper,
owing to the long series of unfortunate
Incidents in the history of the church,
Which have created feeling be-
tween members. But, as before stated,
all that seems to have been smoothedi
over now, and with harmony prevail
ing, it looks as though the congrega-
ton would enjoy an era. of peace and
good will.
One or two errors, however, crept
into the report, which would do a.
manifest injustice. The assertion that
there was a. general sentiment among
the members Of the Methodist church n
Utah against DR.. Ilif's continuance as
mission superintendent is not true. be-
cause it is ait least too broad. Then
some in the church gave it out that
such opposition was manifested in the
shape of a recommendation to Bishop
Vincent that the doctor be removed to
some other jurisdiction. Pretty much
the whole church organization joined
in this request" If such q. protest was
ever made to Bishop Vincent while he
was at Ogden it certainly was not in,
any definite or formal form, as the fol-
lowing letter written by the bishop
while on his way east conclusively
shows:
En- Route, September 10. 1896.
The Rev. Mr.. Gillian:
My Dear Sir and Brother-I have re-
ceived the article from the Salt Lake pa
per. 1t is news TO me. 1 had no formal
or :, informal protest, against Dr. Tiff.
pointment of DR.. Jeffrey. He was put
there at my own suggestion. 1 intended
that if he could not satisfy the brethren,
would as soon possible secure as
f'CAgSASAC
church. Ever since conference [ have
been working in the interest of First
church as well as of Lift, trying to Sc
cure two men who would be an honor to
the conference. DR.. lifts whole course
and conversation was full Of kindness,
betraying no i'll will toward anybody and
seeking in everything to do what seemed
BEST for the work. l frankly confess that
the slight prejudice which L entertained
before l met him was entirely removed
by his broad, sympathetic and generous
spirit L do not now know what objec-
tons men make to- DR.. Tiff. The COM
mittee from the First church did not, as
far as | can remember, protest against
his return as superintendent. Truly
yours, JOHN H. VINCENT.
Now while members may make state
ments regarding this matter and the
doctor, so long as they are not pre-
pared to put them in tangible form
and assume the responsibility for them,
they cannot count, and the letter from
Bishop Vincent must be taken as final
on this point at least.
Dr. Tiff himself denies that he has
desired to secure the pastorate Of the
First church, and is corroborated by
members. Others think differently.
ought to know his own desires best.
Regarding this and the Mabry in
cident, The Herald on Monday, Sept
81, published the following:
Friends of DR.. T. c. Tiff deny that
he has been a candidate for the pas
torate of the First M. E. church, or
that ne Cyl Gsed the appoin meat Of
DR.. Mabry, the facts being thst he
urged the appointment of Mabry in
the first instance. 1t is asserted that
the only opposition DR.. Tiff has from
any quarter is in the First NJ. Z.
church. No petition has ever been
sent to the authorities asking that DR..
lifts field of action be changed to
some other state"
That statement is correct. and there
is nothing more to be said about it.
If he used his influence to have Rev.
Jeffrey appointed, he was doubtless
prompted to do so for the good OF the
church.
In this connection it may be stated
that on Friday night eight members of
the board of trustees of the First
church held 2 meeting and thoroughly
discussed the situation. Those who at
tended were Dix, Ewing, Pells, Good
win, Robinson Eaton, Burtolf and GIL
lilan. The Tiff matter was considered
and the ACCESSIBILITY of making a state
ment to the public was discussed. AZ
ter debating the matter. however, it
was unanimously decided to let it
drop. permit old bones to moulder and
let bygones be bygones.
DR.. A. G. Ewing. one of the leading
members Of the First church, was
called upon yesterday and expressed
himself on the situation.
II am satisfied that no protest was
forwarded to Bishop Vincent during
the Ogden conference; at least none
had been officially authorized by the
trustees of the First church, he
said. 81 have no knowledge of Dr.
Tiff wanting to fill our pulpit, and am
inclined to believe that ne has not en-
tertained such an idea The First
church regrets being mixed up in any
controversy, and the board of trustees
held a meeting last night, discussed
the affair very thoroughly and decided
10 let the matter drop. AS far as Rev
Jeffrey is concerned. think the con-
gregg ton is satisfied with him. and
he will preach for us until the bishop
sends another man"
7. c. Robinson, another member of
the board of trustees, expressed him
self substantially as did DR.. Ewing.
II do not think thera is such an o.
rosition to DR.. IliT outside of the
First church, and I am convinced that
was sent to Bishop Vincent he said.
Tiff IS well liked. genera lily spea king
Another member Of the church ex-
pressed a very different opinion. but
did not care to have any newspaper
controversy with his brethren, and de-
clined to be quoted over his name
just What You Want
in silk, cotton and wool hosiery, all