The Portland daily press., 1897-04-20

take his seat as he WAS out of order,
protested against Mr.. Borry's motion be-
ing put TO vote. He was finally told
that motion to lay on the table is al
ways in order and he sat aown after de-
mandln2 that the vote on this matter
should be taken by call of the roll Of
the conference
Rev. Mr.. Lindsay of Portland here
tried to get the floor but the chair at
first refused to recognize him. When he
could finally make himself heard he said {:
Mr.. President l arise to q question of
privilege as memb ber of this conference.
l want to know whether or not member
of this conference has the right TO make
two motions at the same time, Mr..
Munger has moved the passage of his re-
solutions and now moves that the vote
be taken by call of the roll OF the con-
ference.
Rev. MIR. Luce-'I think he has the
right"
Mr.. Lindsay" All right If that is your
decision on the matter.''
Mr.. Luce, the presiding officer, now
called for a vote on Mr.. Munger's motion
to poll the conference by yea and nay
vote.
After more delay the vote was taken
and Mir. Muuger's motion prevailed. The
president was obliged to appeal to the
members of the conference "Not to for
get that they were Christian ministers
engaged in doing Christian work" in
order TO restore order.
Some one asked the chair if the rules of
the conference did not require a vote of 25
mem bera of the conference to poll the
Louise by a yea and nay vote. This mat
ter was d scussed at some length but it
WAS finally decided ny the chair that the
yea and nay vote had been called for by
at least 25 Members.
Amid considerable excitement the con-
ference was then polled by an yea vote
lton the motion of Mr.. Berry to lay Mr..
Munger's motion ON the table, This
vote proceeded amidst considerable ex-
citement. One member voting against
the motion to lay the matter on the
| table would shout tDo'' in such loud
and emphatic tone of voice that the dig
atty of the conference would be forgot
Ell and the response would be greeted
with laughter aud applause. AS mem
ber after member voted against Mr.. Ber-
| ry's motion the enthusiasm of the confer
ence increased and almost every vote in
the negative was al pauaed. Several
mem hers as their nam es were calIed uuok
tie floor and endeavored to explain why
they voted 'sno'' Or 'syes'' as the case
might be. But Mr. Luce WAS in hurry
to have the matter settled III order to get
through with the business of the confer
ence which had been set aside by the
resolution of Mr.. Munger and in many
cases prevented the members from giving
an explanation as to their reasons for
voting ia the matter.
The vote was then announced by the
secretary of the conference as Al nays
and 10 yeas, and the motion to lay the
Enouncement was greeted with applause
Tbs vote as it stood recorded by the
secrstary was as follows:
| sNays-Joseph Hans. Charles Munger
SiIas NJ. Emerson, William III. Eoster r,
John Nj. Woodbury., Nathan d. Center,
Ivrael Luce, Charles Z. Springer. George
W. Barber, GershorD +. Cobb, Ruel H
kimball, Francis Grosvenor, Hezskie
Chase, Charles W. Gallagher, Frank W.
Smith, james II. Trask, James Nixon,
Bonj. G. Wentworth, George G. Andrews,
! Sylvester Hooper, Oliver S. pillsbury,
William +. Marshall, David b. Holt,
Johu R.CliHord. Melvin Il. King, Albert
A. Lewis, Charles f. Parsons, DAME,
K. Ford, Hosea Hewitt, Inslsy A. bean.
William B. Eldredge, Woodbury. P. Mer
rill, Chester G. Fhelan, Cyrus Puring
ton, BENZ. F. Pickett, William II. Cow,
ell. Gaorge F. Millward, Wilmot z. Lord
William eastman, John B. .Howard.-41
Yeas-Asbury q. Tratton, William S
Jones. George d. Lindsay, G. A. South
ard, Edward o. Thayev, Wilbur f. Berry
Chas. S. S.Cumminas. Howard A. Clifford
Edward G. Strout, William b. Duke
shire.
Rev. John r. Clilfcrd took the fool
after the vote had been announced ant
made quite a lengthy speech against tht
adoption of the resolution. He said
| GAuOh oAHu oIOUuol m QAEor LINN bhll
T:any would endorse, but there is feel
ing that the action which was taken last
fall was sufficient. I am in favor oi
sending board of visitors to Kents' Il Ill,
which L still maintain is our school
have no defense to make in relation to
the election OF brewer to this board OF
trustees. l don't tske very kindly to the
words which have been uttered By many
members of that board in defending their
action. While we can't really clnim to
own Keuts' Hill we have always regarded
it as our school and we mus6 try to bind
| Con tinued on second Page,