The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1898-05-14
NEWARK CONFERENCE
It's Genesis and History Told
by Rev. James M. Free
man, D. D. Of the
M. E. Church.
new JERSEY IN METH0DISM
Epworth League Convention
in Millville-
the Churches.

the Churches.
The following interesting historical
paper was read at the recent meeting of
| the Newark Methodist Episcopal Confer
ence held at Calvary Church, East
| Orange. The author is the Rev. James M.
Freeman, D.. d.
The first American Conference of Meth
odist preachers assembled in Philadelphia
in July, 1713.A its close ten preachers
| were assigned to six different appoint
| ments. Two of these ten preachers were
| sent TO New Jersey, thus identifying our
territory with the earliest official records
| of Methodism in this country. Before this
time, however, some of the travelling
| Methodist evangelists had found their
way to different parts of the State, es-
pecially to that portion which constituted
the highway between the cities of New
York and Philadelphia, each Of which
was an important strageg1c point. Inc
Methodist preachers who went from one
| city to another found it convenient to
| stop on the way at different places, and
IN every place they visited they proclaim
ed their message. Besides this, the
| preachers who came to the city of New
York crossed the Hudson River OCCASION
| ally, and preached the Gospel to the
| scattered settlements in the neighborhood
Among these early itinerants were Lieu
tenant Webb, Francis Asbury, and
George Shadford. So successful were
| these early efforts that at the meeting of
the Conference in 1918 two hundred mem
bers were reported in New Jersey.
From this time we find New Jersey
mentioned among the appointments oil
every Conference. In 1883 two events
| occurred worthy of special notice. For
preachers are called Conferences of the
Methodist Episcopal Church" Before
this their proceedings had been known
as Some Conversations between the
Preachers in Connection with the Rev.
Mr.. John Wesley. but the organ4zatloi,
necessary. 1t was in 17s5 also
that the work was for the tirst
time divided into sections ae-
cording to the different geograph-
zeal locations. Each section was assigned
70 the general oversight of an elder,
the term presiding claer" not having yet
come into use. In that year enc OF these
sections was placed unaer the charge OF
Thomas S. Chew, ana Included among. its
eight appointments, West Jersey nast
ISOLATED New York, Long Island and
three places in distant parts to be
reached by sea.
In 1891. when the term presiding elder
was for the first time used, John McClas-
key had charge OF a section which in
Guided the whole Of New Jersey and
the different Conferences met for the first
time under different names, an arrange
ment which had been provided a year
previous. The various sections had no
distinctive title until lovl, when they were
called districts" each having an appre-
pirate geographical name, though the
belonged are not given. New jersey
District" at his time had seven appoint
inents, including Newburg, n. X, and SIX
teen preachers, besides the presiding
elder; it was doubtless connected with
the Philadelphia Conference. though this
is not definitely stated. In the following
year 1902, when the names of the various
Conferences were published, together with
the districts and appointments belonging
to each. the Philadelphia Conference
reached from the peninsula on the east
| ern shore of Maryland up through Della
ware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New
York west of the Hudson River, taking in
| Albany. One OF its four districts was New
Jersey.
In 1903. for the first time, statistics of
members were given by Conferences and
members. and had s appointments with II
| preachers. This Jersey District was
cont nEsst until 1drs Isl w saa .5 / was 1 dIyldea
| There were 10 appointments, "a preachers,
and $3.50 members.
| place. as a part of the Philadelphia Con-
ference-sometimes being in one district,
! varying it's title as the New Jersey Dts
trict. or the Jersey District, and some
times divided into two. known as West
! Jersey and East Jersey-until 1929, when
we find three districts, West Jersey, East
Jersey, and Asbury. having 80 appoint
Seven years later. namely, 1886, Philadel-
| phia Conference had grown SO that it in
Guided 122 ap~p2lntrnents S0o preachers,
evident that a division of the territory
was necessary. Philadelphia Conference
sent a petition to the General Conference
asking permission to divide itself into two
conferences at some time during the
quadrennium from 1896 to 1870. This petit
| ton was referred to the Committee on
Boundaries. The committee reported in
favor of dividing the Philadelphia Com
ference at once by organizing the New
| Jersey Conference, this setting off 50 APP
pointments, IS preachers, and 1850 mem
AS this left the Philadelphia Conference
| much9the larger of the two in territory
| and in church members, r. w. Pether-
bridge moved to amend the report by add
ing the North Philadelphia District to the
New Jersey Conference. This would have
| given that Conference ID more appoint
| ments, 10 more preachers, $3.50 more mem
| bers, and an addition of territory, includ-
| ing a part of the city of Philadelphia,
| and extending on the western shore OF the
| Delaware River beyond Easton as far as
| ~Strcudsburg. and some distance in the in
| terrier. The motion, however, was laid on
the table, and the boundaries were fixed
| TO 1nciuu6 the Wtt0lt u Lie 0ldlt Ol NEW
| Jersey, Staten Island, and so much of the
| States Of New York and Pennsylvania
as was then included In the Asbury Dis
trict.
On the 26th of April. 1897, the New Jer-
sey Conference met In the Ha1sey Street
| church. Newark, for its first session.
| Bishop Waugh presided. We have been
| told by aged men, now passed away, of
| the marked enthusiasm with which the
| preachers Of the new Conference began
| their work, resolving to make New Jersey
| a garden spot in Methodism. With each
succeeding years an increase of appoints
| ments, of preachers. and of members was
| reported. until In fifteen years the Confer
| ence had more han double in these par
| ticulars. The necessity of a division of the
| Conference was seen by some to be the
coming event of a few years. So intense,
however. was the Conference pride and
| LOYALTY, and so great the affection of its
| members for one another, that the subject
| Of division was not a popular one for dis
| cussion. 1t was a necessity all dreaded,
but it had to come. 1t was foundAincreas-
| ingly difficult from year to year to obtain
| places for the entertainment of the SEES
| sions, which were prolonged to weariness
| on the part of guests and hosts, each
| session lasting from seven to nine days.
| Still. there were many who strongly OPP
| posed any division; some of the fathers
| asserting that it would break their hearts
| Is dissolve Conferences relations with
| brethren beloved.
al last It became evident that some
| action was necessary In the direction of