The age-herald., 1902-05-14
TAKE UP
 WAR CLAIM QUESTION

preaching general conference, soon to as- semble in Dallas, Tex, I hope and con fidently expect that those deceptive meth- ods will be officially disavowed and con demned.
 "I have interpreted the final action of the Senate as entirely exonerating the church from blame in the case, and as eliminating the question of returning the money to the government This seems to me to be the obvious meaning of the res olution in response to the communica- ton of the bishops to the Senate.
 But I find some extreme men still in- sisting upon the necessity of returning the money to the government. Such a course appears to me to be entirely im- practicable, not to say impossible, and as being open to many objections of both right and propriety. It might even in some quarters be construed as a nagging of the Senate by the church for the sake of making spectacular profession of ex- traordnary virtue
 "As you were a member of the commit tee of the Senate upon the report of which the action was taken, I take the liberty of addressing to you this inquiry, if my view of the matter is correct. If it will not give you too much trouble, will thank you to not only give me your opin- ion but the opinion of any other Senators who may feel free to express themselves on the subject
 When the facts connected with the pay ment of the large commission were made n1ibIfa and oriticfGms foi1nd exnrecciop both on the floor of the Senate and else where, relative to certain occurrences at the time of the passage of the biil the bishops of the Methodist Episcopal church, South addressed to the presiding officer of the Senate letter signed by Robert K. Hargrove, secretary of the College of Bishops, Nashville, Tenn which while affirming the justness of the claim, insisted that the church "could not afford to accept it as a gratuity or on conditions refecting upon its honor," and that if by affirmative action it is de- clared that the passage of the bill was due to misleading statements proper steps would be taken for the return of the money to the government.
 This letter was referred by the Senate to the committee on claims, which com
 
 The committee, after full considera- ton of the same in connection with the investigation previously made, reported on January g, 1899, the following resolu- tion to the Senate:
 Resolved, That the report of the com mittee made July B. 1898, be approved and that no censure should rest upon the Methodist Episcopal church, South, for the misstatements and copcealments of the book agents in connection with the passage of the bill for the payment of the claim referred to in the letter of the bishops now under consideration; that the injury resulting therefrom affected only the benefciaries of the fund, and not the United States, and the Senate should take no further action in the mat ter"
 After this resolution had been upon the calendar of the Senate for nearly six weeks it was, on the Fist day of February adopted by the Senate nomine dissenti- ente.
 The letter signed by Senators Clay and Bacon and concurred in by IS other sena- tors Is as follows:
 ''The simple statement of this history of the case would seem to leave no room for questioning the obligation devolving further duty upon the church in con- nection herewith. The letter of the bishops, above quoted was practically an offer to repay the money to the gov- ernment so far as 1t could be made through the Senate of the United States The resolution adopted by the Senate was a distinct reply to that offer, declining to recognize the propriety of the repayment by the church of this money to the gov- ernment. In view of this record, we are unable to see upon what grounds there can be based the contention that the church should make a second offer and invoke second refusal fI,om the gov ernment, or any department thereof The report of the committee and the resolu- ton, both adopted by the Senate, in ex- plicit terms exonerate the church from all blame or ground for criticism, for anything which occurred in connection with the passage of the bill and is a clear expression of opinion that there Is no obligation on the part of the church to repay the money to the government or to make further offer to do so."