Richmond planet., 1902-04-12
MAS ALL TRUE.
THE MEETING AT THE
FIRST BAPT. CHURCH.
Visiting Deacons and the
Records-Stormy Scenes.
Chairman Johnson
'Twixt Two.
Editor Mitchelrs Letter-Facts We're
3 Yerified-Ringing Declarations of
the Visiting Brethren.

The regular meeting of the First Bap
tist Church was held last Monday night
with Rev. w. T. johnson presiding,
Brother B. p. Vanderval clerk. Pray
ell was offered by Deacon Edinburgh
Archer of the Fifth st. Baptist Church.
The minutes of the previous meeting
were az o ted. After other routine bust
ness the report from the Deacon Board
was read.
In this there was statement that J.
r. Pollard, Esq, counsel for Nelson
Williams, Jr, had appeared before the
Deacon Board and stated that he had
asked the clerk for the application for
the meeting and which il was alleged
contained forged names, and CLERK Van
dervall had declined to give up the pa
per. Thereupon application had been
made TO the Deacon Board. This was
refused and the matter referred TO the
church.
OBJECTED TO THE LAWYER.
Brother II. +. Jonathan objected to
Lawyer Pollard. He warned the chair
man against permitting him to see the
records, not as a member of the church.
but as attorney for Nelson Williams. Jr.
The church would be charged with
furnishing information and aiding one
side. 1t had been stated that the church
wanted TO be kept out of court, bat this
would insure its being brought into
court. Brother Jonathan was insistent
and stormy scene took place.
THE CLERK WAS RIGHT.
Chairman Johnson ruled that under
ordinary circumstances any member had
a right TO see the records, bat in a case
where such a member was attorney IN a
suit, the case was different and the clerk
had acted rightly in declining TO permit
Brother Pollard to see the records. He
ruled that part of the report was out of
order.
Letters of dismission were granted. IL
was moved 20 suspend the routine bust
ness and hear from the committee from
the Deacon Board of the Fifth st. Bap-
tist Church. The committee consisting
of Deacons Edinburgh Archer, Edward
Coleman and Samuel Il. Brown had an
peared before the Deacon Board of the
First Baptist Church and had been re-
ferred to the regular church meeting.
THE FIFTH ST. BAPTIST CHURCH DEACoNs.
Deacon Archer stated that they came
upon a friendly mission to a sister
church. Brother John Mitchell, Jr. had
applied TO the Fifth st. Baptist Church
for membership in keeping with the
Baptist pelity. He had made certain
statements in letter addressed TO the
Fifth Street Baptist Church. He want
ed of know whether or not these state
ments were true. He presented the let
ter to Brother Mitchell and the request
was made that it be read
WANTED HIM TO BE DEFINITE.
Deacon J. @. Farley desired Deacon
Archer to state specifically what he de-
sired to know. Name one thing'. said
he. Deacon Archer pointed to the letter
and stated that the statements We're in
the letter.
Then Brother Jonathan moved that the
communication from Brother Mitchell
be read. Brother Hill offered substi-
tute that the records of the church be
read. Tis was agreed to. TWAS at this
point that Chairman johnson interposed.
He stated that the records of the church
would be read from July up to the time
of Mr.. Mitchell's exclusion.
AN APPEAL TO THE RECORDS.
The question arose as to the reading
of the application for the meeting which
contained the forged names. Deacon
Harrison Smith objected stating that it
was not part. of the church proceed
ings.
brObner Nelson WllllamS, Jr. insisted
that it was as the meeting had been call
ed for the purpose Of excluding Mr..
Mitchell.
"Did you hear that, brethren?" ex-
claimed Deacon Farley. Brother Will
liams says that the meeting was called
for the purpose of excluding Mr.. Mitch
ell. Let all of it be read"
EDITOR NIITCHELL's CHARGES TRUE.
This was done although much time
was consumed in reading the records.
At the conclusion, the committee of
deacons from the Fifth Street Baptist
Church arose and Nthanked the church.
Deacon Edinburgh Archer said that
they had all the information they desir-
ed. The records were in keeping with
that letter of Mr.. Mitchell. "What he
has said, "he declared, corresponds ex-
actly with what he has in his letter to
us line for line. This is all we want.
THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO.
Deacon Edward Coleman said that
the records bore out the statements con.
( tanned in Mr.. Mitchell's letter and he
was satisfied. They knew now exactly
I what TO do. Deacon Samuel p. Brown
| conceded with what the others had said
I and the committee retired.
Quite a discussion occurred over a sis
ter from Norfolk, who asked for her let
ter. 1t was finally granted.
A CONFLICT OF INTERESTS.
A committee of ladies asked for per-