The Marlboro democrat. [volume] (Bennettsville, S.C.) 1882-1908, 1906-12-14

L
lguilpy and Tho report OF the commit
tee was based ere, in brief, ss follows
II 'specitlcatiol N o. 3, under ohSrg,
ll.t Ths assertion snade by Mr.. Oroigh
ton that the presiding elder exerois.
the poyger OF o self perpstuatiug body
In violation of the laws of the ohurch
this sssrtion being denoninated> or
the specification as follows:
! 4 Specification Nod: The assertion
that the presiding elders Bhelva mer
who for any reason do not sympathizl
with them and approve their methods
promote those who asand by them and
support each other In doing it, this
assertion heipg declared to be mslio.
| iOusly false.
Specification No. g.: Tho assertion
thsb the presiding elders agree upon
method OF forcing up their salaries
In violation Of the law OF the church.
Specification No. Z: An editorial in
the Christian Appeal of March 10,
1905. In which 1T was charged that
the presiding elders were guilty OF
hesrtless oonduot In grinding and ex.
acting exOrbitant proportion of the
preach era salaries.
Specification M. 8: An editorial In
which the following occurs: when
we take into consideration tho com.
petenoy aud efficiency Of the presid-
Ing eldera and the amount Of service
which they render TO the church, we
discover clear case Of graft." The
preeiding elders mentioned In this
connection are Rev. w. j. Stokes
(sinoe deceased), Rsvs. w. P. Moa
dows, j. S. Beasley, j. w. Kilgo, I'll.
b. Browne and H, w, Bays.
Specification No. 10 refeYs to an cd.
1Gorial in the Christian Appeal, at.
taoktng tho Rsv. &c. O. Watson, who
was at that time acting as editor of
the Southern Christian Advocate, and
who had ih that paper called on Mr.,
Creighton TO spaoify what he means
by the uso OF the term graft" MI.
Watson is referred to in 6his editorial
In contemptuoug terms.
Specification No. 13 relates so an at,
tack on Rev. Dergan, who had an,
sumed personal support of a mission
cry st an expense OF $3.50.
Tha aiticle Gala this contribution
by Rev. Mr.. Dargan a conscience
fund"
N Under charge No!2, specification A
relates to Creighton's charge that the
presidlcg elders Of the Southern Caro-
lima conference brought charges
against him THAI they kpew to be
falHe. Specif fioation No. 6 relates to
an article by Mr. Creighton, referring
to Mr. Il. II. Jones aud ca.oonapira.
tors, charging conspiracy Of the part
OF the pr0siding elders.
The other specifications which are
not raferred TO In the report Of the
trial committees, 1t is presumed, were
not sustained for lack OF suffloinnt ey.
ldancs, They were. of tho sAfns gen,
efal eharGchef .as tii0se Witch aeis
sustaineassana S'hich are outlined
,ssas s slss s,as aasS s. siseaS othaf sfs
tian Appeal.
The character Of c ...s
first attacked IN conferences o.J years
ago and committee Of Investigation
wae Sppointed. This committee con.
aisted OF Rev. M. l.. Carlisle, Rev. II.
O. O'Dell and Rev. r. w. Barber. The
committee reported In 1906 at Spar
tanhurg that choy did not hGv3 auf
'lo'cnt evidence on which TO 20 to
trial OF tho charges and recommended
1hSt the case be left in tho hands OF
Tho presidiDg elder, in, whose district
Mr' Creighton WAS stationed. This
pro3iding elder was w. II. Duncan, of
the Cokesbury district. Mr.. Orelgh.
ton appointed the following commit,
tee to investigate the charges; Rev.
t. Q. Odell, w. A, Massabeau and
Peter StokoB. Their report was made
at the present 9ossi0n and upon that
report the com mIttec of trial was ap-
pointed whose report w&s submitted
Thur6day.