The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-05-15
Misuse Of Pc W er AL
legged in Letters to
Conference.
QUESTION SENT
TO COMMITTEE
Clay Street Church, Richmond
and Texas Minister Complain
Against Acts Of Bishop-Re-
d port Expected Monday.
X Vanderbilt Matter Now
10 in Hands Of Conference.
ESPECIAL to The Times-pispatch.

~ ----------------
Especial to The Dlspatch.1
Asheville. N. c.. May 14.-The ses-
sion of the General Conference Of the
Methodist Episcopal Church, South. of
to-day will be memorable for one
thing particularly. Never in the his
tory of the church. until to-day. had a
charge against one of it's bishops be-
come the subject of discussion on the
conference floor. This morning when
the committee on cpiscopacy had al
ready completed its work so far as
passing on the character OF the bish
ops is concerned, and was ready to
submit It's report, letter was re-
ceived by special delivery addressed
to the committee. The letter came
from Rev. W. f. Packard. pastor OF
the First Methodist Church in Sher-
man. Tex. The letter contained charges
against Bishop Henry c. Morrison.
claiming administration. or the
misuse Of his power with which the
church has invested him, in making
the appointments OF the pastors. AS
soon as Collins Denny, chairman of
the committees, announced the contents
of the letter. Bishop Morrison spoke
TO the conference and said:
II respectfully ask this General Con
ference to appoint committee of in
vestigation to take in charge this pa
per. and report to the General Con
ference Its decision"
IL. w. Anderson. of Texas another
member of the committee on episco-
pacy. made a motion that all the
charges against Bishop Morrison tha.
had been considered by the committee
be referred TO the special committee
OF investigation. T. J. Duncan. also
OF Texas. opposed the motion of DIR.
Anderson. and the motion was not car
ried.
Bishop Morrison then withdrew his
request for a committee of !nvestiga-
ton. and requested that the case take
tho legal course.
The legal course for such cases is.
when charge is preferred against a
bishop. the presiding bishop shall ap-
point committee consisting of TWEEN
ty-hye ministers. who shall consider
the case in committee room and re-
port it's decision to the conference as
to whether trial be necessary.
reference to Other Charges.
The reference of DIR. Anderson to
charges from other sources against
Bishop Morrison brought the matter
to a crisis on the conference floor,
and number of delegates sprang to
their feet and called upon the presid-
been known for several days that
pressure was being brought to bear
to get Bishop Morrison to retire from
active service. upon the ground of de-
cline in efficiency, on account of his
age, and 1t has been known also tina,
Bishop Morrison had refused to re.
tire. claiming that he was in no way
ineffective. 1t was known also tina,
he had employed Judge f. C. oRear
,t,fs, ~.
yers In the South. to defend him, and
that If effort was made to force hin
to retire, he and Judge O'Rear would
fight the action on the conference
floor.
The charges preferred against Bishor
Morrison are all touching his admin.
istrative power, and in no instance has
there been SO much as an intimatior
against his moral character. For up.
Brightness of character and general
ability, he is one of the most highl,
honored preachers in the Methods
Episcopal Church, South.
When the discussion of the charge
against Bishop Morrison began. w A
Christian, of the Virginia Conference
asked II a paper containing a similar
charge had not been in the hands O.
the committee, coming from j. III
Chappel and others, Of Clay Stree
Church, Richmond. B. +. LipscomD
also Of Virginia, and member Of the
committee on episcopacy, answered
that such a paper had been In the
hands of the committee. DR. Christian
insisted upon knowing how the paper
was addressed. and said If it was ad
dressed to the general conference. i
could not legally have been referred
to the committee without first havins
~ xl,o No.. = ,4<1f . I,
tary of the conference.
The secretary stated that he had n,
recollection of such paper havin:
passed through his hands.
DR.. Christian insisted upon KNOWING
the address of the paper. and DR.
Lipscomb then said 1t was addressed t
the conference. When questioned a
to why the paper had not taken TIL,
regular course inreaching the commit
tee, DR.. Lipscomb refused to be cross
examined, and said at the proper tim
he would give sufficient explanation
regarding the course of the paper,
James +. Cannon, of Virginia, in Al
amendment. recommended that tn
paper from Clay Street Church be con
sidered also by the committee of in
vestigation Judge a. L. Lawso
claimed that Dr. Cannon was out o
order, and appealed from the decisio
of the chair in granting that DR.
Cannon was in order, and the confer
ence sustained the chair. The amend
ment of DR.. Cannon was adopted. ID
Cannon and DR., Christian emphasize
the fact that they were acting unde
the Impulse of no desire to persecut
Bishop Morrison, hut only with III
desire for perfect fairness to preva
in this matter.
H.i.t. IRpnOrt IINUeCte,i CNIOn,lny.
The paper from Clay Street Churc
was then recalled from the committee
was announced to the conference, an
Continued on Third Page)
Tor taxicab service, Phone Madiso