The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1914-12-02

from The Daily Item, Nov. 27.
The first fight of the Conference on
the question Of q division was won
Thursday morning by the party ia
voring a division of the Conference.
The question came up when at 10
o'clock, the time set for discussion
Of the amendment to Mr.. McLeod's
motion made by Rev. X. L. Turnip-
seed, relating to the line of division,
Mr.. w. l.. Gray OF Laurens offered a
substitute to the amendmcut to the
effect that the matter Of division be
referred back to the General Confer
ence for 1t to rescind its concurrence
to the requests made to it in 1914 that
the South Carolina Conference be di-
vidcd into two Conferences.
In opposition to this substitute mo-
tion to the amendment Rev. d. M.
Mcleod, Of Sumter. made strong
argument against the adoption Of the
motion. He told Of how he had first
taken up the matter several years ago
and had brought it up at Abbeville
four years ago, when he was defeated
by a close vote. He argued that with
two Conferences closely united bet
ter work could be done by the church
in the State. and I'm opposition to the
Gray motion he stated that the mat
ter had been thoroughly discussed and
every one realized the Importance of
the measure and at that time there
had been only two votes lacking of
having a majority of the Conference
Mr.. Gray argued that the division of
the Conference would be a hardship
on the laymcn of the Conference, who
ruruished the funds e. carry II ON.
tie said j. would mean Gi5union
which would injurc the church in the
Six favored the division. while Du.
Watson B. Duncan thought division
would be wrong. 1t would imperil
every Methodist institution in the
State, he said, except possibly Ep-
worth Orphanage. The laymen did
not want 1t, he said, and he urged the
Gray motion. He stated that the i'm
preston had gone out that factional
differences had caused the desire for
the conference division, which was an
injustice to the Conference. j. l..
Bcasley moved to take a vote OH the
substitute motion. Upon a roll call,
1t was found that the vote stood 122
for the motion and 1870 against the
motion. which therefore failed to car
ry and was lost.
Mr.. Gray then moved to postpone
indefinitely the discussion Of the Dues
tiOn Of division and boundary line.
Upon counter motion, this motion
of Mr.. Gray's was tabled. Another
motion to take vote to ascertain which
of the two lines named in the Mcleod
resolution and the Turnipsecd amend
ment was tabled.
Mr.. Mcleod then made short,
but impressive argument in favor of
his motion and against tho Turnip-
seed amendment. lie argued that by
historical associations, natural geo.
graphical division Of the State, and
for practical purposes the lines pro-
posed by him from north to south was
preferable to the line proposed i'm the
amendment to his motion, the line in
the amendment being from northwest
to southeast. cutting the State into
northwestern and southeastern sec
tions. which. he argued were not ma
tural divisions. This line in the amend
mcnt follows the n@'ur.l w.,.crcOursc
of the state. He usrd maps to show
why this boundary line was best,
showing that $4,000 Mcthodists were
left in the western division and 4G,
900 I'm the eastern division. with 1872
charges in the western and 12G
charges i'm the eastern division.
Al tnc COnCluSlOIl VI Ills ItIiiui NO.
Bishop Denny recognized Rev. Il. r..
Turnipsccd i'm reply in favor of the
amendment, but Immediately alter
wards recognized Rev. j. .. WILSON,
who moved that the discussion be
postponed until II o'clock Friday, as
the time for adjournment had come
This motion prevailed.
Before this discussion Of the division
line was commenced Bishop Denny
ruled ON the motion Of Rev. l.. H.
Wells, who In u mOtiOn on the pre-
vi0us day had questioned the right ol
the General Conference 60 legally au-
thOriZC the state Conference to a,
what the church discipline stated
should be done by the General Con-
ference. lie also questioned the legal