Evening journal., 1914-04-04

hinged, and for while this phase
of the question was debated from the
legal standpoint and several lawyers.
who are among the lay delega es
present got into the heat OF the argu-
ment and made It clear that II would
be unsafe for the Conference 70 base
its opinion and its ultimate action on
anything but the record of the actual
happenings Of the last session of the
General Conference.
Legality Questioned.
The spirited discussion which has
continued almost uninterruptedly
since the matter was brought 70 the
attention of the Conference was Oc-
casioned by the paper and set of reso-
lutions offered by Rev. Dr.. Thomas
II. Lewis, president of the Western
Maryland College. and which had a
tendency to question the authority Of
the other Conferences OF the Method
list Protestant Church In their inter-
probation of the actual meaning Of
the Miller resolution. Nearly every
other Conference of the church has
voted favorably on the question Of
calling an extra session of the Cen
eral Conference, believing that in do
/ ing so the same delegates that were
elected to represent them at that Cen
eral Conference would be eligible to
seat in the proposed extra session.
This was assailed in the paper of DR..
Lewis, and he pointed out very clear
ly In an eloquent address this after
noon that when that General Confer
ence adjourned sine die, as IL did,
that that body was dissolved and that
/ II cannot be again assembled by any
legal process.
AS the matter now stands, and ac-
cording to the ruling of the Mary
land Conference by It's action yester-
| day. there can be no extra session OF
the General Conference called until
after the next session of the Mary
land Conference, and at which other
delegates can be elected 70 that BODY.
AS the General Conference can only
convene in the month of May there
is no possibility of an extra session
of that body before May, 1915. rms
is simply the ruling of this Confer
ence, and seems to be at considerable
\ variance with the opinion OF the
other % conferences OF the same de-
nomination.
Substitute Adopted.
Seeing that his original paper was
destined 10 delay a vote on the mat
ter and possibly create an erroneous
impression, Dr. Lewis offered a sub
/ stitute resolution yesterday after
noon that was more brief and con-
else. and II was adopted almost un-
animously Rev. James II. strausrh'
secretary of the Conference, was one
of the bltterest opponent of the
original Lewis paper and made an
ahle speech In which he derpecated
the fact that this Conference was
called upon to take a stand IN the
matter that might be construed by
the other conferences as OF dlcta-
torial nature and possibly OF an IN
fammatory nature.
The hone of contention In the origi'
nal paper of Dr. Lewis rested on the
question of legality and the refusal
. of the Conference to be represented
therein. I'm the belief that II would b'
an illegal procedure. The substitute
which he offered. and which wa'
finally adopted, is as follows;
"Isor reasons assigned in the fore
, going naper. this conference finds itseli
comnelled TO refuse to recognize the le
!, galifv of the proposed General Confer
, once or TO be represented therein, un
ioss snficient delay be given that The
Annual Conference may elect represen
tatives in the regular way and allow
for the amendment Of the report Of
. the committee by the General Confer
euce and the submission of the action
of said Conference 10 the various annua
conferences and TO the members OF th'
church for n final decision. As this only
( requires l2 months delay and as n,
present reason exists for haste, we fee
tbat n Is reasonable TO ask the Other
conferences to agree that the Genera
Conference may meet some time aftel
: April 1915"
Situation Critical
No question that has ever come TO th'
> attention of the Conference has caused
such quality and quantity OF discus
sion as has characterized TINS alscussion
which lasted for 10 hours with but lev
interruptions. At one time during TN
session yesterday afternoon the sltua
: tion became so critical that lot a TIM
President Bowers was compelled to eN
: ercise his full authority TO preserve th
order and dignity Of the Conference
This was especially the case just befor
the vote was taken, when the Rev. Il. K
Woodford insisted on an aye and ma.
vote. stating that, in Difference to tn
minority, he felt that he would like Z
have the votes recorded in the minutes
This necessarily brought out from unde
B, cover several who intended not to vot,
= and when il was ruled by the chai
that every one would be expected I
n 1 vote several of the ministers ahsente
}. themselves from the room. The Re'
DR.. +. r. Tagv. editor Of the Methods
n Protestant, bitterly opposed the resolt
tion, and stated that he believed Oh
ID adoption of the resolution meant I
h, he Methodist Protestant Churc
~ wide open and almost beyond redemI
'' tion. This statement, coming from OF
4 Of the oldest members Of the Confe
ence, caused many of the ministers I
I'd be skeptical and uncertain as 10 the
O. vote.
n The Rev. DIR. j. NJ Sheridan led n
opposition 10 the Lewis resolution an
N made several lengthy speeches.
70 Rev. DR. David l.. Greenfield asked f
an explanation of the remarks of i
e. Tagg, but as the latter had left Il
4, room, he said, before casting his vote,
s, believe the originators of that rcsol
A. ition have the interest Of the church
n heart and, with implicit confidence
70 them, J shall vote aye and let her sp
te If that viii split her"