Year: 1878

Not long since the State papers were busy with, "How They Stole the Pleasant Valley Methodist Church. "~ The matter came up fer adjudication in the Superior Court, last week, and the ..Church Lost is now Church Re gained" The case is entitled HoIc0n6 vs. Baird and is petition for an injunction to re- strain the respondents from intruding into, and excluding the petitioners from, the Pleasant Valley Methodist church. It appears that the respondent Baird, who was Methodist pastor, had been given charge of the Pleasant Valley church sometime before the quarrel arose. Af- terwards, for reasons which did not appear, the Conference refused to renew Baird's li- cense, and sent another minister to take his place. Amsjority of the church and trustees sided with Baird against the new incumbent, kept him out of the pulpit by ferce and or ganized new church with Baird as it's pastor. The minority appealed to the courts, and the legal question at issue was whether the local society or the General Conference of the Meth odist Episcopal Church was entitled to pos session of the church editice. The petitioners claim under the rules of that church, with which the Pleasant Valley Society had always been connected; the respondents, under the peculiar wording of deed of gift of the land on which the church was situated, and they al- so objected to the form of legal action adopted by the petitioners

 The case was opened by Judge Goodwin in behalf of the petitioners. He was followed by Andrews and Fem for the respondents, the latter referring in the course of his argu- ment to the fact that the new minister sent by the Conference to succeed Baird had been rot ten-egged out of former parish.

 Up to this point the discussion had been con ducted in the high and dry manner in which lawyers usually argue mere points of law. But when Ex-Judgc Jared B. Foster rose to close in behalf of the petitioners, the style of proceedings underwent marked change. He breathed new lifeinto the dry bones of legal dis cussion and, for an hour or more, he delighted bar and audience with 8 most masterly contrast of the christianity of the Bible and of the General Conference of the Methodist Episco- pal Church, with the schismatical, muscular, ''rotten egg" christianity of recent Pleasant Valley Methodism, according to Baird" The bar crowded in from the lobby, attracted by the unlocked for eloquence which was enliven- Ing the dultness of court wook The chief pill lar of our own Methodiet church actually threw up his hands in scstacy, and we momen- tarily expected to- hear his 'sGlory Hallelu- jah!" as the advocate denounced the irregular proceedings into which Pleasant Valley Meth odism had been seduced at the instigation of Baird and the d-l. Even the grave face of the judge showed gleams of enjoyment as the ar- gument rattled briskly over this unaccustomed road.

 We cannot undertake to report the many sharp hits and amusing passages in the learned ex- Judges discourse. He spoke with fer vor, and indeed with an junction that surpris- ed even those who were aware of his natural turn for religious oratory. The eloquence of the advocate, and the justice of his cause were rewarded with decree in favor of his clients, and the Superior court perpetually en- joins Mr. Baird and his Pleasant Valley schis- matics from interfering with the due preach ing of genuine General Conference Methodism Tn the Pleasant Valley church. The respond ents gave notice of a motion to carry up the whether that body will have the real enjoyment out of the trial which signalized the argument in the court below.