Newspaper Page Text
98
J&autjjent Christian JWjffale.
MACON. GEORGIA. JUNE 24. 1870.
The General Conference—Action
respecting the Veto Power of
the Bishops.
The late General Conference very happily,
we think, settled s question which has been
before the Church for many years. The
framers of the Constitution in 1808 made no
provision for the arrest of unconstitutional
legislation. Such provision was soon seen
to be desirable, and a “veto” power lodged
in the Bishops was very naturally esteemed
the proper remedy. The matter was before
several General Conferences, and, finally, in
1854 ours put in a proviso to the restrictive
rules giving the Bishops that power. But
many were not satisfied that this new con
stitutional provision was constitutionally
enacted, and it was referred to the recent
Committee on the Episcopacy to examine
this point and, if the objection was well ta
ken, to suggest some method of giving the
Bishops’ power to arrest any action in the
General Conference, that might be violative
of the “restrictive rules.”
Such a scheme was offered to the Com
mittee, with an argument against the “pro
viso” as it stands in the Discipline, and in
favor of the proposed new law, in substance,
as follows:
I. Some have supposed that what is called
the “veto power” is inherent in the Episco
pacy. This opinion cannot be successfully
maintained, for
1. It is not conferred originally on the
Bishops in what is called the Constitution of
the Church.
2. Bishop McKendree declared against
this opinion when he opposed the rule
making P. Elders elective, which he would
have vetoed, but on this ground could not.
This shows what “the fathers” of the Church
believed on this subject.
3. It not being considered inherent by the
framers of the constitution,the General Con
ference attempted in 1820 and again in 1824,
to confer the veto power on the Bishops, but
failed for reasons to be sCbn presently.
4. The attempt was renewed in our
Church in 1854, and the veto power was
given the Bishops, not by a resolution de
claring it inherent, but as an additional
proviso in the restrictive rules.
These facts prove not only that the fra
mers of our constitution thought it desira
ble that the Bishops should have the veto
power; but that it could be conferred only
as a constitutional provision. And had the
action in 1854 conformed to this idea, then
there would have been no further question
before this General Conference—unless it
be as to the propriety or constitutionality of
the conditions in the proviso.
11. This proviso was not so introduced
into the Discipline, as to make it properly
a constitutional provision. It came in
simply by action on a resolution passed by
we know not what majority of the General
Conference of 1854—there being no record
of a count to ascertain what the vote was;
while the subsequent efforts of Dr. Wm. A.
Smith, the original mover of the resolution,
to have it re-enacted in another way proves
that he did not consider the proviso to have
passed through the process, whereby our
constitutional law is altered or added to.
This process requires a two-thirds majority
in the General Conference, and three-fourths
of the aggregate votes in the Annual Con
ferences, to which bodies likewise such law
is to be submitted before it takes effect. To
illustrate—using definite numbers to make
the point clear —in a General Conference of
300 members before the constitution can be
altered 200 must sanction the amendment,
and in an aggregate vote of 4000 members
of annual Conferences, 3000 must vote for
it. If these majorities do not concur, it is
lost. Therefore either 101 out of 300 voters
in the General Conference and 1001 out of
4000 in the Annual Conferences can defeat
a proposed amendment to the constitution.
Now, while it is granted that only by this
process can the constitution be altered or
added to, it may be asserted that this is not
a constitutional provision in any suoh sense
as requires it to pass through such a process
for enactment.
But we may easily prove that this veto
power of the Bishops is precisely of this
character. We prove it
1. Historically. In 1820, a question arose
in the General Conference as to the consti
tutionality of a resolution it had passed—
Bishop MoKendree said it was unconstitu
tional—but the Conference deolared that
there was no proper tribunal to judge of
and determine the constitutionality of the
acts of the General Conference, and passed
a resolution advising the Annual Conferences
to pass as enabling act, that the next Gen
end Conference might so alter the Constitu
tion, as to give the veto power to the Bish
ops* The action of the Annual Conferences
is not reported at the next session in 1824,
of the General Conference, but it is proba
ble that the vote requisite for altering the
constitution —a concurrence of all the An
nual Conferences—was not given. For in
1824, L; Pierce and W. Winans moved that
the several Annual Conferences be recom
mended to add a proviso to the article on
“limitations and restrictions” in the Con
stitution of 1808, giving authority to the
Bishops to interpose when they deemed the
legislation of the General Conference uncon
stitutional ; and if a majority of less than
two-thirds of the General Conference dis
sented, the rule or rules passed should be
sent to the Annual Conferences for their
unanimous concurrence before it should be
come law. This too passed the General
Conference; but failed, we presume, because
all the Annual Conferences did not vote af
firmatively—though there is no record of
the fact. Both provisions were faulty—
unconstitutional really—the first, in that it
allowed a two-thirds majority of the Gener
al Conference to pass a law declared uncon
stitutional by the Bishops—and if they were
right, really an unconstitutional law—with
out providing for any ultimate court to de
cide between the disagreeing parties—the
second, both in having the same defect, and
in the further one, that a majority of less
than two-thirds of the General Conference,
in conjunction with three-fourths of the vo
ters in the Annual Conferences might over
ride the decision of the Bishops—whereas
the law required two-thirds of the General
Conference and all the Annnal Conferences
to change the Constitution. The point
made here, however, is that the framers of
the Constitution believed that no veto pow
er could be given the Bishops, without the
assent of the Annual Conferences.
It is probable that this failure in two inj
stances to get the veto proviso into the
Discipline—because of the almost certain
failure ever to secure a concurrence of all
the Annual Conferences, i. e. to get a ma
jority in every Conference to agree to any
momentous measure—gave origin to the
movement in 1828 to alter the proviso of
1808 which declared the method of making
changes in the Constitution, and to pat this
proviso into its present form—as recited
above.
But it was not attempted to change this
proviso, (which directs how we may pass an
act in conflict with the restrictive roles,)
without first submitting the proposed change
to the very process prescribed by itself for
altering or amending the Constitution. The
♦
proposed alteration of the proviso having
passed through this process, was confirmed
at the General Conference of 1832.
The point here Is, that fit the proviso of
1808 could not be amended as proposed,
without passing through the Conferences,
this other proviso of 1854 giving the veto
power to the Bishops could not properly be
added except by the same process—the
judgment of the framers of the Constitu
tion being interpreted by their acts.
2. We prove, secondly, that this proviso
of 1854 can be rendered valid only by such
process, because of its nature.
(1.) It is an additional “restrictive rule,”
abridging further the “full powers” of the
General Conference—a majority of course—•
“to make rules and regulations for our
Church,” because it gives to the Bishops
power to arrest legislation under certain
conditions, unless it be enacted by two
thirds of the General Conference. In a
body of 300 members it neutralizes the
votes of 49 of them.
(2.) If while thus abridging its own pow
er, the General Conference, say of 300 mem
bers, had surrendered it to the Annual Con
ferences, (say, of 4000 voters in the aggre
gate,) according to the first proviso, it would
then have transferred the power of legisla
tion taken from 49 members of the General
Conference to the 3000 members of the An
nual Conferences, whose votes must be had
to alter the Constitution. But by the veto
as it now stands the college of Bishops and
one-third plus ( one—say 101 members of
the General Conference—have power to ar
rest legislation which, if in harmony with
the Constitution, 150 members only of the
General Conference CQuld arrest—and if
not constitutional could only be arrested
properly by either 101 voters in the Gen
eral Conference or 1001 voters in the An
nual Conferences.
The Constitution never contemplated the
transfer of such power to the Bishops—how
ever desirable to have some plan devised to
arrest unconstitutional legislation—much
less could it have been within its powers to
transfer it from the General Conference to
the Bishops, by simple resolution of that
body, passed by a majority vote. Such
transfer is only possible, when the voters of
the Annual Conferences, the source of con
stitutional law, shall have assented under
the restrictions by which they have bound
themselves to caoh other—viz, that in such
case a three-fourths majority vote should be
required.
Thus we argue from the nature of this pro
viso of 1854 that, under the circumstances
of its introduction into the Discipline, it has
not passed through that process of enact
ment which gives validity, and it is, there
fore, null and void. Nor can it be made valid
except by vote of two-thirds of the votes in
General Conference and tkreo-fourths of the
votes in annual Conferences, and therefore,
it is proper to expimge it as it now stands,
and to begin its enactment at anew starting
point. This is recommended in the resolu
tions here offered.
111. Nothing need be. said here of the pro
priety of giving the Bishops power to arrest
unconstitutional legislation. The repeated
attempts in the General Conferences from
1820 to 1854 inclusive, to confer this power,
proves that that body felt its necessity—and
we feel it as well.
But it is a question of importance whether
the conditions of the veto proviso, as they
now stand, do not themselves infract the
constitution, by giving two-thirds of the
General Conference power to override the
Bishop’s veto.
Suppose Ist, the Bishops iu error in pro
nouncing some rule or regulation of the
General Conference unconstitutional, and
that the Conference erroneously adopt their
opinion and fail to dissent from it by a two
third vote—then it has given the Bishops
power to arrest even constitutional action
under the plea of its unconstitutionality—
thus robbing the majority of the Conference
of its right to make rules and regulations for
our Church.
Suppose 2d, that the Bishops are correct
in pronouncing the action in question un
constitutional —then this proviso conferring
on two-thirds of the General Conference the
power to override that decision, it gives that
majority that power to infract the provisions
of the restrictive rules, which the Constitu
tion puts under the protection of the annual
Conferences by requiring three-fourths of
their voters to pass affirmatively upon any
action altering or affecting that constitu
tional basis of our Chureh.
Thus, therefore, the veto proviso as it now
stands, confers unconstitutional powers, in
one cose on the Bishops, in another case on
the General Conference itself, and it is
therefore faulty in its form.
It is defective, moreover, because it indi
cates no tribnnal to decide in a caso of dif
ference between the Bishops and the General
Conference on constitutional law. One or
the other must be right; but the General
Conference can by a two-thirds vote declare
the Bishops wrong and itself right aud pass
a law in truth unconstitutional, whereas no
majority—not even a unanimous vote of that
body—ought to have that power. Who then
shall decide between these parties? In a
civil government the difference between the
legislative and executive departments on
constitutional points may be carried to the
judiciary—and on questionable and contested
points neither the veto nor the two-thirds
majority settles the constitutionality of law,
but the judges to whom the appeal may be
made. Now, our judges—constituted such
by our constitution—are the Aunual Con
ferences—or three-fourths of the aggregate
voters in them—and to these judges, when
a difference arises between the Bishops and
two-thirds of the General Conference, the
points in dispute should be carried.
And this process has this advantage—that
if up to their affirmative action on the rule,
it is really an infraction of constitutional
law, it will then have passed through the
process and received the vote by which our
restrictive rules were framed and by which
only they can be altered—and the effect id?
therefore, to set aside the restrictive rules
(if they are really a bar to the action pro
posed) in so far as that rule or regulation
proposed is concerned, and to make consti
tutional what up to that vote was unconsti
tutional. For this reason, it is proposed in
the new proviso, now submitted for consider
ation, that it embrace a provision for sending
any question on which the Bishops and two
thirds of the General Conference disagree,
down to the Annual Conferences that it may
be passed npon by them, as the court of final
resort on all constitutional questions.
Thus, therefore, the harmony will be
maintained between the constitutional pow
ers of the Bishops, the General Conference
and the Annual Conferences—the Bishops
can arrest unconstitutional legislation—two
thirds of the General Conference cannot per
sist and enact the r objectionable law —and
the Annual Conferences can decide between
the disagreeing parties, and by the peculi
arity of the process of deciding, can really
make, what before may not have been con
stitutional.
The Committee on Episcopacy unanimous
ly reported the proposed amendment to the
Gen. Conference. Dr. L. M. Lee, the Chair
man, expanded the argument in a paper of
great power, and the Conference settled with
out discussion a long standing question, by
a vote of 160 yeas,4 nays. Striking from the
Discipline the last “proviso” as it now stands
in the powers of the General Conference, it
sends the following substitute for it down to
the Annual Conferences, to be passed npon
“ Provided, Thai when any rule or regu
lation is adopted by the General Conference
which, in the opinion of the Bishops, is un
constitutional, the Bishops may present to
the Conference which passed said rule or
regulation, their objections thereto, with
their reasons, in writing, and if then the
General Conference shall, by a two-third
vote, adhere to its action on said rule or reg
ulation, it shall then take the course pre
scribed for altering a restrictive rule, and if
thus passed upon affirmatively, the Bishops
shall announce that such rule or regulation
take effect from that time.”
Adulation.
It was objected to this Advocate, in a re
cent District-meeting, that there was in it
too much praise of living men—too much
said of the character of the sermons preached,
etc. It may be so. Adulation is not to our
taste; and we are often constrained to pub
lish what we would not write, however de
served we may believe the praise to be. We
believe that, as .to what we write ourself re
specting our brethren, it will be conceded,
that our commendation is tempered with
moderation, and that we arc guiltless of
piling up descriptive adjectives. If one has
done his work well and worthily, and on
special occasions has met public expectation,
it is proper to say as much. And this oan
be done without going into raptures over
every performance, however the writer may
appreciate it. It is not to our taste to do
it; hence, it has frequently been charged
that wc give stinted praise, even where it is
deserved.
But where men are doing their ordinary
work—though doing it well —it is in decid
edly bad taste to be parading their names
in the papers, at every mention of results.
It is not necessary or proper, in telling of a
local revival to give the name of this and
that preacher, who has only been doing his
duty in rendering “effective aid.” In speak
ing of a quarterly meeting, why tell that
the “popular and gifted presiding elder was
there and preached eloquently ?” He ought
to have been there; and it is to be hoped
that he always preaches eloquently. And
why, after thus glorifying men, conclude “to
God bo all the glory?”
These are our settled opinions—but what
can a poor editor do, when correspondents
so weave these praises up in their letters,
that to leave them out eviscerates the com
muuication ?
Under such circumstances, we are often
driven to take the attitude of an organ of
adulation to worthy brethren, whose works
should and do praise them, when our own
taste would have left them to the silent sat
isfaction of their own consciences and to the
commendation of their Master. And so, too,
when wo copy from other papers the move
ments of the servants of the general Church,
in whose mission and labors all are so inter
ested that they should be made known to
all, we are constrained to take the reports
as wo find them and as we would not have
written them, or else so eliminate the super
lative adjectives from them, as to occasion
remark, if not give offence.
There is difficulty, here, iu keeping a
proper middle course. It is as easy to win
blame from the friends of our brethren if
not from themselves, for seeming neglect
of their popular labors, and thus to get the
reputation of an envious churl, as it is to of
fend the tender consciences of other breth
ren, who think mournfully that a good man
believes all the laudatory things written of
him and is set on stilts by it. We do our
best to keep this middle course, and per
haps give offence on both hands.
Now to put all in a good humor with us,
e copy here a witty paragraph on this sub
ject from the Baltimore Christian Advocate:
In this awful country every chap and chit
is allowed to use adjectives without restraint,
and confound all decent truth with super
latives. Men folks under twenty-five and
women under forty ought to be prohibited
from using these extremes of speech. Lan
guage cannot afford it. The invention of
expressions cannot keep up with the waste
ful expenditure. “Oh ! ms," says a young
lady, “it is so close—not a breath of air—
I’m suffocating !” “My dear, don’t exag
gerate so; it’s blowing a hurricane.” Now,
we would like to know how people are to
express real suffocation and hurricanes, or
any state of oppression or ventilation inter
mediate, if the strongest words in language
are wasted on the weakest meanings. If
every Bishop’s every sermon is “grand” and
“splendid,” what is left to say of a really
extraordinary effort of Episcopal genius?
For our part we are afraid to say anything
about the performances of our friends, lest
by refusing to say what is ridiculously too
much we give offence for saying too little.
If we were to say that Dr. Munsey, or Dr.
Huston, or Dr. Duncan, was in Baltimore,
and preached an interesting and effective
sermon, we would say what is a great deal
to say for any man’s pulpit efforts. There
are few of ns of whom it can always be said
with truth. But how cold and faint would
the commendation appear ? No circuit
preacher in his first year in the mountains
would be let down so quietly as that by his
good-natured country editor. It would be
said, “What’s the matter between Bond and
Munsey ?” “What’s out between Hnston
and Bond ?” “Did you notice how the Bal
timore Advocate let down Dr. Duncan ?”
Now what are we to do ? We know that in
the case of the three distinguished preachers
whose names we have so freely used, exag
gerated, bombastic commendation is either
painful or amusing according to their mood.
No man of sense likes to be mode ridiculous
to other men of sense by being presented as
a monster of eloquence and erudition, such
as eye never saw nor ear heard. And yet
no editor of sense likes to appear colder in
appreciation or less disposed to acknowledge
greatness than his confreres. We are in a
strait between two courses—either to do as
we do at funerals, say nothing personal, in
asmuch as custom requires truth to be sacri
ficed to the manes of the dead, or else to say
just the truth —praise and blame—call ser
mons good, bad, and indifferent as they
seem to us. If we write to inform our
readers about the qualities of Bishops and
other preachers, we are bound to tell the
truth. But how would it sound ?—“Bishop
preached a dull sermon yesterday.”
“Dr. rather disappointed the large
and respectable audience assembled to hear
him yesterday.” “Mr. gave us one
of Robertson’s best last Sunday, equal to
the Chalmers’ week before.” “Dr. Bond
preached last night to the colored people at
Loudoun, and we are sorry to say made a
bad impression.” Now would not this sort
of truth do as much good as the piling the
same reluctant superlatives upon every
man of sufficient prominence to be puffed ?
Praise would be worth something in a paper
of that frank and free variety. We have no
talent for puffery. It is a sad defect as things
go. It is the mainspring of man-motion
now. There is a vociferous genins under
our window who has brought vast talent of
this kind to the business of selling blacking.
We have tried to take lessons from him, but
to onr chagrin we found that we could learn
nothing not already well known to older
publishers. The fellow’s art seemed to rest
on two principles. He commended his
blacking in a strain of grandiose exaggera
tion only limited by the incapacity of our
language. Now nobody believed all this.
He did not expect them to believe it. Bat
in rejecting the mountain of lies, he in
ferred some of his more reasonable asser
tions would stick. He raised the mind so
high above the saleable degree of blacking
that it could not always fall below it. Peo
fle bought it because they fell down to it.
t required more experience than all the
crowd have to conclude that a blacking thus
lauded is not somewhat better than ordinary.
That is one principle. But we found that
newspapers were not at all ignorant of the
■ principle. They puff themselves so far
above all the possibilities of excellence that
they keep up a reputation for more than
they are really worth. The hawkers in
Constantinople understand it when they cry
through the streets, “In the name of the
Prophet ?—figs!”
The University or Georgia has sent out
its Catalogue for 1869-70, which shows 170
pupils in the regular college classes, 10 in
the school of Civil Engineering, 17 in the
SOUTHERN CHRISTIAN ADVQCATE.
Department of Law and 95 in the University
High School—total 292. The Commence
ment Exercises this year begin with a ser
mon from Chancellor Lipscomb, on Sunday,
31st July, and close on Wednesday, 3d Au
gust.
End of the Negotiations.
We have given the action of the General
Assembly of the Southern Presbyterian
Church in respect to the commission sent to
them from the Northern Rranch of that
Church. The matter has ended by the dis
charge of the Committee appointed by the
latter body, so that now there is no commis
sion left with which the Southern commis
sioners can confer. The following paper
was adopted in the Northern General As
sembly, when its Committee reported:
Whereas, This General Assembly, at an
early period of its sessions, declared its de
sire to establish cordial fraternal relations,
with the General Assembly of the Presby
terian Church in the United States, com
monly known as the Southern Assembly,
upon the basis of Christian honor, confidence
and love; and with a view to the attainment
of this end, appointed a committee of five
ministers and four elders to confer with a
similar committee if it should be appointed
by the Assembly then in session at Louis
ville, “in regard to the amieable settlement
of all existing difficulties, and the opening
of a friendly correspondence between the
Northern and Southern Churches,” and for
the furtherance of the objects contemplated
in the appointment of said committee, and
with a view to remove the obstacles which
might prevent the acceptance of our pro
posals by our Southern brethren, re-affirmed
the concurrent declaration of the two As
semblies which met in New York last year,
to the effect that “no rule or precedent
which does not stand approved by both bo
dies shall be of any authority in the reunited
body, except so far as such ride or precedent
may affect the rights of property founded
thereon;” and, as a further pledgo of our
sincerity in this movement, sent a copy of
our resolutions together with our Christian
salutations to the Assembly at Louisville,jby
the hands of delegates chosen for that pur
pose:
And whereas, the Southern Assembly,
while receiving our delegates with marked
courtesy, and formally complying with our
proposition for the appointment of a Com
mittee of Conference has nevertheless ac
companied that appointment with declara
tions and conditions which we cannot
consistently accept, because they involve a
virtual pre-judgment of the very difficulties
concerning which we invited the Conference,
Therefore,
Resolved, That the further consideration
of the subject be postponed (and the com
mittee be discharged. At the same time we
cannot forbear to express our profound re
gret, that a measure designed, and, as we
believe, eminently fitted to promote the es
tablishment of peace and the advancement
of our Redeemer’s kingdom in every part of
our country, has apparently failed to accom
plish its object. Wo earnestly hope that
the negotiations thus suspended may soon
be resumed under happier auspices, and
hereby declare our readiness to renew our
proposals for a friendly correspondence when
ever our Southern brethren shall signify
their readiness to accept it in . the form and
spirit in which it has been offered.
Wofford College.
We would invite special attention to the
“Circular” in this issue, from the pen of
Rev. H. A. C. Walker. We learn from a
late issue of the Christian Neighbor, that
there are paramount reasons, in the insuffi
ciency of the regular incomo of Wofford
College to sustain its Faculty, for immediate
attention to the pledges made by the Con
ference to raise a fund for it. We are satis
fied, that this Institution lies so near the
heart of the Methodists of South Caro
lina, that a vigorous, united, instant effort
will bring all that is asked for, if the people
have the money; and those who are pledged
to this work will hardly feel free, until they
have made one honest and hearty effort to
raise the money.
Death of Wm. Gilmore Sims.
This distinguished South Carolinian died
in Charleston, on the 12th iust. Ho had
been in delicate health for some time, and
was out within a week of his death, after
which his strength failed rapidly. He was
64 years old. He was a remarkably prolific
writer of both prose and poetry, and be
achieved greater popularity as a novelist
than any other Southern writer.
Burke's Weekly for Boys and Girls.—
The last month’s numbers of this popular
Southern publication offers no few attrac
tions to the young reader. There is a full
length picture from life of Big-foot Wal
lace, of whom they have been reading for so
long a time, and another series of adven
tures this time in Florida, by the inimitable
Jack Dobell—an old school-mate of our
own—whom we know to have had adven
tures enough to keep the boys engaged in
reading them, until they are grown. If
there is a better Boys’ and Girls' Weekly any
where, we have yet to see it. Send to J. W.
Burke & Cos., for a specimen number and
see it for yourself. The new volume is just
beginning and it is the right time to sub
scribe. See the announcement of the rich
feast prepared for the readers in the forth
coming volume. Price 82.00 a year—with
liberal- discounts to clubs; and all the preach
ers who act as Agents are allowed 25 per
cent, commission ou moneys forwarded.
Mr. Burke has showed ns two beautiful
engravings—one of Gen. Lee at the Grave
of “Stonewall Jackson,-” and a companion
picture representing the widow and two
orphan children of a Confederate officer
placing, wreaths ou his grave. The pictures
are sold at $1.50 each—B2.so for the two.
Mr. B. will send either picture desired, and
two copies of Weekly for 84.00 —or both
and three copies of Weekly for 80.00—but
in either case one of the papers must be sent
to anew subscriber.
Bowdon Collegiate Institute, which is
advertised elsewhere, holds its Commence
ment exercises, July 3d-6tli. Dr. Boring
preaches the sermon—P. F. Smith, Esq.,
of Newnan, addresses the Literary Socie
ties, and Col. J. W. Avery, the Commence
ment Oration, and A. H. Cox, Esq., the
Address to Class in Oratory. For other
commencements, see Notices.
Rev. T. O. Summers, D. D., received the
honorary degree of LL. D. at the recent
commencement at Emory and Henry College,
Va.. an honor to which his varied learning
fully entitles him.
A Practical Treatise on Agriculture:—To
which is added the Author’s Published Letters.
By David Dickson, Sparta, Ga. Edited by J.
Dickson Smith, Macon, Ga. J. W. Burke & Cos.
A handsomer specimen of book-making baa
not heretofore been produced in the South.
The work will prove invaluable to plan
ters. Mr. Hickson has long been known as
one of the most successful of Southern agri
cultnrists, who for years has been considered
a standard authority in crop-growing, even
on poor thin lands. This book brings to
gether bis experience and bis previous writ
ings in a form where they can be made
profitable for the instruction of thousands.
Christ in Sono. Hymns of Immanuel: Selected
from all Ages, with Notes. By Philip Bchaff,
D.D., New York: A. F. D. Randolph <fc Cos. Price
$2.25.
Here we have a complete and carefully se
lected collection of sacred lyrics, embracing
the choicest hymns on the Person and Work
of onr Lord from all ages, denominations
and tongues—in sections where hymns of
like character are brought together mostly
in chronological order. To those whose de
votional reading consists partly of hymns—
and there ought to be more such than there
are—this will prove a welcome book. Its
popularity is attested, in that this is the
fourth edition, made to meet the demand
for a cheaper edition than those heretofore
brought out.
Palmeb’s Normal Collection of Sacbrd Music:
Consisting of Anthems, Chorusses, Opening and
Closing Pieces, etc., etc. By H. R. Palmer,
Chicago: Root & Cady.
Clarke's Voluntaries for the Organ, Reed
Organ, or Melodeon, Boston : Oliver Ditson
& Cos.
We shall submit these books to those able
to judge better than ourself of their merits.
Tiie Harker Family, —By Emily Thompson.
Price 1d.25.
Jon TretON’s Rest ; <or Ways and Means. A
Story of Life’s Struggles—By Clara Lucas Bal
four.
Jugor-Not—By Mrs. J. McNair Wright. Price
$1.25.
“Come Home, Mother;” and other Tales. Price
50 cents.
Tim’s Troubles. Price $1.50.
The Drinking Fountain Stories. Price SI.OO.
Tom Bunn's Temperance Society. Price $1.25.
These are seven small volumes of Temper
ance Stories, by the National Temperance
Society and Publication House, 172 Will
iam street, N. Y r .—which is giving to the
public many useful books and tracts, which
we can commend to the public.
Lifting the Veil.—New York. Charles Scrib
ner & Cos.
Wherein the way of consolation in be
reavement is pointed out as being found in
faith in Christ, and dure trust in his prom
ises.
Mrs. Margery. A Tale of the Lollards.
Daiset’s Companions ; or Scenes from Child Life.
A Story for Little Girls—By the Author of
“Grandmammar’s Nest.”
The Experiences of a Church Plate.
Born with a Silver Spoon in his Mouth.
“We” mrtu3 “I.” “Oiled Feather Series.”
SnabliNor Sharly— By the Author of “The
Leigiftou Children,” etc.
Allie Moore's Lesson.
Attractive Sunday-seliool books from the
American S. S. Union—all but the two last
republications of English books, after re
vision by tbe Committee of Publication.
Corrcsponhnct.
Culloden, N. Ga. Conference.
“The Lord has done groat things for us
whereof we are glad.” Rev. G. J. Pearce,
paid us a visit, and we commenced a meet
ing on Thursday night 19th May, and con
tinued until 7th of Jnne. In the first ser
vice God was with us —a few came to the
altar for prayer and after that time at every
service God manifested himself.
The work commenced with the youth and
the children and spread out to those older,
and often the father and son were at the
altar of prayer together. Children, young
ladies and wives, passed through the congre
gation seeking theirjfriends and leading them
to the altar—the son leading the father, ox
the wife the husband. Many members of
tbe church who had been cold, were revived
and made happy in the love of God, and of
ten “Glory to God,” came welling up from
many happy souls. Several services were
marked with peculiar power. Ono in
stance : the last day of the meeting soon
after dinner two of the new converts came,
to the house of a brother where Bro. Pearce
and myself were, and informed us that the
young ladies were in the grove near the
church seeking the blessing of pardon, and
that some had obtained the blessing. We
went and found some singing, some shout
ing, some crying for mercy. We prevailed
on them to go into the church, and soon
after we reached it the power of God came
down and many were converted. Parents
embraced their children and God greatly
blessed the whole congregation. The result
was that 35 applied for membership in the
church. W. F. S.
Circular.
Dear Bro. Mouzon: —l address you, not
pretending to know whether you are delin
quent or not, as in a circular I prefer to ad
dress someone, and each other one concern
ed through him; so, as you are first on the
list, of those interested, you first receive this
paper—hope you will promptly give it effec
tive circulation. “ But what does this
mean ? I don’t understand !”—Never mind
now. Please don’t question me here, but
jus'} read carefully to the close; and if then
you are inclined to inquire, I will answer as
best I can.
Brother, since Conference, have you done
your duty toward Wofford College ? You
are aware that Conference provided for the
collection of $8,000; part to aid in making
up the salaries, and part in keeping up the
buildings, library, apparatus, etc. The col
lection on each. District is not large, rang
ing from $550 to $1,050. When this amount
in each case is subdivided, tho sum to be
collected in each charge is a mere trifle, and
pould bo collected easily—for instance—in
a couple of weeks’ passing about in a town,
or on a single round in a circuit. lam so
confident that this could be done—might
kave been done long since—that I am utter
ly at a loss for any excuse for neglect.
You are aware that scholarly Christian men,
such as compose the Faculty of our College
are in demand, and always will be. You are
aware that such accomplished instructors are
always and everywhere highly esteemed, and
command handsome salaries. But are you
aware that two members of our Faculty—
and others, for aught I know—have had very
strong inducements in this respect to leave
Wofford for more advantageous positions ?
Such i3 the fact. Suppose now any one of
the Faculty, pressed by gauDt want, should
retire: —Would it not be as the .removal of
the keystone—the ruin of the arch ? Is it
Hot a marvel of Christian, Methodist, edu
cational devotion that has held together
this body of gifted men! Since the war
their income from all sources has been very
small; part of the time, (and in some cases
particularly,) it has been down almost to the
very point of absolute insufficiency, and of
the commonest quality. 1 know whereof I
affirm, and might descend to parlieularize; but
I am already ashamed in the presence of
what I have just written, and I blush for
my whole conference, preachers and people!
“Money is so scarce !” It is in some pockets,
os it has ever been and will be always; in
others it is not! This cry of “wolf!” very
little affects the person who has had a few
years’ observation. What lady’s robe or
gentleman’s attire—what little master’s or
miss’s outfit —whose furniture, whose table,
indicates scarcity of money? What enter
tainment, what enjoyment, what (innocent)
amusement, finds scar-city of money in its
way ? O, isn’t it a burning shame —isn’t it
a damning sin, that, while Christians and
the world can get money always for worldly
things, the cause of God lias to come (even
among God’s children 1) like a beggar, hat
in hand—nay. get down on its knees—nay,
prostrate itself, and show its nakedness and
cry its hunger, before it can be heard; and
then reoeive the dole-yes, a mere dole, ac
companied with the self-complacent, sanc
timonious whine—“money is so scarce, and
we have so many calls !” And yet whose
cheek tingles, whose heart trembles, whose
purse thrills ?
And yet, after all, I doubt that, any one
deliberately intends to neglect the duty here
involved : it is, on the part of most, perhaps
all, the putting off what should be done on
the instant, allowing this so small an
amount, and yet for so noble a cause, to be
crowded in among other claims toward the
close of the year, and so it is jostled out of
position if not out of mind; and partially
or not at all made up :—while the College
buildings are approaching a state of decay,
and the Faculty nearing, it may be feared,
a forced dissolution. Wonder if God has in
store for us snch an ignominy as this? Perish
the foul thought! But we have it in store
for ourselves unless we amend, and that
right speedily.
My brother, tieloved, if there be no other
convenient way of gathering the small sum
to be raised in your circuit or station, two
or three or half a dozen ladies in a town,
and one lady at each church in the country,
could easily and speedily collect the few dol
lars required; that is, if they understand
the state of the case, and desire that a
proper portion of the young men of our
Church and of the country should be edu
cated in this excellent College. And that
each one who feels any interest in educa
tional matters may bo informed, I will make
a brief statement:—
1. Few, if any, male colleges are ever self
sustaining. Hence,
2. It is usual (is it not uniform ?) that
such a college has an endowment, or invest
ed fund, the interest of which yearly aids
in its support? (“The College of South Caro
lina” in former years enjoyed for such pur
pose a yearly appropriation from the public
treasury of $20,000, I think. Under the
present dynasty, I know not.)
3. Wofford College had an endowment of
some SBO,OOO, and increasing; but the war
swept it away, leaving perhaps $5,000, or so,
and that, even, yielding nothing now.
4. A large proportion of the pupils are
exempt from chargo for tuition, being young
men preparing for the ministry, or sons of
itinerant preachers.
5. In these circumstances of pecuniary
depression, though strong in mental, moral
and religious power, Wofford College asks the
friends of education in the South Carolina
Conference to unite in contributing SB,OOO
to aid in paying the Faculty and keeping
the buildings, etc., in good condition. So
that,
C. Instead of asking the people to give
largo amounts to be funded, we ask them to
keep the capital in their own hands and pay
an annual interest to sustain the College,—
a very small interest.
We have 42,752 white members in the
Conference, besides at least the same num
ber, perhaps fourfold, in our congregations :
and who will say that among these all there
cannot be found on proper application eight
thousand single dollars, or sixteen thousand
single half dollars yearly to sustain Wofford
College in her noble work of a sound, thor
ough, Christianized education.
Brother pastor, by every consideration
that can connect with so interesting a sub
ject, take up this collection at once;, and
wipe out the reproach of negligence that
lies against us! Brother, Sister, Friend,
for the sake of the Church and the country,
co-operate with tho preacher in removing
this blot on our fair fame ! This collection
in every case yet to be attended to may be
secured by the last of July at the very latest
—and should bo : and then be forwarded
instantly to Rev. Dr. Shipp. I am the
more urgent for instant and full collection,
because up to our last Conference the yearly
average received was only $1,500; when the
Conference deemed SB,OOO a year to be need
ed, and has been calling for that amount.—
Brother, brother ! I implore yon take up
this collection, without allowing another
day’s delay! (The suggestion, thought,
work of this circular are mine alone.)
H. A. C. Walker.
A Disastrous Fire.
The many Mends of my aged mother,
Mrs. E. S. Campbell, of Manchester, H. C.,
will be pained to learn that she was entirely
burned out on the morning of June 13tli,
at 1 o’clock. The fire originated by a coal
falling under the steps at about bed time of
the same night.
Many has been the weary itinerant minis
ter of the gospel who received gratuitously
her smiles and cheerful attention, during
the past thirty years, while sojourning at
her hospitable home. No face—not even
the face of her long absent son or daughter
—was ever more welcome, or more cheer
fully served by my mother than the minister
of Christ, of whatever name or denomina
tion. Aud those ministers of South Caro
lina who have met her ever smiling face at
her own bountiful home, will thank me for
giving them this sad information, that they
may invoke God’s blessings upon her in
this her 76th year, now destitute of even
sufficient clothing and food. So precarious
are the times with us in this State, that my
mother used unusual care in storing away
her crop of cotton of last year, and her fam
ily supplies for the present year, in a build
ing adjoining her dwelling, and she laid
down at night surrounded by an abundance
of life’s comforts to be awoke only in time
to make her escape, and witness the de
structifl#!- of everything she possessed but
her land. Little did she think in the clos
ing up of life’s pilgrimage, that she would
be reduced to want. Her chief luxury—
that of ministering to others, and of serving
the church—is removed. May God sanctify
it to her spiritual good, aud for her I ask
the prayers of God’s people.
J. B. Campbell.
Wright’s Bluff, S. C., June 15th, 1870.
Cypress ct., S. C. Cons.—The Rev. A. R.
Danner writes June 14th : “For the encour
agement of the church, let me say, that
there has been a revival on this circuit for
some five weeks past; and it still moves on
sweetly subduing the stoutest of hearts and
clothing sinners in their right mind, at the
feet of the Redeemer. Entire families are
now on their way to see the king in his
beauty. Over 100 members have been ad
ded to the church. We closed at New Hope
last Sabbath night, for want of help, al
though many penitents were at the altar.”
S. S. Celebration.—The Rev. J. B. Platt
writes from Conwayboro’, of an interesting
day, Ist June, at Poplar Church. Its Sab
bath-school, S. N. Anderson, Superinten
dent, who never puts his school into winter
quarters, invited the Rev. A. W. Walker
and his school from the Station, and the two
schools had a grand day of singing, feast
ing and speech making—as is usual on all
sueh occasions. Appropriate addresses were
made by the Revs. J. W. Kelly and A. W.
Walker.
' - From the Nashville Union and American.
Popular Amusements.
Mr Editor: —My attention lias been called
to a neatly printed circular, in tlie shape of
a “season ticket ’’to a Roller-skating Asso
ciation. It contains the favorable opinion
of an eminent physician, and of the *• Inde
pendent** newspaper, and others, on this new
system of exercise. Also this:
“Read what Bishop McTyeire says :
“Mb. Editor:—Allow me to commend to you
aud your readers the Skating-rink. It can—it
should—substitate dancing as an exercise and
amusement for the young people of both sexes.
It furnishes in-door graceful, lively exercise, both
muscular and nervous excitement, and leaves no
excuse for dancing. I wish there was a Skating
rink in every village and boarding-school.*’—let
ter to Christian Advocate , April 9,1870.
These sentences are correctly quoted, but
the brevity af the ticket, perhaps, forbade
the insertion of .a sentence before, and an
other after, the quotation, which would have
the effect of a qualification. During the
month of March I was detained at Chatta
nooga, by missing the connection of the
cars. Instead of a day of weary delay, kind
friends there made it a pleasant detention,
to whom acknowledgments are made; and
in this connection the letter makes mention
of what was, to me, a novelty.—“ Mrs. 0.
took me to the skating rink, and her daugh
ter gave us a specimen of skating, thirty feet
above the level of an ice-pond.” Then fol
lows the quotation as above:
I wrote of the skating-rink only as I saw it.
I bad not seen one before; have not seen
one since. Tho performance was graceful and
modest, and, as in my mind, the perform
ers were increased to a company of the same
sort, I saw no objection to it in a moral or
sanitary point of view.
Asa pastor, I have been accustomed to
commend in the people suitable recreations
and innocent amusements. They are a
mental and physical necessity. Hence I en
courage Mayday parties, Sunday-school pic
nics and reunions, and such like, among the
young—as having the double merit of being
pleasing, if not improving, and of keeping
them from those diversions which are vicious
in themselves or in their tendencies and as
sociations. Not long ago I advised a friend,
at the head of a large boarding school; to
introduce the roller-skating as moro anima
ting and serviceable, under his direction and
control, to young ladies, than listless prom
enades or the calisthenics usually practiced.
But I have accounts, from various quar
ters, of skating-rinks, and of things seen and
done in them, for which I would not like to
bear any degree of responsibility. A friend
writes from another State concerning some
of these, stating that certain persons had
done me the doubtful honor of quoting me
as commending them. Anothersoid: “You
are published as approving it. I went to
the Rink, and was more than amused—l
was shocked. Why, the lascivious handling
of the person, between the sexes, is even
worse than in the waltz.”
How different this is from the original
scene npon which the paragraph in my let
ter is based, the candid reader will judge.
And I beg to demur, when tho paragraph I
have written on the subject is quoted in such
connection of evil. If tho connection be
I egitimate, no alternative is left me but to
withdraw the paragraph so construed, alto
gether.
The definition of allowable popular amuse ■
ments is one of peculiar delicacy and diffi
culty, as all Evangelical Ghureheshave found.
Sobriety and moderation are not character
istic features of the persons for whom they
are designed. Hence, diversions that are
innocent in themselves may become harm
ful in tlieir degree or associations; others
are so essentially vicious, or inevitably prone
to abuse, that not temperance, but total ab-.
stinence, is the only safe rulo concerning
them.
Allow me to say that I have formally
joined my brethren, the Bishops of the
Methodist Episcopal Church, South, with
over two hundred ministerial and lay dele
gates in General Conference assembled, in
a deliberate testimony on the subject of pop
ular amusements, in which the following
sentences occur:
To tlie thoughtful, religious miud, the tendency
of Society in the direction of unrestrained indul
gence in all forms of sensuous gratification is
alarming. Whether this is the result of the reac
tion in the public mind from restraints necessarily
imposed by years of devastating war, or of an ad
vancing civilization which ministers mainly to ma
terial ends and luxurious tastes, it is certain that
the eager rush of Southern society after amuse
ments of one kind or another is ono of the start
ling signs of the times. . . YoungpersODS oTcul
tivuted minds and elegant manners, who may desire
to be sincerely religious, are specially open to dan
ger from'the tone of surrounding fashionable socie
ty, and from the plausibilities of the worldly spirit.
. . . A religion of mere culture, of amiabilities
and aesthetic tastes; ,of sentiment, opinion, and
ceremony may rendily allow participation in “di
versions which cannot be used in the name of tiie
Lord Jesus”—in dancing and reveling, in theatri
cal', operatic, and circus exhibitions, in tho gam
bling operations of tho turf—not to mention the
recently revived excitements of the cock pit. . .
Indulgence in worldly diversions of the class afore
mentioned wc hold to be inconsistent with the
baptismal vows of our members, and with their
Church-covenant. They bare solemnly engaged
to “renounce the devil and all his works, the vain
pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous
desires of the same, and tiie carnal desires of tiie
flesh,” so that they “ will not follow or be led by
them.”
I sincerely desire to avoid a construc
tion of any act or utterance that may seem,
in the leasV to abate anything from this tes
timony.
, The papers that have noticed this subject
will do me a favor by copying the foregoing.
H. N. MoTyeire.
Nashville, June, 1870.
Missionary.
To the Ministers and Members of the Methodist
Episcopal Church, South.
Rev. and Dear Brethren .-—You have learn
ed before this time, that the recent General
Conference consolidated the two Boards of
Missions, and elected one Secretary, instead
of two. “The Board of Missions,” as now
constituted, lias charge of all the Missions,
Foreign and Domestic, connected with our
Church. As will be seen by the Constitu
tion, tho Board is to take charge of all the
funds, not appropriated by the Annual Con
ference Boards, and are to appropriate the
moneys coming into the general treasury,
between the Foreign and Domestic Missions,
under their supervision. Hence, it is im
portant to have a clear understanding as to
the powers of the now as well ns the old
Boards.
Under the operations of tho old Boards,
each Annual Conference had a Board, aux
iliary to the Parent Board of Domestic Mis
sions. These auxiliary Boards were requir
ed to transmit to tho Parent Board at Nash
ville, one-tenth of all their collections; this
ten per cent, was, in part, the revenue of the
Parent Board, and was disbursed according
to the provisions of the Constitution.
In addition to the funds raised for Domestic
Missions, the Discipline required that there
should bo “annual collections in every con
gregation” for the support of Foreign Mis
sions. Now that the Boards aro consoli
dated, it becomes neeessary that all tho col
lections and donations for Foreign Missions
be forwarded to the general treasury, as well
as the ten per cent, on all collections for Do
mestic Missions in each Conference. The
General Conference, by resolution, made,
provision for the payment of Annual Con
ference drafts, heretofore drawn under the
operations of the old law. Here is the Reso
lution :
Resolved, That the appropriations already made
by the Anuual Conference Boards, shall be met
according to the law obtaining heretofore, wit.hont
respect to tbe present law requiring forty per cent,
to be forwarded to tbe Parent Board. -
Brethren cannot fail to perceive that
where ninety per cent, is retained under the
operations of tho old Board of Domestic
Missions, to pay Annual Conference drafts,
authorized at the last sessions, that special
collections must be made in every congrega
tion, for the Parent Board. If the Parent
Board is to rely alone on the ten per cent, for
its revenue, the coming year, then the sup
port of Foreign Missions will be cut off,
and our work in China, among the Indians,
and in the Mission Conference, must perish.
The General Conference, in adopting the
above Resolution, intended only to regulate
those collections 'made for Domestic Mis
sions, in the Annual Conference, and not to
interfere with the collections to be made in
every congregation, for the Board of For
eign Missions. We therefore earnestly urge
all our brethren—Presiding Elders, as well
as those in charge of circuits and stations—
immediately to lift the special collection for
the Parent Board, end forward the same to
A. H. Red ford, Treasurer of the new Board
of Missions. The drafts already issued,
must be met at maturity, and now appro
priations must be made to cany forward the
great work already commenced. Let there
be no delay. Besides tho support of our
Missions, there remains still a balance of
the old debt, that must be paid soon. Now,
dear brethren, act speedily. A small con
tribution, annually, from each member, will
sustain the grand missionaiy enterprises of
the Church; lay this subject before your
congregations; they will respond liberally
and cheerfully. Tell them that now. is a
crisis in our missionary movements, and
that we must have help, and have it imme
diately. We want extra donations and con
tributions. By the blessing of God, and
the hearty co-operation of our brethren,
the old debt will bo paid oil’, this dreadful
incubus will bo removed from tho Church,
and new life will be imparted to our mis
sionary efforts. We earnestly appeal to every
friend, of tlxe Church to help in this glonous
work. Send your contribution, be it small
or great; we will gladly take ‘‘two
or your sl’s, s2’s, slo’s, or SIOO s. Let
every man do his duty. We beg id! the
members and friends of our desolated, but
cloriously recuperative Church, to rally to
the resone. Brethren, the cause of Mis
sions in the Methodist Episcopal Church,
South, can, must, and WLLD be sustained !
J. B. McFerhin, Secretary.
A. H. Bedford, Treasurer.
Missionary Room, Nashville, June 12, 70,
To tiie Presiding Elders,' r Sontli fia.
Conference.
Dear Brethren .-—lt was made my duty at
the last General Conference, to notify you,
that in rearranging the estimates for Bish
ops’ Fund, there was an increased assessment
to our Conference, which takes effect this
year It is therefore necessary to re-adjust
vour assessments, for this Fund, by adding
to them, say, 50 per cent, to cover this in
crease and to pay traveling expenses of the
Bishop who attends onr Conference.
Jos. S. Key,
June 10-8 t Char. Board of Finance.
VOL. XXXIII. NO. 25.
Collections for Student at Wolford
College Preparing for tiie Minis
try from Charleston District.
As there was no column in the Minutes
last year for reporting collections made for
Beneficiary at Wofford College, the proper
credits were not given to the several charges.
I beg leavo so far as this District, is con
cerned now to do so. Tho year runs from
from Oct. 1868, to Oct. 1869, but for brevi
ty’ sake will use only the last figuro—this
will include nil moneys contributed for this
purpose up to date of which I have any
knowledge.
COLLECTIONS FOR 1800.
BctUel charge Rev. J. T. Wiclitmau, $ 40 00
Trinity charge Rev. Wm. P. Mouzon, 15.00
Spring Street,
St. Matthews circuit, Rev. Wm. Hutto,... 20.00
.Upper St. Matthews, Rev. T. E. Wauna
makev, 16.80
Providence, Rev. J. C. Stoll, 15.00
Eastern Oraoge, Rev. B. G. Joues, 10 00
St. Georges, Rev. J. L. Sifley, 10.50
Walterboro, Rev. Wm. Carson, 10.00
Cypress. Rev. A. R. Danner 10.00
Cooper River, Rev. VV. J. Hutson, 5.00
$ 152.30
RECEIVED Ul* TO JUNE 14TH, 1870.
St. Matthew’s circuit, Rev. Wm. Hutto,... $ 15.00
Cypress circuit, Rev. A. R. Danner, 10.00
Upper St. Matthews, Rey. J. E. Watson,.. 10.00
$ 35.00
A. M. Ciirietzberg, P. E.
The assessment made by order District
Conference for 1870, for this purpose was,
Bethel S4O 00, Trinity, S2O 00, Spring
Street $lO 00, St. Matthew’s] sls 00, Prov
idence sls 00 Walterboro’ $lO 00, St.
George’s $lO 00, Eastern Orange $lO 00,
Cypress $lO 00, Cooper River $5 00, Upper
St. Matthews $lO 00.
The Sunday School Convention of
the Union Springs District
Will be held in Fort Deposit, July 7—lotli,
1870.
programme of exercises.
Thursday night—Sermon by Rev. W. G.
Perry.
Friday, 9 o’clock, a. m. Devotional exer
cises.
9 % o'clock* Address by Rev. C. A. King;
Subject, lufant Instruction—its importanco.
Discussion.'
11 o’clock—Address by J.- A. Padgett,
Esq., ; Subject, Gradation of Sunday-school
Instruction. Discussion.
3 o’clock, p. m.—Devotional exercises.
3 % o’clock—Address by Rev. W. F. Nor
ton; Subject, Christianization the Ultima
tum of Sunday-school Instruction. Discus
sion.
8 o’clock—Devotional exorcises.
o’clock—Address by Col. E. B. Wil
kerson; Subject, Relation of the Suuday
sohool to the Family. Discussion.
Saturday, 9 o’clock, a. m.—Devotional ex
ercises.
9}<> o’clock—Address by Rev. W. M. Mot
ley; Subject, Relation of the Sunday-school
to the Church. Discussion.
IT"o’clock —Address b.Y Rev. J. B. Cot
trell; Subject, How shall music be made to
subserve the aims of the Sunday-sohool.
Discussion.
3-o’clock, r. m.—Devotional exercises.
317 o’clock —Address by Rev. W. W. Gra
ham ; Subject, Relation of the Sunday
school to the Benevolent Enterprises of tne
Church. Discussion.
8 o’clock—Devotional exercises.
BJ.j o’clock—Address by Col. R. H. Pow
ell; Subject, Influence of Sunday-school In
struction upon the Wellbeing of Society.
By order of the Board of Directors.
J. W. Shores, Oh'n.
W. C. Menefee, Sec. .
June 24-lt
The Union Springs District Con
ference, Alabama Conference
Will commence in Greenville, Ala., Wed
nesday July 27tli. Opening sermon on Wed
nesday night by Rev! Angus Dowling.
June24-2w J. W. Shores, P. E.
Elliertoii District Conference
Will bo held at Jefferson, beginning July
21st, and embracing Sunday 24th.
Juno 24-3 w J. H. Grogan, P. E.
The Griflin District Conference
Will commence at Forsyth, Wednesday
ovening August 10th, at half post 7 o’clock.
Bishop Pierce is expected to preside.
June 24-3 w W. R. Branham.
Marietta District Conference
Will be held at Carrolton, Ga., com
mencing Wednesday night August 10th,
Bishop Pierce will preside. Introductory
sermon by Rev. Jas. L. Pierce, D. D.
Pastors will please send tho names of del
egates and local preachers who expect to at
tend, to Rev. M. F. Malsby. Delegates will
travel at half fare on the Western & Atlan
tic Railroad, by getting a return ticket from
tho agent. I hope to be able to make the
same arrangement on the Atlantic & West
Point Railroad.
There is a stage lino from Newnan to
Carrolton, on Monday, Wednesday and
Friday. The gentlemanly proprietor, Mr.
W. B. Berry, has consented to take the
delegates at half-fare.
June 24 3w P. M. Ryburn, P. E.
To the Preaehcrs of the North Ga.
Conference,
Dear Brethren : —The Committee on Epis
copacy at the late General Conference, in
making their assessments for the support of
the Bishops for the next four years, appor
tioned to the North Ga. Conference, SISOO
of the amount to be raised annually, instead
of SIOOO, as hitherto. By resolution they
require the chairman of the Joint Board of
Finance of each Conference to make a now
assessment of the amount to be raised to
the different districts and charges, so as to
cover the additional amount to be raised.
I herewith submit tlio appropriation to
each District, and would call tho attention
of Presiding Elders to it, so that they may
divide the amount among the different
charges, hoping that they will urge the
preachers to a speedy collection of the same.
It is to bo hoped, that no circuit or sta
tion will stop at the amount assessed them,
if they are able to raise more, but add to
tho amount all the people are willing to give,
that there may be no deficiency. Dear
brethren, think of your own uccessities, and
remember that our Bishops’ living is put
upon the same footing as your own, and as
you would desire the Stewards, to act for
you, so do you act for the Bishops, for we
are their stewards.
The assessments are as follows:
Augusta District, .' $270
Athens “ 270
Atlanta- “ 270
LaGrango “ 160
Rome “ 125
Marietta “ ..... T ... 125
Griffin “ 125
Elberton “ 95
Dalilonega “ 70
SISOO
The amounts collected may be sent to me
by Express, or by a Post Office order at
Augusta, Ga., or handed to any of the Bish
ops, and the amount reported to me.
C. W. Key, Chairman,
Joint Board of Finance N. Ga. Cons.
June 17—2 t.
Jacksonville District Conference.
The District meeting at Jacksonville, to
embrace the third Sabbath in July, com
menciug on Wednesday before. Como bretli-
messengers of tlio Churches, rpjoipmg
in God’s salvation. So shall we fieach trails
gressors and sinners shall be converted.
June 10-BW. J. A. Wiggins, P. E.
Koine Dist. Meeting.
Arrangements liavo l_>een made by which
Ministers and Delegates coming hy R. R
will return free, if they have paid full fare
in coming. Delegates coming by the Sel
ma, Romo and Dalton R. R. will arrange to
take the train leaving Romo a£ 5:1() p. m.
arriving at Cave Spring at G: 10, p. m. Del
egates by It. It. will be received at tho De
pot ; those coming by private conveyance,
will report at the oilice of Dr. Watts.
The Opening seryiou will bo preached by
Dr. Boring on Thursday night, the 30th
inst. W, P. Rivers, P. C.
June 17—2 t.
Rome District Conference.
Will be held at Cave Spring, beginning
Thursday night, June 30th, and embracing
Sunday, July 3d.
Opening sermon by Rev. Dr. Boring.
Bishop Pierce will preside.
June 10-3 t H. J. Adams, P. E.
Marion, S, C. District Conference.
Will be held at Lynchburg, S. C., June
30 July 3d. Bishop Wightman is expected
to preside.
June 10-3 t J. W.‘ Kelly, P. E.