of the names of women in the roll of the Conference, moved "that no persons whose eligibility has been challenged shall be permitted to participate in the deliberations of this Conference until the committee shall have reported." Upon this cries of "No! no! no!" were heard from all over the floor of the house, and, on motion of A. B. Leonard, by an almost unanimous vote, the motion of J. B. Graw was laid on the table. Thus again the actual membership of the women delegates was confirmed. On the 4th of May the majority report of the Committee on Eligibility of Women was presented, which declared that the challenge of the women delegates was not sustained, and they were "not ineligible to this body." The report was signed by A. J. Kynett, Chairman; John W. Hamilton, David H. Moore, A. B. Leonard, Earl Cranston, E. T. Nelson, Samuel Dickie, and others. A long minority report was presented by T. B. Neely, which concluded by declaring that "to seat the contestants would tend to destroy all respect for the Constitution of the Church, and for the interpretations and decisions of the General Conference." The document was signed by H. R. Brill, J. B. Graw, J. M. Buckley, C. J. Little, Jacob Rothweiler, T. B. Neely, and others. The consideration of the subject involved in the two reports was set for ten o'clock in the morning of the following day. In due course the great debate came on-great only as to its length; for it consisted of the old, well-worn arguments which, by tongue or pen, had kept the Church in more or less of turmoil for nearly a third of a quadrennium. On the 6th of May, "A. B. Leonard moved to recommit the majority and minority reports, with instructions to find, if possible, a common ground of agreement, and report after the reading of the Journal to-morrow morning. Carried." (Journal, p. 102.) This weakening on the part of the leaders of the majority, with a full and final victory already within their reach, is difficult to account for. It transpired that Dr. Buckley, Dr. Graw, with perhaps other leaders of the opposition, insisted that their position in the case was a stern matter of conscience, based on the words of Holy Scripture, and that therefore they could never abandon it; but they took no account of the equally tender consciences of those who were opposed to their theories and interpretations. Another of the same party professed unalterable loyalty to "the Constitution," and from his position he never could be moved; therefore the leaders of the majority consented to fight the whole battle over again, with the view of finding "common ground." the case. But "common ground" was not the prime requirement in By consenting to a recommitment, the majority of the body lost its clear command of the situation; and the inevitable compromise report soon followed, which they now felt in honor bound to accept. The leaders of the minority, in private council, professed their great desire that, as the battle was lost to them, the women might be admitted in a "constitutional way," and not in the questionable attitude which they then occupied on account of the irregular voting in the annual conferences. Therefore it would be necessary, said they, to have the question of the eligibility of women to membership in the General Conference voted on once more by the annual conferences in a direct and "constitutional" manner so that hereafter there could be no dispute over their position. All this, and victory besides, the compromise report conceded, as the following quotations from the document will sufficiently show. Much of its space was taken up with details of the plan of voting on the question; but the vital points were as follows: "Resolved, 2. That in consideration of the general desire for the early and final settlement of the whole question, and in view of the proposed submission to the annual conferences, we recommend that no formal decision of the question of eligibility be made at this time. "The challenge not having been judicially passed upon, those occupying the seats in question do so under a title in dispute, yet without prejudice to the rights of either the challengers or the challenged, and without establishing a precedent." The Conference had become wearied of the subject, and to be rid of it, even with some loss in the premises, was a relief. Besides, it was a compromise, a piece of "common ground" immensely smaller than what they had possessed before the argument began; but, after all, it was not exactly their own quarrel. Time was passing, and, accordingly, the halfway surrender was ratified by a joint yea and nay vote, as follows: For the compromise plan (as above stated), 425. Against the compromise plan (as above stated), 98. Compromises may sometimes be useful as peacemakers, but more often they end in making more confusion. It was presumed that this proposition would be accepted by the annual conferences as a relief to the long-continued strife, and would be adopted with general consent. But such has not been the case. In some form or other the woman question still exists, and, because of "conscience" and "Constitution," there will, no doubt, be room for further history in the case. It only remains to be stated that the four women who were forced to endure the above trying ordeal, after having their rights vindicated by repeated votes of the Conference, either directly or indirectly, withdrew from the seats which that poor "compromise" had left "contested;" and their faces were, officially, seen no more. As a final acknowledgment of their rights as members of the House, the fact becomes one of historic interest that, in the matter of allowances for travel, and otherwise, they were treated like other lay delegates to the General Conference of 1896. Under the admirable administration of the General Conference Commission in 1896 there was no room for question concerning the right of lay delegates to receive the usual allowances as made to clerical members for expenses of travel. The treasury of the commission held ample funds for all legitimate costs incident to the great assembly. But the claim of lay delegates to have their expenses paid out of the funds of the Book Concern, as had previously been done, is manifestly an open disobedience of the Constitution of the General Conference, as contained in the Fifth Restrictive Rule. CHAPTER VII. CHURCH INSTITUTIONS AND SOCIETIES. THE Methodist Episcopal Church has become a great re ligious nation; and its various departments reach out their beneficent hands in countless and constant works of helpfulness. The Methodist population of the world, numbering over five millions of souls, and speaking in about thirty different tongues, makes occasion for a great system of organized charities, the like whereof, in some respects, the world has never Prominent among these, and first in order of time, seen. stands the METHODIST BOOK CONCERN. The earliest collateral work of the Wesleyan preachers was the circulation of Christian literature; and the earliest Methodist Book Concern was John Wesley himself. On his own responsibility, and at his own cost, the great leader became author, editor, and publisher of a whole library of useful volumes, which it was an important part of the duty of his "helpers" to persuade the people to buy. This "book-room" was the only and sufficient theological seminary for those itinerant preachers; and when some of them came over to America, they brought the book-room idea with them. From the "minutes of some conversations between the preachers in connection with the Rev. Mr. John Wesley," published in Philadelphia in 1773, it appears that one Robert Williams had presumed to reprint some of Mr. Wesley's books without permission of the author, for which he was mildly reproved, thus: "4. None of the preachers in America to reprint any of Mr. Wesley's books without his authority (when it can be gotten), and the consent of their brethren. "5. Robert Williams to sell the books he has already printed; but to print no more, unless under the above restrictions." The name of Williams appears in the list of "assistants" for 1774, but never in the list of appointments. Thus it would appear that it was not solely on account of their sense of Mr. Wesley's property in the books, but to prevent the setting up of a private enterprise instead of one which the little conference could control, that the above direction was given. That the preachers were not a "bookish" class of persons appears from the following, in the "Minutes" for 1781: "Ques. 8. Ought not the preachers often to read the 'Rules of the Societies,' the 'Character of a Methodist,' and the 'Plain Account of Christian Perfection,' if they have them? "Answer. Yes." Small indeed must have been the library which did not include these important little books. But Asbury was determined to improve the literary status of his preachers, and, through them, of his people. This appears from the appointment of John Dickins as "Book Steward" at Philadelphia, and Philip Cox as "Traveling Book Steward." This was at the conference of 1789. Dickins had the instincts of a scholar and the enthusiasm of a reformer. He had been educated partly in London and partly at the famous school at Eton, and, next to Bishop Coke, he was the most learned Methodist in America. His generous act of accepting the appointment as Book Steward, and furnishing the capital for the book-room himself, the amount being six hundred dollars-a considerable sum for those daysproves him to have been, in fortune as well as in learning, far above the average of the American preachers of that early day. The following pen picture from that rare book, The Methodist Discipline for 1792, will be useful in setting forth the Methodist Book Concern in its day of small things: "Of the Printing of Books and the Application of the Profits arising therefrom. "Ques. 1. Who is employed to manage the printing business? "Answer. John Dickins. Ques. 2. What allowances shall be paid him annually for his services? "Answer 1. 200 dollars for a dwelling-house and for a book-room. "2. 80 dollars for a boy; "3. 53% dollars for firewood; and "4. 333 dollars to clothe and feed himself, his wife, and his children. |