PERKINS LIBRARY Uulce University Kare Dooks 1903 Oift of Dr. and Mrs. Drcd Peacock '7%«- '^x-A. ^«!l-jk-^ (TV^-k^ \ ^t'^ Jl~^»^ ^. ^. ,-► Y-*^*"^ -*"~^ ~'"*v f-t ■■*~'^ -^ A^- tw ..y. -*j./S*v \ *^ii>,^6«i&?^??55^^}<^j^^ '¥4I<^19<.^< /yXcJiSp^^ ;fcr 5^^ A^c^tn^ y;^^:^ ;^- facts, to prevent such offences as from a misapprehension of N. I'acts might probably arise. Should the case transpire to its worst possi- ^ ble exte;it, and the Church bo driven to cut some off from her membership, as her only alternative, alas for us! — they are the children whom God hath given us, or brethren with whom we have taken sweet counsel, or, it may be, benefactors and chief friends. Wo are obliged to prestint this document to you in print, because it ij< not practicable to Mrite out so many cojiios as are nccossary for you; but \vc have taken all possible care to keep it stricllv witinn the Church, arrrl for vonr use; onlv. SfATEMEyr OF FACTS. The Quarterly Conference held on tlio HOth of August lust, passed tlir following resolutions, to wit: ^'Resolved, That the Gallery is the only proper place for the slaves hi our Churches; and that the Trustees be requested to remove the boxes on the lower floor, and place benches there with a railing up the centre aisle, for the use of the free persons of color." ^'RcsolvcJ, That it is expedient that there should be a small gate cut on each side of the large gate leading into Bethel yard, on a line with the gallery doors, for the use of colored persons entering the Church; and also that a paling fence be erected in all our yards, leading from each side-gate to the Church." ^'Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to communicate the forego- ing resolutioiits to the Board of Trustees, and request their immediate ac- tion upon them; and in case the Trustees are unable to do so for the want of funds, the Committee be instructed to raise a subscription for that pur- pose." Agreeably to the import of the above resolutions, a meeting of the Board of Trustees was called. The Quarterly Conference meeting had been held on Friday; the Societj' meeting was to be held on the next Tuesday evening, and the Committee charged with communicating the resolutions ofthe Quarterly Conference to the Trustees, A\ished the Board to meet previously to the Society meeting. The Board of Trustees was accord, ingly called to meet on the afcernoon of Tuesday, Sept. 3, but the shortness of the notice not giving time for some ofthe brethren to arrange their pri- vate business, or having business of pecuniary urgency which they could make no arrangement to leave at that time, there were but four members ofthe Board who met. This number was one less than a quorum, and of course no business was transacted. A free conversation however, took place as to the expediency of removing the boxes under the front gallc- ries, as proposed in tho rorolution of the Quarterly Conference, and the impressio'i on my mind from what passed, was, that thy brethren generally, not excepting iJie Commiliee, were of opinion, as I myself was, that the reso- lution to remove the boxes a;id make sittir.gs there for the free people of color, was unfortunate, ai;d had belter not be carried into efl'ect. I consid- errd it an evide:'.ce of this, that when we were about to part, the chairman ofthe Committee handed me the resolutions, sayi;;g, he supposed they v.ould be of no farther use, (or words to (hat effect,) neither of his colleagues ob- jecting any thing to it; and (hough I declined taking the paper from him, telling him it was his ai-d he should keep it till there was a meeting of the Board, he persisted in urging it upon me, with similar words as before, un- til I did take it. I was :;cver more satisfied ofthe truth of any fact, tlian at that time I wv.s, that the Committee entirely concurred in the opinion a- gain£,t a removal ofthe boxes; and when they left me I felt perfectly assur- ed that they meant io drop the matter. Farthest of all things was it from my thoughts, that the accidental failure ofthe Trustees at that time to form u quonuii, or the conversation held, was likely to be construed by the Com- niittee, or any one else, either as an intentional evasion, or a trial of strength .fgains! iho Qiiarlerly ('(.;'ference. As reasonably might it have been sup- posed that the Committee itself, by its seeming compliance, intcuded 'a snare for their brethren — a thought aUke unjust, I doubt not. ss it would be unkind. In the Society meeting I adverted to the subject of the removal nf the boxes, and the conversation above mentioned, and (it being a meeting of the whites alone) I took occasion to make some remarks intended to incul- cate christian charity and kindness towards the people of color, especially those who give evidence of sincere piety, and are otherwise respectable in their station. These remarks gave great oiFence to some persons, and were sadly, and as I conceived, strangely misinterpreted. The next day brought proofs of this, and among others, the following letter from the com- mittee enclosing a second copy of the same resolutions which they had left with me the day before. CHARLESTON, SEPT. 4th, 1833. Rtv. WiLLiAuM Capers, D. D. Chairman Board of Trusters. Rev. Sir, — You are aware that we have been appointed to convey to the Board of Trustees, certain resolutions passed by the Quarterly Conference, at a late meeting of that body. At our request you called a meeting of the Board, but for want ofa quorum no business was transacted. Tliough we consider it extronicly doubtful whether there ever loill be a quonun to transact this pnrticular business — the members of the Board being aware of the object, to which some of them are adverse — yet we think it imperatively our duty to make one more attempt to attain the object of our appointment, i. c. to ascertain whether the wish- es of the Conference are to be complied with or not, which we humbly conceive, is the only question for their discussion, they havi7is; nothing to do with the expediency of the act to be performed. We therefore respectfully request, Rev Sir, that you will con- vene the Board at an early day, and lay before them the enclosed communication. With due respect, We are. Your Obd't Servants, F. D. POYAS. .TNO. IT. HONOUR. WILLIAIM G. MOOD. In the above letter, the fiiilure of the Trustees to form a quorum is flatly charged to an intentional delinquency. And though the language of the letter does not express in direct terms, rxny severity or disrespect towards myself, yet the roughness and earnestness of its tone, so strongly in con- trast to the easiness of its authors some twenty hours before, led to a per- suasion in my mind that it owed its character, if not its existence, to some offence taken, to my remarks in the Society meeting. On the evening of the same da}', I saw the Committee, and learned from their own lips that it was so. They had not heard my remarks, being absent from the meeting, but they had heard o/* them, and therefore had Mritten the letter. I tried to convince them that their reporters mi.sconceived me, but they seemed satisfied I had more lik<^ly misconceived myself. Of course, I could not argue against that position. It was plain to me, that apart from the merits of the question, I was to be urged to promote a measure contrary to my a- vowed convictions of right, because I was so unfortunate as to have dis- plcascdf^the membcr.s of the Committee, or their friends, by expressing to the Society my humble views of what I thought^important to the Chinch. I was grieved. And as the Committee seemed to have transferred the of- J{.-it^'l G feucc olthe Minister m iliargc to the Cliainiiau of the Hoard ol" Trustees, and fo be preparing to punish me in the latter capacity, for what fliev were pleased to consider as a trespass in the former, I thou«rht it best, lest the Tnii-tees also should be involved in my affliction, (for there seemed to be wrath) to resign the place of Chairman of the Board; M'hieh from courtesy only, and not from any requirement of the Discipline. I and mv predeces- sors for sevei-al years, had been induced to hold. Another consideration moving me to this, was, lest it should be thought that my relation to the Board of Trustees influenced me unduly in their favor. In these circum- stances and with these views, I avowed to the Committee the puritvof m\ motives in my address at the Society meeting: my innocency of any inten- tional offence to any brother; and that if in the judgment of those who hoard me without bias, I iiad said what might reasonably oflend, I was ready to ask an}- brotlier's pardon before the Society, or even from the pulpit. My address in the Society meeting was delivered by me not as Chairman of the Board of Trustees, but ;is Minister in charge, in which relation I had the undoubted right, (and it was no less my duty,) there to give expression to what I thought important to the spiritual interest of the Church. I had done no more than this, in the present matter. I felt that I had delivered my own soul, and farther I would not act. I told them peremptorily, that they should no longer look to me for a meeting of the Board of Trustees. They seemed however, determined to force me to it; and just one week after this interview, I received from them the following letter. CHARLESTON, SEPT. 11th, 1833. Rev. Dr. Capers, Dear Brother, — Tn our last conversation you remarked that the Quarterly Confe- rence was not the Church, and that the members of the Church were not favorable to the measure contemplated in the resolutions of the Conference relati^e to the occupancy, by colored persons, of certain seats in our Chapels. We thought otherwise, and deter- mined to obtain an expression of the opinions of the members on that subject, as far as we could; we therefore drew up a paper, the purport of which was, that the members of the Church approved of the resolutions passed by the Conference, and recommending that they be carried into immediate effect. Our business would not allow us to devote much time to obtaining signatures , added to which, we are unacquainted with a large proportion of the members, and know not where to find them. We have however pro- cured the signatures of a very respectable number, (nearly all thewja/e members) whose names are sent herewith, a number which we think amply sutficient to answer the object we have in view. We send you a transcript of the names, the original signatures are in our possession, subject to your inspection at any time. In asking for signatures to this expression of the views of the members, we have met with but few, very few refusals. But two declined signing because they were opposed to the ine;isure, the others from various reasons — some because they thought the resolu- tions showed the free persons of color too much favor, by allowing them to occupy seats on the lower floor at all; others because they understood that you were opposed to the measure and were fearful of giving offence — and others again because they thought it unnecessary, as the Conference possessed ample power to act on the subject as they thought best. From all that we can learn — and we have taken some pains to obtain correct infor- mation — we feel warranted in saying, that at least nine-tenths of the members approve of the plan, indeed are an.\ious that it should be carried into effect; it remains to bo seen whether their wishes will be complied with or not. Thus we have performed what we conceive to bo our duty to the Conference and to the Church. Should this remonstrance (for such we think it may with propriety be call- ed) be treated with neglect, we fear the consetpionces will be serious. Wc sincerely iiupe however, that the propriety of submitting to the wishes of the Church will be so manifest, that tiiere will be no further hesitation, and that there may yet prevail "peace ;imong the hrethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." Very Respectfully, F. I). POYAS. JNO. H. HONOUR. WILLIAM G. aiOOD. The paper mentioned in the above letter, and wliich was very numcr- GU.sly signed, by men and women, boys and girls, is as follows. "The Quarterly Conference of the IMethodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, having passed certain resolutions, which appropriate the galleries in our Chapels for the occu- pancy of slaves; and providing that benches supply the places of the boxes on the lower floor, for the use of free persons of color: and also recommending that line fences be e- rected to separate the entrance into the Churches between the whites and colored: We, the undersigned members of the Methodist Episcopal Church, highly approve of the plan adopted by the Conference, and should the Trustees fail to carry it into immediate ef- fect, the Committee appointed by the Conference are hereby authorised and requested fo do so. "Charleston, Sept. 5, 1833." The following letters exhibit the whole corrcsporidencc which eu.sued between myself and the Committee. TARSONAGE, SEPT. 12, 1833. Dear Urethrkn — I have received your letter and the accompanying document. 1 feel mortified and grieved at the course you have taken. Can it be possible that all thiis has been done merely with a view to convince me that 1 was mistaken when 1 expressed a doubt whether the members of the Church collectively would recommend, under exis- ting circumstances, the immediate execution of your plan of the seats? What a pity that so much pains could not have been employed for some more certain good — as for example, seeing each member of your classes once a week regularly and constantly, to advise, reprove, comfort, or exhort them. Is it possible that you who have so little fime for such a service, can have seen two hundred and sixty members of the church, and got their names, men and women, boys and girls, in less than a week.' I presume not. But if you did this by others, how do you assure yourselves or me of the views and reasons «f the signers of your paper.' How do you know that they were fully informed •f all the material circumstances of the case, and so were prepared to act discreetly on the subject? It is not long since numerous signatures were procured, on a much less doubtful occasion than the present, most of which, I believe, would have been refused, had the persons been favored with a full understanding of the circumstances of the case. I deplore this whole course of proceeding. It may be proper enough for political clubs for ought I know, but thoroughly mischievous, calculated to engender partyism, and subvert all order, in the Christian Church. Surely brethren, you did not consider. What church could abide in peace, if, whenever a dithcult and distracting question should arise, deeply interesting to her spiritual interests, and which should be found grave enough to perplex her most experienced ministers, and the most sober and reflecting of her members, it should be submitted to the adjudication, at first sight, of boys and girls, minors, (as a large proportion of your signers are) by whoever might be adventurous enough to hawk about a paper from one to another privately, and get their signatures ex parte? And in the present case, 1 am grieved to learn, that such has been the rage to get subscribers, that even the Sunday Schoolchildren, and Sunday School hours, have not been spared! But your letter tells me it all has proceeded from my having expressed a doubt as to what the church might will in the case. Permit me then, now to express my great regret, that whereas so nmch was accorded in resiiect to a single unlucky doubt of mine, some other doubts, and even strong convictions ol judgment which I then expressed, and to which you answered nothing, could not have had a share of your consideration. 1 told you, in eflect, I was fully persuaded we were not in a situation to settle the matter satisfactorily any way. I was sati^^ed, both from the notes I had received, and the misapprehension of my well-meant remarks in the Society meeting, as reported to me by yourselves, there was too much agitation, not to say passion, prevalent, to make it desirable to pursue the matter furtlier for the present, and that 1 had determined to do no more in it. 1 believed the interests of religion among us, required this of me, and 1 believe so still. It is not apparent what character you attribute to the document which you have sent me — whether it be ajithoritativc, as the voice of the church which you would oblige me to obey; or persuasive, as evidence of the wish of the church. I cannot consider it, however, in eith;/ and most respectable members of the church are not there! ~1 large proportion of boj/s and girls, 7)iinors.'.'.' Certainly you have not examined the paper with that attention to which it is entitled. You throw out a taunt respecting the non-performanre of ourduty as Class-leaders. — We are not conscious of deserving it. If we ivrrc negligent in this matter, your obli- gations as minister in charge, reqiiired that jou should pursue a very dilTerent course. With respect to the character of the "document." You will not regard it even as "persuasive, as evidence of the wish of the Church," because, forsooth, you have no reason to believe that the signers knew what they were about.. Quite complimentary, truly! Did not the paper itself most plainly and explicitly state the object upon its very face.' Or do you think so meanly of the members, as to suppose they would sign a pa- per without knowing what it was.' Or do you suppose (and perhaps this is coming uigh- esl to the mark) that the Charleston IVIethodists are such stupid ignoramuses, as not to know what is what.' We say nothing of tlie ungenerous insinuation, that tec used de- ceptive measures to obtain signatures. But you will not only not consider it as either authoritative or persuasive, but you will even disregard and rebuke the members of the church, for presuming to express their wishes on a subject in which they leel deeply interested. We know as little about political clubs as you do, but if this does not squint mightily towards despotism, we are nmch mistaken. Have a care, brother, that you do not sutler your passion to get the better of your judgment. We notice your sneering remark respecting our wisdom, and thank you for your ad- vice to us to take counsel. We pretend not to be wise: of the philosophy of the schools we know nothing; but we do claim to have some few grains of common sense; and we have taken counsel, (not of mnlattoes to be sure.) We have not acted hastily or un- advisedly as you seem to suppose, but have carefully examined the subject ourselves, and taken the opinions of those whom we regard as having some pretensions to wisdom, and to whose opinions you yourself would show some deference; and the result is, that de- cency, propriety, decorum, custou), and every tiling else, require that a distinct line should be drawn between the whites and mnlattoes in our chapels, and that it be doue speedily. Vou charge us very unjustly with contriving a dilemma for you, and say we should not complain if wc find ourselves involved in it. We have contrived no dilemma for you; if you are in one, it is of your own creation. When the subject of colored persons occupjing the seats of whites, was spoken of again and again at the Loader's meetings, you expressed a firm determination to have nothing to do with it, as it was no part of the business of a minister, but belonged solely to the membership. Why did you not adhere to that resolution? Why, when the members took the subject in hand, and expressed a determination to go througli with it, did you interfere, and obstruct thorn in their course? If you had permitted the members to act, and not have interfered with what you your- self declared was no part of your duty, the business would have been settled before this, quietly and peaceably. Permit us to mention some of the consequences that may result from this business, unless it be satisfactorily adjusted; and we beg that you will calmly and dispassionately consider them. If colored persons are allowed to sit among the; white members, we have reason to be- 10 iieve that uol a tew olllic latlrr will leave tlie cliarcli. This jou may con-'ider a small iimtter; and so it is, when compared with what will probably ensne. You know that ihere are men ciiou«:h in Charleston, who will gladly avail themselves of any thing that may tend to injure the .Methodist Cliarch, and bring it into disrepute. Now then, sup- pose a considerable number of the mcnibcrH resign, for llie avowed reason that they are compelled, contrary to their views of propriety, to associate with a clas-* of persons, be- tween whom and the whites, the law has drawn a broad line of demarcation, and who are regarded by the public authorities with a suspicious eye. Think you it will not be seized on with avidity by the enemies of the church, as a pretext for atfording them rea- son to believe that there is "something rotten in Dcnniarl;?" Will not all the changes possible be rung upon it, to make the public believe that the Methodist ministry are de- signing men, of whom they sliould beware? How would it read in a public print, that a number of the members of the .Methodist C hurch had seceded from her communion, simply because their feelings as Carolinians would not permit tliem to sit side by side in their public assemblies, with mulattoes! And then what would become of your black «.lasse.*? Aye, what would become of your black missions? Think not these are im- ages conjured up from the "vasty deep," lo affright you. They are not the fancied creatures of a dLK.\R Bhetiirkn, — 1 .should have .spoken to you instead of writing my former let- ter, but 1 thought words put down on paper would be least liable to misconstruction, or if not, could be reconsidered with greater certainty. You will phase accept only so much as this sentence in reply to all the epithets contained in your present letter to me. There are some mistakes in your letter, the correction of which may change your views of a much more important matter, namely, the course of your own conduct; and in hope of this, and that convinced of your error, you will forthwith correct it, I will con- fine myself to pointing out those mistakes. Ycu quote from my letter as follows — "What church could abide in peace if when- ever a difficult and distracting question should arise, deeply interesting to her spiritual interests, and which should be found grave enough to perplex her most experienced' Ministers, and the most sober and reflecting of her members, it should be submitted to tlie adjudication, af^;s< sj'g/i^, of boys and girls, minors." To this quotation you re- ply by denying that there exists any such diflicult or perplexing question, or, any such perplexity with respect to a question, of which you say that the Quarterly Conference 11 (leterniiucd on the propei- course to be pursued, and appointed you to pursue tliat course in its name. You have here made two mistakes, both of which are material to a right understanding of the matter in hand. The first is, respecting t like- lihood that any different arrangement of the seats from the present one, would elVcct a remedy of the evil. The decent and orderly people of color only, would observe it (as they iiavf done our present order) while the rest would continue to do .-ls they now do, seating themselves intention;illy out of place. The unauthorised and scandalous intru- sions of these wenches excepted, 1 am sure the line of demarcation between the sittings of the colored people and the whites is as broad in the IMetliodist Church as in any other in the city. \Ve make no question (never did, and never can) whether the whites and colored ou^ht to sit side by side in the churches. Another mistake which oujlit to be corrected, respects my having said I iiad no reasons to believe that the pei-sons who signed the paper you sent me were generally well appri- sed of what they were about, and all the important circumstances and bearings of the measure they seemed to recommend. This was said neither for "compliment" nor the reverse; bnt just for the naked truth's sake. Your mistakes led them unsuspectinclv in- to error, as appeared on the face of the document. The wording of that paper imports ll'.at the Quarterly Conference had ordered the change of the sittings, and appointed you le execute their order; and the good peopli- (not excepting the children) signed their names, doubtless, confiding in the accuracy of the rcpn-sentations there n)ade, and mean- ing to confirm the will of the Conference as expressed in its resolutions. The p.-iper. however, was so fniltily framed as at the same time to approve of the resolutions, and provide for their direct subversion. Another mistake, close following this, is, that I disregarded and rebuked the members of the Church for j)resuniing to express their wishes on a subject in whicli tliey feel deeply interested. I disregarded the document vou sent me, because it was all wrong, but 1 did notdisregard the members of the Church; and Irelniked not thmi, but the faulty procedure by which their names had been gotten to a paper which seems to approve of the resolutions of the Quarterly Conference onlv to set them aside and art another way. .\notlier mistake, and the last 1 shall notice, leads you to accuse me of interfering to prevent the lay authorities oftlie church from acting; and i\va\. after \ had made repeated ileclarations that 1 considered the matter as belonging rightfully to their adjudication. I have done nothing to prevent the regular action of the lay authorities of the church, nor will I, in any matter which is appropriate to them. What I have done, and mean to do, is only directed against your indiscretion, by which all the functionaries of the church, lay and clerical alike, should be superseded. I judge the present authorities can do what ought to be done, withoutgetting up anew one overall the rest. ffufFer me once more to remind you that you w-ere sent to the Trustees. Why should J'on mi-s your way? I am not a Trustee, (jo then to the 'I'rustees whither you were sent, and keep to the resolutions of the Quarterly Conference. Tfthe Trustees cannot, or will not, sanction your wishes, or the wishes of the Conference, you are welcome to tell them of the wishes of the people; but dont take upon yourselves to supersede then;, and do llieir work for them, whether they will or not. To the numerous personalities of your letter, I can make no answer, except, perhaps, to icferyouto Jtt. Cor. iv. 1-5. I am brethren, faithfnilv vours, W". CAPERS. CHARLESTON, SEPT. 17, 1833. Rev. Dr. Capers — Dear Krollier— Your la.«t letter is principally taken up with cndeavorin^r to prove that we have (^omruilted sundry errors, both as to the (jueslion at issue and the couree of our own conduct. And )st, with respect to the fjuesiion. You say your remark was not intended of that which had been submitted to the Quarterly Conference, simply as it then stood, whether the free people of color had not better he seated where the boxes are under the galleries, hut as it afterwards beratne embarrassed. We have yet to b'arn how , or in what way, the question has since become embarrassed. We confess we are.at a loss to conceive of the existence of any other ((uestion, than whether the i— ;i.!ii!if>:i- sh.ill l>f '■.•irricd into effect, or not. It is conceded, we believe, that the Con- 13 ference iias the riglit to pass the resolutions, and wo know ol'no power — save the churcli in its corporate capacity — that can set aside those resohitions, or delay the carrying of them into efiect. WHiat voii call our second mistake is, with regard to the object ofoiu" appointment, and the duties appropriated to us. We certainly have made no mistake in this matter, as we never for a mo'iient imaj'ined, as you suppose we did, that tre should et^'ect the change of the sittings. VVeare well aware, that anv change appertaining to tlie build- ings, is appropriate ^o the functions of the I5oard of Trustees; nor have you even attempt- ed to prove that we supposed otherwise. We are equally welt aware of the duties ap- propriate to our appointment; and have yet to learn that we have assumed the perform- ance of any other; and bv what mode of reasoning yon have arrived at the conclusion, that we have "made the duties of our appointment the unauthorised occasion of a proce- dure, in which wc have superseded the resohitions under which we profess to act, the Trustees, and all known regulations, or usages of church order," we are uttcrlj at a lo8S to conceive. What are the facts of the case? Simply these. The day subsequent to the meeting of the Conference, we waited on vou, as the rhairman of the Hoard of Trustees, and re- quested you to call a meetii'g of that body. You did so, but in conse(]uence of a By Law of the I^oard, requiring five of its members to be present to transact business — (which Hy Law bv the way was long since abrogated by the Ciuarterly (Conference, by a resolu- tion proposed bv yourself) — nothing was done. The subject underwent some discussion bv the individuals present, when it was most broadly intimated that some few of the co- lored members should be consulted, and if th(!v approved of the plan, very well; if not, nothing ought to he done. Tliis was superseding the resolutions of the Conference to some purpose. As those who were present however, professed to be unable to act for want of a (piorum, the}' separated without doing anv thing in the premises. But be it re- membered, that although they could not aj)propriatea few dollars to carry into ertect tlie resolutions of the Conference, /t»r want of a quoriitn, they could find a way to attend to the re-pairing of Cundjerland Church, "7f/()r?/»f (ir ?/o quorum." As we were very desirous of performing the duties appertaining to our appointment, we addressed a letter to you the next day, reijuestiiig that another meeting of the Board might he called; and as our business would not permit us to throw away another after- noon, (which would be the case should there not be a quorum) we enclosed a letter ad- dressed to the Board, containing the resolutions of the Conference, which letter we re- (|uested you to lay before them. To this communication you gave a verbal reply, as follows' "You would not put your right hand, oryour little finger, to the business again, nor would you call a meeting of the 'I'rustees." .And what induced this most strange determination? Why you did not believe that the (.'hurch approved of the resolution of the (Conference! Thus far, you will admit, that we were in the strict line of our duty. But now comes the sequel. In order to prove to you that the church did approve of the resolutions of the Conference, and thereby induce you to call a meeting of the Trustees, we procured the signatures of a large number of the members, to a paper in which their approval is expressed. At this you took offence. .\nd this is the "head and front" of our oflend- ing. We are free to confess that this act was not required of us by the Conference, for it was not possible that they could foresee the necessity of it; but we do maintain that there was nothing to forbid it. You again recur to the question, and quote from our letter a prediction as to what "would be the result of compelling the members, contrary to tlieir views of propriety, to sit beside colored persons in the church. On this you remark, that there are lewd wench- es who obtrude themselves into the sittings appropriated to the ladies, and that the gen- tlemen will not interfere to rid our wives and daughters of this most scandalous intrusion. V\'e think it would be a didiciilt matter to discriniinate between the "lewd wenches," and other colored persons: of this we are certain, that it is next to impossible to prevent them from sitting where they do, unless all colored persons indiscriminately are preven- ted. Wiiether there is "the least likelihood that any difierent arrangement of the seats from the present one would efiect a remedy of the evil," or not, is not now a matter for discussion. The Conference believed it would, and made provision to have it done, and nothing now remains but that it be done. Whether it is made a question, or not, wheth- er the whites and mulattoes ought to sit side by si.le in the church, dors not signify; the fart will be so unless the proposed alteration is erecterl. 14 Under the head of ''another misiake," you mv. — 'I'lie wording of ili.it paper (ilie one signed by the n)Ptnl>t'rs) imports that the Quarterly Conference had ordered the change of the sittings, and appointed us to execute their order. Not so. The wording of the paper imports, tliat the Ciuarierly Confercjice liad ordered the chance, l)ut not that we were appointed to execute tlie order. It imports, that if the 'rru-stet-s fail to do it. they (the momliers) astiie supreme power, give authority to have it done. Shall we tell you a secret? The paper was so worded, because we had good reason to apprehend that the Trustees would not execute the order, and because you had said the Conference could not comjiel their obedience. The list mistake you notice, is our accusing you of interfering to prevent the lay au- thorities of the church from acting; and you say you have done nothing to prevent the regular action of the lay authorities. Sufler us to ask a question or two. Can the Trus- tees act without a meeting? Is it not the province of the Chairman to call a meeting be- fore one can be held? Are you not Chairman of the Board? When these question^ are answered, it will soon appear whether you have obstructed the regular action of the lay authorities or not. You conclude, by reminding us that we were sent to the Trustees, and not to you. AVe are not very conversant with parliamentary usages, but we believe the onlv proper way to address a Hoard, is through their chairman. You are the Chairman of the Hoard of Trustees; we therefore addressed you in the first insi.ance; you acknowledged the cor- rectness of the procedure, l)y calling a meeting of the Hoard, and you liave also kept in your possession a letter addressed to them by us; it is therefore too lato to say that we have mis-sed our way. One more remark, and we are done. Under the head of "the object of our appoint- ment," you say we were appointed for thj purpose of formally communicating to the Trustees the request, not the order, of the Conference. It is doubtless distinctly in your recollection, that the original resolution before the Conference, made \\. obligatory on the Trustees to carry the resolutions into effect. You suggested to the mover, (not to the Conference, mark) the propriety of altering the phraseology, so as to make it a request in order \o prevent ilt-feclini^; you were thou told that the language was designed, but nevertheless, in deference to you, the alteration was made. We therefore think it is ta- king an undue advantage of the circumstances, to lay so much stress upon the word or- der. Bought wit, however, says the old adage, is best, if not paid too dear for; and the mover of the resolutions will be careful for the future, how he suffers his politesse to get the better of his judgment. We arc, reverend and dear sir. Most truly yours, F. D. POYAS. JNO. H. HONOUR. WILLIAM G. MOOD. P. S. As we have now got back to the place from wlience we started, (the Trustees) we hope very shortly, to have an answer to the letter addressed to them some two weelijj ago; and then for the "contingent" duty. It is perceived that I leff the lust \\ ord, and u lon^ one, to the Conunitr- tce. I did not answer th:;ir hist letter, because I had huiriicci (hey were jiot in a temper to j)iofit by what I nii<.'ht .sa}-. Having now laid the whole correspondence hft'ore you, however, ] ^\ ill add to it several explanatioiis M'hich 1 hope will prove sJilisfactory. 1st. To their strong and repeated assi rliows that they htsii imt inistakcn or exceeded the duties assigned them by the Quarterly Conference; and that the paper t<^> which ihiv had so industriously proctireo subscribers was not a superceduru of (he authorities of (he Church; -no other answer is necessary (ban the words of (he paper itself, which nuefiuivocally atithor- isn (he (Jominitlee to do ■\^■ll;lt (be Quarterly Conl'-rciice barle them reijuest 15 the Trustees to do; and that, iiidependenth" of any other authority besides the paper itself. 2. My reasons for dcchning to act asiy longer as Chairman of the Board of Trustees, were as I have stated, and not as they say. I did in- deed express a doubt whether the Church generally would approve of the removal of the boxes; but this was said in the course of remarks on the inexpediency of the measure, and not as a reason for declining to act as Chairman."^ 3. But no matter for what cause I chose to decline an office which no one will pretend I was bound to sustain, how came it to pass that I should be accused by these brethren, of prevetiting the lay authorities of the Church from acting, merely because I would not act as Chairman twelve days after I had told them explicitly that J would not? The Board was as competent to act without me as with me. 4. The affirmation that I kept a letter which was directed to the Board of Trustees, is as gratui- tous as the other about preventing the lay authorities of the Church from acting. The letter was left at my house, and remained there only until it was convenient for me to deliver it to one of the Trustees. 5. What they say respecting the Trustees findiisg a way, ''quorum or no ([uorum," to at- tend to the repairs of Cumberland Church, is as easily set aright. The Trustees passed no act v hatever at the time referred to; bul it being men- tioned that the floor of the Church under the front gallery had sunk a lit- tle, owing to the decay of the girder, tliey went thither, each of his omh accord, merely to examiiio what was the matter. G. The Committee pro- fessed not to know how the quest io!i about the removal of the boxes could be embarrassed after the Conference passed its resolution. Their mean- ing plainly is, that the Quarterly Conierence having once passed the reso- lution, there was no room left to consider any thing that might happen, but right or wrong it nnist be carried into efTect. Noav (to say nothing of the province of the Presiding Elder, or the Minister in Charge, during the in- terval) if the resolution of the Quarterly Conference was thus absolute and illimitable, why did not the Committee who held it to be so, act strictly and exclusively by its authority, and not get up a paper to empower them to do what the Quarterly Conference had requested (not ordered as thev say) to be done? And why did they not respect the mandate more than to seek for another authority, to get the \^ ork done in a difllrent May from that required by the resolution of the Quarterly Conference? If the resolution of the Quarterly Conference was absolute in one of its parts, it must have been equally so in the other; and if the removal of the boxes must neces- sarily take place without respect to circumstances, because a resolution of the Quarterly Conference required it, then ir was equally necessary that their removal be effected by the persons, and in the way, proposed by the the same resolution, of that same Quarteily Conference. The circum- stances of the case which influenced our conduct with respect to it, were briefly these. The resolution for removing the boxes under the front galle- ries and placing open seats in their stead, for the use of free people of color was considered in the Quarterly Conference, simply in view of the convenience of the whites, and a reasonable accommodation of the color- *It will be seen that I foresaw the evil and resigned my place as Chairman ex officio of the Board, sometime before these letters; and that these meVi who here were so loth ta let me do s«, have since accused me of holding to the office from a love of power. IG 0(1. Nothing >vas said uf any iflect likely (o he produced on the hlacks: and unJortunatoly. it seems not to have occurred to any hrothcr, that they might he injured hy if. Hitherto, the free colonid peoplo helongiag to the (-"hurch have genernlly set in the galleries. The resolution ot" the Quar- terly Conference proposed not to exclude them thence, or it Avould have amounted to their exclusion from tl'c Church; for the place of the hoxcs could not hold them, and if they could, ihcy vould hardly choose to expose themselves to the scorn of the hlacks, hy sitting there.' But if they re- mained in the galleries, crowded to excess as they now arc every sabhath, what should become of (hose who now fill the boxes? Could it be right to deprive all these of seats in the Church, in order to make room for the very tew colored j)eople who might be willing to sit there in despite of the indignation of the blacks? lint it was also found that the boxes had been erected, (we believe at the itista!icc of Bishop Asbnry) for the humane and charitable purpose of affording scats to the decripit, and such as from any infirmity might not be able te get up with safety into the galleries. Of these, there are a number in the membership of the Church; and not a few who for many years have worshipped with exemplary piety and constancy. Ought we to turn away the most needy from the pastures of Christ? Still farther, an earnest remonstrance was brought to us by the free hlacks, Avho complained that while some of their most worthy old friends would be excluded the Church, it would be adopting a policy in the Church equal- ly unjust and oppressive to the blacks, aiul inconsistent with our civil in- stitutions — the law of the land making no such distinction between black and brown people, as was proposed to be made. All these things, brethren, coming to our knowledge after the adjournment of the Conference, would it have become us, as put in trust v.ith the Gospel, easily to acquiesce in the ■Avishes of the Committfjc? Could we do less than remonstrate against their course in getting a pa])er handed about from member to member (when you were not yet informed of the difficulties of the case) with so manifest a design to pull for a powei- to do their own will at all hazards? Or could we decline to rebuke a procedure which seemed to abuse vour confidence to get possession of a rod with which to smite and break asunder the bands of the Church? The Committee, agreeably to the postscript of their last letter, applied to the Board of Trustees; and the following extracts of the minutes of the Board will sufHcicntlv inform vou of its transactions. "At a meeting of the Board of 'iVustees of the Methodist Episcopal Church held at Trinity Church, Sept. 19, 188.3. Present, H. Muckinfuss, Sam'l Seyle, S. .1. Wagner, Geo. Just, (ieo. Critzburg, and Abel M'Kee." *^Reso1ved, That we feel willing to carry the resolutions of the Quarterly Meeting Conference into effect as directed, but state, that from the present embarrassment in regard to the funds, they are unable to have the altera, tions made, being nearly 3000 dollars in debt for our new Parsonage, and they having put all the means they ])ossessed, in requisition to raise funds, and have with great difficulty been able to pay up the instalments in the Bank as they became due. They therefore most earnestly request the Quarterly Meeting Conference to suspend the j)roposed alterations, until the Trustees shall be in funds to meet the ex])ense." 17 •*At a mkktixo of the Board ot* Trustees of the Mt;(hodist Episcopal Clmrcli, held at Trinity Church, Oct. 10, 1833, present, Henry 3Iuckin- fiiss, Samuel Seyle, George Just, George Chritzburg, und Abel McKee. "Brother Bass stated to the Board, that one of the Committee told him that they had made collections, in order to have the alterations executed, but that he could not state what amount had been collected. The Board of Trustees, after consultation, came to the following resolutions: to wit. Kesolred. That the Board believe, tliat the proposed alterations will tend rather to injure than promote the welfare of the church. They, in parti- cular, believe that the fences across the yard, will invite lliose who may be disposed to disturb the colored people, to do so, as the fences will screen them from observation. — Also, as the boxes were partly, if not wholly hitcnded, for the accommodation of the infirm and lame old colored peo- ple, who were not able to get up stairs; by taking the boxes from them, they will be driven from the church, or compelled to stay cut of doors. Therefore, it would be very desirable to the Trustees to have the subject reviewed by the Quarterly Meeting Conference, in order to arrange some plan, that might, as far as possible, meet. the views and approbation of all concerned. Resolved, That as the Board of Trustees have no certain inlormation of the amount collected by the committee, whether it is suflicient or not to meet the expense of the alterations, they think it most prudent not to com- mit the church or themselves, by engaging to have the work done, and make the church liable for the deficiency, should there be any. They think it best, therefore, not to interfere with the committee's arrangements. Resolved, That the Trustees, in order to promote the peace of the church, and prevent any collision or misunderstanding Avith the committee of the Quarterly Conference, Mill not put any obstacle in their way, should thev think proper to have the alterations made; and that they may be noti- fied M'here the kevs of the different churches may be had. in order to give them readv access." Agreeably to the last resolution above, the committee was informed that the kevs of Cumberland church were to be had at brother Abel McKee's, those of Trinity at the old house in the church yard, and those of Bethel at the Parsonage. After this, the resolutions of the Quarterly Conference was suffered to sleep. But how is it to be accounted for, that the brethren who had rais- ed so much disturbance about those resolutions — who could recognize no power in the functionaries of the church, no matter how embarrassed, either "to set them aside, or delay the carrying of them into effect," — that these same brethren, the moment they were told that no fiirther oppo- sition would he made, dropped the matter, choosiiig not to act? We avou- der thev were not afraid of incurring a share of the sins which they had so unsparingly charged upon others. AVould they not themselves obey the Quarterly Conference? And above all, would they dare to set aside the (!xtra authoritv which thev had so laboriouslv gathered here and there, bit bv hit. from "IHE SUPREME POWER''' What were reasons worth 3 18 \o llieui, which they had rei'uscd to otliers? Had they not been shakiugr heaven and earth to compel their brethren to rehnquish their reasons, con- science, every thinjr. to the authority of an ill-advised request of the Quar- terly Conference? The tnith seems to be, that the reasons ngainst the measure had become generally known, and commended themselves to every one's conscience. Every body saw that the resolution had been passed prematurely, and ought to be relii:(iui.shcd for some other arrange- ment. We would be glad to believe that, by some means or other, the brethren of the committee happened not to learn, till just at the time ol" the last meeting of the Trustees, what our reasons were. If such was the case, it is fair to believe, that they acted from a sense of riglit; but it" not, the conclusion seems to us unavoidable, that thcv watched the tide. At any rate, "the i)Oor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind,"' the most miserable and the most rrcedy, have not been driven from the house of God; and ther.' may they still be suffered to wait on .lesus, and enjoy his grace. But although tiie committee chose nr)t to remove the boxes, the chuich was not suiFered to repose in peace. After having goaded (intentionally or not) the minister in charge, into a withdrawal of himself from the relation of Chairman to the Board, which long custom, approved by the Board and the Quarterly Conference, had appropriated to him; and after having driven the Board of Trustees to leave the ground clear for them, to do as they pleased respecting the boxes, we still were stunned with the noise of increasing agitation. It soon became apparent that the committee had not been alone. The uproar waxed loaded and louder against the Trus- tees. They were said to have assumed a mastery of the church — to have refused obedience to a positive order of the Quarterly Conference — to have disregarded the authority of the Discipline; — that the church property was in danger — that the Trustees refusing to obey the Quarterly Conference, must have laws made for them by the members of the church, which they should be made to obey; — and finally, that the property of the church in the city, was vested in the corporation of the church as a unit, without respect to our connexion with others under the authority of the (leneral Conference — that the General Conference has nothing to do with the tem- poral affairs of the churches — that the Trustees ought not to be, and must not be, elected as the Discipline directs, and held responsible to the Quar- terly Conference; but they must be elected by the membership, and held responsible to them. It became but too evident, that something like an organized opposition to the economy of the church, as now prescribed in the Discipline, was on foot; and the act of the State Legislature of 1787, Avas to be the wedge for riving asunder the institution of Methodism. Still our esteem for brethren led us to hope the evil might be averted. We appealed to the Discipline, but they planted themselves on the act of Incor- poration — We told them it was very doubtful whether the church could now claim to be a corporation by authority of that act; but they replied, we knew nothing about it — were not conversant with such things. We urged, that if the act of Incorporation was valid, which we believed not, it did not oblige them to infringe the Discipline, — that the act could not have been intended to put the economy of the church under legislative con- trol, as if it prescribed a constitution for the church in giving it a charter; — that what the Legislature had granted w ere cit*il and not ecclesiastical 1-9 ^>i'ivileges, and tor civil and not ecclesiaslical uses. But vhetlier our brethi'cn could answer us, or not, wc could prevail nothiRg with^^tliem. They held that it was their right — the people were the supreme power: (meaning that the nienibcrs oi' a particular society were supreme over tho General Conference, and all the established rules of our discipline.) And for all this, the Trustthe right of his office. If they might do this with respect to the chair, might they not also do the same thing v%ith respect to the pulpit? Did he hold either the one, or the other, from (hem? The Presiding Elder disclaimed holding the chair by their appoiistmont, and brethren were urged not to force us to the necessity of either disniis>i!ig the meeting, or continuing in it against our consciences. They hdd it as a question oi' form, whereas it was one of conscience with us. It would be an act of "disobedience to the order and discipline of the church," which we had most solemnly promised to obey, were we to identify ourselvc s with such proceedings. It was proposed to take the sense of the members presci-t, whether they would persist iu affirming, that brother Bass was the chairman of the meeting by the vote that had been so strange ly put, or would acknowledge him such by virtue of his office. A majority iiisisted \w. irhuuld be coiisidered chairman only by the vote. He then, at my request that he would dismiss the meeting, prayed, and pronounced the benediction, and (he meeting being thus dis- missed, we retired. As we were leaving the house, I requested all who were willing to abide by the Discipline, to accompany us, and added a few admonitory words. This was answered by one o{' the brethren, (the same who had been so prominent in the oppositioh) who called on all those who were not disposed to be governed by the dictum of an individual, to re. main. U'i h'ive been furnished with a copy of the proceedings of the very- extraordinary meeting, -which was held by those members m lio thought proper to remain for such a purpose. Our copy is autheiificaliy sigiied by the individuals who acteJ as chairman and secretary of the meeting. It is as folU>ws: Al u s))(.cial meeting of the membeis of the Methodist Episcopal Church ortliarlos- toii, So. Ca. ill their Corporate capacity, held in Trinity Church in Charleston, on 'I'ues- ilay evening, the 12th Nov. 1833: Hrother .lohii II. Honour was nominated, and took the chair, and brother W. W. • ixHirev fhfTjen as Secretary. 21 Tlie mcetini; was lliPii called to order, and on molioii of brotlier Johu Kingnian, it was resolved, that the Chairman read, for the information of the meeting, the act of in- corporation of divers roli:;ions societies therein named, passed 27th ?»lavc!i, 1787, and the act to which that refers^ passed 26th .Alarch, 17S4; which was according!)- done. On motion of brotlier John Kingman, it was then resolved, that the Chairman read, for the information of tin; meeting, and for their adoption, the following preamble and rules; whicli was accordingly done. Preamblk. — Whereas, by the 3d clause of the act of the Legislature, passed 27tb IMarch, 17S7, incorporating the .Methodist Episcopal Church in the city of Charleston, it is declared, that it shall have perpetual succes.sion of olliccrs and members, and a common seal, with power to change, alter, break and make anew the same, as often as they the said corporation shall judge expedient. .And whereas in the same acta reference is made to an act pa.ssed 2Cth IMarch, 1784, entitled "An Act incorporating divers religious socie- ties therein named," vesting in the Methodist Episcopal ("hurch, &c. all the powers, privileges and advantages which are specified and expressed in the same; and, among other things, it is declared (as by reference to said act will more fully appear,) that the societies severally shall "be able and capable in law, to purchase, have, bold, receive, enjoy, possess and retain to them severally, and to their successors in perpetuity, or for any term of years, any estate or estates, lands, tenements or hereditaments of what kind or nature soever; and to sell, alien, exchange, demise or lease the same, or any pait thereof, as they shall think proper, &c. — and to 7iinke xiich rztlesand by-laws, (not re- pugnant or contrary to the laws of the land,) for the benefit and advantage of the said corporation, and for the order, rule, good government and management of the corpora- tion; and to appoint and choose, di.--place, remove and supply such ollicers, &c. to be em- ployed in the alfairs of the corporation, as they shall from time to time appiove of and think fit. .And whereas the corporation, for divers good reasons, deem it expedient and proper at this time to alter and amend the mode and manner of electing their officers, and to define more particularlv the duties and responsibilities of the said officers, declare the following Rules and Bv-Laws shall be the rule of government for the Methodist I'piscopal Church in the city of Charleston, in the matters particularly set forth in them; and that they he considered as repealing all former rules, usages, and modes of naanage- nient in the said Church, which may be repugnant to those now adopted, viz: ARTICLE L — There sh;ill be an annual meeting of the Church in its Corporate capa- city, on the third Tuesday in November; at which time, a Board of Trustees, nine in number, shall be elected by a majority of the members present, to serve until the next annual meeting; the same persons being re-eligible to office. ART. IL — Scrtini} 1. On the first Monday subsequent to the annual meeting of the Corporation, the Board of Trustees shall meet and elect from among themselves a Chair- man, Secretary and Treasurer. Sec. 2. The duty of the Chairman shall be, to preside at all meetings of the Board, and preserve order and decorum. To call extra meetings of the Board whenever he deems it necessary, or whenever required so to do by any twenty members of the Church, expressed in writing. Sec. 3. The duty of the Secretary shall be, to summon the Trustees by billet to the several meetings of the Board called by the Chairman. To attend all such meetings in person, and keep a journal of its proceedings. To enter in a book the act of the Legis- lature incorporating the Church, and a prior act to which reference is made, defining the powers of tlie Church. To submit, when required, the books and journals of the church to the inspection of the Board of Trustees, or any committee appointed to inspect them by the Church. He shall transmit and communicate any proceedings, order or resolve of the Church or Board of Trustees, that may be required of him by the Presiding Officer. Sec. 4. The Treasurer shall be responsible to the Church for all the funds, papers, books and cflects of the Church entrusted to bis care, unless he can satisfactorily account to the Board of Trustees, that the injury or loss of the above property was unavoidable. He shall not expend or appropriate the funds to any purpose whatever, unless on the au- thority of a written order, signed by the (.'liairman, and countersigned by the Secretary, specifying the purpose of appropriation. He shall keep a regular account of monies re- roived and expended. He shall, at every meeting of the Church, exhibit a correct state- ment of the funds. His books, papers and vouchers shall be subject to the inspection of the Board of Trustees, or a Commiitee appointed by the Church to inspect them. He 22 sliall, on pnteiing upon tlic dulios of liis oflice, gi\c a receipt to the C'liairnian for al' hooks, papers, luonie* ;ind property belonging to tlie Church and entrusted to his care: and in the event of its becoming necessary al any lime to borrow money for tlie use of the Church, he sliall »iign the necessary papers in tlie name of the Treasurer of llie Metli- odist Episcopal Chiireh of Charleston, after being duly authorized so to do. ART. III. — The Hoard of Trustees shall meet at least once a month, to examine and transact the business of the (."hurcli. Five 'JVustees shall form a (|uorMm to do business. Should any vacancy occur by death, resignation or otherwise, it shall be the duty of the Board to appoint a member of the Church to fill the same until the vacancy be supjilied at the ensuing annual election. They shall appoint committees for the purpose of exam- ining the Treasurer's accounts. Secretary's books, and state of the Churches, Parsonages, &c. and receive their reports. They shall keep the Churches, Parsonages and Mouses belonging to the Church in repair, and receive all rents, fi-cs of interments, &c. They shall elect two Sextons, one for Trinity and one for Hethel, who shall account to the Board for all monies that may come into their hands for interments. They shall fix the amount necessary to be paid by strangers for interment in our burial-grounds, together with the Sexton's fees, provided the members of the Church be not compelled to pay more than fi\e dollars for each interment, including every expense. They shall have power to make by-laws for their own government, provided such by-laws are in accord- ance with, or do not infringe on these rules. iS'o person shall be eligible to the oft'ice of a Trustee, unless he has been, at least, one year a regular member of the Church, and of the age of twenty-one ye.irs. At each annual meeting of the Church, they shall exhi- bit a correct statement of all their arts during the preceding year. ART. IV. — .\n Executive Committee of twenty-five, taken from among the members not Trustees, shall be annually elected, with authority, conjointly with the Board of Trustees, to act for the Church during the recess. They shall have authority, (or a ma- jority of them) to authorise the purchase or sale of any property, (the chapels e.xcepted,) as they shall judge most expedient. The Executive Committee shall be empowered to call extra meetings of the Corporation, whenever in their judgment, it shall be necessary to do so. .-Xt each annual meeting they shall report their doings. ART. V. — The Book of Discipline, as altered and amended from time to4ime, by the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, shall be the rule and gov- erning principle in all cases not particularly defined in these rules. ART. VI. — No alteration or amendment shall be made to these rules without the con- currence of a majority of the members assembled at an annual meeting; and not then, unless three months' public notice of such alteration has been previously given. On motion of brother Wm. Laval, it was then resolved, that the above preamble and rules be put separately and distinctly to the vote of the meeting; which was accordingly done, and the said preamble and rules unanimously adopted. On motion of brother John Kingman, it was further resolved, that the meeting go into an election for nine Trustees; which was accordingly done, and the following persons duly elected, viz. Eliab Kingman, Henry ISIuckinfuss, Charles Prince, Samuel Seyle, Abel RI'Kee, Samuel J. Wagner, George Just, George Chritzburg, and John M. lloff. On motion of Brother VVm. Laval, the following resolution was then adopted: Resolved, That in case the Trustees {elect) fail to meet and organize according to the foregoing rules, within fifteen days from the time of their election, such failure^shall be considered a refusal to serve. On motion, further resolved, that the Secretary of this meeting be instructed, and he is hereby authorised to serve the above named Trustees with a notice of their election, and notify them to meet at a particular time and place, and lay before them a copy of the above rules, and ascertain whether or not they will serve, and report at an adjourned meeting. On motion, resolved, that the Secretary furnish the Presiding Elder, and the .Alinisler in Charge on the station, with a copy of the proceedings of this meeting. On motion, resolved, that this meeting be adjourned to the first .Mondav in December next, at half-past six o'clock, 1'. M. at Trinity Church. The meeting was then closed with jirayer bv Rev. V. D. Povas. J. If. liOMUR. Chninnan. \\. W. (^lOUFREY, f^ecretnrif. .23 The cliaracter of the above proceedings is too clearly marked to require definition. When in conversation with brethren, leading members of the meeting, we had objected to the rights they claimed, (supposing the pre- text of incorporation as now set up were valid) we mainly urged the in- compatibility of such claims wiih the Discipline of the Church. To this, we received for answer, that they had no design or desire to infringe on the discipline, but were covered fully by its provisions. The words inclu- ded in a parenthesis, on page 167 of the edition of 1832, sixteen lines from the top, were alledgcd to be ample authority for all they intended to do. — That is to say: the parenthetical exception t'ound in the sentence which points out the way to create a new Board of Trustees, was maintained to authorise, without limit, the controlling of an old Board, changing its re- sponsibility, and vacating it at pleasure. But how? Wliy, the exception provided, that a new Board of Trustees might be created in some other wa}, than by the appointment of the Preacher in (,'harg<% or the Presiding I'Mder, — in those states and territories where the statutes rcfjuirod it. But what of that? Was there any statute in this State providing the manner in which churches must appoint Trustees? There confessedly was not; but brethren maintained that the act of incorporation, by authorising the body corporate to appoint its oilicers. had the same force as a statute which should provide some specific mode for creating a Board of Trustees. — Admitting this to be so in the case of the first formation of a Board of Trustees, (and we have no evidence that the j.hmsoiis iu>t apj)ointed Trus- tees in this city, were not appointed by the then acknowledged corpora- tion, orthat the mode of perpetuating the Trusteeship, as fixed in the Dis- cipline published in 1792. and afterwards to the present time, was not ap- proved by the corporation) still, there appears no shadow of reason for applying the exception which the Discipline appropriates to the particular case of forming anew Board of Trustees, to the cases for which it is now claimed. Does the Discipline make any such exception in fixing the re- sponsihiliii/ oC a Board of Trustees? Or in providing for the perpetuity of a lioard? None whatever; and for this good reason, that none was wanted. But brethren seemed immovable in the position, that the exception above mentioned, would authorise whatever they might choose concerning Trus- tees. If Ave held them to the grammatical construction of the sentence. why to be sure, they understood grammar, but not as it is shaped in the present case. They were bent on their right of carrying the little paren- thesis, a few lines, or a few pages .out of its place at all events. The Dis. cipline was no better at page 163, ten lines from the bottom, than at page 167, fifteen lines from the top, nor better at the 7th line of page 167, than at the fifteenth line of the same page. Certainly no better, we admitted, but the wide difference between the cases, was this, that the authority which framed -the Discipline, framed its pages, and parts of pages, good or bad, as they now are, and not as brethren choose to alter them. If the General Conference had said any where in the book, that the words on page 167 "except in those States and Territories where the statutes provide difler- ently" — should apply to other cases, (as to a succession of Trustees, or the fixing of th; irresponsibility) then the authority would have been as good for those other cases, as for the one specified case. This however, the General Conference had not thought proper to do, and therefore the brethren who seemed so bent on the measure, could not do it. Suppose 24 they could transfer the parenthesis in question, from the case to uliith ex- clusivelylhe discipline afiixes it, might they not, for the same reason, ap- ply it to pajrc IG^, and so take to themselves (lie appoinfnient of Sle^vunls.' Or to page "Jo, and fake npoM them the appointment ol' the Freachers.' If their rightof appointing! lie Trustees, and ooutrolling their responsibilitx . and succession, contrary to the Discipline, be admitted, it rmounts to an admission of a right in tliem to appoint all other otKcors of (he church, and control them at |)lca3ure. 'I'his consccpiencc they never pretended to de- ny, but \vhcn driven to it. they only said they would never exercise the right of interfering >vilh (he ai)poi;itm(iit of those oJFicers of the church who arc appointed lor spiritual purpost s. Thus, then, they had assumed a right, which, IxJili gave them the appoinlmei't and control of all the offi- cers of the church, \vheth('r meivilxTs or nnnisters, and virfu.dly merged in their will all the authority ofail the bodies belonging to the church, from the General Conference down to a Leader's meeting. And all this thev required us to yield to them upon the sole pledge of our confidence, that they would do nothing, which as 31ethodists, they ought not to do. They claimed to love the Discipline no less than we, and to be every whit as hearty Methodists as any others. But what have they now actually done? Let us examine the 5th article of their Rules and By-laws, as a specimen. It reads thus: — "The Book of Discipline, as altered and amended from time to time by the (Tcneral Conference of the .Methodist Episcopal Church, shall be the rule and governing principle in all cases not particularly defin- ed in these Rules." Now if tliese brethren held no independence of the Book of Discipline, or claimed no power superior to it? Why needed thev to adopt it/ If they held a right to ordain that the Book of Discipline shall be the rule and governing principle of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, they must have held an equal right to ordain that it should jiot be. In cither ease, the axithorily of the Booh of Discipline is made to depend on THE WILL or THE :>ii;ETix»i. But why are "all cases not particularly defin. ed by these Rides," alone subjected to the authority of the Book of Discipline? Why not all cases ichatsocvei; w Inch are cognizable by the Discipline, whether dctincd or not defined in (he Rules? This question can be answered in one of two ways oidy, and either one equally goes against the authority of the Discipline. Either, 1st, the cases particularly defined in these rules, are so defined in known contradiction to the Disci|)line, and the two, being opposite, cannot govern together, and so the less, wdiich is the Book of Discipline, must be subjected to the greater, which is the Rule; — Or 2nd, though they agree, as to the p7irpo7-t of the thing to be done, yet, as the authority, or "governing principle^' for doing it, must derive from one or the other, tlie Book or the Rule, and not from both, each distinctively claim- ing the authority to govern, the Book of Discipline must still succumb to the Rule, as to the greater of the two. Now the Book of Discipline is our system of church laws. Its whole importance to the clnnrh is identified with its authority to govern; "the governing principle," being that whicli consthutes the identity of law, Avithout which nothing can be law. This being so, it follows, that whatever divests the Discipline of its "governing principle," destroys it as Discipline to tliat same extent, and necessarily is against it. We conclude therefore, that the Rule which should supersede "the governing principle" of the Discipline, though it could agree with it in every other respect, is a rule against the Discipline. It makes that a dead ^25 letter, a nullity, which before was an authoritative word. It ©usts thd Discipline, and gets into its place. The Discipline cannot be at home, if such a rule keeps the house. And which of these authorities ought we to acknowledge? Our reasoning in the above, is borne out by the whole scope of the pro- (•eedings of this ever to be regretted meeting. They vacated the offices oi' the Board of Trustees, to which its members iiad been regularly appoin- ted, as the Discipline, in the following words, directs: ''And in further trust and confidence, that as often as any one or more of the Trustees herein before mentioned shall die, or cease to be a member or members of the said church, according to the rules and discipline as aforesaid, then and in such case, it shall be the duty of the stationed minister or preacher, (authorised as aforesaid) who shall have the pastoral charge of the members of the said church, to call a meeting of the remaining Trustees, as soon as convenient- ly may be; and when so met, the said minister or preacher, shall proceed to nominate one or more persons to fill the place or places of him or them whose office or offices has or have been vacated as aforesaid: Provided the person or persons so nominated, shall have been one year a member or members of the said church, immediately preceding such nomination, and be at least twenty one years of age; and the said Trustees so assembled shall proceed to elect, and by a majority of votes appoint the person or persons so nominated to till such vacancy or vacancies, in order to keep up the number of nine Trustees forever; and in case of an <'(]ual number of votes tor and against the said nomination, the stationed minister or preacher shall Jiave (he casting vote." — Discijilinc, pages 16;J,4, rd. 183:3. The above has formed a part of our Book of Discipline from the be- ginning; as you will perceive by referring to older editions of the Discip- hne. It is exactly the same in an edition now before me, printed in the year 1797, (the same which contains the annotations of Dr. Coke and Bishop Asbur}'.) In like flat contradiction to the Book of Discipline, as it has been of force from the first organization of the church to the present time, they elected a Board to take the place of the Church's Board of Trustees; and ordained an annual election of Trustees. It matters not that they elected the same individuals — or perhaps it \\ould be more accurate to say, that their election of the same, was a greater disrespect to the Discipline, than if they had elected others; as it seems to imply, not only an intention to sot up a new "governing principle" against the old, but to invalidate the acts which had been performed under the old. And when it is remem- bered what loud complaints had been made against the Board of Trustees, to whose official fiults and neglects all our disturbances were attributed, some special reason must be supposed foi' this very special act. We hope it was done from a conviction that the Trustees had been wrongfully blamed, and (notwithstanding the hue and cry against them) were (he fittest per. sons tor their Ielhodist Church then, as plainly derives from the Methodist ministry, as faith coineth by hearing, or Paul jjlanted the churches ofGalatia.) — At first, all tlie Methodists formed one class, or society; and after- wards, as they who preached the word went every where, more and more societies were formed. And so at first there was but one circuit, ono conference, and subsequently, more from the nature of the case. There jiever was any other reason why all the Methodists on the continent might itr.t flirni oiif single society, and meet in one class, and all the ministers in 27 one conference, but this one reason only, that there were too many, and tow far apart. And for this same reason that our thousands of ministers, and hundreds of thousands of members cannot preach in one pulpit, and worship in one house, we have many pulpits and many houses of worship. The j)roperty of any particular house of worship vests.iu the particular spcietv M'ho build it,yor the use for which it is buiUl The right goes inseparably with the use, and this use recognizes the unity of Methodism, and the com- munity of the members of its whole family. But it is objected that all the members of this family are not minors; that some have made themselves of age by getting an act of incorporation from the State Legislature. Be it so, but still, if such grown up members of the family make a use of their majority agaiust the natural and inalienable affinity of the rest of the family, then do they estrange and separate themselves from the family, and can no longer be identified as members of it. The society at A. (whether incorporated or not, for we are speaking of what obtains under the economy of Methodism) has the right of property to the meeting house at A, agreeably to the uses proper to a Methodist meet- ing house. But if a member of a society at Z should remove to A, on what account could he become a partaker in the right of property to the meet- ing house there? If the right of property belonged to the society at A, without any community between it and other societies, it should be neces- sary for that society to pass some act of its own, to give to tiie member coming from Z, a right among them. But is this the case? We know it is not, under any circumstances whatsoever. The member from Z needs only produce to the minister in charge of the society at A, the certificate of his membership at Z, and by virtue of that certificate he takes an equal place, and equal privileges, with other members of the society at A. They are bound to receive him, whether they wish it or not, and can no more re- fuse him his right of membership among them, than they could expel one of themselves without a trial. But is it objected that this respects things spiritual and not temporal? The objection cannot stand. The Methodist Discipline is of two parts, spiritual and temporal, which both have the same source and agree perfectly together. We will illustrate it by an example taken from the practice of the church in this city. Attached to the Trinity and Bethel churches, are the burial grounds of the society in Charleston, and certain charges are fixed for the interment of strangers in those grounds. If a man die, and his friends wish his body interred in Trinity or Bethel grave yard, he not having been a member of the church, the charges must be paid. He may have been a near neighbor, have had wife or children in the church, but still the charges must be paid, unless for some special rea. son (such as poverty) the Quarterly Conference and the Board of Trustees, remit the debt. But some one may arrive in a packet from New-Orleans or Boston, bearing a certificate of his membership as a Methodist there, according to the Discipline, — he may die immediately on his arrival, with- rk. riiid not at all to that of Charh'stori, because the society at Charleston cannot use a house at New. York; but if the society, or any part of the society, of Charleston, removef to Xew-York, thev will then come in for a share of the debt, along with a share in the use of the pro- perty. Recurring again to the Quarterly Conference, and questions and com- plaints concerning the Trustees, we wish t« make some further explana- tions. At the moment of proposing that the resolution concerning the re. moval of the boxes should be adopted in the shape of a request, and not imqualified direction to the Board of Trustees, I was asked by the mover of the resolution a question to this effect — whether the Quarterly Confe- rence had the right to put the Trustees out of office for disobeying an order of the Conference. I do not remember the very words of the question, but to the best of my recollection, the above was its import. Nor do I remember in what words I made the answer, but it was to this effect, that it might be doubted whether the Quarterly Conference had a right to put them out of office. Some misapprehension, I believe, exists, as to the pre. <'ise meaning I intended to convey. The occasion of the question's being asked, ought in reason, as I think, to he allowed some weight in fixing the application of the answer. For an offence vhich should consist barely and alone in neglecting to do what the Conference had directed, or even lor peremptorily refusing to do it, without any thing proved or apparent against the motives or trustworthiness of the Trustees, in thus refusing to fulfil the order of the Conference, I should still think it unwarrantable in the Quarterly Conference to attempt such a stretch of power. It would fee unwarrantable, because it would be inflicting the greatest possible pun- ishment, for what certainly ought not to be considered by the Quarterly Conference the greatest of offences. The Discipline makes the Trustees responsible to the Quarterly Conference; not because it is jealous for the dignity of that body, but because it judges it to be suitably qualified to guard and care for the interests of the church. An offence therefore, foi* Avhich Trustees should deserve to be put out of office, should be one against fhe interests of the churchj- for which they are in trust — against the trust they hold, and not against the dignity of the Quarterly Conference. The I'ight of the Quarterly Conference to put the Trustees, or any one of them, out of ofllice, rests alone upon inference as to what properly belongs to the meaning of the word "re^o?w'6Ze," in the following sentence, viz. "T/je Board of Trustees of every Circuit or Station, shall he respoxsiule to tJie Quarterly Meeting Covferencc of said Ciraiit or Station; and shall be re- <]uired to present a report of its acts during the preceding year." There is pot another word in the book of Discipline touching the case. Perhaps there ought to be. I am myself inclined to think it would be belter to have the rule more explicit. Taking it, however, as we have it, I will briefly give my views, on close reflection, of the case. The responsibility of one person or body, to another person or body, necessarily implies adu- ty in the former to answer to the latter, and a right in the latter to require the former to answer, in tliose things for which the one is responsible to 29 tlie other. This is resjjonsibilit)', and nothing more nor less than this be- longs to the word. For all the rest, we are left to inference. We infer that a neglect of duty, or i-efusal to do it, deserves punishment, and that when punishment is deserved, it ought to be intlicted, and if inflicted at all, it ought to be by the person or body having cognizance of the case. So also we infer, that the person or body holding such cognizance, has the right to do what shall be found necessary to be done, in order to secure the fulfilment of the duty of the person or body made responsible. All this is reasonable and necessary. But a])plying these principles to the case in hand, (and we know of no others that could apply) how far do they carry tis towards the conclusion, that the Quarterly Conference has the right to put the Trustees out of office? The farthest thcj- can go, as we conceive, is to this extent — viz: The Trustees being made responsible to the Quar- terly Conference, and to no body else, for the faithful discharge of their trusts, that body ought to have power to do whatever is necessary to be done to prevent any breach of the trust. And if it appears, on evidence so- berly considered, that nothing short of putting the Trustees out of office will reach the case, and prevent a breach of trust, — the Quarterly Confe- rence ought to ha\ c power to do it. If there be a doubt as to the render- ing of the rule in the case, whether it conveys the power or not, the Bish- ops are the authority for resolving that doubt. The rule which fixes the responsibility of the Trustees to the Quarterly Conference, was put into the Book of Discipline by the General Conference of 1828. Previously to that time, there was no provision on the subject; and we were left to infer from the general order of our economy, to whom their responsibility ought to beheld. In 1825 and 182G, much and often was the subject agitated; (as I believe it was before and has been since;) but except from the Trustees* themselves, I never heard of its being hinted, much less urged, that they ought to be held responsible to the Corporation. I myself insisted, with all the rest of the official members, that the inference from the analogy of our institutions was clear and strong to require them to account to the Quarterly Conference. Bishop Andrew, then our Presi- ding Elder, did the same, and Bishop M'Kendree the same; and brethren know, that when the Trustees spaki; of being responsible to the Corpora- tion, they got little more credit for it than if they had been guilty of a wil- ful evasion. But all that time, it was taken for granted by all of us, (with- out investigating the case) that the Act of Incorporation of 1787 was of force; and that it comprehended all the male members of the church. Why then were not the Trustees allowed their claim of responsibility to the Corporation, and not to the Quarterly Conference? For these two good reasons. 1st. We were not then dissatisfied with the government of the church, and were willing to shape our views of Discipline by the Book of Discipline. And 2dly. The thing was manifestly too inconvenient. Un- less on some special excitement, a meeting could hardly be formed barely to receive a report about bricks, and wood, and paint. Look to the thin attendance at other meetings, and it will appear reasonable to conclude that the responsibility is best where it is. But it has been urged that the Trustees refuse to be responsible to THE QuARTEKLY CONFERENCE. We might briefly reply, that a reference * Perhaps it is due to the Trustees to say they have expressed a persuasion that thfefa ..is a mistake here. Tliey say they did not hold a» I understood they did. 30 to their minutes concerning the request of the Conference about the boxes, refutes the charge. The Trustees did refuse to be responsible to the Quar- terly Cotiforence. ir/'ore // «vw jra^e o /v//r (if the Discipliiir. lu-r >kvi:k SINCE. Still, it is complained that they neglect to make their annual re- ports to the Quarterly Conference. Once, or perhaps twice, since the Dis- cipline required it to be done, they failed to make a report; but a failure, or neglect to rejjort, does not amount to a refusal to report. We are also free to admit, that the reports which have been made, were not as formal and minute as might have been desired. But what does that signify? The fact of their reporting«t all, evidences their desire to give satisfaction; and that their reports have not been drawn up just to our liking, may possibly prove as much as this — that we are not easily pleased with what thev do. The only instance that has occurred, in my knowledge, of their not report- ing, was last year; and then it was their misfortune, and not their fault. — The Board, early in the year, had been reduced to six members; and though repeated attempts were made to form a meeting, they could not do so, on account of the infirmities, or absence from the city, of two of their body. — The Treasurer of the Board, however, exhibited to the Conference a state- ment of the funds, and the expenditures of the year. Let us have a care that we do our brethren no wronii. To those of you, brethren, who were concerned in the measures of the meeting, so unhappy for us all, we desire to draw^ near, and remonstrate, and commune with you, out of our hearts. You have not wronged us at all — or w^e forgive the wrong. We have no sense of dignity, of character, of interest — no feeling for oui'selves so dear to us as you are. We carry our appeal into your own Ijosoms for our love of you. AVe will be judged by the record of your own love towards us. You have loved us because we loved the church. You have honored us because you judged us faith- ful. Let us then still be faitliful, that we may still be honored by you. Let us know no compromise with the flesh — no shrinking from our duty, even FOR YOUK SAKES. The thing that is right, let us do it, though our hearts bleed within us at the rebukes we inflict. Why would you not hear us when we told you our conscience was off*ended? There was no appealing from conscience, and you forced us away from among you. Alas for the conceit of the Act of Incorporation, lou seemed to think you could vote it to yourselves, whether being, or not being. You were sadly misled. — The deeds and records were with us, and we were advised of their impor- tance to the case. We wanted the church to take measures for the settle- ment of the question of incorporation, first; and when it should be found that the members were a body corporate, then would be soon enough for a meeting of the Corporation. And why, if you could, should you enact the subversion of the Discipline? But we have done. Dear brethren, let these conflicts come to a perpetual end. Make liaste to reject them, and retrieve the church's peace. Let your ministers pass their nights in sleep, and take their daily food as other men. Henceforth let there be no provocation among us, but to love one another; and no stri- ving among us, except for the faith of the Gospel. And may God, even our own God bless you. We subjoin the answer of the Board of Trustees to the notificatibn thej' received of their appointment by the meeting, which claimed to act as the 31 corporation of the church; and also the opinion of the Attorney General. — With respect to the last mentioned document, vc will say to you, that, if time and convenience liad permitted, we would have submitted both it and the deeds and records of the church, to some other distinguished gentlemen of the bar. for their concurrence — such as Major Axson, Mr. Petigru, and Mr. Dunkia — but there was not time. We are authorised to say, however, that, in the opinion of the Attorney General, if our brotluen had the advice of any legal man for their course, thai advice must have been given with- out access to the evidence furnished in the Records of the Church; and that with the deeds and records before him, no lawyer could conclude that the members of the Methodist Church in this city, arc a body corporate. I am, beloved brethren, vour most sincerely alfectionate, and undeserv- ingly faithful pastor, " WILLIAM CAPERS. November 28th, 1833. We believe that the facts contained in the foregoing papers, are faithfully and truly set forth as they transpired; — and we approve of the reasonings, and concur in the sentiments of brother Capers respecting those tacts. HENRY BASS. REDDICK PIERCE. •JOSEPH HOLMES. H. A. C. WALKER. CHARLESTON, Nov. 22, 1833. To W. W. Godfrey, Secrctari/, and others concerned. We acknowledge the receipt of jour notice, of our appointment as Trustees, by a meeting of certain members of the Church, calling themselves the Corporation of the Church, held on the 12th inst. We do consider this meet'mg and all its proceedings, illegal, and of no force, and we cannot in any form or way acknowledge it, as having any legal authority, to appoint, or elect, or control us; nor can we, or will we, acknowledge their authority. We hold our otiice, and are in Trust for the Methodist Episcopal Church, and we in- tend to hold and maintain said olfice and said trust, for the aforesaid purpose, agreeable to the Discipline; and we hold ourselves responsible to the Quarterly Meeting Confer- ence, to whom we feel it a duty, as well as our wish, to give all possible satisfaction. We cannot, as honest men, betray the trust reposed in us. With this notice, we have transmitted to you a copy of the Opinion of the Attorney General, R. Barnwell Smith, Esq. and also the concurring opbion of Thomas S. Grimke,Fs({. Signed, ABEL McKEE, •) ^ SAMUEL J. WAGNER, I "^ .2 GEORGE CHRITZBURG. | a^rS'-S CHARLES PRINCE. }• S • k GEORGE JUST, .^ ^ jS SAMUEL SEYLE, a Is ^ HENRY MUCKINFUSS, J ^ NOVEMBER 18, 1833. OPINION. On the 12th day of November, 1833, certain members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, assembled together; and under the assumption that they were the Incorporated Members of the Methodist Church, according to the act of Incorporation; passed 27th March, A. D. 1787, they proceeded to pass by-laws, and elect officers. By the, 3d Article of these by-laws, a certain number of Trustees are appointed; and it is 32 provided, that "tlipy sliall keep the Churches. Parsonage?, and Houses, bcloiigiug to thr Church in repair, and receive all rents, fees of interment. &c." — and that "ihey shall elect two Sextons, one for Trinity Churcli, and one for Bethel, who sliall account to the Board for all money that shall come into their hands for interments." In the ^th .Arti- cle of these by-laws, an Executive Committee is organised, who "shall have authority to authorise the purchase or sale of any property (the Chapels excepted) as thev shall judge most expedient." By these claases it is plain, that the control and ownership of all the property appertaining to the Methodist Denomination in Ch.irleston is claimed. By another .Article of these liy-laws, the Discipline and forms of the Methodist Cliurch are formally adopted. The right to adopt, implies the right to reject; consciiuontlv tlie whole Discipline of the Methodist Church, as well as its property, depends upon the question, whether tlie proceedings of the meeting on the 12th inst. are legal, and those "present properly exercise the rights they claim. In investigating the question, I will consider — 1st. Whether the individuals who composed this meeting, are legally the corporators under the act of 17S7. 2nd. Whether the Corporation under the act of 1787, is legally in existence. 3rd. To whom do the Churches in Charleston, and the property appertaining to them, belong. First. By the Act of 1787, "the Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston," is de- clared to be incorporated, with several other churches, "and by their said respective names shall severally have perpetual succession of officers and tneviber.s,-dnd a com- mon seal, &c." but no individuals are mentioned in the act, as incorporated, it is clear that a Corporation cannot exist without members; and usually, the names of the indi- viduals incorporated together, are expressed in the charter; but where this is omitted or neglected in the -Act of Incorporation, those who petitioned for the charter, by the peti- tion being granted, must be considered as the original members of the Corporation. It is an incident to a Corporation to choose new members, though no power be given by the charter — Com. iv. 489. Dub. 12. Co. 121. The original petitioners, therefore, under this act, formed the Corporation, with the right of perpetuating themselves bv ordaining a criterion of membership, and providing for a succession of members by election or oth- erwise. Let us now apply these principles to the facts of the case before us. If I am correctly informed, there is no evidence to show who the original petitioners for the Act of Incorporation were. Their names are unrecorded and unknown — and to affirm that the male communicants of the Church in 1787 were these petitioners, is an assumption without a particle of evidence, written or oral, to support it. Admitting, however, these facts to be so — as there is no evidence of their having a "perpetual succession of offi- cers and members," the charter must undoubtedb be dead with the original members. It is laid down, "if all the members of an aggregate corporation die, the body corporate is dissolved." — 31 Bac. Role Abr. 514. A corporation created by charter, as well as by act of the Legislative power, may forfeit its franchises by non-feasance or mal-feasance. Com. 4, 500. The Commonwealth vs. the Union Fire and .Marine Insurance Company. 5 Mass. 230. So if a corporation be constituted of Brethren and Sisters, and all the Brethren die arid all the Sisters, the corporation is dissolved — 1 Role 514, 64. So if a corporation refuses to continue the election of officers till all die who could make an election, the corporation is dissolved. — Rol. 514. C. 40. So if a leet be disused and has no officers or punishment. — Jon. 283. Nor is it necessary that any legal proceedings should take place in these cases to produce the dissolution; for as Chief Justice Ashurst says, "a scire-facias is proper where there is a legal existing body capable of acting, and who have been guilty of an abuse of the power entrusted to them; but that does not ap- ply to the case of a non-existing body." — Bacon 2. v. 31. in Notes. From these au- thorities I conclude, that, if it could be shown that the communicants of the Methodist Church in 1787, were the original members of the Corporation, they having all died without perpetuating the Corporation by "a succe.ssion of officers and members," the Corporation is dissolved. Seco7id. But although the inonibcrs generally of the Church now existing cannot re- vive the Corporation if it be dissolved, it may be that the powers of the Corporation never vested under the Act of 1787, in the members generally of the Church. The .sys- tem of government in the Methodist Church is essentially Ecclesiastical, and the proba- bility therefore is, that the petition for incorporation was made by the official members of the Church, alone; and, consequently, that they alone were incorporated under the ^ 3.3 Jiamc oT "llie Metliodist Episcopal Church in Ci.arlfiston."' The records of the Cliurcii and Corporation, seem clearly to establish this position. From the vear 1794, to the present day, there is not a single meeting of the nienil)ers generally of the Methodist Church recorded, much less is there .any evidence of their ever iiaving exercised the least control over the property or government of the Church. The tirst meeting re- \/ cordedjs jn 1 794; and there were present tiie Rev. Francis Asljury, Rev. Joshua Ken- nonjJohn IWcTTbvval, Thomas .lackson, and \\'ni. Adams. These individuals proceeded lo make Edgar Wells, (who was not present) .John .AIcDowal, Thos. .Tackson, and \\m. Adams, "Stewards for the present year." All the siihsequent proceedings of the Church and the Corporation appear to have been conducted by this Ecclesiastical body, which perpetuated itself by electing members to supply any vacancy which occurred by death or otherwise. In the year 1S0.3, Trustees of the Corporation appear to have been first •elected. The Trustees then, for several \ cars, are called Trustees or Stewards, until the year 1817, when the appellation of Stewards to the Trustees appears to have been dropped; and from that time the property of the Church, and its temporal concerns, liave been governed by the Trustees, who have supplied by election among tlicir body the vacancies as they have occurred in conforiuitt^ to the Discipline of the Church. From these Records of the Corporation and (Miurcli, tlierefore, I infer, that the present Trustees are in fact the Corporation, and that they rightfully control the temporal in- terest of the IVfethodist Church. Rut if the Trustees were not originally t!ie Corporation, and had no right of perpetuating themselves bv electing new metiibers to supph vacan- cies; yet, from the long exercise of this right, the law will sanction it. " By iisasc h select number called the common council, shall choose, for there shall be intended an antient ordinance for if. — U. 4. Co. 77. Kid. I vol. 320 — 29. So, "if the charter says the I3urgi!sses shall choose a ^fayor de-seipsis, by ancient constitutions owrf tisage, the election of one out of two whom the common council shall propose, shall be good."' — II. I.Sol. 190. From these authorities ! infer, that the /f);!^- «snfi:e existing since the year 1794, by which the present Tnistees of the Church exercise their powers and claim their offices, will alone legalize them. Third. But suppose all these positions to be erroneous, and that the individuals wlio assembled together on the 12th inst. reall". constitute the Corporation of the Methodist Episcopal Church, which has been revived by their proceedings, does the propertv of the Church belong to them — or to whom does it belong? Let us first consider Trinity Church. On the 7th da\' of April, 1792, John Cordon, by deed of bargain and sale, conveyed to (icorge Sinclair Capers, William Capers, Abraham Seaver, John Combe, Benjamin Dorrill, Charles Deazol, Wm. llutchins, Jo- seph Baker, William and James Mylne, the land on which this Church is built — under] certain tmsts, with the followiiig proviso: "And upon the farther trust and confidence that as often asanv of the said Trustees, for the time being, shall die or cease to he members of the society called Primitive .^lethodists, the rest of the said Trustees, or of the Trus- tees for the time being, or the majority of them, as soon as convenient may be, f^hall and may choose another Trustee or other T^-tistees, in order to keep the number i)f five, seven, nine, or eleven Trustees forever." On tlie Plli day of Dece mber, 181 5, the Trustees legally existing under the deed, coaviixed TmiTTy Cliiirch, wTtTiTts Parson- .•igeT^JC^ to biSli?)pirAsT)ury and McKendree, Bishops oTthe ^fetTiodrsfTTpiscopal Church in America, and their successors forever." It is by this title that this ( hurch is now held. It is too plain for argument that it cannot be touched by these gentlemen. Let us next consider the titles to Bethel Church. The lot is convc ed b Indenture on. the_5thSeptJ7^5, by Thomas Bennett and Ann his wife, to Edgar Wells, John Mc- ) T)owall, Francis Sutherland, Thomas Jackson, and William Smith, in tmst to build a \ Church, &c. "provided, nevertheless, and it is hereby intended thai as often as any of the Trustees aforesaid, or the Trustees for the time beim:, shall die or cease to be , a member or members o' the said llethodist I'.piscopal Church, then the ren.aining part ^ of the Trustees for the lime being shall, as soon as ma\ be convenient, choose another i Trustee or T?-ustees, in order to keep up the 'trustees forever, who shall stand and act ( in behalf of the said Methodist Church as Trustees aforesaid." ]Now, whether the above j named individuals were oflicers of the Church at the time this deed was e-.ecuted, is im- j material. The legal estate is ve.sted in them, and those they have in snc