'1$
Manuscript, Archives,
and Rare Book Library
African-American
Collection
EMORY UNIVERSITY
A. M. E. Church
Ecclesiastical Judicial
Practice
Revised and Enlarged
Approved by General Conference, May, J 912
Second Edition
By
William H. H. Butler, D.D.,
\9\t
A. M. E. BOOK CONCERN
Printers and ^ublialjpra
631 Pine Street
Phila,, Pa.
A11 rights reserved
(Krmtwtta
Frontispiece
Introduction 9
Comments on First Edition 12
Prefatory Statement 18
Chapter Page
I. Terms.—Court, Fact, Document, Evi¬
dence, Conclusive Proof, A
Presumption, Action 21
Section 1.—Definition of Terms Em¬
ployed 21-22
Section 2.—Facts' in Issue, and Facts
Relevant to the Issue 22-23
Section 3.—What Constitutes1 Evidence.
Kinds of Evidence 23-24
Section 4.—Documentary Evidence;
Either Primary or Second¬
ary 24-26
Section 5.—Directions for Proceeding in
Ecclesiastical Courts 26-28
Section 6.—Hearsay Evidence and Con¬
fessions.—Presumption 28-32
3
4
Contents
Chapter Page
II. Ecclesiastical Court Procedure and Prac¬
tice 32
Section 1.—Production and Effect of Evi¬
dence. Burden of Proof,
Presumption of Innocence,
Competency of Witnesses
and Character of Witnesses.. 32-36
Section 2.—Examination of Witnesses.. 36-39
III. Mode of Procedure and Directions for
Court or Presiding Officer.. 40
Section 1.—Charge or Complaint 40-43
Section 2.—Character of Evidence, De¬
velopment of Case and Ex¬
amination of Witnesses 43-48
IV. Appellate Courts and Grounds of Appeal 48
Section 1.—Courts; Quarterly, Annual
and General Conference,
Triers of Appeal 48-52
Section 2.—Annual Conference Appellate
Court for Local Elder,
Deacon and Preacher 53-56
Section 3.—Proceedings at Trial of
Traveling Elders, Deacons
and Preachers 56-59
Section 4.—Trial of Bishops 59-64
Contents
5
Chapter Page
V. Preliminary Proceedings in an Eccle¬
siastical Court 64
Section 1.—Charge or Complaint 64-67
Section 2. Who Shall Preside at
Church Trials 67
(1) At Trial of Lay Members 67-68
(2) At Trial of Local Elder, Deacon
and Preacher 68-69
(3) At Trial of Presiding Elder,
Itinerant Elders, Deacons and
Preachers 69-70
(4) Subordinate Court of Investiga¬
tion of Bishops in Interval of
General Conference Sessions 70
Note—Important Reference to
Subject of "Fleeing From
Trial" and Proper Course to
Pursue 71
(5) Specimen Form for Various
Church Trials 72
VI. Incorporation of Churches 74
Paragraphs' 1 to 6 74-80
6 Contents
Chapter Page
VII. Distribution of Legislative, Judicial and
Administrative Powers 80
Section 1.—Legislative Powers. General
Conference. Administrative,
Executive and Sub-Judicial.
Bishop and Annual Confer¬
ence 80-84
VIII. Administrative, Executive and Supervis¬
ory Duties and Powers of a Preacher-
in-Charge in the A. M. E. Church 84
Section 1.—Administrative 84-85
Section 2.—Executive and Supervisory.. 86
Section 3-4—Presiding Officer of Various
Church Boards 86-90
Section 5.—Trustee Board. Removal of
Trustee. How Effected Law¬
fully Ad Interim 90-91
Section 6.—Preaching and Pastoral Visi¬
tations 91
Section 7.—Appointment and Removal
of Class-Leaders. Suspen¬
sion of Steward in Interval
of Quarterly Conference, and
Procedure 92-95
Contents
7
Chapter Page
Section 8.—Stewardesses, Amenability,
etc 95-96
Section 9.—What Quarterly Conference
Cannot Do 96
Section 10.—Warning to Presiding Eld¬
ers' Against Answering Hypo¬
thetical Questions 96-97
IX. Trial of Preacher at Annual Conference.
Correct Procedure 98
Section 1.—Investigation on Complaint. .98-100
Section 2-3 —On Regularly Formulated
Charges 100-103
X. Supervisory and Judicial Duties and
Powers of Presiding Elders 103
Section 1.—Supervisory Duties' 104-105
Section 2, 3, 4, 5 —Judicial Duties and
Powers 105-109
XI. The Episcopal Committee (African
Methodist Episcopal Church). Its
Powers and Responsibilities Stated
and Defined 109
Its Status 110
Its' Membership Ill
S'cope of Power, Authority and Func¬
tions 113-121
8
Contents
Chapter Page
APPENDIX. Inconsistencies and Apparent
Contradictions in Our Legislation Re¬
specting General Superintendency 122
Section 1.—Question Asked at Annual
Conference 122
Section 2.—Quotation from Discipline... 124
Rules of Government Interpreted 125
Jttfroburtum
The need of some book for the guidance of
our pastors in the exercise of the judicial func¬
tions and powers of their office has long been
keenly felt.
Time was when the trial of members and
preachers, by "select number," "society," "com¬
mittee," and "conference," and the findings and
judgment of all such "courts" were generally
accepted by the "accused," as final, and without
serious protest or effort to obtain redress, even
though the evidence or proof of guilt was not
conclusive, and despite any irregularity in the
proceedings.
But the times have changed. Ambitious at¬
torney s-at-law, members of our own race and
church-fellowship, practicing in the civil and
criminal courts of the various States; accounts
of court proceedings and correct judicial prac¬
tice being a matter of current news, and pub¬
lished daily in the secular press, and generally
read by a host of our members, has emboldened
them to insist that, in any trial before a "Church
Court," every right and privilege to which they
are entitled shall be fully safeguarded at every
point.
And the civil courts, while pledged to non¬
interference when the laws and discipline of a
Religious Order, or Church Corporation are
legally applied and enforced, will invariably in¬
tervene with a "Restraining Order" whenever a
petitioner comes setting up a "prima-facie" case
9
10
Introduction
of irregularity in procedure; or a miscarriage of
justice under the "statute" by which the appellant
was tried, by which his rights in such order, or
religious corporation, have been denied to him;
or of which he has been wrongfully deprived. In
short, the civil courts will require the Church
court to enforce Discipline according to the in¬
tent and purpose of the law, and in strict con¬
formity therewith.
This has not always been done by those charged
v ith enforcement of Discipline. And the failure
may be traced to the fact that trials before Church
courts are infrequent, and no special thought has
been given to the importance of correct procedure
in these trials, the presiding officer relying almost
wholly Upon the "statute," without consulting the
best authorities upon the method of procedure
before attempting to enforce discipline. Such
errors would not be unexpected in any grade or
order of our ministry; but their avoidance is not
the less necessary. Of late numerous instances
have occurred where a book, giving clear and
concise directions for such procedure in the vari¬
ous Church courts, from the local society to the
General Conference, would have worked incal¬
culable good, preventing much useless and costly
litigation in the civil courts. Such a book our
brother, Rev. Wm. H. H. Butler, D. D., has now
given to the Church. After examination of the
manuscript and discussion with him of its salient
features, I am fully convinced that it is destined
to become a standard work. For he has dealt
with the subject of Ecclesiastical Judicial Pro-
Introduction
11
cedure and Practice in such a sound and com¬
prehensive manner that any revision or amend¬
ment of the book of Discipline cannot possibly
affect its original value as a text book. It is des¬
tined to outlive the author, and to come more and
more into general use by our preachers and lead¬
ing churchmen.
I have known the author for thirty years, and
in all that time, whether as pastor or presiding
elder, his judicial acts have invariably been ap¬
proved by bishops and conferences. And civil
courts, to which appeals have been taken, have
never reversed or pronounced them void. Favor¬
able judgment by the courts of Arkansas (in the
famous Pine Bluff, Ark., case, in 1880), of the
courts of Pennsylvania (in the case of Union A.
M. E. Church, Philadelphia, Pa.), and of Ohio
(in the case of John F. Hamilton vs. the North
Ohio Conference, in 1909), with his conduct of
many important cases before the General Con¬
ferences of our Church, stamp Dr. Butler as pos¬
sessing, in a marked degree, the judicial mind, and
therefore peculiarly fitted and endowed to give
to the Church a work of sterling worth. No
preacher in the African Methodist Episcopal
Church should fail to purchase and study the
work.
W. B. DERRICK (Deceased),
Bishop of the Third Episcopal District, A.
M. E. Church, Bishop's Court, Lillian
Park, Flushing, N. Y., U.S.A.
Jan. 14th, 1911.
(Ztommfttta mt fflxtzt lE&Uum
EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS COMMEND¬
ATORY OF THIS WORK BY
BISHOPS AND LEADING
CHURCHMEN
1.—Extract from Bishop Turner's Letter
"It is really a gem, while it is a fountain of in¬
formation. Not only the A. M. E. Church, but
all the Christian churches, have needed such a
work as you have given us for generations—the
A. M. E. Church for a hundred years. I most
heartily commend your book, and hope that our
ministry will buy and study it."
BISHOP H. M. TURNER.
Atlanta, Ga., May 5th, 1911.
2.—Extract from Bishop Tanner's Letter
"Your 'Practice' received, and without taking
time to examine it, I say ALL HAIL, for I
know the man. So far as ecclesiastical law is con¬
cerned, I knew of no man in the Church that is
your equal. Of course, I except one or two; pos¬
sibly three. I have written next to nothing for
months; but I will examine your 'Practice,' and
what I cannot say of the book I can say of the
man."
BISHOP B. TUCKER TANNER.
Philadelphia, Pa., April 11th, 1911.
l
Comments
13
3.—Extract from Bishop Flipper's Letter
"I have carefully read it, and considered it
from every viewpoint. As a whole, I regard it
as an able treatise and guide for the ministry of
the A. M. E. Church. No minister should be
without a copy in his library. Indeed, it would
be well if he should make it a pocket companion."
BISHOP J. S. FLIPPER.
Atlanta, Ga., April 21st, 1911.
4.—Extract from Bishop Shaffer's Letter
"I have read it with a great deal of pleasure
and profit, and appreciate the fact that it must fill
a long-felt want in the Church, especially among
the ministry, which, unfortunately, is not always
well up in church policy and discipline, much less
in method of procedure in church trials. It is a
little gem, and should not only be in the hands of
our preachers, and in the 'school course of
studies,' but as well in the hands of the laity, as a
means of protection and a source of harmony in
the Church. It is a splendid contribution to our
Church literature."
BISHOP C. T. SHAFFER.
Chicago, 111., May 2nd, 1911.
5.—Extract from Bishop Derrick's Introduc¬
tion
"Doctor Butler has dealt with the subject of
Ecclesiastical Judicial Procedure and Practice in
such a sound and comprehensive manner that any
amendment of revision of the Discipline cannot
possibly affect its original value as a text book.
14
Comments
It is destined to outlive the author. Doctor But¬
ler possesses, in a marked degree, the judicial
mind, and is therefcpre peculiarly fitted and en¬
dowed to give to the Church a work of sterling
worth. No minister in the A. M. E. Church
should fail to purchase and study the work."
BISHOP W. B. DERRICK.
Flushing, N. Y., Jan. 14th, 1911.
6.—Extract from Editorial Notice, by Rev.
Dr. G. W. Allen (Southern Recorder)
"The Doctor touches some vital and delicate
topics, but does so fearlessly and judicially. A.
M. E. Church 'Ecclesiastical Judicial Practice' is
one of the latest factors in the history-making of
our Church. Every minister should have one of
these books."
G. W. ALLEN, D. D.,
Editor Southern Christian Recorder.
7.—Extract from Rev. Dr. Hurst's Letter
(Now Bishop)
"It has brought ecclesiastical jurisprudence
within the reach of the humblest of our pastors,
and none should do without it. I have read the
work with continued interest on account of its
vivid style and the engaging character of the sub¬
ject with which it deals. I am under many obli¬
gations to you for this splendid contribution to
our Church literature."
REV. DR. JOHN HURST,
Financial Secretary, A. M. E. Church.
Washington, D. C., May 2nd, 1911.
Comments
15
8.—Extract from Report of Committee of Re¬
view, Appointed by the Pittsburgh
Ministerial Association
"We cordially bear testimony to its great value
in the proper regulation of ecclesiastical judicial
practice in our churches. It embodies all the ma¬
terial facts such a work should contain, sought out
with great industry, and carefully and candidly
stated. Doctor Butler has not performed his
work a day too soon. He is therefore entitled to
the thanks and patronage of our entire Methodist
ministry."
REV. C. J. POWELL, D. D., President,
REV. B. F. COMBASH,
REV. P. J. BLACKBURN, Secretary.
Pittsburgh, Pa., May 15th, 1911. Committee.
9.—Extract from Report of 'Special Commit¬
tee/ East Pittsburgh P. E.
District Conference
"We are in perfect accord with the high esti¬
mate placed upon this work by Bishops Turner,
Derrick, Tanner, Flipper, Shaffer and others, and
regard the work, 'Ecclesiastical Judicial Practice,'
as being unique, and filling a long-felt want, and
we highly commend the author and his work, and
recommend to the pastors of this district, the pur¬
chase and use of the same as an invaluable aid in
administration of discipline."
REV. N. D. TEMPLE,
REV. R. FRENCH HURLEY,
REV. C. J. POWELL,
REV. P. E. PAUL,
REV. P. J. BLACKBURN,
Altoona, Pa., April 27th, 1911. Committee.
16
Comments
10.—Extract from Report of Committee,
North Pittsburgh P. E. District
Conference
"This book, 'Ecclesiastical Judicial Practice,'
clearly defines the powers and restrictions granted
and imposed by the discipline of the Church and
fills a long-felt want among the ministers and
laymeii of the Church, because of the clearly de¬
fined relations between all parties to 'actions'
brought into our ecclesiastical courts, and the
clear exposition which the author gives of the in¬
dependence and interdependence existing be¬
tween the legislative, executive and judicial de¬
partments of church government. This work
stamps Doctor Butler as one of the ablest writers
on church polity and government, and makes him
a teacher and guide to coming generations. We
believe it will stand as a monument to his scholar¬
ship and genius more enduring than brass. The
thanks of this district conference are due, and
they are hereby extended, him who 'Primus Inter
Pares Est.'"
REV. T. E. WILSON,
REV. E. R. BAZIER,
REV. J. H. PAYNE,
Committee.
West Bridgewater, Pa., May 5th, 1911.
11.—Extract from Report of Committee,
South Pittsburgh P. E. District
Conference
"The Rev. Wm. H. H. Butler, D. D., a member
of the Pittsburgh Annual Conference and Pre¬
siding Elder of the East Pittsburgh P. E. Dis-
Comments
17
trict, has written a book, entitled 'Ecclesiastical
Judicial Practice,' defining the powers and re¬
strictions granted and imposed by the law of the
Church, and which places him among the ablest
writers on church polity. After examination of
the book, and considering its inestimable value to
ministers and laymen, we heartily recommend its
general use, and that the heartfelt thanks of this
conference, with congratulations, be hereby ex¬
tended to our brother, Doctor Butler, through
appended resolutions."
REV. T. J. ASKEW,
REV. M. A. DYER,
REV. J. E. MORRIS,
Committee.
Braddock, Pa., May 11th, 1911.
During the more than two score years I have
labored in the Gospel, as Pastor and Presiding
Elder, experience and observation have con¬
vinced me that it would be a great boon to our
preachers if among the books of reference, so in¬
dispensable to correct administration of discipline,
there was at least one that dealt chiefly with
judicial matters, and to which they may turn for
information that could be regarded as of sufficient
exactness and explicitness to meet the varied con¬
ditions likely to exist and confront them in ad¬
ministering the Discipline of the Church.
And for many years I have been prevailed upon
by our bishops and other leading churchmen to
write a volume of such a character, making it con¬
form, as far as practicable, to every conceivable
exigency likely to arise in any of our churches
and which should give ample directions to our
preachers in the conduct of ecclesiastical judicial
proceedings.
Until now I have deferred the task, feeling a
natural diffidence in attempting to supplement the
very able works given to the church by our
bishops, Wayman and Turner. For there will
never come a time when "Wayman on the Disci¬
pline," and "Methodist Polity," by our venerated
senior bishop, will cease to be regarded as au¬
thority in matters with which they deal.
And yet I may be pardoned if I venture to sug¬
gest that perhaps the wide scope they have taken
18 '
Prefatory Statement
19
and the vastness of the field and subjects with
which they deal, make it quite impossible that
they could give that attention to detail which oc¬
cupies so important a place in judicial proceed¬
ings in pastoral charge, quarterly conference, and
annual conference, as I am now attempting, and
which now call more loudly than ever for au¬
thoritative data. Our membership of today, be¬
ing made up largely of graduates from the public
schools and colleges, are looking for and demand¬
ing that ecclesiastical judicial proceedings shall
be conducted with an orderliness and exactness
measurably conformed to proceedings in the civil
courts.
As Presiding Elder, I have frequently felt
obliged to exercise the reserved powers of such
an officer in correcting serious mistakes made by
the preachers of my district (through lack of ex¬
perience and specific information, rather than in¬
tention), and, in many of these cases, failure on
my part to act promptly and decisively would
have involved serious consequences.
These, then, are some of the reasons which
have prompted me to this effort. I trust the vol¬
ume may receive the approval of our bishops and
preachers generally, and that the laymen of the
church may find herein such assistance in the
conduct of any defense they may be called to
make as will enable them to protect every legiti¬
mate right to which they are entitled when they
enter our communion.
The first edition of this book was given to the
Church in 1911, and received such generous ap-
20
Prefatory Statement
proval of bishops and churchmen generally; and
the author was congratulated so universally by
those whose opinion seemed to him deserving of
respect, that he was induced to revise and enlarge
the work with a view to making it more helpful to
pastors and presiding elders in the discharge of
executive and administrative duties of these of¬
ficers, respectively. And since the twenty-fourth
session of the General Conference of May, 1912,
has placed the stamp of its approval on this work,
the Hon. J. L. Mitchell, Esq., of Providence, R.
I., himself a learned and successful practitioner
at the bar of that State, making the motion and
speech on which the action of the conference was
predicated, I have felt the greater confidence and
assurance that my work is not without merit.
If what I have herein submitted shall prove
useful to pastors, presiding elders, bishops, and
the Church generally, and if judicial proceedings
in the African Methodist Episcopal Church shall
thereby be the more certainly conducted on lines
indicating a better acquaintance with orderly
court procedure (by those charged with adminis¬
tration of discipline in its corrective phases), I
shall be content.
THE AUTHOR.
A. i$L 3L (Eljurrli lErrlmasttral lubtrtal
Jlrarttr?
CHAPTER I.
Section 1. Definition of Terms.
Court—Any person authorized by law to sum¬
mons attendance of witnesses for the purpose of
deciding any question of law, or of fact; or of
law and fact, and to preside at any such trial.
Fact—Everything capable of being perceived
by the senses; every mental condition of which a
person is conscious.
Document—Any matter expressed or de¬
scribed upon any substance by means of letters,
marks, or more than one of these means, and in¬
tended to be used or which may be used, for the
purpose of recording that matter.
Evidence—All statements which a court per¬
mits or requires to be made by witnesses in rela¬
tion to matters of fact under inquiry: and all
documents produced for the inspection of the
court. Such documents are called "documentary
evidence."
21
22
A. M. E- Church
Conclusive Proof—Evidence, upon the pro¬
duction of which, or a fact upon the proof of
which, the court is bound to regard some fact as
proved, and to exclude evidence intended to dis¬
prove it.
A Presumption—A rule of law that courts
shall draw a particular inference from a particu¬
lar fact, or from particular evidence, unless, and
until, the truth of such inference is disproved.
Action—Any judicial proceeding, whether that
proceeding be civil, ecclesiastical or criminal.
Section 2. Facts in Issue and Facts Rele¬
vant to the Issue.
(a) Evidence may be given in any action of
the existence, or non-existence, of any fact in
issue or relevant to the issue, but of no other.
And the Court must exclude evidence of facts
which, though relevant to the issue, appear to
him to be too remote to be material under all
the circumstances of the case.
(b) Facts in issue are all the facts which, by
the form of the pleadings, are affirmed on the
one side, and denied on the other.
(c) In actions where there are no pleadings,
or in which the form of the pleadings is such
that a distinct issue is not joined between the
parties, all the facts from the establishment of
Judicial Practice
23
which the existence or non-existence, nature, ex¬
tent, of any right, or liability, or disability, is as¬
serted or denied in any such case, will, by law
and equity, follow.
(d) The relevancy of facts to facts in issue
depends upon certain principles and rules, to
wit: Facts, which, though not in issue, are so
connected with a fact in issue as to form part of
the same transaction or subject matter, are rele¬
vant to the fact with which they are so con¬
nected.
Section 3. What Constitutes Evidence.
Kinds of Evidence.
Evidence is either oral (or parol) or docu¬
mentary.
(a) Oral, or parol evidence is verbal testi¬
mony ; and all facts may be proven by parol evi¬
dence, except: 1: The contents of documents
such as must be proven otherwise, as by docu¬
mentary evidence; or by secondary evidence of
the contents of documents.
Parol or oral evidence must be direct: viz: If
it refers to a fact alleged to have been seen or
heard, it must be the evidence of a person who
says he saw or heard it; and if it refers to a fact
alleged to have been perceived by any other
sense, or in any other manner, it must be the
24
A. M. E. Church
evidence of a person who says he perceived it
by that sense, or in that manner.
(b) If it refers to an opinion, or the grounds
on which that opinion is held, it must be the evi¬
dence of a person who holds that opinion, on
those grounds.
When there is a question as to any point of
art or science, the opinion on that point of per¬
sons specially skilled in any such matter, is a
relevant fact, and the words "science" and "art"
include all subjects on which a course of spe¬
cial study or experience is necessary to the for¬
mation of a sound opinion.
Witnesses, such as I am here describing, will
be denominated "expert witnesses." And it is
the duty of the Court to decide whether the skill
of the witness in the matter on which the evi¬
dence of his opinion is offered is sufficient to
entitle him to be considered "an expert."
But if expert testimony is introduced, then
facts not otherwise relevant are relevant, if they
support or are inconsistent with the opinion of
experts, when such opinion is relevant.
Section 4. Documentary Evidence; Either
Primary or Secondary.
The contents of a document may be proven
either by primary or secondary evidence.
(a) Primary evidence is the document itself
Judicial Practice
25
produced in court for inspection; or an admis¬
sion of its contents proved to have been made
by a person whose admissions are relevant.
When a document is executed in several parts,
each part is primary evidence of the document.
(b) Secondary evidence means examined
copies, exemplifications, office copies, and cer¬
tified copies; other copies made from the orig¬
inal and proved to be correct: counterparts of
documents as against the parties who did not
execute them; oral accounts of the contents of a
document, given by some person who has him¬
self seen it.
But secondary evidence of the contents of a
document cannot be admitted unless the original
is shown, or appears to be in the possession of the
adverse party; after the adverse party has been
served with notice to produce it, and has failed
to do so, after a sufficient and reasonable time has
been given to enable such party to produce it
(this to be determined by the Court) ; when the
original has been destroyed or lost; and after
proper search has been made for it; when the
original is of such a nature as not to be easily
movable, or in a country from which it is not per¬
mitted to be removed; when it is a public docu¬
ment; when the originals consist of numerous
documents which cannot be conveniently exam-
26
A. M. E. Church
ined in court, and the fact to be proved is the
general result of the whole collection; provided,
that the result can be ascertained by calculation.
Section 5. Directions for Proceeding in
Ecclesiastical Courts.
1. When two or more persons conspire together
to commit any offense or actionable wrong, every¬
thing said, done, or written by either one of them
in the execution and furtherance of their common
purpose is deemed to be said, done, or written by
every one of them, and is a relevant fact as
against each of them. But no relation of such
measures taken in the execution of such common
purpose is relevant as against such person, ex¬
cept those who make them or are present when
they are made.
Evidence of acts relevant under this section
may not be given until the Court is satisfied that,
apart from them, there are prima-facie grounds
for believing in the existence of the conspiracy.
2. When any act done by any person is a fact
in issue, or is relevant to the issue, then the fol¬
lowing facts are also relevant, viz: (a) Any fact
which supplies a motive for such an act, or which
constituted preparation for it. (b) Any subse¬
quent conduct of such person which appears to
have been influenced by such act, or by the au-
Judicial Practice
27
thority of such person. (c) All statements made
by or to that person accompanying and explain¬
ing such act. (d) The conduct of the person
against whom an offense has been committed, and
in particular the fact that he made complaint,
soon after the offense, to persons to whom he
would naturally have complained, are relevant;
but the exact terms of the complaint would not
seem to be relevant.
3. Facts necessary to be known to explain a
fact in issue, or a relevant fact; or which support
or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in is¬
sue, or a relevant fact; or which establish the
identity of any thing or person whose identity is
in issue, or which fix the time or place at which
any fact in issue or relevant fact happened; or
which show that any document produced is gen¬
uine or otherwise; or which show the relation
of the parties by whom any such fact was trans¬
acted; or which afforded an opportunity for its
occurrence or transaction; or which are neces¬
sary to be known in order to show the relevancy
of other facts, are relevant in so far as they
are necessary for these purposes respectively.
4. Generally speaking, facts, whether in issue
or not, are relevant to each other when one is,
or probably was, or probably may be, or may
have been: (a) The cause of the other. (b)
28
A. M. E. Church
The effect of the other. (c) An effect of the
same cause, (d) A cause of the same effect.
(e) When one shows that the other must, or
cannot have occurred; or probably does; or did
exist, or did not exist. (/) Or that any fact did
exist or not, which in the common course of
events would either have caused, or have been
caused, by the other.
5. Whenever there is a question whether an
act was accidental or intentional, the fact that
such act formed a part of a series of similar acts
or occurrences, in each of which the person do¬
ing the act was concerned, such a fact is a rele¬
vant fact, and must be admitted.
Section 6. Hearsay Evidence and Confes¬
sions.
1. The fact that a statement was made by a
person not called as a witness is not relevant to
the truth of the matter asserted thereby, unless
it is admission or confession; a statement by a
deceased declarent, evidence given on a former
trial; a statement made under special circum¬
stances ; or the judgment of a court.
Admissions may be made by any party to an
action, whether substantial or nominal; or by
any person, who, though not a party to the ac¬
tion or proceeding, has a substantial interest in
Judicial Practice
29
the event; or who is privy in law or in blood, or
in estate, to any party thereto.
But no admission is relevant in any action if
it is made either upon an express or implied
promise or condition that the evidence of it is
not to be given; or under circumstances from
which the Court infers that the parties agreed
together that evidence of it should not be given ;
or if it has been made under duress.
2. A confession in law is an admission made
at any time by a person charged with crime, and
suggesting the inference that he committed that
crime. If voluntary, they are relevant facts as
against the person or persons who make them
only. But no confession is deemed to be volun¬
tary if it shall appear to the Court to have been
caused by any inducement, threat or promise
proceeding from a person in authority and hav¬
ing reference to the charge against the accused
person, whether addressed to him directly or
brought to his knowledge indirectly; or, if in the
opinion of the Court, such inducement, threat or
promise gave the accused person reasonable
ground for supposing that, by making a confes¬
sion, he would gain some advantage, or avoid
some evil in reference to the proceedings against
him.
3. But a confession will not be held to be in-
30
A- M. E. Church
voluntary only because it appears to have been
caused by an exhortation of a person in au¬
thority to make it as a religious duty; or by in¬
ducements held out by a person not in authority.
Confession will also be held to be voluntary if,
in the opinion of the Court, it is shown to have
been made after the complete removal of the im¬
pression produced by any inducement, threat or
promise of immunity which would otherwise
have rendered it involuntary. Furthermore,
facts discovered in consequence of confessions
involuntarily obtained, and so much of those
confessions as distinctly relate to such facts, may
be proved.
4. No fact need be proved in any action which
the parties thereto, or their agents, agree to ad¬
mit at the beginning of the hearing, with refer¬
ence thereto, or by their respective pleadings.
And no fact need be proved of which the Court
will take judicial notice. But if the Court be
unacquainted with such fact, he may refer to
any person or document of record for his satis¬
faction in relation thereto; or he may refuse to
take such judicial notice thereof, unless, and
until, the party calling upon him to take such
notice produce such document or book of
reference.
5. No person producing any document which,
Judicial Practice
31
upon its face, appears to have been altered in
any material part, can claim under it, the en¬
forcement of any right created by it, unless (a)
the alteration was made before the completion
of the document (b) with the consent of the
party to be charged under it, or his representa¬
tive in interest. And alterations will be deemed
to be material when, if they were made with the
consent of the party to be charged under it,
they would materially affect his interest, or vary
his obligations in some manner. But if the al¬
terations in no way affect the rights of the
parties, or the legal effect of the instrument,
they are immaterial.
6. It is the duty of all our ecclesiastical courts
to take judicial notice of the unwritten laws,
usages, rules and principles having the force of
law, and administered by superior courts, sitting
and acting by and under authority of the African
Methodist Episcopal Church in America, what¬
ever the nature or jurisdiction thereof; all pub¬
lished acts of the General Conferences of said
Church, not abrogated or rescinded by subse¬
quent legislation by said General Conference;
the general course of procedure and polity in
all such superior legislative and judicial bodies
or tribunals; all the general customs which have
been held to have the force of positive law; the
32
A. M. E. Church
existence and autonomy of the several annual
conferences, with the recognized boundaries
thereof; the Connectional Seal, and the Seals of
the several Annual Conferences; the accession to
office, of the Bishops, General Officers, with
their names, titles, orders, certificates, or other
official or judicial documents, and the signatures
of all such; the ordinary course of nature; nat¬
ural and artificial divisions of time, and the ob¬
vious meaning of English words, and of all other
matters which they are commanded by statutory
law (the Discipline) to take official cognizance of.
CHAPTER II.
ON ECCLESIASTICAL COURT PRO¬
CEDURE AND PRACTICE.
Section 1. Production, and Effect of
Evidence.
1. Burden of Proof.—Whoever desires any
Court to give judgment as to any legal right or
remedy, or liability dependent on the existence
or non-existence of facts which he asserts or
denies to exist, must prove that those facts do,
or do not exist.
2. Presumption of Innocence.—If the com-
Judicial Practice
33
mission of a crime or wrongful act is directly in
issue, it must be proved beyond a reasonable
doubt. And the burden of proving that any
person has been guilty of such crime, is on the
person who asserts it, whether the commission
of such act is, or is not, directly at issue in the
action.
The burden of proof then, in any action, lies
(when the action begins), on that party against
whom the judgment of the Court would be given
if no evidence at all were produced on either
side; regard being had always, to any presump¬
tion which may appear from the pleadings.
However, as the action proceeds the burden of
proof may be shifted from the party on whom
it first rested, by his proving facts which raise a
strong presumption in his favor.
3. Competency of Witnesses and Charac¬
ter of Witnesses.—All persons are competent
to testify before Courts in the A. M. E. Church
—unless, in the opinion of the Court, one is pre¬
vented by extreme youth; or some disease af¬
fecting his mind; or when from any similar
cause he is prevented from recollecting the mat¬
ter on which he is to testify; or from under¬
standing the questions put to him; or from know¬
ing that he ought to speak the truth.
But a person unable, either to hear or speak,
34
A. M. E. Church
is not incompetent, and may give his evidence
by writing or signs, or in any other manner in
which he can make it intelligible. But such evi¬
dence, if in writing, must be written, and if by
signs, such signs must be made, in open court.
Evidence so given will be classed with and deem¬
ed to be parol evidence.
4. The fact that a person is of a particular
character is not deemed to be relevant in ordinary
civil or ecclesiastical proceedings, but if the ac¬
cused be charged with gross immorality, then the
fact that he has a good character is relevant.
But the fact that he has a bad character is
irrelevant, unless it is itself a fact in the issue
being then tried; or, unless evidence has been
given that he has a good character, in which case
it becomes relevant.
5. No husband or wife is compellable to dis¬
close any communication made by either to the
other during the marriage; and no legal adviser
is permitted, whether during, or after the period
of his employment as such (without the express
consent of his client), to disclose any communi¬
cation oral, or documentary, made by his client
during the course of, and for the purpose of his
employment, whether in reference to any mat¬
ter as to which a dispute has arisen, or other¬
wise; or to disclose any advice given by him
Judicial Practice
35
to his client during, in the course of, and for
the purpose of such employment. And it is im¬
material whether the client is or is not a party
to the action in which the question is put to his
adviser.
And no accused person is bound to give evi¬
dence, or to answer any question, if the answer
thereto (in the opinion of the Court) would
have a tendency to expose the witness to any
criminal charge (gross immorality), or to any
penalty or forfeiture of a right which the Court
regards as likely to be sued for. But as the
question of debt is, by the discipline of the
Church, placed for adjudication under arbitra¬
tors, no accused person, if he be made a witness,
should be excused from answering any question
only, because the answer may establish the fact
that he owes a debt, or is liable to any penalty
of less severity than suspension or expulsion
from the society.
6. When the only proof jagainst a person
charged with crime or gross immorality is the
evidence of an accomplice, uncorroborated in
any material particular, it is the duty of the
Court to warn the committee (or conference),
that it is unsafe to convict any person upon such
evidence. The evidence of two witnesses, both
of whom are cognizant of the same overt act, is
36
A. M. E. Church
indispensable in any action before an Ecclesias-
ical Court, proof of which is dependent wholly
upon parol evidence.
But circumstances surrounding the case in
issue may suggest such a strong presumption of
guilt as to justify the Court in permitting the
case to go to the committee (or conference),
upon the evidence of a single witness, so cor¬
roborated. But if there be no circumstances
proved which would corroborate a single wit¬
ness, then the accused is entitled to an acquittal.
Section 2. Examination of Witnesses.
1. Oaths should not be administered or re¬
quired, of any witness in an ecclesiastical court.
But every person having authority to summon,
hear and examine witnesses in any judicial pro¬
ceeding in an African Methodist Episcopal
Church, should require such person to solemnly
affirm and declare, that the evidence he shall
give will be the truth, the whole truth and noth¬
ing but the truth. And if any person shall sub¬
sequently make false statement, or give false
evidence before any such Ecclesiastical Court,
if afterwards discovered to have done so, he or
she should be proceeded against as in other
cases of immorality.
2. Witnesses must first be examined in chief;
then cross-examined; then re-examined (called
Judicial Practice
37
re-direct examination) ; then re-cross-examined.
But the Court may, in all cases, permit a wit¬
ness to be recalled, either for further examina¬
tion-in-chief or for further cross-examination.
Examination and cross-examination must re¬
late to facts in issue, or facts relevant to the
issue; but the cross-examination need not be
confined to the facts to which the witness testi¬
fied on his examination-in-chief. The reexami¬
nation must relate and be directed to the ex¬
planation of matters referred to in cross-exami¬
nation. And if new matter is, by permission of
the Court, introduced in the re-examination, then
the adverse party may further cross-examine
upon that matter.
Questions suggesting the answer which the
person putting the question wishes or expects to
receive, or suggesting disputed facts as to which
the witness is to testify (these are called "lead¬
ing questions"), must not, if objected to by the
adverse party, be asked in the examination-in-
chief, or re-examination (except with permis¬
sion of the Court) ; but such questions may be
asked in cross-examination.
3. When a witness is cross-examined he may,
in addition to the questions hereinbefore re¬
ferred to, be asked any question which tends
to test his accuracy, veracity or credibility; to
38
A. M. E. Church
shake his credit by injuring his character. And
he may be compelled to answer any such ques¬
tion, however irrelevant it may be to the facts
in issue, and however disgraceful the answer
may be to himself, except in the case mentioned
in a preceding section.
But when any witness under cross-examina¬
tion has been asked, and has answered any ques¬
tion which is relevant to the inquiry only as far
as it tends to shake his credit by injuring his
character, then no evidence can be given to con¬
tradict him, except in the following cases: If a
witness is asked whether he has been previously
convicted of a gross immorality, and he denies
it, or does not admit it, or refuses to make an¬
swer, then evidence may be given of his pre¬
vious conviction thereof. Or if the witness is
asked any question tending to show that he is
not impartial, and answers it by denying the
facts suggested, he may then be contradicted.
4. And every witness under cross-examina¬
tion may be asked whether he has made any
former statement relative to the subject matter
in issue in the action, and inconsistent with his
present testimony (the circumstances of the sup¬
posed statement being referred to with sufficient
particularity to designate the particular occa¬
sion). If then he does not distinctly admit that
Judicial Practice
39
he has made such a statement, proof may be
given that he did in fact make it. And the same
course may be taken with a witness upon his
examination-in-chief, if the Court is of the opin¬
ion that he is hostile to the party by whom he is
called, and permits the question.
5. While under examination a witness may
refresh his memory by referring to any writing
made by himself at the time of the transaction
concerning which he is questioned, or so soon
thereafter that, in the opinion of the court, it is
likely that the transaction was then fresh in his
memory. And the witness may also refer to
any such writing made by another person and
read to the witness within the time aforesaid, if,
when he read it, he knew it to be correct. And
an expert witness is entitled to refresh his mem¬
ory by reference to professional or legal
treatises. But all such books and writings re¬
ferred to above must, if he requires it, be pro¬
duced and shown to the adverse party for ex¬
amination; and such party, if he chooses, may
cross-examine the witness thereon.
40
A. M. E. Church
CHAPTER III.
MODE OF PROCEDURE AND DIREC¬
TIONS FOR COURT OR PRESIDING
OFFICER.
Section 1. Charge or Complaint.
1. This should be stated clearly and succinctly,
care being taken to give, not only comprehen¬
sive statement of the crime or wrongful act
committed by the accused, but also the particu¬
lar law or rule of the church violated, citing
chapter, section and paragraph wherein it is
contained. If more than one act or crime be
complained of, each will constitute a separate
offense, and must be charged as such and placed
under a distinct and separate heading, and prop¬
erly numbered. If more than one charge or
complaint shall be made against any accused
person, the Court or presiding officer will not
attempt to try such person on more than one
such charge at the same time, or before the same
committee.
2. Care must be exercised in making specifi¬
cations (if there be more than one), conform
strictly to the charge or complaint; the obvious
Judicial Practice
41
use of such being to assist the committee or
conference to follow the testimony and to deter¬
mine with promptness, whether the allegations
of the complaint have, or have not been proven.
The accused is entitled, also, to have these speci¬
fications give measurably complete details as to
the time, place and circumstancest under which
the alleged offense is charged to have been com¬
mitted; and the Court must protect him in this
inalienable right.
3. The accused person is entitled to defend
himself in person, or by counsel, in every court
of the Church; and presiding officers must, be¬
fore court proceedings are begun, inquire of
such accused person whether he intends to de¬
fend himself, or has secured "counsel" to rep¬
resent him. And if the accused be unable to
make for himself, good and sufficient defense
for want of a knowledge of the law of the
Church, and has been unable to secure com¬
petent "counsel," then it is the duty of the Court
to select and appoint some well-informed and
capable person to act as "counsel" for the ac¬
cused. But this person should, for obvious rea¬
sons be a member of the African Methodist
Episcopal Church, layman or minister.
4. The accused must be found guilty or ac¬
quitted of each charge, and in a separate "ac-
42
A. M. E. Church
tion"; and until that is done, no other proceeding
can be entered against him, or evidence or testi¬
mony permitted to come before the Court and
"trial committee," touching matters not involved
in the charge or complaint in issue. But when
any charge or complaint has been finally ad¬
judicated, whatever the finding or sentence may
have been (unless the penalty inflicted be ex¬
pulsion from the society or conference), then
any additional charge or complaint may be im¬
mediately taken up.
5. The supreme importance of fullness and
accuracy in recording proceedings in all trials,
with the identical words employed by witnesses
in the giving of parol evidence (or the sub¬
stance thereof, if the first be impracticable) ;
the filing of all papers and documents offered
and admitted as evidence, and attaching the
same to the body of the minute or record of
the trial, as exhibits, and duly marked or num¬
bered; the writing into the body of the minute
or record of the trial proceedings, of the charge
or complaint, with the several specifications (if
any there be) ; the finding of the "trial com¬
mittee," or conference; the "charge" of Court
(including any particular instructions by him
given on request of either party to the issue) ;
whether the finding was an acquittal or a con-
Judicial Practice
43
viction; whether the sentence of the Court or
presiding officer was suspension or expulsion
from the "society," or conference; these can¬
not be overestimated, since occasion may arise
for the production of said minute or record, be¬
fore an "appellate court," where the complete¬
ness and accuracy of these official documents
will be determining factors, enabling such court
to reach a safe conclusion, and either affirming
or reversing the court below, as these records
would prove that proceedings in the inferior
court had, or had not been conducted in ac¬
cordance with the laws of the African Metho¬
dist Episcopal Church.
Section 2. Characters of Evidence ; De¬
velopment of Case and Examination of
Witnesses.
1. Either party may introduce any character
of evidence which, in his opinion, may seem
capable of throwing light on the matter at issue.
But all such evidence must be competent; neither
immaterial nor irrelevant testimony will be al¬
lowed to unnecessarily delay or prolong the in¬
vestigation and trial. And it is clearly within
the rights and duty of the Court to determine
all questions arising as to the admissibility of
such evidence, together with any preliminary
question of fact, the solution of which may be
44
A. M. E. Church
necessary to enable him to decide whether it
is admissible. Another question which the
Court must decide is this, viz.: "Whether there
is any evidence." And if it shall appear that
there is such evidence, then the question,
"whether it is sufficient to sustain the charge"
or not, is one which must be left to the com¬
mittee or conference to determine, and it must
be allowed to go to the committee or con¬
ference.
2. The accuser or affirmative party will not
be permitted to present half his case, reserving
the remainder until the accused has begun, but
must regularly develop his whole case in open¬
ing. Whatever affirmative evidence he pos¬
sesses and on which he proposes to rely for a
favorable verdict, must be put in before the
accused is required to begin introduction of
evidence. The accuser, however, may offer evi¬
dence in rebuttal after the defense "rests," and
the accused may also offer evidence in sur-re-
buttal before the case or issue is closed to
evidence.
3. The true office of the examination-in-chief
is to lay before the court, the committee or con¬
ference, the entire information possessed by the
witness. And the object of cross-examination
is to search, correct, supply omissions, and to
sift the evidence.
Judicial Practice
45
The purpose of re-direct examination is to
put in order, set aright, repair and explain
whatever has been obscured or rendered doubt¬
ful and uncertain by the cross-examination.
The first duty of counsel, therefore, is to
treat the witness with perfect fairness and due
consideration when he believes such witness is
testifying to the truth, honestly and conscien¬
tiously. But if there should be reason to believe
he is testifying recklessly or corruptly, then to so
examine him as to break up in his mind the
continuity and arrangement of his statement
of the facts and circumstances, as this will be
the surest and quickest way to detect and ex¬
pose him.
4. The introduction of evidence being con¬
cluded, prosecution and defense "resting," the
Court shall require argument to be made by the
prosecution and defense (unless it is mutually
agreed to submit the case on the evidence, with¬
out argument).
If either the prosecution or defense request
the Court to give particular instruction touching
some particular phase of the law or evidence
which shall appear to him to be consistent with
sound interpretation of the law and evidence, he
should give due weight to them. And if, in his
judgment, either party is entitled to such specific
46
A. M. E. Church
instructions, they should be embodied in. his
charge to the committee or conference.
5. Following argument by counsel for accuser
and accused the Court must proceed to deliver
his charge. This should embrace a lucid state¬
ment of the law governing the case in issue,
with definition of what constitutes the commis¬
sion of the offense charged, and should, in im¬
portant cases, be in writing.
Upon completion of the statement of the
charge to committee or conference, whether
verbally or in writing, then, if the trial were
held before a committee or select number, said
committee should immediately withdraw and
proceed to deliberate upon the evidence given
in the case. And when the committee, or a
majority of it, shall have reached an agreement
as to the guilt or innocence of the accused, or
that the case in issue has or has not been es¬
tablished; or that the complaint was fully justi¬
fied or not, it shall return and report to the
Court in substance, as follows:
"We, the committee (or conference), em¬
panelled (or constituted), to hear and determine
the case in issue in this action (insert here cap¬
tion of case at bar, with name of accuser and
accused), find that the accused (insert here
name of accused), is guilty (or not guilty) as
charged."
Judicial Practice
47
And to this report or finding, the names of
all (or such members of the committee or con¬
ference as have agreed) must be signed.
6. When the verdict is submitted, whether
the accused has been found guilty or acquitted,
the Court must pronounce sentence, or declare
his innocence in conformity therewith, since no
matter or issue is finally determined in an ec¬
clesiastical court until the presiding officer makes,
ex-cathedra, declaration thereof.
And the clerk of record, or minute clerk, must
make entry in the. journal of proceedings, both
of the verdict or finding of the committee or
conference, and the decree of the court; and the
minutes must have the attesting signature of
the presiding officer and clerk of record.
If expulsion from society or conference has
been the order and decree of the court, then
entry of that fact must be made in the journal
of proceedings, with an additional entry indi¬
cating whether the expelled member has exer¬
cised his right of appeal to Quarterly, Annual or
General Conference, or to the Court of Triers
of Appeals in the interval of General Confer¬
ence.
7. The Court must insist that the clerk of
record deliver into the hands of the stewards
of a circuit, mission or station, to the secretary
48
A. M. E. Church
of annual conference, or secretary of the House
of Bishops, original or duplicate copies of all
such proceedings as legally belong to them as
custodians, until such time as appeals thereon
may come on for hearing.
8. Whether an appeal is or is not taken by
the accused member (suspended or expelled
from society or conference) these records must
be preserved as historical data, and securely kept
in custody of the proper official, and by him
transmitted intact to his successor in office. And
presiding officers in quarterly and annual con¬
ference should make inquiry therefor, that our
Church judicial records may always be safe¬
guarded.
CHAPTER IV.
APPELLATE COURTS—GROUND OF
APPEAL.
Section 1. Courts.
1. There are four (4) "appellate courts" in the
African Methodist Episcopal Church, viz: Quar¬
terly and Annual Conferences, Triers of Ap¬
peals, and General Conference.
Of these, the Quarterly Conference is for the
Judicial Practice
49
laymen; the Annual Conference for the licen¬
tiate, or local elder, deacon or preacher, Triers of
Appeal for the itinerant preacher (ad interim),
and the General Conference for the bishop, trav¬
eling elder, deacon or preacher. An appeal will lie
to either of these courts in behalf of the respec¬
tive classes of members, lay and ministerial,
whenever" he believes himself unlawfully de¬
prived of rights guaranteed to him by the dis¬
cipline of the Church, by the erroneous finding
of any committee or Conference, and which has
resulted in either his suspension or expulsion
from the society or conference.
2. If the person appealing is convinced that
substantial justice has not been done him; or
that the committee or conference was not justi¬
fied by the evidence given in any action in bring¬
ing in the particular finding submitted to the
court; or if he believes, and has grounds for be¬
lieving, that the presiding officer seriously erred
in allowing evidence to be introduced which was
improper or irrelevant; or that the "charge" by
him given to the "committee" or "conference"
was partial or erroneous; or if the court refused
to permit the introduction of evidence offered
by the appellant, which of right should have
been admitted, and which he believes would,
had it been permitted to be heard, have changed
50
A. M. E. Church
the views of any one, or all of committee or con¬
ference; or if the court refused to give instruc¬
tions- in his charge which of right he should
have given when prayed for by the appellant;
or if he did instruct contrary to the law and the
evidence; these, or any one of them, will consti¬
tute good and sufficient ground for an appeal
from a sentence of suspension or expulsion from
the society or conference.
3. And if the accused give notice immediately
upon the submission of any such finding of guilt
by "committee" or "conference" of his intention
to appeal from said finding and sentence of sus¬
pension or expulsion to the next ensuing quar¬
terly, annual or General Conference (or to the
Court of "Triers of Appeal"), the presiding of¬
ficer, whether pastor, presiding elder or bishop,
officiating as such in the court of original juris¬
diction, shall cause entry of that fact to be made
in'the Journal of Proceedings, and shall further
order and direct that the case, as made up in the
trial, shall be speedily prepared for submission
to the appellate court having jurisdiction thereof.
4. After the usual devotional exercises have
been concluded, whether in a quarterly or annual
conference, and the calling of the roll has been
completed, the fact that an appeal has been
taken should be noted, and the matter brought
Judicial Practice
51
to an early conclusion by a reviewing of the
case. And the appellate court will either affirm,
reverse or remand the case without unnecessary
delay, as the status of members and their rights
in the society or conference are of prime im¬
portance, and must not be ignored.
5. Only the record of proceedings at the trial,
with the evidence adduced and matter of record,
with any documentary evidence submitted there¬
at and appended as exhibits, will be permitted
to be read to the conference. These last will, of
course, include the "charge" to the conference
or committee by the presiding officer sitting as
the Court in said procedure. And it is the duty
of the presiding elder, in a quarterly conference,
to have such notice of appeal, with the name of
the appellant, entered in the minute of said con¬
ference in answer to the question, "Are there
any appeals?" Having completed the recording
of answers to disciplinary questions prescribed
for such conference, and before he permits en¬
try of the names of expelled members to be
made, he will revert to, and take up for determi¬
nation, the action of the "trial committee" or so¬
ciety, and ascertain, as directed by law, whether
the member appealing has, or has not, been regu¬
larly and legally expelled.
Proceedings in the annual conference, a bishop
52
A. M. E. Church
presiding, shall be conducted in a similar manner.
6. No member of the quarterly, annual or gen¬
eral conference, who was a witness in the original
trial, or who has formed or expressed an opinion
of the guilt of innocence of the appellant, is com¬
petent to sit as one of the triers of the appeal.
7. The appeal being heard in the quarterly, or
annual conference, records of trial read and ar¬
gument concluded, the presiding elder or bishop,
sitting as the court or presiding officer, must in¬
struct the conference as to the law governing the
case appealed, putting such instructions in the
form of an impartial "charge." And it is highly
improper for him to attempt to declare the sus¬
pension or expulsion to have been proper or im¬
proper, regular or irregular. The question is one
which the conference alone must determine, the
discipline expressly providing that "in all cases he
must leave the application of the law with the
district or quarterly conferences."
The same restriction is placed upon a bishop
when presiding in an annual conference. In
none of our church judicatories may any pre¬
siding officer act in the capacity of both judge
and juror.
Judicial Practice
53
ANNUAL CONFERENCE.
Section 2. Appellate Court for Local
Elder, Deacon or Preacher.
1. Having been tried, suspended or expelled
by the quarterly conference, the local elder, dea¬
con or preacher may appeal to the annual con¬
ference, and the preliminary steps to be taken
for that purpose are similar to those prescribed
for the layman when coming for such purpose
to the quarterly conference. And the annual
conference, sitting as a "Court of Appeal" for
the hearing and determining of such cases, the
presiding bishop of that conference (or some
person appointed by him to preside thereat),
should take the same precaution in safeguarding
the rights of the appellant as are required of
the preacher-in-charge, or the presiding elder, in
the society and quarterly conference, respec¬
tively.
2. For obvious reasons, neither the presiding
elder (who sat in the original hearing in the
quarterly conference), the preacher-in-charge
of that mission, circuit or station, nor any local
elder, deacon or preacher (who was a member
of the quarterly conference appealed from and
was present, and took any part in the original
54
A. M. E. Church
proceedings in that case), should be permitted to
participate in the appeal proceedings; certainly
they should not be allowed to vote.
3. As only the proceedings as taken down at
the trial of the issue and certified by the pre¬
siding elder and secretary of the quarterly con¬
ference (which must include all the testimony,
parol and documentary, the verdict of the con¬
ference and "charge" to conference by the pre¬
siding elder), will come before the annual con¬
ference, and from these alone, argued by repre¬
sentative of appellant and quarterly conference,
the verdict of the annual conference will be de¬
termined, it is unnecessary to add further sug¬
gestion.
4. The case being completed by argument of
appellant and respondent quarterly conference,
the presiding bishop will (if he deem it neces¬
sary and expedient, or if he has been specially
requested to do so by either the appellant or
representatives of the quarterly conference), de¬
liver such instructions on the law or discipline
as shall enable the annual conference sitting as
an "Appellate Court" to decide: (a) Whether
the proceedings before the quarterly conference
were regular and correct, and (b) Whether the
recorded evidence appears to be sufficient to jus¬
tify the finding and sentence of the quarterly
Judicial Practice
55
conference appealed from; and (c) Whether
serious errors were committed by the presiding
officer or Court in the form and substance of the
"charge" given to the conference.
5. When a sufficient time has elapsed to en¬
able members of conference to reach a conclu¬
sion on these points, the presiding bishop will
entertain a motion, made by any competent mem¬
ber thereof, if presented in the following or any
corresponding form:
"Resolved, That it is the sense and judgment
of this annual conference that the trial of
Brother .•
a (local elder, deacon or preacher) by the quar¬
terly conference of ( ) was
correct (or incorrect) in form and regular (or
irregular) in procedure, and that the recorded
evidence produced at the trial of the issue ap¬
pealed from was sufficient (or insufficient) to
justify the action of said conference in suspend¬
ing (or expelling) the appellant; and that the
"charge" of the presiding elder to the confer¬
ence was (or was not) both sound as to the law
and impartial in form and expression. That
the sentence of suspension (or expulsion) should
(or should not) stand, and the appeal is (or is
not) sustained, and a dismissal thereof is (or is
56
A. M- E. Church
not) hereby ordered, with instructions that the
case be (or be not) reopened by the respondent
quarterly conference."
If the annual conference refuse to sustain the
appeal, the local elder, deacon or preacher has
no further remedy or redress. He must join
the church and come again from his class as a
probationer.
Section 3. Proceedings at Trial of Travel¬
ing Elders, Deacons and Preachers.
1. Traveling preachers shall make their final
appeal to the general conference, which convenes
every four (4) years, and the mode of procedure
is the same adopted and required in other appeal
cases, whether in the quarterly or annual confer¬
ences, with this notable exception, viz:
It will be observed that the Discipline pro¬
vides an almost immediate relief for a traveling
preacher, a member of any annual conference,
who takes exception to his manner of trial, sus¬
pension or expulsion from conference, or to the
decisions of a bishop. For he may make known
to his bishop that he desires him (the bishop)
to call the "Court of Triers of Appeals," and
when such notice is given to the bishop, he shall
designate three (3) of the nearest conferences
from which he will call the "triers," to meet at a
Judicial Practice
57
given place within three (3) months after such
notification. It will be observed that this provision
is MANDATORY when invoked by a preacher,
and was doubtless inserted in the Discipline to
prevent or correct abuse of the great power vested
in our bishops: (a) To rule arbitrarily; (b) the
exercise of his immense powers to injure and
distress a brother; (c) and to provide immediate
relief from such wrong and injustice when the
General Conference (the appellate court for
such preacher) is too far removed in time of its
convening to give effective relief.
Knowing the preacher has this remedy at
hand, it is inconceivable that any Bishop will
subject himself to the odium of having his ad¬
ministration discredited and his official decisions
overruled, because of hasty and ill-advised ac¬
tion involving the very life of a preacher. What¬
ever the disposition (and few of our Bishops
are capable of acting from any but the purest
motives or making judicial decisions that will
not stand the severest tests of ecclesiastical
jurisprudence), all will be more careful to exer¬
cise due precaution and impartiality, and see
that justice be done to all. But this Court (the
Triers of Appeal), shall have jurisdiction only
of the questions: (a) Of regularity of pro¬
ceedings. (b) Sufficiency of evidence in the
58
A. M. E. Church
trial at annual conference, to warrant finding
and judgment. (c) Injustice, partiality or
grossly erroneous decision by the Court (the pre¬
siding bishop), the effect of which would be
to inflict a grievous injury to the member or
conference from which said appeal was taken,
and which was in clear and direct contraven¬
tion of some right of the appellant, or in viola¬
tion of the spirit and letter of the discipline.
And the finding of this Court of Review
(Triers of Appeal), is subject to approval or
reversal by the General Conference only.
2. If the appeal be made to the General Con¬
ference, the cause or issue will be heard first by
the Episcopal Committee, and while this com¬
mittee is engaged in examination of such Bishop,
as to his administration of the discipline of the
Church within the bounds of his episcopal dis¬
trict. At such a time the Episcopal Committee
sits as the Judicial Committee of the General
Conference, and its powers are largely those of
a "trial committee" or "select number" in a
local society. But whatever the decision and
finding of said committee, nothing shall prevent
either the accused bishop or the appellant, in¬
sisting that the General Conference shall (if it
shall elect to do so by motion), hear the issue
fully elaborated, and make final determination
thereof.
Judicial Practice
59'
3. And whatever the final decision of the
General Conference, there is no appeal from its
action. Bishops and traveling preachers alike
must cheerfully submit to the judgment of their
brethren expressed through this highest ecclesi¬
astical tribunal. For, however hastily we may
proceed in ill-advised legislation, it is inconceiv¬
able that this body would deliberately and ma¬
liciously wrong a bishop or preacher; or re¬
fuse to either, prompt and adequate relief from
harmful imputation, or flagrant and serious in¬
jury to his character or rights within the Con¬
nection.
Section 4. Trial of Bishops.
1. The preliminary trial, or examination, in the
case of bishops (in the interval of General Con¬
ference), is on presentment by a committee com¬
posed of one bishop and four elders, said com¬
mittee having previously temporarily suspended
or inhibited him from the exercise of Episco¬
pal functions, till the convening of said con¬
ference. And this action must always be taken
by such committee during the interval of, and
not at an annual conference session. And if
action was had by committee ad-interim, it must
be either confirmed or reversed by ensuing an¬
nual conference.
60
A. M. E. Church
But the action of any annual conference
against any bishop can only be taken when the
bishop is accused of crime expressly forbidden
in the word of God; or if he has acted so un¬
justly and improperly as to seriously endanger
the "work" or Connection; or has wilfully wrong¬
ed and jeopardized a preacher in his character
and possibility of securing an honorable liveli¬
hood. No trivial complaint will be entertained,
nor anything which does not threaten serious
consequences.
2. The Episcopal Committee of the General
Conference has original jurisdiction of all
charges and complaints against any of the
bishops, and may receive and hear and make
final determination of any such charge or com¬
plaint (subject, of course, to approval of their
report and findings to the affirmative vote of a
majority of the members of the General Con¬
ference), said charges and complaints being pre¬
sented and heard during the sessions of said
General Conference. And this committee shall
make and present its findings and recommenda¬
tions in a special report. This report shall have
for its ground of justification, facts ascertained
by examination of said bishop as to his life and
administration of the discipline of the Church
within the bounds of his episcopal district, or
Judicial Practice
61
when called into another bishop's district for
special service as prescribed in the discipline.
If the Episcopal Committee elect, it may dele¬
gate to a sub-committee the right and power to
make this investigation and report the same to
the full committee, which, after approval, be¬
comes the act and report of said committee in
its entirety. But this approval shall not be given
until after due deliberation and full considera¬
tion has been had thereon.
3. The General Conference, sitting in its judi¬
cial capacity, and as the Supreme Court of the
African Methodist Episcopal Church, and pro¬
ceeding under the practice usual in regular
"court" proceedings, is competent to declare per¬
manent the suspension or expulsion of even a
bishop. No other judicial tribunal in the Church
has this power.
4. In the interval of General Conference, ac¬
tion against a bishop can only be taken on pre¬
sentment of a committee composed of the senior
bishop (or if the senior bishop be the accused,
then the next in seniority), one other bishop and
four elders. And the presiding elder in whose
district the crime is alleged to have been com¬
mitted shall notify the said senior bishop of the
character and ground of such charge, and ad¬
vise him of the urgent necessity of summoning
€2
A. M. E. Church
a committee of investigation. But in the case
of a preacher appealing from sentence of sus¬
pension or expulsion by annual conference, or
some grave error in administration by such
bishop at said conference, the matter is always
referred to the Court of Triers of Appeal, call¬
ed by the bishop presiding at the session of con¬
ference appealed from.
5. The powers of a bishop are both executive
and judicial. By executive I mean that it is his
duty to carry out and enforce the legislation of
the General Conference by executive acts and
orders. By judicial, that he must interpret and
decide all questions of law or discipline in the
annual conferences over which he presides. And
when such conference sits as a "court" in the
trial of appeals of local elders, deacons and
preachers, or as the court of "Original Jurisdic¬
tion," he must sit as the "trial court" or presid¬
ing officer, at which time his acts are, and must
be considered, as purely judicial. The same is
true when he "tries, suspends or expels preach¬
ers in the interval of conference" as per disci¬
pline, which must be by committee, as in other
cases of the trial of itinerant preachers in the
interval of conference by presiding elders. But
whether under bishop or presiding elder, the ap¬
plication of law must remain with the annual or
Judicial Practice
63
quarterly conference. The law and facts being
stated, the question of guilt or innocence shall
be determined by the conference, not by the
Court or presiding officer; nor must he seek im¬
properly to influence the judgment and findings
of said conference by suggesting what verdict
will be pleasing to himself. It is apparent that,
in too many instances, grave miscarriage of jus¬
tice might result from the complaisance of
brethren, and their wish to conciliate a bishop,
whether the evidence did, or did not, warrant
a particular finding.
6. If at the conference, when inquiry is being
made in answer to question 12, "Are the preach¬
ers blameless in life and conversation?" a com¬
plaint be made against any of the preachers, and
the evidence submitted in support thereof shall,
ex-parte, appear conclusive of his guilt, and the
complaint make accusation of some offense which
is of a disqualifying character, for which a min¬
ister may lawfully be either suspended or ex¬
pelled from the conference and Connection, and
the accused preacher be then and there unpre¬
pared to make complete defense, he shall be given
a reasonable time in which to prepare for the
trial of the case. Meanwhile he must be fur¬
nished with a copy of the charge or complaint
made against him, which must specify particu-
64
A. M. E. Church
larly the circumstances connected with the com¬
mission thereof. A preacher should never be
suspended or expelled from conference (as his
church membership, as well as ministerial rela¬
tionship, is wholly vested in said annual confer¬
ence), without regular and formal trial proce¬
dure, as in the case of laymen in the local so¬
ciety. But until the charge or complaint made
against him has been adjudicated, he must be
regarded as "under complaint or charge," and
cannot be assigned to a pastoral charge in that
or any other conference; unless the complaint be
withdrawn, or he has been acquitted upon his
trial.
CHAPTER V.
PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS IN EC¬
CLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Section 1.
1. The charge or complaint having been
prepared, signed and delivered to the preacher
in charge (or other presiding officer), he must
fix the time and the place for the trial of the
issue, consulting (as far as this is practi¬
cable) the convenience of the accused; notify
Judicial Practice
65
the accused (in writing) of such time and place
of trial, transmitting therewith a copy of the
charge (or complaint), including the specifica¬
tions (if any). The length of time intervening
between notice and trial should be such as to
enable the accused to make due preparation.
Circumstances surrounding each case must deter¬
mine what constitutes a reasonable time, some
cases obviously requiring a longer period than
others. In the case of a traveling preacher or
other member of an annual conference, the notice
should certainly be given before the date fixed
for the convening of said conference, that wit¬
nesses or documents necessary to a defense may
be summoned or brought to conference.
2. All objections of a purely dilatory charac¬
ter, or which do not lead to a determination of
the merits of the controversy, should be over¬
ruled by the Court, and all other objections must
be regularly presented and insisted on before the
commencement of the trial or the impanelling of
the committee.
When all preliminary steps have been taken
or waived by the parties in interest, either ex¬
pressly or impliedly, and after the committee has
been called and responded, either party (accused
or accuser) may challenge for cause any mem¬
ber of said committee. But the mere fact that
66
A. M. E. Church
either party is not satisfied with the committee,
or any member of it, will not be regarded as suf¬
ficient ground for challenge within the meaning
of the Discipline, or any sound interpretation
of the law. Only when if said member is re¬
lated by blood or marriage to accuser or accused,
or is a member of the quarterly conference of
that circuit, mission or station, or has heard a
statement of the facts in controversy and has
formed or expressed an opinion of the guilt or
innocence of the accused, would constitute cause
for challenge, and justify the court in excluding
such member from the original committee im¬
panelled to try the case. And the objection,
whatever its ground, must be regularly inquired
into and insisted upon before the commencement
of the trial of the case. Neglect or refusal of
either party to make this examination at the
proper time will be deemed to be a waiver of this
right, and must not be subsequently entertained.
Under no circumstances must the Court per¬
mit either party to experiment and trifle by waiv¬
ing the rights mentioned above when they ap¬
pear to be in his favor, and insisting upon them
when they appear to be against him. And the
validity of all objections shall be determined by
the Court.
Judicial Practice
67
3. The prosecution should set forth the case,
with the facts and circumstances sought to
be proved, carefully avoiding all immaterial
facts or any others not likely to be admissible in
evidence. And when the prosecution has con¬
cluded, the defense, in person or by counsel, may
make his statement, bringing forward his theory
of the case at issue.
Great prudence should be exercised and care
taken to avoid making statements at this time,
which, taken in connection with facts and cir¬
cumstances subsequently proved in the trial,
furnish strong presumptive evidence of guilt.
Unskilled counsel may thus do his client irrep¬
arable injury.
WHO SHALL PRESIDE AT CHURCH
TRIALS.
Section 2.
1. At Trial of Lay-Members.
The stationed pastor or preacher-in-charge
shall preside at all trials of lay-members of his
charge (including stewards, trustees, class-lead¬
ers, deaconesses and stewardesses), unless he is
the accuser; in which case it is the custom and
practice (although nowhere specifically stated
in the Discipline) that he shall notify his pre-
68
A. M. E. Church
siding elder of his temporary incompetence by
reason of his relation to the case to be tried; as
accuser. In that event the presiding elder will
designate and notify a neighboring pastor,
pastor-in-charge, that he is required to preside
at such trial.
But such preacher, assigned to perform that
special duty, has no other or further authority
in said pastoral charge than that for which he
has been requested and assigned. His acts and
judicial functions, in so far as they relate to the
trial and its issue, are co-ordinate with those of
the stationed preacher under normal conditions.
2. At Trial of Local Elders, Deacons and
Preachers.
The preacher in charge shall also preside at
the preliminary trial of either of the above-
named preachers, the discipline providing that
"he shall take charge of all the local elders,
deacons and preachers, and see that they behave
well." But as any trial presided over by the
pastor can only suspend such elder, deacon or
preacher till the ensuing quarterly conference of
that circuit, mission or station, such trial, what¬
ever its findings; will act only as a temporary
prohibition of his ministerial functions. For
final determination as to whether his orders or
license shall be revoked, the case must be brought
Judicial Practice
69
to the quarterly conference, where the presiding
elder of the district in which that pastoral charge
is placed becomes the presiding officer at the
regular trial of the case.
3. Presiding Elders, Itinerant Elders,
Deacons and Preachers.
A presiding elder of an adjacent district shall
preside at the preliminary trial of any presiding
elder, and the presiding elder of the district shall
preside at the preliminary trial of any of the
traveling elders, deacons and preachers of his
own particular district. The result of such trial
can only operate to restrain such pastor from the
exercise of pastoral and ministerial functions till
the next ensuing annual conference, when the
presiding bishop of the episcopal district be¬
comes the presiding officer and will try the case
de novo.
I think it is safe to conclude that, if it shall
be clearly shown to any of the bishops that, in
the preliminary trial of an itinerant preacher,
grievous errors have been committed and errone¬
ous decisions rendered by the presiding officer
at such trial, in consequence of which, great
hardship, if not irreparable injury, was done to
the accused, and he was made to suffer injury,
though the findings of the preliminary action
should be reversed at the trial before annual con-
70
A. M. E. Church
ference, such bishop will peremptorily set aside
the sentence of the preliminary court and order a
new trial of the case, under a different presiding
officer.
4. TRIAL OF BISHOPS.
It appears that there are two subordinate
courts or tribunals before which a bishop
may be called to answer and that have jurisdic¬
tion only during the interval of General Con¬
ference, viz.—a committee of two bishops and
four elders, the senior bishop, or the next in
seniority, presiding, and the annual conference
(presumably that conference within whose
bounds the crime or improper conduct is alleged
to have been committed). In both cases a bishop
must be the presiding officer, and the findings
and sentence can only be operative and effective
until the convening of the next ensuing Gen¬
eral Conference, when the case must be exam¬
ined and tried on its merits as though no former
proceedings had been taken.
When before the Episcopal Committee at
General Conference, the presiding officer may be
either the chairman of said committee or the
chairman of a sub-committee of said committee
to whom the issue is sent for investigation. But
if the case comes before the General Confer-
Judicial Practice
71
ence sitting as the Supreme Court, and in its
judicial, rather than its legislative capacity,
then the presiding officer (or Court) must be one
of the bishops of the African Methodist Episco¬
pal Church.
Note. It may not be amiss to say here that
the provision authorizing the conclusion of an
investigation or trial where the accused "flee
from trial" (noted under the proceedings for
the trial of traveling preachers) is applicable in
trials of laymen as well. Fleeing from trial
means deliberately absenting one-self, as well as
leaving the jurisdiction of the Court. The ac¬
cused being called, and neither appearing in per¬
son nor by "counsel" to make plea, justifies the
prosecution in pressing the case for trial; and the
court should permit at least two witnesses to be
examined before allowing the case to go to the
committee. Absence of the accused under cir¬
cumstances indicated above, and the exparte tes¬
timony of the two or three witnesses, would con¬
stitute "presumptive proof of guilt," and justify
condemnation. But the proceedings must be
regularly conducted, judgment given, and sen¬
tence of Court pronounced, as in a regularly con¬
tested action.
This advice is given because the author has
known instances to occur in which pastors have
72
A. M. E. Church
regarded the mere fact of the absence of the
accused as constituting sufficient ground for con¬
viction and expulsion, without the taking of any
testimony or hearing witnesses; which is a mis¬
take. And a suspension or expulsion affected
thus would be set aside by an appellate court.
The records must be complete, showing strict
compliance with the Discipline in this as in all
other respects if we would avoid embarrassing
complications.
SPECIMEN FORM FOR VARIOUS
CHURCH TRIALS.
A General Form of Journal of
Proceedings at Trials.
(Charge—) (Specifica¬
tions) ( ) At an Ecclesiastical
Trial, convened and presided over by
which met in the city of on the
day of 19 conven¬
ed for the trial of present,
the following, viz.— who had
been summoned to sit as a committee or "Select
Number." appeared and plead¬
ed to the charge and specifications as follows, to
wit. (Insert here the plea.) and
challenged "for cause" the following, viz. (....
). As completed and accepted, the
Judicial Practice
73
committee finally consisted of the following....
After statement of the case, and what was in¬
tended to be proved by the prosecution, Brother
(or Sister) was called, who testified as follows:
(Here insert testimony; first, the direct, then
the cross-ex.) (Additional testimony offered by
other witnesses should follow in order.) The
following documentary evidence was also offered
and admitted—viz: (Insert here all such evi¬
dence.)
The following question was asked in behalf of
the prosecution; objected to by the defense and
the objection was sustained (or overruled) by
the Court. Exception was (or was not) taken
to the ruling of the court.
This was all the testimony for the prosecution-
in-chief.
The defense then made the following state¬
ment, viz:
(or Sister) as a witness, who testified as fol¬
lows, to wit: (Insert here testimony of witness
and of all the witnesses in their order) ; of any
documentary evidence was offered and accepted
Brother
cution and Brother
fense.
appeared for the prose-
for the de-
and called Brother
74
A. M. E. Church
by the Court, who pronounced judgment as fol¬
lows: (Insert here the judgment of the court.)
Attest
Presiding Officer.
Secretary.
CHAPTER VI.
INCORPORATION OF CHURCHES.
1. While not necessary, it is eminently wise
for our societies to be incorporated, since per¬
sonal responsibilities and liabilities which might
otherwise burden individual members of unin¬
corporated societies, involving, as they do, prop¬
erty rights, should, for obvious reasons, be
transferred to corporate bodies.
2. If any of our societies decide to incor¬
porate, the preacher in charge must call a meet¬
ing of the society, said notice of meeting for
such purpose being in writing, and given to the
society at least two weeks before the date fixed
therein for holding said meeting, and read pub¬
licly at one service at least on two Sabbaths next
preceding such meeting.
Judicial Practice
75
For general information it may be stated that
only members of full age in good and regular
standing and in full membership, who are stated
worshippers with such society and have con¬
tributed regularly to its financial support during
the year next prior to the date of the meeting,
would be entitled to attendance and the right to
vote at such meeting.
3. If it is decided to incorporate, a name
should be selected, which, by all means, must be
different from that of any existing religious cor¬
poration in that State; trustees, to the number
of three, five, seven or nine, must be elected;
the date of the annual meeting of the society
must be determined (which should be fixed for
a period not later than fifteen months after the
meeting held for incorporation); a seal should
be adopted, and the preacher in charge, acting as
presiding officer, and the brother acting as sec¬
retary of said meeting, and five other members
present thereat and voting, should execute and
acknowledge before a proper officer or notary
public, the certificate of incorporation, which
certificate must set forth in detail the matters
determined at said meeting, with the place of
worship of said society, and the same shall be
filed in the office of the Secretary of State, the
76
A. M. E. Church
Clerk of the County, or such other person or
public officer as by law is authorized to make
record thereof.
Immediately any of our societies have become
incorporated, and record of that fact has been
filed with the proper official, then, by operation
of law, all property interests of the unincorpo¬
rated society become, and are, vested in the cor¬
porate body.
4. Special care should be taken by preachers
to see that nothing is set forth in the petition of
the society asking to be incorporated, that in the
carrying out the purposes for which the incor¬
poration was sought, will conflict with any pro¬
vision of the discipline of the African Methodist
Episcopal Church, or any of its rules, usages and
time-honored customs. And in particular, he
must not allow any article, chapter, section, para¬
graph, line or word to be inserted therein which
can, by any possible interpretation, operate to
restrict, prohibit or annul the right of every
member of our societies (male or female) of
full age and full membership, regular worship¬
pers with and substantial contributors to the
support in such society, to vote at all meetings
of said corporation; or that would, in effect, give
to members of such incorporated society, or its
trustees or other officers, the right or power to
Judicial Practice
77
restrict, hinder or prohibit the preacher in charge
from the exercise of all his prerogatives under
the discipline of said A. M. E. Church, includ¬
ing the right to preside at all meetings of the said
incorporated society.
5. Particular emphasis is placed upon the
foregoing paragraph for the reason that our
Book of Discipline, containing the laws, rules
and regulations for the conduct of business in
our societies, and enacted by the General Con¬
ference, the governing body to which all such
societies are subordinate, has ordained that sex
shall be no bar to the exercise of full and com¬
plete membership right by any of our communi¬
cants. And it is further ordained and command¬
ed that the pastor, or preacher in charge, shall
preside over all meetings of the society, whether
for the transaction of spiritual or temporal busi¬
ness. This must be understood to mean cor¬
poration meetings as well as meetings of the
Trustee Board, Stewards' Board and Official
Board.
6. And our pastors must insist, in the draft¬
ing and adoption of articles of incorporation,
constitution and by-laws, which shall govern all
its meetings and transactions, that nothing is
permitted to be inserted which in any manner
78
A. M. E. Church
conflicts with any chapter, article, section, para¬
graph, line or word contained in said book of
Discipline. He should also be particularly care¬
ful to have inserted a section or paragraph which
will bind the corporation to the acceptance of
and compliance with any and all subsequent acts
of the General Conference, the tendency and
purpose of which may be to amend, alter or in
any manner change the laws, rules and regula¬
tions in force at the time of incorporation of such
society. For in this way only can there be uni¬
formity of operation and administration. Neg¬
lect or refusal to observe this reasonable pre¬
caution would, if complained of, subject the of¬
fending preacher to the penalty prescribed for
mal-administration. This is said advisedly after
wide observation and large experience of the
confusion and damage resulting from disregard
of this reasonable, if not imperative, duty. If,
however, through inadvertence, articles of in¬
corporation of societies should be adopted from
which the safeguards mentioned above have
been omitted, steps should be taken immediately
to remedy the defects appearing therein. Mean¬
while the preacher should be watchful to pre¬
vent the sowing of seeds of discord against our
discipline in professed adherence to the charter
Judicial Practice
79
by either lay members or officials, and whenever
discovered in any course of conduct or speech
calculated or intended to weaken the authority
and respect for our laws, such person and mem¬
ber, whether in or out of office, should be im¬
mediately proceeded against as per Discipline.
It were better in every way that persons becom¬
ing dissatisfied with the doctrines, rules, regula¬
tions and laws should quietly withdraw from our
communion and seek religious and Church rela¬
tion in churches and communions more in har¬
mony with their changed views. They are in
honor bound to do this after publicly pledging
themselves "to be cheerfully governed by the
Discipline of the African Episcopal Church,
&c.," at the time of their reception into full mem¬
bership, rather than that they should seek, by
seditious words and conduct, to disrupt the
Church. Pastors are required from every con¬
sideration of public trust and responsibility to
act kindly, but promptly and firmly, in such
cases if our Church authority and dignity is
maintained. The following passage from the
Discipline should be scrupulously regarded, viz:
"And in every Corporation of the A. M. E.
Church the pastor shall be President of the Cor¬
poration and of the Board of Trustees, and the
80
A. M. E- Church
mode of electing Trustees shall be the same as
prescribed in the Book of Discipline. Every
pastor shall see that this provision is a part of
the Articles of Incorporation."
CHAPTER VII.
Distribution of Legislative, Judicial and
Administrative Powers.
Section 1. All legislative power is vested in
the General Conference. Neither annual, dis¬
trict, quarterly nor church conference may enact
or create any law. The most, and all, that
either can do is to apply and enforce the laws
contained in the Discipline. Recognition and re¬
spect for this fact will obviate confusion and
disaster to our Methodism. To be specific, ob¬
serve: (a) The powers of annual conference,
quarterly conference and church conference or
society are administrative and judicial, and no
other.
Annual conferences may adopt rules of pro¬
cedure and resolutions, and promulgate such or¬
ders as may appear best suited to bring the
largest results, not inconsistent with the disci¬
pline; but care must be taken in doing this that
Judicial Practice
§1
the conference does not go beyond the plain let¬
ter of the law.
(b) If it shall be conclusively shown that any
preacher has failed in a reasonable compliance
with such laws; or that he is lacking, either in
ability or disposition, to render effective service
in the Itinerant ministry (after advice, instruc¬
tion and reproof by his presiding elder or
bishop) and there are no indications of pro¬
nounced improvement, then the annual confer¬
ence may, upon presentation of conclusive proof
of the existence of such a condition of facts,
and by a majority vote of such conference, rele¬
gate such preacher to a local relation, and assign
him to membership in some quartely conference
within its jurisdiction.
And any preacher has the right to ask for
and receive from conference relief from the
obligations and duties of an itinerant preacher
whenever he believes that either his personal or
domestic interests would be jeopardized by a
continuance of such relation; as the giving and
acceptance of pastoral assignment at annual con¬
ference is in the nature of a contract, dependent
wholly upon, first, the judgment of the confer¬
ence as to the ability and efficiency of the preach¬
er; and, second, the desire of said preacher to
renew his contract to render such service during
82
A- M. E. Church
the year succeeding. Neither the conference nor
the preacher is bound for life to continue the
contractual relation, as is evident from the form
of words employed at his reception into confer¬
ence, viz: "As long as you freely consent to
and endeavor to walk by these rules, we shall
rejoice to acknowledge you a fellow-laborer."
In reaching a sound conclusion as to the ef¬
ficiency of the preachers, and determining wheth¬
er they should continue in the Itinerant relation,
or be located, annual conferences, with one of
the bishops (or some one appointed by him) pre¬
siding, will ascertain, through the pastoral re¬
ports, and the reports of the presiding elders,
and in such other manner as this information
may lawfully be obtained, if the legislative de¬
mands of the General Conference have been
met: (a) As to the conducting of affairs in
the respective pastoral charges; (b) in collec¬
tions raised and reported, for supporting the
several departments of the general Church; (c)
whether the moral life, the religious character
and the official conduct of the preacher conforms
to all the disciplinary requirements.
These, exclusive of the more general disabili¬
ties, such as inaptitude and constitutional inef¬
ficiency, or want of adaptability as pastor, and
which have repeatedly operated to make him a
Judicial Practice
83
failure in the pastorate, and under conditions
which should have brought, and would have
brought to one having the pastoral instinct, a
reasonable measure of success, are the grounds
on which a conference would be justified in lo¬
cating a preacher.
A writ of mandamus, or action for damage in
such a case will not lie in any civil court against
either the conference or preacher, and should
never be sued for.
Section 2. Executive "orders" may issue
from the House of Bishops, or from any bishop
within his own proper episcopal district. But
such "orders," if from the bishops "en-bank,"
shall operate and be intended to promote a fuller
and closer conformity to existing laws and the
discipline of the Church, enacted by the General
Conference, and will be of connectional force
and effect, the bishop's office operating to give
them General Superintendency of the Church as
a Connection, while, by no possible construction,
constituting or making them a legislative body.
And the same restrictions are placed upon pre¬
siding elders and preacher-in-charge., in their
respective spheres of operation.
And while annual conferences cannot overrule
a bishop, nor district or quarterly conferences, a
presiding elder; neither an official board, stew-
84
A- M. E. Church
ards' board, trustees board, nor society or cor¬
poration, overrule a preacher-in-charge respec¬
tively, yet neither a bishop, presiding elder or
preacher-in-charge, is a law unto himself. On
the contrary, each has specific limitations to the
exercise of powers vested in him by the General
Conference, and the various ordinations received,
beyond which no attempt should ever be made
to pass. Whatever the office, whether bishop,
presiding elder or pastor, if he loves the Church,
and would conserve its welfare, he will employ
himself in the interpretation, construction and
enforcement of discipline, leaving to subsequent
General Conferences the task and duty of cre¬
ating new obligations and enacting new laws.
CHAPTER VIII
THE ADMINISTRATIVE, EXECUTIVE
AND SUPERVISORY DUTIES AND
POWERS OF A PREACHER IN CHARGE
IN THE A. M. E. CHURCH.
Section 1. While treating at length the sub¬
ject of the judicial functions and powers of a
preacher in charge in the African Methodist
Episcopal Church, it might be well to indicate
and discuss briefly his administrative, executive
Judicial Practice
85
and supervisory powers, since these must neces¬
sarily fill the larger place in pastoral work.
And it is quite important that every preacher
among us should know to what department of
ministerial duty these belong in order that con¬
fusion in judgment and serious mistakes in ad¬
ministration may be obviated.
He will find these duties and powers amply
described in that chapter of the Discipline de¬
voted to instruction of the pastor as to what he
may and may not lawfully do in presiding over
meetings for the transaction of spiritual and
temporal business; excepting only such meetings
as may have been called for the purpose of mak¬
ing inquiry into complaints of charges preferred
against himself; or where a member is to be tried
upon charges preferred by him; or in which he
is a witness for or against a member. In all
other respects he will discover that directions and
advice apply almost wholly to administrative and
supervisory duties and powers.
That pastor who follows most closely the dis¬
ciplinary injunctions so comprehensively elabo¬
rated, cannot prove other than acceptable and ef¬
ficient, and such will be much sought after in
the more important and responsible pastoral
charges. Bishops and people alike are looking
for just that type of pastor.
86
A. M. E. Church
Sec. 2. Under this general division of his la¬
bors must be placed those executive and super¬
visory acts and decisions which relate to what
is lawful or expedient under exceptionally deli¬
cate circumstances and conditions, the object al¬
ways being this, viz.—to get the best possible
result from any given course of procedure.
For instance: The removal of a class leader
or the suspension of a steward should be done
only after, it becomes clearly apparent from the
unfitness or unfaithfulness of such official the
society would suffer greatly from his longer re¬
tention of such office; and never because of per¬
sonal dislike by the pastor for such officer. As
far as this may be possible, the personal equation
should be kept out of the action of the pastor.
If he does this he will most certainly insure the
cordial support of the society, quarterly confer¬
ence, presiding elder and bishop, of his pastoral
executive and administrative acts.
Sec. 3. It will be noted that under the Dis¬
cipline, only the preacher in charge, or some one
appointed by him, can preside over any of the
"boards" in a local society; or over a "select
number"; or the society as such, when called as
a judicial body, for the trial of a member; the
exception being when the pastor is an accuser;
Judicial Practice
87
or when, because of some legal impediment af¬
fecting himself, the presiding elder or bishop
may have inhibited him from officiating, and the
society is, by either of them (presiding elder or
bishop), temporarily entrusted to the pastoral
care of some other minister or preacher.
And as the presiding officer, whether of of¬
ficial board, trustee board, church conference or
trial committee, the pastor is the party wholly
responsible for lawful enforcement of discipline,
and he alone must determine what is and what
is not correct interpretation of the law and gov¬
ernment of the Church (his acts always being
subject to review by the annual conference to
which he belongs, or any properly constituted
judicial tribunal to which he may be amenable).
Therefore, he should not attempt to shield
himself from the consequences of mal-adminis-
tration of law under the flimsy pretext that he
only put the motion made, declared the result
and judgment, or permitted this or that to be
done because it was the expressed will of a ma¬
jority of the members of his board or society,
indicated by resolution; and that it must not be
construed as expressing his official opinion of
what was right, proper or lawful in the premises.
The Discipline specifically ordains that "the of-
88
A. M. E. Church
ficial board shall not overrule the pastor nor
change any of his plans for the government of
his charge," in order that responsibility for mis¬
judged or unlawful procedure affecting the so¬
ciety or any of its members, may be definitely
fixed, thereby insuring care and deliberation in
all matters of importance. And what the of¬
ficial board, which is constituted of all the stew¬
ards, stewardesses, class leaders and exhorters,
cannot do, assuredly cannot be done by any other
combination of members in a pastoral charge.
Sec. 4. It will sometimes happen that the trus¬
tee board (because it is entrusted with control
of and care for the temporalities of the Church)
will prove more troublesome to the pastor than
either the official or stewards' board, under the
assumption that, having been elected to that office
by the suffrage of a majority of the qualified
voters of the society, they are therefore amen¬
able and responsible only to the society for their
official conduct and action. I fear that there is
just sufficient warrant in this statement to make
it the more dangerous, because of the hiatus im¬
plied in what would otherwise be close and ef¬
fective pastoral supervision of all temporal as
well as spiritual interests of the society by the
pastor.
Yet, since the pastor is primarily and chiefly
Judicial Practice
89
responsible (and will be held to be so at con¬
ference sessions) for the success or the failure
on the temporal as well as the spiritual side of
his charge, it is but reasonable to conclude that
he will be equally solicitous for the best results
in all matters affecting his charge, whether spirit¬
ual or temporal; and therefore he is entitled, both
in law and equity, to exercise a potent influence
over the official action of his board of trustees.
What a pastor cannot do under our form of
discipline is to either suspend or remove a trus-(
tee from office by a simple pastoral declarationJ
to that effect. The^sodet}j_which„elected hiynj
must be convened, and the reasons necessitating
removal of a trustee before the expiration of the
time for which he was elected must be clearly
set forth, or the unfitness of the trustee to longer (
exercise the functions of that office must be
charged and proven (the officer being permitted
to offer his defense if he has any). It is then
competent for the members of the society to de¬
clare by vote the office of trustee, as it
relates to the member complained of, vacated. A
pastor would then be justified in submitting the
names of two other members, one of whom
should be elected to fill out the unexpired term of
the trustee removed by the society.
90
A. M. E. Church
Should a pastor, arbitrarily, remove, suspend
or otherwise attempt to inhibit a trustee from
exercising and performing the duties of his of¬
fice, a presiding elder, at the ensuing quarterly
conference (should his attention be officially
called to the matter), would be justified, and
wholly within his rights and duty, if he declared
such an attempted removal, suspension or inhibi¬
tion of s.aid trustee by the pastor, to have been
unwarranted and illegal, and therefore null and
void.
The exception to this rule is in the case of a
trustee who may have been tried, convicted and
expelled from society, which act of expulsion
automatically removes the trustee from office.
Sec. 5. Methodist Polity (by Bishop Turner)
insists that the quarterly conference may impeach
a trustee or the entire board of trustees, and by
resolution instruct and cause the society to de¬
clare his or their office vacant, electing others
thereto. I do not question the legality of such
a procedure; but insist that any member of the
society may rightfully bring to the attention of
the pastor and society dereliction or unfitness of
a trustee, and by proving facts of sufficient grav¬
ity, initiate proceedings, which may result in de¬
priving him of his office. Of course the quarterly
conference would be the body that, through re-
Judicial Practice
91
ports of trustees, should be the first to discover
unfaithfulness or unfitness, and take prompt ac¬
tion to conserve the temporal welfare of the so¬
ciety. But if for any reason, the quarterly con¬
ference neglected or failed to act, the faithless
official must not be permitted to escape. Indi¬
vidual membership action in prosecuting him for
misconduct in office should then be resorted to.
Sec. 6. Preaching and pastoral visitation are,
of course, the principal employment of our min¬
istry. But the complicated machinery for the
development of individual and collective power
of the membership of our societies, as this has
been crystallized into statutory law and given
into the hands of the pastor for administration,
clothes him with authority and burdens him with
responsibilities, requiring extreme sagacity and
prudence if he would serve the Church efficiently
and satisfactorily.
Students of Church history know that this
twentieth century Church has undertaken numer¬
ous tasks and employments unknown and un¬
dreamed of in preceding centuries. Multiform
as are the agencies that contribute to our broader
civilization, they find a counterpart in the pres¬
ent-day church organization.
And so the pastor must determine how he may
keep in closest touch with the spiritual and so-
92
A. M. E. Church
cial life of members of his congregation and
society, which experience and observation teaches
can be most effectively and certainly done
through a sub-pastorate, called class leaders.
It would be needless to mention this here but
for the regrettable fact that in recent years this
means of acquainting the pastor of salient facts
relating to the spiritual life of his members is
becoming less and less the practice in many of
the larger societies, especially in the great cities.
Every pastor knows this, and has heard many
explanations for the declension so prevalent in
efficient leadership after the manner of the Fa¬
thers of African Methodism.
Whether this is traceable to lack of care by
pastors in appointment of leaders, or a paucity
of suitable brethren for the office, I do not ven¬
ture an opinion. This much is true, viz.: Their
assignment and tenure in office are wholly de¬
pendent upon the choice and judgment of the
pastor. Neither bishop, presiding elder nor any
board of his church can lawfully interfere with
or change his plans in caring for the flock under
him through leaders.
Sec. 7. Of course, having once appointed a
brother to the leadership of a class, it is neither
wise nor just, to leader, or class, to remove him
•without making known to both, the reasons which
Judicial Practice
93
impel him to that course. Certainly the pastor
should first acquaint the brother of his intention
to remove him. But when finally declared, then
no person, or board, or quarterly conference, can
lawfully question the authority or right of the
pastor in making the removal. Such deposed
leader immediately ceases to be a member of
either the official board, or quarterly conference;
and unless he is serving either in the office of
steward, exhorter, local preacher, elder or
deacon, his name should be stricken from the
roll of official members of the society.
But in the case of a steward, since the quar¬
terly conference acts conjointly with the pastor
in placing him in office by confirmation, his
amenability is enlarged thereby to the extent
that, for neglect of duty (only) the pastor may
suspend a steward from active service as such,
till the next ensuing quarterly conference. But
this action should never be taken without first
warning the brother that continued neglect, if
persisted in, will involve suspension. Yet, even
in such a case, when the quarterly conference
convenes, the name of the suspended steward
should be called, along with the other official
members, the pastor making the announcement
that he is suspended for cause; and he should
also declare the name of the brother (if any)
94
A. M. E. Church
who had been appointed to serve in the office ad
interim.
And upon the examination of characters of
members of the quarterly conference, when the
name of the suspended steward is reached, the
pastor must be prepared to convince the ma¬
jority of the conference that he was justified by
all the facts and circumstances in that case, in
suspending the brother from the office of stew¬
ard. The suspended steward must (if he be
present and desire to exercise his legitimate
right) show that his suspension was not justi¬
fied (if he can.)
The conference will then decide the issue by
vote (roll call, or viva voce), the question being
in the following, or some corresponding form,
viz:
"Shall the suspension of Brother
a steward of the mission,
circuit, or station, stand?" Then, if a ma¬
jority of the members of the conference vote
affirmatively, the brother is thereby actually and
permanently removed from the office of steward.
But if a majority negatives the motion, then the
brother is by that vote alone restored to the
rights and functions of steward; and whoever
had been appointed by the pastor to fill the office
ad interim (till the quarterly conference), im-
Judicial Practice
95
mediately and without any other action by quar¬
terly conference or pastor, or presiding elder,
ceases to be a de facto steward.
Sec. 8. The General Conference of 1912 made
stewardesses fu,ll-fledged members of the quar¬
terly conference, as they had been previously
members of the official board. But the powers,
duties and authority of stewardesses were not
otherwise enlarged, they remaining subject to the
pastor and stewards' board, and dependent upon
them for existence and continuance in office,
the obvious purpose of the new legislation being
to give them a voice and vote on matters com¬
ing before quarterly conference through reports.
They are still "assistants to the stewards", for
all practical purposes, and their specific work
must be prescribed by the stewards' board.
Quarterly conferences cannot remove them
from office, though the character of stewardesses
must be examined there as are all other members
of that body.
Examination of character in quarterly con¬
ference (except in the case of local Elders,
Deacons, Preachers and Exhorters) seeks to
discover if each member possesses a good moral,
religious and official character, viz.: if they have
conducted themselves so as to retain the respect
and confidence of society and pastor. If serious
96
A. M. E. Church
lapse in either moral, religious, or official con¬
duct is thereby disclosed, stewards may be sus¬
pended, the license of local preachers may be re¬
voked; stewardesses may be remanded to the
pastor and stewards' board, with recommenda¬
tion that they be removed from office; class-
leader referred to pastor, with suggestion that
the interests of the church and class, require his
removal.
Sec. 9. But quarterly conferences cannot
legally try and expel either class of official named
above. Trial of all such must be by select num¬
ber, or society, and under the presidency of the
preacher in charge. Quarterly conferences may
hear and determine appeals from all such, as in
the case of unofficial laymen.
But in the case of local Preachers, local
Deacons and local Elders, the quarterly confer¬
ence has original jurisdiction, and may try and
expel such from membership in Society and Con¬
nection, giving to such expelled Preacher, (local
Elder, or Deacon) the privilege of appeal to the
annual conference.
Sec. 10. Presiding elders should be specially
guarded in making answer to hypothetical ques¬
tions propounded to them at quarterly confer¬
ences by members, when the question obviously
seeks an official opinion touching matters which
Judicial Practice
97
have probably been the subject of pastoral con¬
sideration and action. It is easy to conceive
that some captious brother, who is disposed to
differ from, and criticise his pastor, might at¬
tempt in this insidious way, to discredit him
without sufficient justification.
It is a settled principle and sound in every
way, that "all the facts and circumstances con¬
nected in any way or manner with the trans¬
action or subject matter, should be fully and
clearly set forth, each in its true relation to the
other, and to all the others," before an opinion
based thereon can be of any value.
Incalculable harm may be done to the pastor,
and his administration seriously crippled, by in¬
judicious speech, founded on misinformation, or
lack of full information, under such circum¬
stances. And a competent presiding elder will
"make haste slowly" when approached in this
manner. He is to give all possible assistance to
pastors when visiting a charge, and he may do
this sometimes, more effectively, by discreet si¬
lence, than in voluble speech.
98
A. M. E. Church
CHAPTER IX.
TRIAL OF PREACHER AT ANNUAL
CONFERENCE
On Complaints.
Sec. 1. The practice in all (or most) of the
conferences, when complaints against a preacher
have been communicated to presiding elder or
bishop, and the matter has not been adjudicated
previously, or in interval of sessions, especially if
these complaints are in writing; or if the accuser
be present at that session of the conference, and
prepared to adduce presumptive proof of the
guilt or misconduct of such preacher for which
he might justly be arraigned for investigation, to
refer the case to a committee called, for con¬
venience and appropriateness, the Judiciary
Committee.
This committee will summons the accused
preacher and his accuser (if said accuser be
present) to appear before it to make answer to
such complaint, and to prosecute it according to
the form of Discipline.
If the investigation is upon documentary evi¬
dence, then all writings having any relation to
the case, competent to be admitted as evidence,
must be submitted for its information.
The Judicial Committee of an annual confer-
Judicial Practice
99
ence sustains the same relation to that confer¬
ence that a "Referee" or "Master in Chancery"
sustains to a civil court; and its conclusions and
judgment must be submitted to the conference
for approval before becoming effective.
The accused preacher is entitled to defend
himself before this committee in person or by
counsel. Nor does his right of defense end when
the committee has reported its findings to con¬
ference. For he may demand the right to be
heard by the conference, either in a personal ap¬
peal for a reversal of the judgment of the Ju¬
dicial Committee, or by counsel; provided such
counsel be a member of the African Methodist
Episcopal Church.
And either the accused preacher, or his coun¬
sel, is entitled to reasonable time in which to
show that the judgment of the committee is not
warranted by the evidence in that particular case.
The committee, of course, will be permitted to
make argument, through its chairman, or any
other member thereof; or the accuser, or his
counsel, if he have any, may show cause, if he
can, why the judgment and sentence of the com¬
mittee should be approved by the conference.
Having heard the report of this committee, the
evidence upon which its finding is predicated, and
argument by the accused preacher, or his coun-
100
A. M. E. Church
sel; also argument by representative of Judicial
Committee, or counsel for accuser, the annual
conference will, after careful deliberation, de¬
cide by ballot, the question of approval or re¬
jection of the report.
Before doing this, the conference may recom¬
mit this report, with specific instructions, if there
be serious defects therein.
But if the report be either approved, or re¬
jected, by the conference, there can be no further
action taken thereon during that session. Pro¬
vided, the conference may, when the minutes are
up for correction and approval on a subsequent
day, by motion, approved by a majority vote,
rescind any action taken on the preceding day
involving the suspension or expulsion of a
preacher. But the conference cannot rescind its
action in the rejection, or disapproval of any
such report of its Judicial Committee.
For that would in effect amount to reopening
the case as against the accused preacher. And
it is a settled principle of ecclesiastical as well as
criminal law, that "no one shall be placed in
jeopardy twice for the same offense."
On Regularly Formulated Charges.
Sec. 2. When the case comes to conference in
the form of "charges" correctly and legally
Judicial Practice
101
drawn, the accused preacher having been "served"
with a copy thereof in time to produce any evi¬
dence at conference which he may possess in dis¬
proof of the alleged crime or offense of which
he may be charged therein, the bishop may send
the case for preliminary trial, to this Judicial
Committee the same as though informal com¬
plaint had been made.
But in such a case the committe is bound to
conduct the investigation and trial of the issue
by observance of all the forms and processes of
an ecclesiastical court, the chairman becoming
acting judge of the competency and relevancy of
evidence, oral, or documentary; the pertinency
and relevancy of questions put to witnesses by
counsel; and should be able to assist the other
members of his committee to reach a just verdict
on the evidence, by grouping the facts estab¬
lished thereby, in such order and manner as
shall admit of no reasonable doubt that the ac¬
cused preacher is innocent or guilty as charged.
Unless the guilt is fully established by compe¬
tent evidence, the accused preacher is entitled to a
verdict of acquittal, or, at least, that the alleged
offense has not been proven.
The committe may not declare defendant
preacher not guilty of the charge preferred, but
that he is guilty of some other, or lesser offense;
102
A. M. E. Church
since it is no part of the duty of the Judicial
Commitee to formulate charges, but to try them.
It must therefore either find the defendant
preacher guilty or innocent of the offense
charged at bar of the conference, and there stop.
Sec. 3. But the annual conference may dis¬
agree with its Judicial Committee on the guilt or
innocence of the accused preacher, and demand
that the case be presented de novo, the conference
sitting meanwhile, as the Court of Original Juris¬
diction.
In such a case the bishop becomes presiding
officer. Clerk of record must be appointed; coun¬
sel for Conference and Connection, assigned to
prosecute the accused preacher; defendant
preacher allowed to defend himself, in person,
or by counsel; witnesses heard; documentary
evidence submitted; argument made by represen¬
tative of conference, and of accused preacher;
charge, or instructions on the law and evidence,
be given by the bishop presiding.
When, after careful and deliberate weighing
of the evidence submitted, the members of an¬
nual conference, or a majority of them, have
reached a conclusion, a motion declaring the
guilt or innocence of accused preacher, and or¬
dering, either his suspension or expulsion; or his
acquittal, will be made, seconded, and put to vote.
Judicial Practice
103
If a majority of the members of conference,
present and voting", indicate by this vote their be¬
lief in the guilt or innocence of accused preacher,
that fact shall be certified to the bishop presiding
by the clerk of record. And it is the duty of the
presiding bishop to give force and effect to the
decree and judgment pronounced by conference,
by declaring the sentence thereunder to be in im¬
mediate operation; and this he will do by virtue
of the authority and power vested in him as one
of the Chief Pastors, Administrative and Execu¬
tive Officers of the African Methodist Episcopal
Church, in conformity with his vows of conse¬
cration, and in obedience to the Discipline of the
Church, in such case made and provided.
CHAPTER X.
SUPERVISORY AND JUDICIAL DUTIES
AND POWER OF PRESIDING ELDERS.
Presiding ~ Elders in the African Methodist
Episcopal Church are not only a necessity, but
the importance and utility of the office, when the
incumbent has peculiar aptitude and ability to
employ with discretion, his talents for helpful¬
ness to pastors and people, and faithfulness and
accuracy in giving to bishop and conference, in-
104
A. M. E. Church
formation indispensable to a full comprehension
of conditions throughout his district, and making
such recommendations as shall be productive of
the best results to local societies and the Connec¬
tion at large. This gives the office great dignity
and honor.
Supervisory Duties.
Section 1. "Taking charge of all the elders,
deacons, preachers (itinerant and local), ex¬
torters, and traveling at large; presiding at dis¬
trict and quarterly conferences, and Sunday-
school conventions, and insisting that business
transacted thereat, shall be according to Dis¬
cipline," constitutes the sum of his supervisory
duties.
But it is scarcely possible to overestimate the
importance of what is embraced in this Dis¬
ciplinary injunction.
"Taking charge," implied responsibility for;
and this definition is susceptible of varied con¬
struction. I think what is intended is this, viz.:
That the presiding elder must acquaint himself
fully, with the character of life and method and
success of pastoral administration, of preachers
under his supervision, to the end "that the gospel
be not blamed"; and further, that he may be able
to advise and admonish when occasion requires;
Judicial Practice
105
also that he may possess accurate information
upon which to make recommendation in assign¬
ment of pastors. Collection of Connectional
moneys should be vigilantly guarded, and in¬
sisted upon by this officer.
Judicial Duties and Power.
Sec. 2. Presiding at district and quarterly con¬
ferences, and Sunday-school conventions, and
giving decisions therein on all questions of law;
changing or removing preachers in the interval
of annual conferences; constituting committees
for the investigation of charges or complaints
against preachers of his district, and presiding
thereat; accepting and forwarding to the prop¬
erly-constituted authorities charges against a
bishop (which may have come lawfully and reg¬
ularly into his possession) constitute the sum of
his judicial powers and duty.
As relates to district and quarterly confer¬
ences he will find little difficulty, since few min¬
isters or laymen members therein will be likely
to overlook the plain letter of the law as regards
what either of these bodies may rightfully at¬
tempt. I do not remember a single instance in
all the years of my acquaintance and experience
as pastor or presiding elder, that occasion has
arisen to necessitate appeal to annual conference
106
A. M. E. Church
as against the decisions of a presiding elder.
Sec. 3. But in the matter of changing and re¬
moval of preachers in interval of conference ses¬
sions, unless the presiding elder exercises great
care, and proceeds with studied deliberation and
sound judgment, conforming strictly to both the
letter and spirit of the Discipline in such case
made and provided, the possibility of becoming
the instrument of great injustice and wrong, to
either preacher, or people; or sometimes, to both,
gives occasion for deep solicitude.
This much is imperative, viz.: He must make
full investigation and satisfy himself that the re¬
moval of such pastor is essential to the peace and
prosperity of the society; and this investigation
must be impartial, the pastor and complainants
being allowed to confront each other, to hear
what is charged in the complaint, and given op¬
portunity to make answer thereto. The presid¬
ing elder will then determine whether the condi¬
tions warrant and necessitate removal of the
pastor.
And even when this complaint reaches him
through the official board, in a written petition
purporting to represent the expressed wish of a
majority of the membership of the Society, he
must satisfy himself that such written petition
honestly represents a majority wish of members
Judicial Practice
107
of the society. To know this with certainty, he
will sometimes be obliged to visit the "charge"
and make diligent inquiry.
We have known petitions of this sort to origi¬
nate in a very small coterie of disgruntled mem¬
bers, who represent in no sense, the will of the
great majority of society. Hence, the incon¬
venience and expense to which preachers would
be put by enforced removal in interval of con¬
ference, and the unjust stigma sometimes at¬
tached to removals effected in this manner, should
have consideration and weight, so that this ex¬
treme method of relief will be reduced to the
minimum.
Sec. 4. As presiding officer at the investigation
of charges or complaints against preachers in his
district, he must insist that every possible op¬
portunity be given the accused preacher to de¬
fend himself, as well as that the accuser be pro¬
tected in his rights in presenting and pressing his
accusation.
Perfect impartiality should characterize his
acts and rulings in such a case. And he should
never encourage a prosecution upon evidence
which would not, with probable certainty, result
in a conviction of the accused preacher if pre¬
sented at annual conference.
What relief has such preacher from the in-
108
A. M. E. Church
justice and wrong done his character, and the
deprivation of means of support of himself and
family during the interval of his suspension, even
after the annual conference reviewing the case
shall determine the suspension was not justified
by the evidence, and refuses to agree with the ad
interim committee in its findings?
Responsibility for a miscarriage of justice in
such a case would not be hard to place, since a
presiding elder should be sufficiently familiar
with ecclesiastical jurisprudence to insure sub¬
stantial justice to all litigants coming before a
court of which he is the presiding officer.
Sec. 5. It will sometimes happen that a queru¬
lous member of quarterly conference will pro¬
pound a hypothetical question, and request a de¬
cision thereon by presiding elder, the object be¬
ing, in this insidious manner, to obtain a de¬
cision which will have a direct and condemnatory
relation to some matter which has been the sub¬
ject of pastoral judicial opinion and ruling, with
the object of discrediting the pastor, and lessen¬
ing general respect for his judgment in affairs
relating to management of his charge.
It would be well if presiding elders would dis¬
courage all such form of queries; or if they are
insisted on, compel his questioner to give full
particulars as to what motive and cause incites
Judicial Practice
109
the question. This course will ordinarily force
the hidden matter to the surface and enable him
to answer discreetly, and then only after he has
learned all the facts and incidents connected with
the issue.
CHAPTER XI
THE EPISCOPAL COMMITTEE
(AFRICAN METHODIST
EPISCOPAL CHURCH.)
Its Powers and Responsibilities Defined.
It is universally conceded that the Episcopal
Committee ranks first among the inquisitional
agencies of the African Methodist Episcopal
Church, and that custom and usage have vested it
with many of the prerogatives and powers in¬
herent only in the General Conference as the
supreme judicial tribunal of the Church.
It was the evident incongruity involved in the
idea and practice of giving to a single court,
whatever its dignity, both original and appellate
jurisdiction in any class of causes, with the con¬
sequent deprivation of the right of review and
of appeal, by our chief pastors (the bishops), on
proceedings, findings, and judgment of the court
of original jurisdiction, if the membership body
110
A. M. E. Church
of the General Conference continued to exercise
that function thus: placing the bishops at the dis¬
advantage involved in a denial of a right which
is secured to all other members of our Connec¬
tion, ministerial and lay (they have the quarter¬
ly, annual, and General Conference for such
purpose) ; and that to deprive a bishop of dignity,
honors, and emolument to which the office of the
bishopric entitled him by what might prove to
have been an unwarranted suspension or expul¬
sion, which constrained the General Conference
to delegate to a committee of its own member¬
ship and constitution certain originally inherent
and reserved powers of the General Conference,
viz.: the clothing of an Episcopal Committee with
what amounts to original jurisdiction of all
causes for judicial investigation and trial in
which a bishop's character, administration, and
decisions in the interval of General Conferences,
had been attacked or challenged.
The status of the Episcopal Committee in the
A. M. E. Church is unique also in this, viz: that
it partakes of the nature of a court of review,
with appellate jurisdiction, in all causes pre¬
sented at General Conference by traveling
preachers in appeal proceedings, from either sus¬
pension or expulsion from membership in an¬
nual conferences.
Judicial Practice
111
In view of the foregoing facts, the importance
and responsibility of this committee can scarcely
be overestimated, or too great care taken in the
selection of its personnel.
Membership of Episcopal Committee.
The Discipline of 1908, page 247, says: "The
General Conference at each session shall choose
a committee before which each bishop in per¬
son shall pass an examination."
The practice, however, is that the council of
bishops makes up this committee, with the other
standing committees, and causes the names of
members to be read by the secretary of the coun¬
cil in the hearing, and for the approval of the
General Conference.
And it is the practice for the presiding bishop
in each Episcopal district to designate in the
council meeting prior to the opening session of
the General Conference, that particular minis¬
terial delegate in each of his annual conferences
receiving the highest number of votes on the first
ballot in his conference (or if none were so elect¬
ed on that ballot, then on a succeeding ballot)
and recognized as leader of the delegation from
that conference, and this without reference to
any particular qualification he may possess, such
as a thorough acquaintance, and workable knowl-
112
A. M. E- Church
edge of the Discipline, polity, and usage of the
Church as a Connection, or the mental endow¬
ment and temperament suggesting a judicial
mind.
That such a method of selecting members of
this committee is open to serious objection, and
may sometimes prove extremely injudicious,
goes without question.
This committee is constituted of a number of
elders equal to the number of organized annual
conferences, the object being to make it repre¬
sentative of every part of the Church, both in
the domestic and foreign field; and further, that
through information brought to them by this
widely distributed agency, the entire Connection
may have certain knowledge of the character
and efficiency of its general superintendency.
The Episcopal Committee is organized in the
following manner, viz.: A chairman, vice chair¬
man, secretary, and assistant secretary, are
chosen by ballot. The place and hours for hold¬
ing its sessions are communicated to the General
Conference so soon as may be convenient after
announcement of its personnel is made by the
secretary of the council of bishops.
And this committe is thereafter given prece¬
dence over all others in the presentation of re¬
ports, the General Conference tacitly consenting,
Judicial Practice
113
and without other preliminary action than by
announcement of the marshal of that committee,
to suspend consideration and action on any mat¬
ter or subject of business or discussion in which
it may be engaged, whenever this committee
gives notice that it has a report to submit to that
body.
As to the scope, powers, authority and func¬
tions of the Episcopal Committee, for present
purposes we will consider them under four spe¬
cific heads, viz.: 1. Examination. 2. Investiga¬
tion. 3. Trial. 4. Assignment of Bishops.
The first, or examination, is the preliminary
step in procedure, and may be taken either upon
a series of questions previously determined, or
by impromptu interrogation by the chairman, or
any member of the committee. The chairman,
of necessity, must be the judge, and decide as to
the pertinancy and relevancy of the latter class
of questions. But all such questions should re¬
late to "travel" among the people of his (the
bishop's) district, which will, of course, include
physical ability to travel, as well as actual travel
done in the proper superintendency of the
churches in his district.
And a bishop may be "retired" from such act¬
ive supervision if he is physically or mentally
disabled or incapacitated to travel among the
114
A. M. E. Church
people of his district; the General Conference
very properly looking to this committee for en¬
lightenment on this phase of its general superin-
tendency, and for such recommendations and
decisions in relation thereto as will forever main¬
tain the efficiency and competency of our Epis¬
copacy.
This far the committee must go with every one
of the bishops, and in the first stage of its work
in the examination of the bishops severally and
separately.
And unless some lapse in correctness of life,
administration, and decision of such bishop has
been discovered by this examination or a com¬
plaint has been made against such bishop in writ¬
ing, with the attesting signature of the complain¬
ant, even though not presented in form and
manner required where trial of such bishop is
contemplated; and if there are no charges (with
specifications) filed against such bishop, the
committee will excuse such bishop from further
attendance on its sessions, and by a majority
vote, pass his character and report that fact to
the General Conference.
But if the committee decide after examination
that any bishop is unable or disqualified within
the meaning of the Discipline, to longer travel
and superintend effectively, the work in his dis-
Judiciat Practice
115
trict, it will report that fact, with a recommenda¬
tion that such bishop be "retired," specifying the
particular reasons for submitting such a recom¬
mendation. And if the General Conference is
satisfied that the committee's recommendation
does no violence to said bishop, but on the con¬
trary, is made with a view of giving more effi¬
cient superintendency to the Church, it will make
such report effective by affirmative vote. If it
disagree with the committee, the bishop will be
retained on the list of effectives and assigned as
all other effective bishops.
The second stage, investigation, is reached
when, and if complaints have reached, or been
filed with the chairman of the committee accus¬
ing a bishop of some irregularity in administra¬
tion, or decision rendered, which, considered ex
parte, would indicate mal administration of Dis¬
cipline by such bishop.
In that case the bishop complained of must be
made acquainted with the character and sub¬
stance of the alleged offense and given oppor¬
tunity to explain and justify his official conduct
and action.
The committe will then determine whether the
complaint is justified or not, and make respectful
answer in writing, to the complainant, stating in
that communication what consideration and
116
A. M. E. Church
action was had by committee thereon, with the
reasons therefor, and it must also report in iden¬
tical terms to the General Conference for its ap¬
proval.
The third, or trial stage, is reached when reg¬
ularly formulated charges with specifications,
have been made against a bishop, and they have
come properly into the possession and custody
of the committee, the accused bishop having pre¬
viously been furnished a written copy thereof,
either by the accuser, or through the agency of
the senior bishop, or the secretary of the Council
of bishops.
The episcopal committee will then proceed to
the trial of the issue as a court of original juris¬
diction. And it is necessary in such a case to
observe all the judicial properties of a regularly
organized ecclesiastical court for the trial of a
bishop in the African Methodist Episcopal
Church.
The accusing witness in such a proceeding be¬
comes the representative of the A. M. E. Church
vs. the accused bishop, and is entitled to the bene¬
fit and advice of competent counsel in the pre¬
sentation and prosecution of the case.
But this committee may delegate to a sub¬
committee of its membership the right and
power to hear the evidence, argument of coun-
Judicial Practice
117
sel, and to reach a conclusion as to the sufficiency
of the evidence offered and admitted, in proof of
the guilt or innocence of the accused bishop. But
a journal of the proceedings before this sub¬
committee, containing the evidence, oral or docu¬
mentary, by accuser and accused, with the con¬
clusions and findings adduced therefrom, must
be written out in detail, and submitted for ap¬
proval, to the episcopal committee in its entirety,
which summarized report and finding may be
either approved, disapproved or remanded for
correction of any inaccuracy, irregularity or
vital defect.
But when finally determined, either by ap¬
proval, or disapproval, the episcopal committee,
through its chairman, will cause the committee
to rise, and will report to the General Confer¬
ence such recommendations and judgment as
may have been reached by his committee after
due and painstaking deliberation. This report
should include all the exhibits, a copy of the
charges and specifications, with the oral and
documentary evidence upon which the recom¬
mendation, finding, or judgment of the commit¬
tee had been predicated as warranting a verdict
of either the guilt or the innocence of the ac¬
cused bishop.
A majority vote of the General Conference is
118
A. M. E. Church
absolutely necessary to make effective the find¬
ings of the committee in all such cases, and this
vote finally determines the whole matter.
Section 4, paragraph 2, book of Discipline,
page 248, indicates the scope within which a
bishop may be charged, tried and convicted, with
the penalties attached to various forms and de¬
grees of offending, viz.:
"If, on examination, it be found that a bishop's
character is not fair—or that he has neglected his
duty—or violated the Discipline—or been guilty
of any crime sufficient to exclude a person from
the kingdom of grace and glory—or has acted so
improperly as to justify suspension, or expul¬
sion, the General Conference shall suspend or
expel him from his Episcopal functions."
Fortunately such a condition or state of facts
has never been presented to any General Con¬
ference of the African Methodist Episcopal
Church in the ninety-six years of its existence,
as justified the application of the penalties of this
law to any bishop. Should the time ever come,
however, a nice judicial question would need to
be decided before a report from this committee
should be adopted in which the expulsion of a
bishop had been decreed. For the words "the
General Conference shall suspend or expel him
from his Episcopal functions/' leaves open this
Judicial Practice
119
vital question, viz.: "To what jurisdiction will
said bishop be remanded for trial to determine
his unaffected rights and place, as a Connectional
preacher"t since only his Episcopal functions
have been legally affected by the General Con¬
ference action under the above section of the
Discipline.
The fourth and last function of this committee
is the assignment of bishops to the supervision
of Episcopal districts, and at this point in their
deliberations t,he greatest care and prudence
must be exercised if the greatest good to the
Church is to follow their action.
No more weighty and responsible duty could
be committed to them than that they should say
the final word in a matter so vitally important to
the Church, and which must inevitably conduce
to a strengthening or weakening of Connectional
effort for a quadrennium, and perhaps, for a gen¬
eration.
Of some things we are certain. For instance,
these assignments should not be made without
first invoking Divine guidance in the selection of
bishops with a view to strengthening the work,
rather than the gratification of his personal wish
or preference, or the preferences of individual
representatives of conferences of any district,
unless from their better acquaintance with con-
120
A. M. E. Church
ditions and needs of that district, they may con¬
vince the judgment of a majority of the Epis¬
copal committee that some particular bishop
could probably work more satisfactorily and ef¬
fectively in that field during the' succeeding quad-
rennium than another. Due weight should, of
course, be given to all such considerations. But
the good and need of the people in any given
district must be the paramount factor in deter¬
mining this question. It is as necessary that the
need of the district, and the availability of the
bishop should determine where he shall be as¬
signed for a quadrennium, as is that same ques¬
tion when assignment of pastors is the subject
for consideration by the bishop and presiding
elders at annual conferences.
In making these assignments the Episcopal
committee is acting "for God and the Church."
What a fearful accountability will be theirs if
they suffer themselves to be influenced by other
than the highest and purest of motives where
interests so vast, vital and far-reaching are in¬
volved. Personally I know that no moments of
my life have ever brought greater concern and
searching of heart than those in which I have
given my voice and vote in determining this mat¬
ter. And since I know that death or only dis¬
ability of some sort can stay the current of in-
Judicial Practice
121
fluence I have helped to set in motion for an¬
other quadrennium, I tremble lest through blind¬
ness or dullness of spiritual vision, I have not
foreseen the consequences of my action, and
that coming years shall prove my unwisdom and
failure to ask and receive Divine illumination in
so grave a concern.
122
A. M. E.- Church
APPENDIX.
Section 1.
Some Inconsistencies and Apparent Con¬
tradictions in Our Legislation Respect¬
ing General Superintendency.
Question Asked at Annual Conference.
Who have been elected by the General Con¬
ference to exercise the Episcopal office and to
superintend the African Methodist Episcopal
Church ?
In answer to this question the Secretary pro¬
nounces the name of each one of the living bish¬
ops, and they are written into the Journal of that
conference.
No. 1. (The natural inference is that each is
as much the bishop of that conference as any
other, notwithstanding one of that number has
been assigned by the Episcopal Committee of
General Conference as the Presiding Bishop of a
particular district of which that particular an¬
nual conference is a member.)
Under the chapter defining the duties of a
bishop in his district, he is required "to travel at
Judicial Practice
123
large through his district and visit every circuit
and station and oversee the spiritual and tem¬
poral business of the societies in his district."
But the very next paragraph says: "He shall,
whenever the officers of any church call him, and
necessity requires him, visit any episcopal dis¬
trict and act alone, in the absence of its bishop,
or conjointly with him, in all cases in which the
interest of the Connection demands his service."
No. 2. (Only the good sense and scrupulous
regard for propriety operates to restrain our
bishops from doing that which, in the case of an
ordinary itinerant preacher, would be called "in¬
terference with another preacher's pastoral
charge," and which subjects such preacher to
severe penalties. And there are instances (I am
glad to say, however, only a few) in which an
attempt to exercise the right given in the section
quoted has been regarded by the presiding bish¬
op of the district as the rankest and most un¬
warranted interference with his rights and pre¬
rogatives, and led to bitter crimination and re¬
crimination.)
The General Conference, through its Com¬
mittee on the Episcopacy, proceeds to make as¬
signment of the bishops to certain portions of
the Connection arbitrarily denominated Epis-<
124
A. M. E. Church
copal District, specifying that they shall serve
the Connection within those bounds for the
period of four (4) years and no longer (unless
by a new assignment by subsequent Committee
and Conference), without making any provision
for redistricting the work or otherwise providing
for its safety in the event of the death, suspen¬
sion or permanent disability of the bishop so as¬
signed, in the interval of the General Conference
quadrennial sessions, thus leaving to the "bench
of bishops" the exercise of what is their proper
and legitimate prerogative, the General Superin-
tendency of the Connection in providing the
necessary Episcopal supervision.
No. 3. To the ordinary mind this appears in¬
congruous. For if the bishops may apportion
any part of the work, and under whatever cir¬
cumstances, it would violate neither reason nor
consistency to permit them to do the same thing
ad libitum.
Section 2.
Scope and Powers Involved in the General
superintendency in the african methodist
Episcopal Church.
(Quotation From Discipline)—Page 218
"The General Conference shall have full power
to make rules and regulations for the Church,
but shall not repeal or change the Articles of
Judicial Practice
125
Religion, nor establish any new rules of doc¬
trine. They shall not alter any rule of gov¬
ernment to the effect of doing away with the
Episcopacy or General Superintendency."
What is to be understood by the term General
Superintendency? I think it includes not only
and simply the Order or rank of an Episcopate,
but also the full and complete possession and
exercise of those rights and prerogatives which
must go hand in hand with orderly conduct and
procedure in any form of church government
that is even quasi Episcopal.
I think the evident meaning here is that we
must not divorce the office from the exercise
of its just powers and prerogatives. "Rule of
Government." This must embrace the right
of the bishops, singly and en-masse, or in council,
to declare, define and interpret the law, and
what is, and what is not, correct and lawful ad¬
ministration of discipline, in all the judicial tribu¬
nals of the Church, from the lowest to the high¬
est, revoking and annulling, by Episcopal decree
and order, manifestly erroneous judicial pro¬
cedure in all parts of the Church.
That the bishops possess this right and authori¬
ty within certain prescribed areas called episco¬
pal districts, and have uniformly exercised it, I
think will not be disputed. But some of them
126
A. M. E. Church
halt at the point where the judgment of the Coun¬
cil or House of Bishops is invoked, predicat¬
ing their disinclination to take action involving
responsibility, upon the ground that "the bishops
are equals" in authority and powers, and there¬
fore no single bishop must be interfered with or
restrained by the "body" of his Peers, however
grievous an error of judgment he may have com¬
mitted, or be likely to commit.
I think that such an assumption is both false
and dangerous. It assumes "that a part is equal
to the whole," which can never be true.
I believe that the General Superintendency of
the African Methodist Episcopal Church is cen¬
tered in all the active bishops, not in the indi¬
vidual bishop, else a part of the superintendency
would cease with the disability or death of any
single bishop, a thing which manifestly cannot be
while any active bishop of the Church is alive.
The council of bishops have recognized the
correctness of this premise by invariably taking
note of want of proper supervision in any part
of the work, and promptly exercising their un¬
questioned right to direct one of their number
to immediately assume direct and efficient charge.
"To err is human." Therefore a bishop, being
only human, is likely at some time to err. Can
it be that of a house of twelve or more bishops,
Judicial Practice
127
each of whom has been elected to the General
Superintendency of the Church as a connection,
and not as a district superintendent, and is equal¬
ly interested and concerned with his brethren, in
the peace and prosperity of Zion, that any one of
these bishops may, with indifference, disregard
the advice, judgment and decisions of a majority
of his peers, and that they are powerless to make
any reversal of such erroneous or deleterious
episcopal official act or decision effective or
remedial? I cannot believe it.
But if this be so, then the sooner we define
the powers, duties and prerogatives of our
bishops, singly and en-masse, the better for the
peace and security of the Church.