Episcopal Church, in the small sections north, and the large section south, which for opposite reasons have separated themselves from it, as in the organized Church itself. But I have from the first anticipated evil and not good from this separation-evil to the Churchevil to the country-and thus far it has borne no good fruits. It has aroused strong and partial opinion, and contrariety of purpose, where there had been heretofore unity of purpose and action. It has aroused the angry passions of men-peaceful, religious men, and hurried them on to threats-if not to deeds of violence-where there had heretofore been Christian fellowship, and peace, and brotherly love.

And I desire much that this controversy may end, and that speedily; but not in a judicial sentence of death, annihilation, against the Methodist Episcopal Church, nor with an imputation of wrong resting upon her, which, in my judgment, is wholly unmerited-but on a full and clear presentation of the actual merits of her controversy, and on such recognized and established principles, that those who take an interest in the case, and those who read its history, may feel that truth and justice have prevailed.

When Mr. Ewing had finished his argument, Mr. Stanberry delivered the closing argument on the side of the plaintiffs, and the case was submitted to the Court.

JUDGE H. H. LEAVITT'S DECISION.

THIS case was argued at an adjourned term of the Circuit Court, commencing on the 23d day of June last, before the District Judge, and by him taken under advisement.

At the October term, 1852, the following opinion was delivered by Hon. H. H. LEAVITT:

This Bill is prosecuted in the names of Smith, Green, and Parsons, appointed, as they aver, Commissioners by the authority of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, and of John Kelley and James W. Allen, supernumerary preachers, and John Tevis, a superannuated preacher, all belonging to the traveling connection of said Church, and having, as they allege, in common with the whole body of preachers in such connection, a personal interest in all the property held by the Methodist Episcopal Church. They aver that they act by the authority of the General conference and the annual conferences of the Church South, and file their Bill for the benefit and in behalf of said Church, and of themselves, and all other traveling preachers, and other persons interested in its funds and property.

The Defendants are Leroy Swormstedt and John H. Power, Agents of the Book Concern at Cincinnati, and, as such, having, as averred in the Bill, in law, the custody and control of the property and effects of said Book Concern, and James B. Finley, all being in the traveling connection of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and interested in its funds and property.

After asserting the claim of the Church South to the property in question, growing out of the alleged division of the Methodist Episcopal Church, in 1845, the Bill alleges that the said Commissioners have made unavailing efforts to effect an amicable adjustment of the matters in controversy; and they now resort to this Court, asking & decree for an account and an equitable apportionment and division of the property and effects set out in the Bill.

The property directly involved in this suit is the Methodist Book Concern at Cincinnati, consisting, as the Bill alleges, of houses, lots, machinery, printing-presses, books, paper, debts, cash, and other effects, amounting to about the sum of two hundred thousand dollars.

It may be well here to notice that this Book Concern had its origin at an early period of the Methodist Episcopal Church, in this

country. Its primary object seems not to have been the founding of a charity for the future benefit of the traveling clergy, but to furnish, at a cheap rate, books and periodicals under the sanction and auspices of the Church, suited to the wants and the improvement of the Methodist communion, in science, morals, and religion; thus serving as an auxiliary agency in the consummation of the great end, early avowed by that Church, of "spreading Scriptural holiness through these lands." The pecuniary means by which it was enabled to commence its operations, were made up by the donations of preachers and other persons, who favored the laudable purpose of its institution. For a time, all the traveling preachers in the connection were required to contribute annually a fixed sum, in aid of its funds. Its first location was at Philadelphia, from whence, however, it was removed, in 1804, to the city of New York. Through the active efforts of the traveling ministry, who were required to act as agents for the sale of the books and publications of the Concern, they were extensively disseminated and sold. Its means and resources had become greatly increased, and the sphere of its usefulness was fast extending, when, in 1836, it was destroyed by fire. Soon after this calamitous event, as the result of active efforts made in its behalf, it was again placed on a basis of efficiency and prosperity by the liberal contributions, not only of those in the Church, but of others not belonging to the connection. In 1820, a branch of the Concern was established at Cincinnati, connected with and subordinate to the institution in New York. In 1839, by an act of the Legislature of the state of Ohio, the branch at Cincinnati was incorporated, and the Agents then in office, or who should subsequently be appointed by the General conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, were created a body-politic and corporate by the name of the "Methodist Book Concern;" and it was declared, by the act of incorporation, that' the Agents "shall hold their agency, and conduct the business of the Concern in conformity with the rules and regulations of the said General conference." Under the able and faithful administration of the Agents intrusted with its management, this Book Concern has greatly prospered, and its capital and resources have rapidly increased.

Previous to the year 1796, the profits arising from the sales of books were applied exclusively to pious and charitable objects, but principally to the support of traveling preachers and their families. The conference of that year determined that those profits should be applied wholly to the relief of traveling preachers, including such as were superannuated, and the widows and orphans of those who were deceased. From that period, this fund has been regarded as pledged to this charitable use; and by the sixth restrictive article of the constitution of 1808, which will be more fully noticed hereafter, it is placed out of the power of the General conference to divert this fund to any other purpose, except by "the concurrent recommenda

tion of three-fourths of all the members of the several annual conferences, who shall be present and vote on such recommendation,' and the approving vote of two-thirds of the succeeding General conference.

It may be proper here to state that, by the Discipline of the Church, the annual conferences are the distributers of this fund to those entitled to its benefit. They report to the General conference the names and number of persons who are entitled as beneficiaries to receive it, and the sum to be paid to each, and the amount is then apportioned to the several annual conferences, and paid to them for distribution. But this fund is only to be used to make up deficiencies in the amounts requisite for the support of its beneficiaries. All are not entitled, as a matter of course, to share its benefits; but such only as are deficient, from the failure of the quarterly and annual conferences to raise the requisite sums, by collections and contributions, for their support.

Such, then, is briefly the origin, history, and purpose of this charity, and the principle on which, and the machinery by which, it is to be administered to its beneficiaries.

These remarks have prepared the way for the consideration of the claim, set up by the Complainants, to the property in controversy. And, in stating the conclusions of the Court on the points presented in this case, it is not regarded as necessary to refer, with great minuteness, to the allegations of the parties, as set forth in the Bill and Answer; nor to the great mass of documentary proofs read, and analyzed, and largely and ably discussed by counsel on the hearing. There is, in truth, very little conflict between the parties as to the facts involved in this controversy. The questions arising in the case are mainly those of legal inference and construction. These, though not numerically formidable, open a wide field for investigation, and are exceedingly important in their bearing upon the unfortunate controversy pending between the two portions of the great and respectable Methodist community of the United States. And no one, having a just comprehension of the character of the issues in this case, will allege that there was any waste of time or of mental effort in the protracted and able arguments of counsel, in the presentation of their points, on the hearing.

It is distinctly assumed by the Complainants, in their Bill, and strenuously urged by their counsel, as the basis of a decree of this Court, for the apportionment and division of the property and funds in dispute, that the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States, as it existed prior to and at the time of the action of the General conference of 1844, and the proceedings that were the sequences of that action, is no longer one Church, but two Churches; which, though alike in faith, doctrine, and discipline, are entirely separate and distinct in their organization. After stating, at length, the resolutions adopted by the General conference on the 8th of June, in the year just named, designated as the "Plan of Separation;" also, the proceedings of the convention of delegates, held at Louisville, on the 1st of May, 1845, and the resolutions of the council of Bishops at New York, on the 2d of July, in the same year, the Bill alleges, "that by and in virtue of the foregoing proceedings, the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States, as it existed before the year 1844, became and was divided into two distinct Methodist Episcopal Churches, with distinct and independent powers and

authority, composed of the several annual conferences, charges, stations, and societies, lying and being north and south of the aforesaid line of division."

As the proceedings referred to present one of the most important questions arising in this case, it will be proper to notice them here with some particularity.

The first of the resolutions embodied in the so-called "Plan of Separation" is in these words:

}

"Resolved, By the delegates of the several annual conferences, in General conference assembled,

"1. That, should the annual conferences in the slaveholding states find it necessary to unite in a distinct ecclesiastical connection, the following rule shall be observed with regard to the northern boundary of such connection: All the societies, stations, and conferences, adhering to the Church in the south by a vote of the majority of the members of said societies, stations, and conferences, shall remain under the unmolested pastoral care of the Southern Church; and the ministers of the Methodist Episcopal Church shall in no wise attempt to organize Churches or Societies, within the limits of the Church South, nor shall they attempt to exercise any pastoral oversight therein, it being understood that the ministry of the South reciprocally observe the same rule in relation to stations, societies, and conferences, adhering, by a vote of the majority, to the Methodist Episcopal Church; provided, also, that this rule shall apply only to societies, stations, and conferences, bordering on the line of division, and not to interior charges, which shall, in all cases, be left to the care of that Church within whose territory they are situated. "2. That ministers, local and traveling, of every grade and office in the Methodist Episcopal Church, may, as they prefer, remain in that Church, or, without blame, attach themselves to the Church South.

"3. Resolved, by the delegates of all the annual conferences, in General conference assembled, That we recommend to all the annual conferences, at their first approaching sessions, to authorize a change of the sixth restrictive article, so that the first clause shall read thus: They shall not appropriate the produce of the Book Concern, nor of the Chartered Fund, to any other purpose other than for the benefit of the traveling, supernumerary, superannuated, and worn-out preachers, their wives, widows, and children, and to such other purposes as may be determined upon by a vote of two-thirds of the members of the General conference.'"

4. Provides, That when the annual conferences shall have voted to concur in the proposed change of the sixth restrictive rule, the Agents at New York and Cincinnati shall, and they are hereby authorized and directed to deliver over to any authorized agent or appointee of the Church South-should one be organized-all notes and book accounts against the ministers, Church members, or citizens within its boundaries, with authority to collect the same for the sole use of the Southern Church; and the said Agents also convey to the aforesaid agent or appointee of the South all the real estate, and assign to him all the property, including presses, stock, and all right