History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

find its Constitution, if any there be. It wrestled with the problem through the quadrennium, and
when it reported to the Conference of 1892, it was refused concurrence, after long and lively
debating in which a contrariety of opinions was expressed. The finality was, until some future
"Commission" to find out the same thing shall dissent, it may be that the section under "General
Conference" in the Discipline of 1808, with modifications as made since that date, is the
Constitution. Whence all this incertitude? It is retributive, as already insinuated, of the assumption
of powers by a class taking advantage of the accident of position. The concrete position of the
Church can never be made abstractly right until a Convention is called, of both classes, to such a
compact, the ministers to select their representatives, and the laity to select theirs, through primary
assembly of the membership, as has been recently suggested, through the New York Christian
Advocate, by an intelligent member of the last class. It was deemed best to dispose of this question
in this connection, as it stands vitally associated with Methodist Reform in 1827-30.
Ezekiel Cooper resigned the Book Agency, having served eight years, and thereupon it was moved
that eight years be the limit of such occupancy, but this was in later years abrogated. History gives
no reasons for his act, but his subsequent career makes it evident that he did not surrender his liberal
sentiments as declared at this Conference of 1808, and while he remained loyal to the Church, in
1821 and onward he is found closely connected with Reform movements, and in 1827 drafted a
scheme for lay-representation, but was discouraged from its ultimate prosecution with the Reformers
of that period by reason of the local preacher feature, which was pressed as an integer, of which more
in its proper place.
Lee had finished his "History of the Methodists" and submitted it to a committee of the
Conference, and through it that body disapproved of the manuscript. As no reason is known at this
day for the action, it can be surmised only that either it was thought inadequate in literary execution
and fullness of detail, or its honest bluntness and disclosures in a few places, not in line with servile
toadyism; and his probable refusal to expurgate brought it under ban. Is there ground for the truth
of this surmise? It is found in the list of "Subscribers' Names" at the close, as published, which is
conspicuous for the absence of nearly every preacher of the Asbury-Soule-McKendree class, and the
presence of many who were active Reformers from 1820, both in the local ranks and of the laity.
This could not be an accident. Debarred from its official publication under the Conference rule, he
rebelled, carried down the manuscript to the close of 1809, and issued it by the help of his
subscribing friends who loved the liberty of the press, denied to Lee and others in that early day. The
imprint is, "Baltimore, Printed by Magill and Clime, booksellers, 224 Baltimore St., 1810." As an
appendix he gives an invaluable roster of all the preachers who ever traveled from 1769 to 1806,
classified, with notes of much historical value on many of them. But one edition was ever issued,
and today it is exceedingly scarce, the writer's copy having been secured after long search and
considerable expense. Properly to group the pertinent facts, it needs to be stated that the ensuing
General Conference of 1812 voted that "the Annual Conferences should collect by committees,
historical materials, and the New York Conference employ a historian to prepare them for
publication — a proceeding which seems to have been soon forgotten," says Stevens.
The first Delegated General Conference was ordered for New York City, May 1, 1812. When the
Book Concern was moved from Philadelphia, Baltimore, the cradle of Methodism and the center of
its membership, territorially, competed with New York, but failed. It was the first index of a