General Conference Bulletin, vol. 7

Conference Proceedings. THIRTIETH MEETING

W. A. Spicer, C. P. Bollman, C. C. Crisler, T. E. Bowen, H. E. Rogers, J. N. Anderson

June 4, 10 A. M.

L. R. CONRADI in the chair. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.8

J. F. Huenergardt offered prayer. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.9

L. R. Conradi: The first matter this morning will be found on page 263 of the BULLETIN, unfinished business, the partial report from the committee on plans. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.10

Resolution 23 was read, requesting the publishing houses to prepare a series of tracts for sale by colporteurs. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.11

Mrs. S. N. Haskell: There are possibilities in the tract work that we do not realize. Tracts can be arranged in packages and sold so that individuals can earn a good living while selling the tracts, and our tracts meet a larger percentage of people than any other class of literature that we distribute. It has been demonstrated that a large proportion have received their first light from this. In city work my husband and I have taken the tracts in large quantities, and have demonstrated over and over again that workers make a good living when handling the tracts. One young man who went to the foreign field last year supported himself during an institute in San Francisco selling tracts at five, ten, and fifteen cents a package. He found that all classes bought readily. They would buy tracts when they would not buy papers, because they would see in the tracts some subject that attracted their attention; and we have felt very anxious that the tracts be placed at a price so that our workers can support themselves selling the tracts the same as selling the periodicals. They can be sold everywhere if this is done. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.12

C. H. Jones: I am sure that our publishing houses will be glad to respond to the call for a series of tracts put up in this way. The interest in the circulation of our tracts is increasing all over the field very rapidly. It has been gradually increasing, until last year our sales exceeded the sales of any other year by far. This year we printed at the beginning of the year a large quantity, thinking we would have enough to supply the field for a year; but we have just received word from Mountain View stating that the tracts are getting low, and that already this year we have sold about a million and a half copies. That is as much as we sold during all of last year. We are now printing another edition to supply the demand. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.13

L. R. Condradi: These are surely cheering reports. Are we ready to go on? Question called. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.14

Recommendations 24 and 25 were read, and question called without discussion. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.15

Number 26 was read, recommending that the word “division” be dropped from the technical name for the North American and European Division Conferences. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.16

W. A. Spicer: Brother Chairman, what is the meaning of “technical name”? Are there to be two names? GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.17

L. R. Conradi: The meaning of the recommendation is to strike out the name “division” entirely, and then we have only the name conference. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.18

J. W. Westphal: I want to call attention to one fact. When the amendments to the General Conference constitution were read yesterday, it was evident that the relation of the General Conference to these division conferences is such that it seems that the division conferences have to be referred to by some name that distinguishes them from other conferences. This is apparent in the changes in the constitution as read yesterday. For instance, the presidents of the division conferences are vice-presidents of the General Conference. Of course the General Conference constitution could not say that the presidents of conferences be vice-presidents of the General Conference, because that might mean the presidents of union conferences. Now to avoid this, the term “division” is used in the General Conference constitution. If this name is dropped out, how are we going to designate this in the General Conference constitution? GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.19

C. P. Bollman: It seems to me that this recommendation would mean a departure from our plan of organization. We have the local conferences, the union conferences, the division conferences, and the General Conference. If you drop out the word “division,” what have we? We simply have a broken link in our chain. I would feel very much opposed to this, and hope that it will not prevail. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.20

E. R. Palmer: The remark of the last speaker would explain I think to a certain extent the idea of the committee that brought in the recommendation. The speaker referred to our having local conferences, union conferences, etc., and yet in no instance is the word local included in the name of the local conference, but its name refers only to its territory; and it was the idea that the designation should be local, union, division, and so on, but when published it be the North American Conference, the South American Conference, European Conference, etc., the name indicating its territory. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.21

W. A. Spicer: I do not understand the necessity for this, for really the constitutional name is division conference. Somehow I like the word. If we say European Conference to a man who does not know, that suggests just one little conference. If we say European Division, at once it suggests that those European fields are a division of one whole world-wide work. Instead of the word “division” suggesting at all to my mind separation, it suggests unity, because the very use of the word means that one part is a division of the whole. In geography we say there are certain grand divisions of the earth: North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa. Our work is formed on those geographical lines. I like the word myself. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.22

M. C. Wilcox: If it were not for the fact that we have union conferences which are purely arbitrary divisions, we would not bring in any of these technical terms at all. I am convinced of that. We name our local conferences by the political terms: Iowa Conference, Kansas Conference, etc. We have no question about that at all. Instead of their name suggesting one little local conference of Seventh-day Adventists. as they do to our secretary, to my mind they suggest that there is probably just such a conference in the next State. If they have a Michigan Conference, do You never say the North Michigan local conference, nor the Iowa local conference conference. That is all met in the very name itself. This suggests that it is local. It gives you limitation in the name itself. Union is a different thing. You never can learn just how much is indicated by the name “union.” You must learn that from the Year Book. But the next step upward brings you to a natural division of the earth. It is the North American Conference. That does not suggest to my mind a limited body. The very fact indicates that there possibly may be a European Conference, or an Asiatic Conference, or a South American Conference. It is implied, it is suggested, in the very name itself. North American Conference covers the whole thing. Why add another name, “division”? Take, for instance, the Asiatic Mission. Asiatic covers the whole thing. It is the Asiatic field. We have that word “division” thirty-one times in this constitution, and we do not need a single one of those words. European Conference covers it; Asiatic covers it. We do not have to say Kansas American Conference. No one questions it for a moment, any more than you have to say German European Conference. If we do not know where Germany is, let us study geography until we know it. If we do not know that Iowa is an American conference, let us study awhile. To my mind it seems that the economy in time would suggest the thing that is so apparent. We do not need the word at all. Nobody has any misunderstanding in any way if we say North American Conference. I do not see the necessity of using the two words any way. In the example that Brother Spicer gave, the grand divisions of the earth, it never suggests union there, but always suggests division. Everybody that studies geography knows that. I believe, brethren, that we will gain something by dropping out a word that is utterly useless. GCB June 5, 1913, page 274.23

H. F. Schuberth: To say European Conference does not at all describe the situation in our division. The division takes in the greater part of Africa, and the greater part of Asia, geographically. It is called European Division because Europe is the leading factor in this division of territory. To describe it as the former speaker suggests, we would have to say Europe-Africa-Asia Conference. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.1

E. R. Palmer: I simply want to correct a wrong impression I gave in my previous statement. I was only attempting to explain the reason why the committee made the change. Referring to the constitution, it was not intended that the word “division” should enter into the full name, but, as illustrated in the following paragraphs, “such division conferences as have been,” when the divisions are referred to as a class; “such union conferences;” “such local conferences.” The word “local” does not enter into the name of any conference in its constitution, but only refers to the large number of conferences when they are referred to as a class. So in this case, when division conferences are referred to as a class, they can be described in the constitution as local conferences are. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.2

A. G. Daniells: Now, there may be good points on both sides, but would it not be well for us to leave this as we have it until we have tried it out for four years? And at the end of four years, if we are badly burdened with that word, we can fix it up then. Now, I do believe that the word “division” will be full of meaning to us. We shall have to use it. Let us go on with it. It is already written. I suggest we go on with the constitutional name that we have and try it out a period, even though it does not suit well for a time, but think about it and know better by actual experience during the period. So I move that recommendation 26 be eliminated from the report. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.3

The motion prevailed. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.4

Item 27 was read, and question called. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.5

Item 28 was read, relating to the West Indian Union. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.6

G. M. Brown: I wish to call attention of the Conference to the fact that in the first part of the preamble it says, “In view of the request that has come from the West Indian Union that their Spanish territory be turned over,” then the recommendation is that the whole union be turned over. Now, brethren, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. I believe the West Indian Union Conference representatives and delegates in this Conference would be in hearty sympathy with the idea of turning over this Spanish territory, but I do not believe these delegates would be in harmony with this resolution. And I believe, further, that there has not been the counsel with this delegation concerning this change of plan that there should have been. I move that this resolution be referred back to the committee for further consideration, and counsel with the union delegation. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.7

L. R. Conradi: It is moved and seconded. Any remarks? GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.8

Philip Giddings: I am in perfect harmony with the recommendation that the West Indian Union be transferred to the supervision of the General Conference. I think I voice the sentiment of the delegates. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.9

A. G. Daniells: I favor the motion to refer this back, giving opportunity to confer with all the delegates from the West Indian Union, and getting a consensus of opinion from them before we pass this resolution here. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.10

L. R. Conradi: The motion is before us to refer. Any further remarks. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.11

W. A. Spicer: Why not make an explanation as to what the recommendation means? Does it mean that the committee recommends the dissolving of the West Indian Union? It says that the West Indian Union is to be under the direct care of the General Conference. That has always been so, just like the South American Union and the Brazilian Union. It seems to me in referring we should ask the committee to explain the meaning. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.12

L. R. Conradi: Will the committee on plans give us some information as to what they mean? GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.13

H. R. Salisbury: We perhaps were not wise in our wording of it, but took it for granted, if it were to come under the care of the General Conference, it would be dissolved as a union conference, because no union is under the General Conference. We thought that inasmuch as one half of its constituency is taken away and the other half scattered in such an awkward way, it would be better to let it return to a mission field of the General Conference. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.14

W. A. Spicer: Ought we not to consider that if all the Spanish territory in the West Indian Union should pass to the General Conference, there would still be left some four thousand Seventh-day Adventist members? They would be giving away only a few hundred members. The constituency would be practically untouched. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.15

The motion to refer prevailed, and the whole report was adopted, save for portions referred. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.16

L. R. Conradi: I think there was a section of the General Conference Constitution referred back to the committee on constitution. Brother Barlett will please present the report. I would say this is the matter of delegation, whether the basis shall be one thousand or five hundred. The majority of the members favor a thousand; a few favor five hundred; but we all felt we ought to leave it as it is if it makes a long discussion. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.17

W. T. Barlett: The section referred back to the committee was Article III, Section 5 (found on page 260 of the BULLETIN). But the committee’s report asks that a change be made also in Section 4. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.18

[The two sections as changed will appear in these minutes at the close of the discussion, on motion to adopt. The change in Section 4 was accepted without discussion. The report on Section 5 recommended that the numerical basis of representation be one delegate for each thousand members, instead of five hundred, as in the past.] GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.19

E. R. Palmer: I do not wish to enter into a long discussion of this proposition, but, believing sincerely that it is wrong, and that it will work an unpleasant hardship in our conferences, I would not like to see it pass without some remark concerning it. I would like to state first practically the wise counsel that our president gave us a few minutes ago,—that we try this for a term and see how it works after this reorganization. We have been on this other basis for a considerable time. That basis has not been sufficient to enable our union conferences to send to this Conference the delegates that they desired to send, and at the opening of this Conference twenty or twenty-five representatives of departments and large institutions were admitted here as delegates at large because the five hundred basis of representation, in several union conferences, did not admit of sufficient delegation. The foreign fields are not affected by this seriously, because they can control their delegation. We can do the same; but if we cut down the basis of representation, then we are limited in our union conferences and prevented from sending the delegates that the union conferences desire to send to the General Conference. It will work practically as it has in the past, something like this: When a union conference meets to select its delegates, and takes up the constitution, it will be found that it is entitled to one delegate from the union, one delegate for each of the conferences in the union, and another for each one thousand members. There will be officials, presidents, leading men in the unions and in the State conferences to fill this number of delegates. But suppose the union conference wishes to send a physician from its leading sanitarium, or from its training-school; or it wishes to send its general agent, who is in charge of its general work throughout the union; or it wishes to send other departmental members, that they may be present at these important departmental meetings, that they may gather encouragement and help and inspiration from a world-wide conference, it cannot do so; for the constitution will not allow of it. The working out of the details of our departmental work and our institutional work upon a broad, strong basis, requires that these men who carry such responsibilities come up to the General Conference, be seated as delegates, work on the committees, have part in these department meetings, and join in the work of the Conference. It costs something; but it is worth something to this denomination. GCB June 5, 1913, page 275.20

I would be very sorry to see, at the time when so many changes are being made, when they come with such confusing rapidity into this Conference,—I would be very sorry, before we have tried out this plan of divisions or seen where there might develop difficulties, to see our representation cut down in this way. I believe it would be a blow at our organized department work which would bring very serious results, and therefore I plead, notwithstanding the sentiment that a great amount of money has been spent in bringing so many here, I plead that the cut shall not be made in this way, for it will cut out only a little bunch of the delegation. It will not cut out our General Conference men; it will not cut out conference presidents throughout our field, although you say it may work that way; but it will mean that the fifty delegates that you cut out by this action will be cut out of our general agents, our publishing-house men, our sanitarium managers and physicians, and our school men, and heads of other departments; and there is where the real sinews of our organized work are found, so far as details are concerned, and these elements must be made strong and intelligent, and be kept together in a world movement by this splendid interchange of ideas. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.1

PHOTO-Farm house, Waterloo school, West Africa.

If this were to carry, I should move that the words be inserted after “one for each union conference” “and one for each organized department of the union,” so that we might be assured from a constitutional basis that each union conference would have the right to send up to this conference at least one member from each of its strongly organized departments. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.2

L. R. Conradi: Would you not move an amendment that will help us. If you will move an amendment, we will test the question. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.3

E. R. Palmer: I move that the report be amended by restoring the words “five hundred” in place of “one thousand.” [Seconded.] GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.4

M. A. Altman: I am opposed to the amendment. I think the last speaker has made a very strong argument, but I believe that his argument overlooks the fact that we are about to have two General Conferences instead of one. The North American Division covers, it seems to me, the ground that is appealed for in this argument,—that we have the same representation in the North American Division, which allows all these departmental representatives to come; and there is where the benefits will accrue to the field from all this large representation. In our union we find fields where the circumstances are so much different that there would be practically little benefit to our local workers. So it seems to me that all the benefits of a large representation would be gained in the meeting of the North American Division rather than in the General Conference, and if this amendment prevails, we shall have practically a General Conference every two years. I am opposed to the amendment. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.5

The question was then called on the amendment. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.6

J. A. Burden: I believe I am fourfold stronger in my work for the foreign field for having heard these splendid reports in this Conference. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.7

The motion to amend was voted upon and passed. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.8

The report was then voted upon, and, as amended, was adopted, as follows:— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.9

[Article III, Section 4 and 5, as adopted.] GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.10

Section 4. Regular delegates shall be such persons as are duly accredited by division conferences and missions, by union conferences not included in any not included in any union conference. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.11

Sec. 5. Each division conference or mission shall be entitled to one delegate without regard to numbers, an additional delegate for each union conference or mission, and for each local conference in its territory, and an additional delegate for each five hundred of its membership. Each union conference not included in a division conference shall be entitled to one delegate without regard to numbers, an additional delegate for each conference in its territory, and an additional delegate for each five hundred of its membership. Each local conference not included in a union conference shall be entitled to one delegate without regard to numbers, and one additional delegate for each five hundred members. Union missions and local missions not included in division or union conferences shall have such representation as may be decided by the General Conference Executive Committee, and accepted by the delegates in session. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.12

A. G. Daniells: Brother Chairman, the officers were requested to name a committee to bear our memorial to the President. We submit these names: C. S. Longacre, J. O. Corliss, R. C. Porter, M. C. Wilcox, K. C. Russell, J. E. Jayne, W. A. Colcord, C. H. Edwards, and S. B. Horton. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.13

L. R. Conradi: I understand that some of the standing committees are ready to report. The committee on plans has a further partial report. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.14

Guy Dail (reading):— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.15

Report of Committee on Plans GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.16

Whereas, In the providence of God our brother and fellow laborer, Elder George A. Irwin, has been suddenly taken from us by death,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.17

29. Resolved, (1) That we do hereby recognize his loyalty to the principles of the advent message, his devotion to its advancement, and his faithfulness in the work; and,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.18

(2) That we extend our hearty sympathy to all members of the bereaved family, commending them to the God of all comfort, who has provided a balm for wounded hearts in the blessed hope of a soon-coming Saviour; further,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.19

(3) That these resolutions be spread upon our records, and that a copy of them be furnished to the family of our deceased brother. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.20

It is recommended,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.21

30. That the work of the North American Division Conference commence June 1, 1913, and that the tithe of the union conferences to the General Conference, and the per cent of tithe from the local conferences to the General Conference, be transferred to the North American Division Conference, beginning with that date. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.22

31. That the Sustentation Fund be transferred at such time as the executive committees of these two conferences may arrange. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.23

32. That the General Conference settle all obligations incurred in administrative work up to June 1, 1913, and that the North American Division Conference assume all obligations incurred in the administration of its work after that date. GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.24

33. That, reckoning from June 1, 1913, the North American Division Conference pay from its funds the balance of the appropriations made by the General Conference Committee for work in North America during 1913, as follows:— GCB June 5, 1913, page 276.25

Atlantic Union	$ 24,242
East Canadian	12,586
Columbia Union	21,100
Southeastern Union	7,260
Southern Union	12,720
Southwestern Union	5,681
South Missouri	1,200
Negro Department	26,103
North American For. Dept.	12,500
Jewish Department	1,500
International Pub. Assn.	1,500
Loma Linda	10,000
Total	$136,342

34. That the General Conference place in the treasury of the North American Division Conference the sum of fifteen thousand dollars as a working capital. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.1

35. That the temporary headquarters for the North American Division Conference be established at Takoma Park, D. C., and that the question of providing permanent headquarters be referred to the executive committee of that conference. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.2

36. That the following departments be maintained by the North American Division Conference: Publishing, Educational, Sabbath School, Missionary Volunteer, Medical, Religious Liberty, Foreign, German, Danish-Norwegian, Swedish, and North American Negro; that it also maintain the Press Bureau. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.3

37. That the North American Division Conference assume the general watchcare of all institutions located within its territory. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.4

Whereas, Medical missionary work is in no case to be divorced from the gospel ministry; and,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.5

Whereas, Instruction has been given through the spirit of prophecy that the two shall be as closely connected as the arm is with the body; and,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.6

Whereas, Without this union neither part of the work is complete; therefore,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.7

38. We recommend, (a) That, for the purpose of strengthening medical evangelistic work, all our larger nurses’ training-schools make practical evangelistic work a part of their regular training, and, where necessary, strengthen their courses of study in the Bible, in hygiene, and in health and temperance principles. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.8

(b) That all our conference officers be asked to give careful consideration to the advisability of employing our graduate nurses in connection with conference efforts. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.9

(c) That all our evangelical laborers make diligent study of the gospel plan of combined medical and evangelistic work as revealed in the life of Christ and emphasized in the testimonies, and seek to make the plan a reality in our evangelistic labor. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.10

(d) That, for the qualifying of workers with advanced combined medical-evangelistic ability and evangelistic-medical ability, we recommend the College of Medical Evangelists, at Loma Linda, Cal., and that the work of the college be so arranged as to provide for strong practical evangelistic training, as well as to meet the requirements of State medical boards. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.11

39. Resolved, That we recognize the Medical Evangelist as the official organ of our Medical Department for a medium of communication between our medical workers, and as a means of keeping before our people the progress of the medical work. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.12

Believing that the efficiency of our sanitarium training-schools for medical missionary nurses should be increased, and desiring to see the educational standard of these schools raised; therefore,— GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.13

40. We recommend, That Dr. W. A. Rubler, Dr. H. W. Miller, and L. M. Bowen constitute a board of advisers to inquire into the standing of all our schools for nurses, to arrange a more uniform curriculum and course of instruction, and to counsel with the boards of the various sanitariums as to changes which would strengthen their work, also to plan for the affiliation of schools of smaller institutions which have a small faculty with those of larger sanitariums having larger faculties. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.14

41. Resolved, That we request the North American Religious Liberty Department to produce a small book of authoritative quotations dealing with the fulfillment of prophecy by the Papacy, and upon the subject of religious liberty, suitable for general use by our laborers. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.15

L. R. Conradi: Are there any further reports? GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.16

W. T. Knox: There is one recommendation that has not yet been acted upon. On page 233 of the BULLETIN there are recommendations from the finance committee of the General Conference. Nos. 1 and 2 have been disposed of, but No. 3 has not. I would like to move a substitute for No. 3 as follows: That the General Conference furnish the Loma Linda College of Medical Evangelists, $16,000 to enable it to complete its hospital and its equipment, and to establish dispensary work in Los Angeles. And that an earnest effort be made at as early a date as consistent, to replace this in the General Conference treasury by donations from the churches of the North American Division. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.17

The motion prevailed. GCB June 5, 1913, page 277.18

The Conference adjourned.

L. R. CONRADI, Chairman;
W. A. SPICER, Secretary.