General Conference Bulletin, vol. 4

GENERAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

G. A. IRWIN

Sixteenth Meeting, April 12, 3 P. M.

ELDER G. A. IRWIN in the chair. After the opening hymn, No. 628, Elder W. T. Knox offered prayer. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.10

The Chair: When the Conference adjourned this morning, the Committee on Organization had just read the report that was submitted in printed form and was passed out. Now, we have a report from the Committee on Education printed in the BULLETIN; and if we took things in regular order, it would have precedence over this. But as some members will be absent to-morrow, and expect to leave before the Conference meeting closes this afternoon, it was requested that we take up the matter that was presented to us just at the close of the forenoon meeting. What is your pleasure regarding this? GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.11

W. T. Knox: I move that the recommendations submitted this morning be made the order of business this afternoon. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.12

Delegate: I second the motion. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.13

The question was called and carried. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.14

The Chair: What is your pleasure in regard to the recommendations? GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.15

E. E. Miles: I move the adoption of the recommendations. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.16

A. G. Daniells: I second the motion. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.17

The Chair: It has been moved and seconded that the recommendations be adopted. The question is now open for remarks. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.18

A. G. Daniells: Read the recommendations, please. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.19

The Chair: The Secretary will read the recommendations. GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.20

Secretary: You will notice on the little slip, that they are numbered, “1,” “2,” and “3.” They should be “11,” “12,” and “13.” [Reading]:— GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.21

“11. That the General Conference Committee of twenty-five, as soon as elected, nominate the members to constitute the corporate membership of the Foreign Mission Board. Said members to be elected by the Conference.” GCB April 15, 1901, page 225.22

Delegate: Is that all of the recommendations? GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.1

The Chair: I think the whole thing is connected, and should perhaps be considered together. They are really one. The Secretary will read. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.2

Secretary [reading]: Recommendations 12 and 13 in connection:— GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.3

“12. That the administration of the foreign mission work be under the supervision of the General Conference Executive Committee. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.4

“13. That it be left to the General Conference Committee to decide how long the corporate life of the Foreign Mission Board be continued.” GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.5

The Chair: It is open for remarks. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.6

I. H. Evans: I have been asked by the committee to offer a word of explanation to this, so that all suspicions may be allayed, and we may all look at it as it is. It is evident, as we read these recommendations, that the desire of the committee is to change the administration of the foreign mission work, from a separate and distinct board, to the supervision of the General Conference Committee. This may be liable to arouse our fears and suspicions, unless we have confidence: so we will consider just the bearings and relations of this. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.7

We anticipate having a large committee, who will have general supervision of all our work everywhere. The design is to group under the management of this larger committee the various departments of our work. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.8

This committee of twenty-five will have a general supervision of the work everywhere throughout the world. But it would have no specific work; no locality to operate in, unless the Foreign Mission Board should give it its territory. We have organized all the territory in the United States and Canada; we have already organized the work in Australasia; we have also organized the Union Conference on the European field. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.9

If the Foreign Mission Board holds all unorganized territory, and we have Union Conference in all organized territory, what has our large committee of twenty-five to do for territory? You see they really would be without a specific field. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.10

Then, besides, if we group all other branches of the work under the management and direction of this large committee, it would be rather lonesome business for the Foreign Mission Board to stand all alone and endeavor to operate. The General Conference Committee would have supervision of all other lines, while this one board would be trying to secure funds in organized territory, and would perhaps never have the hearty co-operation of this general committee, as it would have if the work were directly under their supervision. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.11

Having studied the situation from all standpoints, your Committee on Reorganization thought it advisable to recommend that the foreign mission work become a department of the General Conference Committee. They would then organize it as they thought best, making it a department of the General Conference work, appointing one or more secretaries, as to them seemed best, appointing from this number as many of the committee as they thought advisable, to advise and counsel and study this work in connection with their department secretaries; and yet the whole work, in all its various phases and every advance move, would come under the general committee of twenty-five for advice and counsel. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.12

I think as long as we have started out on this plan of placing the whole work on this large committee, it would hardly be proper that the Foreign Mission Board should endeavor to operate independently; not independently without sympathy, but I mean to give it a continued existence. The Foreign Mission Board is what is known as a “membership corporation.” The General Conference elects its members. That membership forms a constituency, and the members become electors. These members, or electors, elect a board. That board is an operating, or managing, board, and in the constitution the members are called trustees. The reason why this resolution was framed to ask that the committee of twenty-five name the membership of this board, was that there might not be any friction engendered, by getting on men who would be independent, and desire to continue their work as an operating board. I think you can see the wisdom of that provision. It would be folly for us to say that the General Conference Committee is to have the management of the foreign mission work, and then go to work and elect a board who would make it hard for them to operate. The board would be a legal body, and they would legally have the power to do what they pleased. It was therefore thought best that as soon as the General Conference Committee were elected, they should nominate nine men (I suppose they will generally be of their own number), who shall constitute the membership of the board. Then these nine members in conjunction with the other members of the Conference Committee, will elect themselves as the board, and become the legal holders of the property. The only reason why we continue the corporate feature of the board is that we have property, and must be responsible for it until the responsibility can be shifted to the General Conference Association, or some other disposition is made of it. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.13

J. H. Morrison: Do we understand that you are compelled to stay inside of the limits of your own number, twenty-five? GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.14

I. H. Evans: No, we are not compelled to, but we thought it would be the safest and wisest thing to do. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.15

F. M. Wilcox: Several years ago it was found necessary to organize several legal organizations outside of the General Conference Association to hold denominational property, because the General Conference Association had in possession as much property as its charter would permit it to carry. What would be done with the property now held by the Foreign Mission Board, in case the legal corporation died? Would it revert again to the General Conference Association? If so, is the General Conference Association in a position to carry it? GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.16

I. H. Evans: So far as the Foreign Mission Board charter is concerned, they are in a good condition to hold it. Whether it would be wise for them to do that or not, is left for this committee to consider. I think probably we will find that the future management will prefer to delegate to the Union Conferences and foreign mission fields the supervision of all property in their territory, as soon as they become organized so that they can hold it, and in that way they will place the responsibility of the management of these institutions upon those who are in the field and on the ground, which will be a much wiser policy than to try to hold them by a corporation many thousands of miles away. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.17

W. H. Thurston: At what time does the membership of this corporate board expire? GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.18

I. H. Evans: The constitution provides that we elect these members at each session of our General Conference. GCB April 15, 1901, page 226.19

G. B. Thompson: With your knowledge of the foreign field, do you believe this is for the best interests of the foreign work? GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.1

I. H. Evans: I do not see how we can continue our work successfully under any other regime than this. When we start out on a system, we generally have to follow it. We have now a great committee that is to superintend the work, and we have specified that they shall have supervision in all parts of the field, and there is no reason why they can not carry the work, so far as I know, as well as a specific board. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.2

J. W. Westphal: A few years ago the General Conference had a deficit of several thousand dollars each year; and during the past two years it has been about fifteen thousand dollars. When we organize Union Conferences, it naturally seems as if that would increase expenses in all parts of the field. A few days ago we voted that our Conferences pay a second tithe. At the time, at least, I received the impression that that second tithe was to go to support the work in foreign fields. With the Foreign Mission Board in existence, it would go into their hands, but with the blotting out of that board and the foreign work given into the hands of this proposed Committee, the means would go into the hands of the General Conference Committee. Does this mean that the second tithe is to be employed in the home field in making up these deficits, and thus our efforts to extend the work in the foreign fields prove of no avail? This question comes to my mind. I would like to understand it. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.3

W. W. Prescott: As I understand the whole drift and sentiment of this Conference, it is that we shall recognize that the only thing this body exists for is to give this message to all the world just as quickly as possible, and that therefore we can not tolerate the idea of treading around in this same ring, and spending our means within a limited circle, but that we are expecting to break, and are now breaking these bands, in the idea that there is only one field, and that field is the world. If that idea is held and acted upon, as it must be, it will wipe out this question as to whether we are going to hold any of the money in the home field. We are going to have just one field, and have our eyes especially on destitute and barren fields, which are to have the preference. Instead of narrowing down in any way the work of extending this message to all the world, this whole idea is to organize in reference to one thing, and that is to do mission work in all fields. Therefore if we are to word it in any way, it seems to me instead of saying that we are going to absorb the Foreign Mission Board into the home field, it is that we are just turning the whole home field into one mission field, so that this work may be prosecuted with vigor in every part of the world. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.4

C. P. Bollman: This may be the very best plan that could possibly be adopted, but there are certain limitations placed upon human beings by their very nature. It seems to me that we have run up against one of them. Until four years ago, it was supposed that the foreign mission work was not getting its due proportion of the funds. This was simply because the General Conference Committee knew more about the work that lay right close to them than they did about work off in distant fields, and so put more money into home work than was its proportional part. The brethren said that in order to obviate that difficulty, and give more funds to the foreign mission work, we must have a board that would be interested in far-away fields, so that the funds might go to their proper destiny. We are now creating a great committee, the greater number of whom will be in the home field, the United States. They will be presidents of Union Conferences; they are situated here, and will be interested in the work that is right close to them. Seeing the necessities of that, more funds will probably be devoted to the things that some under the eyes of those men than will go into the needy fields. The theory is all right, but I fear it will not work out in practice. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.5

M. C. Wilcox: I would like to ask a question, because I am sure it will help to rectify the wrong impression that is in the mind of the last speaker. The idea was conveyed that the majority of the proposed new committee will be in the home field, and therefore will not have the time to give the thought that ought to be given to foreign mission work. How many of the Foreign Mission Board now existing gave their whole attention to foreign mission work? And how many of them were wholly engaged in working for the field which really demanded all their energies? I think the information will help us materially in this respect. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.6

The Chair: I think there were only three of the nine who devoted their entire time to the foreign work. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.7

A. G. Daniells: May I supplement that question with another: How many of the Foreign Mission Board were located in foreign fields, or spent any considerable time working in what we call foreign fields outside of the United States? GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.8

The Chair: I think only one of them. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.9

O. A. Olsen: There seems to be a misapprehension in some measure with reference to this. It was stated by one speaker that the reason for the change four years ago was that so few had been sent abroad, and so much attention had been given to the home field. The facts are these. If you look up the records, you will find that more were sent abroad the years before than the records show since that time. During the years 1895-97, quite a large number, one hundred and forty, if I remember correctly, were sent abroad to foreign missions. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.10

The Chair: One hundred and fifty-three. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.11

O. A. Olsen: The facts do not show that they were doing less than they have since done. If your look up the records, and find when there was the greatest activity in entering new fields, you will learn that it was before this change came in. As has been referred to, we have been much stirred by the earnest appeals with reference to the foreign missionary work, as we call it, in this Conference. The fact is that each Seventh-day Adventist has but one field [Cries of “Amen!”], and that field is the world. Our business is to send the truth where it has not yet been proclaimed, and to send workers where they have not yet set their feet. With a united effort on the part of those who represent the various branches of the work the greatest success can be attained; and this is the purpose and burden of the Conference, and the committee that has this matter under consideration. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.12

W. W. Prescott: Four years ago we were dividing up the responsibilities; now we are centralizing responsibilities. Four years ago we divided the responsibilities in such a way as to disintegrate the work. Now we are trying to divide the responsibilities in such a way as to unite the work. GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.13

J. W. Westphal: My question has not yet been answered to my mind. It was said that during the last four years there had not been so many missionaries sent out as in the previous years. I think this is true, but there is something in this fact that I wish to call attention to. I believe that during the last four years the Foreign Mission Board had to pay the indebtedness that was incurred before, and because of that it was unable to do as much as it would otherwise have done. The General Conference has recommended the States to pay a certain tithe, yet during the last two years it has run behind $15,200. With the organization of these districts there may be more expense attached to the work in the home fields. Does this mean that this extra tithe which has been voted shall now be taken to pay the General Conference debts, and in that way the work again be hindered, as it seems to me it has been before? GCB April 15, 1901, page 227.14

G. A. Irwin: The reason the tithe of the General Conference has run behind is because of returned foreign missionaries. The present mode of operation requires the co-operation of the State Conferences, the General Conference, and the Foreign Mission Board. When calls are made for individuals to go to foreign fields, they are usually taken out of some State Conference. When any of these return to the United States, the Foreign Mission Board has no territory distinctively its own in the United States. The State Conference from which the laborer was called in the first place, has filled the place of that individual, and thinks it has about all the laborers it can carry. Consequently when a person returns from a foreign field, the General Conference has to assign him to some place of labor. Thus this organization has taken on more laborers than its tithes would warrant. I can see that his would be averted in the proposed plan, because the General Conference will be operating all over the world, and when a person returns from a distant field, he is simply returning to the board that sent him out. GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.1

F. M. Wilcox: These were the difficulties four years ago; I do not know how it is now. The Foreign Mission Board had to work through the General Conference Association. This committee, in turn, had to go to the General Conference Committee, and then work through the Medical Missionary Board, in order to get a physician or a nurse to fill a place in a foreign field. The Foreign Mission Board had really to work through these three organizations in order to do its work. It complicated things greatly, and added to the expense, and caused delay. I can readily see that when the committee of twenty-five is organized, it will be able to handle the work in foreign fields much better than it has ever been handled before, and it seems to me they will be brought into closer and more direct touch with the foreign work than any previous board has ever been able to be. I believe, too, that they will be in a position to carry forward the work with less expense and less friction than any committee which has ever had charge of the work in the past. GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.2

The Chair: The question is called for. The motion is on all three of these that have been discussed here. The motion was to adopt the recommendation. GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.3

C. W. Flaiz: If this recommendation is passed, will the medical missionary work, the tract society, etc., all be emerged together in the General Conference Committee, and be under the direction of the General Conference Committee, and the whole be taken out of the hands of the people, and placed in the hands of the General Conference Committee, and they elect all the officers? GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.4

A. G. Daniells: The plan of organization of the General Conference is simply an enlargement of the plan for the organization of State Conference and the Union Conference. We ought to simplify our machinery for transacting our business. It seems to many that we have multiplied organizations and boards and institutions until the talent of this denomination is to a large extent withdrawn from the field, and placed over the machinery to keep it running. Multiplying boards of two or three or four men to run the particular lines of work does not necessarily or naturally increase the efficiency of our management. The desire of the committee has been to have as few wheels in the machinery as possible. We must have as many laborers of this denomination in the field in personal contact with the masses, preaching the gospel to them, as we possibly can. In Australasia we cut out the State and Union Sabbath-school associations, tract society organizations, and religious liberty associations, so that we have but one organization, and that is the Conference. The Conference did not do away with the work of those different lines, but appointed secretaries to look after those lines of work and to report their work to the State Conference Committee and to the Conference at its annual meeting. That plan has worked splendidly and given good satisfaction. One board, has been able to do the work in all those lines, by the aid of committees and secretaries, that three or four boards had done before. GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.5

Heretofore there have been three boards,—the General Conference Committee, the Foreign Mission Board, and the Medical Mission Board,—all working on missionary lines. It seemed to observers that this was unfortunate. It appeared that instead of having three boards in the territory going here and there for workers and money to do nearly the same work, there should be but one general board. If it should be the General Conference Committee, let them take the field, and have a free hand. I hope the time will come when the Medical Missionary Association, operating on missionary lines, will drop into this, and let the one board do for the entire field. I believe the day is near when only one grand, evangelical missionary board will occupy the field. GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.6

When we formed our Union Conference, we carried the same plan into that, but simply expanded it, making the same organization cover all Australasia. The Union Conference Committee selected its Sabbath-school secretary, its missionary secretary, and its religious liberty secretaries. And, further, it appointed its medical missionary secretary and superintendent, so that we have but the one organization in Australasia. One board with the aid of these secretaries, carries on the entire work. And I want to tell you that after our experiences, we would not go back and multiply boards to do that gospel work under any consideration. We had instruction from Sister White all the way along, at every step we took, to form that simple organization that made us believe that we were on right lines, and the experience that we have had has fully justified our confidence in the source of instruction that came to us. Your committee during this meeting have sought counsel, and have endeavored to follow instruction, and we have tried to step from the Union Conference to the General Conference, and expand the plan. We endeavored to step up from the Union Conference to the General Conference, or the World’s Conference. GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.7

We talk about the General Conference, but we have never had a General Conference. We have had a North American General Conference, or a North American Union Conference, but we have not had a world’s General GCB April 15, 1901, page 228.8

Conference. In this new arrangement, it appears to me that we have the broadest, the most efficient, and the most workable General Conference Committee that this denomination has ever had. Somebody spoke about this Conference being here in America and being wrapped up in the affairs of America. If Union Conferences are organized, a thousand details will be taken from the General Conference Committee, and placed in the hands of the local men, where they belong. They do not belong to the General Conference. I trust that the day is past when the General Conference will have its eyes centered upon the affairs of the United States. The day has come for the General Conference Committee to turn its eyes outward, and look at the great, wide world, and to study it, plan for it, and work for its evangelization. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.1

I would not for one single minute, Brother Westphal, ever favor the idea that the second tithe of which you spoke should be swallowed up in the affairs of America. No! No!! Why, my friends, unless God helps us break up this condition and work as we never have before, it will take a millennium to carry this message to the world. We have not begun yet with the greater nations of the world. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.2

My idea is that the General Conference Committee should leave the details of the affairs of America in the hands of the Union Conferences. They should only deal with the questions that are general and that refer to the whole world. Of course America is a part of it, a little bit of it, and must have a little attention from this General Conference, but the world must have the attention of this Conference Committee. And so it seems to me that this Committee of twenty-five, representing all the districts or the Union Conferences of the world, the medical missionary work, the publishing and educational interests that cover all the lines of this denomination that are being carried on to-day, should be permitted to appoint its secretaries. It might not be best for the secretary that this Conference would elect here to-day should hold the office for two or four years. The Conference Committee may see best to change its secretaries and the treasurer as well, and so it seemed that it would be best for so large a representative board, taking in the interests of the world, to do what the Union Conference is permitted to do—make these line of work departments, select the secretaries, and then work to the very best possible advantage. With this arrangement there will be no friction, and no one will be hampered. The General Conference Committee should throw its whole weight into this matter, to get hold of men and money, as never before, to send abroad to nations that are in darkness. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.3

I have no confidence in plans that leave the main decisions regarding the work in distant lands with a board in this country, the members of whom have never been on the ground. These men can not gather in an upper room here in Battle Creek, and intelligently plan the affairs of people in distant fields. It is not natural; it is not sensible. It must not be done. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.4

That is the way I feel regarding this question, and if I thought there was anything wrong in these recommendations that would hurt the foreign fields, I would smite it as hard as possible. For I tell you, brethren, these foreign fields must have our attention, or the curse of God will be upon us. And it is upon us; for God has told us that the prosperity of our work at home will be in proportion to the degree with which we prosecute the work abroad. Our policy abroad has been feeble; it has been weak; it has not been in harmony with the great profession we have made. And we are having that reflex influence all through the United States. Who can not see it? We are in some respects a weaker people than we were fifteen years ago. What is the reason? One reason is because of our weak, inefficient policy regarding the distant, neglected lands. I hope the term “foreign lands” will be dropped. It does not belong to us as a people: The field is the world. I hope we will drop out of our vocabulary the word “foreign” when we talk about missions. It is missionary work. God occupies the center. All places are equally distant to him,—ah all places are equally near to him! GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.5

I suppose that there will be men on this committee who will be in foreign fields. I believe that our general men who attempt to deal with the affairs in foreign fields ought to visit those fields, and spend a reasonable portion of their time in them. The General Conference Committee should send a man to South America as a representative, authorizing him to meet all the workers, study the needs of the field, outline a policy, and agree on it with those workers. Then the Committee should stand by the decisions come to, and furnish both men and means required in the field. The same ought to be done for the West Indies, South Africa, and Japan. I do not believe that we should trot the globe, simply to run about and spend a few weeks in a country. We should select the best men we can get—men full of the Holy Ghost and good sense. These should go to these distant fields and join the workers in studying the situation on the ground, and outlining the plans to be followed; and the General Conference Committee ought to stand by the decisions that are made. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.6

The question was called at this point. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.7

The Chair: The question is called. As many as favor the adoption of the report will say, Aye; opposed, No. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.8

Carried. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.9

The Chair: I understand that the matter on the larger slip is simply suggestive, and all it will need is a little explanation by the committee that presented it, because yesterday you voted that the General Conference Committee be empowered to organize itself, and to appoint all necessary agents and committees for the conduct of the work. This is simply suggestive as to how this may be done. These suggestions do not require any action of the Conference, as I understand it, but a little explanation. GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.10

W. W. Prescott: It seems to me that very little explanation is required after what has been stated in a general way, as these matters have been before us; and I merely wish to say, unless there be some special question, that the Committee on Organization thought it might be of general interest to the delegation to receive information upon this matter, so that they may fully understand the general drift and purpose of the plan. Therefore, while it is not within the province of the Committee on Organization to direct this large Executive Committee as to what it shall do, they did make these suggestions, in order that the Executive Committee might understand the general purpose of this whole plan. In order that the delegation might have the same information, they thought it desirable to have these suggestions printed in the BULLETIN, and given into the hands of the delegates. I hardly think anything further is necessary to be said, unless there are some questions. The committee did not ask this body to act upon these suggestions, as they did not wish directly to instruct the Conference GCB April 15, 1901, page 229.11

Committee, but simply to make such suggestions as would be in harmony with the general plan which the committee has brought before the Conference. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.1

C. W. Flaiz: I would like to inquire what is to be the scope of the Finance Committee, and what their field of operations? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.2

W. W. Prescott: I suppose this committee would be, as stated, a committee of advice in reference to such financial affairs as come under the general advice of the General Conference. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.3

Eugene Leland: Will this Finance Committee be composed of members of the Conference Committee? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.4

W. W. Prescott: If I understand the feeling of the Committee on Organization, it has been that this Executive Committee should be left free to invite in other helpers in special lines, if it so desires. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.5

A. G. Daniells: The first committee named is the pastoral committee, and you can readily see what its work is. Just the opposite from that, the spiritual work would be the business and finances. It is evident that some men whose minds are specially good and strong in business should give special attention to the finances, so that they will be kept as they should for the general body. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.6

C. W. Flaiz: That is the reason I raised the question. The Pastoral Committee provides for, and takes charge of, furnishing the laborers to the local Conferences; that is, to the camp-meetings and other such work. Inasmuch as they take charge of that work, and this other committee immediately follows, does it follow that this financial committee takes charge of affairs in, for instance, a Union Conference or local Conference, where enterprises are started, and that there is no appeal from their decision? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.7

W. W. Prescott: It is expected that all these committees will act under the advice and counsel of the large committee, and that no absolute power will be delegated to any committee to direct a special department; but that it will be in counsel, and according to the policy established by the large committee. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.8

The Chair: Are there any further questions on these suggestions? What is the further pleasure of the Conference? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.9

W. T. Knox: May I ask for a word of explanation in regard to No. 4? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.10

W. W. Prescott: Those who were in the Publishers’ Convention, held a week previously to the assembling of the Conference, will remember that this matter was very fully considered then. The need of some means of unifying our publishing interests in all parts of the world was fully considered. The Publishers’ Convention appointed a committee representing the publishing houses in the different parts of the world to consider some of these matters, and report. It was probably the mind of the committee that suggested that the committee mentioned in No. 4 should be a permanent one. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.11

The Chair: What is the further pleasure of the Conference? Do you wish now to take up the report of the Committee on Education? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.12

C. W. Flaiz: The latter part of Recommendation 4 says: “Missionary lines, and for the education and training of evangelist canvassers.” Are these to take charge of the canvassers’ schools held in local Conferences? or is it simply a recommendation in connection with the educational work? Some of the States have schools for canvassers, and keep them up three months each year. Does this provide that the provision of this recommendation has to do with these? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.13

W. W. Prescott: Mr. Chairman, I do not understand that it has at any time been the province of any general board or committee to do what we might call meddling, but rather, if anybody anywhere is doing anything for the furtherance of this work, to encourage, strengthen, and help all they can. I understand that the idea in this is not to meddle, or to interfere with anybody, but to develop, encourage, and strengthen the hands of every individual, and every working organization, and to open up work in fields where nothing is being done. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.14

The Chair: What is your pleasure? Do not let the time run to waste. Shall we take up the consideration of the report of the Committee on Education? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.15

M. C. Wilcox: Has the report been printed? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.16

The Chair: Yes; it is found on page 207 of the BULLETIN. I understand that there has been no motion to adopt the report of the Committee on Education. What is your pleasure? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.17

R. D. Hottel: I move the adoption of the report. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.18

Wm. Woodford: I second the motion. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.19

C. C. Lewis: The Committee on Education desire to avoid any unnecessary discussion; and hence, after the remarks that were made yesterday, they revised their report, and it has been rewritten almost entirely. The revision appears as a part of the minutes in the BULLETIN. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.20

We have taken pains to inquire concerning the objections that were offered to the wording of the resolutions yesterday, and there were four criticisms offered: 1 In these resolutions it was not desired that there should be any reference to the word of the Lord; 2 the resolutions should contain no exhortation: 3 they should contain no argument: 4 and no setting forth, or enjoining upon us, of specific duties. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.21

With these criticisms in mind, we have tried to change the resolutions, or word them in harmony with these suggestions. We got along very well with reference to the first three points, thinking that the exhortation and the argument might more properly be introduced in the discussion of the resolutions: but we did not succeed quite so well in trying to eliminate all reference to duty from the resolutions. It seemed to us as if a very large part of that which has been done by this Conference, or which shall be done, pertains to our duty. Duty is that which ought to be done, and it does seem as if we had been deciding here from day to day, and shall continue to decide, what we ought to do. We have not succeeded, perhaps, in eliminating the element of duty from the resolutions, but having done the best we could we present them as printed here in the BULLETIN. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.22

Professor Lewis then read the recommendations as found on page 207 of the BULLETIN. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.23

The Chair: The matter is before you. Are there any remarks upon No. 1? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.24

At the request of the Chair, the Secretary read Recommendations 1, 2, and 3, the question being called, without any discussion, on each one as read. Recommendation No. 3 elicited some remarks, as follows:— GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.25

F. D. Starr: Does the word “or” in the third line indicate that if the Union Conference has such a superintendent the State Conference does not need one, or vice versa? GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.26

C. C. Lewis: It was designed that this would be optional. It was thought that perhaps some of the Union Conferences would want a church school superintendent. Some of the State Conferences would not need a special superintendent. It is designed to leave it so that either the Union or State Conferences could have one or not, just as they choose. GCB April 15, 1901, page 230.27

The question was then called on No. 3. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.1

The Secretary proceeded to read No. 4. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.2

F. M. Wilcox: It strikes me that no matter is of more importance than church schools, and it has seemed to me that there has been a tendency during the last few months for the interest of our people to lag upon the church schools. Perhaps this has come about from the fact that their minds have been directed so emphatically to the sale of “Christ’s Object Lessons.” But even though they give their force to that work, I do not believe they should relax their efforts in the matter of establishing church schools. We ask the people to leave their church organizations, and come into a separate organization; but it does not seem to me that we are out of Babylon, even though we have drawn ourselves apart from the church organizations, until we have taken our children out of the public schools, where State influences surround them as they do in the public schools. I believe an earnest effort ought to be put forth on the part of our people generally for the establishment of church schools. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.3

Luther Warren: Since coming to this Conference, people have been writing to me, and this is one of the special points that they are watching, and about which they desire information. I am sure that unless some special attention is given to this, many of our people will be disappointed as they read the reports from this Conference. Those who have had experience in trying to establish church schools have met many questions that some of us, at least, feel ought to be settled, so that we may act in harmony. I would not like to take the time now when so many are weary, to ask these questions, but will just give a sample of them: GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.4

Some of our laborers, ministers, and Conference officers are advising our people to leave their children in the public schools until some settled plan can be arranged for taking them out and establishing proper church schools. Others are urging that children be taken from the public schools at once. To some, it seems as if the messages coming to us demand that. I am sure that unless some information shall come from this Conference which will help us, many of our brethren will be disappointed. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.5

F. D. Starr: It says, “Those who are appointed on these school boards shall be persons who can efficiently represent the various lines of work taught in these schools.” Does that mean that such persons must be well educated themselves, and that they must thoroughly understand grammar and the other studies that will be taught in the school? GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.6

C. C. Lewis: Not necessarily. I don’t think the resolution had reference to particular subjects that are taught in the school, such as arithmetic, grammar, and geography; but broader lines of work. The recommendation is general in its nature, and not designed to be specific. It is simply to emphasize the importance of taking all the pains possible to select men for school boards who will do efficient work. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.7

E. E. Gardner: Does this refer to school boards in local churches, or simply to the larger central training-schools? GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.8

C. C. Lewis: I think it had reference especially to the boards of our larger schools; but the principle would apply to the boards of the smaller schools. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.9

R. C. Porter: I believe these church schools ought to be worked according to the recommendations we have before us for them, from the fact that unless we make advance moves along these lines, our smaller churches will be largely broken up by those who are interested in such schools, moving to a place where they are established. I find the query coming from all over our Conference: GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.10

“Are you going to have a church school established in our church? If not, can you tell me where they are going to have one?” I believe the people are ready for church schools all over our Conferences where it is at all practical. We are a little behind the times because we have not yet prepared teachers for these, so that we may respond favorably to these calls. Perhaps we are not prepared to meet the issue at once: but I am sure the people are ready for the schools. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.11

C. McReynolds: I would like to inquire if this is to be considered a final report of the committee? or is it simply a partial one? GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.12

C. C. Lewis: It is but a partial report of the committee. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.13

C. McReynolds: I am very anxious the Committee on Education may bring in some suggestions or recommendations concerning the best method of procuring church-school teachers. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.14

S. M. Butler: It seems to me this is too important a question to pass by lightly, and I am sure we can not give it full attention this afternoon: so I would move that we adjourn. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.15

Wm. Covert: I second the motion. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.16

G. A. Irwin: It has been moved and seconded that we now adjourn. I think perhaps it is wise to do so, as it is getting along toward the Sabbath. This educational question is one that so vitally affects the future life of our people, and the destiny of our children, that I should dislike to see it passed lightly over by this Conference. I think the people are looking to this Conference to speak quite definitely upon this subject. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.17

The motion to adjourn carried unanimously. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.18

After singing the Doxology, the benediction was pronounced by R. M. Kilgore. GCB April 15, 1901, page 231.19

G. A. IRWIN, Chairman.
L. A. HOOPES, Secretary.