General Conference Bulletin, vol. 5

GENERAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS. Twelfth Meeting

H. W. Cottrell

MONDAY, APRIL 6, 9:30 A. M.

H. W. Cottrell in the chair. After the opening hymn, the Conference was led in prayer by H. Shultz. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.1

The Chair: We will call up the report of the Committee on Institutions, found on page 67 of the “Bulletin.” Action on this report was deferred. The first recommendation had been read, an amendment was offered, and the question on the amendment is before us. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.2

W. T. Knox: I would say that in our committee we decided to accept the amendment as our original resolution. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.3

The Chair: Now this stands, by common consent, if there are no objections, as the original motion. The secretary will read the resolution as amended. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.4

The Secretary (reading): “All institutions created directly by the people, through either General Conference, Union Conference, State Conference, or mission field organization, to be owned by the people, through these or such other organizations as the people may elect.” GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.5

E. W. Webster: Would the adoption of these resolutions put more work upon conference committees and tie up their energies in running these organizations, and thus keep them out of field work or evangelical work more directly? GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.6

W. C. White: I think a careful study of the whole list of propositions indicates that it is not the design to make conference committees the managers of details of various enterprises, but that the conferences,—local, Union, or General, are to organize proper departments, proper agencies, on a business basis, to manage these enterprises. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.7

The question being called, the delegates voted to adopt the resolution. Resolutions 2 and 3 of the report were also adopted. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.8

Resolution 4 was then read by the secretary. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.9

A. J. Breed: Do I understand, if this passes, that such an institution as Walla Walla College, if it has any property on hand to dispose of, that it can not do it without the consent of the constituency, without the constituency’s being called together to authorize it? GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.10

W. T. Knox: I should like to say in answer to Brother Breed’s question that the thought was, that in case of institutions that are established on this basis, having institutional property used for the operation of the enterprise, there should be no alienation of the institutional plant without the consent of the constituency or electors. The institution might have other property, the school might have a timber claim given to it to be used in building up that work, or a sanitarium might have a piece of real estate given to it to be used for building it up. We do not consider it as being applicable in this case; but property that was especially designed for institutional purposes, for the operating of the business—that was not to be sold or in any way alienated without the consent of the constituency. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.11

Watson Ziegler: If I understand this question rightly, this sets forth from the very beginning that property that is created by the people is in the disposition of the people; but the specific gift is at the disposition of those who have charge of the work to carry the donor’s purpose into effect. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.12

W. C. White: It seems to me that the intention of the resolution is that there shall be no disposal of the institutions. The main plant, the thing itself, that is what is aimed at; not that they shall not buy or sell land, receive legacies and dispose of them, or transact the business that belongs to the department; but this is so worded that it could be easily construed as interfering with the ordinary business of the institution. It says “institutional property.” GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.13

A. J. Breed: That must mean the property owned by the institution, does it not? GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.14

W. T. Knox: I sought to make plain, Brother Chairman, in my answer, that it was designed to apply to the plant itself, and not to property that was given to it for its upbuilding. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.15

W. C. White: Why not say plants instead of property? GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.16

G. B. Thompson: Would not the word “institutions,” instead of institutional property,” bridge the difficulty? GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.17

David Paulson: It must be plain to all that it is the duty of the constituency to instruct the trustees, and they ought to be perfectly competent to do it. If we pass this recommendation, it will be the means of putting into the hands of some narrow-minded person a weapon, so that when the smallest thing is done, as Brother Breed spoke about, something anybody would know ought to be done, he could oppose it as out of harmony with the decision of the Conference. Brother Knox has spoken fully on what it means, but that explanation is not going along with this recommendation, as I understand it. We understand it here, but when we want to sell a little corner lot, in order to do something, some one comes along and says, “Was it not passed at the General Conference that the board was not to do anything without calling together the constituents?” We can not sell the smallest thing; there is no limitation. It seems to me if we want to put ourselves on such a record, to make such a sweeping provision as that to limit the action of a board, there is no need of having any. If the constituents can not keep the board straight, they ought to come together and elect a new one. It seems to me it is all out of place. I am sure that if we pass this sweeping motion here, it will help nobody, but will put an instrument in the hands of somebody to do some mischief with. I want to put myself on record, because I can not see in it any wise features. GCB April 7, 1903, page 97.18

C. Santee: I notice in this writing it says, “without a vote of the constituents authorizing the same.” It does not matter what that institution is, the constituency, at their annual meeting, or at some time, may authorize the board to buy and sell to a certain extent. Thus it has worked in conferences where I was connected. It seems to me that unless a board has been authorized to transact certain business, they ought not to do it. And if they have been authorized by the Conference or by the delegates present to carry on certain business during the year, they have the privilege of doing so, and it is expected they will do it during the year; so it seems to me that is certainly clear and the very thing we want to carry out. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.1

L. R. Conradi: Brother Knox gave the committee’s explanation of the matter, as it was understood, and I think by common consent we have agreed to put in the words, “no disposal or transfer of institutions.” GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.2

The Chair: If there is no member in the house who objects to the committee’s making this change, it will be so accepted. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.3

A. T. Robinson inquired if this section would have any bearing on the matter of handling the estate of the Avondale school, one portion of which is for sale, and the other portion not to be sold without direct vote of the people. The resolution, as changed, specifies only institutions. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.4

The chairman explained that this action could not, he thought, affect any corporate bodies now in existence, or properties controlled by them. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.5

E. R. Palmer: It seems to me that this change that is proposed in the wording of the resolution might open the way for the doing of that which the resolution is designed to prevent. As it was, it provided that property shall not be sold, except upon the vote of the electors. Therefore, if the constituents or the electors vote that the board is to have power to dispose of any properties or any portions of the properties, the board can do that from time to time. But the electors protect themselves against the original property, or any parts of the original property, being sold by the board without the consent of those who created the institution. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.6

W. C. White: I would second Brother Conradi’s amendment. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.7

N. W. Allee: I have no question in my mind about the motive or intent of this resolution. But it seems to me that we can not decide these things here, but must govern these institutions in the states where they are located, and under the laws by which they are to be incorporated and governed. We can outline policies in a general way, but I think we will have to be careful, or we shall place around our brethren a kind of moral obligation that will cripple them in their work. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.8

Watson Ziegler: It is a fact that in almost every state there are civil laws that prescribe the rights and authority of corporate boards. The rights of a corporate board, as conferred upon them by statute, give them the privilege of selling property. But it is a fact that even in temporal business corporations there are by-laws that prescribe the rights of stockholders and the limitations of trustees. I believe that, in passing this, we are passing that which will make the people see that they have a right to express themselves on these questions. It is the moral obligation that we want, so that the confidence of this people may be just as far-reaching as our message. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.9

An amendment to the amended resolution was discussed and failed to pass. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.10

The question being called on the motion as amended, it prevailed. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.11

Resolution No. 5 was then read, the question called for, and it was carried unanimously. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.12

Resolution No. 6 was then read, and passed. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.13

Resolution 7 was read. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.14

A. J. Breed: May I ask a question again? Our college at Walla Walla is owned by several conferences. How will this affect that? GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.15

W. T. Knox: If I remember correctly, in the creating of that incorporation it was intended that it should be a corporation created by the Pacific Union Conference. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.16

W. C. White: I wish to make an amendment so that this shall read: “That each line of institutional work shall be regarded as a department of conference work, and, where possible, that they be represented on the conference committee.” There are states already where we have so many institutions that this proposition would swamp the committee. It is my conviction that the real purpose of the framers of this resolution was in harmony with my proposition, that each line of work be represented, rather that each individual institution be represented. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.17

G. B. Thompson: I second that amendment. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.18

S. H. Lane: I have always strenuously opposed the idea that any man shall occupy a position because, perchance, he occupies another. I believe that every man should occupy that position for which he is best fitted. I believe, and fully believe, and hope that the time shall come, and that speedily, when every man shall be elected to any and every office because he has capabilities of making that office a success, and not because he happens to hold some other position. I think the principle is wrong. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.19

C. H. Bliss: It says, “and where possible.” Now, if there were four lines of special conference work, and each one demanded a position upon the committee, then the committee would be composed of these four special lines of work, leaving only one to represent the conference organization. It seems to me this should be provided against. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.20

Questions were asked as to the working out of the amended resolution. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.21

W. C. White: I can most readily answer by illustrating how we try to work out this principle in this California Conference. We regard church-school work as one of the most important branches of institutional work, and the superintendent of our church-school work is made a member of our, conference committee. We have in this conference a medical institution at St. Helena, another at Eureka, another at Sacramento, another at San Francisco, and there will be many more by the time we meet in General Conference again. It would be impossible, as well as undesirable, to have representatives from each of these institutions on the conference committee, but from the medical missionary work in California we are able to select a man who understands the medical work, who understands evangelical work also, whose interests are for the evangelization of the world, and whose efforts are to make the medical institutions evangelizing agencies; and such a man on our conference committee is of great value, and of great value to the institutional work. So also with our college work. GCB April 7, 1903, page 98.22

R. R. Kennedy: I would not like to have a resolution passed that would in any way hamper the selection of a conference committee. Men may be at the head of these different lines of work who are qualified to act their part nobly and well at the head of institutions or lines of work, but they may not be acquainted with the conference work, and there may be so many of them that it will not be practicable to have them all in the conference committee. I would like to see the selection of the conference committee left free and open, and then select as the case may seem to demand. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.1

The question as amended was called for. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.2

The Secretary (reading): “That each great line of institutional work be regarded as a department of conference work, and, as far as possible, be represented on the conference committee.” GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.3

The resolution was adopted. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.4

Resolution 8 was called for. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.5

The Secretary (reading): “That an advisory committee of three be appointed by this Conference for the study of institutions, and to render such assistance in the carrying out of these recommendations as may lie in their power.” GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.6

The Chair: It is open for remarks. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.7

C. W. Flaiz: What is meant? It simply says that this committee is to be selected for the purpose of studying these institutions. Nothing is said as to the object of the study. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.8

W. T. Knox: I would say, in response to that, there is a thought that, while we could not, by these recommendations, affect any institutions that had already been established, as the right of adopting this rested with their constituency, whatever that might be, and yet still there might be some of these that were already established that would like to bring about such changes as would cause them to conform to the general idea of these recommendations. Therefore this recommendation was made, that a committee be appointed to study the conditions in any such institutions, and assist them in bringing such changes about. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.9

C. W. Flaiz: I would like to move an amendment to No. 8: “That an advisory committee of three be appointed by this Conference for the study of institutions, with the view to bringing about such changes in the existing institutions as will bring them to conform with the foregoing recommendations.” That is the thought I have in mind. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.10

E. G. Olsen: I second that. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.11

W. T. Knox was asked to repeat his explanation as to the intent of the original resolution, and did so. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.12

L. R. Conradi: There is another point mentioned in committee, and that was that in the case new institutions should be started, this committee would be able to look into the matter, and see that the new institution is started on this very basis. If this is followed out, there are a good many legal matters connected with the matter, and it takes men of experience to advise and see that the new institutions are started on the right basis from the very beginning. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.13

W. C. White: I desire to call attention to the statements of the chairman of the committee, that it was not the design of this report to plow into existing institutions, but it was intended principally to assist in the shaping of the future work. To make the resolution in harmony with this, I would like to propose this amendment, in the third line, instead of reading, “for the study of institutions,” I would propose that it should read, “for the study of institutional organizations.” Then the whole resolution will be in harmony with the statements of the chairman of our committee, that this report is designed to shape up our future work. And it is my conviction that we shall benefit existing institutions more quickly, more peacefully, more successfully, by taking this course, than by taking the course intimated by the amendment proposed by my brother at the right. I will offer it as an amendment to the amendment. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.14

E. T. Russell: I second the motion. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.15

W. C. White: It is my conviction, brethren, that if we have a good committee studying into the legal status of this matter and how to adjust relations, and an advisory committee for all the new work that is formed, the success of that will be the best possible argument to such institutions as Healdsburg College, and the Pacific Press, and other stock-company institutions, to put their work on a similar basis; and whatever movement they made would come much better from the stockholders than to appear to come from the General Conference. That is the reason I favor this amendment to the amendment. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.16

Question was called on the amendment to the amendment and carried, as also the resolution as amended. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.17

E. J. Waggoner: I wanted to make a few remarks on the resolutions as a whole the other day, but it seemed as though, according to the ruling, it would not be directly to the point. Even now I would keep still, only I should wish I had said something. There has just been one line that has seemed to run through my mind in all of this; it has seemed as though one thing was paramount, and that has been like the old, northern farmer who could hear in the clatter of his horses’ hoofs over the ground nothing but “property, property, property.” It has seemed as though the word “property,” and “property,” has been the main thing, as though that were our work,—consideration of property,—and it seems to me it would be too bad to allow the impression to go out, to be carried away from here, to go to other parts of the field, to be read, as though the great burden of this work were the management of property. I have not had enough knowledge of the matter to be able to vote on it all either way; but it seems to me as if, if this thing should get out as it is, the sentiment would be carried and perpetuated, which is already too strong, that our work consists in considering institutions and the management of property. I do not believe the brethren think so; but it seems as though when we get together, just the legislation about institutions is the principal thing. I am quite strongly impressed that there is a good deal of truth in the statement by Buckle that no legislator ever passed any legislation that was any benefit to the people, except in repealing previous bad legislation; and all the good legislators have done has been to repeal bad legislation. Now, there has been legislation on these subjects for years and years, and yet things have gone on, and there has been trouble, and I apprehend that in about two years from now—if not two years, four years from now—this same thing will be up, and some other amendments will have to be made to this. GCB April 7, 1903, page 99.18

Is there not something altogether more important than money and institutions?—It is men, and ability to work. I think it will be admitted that all this talk about the resolutions is to preclude the possibility of any man or men forsaking the truth and carrying off institutions. It is to safeguard institutions. Now, either a man is in danger of going off and carrying something with him, or else he is not. If he is in danger, then the thing to do is not to legislate concerning the things, but to go to him and try to straighten him out. The value of a man himself has been so far lost sight of that we fear that if he should go off and his soul be lost—will he carry some property with him? Now, it seems to me that there is a vital thing to be considered, that can not be reached by legislation, by resolution, or amendment. That is the whole thing. I know this is not to the point, for as I have listened to the discussion I have not had any interest to take part in it, because I do not believe that the passing of this report will make any real difference with the conduct of an institution. It depends entirely upon the men who have to do with these things; and we may pass all these, and the only effect it will really have on them will be to be used at some time to cripple somebody in his work; otherwise. I do not think it will have any effect. But now that this thing is passed. I do hope we can come as a Conference, either at this time or at all future times. to the consideration of questions which pertains really to the work, not legislating on theological theorems, for that can not be done, but the consideration of the wants of the field, the presentation of the progress in various parts of the field, and what ought to be done, rather than questions of dollars and cents. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.1

IT MEANS MORE THAN PROPERTY GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.2

L. R. Conradi: I would certainly say, as a member of that committee, that when we considered the matter from the real practical point of view, we found that in considering this thing it really meant something for the work of God, a very much larger matter than mere legislation about property. I believe, brethren, it is a very important thing that our institutions stand on the right basis, so that there may be union in the cause of God; and I believe the union of the cause by having the institutions on the right basis helps the gospel work in all the world; and our committees pray for that very purpose, not for a committee of inquisition, sitting on any man, but in order that all these difficulties may be stopped, and the work of saving souls be carried on. I admit that if the men are not right, all legislation will not help anything; but I say right men want correct principles; they desire correct principles to guide them, and may God help us that we may have those correct principles. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.3

W. C. White: I wish to express a most emphatic and hearty amen to what Brother Conradi has said. To me this means ten times, one hundred times more than property. This to me means reorganization. We all know, brethren, that reorganization, reforms, efforts to reorganize conferences and churches, will not count, unless the reorganization goes on in the heart; but the reorganization of the conference and the reorganization of the heart must go on together. And I want to say this: It is my conviction, brethren, that it is both the intention of those who act upon this, and that the result will be, not to make somebody trouble, but to prevent trouble. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.4

R. C. Porter: I am in perfect harmony with everything that Brother Conradi has mentioned: but I wish to express, also, my sentiment as being in perfect accord with the suggestion that men should be regarded of more importance than property in connection with the third angel’s message. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.5

The resolution, as amended, was called for. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.6

The Secretary (reading): “That an advisory committee of three be appointed by this Conference for the study of institutional organization, and to render such assistance in the carrying out of these recommendations as may lie in their power.” GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.7

The motion was put and carried. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.8

The Chair: The motion prevails, and this adopts this report. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.9

W. A. McCutchen desired to have the memorial from the Southwestern Union Conference come up for action, and by vote it was decided that all memorials should be referred, without special order, to the Committee on Plans. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.10

The Chair: I will now request the secretary of the Committee on Plans to present a further partial report. GCB April 7, 1903, page 100.11