South Congregational Church history and catalogue, 1852–1865 · scan page 145

Searchable source text

THE   EX-PARTE    COUNCIL.  135
almost  entirely  by  tlie  contributions  of  o?ie  man,  his  wishes
would  have  paramount  weight,  and  the  self-governing  power
of  the  Church  be  virtually  abrogated.
It  is  said  that  "  those  of  the  petitioners  who  had  not  been
dismissed,  had  free  access  to  the  records."  In  reply  to  this,
one  of  the  petitioners  who  has  not  been  dismissed,  affirms
that  he  applied  for  an  inspection  of  the  records  and  was
denied  by  the  Clerk.
One  of  the  petitioners  is  informed  for  the  Jirst  time  by
this  document,  that  censure  has  been  passed  upon  him  by
the  Church  ;  which  it  is  understood  was  voted  at  the  close
of  the  prayer  meeting  Dec.  2^th,  1863,  (barely  in  time  to
be  used  in  the  reply  of  the  Committee  of  the  Church,)  and
without  any  summons  to  the  accused,  who  was  condemned
without  a  hearing.  Considering  that  this  brother  is  one  of
those  who  received  letters  of  dismission  and  over  whom
this  Church  has  declared  itself  to  have  no  control,  it  must
be  acknowledged  that  their  action  in  the  case  vindicates  the
position  which  they  claim  for  themselves,  of  being  an  ''Inde-
pendent Congregational  Cliurck'''
This  brother  would  state  that  the  fact  which  he  noted  in
the  records,  was  derived  from  the  public  declarations  of  a
majority  of  the  brethren  in  the  meeting,  both  as  it  respected
their  opinion,  and  their  votes;  and  it  being  the  duty  of  the
Clerk  to  note  all  matters  of  interest  to  the  Church,  this  fact
was  duly  recorded.
In  relation  to  one  of  the  special  grievances  of  the  peti-
tioners, the  deprivation  of  their  rights  by  the  Committee, —
the  latter  justify  their  action  in  refusing  to  call  a  Church
meeting  upon  the  request  of  a  sufficient  number  of  members,
by  the  assertion,  that  the  subject  of  ]Mr.  Carroll's  ministra-
tions over  the  Church  had  been  sufficiently  discussed  at  a
recent  Church  meeting,  and  "the  annual  meeting  must  be
held  in  the  ensuing  montli  of  November,'"  when  the  whole
matter  could  be  rediscussed  and  redecided.  In  reply  the
petitioners  would  state  that  Rev.  Mr.  Carroll  is  settled  for
an  indefinite  period,  and  in  order  to  dismiss  him  it  is  required
that  four  months  notice  be  given,  and  this  was  their  object
in  requesting  the  meeting.  It  was  nearly  four  months
before  the  "annual  meeting"  to  which  they  refer,  would  be
held.     It  is  true  that  the  subject  had  been  discussed  at  a

Cite this page

Silent Grounds Collective, Church Burial & Death Records, CH-P004-0145. South Congregational Church history and catalogue, 1852–1865, printed page not verified, PDF page 145. Hallock, Gerard, 1800-1866; digitized copy contributed by University of California Libraries https://archive.org/details/historyofsouthco00hall/page/n149/mode/1up Accessed September 8, 2026.

Historic U.S. publication before 1931; public-domain assessment based on publication date. Internet Archive does not necessarily provide an explicit license. Preserve publication and digitizing credits.