AN ADJECTIVE RESENTED

Evening Star, Issue 19186, 1 March 1926, Page 6

AN ADJECTIVE RESENTED

DEBATE HOT " ACRIMONIOUS " METHODIST CONFERENCE REPORTS At this morning’s session of the New Zealand Methodist Conference complaints were made regarding tho newspaper reports of the proceedings. Mr H. P. Mourant objected to a statement in the morning paper that the debate on whether the lay vicepresident should be given a part in the ordination service was an ‘acnmoiuous )} ono. Thn.t statement, he said, might have been broadcasted by the Press Association. lie generally speaking, well satisfied with the length and accuracy of tho reports; but this particular report was disastrous. It spoke also of a clash between ministers and laymen. The President (the Rev. P. H. Knight): Not only disastrous, but absolutely untrue! The Rev. W. Brarnwell Scott (Press secretary) said he thought the word acrimonious should not have been used, tie was not there, however, to supervise sheet by sheet of what the reporters wrote, and if Mr Mourant thought he could do any better ho was welcome to the job. Mr J. A. Flesher (Christchurch) said there were such men as sub-editors. No matter how a report was written, it might appear differently when it got actually into print. Tho Rev. W. Woods: It is our own fault entirely. Wo should have gone into committee. It should bo a lesson to us in the future. The Rev. TV. B. Scott: We will have no reporters at all then. Tho Rev. S. Lawry said ho objected to the adjective used in the report. It was not an acrimonious debate. Otherwise the reports were good.