METHODIST UNION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVII, Issue 11225, 24 March 1897, Page 6

METHODIST UNION.

AN INTERESTING CASE [Per Press Association.]

AUCKLAND, March 23

At the Supreme Court to-day a case came before his Honor Mr Justice Conolly which is of considerable interest to adherents of the Wesleyan religion throughout Now Zealand and uhuroh-poople generally. A large number of Wesleyan ministers were present in Court,' and watched tho proceedings closely. The plaintiff by statute is William Baumber, president for the time being of the New Zealand Conference of the Australasian Wesleyan Methodist Church, and tho defendants William Colo, Joseph Dixon, Edward Charles Frost and Samuel Parker. Messrs C. E. Button and 0. F. Buddie appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Theo Cooper (instructed by Messrs Hesketh and Richmond) for the defendants. Mr Buddie opened the ease and read the statement of claim and defence. The plaintiff is the president of the Wesleyan Conference, and the action is brought under tho Wesleyan Methodist Church Property Trust Act, 1887, Further Amendment Act, 1396, and arises out of the recent union in New Zealand of the United Methodist Free Church with the Wesleyan Methodist Church. It is for the purpose of determining the ownership of Mount Eden Free Methodist Church. Tho plaintiff claims that this land and church were tho property of the denomination known as United Methodist Free Churches, and consequently that under Section 3 of the Act of 1896 it became vested in the Wesleyan Methodist body. Section 12 of the Act of 1896 Reserves this property from the operation of Section 3, unless the Court shall declare that the property was held in trust for the United Methodist Free Churches. Defendants arc trustees of the laud, and they defend the action on the ground that the property belongs to the congregation of Mount Eden, and was never counectional property. The Mount Eden congregation refused'to join tho Union, and claim that they have a right to retain possession of their church and property. The questions to be determined by the Court aro whether tho property belongs to the congregation worshipping there or to the denomination, Mr Button stated the case at length, and said that it involved many important points. However, ho believed that after the facts had been put before his Honor it would resolve itself into a question of the construction of the statute passed last year.