CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIV, Issue 123, 1 June 1910, Page 5

CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE.

"A NATIONAL QUESTION."

THE MOTION CARRIED.,

[press association.] . (Received May 31, -6 p.m-V ! * ADELAIDE, May 31. The debate on the separation motion at -the Methodist Conference was continued to-day. . /The IW. Mr Rowe (Queensland) said that the question of separation was a national rather than an ecclesiastical question. He supported the motion because he believed that rjnwas vain to go against the national spirit of any country. The Rev . J. J. Lewis (New Zealand) strongly advocated separation. The movement, he said, was a democratic one; He did not say that the voice' of 'democracy was .always right; but he> believed that in this: instance the popular voice was the voice of God, because it would make for the advancement of His Kingdom. The Rev. W. W. Baumber (New Zealand) said that he was sorry to vote against his colleagues, but there was a-minority of thirty per cent, in the Dominion against separation. The first objection of the minority was that they did not wish to Tweak off the historic connection.

-Mr Shepherd (New Zealand) said that'there were growing up in. Australia and New Zealand two different national sentiments, and without decrying 'the Australian sentiment it was indifferent to New Zealand interests. The Dominion therefore desired national independence. There might be fears that with independence 38gw Zealand might irntatoduce rad/icdl .changes of policy. Such .fears were groundless.

The Rev. C. H. Laws, 8.A., president of the .New Zealand Conference, stated that since his boyhood he had been .an ardent separationist. New Zealauders, he said, did not take up their -attitude in any light-hearted fashicm^ It was the settled judgment of New Zealand.

The %v. C. H. Garland (New Zealand) «aM that !he thought torgariic union with Australia the best thing for New Zealand-; but he had finally decided to sink Kis personal views in deference tfco the unanimous wish of the C&ureh.

deference tfco the unanimous wish, of theCnujreh. Dr. Mortley., iformjerly of New Zealand, thought that the case for the Dominion lacked vital argument. The Rev.. W. J. Williams (Now Zealand) remarked1 itiiat Dr. Morley for twenty years whm in New Zea- - land advocated separation. It was :a gainful experience to findl on© who ad instructed *nd inspired New Zeajlanders on Hie tfjuestion now opposed io them. The motion w,as the voting feeing as follows:-— For the moti-oaa ... ..... ... 106 Against ... .... ... 13 Majority for separation ... 93 Tiie Rev. C. H. Laws., on being interviewed after the vote was taken, said that the Dominion delegates were highly satisfied with the result, and i at th© impartial hearing given, to the i speakers. The result would give the liveliest satisfaction to New Zealand Methodists.