SCOTTISH CHURCH DIBPUTE.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 13488, 31 July 1907, Page 2

SCOTTISH CHURCH DIBPUTE.

THE COMMISSION'S REPORT. "WEE FREES" LAVISHLY TREATED. y United Press Association. — By ElectrU Telegraph. — Copyright. (Received July 31, 8.15 a.m.) LONDON, July 30. The Commission appointed to inquire into the Scottish? Chairclr's dispute- e^b mated the United Ji'ree Church fuads^V £1.,354,720, and allotted £310,000 1| the "Wee Frees,'/ .besides, what- was aVarded before. It is estimated that the United Frees lost altogether half a million sterling. ' The opinion is expressed in Scotland that the Commissioners have been lavishly generous to the "Wee Frees." (To understand the^historic dispute between the United Church and the "Wee, Frees!' ,it. is necessary to go bad* to 1863. In that year* on the invitation of the United Presbyterian' Church, the Free Church appointed a committee to consider if the union pf the two churches could l*e accomplished. A majority of the Free Church was found to favour union, but, owing to 1 the determined' opposition of the party led by Dr. Begg, the project had to be abandoned iri 1873.' In "1804', .on^ .the initiative of the United " Presljy^erjan Church, a fresK movement was made for union. In 1900 -the United Presbyterian Synod agreed unanimously to union and the Free Church agreed by a major-, ity of 557 in a house of 615^ members. The union, by which the United Free rChurcit ol Scotland was. formed, took place in Edinburgh on October 31st,^ 1900. The minority Of the Free Church who refused -to -enter -into the Unitrf| Free Church claimed to represent xflj original Free Church, and appealed fb the law to declare to that effect and to assign to' it the property vested in the Free Church. This diminutive remnant was dubbed the "Wee Frees.'-' In tha Scottish) Courts %l| the judges found in ' favour of 7 the. United Free Church. In ! the House of Lof3s t however, after two hearings, the, final judgment, was given by 5 to 2 in ; favour of the "Wee 1 Frees." The effesot of f this detsisiofl was that the whole f of the fund» and heritable property of the Free- Church was vested in the "wee" remnant. As the "Wee frees" were clearly unable to occupy all the churches or atlminister the funds, a Royal Commission was appointed in 1904 to inquire into the matter. Following on the ConYmission's report an Act of Parliament was passed ip 1905 under which the 'Executive Committee, whose report is given in the above cable, was set up to allocate -the pro- , perty, etc., between the two churches.)