j^umi
B
Persons who wish, to do simple justice to all the parties en¬
gaged in. this unpleasant controversy must keep in their minds
t.tio true state of the case, out of which all the trouble to the
Ohurch, to me, and to the Institution with which I am connected,
has been manufactured.
The Nashville Female Academy was founded more than forty
years ago, by fifty gentlemen, mainly for the education of their
own daughters. It is managed by seven of their number, as
Trustees, from whom I receive my authority. It is specially
pledged to give no influence to one denomination more than to
all others. A majority of the Trustees are in favor of dancing,
as taught and practiced here, and some of them approve of it
even as a fashionable amusement. No Trustee, 110 former
President, ever thought of denying to any patron the privilege
of having his daughter taught dancing somewhere.
The order of the Board of Trustees under which it has been
conducted from the first, forbids our pupils attending the Thea¬
tre, Balls, Parties, &c., but provides that they may attend
Dancing Schools on Saturday. This order had the sanction of
Jos. T. Elliston, President, and other leading Methodists in this
city. Under this order, my predecessors in the Boarding House
and Presidency of the Academy, allowed pupils to go or to be
token to the public Dancing-Schools of the city. My predeces¬
sors may have approved or disapproved of this dancing—I do
not know ; nor is this material, since this is a question of facts
and not opinions.
When I came into power, I, for two years, followed the same
plan, but found the presence with us of ten or twenty young
ladies, going out into the city, avowedly to prepare for fashiona¬
ble life—under circumstances beyond my control—to constitute
an insuperable obst acle between my pupils and the social, reii
gious and literary standard which I had erected. Wishing to
give no offence, I procured rooms near us, and for a while tried
that plan with no better success. I then determined to bring
the dancing under my own eye, as a recreation—to surround it
by such moral and religious influences as might give me the
assurance it would not be used for vain and foolish purposes.
This was my own act; for it I only am responsible. The change
of the dancing from the city, where it was taught as a fashiona¬
ble accomplishment, to the Academy, where it is allowed only
as a recreation, covers the full extent of my offending. I do
not now seek, I never have sought to avoid the results of this
act, either as a minister of the Gospel, or as a schoolmaster.
At any time, if disposed to let his readers know the whole
truth about this dancing, the Rev. J. B. McFerrin could have
made credit for the Methodist Church, out of all the facts, and
still have left open, for brotherly discussion, any difference of
opinion that may exist on points connected therewith. Not
one pupil takes dancing lessons, when given in one of my reci¬
tation rooms, under religious influences for) hiding her to asso¬
ciate the exercise with future display, where five woul'? take, if
• Ipvwprl t,f> go to. th~3_-cifv <1 n.iioixig aeliruihs, i'et-1 iram. JeKtrninl-
and on purpose to prepare themselves for balls, parties, &c.
Even an extreme bigot—ready to improve God's Word—by
including dancing with the "works of the flesh," adultery, for¬
nication, &c., cannot resist such truth as the above; and many
such can be brought in favor of the change from the city to the
Academy, of the dancing.
It does not become me perhaps to enter any defence of the
moral and religious character of the Boarding House of the N.
F. Academy. But that the world may know that I do not enter¬
tain the thought of changing a hair's-breadth any practice of
this school, in view of the circumstances under which I am
placed, I will say: Would to God that the discipline of this
house were in every family in Nashville,—in every Methodist
family in the South! Bigotry is against me, but God is cer¬
tainly with me. His Spirit dwells under my roof, and I
know, and all the teachers associated with me, know, that it
is almost impossible for a child to grow up in our school and
not become a Christian woman. I do not say but that this
might have been done without the dancing, but the dancing is
an appendage I was compelled to have in some form, and I have
it in such a form, that it is not in the way of the attainment of
the great social and religious ends to which I and all my teach¬
ers daily look, in our arduous but often thankless work.
Come and see us—you may not change your views about
dancing, but you can judge as to whether the above is an empty
boast or a settled truth, notwithstanding the dancing.
The Methodist Church is no more responsible for the dancing
of the pupils of the Academy than it is for the practices of the
Nashville University, or of any other institution not under our
control as a Church.
The Editor of the Advocate, and his correspondents, have so
long been teaching the contrary, bysuppressing the truth, that
many good and honest people have come to think the same.
I hope it is not too late to correct this great error which has
done me so much injustice,- and brought disgrace upon our
Holy religion.
Shortly after the change of the dancing from the city to the
Academy, Dr. McFerrin, in a brief editorial, announced the fact
and urged the religious public not to patronize the Academy.
Mark it, he did this, without ever opening his lips to me on the
subject. Shortly after this, at an accidental interview with him,
the subject was unpleasantly discussed between us, and from,
that time to this, there has been no cordiality, on my part, cer¬
tainly, towards him. From that time to this, now in editorials,
more frequently in communications, my name has been used,
the Academy referred to, to be condemned for the dancing, until
during the past summer, the letters of Rev. S. D. Baldwin, en¬
dorsed by the editor, passed beyond common decency in treat¬
ment of this question. To show their spirit, I quote from
the Rev. S. D. Baldwin's letter, referring to my excellent friend,
Rev. J. 0. Church, of Columbia: "lie is building a large
chapel, and it is not to be a dance-house. What pious person
would send a child to a dance-house? Out with your dance-
houses for young ladies ! Let New Orleans and New York keep
such things to themselves," alluding, as this community univer¬
sally believed, to our new Chapel at the Academy. Thus asso¬
ciating the pupils of the Academy with the prostitutes of New
Orleans and New York.
These ministers may remain acceptable to the pupils and
patrons of the Academy, after .sing such language as the above,
but self-respect will prompt rob to have as little as possible to
do with them in all the rela'ions of life. It does not abate
their personal offence in the l^st to admit their denial of allud¬
ing to the Academy, for the m nd and heart must be fearfully
unbalanced before using such language in regard to any female
school.
Now, the effect of this cours- has been to greatly annoy me
in my feelings, has damaged n y influence and reputation as a
Minister, and has tended greyly to the injury of the Institu¬
tion over which T preside. Tils dancing has not rendered me
unacceptable as a minister, tc'. ^ny Methodist Congregation in
Nashville, or its vicinity ; to i}> Presbyterian or Baptist Con¬
gregation. There never was my demand in Nashville for all
this trouble. My honest bret .-ren of the Quarterly Meeting
Conference alone plead the < mand from abroad, to justify
their proceedings. The coo ;e of the Advocate alone has
created- This demand from a'of.urd, where all the facts are not
known.
Now, the editor of the Advoici'te has the same right to attack
Evans & Co., \ D. Morgan &JCo., it. C. McNairy & Co., for
any practice vhh them of wh'ch he does not approve, as he
had to atta. ; me. He lias a right to condemn dancing as
much as he pleases, but he ha no right to use my name, nor
to refer to the Academy, for ne 'tier the Academy, as an Insti¬
tution. nor myself personally, an, in any sense, be held ac¬
countable to him. Every such' eferenee was a violation of my
rights as a citizen of Tennessee.
But for us, brethren, under he same discipline, to estimate
the injustice 'one me by my t thren, in ih.. u juisaetion, we
must take into the account this declaration. You all know
the law of the Bible and the ride of our discipline in regard to
an offending brother. I have never been reprehended by the
preacher in charge in regard to his dancing. I never received
from Presiding Elder Or' Preach r in charge the slightest inti¬
mation of the design to make'Ttue dancing here a cause ol
action against me,'until the p-tsent proceedings v. ere deter¬
mined upon, a short time befor. the Fourth Quarterly Meeting
Conference, last September.
The first reliable information 1 had of the intention to renew
the complaint., I found in the inlumns of the Nashville Advo¬
cate—Is this Methodism?
Preachers in charge of MctRadree Church for the last ten
years, are : Reverends E. C. Si,. ''Bit. A. S. Riggs, L. C. Bryan,
J. Cross, E. Wards-worth. A. > • Erwin.
Presiding Elders .-—Reverent?: John W. Hanner, Moody,
A. F. Drieskell, A. L. P. Gin W. D. F. Saw rib.
Not one of you cm- remonsir, ;H with me about this dancing.
In busty and eusuA ,'ucvxld - >m..- of you may have express¬
ed your ib.wpprobttiou, but is all. All of you having
In view of the publicity given- to it by the " Advocate," and
the fact that it has been city talk. I have a right to suppose you
all knew of the dancing. Not fine of you, including Rev. A.
S. Riggs, ever remonstrated with me. Here is Bigotry in
perfection, trampling upon the IjVord of God, and disregarding
one of the plainest rules of ouij excellent Book of Discipline.
If this be a grave matter, I htve one still more grave in its
personal application, both to R'ev. A. S. Riggs, and Rev. J. B.
McFerrin, and as It belongs to this matter of remonstrance, I
give it here.
At the last Quarterly Meeting Conference for 1856, Bro. J. T.
Elliston made complaint to the Conference about this dancing,
and sundry other little personal matters between him and my¬
self. In regard to the dancing, I, as ever, answered plainly
and fully to my brethren. I was immediately called away
on business, and did not return to that session of the Con¬
ference. The Conference as 1 learned for the first time, ten
months afterwards, passed a resolution disapproving of the
dancing. They immediatelya afterwards passed my character.
Brother Erwin was Preacher!in charge. I was present at
the First, Second and Third Quarterly Meeting Conferences
following, at each of which flev. A. S. Riggs answered no
complaints, with as full a knowledge of the dancing as he has
now. When the resolution was referred to at my late trial, (as
they call it) by Brother Riggs, Rev. John Rains assured Bro¬
ther Riggs that it was not the intention of the Conference to
censure me, but only to disabuse the Church of any con¬
nection with the dancing, which, however, was made plain
enough by the passing of my character. In addition to all
this, I had no knowledge of the resolution until after the pre¬
sent proceedings were determined upon. Now, think of the
use made of that resolution to justify these proceedings—the
suppression of every fact and explanation needful to a right
understanding of it.
I must then repeat I havej never been remonstrated with
about this dancing. A proper and suitable remonstrance, if it
had produced no other effect) would certainly have prevented
any renewal of my connection with the Academy.
These brethren know their own reason for not remonstrating
and bringing me to trial. I always supposed they agreed with
me, that this dancing in the Academy is not the business of
the Church, as most certainly it is not. All that could be said
involving the Church is, that' a Methodist Minister has done
the best that could be done under the circumstances. Truth,
Religion, Methodism, would have said so; but the Editor of the
Advocate, and his correspondents, as before remarked, have
been saying the contrary, until many good and honest people
have come to believe that the Church is responsible for the
practices of this Institution, over whicb it has no control. And
I am placed by them in the Situation that I must be expelled
from the Church, or make the Academy a Methodist school,
else all Methodist patrons will be driven from it.
He boasts that he has never patronized it. If it is his glory
not to have patronized the Academy, it is certainly the shame
of those who do. Are Methodist preachers willing to be spot¬
ted among their brethren, for choosing their school? Are all
my Methodist patrons about to withdraw ? That is what Dr.
McFerrin has urged in his paper, and that is the tendency of
all these proceedings.
I am deeply interested in this matter. Will the Methodist
Church occupy the ground to which Dr. McFerrin urges them ?
I think not. I do not think the Methodist Church will ever
approve of dancing—I should oppose such an approval by all
means in my power. But I do not think the Methodist Church
will ever concern itself about dancing where it has no right to
interfere, and certainly it has no right to interfere with the
practices of this Institution. My action will hear scrutiny, if
I can ever clear up the fog of McFerrinism through which I
have too long suffered the world to look at it. The brethren of
the Quarterly Meeting Conference never voted on the Teal
case of dancing in the Nashville Female Academy. 1 unwisely
accepted of the assumed case proposed by Rev. A. S. Riggs,
leaving the Academy out of the question.
The Records of the Conference and the recollection of breth¬
ren will clearly prove this, though I am now pained to say that
Rev. A. S. Riggs seeks still to bring the action back to the
Academy, by calling the boarding house my private family.
Whatever was his personal understanding, he does know it. was
not mine, neither was it, at the time, the understanding of any
member of the Conference, even of those who are led in all their
thoughts by him.
Seeing, at the first Quarterley Meeting Conference of this
year, that the minds of the members of the Conference were
confused upon the subject, I asked them more clearly to define
the matter to go before the Bishops, which they refused to do,
not that they differed with me in the definition, but because
they thought it unnecessary. I then proposed to simplify
the matter, and settle it now, by presenting a plain ana
proven statement of all the facts in regard to the dancing,
promising to abide their decision—all in vain. I then pro¬
posed to leave the whole matter to three brethren, prom¬
ising to abide their decision—all in vain. I urged them to
settle the question in view of the coming session of General
Conference, calling their minds to the obvious truth, that it
would be a disgrace to us as a Church to have such a question
open for discussion at every table in the city where preachers
might be entertained—-in vain, bigotry still ruled to scat¬
ter firebrands, arrows and death, in our midst, by mingling
with a strife that never belonged to it. There is an honest
difference upon some points involved in this question, between
some of my brethren and myself. We sought to refer the points
to our Bishops. The Rev. A. S. Riggs is alone responsible for
the unworthy quibble by which he thwarts us in our purposes,
and keeps up the agitation-—when he seeks to bring the matter
back again to the Academy, by calling the boarding house my
private family. Thus rendering it necessary, even if the Colleg.
of Bishops confirm Bishop Early's decision, to make a new start,
in order to get an action of the Quarterly Meeting Conference,
not in connection with any assumed case, but upon the real
caSo u.s SLJiieu m tun first uj. uu., ,, ijiuluunidation. ± regrCu
this on account of the agitation which has to be kept up, but
still it will result in my favor, because I shall not he expected
to withdraw from the Church—as I have a right to do, and as I
have promised to do—so long as there are good grounds to
believe that the action of the Bishops was not specific in regard
to the specified case we intended to submit to them.
At any one of the Forty Quarterly Meeting Conferences 1
have attended in the Mclvendree Church, Wesleyanism could
have settled this matter without trouble. See what bigotry
has done with it.
Suppose all such cases, in all localities, had received the
same notice in our papers, with the same inflammatory results,
what would now he the condition of our Church ? Let our
preachers about the Book Concern speak out what they think
ol the course of Dr. McFerrin in this and other local matters
about Nashville, in the Advocate.
The wrong men, at the wrong time, and in the wrong way, have set them¬
selves to correct this wrong, if wrong there be in it.
Thus the cause of religion has been damaged a hundredfold more than it
would have been by letting the matter rest. This matter can never be made
right in the estimation of this community without blotting out all the past and
beginning anew. This X am ready to do with any Brother outside of~a certain
Nashville clique.
This clique bear me no love. Under their shadow, ministers and mem¬
bers may do many things worse than dancing — all right. Ministers have
offices in the Church, and go about professedly to preach the everlasting
gospel—in fact, peddling Armageddon and similar trash. I look with perfect
contempt upon the modern practice of dubbing any and every body D. 1). My
practice may have been unwisely sharp upon these and similar signs of declen¬
sion in our Church, and those who have felt it bear me no love. The dancing
with the leaders here is but a cloak for other thoughts which are in their mind3
Let my brethren outside of this clique call me to trial as a Methodist preacher,
and if they condemn me, I will submit. One other feature of this case, and I am
done—only for the present however.
Tor many years, I had intended during the past summer to retire from the
schoolroom in which, as a student or teacher, X had lived for just thirty years,
and to give up the balance of my days to my family in the country and to min¬
isterial duties. During the last winter, I was persuaded, I may say over-
persuaded, by leading Methodists of Nashville, to change this determination.
They have all acted consistently with these persuasions but one. Who do you
suppose, reader, urged me to renew my connection with the Academy ? Rev.
A. S. Riggs, in more than one conversation, urged me to this course. I doubted
long, and a feather's weight'turned the balance. lie then had as full a knowl¬
edge of the dancing as he now has. lie never gave me the slightest intimation
that he intended to bring me into this trouble. lie found me surrounded by
workmen, harrassed in mind and prostrated in health, carrying out the very
thing he had advised me to do, and then, for the first time, gave me to see the
course he intended to pursue. AH X am worth of money or reputation, X have
invested in the present enterprise.
Again and again, leaving my parlors crowded with parents from all parts of
the South, I had to go to answer to these charges. It was a trial of health, and
heart, and hopes. 1 have no language sufficient to express the deep conviction
I have that my brethren wrong me in this matter ; and they do it in the name
of religion. It was an evil day for me, for himself, for the peace of the
Church, when the amiable and useful Rev. A. S. Riggs, against the remon¬
strance of some of his stewards, against the wishes of nine-tenths of his own
congregation, forgot his Book of Discipline, and consented to become the agent
to render effectual the accumulated slanders of ten years.
They may triumph ; but it will not be the triumph of the Church over the
world, of Methodism over sin, but merely of brethren seeking their own glory,
I fear, over a brother minister, who, in his humble sphere, still more difficult than
his brethren are called to occupy, has left no doubt upon the public mind as to
his opposition to folly and fashion in ail matters relating to his profession.
C. D. ELLIOTT,
Nashville Female Acaiemt,j
January, 1858. j