# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1908_S66
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

66 Proceedings of the twenty-second convention

5. Wisconsin Synod.
Reports of 1908 and 1909: PP. H. Sprengeler and B. Sievers.

6. Joint Synod of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan.
Report of 1909: PP. J. F. Rubel and J. Strasen.

7. English Missouri Synod.
Reports of *1907 and 1909: PP. O. Hagedorn and A. Bendler.

8. Slovak Synod.
Reports of *1906, *1907, 1908 and 1909: PP. J. Brenner and O. Theobald.

VII. Petitions.

Petitions lay before the Synodical Conference from P. J. Ebert in North Yakima, Wash.; from P. W. F. Mundt in Ubly, Mich.; and from P. Herm. Solbrig in Frankenberg, Saxony. They were referred to committees, which reported on them as follows:

A. The letter addressed to the Synodical Conference by the former Pastor J. Ebert of North Yakima, Wash., contains six questions about the ground and justification of certain actions of individual persons and bodies of the Synodical Conference. Since answering these questions would involve the investigation of a case of dispute and a judicial verdict, and such matters have hitherto been rejected by the Synodical Conference as not belonging before its forum, we recommend that it resolve:

1. that the Synodical Conference must refrain from answering the questions put, since it is incompetent to do so;

2. that P. J. Ebert be given the advice to turn with his questions to those persons and bodies who alone come into consideration in the actions objected to by him.

A. Schrödel. P. Brand. C. Gausewitz.
Ad. Spiering. D. Meibohm.

This committee report was adopted by resolution.

B. In the matter of the petition of P. W. F. Mundt the committee recommends referring this matter back to the person concerned with the advice to turn to the Honorable Synod of Wisconsin and Other States, before whose forum it originally and properly belongs.

Chr. Sauer. C. F. Huth.
A. Ackermann. F. W. Curschmann.

This committee report was adopted by resolution.

C. Your committee for the evaluation of the petition of P. Solbrig in Germany takes the liberty of proposing to you first to hear the petition and, on the basis of P. Solbrig's presentation, to resolve the following: