in (, lam happy to say that such was i:nt the fact, and also that, loving everv brother on that committee with whom I had acquaint ance prior to its constitution, there I learned to ]nv him more, and to place all its members in i:.v heart, though we differed widely on the <; :es-i ui before us. Sir, Jam not here to enter t • lists as a mere polemical gladiator—not to ck niv brow, i! J could, with a trophy won as .. able debator. All this is beneath the occa m>n. A great question is before u*—one of i -p interest to tire church, requiring for its I - >|>ef and safe adjustment all the wisdom. pru oro ami pi-tvof which we are capable, I approach it, sir, in the fear of God, and I trust • io.ated with a just sense of the responsibili ties involved. The discussion, it seems tr> me, sir, has pro reed'-d on the other side on the supposition, that t' reare in this body two distinct parties; one • i j_r mistic to slavery, and the other supporters "I it as right in itself, or as a divine institution. I f, asult'-a abolition ; the other, as uitra-pro slavery. Mow whatever may be the fact, as to the fir->t named, it is a thorough mistake as to tb-' second. There is not a pro-slaver v partv r.:i the door of this conference. lam not here i defend slavery as a system from the Bible, or ar.y oilier source, — lam not here to make that m i-. N-t at all, sir. The brethren represent g the Baltimore conference are not pro->!a vey ii n ; nor are tiie* honored people J in part r"(ires-nt. They neither desire or expect us to itike (hat position. Why is it tl at the Bnlti i' re Conference stands where she does > Why site riot go South ? Why maintain her alle giance to she Methodist Episcopal Church in •11 est I toted States? What is the reason ? tie answer is obvious. We do not affiliate in s-lilitneiit and policy with that Church on the *exr;l question : but occupy the old conserva tive ground in reference to it. The section of country with which I am most familiar, was unversed by an able man, who publicly declar ed slavery to be a divine institution, existing by civme right, and traceable in all the ramifica -0 and relations of society. Another, equal ly eminent, took pretty much the same ground, "him I met, and with whom I discussed the •*< as t.iivwj between the Methodist Episcopal ' htircli ami the Methodist Episcopal Church s Cur people did not go with that church, and w b y * If "e had chosen fo connect ourselves with tie ''Methodist Episcopal Church South," stars ani garters aw aited us. In that event, in all I'C'ba' i'ily, Baltimore would have been tlie 'rr j, riurr oi that church, so far as its publiMi !r-- u;t-re>'s aie concerned. There, probably, "s H' k room would have been located, as , its mission rooms. And yet we did not Again : the stand we took brought upon ns ! i:< >ertati m and the bitterest persecution. Uf v, •[e denounced as belonging to an aboii -1 C urch. ihe [Kilitical preps, in some quar . let louse its blood hounds upon us, and pur ■ I us. Some of our preachers came near he -1 '• '.'died ; hut we stood our ground. We til ne circuit nearly crushed out bv the mis rolliiitr-Hiie policy which was put in op ' ration. It was a frontier Circuit, bounded on , :;e 'Me by the Rappahannock river. Did we ,Ue up, even that territory ! No sir, when it -'•as dangerous to go there, when our preachers •"re a! .: s? driven oft, when nearly all out j'"rubers |. ft us and took the Churches with ■•fro, sane half a dozen in Warrenton, and a niore notde spiiits scattered through the ut. remained firm in their attachment to old church, and I stood with them in weal - woo, with tongue arid pen, and all the in "Ue"Ce i could exert. The Baltimore Confer ' "Ct* continued to extend to them its fostering | ar e; and though our people in Wairenton lost vir house of worship, they conceived the de -n ot building another, which, at the time " ' under the circumstances, seemed a hopeless r "Hiking, yet they persevered, the Confer "■•ce helped them, the house was completed, I " J ' : the honor of dedicating it, and notwitstanrl ' M the prognostications that nobody would be '"re,the people came from all directions, it " a> fi 'ed to its utmost capacity the Methodist •••inner was unfurled, it waves there still in tri— f !'h, and there may it float in all time to And the result of all is, (hat like the Phmnix, the Circuit has from its ashes, and promises to be one ot the best in I lie Confer ence. .Now, sir, is it just, is it fair, is it righteous, that a Conference—a people who liave thus in peril and multiplied diliiculties, stood by the old land marks—by the IVleihodist Church—by the discipline, us handed down to us by the lathers, should be oppressed t>v the measure before us—that will paralize all their elibrts, and send disaster and ruin in all their borders ? V\ ill this Cenerul Conference re quite them lor their devotion in this way ' Ist. J shall in the first plate, before coining to the discussion ol the main question, notice s.une points made by Dr. Thompson, in his speech on yesterday. I wish to break the force ot that speech, adorned as it was with classic beauty and refined taste, which I think can be done with a simple replication. And first, he alluded to the Hebrew practice in tlie cases of fugdve servants who tied from their pagan masters to their jurisdiction, By the law or custom of the Jews, the fugitives were not returned: so neither were servants who tied from them sent back. In reply 1 state, the Jewish government was a theocracy —the most simple lorrn of government, next, if not equal, in this respect, to absolute despotism.— 1 his is not the case in the United Slates. Ours is a complex system of government. We have federal and State authority. Tim national gov ernment exercises executive, legislative and ju dicial powers : so do the States in their respec tive spheres. In several of these States slaveiy is sanctioned hy law; and the Constitution, which is the bond of union tor ail the States ol the Confederacy, does contain unquestionable provisions in relation to slaves, or persons held to service or labor ; and these provisions consti tute the compromises of that instiument. Three fifths ol the slave population are repiesenled in one brand) ot tile National Legislature tliev may be taxed : and provision is made lor their recovery i! they (lee from the service of their owners. Ihe church ol Cod is luund in the slave holding States : and I submit, sir, that though this was an eloquent passage in the Doc tor's speech finely put and eliciting hearty responses —it is not applicable ton.;—in our pe culiar circumstances and under our fonn of government, \v hich I believe to be the best the world ever saw. In the next place, Dr. Thompson referred to th<- emancipation of slaves which has taken place in tbe Eastern and Northern States, and attributed it wholyto the high moral sentiment that prevailed there. ] admit that there is as pure moral sentiment in New England an J the North as elsewhere; that it has as much influ ence there as any other part of the globe : ave, more, that it has done vast good in its outward spread. lam willing to grant as much in this connection, as can be claimed, or ought to be granted, I'ut, lam far from believing, that the emancipation of slaves in the East and North,.was brought about simple by the influ ence ot moral sentiment. State policy had a large share in it. Tbe soil of New England, and the North, except in detached portions, is not adapted to slave labor. It could not he made profitable there. As a general rule, grain growing countries are not suited to slave labor, which ran only be employed advatage ously and profitably wfieie cotton, sugar, hemp, rice, or indigo is the staple product. And there can be no doubt, this law bad its influence in accomplishing tbe emancipation r> t -rred to. To prove si l- , that this was riot the result of a moral sentiment superior to that which prevails in the Southern States, I have simpiv to call your attention to the ordinance of 1757, bv which slavery was prohibited in the whole of what was then called the Northwest Territory, out of which five poweiful States have hem formed Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and I believe lowa, whose stars now coriipo.se part of (tie bright galaxy that emblazons the Nation al flag. Who was the author ot that ordinance? Thom is Jefferson, a Virginian a man whose fame fills the world. He wrote it in 1803 or ISO 4-, and though it did not pass at that time, it was adopted with a slight amendment, as to the time it should go into effect, by the Con gress of the Confederacy, which sat cotempoia neously with the Convention that framed the Constitution in 1787. That ordinance, tin production of a Southern man, voted for hy Southern men, has tunned the basis fur freedom 111 I fie five Slutts I have named. Since Ohio lias become a State efforts have been made, either in her Legislature, or in Conventions, to form or re-model her Constitu tion to introduce slavery, hut they were una vailing. When Indiana was a Territory of the : United Slates, the Territorial Legislature peti ti med Congress to suspend the operation of the ordinance < f*B7, so far as it bore upon Indiana: in order that slavery might be admitted into the Territory. The petition was presented in the House of Representatives and referred to a special commitee, of which John Randolph, a Virginian, the owner of 300 slaves, (which he manumitted at his death) was chairman, who reported in substance, that the ordinance of 1787 had worked well, relieving the Territory affected by it, of a great and that it was improper to stipend it <>r comply with the pray er of the petitioners. The report was adopted and by the aid of Southern votes. Indiana was preserved from slavery and ennu* into the U nion as she now remains, a tree State. 3d. Dr. Thompson says that slavery is on the increase ; that it lias more power than it formerly had. 1 beg to say that if this is true the .Methodist Episcopal Church is not respon sible for it as the Doctor intimates. Slavery is the creature of civil not ecclesiastical law, and is beyond the direct control of church action. Religion the Methodist Episcopal Church is not the author of it nor is she accountable for its existence. She has exerted a beneficial in fluence over it in many respects. Whatever truth there may be in the remark "that slavery is on the increase," when applied to certain portions of country, I doubt very much its ap plicability to that j ar', of slave territory with- FRIDAY MORNING, BEDFORD, PA. JULY 4, 1556. ! bounds of (lie Baltimore Conference, \ou will be surprised (o learn, (hat in Balti more C ill/ Station, according to thetestimony of brethren well-informed on the subject , there is but one slaveholder, and it is doubtful, from the : same authority , it there be one. We have in our conference a colored mem bership of between lr,000 and 20,000. In l (lie city of Baltimore alone, theie are between 3,000 and 4,000 members in our church. They have good churches, they sing sweetly, prav powerfully, and have among them many excel lent local preachers. They have their Sabbath and day schools. Yon may tread the streets of Baltimore and you will not meet a single col ored beggar. There are beggars in that citv, but they are not found among the descendants of Africa. Jt may he safely said, that slavery is not on the increase in Baltimore. Brother Critfith says it is on the decrease, [Several voices, true.| Our people there, are well-in formed and intelligent. They know tii.-v can hire labor cheaper than they can buy it, and he responsible for the clothing, feeding and sus taining a family nt slaves, when able to do ser vice or not. ! will make a suggestion to Dr. I horn peon, worthy of consideration, that with al! the increase ot slavery, as lie supposes, and the great value of slave property, Southern people, instead of selling them and pocketing the money, in many cases, manumit them bv scores, and provide from their own means, fur tfieir comfortable sot sisfence in Liberia, or some other colony, until they are aide tu take care'of themselves. 2d. I believe it is admitted—given up by the (I lairmnn of ihe committee on slavery, and the fi lends of the report submitted by "him that it makes a new term uf membership in the Methodist Episcopal Church, namely, non slave-liolding. (Several voices, among them Dr. Raymond's, no, no.] Then sir, I shall pro ceed to prove it from the repott itself, now on your table and under discussion. Ist. 'I he first answer to the question, "what • ball be done for the extirpation of the in eat e vilof slavery 'contains the following provis ion, "there fore, no slave-holder shall be eligible to membership in oar church hereafter, inhere emancipation can be effected wit hunt injury to fh ■ stare." Does not this seek to make en an cipation a condition of admission into our Church is not that a new test i Was it ever matte before > If it was, I have not been aide to discover it. I have studied the M. thodisi discipline: have tried to understand it, having been an administrator of it in different rela tions: and it emancipation was ever a condi tion of admission, it has escaped mv notice. It cannot he found in the imok. Jt is a perfect novelty. Dr. Raymond cannot escape this con clusion. 2d. In the second answer to the question n bove stated non-stave-hot ding is sought to be made a term of membership in a two fold ap plication, as follows : "whenever a meird>er of our church by any means becomes (he owner of n slave, it shall be the duty of the preacher in charge to call together a committee of at least three, members, who shall investigate the case and determine the lime in which such stare shall be freed, and on his refusal or neg/ict to abide by the division of said committer, he shall be dealt with as in case of immorality." .Now, sir, in the slave holding pait of our Conference, and I presume jt is so in all our Conferences in slave territory, a large portion of our members rio not hold slaves. They might become slave holders by inheritance n gift, and would tin v not by tins renuirenjent tie brought before a committee ami if thev refused to appear, or would not ab.de |>\ the decision ol the commit tee, would 11i ev not be tried lor immorality, and il convicted be • xpelied from the church f _\o one (an dispute this, and hence 1 sav. this f.a !ure, if adopted, makes a new term of member ship to those now in the church, and in addi lion has the odious character of an "expost fac to law." It does :hiis to all intents and j urpo ws. It never was done before. Furtliernmie here are members of our church at present ■ lavi holders, who are liable nndi r the proposed hapter, (read it again) '•whenever a member of iur church by any mams becomes an owner of t slave, - form of a note, which reads, "these rules are In affect ihe mem bers of our Societies no further than as thsi) are consistent with the laws of the States in which they reside.'" This took off the stringen cy of thcs- enactments from members residing in th-Southern States; fact, thev were ta ken from their application altogether, and then it was added "and respecting our brethren in \ irginia that are concerned, and alter due con sideration of their peculiar circumstances, u> allow them two years, from the notice given, to consider the expediency of compliance or r.on-cf mplianr.e with these rules." hat a provision 1 And to show that the Conference ai that early dav made a plain and palpable dis tinction between s/aveho/ding and "buying or selling" slaves, the qu-stion is asked: "what shall I?--n- With those wild buy or sell slaves, or give them au av ? and the answer is per emptory, "I/in/ are immediately to he expelled; unless (pi y buv them on purpose to free them." Mark (lie distinction 1 It indicates what has been called here the "animus." It is the key In unlock the meaning of the fathers. (See Emory's history of the Discipline, page 44.) Hut the:.c measures were all suspended in six months, an.' why ? Dr. Coke made a journey uuth, and became convinced that they were improper, and in l7h:> the suspension was per fected by the Conference because "they would do harm." Dr. Coke upon his own authority first suspended these rules, and states the fact and gives the n as m tor doing so in his journal, though they w ere passed hv a conference. I th nhf, sir, if you or the bench of Bishops would do the same; and the transaction displays the simplicity ol government and the administra tion ol the dav. 3d. In further proof of this point, in 1789 tile general rule fiist went into the discipline in these words, "the billing or selling the bodies ami souls of men, women or children, with an intention to enslave them." In 179*2 the rub rends "the hui ing or selling of men, women or children, with an intention to enslave them." I am glad of this change of phraseology and that "bodies and souls" are left out. \on can't enslave the soul .d' a ma.'i-e-as that belongs to God. The Apostles had their feet fastened in the stocks in the inner dungeon, hut their souls were tree ; so of the servant of whom we have heard whose master sought to prevent his going to church or even serving God. While sick and being threatened by his master and charged with hvpociisy, lie turned over in his bed and exclaimed thank God 1 am free: died and went to Heaven! No,sir, vou cannot enslave the sou!; but under the rule of 1789 and 1792 slaves could he held by members of the church by inheritance or gift without violating it. A reference to the circumstances of the times will fix its signification. The slave trade was then rife and the traffle was obviously alluded to. Let it be remembered that this rule is of Amer ican origin. Mr. Wesley did not make it, it is I not among his general rules, and down to this j time the Wesleyan connection has no such rule, i I hat body has a number of Missionaries in slave , j holding countries and no directions or instruc tions are given them interfering with the rela tion of master and slave; on the contrary they are ordered to respect that relation. Their in structions are simply to preach the gospel. But what of all this, sir ; it ha- no force upon i us, thongh much stress has been laid upon the action of our fathers at these periods. What they did, we may not, we cannot do. After the revolutionary war which separated the States from the mother country, the articles ofconfed i oration which had feebly held them together during its continuance proved to he so feeble— such a rope of sand—that they were superseded hv the constitution, which formed a more per , lect government : and who would appeal now for the interpretation of a law of the land to thecs articles of the confederacy t The consti tution, which subverted them, is the supreme | law of the country to which all others have to conform. So in our church government; we cannot go back farther than 180S, when our constitution was established, and we must be governed by its provisions in all our enactments and regulations. Now what is the state of the I case under this constitution? Ist. For the fit ft time the general rule in reference to sla very reads, '■• the. but/inn and sr/ltna of men, women and children villi an intention to en slave Hum.''' Jt was given tins form bv the hody that made this General f oicierence, fixed its powers, and guarded them hv constitutional restrictions. In this form it went info the dis cipline under new guards. 2d. To prove that it was not intended to apply to S/r/re holding in the membership and make the opposite a term of communion the same conference of 1808 struck from the discipline all that related to hol ding slaves by private members of the church, enacted in 1790, (see Emory's History of the Discipline, page 2in—answer to the questions. V'v hat regulations shall he made lor the extir pation of the crying evils of slavery ?", I his makes it clear that the barriers of the Constitution ol the Methodist Episcopal Church, did not make, did not intend to make, non slaveholding a term of membership, ei-e whv (Strikeout these regulations? It was done of i >et purpose, namefv, to conform the Discipline to tiie uile. 3d. 'ltie chapter, which is a mere statute, to rariy out the provision, in theCon | stitulion, with respect to slavery confirms this view, '{here is nothing in that chapter touch j ing non-s!aveholdiug as a t-rm of membership, it simply refers to official relation—nothing more. I nder certain circumstances, fuilv sta led, a man may not sustain an official position ii he be a slaveholder, but under no circumstan ces does (bat fact affect his membership in the ■ church, fth. Tiie efforts which were made, just prior to the meeting of this General Con ference, by sending round to the Annual Con ferences resolutions proposing to change the general rule, so as to make it include slav(-hol ding, i- Conclusive as to the judgment of the au tliorsoj the resolutions of the Conferences who voted for them—and of the Church in these quarters—that it does not, in its present form, contain that feature. And vt, in the measure helore us, the attempt is made to do substantial ly the same tiling bv mere enactment without ; chanirinir (he rule, the effort to do winch sig nally l.iiled in the constitutional process! I- it right, is it lawful, to do that indincily uncon stitutionally, which could not be done direcfh/ and constitulionally ? nth. The proceedings had in relation to the rule, concerning the use :of spirituous liquors, is corroborative of the ground herein taken. It was d. sired to make it more stringent, and the trial to do so was commenced in 1836, and a proposition to change or suspend the rule was s-nt round to the An nual Conferences. which failed to receive the requisite vote. It was started again at the Gen eral Conference of 18-1-0 and pa-serf round the Conferences, and in 18+4 it was found that it still lacked the required vote: in this Confer ence, however, an attempt w as made to put th*> change into the discipline, irrespective of the constitution. I raised the constitutional objec tion myself, which defeated it : and it was once more referred to the Annual Conferences, and in 1848, having received the constitutional vote, it went into the discipline. It was not attempted to put in a chapter containing the de sireil provision, bv a mere majority vote, as in the matter under discussion, leaving the gen eral rule unchanged. The constitution was re spected in this instance, and nothing was done until its provisions were complied with. The cases are parallel—both the rule on spirituous liquors and the one respecting slavery are in the same category o( general rules which area part of the constitution: the action on them should be alike, save that the latter should be more carefully and delicately handled than the former, and certainly nothing on the subject to which it refers should be put in the discipline, not clearly embraced in itstiue import and sig nification. !o offset tlie constitutional argument it has been contended that Baptism and proper con fession of faith, have been made terms of mem bership without the change of a general rule, therefore non-s/aveholdinfj may be. The in stances are not analagotis. Baptism is an ac knowledged sacrament in our creed, and we have regular articles of faith, as a church, which by the first restriction are made part of the Constitution. Baptism ami conformity in faith to these articles may be made terms of commun ion without infracting constitutional provisions. Every member of the church sliould be bapti sed—should agree with us in faith. The Gen eral Conference has a right to require this : and the regulations adopted lor this purpose simply carry out a constitutional principle. Where there is a provision in organic law for any pur pose, the legislative body can adopt enactments to put it in force. This is the univei>.il rule.— As regards then, the regulations making bap tism and confession of faith requisites for ad mission into our church, there is not only no IS'J PICK VEAII. VOL XXIV, NO. 11. conflict with the Constitution, but they wer* necessary to give proper effect to constitutional provisions. I come to the conclusion to which I hope every member of this Conference will come, that the measure before us doeg make a new term ot membership and seeks to do it in an unconstitutional wav. Yon were right, sir, in the warnings nut forth in the address of tlie Bishops in reteieuce to measures uIII ucon stitutional hearing, i'ou might have said it more strongly. '/ lie constitutional argument against the pur posed chapter may by summed up as follows: Ist. Ihe general rule respecting slavery which reads "the buying and selling of men, women and children with an intention to en slave them, does nut in letter or spirit prohibit slaveholding by members of the Methodist Kpi>- copal Church. 2d. The general rule abort stated is guarded and protected by the fourth restriction, upon the powers ollhe General Conference, which says "Ihey (the Geneial Conference) shall nut revoke or change the genera: rules of the united soci'dies." 3d. Nothing can go into the discipline on the subject ot slaveiv exceeding the obvious sense and meaning of the general rule. 4th. The measure reported by the majority of the committee on slavery does exceed "the sense and meaning" of the general rule : it makes non-td art hot din g a term ot membership in the Methodist llpisc pal Church, which is neither provided for nor sanctioned by said rule. sth. To engraft the said measure or chapiter upon the discipline the general rule must be c/utnged, which can only he effected by compli ance with the proviso to the sixth restriction which requires a vote of two-thirds of the Gen eral Conference, concurred in bv three-fourths of all the members of the several annual Con ferences. 6th. It i- not proposed by the majority of the committee on slavery to change the general rule tor tiie admission of their measure, or to wait the constitutional action thereon, but sim ply to pass it by a Majority vote oj i/iis body, and thus force it upon the church. 7th. To do this is clearly and indisputably, unconstitutional, it would bean art violating directly the constitution oft he church, the only safe guard of the rights and privileges of the members thereof. It i- due to candor to sav that 1 shall vote a gainst the other resolution reported bv the ma jority, which asks a change of the general rule so as to make it applv to slaveholding , though it looks to accomplishing it in a constitutional way, which 1 admit you have a right to do if you can. But 1 beg vou to pause before it is done, for the moment it is, a large portiouof th>* pieople of our Conference is unchurched, and the balance will make common cause and own. T say this, sir, in full view of the objection that may lie staled as to class-meeting, and re mark further, hat if von cannot deduce tins fairly from the word of God, espnciallv in view rt the itinerant character of our ministry, which interferes somewhat with the pastoral relation, and sliov. that it is an essential auxiliary in executing fully that relation under our govern ment, then it is not of divine authority, and is a mere conventional rule or jmivilege. that mav he attended to or not, without jeoparding mem bership. 2d. The question has recentlv been mooted as to whether slaveholders were admitted into the Apostolic Church. We leave this fruitless discussion to those whose tastes it mav suit.— Tlie truth ot the natter seems to be this, after all that has been written upon the subject.— 'I he apostles were wise, discreet, holy as well as inspired no n. They had but one aim, but one p airpio.se— to fulfill their glorious commis sion "to preach the Gospel to every creature." They operated upton the world, as they found it, 111 its civil and social relations; —proclaimed "the unsearchable riches of Christ"—the soul saving doctrines of the Cross alike to persons iu ail conditions and relations of society ; and when they became converted, doubtless admit ted them indiscriminately to the "fellowship of the saints" and the ordinances of God's hou.se. They did not meet in council to fix upuii and multiply terms of communion to suit changing notions in Church or State. There vva>, 'tis hue, a council Imld in Jerusalem, of which we have an account in the 15th chapter of the Acts, which was comprised of tlie apostles and elders, convened to settle a question which hail been raised bv some "Pharisees who believed" and taught thai Gentih converts should be "err-