to slavery. Thus that subject was precipitated upon the Conference early in the session. On motion of Nathan Bangs, it was

"Resolved, That the address just read be referred to a special committee of three, and that they be required to prepare an answer as speedily as practicable, and to provide for the appointment of a delegate to represent us to the Wesleyan Methodist Conference."

Orange Scott offered a motion to print the Address in all the official journals of the Church, and while the matter was under discussion, it was on motion of Stephen G. Roszel resolved to postpone the further consideration of printing the address until the committee appointed to answer it reported to the Conference. This committee consisted of Nathan Bangs, William Capers and Thomas A. Morris.

The usual standing committees were appointed, and committees were ordered on Temperance, Allowance of Ministers, Parsonages and Churches, Bible, Sunday-school and Tract Societies, Superannuated Preachers who reside out of the bounds. of their own conferences, and on Canada affairs.

When the Conference assembled on May 5th, the Committee on Answer to the British Conference brought in their report. The section on the subject of slavery was not entirely acceptable; but most, if not all, the objections to it came from members who, though opposed to slavery in the abstract, were not abolitionists. Various alterations and amendments were proposed, and once a motion was made to strike out all that related to slavery. The answer, as finally adopted, was much modified in language, and neither censured abolitionism nor condemned slavery. But when it was moved to print both the address and the reply, the motion was lost.

A Committee on Slavery having been appointed, all memorials relating to that subject were referred to them. Their report was brief, and averse to any new action on the part of the Conference, and any agitation on the subject.

But the report of the Committee did not quiet agitation on the subject, though it was adopted by a large majority. Long before the assembling of the Conference, "the irrepressible conflict" had begun. It broke out afresh when it became known that two of the members of the Conference had attended an

anti-slavery meeting in Cincinnati, and had there made abolition addresses. These members were George Storrs and Samuel Norris, both of the New Hampshire Conference. Stephen G. Roszel offered the following preamble and resolutions which were discussed for the better part of two days, and then carried by a vote, on the first resolution, of 122 in favor and 11 against it:

"WHEREAS, Great excitement has prevailed in this country on the subject of modern abolitionism, which is reported to have been increased in this city recently by the unjustifiable conduct of two members of the General Conference, in lecturing upon and in favor of that agitating subject; and

"WHEREAS, Such a course on the part of any of its members is calculated to bring upon this body the suspicions and distrust of the community, and misrepresent its sentiments in regard to the point at issue; and

"WHEREAS, In this aspect of the case a due regard for its own character as well as a just concern for the interests of the Church confided to its care, demand a full, decided, and unequivocal expression of the views of the General Conference in the premises; therefore,

"Resolved, 1. That the delegates of the annual conferences in General Conference assembled disapprove in the most unqualified sense the conduct of two members of the General Conference, who are reported to have lectured in this city recently upon and in favor of modern abolitionism.

"Resolved, 2. That they are decidedly opposed to modern abolitionism, and wholly disclaim any right, wish, or intention to interfere in the civil and political relation between master and slave as it exists in the slaveholding states of this Union.

"Resolved, 3. That the foregoing preamble and resolutions be published in our periodicals."

No doubt the abolitionists of that day were exasperating and bitter in their denunciations, and delighted in agitation; but those who opposed their methods were not all lovers of slavery. Both the North and South, in their mutual antagonism, forgot the Divine maxim, "He that believeth shall not make haste." The cause for which the abolitionists contended, the cessation of slavery, finally prevailed. The sentiments of the Church as well as of the nation secured its final overthrow; and it is pleasing to know that the foregoing preamble and resolutions were rescinded by the General Conference of 1868, and ordered to be expunged from the Journal.

But to show how the slavery interests had debauched the public conscience, when a committee was appointed to prepare a Pastoral Address to the members of the Church, it was moved by Mr. Roszel and Samuel Luckey that the committee be instructed to incorporate in it a section against abolitionism. Orange Scott moved as an amendment that a paragraph on slavery be also included; whereupon Mr. Roszel withdrew his motion. It will be seen, however, that the suggestion made by Mr. Roszel was acted upon, notwithstanding his motion was withdrawn. The Pastoral Address as adopted says:

"It is not unknown to you, dear brethren and friends, that in common with other denominations in our land, as well as our citizens generally, we have been much agitated in some portions of our work with the very excitable subject of what is called abolitionism. This subject has been brought before us at the present session-fully, and we humbly trust, impartially discussed, and by almost a unanimous vote highly disapproved of; and while we would tenderly sympathize with those of our brethren who have, as we believe, been led astray by this exciting topic, we feel it our imperative duty to express our decided disapprobation of the measures they have pursued to accomplish their object. It can not be unknown to you that the question of slavery in these United States, by the constitutional compact which binds us together as a nation, is left to be regulated by the several state legislatures themselves; and thereby is put beyond the control of the general government, as well as, that of all ecclesiastical bodies; it being manifest that in the slaveholding states themselves, the entire responsibility of its existence or non-existence rests with those state legislatures. And such is the aspect of affairs in reference to this question, that whatever else might tend to meliorate the condition of the slave, it is evident to us, from what we have witnessed of abolition movements, that these are the least likely to do him good. On the contrary, we have it in the evidence before us, 'that their inflammatory speeches and writings and movements have tended, in many instances, injuriously to affect his temporal and spiritual condition, by hedging up the way of the missionary who is sent to preach to him Jesus and the resurrection, and by making a more rigid supervision necessary on the part of his overseer, thereby abridging his civil and religious privileges.

"These facts, which are only mentioned here as a reason for the friendly admonition which we wish to give you, constrain us, as your pastors, who are called to watch over your souls as they who must give an account, to exhort you to abstain from all abolition movements and associations, and to refrain from patronizing

any of their publications, and especially those of that inflammatory character which denounce in unmeasured terms those of their brethren who take the liberty to dissent from them. Those of you who may have honest scruples as to the lawfulness of slavery, considered as an abstract principle of moral right and wrong, if you must speak your sentiments, would do much better to express yourselves in those terms of respect and affection which evince a sincere sympathy for those of your brethren who are necessarily, and in some instances reluctantly associated with slavery in the states where it exists, than to indulge in harsh censures and denunciations, and in those fruitless efforts, which, instead of lightening the burden of the slave, only tend to make his condition the more irksome and distressing.

"From every view of the subject which we have been able to take, and from the most calm and dispassionate survey of the whole ground, we have come to the solemn conviction that the only safe, scriptural, and prudent way for us, both as ministers and people, to take, is wholly to refrain from the agitating subject which is now convulsing the country, and consequently the Church, from end to end, by calling forth inflammatory speeches, papers, and pamphlets. While we cheerfully accord to such all the sincerity they ask for their belief and motives, we can not but disapprove of their measures, as alike destructive to the peace of the Church, and to the happiness of the slave himself."

As a protest against the action of the General Conference on the subject of abolitionism, and their non-action on slavery, Orange Scott wrote and had printed in pamphlet form an "Address to the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, by a Member of that Body," and had it distributed on the seats of the delegates. Upon reading this Address, William Winans and Jonathan Stamper offered the following resolution:

"Resolved, That a pamphlet circulated among the members of this General Conference, purporting to be an 'Address to the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, by a Member of that Body,' containing reports of the discussion on modern abolitionism, palpably false, and calculated to make an impression to the injury of the character of some of the members engaged in the aforesaid discussion, is an outrage on the dignity of this body, and merits unqualified reprehension."

Mr. Scott avowed himself to be the author of the pamphlet in question, and as he considered himself under obligation to defend his course, he requested a copy of the above resolution;

which request was on motion granted. The next day he spoke on the resolution at considerable length, and was replied to by Mr. Winans. On taking the vote, it was carried by 97 in favor to 19 in opposition. The resolution was ordered to be published in the Christian Advocate and Journal and the Western Christian Advocate.

Two of the bishops having died, and the health of Bishops Roberts, Soule and Hedding being impaired, the Committee on Episcopacy recommended the election of three additional bishops. The report was adopted, and Tuesday, May 24th, was fixed on as the date of the election. On the first ballot, Wilbur Fisk and Beverly Waugh were elected, and on the sixth ballot Thomas A. Morris was chosen. The several ballots are here given from private sources of information, as they are not to be found in the Journal, which contains only the results:

whole number of votes, 153; necessary to a choice, 77. So the

first two named were elected.

For the third bishop the ballots were as follows:

When the result of the first ballot was announced, and it was seen that Mr. Morris came within one vote of being elected, he arose from his seat in great agitation, and begged the Conference to drop his name from their ballots. Mr. Winans, who sat three or four seats in front, sprang to his feet, turned round, and playfully shaking his fingers in Mr. Morris's face, peremptorily said, "Sit down, Sir." But as the balloting proceeded, Mr. Morris tried to withdraw from the ballot more