"We can not withhold from you the solemn conviction of our minds that no new ecclesiastical legislation on the subject of slavery at this time will have a tendency to accomplish these most desirable objects; viz., to preserve the peace and unity of the whole body; to procure the greatest happiness of the slave population, and advance generally in the slaveholding community of our country the humane and hallowing influence of our holy religion. And we are fully persuaded that as a body of Christian ministers we shall accomplish the greatest good by directing our individual and united efforts, in the spirit of the first teachers of Christianity, to bring both master and servant under the sanctifying influence of the principles of that gospel which teaches the duties of every relation, and enforces the faithful discharge of them by the strongest possible motives."

These calm words from the chief pastors appear to have expressed the sense of nearly all the southern delegates, and, perhaps, of a majority of northern delegates also; but the reformers had come to the Conference bent on making a demonstration of their sentiments, and they had not long to wait for their opportunity. On his way to the seat of the session, Orange Scott had met one of his friends in New York, who had placed in his hands a memorial to the General Conference against slavery, purporting to be signed by over eleven hundred Methodists of that city and vicinity. Its reading caused no little surprise. It was the heaviest shot from the batteries of the abolitionists that had been fired in all the history of the campaign.

The body had at first refused to appoint a Committee on Slavery; but now nothing else would meet the case. The committee was formed, with Dr. Bangs, leader of the New York conference delegation, for its chairman, and to it the startling memorial was referred. The fact that the paper was sent to the Conference by one who was not a member of the New York delegation awoke suspicions as to its genuineness. Hearing of its presentation, a committee of thirty was hastily formed of the anti-abolitionists in the New York Churches, which at once. proceeded to sift the mass of signatures to the document, which had been sent to them by Chairman Bangs for that purpose. The results of this search were such that the committee of thirty sent a protest to the Conference against the reception of the Scott memorial, reciting the facts which their hasty canvass

of New York Methodism had brought out; and this protest was presented to the body in due course as a part of the report of the Committee on Slavery, from which the following extracts are made:

"It is with deep humiliation we find ourselves compelled, from the testimony adduced in said Protest and its accompanying documents, to believe that unworthy and even fraudulent means were resorted to in procuring the signatures of said Memorial.

"The Memorial declares that the eleven hundred and fifty-four signers whose names are appended to it are members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the city of New York and its vicinity. Whereas, it appears from the document referred to us that fortyfive are not members at all; one is now, and another has been, in the state's prison; and fifteen are probationers, one of whom is only seven years of age. Of those who are members, seventy-eight names are recorded twice; one thrice; ninety are forged; there are fifty-eight whose residences are not put down; twenty-three can not be found in the residences named in the memorial; sixty have declared that they were deceived by various false pretenses; making in all three hundred and ninety-six, which must be deducted from the whole number of signers. Of the entire number, eight hundred and thirteen are females, and it is in evidence that in several instances whole families were set down. The committee of investigation called on less than one-half of the persons whose names are found in the Memorial, and the conclusion is fully warranted that on a more thorough examination many more would be found to be fabricated signatures obtained by false pretenses. We are very glad to know that the two persons actively engaged in the disgraceful work are not members of our Church.

"From all these facts the committee are induced respectfully to submit the following resolutions:

"1. That the numerous frauds manifestly resorted to by those who obtained the signatures to the memorial on slavery from the city of New York, presented to this Conference by Orange Scott, render it unworthy of credit."

If the report had stopped at that point it might have been adopted; but the committee attempted to take advantage of the delicate situation in which the leader of the abolitionists had innocently placed himself, and get in a blow at the heart of the subject itself. It therefore goes on to say:

"In further prosecution of their duty the committee ask permission to submit the following as the conclusion of their report: "WHEREAS, Our Church in various places has been much agi

tated on the subject of modern abolitionism for several years past; and

"WHEREAS, It is most desirable to tranquillize these troubled waters, that we may pursue our appropriate calling in peace and harmony; therefore,

"Resolved, By the delegates of the several annual conferences in General Conference assembled, 1. That it is incompatible with our duty as Christians and Christian ministers to agitate the Church on the above subject any further than we feel ourselves bound to express our individual opinions on proper occasions in suitable language, and with deference and respect for the opinions and characters of those from whom we may conscientiously differ. "Resolved, 2. That we highly disapprove of the conduct of those who would disturb the peace of the Church . . . by forming anti-slavery societies or conventions in the Church, and giving them currency by taking the names of Methodists, or by bringing the doctrines of modern abolitionism into quarterly and annual conferences, class, and other meetings of devotion. And more especially do we condemn the practice of arraigning the characters of individuals, bishops, and other ministers and members of the Church, through the medium of the press, before they have been dealt with as the Sacred Scriptures and the Discipline of our Church most explicitly require.

"Resolved, 3. That it be, and hereby is, made the duty of all the annual conferences, bishops, presiding elders, and preachers to use their influences to banish the above practices from among us. "All of which is respectfully submitted.

"N. BANGS, Chairman."

But the committee miscalculated their strength. The body was very evenly divided on the general subjects, and when the report came up for final action it was read and laid on the table. (Minutes of General Conference of 1840, page 82.)

Another great contest in the General Conference of 1840 was over the appeal from the action of the Missouri Conference, which had censured one of its ministers, Silas Comfort by name, for admitting the testimony of a colored boy at a Church trial against a white member of the Church. This, of course, in the slave state of Missouri was illegal; but there was a party in the Church which objected to having the rules of civil courts made binding in ecclesiastical trials, and the case afforded an opportunity to the abolitionists to express their sentiments respecting the equal rights of men as men.

It was during the struggle over the anterior question raised by this appeal that the first recorded threats of disruption were

ever heard in a General Conference. After some sharp debate, Ignatius A. Few, of Georgia, offered a resolution which affirmed that, in the judgment of the General Conference, colored men were not entitled to testify against white men in states where their testimony was not admissible in courts of law. This resolution was passed by a very close vote; but, later on, the reformers determined if possible to reverse that conservative action, and moved a reconsideration. Such a motion was then held to

be debatable.

In defense of his resolution, Dr. Few made a notable speech, concluding as follows:

"The decision of this Conference reversing that of the Missouri Conference, and going to say that Negro testimony against white members might be received in Church trials, has gone through the length and breadth of the land, and is working its desolating effects. It would therefore be madness to withhold the antidote. If you are prepared to say that the principle of the resolution is indefensible, then you who profess to be the moderate party are prepared to say that all who are connected with the system of slavery are sinners, root and branch before high heaven. Are you afraid of bringing down upon you the wrath of the abolitionists, that you wish to rescind this resolution? And to secure their favor, are you willing to do an act which shall encourage the slave to plunge his knife in the heart of his master, with the hope of having his name emblazoned on the page of history along with that of Brutus?

"I am tired of this agitation. If you will push this thing, let us go. It is not our fault; we have not agitated it. We have sent up no memorials or petitions. We who believe that to preach the Word of Jesus Christ is the grand means of saving the slave, have never troubled you. Let us go. This is the Rubicon, sir. I an- nounce it seriously. This is the Rubicon! Pass it not!"

The next speaker was William Winans, of Mississippi, who also opposed the reconsideration. The conclusion of his speech was as follows:

"It is a matter of life and death with us, sir. Pause, I beseech you. You may rescind this resolution; but we can bear this. We may be hunted from our homes and hearths; but we can bear this. We may be put to death: but we could bear this for the sake of the Lord Jesus. We might emigrate; we are a migratory people, and might go where we would not be thus thwarted, while we are executing our commission as Christ's ministers. But the poor blacks! I know them, sir. I have been thirty years laboring with them, and the rescinding of this resolution will bar all access to

them, and snatch the bread of life from their lips. It will do it, sir; it will. I could on my bended knees beseech you by the wantsthe spiritual wants-of famishing thousands, do not repeal this resolution."

It was the same old horror. The slave must be kept down, or he will become dangerous. And it was also the self-same kindness of a good master towards his servants. Many Methodists had liberated their slaves under the urgent entreaties of the earlier preachers; but in the turn which affairs were now taking the vast majority of masters were likely, for resentment as well as for self-protection against impending danger, to abridge the poor liberties allowed on their plantations; and especially to shut out the Methodist preachers from work among them. For who could tell whether some meek-looking itinerant on a southern circuit might not be an abolitionist in disguise?

The final vote on the question was taken on a substitute for the resolution of Dr. Few, of Georgia, offered by W. A. Smith, of Virginia, as follows:

"Resolved, That it is inexpedient and unjustifiable for any preacher among us to admit persons of color to give testimony on the trial of white persons in any slaveholding state or territory where they are denied that privilege in trials at law; provided, that when an annual conference in any such state or territory shall judge it expedient to admit of the introduction of such testimony within its bounds it shall be allowed to do so."

On this substitute the yeas and nays were taken, resulting in a tie, 69 yeas and 69 nays. The presiding officer, Bishop Hedding, declined to give the casting vote, but decided that the resolution, not having a majority, had failed. Thus narrowly was Dr. Few's resolution saved.

Not satisfied with this result, Bishop Soule at the afternoon session of June 2d offered some explanatory resolutions, affirming that the action of the General Conference on the resolution of Dr. Few relative, to the appeal of Silas Comfort, of the Missouri Conference, was not intended to order any change in the usages of the annual conferences on the subject of admitting colored persons to testify in the trial of white members of the Church; also affirming confidence and brotherly love toward the colored members of the Church. His resolutions were

adopted by a vote of 97 to 27. Thus the position of the Church on this vexed question remained unchanged.