Sentinel of the valley. [volume] (Woodstock, Va) 1841-1848, 1845-07-03

uate o. tie Ueciafatlon, the Southern
4 Delegates were full convinced that The
) frequent and exciting agitation and &C.
ton IN that body on the subject O
slavery and abolition as in Harding's
case, and especially the proceedings in
the case Of Bishop Andrew, each being
regarded as but practical exposition
ofthe principles Of the maj ority-ren-
dered separate organization indispen-
sable to The success of Methodism in
( the South. The truth of the Declare
ton, SO far from being called in ques-
lion, by the Majority, was promptly
conceded in the immediate action the
Conference had upon it, assigning the
Declaration, as the sole ground or rea-
son OF the action, which terminated in
the adoption ofthe plan of separation,
under which we are now acting, as a
Convention, and from the spirit and
intention of which, it is believed to be
the purpose of the Convention not to
depart, in any of its deliberations or
final acts. Although the action ofthis
General Conference on the subject of
slavery. and the relative adverse posi-
ton offhe parties North and South, to-
gether with the irritating and exasper-
ating evils of constant agitation and
frequent attempts at legislation, are
made in the Declaration, the grounds
of the avowal, that separate organi-
cation was necessary to the success of
the Ministry in the slaveholding States,
it was by nomeans intended to convey
the idea, or make the impression, that
no other causes existed rendering a
separate organization proper and ne
cessary; but as the action ofthe Confer
ence on the subject of slavery, was
certain to involve the Church in the
South, in immediate and alarming diff
hculty, and it was believed that this
could be so shown to the Majority, as
to induce them to consent to some
course of action, in remedy of the evil;
the complaint of the Declaration, was
confined to the single topic Of slavery.
1t will be perceived that the case of
Bishop Andrew, although prominently
introduced,is not relied on asexclusive-
ly furnishing the data of this conclusion
at which we had arrived. The entire
action of the General Conference so
frequently brought to view, and which
is made the ground of dissent and ac-
ton, both in the Protest and Declara-
ton ofthe Southern Delegates must be
understood as belonging to the premi-
ses and language employed as inclu-
ding all principles avowed, as we'll as
the action had by the late General Con.
ference on the subject of slavery
I he attempt to disclaim the judicial
character oftbe action in Bishop An
drew's case, and show it to be merely
advisory, cannot affect the previous
reasoning; for first, the disclaimer is as
equivocal in character, as the original
action: and secondly, the reasoning in
support of the disclaimer, negatives the
supposltion OF mere advice, because it
involves issues coming legitimately
within the province ofjudicial process
and legal determination, and thirdly,
Bishop Andrew is by the explanation
of the disclaimer itself, held as respon-
sible for his conduct,in view ofthe alleg-
ed advice, as he could have been held
by the original action without the ex-
PLANTATION. While therefore, the ex-
PLANTATION giving the original action an
advisory character Notwithstanding the
inconsistency involved, fully protects
Bishops Soule and Andrew from even
the shadow of blame in the course they
had pursued, the entire action in the
case, and especially when connected
with the case of Harding, as alluded to
in the declaration, fully sustains the
general view of the subject we have ia
ken in this report. The Southern DEL
egates at the General Conference, in
presenting to that body their declara-
ton and protest, acted, and they con-
tinue to act, as the representatives Of
the South, under the full conviction
that the principles and policy avowed
by the Northern majority, are such as
to render their public and practical re-
nunciation by the Southern Methodist
Ministry aud people, necessary to the
safety, not less than success, of the
Church in the South.
| Other views of the subject however,
must claim share of our attention.
Among the many weigh:y reasons
which influence the Southern Confer
ences in seeking to be released from
the. jurisdiction of the General Confer
ence of the Methodist Episcopal
Church as now constituted, are the no.
vel and as we think dangerous doc-