Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1857-05-02

Resolved, That as the position Of the Baltimore
Methodist Episcopal Conference is well known
the Introduction oi such question Of slavery into
its considerations was highly inexpedient, either
pro or con.
! Rev. Mr. Sicer supposed his position relative
to this subject was well understood rs he Lad eyor
fearessly aud faith fully met the issue as 4 conserv
! atiyc thorough States Rights man. lie regretted
! however, that the question had been agitated al
this time, and would hope to see the resolutions re-
| considered, with n view to bring before the Con
ference those it had adopted in lS46 as they were
/ broad and comprehensive and realirming then
would fully continue this Conference in the proper
| position it then assumed.
Rev. Mr.. Terrence here withdrew his resolu
! tun.
Rev. Mr.. Slicer then moved n reconsideration
Of the vote upon the resolutions just adopted.
Rev. Geo. Brooks moved to lay this motion upon
! the table.
Rev. John A. Collins took the foor in support Of
he position in which the Conference had placed
itself by the adoption of the resolutions. lie re
GREETED having been called upon in so sudden n
manner to vote upon such proposition, but having
voted for their adoption, he was prepared to stand
by them to the end. lie urged that the body could
not with safety take bnck track in the premises,
and he must urge it's standing firmly up to its
declarations in their adoption.
| Tho motion Of Rev. Mr. Brooks to lay upon the
table prevailed
| The No1taern independent Methodist paper,
published at Auburn, and edited by the Rev DR..
| lIosmer, publishes this disgraceful record and
says:
1--WE hope brethren who have had the sim.
plIclty 10 believe that the Baltimore Conference is
anti slavery, will now cease from that delusion,
1t is, and has long been cOnVction,' that there
is no class Of men, sonth of Mason & Dxons line,
more ardently or hopelessly attached to slavery
than Methodist preachers.
"lt other evidences in confirmation Of this opin.
ion were wanting, we might cite the fact that in all
political contests between freedom and slavery
they are invariably found on the side Of slavery.
The clergy of that region never fail to go with the
slavehOldmg and slaveryloying masses they may
be found, to dead certainty, in the front rank Of
the enemies Of freedom. When this is the
case, it is wonder that the community at
large are infected with the crime Of slavery.
Like priest, like people, is an old maxim, and
most fatally eXemrliied in our Border Methodsm,
! as well as everywhere else in the South, But the
clergy not satisfied with acting in concert with
pro-slayery politicians; they write and preach
against freedom Or. Smith has lately written
one Of the most decidly prn-slavery volumes ever
published aud instead Of crushing him, las it ough
to have done, it meets everywhere in the shame
less South with unqualified approval. 1t is no
wonderful that our people do not wish to spenC
money on missions in the slave States, when it i
understood that our ministers there deny bru
Abolitionisis, and affect not to be opposed to
savoholding Church has already done enough t
spread the gospel Of slavery. 1t is time that th
putrescent carcass of human chattelism ceased Il
diffuse its stencil and its deadly efluvia through
our ranks"
In regard to the prentence that slavery has bu
a nominal existence among Southern members o.
the Northern Methodist Churches, we find some
testimony in /ion's Herald. the Methodist organ
for New England, which we copy as follows
WE ARE COMPELLED TO BELIEVE.
1t is with unfeigned reluctance VIC believe the
following testimony, but cannot doubt the de
liberate testimony Of such man as Dir. j. B Nc
Ferrin, editor of the Christian 1dcocate, published
at Nashville, Tennessee. Moreover, it is phio-
sophical Did not Christ say, lie that is not for
me is against me; and he that gatLereth not
with me scattereth abroad? The Northern Adro-
cute, having doubted some Of Dr. McFerrin's state
ments, he replies
What are we to understand by these remarks {?
Does DR.. Ilibbard disheleve our statements, when
we affirm that preachers and ordained ministers
in connection with his Church shareholders =?
We did not say that any of the travelling preach
ers are now ostensiJle Shareholders. We are aware
that in the Baltimore Conference. but few. if any,
of the travelling preachers hold the right OF slave.
property 10 their own name. But how many arc
connected with families holding slayes2 We can
not tell how many but we do know, personally,
some who in this category. And we could
give the names of some in high places whose chill.
dren, if not themselves and wives, are interested
in slaves as property. Does be disbelleve US when
state that local preachers and ordained min
listers in the local ranks In the Methodist Episco-
! pal Church North, are Shareholders? Does be
disbelieve when affirm that members OF
his Church, in Maryland and Virginia, by hun.
dreds, are slaveholders owning slaves as proper
! ty; inheriting slaves; buying slaves; selling
slaves, ,as their wishes convenience may dictate
| If he will not credit our statements, we ask him
| to 90 to Baltimore TO the planting counties in
! Maryland, to many counties in Virginia, and in
vestigate for himself; and if he do not after n
| faithful examination, find our words true, then
will make the amcnde honorable through the
columns of his paper. We refer him to Rev. Tbos.
! O.. Summers d. D., Book Editor,in the Publishing
! House, at Nashville, Tenn, who formerly n
member of the Baltimore Conference aud filled
stations in the City of Baltimore and labored ex.
tensivey i'll Maryland and Virginia, and if lie
will not state that members o! tie Methodist
| Episcopal Church in all these places are slave
holders, and many of them extensive sluvehuld-
ers and that classleaders, stewards and preachers
are Shareholders, then we will retract what we have
said.
| Dr. libbard has been imposed upon and has
been made TO believe that there is indiscrmnate
saveholding among the members of his Church
| in Maryland and Virginia. What does he mean
! Sy indiScrin,iBate suveholdng? Is to inherit
slaves, to buy slaves, TO sell slaves without ref
erence to their emancipation, but property, in
discriminate slavehodng? Then are ministers
Of the Methodist Episcopal Church, North, slave
holders in the same sense that other citizens Of
saveholding States are Shareholders.
"We admit that a majority of the preachers in
! the Northern Connection are opposed to slavery ::
we admit that many of them, with thousands Of
the laity, are aiming to extirpate slaveholding
both in the local ministry and in the membership
vet this admission does not change the fact, and
we think DR.. H., or any of his brethren, should
net repudiate the Southern Church, 'r quarrel
with their brethren in the South, while in his own
Church there are hundreds, If not thousands. &c
bona fde shareholders, and no rule in the D,s.
cipline for their expulsion. They are, to use Dr..
Stevens language consiitutionaly historically,
and administratiyeiy' slaveholding Church."
"TURNED Up" "AGAIN.-Every time the Shame
cratic party has some especially mean job TO per-
form, it calls on The Nelc York Obssyuer If the
Christian ministry is to be attacked-if the North
leIn churches are to be arraigned if mancatching