Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1860-06-05
The Slavery Question
IL THE
Methodist General Conference.

HlCllUu4St GENERAL conference.
SPEECH OF REV. C. BATTELLE
The following is full report of tn,
speech of Rev. G. Battclle, of this city, il
the Conference now sitting at Buffalo, N
Y, against the majority report:
Mr.. PREsIDENT,-All will admit that any
law or rule maker, should be able to indi
cate with reasonable degree of certainty
t he probable results of the law or rule liz
rule is professed!y for the cxtirpation OF
Slavery. How2 Slavery only exists in
one portion of the territory of our Church
1t is an important fact, that the whole
Church, pastors, officials and private mem
bess, where slavery is, are united and de-
cded in their testimony, that rule such
as is here proposed, while it will do much
harm. cnn DO no good, and that its effects
will he evil and only evil, and that con-
tinualIy.
We come TO you then, brethren and cl-
ders of this venerable body, who favor
this measure, and we ask you after the
Methodistic fashion, the plain, simple,
practical question, What good will this
proposed rule probably accomplish? What
good will tl.is rule do not you, hut the
STARE? What good will it do, moi as IL
mere sentimcmt for your part of the Church.
where there is no slavcholding, but rs Il
lar for US to execute where alone slavery
is found!
And since we, all of us, to whom alone
the execution of this proposed law is to be
committed, tell you frankly, that VIC see in
| it, not the slightest good, but much harm
to the slave, to us, to the whole Church,
may we not respectfully, hut most empbat-
tehttlFFe tEehttlFFer6f 6fff@psaeXteneh0us f@ps cohslsrE -,
1t is no answer to all this to say tn"'
slavery is great evil. The Church pore
Ihnt testimony before many of us were
| horn She bears it still. 1t is if possible
| still less an answer to gravely inform US,
| that there are in the far South, and wholly
heyond our pastoral oversight, millions
| ~ slaves Who doubts it? Who among
ns fails to lament it? But what has all
that to do with the eXpediency oil TINS
nronoscd rule? Did the Church enSlnNc
these people? Does she do it? And sup
nose the statement of II former speaker DC
admitted, that some of the laws OF Mary
land. are or were bad, does that make th'S
rule goodP ,.,.,,,.,, =
Nor does it relieve the case to harang"e
MS from the Declaration OF lnuepenoence'
or flood us with tropcs and metaphors
Rut II is said that the old rule is hmHlGC-
ons doubt if there is any other one
law of the Church that has more unl-
formiIy of nterprctation-eithcr among
the Dsstors of this body or elsewhere
Rnt Is the new rnle plain This is, oe-
lirvc the seventh form of new rule that
has hrcn proposcd within less than seven
,.o,rs Each of them in turn, has re-
coired the attention of Conferences, Cen
eral and Annual, heads of Colleges, DOC
tors of Divinity, and of those W VINO are
and of those who expect TO be, ollS'"'S II
the Church. Six of these rules nave gon'
to the shades, chiefly by the help OF tn'
friends of this movement. The seventh
We hone will follow in the same direction
Does not this simple history prove tn
fo,Iv of this whole thing? If the sin It
he reached, were as obvious as brcihrei
snv If is: and the necessity of reaching !
bv a new Church rule ms imperative as
is declared to be, could not any plain goo
man after all this light, in two minute:
and in rs many lines write, down rul
5 which all would approve?
What does this rule meAnI Does
prohibit all slavcholding! Ihen "h
does it not honestly say soF Or does
, mean that the simple relatloh ol s!"'
Q holding shall be no bar to membership
= ovr Ci1nrch. so long as that relation
!, sustained in accordance with the Jaw
# love? Then why not say that! UT dot
If mean that every STAKEHOLDER by I'll
force OF this proposed enactmentis charge
:. with crime. nut upon his defence, and hel
to prove his innocence? Or is 1t after al
a mere "papcr'' law? Is it admitted by
fayorers, that though every hand he
,yrre upliGted for its passage, 1t woulu NJ
s free "A single slave, it would not break
SINGLE shackle? Is its real purpose not
d uextirpntc" nn alleged grievious sin in I!
Soutb. hut as n cub to propitiate "tl
whalc'' in the North?
Under the guisc of giving us a ta'' I
= whose execution or failure, we alone +"
be held to account before God, the Chnrc
I; and the world, do you intend as your re
Of of purposc to delicotcly bind together
<c Sentiment for some far away people to sm
he ot7 If this be so, dear brethren, let I
= = nrnv YOU say it out like men! But wlietll
io So or not, let me most respectfully, ev
nd bumbIy, suggest, that you owe it to yot
selves, to us, to the whole Church, to
alone for the time, the mere spread-cnI
lelorifcations of liberty, and so0eriy
swer us the simple, practical questions
>' What does this rule mem? what go
will il accomplish?
But while we see no good in the P'
posed measure, we see much evil IL
violation of the confidence which our p'
on nile in slave territory have reposed IN y
ia In 1874, the Church said. I'VE VIII
- have slayeholding in the EPiscop"cy,
he will not have slaveholding pastors. n
Border said the same-or rather Tue