New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-04-03
ANNUAL CONFERENCE.
NINTH DAY.
orrespondence Of The N. Y. Tribune.

Correspondence Of The N. Y Tribune.
PHILADELPHIA, March 30, 1860.
The session to day has been the most exciting Of the
entire Conference. The memoirs of six deceased
members were read this morning, and this afternoon
the famous Tract subject was before the Conference,
and elected most excited debate. But tie feature in
the way of intense feeling in the Of the Rev.
w. Quinn, sganst whom charges were preferred for
holding slaves contrary the Discipline, in tthough
his slaves were msnumitted, it was not until they
we're tbirty.three years Of age. Mr. Quinn was re-
ouesed last Conference 10 manumit them earlier. He
entered into an ar sument in his reply by letter, ques
toppg the right of the Conference to authoritatyely
determine the exact time at which he shond mInumt
A, the case may become Of wide importance, 1t
msy be well to sketch ii. The Rev. Mr.. Cunningham
cortended that the Slavery which manumted slaves
at thirty fee years of age was the most profitable
HIND and that il was not manumisson such 10 )ked
to extI patton. Mr.. Qnigey said were about tn
try this for not being Anti Slavery, when he had
manumitted his slaves at q time when they would
bring him 800 600; try man for not being Anti
Slavery who has lost 900 900 for this very principle
A substitute, which offered for the motion TO en-.
terrain the charge, sho wed the to have docu-
mentsry history, which that, in 1872 this Confer
requested all ministers being within the State Of
Delaware absolutely TO manumit ther slaves but fixed
no time. In Mary land, it was understood at tat
ime there could be no manumission aud accordingly
they simply requested ministers resident there, and
holding slaves 10 eDdeavor 70 nduce them 10 accept Of
their liberty, and go 10 Africa.
In 1915, Mr.. Quinn had to answer the question,
" Do You hold slaves in any way7" and he said he
did. He was then required TO manumit Them and ex-
ecute deed of manuntssion, but it fixed no time.
In 1916 Mr.. Quinn replied BY letter, and his charac
ter was parsed, &c.
The question was on the right Of the Conference to
90 behind that action, under which he was required
10 manumit, without any period being fixed, aud in
compliance with which he did manumit at least ten
years than the laws of tne State OF Mary
land fixed the Init at which they should not be
exercised. II also stated that his wife had abso-
Lutte control the slave property and that he could
not manumt her elaves without her consent. 50 that
was argued she was the responsible party in the
case, &c.
Finally, however, the Conference disposed of the
the ground that it was closed by his COM
plispce with the requirement of the Conference Of
1885, which, it was alleged, put it beyond their con-
troll al present Itthus constitutes not even an excep
ton to the recommendation of this Conference one
year ago, that ministers manum slaves at IS and II
years Of age respectively, for male aud female. The
not the BUSINESS of his course, but on the
abstract question whether his case was covered and
finally disposed Of by the Conference acceptance, &c.,
of 1915.
In the evening the appointments were read by the
presiding Bishop.