The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1861-03-22
| Reported for the Daily Exchanged
| PRO CEEDLNGS OF BALTIMORE CON
FERENCE, At STA UNTON, "a.

SrAUNroN, Va, March TO-
Religious services were conducted by Rev. 7. II
| W. Monroe, after which the minutes of the las
session were read and approved. Rev. James Nc
| DOnough was on motion elected to Deacon's or
| ders. The Stewards reported and distributed the
funds subject to their order. The order of the day
was taken up. Rev.W. Hirst presented a communi
| cation signed by number of the Methodists of Bal
| timore, just received. On melton il was read and
laid on the table with all similar papers. similar
! paper was received from Calvert circuit. Rev. Il.
Ii. W. Monroe offered resolution appointing Com
mttee on Memorials. Rev. E. P. Phelps offered
substitute that three of the leading men-two
in favor of and opposed to the memorial-be ap-
poin ted to select Committee of Fifteen to whom all
| the memorials be referred Revs. Messrs. Clemm,
| Rosze and Phelps, were appointed Nominating
| Committee, with instructions to place themselves
on that committee. The substitute was adopted as
amended. Rev. j. N. Davis remarked
The strength of a cause lies in its Justice He
represented the membership of Patuxent circuit
The new chapter had been differently interpreted
Whatever it may mean, it has occasioned much
harm, both at the North and along the border. 1t
should never have been introduced into the Disci-
pline. Compare the chapter with the sent-
ment of the church in former times. Read extracts
from history of the Discipline of 1880.
Question by brother Gibson-How long was that
before the organization of the Conference?
Read again from page 274
Question by brother Gilbert-Was it before or
alter the church was governed by representatives
from different Conferences?
Question by brother Gibson-Did it refer to slave
holding sin?
The Methodist Church is not the only one which
has legisated upon the subject of slavery. He re-
terred to the Presbyterians, to show that the de-
claratons of 1878 were equally as strong, in his
opinion, those of 1861; the Tunker Church, which
disaows any STAKEHOLDER from communion; United
Brethren, who make non-slaveholding test of
membership. Our Baptist brethren have had their
difficulties upon this subject The Episcopal Church
alone has been kept free from this subject. He
deavored to show that our church did not stand
alone. He referred to the Methodist Church South,
which at separation took the same Discipline with
ours, but struck the chapter out. He quoted from
celebrated authors in the Southern Church, to show
that heretofore they had maintained aDti-slavery
grOund-Bascom and DR.. Smith.
The same doctrine was taught by the fathers OF
country-George Washington and ThOs. JEFF
ferson Monroe, Randolph, Henry-if it be penal
offence to circulate the discipline, it is penal of
fence to circulate their writings.
John Letcher endorsed the Ruffrer's pamphlet in
1S32-Summers, of Virginia, has repudiated her
antecedents, and says she is pro-savery.-
What is the true cause of the change of sentiment?
Not the new chapter. The constant agitation of
this subject at the North? The public sentiment
in Virginia has chan ged more rapidly in the last
five years. Dr. Roper is to be credited in large
measure. The Baltimore Conference has either
backslidden or forwardslidden.
The unsettled condition of country admon-
ishes to be careful in action-the secession
of the church in 1874 did to dissolve the Union
than anything else.
We should consult the East Baltimore and other
border conferences before taking such action. If
you pass that maority report you divide this con-
ference by the Potomac river.
1t is contended that the new chapter is doc
trne. 1t is not 1t is said we are the Methodist
Episcopal Church. If so, why seek redress of
grievances at the General Conference2 Why not
elect Bishops, book agents, &C.? If wrong, he
hoped to be set right
David Thomas-Had no speech prepared, but de-
sired to make few remarks in connection with
the subject-he discarded the idea that he belonged
to any party faction-and he wanted to hold on
all of Virginia and Maryland. In regard to the
slavery question, there is no controversy. Did not
regard the chapter laD, but direct insult to
preachers and people of the borders. He read and
commented upon the new chapter. He regarded it as
sufficient cause of separation from the North, but
would it be expedient thus to act? The sentiments
of the chapter false, shown by the Scriptures
of the Old and New Testament. Slavery has done
more for the colored people than any other crcum-
stance that ever happened under the arrangements
of Divine Providence.
But should there be no compromise to retain the
unity of the Baltimore Conference? He could not &C
cord with the definition given by brother Israel of
the doctrine as "a declaration of belief touching
any matter of fact" He regarded it as can object
OF faith" 1t could not be one and the same
The chapter was not contrary to the restriction
rules-did not establish any new standard of doc
trine, but simply gave their opinion of the mean
ing of the sacred Book. He would like, but could
not believe that we were constituted the Methodist
Episcopal Church proper by the action of the Ge-
neral Conference.
He closed by earnest appeal for harmony.
The following ministers constitute the Committee
on Memorials. Alfred Griffith, Norval Wilson, n.
J. B. Morgan, j. Lanahan, G.. w. Israel, w. Hirst,
+. Hickey, E. Busey, j. n. Davis, A. Buhrman, p
b. Smith, r. r. S. Hough, j. Landstreet, J. Wheel
er, S. S. Roszell. Adjourned. STELLA.
MONDAY AFTERNOON.
The examination of character and classes occu-
pied the entire session.
SEVENTH DAY.
STAUNToN, Va, March 20, 1861.
Conference ment at O'Clock. Religious services
by Rev. c. Parkinson. Minutes read and ap-
proved.
Question.-"Do you understand that the cand
date for elders orders, in responding to the
disciplinary questions as the discipline requires,
pledges himself to believe all the doctrines of the
NJ. E. Church ?''
Answer.-"I understand that the candidate ac-
Knowledges his persuasion that the Holy Scriptures
contain sufficiently all doctrine required, fnesessay
for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ;
and that he pledges himself to instruct the people
committed to his charge out Of the said Scriptures,
and to teach nothing required of necessity to
eternal salvation but that aoich he shall be persuaded
may be concluded and proved by the Scriptures;
and that, as to doctrine, he pledges himself in
spending to the disciplinary questions to nothing
beyond these fundamental doctrines G Gods ,cord."-
| Levi Scott
Bishop Scott offered to ordsin Rev. E. F. Het-
rick though he did not believe the doctrine of
| the new chapter, should brother II. withdraw his
protest. He had no authority to ordain any minis
ter who took upon himself the ordination vows
under protest. ,ehaerer tbe ground of that protest
may be.
Rev. j. W. Canter was located at his own re-
| quest.
I The order of the dar was taken up.
Rev. j. W. Start said, whether for veal or for
wo, union disunpn, he as an honest man, as
| his brethren would testify. He belonged to no
man in the Buffalo Conference. Since the action
of the late General Conference, he had entertained
but one view-that is the imperious necessity of a
| separation. The only fluctuations of his view were
in regard to the time and manner. The people of
st. Mary's, Prince Georges and Charles counties,
Nd, are with Virginia to-day; but yet, for expedi-
ency they were willing to delay for a short time.
lie would never give any influence he might have
to unite this Conference with the NJ. E. Church
South. But let come to the new chapter. Is it
constitutional or unconstitutional? Some say it
| harms no one. Murder is uuconstitutional-does
| at harm no one? As for the analogy between
Church and State, it was not so striking as ome
would have us believe. In State, we have legisla
tive, executive and judiciary. If the legislative
depar rtment passed unconstitutional act We could
| appeal to the judiciary. But in Church we must
| appeal to that same body that passed such uncon-
| stituGonal act for its repeal.
He proceeded to discuss the merits of the memo
rial passed in the Laymens Convention He believed
the memorial from Light Street was not based
| upon logical grounds. The question is not what
| the Baltimore Conference has been, but what she