Year: 1874

The Methodist Church was the first


to split on the slavery question, and it
seems impossible to bridge over the


chasm. Many efforts have been made,


but without success. H. v. Redfield,
the correspondent Of the Cincinnati


Commercial, in a recent letter discuss


ing this question, says:


The points of difference are such


that it does not seem possible for the


severed churches to be brought to-


gether, during this generation at leasr.


In Tennessee and other Southern


States where each church. or each


wing of the church, occupies the field,


the antagonism is such that the ad-


vocates of union of the church under


one head must be well-nigh discour-


aged. Those who hope for. the re-


uniting of the great family Of Ameri-


can Methodists, and expect it, lose
sight of the real cause Of the two


Methodists." The northern branch


of the church in the south has gather


ed into its fold nearly two hundred


thousand negroes. They have negro
travelling mixed conferences,


aud mixed schools to the extent OF the


material that will mix. The southern


church have nothing of the sort.


Their colored church is a distinct or


ganization, and there is no mixing in


conference, schools or communion. Is


not this a radical point of difference?


How is it to be surmounted? There


is.only one way; the southern churches


must adopt the method Of the north
ern churches, or the northern churches
must adopt the method Of the southern
church. There is no halfway ground.
Either the negroes must be taken into
the body of the church, or they must
be organized to themselves. The
northern church does one aud the
southern church the other. The
northern church cannot yield this
point, and the southern church will
not yield it. Then how is there 70 be
a union of the church? There can
be none until one or the other pass
over to the opposite, and this neither
will do. The committee on reunion,
at the late general conference of the
southern church at Louisville had this
to say on the subject: Our northern
brethren have mixed conferences,
mixed congregations, and mixed
schools. We do not ask them to adopt
our plan. Wecould not adopt theirs"


We publish the above extract for
the purpose of calling attention to the
last paragraph. 1t echoes the senti-
ments of white people of the south.
The same feeling that actuated the
Louisville conference causes the south
ern people to oppose the civil rights
bill. The Southern Methodist will
never unite with the Northern Metho-
dist so long as they recognize mix
ture of races, and the southern people
will never consent to mixed schools
and social equality. When the points
of difference are 20 radical, what hope
is there for uniting the severed MethO-
dist church or for securing mixed
schools? The Democratic and Con-
party is terribly in earnest
on this question. The mass of abomi-
nation, called the civil rights bill, may
be passed by a malignant partisan con-
gress, but its infamous demands and
can never be enforced
The abominable measure has been so
ventilated, its foul enormi-
ties so thoroughly exposed that there
has been great reaction among the
northern people. Every man Of sense
knows that the passage of the civil
rights bill would break up the public
schools in the south, and that the
negro children, educated by the tax
imposed on the whites would be de-
prived of the facilities for education.
This may induce many Radicals to op-
pose the measure. They might be
anxious to insult and humiliate the
whites, but it remains to be seen if
they would do this at the expense of
bringing up their pet negro children
in ignorance. They will, perhaps, tell
us that unless we submit to mixed
schools and social equality, and COM
ply sreed lywith all the requirements
of the civil rights bill, congress will
provide some more stringent method
Of coereing US into obedience. But
congress. with all its resources for in
venting means for bedeviling and tor
turing the south, cannot force social
equality.-Memphis Appeal