such action. They commonly regard slavery as a great evil, though not necessarily a sin; but it would be a great mistake to conclude that the anti-slavery sentiments of Methodists have been wholly or mostly the fruits of Church action or agitation. Brethren fall into a great error in imagining that all the abolition influences abroad in the Northern Churches originated in them. On the contrary, our common newspapers, the contests and canvassings connected with our elections, our periodical literature, are rife with abolitionism on other and broader grounds. It is perhaps to be regretted that this embarrassing subject is so much discussed at the North; but it is certainly true that Methodists here derive their sentiments chiefly from such sources as I have intimated from their reading, and from their intercourse with their fellow-citizens. They are abolitionists naturally and inevitably, because they breathe the atmosphere of this countrybecause the sea is open to free adventure-their freighted ships bring home periodicals and books from all the countries of Europe tinged, or, if any prefer, infected with these views. The difficulties of this question, then, do not arise chiefly from its relation to abolitionism in the Church, but from the general tone of feeling among the people of the non-slaveholding states.

'I trust, sir, that, in pronouncing our sentiments on the subject under consideration, we shall not regard ourselves as acting for distinct and antagonistic interests-that we shall not inquire whether we may inflict an injury on one portion of the Church, regarded by itself, and no doubt justly, as ever mindful of its constitutional obligations, to save another portion from evils engendered in the hot-bed of abolitionism— part of the Church ever ready to trample down constitutional barriers, and remove old landmarks and securities.

"That is not the true issue; for in four fifths of the antislavery Conferences, to say nothing of the rest, there have been no agitations, no seeds of abolition sown, but the people have

formed their opinions as citizens of the country, and, notwithstanding these convictions on the subject, they have as tender a regard for the interests of the Church as any of their brethren. As a member of the New York Conference, I do most earnestly protest against any declaration which shall go forth before the world affirming or intimating that the New York Conference, as such, has at all meddled in this matter, except to prevent apprehended evil, and to perform what it regarded as a pressing, though painful, duty to the whole Church. I will only say further, that in our action in the case of a venerable and beloved bishop we have trouble and sorrow enough heaped upon us-Pelion on Ossa-afflictions on afflictions. Let not, then, this drop of bitterness be wrung into the cup which we are compelled to drink. Let it not be said that we are groaning under the pressure of difficulties arising from an agitation which we have got up and can not now allay. Let it not be said that we are now suffering the consequences of our unconstitutional meddling with the subject of slavery; that the seed sown by us has sprung up, and we are now reaping the harvest. As a delegate from the New York Conference, I sympathize with its honor; and I declare, before heaven and earth, that it is no fault of that body of ministers that we are now pressed down with such a burden of difficulties. Sir, there are men in this Conference who have suffered much in vindicating what they regarded as the rights of the South. My venerable friend on my right has, on this account, received great and unmerited obloquy. Another excellent minister on my left, and many more not now in my eye, have been reproached as pro-slavery men and men-stealers, for the part they thought it their duty to take against the ultra view and measures that threatened to prevail a few years ago. They have deserved well-I think they have merited the thanks-of Southern brethren for their earnest efforts to shield them and their rights against encroachments on the constitution of the Church.

"Sir, I have done. I do not pretend to have succeeded in making a constitutional argument. My object was to do my duty in stating, as well as I was able, the just and proper grounds of the proposed resolution.'"

It may readily be imagined that the following spontaneous expressions of affectionate attachment that fell from the lips of one of his Southern brethren in the course of the ensuing debate called forth responses in his own warm heart. Rev. G. F. Pierce remarked, "That there was an honored representative of the New York Conference, who favored us with his opinions a few days ago, whom he had loved from his early boyhood, and never more so than now. I take this occasion to assure him that, whatever may be his vote on this trying question (and I estimate all the delicacies of his position), he will still remain enshrined in the fervid affections of a heart too warm to speak prudently on an occasion like this."

On the Thursday after he spoke on the substitute, he wrote to his wife:

CVI.

It is so important to me to watch the great question at issue, that I can do nothing else. I am to preach to-night in Brooklyn. I fear the consequences, but mean to be prudent. The torturing question is still on our hands, and the prospect does not brighten. We came near a vote to-day, and may, perhaps, reach one to-morrow on the " substitute," which will probably pass, and then will follow, in due time at least, the realization of all our fears. I am worn down with agony of mind, with efforts and tears, which yet are all in vain. To God I desire to commit all in the spirit of faith. It is delightful, amid so many causes of sorrow, to be able to speak favorably of the general temper and Christian feeling of the Conference.

He writes:

CVII. TO JOHN M. FLOURNOY, ESQ.

New York, May 31st, 1844. We are full of uncomfortable difficulties in our General Conference. There is much calmness and good temper, but no light. The general feeling against slavery is so strong in the North and West, that all the delegates agree that it would be impracticable for Bishop Andrew to exercise his functions at present. The Southern brethren affirm, with equal unanimity, that they can not allow him to desist without ruin to their cause. Both parties, I have reason to know, represent the real condition of their work. I am satisfied that the evil is beyond the reach of a remedy, and incompatible with our unity. The only proper question before us is the best way of palliating an evil in itself inevitable. I never saw so dark a day. May God direct us. If we may not dwell together, may we, at least, part as brethren.

On the first of June, after a protracted debate, Mr. Finley's substitute passed the Conference by a vote of 110 yeas to 68 nays. The votes were given amid the most profound stillness, Dr. Olin voting with the New York Conference delegation in favor of the substitute. After some discussion on the precise import of the language of this substitute, Dr. Olin, having spoken on the subject, embodied his sentiments in the form of resolutions, which, however, he did not press on the Conference :

"Resolved, That this Conference does not consider its action in the case of Bishop Andrew as either judicial or punitive, but as a prudential regulation for the security and welfare of the Church.

"Resolved, That having made a solemn declaration of what in its judgment the safety and peace of the

66 6

'Sir, I have done. I do not pretend to have succe making a constitutional argument. My object was my duty in stating, as well as I was able, the just and grounds of the proposed resolution.'"

It may readily be imagined that the following taneous expressions of affectionate attachment tha from the lips of one of his Southern brethren in course of the ensuing debate called forth response his own warm heart. Rev. G. F. Pierce remar. "That there was an honored representative of the. York Conference, who favored us with his opinio:. few days ago, whom he had loved from his early ! hood, and never more so than now. I take this occa to assure him that, whatever may be his vote on trying question (and I estimate all the delicacies position), he will still remain enshrined in the affections of a heart too warm to speak pruder an occasion like this."

On the Thursday after he spoke on the substit wrote to his wife:

CVI.

It is so important to me to watch the question at issue, that I can do nothing else. I am to to-night in Brooklyn. I fear the consequences, but be prudent. The torturing question is still on our hand the prospect does not brighten. We came near a vote and may, perhaps, reach one to-morrow on the "subs:" which will probably pass, and then will follow, in d at least, the realization of all our fears. I am wor with agony of mind, with efforts and tears, which yet in vain. To God I desire to commit all in the spirit of It is delightful, amid so many causes of sorrow, to be speak favorably of the general temper and Christian of the Conference.