Cibrarji? of t:he t:heological ^mimxy 
 
 PRINCETON . NEW JERSEY 
 PRESENTED BY 
 
 Princeton University Library 
 
 BX 8393 .S42 
 Scott, 0. 
 
 The grounds of secession 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Arclnive 
 in 2014 
 
 https://archive.org/details/groundsofsecessiOOscot 
 
THE 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 FKOM THE 
 
 M. E. CHURCH, 
 
 OR, 
 
 BOOK FOR THE TIMES: 
 
 BKING A'V 
 
 EXAMIIVATION OF HER CONNECTION WITH SLAVERY, 
 AND ALSO OF HER FORM OF GOVERNMENT. 
 
 BY REV. O. SCOTT. 
 
 REVISED AND COKRECTED. 
 TO WHICH IS ADDED 
 
 WESLEY UPON SLAVERY, 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 
 PUBLISHED BY L. C. MATLACK, NO. 3 SPRUCE ST, 
 
 roR THE nESLEYAN METHODIST COnHCCTIOIl Of AMCBICA. 
 
 1851, 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 In issuing a new edition of this able work, the publish- 
 er feels prompted to say, that he regards this compilation 
 as one of the most important, and truth-telling documents 
 that is extant upon the subjects here treated. It is an 
 honor to the memory of the author. And though he did 
 not claim originality in the chief matter of the work, 
 still, the care and judgment displayed in bringing such a 
 mass of facts within so small a compass, was scarcely 
 less honorable to his talents, than to have originated the 
 whole contents of the work. A large edition has been 
 sold in tract form, and the demand for it is so great, t.iat 
 it is now stereotyped, and put in a form more in corre- 
 spondence with its merits. To make this work what it 
 professes to be, a Book for the Times, the masterly tract 
 of Mr. Wesley upon Slavery is appended, which gives a 
 finish to it that will command an extensive patronage. 
 
 March, 1849 
 
 Cha.s' Wii,lkt9, print. 
 5 Spruce-st. N.Y. 
 
THE 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 FROM THE 
 
 M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 WITHDRAWAL OF JOTHAM HORTON. ORANGE 
 SCOTT, AND LAROY SUNDERLAND. 
 
 With the date of this communication closes 
 our connection with the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. We take this step after years of consid- 
 eration, and with a solemn sense of our responsi- 
 bility to God — we take it with a view to his glory 
 and the salvation of souls. 
 
 Twenty years and upwards of the best part of 
 our lives have been spent in the service of this 
 church — during which time Ave have formed 
 acquaintances which have endeared to our 
 hearts multitudes of Cluistian friends. Many 
 of these are true kindred spirits, and we leave 
 them with reluctance. But the view we take of 
 our responsibility is not local in its bearings, nor 
 limited in its duration. While we live, and when 
 we die, we wish to bear a testimony which shall 
 run parallel with coming ages : nay, with the an- 
 nals of eternity. Many considerations of friend- 
 
4 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 ship as well as our temporal interests, bind us to 
 the church of our early choice. But for the sake 
 of a high and holy cause, we can forego all these. 
 We wish to live not for ourselves, nor for the pre- 
 sent age alone, but for all coming time ; nay, for 
 God and eternity. We have borne our testimony a 
 long time against what we considered wrong in 
 the M. E. Church. We have waited, prayed, and 
 hoped, until there is no longer any groimd for 
 hope. Hence we hq,ve come to the deliberate 
 conclusion that we must submit to things as they 
 are, or peaceably retire. We have unhesitatingly 
 chosen the latter. 
 
 It is, however, proper, in leaving the church, to 
 assign our reasons. These are mainly, the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 1. The M. E. Church is not only a slave-hold- 
 ing, but a slavery defending church. 
 
 2. The Government of the M. E. Church con- 
 tains principles not laid down in the Scriptures, 
 nor recognized in the usages of the primitive 
 church — principles which are subversive of the 
 rights, both of ministers and laymen. 
 
 That the M. E. Church is a slaveholding church, 
 none will deny. She allows her members and 
 ministers unrebuked, to hold innocent human be- 
 ings in a state of hopeless bondage — nay, more, 
 she upholds and defends her communicants in 
 this abominable business ! All her disciplinary 
 regulations which present a. show of opposition to 
 slavery are known and acknowledged to be a 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCFI. 
 
 5 
 
 dead letter in the -South. And they are as dead 
 in the North as in the South. Even the general 
 rule has been altered, either through carelessness 
 or design, so as to favor the internal slave trade ; 
 and yet the last General . Conference refused to 
 correct the error, knowing; it to be such ! 
 
 This church has defended, in a labored argu- 
 ment, through some of her best ministers, the 
 present rightful relation of master and slave — in that 
 she has never called them to account for putting 
 forth such a document. 
 
 She has exhorted, through her regularly con- 
 stituted agents and highest officers, the trustees of 
 Methodist churches to close their pulpits against 
 Methodist anti-slavery lecturers. 
 
 She has refused, in numerous instances, through 
 her bishops, to entertain, m the annual confer- 
 ences, motions expressive of the sinfuhiess of 
 slave-holding — motions for the appointment of 
 committees on slavery — motions for the adoption 
 of reports on slavery ; and that, because those 
 motions and reports contained the sentiment, that 
 slaveholding is sin — which, it was alleged, is con- 
 trary to Methodism, which recognizes and ap- 
 proves of the relation of master and slave under 
 some circumstances. 
 
 She has refused, through her bishops, to hear 
 the prayers of scores and hundreds of her mem- 
 bers against slavery, in some of the annual con- 
 ferences. 
 
 She has refused to publish, in her official pa- 
 
6 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 pers, several addresses of the British Wesieyan 
 Conference, because they alkided to slavery. 
 
 She has arraigned and condemned, withont the 
 forms of trial, members of her highest ecclesiasti 
 cal assembly, for simply attending and speaking 
 in an anti-slavery meeting. 
 
 She has condemned modern abolition, refusing 
 at the same time to say, in the language of the 
 discipline, that she is as " much as ever convinced 
 of the great evil of slavery." 
 
 She has exhorted her ministers and members 
 throughout the country " wholly to refrain" from 
 this agitatuig subject. 
 
 She has said, through some of her annual con- 
 ferences, that slavery is not a moral evil — while 
 she has repeatedly refused, through her bishops, 
 to allow other annual conferences to express the 
 opposite sentiment. 
 
 She has allowed without censure, one of her 
 bishops to issue a labored address, in which an 
 attempt is made to prove that slave-holding is 
 not only justified, but enjoined under some cir- 
 cumstances, by the Golden Rule ! and she has 
 published this address in her official papers. 
 
 She has, through her ministers and members, 
 disfranchised and censured or expelled, class-lead- 
 ers, stewards, exhorters, and local preachers, for 
 the simple crime of their abolition movements. 
 
 She has, through some of her annual confer- 
 ences, prohibited her ministers and preachers 
 from patronizing anti-slavery papers. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 7 
 
 She has refused to receive into some of her an- 
 nual conferences, pious and talented young men 
 on trial, for the simple reason, that they were 
 active abolitionists. 
 
 She has, through the same medium, arraigned, 
 censured, suspended, and in some instances ex- 
 pelled her ministers, for contumacy and msubor- 
 dination with respect to abolition; — and some of 
 these she has followed from year to year, by her 
 bishops and members of other conferences for the 
 evident purpose of destroying their ministerial 
 character and influence ; — subjecting them to re- 
 peated, vexatious and expensive trials. 
 
 She has two or three times altered her discipline 
 to effect, as is believed, their expulsion. 
 
 She has removed Presiding Elders from their 
 districts for their abolition movements ; suffering, 
 as it would seem, this crime to effect the appoint- 
 ment of other ministers and preachers. 
 
 She has refused, in her General Conference ca- 
 pacity, to re-affirm her former language of op- 
 position to slavery, though requested to do this 
 by some thousands of her ministers and mem- 
 bers. She has refused, in the same capacity, to 
 take exceptions to the sentiment of two or three 
 annual conferences, who have said that slavery 
 is not a moral evil. 
 
 And finally, she has adopted a resolution on 
 colored testimony, which disfranchises eighty thou 
 sand of her members — thus giving the weight of her 
 influence to that slaveholding legislation which, 
 
8 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION. 
 
 in a civil point of view, disfranchises millions of 
 our fellow countrymen. 
 
 Add to this, the fact that all her official papers, 
 are so much under the influence of slaveholding, 
 that no abolitionist can be heard on the subject 
 of slavery and abolition, however he may be 
 abused, traduced and misrepresented. 
 
 In view of these facts we ask, is not the M. E. 
 Church one of the main supporters of slavery in 
 this country 1 Has she not defended it in almost 
 every conceivable way 1 And is there any pros- 
 pect that this church will ever be reformed, so 
 long as slavery exists in the country 1 If not, can 
 we obey the commands of God, and continue in 
 fellowship with a church which receives, shields, 
 and defends, thousands and tens of thousands, 
 who, according to Mr. Wesley, are " exactly on 
 a level with men-stealers V' If a large portion of 
 our ministers and members were sheep-stealers 
 or horse-stealers, there would be more propriety 
 in covering them ; — but when we consider that 
 they make merchandize of the souls and bodies 
 of men, or do that which is tantamount to such a 
 traffic, without rebuke, — how can we co-operate 
 with them in the great work of reforming the 
 world 1 Others must judge for themselves, but 
 we feel it our duty to " come out of her" — to 
 "have no fellowship" or connection "with the 
 unfruitful works of darkness," but to "come out 
 from among them and be separate !" By this 
 course we solemnly believe, we can do more for 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 9 
 
 the cause (f{ the bleeding slave, than by continu- 
 ing in a SLAVERY-DEFENDING church, when there 
 can be no hope of reforming her till the comitry 
 is reformed. But, 
 
 2dly, The Goveriynent of the M. E. Church con- 
 tains principles not laid down in the Scriptures, 
 nor recognized in the usages of the primitive 
 church — ])rinciples which are subversive of the 
 rights both of ministers and laymen. 
 
 While we admit that no form of church govern- 
 meut is laid down in the Scriptures, we contend 
 that principles are laid down which are in direct 
 contravention with some of the existing forms. 
 
 That the Roman Catholic is of this class, all wi'l 
 admit. The claims of the high churchmen are 
 believed to be equally unfounded. And though 
 the objectionable features in the M. E. form of 
 church government are less wide of the mark, yet 
 they are as truly unauthorized as anything in 
 either of the above mentioned forms. Both Scrip- 
 ture and primitive usage recognize Christians in 
 the 1 gilt of one great brotherhood — possessing 
 essentially the same rights, subject only to one 
 master. True, pastors and people, have their 
 l)eculiar and distinctive duties, but there is to be 
 710 " lording it over God's heritage.^ 
 
 From the Scriptures it is evident, that even in 
 the times of the apostles, laymen were members 
 of the highest councils of the church, and Lord 
 King clearly proves that this was the usage of the 
 Christian church for several ages. It follows, 
 
10 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 therefore, that the contrary practice is not only 
 without Scripture and usage, but contrary thereto. 
 That separation between ministers and laymen 
 which exists in the M. E. church, owes its origin 
 to the assumptions of Rome ! It exists, we be- 
 ieve, in no other church. Even the Episcopalian 
 church in this country cannot elect a bishop witk- 
 out the concurrence of a hoard of lai/menJ 
 
 The power which our bishoiis claim and exer- 
 cise in the annual conferences is contrary to the 
 plainest principles of Christian responsibility. All 
 religious associations must, in the nature of things, 
 have the right to express, without restraint, their 
 opinions on any moral question. But tliis no an- 
 nual or quarterly conference in the M. E. church 
 can do without the consent of the bishop or pre- 
 siding elder. But no body of Christian men has 
 any more right to submit to such restraints, than 
 they have to commit the entire keeping of the^ 
 consciences to other hands. That holy men of 
 God should consent, in this enlightened age, to 
 exercise such power over the consciences of their 
 brethren, is truly astonishing! but not more so 
 than that ministers can be found who will peace- 
 ably submit to such innovations upon their res- 
 ponsibilities to God !! 
 
 Scarcely less objectionable, is the power con- 
 ferred upon the bishops of the M. E. church, in 
 the appointment of the preachers. That the en- 
 tire destinies of three or four thousand men should 
 be in the hands of some five or six bishops, so far 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 11 
 
 as their fields of labor are concerned, seems to be 
 forbidden by the fact that these bishops are fal- 
 lible men — that they are often ignorant both of 
 the preachers and people ; and that they cannot 
 control the openings of Providence, and the calls 
 of God. We know the presiding elders are usually 
 called upon for advice in this matter ; but there 
 is no OBLIGATION on the part of the Episcopacy to 
 advise with any one. And when all must admit 
 that it would be dangerous for the bishops to 
 exercise the power they possess, what advantage 
 can there be in tneir possessing such power? If 
 it be wrong to rob our fellow-creatures, how can 
 it be right to possess the legal poiver to do this? 
 But that the bishops will ever be curtailed in their 
 prerogatives, in this respect, there is not the least 
 ground of hope, when it is considered, that after 
 those in the general conference who were in favor 
 of some reform in this respect, had toiled for thirty 
 years, namely, from 1790 to 1820, and when, hav- 
 ing finally succeeded in carrying a small com- 
 promise measure, by a vote of more than two- 
 thirds of the general conference, the whole meas- 
 ure was defeated by the minority, including two 
 bishops — though one was but a bishop elect. 
 This measure only provided that when presiding • 
 elders were wanted, the bishop should nominate 
 three times the number wanted, out of whom the 
 conference should elect the requisite number : — 
 and the presiding elders thus constituted, were to 
 be made an advisory council in stationing the 
 
12 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 preachers. This was not what a large portion of 
 the general conference wanted, but what they 
 consented to take, as a compromise measure. 
 But Episcopacy would not be curtailed in this res- 
 pect. And yet some of our friends talk about 
 reforming the church in her government. Impos 
 sible ! This can never be done. History and 
 facts are all against the indulgence of such a 
 hope. Could we see the most distant prospect of 
 any material change for the better, we would wait 
 and patiently labor. We say now, as we have 
 often said, that reform and not revolution, is our 
 wish. But no important church reform ever yet 
 took place in the entire body, though by secessions, 
 the monster, power, has been checked in his pro- 
 gressive career. What would the state of the 
 world now have been, with respect to popery, 
 had it not been for Luther and the Reformation ? 
 Who can tell to what lengths tyranny would have 
 been carried ere this, had there been no opposi- 
 tion 1 no secession 1 
 
 If the presiding elders were a legal council to 
 station the preachers, the case would be bettered 
 but little, in some respects at least, inasmuch 
 as they are created by the bishop alone, and en- 
 tirely dependent on him for their office. They, 
 therefore, would be mere echoes of his will. 
 
 Connected with this unrestricted stationing au- 
 thority, which the bishop possesses, is the power 
 to transfer preachers to any part of the United 
 States, to Texas, or to Africa — and that too, not 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 13 
 
 only without their consent, but against their will ' 
 Thus, for instance, for the simple crime of aboli- 
 tion, a brother may be placed by the bishop 
 where, in all probability, he would be put either 
 out of the church, or out of the world. For, he 
 may be transferred to a southern conference, to 
 which, if he does not go, he would lose his mem- 
 bership in the church ; and where, if he does go, 
 he would be liable to lose his head. It is not 
 enough, to say, in reply to this, that there is no 
 probability that this power will ever be exercised, 
 because its exercise would be wrong ; for how 
 can it be right to possess this power, if it would be 
 wrong to exercise it 1 
 
 Another serious objection to Methodist Episco- 
 pacy, is the election of bishops for life. Once a 
 bishop, always a bishop, however incapacitated 
 to the performance of the duties of the office from 
 bodily or mental infirmities. 
 
 We will mention but one thing more. And that 
 is, that feature in the economy of the M. E. church, 
 which gives the power to the preacher of exclud- 
 ing almost any member he may wish to get rid of. 
 True, the Discipline requires the forms of trial, in 
 case^of expulsion; but as the preacher has the 
 sole power to appoint the committee, and that 
 without giving the accused any right of challenge, 
 it is not, in general, difficult, for a preacher to 
 punish whom he pleases, and that for trifling 
 causes, as many can testify. And as he has the 
 sole right to appoint all the leaders and nominate 
 
14 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 all thQ stewards, it is of but little consequence for 
 an expelled member to appeal to a quarterly 
 meeting conference, if the preacher is known to 
 be strongly prejudiced against him — however un- 
 founded that prejudice Ynay be. 
 
 Such, in brief, are some of our reasons for 
 leaving the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 We wish it to be distinctly understood, that we 
 do not withdraw from any thing essential to pure 
 Wesleyan Methodism. We only dissolve our con- 
 liection with Episcopacy and Slavery. These we 
 believe to be anti-scriptural, and well calculated 
 to sustain each other. 
 
 There are many valuable things in the economy 
 of Methodism; these we shall still adhere to. 
 And this we can do without having any connec- 
 tion with what is worse than objectionable. We 
 know it will be said, God has greatly blessed the 
 church, and is evidently still owning her, and 
 therefore we ought not to disturb her peace by 
 any discussions of her polity. The same remark 
 may be made in regard to slavery. And yet who 
 will pretend either that slavei*y is right because 
 God has so wonderfully blessed the church, or 
 that for this reason we should refrain from agitat- 
 ing her with discussions on the subject 1 We 
 ask who ? for we all know that ar!<!-abolitionists 
 have used this very argument. Abolitionists, how- 
 ever, have considered it unsound. Let them, 
 then, be careful how they take precisely the same 
 ground in relation to another matter. True, God 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 15 
 
 has blessed us ; but this is not perhaps so much 
 owing to our slavery and Episcopacy, as to the 
 evangelical character of our doctrines and our 
 zeal. And let us not forget that he has blessed 
 other churches too. 
 
 Should it be said that God has frowned upon 
 all who have left the church — it might be replied, 
 in the first place, that this is not the fact. Some 
 of the secessions from the church are prospering 
 as well, in proportion to their means, as the M. E. 
 church. ■ And secondly, if it were true, it would 
 not prove that the act of their leaving the church 
 was displeasing tp God — much less would it prove 
 that no circumstances can exist which will make 
 a secession justifiable. 
 
 Though we entertain none other but kind feel- 
 iigs towards those we leave, yet we expect to be 
 ill-treated by our former friends. We know how 
 it has been with others who have left. To lose 
 ministers and members is a mortification to sec- 
 tarian pride. Those who will defend the church 
 and her usages, are fine fellows ; but the moment 
 they leave her communion, no reproachful epi- 
 thets are too bad to heap upon them. Their mo- 
 tives are impugned, and their honesty questioned. 
 And this, for effect, is sometimes done in advance ! 
 But we have counted the cost, and are prej^ared 
 to suffer persecution. By whatever spirit some 
 of our opponents may be actuated, we hope to be 
 saved from all unkind expressions. 
 
 Though but three of us sigu this document, 
 
16 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 scores, if not hundreds, to our certain knowledge, 
 might have easily been obtained. We did not 
 wish any other names now. There will be an op- 
 portunity for all who may desire it, to follow our 
 example. We shall not be disappointed if but 
 few do this We have no anxiety on this ground. 
 We act for ourselves. Knowing, however, that 
 there are hundreds, if not thousands, who enter- 
 tain the same sentiments we do, we have prepar- 
 ed an outline of discipline or jolan of operation — 
 a summary of which will be given in the paper 
 containing this withdrawal. The entire plan will 
 soon be published. It will be seen fron*! the sum- 
 mary, that we have made provision to organize 
 churches, if there is a call for it. 
 
 And now, dear brethren of the M. E. church, 
 we bid you farewell. Many of you we know 
 and love. And while we do not impeach your 
 motives or honesty, we hope in turn you will not 
 treat us as barbarians. There is room enough for 
 us all. Let us have no unchristian contention. 
 
 JOTUAM HoRTON, 
 
 Orange Scott, 
 LaRoy Sunderland. 
 Providence, R. I. Nov. 8, 1842. 
 
 WITHDRAWAL OF REV. LUTHER LEE. 
 By this article, and from its date, I withdraw 
 from the Methodist Episcopal Church. I have 
 been a member of her communion more than 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 17 
 
 twenty-one years, rising of sixteen of which have 
 been spent in the ministry, with what snccess 
 others must judge, subject to the corrections of 
 the last judgment in the light of eternity. 
 
 The first and leading cause which has forced 
 my mind to this conclusion, is the relation which 
 the church sustams to slavery. 
 
 1. There is no rule in the Discipline of the 
 church prohibiting the private members- of the 
 church holding slaves ; but, on the contrary, the 
 legislation of the church supposes that they do and 
 will continue to hold slaves. It is said, in the sec- 
 tion concernhig slavery, •' All our preachers shall 
 prudently enforce upon our members the necessity 
 of teaching their slaves to read the word of God." 
 This every one knows must be a dead letter, as 
 the laws of the slaveholding States forbid the 
 teaching of slaves to read, while it proves that 
 " our members" do and are expected to hold 
 slaves. 
 
 2. The church has made herself responsible for 
 the existence of slavery, by silently passing over 
 the acts, without reproof, of those ministers and 
 conferences which have openly and shamelessly 
 justified slavery as a system. I will give but two 
 of these instances out of many. 
 
 The following is from an address delivered be- 
 fore several conferences by Bishop Hedding : — 
 
 " The right to hold a slave is founded on this 
 rule, ' Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would 
 
18 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 that men should do to you, do ye even so to them , 
 for this is the law and the prophets.' " 
 
 The Georgia Conference passed the following 
 resolution : — 
 
 " Resolved, That slavery, as it exists in the Unit- 
 ed States, is not a moral evil." 
 
 The South Carolina Conference passed a reso- 
 lution of similar import. 
 
 There is then but one question to settle, and that 
 is, Is the Methodist Episcopal Church responsible 
 for these sentiments 1 That slavery has been sanc- 
 tioned by hidividual ministers and constitutional 
 bodies of the church, has been clearly shown ; 
 but has the church so endorsed these proceedings 
 as to make herself responsible for them 1 It is 
 clear to me that she has. 
 
 (1.) These persons have never been dealt with 
 for these sentiments, as persons have who have 
 held and advanced other erroneous and wicked 
 doctrines. 
 
 (2.) The Bishops have never remonstrated 
 against the course of those conferences which 
 have neglected to call these advocates of slavery 
 to an account ; nor have they even attempted to 
 transfer these men to other conferences to be dealt 
 with, which they claim the jjower and right to do j 
 but, on theotherhand, they i^ut the resolutionsby 
 which the conferences pronounced slavery to be 
 right, which they claim not to be legally bound to 
 put, and for the sentiments of which resolutions 
 Uiey say they are responsible to the General Con* 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 19 
 
 ference. When they have been urged to put abo- 
 lition resohitions, they have declined, on the 
 ground that they were i-esponsible to the General 
 Conference for tlic resolutions they put; — and 
 hence they must be responsible for pro-slavery 
 resohatioas. 
 
 (3.) The General Conference has never remon- 
 strated against the neglect of the annual confer- 
 ences to bring these advocates of slavery to an ac- 
 count, nor ordered the Bishops to transfer them 
 to other conferences to be dealt with, which it has 
 power to do ; nor has it condemned the proceed- 
 ings of those conferences in adopting pro-slavery 
 resolutions, notwithstanding the minutes of the 
 same have been before it for examination; nor 
 has the General Conference censured the Bishops 
 for putting those resolutions. 
 
 (4.) While the General Conference has suffered 
 her ministers and annual conferences to advocate 
 slavery, Avithout a single rebuke, she has con- 
 demned modern abolitionism, and condemned 
 ministers for holding and acting out the principles 
 of abolition, and, at the biddmg of slaveholders, 
 has passed a resolution denying the oppressed 
 colored members of the church, in the slavehold- 
 ing States, the right of testifying to the truth in a 
 church trial involving the character of the pale- 
 faced oppressor. 
 
 These facts, taken togetlier, clearly make the 
 church responsible for slavery. 
 
 I think it has now been ^hoivn, beyond the 
 
20 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 possibility of a dovibt in the minds of such as 
 look at the subject without prejudice, that the M. 
 E. Church has committed herself to slavery, so as 
 to make herself responsible for its existence. I 
 will not dwell upon the great wickedness of slave- 
 ry, but rely upon the public sense of justice on 
 this point. And the simple fact that the church 
 is slaveocratic in her principles, feelings, and ad- 
 ministration, is in my view a sufficient reason foi 
 the dissolution of the connection I have so long 
 held with her. 
 
 11. A second reason which has operated strong- 
 ly upon my mind, forcing me to the conclusion 
 that I ought to withdraw from the church, is found 
 in the principles of her government, especially as 
 they have been developed in the administration 
 since the commencement of the anti-slavery dis- 
 cussion. I have always known that the govern- 
 ment of the church was aristocratical in its form 
 and principles, and the greatest '-logical wonders" 
 Avith which I have ever met, have been some few 
 efforts to prove that it is republican or democratic. 
 I know that no church, nor any class of persons 
 in a church, has or can have a right to legislate 
 contrary to the laws of Christ ; but there are many 
 prudential rules which may be enacted to suit 
 times and circumstances; and that the body of 
 the laity should have no voice in making these 
 rules, even such of them as more immediately 
 concern themselves, I have always viewed as ex- 
 tremely arbitrary in principle ; and that every con- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 21 
 
 gregation throughout the denomhiation should be 
 dependent, absohitely so, on the will of an indi- 
 vidual for the man who shall preach to them the 
 word of life ; and that every minister in the con- 
 nection should be absolutely dependent upon the 
 judgment or will of one man, for his field of labor, 
 who has power to say whether he shall labor in 
 the sigh-bui-deued rice swamps of the South, 
 along the shores of the distant Sabine, or in the 
 North, by the cold waters of the St. Lawrence, I 
 never did believe liberal in principle. But I for- 
 merly looked upon these arbitrary principles as 
 existmg only in form, and my reply has always 
 been, when attacked on the ground of the arbitra- 
 ry character of our church polity, that there was 
 no oppression in fact, — that though the govern- 
 ment was arbitrary in principle, yet the piety, 
 good sense and kind feelings of the bishops and 
 preachers, secured a liberal administration. But 
 I can no longer silence the arguments of others, 
 or the voice of my own judgment, with this plea ; 
 — an occasion has arisen, tliese arbitrary princi- 
 ples have been roused from their slumber, this lion 
 of power has roared and Ituped from his lair in 
 vindication, not only of his own claims, but also 
 in vindication of slavery itself. The anti-slavery 
 discussion has been the occasion, and In opposi- 
 tion to this, I have seen persons expelled from the 
 church because they were abolitionists: I have 
 seen class-leaders put out of office because they 
 would open their mouths for the dumb ;• I have 
 
22 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 seen preachers suspended and silenced, beeanse 
 they would plead for the oppressed slave ; I have 
 seen congregations denied the minister they de- 
 sired, while othei-s who were not suspected of the 
 crime of modern abolitionism, were accommodat- 
 ed ; and I have seen abolition ministers sent to 
 distant or poor circuits, to which I have reason to 
 believe they were appointed as an episcopal 
 chastisement for daring to say that slavery is a sin 
 and ought to be abolished. I have seen whole 
 congregations pronounced out of the church, by a 
 public declaration of the preachers whom the 
 Bishop saw fit most graciously to impose upon 
 them against their known wishes ; and the princi- 
 ple of this expulsion en masse, without a form of 
 trial, has been officially sanctioned by the Bishop, 
 who is authorized to decide all such questions. 
 These are but some of the developments of the 
 arbitrary principles of the government of the M; 
 E. chm-ch, which have been made during the anti- 
 slavery discussion. I might enlarge by adding 
 other facts, and illustrations, but I will leave this 
 qficstion here for the consideration of the candid. 
 
 III. A third and final reason which I shall now 
 render, for dissolving my cohnection with the M. 
 K Church, is the uncharitable and bitter spirit 
 which is manifested on the part of the adherents 
 of the church and of her official organs, towards 
 the dissenting brethren. Whenever a brother has 
 presumed to utter an opinion on the subject of 
 church polity, differing from the common views. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CnURCH. 
 
 23 
 
 instead of meeting his views with sound Chris- 
 tian arguments to convince him of his error, the 
 usual method has been at once to denounce him 
 as an enemy, and assail his moral character. It 
 is matter of history that the advocates of our pre- 
 sent form of government have not relied so much 
 upon the strength of their arguments, to put down 
 more liberal views that have occasionally mani- 
 fested themselves in the church, as upon the force 
 of constitutional law, vigorously administered. 
 Even since the secession of Brs. Horton, Scott, 
 and Sunderland, it has been insisted by some that 
 they should be treated as traitors, and be excluded 
 from the pulpits of the church, while others are 
 admitted who have always held views less in 
 accordance with the common standards of the 
 church. They have already been assailed as be- 
 ing ''sordid"' in their purposes; as being under 
 the inflnence of " unhallowed ambition as mak- 
 ing "not an honest effort;" as being '-iniqui- 
 tous" in their proceedings ; and by two different 
 papers, in the interest of the church, have the 
 words which inspiration has applied to the self- 
 willed, cruel and murderous, been applied to these 
 brethren, whose offence is that of withdrawing 
 from the church after they have been long abused 
 in it, and after being often told by the same jour- 
 nals that, with their views, they ought to leave 
 it. This is an extravagance of intolerence which 
 1 caimot bear. To think of retaining my stand- 
 ing in the church, and at the same time honestly 
 
24 GROUNDS OF SRORSflON 
 
 meet and rebuke this abusive and intolerant spirit, 
 wherever I shall meet with it, is hopeless ; and to 
 remain in the church by silently enduring it, and 
 thereby appearing to approve of what I abhor 
 and detest, would not only require an entire 
 change in my constitution and temperament, but 
 also a sacrifice of my principles to a selfish, cow- 
 ardly, worldly policy. If others are prepared to 
 make such sacrifices, I am not; and in saying 
 this, I intend no impeachment of the motives of 
 others, but only a vindication of "my own. I leave 
 behind many whom I highly respect and most 
 ardently love. With many of them I have labored 
 and suffered ; but now a sense of duty compels 
 me, so far as church relation is concerned, to sep- 
 arate myself from them, — and I trust I do it in- the 
 fear of God, with an eye single to his glory, and 
 in the hope of eternal life. 
 
 LUTHER LEE. 
 
 Andover, Dec. 12, 1842. 
 
FttOM THE M. K. CHURCH. 25 
 
 THE M. E. CHURCH AND SLAVERY. 
 
 [Before proceeding to notice the connection of the M. E. 
 Chuich with Slavery, it may not be improper to glance at 
 the views of Mr. Wesley and the English Methodists.] 
 
 I 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 SENTIMENTS OF JOHN WESLEY AND THE ENGLISH WE8- 
 LEYANS. 
 
 The slave trade was extensively carried on 
 during the whole of Mr. Wesley's life. Chris- 
 tians were generally asleep on the subject ; and 
 many professors of religion and some ministers 
 of the gospel were extensively engaged in the 
 atrocious business, even at the time of Mr. Wes- 
 ley's death, and for some years afterward. 
 
 But he was in this, as in almost everything else, 
 fifty years before the times. He published in 1774, 
 seventeen years before his death, a pamphlet en- 
 titled " Thoughts on Slavery," which contains the 
 modern doctrine of the strongest and severest 
 writers on that subject. And his pamphlet has 
 probably done more good in Europe and America, 
 than any other single document ever written. 
 
 The following extracts are from ttiat invaluable 
 work. 
 
 " I strike at the root of this complicated villainy^ 
 I absolutely deny all slaveholding to be consistent 
 with any degree of natural justice." 
 
2$ GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 " That slaveholding is utterly inconsistent with 
 mercy, is almost too plain to need a proof." 
 
 " And this equally concerns every gentleman tKat 
 has an estate in our American plantations ; yea, all 
 
 SLAVEHOLDERS, OF WHATEVER RANK AND DEGREE; 
 
 seeing m^n-buyers are exactly on a level with, men- 
 stealers. You therefore are guilty, yea, principally 
 GUILTY, of all these frauds, robberies, and murders. 
 You are the sirring that puts all the rest in motion ; 
 they would not stir a step without you ; therefore 
 the blood of all these wretches who die before 
 their time, whether in their country or elsewhere, 
 lies upon your head. ' The blood of thy brother' 
 (for, whether thou wilt believe it or no, such he 
 is in the sight of Him that made him) ' crieth 
 against thee from the earth,' from the ship, and 
 from the waters. 0, whatever it costs, put a stop 
 to its cry before it is too late : instantly, at any 
 price, were it the half of your goods, deliver thy- 
 self from blood guiltiness ! Thy hands, thy bed, 
 thy furniture, thy house, th y lands, are at present stained 
 with blood ! Surely it is enough ; accumulate no 
 more guilt j spill no more the blood of the inno- 
 cent! Do not hire another to shed blood ; do not 
 pay him for doing it ! Whether you are a Chris- 
 tian or no, show yourself a MAN ! - Be not more 
 savage than a lion or a bear ! 
 
 " Perhaps you will say, ' I do not buy any ne- 
 groes ; I only use those left me by my father.' So 
 fa^ it is well ; but is it enough to satisfy your own 
 conscience ? Had your father, have you, has any man 
 living, a right to use another- as a slave ? It cannot be, 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 27 
 
 even setting revelation aside. It cannot be that 
 either war, or contract, can give any man such a 
 property in another as he has in his sheep and 
 oxen. Much less is it possible that any child of man 
 should ever be born a slave. Liberty is the right of 
 every human creature, as soon as he breathes the 
 vital air ; and no human law can deprive him of that 
 right which he derives from the law of nature. 
 
 " If, therefore, you have any regard to justice, 
 (to say nothing of mercy, nor the revealed law of 
 God) render unto all their due. Give liberty to 
 whom liberty is due, that is, to every child of man, 
 to every partaker of human nature. Let none 
 serve you but by his own act and deed, by his 
 own voluntary choice. Away with all whips, all 
 chains, all compulsion ! Be gentle toward all men ; 
 and see that you invariably do unto every one as you 
 would they should do unto you. 
 
 J. V/esi,ey." 
 
 The following is Mr. Wesley's dying testimony. 
 This letter is exceedingly interesting, inasmuch as 
 it was thcj last but two which Mr. Wesley ever 
 wrote, and it is dated only four days before his 
 death. It was written to the great and good Mr. 
 Wilberforce, the pioneer of the abolition cause in 
 England. 
 
 "London, Feb. 26, 1791. 
 " Dear S/r— Unless the Divine power has raised 
 you up as Athanasius contra Mundum [Athanasius 
 
28 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 against the world], I see not how you can go 
 through your g'lorious enterprise, in opposing that 
 execrable villany, which is the scandal of religion, 
 of England, and of human nature. Unless God 
 has raised you up for this very thing, you will be 
 worn out by the opposition of men and devils. 
 But, ' if God be for you, who can be against you V 
 0, ' be not weary in well doing !' Go on, in the 
 name of God, and in the power of his might, till 
 even American slavery (the vilest that ever saw 
 the sun) shall vanish away before it. Reading this 
 morning a tract, written by a poor African, I was 
 particularly struck by that circumstance — that a 
 man who has a black skin, being wronged or out- 
 raged by a white man, can have no redress ; it 
 being a law, in all our colonies, that the oath of a 
 black against a white goes for nothing. Wfiat 
 villany is this ? 
 
 « Your aflectionate servant, 
 
 " J. Wesley." 
 
 And yet the General Conference of the M. E. 
 Church has been guilty of this very" villainy," in 
 the black law affair. 
 
 The Wesleyau Methodist Conference in 1830, 
 Resolved, " That, as a body of Christian ministers, 
 they feel themselves- called upon again to record 
 their solemn judgment, that the holding of human 
 beings in a state of slavery is in direct opposition to 
 all the principles of natural rights, and to the be- 
 nign spirit of the religion of Christ. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 29 
 
 "That the Conference fully concur in those 
 strong moral views of the evil of slavery which are 
 taken by their fellow-Christians of different de- 
 nominations ; and that they express their sympa- 
 thy with an injured portion of their race, and 
 their abhorrence of all those principles on which 
 it is attempted to defend the subjection of human 
 beings to hopeless and interminable slavery. 
 
 " That the Conference still farther recommend, 
 in the strongest manner, to such of the members 
 of the Methodist societies as enjoy the elective 
 franchise, that, in this great crisis, when the ques- 
 tion is, whether justice and hum.anity shall tri- 
 umph over oppression and cruelty, or nearly a mil- 
 lion of our fellow-men, many of whom are also 
 our fellow-Christians, shall remain excluded from 
 the rights of humanity, and the privileges of that 
 constitution under which they are born; they 
 will use that solemn trust to promote the rescue of 
 our country from the guilt and dishonor which 
 have been brought upon it by a criminal conni- 
 vance at the oppressions which have so long ex- 
 isted in its colonies, and that, in the elections now 
 on the eve of taking place, they will give their in- 
 fluence and votes only to those candidates who pledgk 
 THEMSELVES to support in parliament, the most 
 effectual measures for the entiy-e abolition of slavery 
 throughout the colonies of the British empire." 
 
 Dr. Clarke, in his Commentary, expressed him- 
 self on the subject of slavery as follows : 
 
 " In heathen countries, slavery was in some 
 
30 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 sort excusable ; among Christians, it is an eno>-mi- 
 ty and a crime, for which perdition has scarcely an 
 adequate state of punishment." 
 
 Again he says — " I here register my testimony 
 against the unprincipled, inhuman, anti-christian, 
 and diabolical slave trade — with all its authors, 
 'promoters, abettors, and sacrilegious • gains; as 
 well as against the great devil, the father of it 
 and them.." 
 
 The following are extracts from Richard Wat- 
 son on slavery : 
 
 " Slavery was manstealirig in its origin ; and 
 with this vicious origin it remains tainted to tiiis 
 day. It would be as hopeless a task to wa.sh it 
 off, as to wash the Ethiop white. Characterized 
 as a ci'ime against God and man, the thin gauze 
 of sophistry .cannot conceal its hateful aspect; 
 and the attempt to find a palliation for it, only 
 makes more audible those thunders which are 
 launched against it, as one of the most odious 
 crimes both in the law and in the Gospel. 
 
 " My argument then is, if it was wrong to en- 
 slave the negroes, it is wrong to keep them in 
 hopeless bondage ; and it follows that, after this 
 country had renounced the African slave trade, 
 it was bound by the very principles on which that 
 wretched traffic was repudiated, to have taken 
 measures for the liberation of all who had thus 
 been wickedly reduced to a state of captivity, and 
 long before this time to have converted them into 
 a free, industrious, a:id happy peasantry." 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 31 
 
 " Slavery is a national violence and theft — an op- 
 pressive, a debasing, a relentless, and vnnurderous 
 bondage." 
 
 The following sentiment was expressed by Dr. 
 Bunting, President of the Wesleyan Conference, 
 in 1836. 
 
 " Slavery is always wrong — essentially, eter- 
 nally, and INCURABLY WRONG. DIE IT MUST; 
 and happy should I have been, had they [the General 
 Conference of the M. E. Church] PASSED SEN- 
 TENCE OF DEATH UPON IT ! " 
 
 Such has been Wesleyan Methodism from the 
 beginning; and such was American Methodism 
 once. But alas, what is it noiv ! 
 
 The following is from an Address of the Wes- 
 leyan Conference to the M. E. Church, put forth 
 in 1835 : 
 
 " Our American brethren will doubtless allow 
 us the fraternal liberty to express our conviction 
 that GREAT SCRIPTURAL PRINCIPLES are op- 
 posed to the continuance of slavery in a Christian 
 state; that the permission of it is one of those 
 deviations from natural equity and evangelical 
 purity which call for further deviations to abet and 
 maintain them ; that it is contrary to the precepts 
 of Christianity, and violates and counteracts the 
 principles and obligations by which the Gospel 
 urges those precepts." 
 
 In 1836 the Wesleyan Conference sent out an- 
 other address to the M. E. Church, from which I 
 make the following extract : 
 
32 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 " Slavery in itself is so obviously opposed to the 
 immutable principles of justice, to the inalienable 
 rights of man of whatever color or condition, tc 
 the social and civil improvement and happiness 
 of the human family, to the principles and precepts 
 of Christianity, and to the full accomplishment ot 
 the merciful designs of the Gospel, that we can- 
 not but consider it the duty of the Christian church 
 to bear an unequivocal testimony against a system which 
 involves so much sin against God, and so much op- 
 pression and wrong, inflicted on an unoffending 
 race of our fellow-men." 
 
 The pro-slavery character of the M. E. Church 
 prevented the publication of either of the address- 
 es from which the above extracts are taken, m 
 any of the church papers. A motion Avas made 
 by the writer, on the floor of the General Confer- 
 ence, to have these addresses published ; but it 
 was rejected. Thus our Wesleyan brethren were 
 treated with contempt. 
 
 SECTION II, 
 
 rORMER SEKTIMENTS AND USAGES Or THE M. E. 
 CHURCH. 
 
 The M. E. Church never advocated trie doctrine 
 of immediate abolition ; but then we liave the 
 clearest evidence that she was formerly strongly 
 opposed to the continuance of slavery in the church 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 33 
 
 or in the couutiy — and that she has widely de- 
 parted from her former strong testimony against 
 slavery. 
 
 The first two bishops of the M. E. Church (Di. 
 Coke and Francis Asbiiry) were decided anti- 
 slavery men. They kindled up, according to the 
 testimony of Dr Capers, a fire in the South which 
 did not go out for thirty years. Mr. Asbury's 
 Journal is full of his opposition to slavery. I will 
 give a few specimens. 
 
 "1772. We dined with Mr. R., who cannot 
 keep negroes for conscience's sake, and this was 
 a topic of our conversation. 
 
 " 1776. After preaching at the Point, I met the 
 class aivl then the black people, some of whose 
 unhappy masters forbid their coming for religious 
 instruction. How will the sons of oppression 
 answer for their conduct when the great Proprie- 
 tor of all shall call them to account. — Vol. 1, p. 
 289. 
 
 "1780. Spoke to some select friends about 
 slave-keeping, but they could not bear it; this I 
 know, God will plead the cause of the oppressed, 
 though it gives offence to say so here. 0 Lord, 
 banish the infernal spirit of sl.wery from thy 
 dear Zion. 
 
 *' 1783. We all agreed (at the Virginia Confer- 
 ence) in the spirit of African liberty, and strong 
 testimonies were borne in its favor at our love- 
 feast. — lb. pp. 356. 
 
 " 1785. At the Virgmia Conference he says. — 
 
34 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 I found the minds of the people greatly agitated 
 with, our rules against slavery, and a prepared pe- 
 tition to the general assembly for the emancipation 
 of the blacks. Colonel and Dr. Coke dis- 
 puted on the subject, and the Colonel used some 
 threats : next day brother O'Kelly let fly at them, 
 and they were made angry enough ; Ave, however, 
 came off with whole bones. — lb. p. 384. 
 
 " We waited on General Washington, who re- 
 ceived us very politely, and gave us his opinion 
 against slavery. — lb. p. 385. 
 
 " 1787. Rode to brother Johnson's — without 
 the labor of slaves, he manages to have abund- 
 ance for man and beast. — Vol. 2, p. 11. 
 
 " 1788. Virginia. Other persuasions are less 
 supine ; and their ministers boldly preach against 
 the freedom of slaves. Our brother Everett, with 
 no less zeal and boldness, cries aloud for liberty 
 and emancipLiLion. 
 
 "Maryland. Most of our members in these 
 parts have freed their slaves. — lb. p. 39. 
 
 " 1796. We reached Charleston. Here are the 
 rich, the rice, and the slaves. The last is awful 
 to me. Wealthy people settled on the rice lands 
 of Cooper's river, hold from fifty to two hundred 
 slaves on a plantation in chains of bojidage. — lb. 
 p. 241. 
 
 "My spirit was grieved at the conduct of some 
 Methodists, that hire out slaves, at public places, 
 to the highest bidder, to cut, skin, and starve 
 them. I think such members ought to be dealt 
 
FROM TFIE M. E CHURCH. 
 
 35 
 
 with. On the side of the oppressors there is 
 law and power, but Avhere is justice and 
 mercy to the poor slaves What eye will pity, 
 what hand will help, or ear listen to their dis 
 tresses 1 I will try if words can be like drawn 
 swords to pierce the hearts of the owners. — lb. p 
 273. 
 
 "1798. My mind is much pained. 01 to be 
 dependent on slaveholders is in part to be a slave, 
 and I was free born. 
 
 " On Saturday, I had a close conversation with 
 some of our local ministry. We are happy to find 
 seven out of ten were not in the spirit or practice 
 of slavery. 
 
 " I assisted Philip Sands to draw up an agree- 
 ment for our officiary to sign against slavery. Thus 
 we may know the real sentiments of our local 
 preachers. It appears to me that we can never 
 fully reform the people, until we reform the preachers — 
 and that hitherto except purging the traveUing 
 connection, we have been working at the wrong 
 end. But, if it be lawful for local preachers to 
 hold slaves, then it is lawful for travelling preach- 
 ers also ; and they may keep plantations and over- 
 seers upon their quarters : but tliis reproach of m- 
 consistency must be rolled away. 
 
 "1814 Georgia. Awny with the false 'cant, 
 that the better you use the negroes, the worse 
 they will use you ! Make them good, then — 
 teach them the fear of God, and learn to fear Him 
 yourselves, ye masters ! I understand not the 
 
36 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 doctrine of cruelty. As soon as the poor Africans 
 see me they spring with life to the boat, and 
 make a heavy flat skim along like a light canoe ; 
 poor starved souls — God will judge !" — lb. p. 376. 
 
 How unlike are these sentiments to the doctrine 
 of Bishop Hedding, as contained in the following 
 sentence : 
 
 " The right to hold a slave is founded on this 
 rule, ' Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would 
 that men should do to you, do ye even so to 
 them ; for this is the law and the prophets.' " — 
 Ch. Ad. and Journal, Oct. 20, 1837. 
 
 " In 1780, the Conference acknowledged that slavery 
 is contrary TO the«laws of God, man and nature, 
 and hurtful to society ; CONTRARY TO THE DIC- 
 TATES OF CONSCIENCE AND PURE RELI- 
 GION; and doing what we would not that others should 
 do unto us; and they pass their disapprobation upon 
 all our friends who keep slaves, and they advise their 
 freedom.'" 
 
 In Lee's History of the Methodists we are told 
 that the following rules were, in substance, adopt- 
 ed in 1784. 
 
 " We view it as contrary to the golden law of 
 God, on which hangs all the law and the prophets,* 
 and the unalienable rights of mankind, as well as 
 
 • la it not wonderful, that the very precept so often ap- 
 pealed to by the Fathers, to show the incompatibility of 
 davery witli Chistianity, should now be pleaded by Bishop 
 Hedding of the same Church, to prove the " right to hold r 
 slave ?" How art the migMy falUn ? 
 
 A 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 37 
 
 every principle of the revolution, to hold in the 
 deepest debasement, in a more abject slavery than 
 is perhaps to be found in any part of the world 
 except America, so many souls that are capable 
 of the image of God. We therefore think it our 
 most bouuden duty to take immediately some ef- 
 fectual method to extirpate this abomination from 
 among us ; and for that purpose we add the fol- 
 lowing to the rules of our society, viz ; 
 
 " Every member m our Society, who has slaves, 
 in those States where the laws will admit of free- 
 ing them, shall, after notice given him by the 
 preacher, within twelve months (except in Vir- 
 giuia, and there \\-ithin two years) legally execute 
 and record an instnmient, whereby he sets free 
 every slave in his possession; those who are from 
 forty to forty-five, immediately, or at farthest at 
 the age of forty-five. 
 
 *^ Those who are between the ages of twenty- 
 five and forty, immediately, or within the course 
 of five years. Those who are between the ages 
 of .twenty and twenty-five, immediately, or at 
 farthest at the age of thirty. Those who are un- 
 der the age of twenty, as soon as they are twenty- 
 five at farthest. And every infant, immediately 
 on its birth. 
 
 "Every person concerned, who will not comply 
 with these rules, shall have liberty quietly to with- 
 draw from our Society within the twelve months 
 following : the notice being given iiim, as afore- 
 said; otherwise the assistant shall exclude him. 
 2 
 
38 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 "No person so voluntarily withdrawn, oi so 
 excluded, shall ever partake of the supper of the 
 Lord with the Methodists, till he complies with 
 the above requisitions. 
 
 " No person holding slaves, shall, in future, be 
 admitted into Society, or to the Lord's Supper, till 
 he previously comply with these rules, concern 
 ing Slavery. 
 
 " Tliose who buy, sell, or give them away, unless on 
 purpose to free them, shall be expelled immediately." . 
 The very next year (1785) the conference said, — 
 " We do hold in the deepest abhorrence the 
 
 PRACTICE OF SLAVERY, and SHALL NOT CEASE TO SEEK 
 
 its DESTRUCTION, by all wise and prudent 
 means." 
 
 In 1788 the following item made a part of the 
 General Rules : 
 
 " The buyinq or selling the bodies and souls of 
 men, women or children, with an intention to en- 
 slave them." — Bangs^ History of M. E. Church, 
 Vol. 1. p. 213. 
 
 [In the year 1800 the following articles on sla- 
 very made a part of the M. E. Discipline.] 
 
 " OF SLAVERY. 
 
 " Question.. What regulation shall be made for 
 the extirpation of the crying evil of African sla- 
 very ■? 
 
 " Answer. 1 . We declare that weare more than 
 ever convinced of the great evil of African slavery, 
 which still exists in these United States, and do 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 39 
 
 most earnestly recommend to the Yearly Confer- 
 ences, Quarterly 'Meetings, and fo those who have 
 the oversight of Districts and Circuits, to be ex- 
 ceedingly cautious what persons they admit to 
 official stations in our Church; and in the case of 
 future admission to official stations, to require 
 such security of those who hold slaves, for the 
 emancipation of them, immediately, or gradually, 
 as the laws of the States respectively, and the 
 circumstances of the case Avill admit ; and we do 
 fully authorize all the Yearly Conferences to make 
 whatever regulation they judge proper, in the 
 present case, respecting the admission of persons 
 to official stations in our church. 
 
 " When any travelling preacher becomes an 
 owner of a slave or slaves, by any means, he shall 
 forfeit his ministerial character in our church, un- 
 less he executes, if it be practicable, a legal 
 emancipation of such slaves, conformably to the 
 laws of the State in which he lives. 
 
 " No slaveholder shall be received hi society, 
 till the preacher who has the oversight of the 
 Circuit, shall have spoken to him freely and faith- 
 fully upon the subject of slavery. 
 
 " 4. ]<>ery member of the society, who sells 
 a slave, shall immediately, after full proof, be 
 excluded from the society, and if any membei 
 of our society purchase a slave, the ensuing 
 Quarterly Meeting shall determine on the num- 
 ber of years in which the slave so purchased 
 would work out the price of his purchase. 
 And the person so purchasmg, shall imme- 
 
40 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 diately after such determination, execute a le- 
 gal instrument for the manumission of such slave, 
 at the expiration of the term determined by the 
 Quarterly Meeting. And in default of his exe- 
 cuting such instrument of manumission, or on 
 his refusal to submit his case to the judgment of 
 the Quarterly Meeting, such member shall be excluded 
 the society. Provided also, that in the case of a 
 female slave, it shall be inserted in the aforesaid 
 instrument of manumission, that all her children 
 who shall be born during the years of her servi- 
 tude, shall be free at the following times, namely 
 — every female child at the age of twenty-one, and 
 every male child at the age of twenty-five. Never- 
 theless, if the member of our society executing 
 the said instrument of manumission, judge it 
 proper, he may fix the times of manumission of 
 the female slaves before mentioned, at an earlier 
 age than that which is prescribed above. 
 
 "5. The preachers and other members of our 
 society, are requested to consider the subject of 
 negro slavery with deep attention ; and that they 
 impart to the Gener?l Conference, through the 
 medium of the Yearly Conferences, or otherwise, 
 any important thoughts upon the subject, that the 
 Conference may have full light, in order to take 
 further steps towards the eradicating this "enor- 
 mous evil from that part of the Church of God to 
 which they are connected. 
 
 " 6. The Annual Conferences are directed to 
 draw up addresses for the gradual emancipation 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 41 
 
 of the slaves, to the legislatures of those States, in 
 which no general laws have been passed for that 
 purpose. These addresses shall urge in the most 
 respectful, but pointed manner, the necessity of a 
 law for the gradual emancipation of the slaves ; 
 proper Committees shall be appointed, by the 
 Annual Conferences, out of the most respectable 
 of our friends, for the conductiug of the business; 
 and the Presiding Elders, Eiders, Deacons, and 
 Travelling Preachers, shall procure as many pro- 
 per signatures as possible to the addresses, and 
 give all the assistance in their power, in every 
 respect, to aid the committees, and to further this 
 blessed undertaking. Let this be continued from 
 
 YEAR TO TEAR, TILL THE DESIRED END BE ACCOM- 
 PLISHED." 
 
 Such were the regulations entered into from 
 time to time, in the early history of Methodism. 
 And, says Mr. Samuel Davis, a member of the M. 
 E. Church, born in Maryland, and residing there 
 until 1826, in a letter to Dr. Fisk, April 8, 1838, 
 
 " So universally were those rules attended to, 
 that I never knew but one single instance of any 
 member's neglecting them ; and that was my next 
 neighbor, at whose house our presiding elder 
 called, in the year 1792, on business, with a 
 preacher who was then stationed there. When the 
 presiding elder was about to retire, the gentleman 
 of the house invited him to stay to dinner, saying, 
 'it was almost ready.' The reply was, ' I never eat 
 a meal in a Methodist slaveholder's house, if I 
 
42 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 know it,' and he immediately left him. I have 
 heard Bishop Asbury, and many of the early 
 preachers, preach pointedly against slavery At 
 our Quarterly Meetinys, where hundreds of slave- 
 holders were present with their slaves, I have re- 
 peatedly heard some of our preachers condemn 
 the PRACTICE of slavery, as a vile sin against God, 
 morally, socially, and politically WRONG, no one 
 interrupting or molesting the man of God. And 
 I have no doubt had all our ministers done their duty, 
 there would not have been a slave left in this country 
 20 years ago. For I knoAV, that about that time and 
 a few years previous, there were hundreds of 
 slaves set free by the members of the Methodist 
 E. Church. As soon as T became twenty-one 
 years of age, T liberated the slaves I inherited, 
 those over twenty-one, immediately, and those un- 
 der, as soon as they became twenty-one years 
 of age." 
 
 Says Rev. Joseph Everett, a distinguished min- 
 ister of the M. E. Church, " In 1787, 1 went down 
 to Cape Charles, through Northampton, and urged 
 the necessity of letting the oppressed go free; for 
 which I was almost obliged to run the gauntlet. 
 I believe when the Lord first sent the Methodists 
 into America to preach the gospel, many got con- 
 verted who held slaves ; and all that continued 
 faithful, after some time, the Lord convinced them 
 it was wrong to keep them; and all who rejected 
 conviction, lost their right to the favor of God 
 But at this time, I fear all who hold their slaves. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 43 
 
 may go to hear the gospel preached all their days, 
 but if they do not give up their oppressive man- 
 ner of living, the word of God will be a savor of 
 death unto their souls, and that they will die in 
 their sins and m their blood, and will be damned 
 for their wickedness." 
 
 The manner in which the power of the gospel 
 wrought upon the slaveholder is strikingly illus- 
 trated in the life of Rev. Freeborn Garrettson, the 
 companion of Asburt, and all the first generation 
 of Methodists. In his life, compiled by Rev. N. 
 Bangs, pp. 33, 34, 35, we have the following, viz: 
 — " I arose from the earth, and advancing towards 
 the house in deep thought, I came to this conclu- 
 sion, that I would exclude myself from the society 
 of men, and live in a cell upon bread and water, 
 mourning out my days for having grieved my 
 Lord. ■ I went into my room and sat in one posi- 
 tion till mne o'clock. " I then threw myself on the 
 bed, and slept till morning. Although it was the 
 Lord's day I did not hitend to go to any place of 
 worship; neither did I desire to see any person, 
 but wished to pass my time away in total solitude. 
 I continued reading the Bible till eight, and then 
 mider a sense of duty, called the family together 
 for prayer. As I stood with a book in my hand, 
 in the act of giving out a hymn, this thought 
 powerfully struck my mind • ' It is not right for 
 you to keep your fellow-creatures in bondage ; 
 you must let the oppressed go free. I knew it 
 was that same blessed voice which had spoken 
 
44 
 
 GKOUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 to me before — till then, I had never suspected 
 that the practice of slave-keeping was wrong : I 
 had not read a book on the subject, nor been 
 told by any — I paused a minute, and then replied, 
 'Lord, the oppressed shall go free.' And I was 
 as clear of them in my mind, as if I had never 
 owned one. I told them they did not belong to 
 me, and that I did not desire their services with- 
 out making them a compensation : I Avas noAV at 
 liberty to proceed in worship. After singing I 
 kneeled to pray. Had I the tongue of an angel, 
 I could not fully describe what I felt : all my de- 
 jection, and that melancholy gloom which preyed 
 upon me, vanished in a moment, a divine sweet- 
 ness ran through my whole frame. It was God, 
 not man, that taught me the impropriety of hold- 
 ing slaves : and I shall never be able to praise 
 him enough for it. My very heart has bled, since 
 that, for slaveholders, especially those who make 
 a profession of religion, for I believe it to be a 
 crying sin." 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 THE M. E. CHURCH PRO-SLAVERY. 
 
 The M. E. Church has evidently been progress- 
 ing backwards from the year 1800, though the first 
 retrogade step was taken in 1792, in the alteration 
 which then took place in the General Rule, leav- 
 
PROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 45 
 
 ing out the words "bodies and souls," &c., as -will 
 be seen from what follows . 
 
 Rev. Robert Emory in his history of the Disci- 
 pline, informs us that he finds the following in 
 
 1789. " The buying or selling the bodies and 
 souls of men, women or children, with an inten- 
 tion to enslave them." 
 
 1792. It reads, " The buying or selling of men, 
 women or children, with an intention to enslave 
 them." 
 
 1808. It reads, " The buying and selling of men, 
 women and children," &c. For this alteration no 
 authority is found in the journal of the General Con- 
 ference. 
 
 An important admission, this ! If and was put 
 in the place of or by mistake, which is hardly 
 possible, how is the leaving out of bodies and 
 scuts in the original rule, to be accounted for ? 
 Let the friends of the church account for these 
 changes as they may ; we have positive proof 
 before our eyes, that the rule has been changed 
 twice since the church was organised : and this 
 rule being a part of the constitution of the church, 
 the constitution of the church has been changed 
 twice. 
 
 And the following, from a letter published in the 
 Pittsburg Christian Advocate, by Rev. Mr. Drum- 
 mond, is not less important. 
 
 " If we take the action of the General Confer- 
 ence, as a true index of the anti-slavery feeling 
 and zeal of the church, I think it is apparent, that 
 
GROUNDS OP SECESSION' 
 
 these have been considerably diminished since 
 the year 1800." 
 
 Now I would inquire, what becomes of the 
 Declaration of the Bishops, made in their address 
 to the late General Conference, that the " general 
 rule on slavery" " has stood from the beginning un- 
 changed ?" 
 
 These changes have greatly altered the charac- 
 ter of the rule. The original rule made tlie crime 
 of slave-trading in the M. E. Church what the 
 spirit of inspiration made it in mystic Babylon — 
 trading in souls of men. When the change was 
 made from bodies and souls of men, women and 
 children, to men, women or children, the idea of sell- 
 ing and buying the immortal part was not so clear- 
 ly expressed, and the Babylonish character of the 
 church was not so fully and clearly acknowl- 
 edged. Here was a gain on the part of slavery. 
 Though buying men, women or children was 
 buying the bodies and souls of these persons, the 
 language was smoothed down, and no longer cal- 
 culated to shock the moral feelings so violently. 
 But when and was substituted for or, the whole 
 meaning of the rule became changed. Previous 
 to 'this, the buying or selling a man, woman or 
 child — any human being — was a violation of the 
 rule, but not so now. It takes six things to vio- 
 late the rule as it now stands. 1. Buying a man 
 (Or men). 2. Buying a woman (or women). 3. 
 Buying a child (or children). 4. Selling a matt 
 (or men). 5. Selling a woman (or women). 6. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 47 
 
 Selling a child (or children). Mark, it is the buy- 
 ing AND selling all these persons which it forbids, 
 not buying or selUng any one class of them, or 
 any one of either class, nor yet buying and sell- 
 ing any one class, or any one of either class, but 
 buying and setling at least, one of each class. 
 
 In 1804, the paragraphs about considering the 
 subject, and petitions to the legislatures (namely, 
 No. 4 of 1796, and No. 6, of 1800) were striken out. 
 
 1808. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of 1796 were struck 
 out, and the following substituted. 
 
 "3. The General Conference authorizes each 
 annual conference to form their own regulations 
 relative to buying and selling slaves." 
 
 This was stricken out iu 1820, and the last tluree 
 paragraphs of the section on slavery, p. 196 of 
 Dis., were added. 
 
 And yet the Western Christian Advocate,, of De- 
 cember 8th, 1837, says, " our readers should know 
 that our church has neither given up nor modified any 
 of her strong Scriptural doctrines, OR REGULATIONS, 
 on the subject of slavery .''^ And Dr. Bangs in the Chris- 
 tian Advocate, of January 29, 1833, said, the Me- 
 thodist Episcopal Church " has always held one 
 undeviating language in opposition to slavery. One 
 of two conclusions must be come to : Drs. Elliot 
 and Bangs are either ignorant of the history of 
 their church's connection with slavery, or are dis- 
 honest enough to practice deception on their rea- 
 ders, by affirming what they know is not true. 
 
 From 1820 to 1835, the church appears to have 
 
48 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 been in a profound sleep ; and when she awoke 
 it was only to oppose all anti-slavery measures. 
 Coke and Asbury were dead, and the old Methodist 
 preachers had learned better than to preach 
 against slavery. 
 
 The church since 1820 has borne no testimony 
 against slavery, except what is contained in the 
 mutilated general rule ; and even this is admitted 
 to be a dead letter in the South. The section on 
 slavery in the latter part of the Discipline many- 
 Episcopal Methodists contend is not in opposition, 
 but in favor of slavery. • 
 
 In the latter end of the year 1834, a number of 
 ministers, members of the New England and New 
 Hampshire Conferences, addressed their brethren 
 in the ministry of these two conferences, in an 
 able Ajipeal, Avhich was published the forepart of 
 Jan. 1835, in Zion's Herald Extra. This drew 
 forth a long reply called the " Counter Appeal,' ' 
 signed by W. Fisk, D. D. Whedon, John Lindsey 
 Jacob Sanborn, H. H. White, H. S. Ramsdell, Abel 
 Stevens, and I believe one other. This document 
 was judged to contain pi;o-slavery sentiments, and 
 it was critically examined by the authors of the 
 Appeal, April 22, 1835. About the time the first 
 Appeal was written, and before it was published, 
 another member of the New England Conference 
 commenced a series of essays in Zion's Herald on 
 the subject of slavery. The whole subject' of 
 slavery and abolition was discussed in Zion's 
 Herald for several months, by 0. Scott and others 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 49 
 
 on one side, and W. Fisk and D. D. Whedon on 
 the other : and so rapidly did anti-slavery senti- 
 ments spread and prevail, that within six months, 
 a majority of the New England and New Hamp- 
 shire Conferences Avere converted to the doctrine 
 of immediate abolition; and in June, 1S35, an 
 anti-slavery delegation from both conferences was 
 secured to the General Conference, with the ex- 
 ception of a single delegate ! 
 
 The General Conference assembled at Cincin- 
 nati the ensuing May. It consisted of about 150 
 members. All except seventeen were either slave- 
 holders or auti-abolitionists. Of these seventeen, 
 nine were from New Hampshire, six from New 
 England, one from Maine, and one from Pittsburg. 
 
 At this Conference, commenced what may be 
 emphatically termed the modern pro-slavery mea- 
 sures of the M. E. Church; or in other words, 
 '■ the reign of terror !" 
 
 We will glance at some of the pro-slavery mea- 
 sures adopted at the General Conference of 1836 ! 
 
 An Anti-Slavery Society had been formed in 
 Cincinnati a year or two before. A meeting of 
 the society was appointed for the evening of the 
 10th of May, to which the abolitionists attending 
 the conference as delegates, were invited. Of 
 those who attended, two of them made remarks 
 suited to the occasion. On the 12th of May, Rev. 
 S. G. Roszell presented to the conference the fol- 
 io wmg preamble and resolntions ; — 
 
 " Whereas, great excitement has pervaded this 
 
50 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 country on the suhject of modern abolitionism, 
 which is reported to have been increased in this 
 city by the unjustifiable conduct of two members 
 of the General Conference, in lecturing upon, and 
 in favor of, that agitating topic; and, whereas, such 
 a course on the part of any of its members is 
 calculated to bring upon this body the suspicion 
 and distrust of the community, and misrepresent 
 its sentiments in regard to the point at issue ; and, 
 whereas, in this aspect of the case, a due regard 
 for its own character, as well as a just concern 
 for the interest of the church confided to its care, 
 demand a full, decided and unequivocal expres- 
 sion of the views of the General Conference in 
 the premises — Therefore, 
 
 " 1. Resolved, — By the delegates of the annual 
 Conferences in General Conference assembled 
 that they disapprove in the most unqualified sense, 
 the conduct of the two members of the General 
 Conference, Avho are reported to have lectured in 
 this city recentjy, upon, and in favor of, modern 
 abolitionism." 
 
 "2. Resolved, — by the delegates of the Annual 
 Conferences in General Conference assembled, 
 that they are decidedly opposed to modern aboli- 
 tionism, and wholly disclaim any right, wish, or 
 intention, to interfere in the civil, and political re- 
 lation between master and slave, as it exists in 
 the slave-holding states of this Union." 
 
 The preamble and resolutions were adopted— 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 51 
 
 the first resolution by 122 to 11, the last by 120 
 to 14. 
 
 A member of the General Conference moved to 
 amend the last resolution by incorporating a sen- 
 timent of the Discipline on this wise : that though 
 " we are as much as ever convinced of the great 
 evil of slavery/' yet we are decidedly opposed to 
 modern abolitionism, &c. This amendment was 
 in the very language of the 'Discipline ; and 
 though the very sentence which would have con- 
 tained it, would have condemned abolitionism, 
 yet such was the pro-slavery character of the 
 General Conference, that they would not say, as 
 the Discipline had always said, that slavery was 
 an " evil." 
 
 They refused to publish the address of the Eng- 
 lish VVesleyan Conference, because it alluded to 
 slavery ; and in a Pastoral Address to the M. E. 
 Church, this Conference exhoi'ted Methodists to 
 abstain from all " abolition movements and asso- 
 ciations, and to refrain from patronizing any of 
 tlieir publications, &c. 
 
 They further said : " From every view of the 
 subject which we have been able to take, and 
 from the most calm and dispassionate survey of 
 the whole ground, we have come to the conclu- 
 sion that the only safe, scriptural, and prudent way 
 for us, both as ministers and people to take, is, 
 WHOLLY TO REFRAIN from this agitating sub- 
 ject," &c. 
 
52 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 The Ohio Annual Conference, had a short time 
 before, 
 
 "1. Resolved, That we deeply regret the pro- 
 ceedings of the abolitionists, and anti-slavery 
 societies in the free States, and the consequent 
 excitement produced thereby in the slave states; 
 that Ave, as a Conference, disclaim all connection 
 and co-operation with, or belief in the same; and 
 that we hereby recommend to our junior preach- 
 ers, local brethren, and private members within 
 our bounds, to abstain from any connection with 
 them, or participation of their acts in the premises 
 whatever." 
 
 "2. Resolved, That those brethren and citizens 
 of the North, who resist the abolition movements 
 with firmness and moderation, are the true friends 
 to the church, to the slaves of the South, and to 
 the constitution of our common country," &c. 
 
 The New Y ork Annual Conference met in June 
 1836, and 
 
 1. Resolved, That this Conference fully con- 
 cur in the advice of the late General Conference, 
 as expressed in their Pastoral Address." 
 
 " 2. Resolved, That we disapprove of the mem- 
 bers of this Conference patronizing, or in any way 
 giving countenance to a paper called ' Zion's 
 Watchman,' because, in our opinion, it tends to 
 disturb the peace and harmony of the body, by 
 sowing dissensions in the church." 
 
 "3 Resolved, That although we could not 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 53 
 
 condemn any man, or withhold our suffrages from 
 him on account of his opinions merely in reference 
 to abolitionism, 3'et we are decidedly of the opin- 
 ion that none ought to be elected to the office of a 
 deacon, or elder, in our chnrch, unless he give a 
 pledge to the Conference, that he will refrain from 
 agitating the church with discussions on this sub- 
 ject, and the more especially as the one promises 
 ' reverently to obey them to whom the charge and 
 government over him is committed, following 
 with a glad mind and will their godly admoni 
 tions :' and the other with equal solemnity prom- 
 ises, to 'maintain and set forward, as much as 
 lieth in him, quietness, peace and love among all 
 Christian people, and especially among them that 
 are, or shall be committed to his charge.'" 
 
 In 1838, the same Conference 
 
 " Resolved, As the sense of this Conference, 
 that any of its members, or probationers, who 
 shall patronize Zion's Watchman, either by writ- 
 ing in commendation of its character, by circu- 
 lating it, recommending it to our people, or pro- 
 curing subscribers, or by collecting or remitting 
 monies, shall be deemed guilty of indiscretion, 
 and dealt with accordingly." 
 
 Under this rule, several members of that Confer- 
 ence were tried and suspended. 
 
 In the year 1837, the Baltimore Conference 
 passed the following resolution : 
 
 " That in all cases of administration under the 
 general rule, in reference to buying and selling men. 
 
54 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 women and children, &c., it be and hereby is re- 
 commended to all committees, as the sense of this 
 Conference, that said rnle be taken, construed and 
 understood, so as not to make the guilt or innczence of 
 the accused to depend upon the simple fact of pur- 
 chase or SALE of any such slave or slaves, hnt upon 
 the attendant circumstances of cruelty, injustice, or in- 
 humanity on the one hand, or those of kind pur- 
 poses or good intentions, on the other, nnder which 
 the transactions shall have been perpetrated ; and 
 further, it is recommended that, in all such cases, 
 the charge be brought for immorality, and the cir- 
 cumstances be adduced as specifications under that 
 charge." 
 
 This resolution takes the ground openly, that 
 slaves maybe bought and sold without guilt; and 
 hot only so, but with kind purposes and good 
 intentions. The guilt or innocence does not, in the 
 judgment of the Baltimore Conference, depend on 
 " the simple fact of purchase or sale," (mark this,) 
 but on the circumstances ; hence the charge is not 
 to be brought for the violation of the " rule," but 
 for immorality ; and the fact that a slave was 
 bought or sold, is not to be brought as a specifica- 
 tion to sustain the charge of immorality, but the 
 circumstances. Then there are circumstances in 
 which it would be right, kind, and good, to sell or 
 buy slaves, and in which it would be wrong, eruel 
 and unjust, so to do. The circumstances are to 
 make out the guilt in a case of administration 
 under this rule, " the general rule," not the fact 
 
FROM niE M. E. CHURCH. 55 
 
 of sale or purchase, hence the rule does not forbid 
 sale or purchase. 
 
 The General Conference of 1840 approved of 
 the journals of the Baltimore Conference with this 
 resolution in them — approved of them', this reso- 
 lution and all ; consequently approved of it, and 
 thus made it their own ; hence the doctrine of the 
 Baltimore Conference, that the "general rule"' is 
 not to "be taken, construed, or understood," so as 
 to convict a person of guilt, &c., for the simple "pwr- 
 chaie or sale"'' of slaves, is the doctrine of the Gen- 
 eral Conference — the doctrine of the whole church. 
 
 The Georgia Conference, in 1837, passed the 
 following resolutions, it is said unanimomhj: — 
 
 " Whereas there is a clause in the Discipline of 
 our Church which states that we are as much as 
 ever convinced of the great evil of slaverij ; and 
 whereas the said clause has been perverted by- 
 some, and used in such a manner as to produce 
 the impression that the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church believed slavery to be a moral evil, 
 
 " Therefore, Resolved, That it is the sense of the 
 Georgia Annual Conference, that slavery, as it 
 exists in the United States, is not a moral evil. 
 
 " Resolved. That we view slavery as a civil and 
 domestic institution, and one with which, as 
 ministers of Christ, we have nothing to do, fur- 
 ther than to ameliorate the condition of the slave, 
 by endeavoring to impart to him and his master 
 the benign influences of the religion of Christ, and 
 aiding both on their way to heaven. 
 
56 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 " On motion, it was Resolved, unanimously, That 
 the Georgia Annual Conference regard with feel- 
 ings of profound respect and approbation the dig- 
 nified course pursued by our several superintend- 
 ents or bishops in suppressing the attempts that 
 have been made by various individuals to get up 
 and protract an excitement in the churches and 
 country on the subject of abolitionism. 
 
 " Resolved, further, That they shall have our cor- 
 dial and zealous support in sustaining them in the 
 ground they have taken. — [Extract from the Min- 
 utes.] 
 
 " Thomas C. Benning, Secretary.^' 
 On the above resolutions the Christian Guardian, 
 
 a Methodist paper published in Canada, made tlie 
 
 following sensible remarks : 
 
 " Alas ! Alas ! ' You that have tears, prepare to shed 
 
 them now.'' 
 
 " Sainted spirit of the venerable Wesley ! Could 
 shame and anger disturb thy deep and holy tran- 
 quillity, this would call them into exercise ! If 
 for aught thou couldst wish to revisit this ' world 
 of grief and sin,' it would surely be to erase from 
 the records of Methodism so foul a blot upon the 
 character of the system which claims thee as its 
 founder; or to inscribe beneath it, in emblazoned 
 capitals, thy firm protest. Gladly wouldst thou, 
 with Heaven's permission, have recorded, in a 
 'hand-writing upon the wall' of that conference 
 room, thy unchanged belief of the true character 
 of ' American Slavery, the vilest that ever saw tlie 
 
FRQ.M THE M. E. CHURCH. 57 
 
 s«n.' Bai '■ if they hear not Moses and the prophets 
 neither will they he persuaded, though one rose from the 
 dead:" 
 
 On tlie 18th of January, 1838, Dr. Capers intro- 
 duced into the South Carolina Conference, a simi- 
 lar resokition ; containing the sentiment that slave- 
 ly is not a moral evil. It passed by a large vote— 
 naanimous, I believe. 
 
 The General Conference has sanctioned both 
 these resolutions, and passed them both, to all in- 
 tents and purposes, by its act of approving the 
 Journals. That body approved them both, by a 
 direct vote : hence these resolutions have become 
 the resolutions of the whole church ! 
 
 The Discipline requires (see p. 25) that the joiu*- 
 nals containing tha proceedings of each Annual 
 Conference be sent to the General Conference. 
 The General Conference appoints a committee of 
 one from each Annual Conference, to whom all 
 the Annual Conference journals are referred for 
 examination, and, if any thing be found anti- 
 Methodistic, to report the same to the General 
 Conference, to be censured or disposed of as that 
 body may determine. The General Conference 
 of 1840 had the journals of these conferences be- 
 fore them, as also those of the other Annual Con- 
 ferences. This committee made a report dated 
 June 1, 1840, in which the New Hampshire, New 
 England, and Oneida Conferences were censured 
 by name, and some others without naming them; 
 but no complaint was whispered against the Gcor- 
 
58 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 gia or South Carolina Conferences. While this 
 report was under consideration, Rev. J. Dodge 
 offered an amendment to the preamble, condemna- 
 tory of the Georgia resolution. He thought that, 
 as the action of several conferences had received 
 animadversion, impartiality required that there 
 should be uniformity of treatment. He therefore 
 moved to amend the report by adding, ' Tlie action 
 of the Georgia Conference, in declaring that 
 slavery, as it exists in these United States, is not 
 a moral evil, contradicts the sense of the general 
 rule and ihe tenth section of the Discipline on the 
 subject, and is therefore irregular.' " 
 
 This amendment was laid on the table, and the 
 report of the committees approving of the acts 
 and doings of the Georgia and South Carolina 
 Conferences adopted by a direct vote. The jour- 
 nals of the Georgia Conference were approved by 
 the General Conference, in full view of this reso- 
 lution ; for Br. Dodge asked the Conference, to 
 say that it was " irregular," and they would not 
 do even that much. The General Conference 
 approved of this resolution ; for they approved 
 the journals, of which it was a part — the whole 
 journals, without exception — and to approve 
 of the whole is to approve of all the parts; 
 for the whole contains all the parts. The Con- 
 ference was asked to except to this part, and 
 would not. This makes the case still strojiger. 
 And what is true of the Georgia Conference is 
 also true of that of South Carolina, and of the 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 59 
 
 Baltimore Conferences, in the case we have no- 
 ticed of buying and selUng slaves. The General 
 Conference has said jmt what these Conferences 
 said, by approving and adopting what they said. 
 The General Conference did say, in this case, that 
 slavery, as it exists, not in the M. E. church, but 
 in the United States, is not a moral evil ; and when 
 the General Conference said it, the M. E. Church 
 said it ; for that Conference is the mouth of the 
 church. This, all this, is as clear as demonstration 
 can make any .thing. 
 
 " Not a riioral evil !" In 1780, slavery was 
 " contrary to the laws of God, man, and nature ; now, 
 " not a moral evil !" In 1784, it was a " crymg 
 evil," and any member in any part of the country, 
 who " sold a slave,'' was to be " immediately ex- 
 pelled ;" now, " not a moral evil !" In 1785, it 
 was held in the " deepest abhorrence ,-" in 1837, "not 
 a moral evil !" It was still a crying evil in 1801 ; 
 and expulsion was the penalty for selling a slave; 
 but, in 1836, the General Conference condemned 
 abolition, bnt refused to condemn slavery: there- 
 fore, in 1837, an Annual Conference says thac 
 slavery " is not a moral evil !" Can you, brethren, 
 believe the Georgia and Baltimore Conferences 
 Avould ever have taken the ground they have, had 
 it not been for the doings of the General Confer- 
 ence ■? Can you see how a Methodist Bishop 
 could possibly put such resolutions to vote, if a 
 Bishop has a right in any case to decline such 
 business ? Was that " disciplinary business V 
 
6a 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECRSSION 
 
 "proper conference business?" In view of all 
 these facts, can you doubt that the influence of 
 the M. E. Church is in favor of slavery 1 For all 
 this prostration of discipline, the General Confer- 
 ence laiu tbe foundation ! 
 
 But to see a body of professed ministers of 
 Christ call that sum of all villainies (American, 
 slavery), a " civil and domestic institution 1" How 
 civil to rob lutman beings of all their rights — to 
 enslave the image of God — to steal and enslave 
 innocent children ! If this is a civil institution, I 
 hardly know where we should go to find a crimi- 
 nal institution ! All this passes unreproved by the 
 official organs of the church ! 
 
 And now I ask, has not the spirit as well as the 
 practice of slavery increased in the M. E. Church 
 j'or the last fifty years ? I can no more doubt this, 
 than I can doubt my existence. If any proposi- 
 tion can be established by facts, this can be. 
 
 And is it not equally certahi, that the influence 
 of the M. E. Church has been for some time past in 
 favor of slavery ? I cannot resist this conviction. 
 I am morally certain that the M. E. Church is at 
 this time one of the " great props" of slavery-. A 
 slaveholding ministry ! A slaveholding church! 
 What inconsistency ! Do not many ministers and 
 ^lembers give their influence and example to what 
 the Bible calls, and Mr. Wesley considers, man- 
 stealing ? 
 
 Are there not Achan's in the church, a thousand 
 times worse than Achan of old ? lie robbed God 
 
FROM Ti'IK M. E. CIIUKCH. 61 
 
 iu temporal things : she has robbed him of his 
 own image.' She has stolen, not a wedge of gold, 
 a Babylonish garment, and a few hundred shekels 
 of silver, but she has stolen human beings, and 
 made mcrchanckize of immortal spirits ! It appears 
 to me that the language of the Prophet Ezekiel to 
 ancient Tyre, is as applicable to the M. E. Church 
 as it was to lier. 
 
 " Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the mul- 
 titude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy 
 TRAFFIC ; therefore will I bring forth a fire from 
 the MIDST OF THEE, it shall DEVOUR THEE J and I 
 will bring thee to ashes upon the earth, in the 
 sight of all them that behold thee." — Ezelc. xxviii. 
 
 The M. E. Church has "defiled" her " sanctua- 
 ries" by the iniquity of her " traffic." And does 
 not the Almighty now threaten to cast her off as 
 profane, and to destroy her ? Is not the portrait of 
 Tyre too true a likeness of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church % If she does not put away her ini- 
 quity, violence, and merchandize in the souls and 
 bodies of men, the days of her prosperity will 
 soon be numbered. 
 
 The voice of warning has gone forth, and the 
 church now sins at her peril. Never till of late 
 has a Methodist minister dared to lift his voice or 
 •pen in defence of slavery ; but now, the man- 
 siealer and robber finds apologists and defenders 
 among Methodist Episcopal preachers, and that 
 too in the Free States! The church is stained 
 with blood, and haunted with the groans of deaths 
 
62 
 
 GROUNDS OF SLCESSION 
 
 less spirits.' Surely, it is enough. God's judg- 
 ments will not always linger, nor his justice for- 
 ever sleep. She claims the descendants of stolen 
 human beings as property ! She makes slaves of 
 the purchase of the Redeemer's bjood. 
 
 Rev. Wm. Winans said, on the floor of the last 
 General Conference, that he had become a slave- 
 holder from principle .' 
 
 Members of the church have been expelled — 
 class-leaders, exhorters and local preachers have 
 been disfranchised — young men have been re- 
 fused admission into conferences for no other rea- 
 son but their being active abolitionists. Travelling 
 preachers have been suspended for contumacy and 
 insubordination in relation to abolition. Presiding 
 ciders have been removed from their districts for 
 their abolition measures, and bishops have gagged 
 annual conferences on the slave question. The 
 Discipline has been twice altered to effect the 
 expulsion of the editor of Zion's Watchman, it 
 is believed, and bi.shops have exhorted Methodist 
 trustees to close their houses against Methodist 
 anti-slavery lecturers. Several conferences have 
 forced their young men to pledge themselves that 
 they would not agitate the church with discus- 
 sions on the slave question, before they could be 
 ordained ; while no reformation pledges have 
 been required of man-stealing ministers as a con- 
 dition of ordination. That which, according to 
 Mr. Wesley, is exactly on a level with man-steal- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 63 
 
 ing, is, in the opinion of the church, a very small 
 matter compared with the shockmg abominations 
 of abolitionism ! 
 
 Rev. Elijah Hedding, D. D., one of the Methodist 
 Bishops, has said in a published address : 
 
 " Tlie right to hold a slave is founded on this 
 rule, ' Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would 
 that men should do to you, do ye even so to them ; 
 for this is the law and the prophets.' " — Ch. Adv. 
 and Jour. Oct. 20, 1837. 
 
 The General Conference of 1840 were guilty of 
 the following pro-slavery measures. 
 
 1. It was proved on the floor of the General Con- 
 ference, that the word " or" in the General Rule 
 had been changed to '■ ami" by carelessness or design, 
 thus favoring slavery. This Stephen G. Roszel 
 andDr. Capers boldly asserted. No one either did 
 or could deny tliis. It was proved that the word 
 
 or" was in the Discipline since 1808 ; and since 
 that time the change could not have been consti- 
 tutionally made without going the round of the 
 annual conferences : but from the records it ap- 
 pears that this had never been done. And yet 
 with all this plam, palpable evidence before them, 
 they refused to make the correction ! And why 
 did they do this ! I know no other reason but 
 their love of slavery; or, at least, their fear of slave- 
 holders. 
 
 2. But to cap the climax of pro-slaveryism, the 
 General Conference passed the following resolu- 
 tion. 
 
64 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSIOX 
 
 " Tliat it is inerpedient and unjustifiadi.e in any 
 of our mivisters to admit the testimony of COLORED 
 PERSONS againat a white person, in church trials, in 
 those states and territories where such testimony is re- 
 jected in COURTS OF LAW." 
 
 Here the rights and interests of tlie membership 
 of the Church are not only cloven down, bnt the 
 positive authority of Jesus Christ is set aside,'and 
 the unrighteous laws of a slavehokling communi- 
 ty are made the measure, of church privileges, and 
 the standard of ecclesiastical proceedings. 
 
 [It is true the Colored Testimony re.solution 
 was rescinded at the General Conference of 1844 ; 
 but this was done more from expediency than from 
 pnnciple. It was done to prevent secession. Had 
 abolitionists and seceders made no noise about 
 the matter, the records of the church had remained 
 stained to this day !] 
 
 Bishop Waugh, at the New England Conference, 
 held in Springfield, Mass., in June, 1842,', refused 
 to put the question for the adoption of the follow- 
 ing resolution, stating that it was too late in the 
 day to give his reasons for so doing. 
 
 " Resolved, That it is the solemn conviction of 
 the New England Annual Conference, that all 
 slaveholding, that is, all recognition of the right 
 of proi^erty in human beings, is contrary to the 
 laws of nature and religion, and ought therefore to 
 be discouraged by all wise and prudent means." 
 
 The influence of the Bishops is, and has been for 
 years, decidedly in favor of slavery. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 6t 
 
 The same is true of all the General Conference 
 papers. 
 
 It is not slandering the Church then, to say, that 
 as a whole, she is pro-slavery to the core. 
 
 There is as much proof that the General Confer- 
 ence of the il. E. church is pro-slavery, as there 
 is that the United States Congress is pro-slavery. 
 
 And those brethren who come out from pro 
 slavery political parties, in consequence of theii 
 corruption, and still remain in a pro-slavery church, 
 are grossly inconsistent.' 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 THE DUTY OF SECEDING FROM PRO-SLAVERY CHURCHES. 
 
 It cannot be right to remain a member of a 
 church which tolerates slaveholding, unless it be 
 right to hold communion with ??iart-,siea/ers — which 
 are the Avorst of all stealers. 
 
 Mr. Wesley says, "This equally concerns all 
 slaveholders, seeing men-buyers are exactly on a 
 l^vel with men-stealers." And the Bible says, " If 
 he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to 
 deatli." Here the crime of holding those in bond- 
 age who were originally stolen, is considered a 
 crime of equal enormity with that of the first 
 thieves — a crime punishable (under the laws) 
 with Death ! 
 
 If it be right to retain a connection with a church 
 
66 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 which tolerates slaveholding, then it must follow 
 that we are at liberty to remain in . fellowship 
 with any other class of sinners. Slavery involves 
 almost every other crime : it is the embodiment of 
 the most frightful crimes that fall under the ban 
 of the divine law, and if it can be admitted into 
 the church, with the dark cloud of guilt, the deep 
 and wide channels of con-uption, and the bitter 
 and overflowing waters of human misery, which 
 follow in its train, there is no crime this side of 
 Pandemonium itself, Avhich can be excluded from 
 the Church of Christ, by the laws which he has 
 enacted for the government of the same. If this 
 sin, when tolerated in the church, does not make 
 secession a duty, no other sin, nor all other sins 
 combined; can make secession a duty; and we are 
 driven upon the fearful consequence that we are 
 at liberty, as Christians, to remain in, and support 
 a church which tolerates every sin that has ever 
 -been committed in this fallen and corrupt world. 
 When the church spreads her fold so wide as to 
 enclose sinners, she loses her identity, and ber 
 distinctive character is merged in the common 
 character of the world. If the toleration of slave- 
 ry in the church does not make secession a duty, 
 the existence of drunkenness, fornication, adultery, 
 robbery, and theft, would not make secession a 
 duty ; and yet not a man can be found who dare 
 say he would remain in a church after it had re- 
 peatedly and publicly refused to make rules for 
 the expulsion of persons notoriously guilty of 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 67 
 
 these latter crimes. By their own decision, then 
 in relation to other sins, are abolitionists bound to 
 secede from all pro-slavery churches. 
 
 The same principle that requires us to.expel a 
 corrupt individual, must require us to withdraw 
 ourselves from the association, when a majority 
 are equally corrupt,' rendering- their expulsion 
 impossible. Now, it is too plain to be denied, 
 that a majority of the M. E. church, and several 
 other religious denominations, do tolerate slave- 
 holders in the church; the minority, therefore, 
 not having it in their power to separate them- 
 selves from the corruption of slaveholding, by 
 expeUing the corrupt party, are bound to effect 
 such separation by seceding themselves from the 
 corrupt body. If it be wrong to remain in church 
 relation with a corrupt individual, which must be 
 trae if the church is bound to expel corrupt in- 
 dividuals, it cannot be right to remain in church 
 relation with a greater number of individuals that 
 are equally corrupt. The duty of expulsion rests 
 upon the obligation to separate ourselves from 
 sinners, and as this obligation cannot be lessened 
 hy increasing the number of the corrupt to a 
 majority, it follows beyond the power of contra- 
 ^diction, that when a majority of any religious 
 community become guilty of Avhat ought to ex- 
 clude an individual, the minority are under ob- 
 ligation to secede : and as slaveliolding-is a crime 
 for which persons ought to be excluded from the 
 Christian Church, it follows, b}^ an iiTesistible 
 
68 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 conclusion, that all true and honest abolitionists 
 are bound to secede from their respective church- 
 es, which have made themselves answerable for 
 slaveholding within their pale. 
 
 To admit slaveholders to the Church, is to say 
 that slaveholding is, in the opinion of the Church, 
 consistent with the principles and obligations of 
 Christianity ; hence, the Church that admits slave- 
 holders to her communion, gives the influence of 
 the Christianity she professes, to support slavery. 
 The influence of the whole church which is lent 
 to the support of slavery, by admitting slave- 
 liolders to her communion, is made up of the in- 
 fluence of each individual who belongs to and 
 sustains the church ; therefore, every individual that 
 belongs to and supports a church that tolerates slaveri/^ 
 lends his influence to support slavery. 
 
 God, by express command, requires us to come 
 out from all religious associations in fellowship 
 Avith sinners. 
 
 Matt, xviii. 17. " Let him be unto thee as au 
 heathen man and a publican." This is a unii'er- 
 sal rule, applicable to all offences; and hence it 
 is applicable to the offence of slaveholding. 
 
 1. It is not to bep-egarded as merely conferring 
 a privilege, or as informing us what we may do, 
 but it is to be viewed in the light of a command, 
 imposing an obligation which binds us in the case. 
 To treat such persons as the text describes in any 
 other way than as heathen, is to violate the law 
 of Christ. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHUROH. 
 
 69 
 
 2. To comply with this command, and treat 
 slaveholders as we would treat a heathen man, 
 we must withdraw from those churches which 
 admit them to fellowship. We would not beloiTg 
 to a church that admitted heathen to membership 
 and communion ; and as Ave are bound to treat 
 slaveholders as we would treat a heathen man, 
 we must be bound to retire from the church where 
 they are admitted and fellowshiped. 
 
 Now, let us inquire wliat relation heathens 
 and publicans sustained to the worshipers of the 
 true God, in the days of our Saviour's incarna- 
 lion, and what relation have they even at this 
 day ! Were heathen and open sinners permitted 
 to mingle in the worship of the Almighty T No, 
 verily. Are they now permitted to sit at the holy 
 communion, to be members of churches, church 
 sessions, presbyteries, conferences, synod.s, con- 
 ventions, or general assemblies 1 These persons 
 liad no sort of religions connection with the wor- 
 shipers of the true God, than which nothing is 
 susceptible of clearer proof We do not suppose 
 that any have hardihood enough to deny the cor- 
 rectness of this position Now, as the worship- 
 ers of Jehovah had no religious connection 
 whatever — were not allowed to have any with 
 heathen men, neither are Christians to have any 
 with impenitent, trespassing brethren. And this is 
 the sense in which we are to withdraw from pro- 
 slavery brethren. The direction of the Saviour, 
 in this place, means that we dissolve all religious 
 
70 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSrON 
 
 connection with disorderly persons, and it means 
 nothing else . . This would fix the meaning of the 
 text, if there were not another passage to the 
 same import in the Bible ; for, whatever is j^lainly, 
 positively, and undeniably taught by any one text 
 of Scripture, is true and of Divine authority; for 
 the Scriptures contain a harmony of truth. They 
 never contradict themselves. But this passage 
 does not stand alone. 
 
 1 Cor. V. 5 . " But now I have written unto you, 
 not to keep company, if any man that is called a 
 brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idola- 
 ter, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner • 
 with such an one, no, not to eat." On this text it 
 may be remarked. 
 
 1. That any one of the offences named brings 
 the offender within its intent and meaning. 
 
 2. Every slaveholder comes within the mean- 
 ing of. the text. It not only includes all open 
 sinners, as a general rule, but it specifically in- 
 cludes the sin of slaveholding. Covetousncss and 
 extortion are clearly among the attributes of slave- 
 ry, and the text forbids us to keep company and 
 eat with those who practice these. 
 
 3. Keeping company and eating with men in 
 the sense of the text, cannot be supposed to mean 
 more than Christian fellowship, or belonging to the 
 same church with them, therefore the text clearly 
 forbids us to belong to the same church with slave- 
 holders ; and hence, when a majority of the church 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 71 
 
 persists iu retaining slaveholders, secession is the 
 only way left of obeying this command of God. 
 
 Here is a plain and positive command not to 
 eat with certain persons — disorderly persons. 
 And both Doddridge and Benson, two of our 
 ablest Commentators, refer this prohibition to a 
 common meal. If, therefore, we are forbidden to 
 eat a common meal with one who is called a bro- 
 ther, if he be covetous or extortionary (and such 
 certainly are slaveholders), most obviously may 
 we not commune with them at the Sacrament. 
 
 But many take the ground that we have no con- 
 cern as to who goes to the communion table, so 
 we are right ourselves. We may take the forni- 
 cator, the thief, the idolator, or the slaveholder, 
 all clotted with human gore, by the arm, and go 
 to the holy communion, and there, in the nearest 
 visible approach we can make to Christ on earth, 
 hold the closest communion with these charac- 
 ters that can be held out of heaven. A minister 
 in high standing, in one of the pro-slavery 
 churches of this land, said, not long since, that 
 he would go to the communion with the devil. 
 But this is not the doctrine of the New Testament. 
 If I have not misapplied this text, and I will thanlc 
 any one who \vill prove that I have, Christians 
 are forbidden to e.\t the Lord^s svpper with any but 
 those who give Scripture evidence of piety. 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 17. " Wherefore come out from among 
 them and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and 
 touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive 
 
72 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION.] 
 
 you." This is a comraand to Christians to come out 
 from all association with the morall}^ unclean and 
 polluted, and as slavery is as great a sin, and as 
 deeply polluting as the idolatry of the Corinthians, 
 it is as binding on us to come out from church- 
 fellowship with slaveholders, as it was in the days, 
 of the apostles, to come out from their heathen 
 countrymen. It is a general rule, applicable to 
 corruption in every age, of every kind. 
 
 Here the Lord has made a separation from dis- 
 orderly persons, the conditions of sonship. From 
 all these Scriptures we prove clearly and posi- 
 tively, that Christians are to hold no fellowship 
 with disorderly brethren, or other disorderly per- 
 sons ; they are not to eat the Lord's supper with 
 them ; they are to ha ve no connection with them, 
 but such as they have with idolators and openly- 
 profane sinners. If the passages we have notic- 
 ed do not prove these positions, then nothing can 
 be proved by the Scripture. 
 
 Eph. V. 2. "Have no fellow.ship witli the un- 
 fruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove 
 them." On this text, Ave should remark. 
 
 ■1. Slaveiy is, beyond all question, one of the 
 unfruitful works of dai'kness. 
 
 2. To belong to a church in whicli slavehold- 
 ing is tolerated, i* to have some sort of fellowship 
 with it, whereas the text commands us to have 
 no fellowship with it. 
 
 3. The expression, " but rather reprove them," 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 73 
 
 puts fellowship and reproof in opposition to each 
 other, so that we cannot do both at the same time. 
 It is therefore plain that to scripturally reprove 
 slavery, we must first cease to fellowship it, by 
 retiring from all religions associations with it. 
 
 2 Thes. iii. 6. "Now we command yon, bre- 
 thren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that 
 ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that 
 walketh disorderly." 
 
 1. Slaveholders, and all who apologize for 
 them, and advocate their right to belong to the 
 church, walk disorderly. 
 
 2. We cannot withdraw from such only by 
 withdrawing from those churches which tolerate 
 slaveholding in their communion ; we are there- 
 fore commanded to secede from all pro-slavery 
 religious associations. 
 
 God holds us responsible for the moral charac- 
 ter of the religious associations to which we be- 
 long. We will here introduce the testimony of 
 Mr. Watson, who is a standard author with all 
 Episcopal Methodists, and whose testimony they 
 must admit. Mr. Watson says, 
 
 " Every church declares, in some way, how it 
 understands the doctrine and disciplinary laws of 
 Christ. If fundamental error is found, the evil 
 rests upon that church collectively, and upon the 
 member.t individually, every one of whom is bound 
 to try all doctrines by the Holy Scriptures, and can- 
 not support an acknowledged system of error 
 without guilt. As to the discipline, the manner iu 
 3 
 
74 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 which a church provides for public worship, 
 the publication of the gospel, the administration 
 of the sacraments, the instruction of the ignorant, 
 the succor of the distressed, the admonition of 
 the disorderly, and the excision of offenders is 
 its declaration of the manner in which it inter- 
 prets those injunctions, which also it does on its 
 own collective responsibility, and that of its mem- 
 bers." 
 
 The simple declaration of Mr. Watson in the 
 above extract, is, that every individual member 
 of a church is responsible for the doctrine and 
 discipline of the same, and. so far as they are ac- 
 knowledged to be erroneous, they cannot support 
 them " without guilt.^^ Take the M. E. Church 
 then for an illustration, and it must be seen that 
 her doctrine, or her discipline, or both, are funda- 
 mentally wrong on the subject of slavery. Her 
 constitutional bodies declare that slavery is right, 
 and her official organs contend that slavery ought 
 not to be excluded from the church. This is all 
 wrong ; and to support the church in this posi- 
 tion, is, according to Mr. Watson, to incur individ- 
 ual and personal guilt. His doctrine is that when 
 the church made these declarations, so dread- 
 fully erroneous, she did it on the individual re- 
 sponsibility of every member. Whoever may be 
 willing to stand in the breach and stand such re- 
 sponsibility, we are not, wc dare not! 
 
 The church is bound, in her collective capacity, 
 ^ do what her members are bound to^do in their 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 75 
 
 individual relations. If individuals were not 
 bound to hold religious connection with disor- 
 derly persons, the church would not be bound to 
 exclude such persons from her fellowship. 
 
 The church is an institution of God, and all its 
 rights and obligations are from the divine Insti- 
 tutor; none of them' are acquired. They are all 
 ordained of God, and imposed by him on the m- 
 dividuals composing the church ; and, as these 
 individuals are not of the world, but chosen out 
 of the world, the church is not of the Avorld, but 
 is also chosen out of the world, and, as Christians 
 are bound to come out of the world and be sepa- 
 rate from sin and sinners, so is the church. But 
 while the duty is the same in both, the manner of 
 performing it differs. Individuals are to withdraw 
 from disorderlij persons; the church is to purge 
 them out — exclude them from her fellowship. 
 The ehurch, in her first organization, is composed 
 of persons who have come out from* the world, 
 and separated themselves from sin and sinners ; 
 hence, she has no connection with either, for the 
 persons composing her have none. 
 
 But Christians do not become free from their in- 
 dividual responsibility, by becoming associated 
 in churches. They carry with them into church 
 associations, their individual responsibilities : and 
 whatever would be wrong in their individual re- 
 lation.s, would be wrong in their church relations. 
 Heaven knows us in our individual relation.*, and 
 in these relations, and in these oiil}^, we will ap- 
 
GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 pear in judgment. Each will have to give an ac- 
 count of himself to God. The judgment of na- 
 tions, and churches, &c., takes place in this world. 
 At the judgment of the gxeat day, the wickedness 
 of associated bodies will rest on the individuals 
 compo.sing those associations. We are held indi- 
 vidually resjDonsible for all we do, whether in our 
 individual or associated characters or relations. 
 Our individual responsibility can never be lessen- 
 ed by entering into associations, but it may be 
 greatly increased, and in many, very many, in- 
 stances, is. If ten men fall on a lonely traveller, 
 and take his life, our laws would convict the 
 whole number of murder : each one would be as 
 readily hanged for murder as though each had 
 separately killed a man. In this case, but one 
 murder has been committed, but ten men are 
 guilty of murder. The guilt does not divide 
 among the ten, but each is held by the law as 
 guilty of the whole murder. And this would be 
 the case had one hundred, or even one thousand, 
 been engaged in the foul deed. The reason of 
 this is found in the fact, that each consented to 
 the dark deed; and we are guilty for all the heart 
 yields up its consent to do, when clear proof ap- 
 pears that the heart did so consent : and the mur- 
 der of the individual in this illustration, fimiishes 
 that proof. But, in relation to our final Judge, no 
 proof is needed : He knows what is in the heart 
 of man, and knows what we consent to do. We 
 see from the great moral prmciple on whioh the 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHUllCH. 
 
 77 
 
 laws of the civilized world are based, that re- 
 sponsibility cannot be lessened by associations. 
 But I have said, it may be greatly increased. If 
 ten men may be all guilty of murder, by killing one 
 man, on the principle that each is guilty of what 
 he consents to do, had ten men or one hundred 
 men been killed, on the same principle, each 
 would be guilty of ten, one hundred, or one thou- 
 sand murders ; for each consented in his heart to 
 the murder of all, and did his part to effect the 
 awful crime. Now, if we are accountable before 
 God for all we consent in our hearts to do, or to 
 aid others in doing — and no doctrine I humbly 
 conceive is more ckarly taught in the Book of 
 God than this — we are held responsible for all the 
 wickedness done by churches, political parties, or 
 other associations icith which ice consent to act. 
 
 This, my dear brethren, is an aw^ul subjecL I 
 fear that human responsibility is. as yet, very im- 
 perfectly understood. The thought that we are 
 held accoiuitable lor the evil done by those with 
 whom we may be associated, is distressing, truly 
 distressing : but it is true-, true. And it is to pre- 
 vent these awful consequences, that we are so 
 frequently commanded in the holy Scriptures to 
 liave no connection with the wicked — to be sepa- 
 rate from sinners. Truly awful will be the con- 
 sequences of disobeying -tliese oft-repeated com- 
 mands. 
 
 In the Presbyterian branches of the church, as 
 also in the Methodist and Episcopalian, there is a 
 
78 
 
 GROIXNDS OF SECESSTOir 
 
 connectianal fellowship "wiiicli unites ail as one 
 in the true and proper sense of Christian fellow- 
 ship, and this is also true of all church organiza- 
 tions not strictly congreg-ational. In the Presby- 
 terian and Methodist ehurclies (I mean all Pres- 
 byterian and Methodist divisions of these great 
 sections of the church), there is but one co^mmu- 
 nion table, because these sections of the church 
 are one, — membership in one place is member- 
 ship in every place. He that brings a regular cer- 
 tificate of membership from Charleston, S. C, or 
 from any other place, can claim his right oi mem- 
 bership in Pittsbui-g, though he owned one thou- 
 sand slaves — on that certificate he can claim his 
 place at the communion table with our anti-sla- 
 very friends, and they have no right, or power, as 
 Presbyterians or Methodists, to forbid him the sa- 
 crament with them. This simple fa^t proves that 
 these cliurches have but one commvniion table, 
 which reaches all through the United States, if 
 not beyond them, and those who go to this table-, 
 eat with all who eat a} it, i. e., all the members of 
 these denominations in the United States. It is a 
 very great mistake to suppose we only eat with 
 those who eat with us, in the same place, and at 
 the same time. This is true only of churches 
 strictly congregational. 
 
 All Presbyterians, Methodists, and others, who 
 have great denominational connections for legis- 
 lation, judicial investigation, or government, have 
 but one communion table, and he who goes to tha/t 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 79 
 
 communion in any one place, fellowships as truly- 
 all who are admitted to the one table of that de- 
 nomination, as he does those he communes with 
 at the communion in the church where he stated- 
 ly worships. Those who are strictly congrega- 
 tional, commune with none but members of their 
 own immediate church ; but Methodists, Presby- 
 terians, &c., commune with all of their denomi- 
 nation. 
 
 The General Conference being the legislative 
 department ot the M. E. church, and that body 
 admitting slaveholders to seats in it, every mem- 
 ber of that church holds such a connection with 
 slaveholders, as binds him to obey the laws they 
 may make, and to hold his membership on con- 
 ditions they may lay down. 
 
 The connections which exist in the churches 
 just noticed, as also the connections with slave- 
 holders, are inseparable from membership in any 
 such chxn-ch. Now, if slavery is sinful, slave- 
 holders must be disorderly persons; and those 
 who would obey the command in the text, and 
 the voice of God, clearly expressed elsewhere in 
 the Scriptures, have no alternative but to with- 
 draw from pro-slavery churches ; for they cannot 
 withdraw from d«or(/er/(/ brethren, while they live 
 with them — this is impossible. 
 
 Again : if slavery be an unfruitful work of 
 darkness, we cannot obey the command to have 
 no fellowship with the unfruitful works of dark- 
 ness, while we retain membership in a pro-slavery 
 
80 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 church ; hence, we must leave such a church, if 
 we a're m it, to obey the command of God. 
 
 I will suppose a case for the sake of illustra- 
 tion. Ten of us unite in a church; and this 
 number might constitute a church, as truly Christ's 
 as any that ever existed. One of our number 
 commits a crime, which M'e, as Christians, are 
 forbidden to fellowship — say, if you please, ex- 
 tortion or fornication. The ofTender is called to 
 an account, and five out of the nine who try him, 
 conclude to keep him in the chuixh to reform 
 huti ; what must the four do ? They are, as are 
 also the five, forbidden to eat the Lord's supper 
 with the offender, to have any fellowship with 
 him. They (the four pure ones) are required to 
 withdraw from this disorder^ person — to have 
 no fellowship with this worker of darkness — and 
 they cannot exclude him from the church ; hence 
 they must withdraw, for they must have no Chris- 
 tian connection with the vile, impenitent offender ; 
 they must leave the church to obey God, and save 
 their souls. When a corrupt majority retaui per- 
 sons 'in the church, whom God forbids his people 
 to fellowship, and commands them to separate — ■ 
 to withdraw from — his people must leave that 
 church. God requires them to leave it, and they 
 must be saved in disobedience, if they are saved 
 in it. 
 
 Psal. 1. 18. " When thou sawest a thief, then 
 thou consentedst with him, and hast been par- 
 takers with adulterers." No charge is here brought 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 81 
 
 against the accused party, that they had commit- 
 ted the crime of theft or adultery, but only that 
 they had consented with those that had commit- 
 ted the one, and been partakers with those who 
 had been guilty of the other. Will it then be de- 
 nied that we consent with, and are made partak- 
 ers with, any class of men, when we voluntarily 
 unite with them in the same Christian church 1 
 If not, the text clearly condemns our association 
 with slaveholders, and holds us responsible for 
 their conduct, so far as we unite with them on 
 terms of Christian fellowship. 
 /■2 John X. 11. "If there come any unto you, 
 and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into 
 your house, neither bid him God speed : For he 
 that biddeth hun God speed is partaker of his evil 
 deeds." 
 
 This relates to false or corrupt teachers. The 
 command not to receive them into our houses, is 
 not intended to prohibit us from entertaining them 
 upon principles of charity, as we would feed the 
 hungry, and clothe the naked, but to prohibit us 
 from entertaining them as Christians and Christian 
 ministers, by which we might give countenance 
 to their corruptions. " He that biddeth him God 
 speed is partaker of his evil deeds."' Dr. Clarke 
 says the words " neither bid him God speed," 
 "mean, acoordmg to the eastern use of them, 
 ' Have no religious connection with him, nor act 
 towards him so as to induce others to believe 
 you acknowledge him as a brother.' " Taking 
 
82 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSIOX 
 
 this interpretation of the words as correct, it 
 follo\vs that to have reUgious connection with 
 men, is to become partakers of their evil deeds, 
 and this every man dpes wlio belongs to the same 
 church with slaveholders. Do not Methodist 
 bishops bid slaveholders God sjieed, when they 
 lay their hands upon their heads, and ordain them 
 to the office and work of the ministry 1 And do 
 not northern abolitionists bid these bishops God 
 speed in their course, when they suffer them to 
 lay upon their heads these same hands that have 
 jfist been taken from the heads of slaveholders ? 
 And do not all the laity say, God speed to the 
 whole operation, by suffering their own ministers 
 to be ordained, and their own pulpits to be sup- 
 plied by bishops that ordain slaveholders, and by 
 belonging to, and supporting a' church, in which 
 slaveholders constitute a large portion of the 
 membership and ministry ? Those who can an- 
 swer these questions so as to exonerate abolition 
 members of pro-slavery churches from responsi- 
 bility, will do their cause great service by exer- 
 cising their rare gifts on the subject. 
 
 Rev. ii. 14, 15. " But I have a few things against 
 thee, because thou h^ist there them that hold the 
 doctrine of Balaam. So hast thou also them that 
 hold the doctrines of the Nicolaitanes, which 
 thing 1 hate." The charge is not for believing the 
 doctrine of Balaam, and of the Nicolaitanes, but 
 for having those in the church that held these doc- 
 trines 3 and the same principles make the church 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 83 
 
 responsible so Ion" as she has slaveholders within 
 her pale, and those that hold that "slavery as it 
 exists in the United States is not a moral evil." 
 
 Uev. xviii. 4. "And I heard another voice from 
 heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that 
 ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive 
 not her plagues." This is spoken of mystic Baby- 
 lon, and beyond all doubt it refers to some corrupt 
 community . From it we may deduce the follow- 
 ing propositions : 
 
 1. God may have a people in a corrupt com- 
 munity. 
 
 2. When a community has thus become comipt 
 as a body, God requures the uncorrapted portion 
 to come out, that is, secede from the corrupt ma- 
 jority. 
 
 3. Such as refuse to do it, by such refusal make 
 themselves partakers of the sins of the body, and 
 render themselves liable to the punishment due to 
 such sins. 
 
 Here is a plain and express command from God 
 to his people, to withdraw from a corrupt church. 
 And what are the reasons given for the require- 
 ment !^ That his people be not partakers of the 
 fallen church's sins, nor receive of her plagues. 
 
 I take the ground, that when a church becomes 
 .so corrupted as to place its members in Christian 
 fellowship with characters which God has forbid- 
 den his people to fellowship — which it would be 
 sinful to fellowship — that church has reached the 
 point of corruption, at which God"s people must 
 
84 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESStON 
 
 leave it. And when a church tolerates, sanctions 
 or in any way approves of sin, gives countenance 
 or support to sin, they are also bound to leave it, 
 else they become partakers of those sins. 
 
 We cannot remain in any of the .pro-slavery 
 churches of the land, without fellowshiping per- 
 sons whom God expressly forbids his people to 
 hold fellowship with ; and slavery being a sin, and 
 the churches giving sanction to the practice 6i 
 that sinby approving of slavenolders as acceptable 
 ministers and members, we become partakers it 
 that sin, if we do not come out of those churches 
 
 God's people were commanded to come out c 
 Babylon. And Avhat were Babylon's sins ? She 
 traded in slaves, and souls of men. — Rev. xviii. 13. 
 Now compare Babylon, as here described, with 
 the pro-slavery churches of this day, and you can- 
 not fail to see that she was no worse than they are, 
 if as bad. They who trade in slaves, trade also in 
 the souls of men ; for slaves are men having souls. 
 
 Trading in " slave! and souls ofmen,'^ was Baby- 
 lon's chief crime. What the members do the 
 church does. This is especially true when the 
 highest authorities of the church permit, allow, 
 or sanction what they do. The members of Baby- 
 lon traded in " slaves and souls of men," and the 
 highest ecclesiastical body of the church, or Baby- 
 lon, still allowed those who did so to retain their 
 membership, as good and acceptable members. 
 This tells the whole tale. And is notthis the case 
 in the pro-slavery churches of this land 1 It is. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 85 
 
 The members of these churches trade in " slaves 
 and souls of men" — have about two hundred 
 BULLIONS OF DOLLARS invcsted in immortal souls, 
 for whom Christ died, some of whom are the 
 members of Clirist's mystical body, "bone of his 
 bone and flesh of his flesh," '•' heirs to a crown of 
 glory which fadeth not away these they sell 
 like brute beasts, with ^'beasts, and sheep, and horses, 
 and chariots." ^Babylon did no more . Hell could 
 ask no more. In this one particular, and the 
 main one too, there is an exact agreement. 
 
 But it is important to our inquiry, to know if the 
 slavery in which Babylon traded differed from 
 American slavery : and if it did, was it more or 
 less sinful 1 Mr. Wesley said that American slave- 
 ry was the " vilest that ever saw the sun." He is 
 good authority, at least with Methodists. But 
 facts are authority with all. The period of Baby- 
 lon's tradmg in " slaves and souls of men," must 
 be one of two, from about A. D. 1000 to 1300, or 
 from 1521 to the present period ; as these are the 
 only periods the members of the Church of Rome 
 were engaged to any considerable extent in slave- 
 ry and the slave trade. The slavery of the first 
 period differed from American slavery in many 
 important particulars, and the difference is all 
 against us. Slaves, then, could be sold only with 
 tlie soil ; the soil and slaves could not be sepa- 
 rated ; where the slave was born, there he died. 
 Under that system, families could never be broken 
 up. Husbands and wives, parents and children, 
 
86 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 could live, and die together ; they could lighten 
 each other's burdens by tender sympathies, by 
 interchange of love. The wife had, in the hour 
 of distress, a husband's bosom to confide in : the 
 husband in his afflictions, a wife's heart to feel for 
 him ; the son, a father's council to guide him ; the 
 daughter, a mother's tenderness to watch over her, 
 and a mother's bosom to dry her tears in, when 
 heart-broken and afflicted. But none of these 
 sweets mingle in the bitter cup in America. Here 
 the demon hand of oppression seizes the web into 
 which is woven all the sympathies and loves of 
 social life, and tears it in pieces, — separates for 
 life husbands and wives, parents and children, 
 prostrates all that can impart any joy to human 
 life . Then, masters might whip their slaves, but 
 they dare not employ another to do it; all the 
 whipping that was done, was done by the mas- 
 ter's own hand. Now, the master may employ 
 as many unfeeling wretches as he may choose, 
 and by hired hands, whip his slaves to death. 
 Then, slaves were admitted as parties at law, and 
 could implead their own masters ; then, law reg- 
 ulated slavery, and the slave could appeal to it in 
 his own person, and obtain redress. Now, a slave 
 cannot be a party in any suit at law whatever — 
 now, the avarice, cupidity and lust of the master 
 regulate slavery, and from these the slave has no 
 appeal. Then, slaves were allowed their oaths 
 against their master — now denied them against 
 any white person. Then, the chastity of female 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 87 
 
 slaves was protected by law ; if a master offered 
 au insult to the chastity of his female slave, she 
 obtained her freedom by making oath to that fact. 
 Now, if she does not yield to the criminal desires 
 of her master, she may be whipped to death, if no 
 white person be present, or sold to some distant 
 laud for a harlot. From these facts, we see that 
 the churches of our land trade in a system of slave- 
 ry far more wicked than Babylon traded in ; and 
 if God's people could not remain in church rela- 
 tions with those who practised the less sin or evil, 
 witliout being partakers of the church's sins, much 
 less can they, if they continue in connection with 
 the greater. 
 
 And now, dear brethren, I ask you to look at 
 this whole subject in the fear of God, and in re- 
 ference to your soul's salvation : let each one ask 
 himself the question, can I be guiltless, holding 
 fellowship with those who trade in slaves and 
 souls of men 7 Can I, dare I, sin against God, in 
 remaining in a pro-slavery church ? 
 
 But it may be said we are bound to do all the good 
 we can in the world, and if we can do more good by 
 staying in a pro-slavery church than by leaving it, are 
 we not bound to stay ? 
 
 It is true that we are bound to do all the good 
 we can ; but it is equally true, that vv-e can do no 
 good by disobeying the commands of God. To 
 talk of weighing probabilities of doing good in 
 disobedience to God's commands, and to admit 
 that it is possible to do more good by disobeying 
 
88 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 the Most High, than by obeying him, is mon- 
 strous. This objection takes this ground : that 
 though God says, " come out of her, my people,''^ 
 they have a right to reply, we think we can do 
 more good by staying in, and therefore ought not 
 to come out. God says, withdraw from every 
 disorderly brother ; the objectors say, Lord, lean 
 do more good by staying with him. The Lord 
 says, let certain persons be to you as heathen 
 men ; the objectors say, Lord, I can do more good 
 liy letting them be to me as Christian men. The 
 Lord says, have no fellowship with the unfruitful 
 works of darkness ; the objectors say, I can do 
 more good by having the closest fellowship with 
 them. The Lord says, no not to eat the feast of 
 unleavened bread with fornicators, &c. : the ob- 
 jectors say. Lord, 1 can do more good by eating it 
 with them. Thus the plain commands of God 
 are set at naught, with the professed object of 
 pleasing him and doing good ; and not only so, 
 we are held bound thus to disobey our Maker. 
 And yet this objection is urged by ministers 'of 
 the sanctuary, in the light of the nineteenth cen- 
 tury. 
 
 Ought we not to keep slaveholders in our Christian 
 fellowship, to secure our influence over them for good ? 
 
 Let us apply the doctrine of this objection to 
 some other sinners. We will keep drunkards in 
 the church, to secure our influence over them, and 
 mali;e them better to their families. We will keep 
 in fornicators for the same reason ; if we turn 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 89 
 
 them out, they will give luirestrained indulgence 
 to their passions, and treat their poor wives 
 worse. We will keep thieves and liars in, to se- 
 cure our influence over them, and to make them 
 all good in the end. This is the doctrine which 
 is brought to support slavery. But this is not all ; 
 if Ave should keep such characters in the church 
 to reform them, we ought to take such in for the 
 very same reason, and not only keep the door of 
 the church open, but take into her arms an un- 
 saved world, with all its abominations. And this 
 is the practice on the subject of slavery : not only 
 are those who are slaveholders kept in, but all 
 who offer are taken in, if there be no other ob- 
 jection. According to this doctrine, we ought to 
 have all the sinners in the world in the church, to 
 secure religious influence over them. Is this the 
 doctrine of the Saviour 1 No, verily ! 
 
 Tlie church is my mother, and it would he ungrate- 
 ful in me to forsake my mother. Ought I not to cleave 
 to my mother 7 
 
 God's children are not orphans, they have a fa- 
 ther as well as a mother. They are bound to obey 
 their father, even God. Now suppose my mother 
 should go a whoring after strange gods, must I 
 forsake and disobey my father, and follow her? 
 I trow not. Christians must obey God ; and if 
 the church become so corrupt that we cannot stay 
 in it without disobeying God, we must leave it, 
 I fear those who have so much to say about their 
 obligations to the church, and so little to say 
 
90 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 about their obligations to the Redeemer, are not 
 the ~ children of God — have not the religion of 
 Jesus, but are orphans — have no father, are chil- 
 dren of the church — have church religion. We 
 are bound to love our mother, the church, so long 
 as she is true and faithful to our father, God, but 
 no longer. 
 
 "il/r. Wesley was opposed to leaving the churchy 
 and preached and published a sermon against schism. 
 Mr. Wesleij was no seceder.'' Why then shoidd I 
 secede 7 
 
 A. — Mr. Wesley in his sermon on schism preach- 
 ed the very doctrine here advanced. He says 
 emphatically, that when a church requires its 
 members to do something forbidden by the word 
 of God. or places them in circumstances in which 
 they cannot do what God's word enjoins, or must 
 do what his word forbids, then, and m that case, 
 they are not only free to withdraw from that 
 church, but are bound by the law of the Most 
 High to do it, and to do it immediately too; and 
 the ruinous effects of separation, which he por- 
 trays in glowing colors, lie all at the door of the 
 church. — See Sermon on Schism, vol, 2, page 165, 
 par. 17. We cannot stay in a pro-slavery church 
 without doing what God's word forbids, and 
 leaving undone what it enjoins ; hence, accord- 
 ing to Mr. Wesley's sermon, we are bound to 
 leave such churches. 
 
 Jfthe fact that the sin of slavery is in the Church 
 renders it a dutu to secede, then the existence of any 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 91 
 
 other sin in the Church must farce us to the same result; 
 and as there is no church which has not sin and sinners 
 in it, how can we belong to any church on earth ? 
 
 Secession is not urged because the sin of slave- 
 ry is in the Church, but because it is tolerated in 
 the Church, or because it is knowingly and publicly 
 suffered to exist in the Church. Did any other 
 sin exist in the Church, under the same circum- 
 stances, equally known to the Church and 
 the world, and, by the same toleration, it would 
 equally demand secession on the part of all those 
 who are opposed to association with shiners. 
 Take an illustration : Suppose we belong to a lo- 
 cal church or religious society. Suppose an indi- 
 vidual member of such church knows that ano- 
 ther member is guilty of stealing a sheep — the 
 crime cannot be worse than to steal a man. He 
 goes to the church with his complaint that A. has 
 stolen a sheep, but for want of proof, he fails to 
 convince the church that Bro. A. is guilty, though 
 he is sure of his guilt. These facts may not jus- 
 tify secession, because the church does not sanc- 
 tion theft ; they would expel A. if they were con- 
 vinced of his guilt, and they would be convinced 
 of his guilt, if reasonable evidence were laid be- 
 fore them. But suppose the accuser convinces 
 the church that A. has really stolen the sheep, and 
 they refuse, or a majority of them, to expel him, 
 on the ground that it is not improper for sheep-steal- 
 ers to belong to the church — the body then as- 
 sumes the responsibility of sheep-stealing, and 
 
92 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 every member who would not share tliat respon- 
 sibility must secede. This is jjrecisely the gi'ouad 
 on which we urge secession for the sin of slave- 
 ry; it is not because it has got into the Church, 
 and lies concealed beyond detection, but because 
 it is suffered publicly to exist in the Church, on the 
 ground that it is right to retain slaveholders in the 
 Church. If it can be shown, that any other sin 
 exists in the Church, by the same public toleration^ 
 it will furnish another unanswerable reason for 
 secession. 
 
 It is sometimes urged that, if we are bound to secede 
 from the Church, because it tolerates slavery, for the 
 same reason must we secede from the civil compact, be 
 cause government tolerates slavery. How is this 1 
 
 1. The principles involved in the two cases are 
 not the same. Membership in civil society does 
 not involve Christian fellowship, and is not under- 
 stood by the world as endorsing the character 
 and sentiments of the other members of such 
 civil society, or the laws and administration ; 
 but membership in a church does imply 
 Christian fellowship, and a sanction of the 
 laws and government of the same so far as 
 moral principle is concerned. We may belong 
 to a church, and not endorse every thing on the 
 ground of expediency ; many prudential rules may 
 exist which we may think are not the best, yet to 
 belong to a church is to endorse its principles 
 and government, so far as to say they are not 
 wicked — but such is not the case with the mem- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 93 
 
 bership in civil society ; it is not so uilderstood 
 by the world. 
 
 2. If the objection be well founded, if it be 
 true that if sin in the Church makes it our duty 
 to secede, it must also be our duty to secede from 
 civil society, because such sin exists in civil so- 
 ciety, it must follow that we are no more respon- 
 sible for the sin that exists in the Church, to which 
 we belong, than we are for the sin that exists in 
 the civil society in which we live. This is not 
 only contrary to every man's common sense, but 
 it must involve the following consequence. As, 
 not only slaveholders, but as thieves, liars, drunk- 
 ards, whore masters and murderers, all belong to 
 civil society, we must either secede from civil 
 society, or we are at liberty to remain members of 
 a Church where all these characters are admitted. 
 There is no way to evade the force of this but to 
 admit that sin in the Church may render it our 
 duty to secede, which does not render it our 
 duty to withdraw from civil.society, the same siji 
 existing there, in which case the whole objection 
 is given up. 
 
 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 1. By adhering to such a church, we violate all those 
 scriptures, which speak of church order and discipline. 
 That Christian churches under the apostolic gov- 
 ernment, were designed to include none but Chris- 
 tians in heart and life, will not be denied, and 
 that the Scriptures contain rules for separating 
 the unworthy from their communion is equally 
 Diain. These rules are of such a character as to 
 
94 GROUNDS OF SEC!eSSXON 
 
 prove it wrong for us to remain in Christian asso- 
 ciation with known offenders. Among these texts 
 are Matt, xviii. 15, 17; Rom. xvi. 17; ICor. v. 5, 9; 
 2 Thess. iii. 6, 14 ; " Let him be iiuto thee as an 
 heathen man" — " Avoid them" — " DeUver such an 
 one unto Satan" — " Not to keep company" — 
 " Withdraw yourselves" — " Have no company 
 with him" — these are all expressions which im- 
 ply expulsion or secession, and prove beyond a 
 doubt that, as Christians, we are bound to with- 
 draw from the associations of all unworthy per- 
 sons, or exclude them from our associations. 
 This remark is to be applied only to Christians or 
 'jliurch associations, the members of which, by 
 ihe law of Christ and by the common sentiments 
 of the world, constitute a common brotherhood 
 To remain in such associations with open offenders, 
 as all slaveholders and their apologists are, is a 
 direct violation of the law of Christ. It is wor- 
 thy of remark that the language of Scripture some- 
 times favors the idea of expulsion, and sometimes 
 secession or a withdrawing on the part of the 
 pure. This leaves us to make our own election 
 under the circumstances of the case, exercising 
 our best judgment in the fear of God ; but where 
 corruption exists, we must do one or the other. 
 Now in the case before us, the expulsion of slave- 
 holders and their apologists is not practicable, as 
 they are far the strongest party, and have the 
 constitution and government of the church on 
 their side, under which circumstances our only 
 means of obeying the law of Christ is secession. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 95 
 
 2. By remaining in such a church we render our- 
 selves liable to all the maledictions implied in those 
 scriptures which hold us responsible for the associations 
 we sustain, and the influence we thereby exert. The 
 following are a few texts of this class : Psa. 1. 18. 
 "When thou sawest a thief then thou cousentedst 
 with him, and has been partaker with adulterers." 
 Slaveholders sustam both theft and adultery. Prov. 
 xxix. 24. " Whoso is partaker with a thief hateth 
 his own soul." 
 
 We cannot see how we could more effectually 
 be partakers with thieves than by uniting with 
 slaveholders in a common brotherhood to pro- 
 mote religion. 
 
 Isa. i. 23. "Thy princes are companions of 
 thieves."' If slaveholders be thieves, which can- 
 not be denied, the princes (chief ministers) of the 
 M. E. church are most notoriously the companions 
 of thieves. Eph. v. 6, 7. "Because of these things 
 Cometh the wrath of God upon the children of 
 disobedience ; be not ye therefore partakers with 
 them." 1 Tim. v. 22. "Neither be partakers of 
 other men's sins; keep thyself pure ." 2 John 11. 
 "For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker 
 of his evil deeds." Rev. ii. 20. I have a few 
 things against thee because thou sufferest that 
 woman Jezebel to teach and seduce my servants." 
 Was that worse than for the M. E. Church to suf- 
 fer slaveholders, men-stealers, to teach ? Verse 
 15. " So hast thou also them that hold the doc 
 trines of the Nicolaitaues, which thing I hate." 
 
96 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 Was that worse than the doctrine of slavery ? 
 Rev.~xviii. 4. " Come out of her, my people, that 
 ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive 
 not of her plagues." 
 
 And now, my dear brethren, having laid this 
 most important subject before you in the plainest 
 manner I am able, you must come to your own 
 conclusions of duty from the arguments presented. 
 I know the truth, in this case, has fearful odds to 
 contend with; church attachments are powerful; 
 we have many friends in these churches whom 
 we love, and whom we ought to love ; these it 
 will be hard to separate from.- Ih these circum- 
 stances, Satan will try to bind us to sin, the vilest 
 sin, slavery, by the very cords which bind us to 
 God's people and to God's church. Shim this 
 snare. Let not feeling enter the mind while this 
 great question is under examination. IMake up 
 your mind as to what is duty — what God requires. 
 This done, recollect that he who hesitates between 
 duty and inclination is undone. 0 ! brethren, I feel 
 for you ! I tremble for you ! There are few, very, 
 few questions on which it is so difhcult to act 
 right, as on this. May the Most High God and 
 Savi/)ur aid you to do your duty on this most im- 
 portant, most difficult subject, that you may stand 
 before him at last, without spot and blameless, 
 which may the Lord grant for his name and mer- 
 cy's sake. Amen. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 97 
 
 M. E. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 
 
 SECTION I 
 
 THE LAITT EXCLUDED. 
 
 The Methodist Episcopal Church has, for some 
 years, been greatly agitated by a controversy on 
 the subject of church government. 
 
 This controversy has resulted in a considerable 
 secession from the church. 
 
 The people were never consulted at the orga- 
 nization of the M. E. church, they had no repre- 
 sentative present; but a few ministers, of them- 
 selves, in the city of Baltimore, in 1784, framed the 
 government without the concurrence or consent 
 of the people, and have held with tenacious grasp 
 ever since, all legislative, judicial, and executive 
 prerogatives. 
 
 By virtue of this usurped authority, this body 
 has imposed upon the church articles of faith, 
 without either their advice or concurrence, and 
 thus has interfered with the free exercise of con- 
 science and the right of private judgment, on the 
 part of the laity, and in respect to matters with 
 which their personal salvation is inseparably 
 identified. What more has the Roman Catholic 
 Church itself done than this, in controlling the 
 faith of its members ? 
 
 They did not embrace and approve of this kind 
 of government, in the act of joining the church, for 
 
98 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 not one in a hundred, if one in a thousand, 
 thought anything about the principles of govern- 
 ment when uniting with the church, but were in- 
 fluenced in this act by entirely different consid- 
 erations. . Neither do they approve of this kind 
 of government by continuing in the church, as a 
 large majority in the church do not understand 
 the 'principles of their own government, nor the 
 government of reformers, or of the difference be 
 tween them ; and among those "who are acquaint- 
 ed with them, perhaps there is a majority in favor 
 of reform. 
 
 •They may probably be influenced to this course 
 from a number of considerations, foreign to the 
 government; such is their attachment to favorite 
 ministers ; and unwillingness to interrupt old as- 
 sociations and attachments. Some may be in- 
 flueced by the argument taken from numbers and 
 popularity; others may think they can succeed 
 better in their temporal avocations, and that it 
 will best subserve their secular interests to belong 
 to so large a community; others, again, do not 
 like to leave the meeting-houses which their mo- 
 ney has built ; and not among the least, is a fear 
 that the new church will not succeed — which 
 fear ought now to be abandoned. 
 
FROM TIIE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 99 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 EPISCOPACY. 
 
 Methodist Episcopacy was established by Dr. 
 Coke and Francis Asbury. Mr. Wesley did not 
 consecrate Dr. Coke a Bishop, as has been as- 
 serted. We have no proof that he ever made 
 such an attempt — and had he done so he could not 
 have succeeded ;, for he never was a Bishop him- 
 self. He could not therefore, confer powers he 
 did not possess. But he could and did appoint 
 Dr. Coke and Francis Asbury joint superintend- 
 ents of the Methodist societies in North America. 
 
 Mr. Wesley did set apart Dr. Coke by th* impo- 
 sition of hands : but this ceremony, though it 
 generally accompanies ordination, does not prove 
 anything in itself. It was a ceremony which, in 
 the days of the apostles, accompanied appoint- 
 ment" to office, where no ministerial function was 
 either conferred or recognized. ' It was also a 
 common ceremony which accompanied the re- 
 ceiving of the Holy Ghost. Again, Mr. Wesley, as 
 the father and founder of the Methodist societies, 
 often exercised the right of sending liis preachers 
 to particular fields of labor, and in doing so, he 
 fipquently laid his hands upon them in token of 
 his blessing ; and this practice he professed to 
 have derived from Acts xiii. 3. In one of his 
 letters he thus speaks, — " Paul and Barnabas were 
 separated for the work to which they were called. 
 
 This was not ordaining them — it was only in- 
 
100 
 
 GjROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 ducting them to the province for which our Lord 
 had appointed them. 
 
 Mr. Wesley in his letter ot appomtment puts 
 himself and Dr. Coke on a level, as it regards 
 grades in the ministry. He applies the term pres- 
 byter to both. Mr. Wesley, as the father of the 
 whole Methodist family, simply " appointed," 
 "set apart," Dr. Coke to "superintend" and "pre- 
 side over" a portion of his great family. This is 
 all that can fairly be gathered from the commis- 
 sion of Dr, Coke. 
 
 Mr. Wesley gave (in this letter of appointment) 
 as one reason for the step he then took, that the 
 Methodists in North America desired " to continue 
 under his care, and still adhere to the doctrine and 
 discipline of the Church of England. 
 
 We cannot suppose that he Avould violate his 
 solemn ordination vows, by ordaining a Bishop, 
 while he was only a presbyter, and also that he 
 would trample on the discipline of the church to 
 which the " people still wished to adhere," by 
 thrusting upon the societies a Bishop of his own 
 creating, contrary to the discipline of said church. 
 
 Mr. Wesley undoubtedly intended that Dr. Coke 
 and Mr. Asbury should ordain other Presbyters. 
 The necessities of the case he supposed would 
 justify, in America, this departure from English 
 usage ; but he could plead no such necessity for 
 making a Bishop — believing as he did, "that Bish- 
 ops and presbyters were of the same order and 
 had thr. same right to ordain." He did not confer 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 101 
 
 upon Dr. Coke any additional ordination power, 
 but merely set him apart to superintend the flock 
 of Christ. Mr. Wesley did not anticipate that 
 Coke and Asbury would assume and exercise the 
 office of Bishops, and organize a separate and 
 distinct Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 He expected both preachers and people would 
 continue under his care, and "still adhere to the 
 discipline" of the established church. And -when 
 Mr. V/esley found that his superintendents had 
 taken the name of Bishops, he wrote to Asbury a 
 letter, of "which the following is an extract. 
 " How can you, how dare you suffer yourself to 
 be called a Bishop T' I shudder, I start, at the 
 very thought ; men may call me a knave, or a 
 fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content. But 
 they shall never, by my consent, call me a Bishop. 
 Tor my sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, put 
 a full end to this. John Wesley." — (^Moore's Life 
 of Wesley, vol. 2, p. 285.) 
 
 It was not the name merely, to which Mr. Wes- 
 ley objected; as the name was scriptural, he cer- 
 tainly could not object, as a churchman, to their 
 being called by a name which exactly designated 
 their office. It is ridiculous to suppose that after 
 he had made them Bishops, he so pointedly con- 
 demned them for takmg the name .' Such a sup- 
 position is contrary to Mr. Wesley's whole char- 
 acter. 
 
 There is evidence that Dr. Coke never consid- 
 ered himself a Bishop in the Episcopal sense. He 
 
102 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 appears never to have been satisfied with his 
 Episcopal authority. He wrote a letter to Bishop 
 White, dated Richmond, April 24, 1791, nearly 
 seven years after Mr. Wesley had made him a 
 Bishop, making a formal proposition for are-union 
 of the Methodists in America with the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church ! He wrote to Bishop Seabury 
 of Connecticut, about the same time, making a 
 similar proposition. 
 
 In the former of these letters he expressed the 
 opinion that he " went farther in the separation" 
 of the Methodists from the Established Church 
 than Mr. Wesley intended — that Mr. Wesley " did 
 not intend an entire separation" — that Mr. Wesley 
 himself " Avent farther than he would have gone, 
 if he had foreseen some events which followed.'" — 
 and that he is now sorry for the separation. How 
 much does this look like constituting Dr. Coke a 
 BishoiJ to form a separate Methodist Episcopal 
 Church 1 These " certain events which followed," 
 were, doubtless, the assumption of the name and 
 office of Bishops, on the part of Coke and Asbu- 
 ry, and their conseqiient proceedings ! In this 
 letter. Dr. Coke styles himself a "Presbyter of the 
 Church of England," and states that about 130 
 preachers had been ordained, and that the "very 
 few, and perhaps none of them would refuse 
 to submit to a re-ordination.'" So nmch for the 
 satisfaction of the preachers at that early day 
 vith ordination from Mr. Wesley's Bishops ! In 
 lus letter to Bishop Seabury, which Dr, Coke read 
 
PROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 103 
 
 to Bishop White, he suggested that in case of a 
 re-union, " there would be use in consecrating Mr. 
 Asbury to the Episcopacy — and that although there 
 would not be the same reason in his (Dr. Coke's 
 ease), because iie was a resident of England ; yet 
 as he should probably, while he lived, occasion- 
 ally visit America, it would not be fit, considering 
 he was Mr. Asbury's senior, that he should appear 
 in lower character than this gentleman." Hence it 
 seems that Mr. Wesley's Bishops were only Pres- 
 byters after all — and that to be true Episcopal Bish- 
 ops they needed, in the opinion of Dr. Coke, a new 
 consecration. 
 
 As lately as 1813, Dr. Coke applied to Wm. 
 ^Vilberforce and several other distinguished gen- 
 tlemen in England, for an appointment to the 
 Episcopacy of India, and promising, if he could 
 obtain that appointment, he would return to the 
 bosom of the Church, and do all in his power to 
 promote her interests. It is as clear as the sun, 
 that Dr. Coke never considered himself properly 
 a Bishop, though this appears to have been the 
 height of his ambition. " If the less can bless 
 the greater;" if presbyters can make Bishops, 
 then has Methodist Episcopacy something to 
 stand upon, though it owes its existence more to 
 these self-styled Bishops, Coke and Asbury, than to 
 John Wesley. 
 
 Mr. Wesley, in page 314, vol. vii. of his works, 
 thus states the whole case. " Hence those who 
 had been members of the church, had none either 
 
104 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 to administer the Lord's Supper, or to bajjtize 
 
 their children." -Judging this to be a 
 
 case of real necessity, I took a step which, for 
 peace and quietaess, I had refrained from taking 
 for many years ; T exercised that power which, I 
 am fully persuaded, the great Shepherd and Bish- 
 op of Souls has given me. I appointed three of our 
 laborers to go and help them by not only preach- 
 ing the word of God, but likewise, by administering 
 the Lord's Supper, and baptizing their children, 
 throughout that vast tract of land — a thoiTsand 
 miles long, and some iinndreds broad." The 
 same facts are referred to as the cause of Mr. 
 Wesley's action in this case, in his Life by Coke 
 and Moore. They there state " that Mr. Asbury 
 informed Mr. Wesley of the extreme uneasiness 
 of the people's minds for want of the sacraments ; 
 that thousands of their children were unbaptized, 
 and that the members of the society in general, 
 had not taken the Lord's Supper for years !" 
 Again, in his own circular upon this subject, Mr. 
 Wesley says, "For some hundreds of miles to- 
 gether, there is none either to baptize or admin- 
 ister the sacraments ; hei-e, therefore, my scruples are 
 at an end, as I violate no order and invade no 
 man's right by appointing and sending laborers 
 into the harvest:^ This, then, was his object, and 
 he incidentally cites the practice of the Alexan- 
 drian Church as sustaining him in the ordination 
 he performed. Such a reference, however, would 
 not have been revelant, had he ordained a Bishop, 
 as the Bishops of that church were elected by the 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 105 
 
 whole church, previously to being ordained by the 
 elders. Can any one believe that, at that time, Mr. 
 Wesley intended to assert and defend his right to 
 originate an Episcopacy ■? Is there another place 
 in his volumiii'^ns works, where such a right is 
 even adverted to ? We believe there is not one. 
 It is evident that the sublime conception of Meth- 
 odist Episcopacy had not then entered liis mind ; 
 when it was forced upon him, we know hoio he 
 expressed himself with regard to it. 
 
 .The case of Scotland was similar to that of 
 America. The societies in Scotland were without 
 any to administer the sacraments, and many mem- 
 bers had been lost in consequence. Hence he 
 says in his Journal, " Aug. 1, 1785. Having, with 
 a few selected friends, weighed the matter tho- 
 roughly, I yielded to their judgment, and set apart 
 tliree of our well-tried preachers, to minister in 
 Scotland." Again, in his works, page 314, vol. 
 vii. he says, "After Dr. (not Bishop) Coke's re- 
 turn, from America, many of our friends begged I 
 would c onsider the case of Scotland." Then, 
 after mentioning the evil arising from the want of 
 ordained ministers there, he adds, " To prevent 
 this, I at length consented to taki: the same step 
 
 WITH REGARD TO SCOTLAND, AS I HAD DONE WITH 
 
 regard' TO America!" . The three preachers re- 
 ferred to, were undoubtedly intended to superin- 
 tend the societies in Scotland, which were, shortly 
 after this, divided into three circuits. So far was 
 Mr. Wesley from originating any Episcopal es- 
 
106 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 tablishment " to supersede the P. E. Church," 
 that, in the same document, he (Mr. W.) says, 
 "Whatever then is done, either in America or 
 Scotland, is no separation from the Church of 
 England. I have no thought of this !" The 
 " SAME step" with regard to Scotland as America. 
 
 If he took the same steps with regard to Scotland 
 as America, and ordained no Bishops for the for- 
 mer place, is it not very strange that the ministers 
 of the M. E. Church should persist in asserting 
 that Mr. Wesley is the author of Methodist Episco- 
 pacy 7 It certainly is ; and it cannot be accounted 
 for only on the ground of ignorance, prejudice, or 
 dishonesty .' 
 
 It appears from " Lee's History of Methodism," 
 that when the society was first organized under 
 Messrs. Coke and Asbury, these gentlemen were 
 not known as Bishops. The title was not assum- 
 ed until about three years after the organization, and 
 then without the knowledge or consent of the conference. 
 We know, too, that mafiy of the preachers were op- 
 posed to the change, and that after considerable de- 
 bate a vote was passed not approving of the act, 
 but acceding to the request of the supei-intendents, upon 
 Mr. Ashury's explanation of the term to allow it to 
 remain.''^ Mr. Wesley's letter to Asbury ap- 
 pears to have been (le.«patched immediately after 
 this, namely, in 1788. So that he lost no time in 
 endeavoring to correct tiie evil. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 107 
 
 Dr. Coke never was received in England as a 
 Bishop . 
 
 About five months after Mr. Wesley's death, 
 the Conference assembled. This was in 1791. 
 Dr. Coke, who had been seven years a Bishop, 
 was present. But he did not preside as Bishop, 
 nor yet as superintendent. He did not preside at 
 all. William Thompson was chosen President, 
 and Dr. Coke, Secretary. The next year, Alexander 
 Mather was chosen President, and Dr. Coke, Se- 
 cretary. And the three following Conferences, Dr. 
 Coke acted not as Bishop, not as President, but as 
 Secretary. 
 
 Some of the Wesleyan preachers supposed Mr. 
 Wesley had attempted to make a Bishop ; others 
 considered it a kind of Presbyterian ordination. 
 They were all thunderstruck ! The thing was done 
 in a private chamber .' One of the preachers, when 
 he heard of the transaction, said, " It is a new 
 mode of ordination, to be sure, on the Presbyterian 
 plan." Another said, " It is neither Episcopal nor 
 Presbyterian, but a mere hodge-podge of inconsis- 
 tency." 
 
 The M. E. Church holds to two orders in the 
 ministry, theoretically ; three practically. Metho- 
 dist Bishops are inducted to the Episcopaoy by a 
 trifle ordination. The forms for the ordination of 
 a Bishop are more pompous than those of an 
 elder. The pretence that all this parade is only 
 to ordain to an office (not an order), is a miserable 
 shift to avoid an obvious difficulty. 
 
108 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 To admit that a Bishop is superior m order, 
 wbukl be to admit that John Wesley made a 
 greater man than himself, — or that Coke created 
 himself a Bishop, and then created the triple 
 crown for Asbury. To deny that a Bishop is su- 
 perior in any sense to a jiresbyter, would be to 
 lower down the Episcopal standard — hence this 
 dodging and trimming between office and order. 
 It is a mere play upon words — a distinction with- 
 out a difference. 
 
 As a presiding elder is next in office to a Bishop, 
 and superior in many respects to other elders, 
 why not ordain him ? Echo answers why ? 
 
 The Episcopal Methodists would never have 
 had any doubts about a third order, had their Epis- 
 copacy come from a regular Bishop of the estab- 
 lished church. 
 
 The usages of the established church are more 
 consistent with her doctrine of a third order, than 
 are those of the M. E. Church with her doctrine 
 of but tivo orders. 
 
 If the bishopric is only nn office in the church, 
 it is about the seventh, in the room of the third. 
 1. Class-leader. 2. Exhorter. 3. Local preacher. 
 4. Junior preacher. 5. Preacher in charge. 6. 
 Presiding elder. 7. Bishop ! Bat the bishopric is 
 the only office that happens to be ordained. Such 
 an ordination to office merely, is supremely ridicu- 
 lous ! 
 
PROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 109 
 
 SECTION TIL 
 
 GENERAL AND ANNUAL CONFERENCES, COMPOSITION . 
 POWERS, ETC. 
 
 The laws of the M. E. church are made by the 
 General Conference. 
 
 The General Conference is comiDosed of travel- 
 ling ijreachers. 
 
 The travelUng clergy, by their delegates in Gen- 
 eral Conference, control the entire church both in 
 respect to its "faith and pr-ictice," and hereby de- 
 stroy the very foundations of all religious liberty, 
 and provide a basis /or rearing up an absolute 
 despotism. 
 
 The members of the General Conference are 
 appointed by the Annual Conferences. 
 
 The AnnKdl Conferences are composed exclu- 
 sively of cravelling preachers. 
 
 No ooe can be elected a member of the General 
 Conference but a travelling preacher. 
 
 No one can vote for members of the General 
 Conference but travelling preachers. 
 
 It may be emphatically called a government of 
 travelling preachers. 
 
 The local ministers and members have no re- 
 presentatives in the law-making department. 
 
 It is denied that they have any right, either natu- 
 ral or acquired, to representation. (See the re- 
 port of the General Conference of 1828.) 
 
110 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 The travelling preachers assumed the power to 
 legislate for the local preachers and members. 
 
 It is upon such principles and with such powers, 
 that the legislative department of the M. E. church 
 is constituted ; principles and powers at utter 
 variance with human rights and the heaven-sanc- 
 tioned equality of the Christian brotherhood. 
 Look at it, reader, and say if you know of a 
 parallel, either civil or religious, except among 
 the absolute despotisms of the Old World. 
 
 The local minisi-srs and members have no neg- 
 ative on the laws, Which are to affect their pro- 
 perty, persons, and reputation. 
 
 To object to, or reason against them, is called 
 sowing dissension and inveighing against disci- 
 pline. 
 
 The penalty annexed to this a'lleged crime of 
 sowing dissension and inveighing ugainst disci- 
 pline is expulsion from the church. 
 
 Persons can be expelled by this rule of disci- 
 pline from the M. E. church, without bemg 
 charged with a breach of the laws of Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 Ill 
 
 SECTION IV, 
 
 BISHOPS AND PRESIDING ELDERS ; APPOINTMENT, 
 POWERS, ETC. 
 
 The Bishops are appointed by the travelling 
 preachers. 
 
 They hold their ofRce during life, unless removed 
 for crime. 
 
 There are about 4000 preachers whose itinerant 
 destiny is placed in the hands of the Bishops. 
 
 They have no appeal from the Bishop's decision ; 
 they must either go to their appointments or 
 leave the itinerant ranks. 
 
 This places the preachers in a state of depend- 
 ence on Episcopal power. 
 
 They can favor or oppress them, in giving them 
 good or bad appointments, keep them near home 
 or send them afar off. They may be under the 
 necessity, sometimes, of learning obedience by the 
 things they suffer. 
 
 The Bishops from these circumstances, acquire 
 very great influence over the preachers and 
 people. 
 
 This was exemplified in the General Conference 
 of 1820, in putting down what were afterwards 
 called the suspended resolutions, after they were 
 carried by a majority of upwards of two-tliirds of 
 the General Conference. 
 
112 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 The New Testament gives no account of such 
 prerogatives being claimed or jiossessed by Bish- 
 ops ; and Mosheim, in his Ecclesiastical History, 
 published by the M. E. church (vol. 1, p. 91), 
 states, that " a Bishop in the first ages of the 
 Christian Church, was a person who had the care 
 of one Christian assembly, which at that time was, 
 generally speaking, small enough to be contained 
 in a private house." Again, in the same volume 
 (p. 88), Mosheim says, " the rulers of the church 
 were called either presbyters or Bishops, which 
 two titles were undoubtedly applied to the same 
 person. 
 
 The most alarming prerogatives of Methodist 
 Bishops are — 
 
 1. Their power to gag and put down the annual 
 conferences. - This power they exercised from 
 1836 to 1840 on the slave question particularly. 
 Their right to prevent an annual conference from 
 expressing a sentiment by resolution or report on 
 what they considered an important' moral ques- 
 tion, was warmly contested. The General Con- 
 ference, however, of 1840, approved their course 
 and gave them this power by express provision 
 This prorogative they have exercised since the 
 last General Conference. Thus an annual confer- 
 ence of 200 members, many of whom are older, 
 and perhaps wiser and better than some of the 
 Bishops, however much they may feel impressed 
 that they ought to express a sentiment on a moral 
 enterprise, may be prevented by the Bishop, if he 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 113 
 
 pleases to pronounce the proposition unconstitu- 
 tional or out of order ; and admitting no appeal 
 from his decision, he may thus trample on the 
 consciences of his brethren and do it according to 
 Methodist Episcopal law .' And this is the monster 
 which, if you touch, you are, in the opinion of a 
 million souls, piercing your Holy Mother .' 
 
 In 1842, at the session of the New England 
 Conference, in Springfield, Mass., Bishop Waugh 
 presided. 
 
 The following resolution was introduced, which 
 the Bishop refused to put, and stated that it was 
 " too late in the day to give his reasons" for such 
 refusal ! 
 
 " Resolved, That it is the solemn conviction of 
 the New England Annual Conference, that all 
 slaveholding, that is, all recognition of the right of 
 property in human beings, is contrary to the laws 
 of nature and religion, and ought therefore to be 
 discouraged by all wise and prudent means." 
 
 How is it possible for a resolution to be more 
 mildly worded than the above ? How reasonable 
 mat such a resolution should have passed ! How 
 cruel and tyrannical the refusal! As lately as 
 1842, a body of Christian ministers denied the 
 privilege of uttering the above language 1 Their 
 rights and consciences trampled under foot by his 
 Holiness in the chair! 
 
 And yet ten thousand preachers, travelling and 
 local, and a million members, submit in silence 
 to such treatment — to such a government ! ! The 
 10* 
 
114 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 same power and prerogatives which the Bishops 
 have in the annual conferences, about two hun- 
 dred presiding elders have in the quarterly confer- 
 ences — and they have often exercised them. 
 * No matter how much any people.inay desire a 
 particular preacher — no matter how much the 
 preacher may wish to serve the people ; unless 
 the Bishop please, they cannot be gratified — and he 
 don't always please, in such cases. No matter 
 how much they may remonstrate against his 
 being stationed with them ; if the Bishop pleases, 
 they must take him. 
 
 I will give a few instances, out of scores that 
 might be selected to show what a mild clever 
 little thing this Methodist Episcopacy is — and 
 how it regards the rights and consciences of the 
 ministry and laity. 
 
 At the session of the New York Conference in 
 1839, it was in some way intimated to the Wash- 
 ington Street Church, in Brooklyn, L. I., that the 
 Rev. B. Griffin was to be appointed to that charge. 
 The church accordingly, through a committee ap- 
 pointed for the purpose, presented itself before 
 the Bishop and remonstrated against Mr. Griffin's 
 being sent to them as their pastor. But the re- 
 monstrance was disregarded, and Mr. Griffin was 
 stationed at Washington Street. 
 
 At the session of the New England Conference, 
 in 1841, both of the large societies in Lowell, 
 Mass., petitioned for particular preachers, but 
 they were told that they should not have the men 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 115 
 
 they asked for. One of the churches [St. Paul's] 
 then requested to be left without a supply by the 
 Bishop, having made arrangements to employ a 
 local preacher. But the Bishop regarded not the 
 request, but forced a preacher upon them. In 
 both these cases, the preachers petitioned for also 
 added their request to the voice of the churches 
 so that the wishes of both preachers and people 
 were disregarded. 
 
 Wesley Chapel Station, after being denied the 
 preacher they wanted, selected some four or five 
 others, and stated to tlie Bishop that they would 
 be satisfied with either of them. But no; they 
 must not have either. And to cap the climax o-' 
 insult, the very man was sent them to whom the]' 
 had objected, either officially or unofficially. 
 
 One circumstance connected with the LoweU 
 churches ought not to be overlooked. In conse- 
 quence of rejectmg their preachers and electing 
 others, they were publicly declared, through 
 Zion's Herald, to be without the pale of the 
 church. This was done by the two rejected 
 preachers, with the approbation of the presiding 
 elder, in a note appended to the Episcopal Bull. 
 A very few who^dhered to the rejected preachers, 
 escaped these maledictions. This alarming step 
 of dismembering whole churches without the 
 forms of trial, developes another of tlie alarming 
 features of Methodist economy — especially when 
 it is considered that the subject was carried up to 
 
116 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 the Bishop, and he approved of the course of the 
 preachers and pronounced it Methodism ! 
 
 Thus tlie doctrine is established, that when an 
 M. E. society dares to reject their preacher, it may 
 be dismembered at a blow! Who can desire 
 membership in such a church 1 True, these ex- 
 scinded churches, by reconsidering certain resolu- 
 tions which gave some offence to the Episcopacy, 
 were graciously taken back again, en masse, by 
 these divines, with another stroke of their Epis- 
 copal pens. A new way this to expel and re- 
 ceive churches — but it is pronounced to be ME- 
 THODISM ! Good Lord, deliver us from such Me- 
 thodism as this ! It is not Wesleijan Methodism .' 
 
 The Chesnut Street M. E. Church in the city of 
 Providence, Avas treated by the Bishops in a simi- 
 lar manner, about the time of the Lowell pros- 
 criptions — viz., in June, 1841. This was a large 
 church, and it liad fixed on a particular preacher. 
 The request was unanimous; but it was rejected. 
 The consequence was a secession, which has 
 resulted in the organization of a Wesleyan church, 
 with a new and beautiful house of worship, all 
 paid for, I believe. 
 
 2. The power which the Bishops have to trans- 
 fer men from one end of the continent to the 
 other, and that contrary to their wishes, is wrong. 
 That they have power to transfer the whole or any 
 portion of the New England Conference to South 
 Carolina, and bring preachers from that Confer- 
 ence to New England, will not be denied. Bishop 
 
PROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 117 
 
 Heddiiiff has openly published this doctrine to the 
 world. He says, in his address on the Discipline, 
 as the only sure method of curing "hsresy," and 
 other evils, " Let the General Conference com- 
 mand the Bishops to remove the corrupted ma- 
 jority of an Annual Conference to other parts of 
 the work, and scatter them among Annual Con- 
 ferences, where they will be governed, and supply 
 their places with better men from other Confer- 
 ences. But such men would not go at the ap- 
 pointment of the Bishop. Perhaps they would 
 not personally; but their names and their member- 
 ship would go where they could be dealt with as 
 their sins deserve. It is true the Bishops have au- 
 thority to do this, and in some cases it might be their 
 duty to do it, without the command of the General 
 Conference." 
 
 What a tremendous power for seven men to ex- 
 ercise over 4000 of their brethren m the ministry ! 
 How dangerous — hoAV contrary to liberty of con- 
 science ! And yet scores of young ministers are 
 annually bowing their necks at the feet of the 
 Episcopacy, and taking upon them " ordinatio 
 vows," which oblige them to obey their chief 
 ministers — without making any* provision for tiie 
 exercise of a " good conscience towards God !" 
 
118 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 ^ SECTION V. 
 
 RECEPTION AND EXPULSION OF MEMBERS, ET€. 
 
 Members are received into the M. E. church by 
 the preacher in charge ; and though tliis is generally 
 (not always) done in presence of the society, 
 there is no rule to prevent him from receiving 
 members obnoxious to the majority. All the class 
 leaders are appointed by /urn, and no steward can 
 be appointed without his nomination. And all 
 new boards of Trustees must be appointed by him 
 or the presiding elder, except in those states and 
 territories where the statutes provide differently. 
 The pulpits of all the Episcopal Methodist 
 churches, built on the plan of the discipline, are 
 entirely under the control of the bishops and 
 clergy. 
 
 The funds of the M. E. church, amounting to 
 near a million of dollars, is the exclusive property 
 of the preachers ! Out of these funds the bishops 
 are served first, and then their cringing vassals. 
 The entire property of the church, including meet- 
 ing-houses, cannot be less than five or six millions 
 of dollars — probably more. The use of this vast 
 sum is entirely under the control of the bishops 
 and their agents — the travelling preachers ! 
 
 In the trial of members the preacher in charge 
 has the right to bring the accused before a com- 
 mittee of his own creating ; and in case of an ap- 
 peal to the quarterly conference, he can carry the 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 119 
 
 matter as he pleases — as he can change all the 
 leaders, if need be, any moment. 
 
 Let Episcoi^al Methodists beware how they 
 offend the preacher in charge, as he can dismem- 
 ber them almost with a nod. And the preacher 
 must be equally cautious how he offends his pre- 
 siding elder. And the presiding elder must take 
 heed to his steps that he keep in the good graces 
 of " his holiness," as he is entirely his creature — 
 and can be made his agent even contrary to the 
 expressedj will of both preachers and people. 
 The government of the M. E. church is, there- 
 fore, a government of bishops ! 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE M. E. CHURCH CONTRASTED 
 WITH THE SCRIPTURES AND THE USAGES OF THE 
 PRIMITIVE CHURCH. — TESTIMONY OF MOSHIEM, LORD 
 KING AND OTHERS. 
 
 " In those early times every Christian church 
 consisted of the people, their leaders and the min- 
 isters and deacons ; and these indeed belong 
 essentially to every religious society. The people 
 were, undoubtedly, the first in authority; for 
 the apostles showed, by their own example, that 
 nothing of moment was to be carried on or deter- 
 mined without the consent of the assembly. 
 Acts i. 15 ; vi. 3 ; xv. 4 ; xxi. 22. It was therefore 
 
120 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 he assembly of the people which CHOSE RULERS 
 and TEACHERS, or received them by a FREE ar,d 
 AUTHORITATIVE CONSENT, when RECOM 
 MENDED by others. The same people REJECT- 
 ED or CONFIRMED, by their SUFFRAGES, the 
 LAWS Avhich were PROPOSED by their rulers to 
 the assembly; EXCOMMUNICATED profligate aad 
 unworthy members of the church ; RESTORED 
 the pcnitentio forfeited privileges ; PASSED JUDG- 
 MENT upon the different subjects of CONTRO- 
 VERSY and dissension that arose in their conimu 
 nity; EXAMINED and DECIDED the disputes 
 which happened between the ELDERS and DEA- 
 CONS ; and, in a Avord, exercised all the authority 
 which belongs to such as are mvested with 
 SOVEREIGN POWER."— Vol. 1., p. 37. Wood & 
 Co., Baltimore, 1832. 
 
 Now of the sLx or seven things that the primi- 
 tive members of the churches did, by authorita- 
 tive investment, not more than one of them can 
 be done by the members of the M. E. Church, and 
 even that one is denied them by pretty good au- 
 thority, as will be seen hereafter. 
 • Lord King on the Primitive Church affords the 
 most ample proof of the correctness of the fore- 
 going quotation from Moshcim. 1. He proves 
 that bisliops Avere common pastors. — p. 27. 2. 
 " When the bishop of a church Avas dead, all the 
 people of that church met together in one place to 
 choose a new bishop. So Sabinus was elected 
 bishop of Emerita ' by the SUFFRAGE of ALL 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 121 
 
 THE BROTHERHOOD, which was the custom 
 Uiroughout all Africa,' for the bishop to be chosen 
 in the presence of the people.'— p. 37. 
 
 " 111 all ordinations all the people were consult- 
 ed, and none were admitted into holy orders 
 without their approbation, as is assured by 
 Cyprian, bishop of this diocese, who tells us that 
 it was his constant custom ' in all ordinations to 
 consult his people, and with their common coun- 
 sel to weigh the merits of every candidate for 
 sacred orders.'" — p. 47. 
 
 Of the members of the primitive churches. Lord 
 King observes : " As soon as they were baptized 
 they commenced members of the church univer- 
 sal, and of that particular church wherein they 
 were baptized, and became actual sharers and 
 exerters of all the privileges and powers of the 
 faithful. What the distinct and separate powers 
 of the faithful were, must be next considered; 
 several of them, to make the discourse under the 
 former head complete, we touched there, as their 
 election and choice of their bishops, their atten- 
 tion to those who were ordained, and such like, 
 which will be unnecessary and tedious to repeat 
 here ; and others of them cannot be well separat- 
 ed from their conjunct acts with the clergy. As 
 tlicy had power to elect their bishops, so if their 
 bishops proved afterwards scandalous and grossly 
 wicked in life, or at least heretical in doctrine and 
 apostates from the faith, they had power to de- 
 
GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 pose them and choose others in their room." — 
 p. 161. 
 
 " As for the judges thut compose the consistory 
 or ecclesiastical court, before whom offending 
 criminals were convened and by whom censured, 
 they will appear to have been the whole church, 
 both clergy and laity; not the bishop without 
 the people, nor the people without the bishop, but 
 both conjunctly constituted that supreme tribu- 
 nal, which -censured delinquents and transgress- 
 ors."— p. 109. 
 
 " But as for the legislative' decretive or jud?- 
 catorial power, that appertained both to clergy and 
 laity, who conjointly made up that SUPREME 
 consistoral court, which was in every iiarish, be- 
 fore which all offenders were tried, and if found 
 guilty, sentenced and condemned." — p. 111. 
 
 "And whosoever will consider the frequent 
 synods that are mentioned in Cyprian, will find 
 that in his province they met at least once and 
 sometimes twice or thrice in a year. As for the 
 members that composed these synods, they were 
 bishops, presbyters, deacons, and deputed lay- 
 men in behalf of the people of their respective 
 churches." — p. 132. 
 
 " When a synod Avas convened, before ever they 
 entered upon any public causes, they chose out 
 of the gravest and renowndest bishops among 
 them, one, or sometimes two, to be their modera- 
 tor or moderators. The office of a moderator was 
 
FKOM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 123 
 
 to PRESIDE in the synod, to see all things calmly 
 and fairly debated and decreed ; and at the con- 
 clusion of the cause to sum up what had been 
 debated and urged on both sides, to take the votes 
 and suffrages of the members of the synod ; and 
 last of all to give his own." — p. 134. 
 
 " When a moderator was chosen, then they 
 entered upon the consideration of the affairs 
 which lay before them, which may be considered 
 in a twofold respect, either as 'relating to foreign 
 churches, or to those churches only of whom 
 they were representatives. As for foreign church- 
 es, their determinations were not obligatory unto 
 them, because they were NOT REPRESENTED 
 BY THEM ; and so the chief matter they had to 
 do v.'itli them was, to give them their advice and 
 counsel, in any difhcult point proposed." 
 
 " But Avith respect unto those particular church- 
 es whose representatives they were, the decrees 
 were binding and obligatory, since the regulation 
 and management of their affairs was the general 
 end of their convening." — p. 135. 
 
 In Dr. Ruter's History of the Church, published 
 at the Methodist Book Room, we have the same 
 testimony substantially, as that of Mosheim and 
 Lord King. He says: "Presbyters were chosen 
 by the imited consent of their clerical brethren 
 and the people at large, and ordained by the 
 Bishops, assisted by the presbyters." — p. 26. 
 
 Of the beginning of- the second century, he 
 says: '-'The bishops and presbyters were still 
 
124 GBOUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 undistinguished by any superiority of station oi 
 difference of apparel ; they were stili. chosen by 
 the people, and subsisted upon a proportion of 
 the voluntary offerings which were paid_by every 
 believer according to the exigencies of the occa- 
 sion, or the measure of his wealth and piety." 
 
 The following scriptures show the part the 
 members of the church took in ecclesiastical af- 
 fairs, in the primitive church. Acts i. 15. The 
 multitude were instructed to choose Matthias, to 
 fill the vacancy caused by the apostacy of Judas. 
 Chap. vi. 3. The multitude of the disciples, by 
 the directions of the apostles, chose the seven 
 deacons. Chap. xv. The important question 
 respecting circumcision, which agitated the church 
 at Antioch, was considered and decided by the 
 apostles, elders and brethren. And the letter written 
 to the church at Antioch, began in this Christian 
 and republican manner : " The apostles and elders 
 and brethren send greeting," &c. At the same time 
 this assembly chose Barsabas and Silas, chief men 
 among the brethren, to go with Paul and Barna- 
 bas, and convey the letter upon this subject. 
 Chap. xi. 22. The church at Jerusalem sent Bar- 
 nabas on a mission to Antioch and other places. 
 The church did it. Chap. xiv. 27. Paul and 
 Barnabas gave an account of their labors among 
 the Gentiles, to the church; not to a body of min- 
 isters — not even to the apostles themselves. 
 Chap, xviii. 27. The brethren wrote, recommend- 
 ing Apollos, eloquent Apollos, to the reception of 
 
PROM THE M, E. CHURCH. 
 
 125 
 
 the discijiles iii the region of Achaia. Besides 
 all this, churches sent their salutations to other 
 churches — sent messengers to their brethren. 2 
 Cor. viii. 23. Luke was chosen of the churches 
 to travel with St. Paul. 
 
 Muiisters had some voice in the selection of 
 their fields of labor, and at times declined to com- 
 ply with the wishes even of an apostle. This is 
 evident from 1 Cor. xvi. 12. Titus went to Corinth 
 of his own accord. 2 Cor. viii. 17. 
 
 THE POWERS AND INVESTMENTS OF THE MINISTRY OF 
 THE M. E. CHURCH ANTI-PRIMITIVE. 
 
 1. The government of the M. E. Church is 
 wholly under the control of the ministry, and 
 ever has been since its organization. Proof. — 
 Discipline, page 8, giving the particulars of the 
 organization of the jM. E. Church in Baltimore, 
 1784. Those who composed this conference were 
 ministers, and only ministers, though there were 
 then in the societies in the states, 14,988 members. 
 And from that time to the present, the only body 
 claiming the right of making laws for the govern- 
 ment of the church, have been ministers, and 
 only ministers. There never was a layman ad- 
 mitted to an assembly in the M. E. Church, which 
 was organized for the purpose of regulating its 
 government ; nor was ever a layman admitted to 
 vote in the election of delegates who compose 
 the General Conference, the law-makmg body. 
 All and every alteration that is made in the Disci- 
 
126 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 pllne,and government of the church, is effected 
 solely by the mmistry ; and the only alternative 
 left for the membership is, to submit to laws en- 
 acted without their being representedj or to leave 
 the church, 
 
 2. Bishops are empowered with the preroga- 
 tive of overseeing the spiritual and temporal 
 business of the church. — Dis. page 27, answer 5. 
 How much is meant by overseeing the temporal 
 business of the church, the writer ne\'er knew; 
 but as the overseeing of the spiritual business is 
 an authoritative investment, the conclusion is, 
 that it is the same in relation to the temporal busi- 
 ness of it. 
 
 3. Both deacons and elders are constituted by a 
 body of ministers only. — Dis. pp. 32, 33. In the 
 case of local preachers, the quarterly conference 
 recommend them to the annual conference, but 
 no one can be ordained without an election by 
 the travelling ministry of an annual conference ; 
 and in the case of itinerant ministers, the people 
 have nothing to say in relation to their being con- 
 stituted either deacons or elders. 
 
 4. A Bishop, or presiding elder, can either of 
 them receive a preacher to travel in the interval 
 of a conference, independent of the voice of the 
 people. — Dis. p. 36. 
 
 5. Those whovhave charge of circuits, can 
 choose committees independently of all the mem- 
 bers of their charge, to appropriate moneys that 
 have been raised for building churches, and pay- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 127 
 
 ing debts upon churches. — Dis. p. 44, answers 
 17, 18. 
 
 6. The Bishops of the M. E. Church, have the 
 absolute jmrer of determining the appointments of 
 the whole of the travelhng ministry, where and 
 how they please ; and neither the ministry or mem- 
 bership liave the right to interfere in any manner 
 whatever. This is the right of the Bishop un- 
 checked ; nor is there any possible means for the 
 abridgment of this power by the people. — Dis. 
 p. 25.^ 
 
 7. The power of Bishops absorbs all the power 
 of presiding elders and preachers in charge. 
 Proof. — They are general superintendents. A su- 
 perintendent has authority to do by himself what 
 he can do by another. This is universally true. 
 But we are not left to rest the matter here. The 
 proof is abundant from the Discipline, as well as 
 from the nature of their office. When a Bishop 
 is present, he is the first one named to do the bu- 
 siness to be done. If a preacher is to be received 
 in the interval of the annual conference, the 
 bishop or presiding elder is to do it. Showing that 
 the bishop is to do it of right, if present, and dis- 
 posed to exercise it. — Dis. p. 36. 
 
 A preacher must have his license signed by a 
 bishop or presiding elder ; showing the same fact, 
 that if a bishop is present, he has the authority, 
 and not the presiding elder, to sign such license. 
 — p. 37. Presiding elders have authority to try a 
 travelling preacher onhj in the absence of the 
 
128 GROUNDS OF SECESSrON' 
 
 bisliop. The bishops have the authority in all these 
 cases when present. — p. G5. In the trial of mem- 
 bers, biskops are the first class of administrators 
 named to preside, and then elders, and deacons, 
 and preachers. — p. 92. Stewards are to be sub- 
 ject to bishops, presiding elders, &c. — p. 168. The 
 same fact of precedence is here observable, as m 
 the foregoing instances. The truth is, when a 
 bishop is present, he absorbs all the power of pre- 
 siding elders and ordinary mmisters, unless it be 
 in some trifling instances where the General Con- 
 ference has, by special enactment, devolved some 
 duty upon those in charge of circuits. But 
 nothing is now recollected that is done while the 
 bishop is present, that would form an exception to 
 this statement. Now to sum up ; when a bishop 
 comes to a quarterly conference, he possesses all 
 the authority of controlling the meeting, by virtue 
 of his general superintendency, which is made up 
 of particulars, of which this is one. The presid- 
 ing elder for the time being loses his authority by 
 the presence of the man who gave him his au- 
 thority. All the authority a presiding elder has 
 when the bishop is in his district, is to '•' attend 
 HIM." — Dis. p. 31. But when the bishop is present, 
 he cannot change, receive, or suspend preachers in 
 his district, unless by the special permission or order 
 of the bishop. — p . 30. And when a bishop comes 
 to a station, the preacher in charge loses his au- 
 thority in the conducting a trial, and in ad other 
 instances, unless the General Conference has, by 
 
FROM THE "M. E. CHURCH. 129 
 
 positive euactmeut, ordered otherwise. In the 
 trial of members, the sole authority is in the 
 bishop to preside if present : next is the presidin£» 
 elder, and then the preach' r in charge. But of 
 right, the preacher in charge of the circuit is 
 utterly dispossessed, if the presiding elder is 
 present, and both of them are without authority to 
 preside in the trial, if the bishop be present. Now 
 see how this might work in the trial of a member, 
 should a bi.shop preside, and then be president of 
 the quarterly conference. All questions of law 
 are to be decided by the president at both trials ; 
 and in case of an appeal of this nature, it might 
 be made to the same person at the trial, at the 
 quarterhj conference, and finally at the annual con- 
 ference, should the bishop be present and exercise 
 the authority with which he is invested. And 
 tlius, the very object for which an ai>peal is taken 
 would be defeated ;. as it is a question that is not 
 debatable, and in the instances here mentioned, 
 it would be the same man who should decide in 
 all the three cases of adjudication. 
 
 Let it not be said- that this absorption of power 
 is unjirecedented, or too monstrous to ascribe to 
 any good man in the M. E. Church. Mr. Asbury 
 formerly possessed this power and more too. In 
 the bound minutes of 1779, we find the following 
 question and answer ■ 
 
 '■ (lues. 13. How far shall his (Asbury's) pow-ei 
 extend ? 
 
 '•AnS. Ox HEARING EVKRY PREACHER FOR AND 
 
130 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 AGAINST WHAT IS IN DEBATE, THE RIGHT Or DETER- 
 MINATION SHALL REST WITH HIM ACCORDING TO THE 
 MINUTES." 
 
 8. The power of presiding elders, in their dis- 
 tricts, while the bishops arc absent, is the same as 
 that of bishops when present, ordaining excepted. 
 They oversee the spiritual and temporal business 
 of the church in the districts. They have charge 
 of all the preachers and exhorters in the districts. 
 They can change, receive, and suspend preachers 
 in their districts. And they are to take care that 
 every part of the Discipline be enforced in their 
 districts; as also to decide all questions of law 
 in a quarterly meeting conference. A presiding 
 elder is in all cases the representative of the 
 bishop, and can do all the bishop could, within 
 the limits of his district, ordaining excepted. 
 
 9. All the power the lay members of the M. E. 
 Church possess, is the power to withhold their 
 support from the ministry and institutions of the 
 church, and, when a man is to be licensed as an 
 exhorter or preacher, the class or society vote to 
 approbate or disapprobate, when there is no lead- 
 ers' meeting held in the place. But, as in most 
 places there are leaders' meetings held, the prac- 
 tical results are, in most cases, they do not vote 
 even here. And though the laws of the States 
 authoritatively invest members of churches and 
 congregations with the right of voting, in the 
 election of trustees for holding churches, yet the 
 Discipline provides, that in all cases, when new 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 131 
 
 boards of trustees are to be created, it shall be 
 done (except in those states where the statutes 
 provide differently) by the appointment of the 
 preacher in charge, or the presiding elder of the 
 district. — Dis. p. 167 
 
 " We know nothing of the right of the society 
 to admit members into church fellowship ; and the 
 Methodist preacher who concedes this right, be- 
 trays his trust, and should be held amenable for 
 delinquency to his brethren. We know not if 
 this has ever happened ; but Mr. Lee speaks of 
 the contrary doctrine as a matter which is not 
 questionable : and hence we have inferred that 
 he, at least, practised upon this opinion when he 
 was a travelling preacher ; and, as he has done so 
 with impunity, if he has done so at all, we have 
 been led to fear that some portions of the church 
 may he gradually sliding into a compromise 
 which would so alter the relation between pastor 
 and people, as to subvert our whole economy." 
 
 " The admission and expulsion of chr.rch mem- 
 bers by a vote of the society, is as absurd in theo- 
 ry, as it would be ruinous in practice." — Editorial, 
 Christian Advocate and Journal, Nov. 25, 1840. 
 
 Here we have the secret let out : that if the 
 management of church affairs are so far under the 
 control of the laity, as for them to admit members 
 into the church, it would tend to " subvert our 
 whole economy." 
 
 The above contrast is presented to the conside- 
 ration of the thinking and considerate, in the hope 
 
132 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 that it may awaken to open investigation, and as 
 constituting a part of the radical difference be- 
 tween the government of tlie M. E. Church and 
 the primitive churches. The italicizing is my own. 
 And this subject, but a mere outhne of what might 
 be exhibited, — a subject upon which the author 
 has bestowed much thonglit — is now submitted 
 in the hope that it may render some aid to those 
 who are seeking to understand the character of 
 the church, built upon the apostles and prophets, 
 Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." 
 
 AN ARGUMENT ON LAYMEN'S RIGHTS. 
 
 In the Acts of the Apostles, xv. 1 — 31, we have 
 a transaction recorded which bears directly upon 
 the question. We will not fill space by quoting 
 the whole chapter, and will only state briefly the 
 principal points, referring to the particular verses 
 relied upon as proof. 
 
 1. An important difference of opinion existed 
 and a discussion arose between the parties at An- 
 tioch. The main question was whether or not 
 the Gentile converts were required to be circum- 
 cised, but this question doubtless wgis regarded as 
 involving 'the perpetuity or abro^tion of the 
 whole Mosaic Ritual. Verses 1, 2. 
 
 2. It was determined that a deputation should 
 be sent to Jerusalem to lay the subject before the 
 apostles and elders. This deputation consisted 
 of " Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 133 
 
 them." Verse 2. Who tliose certain otliers were 
 is not clear, but from Gal. ii. 1 — 5, it is probable 
 tliat Titus was one of them, who must have been 
 a young convert at this time. The niission was 
 undertaken at the expense of the church, for they 
 were "brought on their way by the Church." 
 Verse 3. 
 
 3. " When they were come to Jerusalem, they 
 were received by the church, and of the apostles 
 and elders." Verse 4. The church had as much 
 to do with their reception as had the apostles and 
 elders. 
 
 4. The question was brought before the apos- 
 tles and elders, and the whole multitude for adju- 
 dication. That it was brought before the apostles 
 and elders is proved by verse 6. That it was 
 equally brought before the whole church and dis- 
 cussed by them as by a deliberative body, is proved 
 by verse 12. "Then all the multitude kept si- 
 lence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul." 
 That the multitude participated in the discussion, 
 is proved by a comparison of verses 7 and 12. 
 The former says "there had been much dispnt- 
 ing," while the latter says, " then all the multitude 
 kept silence." Their keeping silence in the 12th 
 verse, is the antithesis of the much discussion in 
 the 7th verse. 
 
 5. After Paul and Barnabas had concluded their 
 remarks, James summed up tlie whole subject, 
 and stated his judgment in the case, which ap- 
 pears to have been satisfactory to all . Verses 13 
 
134 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION' 
 
 — 21, but 19 and 20 in particular. There is the 
 same proof that the church consented to this de- 
 cision that there is that the other apostles did. 
 
 6. They all united in communicating their judg- 
 ment to the church at Antioch. Verse 22. " Then 
 pleased it the apostles, and elders, and the whole 
 Church to send chosen men of their own company 
 to Antioch Avith Paul and Barnabas ; namely Ju- 
 das, surnamed Barnabas, and Silas, chief men 
 among the brethren.'''' The whole church sent these 
 men as much as the apostles and elders did. 
 
 7. They all joined in a written statement of the 
 decision, which they sent by them. Verse 23. 
 "And they wrote letters by them after this man- 
 ner : The apostles, and elders, and brethren, send 
 greeting, unto the brethren which are of the Gen- 
 tiles in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia." Note, 
 this letter was from the brethren at Jerusalem as 
 Avell as from the apostles, and was addressed to 
 the brethren at Antioch, and not to the ministers. 
 
 8. The deputation, when they arrived at An- 
 tioch, delivered the letter to the church, who pro- 
 ceeded to read it. Verse 30, 31. "They came to 
 Antioch, and when they had gathered the multi- 
 tude together, they delivered the epistle : which 
 when they had read, they rejoiced for the con- 
 solation." In this transaction was settled the 
 first great theological question that came up for 
 discussion, after the Master had retired from the 
 world to his throne, and, in its settlement, it is 
 clear that the laity had as much to do as did the 
 
FROM THE M. E, CHURCH. 
 
 135 
 
 ministry. This fact, that the apostles who were 
 divinely inspired to settle the principles of church 
 government, submitted the question to the con- 
 sideration of the brethren, is conclusive evidence 
 that this was the plan upon which the church 
 was organized, and upon which it should be 
 governed. The reason for such a course now, 
 when ministers are not inspired, is much stronger 
 than it could have been then, when ministers 
 were inspired. What right can the ministry have 
 to take away from the laity what was so clearly 
 granted to them by inspired men, whose actions 
 are admitted to have been authoritative f We 
 trow not. 
 
 Acts xviii. 27. "And wlien he [ApoUos] was 
 disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, 
 exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, 
 when he was come, lielped them much which 
 had believed through grace." 
 
 The letter here given was a recommendation 
 as a Christian teacher, and, in giving such a letter, 
 they assumed the right of judging for themselves 
 of his Christian character and of his ministerial 
 qualifications. This right was doubtless assumed 
 and exercised in this case by laymen. There is 
 not the slightest intimation that his was a letter 
 emanating from clerical authority. The letter was 
 also clearly addressed to laymen, and not to some 
 presiding minister, having "charge of all the 
 elders and deacons, travelling and local preachers, 
 and exhorters in his di.strict." 
 
136 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 2 Cor, iii. 1. "Or need we as some others, 
 epistles of commendation to you, or letters ol 
 commend from you V 
 
 Tliis text clearly proves two things, viz. : — 
 
 1. Letters of commendation to and from 
 churches Avere necessary for some other minis 
 ters. The expression, " need we as some others," 
 clearly proves that others did need such let- 
 ters. 
 
 2. The right to give and receive such letters 
 is most clearly ceded to the church in the text. 
 The apostle does not intimate that they had not 
 a right to give and receive such letters Avhen given 
 by other churches, nor does he intimate that they 
 are not necessary for "some others," but only 
 intimates that such letters were not necessary for 
 him and his fellow-apostles. They Ave re com- 
 missioned by Christ, and had the power of work 
 ing other miracles, which was a sufhcient recom- 
 mendation wherever they went, but others needed 
 letters of recommendation. 
 
 From the two points made out above, a very 
 clear conclusion follows. As such letters were 
 given and received by the apostolic churches, 
 and a? the right of giving and receiving xhem be- 
 longed to the churches, it follows that the local 
 churches had the right of judging for themselves 
 on the subject of ministerial qualifications and 
 character. The very act of recommending a 
 minister, is the act of expressing our judgment 
 concerning him, and the right to do this includes 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 137 
 
 the right ol judgment in the case. This we see 
 originally belonged to laymen. 
 
 1 John iv. 1. " Beloved, believe not every spirit, 
 but try the spirit, whether it be of God, because 
 many false prophets are gone out into the world." 
 
 Trying the spirits here clearly means judging 
 between true and false teachers. Those who are 
 required to do this must have the right of judg- 
 ing what is truth and what is error ; to them must 
 belong the right of settling the doctrines of the 
 creed. But this duty of judging between false 
 and true teachers, is, in the text, clearly imposed 
 upon laymen, embracing those whom the apostle 
 calls little children, young men, and fathers. 
 Chap. ii. 12, 13. 
 
 2 John 10. "If there come any unto you, and 
 bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your 
 house, neither bid him God speed." 
 
 .This text is precisely the character of the last, 
 so far as its bearing upon the question is con- 
 cerned. The duty enjoined is, to judge and reject 
 a false teacher, on account of his defection in 
 doctrine. This duty includes the right of judging 
 what the true doctrine is, and what is false doc- 
 trine : and as it is here urged upon the church, 
 not the ministry, it follows that the laity are 
 judges of the doctrines of the Gospel, and are 
 charged with the important work of preserving 
 them pure. 
 
 Rom. xvi. 17. "Now I beseech you, brethren, 
 mark them which cause divisions and offences 
 12* 
 
138 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, 
 and avoid them." 
 
 • This text proves that the power of discipline is 
 lodged with the church. To mark and avoid in 
 the sense of the text, must mean that application 
 of discipline which separates offending members 
 from the fellowship of the church, and this is as 
 far as churcli discipline can go. Now as this ap- 
 plication of discipline is to be made by the church, 
 as the apostle urges the church to this work, the 
 right and power of discipline must be in the 
 hands of the church, and not in the hands of the 
 ministry. 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 5. "Purge out therefore the old 
 leaven, that ye may be a new lump." 
 
 This is a figurative expression, by which the 
 apostle absolutely commanded them to exclude 
 from their communion a certain corrupt member. 
 What shows that the power to do it rested with 
 them, is his severe rebuke for not having done it. 
 Their power or right to expel this corrupt person, 
 did not depend upon his command to do it, be- 
 cause, in connection with the command, he finds 
 fault with them because they had not already 
 done it. This view the preceding verses fully 
 sustain . 
 
 1 Thes. ili. 6. "Now we command you, bre- 
 thren, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that 
 ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that 
 walketh disorderly." 
 
 Withdrawing from a brother means nothing 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 139 
 
 more nor less than excluding him from our church- 
 fellowship. This the brethren, the church, were 
 required to do, and of course they must haVe 
 held the power of discipline in their o^\^^ hands. 
 
 The above texts have been produced as speci- 
 mens of the many which teach that each local 
 church possesses the right and power of disci- 
 pline, and are boiuid to exercise it. These Scrip- 
 tures teach that the church is held responsible for 
 the truth of the Gospel preached among them, 
 and for the purity of 'their own body, which could 
 not be true without the right of choosing their 
 own teachers, and of disciplining theii own 
 members. 
 
 We will conclude ihis branch of our investiga- 
 tion with a few extracts from some principal 
 authors, ^\'e will introduce a few quotations 
 from a work entitled " A Church without a Bish- 
 op," by Lyman Coleman, author of "Antiquities 
 of the Christian Church." 
 
 '• The brethren chose their own officers from 
 among themselves. Or if in the first organization 
 of the churches, their officers were appointed by 
 the apostles, it was with the approbation of the 
 members of the same." — Pages 12, 20. 
 
 " So universal was the right of suffrage, and so 
 reasonable, that it attracted tlie notice of the Em- 
 peror, Alexander Severus, who reigned from A. D. 
 222 to 235. In imitation of the custom of Chris- 
 tians and Jews in the appointment of their priests, 
 as he says, he gave the people the right of reject- 
 
140 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION. 
 
 ing the appointment of any procurator, or chief 
 president of the provinces, whom he might ap- 
 ploint to such office. Their votes, however, in 
 these cases, were not merely testimonial, but 
 really judicial and elective." 
 
 " There are on record instances in which the 
 people of their own accord, and by acclamation, 
 elected individuals to the office of bishop orpresby- 
 ter, without any previous nomination. Ambrose, 
 Bishop of Milan, was elected in this manner, A. 
 D. 374."— Page 67. 
 
 Our author gives a list of others elected in the 
 same way, which we omit. He makes the fol- 
 lowing quotations from^Moslieim's " Dissertations 
 Sacra:," a work which we believe has never been 
 published in this country. 
 
 " This power of appointing their elders con- 
 tinued to be exercised by the members of the 
 church at large, as long as primitive manners 
 were retained entire." — Page 70. 
 
 " The Bishop began in the third century, to ap- 
 point his own deacons at pleasure, and other in- 
 ferior orders of clergy. In other appointments, 
 also, his efforts began to disturb the freedom of the 
 elections, and direct them agreeably to his own 
 will. And yet Cyprian, only about fifty years be- 
 fore, apologized to the laity and clergy of his dio- 
 cese, for appointing Auretius to the office of 
 reader. In justification of this measure, he 
 pleads the extraordinary virtues of the candidate, 
 the urgent necessity of the case, and the impos- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 141 
 
 sibility of consulting them, as he was wont to do 
 on all such occasions," Page 71, 72. 
 
 "The Emperor, Valantiniau III. complains of 
 Hilary of Aries, that he unworthily ordained some 
 in direct opposition to the will of the people ; and 
 when they refused those whom they had not cho- 
 sen, that he contracted an aimed body, and by 
 military power forcibly thrust into office the 
 ministers of the Gospel of peace." — Page 77/ 
 
 " Leo the Great, A. D. 450, asserts the right of 
 the people to elect their spiritual rulers." — lb. 
 
 " TertuUian describes such assemblies [synods] 
 as bodies representative of the whole church." 
 —Page 115. 
 
 Our author makes the following quotation from 
 Mosheim's work referred to. 
 
 " In the mfancy, indeed, ot councils, the Bishops 
 did not scruple to acknowledge that they appear- 
 ed there merely as the ministers or legates of their 
 respective churches; and that they were, in fact, 
 nothing more than representatives acting from in- 
 structions, but it was not long before this humble • 
 language began by little and little, to exchange 
 for a loftier tone. — They at length took upon 
 themselves to assert that they were the legitimate 
 successors of the apostles themselves, and might, 
 consequently, of their own proper authority, dic- 
 tate laws to their Christian flock." — Page 115. 
 
 The writer makes the following quotations 
 from the learned author Neander ; 
 
 " From the nature of the religious life and of 
 
142 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 the Christian Church, it is hardly possible to 
 draw the inference, naturally that the govern- 
 ment shonld have been entrusted to the hands of 
 a single one. The monarchical form of government 
 accords not with the spirit of the Christian Church.'' 
 —Page 19. 
 
 " Riddle gives the following sketch of the con- 
 stitution and government of the church at the 
 beginning of the second century. ' The subordi- 
 nate government, &c., of each particular church 
 was vested in itself; that is to say, the whole 
 body elected its ministers and officers, and was 
 consulted concerning all matters of importance. 
 This is said of the church at the close of the first 
 centuiy." — lb. 
 
 "The mode of appointing bishops and presby- 
 ters," says Riddle, " has been repeatedly changed. 
 Election by the people, for instance, has been 
 discontiruied." — Page 70. 
 
 « It is clearly asserted by Dr. Pin, that in Rome 
 and Carthage, no one could be expelled from the 
 "church, or restored again, except with the con- 
 sent of the people." — Page 102. 
 
 " Valesius, the learned commentator on Euse- 
 bius, says that the people's suffrages were re- 
 quired when any one was to be received into the 
 Church, who for any fault, had been excommuni- 
 cated. This is said of the usages of the Church 
 in the third century." — lb. 
 
 We might multiply these extracts to almost any 
 extent, but will close where we are. Mr. Cole- 
 
FKOM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 143 
 
 man, from whose work we have taken the Uberty 
 to make such copious extracts, is versed in Orien- 
 tal Literature, and has spent some years in Ger- 
 many amid ihe musty records of lier literary in- 
 stitutions, as his work gives ample proof. It 
 should be remarked that all the extracts we have 
 made, are sustained by references to the proper 
 authorities, but as these are works unknown to 
 the common reader, and several of them m other 
 languages, we have omitted the references. Mr. 
 Coleman's book is before the public, and if he has 
 not quoted his learned authorities correctly, let 
 him be called to an account, by the Literati, 
 
 Dr. Mosheim is endorsed by Mr. Watson as 
 follows : 
 
 " The best ecclesiastical historians have show, 
 ed that through the greater part of the second 
 century, the Christian Churches were indepen- 
 dent of each other. Each Christian assembly 
 says Mosheim, was a little state governed by its 
 own laws, which <were enacted, or at least ap- 
 proved by the society." — Biblical Dictiomry — Ar- 
 ticle "Church." 
 
 Mr. Watson is as high authority as can be quo- 
 ted from among English Methodist authors, and 
 he goes quite as far as we do on the subject of 
 laymen's rights and powers, as will be seen from 
 the following extracts : 
 
 "This declaration as to doctrine, in modern 
 times is made by confessions or articles of faith, 
 in which, if fundamental error is found, the evil 
 
144 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 rests upon the heads of that church collectively, 
 and upon the members individually, every one of 
 whom is bound to try all doctrines by the Holy 
 Scriptures, and cannot support an acknowledged 
 system of error without gmh."— Institutes tn one 
 vol. page 422. 
 
 This necessarily involves the right of lay dele- 
 gation in all assemblies where doctrines and rules 
 of government are settled . Our author says again 
 of the power of pastors. 
 
 " We have already said, that the members of a 
 church, although they have no right to obstract 
 the just exercise of this right, have. a right to pre- 
 vent its unworthy exercise." — Page 423 . 
 
 This is granting all ; for the right to prevent an 
 unworthy exercise of power, includes the right 
 of determining when it is justly and when it is 
 unworthily exercised. Now if the laity have the 
 right of judging of the conduct of their rulers, and 
 determining when they act right and when they 
 act wrong, and of interdicting those acts which 
 they believe to be wrong, it is all that we con- 
 tend for. 
 
 In Mr. Wesley's Journal for January 10, 174G, 
 we find the following : 
 
 " I set out for Bristol. On the road I read over 
 Lord King's account of the primitive church. In 
 spite of the vehement prejudice of my education, 
 I was ready to believe that this was a fair and im- 
 partial draught ; but if so, it would follow that bish- 
 ops and presbyters are essentially of one order; 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 145 
 
 aud that, originally, every Christian congregation 
 was a church independent of all others." 
 » Tliese extracts might be swelled into a volume; 
 but as copious extracts have been made from Lord 
 King and others, in other parts of this work, they 
 axe omitted under this head. • 
 
 From the above, it appears that the govern- 
 ment of the M. E. Church is as contrary to the 
 usages of the primitive church, as it is to the 
 principles laid down iu the Holy Scriptures. It is 
 not pretended that any form of government is ex- 
 pressly laid down in the Scriptures; nevertheless 
 the Scriptures abound with elements or principles of 
 church government. The M. E. form of govern- 
 ment is a gross violation of those principles. 
 
 The Episcopals pretend that the great success 
 which has attended their system of operations is 
 evidence of the righteousness and utility of Epis- 
 copacy. " It works well" — ^^he Lord blesses it." So 
 did that which is now the Apocalyptic beast, once 
 work well. The Church of Kome was once pure 
 — and much purer, when it was the age of the 
 M. E. church, than the M. E. church now is. 
 None but those blinded by ignorance, prejudice, 
 interest, or the love of sect, can fail to see the 
 seeds of Poperij in the M. E. polity. Indeed, those 
 seeds are pretty well sprouted already. The 
 church is not yet sixty years old, and Methodist 
 Episcopal Bishops have more power in some re- 
 spects, than Roman Catholic Bishops! And the 
 history of the last seven years teaches us that 
 13 
 
146 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 these bishops have still an open field. They may 
 assume almost any jirerogative, and tTie General 
 Conference will sanction their assumptions .' And 
 why not ? Of what is the General Conference 
 composed 1 Perhaps one-half are presiding el- 
 ders — creatures of the bishop ; and j^erhaps one- 
 eighth are looking for some General Conference 
 office ; and then not a few of the younger mem- 
 bers are looking for the presiding elder's office ; 
 and more are looking for the bishopric than ever 
 can wear the triple crown. Is it therefore strange 
 that a General Conference, composed of such 
 materials, should sustain all Episcopal innova- 
 tions and assumptions, and even authorize the 
 bishops, by legal enactments, to continue their 
 encroachments 1 
 
 Never was there an ecclesiastical system so 
 well contrived, by the dependence of all its parts 
 upon a great central wheel, to accumulate power 
 and put down every opposing thing, as that of 
 METHODIST EPISCOPACY. Hence its danger- 
 ous tendency, both to our civil and religious in- 
 stitutions. 
 
 If revivals, or the success of the M. E. church, 
 prove the government to be right, then it would 
 prove absolute contradictions; for while it would 
 prove aristocracy to be right in the M. E. church, 
 it would as clearly prove republicanism to be 
 right in the Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist Pro- 
 testant, and other chnrche.«, for these all have re- 
 vivals and success, as well as the M. E. church. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 141 
 
 Moreover, if this is a good argument in favor of 
 any peculiar form of church government, it would 
 be equally good in favor of doctrines ; hence it 
 would prove Calvinism right, Arminianism right, 
 Campbellism, right, and every other ism, and by 
 proving too much, destroys itself, and proves 
 nothing at all. But the fact is, this has not been 
 the ground of their success; uo one has ever 
 been awakened, or converted, or joined the 
 church, because of the government, but have 
 been influenced in this by their doctrines, the in- 
 dustry of their ministry, and the piety of the 
 church, while some, it is to be feared, have joined 
 the church from motives less praiseworthy than 
 the above. 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 
 PROSPECT OF REFORM. 
 
 There is no prospect that this church will give 
 up slavery till forced to do so. As to her govern- 
 ment, all efforts at modification and improve- 
 ment have proved abortive ; and the Episcoiiacy 
 of the church never was established on so firm a 
 basis as at present. 
 
 Attempts at reform were commenced about six 
 years after the church was organized. 
 
 Two things have been aimed at in all efforts at 
 reform, — one has been to curtail the Bishop's 
 power, and the other to bring the influence of the 
 lahy into the councils of the church 
 
148 GROUNDS OF S . CESSION 
 
 It, has always been seen by a large portion of 
 the travelling preachers, that if the presiding el- 
 ders were elected by their suffrages, and associat- 
 ed with the Bishops by right in making out the 
 appointments, it would abridge the Bishop's 
 power over them, and afford them some little voice 
 in determining their own fields of labor. To 
 secure this point, therefore, has been an object 
 with many of the preachers, almost from the first. 
 
 The secession that took place in 1792, with 
 James O'Kelly at its head, was in consequence of 
 the unlimited power of the Bishop in stationing 
 the preachers. It was a very small abridgement 
 of (he Bishop's prerogative that Mr. O'Kelly and 
 his friends asked, but the General Conference re- 
 fused to grant it. The restriction desired was in 
 the following words : 
 
 " After the Bishops appoint the preachers at the 
 conference to their several circuits, if any one 
 thinks himself injured by the appointment, he 
 shall have liberty to appeal to the Conference and 
 state his objections ; and if the Conference ap- 
 prove his objections, the Bishop shall appoint him 
 to another circuit." 
 
 After a debate of three days on this proposition, 
 it was lost ; probably through the great influence 
 that Bishop Asbury held over the preachers, as it 
 was understood that he was decidedly hostile to 
 the measure. 
 
 At the Conference of 1800, another attempt was 
 made to abridge the stationing power, by asso- 
 
ra.jM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 149 
 
 ciatiiig a committee of preachers with the Bishop, 
 ill making out the appointments . This also failed- 
 The same question was introduced into thf Confer- 
 ence of 1812, and lost by only three votes. 
 
 In 1816, a resolution was introduced into the 
 Conference to make the presiding elders elective, 
 and to constitute them a council to assist the 
 Bishop in stationing the preachers. This was 
 also lost. 
 
 The same resolution, Avith slight modifications, 
 Avas brought forward in 1820 and passed by quite 
 a majority. After its adoption, however, the Rev. 
 Joshua Soule who had just been elected to the 
 Episcopal office refused to act under the restric- 
 tion, and consequently resigned hi.s office. Bish- 
 op McKendree joined with Mr. Soule in his oppo- 
 sition to the measure, and through their joint influ- 
 ence they succeeded, at length, in bringing over 
 a majority to their side, and obtained a suspen- 
 sion of the resolutions for four j^ears. In 1824, 
 their suspension was continued, and at the Gen- 
 eral Conference of 1828, they were rescinded.* 
 
 Thus an efibrt to abridge the powers of the 
 Bishops, and continued for more than thirty years, 
 was finally defeated by the Bishops themselves .' 
 
 This efi"ort was renewed at the last General 
 Conference (1840), but met with its usual fate. 
 The disposition on the part of the Conference to 
 weaken any of the Episcopal functions, has 
 
 * For the validity of the facts here stated, see Bangs' 
 Histoiy, Vol. II. p. 330 and onwaid. 
 
 13* 
 
150 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 grown less and less from the time that McKendree 
 aud Soule took a stand for themselves and their 
 successors in 1820. 
 
 There never has been a period in the history of 
 the church when the laity have been universally 
 satisfied with its government. Several strenuous 
 efforts have been made by the laity, at different 
 times, to obtain their just rights — but all to no 
 purpose. Secession has been their only remedy. 
 
 The secession from the church that took place 
 in 1828, was preceded by an energetic struggle 
 for reform on the part of a large number of local 
 preachers and laymen, together with some few 
 travelling preachers. Of course the latter class, 
 in any such reform, will be always small, as they 
 are the party interested in sustaining the " ancient 
 regime" of priestly prerogatives. 
 
 The reformers at the time alluded to, commenced 
 their discussions in favor of the rights of the 
 laity, first in the "Wesleyan Repository," and 
 afterwards in the " Mutual Rights." They argued 
 strenuously against the Episcopal form of church 
 government, and insisted on a lay representation 
 in the General Conference. Memorials were sent 
 up to that body both in 1824 and 1828, to secure 
 for the laity a share in its deliberations. But it 
 was like asking the despot to yield his sceptre in 
 favor of his vassals. In the report which the 
 Conference made on the subject of the memorials 
 in 1824, they modestly reply to the petitioners, 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 151 
 
 " Pardon us if we know no such rights — if ■wk 
 comprehend no such privileges." 
 
 At the next Conference (1828) the injured peo- 
 ple made another rally, and once more laid their 
 grievances before the clerical judicatory. In 
 answer to their claim, the Conference deny that 
 the right of the laity to representation is a natural 
 right, because, as they affirm, " the foundation of 
 their rights in ecclesiastical bodies rests on a dif- 
 ferent basis." They also deny that it is an " ac- 
 quired right" which they are entitled to, either on 
 the ground " of becoming Christians or of becom- 
 ing Methodists." And as the right, if it exists at 
 all, must be either natural or acquired, therefore 
 they gravely conclude that no such right exists. 
 
 It was with such logic that they justified ihem- 
 eelves in the exercise of arbitrary power, and 
 resisted the claim of inalienable right on the part 
 of the people. 
 
 After this defeat of liberty in 1828, little was 
 said or done by the disappointed and exhausted 
 people to gain their right, until the Conference of 
 1840, when petitions again flowed in upon this 
 subject. But the Conference had become so con- 
 fident of its authority, so callous to the claims of 
 justice, and so void of all sense of religious free- 
 dom, that it did not give the memorials a respect- 
 ful consideration, nor deem the petitioners worthy 
 of an honorable answer. It is true the petitions 
 were referred to a committee and were reported 
 on. But such was the manner of then- reference 
 
152 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 (having been first laid on the table), and such the 
 report upon them (consisting of a peremptory 
 refusal of the prayer, accompanied with a reflec- 
 tion upon the manner in which the memorials had 
 originated), that the whole subject was treated 
 with utter contempt. 
 
 This treatment has resulted in repeated seces- 
 sions. Dr. Bangs tells us, in the History of which 
 he is the author, that in 1791 (about six years 
 after the organization of the church), the Rev. 
 Wm. Hammet, a very popular preacher, became 
 dissatisfied, and withdrew with a party from the 
 church. He passes over this secession very 
 rapidly, leaving us to guess at the probable number 
 of the seceders. About a year after this, accord- 
 ing to the same author. Rev. J. O'Kelly, with a 
 number of travelling and local preachers, left the 
 church on account of their dissatisfaction with 
 the power lodged in the hands of the Bishops 
 and presiding elders. "In the latter part of 1793," 
 says the Dr., " they began to form societies, and 
 hundreds of the people were induced to forsake 
 the M. E. church, so that in some places whole 
 societies were broken up And he tells us that 
 this disaffection was not confined to Virginia, the 
 place of Mr. O'Kelly's residence, but extended 
 also into North Carolina. Here, then, in about 
 eight years after the organization of the M. E. 
 church. Dr. Bangs tells us of two very important 
 secessions on account of the odium of the gov- 
 ernment. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 153 
 
 The next secession that he mentions, took place 
 in 1813. This, he tells us, was composed of local 
 preachers and laymen; several of the former, and 
 a considerable number of the latter. This body, 
 which originated in New England, under the 
 name of " Reformed Methodists," the Dr. tells us, 
 " has long ceased to exist." On what authority he 
 makes this assertion, I know not ; but I do know 
 that the " Reformed Methodist church" still flour- 
 ishes, and numbers in its communion about fifty 
 ordained, and twenty-five licensed preachers, ana 
 two or three thousand members. 
 
 The next prominent secession took place in 
 1827-8. The seceders organized under the name 
 of the "Methodist Protestant Church." Some 
 thousands soon gathered to their standard, and 
 at the present time they number about sixty thou- 
 sand members. 
 
 Since that time, a multitude of smaller separa- 
 tions from the church have taken place, besides 
 a host of individual withdrawals, both from 
 among the ministers and laity. 
 
 In consequence of the pro-slavery character of 
 the M. E. Church, and also the oppressive and 
 unscriptural character of her government, after 
 long and prayerful deliberation, in November, 1842. 
 Rev. Messrs. J. Horton, L. R. Sunderland and 0. 
 Scott publicly withdrew from the M. E. church, 
 and started a new paper called the True We.sley- 
 an. The second number of this paper contained 
 the withdrtiwal of Rev. Luther Lee, and the 3d 
 
154 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 number, that of Rev. L. C. Matlack, one of the 
 M. E. stationed preachers in the city of Boston. 
 And from that time to the present, not a week, j 
 beUeve, has passed, but has brought to the Wes- 
 leyan office the news of secessions either from 
 the ministry or membersliip of the M. E. church, 
 and generally from both. 
 
 A convention was called at the city of Utica, 
 N. Y., in the month of May, 1843, of ministers and 
 laymen, which formed the " Wesleyan Methodist 
 Connection of America." This connection ex- 
 tends to every free state and territory in the Union. 
 It has ten annual conferences, with from 500 to 
 600 preachers, and about 17,000 members ! 
 
 It is but just to remark, that previotisly to the 
 secession of Horton, Sunderland and Scott, a local 
 secession had taken place in Utica, N. Y., another 
 in Cleveland, 0.; and also pretty extensive se- 
 cessions in Michigan. Our brethren in Michigan 
 had formed themselves into an annual conference, 
 and were in successful operation previously to 
 the above-named secession. They numbered, at 
 the time of the Utica Convention, over twenty 
 preachers, and about a thousand members. They 
 now constitute a very important branch of the 
 Wesleyan Methodist Connection of America. 
 
 The Wesleyan Connection is now in a state of 
 great prosperity, and new recruits are weekly 
 coming to us from the old church. 
 
 There are not less than one hundred thousand 
 Methodists in ihe United States, under various 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 155 
 
 names, who stand disconnected with the M. E. 
 Church, and in hostility to her government Such 
 an amount of dissatisfaction and disrujition is 
 without a parallel in the history of any other 
 cliurch in this country. And let it be noticed, too, 
 tliat these secessions have taken place notwith- 
 standing the strong bond of union calculated to 
 bind the Methodist body together, growing out of 
 unity of faith, homogeneousness of usuage and re- 
 ligious habit, strong attachment to the early pio- 
 neers of the cause, and endearing relations, 
 strengthened by a tliousaud dehghtful considera- 
 tions. 
 
 With what expulsive power, therefore, must a 
 system operate, that can sunder such bonds of 
 union, and throw off thousands and tens of thou- 
 sands from their connection with it ! Must not 
 such a system be radically and necessarily wrong ? 
 
 SECTION VIII. 
 
 LOCAL PREACHERS. 
 
 •'If a local preacher be distressed in his tempo- 
 ral circumstances on account of his services in 
 the circuit, he may apply to the quarterly meet- 
 ing conference, who may give him what relief 
 they judge proper, after the allowance of the 
 travelling preachers and their wives, and all other 
 regular allowances are discharged." 
 
156 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 Who can mark the terms of this provision, and 
 not pronounce it a monstrous outrage upon justice, 
 and an aggravating insult to misfortune ? One 
 would have thought that the conference which 
 adopted it would have blushed for very shame in 
 the act. It is, however, but another proof of the 
 heartless and merciless character of absolute 
 power. Mark ; in the case alluded to in the pro- 
 vision^ it is admitted that the local preacher is 
 "distressed in his temporal circumstances on ac- 
 count of service in the circuit." This, of course, 
 would give him a claim in right, paramount to 
 the claims of all others not thus afflicted. Yet he 
 can claim nothing. " He may apply to the quarterly 
 meeting conference, who may give what relief 
 they judge proper, AFTER the allowance of the 
 travelling -preachers and of their wives, and ALL 
 OTHER regular allowances are discharged !" If 
 there is anything left, the conference " may give 
 what relief they judge proper." 
 
 Thus we see that the travelling preacher must 
 first receive his allowance, however comfortable 
 his circumstances may be, while the local preach- 
 er, who " has broke down under excessive labors 
 in the circuit," and is " distressed in his temporal 
 circumstances," can receive nothing, unless there 
 should be a surj)lus " after all other regular claims 
 are discharged," and the conference should "judge 
 proper" to bestow the fragments of its funds upon 
 him. Alas ! for the poor man, even on this ten- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 157 
 
 ure ; for it is seldom that all the " regular allow- 
 auces are discharged." 
 
 In concluding this brief notice of the local min- 
 istry, I would say, that though they are thus sub- 
 ordinated to the ruling hierarchy, some of the 
 most talented, pious, and liberty-loving men are 
 found in their ranks. They have always furnish- 
 ed a large proportion of the leading spirits who 
 have undertaken reformatory measures in the 
 church, though it is to be regretted that many of 
 them are either too insensible to their own con- 
 dition, or too regardless of their own rights and 
 responsibilities, to make the necessary efforts to 
 pluck themselves and the church from the grasp 
 of a spiritual despotism. Six thousand local 
 preachers, with such proportion of the laity as 
 they might secure to their cause, would shake the 
 fabric of Methodist Episcopacy to its founda- 
 tions. 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 
 INFLUENCE OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL SYSTEM ON 
 THE REPUBLIC. 
 
 No one, I think, can have failed to see, during 
 the course of this investigation, that republican- 
 ism and the Methodist Episcopal economy are 
 perfect antagonists. While republicanism recog- 
 nizes tlie right of the people to frame the govern- 
 14 
 
158 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 ment under which they are to live, we have seen 
 the government of the M. E. Church organized ex- 
 dusively by the travelling preachers, without even 
 consulting the laity in respect to it. While re- 
 publicanism provides for the frequent election of 
 law-makers, by the voice of the citizens, Metho- 
 dist Episcopacy invests the law-making power 
 in the travelling clergy, by a provision unalter- 
 able, except by the travelling preachers themselves.' 
 In a republic, the people also elect their executive 
 and judicial officers : but the conference preach- 
 ers in the M. E. Church have usurped both these 
 departments of resposibility and power. In a re 
 public, the public monies and public edifices are 
 under the supervision of the sovereign people ; 
 but the vast funds of the M. E. Church, together 
 with the houses of worship, with a few ex- 
 ceptions, are under the absolute control of her 
 regular ministry. In a republic, the people 
 choose their own public servants; but the Me- 
 thodist societies are obliged to receive such 
 teachers as the bishops may see fit to send them. 
 In a republic, a man is tried for an alleged 
 offence, by a jury empannelled upon just prin- 
 ciples; but in the M. E. Church, the stationed 
 preacher tries the accused member by a committee 
 of his own selecting. 
 
 This series of particulars, showing the antago- 
 nistic character of Methodist Episcopacy to re- 
 publican principles, might be greatly extended ; 
 but it is by no means necessary, since the most 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 159 
 
 superficial observer cannot fail to see that it has 
 no one feature compatible with the civil policy 
 of our country. Wh.it, then, must be the mfluence 
 of this ecclesiastical superstructure on the Ameri- 
 can Republic 1 ^lust not its legitimate tendency 
 be dangerous and destructive 1 With its eleven 
 hundred thousand members, its ten thousand preach- 
 ers, its million and a half of supporters, its central 
 organs of information, its million of money, its 
 archly constructed machinery, set in motion by 
 the great central wheel of the General Conference, 
 and extending its influence, by means of a thou- 
 sand subordinate wheels, to every society and 
 class throughout the Union, together with its ab- 
 solute head in the persons of the bishops, render 
 the Methodist Episcopal organization a most 
 dangerous institution to the liberties of the nation. 
 It is, indeed, far more dangerous than Catholi- 
 cism itself; for the corrupt and liberty-crushing 
 character of that organization has long since been 
 exposed, so that the ever-watchful eye of liberty 
 is always open to its dark plottings and Jesuitical 
 designs. But Episcopal Methodism is a Protest- 
 ant system, sprung up almost imperceptibly in 
 our midst, under circumstances and auspices 
 which have, till lately, shielded it from public 
 reprobation, and, for the most part, even from 
 any general suspicion. Here lies the differ- 
 ence. 
 
 It is easy to see ,that a people, trained under 
 the influence of such a system, are poorly pre- 
 
160 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 pared to appreciate the benefits of civil freedom, 
 and consequently are dangerous hands into which 
 to commit the guardianship of our free institu- 
 tions. At least one-tenth part of the American 
 population are either directly or indirectly con- 
 nected with the M. E. Church; and when the 
 consolidated and homogeneous character of the 
 organization is taken into view, it must be readily 
 discovered that the same political views must 
 generally obtain throughout this entire body. 
 The political power, therefore, of this numerous 
 people, subject as they are to a central control, may 
 be brought to bear, in any given case, with tre- 
 mendous effect upon the destiny of the republic. 
 A hint may be suggested by the bishops to their 
 presiding elders, by the presiding elders to the 
 preachers on thfeir several districts, and by the 
 preachers to their class-leaders in the several 
 societies, by the leaders to the members of their 
 classes ; and thus a scheme may be extended, 
 and simultaneously adopted, from one end of the 
 Union to the other, in every society of the con- 
 nection. 
 
 It is not intended by these remarks to intimate, 
 that the church was instituted for any corrupt 
 purpose, or that the present generation of her min- 
 isters entertain any treasonable designs towards 
 the government of our country ; but the object is 
 
 show, that when, under the influence of rapid- 
 ly increasing wealth and power, and the despot- 
 ism of its principles, it shall become corrupt, then 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 161 
 
 it will afford a most ready and efficier-t agency, 
 by which a worldly and ambitious priesthood, 
 joined with some intriguing and liberty-hating 
 political party, may upturn the foundations of our 
 government, demolish the temple of freedom, and 
 establish an absolute despotism over the land. 
 Such is the tendency of this system; and, if the 
 result is not realized, it will not be from any want 
 of adaptation in the principles which the system 
 involves, but because the spirit of liberty will be 
 too vigilant to suffer herself to be slain by its per- 
 fidious hand. 
 
 By tracing the parallel lines of civil and eccle- 
 siastical history up to antiquity, it will be found, 
 that in proportion as religious freedom has ob- 
 tained, in the same proportion has civil govern- 
 ment been administered according to free princi- 
 ples. Do we not owe our own republic to a 
 band of religionists, who fled to the wilds of 
 America to secure to themselves and their pos- 
 terity the God-given and inviolable rights of con- 
 science ? 
 
 Is not the church of God to be the standard of 
 justice and right ? But are not the recognition and 
 administration of justice and right, the essentials 
 of civil as well as religious freedom "? If, then, 
 the church exerts her appropriate power on the 
 community in which she exists, and does not at 
 the same time sustain the principles of freedom 
 by securing liberty of conscience to her own 
 members, can we expect that civil freedom will 
 14* 
 
162 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 long continue 1 It is manifest that if the church 
 exerts the power it is its province to exert, it will 
 give character to a nation ; in which case, if a 
 despotism exists in the former, it will sooner or 
 later sway its iron sceptre over the latter. If not, 
 why is the spread of the Romish church in this 
 country considered so dangerous to its liberties ? 
 If it is no matter what church organization' we 
 have, then let Catholicism multiply itself till it 
 swallow up all sects and banish Protestantism 
 from the Mnd. Why not? Is despotism any more 
 dangerous in the Romish tlian in the Methodist 
 Episcopal or any other church 1 Does not the M. 
 E. church, in effect, set up infallibility, deny the 
 right of private judgment, and cut off the exer- 
 cise of individual conscience ■? 
 
 In alluding to the rights of self-government, do 
 not her authorities say, " We know no such rightu ?" 
 And yet it is this organization, involving as it does 
 principles at deadly war with inahenable rights, 
 that is exerting a direct control over a large pro- 
 portion of the American people, and by an influ- 
 ence, more remote, but not less certain, is wear- 
 ing away the foundations of civil fi-eedom itself. 
 
 The M. E. church not only exerts a dangerous 
 influence on the liberties of the nation, by the di- 
 rect and legitimate tendency of its principles, but 
 also by the support which it gives to the system 
 of slavery in our land. This church has taken the 
 ground, either in her declaration or acts, that 
 slavery, as it exists in the United States, is not a 
 
FROM THE M. E. CnURCII. 
 
 163 
 
 moral or political evil ; that is, that it is no evil 
 at all. It has cast the broad EEgis of Episcopal 
 authority over the system as a shield of defence. 
 It has prohibited the agitation of the slavery ques- 
 tion, and enforced the violation of its edicts with 
 the severest of ecclesiastical penalties. It has shap- 
 ed its policy, on this question, according to the 
 slave laws of the South, in rejection of the plain- 
 est j^recepts of Jesus Christ. It admits to its 
 communion and ministry hundreds of slavehold- 
 ers who hold in cruel bondage tens of thousands of 
 their own brethren and sisters in Christ ; and, to 
 accommodate slavery, has disfranchised all its 
 colored members throughout the slaveholding 
 States of the Union. 
 
 In doing all this, and much more that might be 
 mentioned, the M. E. church is giving its support 
 to an institution which, more than all others, is 
 calculated to sap the foundations of our civil 
 freedom, and hasten the republic into the grave 
 where lie the mouldering kingdoms of antiquity. 
 
 In looking in upon the state of things in the M. 
 E. church, it does not require a very sagacious 
 observer to see, in their incipient beginnings, the 
 very corruptions of the Romish church. And as 
 sure as the Bishop of Rome was ever vested with 
 the name and power of a Pope, and as certain as 
 John Tetzel, in the name of Leo X. bartered in- 
 dulgences to sin, so sure the E. Methodist church, 
 unless it change its policy, or is controlled by 
 some foreign influences, will degenerate into a 
 
164 
 
 GROUDNS OF SECESSION 
 
 Popedom, iu wliich a cringing and degraded laity 
 wilLbe but tlie passive tools of a despotic priest- 
 hood. 
 
 The Romish church at the close of the third 
 century, was not so suliject to the dominance 
 of the clergy, nor so liable to a reign of spiritual 
 despotism, as is the Mctliodist Episcopal Church at 
 this present moment. 
 
 The corruptions and usurpations in the primi- 
 tix^e church sprang up incidentally, and were nour- 
 ished by circumstances, but the M. E. church, as has 
 been seen, has its origin in usurpation, and involves 
 in its organization the very elements of ABSOLUTE 
 POWER. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 165 
 
 PRESENT POSITION 
 OF THEM. E. CHURCH. 
 
 THE COLORED TESTIMONY RESOLUTION. 
 
 1. The Rev. Silas Comfort, at the time a mem- 
 ber of the Missouri Conference, permitted a col- 
 
 ' ored person to testify* against a white person, 
 in a church trial. 
 
 2. For this conduct he was tried at the next 
 session of the Conference, and convicted of mal- 
 administration. 
 
 3. He appealed to the next General Conference, 
 and the conference refused to hear the appeal, 
 thereby denying the right of appeal from such a 
 decision. 
 
 4. Upon the top of this refusal to hear the ap- 
 peal, the General Conference passed the colored 
 testimony resolution, by which they declared 
 that the admission of such testimony, " is inex- 
 pedient and unjustifiable."' For this, it cannot be 
 denied, the northern division of the church is re- 
 sponsible, for they had a majority in the Confer- 
 ence, and their leading men voted for the meas- 
 ure. Here the matter rested for four years, when 
 the General Conference of 1844 repealed it. 
 
 THE REPE.iL. 
 
 1. The repeal caiuiot place the church m a more 
 favorable point of light than she was before the 
 
166 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 passage of the resolution. As well might a man 
 or a' community claim to be better for having 
 done wrong. Granting all that can be asked, 
 that the repeal placed the church just where it 
 was before its passage, and it will be seen that it 
 does not reach the case. It leaves them where 
 they were, which is this ; an annual conference 
 had condemned a member for admittuig colored 
 testimony, and the General Conference refused to 
 hear his appeal. 
 
 2. The repeal does not legally secure to colored 
 members the right to be heard in church trials. 
 It certainly could restore only what it took away, 
 and it did not take away the right of colored mem- 
 bers to testify, for they had not the right to be tak- 
 en away. This is proved by the fact that an an- 
 nual Conference declared it to be maladministra- 
 tion to admit a colored person to testify, and the 
 General Conference had refused to allow his ap- 
 peal. 
 
 3. The decisions of the General Conference in 
 the case of Mr. Comfort, fully settles the legal 
 question, that it is mal-administration to admit 
 colored testimony, and of course its admission 
 must be unlawful. This decision was in no sense 
 touched by the repeal of the colored testimony 
 resolution, but remains in full force to this day. 
 Thus it is clear that nothing but a little show has 
 been gained by the repeal. The colored mem- 
 ber has no more right to testify than before. 
 
 To conclude, if the repeal of the colored testi- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 167 
 
 mony resolution was an anti-slavery victory in 
 1844, its passage could have been no less a pro- 
 slavery victory in 1840. This is not a very glo- 
 rious position, when it is kno\ra that such men as 
 Dr. Peck of the jM. E. Book Room, helped to 
 achieve the pro-slavery victory in 1840. If those 
 who voted for the repeal in 1844, proved them- 
 selves anti-slavery thereby, it follows that Dr. 
 Peck proved himself no less pro-slavery by voting 
 for the resolution in 1840. 
 
 ANTI-SLAVERY PETITIONS. 
 
 Nine Annual Conferences and ten thousand 
 members petitioned the General Conference of 1844 
 to take action against slavery. Many of these 
 petitions prayed for an entire separation of slavery 
 from the church. The following resolution was 
 adopted by a Methodist Convention in Boston, 
 Mass., Jan. 18, 1843. It shows the wishes of the 
 petitioners. 
 
 ^'■Resolved, That slavery being a sin, and this 
 sin in the M. E. Church, and the church a unit, 
 nothing short of a SPEEDY and ENTIRE separa- 
 tion of slavery from the church can satisfy the 
 consciences of honest and faithful abolitionists." 
 
 After waiting a year, these brethren petitioned 
 the General Conference, and their petitions were 
 denied. A Committee on these petitions reported 
 against granting the prayer, and the report was 
 adopted without a word of debate. Are the au- 
 thors of the above resolntion satisfied ? Are their 
 
lOS 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 conspieucos at ease ? Have they ceased to be 
 'honest and faithful abolitionists'?" There has 
 been no " speedy and entire separation of slavery 
 from the churdr," nor is there likely to be. 
 
 DIVISION OF THE CHVRCU. 
 
 The M. E. Church is divided, it is true ; but 
 this is no proof of anti-slavery on the part of the 
 north. 
 
 1. The division was a southern measure. The 
 north did not propbse it, did not desire it, did all 
 they could to prevent it. But why did the south 
 leave, if the north were not anti-slavery ■? The 
 reason is plain, the north, to prevent her members 
 " going over iu troops to the secedcrs," took posi- 
 tions which offended the south. Though shivery 
 was not injured, it was offended at the half way 
 expediency course of the north. To speak in the 
 use of legal terms, there was an assault on slavery, 
 Uut no battery. Words ! words ! 
 
 2. The terms of the division are essentially 
 pro-slavery ; and these were dictated by the north . 
 riiey fully recognize the slaveholding Christianity 
 of the south. The preachers are allowed to make 
 the election between the two divisions without 
 censure. The north has pledged itself not to col- 
 lect churches in the southern division. This ac- 
 knowledges the southern division as a branch of 
 the Christian church. Is the north anti-slavery, 
 when it has handed over one half of the nation 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 169 
 
 ',0 a slaveholding church for the safe keeping of 
 then" souls ? 
 
 3. The plan of separation is highly oppressive 
 upon minorities. Suppose portions of societies 
 south of the line of division to be so opposed to 
 slavery that they cannot walk with the southern 
 church ; they are abandoned by the north. The 
 north has pledged itself that it will not take any 
 pastoral charge of such portions of the church. 
 
170 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 CONCLUDING PORTION OF AN ABLE 
 
 REVIEW, 
 
 OF THE PRESENT POSITION OF THE M. E. CHURCH 
 WITH REGARD TO SLAVERY. 
 
 BY KEV. EDWARD SMITH. 
 
 After the question of Radicalism was settled 
 in 1832, the question of slavery began again to 
 agitate the church violently in the north, and 
 action was attempted to be taken against it by 
 annual and quarterly conferences ; but the bish- 
 ops came forward in its behalf, and refused to put 
 motions in the annual conferences condemnatory 
 of it, and the presiding elders did the same in the 
 quarterly conferences, with a few exceptions. So 
 that no (or next to no) official action could be 
 obtained against it, even by way of testimony 
 and remonstrance. This led to the formation of 
 Methodist Episcopal Anti-Slavery Societies, to 
 bring the subject before the membership, that 
 they might have correct information on it. But 
 these societies were not able to withstand the 
 tide of opposition, and were, after a short and 
 feeble existence, disbanded. Anti-slavery trav- 
 elling preachers, who were active in the cause, 
 were tried, some degraded, others gagged, and a 
 number frightened back to their former positions. 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 171 
 
 The excitement in the church was crushed, and 
 the subject to all appearance pat to rest for more 
 than a year, when a few anti-slavery preachers? 
 having lost all hope of a reformation in the church, 
 withdrew from it in the year 1842. They were 
 soon followed by others, and steps were taken to 
 organize a Methodist Church, free from any con- 
 nection with slavery, which organization was 
 completed in June, 1842. This little movement 
 khidled a mighty anti-slavery flame, where the 
 subject had been to appearance dead for nearly 
 two years; three very large conventions were 
 held in a short time after the first withdrawals, and 
 high ground taken against the sin of slaveiy. 
 Assurances were given by these conventions that 
 the general conference of 1844 would do some 
 great thing against slavery, and the anti-slavery 
 members were exhorted not to leave the church, 
 but to wait and see what the general conference 
 would do. And many of them did wait to see 
 the result. 
 
 Previous to this time, some southern papers 
 intimated that the South would insist on having a 
 slaveholder elected bishop. The new-born anti- 
 slavery zeal which the secession of " Scott & Co." 
 had brought into the world, declaimed against 
 this, urging the members to petition the General 
 Conference against it, and also for some decided 
 action "to free the church from all connection 
 with slavery," declaring that if the church was 
 
172 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 not SO freed, " it could not be a home for anti- 
 slavery Methodists." 
 
 It was considered an easy matter to redeem the 
 pledge, not to elect a slaveholder bishop. As the 
 conference had a right to -vote for a non-slave 
 holder, the North, having a majority of votes, 
 could cast their vote for a candidate of this kind, 
 thus redeem the pledge given to the members, 
 and on their return claim that they had preserved 
 the high and holy ofhce from the " foul blot of 
 slavery." This much gained, would form a 
 reason to hope that the rest might be, by the next 
 conference, and the people be thus induced to 
 remain in the church. But when they came to 
 the conference, they found the " foul blot" already 
 on the high and holy office, one of the bishops 
 being a slaveholder ; and how to get it off»meet 
 the expectations they had raised, and keep the 
 people in the church, was the difficulty. 
 
 The first plan proposed was to ask Bishop An- 
 drew to resign his office ; but this was abandoned, 
 and the conference did no more than express their 
 sense of what it was proper for him to do, viz. : 
 " that he would desist from the exercise of his 
 office so long as he might remain connected with 
 slavery." Journals of 1844, p. 84. This decision 
 was come to after about twelve days' discussion 
 No one offered to table charges against Bishop A. 
 for a violation of his Discipline, or pretended that 
 any rule of the church had been violated by him : 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 173 
 
 und when the conference adopted the resolution 
 expressive of their sense of what would be pro- 
 per for Bishop A. to do, they seemed not to know 
 what ihey had done. The thing was "of doubt- 
 ful disputation." And this has been the case 
 with that church's action on slavery from the be- 
 ginning. There has been so much doing and 
 undoing, that it is extremely difficult to balance 
 the account, or know what is done, or rather is 
 not undone — what remains done. The» South 
 believed that the conference had virtually sus- 
 pended the Bishop without the form of a trial 
 and protested against the act as extra-judicial. 
 The North appointed a committee to answer the 
 protest, which answer was placed on the journals 
 of the conference as the answer of the majority, 
 by a vote of 116 to 26. This document took the 
 ground that Bishop A. was not suspended, noi- 
 even tried ; that " he is still a bishop, and that 
 should he act, his acts would be valid." Jour- 
 nals. — p. 203. The other bishops did not appear 
 to know what the conference had done with their 
 colleague, and addressed a note to the conference, 
 to know what should be done with Bishop A.'s 
 name ; what about his salary ; what work should 
 he do, or should he do any ; and if any, how 
 should he be appointed to it 1 This was previous 
 to the vote on the answer to the protest. The 
 conference, by a vote of 155 to 17, directed his 
 name to stand on the minutes, in answer to the 
 question, '-Who are the bishops of the M. E. 
 15* 
 
174 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 Church?" With the names of the other bishops, 
 and also ui the hymn-book and Discipline, as it 
 had done previously ; and by a vote of 152 to 14, 
 directed that his salary should be paid as the 
 salary of the other bishops were paid. In these 
 two respects, be differed nothing from his col- 
 leagues, and by a vote of 103 to G7, he was left to 
 determine, by his " own decision and action," 
 what work he would do, in view of the expressed 
 sense of the conference. From all which we see 
 that Bishop A. was not tried, not deposed or sus- 
 pended, even virtually, nor even advised not to 
 exercise his episcopal functions. He was left at 
 liberty to decide whether he would or would not 
 exercise them, and to what extent. The confer- 
 ence expressed their sense — did not give their 
 advise. They gave the reason for their sense. 
 The abolitionists of the North were ready to leave 
 the church on account of her connection with 
 slavery; and if a slaveholding bishop should 
 visit the northern conferences, hundreds, yea, 
 " thousands would leave the church ;" and they 
 thought Bishop A. ought to prevent this by not 
 acting. Though it was jjerfectly lawful for him 
 to act, it was not expedient in these circumstan- 
 ces. Yet they would not determine the point — 
 they left this for him. — Journal, p. 118. 
 
 The action of the conference in the case of 
 Bishop Andrew was the cause of the division of 
 the church by the Louisville Convention. There 
 was some complaint of the action in the case of 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 175 
 
 Mr. Harding, of the Baltimore Conference, but the 
 southern delegates did not protest against it, ot 
 make it a ground of separation. See Protest, 
 Jour. p. 186. 
 
 Now I inquire what were the matter's at issue 
 between the North and the South, which led to 
 the separation of the largest religious society in 
 the country 1 The North did not pretend to say 
 that slaveholding was sinful, or in any way im- 
 moral, in Bishop A's case. This was not said by 
 a single member of the Conference, in a debate 
 of twelve days. They did not say that slavery 
 was a malum per se — an evil in itself. This was 
 not said by the body, nor by a single member of 
 it. No new action was taken against slavery — 
 no new ground proposed to be taken. Ministers 
 were left to act as they had acted from 1800, and 
 members as they had acted from 1808, in the 
 matter of buying and selling slaves, and from 
 1785 in the matter of holding them. In answer 
 to about ten thousand petitioners, praying the 
 conference to take some action to '• free the 
 church entirely from any connection with slave- 
 ry," the conference replied that " it was inexpedi- 
 ent to take any action on that point." The South 
 asked no change in the Discipline to favor slavery, 
 not even in the person of a single individual. 
 The South were perfectly satisfied with the Disci- 
 pline " as it is." The North gave not the least 
 , intimation of a wish to have it changed. What, 
 then, was the difficulty ? Plainly this. The South 
 
176 GROUNDS OF SECESSIOW 
 
 claimed forherslaveholcling ministers, in the per- 
 son of Bishop Andrew, the rights secured to them 
 in the Discipline. The North denied them the 
 enjoyment of those rights, purely on the ground 
 of expediency. They claimed that if a slave- 
 holding bishop should come to hold their northern 
 conferences, their abolition members would leave 
 the church by thousands . This would be a sore 
 calamity. Expediency required its prevention ; 
 and if a slaveholder was bishop, he would have to 
 travel at large, wonld have to come to the North 
 and thus drive the abolitionists out of the church. 
 Hence Bishop A. ought not to exercise the func- 
 tions of his office, while their exercise would 
 produce this effect — while the impediment re- 
 mained. Both agreed that he had a right to be 
 bishop — that he could rightfully exercise the 
 episcopal functions ; but one contended that it 
 was inexpedient to do so, the other that it was 
 expedient to do right, and that the North was 
 bound to allow their Southern brethren not only 
 the right to be slaveholders, but that slavery 
 should not bfe considered as disqualifying them 
 in any sense for the episcopal office. This was 
 the true issue. It involves nothing but a matter 
 of mere expediency ; not a particle of principle 
 is involved in the whole atlair. 
 
 After seeing what led to the separation, we see 
 at once how far they are apart. — The North takes 
 the discipline " as it is," proposing no change on 
 the subject of slavery. The South adopted it in 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCHl 177" 
 
 the verj' same way at the Louisville Convention. 
 Neither intimated a wish for anything not in 
 the discipline, nor expres sed dissatisfaction with 
 anything therein contained. The North will not 
 agree that a slaveholder shall enjoy his disci- 
 phnary right in the office of a bishop, but he 
 may in every other office or station in the church. 
 The South claim for the slaveholder the exercise 
 of his disciplinary rights hi every station. The 
 North do not make the refusal of right a matter of 
 principle, but of expediency. All the North asks 
 is not to have a slaveholder in the episcopacy ; 
 not because the discipline forbids it, but because it 
 is inexpedient. This is what the North asks ; this 
 is what the South refuses. On this single pointthey 
 are apart — on eveiything else together. This is 
 the true state of the ease, and we may truly exclaim, 
 "Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth." 
 
 The General Conference of 1840 decided that 
 slaveholders had a disciplinary right to the office 
 of bishop, in passing the following resolution : — 
 
 " Resolved, by the delegates of the several 
 annual conferences, in General Conference as- 
 sembled. That under the provisional exception of 
 the general rule of the church, on the subject of 
 slavery, the simple holding of slaves, or mere 
 ownership of slave property in states or territories 
 where the laws do not admit of emancipation, 
 and the liberated slave to enjoy his freedom, con- 
 stitutes no legal barrier to the election or ordi- 
 uation of ministers to the various grades of office 
 
GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 now in the ministry of the M. E. Church; and can- 
 not, therefore, be considered as operating any for- 
 feiture of right in view of such election and ordi- 
 nation." [See Journals of 1840, p. 171.] 
 
 This resolution gives the sense of the General 
 Conference of 1840, which resolution was not 
 asked to be rescinded at the conference of 1844 ; 
 by which it appears that, the General Conference 
 being judge, slaveholders may be rightfully elect- 
 ed and ordained to any grade of office in the M. 
 £. Church, in those states wliich forbid emanci- 
 pation, or deny the liberated slave to^enjoy his 
 freedom. 
 
 I come next to consider the connection of the 
 northern portion of the church with slavery. 
 After the southern protest was presented, contain- 
 ing a declaration that the South could not submit 
 longer to the violation of their rights, a committee 
 of nine was appointed to report a plan of separa- 
 tion. — This commit tee reported twelve resolutions, 
 which were adopted. The first bears on the 
 point in hand, and reads as follows : — " That 
 should the annual conferences in the slavehold- 
 ing states, find it necessary to unite in a distinct 
 ecclesiastical connection, the following rule shall 
 be observed with regard to the northern boundary 
 of such connection : All the societies, stations, 
 and conferences adhering to the church in the 
 South, by a vote of the majority of the members 
 of said societies, stations, and conferences, shall 
 remain under the uiunolested pastoral care of the 
 
FROM THE M. E. CIIORCH. 
 
 179 
 
 southern church : and the ministers of the Metho- 
 dist Episcopal Church shall in no wise attempt 
 to organize churches or societies within the limits 
 of the church south ; nor shall they attempt to ex- 
 ercise any pastoral oversight therein. It being 
 understood that the ministry of the South recipro- 
 cally observe the same rule in relation to stations, 
 societies, and conferences, adhering, by a vote of 
 a majority, to the Methodist Episcopal Church; 
 provided also, that this rule shall apply only to 
 societies, stations, and conferences bordering on 
 the line of division, and not to interior charges, 
 which shall in all cases be left to the care of that 
 church within whose territory they are situated." 
 [Journals of 1844, p. 135.] 
 
 The first thing worthy of notice in this resolu- 
 tion, is the fact that the conferences iu the 
 slaveholding states were made the judges of 
 the necessity for division; and from their de- 
 cision there is no appeal. They were authorized, 
 by a vote of 147 to 22, to decide this question, 
 and to organize a separate coimection. They 
 have decided in favor of division, and have 
 organized a separate connection. The delegates 
 appointed the time for the organizing conven- 
 tion, should the annual conferences find it ne- 
 cessary to hold such a convention. This was 
 not determining the question, but submitting 
 it to the annual conferences for their decision ; 
 and every conference in the slave states deter- 
 mined in favor of the convention, and sent dele- 
 
180 
 
 GROUNDS OP SECESSfON 
 
 gates to it. These delegates decided, with but 
 three dissenting voices, to form a separate con- 
 nection. The South has done what the General 
 Conference authorized them to do, and in the very 
 way prescribed. The South has not acted schism- 
 atically, but by the authority and direction of the 
 General Conference. 
 
 Second. — The societies, sections and conferences 
 bordering on the line of division, have the right 
 to determine, by a vote, whether they will belong 
 to the North or the South. The conferences au- 
 thorized to form the southern church, were the 
 conferences in the slaveholding states, and none 
 else. There are four conferences, part in slave 
 states and part in free states, Philadelphia, Balti- 
 more, Pittsburgh and Ohio. These four include 
 the states of Delaware, Maryland, and two-thirds 
 of Virginia. All these remain in the North. The 
 Virginia, Holston, Kentucky, and Missouri con- 
 ferences border on the south side of the line, and 
 have a right to come to the north, and thus extend 
 the southern line of the northern church, so as to 
 embrace live slave states and part of a sixth ; 
 this can be done. The societies and stations on 
 either side of the line can choose which division 
 they will belong to ; and after all these choices 
 are made, the northern church will include two 
 whole slave states, and two-thirds of a third ; and 
 it may include much more. The slave territory 
 which will be certainly included in the northern 
 churph, contaius at least, according to the minute* 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 181 
 
 of 1843-1844, twenty-seven thousand slave mem- 
 bers of the church ; one-sixth of all the slaves in 
 the whole church, and about the same proportion 
 of slaveholders. • There are about twenty-five 
 thousand slaveholders in the whole church ; and if 
 there are as many slaveholders, in proportion to 
 the slave population in the slave*" territory, in- 
 chided in the northern church as in the southern, 
 there are four thousand in the northern church ; 
 but if but half as many, then the northern church 
 contains two thousand ; and there are unquestion- 
 ably half as many ; so that the north is, and will 
 continue to be, just as much coimected with sla- 
 very as she was before the separation. 
 
 -The only difference is, there are not so many 
 slaveholders' in the northern M. E. church, but 
 the fellowship of slaveholders is as actual and as 
 sinfnl. If ever the .connection of the M. E. 
 church was sinful, it is so yet. The north did not 
 ask for the division ; did not want it — hoped to 
 the last it would not take place. [See Journals 
 of 1844, page 210.] The northern papers have 
 deprecated it — insisted that there was no' cause 
 for it. The north asked not to be freed from 
 church connection with slavery — from the fellow- 
 ship of slaveholders — hoped to the last they 
 might not be thus freed—did all they could to 
 continue slaveholders in their brotherly embrace, 
 except to agree that a slaveholdiug bishop should 
 come to the north and drive the abolitionists out 
 of the church. But the south could not agree to 
 
1^ GSOUNDS OF SECESSIOK 
 
 be hugged in the same bosom with abolitionists, 
 and to free themselves from comiection Avith 
 those who believed slavery sinful, and must there- 
 fore continue to agitate the subject, or become 
 wicked, by making peace with sin, asked and 
 obtained !j separate church. ' And as theirobjcct 
 was to be freed from the agitation of abolition, 
 they had the line run to secure that object, throw- 
 ing a large break-water of slave territory in the 
 northern church, to keep the floods of abolition 
 from coming down on them. 
 
 Both churches are cormected with slavery in 
 the very same way, by the provision of the very 
 same discipline. Slaveholding members and local 
 preachers have the same security in both ; but 
 travelling preachers and bishops may not be al- 
 lowed, on the ground of expediency, to be con- 
 nected with it to the same extent in the northern 
 church, they may in the southern one : this is all 
 the difference. Both are slaveholding churches. 
 The northern church contains both slaveholders 
 and abolitionists, the southern are free from ab- 
 olitionists. : This is the true state of the case. 
 
 , Tliird. — This resolution provides that when the 
 line shall finally be determined, the preachers oi 
 the northern church shall " in no wise attempt to 
 organize churches" or "exercise any pastoral 
 oversight" within' the bounds of the southern 
 church. . This provision gives the slaves up for- 
 ever to the ministry of the slaveholders, and a 
 slaveholding church, binds thousands of minis- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 183 
 
 ters not to obey the Saviour, in goiug into all the 
 world to preach his gospel. The aibolitionists of 
 the north do well to prate about their anti-slavery, 
 their love for the slave, after binding themselves 
 by a covenant never to preach to them glad 
 tidings the opening of the prison doors, and the 
 acceptable year of the Lord, though Providence 
 should op«n the way so to do. It is most likely 
 tliat the General Conference of 1848, will disan- 
 nul this restriction : at least, there are such inti- 
 mations. This provisioii is one of the most re- 
 markable acts on record, and will burn the brands 
 of infamy deeper and deeper into the characters 
 of those Avho passed it, while their memories 
 live. And. strange to tell, there were 147 votes 
 for this covenant to disobey Christ, and only 22 
 against it. Not a single voice wns against it from 
 the New England or New Hampshire conferences ; 
 and but 19 in all from the free States, three of the 
 22 being from the Baltimore conference. I esteem 
 this act more dishonoring to God, if possible, than 
 a conne-tion with slavery ; but the northern 
 church i.'^ in for both, and on decidedly more un- 
 christian grounds than she was ever before the 
 division. 
 
 The second resolution provides " that ministers, ' 
 local and travelling of every grade and office, may 
 remain in the northern church, or, without blame 
 attach themselves to the church south. This ac- 
 knowledges the southern church as equally Chris- 
 tian with that of the north : for were it not so, 
 
]jB4 GROUNDS OP SECESSION 
 
 ministers would be blameable for going from a 
 better to a worse. This passed by a vote of 139 
 to 17. 
 
 The third resolution recommends, for the con- 
 currence of the Annual Conferences, an altera- 
 tion of the sixth ■ restrictive rule, so as to enable 
 the church south, to get an equal proportion of 
 the Book Concern and chartered fund. This 
 passed by a vote of 147 to 12. 
 
 The ninth resolution relinquishes all claim of 
 the M. E. church to the meeting-houses, parson- 
 ages, seminaries, colleges, school and conference 
 funds, in the bounds of the southern church. 
 
 From these several actions it appears that the 
 General Conference fully agreed for the south to 
 separate and form a distinct church ; and that if 
 the south should go -off, they should go full-hand- 
 ed. All the church property in the south was 
 given up in favor of a southern organization; 
 and by a vote of 117 to 12 it was agreed that they 
 should have their full share of the book concern 
 and chartered fimd, if the Annual Conferences con- 
 sent. I have been particular in the examination 
 of this point, to prove, beyond a doubt, that the 
 north fully consented to let the south form a new 
 church ; that the Louisville convention was fully 
 authorized by the General Conference of 1844 to 
 do what it did do ; that it was, in no proper sense 
 of the term, either disorderly or schismatical, 
 that the division was by mutual consent; and 
 that the church south, can rightfully claim all the 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 185 
 
 guarantees given them in the t\velve resolutions, 
 which provided prospectively for said organiza- 
 tion. The convention kept " strictly within the 
 records." 
 
 The required majorities of the several Annual 
 Conferences, did not concur in the recommenda- 
 tion to alter the restrictive rule, to let the southern 
 church have their proportion of the Book Concern 
 and chartered fund : but they may do it yet ; 
 some think they will, but I have no expectation 
 that it will be done. As the matter now stands, 
 these concerns with their vast wealth belong ex- 
 clusively to the northern church. Some of the 
 northern conferences refused, because of the pro- 
 vision binding the ministers in the north never to 
 " attempt" to form societies in the bounds of the 
 church south, or exercise any pastoral duties 
 there. But this poijit was not sent down to the 
 Annual Conferences for their action, but was 
 settled by the General Conference, and therefore 
 formed no reason for their action, unless it was to 
 prevent this monstrous thing by defeating the 
 .southern organization, as the south might not 
 leave unless they could get their share of these 
 concerns. But they have left without their divi- 
 dend; and this odious provision stands in full 
 force, and the northern church is bound to ab.ide 
 by it — bound by a vote of 147 to 12. 
 
 The last thing claiming attention is the influence 
 of the separation on the subject of slavery. It has 
 been confidently asserted by a number of Epis- 
 16* 
 
)86 
 
 GROUNDS OF SECESSION 
 
 copal Methodist preachers, that the northern 
 church is now free from any connection with 
 slavery. Indeed, from what I have been able to 
 learn, they generally make this declaration . But the 
 facts previously noticed, prove that these preach- 
 ers are either very ignorant or very dishonest, for 
 they afhrm what is most palpably untrue. Many 
 think that the northern church, being now sepa- 
 rated from that portion of the south which is most 
 zealous in the defence of slavery, and in connec- 
 tion with the portion which admits it to be an 
 evil, wrong in some sense, will from the nature 
 of their position, become more and more anti- 
 slavery, until she become fully abolitionised ; 
 and then slavery Avill be removed from her pale. 
 This theory looks plausible at first sight, and no 
 one would rejoice more than the writer should 
 this be the case. But he cannot shut his eyes to 
 the evidence, which shows plainly that the very 
 opposite will be the effect ; that the tone of anti- 
 slavery will become less and less in the northern 
 church. 
 
 The border conferences and societies are in a 
 position to induce the northern church to make 
 effort to gain them over ; to do whicli she must 
 yield her professed opposition to slavery. This 
 is obvious ; and in the very same proportion that 
 ehe will be influenced to make proselytes, she will 
 be influenced to give up her apparent opposition 
 to slavery ; for this must be done, before the other 
 can be done ; and by all that the North will be 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH.* 187 
 
 tempted to swell her numbers, enlarge her bor- 
 ders, and extend her dominions South, she will be 
 tempted to abate her opposition to slavery. And 
 it is almost certain she will yield to this powerful 
 temptation, and slaveholding go unrebnked in 
 both churches. There are many more chances 
 that the division will promote the interest of 
 slavery, than it will favor the cause of freedom. 
 There is little or no hope for the slave in this 
 mighty division. 
 
 " Commg events (often) cast their shadows be- 
 fore," and the bodies of future events are already 
 seen by the shadows. The Providence annual 
 conference at its session since the convention, 
 passed the followmg resolutions, with only four 
 dissenting votes : 
 
 -■"1. Resolved, That we are satisfied with the 
 disciplme of the church as it now is, on the sub- 
 ject of slavery; and as we have never proposed 
 any alteration in it, neither do we now ; and that 
 iu«connection with our brethren of other confer- 
 ences, we will ever abide by it. 
 
 " 2. Resolved, That we have entire confidence 
 in the anti-slavery character of our brethren of 
 the Baltimore Confer^ce ; that we greatly re- 
 joice that they stand where they have ever stood, 
 .upon true Methodist ground; that we deeply 
 sympathize with them in all their trials, which 
 have arisen out of their resolution to maintain 
 their integrity ; aud that we piedge ourselves to 
 
188 "grounds of secession 
 
 abide by them in their support of Methodism, as 
 transmitted to us by the fathers." 
 
 Hence we have the position of the most or- 
 thodox New England Episcopal Methodist anti- 
 slavery. The position of the very heart. No 
 change in the discipline on the subject of slavery ; 
 never did want any. The discipline ".as it is." 
 No objections to the provisions which allow 
 members and local preachers to hold slaves ; to 
 buy and sell slaves, (if they do not engage in a 
 general slave trade ; they are not allowed to buy 
 and sell " men, women, and children,") and travel- 
 ling preachers to do the same thing, where the 
 laws of the State forbid emancipation, which is in 
 by far the greater number of the States. This is 
 all right, just as it should be. They want no 
 change in any of these respects ; never did want 
 any ; local preachers and members may hold as 
 many slaves as they want, buy and sell, where, 
 when, and to whom they 2:)lease, if they stop short 
 of buying and selling men, women, and children ; 
 and travelling preachers may do the same in the 
 greater part of the slave states. The anti-slavery 
 character of the Baltimore Conference is just 
 the thing. New England,wants no better anti- 
 slavery. The conference stands, and ever has 
 stood, on true Methodist ground. The members 
 of the church in that conference hold slaves, and 
 buy and sell slaves ; 1 knew one who owned 
 about seventy. The local preachers own.slaves ; 
 I knew one who owned about sixty. This is true 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 189 
 
 Methodist auti-slavery ground. New-England 
 anti-slavery being judge ; by this it is pledged to 
 stand, and ask no change. It is true that confer- 
 ence would not let Mr. Harding be a travelling 
 preacher unless he free his slaves, because he 
 lived in Maryland, where he could emancipate 
 them ; but they made him a local preacher, 
 in possession of his slaves. This is Methodism, 
 " as transmitted to us by the fathers," by which 
 the Providence Conference is pledged to abide. 
 
 Was this the anti-slavery of the New England 
 Conference in 1839, when they wanted the general 
 rule so altered as to make slaveholding a term of 
 membership ? And of the great anti-slavery con- 
 vention of 1843, which resolved that if the Gene- 
 ral Conference of 1844 did not entirely separate 
 the church from all connection with slavery, 
 it would be no longer a home for anti-slavery 
 Methodists 1 How are the mighty fallen ! The 
 Providence Conference have given up every par- 
 ticle of modern abolitionism they ever had ; and 
 have measured their whole length to the pro- 
 slavery of the Discipline — have sanctioned all the 
 extreme South asks, with one exception, a slave- 
 holding bishop. 
 
 In view of all these facts and reasonings, and 
 the conclusions to which they irresistably bring 
 us, what is the duty of anti-slavery Methodists "? 
 Many of them have felt and said that they 
 could not, without violating the plain commands 
 of God, remain in church fellowship with slave- 
 
190 GEOUlifDS OF SECESSION 
 
 holders any longer than there was a reasonable 
 prospect of removing them from the church. 
 Now that there is no reasonable prospect of 
 doing this, and no prospect at all, and a reason- 
 able, if not certain prospect, that the church Avill 
 be far less anti-slavery in sentiment and feeling 
 than formerly, will these j^ersons continue in her 
 fellowship ■? If they do, their sun must set in 
 blackness. I would say to all anti-slavery Me- 
 thodists, into whose hands this tract may fall, the 
 time for decisive action has at length come. 
 You were first promised deliverance from your 
 sinful connections with slaveholders, by the Gene- 
 ral Conference of 1844; and secondly by the 
 Louisville Convention; both are over, and your 
 position is far worse than it was before they first 
 met; you are not only comiected with slavery in 
 the very way you formerly were, but belong to a 
 church whose ministers are bound by a solemn 
 covenant never to preach the Gospel to the 
 slaves of five-sixths of the United States ; and all 
 your influence and support must go to support 
 both of these great wrongs. Can you continue 
 any longer in connection with slavery "? Can you 
 continue in such a connection and be guiltless 
 before God 1 You cannot ; you know you can- 
 not ; your own heart tells you you cannot. You 
 must come out; you must obey God, if you have 
 to do as Abraham did when he left his kindred; 
 you must obey God or perish. To you, my dear 
 breihren, this is an awful subject, and I feel un- 
 
FROM THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 191 
 
 ntterable things while I write. May the gracious 
 and merciful Saviour give you grace and power 
 to do right, and to do it at the right time, the only 
 time it can be done, is the sincere prayer of the 
 writer. 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY 
 
 BY THE REV. JOHN WESLEY, A. M. 
 
 [The following was written and published in the year 
 n74. It will, therefore, probably be admitted, that Mr. 
 Wesley was an " old fashioned abolitionist ;" but how 
 far he differed from those of his lollowers, who are now 
 proscribed, and denounced as " modern abolitionists," 
 the reader cqn judge. 
 
 And here one might ask, if our opponents of the pres- 
 ent age are " old fashioned abolitionists," as some of 
 them would have us believe, why do they not circulate 
 this tract, and thus spread their views 1 If they agree 
 with Wesley, and others who lived and labored with him 
 sixty years ago, why are they so unwilling that this tract 
 should be circulated among Christians at the present 
 time ? Nay, why do they refuse to aid others in dispers- 
 ing it through this nation, as Wesley himself dispersed it 
 to every part of England, thirteen years after it was 
 written 1 This we learn from the following letter : — 
 
 To Mr. Thomas Funntll. 
 
 November, 24, 1787. 
 My Dear Brother, — Whatever assistance I can give 
 those generous men who join to oppose that execrable 
 trade, I certainly shall give. I have printed a large edi- 
 tion of tire " Thoughts on Slavery," and dispersed therr. 
 to every part of England. But there will be vehement 
 opposition made, both by slave merchants and slave- 
 holders ; and they are mighty men : but our comfort is, 
 He that dvvelleth on high is mightier. I am 
 
 Your affectionate brother, 
 
 JOHN WESLEY 
 
 Let those who have doubts about the identity of Wes- 
 Icyan Methodism, and what they are pleased to denounce 
 as modern abolitionism," prayerfully read ihe (bllowlng 
 pages ; they may then be prepared to say who have left 
 the ancient landmarks.] 
 
 17 
 
194 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY, 
 
 SLAVERY. 
 
 1. 1. By Slavery, I mean domestic slavery, or 
 that of a servant to a master. A late ingenious 
 writer well observes, " The variety of forms in 
 which slavery appears, makes it almost impossi- 
 ble to convey a just notion of it, by way of defi- 
 nition. There are, however, certain properties 
 which have accompanied slavery in most places, 
 whereby it is easily distinguished from that mild 
 domestic service, which obtains in our country." 
 (See Mr. Hargrave's Plea for Somerset, the Negro.) 
 
 2. Slavery imports an obligation of perpetual 
 service, an obligation which only the consent of 
 the master can dissolve. Neither in some coun- 
 tries can the master himself dissolve it, without 
 the consent of judges appointed by the law. It 
 generally gives the master an arbitrary power of 
 any correction not affecting life or limb. Some- 
 times even these are exposed to his will, or pro- 
 tected only by a fine, or some slight punishment, 
 too inconsiderable to restrain a master of a harsh 
 temper. It creates an incapacity of acquiring 
 any thing, "except for the master's benefit. It 
 allows the master to alienate the slave, in the 
 same manner as his cows and horses. Lastly, it 
 descends, in its full extent from parent to childj 
 even to the last generation. 
 
 3. The beginning of this may be dated from the 
 remotest period of which we have an account in 
 history. It commenced in the barbarous state oi 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 195 
 
 society, and in process of time spread into all 
 nations. It prevailed particularly among the 
 Jews, the Greeks, the Romans, and the ancient 
 Germans; and was transmitted by them to the 
 various kingdoms and states which arose out of 
 the Roman empire. But after Christianity pre- 
 vailed, it gradually fell into decline in almost all 
 parts of Europe. This great change began in 
 Spain about the end of the eighth century ; and 
 was become general in most other kingdoms of 
 Europe, before the middle of the fourteenth. 
 
 4. From this time slavery was nearly extinct 
 till the commencement of the sixteenth century, 
 when the discovery of America, and of the west- 
 ern and eastern coasts of Africa, gave occasion to 
 the revival of it. It took its rise from the Portu- 
 guese, who, to supply the Spaniards with men to 
 cultivate their new possessions in America, pro- 
 cured negroes from Africa, whom they sold for 
 slaves to the American Spaniards. This began 
 ill the year 1508, when they imported the first 
 negroes into Hispaniola. In 1540, Charles the 
 Fifth, then king of Spain, determined to put an end 
 to negro slavery ; giving positive orders that all 
 the negro slaves in the Spanish dominions should 
 be set free. And this was accordingly done by 
 Lagasca, whom he sent and empowered to free 
 them all on condition. of continuing to labor for 
 their masters. But soon after Lagasca returned 
 to Spain, slavery returned and flourished as be- 
 fore. Afterward, other nations, as they acquired 
 
196 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERV. 
 
 possessions in America, followed the example of 
 the Spaniards ; and slavery has taken deep root 
 in most of our American colonies. 
 
 11. Such is the nature of slavery ; such the be- 
 ginning of negro slavery in America. But some 
 may desire to know what kind of country it is 
 from which the negroes are brought ; what sort 
 of men, of what temper and behavior are they in 
 their own country ; and in what manner they are 
 generally procured, carried to, and treated, in 
 America. 
 
 1. And, First, what kind of country is that from 
 whence they are brought ? Is it so remarkably 
 horrid, dreary and barren, that it is a kindness to 
 deliver them out of it ? I believe many have ap- 
 prehended so ; but it is an entire mistake, if we 
 may give credit to those who have lived many 
 years therein, and could have no motive to mis- 
 represent it. 
 
 2. That part of Africa whence the negroes are 
 brought, commonly known by the name of Guinea, 
 extends along the coasts, in the whole, between 
 three and four thousand miles. From the river 
 Senegal, seventeen degrees north of the line, to 
 Cape Sierra Leone, it contains seven hundred 
 miles. Thence it runs eastward about fifteen 
 hundred miles, including the Grain Coast, the 
 Ivory Coast, the Gold Coast, and the Slave Coast, 
 with the large kingdom of Benin. From thence 
 it runs southward, about twelve hundred miles, 
 and contains the kingdoms of Congo and Angola. 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 197 
 
 3. Concerning the first, the Senegal Coast, Mon- 
 sieur Brue, who lived there sixteen years, after 
 describing its fruitfulness near the sea, says, 
 "The farther you go from the sea, the more fruit- 
 ful and well-improved is the country, abounding 
 in pulse, Indian corn, and various fruits. Here 
 are vast meadows, which feed large herds of 
 great and small cattle ; and the villages, which 
 lie thick, show the country is well peopled." 
 And again : " I was surprised to see the land so 
 well cultivated : scarce a spot lay unimproved ; 
 the low lands, divided by small canals, were all 
 sowed with rice ■ the higher grounds planted 
 with Indian corn, and peas of different sorts. 
 Their beef is excellent; poultry plenty, and very 
 cheap, as are all the necessaries of life." 
 
 4. As to the Grain and Ivory Coasts, we learn 
 from eye witnesses, that the soil is in general fer- 
 tile, producing abundance of rice and roots. In- 
 digo and cotton thrive without cultivation ; fish 
 is in great plenty ; the flocks and herds are nume- 
 rous, and the trees laden with fruit. 
 
 5. The Gold Coast and Slave Coast, all who 
 have seen it agree, is exceedingly fruitful and 
 pleasant, producing vast quantities of rice and 
 other grain, plenty of fruit and roots, palm wine 
 and oil, and fish in great abundance, with much 
 tame and wild cattle. The very same account 
 is given us of the soil and produce of the king- 
 doms of Benin, Congo, and Angola. From all 
 
198 
 
 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 which it appears, that Guinea, in general, is far 
 from a horrid, dreary, barren country — is one of 
 the most fruitful, as well as the most pleasant 
 countries in the known world. It is said indeed 
 to be unhealthy; and so it is to strangers, but 
 perfectly healthy to the native inhabitants. 
 
 6. Such is the country from which the negroes 
 are brought. We come next to inquire what sort 
 of men they are, of what temper and behavior, 
 not in our plantations, but in their native country. 
 And here likewise the surest way is to take our 
 account from eye and ear witnesses. Now, those 
 who have lived in the Senegal country observe, 
 it is inhabited by three nations, the Jalofs, Fulis, 
 and Mandingos. The king of the Jalofs has un- 
 der him several ministers, who assist in the exer- 
 cise of justice. The chief justice goes in circuit 
 through all his dominions, to hear complaints and 
 determine controversies; and the viceroy goes 
 with him, to inspect the behavior of the alkadi, 
 or governor of each village. The Fulis are gov- 
 erned by their chief men, who rule with much 
 moderation. Few of them will drink anything 
 stronger than water, being strict Mohammedans. 
 The government is easy, because the people are 
 of a quiet and good disposition, and so well 
 instructed in what is right, that a man who 
 wrongs another is the abomination of all. They 
 desure no more land than they use, which they 
 cultivate with great care anc5 industry ; if any of 
 them are known to be made slaves by the white 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 199 
 
 men, they all join to redeem them. They not only 
 support all tha» are old, or blind, or lame among 
 themselves, but have frequently supplied the ne- 
 cessities of the Mandingos, when they were dis- 
 tressed by famine. 
 
 7. " The Mandingos," says Monsieur Brae, " are 
 rigid Mohammedans, drinking neither wine nor 
 brandy. They are industrious and laborious, 
 keeping their ground well cultivated, and breed- 
 ing a good stock of cattle. Every town has a 
 governor, and he appoints the labor of the peo- 
 ple. The men work the ground designed for 
 corn; the women and girls, the rice ground. He 
 afterwards divides the corn and rice among them ; 
 and decides all quarrels, if any arise. All the 
 Mohammedan negroes constantly go to public 
 prayers thrice a day ; there being a priest in every 
 village, who regularly calls them together ; and it 
 is surprising to see the modesty, attention, and 
 reverence which they observe during their wor- 
 ship. These three nations practice several trades; 
 they have smiths, saddlers, potters, and weavers ; 
 and they are very ingenious at their several oc- 
 cupations. Their smiths not only make all the 
 instraments of iron which they have occasion to 
 use, but likewise work many things neatly in 
 gold and silver. It is chiefly the women and 
 children Avho weave fine cotton cloth, which 
 they dye blue and black." 
 
 8. It was of these parts of Guinea that Monsieur 
 Allanson, correspondent of the Royal Academy of 
 
200 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 Sciences at Paris, from 1749 to 1753, gives the 
 following account, both as to the country and 
 people : — " Which way soever I turned my eyes, 
 I beheld a perfect image of pure nature : an 
 agreeable ^solitude, bounded on every side by a 
 charming landscape ; the rural situation of cot- 
 tages in the midst of "trees; the ease and quiet- 
 ness of the negroes, reclined under the shade of 
 the spreading foliage, with the simplicity of their 
 dress and manners; the whole revived in my 
 mind the idea of our first parents, and I seemed 
 to contemplate the world in its primitive state. 
 They are, generally speaking, very good-natured, 
 sociable, and obliging. I was not a little pleased 
 with my very first reception; and it fully con- 
 vinced me, that there ought to be a considerable 
 abatement made in the accounts we have of the 
 savage character of the Africans." He adds : 
 " It is amazing that an illiterate people should 
 reason so pertinently concerning the heavenly 
 bodies. There is no doubt, but that, with proper 
 instruments, they would become excellent astron- 
 omers." 
 
 9. The inhabitants of the Grain and Ivory Coast 
 are represented by those that deal with them, as 
 sensible, courteous, and the fairest traders on the 
 coasts of Guinea. They rarely drink to excess ; 
 if any do, they are severely punished by the 
 king's order. They are seldom troubled with 
 war ; if a difference happen between two nations, 
 they commonly end the dispute amicably. 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 201 
 
 The inhabitants of the Gold and Slave Coast, 
 likewise, when they are not artfully incensed 
 against each other, live in great union and friend- 
 ship, being generally well tempered, civil, tracti- 
 ble, and ready to help any that need it. In par 
 ticular, the natives of the kingdom of Whidah art 
 civil, kind, and obliging, to strangers ; and thej 
 are the most gentleman-like of all the negroes 
 abounding in good manners toward each other 
 The inferiors pay the ntmost respect to their su- 
 periors ; so wives to their husbands, children to 
 their parents. And they are remarkably indus- 
 trious ; all are constantly employed, — the men in 
 agriculture, the women in spimiing and weaving 
 cotton. 
 
 10. The Gold and Slave Coasts are divided into 
 several districts, some governed by kings, others 
 by the ])rincipal men, who take care each of their 
 own town or village, and prevent or ajjpease 
 tumults. They punish murder and adultery 
 severely ; very frequently with death. Theft and 
 robbery are punished by a fine proportionable to 
 the goods that were taken. All the natives of 
 this coast, though Heathens, believe there is one 
 God, the Author of them and all things. They ap- 
 pear likewise to have a confused apprehension of 
 a future state. And, accordingly, every town and 
 village has a place of public worship. It is re- 
 markable that they have no beggars among them ; 
 such is the care of the chief men, m every city 
 and village, to provide some easy labor even for 
 
202 
 
 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY- 
 
 the old and weak. Some are employed in blow- 
 ing the smith's bellows ; others in pressing palm 
 oil ; others in grinding of colors. If they are too 
 weak even for this, they sell provisions in the 
 market. 
 
 11. The natives of the kingdom of Benin are a 
 reasonable and good-natured people. They are 
 sincere and inoffensive, and do no injustice either 
 to one another or to strangers. They are emi- 
 nently civil and courteous ; if you make them a 
 present, they endeavor to repay it double ; and 
 if they are trusted till the ship returns the nfext 
 year, they are sure honestly to pay the whole 
 debt. Theft is punished among them, although 
 not with the same severity as murder. If a man 
 and woman of any quality are taken in adultery, 
 they are certain to be put to death, and their 
 bodies thrown on a dunghill, and left a prey 
 to wild beasts. They are jiunctually just and 
 honest in their dealings ; and are also very 
 charitable, the king and the great lords taking care 
 to employ all that are capable of any work. 
 And those that are utterly helpless they keep for 
 God's sake; so that here also are no beggars. 
 The inhabitants of Congo and Angola are gene- 
 rally a quiet people. They discover a good 
 imderstanding, and behave in a friendly manner 
 to strangers, being of a mild temper and an affa- 
 ble carriage. Upon the whole, therefore, the 
 negroes who inhabit the coast of Africa, from the 
 river iienegal to the southern bounds of Angola, 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 203 
 
 are so farfrom being the stnijid, senseless, bmitish, 
 lazy barbarians, the fierce, cruel, perfidious sav- 
 ages they have been described, that, on the con- 
 trary, they are represented, by those who have no 
 motive to flatter them, as remarkably sensible, 
 considering the few advantages they have for 
 improving their understanding; as industrious to 
 the highest degree, perhaps more so than any 
 other natives of so warm a climate ; as fair, just, 
 cind honest in all their dealings, unless where white 
 men have taught them to be other^vise ; and as 
 far more mild, friendly, and kind to strangers, 
 than any of our forefathers were. Our forefathers 7 
 Where shall we find at this day, among the fair- 
 faced natives of Europe, a nation generally prac- 
 ticing the justice, mercy, and truth, Avhich are 
 found among these poor Africans ? Suppose the 
 preceding accounts are true (which I see no 
 reason or pretence to doubt of), and we may leave 
 England and France, to seek genuhie honesty in 
 Benin, Congo, or Angola. 
 
 III. We have now seen what kind of country it 
 is from which the negroes are brought; and what 
 sort of men (even white men being the judges) 
 they were in their own country. Inquire we, 
 Thirdly, in what manner are they generally pro- 
 cured, carried to, and treated, in America ? 
 
 1. First. In what manner are they procured ? 
 Part of them by fraud. Captains of ships, from 
 time to time, have invited negroes to come 
 on board, and then carried them away. But far 
 
204 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 more have been procured by force. The Chris- 
 tians, landing upon their coasts, seized as many 
 as they found — men, women, and children — and 
 transported them to America. It was about 1551 
 that the EngUsh began trading to Guinea ; at first, 
 for gold and elepliant's teeth, but soon after for 
 men. In 1556, Sir John Hawkins sailed with two 
 ships to Cape Verd, where he sent eighty men on 
 shore to catch negroes. But the natives flying, 
 they fell farther down, and there set the men on 
 shore, " to burn their towns and take the inhabit- 
 ants." But they met with such resistance, that 
 they had seven men killed, and took but ten 
 negroes. So they went still farther down, till, 
 having taken enough, they proceeded to the West 
 Indies and sold them. 
 
 2. It was some time before the Europeans 
 found a more compendious way of procuring 
 African slaves, by prevailing upon them to make 
 war upon each other, and to sell their prisoners. 
 Till then they seldom had any wars but were in 
 general quiet and peaceable. But the white men 
 first taught them drunkenness and avarice, and 
 then hired them to sell one another. Nay, by this 
 means, even their kings are induced to sell their 
 own subjects. So Mr. Moore, factor of the 
 African Company in 1730, informs us : " When the 
 king of Barsalli wants goods or brandy, he sends 
 to the English governor at James' Fort, who 
 immediately sends a sloop. Against the time it 
 arrives, he plunders some of his neighbors' towns, 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 205 
 
 selling the people for the goods he wants. At 
 other times, he falls upon one of his own towns, 
 and makes bold to sell his own subjects." So 
 Monsieur Brue says, " I wrote to the king " (not 
 the same), "if he had a sufRcient number of 
 slaves, I would treat with him." He seized 
 three hundred of his own people, and sent word 
 he was ready to deliver them for the goods." 
 He adds, " Some of the natives are always ready" 
 (when well paid) " to surprise and carry off their 
 own countrymen. They come at night without 
 noise, and if they find any lone cottage, surround 
 it, and carry off all the people." Barbot, another 
 French factor says, " Many of the slaves sold by 
 the negroes are prisoners of war, or taken in the 
 incursions they make into the enemi»s' ter- 
 ritories. Others are stolen. Abundance of little 
 blacks, of both sexes, are stolen away by their 
 neighbors, when found abroad on the road, or in. 
 the woods, or else in the corn fields, at the time 
 of the year when their parents keep them there 
 all day to scare away the devouring birds." 
 That their own parents sell them is utterly false : 
 whites, not blacks, are without natural affec- 
 tion! 
 
 3. To set the manner wherein negroes are pro- 
 cured in a yet stronger light, it will suffice to give 
 an extract of " Two voyages to Guinea" on this 
 account. The first is taken verbatim from the 
 original manuscript of the surgeon's journal 
 
 " Sestro, Dec. 29, 1724.— No trade to-day, thougt 
 18 
 
206 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 many traders came on board. They informed us, 
 that the people are gone to war within land, and 
 will bring prisoners enough in two or three days; 
 in hopes of which we stay. 
 
 " The 30th. — No trade yet; but our traders came 
 on board to-day, and informed us the people had 
 burnt four towns ; so that to-morrow we expect 
 slaves off. 
 
 " The 31st. — Fair weather ; but no trading yet. 
 We see each night towns burning. But we hear 
 many of the Sestro men are killed by the inland 
 negroes ; so that we fear this war will be unsuc- 
 cessful. 
 
 "The 2d of January. — Last night we saw a pro- 
 digious fire break out about eleven o'clock, and 
 this morning see the town of Sestro burned down 
 to the ground." (It contained some hundred 
 houses.) " So that we find their enemies are too 
 hard for them at jjresent, and consequently our 
 trade spoiled here. Therefore about seven o'clock 
 we weighed anchor, to proceed lower down." 
 
 4. The second extract, taken from the journal 
 of a surgeon, who went from New York on the 
 same trade, is as follows : "The commander of 
 the vessel sent to acquaint the king, that he 
 wanted a. cargo of slaves. The king promised to 
 furnish him ; and in order to it, set out, designing 
 to surprise some town, and make all the people 
 prisoners. Some time after, the king sent him 
 word, he had not yet met with the desired suc- 
 cess; having attempted to break up two townS) 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 207 
 
 but having been twice repulsed ; but that he still 
 hoped to procure the number of slaves. In this 
 design he persisted, till he met his enemies in the 
 field. A battle was fought which lasted three 
 days. And the engagement was so bloody, that 
 four thousand five hundred men were slain upon 
 \lie spot." Such is the manner wherein the ne- 
 groes are procured ! Thus the Christians preach 
 the Gospel to the Heathens ! 
 
 5. Thus they are procured. But in what num- 
 bers and in what manner are they carried to 
 America "? Mr. Anderson, in his History of Trade 
 and Commerce, observes : " England supplies her 
 American colonies with negro slaves, amounting 
 in number to about a hundred thousand every 
 year;" that is, so many are taken on board our 
 ships ; but at least ten thousand of them die in 
 the voyage ; about a fourth part more die at the 
 different islands, in what is called the seasoning. 
 So that at an average, in the passage and season- 
 ing together, thirty thousand die; that is, properly, 
 are murdered. 0 earth, 0 sea, cover not thou 
 their blood ! 
 
 6. When they are brought down to the shore 
 in order to be sold, our surgeons thoroughly ex- 
 amine them, and that quite naked, women and 
 men, without any distinction ; those that are ap- 
 proved are set on one side. In the mean time, a 
 burning iron, with the arms or name of the com- 
 pany, lies in the fire, with which they are marked 
 on the breast. Before they are put into the ships, 
 
 19 
 
208 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 their masters strip them of all they have on their 
 backs": so that they come on board stark naked, 
 women as well as>men. It is common for several 
 hnndred of them to be put on board one vessel, 
 where they are stowed together in as little room 
 as it is possible for them to be crowded. It is 
 easy to snppose what a condition they must soon 
 be in, between heat, thirst, and stench of various 
 kinds. So that it is no wonder, so many should 
 die in the passage ; but rather, that any survive it. 
 
 7. When the vessels arrive at their destined 
 port, the negroes are again exposed naked to the 
 eyes of all that flock together, and the examina- 
 tion of their purchasers. Then they are separated 
 to the plantations of their several masters, to see 
 each other no more. Here you may see mothers 
 hanging over their daughters, bedewing their 
 naked breasts with tears, and daughters clinging 
 to their parents, till the whipper soon obligea 
 them to part.* And what can be more wretched 
 than the condition they then enter upon ? Ban- 
 ished from their counrry, from their friends and 
 relations forever, from every comfort of life, they 
 are reduced to a state scarce any way preferable 
 to that of beasts of burden. In general, a few 
 
 * These scenes ocRur almost daily at the present time 
 in the United States, in the prosecution of the domestic 
 slave trade. It is estimated tluit Vii-£;inia alone exports 
 to the Southern and Western markets TEN THOUSAND 
 SLAVES annually. Reader, .judge of the aiigiiish and 
 tears this must cause. — Pub. Committee. 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 209 
 
 roots, not of the nicest kind, tisnally yams or po- 
 tatoes, are their food ; and two rags, that neither 
 screen them from the heat of the day, nor the 
 cold of the night, their covering. Their sleep 
 is veiy short, their labor continual, and frequently 
 above their strength ; so that death sets many of 
 them at liberty before they have lived out half 
 their days. The time they work in the West In- 
 dies, is from day break to noon^ and from tv/o 
 o'clock till dark; during which time they are 
 attended by overseers, who, if they think thern 
 dilatory, or think any thing not so well done as it 
 should be, whip them most unmercifully, so that 
 you may see their bodies long after pealed and 
 scarred tisually from the shoulders to the waist. 
 And before they are suffered to go to their quar- 
 ters, they have commonly something to do, as 
 coUectiiig herbage for thi horses, or gathering 
 fuel for the boilers ; so that it is often past twelve 
 before they can get home. Hence if their food is 
 not prepared, they are sometimes called to labor 
 again, before they can satisfy their hunger. And 
 no excuse will avail. If they are not in the field 
 immediately they must expect to feel the lash. 
 Did the Creator intend that the noblest creatures 
 in the visible world should live such a life as 
 this? 
 
 Are these thy glorious work, Parent of good? 
 8. As to the punishments inflicted on them, 
 says Sir Hans Sloane, "they frequently geld them, 
 18* 
 
210 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 or chop off half a foot : after they are whipped 
 till they are raw all over, some put pepper and 
 salt upon them ; some drop melted wax upon 
 their skin ; others cut off their ears, and constrain 
 ihem to broil and eat them. For rebellion" (that 
 is, asserting their native liberty, which they have 
 as much right to as to the air they breathe), " they 
 fasten them down to the ground with crooked 
 sticks on every limb, and then applying fire^ by 
 degrees, to the feet and hands, they burn them 
 gradually upward to the head." 
 
 9. But will not the laws made in the planta- 
 tions prevent or redress all cruelty and oppres- 
 sion 1 We will take but a few of those laws for a 
 specimen, and then let any man judge. 
 
 In order to rivet the chain of slavery, the law 
 of Virginia ordains : " That no slave shall be set 
 free under any pretence whatever, except for 
 some meritorious services, to be adjudged and 
 allowed by the governor and council; and that 
 where any slave shall be set free by his owner, 
 otherwise than is herein directed, the church- 
 wardens of the parish, wherein such negroes shall 
 reside for the space of one month, are hereby 
 authorized and required to take up and sell the 
 said negro by public outcry." 
 
 JO. Will not these laAVgivers take effectual care 
 to prevent cruelty and oppression ? 
 
 The law of Jamaica ordains : " Every slave 
 that shall run away, and continue absent from his 
 master twelve months, shall be deemed rebel- 
 
THOUGHTS UPON S1,AVERT- 
 
 211 
 
 lions." And by another law fifty pounds are 
 allowed to those who kill or bring in alive a re- 
 bellious slave. So their law treats these poor 
 men with as little ceremony and consideration, as 
 if they were merely brute beasts! But the inno- 
 cent blood which is shed in consequence of such 
 a detestable law, must call for vengeance on the 
 murderous abettors and actors of such deliberate 
 wickedness. 
 
 11. But the law of Baibadoes exceeds even 
 this : " If any negro under punishment, by his 
 master, or his order, for running away or any 
 other crime or misdemeanor, shall suffer in life or 
 member, no person whatsoever shall be liable to 
 any fine therefor. But if any man, of wanton- 
 ness, or only of bloody-mindedness, or cruel 
 intention, wilfully kill a negro of his own," (now, 
 observe the severe punishment !) "he shall pay 
 into the public treasury fifteen pounds sterling ! 
 and not be liable to any other punishment or for. 
 feiture for the same !" 
 
 Nearly allied to this is that law of Virginia : 
 " After proclamation is issued against slaves that 
 runaway, it is lawful for any person whatsoevei 
 to kill and destroy such slaves, by such ways and 
 means as he shall think fit." 
 
 We have already seen some of the ways and 
 means which have been thought fit on such occa- 
 sions; and many more niight be mentioned. One 
 gentleman, when I was abroad, thought fit to 
 roast his slave alive ! But if the most natural 
 19* 
 
212 THOITGHTS DPON SLAVERY 
 
 act of "running away" from intolerable cjranny, 
 deserves such relentless severity, what punish- 
 ment have these lawmakers to expect hereafter, 
 on account of their own enormous offences 1 
 
 IV. 1. This is the plain unaggravated mat- 
 ter of fact. Such is the manner wherein our 
 African slaves are procured ; such the manner 
 w^'herein they are removed from their native land, 
 and wherein they are treated in our plantations. 
 I would now inquire whether these things can be 
 defended, on the principle of even Heathen hon- 
 esty ; whether they can be reconciled (setting 
 the Bible out of the question) with any degree of 
 either justice or mercy. 
 
 2. The grand pica is, " They are authorized by 
 law." But can law, human law, change the na- 
 ture of things ? Can it turn darkness into light, 
 or evil into good ? By no means. Notwithstand- 
 ing ten thousand laws, right is right, and wrong m 
 wrong still. There must still remain an essential 
 difference between justice and injustice, cruelty 
 and mercy. So that I still ask. Who can recon- 
 cile this treatment of the negroes, first and last 
 with either mercy or justice ? 
 
 Where is the justice of inflicting the severest, 
 evils on those that have done us no wrong ? of 
 depriving those that never injured us in word or 
 deed, of every comfort of life ? of tearing them 
 from their native country, and depriving them of 
 liberty itself, of which an Angolan has the same 
 natural' right as an Englishman, and on which he 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 218 
 
 sets as high a value 1 Yea, where is the justice 
 of taking away the lives of innocent, inoffensive 
 men ; murdering thousands of them in their own 
 land, by the hands of their own countrymen ; 
 many thousands, year after year, on shipboard, 
 and then casting them like dung into the sea ; and 
 tens of thousands in that cruel slaveiy to which 
 they are so unjustly reduced 1 
 
 3. But waiving, for the present, all other con- 
 siderations, I strike at the root of this complicated 
 villainy, I absolutely deny all slaveholding to be con- 
 sistent with any degree of natural justice. 
 
 I cannot place this in a clearer light than that 
 great ornament of his profession, Judge Black- 
 stone, has already done. Part of his words are 
 as follows : 
 
 " The three origins of the right of slavery assigned by 
 Justinian, are all built upon false foundations: (1.) 
 Slavery is said to arise from captivity in war. The con- 
 queror having a right to the life of his captive, if ho 
 spares that, has then a right to deal with him as he 
 pleases. But this is untrue, if taken generally, — that, by 
 the laws of nations, a man has a right to kill his enemy. 
 He lias only a right to kill him in particular cases, in 
 cases of absolute necessity for self-defence. And it is 
 plain, this absolute necessity did not subsist, since he did 
 not kill him, but made him prisoner. War itself is jus- 
 tifiable only on principles of self-preservation: therefore 
 it gives us no right over prisoners, but to hinder their 
 hurting us by confining them. Much less can it give a 
 light to torture, or kill, or even to enrlave fui enemy when 
 tne war is over. Since dierefore the riglit of making our 
 prisoners sldves, depends on a supposed right of slaughter, 
 that foundation failing, the consequence which is drawn 
 from it, must fail likewise. 
 
 " It is said, secondly, slavery may begm by one man's 
 
214 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 Belling himself to another. And it is true, a man may 
 sell himself to woA for another ; but he cannot sell him- 
 self to be a slave, as above defined. Every sale implies 
 an equivalent given to the seller, in lieu of what he 
 transfers to the buyer. But what equivalent can be given 
 ior life or liberty 1 His property likewise, with the very 
 price which he seems to receive, devolves ipso facto to 
 his master, the instant he becomes his slave : in this case, 
 therefore, the buyer gives nothing, and the seller receives 
 nothing. Of what validity then, can a *Ie be, which 
 destroys the very principles upon which all sales are 
 founded "? 
 
 " We are tokl, thirdly, that men ma.y be born slaves,* 
 by being the children ol slaves. But this, being built 
 upon the two former rights, must fall together with them. 
 If neither captivity nor contract can, by the plain law of 
 nature and reason, reduce the parent to a state of slave - 
 ry, much less can they reduce the offspring." It clearly 
 follows, that all slavery is as irreconcilable to justice as 
 to mercy. 
 
 4. That slavelioldiiig is utterly inconsistent with 
 mercy, is almost too plain to need a proof. In- 
 deed, it is said, " that these negroes being prison- 
 ers of war, our captains and factors buy them, 
 merely to save them from being put to death. 
 And is this not mercy]" I answer, (1.) Did Sir 
 John Hawkins, and many others, seize upon men, 
 women, and children, who were at peace in their 
 own fields or bouses, merely to save them from 
 death ? (2.) Was it to save them from death, that 
 they knocked out the brains of those they could 
 not bring away ? (S.) Who occasioned and fo- 
 mented those wars, wherein these poor creatures 
 were taken prisoners 1 Who excited them by 
 
 * See our Declaration of Irulependeuce- 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 215 
 
 money, by drink, by every possible means, to fall 
 upon one another ? Was it not themselves ? 
 They know in their own conscience it was, if 
 they have any conscience left. But (4.) to bring 
 the matter to a short issue, can they say before 
 God, that they ever took a single voyage, or 
 bought a single negro, from this motive 1 They 
 cannot ; they well know, to get money, not to 
 save lives was the whole and sole-sprmg of their 
 motions. 
 
 5. But if this manner of procuring and treating 
 negroes is not consistent either with raercy or 
 justice, yet there is a plea for it which every man 
 of business will acknowledge to be quite suffi- 
 cient. Fifty years ago, one meeting an eminent 
 statesman in the lobby of the house of commons 
 said, " You have been long talking about justice 
 and equity. Pray which is this bill, equity or jus- 
 tice 1 He answered very short and plain, " D — n 
 justice ; it is necessity." Here also the slaveholder 
 fixes his foot ; here he rests the strength of his 
 cause. '• If it is not quite right, yet it must be so ; 
 there is an absolute necessity for it. It is neces- 
 sary we should procure slaves ; and when we have 
 procured them, it is necessary to use them with 
 severity, considering their stupidity, stubbormaess 
 and wickedness." 
 
 I answer, you stumble at the threshold ; I deny 
 that villainy is ever necessary. It is impossible 
 that it should ever be necessary for any reasona- 
 ble creature to violate all the laws of justice, 
 
216 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 mercy, and truth. No circumstances can make 
 it necessary for a man to burst in sunder all the ties 
 of humanity. It can never be necessary for a ra- 
 tional being to sink himself below a bnite. A 
 man can be under no necessity of degrading him- 
 self into a wolf. The absurdity of the supposi- 
 tion is so glaring, that one would wonder any 
 one can help seeing it. 
 
 6. This in general. But to be more particular, 
 I ask, First, what is necessary ? and, Secondly, 
 To what end f It may be answered, " The whole 
 method now used by the original purchasers of 
 negroes is necessary to the furnishing our colo- 
 nies yearly with a hundred thousand slaves." I 
 grant, this is necessary to that end. But how is 
 that end necessary 1 How will you prove it ne- 
 cessary that one hundred, that one, of those slaves 
 should be procured '? " Why, it is necessary to my 
 gaining a hundred thousand pounds." Perhaps 
 so ; but how is this necessary 1 It is very possi- 
 ble you might be both a better and happier man, 
 if you had not a quarter of it. I deny that your 
 gaining one thousand is necessary either to your 
 present or eternal happiness. "But, however, 
 you must allow, these slaves are necessary for 
 the cultivation of our islands; inasmuch as white 
 men are not able to labor in hot climates." I 
 ■answer, First, It were better that all those island* 
 should remain uncultivated for ever ; yet, it were more 
 desirable that they were altogether sunk in, the depth of 
 the sea, than that they should be cultivated at so high a 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. ^17 
 
 price as the violation of justice, mercy, and truth. But, 
 Secondly, the supposition on which you ground 
 your argument is false. For white men, even 
 Englishmen, are well able to labor in hot climates ; 
 provided they are temperate both in meat and 
 drink, and that they inure themselves to it by de- 
 grees. I speak no more than I know by expe- 
 rience. It appears from the thermometer, that 
 the summer heat in Georgia is frequently equal 
 to that in Barbadoes, yea, to that under the line. 
 And yet I and my family (eight in number) did 
 employ all our spare time there, in felling of trees 
 and clearing of ground, as hard labor as any ne- 
 gro need be employed in. The German family 
 likewise, forty in number, were employed in all 
 maimer of labor. Ajid this was so far from im- 
 pairing our health, that we all continued perfectly 
 well, while the idle ones round about us were 
 swept away as with a petilence. It is not true, 
 therefore, that white men are not able to labor, 
 even in hot climates, full as well as black. But 
 if they were not, it would be better that none should U> 
 bor there, that the work should be left undone, than that 
 myriads of innocent men should be murdered, and my- 
 riads .more dragged into the basest slavery. 
 
 7. " But the furnishing us with slaves is neces- 
 sary for the trade, and wealth, and glory of our 
 nation." Here are several mistakes. For, First, 
 wealth is not necessary to the glory of any nation; 
 but wisdom, virtue, justice, mercy, generosity, 
 public spirit, love of our country. These are ne« 
 
218 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 cessary to the real glory of a nation ; but abunvl. 
 ance of wealth is not. Men of understanding 
 allow that the glory of England was full as high 
 in Queen Elizabeth's time as it is now ; although 
 our riches and trade were then as much smaller 
 as our virtue was greater. But, Secondly, it is 
 not clear that we should have either less money 
 or trade (only less of that detestable trade of 
 man-stealing), if there was not a negro in all our 
 islands, or in all English America. It is demon- 
 strable, white men, inured to it by degrees, can 
 work as well as them ; and they would do it, 
 Avere negroes out of the way, and proper encour- 
 agement given them. However, Thirdly, I come 
 back to the same point.. Better no trade than 
 trade procured by villainy. It is far better to have 
 no wealth, than to gain wealth at the expense of 
 virtue. Better w honest poverty, than all the riches 
 bought by the tears, and sweat, and blood of our fellow- 
 creatures. 
 
 8. " However this be, it is necessary, when we 
 have slaves, to use them with severity." What, 
 to whip them for every petty offence, till they are 
 all in gore blood 1 To take that opportunity of 
 rubbing pepper and salt into their raw flesh ? to 
 drop burning sealing wax upon their skin T to 
 castrate them ? to cut off half their foot with an 
 axe 1 to hang them on gibbets, that they may die 
 by inches, with heat, and hunger, and thirst 1 to 
 pin them doUTi to the ground, and then burn them 
 by degrees from the feet to the head ? to roast 
 
THOUGHT.? rPON SLAVERY. 219 
 
 them alive ? When did a Turk or a Heathen find 
 it necessary to use a fellow-creature thus 1 
 
 I pray, to what end is this usage necessary 1 
 " Why, to prevent their running away ; and to 
 keep them constantly to their labor, that they 
 may not idle away their time : So miserably stu- 
 pid is this race of men, yea, so stubborn and so 
 wicked." AUouing them to be as stupid as you 
 bay, to whom is that stupidity owing 1 Without 
 question, it lies altogether at the door of their in- 
 hutsian masters ; who give them no means, no 
 oppoi-4inrty, of improving their understanding; 
 and; indbod, leave them no motive, either from 
 hope or feat, to attempt any such thing. They 
 were no way remarkable for stupidity, while they 
 remained in their own country. The inhabitants 
 of Africa, where they have equal motives and 
 equal means of improvement, are not inferior to 
 the inhabitants of Europe ; to some of them they 
 are greatly superior. Impartially survey in their 
 own country, the natives of Benin, and Uie na- 
 tives of Lapland; compare (setting prejudice 
 aside) the Samoeids and the Angolans ; and on 
 which side does the advantage lie in point of 
 understanding 1 Certainly the African is in no 
 respect inferior to the European. Their stupidity, 
 therefore, in our plantations is not natural ; other- 
 wise than it is the natural effect of their condition. 
 Consequently, it is not their fault, but yours. You 
 must answer for it, before God and man. 
 
 9. " But their stupidity is not the only reason 
 
220 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERV. 
 
 of our treating them with severity. For it is haid 
 to say, which is the greatest this or their stubborn- 
 ness and wickedness." It may be so : but do not 
 these, as well as the other, lie at your door 1 Are 
 not stubbornness, cunning, pilfering, and divers 
 other vices, the natural, necessary fruits of slave- 
 ry 1 Is not this an observation which has been 
 made in every age and nation 1 And what means 
 have you used to remove this stubbornness ? 
 Have you tried what mildness and gentleness 
 would do T I knew one that did ; that had pru- 
 dence and patience to make the experiro'Jit; Mr. 
 Hugh Bryan, who then lived on the borders of 
 South Carolma. And what was the effect? 
 Why, that all his negroes (.and he had no small 
 number of them), loved and reverenced him as a 
 father, and cheerfut'ly obeyed hun out of love. 
 Yea, they were more afraid of a frown from him, 
 thaii of manv blows from an overseer. And what 
 pains have you taken, what methods have you 
 useil, to reclaim them from their wickedness? 
 Have you carefully taught them that there is a 
 God, a wise, powerful, merciful Being, the Crea- 
 tor and Governor of heaven and earth 1 that he 
 has appointed a day wherein he will judge the 
 world ; will take an account of all our thoughts, 
 words, and actions ? that in that day he will re- 
 ward every child of man according to his works ? 
 that then the righteous shall inherit tlie kuig&om 
 prepared for them from the foundation of the 
 wcr'd ; and the wicked shaU be cast into ever- 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 221 
 
 lasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels? 
 If you have not done this, if you have taken no 
 pains or thought about the matter, can you won- 
 der at their wickedness ? What wonder if they 
 should cut your throat ? And if they did, whom 
 could you thank for it but yourself? You first 
 acted the villain in making them slaves, whether you 
 stole them or bought them. You kept them stupid 
 and wicked, by cutting them off from all oppor- 
 tunities of improving either in knowledge or 
 virtue ! and now you assign their want of wisdom 
 and goodness as the reason for using them worse 
 than brute beasts ! 
 
 V. 1. It remains only to make a little apphca- 
 tion of the preceding observations. But to whom 
 should that application be made ? That may bear 
 a question. Should we address ourselves to the 
 public at large 1 What effect can this have 1 It 
 may inflame the world against the guilty, but is 
 not likely to remove that guilt. Should we ap- 
 peal to the English nation in general ? This also 
 is striking wide ; and is never likely to procure 
 any redress for the sore evil we cojnplain of. As 
 little would it in all probability avail, to apply to 
 the parliament. So many things, which seem of 
 greater importance, lie before them, that they are 
 not likely to attend to tliis. I therefore add a few 
 words to those who are more immediately con- 
 oerned, whether captains, merchants, or planters. 
 
 2. And, First, to the captains employed in this 
 trade. Most of you know the country of Guinea 
 
222 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 several parts of it, at least, between the river 
 Senegal and the kingdona of Angola. Perhaps, 
 now, by your means part of it is become a dreary, 
 uncultivated wilderness, the inhabitants being all 
 murdered or carried away, so that there are none 
 left to till the ground. But you well know how 
 populous, how fruitful, how pleasant it was a 
 few years ago. You know, the people were not 
 stupid, not wanting in sense, considering the few 
 means of improvement they enjoyed. Neither 
 did you find them savage, fierce, cruel, treacher- 
 ous, or unkind to strangers. On the contrary, 
 they were, in most parts, a sensible and ingeni 
 ous people. They were kind and friendly, courte- 
 ous and obliging, and remarkably fair and just in 
 'their dealings. Such are the men whom you hire 
 their own coTintrymen to tear away from this 
 lovely country ; part by stealth, part by force, 
 part made captives in those wars which you raise 
 or foment on purpose. You have seen them torn 
 away, — children from their parents, parents from 
 their children ; husbands from their wives, wives 
 from their beloved husbands, brethren and sisters 
 from each other. You have dragged them who 
 had never done you any wrong, perhaps in chains, 
 from their native shore. You have forced them 
 into your ships like a herd of swine, — them who 
 had souls immortal as your own ; only some of 
 them leaped into the sea, and resolutely stayed 
 under water, till they could suffer no more from 
 you. You have stowed them together as close as 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 223 
 
 ever they could lie, without any regard either to 
 decency, or convenience. And when many of 
 them had been poisoned by foul air, or had sunk 
 under various hardships, you have seen their re- 
 mains delivered to the deep, till the sea should 
 give up his dead. You have carried the survivors 
 into the vilest slavery, never to end but with life ; 
 such slavery as is not found among the Turks at 
 Algiers, no, nor among the Heathens in America. 
 
 3. May I speak plainly to you ? I must. 
 Love constrains me ; love to you, as well as to 
 those you are concerned with. 
 
 Is there a God 1 You luiow there i^. Is he a 
 just God 1 Then there must be a state of retribu- 
 tion; a state wherein the just God will reward 
 every man according to his works. Then what 
 reward will he render to you ? 0 think betimes ! 
 before you drop into eternity ! Think now, " He 
 shall have judgment without mercy that showed 
 no mercy." 
 
 Are you a man 1 Then you should have a hu- 
 man heart. But have you indeed ? What is 
 your heart made of? Is there no such principle 
 as compassion there 1 Do you never feel an- 
 other's pain 1 Have you no sympathy, no sense 
 of human wo, no pity for the miserable 1 When 
 you saw the flowing eyes, the heaving breasts, or 
 the bleeding sides and tortured limbs of your fel- 
 low creatures, was you a stone, or a brute ? Did 
 you look upon them with the eyes of a tiger ? 
 When you squeezed the agonizing creatures 
 
224 THOUGHtS UPON SLAVERT. 
 
 down in the ship, or when you threw their poor 
 mangled remams into the sea, had you no re- 
 lenting "? Did not one tear drop from your eye, 
 one sigh escape your breast ? Do you feel no 
 relenting now? If you do not, you must go on, 
 till the measure of your iniquities is full. Then 
 will the great God deal with you as you have 
 dealt with them, and require all their blood at 
 your hands. And at "that day it shall be more 
 tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for you !" 
 But if your heart does relent, though in a small 
 degree, know it is a call from the God of love. 
 And "to-day, if you will hear his voice, harden 
 not your heart." To-day resolve, God being your 
 helper, to escape for your life. Regard not 
 money ! All that a man hath will he give for his 
 life ! Whatever you lose, lose not your soul : 
 nothing can countervail that loss. Immediately 
 quit the horrid trade ; at all events, be an honest 
 man. 
 
 4. This equally concerns every merchant who 
 is engaged in the slave trade. It is you that in- 
 duce the African villain to sell his countrymen ; 
 in order thereto, to steal, rob, murder men, wo- 
 men, and children, without number, by enabling 
 the English villain to pay him for so doing, whom 
 you overpay for his execrable labor. It is your 
 money that is the spring of all, that empowers him 
 to go on : so that whatever he or the African 
 does in this matter is all your act and deed. 
 And is your conscience quite reconciled to this 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 225 
 
 Does it never reproach you at all ? Has gold en- 
 tirely blinded your eyes, and stupified your heart T 
 Can you see, can you feel, no harm therein ? Is 
 it doing as you would be done to ? Make the 
 case your own. "Master," said a slave at 
 Liverpool to the merchant that owned him, 
 ''what, if some of my countrymen were to come 
 here, and take away my mistress, and Master Tom- 
 my, and Master Billy, and carry them into our 
 country, and make them slaves, how would you 
 like it 1 His answer was worthy of a man : " I will 
 never buy a slave more while I live." 0 let his 
 resolution be yours ! Have no more any part in 
 this detestable business. Instant;ly leave it to 
 those unfeeling wretches, who 
 
 Laugh at human nature and compassion ! 
 Be you a man, not a wolf, a devourer of the 
 human species ! Be merciful, that you may obtain 
 mercy I 
 
 5. And this equally concerns every gentleman 
 that has an estate in our American plantations • 
 yea, all slaveholders, of whatever rank and degree : 
 seeing men buyers are exactly on a level with men 
 stealers. Indeed you say, "I pay honestly for 
 my goods; and I am not concerned to know how 
 they are come by." Nay, but you are ; you are 
 deeply concerned to know they are honestly 
 come by. Otherwise you are a partaker with a 
 thief, and not a jot honester than him. But yon 
 know they are not honestly come by ; you know 
 they are procured by means nothing near so 
 
236 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERT. 
 
 innocent as picking of pockets, house breaking, 
 or robbery upon the highway. You know they 
 are procured by a deliberate series of more com- 
 plicated villainy (of fraud, robbery, and murder) 
 than was ever practiced either by Mohammedans 
 or Pagans.; in particular, by murders, of all 
 kinds : by the blood of the innocent poured upon 
 the ground lilce water. Now, it is your money 
 that pays the merchant, and through him the 
 captain and the African butchers. You therefore 
 are guilty, yea, principally guilty, of all these 
 frauds, robberies, and murders. You are the 
 -spring that puts all the rest in motion; they 
 would not stir a step without you : therefore the 
 blood of all these wretches who die before their 
 time, whether in their country or elsewhere, lies 
 upon your head. "The blood of thy brother" 
 (for, whether 'thou wilt believe it or no, such he 
 is in the sight of Him that made him) crieth 
 against thee from the earth," from the ship, 
 and from the waters. 0, whatever it costs, put a 
 stop to its cry before it be too late ; instantly, at 
 any price, were it the half of your goods, deliver 
 thyself from blood-guiltiness! Thy hands, thy 
 bed, thy furniture, thy house, thy lands, are at 
 present stained with blood. Surely it is enough, 
 accumulate no more guilt; spill no more the 
 blood of the innocent! Do not hire another 
 to shed blood ; do not pay him for doing it ! 
 Whether you are a Christian or no, show yourself 
 
 i 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 227 
 
 a man! Be not more savage than a lion or 
 a bear. 
 
 6. Perhaps you will say, " I do not buy any 
 negroes ; I only use those left me by my father." 
 So far is well ; but is it enough to satisfy your 
 own conscience? Had your father, have you, has 
 any man living, a right to use another as a slave 7 
 It cannot he, even setting Revelation aside. It cannot 
 be, that either war, or contract, can give any man 
 such a property in another as he has in his sheep 
 and oxen. Much less is it possible that any child 
 of man should ever be born a slave. Liberty is 
 the right of every human creature ; as soon as he 
 breathes the vital air ; and no human law can de- 
 prive him of that right which he derives from the law 
 of nature. 
 
 If, therefore, you have any regard to justice (to 
 say nothing of mercy, nor the revealed law of 
 God,) render unto all their ^ue. Give liberty to 
 whom liberty is due, that is,^o every child of man, 
 to every partaker of human nature. Let none 
 serve you but by his own act and deed, by his 
 own voluntary choice. Away with all whips, all 
 chains, all compulsion! Be gentle toward all 
 men ; and see that you invariably do unto everj 
 OTie as you would he should do unto you. 
 
 7. 0 thou God of love, thou who art loving 
 every man, and whose mercy is over ^ll thy 
 works ; thou who art the Father of th" spirits a 
 all flesh, and who art rich in mercy luito all ; thca 
 who hast mingled of one blood all the nations ui 
 
228 THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 on earth ; have compassion upon these outcasts 
 of "men, who are trodden down as dung upon the 
 earth ! Arise, and help these that have no helper, 
 whose blood is spilt upon the ground like water ! 
 Are not these also the work of thine own hands, 
 the purchase of thy Son's blood ? Stir them up 
 to cry unto thee in the land of their captivity ; 
 and let their complaint come up before thee ; let 
 it enter into thy ears ! Make even those that 
 lead them away captive to pity them, and tuni 
 their captivity as the rivers in the south. 0 
 burst thou all their chains in sunder; more 
 especially the chains of their sins ! Thou Sav- 
 ior of all, make them free, that they may be free 
 indeed ! 
 
 The servile progeny of Ham 
 
 Seize as the purchase of thy blood ! 
 
 Let all the Heathens know thy name : 
 From idols to the living God 
 
 The dark Americans convert, 
 
 And shine in every Pagan heart ! 
 
 London, Feb. 26, 1791, 
 
 Dear Sib, — Unless the Divine power has raised you up 
 to be as Athanasiv,s contra mundum, [Athanasius against 
 the world,] I sec noi how you can go through your glori- 
 1 O'lRp.nterprise, in opposing that execrable villainy, which 
 I is the u;andal of religion, of England, and of human na- 
 ture. Tjtviess God has raised you up for this very thing, 
 you will be vorn out by ihe opposition of men and devils. 
 But, " if God U-, for you, who can be against you ?" Are 
 111 of them together stronger than God ? 0 " be not weary 
 In well doing !" Go on, in the name of God, and in tba 
 
THOUGHTS UPON SLAVERY. 
 
 229 
 
 power of Lis might, till even American slavery (the vilest 
 that ever saw the sun) shall vanish away before it. 
 
 Reading this morning a tract, wrote by a poor African, 1 
 was peculiarly struck by that circumstance, — that a man 
 who has a black skin, being wronged or outraged by a 
 white man, can have no redress ; it being a law, in all 
 our colonies, that the oath of a black against a white goes 
 for nothing. What villainy is this ? 
 
 That He who has guided you from your youth up, may 
 continue to strengthen you in this and all things, is the 
 prayer of, dear sir. 
 
 Your affectionate servant, 
 
 JOHN WESLEY. 
 
 This letter is supposed to have been addressed to Mr. 
 Wilberforce, and, as its date shows, was written by Mr. 
 Wesley only four days before his death. — Ed. [0/ tht 
 Methodist Book Room.'i 
 
INDEX. 
 
 A 
 
 rASC. 
 
 Asbury's Journal, Extracts from 33 
 
 Abolition condemned by the General Conference,. .50, 51 
 
 Asbury's power, 129 
 
 B 
 
 Baltimore Conference on the General Rule, 53 
 
 Bishops' power, Ill 
 
 Examples of Oppression, 114, 116 
 
 Argument for it, 117 
 
 Blackstone on Slavery 213 
 
 C 
 
 Conference, action of 1780, 'S4, '83, '8S, 36 
 
 Christian Guardian on Slavery, 56 
 
 Colored testimony resolution, 64 
 
 Comfort's case, 165 
 
 D 
 
 Discipline of ISOO on Slavery, 33 
 
 Davis, Samwel, a letter from 41 
 
 Disciplinary changes in favor of Slavery, 45, 47 
 
 E 
 
 Everett's testimony, 42 
 
 Emory's history, 45 
 
 G 
 
 Garretson's experience, 43 
 
 Georgia Conference on Slavery 55 
 
 General Conlerence of 1840, on Slavery, 59, 63 
 
 of 1844, " 165 
 
 Golden rule for Slavery, 03 
 
 I. 
 
 Laws of Methodism how enacted, 109 
 
 Laymens' rights argued, 132—145 
 
 Local Preachers support ! 155 
 
 Letter to Wilberforce, . ..^ .. , 22S 
 
M 
 
 Methodist Episcopacy examined, P9— 108 
 
 Memliership of Ihe M. E. Church how controlled 113 
 
 Dr. Bond's testimony 131 
 
 Ministerial Authority in that church, 125 
 
 N 
 
 New York Conference, c.i. Abolitionism, 52, 53 
 
 O 
 
 Ohio Conference m. Abolitionism, 52 
 
 O'Keliey's proposition 11% 
 
 P 
 
 Primitive cliurcb government 119 
 
 Power of Methodist Bishops, 126 — 9 
 
 Presiding Elder power 130 
 
 Providence Conference on the Discipline 187 
 
 R 
 
 Resolution Bishop Waugh refused to put at the New 
 
 England Conference, 1S42, 64, 113 
 
 Reform impracticable, 147 
 
 Republicanism and Methodism compared, 57 — 64 
 
 Review by E. Smith, of Methodism and Slavery, 170—190 
 S 
 
 Secession from pro-Slavery churches argued, .... 65 — 86 
 " from the M. E. Church noticed from 1791 to 1842, 152-4 
 T 
 
 Thoughts on Slavery, by John Wesley, 193—229 
 
 W 
 
 Withdrawal of Horton, Scott and Sunderland, 3 
 
 do of Luther Lee 16 
 
 Wesley and the English Wesleyans on Slavery, . . . 25 — 28 
 
 Wesley's Opinion of Bishops and Elders, 144 
 
 in favor of church independence, 145 
 
I 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CArtOHO 
 
 
 
 PKIMTBOIHU.a.. 
 
BX8393 .S42 
 
 The grounds of secession from the M.E. 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00044 0778