Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: March 16, 1861., [Electronic resource]. You can also browse the collection for Isaac Gibson or search for Isaac Gibson in all documents.

Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:

Hour of Meeting.--Mr. Kemper offered a resolution that on and after Wednesday next the House meet at 10 o'clock. Adopted. The Adjutant General.--When Senate bill to "increase the pay of the Adjutant General for services rendered the State in the year 1858-59 " came up, Mr. Kemper asked that it be passed. Mr. Holloway hoped that it would be referred. Mr. Kemper said such a course was unnecessary, the Military Committee having reported a similar bill heretofore by unanimous vote. Mr. Gibson of Jefferson, denied the accuracy of the statement. He was a member of said committee, and had always been opposed to any such bill. Mr. Crane said the John Brown raid had initiated a system of solicitation for increased pay by a great many. The official duties of the Adjutant General had no doubt been much increased by Brown's inroad; for Gov. Wise, on his own responsibility, had given him nearly $1,000 additional pay. The committee then reported a bill making him a salaried office
on of a traveling slaveholder? Answer — No. By J. N. Davis — Are the interpretations of the doctrine of the Church by the Bishops authoritative? Answer.--Certainly not. I am not aware of having given any interpretation of Church doctrine. By what constitutional power was the New Chapter introduced into the Discipline by the General Conference? Answer — By the same power by which any other matter is introduced which is not contrary to the restrictive rules. By Isaac Gibson.--Doesn't the New Chapter determine the moral position of the Church, and make it contrary to the law of God, etc., to hold slaves? Answer.--It does so determine in regard to holding slaves as chattels, whatever that means. E. P. Phelps was opposed to separation from the M. E. Church. He saw no sufficient reason for it. The New Chapter, as I view it, is not sufficient. I say 'tis not law. As I interpret it. it does not interfere with slave-holding in membership or preachers. <