third day--evening session.
The Convention assembled at 7 1-2 P. M.--After the usual religious exercises, the minutes were read and approved.
R. Stockett Matthews
, of Baltimore
, addressed the Convention
He came here to represent East Fairfax Circuit.
He would plead for the Church
He thought something must be done, but he was not for immediate secession.
The New Chapter was an evasion by the General Conference of that which they had neither the courage nor the power to accomplish by law. Tear out everything from the Discipline on Slavery, but let us wait until a request for this can be accepted or refused.--Then, Maryland
can go hand in hand; otherwise, we must part.
came to save the Church
on the Border.
was for secession.
He was not for delay.
The life of the Church
was at stake.
Sixteen years delay have but imposed new burdens.
The General Conference will do nothing for us. Delay one year and the Virginia
membership will have gone to other Churches for rest.
If we separate, and the General Conference abrogates the Chapter, he was for return to the M. E. Church
In law we are entitled to our property, and the Courts
will sustain us in our demand.
He believed all Baltimore
would stand by our action.
He believed that cessation of the slavery agitation would check fanaticism and disunion.
John C. Harkness
, of Washington city
, said that hither to he had been laboring for division.
Now he must cease those efforts.
In view of the fact that without compromise we must be ruined, he was for delay.
He then offered a substitute for all plans before the Convention
This paper proposed one year's delay, and pledged for separation then, if the fullest redress was not given.
, of Baltimore
, was willing to go for any plan by which separation could be delayed one year — otherwise the plough share is run through Baltimore
and the District of Columbia.
The old, honored men of Baltimore
are now on their knees pleading with God for the unity of the Church
Brethren, don't go yet!
He quoted from Calhoun
, and Webster
, to show the disastrous effects of separation in Church upon the State
S. V. Taylor
, of Springfield, Va.
, thought he knew the disease of Virginia
better than the Baltimore
He reviewed the work in Virginia
, and plead for the life of the Church
This was to be preserved by immediate separation.
might suffer, but would not be slain.
But we of Virginia
The discussion was continued by W. Smith
and Col. McPherson
, of Virginia
, and W. R. Woodward
, of Washington
, each pleading for one year's delay as necessary to save the Conference.
By a vote of 48 to 41, the Convention
adjourned at about 12 P. M.
Saturday--10 o' clock P. M.
The Laymen's Convention passed the majority report about 7 P. M., on Saturday, by a vote of 91 to 32.
All the Washington city
, and part of the Baltimore
delegates voted against it.
Its provisions are:
- Separation, immediate, from M. E. Church.
- The possibility of a re-union, if during the coming season, the Annual Conferences guarantee an extra General Conference, an ignoring of slavery in the discipline, and the control of a suitable part of the periodicals of the Church by the border.
The Convention adjourned sine die.
The Virginia delegates are elated.
The Washington city
and many Maryland
delegates are much depressed, considering the action too precipitate, and calculated to split their
The memorial will be offered to the Conference to-morrow.