By this eminently Christian enactment the General Conference made provision for peace and quiet in view of the threatened withdra\val of a large and powerful portion of the Church. History must, however, record that the Southern delegates, at a meeting held on the day following the adjournment, and without waiting for the " necessity" to develop itself, and to be found by the Conferences, called a convention of delegates from the slaveholding Conferences, with a defined ratio of representation, to assemble at Louisville, Ky., on May 1, 1845, invited bishop Andrew to attend and preside in their Conferences, and also issued an address to the min- isters and members in the South, stating what they term "the facts and reasons connected with the pro- posed separation of the Southern Conferences into a dis- tinct organization." This precipitated and virtually decided tlie question of separation. In the controver- sies that followed this summary proceeding, the whole Church was stirred. The various questions involved were discussed in public meetings, in Quarterly and Annual Conferences, in Church periodicals and pam- phlets. Bishop Souk', the senior bishop of the Church, in September called bishop Andrew into the field, to attend with himself the Conferences, in contravention
yi.— M
of the expressed judgment of the General Conference. The slaveholding Conferences appointed delegates to the proposed convention, although several of them had not found the '■ necessity" for a separate organization. The recommendation to change the sixth Kestrictive Rule failed by 2G9 votes to receive the concurrence of the Annual Conferences. The Louisville Convention met May 1, 1845; bishops Soule and Andrew were in at- tendance, and upon invitation presided over its deliber- ations. On May 17 the new Church was organized by the adoption of the following resolution, whose language may seem singular to the curious reader who remembers that what is styled the " provisional plan of separation" gave no direction, authority, or consent for the assem- bling or action of the convention, and that the provi- sions referred to relate solely to the action of the Church separated from, and not at all to the action of the par- ties separating :
"Be it resolved, by the delegates of the several Annual Confei-ences of the Methodist Episcoi.al Chuifh in the slaveholding states, in general riiii\ luiion a-M'nil)lcd, That it is riglit, expedient, and ueces-.uy in cicrt the An- nual Confeiences represented in tlii-^ ('ouMMiiidii into n distinct ecclesiastical connection, separate I'mni ilie jai-is- diction of tlie General Conference of llie ,Mcilii,il;st l^^pis- copal Chni-ch, as at present constituted: and aicoidiiiLjly we, the delegates of said Annual Confeieiicrs artinj,' un- der the ■pr()vi>i(iiial plan (if separation ailopteil by the General ConlVivne.' .iri^ll, il.. -solemnly i/,v/,nv ilie juris- diction hitlierlo c xeiiiseil o\i !■ saiil Annual L'onlevences by llio General Cniirerence ot tlie Metliodist Ki>iscopal Chnrel; ,//'//./; e/.s.s,, //■,./,■ aiul that said Annual Confei- ences -hall l,e, and iliey hereby are, coj(s<2?itte? a separate
ecclesia-t:eal rnnneiii under tlie provisional plan of
separation anav-aid, and l.aseil upon the Discipline of the Methoilist l';pi-i'(.pal('hureli,eonipr(di(ai(lini,Mlie doctrines aud entire lU'iral, ei elc-ia-Ueal, and eanonical rules and regulatiniis (j1' said l)is;ipline, except, only in so far as ver- bal alterations mav W necessary to a distinct orjjauiza- tion, and t i be known by the style and title of 'Tue Meth- odist EiaseieAi. Ciiciuai, Sodtu.'"
By this secession the Methodist Episcopal Church lost 1345 travelling and 316G local preachers, and 495,288 members. Bishop Andrew at once gave in his adhesion to the new Church, and bishop Soule followed him at its first General Conference in Maj', 1846.
Troubles soon occurred upon the border line of the two churches. The Southern General Conference took summary possession of the newspapers within its terri- tory, and of the Charleston Book Depository, with their books, notes, presses, etc., all of which belonged to the Book Concern. The understanding in relation to boun- daries was not kept. Though the rule had not been changed, a pro rata division of the Book Concern was demanded on pain of a suit at law. In this state of af- fairs, the General Conference of 1848 was met by the Kev. Dr. Lovick Pierce, as delegate from the Church South, bearing the " Christian salutations" of that body, and proposing fraternal relations between the two churches; but the existing difficulties were so evidently incompat- ible with the proposed fraternity, that it could not " at present" be entered into, though all personal courtesies, with an invitation to a seat within the bar, were tendered to Dr. I'ierce. As the report on the Declaration was an enactment of the General Conference, it was, like any other enactment, repealable at its pleasure; and in the ex- ercise of its wisdom it said, " Having found, upon clear and incontestable evidence, that the three fundamental conditions of said proposed plan have severally failed, and the failure of either of them separately being suip- cient to render it null and void, and having ft)und the practical working of said plan incompatible with certain great constitutional principles elsewhere asserted, we have found and declared the whole and every part of said provisional plan to be null and void." But in its desire to amicably adjust the claims made by the Church South upon the funds of the Book Concern, it authorized the book agents to offer to submit them to disinterested arbiters, provided eminent counsel learned in the law should advise them that it could be legally done : other- wise, and in case a suit at law should be commenced, to propose an arbitration under authority of the court; and