Such was the legislation of a body of ministers with reference to a subject over which they had no control, provided the laws themselves did not admit of emancipation, which they themselves assumed to be the fact. Hence, the adoption of a proviso which in every case, taking things as they were, either nullified the rule or made it easy for a member or a minister to retain his slaves; for whenever he determined to own slaves it was easy to make it appear that it was in accordance with justice and mercy to retain those already in possession, or that under the law it was impracticable to set them free. Such legislation would seem to be sufficiently absurd, but it is amazing that an intelligent body of men should gravely attempt to compel a preacher or member to emancipate a slave at an expiration of a term of years after having surrendered ownership and control of same. The only theory conceivable that can relieve the conference of the accomplishment of a solemn mockery is the supposition that they, having confidence in the justice of the future, must have believed themselves to be anticipating civil legislation—that the legal emancipation of the slave was an event which the immediate future must produce. However, the attitude of the conference on this subject is of great historical value, bringing into clear relief, as it does, the strong conviction of the Methodist body of Christians that slavery was a great moral evil, the existence of which was deplorable, and to be opposed by every means attached to which there was any hope of its gradual abolishment.[40] The conference of 1818, which met at Nashville, repealed the regulations of the conference of 1817, and decided that the “printed rules on slavery, in the form of discipline” was full and sufficient on that subject.[41] The conference of 1819 also met at Nashville and decided “that no man who is known to hold slaves is to be admitted to the office of deacon or elder.”[42] Peter Burum and Gilbert D. Taylor, who were recommended for admission to the ministry, were rejected by this conference because they were slaveholders.[43] Several applicants for deacon’s orders were rejected for the same reason.