The division of this Church (or secession, as some call it, of the Church South) has as yet resulted, so far as we can see, in no advantage to the slave. The southern portion or branch is not more pro-slavery than before; and the northern division occupies precisely the ground maintained when the resolutions of 1836 and 1840 were adopted, and when there were embraced within her communion the owners of 200,000 slaves. SLAVEHOLDING IS NOT A BAR TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH NORTH. Ten or eleven conferences are now slaveholding, and between 30 and 40,000 slaves are owned at the present time by members of this church. The Baltimore Conference, which belongs to the church North, passed in 1836 the following resolution: "Resolved, That this Conference disclaims any fellowship with abolitionism. On the contrary, while it is determined to maintain its well known, and long established position, by keeping the traveling preachers composing its own body, free from slavery; it is also determined not to hold connexion with any ecclesiastical body, that shall make non-slaveholding a condition of membership in the Church." This conference, so far from regarding slaveholding in the _membership_ a sin, seems to consider it a virtue, and a condition of fellowship. An effort to introduce the slavery question into the last General Conference was defeated, speakers were choked down, and the conference closed in disorder. Since the meeting of that body a number of Conferences have passed resolutions calling for the adoption of a rule which would exclude slaveholders from the church. Some strong men[18] seem determined not to rest the question until there is a semblance at least of consistency between the professions and practice of Methodism on slavery. This church has been "as much as ever deploring the evils of slavery,"[19] for scores of years, and as _much as ever_ strengthening and building up the iniquity! And as a Methodist writer in the _Northern C. Advocate_ in a late article asks--"Is it not high time for honest and God-fearing anti-slavery ministers and members of the Methodist Episcopal Church, to inquire whether in her official position, her anti-slavery professions and character are not all a _mere sham_!" It is to be feared that the good men of this church, who are laboring to effect its renovation from this foul sin, are doomed to disappointment, as many others, who have preceded them, have been. The fact that three new slaveholding conferences will be represented in the next General Conference of this body, augurs unfavorably. METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH.