<y 
 
 ^ 
 
 DUKE 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 DIVINITY SCHOOL 
 LIBRARY 
 
 I 
 

 
 T v. 
 
 Of) \ 
 
HISTORY OF THE 
 
 METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
HISTORY 
 
 M 
 
 OF THE 
 
 METHODIST PROTESTANT 
 CHURCH: 
 
 GIVING 
 
 A GENERAL VIEW OF THE CAUSES AND EVENTS 
 
 THAT LED TO THE 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF THAT CHURCH; 
 
 AND A MORE PARTICULAR ACCOUNT OP 
 
 TRANSACTIONS IN NORTH CAROLINA, 
 
 j*[ eber fie fore jjufiltsfieU. 
 
 WITH 
 
 AN APPENDIX, 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 A REVIEW OF THE ORGANIZATION OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL 
 
 CHURCH, THE INTRODUCTION OF EPISCOPACY, AND THE 
 
 EXCLUSION OF THE LAITY FROM THE COUNCILS 
 
 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 BY REV. JOHN PARIS, 
 
 OF THE N. CAROLINA. CONFERENCE. 
 
 BALTIMORE: 
 PRINTED BY SHERWOOD & CO. 
 
 N. W. CORNER BALTIMORE AND GAY STS. 
 
 1849. 
 
. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1849, 
 By JOHN PARIS, 
 In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, for the 
 State of Maryland. 
 
, 
 
 
 PREFACE, pzi 
 
 The motives that induce an author to present his 
 work to the public often become the subject of spec- 
 ulation. The writer, in setting forth this volume, begs 
 leave to assure his readers that he is actuated by 
 no ambitious or sinister motives, but his object is to 
 vindicate and place truth in her proper position, 
 and to do justice to the memory and characters of 
 some who are no more numbered among the liv- 
 ing. To this end the late Dr. John F. Bellamy had 
 collected materials for such a work, but he was 
 snatched away by the hand of death before it was 
 begun. The materials thus collected fell into the 
 hands of the late Rev. William Bellamy, who, al- 
 though far advanced in life, had determined to get 
 some friend to assist him in writing and publishing 
 a history of reform in the "Old Roanoke District," 
 and had commenced arranging the documents rela- 
 ting to the same, when death called him, also, away 
 to the spirit land. At the suggestions and in com- 
 pliance with the wishes of some of my Christian 
 brethren, both of the ministry and laity, I consented 
 to undertake to write out the contemplated work. 
 
 629562 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 In the outset it was my intention to write a 
 "History of the Methodist Protestant Church in 
 North Carolina;" but at the suggestion of a minis- 
 terial brother of an adjoining conference, for whom 
 I entertain the highest regard, I consented to alter 
 the plan, after I had made considerable progress, 
 and to give a "general view of the subject of re- 
 form throughout the United States, and a particular 
 or definite account of its rise in Carolina." This 
 change must account for the character of the former 
 part of the work. 
 
 Circumstances have demanded such a work. 
 Nearly all the "original reformers" in the ministry 
 of this state have gone down to the grave ; the 
 motives by which they were actuated have long 
 been impugned and misrepresented, and grati- 
 tude demands that justice should be done to their 
 memory. 
 
 One of those, who was a faithful veteran in the 
 days of "reform," but who is now no more, has 
 left behind him a well written essay upon this sub- 
 ject. After expressing a desire that such a histori- 
 cal account should be written, he adds, " The writer 
 of this cannot suppress the belief that a similar spirit 
 to that which hung the bones of Cromwell in chains 
 to gratify the resentment of monarchy against re- 
 publicanism, is here in the old North State, and 
 
PREFACE. VI 1 
 
 ready to pounce upon the reputation of every con- 
 sistent and faithful reformer, so soon as they and 
 their efficient friends have gone the way of all the 
 earth." 
 
 The sources from whence the writer has derived 
 his materials for the work are the papers and docu- 
 ments collected by Dr. Bellamy, and manuscripts 
 and pamphlets forwarded by brethren from dif- 
 ferent places. I have also gleaned many articles 
 and historical documents from the columns of the 
 "Mutual Rights," and "Mutual Rights and Chris- 
 tian Intelligencer." The object of the writer has 
 been to state facts as they transpired, therefore he 
 has drawn largely upon documents written and pub- 
 lished by the actors themselves. 
 
 Tn the Appendix, which contains a review of the 
 policy adopted by the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 in her organization, the introduction of episcopacy 
 and the exclusion of the laity from her councils, in 
 her rule-making department, it has been our object 
 to show that the reformers had just cause to peti- 
 tion for a change in that government, and ask for 
 an acknowledgment of their ecclesiastical rights. 
 
 Throughout the entire work the object of the 
 author has been to exhibit truth with its natural 
 claims. If in this he has failed, and error has stolen 
 into his pages, it is his misfortune and not bis fault. 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 He pleads not infallibility, but rectitude of intention. 
 The volume has been written, with the exception 
 of a few pages, amidst the anxieties, cares, duties 
 and toils of an itinerant life. And in this place 
 the writer most respectfully returns his thanks to 
 those highly esteemed Christian brethren who have 
 so kindly afforded him facilities for the prosecution 
 of his work: and with a willingness that the book 
 shall stand or fall according to its merits, it is here- 
 by submitted to the patrons of religious liberty by 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 North Carolina, Mat, 1849. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Dissatisfaction among the Local Ministry in North Carolina on 
 account of the encroachments of the General Conference. — 
 Address to the Bishops and Virginia Annual Conference. — 
 Circular to the District Conference. — Memorial to the Gen- 
 eral Conference of 1824, 13 
 
 CHAPTER II . 
 
 Meeting of Reformers in Baltimore. — Baltimore Union Society 
 formed. — Formation of the Roanoke Union Society; — Its 
 Constitution and Circular. — Trial and defence of Rev. W. 
 W.Hill, 41 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Protest of the Roanoke Union Society against the ninth section 
 of Discipline. — Formation and Constitution of Granville Union 
 Society in North Carolina. — Trials and expulsions of some of 
 its members. — Correspondence between Ivey Harris and Rev. 
 William Compton with regard to the expulsions, 86 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 Reform in Tennessee. — Trial of Rev. D. B. Dorsey before the 
 Baltimore Annual Conference. — Letter of Rev. H. B. Bas- 
 com to Mr. Dorsey. — Rev. Mr. Dorsey's reply, giving an ac- 
 count of his trial. — Trials and expulsions of the Rev. Dr. 
 Jennings and others of the Baltimore Union Society, by the 
 preacher in charge, Rev. J. M. Hanson, 127 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Association of the Expelled Reformers in Baltimore. — Declar- 
 ation set forth, and withdrawal of ladies in the city. — Gen- 
 eral Convention of reformers in Baltimore in 1827. — Sched- 
 ule of Union Societies. — Resolutions of Roanoke Union 
 Society. — Letter of Rev. William Compton to that body. — 
 Review of the Letter by Committee of Correspondence,. . . . 169 
 
 629562 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Resolutions of the General Conference of 1828. — Notification 
 of Rev Mr. Compton to the ministers of the Roanoke Union 
 Society. — Examination of the grounds assumed by Rev. Mr. 
 Compton. — Trials of the Local Ministers at Horeb. — Expul- 
 sions of the same. — Expulsions at Albemarle, in the eastern 
 part of North Carolina, , 197 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Resolutions of the Union Society in Cincinnati. — Trials and ex- 
 pulsions of ministers. — Secession of a large body of members 
 from the M. E. Church.— Letter of Dr. Bishop to Rev. Mr. 
 Wright.— Call of a General Convention for 1828, 231 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 General Convention of 1828. — Articles of Association adopted 
 by the Convention. — Adoption of the Articles of Association 
 by the reformers generally. — Persecution of reformers in 
 Virginia. — Progress of reform during 1829. — Letters and 
 Reports from the agents appointed by the Convention. — Let- 
 ters from Rev. G. Brown. — Extract of a Letter from Rev. 
 A. McCaine 255 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Organization of the North Carolina Conference. — Adoption of 
 the Constitution and Discipline. — Persecution of reformers in 
 western Carolina. — Expulsion of Rev. Travis Jones. — Organ- 
 ization of associated Methodist Churches and rapid spread of 
 reform principles in that part of the state. — Statistical table 
 of the ministers and laymen expelled for their principles of 
 reform in the United States. — First Virginia Annual Confer- 
 ence. — Pennsylvania, Alabama and Georgia Conferences. — 
 Adoption of the conventional articles by a body of Methodist 
 Societies in W. New York, and organization of the Genesee 
 Conference. — Vermont and Tennessee Conferences — General 
 Convention of 1830. — Constitution and Discipline adopted,. . 287 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 General Conference of 1834.— General Conference of 1838. — 
 Excitement in that body upon the subject of Slavery. — Gen- 
 eral Conference of 1842.— General Conference of 1846. — 
 Boundaries of the Annual Conferences. — Statistical Table. — 
 Concluding Remarks, 315 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Episcopacy. — Ordination among Methodist Preachers in Vir- 
 ginia in 1779.— Letter of Mr. Wesley to the American 
 Methodists, dated September 10, 1784. — Remarks upon the 
 preceding letter. — Dr. Coke's letter of authority from Mr. 
 Wesley. — Dr. Coke's letter to Mr. Wesley. — Charles Wesley 
 to his brother John. — Extracts from Rev. Jesse Lee and Rev. 
 James O'Kelley, 359 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury assume the title of bishop. — Re- 
 marks upon the same. — Letter from Mr. Wesley to a friend. 
 — Letter from Mr. Wesley to Mr. Asbury, remonstrating 
 with him about the title "bishop." — Letter from Dr. Coke 
 to Bishop White of Philadelphia, proposing a union of the 
 Methodist and Episcopalian Churches. — Letter from Bishop 
 White to one of his friends. — Dr. Coke's certificate to the 
 conference. — Dr. Coke's letter to Mr. Wilberforce, soliciting 
 the appointment of bishop in connexion with the Church of 
 England to India. — Remarks upon the foregoing, 367 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The right of the laity to participate in the councils of the church 
 examined and vindicated from Scripture. — An examination of 
 the steps taken in the organization of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church and the exclusion of the laity from participating in 
 her councils. — The justice and propriety of that measure 
 examined. — Remarks in vindication of the character of Rev. 
 James O'Kelley, 393 
 
HISTORY OF THE 
 
 METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Dissatisfaction among- the Local Ministry in North Carolina on ac- 
 count of the encroachments of the General Conference. — Address 
 to the Bishops and Virginia Annual Conference. — Circular to 
 the District Conference. — Memorial to the General Conference 
 of 1824. 
 
 The chronicles of the past, whether sacred or 
 profane, are interesting to the inquiring mind. By 
 resorting to the archives of history we are enabled 
 to separate truth from error, and offer contradiction 
 to falsehood when she appears under the garb of 
 tradition. History tells us of the sufferings and 
 toils through which our forefathers passed in con- 
 tending for that liberty which we as a nation enjoy. 
 And it is also to history that we must look for a 
 true and faithful narrative of the causes and events 
 that led to the securement of our religious liberties. 
 They should ever be watched with a jealous eye, 
 and guarded with the most careful solicitude, for 
 2 
 
14 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 whatever belongs to our spiritual interests, or per- 
 tains to our religious rights, is most unquestionably 
 of vital importance. 
 
 The history of Methodism for the last century 
 testifies to the fact that the great Methodist family 
 are now divided into several distinct ecclesiastical 
 denominations. And although such denominational 
 divisions have taken place, both in England and 
 America, yet so far as the doctrines and means of 
 grace taught by Mr. Wesley are concerned, they 
 are all of the same faith, and subscribe to the same 
 doctrine of salvation. The inquiry then mignt 
 arise, what are the causes that have led to these 
 several divisions among the believers in the doc- 
 trines taught by Wesley ? The answer is, men have 
 had their ecclesiastical rights withheld from them ; 
 and in order to enjoy them they were sought in new 
 organizations. The student in ecclesiastical his- 
 tory will learn that in every instance which has 
 resulted in division, these rights have been with- 
 held by the ministry, exercising authoritative pow- 
 er, and who, evincing a disposition to lord it over 
 God's heritage, have thereby produced schism in 
 the body. 
 
 That every citizen of our country has an inalien- 
 able right to be heard in the law or rule-making 
 department, either in person or by proxy, delegated 
 by his suffrage, is a doctrine that surely no Ameri- 
 can will deny. Again, that which is politically 
 right cannot be religiously wrong; and if we are 
 entitled to such right in the State, according to the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 15 
 
 principle laid down, we are entitled to the same in 
 the church. 
 
 The Bible is admitted among all Protestant 
 denominations of Christians to be the only rule of 
 faith and practice, and consequently it becomes the 
 standard of religious morals. Hence we receive it 
 as an axiom of sound doctrine that no man should 
 be divested of ecclesiastical privileges or excluded 
 from the communion of the church of Christ, ex- 
 cept it be for conduct incompatible with the pre- 
 cepts and doctrines of the word of God. 
 
 The Methodist Protestant Church was originally 
 composed of seceders from the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. The causes of the secession existed in 
 the polity of the M. E. Church; and as those causes 
 have not been generally understood, and as the mo- 
 tives and characters of the seceders or " Reformers" 
 have been impugned, it is the design of the writer 
 to give a faithful narrative of all that relates to the 
 same, so far as the records and documents extant, 
 which relate to those things, afford information. 
 The General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church which met in 1S20 adopted a rule granting 
 to the local preachers a charter, by virtue of which 
 the local preachers in each presiding elder's district 
 were permitted to meet together annually in Dis- 
 trict Conference. According to the charter, the 
 presiding elder by virtue of his office was to pre- 
 side as chairman. The prerogatives of this con- 
 ference extended to the granting of license to preach, 
 recommending preachers to the Annual Conference 
 
16 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 for the itinerancy and for orders, &c. Although 
 this charter had the semblance of a boon, still the 
 local preachers as well as the laity were without 
 any voice whatever either in the Annual or Gen- 
 eral Conferences. The General Conference that 
 granted the local preachers' conference charter also 
 proceeded to enact some special rules for the govern- 
 ment of the local ministry, without any delegated 
 authority whatever from them. The assembling 
 of themselves together in the District Conferences 
 afforded them an ample opportunity of interchang- 
 ing with each other their views with regard to their 
 rights as ministers of the church of Christ. Ever 
 since the establishment of the governing policy of 
 the M. E. Church there were some lew to be found 
 within her pales who questioned the high claims of 
 the itinerant ministry -to exclusive legislation and 
 authoritative control. Soon after the rise of the 
 General Conference of 1S20, the subject began to 
 be discussed by many who advocated the right of 
 the local ministry and laity to representation in the 
 rule-making department of the church. It was 
 among the local ministry (particularly of the south) 
 that the principles of the polity of the M. E. Chui-ch 
 were at this time severely questioned ; for feeling 
 themselves, by virtue of their calling and ordination 
 to the ministry, entitled to the same rights and 
 privileges with their brethren in the itinerancy, and 
 finding themselves without a voice or representation 
 in the rule-making department of the church, and 
 at the same time the itinerant ministry beins; vested 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 17 
 
 with the making as well as the execution of those 
 laws, they very naturally concluded that a disparity 
 existed, unwarranted by the word of God or the 
 nature and obligations of the ministerial office. At 
 the first meeting of Roanoke District Conference of 
 local preachers (after the granting of the charter) 
 the subject began to be earnestly discussed. The 
 General Conference of 1820, as has been remarked, 
 passed some special rules for the government ot 
 the local ministry, unrepresented as they were in 
 that body. These rules had no application what- 
 ever to the laity. To the local ministry it seemed 
 to be a stretch of power unwarranted in the nature 
 of right; and as the "march of power is ever on- 
 ward, and its tendency is to accumulation," many 
 of them became alarmed with regard to the safety 
 of their ecclesiastical rights, and, like our fore- 
 fathers, upon the invasion of their rights by the im- 
 position of the celebrated tea tax and stamp act by 
 the parliamentary authority of Britain, they strong- 
 ly protested against such a stretch of power on the 
 part of the General Conference; not on account of 
 the restriction imposed by the rule above mentioned, 
 as many of the advocates of itinerant supremacy 
 have very unjustly and unfairly contended in the 
 South, but on account of the principle involved, legis- 
 lation without representations. They took the 
 ground that the General Conference had no just 
 right to enact a special rule for their government 
 alone without their being represented in that body 
 by delegated authority. -They laid down the true 
 2* 
 
18 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 American principle, and set up their claims of right 
 to the same. In the year 1821* the District Con- 
 ference of local preachers for Roanoke District in 
 North Carolina, in order to bring the attention of 
 their brethren and the church at large to the sub- 
 ject of the encroachments of the General Confer- 
 ence, sent up an address to the Virginia Annual 
 Conference. 
 
 The caption of the address runs in the fol- 
 lowing words : "Address to the Bishops and Vir- 
 ginia Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church." After expressing astonishment at the 
 stretch of power exercised by the General Confer- 
 ence, and a regret that the harmony of the itinerant 
 and local ministry should be threatened or disturbed 
 thereby, the address proceeds, "Much sensibility 
 
 * During the year 1821 the spirit of inquiry among the Method- 
 ist people concerning their ecclesiastical rights seems to have been 
 awakened throughout the United States, both among the ministry 
 and the laity. This was nothing new. The same inquiry per- 
 vaded the Methodist community in 1794. Rev. Jesse Lee says, 
 "The same spirit prevailed in many places, both among our local 
 preachers and private members. Some of them contended that the 
 local preachers ought to have a seat and a vote in all our confer- 
 ences ; and others said there ought to be a delegation of lay mem- 
 bers." (Lee's History of the Methodists, page 213.) About this 
 time the "Western Repository" was gotten up, being edited by 
 William S. Stockton. In this periodical the ecclesiastical rights of 
 the local ministry and laity were discussed with marked ability, 
 great clearness and force, by writers from various parts of the 
 Union. Although the local ministry in Carolina were among the 
 first in asserting and vindicating their rights, yet the laity seem to- 
 have lain dormant upon the question until the formation of the 
 Baltimore Union Society, as will be noticed in its proper place. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 19 
 
 is created, and inquiry is set on foot whether the 
 General Conference possesses any constitutional 
 right, consistent with the articles of the church and 
 the economy of Methodism, to pass such a rule or 
 make such a law. It is considered by some that 
 they have not, because the 24th Article of the Church 
 disallows the idea that the goods, riches, &c, of 
 Christians are common, as touching the right, title 
 and possession of the same, as some do falsely 
 boast. They think, as that article grants to 
 Christian men the exclusive right, title and pos- 
 session of their own property, the fair conse- 
 quence is that the General Conference have no 
 right to impose a restriction upon them in the 
 manufacture or transfer thereof, beyond what the 
 law of the nation, honesty and religion do mani- 
 festly require. 
 
 " We do hereb}^ most earnestly ask the opinion 
 of the Bishops and Conference upon the subject. 
 And if they should be of opinion that the General 
 Conference have the right to pass the aforesaid 
 law, then we would most respectfully ask the 
 Bishops, Conference and traveling preachers at 
 large, whether there be any constitutional limits 
 prescribed in the system of Methodism bej^ond 
 which the General Conference cannot go in lay- 
 ing restrictions upon the local preachers, as a 
 condition of holding their office t And if they 
 think that the system does prescribe limits to 
 the legislative authority of the General Confer- 
 ence, respecting the local preachers, we would 
 
20 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 feel a peculiar satisfaction in seeing the limits 
 of their power fully and plainly stated by proper 
 authority.* 
 
 " But if the traveling preachers are of opinion 
 that the General Conference is under no restriction 
 in that respect, but are at full liberty to require any 
 sacrifices of the local preachers, which they may 
 from time to time think proper to exact; or that the 
 General Conference, in conjunction with the travel- 
 ing preachers at large, are under no constitutional 
 restraint beyond which they cannot go respecting 
 the local preachers; in that case this conference 
 would respectfully ask whether, considering the re- 
 finement and liberality of the country and age in 
 which we live, the vast and growing numbers, the 
 talent, influence, zeal and utility of the local preach- 
 ers, a reform in the system of church government is 
 not necessary, so far, at least, as respects the local 
 preachers, by granting them a charter sufficiently 
 clear to secure thereafter their official dignity and 
 domestic tranquillity from any further encroach- 
 ments ; or else admit them to an equal share in the 
 councils of the church, at least so far as self-gov- 
 ernment is concerned ? For why should the local 
 preachers alone be considered incapable of self- 
 
 *We have inserted this address of the " Roanoke District 
 Conference" of local preachers because the motives of the local 
 preachers have been misrepresented, on account of this very ad- 
 dress. Their object was not to ask a repeal of this rule under the 
 circumstances, but to oppose the grounds taken by the General 
 Conference, to enact special rules for their government without 
 their consent. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 21 
 
 government ? Does a man become a p olitical 
 idiot by becoming a local preacher among the 
 Methodists? 
 
 " But it has been said, if we admit delegates 
 from the local order into the General Conference, 
 we shall form too large a body to do business. To 
 this we reply, fix the ratio upon a large scale, and 
 the number of representatives will be found full 
 small to do business — for example, the Congress of 
 the United States. It has been said that local 
 preachers have local ideas and local prejudices; 
 and if they were admitted into the clerical council, 
 they would corrupt the church and overturn the 
 itinerant plan ! To which we answer by the same 
 mode of reasoning, the itinerant preachers have 
 itinerant ideas and itinerant prejudices. And how 
 can they legislate for local churches without a 
 minute knowledge of their situation and their pecu- 
 liar difficulties ? Be that as it may, we have no 
 desire to take upon us the care of all the churches, 
 and the awful responsibility of governing the church 
 of God, which he purchased with his own blood. 
 We do, however, wish to understand and exercise 
 our rights as Christians and Methodist preachers, 
 and be able to defend, upon the grounds of ScrijJ- 
 ture, reason and common sense, whatever is found in 
 the system of Methodism : that the two armies of 
 the Shulamite may be able to hold the position as- 
 signed them, and with harmonious energy and un- 
 wearied diligence press towards the mark for the 
 prize of the high calling of God in Jesus Christ. 
 
22 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 " We have the honor and happiness to be, with 
 high consideration and great esteem, your fellow 
 laborers in the bonds of the gospel. 
 "On behalf of the conference, 
 
 "Wm. Bellamy, President pro tern. 
 "Jos. B. Hinton, Secretary. 
 
 " December 7th, 1821." 
 
 The language of this address is the language of 
 men who felt that their rights were not safe. The 
 rule of which they complained applied to them 
 alone, as a distinct order of men in the church ; 
 they doubted the right of the General Conference 
 to enact or adopt such a rule with respect to 
 them; and fearing that the same authority might 
 encroach still further upon their right, such was the 
 first step they took to make manifest their views 
 with regard to those rights. It will be perceived 
 that they complain of the stretch of power exer- 
 cised by the General Conference in adopting what 
 they call "the Spirit-making rule," yet they ask for 
 no repeal of that rule, but modestly inquire after 
 their rights, and of the propriety of being repre- 
 sented by authority delegated by their suffrages in 
 that council which had ventured to adopt a rule for 
 their spiritual government. The address reached 
 the Virginia Annual Conference, and upon being 
 read, one of the members moved that it be thrown 
 under the table, but Bishop McKendree, who oc- 
 cupied the chair, interposed, saying, "Feelings, 
 brethren, men's feelings must be respected." The 
 address was laid upon the table, and when it was 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 23 
 
 taken up and considered an answer was ordered to 
 be sent to the petitioners, but through some man- 
 agement or unaccountable delay, the answer was 
 not received by the Roanoke District Conference 
 until two conference years had passed away. 
 
 At the session of the Roanoke District Confer- 
 ence, held at Whitaker s chapel in 1822, a resolu- 
 tion was passed authorizing the secretary to for- 
 ward a copy of the address "to the Bishops and 
 Virginia Annual Conference" to the several Dis- 
 trict Conferences of local preachers throughout the 
 United States, together with a circular letter ac- 
 companying the same. The design in forwarding 
 these documents or addresses to the District Con- 
 ferences was to bring the attention of their brethren 
 abroad to a candid consideration of their common 
 rights as ministers in the church of their choice. 
 The circular is addressed 
 
 To the several District Conferences of the Local Preach- 
 ers of the Methodist Episcopal Church: 
 
 In the economy of Methodism this conference 
 readily perceive much to praise, much to admire 
 on the one hand, and on the other much to censure, 
 much to deplore. The prominent features of our 
 system, our doctrines, our episcopacy, our itinerant 
 plan, our general rules and usages, are so scrip- 
 tural, so apostolic, and contain so much of primi- 
 tive simplicity and piety, that they successfully 
 challenge the whole world for a comparison, and 
 afford us no little exultation that we are members 
 
24 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 of a church so evangelical, so apostolical. These, 
 under the divine blessing, have suddenly caused 
 her to look "forth as the morning, fair as the moon, 
 clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with ban- 
 ners ;" and have marked her victorious course in the 
 Redeemer's cause with a lucid glory, unequaled 
 since the illustrious founders of Christianity entered 
 upon their eternal reward. In these ever to be 
 held sacred features it would be more than sacrilege 
 to wish an innovation. But then on the other hand 
 the enormous prerogatives with which the itine- 
 rancy invested themselves are at variance with "the 
 refinement and liberality of the country and age in 
 which we live," and contrary to the plainest max- 
 ims of common justice. Those who serve the 
 church in the holy office of the ministry certainly 
 deserve to be honored; and no ministers upon the 
 face of the earth can possibly have stronger claims 
 to the highest consideration than our brethren of 
 the itinerancy, yet we cannot discover either reason 
 or propriety in their uniting in themselves solely the 
 entire executive, legislative and judicial powers of 
 the church, and that, too, without assigning any 
 limits or checks or accountability for the due 
 exercise thereof. 
 
 Thus in truth and fact the local ministry of our 
 cmirch — although so numerous, and enriched with 
 so much talent, experience, zeal, influence, use- 
 fulness and devotedness to the church of their 
 best affections, and containing such numbers, who 
 nursed and guarded her in infancy and child- 
 
METHODIST FROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 25 
 
 hood with the tenderest solicitude and faithfulness, 
 and aided in giving her a name and a place among 
 the churches, by the intensity of their labors and 
 exposure — have been driven into local life to seek 
 that repose which worn out lungs, premature decays 
 and complicated afflictions demanded. These 
 tottering remnants and frosted locks of other days, 
 in common with their other local brethren, are not 
 allowed by the traveling connection to be more than 
 mere ciphers in point of authority^ nor Jo rnaintain 
 any better than a kind of proscribed standing. This 
 unprecedented intolerance, the more remarkable 
 because jnyifiious, exists in no other church; nor in 
 any one except ours does less than one-third of the 
 ministry assume the entire control, to the utter ex- 
 clusion of the lar°er co-ordinate branch from even 
 a voice in~ the making of the very laws by which 
 themselves are to be governed. Many noble, gen- 
 erous spirits in the itinerancy regret, as well as 
 ourselves, the retention of this most absurd princi- 
 ple in our Discipline, and would hail that day as a 
 new and happy era in Methodism in which it shall 
 be expunged. 
 
 As local men we are indeed allowed to preach, 
 under certain circumstances; but however suc- 
 cessful our labors or urgent the necessity may be, 
 we have no authority to form a society or to receive 
 a member. We are permitted to receive ordination, 
 after a lengthy probation, provided we can make it 
 appear that our official services are needed ; and 
 veiy latterly we have been rescued from long neg- 
 3 
 
26 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 lected obscurity by the grant of the Local Confer- 
 ence Charter; but then, as if unable to govern our- 
 selves, the presidency thereof is committed to an 
 itinerant minister, who may, whenever he pleases, 
 attempt to prevent the freedom of investigation 
 and stifle complaint. Such doings have already 
 been seen. 
 
 Does the just discontent of the locality arrest the 
 attention of the General Conference ? As if to drive 
 us into silent submission, the "Spirit" making rule 
 is hung over us in terrorem! Do the South and 
 West and North importune the General Conference 
 for the acknowledgment of our rights ? To pacify 
 or amuse us, an ignis faluus toy, the District Con- 
 ference, is given us. Do the deliberations of the 
 District Conference turn on our injuries and the 
 remedy? Certain members of the powers that be 
 threaten to strip us of even this little brief au- 
 thority! Do we as a recognizing conference re- 
 spectfully spread the grievances of the local order 
 before the bishops and members of an Annual 
 Conference, and ask information, advice and re- 
 lief? We are not even favored with a reply ! Here 
 we pause — here close the painful detail — all our 
 wrongs we " must not, will not tell." 
 
 And what is the fault of the local preachers to 
 merit all this contumely? Are we aliens to the 
 commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the cov- 
 enant of promise ? or are we indeed " incapable 
 of self-government ? or must we go in quest of an- 
 other Moses to lead us from our neglected and pro- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 27 
 
 scribed condition into that state of privilege and 
 usefulness to which our numbers and common jus- 
 tice entitle us ? Providence did, indeed, open the 
 auspicious door to our itinerant brethren for the 
 restoration of entire confidence, harmony and cor- 
 dial co-operation between themselves and us when 
 the District Conference measure was under discus- 
 sion. If these conferences had only been made a 
 little more efficient, and one "delegate" from 
 each had been allowed to take a seat in the " Gen- 
 eral Council," with a like number of representa- 
 tives from the Annual Conferences, it would have 
 formed a representation so equal and so reasonable 
 that it would for ever have silenced the voice of 
 murmur ; a concession, magnanimous, would have 
 cemented indissolubly the bonds of concord and 
 ministerial attachment between us. This, how- 
 ever, has been left undone. Justice and self-respect 
 now equally urge us to claim it as a right. 
 
 Notwithstanding the native inanity of the Dis- 
 trict Conferences, brethren, we may make them 
 immensely important. They are pregnant with 
 events of the most momentous kind, and bid fair to 
 be harbingers of good things to come. They are 
 admirably calculated to bring the local preachers 
 together, to form intimate acquaintances ; and, 
 moreover, those heretofore held within the Roanoke 
 District have been largely blessed, both to preachers 
 and people. Therefore, this conference do entreat 
 you, dear brethren, with respectful earnestness, if 
 possible attend them in your respective districts; 
 
28 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 assured as we are a rich harvest of solid satisfaction 
 will be } r our certain reward. The Local Confer- 
 ence of the Roanoke District, in transmitting to 
 your respective conferences copies of our Minutes 
 and of our Address to the Bishops and members of 
 the Virginia Conference, together with this circular 
 letter, seek a reciprocation of the favor. We shall 
 be extremely gratified and obliged by receiving in 
 exchange copies of the Minutes of your respective 
 conferences, together with any communication you 
 may think proper to make. And we particularly 
 ask a friendly correspondence, disclosing such 
 views as you may have, or may form, concerning 
 the claims and the course which the great body of 
 local preachers in America ought to pursue to ob- 
 tain their formal acknowledgment. In the interim 
 would it not be very advisable that each District 
 Conference, at its next meeting, prepare a respect- 
 ful memorial, to be forwarded to the next General 
 Conference, claiming our most obvious rights, 
 either a "charter sufficiently clear to secure there- 
 after our official dignity and domestic tranquillity 
 from any further encroachments, or else to share 
 equally in the councils of the Church?" 
 
 [Signed] Jos. B. Hinton, 
 
 Secretary of the Conference. 
 Washington, N. C, January 1st, 1823. 
 
 The above circular address sets forth the views 
 of the local ministry with regard to the church of 
 their choice with clearness, and likewise states 
 their grievances with that candor which the nature 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 29 
 
 of the circumstances demanded. Viewing them- 
 selves as virtually proscribed, so far as authority 
 in the church, or weight, or influence in the rule- 
 making department was concerned, they made this 
 appeal to their brethren abroad who were similarly 
 situated, that they might make one common cause 
 together; and by such union increase their strength 
 to vindicate their rights, and plead for a redress of 
 their grievances. 
 
 There is one item in the "economy of Method- 
 ism" in which they say they "perceive much to 
 admire," that draws the particular attention of the 
 reader, and that item is "Episcopacy." At this 
 period of the agitation of the subject of reform in 
 the M. E. Church but little complaint had been 
 made on account of the episcopal office, which had 
 been imposed upon the church at its organization 
 under the sanction of Mr. Wesley's name. In 1790 
 the Rev. James O'Kelly and his colleagues had 
 opposed the stretch of authority exercised by Mr. 
 Asbury, but in vain ; for he tells us, "Francis was 
 born and nurtured in the land of kings and bishops, 
 and that which is bred in the bone is hard to be 
 got out of the flesh." 
 
 But in the year 1826, when that masterly treatise 
 appeared, the "History and Mystery of Methodist 
 Episcopacjr, by the Rev. Alexander M'Caine," 
 which showed most clearly that the episcopal 
 office had been foisted upon the church in America 
 contrary to the desire or intention of Mr. Wesley, 
 the friends of reform no longer viewed it as an acl- 
 3* 
 
30 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 mirable feature in Methodist economy, but re- 
 garded it as spurious and altogether questionable 
 as regarded its legality. 
 
 To the foregoing address several District Con- 
 ferences responded in the most friendly man- 
 ner, and cheered onward the friends of reform ; 
 but from some others the responses were cold and 
 indifferent; and from the Huntsville Conference, 
 which employed their presiding elder to pen their 
 answer, who was said to be a "Scotchman of the 
 old Tory school," they received downright insult. 
 About this time it was intimated by some in high 
 authority that the "Local Conference Charter" 
 would be withdrawn, and the local ministry be- 
 came seriously alarmed concerning the manner in 
 which their rights were viewed by the powers that 
 be. The itinerancy had discovered that the local 
 ministry in their District Conferences, by conferring 
 together, were disposed to inquire after their rights, 
 and also to form a definite opinion with regard to 
 the same, which was becoming fully manifested by 
 the tenor of their circulars and memorials. 
 
 At the meeting of the Roanoke District Confer- 
 ence at Washington, in December, 1823, it was 
 unanimously resolved to address the following me- 
 morial to the General Conference that was to sit in 
 the city of Baltimore in May, 1824, and also to for- 
 ward a copy of the same to all the sister District 
 Conferences : 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 31 
 
 To the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church, to he next holden in the city of Baltimore, in 
 May, 1S24 : 
 
 Dear Brethren, — With unusual solicitude we 
 importune your patient, friendly and impartial de- 
 liberations and resolves — deliberations and resolves 
 which, in our humble opinion, vitally concern the 
 harmony and peace of thousands. We charitably 
 hope that in an order so sacred as yours, and in a 
 body clothed with functions so heavenly, no indi- 
 vidual will be found disposed to stifle our com- 
 plaints, to disregard our lamentations, or to scoff" aty 
 our equitable claims ; but we rather trust that you 
 only wait to know our grievances, that in the plen- 
 itude of your love and justice you may find oppor- 
 tunity to relieve them all. Brethren, you have 
 already done great things for us, whereof we are 
 glad. The Local Conference Charter, which, by 
 your giving and our receiving, has now become an 
 unalienable right, upon the ground of mutual agree- 
 ment, we hold with gratitude, and will guard in- 
 violably. We feel a sort of new r creation by its influ- 
 ence, a sort of resurrection from official death. If 
 love the most animating, union the most enduring, 
 deliberations the most important, investigations the 
 most searching, and resolves the most laudable and 
 useful, be fanciful figments in the Christian character, 
 then we shall admit, and not until then, with our 
 Huntsville brethren, that Local Conferences are mere 
 " ignis fatuus toys," unworthy of our reception and of 
 your wisdom, and in such case, with them we may 
 
32 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 ungratefully tell you to take back the childish toy. 
 But, brettnen, we are persuaded that by this grant, 
 just as it is composed, of a local body and an itin- 
 erant head or president, you have laid a broad 
 base for an extended and permanent union of the 
 local and itinerant orders of our church ; and have 
 so concentrated the energies of the local order as 
 to make them of vastly additional importance to 
 our connection and to the world. Burning as the 
 ordeal is through which our characters pass annu- 
 ally, neither this nor any other motive shall cause 
 us, with our Huntsville brethren, to pant again for 
 the sloth, the neglect, the flesh pots of Egypt ; but 
 you, as our Moses, by giving us the charter, have 
 led us through the Red sea. Carry us, lead us, or 
 go with us a little further, and we will mutually 
 share the delights of the promised land, and set 
 peaceably and harmoniously together under the 
 olive of heaven. We have some old Calebs among 
 us who were with some of you, the veterans of 
 former days, amid the wilderness, of America. 
 That those aged heralds, at least, of the living God, 
 ask a place at your side, not under your feet, nor 
 over your heads, should not surprise you ; and 
 should the hand of God shortly lead them up to 
 heaven, you certainly will feel no hesitancy in 
 admitting the Joshuas they may leave behind to a 
 place in your armies, upon the ground of equal 
 rights. Our wishes, our claims are but few, and, 
 in our opinion, founded in principles of policy so 
 reasonable and equitable that you cannot find it in 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 33 
 
 your hearts to disallow them. First of all, we beg, 
 or rather claim, as a matter of right, the removal 
 from our Discipline of the rule or law prohibiting 
 local preachers from distilling and retailing spirit- 
 uous liquors, under certain penalties, not because 
 the rule affects our interest, but, first, because we 
 never subscribed to such a rule; secondly, we 
 have not made it valid by any subsequent admis- 
 sion or agreement;* and thirdly, it involves a prin- 
 ciple which, as men, Americans and Christians, we 
 can not, we will not admit, namely, that any power, 
 whether in the hands of one man or many, has any 
 implied, expressed or equitable right to make laws 
 for our government without our consent or repre- 
 sentation. If the principle involved in the creation 
 of that law be admitted, laws may be multiplied to 
 any extent for our government, and the same au- 
 thority that creates may abolish, until our Disci- 
 pline may be so mutilated or metamorphosed as to 
 be any thing besides what it was when we sub- 
 scribed to it. 
 
 To guard against future encroachments of a simi- 
 lar nature, and to place our church upon a more 
 elevated and liberal ground, we humbly crave and 
 firmly claim for our order the right of local repre- 
 sentation in the General Conference of our church. 
 The principle upon which this claim is founded, 
 you acted upon in the Local Conference grant. 
 The great object of our church government should 
 be to maintain the most intimate union and har- 
 mony between the two great orders peculiar to 
 
34 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 our church, itinerant and local. This object you 
 wisely sought to secure, by uniting an itinerant 
 head with a local body, in the Local Conference 
 grant. Here the two orders, with their peculiar 
 views, harmoniously blend in one ; and whatever 
 may be the doubts of distrust or inexperience, we 
 already perceive that where wisdom and goodness 
 prevail, as we hope they ever will in these confer- 
 ences, vast benefits will accrue from this union ; 
 and we respectfully ask whether you do not accord 
 with us in opinion that if this miniature effort to 
 harmonize and unite the two orders has been pro- 
 ductive of results so beneficial, whether an admis- 
 sion of the local order, upon a fair ratio of repre- 
 sentation, into the General Conference must not 
 eventually produce a oneness of soul and of object, 
 and vastly illuminate and strengthen the delibera- 
 tions of that conference ? Not that we pretend 
 that wisdom belongs to us, but we think you will 
 admit with us that a concentration of ideas and 
 feelings of men, scattered over a country so exten- 
 sive as ours, and so variously experienced in the 
 adventures of life and of nature, would vastly im- 
 prove the deliberations of any deliberative body. 
 Bat, brethren, when we modestly and affection- 
 ately tell you that we ask, not as a privilege, but 
 claim as a right, which we never expect to relin- 
 quish, namely, a voice in making the laws by 
 which we are to be governed, we entreat you not 
 hastily to reproach us with an inordinate thirst for 
 power. If we ask for power, "it is only to live in 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 60 
 
 the elements of civil and religious freedom ; it is 
 only to walk with you upon the same level along 
 the road to heaven. In justification of your own 
 wisdom, liberality and goodness — for the honor and 
 interests of Methodism — for the success of the 
 Redeemer's kingdom in these United States, never 
 let it be said by an American that you were even 
 willing to legislate, without their consent, for some 
 thousands of your ministerial brethren, many of 
 whom have long since taken all the grades of pro- 
 motion which our church allows, except that of the 
 bishopric, and have served with honor the highest 
 throughout the war. The events of twenty, thirty or 
 forty years will tell their honorable history, when their 
 spirits have fled to heaven and their remains are 
 motionless in the dust, which will soon be the case 
 with many of them. But for the stern demands of 
 principle, and their ardent devotion to the Saviour's 
 kingdom, they would no more trouble you with a 
 word or a sigh, but patiently wait the hour when 
 you would feel entirely willing to join them in hal- 
 lelujah, hallelujah to God and to the Lamb, what- 
 ever your scruples may now be about deliberating 
 with them here. Brethren, we cheerfully admit that 
 hitherto in this great matter you have been gov- 
 erned by policy which you thought best, and not 
 by lordly views over God's heritage. But time and 
 experience will generally ameliorate and improve 
 the best inventions of men, and we respectfully 
 beseech you, in the disposal of this appeal to your 
 justice and magnanimity, in support of a radical im- 
 
36 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 provement in ours, to exercise that moderation, 
 love and prayer which accompanied its creation. 
 
 Brethren, suffer not yourselves to suspect the 
 purity of our motives ; number us not with wild 
 adventurers on hazardous experiments. You can- 
 not help perceiving that if we err, it is an excessive 
 devotion to the vital principles of primitive Meth- 
 odism. Much as we confide in your love and 
 wisdom, any departure from her ancient laws we 
 scrutinize, and only ask the privilege to join you in 
 making her stakes strong, and in rearing high her 
 invulnerable bulwarks ; and upon the most sacred 
 dictates of principle and love we beseech you not 
 hastily to conclude that you have no need of us. 
 
 Had we been governed by views of ambition, 
 long since we should have endeavored not only to 
 rival you in the estimation of our lay brethren, but 
 to obstruct your progress in your itinerant career. 
 But where is the hand among us that has not ad- 
 ministered cheerfully to the necessities of our itin- 
 erant brethren ? Have our hearts been less open 
 to receive them than our doors? And what tongue 
 among us has failed to advocate their cause ? 
 Brethren, you certainly will consider us of some 
 use in the household of God. Say not then, we 
 again beseech you, by refusing our claims, that you 
 have no need of us. We wish with you to live and 
 die. But we again repeat, modestly, affectionately, 
 and firmly, that we never expect to revoke our 
 claims. Brethren, abolish the rule alluded to, and 
 give us an equal voice in making the laws by which 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 37 
 
 we are to be governed, and in so doing you will 
 honor yourselves in the estimation of discerning 
 men ; place on elevated principles the policy of 
 our church; promote the interest of the Redeemer's 
 kingdom, and unite in one two great bodies which 
 now feel an alarming and widening severance. 
 The oldest man among you never did, nor the 
 youngest never will be required to give a voice or 
 a vote on a more important and perhaps ominous 
 question to our church than that comprised in this 
 address. And may He who does all things well 
 rule over and govern your resolves in this matter. 
 Henry Holmes, President. 
 
 Joseph B. Hinton, Secretary. 
 
 How calm, how courteous, and how dignified is 
 the foregoing address ! How christianlike is the 
 spirit that it breathes ! Penned and adopted by 
 Americans who inhaled the pure air of repub- 
 licanism, it sets forth their views of their rights in 
 a clear and lucid manner. The mind is at once 
 struck with the similarity of the doctrines therein 
 laid down and of those of our American ancestors 
 that protested against the celebrated "tea tax and 
 stamp act," which produced the American revolu- 
 tion, and eventuated in the establishment of the 
 liberties of our country. Notwithstanding the 
 charitable spirit of this memorial, and the highly 
 respectable and pious body from which it emana- 
 ted, there have been found men who have shown 
 themselves willing to impugn the motives that gave 
 it birth, and to ascribe to the friends of reform 
 4 
 
38 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 designs and intentions unworthy of the Christian 
 name. It has been urged by the enemies of reform 
 that " the Spirit-making rule," which had been 
 made for the government of the local ministers 
 alone, stood opposed to their temporal interests ; 
 and hence their opposition to the same. But let 
 the truth-loving reader bear in mind the reasons 
 assigned by those memorialists why they prayed 
 for a "removal" of that rule — "not because the 
 rule affected our interest, but, first, because we never 
 subscribed to such a rule ; secondly, we have not 
 made it valid by any subsequent admission or 
 agreement ; and, thirdly, it involves a principle 
 which, as men, Americans and Christians, we can- 
 not, we will not admit, namely, that any power, 
 whether in the hands of one man or many, has any 
 implied, expressed, or equitable right to make laws 
 for our government without our consent or repre- 
 sentation." Here, then, is the clear American 
 principle laid down. And the writer would ask, 
 what American heart can find fault with it ? 
 
 The memorial was the prayer of the local minis- 
 ters alone ; they spread their petition before the 
 General Conference with respect to their own rights. 
 Hitherto the question of the rights of the laity had 
 been but little agitated in Carolina. But in other 
 parts of the Union they were equally active in set- 
 ting forth their claims as Christians, and demand- 
 ing their rights to representation in the department 
 of the church in which rules were enacted for 
 their government. The local ministry of the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 39 
 
 church, in many parts of the United States, were 
 equally alive to their rights; and circular letters 
 were written and distributed by the friends of re- 
 form, for the purpose of promoting and encouraging 
 a union of effort among them in petitioning the 
 ensuing General Conference to grant them the ex- 
 ercise of their rights, "a voice in making the laws" 
 by which they were to be governed. 
 
 Among the writers that came forward at this 
 stage of the controversy, the Rev. Nicholas Snethen 
 and Rev. A. Shinn were prominent. The produc- 
 tions of these distinguished divines shed much light 
 upon the question at issue, and led many to an 
 honest and candid examination of the subject, who 
 had heretofore supposed they possessed no ecclesi- 
 astical rights. The opponents of reform were not 
 idle. Management and care were exercised in the 
 Annual Conferences in order to secure the election 
 of such men as delegates to the General Confer- 
 ence of 1824 as were known to be opposed to the 
 spirit and design of reform. Nor were their labors 
 unsuccessful. Upon the meeting of the "General 
 Conference it was evident that the anti-reformers 
 were in the majority. On the fourth day of the 
 , session a motion was made to appoint a committee 
 to whom should be referred petitions and memo- 
 rials from the laity. The yeas and nays being 
 called for, there were in the negative sixty, affirma- 
 tive fifty-three, the vote fairly showing the spirit of 
 the conference. But this damped not the courage 
 of the friends of reform. Their course, like their 
 
40 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 principles, was onward. For, says a distinguished 
 reformer, "although there was a small majority of 
 the late General Conference decidedly opposed to 
 an equitable church representation, yet there were 
 many who boldly advocated the measure with ar- 
 guments so cogent and language so eloquent that 
 in any other place and before any other judges they 
 must have prevailed." 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 41 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Meeting of Reformers in Baltimore. — Baltimore Union Society 
 formed. — Formation of the Roanoke Union Society; — Its Con- 
 stitution and Circular. — Trial and defence of Rev. W. W. Hill. 
 
 Upon the opening of the session of the General 
 Conference in the city of Baltimore, on the 1st of 
 May, 1824, petitions and memorials from different 
 places, as well as the memorial from the Roanoke 
 District Conference, all praying for a change in the 
 order of the church government, were received, 
 read, referred and reported upon. After a delay 
 of some days, the committee on these memorials 
 and petitions reported ; and it was finally decided 
 by vote that an answer, in the form of a General 
 Conference circular, signed by the bishops, should 
 be given to the petitioners. 
 
 In this celebrated circular address of the Gen- 
 eral Conference there is much art and ingenuity 
 resorted to for the purpose of evading the points 
 directly at issue. The sophistry used is alto- 
 gether unworthy the dignity of so respectable an 
 ecclesiastical body. 
 
 In order to stave off the main questions, and give 
 them the "go by," they say, "But if by 'rights and 
 privileges' it is intended to signify something foreign 
 from the institutions of the church, as we received 
 them from our fathers, pardon us if we know no such 
 
 rights, if we do not comprehend such privileges." 
 
 4# 
 
42 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The rights and privileges claimed by the petitioners 
 were well understood by the members of that body, 
 for they had been clearly set forth, and could appear 
 to none in an ambiguous light. The whole mystery 
 of the case may be resolved into these few words, 
 the General Conference was not disposed to admit 
 those ''rights and privileges," and therefore denied 
 them. It is not the intention or design of the writer 
 to enter into a review of the positions assumed in 
 the circular, but he will offer a paragraph from a 
 review of the same by the Rev. James Smith : 
 
 "Therefore, if the authors of the circular 'know 
 no such rights,' it appears to be time they had 
 looked more closely into this question. ' The 
 institutions of the church as we received them from our 
 fathers,'' is a trite and very convenient topic. It has 
 been the plea of error in other churches also. But 
 those who derive their principles from reason and 
 revelation are not usually in so great need of it. 
 Beside, in the case at issue even that plea, when 
 urged as a ground of right, is doubtless very flimsy; 
 for the ecclesiastical polity" of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church has been, in general, a creature of 
 change from the beginning. See the account which 
 Mr. Wesley gives of the origin of his power. See, 
 also, every history of Methodism ever published in 
 the world." 
 
 Again says the same writer, " How imposing is 
 the ' circular,' but how illusory the boasted ground of 
 constitutional obligation upon the laity, when fairly 
 'considered! when fairly exposed !" 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 43 
 
 Thus far the efforts of the friends of reform in 
 the government of the M. E. Church had been 
 foiled ; but as it was their spiritual home, the 
 church of their choice, they were not disposed to 
 recede from the position they had taken ; but trust- 
 ing in the justice and rectitude of their cause, they 
 resolved to redouble their efforts. To the action 
 of that General Conference they had looked with 
 deep solicitude, and when they saw their claims 
 and petitions so ungracefully set aside in the circu- 
 lar of the same, they boldly resolved to move for- 
 ward, and their practical motto seemed to be, "we 
 never expect to revoke our claims." 
 
 After the rise of the General Conference, a meet- 
 ing was held in the city of Baltimore on the 21st 
 of May, 1824, by a number of the itinerant and 
 local ministers and laymen of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church, convened for the purpose of adopt- 
 ing such measures as in their judgment should be 
 best calculated to effect an improvement in the 
 government of the church. Dr. S. K. Jennings 
 was called to the chair, and Francis Waters, D. D., 
 was appointed Secretary — when the following reso- 
 lutions were adopted : 
 
 Resolved, first, To institute a periodical publica- 
 tion, entitled the Mutual Rights of the Ministers 
 and Members of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 to be conducted by a committee of ministers and 
 laymen. 
 
 Secondly, To raise societies in all parts of the 
 United States, whose duty it shall be to disseminate 
 
44 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 the principles of a well balanced church govern- 
 ment, and to correspond with each other. 
 
 Thirdly, To appoint a committee of their own 
 body to draft a circular addressed to the ministers 
 and members of the M. E. Church, and to forward 
 the same forthwith to all parts of the United States. 
 
 The following persons were accordingly ap- 
 pointed on said committee : — Dr. S. K. Jennings, 
 Baltimore; Dr. John French, Norfolk; W.Smith, 
 New York; Gideon Davis, Georgetown, D. C; 
 John W. Boardly and P. B. Hopper, Esq., Eastern 
 Shore, Maryland. The committee appointed for 
 the purpose issued the following 
 
 Circular addressed to the Ministers and Members of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 An expectation was entertained by the friends of 
 reform attached to the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 in the United States, that the General Conference 
 of 1S24 would have made some important and salu- 
 tary improvement in the government ; that the con- 
 gregated wisdom and experience of that body would 
 have renounced all pretensions to govern the 
 church without her consent, and that by a well- 
 timed measure they would have paved the way for 
 an equitable church representation. But we are 
 sorry to say that our hopes have not been realized, 
 and that very little has been done favorable to 
 these views. 
 
 In consequence of this disappointment, and with 
 an intention to prevent any evils which it may 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 45 
 
 have a tendency to produce, it is thought advisa- 
 ble to address a circular to all the friends of reform 
 in the connection, exhorting them not to suffer these 
 unpleasant circumstances to alienate their affec- 
 tions from the church, nor to induce them to leave 
 her communion, but rather to consider them as admo- 
 nitions calling the more loudly upon all her friends 
 to cleave to her to the last extremity, and to unite 
 as one man in a mutual effort to obtain, by the voice 
 of a majority of the ministry and membership, a 
 representative form of church government, which 
 shall extend to the people as well as to the preachers. 
 This enterprise will certainly be accelerated by 
 promoting the circulation of such periodical publi- 
 cations as are of a respectable and redeeming char- 
 acter ; and by raising societies whose duty it shall 
 be to disseminate the principles of religious liberty, 
 which need only to be known to insure their adop- 
 tion ; each society appointing a corresponding com- 
 mittee to communicate its operations to such simi- 
 lar institutions as may be formed throughout the 
 United States. 
 
 There can be no question as to the efficiency and 
 final result of these measures. They must speed- 
 ily eventuate in the accomplishment of the neces- 
 sary reform, and consequently in the union and 
 stability of our Zion. The effects produced in the 
 last four years fully justify this expectation, inas- 
 much as the late General Conference was nearly 
 equally divided, and that too notwithstanding all 
 the opposition to reform ; and it is our decided 
 
46 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 opinion that if the elections held at the Annual 
 Conferences south and west of the Susquehannah 
 had been conducted in the usual manner, without 
 recourse to management, the majority in the Gen- 
 eral Conference of 1824 would have been of a very- 
 different character. We are sorry to add, more- 
 over, that those ministers who, by the management 
 referred to, were excluded from seats in the Gen- 
 eral Conference are such as are generally consid- 
 ered the ablest members of their respective Annual 
 Conferences. From these facts we may safely in- 
 fer that the fallow ground of the great work of im- 
 provement is already broken up, and that at the 
 next General Conference we may expect to realize 
 our hopes. 
 
 Besides, in almost every section of this vastly 
 extended community there are enlightened and 
 pious men who are ready to put their shoulders to 
 the work, so that the efforts which we are now 
 about to make will be extensive and simultaneous, 
 and well calculated to effect a reformation without 
 endangering the unity of the body. We shall move 
 forward hand in hand, whilst hundreds of the most 
 important men belonging to the itinerancy bid us 
 God speed, waiting only to hear the voice of the 
 people, and they will co-operate with us. 
 
 Attempts have been made to alarm the ignorant 
 with fears lest a reformation should darken the 
 prospect of itinerant ministers and drive them from 
 the work. Upon this subject the feelings of Meth- 
 odists are one — all unite in one common purpose 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 47 
 
 to perpetuate and support the itinerant ministry. 
 Their rights and ours are mutual, and we, the com- 
 mittee selected by our brethren for the purpose of 
 sending forth this circular, call upon every depart- 
 ment of our community to unite with us in assert- 
 ing and defending the mutual rights of the ministers 
 and members of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 S. K. Jennings, Chairman. 
 John French, Secretary. 
 
 At the same time the Baltimore Union Society 
 was formed, which adopted the following 
 
 CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Whereas in all equitable ecclesiastical govern- 
 ments it is an acknowledged principle that each 
 member of the community should be secured in his 
 rights as a Christian believer, one of which is a 
 participation in the enactment of such rules and 
 regulations as are necessary to preserve the purity, 
 peace and prosperity of the body, either personally 
 or by his representative ; and, whereas the govern- 
 ment of the Methodist Episcopal Church is so or- 
 ganized as to give to the traveling preachers the 
 sole power "to make rules and regulations for our 
 church," to the entire exclusion of the local preach- 
 ers and the whole body of the people ; and, where- 
 as a large number of the itinerant and local 
 preachers and of the laity desire to have the govern- 
 ment of our church so altered as to extend repre- 
 sentation to the excluded ministers and to the lay 
 members, it is therefore deemed proper, in order to 
 
48 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 ascertain the number of persons in the Methodist 
 Church who are friendly to such alteration, to raise 
 societies in all parts of these United States, to cor- 
 respond with each other on such subjects as they 
 may believe calculated to improve our church poli- 
 ty; therefore, 
 
 Resolved, That we, the undersigned members of 
 the Methodist Church in the city of Baltimore, do 
 form ourselves into a Union Society for the above 
 named purposes, and do agree to be governed by 
 the following Constitution : 
 
 Article 1. This society shall be denominated, 
 the Union Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 in the city of Baltimore. 
 
 Art. 2. The officers of this society shall consist 
 of a President, two Vice Presidents, a Treasurer, 
 a Secretary, a Corresponding Committee of three 
 members, an Editorial Committee of four ministers 
 and four laymen, all of whom shall be elected an- 
 nually by ballot. 
 
 Art. 3. The President, or in his absence, one of 
 the Vice Presidents, or in the absence of all three, 
 a President pro tern, shall preside at every meeting 
 of the society; and every meeting shall be opened 
 and closed with prayer. 
 
 Art. 4. It shall be the duty of the Treasurer to 
 receive and hold the funds of the society, subject to 
 its directions, and to render annually a statement of 
 receipts and disbursements, and faithfully to deliver 
 over to his successor in office all the funds, books, 
 papers and effects of this society in his possession. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 49 
 
 Art. 5. It shall be the duty of the Secretary to 
 keep a record of the proceedings of the society, 
 and perform such other services as the society may 
 require. 
 
 Art. 6. It shall be the duty of the Corresponding 
 Committee to keep a record of all similar societies 
 of which they gain information, their location and 
 numbers ; to correspond with them from time to 
 time as occasion may require ; and to lay before 
 the society at its meetings all information in their 
 possession. 
 
 Art. 7. It shall be the duty of the Editorial 
 Committee to inspect all original and selected matter 
 that maybe presented for publication in the "Mutual 
 Rights," and to suffer no matter to be published in 
 that work until it shall have received the approba- 
 tion of a majority of said committee ; to employ a 
 person to print the necessary number of copies of 
 forty octavo pages each per month; to solicit sub- 
 scribers and patrons for the publication; and gene- 
 rally to do all matters and things which, in their 
 opinion, are calculated to promote the circulation 
 and usefulness of the work. 
 
 Art. 8. An annual meeting of the society shall 
 be held on the first Tuesday in July in each year, 
 and after having transacted such business as may 
 be submitted for their consideration, shall proceed 
 to elect their officers for the ensuing year. On 
 the election of the Editorial Committee, every mem- 
 ber of a similar society in any other place, and 
 any brother from a distance, known to be friendly 
 5 
 
50 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 to reform, shall, if present, be entitled to a vote in 
 the same manner as any member residing in 
 Baltimore. 
 
 Art. 9. A monthly meeting of the society shall 
 be held on the first Tuesday of each month. 
 
 Art. 10. Any member of the Methodist Church 
 may become a member of this Society by a vote 
 of the same, and by signing the Constitution ; and it 
 is expected of every person wishing to withdraw 
 from the association to signify his desire to the 
 Secretary. 
 
 Art. 11. This Constitution may be altered or 
 amended at any regular meeting by a majority of 
 two-thirds of the members present, provided such 
 alteration shall have been proposed at a previous 
 meeting. 
 
 The position taken by the Baltimore brethren 
 was one that inspired courage in every quarter 
 among the friends of reform. Their association 
 they denominated a "Union Society," we presume 
 from the fact that it was a union of effort by the 
 ministry and laity. The periodical issued by them 
 for similar reasons was called the "Mutual Rights." 
 The Editorial Committee entrusted with the publi- 
 cation of the "Mutual Rights" entered upon the dis- 
 charge of the duties assigned them with the follow- 
 ing address: # 
 
 EDITORIAL ADDRESS. 
 
 It will be expected of the Editorial Committee, 
 at the commencement of the arduous and responsi- 
 ble duty assigned to them by their brethren, to give 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 51 
 
 some account of the motives which have influenced 
 them to accept the appointment; and of the princi- 
 ples by which they are to be governed in the publi- 
 cation of the "Mutual Rights." "With a view, 
 therefore, to gratify this reasonable expectation, the 
 committee take occasion to assure their readers that 
 the paramount consideration which has induced 
 them to embark in this service is a settled con- 
 viction that an acknowledgment of the rights of 
 each department in the church is essential to the 
 well being of the whole ; and that the future pros- 
 perity of Methodism in these United States mate- 
 rially depends on such a modification of our church 
 government as shall put every Methodist in full 
 possession of his rights and privileges as a Chris- 
 tian believer. 
 
 As individuals they have long deplored the un- 
 scriptural and injudicious monopoly of power that 
 has placed in the hands of the itinerant ministry 
 alone the government of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church ; and after a careful investigation of its 
 nature and tendencies, taking into view the en- 
 lightened state of society in this country, they are 
 persuaded that nothing less than an improved gov- 
 ernment, which will secure representation to the 
 ivhole church, and a mutual participation in all her 
 concerns, will produce tranquillity. It will be ob- 
 vious then to every reader that the motives which 
 have influenced the committee are neither sordid nor 
 selfish, but liberal and disinterested, and that the 
 principles by which they intend to be governed in 
 
52 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 editing the contemplated work are the mutual 
 rights of the ministers and members of our church. 
 The chief object of the publication is to realize to 
 the church a practical understanding of the title it 
 assumes. This can be done only through the medium 
 of a free press. 
 
 The committee are confident that if the Method- 
 ist people have a suitable opportunity to compare 
 the arguments adduced on both sides of the great 
 question of reform, permanent harmony may be 
 established among them. Without this they axe 
 equally confident that the difference of sentiment 
 which now so extensively prevails will accelerate 
 an equally extensive alienation of affection, and 
 ultimately terminate in great and ruinous seces- 
 sions from the church. That the Methodist Church 
 is in a state of agitation is a well known fact ; and 
 such a state of things calls loudly upon every friend 
 of religion to inquire into the causes which produce 
 it, and to labor for the restoration of harmony and 
 the preservation of brotherly love. To be pre- 
 pared, however, to perform a becoming part in this 
 important work, it is necessary to enter upon a calm 
 and dispassionate consideration of the subjects in 
 dispute. Modest men will feel no difficulty in ad- 
 mitting the truth of this position ; for it is impossi- 
 ble for any man wisely to estimate his own opin- 
 ions when they differ from those of other men, until 
 he shall have first subjected them to a respectful 
 and scrutinous comparison with the opinions of 
 those who think differently. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 53 
 
 To the doctrines of religion as taught by Wesley 
 and Fletcher, and as embodied in the Discipline of 
 our church, the committee fully subscribe. The 
 services of the church, such as extemporaneous 
 prayer and preaching, sacrament of the Lord's sup- 
 per, baptism, love-feasts, band-meeting and class- 
 meeting, have their entire approbation. Class- 
 meeting, particularly, in the opinion of the commit- 
 tee, is the great means, next to the gospel itself, by 
 which spirituality and order are to be perpetuated 
 among our people. Upon this subject they must 
 be permitted to say they have been trained so long 
 under these doctrines and services that they feel 
 for them all those attachments so natural to men in 
 similar circumstances. And in fact it is because 
 of these and the spirituality of the ministry and 
 membership of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 that they adhere so firmly to her communion. 
 
 It is not in the power of the committee at present 
 to give exact information of every thing which the 
 publication will" contain. A periodical miscellany 
 admits of a variety of subjects, and when continued 
 for a length of time receives many communications 
 unknown to the editors at the commencement of the 
 work. It may be said, however, in general terms, 
 the "Mutual Rights" will contain essays on church 
 government, biographical sketches of eminent and 
 pious persons, lectures on divinity and practical 
 Christianity, interesting narratives, philosophical in- 
 vestigations, and a variety of other matter, both 
 amusing and instructive. Well written communi- 
 ■ 5* 
 
54 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 cations on any of the above subjects will be thank- 
 fully received, and the utmost impartiality observed 
 by the committee. 
 
 S. K. Jennings, Chairman. 
 
 The writers who contributed to the columns of 
 the "Mutual Rights" were ministers and members 
 of the highest standing and ability. Distinguished 
 for their talent, their learning, and their usefulness, 
 they were well acquainted with the history as well 
 as with the defects of the government of the M. E. 
 Church ; their essays upon church polity being 
 clear, logical and scriptural, justly commended 
 themselves to the consideration of every candid 
 and unprejudiced member of the Methodist com- 
 munion. They were men whose very names exer- 
 cised a salutary influence in favor of the cause 
 which they advocated. Of these men a Snethen 
 and a French have gone to their reward, but their 
 names yet live embalmed in the memory of the 
 virtuous and the good who knew them ; and to the 
 lives and acts of their compeers who survive them 
 we trust that history will not be slow to do am- 
 ple justice. And strange as it may appear, yet 
 such is the melancholy fact, that these men who 
 were "burning and shining lights," as well as an 
 ornament and an honor to the church to which they 
 belonged, were traduced by many of their brethren 
 that differed with them in opinion upon church 
 polity; their motives were aspersed, and their 
 names to all intents and purposes cast out as evil. 
 All this was done, not for immorality, not for any 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 55 
 
 violation of the law of God, but for an honest dif- 
 ference of opinion with regard to expediency con- 
 cerning church polity. The powers that be in the 
 M. E. Church had become offended, therefore per- 
 secution raged. "Several of the anti-reformers 
 availed themselves of the freedom of the columns 
 of the 'Mutual Rights,' and wrote essays in vindi- 
 cation of the Methodist government, as being of 
 divine origin, and the only legitimate church gov- 
 ernment on earth, and represented the reformers as 
 'backsliders,' 'under the influence of base motives,' 
 'enemies of Methodism,' 'opposers of God,' 'insti- 
 gated by the devil,' &c. &c. Indeed this kind of 
 abusive matter and 'mere declamation from anti- 
 reformers, accumulated to such a degree that the 
 Editorial Committee of the second volume were 
 under the necessity of restricting those writers to 
 argument alone."* 
 
 The pious reader might ask what had become of 
 that religion which is the love of God shed abroad 
 in the heart by the Holy Ghost, and of that charity 
 which beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth 
 all things, endureth all things ? But this is a ques- 
 tion which must be left for decision to the Judge of 
 all the earth. How strange is such conduct when 
 compared with the spirit of the gospel, which is 
 peace ! How painful, too, to the feelings of the 
 reformers to receive such treatment from Christian 
 brethren, principally ministers of the gospel, and 
 that for opinion's sake alone. 
 
 * See history of the Methodist Protestant Church, by Rev. J. R. 
 Williams, page 129. 
 
56 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 A distinguished reformer in North Carolina, 
 whilst his spirit was weighed down by the un- 
 christian course pursued towards him by men pro- 
 fessing Christianity, expressed himself to a friend 
 thus : "Brother Speight, if it were not for the feel- 
 ings of my heart I would be an infidel." 
 
 During the latter part of the year 1S24 the friends 
 of reform, in different parts of the United States, 
 followed the example set them by the brethren at 
 Baltimore, and having the same objects in view, 
 formed themselves into Union Societies. After the 
 organization of the Union Society at Baltimore, and 
 the appeals and addresses of the same were circu- 
 lated throughout the country, the question, of reform 
 not only received a new impulse in North Carolina, 
 but to a certain degree changed its aspect. The 
 laity now came forward with their brethren of the 
 local ministry, claiming their right to be heard, 
 through representation, in the rule-making depart- 
 ment of the church. Truth had been disseminated. 
 The light had shined ; and by the exercise of "pri- 
 vate judgment" they were now brought into action, 
 and made common cause with the ministry to ef- 
 fect a just reformation in the government of the 
 church to which they belonged. 
 
 At a meeting of a number of local ministers and 
 laymen of Roanoke Circuit, held at Sampson's 
 meeting-house, Halifax county, North Carolina, on 
 the 6th day of November, 1 824, it was moved that 
 the Rev. C. H. Hines open the meeting by prayer; 
 after which the aged and venerable patriot of the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 57 
 
 American revolution, the Rev. William Price, was 
 chosen chairman, and Levi H. McLean secretary. 
 
 The object of the meeting being explained, and 
 the names of those recorded who were in favor of 
 forming a "Union Society," on the same principles 
 of one lately established in the city of Baltimore, 
 the society proceeded to elect its officers ; where- 
 upon the Rev. E. B. Whitaker was elected presi- 
 dent, and Exum Lewis vice president ; the Rev. 
 Richard Davidson, Rev. Henry Hardy, and Rev. 
 William Bellamy were appointed a corresponding 
 committee; the Rev. James Hunter, the Rev. C. H. 
 Hines, and Levi H. McLean a committee to draft a 
 Constitution for the government of the society, to 
 be presented at its next meeting ; also to write an 
 address to the societies in the circuit, explanatory 
 of the objects this society has in view. 
 
 The names of the persons who joined the Union 
 Society at this time were, 
 
 Ministers — Rev. Wm. Price, Rev. Miles Smith, 
 Rev. Wm. Bellamy, Rev. Jas. Hunter, Rev. C. H. 
 Hines, Rev. E. B. Whitaker, Rev. Albriton Jones. 
 
 Laymen — William E. Bellamy, David Morris, 
 Thomas King, Levi H. McLe:^. 
 
 The society appointed its next meeting to be 
 held on the 4th Saturday in the same month, No- 
 vember, at Bradford's meeting-house, and then 
 adjourned. 
 
 Upon its meeting again at the time and place ap- 
 pointed, the following persons united with the soci- 
 ety, viz : Rev. Henry Bradford, John F. Bellamy, 
 
58 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 L. H. B. Whitaker, Absalom B. Whitaker, Henry 
 B. Bradford, Spier W. Coffield, Lansford W. Scott, 
 P. B. Wiley, Benjamin Hunter, E. B. Whitaker, jr., 
 and Thomas Lowe. 
 
 The Constitution, as drafted by the committee 
 appointed at the preceding meeting, was presented 
 and read, and after each article had been discussed, 
 it was adopted in its present form. 
 
 CONSTITUTION OF ROANOKE UNION SOCIETY. 
 
 Man in his primeval state was the noblest work 
 of God on this habitable globe. Although sin has 
 entered into the world, and its deathlike effects 
 have passed on all, yet many vestiges of the noble 
 dignity of man remain, showing his superiority to 
 all other creatures. On man is still placed the 
 image of his Creator in some degree, and to him 
 the guardian care of his God is shown. When it 
 became necessary that the human family should be 
 controlled by a code of laws, we immediately real- 
 ize the condescending goodness of an all-wise Cre- 
 ator, in furnishing them with such as were most 
 conducive to order and happiness. And when an 
 individual or set of men are placed as rulers over 
 the multitude, it is in regard to their capacity and 
 virtue. When the Israelites, in plain deviation 
 from these just principles, exclaimed, "We will 
 have a king," the Lord Jehovah showed them that 
 the very inclination and consent of mind to such a 
 course was Fraught with calamitous events to them 
 and their children after them. The whole subject 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 59 
 
 evinces to man that with his Creator there is no 
 respect of persons. For when the great Redeemer 
 unfolded to man the grand scheme of his redemp- 
 tion, such was at once the conviction of its univer- 
 sality that it was often called the common salvation. 
 And when a serious controversy had arisen, as re- 
 corded in the 15th chapter of the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles, relative to the laws of its administration, we 
 have explicitly the voice of the apostles and elders 
 and brethren on the subject. It is evident that our 
 Saviour inculcated the same principles when he 
 said to his disciples, "One is your master, even 
 Christ, and all ye are brethren." 
 
 From an impartial view of these just, equal and 
 scriptural principles, the inference seems to be irre- 
 sistible that all men by nature are equal, and that 
 none have a right to assume control but by the 
 voice of general consent ; and as the rules and 
 regulations of the Methodist Episcopal Church place 
 the sole governing power in the hands of our itin- 
 erant brethren, who have enacted laws for our gov- 
 ernment without our consent, that infringe upon our 
 civil privileges, while there remains to us no re- 
 dress — we, therefore, deem it indispensable that the 
 whole matter should be carefully and impartially ex- 
 amined; and that the peace and prosperity of Zion 
 depend greatly upon the forming of Union Societies 
 among us ; and as our respected brethren of Balti- 
 more have set us an example at once so laudable 
 and necessary, we resolve, in imitation of them, to 
 adopt the following articles and regulations for the 
 
60 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 government of the Roanoke Union Society, auxili- 
 ary to the Union Society of Baltimore: 
 
 Article 1. This society shall be composed of 
 the members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in 
 this circuit, together with others of other circuits 
 who wish to become members here. 
 
 Art. 2. This society shall be governed by a 
 President and Vice President, who shall be chosen 
 annually by ballot. 
 
 Art. 3. There shall be a Secretary, and also a 
 Corresponding Committee consisting of five mem- 
 bers, chosen annually by nomination and election. 
 
 Art. 4. This society shall meet once in six or 
 twelve months, or oftener, if thought necessary, ac- 
 cording to its determination, at such place as shall 
 be fixed on. 
 
 Art. 5. This society shall elect a Treasurer, 
 who shall hold the funds of the society, subject to 
 its call. 
 
 Art. 6. It shall be the duty of each member of 
 the society to pay an annual subscription of from 
 twenty-five cents to one dollar, which money shall 
 first defray the expenses of said society, and if any 
 surplus, shall be appropriated to the publishing of 
 tracts or pamphlets explanatory of the views and 
 aims of the society, and for other useful purposes? 
 tending to the extension of light and information. 
 
 Art. 7. It shall be the duty of the Corresponding 
 Committee to keep up a regular correspondence 
 with the society at Baltimore, and with other socie- • 
 ties or individuals, as this society may direct. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 61 
 
 Art. 8. At each meeting of the society the Cor- 
 responding Committee shall lay before it the sub- 
 stance of all their communications, and the answers 
 respectively received. 
 
 Art. 9. This Constitution shall be subject to 
 such amendments and additions, annually, as a 
 majority of two-thirds of the society shall judge to 
 be expedient. 
 
 Eli B. Whitaker, President. 
 James Hunter, Secretary pro tern. 
 L. H. B. Whitaker was elected treasurer and 
 William E. Bellamy secretary ; Rev. William Bel- 
 lamy, Rev. R. Davidson, Dr. John F. Bellamy, Ab- 
 salom B. Whitaker and Philip B. Wiley were ap- 
 pointed a committee of correspondence ; Rev. Wm. 
 Bellamy, Rev. C H. Hines and Dr. J. F. Bellamy 
 a committee to draft rules to govern the meetings of 
 the society. 
 
 The next meeting of the society was appointed 
 to be held at Bradford's chapel on the first Satur- 
 day in May, 1825. 
 
 The society met at Bradford's chapel on the 30th 
 of April instead of the first Saturday in May. After 
 the journal of the last meeting had been read, a 
 door was opened for the admission of such persons 
 as wished to join the Union Society, when the fol- 
 lowing brethren were received, viz : Rev. William 
 W. Hill, of Matamuskeet circuit, Rev. Miles Nash, 
 of Roanoke, James Whitaker, sr., and Richard H. 
 Whitaker. The committee of correspondence re- 
 ported no correspondence since the last meeting. 
 6 
 
62 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The Rev. W. Bellamy, Exum Lewis and Dr. J. F. 
 Bellamy were appointed an editorial committee to 
 publish such pieces for this society as they may 
 think will tend to promote a reformation in the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, or promulgate the 
 wishes and views of this society for that purpose. 
 The Rev. James Hunter was appointed an agent 
 to superintend the printing of all such documents, 
 and authorized to apply to the treasurer for money 
 to defray the expenses thereof, as the Constitution 
 directs. 
 
 The next meeting of the society was appointed 
 to be held at Bradford's chapel, on the 14th Octo- 
 ber, 1825. The meeting closed in the usual form 
 with prayer. 
 
 The fourth meeting, which was the second an- 
 nual meeting of the Roanoke Union Society, took 
 place at Bradford's, pursuant to appointment, Octo- 
 ber 14th. At this meeting the following brethren 
 united with the society, viz: Richard Baxter, Spier 
 Whitaker, James Brent, Wilson C. Whitaker, Jesse 
 H. Simmons, Richard H. Whitaker, Henry Dog- 
 gett, David Barrow, Burrows Carter, and Rev. 
 Caswell Drake. At this meeting the society num- 
 bered thirty-nine members. The doctrines of Mu- 
 tual Rights had, through the agency and influence 
 of the reformers, spread considerably in Carolina. 
 The circulars and addresses of the committee of 
 correspondence effected much good in enlisting the 
 members of the Methodist communion in the com- 
 mon cause. In order that the tenor of the doc- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 63 
 
 trines which they laid down, and the propositions 
 set forth in their addresses, may be fairly under- 
 stood, the first circular of the society is here 
 introduced. 
 
 Circular to the members of the Methodist Church in 
 Roanoke District. 
 
 Dear Brethren, — Your attention is respectfully 
 invited to a momentous question, which is at pres- 
 ent and has been for several years greatly agitated 
 and freely discussed among politicians in church 
 and state, both in the old and new world. This 
 question involves at once the very principles of 
 civil and religious liberty and equality. In an 
 early period of our history such a thing as free dis- 
 cussion was not agitated till the dawn of the Ameri- 
 can revolution ; and even at that period we find 
 that this discussion was peculiarly confined to 
 political matters. But in times of more recent date 
 light has gone forth, a spirit of free inquiry has been 
 promoted to great and important lengths, which, in 
 the estimation of hundreds, and perhaps of thou- 
 sands, has resulted in the conviction that our church 
 polity is not of the most equitable and judicious 
 cast ; and an ardent solicitude is now felt and dis- 
 played, in different sections of the country, for the 
 modification of our system of church government, 
 so far as to admit amongst us a general equality on 
 the representative principle. 
 
 On this subject the General Conference has been 
 addressed in vain. The only alternative is an 
 
64 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 appeal to you to unite firmly and piously in an 
 examination of the subject. 
 
 To this end your brethren have met, have 
 formed a society, and have appointed proper offi- 
 cers and committees for the management of the 
 society and for general correspondence. A Con- 
 stitution for said society will be drafted forthwith, 
 and be ratified at a meeting appointed to be held at 
 Bradford's meeting-house on the fourth Saturday in 
 this month. 
 
 It becomes our duty, dear brethren, thus to ap- 
 prise you, and to urge you by all the endearing ties 
 of social concord to meet us there. We ardently 
 wish you to take the subject into serious considera- 
 tion. The great design is the promotion of truth 
 in the accomplishment of the noble object above 
 stated. Should there, however, be with any a sen- 
 timent and feeling opposed to these measures, the 
 subject is open for free and charitable discussion. 
 This may lead to a fair understanding, and to a 
 union of soul that will promote Zion's prosperity. 
 You will understand that no intention exists to 
 split or divide the church, but to form a Union 
 Society for the purpose of communicating freely 
 with one another, and thereby to diffuse light and 
 knowledge relative to the nature and general bear- 
 ing of our church polity. 
 
 We are aware that many say that the socie- 
 ties are not dissatisfied. This can only be known 
 fairly by acquainting ourselves with the subject. 
 Many who have examined the matter are convinced 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 65 
 
 that great and important alterations can be made 
 for the better ; and it is confidently believed that 
 the sooner these can be effected the better it will 
 be. We are sure that the time has arrived when 
 the attempt ought to be made. We, therefore, 
 firmly rely on your co-operation, and remain 
 Yours, in the bonds of friendship, 
 James Hunter, \ 
 C. H. Hines, > Committee. 
 L. H. McLean, ) 
 The spirit of this address is such as the occasion 
 alone called for. It abounds in no idle declama- 
 tion, but calmly and dispassionately sets forth the 
 object and views of the reformers. They most 
 plainly declare that "the object is not to split or 
 divide the church, but to form a Union Society, for 
 the purpose of communicating freely with one an- 
 other, and thereby to diffuse light and knowledge" 
 upon church polity. But the exercise of such 
 liberty gave offence to the advocates of itinerant 
 prerogative, and menaces, rebuke and opposition 
 were soon exhibited by the traveling preachers. 
 The itinerant ministers could talk most loudly upon 
 the principles of church' government, and in their 
 General and Annual Conferences could feel at lib- 
 erty to use the keenest invectives against princi- 
 ples and denounce in the most unmeasured terms 
 measures not agreeable to their judgment or views 
 of sound policy, and none dare to say, why speak- 
 est thou thus? Possessed of this right of "free 
 discussion" and of "private judgment," they con- 
 6* 
 
66 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 sidered it their right alone, and were quite unwill- 
 ing to accord the same right to their brethren of the 
 local ministry and laity. Nor had the two last 
 named classes ever learned that they were not per- 
 mitted to inquire into the nature of the government 
 of the church, or express their sentiments freely con- 
 cerning its polity; but they supposed that such 
 rights would be conceded to them on all sides; but 
 the sequel proves they were sadly mistaken. At 
 the meeting of the Roanoke Union Society in April, 
 1825, the Rev. William W. Hill, of Matamuskeet 
 circuit, was received as a member. Brother Hill 
 had been a minister for several years in the Meth- 
 odist Church, had rendered her much service as an 
 itinerant ; his zeal, learning, talents and eloquence 
 had placed him amongst the most distinguished of 
 her ministry; and although he had now become 
 local, yet his love for the church of his choice was 
 still warm, the lively interest he felt in her pros- 
 perity was the same it ever had been ; and in be- 
 coming a member of the Union Society his object 
 was to do her good, and not harm. He was well 
 acquainted with her ecclesiastical polity, had closely 
 observed it in all its bearings and relations, and 
 was well aware that it was susceptible of much 
 improvement. Knowing the local ministry and the 
 laity to be without any representation or voice 
 whatever in the rule-making department of the 
 church, as an impartial and candid Christian, he 
 could but conceive that their rights were unjustly 
 withheld from them; and as an American citizen 
 
METHODIST FROTESTANT CHURCH. 67 
 
 and a patriot, he could not understand that he was 
 violating any obligation, either civil or religious, in 
 freely discussing this subject with his Christian 
 brethren. This gave offence to "the powers that 
 be" in the itinerancy; and brother Hill, before the 
 meeting of the Union Society in November, and ere 
 he had been enrolled as a member six months, had 
 become the first object of itinerant persecution in 
 Carolina. In the month of August he was sum- 
 moned to trial by Rev. Benjamin Edge, assistant 
 preacher on Matamuskeet circuit, and fairly acquit- 
 ted of the charges. Brother Hill forwarded an ac- 
 count of the whole transaction to the Union Society, 
 and the editorial committee published and circu- 
 lated the same under the title of 
 
 A STROKE AT THE ROOT, &c. 
 
 To the ministers and members of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church in the United States. 
 
 Dear Brethren, — The editorial committee of 
 the Roanoke Union Society take the liberty re- 
 spectfully to lay before yon the following docu- 
 ments, transmitted to us by our worthy brother 
 Hill, a local preacher in our church and a member 
 of our Union Society. We regret that any of our 
 church rulers should so misunderstand that rule in 
 our church discipline which forbids the members 
 of our church "endeavoring to sow dissensions in 
 any of our societies, by inveighing against either 
 our doctrine or discipline," as to think that it can 
 with any propriety be applied to Mr. Hill or any 
 
6S HISTORY OF THE 
 
 other reformer, whether he be of the clergy or laitv, 
 while merely contending for the right of suffrage. 
 
 We have no rule in our book of "discipline" to 
 justify the conduct of Mr. Edge as displayed in 
 these documents. It is, therefore, a manifest abuse 
 of power, and proves the necessity of the reforma- 
 tion for which Mr. Hill and the reformers are now 
 contending. 
 
 We do not hesitate to say that the conduct of 
 Mr. Hill and the reformers, in contending for the 
 right of suffrage, cannot be punished by the rules in 
 our church without the aid of an expost facto law. 
 
 Extract of a letter from Rev. William W. Hill to E. 
 Lewis, Esq. 
 
 August 9, 1825. 
 Brother Lewis: 
 
 With this you will receive the history of an 
 encounter which I have just sustained with Ben- 
 jamin Edge, assistant preacher of this circuit. His 
 death-warrant, which you will find among the pa- 
 pers in its original form, reached me about dusk in 
 the evening of the 5th of this month. It ordered 
 me to trial on the 7th, at half-past 8 o'clock; and on 
 the 6th I attended meeting twenty miles from home. 
 You will find in the speech I delivered on the occa- 
 sion a reference to a soliloquy, (so I characterize a 
 piece'he forwarded me about three weeks since,) to 
 which you will find a reply in the hand-writing of a 
 gentleman whom I have gotten to transcribe my 
 letter to him. After I forwarded my reply, but be- 
 fore it reached his hand, his notice was served on 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 69 
 
 me. Having mislaid his soliloquy, I cannot for- 
 ward the original ; the following, however, is the 
 form and substance. He begins at the top of the 
 sheet thus : 
 
 DAVID'S BEAUTIFUL IDEA. 
 
 How good a thing and how pleasant it is for 
 brethren to dwell together in unity. It is com- 
 pared to holy anointing oil. What are professors 
 of religion without union ? They only serve 
 for sinners to stumble over to destruction ; and 
 it may truly be said, when any member of our 
 church, be he public or private, endeavors to sow 
 dissensions in any of our societies, or to inveigh 
 against the order and government of our church, he 
 not only thereby lays himself liable to censure, but 
 after he is admonished according to discipline, to 
 be cut off if he do not quit it. I have taken some 
 pains to inform myself respecting these men, who 
 on account of a few small things in our discipline, 
 want to raise disturbances in our church, and find 
 that they have backslidden. St. Paul had to com- 
 plain, Demas hath forsaken me, having loved the 
 present world- If they would repent and seek 
 more grace, they would no doubt then be disposed 
 to make concessions ; and then, perhaps, differ- 
 ences might be settled, and they might be restored. 
 I can truly say I wish the salvation of all men on 
 God's earth. Benjamin Edge. 
 
 As this is the first attempt which I have heard of 
 to enforce the gag-law, the decision may be of some 
 
70 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 interest to the reformers. Please write to me as soon 
 as practicable what disposition you will make of it. 
 If you knew the rudeness of the man, you could the 
 better account for the severity of my manner, and I 
 hope this will be its apology. 
 
 Your brother in Christ, W. W. Hill. 
 
 Rev. W. W. HilVs reply to Benjamin Edge. 
 
 The motto of a soliloquy, — which reached my 
 hands lately, designed, I presume, for my perusal, it 
 having my name appended to its back, — "David's 
 Beautiful Idea." 
 
 The strain commences with the following quota- 
 tion : "How good a thing and how pleasant it is 
 for brethren to dwell together in unity." The motto 
 and prologue which are here exhibited are both 
 mild. The latter is a plant of celestial growth, and 
 is green and flourishing with the dews of heaven ; 
 but like the hyacinth, the lily, or the rose, choked 
 with the thorns and thistles of the forest wild, it 
 may spread a shade for the hissing serpent, or 
 shower its virgin beauties on the deadly asp. Oh ! 
 how the heart of sensibility must mourn over this 
 production, which dawns with all the sweet seren- 
 ity of a vernal morning, and wakes up the gay and 
 innocent emotions of the soul ; but ere these lovely 
 fugitives begin to carol and sing, the spirit of the 
 peace-like Phoebus, rising in a sea of fire, frights 
 them into the deep and chilly recesses of nature, 
 and all this joy and lovely scenery, bright as Eden, 
 beauteous as Paradise, becomes the arena of angry 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 71 
 
 elements, a raging, cloudy ocean, mingled as with 
 rains of an equinoctial storm. 
 
 The word unity, as appears from the sequel, is 
 ominously emphasized. Physical union is that 
 law of gravity and attraction by which the atoms of 
 the globe are held united, and as it respects these, 
 it may be called the union of necessity. Moral 
 union, or that which unites men, is effected by vari- 
 ous energies ; among the more common are — first, 
 that of policy for mutual benefit ; secondly, those 
 of terror for purposes of partial domination ; thirdly, 
 those of love flowing from mutual affection. The 
 last of those is that for which the psalmist con- 
 tends in its most refined sense. But which of these 
 does the soliloquist advocate ? If it be the first, 
 and he wish me to become a passive particle in his 
 fairy system, let him metamorphose my nature, 
 as the fairy of Muckelstan Moor did that of the 
 geese which were changed into fragments of grey 
 rock ; and then his all-ruling will, like the law of 
 gravity and attraction, can wield my dust at plea- 
 sure. If it be the second, designed for mutual 
 benefit, and he wish me to be a recipient of the 
 common good, let us join in common consultation 
 upon the ground of mutual rights, that we may mutu- 
 ally secure and enjoy the mutual benefit. If it be 
 the third, designed for partial domination, and he 
 wish me to be a vassal held in superstitious chains 
 of terror, let him, like St. Peter's successor, launch 
 a peal of papal thunder at my head, anathematize 
 all my members, interdict fire and water; and 
 
7-2 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 should he not convert me by these engines of terror, 
 when the United States become the dominions of 
 the pope, and drive from their bosom every repub- 
 lican heretic, I hope his clemency will give me the 
 rocky summit of some western mountain upon 
 which I may waste my days in penitential solitude. 
 If it be the fourth, flowing from mutual affection, 
 that affection, that love which influenced the Lamb 
 of God to die for the world, and which binds the 
 members of Christ's mystical body to each other 
 by ties more tender than ever twined the bones and 
 sinews of the human frame, and he wish me, with 
 himself, to be bound up in the bundle of life, let 
 him cease to write about disaffected members, sow- 
 ing dissensions, inveighings against discipline, cut- 
 tings off, backslidings, Demases, reclaimings, mak- 
 ing concessions, adjusting matters, &c. &c. Little 
 did the royal psalmist imagine, when he penned 
 this elegant fragment, which should be the melody 
 of families mingled in love, that it ever should be 
 made a prelude to censures, threats and cuttings 
 off. Let the soliloquist cease to call the "right of 
 suffrage" treason, and free discussions inveighings 
 and dissensions. Let him cease to arraign the mo- 
 tives of his brethren, and attend more to his own. 
 Let him seek more of that zeal and charity that 
 comes from above, and thinks no evil. Let him 
 not mistake that forbearance in his brethren, which 
 his own forwardness alone prompts to formal resist- 
 ance, for a want of zeal and a loving the world. 
 Let him throw open his Conference doors, and 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 73 
 
 invite his free brethren in the United States, as 
 members of a common family, to equal lights in 
 the councils of his church ; and let him make his 
 concessions for having misconstrued their designs, 
 and having been officiously casuistical respecting 
 their motives. In a word, let him not only wish the 
 salvation of all men, but let him act in a way cal- 
 culated to promote it, by not thinking more of him- 
 self than he ought to think, or less of others ; and 
 then he may obtain that free access to the affec- 
 tions of his brethren which he must for ever despair 
 of while he attempts to lord it over God's heritage. 
 If the soliloquist shall think proper to favor me with 
 another effusion, I suggest the following as the sub- 
 ject of his cogitations : — First, let him reconcile the 
 government of his church to the government of the 
 primitive church and the civil government of his 
 country ; and then with more propriety he may 
 arraign the motives of those who may refuse their 
 assent to its requisitions. But in the meantime let 
 him not be aggrieved if a free American shall re- 
 fuse to admit that the ipse dixit of a few hundred 
 itinerants should be a rule of faith for three hundred 
 thousand Americans. 
 
 NOTICE FROM REV. BENJAMIN EDGE. 
 
 I, Benjamin Edge, assistant preacher, Matamus- 
 keet Banks and Island circuit, send this to notify 
 and request you to attend at the chapel in Matamus- 
 keet on next Sunday, the 7th day in August, A. D. 
 1S25, to appear before a committee of local preach- 
 7 
 
74 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 ers and before the assistant preacher of the circuit, 
 for the express purpose of answering to the charge 
 of trying to sow dissension in our society, in this 
 quarter and in some other places, and inveighing 
 against some of our rules and church government. 
 You can withdraw under church censure if you see 
 proper, if you do it in a formal manner. The time 
 appointed for the committee to meet is at half-past 
 8 o'clock. I am a friend to all true Christians. 
 
 B. Edge. 
 N. B. This was directed on the back to "Rev. 
 Wm. W. Hill, Hyde county, N. C, Matamuskeet." 
 
 The speech of Rev. Mr. Hill before the committee in his 
 own defence. 
 Friends and Brethren, — This action and the 
 ground upon which it is sustained crowns me with 
 laurels far beyond my deserts. To be identified 
 with prophets, apostles, martyrs, and the illustrious 
 patriots of all ages and nations, who have bravely 
 resisted tyranny, is a summit of glory to which my 
 humble pretensions never aspired. But here, on 
 the very ground consecrated by the blood of brave 
 Americans, my contending for the right of suffrage 
 is construed into moral treason, for which I am ar- 
 rested. You, the sons of intrepid veterans, bap- 
 tized in the blood of slaughtered parents, are called 
 upon to punish as a crime in me the act of con- 
 tending for the right of suffrage for which your 
 fathers expired. From the shade of that laurel 
 with which the genius of your country shelters her 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 75 
 
 children, and under which she invites the oppressed 
 and suffering sons of Europe to rejoice and repose, 
 from this shade I am dragged by the grasp of an 
 oppressor before a tribunal, and I stand arraigned 
 as a capital offender. Happy, oh ! thrice happy 
 am I, when on the one hand I behold the tribunal 
 before which I stand, and on the other I mark the 
 counts in the bill of indictment. In the patriotism 
 of that congregation composed of the descendants 
 of those gallant men who lashed from their shores 
 the galleys of a civil tyrant, and in the love and jus- 
 tice of that committee, composed of generous spirits 
 doubly free, free from civil and ecclesiastical domi- 
 nation, free from spiritual tyranny, having been 
 emancipated by the Spirit of God, I feel doubly 
 secure. But, friends, mark the items in this death- 
 warrant — first, endeavoring to sow dissensions in our 
 societies, in this quarter and elsewhere ; and, second- 
 ly, inveighing against some of our rules of church 
 government. Oh! what ground of exultation. Oh! 
 that I was as pure as this arrest would make me. 
 From all that here occurs, I am white as snow and 
 bright as a sunbeam; yet the punishment demanded 
 by the plea, and claimed by the judge at your 
 hands, is official death. After all the vigilance of 
 a regular combination and deep-laid conspiracy 
 against my official life and character, not a vestige 
 of evidence supports the allegation.. But, friends, 
 
 if advocating the right of suffrage be sowing dissen- 
 ts o o o 
 
 sion, and contending that lordly combinations in the 
 church of Christ are incompatible with the religion 
 
76 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 of Jesus, then indeed I am guilty of the crime for 
 which patriots have bled and martyrs expired. 
 
 Wretched indeed is the policy of that church 
 which must be screened from investigation by gag- 
 laws, or protected against opposition by a wall of 
 bayonets. Is this the character which he gives you 
 of Methodism . ? If so, her interest requires that he 
 should be the culprit and I the prosecutor. But, 
 friends, why should we float upon the surface of 
 this business ? Let us dive to the bottom of this 
 deep-laid conspiracy, which strikes at once at the 
 prosperity of our church and the freedom of our 
 country. We this day touch but a remote link of a 
 vastly extended and fearful combination. This 
 freedom of investigation, this devotedness to equal 
 rights, this opposition to lordly encroachments, for 
 which he wishes you to inflict a signal punishment 
 on me, is not the business of a corner nor the reve- 
 rie of a few factious minds, as he would have you 
 believe, but the work of regular associations, and 
 the boast and glory of thousands of the greatest and 
 best men belono-ina; to our church. If I mistake 
 not, men who are now devoted to the reformation 
 for which I contend, were true to the cause of 
 Methodism when the oldest bishop now in the itin- 
 erancy revolted against her. Why have not the 
 bishops, arrayed with their itinerant' legions, as- 
 sailed the editorial committee of the "Mutual 
 Rights," or the other associated societies of the 
 reformers, and crushed this rising Atlas at a 
 stroke? Ah, no! they are but too conscious that 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 77 
 
 they would be compelled to retire from the assault, 
 like the waves of ocean from a massy rock, foam- 
 ing in confusion. Why then does he attempt an 
 achievement which the host of his itinerant brethren 
 durst not touch with their little finger ? He has 
 rashly calculated upon your weakness and his own 
 strength. With all the ambition and none of the 
 skill of Napoleon, he seeks to divide and then de- 
 vour. He drags from the dungeon of despotism 
 the chain of his vengeance, and bids you to rivet it 
 on my hands ; to paralyze my tongue with the 
 frost of official death, that I might talk no more of 
 heaven, of Jesus, and of freedom, would be the 
 summit of his ambition. Yes, friends, the conclave 
 to. which he belongs has found me of some use to 
 my reforming brethren in this State, (pardon this 
 egotism,) and he views me as the shield of freedom 
 and of mutual rights in this section of country. 
 And the materials of which he is made (he being in 
 a great degree devoid of politeness, delicacy and 
 sensibility) qualify him to be a tool in their hands ; 
 and as a sort of subaltern or dragoon, the object of 
 his mission, I doubt not, is to harpoon me from the 
 church, and pluck up at once the germ of reforma- 
 tion in this section of country. But I trust you will 
 this day detect his ambition, and exhibit his pre- 
 sumption to naked view, with all its appalling de- 
 formities, that it may be whipped through the world 
 with the lash of every generous spirit. And that 
 he may accomplish this work of spiritual havoc the 
 more successfully, he comes under the plausible 
 7* 
 
78 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 appellation of a brother. If he be a brother, it must 
 be by the bonds of religious love, for the ties of 
 consanguinity must be vastly remote. But mark 
 his cold, icy visage : do you behold the rosy glow 
 of sensibility suffuse his cheek, or the tear of sym- 
 pathy pearl along his visage? Do you behold his 
 bosom swell with the lacerated feelings of an af- 
 flicted man who sees a brother about to be immo- 
 lated? No: but with a sort of stupid sullenness he 
 pants for barbarous triumph ; while those little 
 sunken, languid blue flames under his forehead 
 glimmer with the lashes of the inquisition. Is his 
 conduct better than his locks? Has he followed 
 me with the arguments, importunities and remon- 
 strances of an aggrieved brother ? Where is the 
 
 CO 
 
 man whom he united with himself in this expedi- 
 tion of love to rescue a wandering brother from 
 error, and bring him back to the right way? No, 
 not a word ever escaped his lips to me on the sub- 
 ject before this day. When he passed up the cir- 
 cuit last a sort of soliloquy reached my hands, hav- 
 ing his name affixed, which I should not have 
 known was designed for my perusal had not my 
 name been appended to its back ; and before he 
 received my answer he issued his arrest. This I 
 received on Friday evening, demanding my at- 
 tendance at half-past 8 o'clock the ensuing Sabbath, 
 at which time I had an appointment for two days' 
 meeting twenty miles from home. No allowance 
 was made for the arrangement of a defence, the 
 collection of testimony, nor the adjustment of busi- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. i\) 
 
 ness; but with the promptitude of an eastern slave 
 I must obey this pigmy lord, and leave the world 
 behind. To cap the climax of his brotherhood, he 
 dragged from Carrituck, a distance of thirty odd 
 miles, this man David Ellis, (with whom I have di- 
 vided my bread and purse, and whose hands I have 
 borne up in this assembly,) and drilled him as the 
 creature of his vengeance for the havoc of this day, 
 while other brethren of far more experience and 
 talents lived within a few miles of the scene of trial; 
 and that he might secure a majority of three he has 
 duped this old Israelite into his deadly policy; a 
 man with whom I have passed ten years of unin- 
 terrupted union, and for whom I could almost have 
 died. And in your presence this man has endea- 
 vored to act the double part of prosecutor and juror. 
 And if blackness can be added to this portray 
 of darkness, this very man, Benjamin Edge, call- 
 ing himself brother, minister of Christ, assistant 
 preacher, has ambushed all my peregrinations in 
 social circles of neighborhood conviviality, through 
 which I have passed with all the hilarity and cheer- 
 fulness of conscious innocence ; he has entered with 
 all the subtlety and venom of a serpent. He has 
 entered into private families and scraped the neigh- 
 borhood in quest of materials to secure his deadly 
 purpose. He has violated all rules of politeness by 
 seeking to pry into private conversations through 
 all possible mediums. Is this the minister of peace, 
 the herald of Jesus, going about like his Lord and 
 Master to do good? Tell it not in Gath, publish it 
 
80 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 not in Askelon. Oh ! how my heart sickens at the 
 sight of this mystery of iniquity. And that nothing 
 may be wanting to complete this spectacle of hor- 
 ror you are called upon to aid in this work of domi- 
 neering vengeance. You, with whom I have spent 
 ten years of the most unsullied communion; you, 
 with whom I have often shared the most hallowed 
 emblems of love, the broken body and shed blood 
 of Christ ; yes, you, with whom ten years of my 
 life have passed as softly away as if I had glided 
 on a river of oil ; you, with whom I might have 
 softly slept in Jesus had not this disturb r come, 
 are called upon to dip your hands in the blood of a 
 brother who never wished you wrong. But, oh! 
 destruction stops not here. Each one of us is the 
 centre of a little community, around which a do- 
 mestic circle plays. We expect to hand our names 
 over to future ages, and to live in the persons of 
 others, when these bodies, now rosy, nervous and 
 gay, are dissolved and motionless in the dust ; 
 nevertheless you are called upon for a verdict which 
 must fester in the hearts of our descendants to the 
 fourth generation, and fling a baleful hue upon the 
 distant scenery of future ages. All this for what? 
 That I may be bound as a victim upon the altar of 
 that man's ambition whose hand trembles to slay 
 me. And what is Benjamin Edge? A passing 
 cloud, a bird of flight, an atom in the breeze, a bub- 
 ble upon the stream of nature, which must shortly 
 burst and vanish away, a scapegoat of the wilder- 
 ness, turned loose to wander through the earth and 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 81 
 
 leave no trace behind. And yet you, the substan- 
 tialities of civil and religious society ; you, the con- 
 necting links between the present and future ages, 
 are called upon to give up a member of your own 
 body, a brother, to the vagaries of this vanishing 
 shade. And should you obey his wishes, what ac- 
 count will you give to the tribunal of your own con- 
 science when you retrospect the work of this day, 
 and survey a brother, an innocent man, without a 
 shadow of blame, transfixed by your sentence, and 
 laid low in the dust ? What account will you ren- 
 der to the free, intrepid spirits of this assembly, 
 whose eyes now flash with the flames of intelligent 
 scrutiny upon your deliberations, should you pun- 
 ish as a crime in me the act of contending for the 
 right of suffrage, for which their brave ancestors 
 agonized and expired ? How will you answer for 
 such an outrage upon the sanctuary of freedom to 
 the awful and violated majesty of these United 
 States, who combine as with the congregated weight 
 of the raging ocean to wreck in an instant the pre- 
 tensions of any tyrant who shall attempt to violate 
 the rights of their children ? What plea will you 
 offer to the advocates of mutual rights in your 
 church, who spurn at lordly encroachments upon 
 the heritage of Christ ? And still more, what ac- 
 count will you render to the members of the Roan- 
 oke District Conference, from whom you hold your 
 official existence ; to whom you stand pledged in 
 the work of reform; and in whom, be you assured, 
 you will find the most inflexible advocates of free 
 
82 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 dom, and the most invulnerable opponents to lordly 
 pretensions in the church of Christ? Lastly, how 
 will you account with Him whose eyes are as a 
 flame of fire, and whose voice is as the roaring of 
 many waters, when he shall ask you why you 
 sealed a brother's lips in silence, and bound him 
 .over in chains? Can you expect from him, for 
 such a work, the soul-exhilarating plaudit of "Well 
 done, good and faithful servants, enter into the joy 
 of your Lord?" Will you not rather anticipate that 
 frightful sentence, which will seize your souls as 
 with the convulsions of an earthquake, "Depart ye 
 cursed into everlasting fire?" This defence is not 
 predicated upon suspicions of the jury; there are 
 men upon that committee with whom I am willing 
 to risk my sublunary all ; and over the two who 
 have been the dupes of that man's policy I would 
 cast the mantle of mercy. The collusion of the 
 judge, Benjamin Edge, with that old Israelite who 
 attempted to occupy a place on that jury, but whom 
 I have been so fortunate as to identify as the prose- 
 cutor, averse to his own wishes and the expecta- 
 tions of his ally, and for which you have justly re- 
 moved him from your committee; I say the collusion 
 of those is a lively comment upon a mysterious 
 vision presented to my mind a few nights past. In 
 appearance a tablet of state was before me, bounded 
 on the edges or extremes with broken inscriptions 
 in bright characters* which one requested me to 
 read, whose name I will not mention, but which I 
 could not decipher; immediately through the midst 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. S3 
 
 two hands with arms from the elbows were col- 
 laterally extended with all the fingers in full per- 
 fection ; and although the ground of the tablet was 
 like slate, and the color of the hands the same, yet 
 the latter appeared in full relief and clear distinc- 
 tion ; the whole appeared to emit a fervid glowing, 
 like a piece of iron in a state of fusion. This in- 
 stant brings the interpretation. Those collateral 
 hands are those two men combined against me; the 
 color of the tablet is the blackness of the plot ; the 
 fervid glowing is the characteristic of the spirit 
 which conducts it. Further I will not go; but I 
 wait for time and circumstances 10 develop the re- 
 maining mystery. But the charities of my heart 
 are still enlisted in behalf of my prosecutor, and I 
 could wish that the part he has acted in this afflict- 
 ing tragedy could be wiped from the memory of his 
 survivors, for his days are evidently almost run, 
 and I am loth to see this stain affixed to his memo- 
 ry. But that man, Benjamin Edge, is the first 
 traveling Methodist minister who ever reached this 
 neighborhood without sharing in my sympathies 
 and support ; and even now the charities of my 
 heart should overflow towards him in rich effu- 
 sion did not justice to myself, my church and my 
 country sternly forbid it. There is a point beyond 
 which forbearance is an abuse, and we have reached 
 it; and under the stern demands of principle I am 
 now compelled to reverse in this instance the order of 
 my whole life, and to recommend him (for his good) 
 to your justice ; a justice, nevertheless, blended 
 
84 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 with mercy. Teach him to respect the rights of 
 your church and country; let him know, freemen 
 of Hyde, that until he shall do this you will do 
 without him, and that he shall do without you ; let 
 him know that you tolerate his performances now 
 more out of respect, to his church than out of re- 
 spect to his talents. Let him learn that that man, 
 John Giles, a member of your own community, 
 who rears a family for the commonwealth, can hold 
 the handle of his plough every day of his life, and 
 infinitely transcend him in talents, though he de- 
 vote himself to his profession alone ; and, indeed, 
 where is the man on that committee who is not 
 better qualified for public usefulness than he is? 
 And, my brethren of the laity, while I really feel 
 myself an unprofitable servant in the main, yet I 
 am glad for your sake that the stroke which he has 
 leveled at your freedom has fallen upon me as 
 your shield. I hold myself ready to be the pack- 
 horse of your burthens, and am prepared to share 
 in your joys and sorrows; and I assure you that 
 the devotedness of this day will never escape my 
 fondest recollections. 
 
 And now, my brethren of the committee, bring in 
 a verdict which shall comport with the interests of 
 your church and the rights of your country, and I 
 shall be satisfied. 
 
 The committee reported — "No cause of action." 
 Was ever a vindication more triumphant? Was 
 ever innocence more nobly or manfully defended 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 85 
 
 than upon this occasion ? No immorality whatever 
 was charged against the Rev. Mr. Hill ; but the speci- 
 fications were for inveighing against discipline and 
 sowing dissension in societies. Was it not passing 
 strange that Benjamin Edge should undertake to 
 expel the defendant in this case from the pale of the 
 church, depose him from the sacred office of the 
 ministry, put the seal of official silence upon 
 his lips for ever, and arrest him from pointing 
 sinners to the Lamb of God any more ? And 
 all this, too, for expressing his opinion concern- 
 ing the government of the church of which he 
 was a member ; an unalienable right which every 
 Christian and patriot possesses in Columbia's hea- 
 ven-favored land. Who can read brother Hill's de- 
 fence without admiration ? How scathing it must 
 have been to the feelings of the judge, if, indeed, 
 he possessed much sensibility. One might con- 
 clude, from what he encountered and suffered on 
 that occasion, that the Rev. Mr. Edge would ever 
 afterwards suffer the friends of reform to rest in 
 peace ; but we shall perhaps hear from him again 
 before the close of this history. The address or 
 defence, although severe, should be read by every 
 lover of mutual rights ; and generations yet to come 
 will admire the man and applaud the Christian that 
 thus boldly and fearlessly encountered the spirit of 
 tyranny, and successfully withstood the insidious 
 efforts of the strong hand of oppression. 
 
 8 
 
86 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Protest of the Roanoke Union Society against the ninth section 
 of Discipline. — Formation and Constitution of Granville Union 
 Society in North Carolina. — Trials and expulsions of some of 
 its members. — Correspondence between Ivey Harris and Rev. 
 William Compton with regard to the expulsions. 
 
 At the annual meeting of the Roanoke Union 
 Society a committee was appointed to review the 
 ninth section of the book of Discipline, as revised 
 by the General Conference of 1824, and make re- 
 port thereon. The General Conference, in the pas- 
 sage of the rules contained in that section, had 
 touched a most delicate question, especially so to 
 the people of the south. Slavery is an institution 
 that is regulated by law in the States where it ex- 
 ists. Laws are enacted from time to time by the 
 legislatures of such States for the special govern- 
 ment and regulation of that class of people. Many 
 individuals who are members of the church are 
 connected with slavery, and that, too, not through 
 choice or action of their own, but by the very cir- 
 cumstances of birth. The customs which obtain 
 with respect to it are thought, by those who have 
 the best opportunities of knowing, to be the most 
 conducive to the welfare of all concerned. And 
 whenever an ecclesiastical body interferes with a 
 subject that belongs more properly to the legisla- 
 tive hall, grounds of offence are given, and discord 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 87 
 
 ensues ; and it is much regretted by the true friends 
 of humanity and of religion that the misguided zeal 
 of both religionists and philanthropists has been 
 such as to militate against the temporal and spirit- 
 ual interests of both classes of the colored popula- 
 tion in the southern States. 
 
 The action of the General Conference, by the 
 adoption of the ninth section of Discipline upon the 
 subject of slavery, created dissatisfaction among 
 the people of the southern States ; and in the south, 
 generally, the rules of said section have remained 
 to this day a dead letter. The committee that was 
 appointed to review this section of the book of 
 Discipline brought in a protest, which, after some 
 discussion, was amended and adopted, and stands 
 on record in the following form and words : 
 
 TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. 
 
 " Open rebuke is better than secret love." 
 
 Extract from the Methodist Discipline, as revised by the General 
 Conference of 1824. 
 
 Section IX. — Of Slavery. 
 
 Question. What shall be done for the extirpa- 
 tion of the evil of slavery ? 
 
 Ans. 1. We declare that we are as much as 
 ever convinced of the great evil of slavery. There- 
 fore, no slave-holder shall be eligible to any official 
 station in our church hereafter where the laws of 
 the State in which he lives will admit of emanci- 
 pation, and permit the liberated slave to enjoy 
 freedom. 
 
88 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 2. When any traveling preacher becomes the 
 owner of a slave or slaves by any means, he shall 
 forfeit his ministerial character in our church, unless 
 he execute, if it be practicable, a legal emancipa- 
 tion of such slaves, conformably to the laws of the 
 State in which he lives. 
 
 3. All our preachers shall prudently enforce upon 
 our members the necessity of teaching their slaves 
 to read the word of God ; and to allow them time 
 to attend upon the public worship of God on our 
 regular days of divine service. 
 
 4. Our colored preachers and official members 
 shall have all the privileges which are usual to 
 others in the District and Quarterly Conferences, 
 where the usages of the country do not forbid it. 
 And the presiding eldeV may hold for them a sep- 
 arate District Conference, where the number of 
 colored local preachers will justify it. 
 
 5. The Annual Conference may employ colored 
 preachers to travel and preach where their services 
 are judged necessary; provided that no one shall 
 be so employed without having been recommended 
 according to the form of Discipline. 
 
 PROTEST TO NINTH SECTION. 
 
 1. We believe the answers given to the foregoing 
 question to be injurious to the refined sensibilities of 
 white men; because, in the first place, it exhibits 
 the late General Conference as a body of white men 
 unnaturally and most zealously engaged for the 
 social advancement and official promotion of colored 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 89 
 
 men in the Church, in opposition to her ancient 
 usages ; and that, too, without her consent in person 
 or by proxy. 
 
 2. Because the arrangement in the fourth item 
 confounds the white and colored officers of the 
 church in the Quarterly Conferences, and the white 
 and colored preachers in the District Conferences, 
 without the sanction of the church or the previous 
 consent of parties. 
 
 3. Because the same item grants to colored 
 preachers the twofold prerogative of mixing with 
 the whites in the District Conferences, and a sepa- 
 rate conference for themselves, which guarantees to 
 them the harmony and exclusive advantage of a 
 private interview with the presiding elder of their 
 respective districts. 
 
 4. Because the fifth item authorizes the Annual 
 Conferences to employ colored preachers to travel 
 and preach without the consent of the people to 
 whom they are destined to preach. 
 
 5. Because the third item makes it the duty of 
 the preachers to enforce upon our members the 
 necessity of learning their slaves to read, and allow 
 them time to attend preaching, as one of the various 
 means devised (in said answer) for the extirpation 
 of the evil of slavery; thus secularizing the word 
 and worship of Almighty God. 
 
 6. Because the foregoing arrangements subject 
 the white members (in case of an appeal) to be 
 tried by a parti-colored Quarterly Conference, as 
 the case may happen. 
 
90 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 7. Because the said answer opens to men of 
 color the shortest and cheapest road to social con- 
 sequence and official promotion to be found in the 
 United States, or even in Christendom ; conse- 
 quently, they will inundate the church, and eventu- 
 ally subject the whites to their official control. 
 
 8. Because said answer cannot fail to increase 
 the insolence of the slaves and free people of color, 
 and consequently expose them to exemplary pun- 
 ishment at the hands of their owners and State 
 authorities under which they live. 
 
 This answer is also calculated to excite the oppo- 
 sition and contempt of our fellow citizens in the 
 southern and western States against our traveling 
 preachers. First, because it was given by a Gen- 
 eral Conference composed of the representatives of 
 our traveling preachers, some of whom were the 
 subjects of the British government. Secondly, 
 because this answer contemplates the extirpation 
 of the evil of slavery by the literary and pulpit in- 
 struction of the slaves, and the official promotion 
 and agency of people of color. Thirdly, because 
 this answer enjoins upon our preachers an interfer- 
 ence with the civil and domestic concerns of the 
 slave-holding States. Fourthly, because this an- 
 swer has a direct tendency to sow the seeds of do- 
 mestic discontent, and to create conspiracies in the 
 southern States. 
 
 For the above reasons we do most solemnly pro- 
 test against this ninth section of our Discipline. 
 
 Signed in behalf of the Roanoke Union Society, 
 Eli B. Whitaker, President. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 91 
 
 At a subsequent meeting of the society the com- 
 mittee on ways and means reported a resolution 
 which was adopted, that copies of the ninth section 
 of the Discipline, with the accompanying protest, be 
 printed and extensively circulated. 
 
 The grounds taken by the authors of the protest 
 are considered by many as imaginary or chimerical, 
 that there is nothing in the ninth section calculated 
 to produce any of the effects spoken of in the pro- 
 test. If so, wrry have not the preachers in the 
 southern States proceeded to execute the requisi- 
 tions of that section , ? So far as the knowledge and 
 observation of the writer extend, they suffer them to 
 sleep: it has lived as a dead letter in the book. 
 The subject was too delicate for the southern min- 
 isters to handle. The times, customs and laws all 
 conspired to dictate to them a more prudent course, 
 and that was to leave the subject where they 
 found it. 
 
 Some time in the early part of the year 1826 the 
 organization of the Granville Union Society took 
 place. Its objects were the same as those of the 
 Roanoke Union Society. Both were desirous to 
 see a reformation effected in the government of the 
 church to which they belonged. But such was the 
 opposition manifested by clerical authority or itin- 
 erant supremacy, that the former society was soon 
 destined to pass through a fiery ordeal. In a 
 few days after their organization the preacher in 
 charge began to manifest a disposition to break up 
 the Union Society, and crush the spirit of reform as 
 
92 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 it were by his mere ipse dixit. The writer begs 
 leave to introduce here a "letter from the Granville 
 Union Society to the Baltimore Union Society, 
 giving an account of the late proceedings against 
 reformers, and asking advice." 
 
 Dear Brethren, — On the fourth Friday and 
 days following in July, 1S26, we met at Plank 
 Chapel meeting-house, in Tar River Circuit, for the 
 purpose of organizing a Union Society, which we 
 proceeded to do, after prayer, in the following man- 
 ner: — A brother arose and proceeded to inform the 
 congregation of the objects of the meeting, namely, 
 to unite for the purpose of petitioning the General 
 Conference to grant to the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church an equitable representative form of govern- 
 ment; and after having answered all the objections 
 which he had heard urged by the old side brethren 
 in a very satisfactory manner, he called on all who 
 were friendly to the wished for amendment to take 
 seats in one square of the meeting-house, which was 
 accordingly done. We then proceeded to elect our 
 officers. Anderson Paschall, President; Lewellyn 
 Jones, Vice President; and Rev. Jesse H. Cobb, 
 Secretary. There were about fifteen persons who 
 became members of this society at that meeting, 
 who proceeded to adopt the following 
 
 CONSTITUTION 
 OF THE GRANVILLE UNION SOCIETY OF N. CAROLINA. 
 
 Whereas it is an acknowledged principle, in all 
 equitable and well regulated ecclesiastical govern- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 93 
 
 merits, that each member should be guarded as a 
 Christian in his rights and privileges, the principle 
 •of which is the right of representation in the law- 
 making department, either personally or by his 
 representative ; and as it is a well known fact that 
 according to the present form of the government 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the itinerant 
 brethren have arrogated to themselves and do exer- 
 cise exclusive authority in the government of the 
 same ; and whereas a minority of the itinerant 
 preachers and a large number of the laity and lo- 
 cality are desirous to have the government of our 
 church so revolutionized as to secure equality of 
 representation to local and lay members : 
 
 We therefore deem it advisable in matters so im- 
 portant to form ourselves into a society, for the pur- 
 pose of corresponding with our brethren within the 
 United States who are favorable to a reform, on 
 such subjects as will tend to improve the form 
 of our church government. And we do adopt 
 for the government of the society the following 
 regulations : 
 
 Article 1. This society shall be denominated 
 the Granville Union Society, auxiliary to the Balti- 
 more Union Society. 
 
 Art. 2. The officers of this society shall consist 
 of a President, Vice President, Secretary, Trea- 
 surer, and a Corresponding Committee of five 
 members, who shall be elected annually, all of 
 whom shall be members of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. 
 
94 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Art. 3. It shall be the duty of the President, and 
 in his absence, the Vice President, to preside at 
 every meeting of the society, to call a special meet- 
 ing whenever the situation of the society may re- 
 quire it, and open and close the meeting with sing- 
 ing and prayer. 
 
 Art. 4. It shall be the duty of the Treasurer to 
 take charge of the funds of the society, and render 
 annually, or oftener, if the society require it, a state- 
 ment of receipts and expenditures ; and to deliver 
 to his successor in office all moneys, papers, books, 
 &c, remaining in his possession. 
 
 Art. 5. It shall be the duty of the Secretar}' to 
 keep a strict record of the proceedings of the 
 society. 
 
 Art. 6. It shall be the duty of the Corresponding 
 Committee to correspond with the Baltimore Union 
 Society, and all other societies and persons as the 
 members of this body may from time to time direct, 
 and lay before the society at each meeting such 
 communications. 
 
 Art. 7. Any person may become a member of 
 this society who is friendly to a reform, by signing 
 his name to this Constitution, or by a written com- 
 munication to the society, provided he is a member 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 Art. 8. This society shall meet at such times 
 and places as shall be appointed, and contribute to 
 defray the expenses of the same. 
 
 Art. 9. There shall be an annual meeting of this 
 society on the 4th day of July, at Harris's meeting- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 95 
 
 house, for the purpose of electing officers and trans- 
 acting other business. 
 
 Art. 10. This Constitution may be altered or 
 amended at any meeting of the society, provided a 
 majority of the members be present, and two-thirds 
 of them concur in such alterations or amendments. 
 
 A few days after the meeting some of the old 
 side brethren informed the preacher in charge (Rev. 
 B. Field) that there had been a union meeting, and 
 that six of the society under his charge at Plank 
 Chapel had become members. Upon the receipt 
 of this information the preacher forthwith sent to 
 each of them the following reproof: 
 
 "I am sorry to learn that you, with several oth- 
 ers, have associated in order to use your endeavors 
 to sow dissensions in our societies by inveighing 
 against the discipline of our church. It therefore 
 now becomes my painful duty as preacher in charge 
 to administer reproof to you for your unscriptural 
 and peace-destroying conduct ; and if you see pro- 
 per to yield to reproof so far as to engage in future 
 to leave off such pernicious conduct, I shall rejoice 
 to hear the same; but if you refuse, you thereby 
 bring me under the necessity of calling you to 
 account before the church to answer for your 
 conduct." 
 
 On the receipt of this reproof not one of them 
 could feel guilty, or a disposition to comply with its 
 requirements, for this obvious reason, the charges 
 contained in it were false and groundless. They 
 
96 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 were nevertheless cited to trial. Four of the lay- 
 men were ready. The trial commenced by exhib- 
 iting the charges, and by an attempt on the part of 
 the preacher to substantiate them. Herein he ut- 
 terly failed. He, however, intent on his purpose, 
 changed his ground, and proceeded to examine 
 some witnesses respecting their opinions of Union 
 Society meetings. The witnesses stated in reply 
 that they thought they were calculated to sow dis- 
 sensions in the church. The preacher in charge 
 then asked the accused for their defence. Brother 
 Lewellyn Jones, a man of irreproachable life, pro- 
 ceeded by asking permission to read his defence, 
 alleging that he labored under some constitutional 
 impediment which tended to injure extempore 
 speaking. On a cold admission of his request, he 
 began, but was ordered immediately to desist, un- 
 der pretence that it was irrelevant. A friend then 
 offered to prove Jones's innocence by his declara- 
 tion as contained in the Constitution of the society, 
 but he too was ordered peremptorily to sit down. 
 "When your evidence is wanted I will call for it," 
 said the preacher in charge. Macon, who stood 
 charged next, alleged in his defence that the object 
 of their association in the Union Society might be 
 plainly developed by reading its Constitution, and 
 asked permission to do so, but this was refused 
 him ; he then asked leave to read only two items 
 in the Constitution, this was also most peremptorily 
 denied. A brother Valentine was,, then called on 
 for his defence, who only pleaded his innocence of 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 97 
 
 the crimes charged in his indictment, and then sub- 
 mitted. A brother Hunt, a young man, was called 
 on last, who simply said he meant no harm; nor 
 had he said one contentious word ; those with whom 
 he had associated were his particular acquaint- 
 ances, and he had every reason to believe were his 
 best friends, and some of them his fathers in the 
 gospel as well as kindred after the flesh ; he had 
 intended no harm, and had said nothing that could 
 give offence. But his plea of innocence before 
 such a tribunal could avail nothing. His staunch 
 pursuer proceeded to pronounce the unrighteous 
 verdict which excommunicated him and his three 
 suffering brethren from the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. 
 
 If this conduct become notorious, we cannot 
 conceive with what grace preachers can ever 
 invite another soul to become a member of our 
 church, while membership is so uncertain; will not 
 unprofessing men of correct views warn their chil- 
 dren and friends of the danger of being disgraced 
 by some bigoted, unfeeling mortal, who may seek to 
 execute his authority upon them, if they should be 
 so unfortunate as to differ from him in matters of 
 church polity? 
 
 It is true these expelled brethren were brought 
 before the class of which they were members, but, 
 alas ! there were found enough tools of priestly au- 
 thority to give a vote, from which the preacher 
 inferred his right to expel them all — for you must 
 know that when the question was put to the society 
 9 
 
98 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 it was not as it should have been, guilty or not 
 guilty, as charged ; but says the priest, " all of you 
 who think their conduct will have a bad effect will 
 signify it by rising up ;" which question you will 
 perceive had no relation to the charge. There was 
 also a local preacher of the same class who was 
 charged with just the same crimes, who was tried 
 four days after by a committee of local preachers, 
 and although the preacher in charge used the most 
 vigilant caution to prevent any reformer, or even 
 any who were suspected of being reformers, to sit 
 on his trial, yet he was acquitted without any ac- 
 knowledgment of errors on his part ; there being a 
 local preacher on the committee whose common 
 sense and religious soul could triumph over party 
 prejudices. The committe however instructed the 
 preacher in charge to give a private reproof to the 
 acquitted preacher and to advise him not to say 
 much more on the subject of reform hereafter. 
 The trial of the other brother has not yet taken 
 place, he having removed before he was ready to 
 meet it. 
 
 Brother Lewellyn Jones appealed to the quar- 
 terly meeting conference, and his case was there 
 reconsidered by a large portion of the old side offi- 
 cial members of the circuit to which he belonged. 
 A considerable debate took place ; for there were 
 some generous, undaunted souls in the conference, 
 who dared to plead the cause of innocence and 
 mutual rights; during the discussions, the presiding 
 elder for a while left the chair and introduced a 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 99 
 
 doctrine which we hope will meet the contempt 
 which it merits, namely, that men may forfeit 
 church privileges without committing an immoral 
 act, and instanced a case or two in criminal cases, 
 where men had been punished as thieves and 
 rogues who had not actually stolen any thing; and 
 that men had been dealt with as tories who had not 
 loaded their gun nor pulled a trigger; alleging that 
 the keeping company with rogues and tories was 
 sufficient proof of guilt. Having performed this 
 task, he resumed the chair and put the vote, and 
 the majority confirmed the sentence from which 
 brother Jones had appealed. 
 
 We would conclude this communication by ask- 
 ing the advice of the Baltimore Union Society and 
 their prayers in this matter. We [ declare, as to 
 ourselves, that all these things do not move us. We 
 hope that we are ready "not only to be bound but 
 to die " in that cause which has ever appeared 
 to us a reasonable and religious one ; and we 
 are glad to say that we believe this flagrant out- 
 rage on our dearest rights will have a healthful 
 bearing on our cause. It has already awakened 
 a spirit of inquiry and sympathy, and numbers are 
 saying "let us die with them;" and we believe 
 that our cause and numbers will always increase 
 in exact proportion to the increase of light upon the 
 subject. 
 
 Since writing the above the preacher in charge 
 in Tar River Circuit has proceeded to expel three 
 or four more members for joining the Union Society, 
 
100 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 one of whom was a preacher. Further commu- 
 nications will be made hereafter. 
 
 We remain, dear brethren, yours in the bonds of 
 a peaceful gospel. 
 
 Anderson Paschall, President. 
 
 Jesse H. Cobb, Secretary. 
 
 After reading the preceding constitution, one 
 would not suppose that simply subscribing thereto, 
 and thus becoming a member of the Granville Union 
 Society, would (upon reasonable principles) consti- 
 tute "sowing dissensions in society," or "inveigh- 
 ing against discipline." But man loves power, 
 and the formation of the Union Society had in con- 
 templation a reformation in the government of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, so as to abridge the 
 authority to a certain extent of- the itinerancy. 
 This was the head and front of their offence. 
 And although this was their undoubted right, as 
 they interfered with no just rights of other men, yet 
 in the eyes of itinerant supremacy it was regarded 
 as a crime, and in order to attach odium was called 
 by another name, "sowing dissensions in society 
 and inveighing against discipline." Hence, for this 
 offence against what we might call the strong hand 
 of ecclesiastical power, these innocent, respectable, 
 and upright members of the M. E. Church were 
 made to feel most grievously its injustice and oppres- 
 sion, by being excluded from the church of their 
 choice. 
 
 It is the exercise of unjust power that constitutes 
 tyranny, either in church or state ; and no tyranny 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 101 
 
 has been more cruel or relentless in the world 
 than that which has been exercised by clerical 
 despots. It was that which brought a Latimer 
 and a Ridley to the stake. It was that which 
 established the bloody inquisition in Spain. It was 
 that which made Italy what she is. And it was 
 but a modification of the same spirit that cast those 
 seven members of the Granville Union Society 
 from the bosom of the church. And strange to re- 
 late, there were professing Christians, even in Car- 
 olina, where independence first drew her native 
 breath, that thought and believed that it was right 
 thus to eject members from the church militant, not 
 for any immorality, but for opinion's sake upon 
 church pohty alone. 
 
 The manner in which that aged Christian man, 
 Lewellyn Jones, was treated by the quarterly 
 meeting conference to which he had appealed, 
 drew forth the sympathies of many of his brethren 
 in his behalf. His age, his piety, his standing in 
 the community, all conspired to render him a fit 
 sacrifice to be immolated upon the altar of " mutual 
 rights." The expelled members thus divested of 
 membership in the church, appealed to the annual 
 conference, as well as sent up charges against the 
 superintendent for mal-administration; but the 
 conference decided it was not mal-administration ! 
 Will any lover of justice or truth pretend to say, in 
 view of all the circumstances, there was no need 
 of reformation in the government of the church that 
 tolerated such high-handed measures as these, or 
 9* 
 
102 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 could look with approbation upon such tragic 
 scenes ? If so, surely he does not breathe Ameri- 
 can air. 
 
 In order that the inquirer after truth may know 
 what feelings and views were held by the preacher 
 in charge, Rev. Wm. Compton, in reference to the 
 expulsion for opinion's sake, we will bring forward 
 a correspondence that ensued between Mr. Ivey 
 Harris and the Rev. Wm. Compton in relation to 
 the expulsion of Lewellyn Jones of N. Carolina, who 
 had appealed to the quarterly-meeting Conference, 
 held at Kings wood meeting house. 
 
 Letter from Mr. Ivey Harris to Rev. TV. Compton. 
 
 December 17, 1826. 
 Respected Sir: 
 
 You will perhaps be surprised when you see the 
 name of him who now addresses you; but I hope 
 you will excuse the liberty I take, when I tell you 
 that my mind has for some weeks been dwelling 
 on a subject in regard to which you may possibly 
 afford me some satisfaction. I had thought to ad- 
 dress you sooner, but hoped that my mind might 
 receive additional light by prayer and meditation 
 on the subject; but I must confess that if any light 
 has been communicated, it has been calculated to 
 involve in deeper mystery the particular act to 
 which I allude. You cannot be at a loss for my 
 allusion, when I refer you to the last quarterly meet- 
 ing conference, held at Kings wood meeting house, 
 Tar River Circuit, and particularly to the part you 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 103 
 
 acted in that awful tragedy on that occasion. And 
 now, my dear brother, permit me to propose several 
 plain questions in the spirit of meekness : and first, 
 was there any evidence adduced on that occasion 
 that convicted our venerable father in Israel, 
 Lewellyn Jones, of any act or word against the 
 laws of God or man, more than was adduced in 
 the case of brother Hunt, at Plank Chapel? I 
 think you will not say there was. Why then the 
 difference in your verdict respecting the two breth- 
 ren? Is it that you erred in the first instance and 
 have since received more light ? The fact is, evi- 
 dence against him there was none, and that in his 
 favor was not admitted. Secondly, was our aged 
 brother convicted or even accused of any thing that 
 in your estimation would exclude him from the 
 kingdom of heaven ? If not, why give your vote to 
 exclude him from the militant church? Thirdly, 
 can it be possible that the shameful attempt of the 
 president of that meeting to identify the reformers 
 with thieves and tories was so influential as to cause 
 any member of that body to strike the fatal blow ? 
 I suppose that the thing is, perhaps, possible as it 
 respects some, but charity and long acquaintance 
 forbid me to think that my brother Compton can at 
 all be subject to such influence. But should you 
 say that remarks about thieves and tories were only 
 by way of simile or comparison, I would just ask 
 how much better character can the reformers sus- 
 tain in the estimation of any man who will raise 
 his hand to inflict the stroke of moral death on an 
 
104 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 old soldier of the cross, solely because he joins 
 them in an humble petition to the powers that be 
 for an equitable representative government, and is 
 so unfortunate as to be found sitting on the same 
 seats with them ? Fourthly and lastly, be so good 
 as to let me know whether it was either just or gen- 
 erous in you to name what was said by some body 
 in Raleigh on the subject of reform, and by some 
 one else in Virginia, and try to transfer their guilt to 
 the venerable and trembling victim before you, who 
 could no more prevent what those unknown men 
 had said than your youngest child could prevent 
 the sin of our first parents. 
 
 And now, my brother, permit me to observe, 
 before I close, that language fails to describe the 
 feeling of my heart when I heard that the sen- 
 tence against the old brother was confirmed by 
 a large majority ; and my feelings were still 
 more poignant, when I heard that my brother 
 Compton, on whom I most depended, as in the 
 case of brother Hunt, to repel the shafts of despot- 
 ism, prejudice and ignorance, had lent a hand 
 and the strength of his influence to hurl an old dis- 
 ciple of Christ over the battlements of the church 
 from such premises. But it is my firm belief that 
 scores and hundreds of reformers will arise from 
 the ashes of our aged and injured brother. Such 
 measures will wake up reflection in thinking minds. 
 Republican principles and equal rights are too pre- 
 cious to relinquish in a civil capacity, and thou- 
 sands are beginning to see that Christ's freemen 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 105 
 
 should enjoy, at least, equal privileges. Be as- 
 sured, my brother, that thousands of the mem- 
 bers of the Methodist Episcopal Church, many 
 of whom are among the most intelligent, are 
 ready to be immolated on the same altar on which 
 our beloved brother Jones expired; and I must take 
 the liberty here to state that apart from the little 
 spark of grace which charity requires me to hope 
 the members of that quarterly conference yet retain, 
 and having the civil authority to support them, I 
 would almost as soon be tried by the popish inqui- 
 sition as by some of the members of that tribunal. 
 You will observe that I say some of them, for there 
 are some of whom I feel united to by the strongest 
 ties of brotherly love. 
 
 And now, my dear brother, permit me in the 
 conclusion to assure you that I feel nothing in my 
 heart towards you contrary to Christian union and 
 fellowship, for I am conscious that the best of men 
 may err in their zeal for what they believe to be a 
 good cause ; and my record is on high that I have 
 not written a single word with a design to irritate 
 your feelings, and I hope you will regard my plain 
 remarks only as the effusions of a full soul. And 
 further, I would request you (if I have not shared 
 the common fate of my reforming brethren — if I 
 have not entirely lost your Christian confidence) to 
 favor me at least with a few lines in answer to the 
 foregoing questions, particularly the first, second 
 and fourth. And I most sincerely pray Almighty 
 God that if light should be afforded from any source, 
 
106 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 I may possess a mind open to conviction and capa- 
 ble of receiving it. Respectfully Yours, 
 
 Ivey Harris. 
 Rev. W. Compton. 
 
 P. S. I would yet observe, with regard to our 
 brother George W. Nolly, that I congratulate him 
 on the comfortable hope that he will escape the 
 "heaviest lashes of the next Virginia Conference," 
 in consequence of having to return a "factious 
 party" about Harris's meeting house, if not as 
 "thieves and tories," yet as being quite above law, 
 and entirely ungovernable. I. H. 
 
 Letter from Rev. Wm. Comjyton to Mr. Harris. 
 
 December 26, 1826. 
 Brother Harris: 
 
 Yours of the 17th was received by me this morn- 
 ing. You request an answer, particularly to your 
 first, second and fourth questions, provided you 
 have not (in my estimation I suppose you mean) 
 shared the same fate with your reforming brethren. 
 Were you placed before me in the same relation 
 with your "venerable father in Israel, Lewellyn 
 Jones," I should deal towards the son as I dealt in 
 reference to the father. Nevertheless I write to you 
 because you so earnestly request it. You ask, 
 under question first, " was there any evidence ad- 
 duced that convicted our venerable father in Israel* 
 Lewellyn Jones?" Most assuredly. His subscrib- 
 ing to the constitution of the Union Society (so 
 called), the object of the votaries of which I have 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 107 
 
 reason to believe, as to the major part of them, is 
 to "revolutionize" the system of Methodist Church 
 government, and so to alter its economy as finally 
 to destroy itinerancy and establish a congregational 
 system among us. You may say " God forbid." 
 If so, and you be sincere, this only vindicates your- 
 self, but is no plea for any other member of your 
 fraternity. But you ask, "had you not the same 
 evidence in relation to James Hunt . ? " &c. I knew 
 that he was a member of the same body with 
 Lewellyn Jones, but I had paid but a superficial 
 attention to your constitution, and therefore did not 
 act upon that as evidence at all, but solely upon the 
 testimony of the witnesses in the case, whose testi- 
 mony 1 considered as only amounting to circum- 
 stantial proof against said Hunt. This I stated in 
 quarterly conference, and further added that, if 1 
 had been governed by the constitution of the Union 
 Society, I would have given my voice to silence 
 him. You inquire, under question second, " was 
 our aged brother convicted, or even charged with 
 any thing that in your estimation would exclude him 
 from the kingdom of heaven ? If not, why give 
 your vote to exclude him from the church mili- 
 tant ?" The plain English of this is, that no person 
 ought to be excluded from the Methodist (which 
 you are pleased to call the militant) Church, unless 
 he be guilty of something that would exclude him 
 from the kingdom of heaven. This plea I think 
 was sufficiently met by brother Howard.* But as 
 
 *The presiding elder. 
 
10S HISTORY OF THE 
 
 most of us are forgetful hearers of those things 
 which confute our strongest arguments in favor of 
 a beloved theory, it may not be amiss to repeat the 
 substance of at least a part of what he said. And 
 to make this more forcible, permit me to preface it 
 with one or two questions. Will you say that the 
 Presbyterians because they are Calvinists, or the 
 Baptists because they deny infant baptism and free 
 communion, or the Protestant Episcopalians because 
 they contend for a regular succession in the minis- 
 try, are heretics and ought therefore to be excluded 
 the kingdom of heaven ? Let your conscience 
 answer. Now if the opinions of neither the one nor 
 the other of these denominations are sufficient to 
 exclude a man the kingdom of heaven, then neither 
 are the opinions of the whole, provided they were 
 concentrated in one man. Let us then suppose 
 Lewellyn Jones to be this man. In sentiment he 
 is a Calvinist — he denies infant baptism and free 
 communion — and contends that none ought to 
 preach the gospel but those who can prove their 
 ministerial authority in a direct line from Christ; — 
 through the apostolical Church — through the church 
 of Rome — and through the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church. You, I suppose, would say that he is not 
 to be excluded the Methodist (that is to say, the mili- 
 tant) Church, because of the peculiarity of his sen- 
 timents. Is this the way you argue? Or is this the 
 " freedom" of which you so often speak, and which, 
 from your course of reasoning, one would think is 
 one of the constituent parts of your contemplated 
 
METHODIST FROTESTANT CHURCH. 109 
 
 change in the government of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church ? If so, what I did in the case of your 
 " venerable father in Israel " I conceive to have 
 been one of the best acts of my life. L. Jones may 
 or may not be a good man, and so of I. Harris ; it is 
 not for me to say. But when a man subscribes to 
 an instrument of writing, the express object of 
 which is to "revolutionize" the government of the 
 Methodist Church, I think it my duty as a member 
 of said church to be decided in my stand against 
 him. And for this reason I have resolved to be no 
 longer neutral in the matter. 
 
 You ask, fourthly and lastly, "was it either just 
 or generous in you to name what was said by some 
 body in Raleigh on the subject of reform, and by 
 some one else in Virginia, and thus try to transfer 
 their guilt to the venerable and trembling victim 
 before you ?" &c. I think both. For certainly I, 
 as a Methodist, ought to be open of heart (which is 
 one definition of the term generous, and the one I 
 suppose intended) in vindicating the church to 
 which I belong, and to which, under God, I owe 
 my religious existence. That is, I ought to keep 
 nothing concealed which would be to the advantage 
 of said church. And I think it very advantageous 
 to Methodism that those who are dividing our Zion 
 against herself should be traced out and exposed in 
 all their ramifications, both as it relates to them- 
 selves and to those with whom they are connected 
 in the great work of revolutionizing the government 
 of the church. I have said both, of course what I 
 10 
 
110 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 did I consider an act of justice as well as of gene- 
 rosity. I will suppose a case : C is found carrying 
 off the body of a murdered man ; upon examination 
 it is ascertained that A caught the deceased and 
 held him fast, that B threw him down, and that C 
 stabbed him through the heart. They are all tried, 
 and being found accessory to the man's death, are 
 all brought in guilty, and must die. In vain A 
 pleads that he only caught and held the deceased, 
 and B that he only threw him down. The law 
 says that they shall die. But Ivey Harris asks 
 "whether it is just to name what B and C did on 
 the trial of A, and so to transfer their guilt to him?" 
 who, perhaps, may say that he had no idea that 
 matters would have been carried so far. But the 
 law says that he must die. Now who is to deter- 
 mine the case? The court by which these men 
 were tried, or Ivey Harris? Transfer the idea, and 
 the thing is explained. Thus, brother Harris, you 
 may perceive what my views are, and what I have 
 to offer for the side I took on the trial of Lewellyn 
 Jones and Thomas Hunt, though you have not men- 
 tioned the young man, but seemed altogether con- 
 cerned for your " father in Israel." 
 
 You ask permission to propose several plain 
 questions, I will also ask it to make several plain 
 statements. And first, I think L. J. is justly ex- 
 pelled, yet I think he is not so culpable as those of 
 Harris's class, through whose influence he and others 
 have been turned aside from the simplicity of the 
 gospel. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. Ill 
 
 In the course of ray observations, I have seen 
 that those fiery zealots for what you call reform, are 
 not the humble, patient, meek and happy souls they 
 once were. As ministers, they are not the soul 
 awakening, soul converting and soul saving preach- 
 ers of righteousness they once were. Instead of 
 their time being devoted to prayer, religious conver- 
 sation, and trying to further the interests of the 
 Redeemer's kingdom when they meet, and espe- 
 cially if they think there is the least chance to make 
 proselytes to their side of the question, it is almost 
 totally taken up in talking about church govern- 
 ment. This is their Alpha and Omega. And yet, 
 strange to say, you call these non-essentials. And 
 will you, for the sake of non-essentials, distract the 
 body to which you belong so far as you have influ- 
 ence ? Will you give the adversary to speak re- 
 proachfully of religion, and arm the enemies of 
 Christ with arguments against the truth? Would 
 you not be more profitably engaged in trying to 
 " provoke each other to love and to good works ?" 
 
 Secondly : you may observe that I have made no 
 reply to what you have said against brother How- 
 ard and others of the Quarterly Conference. This 
 I have not refrained because you exempt me, for I 
 ask no such exemption. I wish to be involved in 
 the same righteous condemnation with my brethren 
 of that conference. If they were unfeeling and un- 
 merciful because of the part they took against 
 Lewellyn Jones and Thomas Hunt, so was I. If 
 for this they are " inquisitors," so am 1. In a word, 
 
112 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 I do not like to be flattered. I am equally praise 
 or blameworthy with those true friends of old Meth- 
 odism. The reason why I say no more is not be- 
 cause any thing you have said is unanswerable, but 
 because I wish every man to fight his own battle. 
 And now. to close the whole, I would propose that 
 you and I pray more and talk less about non-essen- 
 tials. That we read the Bible more, and try to get 
 more religion; for "without holiness no man shall 
 see the Lord." 
 
 . Finally, I have not written with an eye to a 
 paper war, and therefore, though I fear not to de- 
 fend the truth, I wish this to be both the beginning 
 and the end of all controversy with you or any of 
 your fraternity, on the subject of government. 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 Wm. Compton. 
 
 Mr. Harris's reply to Rev. Wm. Compton. 
 
 January 7, 1829. 
 Reverend Sir: 
 
 I received yours of the 26th ultimo, on yesterday 
 evening, and believe it to be my duty to make a 
 few remarks on it ; although when first I addressed 
 you, I assure you, sir, that I had no intention of 
 opening a "paper war" with you, but only intended, 
 from a firm reliance on the God of the armies of 
 Israel and on the justice of my cause, to throw a 
 single stone. And yet I think that young David 
 chose him five smooth stones when he went against 
 Goliath ; which seems to imply that if the first had 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 113 
 
 not been effectual, he would have slung a second. 
 Having so bright an example, I have determined to 
 forward you a second, which although, perhaps, 
 not quite so smooth as the first, yet } r our indirect 
 charge of flattery shall be my apology for slinging 
 it just as it is. And, with the assistance of grace, I 
 promise you, sir, that I will not offend you with 
 flattery on the present occasion. And I further 
 promise you that I will be as concise as possible, 
 consistently with my determination to faring into 
 plainer view the most prominent features' of your 
 very exceptionable reply. The first sentence in 
 your letter that deserves notice is as follows : 
 " Were you placed before me in the same relation 
 with your venerable " father in Israel," I should 
 deal towards the son as I dealt in reference to the 
 father." I will only say, as it respects myself, that 
 I most cheerfully accept the will for the deed in 
 this case, and will only add a consoling line from 
 the celebrated Youno;: 
 
 When naught hut purpose is within thy power, 
 That purpose firm is equal to the deed. 
 
 In quoting my first question, you stop abruptly 
 in the middle, and answer, "most assuredly, his 
 subscribing to the constitution of the Union Society 
 (so called), the object of the votaries of which I 
 have reason to believe, as to the major part of them, 
 is to revolutionize the system of Methodist Church 
 government, and so to alter its economy as finally 
 to destroy itinerancy and establish a congregational 
 system among us," &c. Now it the single circum- 
 10* 
 
114 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 stance of L. J. having subscribed his name to the 
 paper referred to, amounts to proof sufficient in the 
 mind of any reasonable man on whom the sun ever 
 shone, that it was his intention by that act to con- 
 tribute his mite to accomplish the deleterious ob- 
 jects which yon are pleased to ascribe to a major- 
 ity of the reformers ; then, sir, there might be some 
 propriety in your asking respecting him, as the 
 high priest did concerning Jesus, " What need we 
 any further witness." Permit me first to inquire, 
 with regard to L. J"., whether there is any matter 
 contained in the obnoxious paper that serves as a 
 foundation on which to build your conduct and ac- 
 tions concerning him? Is there a single word or 
 hint in that or any other official document, from 
 which you can draw any legitimate conclusion that 
 either Lewellyn Jones or a majority of the votaries 
 of reform have any intention or wish to "destroy 
 itinerancy or establish a congregational system 
 among us ?" On the contrary, does not the " Mutual 
 Rights," a periodical paper, the most important of 
 any extant on the subject, and which has circulated 
 almost throughout the United States, (notwithstand- 
 ing the indefatigable efforts of itinerants, generally, 
 to impede its currency and smother the light that 
 emanates from it), I say, does not that work abound 
 with unequivocal attestations of special attachment 
 and regard to the itinerant plan? And will Wil- 
 liam Compton, at this time of day, fly in the face of 
 such evidence, and assert that he has " reason to 
 believe that the object of a majority of the reform- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 115 
 
 ers" is what he states it to be ? Oh my God, lay 
 not this sin to his charge! But you will say you do 
 not read the "Mutual Rights;" if so, I must tell 
 you, sir, that you are still more inexcusable, because 
 you neglect to improve the means of information. 
 The old adage says, " none so blind as he that will 
 not see." You go on to quote the latter part of my 
 first question, and answer as follows : "I knew that 
 he was a member of the same body with L. J., but 
 I had paid but a superficial attention to your consti- 
 tution, and therefore I did not act upon that as evi- 
 dence at all," &c. Astonishing that an instrument 
 of writing so offensive as that appears to be should 
 have been read in your hearing, as I know it was, 
 and subject to your perusal, and that at a time 
 when you were seeking evidence, and knowing 
 moreover, as you did, that several brethren had 
 lately been expelled for having subscribed to it ; I 
 say, it is indeed astonishing that you could collect 
 no scrap of evidence from that paper to help out 
 the circumstantial proof you say you obtained ! 
 And yet a few weeks afterwards you thought you 
 could see sufficient turpitude in the act of subscrib- 
 ing to the self same paper to expel our venerable 
 father for that act alone, unaccompanied with any 
 other evidence of whatever nature ! 
 
 Permit me in closing my remarks on your answer 
 to my first question, which have exceeded the 
 limits I had set myself, to suggest that, as your 
 mind underwent such a change, in reference to the 
 paper alluded to, on a second reading, that, per- 
 
116 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 haps, it would not be amiss to give it a third, and 
 perhaps you will then abandon the second view 
 you took of it, and resume the first. 
 
 You next quoted my second question, and were 
 so condescending as to translate it into English for 
 me, for which I tender you my thanks, as I have to 
 acknowledge that I am a bad hand at translation. 
 Indeed so ignorant was I in such things, that I did 
 not know but that my dialect approached nearer to 
 the English language than any other, though I was 
 apprehensive it was not all good English. But 
 while you are giving me the English of my second 
 question, you enclose a short sentence in paren- 
 thesis, as being peculiarly exceptionable, as follows: 
 "The Methodist (which you are pleased to call the 
 militant) Church." Now, sir, I would ask, when a 
 man is expelled from the Methodist Church, if he 
 is not at that moment expelled from the visible mili- 
 tant church also ? You will take notice that I did 
 not say that the Methodist comprised the whole of 
 the militant church. And now, sir, why this sem- 
 blance of criticism? You go on to state that my 
 "second question was sufficiently met by your 
 brother Howard," but thinking, 1 suppose, that you 
 were about to bring me into a dilemma, you ask as 
 follows : " Will you say that the Presbyterians be- 
 cause they are Calvinists, or the Baptists because 
 they deny infant baptism and free communion, or the 
 Protestant Episcopalians, because they contend for 
 a regular succession in the ministry, are heretics 
 and ought therefore to be excluded from the king- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 117 
 
 dom of heaven? Let your conscience answer." 
 My conscience, sir, answers no. You go on then 
 to suppose that all the errors of these different 
 denominations are concentrated in one man, who is 
 a Methodist and named L. J., a case that I believe 
 has never existed in the Methodist Church in 
 America, and I think never will ; but I will sup- 
 pose, since it will accommodate you, that the thing is 
 possible, as we may suppose that when the sky falls 
 we shall catch larks ; and I would ask, what have 
 you gained by my admission ? For a doubt still 
 remains on my mind whether in that case (if we 
 are convinced that he is a member of Christ's mys- 
 tical body, and a fit subject for the church triumph- 
 ant) it would be right to exclude him from our com- 
 munion. But as we are sometimes forgetful readers 
 "of those things which confute our strongest argu- 
 ments in favor of a beloved theory," especially if 
 they are found in a book which we are wont to re- 
 gard as almost immaculate, permit me to refer you 
 to your book of Discipline, last edition and 90th 
 page, and you will there read as follows: "If the 
 accused person be found guilty, by the decision of 
 a majority of the members before whom he is 
 brought to trial, and the crime be such as is expressly 
 forbidden by the word of God, sufficient to exclude a per- 
 son from the kingdom of grace and glory, let the minis- 
 ter or preacher who has charge of the circuit expel 
 him." Now, my dear sir, it appears to me that in 
 order to support your beloved "theory," or appear 
 consistent, you must turn reformer yourself, and 
 
118 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 petition the powers that be as ardently to amend or 
 expunge the above quotation as any of them can for 
 the abrogation of the brandy law, the law respect- 
 ing itinerant negroes, or any thing else to which 
 they object. But, sir, to close on this point I will 
 now make an appeal to your own reason and con- 
 science. Do you believe it just and right to ex- 
 clude a member of Christ's mystical body, and a 
 fit subject for the kingdom of glory, from commun- 
 ion at the Lord's table, and from all church priv- 
 ileges with the Lord's children, solely on account 
 of a difference of opinion about non-essentials ? Do 
 you not invite all the Lord's children to the Lord's 
 table ? But perhaps you will say, I invite all that 
 are in good standing. If so, then the first question 
 recurs, ought a difference of opinion about non- 
 essentials to affect their standing ? Oh, my God ! 
 drive these interrogatories home to his conscience. 
 You proceed then to ask exultingly, " Is this the 
 way that you argue?" &c, as though you had taken 
 great spoil. I think, sir, if you will read the fore- 
 going remarks with attention and candor, you may 
 possibly think that your exultation was rather pre- 
 mature. You go on to say that " when a man sub- 
 scribes to an instrument of writing, the express 
 object of which is to ' revolutionize' the government 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church, I think it my 
 duty, as a member of said church, to be decided in 
 my stand against him." I have no wish, sir, to 
 bind your conscience ; for my venerable father and 
 several of my brethren are now groaning under the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 119 
 
 effects of will and power that have combined to 
 fetter theirs. If, after reading the foregoing, and 
 especially the many luminous essays that have been 
 published in the "Mutual Rights," on the propriety 
 and necessity of some alteration in the economy of 
 our church ; if, after obtaining all the light you can 
 on this important subject, you still feel it to be your 
 duty to regard your brother as a heathen man and a 
 publican, because he prefers an equitable representa- 
 tive government, then, sir, I wish you to enjoy that 
 freedom for which we plead. In closing the sen- 
 tence you say, "and for this reason I have resolved 
 to be no longer neutral in the matter." Thank you, 
 sir: we have been waiting for years for some of our 
 old side chieftains to break silence on this subject; 
 and if you will come forward with your strong rea- 
 sons, and combat our arguments, instead of our 
 persons or piety, (without evidence,) we will listen 
 or read with pleasure. You next quote my fourth 
 and last question, and answer first by saying, " I 
 think both ;" and then proceed to give me a defi- 
 nition of the term generous contained in my question; 
 after which you go on to display your generosity in 
 "vindicating the church," and in "keeping nothing 
 concealed that might injure her." But you cer- 
 tainly knew that my question did not have refer- 
 ence to the church but to the accused person. 
 You next mention some who are " dividing our 
 Zion against herself," and manifest a wish to ex- 
 pose them in all their ramifications. If, sir, you 
 can give me any mark by which I may know them, 
 
120 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 I will render any assistance in my power in order 
 * to detect and expose them. But from the contents 
 of your remarks it appears to me that you have 
 indirectly, at least, charged the reformers with 
 this crime. Now, my dear sir, permit me to 
 request you to ask your own conscience, in the 
 presence of God, if it was not an uncharitable 
 and unwarrantable insinuation ? Indeed, sir, if I 
 had been told that you thought the reformers guilty 
 of this crime, I should have thought that you were 
 falsely accused. You go on to declare that you 
 think you performed "an act of justice as well as 
 generosity," and proceed to suppose a case respect- 
 ing a murder committed by A, B and C. You say 
 they are all tried, and being found accessory to this 
 man's death, &c. Now where is the proof that L. 
 J. was accessory to any thing that those two other 
 men ever said or did in their lives. And now, sir, 
 as your case is entirely irrelevant, permit me to 
 substitute one more applicable to the subject in 
 hand. Suppose a murder committed in the State 
 of Tennessee by A and B, and an inhabitant of 
 Granville named C is arrested under a suspicion of 
 murder. At his trial a witness comes forward and 
 states that he saw A and B kill a man in Tennessee. 
 The judge would no doubt ask as follows: "Wit- 
 ness, was C present or in any way accessory to the 
 man's death that you know of?" The witness 
 answers, "He was not present, and I have no rea- 
 son to believe that he was at all accessory to the 
 man's death, only that he is a man, and the murder 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 121 
 
 was committed by men, for I do not think he 
 ever was in Tennessee." Now, sir, ivey Harris 
 asks again whether it was either just, generous or 
 pertinent in the witness to name what A and B did 
 in Tennessee, especially if he had done it with a 
 design to impress the minds of the judge and jury 
 unfavorably with regard to C? " The law," you 
 say, " says that they shall die ;" but I. H. asks 
 whether it is just to name what A and B did on the 
 trial of C ? Stop, sir, I. H. did not ask whether it 
 was just to name what A and B did on the trial of 
 C " after they are all tried and found accessory to the 
 mail's death.'''' I will now, sir, take occasion to ask 
 what law it is that you speak of, and by what 
 authority it was enacted ? 
 
 As you are fond of illustration, I will take the 
 liberty to state a case, and I promise you it shall 
 not be an irrelevant one ; but I shall use different 
 letters from yours, because I think them more sig- 
 nificant and appropriate. Suppose I (itinerant) is 
 found in the possession of that which is the un- 
 doubted right and property of L (local man) and 
 L (layman) ; and while he is in the possession of 
 this property he assumes the authority to enact a 
 law punishing with death L and L and their chil- 
 dren after them, if they should be guilty of remon- 
 strating or "inveighing" against his authority or 
 injustice. In some few years some of the oldest 
 and most intelligent children of L and L are heard 
 to express a wish that I would repeal that law 
 and restore them their right. On hearing of this, 
 11 
 
122 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 I despatches an officer to arrest them, and they 
 are brought before a court that was appointed and 
 its members nominated by I himself. Now I. H. 
 asks who is to determine their case ? Shall it be I's 
 court or a court that is formed on the principle of 
 justice, reason and religion ; or, if you like it better, 
 a court and a law that had been previously ap- 
 pointed and enacted by I, L and L in conjunction ? 
 "Transfer the idea, and the thing is explained." 
 
 You proceed to make several "plain statements," 
 and say, first, "I think L. J. is justly expelled, yet 
 I think that he is not so culpable as those of Harris's 
 class, through whose influence he and others have 
 been turned aside from the simplicity of the gospel." 
 Worse and worse. Really, sir, it appears to me that 
 if it is just to punish one who is inadvertently and 
 unsuspectingly led astray in this manner, there can 
 be no punishment inflicted in this life adequate to 
 the crime of him who is the contriver of his seduc- 
 tion. But from what has he been turned aside by 
 those emissaries of Satan ? From the simplicity of 
 the gospel. Pray, sir, in what do you make the 
 simplicity of the gospel to consist ? Does it con- 
 sist in all ecclesiastical power being vested in few 
 hands ? Then, sir, we may suppose that the pope 
 of Rome shared largely in this grace. Does it con- 
 sist in the itinerancy claiming all legislative, execu- 
 tive and judicial power in the church, and in with- 
 holding from the locality and laity their just rights ? 
 Then, sir, you would make the gospel knavish as 
 well as simple. The substance of your remarks is 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 123 
 
 the old tale over again, the reformers have back- 
 slidden. But as this is judging (without evidence, 
 as it respects a large majority of them) , and not ar- 
 gument, I shall pass it over by saying, with an 
 apostle, "nowwalkest thou not charitably." But 
 as to your charge respecting reforming ministers, I 
 would just ask if it might not be justly retorted ? 
 You next ask, "and will you, for the sake of non- 
 essentials, distract the body to which you belong ?" 
 No, sir, we only wish to introduce a habit of sober 
 and deliberate thinking. " Will you give the ad- 
 versary cause to speak reproachfully of religion ?" 
 No, sir, we are laboring to take from him all occa- 
 sion to speak reproachfully of religion in general, 
 and of the Methodist Church in particular, by say- 
 ing, as many have said, "we admire your doctrines 
 and the zeal of your ministers, but we despise the 
 government of your church, because it is despotic 
 and aristocratical." You go on, "and arm the ene- 
 mies of Christ with arguments against the truth !" 
 God forbid ! but we feel it to be our duty to com- 
 bat such arguments, and furnish the church and the 
 world with weapons with which to defend it. It 
 seems, sir, by your following remarks, that my 
 friendly effort to save your feelings, after I had en- 
 deavored plainly to point out the injustice of your 
 conduct relative to L. J., is construed by you into 
 flattery, of which, however, I was not conscious ; 
 and you appear to glory in being "equally blame- 
 worthy with those true friends of old Methodism." 
 In vain you try, sir, to collect a tax for your present 
 
124 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 economy by attaching the term "old" to it; for 
 many of our present rules and regulations were 
 born since the days of Wesley. How old, for in- 
 stance, is the brandy law? And even episcopacy 
 itself is not yet forty-five years old in the Methodist 
 Church. And I will tell you, sir, if Moore's Life of 
 Wesley is entitled to credit, it was a source of sor- 
 row to Mr. Wesley when he heard that a man named 
 Bishop was born in America : see Moore's life of 
 Wesley, vol. 2, page 385, in a letter addressed to 
 Mr. Asbury, dated London, September 20th, 1788. 
 Although I know that between this letter and the 
 account given in our Discipline, page 6, there is a 
 manifest discrepancy. You go on to propose that 
 "you and I pray more and talk less about non- 
 essentials." As to praying more, with the assist- 
 ance of grace I will join you. As to talking less, 
 how does that accord with the resolution you say 
 you have formed, "to be no longer neutral in the 
 matter . ? " 
 
 I have finished the argumentative part of this 
 address ; and now, my dear brother Compton, I 
 beseech you not to construe the pointed manner in 
 wdiich I have addressed you, and my honest efforts 
 to avoid the imputation of flattery, into asperity or 
 spleen. And as it respects your addressing me 
 again on this subject, I wish you to consult your 
 own feelings and inclination ; and as I have endea- 
 vored to be full and explicit, I incline to the opinion 
 that I shall not address you again on the subject, 
 although I do not preclude myself. One request 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 125 
 
 more I have to make of you, and that is, if you 
 write again on this subject, you will not trouble 
 yourself to establish irrelevant points by irrelevant 
 suppositions, but come to the point at issue between 
 us. Otherwise, quote Paul's leaving his cloak at 
 Troas with Carpus as a conclusive answer to all 
 my arguments. 
 
 I add no more but a sincere prayer to Almighty 
 God that you and I, after this life shall end, may 
 fill some happy seat in that church where not one of 
 the members shall feel any disposition to punish 
 either father or son on account of any difference of 
 opinion about non-essentials. 
 
 Yours, in the best of bonds, 
 
 Ivey Harris. 
 
 Rev. Wm. Compton. 
 
 The Granville Union Society had been formed in 
 July, and ere six months had passed away seven 
 of its members had been summoned to trial and 
 expelled from the church of their choice, for the 
 crime of subscribing to the innocent constitution of 
 that society. At the same time no charges were 
 brought against the other members who had signed 
 that instrument, and were equally guilty. The 
 principal actors in these disagreeable and deplora- 
 ble scenes were the Rev. Benton Field and Rev. 
 William Compton. They no doubt concluded that 
 the sacrifice of seven victims would be such a 
 victory as to annihilate the Union Society, awe into 
 submission the advocates of reform, and eradicate 
 11* 
 
126 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 the rising germ of republicanism in the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church. But in this they met with a 
 most signal failure. There were, however, some to 
 be found who talked loudly of their attachment to 
 "mutual rights," whilst no adverse gales were 
 blowing, but when "the tug of war" came on their 
 principles changed with the times ; they renounced 
 the doctrines of reform, became the advocates of 
 itinerant supremacy, sought again to float in the 
 current of popularity, rather than oppose the pleas- 
 ure and wishes of a few erring mortals, who were 
 willing to lord it over God's heritage for a season. 
 Such men are to be pitied. Their principles are 
 ever governed by the rule of convenience. Hence, 
 when they ascertain the location of power or of the 
 majority, they are at no loss when to fall into ranks. 
 But there were many others who had espoused the 
 principles of "mutual rights," and adhered to the 
 same from principle. These may, with becoming 
 propriety, be called men of principle, because they 
 were willing to stand by their principles, and if the 
 force of circumstances made it necessary, were 
 even willing to bear their exiled brethren company 
 unto their "Patmos." Those seven brethren had 
 evidently suffered persecution for the sake of their 
 opinions, apart from the doctrines of the gospel ; 
 hence, they were not forsaken by their brethren 
 who cherished kindred sentiments, but were still 
 received and regarded as belonging to the household 
 of God. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 127 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Reform in Tennessee. — Trial of Rev. D. B. Dorsey before the 
 Baltimore Annual Conference. — Letter of Rev. H. B. Bascom 
 to Mr. Dorsey. — Rev. Mr. Dorsey's reply, giving an account 
 of his trial. — Trials and expulsions of the Rev. Dr. Jennings 
 and others of the Baltimore Union Society by the preacher in 
 charge, Rev. J. M. Hanson. 
 
 The transactions that are recorded in the pre- 
 ceding chapter are such as seem to challenge the 
 belief of the credulous, particularly when we bring 
 into view the part enacted by the ministers of reli- 
 gion. But the pious mind is clouded with astonish- 
 ment upon a recital of the fact that the administra- 
 tion of Rev. Benton Field was not only approved 
 by his itinerant brethren in the ministry, but his 
 official character was passed by the Virginia An- 
 nual Conference, to which he was amenable. That 
 conference held its subsequent session at Peters- 
 burg, Va., in February, 1827. " The Granville 
 Union Society of North Carolina presented to it a 
 petition praying that seven of its members lately 
 expelled from the M. E. Church for being members 
 of said society be restored to their former standing. 
 The petitioners alleged that although the charge ex- 
 hibited against them was that of inveighing against 
 the discipline, yet nothing was proved against them 
 on the trial but their having joined the Granville 
 Union Society. That when the preacher found he 
 
128 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 could not substantiate his charge, he put the follow- 
 ing question to the society: 'You that believe their 
 being members of the Union Society will have a 
 bad effect will rise up.' That a majority of those 
 present were of that opinion and rose up, upon 
 which the preacher read them out as expelled. 
 With the petition the Granville Union Society pre- 
 sented a charge against the preacher for mal-ad- 
 ministration ; but the conference decided that it 
 was not mal-administration. Thus the door is 
 closed on our unfortunate brethren, and opened 
 for all the reformers to be pushed out of the 
 church." * 
 
 Early in the year 1825 a disposition was mani- 
 fested to persecute reformers in Tennessee. There 
 were some to be found among the membership of 
 the M. E. Church in that State who openly espoused 
 the doctrines of " mutual rights ;" but there too 
 were to be found the opponents of such principles, 
 holding the reins of power, and most unscrupulously 
 willing to exercise the same, even to the expulsion 
 of their Christian brethren who would venture to 
 differ from them upon questions of church polity, 
 as the. following extract of a letter will show, which 
 was published in the " Mutual Rights" for Novem- 
 ber, 1S25, and written by a member of the Bedford 
 Union Society : 
 
 " Dear Brethren, — You have already been ap- 
 prised by Dr. Elgin and brother Smith that a re- 
 forming society in the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 
 * Letter of Rev. W. Harris. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 129 
 
 was about to be established in Bedford county, 
 Tennessee. The society alluded to organized in 
 May last, under the name of the 'Union Society of 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church, Bedford county, 
 Tennessee,' and adopted a preamble and constitu- 
 tion. This measure has been most intemperately 
 opposed by the itinerant preachers, a majority of 
 the class leaders and stewards, as well as by some 
 of the local preachers and exhorters, as you will 
 see in the sequel. 
 
 " The first regular attempt at raising this society 
 was at a meeting in February last, at which time 
 nothing decisive was done, except that all who 
 were in favor of any alteration or amendment in 
 any part of our Discipline agreed to have their 
 names put on a paper to that effect, and appointed 
 a committee to draw up a constitution, to be pre- 
 sented at the next meeting in May. But in April, 
 previous to the meeting which was to take place in 
 May, and before the committee had agreed on any 
 plan, our presiding elder, the Rev. James Gwinn, 
 at a quarterly meeting in an adjoining circuit, (in 
 which there were also some reformers,) at the close 
 of his sermon on Saturday, publicly read out the 
 names of fourteen official members, (some of whom 
 were local preachers,) living in different circuits, 
 and declared that 'these brethren had put them- 
 selves out of the church, and were no longer to be 
 considered Methodists.' This was not all, for at a 
 Quarterly Meeting Conference in this circuit the 
 Saturday following, the elder introduced a written 
 
130 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 resolution, the purport of which was to declare that 
 the brethren whose names he had read out were no 
 longer to be viewed as Methodists. But at that 
 time the conference did not sanction the measure. 
 After this a momentary calm ensued, and it was 
 fondly hoped that in this country at least men were 
 allowed liberty of conscience, as well in matters of 
 church polity as in civil government, without being 
 liable to the anathemas of the church. But our 
 hopes were vain and delusive ; for as soon as the 
 society organized in May an open war of extermi- 
 nation commenced. One local preacher after an- 
 other was cited to trial and suspended, and the 
 Quarterly Meeting Conference have uniformly (thus 
 far) expelled them from the church — but appeals 
 have been taken to the Annual Conference. Indeed 
 they have found out a short way with the unor- 
 dained local preachers and exhorters, that is, not to 
 renew their licenses. The number of local preach- 
 ers expelled, cut off or censured, are nine or ten, 
 besides exhorters. And those in power emphati- 
 cally declare that so soon as they get the trials of 
 all the official members completed, if the common 
 members will not abandon the 'Union Society,' 
 these also will be turned out. 
 
 "Now that you may judge how far we ought to 
 be considered revolters, as we are termed, I will 
 give you an extract of what is called the most ob- 
 jectionable part of our constitution, to wit : ' And 
 that this amendment should introduce an equilibrium 
 into said church, by admitting a representation 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 131 
 
 from the local ministers and laymen, equal to that 
 of the itinerant ministers, into all the assemblies 
 convened for the purpose of making laws and regu- 
 lations for her government.' And to show you the 
 sentiments of our moderate presiding elder on the 
 same subject, I will give you an extract from his 
 sermon, preached at a camp-meeting in this county 
 on Sunday last, and taken down at the time by 
 myself, to wit: 'That God, in his word, never de- 
 signed common members to have anything to do with 
 the management of the church — that his ministers 
 are the only judges of what is right and wrong, both 
 as it relates to spiritual matters and church govern- 
 ment; because God has called them to the work — 
 that even these ministers have no riobt to legislate 
 about church matters, as their only guide is the 
 Bible; but that, for their own convenience, they may 
 make rules and regulations for the government of 
 the societies they have raised.' Thus you see 
 what kind of equality and freedom exists in our 
 church in this land of liberty. 
 
 " The main motive in making this communica- 
 tion is to ask the counsel and advice of the Balti- 
 more Union Society in relation to the course we 
 ought to pursue, for, although a strong effort will be 
 made bv the reformers at our next annual Confer- 
 ence to reverse the decisions had against them ; yet 
 I am fearful it will not avail. In the event of my 
 fears being realized, the only alternative then will 
 be, either to ask forgiveness, submit to the yoke, 
 and abandon every attempt at a redress of our 
 
132 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 grievances, or organize another church. What 
 would be best ? We love the Methodist Church; 
 we love her doctrines ; we love her ordinances ; we 
 love the itinerating plan ; and we love her ministers ; 
 but we believe God will smile upon our efforts if 
 we are driven from the church, and thereby com- 
 pelled to separate, because we have not attempted 
 to do any thing more than the Bible and the laws of 
 our free and happy country will justify. I contem- 
 plate the possibility of a separation with fear and 
 trembling, and ask counsel in the sight of God." 
 
 The progress of the principles of reform has been 
 onward from the beginning. Though the hydra- 
 headed monster persecution had reared its hideous 
 front in many places, and the advocates of " mutual 
 rights " had been made to feel the oppressive hand 
 of power, yet the friends of religious liberty still 
 hoped that a brighter day would yet dawn upon 
 them ; that their itinerant brethren would be brought 
 to acknowledge the "rights and privileges" of the 
 laity and local ministry, inasmuch as many of them 
 were known to be in favor of their claims to repre- 
 sentation in the rule-making department of the 
 church. Hitherto we have seen that the persecu- 
 tions which had been carried on against the advo- 
 cates of reform were waged by the itinerant minis- 
 try individually, and had merely received the sanc- 
 tion of Annual Conference. But in the beginning 
 of the year 1827, we have the strange spectacle ex- 
 hibited to us of an Annual Conference of ministers 
 of the gospel in solemn assembly taking an active 
 
METHODIST PROTESTAJMT CHURCH. 133 
 
 part in these inquisitorial proceedings, as the fol- 
 lowing extract from the "Mutual Rights" for June 
 of that year will show. 
 
 "On Wednesday the ISth of April, the Rev. 
 Dennis B. Dorsey was 'charged before the Balti- 
 more Annual Conference with having been actively 
 engaged in the circulation of an improper periodi- 
 cal work.' A confidential letter from Mr. Dorsey 
 to a friend, recommending to his attention the 
 Mutual Rights, as an important work on church 
 government, was produced in evidence, and read 
 in the conference. Mr. Dorsey acknowledged the 
 letter to be his, but did not consider that he had 
 violated any law by recommending the above work. 
 After Mr. Dorsey had retired, the following resolu- 
 tion was offered by the Rev. Stephen G. Roszel, 
 and adopted by the conference: 'Resolved, that 
 Dennis B. Dorsey's character pass, upon his being 
 admonished by the president, and promising the 
 conference that he will desist from taking any 
 agency in spreading or supporting any publications 
 in opposition to our discipline or government.' 
 
 "On the following day the admonition was given 
 in due form from the chair ; but Mr. Dorsey could 
 not be induced to make the promise required by the 
 resolution. He objected to it as unreasonable and 
 unjust — there being no law in the Discipline prohib- 
 iting any preacher from recommending or circulat- 
 ing such works as the Mutual Rights. He stated 
 that he was willing to promise the conference to be 
 submissive to the discipline and government of 
 12 
 
134 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 the church, and to recommend like obedience to 
 others, until by the legislative authority of the church 
 some modification of the government could be 
 effected. A promise embracing more than this 
 he informed them he could not make. 
 
 " On Friday the case was again resumed, and Mr. 
 Dorsey was pressed to make the promise required 
 by the resolution, which he still declined, urging, as 
 before, the injustice of the requirement. Upon 
 which the Rev. Stephen G. Roszel made the follow- 
 ing motion: 'Moved, that the character of brother 
 Dorsey pass, upon his being reproved by the presi- 
 dent for his contumacy in resisting the authority of 
 the conference.' This motion, however, did not 
 prevail. After considerable desultory conversation 
 on the case, the following resolution was offered by 
 the Rev. Job Guest, and adopted by the confer- 
 ence: 'Moved and seconded, that the bishops be 
 and hereb} 7 are requested not to give Dennis B. 
 Dorsey an appointment for the present year ; and 
 that his name be so returned on the minutes, with 
 the reasons assigned why he has not an appoint- 
 ment, viz: his contumacy in regard to the authority 
 .of the conference.' On Saturday the latter part of 
 this motion was so far rescinded as to omit the 
 publication of it on the printed minutes of the 
 conference, but to retain it on the journal. 
 
 " Thus was brother Dorse}'-, a presbyter in the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, without any charge 
 against his moral or religious character, left, by the 
 order of the conference, without a prospect of sup- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 135 
 
 port for himself and family, and that, too, with a 
 constitution seriously injured in the service of the 
 church." 
 
 Who can read the preceding narrative without 
 his sympathies being drawn out in behalf of this 
 wronged and misused man? The news of the 
 action of the Baltimore Annual Conference in this 
 case created quite a sensation throughout the entire 
 borders of the church, and called forth just expres- 
 sions of disapprobation and condemnation from the 
 friends of moderation and equal rights in all quar- 
 ters. Union Societies in different parts of the 
 United States passed resolutions approving the 
 stand taken by Mr. Dorsey, and censuring in strong 
 terms the action of the Annual Conference in the 
 premises. Liberal contributions were forwarded 
 by the friends of reform from different quarters to 
 Baltimore, for his relief and support, and the spirit 
 that was manifested towards him by the friends of 
 "mutual rights" was worthy of such men and of 
 such a cause. Among the itinerant ranks there 
 were many who reprobated in strong terms the un- 
 just and iniquitous sentence thus passed upon him. 
 Epistles of consolation were addressed to this martyr 
 of mutual rights by several of the traveling minis- 
 ters of the M. E. Church, some of which reflected 
 severely upon the conduct of the Baltimore Annual 
 Conference. No doubt many of them were taken 
 by surprise, as well as they knew men, when they 
 learned of the unjust treatment meted out to Mr. 
 Dorsey by the supporters of Episcopal authority. 
 
136 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Innocence and truth may suffer, but among the vir- 
 tuous and good they never fail to find friends in the 
 hour of trial. Even so in the case of this Christian 
 minister; there were men who boldly came forth to 
 sustain him in the face of fearful ecclesiastical au- 
 thority, and denounced in unmeasured terms the 
 treatment he had received at the hands of the con- 
 ference. The writer begs leave to introduce here a 
 letter addressed to the Rev. D. B. Dorsey by the 
 Rev. H. B. Bascom, and published in the Mutual 
 Rights for May, 1827, inasmuch as Dr. Bascom is 
 ranked among the ablest exponents of Methodist 
 Episcopacy by the membership of that communion, 
 and his claims have been supported by some for the 
 episcopal office. 
 
 April 27, 1827. 
 My Dear Sir : 
 
 Not knowing you personally, nor the place of your 
 residence, I ask the privilege of addressing you 
 through the medium of the Mutual Rights, for ap- 
 proving and recommending of which you now stand 
 suspended as a Methodist traveling preacher! The 
 Baltimore Annual Conference of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church — with three or more bishops pre- 
 sent to direct and shape its measures — have, by a 
 solemn resolution, after several days' deliberation, 
 officially decided that a presbyter in the church of 
 God deserves punishment and disgrace, because he 
 adopts opinions and sentiments, on the subject of 
 church government, w r hich are received and acted 
 upon by a large majority of Protestant Christians 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 137 
 
 throughout the various divisions of the religious 
 world ! I cannot pause, my brother, to write the 
 many denunciations that common sense, throughout 
 an outraged community, will pronounce upon this 
 overbearing act of abandoned tyranny! But I 
 hasten to inquire why were you selected as the vic- 
 tim, the sole victim, when it was in proof before them 
 that others were in the same condemnation! Why 
 did not " my lord of Canterbury" who "rides in 
 the whirlwind and directs the storm" among you, 
 and by whom even bishops are tithed at will, to- 
 gether with the active and zealous doctor, the prin- 
 pal officer in his " star chamber," select a goodly 
 number of victims, and offer an appalling hecatomb 
 at once! Was it because heaven had deprived you 
 of health? Was it because you were remote from 
 home and friends? Was it because, like your Mas- 
 ter, you were poor, and with the humble sharer of 
 fortunes "had scarcely where to lay your head ?" 
 Did they wish, by increasing your mental inquietude, 
 to strengthen the desolation without, and so send 
 you to a premature grave? Or was it intended by 
 the horror of the example made of you, to say to 
 other reformers, "If you have the word, we ha.ve the 
 sword!" I cannot refrain from asking where three 
 or four members of the Baltimore Conference were 
 d uring this labored deed of hard-earned infamy ? 
 Did they sit by in inglorious silence ? But, my 
 brother, be not discouraged, recollect that the great 
 father of us all, as Methodists, was by a similar 
 body and in the same city forty years ago, declared 
 12* 
 
138 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 unworthy of name or place in that communion, in 
 the bosom of which you now find yourself honora- 
 bly degraded. When Mr. Wesley was informed of 
 this, he declared, in a letter now in my possession, 
 that the American bishop had "no more connection 
 with him." But I trust you will not so decide in 
 relation to your blinded and prejudiced brethren. 
 "Yet a little while," and this stupid, laudean zeal, 
 will be cooled in the humiliation and disgrace of 
 your persecutors; public indignation will chastise 
 their pitiful pretensions to lordly inquisition over the 
 rights and consciences of those who have too much 
 intelligence and too much candor to think and act 
 by their prescription ! To conclude, my dear sir, 
 I beg you to accept the best wishes of a stranger, 
 "faint not in the day of evil ;" the honorary over- 
 throw you have sustained, for the rights of con- 
 science, will make strangers your friends : on hear- 
 ing of the treatment you and others received at the 
 Baltimore Conference, ten or twelve persons within 
 my charge have declared for reform, and are ready 
 to aid you with their influence and purses. Wish- 
 ing the speedy restoration of your health, and that 
 you may live to see the cause of religious oppres- 
 sion banished from the church and the world, 
 
 I remain yours in the kingdom and patience of 
 Jesus. Vixdex. 
 
 Rev. D. B. Dorset. 
 
 The preceding letter from the pen of Dr. Bas- 
 com breathes forth the sentiments of a genuine 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 139 
 
 reformer. And although at the time a traveling 
 minister himself in the Methodist connexion, yet he 
 could venture to denounce the treatment received 
 by the Rev. Mr. Dorsey at the hands of the Annual 
 Conference, and reflect most severely upon the in- 
 justice of such treatment. Nor did the doctor stop 
 at this; but followed it up by a second, in vindica- 
 tion of the positions taken in the first, which is, if 
 possible, the more severe of the two; the last men- 
 tioned letter is to be found published in the Mutual 
 Rights for August. 
 
 The honest inquirer- after truth might be reasona- 
 bly led to ask the question, was not Dr. Bascom 
 called to account and dealt with, for the freedom 
 and boldness of his reflections upon the action of the 
 Baltimore Annual Conference in the case of Mr. 
 Dorse} 7 ? The answer is no. "The powers that 
 be" in the M. E. Church, at that time, seem to have 
 had different methods of dealing with different men. 
 Rev. D. B. Dorsey circulated or recommended the 
 Mutual Rights; for this he was proscribed by the 
 Annual Conference. Rev. H. B. Bascom, D. D., 
 wrote and published in that same work, the Mutual 
 Rights, such strictures as the preceding, upon 
 and against a conference of Methodist minis- 
 ters, with three bishops at their head, and no 
 charges are brought against him. And, unless his- 
 tory tells a dubious tale, it was not long after these 
 things took place that the doctor was appointed 
 to a professorship in one of the western colleges 
 under the patronage and control of the M. E. 
 
140 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Church,* since which time his pen has ceased to 
 write such strictures. In order that the reader may 
 have a full view of all the points in the case of 
 Rev. Mr. Dorsey, the writer will subjoin his reply 
 to Rev. H. B. Bascom. 
 
 Baltimore, May 15, 1827. 
 Rev. and Dear Sir : 
 
 I have had the pleasure of reading your affection- 
 ate communication, addressed to me through the 
 medium of the Mutual Rights, and now enjoy the 
 pleasure of returning you, through the same me- 
 dium, my grateful acknowledgments for the solici- 
 tude you evince on my behalf. In the meantime 
 I am not unmindful of the great principles on which 
 this matter is predicated, of which I presume you 
 are an advocate. As you put several interrogato- 
 ries relative to the case, for your personal informa- 
 tion I will give you a glance at the whole affair. I 
 am the more inclined to this than to entire silence, 
 under existing circumstances, for two reasons. 
 The first regards the reputation of our conference, 
 which is as liable to be tarnished as my own ; and the 
 second is grounded on the special regard which I 
 must necessarily feel for my character, as a Christian 
 and a minister of the gospel. This brief history shall 
 be given from my best recollections, and the least ex- 
 ceptionable means of information. If there should 
 be any apparent mis-statement, I hope no brother 
 will attribute it to design ; and that if any one be 
 
 * See History of the M. E. Church by N. Bangs. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 141 
 
 prepared to correct it, he will do so through this 
 public medium, before he undertakes to correct or 
 criminate in a private manner. 
 
 Some time last Februar}^ I wrote a few lines to 
 a friend, Mr. Hugh Sharp, in which I gave him in- 
 formation "of a work on church government pub- 
 lishing in Baltimore, by a committee of u Methodist 
 preachers and members, exposing to open view 
 some of the errors in our government and adminis- 
 tration." I also informed him that the work "was 
 a very satisfactory one, well worth his attention;" 
 that 1 had " taken it more than eighteen months, and 
 was well pleased with it ;" that it contained so 
 many pages, and came at so much per year; that 
 several in that part took it and were well pleased 
 with it ; and finally requested him to let me know 
 immediately if he desired to have the work, and to 
 inquire of a brother, whom I named, whether he 
 would take it also. In conclusion, I remarked to 
 him, " you need not mention this to any other per- 
 son, if you please." But when Mr. Robert Min- 
 shall, the preacher in charge of Huntingdon circuit 
 came round, my friend Sharp betrayed me, by giv- 
 ing him my letter to read. Mr. Minshall then, ac- 
 cording to his own telling in conference, asked him 
 for a copy of the letter, to which he replied that he 
 might have the original, as it was of no use to him. 
 About this time there was a letter written by Mr. 
 Minshall to Mr. David Steele, giving him informa- 
 tion that I was actively engaged in circulating the 
 Mutual Rights, and probably censuring me for such 
 
142 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 conduct. This information was communicated to 
 Mr. John Davis, who in his turn reported it again, 
 until, finally, it was brought before the late Annual 
 Conference, first in the form of an objection, and then 
 as a charge. After the commencement of the con- 
 ference, I had an interview with Mr. Davis, who 
 gave me an assurance that, as I would give him no 
 satisfaction in his interrogatives, he could not pass 
 over it on the examination of my character. Ac- 
 cordingly, when my name was called, in the exam- 
 ination of characters, Mr. S. G. Roszel arose and 
 made some objections, stating, as I was informed by 
 members of conference, (for I was too unwell to be 
 present,) that I had been away from my circuit the 
 past year, under the pretence of being ajflicted, but 
 had been traveling extensively, circulating a work 
 derogator}' to the interests of the church. My case 
 was then postponed until I could be present. 
 
 The following or second day after, I was pre- 
 sent, when my name was called, and the inquiry 
 instituted, whether there was any thing against my 
 character. Certain members of the conference re- 
 plied that there was, but the brother who had made 
 the objection was absent. Mr. Roszel, being sent 
 for, came in and stated his objection, on the ground 
 above mentioned. This led to reference for infor- 
 mation, and Messrs. Steele and Minshall were re- 
 ferred to as informants. My letter was now pro- 
 duced by Mr. Minshall, who stated how he obtained 
 it, and intimated that it had now accidentally come 
 in place, as he thought, when he obtained it, might 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 143 
 
 some time be the case. The letter was then read, 
 and the president, Mr. Soule, remarked that if I had 
 any thing to say in reply, I was now at liberty to 
 speak for myself. As I saw no formal charge, I had 
 nothing to say, only to acknowledge the letter read 
 to be my own production. I then retired, and 
 after considerable deliberation on the subject, the 
 case was decided. Some brother, in passing out 
 of the conference, remarked to me that I could now 
 go in, which left me under the impression that my 
 character had passed. I then went in and re- 
 mained until conference adjourned, but heard no 
 official announcement of the decision until next day. 
 I learned however, in the meantime, the nature of 
 the decision, in part, but could find no one to give 
 it to me in full. 
 
 The next morning, when the journal of the pre- 
 ceding day was read, there was a formal charge 
 recorded, which was "for having been actively en- 
 gaged in the circulation of an improper periodical 
 work." The president then announced to me 
 from the chair that the decision of the confer- 
 ence in my case was, "that my character should 
 pass, upon my being admonished by the president, 
 and promising the conference that 1 would desist 
 from taking any agency in spreading or supporting 
 any publication in opposition to our discipline or 
 government." The admonition was then given 
 from the chair, after I had signified my disposition 
 to submit to it, for the sake of brethren's con- 
 sciences. I was then required to give a pledge 
 
144 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 that I would comply with the latter part of the 
 resolution, which I refused to do, while the resolu- 
 tion remained in its unqualified form. I then re- 
 plied to all the important items of the admonition, 
 and gave my reasons for not complying with the 
 latter part of the resolution. The following is the 
 substance : 
 
 Mr. President, — With you I admit the import- 
 ance of clearly ascertaining that we have found the 
 truth before we undertake to communicate it ; and 
 that when we do communicate it, we ought to be 
 careful to cultivate the spirit of Christianity, lest it 
 be attended with greater injury than good to our 
 fellow men. These considerations have governed 
 me throughout ; and God forbid I should ever depart 
 from them ! As it regards the allusion to my 
 promises, before I received ordination, to be obedi- 
 ent to my superiors, and not to " mend our rules, 
 but keep them," I reply that I regret exceedingly 
 that when I made such promises I was not better 
 qualified to judge of our discipline and government. 
 I was young, inexperienced and uninformed. I 
 perceived no errors in either of these. But, sir, if 
 I now had to pass tha,t examination, I should cer- 
 tainly be strict in qualifying my promises, as I do 
 believe there are rules of discipline, as well as prac- 
 tices in our administration, which ought to be 
 modified. 
 
 I do, sir, as firmly and fully believe in our doc- 
 trines, generally, as any brother ; and have endea- 
 vored, since I became a member of our church, to 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 145 
 
 obey them ; nor do I now feel any abatement of my 
 purpose to persevere in this path of duty to the end, 
 by the grace of God assisting me. I have uniformly 
 recommended our Discipline to others, as well as 
 labored to conform to its mandates myself; and in 
 this course, too, I feel inclined to persevere until 
 some better modification of them shall be intro- 
 duced by the proper authorit}^ of the church, or un- 
 til they be repealed. And as to the grand funda- 
 mentals of our government, (meaning the itinerant 
 operations,) no member of this conference feels 
 more disposed to support them than I do. But, sir, 
 believing as I do that there are some of the minutiae 
 of our discipline and government which could be 
 modified to advantage, 1 wish to enjoy the privilege 
 of examining the subject by reading ecclesiastical 
 history, the "Mutual Rights," or any thing else 
 which will afford me the necessary information. 
 And when I am fully convinced that I have ob- 
 tained a knowledge of the truth, I desire the privi- 
 lege of communicating it in the best possible manner 
 to the church and the world, either verbally or 
 otherwise. And although I should rejoice to have 
 the sanction of this conference in so doing, yet if 
 it cannot be obtained, I must beg the privilege of 
 pursuing the course which my judgment and con- 
 science dictate. 
 
 You admit that the 'preachers have a right to read 
 
 and examine the "Mutual Rights," or any thing else 
 
 they please. And is it not admitted that they have 
 
 the same right to communicate to others what they 
 
 13 
 
146 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 learn ? Are we to retain our information, and 
 neither speak nor write about it ? No, sir, I cannot 
 suffer any man or body of men to trammel my 
 rational faculties in their search for truth ; nor to 
 restrain them from promulgating it when obtained ; 
 and I now reserve to myself the entire privilege of 
 doing so, either verbally or in any other manner I 
 judge most expedient. 
 
 I have read the " Mutual Rights," sir, for myself, 
 and think highly of the work, and recommend it to 
 every member of this conference. The bishops them- 
 selves read it, the preachers read it, the book agents 
 read it, and exchange the " Methodist Magazine " 
 for it ; and will any one say that the people have no 
 right to read it ? Without an act of reason, my in- 
 telligence itself, on the first blush of the subject, 
 forces this language upon me, if bishops, preachers 
 and book agents read this book with impunity, then 
 all the members of our church ought to enjoy the 
 same privilege. But I must come to the conclusion 
 and application of this argument. If the members 
 have as good a right to read the " Mutual Rights " 
 as the ministry, (which all must admit, or else deny- 
 that they are free,) and if the ministers undoubtedly 
 have this right, as has been admitted on this floor 
 by bishops and others, then there is no argument to 
 set aside the consequence, that it is the right of any 
 preacher to recommend the work to the people, if he 
 judge it would be profitable to them. And every 
 attempt to inflict punishment on a preacher for 
 recommending it to the people is an absolute, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 147 
 
 though indirect, declaration that they are not at 
 liberty to read and examine for themselves. If it 
 be a preacher's right, how can you punish me for 
 so doing ? Yet I have been punished with an admo- 
 nition for recommending the "Mutual Kights" to one 
 or two members, for this is all the proof you had 
 against me. 
 
 After this I retired, and the sense of the confer- 
 ence was taken whether my reply was satisfactory, 
 and the vote was given in the negative. I was 
 again called in and interrogated on the subject, but 
 replied as before, in my own language, qualifying my 
 promises, and yielding so fa?- as 1 could without 
 sacrificing the clearest dictates of my judgment and 
 conscience. I again retired, and, as I was in- 
 formed, the question, " whether my character pass," 
 was again put to the conference, and answered by 
 a vote in the negative. It was then " moved that 
 the case be postponed till to-monow." 
 
 The next day the case was again resumed, and 
 I was once more interrogated. I replied in sub- 
 stance as follows: 
 
 Mr. President, — Upon a candid re-examination of 
 the subject, I am prepared to reiterate the remarks 
 which I offered }^esterday, relative to my disposi- 
 tion to render a respectful obedience to our disci- 
 pline and government. But I request the confer- 
 ence, if they please, to favor me with the rule of dis- 
 cipline on which 1 have been charged, tried and pun- 
 ished, that I may be better prepared to conclude 
 how to shape my course. (No law was given.) If 
 
14S HISTORY OF THE 
 
 there be any rule, and you have proceeded accord- 
 ing to it, then I am subject to no further penalty, 
 unless I can be punished twice for the same 
 offence. 
 
 It has just now been suggested to me by a brother 
 at my left hand that there is a law of the General 
 Conference, passed at their last session, requiring 
 our preachers not to become agents for other book- 
 sellers, &c. Now, supposing this law to apply to 
 the case in hand, (which we believe it will not,) I 
 knew nothing about its existence until half an hour 
 ago ; and how then could I keep or break it ? It is 
 not in our Discipline. A law must be promulgated 
 before it can be in force; for "where there is no 
 law" there can be "no transgression." How then 
 can I be punished for the transgression of that law? 
 I feel myself as much bound as any member of this 
 conference to keep the laws of the General Confer- 
 ence, until they shall be amended or repealed. 
 When I violate any one of those laws I am amena- 
 ble at this tribunal, and, if found guilty, subject to 
 punishment, and am willing to submit to it. But I 
 cannot be punished now for an offence which I may 
 or may not commit hereafter, without a violation of 
 justice. Moreover, it has been suggested by the 
 president that " an Annual Conference has author- 
 ity to make rules and regulations for its own mem- 
 bers." Admitted. Rules and regulations are not 
 laws to regulate moral conduct, I presume. This 
 conference is now sitting in a legislative or execu- 
 tive capacity. If the former, then not the latter ; 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 149 
 
 and if the latter, not the former. If you are sitting 
 in an executive capacity, how can you enact laws 
 for yourselves to execute? if in a legislative capa- 
 city, how can you execute your own laws ? unless 
 you prove that these two powers should be united 
 in one body, which would astonish my understand- 
 ing, and prove a monstrous anomaly in ecclesiasti- 
 cal government in this country. 
 
 But if this conference had the power both to enact 
 laws for the regulation of the moral characters of 
 its members, and to execute such laws when en- 
 acted, surely none would argue that you had au- 
 thority to punish one of your members for a breach 
 of a law before it is broken or even enacted! And 
 when was the law enacted which prohibits any 
 of your body from recommending the " Mutual 
 Rights ?" the supposed offence for which I have 
 suffered the punishment of an admonition. 
 
 I might easily say much more on the subject, for 
 it is one of the deepest moment to me ; but suffer 
 me to close my remarks by referring brethren to the 
 many hard things which some of them have said on 
 this floor ; and also to what some of them have 
 written and published in opposition to certain parts 
 of our discipline and government; and let me re- 
 quest them to refer to those things when they shall 
 give their vote in this case. 
 
 I now retired again, and Mr. Roszel offered the 
 
 following motion : " That the character of brother 
 
 Dorset) pass, upon his being reproved by the president for 
 
 his contumacy in resisting the authority of the conference." 
 
 13* 
 
150 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 This motion did not prevail. The following motion 
 was then offered by Mr. Job Guest, but written, as 
 the secretary says, by Mr. F. S. Evans : " Moved 
 and seconded, that the bishops be and hereby are 
 requested not to give Dennis B. Dorsey an appoint- 
 ment for the present year, and that his name be so 
 returned on the minutes, with the reasons assigned 
 why he has not an appointment, viz: his contumacy 
 in regard to the conference.'' This motion was 
 divided, and the first and second parts adopted 
 separately. The resolution being read to me, 
 when called in, I requested a transcript from the 
 journal of all the proceedings in the case ; and sig- 
 nified a probability of my appealing to the General 
 Conference against their decision. My request was 
 laid over, however, till the next day. 
 
 When the case was called up on the following 
 day, on motion of Mr. Joshua Wells, it was resolved, 
 that the last resolution passed on yesterday, rela- 
 tive to the return of the name on the minutes, be 
 amended, and "that the words, 'with the reasons 
 assigned why he has not an appointment, viz: his 
 contumacy in regard to the authority of the confer- 
 ence,' be retained on the journal, but not published 
 on the minutes." This motion was adopted. The 
 same day, as I could not be present on account of 
 bodily indisposition, J wrote to the conference, in- 
 forming them of my determination to appeal to the 
 General Conference, and requested them to pass a 
 resolution that this appeal be inserted in the minutes 
 along with their former resolution. In that letter 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 151 
 
 I renewed my request for a transcript from the 
 journals. Mr. Robert Cadden then moved that my 
 " request be not granted." The secretary, Mr. 
 Waugh, and others, made some remarks on the im- 
 propriety of my obtaining such a document, without 
 some restraint not to publish it until the General 
 Conference. This motion was lost. After this, it 
 was, on motion of Mr. Roszel, "resolved that" my 
 " request be granted.'''' 
 
 Thus, dear sir, you have an outline of this afflict- 
 ive and protracted trial ; and you are now left to 
 form your own opinion concerning the nature and 
 grounds of the charge — the manner in which it was 
 introduced — the proofs by which it was sustained — 
 the decisions of the conference in the case — and my 
 merit or demerit of the penalties inflicted. Solicit- 
 ing an interest in your petitions to the God of all 
 grace, that I may have that love which " endureth 
 all things," and " thinketh no evil," I subscribe 
 myself, dear brother, your fellow laborer ia the 
 cause of religious liberty and in the ministry of 
 reconciliation, Dennis B. Dorsey. 
 
 To Vindex. 
 
 The treatment received by Mr. Dorsey at the 
 hands of the Baltimore Annual Conference, al- 
 though it was an act unlooked for by the friends 
 of reform, yet did not dampen the ardor of the 
 true friends of mutual rights. They saw the storm 
 was gathering, and they were nerved for the 
 contest. 
 
152 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The part which the Baltimore Union Society 
 took in making public, through the " Mutual Rights," 
 the facts in Mr. Dorsey's case, and the expression 
 of their opinion on the conduct of the Baltimore 
 Annual Conference, brought down upon them the 
 displeasure of its ministers. 
 
 "The Rev. James M.Han son and Beverly Waugh, 
 preachers in charge of the City and Point Stations, 
 immediately excluded fou rteenlocal preachers, who 
 were reformers residing in Baltimore, from all the 
 Methodist pulpits in this city. Several of the pro- 
 scribed and persecuted brethren were formerly 
 traveling preachers ; most of them had been preach- 
 ers from fifteen to thirty years ; and all of them had 
 contributed to the support of the itinerant ministry, 
 and towards the building of those very houses of 
 worship in which they were now considered un- 
 worthy to officiate. The private members were 
 also made to feel the displeasure of men in power 
 in various ways. A brother, Mr. John Gephart, 
 whose religious character stood fair, and who was 
 recommended by his leader as a suitable person to 
 be admitted into full membership in the Methodist 
 Church, was rejected b} r Mr. Hanson because he was 
 a member of the Baltimore Union Society. It was now 
 very evident, from these facts, and from the threats 
 thrown out by anti- re formers, that a storm of per- 
 secution was gathering over the heads of the mem- 
 bers of the Union Society. They were, however, 
 not dismayed, but calmly awaited the crisis, trust- 
 ing in the protection of Almighty God, and resting 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 153 
 
 their cause on the sure foundation of truth and 
 righteousness. 
 
 "Measures were now taken to expel the principal 
 members of the Baltimore Union Society, in conse- 
 quence of their having exposed the unjustifiable 
 conduct of the Annual Conference. 
 
 "A secret meeting of anti-reformers was convened 
 in July at a school-room in this city; several trav- 
 eling preachers were present, and a plan was 
 adopted to effect the expulsion of the proscribed 
 members. A committee of seven anti-reformers 
 were appointed, who with the assistance of the 
 preacher in charge, Rev. James M. Hanson, were 
 to effect this desirable object. The writer had an 
 interview with the principal member of the com- 
 mittee a day or two after their appointment, and re- 
 quested some information relative to their instruc- 
 tions. He replied, 'I will give you the informa- 
 tion you desire very cheerfully, and in a few words. 
 You and your friends are members of the Union 
 Society, and say you will not leave it. You pub- 
 lish the Mutual Rights, and say you will not discon- 
 tinue that publication. You also say you will not 
 withdraw from the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 Now we are reduced to one of two alternatives; 
 either to let you remain members of the church, and 
 let you go on peacefully publishing the Mutual 
 Rights, by which you agitate the church, or to ex- 
 pel you. We have come to the determination to 
 take the latter alternative and expel you. It is 
 therefore made the duty of our committee to 
 
154 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 examine the 'Mutual Rights,' and if we find any 
 thing- in that work which is a violation of the Dis- 
 cipline, we are authorized to bring charges and have 
 you expelled.' 
 
 " Here was a frank avowal of the intentions of the 
 anti-reformers. 1. They had determined to expel 
 the leading reformers in Baltimore, because they 
 were members of the Union Society. 2. Because 
 they would continue to investigate the principles of 
 church government. 3. Because they would not 
 withdraw from the church. 4. That some pretext 
 was to be sought by which to justify their excom- 
 munication. 5. The Mutual Rights were to be 
 'examined' in order to find some real or pretended 
 accusation by which these holy men of God might 
 effect the expulsion of their brethren and fathers. 
 
 " Whilst the prosecuting committee were engaged 
 in examining the 'Mutual Rights' and preparing 
 charges, another part of the plan was developed. A 
 meeting of all the male members belonging to the two 
 stations, exclusive of reformers, was called on the 
 7th of August, in the little old Baptist meeting 
 house on Pitt street. At that meeting a resolution 
 was passed approving of the conduct of the con- 
 ference in Mr. Dorsey's case; and an 'address,' 
 which had been previously prepared by a deserter 
 from the ranks of reform, was read, and ordered to 
 be published, in which the members of the Union 
 Society, and other reformers, were denounced as 
 ' enemies to Methodism,' &c. One of them in 
 particular was named, and assailed in the most 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 155 
 
 intemperate, unchristian and abusive language. The 
 conduct of the preachers in charge, who had ex- 
 cluded the fourteen preachers from the pulpits, was 
 also approved and sanctioned by the meeting. The 
 obvious and immediate design of this meeting was 
 to prepare the people to witness the excommunication 
 of their friends and relatives, without those feelings 
 of abhorrence and indignation which flagrant acts of 
 injustice and cruelty were calculated to inspire in the 
 bosom of every pious man and woman in the city. 
 
 " By the first of September Mr. Hanson was ready 
 with his select committees of trial; one to suspend 
 the preachers, and the other to condemn the lay- 
 men. There were nine persons on the two com- 
 mittees, three preachers and six laymen, all of 
 whom had assisted to appoint the members of the 
 prosecuting committee, at the meeting held in the 
 schoolroom; and had prejudged and condemned the 
 members of the Union Society at the meeting held 
 in the little Baptist church above referred to on the 
 7th of August. Some of them had publicly de- 
 clared that ' if they had the power they would ex- 
 pel every member of the Union Society from the 
 church.' Yet these men were selected by Mr. 
 Hanson to act as jurors to condemn, that he might 
 expel the members of the Union Societ} r , and w T ere 
 retained by him on the trials, notwithstanding they 
 were repeatedly objected to on these very accounts."* 
 
 Such were the preparations made in Baltimore 
 by the opposers of reform, and such were the men 
 
 * See History of the M. P. Church by Rev. James R. Williams, 
 pp. 166—69. 
 
156 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 before whom the friends of mutual rights were to be 
 brought forth and tried in the church of God for 
 their opinions upon church polity. After reading 
 the preceding graphic description, given by one 
 who was of the number doomed to martyrdom, 
 the conclusion is irrestibly forced upon us, that the 
 Rev. Mr. Hanson and his compeers in the work of 
 proscription fondly looked forward to no other issue 
 than that which they finally obtained, viz : the ex- 
 pulsion from the church of the Redeemer of those 
 faithful ministers and members for the onerous sin 
 of differing with them in opinion upon the subject of 
 church polity. 
 
 Early in September the arrangements appear to 
 have been completed, arjfl Mr. Hanson entered 
 vigorously upon the campaign of his unholy cru- 
 sade. The following notice was sent, to each of the 
 accused. The subjoined is a copy of the one sent 
 to Dr. S. K. Jennings. 
 
 Baltimore, September 8, 1827. 
 
 Rev. Sir, — You are hereby informed that charges 
 have been preferred against you by the following 
 persons, J. Rogers, S. Hardin, J. Berry, I. N. Toy, 
 A. Yearly, G. Earnest and F. Israel. 
 
 As it is desirable for the satisfaction of all who 
 feel an interest in the matter that a hearing should 
 be had as soon as practicable, it is hoped that 
 Tuesday evening next, at 7 o'clock, will suit your 
 convenience. Yours respectfully, 
 
 James M. Hanson. 
 
 Rev. Dr. S. K. Jennings. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 157 
 
 To the foregoing note the following reply was 
 returned: 
 
 I have also to say to you that the nature of my 
 defence will make it imperiously necessary for me 
 to correspond with the several writers, for the pub- 
 lication of whose papers, as one of the editors of a 
 periodical work, I am called to give an account. 
 This circumstance, together with other and very 
 important parts of my intended defence, will neces- 
 sarily require a good deal of time. A proper sense 
 of justice on the part of the executive, therefore, will 
 certainly protect me against the violence of being 
 urged to too hasty a hearing. 
 
 I am, &c. S. K. Jennings. 
 
 Rev. J. M. Hanson. 
 
 Dr. Jennings was a member of the Baltimore 
 Union Society, and a member of the editorial com- 
 mittee, and as a matter of course was deemed by Mr. 
 Hanson a friend and patron of the Mutual Rights — 
 upon this the charges and specifications against 
 him were all based, and in order to his defence, it 
 was important in his case that he should have some 
 correspondence with the writers of those articles in 
 the Mutual Rights, which were regarded so objec- 
 tionable by the men in power. But this boon was 
 denied him. Hear Mr. Hanson in reply. 
 
 "I am no less astonished that you should think it 
 
 all-important to your intended defence, to have a 
 
 correspondence with the writers of those pieces 
 
 which the brethren above alluded to have desig-. 
 
 14 
 
158 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 nated. The sentiments and expressions which are 
 deemed exceptionable have been published to the 
 world and speak for themselves. With the writers 
 for the "Mutual Rights," scattered as they are over 
 the continent, the charges in question have no im- 
 mediate concern ; nor is it easy to see how these 
 writers are to render you any assistance. They 
 can furnish no testimony — they can undo nothing 
 that you, as a member of the editorial committee 
 may have done; and without designing to flatter, I 
 may be permitted to say they can place the subject 
 in question in no light in which it has not appeared 
 to your own mind ; seeing that it has been with you 
 a subject of close and deep deliberation for several 
 years. Under these impressions, and desirous, for 
 the good of all concerned, to bring the matter to as 
 speedy an issue as is consistent with a proper sense 
 of justice, it is deemed altogether unadvisable to fix 
 upon any period for investigation beyond Monday 
 17th, at 7 o'clock P. M. I am, Sec. 
 
 James M. Hanson. 
 
 Rev. Dr. S. K. Jennings. 
 
 P. S. Should you prefer any evening prior to 
 the time above mentioned, be good enough to let 
 us know. J. M. H. 
 
 Accordingly on the 17th of September, 1827, the 
 trial of Dr. Jennings came on. Rev. James M. 
 Hanson in the chair. Rev. Samuel Williams, John 
 W. Harris and Thomas Basford, committee. 
 
 Mr. Israel, on the part of the prosecution, opened 
 the case as follows : 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 159 
 
 I have nothing personal against Dr. Jennings, I 
 have the highest regard and personal esteem for 
 him. I regret that this course was unavoidable. 
 We had no other alternative. We were driven to 
 this course. We have been told by the members of 
 the Union Society that they must have lay delega- 
 tion. They say, also, they will never withdraw 
 from the church. Lay delegation we believe is not 
 practicable or expedient. With these views we 
 never can agree; we are as distant as the poles. 
 The Mutual Rights have produced wranglings, dis- 
 putations and division. Are there not two parties? 
 Every religious community has a right to form its 
 own discipline, and its members are not at liberty 
 to disturb it. While they remain members of the 
 church, they have no right to form and be members 
 of the Union Society. We claim what we conceive 
 to be a right of ours, and we ought to be left in the 
 peaceable enjoyment of our rights. 
 
 The rules which we think have been violated 
 are to be found on pages 7S and 91 of the Disci- 
 pline, as designated in the charges and specifications 
 upon which this trial is founded ; and we refer to 
 the Mutual Rights in extenso in proof of the charges. 
 But more particularly to the references which are 
 appended to the specifications. 
 
 CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS. 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Samuel K. Jennings is charged 
 with endeavoring to sow dissensions in the society 
 or church in this station or city, known by the 
 
160 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 name of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and with 
 the violation of that general rule of the Discipline of 
 the said church or society which prohibits its mem- 
 bers from doing harm, and requires them to avoid 
 evil of every kind; and especially with violating 
 that clause of said general rule which prohibits 
 speaking evil of ministers. 
 
 Specification 1st. Because the said Samuel 
 K. Jennings, while a member and a local preacher 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church aforesaid, did 
 heretofore attach himself to and become a member 
 of the society called the Union Society of the city of 
 Baltimore ; which Union Society is in opposition to 
 the Discipline, in whole or in part, of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church aforesaid. 
 
 Specification 2d. Because of the said Samuel K. 
 Jennings, as a member of said Union Society, 
 directly or indirectly, either by pecuniary contribu- 
 tions or his personal influence, aiding, abetting, co- 
 operating or assisting in the publication and circu- 
 lation of a work called "The Mutual Rights of 
 the ministers and members of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church," printed under the direction of an 
 editorial committee, (of which the said S. K. Jen- 
 nings is or lately was one,) appointed by, or who are 
 members of the Union Society aforesaid, which 
 work or publication, called "The Mutual Rights of 
 the ministers and members of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church" contains (among other things) much 
 that inveighs against the Discipline of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church aforesaid, in whole or in part, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 161 
 
 and is in direct opposition thereto; and that is 
 abusive or speaks evil of a part, if not of most of the 
 ministers of that church. The general tendency of 
 which work or publication has been to produce dis- 
 agreement, strife, contention and breach of union 
 among the members of said church in this city or 
 station. 
 
 Specification 3d. Because the said Samuel K. 
 Jennings, as a member of the Union Society 
 aforesaid, did devise, request, or recommend, the 
 publication of a pamphlet entitled " The History 
 and Mystery of Methodist Episcopacy," written by 
 the Rev. Alexander McCaine, in which various de- 
 clarations and assertions are made without proper 
 proof or just foundation, calculated to disgrace and 
 bring reproach upon the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 aforesaid, its ministers and members ; and which 
 declarations and assertions are well calculated to 
 produce, increase, and heighten the disagreement, 
 strife, contention and breach of union alluded to in 
 the 2d specification. 
 
 For proof of which, the publication entitled " The 
 Mutual Rights of the ministers and members of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church" is referred to, and 
 particularly, 
 
 No. 1, page 31, Constitution of the Union Society of Baltimore. 
 " 7, " 261, Essays on church property, Nos. 1 &2, by Rev, 
 
 N. Snethen. 
 " 25, '• 26, Joseph Walker's letter, Alabama. 
 " 27, " 53, Luther on Representation. 
 "29, " 100, Timothy's Address to Junior Bishop. 
 " 30, " 147, Dissenter. 
 14* 
 
162 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 No. 32, page 199, Rev. A. Shinn's Appeal. 
 " 33, " 214, Granville Union Society. 
 " 34, " 270, Vindex. 
 
 Sovereignty of Methodism in the south. 
 " " " 248, Address of N. Snethen. 
 " 35, " 277, Union Society on D. B. Dorsey's case. 
 " 36, " 301, Address. 
 « " " 300, Neale. 
 " " " 322, Centreville proceedings. 
 
 And also the said pamphlet, entitled " The His- 
 tory and IVtystery of Methodist Episcopacy, with 
 such other documentary or oral proof as the under- 
 signed may deem expedient to exhibit or produce. 
 Signed George Earnest, Jacob Rogers, Samuel 
 Harden, Isaac N. Toy, Alexander Yearly, Fielder 
 Israel and John Berry. 
 Baltimore, September 7, 1827. 
 
 Doctor Jennings in the first place made a formal 
 protest against the competency of the court which 
 Mr. Hanson convened, upon the grounds of its want 
 of jurisdiction in the case; that the charges and 
 specifications upon which he was arraigned consti- 
 tuted a case entirely new ; that, in despite of all 
 sophistry, it would be so considered by impartial 
 judges. He objected both to the competency and 
 the right of the tribunal to try the questions involved 
 in the case, and declared that he would "consider 
 it an executive usurpation of exposl facto legislative 
 authority." But Mr. Hanson made known his de- 
 termination to proceed. 
 
 The doctor now protested against the proceed- 
 ings upon the grounds of the impossibility of a fair 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 163 
 
 and disinterested trial — that sentence was already 
 pronounced by the men who were to sit in judgment. 
 That his prosecutors had referred almost exclu- 
 sively to papers published in the '•Mutual Rights," 
 likewise to " The History and Mystery of Meth- 
 odist Episcopacy," written by Rev. A. McCaine. 
 For proof of the true position of the men who were 
 to sit as his judges, he referred to a pamphlet, whose 
 manuscript, written by Dr. Bond, and the rest of 
 that committee, had the sanction and vote of the 
 meeting at the corner of Pitt and Front streets, a 
 meeting of the old side brethren, when and where 
 these three brethren of the committee acted and 
 voted with them as they now admit." That by 
 that vote they had virtually condemned and placed 
 their seal of disapprobation both upon the " Mutual 
 Rights " and the " History and Mystery of Method- 
 ist Episcopacy." That, with these evidences before 
 him, there was an impossibility of this committee 
 being able to give an impartial hearing in the 
 case. 
 
 But Mr. Hanson decided that that vote which 
 they had given did not disqualify them for acting 
 on the committee. 
 
 Dr. Jennings then entered his third protest, in 
 which he objected to the whole of the proceedings as 
 being illegal, and totally at variance with the usages 
 and spirit of Methodism, in which he took very 
 general grounds. 
 
 But to all human appearances the die had been 
 cast, for the chairman overruled all objections ; the 
 
 
164 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 trial proceeded — the doctor was pronounced guilty 
 of the specifications, and suspended from the exer- 
 cise of his ministerial functions. 
 
 From an attentive perusal of the specifications 
 alleged against Dr. Jennings, there appears to be an 
 entire absence of any thing bearing a semblance of 
 immorality. If he had become a member of the 
 Union Society, he violated no rule of discipline in so 
 doing. If he had contributed either Directly or in- 
 directly to the support of the " Mutual Rights," he 
 violated no rule or obligation. That periodical had 
 for its object the welfare of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. If he had advised, recommended or 
 requested the publication of " The History and 
 Mystery of Methodist Episcopacy," written by Rev. 
 A. McCaine, that is a work which exhibits much 
 learning, deep research, able arguments ; and sets 
 forth truth in so clear and masterly a manner that 
 all the arguments and sophistry of the votaries of 
 Methodist Episcopacy disappear before it like the 
 vapors before the midday sun ; and it is a work which 
 any may read to advantage and profit. But this 
 third and last specification has been pronounced by 
 history to be " notoriously untrue." 
 
 We have presented before the reader the charges 
 alleged and the measures adopted by the Rev. Mr. 
 Hanson in the trial of Dr. Jennings, inasmuch as 
 they are nearly similar or amount to the same as 
 those alleged against the other reformers of Balti- 
 more who were brought to trial. 
 
 iMr. Hanson proceeded in his work with a zeal 
 
METHODIST FROTESTANT CHURCH. 165 
 
 that might challenge that of Archbishop Laud in the 
 " Star Chamber," for in a few days eleven minis- 
 ters and twenty-two laymen were expelled from the 
 communion of the church. " The Rev. A. McCaine 
 was tried separately, in his absence, by a com- 
 mittee selected by Mr. Hanson, composed of three 
 of the most illiterate local preachers, perhaps, in the 
 state of Maryland, and suspended. The preachers 
 carried up their cases to the District Conference 
 that sat on the 26th December, 1S27, which was 
 their proper court of trial. Here they expected to 
 have justice done them, as a majority of the confer- 
 ence were reformers. But on the morning of the 
 second day, after holding a caucus the preceding 
 evening, the presiding elder, with a minority of the 
 conference and the votes of nine colored men, who 
 were not entitled to a vole, dissolved the District 
 Conference, and ordered the preachers to appear at 
 the Quarterly Conference and stand their trials. 
 Indignant at this unexpected act of injustice, the 
 preachers determined not to appear before the 
 Quarterly Conference, but to appeal to the ap- 
 proaching Annual Conference against the arbitrary 
 and illegal proceedings of the presiding elder. In 
 the meantime the Quarterly Conference expelled 
 them all."* 
 
 The following extract from the " Mutual Rights," 
 will exhibit a concise view of the course pursued 
 by the parties during the " reign of terror." 
 
 *See History of the M. P. Church by Rev. J. R. Williams, 
 pp. 192— 93. " 
 
166 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 " The men in power here are going on calling to 
 their bar the members of the Union Society, to an- 
 swer to the charges and specifications which they 
 have contrived to get up. Sometimes two are tried 
 in one day ; and we are in a fair way to afford them 
 ample employment. Since they began to summon 
 us we have admitted more new members than they 
 have been able to try. The world can now under- 
 stand them ; their determination is, that the only 
 condition of fellowship with the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church shall be unqualified and silent submission. 
 They are determined to put down the Union Socie- 
 ties and mutual rights. These institutions have too 
 much influence over the people, they talk too much 
 about liberty for the power party, who are deter- 
 mined, it would seem, to prevent a representation, 
 if they lose half of the members. They have re- 
 moved all the reforming class-leaders ; and so by 
 the expulsion of the members of the Union Society, 
 and the retirement of members who will be dis- 
 gusted by such doings, there will be great mischief 
 done." 
 
 The local preachers being notified by the presid- 
 ing elder of the Baltimore District, Rev. Mr. Frye, 
 of his intention to bring before the Quarterly Con- 
 ference of the city station the charges and specifi- 
 cations for which they had been suspended, made 
 a formal protest against the illegality of such a step 
 being taken ; alleging, as the grounds of their pro- 
 test, that he had dissolved the District Conference, 
 (before which alone their case could have been 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 167 
 
 legally considered,) by counting the votes of colored 
 men, said to be without precedent in the State of 
 Maryland. 
 
 A memorial was also sent up, by all who were 
 expelled in Baltimore, to the Baltimore Annual 
 Conference, which assembled in Carlisle, in April, 
 1828. But that conference not only confirmed the 
 act of Messrs. Hanson & Co. in the expulsion of the 
 memorialists, but likewise expelled the Rev. Dennis 
 B. Dorsey and the Rev. Wm. C. Pool, for charges 
 of a similar nature. 
 
 The brethren that were thus prosecuted and ex- 
 pelled from the M. E. Church in Baltimore, on ac- 
 count of their reform principles, were among the 
 oldest, most exemplary and faithful supporters of the 
 worship and doctrines of that communion. We 
 subjoin a list showing the number of years each one 
 had been a member of the church. 
 
 John Chappell, 
 
 46 
 
 Rev. Luther J. Cox, 
 
 19 
 
 Rev. D. E. Reese, 
 
 33 
 
 Joseph R. Forman, 
 
 19 
 
 Thomas Jarrett, 
 
 32 
 
 Rev. John S. Reese, 
 
 17 
 
 Rev. Dr. S. K. Jennings, 
 
 30 
 
 Thomas Mummey, 
 
 16 
 
 Samuel Jarrett, 
 
 30 
 
 Rev. Thomas McCormick, 
 
 16 
 
 Rev. James R. Williams.. 
 
 ,27 
 
 Thomas Patterson, 
 
 16 
 
 " John Valiant, 
 
 27 
 
 John Paul, 
 
 15 
 
 " William Kesley, 
 
 26 
 
 George Northerman, 
 
 15 
 
 Lambert Thomas, 
 
 26 
 
 Samuel Guest, 
 
 14 
 
 William K. Boyle, 
 
 25 
 
 J. H. W. Hawkins, 
 
 12 
 
 Arthur Emerson, 
 
 25 
 
 Samuel Thompson, 
 
 12 
 
 John Kennard, 
 
 23 
 
 Thomas Parsons, 
 
 12 
 
 Samuel Krebs, 
 
 22 
 
 Rev. R. T. Boyd, 
 
 11 
 
 John J. Harrod, 
 
 20 
 
 John P. Howard, 
 
 10 
 
 Rev. John C. French, 
 
 20 
 
 Ebenezer Strahan, 
 
 8 
 
 "Wesley Starr, 
 
 20 
 
 Levi R. Reese, 
 
 4 
 
168 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 It would appear from the preceding schedule 
 that neither office, nor station, nor piety, nor zeal, 
 nor talents, nor services, nor usefulness, nor age 
 could screen a member of the church from expul- 
 sion, if he was brought before Mr. Hanson's com- 
 mittee for the crime of being a member of the Union 
 Society. And it no doubt will astonish the pious 
 reader to learn that such events were enacted in 
 the M. E. Church, in these United States, as late as 
 the year 1827. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 169 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Association of the expelled reformers in Baltimore. — Declaration 
 set forth, and withdrawal of ladies in the city. — General Con- 
 vention of reformers in Baltimore in 1827. — Schedule of Union 
 Societies. — Resolutions of Roanoke Union Society. — Letter of 
 Rev. William Compton to that body. — Review of the letter by 
 Committee of Correspondence. 
 
 The expelled brethren, in being thus divested of 
 church fellowship, united themselves together un- 
 der the following instrument of association, in order 
 to secure to themselves and friends Christian 
 communion : 
 
 COPY OF THE INSTRUMENT 
 
 Under which the expelled members and ministers in 
 Baltimore united, "in order to pray together, to receive 
 the word of exhortation, and to watch over one another 
 in love, that they might help each other to work out their 
 salvation." 
 
 We, the undersigned, formerly members of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, in the city of Balti- 
 more, having been excluded from the fellowship of 
 that body, by what we believe to be an unjustifiable 
 process, based upon insufficient charges, and those 
 charges not sustained by competent testimony, 
 have, for the present, agreed to unite together as a 
 society of original Methodists, under the " General 
 Rules of the United Societies," prepared by the 
 15 
 
170 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Rev. John and Charles Wesley. Our object is to 
 wait and see whether the present abuses in the 
 administration of the government will be cor- 
 rected. If they should, and freedom of inquiry and 
 public discussion be permitted in the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, it would afford us pleasure to 
 return; provided we can do so without relinquishing 
 the opinions for which we have been excluded, 
 namely, an honest and, as we believe, enlightened 
 conviction that the present form of government in 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church, so far as it pre- 
 cludes the grand principle of representation, and 
 confines all legislative, executive and judicial pow- 
 ers to the itinerant ministry, is unscriptural and 
 anti-Christian; and that reform in the government 
 of said church is necessary, in order to its- essential 
 and permanent prosperity. With these views, we 
 solemnly unite in the name of the Great Head of 
 the church, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 
 receiving the Holy Scriptures as our guide ; and 
 for prudential purposes adopting as an instrument 
 of union the " General Rules " of Messrs. John and 
 Charles Wesley, with such subsequent regulations 
 as our peculiar circumstances may from time to 
 time require. 
 
 John Chappell, Ebenezer Strahan, 
 
 John J. Harrod, John H. W. Hawkins, 
 
 Wesley Starr, Thomas Patterson, 
 
 John Kennard, Samuel Krebs, 
 
 William K. Boyle, Thomas Parsons, 
 Arthur Emmerson, Thomas Jarrett, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 171 
 
 John Gephart, jr., Joseph K. Forman, 
 
 John P. Howard, George Northerman, 
 
 Levi R. Reese, Samuel Thompson, 
 
 Lambert Thomas, Samuel Guest, 
 
 Samuel Jarrett, John P. Paul. 
 Baltimore, December 23, 1827. 
 
 We, the undersigned, elders, deacons and li- 
 censed preachers, subscribe our names respectively 
 to the foregoing instrument, approving the objects 
 contemplated therein. 
 
 Samuel K. Jennings, Luther J. Cox, 
 Daniel E. Reese, John S. Reese, 
 
 James R. Williams, John C. French, 
 
 William Kesley, Reuben T. Boyd. 
 
 Thomas McCormick, 
 Baltimore, January 26, 1828. 
 
 We now come to record an act which, for mag- 
 nanimity of purpose, will justly challenge a paral- 
 lel in church history. It is the course pursued and 
 the measures adopted by the ladies of Baltimore on 
 account of the fatal results attending the ad minis- 
 tration of Mr. Hanson, in the expulsion of their 
 "husbands, fathers," &c, from the church of their 
 choice. The firmness and moderation which they 
 evinced, and the zeal and devotedness which they 
 exhibited under the circumstances, are above all 
 praise. 
 
 Baltimore, December 31, 1827. 
 
 At a meeting of female members of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, convened at the Rev. Dr. Jen- 
 nings's, for the purpose of taking into consideration 
 
172 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 the most advisable course to be pursued by the 
 wives and friends of those members of said church 
 who have been expelled, and of those ministers who 
 are suspended by the official members of the Balti- 
 more Station, for the sake of reform ; the meet- 
 ing was opened with prayer ; and, on motion, 
 Mrs. Rebecca Hall was called to the chair, and 
 Mrs. Wesley Woods was appointed secretary. 
 
 On motion, resolved, that the members of this 
 meeting deeply regret the necessity of withdrawing 
 from the Methodist Episcopal Church ; yet, from a 
 conviction of duty, we do hereby resolve to with- 
 draw from said church, when our husbands, fathers 
 or friends shall have been expelled. 
 
 On motion, resolved, that a committee of nine be 
 appointed to consider and report on the most ad- 
 visable measures to be adopted by those females 
 who have determined to withdraw from the church. 
 The following were appointed said committee, viz : 
 Mrs. Mummey, Mrs. Jennings, Mrs. Harrod, Mrs. 
 Woods, Mrs. French, Mrs. Kennard, Mrs. Reese, 
 Miss L. Martin and Mrs. Owens. ! 
 
 The meeting then adjourned to give the commit- 
 tee time to prepare and report such measures as 
 they may deem most advisable. 
 
 Rebecca Hall, President. 
 
 Mary Ann Woods, Secretary. 
 
 Monday, January 7, 1828. 
 The meeting convened for the purpose of hearing 
 the report of the committee. The following report 
 was read and unanimously adopted : 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 173 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 The committee appointed to inquire into the best 
 n.easures to be adopted by the female friends of 
 reform in the government of the M. E. Church 
 in this city, to secure their present peace and union, 
 aid their future happiness, have had the subject 
 uider serious and deliberate consideration, and 
 b<g leave to report that, inasmuch as it was unani- 
 mously resolved at our meeting on the 31st Decem- 
 ber, that on the expulsion of our husbands, fathers, 
 &-., we would feel it our duty to withdraw from 
 tie church and unite with our expelled friends, it 
 i: expedient, in the opinion of your committee, that 
 the wives, daughters, &c, of our friends and breth- 
 ren already expelled withdraw from the church ; 
 and that all who determine on this course should 
 address a joint letter to Mr. Hanson, stating their 
 determination to withdraw, and assign their reasons 
 fori so doing; and also requesting of him a certifi- 
 cate of their acceptable membership. 
 
 And your committee further beg leave to submit 
 the following as the form of a suitable instrument to 
 be adopted and subscribed by the females who may 
 withdraw from the church : 
 
 DECLARATION. 
 
 The subscribers, members of the methodist Epis- 
 copal Church in the city of Baltimore, believing 
 that the form of government in said church is, in 
 some of its features, contrary to the Holy Scrip- 
 tures ; and that it deprives a large proportion of the 
 15* 
 
174 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 ministers and members of said church of their 
 natural and Christian rights ; and believing t'lat 
 the ruling authorities in this city have grealy 
 abused the power they hold, to the injury of relig'nn, 
 in that they have suspended eleven local preachers, 
 by what we consider improper measures, for aidng 
 the cause of reform, and have expelled twenty-t.vo 
 lay members for the same cause, and have treaed 
 others hardly whom they have not expelled, End 
 have for the same cause deprived most of our br- 
 mer class-leaders of their official standing; which 
 preachers, members and leaders are our compan- 
 ions, fathers, children, or highly esteemed brethrei, 
 in whom we have the fullest Christian confidence; 
 and by these means they have created a state of 
 things calculated to destroy Christian union anc 
 Christian confidence. Therefore, for these and 
 other considerations, we have determined and 
 hereby do agree to dissolve for the present our con- 
 nection with the Methodist Episcopal Church, by 
 withdrawing therefrom ; and that we will address 
 a joint letter to Rev. J. M. Hanson, expressive of our 
 determination to this effect, and request of him a 
 certificate of our acceptable standing in the church. 
 And we do hereby declare that we have been im- 
 pelled to this measure only by existing difficulties 
 in the church ; and that so soon as those difficulties 
 shall be removed, and our expelled and injured 
 friends shall be restored to the enjoyment of their 
 former standing and privileges, on proper and Chris- 
 tian principles, it will be our delight to return to 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 175 
 
 the church, from which we now reluctantly retire. 
 We farther agree that until the way of our return 
 shall become practicable, or the opening of Provi- 
 dence shall mark out to us some other way, we 
 will unite in Christian communion and religious 
 worship with each other, and with our brethren and 
 sisters who have been or may be persecuted from 
 the church for reform principles. 
 
 And finally we hereby declare that we have not 
 been influenced to adopt this measure by the per- 
 suasion or other means of our husbands, relatives or 
 friends, but from a deliberate and settled conviction 
 of duty to our God, ourselves, and our injured 
 friends and brethren. We therefore hereby sol- 
 emnly unite ourselves together for the reasons and 
 for the purposes before named, with a firm reliance 
 on the support and assistance of Almightj'' God in 
 this important duty and engagement. 
 
 The committee further beg leave to offer the fol- 
 lowing as a suitable form of a letter, to be sent to 
 the preacher in charge of this station, by those 
 females who may determine to withdraw from the 
 church. 
 
 The letter, after receiving the signatures append- 
 ed, was presented to Mr. Hanson on the Saturday 
 preceding the lovefeast. 
 
 Rev. James M. Hanson: 
 
 We, the subscribers, female members of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, in the city of Balti- 
 
176 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 more, feel ourselves under the necessity of address- 
 ing you on a subject peculiarly painful. For a series 
 of years we have been endeavoring, in our humble 
 sphere, to serve God and make our way to heaven. 
 And long since the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 became the home of our choice, where we had 
 fondly hoped to dwell in the peaceful enjoyment of 
 the means of grace and the ordinances of Christiani- 
 ty, to the end of life. In this church our dearest 
 Christian associations and religious friendships were 
 formed, and flourished. Our hopes, our fears, our 
 wishes, all were identified with the church of our 
 choice. Around all her ordinances, her services, 
 her ministers, our best affections were entwined; and 
 for her peace and prosperity our daily prayers were 
 offered to a throne of grace. This preference was 
 not given to the Methodist Episcopal Church be- 
 cause we considered her government more perfect 
 than that of others; for, indeed, we were no more 
 careful to inquire into that subject than our preachers 
 were to give us instruction concerning it; but our 
 preference grew out of the purity of her doctrines, 
 the piety of her members, the excellence of her 
 moral discipline, and her itinerant plan. And 
 though recent events have led us to examine, more 
 closely than heretofore, the Methodist Discipline, 
 and this examination has resulted in a conviction of 
 its defectiveness, in many particulars, yet we could 
 have borne those comparatively trivial inconve- 
 niences, and could have lived happily in the bosom 
 of the church all our da3 r s, nor had we thought of 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 177 
 
 forsaking her communion until death, but for recent 
 occurrences which have taken place under your 
 administration and superintendence. But, sir, to 
 see a large number of our highly esteemed local 
 preachers excluded from the pulpits, arraigned, con- 
 demned and excommunicated, and the seal of official 
 silence set upon the lips which have so often con- 
 veyed heavenly consolation to our minds and hearts ; 
 to see our beloved class-leaders torn from us, and 
 deprived of their official standing, and a large 
 number of our lay-brethren expelled without a 
 crime ; and to see the unwarrantable measures by 
 which these distressing results have been effected, 
 is too painful for us! In short, to find our dear 
 companions, fathers, brothers, children and friends 
 treated as criminals and enemies, prosecuted, sus- 
 pended and expelled ; denounced as backsliders 
 and disturbers of the peace ; and to be ourselves 
 treated coldly and distantly by our former friends, 
 and by our pastors; and all for a mere difference 
 of opinion about church government, is more than 
 we feel bound in Christian charity longer to endure ; 
 and we, therefore, feel it our duty, in the fear of 
 God, though with emotions of poignant sorrow, and 
 with aching hearts, to withdraw from the church 
 of our choice and fondest attachments. To this 
 painful resort we are driven by the measures you 
 have taken against our friends and brethren. To 
 remain in the church under the circumstances now 
 existing, would be to evince a want of filial, connu- 
 bial, and fraternal attachment to our persecuted 
 friends, and a want of self-respect. 
 
178 
 
 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 We therefore request you to consider us as with- 
 drawn from the Methodist Episcopal Church, and 
 to furnish us a joint or individual certificate of our 
 acceptable standing, as soon as convenient. 
 
 Hannah L. Harrod, 
 Catharine Mummey, 
 Guinilda Mummey, 
 Mary Kemiard, 
 Sarah Krebs, 
 Jane Thomas, 
 Elizabeth Williams, 
 Sarah Williams, 
 Elizabeth Taylor, 
 Mary Williams, 
 Frances Williams, 
 Catharine Williams, 
 Hannah Jennings, 
 Mary O wings, 
 Elizabeth Crouch, 
 Elinor Gephart, 
 Maria Paul, 
 Elizabeth Forman, 
 Phillippa Starr, 
 Rachel Hawkins, 
 Elizabeth Baxley, 
 Susan Guest, 
 Sarah Emmerson, 
 Elizabeth Valiant, 
 
 Isabella Northerman, 
 Elizabeth Kennard, 
 Anna Jarrett, 
 Ruth Reese, 
 Rebecca Reese, 
 Margaret Reese, 
 Mary Reese, 
 Margaret Patterson, 
 Mary French, 
 Sidney Boyd, 
 Rebecca Jane Roberts, 
 Lucy Fore, 
 Mary Jane Thomas, 
 Jemima Jones, 
 Hannah Martin, 
 Letitia M. Martin, 
 Maria M. Martin, 
 Maria Cox, 
 Mary Meads, 
 Mary Ann Woods, 
 Catharine Wallace, 
 Elizabeth Brit, 
 Mary Ann Valiant. 
 
 Who can read unmoved the account of the pro- 
 ceedings of these excellent Christian ladies, and the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 179 
 
 course they pursued when their "companions, 
 fathers, brothers, children and friends," were prose- 
 cuted, suspended and expelled from the church ? 
 Sensible of the deep injustice done to those whom 
 they held most dear, they prudently took the praise- 
 worthy resolution to follow their exiled friends into 
 their " Patmos." How excellent are the sentiments 
 set forth in their declaration ! The lovers of justice 
 and truth may here read, pause and admire! 
 
 According to the best information afforded us, 
 the expelled laymen associated themselves together 
 on the 23d December, 1827. The ministers united 
 with them January 26th, 1828, and the ladies 
 who had withdrawn joined the association a few 
 days afterwards. 
 
 This was no doubt, according to the best accounts 
 the first society formed of those known, for the space 
 of about two years, by the name of the Associated 
 Methodist Societies; which, upon the adoption of 
 the Constitution, took the name of the Methodist 
 Protestant Church. 
 
 The association thus formed, "elected the 
 preachers and ministers to serve in the same rela- 
 tions and offices they respectively held prior to their 
 expulsion, and the instrument declaring this fact 
 was recorded in the clerk's office, Baltimore. This 
 act was deemed necessary to guard against the 
 effects of representations made to the community 
 by the old side men, that being deprived of mem- 
 bership, their parchments became null and void, 
 
180 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 and consequently their ministerial acts would be 
 illegal."* 
 
 The high-handed and tyrannical measures of 
 Mr. Hanson and his committee, which they adopted 
 to effect the expulsion of the reformers, created 
 quite a deep sensation throughout the Methodist 
 community in the United States. Union societies 
 and churches, upon the receipt of the startling intel- 
 ligence, held meetings and passed resolutions of 
 abhorrence and condemnation of the administration 
 of Rev. James M. Hanson, and of sympathy for 
 the persecuted reformers. The communications 
 sent to the Baltimore Union Society from north, 
 south, east and west, were respectful in their 
 tenor; and coming as they did from highly respect- 
 able and influential bodies of Christians, they could 
 not fail to strengthen the hearts and hands of the 
 exiled reformers. These numerous addresses of 
 the Union Societies may be found in the fourth vol- 
 ume of the Mutual Rights for 1827-8. 
 
 In November, 1827, a general convention of re- 
 formers met in the city of Baltimore, composed of 
 ministerial and lay delegates from the states of Ohio, 
 Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Virginia, North 
 Carolina and the District of Columbia. One hun- 
 dred delegates had been appointed to attend this 
 convention, but owing to the circumstances that 
 generally militate against the assemblage of such a 
 body, but fifty-seven were in attendance. This 
 
 * Williams's History of the M. P. Church, p. 210. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 181 
 
 body adopted a "memorial to the General Confer- 
 ence," praying for a joint representation from the 
 local ministry and membership, and prepared an 
 address to the Methodist public, both of which 
 were published for the information of the com- 
 munity. 
 
 Up to this period, about twenty-four Union So- 
 cieties had been formed, according to the best 
 information extant upon the subject. The following 
 statement may afford some idea of the date of their 
 organization, as well as of their locality : 
 
 Baltimore Union Society, formed May 21st, 1824 
 
 Roanoke, N. C, Auxiliary to Baltimore U. S., Nov. 6, 1824 
 
 Bedford county, Tennessee, Auxiliary, 
 
 . 1825 
 
 Cincinnati, Ohio, 
 
 " 
 
 1826 
 
 N. York, Western U. Society, 
 
 a 
 
 . 1826 
 
 Miami U. Society, 
 
 it 
 
 1826 
 
 Granville, North Carolina, 
 
 it 
 
 . 1826 
 
 Liberty Town, Maryland, 
 
 iC 
 
 1827 
 
 Fell's Point, Baltimore, 
 
 it 
 
 . 1827 
 
 Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, 
 
 ft 
 
 1827 
 
 Centreville, Maryland, 
 
 St 
 
 . 1827 
 
 Steubenville, Ohio, 
 
 it 
 
 1827 
 
 Chesterlown, Maryland, 
 
 if 
 
 . 1827 
 
 New Market, Maryland, 
 
 it 
 
 1827 
 
 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 
 
 it 
 
 . 1827 
 
 Somerset, Maryland, 
 
 a 
 
 1827 
 
 Newtown, Maryland, 
 
 a 
 
 . 1827 
 
 Lancaster, Virginia, 
 
 tt 
 
 1827 
 
 Centreville, Indiana, 
 
 it 
 
 . 1827 
 
 New Orleans, Louisiana, 
 
 it 
 
 1827 
 
 Louisville, Kentucky, 
 
 tt 
 
 . 1827 
 
 Burlington, Vermont, 
 
 tt 
 
 1827 
 
 Greenfield, Ohio, 
 
 tt 
 
 . 1827 
 
 Greenville, Alabama, 
 
 a 
 
 1827 
 
 16 
 
 
 
182 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The reader will observe, from the preceding 
 schedule, that Union Societies had been formed in 
 twelve different states. In those societies were to 
 be found some of the most distinguished ministers 
 of the M. E. Church, in point of piety, talent and 
 influence. But no character was too fair, at this 
 stage of the history of reform, to be attacked and 
 aspersed by the votaries of the Methodist Episcopal 
 hierarchy. Even the much-honored Dr. H. B. 
 Bascom, the present champion or defender of the 
 M. E. Church, South, was denounced by Rev. Mr. 
 Hanson and his co-laborers, the prosecuting com- 
 mittee, as "a reckless assailant that transcends all 
 decency of invective." To be in favor of reform, 
 or of "mutual rights," was regarded by the advo- 
 cates of the old order of things as an offence 
 calling for expulsion from the church. 
 
 NORTH CAROLINA. 
 
 We now turn our attention to the state of affairs 
 in North Carolina. The Roanoke Union Society 
 had continued to swell its numbers, and disseminate 
 its circulars and publications throughout the state, 
 in order to enlist the minds and feelings of the 
 Methodist community in the cause of a republican 
 church polity. The measures adopted by this 
 society in the dissemination of the doctrine of 
 mutual rights, did not fail to bring it into notice 
 with those in authority in the M. E. Church. 
 
 Accordingly, early in the year 1S2S, the Virginia 
 Annual Conference sent to the Roantfke Circuit, as 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 183 
 
 preacher in charge, the Rev. William Compton, 
 who had figured so conspicuously in the trials and 
 expulsions of the members of the Granville Union 
 Society; and whose, principles and character as an 
 anti-reformer were well known in Roanoke. 
 
 From the well known reputation of Rev. Mr. 
 Compton, the Roanoke Union Society had just 
 grounds of fear upon learning that he had been ap- 
 pointed by the Annual Conference to be their 
 superintendent. The appointment was an unfor- 
 tunate one. The minds of the Roanoke brethren 
 were not prepared to receive him. His previous 
 course towards the venerable Lewellyn Jones and 
 others on Tar River Circuit, had rendered him ob- 
 noxious to their feelings, and they naturally con- 
 cluded that he had been selected in view of their 
 position as reformers, and hence they were to 
 become the victims of his unsparing zeal. They 
 were no strangers to his sentiments respecting the 
 reformers. They expected, as a matter of course, 
 that as he had done nnto other reforms, he would 
 do even so unto them. Hence they were not 
 prepared to receive him with that warmth of feeling 
 and confidence of good-will which is so character- 
 istic of Methodists. 
 
 Soon after the appointment of the Rev. William 
 Compton to the Roanoke Circuit was known, a 
 called meeting of the Roanoke Union Society was 
 held. The meeting of the socieiy was on the 4th 
 of April, 1828. The circumstances under which 
 they were n©w placed were entirely new. The 
 
184 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 melancholy tidings of the expulsion of their brethren 
 in Baltimore had reached them ; and from the 
 fact that one of the most prominent actors in the 
 expulsion of seven members of the Granville Union 
 Society, had been sent to watch over them, as 
 preacher in charge, they naturally concluded that 
 a storm-cloud was Qatherino; to burst over their own 
 heads. But they stood firm. Trusting in the jus- 
 tice of their cause and the rectitude of their princi- 
 ples, they were willing to brave the event. They 
 had no compromise to make — no principles to sell. 
 The path of duty led onward. 
 
 The business of the society, on the first day, was 
 principally of a local nature. On the next day, 
 April 5th, the following resolutions were offered 
 by Rev. William Bellamy and adopted by the 
 society, being such as fairly defined their position 
 and principles in view of all the circumstances. 
 
 " 1. That as the sense of this meeting the conduct 
 of our brethren in the city of Baltimore, and else- 
 where, who have been expelled from the church on 
 account of their attachment to the principles of re- 
 ligious and ecclesiastical liberty, as contended for by 
 the reformers in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 is justly entitled to our approbation as fellow advo- 
 cates for truth, and our strongest Christian S3 r mpa- 
 thies as a religious community. 
 
 "2. That as the sense of this meeting, our sisters 
 in the city of Baltimore, who have recently escaped 
 from the church in consequence of the 'abomina- 
 tion which maketh desolate, standing where it 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 185 
 
 ought not,' are also entitled to our friendly sympa- 
 thies and Christian salutations." 
 
 The above resolutions were ordered to be for- 
 warded to the editorial committee of the Mutual 
 Rights, at Baltimore, to be disposed of as they 
 should think proper. 
 
 The following resolutions, next in order, were 
 offered by brother L. Whitaker. 
 
 "1. That the expulsion of Lewellyn Jones and 
 others, in the Tar River Circuit, during the year 
 1326, for joining the Union Society there; and more 
 particularly the part borne in that unfortunate trans- 
 action, by the Rev. Wm. Compton, now appointed 
 to this circuit as a minister, meets with the decided 
 disapprobation of this society. 
 
 "2. That individually we apprehend a similar 
 course is intended to be pursued towards us : it 
 being a sound maxim that what has been done, in 
 all probability will be repeated. 
 
 "3. Therefore, that before we can receive as a 
 messenger of peace the said William Compton, we 
 must be assured that he will endeavor to repair the 
 wrong he has committed, by using his best efforts to 
 restore to t A he Methodist Episcopal Church the said 
 Lewellyn Jones and others that were expelled for 
 the same cause. 
 
 "4. That the corresponding committee furnish 
 the Rev. William Compton with a copy of these 
 resolutions, requesting his answer thereto." 
 
 These resolutions, as appears from the journal, 
 were all adopted unanimously. They are couched 
 16* 
 
186 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 in no ambiguous language, but express in decided 
 terms the undivided sentiments of the Roanoke 
 Union Society. 
 
 The Rev. William Compton was furnished in due 
 time with a copy by the committee of correspond- 
 ence, to which he returned the following reply: 
 
 To the members of the Roanoke Union Society. 
 
 Dear Brethren, — From the friendly and re- 
 spectful treatment I received from the reformers, on 
 my first round on the circuit, I had flattered myself 
 that, however we might differ in our sentiments 
 on church government, nothing unpleasant would 
 occur between you and me through the year. But 
 from a communication received from you, 1 am ap- 
 prehensive that I shall be disappointed; for be ye 
 well assured that I am not conscious of having done 
 wrong in the part that I acted in Quarterly Confer- 
 ence, in reference to Lewellyn Jones and others. 
 As to the reformers in this circuit, I had indulged a 
 hope that they would not interfere with me or my 
 concerns,* but were willing that I should think for 
 
 * From this passage it is very plain that the author wishes it to 
 be inferred that he is the ag«rieved party in this affair, and is en- 
 deavoring to turn the scales and make himself a persecuted being, 
 to whom the right of private judgment is denied ; and he writes 
 willi as much assurance as if the fact were so. In the name of 
 goodness, who would suppose, from perusing the passage referred to., 
 that W. Compton had ever in his life censured (much more punished, 
 and that severely too,) a brother for the same thing he affects to 
 plead for? Who could suppose that, with so much charity on his 
 lips, he had ever raised his hand against an inoffensive man? Yet 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 1ST 
 
 myself, and that they would cast their influence 
 with mine into the common scale of truth, and do 
 what they could to help forward the interest of the 
 Redeemer's kingdom. While I had concluded 
 within myself that, if they continued to conduct 
 themselves as they had done since I came into the 
 circuit, so far as I had knowledge of their proceed- 
 ings, that I should leave them as my predecessor 
 had done before me. You seem resolved not to 
 receive me as a "messenger of peace," unless I 
 give the assurance you have demanded. This I 
 shall not do; and of course I am rejected. But I 
 should like to know by whom; not in the aggregate, 
 but by name; for I cannot consistently darken the 
 door or eat the bread of any man into whose house 
 I am not received as a "messenger of peace:" and 
 if it be by a majority of the representative depart- 
 ment of any class that I am thus rejected, I should 
 take it as an instance of candor and honesty to be 
 advertised of the fact, that I may shape my course 
 accordingly. I have no hesitation in saying that I 
 
 it is so. This identical W. Compton, (unless we believe the 
 eastern tale of the dervise killing the king and leaving his own 
 body and taking up his abode in that of his majesty, and that this 
 is only W. Compton in appearance, and the soul in the body is 
 quite another existence,) within less than two years, in one day's 
 journey of Bradford's church, had exerted all his influence, and 
 boasted the accomplishment of his object, not only to censure but to 
 punish Jones and others for attempting practically to exercise the 
 very principle he so affectedly rants about. Such is the fact. 
 Surely this is "something new." 
 
 A Member of the Roanoke U. Society. 
 
188 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 am on the old side, where I mean to continue, un- 
 less my mind should very materially change, or the 
 majority should say that there shall be a change in 
 the government of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 Nor have I any idea that any of the reforming 
 brethren in this circuit will change their ground, for 
 the same reason that I shall not change mine. 
 
 Wherefore, then, permit me to ask, is the neces- 
 sity of our agitating this subject, when we know 
 that both the one and the other are fixed in their 
 purpose ? Have we time hanging so heavily on our 
 hands, that we must necessarily pass it off in a way 
 which is often the means of harrowing up the feel- 
 ings of brethren? Would we not act more wisely 
 to "agree to disagree," and let this subject be more 
 still in our frequent conversations with each other? 
 Surely, my brethren, we must admit that there has 
 been too much asperity on both sides already, and 
 that it is high time for us to deplore the languishing- 
 state of Zion in this circuit. Time is flying with 
 the rapidity of light, and souls more precious a 
 thousand fold than the gold of Ophir, are peopling 
 the eternal world by myriads. And should we not 
 then, instead of catching at shadows, nerve the 
 strong arm of faith and take of the things of God 
 and eternity, and show them to a dying world? 
 Let this be the burden of our concern and the ob- 
 ject of our contention, and then may we hope to see 
 the waste places of our beloved Zion restored. 
 
 And, finally, let it be for the man of sin, but not 
 for the man of God, (and more especially the minis- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 189 
 
 ter of Jesus Christ,) to say that the man who does 
 not see exactly as he sees, is not a "messenger of 
 peace." Reject me if you think proper, brethren, 
 and with me the gospel of Christ; but take care 
 that in so doing you do not "reject the counsel of 
 God against yourselves." With these remarks, 
 I conclude by taking the liberty of subscribing 
 myself, dear brethren, yours in the kingdom and 
 patience of Jesus. 
 
 William Compton. 
 May 5th, 1828. 
 
 On the 6th of June following the Roanoke Union 
 Society met at Bradford's Chapel, and the letter of 
 Rev. Mr. Compton was read before that bocty. The 
 committee of correspondence made a report upon 
 said letter, in the form of a review of its contents, 
 which was adopted and published, together with the 
 letter, in one of the political papers of the day. 
 The following is the 
 
 REVIEW REPORTED BY THE COMMITTEE. 
 
 Your committee think they will not be deemed 
 by this society, to take any thing on themselves but 
 what as a committee of correspondence they ought 
 to do, if they endeavor to exhibit to the society, its 
 situation as a society in regard to the perils of its 
 members, and to justify the course of the society in 
 the adoption of the resolutions aforesaid ; in doing 
 which, it becomes proper to examine the circum- 
 stances under which they were adopted. 
 
190 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Recent information from Baltimore, giving details 
 of occurrences there, in which the Rev. Mr. Hanson 
 acted so notable a part, had placed the matter 
 beyond the reach of reasonable doubt, that it had 
 become the decided determination of the rulers in 
 our church to expel from its membership all such 
 as had the hardihood, in their estimation, to question 
 their justice or their infallibility. It was, in other 
 words, declared an offence, and for its commission 
 the party was expelled, if in the exercise of a right 
 guaranteed to us by all our fundamental laws, any 
 member should declare in his opinion a minister of 
 the gospel had committed wrong — an offence of so 
 trivial a nature as not to be finable if committed 
 towards the highest officer recognized by these 
 United States. It is also a fact beyond the reach of 
 self-denial, that one Lewellyn Jones, in Tar River 
 Circuit, had been lately expelled for becoming a 
 member of a Union Society. It was also a fact 
 equally notorious, that in the transaction the Rev. 
 William Compton had taken a decisive and active 
 part in behalf of irresponsible power. 
 
 When this society was informed that the said 
 Rev. Win. Compton was appointed to take charge 
 of this circuit, it could but occur to the society so 
 apparently that it was impossible but it should no- 
 tice it, that its own membership stood on a founda- 
 tion somewhat precarious, with a minister who had 
 avowed his determination not to be neutral; who had 
 compared reformers to "thieves and tories;" who 
 charged them with designs to overturn whatever he 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 191 
 
 considered lovely or venerable in our church; who 
 had boldly and with complacency declared that the 
 reformers might be expelled, though they were 
 guilty of no immoral act ; who had avowed it to be 
 both "just and generous" to ransack the conversa- 
 tions of men at great distances, and fix whatever 
 was exceptionable in them on the accused person, 
 however innocent he might be of their thoughts or 
 ignorant of their expressions ; it is conceived by 
 your committee thai the society was urged both by 
 a sense of sympathy to the injured and safety to 
 itself, to adopt the resolutions. 
 
 The society feeling, as it ought to have done, the 
 weight of its responsibility, was bound by every 
 consideration that ought to influence it, to ascertain 
 in direct terms whether its fears were reasonable 
 or groundless ; thinking, if they were the latter, no 
 candid, no religious man could or would for one 
 moment refuse to make reparation for an injury 
 committed by him ; if the former, how is it possible 
 that it could receive, as a brother, as a minister, as 
 a " messenger of peace," the man who of all others 
 had made himself so conspicuous in committing 
 havoc among its brethren ? It is not in nature to 
 do so. 
 
 Your committee are of opinion that the apprehen- 
 sions of the society were reasonable, and that the 
 answer of the said Rev. Wm. Compton to the reso- 
 lutions of this society has reduced it to a certainty 
 that they were so. The letter declares that the 
 writer had come to the conclusion to leave the 
 
192 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 reformers here as he found them ; but at the same 
 time he gives us to understand that he had done 
 so from the very friendly treatment he had received 
 from them ; and even this small boon is taxed with 
 their demeaning themselves in the same wa} r , as 
 far as his knowledge of their conduct extended, 
 lour committee, while they express the satisfaction 
 of knowing that the very friendly conduct of the 
 reformers had disarmed a belligerant, are at the 
 same time of opinion that the difficulty of obtaining 
 a court to answer his purpose, in the manner pre- 
 scribed in the book of Discipline, might very possi- 
 bly have been an inducement in the formation of 
 the said determination. The answer to your reso- 
 lution further declares, and that too in a manner 
 that we cannot hesitate to believe the truth of the 
 declaration, that as respects the conduct of the Rev. 
 Mr. Compton in the affair of Lewellyn Jones, he 
 feels no degree of compunction. Your committee, 
 therefore, cannot hesitate to think that in regard to each 
 one of your society, his abilities would be exerted and his 
 power lent to place us where the said Lewellyn Jones 
 'is — out of the pale of the church.* 
 
 But our brother Compton affects to believe that 
 your resolutions are predicated on the circumstance 
 of his being ^^-reformation ; that his belief is but 
 affectation becomes apparent from the fact that it 
 must be known to him that no such resolution was 
 adopted in regard to the Rev. Mr. Carson, the Rev. 
 Mr. Bain, the Rev. Mr. Doub, or the Rev. Mr. 
 
 *How soon was this all realized! — Author. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 193 
 
 Hooks, all known to be in principle against reform ; 
 and from the fact that the resolutions themselves do 
 not even so much as imply such a construction. 
 
 The resolutions say, in the first place, that the 
 society disapproves the expulsion of Lewellyn 
 Jones, and that disapprobation is founded on the 
 circumstance of Lewellyn Jones being a reformer, 
 and being expelled therefor. In the second place, 
 the society disapproves the part taken in regard to 
 Jones by the Rev. William Compton. In the third 
 place, the Rev. Mr. Compton being appointed to 
 take charge of this circuit, the society says it is 
 apprehensive a similar course is intended to be 
 pursued in regard to each member; and in conse- 
 quence of all these circumstances united, it resolves 
 that before it can receive as a " messenger of peace 
 the said Rev. Wm. Compton, it must be assured 
 that he will repair the wrong he has committed, by 
 using his best efforts to restore to the church the 
 said Lewellyn Jones." Your committee beg leave 
 to call the attention of the society to the fact that the 
 Rev. Mr. Compton takes no notice whatever, in his 
 very mild and friendly letter, of the second resolu- 
 tion, the one most interesting to this society. Our 
 brother seems to reproach us with a waste of time, 
 and that too in a manner calculated to harrow the 
 feelings of brethren. In one respect your resolu- 
 tions were a waste of time, since on him they seem 
 to be of no effect. From the tenor of his letter, 
 your just fears seem to be regarded in the same 
 light as a crowned head would the remonstrances 
 17 
 
194 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 of his subjects, when he was determined to dis- 
 regard them. 
 
 The world is not centred, however, in one man. 
 Your committee are of opinion that the cause for 
 which this society is contending, and in furtherance 
 of which the resolutions were passed, (it seems to 
 them, at least, to be of that importance,) that a few 
 days, or weeks, or years, may be very profitably 
 devoted to it, without deserving the reproach of a 
 waste of time. Since, however, it is almost crimi- 
 nal in the view of the Rev. William Compton to 
 harrow the feelings of a brother, and in this your 
 committee can very readily join, it would be well 
 to inquire if none have feelings but the a?ities. Had 
 Jones no feelings when, dragged before an unre- 
 lenting tribunal, he heard his name associated with 
 tories, and at the same time saw himself thrown 
 from the membership of the church, and that too for 
 an act declared by his judges to constitute nothing 
 immoral ? Had Harris no sensibility when charged 
 by this self-same man* with turning others from 
 the simplicity of the gospel? It were useless to 
 follow this subject further — the adage is exemplified, 
 that "we are guilty of what we blame in others." 
 
 Our brother's letter has one remarkable passage, 
 the import of which your committee hope he did not 
 intend; the passage is this: "Reject me if you 
 think proper, and with me the gospel of Christ." 
 Your committee, in regard to this part of the letter 
 of the said Rev. Win. Compton, are persuaded that 
 
 * See Rev. W. Compton's letter to Ivey Harris. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 195 
 
 no reasonable man can for one moment suppose 
 that the rejection of any one man amounts to the 
 rejection of the gospel of our Saviour ; if it did, 
 we apprehend that few would be in the pale of that 
 gospel. Your committee, without commenting on 
 the vanity and self-sufficiency of the man in arro- 
 gating to himself so eminent a distinction, will barely 
 remark, that if the rejection by this society of the 
 Rev. Wm. Compton, as a "messenger of peace" to 
 it, places its members in the awful situation of re- 
 jecting the counsel of God against themselves, what 
 is the situation of the man who uses his mission as 
 a means to oppress and to deprive of communion 
 with his Maker a soul that has been purchased by 
 the blood of the Saviour ? 
 
 Your committee are forced to believe, on a review 
 of the whole matter, that though possibly to some 
 the mission of our brother Compton may be one of 
 peace, yet to this society it evidently carries with it and 
 sends before it the emblems of war. 
 
 Something is said, in the reply to your resolu- 
 tions, about the representative departments of the 
 different societies. Your committee (to this part of 
 it) are at a loss to understand the object of the 
 writer. He boldly avows himself to be on that 
 side of this controversy which denies the semblance 
 of representation from the membership of the 
 church. Your committee, therefore, are of opinion 
 that this society should take no steps to inform the 
 said Rev. Wm. Compton of the names of those who 
 voted in the affirmative or negative on the passage 
 of the resolutions referred to. 
 
196 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 B} 7 " your resolutions your course is now decided ; 
 from the answer of the Rev. Mr. Compton, his 
 seems to be equally as much so. Your committee, 
 therefore, recommend the adoption of the' following 
 resolutions : 
 
 1. That this society deem it inexpedient to make 
 any reply to the letter of the Rev. Mr. Compton. 
 
 2. That this society is engaged in a contest in- 
 volving interests to its members of a class the most 
 important. 
 
 3. That its members will make cause with each 
 other, and will stand by each other in every 
 emergency. 
 
 4. By the members of this society individually, 
 that they make no disclosures, no concessions, and 
 no apologies of what nor for what has been done in 
 this society, for the sake of peace or advantage to 
 themselves, and of throwing blame on others, other- 
 wise than may be ordered by the society itself. 
 
 All of which is respectfully submitted. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 197 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Resolutions of the General Conference of 1S28. — Notification of 
 Rev. Mr. Compton to the ministers of the Roanoke Union So- 
 ciety. — Examination of the grounds assumed by Mr. Compton. — 
 Trials of the local ministers at Horeb. — Expulsions of the 
 same. — Expulsions on Albemarle, in the eastern part of North 
 Carolina. 
 
 From what has been related in the preceding 
 chapter, we have seen that the position of the Rev. 
 Mr. Compton, in regard to the Roanoke Union 
 Society, was one that augured not much of good. 
 
 But even that was destined to be soon changed 
 for one that promised still less. In May (a few 
 weeks preceding his communication to the Union 
 Society) the General Conference met at Pittsburg. 
 The brethren who had been expelled at Baltimore 
 sent up a memorial to that body, setting forth the 
 irregular and improper proceedings which had been 
 had against them, and by which they had been ex- 
 pelled from the church, and respectfully petitioned 
 that body to take such measures as, in their wisdom, 
 should restore them to the church of their former 
 fellowship, and that "those likewise who had with- 
 drawn on their account might be received with 
 them on principles which should secure to them 
 and the church the liberty of speech and of the 
 press, without sanctioning the licentiousness of 
 either." The General Conference adopted resolu- 
 17* 
 
198 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 tions, laying clown certain principles or conditions 
 upon which the expelled and withdrawn might 
 again become united with the church. But these 
 conditions were such as the expelled could not con- 
 scientiously accede to. Contending as they had 
 been for principles and rights, they saw in these 
 resolutions not even the semblance of a bait to allure. 
 Although they advised that no further proceedings 
 be had against the reformers for any past agency or 
 connection with Union Societies or the "Mutual 
 Rights," yet the Rev. Mr. Compton affected to seize 
 upon these very resolutions as affording him new, 
 special and enlarged authority to proceed upon a 
 vigorous campaign against the members of the 
 Roanoke Union Society. In order that the reader 
 may fully understand the flimsy pretensions of this 
 reverend gentleman, we shall here bring forward 
 the resolutions of the General Conference. 
 
 RESOLUTIONS OF THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1828, 
 
 IN REPLY TO THE EXPELLED BRETHREN. 
 
 Whereas an unhappy excitement has existed in 
 some parts of our work, in consequence of the or- 
 ganization of what have been called Union Societies, 
 for purposes and under regulations believed to be 
 inconsistent with the peace and harmony of the 
 church; and in relation to the character of much of 
 the matter contained in a certain periodical publica- 
 tion called "Mutual Rights," in regard to which 
 certain expulsions from the church have taken 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 199 
 
 place; and whereas this General Conference in- 
 dulge a hope that a mutual desire may exist for 
 conciliation and peace, and is desirous of leaving 
 open a way for the accomplishment of so desirable 
 an object, on safe and equitable principles : there- 
 fore, resolved, by the delegates of the Annual 
 Conferences, in General Conference assembled, 
 1. That in view of the premises, and in the earnest 
 hope that this measure may tend to promote; this 
 object, this General Conference affectionately ad- 
 vises that no further proceedings may be had in any 
 part of our work against any member or minister 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church, on account of 
 any past agency or concern in relation to the above 
 named periodical, or in relation to any Union 
 Society above mentioned. 
 
 2. If any persons expelled as aforesaid feel free 
 to concede that publications have appeared in said 
 (i Mutual Rights," the nature and character of which 
 were unjustifiably inflammatory, and do not admit 
 of vindication; and that in others, though for want 
 of proper information or unintentionally, have yet 
 in fact misrepresented individuals and facts, and 
 that they regret these things ; if it be voluntarily 
 agreed also that the Union Societies above alluded 
 to shall be abolished, and the periodical called the 
 "Mutual Rights" be discontinued at the close of 
 the current volume, which shall be completed with 
 due respect to the conciliatory and pacific design 
 of this arrangement, then this General Conference 
 does hereby give authority for the restoration to their 
 
200 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 ministry or membership respectively, in the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church, of any person or persons %o 
 expelled as aforesaid ; provided this arrangement 
 shall be mutually assented to by'any individual or 
 individuals so expelled, and also by the Quarterly 
 Meeting Conference, and the minister or preacher 
 having the charge of any circuit or station within 
 which any such expulsion may have* taken place; 
 and that no such minister or preacher shall be 
 obliged, under this arrangement, to restore an}- such 
 individual as leader of any class or classes, unless 
 in his own discretion he shall judge it proper so to 
 do ; and provided, also, that it be further mutually 
 agreed that no other periodical publication, to be 
 devoted to the same controversy, shall be estab- 
 lished on either side, it being expressly understood, 
 at the same time, that this, if agreed to, will be on 
 the ground not of any assumption of right to require 
 this, but of mutual consent, for the restoration of 
 peace, and that no individual will be hereby pre- 
 cluded from issuing any publication which he may 
 judge proper, on his own responsibility. 
 
 It is further understood that any individual or in- 
 dividuals who may have withdrawn from the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church, on account of any proceed- 
 ings in relation to the premises, may also be restored 
 by mutual consent, under this arrangement, on the 
 same principles above stated. 
 
 The preceding resolutions of the General Confer- 
 ence were published in the " Christian Advocate 
 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 201 
 
 and Journal," soon after the rise of the conference ; 
 and under pretext of authority from these, the Rev. 
 Mr. Compton shortly afterwards commenced his 
 crusade against the Roanoke Union Society. From 
 his proceedings on record, it appears that he chose 
 to begin with the ministers. Accordingly he sent 
 to each one of them belon^in^ to Roanoke Circuit 
 
 o CD 
 
 the following notification. The following is a copy 
 of the one sent to Rev. William Bellamy. The 
 original is before me. 
 
 August 14, 1828. 
 Mr. Bellamy: 
 
 Sir, — The General Conference of May last resolved 
 that on certain conditions those reformers who have 
 been expelled the church should be restored to their 
 former standing. Which implies that if these con- 
 ditions are not complied with, they shall not be 
 restored. The plain inference is, that those who 
 have not been expelled, and who are guilty of the 
 same things, must either comply with these condi- 
 tions or expect to share the same fate. Since there- 
 fore the 4th volume of the "Mutual Rights" is now 
 completed, I take the liberty of informing you that 
 I conceive that the General Conference has made it 
 my duty to request you to dissolve the "Union So- 
 ciety " of which you are a member, so far as you are 
 concerned, and to cease to patronize the "Mutual 
 Rights." Also } r ou are hereby notified that, if you 
 will not comply with these conditions, you may 
 prepare for trial before a committee ; and also for 
 having " inveighed against the government of the 
 
202 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 church/' and for expressions that you have in- 
 dulged. The time of the trial you will be informed 
 of hereafter. Respectfully yours, 
 
 Wm. Compton. 
 
 From the tenor of this notification or circular of 
 the Rev. Mr. Compton to the local ministers belong- 
 ing to the Union Society, it must be evident that he 
 wished to place them without the pale of the church. 
 He heeded not the published resolutions of the Gen- 
 eral Conference. He acted not according to the 
 counsel and advice of that body, although he pro- 
 fessed to shape his course according to the condi- 
 tions which it laid as a rule of action in the prem- 
 ises. Hear what the General Conference says : 
 "1st. That in view of the premises, and in the earn- 
 est hope that this measure may tend to promote this 
 object, the General Conference affectionately ad- 
 vises that no further proceedings may be had in 
 any part of our work, against any member or min- 
 ister of the Methodist Episcopal Church, on account 
 of any past agency or concern, in relation to the 
 above named periodical, or in relation to any 
 Union Society above mentioned." 
 
 Hear what the Rev. William Compton says : 
 " The plain inference is that those who have not 
 been expelled, and who are guilty of the same 
 things, must either comply with those conditions, 
 or expect to share the same fate." 
 
 What a false and wretched deduction from such 
 fair premises ! How discordant are the sentiments 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 203 
 
 advanced ! Does this professed minister of the 
 gospel give the least assurance, by such declara- 
 tions as the above, that he is the " messenger of 
 peace" to these men, his brethren in the ministry? 
 He does not. The majority of them were his sen- 
 iors in the sacred office, men of unsullied purity of 
 morals, of extensive Christian and ministerial influ- 
 ence, had done much for the cause of religion and 
 of the church ; yet the notes of love are not heard in 
 the voice of this circular addressed to them by a 
 co-laborer in the cause of the Redeemer. 
 
 No argument is used by the minister to dissuade 
 them from their present course ; but to all human 
 appearance he speaks altogether as one who is 
 disposed to lord it over God's heritage. No 
 kind admonition is given — no Christian entreaty or 
 appeal is made to these brethren. They are 
 sternly addressed as offenders, and two unjust and 
 unreasonable alternatives are presented to them, 
 without being advised as to which they should 
 accept. The subject is presented in the attitude 
 of menace, either " to dissolve the Union Society 
 of which you are a member, so far as you are con- 
 cerned, and cease to patronize the Mutual Rights," 
 or else " prepare for trial before a committee," the 
 time of which trial they would be informed of. 
 
 To become members of a Union Society infringed 
 upon no man's rights; violated no precept of mo- 
 rality or religion. To discuss freely and frankly the 
 principles and polity of the church of which they 
 were members, and in the service of which some of 
 
204 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 them had spent many years of toil and privations 
 as itinerants, was a right which, as freemen, they 
 knew not how to yield. Their organization of a 
 Union Society had for its object a reformation in the 
 government of that church, by the introduction of 
 the principle of representation into the same, that 
 her peace, her usefulness, and her prosperity might 
 be promoted. The "Mutual Rights " was a period- 
 ical devoted to this same object. The numerous 
 essays published in its columns upon the subject of 
 church polity, were written by distinguished minis- 
 ters and members of the church, and of whose at- 
 tachment and zeal for her true interests no one could 
 justly doubt. In patronizing this periodical they 
 involved no man in responsibility but themselves, 
 the expense incurred they paid from their own 
 purses ; and yet in view of all these things they are 
 notified "to dissolve the Union Society, and cease 
 to patronize the "Mutual Rights," and in the very 
 preface of that notification they are given to under- 
 stand that a failure of implicit obedience on their 
 part, to this mandate, would cause them to share 
 " the same fate" of those brethren who had been 
 ejected from the church in other parts of the United 
 States. 
 
 The character of this "anti-reformer" was well 
 known to the members of the Roanoke Union So- 
 ciety. Against the reformers belonging to the 
 Granville Union Society his influence had been ex- 
 erted to exclude them from the pale of the church, 
 and his arguments in justification of that affair were 
 publicly known. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 205 
 
 Again, in the very first words in the opening ad- 
 dress of this circular admonition, there is something 
 that appears quite ominous. Instead of the frater- 
 nal and courteous term of "brother" so generally 
 used among Christians, we notice this address opens 
 with "Mr. Bellamy.'' 1 
 
 Indeed, this opening address of the circular ad- 
 monitory, if it admits of such an appellation, was 
 quite significant. It seemed to furnish presumptive 
 evidence that these ministers of the gospel were 
 not regarded as " brethren in Christ" by him who 
 had now come to exercise authority in the church. 
 
 This circular of Rev. Mr. Compton served as a 
 premonition of what was to ensue. At this time 
 there were eleven ministers and preachers mem- 
 bers of the Roanoke Union Society, who belonged 
 to the circuit under his superintendenc3\ The cir- 
 cular produced no effect upon any, save Rev. M. 
 Smith, who soon after addressed a letter to the 
 society signifying his desire to withdraw, which 
 was granted. Matters had now arrived at a crisis; 
 the ministers refused obedience to the mandate of 
 the superintendent — the die was cast. 
 
 From the original papers before me, Rev. Mr. 
 Compton's circular bears date August 14th; and 
 sixteen days thereafter, the 30th of the same month, 
 he proceeded to summon the victims for the sacri- 
 fice. There is said to be " policy in war," and the 
 steps taken in this procedure strongly indicate the 
 policy of the principal actor. It was fairly under- 
 stqpd that the ministers who were members of the 
 
206 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 Union Society, with their friends who were official 
 members upon Roanoke Circuit, would constitute 
 a respectable majority of the Quarterly Meeting 
 Conference, before which body the cases of the 
 accused would ultimately come, and if so, the 
 measures of Rev. Mr. Compton would meet with 
 certain defeat. This was easily foreseen. He, 
 therefore, so arranged the order of business as to 
 summon seven of the ministers to trial at one time ; 
 it being well known that if that number were sus- 
 pended by a trial before a committee, and divested 
 of the right of voting on the case of each other 
 in the Quarterly Conference, the prosecuting officer 
 would be able to carry his point. 
 
 The ministers cited to trial were Rev. William 
 Bellamy, Rev. James Hunter, Rev. Henry Brad- 
 ford, Rev. Eli B. Whitaker, Rev. Albriton Jones, 
 Rev. William Price and Rev. Miles Nash. It ap- 
 pears that from some cause not easily explained at 
 this time, Rev. C. H. Hines was not summoned ; 
 although from the beginning he had been side by 
 side with the foremost of the others in the cause of 
 mutual rights. As to Rev. Caswell Drake and Rev. 
 R. Divison, a more summary] mode of procedure 
 was reserved for them. 
 
 The following is a true copy of one of the cita- 
 tions issued — the original is before me. 
 
 August 30, 1828. 
 
 Mr. Bellamy, — You are hereby notified that the 
 committee on your case will meet at Shady Grove 
 meeting-house, on Saturday, October 4th, before 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 207 
 
 whom you are requested to appear for trial, if you 
 think proper. Wm. Compton, 
 
 Assistant Preacher in Roanoke Circuit. 
 
 These seven local ministers being summoned to 
 trial at one of the extreme points of the circuit, and 
 from thirty to forty miles distant to most of them, 
 and being furnished with no charges or specifica- 
 tions against them, and being well aware of the 
 manner in which the prosecuting officer, Rev. Mr. 
 Compton, was competent to exercise his arbitrary 
 powers, not one of them attended trial. 
 
 Mr. Compton's committee consisted of the Rev. 
 Henry Fitts, a rabid anti-reformer, Rev. Thomas 
 Cottrell, and J. J. Judge, a young licentiate, whom 
 Rev. Mr. Compton had very recently prevailed upon 
 to accept of license to preach, and for very just 
 reasons this was supposed by many to be for the 
 purpose of aiding more effectually in carrying out 
 his purposes ; as he likewise took care to appoint 
 another class-leader in a society which already had 
 one, which was deemed sufficient for the society, 
 thereby contributing to his strength to oppose the 
 advocates of mutual rights. 
 
 The committee, as above constituted, met ; the 
 charges and specifications prepared by Rev. Mr. 
 Compton, who acted in the double capacity of 
 prosecutor and judge, were presented and acted 
 upon ; and the seven local ministers were sus- 
 pended from the exercise of the sacred office of the 
 ministry. According to the regulations of discipline 
 in the M. E. Church, the cases of the suspended 
 
208 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 ministers would necessarily come up for definite 
 action before the ensuing Quarterly Meeting Con- 
 ference, which was to meet at Horeb, on the 25th 
 of the same month, (October,) 1828. 
 
 The suspended local ministers were prompt in 
 attending the Quarterly Conference. They enter- 
 tained a hope at least of having an impartial hear- 
 ing before that body, but they were doomed to dis- 
 appointment. He who could lend his influence in 
 the quarterly conference of Tar River Circuit, to 
 excommunicate the venerable Lewellyn Jones and 
 others from the church of God, without even a 
 suspicion of immorality being brought against them ; 
 no charge alleged but being members of a Union 
 Society; and who could say, upon reviewing the 
 whole affair, "I believe him justly expelled" — was not 
 to be foiled in his measures of that sort in his own 
 Quarterly Meeting Conference, at this time — his 
 men were there. . 
 
 When the cases of the suspended ministers were 
 called up, objections were made against the preacher 
 in charge, Rev. William Compton, and his three 
 committee men being permitted to sit upon the 
 trials now pending, upon the ground that they had 
 sat and decided upon the same before. But the 
 presiding elder, Rev. Joseph Carson, decided that 
 they were legally competent. 
 
 No formal report of the action or verdict of the 
 committee was presented, but a list of charges and 
 specifications were produced and read against the 
 accused; being nearly similar against each one. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 209 
 
 The following is a copy of the charges and spe- 
 cifications against the Rev. William Bellamy, taken 
 from the minutes : 
 
 " Charge 1. Endeavoring to sow dissension by 
 inveighing against the discipline of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church. 
 
 "Specification 1. Introducing and furthering op- 
 position to the government of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church. 
 
 " Specification 2. His rejection of William Comp- 
 ton from the authority assigned him by one of the 
 superintendents of said church. 
 
 " Specification 3. The circulation of a paper called 
 the Tarborough Free Press, containing much invet- 
 eracy against Methodism, and certain false asser- 
 tions against William Compton. 
 
 " Specification 4. His contempt of Wm. Comp- 
 ton's authority, in publishing the said Compton's 
 notification and citation. 
 
 " Charge 2. His refusing to comply with the re- 
 solution of the General Conference of 1828, as 
 contained in the Christian Advocate and Journal, 
 of June 20, 1828. 
 
 "Specification 1. His not withdrawing from the 
 Union Society of Roanoke Circuit. 
 
 "Specification 2. A manifest determination to 
 rebel against the government of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, by sending up delegates to the 
 Baltimore Convention." 
 
 In reviewing the preceding charges and specifica- 
 tions, we find no allegations for any thing of an 
 18* 
 
210 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 immoral character. The first specification appears 
 to be founded upon the fact that the accused was 
 one of the original members of the Roanoke Union 
 Society.* 
 
 The second, that he was still a member of that 
 society when the resolutions were adopted, which 
 the Rev. Mr. Compton seems to have regarded as 
 equivalent to his rejection. These resolutions ex- 
 pressed sentiments perfectly in unison with the 
 feelings of every lover of justice and truth under 
 all the circumstances. They are as follow: 
 
 " Resolved, That the expulsion of Lewellyn 
 Jones and others, in the Tar River Circuit, in the 
 year 1826, for joining the Union Society there, and 
 more particularly the part borne in that unfortunate 
 transaction by the Rev. William Compton, now 
 appointed a minister in this circuit, meets with the 
 decided disapprobation of this society. 
 
 "Resolved, That individually we apprehend a 
 similar course is intended to be pursued towards 
 ourselves: it being a sound maxim, that what has 
 been done in all probability will be repeated. 
 
 * In order to show the nature and bearing of the testimony pro- 
 duced to sustain the first specification, I shall here introduce the 
 evidence of Mr. A. W. Moore, who testified as follows: "Some 
 two or three years past, myself and the Rev. William Bellamy 
 were in conversation on the subject of reform in our church, at 
 which time the said Bellamy told me that the principle of reform 
 had had its influence on his mind for some time; and, if I do not 
 mistake, he said it was made known to the brethren by himself, 
 requesting them to think on the subject and make ready for its 
 defence. — From the Minutes. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 21 L 
 
 "Resolved, therefore, That before we can receive 
 as a messenger of peace the said Rev. W. Compton, 
 we must be assured that he will endeavor to repair 
 the wrong he has committed by using his best efforts 
 to restore to the Methodist Episcopal Church, the 
 said Lewellyn Jones and others that were expelled 
 for the same cause." 
 
 The assurance here asked by the members of the 
 Union Society, the Rev. Mr. Compton was unwill- 
 ing to give. To have done so would have been a 
 confession of error on his part, and human nature 
 has an antipathy to saying "I have done wrong." 
 In the absence of the assurance asked, they were 
 not able to receive their minister as a "messenger 
 of peace," when he had declared, and the fact was 
 published to the world, that as it regarded the re- 
 formers he had "resolved to be no longer neutral." 
 That being a well known fact, how could he be 
 received as a messenger of peace by them? After 
 the adoption of these resolutions by the Union So- 
 ciety, the Rev. Mr. Compton saw proper, for reasons 
 as yet inexplicable, to leave out of his circuit or charge 
 five churches, respectable in numbers, piety and in- 
 fluence, virtually cutting them off' from the connex- 
 ion, and abandoning them altogether as a minister, 
 and leaving the world vaguely to suppose that this 
 was done simply because less than one-third, or 
 one-fourth, of the aggregate of the members of those 
 churches were members of the Union Society. If 
 this minister wished to be regarded as a "messen- 
 ger of peace," this step involved him in a funda- 
 
212 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 mental error. It admits of no palliation. These 
 churches, as such, had not rejected his authority; 
 nor had less than one-third of their members, as 
 connected with the Union Society, required him to 
 give an assurance to them of his character as a 
 messenger of peace, in order to enable them to 
 receive him as such. 
 
 "Specification 3. The circulation of a paper 
 called the Tarborough Free Press, containing much 
 inveteracy against Methodism, and certain false 
 assertions against W. Compton." 
 
 This specification seems to require, from its 
 character, a particular examination, inasmuch as the 
 paper in question is alleged to contain certain false 
 assertions against W. Compton. The Tarborough 
 Free Press is a political paper; the number pro- 
 duced on trial to sustain the specification is dated 
 July 18, 1S28. A number of the same date is 
 before me. The paper contains an address setting 
 forth " to the members of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church" the state of affairs with regard to 
 the subject of reform at that time. It notices the 
 formation of Union Societies, and the persecutions 
 and expulsions that had befallen the members of 
 the same. It likewise contains a copy of the reso- 
 lutions adopted by the Roanoke Union Society and 
 sent to Rev. >W. Compton; Rev. W. Compton's 
 reply to the same ; a review of that reply by the 
 committee of correspondence; nearly all of which 
 are to be found in the preceding chapter of this 
 work. Also, a postcript of some five columns, from 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 213 
 
 the pen of Col. S. Whitaker, in which he reviews 
 the course pursued by Rev. Mr. Compton towards 
 the members of the Granville Union Society; the 
 position assumed by the same reverend gentleman 
 upon Roanoke Circuit; and examines, with the 
 acumen and learning of a jurist, the question of 
 right concerning the appointment of Rev. William 
 Compton to Roanoke Circuit, and his exercise of 
 authority over the churches in that circuit ; and con- 
 cludes with "observations on the influence of eccle- 
 siastical principles over the civil institutions of all 
 countries." In all these things the writer is unable to 
 detect either the semblance of "inveteracy against 
 Methodism," or of "false assertions against Wm. 
 Compton;" but of truth and logical arguments, 
 illustrated by facts, and directed against anti-repub- 
 lican principles and irresponsible power. 
 
 The Roanoke Union Society published many of 
 its circulars and transaction in the Tarborough Free 
 Press ; contracted for and circulated a large amount 
 of its numbers containing their publications, among 
 the Methodist community. This was offensive to 
 Mr. Compton. The diffusion of light and know- 
 ledge, with regard to the polity of the church, did 
 not suit his views of Christian propriety. 
 
 " Specification 4. His contempt of Wm. Comp- 
 ton's authority in publishing the said Compton's 
 notification and citation." This is the most ridicu- 
 lous of all the items in the count. The Tarborough 
 Free Press had been subsidized by the Union So- 
 ciety, and upon the reception of the "notification 
 
214 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 and citation," each having the semblance of some- 
 thing new under the sun, and the accused feeling 
 himself under no obligation to keep secret such docu- 
 ments as the Rev. Mr. Compton might send him, 
 he very frankly consented to place them in the col- 
 umns of that paper, there being no rule of church 
 forbidding him such liberty, yet he was held to 
 account for it. 
 
 Specification 1st, under charge 2d. His not with- 
 drawing from the Union Society of Roanoke Circuit. 
 
 He had an indefeasible right to unite with the 
 Union Society for the objects therein contemplated ; 
 and as he contravened no law either of God or man, 
 no human authority had a right to require him to 
 withdraw from it. 
 
 "Specification 2. A manifest determination to 
 rebel against the government of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, by sending up delegates to the 
 Baltimore convention." 
 
 The fact that the accused was present at a meet- 
 ing of the members of the Methodist Church, which 
 was held for the purpose, to appoint delegates to 
 attend a general convention of the friends of reform 
 at Baltimore, was relied on to support this item in 
 the count. During the interval between the trial 
 before the committee and the sitting of the Quarterly 
 Conference it appears that the Rev. Mr. Compton 
 had been quite busy in traversing the country and 
 obtaining certificates from a distance to enable him 
 to carry his point. The Rev. Mr. Bellamy was the 
 only person brought to trial on Saturday, the first 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 215 
 
 day of the Quarterly Conference session. The 
 friends of mutual rights made as firm and resolute 
 a defence in his case as possible ; but they were over- 
 powered by being outnumbered. The prosecutor 
 had been able to muster a majority at that time and 
 place to sustain his measures and doctrines. He 
 was no novice in such business. 
 
 It was during the discussions, pro and con, that 
 the Rev. Joseph Carson decided "that when a 
 preacher is appointed to a circuit, he is bound to go 
 or leave the itinerancy, and if he does go, every 
 member in the circuit must receive him and give him 
 obedience or leave the church." To which the 
 late Dr. Jno. F. Bellamy, a member of the Quar- 
 terly Conference, replied, "that when a preacher is 
 appointed by the bishop to a circuit, he must 
 go, and has no appeal therefrom, I am fully aware 
 was the rock on which O'Kelly and his associates 
 were wrecked ; but do I correctly understand you 
 to say that, if he does go, all the members in 
 the circuit are bound to give him implicit obe- 
 dience?" The chair replied, "You do correctly 
 understand me." " Then," said Dr. Bellamy, "if 
 this be the odious doctrine of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church, I will not stay a moment longer in it, 
 for I owe implicit obedience to none but my God." 
 
 The local ministers were well aware that from 
 the similarity of the charges alleged, the fate of all 
 would be determined in the case of the first. The 
 sun had gone down. Day had departed, and 
 sable night had spread her curtains of darkness all 
 
216 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 around, when the vote was taken, and the Rev. 
 William Bellamy, one of the first itinerant preach- 
 ers who had traveled in Carolina, who had served 
 as yoke -fellow with Bishop George in those early 
 days of Methodism, was found guilty — expelled the 
 church — the seal of official silence set upon his lips. 
 And all this was for the wondrous offence of 
 being in favor of a reformation in the government 
 of the church. Surely that was a propitious hour 
 for such a deed ! For the of sake religion we will 
 pass in silence, the events of the following Sabbath 
 day. The Quarterly Conference adjourned until 
 Monday. The remaining six local ministers saw 
 nothing before them but what they had seen meted 
 out to the brother whose case had been decided. 
 Hope had departed, but they were determined to 
 face the storm they were unable to resist, with that 
 firmness and constancy of purpose which became 
 men possessed of unshaken confidence in the justice 
 and righteousness of their principles. Monday came. 
 The Quarterly Conference met. Minister after min- 
 ister was called up — charged — found guilty — de- 
 posed from the sacred office, and excluded from the 
 communion of the church. They had served the 
 church long and faithfully. Five of them had 
 toiled in her service as itinerants. The Rev. James 
 Hunter had filled the office of presiding elder. But 
 these labors, these services, were of no avail. They 
 were guilty of being in favor of a change in the gov- 
 ernment of that church, and therefore unfit to de- 
 clare the sweet and consoling truths of salvation — 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 217 
 
 unfit for union among her membership or com- 
 munion with her, although their religious morals 
 were above suspicion. 
 
 The last of the seven ministers who were ac- 
 cused, Rev. William Price, was now called up. He 
 was venerable on account of his age and the sanctity 
 of his manners. He was one of the band who had 
 followed the fortunes of Washington from battle- 
 field to battle-field. He was well acquainted with 
 the nature and extent of his right, and by hard- 
 earned experience well knew and understood what 
 those rights had cost. After having looked on and 
 witnessed the trials and expulsions of his brethren, 
 his turn had now arrived. 
 
 The charges and specifications against him being 
 read, a proposition was made to him, that if he would 
 abandon the Union Society, and give up his princi- 
 ples of reform, the charges would be withdrawn. 
 This proposition was met with a scorn becoming 
 the man. His speech is too good to be lost. I 
 shall give an extract of a letter written by the Rev. 
 James Hunter, who was present, addressed to the 
 editor of the "Mutual Rights and Christian Intel- 
 ligencer," in which a graphic description of the 
 address is given. 
 
 North Carolina, November 3, 1828. 
 Dear Brother : 
 
 Since I wrote to you we have had warm work on 
 old Roanoke Circuit. The Rev. William Comp- 
 ton, our assistant, and the Rev. Joseph Carson 
 19 
 
218 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 presiding elder, with their party, have succeeded 
 in excommunicating seven local preachers, (myself 
 among the number,) at our late quarterly meeting. 
 They had the policy to arrest us all at one time, 
 that they might deprive us of each other's votes. 
 They had the candor to acknowledge that they did 
 not deal with us for any act of immorality, but for 
 our adherence to the cause of reform ; for we all 
 refused to comply with their insulting and degrad- 
 ing terms, namely, to withdraw from the Union 
 Society and cease to patronize the " Mutual Rights." 
 Our venerable brother Price, just before the sen- 
 tence of excommunication was passed on him, ad- 
 dressed the president and the conference nearly in 
 the following words : "I am seventy-foar years old, 
 have been a Methodist about fifty years. I w 7 as 
 three years a soldier in the revolutionary war ; and 
 while a prisoner, a British officer offered me a great 
 bribe to join the British and fight against my coun- 
 try, but I told him, if I had one hundred lives I 
 would lose them all in fighting for my liberty and 
 my country. I have considered well my situation, 
 and am firm in my purpose. I shall not forsake the 
 Union Society. I remember in your preaching 
 yesterday you related an anecdote of two birds 
 singing to each other : one sang, I love you, I love 
 you ; the other responded, show it, show it. Now 
 if you love me, show it." The firmness of the old 
 saint inspired us all with fresh courage to suffer in 
 so righteous a course. 
 
 James Hunter. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 219 
 
 What admiration this pathetic appeal must ex- 
 cite in the bosom of every lover of justice and of 
 right ! The old veteran, although past his three- 
 score years and ten, and staggering under the press- 
 ing hand of time, his sun of life almost ready to dip 
 its disc in the ocean of eternity, stands arraigned 
 upon that soil (before a religious tribunal) for the 
 liberty of which he had toiled, fought and suffered 
 for three years. And, stranger still to relate, " the 
 head and front of his offending" amounted to this, 
 he had the independence, as a man, to think for 
 himself, and the candor to give expression to the 
 sentiments he had embraced, concerning the polity 
 of the church, in a manner which he deemed per- 
 fectly consonant r with his rights as a man and a 
 Christian. He is found guilty of all this, and the 
 aged minister of Christ is cast over the battlements 
 of the church as unworthy of membership in it. 
 And all this was done in Carolina, where the notes 
 of American independence were first heard, and 
 upon the very soil which had been consecrated by 
 the blood of the martyrs of liberty. 
 
 Review the transactions which have just been 
 recorded, and the principles which prompted and 
 governed the same, and surely every candid reader 
 will at once arrive at the conclusion that the polity 
 of that church which could tolerate and practice 
 such measures, stood in much need of reformation. 
 
 But the work which the Rev. Mr. Compton had 
 before him was not yet done. Rev. Caswell Drake 
 and Rev. R. Davidson, both belonged to the Roan- 
 
220 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 oke Union Society, although, from their location at 
 the extreme end of the circuit, they were but sel- 
 dom able to attend its sittings. The former at- 
 tended the trials of the seven local ministers at the 
 Quarterly Conference, and defended them before 
 that body. His principles and sentiments by that 
 means became no longer ambiguous, and he was 
 doomed to be placed upon the same category with 
 the devoted seven. In a few days after the trials 
 at Horeb, Rev. Mr. Compton arrived at Warrenton, 
 at which place the two local preachers above men- 
 tioned held their membership in society, and called 
 upon Rev. Mr. Davidson, who was the class-leader, 
 and demanded the "class-paper," stating that he 
 wished to make a new one. He received the paper 
 containing the names of the members of the church, 
 carried it away, appointed a new class leader, made 
 out a new class-paper or list, containing the names 
 of those who w r ere members of the church, leaving 
 off the names of the two local preachers. He also 
 called together the trustees of the church at that 
 place, (Rev. C. Drake excepted,) and introduced 
 and secured the passage of a resolution prohibiting 
 those two local ministers from officiating in any of 
 their pulpits, upon the ground that they were no 
 longer within the pale of the M. E. Church. 
 
 The above act may be comprehended in what is 
 meant by the term, "scratch law." Who has ever 
 read of such a mode of operation in ecclesiastical 
 affairs ? Perhaps none. By what rule or law were 
 these ministers of Christ tried ? By none at all ; 
 
METHODIST FROTESTANT CHURCH. 221 
 
 no, not even the semblance of rule. No charges 
 were made out, no citations given, no trials had, 
 no rule of Discipline brought into requisition in the 
 case ; but by the ecclesiastical dictum of the Rev. 
 William Compton, and the dash of his pen, these 
 two members of the church of Christ are stripped 
 of all ministerial functions and cast from the bosom 
 of the church, without receiving even the semblance 
 of a formal notice of the same. Where was the jus- 
 tice, where was the propriety of such a procedure 
 as this ? There was none. It was worse than 
 arbitrary — it was tyrannical in the extreme. But the 
 heart sickens to contemplate such transactions as 
 these. Yet "justice should be done though the 
 heavens fall." It was such events as these which 
 we have recorded that led to the organization of the 
 Methodist Protestant Church. 
 
 The Rev. William Compton is presented before 
 the mind of the reader in this work quite conspicu- 
 ously; and the writer regrets that the position 
 assigned him is one so unenviable ; but truth re- 
 quired a faithful narrative, and the actions of the 
 man are recorded. The writer adopts the sentiment 
 of Bishop Burnett, that "whatever moderation or 
 charity we owe to men's persons, we owe none at 
 all to their errors, and to that frame which is built 
 on and supported by them." Mr. Compton no 
 doubt felt that his actions were prompted by cor- 
 rect motives at that time, although he inflicted such 
 distress upon his Christian brethren. But he is no 
 more — his race is run ; and he has gone to the 
 19* 
 
222 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 presence of his Maker, and his actions have been 
 weighed by the Judge of all the earth. The writer 
 here takes pleasure in recording the fact that Rev. 
 Mr. Compton remarked but a short time previous 
 to his death, to a member of the M. P. Church, that 
 " his feelings had been greatly moderated and softened 
 towards the reformers" Of that fact we believe none 
 doubt. 
 
 About the time of the persecutions upon Roanoke, 
 hostility began to manifest itself in different parts 
 of North Carolina against the friends of mutual 
 rights. On Albemarle Circuit in particular, which 
 runs through the district of country lying on the 
 south side of Albemarle Sound, several were 
 ejected from the church without the semblance of a 
 trial. The doctrines of mutual rights had been 
 embraced by a few persons in that part of the 
 country, and three local ministers, the Rev. Joshua 
 Swift, Rev. Swain Swift, and Rev. H. Tackinton, 
 were understood to be in favor of a reformation 
 in the government of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. 
 
 The Rev. William W. Hill attended an appoint- 
 ment to preach in their immediate neighborhood, 
 and as he was known to be an able and zealous 
 advocate of the subject of reform, these three minis- 
 ters requested him to say to their brethren and 
 neighbors from the pulpit, after preaching, that 
 " they were in favor of the doctrines of reform." 
 The announcement was simply made, according to 
 request. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. _22^;> 
 
 The preacher in charge of the circuit, Rev. J. D. 
 Halstead, being at that time in a part of the circuit 
 somewhat remote, learned the simple narrative of 
 the announcement; and upon arriving at one of his 
 appointments, about twelve miles from the place at 
 which Rev. W. W. Hill had preached, proceeded, 
 to announce from the pulpit that these three minis- 
 ters, against whose moral or official characters no 
 charges had been alleged, were no longer ministers 
 or members of the M. E. Church ! What an out- 
 rage upon reason and upon rights ; but more prop- 
 erly an outrage upon religion ! The inquiry might 
 arise, what was their offence, that they were thus 
 summarily disposed of without form of trial ? The 
 only answer at hand is simply this, they had re- 
 quested an announcement of the fact that "they 
 were in favor of reform." And for that offence the 
 Rev. J. D. Halstead proceeded to declare them 
 out of the pale of the church. Comment is un- 
 necessary. The simple narrative is sufficient to 
 demonstrate the shameful impropriety of such an 
 unrighteous act. 
 
 We may search in vain for any authority to jus- 
 tify the conduct of Rev. Messrs. Halstead and 
 Compton, in thus expelling ministers of the gospel 
 from the church without the form or semblance 
 of a trial. The sacred Scriptures warrant no such 
 procedure. 
 
 But the General Conference cf May, 1828, had 
 issued a pastoral address, signed by the bishops 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church,' and certain 
 
224 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 doctrines are therein laid down which these divines 
 may have seized upon as a pretext for the exercise 
 of such high-handed and tyrannical measures. The 
 objectionable doctrines set forth in that famous 
 address are contained in the following remarkable 
 sentence : 
 
 "The great Head of the church himself has im- 
 posed on us the duty of preaching the gospel, of 
 administering its ordinances, and of maintaining its 
 moral discipline among those over whom the Holy 
 Ghost, in these respects, has made us overseers. 
 Of these also, viz: of gospel doctrines, ordinances, 
 and moral discipline, we do believe that the divine- 
 ly instituted ministry are the divinely authorized 
 expounders; and that the duty of maintaining them 
 in their purity, and of not permitting our ministra- 
 tion in these respects to be authoritatively controlled 
 by others, does rest upon us with the force of a 
 moral obligation." 
 
 According to this celebrated manifesto, " the 
 divinely instituted ministry are divinely authorized 
 expounders" of discipline; consequently ample 
 grounds aie here afforded for the lovers of power 
 and authority to expound the same as best suits 
 their views of propriety or bias of mind. Indeed 
 this startling declaration of the General Conference 
 savors very much of the claims of infallibility set 
 up by the church of Rome. It is flattering to the 
 minds of ecclesiastical aspirants, and no doubt may, 
 and does turnish such as presume to deviate from 
 the common path of disciplinary regulations by the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 225 
 
 allurements of ambitious feelings, with a pretext 
 for their arbitrary measures. Taking every possi- 
 ble view of the case that is presented at the present 
 period, w T e are forced to the conclusion that, in the 
 adoption and promulgation of such doctrines and 
 sentiments, the General Conference could have 
 been influenced by no other motives than a de- 
 sire to strengthen the hands of the itinerant min- 
 istry, and to impart to them a character of 
 authority, whose prerogatives were not to be 
 questioned by the local ministry and membership 
 of the church. 
 
 Up to this period of our narrative, there had been 
 eight lay members of the church expelled in Caro- 
 lina, (including one who had been informally cut 
 off on Albemarle,) on account of their opinions con- 
 cerning church polity. They had been condemned 
 and ejected from the church contrary to the known 
 rules of that church; they had appealed to the 
 Annual Conference, and likewise sent up charges 
 to that body against Rev Benton Field, preacher in 
 charge, for mal-administration. The conference 
 decided "it was not mal-administration," and there- 
 by closed the doors against their return. Again 
 we find that twelve ministers had been cast out 
 from the church — seven of whom were admitted 
 to the benefits of a mock-trial, and five were dis- 
 posed of by the process of the scratch law. To 
 appeal to that conference which had sanctioned 
 the measures of the Rev. Mr. Field, would have 
 been useless; therefore no appeal was made but 
 
226 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 lo the community, to their friends, and to their 
 God. 
 
 In the latter part of this year (1828) the friends 
 of mutual rights in Lynchburg, Virginia, suffered 
 persecution on account of their principles. Two 
 local preachers and nine laymen were expelled 
 from the church under the superintendency of the 
 Rev. W. A. Smith; an act so manifestly unjust, and 
 so void of all semblance of Christian charity, that 
 it led to the withdrawal of about fifty members 
 from the communion of the M. E. Church. The 
 ladies, to the number of thirty-seven, following the 
 laudable example set them by their sisters in Balti- 
 more, addressed a letter to the preacher in charge, 
 setting forth the reasons for taking such a step, and 
 withdrew in a body from the church. We extract 
 an account of these proceedings from the Mutual 
 Rights and Christian Intelligencer. 
 
 Lyncheurg, October 18, 1828. 
 Rev. D. B. Dorsey: 
 
 Dear Sir, — The most cogent arguments that can 
 be advanced by the friends of reform, in support 
 of the principles which they advocate, are feeble 
 when compared with those demonstrative facts with 
 which our opponents furnish us. The principles 
 of the Methodist government had not been devel- 
 oped until within the past year. It began with you, 
 and each subsequent move more clearly tends to 
 hold them out to public view; and in proportion 
 as they are felt and s,een the cause of reform is 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 227 
 
 advanced. Such, I am happy to say, is the result 
 in this place. In your last paper you noticed the 
 meeting of the friends of reform in Lynchburg, and 
 published their resolutions. Our proceedings were 
 speedily followed by citations to answer before a 
 committee for " endeavoring to sow dissensions in 
 our church by inveighing against its Discipline." 
 The specification, " because they constituted an in- 
 flammatory meeting, on the evening of the ISth of 
 September, in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 that adopted and published in the 'Lynchburg 
 Virginian' a certain preamble and resolutions, 
 signed C. Winfree, chairman, and John Victor, 
 secretary, of an inflammatory character." This 
 meeting was attended by a large number of our 
 most respectable citizens ; and in whatever point 
 of view it might be regarded by our opposing 
 brethren, we have the united testimony of a disin- 
 terested and intelligent public to sustain us in say- 
 ing that it was conducted in an orderly, respectful 
 and dignified manner. As to the character of the 
 meeting, however, the committee did not express 
 an opinion. The character and tendency of the 
 preamble and resolutions were the ostensible ground 
 on which they sustained the charge and specifica- 
 tions. And thus for the expression of their senti- 
 ments, on a subject of mere human policy and con- 
 venience, were two local preachers and nine lay 
 members, stewards, leaders, and one exhorter cut 
 off from the communion of the church. I hope you 
 will publish the preamble, that an enlightened com- 
 
228 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 munity may- distinctly see the development of that 
 principle in our government, and that policy of our 
 irresponsible rulers, which are exerted to suppress 
 the freedom of speech and the press, apart from its 
 licentious use ; for we humbly conceive that our 
 sentiments in that paper are expressed in a calm, 
 temperate and dignified manner. The decision 
 of the committee was of course sustained by the 
 Quarterly Meeting Conference. 
 
 Such has been the influence of these measures, 
 that although we had considered our number but 
 small, we now find that we are surrounded by a 
 host of warm and fast friends of reform. The 
 females assembled and addressed a letter to the 
 preacher in charge, a copy of which I send you, 
 marked A, signed by thirty-seven members. Since 
 that there have been other secessions, male and 
 female, so that we now number sixty-two members, 
 who on the 13th inst. formed themselves into a soci- 
 ety, adopting an article of association, and receiv- 
 ing the Rev. William J. Holcombe and John Per- 
 cival as licensed preachers, appointed stewards 
 and leaders, and formed three classes. A sub- 
 scription paper was opened for the purpose of 
 erecting a house of worship, and on this day up- 
 wards of two thousand dollars are subscribed for 
 that purpose. In the meantime the houses of the 
 Episcopalian, Presbyterian and Baptist denomina- 
 tions are open for our accommodation. Brother 
 Holcombe preached on last Sabbath, at 11 o'clock, 
 in the Baptist church ; the Episcopalian will be 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 229 
 
 occupied by us on next Sabbath at the same 
 hour, and the Presbyterian at night. Our cause 
 is advancing daily. 
 
 A number of our Methodist brethren are looking 
 with anxiety to the convention ; and should it be 
 determined to establish an independent church, 
 and the foundation be well laid, we calculate on a 
 very large addition to our communion. May the 
 great Head of the church inspire us with wisdom 
 commensurate with this importat business. Our 
 meetings are well attended ; much love and union 
 prevail ; and the members seem to enjoy the life 
 and power of religion. We bear with patience 
 the opposition and hard sayings of our opposing 
 brethren ; nor will we return railing for railing. 
 Yours, in much love and esteem, 
 
 J. Victor. 
 
 Copy of the instrument of association under which the 
 reformers united on the 13th of October, 1S2S. 
 
 We, the undersigned, formerly members of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church in Lynchburg, some 
 of whom have been expelled from the fellowship 
 of that body, solely for our reform principles, and 
 others who have withdrawn from that church, be- 
 cause of our objection to its government, and the 
 arbitrary and oppressive administration of its Dis- 
 cipline, have agreed to unite together as a society 
 of original Methodists. Our object is to form, in 
 connection with reformers generally, a system of 
 government in which the great principles of 7'epre- 
 
 20 
 
 • 
 
230 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 sent at ion and mutual rights and interests shall be dis- 
 tinctly acknowledged in connection with the system 
 of an itinerating ministry. With these views, we 
 will wait the result of the General Convention of 
 reformers, to be holden in the city of Baltimore on 
 the 12th of November next. And we now solemnly 
 unite, in the name of the great Head of the church, 
 our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, receiving the 
 holy Scriptures as our guide; and for practical 
 reasons adopting as an instrument of union the 
 General Rules of the Rev. John and Charles Wes- 
 ley, with subsequent regulations, as our peculiar 
 circumstances may from time to time require. 
 
 Resolved, that we receive Dr. W. J. Holcombe 
 and John Percival (who have sustained the office 
 of licensed preachers in the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church for upwards of four years) as licensed 
 preachers of this association, and that certificates 
 of this our approbation and appointment be given to 
 these our brethren by the chairman of this meeting, 
 and countersigned by the secretary. 
 
 And further, that George Percival, who has for 
 many years sustained the office of exhorter in the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, be received in this 
 association in the same capacity, and that a certifi- 
 cate of this our approbation and appointment be in 
 like manner given him. 
 
 C. Winfree, Chairman. 
 
 J. Victor, Secretary. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 231 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Resolutions of the Union Society in Cincinnati.— Trials and ex- 
 pulsions of ministers. — Secession of a large body of members 
 from the M. E. Church. — Letter of Dr. Bishop to Rev. Mr. 
 Wright. — Call of a General Convention for 1828. 
 
 Previous to the sitting of the General Confer- 
 ence of 182S, a memorial was drawn up by the 
 members of the M. E. Church at Cincinnati, and 
 presented to that body when in session. 
 
 The memorialists in their address justly repre- 
 hended the prosecutions which had been had, in 
 Baltimore and other places, against the members 
 of the church on account of their opinions concern- 
 ing church polity ; and respectfully prayed the con- 
 ference to restore all such to their former standing 
 as had been expelled, and also to adopt such 
 measures as would prevent the recurrence of sim- 
 ilar evils. 
 
 On the 26th of June the Union Society met, and 
 appointed a committee of five members to receive 
 the report of the General Conference on petitions 
 and memorials, and to report thereon. On the 10th 
 of July the society met to receive the report of their 
 committee, which was read and adopted, and the 
 following resolutions passed. 
 
 "Resolved 1. That we cannot but approve of 
 the conduct of our expelled brethren in Baltimore, 
 
232 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 in rejecting proposals evidently so partial and un- 
 just, and difficult to be complied with. 
 
 " Resolved 2. That we feel extremely gratified 
 at that degree of peace and prosperity with which 
 they appear to be at present favored, and we sin- 
 cerely pray that it may be long continued. 
 
 " Resolved 3. That according to our present 
 feelings and sentiments, we ought and do therefore 
 design to patronize the 'Mutual Rights,' and to 
 continue the Union Society until the meeting of the 
 convention in November next, and then be governed 
 as circumstances may seem to direct. 
 
 ''Resolved 4. That in order to prevent unpleas- 
 ant feelings, we will use our influence with the 
 editors of the above named periodical not to insert 
 in its pages any matter calculated to excite the 
 effects above stated. 
 
 " Resolved 5. That it is our wish to promote peace 
 and concord ; and whatever we can safely surren- 
 der to our old side brethren, for peace and quiet- 
 ness' sake, we feel disposed to do it. But the 
 liberty of speech and of the press, with the right to 
 assemble peaceably and orderly, to discuss church 
 government or any other subject we may think pro- 
 per to take up, is what we cannot relinquish to any 
 human authority whatever." 
 
 After the passage of the above resolutions, it was 
 stated by some high in authority that the Cincin- 
 nati reformers had passed the Rubicon, and could 
 no longer be tolerated. 
 
 On the 17th of July fourteen members of the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 233 
 
 Union Society were waited on by a prosecuting 
 committee of the following members: Christopher 
 Smith, Robert Richardson, Sacker Nelson and Lit- 
 tleton Quinton. 
 
 On the 25th of July brother William Young, a 
 local preacher, was served with charges, of which 
 the following is a copy; and notified to appear for 
 trial at the Stone church, at 9 o'clock on Friday, 
 the 14th day of August. 
 
 " Rev. Wm. Young; is charged with endeavoring 
 to sow dissensions in the society or church, in this 
 station or city, known by the name of the Method- 
 ist Episcopal Church, and with the violation of that 
 general rule of Discipline of said church which 
 prohibits members from doing harm, and requires 
 them to avoid evil of every kind ; and especially 
 with violating that clause of said general rule 
 which prohibits speaking evil of ministers. 
 
 " Specification 1. Because the said Wm. Young, 
 while a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 did heretofore attach himself to, and become a 
 member of the society called the Union Society of 
 the M. E. Church of Cincinnati; which Union So- 
 ciety is in opposition to the Discipline, in whole or 
 in part, of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and has 
 arrayed and combined all the workings of the spirit 
 of party in their pernicious and destructive forms, 
 distinguishing its members as organized and sys- 
 tematic opponents of the church aforesaid. 
 
 " Specification 2. Because the said Wm. Young 
 as a member of the said Union Society, directly 
 20* 
 
234 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 or indirectly, either by pecuniary contributions or 
 his personal influence, aiding, abetting, co-operat- 
 ing or assisting in the publication or circulation of a 
 work called ' The Mutual Rights of the ministers 
 and members of the Methodist Episcopal Church,' 
 printed in Baltimore, (for proof of which see ' Mu- 
 tual Rights,' No. 44, page 230, 2d resolution ;) which 
 periodical work or publication called the ' Mutual 
 Rights,' &c, contains among other things much 
 that inveighs against the Discipline of the Method- 
 ist Episcopal Church aforesaid, in whole or in part, 
 and is in direct opposition thereto, and that is 
 abusive or speaks evil of a part if not of most of the 
 ministers of that church; the general tendency of 
 which periodical work has been to produce and con- 
 tinues to produce disagreement, strife, contention 
 and breach of union among the members of said 
 church in this city or station. 
 
 "Specification 3. Because the said Wm. Young, 
 as a member of the Union Societ} r aforesaid, did at 
 a meeting of said society, held on the evening of the 
 10th of this month (July), vote for or otherwise 
 agree to the adoption of the following resolution, 
 viz: 'That according to our present feelings and 
 sentiments, Ave ought and therefore design to patron- 
 ize ' The Mutual Rights,' and to continue the 
 Union Society until the meeting of the convention 
 in November next, and then to be governed as cir- 
 cumstances may seem to direct;' which resolution, 
 on account of the licentious manner in w r hich the 
 periodical called 'Mutual Rights' has been con- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 235 
 
 ducted, and on account of the discord and strife pro- 
 duced by the organization and continuation of a 
 distinct body, within the bosom of the church, 
 called the Union Society, is a plain violation of the 
 existing regulations under which we are voluntarily 
 associated as Methodists and as Methodist ministers, 
 and is in opposition to the judgment and advice 
 of the late General Conference of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, and is well calculated to produce 
 and increase the disagreement, strife, contention 
 and breach of union alluded to in the 3d specifica- 
 tion. For proof of which the publication entitled 
 the 'Mutual Rights of the ministers arid members 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church' is referred 
 to, and particularly the following pnpers." 
 
 The papers here referred to are the same as those 
 presented upon the trial of Dr. S. K. Jennings at 
 Baltimore. From a careful comparison, the reader 
 cannot doubt that the preceding charges and speci- 
 fications were framed after the model or original 
 invented by the prosecuting committee in Balti- 
 more ; therefore the same papers pressed into ser- 
 vice in that city would answer the purpose in 
 Cincinnati. 
 
 Upon the meeting of the Quarterly Meeting Con- 
 ference, it was determined, in order to obviate exist- 
 ing difficulties, to appoint a committee to confer 
 with a committee on the part of the Union Society. 
 The committee were vested with authority in case 
 of a failure to reconcile the difficulties, to devise a 
 plan for a separation, and to report to the church 
 
236 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 the result. Several communications passed be- 
 tween the two committees, but no terms were 
 agreed upon. The friends of reform were willing 
 to abolish their Union Society, but wished to re- 
 serve to themselves the right to assemble as mem- 
 bers of the church, for the purpose of transacting 
 such business as they might think proper, for the 
 purpose of promoting the cause of reform in the M. 
 E. Church. They likewise refused to withdraw 
 their support from the " Mutual Rights " at present, 
 and in case they did yield that, they wished to re- 
 serve to themselves the right to disseminate their 
 sentiments through such a medium as they might 
 see proper to select. The committee of the Quar- 
 terly Conference regarded such terms as altogether 
 inadmissible, and the correspondence closed with- 
 out any thing being effected. 
 
 A few days afterwards thirteen others were sum- 
 moned to trial upon charges and specifications 
 similar in every respect to those alleged against 
 Rev. Mr. Young. Prosecutions having been thus 
 commenced, involving principles, rights and inter- 
 ests of an important nature to every friend of 
 religious liberty, the reformers resolved to make 
 common cause in the coming contest. 
 
 After being summoned to attencl trial, the follow- 
 ing vote was sent to the preacher in charge, asking 
 the privilege of trial before the society of which 
 they were members, according to the provisions of 
 the Discipline. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 237 
 
 Cincinnati, August 9, 1828. 
 Rev. John F. Wricht : 
 
 Dear Brother, — We have received the charges 
 which have been preferred against us by brothers 
 Quinton, Richardson, Smith and Nelson. 
 
 We have now to ask for the privilege granted in 
 our Discipline to an accused member, viz : the 
 rio-ht of trial before the society of which we are 
 members. We would be glad if you would send 
 us an answer by the bearer. Moses Lyon, 
 
 E. Hall. 
 
 To the preceding note Mr. Wright saw proper 
 to make the following reply. 
 
 Cincinnati, August 9, 1828. 
 Messrs. Lyon and Hall : 
 
 In answer to your note, I need only say the privi- 
 lege you ask for is utterly impracticable. Neither 
 you nor myself have power to compel members to 
 attend; so that, if such a course should be deter- 
 mined on, nothing is more certain than that no 
 investigation could be had in the case. 
 
 Yours, &c. J. F. Wright. 
 
 The objection urged by Mr. Wright against 
 granting the "disciplinary privilege," requested by 
 Messrs. Lyon and Hall, is exceedingly strange. 
 In the first place, it seemed to amount to a reflec- 
 tion upon the membership of the church, virtually 
 presuming a disregard, on their part, of the inter- 
 est of the church. In the next place, it might be 
 presumed that he regarded this rule passed by 
 
23S HISTORY OF THE 
 
 the General Conference, as an impracticable one. 
 Neither of which positions can be regarded as true. 
 But the key to his objections was possibly this : he 
 feared the decision of the matter before the society. 
 
 On Sunday, August the 10th, the ministers offi- 
 ciating in the different Methodist churches in Cin- 
 cinnati, were requested to read notices from the 
 pulpits inviting the attendance of the members at 
 Stone church, on the following Wednesday, at 
 which time and place business of importance would 
 be brought before them. 
 
 This call upon the membership was made by the 
 trustees for the purpose of obtaining an expression 
 of their sentiments in regard to the proceedings 
 which had been instituted. Some of the preachers 
 refused to read the notices, and one recalled in the 
 afternoon what he had published in the morning. 
 
 Although opposition to the meeting was thus 
 offered, a considerable gathering of the members 
 took place. The objeci of the meeting being 
 stated, the following resolutions were unanimously 
 adopted : 
 
 " 1. That the trustees of this station have au- 
 thority to call the church together on business in 
 relation thereto, whenever they are of opinion such 
 call is necessary, and all such calls we consider 
 leffal and valid. 
 
 "2. That at such meetings, whatever business 
 is laid before the church, a majority shall decide 
 thereon, and that decision shall be binding. 
 
 "3. That as these prosecutions most clearly 
 
JWETHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 .-239 
 
 involve a violation of that sacred trust committed to 
 us by our forefathers, viz: the liberty of speech and 
 of the press, and as they are contrary to the spirit 
 and genius of our holy religion, unacknowledged 
 by our book of Discipline, and highly dangerous to 
 our civil and religious liberties, we hereby express 
 our entire disapprobation of such proceedings. 
 
 "4. That from any view we are able to take of 
 these matters, the alleged grounds of complaint are 
 totally insufficient to sustain the charges here pre- 
 ferred. 
 
 "5. That forasmuch as some of our accused 
 brethren have required of the preacher in charge an 
 investigation of these complaints before the church, 
 and as the preacher in charge has denied that privi- 
 lege, a privilege which is granted in the Discipline 
 of said church, a right which, from the peculiar and 
 uncommon nature of these charges, is imperiously 
 called for, we hereby declare we shall acknowledge 
 no expulsions as valid or legal where such right has 
 been denied. 
 
 "6. That we respectfully submit to the preacher 
 in charge, the propriety of immediately withdraw- 
 ing these prosecutions, as the objects for which they 
 were instituted can never be accomplished thereb} 7 . 
 
 " 7. That should the preacher in charge reject our 
 counsel and advice in relation to these prosecutions, 
 we hereby authorize and command our brethren, 
 the trustees of this station, to adopt such measures 
 to enforce a compliance with our wishes, as above 
 stated, as they may judge necessary. 
 
240 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 "8. That a copy of the resolutions passed by the 
 members of the Methodist Episcopal Church of 
 this station, be presented, by the trustees of said 
 church, to the Rev. John F. Wright, preacher in 
 charge. 
 
 " 9. That the trustees be required to have the re- 
 solutions passed by this meeting, recorded in the 
 church book." 
 
 A copy of the preceding resolutions was present- 
 ed to "the Rev. Mr. Wright, accompanied by the 
 following note : 
 
 Cincinnati, August 13, 1828. 
 
 Dear Brother, — We herewith send you a copy 
 of the resolutions adopted by the Methodist Episco- 
 pal Church in Cincinnati, at a meeting held this 
 day agreeably to public notice given by the trustees 
 of this station. We request you to inform us by 
 the bearer whether you design to act in accordance 
 with the wishes of said church. 
 
 Trustees. 
 
 Rev. J. F. Wright. 
 
 Mr. Wright replied in the following note: 
 
 Cincinnati, August 14, 1828. 
 
 To the Trustees, — In answer to your note, I 
 beg leave to remark that, in my humble opinion, the 
 trustees have exceeded the power vested in them 
 by the law of incorporation, by taking jurisdiction 
 over and interfering with the spiritual concerns of 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church of this station, (as 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 241 
 
 trustees,) inasmuch as their office only contemplates 
 their having control of temporal affairs. 
 
 You wish me to say whether I " design to act in 
 accordance with the wishes of said church." To 
 which I answer, from the smallness of the number 
 convened together on yesterday, and as I am in- 
 formed but few voted, I cannot suppose the wish of 
 the church is yet ascertained. No regular investi- 
 gation has yet been made, and I feel myself bound, 
 as preacher in charge, to attend to the business as 
 the Discipline of our church directs. 
 
 Yours, &c. J. F. Wright. 
 
 On the 14th of August the trials of the local 
 preachers came on. There were four of them, viz: 
 David English, J. B. Dorman, J. Haughton, and 
 William Young. The committee appointed to sit 
 on the trials consisted of Daniel Duvall, J. Walls, 
 and John Clark. The accused brethren urged ob- 
 jections against each one of them. Mr. Clark was 
 a man whose rabid opposition to the cause of re- 
 form rendered him particularly objectionable, but 
 all objections were overruled. 
 
 As various articles published in the "Mutual 
 Rights," had been relied upon by the prosecuting 
 committee to sustain the charges, they proceeded 
 to read, as evidence, items of different articles from 
 that work. The accused brethren objected to the 
 proceedings in this respect, and insisted that the 
 whole of each article should be read, in order that 
 the true meaning and understanding of each essay 
 21 
 
242 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 might be had. To this objections were made, on 
 the ground that it would occupy too much time. 
 Late in the afternoon the evidence closed on the 
 part of the prosecution. Three of the accused 
 ministers then addressed the committee in their de- 
 fence. They urged the impropriety of being held 
 responsible for the written sentiments of other men, 
 and those men, too, itinerant ministers, members of 
 Annual Conferences, responsible to the same, and 
 within the reach and control of the rules of the 
 church. They also took the grounds that the ques- 
 tion at issue was neither of a personal nor private 
 character, and consequently could not be decided, 
 with any degree of propriet} r , by such church prose- 
 cutions; that neither Union Societies, nor such pe- 
 riodicals on church polity as the Mutual Rights, 
 were condemned by the word of God, or forbidden 
 in the Discipline of the church of which they were 
 members. 
 
 They retired for the night, and on the following 
 day pronounced the accused ministers guilty of the 
 charges which had been preferred against them ; 
 consequently they were suspended from all minis- 
 terial functions until the sitting of the Quarterly 
 Conference. 
 
 August 15th. the trial of the ten lay members 
 came on. Upon the opening of the trial, the ac- 
 cused brethren arose, and one of their number, as 
 spokesman, read the following paper: 
 
 " As accused members of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church of Cincinnati, we claim the privileges 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 243 
 
 granted us in the fifth restrictive rule of the Disci- 
 pline of our church, in the following words, to wit: 
 'Neither shall they (ihe General Conference) do 
 away the privileges of our members, of trial before 
 the society or by committee, and of an appeal.' 
 
 " We do, therefore, protest against being tried 
 before a committee or select number of said church 
 contrary to our wishes or consent; and we do hereby 
 notify you that we will not submit to any decision 
 in our cases, unless such decision shall be made by 
 the society of which we are members. 
 
 "Signed, E. Hall, W. L. Chappell, H. Handy, 
 S. Ashley, T. Wright, James Foster, M. Lyon, J. 
 Snyder, J. Garretson, G. Lee." 
 
 The disciplinary privilege claimed by the ac- 
 cused, was disallowed by Rev. Mr. Wright, and 
 they immediately withdrew from the house. The 
 trials proceeded, and the ten brethren were all 
 found guilty of the charges and specifications, and 
 in a few days the preacher in charge sent the fol- 
 lowing note of admonition to each one. The copy 
 is taken from that sent to Mr. Hall. 
 
 Cincinnati, August 18, 1828. 
 Brother Hall, — I take this method of discharg- 
 ing the painful duty of administering reproof, which 
 devolves on me on account of my present situation. 
 You have been convicted of endeavoring to sow 
 dissensions in the society or church of which you 
 are a member, by a decision of the committee ap- 
 pointed to investigate the charges preferred against 
 you. 
 
244 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 You therefore plainly discover that the only 
 ground on which expulsion from the church can be 
 avoided, is an abandonment of the course which 
 you have for some time past pursued, and which, 
 according to the judgment of your brethren of the 
 committee, is calculated to produce diagreement, 
 strife, contention and breach of union among the 
 members of our church. 
 
 As you are the arbiter of your own destiny in 
 this matter, I hope you will inform me in writing, 
 by Wednesday evening next, if you should feel 
 disposed to comply with the above condition. 
 
 Yours, &c. • JoHisigF. Wright. 
 
 While the prosecutions were thus pending, the 
 reformers, feeling deeply interested in the issue, 
 held consultations together as to the proper course 
 to be pursued under the circumstances. They 
 were informed by the best of legal authority that 
 according to the civil law they could compel Mr. 
 Wright to grant the lay members the privilege of a 
 trial before the society; or, in case of a refusal on 
 his part, commit him to jail by a writ of mandamus. 
 Reports were likewise in circulation that another 
 catalogue of names of the members of the Union 
 Society, to the number of about thirty, had been 
 made in view of prosecution. The trustees em- 
 braced the opinion that some prompt step should 
 be taken in order to arrest the tide of prosecution ; 
 and after much consultation and interchange of 
 views one with another, they recommended that 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 245 
 
 " forasmuch as no peace can be enjoyed in the 
 church, reformers in a body had better withdraw." 
 An appointment was therefore made for the re- 
 formers and their friends to meet at the Stone 
 church, at 2 o'clock on Monday, 18th of August, 
 for the purpose of formally withdrawing from the 
 church. At the hour appointed a considerable con- 
 course had assembled, and the meeting had been 
 opened in due form; and its object being stated, 
 about two hundred and forty gave in their names, 
 thereby formally withdrawing from the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church. In the following letter, ad- 
 dressed to the Rev. Mr. Wright, their reasons for 
 taking this step are fairly and candidly stated : 
 
 Letter to Rev. J. F. Wright from the seceding members 
 of the M. E. Church of Cincinnati. 
 
 Sir, — We have beheld with unfeigned sorrow 
 and regret the proceedings lately had against our 
 brethren, by way of distinction called reformers, in 
 this city. These proceedings, we are compelled to 
 say, are distinguished by cruelty and oppression in 
 their most afflicting forms. You, sir, are not igno- 
 rant that the church in this station expressed, at a 
 public meeting called by the trustees for that pur- 
 pose, their entire disapprobation of these prose- 
 cuting measures. You have also been advised not 
 to proceed, and forewarned of the awful conse- 
 quences, by brethren whose judgment it was your 
 duty to respect. Nevertheless, led on and assisted 
 
 21* 
 
246 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 by a set of men, some of whom are remarkable for 
 their ignorance, others for their deep-rooted preju- 
 dices, and some by tempers of the most inflamma- 
 tory character, yon have summoned a number of 
 our brethren before a partial tribunal, prepared to 
 do the direful deed ; and thus by the most unjusti- 
 fiable measures you have procured the condemna- 
 tion of our brethren, whose characters stand fair 
 before both the church and the world. In these 
 proceedings you must be aware you can neither be 
 sustained by the Discipline of our church nor by 
 the laws of our country. By an appeal to that tri- 
 bunal we can compel you to accede to the reason- 
 able request of our brethren. Alas! we lament to 
 prove that civil law alone will induce any Method- 
 ist preacher to accede to what religion and justice 
 require. Oh ! " tell it not in Gath, publish it not in 
 the streets of Askelon," lest the uncircumcised, the 
 enemies of Christianity, triumph. But unwilling 
 to avail ourselves of the advantages we thus pos- 
 sess, we have determined to secede, and leave our 
 brethren in the quiet possession of our sanctuary, 
 our home, for peace and quietness' sake, and seek a 
 place where a watchful Providence shall direct our 
 way. We therefore request of you, forthwith, cer- 
 tificates of our good standing and character; and 
 pray that you and your associates in these unhal- 
 lowed prosecutions may find mercy in the day of 
 the Lord Jesus. 
 
 Cincinnati, August 18, 1828. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 247 
 
 THE LOCAL MINISTERS. 
 
 The court which had been convened to try them 
 had no authority further than to suspend them from 
 the exercise of ministerial functions, therefore their 
 several cases came up properly before the ensuing 
 Quarterly Conference. By the time this body met, 
 owing to secessions, removals from office, &c, the 
 friends of reform were in the minority. Before a 
 tribunal composed almost entirely of the supporters 
 of arbitrary power, many of them being the official 
 creatures of the preacher in charge, no other de- 
 cision could have been looked for than that which 
 was rendered, viz: a confirmation of the verdict 
 rendered by the committee — consequently the local 
 ministers were all expelled from the church. 
 
 However, the Quarterly Conference, willing to 
 put on the semblance of lenity, proposed terms to 
 the expelled, in the form of a resolution, upon which 
 they might still retain their standing in the church ; 
 those terms being such as no reasonable man could 
 believe that they, under all the circumstances, 
 would for a moment entertain — the conditions thus 
 offered requiring them to withdraw from the Union 
 Society, and to cease to patronize the " Mutual 
 Rights." Such conditions had no charms for the 
 expelled. 
 
 The following official notice was sent to the local 
 ministers, containing the decision of the Quarterly 
 Conference in their cases : 
 
 Dear Brother, — The conference have made it 
 my duty to inform you of their decision. They 
 
248 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 have found you guilty of the charge, with its sev- 
 eral specifications ; and have passed a resolution 
 that if you promise to desist from the course in 
 future for which they censure you, viz: that you 
 withdraw from the Union Society, and that you 
 cease to patronize the " Mutual Rights," that you 
 retain your standing in the church. 
 Yours, affectionately, 
 
 G. R. Jones, President. 
 Rev. W. Young. 
 
 To the above note the Rev. Mr. Youno; sent the 
 following reply : 
 
 Dear Brother, — As it respects the decision of 
 the conference in my case, which you gave me last 
 evening, which informed me that they considered 
 me guilty of the charges preferred against me, I 
 expected nothing else, from a belief that the com- 
 mittee of local preachers and a majority of the 
 Quarterly Conference were selected with an eye to 
 this decision. 
 
 Concerning the proposition made to me by the 
 conference, viz: to withdraw from the Union Soci- 
 ety, and cease to patronize the " Mutual Rights," I 
 have only to say, I shall reserve to myself the 
 right to patronize and read such books as my 
 judgment shall from time to time direct; and for 
 the matter contained therein I shall endeavor at 
 all times to pass judgment with a reference to the 
 rule of right. I shall continue to think it a right 
 belonging to me to converse with my brethren, in 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 249 
 
 society meetings or otherwise, on the subject of 
 church government or any other lawful subject. 
 
 I have now to say that I consider the proceedings 
 in my case to be illegal, and the decision to be un- 
 just, and from it I shall appeal to the Annual 
 Conference. I remain yours, &c. 
 
 William Young. 
 
 The four local ministers took an appeal to the 
 ensuing Annual Conference, but, as might have been 
 expected, that body confirmed the decision of the 
 court below. The brethren who had seceded from 
 the church were now destitute of a place of worship, 
 but were very kindly accommodated by being ten- 
 dered the use of the Second Presbyterian and Epis- 
 copal churches. Verily they were enabled to adopt 
 the language of the psalmist and say, " When my 
 father and my mother forsake me, then the Lord 
 will take me up." 
 
 They were regularly supplied with the ministra- 
 tion of the word by Rev. Messrs. Bishop, Price, and 
 others. And now we have to record an act at 
 which the feelings of every Christian, in whose heart 
 the spirit of the Redeemer dwells, must revolt. 
 The preaching of the gospel of Christ to the breth- 
 ren who had seceded, by the Rev. Mr. Bishop, gave 
 offence to the presiding elder, who notified him that 
 he should institute charges against him at the 
 approaching Annual Conference for such conduct. 
 This man in high authority was prompt to redeem 
 his word. Charges were presented to conference, 
 
250 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 but that body decided that they were not just 
 grounds of complaint against the Rev. Mr. Bishop. 
 But they requested him by vote not to preach the 
 gospel of Christ to those persons in Cincinnati who 
 had seceded from the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 on account of the prosecutions which had been 
 instituted there. 
 
 In this vote of the Annual Conference the Rev. 
 Mr. Bishop felt himself as it were trammeled in the 
 exercise of his ministerial functions, and that this 
 request of the Annual Conference might in its ten- 
 dency prove to be a snare to entrap him. Com- 
 ment upon the unreasonableness and injustice of 
 such a requisition is unnecessary. He saw proper, 
 under the circumstances, to retire from the Method- 
 ist Episcopal Church, and take charge of the society 
 of those who had seceded. The following letter, 
 addressed to the preacher in charge, defines his 
 position with great clearness and force as a Christian 
 minister : 
 
 Rev. J. F. Wright : 
 
 Dear Brother, — After much reflection, many tears 
 and many prayers to Almighty God for direction, 
 I have come to the conclusion that it is my duty to 
 withdraw from the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 And I do hereby tender to you, and through you to 
 bro. G. R. Jones, as the proper organs, a resigna- 
 tion of my membership in said church, and shall 
 from this date consider myself no longer accounta- 
 ble to the discipline and authorities of the Method- 
 ist Episcopal Church. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 251 
 
 It was not my design or wish ever to dissolve 
 my connexion with a church for whose welfare 
 I have felt a deep interest, and have labored to 
 the best of my ability for thirty years; but I ex- 
 pected to live and die within her pale. But 
 the vote of the conference, prohibiting me from 
 preaching to the seceded brethren in this city, im- 
 poses a requisition with which I cannot comply as 
 a conscientious man, and it involves a principle I 
 cannot admit. I never can subscribe to the right of 
 any man or body of men authoritatively to say to any 
 minister called of God to preach the gospel to dying 
 men, you must not preach to any congregation of 
 immortal souls who are probationers or candidates 
 for eternal happiness or woe. I must be at liberty 
 to follow the dictates of my own conscience in ful- 
 filling the commission given to me by the great 
 Head of the church, "Go into all the world and 
 preach the gospel to every creature ;" because I 
 know I must give an account to Him for myself in 
 the great day. I believe it is the will of God that 
 I should preach to those seceders in this city, but 
 the conference forbids it; for although the vote was 
 in the form of a request, yet it being a formal vote 
 of the conference, and made a matter of record on 
 the journals, it amounts to an official prohibition; 
 so that I am driven to the necessity of withdraw- 
 ing from the church, or violating my conscience. 
 And whether it be right to obey God or men, judge 
 ye. In this matter I am not left to choose as in a 
 matter of judgment, but of conscience. Hence, my 
 
252 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 brethren have compelled me to resign my standing 
 in the church, which I suppose is what some of them 
 designed to accomplish : and it may be pleasure to 
 them, but it is painful to me. It is to my wounded 
 soul like cutting off a right arm, or plucking out a 
 right eye. 
 
 But from a conviction of duty I must do it. I 
 do not take this step from any hostile feeling, or 
 from the dictates of any unhallowed passion ; my 
 feelings are of a very different nature. No one cir- 
 cumstance of my life has ever caused me more 
 heartfelt grief than that in which the conference 
 has placed me by the above act. I am frequently 
 led involuntarily to exclaim, why. did my brethren 
 do so? Surely if they had known the tortures they 
 were about to inflict on my already lacerated and 
 bleeding heart, they would not have done it. Al- 
 though the church has had many much more able 
 ministers, a truer or more sincere friend she never 
 had within her pale. 
 
 I have been in that church, I may say, from child- 
 hood, but I now go out like the old servant of 
 God, not knowing whither he went. But 1 lean on 
 the divine arm, and trust the Lord will lead and 
 support me. 
 
 Contrary to my former calculations or intentions, 
 I now retire from under the jurisdiction of the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church, (which is near and dear to 
 me,) for the reason already stated, that the com- 
 mand of the conference and the command of Jesus 
 Christ given to me, stand in direct opposition to 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 253 
 
 each other. Christ says, preach the gospel to 
 every creature. The conference says, preach not 
 the gospel to those hundreds of souls in Cincinnati 
 who have seceded from the church. So that I can- 
 not obey one without violating the other. And if I 
 disobey the command of the conference, in obey- 
 ing the command of Christ, I subject myself to 
 trial, suspension and expulsion, which I have reason 
 to believe would be carried into execution ; and I 
 do not wish any further affliction of this kind. And 
 if I disobey- the command of Christ, in obeying the 
 command of the conference, I shall endanger my 
 eternal salvation. 
 
 Under these circumstances, I dare not confer 
 with flesh and blood; I must, therefore, stand free 
 to obey the great Head of the church, and leave the 
 event with him. Yours in deep affliction,* 
 
 T. Bishop. 
 
 The General Convention of reformers which met 
 in Baltimore in November, 1827, appointed a cotn- 
 mittee for the purpose of calling another convention, 
 to meet at such time as they might designate, if in 
 their opinion the general interests and object of the 
 Methodist reformers required it. That committee 
 met in Baltimore, July, 1828, and taking into con- 
 sideration the action of the late General Conference 
 
 * See " An exposition of facts connected with the late prosecu- 
 tions in the Methodist Episcopal Church of Cincinnati," &c, 
 printed in 1828; a copy of which has been politely furnished the 
 author by bro. Conclin of that city. 
 22 
 
254 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 upon the memorials and petitions of the friends of 
 reform ; and regarding as highly exceptionable the 
 terms proposed for the return of those who had 
 been expelled for being in connection with Union 
 Societies, circulating or patronizing the " Mutual 
 Rights," &c, determined upon calling another 
 convention. 
 
 They stated in their address that "the committee 
 wish it to be understood, however, that the}? in no 
 case advise a separation from the church, until the 
 sentiments of the reformers generally can be 
 known, through their respective representatives in 
 the contemplated convention. 
 
 " In conformity to the trust reposed in us by the 
 convention, for the reasons above stated, we hereby 
 give notice that another general convention will 
 be held in the city of Baltimore, in St. John's 
 church, Liberty street, to begin its session on Wed- 
 nesday, the 12th day of November next, at 10 
 o'clock, A. M." 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 General Convention of 1823. — Articles of Association adopted by 
 the Convention. — Adoption of the Articles of Association by the 
 Reformers generally. — Persecution of Reformers in Virginia. — 
 Progress of Reform during 1829. — Letters and Reports from the 
 agents appointed by the Convention. — Letters from Rev. G. 
 Brown. — Extract of a letter from Rev. A. McCaine. 
 
 The General Convention which met in the city 
 of Baltimore, in November, 182S, was composed 
 of delegates from the States of Vermont, New York, 
 Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, North 
 Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Alabama, New Jersey, 
 and the District of Columbia. 
 
 Upon the organization of the Convention, the 
 Rev. Nicholas Snethen was elected president, and 
 William S. Stockton was appointed secretary. 
 
 The first business to which the convention pro- 
 ceeded, was to take up and consider the reply of 
 the late General Conference of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church to the memorial of the Convention of 
 Reformers of 1S27. A committee of the following 
 brethren were appointed to prepare an answer to 
 that celebrated document, viz: Gideon Davis, D. 
 C; Dr. Thomas Dunn, Philadelphia; James Tow- 
 ler, Ohio; P. B. Hopper, Maryland; Dr. John 
 French, Virginia. 
 
 The review which this committee reported of the 
 reply of the General Conference to the memorials, 
 
256 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 is an able document, which clearly refutes the ar- 
 guments and positions taken by the General Con- 
 ference, and is worthy of a perusal by all inquirers 
 after truth. But owing to its length we are con- 
 strained to omit it in the plan of this work. 
 
 A committee was also appointed to prepare and 
 report to the convention, a system of rules for the 
 government of those reformers who might be dis- 
 posed to associate together in an independent church 
 organization. The committee was composed of 
 Rev. S. K. Jennings, Baltimore ; Rev. W. H. Co- 
 mann, Virginia; Rev. W. B. Elgin, Tennessee; 
 Rev. Wm. Young, Ohio; Rev. N. Snethen, Mary- 
 land; Mr. William L. Stockton, Philadelphia; Mr. 
 Wm. C. Lipscomb, D. C.; Spier Whitaker, Esq., 
 North Carolina; Mr. John Victor, Lynchburg, Va. 
 
 On Tuesday, the 18th November, the following 
 preamble and resolution were offered by Mr. G. 
 Davis, and adopted by the convention : 
 
 "Whereas certain resolutions were passed by 
 the last General Conference with a professed design 
 to restore to the communion of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church, certain persons who had been ex- 
 cluded from said communion, on account of their 
 belonging to Union Societies and for patronizing the 
 Mutual Rights; and whereas certain Methodist 
 reformers in the city of Baltimore and elsewhere, 
 who were interdicted said communion, and for 
 whose restoration said resolutions were professedly 
 adopted, have refused to accept the terms therein 
 contained: therefore, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 257 
 
 "Resolved, That this convention consider the 
 terms of said resolutions to be such as they could 
 not accept and retain an honorable and Christian 
 standing among their brethren ; and that they ap- 
 prove of their course in this respect, as a favorable 
 illustration of their adherence to just principles, 
 equally honorable to themselves and the cause in 
 which they have suffered." 
 
 The committee upon organization presented their 
 report, which was taken up, read, and ordered to 
 be printed for the use of the convention. 
 
 After various substitutes and amendments had 
 been acted upon, Mr. John Victor offered the follow- 
 ing resolution, which was adopted: 
 
 "Resolved, That the several papers, together 
 with the printed report of the committee on organi- 
 zation, be referred to a select committee, with di- 
 rections to collate the same and report thereon as 
 soon as practicable." 
 
 The following were appointed said committee: 
 Rev. J. R. Home, Rev. A. McCaine, Rev. S. K. 
 Jennings, Rev. J. R. Williams and Mr. G. Davis, 
 who reported through their chairman, Rev. J. R. 
 Home, which report being taken up and acted upon, 
 article by article, was amended and finally adopted 
 in the following form: 
 
 PREAMBLE. 
 Whereas the friends of a fair and equal repre- 
 sentation in the government of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church, when they have insisted on the 
 22* 
 
258 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 necessity of a modification in the polity of the 
 church, which should recognize this fundamental 
 principle, the only safeguard to the liberties of the 
 people, and when they have submitted respectful 
 petitions and memorials to the General Conference, 
 praying for the admission of the principle, have 
 been met in 'the manner which has encouraged and 
 prepared the friends of absolute power to request 
 and urge them to withdraw from the fellowship of 
 the church, and to threaten them with excommuni- 
 cation if they should refuse to comply: 
 
 And whereas many of our highly esteemed and 
 useful members in the church, by an unjustifiable 
 violence, have, been excluded from the fellowship of 
 their brethren, and have been thereby compelled 
 for the time being to form themselves into religious 
 fraternities for the purposes of Christian fellowship : 
 
 And whereas all the Methodists of the United 
 States, and perhaps of the world, have been united 
 together in their visible fellowship under the general 
 rules of Mr. Wesley, which express the only condi- 
 tion and legitimate test of membership: 
 
 And whereas, in violation of good faith and 
 brotherly love by an exercise of power not author- 
 ized by the word of God, other tests have been set 
 up for the support of that violence, by which many 
 valuable brethren have been unlawfully excluded 
 as aforesaid : 
 
 And whereas these measures have been so con- 
 ducted, that we are justified in believing it to have 
 been the intention of the General Conference and 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 259 
 
 the anti-reformers under their influence, to punish 
 all the avowed friends of representation and intimi- 
 date any who may feel inclined, to favor that 
 principle : 
 
 And whereas the late decisions of the Baltimore 
 and Ohio Annual Conferences, as also the ultimate 
 proceedings and report of the General Conference 
 in relation to this subject, have placed every friend 
 of representation in the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 in such a situation that their opponents have it com- 
 pletely in their power to compel them to renounce 
 their principles, or be excluded from the fellowship 
 of their brethren: 
 
 And whereas the ministers favorable to the prin- 
 ciples of representation, in sundry places, are no 
 longer admitted to ordination or to occupy the pul- 
 pits of the Methodist Episcopal Church, to the great 
 grievance of many : 
 
 And whereas the opposers of representation 
 apear to show no concern for the spiritual welfare 
 of those whom they have excluded as aforesaid, or 
 of those who, on account of such exclusions, have 
 considered themselves called on to withdraw out of 
 the reach of their violent measures, but hold them 
 up to public view as evil-minded persons, and pro- 
 phesy evil things concerning them, notwithstanding 
 the fact that those who have the best means of 
 knowing the injured brethren have unabated confi- 
 dence in their moral and religious integrity, and in 
 common with all the admirers of steady adherents to 
 principle, do actually applaud their firmness in 
 
260 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 holding fast the principle of representation, although 
 by so doing they have been subjected to such heavy 
 pains and penalties: 
 
 And whereas the report of the General Confer- 
 ence above referred to, not only has sanctioned 
 their unjust proceedings, but in effect asserted a 
 divine right to continue to legislate and administer 
 the government of the church in this oppressive 
 manner : 
 
 Therefore, we, the delegates ot the friends of a 
 
 REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT in the 
 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, elected and appointed 
 by them to meet in convention in the city of Balti- 
 more, in November, 1828, with a due regard to the 
 fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty 
 as recognized by the Constitution of the United 
 States, and the several States of the Union, in com- 
 mon with other Protestant churches, do in behalf of 
 ourselves, our constituents and our posterity, in the 
 fear of God, solemnly protest against the right 
 of the General Conference to assume such power, 
 or to institute or sustain any such violent proceed- 
 ings to which it necessarily leads. And we do 
 hereby acknowledge and sustain the right of those 
 brethren who have been excluded, and of those who 
 have on their account withdrawn as aforesaid, to 
 unite and form themselves into communities; and 
 we do this the more willingly, because in so doing 
 they will now of necessity meet the demand which 
 has been so often made by their opponents, to ex- 
 hibit a plan explanatory of the changes which they 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 261 
 
 desire, and what they intend to avoid until driven to 
 it by necessity, to demonstrate by its practical ope- 
 rations the expediency of a representative Method- 
 ist Church government; and do therefore adopt 
 the following articles of association for the govern- 
 ment of such societies as shall agree thereto, under 
 the appellation of Associated Methodist Churches. 
 
 ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION. 
 
 Article I. The articles of religion, general rules, 
 means of grace, moral discipline, rites and cere- 
 monies of the Methodist Episcopal Church, are 
 hereby declared to be the rules of faith and practice 
 for those societies which may unite in this associa- 
 tion; and the mode of administering the same is 
 hereby adopted, except when contravened by some 
 other article. 
 
 Art. II. Each society or church shall have the 
 sole power to admit serious persons into full mem- 
 bership, and to regulate its own temporal concerns 
 in accordance with these articles. The stewards 
 to be elected by the male members over the age of 
 twenty-one years, and the leaders by the respective 
 classes. 
 
 Art. III. The right of property is declared to be 
 vested in the respective societies or churches, who 
 shall elect trustees for the purpose of holding the 
 same for their benefit. 
 
 Art. IV. The trial of members shall be conduct- 
 ed according to the seventh section of the second 
 chapter of the Discipline of the Methodist Episco- 
 
262 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 pal Church ; provided, however, that nothing there- 
 in contained shall be so construed as to deprive an 
 accused member of the right to challenge; and 
 provided, further, that the accused shall have a 
 right to appeal from the decision of the committee 
 to the next Quarterly Conference ; and no member 
 of that Conference who shall have sat on any case 
 as a committee-man, shall be permitted to vote on 
 the appeal. 
 
 Art. V. There shall be a Quarterly Conference 
 in each station and circuit, composed of all the 
 ordained and licensed preachers and exhorters 
 belonging thereto, and of all the stewards and 
 leaders. The preacher in charge shall be the presi- 
 dent of the conference. The conference shall elect 
 its own secretary. The business of the Quarterly 
 Conference shall be, first, to inquire into the official 
 and religious character of its members ; secondly, 
 to license exhorters and suitable persons to preach 
 the gospel, and to recommend to the Annual Con- 
 ference preachers for ordination or to travel. They 
 shall also hear and decide upon appeals from 
 committees. 
 
 Art. VI. There shall be in each State, as soon 
 as may be, one, or not exceeding two, Annual Con- 
 ferences, to be composed of all the ordained minis- 
 ters and an equal number of lay delegates. But 
 until such time, conferences may be formed when 
 it shall be most convenient. The lay delegates to 
 the Annual Conferences shall be chosen by the 
 licensed preachers and lay male members over the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 263 
 
 age of twenty-one years, at the Quarterly Meetings 
 next preceding the sitting of the Annual Con- 
 ferences. 
 
 Art. VII. Each Annual Conference shall elect a 
 president and secretary. 
 
 Art. VIII. Each Annual Conference shall pro- 
 vide the mode of stationing its own preachers. 
 
 Art. IX. It shall be the duty of the presidents 
 of the Annual Conferences to travel through their 
 respective bounds, to fill vacancies, and to make 
 such changes in the circuits or stations as may be 
 deemed absolutely necessary. The president shall 
 have the right of the pulpit in whatever place he 
 may be, but shall not supersede the prerogatives of 
 the minister in charge. 
 
 Art. X. Each Annual Conference shall have 
 power to make such rules and regulations for its 
 own government, and the Government of the stations 
 and circuits within its bounds, as may be necessary 
 for the promotion of the spiritual interests of the 
 community; provided, nevertheless, that no rule 
 shall be binding on the preachers or people, which 
 shall contravene the provisions of these articles. 
 
 Art. XI. Each Annual Conference shall have 
 power to receive into the itinerancy and to ordain 
 such preachers as may be recommended to that 
 body by the Quarterly Conference. The president, 
 assisted by two or more elders, shall perform the 
 ordination. 
 
 Art. XII. The Annual Conferences shall fix the 
 times and places of their sittings. 
 
264 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Art. XIII. Every person whose name is entered 
 on the list of traveling preachers, shall be subject 
 to the appointment of the conference and receive 
 the same allowance as is provided in the Discipline 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 Art. XIV. It shall be the duty of the preacher 
 in charge of any station or circuit, as soon as prac- 
 ticable after his arrival in his circuit or station, to 
 assemble the Quarterly Meeting Conference, that 
 he may obtain the necessary information for the 
 proper understanding of the condition of the circuit 
 or station, and for enlisting all the helps within its 
 limits, for carrying on the great work of the Lord. 
 
 Art. XV. Nothing contained in these articles is 
 to be so construed as to interfere with the right of 
 property belonging to any member of this associa- 
 tion, as recognized by the laws of the State within 
 the limits of which the member may reside. 
 
 Art. XVI. There shall be a General Convention, 
 to be held in the city of Baltimore on the first 
 Tuesday in November, 1S30, to be composed of an 
 equal number of ministers and lay representatives 
 chosen by the Annual Conferences respectively. 
 
 Art. XVII. Supernumerary and superannuated 
 ministers shall be entitled to the same amount of 
 support which is allowed to those more effective. 
 And if any circuit or station should be willing to 
 support any one or more of such supernumerary or 
 superannuated ministers for any indefinite number 
 of years, the privilege shall be granted them. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 265 
 
 The convention, in order to carry out its objects 
 more effectually, passed several resolutions, among 
 which are the following: 
 
 "Resolved, That agents be appointed with full 
 powers to travel through the different States, and 
 assist in carrying into effect the articles adopted by 
 this convention, and employ such other persons to 
 aid them as they may deem proper. 
 
 "Resolved, That a committee of five be appoint- 
 ed to prepare a Constitution, a Book of Discipline, 
 and a Hymn Book, to be submitted to the conven- 
 tion to be held on the first Tuesday in November, 
 1830, in the city of Baltimore. In order to carry 
 out the provisions of this resolution, the following 
 brethren were appointed to constitute the committee, 
 viz: Rev. James R. Williams, Rev. A. McCaine, 
 Rev. S. K. Jennings, Mr. Gideon Davis and Mr. 
 John J. Harrod. 
 
 " Resolved, that it is the opinion of the conven- 
 tion that elders and deacons who have been or may 
 be deprived of their offices in the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church, on account of reform, sustain the 
 same characters and offices in the Associated Meth- 
 odist Churches as they did in the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church." 
 
 The convention also adopted a form of deed to 
 secure to the use of individual societies the church 
 property intended for the use of the Associated 
 Methodist Churches. 
 
 It was just cause of gratulation to the friends of 
 mutual rights that the convention were enabled to 
 23 
 
266 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 adopt these articles of association, as the expelled 
 and the withdrawn from the M. E. Church could 
 unite under them in church union and fellowship; 
 and as they pointed forward to better things to 
 come, they were hailed and received as the harbin- 
 ger of prosperity. These articles of association 
 were adopted with great unanimity by the friends 
 of reform throughout the length and breadth of the 
 land. 
 
 The powers that he of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church now, for the first time, began to see that 
 " the ashes of the martyrs are the seed of the 
 church," and that the unjust persecutions which 
 they had waged against the friends of reform were 
 building up a new and distinct ecclesiastical organ- 
 ization, professing the same doctrines and observing 
 the same means of grace with themselves. The hand 
 of persecution, which had been busy, was not stayed. 
 The epithets of "backsliders," "apostates," "ma- 
 licious persons," " radicals," and " disorganizes," 
 were generally applied to the advocates of reform, 
 and frequently too by those who professed to be the 
 " divinely authorized expounders of gospel doc- 
 trines and moral discipline." Many of them seemed 
 to be fully persuaded that the reformers were 
 amongst the most wicked and impenitent through- 
 out the land. To sustain this assertion, we shall 
 relate an anecdote that came under our own obser- 
 vation. During the excitement upon the subject 
 of reform in Carolina, the ministers of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church held a camp-meeting in a part 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 267 
 
 of the country where the principles of mutual rights 
 were taking root. One of the divinely authorized 
 (no doubt thinking he was doing God service) took 
 it into his head during his sermon at this meeting 
 to hold up to his audience the characters of the 
 reformers in a most appalling light, and closed his 
 phillipic In the following remarkable words : " For 
 we do believe that if these reformers do not reform, they 
 will never see the face of their God in 'peace.' 1 '' 
 
 The very favorable reception which the con- 
 ventional articles of association met aroused to 
 action the spirit of proscription in quarters where it 
 had heretofore lain dormant. Soon after the rise 
 of the convention the spirit of persecution began to 
 rage violently in Virginia, in Northumberland county, 
 and in Lynchburg, in that State, in Georgetown, 
 D. C., in North Carolina, and in other parts of the 
 Union. 
 
 We will here copy an article from the columns 
 of the "Mutual Rights and Christian Intelligencer," 
 of February 20lb, 1S29, showing the manner in 
 which the Rev. Benedict Burgess and others were 
 disposed of by the authorities of the M. E. Church: 
 
 "Brother Dorsey, — I am not fond of writing, 
 but on the present occasion it becomes my duty to 
 give you, as far as I am able, an account of pro- 
 ceedings against reformers in this county. In doing 
 this I am determined to extenuate nothing, nor to 
 set down aught in malice ; if I err, it shall not be 
 intentional ; and correction of an error will be 
 acknowledged by me with cheerfulness. 
 
26S HISTORY OF THE 
 
 " We live in Northumberland county, State of 
 Virginia, which forms a part of what is called Lan- 
 caster Circuit, in which we were members of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church. This circuit I trav- 
 eled in the years 1809 and 1810. From that time 
 I have remained here in a local relation to said 
 church, doing my best to promote the Redeemer's 
 kingdom. 
 
 " Soon after my return from the convention held 
 in Baltimore, in November last, I received a letter 
 from the Rev. Samuel Clarke, preacher in charge 
 of Lancaster Circuit, addressed to Benedict Bur- 
 gess, Thomas Berry, John Lansdell, and others, 
 requesting information, in the following words : 
 ' Do you, or do you not, consider yourselves mem- 
 bers of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and hold 
 yourselves amenable to its laws ? or do you con- 
 sider yourselves members of another society ? I 
 wish you to give me a definite answer to these 
 lines.' For myself, I could have sent him an an- 
 swer, (but not for others,) that I did consider my- 
 self a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 The ensuing Sabbath I preached at Fairfield's 
 meeting-house, and informed the congregation I 
 thought that the last time I should address them as 
 a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church, con- 
 cluding in my own mind that the letter was sent 
 preparatory to a trial. After the congregation was 
 dismissed, and the society retained, I rose and 
 observed that I had received the above letter, and 
 not knowing the minds of all to whom it was ad- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 269 
 
 dressed, I thought it my duty to read it to them. 
 After reading the letter, I told them the course I 
 meant to pursue, and asked their concurrence, to 
 which all appeared to agree. The press of busi- 
 ness prevented me from accomplishing my purpose 
 of seeing brother Clarke the next week; and on the 
 Sunday following, which was the 21st of December 
 last, I went to meeting and found him in the pulpit. 
 He preached from Genesis xiii, S and 9 : ' And 
 Abraham said unto Lot, let there be no strife, I 
 pray thee, between me and thee, and between my 
 herdmen and thy herdmen, for we be brethren. Is 
 not the whole land before thee ? Separate thyself, 
 I pray thee, from me ; if thou wilt take to the left 
 hand, then I will take to the right ; or if thou wilt 
 take to the right hand, then I will go to the left.' 
 I thought I saw a great discrepance between the 
 spirit of Abraham and our preacher. This might 
 have been owing to the excitement under which he 
 labored. The fatal consequences of Lot's choice 
 were largely descanted upon. After sermon the 
 Rev. T. C. Thornton detained the people by a 
 short exhortation, while, as I suppose, preparations 
 were making. After he sat down brother Clarke 
 again resumed the stand, and, as nearly as I can 
 now recollect, addressed the congregation in the 
 following words : ' I am for peace ; I serve the 
 God of peace. It is well known that there is and 
 has been strife in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 not on doctrines, but on church government. There 
 has lately been a convention in Baltimore, and 
 23* 
 
270 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 those who went and those who sent delegates to 
 that convention have joined another church by that 
 act. Therefore the following names are to be con- 
 sidered as having withdrawn from the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church.' Eight or ten names were then 
 read out. I arose to address the congregation 
 from the altar, when the people were dismissed 
 and requested to withdraw, in order to hold a class- 
 meeting. After the doors were closed, I requested 
 of brother Clarke liberty to speak, and had it 
 granted if I would not be long. I told the society 
 I protested against the course that had been pur- 
 sued ; that my going to the convention was for the 
 purpose of consolidating those brethren who had 
 been expelled, and to provide an asylum for my- 
 self and others who might be expelled for maintain- 
 ing the principle of righteousness in representation ; 
 that I rejoiced in having had the privilege of attend- 
 ing the convention, and thought it one of the best 
 acts of my life. 
 
 " After considerable altercation, I told brother 
 Clarke that it was probable he had not read out 
 enough, and he had better ask if there were any 
 more. He did so, and a number more arose and 
 observed they were equally guilty (if there was any 
 guilt in the act) with myself and those other breth- 
 ren who had been read out. In the confusion that 
 ensued, there was no appointment made for Christ- 
 mas day, and of course there could have been no 
 general notice given. As far as it could be done, 
 there was notice that on that day I would preach, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 271 
 
 and proceed to form an Associated Methodist 
 Church at Fairfield's. Although the eight or ten 
 names which were read out were in various parts 
 of the circuit, and the Rev. T. C. Thornton attended 
 our meeting on Christmas, and used his best efforts 
 to prevent, as I thought, our organization, (this he 
 denied as being his object,) there were enough 
 united themselves under the conventional articles 
 to prove that all were not read out who believed 
 the government of Episcopal Methodism and des- 
 potism to be the same thing. We set down twenty- 
 one names ; elected brother Thomas Berry our 
 class-leader, and John Lansdell our steward ; ap- 
 pointed two prayer-meetings in the week, and a 
 day of fasting and prayer. Since then we have 
 been on the increase, and the blessing of God ap- 
 pears to attend our efforts to promote the Redeemer's 
 kingdom. Last Saturday was Quarterly Meeting 
 day for the circuit ; and the Quarterly Conference, 
 purged and purified as it was, sanctioned all that 
 had been done, and directed their proceedings to 
 be published. 
 
 " I am now acting under the conventional arti- 
 cles, and shall do my best, as soon as I can, to 
 enlarge the work and spread the principles. We 
 are in want of a man of experience and heart- 
 felt religion to take charge of the executive 
 department of the churches that are springing up 
 in this section. 
 
 " Yours, in the bonds of mutual rights, 
 
 "B. Burgess." 
 
272 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The organization of the friends of reform into 
 churches and societies under the conventional arti- 
 cles, marks a new era in the history of reform. Up to 
 this period there was no point to which the expelled 
 and proscrihed could look for relief upon being cast 
 out from the pales of the M. E. Church ; but a 
 brighter day had now dawned, and associated 
 Methodist Churches were being organized through- 
 out the length and breadth of the land. The gales 
 of prosperity wafted onward the cause, and success 
 attended the efforts of those ministers who labored 
 to propagate the doctrines of mutual rights. The 
 agents appointed by the convention under its first 
 resolution, " to travel through the different states," 
 were of eminent service to the cause in organizing 
 and building up churches, although they were 
 invariably opposed in their operations by the sup- 
 porters of clerical domination. 
 
 Their reports are highly interesting. We sub- 
 join a few extracts from the "Mutual Rights and 
 Christian Intelligencer." 
 
 From the Rev. Dr. J. French, one of the agents for 
 Virginia. 
 
 Norfolk, January 30, 1829. 
 Dear Brother, — Societies have been formed 
 under the conventional articles at the following 
 places on this part of the seaboard of the state, 
 viz : Princess Anne court house, (this society was 
 formed 30th Nov.;) Cowlings' meeting house, Nan- 
 semond county; Smithfield and Bethel, Isle of 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 273 
 
 Wight county; Hampton and Fox Hill, Elizabeth 
 city county; and Old Point. Yesterday I received 
 a letter from the Rev. Miles Kino;, of Mathews 
 county, in which he stated that he had formed 
 a society there. 
 
 I have several appointments out, commencing at 
 Suffolk to-morrow evening, at all of which I expect 
 to form societies. I have not learned what is doing 
 in other parts of the state. We shall' get on but 
 slowly during the winter. But by the blessing of a 
 good Providence I hope we shall move on rapidly 
 when the spring opens upon us. The prospect 
 exceeds my expectation. Faithful preaching and 
 holy living, with the due enforcement of the moral 
 discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church, which 
 is recognized by our first conventional article, will 
 bear down every thing before us. My method is, 
 to insist on every person examining the matter in 
 dispute, so as to understand it, and then follow the 
 honest convictions of his own mind ; and that, which 
 ever side he may take, he is bound to cultivate kind 
 feelings toward those who differ from him in opinion. 
 I insist upon the possibility and necessity of our 
 living in peace and brotherly love, whilst we differ 
 in opinion. How much of the religion of Christ 
 can dwell in any other bosom than that which en- 
 tertains this holy principle? But alas! our oppos- 
 ing brethren, blinded by passion as it would seem, 
 appear determined to give no quarters. But "let 
 us know our calling better" than to "return railing 
 for railing." Our holy religion imperiously requires 
 
274 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 that we should be loving and kind to all men. 
 Jesus Christ has set us this example, nor are we at 
 liberty to depart from it. If we do, we shall be in 
 danger of eternal fire. For the want of a house, 
 nothing has been done in this place. ]n the spring 
 we expect to commence building one. We have, 
 however, procured a large room, and on Wednes- 
 day, the ISth Feb., we intend to have a meeting 
 and form a society. I hope to be able to return 
 home by that time. 
 
 I think we shall do pretty well here. Since I 
 have been free I have tasted the sweets of liberty; 
 and really it surpasses my expectation. It is a 
 blessing indeed. The fraternal feeling, oh how 
 delightful it is! No lord, no master, save one. 
 All we are brethren. " Let brotherly love continue." 
 Yours in Christ, John French. 
 
 Extract of a letter from the Rev. W. W. Hill, one of 
 the agents for North Carolina, dated Warrenton, 
 Feb. 2d, 1S29. 
 
 Brother Dorsey, — At some future period I 
 expect to give you some concise account of things 
 respecting reform in Carolina. I am now on a tour 
 of some extent, and am pleased with our prospects. 
 In some places our cause is triumphant, though in 
 its infancy. All I think necessary for our speedy 
 triumph throughout the state, is a regular plan of 
 operation and a few efficient itinerant ministers, to 
 act in union with our local materials. Our cause 
 is dear to every patriot, statesman, and, I may add, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 275 
 
 enlightened Christian, who thoroughly understands 
 it. But it must have effective support. 
 
 Dr. Home has been arrested, but has vanquished 
 his assailants. You will soon hear from him 1 
 presume. 
 
 Extract of a letter from the Rev. Eli Henkle, one of 
 the agents for Maryland. 
 
 Dear Brother, — I commenced the duties as- 
 signed me by the late convention, on the Sabbath 
 after I reached home, and organized the first class 
 at Providence meeting house, on the same day. 
 
 The first person who came forward was our old 
 friend, the Rev. Aquila Garretson, once a traveling 
 preacher, but who has been ]ocal for many years past. 
 In a few days after this event, I was informed by 
 the preacher in charge of Baltimore Circuit that 
 the meeting house had been secured, by a proper 
 deed, to the Methodist Episcopal Church, and that 
 he did not know whether the trustees would allow 
 the reformers to preach in it. Our friends in this 
 neighborhood, however, appear to be determined to 
 attend to this matter, without troubling the mem- 
 bers of society. With all the menacing which we 
 have heard from the authorities, we have still con- 
 tinued to use the house withoat interruption. 
 
 The second class in Baltimore Circuit was raised 
 at Sandy Mount meeting house, on the first Sunday 
 in December. The members of the old church in 
 this place had become quite numerous, insomuch 
 that Mr. S. had talked of dividing them into two 
 
276 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 classes. This, however, they saved him the trou- 
 ble of doing, by dividing themselves; and I suppose 
 not altogether to his liking, for his class is as much 
 too small now as it was too large before. This is 
 called " raining the society," although everv one 
 has been left entirely free to decide and act for him- 
 self. It will be remembered that many of the above 
 members were the fruits of the reformers' camp- 
 meeting, held in that neighborhood last October; to 
 which we could not prevail on a single itinerant 
 preacher to come. We next organized in West- 
 minster, in Frederick county ; and here our suc- 
 cess was fully equal to my previous calculations. 
 A good class was formed the first day, and others 
 have joined since. We anticipate no difficulties 
 respecting the meeting house in this place, as it 
 is free; and the citizens are almost unanimously 
 friendly to our cause, except members in the old 
 church, and a few R**** C ******** — distant 
 kindred. 
 
 We also organized in Reisterstown, Baltimore 
 Circuit. And here our numbers surpassed my ex- 
 pectations. Several of the oldest professors in the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church joined the new class; 
 and they also are permitted to worship in a house 
 which belongs to the people of the village, who are 
 generally our fast friends. In consequence of 
 family afflictions, I have not yet been able to ex- 
 plore Great Falls Circuit to any extent. However 
 I have made an effort to organize at two places; 
 the first of which was at Cullison's meeting house, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 277 
 
 where but few gave in their names — others intend 
 to join hereafter. The next place was at Chesnut 
 Ridge meeting-house, built for the Methodist society. 
 The whole of both classes at this place made a 
 transfer of themselves to the Associated Methodist 
 Churches. There are many other places in readi- 
 ness for us, and even anxious to leave the old 
 establishment. I understand the trustees of several 
 meeting houses have had their orders from the 
 itinerants. I do not intend, however, to allow my- 
 self to be frightened by shadows. The six classes * 
 organized in this part of the country consist of 
 about 160 or 170 members — nearly all out of the 
 old church. Our meetings have been profitable. 
 
 Last week I returned from a visit to Harford 
 county, where I organized classes at the following 
 places, viz: the Log meeting-house, Wesleyan 
 church, Waters' meeting-house, Abingdon, Calvary 
 meeting-house, and the Union chapel. The num- 
 bers in these places I cannot precisely state, but 
 judge that the classes formed will average twelve 
 or fifteen members. Many others are ready to 
 unite in different places which I did not visit. At 
 the Wesleyan church (a large new brick house) 
 the whole society united with us. At the Union 
 chapel the same calculation may be made. The 
 leading members have led the way; and, although 
 all have not yet followed them, we see a very fair 
 prospect of their doing so, as the preachers of the 
 circuit have not visited that appointment since the 
 convention in November. 
 24 
 
278 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Our brethren of the new church are expecting 
 and preparing for a preacher or two. immediately 
 after the conference, and will contribute liberally 
 towards their support. At present the new classes 
 are under the care of brothers Richardson and 
 Webster, who have agreed on a time when they 
 intend to visit the upper part of Harford Circuit. 
 
 The first Quarterly Meeting in Harford, for the 
 new church, is to be held on the last Saturday and 
 Sunday in March. The place will be named here- 
 after. At our meetings we usually had comfortable 
 seasons. They were well attended. I intended 
 inserting several interesting anecdotes, but feared 
 I would be too tedious. 
 
 The first church was formed in the city of Phil- 
 adelphia under the conventional articles of asso- 
 ciation, in March, 1829, as the following extract of 
 a letter from the columns of the Mutual Rights and 
 Christian Intelligencer will show: 
 
 Philadelphia, March SO, 1829. 
 Brother Dorsey, — You will please to consider 
 this an official communication. In the beginning 
 of the present month the association of reformers 
 in this city adjourned sine die. A tew days after, a 
 church was formed and the conventional articles 
 adopted, except the fifteenth, which, having no 
 application in this part of the country, was waived. 
 Our well beloved brother Dr. Thomas Dunn is our 
 chosen pastor. Our first meeting for public worship 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 279 
 
 was held on the 22d inst., at which time so evident 
 were the enlightening, suasiveand melting influences 
 of divine grace on both the preacher and congre- 
 gation, that no one could deny the presence of the 
 divine and only Head of the church. 
 
 Classes have been formed, prayer meetings held, 
 and on the 2Sth and 29th inst. a Quarterly Meeting 
 was holden. In all our meetings the Saviour of 
 our Israel has vouchsafed his blessings, and more 
 especially in our love-feast on Sabbath morning, 
 when we had peace and Christian fellowship, and 
 were all of one mind and of one heart. There were 
 about one hundred and fifty present. We have 
 every needed assurance that our duty is to take 
 courage and press forward, praising the Lord con- 
 tinually. The Wesley an Society of Kensington (a 
 district of this city) adopted the conventional arti- 
 cles on the 26th inst. That society consists of more 
 than two hundred members, and has a good meet- 
 ing house. ttt o 
 
 ° W. S. Stockton, ) 
 
 T n > Committee. 
 
 Joseph Uramerj ) 
 
 In the northern and north-western States the 
 work of reform prospered greatly during the year 
 1829. tt Churches and societies were organized, and 
 circuits were formed in many parts of the country, 
 although the clerical itinerants labored hard to stifle 
 inquiry and arrest the efforts of the advocates of 
 mutual rights. In some places some of the best 
 and most efficient of traveling ministers were 
 understood to be on the side of reform, and when 
 
280 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 the conventional articles began to be adopted by 
 the people, and calls were made for ministers, such 
 preachers promptly responded to the Macedonian 
 call, dissolved their connection with the M. E. 
 Church, and enlisted themselves under the banners 
 of the new organization. 
 
 We shall here introduce a letter from the Rev. 
 George Brown, of the Pittsburg Conference, who 
 had long been known as a decided advocate of 
 reform, to the presiding elder of his district. 
 
 Pittsburg, Pa., June 3, 1829. 
 
 My Dear Brother Eddy, — The time has now 
 arrived for me to follow my principles as a reformer, 
 or abandon them. I have taken time and written 
 extensively to the reformers, and particularly to the 
 members of the late convention in Baltimore, and 
 am now satisfied as to the objectionable articles. 
 They and all the rest were well meant, and for the 
 present may be useful; and for my own part I do not 
 entertain a single doubt that the convention of 1S30 
 will construct a system of ecclesiastical govern- 
 ment which will be in all respects perfectly conge- 
 nial with republican principles and feelings. 
 
 My feeble services have been called for in four 
 different directions. The brethren of three out of 
 four desired me to be in readiness against a certain 
 time, but the fourth was a call that would admit of 
 no delay. Being unablo to ascertain where a com- 
 munication would find you on your district, and 
 being much pressed with other business about the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 2S1 
 
 time I left New Lisbon, I have delayed until now 
 to inform you, as my presiding elder, that on last 
 Sabbath my labors in the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church were brought to a final close. I have many 
 valuable friends in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 in the ministry and among the members. I now, 
 as heretofore, testify my affection for the doctrines, 
 class meetings, love-feasts, moral discipline, sacra- 
 ments, and itinerancy of the church. But the 
 government I do most conscientiously disapprove ; 
 and since all hope of change is now cut off; and 
 since the brethren who were expelled, in part on 
 my account, cannot honorably return; and since a 
 new church had to be formed ; I have deemed 
 myself bound by all the principles of Christian 
 honor to go with the reformers. You will not 
 understand me to have one unloving sentiment or 
 feeling about my soul in reference to you. No, my 
 brother ; nor have I any in reference to a single 
 individual this day on earth. I love my God. I 
 love his people of every name. I desire the happi- 
 ness of all the human race. I go with the reformers 
 because I love their principles ; and my prayer to 
 the s;reat and glorious Lord of the whole creation 
 is that they may universally prevail ! 
 
 With great respect, I am, &c. 
 
 Geo. Brown. 
 Rev. Ira Eddy, P. E. O. District. 
 
 The reformers in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, had 
 been soliciting the Rev. Mr. Brown to come to that 
 24* 
 
282 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 city and take charge of tbem as an Associated 
 Methodist Church ; and prior to the date of the 
 letter addressed to the Rev. Mr. Eddy, the presid- 
 ing elder, he had adopted the resolution of yielding 
 to their call, and casting in his lot among them. 
 His letter of response, to the committee that were 
 appointed to correspond with him, seems to breathe 
 such a spirit, and teems with such information, that 
 it cannot fail to interest. We subjoin a copy. 
 
 New Lisbon, May 27, 1829. 
 
 Dear Brethren, — Your second communication 
 has been received, and I hasten to inform you that 
 on next Sabbath I close my labors for ever in the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church. I had supposed my- 
 self already done, and had fixed on this morning to 
 set off for Pittsburg; but by an importunity that I 
 could not resist, on the part of some of the brethren 
 and other friendly citizens, I have been overcome. 
 I love this people ; they have evinced a friendship 
 for me and mine, during my residence among them, 
 that has made me greatly their debtor; and besides, 
 they are nearly all reformers, so far as they under- 
 stand the subject ; and they desire me to state my 
 reasons on Sunday for leaving the old establish- 
 ment. This, through divine help, I design doing, 
 in the close of my second sermon, in as clear and 
 candid a manner as possible. 
 
 There is another consideration of some moment. 
 Mrs. Brown's health is still very feeble ; but, thank 
 God, it improves a little; and against next week J 
 can in all probability leave home with more pro- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 283 
 
 priety than now. I shall be off on Monday next, 
 God willing, and shall probably be with you on 
 Tuesday night. I have just received a letter from 
 brother Shinn, inviting me to Cincinnati to form a 
 circuit round that city. He assures me, on good 
 authority, that a good circuit could be formed in a 
 very little time. I have also received official in- 
 formation from Ohio Circuit, stating that they go at 
 the end of this conference year, and will take no 
 more preachers from the old side. They have 
 asked me to come over and help them. 
 
 I have just received another private communi- 
 cation from circuit, calling for help. 
 
 The " divinely authorized " have forbidden a very 
 respectable local preacher, whom no threats could 
 terrify into silence, the occupancy of some of the 
 pulpits ; and the brethren think this is as proper a 
 time as any to be off. The circuit is large, say one 
 thousand strong, and it is thought a majority of them 
 are reformers. The letter stated that the conven- 
 tional articles, though somewhat objectionable, 
 would be adopted for the present. If we can only 
 get a constitution formed on purely republican 
 principles, under the blessing of our glorious Lord, 
 we shall abundantly succeed with a liberty loving 
 2>enple. I think the day may yet come when we, 
 who are only becoming a people, shall sit under our 
 own vine and fig tree, eating the pleasant fruit 
 of ecclesiastical liberty, none daring to make us 
 afraid. Our opposing brethren, from the bishops 
 down, have done all they could to crush the Mutual 
 
284 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 Rights ; but surely they have failed of success. 
 Much less will they be able to withstand us when 
 our preacners go in person preaching the same gos- 
 pel, carrying with them the same moral rules of 
 holy living, giving the people an itinerant ministry, 
 love-feasts, class-meetings, and distributing our prin- 
 ciples of government in pamphlets as they go. 
 Ours is the glorious cause of ecclesiastical emancipa- 
 tion, and has no enemies in America save on the old 
 side ; and I greatly miss my guess if the very means 
 which they have employed, and are now employing 
 against us and our cause, do not ultimately help in 
 many ways. 
 
 Give my love to all the holy brethren of the like 
 precious faith with ourselves, and tell them that I 
 desire an interest in their prayers. I am a frail 
 child of the dust. I tremble much at the vastness 
 of our undertaking. Our only help is in the strong 
 God of Zion. He inhabits eternity, but his eye is 
 fixed on the truth and him who loves it, however 
 poor he may be. Him I love, and do most ardently 
 long for that perfect liberty from sin which he alone 
 can give ; and I do most cordially believe that we 
 need not remain in ecclesiastical bondage in order 
 to enjoy this "glorious liberty of the sons of God." 
 Very affectionately yours, &c. 
 
 George Brown. 
 
 Mr. W. Stevenson, } 
 " S. Remington, > Committee. 
 " C. Craig, ) 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 2S5 
 
 The subject of reform, during 1829, extended as 
 far north as Boston, and secessions from the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church, and organizations under 
 the conventional articles of association, took place 
 in New York and New England. Revivals of reli- 
 gion attended the labors of the ministry of the newly 
 organized church in many places. The " Mutual 
 Rights and Christian Intelligencer" of this year 
 says, " It affords no small gratification and comfort 
 to receive such assurances of the divine favor and 
 blessing as our infant Zion is realizing in different 
 parts of the country. After a long and fiery trial, 
 hundreds who have endured with patience, and 
 stood firm to their purpose, are beginning to see the 
 fruit of their labor. Surely if heaven's smiles are 
 to be received as evidence that a people is right, 
 this people is right. Would the Lord own and 
 bless the labors of apostates in this gracious manner ? 
 The work is spreading in Maryland, New York, 
 New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylva- 
 nia, and several other places; and the Lord is add- 
 ing to the associated churches daily such as give 
 evidence that they have passed from death unto 
 life, and some who promise great usefulness to the 
 church." 
 
 The labors of the Rev. Alexander McCaine, 
 traveling agent in the south, were of eminent service 
 in the cause of reform. His letters to the " Mutual 
 Rights and Christian Intelligencer" are highly 
 interesting. In his close of a series he sums up in 
 these words : 
 
2S6 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 " And as this is the last of the series, before I 
 close it I will be allowed to sum up in a few words 
 an account of ray labors in the cause of reform. 
 It was nearly nine months since I first left home 
 until my return at Christmas. In that time 1 trav- 
 eled from the mountains to the sea-board in Vir- 
 ginia, crossed North Carolina four times, and was 
 in South Carolina twice. Wherever I preached 
 I had far larger congregations than I used to have 
 when I was an itinerant preacher in the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church. I felt, blessed be God, as much 
 of the comforts of religion in my own soul, and saw 
 as much of the divine presence among the congre- 
 gations, as I generally did in former years. I have 
 received, wherever I went, far more respectful at- 
 tention than I ever received in the old church. I 
 have convened with the high and the low, the rich 
 and the poor ; and have conversed with all ranks 
 in the community, from the governor down to the 
 day laborer; with judges, lawyers, doctors, legisla- 
 tors, ministers, magistrates, merchants, mechanics, 
 farmers, &c. &c, on the subject of reform, and 
 have not, in all my travels, or among all those with 
 whom I have conversed, ever found one man who 
 did not say reformers are right, and that their cause 
 must finally prevail. Amen and amen. 
 
 " Alexander McCaine." 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 287 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Organization of the North Carolina Conference. — Adoption of the 
 Constitution and Discipline. — Persecution of reformers in West- 
 ern Carolina. — Expulsion of Rev. Travis Jones. — Organization 
 of Associated Methodist Churches and rapid spread of reform 
 principles in that part of the state. — Statistical table of the min- 
 isters and laymen expelled for their principles of reform in the 
 United States. — First Virginia Annual Conference. — Pennsyl- 
 vania, Alabama and Georgia Conferences. — Adoption of the 
 conventional articles by a body of Methodist Societies in W. 
 New York and organization of the Genesee Conference. — 
 Veimont and Tennessee Conferences. — General Convention of 
 1830. — Constitution and Discipline adopted. 
 
 The Baltimore convention closed its session on 
 the 22d November, 1S28. The proscribed and 
 expelled reformers in North Carolina had looked 
 to the result of its deliberations with anxious solici- 
 tude; scattered and peeled as they had been, and 
 proscribed by the " divinely authorized" they had 
 hoped that by the labors of the convention a plat- 
 form would be arranged upon which they could 
 rally. Their hopes were not disappointed. 
 
 The expelled and withdrawn ministers who had 
 suffered prosecution for opinion's sake, concern- 
 ing church polity alone, met together in Annual 
 Conference at Whitaker's chapel, Halifax county, 
 on the 19th of December of this year. 
 
 They were met by delegates elected and deputed 
 by the laity to represent them in the deliberations 
 of the conference. 
 
2SS HISTORY OF THE 
 
 They organized by the election of Rev. E. B. 
 Whitaker, president pro tern., and Rev. Miles Nash, 
 Secretary. 
 
 The conference was composed of eight ministers, 
 five licensed preachers and twelve lay delegates. 
 Seven of these eight ministers present had been 
 expelled from the M. E. Church without any charge 
 of immorality being exhibited against them. The 
 other minister, Rev. W. W. Hill, had been tried by 
 a committee on account of his principles as an ad- 
 vocate of mutual rights, and acquitted. 
 
 Every member of this conference had belonged 
 to the Roanoke Union Society except the five 
 licensed preachers. 
 
 The ministers that composed this, the first North 
 Carolina Conference, were Rev. James Hunter, 
 Rev. E. B. Whitaker, Rev. William Bellamy, Rev. 
 Henry Bradford, Rev. Miles Nash, Rev. William 
 Price, Rev. William W. Hill, and Rev. Abriton 
 Jones. 
 
 Owing to the early meeting of this conference 
 after the rise of the Baltimore convention, and the 
 consequent shortness of the notice given, the mem- 
 bers of the Granville Union Society were not able 
 to make the arrangements to attend, or elect their 
 delegates to represent them in that body. 
 
 The "preamble, articles of association and reso- 
 lutions, as adopted by the convention at Baltimore," 
 were taken up and considered by this conference, 
 and unanimously adopted. 
 
 The conference made arrangements to bring into 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 2S9 
 
 the most effective action the labors of its ministers. 
 Three circuits were formed, and ministers assigned 
 to the superintendency of the same. The Rev. 
 W. W. Hill was appointed an agent to travel 
 throughout the state. 
 
 The friends of reform had now a star of hope to 
 illumine their path. The articles of association 
 were embraced by them as a bond of union, and 
 churches and societies of much strength, respecta- 
 bility and influence, were formed in the eastern 
 part of Carolina, despite the efforts of the votaries 
 of clerical supremacy. 
 
 The second session of the North Carolina Confer- 
 ence was held at Sampson's meeting house, on the 
 2d of April, 1S29. At the opening of this session, 
 several ministers gave in their names and were 
 received as members of the body who had not had 
 an opportunity of attending the first session. Ar- 
 rangements were made at this conference for a 
 more extended plan of operations. A fourth circuit 
 was added to the previous number. 
 
 But the hand of persecution for opinion's sake 
 had not yet been stayed. A short time prior to this 
 period the Rev. James Hunt, who had previously 
 been arraigned for belonging to the Granville Union 
 Society, was again summoned to trial, and expelled 
 from the Methodist Episcopal Church upon the 
 charge that he had invited one of the ministers who 
 was laboring in the cause of reform, to preach at 
 one of his appointments, and that invitation had 
 been accepted. 
 — - 55.^ 
 
290 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 In the western part of Carolina the Rev. Mr. 
 Merriwether, superintendent of the Guilford Cir- 
 cuit, began to distinguish himself by his zeal in 
 executing the reformers upon the Guilford Circuit. 
 In the month of April of this year, 1829, after 
 having preached at Moriah in Guilford county, the 
 congregation beins; dismissed, he took one of the 
 brethren, Col. William Gilbreath, aside, and upon 
 inquiring of the brother, and learning that he was 
 a patron and reader of the "Mutual Rights and 
 Christian Intelligencer," this clerical lord over 
 God's heritage in a most dictatorial manner told 
 brother Gilbreath that he " must neither patronize 
 nor read the ' Mutual Rights.' " To which the 
 brother responded, " What I buy and pay for is my 
 own, and I will read as I please" But the reverend 
 gentleman, feeling strong no doubt in his "little 
 brief authority" brought his arguments to a close 
 by the adoption of language better suited to the 
 latitude of Rome than it was to Carolina, and in a 
 most consequential manner told brother Gilbreath, 
 "I will give you four weeks to consider about quilting 
 the '"Mutual Rights,'' and if by that time you do not 
 discontinue it, I will have you excelled from the church" 
 The reply to this proffered alternative is character- 
 istic of the honest simplicity and native indepen- 
 dence of the man ; " You need not give me five minutes, 
 for I will read, and also circulate it, if any body else 
 wants to read the work." 
 
 Brother Gilbreath, feeling alarmed for the rights 
 of himself and brethren as Christians, gave them 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 291 
 
 due notice of the menacing attitude their pastor 
 had assumed towards himself and them, and a meet- 
 ing of the church was called in order to consult 
 upon the proper course to be pursued. The meet- 
 ing took place on the 7th of May, just two weeks 
 after brother Gilbreath had been notified to discon- 
 tinue the "Mutual Rights." The meeting was or- 
 ganized by calling the Rev. John Coe to the chair, 
 and the appointment of Joseph Gilbreath secretary. 
 The president opened the meeting by an address 
 to the throne of grace. 
 
 On motion, the following brethren, Jesse Ives, 
 William Heath, John Hinkman, James Hendrix 
 and William Gilbreath, were appointed a com- 
 mittee, who submitted the following preamble, and 
 resolutions, which were read, examined and adopted 
 by the meeting. 
 
 "Whereas it is the undoubted right of all free- 
 men peaceably to assemble and freely to declare 
 their sentiments on the conduct of their ecclesiasti- 
 cal as well as civil rulers; — and whereas, when 
 the General Conference were petitioned to give up 
 the dangerous power which they had assumed, they 
 refused to do it, and professed that they were the 
 divinely instituted authority to make, alter and en- 
 force the laws of the church, and have denied us 
 the liberty of the press and the freedom of speech ; 
 and the preacher in charge of this circuit having ex- 
 pressed a determination to prefer charges against 
 all the members who circulate the ' Mutual Rights 
 and Christian Intelligencer,' or propagate the prin- 
 
292 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 ciples of reform therein supported, which this meet- 
 ing believe to be reasons sufficient to justify the 
 adoption of the following resolutions : Therefore, 
 
 " Resolved, 1st. That this meeting highly disap- 
 prove of the government of the M. E. Church, so 
 far as it respects the unlimited control of the itiner- 
 ant preachers over the church; believing it to be 
 contrary to the rules laid down by our Saviour in 
 the New Testament, and practiced upon by his 
 apostles after his ascension to glory, and contrary 
 to our federal and state constitutions. 
 
 "Resolved, 2. That we consider it a duty which 
 we owe to ourselves and our posterity, to withdraw 
 from the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 " Resolved, 3. Thafthe articles of association of 
 the Associated Methodist Churches be adopted, 
 and we do hereby form ourselves into a society 
 under their regulations. 
 
 "Resolved, 4. That this meeting receive the Rev. 
 John Coe, local elder, and Isaac Coe, licensed 
 preacher, into our church, in the same standing 
 which they had in the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 as ministers, with the same offices and privileges." 
 
 This church thus organized, consisted of thirty- 
 four members: and when the Rev. Mr. Merriwether 
 returned at the end of his '■'■four weeks," he found 
 that but two of all his flock at Moriah, were left in 
 the pales of the M. E. Church. The Rev. John 
 Coe accepted the invitation and charge of the 
 church, and prosperity attended the labors of this 
 faithful minister of Christ. This was the first As- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 293 
 
 sociated Methodist Church in Western Carolina, 
 and the influence which it has exerted, and the 
 beneficial results produced thereby in furtherance 
 of the principles of Methodist Protestantism, have 
 been vast indeed. 
 
 But the Rev. Mr. Merriwether was not willing to 
 stop here. Having ascertained that the Rev. Travis 
 Jones, an aged local minister within his charge, 
 was a patron and reader of the " Mutual Rights and 
 Christian Intelligencer," he proceeded to summon 
 him to trial in due form, alleging no charges of im- 
 morality against him — no allegations, save those of 
 patronizing and reading that religious periodical. 
 The committee sat, Mr. Merriwether presided, and 
 Rev. Travis Jones, orthodox in doctrine, unblem- 
 ished in reputation, was expelled from the M. E. 
 Church. 
 
 This high-handed measure produced deep dis- 
 satisfaction in the church at Bethel, in the vicinity 
 of Rev. Mr. Jones ; this church was composed of a 
 numerous society, highly respectable for its piety, 
 numbers and influence; but seeing brother Jones 
 stricken down so unjustly by the hand of arbitrary 
 power, from his ministerial functions, without the 
 semblance of error" on his part, this whole church 
 (with one or two exceptions) withdrew in a body 
 and united with the reformers. Indeed Mr. Merri- 
 wether seems to have been quite an adept in the 
 science of making reformers in little time. But the 
 zeal for proscribing brethren for opinion's sake car- 
 ried the Rev. Mr. Merriwether farther still, and he 
 25* 
 
294 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 visited a neighboring circuit, and at a two days' 
 meeting on that circuit undertook to expose, as he 
 affected to believe, the errors and mischievous ten- 
 dency of the conduct and the course pursued by 
 the " radicals" as he was pleased to call them. 
 His object appeared to be to incite a spirit of hos- 
 tility against the reformers generally, and those 
 composing the church at Moriah particularly. A 
 camp-meeting soon came on in this part of the 
 country, and some official brethren, who had re- 
 cently attended a Quarterly Meeting Conference 
 among the reformers at Moriah, were in attendence, 
 who soon understood that this act of attending a 
 meeting among their Christian friends had rendered 
 them obnoxious in the sight of their itinerant rulers. 
 Among the itinerants at this meeting, that noted 
 leader in proscriptive rudeness, the Rev. Benjamin 
 Edge, who had been so severely scathed by the 
 defence of Rev. W. W. Hill, in August, 1825, made 
 his appearance. His feelings towards the reformers 
 had undergone no change for the better. 
 
 As Quarterly Conference was to be held in con- 
 nection with the camp- meeting, a brother, Alexan- 
 der Robbins, came up recommended for license to 
 preach, but as he had been to a meeting among the 
 reformers, he was looked upon as one of the "birds 
 hi strange feathers." One of the preachers under- 
 standing that bro. Robbins was desirous to discon- 
 tinue the " Christian Advocate " and to take the 
 "Mutual Rights and Christian Intelligencer," in 
 order to hear both sides of the question, endeav- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 295 
 
 ored to dissuade him from such a step; and pro- 
 posed to him to patronize the paper called the 
 " Itinerant" promising at the same time that he 
 should have it gratis, provided he did not patronize 
 the "Mutual Rights." At this stage of the contro- 
 versy, the Rev. B. Edge addressing himself to Mr. 
 Robbins remarked, "I have said that j r ou were on 
 the way to join the reformers, as I have heard that 
 you have been to a meeting among the 'Rads? " 
 To which Mr. Robbins replied, " I have, but what 
 of that?" 
 
 Benjamin Edge. We will cut down every man 
 that will associate with that people. 
 
 A. Robbins. But have you a right to cut them 
 down if their conduct is upright and their characters 
 stand fair? 
 
 B. Edge. Yes, we have; for who can walk 
 among the pots without getting smutted ? These 
 schismatics are a bad people. 
 
 A. Robbins. If you intend to cut down and de- 
 stroy the influence of every man for no other cause 
 than visiting his religious friends, I will belong to 
 no such a party; and I do therefore declare that I 
 am no longer a member of the M. E. Church. 
 
 Of the conduct of the Rev. Mr. Edge we will 
 leave the reader to form his own opinion. We 
 regret, deeply regret, on account of the ministerial 
 office, that it is so deficient of the spirit and sanc- 
 tity of religion. Mr. Robbins made no effort at 
 this meeting to obtain preacher's license, but having 
 a consultation with Rev. John Wilburn and Rev^ 
 
296 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Alson Gray, local preachers, and relating to them 
 the declarations set forth by Mr. Edge, they also 
 resolved to withdraw from the M. E. Church. 
 They accordingly designated the following Saturday 
 as the time for meeting, to organize themselves into 
 an Associated Methodist Church under the conven- 
 tional articles. The meeting was held and a church 
 of sixteen members was formed, called Liberty, 
 including four local preachers. This church soon 
 rapidly increased in membership, and prosperity 
 has continued to mark her progress up to the pre- 
 sent period. To these three churches of which we 
 have spoken, Moriah, Bethel and Liberty, may be 
 attributed the rise and formation of six circuits in 
 Western Carolina, numbering upwards of two 
 thousand members. 
 
 Through the indefatigable labors of Rev. Alson 
 Gray, the principles of mutual rights were speedily 
 disseminated in this part of Carolina, and many 
 churches organized. An account of one of the 
 churches organized by that minister, is worthy of a 
 place in this history. 
 
 At Sandy Ridge, Guilford county, he organized 
 a class of three ladies — Mrs. Lindsay and Mrs. Anna 
 and Harriet Chipman. The place of worship at 
 that time was in a small dilapidated school house. 
 For twelve months did this little band of pious 
 females stand alone. Gloomy indeed appeared the 
 prospect. But they fainted not nor despised the 
 day of small things. At length a revival of religion 
 broke out; their numbers were increased and the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 297 
 
 star of pjpsperity began to shine upon their path. 
 In 1844 this society numbered upwards of one 
 hundred and seventy members, and has since had 
 a respectable increase. 
 
 In summing up an account of the excommunica- 
 tions which took place in Carolina, it appears that 
 the following ministers of the gospel were expelled 
 from the M. E. Church on account of their opinions 
 with regard to the polity of the church, viz: Revs. 
 James Hunter, Henry Bradford, William Bellamy, 
 E. B. Whitaker, William Price, Miles Nash, Albrit- 
 on Jones, C. Drake, J. Swift, S. Swift, H. Tar- 
 kington, R. Davison, James Hunt, Travis Jones. 
 
 Among the laity it appears that not more than 
 eight suffered excommunication on account of their 
 reform principles. The proscription of all these 
 ministers and laymen appears to have met the ap- 
 probation and concurrence of the Quarterly and 
 Annual Conferences having cognizance of the 
 actions of the principal administrators of discipline. 
 
 In the State of Maryland, as we gather from the 
 documents and publications extant, thirteen minis- 
 ters and twenty-two laymen were expelled for the 
 same causes as the above. * 
 
 In Cincinnati four ministers or preachers and ten 
 laymen. 
 
 In Lynchburg two ministers and nine laymen, 
 and in Northumberland, Va., one minister and eight 
 laymen. 
 
 *See Mutual Rights, vol. ili, p. 129. 
 
298 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 In Tennessee fifteen official members of the 
 church were publicly read out, a number of which 
 were ministers and preachers. 
 
 The case of the expulsions in the last named 
 state was carried up to the Annual Conference, 
 and that body not only reversed the decision had 
 against these reformers in the tribunals below, but 
 passed resolutions censuring the conduct of the pre- 
 siding elder, the Rev. James Gwynn, through 
 whose agency and action they had been expelled. 
 
 The action of the Tennessee Annual Conference 
 in this case materially differs from that of the Vir- 
 ginia and Baltimore Conferences. Appeals of a 
 similar nature, involving the same principles and 
 rights, were carried up to them, but in both instances 
 the administrations of the men in power were 
 approved. 
 
 The following table affords something like a sta- 
 tistical account of the expelled ministers and mem- 
 bers that were excluded from the M. E. Church 
 during the agitation of the subject of reform. 
 
 In Maryland, of the ministry, . 
 
 . . 13 — of the laity, . . 
 
 22 
 
 " N. Carolina, " . . 
 
 . . 14—" " 
 
 it 
 
 . 8 
 
 " Cincinnati, " . . 
 
 . . 4—" « 
 
 tc 
 
 10 
 
 " Lynchburg, Va., " . . 
 
 . . 2—" " 
 
 te 
 
 9 
 
 "Northumberland, Va.," . . 
 
 . . 1—" " 
 
 it 
 
 . 8 
 
 " Tennessee, " . . 
 
 . . 5—" " 
 
 ec 
 
 10 
 
 Total ministers 39 
 
 total laity 
 
 67 
 
 Sum total 106. 
 
 If we take into the account the five churches 
 struck off from the Roanoke Circuit in Carolina, 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 299 
 
 containing nearly one hundred members in the 
 aggregate, the number is greatly increased. 
 
 The first Virginia Annual Conference was organ- 
 ized under the conventional articles of association 
 at Lynchburg, June 1st, 1S29. The conference 
 was composed of the following ministers, viz : Rev. 
 A. McCaine, Rev. J. B. Tilden, Rev. G. Reed, 
 Rev. Miles King, Rev. B. G. Burgess, Rev. Wm. 
 Pinnell, Rev. Benedict Burgess, Sr., Rev. Richard 
 Latimore, Rev. W. H. Comann, Rev. Dr. J. French, 
 and Rev. John Percival.* The Rev. Alexander 
 McCaine was elected president. The district was 
 laid off' into eight circuits, and the ministers were 
 appointed to their respective charges or fields of 
 labor. 
 
 October the 8th of this year an Annual Confer- 
 ence of Associated Methodist Churches was organ- 
 ized at Philadelphia, " composed of ministers, 
 preachers, and lay delegates from Pennsylvania, 
 Delaware, New Jersey, and western section of the 
 State of New York. Eighteen ordained ministers 
 and fifteen licensed preachers and lay brethren 
 composed the conference. The Rev. John Smith, 
 of Delaware, an old and highly respected minister, 
 was elected president." t This conference laid off 
 its fields of labor into fifteen different charges. 
 
 On the 2d of April the Maryland Conference of 
 Associated Methodists met in the city of Baltimore. 
 
 *The names of the lay delegates are not recorded in this work, 
 f See " Mutual Rights and Christian Intelligencer " for October 
 20th, 1829. 
 
300 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Twenty ordained ministers and twenty-six lay dele- 
 gates were in attendance. During the session six 
 deacons were ordained to the office of elder, and 
 also six licentiates were ordained to deacon's orders. 
 The Rev. Nicholas Snethen was elected president. 
 At the ensuing session this conference made a 
 return of about 2,000 members. 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF THE ALABAMA CONFERENCE. 
 
 Extract of a letter from Rev. Peyton Bibb, pub- 
 lished in the " Mutual Rights and. Christian Intelli- 
 gencer," dated Alabama, May 15th, 1829. 
 
 "Our Annual Conference for South Alabama met 
 on the 1st instant. It was attended by sixteen 
 preachers, who joined the reform churches under 
 the articles of association ; and there were two 
 others whose ideas of reform extended further than 
 the articles appear to go. They did not join, but 
 are willing to assist us with their labors. There 
 were four others who sent in their names as re- 
 formers. The first business was to call a meeting 
 of the Union Society and read the articles of asso- 
 ciation, which were adopted, and the society dis- 
 solved. The conference then convened, and after 
 appointing the Rev. Britton Copel their president, 
 proceeded to lay off the work among the preachers. 
 They appointed another conference to be held in 
 the latter part of the year. Peace and love crowned 
 our meeting." 
 
 This conference, at its second session, held Sep- 
 tember 16th, 1830, reported 881 members. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 301 
 
 The first Annual Conference of the Associated 
 Methodist Churches, for the State of Georgia, was 
 held in Newton county, on the 22d of July, 1S30. 
 The conference was organized by the election of 
 Rev. Eppes Tucker, president, and Harrison Jones, 
 secretary. The following ministers were regarded 
 as members of this conference: — Revs. Eppes 
 Tucker, Aaron G. Brewer, Jesse Morris, R. W. W, 
 Wynne, Jas. Lowery, R. P. Ward, Ethel Tucker, 
 Robert Walker, Chas. Williamson, Harrison Jones, 
 John A. Russell, Robert McCorkle, Thomas Gard- 
 ner, Henry Saxon, B. Swearingen, James Hodge, 
 Abraham Lucas, William Pentecost, J. R. Swain, 
 C. P. Witherspoon. 
 
 - Twelve lay delegates were in attendance as 
 members of this conference, representing the mem- 
 bership. The conference laid off the district into 
 eleven circuits or fields of labor and one mission. 
 The Rev. A. G. Brewer was appointed conference 
 missionary. 
 
 An account of the earlier proceedings of the 
 friends of mutual rights in Georgia, though some- 
 what out of order as to rotation of dates, will not be 
 uninteresting to the reader. The following, from 
 the "Mutual Rights and Christian Intelligencer," is 
 from the pen of the Rev. A. G. Brewer: 
 
 " The first organization of reformers in this State 
 
 took place in 1S27, under the Discipline of the 
 
 Methodist Society. The number in the societies 
 
 was about seventy. Their number became a little 
 
 26 
 
302 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 impaired by reason of the difficulties they had to 
 encounter, both by persecution and the want of suf- 
 ficient ministerial help ; but. they, nevertheless, re- 
 tained upwards of sixty members. Early in the 
 year 1829 they adopted the ' Conventional Articles 
 of the Associated Methodist Churches,' and have 
 had some little increase since. But the spirit 
 of reform was not confined to this despised few; 
 many in the State, in different counties, were ex- 
 amining the principles and vindicating the rights 
 of the local ministers and lay members to a seat in 
 the legislative department of the church of God. 
 And within nine months last past they have organ- 
 ized ten or twelve churches under the conventional 
 articles, and are rapidly increasing. They now 
 number about three hundred in this State. There 
 are at least sixteen preachers, and the number is 
 increasing. The excitement spreads just in pro- 
 portion to the spread of information on the subject 
 of the pending controversy between us and the 
 ' old side church.' For so soon as the people are 
 made acquainted with the just claims of the re- 
 formers, and the treatment they have received from 
 the ministers of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
 (the ' divinely authorized expounders,' as they are 
 pleased to call themselves,) they are our decided 
 friends, and concede the rights we claim. 
 
 " I presume the work will spread much more 
 rapidly after our conference and camp-meeting than 
 it has yet done, as the conference will undoubtedly 
 be able to give a greater extent of privileges to the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 303 
 
 churches, by enlarging the field of labor of the 
 preachers. In fine, our prospects are good, and 
 nothing can prevent our success but a want of 
 faithfulness to God. May the Fountain of good- 
 ness help us in this struggle for an ecclesiastical 
 independence. 
 
 " Truly and sincerely yours, in Christian liberty, 
 
 "Aaron G. Brewer. 
 
 " Georgia, April 16th, 1830." 
 
 Early in the year 1830 a body of Methodists who 
 had been organized as a distinct ecclesiastical body 
 in western New York, and had formed an Annual 
 Conference embracing about twehly-rlve ministers 
 and preachers, and between four and five hundred 
 members, adopted the conventional articles of the 
 Associated Methodist Churches, and fell into line 
 with the reformers. The appellation by which this 
 religious fraternity had heretofore been known was 
 the Methodist Society. An account of this transac- 
 tion is given in the "Mutual Rights and Christian 
 Intelligencer" in the following words, by the secre- 
 tdivy of the first Annual Conference, the Rev. O. 
 Miller : 
 
 " The Rochester Annual Conference of the Meth- 
 odist Society held its session in Ontario, Wayne- 
 county, commencing on the 13th inst, (February,) 
 and having closed the ordinary business, the con- 
 ference resolved itself into committee of the whole 
 on the following question : 
 
 " 'Shall we adopt the conventional articles of the 
 Associated Methodist Churches ?' 
 
304 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 " After considerable discussion and mature de- 
 liberation — although there were some of the articles 
 which to us were somewhat objectionable, yet from 
 our knowledge of the sentiments of our reforming 
 brethren, as stated and ably defended in the ' Mu- 
 tual Rights,' being convinced that their sentiments 
 on ecclesiastical government were in unison with 
 ours, and possessing the fullest confidence in their 
 intelligence, piety, experience and talents, and pre- 
 suming that the convention of 1S30 will possess 
 sufficient wisdom to correct any improprieties of the 
 present articles — the conference adopted all the 
 articles so far as they are not opposed to the Con- 
 stitution of the Methodist Society, and resolved 
 itself into a conference, under the title of the Gen- 
 esee Conference of the Associated Methodist 
 Churches ; and proceeded to elect five delegates 
 to attend the convention in Baltimore, in November 
 next." 
 
 The conference elected the Rev. J. Covel presi- 
 dent, and laid off its district into seventeen fields 
 of labor or circuits. 
 
 The first Annual Conference for the State of 
 Vermont met, and was organized under the con- 
 ventional articles of association, at Shelburn, on 
 the 19th of February, 1S30. The Rev. Luther 
 Chamberlain was elected president, and C. Walker 
 secretary. This conference was composed of five 
 ministers and five lay delegates. The ministers 
 were Rev. Luther Chamberlain, Rev. Nathaniel 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 305 
 
 Gage, Rev. Chandler Walker, Rev. David Ferris, 
 Rev. Thomas A. Carpenter. 
 
 The respective Annual Conferences which were 
 organized up to the latter part of 1830 elected their 
 delegates to represent them in the general conven- 
 tion which was to meet in Baltimore, on the 2d of 
 November, in this year. 
 
 The first conference for the State of Tennessee 
 was held in Bedford county, October, 1829. The 
 writer has been unable to obtain a copy of its trans- 
 actions, consequently he is unable to say any thing 
 more with regard to its organization. 
 
 GENERAL CONVENTION. 
 
 On the 2d of November, 1830, the general con- 
 vention met in the city of Baltimore. This body 
 was composed of eighty-three ministerial and lay 
 delegates, and was organized by the election of 
 Francis Waters, D. D., president, and Rev. Wm. 
 C. Lipscomb secretary. The committee which had 
 been appointed at the convention of 182S to draft a 
 Constitution and Discipline, made their report by 
 reading the "draft of aConstitution and Discipline."* 
 After minutely and carefully investigating the drafts 
 presented, and making some small alterations, the 
 present most excellent Constitution and Discipline, 
 as it is found in the edition of 1830, were adopted. 
 
 The convention adopted the following preamble 
 and elementary principles by which the Constitution 
 stands prefaced : 
 
 * See Williams's History of the M. P. Church, page 301. 
 26* 
 
306 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 We, the representatives of the Associated Meth- 
 odist Churches, in general convention assembled, 
 acknowledging the Lord Jesus Christ as the only 
 Head of the church, and the word of God as the 
 sufficient rule of faith and practice in all things per- 
 taining to godliness ; and being fully persuaded 
 that the representative form of church government 
 is the most scriptural, best suited to our condition, 
 and most congenial to our views and feelings as 
 fellow citizens with the saints, and of the house- 
 hold of God : and whereas a written Constitution, 
 establishing the form of government, and securing 
 to the ministers and members of the church their 
 rights and privileges, is the best safeguard of Chris- 
 tian liberty ; we, therefore, trusting in the protection 
 of Almighty God, and acting in the name and by 
 the authority of our constituents, do ordain and 
 establish and agree to be governed by the following 
 elementary principles and Constitution : 
 
 1. A Christian church is a society of believers in 
 Jesus Christ, and is of divine institution. 
 
 2. Christ is the only Head of the church ; and the 
 word of God the only rule of faith and conduct. 
 
 3. No person who loves the Lord Jesus Christ 
 and obeys the gospel of God our Saviour ought to 
 be deprived of church membership. 
 
 4. Every man has an inalienable right to private 
 judgment in matters of religion, and an equal right 
 to express his opinion in any way which will not 
 violate the laws of God or the rights of his fellow 
 men. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 307 
 
 5. Church trials should be conducted on gospel 
 principles only; and no minister or member should 
 be excommunicated except for immoralit}", the 
 propagation of unchristian doctrines, or for the 
 neglect of duties enjoined by the word of God. 
 
 6. The pastoral or ministerial office and duties 
 are of divine appointment, and all elders in the 
 church of God are equal ; but ministers are for- 
 bidden to be lords over God's heritage, or to have 
 dominion over the faith of the saints. 
 
 7. The church has a right to form and enforce 
 such rules and regulations only as are in accord 
 ance with the holy Scriptures, and may be neces- 
 sary or have a tendency to carry into effect the 
 great system of practical Christianity. 
 
 8. Whatever power may be necessary to the 
 formation of rules and regulations is inherent in the 
 ministers and members of the church ; but so much 
 of that power may be delegated, from time to time, 
 upon a plan of representation, as they may judge 
 necessary and proper. 
 
 9. It is the duty of all ministers and members 
 of the church to maintain godliness and to oppose 
 all moral evil. 
 
 10. It is obligatory on ministers of the gospel to 
 be faithful in the discharge of their pastoral and 
 ministerial duties ; and it is also obligatory on the 
 members to esteem ministers highly for their work's 
 sake, and to render them a righteous compensation 
 for their labors. 
 
30S HISTORY OF THE 
 
 II. The church ought to secure to all her official 
 bodies the necessary authority tor the purposes of 
 good government; but she has no right to create 
 any distinct or independent sovereignties. 
 
 These elementary principles embrace what the 
 reformers, whilst within the pales of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, had petitioned and contended 
 for, and for which they had suffered persecution, 
 proscription and expulsion ; and the Constitution 
 was carefully drawn so as not to conflict with those 
 principles. 
 
 It will be unnecessary to embody the Constitu- 
 tion in the plan of this work, inasmuch as that in- 
 strument has been so generally read and examined 
 by all who have perused the Discipline of the Meth- 
 odist Protestant Church. In the first article of the 
 Constitution the title of the church is given in these 
 words : " This association shall be denominated 
 The Methodist Protestant Church, comprising 
 the Associated Methodist Churches." 
 
 The members of this communion, whilst within 
 the pales of the Methodist Episcopal Church, had 
 by their writings, their essays, their memorials, their 
 remonstrances, and their acts, protested against the 
 governmental policy of that church, but never 
 against her doctrines ; and in adopting a name by 
 which the church was to be known among her 
 sister churches, the convention chose the above title 
 as expressive of the principles of her ecclesiastical 
 polity. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 309 
 
 The Constitution of the Methodist Protestant 
 Church is justly entitled to the admiration of every 
 lover of mutual rights. It secures to the ministry 
 and membership all that is scripturally and legiti- 
 mately their right. It serves as a barrier to pre- 
 vent the one from encroaching upon the preroga- 
 tives of the other, and is a beautiful exempliBcation 
 of church polity for which the reformers had been 
 contending, and for which they had suffered so 
 much contumely and reproach. One of the articles 
 of the Constitution, which makes provision for 
 altering the same, may not perhaps be improperly 
 inserted here, inasmuch as one item has been 
 amended or altered since its adoption. 
 
 " Art. 16. — Provisions for altering the Constitution. 
 1. The General Conference shall have power to 
 amend any part of this constitution except the 
 second, tenth and fourteenth articles, by making 
 alterations or additions, as maybe recommended in 
 writing, by two-thirds of the whole number of the 
 Annual Conferences next preceding the sitting of 
 the General Conference. 
 
 "2. The second, tenth and fourteenth articles of 
 this constitution shall be unalterable, except by a 
 general convention called for the special purpose 
 by two-thirds of the whole number of the Annual 
 Conferences, next preceding the General Confer- 
 ence, which convention, and all other conventions 
 of this church, shall be constituted and elected in 
 the same manner and ratio as prescribed for the 
 General Conference. When a General Conference 
 
310 HISTORy OF THE 
 
 is called by the Annual Conference, it shall super- 
 sede the assembling of the General Conference for 
 that period ; and shall have power to discharge all 
 the duties of that body, in addition to the particu- 
 lar object for which the convention shall have been 
 assembled." 
 
 It will be observed that this article makes provis- 
 ion for altering the constitution, and in conformity 
 thereto the first section of the eighth article was 
 altered at the General Conference of 1838. That 
 article required the General Conference to be held 
 once in seven years, but it was soon ascertained 
 that the interval between the meetings of the Gen- 
 eral Conference would be too long, and at a called 
 session of the General Conference in 1838, the 
 period of meeting was altered lo every fourth year 
 thereafter. 
 
 The convention likewise passed the following 
 resolution : 
 
 " Whereas it is declared b} r this convention that, 
 whatever power may be necessary to the formation 
 of rules and regulations, is inherent in the minis- 
 ters and members of the church ; and that so much 
 of that power may be delegated from time to time, 
 upon a plan of representation, as they may judge 
 proper: therefore, 
 
 "Resolved, That all power not delegated to the 
 respective official bodies of the Methodist Protestant 
 Church by this convention, are retained to said 
 ministers and members." 
 
 The preceding resolution was passed about the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 311 
 
 close of the session, and exhibits in a most striking 
 point of view the due regard which the convention 
 had for the rights of their constituents. Every 
 article they adopted, and every resolution they 
 passed, was worthy the wisdom and integrity of 
 that body. They had been delegated with authority 
 by their Christian brethren to form a constitution, 
 not for the convenience of a "privileged few ," but 
 for their Christian brethren of the entire church, 
 both of the ministry and laity — American Chris- 
 tians, who justly appreciated their rights, both civil 
 and religious. This convention therefore had the 
 enviable satisfaction of presenting to the church, as 
 the result of their labors, a constitution which amply 
 met the wishes of their constituents, by securing the 
 interests of all the parties concerned. 
 
 The hymn book published by John J. Harrod, 
 and known by the title of " Associated Methodist 
 Hymns," was adopted by the convention to be used 
 in the churches until the ensuing General Confer- 
 ence. Up to this period the periodical devoted to 
 the interests of the reformers or Associated Meth- 
 odists, and first called the "Mutual Rights," and 
 afterwards the " Mutual Rights and Christian In- 
 telligencer," had been published upon the respon- 
 sibility of the Baltimore Union Society. This paper 
 was transferred by the Union Society to the conven- 
 tion, to be conducted under rules and regulations 
 prescribed by its authority. Its name was now 
 altered from that of " Mutual Rights and Christian 
 Intelligencer," to "Mutual Rights and Methodist 
 Protestant." 
 
312 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The convention also appointed a book committee, 
 consisting of five persons, whose duty it was "to 
 select, from time to time, such books, tracts, &c, 
 for publication as a majority of them might deem 
 proper." A book agent was appointed to publish 
 such books, tracts, &c, as might be agreed on by 
 the book committee and himself; all of which were 
 required to be sold to the conferences, preachers 
 and members at wholesale prices. The agent was 
 required to make a discount of ten per cent, from 
 the wholesale prices on all money paid to him by 
 the conferences, preachers and members, which 
 ten per cent, was to be paid over to the book com- 
 mittee, to be held by them as a book fund for the 
 church. A resolution was also adopted, that the 
 several Annual Conferences be most earnestly re- 
 quested to adopt such measures as in-their wisdom 
 they may deem most proper for the purpose of 
 creating additional funds, to aid in the establish- 
 ment of a book concern by the ensuing General 
 Conference.* 
 
 The conferences which were represented in, and 
 recognized by the convention, were the Vermont, 
 the Boston, the New York and Lower Canada, the 
 Genesee, the Pennsylvania, the Maryland, the 
 Virginia, the North Carolina, the Tennessee, the 
 Georgia, and the Ohio; amounting in number to 
 thirteen. 
 
 From the rise of the convention until the meet- 
 
 * See first edition of the Discipline M. P. Church. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 313 
 
 ing of the General Conference in 1834, the Method- 
 ist Protestant Church continued steadily to increase 
 in numbers ; although her downfall or dissolution 
 was confidently predicted by those who prayed not 
 for her prosperity. Some of those foretellers of 
 events limited her existence to three years ; others 
 to seven; and some few allotted her ten; but it is 
 believed that none of these prophets had a perfect 
 knowledge of the things whereof they spake, al- 
 though they spake as they were moved. 
 
 Julius Caesar once made the remark, that "it is 
 very natural for a man to believe that which he 
 wishes to take place." Upon this principle, there- 
 fore, we may account for the manner in which 
 many of the prophecies in regard to the Methodist 
 Protestant Church were predicted. After the 
 organization of the M. P. Church, it was very 
 common for the ministry and membership of that 
 communion to be represented by some who were 
 to be found in the pales of the old church, as 
 "Backsliders," Expelled persons," "Radicals," 
 "Restless Spirits;" the community in many places 
 were cautioned against them as persons altogether 
 unworthy of Christian regard. But wherever the 
 causes and principles which led to the formation of 
 the M. P. Church were understood amono; other reli- 
 gious denominations, she was respected and re- 
 garded as a' branch of the church of Christ; and 
 probably among all the churches throughout the 
 United States, none has manifested a more cour- 
 teous, liberal and Christianlike spirit towards this 
 27 
 
314 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 young daughter of Zion, than the Presbyterian 
 Church. 
 
 The kindness and courtesy manifested by the 
 Presbyterian brethren towards the ministry of the 
 M. P. Church, have placed the latter under a last- 
 ing debt of gratitude, as well as elevated them- 
 selves thereby, in the respect and esteem of the 
 latter. Perhaps this was the cause that induced 
 the Rev. Cornelius Springer of Ohio, in a speech 
 upon the floor of our last General Conference, to 
 call the " Presbyterian the most respectable Church in 
 the United States." Some member of the body ob- 
 jected to the phraseology of the speaker, as it 
 seemed to place that church too pre-eminent over 
 the other sister churches — the speaker then, with 
 that characteristic pleasantness for which he is dis- 
 tinguished, transposed the sentiment by changing 
 it into this form, "the Presbyterian church, which is 
 among the most respectable in the United States." 
 
 They are our friends who cleave to us in the 
 day of adversity, and it is but proper and right 
 that we should love and appreciate those friends; 
 and that we as a church have not been deficient in 
 this respect, we think the following anecdote will 
 show : A gentleman of the M. E. Church, address- 
 ing himself to a lady who was a member of the 
 Methodist Protestant Church, remarked, "I under- 
 stand, Miss , that the reformers are very fond of 
 
 other denominations." To which she very promptly 
 replied, " 1 am happy to inform you, sir, that other 
 denominations are very fond of them." 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 315 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 General Conference of 1834. — General Conference of 1838. — Ex- 
 citement in that body upon the subject of Slavery. — General 
 Conference of 1842. — General Conference of 1846. — Boundaries 
 of the Annual Conferences. — Statistical Table. — Concluding 
 Remarks. 
 
 The first General Conference of the Methodist 
 Protestant Church met in Georgetown, D. C, May 
 6th, 1834. The Rev. Nicholas Snethen was elected 
 president, and Rev. William C. Lipscomb, secre- 
 tary. The operations of the Constitution and Dis- 
 cipline had been watched and closely observed 
 from their adoption up to this period, (a space of 
 nearly four years,) and consequently the General 
 Conference was prepared to make such alterations 
 as the experience of the past might suggest. 
 
 By a comparison of the edition of the Discipline 
 of 1841 with that of 1844, it will be observed that 
 some very important changes and improvements 
 were made. 
 
 This General Conference recognized fourteen 
 Annual Conferences — the Pittsburg Conference 
 being set off, constituting one more new conference 
 district. The prosperity that had attended the 
 labors of the ministry, and the consequent increase 
 of numbers or numerical strength, according to the 
 
316 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 statements of the Mutual Rights and Methodist 
 Protestant, were greatly encouraging. Opposition 
 had generally been thrown in the way of the minis- 
 ters of the Methodist Protestant Church, by the 
 supporters of the one-man-power system; but the 
 truth had been received by many, and embraced by 
 such as had the manly independence to think, to 
 choose, and act for themselves. The minutes of the 
 several Annual Conferences now exhibited the 
 membership as 26,587; and the ministers and 
 preachers over 500, about one-third of whom were 
 in the itinerancy.* This General Conference took 
 some preliminary steps in view of the establishment 
 of a book concern to belong to the church, but the 
 business did not succeed according to the expecta- 
 tions of its projectors. 
 
 From the rise of the General Conference of 1834, 
 until the sitting of the General Conference of 1838, 
 the cause of republican principles of church polity 
 was onward. Methodist Protestantism continued to 
 spread and her principles to be cherished. Exten- 
 sive revivals of religion took place in many confer- 
 ences, and large accessions were made to the church, 
 although at the sitting of the ensuing General Con- 
 ference it was ascertained that the ratio of increase 
 (taking the entire connection into the account) had 
 been small. But this may be accounted for upon 
 the ground that in many places a great declension 
 of religion had prevailed, seriously diminishing the 
 numbers in other churches. It was during this 
 
 *See Williams's History M. P. Church, page 327. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 317 
 
 period that Methodist Protestantism began to obtain 
 a foothold in South Carolina. 
 
 In the year 1834 a difficulty arose in the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church, in the city of Charleston, 
 in consequence of the high-handed and arbitrary 
 measures of the men in power. The difficulty 
 originated between the ministry and the officiary of 
 the church with regard to the extent of the rights 
 or prerogatives of the latter as trustees. The mat- 
 ter was pushed to the most unpleasant extremes, 
 and resulted in the expulsion of eight worthy and 
 influential members from the church. This pro- 
 ceeding was of such a nature as to alarm many of 
 the brethren and friends of the expelled with respect 
 to their rights as members of the church. Accord- 
 ingly about one hundred and fifty withdrew from 
 the communion of the M. E. Church, and formed 
 themselves into an independent church, and in a 
 formal manner adopted the Methodist Protestant 
 Discipline. This is an interesting church. Its trials 
 have been great, but it has stood firm. Upon their 
 organization they found themselves without a house 
 of worship, and arrangements were soon made to 
 build a suitable church. In the early part of 1835 
 the house was finished at a cost of $12,000. In 
 the year 1838 the great fire happened in Charles- 
 ton, which consumed this beautiful house of wor- 
 ship, leaving the society without a place in which to 
 worship their God, and a debt of four thousand 
 dollars still hanging over them for the house con- 
 sumed in the conflagration. But they fainted not 
 27* 
 
318 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 in the day of adversity. They determined to re- 
 build, and appealing to the benevolence of Christian 
 friends abroad, they embarked in the effort and 
 succeeded in erecting, upon the same spot on which 
 the first had stood, another handsome and commo- 
 dious church, and at this date are altogether free 
 from church debt. Again, in the early part of 1S45 
 the course pursued by the minister in charge of this 
 station, involved the society in sore and trying diffi- 
 culties by his indiscretions; and endeavoring to 
 sustain himself in justification of his conduct, he 
 formed a small party of adherents, who, upon his 
 expulsion from the ministry, retired from the church. 
 Again, two superintendents of this church have 
 been stricken down by the hand of death within a 
 few years, viz: Rev. D. Davis and Rev. William 
 H. Bordley, pastors dearly beloved of the flock. 
 The history of this church is full of interest. The 
 misfortunes and trials it has borne have led many 
 to call it the " afflicted church." It has been tried, 
 sorely tried, and yet has stood firm. Its materiel 
 is made up of sterling spirits, possessing sound 
 principles, actuated by the holiest of purposes. 
 The writer cannot soon forget the happy hours and 
 delightful season of religious enjoyment he realized 
 when attending their camp-meeting in 1S45. 
 
 GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1838. 
 
 The General Conference of 1838 was a special 
 session called by a constitutional majority of the 
 Annual Conferences. After the rise of the General 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 319 
 
 Conference of 1S34 it was believed by many that the 
 interests of the church would be better subserved 
 by the meeting of its highest legislative department 
 at shorter intervals. The subject was discussed 
 by many writers in the church organ, the " Mutual 
 Rights and Christian Intelligencer;" and the subject 
 coming legally before the respective Annual Con- 
 ferences, it was decided that a special session of 
 the General Conference should meet in 1S38, and 
 delegates were accordingly elected to the same. 
 
 On the 15th of May, 1S3S, the second General 
 Conference met at Pittsburg, Pennsylvania ; it was 
 composed of fifty-three members, representing fif- 
 teen Annual Conferences. 
 
 The following; are the names of the members of 
 conference : 
 
 Boston Conference — John McLeish, W. Wyman. 
 
 Vermont Conference — John Croker, A. McLaughlin. 
 
 New York Conference — T. W. Pearson, J. L. Ambler, Win. 
 Wood, Wm. Stead. 
 
 Champlain Conference — Nathan Green. 
 
 Genesee Conference — Michael Burge, S. Beecher. 
 
 Pennsylvania Conference — A. Woolson, W. S. Stockton. 
 
 Maryland Conference — Thomas H. Stockton, Luther J. Cox, 
 William Kesley, Wm. C. Lipscomb, John Clark, E. Crutchley, 
 T. C. Brown, J. S. Zeiber. 
 
 Virginia Conference — Rev. Dr. Finney, J. M. Smith. 
 
 North Carolina Conference — Samuel B. Harris, L. H. B. 
 Whitaker. 
 
 Georgia Conference — R Blount, C. Kennon. 
 
 Alabama Conference — Peyton S. Graves, B. S Bibb. 
 
 Tennessee Conference — R. W. Morris, James L. Armstrong. 
 
 Illinois Conference — Wm. H. Collins, R. A. Shipley. 
 
 Ohio Conference — B. W. Johnston, M. M. Henkle, William 
 Disney, S. Bell, J. J. Amos, M. Lyon. 
 
320 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 Pittsburg Conference — A. Shinn, George Brown, J Elliott, 
 C. Springer, E Woodward, D B. Dorsey, C. Avery, J. Carey, 
 J. Bell, E. Haskins, T. McKeever, J. Barnes, W. Garrard, 
 B. Connell. 
 
 The Rev. Asa Shinn, of the Pittsburg Confer- 
 ence, was elected president, and the Rev. T. W. 
 Pearson, secretary. 
 
 No alterations of any importance were made in 
 the Discipline at this session ; its general provisions 
 being so well adapted to the wants of the church 
 that it was deemed most prudent to make but little 
 change. 
 
 At this session the first section of the eighth article 
 of the Constitution was amended by striking out the 
 word seventh, and instituting the word fourth, in 
 its place, so as to require a meeting of the General 
 Conference once in every four years, instead of every 
 seven. A plan was adopted for the establishment 
 of a church book concern. The project proposed 
 was to raise a capital of $20,000 for the purpose. 
 The object had in view, in the establishment of the 
 book concern, was of a twofold nature. 1. For the 
 publication and circulation of such books as should 
 tend to the diffusion of religious knowledge and to 
 the promotion of piety. 2. The raising of a dividend 
 to enable the Annual Conferences respectively to 
 carry out their plans of itinerant operations, in dis- 
 seminating the great truths of Christianity. 
 
 One of the sections of the plan adopted reads in 
 the following words : " After the year 1842, let it 
 be the duty of the committee to make dividends 
 from the profits arising out of the business, to the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURGH. 321 
 
 respective Annual Conferences, in proportion to the 
 amount of actual capital invested by the respective 
 conference districts." But the business of the 
 concern not having succeeded as well as it was ex- 
 pected, no division of dividends has yet been made 
 to the Annual Conferences, and the profits arising 
 therefrom have been applied to the relief of the 
 concern from its obligations and to the extension of 
 its business. 
 
 It was at this session of the General Conference 
 that some excitement first began to be manifested 
 upon the subject of slavery in connection with the 
 church ; a subject, too, that most unhappily divides 
 in feeling the north from the south, both in its civil 
 and religious aspects, and the agitation of which 
 there is mach reason to fear has militated, not only 
 against the peace of the church, but has in some 
 places seriously affected the progress of religion. 
 The truth of this assertion is sustained by history. 
 The Methodist Episcopal Church presents a case 
 in point. It was upon that exciting question that 
 the north and south parted asunder at the General 
 Conference of 1S44 ; and within the space of two 
 years it appears from the returns that the Northern 
 portion of that church had suffered a decrease in 
 membership of about fifteen thousand ; and if we 
 were to take into the account the bitterness of feel- 
 ing that took possession of the hearts and minds of 
 many, both of the ministry and laity, and the un- 
 happy wrangling and controversy that ensued, the 
 loss would appear still greater. 
 
322 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 We have mentioned the introduction of this 
 agitating subject into the General Conference of 
 183S, in order that its progress may be fairly traced 
 in connection with the M. P. Church. The con- 
 ference regarded the subject as one over which 
 they could not take constitutional cognizance, and 
 therefore referred it to the people, where it more 
 properly belongs, or rather to the Annual Confer- 
 ences where the subject in question is immediately 
 concerned Two new Annual Conferences were 
 set off by this General Conference, viz : the Pitts- 
 burg and Illinois Districts. The name of the paper 
 conducted as the organ of the church, and devoted 
 to its interests, was now changed to that of " The 
 Methodist Protestant and Family Visiter." As has 
 been remarked in the preceding part of this chapter, 
 the increase of the M. P. Church for the past four 
 years had been small, and from the best calculations 
 which we are able to make, it exceeded to some 
 extent 2S,000. 
 
 GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1842. 
 
 On the 3d of May, 1842, the third General Con- 
 ference met in Baltimore, and continued its session 
 fourteen days. There were fifty-one members 
 in attendance from the following conferences: 
 
 Boston Conference — Thomas F. Norris, minister. 
 
 Vermont Conference — Lewis S. Fish, layman. 
 
 New York Conference — T. K. Witsil, Enoch Jacobs, ministers; 
 John J. Reed, layman. 
 
 Champlain Conference — None in attendance. 
 
 Genesee Conference — A. Purnell, minister; Thomas Baikley, 
 layman- 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 
 
 323 
 
 Onondaga Conference— O. E. Bryant, minister; L. B. Morris, 
 
 layman. 
 
 Pennsylvania Conference— J. Smith, minister. 
 
 Maryland Conference— Francis Waters, A. Webster, John S. 
 Reese, F. Stier, James R. Williams, W. C. Lipscomb, William 
 H.Bordley, ministers ; William S. Stockton, A. S.Naudain, Peter 
 Light, E. Crutchley, J. B. Thomas, A. Waugh, William Rusk, 
 laymen. 
 
 Virginia Conference — John G. Whitfield, minister; H. B. 
 Wood house, layman. 
 
 North Carolina Conference — Alexander Albright, minister ; 
 Wilson C. Whitaker, Robert C. Rankin, laymen. 
 
 South Carolina Conference— Alexander McCaine, minister. 
 
 Georgia Conference— None in attendance. 
 ' Alabama Conference— P. S. Graves, minister; B. S. Bibb, 
 
 layman. 
 
 Tennessee Conference— None in attendance. 
 
 Indiana Conference— Thomas Hicklin, H. P. Bennett, ministers; 
 William Smith, John Burton, laymen. 
 
 Illinois Conference— William H. Collins, minister. 
 
 Mississippi Conference— Samuel Butler, minister. 
 
 Ohio Conference— A. H. Bassett, minister; J. Whetstone, D. 
 C. Carson, laymen. 
 
 Pittsburg Conference— A. Shinn, John Burns, G. Brown, Z. 
 Ragan, John Clarke, jr., C. Springer, ministers; Thomas Freeman, 
 J. Souder, P. Lewis, James Clark, laymen. 
 
 Rev. Asa Shinn, of the Pittsburg Conference, 
 was elected chairman, and Rev. A. H. Bassett, of 
 the Ohio, and J. J. Reed, of the New York Con- 
 ference, secretaries. 
 
 A few alterations or amendments of the Disci- 
 pline were made at this conference, but principally 
 relating to Annual Conferences, presidents of con- 
 ferences, superintendents, missionaries, &c, all of 
 which may be seen by comparing the edition of 
 
324 .HISTORY OF THE 
 
 the Discipline of 1S42 with the preceding one. The 
 amendments made were such as were suggested by 
 experience, which no doubt will tend to promote 
 the prosperity as well as secure the harmony of the 
 church. At this conference the brethren from the 
 north renewed the exciting subject of "abolition," 
 which had been introduced into the preceding Gen- 
 eral Conference. Warm and animated debates 
 ensued. The abolitionists were clamorous for the 
 conference to adopt some definite rule upon the 
 subject of slavery, declaring it sinful in all its 
 aspects and relations, while the conservatives or 
 moderate men of both parties stood by the consti- 
 tution, maintaining the ground that the General 
 Conference had no constitutional authority to legis- 
 late upon moral subjects — that the question properly 
 belonged to the respective Annual Conferences 
 within the limits of which the institution of slavery 
 existed. But the more firm and determined sup- 
 porters of the south went further in the range of 
 their arguments, and appealed to holy writ in 
 vindication of the existence of the institution. The 
 debates closed by the adoption of the following 
 resolution : 
 
 "Resolved, That in the judgment of this General 
 Conference the holding of slaves is not, under all 
 circumstances, a sin against God, yet in our opinion, 
 under some circumstances, it is sinful, and in such 
 cases should be discouraged by the Methodist Pro- 
 testant Church. This General Conference does not 
 feel authorized by the constitution to legislate on 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 325 
 
 the subject of slavery; and by a solemn vote we 
 present the church our judgment, that the different 
 Annual Conferences respectively should make their 
 own regulations on this subject, so far as authorized 
 by the constitution." 
 
 This resolution did not satisfy the ultraists of the 
 north, nor was it agreeable to some of the delegates 
 from the south, who were opposed to intermeddling 
 with ihe subject, and a protest bearing a few names 
 was recorded on the journal against it. 
 
 At this General Conference the periodical estab- 
 lished as the organ of the church, and called the 
 "Methodist Protestant and Family Visiter," was 
 changed in name to that of " Methodist Protestant." 
 Rev. E. Y. Reese was elected editor, but subse- 
 quently resigned. The services of the Rev. Au- 
 gustus Webster were afterwards secured by the 
 book committee, and the editorial department of 
 the paper was filled by him until the sitting of the 
 General Conference of 1846. During the period 
 intervening between the General Conferences of 
 1838 and 1S42, the friends of the book concern 
 labored with commendable zeal to place it upon a 
 safe and respectable footing. The financial condi- 
 tion of the country was such that the demand for 
 books was small, but their devotion to the interests 
 of the church was too great to be foiled even under 
 the pressure of these circumstances. Through 
 their devotion to its interests the concern was ena- 
 bled to live. 
 28 
 
326 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1846. 
 
 The General Conference of 1S4G met in the city 
 of Cincinnati, on the first Tuesday in May. It was 
 composed of seventy-one delegates from the follow- 
 ing conferences : 
 
 Maine Conference — None in attendance. 
 Boston Conference — None in attendance. 
 Vermont Conference — Ziba Boyington, minister. 
 New York Conference — None in attendance. 
 Champlain Conference — None in attendance. 
 Onondaga Conference — Ira Hogan, minister. 
 Genesee Conference — S. M. Short, minister. 
 Pennsylvania Conference — None in attendance. 
 New Jersey Conferenee — None in attendance. 
 Maryland Conference — F. Waters, D. D., E. Henkle, J. S. 
 Reese, L. R. Reese, J. Varden, I. Webster, U. Ward, J. R. 
 Williams, T. Simm, ministers; W. Starr, A. L. Withers, T. R. 
 Brown, J. Shriver, J. B. Matthews, laymen. 
 
 Virginia Conference — R. B. Thompson and John J. Whitfield, 
 ministers. 
 
 North Carolina Conference — William Bellamy, W. H. Wills, 
 John Paris, ministers; Spier Whitaker, layman. 
 South Carolina Conference — None in attendance. 
 Alabama Conference — None in attendance. 
 Huntsville Conference — Henry Stilwell, minister; H. R. Bea- 
 ver, layman. 
 
 Mississippi Conference — Enos Fletcher, minister; N. White- 
 head, layman. 
 
 Louisiana Conference — Allen Rushing, minister. 
 Tennessee Conference — R. \V. Morris, minister; James L. 
 Armstrong, layman. 
 Arkansas Conference — None in attendance. 
 Indiana Conference— D. H. Stephens, Cyrus Jeffries, ministers; 
 William Smith, layman. 
 
 Illinois Conference— John Clarke, jr., W. H. Collins, ministers; 
 Joel Rice, C. Rice, layman. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 327 
 
 Muskingum Conference — C. Springer, Z. Ragan, J. Dalby, jr., 
 J. Burns, G. Claney, R. Andrew, J. Thrap, ministers; J. Bell. S. 
 Rodman, W. B. Kerlin, T. Campbell, A. W. Beatty, laymen. 
 
 Ohio Conference— A. H. Bassett, R. M. Dalby, J. White, J. 
 
 E. Wilson, ministers; James Foster, D. C. Carson, M. Kennedy, 
 laymen. 
 
 Pittsburg Conference — G. Brown, W. Reeves, P. T. Laishly, 
 
 F. A. Davis, J. Cord, ministers; J. H. Deford, F. H. Pierpont, J. 
 W. Philips, C. Craig, laymen. 
 
 Michigan Conference — James Gay, minister; H. Brownson, 
 layman. 
 
 The Rev. Francis Waters, of the Maryland Con- 
 ference, was elected president, and Rev. James E. 
 Wilson and Rev. A. H. Bassett, of the Ohio Con- 
 ference, secretaries. 
 
 At this session of the General Conference but 
 few alterations of the Discipline were made, and 
 those principally of minor importance. It was be- 
 lieved by that body that but few alterations or 
 amendments were needful, and that that period 
 was not an auspicious one for effecting changes. 
 
 A question now came up from the Maryland 
 Conference, requesting the General Conference to 
 express its opinion upon the constitutionality of the 
 action of that body (the Maryland Conference) with 
 regard to the "Mission Rule." The Annual Confer- 
 ence had changed the St. John's Station in Baltimore 
 into a mission, and doubts were entertained by 
 many as to the constitutionality of the measure. 
 The General Conference declared the action of 
 the Maryland Conference in the premises to be un- 
 constitutional. The committee to whom the request 
 of the Maryland Annual Conference was referred 
 
328 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 were divided in their sentiments. Majority and 
 minority reports were made. Excited and ani- 
 mated debates ensued upon proposed alterations of 
 the mission rule. A substitute offered by Dr. 
 Waters was finally adopted, which changes the 
 preceding rule in some of its features, by granting 
 to Annual Conferences more discretionary powers 
 than they had heretofore possessed with respect to 
 fields of missionary labor. 
 
 The abolitionists also labored hard to get some 
 rule adopted by the General Conference upon the 
 subject of slavery. Various resolutions, amend- 
 ments and substitutes were offered. Highly ex- 
 cited debates ensued ; the speakers being princi- 
 pally the ultraists and conservatives of the north. 
 The former insisting upon the right and propriety 
 of the General Conference in taking action in the 
 premises or of expressing an opinion thereon ; the 
 latter took the ground that the General Conference 
 had no constitutional right to meddle with the sub- 
 ject ; that it legitimately belonged to the respective 
 Annual Conferences where it existed, and that the 
 General Conference had no right to trammel their 
 action by the expression of an opinion in its legisla- 
 tive capacity. The following resolution, offered 
 by Dr. J. S. Reese, was adopted, after one or two 
 others had been laid on the table, and another one 
 read and withdrawn : 
 
 " Resolved, that in the judgment of this General 
 Conference the holding of slaves is, under many 
 circumstances, a -sin against God, and in such cases 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 329 
 
 should be condemned by the Methodist Protestant 
 Church ; nevertheless, it is our opinion that under 
 some circumstances it is not sinful. This General 
 Conference does not feel authorized by the consti- 
 tution to legislate on the subject of slavery, and by 
 a solemn vote we present to the church our judg- 
 ment that the different Annual Conferences, respect- 
 ively, should make their own regulations on this 
 subject, so far as authorized by the Constitution." 
 
 Some of the delegates from the south protested 
 against being called upon to vote on this subject ; 
 the yeas and nays having been demanded, upon 
 the call of each name by the secretary, those who 
 protested against the action in the premises gave 
 their reasons for their vote as they saw proper under 
 the circumstances. 
 
 A favorable report of the financial condition of 
 the book concern and church paper was made by 
 the book committee. The Rev. E. Y. Reese was 
 elected editor of the " Methodist Protestant " and 
 book agent for the ensuing four years. The salary 
 of the editor it was resolved should be not less than 
 nine hundred dollars ; and he was allowed to have 
 the assistance of a clerk appointed by the book com- 
 mittee, whose salary and duties are to be prescribed 
 by the board. 
 
 As we have not at hand the report of the book 
 committee to the General Conference, we shall 
 here introduce the report of that committee to the 
 last session of the Maryland Annual Conference, 
 held March, 1849. The book concern being located 
 28* 
 
330 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 within the bounds of that conference, the commit- 
 tee are required to report annually to that body, as 
 well as to each session of the General Conference. 
 
 REPORT OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE BOOK CONCERN. 
 
 To the president and members of the Maryland Annual 
 Conference, in conference assembled. 
 
 Beloved Brethren, — The directors of the Meth- 
 odist Protestant Church Book Concern, in obedi- 
 ence to the requirements of the Discipline, take 
 occasion to present to the Maryland Annual Con- 
 ference, now in session in Alexandria, their report 
 of proceedings for the past conference year, together 
 with a statement showing the true condition of the 
 concern at the present time. 
 
 By a reference to the report of the directors, 
 rendered to the last session of the conference, it 
 will be seen that the concern was then worth 
 $4,129 76 ; the present report will show that, by 
 the assistance of kind friends and a successful busi- 
 ness during the year, the concern has nearly 
 doubled its value, and is now worth $8,250 32. 
 In our last report we informed the conference that 
 we had decided on stereot} ? ping the hymn book. 
 This has been accomplished at a cost of four hun- 
 dred dollars, and will save the expense of composi- 
 tion in all future editions for at least twenty years 
 to come. The first edition worked off" from the 
 plates numbered 3,000 copies, of which we have 
 sold 2,200, in addition to 700 which were on hand 
 at the date of our last report, making in all 2,900 
 copies. 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 331 
 
 Of the Discipline there have been sold 2,300 
 copies, and of Clarke's Commentary 56. sets. Were 
 our friends to purchase this work freely, its sales 
 would greatly advance the pecuniary interests of 
 the church; for although we furnish the work at a 
 much lower price than that at which any similar 
 work can be purchased in the United States, it nev- 
 ertheless yields a handsome profit. The whole 
 amount of books sold during the conference year 
 was $4,005 89; of this a large proportion remains 
 uncollected, but it is a favorable indication that 
 our receipts on account of book debts during the 
 year amount to $3,972. At the commencement 
 of the year our ledger showed an indebtedness to 
 the concern of about $3,000, after making due allow- 
 ances for losses; and at the present about the same 
 amount, with equal allowance, is due us; so that 
 our receipts on book accounts the present year are 
 equal, within a fraction, to the amount of sales 
 effected. But we do not say this in justification of 
 those who are culpably negligent. 
 
 The financial condition of the paper is still im- 
 proving, but less rapidly than could be desired. 
 At the last report there were 2,800 subscribers on 
 the list, of whom we have been compelled to erase 
 the names of several hundred for non-payment; 
 but by the addition of new subscribers the present 
 list is within a fraction of 3,000. 
 
 The total receipts during the past year on the 
 paper, including old dues, are $4,195 28; on the 
 present (15th) volume the receipts have been light, 
 
332 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 only $1,753. It is hoped, however, that as in for- 
 mer cases, the close of the year will bring up the 
 deficiency. 
 
 The expenses for publishing the paper are about 
 the same as for the preceding volume, say $3,500. 
 The profits on the present volume, it is thought, 
 will be in the neighborhood of one thousand dollars. 
 On volume 14th the collections have covered the 
 entire expense of its publication, so that payments 
 hereafter on that volume and all preceding volumes, 
 will be placed among the actual* profits of the 
 concern. 
 
 ASSETS. 
 
 The stereotyped plates were passed into our hands at an 
 
 estimated value of $5,150 00 
 
 Hymn Book plates cost 400 00 
 
 Stock in hand, valued at 2,250 00 
 
 Due by present subscribers to Methodist Protestant to the 
 
 end of present volume, after deductions for bad debts, 4,100 00 
 
 Discontinued subscribers, 700 00 
 
 Collectable book debts, 3,000 00 
 
 Cash on hand, 241 00 
 
 $15,841 00 
 
 LIABILITIES. 
 
 Mortgage to S. A. F. S. of Maryland Conference, . $1 ,800 00 
 Notes payable in redemption of scrip, . . . 1,636 68 
 
 Sundry debls, 1,900 00 
 
 Phebean Society, 800 00 
 
 Interest to Phebean Society, ..... 54 00 
 
 Estimated expense of publishing Methodist Protestant to 
 
 end of present volume, including half of salaries and rent, 1,400 00 
 
 $7,590 68 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 333 
 
 ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. 
 
 Assets, $15,841 00 
 
 Liabilities, 7,590 68 
 
 Present worth of the concern at the former estimated ■ 
 
 value of the plates^ ...... $8,250 32 
 
 It will be recollected that in our last report to the 
 conference there were sixty-eight shares of church 
 scrip remaining unredeemed, amounting to $3,400. 
 We now purpose to inform the conference how the 
 principal and interest of ihose shares of scrip have 
 been disposed of. Sixteen shares ($S00), held by 
 the Phebean Society, remain in possession of that 
 society, and the interest paid annually. Sixteen 
 shares ($800), held by the S. A. F. Society have 
 been canceled in the following manner: the mana- 
 gers of that society have relinquished the interest, 
 and have taken a lien on the property of the book 
 concern for the principle, together with $1,000 due 
 by the concern to W. Starr, which he assigned as a 
 donation to said society, it being part of a loan of 
 $1,700 made by him two years ago, to enable the 
 book committee to publish an edition of Clarke's 
 Commentary. The payment of the whole $1,800 
 to be made by installments of $200 per annum, 
 commencing on the first day of December, 1S51, 
 with interest from that date until the whole shall 
 have been paid. Twenty-eight shares ($1,400), 
 held by Wesley Starr, have been canceled in the 
 following manner : He relinquished or gave to the 
 concern the interest due, $805; he also gave to the 
 concern $350, which was due to him, and received 
 
334 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 from the committee their notes for the balance, 
 $1,050, with interest till paid. The same brother 
 gave to the concern $350 of the amount loaned by 
 him to publish Clarke's Commentary, subject, how- 
 ever, to the annual payment during his lifetime of 
 $20 for the benefit of the West Baltimore Station 
 Sabbath School. Four shares ($200), held by Ed- 
 ward Green, were purchased by the concern for 
 $145, and he relinquished or gave the interest due 
 to the church. Four shares ($200), held by William 
 Savory's heirs, were purchased by the concern for 
 $200, and they relinquished the interest. 
 
 By the above statement the conference will per- 
 ceive: 1st, That all the interest due on the scrip, 
 amounting to the sum of $1,300, has been relin- 
 quished to the church, and thus a heavy item of 
 liability is for ever removed from the debtor side of 
 our annual account. 2d, That the certificates of 
 stock issued by the Methodist Protestant Church in 
 1839, except the few held by the Phebean Society, 
 have been canceled; and 3d, That the debt on 
 scrip has been so arranged by notes as to give the 
 concern ample time to pay it, without embarrassing 
 it in its other operations. 
 
 In connection with the above statement, the 
 directors take pleasure in acknowleding the receipt 
 of a donation of $500, for the benefit of the Mary- 
 land Annual Conference, from a young lady who is 
 a member of our church, and who on a former 
 occasion bestowed a gratuity of $1,000 to the con- 
 cern subject to the annual payment of $60 worth 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 335 
 
 of religious books. The conditions of the recent 
 gratuity are: the directors of the book concern are 
 to distribute annually to the itinerant preachers of 
 the Maryland Annual Conference, thirty dollars 
 worth of suitable books, so as to meet the neces- 
 sities of young men in the ministry, who may be 
 unable to purchase them. She also assigns to the 
 directors the right to distribute $30 worth additional, 
 to be charged to the account of $60 per annum, 
 (life annuity,) to which she was entitled for the for- 
 mer donation. Should the concern at any future 
 time prefer to return the $500 to stop the annuity, 
 they are authorized to pay the sum to the managers 
 of the S. A. F. Society. 
 
 Dear brethren, permit us to conclude our report 
 by an appeal to the good sense and benevolent 
 feelings of the ministers and members of the Mary- 
 land Conference and those of the thirty-two Annual 
 Conferences of the M. P. Church. Does it not 
 appear to you, brethren, that so numerous a body 
 of ministers and members, most of whom have 
 means and opportunities to do much good, have 
 done exceedingly Utile towards the establishment 
 of a concern, the avowed design of which is, by the 
 sale of books and the publication of a religious paper, 
 to obtain annually a sum sufficiently respectable to 
 distribute to each of the Annual Conferences at 
 least one hundred dollars, to aid in making up de- 
 ficiencies among the itinerant brethren who have 
 not received the whole amount of their limited 
 allowances ? 
 
336 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 The book concern has been in operation for ten 
 years, under the direction of attentive, laborious 
 men, whose services have been yielded gratuitously, 
 and lo ! such has been the apathy of the church, 
 generally, that the concern just now begins to show 
 signs of life and promises of future usefulness. Out 
 of thirty-two conference districts we have at length 
 obtained within a fraction of 3,000 subscribers, 
 which is less than an average of 100 to each dis- 
 trict, when, to speak within the bounds of modera- 
 tion, the average ought to be at least 500 to each 
 district. During the past year we have sold about 
 $4,000 worth of books, an average less than $130 
 to each district, when any impartial man will say 
 that five times the amount ought to have been pur- 
 chased, especially as the profits are designed to 
 benefit the purchasers, by aiding them to make up 
 deficiencies in their own conferences. Can we not 
 do better than we have done? or shall the same 
 apathy which has benumbed and retarded the ad* 
 vancement of our little concern for so many years 
 continue to arrest our progress and keep us down, 
 until we become a reproach and a by-word among 
 the thousands of Israel ? 
 
 Again, dear brethren, does it not appear to you 
 to be a burning shame that the subscribers and the 
 purchasers of books should retain in their own 
 hands nearly $7,000 which are justly due to the 
 concern ? The directors tell you that the concern 
 is worth $8,250, but alas ! almost the whole amount 
 is away in the hands of their customers, and the 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 337 
 
 directors and agent left without means to pay off 
 the printer and paper-maker. Do we not appear 
 to you very much like certain rich men who have 
 their thousands on paper, but have not money to 
 buy their marketing? And does not the conduct 
 of the whole church resemble the parent who pro- 
 fesses great affection for the child, but denies it 
 food and raiment? 
 
 It would encourage us who hold the laboring oar 
 greatly if we could bring the ministry and member- 
 ship to make suitable efforts towards carrying the 
 concern up to a point whence it may be able to 
 furnish the help designed by its founders and origina- 
 tors. Come, brethren, let us try if we cannot, during 
 the coming year, greatly increase the subscription 
 list, and further the sale of our church books. 
 
 The session of the General Conference is now at 
 hand, to which body the directors of the book con- 
 cern are required to give " a full and particular 
 account of all matters and things connected with 
 the church book concern." It would be very 
 pleasant to all to have it in our power to exhibit 
 the concern in a healthy and prosperous condition. 
 Nothing can prevent so desirable a result but negli- 
 gence on the part of the church. The brethren 
 will doubtless excuse our great plainness in the 
 preceding remarks when they take into view our 
 anxiety to make the concern efficient in the secure- 
 ment of the great objects of its institution. All of 
 which is respectfully submitted by the directory. 
 James R. Williams, President. 
 29 
 
338 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 BOUNDARIES OF THE ANNUAL CONFERENCES. 
 
 The General Conference of 1846 recognized the 
 following twenty-nine Annual Conference Districts, 
 their boundaries being as follow: 
 
 Maine District includes all the State of Maine. 
 
 Boston District includes all the States of Mas- 
 sachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire. 
 
 Vermont District commences at the south-east 
 corner of the State of Vermont, and runs thence, 
 westwardly, to Lansingburg, on the North river 
 (leaving that town in the New York District) ; 
 thence, westwardly, to the south-west corner of 
 Montgomery and Fulton counties ; thence, from the 
 north-west corner of Fulton county, eastwardly, 
 opposite the towns of Athol and Johnsburg, as far 
 north as the south line of Elizabethtown ; thence, 
 eastwardly, along the south line of Elizabethtown to 
 lake Champlain ; thence down the lake to the Canada 
 line ; thence to the north-west corner of New 
 Hampshire ; and thence to the place of beginning. 
 
 New York District includes the State of Con- 
 necticut, and that part of the State of New York 
 lying south-east of a line beginning at the north- 
 west corner of Montgomery county; thence, east- 
 wardly, to Lansingburg, on the North river, in- 
 cluding that town ; thence, south, by said river, to 
 Troy; and thence, eastwardly, to the north-west 
 corner of Massachusetts, including Long and Staten 
 islands. 
 
 Onondaga District commences at the point 
 where the old pre-emption line intersects" Lake 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 339 
 
 Ontario, and runs thence, southwardly, bounding 
 on the Genesee District, to the line of the Pennsyl- 
 vania District; thence, along said line, so far as to 
 embrace Cherry Valley and Westford Circuits, and 
 all the territory west and south of the county of St. 
 Lawrence (with the exception of Twin Circuit); 
 thence, in a north-westwardly direction, to the 
 Oswego river ; and thence, by lake Ontario, to the 
 place of beginning. 
 
 Genesee District commences at the point 
 where the old pre-emption line intersects Lake 
 Ontario, and runs thence in a direct line to the 
 foot of Seneca lake ; thence, up the middle of said 
 lake, to the line of Pennsylvania District ; thence, 
 west, to the north-west corner of said district ; 
 thence, south, to the southern boundary line of the 
 State of New York ; thence, by said State line, to 
 Lake Erie ; and thence, by said lake, the Niagara 
 river, and Lake Ontario, to the place of beginning 
 
 Michigan District includes the State of Michi- 
 gan and the northern tier of counties in the State 
 of Indiana. 
 
 Indiana District includes all the State of In- 
 diana, except the part embraced in the Michigan 
 District. 
 
 Illinois District commences at the north line 
 of Township No. 4, on the Mississippi river, north 
 of the base line, running due east to the Indiana 
 line ; embracing all the southern part of the State 
 and all that part of Missouri not included in the 
 Arkansas District. 
 
340 HISTORY OP THE 
 
 North Illinois District embraces all that por- 
 tion of the State of Illinois not included in Illinois 
 District and the territory of Wisconsin. 
 
 Iowa District includes all the territory of Iowa 
 west of the Mississippi river, and north of the 
 States of Missouri and Arkansas. 
 
 Ohio District includes that part of the State of 
 Ohio lying west of the Sciota and Sandusky rivers, 
 excepting the counties of Crawford, Seneca, San- 
 dusky and Wyandott. 
 
 Muskingum District includes all that part of the 
 State of Ohio not included in the Ohio District. 
 
 Pittsburg District includes that portion of the 
 States of Virginia and Pennsylvania lying west of 
 the Allegany mountains. 
 
 New Jersey District includes the State of N. 
 Jersey. 
 
 Pennsylvania District begins at the junction 
 of the Lehigh and Delaware rivers and runs thence 
 
 O 
 
 by a direct line to Harrisburg (including that city); 
 thence by the Susquehanna river to the mouth of 
 the Juniata; thence up the Juniata to the dividing 
 line of Mifflin and Huntingdon counties; thence by 
 a direct line due north into Allegany county, N. Y., 
 so far as to embrace Broome county by a line due 
 east; thence by the north-east and east lines of 
 Broome county to the Delaware, and thence by 
 said river to the place of beginning. 
 
 Maryland District includes all the State of 
 Maryland and that part of Virginia not included in 
 the Virginia District; the State of Delaware, and 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 341 
 
 all that part of Pennsylvania west of the Susque- 
 hanna river not included in the Pittsburg District. 
 
 Virginia District includes all the State of Vir- 
 ginia not included within the Maryland and Pitts- 
 burg Districts. 
 
 North Carolina District includes the State of 
 North Carolina. 
 
 South Carolina District includes the State of 
 South Carolina. 
 
 Georgia District includes all the State of 
 Georgia, except the counties of Decatur, Thomas, 
 Lowndes, Ware and Camden. 
 
 Florida District includes all that part of 
 Florida east of the Apalachicola river; and that 
 part of Georgia not included in the Georgia District. 
 
 Alabama District includes that part of Ala- 
 bama not included in the Huntsville District, and 
 that part of Florida west of Apalachicola river. 
 
 Tennessee District includes all that part of 
 Tennessee not included in the Huntsville District, 
 and the State of Kentucky. 
 
 Huntsville District commences at the south- 
 western corner of Lafayette county, Alabama, and 
 runs eastward with the lines of Lafayette and 
 Walker counties to the Black Warrior river; thence 
 down said river to the south-western corner of 
 Jefferson county; thence in a direct line across 
 Shelby county to the south-west corner of Talla- 
 dega county; thence eastward with the southern 
 boundary line of Talladega and Randolph counties 
 to the State of Georgia; thence northward with the 
 29* 
 
342 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 state line to the State of Tennessee; thence in a 
 direct line to the nearest point of the Cumberland 
 mountain, on the north side of Tennessee river; 
 thence in such direction to the mouth of Cedar 
 creek, in Perry county, as may be necessary to 
 comprise all the country situated on the waters of 
 Tennessee river, on the north side thereof, between 
 the two points last designated, and all the country 
 situated on the waters of Buffalo river above the 
 mouth of Sinking creek, in Perry county; thence 
 up Tennessee river (from the mouth of Cedar 
 creek) to the line of the State of Alabama; thence 
 southward with the said line of Alabama to the 
 beginning. 
 
 Mississippi District includes the State of 
 Mississippi. 
 
 Louisiana District includes the States of 
 Louisiana and Texas. 
 
 Arkansas District includes the State of Ar- 
 kansas. 
 
 Philadelphia District includes all that part of 
 the state of Pennsylvania east of the Susquehanna 
 river (except Hummelstown Mission,) not included 
 in the Pennsylvania District. 
 
 Two other Annual Conferences, viz: the Texas 
 and Missouri, had been organized prior to the sit- 
 ting of the General Conference of 1846, but the evi- 
 dence of their organization failed to reach the Gen- 
 eral Conference, from some unforeseen cause, con- 
 sequently their names and boundaries do not yet 
 appear in the book of Discipline. Since then 
 
METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 343 
 
 another, the Wabash Conference, has been organ- 
 ized, making in all thirty-two Annual Conferences 
 in the Methodist Protestant communion. 
 
 STATISTICS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 The following table of statistics is taken in part 
 from the reported or published minutes of confer- 
 ences about the close of the year 1S4S and the be- 
 ginning of 1849. For want of later items of intelli- 
 gence with regard to some of the conferences, we 
 have had to copy from their minutes published one 
 and two years ago. Consequently the total numer- 
 ical strength of the church, as summed up in the 
 table, no doubt falls considerably below the true or 
 actual numbers. 
 
 There is a rule of Discipline, found on page 53, 
 section 23d, which requires that " each Annual 
 Conference shall publish its minutes, containing, 1. 
 A list of all the appointments for the ensuing 3?ear. 
 2. A complete list of all the stationed and unsta- 
 tioned ministers and preachers within the district, 
 and those who are superannuated. 3. The names of 
 those ministers and preachers who have deceased, 
 withdrawn, or been expelled. 4. The general ex- 
 hibit of the conference steward. 5. The number 
 of members, including ministers and preachers. 6. 
 The time and place of holding the next Annual 
 Conference; and the number of houses of worship 
 belonging to the district." But we regret that some 
 of the Annual Conferences have so overlooked this 
 rule, that our statistical table is rendered meagre. 
 
344 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 STATISTICAL TABLE. 
 
 ANNUAL CONFERENCES 
 
 a 
 
 00 00 00 
 
 £ » US 2 
 
 .2-0 
 
 — C 
 00 CO 
 
 si 
 
 cO* 
 
 ]VIaryland, . . . 
 Virginia, . . . 
 North Carolina, 
 South Carolina, 
 Georgia, . . . . 
 
 Florida, 
 
 Alabama, . . . 
 Mississippi, . . 
 Louisiana, . . . 
 Texas, .... 
 Arkansas, . . . 
 Missouri, . . . 
 Huntsville, . . 
 Tennessee, . . 
 Illinois, . . . . 
 North Illinois, 
 Iowa, ..... 
 Michigan, . . 
 Wabash, .... 
 Indiana, . . . , 
 
 Ohio, 
 
 Muskingum, . , 
 Pittsburg, . . . 
 Pennsylvania, . 
 Philadelphia, . 
 Genesee, . . . , 
 Onondaga, . . . 
 New York, . . . 
 New Jersey, . 
 Boston, .... 
 Vermont, . . . 
 Maine, .... 
 
 3 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 1 
 
 12 
 1 
 
 29 
 12 
 10 
 
 3 
 10 
 
 2 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 •7 
 6 
 9 
 
 29 
 9 
 4 
 
 1(3 
 9 
 
 1U 
 IS 
 32 
 29 
 
 56 
 25 
 26 
 13 
 34 
 
 9 
 28 
 23 
 
 9 
 12 
 13 
 15 
 22 
 25 
 26 
 28 
 11 
 29 
 23 
 17 
 44 
 60 
 50 
 12 
 10 
 23 
 23 
 31 
 10 
 17 
 16 
 11 
 
 67 
 
 24 
 
 11 
 
 26 
 
 3 
 
 26 
 
 15 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 33 
 40 
 26 
 10 
 30 
 15 
 23 
 51 
 82 
 63 
 9 
 6 
 12 
 32 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 
 11 
 
 17 
 
 67 |356 
 
 81 761 
 
 677 
 
 6,500 
 3,000 
 4,030 
 1,778 
 2,004 
 
 710 
 4,282 
 1,096 
 
 584 
 
 500 
 
 733 
 
 500 
 
 876 
 1,382 36 
 1,995 13 
 
 944 5 
 
 380 
 1,680 3 
 1,210 5 
 1,471 20 
 4,319! 67 
 5,819419 
 5,799 55 
 
 520 5 
 1,300 
 1,009 
 1,296 
 1,409' 
 
 844! 
 
 700 1 
 
 700: 
 
 5351 
 
 59,905,662 
 
* METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH. 345 
 
 'CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 The progress of the Methodist Protestant Church 
 has been onward. Prosperity has marked her 
 course. Truly the Lord has done great things for 
 her, whereof we are glad. In the preceding pages 
 we have brought to view the untoward circum- 
 stances that gave birth to her organization — we 
 have noticed the character of the persecutions got- 
 ten up by men in high places against those called 
 " reformers," and we have watched those perse- 
 cuted few who nobly refused to abandon their princi- 
 ples of ecclesiastical polity., and thereby admit and 
 acknowledge the exclusive claims of itinerant cler- 
 ical supremacy — we saw them, when cast out of 
 the church of their first love, rally together and 
 unite themselves in a bond of Christian brother- 
 hood under the banners of mutual rights. And 
 though their organizations were "few and far bo 
 tween" yet tracing their history we find that in 
 twenty years this little company has become a 
 great army. The principles of reform have out- 
 lived the war of persecution that once' so madly 
 raged. There have been a few of the ministry of 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church who have talked 
 and written of " the Methodist Protestant Church 
 being a failure," that " the cause was going down," 
 &c. But her failure (if it be called such) consists 
 in the onward march of her principles, a rapid in- 
 crease of membership, and the influence and use- 
 fulness of her ministry. And as to " the cause 
 
346 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 going down," we would remark, in the language of 
 the Rev. Asa Shinn, who, having heard such a re- 
 mark made upon a certain occasion, replied, ; ' 'Tis 
 true it is going down, but, like the beautiful Ohio 
 river, the further it goes the deeper and broader it 
 becomes." 
 
 The Methodist Protestant Church is one of the 
 fairest of the dau^htei-s of Zion. Her Constitution 
 and Discipline secure to her ministry and member- 
 ship mutual rights, and justly challenge the admira- 
 tion of the world as a system of ecclesiastical polity. 
 Her principles have been spreading and continue 
 to spread. Christian people, becoming tired of 
 itinerant supremacy, are throwing off such author- 
 ity; and, resolved to think for themselves, are call- 
 ing for the ministry and discipline of the M. P. 
 Church. Very recently such calls have been made 
 from the cities of New Orleans and Mobile ; and 
 within the last year large secessions from the M. E. 
 Church have taken place in the western part of 
 North Carolina, and flocking to the standard of the 
 M. P. Church have organized themselves under her 
 discipline. For these things and such as these 
 some of the votaries of itinerant clerical supremacy 
 in the former church take umbrage at the last men- 
 tioned church. It was but a few years ago that one 
 of the ministers of the M. E. Church in North Car- 
 olina, speaking of the M. P. Church, declared over 
 his own signature that "she was like the vulture that 
 preyed upon the carcases of its ovm murdered victims ;" 
 and "like the wandering gipsey who refused to bring 
 
METHODIST TROTESTANT CHURCH. 347 
 
 up her own natural offspring, she seizes upon every 
 straggling child upon which she can lay her hands, 
 and bears it off to make it the dupe of her own base 
 impositions.'''' * 
 
 Alas ! alas ! what had become of that charity 
 which hopeth all things when this teacher of the 
 religion of Jesus penned the preceding sentences ! 
 But thank God we are happ}^ to record that only a 
 few of the ministry of the M. E. Church so far forget 
 their calling and profession as to exhibit such a 
 spirit, or breathe such sentiments towards the 
 Methodist Protestant Church. 
 
 It is not necessary for us to declare the foregoing 
 
 * Bigotry often sways the feelings of Methodists, as well as of 
 other people, although Mr. Fletcher has said, " bigots are religious 
 savages." Upon a certain occasion, a popular minister of the 
 Methodist Protestant Church, traveling through a part of the 
 country where he was but little known, called in a country village 
 and was invited by a friend to preach in the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church at night. The invitation was accepted. An old side 
 brother, who was in the habit of giving utterance to his feelings 
 under the preaching of the word, but not much distinguished for 
 his charity towards Methodist Protestants, " shouted aloud " in 
 the congregation during the sermon. On the next day, meeting 
 with a friend, he inquired "who the minister was," with whom 
 he had been so much delighted the preceding evening. On being 
 told that he was a minister of the Methodist Protestant Church, 
 he exclaimed, "Well, if I had known that, I would not have 
 shouted last night!" 
 
 We relate these things not for the disparagement of the M. E. 
 Church, but to afford a glance at the opposition that is sometimes 
 exhibited by a few, within the pale of that communion, to the M. 
 P. Church, and that, too, for an honest difference of opinion about 
 church polity. 
 
348 
 
 HISTORY OF THE 
 
 assertions which we have quoted, to be destitute of 
 truth or the least semblance of truth; for history, 
 observation, and facts all combine to contradict 
 such assertions, and demonstrate to the world the 
 entire vanity of all such declarations. And throwing 
 the mantle of charity over all such men, the very 
 best, as well as the mildest conclusion at which we 
 can arrive, is simply this, that they are ignorant of 
 the things whereof they write or speak. 
 
 Of the labor, zeal and usefulness of the ministry 
 of the M. P. Church .jwe leave the world to judge. 
 Their efforts to promote the advancement of the 
 Redeemer's kingdom, by winning souls to Jesus, 
 have been abundantly owned and blessed of God. 
 Extensive and glorious revivals of religion have 
 crowned their labors in almost every part of the 
 United States where their efforts have been 
 directed. Believers have been edified and the 
 church built up and strengthened. They inculcate 
 the doctrines of free grace, and teach that " holi- 
 ness without which no man shall see the Lord." 
 Zealously enforcing these principles, and firmly 
 adhering to the Constitution and Discipline of the 
 church, they can, they will succeed. 
 
 Thus far the Methodist Protestant Church has 
 been abundantly blessed of God. May she ever 
 be watered with the dews of heavenly grace, be 
 instrumental in guiding millions of happy spirits 
 to heaven, until this lovely daughter of Zion 
 shall prove a praise and a blessing in the whole 
 earth. Amen. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 CONTAINING A REVIEW OF THE ORGANIZATION OF THE METHODIST 
 
 EPISCOPAL CHURCH, THE INTRODUCTION OF EP1SCOFACY, 
 
 AND THE EXCLUSION OF THE LAITY FROM THE | 
 
 COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Episcopacy. — Ordination among Methodist Preachers in Virginia in 
 1779. — Letter of Mr. Wesley to the American Methodists, dated 
 September 10th, 1784. — Remarks upon the preceding letter. — Dr. 
 Coke's letter of authority from Mr. Wesley. — Dr. Coke's letter to 
 Mr. Wesley. — Charles Wesley to his brother John. — Extracts 
 from Rev. Jesse Lee and Rev. James O'Kelley. 
 
 The history of the Methodist Episcopal Church, from its 
 organization in 1784 down to the present period, demonstrates 
 the fact that all the difficulties through which she has passed have 
 had their origin in the nature of that system of ecclesiastical 
 polity which she adopted, or rather which was adopted and palmed 
 upon her by the two Britons, — Coke and Asbury, — under the pro- 
 fessed sanction of Mr. Wesley's name. 
 
 In the economy of this government there are two points to 
 which we invite the particular attention of the reader, viz : Epis- 
 copacy, and the exclusion of the laity from any participation 
 whatever in the law or rule-making department of the church. 
 Episcopacy is a subject that has had its advocates as well as 
 opponents in almost every period of the history of the Christian 
 church. Various definitions have been given of its prerogatives 
 and powers as it exists among the different orders of Christians.. 
 The Church of Rome has her system of episcopacy. The Greek 
 Church has hers also. The Church of England boasts of the 
 scriptural authority of hers ; and her eldest daughter, the Protest- 
 ant Episcopal Church in the United States, brings forward her 
 30 
 
350 APPENDIX. 
 
 boastful pretensions to an " unbroken chain of prelatical succes- 
 sion" from the apostles down to the present period. And lastly, 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church presents before us her system of 
 episcopacy, into which we now propose to institute an inquiry 
 as to its validity. 
 
 It is generally asserted by the writers of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal school that the government of that church is to be attributed 
 to John Wesley, as its author and founder, so far as plan or sys- 
 tem is concerned. The truth or justice of this position it is now 
 our business to investigate. That John Wesley was the founder 
 of Methodism in Europe is admitted on all sides, and that he like- 
 wise supplied the American Methodists for a few years with 
 preachers sent over from England through his influence or by his 
 authority, is equally true. But that he recommended the " epis- 
 copal form of government," we regard as altogether untenable, 
 and it cannot be sustained by the facts in the case. 
 
 During the struggle of war between the American colonies and 
 the mother country, a contest of opinion sprang up among the 
 few Methodist preachers then in America, with regard to the 
 administration of the ordinances of the church. At a conference 
 held in Virginia, in 1779, the preachers, "feeling the want of the 
 instituted means of grace among the societies," consulted together, 
 and chose a committee for the purpose of ordaining ministers. 
 The committee thus chosen first ordained themselves, and then 
 proceeded to ordain and set apart other preachers for the same 
 purpose, that they might administer the holy ordinances of the 
 church of Christ* This movement produced a warm contention 
 anion": the Methodist preachers, many of them opposing such a 
 step as being informal and therefore invalid ; and in order to settle 
 the difficulty, it was agreed among them to desist from adminis- 
 tering the ordinances for one year, and that Mr. Asbury should, 
 in the space of that time, write to Mr. Wesley in England, and 
 lay their situation before him and get his advice. This was in 
 the year 1780. Mr. Wesley, in the year 1783, wrote a letter 
 of advice to the Methodist societies, exhorting them to "abide 
 by the Methodist doctrines and Discipline." But in the following 
 
 * Lee's History of the Methodists, p. 69. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 351 
 
 year, 1784, when peace had been established between the two 
 countries, and the colonies had become independent states, and all 
 British authority, both civil and ecclesiastical, being withdrawn, 
 and at an end in America, Mr. Wesley seems to have taken new 
 views with regard to the situation of the American Methodists, 
 as the following circular letter to them will show : 
 
 Bristol, September 10th, 1784. 
 To Dr. Coke, Mr. Jlsbury, and our brethren in North America : 
 
 1. By a very uncommon train of providences, many of the 
 provinces of North America are totally disjoined from the British 
 empire, and erected into independent states. The English govern- 
 ment has no authority over them, either civil or ecclesiastical, 
 any more than over the states of Holland. A civil authority is 
 exercised over them, partly by the Congress, partly by the state 
 Assemblies; but no one either exercises or claims any ecclesiastical 
 authority at all. In this peculiar situation some thousands of the 
 inhabitants of these states desire my advice ; and in compliance 
 with their desire, I have drawn up a little sketch. 
 
 2. Lord King's account of the primitive church convinced me 
 many years ago, that bishops and presbyters are the same order 
 and consequently have the same right to ordain. For many years 
 I have been importuned from time to time, to exercise this right, 
 by ordaining part of our traveling preachers. But I have still 
 refused, not only for peace' sake, but because I was determined 
 as little as possible to violate the established order of the national 
 church to which I belonged. 
 
 3. But the case is widely different between England and North 
 America. Here there are bishops who have a legal jurisdiction. 
 In America there are none, and but few parish ministers. So 
 that for some hundred miles together there are none either to bap- 
 tize or administer the Lord's supper. Here therefore my scruples 
 are at an end: and I conceive myself at full liberty, as I violate 
 no order and invade no man's right, by appointing and sending 
 laborers into the harvest. 
 
 4. I have accordingly appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. Francis 
 Asbury to be joint superintendents over our brethren in North 
 America. As also Richard Whatcoat and Thomas Vasey, to act 
 
352 APPENDIX. 
 
 as elders among them, by baptizing and administering the Lord's 
 supper. 
 
 5. If any one will point out a more rational and scriptural 
 way of feeding and guiding those poor sheep in the wilderness, I 
 will gladly embrace it. At present I cannot see any better method 
 than that I have taken. 
 
 6. It has indeed been proposed to desire the English bishops 
 to ordain part of our preachers for America. But to this I object, 
 1. I desired the bishop of London to ordain one only; but could 
 not prevail. 2. If they consented, we know the slowness of their 
 proceeding ; but the matter admits of no delay. 3. If they would 
 ordain them now, they would likewise expect to govern them. 
 And how grievously would this entangle us! 4. As our Amer- 
 ican brethren are now totally disentangled both from the state, 
 and from the English hierarchy, we dare not entangle them again 
 either with the one or the other. They are now at full liberty, 
 simply to follow the Scriptures and the primitive church. And 
 we judge it best that they should stand fast in that liberty where- 
 with God had so strangely made them free. 
 
 John Wesley. 
 
 The preceding letter is the only document that has ever been 
 produced in this country bearing the signature of the Rev. John 
 Wesley, having any relation to the organization of the Meth- 
 odists in America into a church. The declaration has often 
 been published to the world, that Mr. Wesley "preferred the 
 episcopal form of church government to any other," and that con- 
 sequently he had set apart and ordained Dr. Coke to the office of 
 bishop. And we find in the Methodist Episcopal Church Dis- 
 cipline the following statement laid down as an exposition of 
 the reasons and causes that led to the formation of that church, 
 as well as the steps taken in the same : 
 
 " The preachers and members of our society in general being 
 convinced that there was a great deficiency of vital religion in 
 the Church of England in America, and being in many places 
 destitute of the Christian sacraments, as several of the clergy had 
 forsaken their churches, requested the late Rev. John Wesley to 
 take such measures, in his wisdom and prudence, as would afford 
 
APPENDIX. 353 
 
 them suitable relief in their distress. In consequence of this, our 
 venerable friend, who, under God, had been the father of the great 
 revival of religion now extending over the earth by means 
 of the Methodists, determined to ordain ministers for America ; 
 and for this purpose in the year 1784 sent over three regularly 
 ordained clergy. But, preferring the episcopal mode of church 
 government to any other, he solemnly set apart, by the imposition 
 of his hands and prayer, one of them, viz: Thomas Coke, doctor 
 of civil law, late of Jesus College, in the University of Oxford, 
 and a presbyter of the Church of England, for the episcopal 
 office ; and having delivered to him letters of episcopal orders, 
 commissioned and directed him to set apart Francis Asbury, then 
 general assistant of the Methodist society in America, for the 
 same episcopal office, he, the said Francis Asbury, being first 
 ordained deacon and elder. In consequence of which, the said 
 Francis Asbury was solemnly set apart for the said episcopal 
 office, by prayer and the imposition of the hands of the said 
 Thomas Coke, other regularly ordained ministers assisting in the 
 sacred ceremony. At which time the General Conference held at 
 Baltimore did unanimously receive the said Thomas Coke and 
 Francis Asbury as their bishops, being fully satisfied of the validity 
 of their episcopal ordination." — See Methodist Book of Discipline. 
 The preceding is the account which the authorities of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church give of her origin. Is it in accord- 
 ance with the principles laid down and the statements made in 
 the foregoing letter signed by John Wesley? It is not. The 
 discrepancy is most palpable. The account in the Methodist 
 Discipline says " he (Mr. Wesley) solemnly set apart, by the 
 imposition of his hands and prayer, one of them, viz : Thomas 
 Coke, doctor of civil law, late of Jesus College, in the University 
 of Oxford, and a presbyter of the Church of England, for the 
 episcopal office." Mr. Wesley says, " Lord King's account of the 
 primitive church convinced me, many years ago, that bishops and 
 presbyters are the same order, and consequently have the same right 
 to ordain." Now, upon this avowal of Mr. Wesley, Dr. Coke 
 had as good a right to ordain Mr. Wesley to the episcopal office 
 as Mr. Wesley had to ordain him. They were both presbyters 
 in the Church of England, equal in office and equal in authority 
 30* 
 
354 APPENDIX. 
 
 so far as that office gave them authority in the church. In the 
 account given in the Discipline, we find the words " episcopal" 
 and " bishop," brought into use, but in Mr. Wesley's letter they 
 are not to be found, so far as the organization of a " Methodist 
 Episcopal Church" is concerned. 
 
 Mr. Wesley says, " I have accordingly appointed Dr. Coke 
 and Mr. Francis Asbury to be joint superintendents over our 
 brethren in America." That Mr. Wesley never intended by 
 the term " superintendent," in the preceding sentence, to convey 
 the idea that is attached to the term "bishop," is certainly sus- 
 ceptible of the clearest proof. For, 1. When he spoke of the 
 prelates or church dignitaries of the Church of England, of which 
 he was a member, he never used the term " superintendent" as 
 applicable to them at all, but invariably used the term "bishop." 
 2. Mr. Asbury, at the date of Mr. Wesley's letter, was nothing 
 more than a lay preacher, consequently when Mr. Wesley said* 
 " I have appointed Dr. Coke and Francis Asbury to be joint 
 superintendents," he could have had no reference whatever to 
 the ordination of Dr. Coke to the episcopacy. 3. If Dr. Coke 
 ever was ordained to the office of the episcopacy as taught and 
 received by the Methodist Episcopal Church, it had been done 
 prior to the date of Mr. Wesley's letter, which is entirely silent 
 upon the subject. And lastly, all who are acquainted with the 
 style and clearness of Mr. Wesley's sentences as a writer, must 
 admit that he was too concise to use the word " superintendent,' 
 to represent the idea of the episcopal office in a theological sense. 
 That Mr. Wesley gave Dr. Coke a letter testimonial of his 
 appointment as a "superintendent," we readily admit; but the 
 words "episcopacy" and "bishop" are not to be found therein. 
 As this novel document is to be found in Drew's Life of Dr. Coke, 
 we shall transcribe it for the satisfaction of the curious. 
 
 To all whom these presents shall come: John Wesley, late fel- 
 low of Lincoln College, in Oxford, presbyter of the Church of 
 England, sendeth greeting: 
 
 Whereas many of the people in the southern provinces of 
 North America, who desire to continue under my care, and still 
 adhere to the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, 
 
APPENDIX. 355 
 
 are greatly distressed for want of ministers to administer the sac- 
 rament of baptism and the Lord's supper, according to the usages 
 of the same church ; and whereas there does not appear to be any 
 other way of supplying them with ministers, 
 
 Know all men that I, John Wesley, think myself to be provi- 
 dentially called at this time to set apart some persons for the 
 work of the ministry in Ameiica. And, therefore, under the pro- 
 tection of Almighty God, and with a single eye to his glory, I 
 have this day set apart as a superintendent, by the imposition of 
 my hands and prayers, (being assisted by other ordained minis- 
 ters,) Thomas Coke, doctor of civil law, a presbyter of the 
 Church of England, and a man whom I judge to be well qualified 
 for that great work. And 1 do hereby recommend him to all 
 whom it may concern as a fit person to preside over the flock of 
 Christ. In testimony whereof 1 have hereunto set my hand and 
 seal, this second day of September, in the year of our Lord one 
 thousand seven hundred and eighty- four. 
 
 John Wesley. 
 
 There are two points that deserve particular attention in the 
 preceding document. First, that many of the Methodists in 
 America who desired to continue under the care of Mr. Wesley* 
 and " to adhere to the doctrines and discipline of the church of 
 England, were distressed for want of ministers to administer the 
 sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper, according to the 
 usage of the same church." From what is set forth in this item 
 it is evident that those people still wished to adhere to the doc- 
 trine and discipline of the Church of England; consequently they 
 desired no departure from her regulations; and of course neither 
 desired nor expected to recognize any man in the character of 
 " bishop," apart from those who derived their prelatical functions 
 and authority from that church ; and in order to meet these wants 
 of the people, a man of Mr. Wesley's goodness of heart and 
 rectitude of purpose could never have intended to place over them 
 a man holding an office contrary to the principles of the established 
 church. Secondly, that Mr. Wesley did set forth as a superin- 
 tendent, by the imposition of his hands and prayers, Thomas 
 Coke. Upon this point the question naturally arises, did Mr. 
 
356 APPENDIX. 
 
 Wesley in this act consecrate or ordain Dr. Coke a bishop? The 
 fair inference or answer is, he did not. If he had done so, his 
 candor was such that he would have been free to declare it. But 
 he uses neither of the terms, and merely states, " I have set 
 apart," &c. If he had regarded Dr. Coke as a " superintendent " 
 vested with the exclusive authority and prerogatives now claimed 
 by " the bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church," he would 
 have felt free to recognize him in that character. But the reverse 
 is true. Mr. Wesley had merely set apart Dr. Coke as a " super- 
 intendent," and not as a bishop. The object had in view in 
 setting apart Dr. Coke was, as it appears, that he might visit the 
 Methodists in America, under the sanction of Mr. Wesley's name 
 and influence, and make arrangements in order to their being sup- 
 plied with the "sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper." 
 And as Mr. Wesley declared over his own signature, eight days 
 after that setting apart, that Lord King's account of the primitive 
 church had convinced him years ago that bishops and presbyters 
 are the same order, it would be doing him not only gross injustice, 
 but charging him with folly, to assert that, entertaining such sen- 
 timents as this concerning ecclesiastical orders, he had set apart 
 or ordained Dr. Coke (who was then a presbyter in the Church of 
 England) to the office of bishop in the Methodist Church in 
 America. He was a man whose intentions were too pure to lay 
 himself liable to such a charge of duplicity. There is not an 
 instance on record in which he called either Dr. Coke or Mr. 
 Asbury "bishop." But he invariably opposed their assumption 
 of that title, of which there is an ample amount of documentary 
 testimony ; and that opposition must have been for the reason 
 that they were not bishops in his estimation, as they professed to 
 be ; or else his opposition to their use of the term rested upon 
 improper grounds, which none will presume to assert. 
 
 We shall here introduce one of Mr. Wesley's biographers, 
 Rev. Mr. Moore, to speak upon the point at issue. " With re- 
 spect to the title of bishop, I know that Mr. Wesley enjoined the 
 doctor and his associates, and in the most solemn manner, that it 
 should not be taken. In a letter to Mrs. Gilbert, the widow of 
 the excellent Nathaniel Gilbert, Esq., of Antigua, a copy of 
 which now lies before me, he states this in the strongest manner. 
 
APPENDIX. 357 
 
 " In this and every deviation, I cannot be the apologist of Dr. 
 Coke, and I can state, in contradiction to all Dr. Whitehead and 
 Mr. Hampson have said, that Mr. Wesley never gave his sanc- 
 tion to any of these things; nor was he the author of one line of 
 all that Dr. Coke published in America on this subject. His 
 views, on these points, were very different from those of his zeal- 
 ous son in the gospel. He knew that a work of God neither 
 needed, nor could be aided, nor could recommend itself to pious 
 minds by such additions." (Moore's Life of Wesley.) 
 
 The preceding testimony of Mr. Moore, Mr. Wesley's biogra- 
 pher, is to the point. It shows conclusively that Mr. Wesley 
 did oppose the pretensions of " Dr. Coke and his associates " to 
 the episcopacy, and consequently the terms, "episcopacy," " epis- 
 copal," and " bishop," so far as they are applied to the Methodist 
 Church, are purely of American invention. 
 
 The "setting apart of Dr. Coke as superintendent," and the 
 events that grew out of it, produced much dissatisfaction amongst 
 the warmest friends and most ardent admirers of Mr. Wesley. 
 Different views have been taken by many, with regard to the 
 motives that influenced his actions, and prompted him to pursue 
 the course so much deplored by his friends. At this period he 
 was far advanced in life, being in his eighty-second year, a period 
 of life in which the counsels and influence of others would most 
 likely succeed in warping him aside from a policy to which he 
 had long adhered, or cause him to abandon the well cherished 
 principles of earlier days. His brother, Mr. Charles Wesley, 
 speaking of this step says: 
 
 " 'Twas age that made the breach, not he." 
 
 History seems to be silent, or at least ambiguous, with regard 
 to the individual with whom the scheme originated, to " set 
 apart Dr. Coke as a, 'superintendent,'"' yet it appears, with all 
 the force of a moral certainty, that after the subject had been en- 
 tertained by Mr. Wesley he doubted the propriety of the mea- 
 sure. The clergymen who attended the conference at Leeds 
 opposed the scheme. 
 
 Says Dr. Whitehead, "Mr. Fletcher was consulted by letter, 
 who advised that a bishop should be prevailed upon, if possible, 
 
258 APPENDIX. 
 
 ?J 
 
 to ordain them, (Coke and others,) and then Mr. Wesley might 
 appoint them to such offices in the societies as he thought proper, 
 and give them letters testimonial of the appointment he had given 
 them. Mr. Wesley well knew that no bishop would ordain 
 them at his recommendation, and therefore seemed inclined to do 
 it himself. In this purpose, however, he appeared so languid, if 
 not wavering, that Dr. Coke thought necessary to use some fur- 
 ther means to urge him to the performance of it. Accordingly, 
 August 9, Mr. Wesley being then in Wales on his way to Bristol, 
 the doctor sent him the following letter: 
 
 Honored and Dear Sir, — The more maturely 1 consider the 
 subject, the more expedient it appears to me that the power of 
 ordaining others should be received by me from you, by the im- 
 position of your hands; and that you should lay hands on brother 
 Whatcoat and brother Vasey, for the following reasons: 1. It 
 seems to me the most scriptural way, and most agreeable to the 
 practice of the primitive churches. 2. I may want all the influ- 
 ence in America which you can throw into my scale. Mr. 
 Brackenbury informed me at Leeds that he saw a letter in Lon- 
 don from Mr. Asbury, in which he observed that he would not 
 receive any person deputed by you with any part of the superin- 
 tendency of the work invested in him, or words which evidently 
 implied so much. I do not find any, the least degree of prejudice 
 in my mind against Mr. Asbury, on the contrary a very great 
 love and esteem, and am determined not to stir a finger without 
 his consent, unless mere sheer necessity obliges me, but rather to 
 lie at his feet in all things. But as the journey is Jong, and you 
 cannot spare me often, and it is well to provide against all events, 
 and an authority formally received from you will (I am conscious 
 of it) be fully admitted by the people, and my exercising the office 
 of ordination without that formal authority may be disputed, if there 
 be any opposition on any account ; I would therefore earnestly 
 wish you would exercise that power in this instance, which I have 
 not the shadow of a doubt but God hath invested you with for the 
 good of our connexion. 1 think you have tried me too often to 
 doubt whether 1 will in any degree use the power you are pleased 
 to invest me with, further than I believe is absolutely necessary for 
 the prosperity of the work. 3. In respect of my brethren (bros. 
 
APPEXDIX. 
 
 25^ 
 
 What coat and Vasey), it is very uncertain indeed -whether any of 
 the clergy mentioned by brother Rankin will stir a step in the 
 work, except Mr. Jarrett ; and it is by no means certain that even 
 he will choose to join me in ordaining ; and propriety and universal 
 practice make it expedient that I should have two presbyters with 
 me in this work. In short, it appears to me that every thing 
 should be prepared, and every thing proper be done, that can pos- 
 sibly be done this side the water. You can do all this in Mr. 
 
 C n's house, in your chamber ; and afterwards (according to 
 
 Mr. Fletcher's advice) give us letters testimonial of the different 
 offices with which you have been pleased to invest us. For the 
 purpose of laying hands on brothers Whatcoat and Vasey, I can 
 bring Mr. C. down with me, by which you will have two pres- 
 byters with you. In respect to brother Rankiivs argument, that 
 you will escape a great deal of odium by omitting this, it is no- 
 thing. Either it will be known or not known; if not known, then 
 no odium will arise ; but if known, you will be obliged to ac- 
 knowledge that 1 acted under your direction, or suffer me to sink 
 under the weight of my enemies, with perhaps your brother at 
 the head of them. 1 shall entreat you to ponder these things. 
 Your most dutiful, T. Coke. 
 
 This letter affords matter for several observations, both of the 
 serious and comic kind; but I shall not indulge myself on the oc- 
 casion it so fairly offers. The attentive reader who examines 
 every part of it, will be at no loss to conjecture to whose in- 
 fluence we must impute Mr. Wesley's conduct in the present 
 business. 
 
 " That Mr. Wesley should suffer himself to be so far influenced 
 in a matter of the utmost importance, both to his own character 
 and to the societies, by a man of whose judgment in advising, 
 and talents in conducting any affair, he had no very high opinion, 
 is truly astonishing, but so it was ! Mr. Wesley came to Bristol, 
 and September 1, every thing being prepared as proposed above, 
 he complied with the doctor's earnest wish, by consecrating him 
 one of the bishops, and Messrs. Whatcoat and Yasey presbyters of 
 the new Methodist Episcopal Church in America."* 
 
 *See Whiteheads Life of Wesley, vol. ii. pp. 255-6. 
 
360 APPENDIX. 
 
 Dr. Coke was ordained in the manner, and at the place,, and 
 under the circumstances suggested and insisted upon in his letter 
 to Mr. Wesley. Can any one who has read, the account, for a 
 moment doubt with regard to the identity of the prime mover in 
 this strange procedure ? We find Dr. Coke petitioning for the 
 office, and setting forth the steps that might be taken in bestow- 
 ing that office upon him. In the next place, we find Mr. Wesley 
 granting the asked for boon, according to the request of the peti- 
 tioner, and Dr. Coke is set apart as a " superintendent." Up to 
 this period the term " bishop," had not been applied to Dr. Coke. 
 It was reserved to himself to take the initiative in the use of that 
 term. Mr. Wesley has been much censured by his friends for 
 the steps he took in the ordination or consecration of Dr. Coke, 
 and by none more so than by his brother, Charles Wesley. 
 
 Dr. Whitehead, one of Mr. Wesley's biographers, in speaking of 
 the ordination of Dr. Coke, uses the following language: "But 
 Mr. Wesley was never publicly elected by any presbyters and 
 people to the office of a bishop ; nor ever consecrated to it; which 
 made his brother Charles say : 
 
 • So easily are bishops made, 
 
 By man's or woman's whim ; 
 Wesley his hands on Coke hath laid, 
 
 But who laid hands on him ?' 
 
 The answer is, no body. His episcopal authority was a mere 
 gratuitous assumption of power to himself, contrary to the usage 
 of every church, ancient or modern, where the order of bishops 
 has been admitted. There is no precedent either in the New Tes- 
 tament or in church history that can justify his proceeding in 
 this affair. And as Mr. Wesley had received no right to exercise 
 episcopal authority, either from any bishops, presbyters, or peo- 
 ple, he certainly could not convey any right to others : his ordi- 
 nations, therefore, are spurious and of no validity. 
 
 " Nor can Mr. Wesley's practice of ordaining be justified by 
 those reasons which Presbyterians adduce in favor of their own 
 method of ordaining to the ministry ; for Mr. Wesley ordained 
 not as a presbyter, but as a bishop ! his ordinations, therefore, 
 were not presbyterian, nor will the arguments for presbyterian 
 ordination apply to them. 
 
APPENDIX. 361 
 
 "Let us review the arguments on this subject, reduced to a few- 
 propositions : 1. Mr. Wesley, in ordaining or consecrating Dr. 
 Coke a bishop, acted in direct contradiction to the principle upon 
 which he attempts to defend this practice of ordaining at all. 2. 
 As Mr. Wesley was never elected or chosen by any church to be 
 a bishop, nor ever consecrated to the office, either by bishops or 
 presbyters, he had not the shadow of right to exercise episcopal 
 authority in ordaining others, according to the rules of any church 
 ancient or modern. 3. Had he possessed the proper right to 
 ordain, either as a bishop or presbyter, (though he never did ordain 
 as a presbyter,) yet his ordinations, being done in secret, were 
 rendered thereby invalid and of no effect, according to the estab- 
 lished order of the primitive church, and of all Protestant 
 churches."* 
 
 Mr. Charles Wesley, who had walked hand in hand as it were 
 with his brother John, condemned in severe terms his policy and 
 conduct, as well as the " ambitious pursuits " of Dr. Coke, as the 
 following extract of a letter from him will show : 
 
 " I must not leave unanswered your surprising question, 'What 
 then are you frightened at ?' At the doctor's rashness and your 
 supporting him in his ambitious pursuits — at an approaching 
 schism as causeless and unprovoked as the American rebellion 
 — at your own eternal disgrace, and all those frightful evils which 
 your reasons describe. 'If you will go hand in hand with me, 
 do.' I do go, or rather creep on in the old way in which we set 
 out, and trust to continue in it until I finish my course. 'Perhaps 
 if you had kept close to me, I might have done belter.' When^you 
 took that fatal step at Bristol, 1 kept as close to you as close could 
 be; for I was all the time at your elbow. You might certainly 
 have done better if you had taken me in to be one of your council. 
 
 " I thank you for your intention to remain my friend. Herein 
 my heart is as your heart. Whom God hath joined let no man 
 put asunder. We have taken each other for better for worse, 
 till death do us part ?— no, but eternally unite. Therefore, in the 
 love which never faileth, I am, 
 
 " Your affectionate friend and brother, C. Wesley." 
 
 * See Whitehead's Life of Wesley, vol. ii, p. 269. 
 31 
 
362 APPENDIX. 
 
 We will now follow Dr. Coke to America, and notice his 
 movements in this country in reference to his new station as su- 
 perintendent. Jesse Lee says, in his history of the Methodists: 
 
 "As soon as Dr. Coke landed in America, he laid his plan to 
 meet Mr. Asbury as soon as possible, and traveling from New 
 York to Philadelphia, and then down into the Delaware state, he 
 met with Mr. Asbury at Barret's chapel on the 14th of the same 
 month. They then consulted together about the plan which Mr. 
 Wesley had adopted and recommended to us. After the business 
 was maturely weighed, and sufficient time was taken to consult 
 some more of the preachers who were present on that day, it was 
 judged advisable to call together all the traveling preachers in a 
 general conference, to be held at Baltimore, at Christmas. 
 
 "Mr. Freeborn Garrison undertook to travel to the south, in 
 order to give notice to all the traveling preachers of this intended 
 meeting. But being fond of preaching by the way, and thinking 
 he could do the business by writing, he did not give timely notice 
 to the preachers.'who were in the extremities of the work, and of 
 course several of them were not at the conference. 
 
 "December 27th, 1784. — The thirteenth conference began in 
 Baltimore, which was considered to be a General Conference, in 
 which Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury presided. 
 
 "At this conference we formed ourselves into a regular church, 
 by the name of the Methodist Episcopal Church, making at the 
 same time the episcopal office elective, and the elected superin- 
 tendent amenable to the body of ministers and preachers." 
 
 From this statement of Mr. Lee it is evident that only a small 
 attendance of the preachers was had at the Baltimore Conference 
 when the organization of the " Methodist Episcopal Church" 
 took place. 
 
 Mr. Asbury in his journal says, " Friday, 24th (December), 
 rode to Baltimore, where we met a few preachers ; it was agreed 
 to form ourselves into an episcopal church, with superintendents, 
 elders and deacons. When the conference was seated, Dr. Coke 
 and myself were unanimously elected to the superintendency of 
 the church. We were in great haste, and did much business in a 
 little time?'' 
 
 It is exceedingly strange that this body of men, convened for 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 363 
 
 the purpose of transacting business of such vast importance to the 
 spiritual interests of thousands, should act in such " great haste." 
 But perhaps these two Britons, Coke and Asbury, in order that 
 their favorite plans might be adopted in that body, found it most 
 expedient, as the presiding officers of the conference, to do " much 
 business in a little time." 
 
 We shall here introduce another witness who was present at 
 the Baltimore Conference of 1784, viz: Rev. James O'Kelley. 
 This distinguished minister in his "Apology" speaks thus: 
 
 " And it came to pass in the year of our Lord 1784, in the 
 twelfth month, the traveling preachers were called together to the 
 great city of Baltimore, to consider the contents of the circular 
 fetter. 
 
 " 2. We perceived the counsel given in the circular letter to be 
 good ; because we are directed to follow the Scriptures and the 
 primitive church ; and to stand fast in our liberties, seeing we 
 were free from the power of kings and bishops. Amen. 
 
 " 3. The conference unanimously agreed to separate from the 
 Church of England ; and therefore we formed our religious socie- 
 ties into an independent church. The title was the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church. 
 
 " 4. The term episcopacy did not set well on the minds of some, 
 seeing Mr. Wesley assured us it was not apostolic. But Thomas 
 explained it away, by that indefinitive term ' Methodist Episco- 
 pacy.' We had episcopacy but no bishop. 
 
 " 5. Thomas and Francis were our superintendents, as presiding 
 elders, according to John's appointment. But they were not 
 elected by the suffrage of conference, although it is so written in 
 the book of Discipline." 
 
 We have now introduced two witnesses who attended the Bal- 
 timore Conference of 1784, when the organization of the M. E. 
 Church took place. Mr. Asbury says, "we were in great 
 haste and did much business in a little time" Mr. James 
 O'Kelley says, "Thomas and Francis were our superintendents, 
 as presiding elders, according to John's (Wesley's) appointment. 
 But they were not elected by the suffrage of conference, although 
 it is so written in the book of Discipline." Here Mr. O'Kelley 
 joins issue with what is recorded in the book of Discipline. And 
 
364 APPENDIX. 
 
 we think his assertions in this case worthy of alJ credit, as he 
 was present at the Baltimore Conference, and was ordained to 
 the office of elder during its session, and maintained a character 
 of spotless purity until death. He declares that Dr. Coke and 
 Francis Asbury were not elected to their offices, as superinten- 
 dents of the church, by the suffrages of the conference. We have 
 also introduced Rev. Jesse Lee, who (ihere being no evidence 
 that we can gather of his being at the Baltimore Conference of 
 1784) says, "Mr. Asbury was appointed a superintendent by 
 Mr. Wesley, yet he would not submit to be ordained, unless he 
 could be voted in by the conference : when it was put to vote he 
 was unanimously chosen." But there is no evidence that we 
 have been able to find in our researches that will go to show that 
 Mr. Lee was at that conference, consequently he could not have 
 spoken as an eye witness. 
 
 Again, it has been asserted, and with much show of reason and 
 truth, that some of the general minutes of the early Methodist 
 Conferences have been altered; and if so, it was not an impossi- 
 bility for Jesse Lee to learn a different account of the manner in 
 which Mr. Asbury came into office from that given by Rev. James 
 O'Kelley. For instance, Mr. Lee tells us that at the Conference 
 of 1784 the following question and answer were adopted: 
 
 " Q. 2. What can be done in order to the future union of the 
 Methodists ? 
 
 " A. During the life of the Rev. John Wesley we acknowledge 
 ourselves his sons in the gospel, ready in matters belonging 
 to church government to obey his commands," &c. 
 
 And that at the conference of 1787 this engagement was left 
 out of the minutes. 
 
 Again, the same author tells us that "in the course of this year 
 (1787) Mr. Asbury reprinted the general minutes, but in a differ- 
 ent form from what they were before." That they (the superin- 
 tendents) gave themselves the title of bishop, in the minutes. That 
 " they changed the title themselves without the consent of con- 
 ference," &c. 
 
 Now taking this view of the case, we are forced to the natural 
 conclusion that inasmuch as those two Britons, who would be 
 American bishops, could presume to alter or change the " general 
 
APPENDIX. 365 
 
 minutes," the account given by Mr. O'Kelley, who was an eye 
 witness, is to be preferred to that of Rev. Jesse Lee. who was 
 probably not there ; and that " they (Coke and Asbury) were not 
 elected by the suffrage of conference although it is so written in 
 the book of Discipline." 
 
 But the reader may inquire, may we not place implicit reliance 
 upon the assertion of Mr. Asbury, when he says " Dr. Coke and 
 myself were unanimously elected to the superintendency of the 
 church ?" To which we reply that Mr. Asbury, in the printed 
 general minutes for 1787, left out the term " superintendent," and 
 inserted " bishop " in its place, without any authority for doing 
 so.* Therefore we come to the conclusion that, if Mr. Asbury 
 could allow himself such latitude in the use of terms, it was not 
 a difficult affair for him to write down the term or phrase in his 
 journal, "unanimously elected," when the plain import of the 
 transaction was nothing more than being " unanimously " received 
 by the conference as one of the superintendents of the church. 
 
 It will be borne in mind by the reader that Mr. Asbury was 
 brought up and educated in " a land of kings and bishops," in 
 which elections, according to the common acceptation of that 
 word, are not much in vogue ; and consequently, inasmuch as he 
 belonged to the British school, his ideas of "election" were not 
 of the American mould. It is well known that he was not an 
 admirer of "elections," even in the General Conference, and the 
 part that he and his friends acted in that body at its session in 
 Baltimore, in 1792, in opposition to the measure proposed allow- 
 ing the preachers the right of appeal to the conference from the 
 appointment of the bishop, if they thought themselves injured by 
 his appointment, goes to show his anti-republican feelings. Mr. 
 Asbury and his adherents advocated the absolute authority of the 
 "one-man-power," the bishop, upon that occasion, and defeated 
 the measure proposed. It was the principles laid down and the 
 doctrines advanced by Mr. Asbury and his friends, upon this 
 occasion, that induced the Rev. William McKendree (afterwards 
 bishop), the Rev. James O'Kelley, and several other traveling 
 ministers, to withdraw from the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 * See Lee's History of the Methodists, page 128. 
 31* 
 
366 APPENDIX. 
 
 Therefore, under all the circumstances we are fully persuaded 
 that the Rev. James 0"Kelley spoke what he knew to be true, 
 when he said, " Thomas and Francis were our superintendents, as 
 presiding elders, according to John's appointment; but they were 
 not elected by the suffrages of conference, although it is so written 
 in the book of Discipline." 
 
APPENDIX. 367 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury assume the title of bishop. — Remarks 
 upon the same. — Letter from Mr. Wesley to a friend. — Letter 
 from Mr. Wesley to Mr. Asbury, remonstrating with him about 
 the title " bishop." — Letter from Dr. Coke to Bishop White of 
 Philadelphia, proposing a union of the Methodist and Episcopalian 
 Churches. — Letter from Bishop White to one of his friends. 
 —Dr. Coke's certificate to the conference. — Dr. Coke's letter 
 to Mr. Wilberforce, soliciting the appointment of bishop in 
 connexion with the Church of England to India. — Remarks upon 
 the foregoing. 
 
 From what has been brought to view in the preceding chapter, 
 it is evident that the pretensions of Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury to 
 the episcopacy rest upon grounds both strange and unreasonable. 
 And if we extend our inquiries still further, we shall discover that 
 the position occupied by these two men is such as may well 
 excite in the bosom of the reader a sympathetic feeling for some 
 of the traits that belong to man's fallen nature. Mr. O'Kelley 
 tells us that " about the year 1787 Francis directed the preachers 
 whenever they wrote to him to title him bishop. They did 
 so: and this was the beginning of our spurious episcopacy." Up 
 to this time the title of " bishop " had not been used in the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church ; the two superintendo./s were known 
 only as such, but it seems they coveted quite a different title, and 
 in order to receive that title, were willing to condescend so low as 
 to take the initiative steps themselves. What a humiliating 
 thought ! But again we propose to call up another witness to 
 testify on this point. Rev. Jesse Lee says : " In the course of 
 this year (1787) Mr. Asbury reprinted the general minutes; but 
 in a different form from what they were before. * * * * This 
 was the first time that our superintendents ever gave themselves 
 the title of bishop in the minutes. They changed the title them- 
 selves, without the consent of the conference ; and at the next 
 conference they asked the preachers if the word bishop might 
 
368 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 stand in the minutes ; seeing it was a Scripture name, and the 
 meaning of the word bishop was the same with that of superin- 
 tendent. 
 
 "Some of the preachers opposed the alteration, and wished to 
 retain the former title ; but a majority of the preachers agreed 
 to let the word bishop remain." 
 
 Here, then, we have a concise history of the manner in which 
 episcopacy crept into the Methodist Episcopal Church. "Francis 
 directed the preachers when they wrote to him to title him bishop! 
 This was the first time our superintendents ever gave themselves 
 the title of bishop in the minutes. They changed the title them- 
 selves without the consent of the conference ! ! .'" Why was this 
 donej 1 Were they in truth and in fact bishops, and did the church 
 or the conference withhold from them their rightful titles? We 
 think not. Was this act of Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury intended 
 to promote the prosperity of the church or the cause of Christian- 
 ity? Surely it was not. The church had not thought proper to 
 call them bishops. The conference had not thought proper to call 
 them bishops. Therefore they were not regarded as bishops. 
 But they " gave themselves the title of bishop in the minutes," 
 " without the consent of the conference " Again, " at the next 
 conference they asked the preachers if the word bishop might 
 stand in the minutes;" thus was the favor asked, and thus the 
 much loved object gained. What a charm there must have been 
 in that name ! Is not this without a parallel in all ecclesiastical 
 history ? Where shall we find upon record a transaction amongst 
 the ministers of Protestant churches that exhibits so much of the 
 spirit of arrogance and of self-elevation ? But however pleasing 
 this title may have been to the fancy of these two Englishmen, it 
 appears from the testimony that we shall hereafter introduce in its 
 proper place, that Dr. Coke, at least, whom we shall designate as 
 the father of Methodist episcopacy, was far, very far from being 
 satisfied with his claims to legality in the episcopal office. 
 
 The conference of 1784 had adopted the following as one of 
 their binding rules : "During the life of the Eev. Mr. Wesley, 
 we acknowledge ourselves his sons in the gospel, ready in mat- 
 ters belonging to church government to obey his commands;" and, 
 strange to relate, the conference of 1787, which granted the 
 
APPENDIX. 369 
 
 request of Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury, that the word " bishop " 
 might stand upon the minutes in the room of " superintendent," 
 left off from their printed minutes this solemn acknowledgment 
 and obligation entered into. What could have been the motives 
 that led to this act? Was it not feared that his influence or au- 
 thority over the preachers would operate against the new-horn 
 episcopacy of the two superintendents? But this is not all ; for 
 we find from various sources of high and unquestionable author- 
 ity, that the name of the Rev. Mr. Wesley was also left off the 
 minutes of conference at the same time. In order to give the 
 reader an idea of the feelings of the venerable Wesley under such 
 treatment from those of whom he had a right to expect better 
 things, we shall insert a copy of an extract of a letter written by 
 Mr. Wesley to Rev. Beverly Allen, and first published by Rev. 
 Wm. Hammett of Charleston, South Carolina, in 1792. 
 
 London, October 31st, 1789. 
 
 My Dear Brother, — The point you desire my thoughts 
 upon is doubtless of no common importance. And I will give 
 you my settled thoughts concerning it without the least disguise 
 or reserve. Indeed this has been always my manner of speaking 
 when I speak of the things of God. It should be so now in par- 
 ticular, as these may probably be the last words that you will 
 receive from me. 
 
 It pleased God sixty years ago, by me, to awaken and join 
 together a little company in London, whence they spread through- 
 out the land. Sometime after I was much importuned to send 
 some of my children to America, to which I cheerfully consented. 
 God prospered their labors; but they and their children still es- 
 teemed themselves one family, no otherwise divided than as 
 Methodists on one side of the Thames are divided from the other. 
 I was therefore a little surprised when I received some letters from 
 Mr. Asbury, affirming that no person in Europe knew how to 
 direct those in America. Soon after he flatly refused to receive 
 Mr. Whatcoat in the character I sent him. 
 
 He told George Shadford, " Mr. Wesley and I are like Caesar 
 and Pompey, — he will bear no equal, and I will bear no superior." 
 And accordingly he quietly sat by, until his friends, by common 
 
370 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 consent, voted my name out of the American minutes. This 
 completed the matter and showed he had no connection with 
 me."* 
 
 Who can read this account given by Mr. Wesley of the treat- 
 ment he had received at the hands of Mr. Asbury, and not feel 
 fully convinced of the force of the truth, that Mr. Wesley's will 
 and authority had been most ungratefully discarded by those very 
 persons from whom he had a right to expect better treatment ? 
 
 But it must be borne in mind by the reader that Dr. Coke and 
 Mr. Asbury were now wearing the title, of bishop, and as Mr. 
 Wesley professed to be nothing more than " a presbyter of the 
 Church of England," they very possibly concluded that he was 
 quite an improper person to have any connection with, or au- 
 thority over them, being bishops of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. 
 
 From the documents and authorities which we have introduced 
 we can plainly perceive the improper, illegal and unjustifiable 
 manner in which episcopacy was foisted upon the Methodist 
 Church in America. These authorities are so plain and positive 
 in their statements, and so respectable as to character, that we are 
 not permitted to doubt. Yet the authorities of the M. E. Church 
 tell us that the episcopacy is derived from Mr. Wesley, that he 
 is the author of it. Rev. H. B. Bascom in his " Review of the 
 Manifesto' of the Majority," tells us " the full validity of our 
 episcopacy as exclusively derivedfrom Wesley must be admitted or 
 we have noneVf In reply to this proposition of Dr. Bascom, we 
 assume the ground that if the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 derived a "valid episcopacy exclusively from Mr. Wesley," no 
 man could have had a more certain knowledge of it than Mr. 
 Wesley himself, nor would any man upon earth have been more 
 free to confess and declare the same. He was a man that kept 
 but few secrets. Mr. Charles Wesley, in writing to a friend 
 about his brother John, uses the following language, "You ex- 
 pect he will keep his own secrets ! Let me whisper it into your 
 ear, he never could doit since he was born. It is a gift which God 
 
 * See Defence of Truth by Rev. A. McCaine, pp. 98-9. 
 f Review of the Manifesto of the Majority, p. 133 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 371 
 
 has not given me."* Therefore we assume the position that " the 
 full validity of Methodist episcopacy" never has been, and never 
 can be proved by any act or acknowledgment on the part of Mr. 
 Wesley; but the vanity and nothingness of the thing, as well as 
 the unreasonable and improper pretensions and claims of Dr. 
 Coke and Mr. Asbury to the title of li bisliop," by the declarations 
 of Mr. Wesley over his own proper name, we regard as being 
 easily established. 
 
 Soon after the transactions that look place in the conference of 
 1787 became known in England, and Mr. Wesley was fully 
 apprised that Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury had so arranged matters 
 in America, and that they were wearing the dignified and prelatical 
 title of "bishop," he wrote to Mr. Asbury the following letter: 
 
 London, September 20, 1788. 
 There is indeed a wide difference between the relation wherein 
 you stand to the Americans and the relation wherein 1 stand to 
 all the Methodists. You are the elder brother of the American 
 Methodists; I am under God the father of the whole family. 
 Therefore I naturally care for you all in a manner no other person 
 can do. Therefore f in a measure provide for you all ; for the 
 supplies which Dr. Coke provides for you, he could not provide 
 were it not for me — were it not that I not only permit him to col- 
 lect, but support him in so doing. 
 
 But in one point, my dear brother, I am a little afraid both the 
 doctor and you differ from me. 1 study to be little, you study to 
 be great. I creep ; you strut along. I found a school ; you a 
 college. Nay, and call it after your own names ! 0, beware ! 
 Do not seek to be something! Let me be nothing, and Christ be 
 all in all. 
 
 One instance of this your greatness has given me great con- 
 cern. How can you, how dare you suffer yourself to be called a 
 bvshojy? I shudder, I start at the very thought. Men may call 
 me a knave, or a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content; but 
 they shall never by my consent call me a bishop! For my sake, 
 for God's sake, for Christ's sake, put a full end to this ! Let the 
 Presbyterians do what they please, but let the Methodists know 
 their calling better. 
 
 * Whitehead's Life of Wesley, vol. ii, p. 227. 
 
372 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Thus, my dear Franky, I have told you all that is in my heart; 
 and let this, when I am no more seen, bear witness how sincerely 
 I am your affectionate friend and brother.* 
 
 John Wesley. 
 
 Can any man suppose that the pious and venerable Wesley, of 
 morals so pure, of intentions so upright, could thus address one 
 whom he regarded as a bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 in a valid or legitimate sense ? Never; no, never. Can any one 
 believe that Mr. Wesley would appoint or ordain Coke and 
 Asbury bishops in the church, and then say to them, " men may 
 call me a knave, or a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and 1 am content; 
 but they shall never by my consent call me a bishop ?" Surely 
 not. That illustrious man, who was great in goodness, could not 
 be guilty of such inconsistency and impropriety of conduct. His 
 letter to Mr. Asbury is a sharp one. He saw the effort on the 
 part of the two superintendents to elevate themselves in the 
 church, by departing from what he conceived to be the sphere of 
 duty and propriety; and as the case was a desperate one, the 
 honest, frank and sharp rebuke contained in the preceding letter, 
 was the remedy he saw proper to offer. Therefore we arrive at 
 the conclusion, from the language of the letter above, that " the 
 full validity of episcopacy, as exclusively derived from Mr. 
 Wesley," is not to be found in the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 If Mr. Wesley had created Dr. Coke a " bishop," it would have 
 been folly in the extreme for him to say to Mr. Asbury, 
 " for my sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, put a full end to 
 this." But, ah! the much-loved title was not put away. 
 
 From Lee's History of the Methodists we learn that in the 
 year 1789 "the bishops introduced a question into the annual 
 minutes which was as follows: 
 
 |; " Q. Who are the persons that exercise the episcopal office in 
 the Methodist Church in Europe and America ? 
 
 " A. John Wesley, Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury, hy 
 regular order and succession." 
 
 The reader will bear in mind that in 1787 the name of Mr. 
 Wesley had been left out of the minutes, and no reason assigned 
 
 *See Moore's Life of Wesley, vol. ii, p. 285. 
 
APPENDIX. 6(0 
 
 for the same. And we now find his name two years afterwards 
 restored to the minutes as one of the persons filling or exercising 
 the episcopal office in Europe and America. The fallacy of this 
 declaration is obvious, and the inconsistency involved is most 
 glaring, when we recall to mind the declarations of Mr. Wesley 
 to Mr. Asbury the preceding year: — " Men may call me a knave, 
 a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content; but they shall 
 never, by my consent, call me a bishop !" and added, " For my 
 sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, put a full end to this!" 
 Strange to relate, these two Britons, with these declarations of 
 Mr. Wesley as it were still ringing in their ears, after having two 
 years before left off his name from their minutes, now bring it 
 back, and not only reinstate it, but place it u-ith their own in the 
 answer to the above question ; and generations to come are to 
 understand, from that, that John Wesley was one of the bishops of 
 the Methodist Church in Europe and America; a name which he 
 held in more abhorrence than he did that of rascal or scoundrel. 
 
 Mr. Lee says : " The bishops introduced this question into the 
 minutes;" therefore we are left to understand that the confer- 
 ences had no band in the strange affair. As we do not pretend to 
 know the heart of any man, we shall not undertake to determine 
 the object had in view by these American " superintendents," in 
 placing the name of the Rev. John Wesley with theirs as one of 
 the bishops of the Methodist Church. It is enough to say it 
 suited their purpose, therefore they did it. But perhaps some 
 adherent of the ancient order of things might argue, as Dr. Emory 
 once did, in order to evade a difficulty, " They did enter him as 
 exercising the episcopal office, but they did not entitle him 
 bishop." To which we would answer in the language of the 
 Rev. A. McCaine, "To deny that Mr. Wesley was a bishop, 
 merely because he was only entered ' as exercising the episcopal 
 office,' is to deny that Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury were bishops, 
 for they were entered in the same way in the same answer. If, 
 therefore, it was necessary to constitute Mr. Wesley a bishop to 
 enter him by that title, it was equally necessary to enter Dr. Coke 
 and Mr. Asbury by that title to constitute them bishops." * 
 
 * Defence of the Truth, page 114. 
 32 
 
374 APPENDIX. 
 
 From the testimony which we have produced and Jaid down 
 upon the preceding pages of this chaper, it must be apparent to 
 every candid reader that the Rev. John Wesley can with no de- 
 gree of fairness be called the author or father of American Meth- 
 odist Episcopacy. And as Dr. Coke is said to be the first born 
 son in that line, we shall now proceed to show that even he 
 placed very little if any confidence in his claims to the legality of 
 his birthright — the episcopacy. 
 
 Messrs. Coke and Asbury might state, as they had set forth in 
 the Annual Minutes of 1789, that the persons "who exercised 
 episcopal office in Europe and America were John Wesley 
 Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury, by regular order and succes- 
 sion;" but knowing, as he well did, the firmness with which Mr. 
 Wesley repudiated all such pretensions and claims to the title of 
 " bishop," and as he professed to derive his claims to that office 
 upon Mr. Wesley's authority, he had ample reasons for becoming 
 dissatisfied with the validity of his " title," which was as unsub- 
 stantial as a " gilded toy," according to the principles laid down 
 and the definitions given by the best writers upon ecclesiastical 
 usages. Early in the year 1791 Dr. Coke opened a correspond- 
 ence with Bishop White, of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 
 who was then a resident at Philadelphia. The object proposed 
 in his correspondence was a union of the Methodist with the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church ; the re-ordination of the ministers 
 who had been ordained by himself and Mr. Asbury; "there was 
 also suggested by him a propriety, but not a condition made, of 
 admitting to the episcopacy himself and the gentleman associated 
 with him in the superintendence of the Methodist societies." As 
 this correspondence of Dr. Coke with the bishop is calculated to 
 throw much light upon the subject, with regard to the views he 
 entertained of his ordination to the episcopacy, we shall transcribe 
 his letter. 
 
 Right Reverend Sir, — Permit me to intrude a little upon 
 your time, upon a subject of great importance. 
 
 You, I believe, are conscious that I was brought up in the 
 Church of England, and have been ordained a presbyter of that 
 church, For many years 1 was prejudiced, even I think to bigotry, 
 
APPENDIX. 375 
 
 in favor of it; but through a variety of causes and incidents, to 
 mention which would be tedious and useless, my mind was ex- 
 ceedingly biased on the other side of the question. In consequence 
 of this, I am not sure but I went further in the separation of our 
 church in America than Mr. Wesley, from whom I had received 
 my commission, did intend. He did indeed solemnly invest me, 
 as far as he had a right so to do, with episcopal authority, but 
 did not intend, I think, that our entire separation should take 
 place. He being pressed by our fiiends on this side the water 
 for ministers to administer the sacraments to them, (there being 
 very few clergy of the Church of England in the states,) went 
 farther, I am sure, than he ivould have gone, if he had foreseen 
 some events which followed. And this I am certain of — that he is 
 now sorry for the separation. 
 
 But what can be done for a reunion, which I wish for, and to 
 accomplish which, Mr. Wesley, I have no doubt, would use his 
 influence to the utmost? The affection of a very considerable 
 number of the preachers and most of the people, is very strong 
 towards him, notwithstanding the excessive ill usage he received 
 from a few. My interest also is not small; and both his and 
 mine would readily, and to the utmost, be used to accomplish that 
 (to us) very desirable object ; if a readiness were shown by the 
 bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church to re- unite. 
 
 It is even to your church an object of great importance. We have 
 now above 60,000 adults in our society in these states ; and about 
 two hundred and fifty traveling ministers and preachers ; besides a 
 great number of local preachers, far exceeding the number of travel- 
 ing preachers, and some of these local preachers are men of very 
 considerable abilities; but if we number the Methodists as most 
 people number the members of their church, viz — by the families 
 which constantly attend the divine ordinances in theirplaces of wor- 
 ship, they will make a larger body than you possibly conceive. 
 The society, I believe, may be safely multiplied by five on an aver- 
 age, to give us our stated congregations, which will then amount to 
 300,000. And if the calculation, which I think some eminent 
 writers have made, be just, that three-fifths of mankind are unadult, 
 (if I may use the expression,) at any given period, it will follow 
 that all the families, the adults, which form our congregations in 
 these states amount to 750,000. About one-fifth of these are blacks. 
 
376 .APPENDIX. 
 
 The work now extends in length from Boston to the south 
 of Georgia; and in breadth, from the Atlantic to Lake Champlain, 
 Vermont, Albany, Redstone, Holstein, Kentucky, Cumberland, &c. 
 
 But there are many hindrances in the way. Can they be re- 
 moved ? 
 
 [ 1. Our ordained ministers will not, ought not to give up their 
 right of administering the sacraments. I do not think that the 
 generality of them, perhaps none of them, would refuse to submit 
 to a reordination, if other hindrances were removed out of the way. 
 I must here observe that between sixty and seventy only, out of 
 the two hundred and fifty, have been ordained presbyters, and about 
 sixty deacons (only.) The presbyters are the choicestof the whole. 
 
 2 The preachers would hardly submit to re-union if the pos- 
 sibility of their rising up to ordination depended upon the present 
 bishops in America. Because, though they are all, I think 1 may 
 say, zealous, pious, and very useful men, yet they are not ac- 
 quainted with the learned languages. Besides they would argue, 
 if the present bishops would waive the article of the learned lan- 
 guages, yet their successors might not. 
 
 My desire of a re-union is so sincere and earnest, that these 
 difficulties make me tremble; and yet something must he done 
 before the death of Mr. Wesley, otherwise I shall despair of success; 
 for though my influence among the Methodists in these States, as 
 well as in Europe, is 1 doubt not increasing, yet Mr. Asbury 
 whose influence is very capital, will not easily comply ; nay, I know 
 he icill be exceedingly averse to it. 
 
 In Europe, where some steps had been taken tending to a sepa- 
 ration, all is at an end. Mr. Wesley is a determined enemy of it, 
 and 1 have lately borne an open and successful testimony against it. 
 
 Shall I be favored with a private interview with you in Phila- 
 delphia? 1 shall be there, God willing, on Tuesday, the 17th of 
 May. tf this be agreeable, I'll beg of you just to signify it in a 
 note directed to me at Mr. Jacob Baker's, merchant, Market 
 street, Philadelphia; or if you please by a few lines sent me by 
 the return of the post, at Philip Rogers', Esq., in Baltimore, from 
 yourself or Dr. Magaw; and I will wait upon you with my 
 friend Dr. Magaw. We can then enlarge upon the subjects. 
 
 I am conscious of it that secrecy is of great importance in the 
 
APPENDIX. 6 ii 
 
 present state of the business, till the minds of you, your brother 
 bishops, and Mr. Wesley, be circumstantially known. I must 
 therefore beg that these things be confined to yourself and Dr. 
 Magaw, till 1 have the honor of seeing you. 
 
 Thus you see that I have made a bold venture on your honor 
 and candor, and have opened my whole heart to you on the 
 subject as far as the extent of a small letter will allow me. If 
 you put equal confidence in me, you will find me candid and 
 faithful. 
 
 I have notwithstanding been guilty of inadvertences. Very 
 lately I found myself obliged (for the pacifying of my conscience) 
 to write a penitential letter to the Rev. Mr. Jarrett, which gave 
 him great satisfaction ; and for the same reason I must write 
 another to the Rev. Mr. Pettigrew. 
 
 When I was last in America, I prepared and corrected a great 
 variety of things for our magazine, indeed almost every thing 
 that was printed, except some loose hints which I had taken of 
 one of my journeys, and which I left in my hurry with Mr. As- 
 bury, without any correction, entreating him that no part of them 
 might be printed which could be improper or offensive. But 
 through great inadvertency (I suppose) he suffered some reflec- 
 tions on the characters of the two above mentioned gentlemen to 
 be inserted in the magazine, for which I am very sorry ; and 
 probably shall not rest till I have made my acknowledgments 
 more public — though Mr. Jarrett does not desire it. 
 
 I am not sure whether I have not also offended you, sir, by 
 accepting one of the offers made me by you and Dr. Magaw of 
 the use of one of your churches, about six years ago, on my first 
 visit to Philadelphia, without informing you of our plan of sepa- 
 ration from the Church of England. If 1 did offend, (as I doubt 
 I did, especially from what you said to Mr. Richard Dallam of 
 Abingdon,) I sincerely beg yours and Dr. Magaw' ; pardon. I'll 
 endeavor to amend. But, alas ! I am a frail, weak creature. 
 
 I will intrude no longer at present. One thing only I will 
 claim from your candor: that if you have no thought of improv- 
 ing this proposal, you will burn this letter and take no more 
 notice of it, (for it would be a pity to have us entirely alienated 
 from each other, ii we cannot unite in the manner my ardent 
 32* 
 
378 APPENDIX. 
 
 wishes desire,) but if you will further negotiate business, I will 
 explain my mind still more fully to you on the probabilities of 
 success. 
 
 In the meantime permit me, with great respect, to subscribe 
 myself, right reverend sir, 
 
 Your very humble servant in Christ, 
 
 Thomas Coke. 
 The Rt. Rev. Father in God, Bishop White. 
 Richmond, April 24, 1791. 
 P. S. You must excuse interlineations, &c. I am just going 
 into the country and have no time to transcribe. 
 
 Dr. Coke in this letter to Bishop White having proposed an in- 
 terview with that gentleman, accordingly waited upon him, upon 
 his arrival in Philadelphia. The substance of the conversation 
 that passed between them has been given to the world in a letter 
 from Bishop White to one of his friends. The following is an 
 extract. 
 
 Philadelphia, July 30, 1804. 
 Reverend Sir: 
 
 In the spring of the year 1791, I received a letter from Dr. 
 Coke, on the subject of uniting the Methodist Society with the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church. An answer was returned. In con- 
 sequence of which, Dr. Coke, on his coming to town made me a 
 visit, having not then received my letter, but having heard that 1 
 had written. Our conversation turned chiefly on the aforesaid 
 subject. The general outlines of Dr. Coke's plan were a re- 
 ordination of the Methodist ministers, and their continuing under 
 the superintendence then existing, and on the practices of their 
 peculiar institutions. There was also suggested by him a pro- 
 priety, but not a condition made, of admitting to the episcopacy, 
 himself and tht!. gentleman associated with him in the superin- 
 tendence of the Methodist societies. This intercourse was com- 
 municated at that time from Dr. Coke to Dr. Magaw. I do not 
 know of any other person then informed of it, unless I may ex- 
 cept the gentleman above alluded to, by whom, if I have been 
 rightly informed, my letter to Dr. Coke was opened in his ab- 
 sence; such a freedom being understood, as I supposed, to arise 
 
APPENDIX. 379 
 
 out of the connection between the two gentlemen. But for this part 
 of the statement I cannot vouch. It was understood between Dr. 
 Coke and me that the proposal should be communicated to the 
 bishops of the Episcopal Church at the next convention, which 
 was to be in September, 1792. in New York. This was accord- 
 ingly done. After which 1 perceived no use of further commu- 
 nication on the subject ; and 1 have not since seen Dr. Coke, nor 
 heard from him, nor written to him. 
 
 It appears to me that the above comprehends either explicitly, 
 or by implication, all the points to which your letter leads. It 
 w r ould have been more agreeable to me, if no occasion of this 
 testimony had occurred ; and it is now given merely to prevent 
 the matter being understood otherwise than it really is. 
 
 The above is what I have written to Mr. McClaskey : and I 
 remain, &c. &c. Your aliectionate brother, 
 
 William White.* 
 
 From what is brought to light in the two preceding letters of 
 Dr. Coke and Bishop White, it is evident that the doctor placed 
 no reliance upon the validity of his title to the episcopacy. But 
 upon the contrary, the admissions and acknowledgments which 
 he makes all go directly to confirm and sustain ihe propositions 
 which we have laid down, that John Wesley never constituted 
 Dr. Coke a bishop; and that his pretensions to the episcopal 
 office, and his founding them upon the authority of Mr. Wesley, 
 all amount to a mere nullity. Of this Dr. Coke appears to have 
 been fully sensible. 
 
 We now proceed to notice some of the contents of the doctor's 
 letter, and in the first place invite attention to this particular sen- 
 tence : " He (Wesley) did indeed solemnly invest me, as far as he 
 had a right to do so, with episcopal authority, but did not intend, 
 I think, that our entire separation should take place." Dr. Coke 
 had been brought up in the Church of England, and well under- 
 stood the principles laid down in the formulary of that church. 
 He also knew that, according to the same, a presbyter had no 
 
 * See History and Mystery of Methodist Episcopacy, by Rev. A. 
 McCaine, p. 27. 
 
3S0 APPENDIX. 
 
 "authority" to ordain or consecrate a presbyter to the episcopal 
 office. He well knew that Bishop White had been ordained to 
 the episcopacy by the proper authorises in England, as laid 
 down in the formulary of the established church; that he sub- 
 scribed to the doctrines and principles of that formulary: and 
 therefore, when Dr. Coke said to Bishop White, "He did indeed 
 solemnly invest me, as far as he had a right so to do, with episco- 
 pal authority," he as a matter of course well understood and 
 believed that the bishop knew the Rev. John Wesley, a presbyter 
 of the Church of England, had no authority, whatever, to invest 
 any man loilh "episcopal authority,'" and that all such inveslure 
 amounted to nothing more than a perfect nullity, and consequently 
 could be regarded in no other light. 
 
 Again, the propositions in the letter of Dr. Coke to Bishop 
 White, in relation to a union of the Methodist and Protestant 
 Episcopal Churches, appear to have been made by the doctor, 
 without consulting his colleague, Mr. Asbury, or the traveling 
 preachers, or the sosieties, or even Mr. Wesley. 
 
 It was a secret business. None of these were consulted. The 
 project originated in his own mind ; and we find him willing to 
 transfer the Methodist Church, without consulting either the 
 preachers or laity, to the Protestant Episcopal Church. No man 
 will presume to assert that Dr. Coke had any authority whatever 
 for making the overtures, which he did, to Bishop White. It was 
 done without authority. It was done without the knowledge or 
 expectation of any of the departments of the church, for they 
 expected better things at his hands, and well he might say to the 
 bishop, " I am conscious of it that secrecy is of great importance 
 in the present state of the business." 
 
 The next thing which we shall notice is that most remarkable 
 and striking suggestion which Dr. Coke made in his private in- 
 terview with Bishop White. The bishop, enumerating in his 
 letter the outlines of the plan of Dr. Coke, says, " There was 
 also suggested by him a propriety, but not a condition made, 
 of admittiiig to the episcopacy, himself and the gentleman 
 associated with him in the superintendence of the Methodist 
 societies. 
 
 Here then we have another tacit acknowledgment on the part 
 
APPENDIX. 381 
 
 of the doctor, that he did not regard himself as being invested 
 with the functions of a bishop as understood among churchmen. 
 In his letter to the bishop he had stated, " I don't think that the 
 generality of them, (the ministers,) perhaps none of them, would 
 refuse to submit to a re-ordination, if other hindrances were re- 
 moved out of the way." These ministers had been ordained by 
 Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury, and if they were "bishops," their 
 right to ordain others to the ministry according to the practice 
 of the English Church was unquestionable. If Dr. Coke 
 was willing that these ministers should be re-oidained, it 
 was a tacit admission that he and Mr. Asbury had no right to 
 ordain, and the reader will bear in mind that the doctor was ac- 
 tually making an effort at negotiation for their re-ordination. 
 Taking whatever view of this affair we may, we are forced to 
 the conclusion that if Dr. Coke regarded himself as a bishop, 
 his conduct is passing strange. 
 
 The suggestion of the doctor to the bishop, of the propriety of 
 "admitting to the episcopacy " himself and the gentleman asso- 
 ciated with him, seems to betray altogether an absence of that 
 modesty which should mark the movements of the ministers of 
 Christ, and which should certainly pertain to one who professed 
 to belong to an order of ministers above that of presbyter. But 
 the doctor wished to take rank with the episcopacy, and as prac- 
 tical authority suited his views and feelings best — and if we may 
 infer from this action of the man, he did not consider himself in 
 any valid or ecclesiastical sense of the term a bishop, as under- 
 stood by those brought up in the English Church, — and " secrecy 
 being important in the present state of the business," and no one 
 being ready or prepared to represent his claims to the episcopacy, 
 he took the initiative himself. And — shall it be written ? — 
 " Bishop" Coke " suggested the propriety of his being admitted 
 to the episcopacy." 
 
 Such claims, such pretensions, and such proceedings as we 
 have detailed with regard to the introduction of episcopacy into 
 the Methodist Church in America, can scarcely find a parallel in 
 ecclesiastical history since the reformation. But these projects of 
 Dr. Coke all failed. He had declared in his letter to Bishop 
 White, that " something must be done before Ike death of Mr. 
 
382 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Wesley, otherwise I shall despair of success." It had been 
 agreed upon between him and Bishop White that his proposal of 
 a union between the two churches should be laid before the Pro- 
 testant Episcopal Convention which was to convene in New 
 York, in September, 1792. The faithful and laborious Wesley 
 closed his useful life on the 2d day of March, 1791. The pro- 
 ject of Dr. Coke failed. If Mr. Wesley had lived, who was 
 strongly attached to the established Church of England, we can- 
 not tell what turn affairs might have taken, or what would have 
 been the result of Dr. Coke's negotiations. 
 
 The motives that led Dr. Coke to take these steps are hard to 
 fathom. He had been in the practice of using high-handed mea- 
 sures — such it is presumed as he thought compatible with the 
 prerogatives of his episcopal authority, from the beginning of his 
 connection with the Methodists in America; and although he 
 was recognized by them as " one of the bishops of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church," yet at the conference at Baltimore, in 1787, 
 they cut down his episcopal authority to such a degree, that his 
 position as a "bishop" was rendered quite anomalous. The Rev. 
 Jesse Lee says, " At the Baltimore Conference the preachers 
 complained of Dr. Coke, because he had taken upon himself a 
 right which they never gave him, of altering the time and place 
 of holding our Conference, after it had been settled and fixed on 
 at the previous conference. Another complaint was brought 
 against him for writing improper letters to some of our preachers, 
 such as were calculated to stir up strife and contentions among 
 them." 
 
 At that time the doctor saw that the preachers were pretty gen- 
 erally united against him, he acknowledged his faults, begged 
 pardon, and promised not to meddle with our affairs again when 
 he was out of the United States. . He then gave in writing a cer- 
 tificate to the same purpose, which is as follows : 
 
 CERTIFICATE OF DR. COKE TO THE CONFERENCE. 
 
 I do solemnly engage by this instrument, that I never will, 
 by virtue of my office, as superintendent of the Methodist Church, 
 during my absence from the United States of 'America, exercise 
 any government in the said Methodist Church during my absence 
 
APPENDIX. 3S3 
 
 from the United States. And I do also engage that 1 will exer- 
 cise no privilege in the said church when present in the United 
 States, except that of ordaining according to the regulations and 
 law already existing, or hereafter to be made in the said church, 
 and that of presiding when present in conference, and lastly, 
 that of traveling at large. 
 
 Given under my hand the second day of May, in the year 1787. 
 
 Thomas Coke. 
 Witnesses, John Tunnil, 
 John Hagerty, 
 Nelson Reed. 
 
 The preachers then agreed to forgive what was past, provided 
 this condition should be expressed in the minutes, which was 
 done thus: 
 
 " Q. Who are the superintendents of our church for the United 
 States. 
 
 " A. Thomas Coke (when present in the States) and Francis 
 Asbury." 
 
 The position in which the preceding certificate which Dr. Coke 
 was required to give, and the condition thus expressed in the 
 minutes, had placed him, was such that his claims to "episcopal 
 authority" may be justly controverted on every side. If Dr. 
 Coke was a " bishop" at all, in a proper ecclesiastical sense of 
 that term, he was as much a "bishop" when in Europe as he 
 was when in the United States. If he had been consecrated a 
 "bishop" by the imposition of the hands of the Rev. John Wes- 
 ley, as a matter of course, his "episcopal authority" over his 
 bishopric was the same, unchanged and unchangeable, wherever 
 he was, so long as he held that official station. The Rev. James 
 O'Kelley, in giving an account of the transactions that took place 
 at this conference, says, " the free people of America were ex- 
 ceedingly jealous of the growing body of Methodists, because of 
 the European heads;" but we are not aware that such feelings 
 could have influenced the conference in its action in the case of 
 Dr. Coke. Mr. Asbury likewise was from the same land of 
 "bishops and kings," and yet the conference saw proper to "clip 
 the wings" of the former as regards the exercise of his " episco- 
 
3S4 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 pal authority," and at the same time left the other untrammeled 
 in the exercise of the functions of his office. But such was the 
 character of Methodist Episcopacy in 1787. Such was its char- 
 acter in 1791, when Dr. Coke attempted to negotiate with Bishop 
 White to effect a union between the Methodist and Protestant 
 Episcopal Churches. And yet Dr. Bascom, one of the champions 
 of southern Methodism, in speaking of this same " episcopacy," 
 uses the following remarkable language: "Not only had the 
 General Conference done nothing toward the institution of episco- 
 pacy, but even the church had not. Its existence dates back 
 before the birth of either. It was the first grand substantive 
 arrangement around which all others subsequently clustered and 
 assumed organic form."* 
 
 Dr. Bascom has written this remarkable sentence while treat- 
 ing of the character of Methodist Episcopacy, "the full validity 
 of our episcopacy, as exclusively derived from Wesley, must be 
 admitted or we have none." We have already seen, from the tes- 
 timony before us, Dr. Coke, whose name stands as the first bora 
 in that episcopal line, in his overtures to Bishop White, to all 
 intents and purposes, renouncing "the full validity'' of his claims 
 to the episcopal office, ill the admissions and overtures which he 
 made to that gentleman. Again, we find Dr. Coke, eight years 
 afterwards, petitioning the bishop of London to ordain a given 
 number of preachers proposed by the British Conference.! How 
 does this sound ! What " full validity " do we find set forth in this 
 act ? "Bishop" Coke of the Methodist Church, petitions the 
 Bishop of London, of the English Church, to ordain "a given 
 number" of Methodist preachers ! What is the plain inference 
 to be drawn from this transaction ? It is simply this, "Bishop" 
 Coke tacitly admits that he had no authority to ordain. Why ? 
 Because he was not a " bishop." 
 
 Again we find Dr. Coke in 1813, petitioning some of the most 
 eminent and influential British statesmen, who stood high with 
 the government, for episcopal orders, and proposing a willingness 
 " to renounce all connection with the Methodists if the prince 
 regent would only make him bishop for India." If any thing 
 
 * Review of the Manifesto of the Majority, p. 160. 
 t See Drew's Life of Dr. Coke, page 288. 
 
APPENDIX. 3S5 
 
 should yet be wanting to satisfy the honest advocates of " Meth- 
 odist Episcopacy" that Dr. Coke had no confidence in his own 
 claims of episcopacy — that he. was no bishop — and that some 
 proceedings, altogether wrong, were had in the formation of the 
 government of the M. E. Church, surely the following letter 
 will. It is copied from " Wilberforce's Correspondence," vol. 2, 
 page 114, and kindly furnished me by my much esteemed friend 
 and brother, the Rev. Alexander McCaine. Here is the letter. 
 
 At Samuel Hague's, Esq., Leeds, April 14, 1813. 
 
 Dear and Highlv Respected Sir, — A subject which appears 
 to me of great moment lies upon my mind, and yet it is a subject 
 of such a delicate nature, that I cannot venture to open my mind 
 upon it to any one of whose candor, piety, delicacy and honor I 
 have not the highest opinion. Such a character I do indubitably 
 esteem you, sir, and as such 1 will run the risk of opening my 
 whole heart to you upon the point. 
 
 For at least twelve years, sir, the interests of our Indian em- 
 pire have lain very near my heart. In several instances 1 have 
 made attempts to open a way for missions to that country, and 
 even for my going over there myself, but every thing proved 
 abortive. 
 
 The prominent desire of my soul, even from my infancy (I 
 may almost say), has been to be useful. Even when I wasadeist 
 for part of my time at Oxford, (what a miracle of grace !) useful- 
 ness was my most darling object. The Lord has been pleased to 
 fix me for about thirty-seven years on a point of great usefulness. 
 Myinfluence in the large Wesleyan connexion, the introduction and 
 superintendence of our missions in different parts of the globe, 
 and the wide sphere opened to me for the preaching of the gospel 
 to almost innumerable large and attentive congregations, have 
 opened to me a very extensive field for usefulness. Could I but 
 close my life in being the means of raising a spiritual church 
 in India, it would satisfy the utmost ambition of my soul here 
 below. 
 
 1 am not so much wanted in our connexion at home as I once 
 was. Our " committee of privileges," as we term it, can watch 
 over the interests of the body, in respect to laws and government, 
 33 
 
386 APPENDIX. 
 
 as well in my absence as if I was with them. Our missionary 
 committee in London can do the same in respect to missions, and 
 would only make them feel their duty more incumbent upon 
 them. Auxiliary committees through the nation, (which we 
 have now in contemplation,) will amply supply my place in 
 respect to raising money. There is nothing to influence me much 
 against going to India, but my extensive sphere for preaching the 
 gospel. But this I do assure you, sir, sinks considerably in my 
 calculation in comparison of the high honor, (if the Lord was to 
 confer it upon me in his providence and grace,) of beginning or 
 reviving a genuine work of religion in the immense regions of 
 Asia. 
 
 Impressed with these views, I wrote a letter about a fortnight 
 ago to the earl of Liverpool. I have either mislaid the copy of it 
 or destroyed it at the time for fear of its falling into improper 
 hands. After an introduction drawn up in the most delicate man- 
 ner in my power, I took notice of the observations made by Lord 
 Castlereagh in the House of Commons, concerning a religious 
 establishment in India connected with the established church at 
 home. I then simply opened my situation in the Wesleyan 
 connection as 1 have stated to you, sir, above. I enlarged on the 
 earnest desire I had of closing my life in India: observing that if 
 his royal highness the prince regent and the government should 
 think proper to appoint me their bishop in India, I should most 
 cheerfully and most gratefully accept the offer. I am sorry I 
 have lost the copy of this letter. In my letter to Lord Liverpool 
 I observed that I should, in case of my appointment to the 
 episcopacy of India, return most fully and faithfully into the 
 bosom of the established church, and do every thing in my power 
 to promote its interest, and would submit to all such restrictions 
 in the fulfilment of my office as the government and bench of 
 bishops at home should think necessary. That my prime motive 
 was to be useful to the Europeans in India ; and that my second 
 (though not the least) was to introduce the Christian religion 
 among the Hindoos by the preaching of the gospel and perhaps 
 also by the establishment of schools. 
 
 I have not, sir, received an answer. Did I think that the 
 answer was either withheld because Lord Liverpool considered 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 387 
 
 me as acting very improperly by making the request, I should 
 take no farther step in the business. This may be the case, but 
 his lordship's silence may have arisen from other motives: on 
 the one hand because he did not choose to send me an absolute 
 refusal, and on the other hand because he did not see proper, at 
 least just now, to give me any encouragement. When I was in 
 doubt this morning whether I ought to take the liberty of writing 
 to you, my mind became determined on my being informed about 
 three hours ago, that in a letter received from you by Mr. Hey, 
 you observed that the generality of the House of Commons were 
 set against granting any thing of an imperative kind to the Dis- 
 senters or Methodists in favor of sending missionaries to India. 
 Probably I may err in respect to the exact words which you used. 
 
 I am not conscious, my dear, respected sir, that the least degree 
 of ambition influences me in this business. I possess a fortune 
 of £1,200 a year, which is sufficient to bear my traveling ex- 
 penses, and to enable me to make many charitable donations. I 
 have lost two dear wives, and am now a widower. Our leading 
 friends through the connection receive me and treat me with the 
 utmost respect and hospitality. I am quite surrounded with 
 fiiends who greatly love me : but India still cleaves to my heart. 
 I sincerely believe that my strong inclinations to spend the re- 
 mainder of my life in India originated in the divine will, whilst I 
 am called upon to use the secondary means to obtain the end. 
 
 1 have formed an intimate acquaintance with Dr. Buchanan, 
 and have written to him to inform him that I shall make him a 
 visit in a few days, if it be convenient. From his house 1 intend, 
 Deo volante, to return to Leeds for a day, and then set off next 
 week for London. The latter end of last November I visited 
 him before, at Moat Hall, his place of residence, and a most 
 pleasant visit it was to me, and also to him I have reason to 
 think. He has been, since I saw him, drinking of the same bitter 
 cup of which I have been drinking, by the loss of a beloved wife. 
 
 1 would just observe, sir, that a hot climate peculiarly agrees 
 with me. I was never better in my life than when in the West 
 Indies, during the four visits I made to that Archipelago, and 
 should now prefer the torrid zone as a climate to any part of the 
 world. I enjoy in this country, though sixty-five years of age, 
 
:ss 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 such an uninterrupted flow of health and strength as astonishes 
 all my acquaintances. They commonly observe that they have 
 perceived no difference in me for these last twenty years. 
 
 I would observe, sir, as I did at the commencement, that I 
 throw myself on your candor, piety and honor. If I do not suc- 
 ceed in my views of India, and it were known among the 
 preachers that 1 had been taking the steps I am now taking, 
 (though, from a persuasion that I am in the divine will in so 
 doing,) it might more or less affect my usefulness in the vineyard 
 of my Lord, and that would very much afflict me. And yet, not- 
 withstanding this, 1 cannot satisfy myself without some advances 
 in the business. 
 
 I consider, sir, your brother-in-law, Mr. Stephen, to be a man 
 of eminent worth. I have a very high esteem for him. ] know 
 that his yea is yea, and what he promises he certainly will per- 
 form. Without some promise of confidence he might (if he 
 were unacquainted with the present business) mention it to 
 Mr. , with whom 1 know Mr. Stephen is acquainted. 
 
 I have reason to believe that Lord Eldon had (indeed I am sure 
 of it) and probably now has an esteem for me. Lord Sidmouth 
 I do think loves me. Lord Castlereagh once expressed to Mr. 
 Alexander Knox, then his private secretary in Ireland, his very 
 high regard for me; since that time I have had one interview with 
 his lordship in London. I have been favored on various occa- 
 sions with private and public interviews with Lord Bathurst. I 
 shall be glad to have your advice whether I should write letters 
 to those noblemen, particularly to the two first, on the present 
 subject, or whether I had not better suspend every thing and have 
 the pleasure of seeing you in London. I hope I shall have that 
 honor. I shall be glad to receive three or four lines from you 
 (don't write unless you think it may be of some immediate im- 
 portance,) signifying that I may wait on you immediately on 
 
 my arrival in London. If Mr. were acquainted with 
 
 the steps I am taking, he would I am nearly sure call imme- 
 diately a meeting of our committee of privileges, and the conse- 
 quences might be unfavorable to my influence and consequently 
 to my usefulness among the Methodists. But my mind must- be 
 
APPENDIX. 3S9 
 
 eased. I must venture this letter and leave the whole to God, 
 and under him, sir, to you. 
 
 With very high respect, my dear sir, your very much obliged, 
 very humble, and very faithful servant, 
 
 T. Coke. 
 
 This letter is the most remarkable document of the kind we 
 have ever read. When we take into consideration the position 
 of its author, his calling and character before the world, we are 
 forced to the conclusion that it must stand alone, as having no 
 parallel among all the petitions of office-hunters or the seekers 
 of promotion and preferment from the civil authorities and 
 " powers that be." The doctor's letter to Bishop White was bad 
 enough, considering his profession and calling; but this one to 
 Mr. Wilberforce is still worse. He sets out in his introduction 
 by declaring the prominent and leading desire of his soul to be 
 useful, and extolling the great sphere of usefulness in which he 
 was then acting, and his influence in the large Wesleyan con- 
 nexion. In the next place he brings to view the ease or pro- 
 priety with which he could be released from his sphere of use- 
 fulness and influence in Europe, and then arrives at the gist of 
 the subject, the main point in the grand question, " observing that 
 if his royal highness the prince regent and the government 
 should think proper to appoint me their bishop in India, I should 
 most cheerfully and most gratefully accept of the offer." 
 
 Here we find this " bishop" of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 a second time presenting himself as an applicant for promotion to 
 the episcopacy. 
 
 1. He suggested the propriety of his being admitted to the 
 episcopacy in the United States, in 1791. 
 
 2. He petitions the British government to appoint him bishop 
 to India, in 1813. 
 
 Yet the historical records of the M. E. Church teach us that 
 Dr. Coke all this time was " one of the bishops of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church." But the conduct of Dr. Coke contradicts the 
 assertion. If he was a " bishop " in his own estimation, he 
 never would have petitioned for the appointment of " bishop " 
 from any source whatever. But it appears from the actions of 
 33* 
 
390 APPENDIX. 
 
 the man that promotion suited his views of propriety concerning 
 himself, and that episcopacy was a "gilded toy" which pleased 
 his fancy ; that no possible opportunity therefore was suffered 
 to pass unimproved by him by which he might be raised to the 
 office of bishop. The preceding letter breathes the spirit of 
 vanity, egotism and ambition. He coveted the office of bishop 
 and taking his own case into his own hands, laying aside all 
 modesty, he becomes a petitioner directly to the British govern- 
 ment for the much-loved and long-sought appointment. If he 
 had ever received or had been invested with "episcopal authority" 
 by Mr. Wesley, it is now forgotten or lost sight of, and the whole 
 mind of the man is absorbed in the deep interest which he feels 
 in being appointed bishop to India. He does not write as a 
 bishop ; he makes no pretensions to such a title or such an office, 
 but he is welting that office. His position is that of an applicant 
 before those whom he acknowledges to be possessed of the 
 power to bestow. And where is the man that can say, in view of 
 all these, things, that Dr. Coke had any legal claims to the office 
 of " bishop .'" If he was a bishop he would have known it. If 
 he had known it he would not have become an applicant for the 
 office. The conclusion then is, he was not a " bishop." 
 
 This letter of Dr. Coke to Mr. Wilberforce abounds with the 
 most fawning flattery and sycophantic adulation that we have 
 ever read. As an American, we declare it altogether unworthy 
 of the profession of the man. But it was written in a land of 
 "bishops and kings," by one whose education was deeply imbued 
 with the spirit of such institutions, and where flattery often 
 served, instead of merit, as a passport to promotion. Were it 
 not that this letter comes to us through the highly respectable 
 channel which it does, " Letters and Correspondence of Mr. Wil- 
 berforce," we should hardly be prepared to' receive it. But the 
 name and character of Wilberforce do away all suspicion that 
 might arise as to the authority of the letter. One peculiar feature 
 likewise is to be found in it which belonged to the letter written 
 to Bishop White, viz: the injunction of secrecy. 
 
 Dr. Coke was a subject of the king of Great Britain, and his 
 views and sentiments no doubt were far from being of the republi- 
 can mould. In the part which he took in organizing the govern- 
 
APPENDIX, 391 
 
 ment of the M. E. Church the principles of republicanism seem to 
 have entered into none of his measures. There was an address 
 drawn up and presented to General Washington, president of the 
 United States, and signed by Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury, 
 as bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, in which they 
 lauded the constitution of the United States, and declared it to be 
 •the "admiration of the world." This address bears date "May 
 19th, 1789." For signing this address to the president of the 
 United States Dr. Coke was charged before the British Confer- 
 ence; the sentiments which it set forth being thought by the 
 British Conference to be unworthy of a subject of his majesty. 
 He was censured for this act by his name being left off the 
 minutes for one year. 
 
 From the facts and circumstances which we have narrated, it 
 must be evident that the episcopacy which exists in the Method- 
 ist Episcopal Church is of a spurious character. We have not 
 made it our business in these pages to go into a detailed account 
 of the various definitions given of episcopacy by distinguished 
 authors who have treated upon the subject, but will simply re- 
 mark in this place, that among all the definitions of ecclesiastical 
 writers of good authority, not one of them suits Methodist Epis- 
 copacy, or rather Methodist Episcopacy does not agree with any 
 one of them. 
 
 At the organization of the M. E. Church in 1784, the title of 
 superintendent was given to Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury. In the 
 general minutes, printed in 1787, the word superintendent was 
 left out, and "bishop" inserted, and at the ensuing conference 
 that body was asked if the word "bishop" might stand, seeing it 
 was a scriptural name. 
 
 At the same time Mr. Wesley's name was left off the minutes. 
 
 Rev. James O'Kelley says, " this cruel act was thought by one 
 to hasten the death of dear Wesley. Did not Thomas in behalf 
 of Wesley, explode the conduct of Francis before a congregation 
 in the city of Baltimore?" — Apology, p. 12. 
 
 In 1788, John Wesley wrote to Mr. Asbury, saying, "men 
 may call me a knave, or a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am 
 content; but they shall never by my consent call me a bishop," 
 
 In the year 1791, we find Dr. Coke attempting a negotiation 
 
392 APPENDIX. 
 
 with Bishop White of Philadelphia, for a union of the Methodist 
 and Protestant Episcopal Churches, and suggesting "the pro- 
 priety of himself and the gentleman associated with him" being 
 admitted to the episcopacy. 
 
 In 1799, we find Dr. Coke petitioning the bishop of London to 
 ordain "a given number" of Methodist preachers, and to all 
 intents and purposes, by this act, declares himself no " bishop" 
 Again, in 1813, we find Dr. Coke writing letters to Lord Liver- 
 pool and Mr. Wilberforce, seeking and soliciting the appointment 
 of bishop to India in connection with the established church. 
 
 1. Therefore we arrive at the conclusion that episcopacy was 
 foisted upon the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 
 2. That it assumed its present form and character by degrees, as 
 it did also its name. 
 
 3. That John Wesley was not the father of it. 
 
 4. That the laity of the church, not being consulted about it, 
 as a matter of course had no hand in its introduction. 
 
 5. That Dr. Coke, the eldest son in this episcopal line, had no 
 confidence in his right to exercise episcopal functions. 
 
 6. That Dr. Coke, whilst wearing the title of bishop, was ex- 
 tremely anxious to obtain the office and be invested with the 
 functions of a bishop. 
 
 7. That the existence of "episcopacy" in the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church has been the cause of all the difficulties and trials 
 of any consequence through which she has passed. 
 
 8. That the high claims to authority and power set up for her 
 " episcopacy" caused the Rev. William McKendree,* Eev. James 
 O'Kelley, together with many other worthy ministers, and a 
 large body of the laity to secede from the M. E. Church. 
 
 9. That the same claims of power and prerogative maintained 
 by the "episcopacy" led to the expulsion of the reformers from 
 the communion of the M. E. Church, and gave rise to the estab- 
 lishment of the Methodist Protestant Church. 
 
 10. That it was this same indefinable episcopacy that brought 
 about the division between the North and South, and severed the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church into two parts in 1844. 
 
 * Afterwards Bishop McKendree. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 393 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The right of the laity to participate in the councils of the church 
 examined and vindicated from Scripture. — An examination of the 
 steps taken in the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 and the exclusion of the laity from participating in her councils. 
 — The justice and propriety of that measure examined. — Remarks 
 in vindication of the character of Rev. James O'Kelley. 
 
 Having in the preceding chapters brought to view the surrep- 
 titious manner in which episcopacy was introduced into the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, we proceed in the next place to 
 notice another striking feature in the polity of that church, 
 namely, the exclusion of the laity from the rule-making de- 
 partment. Every American citizen is possessed of civil rights. 
 He has a voice in making the laws by which he is to be governed. 
 By delegated authority be is represented both in the state and 
 national legislatures. This is conceded by all to be politically 
 right, because the principle is just and good. But should it stop 
 here ? We answer, No. Because man most unquestionably has 
 his ecclesiastical as well as civil rights. The same principle is 
 applicable to church as well as to state. If it is Justin the latter, 
 it is not unjust in the former. If the relationship which he sus- 
 tains to the state justify his right to the exercise of the elective 
 franchise, surely there can be nothing found in the nature of 
 right, or of religion, or in the precepts of the gospel, to annul the 
 justice or propriety of this principle as applicable to the relation- 
 ship which the membership sustain to the church of God. 
 
 This doctrine is admitted and practised by Episcopalians, Pres- 
 byterians, Baptists, Lutherans, Congregationalists, and by all the 
 Protestant denominations of Christians in the United States with 
 the exception of the two divisions of the old hierarchy, viz : the 
 "Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States," and the 
 "Methodist Episcopal Church South." These two divisions of 
 the original establishment formed by Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury, 
 with their colleagues, still hold on to " the institutions of the 
 
394 APPENDIX. 
 
 fathers" as " they received them from their hands," to the exclu- 
 sion of the laity from all participation in the rule-making 
 department of the church. The question naturally arises have 
 the laity no right to a voice or representation in the department of 
 the church in which rules are made for their government? We 
 answer in the affirmative, and lay down the proposition that they 
 have a right to exercise their suffrage in that department. 
 
 ft is argued by ecclesiastical writers that no particular form of 
 church government is laid down in the New Testament. This 
 proposition we shall not attempt to controvert, but we do assume 
 the position that enough is therein laid down and set forth to 
 ' show most conclusively that the laity were consulted and did par- 
 ticipate in the councils that regulated the affairs of the primitive 
 church. To sustain this position we refer, in the first place, to 
 the election of the successor of Judas. Acts of the Apostles, 
 chap, i, v. 15, it is written, " And in those days Peter stood up 
 in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of the names 
 together were about a hundred and twenty,)" &c. Peter, in the 
 address upon this occasion, did not address apostles alone ; the 
 sacred penman tells us he stood up in the midst of the disciples, 
 and that their number was about one hundred and twenty. And 
 in verse 22 he says, " Beginning Irom the baptism of John, unto 
 that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be or- 
 dained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." In the fol- 
 lowing part of the chapter we are informed that they appointed 
 two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and 
 Matthias; and that after they had prayed they gave forth their 
 lots. In this grave and deeply interesting transaction to the 
 primitive church, we find that the eleven apostles were not acting 
 alone or independent of the disciples (the Jaity), but the number 
 of the names together were about a hundred and twenty; and in 
 this election the laity most unquestionably participated with the 
 apostles. 
 
 The next passage to which we refer, in order to support our 
 position, is to be found, Acts, chapter 6th, verses 2 and 3, and 
 relates to the selection of the seven deacons. It reads as follows : 
 Then the twelve called the multitude of disciples unto them, 
 and said, it is not reason that we should leave the word of God 
 
APPENDIX. 395 
 
 and serve tables. Therefore, brethren, look ye out among you 
 seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, 
 whom we may appoint over this business. In this instance the 
 address is made to " the multitude of disciples." The business to 
 be transacted was of great importance to the church. It was 
 therefore, according to the judgment/)!' the twelve apostles, neces- 
 sary and proper for the "multitude of disciples''' (the laity of the 
 church) to have a hand in this matter; and as it pertained to 
 the affairs of the church, it was laid before them. 
 
 In the 5th and 6th verses we read thus: And the saying pleased 
 the whole multitude; and they chose Stephen, a man full of laith 
 and the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, 
 and Simon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch, 
 whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, 
 they laid their hands on them. This account, as stated by the 
 sacred writer, clearly establishes the fact that in the first Chris- 
 tian church ever established, and which was located at Jerusa- 
 lem, the laity participated in the affairs of its government, and 
 acted an important and prominent part therein, and that too, by the 
 counsel and approbation of the apostles. It was necessary to elect 
 officers for the church. The apostles would not arrogate to them- 
 selves the right to do this, independent of their Christian brethren 
 comprising the membership; this right belonged to the whole 
 multitude. The apostles thus conceded it. Upon this principle 
 the multitude acted; and the whole transaction goes to demon- 
 strate the proposition that the laity in the primitive church were 
 not only possessed of, but did actually exercise their suffrage and 
 authority in the government of the same. 
 
 We beg leave to refer in the next place to Acts, chapter loth, 
 which affords an account of the first church council ever held. 
 The result of that council is given in the following words, "Then 
 pleased it the aposlles and elders, with the whole church, to send 
 chosen men of their own company to Antioch, with Paul and 
 Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief 
 men among the brethren : and they wrote letters by them after 
 this manner: The apostles and elders, and brethren, send greeting 
 unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch, and 
 Syria, and Cilicia." (See verses 23 and 24). From the whole 
 
396 APPENDIX. 
 
 tenor of the transaction, as recorded in this chapter, it is evident 
 that the laity participated in the deliberations of this important 
 church council. The terms used by the inspired 'writer clearly 
 establish the fact. The words apostles and elders with the whole 
 church are very expressive. Beyond the possibility of a doubt, 
 the phrase embraces the laity. And the address of the letter sent 
 by the messengers chosen by that council, shows most clearly to 
 the satisfaction of every unprejudiced mind, that three distinct 
 classes of persons, all belonging: to the Christian church, consti- 
 tuted the writers of that epistle ; that apostles, elders and brethren 
 were all united to give authority and character to the same. Let 
 the reader view this transaction of the church council at Jerusa- 
 lem in every aspect of which it is susceptible, and the stubborn 
 truth is forced upon his mind, that the laity of the church formed 
 a part of that council ; that they possessed an indefeasible right 
 to participate in the same, and that right is endorsed by apostles 
 and elders all co-operating together. 
 
 Although no particular form of church government is laid down 
 in the New Testament, yet there is enough set forth and contained 
 therein to show to the satisfaction of the honest inquirer after 
 truth, that the laity have an iinquestionable right to a participation 
 in the councils that relate to the government of the church. And by 
 the testimony which we have drawn from holy writ, and the 
 arguments adduced therefrom, we hope that we have fully and 
 fairly sustained the position laid down in the second page of this 
 chapter. 
 
 The truth being clearly established that the laity w T ere possessed 
 of ecclesiastical rights and privileges, and participated in the 
 affairs that related to the government of the primitive church, the 
 injustice and impropriety of the polity adopted by the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church upon her organization, in excluding the laity 
 from participating or exercising any voice or authority in her rule- 
 making department or councils, becomes more apparent and mani- 
 festly more absurd. 
 
 There is not the least evidence extant that the moving spirits in 
 the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church entertained 
 the most remote idea of admitting the laity to exercise any in- 
 fluence or participate in any way in the rule-making department. 
 
APPENDIX. 397 
 
 Bat on the contrary it is evident that the laity were to be left out 
 or excluded, from the simple fact that they were not invited to the 
 conference oi 1784 when the church was organized. Rev. Jesse 
 Lee, who was a firm advocate of the M. £. Church hierarchy, 
 and whose account will not be called in question, writes thus 
 about the steps taken in that organization : " As soon as Dr. 
 Coke landed in America he laid his plan to meet Mr. Asbury as 
 soon as possible, and traveling from New York to Philadelphia 
 and then down into Delaware Stale, he met with Mr. Asbury at 
 Barrett's chapel, on the 14th of the same month, (November, 1784.) 
 They then consulted together about the plan which Mr. Wesley 
 had adopted and recommended to us. After the business was 
 maturely weighed and sufficient time was taken to consult some 
 more of the preachers who were present on that day, it was 
 judged advisable to call together all the traveling preachers in 
 a general conference to be held in Baltimore at Christmas. Mr. 
 Freeborn Garrison undertook to travel to the south, in order to 
 give notice to all the traveling preachers of this intended meeting. 
 But being fond of preaching by the way, and thinking he could 
 do the business by writing, he did not give timely notice to the 
 preachers who were in the extremity of the work, and of course 
 several of them were not at that conference." (History of the 
 Methodists, p. 93.) 
 
 From this account it is evident that Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury, and 
 the few preachers whom they " consulted," had no disposition or 
 intention whatever, to permit the Jaity to have any weight or 
 take any part in the organization of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church. 
 
 Our reasons for arriving at this conclusion are these: 
 
 1. Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury determined upon calling together 
 none but the preachers upon that occasion. 
 
 2. Mr. Garrison, who undertook to travel to the south, went to 
 give notice to the traveling preachers, and not to the laity. 
 
 3. The shortness of the notice given, which was just six weeks 
 from the day that Dr. Coke met Mr. Asbury, plainly intimates 
 that the laity were not to be consulted. 
 
 4. Not one of the laity took a seat in the General Conference 
 of. 1784. But that conference was composed of Dr. Coke, Mr. 
 
 34 
 
398 APPENDIX. 
 
 Asbury, and the traveling preachers. Such, then, was the 'com- 
 plexion of that conference in which the government of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church received its mould and form. The 
 laity had no delegated representative authority in that body; nor 
 has a layman ever since been permitted to hold a seat either in a 
 General or an Annual Conference of that church. 
 
 The Annual Conferences are composed of the bishops and 
 traveling preachers : no layman is permitted to exercise the right 
 of taking a seat with them. The General Conference is com- 
 posed of the bishops and delegates of the traveling preachers, 
 elected by the respective Annual Conferences. These delegates, 
 being elected by the itinerant preachers, receive all their delegated 
 authority from that source, and consequently are to be viewed 
 as the representatives of the traveling preachers alone, or of 
 the Annual Conferences from which they have been elected. 
 Neither the voice nor the vote of a layman is heard or received 
 in this body. And, strange to tell, in this the highest council of 
 the church the rules for the government of the laity are made. 
 Nor does their exclusion from the right of suffrage stop here. 
 In the election of church officers they are without a voice. The 
 class-leaders are appointed and the stewards nominated by the 
 «« preacher in charge," and the former may be removed by him at 
 his pleasure. The trustees who are to hold the church property 
 are appointed by him, and come into office through his choice, 
 and consequently in the Quarterly Meeting Conference (in which, 
 by virtue of his authority to appoint church officers,) he may 
 obtain a most preponderating influence; that body being composed 
 of the preacher in charge, his assistant, (if he have one,) all the 
 local preachers, exhorters, stewards and class-leaders upon the 
 circuit. Taking this glance at the principles of the government 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church, we ask in all candor, can 
 one solitary feature or principle of republicanism be found in 
 it ? We think the answer must be no. None can be found. 
 Why? Because the laity are altogether excluded from the exer- 
 cise of the right of suffrage. And strange as it may appear, we 
 have heard it argued, bolh by the ministry and the laity of this 
 church, that her system of church government is purely republi- 
 can. One argument that we have heard abvanced to support the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 399 
 
 preceding proposition, was nearly in these words, " that the 
 membership had a right to petition both the Annual and General 
 Conferences; that they did often petition those bodies, that their 
 petitions were received, read, and respectfully considered; conse- 
 quently .they were represented, and had an influence in those 
 bodies." How flimsy the argument! How miserable the subter- 
 fuge ! Is it not awell known fact that foreigners sometimes petition 
 our national and state legislatures, and that their petitions are 
 respectfully treated ? and who, we ask, with any pretensions to 
 intelligence or even to sancity, would presume to assert that they 
 are represented in such legislatures, when the truth is they have 
 neither part nor lot in them ? Again, some of the votaries of the 
 Methodist Episcopal hierarchy have endeavored to explain the 
 " republicanism " of that church by a process of reasoning quite 
 different. They lay down the proposition that the laity make, 
 constitute, and appoint the preachers, who make the rules for 
 their government. The loonderful argument to support this pro- 
 position runs thus: "the laity recommend all persons who are 
 candidates for preacher's license to the Quarterly Conference ; 
 that without such recommendation they could not obtain license 
 or orders; — that all the traveling ministers who have seats in 
 an Annual Conference, or are elected to seats in the General 
 Conference, once obtained this recommendation from the class 
 or society of which he was a member." Such an argument 
 should excite our pity; and no doubt the only reason why such 
 a one was ever used was this, there was none better to give, and 
 a bad argument was better than none. 
 
 But light as it is, suppose we weigh it in the scales of truth. 
 When a society recommends a man to the proper authority 
 to obtain license to preach, what is the extent or latitude of that 
 recommendation ? Is it to become a traveling preacher ? Answer, 
 no ; because the authority to which they recommend him, can- 
 not constitute him such. Is it to have him ordained to the min- 
 istry ? Answer, no; because the authority in question are also 
 deficient in that respect. Is it to have him constituted a member 
 of an Annual Conference ? Answer, no; because the authority 
 to which the society recommend him cannot make him one. 
 Does the society then recommend him as a proper person to 
 
400 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 make Jaws or rules for the church? Answer, no; because they 
 recommend him only to the Quarterly Conference as a suitable 
 person to be licensed to preach. The recommendation goes no 
 further; it looks no further. 
 
 1. The person so recommended, when he shall have been ex- 
 amined by the proper authorities, may be found deficient in the 
 requisite qualifications, and may fail entirely in obtaining license. 
 
 2. The applicant may have no idea of acting in any other 
 sphere lhan that of a local preacher, consequently he can never 
 take any part in making rules for the church. 
 
 3. The applicant so recommended by his society may obtain 
 license to preach, be recommended by the proper authority, the 
 Quarterly Conference, as a suitable person to enter the traveling 
 connexion, and yet never obtain full standing in the Annual 
 Conference, and consequently never become a suitable person to 
 exercise any weight or influence in the rule-making department 
 of the church. 
 
 Thus it will be perceived that the argument in question 
 amounts to nothing. Indeed all those who set up such argu- 
 ments seem to forget the fact that when some thousands of the 
 members of the M. E. Church petitioned the General Conference 
 of 1824, asking that body, in most respectful terms, to adopt such 
 measures as would admit the laity to be represented in the law- 
 making department of the church ; claiming it as a right and a 
 privilege to which they were in justice entitled; they were 
 answered in a pastoral address adopted by the conference and 
 signed by the bishops, with a "pardon vs, dear brethren, if ice 
 know no such riglits, if ive comprehend no such privileges." 
 
 Rev. Jesse Lee, in speaking of the conference that convened 
 at Baltimore on the 27th of December, 1784, says, "At this con- 
 ference we formed ourselves into a regular church, by the name 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church.''* We have before stated 
 that the laity were not represented in this conference, nor were 
 they notified, so far as we have been able to learn, that such a 
 measure as the organization of the church was intended to be 
 adopted at that time. But the deed was done, and done, too, 
 
 *See Lee's History of the Methodists, p. 94. 
 
APPENDIX. 401 
 
 without the sanction or consent of the laity being obtained. 
 The question now is, was it right ? We answer, no. It was 
 unjust, it was unrighteous. They professed to be acting under 
 the sanction of Mr. Wesley's name. In the first quotation 
 which we have introduced in this chapter from "Lee's History of 
 the Methodists," we are informed that when Dr. Coke and Mr. 
 Asbury first met together in America " they consulted together 
 about the plan which Mr. Wesley had adopted and recommended 
 to us." In all our researches and inquiries in the history of 
 Methodism we have been unable to find any thing which can be 
 taken for the plan alluded to, unless it be the letter of Mr. Wes- 
 ley, dated September 10, 1784, and addressed "To Dr. Coke, 
 Mr. Asbury, and our brethren in North America." No other 
 document, showing the semblance of "apian," has ever been 
 produced in this country, upon the authority of his name with 
 the exception of this one. But what is the plan that this docu- 
 ment recommends ? Or what is the advice therein given? Let 
 Mr. Wesley answer for himself in his own words. Here it is. 
 " They (the American Methodists) are now at full liberty simply 
 to follow the Scriptures and the primitive church. Jind we judge 
 it best that they should stand fast in that liberty wherewith God 
 has so strangely made them free." This advice is good. It is 
 worthy of the great and good Wesley. But it was not regarded 
 by the conference of 1784. If it had been, the rights of the 
 laity would neither have been disregarded nor trampled under 
 foot. If, according to Mr. Wesley's advice, the usages of the 
 "primitive church" had been followed, the laity would have 
 been called upon, and permitted to exercise their rights, and act 
 their part in the governmental affairs of the church. 
 
 As an ecclesiastical historian, Mosheim ranks among the most 
 pre-eminent. This writer informs us that the people, the laity, did 
 participate in the councils, and exercise a due weight and influence 
 in the affairs and government of the primitive church. He says, 
 " It was, therefore, the assembly of the people which chose 
 their own rulers and teachers, or received them by a free and 
 authoritative consent, when recommended by others. The same 
 people rejected or confirmed, by their suffrage, the laws that were 
 proposed by their rulers to the assembly ; excommunicated profli- 
 
402 APPENDIX. 
 
 gate and unworthy members of the church ; restored the penitents 
 to their forfeited privileges; passed judgment upon the different 
 subjects of controversy and dissension that arose in their com- 
 munity; examined and decided the disputes which happened 
 between the elders and deacons; and, in a word, exercised all that 
 authority which belongs to such as are invested with the sove- 
 reign power." This authority and these rights, exercised by the 
 "people" of the primitive church, the Baltimore Conference of 
 1784 withheld from the "'people" of the M. E. Church. Mr. 
 Wesley held the reins of power in his own hands among the 
 Methodists in the united kingdom of Great Britain ; he was ac- 
 knowledged by these as their spiritual ftuher. He saw proper to 
 exclude republicanism from his polity in the government of his 
 societies in that part of the world. Indeed it is very probable 
 that he may have been quite anti-republican in his feelings in a 
 general point of view, as it is a well known fact that he was 
 warmly opposed to the independence of the United States. We 
 copy the following characteristic letter written by him, and 
 which was published in the Wesleyan Methodist Magazine 
 (London) for April, 1830. It is addressed to Mr. John Mason. 
 
 Near London, January 13, 1790. 
 My Dear Brother, — As long as I live the people shall have no 
 share in choosing either stewards or leaders among the Method- 
 ists. We have not and never had any such custom. We are no 
 republicans, and never intend to be. It would be better for those 
 that are so minded to go quietly away. I have been uniform 
 both in doctrine and discipline for above these fifty years; and it 
 is a littie too late for me to turn into a new path, now I am old 
 and gray-headed. Neither good old brother Porna (God bless 
 him) expects it from me, nor brother Wood, nor brother Fla- 
 mank. If you and I shall be called hence this year, we may 
 bless God that we have not Jived in vain. Come, let us have a 
 few more strokes at Satan's kingdom, and then we shall depart 
 in peace! 
 
 From the tenor of this letter we are left without a doubt con- 
 cerning the anti-republicanism of Mr. Wesley's policy with re- 
 spect to the government of his Societies in Great Britain. It was 
 
APPENDIX. 403 
 
 in that school that the two Britons, Coke and Asbury, formed 
 their opinions of church policy for the Methodists. They were 
 well acquainted with the modus operandi by which Mr. Wesley 
 held the reins of power over his societies, — and if they were 
 the lovers of power and authority which some of their friends 
 have represented them to be, we need be at no loss to account 
 for the manner in which they, as the moving spirits and active 
 managers in the conference of 1784, ventured to depart from the 
 counsel and advice of Mr. Wesley, with regard to the proper 
 course to be pursued by the American Methodists; and this 
 departure most unjustly excluded the laity from all participation 
 in the councils of the church, by adopting something similar to 
 the pattern which they had seen in England. 
 
 Thus have we presented to view the manner in which the 
 laity in the Methodist Episcopal Church have been proscribed 
 from a participation in the councils which form the rules for the 
 government of her members ; and the anomalous spectacle is pre- 
 sented before us of the itinerant ministry arrogating to themselves 
 the authority and right to legislate for the whole church, to enact 
 the rules for the government of all its members, and also to exe- 
 cute those rules. With regard to the character of such a govern- 
 ment as the one which we have described, we beg leave in this 
 place to quote the opinion of Dr. Bascom, which is certainly 
 entitled to much weight. The doctor says, "A prescriptive legis- 
 lative body, making laws without the knowledge or consent of 
 the people to be governed by them, is a despotism. Legislatures 
 without constituents, or peers and fellows deputing them as their 
 representatives and actors, — thus constituting themselves a legis- 
 lature beyond the control of the people, — is an exhibition of 
 tyranny in one of its most dangerous forms." With the learned 
 author just quoted we fully concur in opinion. The argument 
 has been advanced by the advocates of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church polity, that " the system of government adopted by the 
 ecclesiastical authorities of said church was prepared for the ac- 
 ceptance of the membership, — that every one who united with the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church accepted and adopted that system, — 
 and consequently agreed to submit and conform to the same." 
 Now it must be admitted that such would certainly be a very 
 
404 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 tame submission, when we take into view the powers of the 
 General Conference, and the alarming extent to which those 
 powers are sometimes exercised. If the General Conference were 
 infallible, such submission would not involve so much impropriety, 
 nor prove such a dangerous surrender of the exercise of just and 
 proper rights. That the action of the General Conference does 
 often interfere with the feelings and ecclesiastical situation of those 
 who have tamely submitted to the government of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, many will testify. The General Conference of 
 1844 passed a resolution, or adopted a plan to divide the church 
 into two separate divisions, North and South. The laity were 
 not consulted at all upon the subject. The ministry, we presume, 
 plead no authority of constitution or Discipline for so doing ; but 
 embarked in this work because they believed their powers to be 
 competent to the tast under the circumstances. A plan of sepa- 
 ration was agreed upon by the itinerant ministry ; the laity having 
 no hand in it. That act has proved sorely embarrassing to thou- 
 sands of the Jaity of the church, and has led to consequences and 
 events long to be deplored in some of the churches in Virginia ; 
 particularly in the town of Alexandria at this time. What 
 divisions in feeling ! what enmities the plan of separation has 
 produced ! And that plan was devised and acted upon by the 
 itinerant ministry without consulting the laity ! But the question 
 may be asked, can there be any impropriety on the part of a 
 Christian by connecting himself with an ecclesiastical establish- 
 ment in which the right of the elective franchise is withheld from 
 him? We beg leave to call up Dr. Bascom to answer this ques- 
 tion. Hear him : 
 
 " Whenever a Christian people place themselves under a min- 
 istry who claim the right of thinking and deciding for them, in 
 matters of faith and morality, they are guilty of impiely, however 
 unintentional, to the great Head of the church, inasmuch as 
 it is required of every Christian to reflect and determine for 
 himself in all such cases, and the duty cannot be performed by 
 another." 
 
 This sentiment of the doctor's is weighty. Let the reader 
 digest it well. Comment is unnecessary. It is comprehensive 
 and expressive. There are thousands of the laity, no doubt, 
 
APPENDIX. 405 
 
 who suppose that all church authority of right belongs to the 
 clergy; and many may even glory in the "supposed fact that 
 they have no ecclesiastical right;" and that all church power is 
 safely lodged in the hands of the itinerant ministry. If the piety 
 of such men is not deeper than their intelligence, they should he 
 objects of our pity. The sentiment quoted above bears very hard 
 upon all such. But the question may be asked, may it not tend 
 to promote the unity and prosperity of a church, if the laity waive 
 or disdain the exercise of all ecclesiastical rights, and suffer the 
 exercise of church power or authority to be vested entirely in the 
 ministry? We again call Dr. Bascom to the stand. Hear him: 
 
 " Whenever the members of a church resign the right of suf- 
 frage, and of discussing freely and fearlessly the conduct of their 
 rulers, whether it be done by direct concession, or indirectly by 
 attaching themselves to and continuing within the pale of a 
 church where such a system of polity obtains, they renounce to a 
 fearful extent one of the first principles of the Protestamt 
 religion, and bring dishonor upon its name." 
 
 So wrote Dr. Bascom, and who will dare to controvert the doc- 
 trine laid down in the sentiment ? It is worthy of all considera- 
 tion, and merits the attention of every inquirer after truth. In 
 the history of the Methodist Episcopal Church we find that she 
 has repeatedly been agitated, and in every instance the nature of 
 her government has been the exciting cause ; that the claims to 
 high legislative authority set up by the ministry have been one 
 of the most fruitful sources of her troubles. Her membership, 
 generally, are satisfied with her government, or profess so to be, 
 (although conscious that they are permitted to exercise no weight 
 or voice in it,) until by some unexpected change in affairs they 
 are made to feel the weight of arbitrary power. The scales thus 
 falling from their eyes, they begin to talk about just rights, equal 
 rights, "mutual rights," &c. Such is the peculiar attachment of 
 some to what they have heard called the " most excellent book 
 of Discipline" of the M. E. Church, that they will not suffer 
 themselves to peruse a paper or document that calls in question 
 the justice of the principles couched in that book. The following 
 anecdote may not be inappropriate. A gentleman presented to 
 his neighbor a little pamphlet entitled, " Questions and Answers 
 
406 APPENDIX. 
 
 on Church Government," with a request that he should read it, 
 as it contained some things that had interested him. This neigh- 
 bor was a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and quite 
 zealous for her Discipline. Upon laking up the little pamphlet 
 in question, and reading one or two pages, he threw it down, ex- 
 claiming, " 1 shall not read it ; I see at once that the object is to 
 show the superiority of the M. P. Church government over that of 
 the M. E. Church ; and that is enough for me to know." Such 
 are the men we suppose to whom Dr. Bascom alludes when he 
 says, " They renounce to a fearful extent one of the first prin- 
 ciples of the Protestant religion, and bring dishonor upon its 
 name." 
 
 REV. JAMES O'KELLEY. 
 
 We have had occasion to introduce the name of this dis- 
 tinguished minister of the gospel into the body of this work; 
 and as much has been said and written from certain quarters, 
 tending to disparage the name and character of that good and 
 worthy man, we deem it but justice to his memory to make a few 
 statements in this place in regard to him. At the conference in 
 Baltimore, in 1792, Mr. O'Kelley brought in a resolution which 
 read in these words : " After the bishop appoints the preachers 
 at conference to their several circuits, if any one think himself 
 injured by the appointment, he shall have liberty to appeal to the 
 conference and state his objections; and if the conference approve 
 his objections, the bishop shall appoint him to another circuit." 
 The debates on this resolution sorely agitated the conference. 
 It had many talented advocates as well as opponents. The 
 measure failed when it was put to vote. The one-man-power 
 party triumphed; and Rev. James O'Kelley, Rev. Wm. McKen- 
 dree, and several other ministers withdrew from the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, as they were unwilling longer to endure a 
 government so arbitrary. 
 
 Rev. Jesse Lee tells us in his history that one of the preachers 
 told him " that it was his intention to have O'Kelley tried at that 
 conference for the false doctrines which he had been preaching ; 
 and he believed that his leaving the conference was more out of 
 fear of being brought to trial than on account of the appeal." 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 407 
 
 We understand from Mr. Lee that the "false doctrines" alluded 
 to was Unitarianism. Dr. Bangs, in his " History of the Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church," presents Mr. O'Kelley in a position 
 scarcely more enviable. These charges and allegations have 
 been repeated and reiterated so long and so often that many at the 
 present time take it for granted that they are true. I shall here 
 record the testimony of one of his Christian friends in vindication 
 of his character, one who knew him well, and I might almost say, 
 one who knew him best. This writer says of Mr. O'Kelley: 
 i- " Many slanders have been leveled at this eminently great and 
 pious minister of Jesus Christ by the sycophants of episcopacy. 
 According to them his soul was ambitious, and his doctrines 
 heterodox; he withdrew because he was not made a bishop. 
 This senseless slander, which no man of common understanding 
 can believe, has been circulated with as much seriousness by 
 some of the ' divinely authorized' as if they really believed the 
 truth of their assertion. He was charged with being a Unitarian, 
 and of denying the divine character of our common Saviour. I 
 was intimately acquainted with him for thirty-five years, in 
 which time I have been with him at different times for months 
 together. I knew as much of his sentiments as any human being 
 upon earth, and I declare before God that he always contended/or 
 the divinity of Christ, and the fullness and extent of his atonement, 
 with a strength of thought and energy of expression that I have 
 never heard equaled hy any other man. This was the subject of 
 the last sermon I ever heard him deliver, when bending under the 
 weight of almost ninety years. His superior as a Christian and 
 his equal as a preacher I have never yet seen. He died in the 
 triumphs of faith, and is now seated in his heavenly Saviour's 
 kingdom. He was the friend and instructor of my youth, and 
 his memory shall be dear to me until my heart is cold in death. 
 
 " Here I wish to make a few remarks respecting the Christian 
 Church. About the year 1794 Mr. O'Kelley and others, who had 
 withdrawn from the Episcopal Methodists at the General Con- 
 ference of 1792, with several societies and local preachers, 
 formed themselves into an independent church, and called it the 
 'Republican Methodist Church.' This name it bore for several 
 years, until a majority became convinced that the disciples of 
 
408 APPENDIX. 
 
 Christ should be called by his name, believing this was the 
 worthy name by which the primitive saints were called, and that 
 they were so called first at Antioch by divine appointment, for so 
 the original term seems to imply. This they believe is the new 
 name by which the Lord promised his followers should be called. 
 This name, therefore, was adopted. There were, indeed, a few 
 who opposed its adoption, viz: Rev. John Robertson, Thomas 
 Hardy and Edward Almond, and a few private members, who 
 still retained the former name. This little church is now extinct. 
 The church in connection with Mr. O'Kelley always did and still 
 does believe, and her ministers preach, the doctrine of a trinity, 
 the divinity of the Son of God, and his atonement for lost sinners, 
 as fully and closely as any people upon earth. Some years after 
 the organization of this church a sect sprang up in New England, 
 who are strictly Unitarians, also calling themselves the 'Christian 
 Church.' They published a paper entitled ' The Herald of Gos- 
 pel Liberty,' edited by Elias Smith, in which they deny the 
 divinity of Christ, and ridicule the doctrine of atonement. They 
 refuse baptism to infants, and administer it by immersion to adults 
 alone. 
 
 " Seventeen or eighteen years past, a missionary by the name of 
 Plummer was sent from this body, who attended a general meet- 
 ing of the Christian Church. Mr. O'Kelley asked him, ' If Jesus 
 Christ were now upon earth, and you knew it were he, would 
 you worship him ?' He answered, ' No, no sooner than I would 
 you, for 1 do not believe he was any more divine.' Mr. 
 O'Kelley replied, 'Then I have no fellowship for you?' He 
 was a man of insinuating address. He drew off Mr. William 
 Guiry, a man of ingenuity and eloquence ; and they proselyted 
 some of the most numerous and respectable societies in Virginia 
 and every traveling preacher at that time in connection with Mr. 
 O'Kelley, with some local preachers and a few members, and two 
 or three preachers in this State. There is no intercourse between 
 these churches. Those who remained firm to their first doctrines 
 refused all fellowship with this heterodox party, and viewed 
 them as refined infidels infinitely more dangerous than the dis- 
 ciples of Voltaire, Rosseau, or Paine. But being called by the 
 same general name, the same heterodoxy is by many indiscrimi- 
 
APPENDIX. 409 
 
 nately ascribed to all, for the want of information, and by numbers 
 more from design, especially some of the 'divinely authorized,' 
 many of whom know better, but, to injure a church they do not love, 
 they zealously propagate the cruel slander. The charge of Arian- 
 ism, Socinianism, &c, so liberally bestowed upon the orthodox 
 Christian Church,* has more than all other things retarded its 
 prosperity and advancement ; but, in spite of all opposition, it is 
 gradually increasing. It has a number of respectable, pious and 
 useful preachers, and some of them of superior talents, and 
 several thousand members. There have been some considerable 
 revivals in it in the course of a few years, with the addition of 
 some hundreds of members. The members and preachers of this 
 church are to a man (1 believe) genuine republicans, and ardently 
 wish the most complete success to the reformers in their glorious 
 struggle. 
 
 " This brief statement I have shown to an old preacher of high 
 standing and several members of the Christian Church, who are 
 of opinion that its publicity may be attended with good conse- 
 quences. To Mr. O'Kelly and his dissenting brethren, as well as 
 us reformers, has been meted out a full share of episcopal ire. 
 We may well doubt the goodness of a cause which requires such 
 weapons to defend it. Despotism and tyranny need persecution 
 and slander to support them. Truth and justice can stand by 
 themselves. If they had truth on their side, surely it could be 
 fairly defended; and although the bombast of an Armistead, and 
 the sophistical reasoning of one of the laity, a Bond and an 
 Emory have failed, (here must be at least one champion in the 
 invincible phalanx of the itinerants who, Sampson-like, could 
 step forward and tear up the sophisms of the reformers by the 
 roots and expose their nefarious designs to the contempt and ab- 
 horrence of the world. f The advocates for reform deserve well 
 of their brethren of every sect, for indeed religious liberty is a 
 common cause; and notwithstanding all that their enemies can 
 say against them, the names of an O'Kelley, a Jennings, a Shinn, 
 
 * The church in which Mr. O'Kelley lived in full fellowship. 
 fThis article was written in the time in which the reform ques- 
 tion was agitated. 
 
410 APPENDIX. 
 
 a McCaine, a Snethen, and a Dorsey, with many others of the 
 martyrs of the present times, shall live embalmed in the grateful 
 recollection of unborn thousands, and be handed down with honor 
 to the latest generation, while the names of the present episcopal 
 despots shall perish from the earth or only be remembered with 
 disgust as the religious oppressors of the present day. 
 
 " A CiTrzEN of Caswell County, N. C." 
 
 We regard the preceding paper as a triumphant defence of that 
 pious and worthy minister, Mr. O'Kelley. Let those who have 
 regarded him as guilty of the heresy of Unitarianism weigh it 
 well. But the question may be asked, has not the denomination 
 with which he lived in fellowship, embraced the doctrine of the 
 Unitarians ? There is a union or fraternal relation of some kind 
 existing between them and the Unitarians of the north, which 
 union was consummated about the year 1839. In the south there 
 are three conferences, called "• the North Carolina and Virginia 
 Christian Conference," " the North Carolina Christian Confer- 
 ence," and " the Eastern Virginia Christian Conference." The 
 last named conference is composed principally of the party drawn 
 away from Mr. O'Kelley by Mr. Plummer. The three conferences 
 meet together in what they call the " Southern Christian Asso- 
 ciation." They have established a paper entitled the " Christian 
 Sun," w-hich is devoted to the interests of the association, and in 
 which the doctrine of Unitarianism is boldly advocated. 
 
 The last session of this association adopted the following reso- 
 lution, "Resolved, that we advise our brethren to procure for 
 their use the hymn book published by the Christian General 
 Book Association at Albany, N. Y." Although we believe, from 
 our acquaintance with these people, that somefeiv of the ministers 
 are sound in the doctrines once preached by Mr. O'Kelley, yet we 
 think this alliance with the Unitarians is altogether improper and 
 highly reprehensible, as it appears that they unite upon a name, 
 keeping doctrines and faith out of the question. Under all these 
 circumstances, we fear that the flourishing Christian Churches 
 planted by the venerable O'Kelley will ere long become the 
 school of Unitarianism. 
 
 Mr. O'Kelley was like Mr. Whitfield, a great and successful 
 minister of the gospel, but deficient in the economy of church 
 
APPENDIX. 411 
 
 government. Herein be failed. If the more cautious and politic 
 Wesley had pursued the course adopted by the two former and 
 failed to bind his societies together by written rules, and unite 
 them thereby upon well denned principles, they might at this 
 day have been as few in numbers as those of Mr. Whitfield. 
 Mr. O'Kelley and his preachers, with the societies, adopted the 
 New Testament both as a confession of faith and a discipline for 
 the government of the church. But men with regard^to the doc- 
 trines of the New Testament differ widely — even so with regard 
 to the maxims of church polity contained therein. And it is the 
 opinion of those most experienced in ecclesiastical affairs that a 
 condensed embodiment of the fundamental doctrines of religion 
 and a summary of well defined rules for government, secure the 
 most unity and harmony in the church, and lead to the greatest 
 prosperity, as they admit of less latitude of construction than 
 many take in the New Testament. Mr. O'Kelley has gone the 
 way of all the earth, but he has left a name and a character that 
 live embalmed in the fond recollection of numerous friends and 
 admirers. He closed his useful life in peace, and we trust has 
 entered into that rest which remaineth for the people of God. 
 
 THE END. 
 

 Date Due 
 
 1 
 
 
 jUN 22 "54 
 
 Amy ^ 
 
 
 
 AUQ 4 "54 
 
 ' V. : ] Q 
 
 
 
 .IAN 28"^ 
 
 OCT 6 
 
 
 
 AUG36 '56 
 
 OCT 2 4 
 
 
 
 ; ^ - 
 
 MOV B 
 
 
 
 
 NOV $ 1 
 
 NOV 2 1 
 
 
 
 
 NOV 13 I 
 
 >PH k 
 
 
 
 
 O'C r 
 
 kar 1 9 tl 
 
 
 
 
 MM 1X TC 
 
 MAR 2 - - 
 
 
 
 
 Wi 
 
 decq?; 
 
 
 
 
 «*.3ii 
 
 OcG 1 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 *U/?Q f 
 
 
 
 
 2 91 
 
 \ - vr 
 
 
 
 
 SEP 2 £-' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 j V A <*.' 
 
 
 
 
 
 •^C a 
 
 
 
 
 
 : i% 
 
 
 
 
 
 cct 2; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
,5j*S University Librari 
 
 D01284146Q 
 
 5 
 
 
 32 ^ 
 
 - 
 
 Div.S 287.7 P232H 62956 2 
 
<>-:■ -W 
 
 •3* 
 
 
 tmiBm