bers would be immediately satisfied, if they could be assured that the agitators were' determined to abide by a liberal and bonâ fide interpretation of the settlement made in 1797;" and particularly that part of it which says, certain extra "formal meetings may be held, if they first receive the approbation of the Superintendent and the Leaders' or Quarterly Meeting." But to say this might have led people to think of what has been going on during this year and the last, and to remark how very little agitators by profession have either hitherto cared about this law, or are likely to observe it in future; and to do this was not deemed advisable. 3. Gentlemen under censure have a peculiar way of acknowledging their own misconduct, and that of their friends. When these "counsels of peace" have been adopted, the author says, page 37, "We shall have none of these disgraceful outbreaks of popular feeling, having the recovery of liberty for their object, and which indicate a state of things where all cannot be quite right. Englishmen do not generally cry out thus without a cause, and Methodists least of all." Facts are stubborn things; and it is in vain to deny that, amongst the agitators, there have been "disgraceful outbreaks of popular feeling;" but then, of these, it is here assumed, other parties must bear the blame. This logic is at least as good as that of the Staffordshire Magistrates, who, since there could not be any Wednesbury riots "without some cause," said they were produced by the early Methodists. This is the way in which Adam reasoned, and in which his offending children follow an offending father. For whatever purpose such an argument may be adduced, we may safely say of the party using it, that to innocence and penitence he is equally a stranger. 4. Legal treatment seems to produce a degree of causeless wonder and perplexity. At page 30, we read, "Now, a large number of our people are persuaded, (whether truly or otherwise,) that the tendency of our ecclesiastical government, during the last half century, has been in a direction opposite to that of the freedom of the governed; that their liberties have been curtailed since the settlement of 1797; and that, while the liberties of the subject have been, to a very large extent, politically increased during that period, ecclesiastically they have been much restricted and diminished." There was no need of the parenthesis, ("whether truly or otherwise,") seeing the truth of our author's sentiment was so manifestly realised in his own experience. His "liberties may have been "politically increased," but certainly "ecclesiastically" they are much diminished. Yet there are parties in a still worse predicament. "Their liberties have been curtailed" till they are no longer free to choose an employment, or a dwelling, or even a country, for themselves. There can be no true liberty without law, and men must submit to the one, if they wish to enjoy the other. 5. Men may endure the application of law, and still be warped and biassed in their judgment. Concerning a dispute which arose in the primitive church, and in which, of course, our author was not personally involved, he gives it as his opinion, page 16, that "one side was, as we now view the matter, altogether in the right; and the other side was plainly and palpably in error." But when his mind was occupied by questions nearer home, he tells us, in the Preface, "that the right path, in almost all instances where the wise and good disagree, lies at an equal distance from the extreme views entertained on either side." Possibly a similar thought may have consoled other minds. Judges and juries, like ordinary men, are not infallible; and a trial may be regarded as merely an instance in which the "wise and good disagree," while the "right path lies at an equal distance from the extreme views entertained on either side." It is thought, if the readers of this pamphlet are only candid, they too will be of the same opinion; and, at page 8, we find our author's mode of convincing them. "Here let us candidly review the matter. It would be a wonder of no small magnitude, if, unlike all other disagreements, it should be found that, in this instance, all the fault was on one side. If this is, as it has been said to be, a ‘family quarrel,' how rarely have we ever heard OFFENDERS AND THEIR JUDGES. of such a thing as a family disagreement occurring, without more than one party being in the wrong!" Every judicial contest is a "family quarrel," seeing all the parties are children of a common parent, and "how rarely have we ever heard of such a thing," "without more than one party being in the wrong!" 6. A man who has done wrongly himself, may still feel competent to tell other people how to do right. Some nameless individual, at page 19, is thus corrected. "The Wesleyan Societies had been told, years ago, by one of their own Ministers, a man of great shrewdness of intellect, that, in any case of supposed oppression, they had the remedy in their own hands; inasmuch as all pecuniary supplies are furnished by themselves voluntarily. It was a most unfortunate speech; for it ignored the authority of the Bible." A free-born Englishman may share in the terrors of Cain, and be heard to exclaim, "Every one that findeth me shall slay me;" and, to relieve his mind, a friend may tell him he is still young, and strong, and free, and, should the worst happen, he can yet defend himself; upon which a third person may observe, That is "a most unfortunate speech," for it has "ignored the authority of the Bible," which commands us to "live peaceably with all men.' Doubtless that is "a most unfortunate speech" which meets with such treatment; and that man is still more "unfortunate," who supposes that, by animadverting upon it in such a way, he has said anything at all to the purpose, or which can possibly be of the slightest service to mankind. 7. All that has happened has not deterred this writer from undertaking to cure the existing evils in Methodism. His prescription is, "that concessions must be made on both sides." (Page 24.) First, on the part of the Conference, he intimates that its "debates" should be "open to the public," and, "by petition," it should be as accessible as "Commons," "Lords," and even "Majesty itself." These parties, it seems, are very accessible; and certainly the people, who have bound themselves, by law, to pay whatever taxes these three estates may agree to impose, are entitled to some consideration. Possibly the Conference may be equally affable, when it has the same reason for being so. Nor is it yet quite clear that all those liberal friends to charities, "supported by voluntary contributions," who do not insist on being present at all the meetings of their managing Committees, have no solid reason for this abstinence and reserve. However, these and "half a score other concessions of the same sort," it seems, are contemplated: of course, all to be made by the Conference. Upon turning to the other side, to see what "concessions" were required of them, we thought perhaps the writer would set an example, and concede the point of etiquette, which formerly sealed his lips, and tell his brethren what he knows about their anonymous libellers; or, that he might persuade the manufacturers of "Fly. Sheets " to concede their privilege, and engage to publish no more; or, that some Leaders'-Meetings might be advised to concede the right of saying that black is white by returning a verdict in flat opposition to the notorious facts of the case; or, that it might be recommended to the agitators, to concede their own asserted right to make open war upon the Conference, and, at the same time, to protest against its using those extraordinary powers which the constitution of Methodism has provided for such occasions. But we were disappointed. Conference is to concede, while its opponents are to "pause and consider " "whether they may not have gone too far;" "whether they have not expected and required too much," and whether, in other respects, their mode of operation does not admit of improvement. This is all; and assuredly this will not do. "Mutual concessions" are a vulgar remedy, which fails to meet the case. Such a proposal, to be even considered, must be made by one who has the confidence of both parties. This advantage Mr. Walton does not possess; and if he had it, judging from this pamphlet, in his hands, it would never be turned to any useful account. LONDON-PRINTED BY JAMES NICHOLS, HOXTON-SQUARE. THE WESLEYAN VINDICATOR AND CONSTITUTIONAL METHODIST. EDITED BY THE REV. SAMUEL JACKSON, AND A SUB-COMMITTEE. AUGUST & SEPTEMBER, 1851. MEETING OF WESLEYAN MINISTERS AND LAYMEN, CONVENED AT MANCHESTER, JULY 16TH, BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE CONFERENCE. FOR some time past it has been vauntingly and perseveringly stated, by parties disaffected towards Wesleyan Methodism, that if its laymembers were only allowed free and open expression of their opinions concerning what are understood to be its constitutional principles, and disciplinary laws and regulations, it would appear that they are generally dissatisfied with them, and desirous of great and revolutionary changes. An opportunity has recently occurred in the large and influential Meeting, held at the call of the President of the Conference, in Oldham-street chapel, Manchester, on the 16th of July, for testing the truth or falsehood of this statement; and it is proved to be, like many others made by the same persons, false. That Meeting has made it evident to every observant and unprejudiced individual who attended it, or who has read a correct report of its proceedings, that the body of the Methodist laity is sound and healthy at the heart, and in its principal members; though, through the sinful and contaminating associations into which it has of late been brought, it may be found corrupt and feeble in some of its extremities. Some four hundred and fifty lay-gentlemen, and some two hundred and fifty Ministers, were invited to the Meeting, "to confer, in a friendly conversation, upon various subjects affecting the general interests of the Connexion at the present time," most of whom attended. The only rule of exclusion laid down by the President, in the preparation of his lists of persons to be invited, as we understood, was, the public committal of themselves in opposition to constitutional Methodism; LONDON: PUBLISHED BY JOHN MASON, 14, CITY. ROAD; and in the Meeting there was not the least restraint placed upon any individual as to the free and open expression of his opinions. We are aware that some pains have been taken to represent it as a partial and exclusive Meeting, because they who have publicly confederated together for the destruction of Wesleyan Methodism, and who have openly declared that they will "either revolutionize or annihilate it,” were not invited to it by the President; but the justice and propriety of excluding such persons from the Meeting must appear to every reflecting and impartial mind. Indeed, so little were their opinions and measures deemed worthy of consideration in the Meeting, that they were not so much as once referred to, except in the way of disavowal of any sympathy with them by one or two speakers, when their sentiments seemed, in expression, to border on interference with established principles. The Meeting was as large as it could well be, for the object for which it was called. Individuals known to be erroneous in their views of Wesleyan polity, but who had not openly and violently committed themselves against it, were invited to attend. They were present, and spoke in it; and the declared conclusion of nearly all who composed the Meeting is, that-though in some of its minor parts it may be examined by the Conference, and perhaps more fully adjusted in their application to the circumstances of the present times, yet— substantially, and as a whole, "Methodism as it is" needs no change. It is true, that some few individuals expressed opinions which, if carried out into practical working in Methodism, would essentially revolutionize its ecclesiastical system; but such opinions found no general support in the Meeting; and the individuals who expressed them avowed, that they did not perceive that they had such a bearing towards essential change as the Meeting declared them to have. Perhaps the numerous and contradictory opinions of the many who spoke may be pleaded against us in this judgment of what passed; but in addition to the satisfactory reasons supplied by laymen to laymen against proposed modifications, or supposed improvements, we would remind our readers of the strong and decisive Resolutions passed unanimously by Lay-gentlemen, who assembled in Manchester; and that in a Meeting of their own, voluntarily called by themselves at the conclusion of the first day's proceedings; and which unequivocally express their agreement in the essential and established principles of Methodism. Several of the more extreme suggestions offered to the Meeting were fully shown by Mr. Scott to be impracticable in the Wesleyan Connexion ; and most of the others that were not remarked upon by the laymen themselves, might easily have been satisfactorily answered by the Ministers present, if they had not, of set purpose, abstained from occupying the time of the Meeting. They desired to hear what the laity had to say upon the various subjects affecting the general interests of the Connexion, and therefore were almost wholly silent; but in conversation among themselves, the lay-members of the Meeting generally answered each other's proposals, until, we fearlessly assert, the general conclusion in the mind of the Meeting was, that it is a dangerous thing to attempt to improve the long-tried system of Wesleyan Methodism; and, as one member expressed himself, it is much easier to mar than to mend it. We have no intention of animadverting upon the Meeting in Manchester in an unfriendly spirit. We were among those who heartily approved of the calling of the Meeting, and, on the whole, we are well satisfied with its results; but, to express honestly the full convictions of our mind concerning it, we cannot but make a remark upon one or two difficulties that appear to us in connexion with it. One is, the difficulty of selecting from the numerous suggestions made for improving the practical working of Methodism, any upon which there was a general agreement, even in the Meeting itself. In justice to all the persons present at the Meeting, we are bound to say, there appeared no general agreement upon any one suggestion that was offered. Some of the suggestions, when made, were cheered and applauded; but when spoken against, the objections expressed had at least equal support. It is true, there was a general agreement in the opinion, that something should be done by the Conference to meet the desires of some persons who had been rendered uneasy in the Societies, through recent misrepresentations of Methodism; but with this was the open avowal by nine-tenths of the persons who spoke in the Meeting; "I do not desire personally any change in Methodism. I have all the liberty and freedom for profit, usefulness, and enjoyment I want;" and with this avowal it is evident that the suggestions offered were not for what were even supposed to be improvements, but were, in most instances, viewed as mere expedients to be employed for the recovery of peace to the Connexion. This, we think, is dangerous ground to be taken in relation to the church of Christ, and, undoubtedly, places before the Conference no small difficulty. Expediency is not at all times to be rejected and denounced. There is a just and wise expediency, as there is also an expediency that is unjust and foolish; but for the wellworking of a system which is to be carried on, not merely through the present times of agitation and disturbance, but, as it is hoped, for ages to come, defects should be clearly ascertained, and specifically pointed out, before requests should be urged for improvement. And without any unfriendly reflection upon the Meeting at Manchester, and with sincere and earnest admiration of the religious feeling which governed the persons attending it, we must nevertheless be allowed to say, that we think there should have been some general agreement upon ascertained defects, before the request had been made that some improvements should be made. We are not among the number who think that no adjustments should be made, from time to time, of the external agencies of Methodism to the circumstances around it. It is essentially a living and expansive system, providentially adapted to the various and increasing wants of different nations, and progressive ages; and to attempt to stereotype |