less unity in the body, that concentration of talents which, as a machine of vast power, has been so successfully brought to bear on the accomplishment of grand plans for "the furtherance of the gospel," would have been utterly impracticable. If independency were now to be let loose on the Connexion, "Ichabod" might be written upon it. Distrust, jealousies, confusion, and tyranny, as so many thunderbolts, would strike the temple of Methodism, and spread the ruin round in thousands of fragments.

If a crisis were to come in which we shall have to make our choice between the Independency and the dissolution of the connexion, we speak advisedly in declaring, we should prefer its dissolution; and so become proper Independents, both in profession and practice. But such a crisis never has, and, we believe, never will come. The Wesleyan Methodist connexion shall live "long as the sun and moon endure." "God is in the midst of her, she shall not be moved; God shall help her, and that right early." EPSILON.

Correspondence.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ILLUMINATOR.

It appears exceedingly desirable that the terms of a decision so important as that recently pronounced by the Lord Chancellor, in the Manchester case, should be distinctly understood; and I, therefore, trouble you with one or two observations as to their meaning. I have before me both that report of the judgment which appeared in the Watchman and which, as I have reason to believe, has been pronounced by the Chancellor himself to be correct-and that contained in the accredited organ of the defeated party, which, of course, is somewhat garbled. There are three topics upon which, as I conceive, the expressions of the eminent judge alluded to, have been misinterpreted.

The first is the suggestion which he very kindly and considerately threw out"Whether it would not be advisable to make some endeavour, for the interests of this society, by some attempt towards accommodation, to put an end to those dissensions which had given rise to the present proceedings." Now, I have heard it strangely argued that this passing hint was nothing less than a grave recommendation, given to the Conference, by Lord Lyndhurst, the conservative Chancellor of England, to concede every claim which has been so boldly urged upon it-to upset the established discipline of the Wesleyan connexion-converting it, at once and irremediably, into the most powerful engine of democratical excitement which any age ever witnessed, and thus to lend every assistance in its power to the attempted overthrow-by Jews, Turks, and Infidels; and by men who are either not half so wise or not half so honest as either Jews, Turks, or Infidels-of the religious institutions of this great country. I read the passage very differently; and that in the full memory of those encomiums upon Dr. Warren's general character, which will subsequently be noticed. It appears to me to impress upon that unhappy man such advices as the following" Remember what the ViceChancellor told you: 'that the publication' of that speech of yours, which we have heard so much about, would go a great way to create that very schism in the Methodist Society which, if it is not put an end to, will infallibly destroy the Society itself.' I exhort, I beseech you to desist from such divisive proceedings: nay-if wounded vanity be the occasion of this feeling-I soothe, I flatter you; I know you are a very clever fellow; I have seen your picture in the Imperial Magazine-I have read your son's Life of you, and your Digest!' and then, the Sermons!-I dandle you, you great baby!" The second topic of misapprehension is to be found in the latter part of the Chancellor's observations. He declares" whether' "the members of the District Committee "acted wisely, discreetly, temperately, or harshly—these are matters with which I have no concern, and upon which I desire now to express no opinion,”—Oh! say the wise men

་

of the Association, that means, "the District Committee acted harshly. This is a matter with which I have some concern, and upon which I do desire now to express my opinion." Now, I do most kindly advise any man who has ever, for one moment, been tempted to harbour such an idea, for the love of himself and for the safety of his friends, to apply to the nearest mad-doctor he can find; at all events, I adjure him never again to attempt a thought about any thing. He is an unaccountable idiot. Why, even the paid fool of the radical household dares not stake his chance of freedom from confinement upon the avowal of such a sentiment. Even he alters the text before he tries his hand at such a perverted comment. Read his version. "Whether they acted wisely, temperately, discreetly, or CRUELLY AND harshly." I see the motive for the alteration. The unfortunate fellow thought that he must balance epithets; and that it would look odd that, on the one hand, the Chancellor might imply the possibility of the proceedings being both wise, temperate, and discreet; while, on the other, he only threw out the one conjecture that perhaps they were somewhat harsh. My wonder is, that he found any difficulty in at once coining a respectable majority of suppositions, cramming them into the Lord Chancellor's mouth, and then quietly standing upon his own most unquestionable reputation for the fidelity of his report.

A third mistake has prevailed as to the concluding paragraph of the Lord Chancellor's judgment. A plain motive for those observations has already been suggested. But there is one still plainer. The eldest son of Dr. Warren partakes the learning, piety, and talents of his father, in, at least, an equal degree. Let there be "no mistake." If there be a difference-I know the parties well and I solemnly protest that I think the younger the far more learned, pious, and talented of the two. Now, it is matter of common professional gossip, as I am informed, how this son wrote a paper in Blackwood's Magazine called "Lords Brougham, Lyndhurst, and Local Courts,"(by the way, who is Lord Local Courts ? Does Mr. Smith, of Stockport, intend to take this title, on account of his patriotic objections to leaders' meetings?)-how that paper, containing clever invectives against Lord Brougham-fulsome compliments upon the whiteness of Lord Lyndhurst's first finger-and rather meagre, and very hesitating, reasonings upon any legal topic whatever-was reprinted in a separate form; how Lord Lyndhurst once, if not twice, asked the writer to dine with him; and how this same writer, being verily "below the bar," acted, during the recent trials, as the prime prompter and informant of the plaintiff's counsel. It is not strange that, under such circumstances, the Chancellor should express some sympathy with the father of his recent guest, now figuring so unenviably before the court. But what sympathy? "Oh!" he said, "Dr. Warren was the victim of those proceedings." Indeed! Take it that he did so. Who denies it? Dr. Warren was the victim of those proceedings; and so will every man be who adopts a similar course.On your own showing, the Chancellor might be supposed to have said, "I am sorry that Dr. Warren should be hanged (suspended if you like) for sheep stealing." But does he add, "I don't think sheep-stealing an indictable offence "-or, "I regret that sheep-stealing is a capital crime"? But, of course, the assertion made on the other side is false. State fully what the Chancellor did say : "Dr. Warren asserts that he is a very pious and clever gentleman; and I know it, because his son has told me so, and it is not even attempted to be contradicted on the other side. Now, I am very sorry that such a man should suffer, because there is a general dissension in the community of which he was a member. I don't mean to call him a victim, for that term might be misunderstood, as was Dr. Bunting's application to Dr. Warren's former proceedings of the term 'unprincipled;' and I am most anxious to be understood as not pronouncing any opinion upon the moral merits of the question, the Vice-Chancellor having set. tled them, and the appeal to me, as is plain from the arguments of counsel on both sides, being exclusively upon the law of the case; and I, therefore, distinctly guard against any false impression being created by my use of the word 'sufferer.' I will not say, for I do not mean, victim." Read the Chan: cellor's words, not as curtailed, but as fully given in his own approved report-"I must again, before concluding, express my great regret at the existence of the dissensions, which have given rise to these proceedings; and from what I have heard, and from what, I may say, I know of the character of Dr. Warren-of his learning, of his piety, of his talents, and of his good conduct, which have been stated on one side, and not even attempted to be contradicted on the other-taking all these things into consideration, I must express my regret that he should be the sufferer-sufferer, I say, arising out of a contest which had originated, as it appears, in the establishment of a particular body, which this society, or a part of this society, thought it right to establish. I express my regret that he should have been the sufferer-I will not say the victim, BUT THE SUFFERER-in those proceedings."

Four times does he use the word sufferer. Had he omitted the last qualification, "but the sufferer,'' the Chancellor's meaning might have been doubtful. As the paragraph stands, it is unquestionable.— Any other interpretation expressly contradicts his repeated assertion, that on such topics nothing should induce him to express an opinion. They were not controverted before him, as they were before the Vice-Chancellor.

One phrase in the paragraph just now quoted, really deserves a passing observation, Dr. Warren's learning, piety, talents, and good conduct were not even attempted to be contradicted on the other side. Now not to estimate the merit of such moderation by the usual standards-not to remind the few foolish radicals in the six London circuits how frequently, but how unsuccessfully some of them have been canvassed by Dr. Warren and his private friends, for an invitation to London-not even to remind the insignificant faction at Bury, in Lancashire, how, in spite of Dr. Warren's persevering efforts, just two years, ago, to take the second preacher's place in that circuit, they perseveringly and disdainfully rejected all his overtures-utterly to pass by the history of the stationing committee of 1833, when Dr. Warren could and did solicit Dr. Bunting for his vote and interest towards an appointment to London, notwithstanding the failure of Dr. Warren's own negociations; and when such a crowd of memorialists belonging to the Manchester First Circuit, obtested the Conference that they might not be visited with so insupportable an infliction-not to detail Dr. Warren's very itinerant course through this large Island, from Brecon to Edinburgh, and from Rochester to Wrexham-one question shall suffice. Do the defendants believe that Dr. Warren is this very learned, pious, talented, and well-behaved gentleman? If they don't, why did they not say so? They did not attack him, even in the Vice-Chancellers Court, under all the necessary vexation excited by the unfounded imputations of the plaintiff's counsel. Let him imitate their conduct there. In the Lord Chancellor's Court, they had nothing to do with the character of either party. Yours, &c. TITUS JENKINS.

MISSIONARY NATHANIEL TURNER AND THE ASSOCIATION.

66

A letter, recently received from an emigrant who is "no Methodist," in Van Dieman's Land, and bearing date, September 7, 1834, contains the following reference to this worthy Cheshire-man, who is now a Wesleyan missionary in Hobart Town. The writer landed with " a solitary eight-pence" in his pocket; but is now in the receipt of a good salary; and acknowledges his obligations to this Wesleyan missionary. 'In obtaining this situation, I derived essential benefit from your kind letter of introduction to the Rev. Nathaniel Turner. Indeed, it was the only letter which was of the least service to me. Again "I have told a long story about myself and situation— -to show you how much Mr. Turner is respected here, by all classes, both high and low (and I do not know any person who more deserves to be so), for he is indefatigable, both in his preaching and his endeavours to do good to his fellow-creatures-—” The writer does not seem to be aware that the "Grand Central Association," have determined to stop the supplies;" which means, in plain English, that his friend Turner, and many others like him, are to be starved to death. It is but a few years since this same missionary fell under the suspicion of a "Grand Central Association" of savages, in New Zealand, who thought that he had come there in order to set up a great system of spiritual despotism, and that he had already obtained too much power and wealth; and, therefore, went in a body to the missionary settlement, and demanded "a redress of grievances;" but not receiving satisfaction, proceeded at once to humble him and liberate themselves, by "stopping the supplies." Yet as there happened to be a few Christian people in the country, belonging to the church mission, who were not members of the "association," this excellent man and his family obtained a temporary shelter and a morsel of bread, and he was thus spared to confer further blessings, temporal and spiritual, upon his countrymen, in that distant part of the world.

66

From "perils among the heathen," his God has already delivered him; and the issue of these "perils among false brethren," will be seen in due time.

NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.

"When the Devil was sick, the Devil a monk would be." No sooner did the veritable editors of the Lantern feel the force of some remarks which we conceived it to be our duty to make on certain recent events, on the one hand; and, most probably, the reproaches of conscience-because of their own "ineffable hypocrisy" of which they have, again and again, been convicted, at the bar of the public-on the other, than they became squeamish and faint. "Where there is shame there may, in time, be virtue."— To atone in some degree for the past, and to lead a few easy souls to imagine that they were not so bad as their conduct declares them to be, these editors, much to the surprise of the readers, have assumed a tone of piety and tender regard for the sacred truth. This comes, all will acknowledge, with a very ill grace from the professed organ of an Association who, in that vehicle of slander, "the Catechism," have given publicity to falsehoods of the basest character, and to misappropriations of God's holy word at which the wildest fanatic and the most ignorant sectary would blush. Why do not the champions of the Association shew themselves to be men worthy of the office they have assumed, and boldly combat the principles we have laid down? Why do they, like mice, spend their time and squander the twopences of their deluded admirers by amusing them with nibbling at certain slanderous allegations, men of straw, which they have most ungenerously filiated upon the late Dr. A. Clarke, instead of meeting the questions at issue, as if anxious to arrive at truth? We have thrown down the glove, and have dared them to the combat. If they meet us like men, we will respect them; if not, they will continue the objects of our supreme contempt. By Methodism, grounded on the principles we have declared, we shall stand; and these principles, we are bold to affirm, they dare not attempt to shake, because they know they cannot.

A powerful appeal on behalf of poor Doctor Warren has been made to the liberal public, for pecu niary aid. We fear some of his most boisterous friends are hanging back. We see no account of any donations from his admirers in Liverpool, and imagine that our predictions will be verified. We hope our sapient advocates for Methodist reform will not forsake him in this, his hour of extremity. We especially look to the persons who composed the meeting at the house of Mr. C. Cole, (October 17, 1834,) and call upon them to act consistently: they "pledged themselves to a constant and unwavering determination to hold up the Doctor's hands, by giving him the best support their united energies could devise." Oh the fickleness of human nature! In the published list of subscriptions, we do not even find the name of Mr. C., or any of that clique!

We have received from a friend a copy of the "Appeal," issued by the Diss branch of the "Grand Central Association," which we intend to illuminate in our ensuing number. It seems that, for some time, the Conference has regularly sent preachers to that circuit, accompanied with an annual grant of money, to supply the lack" of the good people there. By the blessing of God upon the labours of the preachers sent, and on the charitable contributions of the friends at a distance, the circuit has prospered so as to become independent of the Contingent Fund; and a tine system of moral machinery is now established in that neighbourhood which, with proper attention, will bestow immortal blessings on generations yet unborn. All this now turns out to be such a system of priestly tyranny that a party of the Diss Methodists can bear it no longer, and have accordingly joined the Grand Central, and have resolved at once, to "stop the supplies." Such is their plan of fulfilling the command, "freely ye have received, freely give"! But this is no "new way of paying old debts," for we have heard of persons frequenting particular shops for a long time, until their payments were greatly in arrears, and then settling the accounts by complaining of ill usage, and transferring their custom elsewhere. So much for the generosity and gratitude of a Mr. Gosling and his associates. As to their notions of duty, they seem to think that the work of tinkering the constitution of Methodism is of primary and paramount obligation, and therefore that it is to be done first and in person; but the all-important business of converting and saving the world is secondary and subordinate, and, therefore, is to be attended to afterwards and by proxy. If our correspondent think it possible for any creature in Norfolk, whether fish or fowl, to mistake this for genuine Wesleyanism, he may command our services as illuminators.

Our contemporary is so shocked at the impiety of the Illuminator, that he says it makes his "blood run cold." We cannot doubt the effect, as every man is a competent judge of his own feelings; but we suspect some little mistake about the cause. There is something so much akin to Judas in the act of taking the holy Sacrament with the Methodist preachers, on Sunday, and then going and delivering them up, by wholesale, to the vengeance of the Hull rabble, on Wednesday, that the man who can report such proceedings-not merely with calmness, but evident satisfaction-is not likely to be much shocked by anything in the way of impiety. It is possible, that party spirit may influence his feelings quite as much as religion, and that the judgment of the Court of Chancery has helped to make his "blood run

cold."

Poor fellow!

Communications have been received from "An Admirer of the Case without a Parallel,"-"Aleph," -“Epsilon,"—" G. T."—" Titus Jenkins,"—" M. J."—"A Friend to Truth,"-" L."—" Mentor."

Our readers will kindly correct the following errata, which escaped detection as the work was going through the press :-In page 95, for "seven missionaries," read "eleven missionaries ;" and in page 112, for" was uttered," read "was said to have been uttered."

Printed and Published by R. DICKINSON, 67, Pool-lane, Liverpool, to whom all communications (post paid) to the editor, are to be addressed; Sold also by J. MASON, 14, City-road, J. HUTTON, 16,City-. road, and WHITTAKER and Co., Ave Maria-lane, London; LOVE and BARTON, Manchester; SPINK and CULLINGWORTH, Leeds; DEARDEN, Nottingham; ATKINSON, Bradford; SAXTON and CHALONER, Sheffield; the CHRONICLE OFFICE, Chester; PEART, Birmingham; OGLE, Bolton; WILSON, Whitehaven; JEFFERSON, Carlisle; DICKINSON, Workington; and may be obtained, by means of the Methodist Preachers, in any part of Great Britain and Ireland.

ILLUMINATOR;

DESIGNED

TO EXHIBIT THE TRUE PRINCIPLES OF THE WESLEYAN CONSTITUTION; TO VINDICATE THE CHARACTER OF ITS AUTHORITIES; TO GUARD THE MEMBERS AGAINST THE ATTEMPTS MADE TO SEDUCE THEM FROM THE SOCIETY; AND EXPOSE THE SPIRIT AND OBJECTS OF THE SO CALLED GRAND CENTRAL ASSOCIATION.

No. 9.

66

TO BE PUBLISHED EVERY FORTNIGHT.

LIVERPOOL, APRIL 29, 1835. Price 13d.

REFLECTIONS ON THE ASSOCIATION.

(Concluded from No. 7, p. 102.)

Our fifth inquiry has reference to the frequent floundering of the Association, as evidently not based on uniform principles; and as animated by an improper spirit of violence and contention. We are aware, from the conduct of the party, that this spirit will be retorted on ourselves. We profess not impeccability. If unawares we have been betrayed into wrong statements or wrong tempers, we would wish to be the first to regret and confess it. Of this, however, we are not conscious. But the faults of one side will not quite vindicate those of the other. It is thus the cause of religion suffers while infidels and wicked men exaggerate and laugh to scorn, our mutual recriminations. Who is answerable for such consequences? To say there are faults on both sides, commonly means just nothing. The question is, where lies the great burden of culpability? Who began the contest? And on which side may the greatest number of inconsistencies and improprieties be found? "The day will declare it." In the mean time, the cause of truth seems to require that systems should, in some degree, be tried by their operation and effects.

We think we see a multitude of discrepances lying on the extreme surface of the Association. What then may be expected to rest in its depths and foundations? After all the hostile attacks the Associates have made upon the character and conduct of the preachers, who would expect that they would still persist in hearing them? They tell the world that no honest man can be a member of our society, and yet refuse to leave us, and are perfectly enraged when they are forced to be honest. They charge the preachers with tyranny on the one hand, or cowardice on the other, and then confess that they have allowed themselves to be dragged into the Association. At one time Mr. Wesley is held up as a noble example and authority, and at another, he is denounced as a weak old man and a despot. The people are not unfrequently exhorted to rise en masse and shake off their oppressions; and, at the same moment, we find it printed all over England, that they bear those burdens with great patience, as they have long done, and that all this is very honourable to