themselves), they are guilty of deluding the public. Neither the Ministers nor the people in the New Connexion possess much power; it has been grasped and wielded principally by a secular class of officers in the Societies. Let any candid, impartial person read the Rules of this Body, and he will soon find that most of them are an outrage upon its radical doctrine of equality. We have given some confirmatory instances in former Numbers of the Illuminator, and they have not been refuted, neither will they be, for they are unanswerable.

Moreover, this Connexion have exhibited to the world at large their deeply rooted enmity to our religious communion. By publishing scurrilous letters-making inflammatory speeches-subscribing money to remove the "mill stone" from the neck of Dr. Warren-giving up their Theological Institution to please him-supporting the Advocate and the Lantern, and lending their chapels and and schools in Bury, Nottingham, Stockport, Hanley, Halifax, London, and Sheffield, to the notorious revilers of Methodist Preachers; they have done their utmost to inflict injury on our Connexion, and have bidden the Association "God speed."

Nevertheless, as Christians when they have been accused of forging any part of the Old Testament have appealed to the infidel Jews for their triumphant vindication; so the Wesleyan Preachers who are charged by the Association with changing the construction of a certain law, that they might usurp the rights of the people, can refer their case to the New Connexion-their bitter, diligent, persevering adversaries—in full confidence that, by their decision, they shall stand honourably acquitted. This Connexion is well able to judge on the point at issue between us and the Grand Central Body. Its founders had an entire acquaintance with all the particulars for which they petitioned, and also with those which the Conference granted in 1797.The New Methodist Magazine for 1826, contains a history of that community; and one part of it, commencing at page 368, is exceedingly important. It gives an exact copy of the Rules of Pacification as they were sent by the Conference then sitting in Leeds to the delegates who, in the same town and at the same time, were assembled in Ebenezer chapel; where, after duly considering them and not being satisfied, they "unanimously resolved to separate, and form a New Itinerancy." And is their statement of the celebrated Rules of Pacification precisely similar to that which the Conference declares to be the genuine one? IT IS. The paraphrase of 1800, which speaks of officers and members being expelled by "a majority of the Leaders' meeting," is in no part of the document. Neither is the right, or power asserted to be conveyed by such an expression, or by any other, to be found in their account of the new regulations of 1797, but just the reverse, for they declare that it was never communicated by the Conference to Leaders' meetings. The historian when noticing that part of the rules of Pacification which refers to expulsion from Society, writes as follows:

"It is stated that no Member of Society should be expelled for immorality, unless the charge was first proved at a Leaders' meeting. So far it was satisfactory; but there were two other points relating to Membership of far greater importance; namely, their continuing such in Society as were immoral and the exclusion of others against whom no immorality could be brought. That some immoral characters have been kept in Society, is, perhaps, what no person will deny; and in one instance, to mention no more, about thirty Leaders and Local Preachers were expelled at one time, when they were allowed to be sound in the faith, and pure in their morals; AND THIS POWER THE PREACHERS STILL RETAINED."

We have transcribed this paragraph out of the New Connexion history, highly censurable as some part of it undoubtedly is, for the sake of the great principle and momentous fact with which it concludes. It is of such importance as to roll away a mountain of slander which the Advocate, the Lantern, and a host of speech-making "Grandees" have heaped on the Wesleyan Conference. By these agents of agitation it has been trumpeted through the land, that the Methodist Ministers have broken faith with their people, violated the Rules of Pacification made in 1797, and most unmercifully wrested from the Societies one of their greatest rights and privileges; but what say their dear friends and supporters-the New Connexion? They declare the charge is untrue, and the Associationists are false witnesses; for "the power to expel Members the Preachers still retained."* Indeed, this is one of their principal reasons as given in the passage we have quoted, for their separation from the Wesleyan com

*The New Connexion, after labouring in the metropolis since the year 1800, have at length obtained one chapel to call their own. It has been opened very lately for divine worship and public scandal. The London Association occupied it on Wednesday the 23d November, to revile and degrade the Wesleyan Conference. Mr. Eckett appears to have been the chief speaker on the occasion, and the principal part of his speech was, accusing the Conference of having robbed the official meetings of the power of expelling members which it had conceded to them in 1797. He declared, "it was only at the last Confer ence that the alteration was made in the Minutes of the Conference, giving them that power." Yet the history of the religious body in whose chapel he made his charges, most triumphantly refutes them, and clearly convicts Mr. Eckett of the sin of having borne false witness against his neighbour. Surely, won ders will never cease!

munity. They advance two objections against the authority to exclude persons from religious communion being retained by the Preachers. One of them is, that the Methodist Ministers refuse to exercise this prerogative in some instances which demand it, by continuing immoral Members in Society. We must deny the truth of this allegation. Let criminal characters be charged and convicted before the proper tribunal (for without such a procedure they cannot be lawfully excommunicated), and, we believe, the Superintendents will faithfully perform their official duty. We beg leave to tell the New Connexion, that immoral individuals are more likely to be kept in Society with them than with us. Their system makes certain wealthy manufacturers as much the lords over some Societies, as they are over their secular establishments. Suppose that these distinguished Members are chargeable with neglecting the means of grace-drinking to excess, or grossly oppressing the hireling in his wageshow are they to be cut off from church fellowship? By the Preachers? No; for these know that, in the balancing of power, they have been treated most unjustly; the balancers, as was very natural, took care to have Benjamin's mess. The expulsion must be by a majority of Leaders, who, in the case under consideration, will be powerfully tempted to neglect their duty. And why? The subsistence both of them and their families is at stake. If these officers turn them out of the Society, they will have cause to fear these expelled masters will turn them out of their employ! How perilous is such a situation to the enforcement of the New Testament law of purity in a Christian church!

A second objection made by the New Connexion to the Preachers retaining, in 1797, the authority to expel from Society is, that upon officers who are sound in faith aud pure in morals, it is sometimes excercised. We are willing to admit that Leaders and Local Preachers who believe Methodist doctrines and live free from scandalous criminality, are occasionally visited with expulsion. What then? Is it tyrannical and unscriptural? We deny the truth of such an accusation. Such individuals were proved to be guilty of habitual railing—sowing discord-promoting division—and preventing the prosperity of the work of God. And what saith the Scriptures? We are to "mark" and "avoid these tramplers upon the peace and unity of the Lord's people; and this inspired rule can be kept only in one way-by trying them for their offences, and excluding them from the society of those that wish to live in godly quietness.

The testimony of the New Connexion, that the Preachers in 1797, still retained their power to expel from Society, and the reasons which they have assigned why they dissented from it, most clearly demonstrate the Association to be guilty of libelling the Conference; and we seriously call upon these slanderers to "bring forth fruits worthy of repentance." ""*

Correspondence.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ILLUMINATOR.

One of my first objects on my arrival in this circuit, was to make myself fully acquainted with the extent of the disaffection toward the Conference and toward Methodism, and with the character and purposes of those persons who made themselves the most active and zealous in the work of opposition to that cause which had once done them good, and who might appear, from their place in the Society, from their character and station in life, as well as from any other circumstance with which they might be connected, to be the head and soul of the opposition we had to grapple with in this place. I had soon an opportunity to do this; partly at some of their meetings, at which as they held them in our chapel, I thought it right to attend, and to oppose them as far as I could; and partly from private interviews, by calling upon them at their houses, in order to converse with them freely and fully on the subjects of their fancied complaints, or as I might happen to meet with them in any other way. In this intercourse with the persons in question I made it a point of duty, as often as I could, to have some one with me, as a witness to what might be said; and, for the most part, my colleague, Mr. Hobill, was the person who occupied this place. In this way, I

* We happened to meet the other day with the November number of the New Connexion Magazine. It reports progress in their wonted creditable style, and shows that, like eagles, they pounce upon more than one kind of prey. We have extracted from its pages the subjoined "choice bit" of intelligence :

"AN OPENING AT BELPER.

"On Sunday, September 20th, 1835, a Society of seventy members in Belper, formerly connected with the Primitive Methodists, were taken into church-fellowship, as a part of the Nottingham circuit!! They have 112 scholars in a Sabbath school, two or three places to preach in, and four Local Preachers." When a New Connexion Minister again asserts in the Lantern how many per cent. the Body has reased, he will, of course, keep facts like the above on the back ground.

obtained evidence, from the lips of the persons themselves, not only that they had been, but that they still were members of the Association; and that they were aiders and abettors of the objects of that conspiracy against Methodism and truth; and, from principle, opposed to the discipline of that branch of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ to which they professed to belong. With some of these infatuated men, I had several interviews in this way; and I talked and reasoned with them, as far and as long as I could, till, in one or two of the cases (Daniel Douglas was one, and Joseph Sherwen was another), it was intimated that these visits from me were no longer desired. My colleague, Mr. Hobill, was with me on both these occasions. In all my interviews with these persons, I endeavoured to be as calm as I could, and even mild also, when I found a disposition to sobriety on the part of the persons in question, which, at times, with some of the individuals, might chance to be the case. But when I found them asserting-strongly and vehemently assertingthings which I knew to be false, I did not hesitate in the least flatly to contradict them to their face, and to challenge them to prove their assertions in any way they could; and I thought it right to do this, both in public and in private.

66

During the course of these my interviews with them, it was not difficult to discover, that, if they persisted in the course they were openly pursuing, they could not possibly be retained within the bosom of our Society. They openly, and in the most violent terms, before our people, calumniated the whole Body of our Preachers as tyrants, and the system of Methodism itself as tyranny, popery, and every thing else that was abominable and not fit to be endured: while they, on their part, were represented, each man by his brother, as all that was perfect and excellent, and as men who were shamefully deprived of their rights by their Preachers, in the most cruel and arbitrary way; so that they had been literally compelled, by their sufferings, and sorrows, and wrongs, to unite in defence of their rights, and to determine, by bold but necessary undertakings, to bring their tyrannical Preachers down to their own place. Of such like materials as these, I met with a pretty fair sample the first day I came into this town, in one of their public meetings, held in the chapel in the evening, when the prayer-meeting was over; in which one of the Sheffield heroes, in July and August last, stood up, and falsely charged the "tyrannical Conference with having treated respectable bodies of Trustees," and "the Rochdale delegates, who were not connected with the Association, just as they had treated the delegates of the Association." So that it was not the Association alone, but all and every other person of their own Societies, that the Conference and Methodist Preachers insulted and wronged. These false statements, made in the most bitter and virulent manner, before a great number of people in our chapel, were, of course, met; and the speaker was told to his face, either that he was ignorant of the things he pretended to know, or else he was deliberately lying to the people; and that, in either case, he was deceiving the people with falsehood, and leading them astray. It was not without much clamour and opposition that these statements were made; and they had to force and cut their way through plentiful emissions of such sounds as venomous reptiles, when furious, are well known to make. And as this bitterness of spirit was evidently rooted and fixed in the heads and leaders of the faction banded to oppose us, and as they clamoured for things which my judgment told me were unscriptural; and never were, nor ought to be, any part of Methodism, and could only tend to upturn our whole system by the roots, it was impossible I could entertain a doubt as to what line of conduct I must pursue, with regard to these men. I, therefore, gave them to understand, that if they persisted in their hostility to our system, it would be my painful duty to bring them to answer for their conduct before a Leaders' meeting.

In the meanwhile I found that the rules of the Association had been read and expounded in the classes, and that Methodism, as connected with the Conference, was regularly denounced before the members in the classes; and, moreover, that they were, at the same time, dissuaded from contributing to our cause as usual, and directed to give their monies for the use of the Association. Such was their infatuation, or loss of all principles of honesty, that they could not, or would not, perceive the wrong there was in this. They could not, or would not, perceive, that having been entrusted with classes belonging to the Wesleyan Conference, on the known understanding and condition that they were faithfully to help the Preachers to build them up in piety, and in love and attachment to all our rules and discipline, it was a breach of faith in them, a flagrant violation of a trust and of their own voluntary engagement, to alienate the minds of their classes either from the Conference, or from those laws and rules of discipline which they had engaged to observe. Yet, so far had they gone on in their classes, that some of the Leaders had actually refused to take money for the support of our cause, when one of his members offered it; and some other members had left off meeting in class, because of the perpetual importunity to which their Leader had sub

jected them, in order to shake their attachment to Methodism, and to induce them to enrol their names as members of the Association. So that, by these treacherous arts and devices, almost the whole Society at Whitehaven had been allured from true Methodism and attachment to their Preachers, and even filled with bitterness against them both; and these things were becoming worse every day.

On examination I found I had twelve persons in the whole which it would be my duty to impeach-a most formidable task this in a circuit; but I saw no way to escape it, consistent with the duty which I owed to Methodism, and to the sound part of our Society in this town, and to those very persons themselves, and also to God.

I now drew up the following indictment, and gave or sent a copy of it to each of them:-"Sir-You are hereby requested to attend at a Leaders' meeting on Monday evening next, September 14, at eight o'clock, in the vestry, to answer to the following charges which will be preferred against you, namely: first, your having been connected with an association called The Grand Central Association.' Secondly, your aiding and abetting the said Association. Thirdly, your opposing the discipline of the Society of which you are a member." And as I knew some of these individuals were Trustees, I published, distinctly, from the pulpit, on the Sunday before the trial took place, when I was announcing the Leaders' meeting, that, the Trustees were at liberty to attend, and take part in such branches of the business which would be brought before the meeting, as properly, according to our rules, belonged to them.

On the Monday evening, after preaching, they all obeyed the summons except one, who had that morning set out on a journey. There a was mob of all sorts of people attending them into the chapel, crowding up even to the vestry door, and anxiously awaiting the event. I had arranged for my colleagues to be with me, as well as the three or four Leaders whom I knew to be faithful; and I believe all those Leaders were present whom I had not thought fit to impeach; brought, as I have good reason to believe, by the opposite party in the full and confident expectation that they should ride through the business of the meeting on a high tide of votes. But no Trustee came to the meeting simply in the capacity of Trustee. All the Trustees in the town were among the Leaders, or else among the accused, except one, who, although he knew of the business, and of his privilege to be present, did not think proper to attend. On calling over the names of the Leaders, and looking round, there was one man present among the Leaders who was not on the list. requested to know if he came there as a Trustee. But finding he was not come as a Trustee, but was a Leader from the country, I requested him to retire from the meeting, as not having a right there. But the opposite party strongly opposed this. He was a man of their party; and they requested him not to obey my order. "He had," they said, "as much right to be there as either of my colleagues." And they were for "taking the sense of the meeting,” whether my colleagues had any right to attend a Leaders' meeting, except as my substitute only, when I happened not to be there. I found it was of no use to contend concerning the presence of this person, and having distinctly protested against it, as a violation of our rules and discipline, I proceeded to the business of the evening for which we were met.

Having called over the names of the accused, I next addressed a few words to the rest of the Leaders, separate and apart from them; the purport of which was to acquaint them, "that it would be their solemn duty in this case, as in the presence of God, and as those who must give an account, to judge of, and express their opinion, as to whether the brethren before them, whose names I had read, were guilty or not of the charges which would be preferred against them; confining themselves solely and exclusively, in this stage of the business, to the facts of the case." And here I may just remark, that I was frequently and much interrupted while I was stating these things to the meeting, by various questions and remarks irrelevant to the point then before us, but to which I paid as little attention as I possibly could, that I might preserve the more order and decorum in what I had to do.

I called the name of William Baisbrown, and requested to know from himself whether he was guilty of any one of the three charges mentioned in his indictment, which charges I then distinctly read. He pleaded guilty to the two first; but would not say any thing concerning the last, till certain questions had been discussed by that meeting, the purport of which was, namely-"to take the sense of the meeting as to whether, being a member of the Association, and aiding and abetting its objects and design, was violation of our rules." He demanded to know whether I would put such a question to the meeting. I told him I could not submit any such question to the meeting; that if he or any other person wished to say any thing on that, or any other subject, they should say as much as they pleased after we had gone through the facts of the case; and I begged that I might not be interrupted; and then, as Mr. Baisbrown had pleaded guilty to two of the charges, I deemed it unne

cessary to trouble him concerning the third, and so proceeded to the next name I had on my list. But the moment I attempted to do this, I was clamourously interrupted, and told that "Mr. Baisbrown's case was not decided," &c. Here, again, discussion was demanded, and I was requested to show what law Mr. Baisbrown had broken, by aiding, or abetting, or by being a member of the Central Association, and the like. I told them he had acknowledged himself a member of the Association, which was sufficient for my purpose, as it implied opposition to Methodism, and to Methodistic rules and discipline; and then I proceeded again, amidst much clamour and noise, to the next person on my list, and requested him to plead to his charge. But he was ordered by Mr. Baisbrown and others not to answer me a word; and he obeyed their mandate. I then told them, that if they did not choose to plead, their silence would be taken as an acknowledgement of their guilt, which they received with expressions of scorn and contempt; and again charged the "brother" not to speak. I then passed on to the next name; and he also, in like manner, was charged not to speak. And so I proceeded to the next; and all being charged in succession not to speak, I received an answer from none. And having, in this way, gone to the bottom of my list, I concluded the meeting, and came away, as did also my colleagues, and the three or four Leaders of classes who were faithful to our cause. It was a night much to be remembered by us all. Never did infatuated men more completely defeat their own purposes, or more effectually cut the throats of their own schemes, than these heroes of reform, on that memorable night. They knew, that out of the whole list of Leaders, they had a great majority on their side; and they evidently appear to have thought, that the accused themselves would all vote in favour one of another; and thus they appear to have reckoned on triumphant success. For it never seems to have entered into their heads for a moment, that confederates in the same crime are ineligible to sit on the jury at the time when their confederates are tried; or, that, if twelve men commit theft and shed blood, the eleven may not be on the jury, at the trial of one of themselves; and so, in a regular series, till the whole have been tried. And hence these individuals called out for "one at a time,” and insisted on being tried "one at once." And thus they would not allow me to go on to the second name on my list, till "the meeting (meaning themselves), had considered and decided concerning the first." And, because I did not submit to their wisdom, and allow them to be tried in this way, I am a tyrant, and have committed an outrage on "Christianity, on the laws of Methodism, and on British justice!" Thus, in their wisdom, they think, and thus they affirm. But although neither the Bible nor Methodism can teach them to think differently on these points, British justice, at least, we presume, would make some attempts to teach them better, if some things were carried into its courts which they have thought proper to do.

While I was putting on my hat and cloak in the vestry, in order to come away, the clamour of voices around me was as the waves of the sea. They called me all manner of names which they thought contemptible and vile, or which they were able to apply to me in a vile and contemptible sense, as that of judge, pope, aud hangman; and one of them (Mr. Gordon) cried out to the immense mob in the chapel, who had all the while been responding to their voices, by clapping of hands, bravos, &c., just when I was beginning to face them, "let that hangman come QUIETLY past," in a manner and tone of voice which could only be understood as requesting them to illtreat me. And I was not a little pressed and jammed against the gallery staircase while pressing with my strength to get through them, amidst hisses and sneers in abundance, and all kinds of contempt.

All this was on the Monday evening. And as I had to set out the next morning in order to attend our financial District Meeting, at Penrith, the business of Monday lay over till the Friday, when I was returning home again. On this day (Friday) I requested all the Leaders who were present on the Monday, and that had any right to vote on the case, to meet again; but at this time we met at my house, in order to be quiet and secure from the mob. I had some doubt on my mind at the time, and I still have much doubt whether, in the case of these men, one of them having pleaded guilty to two of the charges brought against him, and the others having refused to plead, it was at all necessary to take the sense of the Leaders' meeting, as to the fact of their innocence or guilt of the charges alleged against them. However, I did put it to them; and of the four Leaders present on the occasion (all who thought proper to come), three gave their voices against them, and the fourth requested to be neutral. A week after this meeting the Leaders met again. And having, in the mean time, consulted with individuals upon the subject, I stated to the Leaders my intention to drop all their names, and so to have done with them for ever; or, at least, till such time as they became very different men. The day after, which was Saturday, I told most of them they were dismissed; that "we," and not "I," as the thing