says, touching those who encourage recusancy" they be like roots of nettles, which sting not themselves, but bear and maintain the stinging leaves." He is not, indeed, a seceder himself, but the system he supports is a system of secession; it naturally and necessarily bends that way, and must end either in total separation, or, as Wesley predicted, by splitting into two parties, the one to be denominated Wesleyan Methodists, the other Dissenting Methodists.

Total separation is undoubtedly the object of those who have introduced into their chapels the administration of the sacraments. Now that this separation, as far as it has proceeded, is wholly the work of the preachers, we have their own acknowledgment to avouch: one of them complained, that "they were willing to give the sacrament, but the people would not have it." (C. R. p. 10.) And in 1814, five of them signed the following declaration:- Although the wishes and demands of the people are made the plea, the principles and desires of the preachers constitute the primary and chief cause:" this they inferred from the manner in which numbers of their brethren had for years been in the habit of speaking of the Clergy, and recommending and urging the measure in question. After all, the petitions to Conference for it have been very partial, and never half so numerous as those which have been against it, and there never was a petition presented for it at the Conference from any circuit, but where preachers favourable to the measure were stationed at the time. (P. 79.) With respect to the manner in which they have been in the habit of speaking of the Clergy, a more unreserved explanation is given in a remonstrance presented to Conference in 1816, signed by thirty-seven persons. It was a habit, it seems, of "speaking and writing of them in an uncandid and unchristian spirit," by which they greatly encouraged and augmented the discontent" of those who were disposed to separate. (P. 92.) This is, we apprehend, a complete answer to the statements of some individuals, prompted no doubt by their own personal feelings, but not borne out by an investigation of facts, that the disposition of Conference is not to widen the breach unnecessarily, nor to depart from the principles of Wesley further than circumstances unavoidably require.* Mr. Sandwith endeavours to defend the Connexion from the imputation of sectarianism, by urging, that to forsake the communion of the Church, is no condition of membership among them; and he would persuade us of its absolute utility to the Establishment, because it prevents numbers in the society from degenerating into thorough-paced dissenters. But what dissent can be more thorough-paced, than total separation from her service and communion? for Mr.

* See Wesley's Sermon upon attending the Church Service,

Watson's assertion, in his observations upon Southey's Life of Wesley, is not correct: it is not true, (we speak from personal knowledge) that very few of her serious members have, at any time, been separated from her communion by a connexion with the Methodists; it is not true, that they have usually continued attendants on her services, and observers of her sacraments; it cannot be true in all those instances, where their service is performed in church hours, and the sacrament administered in their chapels; nor is the case materially altered, when the church hours are only just avoided; for though the declining any direct interference may be considered a mark of respect, it makes little difference in point of fact; for how few will rush directly from the chapel to the church?---and though there is less appearance of rivalry, the numbers abstracted from the established worship are not less. It is in vain that Mr. Sandwith shelters himself under the broad shield of Wesley's authority: when he expressed his opinion that it might wean dissenters from their meetings, he suffered not the sacrament to be administered, but strongly urged upon his followers the necessity of taking it once a month, if possible, at the church: from that system, undoubtedly, there resulted an accession of occasional conformity, and a bond of attachment to the church, which has since been greatly weakened.

To these conclusions Mr. Galland opposes the sentiments expressed by Conference in 1820, when it appears, by an extract from their minutes, that they condemned a narrow, bigoted, and sectarian spirit: this bears the semblance of an enlarged and liberal mind with relation to the Establishment; but is it not possible that some preacher of weight in the Conference, with useful abilities, but heterodox opinions, had caused a fermentation in the Connexion, which it was necessary to allay? We do not venture to pronounce, that such a circumstance was the principal motive of the declaration: but we think it not improbable that it may have been a collateral consideration, particularly when we recollect the unsuccessful struggle that has recently been made, to introduce the Liturgy into their service, as well as the confession that one of their chief ornaments holds peculiar and anti-Wesleyan notions, against which it was necessary to caution the junior preacher.

We wonder that Mr. Sandwith, so strenuous a Methodist as he appears to be, should have said nothing against the proposal of lay-delegation. To those who are the devoted sons of Methodism, the proper line of policy unquestionably is, to preserve the Conference as it now is. Itinerant preachers are to Methodism what the celibacy of the Clergy is to Roman-catholicism. A body of men are thus set apart from all local and domestic interests, and exclusively attached to the interests of the sect. As the cause of popery is to the Romish priest in the stead of

wife and children, so his zeal for Methodism is to the Metho dist Itinerant in the stead of home and place. Obviously therefore, the present constitution of the Conference is precisely that which every bigot of the sect should cherish and hold fast with the most inexorable obstinacy.

1

The grand object of the preachers, on their present footing, as an insulated body of men, must be to extend the pale of the society. So long as their own emoluments depend upon the numbers enrolled in the Connexion, every member being forced by the rules of the Society to contribute his quota, they must be more disinterested than mankind in general, if, holding the reins of the executive in their own hands, they adopt not every measure that promises to enlarge the number of their adherents. It is true, that the preachers are in some respects dependent on the people, they must be careful not to outrage their feelings, or do any thing that may make them revolt from their obedience: but their influence is enormous, and they know it: "they calculate," we are told, "with a degree of certainty unknown to political society, on that high-toned moral principle in their subjects, which makes subordination to legitimate authority a matter of duty and of conscience." (Sandwith, p. 25.) To maintain and augment this power, no art of policy is neglected. The discontented they deter from separation, by representing themselves as peculiarly blessed with " the fostering kindness of heaven;" and they punish the refractory tradespeople in the Connexion, by annoying them amongst their customers. (Reflections on Methodism, pp. 21, 22.) These are not the injurious taunts of an enemy, but the confessions of those who have felt their iron rule; and a writer, who goes so far as to vaunt that Methodism is vastly superior to the Church as a society, yet complains that, by the abuse of its institutions, each individual composing the Con ference is turned into a private Pope, to whose power no limits may be set, and who, in conjunction with his brother, forms the true Antichrist of pride, that every good Christian is bound to resist. "Can these things be, and overcome us like a summer cloud, without our special wonder?" The power thus acquired being enormous, the next question must be, how is it in fact employed? Notwithstanding the protestation of Conference, is it not used for party purposes, even to the limitation of charity? Speaking from experience, we deny that, as a body, they have "extensively mitigated the distresses of the poor." (H. S. p. 61.) The amount of their contributions without doubt is considerable, but the spirit of its appropriation is sectarian: large sums are drawn from the people, but it is all [naturally enough] for Methodist schools, Methodist missions, Methodist chapels, and Methodist preachers; the large sums given to the Methodists are often

an excuse for not subscribing to objects of more enlarged utility.

After all, it must be confessed, that they stand in need of all their influence, if they can accomplish what Mr. Welch proposes; if they can eke out of their flocks enough, to give pensions of 801. per annum to their supernumeraries, and 40%. to the widows of their preachers. If, indeed, they provide for these demands principally out of their own salaries, they set an example which the Clergy of the Establishment would do well to imitate; for there is many a Clergyman's widow who would rejoice to have half that annuity secured to her for life: but since they have accumulated a capital, amounting, by Mr. Welch's confession, to near 30,000, it is evident that there must have been, year after year, a considerable surplus beyond the exigency of the present time. Let the Conference follow up the plan of disposing of a part of their surplus, suggested by Wesley, in a sermon preached in 1789" With two thousand pounds," says he, "we could supply the present wants of all our poor, and put them in a way of supplying their own wants for some time to come.---Now, suppose this could be done, are we clear before God while it is not done ?"--Let them follow up this suggestion in an extent proportionate to the increase of the Connexion, and then Mr. Sandwith may with justice say, that they mitigate extensively the distresses of the poor. And so will they take an effectual step to obviate the application of another remark of their founder, when, after the experience of more than half a century, he observed, that nine out of ten among them decreased in grace, in proportion as they increased in wealth.

We have already mentioned, that Mr. Robinson and several other members of the old connexion have seceded and joined themselves to the body, calling themselves Church Methodists. On taking this step, they issued a circular letter, signed by the names of some of the principal individuals; a sort of manifesto, explaining their principles to the public. It may not be uninteresting to some of our readers to read the following extract from it, given by Mr. R. in his preface.

As some persons may wish to know the difference between Church Methodism and Dissenting Methodism, we beg to state, that the chief difference is this: first, that the Church Methodists will place the government of their connexion, not in the hands of the preachers only, (like the Dissenting Methodists,) but with the preachers and people conjointly; as their yearly Conference will consist of two separate assemblies, the one composed of the travelling preachers, and the other of representatives chosen by the leaders, stewards, and local preachers, at one of their quarterly meetings every year; and no law will be binding on the societies at large, without the consent of a majority of both :-second, the Church Methodists consider themselves members of the Church of England, like Mr. Wesley; they

will hold no meetings during divine service in canonical hours, nor will their preachers administer the ordinances of baptism and the 'Lord's supper; it not being their design to interfere with the Church, or with dissenting societies. If any dissenters should become members of the society, they are not expected on that account to leave their former religious connexion, but still to continue receiving the ordinances at the hands of their former pastors. As the Conference Methodist connexion has violated its engagement to the country, by separating from the Church, (and, as Mr. Steward, a leading member of the Conference, observes, now contradict all the professions they have made, by resorting to a measure which they gave the world to believe they would never adopt, that of administering the ordinances,) we think the country has a right to expect some pledge from the Church Methodists, that they will not follow their example; and therefore we intend to settle all our preaching houses on trustees, for the use of the Conference, which Conference is to be composed of the preachers and people, as already stated; but if the Conference should depart from its first principles, in allowing the administration of the sacraments by their own preachers, or hold meetings in canonical hours, when there is divine service in their respective parish churches, that then the chapels shall be given up to the Crown. This will be secured by a deed, which is essentially the same as the one used by the Irish Church Methodists, which received the approval of the late Attorney-General, Mr. Saurin. This, we conceive, is the best method we can adopt for perpetuating the original principle of Methodism, which, we apprehend, is the same as the one recognized by the Bible Society."

"We are encouraged by knowing, that this liberal and antisectarian plan has already received the approval of some of the most distinguished members of the Established Church, both clergy and laity, as well in this country as in Ireland, where there is a regular connexion of nearly 13,000 members, who are proceeding on a similar plan, and with whom we hope to act in unison, on the essential principles we have here laid down. We know, that several leading members and ministers of the Independent and Baptist Societies decidedly prefer Church Methodism with a representative system, though closely connected with the Church, to the Conference system; because they conceive that the latter system is more opposed to religious liberty than any other in the country, except the Roman Catholic."

We sincerely congratulate Mr. Robinson and his friends on their emancipation from the arbitrary controul of the Conference of Preachers. If they must be Methodists still, we are glad to find, that they are no less determined to keep to the Church, and to respect her authority. We could wish that they were not only almost Church-of-England-men, but altogether such as true Churchmen ought to be,-solely and exclusively devoted sons of the Church. But if this cannot be, if the system originated by Wesley has so strong an hold on their affections, that they would seem to themselves to be abandoning a part of their Christian profession in abandoning