will certainly be supplied with these "frequent statements." The writer, however, seems to have been nearly weary of them, and modestly hints, that they ought to be authenticated; and by this time, your credulity, I hope, has begun to stagger. In my former letter I exhibited in parallel columns the discipline of the New Testament, of Conference Methodism, and of Protestant Methodism; and I have the pleasure of knowing already, that the view I presented has satisfied the minds of hundreds. For reasons already assigned, we do not consider the laws of the realm as exactly adapted to the government of the church; a little discordancy, therefore, between the two codes, does not occasion to us any embarrassment. But since the British statute bock is supposed by your people to be of equal authority with the New Testament, in matters of ecclesiastical discipline; you are obliged to show the agreement of your laws with the laws of the land. When your advocate shall come forth to make out his demonstration, I beg he will just glance at the following contrast.

THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION,

1. Recognises two distinct legislative assemblies.

2. Gives the king a veto on every proposed law.

3. Gives the people a right to elect their own representatives in the commons' house of parliament.

4. Would be destroyed, were all the members of the house of commons elected by officers of the executive government.

5. Allows of trial by peers to all the people.

6. Does not decide the fate of

THE PROTESTANT METHOD-
ISTS,

1. Protest against it; and have provided but one.

2. Protest against it; the power of legislation being exclusively in the yearly meeting.

3. Protest against it; their private members not being allowed to send a single representative to the yearly meeting.

4. Allow none to vote for legislators but members of the local preachers' and quarterly meetings; and these all belong to the executive government.

5. Protest against it; and deprive their missionaries and private members of the privilege. 6. Protest against it; and de

a prisoner by the vote of a majority of the jurors; but by their unanimous voice.

7. Does not permit a judge to vote in any criminal cause.

cide every cause by a majority

of votes.

7. Protest against it; and empower their chairman to give a single vote in every cause.

Was it not worth while to leave us, that you might enjoy the benefits of the British constitution in the Protestant society?

Much has been said respecting the degrading document, as it is termed, which was read to the leaders, and to which their assent was required as a qualification to sit in judgment on the disaffected. It was deemed a reflection on their honour, and implied a suspicion of their attachment to Methodism. Where there was no proof of this, it was contended there ought to have been no jealousy; and it was considered unjust to bring a man to such a test, whose Methodistical loyalty could not be impeached without it.

As much misconception has prevailed on the subject of this paper, I will give it verbatim from the stewards' book.

"We, the undersigned, members of the leaders' meeting, assembling at the old chapel, taking into consideration the troubles at present existing in the society, and especially the reports which have been widely circulated in newspapers respecting the proceedings of a part of the members of this meeting, do feel ourselves called upon to express our cordial attachment to Wesleyan Methodism, and our determination to discharge our proper duties in the Methodist society, by freely subscribing* our names, in token of our cordial assent, to the following resolutions:

66

"1. As our regular weekly leaders' meetings are sufficient for the transaction of the business of the society, and our quarterly meeting for the business of the circuit, and as other meetings of leaders, local preach

* As some hesitated to subscribe, who approved of the resolutions, the verbal expression of their assent was accepted as sufficient. Q Q

ers, and others, called without the knowledge and consent of the superintendent, are contrary to the rules of pacification, and tend to disunite and divide us, we unreservedly engage not to attend any meetings of that description, but to conform ourselves to our existing laws on that subject.

"2. As it has been reported that many of the leaders of this meeting have united in a determination to advise the members of their classes not to pay their usual contributions, we hereby engage to observe and enforce in our classes, our old rule on that subject, not only by receiving what the members are willing to give, but by prudently, and in the spirit of christian kindness, advising them, as need may require, to contribute as God hath prospered them.

"3. We hereby renew the engagements which we either virtually or formally made when we were first appointed to our office as leaders, to act in all things as God shall give us grace so to do, in conformity with our excellent discipline, which we believe, as a whole, to be agreeable to the word of God; and it is our determination to seek for ourselves, and press upon the members of our classes, such a heartfelt belief of those essential doctrines of the gospel which are taught amongst us, as shall produce in our lives, and in theirs, all the peaceable fruits of righteousness."

That there was an organized opposition to the preachers, and some important rules of the connexion, made by leaders and local preachers, who held their regular secret meetings, in which a chairman presided, and a secretary minuted down the resolutions, and proceedings, no one now pretends to deny. And that no society, civil or religious, could long subsist in which such things should remain unnoticed, is too plain to require any proof. And yet, it seems, no test is to be applied, in the absence of positive evidence, to ascertain who are the guilty party. And where did your Protestant agitators learn this? Here they bawl about the

* See Minutes, vol. i., p. 376.

liberty of Englishmen, and the liberty of the gospel, at a most marvellous rate; taking care, however, to avoid any specific reference to either the law of the land, or the testimony of God. Let us hear what these have to say upon the subject.

The great principle of the celebrated Alfred's government was to make his subjects responsible for one another. "That he might render the execution of justice," says Mr. Hume, "strict and regular, he divided all England into counties: these counties he sub-divided into hundreds, and the hundreds into tithings. Every householder was answerable for the behaviour of his family and slaves. Ten neighbouring householders. were formed into one corporation; who, under the name of tithing, decennary, or fribourg, were answerable for each other's conduct; and over whom one person, called a tithingman, headbourg, or borsholder, was appointed to preside. When any person in any tithing or decennary was guilty of a crime, the borsholder was summoned to answer for him; and if he were not willing to be surety for his appearance, and his clearing himself, the criminal was committed to prison, and there detained till his trial. If he fled either before or after finding sureties, the borsholder and decennary became liable to inquiry, and were exposed to the penalties of law; thirty-one days were allowed them for producing the criminal; and if the time elapsed without their being able to find him, the borsholder, with two other members of the decennary, was obliged to appear, and, together with three chief members of the three neighbouring decennaries, (making twelve in all,) to swear that his decennary was free from all privity, both of the crime committed, and of the escape of the criminal. If the borsholder could not find such a number to answer for their innocence, the decennary was compelled by fine to make satisfaction to the king, according to the degree of the offence. By this institution every man was obliged, from his own interest, to keep a watchful eye over the conduct of his neighbours; and was, in a manner,

surety for the behaviour of those who were placed under the division to which he belonged."

In this case, when one of the community had violated the law, the rest were made responsible: and if they could not produce twelve good men and true, living in their vicinity, to swear to their innocence, they had to suffer the penalty. This was something more than a verbal assent to the laws, as a qualification to act as jurymen. And remember this excellent king instituted the trial by jury. The moral influence of his laws, and his love of liberty are thus noticed by Hume: "Such success attended his legislation, that everything bore suddenly a new face in England: robberies and iniquities of all kinds were repressed, by the punishment or reformation of the criminals; and so exact was the general police, that Alfred, it is said, hung up by way of bravado, golden bracelets near the highways; and no man dared to touch them. Yet amidst these rigours of justice, this great prince preserved the most sacred regard to the liberty of his people; and it is a memorable sentiment, preserved in his will, that it was just the English should for ever remain as free as their own thoughts."

The testimony of scripture supports this principle of mutual responsibility. In Deut. xxi. 1-9, the case is put, of a murder being committed by a person or persons unknown. Suspicion immediately falls upon the inhabitants of the nearest city; who, to clear themselves, are obliged, by their elders, to sacrifice an heifer : "And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley; and they shall answer and say, our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, O Lord, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel's charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them. So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the Lord."

In the above instances, the parties against whom