aries, etc. But it must create great confusion to call these presiding officers, elders; because that is the name of another, and an inferior class of officers, according to the New Testament. The Protestant elders are not itinerants; for they have confessed in this month's Magazine, "that the office was local, every church having its elders." In scripture, I have shown, the itinerants governed the elders, who were local; among the Protestants, the elders tyrannise over the itinerants; and because we would not submit to their tyranny, they set off full gallop on a heavenly mission, and full of zeal for the glory of God, to inspire the nation" with astonishment and disgust at the conduct of Methodist preachers."

If it be said that when a church is organised, the authority of the evangelist should cease; I ask, were not primitive churches just as capable as modern ones are, to manage, as soon as formed, their own affairs? Ephesus was much further advanced in arts, sciences, and civilization, in the days of the apostles, than most heathen countries are at this day; and yet though this church was founded and settled by St. Paul, we find Timothy in it, ten years after its formation, exercising authority over both elders and members. I adduced in my first letter what I esteem conclusive proof, that an evangelist presided in this church about forty years after it was planted; Mr. Glover, in controverting my argument, is reduced to the absurdity of supposing the word angel, to be a noun of multitude: "There can be no doubt," he says, "that the word angel, is meant for the whole church.' And the proof of it is, that at the end, and sometimes in other parts, of an epistle, the church is addressed, as though this could not be done through the medium of its minister; and as though this were any proof that he could not be addressed personally! Will Mr. G. have the goodness to give an example, in corroboration of his singular opinion, from any other part of scripture, or from any writer whatever, that the angel, is a noun of multitude?

A scribbler, under the signature of "A Churchman," has made himself very busy in this controversy, aud would fain pass himself off for a person of some consequence, as to parts and learning, and vapours as though the destiny of Wesleyan Methodism were in his hands. But he betrays himself. The flagellation which the Noncons have received, would not have goaded him to madness, had he not been of their party. A man makes himself appear ridiculous when he puts on a mask, if he cannot hide himself under it. An ass should not disguise itself in a lion's skin, if it have not discretion enough to refrain from braying. He talks about learning, in the style of an ignoramus; and he raves with all the incoherence of a maniac, without enlivening his furious invectives by a particle of wit. Report, it is true, has fathered this pigmy suckling, which has nearly roared itself to death of the gripes, upon a member of the establishment, as well as upon the Protestants; but I really feel no curiosity to ascertain who may be its parent. I doubt not but the writer is pedant enough to presume, that in a few years there will be as many volumes written to find out who is entitled to the merit of his productions, as have already issued from the press to determine who was the mysterious author of Junius; but he should recollect, that, though we may be anxious to draw aside the veil which conceals a giant, few people would think it worth the trouble to strip a little quadruped, disguised in a cap and jacket, in order to discover whether it were a lap dog or a monkey.

Though I am not very nice in such matters, I really cannot stoop so low as to enter into controversy with a man who cannot argue, who dare not show his face, and who has only the darkness of secresy to screen his head from dishonour; yet I will take occasion here to explain a point. Many of the Protestants are circulating, very industriously, that my principles are changed; and that in these letters I advocate sentiments contrary to those contained in "Ecclesiastical Claims." The principle which inspired the two works

is precisely the same; they are both in defence of Methodism. The former was written when our religious privileges were threatened by churchmen; the latter, when eternal war was declared against us by the Protestants. I never gave a pledge to any man, or body of men, that I would not alter my opinions upon any religious question. A man must either give up reading and study, or be at liberty to change his sentiments. I am not aware, however, that my views on church government have undergone any alteration since I wrote "Ecclesiastical Claims." I published that work with great reluctance; and this has been the case with regard to all my controversial performances; and the only reason why it has not been reprinted, is, that the church of England has since manifested a more peaceable disposition. Had avarice been my ruling passion, as the Protestants insinuate, I could have made nearly a fortune by that book; for the first edition, of 1,250 copies, was soon sold off, and I have been very strongly importuned by booksellers and others to reprint it. But though I approve generally of the sentiments and arguments it contains, I should make many serious alterations in it, were the spirit of persecution to revive, and render a second edition necessary.

In publishing this book, I had the misfortune to incur the censure of my brethren, who thought proper to express their disapprobation in a minute of Conference. Upon this minute I printed some remarks, and sent them by post to the superintendents only; it was never sold, nor intended to meet the public eye. In this letter I made some free remarks upon the conduct of some of the preachers, who were principally concerned in procuring the censure. The Protestants have obtained this letter by means which I will not stop to explain at present. They seem to exult in it that I was once at variance with some of the preachers, against whom their bitterest hostility has been directed; and to think that it is very inconsistent on my part, after the lapse of so many years, to defend their

conduct against the unceasing attacks of these agitators. Had it been any part of my religion, never to forgive an injury, or to suppress an angry feeling, there would undoubtedly appear to be some inconsistency in my present conduct; but if they can never forget the Leeds case, and are determined to cherish their resentments for ever, I thank God I have no fellowfeeling with them. And I will tell the Protestants, that this case of mine, which they are dragging before the public to expose my wickedness in being reconciled to those with whom I once had a difference, will furnish the most triumphant evidence in refutation of the charges which they are perpetually urging against the principal preachers, and against Mr. Bunting in particular. It is said that the Conference is enslaved by them; that if a preacher dare to oppose them, he is punished by being sent to a poor circuit, etc. Now what was the fact, in my case? Nearly all the principal men were opposed to me, and certainly I did not spare them; but instead of their transporting me to the worst circuits for fourteen years, I have, during that period, had a run of several of the best circuits in the connexion. This fact proves either that they do not possess the power ascribed to them, or, if they do, that they do not pervert it if the former be the fact, the Protestants are calumniators; and if the latter, the preachers deserve that power which they do not abuse.

"The leaders meeting of the Leeds Wesleyan Protestant Methodist Society," by their stewards, John Kirkbride and Willian Myers, have advertised me in the Leeds Mercury as having in my second letter asserted things which "are completely false-audacious calumnies vile insinuations—unjust― Jesuitical," If these charges be true, I must be a very bad man and if false, what must be the character of the accusers?

etc.

Some have wondered that I did not answer these charges in the paper where they first appeared. To have done so, I must have been at an enormous expense in advertising; and great as a Methodist

preacher's salary is, according to Protestant statements, I found that my finances would not allow me to contend with a whole leaders' meeting, in this kind of warfare. But waiving this, I am not at all satisfied that the editor of a newspaper has a right to publish a libel on a person, and then charge him an exorbitant sum for the privilege of defending himself. To concede this, would amount to a premium on defamation; and he who could be mean enough to give it, would never want an accuser! As I felt no disposition to pay Mr. Baines several pounds for publishing through the county that I am an unprincipled villain, I have let the poison work. I was under no alarm that my character would suffer in the esteem of any whose esteem I value, by remaining a few weeks under the accusations of a trio of Protestants, in Mr. Baines's most religious and patriotic paper. I will just, however, inform Mr. B., that he need not publish any more addresses to me personally, as I have no intention of ever looking into his paper again. If he think it his duty to the public, to denounce me as a bad man, let him by all means relieve his conscience; but he must not calculate upon my paying him money to repel calumnies as often as he may please to lend his columns for their reception. His feelings in relation to Methodist preachers are pretty well known.

I stated in my second letter, page 5, "Many of the heads of your party were suspected of heterodoxy respecting the trinity. It was naturally expected that this most momentous subject would be noticed in some way in your list of doctrines; but though it extends to fourteen particulars, the trinity is left out." In reference to the first part of this charge, the advertisers say, "We boldly assert that we have not heard a single imputation of that nature whispered against any of the parties referred to." Indeed! I have very frequently not only heard the imputation whispered but proclaimed aloud. Now for the proof. One to whom I refer, as among the heads of your party is, Mr. Tucker. That he was esteemed one of your principal men is