ames Bennet was Charles Wesley's host. We mentioned John Bennet. John
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
another was built on a site at the end of Pinstone Lane, near Burgess Street.
Mr. James Bennet, a Sheffield cutler, contributed generously towards its erection.
The second ' House' ceased to be used by the Methodists; and in 1745 another was built in Pinstone Lane.
On February 9, 1746, it was attacked by a large mob, and before the end of the week it was destroyed.
The Justices of the Peace refused to interfere, but an appeal was made against them at the York Assizes, and they were compelled to rebuild the preaching-house.
This vigorous action on the part of the Sheffield Methodists taught the magistrates a much-needed lesson.
When John Wesley preached ' at the end of the house' on July 1, 1748, he had a quiet congregation. * On Saturday, July 2, John Wesley reached Epworth, and preached to a large congregation.
The next day he attended the service in the church.
Mr. Romley, the curate, preached, but, as the rector was present, Wesley had once more the comfort of receiving the Lord's supper in Epworth Church.
The Rev. Henry J. Foster tells us that the rector was the Hon. and Rev. John Hay.
He was the third son of George, Earl of Kinnoul, and the grandson of the famous Harley, Earl of Oxford.
He had received the living of Epworth on the presentation of George II.» On Wednesday, July 6, Wesley reached Grimsby, and preached in the large room over the old Town Hall.
The room would not contain the congregation ; many stood on the stairs and in the adjoining rooms, and many below in the street.
He says:
' The fear of God has lately spread in an uncommon degree among this people also.
Nor has Mr. Prince been able to prevent it, though he bitterly curses us in the name of the Lord.'
Returning to Epworth, and visiting other places, on July 9 he reached Newcastle.
On Sunday, July ro, Wesley tells us that he began exhorting all that loved their own souls solemnly to renew their covenant with God.
He explained the nature of that covenant on the mornings of the ensuing week.
The spirit of Joseph 1 We take this opportunity to correct a mistake in our account of the riot in 1743.
In John Wesley and the Methodist Societies (p. 119) we should have said that ames Bennet was Charles Wesley's host.
We mentioned John Bennet.
John Bennet was in Sheffield during the riots; afterwards he accompanied Charles Wesley to Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Our description of him may therefore stand.
3 See Rev. T. Alexander Seed's History of Norfolk Street Chapel, Sheffield, 16-18.
2 See W.H.S. Proceedings, v. 203.
T00
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
in Colne, that relic of the old Roman colony.
At the time we have reached the town was a Lancashire stronghold which was tenaciously held against the Methodists.
We see John Jane innocently riding through Colne, seemingly without any intention of preaching there.
But as he looked like a Methodist suspicion was roused.
The men of the town, urged on by their parson, had made up their minds that no Methodist should preach in Colne.
Amobgathered, swarmed around the traveller, and pulled him off his horse.
They marched him to the stocks.
Being fastened firmly, John Jane improved the opportunity he had not sought.
He preached to his assailants, and vehemently exhorted them 'to flee from the wrath to come.'
The mob being glad to get rid of him, let him go.
It would seem that after a time he returned to Colne, and the incidents we are now to relate took place.
John Bennet was not personally acquainted with John Jane, but the news of his arrest, which was brought to Miller's Barn, troubled him.
'he next morning he rose early and set out for Hindon, thinking that he might hear more definite news concerning him.
When he came there he found a number of people had assembled to watch for Jane's return from Blackburn.
After some time spent in prayer it was determined that Bennet and another should ride on and meet him.
They had not gone far from the house when they met a woman nearly 'lost for breath with walking,' who gasped out, ' Make haste,
I pray you, for the men have almost killed the young man.'
Bennet tried to console her by telling her not to be troubled, since the young man was in the hands of God.
After going forward for some miles the horsemen saw three men on the road coming to meet them.
As they drew near they were found to be the minister of Colne and his two assistants.
Each was armed with a large pistol.
Being asked what they had done with their prisoner, the minister said, ' Sent him to the house of correction at Preston.'
John Bennet determined to go there.
He found John Jane locked up with the prisoners.
Once more he had found his opportunity.
When Bennet saw him he was reading ' a good book' to the rest of the prisoners.
They were listening attentively.
Bennet would not at first interrupt the reading ; but his heart was so full of desire to ease the reader of his grief that he felt he must make himself known to him.
He went forward, and took the prisoner by
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
IOI the hand and said, ' Brother Jane, how do you do?'
The two preachers, as we have said, had never met before; but the ' Brother ' went from the heart to the heart, and, says Bennet,
"we embraced each other with tears in our eyes.'
The other prisoners drew near them.
We can still hear the clanking of their fetters.
Bennet says, ' They wondered much to hear us rejoice under such circumstances.'
When we remember the loathsome conditions of the English jails and prisons of that period we share in the wonder.
The coming of John Bennet was opportune.
John Jane had been ill fed and worse housed.
Bennet says, ' He would have showed me his lodging room and his bed had I cared to have seen them, but the character I had heard before of them satisfied my curiosity.
When he went to bed he was locked up in a dark place, and lay upon some straw with an old blanket over him.
He was in all this resigned, and his soul was kept in peace.'
John Bennet did not share his resignation.
He saw the jailer and paid for a change of room, and the two friends had supper, and stayed together during the night.
John Bennet, who had some knowledge of law, got sight of the warrant on which John Jane had been committed.
In it he was described as ' A very disorderly person, wandering about and giving no good account of himself, and occasioning riots and disturbances in several parts of the said county of Lancaster, particularly at Colne, on Sunday last, occasioning great tumults, and disturbing the congregation about to attend
Divine Service.'
The charge was as ridiculous as that brought by the wolf against the lamb for troubling the stream.
Bennet determined to see some magistrate who would accept bail for Jane's appearance at the next sessions.
He was successful with Justice Whitehead, who had committed him.
He took Bennet's single bail and wrote a few lines to the keeper of the jail to release the prisoner.
On Saturday, July 30, the two friends left Preston, and reached Roughlee in the evening.
Bennet preached there on Sunday in the morning, and then at Miller's Barn in the evening, and so concluded his journey of charity.* While John Jane was passing through his sharp experiences,
Wesley was visiting his ever-widening parish in the northern counties of England.
On Wednesday, August 24, he 1 John Bennet's MS. Journal.
T00
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
in Colne, that relic of the old Roman colony.
At the time we have reached the town was a Lancashire stronghold which was tenaciously held against the Methodists.
We see John Jane innocently riding through Colne, seemingly without any intention of preaching there.
But as he looked like a Methodist suspicion was roused.
The men of the town, urged on by their parson, had made up their minds that no Methodist should preach in Colne. Amobgathered, swarmed around the traveller, and pulled him off his horse.
They marched him to the stocks.
Being fastened firmly, John Jane improved the opportunity he had not sought.
He preached to his assailants, and vehemently exhorted them 'to flee from the wrath to come.'
The mob being glad to get rid of him, let him go.
It would seem that after a time he returned to Colne, and the incidents we are now to relate took place.
John Bennet was not personally acquainted with John Jane, but the news of his arrest, which was brought to Miller's Barn, troubled him.
'Che next morning he rose early and set out for Hindon, thinking that he might hear more definite news concerning him.
When he came there he found a number of people had assembled to watch for Jane's return from Blackburn.
After some time spent in prayer it was determined that Bennet and another should ride on and meet him.
They had not gone far from the house when they met a woman nearly 'lost for breath with walking,' who gasped out, ' Make haste,
I pray you, for the men have almost killed the young man.'
Bennet tried to console her by telling her not to be troubled, since the young man was in the hands of God.
After going forward for some miles the horsemen saw three men on the road coming to meet them.
As they drew near they were found to be the minister of Colne and his two assistants.
Each was armed with a large pistol.
Being asked what they had done with their prisoner, the minister said, ' Sent him to the house of correction at Preston.'
John Bennet determined to go there.
He found John Jane locked up with the prisoners.
Once more he had found his opportunity.
When Bennet saw him he was reading ' a good book' to the rest of the prisoners.
They were listening attentively.
Bennet would not at first interrupt the reading ; but his heart was so full of desire to ease the reader of his grief that he felt he must make himself known to him.
He went forward, and took the prisoner by
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
IOI the hand and said, ' Brother Jane, how do you do?'
The two preachers, as we have said, had never met before; but the ' Brother ' went from the heart to the heart, and, says Bennet,
"we embraced each other with tears in our eyes.'
The other prisoners drew near them.
We can still hear the clanking of their fetters.
Bennet says, 'They wondered much to hear us rejoice under such circumstances.'
When we remember the loathsome conditions of the English jails and prisons of that period we share in the wonder.
The coming of John Bennet was opportune.
John Jane had been ill fed and worse housed.
Bennet says, ' He would have showed me his lodging room and his bed had I cared to have seen them, but the character I had heard before of them satisfied my curiosity.
When he went to bed he was locked up in a dark place, and lay upon some straw with an old blanket over him.
He was in all this resigned, and his soul was kept in peace.'
John Bennet did not share his resignation.
He saw the jailer and paid for a change of room, and the two friends had supper, and stayed together during the night.
John Bennet, who had some knowledge of law, got sight of the warrant on which John Jane had been committed.
In it he was described as ' A very disorderly person, wandering about and giving no good account of himself, and occasioning riots and disturbances in several parts of the said county of Lancaster, particularly at Colne, on Sunday last, occasioning great tumults, and disturbing the congregation about to attend
Divine Service.'
The charge was as ridiculous as that brought by the wolf against the lamb for troubling the stream.
Bennet determined to see some magistrate who would accept bail for Jane's appearance at the next sessions.
He was successful with Justice Whitehead, who had committed him.
He took Bennet's single bail and wrote a few lines to the keeper of the jail to release the prisoner.
On Saturday, July 30, the two friends left Preston, and reached Roughlee in the evening.
Bennet preached there on Sunday in the morning, and then at Miller's Barn in the evening, and so concluded his journey of charity.* While John Jane was passing through his sharp experiences,
Wesley was visiting his ever-widening parish in the northern counties of England.
On Wednesday, August 24, he 4 John Bennet's MS. Journal.
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
arrived at Haworth ; and in the evening he preached there to a congregation 'more than the church could contain.'
The next morning the service began at five o'clock ; and even then the church was nearly filled.
During this visit it is probable that William Grimshaw described the condition of things in Colne and its neighbourhood.
It is certain that Wesley made up his mind to ascertain the facts of the case by personal inquiry, for, after the morning service in Haworth church, he and Grimshaw, with Grace Murray, set out for Roughlee, where Thomas Colbeck was to meet them.
Colbeck was a young local preacher, one of Grimshaw's travelling companions, who had introduced Methodism into several villages in the neighbourhood.
As Wesley and his companions rode towards Roughlee they were stopped again and again by friendly people, who entreated them not to go any farther.
They were told that a large mob from Colne was on the road before them.
But the kindly counsel was not taken.
The two horsemen rode on.
Pulling bridle a little later, they met with some people who told them that the mob had not yet reached Roughlee, so they rode on quickly that they might get there before the Colne crowd arrived.
In this they were successful, and Wesley, finding the place quiet, began to preach shortly after noon.
He had about half finished his discourse when the Colne mob came pouring down the hill like a torrent.
As we have followed Wesley in his fearless evangelizing work we have met with many mobs; but the Colne mob possesses characteristics which give it some claim to pre-eminence.
It was carefully organized, and its work was not confined to Colne.
Its operations were carried on over a considerable space of country, out of which it was determined to expel by violence all Methodist preachers and those who followed them.
We have already met its 'Commander-in-Chief.'
We have seen him ' armed with a large pistol,' passing along the road from Preston.
He is the Rev. George White, the curate of Colne.
Mr. Laycock in his Methodist Heroes in the Great Haworth Round, describes him accurately as 'a choice specimen of the worst class of clergy in his day.'
He had been educated for the Roman Catholic priesthood at Douay College, in France.
But he had scruples, and recanted.
Archbishop Potter 1 From Grace Murray's description of the disturbance we find that William
Grimshaw persuaded her to remain at Roughlee.
The time of waiting for Wesley's return was spert in prayer.
See Methodist Recorder, Winter No., 1902, p. 25.
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
recommended him for prefermentin the Church of England to the Vicar of Whalley, and he became curate of Colne and Marsden, on .the north-east border of Lancashire.
He frequently abandoned his parish for weeks together.
On one occasion, it is said, he read the Burial Service more than twenty times in a single night over the graves of parishioners who had been interred in his absence.
But, if we may justly accuse him of the neglect of his clerical duties, no one can say that he showed any lack of energy when Methodists were to be persecuted.
He preached against them, raised and led mobs against them, and displayed extraordinary energy in his attempts to exterminate them.
We do not question the skill of Mr. White in mob-raising.
He had a considerable power of appeal, as witness the following 'proclamation':
'Notice is hereby given, if any man be mindful to enlist into His Majesty's Service, under the command of the Rev. Mr. George White, Commander-in-Chief,
John Bannister, Lieut.-General of His Majesty's forces for the defence of the Church of England, and the support of the manufactory in and about Colne, both which are now in danger,
&c., &c. ; let them now repair to the Drum-head at the Cross, when each man shall have a pint of ale in advance, and other proper encouragements.'
The linking of 'the support of the manufactory ' with 'the defence of the Church of England ' shows that Mr. White was not deficient in the wisdom of the serpent ; but his master-stroke was clearly the ' pint of ale in advance,' and the 'other proper encouragements.'
The information about drum-signal and the place of assembling reveals Mr. White's care of details.
Under his skilful guidance the Colne mob attained a high standard of discipline ; when it was on the march it became the terror of neighbouring towns and villages.
The conduct of the mob on that day must have given its Commander-in-Chief, Mr. George White, great satisfaction.
That feeling would not be diminished when he received a letter from Wesley describing the proceedings at Roughlee and Barrowford.
It was dated August 26, 1748, and must be quoted.
S1r,—Yesterday, between twelve and one o'clock, while I was speaking to some quiet people, without any noise or tumult, a drunken
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION.
rabble came, with clubs and staves, in a tumultuous and riotous manner, the captain of whom, Richard B[annister] by name, said he was deputyconstable, and that he was come to bring me to you.
I went with him; but I had scarce gone ten yards when a man of his company struck me with his fist in the face with all his might; quickly after another threw his stick at my head.
I then made a little stand ; but another of your champions, cursing and swearing in the most shocking manner, and flourishing his club over his head, cried out,
'Bring him away.'
With such a convoy I walked to Barrowford, where they informed me you was, their drummer going before, to draw all the rabble together from all quarters.
When your deputy had brought me into the house, he permitted Mr. Grimshaw, the minister of Haworth, Mr. Colbeck, of Keighley, and one more to be with me, promising that none should hurt them.
Soon after you and your friends came in, and required me to promise I would come to Roughlee no more.
I told you I would sooner cut off my hand than make any such a promise; neither would I promise that none of my friends should come.
After abundance of rambling discourse (for I could keep none of you long to any one point) from about one o'clock till between three and four (in which one of you frankly said, 'No; we will not be like Gamaliel, we will proceed like the Jews'), you seemed a little satisfied with my saying, 'I will not preach at Roughlee at this time.'
You then undertook to quiet the mob, to whom you went and spoke a few words, and their noise immediately ceased.
I then walked out with you at the back door.
I should have mentioned that I had several times before desired you to let me go, but in vain; and that when I attempted to go with Richard B[annister] the mob immediately followed, with oaths, curses, and stones; that one of them beat me to the ground; and, when I rose again, the whole body came about me like lions, and forced me back into the house.
While you and I went out at one door, Mr. Grimshaw and Mr.
Colbeck went out at the other.
The mob immediately closed them in, tossed them to and fro with the utmost violence, threw Mr. Grimshaw down, and loaded them both with dirt and mire of every kind, not one of your friends offering to call off your bloodhounds from the pursuit.
The other quiet, harmless people, who followed me at a distance, to see what the end would be, they treated still worse, not only by the connivance, but by the express order, of your deputy.
They made them run for their lives amidst showers of dirt and stones, without any regard to age or sex.
Some of them they trampled in the mire and dragged by the hair, particularly Mr. Mackford, who came with me from Newcastle.
Many they beat with their clubs without mercy.
One they forced to leap down (or they would have thrown him headlong) from a rock, ten or twelve feet high, into the river.
And when he crawled out, wet and bruised, they swore they would throw him in again, which they were hardly persuaded not to do.
All this time
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
you sat well pleased close to the place, not attempting in the least to hinder them.
And all this time you was talking of justice and law!
Alas, sir, suppose we were Dissenters (which I deny), suppose we were Jews or Turks, are we not to have the benefit of the laws of our country ?
Proceed against us by the law, if you can or dare; but not by lawless violence; not by making a drunken, cursing, swearing, riotous mob both judge, jury, and executioner.
This is flat rebellion against God and the King, as you may possibly find to your cost.?
' All this time you sat well pleased.'
That sentence catches the eye.
We think it also describes White's feelings when reading Wesley's letter.
He had done his best to stir up the mob, and he had met with unquestionable success.
Before this riot, on July 24, he had preached against the Methodists at Colne; on August 7 he had repeated the sermon at Marsden.
We note that his text was, ' For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.'
His pulpit harangue pleased him so much that he published it on November 7, 1748, with an epistle dedicatory to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
It must be remembered that Dr.
Herring was the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1748.
We have already described his attitude towards Methodism.* White's choice of a text shows his lack of humour and caution.
As the Commander-in-Chief of the Colne mob he ought to have felt some twinges of conscience when denouncing the authors of tumults.* Glancing at the pages of John Wesley's Journal, we pause at an entry he makes in 1752.
' We rode to Roughlee, and found a large, serious, and quiet congregation.
There have been no tumults since Mr. White was removed.
. It was his manner first to hire, and then to head, the mob, when they and he were tolerably drunk.
But he drank himself first into a jail and then into his grave.'* That is a dismal statement, without any relief.
In substance it is repeated in a footnote which appears in The Life and Times of Selina, Countess of Huntingdon.
But the author has extended his paragraph.
In continuation he says : ' He was interred in his own church, April 29, 1751.
It is reported, and believed in the neighbourhood of Colne, vee Journal, iii. 370-371 ; Laycock's Methodist Heroes, 60-62, 64-65. tL White kon, and Grimshaw's reply to it, are in the Library of the Wesleyan
Conference Office, City Road, London.
*iv. 31.
PROGRESS AND PERSECUTION
a that Mr. White, when on his dying bed, sent for Mr. Grimshaw, expressed his concern for having opposed him, being fully convinced of the impropriety of his former conduct, and begged the assistance of his instructions and prayers.'
We hope that the report was true.
This reference to White's death is anticipatory ; we shall have to meet him again as a fierce persecutor.
1Vol. i, 261 note.
GRACE MURRAY
In the preceding chapter we have noticed the presence of Grace Murray at Roughlee, and have seen that by reason of William Grimshaw's advice she stayed there and did not witness the riot at Barrowford.
She welcomed the return of Wesley, Grimshaw, and Colbeck; and, in her Diary, she describes the treatment they had received.
We watch her as she greets Wesley on his arrival ; and many thoughts arise in our mind.
We have now reached a stage in our description of the experiences of John Wesley when it is necessary to face a question that has caused much controversy.
We approach the subject with reluctance ; but it is impossible to ignore it.
The relations between John Wesley and Grace Murray have been discussed for many years, and it is difficult to treat the subject without prejudice.
We cannot at this point examine the whole of the case, but we will try to state the condition of affairs between John Wesley and Grace Murray, existing at the time we have reached.
In the winter number of The Methodist Recorder, published in 1902, Mr. Curnock, its editor, wrote an article which attracted considerable attention.
Its sub-title was, 'The Story of Grace Murray.'
From ' Diaries' and ' Letters' in the possession of Mr. R. Thursfield Smith and Mr. Russell Colman he gathered materials which he used with much skill in Grace
Murray's defence.
Mr. Smith lent him leaves of the ' Diaries.'
He describes them as 'little leaves of paper, yellow with age, and filled with the tremulous writing of an ancient lady whose eyesight was rapidly failing.'
Reading the diary written in her extreme old age, he gathered together what he deemed to be 'reliable traditions' concerning her life at Chapel-en-leFrith.
He also considered there was little difficulty in picturing the woman who for many years ' wielded so gracious an influence in the evangelical circles of English Christian life.'
GRACE MURRAY
A The evidence contained in Mr. Curnock's article is wholly in favour of Grace Murray's conduct in her relations with John
Wesley at the period we are considering.
It would be unfair to her to express an opinion on the case without reading his article.
We are bound to say, however, that it is difficult to follow Grace Murray's account owing to the absence of dates which fix the sequence of events.
We note, for instance, that the events which happened in 1749 are not distinctly separated from those which occurred in the previous year ; and, further, that a visit to Ireland, and another to Ludlow with Mr. and Mrs. Charles Wesley, who were married on April 8, 1749, share the same fate.
It needs a close acquaintance with Methodist history to escape the confusion caused by dateless documents.
In justice to John Wesley it is also necessary to say that, as the editor of his Journal, Mr. Curnock signed the ' Preface' to the first volume of the standard edition in October, Ig09gQ— that is, seven years after his article in The Methodist Recorder was written.
In the Journal there are several important editorial notes which modify some of Mr. Curnock's earlier opinions.
That fact must be taken into account.
Mr. Curnock, in his article in The Methodist Recorder, states a side of the case which must be considered.
But, some years before he wrote that article, the Rev. Luke Tyerman, the wellknown Methodist historian, had gathered together evidence which brings before us another view of the circumstances we are about to state.
He read the Memoirs of Grace Murray published by her son; but he also studied a pamphlet by John Russel Smith, of Soho Square, London, which purported to be a publication of a manuscript attributed
- to John Wesley, which is in the British Museum.
Mr. Tyerman was a keen searcher after broadsheets, pamphlets, and books which dealt with the origin and progress of Methodism.
He went to the British Museum, and carefully compared Smith's pamphlet with the Wesley manuscript.
He found that the latter was not in Wesley's handwriting, but that it was clear that it had been read by him, for some revisions appeared in it which were, in his opinion, certainly written by Wesley.
He was a competent judge.
In comparing the printed pamphlet with the original document he found, that with a few unimportant exceptions, including one or two omissions, the original document had been 'faithfully and correctly'
GRACE MURRAY
reproduced in Smith's book.
With the information he had gained he proceeded to give an account of incidents connected with the courtship of John Wesley and Grace Murray which it is difficult to harmonize with some of.the statements contained in The Methodist Recorder article.
It is well known that Mr Tyerman was a somewhat aggressive critic of John Wesley's actions; but no one can read his account of the Grace
Murray episode without perceiving that his sympathies are with Wesley.?
In 1910 a book was published in London entitled John Wesley's Last Love.
It was written by Dr. Augustin Leger, a Frenchman, who occupies a high place among the students of Wesley's life and work.
We are especially indebted to him for the full and accurate reproduction of the British
Museum manuscript mentioned by Tyerman.
It is enriched with notes taken from the Standard Journal of John Wesley, and from other documents.
These illuminating paragraphs, gathered from many sources, occur throughout the whole volume.
Dr. Leger avoided the example set by men who have aspired to write on Wesley without consulting those who know most about him.
In his Preface he acknowledges the help he had received from the writings of Mr. Curnock, Mr. Telford, and Mr. George Stampe, and from the Proceedings of the Wesley
Historical Society.
We cannot accept all the opinions expressed in his book, but no one can read it carefully without seeing that its contents must be weighed by those who wish to understand a complicated and somewhat bewildering case.
In our attempt to unravel a tangled skein we will now fix our attention on the opening stage of the love-affairs of John
Wesley and Grace Murray, leaving later events to be treated in the order of their succession.
When we saw Grace Murray riding with Wesley and Grimshaw to Roughlee we wondered why she should be with them on such a perilous enterprise ; but when we became acquainted with the foreground of that event our wonder ceased.
It is not necessary to explore the whole of that foreground.
It will be enough to say that when we catch sight of Grace Murray at Roughlee in 1748 she was a widow of about thirty-three years of age.
She was in domestic charge of Wesley's Orphan House in Newcastle, and was a faithful and efficient housekeeper.
We will take Wesley's 1 See Tyerman's Life and Times of John Wesley, li. 48-57.
IIo
GRACE MURRAY
iz ah description of her in this capacity.
He says, 'she has every qualification I desire.
She understands all I want to have done.
She is remarkably neat in person, in cloaths, in all things.
She is nicely frugal, yet not sordid.
She has much common sense: contrives everything for the best ; makes everything go as far as it can go; foresees what is wanting and provides it in time ; does all things quick and yet without hurry. She is a good work-woman ; able to do the finest, ready to do the coarsest work : Observes my rules, when I am absent as well as when I am present: And takes care that those about her observe them, yet seldom disobliges any of them.'
An attempt has been made to elevate the social position of Grace Murray at the time when she was at the Orphan House; but, after Wesley's description, those attempts are unnecessary.
We can imagine a twentieth-century mistress lingering over his 'testimonial,' lost in surprise and envy.
Wesley accepted the statement that she was his ' servant,' but made light of it.
We presume that he anticipated the modern conviction that every position in life is honourable if its duties can be, and are, honourably fulfilled.
In addition to being an exceptionally efficient housekeeper, Grace Murray was an admirable nurse.
Wesley says that as a nurse she was careful in the last degree, indefatigably patient, and inexpressibly tender, also that she was quick, cleanly, and skilful.
When her domestic work was done she found leisure for work among the Methodist Societies.
In April, 1742, we find her name in John Wesley's list of the leaders of the bands at the Foundery, London.* When she came to the Orphan House she continued her work among the womenbands in Newcastle and the neighbourhood.
She was so successful as an evangelist that Wesley sometimes employed her to 'regulate the bands' in other parts of the country.
He bears high testimony to her spirituality and her extraordinary success.
Our admiration is increased when we remember that at the time when she was helping so many in the struggles of the spiritual life she was fighting a hard and long-continued battle with religious doubt.
Sometimes she thought the victory was won; then the star of hope faded.
But she kept on her work, and tried to clear out of the paths of others the difficulties that encumbered her own.
She was a 1 Dr. Leger's John Wesley's Last Love, 70.
* Stevenson's City Road Chapel, 29.
GRACE MURRAY
I1I Christian woman of a high type, and possessed John Wesley's entire confidence.
Soon after she became a widow, and removed to the Orphan House, she had several offers of marriage.
She had much personal charm, and we do not wonder at the impression she produced on men ; but she had made up her mind to remain single, and devote herself to her work in the Orphan House, the classes, and the bands.
She persisted for some time in this resolution.
Then the crisis came.
She modified her views ; and now the path to Roughlee lies before us.
It will be remembered that when John Wesley came back from his visit to the towns near the Border, the sickness that had weakened him for several months compelled him to rest after his return to the Orphan House.
Grace Murray nursed him ; and we presume it was then he found her ' inexpressibly tender.'
For some time he had been thinking about her as a wife, but now the critical moment came.
He declared his love.
The effect of this declaration filled her with amazement.
She said, ' This is too great a blessing for me ; I can't tell how to believe it.
This is all I could have wished for under heaven, if I had dared to wish for it."
John Wesley's further record is: 'From that time I conversed with her as my own.
The night before I left Newcastle, I told her, " I am convinced God has called you to be my fellow labourer in the gospel.
I will take you with me to Ireland in the spring.
Now we must part fora time.
But, if we meet again, I trust we shall part no more."
She begged we might not part so soon, saying, "Tt was more than she could bear.'"'
Upon which I took her with me through Yorkshire and Derbyshire, where she was unspeakably useful both to me and to the Societies."
And that explains among other things, why we have met her at Roughlee.* We must now pause for a moment to record something that occurred at the Orphan House in 1746.
John Bennet was for a long time in the sick-room there ; he was nursed by Grace Murray.
He was much impressed by her kindness, and when he recovered they parted as friends.
For nearly two years they corresponded with each other.
His letters contained, from time to time, sentences, the meaning of which could not be mistaken ; but Grace Murray resolutely ignored them in her
1See Dr. Leger's John Wesley's Last Love, 1-2.
II2
GRACE MURRAY
i correspondence with him.
As we watch her reading the letters we think she lingers over those sentences without displeasure.
John Bennet's illness, and his frequent correspondence with her, must be remembered as we continue our story of events, which Mr. Curnock has well named 'A tragedy of errors.'
After the riot at Barrowford, Wesley, Grace Murray, and Mr.
Mackford visited several places in Yorkshire.
At Miller's Barn, in Rossendale, they met John Bennet.
On August 31 they arrived at Bennet's home in Chinley.
Two days later John Wesley left Chinley and set out for London.
When he said farewell to his friends he asked John Bennet 'to take great care of Mrs. Murray'; which very thing he was zealous todo.
Mr. Mackford felt that he must get back to his business in Newcastle ; so he rode away to the north, and left Grace
Murray and John Bennet to enjoy each other's society.
On Wednesday, September 7, they rode together to Buxton ; and the next day to Taddington.
The road to Taddington from Buxton lies through Ashwood Dale, famous for its 'romantic beauties.'
Topley Pike, with its precipices, marks the way, and whispers its warnings to reckless climbers.
Then comes the steep ascent to Taddington.
It claims to be 'the highest village in England.'
Those who have toiled to it on a hot summer day will admit the claim at once.
Mr. Croston describes it as 'a cold, bleak, stony-looking village, with a fine old Gothic church standing in the midst of a field a short distance back from the way.
The road commands a wide extent of country, bounded by a vast chain of rugged hills and barren moorlands.'
Near the church stands a fine pillar similar to the beautifully carved pillar in Bakewell churchyard.
Grace Murray and John Bennet rode on slowly, and then they began to talk freely together about hopes that had long lingered in Bennet's mind.
We have not found any decisive evidence that Bennet was acquainted with Grace Murray's informal engagement to Wesley, but a sentence in her description of the conversation shows that Wesley was in her mind.
We will give the description in her own language.
Mr. Bennet and I travelled into Derbyshire.
It was now Mr.
Bennet's opportunity to know my mind as to our becoming engaged 1Croston's On Foot through the Peak, 339.
GRACE MURRAY
to each other, and he said God gave me to him for a wife in answer to his prayer on the occasion when he was so dangerously ill at Newcastle, at which time he cried out, ' My pain is gone.
I am well.'
This and many other things he used as arguments to convince me. I told him that I could not give him my answer, for if I were to marry it would take away my usefulness to God's cause, I feared, and than that I would rather die.
He said that it would never do so, as I should go about with him, and that there was as much need of usefulness in his circuit as in any other.
Still I objected, and said I could not marry without Mr. Wesley's consent; yet he argued with me until I was brought to reason upon the matter.
The next day we were to set out for Leeds, in Yorkshire, on my way home.
That night Mr. Bennet had the most surprising dream that I ever knew.
I have it by me now, but it is too tedious to mention here.
I could not get over it.
He said, ' Take care that you do not fight against God.'
I said, ' You are a man of fortune, and I have no fortune, but a child to keep.'
And he answered, 'I know it well, and I want no fortune but yourself.
I will take care of your child.'
All this made against me.
I could not get over it.
Then I said, ' If Mr.
Wesley will give his consent, I will yield.'
He said, 'I will write him this night, and let him know.' Soon this I partly gave him my promise.'
The statement we have quoted does not greatly help us to decide the important question, Did Grace Murray inform John
Bennet before ' partly giving him her promise,' that she was already engaged to John Wesley?
The agreement between them to ask Wesley's consent carries us a little way towards an answer; but the most serious part of the conversation is the assertion of Grace Murray that she feared, if she were to marry, it would take away her usefulness to God's cause and that she would rather die than make that sacrifice.
A person possessed of abnormal charity might suggest she meant that, if she married Bennet instead of Wesley, the calamity she dreaded might occur.
We will give her the benefit of the doubt ; but we are haunted by the thought that she did not tell Bennet the whole state of the case.
Up to this point our association with John Bennet has caused us to look on him with an everincreasing respect.
If he knew all about the relations between Wesley and Grace Murray and yet pushed his suit, that respect would be lessened.
The letters to Wesley were written.
We cannot say when they reached him.
On September 2 he had set out for London, and arrived at the Foundery two days after that date.
Letters 1 See Mr. Curnock's article in The Methodist Recorder, Winter Number, 1902, 25.
It must be remembered that this statement, taken from an old Diary, was written long after the events occurred.
TI4
GRACE MURRAY
ve then travelled slowly.
But they reached him.
This is Wesley's statement : 'I left her in Cheshire with John Bennet and went on my way rejoicing.
Not long after I received a letter from John Bennet and another from her. _ He desired my consent to marry her.
She said, '' She believed it was the will of God."
I was utterly amazed: but wrote a mild answer to both, supposing they were married already.
She replied in so affectionate a manner that I thought the whole design was at an end.'
By 'the whole design' we presume that Wesley means the design of the marriage between Grace
Murray and John Bennet.
If he came to that conclusion he was mistaken.
Leger's John Wesley's Last Love, 2:
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
AT the close of John Wesley's letter to White, of Colne, there is a veiled threat of legal proceedings which might be taken against the persecutor of the Methodists.
It was no more than a hint, for Wesley knew that the success of such proceedings was doubtful.
At that time there were only a few places in the country where it was probable that magistrates would defend the Methodists against mob violence.
At Quarter Sessions and Assizes it was possible that justice might be done, as we have seen in the case of the Sheffield preaching-house.
In those days, however, there was a tribunal which was often called 'the refuge of the oppressed'
; it was the Court of King's Bench, in London.
But between magistrates and the courts of appeal there lay a path strewn with hindrances.
There was sure to be delay, and a need of great expenditure of money.
It is no wonder that Wesley paused before he made up his mind to commence legal proceedings against White and the rioters at Roughlee and Barrowford.
While Wesley was reflecting, there was one man at least who was determined to act.
John Bennet, before he entered on his business as a carrier, had served for some time as a justice's clerk, and his short legal training had made him familiar with the processes of prosecutions.
Acting with caution, he made inquiries and tried to elicit information which would justify the commencement of proceedings against the Commanderin-Chief of the Colne mob.
On September 19 he went to Preston and consulted a lawyer.
He tells us that, in the course of the conversation, he had ' a secret check,' at which we do not wonder.
He hesitated to proceed, but did not abandon his intention.
On October 7, 1748, we see Bennet in Preston.
The time had come when John Jane had to appear at the Sessions, and he wished to stand by him and strengthen him by his sympathy.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
His experiences in Preston cast light on the administration of justice in those far-off times ; they, therefore, possess exceptional interest.
Seeking for Mr. Whitehead, whom we have met in the course of the former proceedings against John Jane,
Bennet went to an inn, but failed to find him.
But, standing together at the door, he caught sight of 'two of the greatest enemies of the Methodists,' who were in close consultation.
One of them was the foreman of the Grand Jury ; the other was the ringleader of the Roughlee mob.
It was not difficult to divine the topic of their conversation.
Passing by them Bennet went to the office of an attorney, Mr. Fenton, whom he knew, and asked his advice on the subject of the suppression of the Colne mob.
Mr. Fenton, going to the root of the matter, told him that he ought to indict the Colne minister.
He determined to doso.
While the document was being prepared, Mr. Whitehead rushed into the office to get an indictment drawn against John Jane for preaching.
Following Bennet's account, in his MS. Journal, we conclude that White was with him.
The clerk told Whitehead that he could not indict Jane for that offence.
Bennet, continuing his account, says :
' The Parson said then the Devil was in it.
He desired paper, and pen and ink, and said he would draw one himself, for the foreman of the jury said he would bring in his Bill, let it be what it would.
He began to write something, but no man could understand what it was, nor what he meant; only he mentioned John Jane.
Mr. Fenton, our attorney, looked over his shoulder, and said, '' Sir, you spelled Jane wrong " ; upon which Mr. Fenton showed him the indictment drawn up against himself by John Jane for putting him into the stocks,
&c.
Mr. Whitehead reads it over, throws it down, and goes down the stairs with all the haste imaginable.'
From Mr. Fenton's office we must now adjourn to the court.
As might be expected, the Grand Jury quashed John Jane's indictment against White.
Bennet says, ' We could have no justice done us by the jury, though all the bench seemed on our side.'
We confess our surprise at his closing words.
The vision of a bench determined to do justice to the Methodists at that time excites our astonishment.
Our surprise increases as we watch the further proceedings.
When the case of John Jane came up, he surrendered to the court.
White appeared against him, and asked that his ' recognizance' should be
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
continued ; that is, that the document by which Jane had bound himself to appear before the court should still remain in force.
But the bench would not grant White's appeal, and John Jane was discharged.
A number of the Roughlee Methodists were in the court, and we can see their glad glances at each other, and at Bennet and Jane, when the decision of the bench was declared.
John Bennet must have been encouraged by the result of the proceedings at the Preston Sessions.
But the action of the Grand Jury convinced him that the surest way to get a verdict against the organiser of the Colne mob was to remove the case to the courts in London.
He was corresponding with John Wesley, and both of them wrote to Mr. Glanville, a barrister in London, and asked his advice on the best manner of proceeding in their attempt to effect a redress of their grievances.
We linger for a moment on Mr.
Glanville's name.
He was a man who for many years had been eminent for an utter disregard of all religion.
But alady, who was unable to argue with him on the questions he raised, gave him Wesley's Earnest Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion, and asked him to read it.
He did so, and was thoroughly convinced that there was 'reality in religion.'
He abandoned his former views.
Wesley, meeting him, talked with him for an hour, and then took him to a watchnight.
He stayed to the end, and was much affected.
Wesley's hope concerning him was fulfilled:
'Let but a little seed be sown, and God is able to give it an increase.'
John Bennet's letter to Mr. Glanville was written on October 8.
It met with an immediate response.
Mr. Glanville took up the case sympathetically, and advised an appeal to the London Courts.
Bennet was anxious to proceed, but soon found that the difficulties in the way were more than could be surmounted at that time.
The chief of them was the lack of money to carry on the suit.
In his letter to Wesley, written from Chinley on October 22,1748, he says: 'I desire more particular directions from you before I proceed.
You say, " The fees must be regularly paid to the counsel.'"'
But where is the money?
Indeed, I know not.
The Societies in these parts are very poor, and I find many startle at the thought of a Chancery suit, they supposing it will be so expensive.
It cost Roughlee 1 For Mr. Glanville, see John Wesley's Journal, iii. 328, 389, note.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
before, when W. Darney was abused, about £20.
It has cost loosing J. Jane, at this time, betwixt four and five pounds, and I fear it will be difficult to procure money here unless some other Societies are acquainted therewith and assist them.
I believe in a little time I can raise £20 or £30 in these parts, and that will be all.
I am willing to do what is in my power, but not to go on my own head to enter such an action without further advice and a more unanimous consent of my brethren.
Who must lodge the information?
In whose name must this action be carried on?
Mr. Grimshaw and Mr. Colbeck seem unconcerned in the matter, though they were the chief sufferers.
. .. As soon as you receive this letter, please let me know what I must do, and how I must proceed in this affair, and I shall be ready to obey you.'
The conduct of John Bennet throughout this affair increases our respect for him.
We know that, in some cases, he defrayed the cost of actions against mobs that had disturbed Methodist congregations ; but the thought of a law suit in London daunted him.
If he had been strongly supported by the Societies he would have proceeded against White and his ruffians, but the poverty of the Societies had to be considered.
Without considerable pecuniary assistance from the Methodists of other neighbourhoods he felt that his efforts to secure the protection of the law for the people of Colne and its neighbourhood must proceed with caution.
But he was determined that he would not abandon the task he had undertaken until it was clear that its accomplishment was hopeless.
It is not essential that we should pursue the subject of the projected proceedings against George White.
The preparations for the suit dragged their slow length along.
Whatever may have been Grimshaw's attitude at the time when Bennet wrote to Wesley, it is certain that afterwards he took a keen interest in the appeal to the law-courts.
But in December, 1748, Mr.
Glanville died.
In April, 1751, White passed away at Langroyd Hall, near Colne; and so the case was removed beyond earthly jurisdiction.
In following the Colne case we have noticed that the progress of the legal proceedings was retarded by the straitened financial resources of the prosecutors.
John Bennet's letter to Wesley shows that fact.
But it cannot be doubted that the popular 4 Methodist Recorder, Winter Number, 1902, 30.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
I19 opinion was that Wesley and his lay preachers were well paid for their work, and that they were supported by the liberal contributions of their people.
Have we any evidence of the existence of that delusion?
It will be remembered that George White preached a sermon at Colne, and repeated it at Marsden.
It was afterwards published, and was dedicated to Dr. Herring, who was then the Archbishop of Canterbury.
In those days, when 'dedications' were common, it was supposed that those who permitted them by that act showed their agreement with the sentiments contained in a book or pamphlet.
We hesitate to say that the Archbishop's acceptance of White's sermon signified his acceptance of the extraordinary statements it contained.
Still, it is certain that the 'dedication' of White's pulpit-harangue would impress unwary readers.
Few copies have escaped the ravages of time.
One of them lies before us.
It is accompanied by an ' Answer' written by William Grimshaw.
These two documents will give us the information we need.
In reading White's sermon we have wondered what the Archbishop thought of the statement that 'the Act of Toleration was chiefly calculated for the further improvement of trade."
Was he impressed by the preacher's conclusions that the Act, therefore, did not apply to the Methodists because they directly opposed trade ; and that it was never the meaning of the Legislature to tolerate the Methodists, but rather ' to encourage daily industry and labour for the public good'?
This statement concerning the real purpose of the Act of Toleration enables us to judge the fitness of White to give an opinion on the contents of an Act of Parliament.
But our chief interest in him at this moment is to find out what he thought of the financial position of the Methodist preachers, including George Whitefield.
In anote appended to his sermon he refers to John Wesley, George Whitefield, and the lay preachers, and accuses them of ' cozening' a handsome subsistence out of their 'irregular expeditions.'
Then, not content with bare statements, he descends to particulars, and says:
No satisfactory account has been given us of Mr. Whitefield's disbursements in Georgia, and I'm afraid by his late modest insinuations, in or about the Highlands of Scotland, of the want of £500 more (a sum we ministers in these parts seldom see, even after a regular
4See ante, 17.
I20
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
conduct of many long years), he thinks the nation is become more and more fool foolish, and within the reach of his farther impositions.
It appears from many very probable accounts that Mr. Wesley has in reality a better income than most of our bishops, tho' now and then (no great wonder) it costs him some little pains to escape certain rough compliments.
As to the under lay-praters, I have reason to assert that, by means of a certain allowance from their schismatical general, a contribution from their very wise hearers, and the constant maintenance of themselves and horses, they may be supposed in a better way of living than the generality of our vicars and curates ; and doubtless find it much more agreeable to their constitution to travel abroad at the expence of a sanctify'd face and a good assurance than to sweat ignominiously at the loom, anvil, and various other mechanic employments which Nature had so manifestly designed them for.
This vivid footnote would doubtless be read with eagerness by passionate lovers of scandal ; but it brought down on White a keen and well-deserved chastisement.
In 1749 William Grimshaw took up his pen, and wrote his Answer to a Sermon lately Published against the Methodists.
It traverses the whole of White's allegations, and gives us valuable information | on the subject of Methodist finance.
White complains that he and those to whom he was speaking had not received from Whitefield any satisfactory account of his disbursements in Georgia.
That is no cause for wonder.
But Grimshaw showed that an account had been given to the authorities in Georgia.
He reproduced the sworn information of three persons, who appeared before two of the Bailiffs of Savannah.
They declared that they had carefully and strictly examined all the accounts relating to the Orphanage, for which Whitefield had collected money, from December 15, 1738, to January 1, 1745 ; and they swore 'that it doth not appear that the said Mr.
Whitefield hath converted any part thereof to his own use and property ; or charged the said House with any of his travelling, or other private expences:
But on the contrary hath contributed to the said House many valuable benefactions.'
This declaration was made on April 16, 1746; but it is clear that White was ignorant of its existence.
If ignorance is a valid excuse for his statements, we will give him the benefit of the plea.
As to John Wesley and his income, Grimshaw, who was acquainted with his private affairs, easily refuted White's statement.
He says that he was credibly informed that
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
T2Y Wesley's ' fellowship' was about {100 a year, but that {50 was deducted from that amount for non-residence.
Then he continues : ' The remainder, with the profits arising from the sale of his books, are so entirely laid out in carrying on the great and good work he is engaged in, that he scarcely provides necessaries for himself.
This is a true relation of that good man's estate, of whom you are pleased roundly and falsely to affirm "' that he has a better income than most of our bishops." '
As to the lay preachers, who, according to White, were supposed to be 'in a better way than the generality of our vicars and curates,' it is certain that White was unacquainted with that ' Rule of a Helper' which commands,
' Take no money of any one.
If they give you food when you are hungry or clothes when you need them, it is good.
But not silver or gold.
Let there be no pretence to say we grow rich by the gospel.'
That rigorous ' rule' was in active operation at the time White preached his sermon.
Grimshaw, at a stroke, demolished his accusation.
We cannot believe that the Archbishop of Canterbury saw White's Sermon before he accepted its ' dedication.'
He was no friend to the Methodists, but he was accustomed to show his opposition in more honourable ways than those adopted by the curate of Colne.
From August 13 to October 8, 1748, Charles Wesley was in Ireland.* In Mr. Crookshank's History of Methodism inIreland there is a full account of this visit.
We note that he preached several times in Cork, where the lay preachers had been carrying on successful pioneer work.
There seemed to be a good prospect; but Mr. Crookshank warns us that the clouds were gathering for a great storm.
He says that very soon after Charles Wesley left Cork a spirit of prejudice and hostility against Methodism arose in the city, and a storm of outrageous and destructive persecution burst on the Methodists.
He adds that even when Charles Wesley was there, 'there were faint indications of what was coming notwithstanding his apparent popularity.'
On Sunday, September 11, we see Charles Wesley in a state of rapture.
In his hand he holds the Bishop of Exeter's late Charge to his clergy ; having read it he thinks it ' worthy to be
1See John Wesley and the Methodist Societies, 217.
his Journal he says that on August 14 he met his brother in St. Patrick's ; but John Wesley on that day was in Newcastle.
3 Crookshank's History, i. 43»
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
the manuscript document were discovered ; they add much to the value of the closing volume.'
Using the ' Fragment,' published in November, 1916, we find that John Wesley arrived in London from St. Albans between seven and eight o'clock in the morning of Sunday, September 14.
He preached at West Street before noon, and at five o'clock in Moorfiélds to a larger congregation than he had seen there for some years.
He had started from St. Albans at four o'clock, and we do not wonder that the old physical trouble returned, and that he had to nurse himself back into health.
He was so much better the next day that he preached at Wapping in the evening ; but he admits that he felt 'much weakness.'
He consoled himself by thinking, ' If it be best, God is able to make me strong.' The next day he began visiting the classes.
He was disappointed with their condition.
From the beginning to the end of this stay in London we see little of his bright and hopeful spirit.
There is one ray.
When he visited the classes at Southwark he was refreshed.
He records his opinion -that the Southwark classes were the only part of the Society in, London which increased daily.
He imputed this prosperity 'chiefly to the zeal and vigilance of the leaders.
They laboured in the work, and 'spared no care or pains to seek and save that which is lost.'
It was during this stay in London that John Wesley visited Lady Huntingdon at Chelsea.
Whitefield was in England.
When Wesley reached London he met Howell Harris, who gave him a message from Lady Huntingdon.
He went to see her, and, at her request he preached several times to crowded and fashionable congregations that were accustomed to assemble at her house.
Whitefield left for Scotland on September 3.
It was four days after his departure that Wesley's first visit took place.
He spent three hours with Lady Huntingdon, and they talked together 'as in the times that were past.'
In the evening he preached at West Street Chapel.
Several of Lady Huntingdon's friends were there.
We are specially interested in one of them—Lady Bath, the daughter of Colonel Gumley.
On Friday morning he went to Chelsea, and preached at Lady Huntingdon's to a fashionable audience.
The next Sunday he preached twice 'in the fields," and once at West Street.
In the evening he went once more to Lady *See Fragment III, Standard Journal, viii. 156-159,
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
Huntingdon's house and preached to the congregation there assembled.
He says, 'After preaching they gathered round me on every side, and I was enabled to speaktotheir hearts.
Surely I am not come this warfare on my own cost.
Now let God do as seemeth in His own eyes.'
We stirmise, from an incidental remark, that the relations between Lady Huntingdon and Wesley had not been so cordial as in other days ; but they had a quiet talk together and misunderstandings were removed.?
On Monday, September 12, John Wesley set: out for the West.
The next day he preached 'in the new-built room' in Bristol.
On Thursday he left Bristol.
Riding to Langford he had a joyous surprise.
A man called after him and told him that ' Mr. Thomson, of Cornwall,' was in a house to which he pointed.
Wesley rode up to the door, and found his friend _ there.
They spent an hour together 'in declaring to each other the wonderful things God had done.'
It is probable that Thomson told him of the improved condition of affairs in Cornwall.
Persecution had moderated, or ceased.
It should be noted that the adversaries of Methodism could no longer avail themselves of the plea that the country was at war ; and, therefore, that men could be 'pressed' for the Navy and Army.
That weapon, which they had ruthlessly used, was falling from their hands.
The ' preliminaries' of the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle had been signed in April, and the definitive treaty was on the eve of being concluded and signed. *
Wesley could therefore proceed on his journey without any expectation of being clutched by magistrates and press-gangs.
He rode on his way ; and his expectations were realized.
He _methis friend Mr. Bennett, preached in the churches at Tresmere and St. Gennys, and 'in the fields' at many places without interruption.
It was only at Newlyn that he received showers of dirt and stones from the ' rabble-rout.'
But even there the assault died down before the service concluded.
'Then all were quiet and still ; and some looked as if they felt what was spoken.'
Mobs showed a certain amount of sagacity when they made it impossible for Wesley to be heard.
Almost invariably a listening crowd was subdued by the spell of his extraordinary influence.
Remembering the state of his health, 1Wesley's Journal, viii. 158, 159.
2The definitive treaty was signed on October 7.
See Smollett's History of England, xi. 301-302.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
the manuscript document were discovered ; they add much to the value of the closing volume.'
Using the ' Fragment,' published in November, 1916, we find that John Wesley arrived in London from St. Albans between seven and eight o'clock in the morning of Sunday, September 14.
He preached at West Street before noon, and at five o'clock in Moorfiélds to a larger congregation than he had seen there for some years.
He had started from St. Albans at four o'clock, and we do not wonder that the old physical trouble returned, and that he had to nurse himself back into health.
He was so much better the next day that he preached at Wapping in the evening ; but he admits that he felt 'much weakness.'
He consoled himself by thinking, ' If it be best, God is able to make me strong.' The next day he began visiting the classes.
He was disappointed with their condition.
From the beginning to the end of this stay in London we see little of his bright and hopeful spirit.
There is one ray.
When he visited the classes at Southwark he was refreshed.
He records his opinion -that the Southwark classes were the only part of the Society in, London which increased daily.
He imputed this prosperity 'chiefly to the zeal and vigilance of the leaders.
They laboured in the work, and 'spared no care or pains to seek and save that which is lost.'
It was during this stay in London that John Wesley visited Lady Huntingdon at Chelsea.
Whitefield was in England.
When Wesley reached London he met Howell Harris, who gave him a message from Lady Huntingdon.
He went to see her, and, at her request he preached several times to crowded and fashionable congregations that were accustomed to assemble at her house.
Whitefield left for Scotland on September 3.
It was four days after his departure that Wesley's first visit took place.
He spent three hours with Lady Huntingdon, and they talked together 'as in the times that were past.'
In the evening he preached at West Street Chapel.
Several of Lady Huntingdon's friends were there.
We are specially interested in one of them—Lady Bath, the daughter of Colonel Gumley.
On Friday morning he went to Chelsea, and preached at Lady Huntingdon's to a fashionable audience.
The next Sunday he preached twice 'in the fields," and once at West Street.
In the evening he went once more to Lady *See Fragment III, Standard Journal, viii. 156-159,
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
Huntingdon's house and preached to the congregation there assembled.
He says, 'After preaching they gathered round me on every side, and I was enabled to speaktotheir hearts.
Surely I am not come this warfare on my own cost.
Now let God do as seemeth in His own eyes.'
We stirmise, from an incidental remark, that the relations between Lady Huntingdon and Wesley had not been so cordial as in other days ; but they had a quiet talk together and misunderstandings were removed.?
On Monday, September 12, John Wesley set: out for the West.
The next day he preached 'in the new-built room' in Bristol.
On Thursday he left Bristol.
Riding to Langford he had a joyous surprise.
A man called after him and told him that ' Mr. Thomson, of Cornwall,' was in a house to which he pointed.
Wesley rode up to the door, and found his friend _ there.
They spent an hour together 'in declaring to each other the wonderful things God had done.'
It is probable that Thomson told him of the improved condition of affairs in Cornwall.
Persecution had moderated, or ceased.
It should be noted that the adversaries of Methodism could no longer avail themselves of the plea that the country was at war ; and, therefore, that men could be 'pressed' for the Navy and Army.
That weapon, which they had ruthlessly used, was falling from their hands.
The ' preliminaries' of the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle had been signed in April, and the definitive treaty was on the eve of being concluded and signed. ?
Wesley could therefore proceed on his journey without any expectation of being clutched by magistrates and press-gangs.
He rode on his way ; and his expectations were realized.
He _methis friend Mr. Bennett, preached in the churches at Tresmere and St. Gennys, and 'in the fields' at many places without interruption.
It was only at Newlyn that he received showers of dirt and stones from the ' rabble-rout.'
But even there the assault died down before the service concluded.
'Then all were quiet and still ; and some looked as if they felt what was spoken.'
Mobs showed a certain amount of sagacity when they made it impossible for Wesley to be heard.
Almost invariably a listening crowd was subdued by the spell of his extraordinary influence.
Remembering the state of his health, 1Wesley's Journal, viii. 158, 159.
2The definitive treaty was signed on October 7.
See Smollett's History of England, xi. 301-302.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
and the pressure of his private cares, we wonder at the vigour he showed, during this visit.
With charming naiveté he says:
' Believing my strength would not allow of preaching five times in the day, I desired John Whitford to preach at five.'
That sentence has a tone of arrest which haunts us.
Richard Moss and John Slocomb had accompanied Wesley from Bristol.
On the return journey Slocomb waited for them at Cullompton.
Wesley and Moss left Crediton soon after sunset.
The night was exceeding dark.
Neither moon nor star appeared.
The rain poured down; in the deep and narrow lanes it was scarcely possible to see the road.
When the travellers were groping their way in one of these lanes they heard the sound of horses coming toward them.
Then a voice cried, 'What have you got?'
Wesley did not understand the meaning of that challenge, but Richard Moss came to his aid and replied, ' We have no panniers.'
Upon which the man answered, ' Sir, I ask your pardon,' and went by very quietly.
If the further conversation between the two preachers had been recorded we think it would have concerned the excellence of the 'rule' which forbade 'the buying or selling of uncustomed goods.'
The two companions went on their journey ; and a little before eight o'clock the moon rose.
Then they rode cheerfully on, and before ten reached Cullompton.
On October xr John Wesley arrived in Bristol.
Until the end of the year the entries in his Journal lack the fullness that has so effectively guided us through the incidents of his life.
His mind seems to have been burdened by a trouble he does not mention, but which we think we can detect.
The few entries he makes are of considerable importance; we will note some of them.
During the week after his arrival in Bristol he devoted his time to the visitation of the classes.
He relied on the faithfulness of the leaders, and the loyalty of the members for the success of his work.
Experience was constantly confirming his estimate of the high value of the classmeeting.
The building of the 'New Room' must have interfered with the meetings in Bristol, and Wesley soon perceived a threatening danger.
He faced it with his habitual courage.
The method he adopted is shown in the Journal.
He tells us that during this visitation he left out of the list of members 'every careless person, and everyone who wilfully and obstinately refused to meet his brethren weekly.'
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
this means the number of members was reduced from nine hundred to about seven hundred and thirty.
Leaving Bristol, Wesley rode towards London.
He arrived there on October 15.
On November 1 there was a solemn assembly at the West Street Chapel.
It was All Saints' Day.
For several years a service had been held there in commemoration of those who had passed away, and to the end of his life John Wesley remembered his old comrades and friends whose warfare was accomplished, and who were living in the light of eternity.
He closes his brief record with the memorable words, ' Surely,'' right dear in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints." '
There was another solemn assembly in the West Street Chapel a few days afterwards.
On Sunday, November 13, Sarah Peters, 'a lover of souls, a mother in Israel, went to rest.'
We read Wesley's testimony concerning her with guiltless envy.
What a revelation of his tenderness is given in his tribute to her character!
' During a close observation of several years I never saw her, upon the most trying occasions, in any degree ruffled or discomposed, but she was always loving, always happy.
It was her peculiar gift, and her continual care, to seek and save that which was lost ; to support the weak, to comfort the feeble-minded, to bring back what had been turned out of the way.
And in doing this God endued her above her fellows with the love that " believeth, hopeth, endureth all things." '
In Wesley's Journal there is a record of the cause of her death.
It makes a strong appeal to us.
On Sunday, October 9, she went, with Silas Told, to Newgate to visit the condemned malefactors.
The prisonwork of the London Methodists was carried on by some of the members who belonged to the Society at the Foundery, Silas
Told being the leader in this self-denying form of Christian charity.
Wesley tells us that Sarah Peters, at the time we have reached, went constantly to Newgate, sometimes alone, sometimes with one or two others.
These visitors entered the cells of the prisoners condemned to death, and exhorted and prayed with them.
When Sarah Peters went away she was followed with 'abundance of prayers and blessings.'
In November there were six men and one woman who were awaiting execution.
One of the men was suffering from jail-fever, 1 Journal, iii. 380.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
' but he was visited with the rest.
On October 28, at six o'clock in the morning of the day of execution, Silas Told and Sarah
Peters were admitted to the prison, and said farewell to their grateful friends.
On Wednesday, November 2, Sarah Peters, worn out with her work, took to her bed, having the symptoms of a malignant fever.
Wesley had sometimes told her that 'she carried her charity too far, not allowing herself what was needful' ; but her answer was, 'I can live upon one meal a day, so that I may have to give to them that have none.'
Wesley's gentle reproof was needed; for when the fever attacked her she had no strength to resist.
But she ' praised God in the fires for ten days, continually witnessing the good confession, ''I have fought the good fight ; I have kept the faith ; 1 am going to receive the crown."
And a little after midnight on Sunday, the 13th, her spirit returned to God.'?
Before closing our record of 1748, a year crowded with important incidents, it is necessary to record an important fact which concerns the development of the constitution of the Methodist Church, and that confirms our faith in the truth that ' somehow good will be the final goal of ill.'
John Bennet, in a letter written from Chinley on October 22, 1748, says:
On Tuesday, the 18th of this inst., was a meeting (at Todmorden Edge) of the Leaders in the several Societies belonging to Wm. Darney,
&c.
Four stewards we appointed to inspect into and regulate the temporal affairs of the Societies; every Leader brought his Class Paper and showed what money he had received in the Quarter, which was fairly entered in a book for the purpose.
The several Bills of Charges were brought in at the same time, and after they were thoroughly examined were all discharged.
But, alas! the people are exceedingly poor, and will not be able to maintain the preachers and William Darney's family.
The overplus after the Bills were discharged was only gs. 2d....
On Thursday, the 2oth of this inst., was our Quarterly Meeting held at Woodley, of the Leaders in Derbyshire, Cheshire, and part of Lancashire.
The same method was used here as above.
The Lord did bless our meeting in a very extraordinary manner.
After business was ended we sang a hymn, several of the brethren prayed, and I gave a short exhortation.
Oh! dear Sir, let this method be used in other places.
Once a year we propose to meet all the Leaders, and at the other Quarterly Meeting the Stewards in each respective Society need only to be present with the particular accounts.
This way will not be very expensive.
I have made a small book which shall be kept in the * See John Wesley's Journal, iii. 381-387.
Sarah Peters was a worthy predecessor of Mrs. Elizabeth Fry.
Mrs, Fry's visits to Newgate began in 1813.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
Box with the Accounts, wherein an exact Account of the Marriages, Deaths, Backsliders, &c., shall be noted down that I may be able to give you an account thereof each Quarter.
The question of the origin of Circuit Quarterly Meetings has excited much interest.
In the Wesleyan Methodist Magazine for 1843, a series of articles appeared entitled
' Methodism in Former Days.'
The third was written by Dr. William W.
Stamp.
It dealt with the question we are now considering.
In this article Dr. Stamp quoted an entry contained in an old book which is now in the archives of the Keighley Circuit.
It is a small folio bound in vellum ; and the entry, in the opinion of the Rev. J. Conder Nattrass, is in William Grimshaw's handwriting.* This entry must be considered in connexion with the details contained in John Bennet's letter to Wesley from which we have already quoted.
The entry, which is accompanied by an account of cash received and distributed, is as follows:
Oct. 18th, 1748.
At a Meeting then held at Major Marshall's, at Todmorden Edge, in the parish of Rochdale and County of Lancaster, of the Leaders of several Classes in several Religious Societies (to wit) Rosindale,
Roughlee, Hepponstal, Todmorden, &c., the following Persons were chosen Stewards of the said societies, and intrusted to transact the temporal affairs :
James Greenwood, John Parker, John Madin, James Dyson.
Memorandum, It was then agreed That if there be any just Cause to Exchange any of the above Stewards, It shall be done at the next
Quarterly Meeting held for the said societies by the Approbation of the Leaders then present.
Note.
If any Dispute arise touching the choosing of a Steward, or Stewards, the greater Number of Voices shall have the choice to elect a fresh Steward.
This shall be mentioned to our Minister, Mr. John Wesley, or his Successor, who shall end any dispute of this kind.*
1See Methodist Recorder, Winter Number, 1902, 29, 30.
Bennet returns the number of members in Darney's Societies, 'as appeared by the books wherein the mames were entered,' as 358; in the sections represented at the Woodley meeting there were 527 members.
Mr. Nattrass's ' Notes on Early Methodism in Haworth,' in W.H.S. Proceedings, x. 145.
A photograph of the famous entry appears in connexion with the article.
See also Laycock's Great Haworth Round, 67 ; and the Rev. F. F. Bretherton's article on ' Quarterly Meetings' in W.H.S. Proceedings, vii. 78.
* See photograph of the 'entry' in W.H.S. Proceedings, x. 141.
TOIL AND TROUBLERS
It will be seen that this ' entry ' relates to the first Quarterly Meeting mentioned by John Bennet in his letter to Wesley.
It is clear that an attempt was to be made to face the financial difficulties that embarrassed the progress of Methodism at this time.
It is likely that Bennet's thoughts had been turned to the subject in consequence of the lack of money to assist
Societies when attacked by mobs.
At this point it is enough to say that his scheme was received by Wesley with admiration ; but he hesitated to allow the method to be used in other places until he had consulted the Conference on _ the whole question.
That consultation took place in 1749; we shall see the decision that was reached on this most important suggestion.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
WHILE politicians were considering the treaty of Aix-laChapelle, and counting up gains and losses, John Wesley was watching the effect of the war on the moral and religious condition of the nation.
He was a loyal Englishman, who followed the course of political and military affairs with attention ; but the improvement of the moral and religious condition of his fellow countrymen was his ruling passion.
As he looked at the crowds in London and.elsewhere, did he see that the war had sobered them; that it had created in them a more religious spirit?
Instead of giving his impressions of the effects of the war we will look at the English people at the close of 1748 through the eyes of a man who had no sympathy with Wesley's work, and who has never yet been suspected of Puritanical tendencies.
His knowledge of Methodism may be judged from the ridiculous, passage in his History which John Wesley chastised.
Smollett considered Methodism to be a superstition that was spread ' by the endeavours of a few obscure preachers, such as Whitefield and the two Wesleys, who found means to lay the whole Kingdom under contribution.'
He must have been reading George White's sermon.
What does Smollett say on the supremely important subject of the moral condition of England at this time?
"Commerce and manufacture flourished again, to such a degree of increase as had never been known in the island ; but this advantage was attended with an irresistible tide of luxury and excess, which flowed through all degrees of the people, breaking down all the mounds of civil polity, and opening a way for licence and immorality.
The highways were infested with rapine and assassination; the cities teemed with the brutal votaries of lewdness, intemperance, and profligacy.'
In another place he describes the condition of things in 1750.
He says:
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
By this time all the jails in England were filled with the refuse of the Army and Navy, which having been dismissed at the peace, and either averse to labour or excluded from employment, had naturally preyed upon the commonwealth.
Great numbers of those wretches who, by proper regulations, might have been rendered serviceable to the community, were executed as examples; and the rest perished miserably amidst the stench and horrors of noisome dungeons.
Even the prison of Newgate was rendered so infectious by the uncommon crowds of confined felons, stewed together in close apartments, that the very air they breathed acquired a pestilential degree of putrefaction.
It was this putrefied air, which, adhering to the clothes of the malefactors brought to trial at the bar of the Old Bailey in May, produced among the audience a pestilential fever, which infected and proved fatal to the Lord Mayor of London, one alderman, two of the judges, divers lawyers who attended the session, the greatest part of the jury, and a considerable number of the spectators.
In order to prevent such disasters for the future, the jails were cleansed, and accommodated with ventilators, which exhaust the foul and supply a circulation of fresh air; and other humane precautions were taken for the benefit of the prisoners.?
No one can read Smollett's descriptions of the condition of England at the close of the war without perceiving the peril that threatened the country.
Wesley's knowledge of mobs and jails far exceeded that of the historian ; but, in addition, he was exceptionally well acquainted with the religious state of the people of England.
In the tumultuous times of the preceding century Sir Edward Sackville in a moment of despondency said, 'The passing-bell ringeth for religion.'
In 1748 many were ready to echo his words.
In the eighteenth century not a few Christian people listened daily for the doleful knell.
The Methodist evangelists refused to despair.
The bells they heard were ringing out 'the darkness of the land, ringing in the Christ that is to be.'
They ought to have been supported by all the Churches; but, as we know, that support, in most places, was denied them.
At this critical time an assault was made on the principal leaders in the great campaign against irreligion.
We have described the opening stage of that assault on the Wesleys and Whitefield, and it is necessary to refer to its development.
We may say at once that, in the case of the publication of the ' pretended charge' of the Bishop of Exeter, our sympathies are wholly with Dr. Lavington.
But when explanations had been given, and the Wesleys and Whitefield had been cleared
1Smollett's History of England, xii. 56, 81.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
from all blame, the matter,so far as they were concerned, should have ended.
The publication of Lavington's retractation was the act of Lady Huntingdon, and the bishop should have settled the affair with her.
Instead of closing the controversy, Dr.
Lavington resumed it by attacking Wesley and Whitefield in three anonymous pamphlets bearing the title The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compar'd.
The first and second were published in 1749, the third in 1751, and in 1754 the three parts were issued in two volumes.
We do not think it is necessary to dwell at length on the contents of these pamphlets.
They created much excitement in the country, and certainly produced, in some quarters, a strong prejudice against the Methodists.
Lavington's attack was continued for a considerable time, and its consequences were of great importance so far as the work of John
Wesley is concerned.
The best modern answer to Lavington's book is contained in Miss Julia Wedgwood's John Wesley and the Evangelical Reaction of the Eighteenth Century.
Miss Wedgwood is far from being a partisan of John Wesley, and that fact increases the value of her criticism of Dr. Lavington.
With two of the Bishop's pamphlets before her, this is what she says:
The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compar'd (1754) is hardly to be classed with the publications which represent the ' Church against the Methodists'; Bishop Lavington, the anonymous author, deserves to be coupled with the men who fling dead cats and rotten eggs at the Methodists, not with those who assailed their tenets with arguments, or even serious rebuke.
The vulgar prejudice of a similarity between Methodists and Roman Catholics, which was fading away at this time, was made use of to give a sting to every possible action, habit, or expression which could be proved common to both, the whole being flavoured with that spice of coarse buffoonery which would doubtless secure plenty of readers.
It is constructed on a very simple plan : some extract is taken, generally from those extravagant passages in Wesley's or Whitefield's journal which lend themselves to such a purpose, and then follows a parallel quotation from the lives of the saints tending to identify the two instances of enthusiasm, which indeed in many instances was possible without any reflection on either.
Take the following specimen:
' Another bait to catch admirers, and very common among enthusiasts, is a restless impatience and insatiable thirst of travelling and undertaking dangerous voyages for the conversion of infidels.
Accordingly our itinerant Methodists are fond of expressing their zeal on this account.
Mr. Whitefield says, '' When 1Green's Anti-Methodist Publications, p. 57.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
AS, ' letters came from Messrs. Wesley, their accounts fired my soul, and made me even long to go abroad for God too.
The thoughts of it crowded continually upon me'; and then comes a parallel passage from Wesley.
But all this only shows the natural, unsettled humour, the rapid motion, of enthusiastic heads.
And we may assure them that the zealous impatience of Popish fanatics are, by all accounts, greatly superior.
''Oh, how many times have the nuns seen their sister of prayer drunk with zeal for the conversion of sinners and infidels, bemoaning herself that she was not a man to go abroad and gain erring souls!''
The windmill is in all their heads.
'Tis almost incredible what miseries were endured by St. Francis, in his heroic voyage to convert the Sultan of Egypt, in that of St. Anthony to convert the Moors, and of St. Ignatius to convert the Turks.'
The above quotation will appear to most persons to have the aspect of an attack rather upon Christianity than upon Methodism.
The following passage is a specimen (the worst, it is allowed) of the writer's courtesy.
Whitefield had mentioned in the most general and abstract language that his youth had not been free from vice; on which his opponent remarks:
' His first account of God's dealings with him is such a boyish, ludicrous, filthy, nasty, and shameless relation of himself, as quite defies paper, and is shocking to decency and modesty.'
The conclusion of the book is far more shocking to decency and modesty than any possible confession of Whitefield's.
It consists of a long account of the Eleusinian Mysteries as they are explained by ecclesiastical writers, with all that physical symbolism so shocking to our notions of which, justly or unjustly, they are accused by the Fathers ; and this painful picture is made relevant to the writer's purpose by being described as 'a strange system of heathen Methodism.'
Such was the remedy offered by a Father of the Church to a corrupt age against the terrible danger of enthusiasm.
The only interest in this rambling and scurrilous production is that it is the first attack upon the Methodists in which we find the remarkable convulsions produced by Wesley's preaching noticed with anything of that fullness which we should expect.
One explanation suggested by Lavington is that Wesley had drugged the convulsionnaires, but he does not shrink from the conclusion (which was totally alien to the dry, commonplace sense of the Church in that day) that ' If there be anything in this mysterious part of Methodism exceeding the powers of nature, I see no reason against concluding that is the work of some evil spirit, a sort of magical operation or diabolical illusion.'
This distinct acceptance of the Methodist disorder as possibly supernatural at once separates Dr. Lavington from his brother bishops, as taking up an attitude which they could not have adopted without stultifying themselves.
It is a curious test of the evidential value of miracles that while on the one hand Wesley was assailed for not working them, on the other he should be reproached with encouraging magical operations and diabolical illusions,* 1 Miss Julia Wedgwood's John Wesley and the Evangelical
Reaction of the Eighteenth Century, 313-315.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
A visit to Exeter Cathedral enriches the picture gallery of the mind.
We have watched the great towers as they have stood against the blue of a cloudless sky; we have seen them in 'the pale moonlight'; we have lingered before the decorated front crowded with the figures of Kings and Knights ; we have entered the cathedral and worshipped there at evensong.
Memory holds fast the treasure of these: recollections ; but it also reminds us of two mysteries.
Those who visit the Close in the evening, when the hurry of day is over, will pause in the presence of that white marble figure which represents a man who still lives in the regard of students of ecclesiastical polity.
Looking at the figure in the deepening twilight we confess that our thoughts are not busy with ' ecclesiastical polity,' but with another question.
We are in the presence of Richard Hooker, universally known as 'the judicious.'
As we look at him, sitting in an attitude suggesting profound meditation, we ask ourselves a question which baffles us:
"Why do some men who possess unquestionable wisdom, whose " judiciousness''' becomes a proverb—why do they so often make mistakes in their matrimonial arrangements?'
Let it not be supposed that we have raised this question recklessly.
We shall see that it is intimately connected with facts we shall soon have to face.
We will wait for the morning light before we confront the second mystery.
We enter the cathedral, and read the inscriptions on the tombs and monuments.
One of them arrests our special attention.
It describes a man who possessed conspicuous and enviable virtues.
His epitaph declares that "he never ceased to improve his talents, nor to employ them to the noblest purposes.'
It concludes with these words:
' Unaffected sanctity dignified his instructions, and indulgent candour sweetened his government.
At length, having eminently discharged his duties, Of a man, a Christian, and a Prelate, prepared by habitual meditation To resign life without regret, To meet death without terror, He expired with the praises of God upon his lips, In his 7gth year,
September 13, 1762.'
The date arrests our attention.
We look up and find that we have been reading the inscription on the monument erected to the memory of Bishop Lavington, In trying to solve the mystery of this eulogium
4See Tyerman's Life and Times of Wesley, ii. 153.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
aX we take refuge in the theory of the efficacy of a 'late repentance.'
Lavington became the Bishop of Exeter in 1747, and soon commenced his campaign against the Methodists.
His wide diocese included Cornwall.
Notwithstanding the rough experiences which had tested the fidelity of the Societies in that county, the members stood fast, and their numbers constantly increased.
Cornwall was Lavington's difficulty.
After visiting that part of his diocese, he came to the conclusion that he would strike a blow at the clergy who were encouraging the Methodists.
We note that in 1748 all the pulpits of the churches in the north-west corner of Cornwall, with one exception, were closed against the Wesleys.
That was a considerable victory for Dr. Lavington.
But the key of the position was not taken.
George Thomson held out without a thought of surrender.
The bishop determined to terrify him.
He summoned him to meet him.
It was an interesting interview.
When Thomson appeared the bishop charged him with * Methodistical practices,' and with 'daring to countenance
Whitefield."
But Lavington did not know the man to whom he was speaking.
The conversation between them grew exciting.
Then the bishop blundered.
He threatened 'to strip off the gown' from Thomson, but was saved the trouble.
Thomson took off his gown, threw it down at the bishop's feet, and said, 'I can preach the gospel without a gown.'
Saying this, he left the room and ended the interview.
Lavington was lost in amazement.
He went through the experience of the hectoring man who meets an antagonist firm of purpose.
His courage failed.
He was unaccustomed to such a spirit of independence.
When he had recovered from his surprise he sent a message to Thomson, who went once more to meet him.
Instead of continuing his threats, Lavington tried the soothing method.
But neither soothings nor threats shook Thomson's determination to befriend the Methodists, and to preach the doctrines that had led him into his experience of salvation by faith.?
If Lavington could have induced Thomson and Bennett to close their pulpits against the Wesleys he would have greatly encouraged their enemies.
But would his victory 1 Life and Times of Lady Huntingdon, i. 126.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
have been complete?
The Methodist preachers would have carried on their work.
Further, we wonder if he suspected that in Truro a voice would soon be heard proclaiming the doctrines of Methodism from the pulpit of the great church in that town.
A clergyman was there who' was gradually approaching the light in which Thomson and Bennett walked.
We have waited for him; and now he comes into view.
He was appointed as curate of Truro in 1746.
Bewailing the ineffectiveness of his preaching, through many weary months he sought the secret of power.
In 1748 he found it in his own experience of conversion.
In that year he became a most successful evangelical preacher, and was soon brought into fellowship with the men who were toiling to effect the religious reformation of the people of Cornwall. We hail the coming of Samuel Walker of Truro.
Lavington's pamphlets, which were issued at intervals, may have strengthened the prejudice of some persons whose knowledge of Methodism was superficial, and his campaign in Cornwall may have given a little more courage to persecutors who were beginning to suspect that they were fighting a losing battle; but it is safe to say that Methodism in the western country received little permanent injury from the bishop's attacks.
We may now dismiss him, for a time, from our thoughts, and tum our attention to events which did endanger the work of the Wesleys in England.
On February 21, 1749, John Wesley arrived at Kingswood, and made the school his centre until the end of March.
He was very busy there.
He carried out his design to have as many of the preachers at the school as could possibly be spared during Lent, and 'to read lectures to them every day, as he did to his pupils in Oxford.'
Seventeen assembled.
He divided them into two classes, and read to one Bishop Pearson On the Creed, to the other Aldrich's Logic, and to both Rules for Action and Utterance.
He was now in his element.
Charles Wesley paid him a brief visit.
He says, 'I spent half an hour with my brother at Kingswood, which is now very much like a college.
Twenty-one boarders are there, and a dozen students, his sons and pupils in the gospel.
1 When John Wesley was a tutor at Lincoln College, Oxford, he was not only Greek Lecturer, but also Lecturer in Logic and in Philosophy.
See Mr. Brigden's article in W.H.S. Proceedings, xiv. 154.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
I believe he is now laying the foundations of many generations.'
He also set apart an hour weekly for the purpose of meeting the children of the four schools which then existed at Kingswood.
He mentions the schools.
One was for boys who boarded in 'the new House'; a second was for girls who were boarders in the old 'Room'; a third was a school for day-scholars, boys taught by James Harding; and the fourth was a school for girls taught by Sarah Dimmock.
This enumeration reminds us of the fact that Wesley designed to have a boarding-school for girls at Kingswood, and succeeded in establishing it.
In his Journal there is a photograph of the ' Rules for the girls' school at Kingswood.'*
They remind us of the ' Rules' of the boys' school; we note that the charge for board and teaching of a child was ten pounds a year.
The children's meetings conducted at Kingswood by Wesley in 1749, gave him much satisfaction. He found that some of the children were deeply and lastingly affected.
In addition to teaching and preaching, Wesley was busy with his pen.
He was preparing material for his new venture, the Christian Library, the first volume of which was printed by Felix Farley at Bristol in this year.
On Friday, March 31, John Wesley was abridging Cave's Primitive Christianity.
His brother arrived at the school.
In his Journal Charles Wesley records an interesting fact.
He found there 'our beloved sisters Murray and Davey.'* John Wesley does not mention Grace Murray at this point in his Journal.
Her little son was at the school, but that does not altogether explain her presence.
Suddenly we remember that John Wesley had promised to take her to Ireland in the spring, and that he was thither bound in a few days.
Considering all that had happened, he might have thought himself released from his promise, but we know that he occupied a conspicuous place among those who swear to their own hurt and do not change.
On Saturday, April 8, there was a sound of wedding-bells in Garth.
On that day Charles Wesley and Sarah Gwynne were married.
Not a cloud was seen from morning till night.
Mr. Gwynne gave away the bride, and John Wesley joined the hands of the happy pair.
It was a genuine love-match ; 1See John Wesley's Journal, iii. 391 note.
3 iii. 357.
* Charles Wesley's Journal, ii. 54.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
and the brightness of the day seemed a prophecy of coming years of gladness.
The wedding-party returned to the house, and the delighted bridegroom says:
'We were cheerful without mirth, serious without sadness.
My brother seemed the happiest person among us.'!
Fg On Sunday morning, April 16, about three o'clock, John Wesley, with his travelling companions William Tucker, one of his preachers, and Grace Murray, landed in Ireland after a stormy voyage from Holyhead.
Their landing-place was then known as Dunleary, now as Kingstown.
After making arrangements for his companions to follow in a chaise, Wesley walked to Dublin, and reached Skinner's Alley a little before the time of service.
He preached there; and in the afternoon, and again in the evening, he preached in the garden connected with the room near Dolphin's Barn.*
John Wesley's third visit to Ireland occurred at a critical time.
The Societies had been subjected to fierce persecution, especially at Cork, where the threat of coming storms, which Charles Wesley had anticipated, had been fulfilled.
John Wesley stayed in Ireland until July 20, when he embarked in a small sloop, with Grace Murray and others, and sailed for Bristol.
In his Journal and in Crookshank's History of Methodism in Ireland the ordinary incidents of this visit are fully stated. ° In addition to his constant preaching and visitation of the Societies Wesley was busy with his pen.
It was in 1749 that two pamphlets appeared which have a special interest and value.
They were both printed in Dublin by S. Powell, in Crane Lane.
Mr.
Green, in his Wesley Bibliography, reminds us that, up to 1749, all that had been recorded of the several Conferences previously held was preserved and circulated in manuscript.
We have taken full advantage of the contents of the Bennet Minutes, which have been republished by the Wesley Historical Society, and we have seen how necessary it was that not only the lay preachers, but also the members of thé Societies, should be acquainted with the resolutions that were passed by the Conference for their government.
In the Minutes printed in Dublin, we 1C. Wesley's Journal, ii. 55, 56.
See ante, 53.
See John Wesley's Journal, iii. 395-414; Crooksbank's History of Methodism, i. 49-58.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
see the first step that was taken to spread information of great value among the Societies.
At the first Conference, held in London in 1744, the question was asked, ' How far should any of us mention to others what may be mentioned here?'
It was then agreed, ' That not one word which may be here spoken of persons should be mentioned elsewhere.
Nothing at all, unless so far as we may be convinced the glory of God requires it.
And from time to time we will consider on each head, Is it for the glory of God that what we have now spoken should be mentioned again?'*
John Wesley was of opinion that the time had come to publish some of the proceedings of the Conferences that had been held, for the guidance of the preachers and the Societies, so that unity of procedure might be maintained in the two countries.
So the pamphlets, which were afterwards called The Doctrinal Minutes and The Disciplinary Minutes, were published.
The first had a large circulation, not only in Ireland, but in England.
The second had a limited sale.
It was suffered to become so scarce, that, when it was reprinted in 1862, only three of the old copies were known to be in existence. * We must now, with reluctance, turn towards a subject we have already treated in its preliminary stage.
John Wesley and Grace Murray were together in Ireland for three months.
She was then ' engaged,' as we have seen, to John Bennet ; but Wesley says she neither wrote to him nor heard from him.
He came to the conclusion that ' the affair between them was as if it had never been.'
It is possible to account for Bennet's silence.
It is said that some of his relations objected to his marriage with Grace Murray, and that his letters to her got into wrong hands and were stopped.
But it is difficult to believe that a shrewd man like Bennet would allow three months to go by without suspecting the mischief, especially when he received no answer to his letters.
Wesley watched Grace Murray working among the Irish Societies with great admiration, and the old love revived.
Instead of resisting the impulse, and waiting to see Bennet on his return to England, when satisfactory explanations might have been given, he declared himself to Grace Murray, and found
1 John Wesley and the Methodist Societies, 205.
*See Green's Bibliography, Nos. 135, 136.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
I4I that her old love for him had come back in still greater strength.
They then made a solemn verbal 'contract' to marry each other.
On the first occasion, as we have said, the engagement was informal.
Now it acquired special force.
After a rough passage from Ireland Wesley and Grace Murray landed at the quay in Bristol.
At Bristol or at Kingswood Grace Murray listened to 'idle tales' about Wesley and some other woman.
She believed them; and, . 'in a sudden vehement fit of jealousy,' she wrote an affectionate letter to John Bennet.
She said nothing to Wesley about the re-opening of the correspondence with Bennet until the letter had been dispatched.
When Bennet received her letter he replied to it at once, and said he would meet her when she came into the North.
Leaving Bristol with John Wesley, she reached London.
Conversing with an intimate acquaintance, she revealed the fact of Wesley's love for her.
Her friend gave her this advice:
'Sister Murray, never think of it.
I know you thoroughly.
It will never do.
The people here would never suffer you.
And your spirit would not bear their behaviour.
You have not humility enough, or meekness, or patience ; you would be miserable all your life.
And that would make him miserable too.
So that, instead of strengthening, you would weaken his hands.
If you love yourself, or if you love him, never think of it more.'
Setting out for the North, John Wesley and Grace Murray arrived at Epworth.
In that town an interview took place between Wesley and Bennet.
Wesley was surprised to find that letters he had written to Grace Murray had been forwarded by her to Bennet.
The conversation between the two men opened Wesley's eyes, and he saw he had made a mistake.
He judged it right that Bennet should marry Grace Murray without delay.
The next morning he wrote to her telling her he thought it was not proper that they should converse any more together.
After reading the letter she ran to Wesley 'in an agony of tears.'
He was easily moved | by the tears of a woman; but John Bennet came into the room and claimed her as his right.
Once more Wesley determined to give her up to him.
The wise determination to converse no more with Grace Murray could not bear the strain of the news of her serious illness.
Wesley paid her a sickvisit.
She then told him once more of her love for him,
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
saying, ' How can you possibly think I love any ce better than you?'
But, in the evening, John Bennet called on her, with a friend, and argued with her until, at last, she said,
'I will marry John Bennet.'
On September 6 Wesley, who was much perplexed in his mind by her assurance that she loved him 'a thousand times better than ever she loved
John Bennet in her life,' asked her, on their way to Newcastle, 'Which will you choose?'
Again and again she said, 'I am determined by conscience, as well as inclination, to live and die with you.'
On arriving at the Orphan House, Wesley wrote a strong letter to Bennet in which he set forth the whole of the case.
He especially dwelt on the fact of 'the engagement ' between Bennet and Grace Murray in Derbyshire, at the time when there was an ' understanding' between Wesley and herself concerning marriage.
It appears from this letter that, in the Derbyshire interview, Bennet asked Grace Murray whether she was 'engaged' to Wesley, and she replied that she was not.
Wesley, in his letter to Bennet, dated September 7, 1749, says ' There was not so explicit an engagement as would stand good in law; but such an one there was, as ought in conscience to have prevented any other, till it should be dissolved.'
Among the many mischances of this unfortunate business, we must number the fact that Wesley's letter, sent to Bennet by the hand of William Shent, was never delivered to him.
But Wesley forwarded a copy of it to Charles Wesley, who was in Bristol.* It is necessary to state that, on Thursday, September 2 when at Hindley Hill, near Allendale, in Northumberland,
Grace Murray asked that the ' contract' she had made with Wesley in Dublin might be renewed.
Christopher Hopper, one of the best known of Wesley's lay preachers, lived at Hindley Hill, and was in the room when the solemn vows were spoken.
He noticed that Grace Murray paused and trembled.
He asked her if she had any scruple on her mind.
Wesley also said, 'If you have the least scruple, I beg you would stop.
Pray, do!'
She cheerfully replied, 'I have none at all.'
Then she spoke the words of the ' contract ' immediately.
In describing the ' contract,' when it was made in Dublin, Wesley calls it 'a contract de praesenn.'
In a 1 The letter appears in the British Museum MS., and in Dr. Leger's Wesley's
Last Love.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
note in Dr. Leger's book such a contract is described as follows :
"Any contract made per verba de praesenti was, before the time of George II, so far a valid marriage that the parties might be compelled, in the spiritual Courts, to celebrate it in facie Ecclesiae.'* Both Wesley and Grace Murray understood the contract in the sense in which it was commonly regarded about that time in England.
An hour after making the contract Wesley took horse for Whitehaven, leaving Grace Murray to carry on her work among the women-bands in Allendale.
She stood looking after him as he rode up the hill.
He says that he had not one uneasy thought; he believed God would give them to meet again 'at the time when He saw good.'
They met once more on Friday, October 6, and then Grace Murray was the wife of John Bennet.
In order that we may shed a light on the startling fact we have mentioned we must leave the North and make our way to the West of England.
Shortly after Charles Wesley's marriage Mr. Gwynne left Garth; and, crossing the borderline, found a new home in Shropshire.
He settled in Ludlow, that town which stands on a high hill crowned with a great church and a ruined castle—a castle which makes us dream of Milton and Comus.
Charles Wesley and his young bride made their way to Bristol.
They found a temporary lodging in Stokes Croft, but, on September 1 they removed into a newly-built house in Charles Street in the same neighbourhood.
The beautiful days went by; then John Wesley's letter, enclosing a copy of the letter written to John Bennet, came to hand.
All the brightness faded.
Charles Wesley was an impetuous man; his feelings changed swiftly ; his actions kept pace with them.
When he thought that his brother was about to be married to Grace Murray he determined that he would hasten to the North and prevent what seemed to him a catastrophe.
We turn to his Journal, hoping to find out his real objection to the marriage.
But from September 15 to October 22 there is a tantalizing gap in the records.
We cannot accept the usual explanation that his only objection to the marriage was the social position of Grace Murray.
It finds some support in a letter he wrote to John Wesley, so cannot be dismissed at once from consideration.
But, in addition, after reading his brother's letter he thought that 1R. M. Kerr's Student's Blackstone, 103.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
r John Bennet had been badly treated.
And, further, we think that the danger to the peace of the Societies, which had been suggested in the conversation between Grace Murray and her clear-eyed ' familiar friend ' when they met in London, was present in his mind when he left his house and posted to the North.
Our suspicions are confirmed by an extract from a letter to Grace Murray which has been rescued from oblivion by the editor of John Wesley's Standard Journal.
In that letter Charles Wesley says:
' The case thus appears to me.
You promised J. B. to marry him—since which you engaged yourself to another.
. And who is that other?
One of such importance that his doing so dishonest an action would destroy both himself, and me, and the whole work of God.'
It is only necessary to mention a few more facts connected with this ' Tragedy of Errors.'
Charles Wesley met George Whitefield in the North and told him the story.
Whitefield, in a subsequent interview with John Wesley, showed that he was not carried away by Charles Wesley's statement.
John Wesley says Whitefield told him 'it was his judgement that she was my wife and that he had said so to John Bennet ; that he would fain have persuaded them to wait, and not to marry till they had seen me; but that my brother's impetuosity prevailed and bore down all before it.'
Charles Wesley acted with his usual swiftness.
He went to Whitehaven, saw his brother, and reasoned with him in vain.
Then he went to Hindley, where Grace Murray was staying, and carried her away behind him to Ferry Hill.
Arrangements were made with John Bennet for her marriage.
All this time John Wesley was going on with his work!
On a most critical day, when he might have had an interview with Grace Murray, he hesitated, but at last he decided that as he had promised to be in Whitehaven he must keep his word.
So he rode away to his appointment.
On Tuesday, October 3, when he was returning from Whitehaven in heavy storms of rain,
John Bennet and Grace Murray were married in St. Andrew's Church, Newcastle, in the presence of Charles Wesley and George Whitefield.
Mr. Curnock, the editor of John Wesley's Journal, adds a note with which we may close this subject.
He says: 'Too late Charles Wesley discovered that he had 1 John Wesley's Journal, iii. 439 note.
CLOUDY AND DARK DAYS
persuaded John Bennet to marry his brother's betrothed fiancée, and had led Grace to believe that ''the important person' who had steadfastly loved her for ten years had actually expressed the wish that, for the sake of the work of God, she would marry another.
. .
. The marriage of Grace Murray, either with Bennet or Wesley, was, per sé, a matter of small moment compared with a breach between John and Charles Wesley, which must at that critical period have either rent the Methodist Society in twain, or, more probably, scattered it to the winds.
The disaster was averted by the tact and tenderness of George Whitefield and John Nelson, and by John Wesley's extraordinary self-control and charity.'*
1 Full information on the subject of John Wesley and Grace Murray may be obtained from the editor's notes in Wesley's Journal, iii. 417-422, 429, 431, 4393
Henry Moore's Life of Wesley, ii., 163-171 ; Tyerman's Life and Times of John Wesley, ii. 42=57 5 Winter Number of The Methodtst Recorder, 1902; and Dr. Leger's
John Wesley's Last Love
XII
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
On Thursday, November 16, 1749, John Wesley held a Conference in London.
He does not mention the fact in his Journal, but we have sufficient evidence to prove it.
The minutes of this Conference are in existence.
They are contained in a manuscript book which has passed through several hands.
It was, until a few years ago, in the possession of Mr. George Stampe, of Grimsby.
In 1862, when a revised edition of the first volume of the printed Minutes of Conference was issued, the proceedings of the 1749 Conference were published in its Appendix.
A mistake occurred in the 'introductory note.'
The MS. is not in the handwriting of 'the late Rev. John Jones.'
The error was corrected in 1896, in the first Publication of the Wesley Historical Society.
Exceptionally competent judges declared that the MS. minutes of the 1749 Conference 'is wholly in Wesley's own handwriting.'
In describing its transactions we will follow the report contained in the Appendix to the 1862 edition of the printed Minutes of Conference.
It will be seen that the proceedings were of special importance.
We have no information concerning the building in which it was held, nor is there a list of those who were present.
We know that Charles Wesley was in London on November 16; but in his Journal he says nothing about the Conference.
All that we know is that the next day, after ' examining the classes,' he returned to Bristol ' in great bodily pain.'
It is also clear, from a record in the minutes, that John Bennet was absent.
We will refer to that record at a later stage.
We regret the lack of these particulars of attendance; but our main business at present is with the proceedings of the Conference.
It is not surprising that the first question concerned the union of the Societies throughout England.
The subject 1See W.H.S. Publications, i. 5.