b'\n\n"^^BlfcSr^ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nWwivlk \n\n\n\n\nGlass \n\n\n\n\n\n\nRnnk 4 \n\n\n\n\n\nX \n\n\n\n\n$LLA1Yz<^: \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nHISTORY \n\n\n\nfpwsbgjflpajt <$ftttr$ i\xc2\xab ^mqicit, \n\n\n\nFBOM ITS OKIGIN UNTIL THE YEAR 1760. \n\n\n\nBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF ITS EARLY MINISTERS. \n\nBY THE \n\nHEV. RICHARD 1 WEBSTER, \n\nLATE PASTOR OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, MAUCH CHUNK, PA. \n\n\n\n\'% glcmoit flf tire Juttlror, \n\nBY THE REV. C. VAN RENSSELAER, D.D. \n\nAND \n\n^tt historical Introduction, \n\nBY THE REV. WILLIAM BLACKWOOD, D.D. \n\n\n\nPUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. \n\n\n\nPHILADELPHIA: \n\nJOS i: I\'ll M. WILSON, \n\nNa 27 801 "Mi n:\\111 -mil 1. i:u...\\\\ | iii:.-t.\\CT ST. \n\nL857. \n\n\n\ntf \n\n\n\n\n?> \n% \n\n\n\nEntered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1857, by \n\nJOSEPH M. WILSON, \n\nin the Clerk\'s Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of \nPennsylvania. \n\n\n\nNOTICE. \n\n\n\nThe Presbyterian Historical Society resolved, in 1853, to \npublish the Eev. Eichard Webster\'s "History of the Presbyte- \nrian Church." A committee, consisting of C. Van Eensselaer, \nJohn C. Backus, and Samuel Agnew, was appointed, with \npower to take measures to carry the resolution into effect. \nVarious circumstances interfered to prevent the publication of the \nwork until the present time. \n\n>\xe2\x80\xa2 the committee was appointed, the basis of the Presbyte- \nrian Historical Society has been enlarged so as to include other \nbranches of the Presbyterian church. It is, therefore, proper to \nBtate thai the Society itself is not to be considered as committed to \nany of the controversial statements of the present history; but \nmerely as issuing it under its general patronage and authority, \nafter the manner of other Historical Societies. \n\nThis volume of Church History is the first volume of the \nPUBLICATIONS OF THE TEESBYTEEIAX HISTOEICAL \n\nSOCIETY. \n\nC. Van Rensselaer, \n\nChairman Ex. Cum. of P. II. S. \n\nIn. i MitF.R 22, 1856. \n\n\n\nCONTENTS. \n\n\n\nPAGB \n\nMemoib 11 \n\nLntkouuctio.n 45 \n\n\n\nPART I. \n\nHISTORICAL. \n\nCHAPTER I. \n\nState of Ulster during the Reigns of James I. and Charles I. \xe2\x80\x94 Trials of the \nter Presbyterians \xe2\x80\x94 The Eagle\'s "Wing \xe2\x80\x94 Bishop Biamhall \xe2\x80\x94 Mr. Castell \xe2\x80\x94 \nHis plan for introducing the Gospel into the Colonies \xe2\x80\x94 The Battle of Dunbar \n\xe2\x80\x94 Scots Prisoners sent to the Colonies \xe2\x80\x94 1670 to 1680, Scottish Presbyterians \nsettle in Virginia, and procure a Minister from Ireland \xe2\x80\x94 Settlements in \nMaryland \xe2\x80\x94 1080, Colonel Stevens applies to Laggan Presbytery for a Minis- \nter \xe2\x80\x94 Efforts of Scottish noblemen and others to settle Carolina \xe2\x80\x94 1684, Other \nprisoners sent from Scotland to Carolina. \xe2\x80\x94 Lord Cardross \xe2\x80\x94 Settlements on \nthe Potomac and Patuxent \xe2\x80\x94 Scotsmen join in purchasing the Jerseys \xe2\x80\x94 Scott, \nof Pitlochic \xe2\x80\x94 Voluntary exiles \xe2\x80\x94 Barclay, of Urie \xe2\x80\x94 Hume, of Paisley \xe2\x80\x94 Emi- \ngration to Jersey, Delaware, and Virginia \xe2\x80\x94 Dutch Reformed Congregations \n\xe2\x80\x94 Society of Friends \xe2\x80\x94 Ranters \xe2\x80\x94 John Labadie \xe2\x80\x94 Delusion in NewEnglaud \xe2\x80\x94 \nEfforts made in Bdassaohnsettfl to send the Gospel to Virginia \xe2\x80\x94 Episcopal \nciiuivii\' \xe2\x80\x94 Baptist \xe2\x80\x94 Presbyterianisn] in Philadelphia \xe2\x80\x94 Francis Makcmio \xe2\x80\x94 \nOther Ministers \xe2\x80\x94 State of Morals \xe2\x80\x94 Religious Liberty in the Colonies Go-TS \n\nCHAPTER II. \n\nOpenii nth Century \xe2\x80\x94 1 1 igli-Churchism again in power \xe2\x80\x94 New Jersey \n\nunit""l to New York \xe2\x80\x94 Visootmi Cornbory appointed Governor \xe2\x80\x94 Conduct of \n\nCharon Part; In Pennsylvania, 1701-1703 \xe2\x80\x94 Colonel Quarry \xe2\x80\x94 George Keith \n\nr Robert Can, Governor \xe2\x80\x94 Fears of compulsory enforoement of Con- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0y \xe2\x80\x94 Society for Pn>|i:ipitiiig the Gospel in Foreign Parts incorporated \n\nin l T < \xe2\x80\xa2 i Btepi taken to hare a Bishop oonsearated- The Bishop of London \n\nand Arohbi Two Jacobites consecrated, and Benl \n\nBishop of London and the Baptism of rMmmntftrn Vesay, tho \n\nTrinity Church, New York \xe2\x80\x94 Town of Jamaica Settled \xe2\x80\x94 rohn Huh- \n\n\n\nb CONTENTS. \n\nPAQH \n\nbard and Lord Cornbury \xe2\x80\x94 Tyrannical proceedings in Jamaica \xe2\x80\x94 Keith urges \nCornbury to further harsh Steps \xe2\x80\x94 Samuel Bownas \xe2\x80\x94 Hempstead settled \xe2\x80\x94 \nFurther proceedings of Keith and other Episcopalians \xe2\x80\x94 Irregularities of the \nEpiscopal Clergy \xe2\x80\x94 Proceedings in Virginia \xe2\x80\x94 Several Ministers qualified to \npreach\xe2\x80\x94 First meeting of the Presbytery \xe2\x80\x94 Note 79-91 \n\nCHAPTER ni. \n\nThe Synod of Ulster before 1697\xe2\x80\x94 Records lost\xe2\x80\x94 Order adopted in 1G98\xe2\x80\x94 Sub- \nscription of Confession adopted, 1705 \xe2\x80\x94 Probable course of Philadelphia \nPresbytery \xe2\x80\x94 First meeting at Freehold \xe2\x80\x94 Second meeting at Philadelphia \xe2\x80\x94 \nThe Members \xe2\x80\x94 Letters from members to Scotland \xe2\x80\x94 Aid from London \xe2\x80\x94 Soori \nfailed \xe2\x80\x94 Happy intercourse of the Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 Doctrines and Order of the first \nmembers of the Presbytery \xe2\x80\x94 Formation of the Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Note \xe2\x80\x94 Fund esta- \nblished \xe2\x80\x94 Emigration from North of Ireland \xe2\x80\x94 Cotton Mather \xe2\x80\x94 Ministers \narrive from Ireland \xe2\x80\x94 The Toleration Act extended to Ireland in 1719 \xe2\x80\x94 Irish \nPresbyterians refuse the terms of the Toleration Act \xe2\x80\x94 Their firm proposed \nto the Government \xe2\x80\x94 Mr. Haliday, of Belfast, refuses subscription to the \nWestminster Confession \xe2\x80\x94 Troubles in the Irish Church on Creeds and Con- \nfessions \xe2\x80\x94 1721, Gillespie\'s proceedings in the Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Discussions in Synod \n\xe2\x80\x94 Further proceedings in the Irish Presbyterian Church \xe2\x80\x94 Their effects on \nthe Synod \xe2\x80\x94 The Antrim Presbytery \xe2\x80\x94 Synod of Philadelphia, 1727 \xe2\x80\x94 "A full \nSynod" every third year resolved on \xe2\x80\x94 Debates on Subscription \xe2\x80\x94 Dickinson\'s \n"Remarks" \xe2\x80\x94 Proceedings in Synod of 172\'.l \xe2\x80\x94 Division in Charleston Pres- \nbytery \xe2\x80\x94 The Adopting Act \xe2\x80\x94 Samuel Hemphill \xe2\x80\x94 Jealousy of the people for \nthe Standards \xe2\x80\x94 Difference between Gilbert Tennent and Cowell \xe2\x80\x94 Proceed- \nings adopted to save the Church from the intrusion of unsound or immoral \nministers from other Churches \xe2\x80\x94 Supplies from New England \xe2\x80\x94 From Eng- \nland \xe2\x80\x94 from Ireland \xe2\x80\x94 From Scotland \xe2\x80\x94 Presbyterianism in New England \xe2\x80\x94 \nEmigration from 1718 till 1740 mainly Presbyterian \xe2\x80\x94 Effect on the \nChurches 92-120 \n\nCHAPTER IV. \n\nIdentity of Discipline in the Irish, Scottish, and American Churches \xe2\x80\x94 Family \nTraining \xe2\x80\x94 Ministerial Labours \xe2\x80\x94 Presbyterial Oversight \xe2\x80\x94 Psalmody \xe2\x80\x94 Francis \nRous \xe2\x80\x94 Ministerial Support \xe2\x80\x94 Schools \xe2\x80\x94 Style of Preaching \xe2\x80\x94 Publication of \nSermons \xe2\x80\x94 The " Marrow Controversy" \xe2\x80\x94 Ministers come from the Mother- \nChurches \xe2\x80\x94 Gilbert Tennent educated in this country \xe2\x80\x94 Feeling of other \nbodies towards the Church \xe2\x80\x94 1729, The Synod condemns the prevalence of \na litigious spirit among Church-members \xe2\x80\x94 Order relative to Marriages \xe2\x80\x94 \nLimited Intercourse with the Church of Scotland \xe2\x80\x94 Correspondence with \nthe Scottish Assembly, and with the Society for Propagating Christian \nKnowledge 121-131 \n\nCHAPTER V. \n\nState of Society before the "Great Revival" \xe2\x80\x94 Intelligence of Revivals abroad \n\xe2\x80\x94 Effects on the Churches \xe2\x80\x94 Decline of Godliness lamented \xe2\x80\x94 Means adopted \n\n\n\nCONTENTS. 7 \n\nPAGE \n\nby the Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Gilbert Tennent \xe2\x80\x94 Synod adopts his Views \xe2\x80\x94 Philadelphia \nPresbytery complies with Recommendations \xe2\x80\x94 State of affairs in New Jersey \n\xe2\x80\x94 Synod of 1735 \xe2\x80\x94 Exercise of Authority \xe2\x80\x94 John Cross \xe2\x80\x94 Overture from Lewes \nPresbytery on Ministerial Preparation \xe2\x80\x94 Discussions caused thereby \xe2\x80\x94 The \nRevival in progress \xe2\x80\x94 Arrival of Whitefield \xe2\x80\x94 Reception in Philadelphia, \nand in New York \xe2\x80\x94 Franklin\'s Estimate of Whitefield \xe2\x80\x94 Sources of his Power \n\xe2\x80\x94 He goes southward \xe2\x80\x94 Returns from Georgia during the following April \xe2\x80\x94 \nFollowed by great multitudes \xe2\x80\x94 He visits New York again \xe2\x80\x94 Gilbert Tennent\' s \nSermon on an "Unconverted Ministry" \xe2\x80\x94 The Revival at Fagg\'s Manor \xe2\x80\x94 \nMeeting of Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Large attendance \xe2\x80\x94 Effects of Revival Sermons 132-148 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI. \n\nContinued Discussions in Synod respecting the Trials of Candidates for the \nMinistry \xe2\x80\x94 Present rule continued \xe2\x80\x94 Protest \xe2\x80\x94 An explanatory Overture \xe2\x80\x94 \nProceedings of Gilbert Tennent and Samuel Blair \xe2\x80\x94 Minute adopted \xe2\x80\x94 Mild \nConduct of the majority of Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Contrasted with the action of New \nHaven Association \xe2\x80\x94 Meeting of the Commission of Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Appearances of \nDivision \xe2\x80\x94 Efforts to induce Whitefield to visit Boston \xe2\x80\x94 His progress thither \nfrom Georgia \xe2\x80\x94 His Reception \xe2\x80\x94 " The Querists" \xe2\x80\x94 Gilbert Tennent goes to \nBoston \xe2\x80\x94 Whitefield again in Philadelphia \xe2\x80\x94 His progress southward \xe2\x80\x94 Dis- \n-ion in Donegal Presbytery \xe2\x80\x94 Complaints against Alexander \xe2\x80\x94 Cross, of \nBaskingridge \xe2\x80\x94 Divisions \xe2\x80\x94 William Tennent and the Philadelphia Presbytery \n\xe2\x80\x94 Synod meets, in May, 1741 \xe2\x80\x94 Continued Irritations \xe2\x80\x94 State of Religion in \nthe Synod and in New England contrasted \xe2\x80\x94 Preparations in Synod for \nbusiness \xe2\x80\x94 Protestation read by Robert Cross \xe2\x80\x94 Twelve Ministers and eight \nElders sign this Protest \xe2\x80\x94 Parties in the Synod \xe2\x80\x94 The Minority withdraw \xe2\x80\x94 \nEffects of the division, and the state of the Parties \xe2\x80\x94 Letter of Andrews \nto Pierson 149-181 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII. \n\nFynnd proceeds with business after withdrawal of the Brunswick Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 \nOverture adopted \xe2\x80\x94 Commission appointed \xe2\x80\x94 Meeting in Juno of the ex- \ncluded Brethren at Philadelphia \xe2\x80\x94 Blair appointed to prepare a paper on \n; in the Church, and Tennent an answer to the Protest \xe2\x80\x94 Applications \nfrom numerous places to the Brunswick Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 Qreaghead and the \nBolemn League and Covenant \xe2\x80\x94 Creaghead withdraws \xe2\x80\x94 Davenport in Con- \nit\xe2\x80\x94 Moravians in Pennsylvania \xe2\x80\x94Charge against Rowland \xe2\x80\x94 Anxieties \nof Gilbert Tennent \xe2\x80\x94 Dickinson In Boston \xe2\x80\x94 Gilbert Tennent preaches in \n. ik against the Moravians\xe2\x80\x94 Synod meets to Philadelphia in May, \n1742 \xe2\x80\x94 Conference with the Brunswick Brethren proposed an [nterloquitux \nBrethren bring in a Protest) irhioh Is sustained \n\xe2\x80\x94 The Brunswick Brethren withdraw\xe2\x80\x94The Nottingham Sermon again \xe2\x80\x94 \nLetter from Andre" In New England\xe2\x80\x94 Creaghead \n\nand a portion of hi* people adopt Cnmcroninn I\'rinciplei Correspondence \noi Whiteneld\xe2\x80\x94 Synod of I \xe2\x96\xa0\' m at to the Brunswick \n\n\n\nCONTENTS. \n\nPAOI \n\nParty \xe2\x80\x94 Other Proposals from the New York Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 Action of the Synod \n\xe2\x80\x94 Application from Virginia to Scotland for Preachers \xe2\x80\x94 Synod of 1744 \xe2\x80\x94 \nDavenport retracts his Errors \xe2\x80\x94 General Association of Connecticut advise \nagainst communion with Whitefield \xe2\x80\x94 Synod of 1745 \xe2\x80\x94 Committees ap- \npointed in order to adjustment of difficulties \xe2\x80\x94 Their efforts ineffectual \xe2\x80\x94 \nWhitefield again in Philadelphia. \xe2\x80\x94 Plan adopted in Synod for Union 182-217 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII. \n\nConcessions of the New-Side Brethren to those of New York \xe2\x80\x94 Philadelphia \nSynod meets, May 29, 1746 \xe2\x80\x94 Proposals for Intercourse \xe2\x80\x94 New York Synod \nmeets in the Spring \xe2\x80\x94 No action on the Proposals of the Philadelphia Synod \nthis Year \xe2\x80\x94 Nor in 1747 nor in 1748 \xe2\x80\x94 No action on Union in the Old Synod in \n1747 or 1748 \xe2\x80\x94 In 1749, proposals made in New York Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Submitted to \nthe Philadelphia Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Referred to the Commission and to the Presby- \nteries \xe2\x80\x94 Loss of Presbyterial Records \xe2\x80\x94 Action of the New York Commission \xe2\x80\x94 \nMeetings of the Synods of New York, May 16, 1750, and of the Philadelphia \nSynod, May 23, 1750 \xe2\x80\x94 Their respective Plans for Union \xe2\x80\x94 Consideration of \nthese Plans \xe2\x80\x94 Answer of the New York Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Inaction of the Philadelphia \nSynod on this subject in 1 753 \xe2\x80\x94 New York Synod of 1754 \xe2\x80\x94 Philadelphia Synod, \n1755 \xe2\x80\x94 Reply of New York Synod to the Philadelphia Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 Action \nthereon by the Philadelphia Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 How received by the Synod of New \nYork \xe2\x80\x94 Philadelphia Synod of 1756 \xe2\x80\x94 And of the New York Synod in the Fall \n\xe2\x80\x94 In their next meeting they agree to assemble in Philadelphia at the same \ntime with the Philadelphia Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Proposal accepted by the latter body \xe2\x80\x94 \nThey meet in the Second Presbyterian Church in May, 1758 218-239 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX. \n\nWhitefield in 1745\xe2\x80\x94 News of the Rebellion of \'45\xe2\x80\x94 Further labours of White- \nfield \xe2\x80\x94 The Great Valley of Virginia \xe2\x80\x94 Philadelphia Synod\'s care for Virginia \n\xe2\x80\x94 Extension of the Church through Western Virginia and Carolina \xe2\x80\x94 Irish \nCongregations in Pennsylvania weakened thereby \xe2\x80\x94 Creaghead applies to the \nAssociate Synod of Edinburgh \xe2\x80\x94 Arrival of Culbertson, Telfair, and Kinloch \n\xe2\x80\x94 Points of agreement between the Associate Presbytery and the Reformed \n\xe2\x80\x94 Old-Side Synod direct McDowell and Smith to prepare a Representation \nfor circulation, showing the most dangerous principles and practices of the \nSeceders \xe2\x80\x94 Gellatly\'s Reply to the New-Side Brethren \xe2\x80\x94 Answered by Samuel \nFinley and Robert Smith \xe2\x80\x94 Covenanters join with the Anti-Burghers and \nBurghers and form the Associate Synod in 1782 \xe2\x80\x94 Peace in the Churches in \nNew Jersey \xe2\x80\x94 Difference of increase in the Synods \xe2\x80\x94 Reasons for the dif- \nference \xe2\x80\x94 Effects of the Revival on Church Government \xe2\x80\x94 State of the \nChurches in New England \xe2\x80\x94 Synod of Philadelphia agrees to establish a \nSchool \xe2\x80\x94 Three Presbyteries meet to adopt a plan for establishing a School \n\xe2\x80\x94 Action resolved on, and Alison placed at the head of the Institution \xe2\x80\x94 \nCorrespondence with Professor Hutcheson, of Glasgow, respecting the \nSchool \xe2\x80\x94 Alison removes to Philadelphia \xe2\x80\x94 The School changed to Elk \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\n\nCONTEXTS. 9 \n\nPAGB \n\nAid afforded to the School under Samson Smith \xe2\x80\x94 Presbytery of New York \naim at founding a first-class Literary Institution \xe2\x80\x94 Council of New Jersey \ngrant charter for such an Institution \xe2\x80\x94 College commenced at Elizabethtowu \n\xe2\x80\x94 Efforts made to promote the welfare of the College in England \xe2\x80\x94 Attempt \nto send Pemberton to England on behalf of the College \xe2\x80\x94 Davies and Tennent \nBent \xe2\x80\x94 Their success in England, Scotland, and Ireland \xe2\x80\x94 A Divinity Pro- \nfessor appointed in Yale College \xe2\x80\x94 Revivals of Religion in Yale and in \nNassau Colleges \xe2\x80\x94 Death of President Burr, and of Finley \xe2\x80\x94 Articles con- \ntained in the "Plan of Union" of the Synods 240-270 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER X. \n\nImportance of the Document as finally adopted \xe2\x80\x94 Effects of the remodelling the \nPresbyteries \xe2\x80\x94 Relative influence of the two Synods \xe2\x80\x94 Differences, in 17G2, on \ntrial of Samson Smith \xe2\x80\x94 Other causes of difficulty \xe2\x80\x94 Proceedings in 1764, \n1766, and 17G6 \xe2\x80\x94 Action in the case of Donegal and Carlisle Presbyteries \xe2\x80\x94 \nPhiladelphia Presbytery test the sense of Article VI. of the Plan of Union, \nin the cases of Magaw and John Beard \xe2\x80\x94 Second Presbytery of Philadelphia \nfeed far one year \xe2\x80\x94 Case of Hugh Williamson \xe2\x80\x94 The Old-Side men offended \nwith the- deaisioD as offensive to the New England Churches \xe2\x80\x94 Dissent of the \n.1 Presbytery of Philadelphia \xe2\x80\x94 Reply of the Synod \xe2\x80\x94 In 1774, Tate \nrequests a review of the action of Synod \xe2\x80\x94 The Act rescinded, and a Substi- \ntute adopted \xe2\x80\x94 Important Minute of 1784, relative to Ministers and Licen- \ntiates from abroad \xe2\x80\x94 Desponding tone of the Episcopal Ministers \xe2\x80\x94 State of \naffairs in Episcopal Church \xe2\x80\x94 Interference of New-Side Brethren in settle- \nment of an Episcopal Minister \xe2\x80\x94 Proceedings connected therewith \xe2\x80\x94 Alison \nproposes, is 17\'w, to establish a Magazine \xe2\x80\x94 Correspondence with the Con- \nBociated Churches of Connecticut resolved on \xe2\x80\x94 A Convention meets at Eliza- \nbethtown \xe2\x80\x94 Election-strife in New York \xe2\x80\x94 Concluding Observations 271-294 \n\n\n\nBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH \n\nOF THE \n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. \n\n\n\nTiff, writer of this sketch was on familiar terms of intercourse with the \nlate Rev. Richard Webster. Born and brought up in the same city, \ncontemporaries in age, and students in the same theological seminary, a \nfriendship existed between us which ripened with the progress of time \nand was interrupted only by death. My friend, in his will, bequeathed to \n\xe2\x96\xa0M hie historical manuscripts: they are now published in the same condi- \ntion in which he left them. \n\nIn our last interview, I asked Mr. Webster when his history would be \nready for the press. He answered, with a smile, "Never; I am all the \ntime making corrections and additions." The truth is, that his work was \nleft in an imp rfeol state; but it will nevertheless be highly appreciated \nby the public as a valuable repository of Presbyterian history and bio- \ntnphy. \n\nAnother remark [may make here respecting his work is, that it only \nthe early portion of the history of our church. The \nperiod embraced In the presenl volume is a little more than half a century, \nand is limited to the reunion of the Synods of New STori and Philadel- \nphia, In 1758. The reader, lhrrcfi\xc2\xbbru, must imt iwpirct to tind a rompleta \n\nhistory of the Presbyterian ohuroh in the United States. The early poxt \n\n11 \n\n\n\n12 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\ntion, which is exceedingly rich in events and in illustrious men, possesses \na peculiar interest; and this is the portion comprehended within the \nscope of Mr. Webster\'s researches, now published. \n\nIt is my purpose to make a few remarks on the character of the la- \nmented author of this volume, chiefly in connection with his devotion to \nhistory ; and to incorporate into this sketch, on other points, the views \nand opinions of brethren who were more intimately acquainted with his \nministerial character and habits of life. \n\nFacHARD "Webster was born in the city of Albany, New York, on the \n14th of July, 1811, and was the youngest child of Charles R. Webster \nand Cynthia Steele. His father was a prominent bookseller in that city, \nand publisher of an influential newspaper. Richard\'s love of books and \nof newspaper-writing was undoubtedly nurtured by his father\'s occupation. \nHis mother belonged to one of the good old families in Albany whose \npraise is in the churches. The young child was trained according to the \nprinciples of the covenant of promise, and was brought up under the \nministry and ordinances of the First Presbyterian Church, which was at \nthat time under the pastoral care of the Rev. Dr. William Neill, and sub- \nsequently of the Rev. Dr. Henry R. Weed and the Rev. Dr. John N. \nCampbell, the latter of whom is still pastor of the church. Richard \nWebster early professed his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and, while \nthe "dew of youth" was upon him, united himself with the followers of \nthe Redeemer. The principal facts in his life will be presented in ex- \ntracts from the personal reminiscences and testimony of others. \n\nGod gave to Richard Webster a good, vigorous intellect. Even a \ncasual observer could not fail to see the flashes of intelligence which ema- \nnated from no ordinary mental constitution. In the true acceptation of the \nword he might be called a talented man, \xe2\x80\x94 sprightly, however, rather than \nlogical, and original and ready rather than very profound. Well culti- \nvated in early life, his mind expanded under the influence of the collegiate \nand theological course, and received great strength and discipline from the \nhigher studies incident to his profession. His intellectual powers were \nfar above the average of those of his ministerial brethren; and, although \nnot in the first rank, occupied by the privileged few alone, he was certainly \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 13 \n\nprominent among the many -who belong to the class of able, well-endowed, \nuseful men. \n\nWith a retentive and excellent memory, Mr. Webster treasured up what \nhe acquired. He was a hard student all his life. His professional edu- \ncation was regarded only as a means to an end. The preliminary course \nhad but prepared him to continue his literary and religious investigations \nwith the greater zeal and perseverance. Many, it is to be feared, err \nin placing too great reliance upon the discipline and knowledge early \nacquired, instead of aiming at a steady and progressive improvement by \nmeans of their preparatory resources. Mr. Webster, instead of relaxing \nfrom study, made it his daily work. He became more and more familiar \nwith the original languages of Scripture, and prosecuted his theological \nstudies to an extent quite unusual among the temptations of an active \nmissionary life. If not a very learned man, he was more so than many \nwho, owing to circumstances, have attained a higher reputation. \n\nMr. Webster possessed warm social feelings. The emotional part of \nhis nature was simple and earnest, and was a true balance to his insatiable \nlove of knowledge. When free from restraint and among friends, he \nloved to indulge his natural humour. Few persons, indeed, had more \nwit, more genuine playfulness, a more rich vein of native fun. This \nexuberant capacity for amusing others often manifested itself in pleasant \nand jocose remarks producing irresistible laughter. His nature was emi- \nnently social; but deafness interrupted, especially in the latter part of his \nlife, this genial flow of soul. In the family, his affectionate disposition \nshowed it.self in endearing and delightful manifestations. \n\nMr. Webster\'s piety was sincere and full of good fruits. With much \nof tliu emotional in bis nature, religion drew forth the homage of his soul. \nHis affections were set upon things above. He was a holy man. No one \nHold mistake the purposes of his life. His heart was in the ministry of \nreconciliation. Devotion to the Lord Jesus Christ was his reigning pas* \n\xe2\x96\xa0ion. Hi-; bad consecrated himself to his Master\'s service with a view to \npreach tin- gospel among the heathen; but, when Providence seemed to \ntlnow obstaoles in this direction of his choice, he joyfully went to a mis- \nsionary-field at home, doubtless under the guidance of bis heavenly Father, \nwho greatly blessed him in his labours. Living a sealons, self-denying, \nand aetive life, he aooomplisbed much fox the adyaaoement of the lie- \n\n\n\n14 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\ndeeraer\'s kingdom. A tender compassion for souls was the beauty and \npower of his ministerial character. A sweet, earnest love, that came from \nGod, enabled him to toil in the destitute coal-regions of Pennsylvania, \nedifying the saints and exhorting sinners to repentance. The Rev. A. B. \nCross, who preached his funeral sermon, fitly chose for his text, "Ye are \nwitnesses, and God also, how holily, and justly, and unblamably we be- \nhaved ourselves among you that believe ; as ye know how we exhorted, \nand comforted, and charged every one of you, as a father doth his chil- \ndren, that ye should walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his \nkingdom and glory :" 1 Thess. ii. 10-12. \n\nThe Rev. F. De W. Ward, of Geneseo, New York, was the class- \nmate and room-mate of Mr. Webster at Union College and at Princeton \nTheological Seminary. Mr. Ward was deeply afflicted by the intelligence \nof the death of his friend, and sent the following notice for publication \nin the Presbyterian Magazine. I thought it expedient, however, to \nreserve it for the present sketch : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Geneseo, New York. \n\n"lam a mourner. A friend, greatly respected for his richly-stored mind, \xe2\x80\x94 a \nChristian brother, dearly beloved for his pious heart, \xe2\x80\x94 has fallen before the great \ndestroyer, \'whose shafts none can repel.\' Rev. Richard Webster, despite the \nprayers and tears of a weeping family and a large circle of loving parishioners \nand clerical associates, has been called away from us. Our loss is his gain. He \nhas doubtless gone to join the company of \' the just made perfect.\' \n\n" He was my fellow-collegian at Schenectady, my room-mate for nearly three \nyears at Princeton, a most faithful and valued correspondent during my ten years\' \nmissionary-life in India, and a visitor than whom none was more welcome to my \nhome. I have known him long and well, and have loved him the more with every \nyear\'s extended acquaintance. \n\n" His conversion occurred at Albany, his native city, and was whole-hearted. \nWhen he united with the church, he laid upon the altar of his Saviour mental \ncapacities of rare excellence and power. His was a rapid mind, a poetic genius, a \nretentive memory, quick wit, great ability of application, indomitable perseverance, \nuntiring energy, and all devoted to Christ ! In naming these characteristics I do \nnot flatter. The grave is a place where truth alone is to be spoken. \n\n"I said that his conversion was deep, \xe2\x80\x94 \'whole-hearted.\' He has told me (not \nwith ostentation : that was far from him) with what pleasure he waited the hour \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 15 \n\nof noon, when his law-employer would go to dinner, leaving him alone to read his \nBible and enjoy his private devotions undisturbed. Nor could I detect, during our \nlong acquaintance, any diminution of this devotional temper, \xe2\x80\x94 any thing that would \nseem to say, \'Oh that I were as in days past!\' I have rarely met one who so \nloved his Bible. He had a \'Woodworth\' edition, and with loving intensity did \nhe daily read and study its pages. That dear book! \xe2\x80\x94 I think I see it still, as it \nused to lie upon his table, \xe2\x80\x94 plain in binding, plainer still in paper and type ; but \nit contained a stream to which he was ever resorting, to drink of its life-giving \nwaters. \n\n"He was in heart a foreign missionary. Ahmednuggar was the field he had \nchosen. Upon the eve of departure Providence said, 4 You must not go.\' The \nprohibition seemed strange, when the call was so loud from the grave of Gordon \nHall and his devoted associates, \xe2\x80\x94 \' Send the gospel to the land of Brahma.\' Our \nbrother grieved and wept over the disappointment. But his was not the dis- \nposition to say, \xe2\x80\xa2 If I cannot go where I would I will turn to another profession.\' \nWith the same self-devotion which would have sent him to India, he sought for a \ndestitute locality on Christian ground. He found it among the mountains of Penn- \nsylvania. The history of his life there, others\' pens will, I trust, give to the \nchurch and the world. Our mutual friend and classmate, Dr. D. X. Junkin, told \nme, in May last, that, \' notwithstanding the sad disadvantage of his deafness, not \na member of our class had accomplished more, if as much, for our church as Mr. \nWebster, \xe2\x80\x94 nearly a score of churches (if I am not misinformed) owing their exist- \nence to his agency.\' \n\n" My last letter from his loved pen contained a warm request to come and see \nhim. Would that I had done so! And shall all that he wrote find a grave with \nhis body? Those thousand pages of manuscript, upon almost every possible \nsubject : \xe2\x80\x94 his researches in church history, \xe2\x80\x94 his letters, full to overflowing of fact \nand thought and spiritual wit, \xe2\x80\x94 essays, orations, and poems, \xe2\x80\x94 his discourse upon \ntin- death of the missionary Barr, \xe2\x80\x94 his many, many sermons, exegetical, doc- \ntrinal, and hortatory: \xe2\x80\x94 is there no one to collect all these, read them, and compile \na volume of \'Remains\'? My judgment is greatly at fault if such a volume would \nnot be well received by the Christian public, while the proceeds might go towards \na family left in far from affluent circumstances. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 I urn a mourner. Two of my best-beloved friends and zealous co-workers in \nthe Christian field are in their graves: \xe2\x80\x94 Lawrence in India, Webster in America, \xe2\x80\x94 \nkindred in heart, and one now in heavenly worship. May my last end be like \ntheirs ! \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 A lieu, my much-loved brother! In the words with which you closed a letter \n\nto me years ago, \' Very pleasant hast thou been to mc; thy love to mo was peering \n\nth>- lore Of Women! 1 1!\'.- it mini: HO to live, that, iii the genend revelation, these \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 II see thee ngain in peace, tin -<\xe2\x96\xa0 ears shall bear, and tlii- heart shall again \n\ncommingle and coalesce with the heart of him for whom I mum a. W. \' \n\n\n\n16 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nIn order to exhibit more clearly some of the traits of the Rev. Richard \nWebster\'s character, I will lay before the reader a graphic letter of the \nRev. Benjamin J. Wallace, editor of the Presbyterian Quarterly \nReview, Philadelphia, who was a classmate of our departed brother in \nthe Theological Seminary at Princeton, New Jersey. \n\n\n\n" Presbyterian House, Philadelphia, 1 \nJuly 9, 1856. J \n\n"My Dear Sir: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" It is a melancholy pleasure to comply with your request, to endeavour to give \nthose not so well acquainted with our departed friend Webster as were you and \nmyself, some idea of his character as it impressed me. \n\n" He came to the Seminary at Princeton while I was a student there. I think I \nwas a year with him before I knew much of him. We were not in the same class, \nand he was not a person much given to seeking new friends. I cannot now \nrecall the occasion of our intimate acquaintance; but I remember well that it \nwas immediate, and a source of great pleasure to me while I continued at \nPrinceton. \n\n"I may as well state at once that the keynote of Richard Webster\'s character, \nas it was revealed to me in the confidence of youthful friendship, was one hardly \nsuspected by those who knew him in after years. He was a poet. I do not mean \nby this merely that he wrote verses, or only that he took great delight in the works \nof the great masters of the imagination. My meaning is, that he was a poet in the \nessence of his nature, and that he had all the special traits which go to make up \nthat strange and interesting character. No one can gain the right position from \nwhich to see him without keeping this in view. His mind was indeed so absorbed \nin later times by things which he considered much more important, that he did not \ngive much time to poetry as an art ; but it was impossible to root out from his \nnature its constituent elements. I remember, at this distance of time, but two \nof his poetic ideas, and I will mention them as specimens of his mood of early \nthought. \n\n"One occurs in a critique on Shakspeare. \'Artists have found,\' Webster fays, \n\xe2\x80\xa2 great difficulty in painting the different shades of white in nature ; and, in order to \nbring them out, they have generally contrasted them with dark colours. Writers \nhave met with a similar difficulty in delineating the female character. Their plan is \nto contrast it with impurity or ruggedness. Shakspeare alone, like Nature, shades \nwhiteness with white.\' Mrs. Jameson\'s \' Characteristics of Women\' might almost be \ntaken as a commentary on this admirable criticism. \n\n"The other thought \xe2\x80\x94 or fancy \xe2\x80\x94 occurs in a beautiful poem, the finest, I think, \nhe ever wrote \xe2\x80\x94 \' The Funeral of Shelley.\' The body of this exquisite, though, \nit must be regretfully added, infidel poet, was, it will be remembered, burned on \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 17 \n\nthe shores of the Gulf of Spezia, by Byron and others. The flame, Medwin de- \nclares, in blazing up, was coloured like the rainbow. Webster says, it \n\n\'Gracefully curl\'d up, \nAs if from offend flowers, that to the flame \nGave all their beauty.\' \n\n"You, my dear sir, who knew Webster so well, will be able, with this clue, better \nto understand his peculiar nature. You will better appreciate his acuteness, his \npeculiar kind of shrewdness, his playful fancy, his satirical turn, his reverence for \neverj* thing old, his passion for books, his power of living within himself and \n\n\' Chewing the cud of sweet and bitter fancy,\' \n\nand, in fine, that slight dash of eccentricity which you must have often noticed. \nThat he kept his poetic nature so much to himself is one of the marvels of his \npeculiar genius. \n\n"Richard Webster has never been appreciated. That he bore up so bravely, and, \non the whole, patiently and meekly, \xe2\x80\x94 that he laboured kindly on in an obscure place \nfor a lifetime, with no more restlessness than was betrayed in an occasional satiric \nhit at some of our famous men, \xe2\x80\x94 is a wonder, attributable partly to the nobleness of \nhis nature, and, we must devoutly add, partly to the grace of God, which was given \n|q him in no common measure. It was his misfortune, as men estimate things, to \nhave a body of most frail and nervous organization: he reminded one of Charles \nUunb, only that he was sharper, and thus not so genial. He was very deaf, even \nat the Seminary; and it grew upon him steadily with increasing years. He was \nvery near-sighted, and he grew prematurely old. A man who always appeared to \nme young, I found spoken of as old, \xe2\x80\x94 almost (partly from his connection with ancient \n! documents) as an antique. These defects, especially his deafness, inter- \nfsvad materially with his power as a public speaker. He heard none of the ordi- \nnary Bonndfl of nature in the fields or woods ; he heard nothing of the mixed sounds \nof a great city : he heard nothing, he once wrote to me, but \' the human voice \nmore loudly than usual.\' \n\n"This comparative isolation from society, and physical unfitness for much of the \n- of life, drove him to history. Passionately devoted to the Presbyterian \nchurch, holding our Faith and ( trder to bo the very primitive form nnd mould of \ntruth, he COUld conceive of nothing more noble and venerable than Cal- \nvinism and Preebyterianism. Around the obnrab ho poured the wealth of \nerenoe, hit Imagination, and his affection; and by now much he was r< - \nfrom being a great aotor In the present, h" determined to chronicle what \ntin the past It was imp one so aotive, so versatile, so eegeis \n\nIveaudnd to one small spot: it lav in hisnsftune to expand itsrlf; \nand, if he oould nol be an i tatesman, hi- instinoni led him next to be \n\n:. historian. Fet, after all, foi ire would notation the partiality of \n\n\n\n18 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nfriendship, even over bis grave, to lead us from the strict truth, \xe2\x80\x94 as he would \nalways aud under all circumstances have been rather artist than statesman, so he \nhad not so much the large comprehensiveness and far-seeing sagacity of the true \nhistorian, as the keen observation, the acute insight, the delight in an event, the \nhomelike feeling, the fondness for anecdote and incident, which make the bio- \ngrapher. And it is no mean thing to be known to after-times, for how long we may \nnot yet say, as the biographer of the Presbyterian church in America. \n\n" Of Mr. Webster\'s course as a pastor, as a member of church courts, and in the \nvaried relations of the ministry, others can speak better than myself. We were \nseparated, during his ministry, by distance, and by our position in different \nbranches of our church, and differed materially as to some important church ques- \ntions. But I can well believe all that I have heard of his excellence in these rela- \ntions. I think, however, that I can appreciate, better than those who knew him \nlater in life, the difficulties which he overcame in himself before he settled quietly \ndown among the mountain-valleys, as a missionary and pastor to a scattered, and \nin a great degree rude, population, limiting his ambition to the founding of a pres- \nbytery, of which the younger ministers called him the father. His fervid, discur- \nsive, and somewhat romantic nature was more characteristically shown in his con- \nsecrating himself to the missionary work in India, whither he would have gone bad \nnot circumstances entirely beyond his control prevented him. It was, perhaps, \nthe tenderness of his heavenly Father which shielded him from trials which he \nmight not have been able to bear, accepting the sincere and earnest intent for the \naccomplished deed. \n\n\xc2\xab\xc2\xab What was especially admirable in Webster was the practical good sense with \nwhich he accepted his narrow conditions, feeling that God had fixed his lot, and \naddressing himself with constant and patient industry to every field of exertion \nwhich lay within his reach. There is something of the true sublime in this self- \nabnegation, the laying aside of vain imaginings and the dissolving of day- \ndream, to accomplish the plain, practical work given us to do. No one can be \nsure what he is fit for, until the providence of God confirm his aspirations ; but one \nthing we may all do : \xe2\x80\x94 we may heartily and cheerfully address ourselves to what- \never work is actually allotted to us, be it great or small. Webster exem- \nplified this greatness. \xe2\x80\xa2 He that ruleth his spirit is greater than he that taketh \na city.\' \n\n" His death-scene was very interesting. You will permit me to refer to it, as \nillustrative of his inner or more hidden character. I think it is Goethe who \nremarks that the poet is one who carries all through life the fresh feelings of \nchildhood. There belongs to such intensely vital organisms as Webster\'s \xe2\x80\x94 where \nthere is no robustness, but vivid nervous energy \xe2\x80\x94 a kind of elastic tenacity of life, \nsuch as we see in children, who rebound from attacks of disease that lay strong \nmen low. Accordingly, he could not believe that he was dying. Like all of us, \nhe had some idea about death ; but it was not realized. \' Doctor,\' he said, \' yon \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 19 \n\nmust be mistaken. I cannot be dying. I feel naturally; I am in full possession \nof all my powers. I feel very much as I have always felt.\' On being assured \nthat his hours were numbered, he said, \'You must know best; but I never con- \nceived of such a death.\' There was, it will be observed, no thought of fear, \xe2\x80\x94 his \npreparation for death having been long since made, \xe2\x80\x94 but, mingling with his calm \nfaith and trust, and with every other feeling suitable for a Christian\'s death-bed, \nthere was a palpable curiosity, a wonder at death, a gazing at this king of ter- \nrors, as though he were overrated, \xe2\x80\x94 a fresh, keen sensation, in view of this great \ncrisis through which he was now to pass. \'It cannot be death,\' he said; \'if it be, \nit is such a death as I never dreamed of.\' It is not too much to believe that the \nSaviour, whom he had, amid great disappointment and difficulty, so unfalteringly \nand uncomplainingly served, kept all evil influences from that death-bed, gave him \nto part from life sweetly and pleasantly, and opened for him so gently the portals \nof heaven, as that the poet-Christian felt, in its loveliness, something so natural, \nthat he said, \' I never dreamed of such a heaven. It is most glorious ; but, what \nis wonderful, it is not strange. It is only a brighter home!\' \n\n"You have, my dear sir, so repeatedly assured me that I might write just what \nI pleased of our mutual friend, that I have perhaps indulged my feelings too \nmuch. The public may not be interested in my view of Richard Webster. I can \nonly say that I can think of him no otherwise; and that, however imperfectly I \nhave answered your expectation, I have done what I could. \n\n"Very truly and respectfully yours, \n\n" Benjamin J. Wallace. \n\n" The Rev. C. Van Rensselaer, D.D." \n\nHaving given the testimony of classmates at the college and semi- \nnary, who had abundant opportunities of discovering character, as well as \ntacf in delineating it, I next present to the reader the testimony of a \nparishioner. The Rev. JAMES Scott, of Holmcsburg, Pennsylvania, \nwho was formerly a teacher at Mauch Chunk, attended on Mr. Webster\'s \nministry, and partook of the hospitalities of the parsonage. Mr. Scott \nmites as follows: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" IIoLMEsnuRO, Pa., August, I80G. \nin: \xe2\x80\x94 \n" DlAB Sin: \xe2\x80\x94 It affords mc much pleasure to learn that you are engaged in the \npublication of tin; late Bev. 11. Winter\'s work on the History <>f the Presbyterian \n\nchurch in this oonntry; and, in oompllanoe with yonr req t, it gives great \n\n1 -, .in- disposal Hi" following reminiscences of one whom I \n\n(Vmml, lmnimri\'d n? a mini -tcr, ami loved ns a father. \n"About eight years ago, it was, in the providence of God, my lot to bfl cm- \n\n\n\n20 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nployed as teacher in the grammar-school at Mauch Chunk. I was then a \nstranger in this land ; and it requires the heart of a stranger to realize the full \n\xe2\x96\xa0weight and preciousness of true Christian friendship. It was then and there that \nI was first made truly sensible of the reality of those bonds which unite the many \nmembers of the one mystical body. The Rev. Mr. Webster quickly sought me out, \nand extended to me a most cordial welcome. From that hour till the day I left for \nPrinceton I found in his house a most grateful asylum. His friendship towards \nme increased day by day. His excellent library was at my service at all times, \nand his counsel was always good and seasonable. He threw around me a chain \nof such delightful circumstances as I never again expect to find in this world of \nchange and turmoil. I need not say how fraught with instruction was the con- \nversation of such a man. His learning was varied and extensive. He read much, \nand seemed to have remembered all he read. His memory for names of persons \nand places was proverbial. \n\n"His Sabbath services were always interesting and instructive. The matter \nwas excellent, \xe2\x80\x94 plain, doctrinal, practical, and experimental truths, often min- \ngled with some appropriate illustrations, drawn from his favourite study, \xe2\x80\x94 history. \nAs he was long deprived of the sense of hearing, it would be preposterous to judge \nof his pulpit performances by elocutional standards. \n\n" He was earnest in his delivery, being sometimes moved even to tears. \n\n" Again and again have I heard him, in a strain of extreme tenderness, expostu- \nlating with sinners, beseeching them, by the mercies of God, to turn from their \nevil ways and live. \n\n" The low state of religion that prevailed for many years in Mauch Chunk \ngreatly grieved him. During this period, the plaintive tone of the weeping prophet \noften characterized his pulpit services. Especially on one occasion I recollect \nhow deeply he was affected. His heart seemed overwhelmed within him. I went, \nin company with a mutual friend of his and mine, with a view of administering \nsome word of comfort. He freely unbosomed to us his whole soul ; and truly his \nfeelings were such as could arise from nothing less than the most vivid apprehen- \nsion of spiritual things, the value of the soul, and the worth of the Saviour. \n\n" But we can gain a clearer insight into the heart of the man from the following \nselections out of a correspendence stretching over the whole period of my semi- \nnary life, and up to my settlement in my present field. \n\n"lam yours, fraternally, \n\n"James Scott." \n\nThe following are extracts from the letters of Mr. "Webster referred \nto in Mr. Scott\'s communication. These specimens of Christian cor- \nrespondence with a young friend are highly creditable to head and \nheart : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 21 \n\n" The death of the excellent Dr. Miller brought to my mind sensibly the many \nand great obligations I owe to him. When I was about to leave the seminary he \nprayed with me, and parted with me most affectionately. I can never be thankful \nenough to God for his mercy to our beloved church iu sparing him, through thirty- \neix years, to aid so efficiently in training her sons for the ministry. His venerated \nand beloved colleague may yet live to see many of us go before him to the dust. \nIn our presbytery, every minister but Mr. Hunt was trained at Princeton." \n\n" We have just closed an interesting series of meetings at Nesquehoning. The \nattendance was large, regular, and solemn: ten persons confessed themselves \ndeeply concerned about their souls. It was very encouraging." \n\n" Let nothing hinder you from taking a full course at the seminary. Who is \nsufficient for these things, even with the best training ? Our church is suffering \nwith half-educated men. \' Workmen that need not to be ashamed\' are needed, \ngreatly needed, in this day of lamentable and amazing indifference to the \nmeans of grace. In this place, swarming with people, I do not think more than \nfifty male heads of families attend any place of worship regularly ; while of the \nyounger men a larger proportion attend, but with what shocking carelessness ! \nWith sorrow I say it, mine is not a rare case. Sin reigns triumphantly, unto death \nof the soul as well as of the body. Seeing these things are so, how lamentable \nthat our spirit is not stirred within us, as was Paul\'s at Athens ! There, the city \nwas wholly given to idolatry ; here, the whole world lieth in wickedness, worship- \nping and serving the creature rather than the Creator." \n\n"Now, my dear brother, God has led you in this land of strangers graciously, \nand permitted you to preach the gospel. Value highly the privilege, and mfegnify \nthe grace of God in counting you worthy to be put in trust with the ministry. I \nhuvc great confidence in your faithfulness as a student, and in your sincerity as a \nfollower of Jesus. Desire much to be enabled to do great things for him: espe- \ncially cultivate the spirit of a compassionate, suffering Saviour, that you may con- \ndescend to men of low estate, and weep with them that weep. Much is to be done \n- from house to boose; but it cannot be done without the preparation of \nheart which is from the Lord." \n\n" Hive you made any arrangements yet as to your future field of labour? I \n\ntru-t that you will remember the Scripture rale of waiting for Che Lord and asking \ncounsel of him. Be sets 1 1 1 \xc2\xab \xe2\x96\xa0 bounds of our habitations, and opens tin- doors of \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 -. Oh, may he graoion Ij direot you, and abundantly replenish you with \ntin\' spirit of piety, with all saving knowledge, and irlth a large and bl I e\xc2\xbb \n\ne of the fulness of Christ I There arc trials and perplexities In the easv* \n\n\n\n22 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\ncise of the ministry unexpected and wonderful. Paul prayed to be delivered from \nunreasonable and absurd men : we need the like deliverance, but, to escape them, \nwe must needs go out of the world. Hence, there is nothing of such unspeakable \nimportance and infinite comfort as a childlike trust in God and a sincere and \nhearty endeavour to know and to do God\'s will. How comfortable to be able to \nsay, \'Lord, all my desire is before thee.\' \'I will hear what God the Lord will \nspeak, for he will speak peace to his people.\' \xe2\x80\xa2 My times are in thy hand.\' \n\n"You will feel the lack of Christian fellowship, \xe2\x80\x94 no one to understand your \nmotives, to enter into your designs, to help you by example or counsel, sympathy \nor co-operation. How often will you be forced to realize, \'AH seek their own ;\' \nand, judging you by themselves, they will attribute all that you do to selfish ends, \nto low-minded cunning. \n\n"You will grieve to find them that seemed to be pillars savouring only the \nthings that be of men, and caring only for the things which perish in the using. \nEven if you do not bitterly cry out, \' My soul is among lions,\' you may suffer from \nbeing \'in a dry land where no water is.\' \n\n"Temptations will arise, \xe2\x80\x94 \'musing, the fire burns; then spoke I with my \ntongue,\' \xe2\x80\x94 as one weary of life, weary of the service of God :\xe2\x80\x94 temptations to \nsloth, to discouragement, to self-exaltation, unwisely comparing yourself with \nothers. These temptations will harden the heart and hinder prayer. \n\n"Above all things, be mindful that, as Christ was in this world, so are you in \nthis world. He said, \' Yet I am not alone; he that sent me is with me.\' May this \nbe your comfort too ! \n\n" Let me hear from you, especially as to what has presented as a future field of \nlabour. \n\n"I wish you would, at some convenient time, write a letter to McKillip on the \nsubject of his duty to his soul. His direction is Sacramento, California." \n\n"You probably heard that, at White Haven, the fault in your public services is \nsaid to be that your prayers and sermons are too long. Remember they have \nbeen used to different ministrations, \xe2\x80\x94 short in length, not heavily laden with \ninstruction, and off-hand in manner. You have been used to the ways of a well- \ntrained people, who waited for instruction, and who listened that they might re- \nmember. But too many listen now only to be interested for the moment, and \nnever remember, much less consider, except it be some striking saying or out- \nlandish expression. \' Jesus spake unto them as they were able to bear it.\' He \nused similitudes, \' and without a parable spake he not unto them.\' The whole \nkingdom of nature furnishes analogies to aid us in understanding the mysteries \nof the kingdom of grace. So does the providence of God in the history of the \npast and the events of to-day. What use did Jesus make of the news that Pilate \nhad cruelly murdered the Galileans at the altar? The tower of Siloam had \n\n\n\nEEV. RICHARD WEBSTER. Xd \n\nprobably fallen years before; yet he turns the remembrance of it to account. \nWhat will suit a mind like yours, accustomed to the catechisms and the valuable \nteachings of an aged pastor, will repulse a mind untutored as a wild ass\'s colt. \nThe Greenlander needs much pains to be taken with him before he can be satisfied \nwith venison or turkey: to him, train-oil is at once a necessity and a luxury. \nM;iny a deceived heart feeds on ashes, of choice, and can scarcely stomach any \nthing else. We are sent as physicians to heal a dying world. They can neither \nrelish nor profit by the strong meat, save in small quantities. Hence the great \ndifficulty of dividing aright the word of God, and of giving to each man a portion \nin due season." \n\n" I am persuaded that where there is extreme diffidence, or, as in the case of our \n\nfriend at , no fluency, it is decidedly a duty to write out the whole sermon \n\nin a fair, large hand, to read it over, so as to be entirely familiar with it, and then \nnee it in the pulpit. This was the method of Dr. Green. Mr. Glen uses the same \nmethod, and his style of preaching is generally and greatly admired. It is true, \nhe lii- complete self-possession, \xe2\x80\x94 not the slightest embarrassment; and it is our \nduty to cultivate boldness as ambassadors of God. Humility towards God, and \n- in his service, are related as cause and effect. There is a criminal \ntimidity growing from want of faith, forgetting that we speak \'as though God did \nbeseech men by us.\' \n\n"A missionary who has two or three preaching-places may use the same \nsermon : and, if he does this with a diligent attempt to improve, his success will \nequal his desires. Dr. Franklin says, \'Whitefield never appeared to such advan- \ntage as when preaching a sermon the fortieth time.\' Our great danger is, to let \nother things occupy us, ami make our preaching only an accessory, not the main \n-.1 rely, dear brother, on your unfeigned piety to keep you, in a great \nmeasure, from this error." \n\n\n\nRev. Dr. I \'avid X. Junkin, now of Hollidaysburg, Pennsyl- \nvani:i, was formerly settled at Greenwich, New Jersey, and was well ac- \nquainted with i. ur departed brother. The intimacy was formed at the \nTheological Seminary, and was nurtured by frequent intercourse as mem- \nbers of the Bame synod. They were friends by social and ecclesiastical \n\xe2\x96\xa0 Dr. Junkin thus refers to Mr. Webster in a communication whioh \n\nis copied from "\'/\'/<< Presbyterian:" \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Hi a College in 1829, and al Princeton Theological Bemfc \n\nnary la in the latter place thai the writer made hi- acquaintance In \n\n.1 v be was the devout and conscientious student) the cheerful \n\n\n\n24 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\ncompanion, the consistent Christian. After completing his seminary course in \n1834, he offered himself, and was accepted, as a foreign missionary by the Ameri- \ncan Board. But his increasing deafness threatening to make the acquisition of \nspoken languages difficult, and other causes having delayed his departure, he was \ndetained from the foreign field ; and, with the promptness and zeal which ever \ncharacterized him, he sought one of equal or greater toil and self-denial in his own \ncountry. \n\n"In the autumn of 1835, he came to South Easton, Pennsylvania, at the \ninstance, it is believed, of the Hon. J. M. Porter, and for a short time laboured in \nthat place ; but, the field not proving as encouraging as was hoped, he shortly after- \nwards entered the important field in which he wore out his valuable life and in \nwhich he was the instrument of such extensive good. \n\n" On Sabbath, the 1st of November, 1835, the writer, aided by Ruling Elder \nEnoch Green, of Easton, (lately gone to his rest,) organized the Presbyterian \nchurch of Mauch Chunk, with twenty-four members. On the 4th of the following \nmonth, accompanied by Brother Webster, he again repaired to Mauch Chunk, \npreached, and introduced the youthful pastor to the little flock that had so lately \nbeen gathered in those mountain-gorges. On the next evening, (Saturday,) De- \ncember 5, Mr. Webster preached his first sermon in the field of his life-labours ; \nand the next day (Sabbath) the two classmates administered the first Lord\'s \nSupper that was spread in that congregation. \n\n" From that time to the hour \xe2\x80\x94 indeed, to the moment \xe2\x80\x94 of his death, he continued \nto preach Christ crucified to that people, and at many other points in the Pennsyl- \nvania coal-region. He was emphatically the apostle of the coal-fields. He threw \nhis earnest heart, his clear, well-furnished mind, his untiring energies, and his \nworldly substance, into the work of evangelizing the population of the mining \nregion and towns. With a slender and feeble frame, and amid impediments and \ndifficulties that would have deterred most men, he hoped on and toiled on, until, \nwith God\'s blessing, his own immediate flock was enlarged and became an im- \nportant and efficient church, and churches were organized and houses of worship \nreared in all that region. He was indefatigable in preaching, travelling, visiting, \ncorresponding, and introducing and sustaining missionaries. Whilst his own \nstipend was very small, he relinquished his allowance from the Board of Missions, \nin order that it might be given to other labourers in his favourite mountain-field. \nOften, like his Master, did he travel on foot to great distances, over steep and \nrugged roads, to carry the gospel to the destitute, and this without hope of earthly \nreward. \n\n" In the spring of 1838, he was married to Miss Elizabeth Cross, of Baltimore, \nand, in a home of more than usual affection and felicity, found rest amid his toils, \nand solace in his trials. A fonder, a happier, or a wiser husband and father the \nwriter has rarely known. \n\n\'- Arduous and widely extended as were our brother\'s professional labours, he \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 25 \n\nfound time for literary effort and historical research; and the columns of the \nPresbyterian, the New York Observer, the Watchman of Vie South, and other \njournals, were enriched by his scholarly and sprightly contributions. The \nreaders of these journals will not soon forget \'K. H.,\' the finals of his place of \nresidence. \n\n" No one had collected such rich and extensive materials for a history of Ameri- \ncan Presbyterianisin ; and, indeed, some of the histories already published are \nindebted to his researches and his liberality in imparting information. It is hoped \nthat this portion of his life-labour is in such a shape that it will not be lost to the \nchurch. \n\n" Though he seldom published, he not unfrequently wrote in poetry, and some \nof his unpublished verses are worthy a place among the best productions of the \nAmerican muse. \n\n"Although deprived of the facility for social intercourse which ready hearing \naffords, Mr. Webster was nevertheless a favourite in the social circle. He was a \ncheerful Christian; and his extensive reading, his unfailing memory, his exhaust- \nless fund of anecdote, his sparkling wit, his lively but always barbless repartee, all \nchastened by the most considerate Christian propriety, gave a charm to his con- \nversation that made it ever coveted. \n\n" But it was as a Christian and a minister that he made his strongest mark upon \nhis generation and will be most fondly remembered by his brethren and his sor- \nrowing church. Solemn, earnest, ready, sound, scriptural, illustrative, terse, and \ncompact in style, and full of holy unction, his sermons were always impressive, \nand were largely blessed. In pastoral duties he was tender and skilful, and in ex- \nample such as became the Christian pastor. His death-bed sermons were the most \nimpressive of his life. To his dear ones, to his mourning people, and to all that \napproached him, ho most effectively commended, in dying, that gospel he had \n1 when living. His last two pulpit discourses \xe2\x80\x94 by a coincidence that \nstartled at the time and now seems almost prophetic \xe2\x80\x94 were from the texts, \'The \ncup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?\' and, \'Enoch walked \nwith God, and he was not: for Ood took him.\' He had gone from the bed to the \npulpit, and from the pulpit to the bed, fnun which he never rose. \n\n"At the time he was seised with hil 1 -\xe2\x80\xa2 i - 1 illness he was looking forward with \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0 the < ipletion of the aew and elegant ohureh-edinoe, the Beoond built \n\ndaring his pastorate; and one of his lasi efforts at Letter-writing was an Invitation \nto Qu writer to preach at th<\' dedication when it Bhotdd be finished. Bui he was \nnot permitted, In the body, to witness the oonsnminatlon so dear t<> his heart. But \nwill he doI witness it from the bulwark* of the upper temple\'.\' \n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 I \xc2\xbbi \xe2\x96\xa0 l your spaee permil \xe2\x96\xa0 detailed description of the olosing soenee of \'his great \ni man\'s life, it ooold nol but commend the blessed gospel to your readerii \n\n|nd V aeh them how tO die. One of the most unselfish men the writer ever knew, \n\n\n\n26 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OP THE \n\nthis characteristic was apparent to the close. With a countenance radiant with the \njoy of salvation, and borne in triumph upon the full tide of the promises, his \nthoughts, his counsels, and his prayers were employed for the good of others, and \nhe seemed scarcely to think of himself. The tender husband and father seemed to \nwish to live for his dear ones, and the devoted pastor longed to labour on for his \nMaster ; but every such wish was qualified with the language, \' The cup that my \nFather giveth me, shall I not drink it?\' \' Not my will, but thine, be done.\' With \nhis children standing, at his request, where his eye could rest upon them to the \nlast, he prayed for them, their mother, and the church, until, with \'Into thy \nhands I commit my spirit,\' he peacefully fell asleep in Jesus. \n"Many, as they tearfully retired from that chamber, so \n\n\' Privileged beyond the common walk \nOf virtuous life, quite on the verge of heaven,\' \n\neaid that now they better understood the prayer, \' Let me die the death of the \nrighteous, and let my last end be like his.\' " \n\nThe following letter from one of his co-labourers, now at the South, \nwill be read with much interest : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Augusta, Ga., September 2, 1856. \n"Rev. C. Van Rensselaer: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Dear Sir : \xe2\x80\x94 Permit me to say a few words respecting our deceased brother, \nthe late Rev. Richard Webster, of Mauch Chunk. For several years I laboured, \nas a licentiate of Luzerne Presbytery, in the section of country embracing White- \nHaven, Beaver Meadow, and Hazleton, and, during that time, had much friendly \nintercourse with Mr. Webster, and learned to love him as a brother and revere \nhim as a father. He frequently administered the sacraments for me and aided me \nin pastoral visitation ; and I do most thankfully acknowledge my deep indebtedness \nto his example, counsel, and Christian sympathies. In the coal-mining region, \ncomprising Carbon and Schuylkill counties and the lower portion of Luzerne, ho \nwas well known and much beloved and revered as a father in the gospel ; and it is \nto his long, self-denying labours and watchful oversight that the churches of that \nregion owe very much of what they are at present. I believe that the uniform im- \npression of Mr. Webster in the minds of the people is that of a most sincere, self- \ndenying, and devoted servant of Christ, as tender and sympathizing a friend in \n6orrow as ever lived, and, withal, a man of singular acuteness of mind and depth \nof character. I never knew a man with heart so womanly in tenderness, and so \nquick to enter into sympathy and feel with the woes of others. It was one of his \nmost prominent and lovely traits, and most of all endeared him to those among \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 27 \n\nwhom he laboured as a pastor and evangelist. His words were always full of com- \nfort to the bereaved and afflicted. Although seemingly frail in body and of little \nphysical strength, he yet possessed great hardihood, and was in the habit of walk- \ning distances of miles, in all weather, to fulfil his frequent missionary engage- \nments. Wherever he went, on these errands of love, preaching formed but a small \npart of his work: * in season and out of season,\' from house to house, he \nlaboured, \xe2\x80\x94 instructing, warning, and tenderly admonishing and beseeching, with \nall meekness, patience, and fidelity. His pastoral visits were very edifying. On \naccount of defective hearing, the burden of conversation fell upon himself; but he \npossessed a rare facility in discerning, or learning in some way, the true character \nand circumstances of persons and families, and in adapting his discourse to them. \nI have sometimes seen him plead with tears ; and his manner, tone of voice, and \nexpression of countenance, at such times, were very affecting. Unfeigned \nhumility, springing from a deep, abiding 6ense of his unworthiness and uuprofit- \n38, was, as all who knew him intimately will testify, one of the most marked \nand beautiful features of our departed brother\'s character. Although gifted with \na rare fund of humour and pleasantry, which he freely disbursed among others, \nthe habitual seriousness and even sorrowfulness of his countenance clearly \nBhadowed the depth and intensity of his heart-struggles and experiences. More \nthan once, in confidential Christian interchanges with him, he would speak with \ntears of the unfruitfulness of his ministry and the unprofitableness of his \nlife. \n\n"Mr. Webster\'s preaching \xe2\x80\x94 a3 all know who have heard him \xe2\x80\x94 was singularly \nearnest, affectionate, and evangelical. \n\n"Yours, in the gospel, \n\n"John F. Baker." \n\nThe Rev. ANDREW B. Cross, the brother-in-law and intimate friend \nof Mr. Webster, was called upon, in providence, to preach his funeral \nOOUrse has been printed in pamphlet form \xe2\x80\xa2 \nami, fa . d room, the whole of it would have been published \n\n.\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2.\xe2\x80\xa2 to the Bistoxy. The delineations of character are re- \ntnarkably well drawn, and are nol overdrawn. The account of the last \nbeloved brother in the Lord is particularly interesting and \nedifying. The reader will tind the whole worthy of his attentive pe- \nrusal : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\ni bare of vim- tats pastor oommenoed twenty-four year \nther npon <.iir theological studies, and bai continued until liis \ndeath, in an Intimacy and familiarity whioh rarely happen. Durfa \xe2\x96\xa0 all this period \n\n\n\n28 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nnothing ever interrupted our friendship. To his life I could bear witness. But I \nam forbidden by his dying direction; and you know, from his humble, modest, diffi- \ndent life, he would not allow me to say any thing which might appear flattery con- \ncerning him. If he were present he would say, Preach plainly and practically to \nthe people. \n\n"What can be more practical than to call upon you to bear witness to his ministry? \n\xe2\x80\x94 to call up to your recollection his life, his labours, his prayers among you and for \nyou, and to remind you that you are witnesses to these ? Not only you who were \nthe members of his church, but the people of this town, of the country arouud, the \nmany congregations to which he so often and 60 earnestly preached the gospel, \xe2\x80\x94 ye \nall are witnesses. \n\n"He strove to preach the gospel to every one of you. Instant in season and out \nof season, he warned, exhorted, charged, and comforted you in the spirit and with \nthe love of a father. On his death-bed he expressed his anxiety to live to a certain \nhour, that he might see a man who had neglected attending the sanctuary, and to \nbeg him to attend, that, if any thing in him had hindered, that cause would now be \nremoved. God spared him to see him, and from his dying lips did speak to him. \nCould any thing but the sincerest love for the soul of a man move him at such an \nhour ? And yet this was only an exhibition of the tender and faithful spirit which, \nduring his ministry, sought thus to deal faithfully with the souls of his flock, and \nany whom the providence of God placed in his way. \n\n"While he sought to preach the gospel to every one of you, he did not cease to \nremember every one of you in his prayers before God. I doubt if there be an indi- \nvidual among all his people, or among all his friends, whose particular case, with \nall its attendant difficulties, he has not made the subject of special prayer to God. \nAre there not among you, parents, many parents who do not pray for yourselves \nand your children, on whose behalf he has often wrestled with God, and who have \nbeen a burden on his heart so great that he has been ready to sink under it? (Read \nhis sermon, \'A Word to Fathers,\' preached in this church January 8, 1854.) He \nis here no more to preach or to pray. But if you perish, and if your children go \ndown to hell, it will be against his warnings, entreaties, and prayers. I mention \nhis prayers for you because they were remarkable for their earnestness, particu- \nlarity, and tenderness. He seemed to make every case his own for which he was \npraying. In the house of mourning, amid the afflicted and bereaved, he will not \nsoon be forgotten. His tender and sympathizing heart led him to seek out such, to \nminister to them the consolation of the gospel. \n\n"The house of mourning and affliction were never passed when it was in his power \nto visit them. This was not confined to his own congregation, or this town, or the \nchurches of your vicinity. His letters of condolence went far and wide, whenever \nthe hand of God was laid upon one that he knew. The tenderness of his heart \ntowards the afflicted I need not call up to you who have for many years known and \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 29 \n\nfelt it. He came as the minister of Jesus, and brought you the consolation of the \ngospel, \xe2\x80\x94 the true balm of healing and consolation. \n\n"You had his whole ministerial life. Ye are witnesses. God also made him a wit- \nness among you, and his testimony is on record in the high court of our King. \nSoon you will meet him to hear his testimony. I call upon you to-day to remember \nand profit by it. Take heed to it. His voice, which so often warned and testified, \nis now silent. Lay up his instructions in your memories ; meditate upon them. \nMay God quicken your consciences to apply them ! Walk with God, and you shall \nmeet him with joy before your Father in heaven. \n\n" Rev. Richard Webster was born at Albany, New York, July 14, 1811 ; was the \nyoungest child of Charles R. Webster and Cynthia Steele, of that place ; died at \nMauch Chunk, Pennsylvania, Thursday morning, June 19, 1856, at a few minutes \nbefore twelve o\'clock, leaving a wife and six children. At his death he wanted only \ntwenty-five days of being forty-five years of age. \n\n" He graduated at Union College in 1829, at Princeton Theological Seminary in \n1834. On leaving the Seminary he designed entering the foreign missionary field, \nand was, on September 2, 1834, designated by the Committee of the American \nBoard to the \' Mahratta Mission.\' A difficulty delayed his sailing, which gave him \npuiu at the time, but was cleared up satisfactorily and greatly to his honour. God \nhad work fur him in another field not less laborious or self-denying, in which he \nwas to do much for his Master\'s glory. He was ordained an evangelist, by the \nPresbytery of Albany, April 29, 1835. He was soon engaged as a missionary at \nSouth Easton, Pennsylvania, and there commenced a work, which, through many \nchanges and difficulties, has grown into the Second Presbyterian Church. From \nthis place he extended his labours to Mauch Chunk, thirty-six to forty miles north- \nlii Easton, on the Lehigh River. At this point, a few years before, coal- \nmine- bad been opened: there, and in the vicinity, had collected a population of \nabout two thousand persons. He commenced, in 1835, preaching there once a \nmonth, and missionating in the vicinity. His labours were so successful that, by \ntli>- spring of 1886, there had been a church organized, a lot secured, and part \nof the money promised towards building a church, which was afterwards erected, \nan 1 dedicated February, 1837. He commenced, in April, to preach one-fourth of \nhi- time at Summit Hill, nine miles west ; was installed pastor at Mauch Chunk \ni-:;7. Prom January, 1818, he gave up the other places, and preached \nregularly at Mauch Chunk. P.ut then, us before, ho preached during the week in \nfa adjacent villages, and visited the people. The amount of these labours and \n\' lenlal rnnn.it he well estimated bj any one who is not familiar with the \n\nrapid growth and great asssssits fafrpreaohing in the eoul-regions, embracing parts \nof Berks, Lehigh, Northampton, Lnserne, Colombia, and SohuylkQ] oonntiasi and \n: will* r/hioh be laboured to carry the gospel t" them. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2At hi-i InstaOM tin- General Assembly ffii.1 memorialized, and, in May, 18 13, \n\n\n\n30 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nconstituted the Presbytery of Luzerne. The great object of this presbytery was to \ntake charge of this missionary-field. By appointment of the Assembly he opened, \nthe presbytery with a sermon. He was considered not only the father of the pres- \nbytery, but was looked up to as a father by the ministry and churches in all that \nvicinity. \n\n" In a letter from one of the oldest members of this presbytery, he remarks that, \nfor information and counsel by his brethren, none of our ministers would be missed \nas much, excepting some of the older professors in our seminaries. \' He was a \nmodel for a member of presbytery,\' said another member. \n\n" His ministerial life was abundant in labours, not sparing himself. Gifted by \nGod with great clearness of mind, a wonderful facility in acquiring knowledge, an \nexceedingly tenacious memory, a diligence and application which knew no cessa- \ntion, he was familiar with almost every subject connected with the church : with a \nfaculty for, and promptness in, communicating information, he was a most enter- \ntaining and instructive companion. \n\n"Anioug the incidental labours of the years of his ministry was a constant con- \ntribution to the religious press. Few men who were not regularly in the editorial \nchair wrote more. But most of this period he gave the strength of a mind, which \nseemed to have been constituted by God for the work, to gathering up and pre- \nparing for publication what could be found of the early history of the Presbyterian \nchurch in the United States, and the lives of her early ministers. In the prose- \ncution of this work he became the repository of almost every thing that could be \ncollected in connection with them. Since the effort has commenced among the \nchurches to prepare histories of their early settlement and organization, he has \nbeen called upon continually for a history of some church or preacher, and, from \nhis generous disposition, he has been taxed with writing almost weekly such \nsketches and histories, many of which have appeared in the historical sermons \npreached and published by pastors. In the histories of the church in different \nStates, published within a few years, large contributions have been furnished by \nhim, in addition to the numerous articles contributed on this subject to the reli- \ngious press of our own church. \n\n" The \xe2\x80\xa2 History of the Presbyterian Church,\' to which he had devoted so much \ntime and attention, and which has been looked for with so much anxiety, happily \nfor the church, had so far reached its completion as to be in readiness for publica- \ntion, and, under the auspices of the Historical Society, was about being placed in \nthe printer\'s hands a few weeks before his decease. \n\n" He prepared, at the request of the Board of Publication, \'A Digest of the Acts \nof the Assembly,\' which is a most valuable book of reference in our church judica- \ntories. \n\n" The field to which he had given his regular labours for twenty-one years was \nthe congregation collected at Mauch Chunk. There he had been greatly blessed in \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD AVEBSTER. 31 \n\ncollecting and gathering into the fold of the Great Shepherd many souls, who -will \nhail him with joy before the throne as their father in the gospel of Christ. The \ncongregation had gradually so increased, notwithstanding deaths and the nume- \nrous changes incident to such a population, that persons could not obtain sittings. \nDuring the past year another lot was procured, and a large, comfortable house, \nof fifty feet long by eighty-five feet wide, has been erected : in a few weeks the \nbasement will be in readiness for preaching. \n\n" He was a most laborious preacher and an indefatigable pastor. Such was his \npromptness and vigilance that no part of his field was neglected or escaped his \noversight. With his delicate frame, and the heavy calamity of his deafness, it \nwas always the wonder of his friends and people how he could perform the amount \nof service which he so regularly rendered. At the same time, while he suffered \nnothing to hinder his preaching to his own people, his labours among his brethren in \nthe congregations around were abundant. In a letter, of December, he said, \' Last \nweek I preached five times for Brother Irwin at Catasaqua ; last month three times \nfor Brother Gaston, besides a Sabbath. In September, I preached ten times for \nmy brethren in eight days.\' These are specimens of labour extra from his own \n. tad yet he did not seem to feel he was doing any thing. His labours were \nunto thi his first attack, which was severe, he preached twice to hia \n\nown people. On the last Sabbath, he got out of his bed, and went into the church, \nand preached from the words, \'Enoch walked with God, and he was not; for God \ntook him.\' As he closed his sermon with the prayer that both pastor and people \nMight BO live that, when they came to die, it might be said of them with truth, they \nhad walked with God, many of the congregation thought, and some of them re- \nmarked, that lie seemed as if ho was preaching his last sermon. \n\n" Ee went from his pulpit back to his bed. A week after he had another attack, \nin which lie suffered violent pains and was left greatly prostrate; but his physician \nhoped, under proper treatment, he might recover. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 II- was dowii-htairs two or three times on Monday, Juno 16, walked about \n\nthe yard, and wanted to fix a Dumber of little things; took tea with his family. \n\ni- not so well, lay in bed, hut read the newspapers and letters of cor- \n\nsTote. On Wednesday afternoon, (18th^)when the papers were \n\nbrought, lie felt so weak that lie told them he did not wish them, and only glanced \n\nirhiofa bad come. The doctor observed bis pulse was rery rapid and \n\n\xe2\x96\xa01 concluded to spend the night with him. Ahout twelve o\'clock, ho felt \n\n; \'.\'. 1 1 i . \xe2\x96\xa0 1 1 , he asked the doctor if there was any prospect of ini- \n\ndeath. \'I Should like tO know if there i-.\' Tin- slate was handed, and \n\non it was irritten, he \'might live a few hours, i On reading H \n\nIdea; [ did not expect it: but I I [havenopre- \n\nbj long ago. I hare renewed it dailj : I am a \n\nrinner, I hive had my faults; but l have trotted in (herighteousnei i ofnrj l \n\n\n\n32 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nSaviour ; I throw myself upon him : I trust I have the forgiveness of my God.\' \' I \n\xe2\x80\xa2wish heartily to forgive every one;\' \' give my love to all.\' \'I have often admired \nthe dying sayings of Samuel Blair and Jonathan Edwards,\' repeating them, \' and \nthat of John Breckenridge, \xe2\x80\x94 God is with me.\' \'And it is mine : not a cloud, not a \nfear, \xe2\x80\x94 entire trust in my Saviour. I did not expect this ; but thanks be to God for \nsuch a death! Can it be that it is death? Is not the doctor mistaken? I had no \nsuch thought.\' On the head being shaken to say that there was no mistake, he \nsaid, \' It is such a death as I never knew of:\' \' not a pain, no weakness; my facul- \nties are all as usual.\' \' Thank God, no one could be more kindly dealt with ; it ia \nnot only without a terror it comes, but it is sweet : can it be death? I thank God \nmy body is not racked with pain, that I have the perfect use of my senses, that I \nwas early called to the knowledge of the Saviour, that he permitted me the honour \nof preaching his name. Oh, how I have loved to preach it ! I can bless God, my \ntimes are in thy hand.\' \n\n"About half-past one o\'clock in the morning, he requested that his children \nshould be awakened, to see him and bid him farewell, as he might not live until \ndaylight. When they came he embraced them, kissed each of them, prayed for \nthem, which he did several times. lie gave directions about things of his house \nand family, his funeral, who should preach, his burial, avoiding all show, and men- \ntioned friends to whom he wished letters to be written. He said he would like to \nlive for his family and the church ; lamented the vacancies, need of ministers for \nthe missionary -fields. \' Oh, how I love the cause of missions !\' \' I am comfortable \nIt seems impossible that I am drawing near to death. I can well pity the poor \nsinner, drawing near his end, and so little in the circumstances to aid in his pre- \nparation. My voice and words fail me to express the trust I have in God.\' \'I \nwould like to say to the impenitent, sickness is no time to prepare to meet God ; \nwhen there is a sinking of all the faculties, it is hard to do any thing, hard to enter \nin at the strait gate, hard to find the narrow way.\' \' If this be death, it approaches \nWith tender, gentle, loving embrace ; I feel no pain, no apprehension. I look for- \nward with joy to meeting my Saviour, with perfect calmness of mind, aDd assur- \nance of the blessing of the Lord upon myself, my wife, my family, my friends, and \nthe church of God.\' \xc2\xab If I have been deceived all my life, I now come, at the \neleventh hour, and put my trust in the Saviour, hoping in his mercy, confessing \nmy sins, and acknowledging his mercy, which has been with me always. Into thy \nhands I commend my spirit: thou hast redeemed me. His I am, and him I serve.\' \nHe repeated the hymn, \'Lord, I am thine, entirely thine,\' to the line, \'And con- \nsecrate to thee my all:\' then added, \'Blessed be God, this is not a new work, not a \nthing taken up to-day or yesterday!\' \n\n" Speaking of his people, he said, \' May God be with them! I loved to preach \nthe gospel to them; I thank God for permitting me to preach it to one people.\' He \nhad a horror of pastoral changes. \' He thought he had not been altogether un- \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 33 \n\nfaithful, but had come very short\' \' How strange the deceitfulness of things! I \nfeel that I might get up in a few minutes as well as any of the children.\' \' Truly, \nman walketh in a vain show.\' \n\n" Speaking to his family, he said, \' I love you, my wife and children ; I have no \nbreath, or I would tell you \xe2\x80\x94 but words cannot tell you \xe2\x80\x94 how much I love you. \nThis is a great trial. How little we expected it yesterday ! How differently wo \nwould have spent yesterday and last night if we had known it!\' * The cup which \nmy Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? Thy will be done. Father, into thy \nbands I commit my spirit.\' \xc2\xab Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of \ndeath, I will fear no evil ; thy rod and stafiF comfort me.\' \' I have not been faith- \nful enough with my children, and yet I have tried in some measure to bring them \nup for God.\' \' He has promised to be a Father to the fatherless, a God to the \nwidow. How dear is every one of you to me! Oh, how hard to part!\' \'I \nwould like, when death approaches, for all to leave me but my own family, \nthat we may have a calm, quiet, pleasant committing of ourselves into God\'s \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 He continued to read what was written on the slate until within a few minutes \nbefore he died, when he told them to put it away, \xe2\x80\x94 that he was so weak it was too \ngreat exertion for him to read. At that time his pulse had ceased in one of his \nand nearly in the other. A very short time before this he said to his wife \nthat his hands were cold, and asked her to rub them; and, while she and his oldest \nchild were rubbing them, he remarked about his mistake of the coldness. \' lie did \nnot think.\' \xe2\x80\xa2 It was death.\' And so quietly and gently did he pass away, that \nthose around did not perceive it until the doctor said, \' He is gone.\' \n\n" These gathered thoughts from his death-bed have been saved from the many \nthings sai\'l by him during that period, through the recollection of some that stood \nby him. Very much that he said has escaped. During the morning, when it was \nthat he was dying, his room was filled with friends and members of the con- \nsi, who wanted to hear the last word or take the last look at one who had \nbeen identified with them. All his sayings bore the correct, concise, and \n"f bis mind. Without wandering, or wavering, or hesitating, ho \ncoittiii\'ii\'d his utterances as long as his strength pennitted. His tongue had \ny ceased to utter the thought! pi his heart to his people and family until it \nmated With new energy in the presence of his Saviour. \n" Bow glorious and blessed the change! Ho \xe2\x80\x94 who for years had not heard \nthe sound of his own voice, or of one of his own children, or the voice of the 0On\xc2\xbb \ngregatlon to whom ho preached, when they sang praise to God \xe2\x80\x94 has awaked amid \nI ]\'"\'>\' of the redeemed^ to tana his harp and lift up his roloe, ami hear the \n\nBongs of the redeemed, as they give glory and honour to the Saviour who \n>nd sought to honour on earth* \n\n\n\n34 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\n" \' Oh for the death of those \n\nWho slumber in the Lord! \n\nOh be like theirs my last repose, \n\nLike theirs my last reward!\' \n\n"Added to the life and labours, you have had the death, of your pastor. A life \nof devotedness to God, \xe2\x80\x94 ripened and completed in your midst,\xe2\x80\x94 with a calm, quiet, \npeaceful, hopeful, and blessed death. \n\n" May his death be more blessed to all of you than the labours and example \nof his life have been ! May you, who have been the objects of his prayers, and \nwarnings, and entreaties, flee to that Saviour whom he so often, so earnestly, and \nso tenderly besought you to embrace 1 Make him the end of your conversation. \nMay God, in his great mercy and grace, give each one of us the wisdom and the \ngrace to live the remainder of our days in his service, and, when they are ended, \nmay we in peace enter into our rest I" \n\nThe following interesting letter from Mrs. Webster, the respected \nwidow of the departed servant of Christ whose life it is my aim to illus- \ntrate as fully as possible in a brief space, is here introduced, with the \nadvice of some of my personal friends whom I consulted. Although the \nletter was written simply to furnish materials for the compilation of a \nbiographical sketch, and not for publication by itself, yet I have assumed \nthe responsibility of inserting it entire, for reasons which, I trust, the \nreader will appreciate on a perusal. It was a point of great delicacy; \nand, if I have offended propriety by the course adopted, I throw myself \nupon the indulgence of the public : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Mauch Chunk, July 28, 1856. \n"Rev. C. Van Rensselaer, D.D. : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Dear Sir : \xe2\x80\x94 I feel very grateful for your kind letter, and far more indebted to \nyou for the interest manifested in regard to my dear husband\'s book than words \ncan express : if there were any way to lessen your care and trouble with it I should \nbe very glad to know of it, and would cheerfully incur the additional expense; \nand may I hope that you will do no more personally than is absolutely indis- \npensable ? The terms of the agreement appear to me fair and liberal : profit I do \nnot expect, though I should deeply regret Mr. Wilson losing in any way by it. \n\n" There appears to be something of an impression that Mr. Webster\'s great anti- \nquarian tastes, &c, combined with his deafness, rendered him almost unfit for \nother labours. But it is a very great mistake indeed : the business of his life was \nto labour faithfully, earnestly, and amid much fatigue and discouragements, in the \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 35 \n\nBervice of his Master. Every thing else was subordinate. He had literary and \nantiquarian tastes, but they were gratified only in fragments of time, redeemed, I \nmay say, by his unfailing industry. His correspondence was large. He had \nmany calls to prepare obituary notices and many other such small things, which \nwere promptly attended to. His sessional and presbytery books were carefully \nkept, \xe2\x80\x94 the entries of the last meetings all neatly recorded. He was always ready \nto prepare a New Year\'s Address, &c. ; but his chief work was never neglected. \nHe mourned over his deafness, and yet visited as faithfully, embraced every oppor- \ntunity for saying a \'word in season,\' and was as welcome and his society as much \ndesired as that of any pastor. His preparation for the pulpit was extremely \ncareful. He delighted in his work. The time passed unconsciously while in his \nstudy, \xe2\x80\x94 often saying, when sent for to dinner, that he \xe2\x80\xa2 had not thought the morn- \ning half spent,\' so busy had he been. His rule was to visit every family before \neach communion-season ; and I scarcely remember an instance of social visiting \nthat was not closed with prayer. And here suffer me to say, he was peculiarly a \nman of prayer: he did not require solitude, on account of his deafness; the closing \nof his eyes, or the hand placed over them, was enough ; and our little ones often \nslipped out of the room when they saw it, leaving him alone. But not only thus : \nas he attended to his flowers, as he walked the streets, as he travelled, and as he \noften sat in the social circle, hearing nothing, his heart was lifted up in prayer. \nNo one can imagine the holy, devotional spirit in which his days were passed. I \nsaw and felt it; and almost the only feelings of alarm and fear for his recovery, \nduring his illness, proceeded from this very feeling. I saw, as plainly as I saw his \nface, the wonderful growth in spirituality and heavenly-mindedness; and, as I sat \nby his bedside, the thought would come unbidden, \' Has all this manifest growth in \ngrace been the preparation for his end?\' Many of our people have remarked to \nme, since his death, that they had felt the same. His preaching, especially on \nlay\'s lecture, had so much of heaven, \xe2\x80\x94 so much as though the glories of it \nwere already objects of sight, \xe2\x80\x94 so much holy joy in dwelling on the glory to be \nrevealed, \xe2\x80\x94 that, among themselves, several had remarked, they feared their \nminister was soon to finish his work, and, while he and I were looking forward to \nhis KOOTBTJ, many of them scarcely ventured to hope for it. At our late com- \niniininn-seasonH I have almost trembled: ho seemed so nearly done with emblems, \nso nearly drinking of the \' wine new in the kingdom of his Father.\' I hope I am \nI for the mercy of such an abundant preparation; but tho loss to myself \xe2\x80\x94 \n|0 hi- DOM children \xe2\x80\x94 in DOl lessened, Wi li:ive lout his holy example, and his \n\nprayers, irhioh win; almoal nnnossinfl for as. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 ii.- repeated t.. me, after Ida last visit to Philadelphia, y>nr prediction, \nMailed Incredulously, and, I think, tin.\' subjeoi was oerer mentioned by him again, \ndy thought "f, most likely. \n\n"The Thursday aflat hi- return in- mi taken violently ill. Afu-r a few days ho \n\n\n\n36 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nrallied, and was able to take short rides in about a week, improving slowly. He \npreached twice between the two severe attacks. From the last he recovered \nslowly; and when from many of his symptoms we feared another, came the sleep- \nlessness, the sinking and the exhaustion, and the end, so unexpected, that it seemed \nhard for either of us to believe that it was death. Again and again I asked the \ndoctor if it were not possible he was mistaken. He referred me to the imper- \nceptible pulse, but added, all else was as new to him as to me. He had seen death \nin many forms, but this differed from all that he had ever imagined. To him, it \nseemed like one preparing for sleep and leaving directions to be attended to during \nthe time. He had feared from the first, not from the violence of the disease, but \nfrom the worn-out state of the system. He considered him the most cheerful and \npatient sick person he ever saw. He was grateful for every attention, perfectly \nsatisfied to do what we thought best. \n\n"The Sabbath was to him ever a delight. He rose earlier than on other days; \nand, oh, how we miss his cheerful greeting on that holy day, \xe2\x80\x94 his morning prayer, \nso full of praise and thanksgiving, \xe2\x80\x94 the holy cheerfulness that characterized his \nappearance during the interval of worship ; and then, when the labours of the day \nwere over, and we sat down, alone, to talk them over, and as I saw the solemnity, \nand especially the mourning over our young people, who seemed so careless, so \nkind, and so attached to him, and yet slighting his message, I have often thought \nthat, could those who think the pastor\'s duties easily performed have seen the \nsickness of heart, the failing of spirit, and almost the giving up of hope, they would \nhave changed their opinion. \n\n" From the commencement of his ministry until about a year since he preached \nregularly three times a day : this past year he has not more than half the time. \n\n" My brother has fallen \xe2\x80\x94 I know not how \xe2\x80\x94 into the strange mistake of sup- \nposing that he did not hear his voice. He again and again told me that he did. \nAnd as to our children, it was their delight to talk to him and ask questions. Our \nvoices reached his ear easily. Of course, he lost all general conversation ; but all \nour family matters \xe2\x80\x94 all that interested us \xe2\x80\x94 was told him as a matter of course. \nI always encouraged it in the children, for his sake as well as theirs ; and none but \nourselves know the cheerful, sprightly, interesting, and pious spirit which threw \nsuch a charm around our home, \xe2\x80\x94 with what delight he returned, after his frequent \nabsences, forgetting the weariness and fatigue in the comfort of being again with \nus ; and, to the very last days of his life, as our boys returned from school, he \nwas interested in their lessons and in hearing the little things they had to \nrelate. \n\n" He had his books and papers gathered around his sick-bed; for there he spent \nnearly all the time, on account of weakness. He had sent for \' Dr. Hodge\'s \nEphesians:\' it came while he was sick. He read it carefully, comparing the notes \nwhich he had taken when at Princeton. And in bed he copied what is done of \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 37 \n\nPresident Davies\'s letters, \xe2\x80\x94 wrote letters, even on the Monday before his death, \nrelating to a vacancy in our bounds, &c. His Bible was always beside him. He \nrequested me, one day, to read some of the closing chapters in \'Alexander\'s \n\xe2\x80\xa2Isaiah,\' saying he had just reread them with so much comfort. He said he had \nseveral sermons all thought out, and only waited for strength to write them. He \npointed out Isaiah xxxviii. 19 as the first one he wished to preach after his re- \ncovery, \xe2\x80\x94 having felt in what peril of life he had been, and how his heart over- \nflowed with thankfulness, thinking the danger was past. Hebrews xiii. 7, last \nclause, was another. His interlined Greek Testament was always at hand. \nThe word of God was to him an unfailing delight, reading almost with \nrapture. \n\nM There were none present in that hallowed chamber of death who can do justice \nto the scene. No words can express the holy composure, the strong desire for life, \nthe clinging to us with an intensity of affection. He said that words could not \ntell the longing desire to labour for souls, and yet the loveliest spirit of submission, \nall indicating that he was not alone in that hour of trial : \xe2\x80\x94 the Everlasting arms \n\xe2\x80\xa2were manifestly supporting him ; the sting of death was not there." \n\nMr. Rockwood, of Mauch Chunk, was an intimate friend of Mr. \nWebster, and one of the elders of the church. He was present at the \nclosing and impressive scene, and has sent an interesting communi- \ncation, which we here publish, giving his impression of Mr. Webster\'s \ncharacter and labours, and an account of his last hours. \n\n" Mauch Chunk, August 12, 1856. \n"Rev. Db. C. Van Rensselaer: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" lU.v. and Dear Sir: \xe2\x80\x94 Friends of our late pastor, Rev. Richard Webster, \n\nI aiding that you are preparing a \' Biographical Sketch\' to accompany his \n\nmiog work, hare requested mo to attempt to give you the impressions \n\nmade by him H a man Hid I nrilrilrtUT at home. While his historical labours \n\nare widely known, few besides his own people could be fumiliar with his pastoral \n\nwork, as hii brethren in the ministry Mldom miw bin iii the midst of his labours. \n\n" .My : t \xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0 i n : i i 1 1 1 : 1 1 1 \xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x80\xa2 - , both .-.\xe2\x80\xa2<-i:il and in Ihe eliuivli, lias been intimate for about four \n\nIheee were not his most laborious years,\xe2\x80\x94 his declining strength baring, of \nmpeiled him to lessen his labour outside of bis own parish. Daring the \n\npart of his ministry he had been in the habit of performing an amount of e\\tr:i \n\n- in the destitute neighbourhoods, from four to twenty mile- around, whiofa \nring when his feeble frame i- remembered, and aideh ondonbtedly shorts \n\ncne.i hi- lite. To these efforts many of the cimiviies of the ooataegion owe their \n\norigin. Many of il,e,e efforts have heeli made <|iiite beyond tin\' linn \n\n\n\n38 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\n\' Sabbath-day\'s journey,\' \xe2\x80\x94 by holding series of meetings during the week, after \n\xe2\x96\xa0which he would return and preach to his own people on the Sabbath. Until \nwithin about two years past he has had regular preaching-stations, which occu- \npied nearly every Sabbath afternoon. Many of these preaching-expeditions were* \nmade wholly or in part on foot, and often in the night, regardless of the \ninjurious effect of the night-air upon his hearing. \n\n" Mr. Webster\'s deafness occasioned no aversion to society. He was of a genial, \npleasant spirit ; and, even since he could be addressed, only through a tube, he was \naffable and easy of approach, even to strangers, \xe2\x80\x94 delighting in social intercourse, \nand capable of entertaining with lively anecdote or of instructing by grave \nremark. He was, notwithstanding his difficulty of hearing, faithful in pastoral \nvisitation, especially in times of sickness or affliction, when the natural tenderness \nof his feelings enabled him to make the sorrows of others his own, and unite his \ntears with theirs in true sympathy. His depth of feeling on these occasions \n(constantly recurring in a community so liable to accident and sudden death) wore \nseriously on his own strength. Cases of bereavement were feelingly noticed in \npublic prayer, and often again remembered on their anniversary another year. \nHis conversations with the impenitent were frequent, and his faculty of pleasantly \nintroducing pointed, personal appeal was good. Often, where conversation was \nprecluded, his pen was used. His general conversation showed that the con- \nversion of souls was his most earnest desire, and, while naturally cheerful, \nnothing so saddened him as the fewness of additions to the church from the \nworld. He continually mourned that he was not more useful. \n\n"Mr. Webster\'s historical researches have been so spoken of as to give the im- \npression that they formed the labour of his life. They were, however, the result \nof leisure hours, although the amount of these labours (often performed in un- \nselfish regard for the wishes of others applying for information) gives evidence \nof his industrious habits. His life was literally and truly devoted to the ministry. \nHis pulpit exercises were uniformly good, and well digested and prepared. \nDuring the last few years he wrote most of his sermons ; but they were complete \nin his mind before writing, so that the manuscripts showed few alterations. The \ndistinguishing feature of his preaching was that he preached Christ, \xe2\x80\x94 seldom occu- \npying the pulpit with discourses merely historical, literary, or critical. His lan- \nguage, while showing no attempt at ornament, was clear, condensed, and often \nbeautiful, but never calculated to attract attention from the truth to itself. His \nsermons were earnest, convincing, and instructive, and such as would interest and \npi-ofit both the learned and the unlearned. The peculiarity of voice \xe2\x80\x94 arising \nprobably from deafness \xe2\x80\x94 was to a stranger unpleasant; but, when the ear had \nbecome accustomed to it, his delivery was found to be forcible, and the preaching \ngrew upon the hearer from year to year. \n\n" His life and manner were becoming a minister of the gospel, \xe2\x80\x94 cheerful, but \nserious and beyond reproach, commanding the confidence alike of the Christian \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. o9 \n\nand the worldling. He felt little encouragement in his work ; but his exertions \nand influence have not been without their share \xe2\x80\x94 and that a large share \xe2\x80\x94 of eftect \nupon the community around him, shown in the increased regard for the Sabbath, \nthe sanctuary, and for sacred things. The church originated and fostered by him, \nand now for years self-sustaining and prosperous, is a testimony to his usefulness. \n\n" Mr. Webster had a great advantage for 6tudy, in a remarkably retentive \nmemory, which enabled him to treasure up what he read even casually, and to \nremember clearly his own trains of thought. He once remarked to me that he \ncould preach an unwritten sermon, even several years after its first preparation, \nwithout material change even in the language. He kept himself well informed in \nthe religious and other literature of the day, and, both in preaching and con- \nversation, showed a mind thoroughly trained and abundantly stored. \n\n"Mr. Webster was humble and unselfish in a high degree in his intercourse \nwith all. He gained the warm regard especially of those of his congregation \nwho were in the more humble walks of life, by the interest he took in their \nwelfare. Their children were all known to him by name. Towards the close \nof his life it was noticed that he preached with increased unction, and watched \nwith more earnest desire for an increasing religious interest. When confined with \n-. his de-ire to preach was so strong that it was with difficulty that he could \nbe induced to forego the attempt; and, on two Sabbaths during his last illness, \nhe arose from his bed to preach, and returned from the pulpit directly to his bed. \n\n"Although his friends greatly feared the result of his sickness, he did not \nappreciate the danger, and, until within a day or two of his death, looked for- \nward with expectation to an early resumption of his pulpit duties. His vital \npowers failed very gradually for many hours before death. When told, about \ntwelve hours before his departure, that he was near death, he could scarcely \nbelieve it, his feelings having given so little admonition of the decay of nature. \nB\xc2\xab WU taken by surprise, but not unprepared. Without the least perturlmtion \ni bis resignation and entire peace of mind. I was permitted to be \nwith him for the last ten or eleven hours, and a greater privilege is seldom \nenjoyed in a lifetime. No written narrative of peaceful death-bed \ngave mo such a realizing sense of the value of a good hope in Christ, and doily \nto God, as a preparation for death. There was not a fear or a. \ndoubt His mind was calm and composed, though active and fully awake to his \n: yet all was peace and joyful anticipations for the future for \n\nhimself, and cheerful trust in God for his family and tin- ohureh. Borne of the \n\nirhioh I have read have always appeared to me as if said \n\naround ; but, in this instance, the continuous atteranoe \n\nnt thought was the evident overflowing of a heart stayed on <;.,.i and filled \n\nwith lore for him and his <\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x96\xa0:\xe2\x96\xa0 presaions of resignation, lore to God, and \n\neons\' lenos in hfan, accompanied by humble self-abasement an I 001 n \n\nof hiii, would make a valuable chapt.T of religious experience. \n\n\n\n40 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\n" Soon after being informed that he was gradually but steadily sinking, and \ncould live but a few hours, he said, \' If this be death, it approaches with tender, \ngentle, loving embrace : I feel no pain and no apprehension. I look forward with \njoy to meeting with my Saviour, \xe2\x80\x94 with perfect calmness of mind and assurance \nof the blessing of God upon myself, my wife, my family, my friends, and the \nchurch of God.\' At another time he said, \'lam very comfortable: it seems im- \npossible that I am drawing near to death.\' \' My voice and words fail me to ex- \npress the trust I have in God.\' \'If I have been deceived all my life, I now come, \nat the eleventh hour, and put my trust in the Saviour, hoping in his mercy, con- \nfessing my sins, and acknowledging his mercy, which has been with me always.\' \n\xe2\x80\xa2Into thy hands I commend my spirit! Thou hast redeemed me,\' repeating the \nhymn, beginning \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n, " \'Lord, I am thine, entirely thine,\' \n\nand ending with \n\n" \' Thee, my new Master, now I call, \nAnd consecrate to thee my all.\' \n\nHe said, \'Blessed be God! this [consecration] is not a new work; not a thing \ntaken up to-day or yesterday.\' . . . \' Dying is but going home.\' He expressed no \ndesire to live except to be useful to the church and to his family. He said, \xe2\x80\xa2 I \nwould have been thankful to be spared to preach. I love to preach. I have \nembraced every opportunity to do so, and have, no doubt, overworked myself.\' \nHe was thankful that his whole ministry had been among \' one people.\' \' I would \nlike to say to the impenitent, that sickness is no time to prepare to meet God, \nwhen the sinking of all the faculties makes it hard to do any thing, \xe2\x80\x94 hard to enter \ninto the strait gate, \xe2\x80\x94 hard to find the narrow way.\' \' I had hoped to rise up \nto preach from the words of Hezekiah on his recovery, (Isa. xxxviii. 19,) "The \nliving, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day: the father to the children \nshall make known thy truth," \xe2\x80\x94 the duty of those spared to teach the knowledge \nof God to children.\' He * thanked God he had not been altogether unfaithful; but \nhad come very far short.\' \n\n"He had no pain: his mind was clear, his sight and voice strong, and he \nseemed unable to realize that he could be dying. He said, \' How strange the \ndeceitfulness of things ! I feel as if I might get up, in a few minutes, as well as \nany of the children. Truly, man walketh in a vain show.\' \n\n"With frequent confessions of sin and expressions of his entire trust in saving \ngrace alone, he, from time to time, as he supposed the scene was closing, com- \nmitted himself \' to God, to go through the dark valley and shadow of death, but \nnot alone.\' He spoke but seldom of his own salvation: it seemed to be a subject \nlong since committed to God, with the full assurance of faith. His thoughts were \nmainly given to others. His prayers were for his family and the church. \nSeveral times, as he thought death approaching, he bade each member of his \nfamily good-by with a most affecting exhibition of love. He had the children, \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 41 \n\nmore than once, all brought near, where he could look upon them. He prayed \nthat his boys might be permitted to preach the gospel. \n\n" In the morning, one or two of his congregation came to bid him farewell, and \nit distressed him ; but afterwards he seemed to receive strength from on high to \nsustain him, and he desired to see all. Many of his church and congregation \ncame in, for each of whom he had a word in season, and sent messages to the \nabsent. Many were mentioned by name, whom he had hoped to see brought \ninto the church. He was anxious to see one friend, who lived near but had \nthen gone out to his work. He wished to live till noon, when this person would \nreturn from work, and frequently inquired, \'How late is it?\' \'Is it twelve \no\'clock?\' His desire was gratified: his friend was sent for. Such was his \ninterest for his congregation, each of whom, by name, children and adults, he was \nin the habit of bearing on his heart at the throne of Grace. \n\n" His faculties were spared to him, so that he continued to converse until \nwithin a very few minutes of his ceasing to breathe. It was the \' death of the \nrighteous;\' and none, witnessing it, could fail to wish, \'May my last end be \nlike his !\' Very respectfully yours, \n\n" Chaeles G. Rockwood." \n\nThus did this good man live and die ! His " works do follow him." \nThe seals of his ministry were many, and bright are the jewels in the \ncrown of his rejoicing. He lived to a good purpose, and, having ended \nhis work, has entered into his rest. \n\nAmong the incidental labours of Mr. "Webster\'s life is the history \nwhich is now published. It was written amid the incessant calls of active \nministerial duties. This is, of itself, a sufficient apology for whatever \nimperfections may be found in the volume. \n\n.Mr. Webster had a natural taste for historical investigation. His \n\n_ fur facts and incidents in history and biography was ever fresh \n\nami intense. A lover of history has reason to thank God for directing \n\nhi- pursuits towards a branch of knowledge so grand and useful. It is a \n\nfit u\'lv that brings the mind in contact with Providence; it has relations \n\nof a wry comprehensive onaraoterj and, while in itself satisfying and \n\ndelightful, it prodnoefl results helpful to the cause of religion and truth. \n\nMr. Webster, in devoting a considerable part of his time to historical \n\nations, fell that he was engaged in a way likely to benefit his \n\nHit testes and desires made history a recreation. Bis \n\nmind was refreshed by roaming through the by-ways and paths of the \n\n\n\n42 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE \n\nolden time. It was his delight to pursue inquiries relating to the history \nof the Presbyterian church and the men of a former generation. \n\nMr. "Webster\'s patience and alacrity to endure hardship were as con- \nspicuous in historical inquiries as in ministerial labours. Whatever \nhe did he tried to do heartily, as unto the Lord. He did not regard \npreaching as for his Master and writing history as for himself. He was \ndevoted to Christ in every thing, and hence was willing to bear toil and \nself-denial wherever they were to be encountered. His labours as an \nhistorian were abundant. W T ho will ever know how many miles were \ntravelled, how many letters sent forth and received, how many books con- \nsulted, how many late hours of the night taken from rest, how many \nchambers and old repositories explored with scrupulous care and cunning, \nhow much time and health and strength and property taxed, in pro- \nmoting the pursuits which he had at heart? It was delightful to find \nthis diligent man cheerful in the midst of his labours. He worked at his \ntask gladly. His patience was inexhaustible, and his habits of endurance \nextraordinary. He copied with his own pen all that part of the exten- \nsive Bellamy correspondence which threw any light upon the history of \nthe Presbyterian church, into a large volume, elegantly written, which is \nin the possession of the Presbyterian Historical Society, \xe2\x80\x94 a donation of \nhis thoughtful head, untiring hand, and benevolent heart. \n\nUnaffected modesty marked the character of our Presbyterian his- \ntorian. W T ith all his ardour of investigation and success of research, \nMr. Webster was the last to appreciate his own just claims. He never \nobtruded himself into public notice. No one ever charged him with \ndesiring notoriety or public applause. On the contrary, his modesty \ninterfered with his merit, and his diffidence prevented an extensive appre- \nciation of his researches. \n\nA disinterestedness of spirit is the last trait I shall mention in the \ncharacter of my friend as an historian. Mr. Webster had a large and \ngenerous soul. He worked not for himself, but for all who chose to avail \nthemselves of his labours. Jealousy formed no part of his character. \nHe had no private ends to answer. Some might have considered it a \nlawful and proper reserve to keep their manuscripts from the inspection \nof others, but he was ever ready to lend to investigators of history all the \npapers in his possession. Few men, it is believed, showed as great gene- \n\n\n\nREV. RICHARD WEBSTER. 43 \n\nrosity as he in thus allowing others even to anticipate the results of his \nown researches, if they had shown a disposition to do so. His manu- \nscripts have been freely lent in a spirit of disinterested and religious \nscholarship worthy of all praise. \n\nThe last time I saw Mr. Webster was in May, when he came to Phila- \ndelphia to attend the anniversary of the " Presbyterian Historical \nSociety." He himself was the life of the meeting. He wrote the \nannual report which was read on that occasion, and made several \nspeeches full of wit and learning. The appearance of his venerated \nfriend, Samuel Hazard, Esq., in the chair, revived some reminiscences \nof a pleasant character; and he told several historical anecdotes with \ngreat glee, and to the amusement and edification of us all. On the fol- \nlowing morning, when he came to bid me farewell, I asked him to leave \nhis manuscript history for publication. He smiled, and said, " I do not \nbelieve it will ever be published." He, however, left it, and measures \nwere about to be taken to put it to press, when the unexpected and \nmelancholy tidings of his decease suspended the undertaking for a \n\n\n\nThe last will and testament of Mr. "Webster contained the following \nbequest : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" To the Rev. Dr. Courtlandt Van Rensselaer I give and bequeath the manuscript \nof my book, and all my historical memoranda." \n\nActing under a sense of the responsibility thus imposed upon me, I \nmade inquiries respecting the terms on which the history could be pub- \nlished ; and, finding that Mr. Joseph M. Wilson made the most advan- \nU offer, I put the work into his hands. I previously communicated, \nhowever, with the executors and with judicious friends, and obtained a \ngeneral assent to the arrangement as a just and liberal one. \n\nAnd, now that I have finished this brief and imperfect sketch of the \nlife and character of the author, I commit the volume, in his name, to \nthe public, with the hope and prayer that it may meet every reasonable \ntion, be the means of imparting useful information, assist in \nawakening and in extending the spirit of historical inquiry, and redound \nto the honour of our common religion and to the glory of God. \n\nC. Van Rensselaer. \n\nTuiLADELruiA, December 22, 185G. \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. \n\n\n\nThe great King of Zion has endowed the Presbyterian church \nin the United States with a goodly heritage, and, under his foster- \ning care, its borders have been widely extended. In the space of \na century and a half, a cause which at first was represented by a \nfew itinerant missionaries, labouring among a number of scattered \nsettlers on the shores of the Chesapeake and the adjoining regions, \nhas attained to a magnitude unprecedented in the annals of Pres- \nhyterianism. \n\nFor many years past, the Presbyterian church numbers among \nthe most valued of her members the descendants of settlers from \nHolland, France, Germany, and other nations of Continental \nEurope. Still, the great body of those hardy pioneers who sought \na home in the Western world, or who were driven hither by per- \nsecution, and founded our Zion, were from Scotland and the North \nof Ireland. It is true, that a large proportion of the English \nPuritans who settled New England held Presbyterian principles, \nand were favourable to our form of church polity. Popularly, the \nterm Puritanism, when associated with New England, is under- \nstood to signify Congregationalism ; but the fact, as here stated, \nthat many of the English Dissenters, who fled from their native \nland to New England, in order to enjoy liberty of conscience, \nwere Presbyterian in sentiment, is established by abundant and \nmost satisfactory evidence.* Into the causes which operated in \nproducing a graduul change in the character of the early New \nEngland churches, and which prevented a full development of a \ndistinct Presbyterian organization, it is not our object here to \nenter. We desire rather to advert to the circumstances which led \nt<> tin- formation of our church in the Middle States of the \nTni\'-ii; and, in this connection, the few pages of this work \n\nwhich can h<- Bpared for an introductory chapter may be de- \nvoted to a recital of the causes which led to the settlement of \n\n\n\n* Bo itional History of the Presbyterian Church, dhap. i \n\ndelphia: v.. B. Martta. M \n\n45 \n\n\n\n46 INTRODUCTION. \n\nthe fathers of our Zion in the wildernesses of this continent, \xe2\x80\x94 to \nthe principles which these hardy sons of a covenanted Reforma- \ntion brought with them to the land of their adoption, \xe2\x80\x94 to an ex- \nposition of their social characteristics, and their influence in form- \ning and modifying the religious institutions of our country. We \ncan merely glance, as it were, at each of these topics. To treat \nthem fully, as their importance merits, would require the compass \nof several volumes, and the command of much antiquarian and \nstatistical information, of which, it is to be regretted, that, through \nneglect, much has been already lost. A large portion of valuable \nmaterial for the history of the church might yet be preserved by \nthe industry of competent persons, who would collect and arrange \nsuch facts as are connected with their own districts ; but it is to \nbe feared, that the causes which allowed so much information to be \nlost, by the men of the last generation, will continue to operate in \nour own day also. \n\nScotland has stood out pre-eminently in modern times as the \ngreat witness-bearer, among the European nations, for civil and \nreligious liberty. In carrying out the reformation of religion in \nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Scottish people dis- \nplayed an intelligence and an energy of character which contrast \nmost favourably with the conduct of the inhabitants of the south- \nern portion of the island. In England, the heads of the church \nor of the state might overthrow the power and repudiate the doc- \ntrines of the Church of Home, as was done in the reigns of \nHenry VIII. and of Edward VI. ; or, as in the reign of Mary, \nthey might reverse what had thus been accomplished. In either \ncase, a numerous body of the people clung to their national sanc- \ntuaries, and permitted their leaders to effect such changes in the \nformularies of the church as they pleased, without appearing to \nfeel that they should have an influential voice in such important \narrangements, and that there was a divine standard to which an \nappeal in all such matters should be made. In Scotland it was far \notherwise. There, the people soon comprehended the great truth, \nthat the evils under which the country groaned were mainly \ntraceable to the tyranny, the rapacity, and the debasing super- \nstitions of the Romish church, which had departed from the prin- \nciples and order which God had enjoined in his Word. They \nfurther perceived, that these evils must continue to afflict the \ncountry, until a thorough reformation was effected in the church, \nand that no church should be considered reformed or pure whose \ndoctrines and discipline were not strictly in accordance with the \nrevelation which the King of Zion had given, and in which alone \nhis will was to be discovered. \n\nThe great doctrine of the Headship of the Lord Jesus Christ \nsoon came to be recognised on the north of the Tweed ; while in \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 47 \n\nEngland, the civil power, in freeing itself from the bondage under \nwhich it suffered in the palmy days of Romish supremacy, not only \nregained the possession of the civil sword, \xe2\x80\x94 which rightfully be- \nlongs to civil rulers, \xe2\x80\x94 but, at the same time, it reversed its former \ncondition. It was not satisfied with securing an independence of \nspiritual control in the affairs which belonged to its own province, \nbut it laid the church prostrate, depriving it even of spiritual \njurisdiction, and trampling it under the foot of the state. In \nScotland, however, the distinction soon became apparent to the \npublic mind, between the province of civil rulers, and the depart- \nment which belonged to them, as ruling in civil affairs, on the \none hand ; and the province of spiritual officers, on the other hand, \nwho were called to administer the functions of an office, which they \nheld from the Lord Jesus Christ, which regarded spiritual things, \nand was instituted for the administration of the affairs of the \nchurch. Addressing the regent of the kingdom, even as early as \n1571, Erskine, of Dun, says, "There is a spiritual jurisdiction \nand power which God has given under his kirk, and to them that \nbear office therein; and there is a temporal jurisdiction and power \ngiven of God to kings and civil magistrates. Both the powers are \nof <>"d, and most agree to the fortifying one of the other if they \nbe right used. But when the corruption of man enters in, con- \nfounding the offices, usurping to himself what he pleases, nothing \n\nling the good order appointed of God, then confusion follows \nin all estates. The kirk of God should fortify all lawful power \nand authority that pertains to the civil magistrate, because it is the \nordinance of God. But if he pass the bounds of his office, and \nenter within the sanctuary of the Lord, meddling with such things \nM appertain to the ministers of God\'s kirk, then the servants of \n\nmould withstand his unjust enterprise, for so they are com- \nmanded of God."* \n\nIn Germany, the controversies in which the church was engaged \nH re of a different character from those which were raised in Scot- \nland in consequence of the action of the civil power, and the \nof which so rapidly made the people of that land \nfamiliar with the principles for which they had afterwards to con- \ntend, even to the forfeiture of liberty and life. In France, the \nterrible power of the monarchy, which was used so recklessly in \nthe VMi holocaust of St. Bartholomew, effected such an overthrow \nof tin- upholders of the reformed faith, that their cause was merely \n\nable, for a considerable time, to struggle for existence, without as- \nserting for itself the prerogatives which the nobles and people of \nScotland demanded for the church of their land. \n\nThat Christ is King in Zion \xe2\x80\x94 the only king whose right it is \n\n* Bannatyno\'a Memoirs, pp. 197-204 ; Caldenrood, p. 48. \n\n\n\n48 INTRODUCTION. \n\nto prescribe what doctrines are to be taught and believed, what \nordinances are to be observed, and what offices are needful for the \nwelfare or the extension of the church \xe2\x80\x94 is not only important as \na correct theological principle, but it is momentous also in the con- \nsequences which flow from it. Whatever the doctrines, the ordi- \nnances, and the offices may be, which Christ has instituted in his \nchurch, his people have received them from him, to be held as a \nsacred deposit, for the ends for which they have been given. The \nmembers of the church are not at liberty to surrender these doc- \ntrines, to yield up these ordinances, or to change or abolish these \noffices. To do either would constitute a breach of trust, and mani- \nfest a contempt for the privileges with which they were endowed. \nIt would indicate a disparagement of the wisdom of the church\'s \nHead, and would further involve a usurpation of the authority \nwith which he alone is clothed. If the members of the church \xe2\x80\x94 \nas individuals or in their collective capacity \xe2\x80\x94 dare not act in this \nmanner without flagrant sin, neither have those who are invested \nwith office a similar liberty. They hold their office from Christ, to \nwhom they are responsible, and who demands of them that they \nshall be faithful in the administration of all their functions. \nThey are not at liberty to increase or to diminish the number of \nthe institutions which Christ has appointed. They are not legis- \nlators, to enact new laws, enjoin ordinances or doctrines which are \nnot already given by Him whose right it is to rule. Their office is \nexecutive and declarative, not legislative. And, consequently, \nthey are not at liberty \xe2\x80\x94 either at the suggestion of their own wis- \ndom, or in order to please any party, within or without the pale \nof the church \xe2\x80\x94 to change or surrender what Christ has ordained. \nIf speculative men, who are fond of novelty or changes in re- \nligion, \xe2\x80\x94 if worldly men, who dislike holiness of doctrine, \xe2\x80\x94 if civil \nrulers, who are ambitious of authority in the household of faith, \xe2\x80\x94 \nshould suggest or demand any change or surrender of these trusts, \nthen the reply of every enlightened and faithful servant must be, \n" These are not ours, but Christ\'s. They have been committed to \nour hands, to be held for his glory ; to be retained, amid all perils, \nin their integrity, for the ends of their institution, and thus to be \ntransmitted to coming ages. It is His prerogative who gave them \nto modify or abrogate them, not ours." \n\nThe Scottish mind soon comprehended this principle. It per- \nmeated the masses of the people ; and, under the influence of such \nleaders as Knox, Melville, and Henderson, the professors of the \nreformed faith comprehended their duties as well as their privi- \nleges, and they saw that the one involved the other. \n\nIt is obvious, that an intellectual, energetic, and high-minded \npeople, educated in such principles, and thoroughly imbued with \ntheir influences, would be prepared for resisting all attempts at en- \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 49 \n\ncroacliing on their spiritual privileges. Hence the prompt resist- \nance of the Scottish people to the exercise of arbitrary power, in \necclesiastical matters, by Charles I. and Charles II. in Scotland, \xe2\x80\x94 \na resistance as remarkable for the clearness of conception which \npervaded all ranks of the community regarding the principles \nwhich were involved, as it was for the tenacity of purpose wnich \nthey displayed, and the enormous sacrifices of ease, property, \nliberty, and life which were so freely made during the protracted \ncontest. The struggle had commenced in the reign of James ; but, \nwhen Charles I. succeeded to the throne, it became obvious that \nall the wiles of diplomacy and courtly intrigue, and all the power \nof the secular arm, would be used to abolish presbytery and esta- \nblish prelacy in its stead. There were a few in Scotland who held \nthe doctrine, that resistance to the civil magistrate was unlawful \nfor Christians \xe2\x80\x94 although his rule might be unjust and oppressive \xe2\x80\x94 \nso long as he confined his power to mere secular things.* We shall \nhave occasion to show that the great majority of the people had \nclearer views on the relation which should subsist between rulers \nand their subjects. Many would have submitted to much that was \noppressive, with no other kind of opposition than that of remon- \nstrance and supplication; while others held more decided views \non this subject. " But all were compelled to perceive, that the \nking had much more in view than to allow them even the hard \nalternative of obedience or punishment, which, in matters dis- \ntinctly religious, must always subject men to penalties till the civil \nmagistrate can be prevailed on to relax his requirements. The \nintention of his majesty, it was easily seen, was positively to com- \npel them to adopt all those changes in religious worship which he \nmight think proper to introduce, and to prohibit absolutely and \nunconditionally those modes of worship which they believed to be \nmost accordant with the word and will of God. The alternative \nWM not obedience or the forfeiture of certain civil advantages and \nthe infliction of certain temporal penalties, but obedience or im- \nprisonment, exile, and death; or, rather, it was, obey the king, \nthough V"U should thereby be disobedient to God. With deep and \nanxious solioitude, they set themselves to the investigation of this \n\n* The peculiar character of the trials which the people of Scotland had to en- \ncounter -".,11 dispelled from their minds any Lingering eloads of darkness on the \nsubject of aon-reautanoe and paasive obedience, in England, so long as the Court \nvisited Puritan* and Dissenters with pains and penalties, there were many of the \n\ni u who held most determinedly t" the doom P passive obedienoe. When, \n\nII. ascended Urn throne, the Episcopalians began I i \nrienoe the application of their own principles, they speedily abandoned them for \noal and common view which had been maintained by those whom, without \ncompunction, they had seen visited with oonfi cation, imprisonment, and oompli- \n- I \'\xe2\x80\xa2 (fume\'s History of England; Boston: Phillip \nmo, vni. vi. pp. 822 829. klaoeulay\'s History of England; New York: \n. l2mo, vol. ii. chap, ix. pp. 801 806. \n4 \n\n\n\n50 INTRODUCTION. \n\nmomentous question; and, after the most profound and studious \nperusal of eminent divines and jurists, and especially of the Bible, \nthey arrived at the conclusion, that a Christian people were en- \ntitled to take up arms in defence of their religious liberties against \nany assailant."* \n\nIf is not our province to trace the history of the great struggle \nwhich was continued during four reigns, and which deluged the \nsoil of Scotland with the blood of her martyred heroes. Our \nobject is merely to point to the principles which were involved in \nthe strife, and to the fact, that these persecutions were mainly \ninstrumental in bringing to this country many of the worthy \nfathers and founders of our Zion. Of these, some were igno- \nminiously transported as felons for their attachment to the cause \nof God. They were prayerful and holy men. Their crime, in \nthe eye of their oppressors, was, that they would not violate the \ndictates of conscience, and sin against the law of their God. \nOthers fled, because they saw no prospect in their own country \nthat the ark of the Lord would enjoy a safe resting-place, and \nthey sought a region in which they might worship God in peace ; \nwhile others still, attracted by the prospects which the colonies \nheld forth to them, left the homes of their ancestors, and sought \nan asylum in the companionship of those who had borne a good \ntestimony and endured much hardness for their Lord and Saviour. \n\nIn Ireland, the causes which produced the remarkable exodus \nof the Presbyterian inhabitants of Ulster to the North American \ncolonies, which commenced in the end of the seventeenth century, \nand which has continued to flow with more or less regularity until \nthe present time, were different, in some respects, from those \nwhich prevailed in Scotland. These causes soon began to affect \nthe Scottish settlers, who had been induced to occupy the lands \nwhich fell into the hands of the Crown after the suppression of the \ngreat rebellion of O\'Niell. The settlement, or, as it has been \ncalled, the "Plantation of Ulster," by settlers from Scotland and \nEngland, commenced in the reign of James I. This great mea- \nsure was rendered necessary because of the deplorable condition \nto which the northern province had been reduced by the pro- \ntracted wars in the time of Elizabeth. The whole kingdom had \ngreatly suffered, but the northern portion had especially been de- \nvastated and reduced to the lowest and most abject condition of \nmisery.f \n\nAfter the accession of James, arrangements were made to extend \nEnglish laws and customs over the whole of the kingdom. In \n\n\n\n* Hetkerington\'s History of the Church of Scotland ; third edition, p. 102. \nVide also Baillie, vol. i. p. 189. \n-j- Leland, vol. ii. p. 410; Cox, vol. ii. p. 3 ; Morrison, vol. ii. pp. 172, 200, 283. \' \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 51 \n\nLondon, O\'Xiell and O\'Donnell were received with marks of dis- \ntinguished favour. The former was confirmed in the Earldom of \nTyrone, and the latter was created Earl of Tyrconnell ; while an \nact of oblivion and indemnity was published under the Great Seal\', \nwhereby all offences committed before the accession of James were \npardoned, and never to be called into further question. Most of \nthe Irish lords yielded their estates to the Crown, and received \nthem back again under an English title. Speedily, however, it \nappeared, that the restraints under which O\'Niell and Tyrconnell \nhad placed themselves were more than their impetuous spirits \ncould brook. Formerly, they had been recognised as masters in \ntheir own territories, \xe2\x80\x94 their will had been received as law ; but \nnow they felt that officials were ordained to administer the pro- \nvisions of a code which, they perceived with regret and chagrin, \nabridged their power, and divested them of honour in presence of \ntheir people. Smarting under disappointment, and perhaps dread- \ning the further interference of the English authorities, which \nthey apprehended would prove adverse to the Romish church, as \nwell as to their personal dignity, they commenced the arrange- \nments of a plot, which was never matured, in consequence of the \n[y flight of the two chieftains to the continent. Romish parti- \nsans have laboured most sedulously to show that the charge of a plot \nagainst the two Northern earls is absurd ; but the authorities on \nwhich they rely clearly demonstrate that proceedings had been \ncommenced, which, had it not been for their speedy departure, \nwould have resulted in turbulence and civil war.* \n\nThe flight of Tyrone and Tyrconnell caused their extensive \nestates to revert to the Crown ; and the settlement of these lands, \nWith such a population as would promote the arts of peace and \nindustry, became a leading object of James\'s policy. The regu- \n- which the King adopted for the settlement of the lands in \nUlster were, in many respects, well calculated to secure the \nobjects of tin\' Government, had they been faithfully carried out \nby the principal "undertakers" among whom the estates were \ndivided. In many case8, however, the stipulations assented to by \nth\xc2\xab- undertakers were disregarded, especially in relation to fixed \nand the granting of leases t<> the tenants, who had been \ninduced to Bettle on the lands as fanners. Grievances on these \npoints were complained "I" finally by Bottlers from England and \nScotland. In the twelfth article <>[\' the " Conditions" on which \nthe proprietors reoeived their estates, it was enacted, that " the \nlaid undertakers Bhall not dcini.se any part of their lands at will \n\n\n\n: Ireland, toI ii. p. l_; Ungard, rol Ix p. Ml. Dolman\'a \nappUment," p. 186, in O\'Connor 1 * \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 n \n\n\n\n52 INTRODUCTION. \n\nonly, but shall make certain estates for years, for life, in tail, or in \nfee-simple;"* and yet it was found that this important condition, \nso essential to the prosperity of the plantation, was neglected from \nthe beginning.f \n\nDuring the subsequent history of the Ulster Plantation, the irri- \ntating and depressing influence of this unjust conduct of the under- \ntakers continued to produce a plentiful crop of injuries. Tenants \nlearned that they were altogether in the hands of their landlords, \nand they felt that they possessed no adequate means of protecting \nthemselves from their rapacity and avarice. If they improved \ntheir holdings, then they might be \xe2\x80\x94 and were often \xe2\x80\x94 called on to \npay a higher rent to their landlords, because of their own indus- \ntry, which had increased the value of the farms. If they neglected \nto improve their lands, then they suffered from poverty and its at- \ntendant evils. \n\nOn the whole, and notwithstanding these obstacles to improve- \nment, the province continued to advance in prosperity. Letters \narrived from Scotland, and they were followed by ministers of the \ngospel, who were encouraged to remove to Ireland by the pros- \npects of usefulness among their countrymen, as well as by the \nproceedings of the Irish Convocation, in which the learned and \ntolerant Ussher had borne so prominent a part. A remarkable \nrevival of religion followed the labours of these devoted servants \nof God, and the cause of divine truth began to prosper in a re- \nmarkable degree in Ulster. \n\nNo sooner, however, had the inflexible character of the Presby- \nterianism of these faithful ministers been established, and the suc- \ncess become obvious which followed their services, than they were \ncalled on to encounter the jealousy of Echlin, the Bishop of \nDown, who proceeded, in a short time, to suspend two of their \nnumber. Through the influence of Ussher, these men were re- \nstored again ; but, soon afterwards, Echlin silenced four other \n\n\n\n* Vide "Confiscation of Ulster," by MacNevin, Dublin and London: 1846, \np. 135. \n\nf Complaints on this subject became so loud that, at length, a commission was \nappointed to investigate the state of the Ulster settlement. The returns, as given \nin " Pynnar\'s Survey," indicate a lamentable state of affairs. No less than \neighteen of the most extensive undertakers are reported as defaulters in the matter \nof leases. " He hath made no estates," is a common entry. In the cases of others, \nno information could be procured, because of their absence from their properties. \n(Vide "Confiscation of Ulster," pp. 171-195.) The conduct of the London com- \npanies, among whom the county of" Londonderry was divided, appears to have been \nequally negligent. The Grocers\', the Ironmongers\', the Haberdashers\', the Drapers\', \nand the Salters\' Companies appear to have been most culpable. ( Vide ante, pp. \n221-228.) It is no wonder that Pynnar should state in his report, "that from the \ninsecurity of tenure, many of the English tenants did not then plough upon the \nlands, nor use husbandry, because they feared to stock themselves with cattle and \nservants for such labours." \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 53 \n\nbrethren, and, accordingly, the whole Scottish settlers were filled \nwith alarm and distress. Although the case of these aggrieved \nmen was carried up to London, and referred by the King to the \nLord-Deputy of Ireland, still, they did not receive redress. \nAlarmed at the gloomy state of affairs, and perceiving no ray of \ntight in any part of the horizon, the Ulster Presbyterians directed \ntheir attention to New England, with the view of removing thither, \nin despair of enjoying either civil or religious liberty at home. In \nthe Bpring of 1034, Mr. Livingston, and a layman named William \n"Wallace, were deputed to visit the colony, and select a suitable \nplace of settlement. They went to London, and afterwards to \nPlymouth, in furtherance of their instructions ; but subsequently, \nbeing deterred by various untoward circumstances, they returned \nto Ulster, where they found their brethren prepared to await the \nevents which a change, that had taken place in the administration \nof the civil affairs of the kingdom, might produce.* \n\nInstead, however, of any amelioration in ecclesiastical affairs, \nthe appointment of the notorious Wentworth as lord-deputy led to \nan accumulation of grievances which sadly oppressed an already- \nafllieted people. Under the influence of Laud, decided steps were \ntoken to modify the church in Ireland so/ as to accord with his \nRomanising views. Serious alterations for the worse were made \nin Trinity College in Dublin. Arminianism was openly favoured. \nBramhallf and Leslie, who proved most bitter and unscrupulous \ntormentors of the Presbyterians, were promoted; and, through \nthe efforts of Wentworth, a high-commission court was established \nin Dublin, which enabled the deputy to subject the freedom and \nproperty of every individual in the kingdom to his control. The \nPresbyterians were soon made to feel the effects of this new \ninstrument of tyranny. On the death of Echlin, Leslie was ap- \npointed to bis see. He immediately signalized himself by the \nMspensioD of five other ministers. And bis intolerance and re- \nlentlesa Beverity hastened the intended voyage to New England ; \nf\xc2\xbbr the Presbyterian laity were now thoroughly satisfied that it \nw.is tlnir duty to abandon a country in which their religious privi- \nvere bo flagrantly violated. The affecting incidents of this \nremarkable voyage are well known* and need not be enlarged on \nhere. The resseJ which bore so precious a cargo,! after aocom- \n\n\n\n\xe2\x99\xa6 Bdd\'l Hi-tory. vol L p. 1 12. \n\nt Afterwards oalled "The Canterbury oil Ireland," from his teal in imitating \nI. hi I. \n\nI my, wii" m ebonl to settle in the anoaltrvated mM\xc2\xab of \n\xe2\x96\xa0 DJoying liberty of eonsoieuoe, were one hundred and \ni \xe2\x96\xa0 r. kmong Ihem, were Mr. Blair, Mr. Livingston, Mr. Roberl Hamil- \nton, and Mr. J. .lm MeGeUand, afterward* minister! In Scotland; John Stuart, Pro- \nvost of Ayr, Captain Andrt Charles Campbell, John Sumerrfl, Bngl \n\n\n\n54 INTRODUCTION. \n\nplishing about two-thirds of the voyage, was arrested by severe \nstorms, and, after great suffering by all on board, was provi- \ndentially driven back to Carrickfergus Bay. The ministers, being \nprevented from exercising their offices in Ireland, were compelled \nto flee to Scotland, where they were soon settled in pastoral \ncharges. \n\nFrom this period until the breaking-out of the Massacre of \n1641, the trials of the Presbyterians were exceedingly oppressive. \nFor instance, the Bishop of Down was authorized to arrest, in a \nsummary manner, and to imprison during pleasure, the Non-con- \nformists in his diocese. Wentworth, aware that the laity were \naccustomed to maintain an affectionate intercourse with their pas- \ntors who had been banished to Scotland, resolved to abolish the \npractice. By concentrating troops in the northeastern districts, \nhe cut off all connection between the kingdoms, and, at the same \ntime, alarmed the Scotch, who knew not when he might land these \nforces to aid the King in his efforts against the religious liberties \nof Scotland. In pursuance of his plans for the extermination of \nPresbyterianism, and the prevention of any effort on the part of \nthe people to oppose the arbitrary measures of Charles, Wentworth \nnow adopted an expedient more intolerable and oppressive than \nany which lie had previously attempted. This was the imposition, \non the Ulster Scots, of the celebrated Black Oath, \xe2\x80\x94 so called, \nbecause they were compelled to swear, never to oppose any of the \nKing\'s commands, and to abjure all covenants and oaths contrary \nto the tenor of this unconditional engagement. The proceedings \nconnected with the enforcement of this ensnaring and illegal mea- \nsure were of the most flagitious character, involving the Presby- \nterians in manifold sufferings. Having tried every expedient \nshort of extirpation \xe2\x80\x94 oaths, fines, forfeitures, and imprisonment \xe2\x80\x94 \nwithout subduing the Scots, he, at length, conceived the idea of \nbanishing them altogether out of the kingdom. The result, had \nhe succeeded, would have secured the overthrow of Protestantism \nin Ireland ; for the few scattered Protestants who would have re- \nmained could never have withstood the furious assaults of the \nRomanists in the massacre which took place during the year fol- \nlowing. His object was, by means of intrigue, to procure from \nthe Irish Parliament a recommendation to remove the Northern \nPresbyterians, lest they should unite with Argyle and aid him in \nhis objects in Scotland, or lest he might invade Ulster, and, by \ntheir means, effect an insurrection in the North. Happily, when \nParliament assembled, the state of affairs was such that the project \nwas never submitted; and it only remains on record as an evidence \nof his reckless and unfeeling despotism. \n\nBrown, mritk many families and single persons." (Reid\'s History, vol. i. chap. iv. \np. 201.) \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 55 \n\nIn the calamitous period of 1641, the Presbyterians suffered \nseverely, and many were treacherously and ruthlessly butchered. \nOf the ministers, a number had withdrawn or been banished to \nScotland, and, on the occasion of the first alarm at the breaking \nout of the storm, a season was given for preparation ere the terrible \nvisitation, which swept over the country, had time to reach the \nScottish settlers. In this way many lives were providentially \nsaved. As soon as peace was restored, the cause of Presbyte- \nrianism began to flourish again. The chaplains, who had come \nto Lister with the Scottish regiments which had been drafted \nover to meet the emergency, consented to remain in the country. \nA presbytery was regulaily organized, sessions were formally \nestablished in many congregations, and the foundations of the \nchurch were laid broad and deep in the land. A fervent appeal \nto the Assembly, in Edinburgh, was favourably entertained, and \nadditional ministers were sent to Ulster. Of these, some had been \nin Ireland before. They were all men of deep piety and fervent \nzeal, and, under their ministrations, the church broke forth on the \nright hand and on the left. In many districts of the country, where \nsettlers had languished for the ordinances of religion, churches \nWere formed, and successful efforts were made for the enforcement \nof strict discipline throughout the bounds of the presbytery, in ac- \ncordance with the practice of the parent-church. \n\n< m the abolition of the monarchy, by the execution of Charles I., \nthe Lister Presbyterians found that trials were still in store for \nthem; and, although Prelacy had been deprived of its former \npower, they learned that the downfall of their old enemies \nbrought them little relief. They occupied a middle position be- \ntween the High-Church Prelatic party, that would have restored \nthe monarchy on the principles of non-resistance and passiVe \nobedience, and the Independents and other sectaries, who would \nhave destroyed all royal authority in the state, and all settled \ngovernment, whether Episcopal or Presbyterian, in the church. \nPresbyterians were anxious for a constitutional monarchy, \n\nwith proper restraints OD the royal authority, and with adequate \n\nsecurities on the subject of religion; while they adhered to the \n1 mi-, and desired the establishmenl of a Presbyterian form \n\nof government in the church. Accordingly, they did not as-cut, \nto tin \xe2\x96\xa0 policy of the Leaders who represented the authority of Crom- \nwell in [reland; and, on his \xc2\xbb\xc2\xab n arrival, they continued steadily to \n\nite his news. Forthwith, the presbytery was first threatened \nby the army, under Venables, and, subsequently, a considerable \nDumber of the ministers were imprisoned because they refused be \nswear to an Bffe lgbhent, which would have committed! them to an \nabandonment of their well-known principles. Afterwards, many \ne-t\' them, because of the privations which they had to encounter, \n\n\n\n56 INTRODUCTION. \n\nwere compelled to flee to Scotland, while a plan was concocted for \ntransporting the remainder of them out of the kingdom. At one \ntime, Cromwell designed to remove the leading Presbyterians to \nMunster, the southern province of the island, and a proclamation \nto that effect was made.* Had the measure been carried out, it \nmight have produced a powerful effect in ameliorating the con- \ndition of the island, as the North would not have been surren- \ndered by the Scottish population ; and when the influence of that \npeople in Ulster is contrasted with the want of energy which has \nbeen displayed by the Protestants of the South, it is perhaps to \nbe regretted that the design of Cromwell was not executed. \n\nAlthough Charles II. was fully aware, that the Presbyterians \nlaboured with great zeal and success in promoting his restoration, \nyet, having determined on patronizing Prelacy, it would have \nmanifested weakness to expect that a man who had no gratitude, \nand who never remembered his benefactors, would interfere to \ndeliver his friends from the fresh troubles in which they were in- \nvolved by. the return of their old enemies to power. About this \nperiod it became customary with the gentry, who aimed at com- \nmending themselves to the bishops and their friends in power, to \nexhibit their zeal by inflicting a series of annoyances of an irri- \ntating character on the Presbyterian ministers. Foremost, now, \namong their clerical persecutors, stood the celebrated Jeremy \nTaylor, Bishop of Down and Connor, f who, after citing the breth- \nren in his diocese to his visitation, proceeded, in the most summary \nfashion, to proclaim thirty-six of their churches vacant. His ex- \nample was followed by others of the Northern prelates, and, in a \nshort time, no less than sixty-one ministers^ were prohibited from \n\n\n\n* Vide Copy of the Proclamation, in Reid, vol. ii. pp. 272-275. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0J- These references to the arbitrary proceedings of the bishops in Ireland, and to \nthe Prelatica! supporters of the despotism of the Stuarts in Scotland, are not made \n.\xe2\x80\xa2with a view to create prejudice against Episcopacy. In Scotland there was a \nLeighton, and in Ireland there were Ussher, Bedell, and others, who were tolerant \nand benevolent as well as learned men. The odium of these unjust and tyrannical \nmeasures belongs to the men and to the spirit of the age in which they lived. In \nScotland, the Parliament never represented the people. The General Assembly \nwas the court in which the popular voice was heard. Hence it came to pass that, \nas the Assembly was opposed to Prelacy, the Scottish bishops threw themselves \ninto the arms of the monarch, and sided with his subservient Parliament. They \nsustained the King because he supported them. In Ireland, also, the upholders \nof Episcopacy found that the spread of Presbyterianism would certainly limit \nthe powers of the hierarchy, and eventually succeed in abolishing the pecu- \nliar features of the system, if its progress were not arrested ; and they therefore \nlent themselves to sustain the Court against a people whose political views gave \noffence to the monarch. Thus, in Ireland, as well as in Scotland, the bishops saw \nthat, as a reward for their services in maintaining the royal authority, the power \nof the civil arm would be extended to sustain themselves. ( Vide Hodge\'s His- \ntory, p. 59, note.) \n\nJ There were nearly seventy ministers, associated together in presbyteries, at \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 57 \n\nexercising any of their functions in the country. Had they \nmerely been deprived of their temporal benefices, they would \nhave borne the injury with meekness ; but to be prohibited, under \npains and penalties, from preaching, baptizing, and ministering, in \nany way, to their flocks, and to see that thus, by one stroke, \nnearly all the ministers of the province were silenced, was to them \nand to their people an inexpressibly severe trial.* \n\nIn process of time, a season of relief was enjoyed again, and a \ngoodly number of ministers returned to their charges ; but they \nhad scarcely resumed their labours ere they were called on to \nencounter renewed persecutions. Numbers of them were im- \nprisoned. In different districts their churches were closed ; and, \ngenerally, their worship was interdicted, while the penalties of \nrecusancy were inflicted on both ministers and people, by an in- \ntolerant, time-serving, and reckless magistracy. So long did this \ndeplorable state of affairs continue, and so severe were the dis- \nss of the ministers and the members of their charges in the \ncounties of Donegal and Derry, that, in the year 1684, the ma- \njority of the Presbytery of Laggan intimated to their brethren \nin other presbyteries their intention of removing to America, " be- \ncame of persecutions and general poverty abounding in those \nparts, and on account of their straits and little or no access to \ntheir niini.stry."f \n\nDuring the reign of James II., the ^Presbyterians, as well as the \nother Protestants of the country, were called on to contend against \nthe efforts which were then made to establish Popery in the king- \ndom. Favoured by William III., and even endowed by that \nprince, yet no sooner had Anne ascended the throne than the \nsame intolerant High-Church party that had formerly oppressed \ntin-in renewed their assaults. At one time, their annoyances \narose from embarrassments about the marriages which the lninis- \n\nthis period. <>f those, seven only conformed to Prelacy, and sixty-one remained \nfaithful to their principles. Of the small number of ministers in Ulster who were \nDOt Presbyterian, and who had been endowed during Cromwell\'s time, DO fewer \ntli m < l\'-ven appear to have conformed to Prelacy. \n\n* "Those ministers enjoyed the painful, though honourable, pre-eminence of \nbeine; the first to suffer in the three knurl. m-. Hi\'- Non-conforinists of England not \n1 ejected till the month of August in the following year, nor the Presbyterians \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 tnd till the subsequent month of < October, 1662. The reasou of the minis- \nter-, being ejected in Ireland so long before their brethren in the Bhrter kingdom \nIs; \xe2\x80\x94 The old form of ehurcii government un<i worship had never been \nabolished by law in Ireland; and therefore, at the Restoration, Prelacy, being \n\xe2\x96\xa0tin the legal Establishment, was Immediately recognised and enforced. Both in \ni I an I in Scotland it had been abolished by acta of their respective Parlia- \n\nnents, and thi nbstituted in room of the Common Prayer Book. It \n\ntherefore, that these aota should be ami repealed, and new \nParliament passed, before the bishops had power to proceed against those who did \ni. v.. I. ii. p, 860, and oote 16 "n same page.) \n\nf Prom MS. Minute-, QUOtsd by 1UM, vol. ii. | \n\n\n\n58 INTRODUCTION. \n\nters were accustomed to celebrate among their own people. At \nanother time, they were assailed because their ministers obeyed \ntheir presbyteries by preaching in vacant charges ; while the most \nabsurd charges of disloyalty were urged against them in virulent \npamphlets, and often made the subject of legal investigation before \nunscrupulous magistrates. To such lengths were these harsh pro- \nceedings carried, that a presbytery, which had met for the pur- \npose of forming a new congregation, were arrested and indicted \nfor a riot, while they were sitting peaceably engaged in the \ndischarge of their duties, making provision for the spiritual edifi- \ncation of their own members. Add to these trials the compli- \ncated insults and vexations which flowed from the adoption by the \nGovernment of the "Sacramental Test-Act," an act which, in its \noperation, was most oppressive, and it will not seem strange that, \nat this period, considerable numbers of the Presbyterians began to \nseek relief by emigration to the colonies. In England, the Dis- \nsenters enjoyed full security for their religious observances ; but \nin Ireland, and among the Presbyterians, the disabilities created \nby this act extended to all civil and military offices held under the \nCrown. In fact, no Presbyterian could hold any situation in the \narmy, the navy, the customs, the excise, or the post-office, in any \ncourt of law, or officiate as a magistrate, without conforming to the \nEstablished Church. \n\nAfter the accession of the House of Hanover to the throne, \nthe Ulster Presbyterians continued to endure many grievances of \nthe most mortifying and irritating character, even subsequent to \nthe period when their worship was legalized by the "Act of Tole- \nration." Many of the largest estates were in the hands of Epis- \ncopalians, who utterly refused to allow Presbyterian churches to \nbe erected on their properties. To enforce conformity, many \nlandlords exacted a higher rental from Presbyterians than they \ndemanded from their Episcopal tenantry; and, as soon as any \nyielded to this pressure, and joined the Established Church, their \nrents were reduced to a just standard. Though constituting two- \nthirds of the population of Ulster, no gentleman of their com- \nmunion could fill the office of magistrate or sheriff, and even their \nteachers had much difficulty in conducting their schools. At \nlength, on the accession of George II., such changes occurred in \nmany districts of Ulster, that emigration to America began to be \ncarried out on a scale far beyond any thing known in the history \nof the province. After the Revolution, and with a view to en- \ncourage the agricultural prosperity of the North, many of the \nlandholders had given leases to their tenants in conformity with \nthe article in the " Condition" to which we have already referred. \nMany of these leases were only for thirty-one years ; and, now \nthat they had expired, the landlords took advantage of the \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 59 \n\ntenants, and raised the rents of their holdings to an unwonted \nsum, because of the increased value of the lands, which had been \nimproved by the tenants\' skill and industry. Add to this the \nannoyance of a proportionate increase of tithe paid to a hier- \narchy and clergy who not only rendered the Presbyterians no \nspiritual benefits in return, but, on the other hand, were their \nmost determined oppressors, \xe2\x80\x94 and, still further, the distresses \narising from a number of uncongenial seasons, which produced \nscanty harvests, \xe2\x80\x94 and it will not be thought strange that emi- \ngration should be hailed as a boon by any people so unfavourably \ncircumstanced. \n\nAddressing the Secretary of State in England, Archbishop \nBoulter gives a melancholy picture of the condition to which the \nNorthern Presbyterians had been reduced. According to his \nstatement, a number of agents from the colonies, and masters of \nvessels, aware of the distress which existed and of the dissatis- \nfaction which was felt by the people with the administration of \nlaw. had travelled through the country, pointing out the advan- \n\nwhich might be enjoyed by those who would resolve to cross \n\nAtlantic and seek that peace and prosperity which were \nOffered in an American home. The archbishop also shows that, \nin three years, no less than four thousand tA\\o hundred men, \n\ni. and children had deserted the country, and that, of these, \nii" less than three thousand one hundred had gone in the summer \nof 1 7_!s.* The wisdom of the Head of the church in all these \nprovidences is abundantly manifest. Had the Ulster Presbyte- \nrians been permitted to abandon their country at the time when \nLivingston and Wallace were deputed to prepare for carrying \nout the scheme, their numbers were then so few that a small body \nonly could have reached the colonies, while it is probable that a, \nweak remnant only, unable to contend with the trials which were \nstill to be encountered, would have remained at home. Had the \nvoyage of \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2The Eagle-Wing" succeeded, a similar result must \nhave taken place. Ulster would never, in that case, have become \nthe great nursery for our church which it has been for a century \nand a quarter, Bending off the excess of its population from year \n\n:r to strengthen the cause which had been established on \nthis great continent, while the parent-stock, which remained in \n\nd land, continued to grow and prosper. The church had \n\nnow, however, attained to a considerable magnitude; ami, from \n\nt It i - time forward, the American colonies presented attractions to \nUlster Pn byterians which the lapse of time and the occur* \n\n\n\n161. Writing in the spring of m \nI [ng "ii about one U \n\nI \n\n\n\n60 INTRODUCTION. \n\nrence of many social changes on both sides of the ocean have not \nserved to diminish. The tide which then commenced to flow has \nnever ceased to set in the same direction, until, at the present \ntime, it is probable that the descendants of the Irish Presbyte- \nrians in the United States are threefold more numerous than the \nwhole Presbyterian population now in Ireland.* \n\nThe circumstances here enumerated will account for the fact, \nthat a greater number of settlers arrived in this country from \nScotland than from Ireland during the middle of the seventeenth \ncentury, and that afterwards this proportion was decidedly re- \nversed, and the majority were supplied from Ireland. The \ntroubles in Scotland were mainly terminated by the Revolution \nsettlement; but many of the grievances of the Ulster Presbyte- \nrians were only then commencing. In Scotland, the difficulties \nconnected with the tenure of land did not exist, while it was \nchiefly after the Revolution that the evils of the landlord system \nin Ireland began to be fully experienced.! These trials were \nendured by the people of Ulster until patience became exhausted ; \nand, as hope died out, the disheartened people began \xe2\x80\x94 at first in \nsmall numbers, and then in greater bodies \xe2\x80\x94 to desert their homes. \nAlthough a goodly number of emigrants had gradually been \nleaving the country for the colonies, and even Makemie and \nothers had commenced their labours among the Scotch and \nUlster settlers before the Revolution, still, it was after that period \nthat the great emigration-movement commenced, which, at length, \nattained to such a magnitude that certain leading authorities! in \nIreland began to dread the removal of the entire Presbyterian \npopulation of Ulster. \xc2\xa7 For instance, six thousand Irish are \nreported as having come to this country in 1729, and, before the \nmiddle of the century, nearly twelve thousand arrived annually \nfor several years. || Of these, the greater number arrived in \nPennsylvania, although many of them afterwards removed to Vir- \nginia and the Carolinas. At the same time, Charleston had be- \ncome a favourite port of arrival for Irish and Scottish settlers, \nmany of whom found their way out into the agricultural districts \n\n\n\n* Vide Reid, vol. iii. p. 514, note 55. \n\nf Many of these evils still exist in different parts of the country, and, for several \nyears past, an effort has been made to settle the questions in dispute between the \nlandlords and the cultivators of the soil. The measure is popularly known as \nthe "Tenant-right" movement. \n\n% Wodrow\'s MS. Letters, xx., No. 129. \n\n| Vide Hodge\'s History, p. 65 ; Holmes\'s Annals, vol. ii. p. 123. Holmes says, \nthat, "in the first fortnight of 1773, three thousand five hundred passengers ar- \nrived in Pennsylvania from Ireland. In October, a ship arrived from Galway, in \nthe North (west) of Ireland, with eighty passengers, and a ship from Belfast, with \none hundred and seventy passengers." Vol. ii. p. 305. \n\n|| Proud\'s History of Pennsylvania, vol. ii. pp. 273-274. \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 61 \n\nof North and South Carolina, and numbers of the remainder con- \nstituted the early settlers of Georgia.* \n\nThe religious views of these founders of our church \xe2\x80\x94 whether \nthey came from Scotland or from Ireland \xe2\x80\x94 were equally decided \nand well known. They steadfastly adhered " to the form of \nsound Avords" laid down in the "Westminster Standards, which they \nheld to be the fullest, the clearest, and the most scriptural ex- \nhibition of the truths of revelation which had been drawn up for \nthe use of the church in any age. All the influences which had \nbeen brought to bear on the Scottish population, from the reign \nof James I. till that of William III., had never infected them \nwith the leaven of Pelagian or Socinian error. The Moderatism \nwhich afterwards grew up in the country, and produced such a \nharvest of evil, was a plant of later growth. The seed of this \nUpas-tree was sown at the time of the Revolution settlement, \nwhen the "compromise" or "comprehension" was assented to, \nwhich allowed the intruded Prelatists to remain in the parishes \nwhich they then held in the Scottish church. In Ireland, the \npopulation were equally Calvinistic and Evangelical. The allure- \nDUentfl of place and power, the fascinations of the national Esta- \nblishment, the tyranny of the Government, the continued perse* \ncations of the hierarchy, and the insolent conduct of the gentry, \nfor upwards of a century, were powerless to seduce or to drive \ntlirin from their integrity. The Ulster Scots maintained their \nprinciples through the storm as well as in the calm, resisting \nalike the minions of the Stuarts during the monarchy, and the \nproffered endowments or the frowns of the officials of Cromwell in \ntin- days of the commonwealth. They could leave the country, but \nthey could not abandon their principles. No prelatic forms had \ncr.pt into the system of church government to which they were \nattached, and they were equally free from Arminian views; while \nno elements of Congregationalism had been adopted into their \ndiscipline. They were as much opposed to Independency, on the \none band, a- tiny were to Prelacy, on the other; and that form \nof church government which they loved, and for the maintain- \nIMC of which they had testified in days of trial, they brought \nwith them to these Bhores. Politically and religiously, thcy \n\nwere in a strait between three parties, and from the enmity \noh they had to calculate on ill-will ami Buffering, The \n\n- hated them, as being heretics, and as intruders on a \n."oil which formed the heritage of their fathers. The Prelatists \ntrampled apoo them, as a stiff-necked gem ration, because they \n\n1 to acknowledge tin- lawfulness of the power which the \n\n\n\ni. pp. I\'M, 1 11\'. \n\n\n\n62 INTRODUCTION. \n\nheads of the church assumed. And the civil rulers of the day sub- \njected them to penalties, because they protested against tyranny, \nand demanded the exercise of constitutional power in the state. \n\nEven as early as 1559 we find Willock \xe2\x80\x94 the colleague of Knox \n\xe2\x80\x94 propounding to the Convention of Estates,* in Edinburgh, the \ndoctrine, " that the power of rulers was limited both by reason \nand by Scripture, and that they might be deprived of it upon \nvalid grounds." To these sentiments Knox assented, with certain \nlimitations, not of the principle, but merely to guard against pas- \nsion or prejudice being allowed to rule in the practical application \nof the principle in individual cases. The Assembly of 1649 de- \nclared "that, as magistrates and their power are ordained of God, \nso they are, in the exercise thereof, not to walk after their own \nwill, but according to the law of equity and righteousness ; that \na boundless and unlimited power is to be acknowledged in no \nking or magistrate ; and that there is a mutual obligation betwixt \nthe king and his people, \xe2\x80\x94 each of them is tied to the other for the \nperformance of mutual and reciprocal duties." From these posi- \ntions the Scottish people were never driven. To these sentiments, \nand to the principles laid down in the Covenants, both the Scot- \ntish and the Ulster Presbyteriansf adhered during that long war- \nfare, in which they resisted the power of the Stuart dynasty, and \nin which they ultimately triumphed, while the faithless race that \nhad oppressed them was hurled from the throne. \n\nThe training through which, in Scotland and Ireland, our \nemigrant fathers had been conducted was admirably adapted to \nconstitute them wise and energetic founders of new states. They \nwere lovers of liberty, but they respected law ; and it was a por- \ntion of their creed that the office of the civil magistrate is of \nGod. Such a people were eminently qualified for establishing and \nmaintaining the institutions of a free country. All national asso- \nciations of men require the influence of a restraining power. An \natheistical or an immoral people may be controlled by the pre- \n\n* Vide Hetherington, 3d ed., Edinburgh, p. 25. \n\nf When the Irish Presbyterians were charged with disloyalty by one of their \nmany traducers, in the reign of Anne, their defender, Kirkpatrick, justifies their \nviews by an appeal to the principles which placed William III. on the throne. He \nquotes the sentiments of Hoadly as expressing Presbyterian views. Hoadly had \nreceived the thanks of the House of Commons for his writings ; and Kirkpatrick \nquotes, from the sermon preached by him before the Lord-Mayor of London, the \nfollowing: \xe2\x80\x94 "If, therefore, they (t. e. magistrates) use their power, to the hurt \nand prejudice of human society, they act not, in any such instances, by authority \nfrom God, but contrary to His will. Nor can they, in such instances, be called \nhis vicegerents without the highest profaneness : and, therefore, to oppose them \nin such cases cannot be to oppose the authority of God; nay, a. passive non- \nresistance would appear, upon examination, to be a much greater opposition to the \nwill of God than the contrary." (Vide Kirkpatrick\'s "Presbyterian Loyalty," \nBelfast, 1713, p. 4.) \n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION. 63 \n\nsence of a military force which represents and carries out the \nwill of an autocrat; but a moral, religious, and educated people, \namong whom the fear of God dwells and the influences of religion \nare in full operation, will require little external force or compul- \nsion to secure the observance of order or obedience to just and \nequitable laws. Their religion and their politics both take hold \non the sanctions of eternity ; and in their integrity, their obedience \nto law, and their respect for those who rule, it will be seen that \ntrue religion is the only safe foundation on which the edifice of \ncivil society, especially in a republic, can be erected with any \nrational prospect of permanence. \n\nSuch were our emigrant fathers. " Their moral principles \nwere derived from the words of Him who lives and abides forever ; \nand the commands of God, and the awful retributions of eternity, \ngave force to these principles, which became a living power and \na controlling influence. The time has but just passed when the \nschoolmaster from Ireland taught the children of the Valley of \nVirginia and the upper part of the Carolinas as they taught in \nthe mother-country, \xe2\x80\x94 when the children and youth at school re- \ncited the Assembly\'s Catechism once a week and read parts of the \nBible every day. The circle of their instruction was circum- \nscribed ; but the children were taught to speak the truth and \ndefend it, to keep a good conscience, and fear God, \xe2\x80\x94 the founda- \ntion of good citizens and great men. Wherever they settled in \nAmerica, besides the common schools, they turned their attention \nto high-schools and academies, and to colleges, to educate men \nfor all the departments of life, carrying in their emigration the \ndeep conviction, that without sound education there could be no \npermanence in religious or civil institutions, or any pure and un- \nOebaeed enjoyments of domestic life."* \n\nThis work, in the body of which and in the biographical depart- \nment an attempt is made to record the incidents of the lives of a \ngoodly number of those honoured men and to chronicle their \nlabours in founding our Zion, will form an enduring monument to \ntheir intelligence, 1 1 j \xc2\xab -i r- social worth, and their earnest religious \nconviction.-. The seed which they sowed in troublous times, and \nwhich they watered with their tears, has, under the divine bless- \ning, grown up a goodly tree, and prospered, until its branches are \nspreading out and overshadowing this fair land ! " The memory \nof the just is blessed." E*t<> j>i-rj>ctua! \n\nWilliam Blackwood. \n\nNabob, 1867. \n\n* Footc\'a Sketches of North Carolina, pp. L22, 128, \n\n\n\nPART I. \n\n\n\ngjistan cal. \n\n\n\nTHE \n\n\n\nptTsbtrviau CJntrcjj in America \n\n\n\nTin: northern district of Ireland was to the Presbyterians \nitland in the days of James and Charles what New Eng- \nland was to the Puritans, \xe2\x80\x94 a refuge from oppression; and the \nintelligence, the integrity, and the prosperity of Ulster is the \nmemorial of their wisdom and their piety. There was a time \nwhen the most judicious ministers thought that they must \ntheir new homes and lead their brethren to the wild \n3 of America as once they had gone with them to the \ndevastated and confiscated fields of Irish rapine. They took \nWing* to speed them across the ocean ; hut the sea \nWrought and was tempestuous, and, alter many disasters, they \nabandoned their project. f Bishop Bramhall, in Latin verse, \nderided tie- return of the Puritanical Argo without the golden \nThey were not Buffered to come hither; there they \njo build the church of Godj and he, though not imme- \ndiately, yet really, tie- instruments \xc2\xab>t\' planting religion in our \nland ; for the individuals who, single-handed, laid the founda- \nof our church, owed to Ulster their birth, and to her \n\n\n\ni; i n: i i\'i. byterl to Church la Ireland. \nt Tli- ."ninth- Rutherford wrote, in 1687| to John Stuart, Provoal of Ayr: \xe2\x80\x94 \ni n.t bare yon think it strange that your journey t" New England baa got \nit hath indeed made my bear! heavy ; but I know thai it la a i \ndumb providence, bat aipeaking one whereby the Lord apeaka hie mind to yon, \nfor I lo not well anderatand what l"- B&ith. However it i--, \n\nbath shown yon t * i \xe2\x80\x94 marvelloui kindnesa in th< \nbear fr..in you, r..r I am anxioua what to do. li I \nfa Kew England I would follow it." 00th Letter ulso. \n\n6 Go \n\n\n\n66 Webster\'s history of the \n\npastors and faithful teachers the training in knowledge and \ngoodness which made them benefactors of this whole nation. \n\nIn 1641, Mr. Castell, the Parson of Cortenhall, published* \na plan for introducing the gospel into the colonies. It was \napproved by seventy of the Westminster divines, by Alexander \nHenderson and the Scottish Commissioners. But forty years \npassed, and nothing was done by the Establishment or the \nDissenters. The Church of Scotland at that period, like the \nChurch of Ireland, had too many foes, to say nothing of her \npoverty, to attempt the extension of her doctrine and her \ndiscipline in parts beyond sea. \n\nBut the folly and the cruelty of the Government contributed \nto effect a result which the Church was unable to accomplish. \nAs in the Apostolic age persecution led to the disciples being \nscattered abroad throughout Judea and Samaria ; so the oppres- \nsion of men in high places in Britain became the occasion of \nsettling the wilds of America with the fathers of our Presby- \nterian Zion. \n\nImmediately after the battle of Dunbar, the victorious gene- \nral sent the Scots prisoners by shiploads to the Plantations to \nbe sold. A list of those sent in one vessel is preserved in the \nMassachusetts Historical Society\'s Collections. After the \nRestoration the same method was pursued by the king ; and \nmany of those concerned in the risings at Pentland and Both- \nwell were consigned to servitude beyond the Atlantic. A \nstream of emigration flowed from the oppressed congrega- \ntions, and Scottish merchants and physicians were found from \nNew York to Charleston, and throughout the West Indies. \nRobert Livingston came to New York in 1672f with his \nnephew. He was a son of the venerable minister of Ancrum, \nwho was banished to Holland, and whose name is linked in \nhonourable remembrance with the signal refreshing at the \nKirk of Shotts. \n\nBetween 1670 and 1680, Scottish Presbyterians settled on \nthe eastern branch of Elizabeth River, near Norfolk, in \nVirginia, and had a minister from Ireland, who died in \nAugust, 1683. \n\nIn the lower counties of Maryland, on the Eastern Shore, \n\n* Reprinted in Force\'s Collections. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0j- Sedgwick\'s Life of Governor William Livingston. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 67 \n\nthey established themselves, during the persecution in their \nnative land. They had meeting-houses* in Snow Hill, Pitt\'s \nCreek, "Wicomico, Monokin, and Rehoboth, at least twenty \nyears before the close of the seventeenth century. Their appli- \ncation is the first that is known to have been made to the British \nchurches for a minister. In December, 1680, a letter from \nColonel Stevensf was laid before Laggan Presbytery, in \nIreland, to send a minister to the people in Maryland, beside \nVirginia. "J \n\nThe Scottish noblemen and gentlemen who opposed the \nintroduction of arbitrary power under the guise of prelacy, \n-ut iv in close eorrespondence with Shaftesbury and other \nleaden of the Country party against the Court. While \nseeking his aid and counsel to effect a political change at \nhome, they embarked also in his scheme of settling Carolina. \xc2\xa7 \nThe king Bignified, toward the end of 1682, to his council in \nScotland, that Sir John Cochran, of Ochiltree, and Sir George \nCampbell, of Ceanock, had been sent up to him as commis- \nsioners about the project, and he recommends the council to \nencourage them. These commissioners contracted with the \nbfde-proprietora of Carolina for a county of thirty-two square \nplat- of twelve thousand acres, with a quit-rent of one penny \nan acre, and engaged to advance ten pounds for each hundred \nacres before October, 1682, and ten thousand pounds besides, \nif necessary for charges. Among the thirty-six "under- \ntakers" were the Lords Callender, Cardroas, Haddington, and \nit, with Sir Patrick Hume, ofPolwarth, and the eminent \nlawyer Sir George Lookhart Their agent in London was the \nRev. Mr. Ferguson, who was constantly engaged in Bcheto.ee \n\nigainsi the govern at, always detected and never punished, \n\n; acted and openly charged at the trial of Baillie of \n\nJemSWOod, that there was no purpose to promote emigration, \n\n\' . \' ly 1 1 i - f < . iv - \n\nric-i William Bterena died \xe2\x96\xa0s.\'.d i> mber, 1687, aged 67, at lii- residence In \n\nth, mi. : having been for twenty-two yean a judge of the county oonrt \nnnt on n.ii, and a deputy-lieutenant of the province, \n\nibetone, by bVer. J. L OaUniidinghain. | \nH lory of Prei bj teiinn Qhurob in Ireland. \n\\ Wodrow. ii. 1686, \xe2\x96\xa0 - 1 ti . - great iin.i good Bar! of OaiwIHa." whose! La I7ett> \n\xe2\x96\xa0tautex \\--.- e Bootland. Archibald Kennedy, a merchant hi \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 i latex date, having luooeeded to the earldom. \n\n\n\n68 WEBSTER S HISTORY OF THE \n\nand that it was a cover of the designs which were defeated by the \ndiscovery of the Rye-house plot and by Monmouth\'s overthrow. \n\nAfter the defeat at Bothwell, the king* allowed the pri- \nsoners who made acknowledgment of repentance to be trans- \nported, and great numbers were banished in the summer of \n1684. Two-and-twenty were sent over to Carolina in one \nship, principally from Glasgow, Eaglesham, and Eastwood. \nWith them sailed William Dunlop, a probationer, and Henry \nErskine, Lord Cardross, leaving their families. After a \nvoyage of great hardship, they reached Charleston in the fall. \nThe settlement was at Port Royal, at the mouth of Broad \nRiver. "The place was sickish;" and as early as 1686, "the \nEnglish were very much off* that plantation of Carolina." \nAdverse, disheartening circumstances caused Cardrossf to go \nover to Holland, and Dunlop returned on the accession of \nWilliam, and was made principal of Glasgow University. \nScarce a tradition of the enterprise remains. \n\nPresbyterians from Fifeshire, under the auspices of Colonel \nftmian Beall,| took up their abode between the Potomac \nand Patuxent, during the time of Scotland\'s trouble, and \nformed the congregations of Marlborough and Bladensburg. \nThomas Wilson, \xc2\xa7 an English Friend, in 1691, coming north, \nafter preaching in Virginia and Carolina, was invited to hia \nhouse by " an ancient, comely man, an elder among the \nPresbyterians," who lent him his boat next morning across \nthe Potomac, on his way to Patuxent. \n\nScotsmen joined with Penn and others in the purchase \nof the Jerseys. Fair were the terms and wise the consti- \ntution promulgated by the proprietors; numbers removed \nfrom Scotland to East Jersey, taking many servants with \nthem, having received as a gift from the council their \nbrethren who could not comply with the outrageous measures \nof the government. Among others who removed was George \nScot, || of Pitlochie, who had suffered grievously by fine and \nimprisonment for his non-conformity. He was the son of Sir \n\n\n\n* Wodrow. | He was created, on the Revolution, Earl of Buchan. \n\nJ He was a prominent man in the colony in 1689, when he joined in representing \nto the council that there was no ground for suspecting the Papists of a plot. \nMSS. Maryland Hist. Soc- \n\n\\ Friends\' Library. || Wodrow. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 69 \n\nJohn Scot, of Scotstarbet, and a man of large estate. In 1674, \nhe, with Beveral gentlemen, appeared before the council, and, \non their acknowledgment of having been present when John \nWelsh and other "outed" ministers preached, they were fined \nand ordered to lie in prison till payment was made. Pitlo- \nchie\'s fine was one thousand pounds Scots, \xe2\x80\x94 the heaviest of all; \nand for his alleged impertinent and outrageous carriage before \nthe council, five hundred merks were added to it. "Would \nthey haw taken the oath of supremacy, the fine would have \nbeen remitted ; they remained in prison till it was paid. \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 By and attour" all this, he was fined in the next month one \nthousand pounds for harbouring that excellent man, Mr. \nWelsh. After this, he was intercommuned, and, being seized \nfor attending conventicles, was sent by the council, February \nv . 1677, to the Bass, and remained prisoner till the beginning \n\ntober, when ho was released on giving bond to appear \nwhen called. His wife, the daughter of that eminent \nChristian, William Bigg,* of Aithcrney, not appearing when \ncited by the council, was fined one thousand rnerks for fre- \nqnenting conventicles, and was intercommuned. Pitlochie, \n00 Leaving the Bass, gave security in ten thousand merks that. \noald confine himself to his own lands, and not keep \nconventicles. He was before the council May 14, 1679, on \na charge of having violated his engagement; he was ordered \nto pay three thousand merks and confine himself to his own \nlands, the rest of the penalty in the bond being superseded \nu until they see how th<- said (icorge carries in time coming." \nHe was fined on the 28d of January following seven hundred \npounds for nol attending musters and the king\'s host. In \n\nhe was indicted for treason, rebellion, and favours done \nto rebels; bat, being oul of the kingdom, the prosecution was \ndropped. Re was however, on his return, sent to the Bass. \nlb- petitioned the council to be let out to remove to Mast \nJersey, promising to take with him his fellow+prisonerj the \n\nArchibald Biddel, and to be "caution for him" in five \nthousand merks. He was released in the spring of 1684, and \npublished an appealt to the Presbyterians, showing them the \nadvantages of settling there, especially of having the free \n\n\' loirs. \n\nI .i.-r-.-v ander tin- ProprlettriM. \n\n\n\n70 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nenjoyment of their own mode of worship, which was no longer \ntolerated at home. The appeal was seconded by letters from \nScotsmen already established there, particularly from James \nJohnston, of Spotswood. Beside Mr. Riddel, the Rev. Wil- \nliam Aisdale accompanied him, but died at sea. The Rev. \nThomas Patterson,* who had been "outed" from the parish \nof Borthwick by the council, in August, 1662, and who seems \nto have escaped the notice of the persecutors, was expected to \ngo also ; but it is not known whether he went. The council \nreconimendedf the king to grant Pitlochie " a gratification," \nin consideration of services rendered by his father, and \ngave him warrant, February 11, 1685, to transport from the \nprisons of Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Stirling, one hundred \npersons who were willing to go, not having landed property \nworth one hundred pounds a year. He petitioned afterwards \nfor some of those who had recently been banished, and, oil \nthe 7th of August, twelve more were given him. The names \nof over seventy men and of ten or twenty women given him \nare preserved by Wodrow. \n\nThey were, some of them, men of great worth, and had \nalready passed through much suifering. At the head, was \nJohn Frazer, J who, having taken his degree of Master of Arts, \nand gone to London for his safety and preparation for the \nministry, was seized at a meeting while the Rev. Alexander \nShiels was preaching. The minister, with Frazer, John \nForeman, and five others of his hearers, were sent up to \nScotland, having first lain in Newgate. They were marched \nthrough London, manacled two-and-two, as criminals. They \nwere examined by the council and sent to Dunotter. One \nhundred persons were thrust into a vault under ground, with \none window which opened to the sea: there, ankle-deep in \nmire, with nothing on which to sit or lie, they were pent up \nthrough the summer. Frazer, weak and sick, was marched \non foot to Leith, where a Newcastle ship, Richard Hutton, \nmaster, was lying to receive him and his companions in tri- \nbulation. Twenty-eight persons left at this time a testimony \ndated August 28, 1685, against their unjust banishment, \nand for the covenants and the preaching of the word in \n\n* Wodrow. t Ibid - t Ibid. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 71 \n\nfields and houses. Those who could not pay their passage \nwere given to Pitlochie, and all the banished were put into \nhis care. \n\nAfter long delay, the ship sailed, September 5; the pro- \nvisions began to putrefy ; malignant fever attacked nearly \nall on board, and swept away twenty-two of the prisoners, \nwith most of the crew. Pitlochie and his excellent lady died, \nwith their sister-in-law, Lady Aitherney and her son and \ndaughter, and the wife of Mr. Riddel. The captain was \ninhuman beyond measure. Upwards of sixty died, many of \nwhom were voluntary exiles for the word of God. \n\nThey reached iSew Jersey about the middle of December. \nThe people on the coast showed them no kindness; but \n>% ;t town* a little way up the country sent horses for the \nfeeble, and entertained all of them till the spring." Pitlochie \nhad Bold what remained of his estate to pay the freight, and, \ndying, he gave the prisoners to his son-in-law, Mr. John \nJohnston. They resisted his claim; and the governor, on \nhearing both parties, summoned a jury, whose verdict was, \nthat, not having of their own accord come in that ship, nor \nbargained with Pitlochie for money or service, they were free. \nAfost of them went to New England, and wore kindly enter- \ntained. \n\nFrazer was ordainedf in Hartford county, Connecticut, and \npreached at Woodbury. His labours were blessed ; but on the \naccession of William, he returned with his wife to Scotland, \nand became the minister of Alness. His son was the author \npf the admirable work on Sanetin\'cation. \n\nAmong the voluntary exiles was Robert McLellan, of Bal- \n\nmagechan. He had been forfeited in lb\'SO. He made his \nhome at Woodbridge; and on the revolution, in Betuming \n\nId Scotland, was captured by the ETrengh, and, oft being \nreleased, he waa shipwrecked on the Eriflh coast, lie reached \nhome at last, and was reinstated in his Lands. \n\nAnother was William Niven, of PolLockshows ; tike MoLel- \nlan, honourable and excellent, lie also returned, \n\nThe Rev. Archibald Riddel had a sail to a con gregatio n on \n\n[lODg Island; but he preferred to settle at Woodhridirc. He \n\xc2\xbb Wodrow. f I\'r. ; | on S:nu-iiliaition. \n\n\n\n72 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nalso returned,* suffering, by-the-way, years of imprisonment in \nFrance. He was the brother of the Laird of Kiddel, in Rox- \nburghshire, \xe2\x80\x94 a heavy sufferer for conscience. In the summer \nof 1677, he joined, with Mr. Welsh and other " outed" ministers, \nin dispensing the sacrament at Maybole, in Carrick. Search \nwas ordered to be made for him after Both well ; and proclama- \ntion was made, June 26, 1679, against harbouring or resetting \nhim. In September, 1680, he was seized while riding from \nMoffat-well, and imprisoned; he demanded to be tried for his \naccession to the rising. He would not engage to abstain from \nfield-preaching ; and, not being able to find security, he was \nleft seven months in Edinburgh prison and three years and a \nhalf in the Bass. He was liberated in the spring of 1681 to \nsee his dying mother,! and in June was again sent to the Bass \nfor holding a conventicle at Kippen. There he remained till \nhe sailed for America. \n\nAmong the prisoners were John Foreman, John Henderson, \nJohn Foord, \xe2\x80\x94 names still familiar in Freehold. These ban- \nished men formed a large part of our early congregations in \nEast Jersey. \n\nColonel Barclay, of Urie, was, like Pitlochie, concerned in \nthe shipment of prisoners. He had twenty-three given him \nat one time. He settled at Amboy, and, though nearly \nrelated to the great Quaker apologist, was a churchman. \n\n"That excellent person," Lord Neil Campbell, the son of \nthe Marquis of Argyle, and the brother of the earl, was not \nsuffered, after 1681, to live in his own house; and, having \nrefused the test, he was forced to go to America at hazard of \nlife, leaving his family behind. He returned on the downfall \nof the Stuarts. \n\nThe Rev. David Simpson, minister of Killean, was, after \nthe indulgence, placed by the council at Kintyre. He was \nimprisoned, but liberated March 17, 1685, on condition of \nleaving the kingdom. He went to New Jersey and died there. \n\nIn the parish of Dalserf, in Lanarkshire, the curate, Mr. \nJoseph Clelland, was very active against non-conformists. \n\n* His daughter, Mrs. James Dundas, remained here. \xe2\x80\x94 W. A. Whitehead, Esq., \nof Newark. \n\nf She had been denounced as a rebel while a widow. Her husband had been \nheavily fined. \xe2\x80\x94 Wodrow. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 73 \n\nMany families were scattered. John Harvie and Walter Ker \nwere seized. The former was given to Pitlochie. The latter \nwas banished September 3, 1685 ; he settled in Freehold, \ngreatly serviceable in promoting the interests of religion, \nand lived till 1744 to witness the great awakening. The Rev. \nDr. Ker, of Goshen, New York, and the Eev. Jacob Ker, of \nSomerset, Maryland, were his grandsons. \n\nMr. Hume,* living near Paisley, a man of property and \n\nlability, was imprisoned for his zeal as a Whig, and \n\nreleased on condition of removing to America. A contagious \n\ncarried off himself and his wife while at sea in a \n\nded vessel. His only child, a daughter of fifteen, was \n\nkindly received by her mother\'s brother, Dr. Johnson, of \n\nfork. Bhe married AVilliam Hoge, an exile for Christ\'s \n\nBake: they settled at Amboy. Their son was the Rev. John \n\n. of < )[pe4iihou, Virginia, and their grandson the Rev. Dr. \n\nMoses II - \n\nLittle companies of Scotsmen, driven from home by brutal \noppression, were scattered through East Jersey, Delaware, \nand along Fork and Rappahannock, in Virginia. f There was \na large emigration to Charleston. \n\nThe closing of the seventeenth century was marked by the \nsubsiding of the flood of religious feeling which had so power- \nfully for three generations agitated Great Britain. \n\nThe turbid waves were almost at rest, and the atoms lately \ntossing on the top of the billows were precipitated as from \na chemical Bolution, and gradually congealed and stratified in \nforma and masses as distind and unchangeable as the second- \nary and tertiary formations <\xe2\x80\xa2(\' our globe. \n\nA rimilar tendency to assume and adhere to distinctive \nforma and denominational peculiarities was displayed in this \n\nDutch Reformed congregations, surrounded in the \n\nr towns by an English population, and living under a \n\ntimenl which favoured the sole use of the English \n\ntongue, abated do! one joi of their tenacity for the exclusive \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Di m t B \n+ Dr. n. \xe2\x80\xa2in.-. bop of London, mi born of paranti >">tii nattrOt <,f \n\nVirginia, hii grandparanti baring ramorad Bran Newbottla, tin- pai \n\nL\xc2\xabighton, to York Kivcr, wiicro "it was at least two miles ov.r. \' \n\n\n\n74 Webster\'s history of the \n\nuse of Low Dutch in their religious services. The necessity \nthus created favoured the introduction of the Church of Eng- \nland ; and Trinity Church, New York, increased rapidly in \nnumbers, through the falling off of the young people from the \nlanguage and the Church of Holland. The Livingstons and \nsome other Scotsmen adhered to the Reformed Dutch church, \nthough barely able to follow the preacher through the mazes \nof a strange language. \n\nThe Society of Friends, shaken by the rupture with Keith, \nand constantly roused by the earnest appeals of ministers \nfrom England, was in the process of crystallization. Vital \nheat departed and left the beautiful transparent forms sub- \nsisting till now. \n\nThe Ranters \xe2\x80\x94 a portion of the gangrene which consumed \nthe cause of truth and godliness in Cromwell\'s day \xe2\x80\x94 still \nclaimed to possess divine attributes and to be able to do \nactions inconceivably vile without incurring guilt. They still \nintruded on the worship of others, hooting like owls, dancing \nand defaming ; but they were almost extinct, and in a few \nyears no trace and scarcely a remembrance of them remained \nin Rhode Island, at Oyster Bay, and Mattinecock, Long Island, \nor in Middletown, New Jersey, where once they were in \nadmiration.* \n\nA community existed near Chester, f Maryland, formed on \nthe model devised by John Labadie, who died in 1674. \nSamuel Bownas visited "the Labadies" in 1702. When \nsupper came in, twenty men entered a large room at a call ; \n\n* Friends\' Library. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0j- Bownas\'s Journal, in Friends\' Library. Mr. Ward wrote, September 15, \n1666, to his fellow-exile, John Brown, of Wamphray: \xe2\x80\x94 "If worthy Labadie come \nto see you, (for the French Synod have begun to persecute him already, and have \nsummoned him to appear at Amsterdam to answer to a commission that they have \nappointed to question him about some things ; they pretend he favours the Mil- \nlianary opinions ; but, the truth is, they cannot bear his zeal for God ;) if he come, \nI say, be very kind to him, and ye may think, if it were not fit, having him dine \nwith you. I am much taken with the man, for the great report he hath of pietie, \nzeal, and learning, and for which he is in repute among all the godly who know \nhim." John de Labadie had been a Jesuit, and entered the Reformed church. \nWilliam Penn visited at Weiwart, in Holland, a religious society which had been \nawakened by him to seek after a more spiritual fellowship, and had followed him \nin the way of a refined Independency. The Brownists also held Labadie in high \nesteem. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 75 \n\nsitting down, one after another took off his hat, and, after a \n11 of silence, one after another put on his hat and \n: to eat. The women ate by themselves. They had all \nthings in common, but could take nothing when they went \naway. They were in all about one hundred. They made \nLinen, and had a plantation of corn, tobacco, and flax, besides \npinch cattle. But as early as 1720 they were all scattered. \nThey were probably from Xorth Holland. \n\n"The Labadeans* were correct on the subject of justifica- \ntion." Whitefield said, "John Labidee went on in the \nsame manner as the Moravians, in Maryland. His plan was \ncarried as high as theirs; but it fell remarkably." \n\nXcw England saw a form of delusion in the followers of \nBank- and Case.* Many under their influence fell down as \nin a tit. and rose up crying, " Oh, the joy !" " Many now living \nhaw not forgot tin.- mad freaks of the infamous Case and \nBanks, with their followers. Who could have a stronger per- \nBOaaioi of their interest in Christ than they had? How did they \nlently go about the streets in a kind of rapture, crying, \n\xe2\x80\xa2.I..V. joy !\' "t They were like those in Scripture whose "sins \nopen beforehand, going to judgment." They went, in the \nspring of ln\'.i\'.i, into Xew Jersey and Pennsylvania, then ealled \nk - the new country," and, after a season, came to naught. \n\nThe attempt made by Massachusetts to send the gospel to \nVirginia, in L643, was promptly crushed by the banishment \nof the ministers and the expulsion of the congregations. The \nhomeless people established themselves on the western shore \nof Maryland, in Anne Arundel, and the adjacent counties of \nCharles and Prince ( leorge. \n\nThe Rev. Matthew Hill. I ejected from Think, in Yorkshire, \n\nby the Uniformity Act, settled in Charles county in lii~4. \n\nThe prospect of usefulness was encouraging al lirst ; but new \n\ntronbl and his hopes were blighted. Those driven \n\nfrom STansemondS retired to North Carolina; and Duraot\'s \n\nin Perquimans county, perpetuates the name of "the \n\nelder of that orthodox congregation." His < leneva Bible \n\nerved by the Historical Society of North Carolina. \n\n\n\n+ DloUnson\'i Display ofSomreign One* \n\nJ Calamy\'s M.in-.rials. -.,,-, qnfiiii by Duncroft. \n\n\n\n76 Webster\'s history of the \n\nThe New Haven colonies in West Jersey seem to have \nremained without stated ministers till the close of the cen- \ntury, when the Rev. Thomas Bridge, from England, settled \nat Cohanzy. \n\nThe Puritan settlements on Long Island were early sup- \nplied with ministers. These were East Hampton, South- \nampton, Southold, Setauket in Brookhaven, Hempstead, \nJamaica, and Newtown ; even Flushing* also, before 1657, \nhad a Presbyterian minister who went to Eastern Virginia. \n\nIn West Chester county, New York, Bedford and East \nChester had a minister from Connecticut. \n\nIn East Jersey were the congregations of Elizabethtown, \nNewark, Woodbriclge, and Freehold. The minister at New- \narkf was the only one who did not have recourse to some \nother calling for maintenance. \n\nThe French churches in the province of New York gra- \ndually merged in part in the Reformed Dutch body ; a \nportion received missionaries from the Gospel Propagation \nSociety, and laid aside their distinct character for the Epis- \ncopal form. \n\nThe few Swede churches, of the discipline of Augsburg, \nretained their separate existence till of late years they have \ncome under the jurisdiction of the Bishops of New Jersey, \nPennsylvania, and Delaware. \n\nIn the province of New York there was, before 1699, but \none Church minister except the chaplains of the forces ; none \nin the Jerseys or Delaware, and but one in Pennsylvania. \nTrinity Church was erected in New York in 1696 ; and Mr. \nVesey, formerly an Independent minister in Queen\'s county, \nLong Island, celebrated divine service for the first time, Feb- \nruary 6, 1697. Christ Church was erected in Philadelphia \nin 1695, and was served by Dr. Clayton, Rector of Crofton, in \nYorkshire, and afterward by Mr. Evans. In 1700, prayer- \nbooks were given "as fine as those in the queen\'s chapel." \nIn Maryland and Virginia, there was provision by the statute \nfor the clergy, and the parishes were mostly supplied. In \nNorth Carolina there were no ministers of any persuasion but \nthose of the Society of Friends. \n\n* O\'Callaghan\'s New York. f Whitehead\'s East Jersey. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 77 \n\nIn South Carolina, there were Congregationalists from .New \nEngland, and Scottish Presbyterians. They were so much \nmingled in Charleston that, while the church was independent \nin its government, its ministers, for twenty years, were of the \nChurch of Scotland. \n\nThere was a Baptist congregation and several French \nchurches; yet, in 1704, when there was but one Episcopal \ncongregation, the Church of England was established by law, \nand her sacramental test enacted. \n\nThere were Baptist congregations from Ireland in Middle- \ntown, Cohanzy, and Cape May, in New Jersey; there were \ncongregations from New England, at Piscataway and Cohanzy, \nDot in fellowship with the other churches of that order in the \nprovince. In Pennsylvania there was a Welsh Baptist mi- \nni-Kr serving Penuepek and Philadelphia. In Delaware \nthere was a minister with his nock, at Pencader, from the \nprincipality of Wales. \n\nIn Philadelphia, a Presbyterian congregation was slowly \nformed during the last ten years of the century. It is highly \nprobable that the visit of Francis Makemie to the city in 1692 \nled to the gathering cf the Protestant dissenters for worship \nut the l;arbadi>cs store. Jedediah Andrews, from Massachu- \nbegan to preaeh statedly to them in the autumn of 1698. \n\nF ram-is Makemie came to Maryland in 1G82, and spent one \nOr two years as the minister in Lynnhavcn parish, Virginia, \nlh subsequently fixed his abode in Accomac county, and in \n1699 took license under the Toleration Act. The ministers \nof Laggan Presbytery* intimated to the other presbyteries in \nIreland, in 1684, their intention to remove to America, (some \nof them having been invited thither,) the course of "the Pre- \nkationa] party" being bo vexatious; but a favourable turn of \n\xe2\x96\xa0flairs detained them in I flster. \n\nThe only other Presbyterian ministers known to have been \nin any besides the New England States at an earlier date than \n1706 are Nathaniel Taylor, al Marlborough, Maryland; Dugald \ni, ut Brookhaven, ob Long [sland, from L685 to 1691, \nwh<> returned to Scotland, and was, in 1696, a member of \nLochmaben Presbytery; Thomas Bridge, who was called from \n\n]\xe2\x96\xa0.\xe2\x80\xa2 \n\n\n\n78 Webster\'s history of the \n\nCohanzy to the first church in Boston, in 1704 ; Mr. Black, \nwho laboured in West Jersey and in Lewes, Delaware ; John \n"Wilson at Newcastle, and Samuel Davis, also in Delaware. \n\nThe state of morals was generally good, the people sober \nand "not over-zealous." \n\nLiberty of worship existed in every province. Virginia was \nno exception ; for Makemie in no instance complains of ill- \nusage or molestation, and, in his "Plain and Loving Persuasive \nto the Inhabitants of Maryland and Virginia," published in \n1705, he clearly assumes that intolerance was not the order of \nthe day. The New York law of 1693, dividing the provinces \ninto parishes and precincts, and directing assessments of a \nrate for the support of the ministry, was purposely* worded \nindefinitely, so as not to awaken a suspicion in the minds of \nthe majority of the Assembly of intention to secure the com- \npulsory maintenance of the Episcopal clergy. There was then \nnot one Church-of-England congregation in the province, and \nthe only churchman in the Assembly was James Graham e J the \nspeaker. The vestry of Trinity Churchf having inquired, in \n1695, if by "able Protestant minister" was to be understood a \nDissenting minister, the Assembly declared that under the act \nany congregation might call and settle a Protestant Dissenting \nminister. Governor Fletcher denied their right to put such \nan interpretation on the words ; but it is not known that he \nrefused, in any instance, to order the induction of a Dissenter \nwhen regularly chosen by the people. Increase Mather, seeing \nprovision made for support of the gospel, induced Mr. Vesey, \nwho was| labouring on Long Island, to go to the city of New \nYork and serve the spiritual interest there. Governor Fletcher \nis said\xc2\xa7 to have bought him off. He sailed for England, and, \nobtaining orders, was inducted|| Rector of Trinity Church by \nthe two Dutch Reformed divines. \n\n\n\n* Colonel Morris, quoted in Macdonald\'s Hist, of Jamaica, \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2J- Proceedings of New York Assembly. \n\nX The Rev. Mr. Miller ; reprinted in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll \n\nI Doc. Hist, of New York. \n\nII Dr. Brownlee\'s Sketch of History of Reformed Dutch Church in America. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 79 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER n. \n\nThe eighteenth century opened with the accession of Anne, \nami the restoration to favour of the patrons of High-Churchisni \nami the enemies of the liberty of the subject- \nNew Jersey passed from under the control of the pro- \nprietaries, and was united by the crown with the province of \nNew York, under the government of the Queen\'s cousin, \nEdward Hyde, Viscount Cornbury. He was the grandson of \nClarendon, the historian. Lacking his talents and his grave \ndignity of manner, he was the inheritor* of his rapacious, \ndespotic principles. Clarendon, when he knew Charles the \nSecond to be a Papist, made it felony for any man to say so; \nwhile persecuting the non-confunnists without limit or mercy, \nhe protected the chief instruments of the great rebellion, who \ncould purchase his favour by gifts of money, or of the por- \ntraits of the noble families they had despoiled in the civil war. \nDestitute of honourable feeling, he made his history a vehicle \nOf calumny. He was displaced by men as worthless as himself, \nand died in exile. \n\nCornbury was a spendthrift, transported to the Plantations \nt\'> save him from his creditors. He at oner assumed to be the \npatron of tin- church, ami required all congregations to apply \nto him for leave to settle ministers. The sect of the Bero- \n\ndiane existed a! that day; they knew no king but Cesar: and \nloud were their professions of zeal for the Church of England, \nm\xc2\xbbw thai seal foT her was the passport to favour. \n\nIn 1701, the Church partyf in Pennsylvania refused to sign \na paper clearing Penn\'s government of the charge of persecu- \ntion. In 1708, they, with a packed vestry headed by John \nBloore, waited on Lord Cornbury, and, among many compli- \nments, hoped they should prevail on the Queen to extend the \n\n* LOO toa on Claren 1 f Wat^.n\'* Annul* of PhUaddpfaiA, \n\n\n\n80 Webster\'s history of the \n\nlimits of his government over them, that so "they may enjoy \nthe same blessings others do under his authority." Cornbury \ncame again to Philadelphia. Colonel Robert Quarry headed \nthe address, and asked him to beseech the Queen to grant \nthem this favour. William Penn was offended at these turbu- \nlent churchmen, and asked the Lords of Trade either to buy \nhim out, or to let him buy out "the hot Church party." \n\nColonel Quarry, an officer in the customs, was a zealous \nchurchman, and indefatigable in ferreting out causes of com- \nplaint against the colonial assemblies and the governors who \nwere not of his temper and notions. His letters in the Brod- \nhead collection in Albany unveil his exertions for the esta- \nblishment of thorough despotism. \n\nThe chief instigator of all these movements was George \nKeith, born in Scotland in 1638, and a graduate of Aberdeen \nin the class with Burnet, Bishop of Salisbury. A prominent \nminister in the Society of Friends, he was disowned, in Phila- \ndelphia, as a disturber. Failing in his attempts to form a sect \nembodying the differences for which he contended, he took \norders in England; and his efforts in America, from New \nHampshire to Currituck, entitle him to the credit of being the \napostle of Prelacy, and the successful founder of the English \nchurch on a permanent basis along the sea-coast. \n\nThe appointment of a bishop for Virginia was resolved on \nin the reign of Charles the Second. The revenues of the see \nwere to be drawn from the customs;* but there were so many \nother less sacred but more fascinating persons to be supported \nout of that branch of royal income, that the scheme was \nabandoned. Fears of the establishment of Episcopacy, and \nof compulsory enforcement of conformity to human appoint- \nments in divine things, arose in the colonies soon after Sir \nRobert Carrf entered on his government. The conduct of \nColonel Fletcher in New York, in assuming the right to fur- \nnish the towns with ministers of his own choosing, gave new \nuneasiness. The Venerable Society for Propagating the \nGospel in Foreign Parts was incorporated in 1701; with royal \nfavour, large funds, and a strong array of zeal and political \n\n* Seeker\'s letter to Walpole. The scheme failed through the resignation of \nClarendon. \n\nf MS. letter in Massachusetts Historical Society. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 81 \n\ninfluence, it commenced vigorous operations. The amazing \nproposal was made by Colonel Morris,* a pupil of Keith\'s, \nthat the society should sec that only churchmen were sent out \nas governors of the colonies, and should endeavour to have \nthe rule introduced, that no person should he competent to \nreceive a considerable benefice in England, who had not per- \nformed three years of missionary labour in America. Colonel \nHeathcotef wrote to the Venerable Society, that as carl}* as \nNovember, 1705, it was reported that the Queen would main- \ntain from lur own purse a suffragan bishop in America. He \nfelt no doubt that, when this was done, many educated at \nBoston College would conform and be content to take the \n\xe2\x96\xa0 it secured by law, without being burdensome to the \n\xe2\x80\xa2ociety. \n\nThis report gained so much confidence that Mr. John Lil- \n\nr of St. Paul\'s, in Talbot count}*, and senior \n\nman in Maryland, who was judged the fittest person, J \n\ntit to Great Britain to be in readiness for consecration. \n\nPerhaps the chief hinderance to the consummation of the \n\nproject was. that the clergy here and at home were mostly \n\nattached to the Jacobite cause; and that the Scots here, as well \n\nM in their native land, were greatly embittered against the \n\ngovernment, by reason of the union of the kingdoms. As \n\nDr. Chaunceyg said to President Stiles, "The ministry regard \n\nmere tools; but they are edge-tools, and they use \n\nthem only when there is a needs-be." The scheme, however, \n\nm fool ; for the Bishop of London|| addressed the Queen\'s \n\nCouncil in December, 1707, urging that the appointment of a \n\nsuffragan in Virginia would excite no clamour, and for the \n\nwant of no.-, bigamy and all other evils infested the provinces \n\nand grew apace. Archbishop Becker wrote an appeal in I7o0 \n\nin favour of sending n bishop to Virginia.^ Dlt Johnson, of \nKing\'s College, New York, applauded the good design, There \n\nQUCh talk in London of the matter, when the death of \n\n\n\ni.s of tin- English Church. \nf Bolton\'s History of Weal Chester County, Ren York. J Hawkins. \n\nI s< || Albany Documents. \n\nfl Sock> r\'\xc2\xbb letter, end \xe2\x80\xa2 eritietJ commentary oo it, ere -.. curious and Ulu \nof the tfanee \xe2\x96\xa0 . \xe2\x80\xa2 printing together. The critical eonuMntary i* iu tLo \n\nRe/V York State Library. \n\n\n\n\n\n82 Webster\'s history of the \n\nMr. Henry Pelharn threw this, with many other schemes, out \nof mind. Dr. Stennet related to Davies, in 1753, "a confer- \nence he had with the Duke of Newcastle and the Archbishop \nof York about the mission of bishops into America. It was \nvery entertaining." \n\nTwo Jacobite clergymen,* Talbot, of Burlington, and Dr. \nRichard Welton, of Christ Church, Philadelphia, were conse- \ncrated by some of the English non-juring bishops in 1723, and \ncame to America, exercising their functions secretly over as \nmany as received them. The British government commanded \nthem to return immediately. Talbot took the oaths of alle- \ngiance, and Welton retired to Lisbon. Talbot would not read \nthe prayers for the reigning family, nor give thanks for the \ndefeat of her majesty\'s enemies. Governor Hunterf said, in \n1715, that he incorporated the Jacobites at Burlington to \nsanctify his sedition and insolence. The Venerable Society \nceased to employ Talbot, on account of his disaffection to the \nHouse of Hanover. \n\nGibson,^ Bishop of London, wrote to the clergy in America \nto beware of asserting the invalidating the baptism of Dis- \nsenters; for it had been set on foot by the non-jurors, to injure \nthe Church of England, and was in opposition to the constant \ndoctrine of the church. \n\nIn 1699, Vesey\xc2\xa7 declared that experience had undeceived \nhim as to the comforts to be found in his new situation as the \nRector of Trinity Church in New York: \xe2\x80\x94 "We find ourselves \nunder all discouragements imaginable." Lord Bellamont de- \nscribes him " as capable of any wickedness, base, unchristian ; \nhis wickedness is plain; he wants honesty." With Governor \nHunter he came into direct conflict, and used all means to \ndestroy his credit at home. The sin of Bellamont and Hunter \nconsisted in refusing to bestow on Trinity Church "a small \nfarm," called "The King\'s Bowerie." They gave the rector a \nlease of it during their continuance in office as governor. \nVesey wanted it in fee ; he subsequently obtained it. That \n"small farm" now lies in the city of New York, and yields a \nprincely revenue. \n\n\n\n* Dorr\'s History of Christ Church. -f- Albany Documents. \n\nX MSS. of Ebenezer Hazard, of Philadelphia. \\ Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 83 \n\nIn 1702, besides Vesey, the clergymen in New York "in \norders" were Bartow, church missionary at West Chester, and \nStuart, in Bedford. They were missionaries. Patrick Gordon \nited suddenly." \n\nThe town of Jamaica* was settled entirely by Presbyterians ; \nand in 1702 there were considerably above a hundred families, \n: >lary for all Christian knowledge and goodness. They \nhad a stone church worth <\xc2\xa3600, and a parsonage valued at \n\xc2\xa31500; the glebe consisting of an orchard and two hundred \nacres of laud. The Act of 1693 had constituted Jamaica, \nNewtown, and Flushing, a parish, and imposed the obligation \nt<> raise \xc2\xa300 for the support of a minister. This had been \nwholly disregarded until the accession of Cornbury, when the \nJan. 1702) Presbyterians for churchwardens \nand vestrymen, and settled in the following month the Rev. \nJohn Hubbard, according to the provisions of the act. He \nWBfl born in Ipswich, Massachusetts, in 1677, and graduated \nat Harvard in 1695, in the same class with Andrews of Phila- \ndelphia. \n\nHubbard took a journey to Boston, and on his return in \ntlic summer, of a Saturday, learned that Bartow, the church \nmissionary at West Chester, had just arrived; and he sent to \ninquire if he intended to preach on the morrow. He answered \nthat he did. The next morning, Bartow went to church on \nthe last ringing of the bell; and, finding that Hubbard Lad \nbegun his service, he went straightway to the "pew" or pulpit \nand sat down, expecting he would desist, "being he knew I \norders from the government to officiate there." Hubbard \ndid not desist, and Bartow forbore to make any interruption; \nbut, in the afternoon, he, with the countenance of Chief-Justice \nMompesson, and Mr. Carter, her majesty\'s controller, went \nearly, and when Hubbard arrived he found Bartow read- \ning the liturgy. He withdrew, and assembled the congrega- \ntion in an orchard hard l\xc2\xbby. Many went in and look benches \n\nand seats out of the church. Bartow, on finishing, locked the \n\nchurch and gave the key to Cardale, the sheriff. The people \n\nasked for the key and were refused; and Bartow says, jocosely, \n\nding and wrangling thai ensued are by me ineffable." \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Ifaod m Jd\'i II \n\n\n\n84 Webster\'s history of the \n\nLord Cornbury thanked Bartow, as doubtless Abab also \nthanked the scarcely more iniquitous elders of Jezreel, and \ntold him, he would do the church and him justice. Accord- \ningly, in 1703, Bartow is reported as receiving a benevolence \nof \xc2\xa330, in addition to a salary of \xc2\xa350 from the Venerable \nSociety. \n\nMy lord summoned Mr. Hubbard and the heads of his con- \ngregation, and forbade him ever more to preach in that church ; \n" for, in regard it was built by a public tax, it did belong* to \nthe Establishment." He threatened them with the penalty of \nthe statute for disturbing divine worship, but, on their submis- \nsion and promise, he forgave them. He suspended Hubbard \nfor a breach of the public peace, and afterward gave him a \n"during pleasure" license; which he held till his death in \n1705. \n\nThe Venerable Society, in 1706,f acknowledged most thank- \nfully the continual bounty of the Queen, " which has had very \ngood effects abroad, by influencing and exciting the governors \nand inhabitants to build several new churches, and even to \nconvert some of the meeting-houses of the Quakers and other \nsectaries into houses of worship according to the Church of \nEngland." \n\nIt was during the great plague in London, that Clarendon \ninduced his pliant master to add heavier burdens to the op- \npressed non-conformists ; it was during the great sickness in \nXew York, in the summer of 1702, that Cornbury sought a \nrefuge in Jamaica. He entreated Hubbard in a friendly man- \nner for the use of the parsonage: it was granted, and, on \nreturning to the city, his lordship delivered the house into the \nhands of the churchmen. "The warrant," says Colonel \nMorris, "which he gave to the sheriff to dispossess the dis- \nsenting minister of the glebe, was wholly without form or due \ncourse of law." Cardale seized the glebe, surveyed it out \ninto lots, and leased them for the benefit of his party. \n\nGordon, who was " expected suddenly," arrived in April, \n1702, and, going from the city to Jamaica, he took sick on \nSaturday, and died in eight days. The Rev. William Urqu- \nhart, who was supported by the subscriptions of the Yorkshire \n\n* Macdonald\'s History of Jamaica. f Report of Venerable Society. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 85 \n\nclergy, was inducted July 4, 1704, and Hubbard, being then in \npossession of the parsonage, was ordered by Cornbury to de- \nliver it to the rector : he did so quietly and peaceably. Hub- \nbard died in his twenty-ninth year, October 11, 1705. TJrqu- \nhart retained the church and parsonage unmolested till his \ndeath in August, 1709. \n\nCotton Mather, in his letter to the London ministers in \n170G, tells them, the good people of Jamaica adorned the \ndoctrine of God their Saviour by a most laudable silence and \nwonderful patience under these wrongs. \n\nThe next instance* of the success of Keith in engaging \nCornbury in his daring schemes was the seizure and impri- \nsonment, November 21, 1702, of Samuel Bownas, a minister \nof the Society of Friends. Keith informed against him ; and \n"William Bradford, a printer, who had been disowned by \nFriends, gave evidence that he heard Bownas, in his preach- \ning at the huu.se of Nathaniel Pcarsall, in Hempstead, speak \ndisparagingly of the Church of England in relation to the \ntment of Baptism. \n\nA warrant was placed in the hands of Thomas Cardale, \nHigh-Sheriff of Queen\'s county, for the apprehension of \nBownas. Colonel Heathcote, in a letterf to the secretary. \nSaid, "Many of the instruments made use of to settle the \nchurch in Jamaica were of warm tempers, and, if report is \ntrue, indifferent in their morals. One Mr. Cardell, a transient \nperson, and of very indifferent reputation, was recommended \nand made high-sheriff <>f the county, and the settling of the \nchurch was left in a greal measure to his dare and conduct." \nThe Son. William Smith calk him "one Cardwell, a mean \nfellow." Thorn] he sustained a despicable character, \n\nami, being afterwards thrown into prison lor .-Mine offence, he \nhanged him.-. -if. \n\nThe warrant was served on Bownas while at meeting, in \nFlushing, on the 29th ; ami, though h>\' was wrongly named, he \n\ntook no advantage of the defect The sheriff was vetiy \n\nmoderate, ami in a very l\'oo.1 humour; he spoke mildly and \n\nd blamed Keith and Bradford. He let him stay \n\n\n\nnnuL + i-\'.J.rii.w v 11. 171 1, quota -I bj Maodonaid. \n\n; B. r. Th . md. \n\n\n\n86 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthree days with Iris friends, and then carried him to Jamaica. \nThe four justices, on pretence of cold, met in a small room, \nand thus disappointed the great crowd which had gathered. \nA priest was with them, who put the worst construction on \nevery thing, and the next day he was committed. \n\nOn the 26th of December a special commission of Oyer and \nTerminer was held, and John Bridges, Esq., Chief-Justice, gave \n"an uncommon charge" and adjourned the court till Monday. \nThe grand jury ignored the bill against Bownas. "The other \njustices, being mostly Presbyterians, cared nothing; but Bridges \nsaid to the grand jury, \'You have forgotten your oaths; I de- \nmand your reasons for not finding the bill.\' " James Clement, \na bold man and skilled in the law, refused to give the reasons. \nThe grand jury were sent back; and, finding no bill, Bridges \nthreatened to send Clement to London, " chained to the deck \nof a man-of-war, like other vile criminals." Bownas was con- \nfined in a room which had two years before been protested \nagainst as an unlawful prison ; his friends were denied admit- \ntance; and, that he might be chargeable to no man, he learned \nto make shoes and earned his food. The grand jury refusing \nto find any bill against him in August, he was released, having \nbeen in prison a year lacking twenty-three days. \n\nThomas Hicks, who had been a justice many years, em- \nbraced him, and said, "Dear Samuel, the Lord has made use of \nyou as an instrument to put a stop to our arbitrary courts of \njustice, which have met with great encouragement since his \nLordship came here for governor. The judge frets because \nhe cannot have his way of you; and the governor is dis- \ngusted, he expecting to have made considerable advantage by \nit. But the eyes of the country are now opened. You are not \nalone; it is the case of every subject, and they will never be \nable to get a jury to answer their end. Had the Presbyterians \nhave stood as you have done, they had not so tamely left their \nmeeting-houses to the church. He blamed that people veiy \nmuch for being so compliant to all the claims of the gover- \nnor, although ever so unreasonable and against law." But \ntheir compliance secured them from no hardship which Corn- \nbury could inflict. \n\nThe next town on the island, Hempstead, was settled from \nthe North of England, the first minister being the Rev. Rich- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 87 \n\nard Denton,* a Presbyterian minister of Coley Chapel in Hali- \nfax. He was small in stature and blind of an eye : the quaint \nannalist styles him an Iliad in a nutshell. He was not accept- \nablef to the Puritan portion of his flock ; they made no oppo- \nsition until he baptized the children of those who were not \nchurch-members; then they broke away from him. He re- \nturned to England before 1663, and a long, angry controversy! \nis said to have arisen between the Independents and the Pres- \nbyterians, similar to that which caused Governor "Webster, of \nHartford, and Mr. Iiussel, the minister of TVethersfield, to \nremove with many others to Hadley, Mass., in 1659. The \nIndependents contended for the exclusion from all authority \nin the state, and from all privileges in the church, those who \nwere not Christians, by an open covenanting with the visible \nchurch. \n\nThe lax party triumphed; and at the end of twenty-five \n\ntli\xc2\xab- Rev. Jeremiah Ilobart was settled, and remained \n\nfifteen years; when, many\xc2\xa7 falling away to the Quakers, and \n\nnior,- becoming irreligious and refusing to support the gospel, \n\nhe removed to Connecticut. \n\nGeorge Keith || preached there and found the people gene- \nrally well affected and greatly desiring the services of the \nchurch. The Venerable Society sent thither, in 1704, the Rev. \nJohn Thomas, who had been a missionary in Philadelphia; and \n1,.- book possession of the church and parsonage in direct op- \nposition to the will of the people, for they were more unwilling \nt.. be taxed to sustain a Conformist than a Presbyterian. "The \neountry,"^ said he, "is exceedingly attached to a Dissenting \nministry; and, were it not for his Excellency my Lord Corn- \n- most favourable countenance to as, we mighl expect \n\nrarest entertainment here I have scarcely a man \n\nin the parish real and steady to the interest and promotion of \n\ntie\' church, any farther than they aim al the favour or dread \n\nthe displeasure of his lordship The people are all stiff \n\n\n\n* Mather\'s Magnolia. \n\nf Letter t>. the Claasii of km terdam: quoted la O\'Cailaghan\'a History. \nI Letter of Church MUaioBary\': quoted bj Rev. Dr. Qhraiahael, Beater of Sb \n! \' u tbul M itory "f Connecticut \n\nth\'i Journal: reprinted by Prote tanl Episcopal Historical Booiety. \nolety: quoted by Thompson, Canniohael, \n\n\n\n08 WEBSTER S HISTORY OF THE \n\nDissenters ; not above three church-people in the whole parish. \n.... If it had not been for the countenance and support of \nLord Cornbury and his government, it would have been im- \npossible to have settled a church on the island." \n\nThomas gives, in 1717, as the result of twelve years\' experi- \nence of "rowing against wind and tide," that "the pious fraud \nof a caressing and well-ordered hospitality has captivated and \ninclined their affections [to the church] more powerfully than \nthe most carefully-digested sermons from the pulpit." \n\nThe church and parsonage remained in the possession of the \nEpiscopalians, no effort having been made to recover them at \nthe law. To insure quiet occupation, Governor Cosby, some \nthirty years after the seizure, granted them by a royal charter, \nto those who detained them from their lawful owners. \n\nThe proprietaries of East Jersey had from the first granted \nreligious liberty, giving two hundred acres in each parish for \nthe support of the gospel, and securing to the people the right \nto select their own minister. They surrendered the govern- \nment to the crown in 1702, mainly through the urgency of \nColonel Lewis Morris. On the accession of Cornbury, the \nPrayer-book was ordered to be read, the sacraments to be ad- \nministered only by persons episcopally ordained ; and all minis- \nters, without ordination of that sort, were required to report \nthemselves to the Bishop of London. A bill for the main- \ntenance of the Church* in the Jerseys was defeated solely \nthrough the unflinching perseverance of a Baptist and a \nQuaker, \xe2\x80\x94 Richard Hartshorne and Andrew Browne. The \nBaptist ministers in "West Jersey qualified themselves accord- \ning to the Toleration Act, and had their places of meeting cer- \ntified, "the Dissenters being troubled in Queen Anne\'s reign." \n\nA minister was needed for the Falls, in Shrewsbury, where \nColonel Morris was about to build a church, \xe2\x80\x94 "and he\'ll en- \ndow it;" and Episcopal churches were about to be erected in \nAmboy, Hopewell, Monmouth, Burlington, and Crosswicks. \n\nThe benefits of the Toleration Act were secured to Dis- \nsenters in Maryland in 1702. The irregularities of the clergy \nof the Established church rose to such a height, men of such \nknown infamy being put in orders by the Bishop of London, \n\n* Morgan Edwards\'s History of the New Jersey Baptists. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 89 \n\nthat "a Maryland parson" came into vogue as an epithet ex- \npressive of unparalleled insolence and immorality. Governor \nSej\'mour* proposed to establish a court, consisting partly of \nla}-nien, to take cognizance of the manners of gentlemen in \norders. The necessity was admitted of something more effec- \ntual than the supervision of the commissary to restrain the \ndisorders; but the governor\'s plan seemed to savour too \nstrongly of Presbyterianism, with its ruling elders, to be \nAccepted in any exigency. \n\nIn Virginia, Governor Nicholson drew on himself the dis- \nlike <>f Mr. Blair, the bishop\'s commissary, and the Scottish \nclergy in the province. He presented such a view of the affair \nto the Government that the council forbade Mr. Blair to leave \nEngland. He however returned to Virginia, and the dispute \nbetween the English and the Scotch rectors raged virulently. \nThe pnblicationsf on both sides were painfully unbecoming. \nTlic clergy! \' n Pennsylvania came to the governor\'s aid, and \ndrew up an address again>t Mr. l>lair. \n\nMr. lilair,\xc2\xa7 describing the state of things in Virginia, said, \nin 1702, "There is a sort like Presbyterians here whMi is \nupheld by Borne idle fellows that have left their lawful employ- \nment, and preach and baptize without orders." Beverly, in \n17""). speaks of the two small conventicles of the Preaby- \nterians: \xe2\x80\x94 "\'Tis observed that those counties where they are \nproduce very mean tobacco, and for that reason can\'t get an \n\northodox minister to stay among them." Thus unwittingly \n\nsords to Makemie the praise of preaching the gospel to \n\nthe pool-; and, to do so, belies Accomac county, which was the \n\ngarden <>f plenty, lie does not go so Ear as the Quaker who \n\n; - that the soil around BostOta became so impoverished, \n\nafter the hanging of Quakers, that they could not raise wheat \nor p. \n\nThe aspect of affairs thi ghout the colonies was ;i grief \n\nof heart to the Presbyterians, and doubtless Le\xc2\xa3 to mtach con- \n\n\n\n* l\xc2\xbbr. Hawl : Protestant Episcopal Choroh in Maryland, ii was, \n\nhowever, enacted in Bontfa Carolina, bal i the Crown on the re] resents- \n\nii.. n of tin- Lords, Spiritual end Temporal. \n\nt Beprinted in tin- Chnroh Beview. \n\nJ Pej . edited bg Mr. Bamnel Haaard. \n\n{ Bepoirtfl "t" tin- \\ \xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0; v. \n\n\n\n90 Webster\'s history of the \n\nsultation by letter and personal conference on the part of \nMakemie, Taylor, Davis, and the devout men who wor- \nshipped with them. They devised, as the best plan, that \nMakemie should visit Great Britain and Ireland, and repre- \nsent the circumstances of " those favouring our way in the \nPlantations," and endeavour to interest the ministers in Lon- \ndon, and those in Scotland and Ireland, in the defence of \ntheir rights and in the supply of their wants. With a view \nto this voyage, Makemie executed a power of attorney for the \nmanagement of his property in his absence, and in case of his \ndeath, and sailed some time after May 30, 1704.* \n\n" He prevailed! with the ministers of London to undertake \nthe support of two itinerants for the space of two years, and, \nafter that time, to send two more on the same condition, \nallowing the former after that time to settle ; which, if accom- \nplished, had proved of more than credible advantage, con- \nsidering how far scattered most of the inhabitants be; but, \nalas ! they drew back their hands." He returned in the fall \nof 1705, accompanied by the Rev. John Hampton and George \nMcNish, and, it is not unlikely, by Mr. John Boyd, a proba- \ntioner. Makemie\'s field of labour was on both sides of the \nPocomoke, the meeting-house being in Maryland, and the \ncongregation being called Pocomoke, or Coventry, but most \ngenerally Rehoboth. Twenty-five miles distant was Snow \nHill and the associated congregation of Pitt\'s Creek ; and \nfifteen miles from Snow Hill were the united congregations \nof Monokin and Wicomico. These, having four places of \nWorship, were reckoned as two congregations ; and the pres- \nbytery says, in 1710, there were four congregations in Mary- \nland, counting these as two, together with Rehoboth and \nMarlborough. \n\nThe four meeting-houses in Somerset county had shared \nwith Rehoboth the labours of Makemie ; and, when (Novem- \nber 14, 1705) he waited upon Somerset Court with McNish \nand Hampton, that they might be qualified to serve them, the \nRev. Robert Keith,! of Coventry parish, and Mr. Alexander \nAdams, anticipated the application. These gentlemen repre- \n\n* Spence\'s Early History of Presbyterianism. \n\nf Letter of Philadelphia Presbytery in 1710 to Dublin Presbytery. \n\nJ Spence. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 91 \n\nBented to the court, then sitting at Dividing Creek, that they \nhad reason to believe that Makemie and his assistants de- \nsigned to ask to be qualified as Dissenting teachers, and they \n\n3ted the court to refer the application to the governor. \nMcNish applied ; but the matter was referred to the governor. \nIn January, 1700, McNish and Hampton made a joint appli- \ncation to Somerset Court, and it was in like manner referred. \nThe business was long delayed; but, at last, Governor Sey- \nmour issued his order, and McXish and Hampton presented \nit to the court, and were qualified (June 12, 1706) to preach \nin the meeting-houses at Snow Hill, the Head of Monokin, \nnear Mr. Edgar\'s, and on Captain Joseph Venable\'s land. \nCaptain Venable was at this time one of the justices on the \nbench ; his residence was on Wicomico. The other place of \nworship was on Pitt\'s Creek. \n\nThe first meeting of the presbyter}\' was probably held in \n\nmber, 1706;* but the first leaf of the records is lost, \xe2\x80\x94 \nthe book beginning with a fragment of the minutes of a meet- \n\nheeember 26,) probably called at Freehold, for the pur- \n\nof ordaining Mr. John Boyd. \n\n* [In the Preliminary Sketch of the " Records of the Presbyterian Church," \n\nprinted by the Board of Publication by the authority of the General Assembly, \n\n-\'\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0-, the editor, says, " Iu consequence of the irrecoverable loss of the \n\nfi;-r leaf of the minutes of this body, -we are unable to ascertain the precise duto \n\neocledastioal association; but, judging from the first date, which appears \n\non page third of these records, it must have been about the beginning of the year \n\n; \\ of Philadelphia consisted at seven ministers, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : Francis \n\n. John II impton, Qeorge McNish, Samuel Davis, \xe2\x80\x94 all, from the best ac- \n\nemigrants from Ireland, and exercising their ministry on the Eastern Shore \n\nryland; John Wilson, also, from Scotland, settled in New Castle, \xe2\x80\x94 and \n\nfrom New England, and settled in Philadelphia. To these \n\nI J Im I\' I, wh<> ua- tin- first person ordained by the new pres- \nLn 1706, and settled in Freehold, New Jersey." El>.] \n\n\n\n92 Webster\'s history of the \n\n\n\nCHAPTER m. \n\nThe records of the Synod of Ulster before 1697* are lost; \nbut the Rev. Mr. Iredell declared to the synod, in 1721, that \nhe had assented to the Confession of the Westminster divines \nin 1688 ; and it is improbable that any persons were licensed \nwithout giving to the presbytery entire satisfaction of their \ndoctrinal soundness, even in minor matters. What had been \nmatter of custom was, by the unanimous vote of the synod in \n1698, made a matter of statute ; candidates, on being licensed, \nwere required to subscribe the Confession, and in June, 1705, \n"such ministers as are to be licensed shall subscribe the \nWestminster Confession to be the confession of their faith, \nand promise to adhere to the doctrine, discipline, and govern- \nment therein contained; as also those that are licensed and \nhave not subscribed are to be obliged to subscribe before they \nare ordained." This was unanimously approved of; and the \nnext year the presbyteries reported that the rule was uniformly \ncomplied with.f When the Presbytery of Philadelphia met, \nthis doubtless made, of course, a part of their constitution. \n\nThe first leaf of their records being lost, we can know no- \nthing of the articles of agreement embraced in their bond of \nunion; but if it were not for the paging, one might naturally \nsuppose that a thousand leaves were gone, with the pro- \nceedings of a century spread upon them; for there is no \nappearance in the movements of the body, indicating that it \n\n* The facts concerning the Synod of Ulster are taken from the report of "The \nClough Case," in which authenticated extracts from the minutes were admitted in \nevidence, [before the Court of Exchequer, in Dublin, on the celebrated trial which \ninvolved the right of the Trinitarian portion of "The Clough Congregation" to pre- \nvent Unitarians from carrying off the meeting-house and Congregational pro- \nperty. Ed.] \n\nj- In 1708, the churches of Connecticut, represented by delegates at Saybrook, \nunanimously adopted the Westminster Confession, leaving out some things relating \nto divorce and church-discipline. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 93 \n\nwas oppressed with a cumbrous system which it had not \nproved. The machinery goes on as quietly as though by long \nuse every part had become thoroughly fitted for its place and \nwork. Were it not for the names of places incidentally men- \ntit uK-d, one could easily believe that he had taken up the \nminutes of some of the original presbyteries of the Irish \nchurch. \n\nThe book opens with the brethren in session at Freehold, \non a [Thursday, engaged in examining Boyd for ordination; \nthey held \'\'Sederunt 2d" on Friday, sustained his trials, and \non the Lord\'s day, December 27, 1706, his ordination was \nrmed at "the public meeting-house in this place, \nbefore a numerous assembly." This was an adjourned \nmeeting. \n\nThe meetings were annual. The second was at Philadelphia, \nMarch 22. 17<>7 : four ministers with their elders were present. \nThe adjusters are ranged according to seniority, but the elders \naccording t<> their position in society or their age. "WIlsop is \nn the roll, and his elder John Gardner is third; An- \ndrews is Beoond, and his elder Joseph Yard is first; Taylor is \nthird, and Lis elder William Smith is second; whale McNish \nand his elder James Stoddard stand side by side. Wilson was \nen moderator by a plurality of votes, and McNish clerk. \nIt being Saturday, tiny adjourned till Tuesday at 4 p.m., after \nhaving refused t\xc2\xab> accept the excuse Davis had sent by letter \n\nfar bie absence from this and the preceding meeting. On \nlay, Makemie, Hampton, and Boyd appeared, and the \nmeeting was opened by Makemie and Wilson with discourses \non the first and second verses of the lOpistle to the Hebrews, \n0b appointed at the meeting of the lasl year.\' They had little \nbusiness. Wilson wrote requiring Davie to attend the next \nmeeting; Hampton gave reasons for nol accepting) at this \ntine-, the call to Snow Hill, now tendered to liim. and it was \n\nleft in his hand-; Taylor wrote to the people to encourage. \n\n* Th< - an I addition, and trere approved* Aftec the \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 -h bishops modelled their synods after the Presbyter! \nti.ni, and appointed a oommittee, celled \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2Tin; Brethren of the Exercise," tp arrange \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 - during the session. Principal Forrester, at the time of fi i \ntin- ]\xe2\x80\xa2!\xe2\x96\xa0 ea appointed t" deliter " The Addition\'\' at the \n\nopening of the \n\n\n\n94 Webster\'s history op the \n\ntheir endeavours for a settled minister among them ; and An- \ndrews and Boyd were appointed a committee to prepare over- \ntures for the propagating of religion in the congregations. \nThe next day closed their sessions. Makemie wrote to Mr; \nAlexander Colden, the minister of Oxnam, in Scotland, giving \nan account of the state of the Dissenting Presbyterian interest \nin and about Lewestown, and signifying the earnest desires of \nthat people for him to come and be their minister. "Wilson \nwrote to the presbytery of which Colden was a member, to the \nsame effect. This was probably the Rev. Alexander Colden, \nof Dunse-in-the-Merse, who had a sister of his wife\'s residing \nin Philadelphia. His son, Cadwalader Colden, M.D., visited \nhis aunt in 1710 ; and, going to New York, he acquired the \nfavour of Governor Hunter, and was made surveyor-general \nof the province, and was afterwards appointed lieutenant- \ngovernor. \n\nThe aid from London to sustain missionaries- was continued \nbut for a short time. The need of its continuance was pressing, \nand Dr. Cotton Mather and the Boston ministers, in 1709, \ncheerfully gave their concurrence in applying for its renewal. \n"Wilson and Andrews wrote to Sir Edmund Harrison in con- \ncert with the letter from New England; and in 1710, McNish \nwrote to Dr. Tongue in London. Henry, in the following \nyear, wrote to the Presbytery of Dublin ; Wilson and Ander- \nson wrote to the Synod of Glasgow on the same head. \n\nThe application to London failed. The Rev. Thomas Rey- \nnolds generously sent assistance and continued it for several \nyears. \n\nThe intercourse of the brethren for nine years was harmo- \nnious and happy; quiet, steady growth in numbers marked \neach successive meeting, and the churches which had retained \ntheir New England connection and their independent form, \ngradually, with their ministers, joined their fellowship and \nwalked by the same rule. Newtown and Southampton, on \nLong Island, led the way: Elizabethtown and Newark, ac- \ncompanied by their neighbours, followed. \n\nThus in the formation of the churches, and in the establish- \nment of the presbytery, the fathers of our Zion brought with \nthem and planted on our soil the same system of church order \nand government to which they were attached, and for which \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 93 \n\nmany of them had borne hardness in their native land. The \nessential elements of presbytery, containing the parity of \npastors and the prerogatives of ruling elders in their respective \nchurches, together with the action of the \'-Kirk Session," from \nwhich an appeal might be taken to a higher court, in which \nthe subject under consideration should be authoritatively dis- \nposed of, were principles of government as well known to \nthem as to their descendants in more modern times. \n\nThe formation of the synod also occurred with as little \nparade as the opening of a flower; the bud burst its leafy \nbonds and expanded its beauty to the eye and poured its fra- \ngrance on the air. It was rendered necessary by the extension \nof territory.* The Presbytery of Long Island embraced the \nprovince of New York; Philadelphia Presbytery covered East \nand West Jersey and so much of Pennsylvania as lay north of \nGreat Valley. All the other churches belonged to Xew- \nsbytery, the project of forming the ministers on the \npeninsula between the Delaware and the Chesapeake into the \nPresbytery of Snow Hill having failed. \n\nThe synod met on the 17th of September, 1717, and was \ncalled upon by Newcastle Presbytery to pronounce authorita- \ntively ..n the marriage of a man to his brother\'s widow. Con- \nsiderable time was spent in discoursing on it: they made a \n\n* [Ti of Philadelphia met in that city on Tuesday, September 18, \n\n171\'.. ai i with business until Saturday, the 22<J. On Friday, the 21st, \n\nI the following minute : \xe2\x80\x94 \n" It having pleased Divine Providence so to increase our number, as that, after \nmuch deliberation, ire judge n may be more serviceable to the Interest of religion \nt.. divide out i nbordinate meetings or presbyteries constituting "no \n\nannual! Philadelphia or elsewhere, to consist of all the \n\nwjh subordinat orn ting for this year al leant: There- \n\need by the presbytery, after Berions doliberati tint the first subor- \ndinate meeting or presbytery i" meet at Philadelphia or elsewhere, as they shall \n\nfollowing members, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : Masters Andrews, Jones, \n\nPowell, Orr, Bradner, and Morgan. An I tie- second to meet at Newcastle or else- \nat tlo-y shall see tit, to \'-on \' t of these, riz. : Ida ters Anderson, MoGill, \n\n. Brans, and Conn. The third to n t at SncW Hill \n\nwhere, I pton, and ffenry, And. in \n\nnly our brethren Mr. MoNish and Mr. runny are of i or \n\nnumbei meetly r mmend it to them to use theii \n\nwith the neighbouring brethren that are settled there which, as \nnot with as, t.. join with (ham in erecting a fourth proebytery." & \ni >a Church, pp. I \xe2\x96\xa0:. II. Board of Publication, 1841. B\xc2\xbb.] \n\n\n\n96 Webster\'s history of the \n\nunanimous declaration of its being incestuous and unlawful, \nthe parties not to be restored to church privileges until they \nparted. \n\nThey also began a fund for pious uses, to which yearly con- \ntributions were made by the congregations: by it they aided \nfeeble churches, assisted in building places of worship, and \nrelieved the widows of their deceased members. \n\nAbout this period, a large emigration commenced from the \nnorth of Ireland; year after year it flowed into Maine, Massa- \nchusetts, and New Hampshire, and New York, New Jersey, \nPennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland. The immediate cause \nis supposed to have been the refusal to renew the leases to the \ntenants on the old terms, or on any terms which they judged \nreasonable. \n\nCotton Mather* wrote to Principal Sterling, of Glasgow, on \nthe 3d of Fourth month, 1713, expressing the hope that, " as \ngreat numbers are like to come to us from the north of Ire- \nland, the bond between the churches of Scotland and New \nEngland will every day grow stronger and stronger." On the \n6th of Eighth month, 1718, he writes to him : \xe2\x80\x94 "We are com- \nforted with great numbers of the oppressed brethren coming \nfrom the north of Ireland. The glorious providence of God, \nin the removal of so many of a desirable character from the \nnorth of Ireland, hath doubtless very great intentions in it." \n\nAmong these were Thomas Creaghead, who came in 1715 ; \nJames McGregoire, in 1718, with a number of families, who \nestablished themselves at Londonderry, New Hampshire ; \nEdward Fitzgerald, at the head of a company who settled at \nWorcester, Massachusetts ; William Coruwell, from Mona- \nghan Presbytery, with a body of settlers at Casco Bay, in \nMaine, in Falmouth township, near Portland ; and William \nBoyd, minister of Mecasky, (or Macosquin,) who returned \nsoon after and settled at Taboyn. Mather also speaks in high \nterms of James Woodside, who also returned. \n\nOn the 10th of Sixth month, 1718, Mather wrote to An- \ndrews : \xe2\x80\x94 " Sir : it has been a great satisfaction to your bre- \nthren here to understand how comfortably and admirably you \nare strengthened by an accession of excellent men to carry on \n\n* Mather MSS., American Antiquarian Society, Worcester. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 97 \n\nthe work of the ministry with you. The compassion which \nour dear Saviour has herein shown to the sheep in the wilder- \nness and the encouragement given to his faithful servants who \nwanted such faithful labourers, we have observed with delight \nand veneration. And we promise ourselves that your wise, \ngracious, candid, and condescending union with one another, \nan-1 your continual progression of services to be done for the \nkingdom of God, will be attended with many happy con- \nsequents in yonr parts of the world/\' \n\nThe Act of Toleration, relieving Dissenters from the oppres- \nsive Act of Uniformity, was not enacted by the Parliament of \nJjpeland till 1719, in the sixth year of George I. \n\nThe Dissenters in England, in order to enjoy relief under \ntli- Toleration, were required to subscribe the doctrinal Arti- \ncles of the Church of England. The Irish Presbyterians were \ndetermined not to accept of the toleration if tendered on those \nterms. On the 10th of November, 1714, there was a meeting \nof ministers and gentlemen at Antrim, to consider on what \ngrounds they would receive it; and their unanimous resolve \nthat " the first thing we shall propose to the government \nand insist upon is, that the terms on which we will accept it \nshall be OUT subscribing the Westminster Confession of Faith." \nAt a full Bynod in Belfast, June 19, 1710, an interloquitur was \nheld, and the resolution was unanimously approved and ad- \ni to; yet, as the government might refuse to allow sub- \nBcription to the Westminster Confession to be enacted as the \nc lition, they agreed in that case to propose, that the condi- \ntion be subscription to this formula: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0 1 profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ the \n\nal Son of God, and in God the Holy Ghost ; that these \nare one < tod, the same in substance, equal in power and \n\nglory. I believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New \nmen1 were given by divine inspiration, and thai they are \n\na perfect rule of faith and practice; and, pursuant to this, 1 \n\nsail the doctrines common t<> the Protestant churches \n\nme and abroad, contained in their and out public Con* \n\n; Faith." \n\nI . this, some objected that it might be regarded as \xc2\xab reeedt \n\nIng from the Qonfeeeioa bo propose such a fenndla. it was \n\nfeplied, thai the formula vrsi in substance the wmfl with our \n\n7 \n\n\n\n98 Webster\'s history of the \n\nConfession, and a compendious abridgment of divers of the \nmost fundamental articles of it, and that to tolerate on the \nground of it, would give the public sanction of authority to \nour standing by and preaching up to all known principles con- \ntained in our Confession. It was agreed, with but one dissent- \ning voice, that to propose the formula could not rightly be \nconstrued as a relinquishing the "Westminster Confession as \nour Confession. From the determination as a last resort to \npropose this formula, three ministers and two elders dissented, \nand one minister and one elder were non liquet. \n\nIn 1721, at the Synod in Belfast, Mr. Haliday, having been \ncalled to the old congregation in that town, declined to declare \nfor the Confession, though he had assented to it when licensed \nat Rotterdam. Testimonials of his soundness in the faith \nwere produced from the London ministers, from Leyden, Rot- \nterdam, Basle, and Geneva, and from several presbyteries. \nHe said, " My refusal to declare my assent does not proceed \nfrom my disbelief of the important truths contained in the \n"Westminster Confession, the contrary of which, by word and \nwriting, I have often declared, as this venerable body can bear \nme witness ; but my scruples are against the submitting to hu- \nman tests of divine truth, when imposed as a necessary term \nof Christian and ministerial communion, especially in a great \nnumber of extra-essential truths, without the knowledge or \nbelief of which men may be entitled to the favour of God and \nthe hopes of eternal life, and, according to the laws of the \ngospel, to Christian and ministerial communion." \n\nThe synod utterly disclaimed all power of imposing on \nmen\'s consciences, of which God alone is Lord ; and, at the \nsolicitation of the reverend commissioners from Dublin Pres- \nbyteiy, they indulged Hallyday, who declined giving the rea- \nsons of his scruples, lest it should cause heat and altercation ; \nbut they rebuked the Belfast Presbytery for having proceeded \nto settle him. \n\nThey, however, by a majority resolved that each individual \nminister should express his opinion distinctly concerning the \nSupreme Divinity of our Lord and Saviour ; several declined \nand were excluded. Others professed their faith in the Trinity, \nbut refused to subscribe the Westminster Confession. \n\nA great number of congregations supplicated the synod, \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 99 \n\nearnestly, that all its members and all the inferior judicatories \nshould be obliged to subscribe the Westminster Confession. \nAn overture concerning the Eternal Deity of the Son of God \nwas brought in ; an interloquitur was held, and the overture \nremodelled, read three times, and reasoned upon at great \nlength. Some withdrew, and, while professing in the strongest \nterms to believe the article, objected to the overture as unsea- \nsonable, and because, in their judgment, they were against all \nauthoritative decisions and human tests of orthodoxy. \n\nThe synod declared it to be an aspersion, wholly groundless \nbo far a< they knew, that the Deity of the Son of God was im- \npugned by their members; and that "it is our resolution that \nwhoever denies this article hereafter in the pulpit, or in con- \nversation, or in print, shall be proceeded against according to \ntie- law of the gospel and disowned." \n\nIn 17l\'1, Gillespie introduced a declaration into the Synod \nof Philadelphia, which was adopted: \xe2\x80\x94 "Our opinion is, that if \nany brother have any overture to offer to be formed into an act \nof aynod, for the better carrying on in the matters of our go- \nvernment and discipline, he may bring it in against next \n." The design of Gillespie was probably to prepare the \nway for an overture concerning some material point of doc- \ntrine, perhaps the very one which had engrossed the attention \nof the mother-synod. 1 Dickinson appears to have occupied the \nground of Ballyday, A.bernethy, and others, who, while profess- \ning the doctrine of the I >eity of ( Ihrist, objected to any authori- \ndecision by a human tribunal, lie, therefore, with Mor- \ngan, Jones, l>. Evans, Pierson, and Webb, protested against \nadopting the resolution, and against its being recorded. \n\nAndrews* wrote to Oolman, April BO, 17l!-!: \xe2\x80\x94 "Two or three \n\nthings have happened within a twelvemonth among us of no \n\npromising asped among some few other better Idlings. \n\nThe business of the protestation thai happened at our Is | \n\nsynodical meeting, I\'ve endeavoured to heal, and I hope \'twill \n\naled. 1 know not but the l\'aeiliet Articles have had their \n\nt The adopted, In 1720, by the Mall Synod. "If any \n\ntribe shall scruple ji ii v phrase or phrases In the Confession, be \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0hall lie !.. which the presbytery shall aooepi of, \n\nprovided they judge mob i motion shall be \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 It\'s II lmv : U | !\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2.,\xc2\xab\xe2\x96\xa0, " til. in we \n\n\n\n100 Webster\'s history of the \n\ngood use. In short, I think the difference is in words, for I \ncan\'t find any real difference, having sifted the matter in seve- \nral letters which have passed between Mr. Dickinson and me \nupon it. I am still of the mind, as I told you before, that the \nsquabble at New York is at the bottom and has an evil influ- \nence on our peace. I wish it may not do more hurt hereafter." \n\nDickinson, as the moderator, opened the synod with a ser- \nmon* on 2 Timothy iii. IT, in 1722. It bore directly on his \nposition assumed in the protest; asserting that the church has \nno authority to make new laws or alter or add to what is pre- \nscribed in the Bible. "I challenge the world to produce any \nsuch dedimus potestatem from Christ, or the least lisp in the \nBible, that countenances such a regal power." \n\nThey had accompanied their protest with reasons. McGill \nand McNish produced answers ; when Jones, Morgan, Dickin- \nson, and Evans, brought in a paper testifying their judgment \nconcerning church government, which was approved by the \nsynod, and ordered by the synod to be recorded in the synod- \nbook. Likewise, the said brethren being willing to take back \ntheir protestation against the act, together with their reasons \ngiven in defence of said protest, the synod doth hereby order \nthat the protest, together with the reasons of it, as also the an- \nswers at the appointment of the synod given in to the reasons \nalleged by Mr. Daniel McGill and Mr. George McNish, be all \nwithdrawn, and that the said act remain and be in all respects as \nif no such protest had been made. The articles are as follows : \n\n" 1. We freely grant that there is full executive power of \nchurch government in presbyteries and synods, and that they \nmay authoritatively in the name of Christ use the keys of \nchurch discipline to all proper intents and purposes, and that \nthe keys of the church are committed to the church officers \nand to them only. \n\n" 2. We also grant that the mere circumstantials of church \ndiscipline, such as the time, place, and mode of carrying on, in \nthe government of the church, belong to ecclesiastical judica- \ntories to determine as occasions occur, conformable to the \ngeneral rules in the word of God, that require all things to be \n\nallow of. The synod soon saw the advantage taken of these articles by unsound \nmen, and repealed them." \xe2\x80\x94 Wodrow Correspondence. \n* MSS. Massachusetts Historical Society. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CIIURCH IN AMERICA. 101 \n\ndone decently and in order. And if these things are called act?, \nwe will take no offence at the word, provided that these acts \nbe not imposed on such, as conscientiously dissent from them. \n\n"3. We also grant, that synods may compose directories and \nrecommend them to all their members, respecting all the parts \nof discipline; provided that all subordinate judicatories may \ndecline from such directories, when they conscientiously think \nthey have just reason to do so. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa24. We freely allow that appeals may be made from all infe- \nrior to superior judicatories, and that they have power to con- \nsider and determine such appeals." \n\n"The synod was so universally pleased with the abovesaid \ncomposure oftheirdifieren.ee, that they unanimously united in \na thanksgiving-prayer, and joyful singing the 180th Psalm." \nThe reasons of protest and the answer were both dropped \nfrom the record. The four points presented as the basis of \nment were 80 materia], in the judgment of the Synod of \nUlster, that they decided, in 172."), that those who denied thou \n\nshould not be allowed to vote in any matter affecting those \nwho believed them, u it being contrary to common equity, \nthat, where there is a parity of power, the obligation to mu- \ntual Babmission should not be equal in all the members." \nThe next year a Committee of Bills and ( >vertures was ap* \npointed, on which Dickinson served; but Jones and 1). Evans \nmted from the appointment of it. \nImmediately alter the adoption of Gillespie\'s proposal in \n\n1721, a commissi) P synod was appointed to act in their \n\nname, and with all their authority, in the matter of the fund \n\nor any other business which may come before them. The \ncommission was annually appointed until the formation of the \nGeneral Assembly. The loss of all the minutes of its pro*- \nceedinga is much to be regretted; \n\nIn 1722, the Iii-h Synod resolved firmly and constantly to \nadhere to the Westminster Confession, as being founded on \nthe Word of God and agreeable thereto; and to cleave to and \nmaintain the Presbyterian government and discipline, hitherto \n\nexercised i og them according to our known rules, agreeable \n\nto the Scripture. \n\nIn 17_\' \xe2\x80\xa2\'., tor the security of the church, they resolved that \n\nthe declaring of Article- of Faith in Scripture language only, \n\n\n\n102 Webster\'s history of the \n\nwhich had been permitted by the Pacification Articles, shall \nnot be accepted as sufficient evidence of a person\'s soundness \nin the faith; and that the condemning of all creeds, confes- \nsions, and declarations of faith in human words, opens a door \nto let errors and heresies into the church. \n\nThese proceedings sent a wave across the Atlantic ; and in \n1T24, the Presbytery of Newcastle entered in their book a for- \nmula, expressing adherence to the Westminster Confession, \nand their candidates on being licensed cheerfully signed it :\xe2\x80\x94 \n"I do own the Westminster Confession as the confession of \nmy faith." What the Presbyteries of Philadelphia and Long \nIsland did during these years cannot be ascertained, their \nrecords being lost. The formula used by Armagh Presbytery, \nin Ulster, was, "I do believe the Westminster Confession of \nFaith to be founded on and agreeable to the word of God, \nand therefore as such, by this my subscription, do own it as \nthe confession of my faith." \n\nIn 1725, the Irish Synod resolved to suspend from the mi- \nnistry all who reproached the church judicatories \xc2\xa3pr requiring \nsubscription ; and " that whosoever shall maintain- that Christ \nhas not lodged any authority in the judicatories of this church, \nbut that they are mere consultative meetings, whose decisions \neven in matters of prudence and expediency may be counter- \nacted and defeated by every man\'s private judgment, ought \nnot to be allowed to vote in any matter the decision whereof \nmay affect any member who believes the proper authority of \nour judicatories as the ordinance of Jesus Christ, to which \nsubmission is due in all things lawful for conscience." They \nordered also that censure be inflicted on those who refused, \nwhen required by a regularly-constituted judicatory, to give a \ndeclaration of their sentiments on any important article of \nfaith. They transmitted the following overture by a great \nmajority to the presbyteries: \xe2\x80\x94 AVhether or not we should, after \nthe laudable example of the Church of Scotland in their \nGeneral Assembly, require of every minister and ruling \nelder, before their admission to vote in the General Synod, \nthat he subscribe or declare the Westminster Confession of \nFaith to be the confession of his faith as a qualification of \nmembership? They also ordered, that if any inferior judica- \ntory shall reverse or alter the decisions of their superior judi- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN OHUSCH IN AMERICA. 103 \n\neateries, the moderator and clerk then in office shall incur \nsuspension as long as the next higher judicatory shall see fit. \n\nIn 1726, the non-subscribers ottered propositions for an ac- \ncommodation, which the subscribers rejected as inconsistent \nwith the peace and unity of this church; and, "by these their \nprinciples and their declared resolutions to adhere to them, they \nput it out of our power to maintain ministerial communion \nwith them in church judicatories as formerly, consistently \nwith the faithful discharge of our ministerial office and the \npeace of our own consciences." The non-subscribers read \ntheir observations on this paper: eighteen ministers and four \nelders objected to proceed to the vote on it. It was agreed to \nby a great majority, eleven ministers and one elder dissent- \ning. The non-subscribers, being thus excluded, withdrew, and \nformed the Antrim Presbytery. \n\nIn the Synod of Philadelphia, in September, 1727, Thomson, \noi Lewi Stown, introduced the following overture:* \n\n"That tin.- synod, as an ecclesiastical judicature of Christ, \nclothed with ministerial authority to act in concert in behalf \nof truth and in opposition to error, would, by an act of its \nown. publicly and authoritatively adopt the Westminster Con- \n. of Fa^th, Catechisms, cV,c. for the public confession of \nour faith; and oblige each presbytery to require every, candi- \ndate for the ministry to subscribe or otherwise acknowledge, \nooram pnsbyteris, the said Confession, ami promise not to \nI i or teach contrary to it. All \'actual ministers\' coming \n\namong Ofl to do the like, and no minister to teach or preach \ncontrary to eaid articles, unless first he propose the point to \nthe presbytery or synod to he by them discussed. Each mi- \nnister to recommend to his dock to entertain the truth in I6ve, \nalous, and fruitful, ami earnest by prayer with God, to \n\nthe vine from being spoiled by these deluding \n"t \nthing ifl said of it in the minutes of that year; but New- \n\nbytery, March 28* L728, requested it to he produced, \nand, being read, a judgment on it was deferred iill the next \n! ing, They say subsequently thai the synod slighted it, \nand that Thomson published a letter wim-h took? effect. Ee \n\n\' [J, b0O Mr. I BTdVl U88. \n\n\n\n104 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nprinted the overture, with his reasons for its adoption. It was \nproposed, he says, as an expedient for preventing the ingress \nand spreading of dangerous errors among ourselves and our \nflocks. "Being an organized body, we ought, especially when \napparent dangers call for it, to exert ourselves in vindication \nand defence of the truth we profess. "We are not accountable \nto the judicial inquiry of any superior earthly judicatory; and, \nif we do not exert the authority inherent in us for maintaining \nthe purity of gospel truth, there is no earthly authority to call \nus in question for our neglect, our errors or heresies. \n\n"Perhaps my unacquaintedness with our records may cause \nme to mistake ; but it seems to me we are too much like the \npeople of Laish, \xe2\x80\x94 in a careless, defenceless condition, as a city \nwithout walls, having never, by a conjunct act of the represen- \ntatives of our church, made it our confession as we are a united \nbody politic, and there being nothing to keep out of the mi- \nnistry those who are corrupt in doctrinals, or to prevent any \namong us from propagating gross errors. Pernicious and dan- \ngerous corruptions in doctrine have grown in fashion among \nthose, whose ancestors would have sealed the now despised \ntruth with their blood. Our infancy and poverty prevent us \nfrom planting a seminary of learning ; and we must depend on \nother places for men to supply our vacancies, and so are in \ndanger of having our ministry corrupted, by those who are \nleavened beforehand with false doctrine. If such an expedient \nbe neglected, (now, I hope it may be done,) those who now \ndiscern not the necessity hereof, may, ere many years, see it \nwhen it will be too late; when perhaps the number of truth\'s \nfriends may be too few to carry such a point in the synod." \n\nThe synod met in the fall by delegates, it having been \nresolved to do so in 1724, and to have " a full synod"* every \nthird year. The delegates were, from Philadelphia Presby- \ntery, Andrews, Morgan, "William Tennent and his son Gil- \nbert, Pierson, Dickinson, and Parris ; from Newcastle Pres- \nbytery, Creaghead, Thomson, Anderson, Gillespie, McCook, \nGelston, Houston, and Boyd ; from Long Island Presbytery, \nPomeroy and Cross. There were twelve elders, all Irishmen \nor Scotchmen, except John Budd, from Philadelphia, and \n\n* The Synod of Ulster speak of " a full synod" as early as 1716. The plan \nof delegation went out of use in 1730. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 105 \n\nKathaniel Hazard, of New York. Of the ministers, six were \nfrom New England. \n\nThe overture on subscription being read, the s}*nod, judg- \ning it to be a ver} T important affair, unanimously deferred the \nconsideration of it for a year, recommending it to the mem- \nbers of each presbytery to give notice to the absent members \nof it, and agreeing that the next synod should be a full one. \n\nAndrews* wrote to Colman, April 7, 1729: \xe2\x80\x94 "We are now \nlikely to fall into a great difference about subscribing the \n"Westminster Confession of Faith. An overture for it \xe2\x80\x94 drawn \nup by Mr. Thomson, of Lewestown \xe2\x80\x94 was offered to our synod \nthe year before last, but not then read in the synod. Measures \nwere taken to stave it off; and I was in hopes we should have \nheard no more of it. But last year it was brought again, \nrecommended by all the Scotch and Irish members present ; \nand, being read among us, a proposal was made, prosecuted, \ntad agreed to, that it should be deferred till our next meeting \nf>\xc2\xbbr farther consideration. The proposal is, that all ministers \nand intrants should sign it, or be disowned as members. \n!X<\xc2\xbb\\v, what shall we do? They will certainly carry it by \nbombers. Our countrymen say they are willing to join in a \nvote to make it the Confession of our church ; but to agree to \nBaking it a test of orthodoxy and term of ministerial com- \nmunion, they will not. I think all the Scotch are on one \n.-i\'l\'\\ and all the English and Welsh on the other, to a man. \nNevertheless, I am not so determined as to be incapable to \nreceive advice; and I give yon this account that I may have \nyour judgment what I had best do in the matter. Supposing \nJ do believe it: shall I, on the terms above mentioned, sul>- \nBcribe or not? i earnestly desire yon by tin- first opportunity \nto scud me your opinion. Qur brethren have got the over- \nture, with a preface to it, printed; and I intend to send you \noik- for lip- better regulation of your thoughts about it. \nSome say ih\'- design of this motion is to spew out our coun- \ntrymen, \xe2\x80\x94 they being scarce able to hold way with the other \nbrethren in all their disciplinary and legislative notions. \n\nWhat truth there may !><\xe2\x96\xa0 in this I know not. Some drn\\ it ; \n\nwhereas others say there is something in it. 1 am satisfied, \n\n* Printed Is Hodgi \n\n\n\n106 Webster\'s history of the \n\nsome of us are an uneasiness to them, and are thought to be \ntoo much in their way sometimes, so that I think it would he \nno trouble to lose some of us. Yet I can\'t think this to be \nthe thing ultimately designed, whatever smaller glances there \nmay be at it. I have no thought, they have any design \nagainst me in particular; I have no reason for it. This busi- \nness lies heavy on my mind ; and I desire that we may be \ndirected in it, that we may not bring a scandal on our pro- \nfession. Though I have been sometimes the instrument of \nkeeping them together, when they were like to fall to pieces, \nI have little hope of doing so now. If it were not for the \nscandal of a division, I should not be much against it; for the \ndifferent countrymen seem to be most delighted with each other \nand to do best when they are by themselves. My congrega- \ntion being made up of divers nations of different sentiments, \nthis brings me under greater difficulty in this contested busi- \nness than any other minister of our number. I am afraid \nof the event. However, I will endeavour to do as near as I \ncan what I understand to be duty, and leave the issue to \nProvidence." \n\nDickinson published "Remarks"* on a discourse entitled \n"An Overture." It is dated April 10, 1729, and was printed \nby J. P. Zenger, Smith Street, New York. He insists that \npoor defenceless Laish will not be bettered by the wall of \nsubscription, which will fall if a fox go over it. Her true \ndefence is the thorough examination of candidates on the \nsaving work of grace in their hearts, in reviving ancient disci- \npline, in bringing offenders to account, and being diligent in \npreaching the whole counsel of God. He shows that there \nmay be a bond of union without subscription, that the \nsynod had already a bond of union in the general acknow- \nledgment of the truth, and that subscription always causes \ndisunion. To shut out of the ministry non-subscribers, is to \nmake the Confession, not the Bible, our standard, and is an \ninvasion of the royalty of Christ. \n\nHe depicts the sad condition of a good man who cannot in \nconscience subscribe: he is, at best, treated as a weak brother, \nor held up to his people as an object of distrust. He refers to \n\n* Old South Church Library. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 107 \n\nthe dismal group of heresies which crowded into the church, \nwithin seventy years after the adoption of the Nicene Creed ; \nall of which "flowed from the corrupt fountain of impositions \nand subscriptions. This was the mark set by Providence on \nthe first subscription of this kind, and this the defence and \npropagation of the truth that followed from it. The churches \nof New England have always been non-subscribers, and yet \nretain their first faith and love. Subscription, therefore, is \nnot necessary to the being or the well-being of a church; \nunless hatred, variance, emulation, wrath, strife, sedition, and \n- are necessary to that end."* \n\nTo this, if Thomson replied, no copy of his answer is \nknown to remain. In his view, " secret, bosom enemies of \nthe truth (I mean those who, being visible members of the \nchurch, do not openly and violently oppose the truth professed \ntherein, but in a secret way endeavour to undermine it) are as \ndangerous as any; and the church should in a special manner \n-\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0 her vigilance against such, by searching them out, \niiscovering (hem, and setting a mark upon them, whereby \nthey may be known, and so not have it in their power to \ndeceive." \n\nTin- result of this delay was manifest and happy. In 1729, \nall the members of synod were present, except Morgan, Pem- \nberton, Cross, Webb, Stewart, Pomeroy, and Hook; four of \nwhom were New England men. There were thirteen elders, \nof whom Mr. Budd was of Ameriean birth, and William \nWilliams was probably a Welshman. \n\n\'l\'h.\' overture was referred to Anderson, the moderator, \nAndrews, Dickinson, Thomson, Pierson, Oreaghead, and \nConn, and the elder John Budd. They brought in an over- \nture, which, after long debating, was agreed on \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 What President I bed the Professorship of Divinity in Yule Col- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0lipliuii t.i the C.iil\'.-.-Mnii binding mi (lie prO&SSOT, Dr. Johll \n\nGale, of ELilliogworth, attacked him, and quoted the passage in the text Mr. \nI eplied. Dr. Bellamy wrote "" the Mime side, under the signature of \n\n*\' Paulinos." Dr. Bopldnt w.i- tealoru for the rahsoription. Bostwiok,on hearing \nft Dr. Dana\'s settlement si Walhngford, wrote to Bellamy, (January 1, I7.v.\'.) \n\nmercy thai all "ur ministers are professed adherers to the Confession of \nFaith. No Arminiaa oan be encouraged \xc2\xabr pet hi* bread by preaching an \n\nttempl has been made by sa lagi man from Ireland, nil \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 coast, but to DC put | \n\n\n\n108 Webster\'s history of the \n\n"All the ministers of the synod now present, except one \nthat declared himself not prepared, after proposing all the \nscruples that any of them had to make against any articles \nand expressions in the Confession of Faith and Larger and \nShorter Catechisms of the Assembly of Divines at Westmin- \nster, have unanimously agreed in the solution of those scru- \nples, and in declaring the said Confession and Catechisms \nto be the Confession of their Faith; excepting only some \nclauses in the twentieth and twenty-first chapters, concerning \nwhich clauses the synod do unanimously declare that they do \nnot receive those articles in any such sense, as to suppose, \nthat the civil magistrate hath a controlling power over synods, \nwith respect to the exercise of their ministerial authority, or \npower to persecute any for their religion, or in any seuse \ncontrary to the Protestant succession to the throne of Great \nBritain." \n\nThe ministers present were Andrews, Creaghead, Anderson, \nThomson, Pierson, Gelston, Houston, Tennent and his son \nGilbert, Boyd, Dickinson, Bradner, Hutcheson, Thomas \nEvans, Stevenson, Conn, Gillespie, and Wilson. Observing \nthe unanimity, peace, and unity which appeared in all their \nconsultations and determinations in this affair, they unani- \nmously agreed in giving thanks to God in solemn prayer and \npraises. \n\nThey also unanimously ackowledged and declared that " they \njudge the Directory for worship, discipline, and government, \ncommonly annexed to the Westminster Confession, to be \nagreeable in substance to the word of God and founded \nthereon ; and, therefore, do earnestly recommend the same to \nall their members, to be by them observed as near as circum- \nstances will allow and Christian prudence direct." \n\nElmer, who had recently come from New England, pro- \nfessed himself not prepared to act ; but, in 1730, he gave in \nhis adhesion. Pemberton and Morgan "declared" before \ntheir presbyteries; and David Evans, who had withdrawn \nthree years before, returned and adopted the Confession. \n\nThis unanimity was remarkable, and ought to be re- \n\n* Pemberton, in a letter to Dr. Colman, calls it " our happy agreement." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 109 \n\ngarded as a signal manifestation of God\'s gracious love \nand care. \n\nThe Presbytery of Charleston at the same time were \nsadly divided. The Rev. Josiah Smith, of Cainhoy, and \nMr. Basset, of Charleston, appeared as non- subscribers. \nThe former represented to Dr. Colman* that the mutter \nwas urged in an unbrotherly and unchristian manner by \nthe Scotch brethren. He published a sermon, in 1729 : \xe2\x80\x94 \n"Human Impositions proved unscriptural ; or, the Divine \nRight of Private Judgment." The Rev. Hugh Fisher, of \nDorchester, South Carolina, published, on the opposite side, a \nsermun entitled "A Preservative! against Dangerous Errors \nin the Unction of the Holy One," Smith\'s reply was headed, \n"V> NewJ Thing for Good Men to be evil-spoken of." \nSmith said that they denied the right of private judgment \nand insisted on his putting the Confession on the same footing \nwith the Bible. This they, of course, denied, and charged \nhim with saying that Pierce, of Exeter, had as good right to \nhold his heretical views of the Trinity as they had to hold the \ntruth. He declared that he believed every thing in the West \nminster Confession, except the clauses on the power of the \ncivil magistrate, on the divine right of ruling elders, and on \n(he subject of marriage with wife\'s kindred. "There is but \nOne book that I prefer to it." His adherence was read in \nPresbytery; but the majority refused to accept it, unless he \nsubscribed also seven articles of their framing. The diffi- \nculties continued from March, 1728-9, to 1731. The White \nMeeting-house in Charleston bad been occupied by Presby- \nterians and Independents: the Presbyterians withdrew, and \nthe line of separation was drawn between the two bodies, not \nbecause of tln-ir different modes of church government, but \nas subscribers and non-subscribers. \n\nThere seems fee ham bees a gemewd acquiescence in the \nAdopting Act, each Presbytery reporting yearfy that those \nwho were Licensed or ordained did adopt, subscribe, or declare \n\nfor ll.< LOU in the fullest manner. A formula w;is \n\ned on the records of Newcastle and Donegal Preabyi \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 1 M:v nol \n\ntehoMtti lii-t..ri -iii Sici.iv Library, J Ibid. \n\n\n\n110 Webster\'s history of the \n\nteries, and was signed by each member on being received. \nAt Nottingham, some dissatisfaction arose from the suppo- \nsition of a laxness in the matter of scruples ; but Newcastle \nPresbytery hastened to allay it by " declaring openly before \nGod and the world that we all with one accord adhere to \nthe same sound form of doctrine in which we and our \nfathers were trained, and own the Westminster Confession \nand Catechisms to be the Confession of our Faith, being in \nall things agreeable to the word of God so far as we are able \nto judge and discern, taking them on the true, genuine, and \nobvious sense of the word." \n\nIn Boston, an Irish minister expressing himself strongly \nagainst the non-subscribers, Dr. Colman laid the matter before \nthe indefatigable Wodrow. He was shocked at such unpa- \nralleled conduct, and feared it was "one of those whose heats, \nhaving nearly consumed them at home, have carried their \nfire to the Synod of Pennsylvania. "We have a copy of their \nact about subscription ; but I know not well what to make \nof it."* He had lamented so much the divisions growing out \nof this controversy in England and Ireland, that he feared our \nAdopting Act might issue as unhappily. " We are saved from \nthese things," says he, "by the Act of the Revolution, Parlia- \nment making subscription binding on all." \n\nNo instance of erroneous teaching is known to have oc- \ncurred until 1735, in the case of Samuel Hemphill. He could \nhardly be called heretical, \xe2\x80\x94 being a trivial man, of no vigour \nof thought or capacity of expression, and who indifferently \ntook up any printed discourse, committed it to memory, and \ndelivered it fluently and handsomely as an extemporaneous \neffort. As soon as he was detected, he was forsaken by his \nzealous friends, and passed at once out of notice. Henry \nHunter was, in like manner, ready to sail with any wind : \nhe used whatever came to his hand, and his folly was soon \nmanifest. Branded as heretics, Hemphill and Hunter might \nhave been canonized as martyrs; proved to be plagiaries, \npopular odium made them glad to escape from disgrace into \nobscurity. \n\nHemphill had been received by the synod from the Presby- \n\n* Wodrow Correspondence. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. Ill \n\ntery of Strabane in 1734, and he adopted the Confession in \ntheir presence. Letters from Ireland induced Newcastle Pres- \nbytery (for he began his labours at New London) to call him \nto account; but nothing was proved to his disadvantage. He \nspent the winter in Philadelphia, expecting to find a congrega- \ntion in the country. Being a young man, with a free, hand- \nsome delivery, he was invited to preach as assistant to An- \ndrews, lie drew great numbers after him ; but many of the \ncongregation were disgusted with the sentiments he uttered, \nand ceased to attend. Andrews heard him regularly, and \nnotified the moderator of the commission that he wished to \npresent charges against Ilemphill for erroneous teaching. \nFranklin was a great admirer of him; and, on the week be- \nfore the commission met, ho wrote and published in his paper* \na dialogue in which he thus speaks: \xe2\x80\x94 "Upon the supposition \nthat we all have faith in Christ, as I think we have, where can \n1m- the danger of being exhorted to good works? Is virtue \n. \'.\'.... Will you persecute, silence, and condemn a \ngood preacher for exhorting nicn to be honest and charitable? \n. . . . Supposing our fathers lied themselves to the AVest- \n\nminster Confession: why should not a synod in George the \nSecond\'s time have as much right to interpret the Scriptures \nas one that met in Oliver\'s time? .... If any doctrine there \nmaintained is, or shall be thereafter found to be, not altogether \northodox, why must we be forever confined to that or any other \n( \'out- sssion?" The commission was fully attended. Andrews \npresented eight articles, drawn from the sermons he had heard, \neither impugning or leaving out of view original sin and the \nblood of Christ, and representing salvation by the merits of \nChrist, as setting God forth as stern and inexorable. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2r many delays, Ilemphill produced his uotes, and the \n\nsommission declared him erroneous in doctrine, and sus- \npended him. Tiny published an extrad of their minutes ;f \nand Franklin, early in .Inly, wrote- and printed " Some Obser- \nvations^ on the Proceedings of the C mission La the Affair of \n\nthe Rev. Mr. Hemphill, together with a Defence of bis Sermons \n\nagainsl the Censure passed on them by the Commission." In \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 : In Philadelphia Library. \n\nItfa Church Library. J Ittd \n\n\n\n112 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthis lie assails Teiment of Neshaminy, and his son Gilbert, \nand with virulence defames Hubbell, of Westfield, New Jersey. \nHe takes the ground that the old man (Andrews) was jealous, \nand the commission, to uphold him, would have declared any \ndoctrine "necessary and essential." He also advertised "A \nNarrative of the Proceedings of Seven General Synods of the \nNorthern Presbyterians in Ireland, with relation to their dif- \nference in judgment and practice from the year 1720 to 1726, \nin which they issued in a synodical breach : containing the \noccasion, rise, true state, and progress of the difference, by \nAntrim Presbytery, with Hallyday\'s reasons against the impo- \nsition of human tests."* \n\nDickinson published anonymously, in September, "Re- \nmarks on a Letter to a Friend in the Country ;f containing the \nsubstance of a sermon preached at Philadelphia in the congre- \ngation of the Rev. Mr. Hemphill, in which the terms of Chris- \ntian and ministerial communion are so stated that human im- \npositions are exploded, a proper enclosure proposed for every \nreligious society, and the commission justified in their con- \nduct toward Mr. Hemphill, "f To this he appended the Adopt- \ning Act, "to | convince the reader that we govern ourselves \naccording to the principles here asserted and pleaded for." \nIf a man be, in the society\'s opinion, qualified for the work \nof the ministry, and like to serve the interests of Christ\'s \nkingdom, they can with a good conscience admit him to the \nexercise of the ministry with them, notwithstanding lesser \ndifferences of opinion in extra-essential points. But if he \nembrace such errors as, in the judgment of the society, un- \nqualify him for a faithful discharge of that important trust, \nthey cannot admit him to the cure of souls without unfaithful- \nness to God and their own consciences. To admit him were \ndeliberately to send poison into Christ\'s household, instead of \nthe portion of meat which he has provided. \n\n* Franklin\'s Memoirs of his own Life. The pamphlets he issued in this case have \nescaped the search of Mr. Sparks. The Letter to a Friend in the Country we have \nnot seen; but the Observations on the Minutes of the Commission, and the defence \nof the observations, are both in the Old South Church Library, and are evidently \nfrom Franklin\'s pen. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0j- American Antiquarian Society\'s Library. See advertisement, November, 1735. \n\n% Quoted by Dr. Hodge. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 113 \n\nHemphill contemptuously disregarded the synod\'s citation, \ndeclaring that he had adopted the Confession only in its "es- \nsential and necessary doctrines," and that he "despised their \nclaim of authority." The synod disowned him; and the \nspeedy deletion, in the printed works of Dr. James Foster, \nDr. Ihbote, and Dr. Clarke, of his objectionable discourses, \ncovered him and his adherents with confusion. \n\nThe synod desired the brethren to answer any complaint of \nHemphill if necessary, and agreed to defray the expense out \nof the fund. \n\n"While this case was before the synod, it was resolved that "if \nany member prepare any thing for the press on any religious \ncontroversy, he shall submit the same to be perused by a com- \nmittee of the synod." One was appointed for the Xorth, con- \nsisting of Andrews, Dickinson, Kob, Cross, Pemberton, and \njon; another, of Anderson, Thomas Evans, Cathcart, \nStevenson, and Thomson.* \n\nThe people of Paxton and Deny in 173G supplicated for an \nexplanation of some expressions and distiiic-tioDS in the first \nor preliminary act adopting the standards, great stress having \nbeen laid by the friends of Hemphill on the restriction eon* \nta\'med in the words "necessary and essential doctrines." The \nsynod declared they adopted and adhered to the Confession, \nI liisiu, and Directory, without the least variation or altera- \n\ntion, and without any regard to said distinctions. \n\nThe eonjnnoi Presbyteries^ of New Brunswick and New* \ndeclared it to be an aspersion that they do not cleave to \n\nand maintain the standards S8 fully as the Synod of Philadel- \nphia in their public acts have done. " We believe with our \n\nhearts, and profess and maintain with our lips, the doctrines \n\nBammed up and contained in the Confession of Faith and \n\nLarger and Shorter Catechisms of the Assembly of Divines at \n\nthe truths of ( tad cevealed and contained in \n\nthe Holy Sei-ijUures of the Old and New \'Testaments, and do \n\nreceive, acknowledge, and declare the said Confession and \n< tiisms to be the confession of onr faith; ye1 so as thai no \n\n\n\n* In 1722, R forbade Gillespie to ].-iMM, troj remarl i \n\nAtriata c.r Hyn\xc2\xab\xc2\xbbi, in \xe2\x80\xa2 mm <>f ilitripUnti, until they gwve mb \nt Qaotod by Dr. li \n\n\n\n114 Webster\'s history of the \n\npart of the twenty-third chapter of said Confession shall be \nconstrued as to allow civil magistrates, as such, to have any \necclesiastical authority in synods or church judicatories, much \nless the power of a negative voice over them in their eccle- \nsiastical transactions ; nor is any part of it to be understood as \nopposite to the memorable settlement of the crown of the \nthree kingdoms in the illustrious house of Hanover." \n\nThe jealousy of the people for the integrity of the standards, \nand for exact and hearty adherence to them, was most reason- \nable, from their knowledge of the spread of the ISTew Light " at \nhome," and from the probability that errorists would cross the \nocean to corrupt "our church." Great alarm prevailed on ac- \ncount of the progress of error in the British Isles. Dr. Col- \nman* wrote feelingly on the subject to Andrews, deploring the \npropagation of dangerous heresies by men who "sheltered \nthemselves under the covert of believing the Bible, while they \nrefused to avow how far they had departed from the faith of \nGod\'s elect." \n\n2so dispute seems to have arrayed brother against brother \nuntil 1738, when Gilbert Tennent and Cowell carried on in a \ncorrespondence a discussion on the ingredients of holy obedi- \nence, \xe2\x80\x94 whether a view to our own eternal interests could in \nthe sight of God be an acceptable motive for seeking salva- \ntion and keeping his commandments? " Sundry large letters \npassed between them. The synod appointed a committee to \nconverse with them together, and, if there be necessity, dis- \ntinctly to consider the papers. They ordered them to refrain \nfrom all public discourse on the controversy, and all methods \nof spreading it among the populace, until the committee have \nmade their report to the synod. They were found to be sub- \nstantially and thoroughly agreed, although Tennent feared \nthat there had been \' slighting and shuffling\' to hide errors \n4 contrary to the express testimony of Holy Scriptures, our \nConfession of Faith, and Christian experience.\' " \n\nImmediately after the exclusion of Hemphill, an overture \nwas presented and adopted, lamenting the great and uni- \nversal deluge of pernicious errors and damnable heresies, "and \nthat so many wolves in sheep\'s clothing are invading the flock \n\n* MSS. of Massachusetts Historical Society. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 115 \n\neverywhere ; and, as we are likely to have the most of our \nsupply of ministers from the north of Ireland, the synod \nbears testimony against the late too common and now alto- \ngether useless practice of some presbyteries in that region, \nin ordaining men, sim ttttdo, immediately before they come \nhither, and depriving us of the just right of inspecting into \ntheir qualifications." \n\nlinbert Cross, Thomson, and Ilouston, wrote to the Gene- \nral Synod, that "the continuance of the practice will be very \ndisagreeable and disobliging to us; and that no minister so \nordained in Ireland shall be admitted to the exercise of his \nministry among us unless he submit to such trials as the pres- \nbytery to which he comes may appoint." They suggested, \nalso, that it is " our earnest desires, that ministers, besides \ncredentials, should bring letters from brethren who are well \nknown to us to be firmly attached to our good old principles \nand Bchem< \n\nA letter was received from the Synod of Ireland in 1738. \nAnderson and Thomson were directed to prepare and trans- \nmit a respectful answer. Yearly inquiry was made concern- \ning the order in relation to ministers coming from Europe. \nJt was faithfully observed. \n\nIt being with exceeding difficulty that candidates from Xew \nEngland conld be induced to visit our vacancies, there was no \nnneasinese felt, lest we should be overrun from that quarter. \nNot until the great revival did "that hive of preachers" \ni. Of the few who came, several returned as soon as \nthey could find an eligible situation, \xe2\x80\x94 Joseph Smith to Mid- \ndletown Upper Eouses, Mioses Dickinson to Norwalk, Chalkei \nto Glastenbury, Gould to ICiddlefield, Tudor to Eas1 Windsor; \nwhile four others made only a transienl rtay and passed to \nparte unknown. Philadelphia Presbytery, in 1785, wrote to \nthe Elector of Sale in behalf of tin* waste places in We I \n.. Daniel Buckingham,* who graduated al Yale in 1785, \nand was licensed by 1 [ampshire Association, cane\' ; but, though \ncalled to Pilesgrove and GUoster, he went to the Bast Robert \nSmall has the credit of being the first New Englander who \nsoughta field of oaefulnesfl in Newcastle Presbytery; he \n\n* ms. Rccorda of Philadelphia Presbytery. \n\n\n\n116 Webster\'s history of the \n\nwent into West Jersey ; but the lack of good testimonials and \nsome ill-reports deterred Philadelphia Presbytery from en- \ncouraging him. The Rev. John Adams, a graduate of Har- \nvard, came as a candidate to Philadelphia for the post of \nassistant to Andrews. Dr. Cooper,* writing to Dr. Colman, \nMarch 25, 1735, said that he intended to have proposed to the \nministers of Boston to resume the consideration of Mr. Adams \nfor Philadelphia, " for I can\'t but think it a pity that such \nsuperior talents as his should be so much unimproved." \nAdams preached the opening sermon of Presbytery in May, \n1736, from Isa. xxxv. 2. He settled at Newport, Rhode Island. \n\nIn two cases the committee of synod declined to ordain. \nThey had no uneasiness as to the orthodoxy of Cleverly; but, \nowing to the opposition made by some of his hearers, they \ndid not proceed to ordain him at West Hanover, (Morristown,) \nNew Jersey. The congregation of Goshen seems to have been \nmuch distracted at the close of Bradner\'s life with a personal \ndifference between him and Samuel Nealy. On his death, \nSamuel Tudor, a native of Poquonnok, in Windsor, who gra- \nduated at Yale in 1728, came as a candidate. f Instead of \nappl}dng to the presbytery, the congregation supplicated the \nsynod, in 1735, to send as soon as possibly may be, a committee \nto ordain him. He wrote to the synod, declaring his readiness \nto adopt the Confession and submit to Presbyterian rules. \nThe synod appointed him a Latin exegesis and a popular ser- \nmon on Rom. xi. 6, and directed Robert Cross to preside in \nthat affair, and with Pumry, Webb, JNutman, John Cross, and \nChalker, to meet there in the course of the next month and \nordain. The congregation was publicly notified, on a Lord\'s \nday, that if any desired they might lay their objections. \nRobert Cross, Pumry, and Chalker met, and did not ordain \nhim because of insufficiency. \n\nTudor was born March 8, 1704-5, in East Windsor, and was \nmarried December 10, 1729, to Mary, daughter of the Rev. \nJoseph Smith, of Cohanzy, and afterwards of Middletown. \nHe was ordained the second minister of Poquonnok Society \n\n* MSS. of Massachusetts Historical Society. \n\n| The New York papers of 1734 describe him as a Presbyterian minister in the \nHighlands who had been pursued by robbers, near the Fishkills, on the 12th of \nAugust. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 117 \n\nin Windsor in January, 1740, and died September 21, 17-37. \xe2\x80\x94 \xe2\x80\xa2 \na faithful and useful minister, respected for intelligence, appli- \ncation to business, and dignity of manner. \n\nOnly one minister besides John Orme seems to have come \nfrom England from the formation of the synod to the disrup- \ntion: \xe2\x80\x94 Mr. Peter Finch, in 1724. His testimonials were ap- \nproved, and leave was given to the people in Kent county, \nDelaware, on their request, to employ him. The next year, a \nsmall sum was allowed him out of the fund. He is not \nagain mentioned. He was probably the Rev. Peter Finch, of \nNorwich, who was one of Matthew Henry\'s friends. \n\nJohn MadoweU was accepted by the synod in 173G as a \nprobationer, being recommended by the Presbytery of Temple- \nPatrick, the Session of Dunagor, and several brethren of note \nin the north of Ireland. He was appointed to supply the \nnew erection in Philadelphia during the months of October \nand November. His name never again appears on the roll. \n\n\' land sent ns few men during the twenty-live years before \nthe division. Laingand Eutcheson were Scotsmen, and per- \nhaps John Cross, Carlisle, and one or two more. The great \nmajority were Nortb-of-Ireiand men, educated at Glasgow. \n\nDuring the same period, only one impostor intruded him.- \n\nself on them, \xe2\x80\x94 lainc- Morehead; he preached with acceptance \n\nin West Jersey and in Newcastle county, and for several years \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 1 the efforts of the synod to reduce him to obedience. \n\nEtc .-nnk into contempt and was forgotten. \n\nThere was much land bo be possessed. There were none to \ngo forth with them into the wilderness and contest the inhe* \nritance. Qreat caution was used in meting out the bounds \nii congregation, and no new erection was encouraged \nhastily. A perambulation of the territory was made by indif- \nferent persons, ami the projectors were required to famish the \nneighbouring ministers with lists of their supporters and \nmembers who were to embark in tin\' enterprise. There was \nno lack of delay on the part of the presbyteries, each pastor \nbeing naturally sensitive on the subject of the invasion or \nmi of bis Legitimate domain. Generally, the people strug- \ngled manfully till the synod or presbytery yielded, and in \n\xe2\x96\xa0. hich had made the reverend judical \n\n\n\n118 Webster\'s history of the \n\npause were disappointed, in the mutual growth of the mother- \nchurches and their flourishing daughters. The opposition to \nthe erection of the ^"ew London congregation was protracted \nfor years ; slowly, point by point, every thing was yielded, and \nfor the obvious reason that all the gloomy apprehensions of \nthe church of Elk River were dispelled. New London, in her \nturn, seems to have resisted the building at Fagg\'s Manor, and \nwith the like result : the church rose on the site selected by \nthe people, and no loss was sustained by New London. Boyd \nhad a field from 1724 to 1735, covering Octorara, Pequea, \nMiddle Octorara, and the Forks of Brandywine. Hanover, in \nEast Jersey, struggled, as though its existence were at stake, \nagainst giving leave to "West Hanover or Morristown to have \na minister; but, seeing no prospect of reducing "the west \npart" to submission, they yielded, and at leDgth admitted that \nthey were no losers thereby. \n\nIn New England the boundaries of the towns and the con- \ngregations were identical and unchangeable until the colonial \nlegislature gave leave. This was a cause of great trial to the \nIrish Presbyterians in Massachusetts. In 1718, they settled in \nWorcester,* having the Rev. Edward Fitzgerald for their \nminister. Their attempt to build a meeting-house was out- \nrageously defeated by a mob headed by some of " the con- \nsiderable persons" of the place. They had afterwards the Rev. \n"William Johnston ; but they were taxed for the support of the \nfirst church in the town, and finally he left them and settled \nin Londonderry. They retained their Presbyterian prefer- \nences, and carried their children for baptism to the distant \ntowns where there were Presbyterian ministers ; and the most \nof them, about 1740, removed to Otsego county, then the \nwestern frontier of New York. Bitter were the complaints \nof the Rev. Mr. Frink,f of Rutland, because of the obstinacy \nof the Irish in his parish. They constituted two-fifths of the \npopulation, but could obtain no privilege for themselves as a \nseparate society until the west part of the parish was formed \ninto a town called Oakham. Then they gathered a church \nafter the model of the church in North Britain. The Rev. \n\n\n\n* Lincoln\'s History of Worcester. \n\n| MSS. of Massachusetts Historical Society. He subsequently took holy orders. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 119 \n\nMr. Smith, of Falmouth, now Portland, went over to Mr. \nAllen\'s, May 29, 1736, and met the ministers on the affair of \nthe Irish. In the district of Maine,* the same trouble befell \nthe Irish settled at Purpooduck, on Casco Bay : the Irish Pres- \nbytery, with William Johnston for moderator, and William \nMcClenaghan for clerk, proposed as a compromise that the \nsecond church of Falmouth should allow the people the use \nof their meeting-house two Sabbaths in the year, for the ad- \nministration of the sacrament by their own ministers. This \nwas denied, and the presbytery proceeded to furnish them \nwith regular supplies. \n\nThe Irish Presbytery is mentioned in the Colman MSS. in \nthe Massachusetts Historical Society\'s Collection ; but its real \nname was the Presbyter} 7 of Boston, and the date of its origin \nand its extinction are alike unknown. Among its members \nwere the Rev. John Moorhead, of Boston, William Johnston \nand Davidson, of Londonderry, William McClenaghan, of \nBlandford, Massachusetts, James Morton, of Coleraine, Ruth- \nerford, Urqnhart, John Harvey, and John Caldwel l. The Rev. 01-um \nMr. Lemercier, of the French church in Boston, was also a \nBofember. A curious pamphlet warfare arose on the receiving \nof the Rev. Mr. Hillhouse, of New London, Connecticut, in \n1736 : Moorhead and Harvey approved, while Rutherford ob- \njected. The ordination of David McGregoire over the \nsecond congregation in Londonderry was accomplished with- \nout the consent of the presbytery, and when he offered to \ntake his seat, he w&fl refused, Moorhead withdrew and met \nwith them no more, and they suspended him "\xe2\x96\xa0db officio ct \nio." \n\nS<> mention is made of this presbytery, in any work we have \nseen, except in a tew pamphlets,\'!\' nilv :m, l unimportant, in \nrmons preached before it.t and in two or three Letters) \nwhich are the only vestiges remaining of its existence. \n\nThe influx from abroad, from 1718 to 1740, was wholly Pro- \n\n* Smith\'-* i>i-iry ( in Deane\'a History of Portland MAP <>t\' afaeaaolraaettfl Hifl- \nI \n\nt Letter t.> John Presbyter, by Mr. Lemeroier, in Maeseobaeetti Historical \nSociety\'* Library, \n\nJ MeCtaUghan\'l ^rmnn on tli<> (\'liri-tinn \xe2\x80\xa2-. .1- 1 i *t-. iii.I OaldwaO on tli\' \n\npropbeta, in the Meawoiwaatto Bietorioal Booiety\'i Library. \n\n\n\n120 Webster\'s history of the \n\ntestant and largely Presbyterian. The newspapers furnish \ncurious items of the extent of it. In September, 1736, one \nthousand families sailed from Belfast on account of the diffi- \nculty of renewing their leases. On the ninth of that month, \none hundred Presbyterians from Ireland arrived at Philadel- \nphia, as many more soon after at Newcastle, and twenty ships \nwere daily expected from Ireland. At this time, three hun- \ndred and eighty-eight persons from Holland landed on our \nshores. The loss to Ireland is deplored, the linen-weavers and \nsmall farmers composing a great portion of the emigrants. \n"Wodrow* says, the departure of the people in shoals excited \nthe fears of the government, lest Ireland should be wholly \nabandoned to the Papists. He hoped it would lead to exten- \nsion of privileges to the Presbyterians. \n\nThe effect was soon visible. New York had seen for twenty \nyears a small Presbyterian flock assembling in a house without \ngalleries, six out of its eight windows being closed with \nboards, poverty preventing their being glazed, and the frac- \ntion of light being enough for the handful of people. But \nnow the pews on the ground-floor were filled, three galleries \nwere constructed, and the sun blazed unobstructed through \nthe whole line of windows. The church in Philadelphia had \nincreased so much that, in 1733, an assistant minister was \nneeded. Newcastle Presbytery was large enough in 1734 to \nset off Donegal Presbytery on the west, and, having surren- \ndered Lancaster county, was able soon after, in 1738, to realize \nthe long-cherished project of forming the Presbytery of Lewes \nout of the churches on the peninsula. Philadelphia Presby- \ntery was divided in 1733, and East Jersey Presbytery was \nformed. Long Island Presbytery, declining from the attach- \nment of the ministers in "the East Riding" to Connecticut, \xe2\x80\x94 \nan attachment growing out of its being the land of their birth, \nand strengthened by matrimonial ties and the convenience of \ncrossing the sound to attend its associations, \xe2\x80\x94 was united, in \n1738, to East Jersey Presbytery, under the style of the Pres- \nbytery of New York. Portions of New York and Philadel- \nphia Presbyteries were constituted the Presbytery of New \nBrunswick in the same year. \n\n* Correspondence Wodrow Soc. Pub. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX A5IERICA. 121 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV. \n\nThe methods in use in Ireland and Scotland were all intro- \nduced on the erection of congregations. They were so gene- \nrally accustomed to modes closely similar, that no solicitation \nwas needed to secure the acquiescence of the people in them. \nThe emigration brought over many schoolmasters, and few \nPresbyterian settlements were without schools during most of \nthe year. It was rare to find one, (except among the servants, \nand (.\'ven among them it was very rare,) who could not read \nand who did not possess a Bible. The Shorter Catechism was \nlearned at home and recited at school; and the Psalms in \nmetre were largely treasured in the memory; they were the \nlullaby of the babe, and the song at the loom and at the wheel. \nThey formed universally a part of family worship. That pre- \ncious privilege was regarded as an indispensable duty. \nEnquiry was made concerning the observance of it, on the \npCOasion of asking baptism for their children. Family in- \nstruction was not neglected; the Catechism was "gone \nthrough" on Sabbaths by parents, children, and servants; ser- \nmons were repeated, and the points of doctrine duly compared \nwith the Scripture. \n\nThe congregations were divided into portions called "quar- \nters," each of which was committed to the charge of an elder, \n\nand the people in endi quarter were gathered :it suitable and \n\noft-recurring seasons al some convenient point, \xe2\x80\x94 it might be a \nkitchen or a barn, to accommodate large numbers, \xe2\x80\x94 and old \nand young were solemnly, carefully, and al length, catechized. \nThe seed sown in the sanctuary was harrowed in by the cate- \nchizing. The minister knew the state of the flock and how \nthey profited by the word preached. \nThe presbyteries* visited the congregations, taking first tho \n\n* MB. Minutes of Donegal Presbytery. \n\n\n\n122 Webster\'s history of the \n\nminister by himself, and asking him how he performed the \nduties of preaching, visiting, and catechizing, how the elders \ndischarged their office, and how the people hearkened to the \nword and submitted to godly discipline. \n\nHe being put forth, the elders were called in and questioned \nconcerning their minister\'s doctrine, life, diligence, and faith- \nfulness ; as to the extent to which they laboured in their quar- \nters, and how the people deported themselves toward those who \nwere over them in the Lord. Lastly, the people were called in, \nto answer by their representatives, \xe2\x80\x94 who were strictly what \ntheir name imported, \xe2\x80\x94 representatives. These were chosen to \nact and speak for the people, to sign the call and be the respon- \nsible agents in all secular matters. They were asked how the \npeople were satisfied with their minister and with the elders, \nand how they performed their stipulations for his support. \nEach of the three parties was asked if any cause of complaint \nexisted, or of dissatisfaction, and the presbytery proceeded \nauthoritatively to investigate the alleged matter and to remove \nit or rebuke the offenders. \n\nThe Lord\'s Supper was celebrated, according to the usage \n"at home," twice in the year. It was preceded by a day of \nfasting: several of the neighbouring ministers attended, and \nsermons suitable to the approaching solemnity were preached \non the Thursday, Friday, and Saturday previous. Ordinarily, \na large body from adjacent congregations came with their mi- \nnisters, and were on the ground before the Sabbath. Tokens \nwere distributed, and those from a distance received them on the \ntestimony of their minister and his elders. Often they brought \nwritten requests from their pastors that they might share in \nthe feast. Commonly it was in the open air that most of the \nsermons were preached; a covered stand, called a tent, being \nan appendage to every meeting-house. The tables were \nspread and reached across the house and from the pulpit to \nthe door. The action-sermon was long and full of the marrow \nof the gospel ; the fencing of the tables was scarcely less solemn \nand even more heart-searching. \n\n" Then, in the simple music \nOf the old glorious days, \nThe hearts of pious thousands \nGush\'d forth in streams of praise. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 123 \n\nThe Psalms in metre, the work of Francis Rous,* an English \ngentleman, of Cornwall, were hallowed by innumerable pious \nand tender associations. Plain of speech, our fathers stumbled \nnot at the roughness of the verse nor sighed at the lack of \nmelody. The same words and the same tunes charmed unholy \nthoughts from the mind of Burns, as he sat, of a Saturday \nnight, by the cotter\'s ingle-side. The same words and the \nsame tunes harmonized with Brainerd\'s devotions, and thrilled \nWhitefield like the songs of heaven, at Cambuslang and White \nClay. Our fathers were not virtuosi, charmed even in God\'s \nhouse with rubbish if rare, and trifles if tasteful: \n\n"And surely God was praised, \n\nWhen David\'s words to David\'s tune \nFive hundred voices raised, "f \n\nWhen the sacred symbols were uncovered, how many hearts \nbroke as if in bitterness for a first-born! and, as they rose to \ntake their places at the board, it was reverently, as though \nseeing Him that is invisible; even as though before their \neyea ( Jhrist had been set forth evidently crucified among them. \n\nThe Lord\'s Supper was, in its fullest sense, a monument of \nthe great facts of redemption, \xe2\x80\x94 a memorial of the necessity of \natonement, the glorious Deity of the Son of God, the freeneas \nof justification, and the fulness of the promises. The mode \n\n* [Francis Rous, or Rouse, was born at Halton, in Cornwall, in 1579, and edu- \ncated at Broadgate Hall, now Pembroke College, Oxford. Ho studied law; and in \nthe fir-t Parliament called by Charles I., he was returned for Truro, in Cornwall, \ngony in tin.- third, and tot Truro again in the fifteenth and sixteenth of that \nreign. He was one of the fen laymen appointed by the Commons to sit in the \nAssembly of Divines at Westminster, He sat In the Parliament called in 1668, and \n\nheld the post of Speaker for a month. He aimed at conforming the government \nto the model Of the Jewish; but, failing in this object, he proposed that Cromwell \n\nshould be slerated it rule with the title of Protector. Cromwell made him ono of \n\n_\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0.-. oosellors. He eras made Provost of Eton in 1648, at which place he \n\ndied in 1669, and was buried with great pomp and splendour. His chief works \n\nwere Meditations dedicated to the Baints throughout the three nations; The Law- \n\nof obeying the Preeenl Government; The Beauties of the Fathers of the \n\nree centuries; Interior* Etegni Dei; and a Translation of the Psalms into \n\nEnglish MetN, printed in IC1">, by order of the lion \xe2\x96\xa0 .- of Commons. Vi\'le Hose\'s \nBiOg. Did, foL \\i. p. 692. London: B. Fellow. -s. [fldgatC Strct, 1M7. Tho \n\nVersion of the Psalms, after being modified by \xe2\x96\xa0 oommlttee, was adopted, in L649L \nby the G nbly of the Church of Bootland.\xe2\x80\x94 Ed.] \n\nf Mrs. Gray, of Last -n, Pennsylvania. \n\n\n\n124 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nin which it was administered rendered it necessary that the \nhighest truths, the loftiest themes, should be preached, and \nwith unction. Every circumstance conspired to invest even \nthe most lifeless preacher with such a feeling of the greatness \nof the occasion, as made him surmount at least for the time \nthe narrow limits of his talents, and speak in the demonstra- \ntion of the Spirit and with power. The closing service of \nthanksgiving prepared the way to return home, pondering in \ntheir hearts the great things which had been told them. Those \nwere golden days, when souls were enlightened with such a \nknowledge of Christ, as if the light of the sun had been seven- \nfold, as if the light of seven days had poured at once on the \nworshippers, with healing in every beam. \n\nMany of the congregations furnished their ministers with a \nhouse and farm, or else promised him in the call a sum of \nmoney to buy a plantation. The salaries were mostly paid in \nkind, wheat, Indian corn, hemp, and linen yarn being fre- \nquently specified in the call; and, from a riddle to a squire\'s \n" publishment of a marriage" or an " estray," every imaginable \narticle is entered on their surviving "count-books" as being \nreceived in payment of stipend. \n\nClassical schools were established by man} T ministers. An- \ndrews probably had one in Philadelphia; Dickinson had at \nElizabethtown, Thomas Evans at Pencader, and William Ten- \nnent at iSTeshaminy. The school at New London went into \noperation soon after Alison\'s settlement. Two-thirds nearly \nof the ministers, until 1738, were graduates of Glasgow Uni- \nversity. The New England men were mostly from Yale. The \nfew Welshmen were scholars of a high standard, their educa- \ntion having been thorough and on a liberal scale. \n\nOf the style of preaching little judgment can be formed. \nFranklin evidently had no favour to them; for he says, he \nwould rather hear Hemphill preach other people\'s sermons \nfluently, than hear the old synod preach their own dull com- \npositions. Makemie printed but one sermon, long, full, clear, \nand valuable : his other productions are plain and vigorous in \nstyle. \n\nIt is remarkable that Andrews, during a ministry of forty- \nfive years in Philadelphia, is not supposed to have published \na line; while Morgan put forth almost as many sermons as \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 125 \n\nany Xew England divine of his day. Dickinson appears to \nhave passed twelve years of his ministry without using the \npress; but, after that, he was before the public to the latest \nyear of his life, discussing the Evidences of Christianity, the \nDoctrines of Grace, the Claims of the Prelatists, the lifeless \nScheme of Baptismal Regeneration, and the serious errors of \njudgment among the unwise friends of the Revival. Robert \ni published one sermon, Pierson three, and Pemberton \n\na] ; while Gilbert Tenneiit\'s writings issued from the press \nlike bees from a hive; no complete list of his multitude of \npublications will probably ever be made. \n\nNone are known to have left any work in manuscript, ex- \ncept Henry, of liehoboth. Scarcely a fragment of their corre- \nspondence exists. \n\nThey were mostly worthy men, few of them of a rare order \nof talent, but learned and competent for an honourable dis- \ncharge of their office. Of their success in winning souls, we \nmay hope there is a bright reeord on high; but on earth their \nlii\'inoi-ial has perished with them. \n\nMorgan* tells us that at one or two periods of his ministry, \nhe saw the w<>rd take effect on many souls. In 1719 and \'20,f \nthere \\v;i- in Monmouth county an amazing change; new con- \ndone were formed, and "the marks of a work of grace \nastonishingly plentiful among those who had lived longer \nhnder means of grace." Hopewell and Maidenhead received \na large inoreas* , the iir.-4-l\'riiits of the youthful labours of \nMosee Dickinson. There is a tradition of a revival at Jamaica \nunder Rdbert Cross. The Dutch Efceformed church in New \n: . in the Rev. Theodore James Frelingiraysen, \na mosl eminently v. :-.\xe2\x80\xa2. laborious, and successful servant of < tod. \n.tht\'ul counsel roused Gilbert Tennent to consider nar- \nrowly his own performances, and to gird himself for a more \nvigorous invasion of Satan\'s kingdom. A considerable degree \nattended Tennent\'e preaching on Staten Island and \nat N\xc2\xab\'\\\\ Brunswick. Hie brother John rami- like "a dew iVom \nthe Lord" on khe plains of .Monmouth, and dhanged Freehold, \nfrom a feeble, diffracted congregation of careless hearers, into \n\n* Answer to in Anonymoiu Kailer a. \xe2\x80\x94 Am. Aatiq. Boo. Lib. \n\nfMfi Hon Mather.\xe2\x80\x94 Am. Aftttq. 8oo. \n\n\n\n126 Webster\'s history of the \n\na large and united body of devoted, well-taught Christians. \nJohn Cross, also, "at a place called the Mountains, back of \nNewark," enjoyed such a degree of success that the fame of \nit reached Northampton, and is mentioned by Edwards in his \nThoughts on Revivals. \n\nThe "Marrow Controversy" in Scotland, and the secession of \nthe Erskines, could not fail of interesting deeply the members \nof synod. Gilbert Tennent and his father were correspondents* \nof the Erskines : and the alumni of Glasgow partook largely \nof the feeling pervading the West of Scotland in regard to the \ngrowth of Pelagianism and profanity under the deathlike \nshadow thrown by moderatism and patronage over "the hail \nkirk." When, therefore, in 1733, Gilbert Tennent introduced \nhis overture concerning ministerial faithfulness in preaching \nand in dispensing the sacraments, the synod accepted it and \nformed it into an act ; each presbytery entered it on their book, \nand took order for the careful observance of it. \n\nFor the first thirty years, the synod received, almost without \nan exception, its candidates and its ministers from the mother- \ncountry or New England ; but towards the close of that period, \nnatives of the middle colonies, or persons who had received \nall their education here, came forward to be taken on trials. \nThe first who is known to have pursued his whole course of \nstudy in the bounds of the synod was Gilbert Tennent, who, \nshortly after being licensed, received from Yale the degree of \nA.M. His brother John was the next, and his performances \nwere universally approved by Newcastle Presbytery. \n\nThe state of feeling in the synod towards other denomina- \ntions appears strikingly in the circumstance of their having \nallowed the Presbytery of Philadelphia to ordain the first Lu- \ntheran minister who settled in Berks county. This case has \nbeen sadly misrepresented; Dr. Hill having charged Andrews \nwith such laxness that he consented to ordain a Dunker. \n\nThe Lutherans had, very early, a congregation in New York \ncity, using the Low Dutch language. In their settlements on \nthe Mohawk, and in Dutchess county, the preaching was in \nHigh Dutch. The Swedish churches were Lutheran, and had \nministers from their own country; but the German Lutherans \n\n* Whitefield\'s Letters, 3 vols. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 127 \n\nin Pennsylvania, though numerous, had none to minister to \nthem in their own tongue. They had been involved in \ntrouble, owing to objections being made to the title by which \nthey held their land in Schoharie, in New York; and, in 1729, \nmany removed to Oley and Tulpehocken, in Berks county. \nAmong them was the well-known Conrad "Weiser, the Indian \ninterpreter. \n\nIn August, 1730, John Peter Miller arrived in Philadelphia \nand began to preach to them. He was born in Oberant Lan- \ntern, in the Palatinate, and had graduated at the University of \nHeidelberg. He presented himself for ordination to the \nsynod, who "agreed that the Dutch probationer be left to the \ncare of Philadelphia Presbytery to settle him in the minis- \ntry.\'\' Andrews, writing to Dr. Colman,* October 4, 1730, said, \n"There is lately come over a Palatine candidate for the minis- \ntry, who, having applied to us at the synod for ordination, \'tis \nLeft to three ministers to do it. He is an extraordinary person \nfor sense and learning. We gave him a question to discuss \nabout Justification, and he has answered it in a whole sheet \nof paper in a notable manner. He speaks Latin as readily \nas we do the vernacular tongue, and so does the other, Mr. \nWeiss." \n\nMiller was "ordainedf at the end of 1730, upon order of the \nScotch Synod, in the old Presbyterian meeting-house in Phila- \ndelphia, by three eminent ministers, Tennent, Andrews, and \nBoyd." lie officiated for the Lutherans in Oley and Tulpe- \nhocken for several years; but in September, 1735, he was im- \nmened by Oonrad Beissel, of Bphrata, having adopted the \nviews "i\' the Seventh-day Baptists. In this he was followed \nby Weiser, who subsequently returned to the Lutheran church. \nMiller removed to the " EQoster" at ESphrata, and assumed the \nDame of Jabez, Beissel being called Friedeam. The fraternity \ndressed like Capuchins. Millerwaswell known in the literary \nworld: he had an extensive correspondence, and was the au- \nthor of "Chronicon Ephratense." Ee succeeded Beissel as \nhead of the society, and died September 21, 1796.} \n\n\n\nI Mated in Bodgrt Betray, from B. BmuA*! M88. \nt Pahneftoek*! BkaMh of the Donkara \n\nX Dr. Douglas.*, iu his work on the Provinces, ppcaks of him as writing very \n\n\n\n128 Webster\'s history of the \n\nMr. Weiss, mentioned by Andrews in connection with \nMiller, was the minister of the German Reformed Church in \nGosenhoppen, Pa. \n\nMr. Johannes Henricus Goetschius, or Goetschy, applied, \nthrough Andrews, to the synod, in May, 1737, signifying the \ndesire of many of the German nation that he might be or- \ndained on the synod\'s order. He was a native of Switzer- \nland, and had been educated at the University of Zurich. \nHis testimonials from Germany were ample, and satisfied the \nsynod as to his learning and good Christian conversation. \nThey recommended him to Philadelphia Presbytery, to act \nupon further trials of him as to them should seem fit. The \npresbytery met two days after, and agreed that he might \npreach, but declined to ordain him for a season, because, \nthough learned in the languages, he was deficient* in divinity \nand college learning. Where he was ordained, or by whom, \nis unknown to us; he served the Reformed Dutch Church in \nBucks county, and was settled, in 1741, the first pastor of \nJamaica, Newtown, Success, and Wolver\'s Hollow, on Long \nIsland. In 1751, he removed to Hackensack, ISTew Jersey. \n\nIn 1729, the synod bore testimony against, and declared their \ngreat dissatisfaction at, the religious lawsuits that are main- \ntained among professors of religion, so contrary to that peace \nand love the gospel requires, and the express direction of the \nHoly Ghost, (1 Cor. vi. 1-3,) and consequently very much to \nthe scandal of our holy profession. They recommended to each \nminister to bring his congregation into a joint agreement to \navoid all unnecessary lawsuits for the future, and to refer diffi- \nculties which cannot easily be accommodated between them- \nselves, to prudent, religious, and indifferent friends, (if it may \nbe, of our own profession,) mutually chosen or otherwise, as \nsuch society shall think best, to decide and determine such \ndifferences. \n\nThe particular occasion calling for this testimony was, pro- \nbably, the necessity of intrusting church and parsonage lands \nto individuals, to be held in their own name. It was removed \n\n\n\nfinely in Latin on Religious Mortification. Morgan Edwards mentions him with \nmuch respect. \n\n* Manuscript Records of Philadelphia Presbytery. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 129 \n\nin Pennsylvania, by the law of 1731, allowing religious socie- \nties to hold lands,* and securing to them the property already \nin their possession. \n\nIn 1734, the synod forbade its members in "Pennsylvania \nand the lower counties from this time forward to marry any by \nlicense from the governor, till the form of them be altered and \nbrought to a nearer conformity to those of the neighbouring \ngovernments of New York and New Jersey; and particularly \ntill they are altered in such a manner as hath nothing peculiar to \nthe ministers of the Church of England, nor oblige us to any \nof the forms and ceremonies peculiar to that church." The \nPresbyteries of Newcastle and Donegal were ordered con- \njunctly to make such regulations for their members as was fit. \nOrr, of Nottingham, was soon tasked by his brethren for hav- \ning married the Rev. Benjamin Campbell with a license; and, \nthirty Tears after, Ilezekiah James Balch was gravely ques- \ntioned by Donegal Presbytery concerning his having been \nmarried by an Episcopal minister. lie excused himself that, \nMr. Bay not being at home, he had to submit to the Common \nPrayer-Book formula or go unwed. About that time, New- \ncastle Presbytery called up Dr. Robert Davidson, then a \nlicentiate, for having joined himself in marriage to an unbap- \nti/c.l person. \n\nIn 1738, the " marriage act" was so modified that ministers \nhad Liberty to marry by license in certain exempt cases; but \nthey were enjoined to marry none clandestinely, or without \nconsenl of parents or guardians; and if either of the par- \nties belonged to any congregation of ours, not to marry \nunless they produced certificates from their minister of there \nbeing no hinderance; and if from vacant congregations, then \nto bring like certificates from substantial persons. \n\nin IT;;\'. 1 , the Presbyterians\'] of Lancaster county, with their \nrespective ministers, represented bo the General Assembly \nof Pennsylvania, thai they bad been educated according to \nthe doctrine, worship, and government of the Church of Scot- \nland, and were excluded from all offices, and from giving evi- \ndence, by B ceremony (kissing the book) which, in their judg- \n\n\n\n* Boiton "ii the Land TiOea of Pennsylvania. \nf WaUon\'.- Anxutfi of Philadelphia. \n9 \n\n\n\n130 Webster\'s history of the \n\nment, is inconsistent with the word of God. They prayed \nthat a law might pass authorizing them to take the oath with- \nout such form. \n\nThe intercourse with the Church of Scotland was limited \nand unfrequent ; but two instances occur in thirty years of an \ninterchange of letters. The first was in 1727, when the com- \nmittee to settle the difficulties in the congregation of New \nYork was directed to write an account of the aftair to Scot- \nland. The committee met in November; and a letter from \nthe Commissioners of the Assembly was presented, and they \nwrote an answer. In 1730, the General Assembly sent to \nDr. Nicoll a copy of their act, securing the property in New \nYork to the use of a Presbyterian church forever, and ordered \nhim to lay it before the synod. He did so, and the synod \nfound that the terms of the act had been complied with. \n\nIn 1733, on hearing that certain gentlemen in Virginia had \nbehaved harshly and injuriously to the Eev. Hugh Stevenson, \nwhile on a mission to our vacancies in the colony, a copy \nof his representation was sent to the Assembly, and that \nvenerable body was requested to use their influence to pro- \ncure them three benefits : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. Assistance from the societies for propagating Christian \nknowledge, or some other source, to support itinerant minis- \nters in Virginia. \n\n2. The favourable notice of the government to restrain and \ndiscourage persons in that province from hampering, by illegal \nprosecutions, our itinerant missionaries. \n\n3. Some assistance from his Majesty for our encouragement, \nby way of regium donum. \n\nAndrews, Anderson, Thomson, and Stevenson wrote and \nsent two copies of the letter, that one might, if not both, \nreach its destination. No answer was received. \n\nIn 1730, the Commission of the Assembly wrote to the \nsynod, informing them of moneys left by the Rev. Dr. Daniel \n"Williams for the propagating of the gospel in foreign parts. \nAfter much discourse, Andrews, Anderson, Thomson, and the \nelder John Budd, were appointed to write a reply, and also \nto address the associated ministers of Boston on the matter. \nIn 1731, answers were received from Boston, and from Mr. \nWilliam Grant, President of the Scottish Society for propa- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 131 \n\ngating Christian Knowledge. They were read; but no action \nwas taken on them. This correspondence probably opened \nthe way for Dickinson and Pemberton to propose to the \nsociety to undertake the support of missionaries to the In- \ndians in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. The \nresult was, that they, with others of New York Presbytery, \nwere appointed correspondents of the society, with power to \nselect fields, employ missionaries, and superintend their pro- \nceedings. \n\n\n\n132 Webster\'s history of the \n\n\n\nCHAPTER V. \n\nThe causes were at work for a score of years, out of which \nrose the " Great Revival," giving existence and form to its \nglorious and memorable mercies, and to its deplorable and \nremediless catastrophe. There were circumstances \xe2\x80\x94 some \nobvious, and more unsuspected \xe2\x80\x94 creating the necessity for \nthat amazing revolution in the hidden springs of our \nchurch\'s life. Zinzendorf, "Wesley, and Whitefield were not \nthe authors of " the manner of the time;" they were but the \nlightning and the thunder, the rushing wind and the rain-tor- \nrents, in which the long-gathering storm breaks forth. God \nvisits the waters, the parching pasture, and the withering \nfield; we gaze on the dividing of the flames of fire, the \nshaking of the wilderness, and the terrific land-flood, as \nthough they had no king over them. In another age, how \nlittle could those great evangelists have accomplished ! \n"Thou preparest them corn, when thou hast so provided \nfor it." \n\nIt was a period of migration. Families left their homes \nfor a forest. Untried paths and unthought-of embarrassments \nwrought amazing and rapid changes in the energies and the \nplans of the new settlers. Daring ventures, hazard of life, and \nwant of old restraints, good influences, and holy privileges, \nshaped the spirits of the people after another pattern than that \nwhich was shown to Moses in the mount. They sought ex- \ncitement rather than instruction, and wearied of the cus- \ntomary methods, so venerable in the meeting-house standing \namid their fathers\' sepulchres, a substitute was sought for \nthe joy that grows out of meditating, reflecting, and praying. \nThey desired to enjoy a sensible impression on their hearts; and \ncomfort to be swallowed, as an exhilarating cordial, \xe2\x80\x94 stimulat- \ning, strengthening, requiring no other effort to understand or \nappreciate it than was needed beside the blazing fire, to feel the \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 133 \n\ngenial heat pervading the freezing limbs, and driving the torpid \ncurrent through the numbed extremities. They who live in \nsettled homes may wait for the slow leavening of the dough and \nthe thorough baking of the loaf; but he who came in hungry \nand exhausted, was glad of a cake baked before the glowing \ncoals. The sudden summons to flee from the savage made them \nsnatch up the food, however uninviting. There is a oneness \nin our bodily and our spiritual habits : they wanted preaching \nsuited to warm and enliven them, \xe2\x80\x94 undervaluing the slow \nenlightening, the gradual process of the leaven in the three \nmeasures of meal. \n\nA remarkable succession of diseases, for a period of years, \ntraversed the provinces, or, confined to a few localities, bore \noff the children and the youth; yet those years were not more \nremarkable for unexampled mortality than for unbridled merri- \nment. The gayety seemed unchecked, though the gayest had \nI away; though the flower and the life of the revels had \nbees mown down; though the new lines of graves in every \nburial-place were like the swarths behind the reaper. \n\nThere was mourning for the dead by many a hearth, \xe2\x80\x94 \nmourning admitting of no consolation, for they had died with- \nout repenting. Deep and bitter were the concealed heart* \nsearchinge of parents; often the light-hearted wept upon their \npillow. \n\nA vast change was visible in the churches of New England: \ntin- discipline was relaxed, the doctrine was diluted, and the \npreaching tame and spiritless. A written form of words super- \nMil, d the DOtee which had served for "a brief" in the pulpit; \nthe confinement of the eye and the finger to the Line, and the \nabsorption <>f the minister iii the reading of the scroll, left the \nyoung onawed and the aged slumbering, while the ethers \n\nglided in reverie to the Sum or the traffic, the fireside or tho \nforest The powerless Sabbath was followed, as soon &s the \n\nsun went down, !.y visiting, gayety, and the resumption of \n\nworldly talk, if nc4 of worldly pork. Dancing became a re- \nspectable diversion, and attained to amazing popularity, espe- \ncially in the new settlements. \n\nThe home of the emigrant famished him with many induOO- \n\nliienN to remember and reflect Disappointment and Borrow \n\ncame; sickness and bereavement i\\\\i>w him to his Bible: and \n\n\n\n134 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthe family which had not known God, gladly gathered round \nthe mercy-seat, because their soul fainted in them. \n\nThere was a widely-diffused remembrance of the powerful \npreaching of other days, when the terrors of the Lord darkened \nthe sky and deluged the earth with the summer rain, and the \nglory of Jesus \xe2\x80\x94 a rainbow like unto an emerald \xe2\x80\x94 shone round \nthe Father\'s throne, and filled the heart with peace in be- \nlieving. There was a sighing after the consolations of the \ngospel, \xe2\x80\x94 the support of the everlasting arms. They asked for \nbread which would satisfy. This remembrance was kept alive \nby the occasional hearing of faithful preaching, and the con- \nstant renewal of reports of the success of the gospel in the Old \nWorld. \n\nThese reports awakened much curiosity, and kindled in \npious hearts a spirit of supplication and " a looking-for of re- \ndemption." \n\nThere were, throughout the land, many able ministers of \nthe New Testament, \xe2\x80\x94 workmen that needed not to be ashamed ; \nand a large number of mature or aged disciples who prospered \nthrough the preaching of the truth. There was also the abiding \npresence of Christ in his church, like the unnoticed dew on \nthe mown grass. His spirit was brooding on the face of the \ndarkened deep, and the way of the Lord was prepared as the \nmorning. \n\nThe declining power of godliness was a subject of lamenta- \ntion in 1733; and the synod earnestly recommended, as a \nproper means to revive it, that all its members take particular \ncare about ministerial visiting of families, and do press house- \nhold and secret worship according to the Westminster Direc- \ntory. Each presbytery was ordered to make inquiry, at suitable \nseasons, of each minister, touching his diligence in each par- \nticular. It being found, the next year, that the order had not \nbeen fully put into execution, it was renewed ; and the brethren \nwere earnestly obtested, conscientiously and diligently to pur- \nsue the good designs thereof. This meeting was very large, \nthere being thirty-two ministers present and only seven absent, \nnone of the latter being, important persons. There were also \nfifteen elders. On the 20th of September, Gilbert Tennent \nintroduced an overture that there be due care in examining \ncandidates for the Lord\'s Supper, and for the ministry, on the \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH EH AMERICA. 135 \n\nevidences of God\'s grace in them, as well as their other neces- \nsary qualifications. He had then been in the ministry about \nseven years, and had been solemnly exercised during severe \nsickness concerning his manner of dealing with souls; and on \nrecovering, had, upon examining "the states of his people," \nfound that most had, in his judgment, "built upon sand." \nThe short ministry of his brother John, his faithfulness and \nlarge success, had impressed him deeply; and he was ready to \nsay, with Elijah, "I only am left, and they seek my life; I am \nvery jealous for the Lord of hosts." \n\nHow many of the errors of his life had never been com- \nmitted, could the still, small voice have been heard by him, \ndeclaring that God had reserved seven thousand undefiled \nsouls for himself! \n\nHi< overture was intrusted to a special committee of Ander- \nson, Thomson, Dickinson, and Cross. They reported, and the \nadmonition was unanimously approved by the whole synod: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nm Ab it hae been our principle and practice, and is recom- \nmended in the Westminster Directory, to he careful in this \nmatter, so it awfully concerns us to be serious and solemn in \nthese trials. We do, therefore, in the name and fear of God, \nexhort and obtest our presbyteries to take special care noi to \nadmit into the .-acred office loose, careless, and irreligious \nmen; hut particularly to inquire into the conduct, conversa- \ntion, and behaviour of Buch as offer themselves to the ministry, \nand that they diligently examine them in their experience of a \nwork of sanctifying grace in their hearts, and admit none to \n\nthe Bacred trust that are not, in the eye of charity, BeiioUfl \n\n( \'hri-tians. \n\n"We do also Beriously and solemnly admonish all our \nministers to make it their awful, constant, and diligent oare to \napprove themselves to God, to their own consciences, and to \ntheir hearers, as serious, faithful Btewards of the mysteries of \nGod, and of holy and exemplary conversations. \n\n""We do also exhort them to u-<- due oare in examining \n\n. they admit to the Lord\'s Supper." \nThey added, also, a unanimous recommendation to the \n\npresbyteries to take effectual can- that each of their members \nshould he faithful in the discharge of their awful trust In \n\nparticular, that they frequently examine into the life of each \n\n\n\n136 Webster\'s history of the \n\nminister, his conversation, diligence, and methods in dis- \ncharging his calling; and that at least yearly, they examine \ninto his manner of preaching, whether he insist on the great \narticles of Christianity, and recommend the crucified Saviour \nas the only foundation of hope ; the absolute necessity of the \nomnipotent influence of the divine grace to enable them to \naccept of this Saviour; whether he do, in the most solemn and \naffecting manner he can, endeavour to convince his hearers of \ntheir lost and miserable state while unconverted, and put them \nupon the diligent use of those means necessary to obtain the \nsanctifying influences of the Spirit. "Whether he do (and how) \ndischarge his duty to the young people and children in cate- \nchizing and familiar instruction; and whether and in what \nmanner he visits his flock and instructs from house to \nhouse.* \n\nThis recommendation was to be copied into each presbytery- \nbook, and to be read at the opening of each meeting; the \nministers who are found defective to be censured, and, refusing \nto submit, to be reported to the synod. \n\nThe records of Philadelphia Presbytery show that the rule \nwas complied with in regard to candidates for the ministry. \nEast Jersey Presbytery complained, the next year, that they \nare incapable to comply with the excellent design of the act, \nby reason that several of the members, and John Cross in par- \nticular, neglect to attend their stated meetings. The synod, \non hearing this, admonished Cross. Gilbert Tennent was not \npresent. The synod, esteeming the act to be of the greatest \nmoment and importance, exhorted the presbyteries to an exact \ncompliance with all parts of it; and they also exhorted all to \ntake due care that they who receive baptism, for themselves \nor their children, are of a regular life and have suitable ac- \nquaintance with the principles of the Christian religion ; that \nthat seal be not set to a blank, and that those who are mani- \nfestly unfit be not admitted to a visible church relation. \';. \n\nEast Jersey Presbytery was nearly equally divided in senti- \nment; and, at the end of three years, they were divided by \nsetting off Cross, Wales, the two brothers Tennents, and Blair, \ninto a separate body, with the name of New Brunswick Presby- \n\n* They also directed them "to be as much in catechetical doctrine as possible." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 137 \n\ntery. However kindly intended, this was the immediate and \nmain cause of rending the church. \n\nThe meeting in 1735 was large ; the case of Hemphill having \ndrawn thirty ministers and sixteen elders. The instance of \nHemphill, and "some other considerations to the like purpose," \nsecured the adoption of five new rules: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. That the moderator of each presbytery and two ministers \nbe a committee to examine the credentials of every European \nminister or probationer, and that he do not preach in any \nvara i it congregation till he subscribe the "Westminster Con- \nfession, and satisfy them of his firm attachment to it. \n\n2. That no call be presented to such person till he has \npreached half a year in our bounds. \n\n3. That all calls shall be moderated by a minister appointed \nby the presbytery under whose care the congregation is. \n\n4. That no student shall be taken on trials till he give most \nof the members of the presbytery opportunity, at their houses, \n"to take a view of his parts and behaviour." \n\n5. That no minister ordained in Ireland, sine tHulo, shall be \nallowed to exercise his ministry among us, till he submit to \nBUGJh trials as the presbytery in which he resides may \nappoint \n\nAs early as 1735, the synod blamed John Cross for re- \nmoving, without the concurrence of his presbytery, from one \nCongregation to another. It is not known whether any similar \nhad occurred; but, in 1737, fears were expressed that \nirregular Bteps might be taken to effect the- transporting of \nministers from one presbytery to another. Five more rules \nvrere therefore adopted in relation to candidates fbr settlement: \xe2\x80\x94 \n1. No probationer is to preach to B vacant congregation with- \nout the consent of hie own presbytery. 2. Nor to a vacancy \nin another presbytery without the appointment of the presby- \ntery under whose care it is. .\'\'\xc2\xbb. That do presbytery make \nBuch appointmenl tor him unless he has credentials or recom* \nmediations from his own presbytery, 4. That vacancies en- \ncourage aone to j. reach among them without the concurrence \nof presbytery. 5. That do minister invite probationers or \nministers to BUpply vacancies without the advice and concur- \nrence of his brethren. \n\nAs might hav.- 1m, M expected, these tulefi were broken, \n\n\n\n138 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nsome ministers and probationers having gone out of their \nbounds and preached, as candidates, without allowance asked \nor given. Who these persons were is unknown. The rule \nwas adopted that if a minister, leaving his own presbytery to \npreach to a vacancy, is informed, by a minister of the presby- \ntery into the bounds of which he has come, that he thinks his \npreaching will tend to divide or disturb the congregation, he \nshall not preach till the presbytery or synod allow him. An \nexplanation was added, that, if he has already obtained leave \nof the presbytery, then he need not regard the advice. \n\nThe same year, th\'e Presbytery of Lewes introduced an \noverture, which, though most kindly meant, and in itself \nmost wise, became an occasion of dissension, wrath, and \nconfusion. Poverty preventing our students from going to \nEurope or New England for a university education, they \nproposed that the synod should appoint a committee, before \nwhich all students, with or without diplomas, should appear \nand be examined, and, if approved, receive a synodical testi- \nmonial ; and that this, when they offered themselves to their \npresbytery, should be accepted as equal to a degree in the \narts. Nothing but attendance was to be required ; no fee or \ngratuity of any kind. The synod, by a great majority, \nadopted the plan, and for that year appointed two committees, \n\xe2\x80\x94 the one north of Philadelphia, consisting of Andrews, \nRobert Cross, G. Tennent, Pemberton, Dickinson, Cowell, \nand Pierson ; the other, of Thomson, Gillespie, T. Evans, \nHook, Anderson, Martin, and Alison. There were twenty- \neight ministers present and sixteen elders. It is to be ob- \nserved that, in the committees, the three Presbyteries of New- \ncastle, New York, and Philadelphia were represented by three \nmembers, Lewes and Donegal by two, and New Brunswick \nby one. Why some other member of the last body was not \nsubstituted for Cowell, one of the youngest members of Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery, is only to be guessed. Probably the \nmajority chose to testify their regard for him, seeing he had \nbeen so rudely assailed and so bitterly inveighed against by \nGilbert Tennent, by letter and before synod. \n\nThe proposal, to require candidates to exhibit a diploma \nbefore they were taken on trial, was simply conforming to \nthe Westminster Directory. It was the uniform practice of \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 139 \n\nthe Synod of Ulster and the Scottish Kirk. "The synod* \ncame to a public agreement to take alt private schools, in \nwhich young men are educated for the ministry, so far under \ntheir care, as to appoint a committee to examine all such as \nhad not obtained degrees in the European or Xew England \ncolleges, and to give them a certificate which was to serve our \npresbyteries instead of a diploma." No objection appears to \nhave been made at the time to this method ; no dissent was \nentered ; but, in 1739, the New Brunswick Presbytery, having \ndisregarded it, brought in their apology t for dissenting from two \nacts or new religious laws passed at the last session of synod. \nThe whole ground is gone over of the wrongfulness of the \n\nin precisely the mode, and nearly the language, of the \n\nLigbt Brethren of Antrim; and might have been adopted \nfor a manifesto by the Friendly Society of Belfast. It ex- \ndeclares that it is a false hypothesis that the majority \nof any church judicatory has a power committed to them by \nChrist to make new rules about religious matters, which shall \nhe Mi, ding on those who conscientiously dissent from them ; \n\nthough the majority judge the rules to be not against \nbut agreeable to the word and serviceable to religion. This \nwould include every law made by session, presbytery, or \nsynod. It militated as strongly against the requirement of \n\nription to the Westminster Confession, or of classical \nlearning in candidates, as against the two acts it aimed at. \n"It isf heterodox and anarchical, and plainly contradicts the \nthirty-first article, third section, of the Confession of Faith." \n1? denied thai any church courl has power to make rules \nabout expedients and prudentials. The Irish Synod declared, \nin 1725, thai those who made this denial were deserving of \nexclusion from the privileges of membership in their body. \n\nA day was -pent in debate on the objections ; the act was \nreaffirmed, except thai the examination was to be before \nthe whole synod or its commission. There were thirty-two \nministers in attendance and eighteen elders, \xe2\x80\x94 all men of \nweight, age, and experience. On the decision of the matter, \nGilbert Tennent cried oul thai it was to prevent his father\'s \n\n\n\n; Philadelphia to Um Rector of Trie, 1746. \n\n; 1711. \n\n\n\n140 Webster\'s history of the \n\nschool from training gracious men for the ministry. He pro- \ntested ; his father, his two brothers, his two co-presbyters, his \nelder, David Chambers, his brother Charles\'s elder, William \nMcCrea, Thomas Worthington,* and John Weir, elders, joined \nin the protest. \n\nIt is curious to notice that the synod\'s act, as remodelled, is \nidentical with the course pursued by the Synod of Ulster for \nthe last thirty years, as a preventive to the entrance of Arian \nor unlearned preachers into her communion. The opposition \nto the act in its new form was as fiery as at first. The protest \nwas the third which had been presented since the formation \nof Philadelphia Presbytery. \n\nPersonal rancour appears to have operated strongly on the \nminority. They regarded the act as bearing solely on the \nPresbytery of New Brunswick, depriving them of the power \nof taking up whatever candidates they pleased, and, in effect, \nclosing every door of entrance against all whom the majority \nof synod did not approve. The protesters demanded the power \nof imposing on the synod whatever persons they pleased. \n\nThe act about vacancies was remodelled, no one objecting. \n"When the preaching of a minister from another presbytery \nseemed to cause divisions or hinder the settlement of a minis- \ntr}-, complaint was to be made to the presbytery, and the \nminister was to appear and abide by their decision. \n\nThe Presbytery of New Brunswick had not only objected \nto the synod\'s acts, but had taken Rowland on trials, and \nlicensed him and sent him to preach to a vacancy in Philadel- \nphia Presbytery. The synod did not command them to \nrevoke his license, but simply censured their action, and deter- \nmined not to admit Rowland as a preacher in their bounds \nuntil he should submit to the requirements of the act. [In a \nsimilar spirit, and for the preservation of order and discipline, \nthe] Synod of Ulster [had] directed that if any judicatory \nreversed or disregarded the acts of the court above, the mode- \nrator and clerk in office at the time of the offence should be \nsuspended from their ministerial functions during the pleasure \nof the next higher authority. \n\n\n\n* Probably from Upper Marlborough, who died March, 1753, aged 63, \xe2\x80\x94 five miles \nfrom Annapolis. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 141 \n\nThe synod then decided the difficulty between Tennent and \nCowell, apparently to the mutual satisfaction of the parties. \n\nThe project of a school or seminary was approved, and it \nwas resolved to send home to Great Britain, to prosecute the \naffair, either Pemberton and Dickinson, or Anderson and \nRobert Cross. The commission met in August to deliberate \nand proceed, but, discouraged by the small attendance, did \nnothing. Colman sent them the promise of aid from Boston ; \nbut the breaking out of the Spanish war closed up all hope of \naid from Europe. No answer appears to have been sent from \nthe Church of Scotland. \n\nThere was an overture presented from Thomas Evans; but \nthe contents are not known, nor whether it bore on the points \nin dispute. \n\nThis was an eventful juncture. The revival was in pro- \n: Freehold* Hopewell, New Brunswick, Baskingridge, \nand Newark had received the heavenly gift, and from the \neasi end of Long Island came tidings of "gracious communi- \ncations from God." \n\nThe arrival of YVhitetield was looked for. His way had been \nprepared by the publication of his journals and his sermons, \nand by highly-coloured and ilattering newspaper notices. He \nreached Philadelphia in Xovember, 1739, with Seward, his \naffluent and munificent friend, and a company of persons for \nthe Orphan-house. lie brought a cargo of goods to be sold \nfor the benefit of the institution, and hired a house, exposed \nthem for sale, and advertised them in tlhe city prints, lie \nram-- as a gentleman, and lived as one who was the associate \nof the gentry and had friends among the nobility. Franklin \nhow much the people in his day looked up to an "Old \nEngland man." The distinction of ranks was kept up in the \ncolonies with the precision and etiquette of a German prin- \ncipality of four miles Bquare. The sermons on Regeneration \nand the Almost Christian gained many hearts for him, and \nhi- captivating eloquence won many more, lie was then* of \nmiddle Btature, Blender body, fair complexion, comely appear- \nance, and extremely bashful and modest. \n\nMu\'h had been published against him in England, and had \n\n* (fowtptper account. \n\n\n\n142 Webster\'s history of the \n\nfound its way hither. " The Trial of Mr. Whitefield\'s Spirit" \nis an ingenious and ahle twisting of all his unwise expressions \nto his disadvantage. The Bishop of London\'s pastoral letter \nmet the approbation of Dr. "Watts, who could not help saying, \n"I wish* Mr. "VVhitefield had not risen above any pretence \nto the ordinary influence of the Spirit, unless he could have \ngiven better evidences of it. He has acknowledged to me \nthat it was such an impression on his mind that he knows it \nto be divine, though he cannot give me any convincing proof \nof it." The bishop replied, very justly, " From the time that \nmen imagine themselves singled out by God for extraordinary \npurposes, and, in consequence of that, to be guided by extra- \nordinary impulses and operations, all human advice is lost \nupon them." The Dissenters in England were not cordial to \nhim, having been denounced by him as banded formalists. \nOn the other hand, the Erskines admired him and loved him, \nand wrote to him to come to them in Scotland. \n\nIn Philadelphia, all the churches were thrown open to him, \nand in the evenings he preached from the balcony of the \ncourt-house. Gilbert Tennent came to him ; his preaching \npowerfully influenced Whitefield, so that he came under \nTennent\'s control, drank of his spirit, and spoke his words. \n\nHe proceeded in company with him to New York, having \nbeen invited thither by Thomas Noble, a wealthy merchant, \nwhose acquaintance he had made in England. The commissary \nrefused him the church, \xe2\x80\x94 the court-house was shut against \nhim ; he preached in the fields on Sabbath afternoon and in \nthe Presbyterian meeting-house in the evening. Through \nthe week he preached twice or thrice daily in the city. He \ntreated Pembertou as a novice, a dauber, having readily \ntaken Tennent\'s suspicion for the truth. This conduct he \nsoon deeply regretted, and wrote to Pembertou, f expressing \nhis contrition. New York was under a universal concern ; \nso was Philadelphia. \n\nReturning, he preached for Dickinson, at Elizabethtown ; \nfor Tennent, at New Brunswick, and at Maidenhead, Burling- \nton, and Abington. Treat, of Abington, and Campbell, of \nTehicken, gave up their hope in Christ, and mourned as self- \n\n* Philips\'s Life of Wliitcfield. f Whitefield\'s Letters \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 143 \n\ndeceivers and soul-murderers. " God blessed the word won- \nderfully at Philadelphia. I have great reason to think many \nare brought home to God." \n\n"It is not to be expressed with what great crowds he was \nfollowed." The writer liked not his doctrine, "yet could not \nbut admire to see what a command he had of the attention \nand the affections of the audience. His delivery was warm \nand affectionate, and his gestures natural and the most beau- \ntiful imaginable."* \n\nFranklin attended his sermons, with an enormous multi- \ntude of all sects. "It wasf matter of speculation to me to \nobserve the extraordinary influence of his oratory on his \nhearers, ami how much they admired and respected him, \nnotwithstanding his common abuse of them, by asserting \nthat naturally they were half beast and half devil. From \nbeing thoughtless or indifferent about religion, it seemed as \nif all the world were growing religious, so that one could \nnot walk through the town of an evening without hearing \npealma sung in different families in every street, lie had \na loud and clear voice, and artieulated his words so per- \nfectly that he might be heard and understood at a great \ndistance, especially as his auditories observed the most per- \nilence. I computed that he might well be heard by \nthirty thousand." \n\nWhat were the sources of Whitefield\'s power? "Neither^ \nenergy, nor eloquence, nor histrionic talents, nor any artifices \n\nof Style, nor the most genuine sincerity and self-dcvoted- \n\n. nor all these united, could have enabled him to mould \nthe religious character of millions of his own ami future \nEttious. The secret !i<-.- deeper, though not very deep. \nIt consisted in the nature of the theology he taught, \xe2\x80\x94 its per- \nmit simplicity ami universal application. Man i- guilty, and \nmaj obtain forgiveness j man is immortal, ami must ripen \nhen fox endless weal or wo hereafter. Expanded into innu- \nmerable forms, and diversified by infinite varieties of appli- \ncation, the.-.- two cardinal principles u- lever in his heart and \n\non his tongue. Lei who would invoke poetry to embellish \n\n\'. y..vk uvipipm -f ilea .int.-. f Fnnkltn\'i Autobiography. \n\n; B dh rt wrgb Review; uHele, "Pbilipe\'f Whitefleld." \n\n\n\n144 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthe Christian system, or philosophy to explore its esoteric \ndepths; from his lips it was delivered as an awful, urgent \nsummons to repent, believe, and obey. In fine, he was \nthoroughly and continually in earnest, and, therefore, pos- \nsessed that tension of soul which admitted d either of lassi- \ntude or relaxation, few and familiar as were the topics to \nwhich he was confined. His was, therefore, precisely the \nstate of mind in which alone eloquence, properly so called, \ncan be engendered, and a moral and intellectual sovereignty \nwon." \n\nWhat Whitefield saw in Philadelphia satisfied him of the \ndegeneracy of the ministry and the lack of piety in the \nchurches. On slight evidence, he was convinced of the want \nof spirituality in preachers and hearers. Tennent\'s testimony \nwas doubtless the foundation, or at least the strongly-predis- \nposing inducement, to take up at once so harsh and unwar- \nrantable a judgment. He fancied that "he saw not as man \nseeth :" faith in his own insight into secrets of the heart was \nhis besetting sin. \n\nThe cargo being sold, he purchased a vessel, and sent his \npeople by sea to Georgia, while he and Seward journeyed by \nland. His stay in Philadelphia was of less than a month\'s \ncontinuance; yet the change was so great that there was reli- \ngious service every day for a year after, and three times on \nthe Sabbath. No less than twenty-six associations for prayer \nwere formed. Ten thousand assembled on Society Hill* to \nhear his last sermon. A thousand persons accompanied him \nout of Philadelphia. The judges at Chester sent him word \nthey would defer the court till after the sermon. The \nchurch being too small, the church minister erected a plat- \nform, and he preached to seven thousand. At Wilmington \nhe preached twice to five thousand ; at Newcastle to two \nthousand five hundred; at Christiana Bridge to three thou- \nsand; and on Sabbath, at White Clay, to eight thousand. On \nMonday he preached at North East. \n\nAt Annapolis the governor treated him courteously, and \n\n\n\n* Where the Third Church now stands, in Pine Street ; so called from the land \nhaving been owned by the " Society of Free Traders." \xe2\x80\x94 Watson\'s Annals. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 145 \n\nattended: the church minister* was under couvictions, wept \ntwice, and begged his prayers. "Meeting with no opposition, \nhe was ready to cry out, Satan, why sleepest thou?" \n\nHe reached Williamsburg, Virginia, December 15 ; not \nhaving met with an almost Christian since leaving Delaware, \ntill, at Captain Whiting\'s, he saw a planter striving to know \nthe way of God more perfectly. The governor, and Mr. Blair, \nthe commissary, were attentive and polite, and were among \nhis hearers. At New Bern, North Carolina, there was " an \nuncommon influence" accompanying the word ; at Newton, \non Cape Fear, lately settled from Scotland, his labours were \nnot without effect. \n\nHe published a journal of what God had done in Maryland \nand Virginia. From Georgia he wrote; and Franklin pub- \nlished two letters on Archbishop Tillotson\'s Right to be called \na Christian, and asserting that Mohammed has a better title to \ntlic name. Soon followed his letter to the planters on the \nsubject of their slaves, and expressing his belief that God had \na quarrel with them for their unworthy usage of them. \n\nIn the middle of April he arrived at Newcastle; and, it \nbeing the Lord\'s day, he preached twice, and on Monday, at \nWilmington, to three thousand, and went to Philadelphia. \nThe bishop\'s commissary, following the example of Dr. Gar- \nden at Charleston, closed the churches against him. lie \npreached in the open air and in the meeting-houses of the \nBaptists and the Presbyterians. On Tuesday eight thousand \n\nwere present on Society Hill; Wednesday he preached twice \nin the city; Thursday at Abingdon and Society Hill; Friday \nat White Marsh ami Qermantown; on Saturday and Sabbath \nat Philadelphia; on Monday al Greenwich and Gloucester; \n\non Tuesday in the city; Wednesday at Neshaminy; and on \nThursday ;it Skippack, where the famous Mr. Spalemburg \n(Spangenburg?) had resided. Peter Boehler followed the ser- \nmon with an ezhoitatiOD in < lerman. \n\nThe mwt day \xe2\x80\x94 rising at three, and riding fifty miles \xe2\x80\x94 he \n\npreached at Amwell to five thousand, "with the Bame power \nas usual." Gilbert Tennent, Wales, Rowland, and Campbell, \nu four godly ministers, met ua here." Saturday and Sabbath \n\n\n\n* WhiftdMd\'a Letters. \n10 \n\n\n\n146 Webster\'s history of the \n\nlie preached at New Brunswick, seven thousand being pre- \nsent. On Monday he preached at Woodbridge and Elizabeth- \ntown, and remained in New York from Tuesday till the Sab- \nbath. Since his former visit the society had increased from \nseventy to one hundred and seventy. " The word ran." \n\nOn Monday he preached on Staten Island. Going to New \nYork, he had the company of the Rev. Jonathan Arnold, a \ngraduate of Yale, who had conformed, and was then the \nsociety\'s itinerant missionary. They discoursed on regenera- \ntion; and Arnold* hearing afterwards that "Whitefield had \nrepresented him as knowing nothing of religion, he wrote to \nWhitefield\'s diocesan, the Bishop of Gloucester. His lord- \nshipf replied, that he had for some time refused to see \nWhitefield, or " answer his letters, though he was very \nobliging." \n\nTuesday he preached at Freehold and Allentown ; "Wednes- \nday at Bristol ; Thursday in Philadelphia, \xe2\x80\x94 " things go on \nbetter and better, only Satan begins to cast some into fits ;" \nFriday at the ancient Baptist church in Pennepek ; Saturday \nand Sabbath at Philadelphia ; Monday at Darby and Chester, \n\xe2\x80\x94 the people having been crossing the ferry as fast as two \nboats could carry them since three in the morning ; Tuesday, \n"Wilmington and White Clay ; Wednesday at Nottingham. \n\nGilbert Tennent had preached there, on the 8th of March, \nhis sermon on "An Unconverted Ministry." Cross, being \ndenied the use of the meeting-house, had preached in the \nwoods, amid amazing manifestations of distress. Whitefield \nhad not spoken long when he perceived numbers melting. \n"As I proceeded, the influence increased, till at last, both in \nthe morning and the afternoon, thousands cried out so as \nalmost to drown my voice. Oh, what strong cryings and \ntears were poured forth after the dear Lord Jesus ! Some \nfainted ; and, when they got a little strength, would hear and \nfaint again. Others cried out almost as if they were in the \n\n\n\n* He insisted \xe2\x80\x94 at the house of Mr. Smith, in New York, " after a plentiful sup- \nper of wild fowl" \xe2\x80\x94 on examining Whitefield on his experience. This involved him \nin a newspaper controversy with Mr Smith, which was reprinted in the Philadel- \nphia papers. \n\nf New York Gazette. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 147 \n\nsharpest agonies of death. After I had finished my last dis- \ncourse, I was so overpowered with a sense of God\'s love that \nit almost took away my life." \n\nThe next day he preached at Fagg\'s Manor. The revival \nhad recently began under Blair. "Look where I would, \nmost were drowned in tears. The \'word was sharper than \na two-edged sword.\' Their hitter cries and tears were \nenough to pierce the hardest heart. Oh, what different \nvisages were then to be seen ! Some were struck as pale as \ndeath, \xe2\x80\x94 others lying on the ground, \xe2\x80\x94 others wringing their \nhands, \xe2\x80\x94 others sinking into the arms of their friends, \xe2\x80\x94 and \nmost lifting up their eyes to heaven and crying out to God \nfor mercy. I could think of nothing when I looked at them \nso much as the great day. They seemed like persons awak- \nened by the last trump and coming out of their graves to \njudgment." Twelve thousand were present. The Rev. \n.lames Anderson, of Donegal, was present, and as soon as \nrvioe ended, "furiously pressed," says Blair, in his Reply \nto The Querists, "to the stand, to reason with Whitefield con- \ncerning his mode of procedure. His request was denied." \n\nWhitefield then proceeded to Reedy Island, in Delaware, and \nBailed lor Charleston before the meeting of synod. He said, \nM The war between Michael and the dragon has much increased. \nBlessed be God, the devil\'s children begin to throw off the \nmask ! I want to draw the lingering battle on." \n\n" I could not help recommending these men* in the strong- \nest manner wherever 1 went, because I saw they gloried in the \n\ner^s- of ( "hrist." \n\nThe synod met May 28. The attendance of ministers and \n\nelders was v.-ry large. It was a critical time; New Bruns- \nwick Presbytery having assumed ground wholly untenable om \nany scriptun] principle and subversive of all Presbyterian \ngovernment, \xe2\x80\x94 and, indeed, of all ecclesiastical and civil Bub- \nordination, \xe2\x80\x94 and having, in defiance, taken Finley on trial, \nlicensed Robinson and McCrea, and ordained Rowland. The \nstrangest ox o o ss of) in outcries in worship, \xe2\x80\x94 the most violent \n\ndenunciations Of all who "followed OOl U8" \xe2\x80\x94 the most fla- \ngrant errors concerning the witness of the Spirit, imparting \n\n* Tennent, Cross, Blair, and Rowland. \n\n\n\n148 Webster\'s history of the \n\nimmediate knowledge of our acceptance with God, and of the \nhearts of others, and of our duty in every conceivable in- \nstance, \xe2\x80\x94 startled and shocked all who were not wholly carried \naway with them. All the intervals of synod were spent by \nthe "New Side" in preaching: there were fourteen sermons \nduring the week on Society Hill, besides several in the Bap- \ntist church. Davenport and Rowland were there. None \nwere suffered to preach on the stand who were not of "White- \nfield\'s principles. Dickinson was excluded on this ground, \nhe having attacked from the pulpit at Newark the delusion \nconcerning the witness of the Spirit. Yet Dickinson said, \n" The alteration* in the face of things is altogether amazing. \nNever did the people show so great a willingness to attend \nsermons, nor the preachers greater zeal and diligence. Re- \nligion became the subject of most conversation : books of \ndevotion were chiefly in demand : psalms and prayers were \nthe entertainment which almost superseded all others." \n\n\n\n* Letter to Foxcroft, in Christian History. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 149 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI. \n\nPierson was chosen moderator, and Treat, who had recently \nresumed his ministry, clerk. \n\nAt the first morning session,* upon reading the last year\'s \nminutes, a paper was brought in and read, of proposals to \naccommodate the difference about the trials of candidates. A \ncopy of it was given to each party. On proceeding to consider \nit on the afternoon of the next day, the protesting brethren \ndeclared their dissatisfaction with the plan. This was pro- \nbably the plan of Dickinson, and it was in the largest sense \ncourteous and conciliating. The majority, though denounced \nBfl enemies of the revival, being of a far different temper, \nsought to heal the church\'s wounds, and agreed to submit a \nStatement of the matter, drawn by mutual consent, either to \nthe highest church courts in Scotland or Ireland, or to the \nassociated divines of London or Boston, and obtain their \njudgment or advice. The protesters refused to concur, be- \nlt would be difficult to frame a representation which \nboth parties could adopt; because they did not need the ad- \nvice of any body <\'f men, seeing the Lord smiled on their \n; and because most of those whose judgment was de- \nsired were incompetent, as they averred, to give advice of any \nvalue; being dead formalists, with religion decaying under \ntheir ministrations. \n\nThe synod, .-till desiring that this unhappy difference might \nbe accommodated, recommend that each brother consider \nsome further expedient, and, if possible, bring it in at the \nnext sederunt An overture with this intent was offered next \n\n* Preface and Appandii to Protestation. \nQilberl Tonnent\'i Remarks on the Protestation. \n\nRumination tad Refutation of Mr. <;. Tennent\'e Remarks on the Protestation, \nand "ii if- profane and sppendiz. By some memben \xe2\x96\xa0 the synod, pa order. \n\nUuutcU largely bj Di I \n\n\n\n150 Webster\'s history of the \n\nmorning, but was rejected by the minority, the stumbling \nblock being, whether the synod is the proper judge of the \nqualifications of its members, or whether each presbytery \nmay force upon it whom they please. \n\nThe uncomfortable debate was resumed, and was ended by \na vote to continue the rule for the present. The protest \nwas renewed, John Cross and Alexander Creaghead joining \nin it, and the following elders : \xe2\x80\x94 Robert Cumming, of Free- \nhold, James Cochran, of Fagg\'s Manor, Richard Walker, of \nNeshaminy, Daniel Henderson, of Forks of Brandywine, John \nHenry, of Lamington, William Emmitt, of White Clay, James \nMiller, James McCoy, Robert Matthews, Joseph Steel, and \nHugh Lyon or Lynn. Gillespie and Hutcheson desired their \ndissent to be entered. \n\nThe next morning, an overture explanatory of the acts con- \ncerning intrusions and candidates was offered. It contem- \nplated a declaration that the synod do heartily rejoice in the \nlabours of the ministry in other places besides their own par- \nticular charge, and, as a proof of this, repeal the act on intru- \nsions. It went so far as to propose that those who are licensed \nand ordained in violation of the act shall be regarded as \ngospel ministers, although we cannot admit them to be mem- \nbers of synod until they submit to our rule ; because we think \nthat rule needful to be insisted on, for the well-being of this \npart of Christ\'s church. This act was not adopted, although \nDr. Hodge says, (vol. i. 253,) " they passed the explanatory de- \nclaration," and, (p. 248) "because the act was misinterpreted, \nthey agreed to repeal it," and (vol. ii. 142) a general anxiety \nwas felt to have the difficulty arranged, and the act was re- \npealed. This mistake grew out of the insertion of the paper \non the records, it being a thing rarely done in the case of a \nrejected minute. Mr. Tracy* adds, "A minute was adopted \nacknowledging a work of grace in the land, and giving thanks \nfor it." An inspection of the printed record shows this to be \nan error. \n\nOn the introduction of this explanatory overture, two expe- \ndients for peace were offered, and, after some consideration, \nthey were deferred till the afternoon. One of them was from \n\n* Great Awakening. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 151 \n\na member of New Brunswick Presbyter}-, suggesting, tbat \nsynodical committees of two ministers attend each presbytery \nwhen engaged in examining candidates, and should accuse the \npresbytery to the synod if they saw cause. But, when asked \nif they would defer the trials on the committee\'s objecting \nand refer the matter to the synod, the protesters frankly \nreplied they would not. \n\nGillespie prepared the other. A fair copy of the trials of \neach candidate should be produced by the presbytery when \nthey were to be admitted to membership in the synod. Dick- \ninson asked, Would the protesters, if the synod saw or thought \nthey saw insufficiency in the reported trials, submit the candi- \ndate to the synod for examination or censure ? Gilbert Ten- \nnent said they might censure the presbytery, but that the can- \ndidates should not be produced to the synod, however de- \nfective they might judge the trials to be. \n\nIt being evident that nothing but submission to their will \nwould satisfy hixn and his adherents, the synod passed to \nother business, no vote being asked for on these well-meant \nexpedients. The majority made great concessions, yet Mere \nstigmatized as still\', pert, and arrogant, because they did not \nsacrifice their own convictions, and abandon what they con- \nci-ived to 1)0 necessary defences. Tennent insisted that each \npresbytery should be a sovereignty, with a private mint to \nput the guinea-stamp on pieces of such weight and such \nalh.y &g it chose, and to circulate them through the domi- \nnions <>t\' the synod currently, and as of equal value with the \nstandard coin. The synod w%a disrobed of all its dignity, \n\nand each presbytery was at liberty to disregard and annul its \n\ndecn \n\nTie- further consideration of the explanatory overture was \ndeferred. What action might have been taken on it, or \n\nwhat good might, have resulted from its adoption, was lost \n\nsight <>f in the amaaement) sorrow, and indignation caused \nby an ttnpfeoedenHed measure of Gilbert Tennent and \nSamuel Blair. \n\nTennenl ajked for an interloquitur, \xe2\x80\x94 a secret session, in- \nformal, and from which it is believed even the elders were \nexcluded. The design of it was to prepare business and to \nunderstand each other\'s views, before introducing affairs of \n\n\n\n152 Webster\'s history of the \n\nmoment on the floor of synod. It being the closing after- \nnoon session, the synod declined to go into an interloquitur, \nand directed Tennent to proceed with whatever he had to \noffer. The house was full. The great multitude which had \nbeen attending on the preaching of Tennent, Blair, Rowland, \nCross, Creaghead, and Davenport twice a day for a week, \ncame up with highly- excited feelings. They were fully pre- \npared to sanction Tennent\'s course, and to go far beyond. \n\nTennent then read a paper, and Samuel Blair followed with \na like representation of their view of the state of the ministry. \nThere was no concert between them. Each, unknown to the \nother, had drawn a most appalling picture ;* and we wonder \nwhy they did not conclude by declaring that they could not \nsit in synodical union with men whom they believed, and told \nto their faces, even weeping, that they were enemies of the \ncross of Christ. ~No attempt was made to interrupt them ; \nbut, when the reading was finished, they were earnestly \nentreated to spare no man in the synod whom they could \nprove unsound in doctrine or immoral in practice ; to take \nChrist\'s method, and not condemn the innocent with the \nguilty. They then offered to prove the matters of charge \nagainst particular members, if the synod required it. The \nmajority declined to institute process on Tennent\'s and Blair\'s \nstatements, and urged that they should proceed in a regular \nway by tabling charges against particular persons. Both \nBlair and Tennent admitted they had never spoken with the \npersons they aimed at, or made any regular inquiry into the \ntruth of the reports they had credited. \n\nWith amazing moderation, the following minute was \nadopted : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Mr. Blair and Mr. Gilbert Tennent representing many \ndefects in our ministry that are matters of greatest lamenta- \ntion if chargeable on our members: the synod do, therefore, \nsolemnly admonish all the ministers in our bounds seriously \nto consider the weight of their charge, and, as they will answer \nit at the great day of Christ, to take care to approve them- \nselves to God in the instances complained of. And the pres- \n\n* Neither of these papers have I seen. They are quoted by Dr. Hodge at much \nlength. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 153 \n\nbyteries are recommended to take care of their members in \nthese particulars." \n\nHaving readily granted the request of Newtown and Tini- \ncum to be placed under the care of New Brunswick Presby- \ntery, they adjourned till the next year. \n\nThe minute is scarcely such as would have been expected \nfrom a body in which the immense majority was stigmatized \nas bitter enemies to heart-religion. Yet there were no less \nthan seventeen ministers who were so styled, six who \nscarcely escaped the like reproach, and, at the most, eight \nministers only who could listen with patience to the unwar- \nrantable language of Tennent and Blair. \n\nThe elders were more equally divided; thirteen being with \nthe majority and eleven with the protesters. \n\nWhy tla-y were not rebuked or suspended for their repre- \nsentations, is difficult to conceive. The New Haven Association \ndeposed the Rev, Timothy Allen, for saying, that the reading \nof the Scriptures could no more convert a sinner than the read- \ning of an old almanac. Yale College denied Brainerd his \nte, for having asserted, that the chair on which he leaned \nwas its pious as his tutor ; and expelled the Rev. John Cleve- \nland, of Chebaceo, and his brother, because they had wor- \nshipped with the Separate Church, of which their parents \nwere members. The rector justified this last measure in the \nnewspapers. They were expelled for being followers of the \nPaines, \xe2\x80\x94 two lay exhorters, whose corrupt principles and per* \nnicioufl practices are set forth in the declaration of the lninis- \nf Windham county. The moderation in the case only \nsecured for the majority the unenviable reputation of being \n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2 hypocrites, dumb dogs/\' who would not bark when \nbeaten. It is only to be acoonnted for on the supposition of \nwisdom, piety, meekness, and forbearance on their part, to- \ngether with greal tenderness toward honoured but misguided \nbrethren, and an unwillingness even to seem to oppose good \nmen, zealously labouring and with remarkable success. They \nsubmitted to the rebuke of the righteous, as though il were \na refreshing anointing rather than a deadly Mow. It te a \nspectacle worthy to be contemplated. The members against \nwhom Tennenl and Blair testified were respectable for their \n\xe2\x96\xbaer, age, long-tried fidelity, and admitted ability. It is \n\n\n\n154 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\ncommon to suppose that Dickinson and his co-presbyters en- \njoyed the high esteem of Tennent at the time: yet he would \nnot suffer him to preach on Society Hill, because he was not \nof Whitefield\'s principles. One of the oldest and most distant \nmembers, Hugh Conn, was present, after an absence of \neight years. Anderson and Houston were there for the last \ntime, their earthly career being finished before the next synod. \nWho of the majority merited these castigations ? It is true \nwe have the testimony of the friends of the revival against \nthem ; but we have other testimony in their favour and quite \nas unexceptionable. Robert Cross is charged with having \npreached little of an experimental or awakening character in \nPhiladelphia ; yet he left behind him at Jamaica* a precious \nmemory of his faithfulness. \n\nHappily, Tennent lived long enough to lament the breach \nof that day, and to testify in favour of the men whom he had \ntrodden down as mire in the streets. Tradition has sadly \nconfused matters, and given all the credit for zeal and warm \npiety to the New Englanders and South Britons ; but in the \npamphlets of that day not a syllable to that effect is breathed. \nNeither the New England divines of that generation nor their \npeople experienced such lenity or favour from Whitefield or \nhis votaries. \n\nThe synod adjourned without a rupture ; but in what sense \nwere the two parties united in one body? The protesters had \nno faith in the piety of the opposite side, and no respect for \ntheir judgment. The New Brunswick Presbytery renounced \nthe jurisdiction of the synod, when it was not satisfied with its \ndecisions. The old side must have gone to shameful lengths \nin recrimination, if they returned the tithe, in kind, of the \nreproachful, unchristian attacks of the Nottingham sermon. \n\nThey parted, but not to lay down their weapons. The \nNottingham sermon issued from the press at Boston and Phila- \ndelphia, and the representations of Blair and Tennent were \nboth published. Tennent also proceeded to evangelize in \n"West Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. \n\nThe commission met on the adjournment of the synod, and \nreferred to the next synod the application of " a party in \n\n* Macdonald\'s History of Jamaica. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. lS| \n\nNottingham" to be dismissed from Donegal Presbytery. New \nBrunswick Presbytery soon after licensed Samuel Finley; and \nhe went to supply "the party" who set forward the building \nof a meeting-house at the Rising Sun, separated from the Old \nChurch only by the highway. \n\nWhile at Charleston, "Whitefield was written to by Dr. \nColman and Mr. Cooper, in the name of the associated minis- \nters, to come to Boston. The letters of the Rev. Josiah Smith \nto Colman, in favour of Whitefield, had been fully confirmed \nby Pemberton, of New York. There was a general anxiety \nthrough New England to hear him, and the Boston ministers \ntook the lead in pressing him to come. He sailed for Rhode \nIsland ; and while there he received a letter from Jonathan \nBarber,* one of the "young ministers on Long Island, who \nhad great communications from God." In it, he used to \n"Whitefield, the language of the centurion to the Saviour: \xe2\x80\x94 \n" I thought myself not worthy to come unto thee." \n\nThis pleased "Whitefield ; and he published it, with the \nfeet that Barber had waited a fortnight for him under an \na-- u ranee of seeing him, from having these words impressed \nUpon him: \xe2\x80\x94 "Is not Aaron thy brother? I know that he \ncan speak well. Behold, he cometh forth to meet thee; and \nwhen he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart." Like the \neagle, he famished many a feather besides this, towing arrows \nagainst himself and against the cause of Christ. This interview \ndecided him to place Barber at the head of the Orphan-house \nin Georgia, \xe2\x80\x94 a step which prejudiced many against him; for \nBarber was generally considered a kind of Quaker, guided by \nhis own whimsejB and impressions as implicitly as if they \nwere the won! of (Jod. Yet he whs doubtless a Worthy, good \nman, of great excellence and piety, being beloved and ho- \nnoured by Bnel and the best men of his tune. Tin\' exagge- \nrations of Chauncy and like spirits are too commonly relied \non, to ihc great injury of a devoted servant of Jesus. The \nehatl\'has been can-fully garnered by the accusers of the breth- \nren, and no rOOOrd has lion made below the Bkics, of the \nbll&dredfbld Of gOOd seed, brought, forth by the word in his \nheart, and long ago stored away by the Lord of the harvest \n\n* Whitefield\'u Journals. \n\n\n\n156 Webster\'s history of the \n\nColman wrote down Lis first impressions of Whitefield. \nHappily, the notes remain. The opinion of such a man is \ntruly valuable. " His holy fervour of devotion in prayer and \nof address to the souls of his hearers in preaching was such \nas we had never before seen or heard. My esteem for him \nwas sincere and great." \n\nGovernor Belcher showed him every honour, and besought \nhim, with tears, not to spare ministers or magistrates, but to \nrebuke openly their degeneracy. The language of such a \nman must have inflated any minister of twenty-seven years \nof age to an amazing degree. Whitefield\'s previous conduct \nafforded melancholy proof that he needed a wise reprover. \nEdwards, at Northampton, ventured, as Watts had done at \nthe outset, on this necessary but unwelcome duty. \n\nHe cautioned him against pronouncing persons to be un- \nconverted, and against giving way to every motion of his soul \nas if of divine origin. The impression left on Edwards was \nthat Whitefield was not altogether pleased with the counsel; \nbut he seems to have adopted it. \n\nAt Boston, the Bishop of London\'s commissary and his \nclergy were civil, when he called. One of them began with \nhim for calling "that Tennent" and his brethren faithful \nministers of Christ. They questioned the validity of Presby- \nterian ordination, and quoted Whitefield\'s words against him- \nself, and said that when Wesley was there, he was strenuous \nfor the church and against all other forms of government. \nThe discussion ran on, showing that they had no favour for \nthe doctrines he preached. He left them without asking for \ntheir pulpits. \n\nThe meeting-houses were open to him all along the road he \ntravelled. At New Haven, he preached before the governor \nand the legislature, and in the college. At table, he expressed \nhimself so as to leave an impression on Mr. Clap, the Rector \nof Yale, that he had concerted with Edwards to bring gra- \ncious youth from Great Britain, to be ordained by New \nBrunswick Presbytery, and to supersede the unconverted \nparish ministers of New England, \xe2\x80\x94 an impression, however, \nunfounded, and fitted to rally and marshal a legion against \nthe supposed projectors. \n\nUnusual success attended his preaching at Milford, Strat- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 157 \n\nford, Fairfield, Xorwalk, and Stamford ; and, at the last place, \nhe was visited by several ministers under deep concern. He \npreached at Rye, being kindly entertained by the Episcopal \nminister, and at Kingsbridge, and, on the 30th of October, \nreached New York. \n\nDavenport was there. He had lately, in two months, seen \ntwenty instances of conversion among his people. Barber \nwas there, and his marriage was accomplished by Pemberton, \nand followed by Whitefield with a prayer. \n\nWhitefield preached, and Pemberton never before had seen \nthe word fall with such power. At night there was a great dis- \nplay of divine power. He spoke with authority; some fainted, \n\'-others favouring," shrinking, crying, weeping, on all sides. \nHe preached three days. lie was shown two volumes of ser- \nmons, bearing his name, and lately published in London: he \nhad never before seen one of them. On seeing the production \ncalled "The Querists," he remarked, "I have long expected \nopposition: I believe it will increase daily." \n\nThe title of this pamphlet explains its origin: \xe2\x80\x94 "The Que- \nrists; or, an Extract of sundry passages taken out of Mr. \'White- \nfield\'s Sermous, Journals, and Letters, together with Borne \nscruples proposed in proper queries raised on each remark; pre- \nvented to Newcastle Presbytery at White Olay Creek. September \n!\xe2\x80\xa2, 17-40, by sundry members of the 1\'resbyterian persuasion." \n"The presbytery, having maturely considered them, resolved \nthat, Mr. Whitefield being expected soon to come again into \n\nthese parts, and as he best understands his own intentions ill \n\ne leave it to the people to print and him to \nanswer them." From this decision Samuel Blair and Charles \nTennent, with his elder, William AfcOrea, and Hutcheson\'s \nelder, John Bravado, (or Brevard,) dissented. \n\nNewcastle Presbytery was small, and nearly equally divided \ninto three parts: Thomas Evans, Alison, and Cathcarl being \non the old side, Blair and Charles Tennenl on the new; Gil- \nlespie and Bntcheson, the Benior members, being dissatisfied \nwith bothi Oonn and Orme were bo far off thai they rarely \nattended presbytery, and of course were oo1 of any weight in \nthis eventful time. \n\nAt this meeting Gilbert Tennent was present, being on a \npreaching torn-. His representation and Blair\'e were called \n\n\n\n158 Webster\'s history of the \n\nup, as the synod ordered. They, and Charles Tennent also, \nwere most earnestly pressed by the presbytery to spare none \nof them, but to table charges if they could lay to their charge \nany thing unbecoming their office as Christ\'s ambassadors. \nGillespie openly entreated them for God\'s sake to do so. Gil- \nbert Tennent replied that the proposal was matter of surprise \nto him ; that he had no thought of such a thing till it was \nmentioned in the face of the judicatory ; that his meeting with \nthem was wholly accidental ; and that for him to enter on a \njudicial process was inconsistent with his design of itinerant \npreaching and the appointments already made. They then \nasked him to leave the matter with them in writing, and that \nthey would take it in any way. \n\nHow Blair answered is not mentioned. Charles Tennent* \nwas subsequently called to answer for defending some of \nWhitefield\'s expressions, Whitefield having himself retracted \nthem. \n\n" The Querists" was soon published. Its bitterness was much \ncomplained of; but its bitterness consisted in doing what Ers- \nkine had done in private letters to Whitefield, and w r hat Watts \nand Edwards had done in conference ; pointing out his errors \nand his inconsistencies with himself no less than with the \nScriptures. The style is courteous, and the pamphlet is calm, \njudicious, searching, and fair. Whitefield wrote a reply on \nreading it; he thanked them for the opportunity of confessing \nhis faults, acknowledged all they had said, and pointed out \nwhat they had overlooked. He had made the like acknow- \nledgment to Erskine. His friends said, " The excellent meek- \nness of his answer to The Querists will honour him much." \nWhitefield suspected it was the w^ork of a minister, and many \nattributed it to Thomas Evans, of Pencader. He said, " If this \nbe the work of the ministers put forth in the name of the \npeople, they have not acted simply with me." He absolutely \ndenied the doctrine of Universal Redemption, which they sup- \nposed him to hold. \n\nHe persuaded Gilbert Tennent to go to Boston, to water \nwhat he had sown ; and, with the concurrence of the neighbour- \ning ministers, he consented to go and "blow up the divine \n\n* Philadelphia papers of that date contain his explanation of his conduct. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 159 \n\nfire lately kindled there, although his cold constitution of \nbody poorly fitted him to endure the northern gusts." \n\n"Whitefield was accompanied to Philadelphia by Davenport, \nand spent a week there preaching in the Great Mouse, which \nhe opened, though the roof was not on ; and he preached in it, \nevery day. " God has revived his own work in Philadelphia. \nHis glory filled the Great House." Being excluded from the \nEpiscopal pulpits, and enormous multitudes* flocking to hear \nhim, it was proposed to build a house. Sufficient money was \nat once procured to buy ground and build a house one hun- \ndred feet long by seventy broad. It was carried up with spirit, \nand was soon ready for use. "The affairs belonging thereto \nare, I believe, well settled." The trustees were to be taken in \nequal numbers from each denomination, and the house to be \nopen for any preacher of any religious persuasion, even a mis- \nsionary to propagate Mohammedanism. \n\nOn the loth of Xovember, he preached in Cross\'s meeting- \nhouse, because of the snow. "The word was attended with a \nsweet and wonderful power." Now he began to realize the \ntruth of Edwards\'s remarks; and he declared that the openly \nexposing of our opinion of ministers as unconverted, was a \nLording over the brethren, and not to be tolerated. "Oh, pray \nfor me," he wrote to Gilbert Tennent, "that I may not by any \nmeans grieve the children of God." \n\nOn the 17th he preached at Gloucester, \xe2\x80\x94 "an affecting melt- \ning," \xe2\x80\x94 and at Greenwich "to a few without power;" on the \n1-th, al 1 \'ilesgrove, to two thousand. None were affected. On \nthe 19th he preached twice at Cohanzv, (Fairfield,) to some \nthousands; Gilbert Tennent had been there not long before. \n\nThe whole congregation was moved, and tWO cried out. "The \nSpirit of tie- Lord moved over the whole face of the congre- \ngation." on the 20th be preached at Salem, to two thousand \n\xe2\x80\x94 a precious tine-, ih- crossed the bay ami preached at New- \ncastle] few \'Were affected, and some scoffed. Here Anderson \n\ndesired a conference with him; hut Whitefield, who bad turned \n\nfrom bin) at B\'agg\'fl Manor, declined, and, identi!\\ [ng him with \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2Tie- i laid, "Yon have made your remarks on me \n\npublic: I can have no private discourse on the matter." The \n\n\n\n* Franklin\'s Bfanoin. \n\n\n\n160 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nnext day, at WTiite Clay Creek, lie found thousands waiting to \nhear the word. Several of Anderson\'s associates were present. \nThe people were greatly moved ; some cried out. On Saturday, \nthe 22d, he preached at Fagg\'s Manor, to many thousands; \nthere was a wonderful powerful moving of hearts, hut not so \ngreat as at his first visit. \n\nHe spent the Sabbath at Nottingham. There was a great \nconcourse, and the blessing descended like the dew. The next \nday, November 24, at Bohemia, Maryland, Hutcheson\'s charge, \nhe preached to thousands, and had not seen "a more solid \nmelting since his arrival." \n\nHe then went to Reedy Island to embark, and, the sloop \nbeing detained by contrary winds for a week, he preached \nfrequently. The captains" and crews of the wind-bound vessels \nattended ; crowds came from the country, and some from Phila- \ndelphia, and there was a general and deep concern. \n\nHe sailed for Charleston the seventy-fifth day after he landed \nat Rhode Island, having preached one hundred and seventy-five \ntimes, exhorted frequently iu private, collected, in money, \ngoods, and provisions, \xc2\xa3700 for the Orphan-house, never hav- \ning journeyed with so little fatigue or seen such a continuance \nof the divine presence with those to whom he preached. \n\nDonegal Presbytery was the field of the sorest conflict. Other \npresbyteries were on the circumference of the tornado, but it \nlay in the centre, and was devastated by its maddest whirlings \nand its mightiest uprootings. The senior ministers were \nThomson, of Chestnut Level, Boyd, of Octorara, and Bertram, \nof Derry; next in age was Alexander Creaghead, of Middle \nOctorara, a standard-bearer in the warfare; and with him was \nassociated in opposition to the rest of the body David Alex- \nander, of Pequea. They two declined attendance on the stated \nmeetings, because candidates were licensed and ordained after \nsuperficial examination, and while giving no evidence of not \nbeing enemies to heart-religion. The five to whom they \nopenly objected were Black, of Brandy wine Manor, Elder, of \nPaxton, Zanchy, of Hanover, Samuel Thomson, of Pennsboro\', \nand Cavin, of Conococheague. They two countenanced the \nitinerations of Finley and the separation at Nottingham, and \nwere themselves complained of for seeking to promote divi- \nsions : Creaghead at New London and Alexander at Brandy- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 161 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0wine Manor. Thomson complained of Blair for intruding into \nhis charge at Chestnut Level, to foment alienation of feeling. \nBesides, Creaghead was charged with making adherence to \nthe Solemn League and Covenant a term of admission to \nchurch privileges ; while the sin of drunkenness lay at Alex- \nander\'s door. \n\nThe presbytery* came to Middle Octorara to take up the \ncomplaints against the minister; they found him in the pulpit \npreaching agaiust "blind leaders of the blind." On conclud- \ning, he invited the large congregation to meet at the tent and \nhear his defence. The presbytery being about to proceed to \nbusiness, the people rose in a tumult, railing on them; and \nthey adjourned to another place. Creaghead\'s defence was \nread from the tent by Alexander and Finley, and the next day, \nthe presbytery were forced to hear it read from the pulpit. \nFor this contumacy, he having renounced their authority in the \nfin! instance, he was suspended. \n\nThe press was used by both parties. The Querists replied to \n"Wnitefield, showing how many things still needed explanation \nin his language and conduct. To this Samuel Blair replied \nwith unsparing and inexcusable severity, imputing the most \nunworthy motives to the ministers, whom he regarded as its \nauthors and patrons. "It is no sin to exclaim against dry, \nsapless, unconverted ministers, for such surely are the bane of \nthe church." "That is," said The Querists, "it is no sin to \ndriaiiie a man after you have given him a bad name." "The \nQuerists No. III." was composed of notes on Tennent\'s Not- \ntingham Sermon, in January, 1741, Finley preached a sermon \non Matthew xii. 27, 28: \xe2\x80\x94 *?If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by \n\nwhom then do your sons cast them out?" It was published \nwith the title, Ohbisx Rbionihg. and Satan Kauino, \xe2\x80\x94 severe, \nbitter, anjnat, and mischievous, lie also printed a Letter to a \nFriend, in which he speaks of "the set of priests;" "pride and \ninteresl have hindered the general of ecclesiastics from embrac- \ning Christ/ 1 **Chrisi kepi aloof and damned them for their \nrotten performances, Eastings, prayers, and alms." "Oh, the \nbabbling ignorant priests thai would seem such friends fco holi- \n"Aiv not these the devil\'s advocates! whose spirit \n\n* MS. Hecorda of Donegul PwbyUa ji citd by l\xc2\xbbr. llodgo. \n11 \n\n\n\n162 Webster\'s history of the \n\ncame from them?" "Diabolical reasoners, be they ministers \nor people. ministers of Satan, enemies of all righteousness \nwho like Elymas ."* These specimens mournfully illus- \ntrate the state of things at that day, and explain the necessity \nfor hesitating before we cast out, as vile, every man who joined \nin the outcry against Finley and the older ones from whom he \nlearned such language. \n\nHe used the same unmeasured and inexcusable invective in \nhis answer to Thomson\'s able, scriptural, dignified sermon on \nConviction and Assurance. " The Clear Light put out in Ob- \nscure Darkness," is the title of this performance; and Thom- \nson\'s doctrine is condemned as Moravian, Muggletonian, and \ndetestable. \n\nTennent made his tour through New England in the severe \nwinter of 1741, Long Island Sound being frozen over; and, \nwhile Whitefield had been scrupulously exact, neat, and hand- \nsome in his apparel, Tennent laid aside powder, discarded \nwigs, and wore a large greatcoat girt with a leathern girdle, \nas if the new era in religion was to date from the new style in \nclothes. He appears to have avoided denunciation and extra- \nvagance, and to have preached with great clearness, solemnity, \nand power, the glorious distinguishing doctrines of the gospel. \nHe was received with great respect and cordial welcome, and \nwas signally honoured of God in winning souls. f \n\nIn May, 1741, Donegal Presbytery met at Pequea to hear \nthe complaints against Alexander ; he took the pulpit and pre- \nvented the moderator from preaching. They cleared him of \nthe charge of drunkenness ; but his excess in drink at a funeral, \nhis reproaches of his presbytery, and his refusal to submit to \nthe constituted authorities of the .church, could not be over- \nlooked. He was disowned till he manifested repentance. \n\nAt the same time, "the dreadful scandals" of Cross, of \n\n* Library of Harvard University. " Mr. Whitefield is very sure of God\'s eternal \nlove, and is not afraid he shall ever be ashamed of his hope. . . . Now, I would be \nglad to learn of these diabolical reasoners, (the Querists,) be they ministers or \npeople, if it be the devil\'s custom to set the world in an uproar about their souls ?" \n\nj- A letter from Portsmouth, New Hampshire, published in the Pennsylvania \nGazette, says, "That heavenly man preached six sermons there, and spoke a9 \nI never heard man speak before. While dwelling on the grace of Christ towards \nthe guilty, there were such outcries and weepings you could scarcely distinguish \none sound from another." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 163 \n\nBaskingridge, came to light, and his absence from the meeting \nof Xew Brunswick Presbytery delayed his trial and condem- \nnation till after the synod. \n\nDivisions had already begun. "William Tennent,* of Kesha- \nminy, had renounced the authority of Philadelphia Presbytery \nsince the fall of 1739. " Xew erections" of separate congrega- \ntions were nearly completed at Nottingham and Hopewell. \nTo the Great House in Philadelphia, a large body had with- \ndrawn from the Old Meeting-house, and all of these erections \nwere supplied by the New-Side ministers and licentiates. \n\nThe synod met on the 27th of May, 1741 ; the Old Side were \nexasperated by the misrepresentations and insults of the Pro- \ntesters, and by their unwearied and successful schemes m \nalienating their people from them, and trembled with a godly \njealousy lest the principles of the New Brunswick men (being \nlike those of the Irish non-subscribers in the matter of church \ngovernment) should bring in here, as there, contempt of the \ndoctrines of grace and denial of the Supreme Deity of the \nSon of God. The New Side came flushed with success ; the \nshout of a king was in their camp; they had the favour of the \npeople, as the men whom God had owned, and they had the \nfavour of God, making them mighty to pull down the strong- \nholdfi of Satan. \n\nThey did not meet as brethren. Each was strongly prepos- \nsessed againsl tin- other, and the actions of each served to irri- \ntate ami embitter the feelings already excited and wounded. \nThey were blinded to each other\'s excellencies, and amazingly \nacute in discerning the dimensions of the mote in their bro- \nther\'s eye. The strange incongruity was seen, of the smallest \nami the youngest presbytery refusing to be bound by any law of \ntli-\' Bynod which displeased them; ami having three licentiates \n\nami one minister 00 their list, whom the synod could QOl accept \n\nwithout laying aside its authority, ami sinking itself into a mere \n\nconsultative body whose decisions were binding on UOne, The \n\nclaim made l,v the non-subscribers in the I\'lster Synod twenty \n\nbefore, was renewed by the Protesters under a Mill more \noffensive form; for they admitted the synod\'s power to make \nrales, ami the excellency of the rules, when the Bynod was com* \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 MS. Records of Philadelphia Pre s by te ry. \n\n\n\n164 Webster\'s history of the \n\nposed of godly men ; and denied its power and the binding \nforce of its enactments, only, when the church was crushed by \na majority of blind guides, letter-learned Pharisees, and dead \nmen. In effect, they asserted, "If we were the majority, it \nwould be binding on you to obey the rules ; but, seeing you \nsightless and Christless ones are in the majority, the rules are \nnull, and, like yourselves, fit only to be despised." \n\nNo human skill could throw a bridge across the frightful \ngulf yawning between them, that they might meet half-way \nor stand on debatable ground. There can be no union where, \nin the eyes of a handful, the majority of their brethren are as \ngrasshoppers. \n\nWhat, then, was the great point of difference? On neither \nside was there ignorance or hatred of the doctrines of grace, \nor the habit, or the wish, of sinking them unobserved into in- \nsignificance. Nor was there disbelief or dislike of the doc- \ntrine of Regeneration, or its author, necessity, or nature ; nor \nyet as to the evidences of it, but only as to the convictions \npreceding the change from death to life, and the immediate \ninward witness of the saving change ; and even the difference \non these points, when divested of exaggerations and cleared of \nconfusion of terms, was so small as to be indiscernible. There \nwas no difference as to the mode of church government, or \nsubscription to the Westminster standards, or the necessity of \na learned ministry, much less of the higher necessity of piety \nin ministers and people. Nor yet as to the outcries, faintings, \nlaughter, and other unusual accompaniments : both abhorred \nthe thought that they were marks of saving operations of the \nSpirit; the one derided them as degrading public worship and \nsubstituting bodily exercise for reverent hearing of the truth ; \nthe others contended that they were not necessarily contempt- \nible or abominable as the effects of terror, or overwrought \nsensibility, or Satanic agency. \n\nIn New England, the case was widely different. There Ar- \nminianism was secretly working and widely diffused. Its \neffect was seen in the lethargic preaching, and the dead formal- \nism, strangely joined with bitter denunciation, and tireless \nmanoeuvres to put down every one who acknowledged another \nking besides Caesar. In Connecticut, the legislative power was \ninvoked, and the law giving liberty to sober dissenters from the \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 165 \n\nstanding order to form themselves into congregations, was \nrepealed. A minister of the colon}-, preaching in a parish with- \nout the consent of the pastor, though it were in a Baptist \nmeeting-house by the request of the Baptist preacher and his \npeople, was deprived of his salary for a year. Ministers not \nof the colony, committing the like offence, were to be taken \nup as vagrants and carried from constable to constable, till they \ntouched the soil of the nearest province. In the Bay, as well \nas in Connecticut, the associations issued warnings, testimonies, \nand declarations against the promoters of the Revival, and laid \nhold on every available opportunity to unsettle them from \ntheir pastoral charges, or to hedge up their admission to settle- \nment in any vacancy. But the Old Side had no willing legis- \nlature to frame laws for their advantage; they issued no testi- \nmony against Whitefield or any man; no pious man was un- \nsettled for his adherence to the Protesters; no hinderance was \noffered to congregations asking a change of jurisdiction. The \nmeasure of courtesy towards the Protesters, and especially the \nexcellent meekness of their submission to the high-handed \nassaults on their personal and ministerial character by Blair \nand Tennent, greatly honours them. \n\nThere were present twenty-six ministers and eighteen \nelders. Andrews was chosen moderator, and Boyd clerk. \nThe whole of New York Presbytery were absent, probably by \ndesign, being apprized that a crisis was at hand, and being \nunable to act with either side, or compose the difference be- \ntween them. \n\nThere had been, doubtless, much concert on the part of the \nmajority. They had folly mastered their forces. The right of \nsome to rit as members in synod was the firsl branch of busi- \nness; and Oreaghead, having declined the jurisdiction of his \npresbytery and having been suspended, his case was taken up. \n\nHe presented a paper, which was read; and the next day was \n\nconsumed in considering a paper of charges made by hifi \npeople against John Thomson, and a second paper offered \nby Creaghead. The charges wire handed to Thomson to \nperuse, and his presbytery was ordered to judge in that aflaii \nlily. \nThe afternoon of Friday, the 29th, and the morning of Sa \ntnrday, were devoted to hearing the answer of I Donegal Presby \n\n\n\n166 Webster\'s history of the \n\ntery to Creaghead\'s paper, and to discoursing on it. They \nadjourned at noon, till three on Monday. \n\nThe Sabbath was a busy day. Gilbert Tennent preached \nfive times, beginning at six in the morning, and baptized \neight adults. \n\nOn Monday, June 1, after the reading of the minutes, the \nfollowing protestation w r as brought in by Robert Cross, and \nread : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nEeverend Fathers and Brethren : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nWe, the ministers of Jesus Christ, and members of the \nSynod of Philadelphia, being wounded and grieved at our very \nhearts, at the dreadful divisions, distractions, and convulsious \nwhich all of a sudden have seized this infant church to such a \ndegree, that unless He, who is King in Zion, do graciously and \nseasonably interpose for our relief, she is in no small danger \nof expiring outright, and that quickly, as to the form, order, \nand constitution of an organized church, which hath subsisted \nfor above these thirty years past, in a very great degree of \ncomely order and sweet harmony, until of late. We say, we \nbeing deeply afflicted with these things which lie heavy on our \nspirits, and being sensible that it is our indispensable duty to \ndo what lies in our power, in a lawful way, according to the \nlight and direction of the inspired oracles, to preserve this \nswooning church from a total expiration : and after the delibe- \nrate and unprejudiced inquiry into the causes of these confu- \nsions which rage so among us, both ministers and people, we \nevidently seeing, and being fully persuaded in our judgments, \nthat, besides our misimprovement of, and unfruitfulness under, \ngospel light, liberty, and privileges, that great decay of practi- \ncal godliness in the life and power of it, and many abounding \nimmoralities: we say, besides these, our sins, which we judge \nto be the meritorious cause of our present doleful distractions, \nthe awful judgment we at present groan under, we evidently \nsee that our protesting brethren and their adherents w r ere the \ndirect and proper cause thereof, by their unwearied, unscrip- \ntural, antipresbyterial, uncharitable, divisive practices, which \nthey have been pursuing, with all the industry they were ca- \npable of, iwith any probability of success, for above these \ntwelve months past especially, besides too much of the like \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 167 \n\npractices for some years before, though not with such bare- \nfaced arrogance and boldness. \n\nAnd being fully convinced, in our judgments, that it is our \nduty to bear testimony against these disorderly proceedings, \naccording to our stations, capacity, and trust reposed in us by \nour exalted Lord, as watchmen on the walls of his Zion, we \nhaving endeavoured sincerely to seek counsel and direction \nfrom God, who hath promised to give wisdom to those that \nask him in faith, yea, hath promised his Holy Spirit to lead \nhis people and servants into all truth, and being clearly con- \nvinced, in our consciences, that it is a duty called unto in this \nt juncture of affairs. \n\nReverend fathers and brethren, we hereby humbly and \nsolemnly protest, in the presence of the great and eternal God, \nand hia elect angels, as well as in the presence of all here pre- \nsent, and particularly to you, reverend brethren, in our own \nnames, and in the names of all, both ministers and people, \nwho shall adhere to 08, as follows: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. We protest that it is the indispensable duty of this synod, \nto maintain and stand by the principles of doctrine, worship, \nand government of the Church of Christ, as the same are \nBummed up in the Confession of Faith, Catechisms, and 1 liree- \nt"iy composed by the Westminster Assembly, as being agree- \nable to the word of God, and which this synod have owned, \nacknowledged, and adopted, as may appear by our synodical \nrecords of the years 1729, 1736, which we desire to be read \npublicly. \n\n2. We protesl that no person, minister or elder, should be \nallowed to Bit and vote Lb this synod, who hath not received, \nadopted, \'>r Bubscribed the said Confessions, Catechisms, and \nJ directory, as our presbyteries respectively do, according to our \nlast explication of the Adopting Act; or who is either accused \nor convicted, or may be convicted before this synod, or any of \near presbyteries, of holding or maintaining any doctrine, or \nwho art and persist in any practice, contrary to any of those \ndoctrines, <\xc2\xbbr rules contained in said Directory, or contrary to \n\nof the known rights of presbytery, or orders made on \n\nI to by this Bynod, and which stand yel unrepealed, un- \n\nLe or until he Denounce Buch doctrine, and, being found \n\nguilty, acknowli his sorrow for such \n\n\n\n168 Webster\'s history of the \n\nsinful disorder, to the satisfaction of this synod, or such infe- \nrior judicatory as the synod shall appoint or empower for that \npurpose. \n\n3. We protest that all our protesting brethren have at pre- \nsent no right to sit and vote as members of this synod, having \nforfeited their right of being accounted members of it for \nmany reasons, a few of which we shall mention afterwards. \n\n4. We protest that, if, notwithstanding of this our protesta- \ntion, these brethren be allowed to sit and vote in this synod, \nwithout giving suitable satisfaction to the synod, and particu- \nlarly to us, who now enter this protestation, and those who \nadhere to us in it, that whatsoever shall be done, voted, or \ntransacted by them, contrary to our judgment, shall be of no \nforce or obligation to us, being done and acted by a judicatory \nconsisting in part of members who have no authority to act \nwith us in ecclesiastical matters. \n\n5. We protest that, if, notwithstanding this our protestation, \nand contrary to the true intent and meaning of it, these pro- \ntesting brethren, and such as adhere to them, or support and \ncountenance them in their antipresb}*terial practices, shall con- \ntinue to act as they have done this last year, in that case we, \nand as many as have clearness to join with us, and maintain \nthe rights of this judicatory, shall be accounted in no wise \ndisorderly, but the true Presbyterian church in this province ; \nand they shall be looked upon as guilty of schism, and the \nbreach of the rules of presbyterial government, which Christ \nhas established in his church, which we are ready at all times \nto demonstrate to the world. \n\nReverend and dear brethren, we beseech you to hear us \nwith patience, while we lay before you, as briefly as we can, \nsome of the reasons that move us thus to protest, and, more \nparticularly, why we protest against our protesting brethren\'s \nbeing allowed to sit as members of this synod. \n\n1. Their heterodox and anarchical principles expressed in \ntheir Apolog}\', pages twenty-eight and thirty-nine, where they \nexpressly deny that presbyteries have authority to oblige their \ndissenting members, and that synods should go any further, in \njudging of appeals or references, &c, than to give their best \nadvice, which is plainly to divest the officers and judicatories \nof Christ\'s kingdom of all authority, (and plainly contradicts \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 1G9 \n\nthe thirty-first article of our Confession of Faith, section three, \nwhich these brethren pretend to adopt,) agreeable to which is \nthe whole superstructure of arguments which they advance \nand maintain against not only our synodical acts, but also all \nauthority to make any acts or orders that shall bind their dis- \nsenting members, throughout their whole Apology. \n\n2. Their protesting against the synod\'s act in relation to the \nexamination of candidates, together with their proceeding to \nlicense and ordain men to the ministry of the gospel, in oppo- \nsition to, and in contempt of, said act of synod. \n\n3. Their making irregular irruptions upon the congregations \nto which they have no immediate relation, without order, \nconcurrence, or allowance of the presbyteries or ministers to \nwhich congregations belong, thereby sowiug the seeds of di- \nvision among people, and doing what they can to alienate and \nfill their minds with unjust prejudices against their lawfully- \ncalled pastors. \n\n4. Their principles and practice of rash judging and con- \ndemning all who do not fall in with their measures, both minis- \nters and people, as carnal, graceless, and enemies to the work \nof God, and what not, as appears in Mr. Gilbert Tennent\'s \nsermon against unconverted ministers, and his and Mr. Blair\'s \npapers of May last, which were read in open synod; which \nrash jndging has been the constant practice of our protesting \nbrethren, and their irregular probationers, for above these \ntwelve months past, in their disorderly itinerations and preach- \ning through our congregations, by which (alas for it!) most \nof "in- congregations, through weakness and credulity, are so \nshattered and divide\'], ami Bhaken in their principles, that few \n\nor none of ttS can lay we enjoy the comfort or have the SUC- \n\noesE among <>ur people, which otherwise we might, and which \nwe enjoyed heretofore. \n\n5. Their industriously penunding people to believe that the \n\nmil of God, whereby he calls men to the minis) ry, does not \n\neonsisl in their heiog regularly ordained ami set apart to that \nwork, according to the institution and rules of the word] hut \nin some invisible motions ami workings of the Spirit, which \nnone ,-;,ii he com,;,, us or sensible of but the person himself, \nami with respecl to which he i- liable to he deceived, or play \nthe hypocrite. That the gospel, preached in truth by nneon> \n\n\n\n170 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nverted ministers, can be of no saving benefit to souls; and \ntheir pointing out such ministers, whom they condemn as \ngraceless by their rash judging spirit, they effectually carry the \npoint with the poor credulous people, who, in imitation of their \nexample, and under their patrociny, judge their ministers to \nbe graceless, and forsake their ministers as hurtful rather than \nprofitable. \n\n6. Their preaching the terrors of the law in such a manner \nand dialect as has no precedent in the word of God, but rather \nappears to be borrowed from a worse dialect; and so indus- \ntriously working on the passions and affections of weak minds, \nas to cause them to cry out in a hideous manner, and fall down \nin convulsion-like fits, to the marring of the profiting both of \nthemselves and others, who are so taken up in seeing and hear- \ning these odd symptoms, that they cannot attend to or hear \nwhat the preacher says ; and then, after all, boasting of these \nthings as the work of God, which we are persuaded do proceed \nfrom an inferior or worse cause. 4 \n\n7. Their, or some of them, preaching and maintaining that \nall true converts are as certain of their gracious state as a per- \nson can be of what he knows by his outward senses; and are \nable to give a narrative of the time and manner of their con- \nversion, or else they conclude them to be in a natural or grace- \nless state, and that a \'gracious person can judge of another\'s \ngracious state otherwise than by his profession and life. That \npeople are under no sacred tie or relation to their own pastors \nlawfully called, but may leave them when they please, and \nought to go where they think they get most good. \n\nFor these and many other reasons, we protest, before the \nEternal God, his holy angels, and you, reverend brethren, \nand before all here present, that these brethren have no right \nto be acknowledged as members of this judicatory of Christ, \nwhose principles and practices are so diametrically opposite \nto our doctrine, and principles of government and order, \nwhich the great King of the Church hath laid down in his \nword \n\nHow absurd and monstrous must that union be, where one \npart of the members own themselves obliged, in conscience, to \nthe judicial determinations of the whole, founded on the word \nof God, or else relinquish membership; and another Dart de- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 171 \n\nclare, they are not obliged and will not submit, unless the de- \ntermination be according to their minds, and consequently \nwill submit to no rule, in making of which they are in the \nnegative ! \n\nAgain, how monstrously absurd is it, that they should so \nmuch as desire to join with us, or we with them, as a judica- \ntory, made up of authoritative officers of Jesus Christ, while \nthej openly condemn us wholesale; and, when they please, \napply their condemnatory sentences to particular brethren by \nname, without judicial process, or proving them guilty of \nheresy or immorality, and at the same time will not hold \nChristian communion with them ! \n\nAgain, how absurd is the union, while some of the mem- \nbers of the same body, which meet once a year, and join as a \njudicatory of Christ, do all the rest of the year what they can, \nopenly and aboveboard, to persuade the people and flocks of \ntheir brethren and fellow-members to separate from their own \nB, as graceless hypocrites, and yet they do not separate \nfrom them themselves, bat join with them once every year, as \nmembers of the same judicatory of Christ, and oftener, when \npresbyteries are mixed! Is it not most unreasonable, stupid \nIndolence in us, to join with such as are avowedly tearing us \nin pieces like beasts of prey? \n\nAgain, is not the continuance of union with our protesting \nbrethren very absurd, when it is so notorious that both their \n(loctrine and practice are so directly contrary to the Adopting \nArt, whereby both they and we have adopted the Confession of \nFaith, Catechisms^ and Directory composed by the "Westmin- \nster Assembly. \n\nFinally, U QOl ft >iitiiiuancc of Union absurd with those who \n\nwould arrogate to themselves a right and power to palm and \n\nObtrude members On our synod, contrary to the minds and \n\njudgment of the body? \n\nIn fine, a continued anion, ID our judgment, is most absurd \n\nand inconsistent, when it is bo notorious that our doctrine and \nprinciples of church government, in many points, are not only \ndiverse, but directly opposite. For how can two walk together! \nezcepi they b.- agreed \'.\' \n\ni: . . rend fathers and brethren, these are a part, and but a \npart, of our reasons why we protest as above, and which wo \n\n\n\n172 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nhave only hinted at, but have forborne to enlarge on them, as \nwe might. The matter and substance of them are so well \nknown to you all, and the whole world about us, that we \njudged this hint sufficient at present, to declare our serious \nand deliberate judgment in the matter; and, as we profess \nourselves to be resolvedly against principles and practice of \nboth anarchy and schism, so we hope that God, whom we \ndesire to serve and obey, the Lord Jesus Christ, whose minis- \nters we are, will both direct and enable us to conduct our- \nselves, in these trying times, so as our consciences shall not \nreproach us as long as we live. Let God arise, and let his \nenemies be scattered, and let them that hate him fly before \nhim ; but let the righteous be glad, yea, let them exceedingly \nrejoice. And may the spirit of life and comfort revive and \ncomfort this poor swooning and fainting church, quicken her \nto spiritual life, and restore her to the exercise of true charity, \npeace, and order. \n\nAlthough we can freely, and from the bottom of our hearts, \njustify the Divine proceedings against us, in suffering us to fall \ninto these confusions for our sins, and particularly for the great \ndecay of the life and power of godliness among all ranks, both \nministers and people, yet we think it to be our present duty to \nbear testimony against these prevailing disorders, judging that \nto give way to the breaking down the hedge of discipline and \ngovernment from about Christ\'s vineyard, is far from being the \nproper method of causing his tender plants to grow to grace \nand fruitfulness. \n\nAs it is our duty in our station, without delay, to set about \na reformation of the evils whereby we have provoked God \nagainst ourselves, so we judge the strict observation of his laws \nof government and order, and not the breaking of them, to be \none necessary mean and method of this necessary and much- \nto-be-desired reformation. And we doubt not, but when our \nGod sees us duly humbled and penitent for our sins, he will \nyet return to us in mercy, and cause us to flourish in spiritual \nlife, love, unity, and order : though perhaps we may not live to \nsee it, yet this testimony that we now bear may be of some \ngood use to our children yet unborn, when God shall arise and \nhave mercy of Zion. \n\nMinisters: \xe2\x80\x94 Robert Cross, John Thomson, Francis Alison, \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 173 \n\nRobert Cathcart, Richard Zanchy, John Elder, John Craig, \nSamuel Caven, Samuel Thomson, Adam Boyd, James Martin, \nRobert Jamison. \n\nElders:\xe2\x80\x94 Robert Porter, Robert McKnight, William McCul- \nloch, John McEwen, Robert Rowland, Robert Craig, James \nKerr, Alexander MeKnight. \n\nAfter being read, it was laid on the table, and was signed \nby several. Some cried that they were protesting gross lies \nbefore Almighty God ; and others that the elders were sub- \nscribing what they had not heard or considered. Andrews \nleft the chair; the Brunswick party, loath to be cast out \nha.-tily, spoke in their own defence; but, the house being con- \nfused, it was hard to tell what was said. Blair and others \ninsisted that the Protesters ought to withdraw, not being a \nmajority of the body. The building was crowded, and the \ngalleries rang with the cry to cast the Protesters out. \n\nThe Brunswick party offered no pacific overtures or any \nsatisfaction for past grievances, but only unchristian reproaches. \nThis brought the affair to a crisis, so that both parties could \nnot sit together. \n\n"It was canvassed by the former Protesters whether they or \nwe were to be looked on as the synod. We maintained that \nthey had no right to sit, whether they were the majority or \nnot. Then tiny motioned that we should examine this point, \nMid that the major number was the synod." \n\nTIm\' roll was counted. Andrews decided at once, and said \nopenly he would not join with the New Brunswick gentlemen. \n\nGillespie and McHeniydid not appear, when it was now oi \n\nnever in the point of outvoting. Blmer had probably gone \nhome with his elder, Jonathan Fithian, on Saturday. Hutche* \nson hesitated. The minority consisted \'<\\\' William Tennent \nand his elder, Richard Walker; Gilbert Tennenl and his elder, \nDavid Chambers; Richard Treat, Bleazer Wales; Samuel \nBlair ami his elder, John Ramsey; William Tennent, junior; \nCharles Tennent and his elder, William Medea; Alexander \nI bead and David Alexander. They withdrew, followed \nby a great crowd. \nThen Andrews resumed tic chair, and the synod proceeded \n\n\n\n174 Webster\'s history of the \n\nto business. Andrews* had not been consulted, and knew \nnothing of the design till the protest was brought. Itf had \nbeen drawn up and agreed upon after consultation and solemn \nprayer. \n\nThe protest has been greatly condemned as violent, unpre- \ncedented, unwise, and unnecessary. \n\nWas it unprecedented ? It was not unlike the protest of \nthe subscribers in the Synod of Ulster, by which they ex- \ncluded the non-subscribers in 1726, who withdrew and formed \nthe Antrim Presbytery. This was probably the precedent \nwhich governed their course. \n\n"Was it not the only practicable mode of pacification ? If \nthey tabled charges, who should judge? Were not the Pro- \ntesters accused in open synod and in print by Tennent and \nBlair? There could be no umpire. Creaghead would submit \nhis case only to a committee packed with a majority of his \nfriends. Tennent would refer neither to Scotland or Ireland, \nLondon or Boston, for he had the smiles of God on his course. \n\nWas it not necessary? What could be more absurd and \ninconsistent than continued union, while the minority divided \ncongregations, defamed their brethren, and set at naught the \nsynod\'s claim to make any rules not pleasing to them ? \n\nIt was a warring chaos, \xe2\x80\x94 potsherds dashing against potsherds. \nSeparation was necessary, and to effect it a test was necessary. \nWas it ill-timed? Could it have been longer delayed with \nany benefit ? Was it a duty for the synod and the presbyteries \nto brook further contumely and defiance ? The New Side were \nfully prepared, and they would yield not an inch in Creaghead\'s \ncase. They doubtless expected some, if not many, would con- \ncur, and demanded that the Protesters should withdraw. \n\nThere were five classes in the synod : \xe2\x80\x94 the Protesters, the \nexcluded, the silent, those who were dissatisfied with both \nparties, and the absent. Death had removed Anderson and \nHouston ; Gould had gone among the Congregationalists on \nLong Island; and Stevenson, "having omitted his ministry," \nwas struck off the roll at the opening of the session. \n\nThe Protesters were Robert Cross, of Philadelphia, and John \n\n\n\n* MS. Letter of Andrews to Pierson: in the hands of Dr. Sprague. \n\nf Refutation of Tennent\'s Remarks on the Protest. \xe2\x80\x94 Presb. Hist. Soc. Lib. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CnL\'RCH IN AMERICA. 175 \n\nThomson, of Chestnut Level, who had been members of the \nsynod almost from its formation ; Francis Alison, of New \nLondon, and Robert Cathcart, of Wilmington, and the rive \nyoungest members of Donegal Presbytery, \xe2\x80\x94 Zanchy, Elder, \nCavin, and Samuel Thomson, with John Craig, of Augusta, in \nVirginia; together with Adam Boyd, (then in the sixteenth \nyear of his ministry, who seems not to have signed the protest \ntill it was laid on the table,) James Martin, of Lewestown, and \nRobert Jamison, of Duck Creek. \n\nThe excluded were "William Tennent, of Nesharniny, now \nnear the close of his days, and his three sons; Richard Treat, \nof Abingdon, and Eleazer Wales, who had been ordained nine \nor ten years; Samuel Blair, of Fagg\'s Manor, and Alexander \nCreaghead, of Middle Octorara, who, in six or seven years, \nhud risen to the first rank as preachers and men of influence ; \nand David Alexander, whose ministry had but recently begun. \n\nThose who were dissatisfied with both parties were the large \nmajority of the synod. Two of the oldest ministers, Gillespie \nand Hutcheson, stood aloof on the division. The Presbytery \nof New York, composed of the best men, did the same; and \ntie- Presbytery of New Brunswick took under its care the \nchurches in West Chester county, installed a pastor, and ap- \npointed supplies for the Highlands, as though the Presbytery \nof New York had ceased to exist. \n\nThe silent were a small fraction, to which belonged the \noldesl minister, Andrews; Elmer, of Cohanzy, who protested \nthe next year, against the exclusion, but whose congregation) \nrtheless, was divided by the Brunswick Presbytery, aa \nthough he were B dead man; Cowell, of Trenton, like the \nother two, from New England; and McHenry from Ireland, and \nvery recently ordained assistant to William Tennent at Xesha- \nminy and I >eep Run. \n\nThe absent were the three most distant ministers, aged \nmen: \xe2\x80\x94 Orme, of Dpper Marlborough; Oonn, of Bladeneburg, \nand Bertram, of Deny, on the Bwatara; Hook, of Drawyers, \nlike Bertram, near the close of life; and the Welshmen, David \nEvans, of Pilesgrove, and Thomas Evans, of Pencader. \n\nThe Bilenl and the absent all remained with the Old Side, \nwhile of the dissatisfied only Gillespie returned to them. \n\nThe extent of the division was great Bedford and Oram- \n\n\n\n176 Webster\'s history of the \n\npond, and Salem and Setauket, in New York Presbytery, \nplaced themselves under the care of the Brunswick Presbytery. \nThe separation in Philadelphia was large; Hopewell and \nMaidenhead, Cohanzy, Neshaminy, and Great Valley, in Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery, were rent asunder: Greenwich, Gloster, \nCape May, and Abingdon went over undivided. In New- \ncastle Presbytery, Bohemia, White Clay, Pigeon Eun, or Red \nLyon, withdrew: there were separations from Newcastle, \nDrawyers, Pencader, Red Clay, and Elk River. In Lewes \nPresbytery, divisions ensued at Lewes and Dover, and in \nSomerset ; in Donegal Presbytery, in every congregation, and \nespecially the new settlements west of Susquehanna and in \nthe Valley of Virginia. AVhile from the New-Side congrega- \ntions there were no separations to any extent; a few only \nwithdrew from Treat, of Abingdon, Blair, of Fagg\'s Manor, \nand Creaghead, of Middle Octorara. \n\nThus was the division accomplished. The most pious and \njudicious men might have signed the protest, or have upholden \nthe movers of it. The grounds of it w r ere solid ; the reasons \nfor it just and weighty. \n\nThe action and language of the Brunswick party were anar- \nchical, and were defended by precisely the assumptions made \nby the non-subscribing Presbytery of Antrim, that had fallen \ninto Arianism. \n\nLicensing and ordaining in direct violation of the synod\'s \nexpress and repeated injunction was rebellion; and to give \nway to it, was to abandon the authority and liberty which \nChrist had given them. \n\nIntrusion, though not meriting the heavy civil penalties \nadjudged to it in Connecticut, was unbrotherly, and destruc- \ntive of a pastor\'s success and comfort. The justification of it \nmade it worse ; for they admitted, it was wrong except where \nthe people were burdened with the ministry of dead men. \n\nThe denunciation was a lording over brethren, and a con- \ndemning of the law of Christ ; its effect on the converts was \nthe generation of arrogance and censoriousness, which brought \nthem and "the work of God" into contempt. To it must be \ntraced much of the bitterness of opposers, and the sad, rapid, \namazing, and hopeless decline of the revival. \n\nThe doctrine of assurance and the Spirit\'s witness were so \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 177 \n\npreached as to lead to Antinomianism; John Cross* was up- \nheld by many, and continued to exercise his ministry, although \nsuspended ou glaring evidence; Dickinson was charged with \nhaving done the greatest mischief, such as no professed infidel \ncould hftve accomplished, in teaching that we must seek the \nevidences of our acceptance with God in the work of sanctifi- \ncation in us.f \n\nGilbert Tennent had asserted in preaching, and maintained \nin private, that every true convert is as sensible of the grace \nof God in him, and the love of God to him, as he is of a stab \nin the flesh or a thought in his mind. \n\nBesides this, which made every man a sufficient judge of his \ninterest in Christ, they complained of no other instance of \nerroneous teaching, except the assertion that people were \nbound to their pastors only as long as they thought they could \ngel good from their preaching, and had the right to forsake \ntlicm when they might be more benefited elsewhere. \n\nOn these five grounds they rested their demand that the \nBrunswick party should be excluded from membership in the \nsynod until they made satisfaction for these grievances, and \n_\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 -d do more to pursue their divisive courses. \n\nThe New York brethren agreed with the Protesters, that \ntfoeee were reasonable grounds of complaint and loud calls for \nlamentation; and they would not come into any union with \nthe excluded party, until they had solemnly engaged no more \nto offend in any of these things. Thus was the protest justi- \nfied by those who condemned the exclusion; and the exclu- \nsion was maintained by New York Presbytery to its full \nextent, until all that was demanded in the protest was secured \nby the plighted faith of Tennent and hia coadjutors. \n\nIn this connection, the following calm and valuable letter \nmay he read with advantage, as illustrative of the length to \nwhich the Leaden of the Brunswick party had gone in thec- \nal \\ie\\VS. \n\n\n\n* I \xc2\xbb i t \xe2\x80\xa2 U i 1 1 - . . i \xc2\xbb " - Defence of big Display of Grace. \n\nt Cro\xc2\xab* llnrv. Coll. Libr. \n\n\n\n178 Webster\'s history of the \n\nANDREWS* TO PIERSON, OF WOODBRIDGE. \n\n"Philadelphia, June 25, 1741. \n\n" Key. and Dear Brother : \xe2\x80\x94 %-> \n\n" Mr. Dickinson\'s letter of May 23, and yours since that \ndate, came both to hand ; and, though you both agree, it \nwould be unreasonable to bring on the debate about the \ncontested act at our last synod, when so many were absent ; \nyet I am told there is reason to believe it was designed, and \nif they had carried their point in having that act rescinded, \nit would have brought in such a deluge of preachers that \n\'twould have been in vain for any that don\'t come into all \ntheir new notions, to have appeared at synod any more. And \nsome judged they were strengthening their party with such \na view, as we all know they stick at nothing to gather prose- \nlytes. What influence that had in bringing on the protesta- \ntion against them now, as I was not consulted, or whether any, \nI can\'t tell. You may have your thoughts, as I have mine. \n\n"But, brother, you that way don\'t see, hear, and feel what \nwe do. The confusions they have made this way, in town and \ncountry, are perfectly astonishing, and indeed e\'en make us \nweary of our lives. They have called themselves members \nwith us, but have been continually acting against us, and \nendeavouring to make all that don\'t follow them to be looked \non as carnal, graceless, unconverted hypocrites, to destroy our \nusefulness and bring as many as possible over to them, so \nthat we can scarce tell where to go or who to speak to. But \nthis is not all; both town and country are full of Antinomian \nnotions, which if we say any thing against, in pulpit or out, \n\'tis almost as much as our lives are worth, and we feel our- \nselves bound in conscience to give people warniug and endea- \nvour to preserve them from destruction. \n\n" The prevailing opinion among the party is, that the moral \nlaw is no rule to believers. They freely declare they don\'t \ndo any good, or bring forth any fruit, or avoid any evil, on \nconsideration of any law obliging or forbidding them, or from \nany fear of God at all. Xay, they tell me they have no \nregard to any thing they do or can do, to promote their own \n\n* Transcribed from the original by permission of Dr. Sprague. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 179 \n\nhappiness or salvation at all. The}- utterly disclaim all self- \nlove, and make it a wrong mercenary thing, contrary to the \nspirit of the gospel, to have any eye to their own benefit in \nany thing they do, but only the glory of God, exclusive of \ntheir own good. \n\n" The common vogue is, that we must not press the un- \nconverted to do duty, because all they do is sin ; and that \nthere is no need to urge the converted to it, because they \nwill do it, not because they must. Accordingly they avoid \npreaching up moral duties ; and, though they have ever so fair \nan opportunity for it, they avoid telling the people that the \nmoral law is the eternal rule of reasonable creatures ; they \nseem to be afraid to do it ; for, if they did, they would be as \nbad as we, and their hearers would leave them. They con- \nvene with that party a hundred times more than I do, and, \nconsequently, must know their errors better than I can ; and \nyet they say nothing to bring them off, that I hear of, which \nthey would do it\' they were not of the same mind themselves, \n36 can\'t be honest men. This enthusiastical frenzy is, \nI think, universal among them, (I mean their leaders and \nsome others,) that they can tell who is converted or not, espe- \ncially upon a little discourse, and so judge and condemn and \ndamn with all tjie freedom imaginable. \n\n"The Christ they invite persons to, seems to me not the true \nChrist. The true Christ has a yoke, which they that come to \nhim must take upon them; but this yoke is not mentioned, \nbut only \'Come, come.\' All which, and much more to the \nsame purpose, they say, they learned of Mr. Whitefieldj \n\nand tiny do think they follow him punctually in them, which \n\ni- their aim. 1 know in some of them they are not mistaken, \n\nand 1 feared things would come to this pass from the begin- \nning, which made me dissatisfied. Some people blamed me \n\nthen (thinking people would take the good and leave the had) \n\nthat now justify me and Bay thai I saw further than they. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2A prevailing rule to try converts is, that, if you don\'t \nknow when vou were without Christ and unconverted, &c, \nyon have no interest in Christ, lei your love and your practice \n\nhe what they may; which rule, ;i s it is unseriptural, so I am \nof the mind will CUt off nine in fcen, if not ninety-nine in \na hundred, of the good people in the world that have had a \n\n\n\n180 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\npious education. And, hence, in a manner, all our pious fore- \nfathers are doomed to the pit, as most sober, pious people are \nnow. The old rule that our Saviour gave of judging the tree \nby its fruits, is now generally thrown out of doors, and an \nintuitive way of judging, like God\'s, is now pretended to. All \nthat don\'t come up to this way of thinking and judging are \ndeclared carnal ; and so much as to call it in question, is \nalmost fatal. Nay, all that don\'t think we are saved in the \nway of absolute sovereignty, (which some think renders all \nthe promises of the gospel, and the gospel itself and the Me- \ndiator of it, all needless and useless,) and that don\'t believe \nwe must feel the Spirit blow upon us as evidently as we can \nfeel the northwest wind, they are looked upon as carnal \npersons. \n\n" Now, my dear brother, I don\'t know what you may think \nof these things ; but I think they strike at all solid religion, \nand tend to pervert the good principles derived to us from our \nforefathers; and I think \xe2\x80\x94 nay, I am almost sure \xe2\x80\x94 you like \nthem no better than I, notwithstanding the angry letter you \nwrote me concerning the convulsive motions caused by Rd.\'s* \nextravagant preaching. You quite mistook me, or you had \nspared the pains in that letter, as if I think convictions and \nawakenings, &c. were needless. Indeed, my brother, I never \nhad such a thought. God forbid I should ; but I am of the \nmind that those things of which we have heard so often, \nat least some of them, are not of that nature. But I\'ll \nforbear : only say that if you have heard nothing of them, or \nif you judge such outcries must be, or we are lost, I think \nyou and I and our forefathers have been doing nothing but \ndeceiving the people ; but I hope in God it is not so, at least \naltogether. But enough of this at this time, and, for aught \nI know, more than expedient ; for, if Whitefield or some \nother should come at the sight of this letter, it may occasion \nmany a raving sermon, as the exposing my former letters did. \nBut, though such an unbrotherly, not to say unchristian, thing \nwere done once, I can\'t entertain a thought that it will be \ndone again. \n\n" I have here enclosed a protestation. "What you may think \n\n* Rowland. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 181 \n\nof it I won\'t pretend to guess ; nor, as I was not concerned in \nit, will I tell you iny thoughts of it. Only this I will venture \nto say : that, if it had not heen done now, if things didn\'t soon \nmake a great turn for the better, it must, in my mind, have \nbeen done in a little time, unless we would be contented to be \na Babel both as to principles and practice. \n\n" My dear brother, if you find your judgment don\'t jump \nwith mine in every thing, I desire charity between us may \nbe kept alive ; for I do assure you, if I know any thing of the \ndoctrines of our predecessors and the reformed churches, (and \nI humbly conceive I am not altogether an ignoramus in \nthem,) I have not varied from them. What I dislike is, for \naught I know, new, not known, at least not professed, by \nthose that went before us, and, which is abundantly more, not \naccording to the word. Therefore, non credo quia ?wn lego. I \ni this for Brother Dickinson as well as yourself; and, \nwith hearty affection from Mr. Cross and self for you and Mr. \nDickinson ami yours and his. in the entire bond of Christian \nbrotherly friendship, I rest, your own \n\n"Jebediah Andrews." \n\n\n\n182 webstee\'s history of the \n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII. \n\nThe Brunswick party having withdrawn, the synod pro- \nceeded with its business, making no other reference to their \ndeparture than this : \xe2\x80\x94 that they appointed Thomson, Thomas \nEvans, and Alison to defend the protestation in print, if need \nbe. The overture which Thomson and his elders had brought \nbefore Donegal Presbytery was taken up and readily ap- \nproved, nem. con. \n\n" That every member of this synod, minister or elder, do \nsincerely and heartily receive, own, acknowledge, or subscribe \nthe "Westminster Confession of Faith and the Larger and \nShorter Catechisms as the confession of his faith, and the \nDirectory, as far as circumstances will allow and admit in this \ninfant church, for the rule of church order. \n\n" That every session do oblige their elders at their admis- \nsion to do the same." \n\nThe commission was appointed, to consist of Thomson, \nDickinson, Pemberton, Pierson, Robert Cross, Alison, Boyd, \nand Martin, with Andrews, the moderator; but there is no \nrecord of its having been called together. \n\nThey gave ten pounds out of the fund to the under- \ntakers of the meeting-house in Wilmington to defray the \ncharge of it, and lent them thirty pounds, free of interest, for \nthree years. \n\nThe synod, taking to their serious consideration that God\'s \njudgments are abroad in the earth, and the war in which \nwe are engaged, the threatening scarcity of grain by the dis- \ncouraging prospects of our crops, and the mournful melan- \ncholy divisions among us who profess to be followers of the \nPrince of peace, resolved to keep a day of humiliation, fasting, \nand prayer, to implore the merciful and compassionate regard \nof our good God in these difficulties ; and that it be left to \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 183 \n\neach presbytery to appoint the time as it will best suit within \ntheir respective bounds. \n\nThey then adjourned. \n\nThe non-subscribers in Ireland, always assumed, that they \nwithdrew on being protested against, in the face of the \nsynod\'s declaration that they were excluded. \n\nThe Brunswick party, always alleged, that they were ex- \ncluded, although they withdrew on rinding the majority of \nthe synod resolute in demanding of them satisfaction for the \ngrievances complained of in the protest; they denying that \nsuch grievances had been committed by them. \n\nThe three excluded ministers* of New Brunswick Presby- \ntery met in Philadelphia on the 2d of June, the day after the \nprotest was introduced, pro re nata. Rowland was chosen \nclerk, and the six ministers who adhered to them sat as cor- \nrespondents. Hutcheson was present, although undecided \nwhat course to pursue. Gillespie, though absent, signiried \nhis willingness to join them. \n\n" lla\\ in_r been all along joined in one united synod with the \nother Presbyterian ministers in these parts, the greater. part \nof whom, with us in synod met, did yesterday, without any \njust grounds, protest against our continuing with them any \nlonger, and so cast us out of their communion, we tamo \ntogether to consider how we ought to conduct ourselves in \npresent circumstances fur the fulfilling of the work committed \n\nby the Lord Jesus, as ministers and elders, and agreed \n\nt" declare, \xe2\x80\x94 \nM That the protestation is unjust and sinful. \n\n"Thai it is OUT boundeo duty to form ourselves into dis- \ntinct presbyteries tor carrying on the government of Christ\'s \nchun-h. \n\n"That those brethren who have lefl Newcastle and Done- \ngal Presbyteries meet at White Clay Greek, on the 80th of \nJune, and form the Presbytery of Londonderry. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2That the two presbyteries do meal al Philadelphia, the \nsecond Wednesday in August, in the capacity of a Bynod. \n\n" Lesl any Bhould suppose us t-\xc2\xbb he receding from Preeby> \n\nteriau principles, we unaniinoii-ly declare that we do adhere \nRen Brunswick Pr o a byto r j . \n\n\n\n184 Webster\'s history of the \n\nas closely and fully to the Westminster Confession, Cate- \nchisms, and Directory, as ever the Synod of Philadelphia \ndid in any of their public acts and agreements about \nthem." \n\nBlair was appointed to draw up, against the next meet- \ning, an account of the differences in the synod for some \nyears past, and which have issued in this separation. Ten- \nnent was directed to prepare an answer to the protest, \nwherein things are most unjustly represented. Blair\'s paper \nwas adopted and published as the Declaration of the Con- \njunct Presbyteries* "When the protestation was printed with \na preface, Tennent speedily sent forth Remarks on the Pro- \ntest, and, as an appendix, the apology his presbytery had \npresented to the synod in 1739. This called forth two pam- \nphlets, \xe2\x80\x94 one, a Refutation of Remarks on the Protest, and \nthe other from John Thomson, being an examination of the \napology, and entitled " The Government of the Church." \nTo this latter piece Samuel Blair replied, coinciding with \nThomson in all his principles, and denying that he or his \nparty had ever taken the positions which seem to constitute \nthe very essence of the apology. \n\nBlair\'s paper was printed in 1744, and was entitled "A Vin- \ndication of the Brethren cast out, from maintaining Princi- \nples of Anarchy and denying the Scriptural Authority of \nChurch Judicatories." He expresses surprise that Thomson \nnever once charged them with holding the Congregational \nplan, and asserts that the apology was valid and conclusive \nagainst the claim of legislative or law-making power, and \nmaintained the executive authority of church courts. He \ndeclares all that had been said of the apology as anarchical \nw r as palpably false. He said he knew nothing of Tennent\'s \npaper when he prepared his representation. " What hurt was \nthere in obtaining such a synodical admonition when there \nw r as really so much needed and more ?" \n\nOn the afternoon of the 2d of June, the Brunswick party \nreceived supplications from Tredryffryn, Norriton, Brandy- \nwine, Nottingham, Leacock, Hopewell, (now Big Spring,) \nPigeon Run, Christiana Bridge, Little Britain, Donegal, Derry, \nGreenwich, Cape May, Hanover in Lancaster, Pennsboro\',( Car- \nlisle,) Conecocheague, Newtown, and Tehicken, and from James \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH EH AMERICA. 185 \n\nRiver in Virginia. From this it would seem as if preparations \nLad been made by these congregations, which were vaeaneies, \nto petition the synod for supplies, passing over their own pres- \nbyteries; and by those of them which had pastors, to demand \nrections, or to be loosed from their ministers and have \nsupplies. Probably intimations of this revolutionary measure \nwere conveyed to the synod in some informal way, and deeided \nthem to delay no longer, but to free themselves from continued \nunion with men who behaved to them as if they were heathen \nand publicans. Nothing but the foresight of some impending \nJtrophe eould have led so many congregations to send up \nsupplications at such a time. They were the effects which \nmight naturally have been predicted from the dispersion abroad \nof the representations of Tennent and Blair. In many places, \npublic worship was forsaken to B large extent, and the ministry \nof the pastofd scouted) as being as unlikely to be used by God \nin the conversion of souls, as the agency of Satan. \n\nThey appointed James Campbell, a licentiate, who had told \nth\'- Bynod openly that he was unconverted, and had laid aside \npreaching, until solemnly engaged by Wniteheld to resume it, \nto begin at Londonderry, ( Fagg\'s .Manor.) and go to Forks of \nBrandywine, left vacant by the removal of Black; Leacockand \nDonegal, also vacant; Hanover, Zanchy\'s charge; Derry, Ber* \ntram\'.- ; Paxton, Blder\'s; Pennsboro\', Samuel Thomson \'a; Cone- \nboeheagne, ( lavin\'s; Little Britain, J. Thomson\'s; Nottingham, \ntin- in-w erection; Klk River, vacant by Eouston\'s removal; \nn Run and Christiana Bridge, vacancies; and Greenwich, \n\nin West Jersey, also vacant. Rowland was directed to follow in \n\n( tanpbelTe track. Finley was sent to supply tin- new erection \nat Nottingham, and to go to Baltimore, and to Dover in Dela- \nware. There being a great necessity in the valley, embracing \nTredryffryn and Norriton, David Alexander was sent thither. \n\nA few weeks after, John Cross was called up and suspended; \nDavid Alexander probably died within a year. \n\nNo notice is taken in the manuscri] I records of the fad \n\nStated in another j. lace by Blair,* thai at this meeting, or tin- \none iii August, Creaghead and his elder, Samuel Irwin, brought \n\nI . [>) leave tfa \n\nchurch. \xe2\x80\x94 Pi.. \n\n\n\n186 Webster\'s history of the \n\nin a proposal for the conjunct presbyteries to adopt the Solemn \nLeague and Covenant. He urged that neglect of it was the \ngreat cause of the decline of religion. They declined to com- \nply, because the renewal of it was properly a national work, \nbelonging to the three kingdoms, and not to two presbyteries. \nHe immediately withdrew, and sounded the alarm on both \nsides of the Susquehanna, that the Westminster standards had \nnever been adopted by either the synod or the presbyteries. \nThe bond which had held the party together while contending \nwith the synod was gone ; they had no occasion to unite to- \ngether against a majority; they began to make demands on \neach other. The Seceder and the Covenanter element worked \nfreely and developed itself rapidly. Creaghead had been com- \nplained of by his people for introducing new terms of com- \nmunion; he now opened a correspondence with the Reformed \nPresbytery* in Scotland, to send ministers to Pennsylvania, \nfor there were many who had embraced all the principles of \n"the mountain men," and others had emigrated to this country \nwho at home had been associated with the Society people in \ntheir native land. There were others, still more numerous, but \nfor the time more quiescent, who clung to the peculiarities of \nthe Associate Presbytery, and who were not behind the very \nchiefest of them in their repugnance to the Burgess Oath, and \nin their abhorrence of a defective or mutilated testimony \nagainst all errors, individual and national, of every degree of \nimportance. The Tennents were correspondents of the Ers- \nkines ; so also was Whitefield, and in his letters showed the \ngreatest interest in the movements of the Seceders; and it was \ndoubtless a widely-current rumour, that he was going to Scot- \nland at their solicitation to espouse their cause. Almost at \nthe very time the conjunct presbyteries met in Philadelphia, \nWhitefield met with the Associate ministers in Edinburgh, and \nthe silver cord was loosed which bound him in endearing friend- \nship to the Erskines. He could not consent to unite himself \nas a member with them, or be confined by their methods in \nintercourse with other denominations. The breachf took place \n\n\n\n* Sketch of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in America, by Dr. J. N. McLeod. \nf Fraser\'s Life of Erskine ; Philips\'s Whitefield ; McKerrow\'s History of the \nSecession Church. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 1ST \n\nAugust 5, 1741 ; and ou the 8th, he wrote to Thomas Noble, \n\xe2\x96\xbaf New York, detailing the particulars and desiring them \nto be communicated to the Tennents. "I am glad to hear the \nwork of the Lord prospers in their hands, and that they intend \nto meet La a synod by themselves. Their catholic spirit will \ndo good." \n\nIn the very month of the rupture, Davenport went through \n.traordinary career in Connecticut. He was no wild en- \nthusiast, but a grave man, of great piety, of unblemished life; \na powerful reasoner, no mean poet, and, what was of great im- \nportance in that colony, of one of its most ancient and honour- \nable families. It is monstrous to pretend that he had a capti- \nvating eloquence, or could preach so as to depict as if before \nthem hung and groaned the bleeding Saviour.* His sermons \nplain, not striking; his exhortations stirring and warm, \nbut uttered in a strange singing tone that was intolerable to \nthe careless, bat which moved amazingly the feelings of the \nnewly awakened, and of all who sympathised with him. De- \nDonncing nan as unconverted, walking with his hearers in \n\nprocession through the streets and from tOWn to town, singing \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2human composures," or hymns of his own composing; burn- \nioua books and gay apparel in one bonfire, and setting \nuj. separate meetings: tin sc, with the delusive notions of the \nWitness of the Spirit, brought him into contempt and caused \nhi.- good to be evil Spoken o\xc2\xa3 Friends and foes were thrown \nber in opposition to him, and good men by their zeal \n: him Strengthened the hands of evil-doers, and Led many \nto separate from the standing order, and forsake the ministra- \n\xe2\x96\xa0 if faithful pastoiSi \nA few Moravians had been in Pennsylvania, New Jersey; \nand New York, tor Bevecal yean. Peter Boebler was at skip- \npack, in IT;)\'.\'; and in November, 1741, Counl Zinaendorff ar- \nrived: he laid aside all mark of rank, and lived as a Lutheran \nminister, with the came of Von Thurnstein. He appeared \nbefore the governor in Philadelphia, and, in the presence of \n\nI. \'i. Franklin, Allen, and other persons of distinction, \n\ndenned bis position in a Latin oration; he also made several \n\n\n\n\xc2\xbb Gbl - II)-\' \xe2\x80\xa2!\xe2\x80\xa2:\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 ft] t\\ N\'W \n\nII IT. 11. \n\n\n\n188 Webster\'s history of the \n\nstatements of his intentions in French. Logan* speaks of the \nLatin and the French as being wholly unlike any performances \nhe had ever heard in either of those tongues. The brethren \nhad, previously to the count\'s arrival, bought "a barony" called \nNazareth, which Whitefield had once contracted for, to found \na home for coloured persons, and which, after having laid the \nfoundation of a building, he had given up. When Zinzendorif \ncame to the Brethren on the Lehigh, they met for worship in \na stable, and called the place Bethlehem. He visited the Ger- \nmans in Oley and Tulpehocken, and, finding that one of the \nBrethren had joined the "Sieben Taegers" in the Kloster at \nEphrata, he went thither. He soon set forward measures for \ngathering the pious of the numerous German sectsf into a \nyearly conference for friendly religious intercourse. The prin- \ncipal obstruction in the way was the belief of some that he \nwas an immoral man, who had fled from his own country, and \nthe impression in others that he was the Beast of the Revela- \ntions. He made a great impression in New York and Phila- \ndelphia, and drew many of Whitefield\'s chiefest friends after \nhim. Dickinson, Tennent, and Finley all wrote against him, \nviewing his tenets as subversive alike of law and gospel. \n\nAbout this time, Rowland was indicted for horse-stealing, \nand acquitted on the testimony of William Tennent and two \nof the elders of the New-Side church of Hopewell. The wit- \nnesses were indicted for having procured his acquittal by wilful \nperjury; and popular indignation rose so high that Rowland \nleft Hunterdon county, and settled at New Providence and \nCharlestown, in Pennsylvania. \n\nAmid all these painful circumstances, the stout heart of \nGilbert Tennent shook; and he who had preached on the bene- \nfits of spiritual desertion learned the bitterness of it,| and \ntrembled for his salvation. \n\n\n\n* Watson\'s Annals of Philadelphia; Translation of the Count\'s Letter, by Rev. \nMr. Reading, of Appoquinimy ; Answers to Queries proposed to the Count; Curious \nand astounding documents in Philadelphia papers of 1741, \'42, \'43. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0j- Jackson\'s Life of Zinzendorif. \n\nJ MS. Letter of D. Brainerd to Bellamy, February 4, 1742-3: \xe2\x80\x94 "I\'m more dead \nto the world than ever ; but I\'m afraid I shall fall into the same state dear Mr. Ten- \nnent has been in, so amuse myself with something, tho\' I satisfie myself with \nnothing." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 189 \n\n"Whitefield heard of his distressed state, and wrote to hiin \nfrom \n\n"Gloucester, England. February 5. 1742. \n\n"I bless God for delivering Brother Rowland out of the \nhands of his enemies. I am persuaded he will deliver your \nbrother William also. By your desertion and temptations, I \nbelieve God is preparing you for a fresh work. I believe you \nwould be better it\' you would always evangelize." \n\nThe following letter will serve to illustrate the state of Mr. \nTeimeiit\'s mind at this period: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"GILBERT TENNENT* TO JONA. DICKINSON. \n\n"February 12, 1742. \n\n\'\'I have many afflicting thoughts about the debates which \nhave subsisted in our synod for some time. I would to God \nthe breach were healed, were it the will of the Almighty. As \nfor my own part, wherein I have mismanaged in doing what I \ndid, 1 do l\xe2\x80\x9e,k apon it to be my duty, and should be willing to \nacknowledge it in the openest manner. I cannot justify the \n\nrive heal of temper which has sometime appeared in my \nconduct I have been of late, Bince I returned from New \nj _ ind, visited with much spiritual desertion and distresses \nof various kinds, coming in a thick and almosl continual suc- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 m, which have given me a greater discovery of myself \n\nthan I think 1 ever had before. These things, with the trial f \n\not\' the Moravian-, have given me a clear view of the danger \n\xe2\x80\xa2 ry thing which tends to enthusiasm and division in the \nvisible church. 1 think that while the enthusiastical Moravians, \nand Long-beards or Pietists, are uniting their bodies, (no doubt \n{\xe2\x80\xa2> increase their strength and render themselves more consider- \nable,) it Lb a shame thai the ministers who are in the main of \nBound principle- in religion Bhould be divided and quarrelling. \nAlae for it! my soul is Bick forthese thing-. 1 wish that aome \n\n* Published in Pennsylrai .1 reprinted in Hodge\'s History. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 my, M : 1 1 \xe2\x96\xa0 1 1 -j\'\',, 1748, writes us follows :\xe2\x80\x94" The Morarian \n\nrer; end f<>r my part I\'m totally lost fend non- \n\n;luit I I\'ti\'l\'iiv.iir n\xc2\xab in 1 1 .- li m possible to suspend my judgment \n\nat>"Ut \'em, foe 1 ennnot tell whether they fere eminent Christians, "r whethi r their \n\noonduct i-< nil underhandtd policy end an i on. The more l talked to \n\n. the more I wu lost fend puisled; and )\xe2\x80\xa2 t Mr. ,\\. ble mnst i>o \n\n::in." \n\n\n\n190 Webster\'s history of the \n\nscriptural methods could be fallen upon to put an end to these \nconfusions. Some time since I felt a disposition to fall on my \nknees, if I had opportunity, to entreat them to be at peace. \n\n"I remain, with all due honour and respect, your poor \nWorthless brother in the ministry. \n\n"P.S. \xe2\x80\x94 I break open this letter myself, to add my thoughts \nabout some extraordinary things in Mr. Davenport\'s conduct. \nAs to his making his judgment about the internal states of \npersons or their experience, a term of church fellowship, I \nbelieve it is unscriptural, and of awful tendency to rend and \ntear the church. It is bottomed upon a false base, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : that \na certain and infallible knowledge of the good estate of men \nis attainable in this life from their experience. The practice \nis schismatical, inasmuch as it sets up a term of communion \nwhich Christ has not fixed. The late method of setting up \nseparate meetings upon the supposed unregeneracy of pastors \nis enthusiastical, proud, and schismatical. All that fear God \nought to oppose it as a most dangerous engine to bring the \nchurches into the most damnable errors and confusions. The \npractice is built upon a twofold false hypothesis : \xe2\x80\x94 infallibility \nof knowledge, and that unconverted ministers will be used as \ninstruments of no good in the church. The practice of openly \nexposing ministers who are supposed to be unconverted, in \npublic discourse, by particular application of times and places, \nserves only to provoke them instead of doing them any good, \nand declares our own arrogance. It is an unprecedented, divi- \nsial, and pernicious practice. It is lording it over our brethren \nto a degree superior to what any prelate has pretended, since \nthe coming of Christ, so far as I know, the pope only excepted ; \nthough I really do not remember to have read that the pope \nwent on at this rate. The sending out of unlearned men to \nteach others upon the supposition of their piety in ordinary \ncases seems to bring the ministry into contempt, to cherish \nenthusiasm, and bring all into confusion. "Whatever fair face \nit may have, it is a most perverse practice. The practice of \nsinging in the streets is a piece of weakness and enthusiastical \nostentation. \n\n"I wish you success, dear sir, in your journey; my soul is \ngrieved for such enthusiastical fooleries. They portend much \nmischief to the poor church of God if they be not seasonably \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 101 \n\nchecked. May your labours be blessed for that end ! I must \nalso express my abhorrence of all pretence to immediate inspi- \nration or following immediate impulses, as an enthusiastieal, \nperilous igm8-fcdHU8." \n\nWell might " Philalethes" array Gilbert against Tennent, \nwhen this letter issued from the press, at the very time the \nthird edition of the Nottingham Sermon appeared. How \nTennent could so entirely have forgotten his own guiltiness \nin the main with Davenport, is not to be conjectured. The \nletter is like David\'s condemnation to death of the rich man \nwho furnished his guest with a feast on the only lamb of his \npoor neighbour. Did Dickinson reply with Nathan\'s rebuke \nto him? Probably he was so rejoiced to be furnished for his \njourney with this weapon of proof, that he forgot to notice \nthe inconsistency. \n\nDickinson journeyed through New England to Boston; \n"for they were wont in old time to say, \'Surely they will ask \ncounsel at Abel,\' and bo they ended Che matter." He also, in \nconcert with Edwards and Burr, used his influence to have \nBrainerd restored to his standing in Yale College, but to no \npurpose. The determination seems to have been formed in \neonsnltation at Boston to make the withdrawmsnl of the pro- \ntest the indispensable prerequisite to further continuance in \nunion with the Philadelphia Synod, or to demanding an ac- \nknowledgment from the Brunswick party of their errors or \nmissteps. This was in effect to constitute the synod as it\' the \nseparation had never taken place, and to take up the whole \n\ncontroversy as i\' -t I on the morning of dune 1, 1741. The \n\nletter of Tennenl to Dickinson,* with others of Like Import \nto Pemberton and Whiiefield, Btrongly impelled them to gra- \ntify bim in this tender point ; and the conjunct Presbyterians, \nhaving cleared themselves of all receding from Presbyterian \n\nprinciples, and from all eoncurrence in any of tin- offensive \n\nthings in the praetioes or teachings of Oross, Oreaghead, and \nlied the New Xork brethren thai they wrere \n\n\n\n\xe2\x99\xa6 Tli\' toed by DioUoMn in tli- hinda of Clap, of N< w Keren, who \n\nhri\'l it printed. Tin- letten t\'/ Wbitefield end Pemberton we b\xc2\xbbT\xc2\xab not \n\n\n\n192 Webster\'s history of the \n\nclear of tlie charges in the protest, of promoting anarchy and \ninflaming enthusiasm. \n\nIn April, 1742, Tennent preached in New York his sermons \nagainst the Moravians ; he used hardly stronger language than \nDickinson, who pictured the Moravians as libertines in his "Dis- \nplay of Grace." Tennent uttered his own condemnation in \nevery syllable in which he exposed and denounced them ; and \nthe paragraphs of the Nottingham Sermon, placed in parallel \ncolumns with others from the Moravian Sermon, furnish a \nremarkable specimen of recantation made unconsciously. \nAmong the memorable things of that day, is the fact that \nTennent saw no self-contradiction in the two productions ; \nand that neither he nor Blair nor any of their party inter- \npreted their apology as Thomson did, or saw in it any of \nthe anarchical or heterodox principles, which, to every other \nperson, glare on the surface and are the very soul of it. \n\nThe synod met in Philadelphia in May, 1742, the Brunswick \nbrethren being in town, with their newly-ordained co-presby- \nters and a full quota of elders. Gillespie and Hutcheson were \nabsent. Of New York Presbytery, there were present Dick- \ninson and his elder, David Whitehead, Pemberton and his \nelder, Nathaniel Hazard, Pierson and his elder, John Ball, \nSimon Horton, of Connecticut Farms, and his elder, Timothy \nWhitehead, Nutman, (without charge,) Leonard, of Goshen, \nand Azariah Horton, the missionary to the Long Island In- \ndians. Of Donegal Presbytery, there were Thomson, Boyd, \nZanehy, Gavin, Black, Samuel Thomson, and Alexander \nMcDowell, newly ordained as an evangelist. With them were \nthe elders, \xe2\x80\x94 John Hally, Andrew Gray, Thomas Hope, Walter \nCaruth, George Davison, James McTire. Of Newcastle Pres- \nbytery, there were only two present, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : Cathcart and \nAlison, with the elders, William Lindsay and Samuel Steel. \nFrom Lewes, only Jamison ; and the presbytery, being reduced \nto two by the death of Hook, was merged in Newcastle. Of \nPhiladelphia Presbytery, there were Andrews and his elder, \nWilliam Gray, R. Cross and his elder, John Cross, David \nEvans, Elmer and his elder, Jonathan Fithian, Cowell, \nMcHenry and his elder, Samuel Hart, Samuel Evans, newly \nordained pastor of Great Valley, and his elder, David Griffith, \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 193 \n\nand Guild, newly ordained at Hopewell, and his elder, Thomas \nStidmore. \n\nDickinson was chosen moderator, and Alison clerk. An- \ndrews preached from 2 Cor. iv. 5. The absence of New York \nPresbytery last year was considered, and the excuses of some \nof the members sustained. \n\nThe next day, Dickinson moved that a conference be held \nwith the Brunswick brethren, to accommodate the difference \nand make op the unhappy breach. It was resolved to hold the \nrence at the usual place of meeting in the afternoon, and \nthat t\'<\xc2\xbbur of the abscutccs at the time of the divison, \xe2\x80\x94 Dick- \ninson, David Evans, Pierson, and Pemberton, \xe2\x80\x94 and four of \n\'rotegters, \xe2\x80\x94 Cross, Thomson, Cathcart, and Alison, \xe2\x80\x94 with \nAndrews, should be a committee to try all methods consistent \nwith gospel truth, to prepare the way for healing the breach. \ninference was BO tar encouraging* that, at the next morn- \n\naion, the synod was resolved into an interloquiiur of \n\nministers and elders, and the ejected brethren bad leave to \nbring with them those they had ordained, and whom the synod \n\nhad not accepted a- members, with their respective elders. A \n\ngr\xc2\xbb al <l<-:i! of time was spent to no purpose, the question being, \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 Who should be judges in the case\':" Tin\' ejected brethren \nwould submit it to the consideration of none but those who \nhad not .-igned tin- protest; and the Protesters answered that \nthey, with those who adhered to them, were the synod, act, d \nh in tin- ejection, and in doing so had only cast out such \n\n. judged had rendered themselves onworthy of member- \nship by openly maintaining and practising things subversive \n\nof their constitution; and that, therefore, they would not be \ncalled to account by absent brethren <>r any judicature on \nearth, though they were willing to give the reasons of their \nconduct t\'t their absent brethren and the public, to consider \nand review it. Alison did not concur in this, hut entered on \nthe minutes his dissent W<- agreed with the Protesters, that \nin infringement of their rights, for any absent members \nto pretend to oal] the body to an account, and to judge of the \ntheir proceedings; vet he firmly believed it to be \n\n\n\nins. (letter hi P\xc2\xabnwylT\xc2\xbbnl I i.-nncnt \n\nVMMd willing to make a retroctiou a^ full n* DOOU !>\'\xe2\x80\xa2 \' \n\n13 \n\n\n\n194 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthe synod\'s duty, to submit them to a review of the next synod. \nThough looking on it as giving up some of their rights, it was \nhis earnest desire, and he insisted that the merits of the synod\'s \naction in the exclusion be fairly tried by the present synod, to \nmanifest the justness of the proceedings. \n\nOn the next day, two hours were again spent in an interlo- \nquitur, and on Monday the New York Presbytery brought in \ntheir protest, in which Elmer joined them. 1. They declare \nthe exclusion without previous trial to be an illegal and un- \nprecedented procedure, contrary to the rules of the gospel, \nand subversive of our excellent constitution. 2. They con- \ndemn the conduct of the Protesters in refusing to have the \nlegality of the exclusion tried by the present synod. 3. They \ndemand that all who were excluded, with their adherents, are \nto be owned as members of synod until excluded by fair and \nimpartial process. 4. They protest against all passages in any \npamphlets lately published in these parts, which seem to reflect \non the work of divine power and grace, carried on in so won- \nderful a manner in many of our congregations, and declare to \nall the world, that we look upon it to be the indispensable \nduty of all our ministers to encourage that glorious work with \ntheir most faithful and diligent endeavours. 5. With equal \nsolemnity, they protested against all divisive and irregular \nmethods and practices, by which the peace and good order of \nour churches have been broken in upon. \n\nThis protest is dated on the preceding Saturday. Three \nelders joined in it: \xe2\x80\x94 the two Whiteheads and Nathaniel \nHazard. The synod took no notice of it, and adjourned, after \nentering Alison\'s concurrence with it in the second article, to \nthe next year. A note enclosed in brackets was appended to \nthe protestation, declaring the first article to be untrue ; for \nthe synod, by a vote, declared they were to be excluded if \nthey refused to give satisfaction for the points complained of; \nand upon this they withdrew. \n\nThis places the matter in its true light. The Protesters \ndemanded of the synod that the Brunswick party should be \nexcluded, unless they repented and desisted from their irre- \ngular and divisive methods. The roll being called, it appeared \nthat the majority sustained them in their demand. On this, \nthe Brunswick party withdrew. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 195 \n\nThey were as unprepared to comply with the demand in \n1742 as in the preceding year, and determined to persevere ; \nfor they had never intermitted them in the methods con- \ndemned so strongly by the .New York brethren and the Pro- \ntesters. The labour of Dickinson and his estimable associates \nteems to have been spent solely in endeavouring to bring the \nProtesters to repentance, all that had been done on the other \nside, being passed over in a closing clause of their paper. \nContinued union would have been as absurd and mischievous \nas before the protest. There was no movement on the part \nof the conjunct presbyteries, to allay the uneasiness their pro- \nceedings had produced, or to soften the vindictive asperity of \ntheir language or their action towards the Old Side and their \nadherents. The separation in Philadelphia was completed, \nami Samuel Finley preached six months to the new congrega- \ntion, and Gilbert Tennent was installed by his presbytery over \nit. The new erections were supplied as frequently as possible; \npastors were given to them, ami evangelists ordained to minis- \nter to them ami to go on distant missions. \n\nTennent\'s letter to Dickinson was published in August, \nand was followed by David Evans\'s remarks, showing how \nboth it and the " Declaration of the Boston Ministers in Rela- \ntion t<\xc2\xbb Davenport" justified the "Trotest" and "our watchful \nQuerists." Tennent hastened to send forth an explanation of \nit, which was really a retraction of it. The third edition of \n0m " Nottingham Sermon" appeared. If Davenport had \npreached or published it, it would have been denounced by \n41 all that fear God" as fanatical and insane, lie would have \nbeen compelled, before being restored to standing in the \nchurch, to have retracted explicitly almost every sentiment it \ncontained. For all that Davenport did in his frenzy, with \n"the Long fever and the unceasing How of the oankery \nhumour," was mild when compared with the denunciations \nwhich Tennent ottered, and published ami republished in all \nsoberness ami cold blood. No retraction was demanded of \nTennent. lie denied Bolemnly thai lie had ever urged people \n\nto Keparate from their pastors if they deemed them unworthy; \n\nyet. in his printed letter to Franklin in September, L742/ he \n\n* Quoted \xc2\xbb>y Dr. Hodge. \n\n\n\n196 Webster\'s history of the \n\nsaid, " I see not how any who fear God can sit contentedly \nunder their ministrations" (whom he supposed to have con- \nspired in opposing the work and servants of God) "without \nbecoming accessory to their crimson guilt." The "Exa- \nminer; or, Gilbert versus Tennent," was too thorough an ex- \nposure, in his own words, of his inconsistencies and con- \ntradictions, for him to pass over. In his " Examiner Exa- \nmined" he retracted nothing, but renewed some of his most \ncruel, unsupported, and sweeping charges. He had said, in \nthe " Sermon on an Unconverted Ministry," " Let those who \nlive under the ministry of dead men, whether they have the \nform of religion or not, repair to the living." To assert that \nthis was a call to set up separate meetings on the supposition \nthe ministers were unconverted, or even contentedly unsuc- \ncessful in their work, he pronounced a dreadful instance of \neftronted impiety, and that all the world knew it to be a \ngroundless and crimson calumuy imputed to him by the \nenemies of the power of religion. The " outgate" from the \ndilemma was, he was charged with encouraging separation \nfrom ministers merely because unconverted; while he had \nonly done so where the ministers were opposers of the work \nof God. "It is the necessity of their wretched cause that \nurges those unhappy men to take such sinful and scandalous \nmethods to cloak their horrible wickedness in opposing God\'s \n\nwork Is not this the reason why a work of conviction \n\nand conversion has been so rarely heard of in the churches till \nof late ? \xe2\x80\x94 that the bulk of her spiritual guides are stone-blind \nand stone-dead ? . . . . Consider that there is no probability of \nyour getting good by the ministry of Pharisees ; for, take them \nfirst and last, they do more harm than good. When the life of \npiety comes near their quarters, they rise up in arms against it \nas a common enemy that discovers and condemns their craft \nand hypocrisy. And with what art, rhetoric, and appearances of \npiety, will they varnish their opposition of Christ\'s kingdom!" \nIf unconverted, of course they would oppose the work of \nGod, and, consequently, were to be forsaken. That the "Ser- \nmon" had a reference to his brethren, he openly admitted in \n1743. " When I composed it, I expected it would be judged \nby that tribe it detected, as guilty of scandalum magnatum, as \nworthy of stripes and of bonds. I supposed it would be like \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 197 \n\nrousing a wasp\'s nest; and I have found it according to my \nexpectations." At that time, also, he said, "Give me leave \nalso to propose this query to Mr. Thomson and his associates: \xe2\x80\x94 \n"Whether it was because such as were convinced of sin had \ngenerally a less esteem for his ministry and theirs, that he, \nand some at least of them, have so fiercely opposed the \nblessed operations of the Holy Ghost in convincing and \nalarming a secure world? For my own part, I must say, I \nhumbly conceive that to be the secret of the story of their \nopposition, the bottom of the mystery, the true spring of their \nmalignant contending against vital godliness. The false and \nungenerous method, as well as long continuance of their op- \nposition to the work of God, under so much advantage of \nlight and evidence in favour of it, together with their dan- \ngerous errors, free me from the just imputation of rash \njudging in thinking as I have expressed." They opposed \nQod\'fl work by their " false and dangerous Moravian doctrine \nof conviction. Witness Mr. Thomson\'s detestable and incon j \nBistonl performance oa that subject, which divers leaders of \nthat schismataca] party have expressed their approbation of) \nHardly any thing can be invented that has a more direct \ntendency to destroy the common operations of God\'s Spirit \nand keep men from Jesus than what Mr. Thomson has ex- \npressed in that performance.\'\' Croswell had not need more \nunbounded language in describing Dickinson\'s "Display of \nGrace,\'\' \n\nTennent affronted the "Old Side" by his contempt no less \nthan by his invectives. The "Protesters" said, ^Through \ntheir rash judging and condemning all who <l<> not join with \nthem, which lias been their constant practice in their itinera- \ntions through our congregations, most of them arc so shat- \ntered, divided, and shaken in their principles, that we have \nneither the comfort or success we had heretofore." Ee re- \nmarked on this : \xe2\x80\x94 " As to their comfort, wc beHeve them ; but \nrespecting their success, we thought it had been the same as \nformerly, for truly this is the first time we ever heard of the \nas of most of them." \n\nHen must have had rare constitutions and aneqnalled \nsensibilities who could regard the author of such attacks on \nthem with calmness, or v. ho could feel confidence in the \n\n\n\n198 Webster\'s history of the \n\nmediation of those who upheld his right to membership with \nthem. \n\nAs an illustration of this mild and forbearing spirit, the \nfollowing letter will serve as an example : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nANDREWS TO PIERSON.* \n\n"Philadelphia, August 3, 1742. \n\n" Rev. and Dear Sir : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"As you desired me, when here last, to give you account \nof things that should happen here from time to time, so, old \nfriendship, conscience of duty, and inclination, prompt me to \ngratify you in that regard. Being now entered into the \nsixty-ninth year of my life, \xe2\x80\x94 and so know it can\'t be long \nbefore, in the course of nature, I shall be called to give up \nmy account, \xe2\x80\x94 and being lately threatened with death by a sur- \nfeit contracted by the excessive heat, (from which indisposi- \ntion I am scarcely recovered,) I thought myself obliged to \nopen my heart and ease my mind a little to you. And, as \nwhat I am about to say will be the entire fruit of brotherly \nlove and Christian friendship, I hope and desire that, though \nmy sentiments may not be agreeable to yours, and may seem \nto bear too hard on some late transactions, yet, considering \nour state of imperfection, in which none is secured from being \nsometimes deceived, I trust your piety and candour will cause \nyou to put the best of constructions upon them. I must, \ntherefore, dear brother, tell you, that, according to. my opinion \nand that of all sober, judicious, unprejudiced persons I speak \nwith about it, the \' Protest\' given in last synod is chargeable \nwith at least three imperfections. I don\'t mean simply as to \nthe matters of complaint contained in it, (those against whom \nit is levelled must, in that respect, answer for themselves ;) \nbut that any thing of that nature should be exhibited at that \ntime seems to me liable to no mean exceptions. In short, \nthen, I take it to have been needless, unseasonable, and \nunkind. \n\n" 1. I take it to have been altogether needless; for I cannot \napprehend any need or necessity can be pretended for it, \nunless it were to tell the world you were not guilty, or had no \n\n* Transcribed from the original, in the hands of Dr. Sprague. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 199 \n\nband in the excluding protestation which you represent as a \ncriminal action. If this were the reason (and I can see no \nother of any consequence,) nothing could be more need- \nless. Everybody knew you were not here when it was done, \nand, therefore, could not possibly have any hand in it. But \nit may be replied, if we hadn\'t done as we did, people might \nthink we agreed to it or connived at it. I answer, your dis- \napprobation might have been declared in synod, and entered \non the minutes, without such a public and noisy procedure, \nwhich would have sufficiently saved your credit, if there was \nany danger of it, \xe2\x80\x94 as I apprehend there was none, for I \nnever heard of any thing suggested that had the least hint \nthat way. \n\n" 2. To me it appears to have been egregiously unseasonable. \nWe were at that time, and some time before, on motions and \nendeavours \xe2\x80\x94 as was, I think, on all hands professed \xe2\x80\x94 about \nways and means of accommodation and healing the doleful \nrent and divisions among us. Now, in my poor judgment, \nthat transaction had a direct tendency to prevent, or at least \nretard. Let it be considered that all men have their wcak- \n- and imperfections; and that an inclination not to be \nundervalued or despised more or less obtains with all men. \nNow, let anybody look impartially into the nature and ten- \ndency of that protestation, and see whether it hath not a \ndirect tendency \xe2\x80\x94 especially considering the public clamorous \ncircumstances of it \xe2\x80\x94 to exasperate the spirits of the former \n\' Protesters,\' and render them abundantly more unfit and \nindisposed for accommodation and passing by grievances than \nthey were before. I desire you will not take it amiss if I tell \nyou that it appeara to me in thai aspect, and not to me only, \nbut to all indifferent persons I hear Bpeak of it. It appears \nt > me a Btumbling-block in the way of peace and concord, \n(though I don\'t believe designed so,) and the mosl material \n\none of that nature which has been thrown in the way all \n\nalong, not so much from the nature of the thing, as the emi- \nnent quality of Borne persons concerned in it. My dear brother, \nLook over it again, and Bay if it don\'t look like a design, \n\n(though I won\'t Buffer myself to imagine it was so,) \xe2\x80\x94 it\' it \n\ndon\'t carry an aspect of an intention to disgrace, vilify, and \nruffle the passions of the i Protesters, 1 and consequently, i"it \n\n\n\n200 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthem out of humour, and indisposed for that glorious and \nnecessary work of coalition which all profess to he aiming at? \nMy dear friend, I shall look upon it as my duty, and hope I \nshall not be wanting in endeavours, to prevent such an evil \neffect; but if the transaction be looked on with an impartial \neye it bears too much of that aspect. I am willing to think \nmyself mistaken, not being willing to harbour any wrong \nnotions of my old, dear, valuable friends. \n\n" 3. As for the third particular, I think myself equally con- \ncerned with my neighbours, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : unkindness. I am at a \nloss to make the matter agree with the friendship that is pro- \nfessed. Did not you know how sorely we have been handled, \nand what loads of affliction we have laboured under, and par- \nticularly myself, your old, sincere, unfeigned friend and bro- \nther, by the enormous doings of these men? Did not you \nknow these things, which we have suffered, to the wounding \nof our souls, disturbance of our peace, and almost to death ? \nSurely you could not be altogether ignorant of it. If so, to do \na thing, as if designed on purpose to throw us in the dirt, and \ngive our enemies, that have sought our ruin and to deprive us \nof all comfort of life, advantage to trample on us and render \nus despicable and useless in the world, \xe2\x80\x94 I say, it looks very \nstrange from friends. I bless God that I do not perceive it \nhath done us any harm as to our particular charge and busi- \nness, which is, to me, a wonderful providence; but if you had \ncome on purpose to weaken our hands, I do not see how a \nmore direct method could have been taken. Suppose we were \nin the wrong in our sentiments, and don\'t agree with you in \nour notions of some men and things : as long as we profess \nsincerity and conscience, and are in other things, I hope, \ntolerably regular, \xe2\x80\x94 and nobody can convict us of hypocrisy \nin our profession, \xe2\x80\x94 one would have expected pity from old \nfriends, and not such a blow under the fifth rib, when there \nwas really no need of it, by opening a door to let in our ene- \nmies to devour us. Truly, my dear brother, it appears asto- \nnishing to me. But I will stop my pen, (perhaps it has run \ntoo far already,) and tell you my thoughts. I don\'t impute \nit to old friends : it was chiefly the transaction of one man, \nwho, in an ostentations, noisy manner \xe2\x80\x94 so my old friends shall \nbe such still ; some say dux fcemina facti; if so, more is the \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 201 \n\npity. I was going for an appendix to compare the former pro- \ntest (wherein I had no hand) with this, and see if I could not \nmake this look as black as that. But I forbear, and pray the \nLord open all our eyes, rectify our mistakes, and keep us from \nbeing biassed by human favour, affection, or example, but \nsincerely follow the things that tend to true Christian peace \nand truth, that so we may give in our account with joy. \n\n" Let there be no diminution of affection or stagnation of \ncorrespondence. \n\n"Let us compassionate each other\'s weaknesses; and, if you \nreckon me, as Gilbert does, an enemy to God\'s work, or call \nme devil, my Christian charity towards my good old friends \nshall, I hope, remain inviolate. Pray, take in good part these \nuncouth lines, because the effort of the sincere affection and to \ndeliver the soul of \n\n"Your old friend and brother, \n\n" J. Andrews. \n\n"You may let this go to next town, tied nan ultra . Having \nheard the Moravians twice, think their doctrine the same as \nWhiteneld\'a when he first came here. Divers dead last week \nof the heat. J \'ray the Lord make QS ready." \n\nTn New England and parts adjacent, while many separated \nfrom the standing order, and became strict Congregatibnalists, \na number invoked councils to relieve them from lukewarm or \ninsufficient pastors, or to countenance them in Banning new \ncongregations. \n\nThe Iii-h Presbyterians there, were not united. The Rev. \nJohn Oaldwell preached in the old church of Londonderry, \nN.I!., on the Trial of the Spirits; and the Rev. David Mcdre- \n\ngoire, of the BOCOnd church in the town, to whom "the \n\nwondrous work now making its triumphant progress through \nour land was agreeable," preached on the same text with widely \ndifferent do. \xe2\x96\xa0trine and inferences. Roth sermons were printed. \nOaldwell, during Davenport\'s Btay in Boston, preached before \nthe Presbytery of Boston, in the (Trench meeting-house, a \nsermon on the false prophets, full of personal allusion \nincidents and instances taken from Wnitefield\'s writings and \nof his friends. Tennent had described the old Pharisees \n\n\n\n202 Webster\'s history of the \n\nas having a fair and strict outside, but being full of pride, \npolicy, malice, ignorance, covetousness, and bigotry to human \ninventions in religious matters; and that those that have \ncovetously and cruelly crept into the ministry in swarms and \ncrowds, were as like those of old, as one crow\'s egg is like \nanother. Caldwell described false teachers as laying aside \nreason, opposing, contradicting, and endeavouring to bring \ninto disgrace the ministry of God\'s appointment; speaking \nloud, like Baal\'s prophets ; presumptuous, throwing defiance at \nSatan, and saying "Why sleepest thou?" and being in some \nor more particulars answerable to the characters given in \n2 Pet. ii. 10, and "turning the grace of God into lascivious- \nness." Such he declared the whole tribe of evangelists and \nitinerants to be. It was, in the highest degree, merciless and \nunjust. Caldwell has left these two sermons; but, besides \nthese, we know nothing of him, and little or nothing of those \nwho acted with him. \n\nThe expression of religious joy by a hearty laugh during \ndivine service, was quite as offensive to some, as the fits into \nwhich Satan cast several in Philadelphia were to Whitefield. \nLay exhorters rose up in abundance in the East; and, though \nTennent condemned the practice of sending them forth as \nperverse and unjustifiable, yet the names of several* are given \nwho, under his auspices, went out to supply the lack of service \nof the plastered hypocrites. \n\nCreaghead published his manifesto or declaration of prin- \nciples, and formed, after the mode of the Society people in \nScotland, praying-societies in many places. A part of his \ncongregation forsook him to receive supplies from Donegal \nPresbytery ; another portion left him to remain with the New- \nSide ; and a third fraction adopted, with him, the distinctive \ntenets of the Cameronians. While in New England, New \nYork, and New Jersey, there were opposers of the revivals, \nopposers of Davenport, and friends of his proceedings, each \nwidely parted from the other; throughout Pennsylvania and \nthe lower provinces there were Old-Side, New-Side, and Cove- \nnanter congregations worshipping in the same log meeting- \n\n* Lawyer Paine, Daniel Rogers, Samuel Thatcher. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 203 \n\nhouse, at different hours or ou different days, and severed from \neach other as if by oceans. \n\n"The trial of the Moravians" continued. Pernberton* wrote \nto Doddridge that the Moravians tried to draw off the affec- \ntions of the people from the soundest and most zealous \npreachers; and the following extracts show that Tennent had \nhis share of "the trial." \n\nWIIlTEFIELBf TO NOBLE, OF NEW YORK. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 Ki\'iNuuitGH, September 2, 1742. \n\n"I have just Leon writing to our dear brother, Gilbert Ten- \nnent. Both your letters came to me at the same time, and, \nhad I not been used to trials of that nature, would have affected \nme much. Dear Mr. Tennent speaks many things that I know \nare too true of the Moravian brethren; but his spirit seems to \nbe too much heated, and I fear too much of his own wild fire \nis mixed up with that sacred lire of zeal which comes from \nGod." \n\n" September 22. \xe2\x80\x94 Take heed that your getting acquainted \n\nwith any new Bet of Christians does not insensibly lead you to \n\ndespise others of your old acquaintance Principles of \n\nthemselves, without the Spirit of God, will not unite any Bet \n\nOf men together." \n\nWIIITEFIELD TO DR. COLMAN, OF BOSTON. \n\n"September 24, 1742. \n\n"There seems to be Buoh a time in Philadelphia as we have \nhad in England. I have wrote to Mr. Tennent. He, in a late \nletter, thinks me too charitable; but my conscience does not \nreproach me for that I go on preaching the cross and the \nr of the Redeemer, and desire to say as little as possible \nabout others, leal I Bhould divert people\'s minds from the sim- \nplicity of the gospel. I have often found thai opposing, in- \nstead of hurting, makes erroneous people more considerable. \nThis made me wish the Boston ministers would qoI Bay bo \nmuch about the exhorters, It will only Bet the people the \nmore upon following them. \n\nZinzendorff formed the English Moravian church in Phila- \n\n* Doddridge\'s Correspondence f WbiteBcld\'s Correspondence, 8 Tola. \n\n\n\n204 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\ndelphia, December 31, 1742, and immediately left the city for \nFrankford, on his way to New York, to sail for Englaud. \n\nThat fanaticism was making headway at this time in New \nEngland, the following extract of a letter from the Rector of \nYale to Dickinson, dated March 14, 1743, will testify: \xe2\x80\x94 "I take \nthe liberty to inform you of one pretty remarkable piece of \nnews, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : the Separatists or Antinomians at New London, \nunder the conduct of Messrs. Croswell, Allen, Curtiss, &c, \nhave sent for Mr. Davenport to embody them into a church. \nThe next Sabbath after he came, they made a bonfire in the \nstreet, before Mr. Adams\'s meeting-house, just as the people \nwere corning out, and burnt up your dialogues, sermons, &c, \nMr. Adams\'s sermons, Russel\'s seven sermons, the Whole Duty \nof Man, the Old Testament, and sundry other such erroneous \nbooks. One of them made a prayer and exhortation over the \nbonfire, and told them it was a mercy they had escaped the \nerrors contained in those books; for, if the} 7 had not, they \nwould have been in the flames, as those books were. Mr. D.* \nalso commanded Mr. Allen and Mr. Curtiss to pull off their \ngowns, and others their banyans, wiggs, short cloaks, &c. ; \nthey accordingly pulled them oft" and laid them in a heap. But \nsome said they had a revelation not to burn them; so, after \nsome dispute, it was deferred." \n\nThe synod met in 1743, the Brunswick party being also in \ntown. Dickinson, Pemberton, Pierson, Burr, and Nutman, \nof New York Presbytery, were present without elders. From \nNewcastle Presbytery, now embracing Lewes, there were Cath- \ncart, Alison, and Jamison ; Martin, and Thomas Evans being \ndead, Glasgow having embraced Episcopacy, and Carlisle \nceasing to be mentioned. From Donegal Presbytery, there \nw r ere Thomson, Boyd, Black, Elder, Zauchy, McDowell, and \nthe newly-ordained ministers, Bell and Hyndman. There \nwere also eight elders. From Philadelphia Presbytery, there \nwere Andrews and his elder, "William Gray; Robert Cross; \nElmer and his elder, John Ogden; Cowell; McHenry and \n\n\n\n* Transcribed from E. Hazard\'s MSS. Brainerd wrote to Bellamy, March 26, \n1743: \xe2\x80\x94 "Mr. Davenport\'s conduct makes a terrible noise at New York and the \nJerseys ; where, \'tis affirmed, he has burnt the Old Testament among other books." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 205 \n\nhis elder, Samuel Hart; and S. Evans and his elder, David \nGriffith. \n\nDickinson preached from 1 Cor. i. 10. Cowell was chosen \nmoderator, and Alison clerk. Thomas Cookson, Esq., one of \nhis Majesty\'s justices for Lancaster county, appeared, in the \nname of the governor, with a paper and an affidavit about it. \nAll business was laid aside to hear the paper, and they unani- \nrnously declared their detestation of it, and that they knew \nnot who was the author; and that Mr. Alexander Creaghead, \nto whom it was ascribed, "hath been no member of our society \nfor some time past, nor do we acknowledge him as such." \n\nDickinson, Pemberton, Alison, and Cowell drew up an ad- \ndress to the governor, which the synod approved, and ap- \npointed Andrews, Cross, Cathcart, and the moderator to \nlit it, with a copy of the minute.* \n\nThe meeting on Monday morning was adjourned till the \nafternoon of that day, that some proposals of peace and agree- \nment might be prepared and sent to the Brunswick party. \nThese proposals were sent in an extra-judicial way by Burr, \nand were in substance: \xe2\x80\x94 1. That they recant the principles of \ntheir Apology, and engage to submit to agreements ami COB* \nclnsione adopted by the majority of the synod. -2. That they \nlicense only those who submit to the synod\'s rule or an e\xc2\xbb|iiiva- \nl<-iit. and give Dp those licensed or ordained without such sub- \nmission, to be examined by the synod, and promise to hold no \nministerial communion with those of them who refuse submis- \nsion, or who being examined arc found deficient. \'\xe2\x96\xa0). That \nthey will neither intrude or send missionaries within fixed \nral charges, nor encourage separation, nor supply with \npreaching the societies that have separated, but will declare \nall such practices pernicious and anti-presbyterian* -1. That, \nuntil censured on proper judicial process, they will in no way \ndiminish any minister\'s character, nor claim she right to judge \nof men\'s spiritual states towards Gtod, If sound in faith and of \na good lite. ",. That they renounce the tenets of the Notting- \nham Sermon, such as the allowance to church members to \nguess at their pastor\'s spiritual state, and on thk guess without \n\nfurther trial to leave him as graceless. fj. That they aekm.w- \n\n\' Print..-,] in Dni.Jf.r.l- W< kh Mercury. \n\n\n\n206 Webster\'s history of the \n\nledge their guiltiness in these things, and that, though they \nmay have been influenced in doing them by zeal to promote a \nwork of grace, they are convinced these practices have had a \ndreadful tendency to promote divisions and disturb the church. \n7. That, whether they accept of these terms or not, they are \nwelcome to table charges in the proper judicature against any \nof us, and that r if they accept these terms or any other that \nthey and we can devise, all other grounds of complaint shall \nbe removed by public trial, or by such method as they or we \nshall determine. These proposals, except the first and second, \nare evidently identical with the acknowledgments made by \nTennent in his letter to Dickinson. They took him at his \nword, and offered reconciliation on the terms of his own choos- \ning. On meeting in the afternoon, the Brunswick party sent \nfor answer, that they judge that there can be no regular method \nof reconciliation until the illegal protest be withdrawn ; that \nthey and we may be both upon an equal footing in the regular \ntrial of the difference. They alleged that there were misre- \npresentations and unreasonable demands, and that they had \nseveral charges in which they must have satisfaction before \nthey could come into stated union with them. \n\nThe New York Presbytery had prepared and sent proposals \nof a different character. They asked: \xe2\x80\x94 1. That the protest be \nwithdrawn, and that the excluded members peaceably take \ntheir seats as formerly. The synod replied, that the protest \nwas sufficiently justified by the reasons contained in it; and \nthat the only sensible expedient for reunion was for the ex- \ncluded to give under their hands a statement how far they \nwould comply with the demands of it, by acknowledging their \nmisconduct and by giving satisfactory security against the \nfears of its being repeated. 2. They proposed that all who in \nfuture are privately educated for the ministry shall submit to \nthe synod\'s rule or else go to a New England college for a \nyear: their expenses there, if need be, to be defrayed out of \nthe synod\'s fund. The synod replied, that if the excluded \nrefused to give satisfaction for the past, it was unlikely any \nequivalent to the rule would be of service; and that the best \nmethod would be for them to state what satisfaction they are \nwilling to give on this head. That no one shall close his \npulpit against any brother, and no one encourage separation \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 207 \n\nor alienation from pastors. They replied, where love and \nesteem actually subsist, there is no need for such a right to \nbe pleaded by the itinerant; and where jealousy and distrust \nexist, such a rule would undoubtedly increase them. That no \nminister ought to he allowed to itinerate unless by order of his \npresbytery, and by concurrence of the body into whose bounds \nhe goes. That the separations were already made, and that \nthose concerned in them ought to be required to return to \ntheir pastors, or be dealt with as disorderly. 4. That if any \none has or thinks he has ground for any complaint against a \nbrother, he shall privately seek to have it removed ; and that \non failing, he may cite him to appear before his presbytery or \nthe synod or its commission. They replied, this was the rule \nalready, and that the natural method was the best, to bring \nevery ease before the next highest judicature. 5. That all \ntreat one another as if do difference had ever existed. They \nreplied, this was impossible until repentance were shown and \nsecurity given ; and was unscriptural, for we are required to \nrebuke them that sin, and avoid the author of division. 0. \nThey urged, that at this Bession some plan of accommodation \nshould be adopted, but that it\' none could be agreed on, then \ntiny asked the Bynod to give leave to as many of their mem- \nbers as pleased to erect a new synod, to be in communion \nwith them, and yearly, by the interchange of two correspond- \nents, to consuH the general interest of religion in these parts. \nThey refused on the ground thai this would be authorize and \nperpetuate schism, and would be a continual temptation to \neach party to build op itself against the other; but thai if the \n\nnod should be erected, though they could not hut regard \n\nii ai a contentious separation, yel they would endeavour to cul- \na truly ( Ihristian and charitable disposition toward.- them, \nbo far as they could; for they added, they had reason to acknow- \nledge thai the remains of corruption and uncharitablenese did \nto,, much and too often prevail over them. \n\nThese proposals were unanimously rejected by the Bynod. \n\n<>n this, Dickinson, in behalf of bis co-presbyters, declared \nthat they complained of no unfriendly or unbrotherly treatment \nfrom the bj aod to themselves, but that, as long as the Brunswick \nbrethren were excluded, they could qoI Bee their way clear to \nbit and act as though we were the Synod of Philadelphia. \n\n\n\n208 Webster\'s history of the \n\nAn answer to this paper was read ; but it was unanimously- \nagreed not to enter it on the record. \n\nThe New York brethren had happily escaped the divisions \nthat rent and tore the congregations in "West Jersey and Penn- \nsylvania ; they had seen much of the contending in New Eng- \nland, and sympathized with the moderate party which bore \nthe cross-fire of the opposers of the revival and the favour- \ners of extravagances. They had no occasion to burden them- \nselves with Saul\'s massive armour, and could not understand \nwhy the Protesters and their associates refused to harness them- \nselves in coats of mail which would render them helpless \nbefore the giants that were in those days. They approached \nthe shield on the golden side, while the others saw no sign of \nany thing better than brass. They were at their ease, and could \nnot have compassion on those whose flocks were scattered, and \nwho met with reverence more rarely than with reviling. The \nNew York terms of accommodation would have been rejected \nby their best friends in New England. Dr. Colman was not \nsatisfied with Davenport\'s ample retraction, .till he added to it \nan explicit condemnation of intrusions. In July, 1743, a tes- \ntimony in behalf of the revival, signed by many ministers in \nNew England, contained this proviso: \xe2\x80\x94 That ministers do not \ninvade the province of others, and in ordinary cases preach in \nanother\'s parish without his knowledge and against his con- \nsent, nor encourage new and indiscreet young candidates to \nrush into particular places. Colman* and fourteen others \nconcurred in the testimony, with the exception of the article \nof itinerancy, or ministers and others intruding into parishes \nwithout the consent of the pastors; "which great disorder we \napprehend not sufficiently testified against." The New York \nterms proposed to sanction this itinerancy on the largest scale. \nThe frankness on both sides is pleasing. The Protesters made \ntheir demands full and clear; each party understood how much \nwas asked, and how much was yielded. \n\nIn 1742, several of the back-inhabitants of Virginia suppli- \ncated the commission to ask the Scottish kirk to send them a \nprobationer or a minister. The letter was written, but was \nnot answered. McDowell, from Virginia, had been ordained as \n\n* Tracy\'s Great Awakening. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 209 \n\nan evangelist, and sent to them ; and Hyndman was on this \nsupplication ordained and sunt to them. \n\nIn 1743, the synod laid before the General Assembly in \nEdinburgh the low and melancholy condition of the church for \nwant of probationers to supply numerous vacancies, and for \nwant of suitable encouragement of ministers in new settle- \nments; and asked them to send probationers and ministers, \nand allow them some small support for a few years in new \n-. and also to aid in establishing a school. Alison and \nMcDowell wrote to some gentlemen in Virginia, begging their \ninterest to further the application* \n\nThe Brunswick party had not been idle; they ordained \nRobinson and Campbell in 1742, and the next year, Finley, \nMcKnight, Youngs, and Beatty. They also licensed Dean, \nand sent Treat to preach at Milford, in Connecticut, and heal \nseparation there. Robinson went through the Valley of \nVirginia into North Carolina. an<l BpenJ two years in the new \nsettlements there and beyond the Susquehanna. \n\n1 tovenport, having denounced the Boston ministers, was pre- \nBented to the grand jury and by them declared to be insane, \nlb- offered himself in October, 1743, as a member of New \nBrunswick Presbytery; the people of Hopewell, New Jersey, \npetitioning that lie might supply them with a view to settle- \nment The presbytery examined him, and, finding him bum- \nbled ami contrite for some of the things in which they thought \nhim faulty, hut not in all, they could not allow a call to be \n| ated to him, but suffered the people to "improve" him \n\nfor the next six months. \n\nEarly in February, 1743-4, Gillespie" 1 waited upon N<- - \noastte Presbytery, "convened :>t the New London trait, and \n\nthen and there, in tin- presence of the Bald presbytery and of \n\na very numerous congregation, confessed bis error and sin in \n\nleaving them, ami solemnly declared be was Barry In- hail ever \n\njoined with the new part v ; that he had a- ted ra.-ddy ami divi- \n\nsively, ami was led to it b\\ tie\' appearance of piety in some, \nand by not duly considering and comparing the protestation and \nthe apology of the New Brunswick Presbytery. He though! \nthai tin- things laid to the charge of -aid presbytery, and \n\n11 \n\n\n\n210 Webster\'s history op the \n\nas a ground of casting them ont, had not been tabled against \nthem, nor they called to an account and tried before their \nexclusion. Whereas, upon a fair\' and impartial review of the \naffair, he found there was a sufficient ground to cast them out \nin 1739, when they gave in their apology, because in it they \nargued for the subversion of the Presbyterian plan of govern- \nment, and paved the way for all the anarchy and confusion \nthat has followed since. The letter that he published to the \nPresbytery of New York, went upon a false foundation, as if \nthe apology had not been tried ; and that, by their adhering to \nit and endeavouring to vindicate it, they deserved exclusion. \nHe was received as a member with mutual joy and satis- \nfaction." \n\nIn 1744, none of New York Presbytery were present in \nsynod, and they sent no further proposals. Pomeroy sent his \nexcuse for absence, he being near his end. Gillespie appeared \nfor the first time since the rupture. Hutcheson wrote to the \nsynod expressing his views of the proceedings on both sides, \nand giving his advice. They sent a respectful reply to him by \nAlison. Jamison and Stevenson had been removed by death, \nGriffith and Steel had been ordained, Scougal received from \nScotland, and Bell suspended. Newcastle Presbytery now \nhad seven ministers, all present; there were five from Donegal \nand six from Philadelphia : there were fifteen elders. McHenry \nwas chosen moderator. Many people of North Carolina re- \nquested the synod to take their desolate condition into consi- \nderation, and send one of their number to correspond with \nthem. John Thomson, who was about settling in Virginia, \nwas appointed, and travelled thither to preach to them and \nlearn fully their condition. They also wrote to "Wales, that a \nprobationer, speaking the language of the Principality, might \nbe sent over. \n\nThe brethren having agreed privately to establish a school, \nthe synod took it under their care, and resolved to keep it \nopen through the year, that all who please may have their \nchildren instructed gratis in the languages, philosophy, and \ndivinity. It was to be supported by yearly congregational col- \nlections. Alison was chosen master, with a salary of twenty \npounds, with leave to choose an usher, to whom they promised \nfifteen pounds. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 211 \n\nThe Bev. Mr. Dorsius, or Dorsey, of the Reformed Dutch \nchurch in Bucks county, from the deputies of Xorth and South \nHolland, desiring of the synod an account of the state of the \nHigh and Low Dutch churches in the province, and of the \nsynod\'s churches, and whether they can be united in one \nsynod, or whether the Dutch can be formed into a synod by \nthemselves, \xe2\x80\x94 the synod wrote to the deputies of those synods \nand to the Scotch ministers in Rotterdam, giving the account \nand signifying their willingness to join with the Calvinist \nDutch churches. They represented also the great want both \npf High and Low Dutch ministers, and desired them to help \nin educating men for the ministry. \n\nThe Brunswick party sent Blair to the synod, demanding \nthat a portion of the fund be allowed them. They replied, \nthat they saw in this no endeavour for peace or for healing \nthe lamentable divisions; and that as they have by their con- \nduct forfeited all right to membership, their demand is highly \nunreasonable and unjust, and not to be complied with. \n\nDickinson, Pierson, and Xntman, with Gillespie, were put \non the commission. \n\n( \xc2\xbbn the 8th of July, 1744, Davenport made a free, complete \nretraction of all his errors: \xe2\x80\x94 "I had the long fever and the \ncftnkery humor raging at once; my spirit was devoid of in- \nw\\ki> peace, laying too much stress on externals, neglect- \ning the heart, being full of impatience, pride, and arrogance." \nM His manner was bo changed; it was with such a mild, plea- \nsant, meek and bumble spirit, broken and contrite, as I scarce \nav exceeded or equalled. He asked pardon of those he \nhad treated amiss, and in a large assembly made a public \nrecantation of bis mistakes and offences:" \n\nIn August, 17 1 1. Whitriieid arrived in New Bngland, and \nremained there till the spring. ( ra one occasion, while preach- \ning al Webb\'s meeting-house to Boston, there was an outcry \nand greal confusion. In-. Ootman* wn.tr at once to him, not \nt.. encourage such things and mafee a parry for Btfoorhead, the \nyterian minister. Whitefield disclaimed any such idea-; \nand Column r< ] di<<l, wishing \'\'such things might be confined \nUs, where I alwfyi esteemed them bui the signs of the \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 1180. of MaawchuBctu EDltortfltJ B \n\n\n\n212 Webster\'s history of the \n\nweakness and infirmity of minister and people." A body of \npeople separated at Kewburyport, and subsequently became a \nPresbyterian church. When Whitefield preached in their \nnew meeting-house, such was his kindness* on the head \nof separations, that he declared to the congregation before \npreaching, that he would not have appeared there, but be- \ncause of the snow, and the other places of worship being \nrefused him. He also declared at that time against unscrip- \ntural separations. \n\nIn June, 1745, the General Association of Connecticut}* \ndeclared, that Whitefield having been the promoter or faulty \noccasion of the prevailing disorders, it would be by no means \nadvisable for any of our ministers to open their pulpits to him, \nduring his progress through this government, or for any of \nour people to attend his administrations. \n\nThe synod in 1745 was attended by Dickinson, Pierson, and \nPemberton, with his elder, Xathaniel Hazard; all of Philadel- \nphia Presbytery but Guild ; all of Newcastle Presbytery, and \nonly three \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : Thomson, Boyd, and Zanchy \xe2\x80\x94 from Donegal. \nThere were thirteen elders. Cathcart was chosen moderator; \nDickinson, Pierson, and Pemberton were put at the head of \nthe commission. \n\nAt the request of the Xew York brethren, a committee was \nappointed to confer with them and accommodate the difference \nbetween them. The committee did not succeed, and the synod \nspent much time in committee of the whole, and appointed \nThomson, Alison, Griffith, Steel, and McDowell, to prepare and \nbring in a plan of union. As a preliminary, the Xew York \nbrethren declared that they accounted only such of the Bruns- \nwick party as had been members of the synod, to be members \nnow. \n\nThe plan was prefaced by a narrative of the differences ; \nand, premising that the New York brethren proposed that \nall the members of the synod should subscribe the essential \nagreements on which the synod was established, they concur, \nand declare those agreements to be : \xe2\x80\x94 1. In all prudential \nacts, every member shall either actively concur or peaceably \n\n\n\n* Noticed in all the papers of the day. \nf Trumbull\'s History of Connecticut. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCII IX AMERICA. 213 \n\nsubmit to, and not counteract the determinations of tlie ma- \njority ; or else withdraw if he have not freedom of con- \nscience to comply. 2. Only the rules of the gospel and our \nknown methods shall be used, when any one sees faultiness \nin his brother\'s life or doctrine. 3. Xo minister shall preach \nin another\'s charge, unless invited by him or appointed by \nthe proper authority; and new erections in any regulated \ncongregations shall neither be maintained or supported by \nany of our members. 4. None shall be admitted, without \nsubmitting to examination and subscribing these agree- \nments. 5. That each member keep a day of fasting, to \nmourn the decline of religion and implore the blessing \nof God. \n\nThe New York brethren immediately declared they would \nnot be united with them on this plan, and desired a copy \nOf it for their ] presbytery. They proposed that they be \nallowed to form, with the consent of the synod, a new \nsynod; that there may be a foundation for both bodies to \na<t in mutual concert, and maintain love and brotherly \nkindness. The synod replied, that they saw no just ground \n\nfor their withdrawal; yet, seeing they proposed to ered a \nnew synod in the most rriendly manner possible, we Bhall \nendeavour to maintain Christian affection towards them and \n\nshow it on all suitable occasions by correspondence and \nfellow-hip. \n\nMiiiut.-n.-~-; was necessary in Ihe detail of the measures \nwhich separated the New York Presbytery from the Protest- \nera, thai justice might be done to the character\' of the latter, \na- Christian men of g 1 report. They insisted on .me point \n\nonly, to which the New York brethren could not fully GOU* \nBen1 ; tor they eoneiirn-d in regarding those only as ineinhers \n\nof the synod who were so at the protestation. 411 ordained \nsince, a- well as any ordained in disregard of the rule con- \ncerning candidates, were nol to be admitted as members of the \n\nsynod, ev.-n on the withdrawal of the protest, until the ma- \njority of the body eon. ente. 1. The hi n< h-ra nee, was the demand \n\nto amalgamate the old and New Bide congregations, as it\' do \nseparation bad taken place; to unsettle their pastors; and to \ncompel the people to return to the old meeting-houses. The \nthing was impracticable; and, even if the Brunswick party \n\n\n\n214 Webster\'s history of the \n\nhad faithfully used all their endeavours to effect it, their suc- \ncess would have amounted only to filling old hottles with the \nnew fermenting liquor, merely to see them burst and waste \nthe wines. \n\nIt was a kind Providence that frustrated their well-meant \nendeavours for a reunion. Separation placed both parties in \na position to see other\'s excellencies, and made them cordially \ndesirous of drawing together. There was too much corrup- \ntion and contentiousness, and too frequent } T ieldings to it, in \nmost of the Protesters and the excluded, to have rendered \nunion comfortable. Many expedients might have been de- \nvised ; but it is a blessing that cometh of the Lord, " to make \nmen of one mind in a house." The commission met at Bran- \ndywine, Delaware, on the 20th of August, and wrote to Presi- \ndent Clapp and the Trustees of Yale, who, in reply, expressed \ntheir readiness to aid them in sustaining their school, and \ninquired about the plan of it and the state of the synod. \n" Our poor undertaking has been so blessed by Providence \nas to exceed our expectations. Several ministers and gentle- \nmen have helped us to books, to begin a library ; and we hope \nin time to obtain assistance from England, Ireland, and else- \nwhere, to found a college. Our fund for public uses is consi- \nderable ; but we have had no occasion to apply any of it to \nthe school." They proposed to send their scholars to Yale, \nto be examined by the president and fellows, and treated only \naccording to proficiency. \n\nThe particulars are lost to us of the proposals interchanged \nbetween the New York and the Brunswick brethren, before \nthey united in forming a union. Whitefield was in the \ncountry ; but he was not consulted,* although he was at \nNew York very shortly before the new synod met at Eliza- \nbethtown. \n\n" At New York, Whitefield found the seed sown had sprung \nup abundantly, and at the east end of Long Island he saw \nmany instances. Near Freehold, he preached, through an \ninterpreter, to the Indians who had been converted under \nBrain erd, and saw nearly fifty in a school learning the Assem- \n\n\n\n* "His seeming to favour the Moravians causes our ministers to keep aloof \nfrom him." \xe2\x80\x94 Rev. Enos Ayres to Mr. Bellamy, September, 1745. MS. Letter. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 215 \n\nMy\'fl Catechism. William Tenneut seemed to encourage the \nmission with his whole heart." \n\n"His party I found much on the advance," is all that \nWhjtefield says on the matter, so interesting and so important \nin its vast and happy results. \n\nFifty persons on horseback escorted "Whitefield into Phila- \ndelphia, where he found Gilbert Tennent settled ; and the trus- \ntees of the Great House offered him eight hundred pounds if \nhe would preach for them six months iu the year. It appears \nthat he urged Romainc and Dr. Ilaweis* to go and preach, \nin the Great House. He remained seven days in the city, \xe2\x80\x94 \nfr.>m the 13th to the 20th. \n\nThe meeting to constitute the synod was large. Of Xew \nYork Presbytery were present, Dickinson and his elder, \nJoseph Woodruffe ; Pemberton and his elder, Nathaniel Ha- \nzard ; Piersoft; Simon Horton ; Burr and his elder, Joseph \nPrndden : Johnes; Byram, of Mendham, aud his elder, Ben- \njamin Leonard; Sturgeon, of Bedford, and his elder, John \nAyrea : and A. Hortoau \n\nOf New Brunswick Presbytery, Gilbert Tennent and \n\xe2\x96\xa0is elder, Samuel Hazard; Lamb; Treat; William Ten- \nMM and his elder, Robert Gumming\'; MrCrea and his \nelder, John Craig; Robinson; Youngs; Beatty and his \nelder, Richard Walker; MeKnight and his elder, Peter \nPeryen. \n\nOf Newcastle Presbytery, Samuel Blair and his elder, John \n: 8. l-\'inl\'-v; C. Tennent; John Blair and his elder, \n\nAlexander Moody. \n\nThey considered and adopted the following plan and foun- \ndation of their synodieaJ anion: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n-\xe2\x80\xa2 1. They agree thai the Westminster Confession of Faith, \nwith the Larger and Shorter Oaieehisms, he the public con- \nfession of their faith in each manner as pas agreed unto \nhv the Synod of Philadelphia* in the year 17^\'.\xc2\xbb, and bo \nbe inserted in the latter end of this book. And they declare \ntheir approbation of the Directory of the Assembly of \nDivines al Westminster, as the general plan of worship \nand discipline* \n\n* I..; of t li \xc2\xab\xe2\x80\xa2 Count.--- of Bunttagdon. \n\n\n\n216 Webster\'s history of the \n\n"2. They agree that, in matters of discipline, and those \nthings that relate to the peace and good order of onr churches, \nthe}- shall be determined according to the major vote of minis- \nters and elders, with which vote every member shall actively \nconcur or pacifically acquiesce ; but if any member cannot in \nconscience agree to the determination of the majority, but \nsupposes himself obliged to act contrary thereunto, and the \nsynod think themselves obliged to insist upon it as essen- \ntially necessary to the well-being of our churches, in that \ncase such dissenting member promises peaceably to with- \ndraw from the body, without endeavouring to raise any dis- \npute or contention upon the debated point, or any unjust \nalienation of affection from them. \n\n" 3. If any member of their body supposes that he hath \nany thing to object against any of his brethren with respect \nto error in doctrine, immorality in life, or negligence in his \nministry, he shall not on any account propagate the scandal \nuntil the person objected against is dealt with according to \nthe rules of the gospel and the known methods of their \ndiscipline. \n\n" 4. They agree that all who have a competent degree of \nministerial knowledge, are orthodox in their doctrine, regular \nin their lives, and diligent in their endeavours to promote \nthe important designs of vital godliness, and that will submit \nto their discipline, shall be cheerfully admitted into their com- \nmunion. \n\n"And they do also agree that, in order to avoid all divisive \nmethods among their ministers and congregations, and to \nstrengthen the discipline of Christ in the churches in these \nparts, they will maintain a correspondence with the Synod \nof Philadelphia in this their first meeting, by appointing two \nof their members to meet with the said Synod of Philadelphia \nat their next convention, and to concert with them such mea- \nsures as may best promote the precious interests of Christ\'s \nkingdom in these parts. \n\n" And that they may in no respect encourage any factious \nseparating practices or principles, they agree that they will \nnot intermeddle with judicially hearing the complaints, or \nwith supplying with ministers and candidates such parties \nof men, as shall separate from any Presbyterian or Cougrega- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 217 \n\ntional churches that are not within their bounds, unless the \nmatters of controversy be submitted to their jurisdiction or \nadvice by both parties." \n\nCompared with the proposals offered by the Protesters, \nthese articles look almost as if drawn by the latter. The \nfourth article is so contrary to all that had been taught about \ngraceless and unconverted preachers, that it might have been \nbrought in by Thomson and Robert Cross and accepted by \nany one of the Old Side. \n\n\n\n218 Webster\'s history of the \n\n\n\nCHAPTER VHI. \n\nActing by themselves, and engaged in constituting a synod \nfor themselves, the New Side yielded much to the New York \nbrethren, without imagining they were yielding any thing.* \nDemanded as articles of submission by Philadelphia Synod, \nmost of the terms of the Plan would have been rejected super- \nciliously. \n\nDickinson was chosen moderator, and Pemberton clerk, \nand they two were appointed a committee to meet with the \nPhiladelphia Synod and propose terms of agreement and cor- \nrespondence. An interloquitur was held, probably to agree \non the terms to be offered by them; and a commission was \nappointed, embracing four members of the New York Presby- \ntery, and two from each of the other presbyteries. \n\nPhiladelphia Synod met May 29, 1746, with twelve minis- \nters and eleven elders. No new members had been added, \nand Bertram and Scougal had died. The smallpox being in \nPhiladelphia, the committee of New York Synod did not at- \ntend ; but Dickinson wrote, desiring correspondence, each body \nto send yearly to the other two of their members, and pro- \nposing a triennial meeting, by delegates,\' in some convenient \nplace, " to order public affairs for the glory of God, and the \ngood of the church." They replied: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\n\n* Samuel Finley to Bellamy, Elizabethtown, September 20, 1745. "I can truly \nsympathize with you in your grievances as to the declension of religion and to \nthose horrendous principles you mention; they are antinomian and enthusiastic. \n.... We have some that treat us in the same way as your Eastern Exhorters, and \nequally pervert the Scriptures, ignorantly taking some scriptural expressions in \ntheir full extent, and will not observe the limitations made by other Scriptures. \nBut I\'m so hurried I cannot write the fourth part of what I would. We are joined \nin a synod with New York Presbytery. Religion is not lively with us ; yet some- \ntimes a sinner is brought home and saints refreshed." \n\n\n\npresbyterian church is america. 219 \n\n"Reverend and Dear Brother: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" We had yours laid before us by Mr. Andrews, and trust we \ncan heartily join in all proper methods to promote the glory \nof God, the interest of Christ\'s kingdom, and welfare of the \nchurches in these parts; and shall readily join with you in \nremembering each other at the throne of grace, and praying \nI*-!- each other\'s gospel endeavours to advance religion. We \nare also pleased, that attempts are making by you, to prevent \ndivisive methods, We would desire, you might communicate to \nus the plan on which you have erected yourselves, what general \nments you have brought the members under on their ad- \nmi\xe2\x80\x94 ion, and who are members with you. When we are better \nacquainted with these things, we can the more readily judge \nhow we shall be able to answer your desires. We can assure \nyou of our regard and friendship, and of our prayers for the \ndivine blessing on your person and ministerial labours." \n\nin their letter to the Rector and tin- Trustees of Yale, they \n\nThe New York Synod\'s proposals seem fair; but, till the \n\ndividers of our churches (and they chiefly make up that body) \n\ndeclare againsl the late divisive, uncharitable practices, and show \n\nus in what way fchej intend to have their youth educated for \ntin- ministry, we shall be shy to comply with their proposals." \n\nThe omission of Bending the plan and the list of members \nof the Dew synod was a fatal one. Had Dickinson met with \nthem, it Wpould bare been supplied, and the way prepared for a \nreconciliation and for friendly intercourse as two contiguous \nand distend judicatories. \n\nnexl meeting of New York Synod was in the spring, \nand was very small. The members were prevented from at- \ntending by the apprehension of smallpox and other difficulties. \nDickinson preached from Psalm aoriv.4; and Pemberton was \n\nchosen moderator. The reply Of the Synod of Philadelphia \n\nwas read; but no notice appears to have been taken of it at \nthis time, or at the meeting in May. 17 IT, or in 17 \\*. During \nthis time, Robinson, Dickinson, Brainerd, and Tinker died; \nand there were ordained Roan, Beckett, Bostwiok, Grants \nSnnter, Dean, Green, Lawrence, 1 levies, Arthur, Sterling, Bay, \nand Prudden. Davenport, Symmes, and Lewis had been re- \nceived from Long bland Or New England. \n\n\n\n220 Webster\'s history of the \n\nNothing was done on the subject of union or correspond- \nence with the New York Synod by the Old Synod in 1747 or \n1748. The meeting in 1747 was small, \xe2\x80\x94 twelve ministers and \ntwelve elders.* Andrews had been removed by death, and \nfour ministers had been ordained: \xe2\x80\x94 Thorn, Dick, Hamilton, and \nHector Alison. In 1748, there were fourteen ministers pre- \nsent, and twelve elders; Dick had died, and Brown had been \nreceived from Scotland. \n\nDuring this lull in the storm, which so completely becalmed \nthe two ships of Zion that they attempted no intercourse, the \nspirit of Gilbert Tennent stirred within him, and he preached, \nJune 20, 1749, the "Irenicuni; or, a Plea for the Peace of \nJerusalem." \n\nIn May, 1749, the New York Synod met, with twenty-two \nministers and six elders. Twenty-one ministers were absent. \nDean had died and Allen had been received, and Rodgers, \nSmith, John Brainerd, and Richards had been ordained. The \nPresbytery of Suffolk was admitted into the synod, and Mr. \nPrime and Mr. Brown took their seats. \n\nA motion was made for making proposals to the Philadelphia \nSynod for a union : it was considered the next day, and, after \nmuch reasoning, was carried by a great majority. Among \nthe absentees were Samuel and John Blair, William and \nCharles Tennent, Wales, and Sterling. \n\nThe paper was as follows : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" The Synod of New York are deeply sensible of the many \nunhappy consequences that flow from our present divided \nstate, and have with pleasure observed a spirit of moderation \nincreasing between many of the members of both synods. \nThis opens a door of hope, that, if we were united in one body, \nwe might be able to carry on the designs of religion in future \npeace and agreement to our mutual satisfaction; and, though \nwe retain the same sentiments of the work of God which we \nformerly did, yet we esteem mutual forbearance our duty, \nsince we all profess the same Confession of Faith and Direc- \ntory of Worship. We would, therefore, humbly propose to \nour brethren of the Synod of Philadelphia, that all our former \n\n* Gillespie, though recorded as absent, was present on the second day of the \nmeeting. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCn IB AMERICA. 221 \n\ndifferences be boned in perpetual oblivion, and that for the \ntime to come, both synods be united into one, and that hence- \nforth there be no contentions among us; but to cany towards \nMefa other in the most peaceable and brotherly manner, which \nwe are persuaded will be for the honour of our Master, the \ncredit of our profession, and the edification of the churches \ncommitted to our care. Accordingly, we appoint the Rev\xc2\xbb \nMessrs. John IMerson, Gilbert Tennent, Ebenezer Pemberton, \nand Aaron Burr, to be our delegates to wait upon the Synod \nof Philadelphia with these proposals. And if the Synod of \nPhiladelphia see meet to join with us in this design, and will \nplease to appoint a commission to meet for that purpose, we \nappoint the Rev. Messrs. John Pierson, Ebenezer Pemberton, \nAaron Burr, Gilbert and William Tennent, Richard Treat, \nSamuel or John Blair, John Roan, Samuel Finley, Ebenezer \nPrime, David Bostwick, and James Brown, (whom we appoint \n\na Commission Of the synod i\'or the ensuing year,) to meet with \n\ntin\' commission of the Synod of Philadelphia, at Booh time \nand place a- they shall choose, to determine the affair of the \nunion, agreeable to the preliminary articles concluded upon \n\nby this synod ; and it IS agreed that any other of ourim-mlnTs \nwho shall please to meet with the commission shall have \nliberty of voting and acting in snid affair equally with the \nmembers of said commission. Which articles proposed as a \n\n.1 plan of union are as follows, viz.: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 l. To preserve the common peace, we would propose that \nall dames of distinction which have been made use of in the \nlate tames be brevet abolished. \n\nu 2t Thai every member assent unto and adopt the Confes- \nsion of Kaith and Directory, according to the plan formerly \n\nagreed to by tin- Synod of Philadelphia in the years . \n\nThat every member promise, that after any question has \ndetermined by the major vote, he will actively concur or \n; l \xe2\x80\xa2 1 1 1 i t to the judgment of the body; bu1 if hi- con- \nscience permil him to do neither of these, thai then he shall \niliged peaceably to withdraw from our synOdical com- \nmunion, without any attempt to make a Bchism or division \namong as. Yel this is ool intended to extend to anj \nhut those which the synod judges essentia] in matters of doe- \ntrine or discipline. \n\n\n\n222 Webster\'s history of the \n\n"4. That all our respective congregations and vacancies be \nacknowledged as congregations belonging to the synod, but \ncontinue under the care of the same presbytery as now they \nare, until a favourable opportunity presents for an advan- \ntageous alteration. \n\n" 5. That we all agree to esteem and treat it as a censurable \nevil, to accuse any of\' our members of error in doctrine or \nimmorality in conversation, any otherwise than by private \nreproof, till the accusation has been brought before a regular \njudicature and issued according to the known rules of our \ndiscipline." \n\nThe Synod of Philadelphia met the week following: four \nministers present from each presbytery, and ten elders. One \nminister had been ordained. Joseph Tate and Brown had \nreturned to Scotland. At the first sederunt, the proposals for \npeace and union were brought in by the four delegates of New \nYork Synod, and the synod resolved itself into a committee \nand spent the next morning in considering them. \n\nThe delegates agreed to the following concessions and \namendments in the proposals. \n\n1. "We retain the same sentiments of the work of God which \nwe formerly did, [though great and good men have been of \ndifferent opinions.] \n\nIn the third article to strike out "yet this is not intended," \n&c, and to substitute "always reserving a liberty for such \ndissenting members to lay their grievances before the synod \nin a peaceable manner." To add two articles: \xe2\x80\x94 "6. That \nthere be no intrusion into the bounds of presbyteries or pas- \ntoral charges against the inclination of presbyteries or pastors. \n\n"7. That all candidates for the work of the ministry \neither be examined by the synod or its commission previous \nto their admission on trials by any of our presbyteries, or else \nbe obliged to obtain a college-diploma, or a certificate, from the \npresident and trustees of the college, of their having been \nexamined and found qualified." \n\nGilbert Tennent only objected to the synodical examination \nof candidates. \n\nIt was also agreed that the two commissions should ripen \nthings for the next synodical meetings, but not finally deter- \nmine any thing. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 223 \n\nThe synod, at the close of this conference, resolved, as the \ndelegates have given lis some hope of our great ground of \ncomplaint being removed, to leave the matter to a commis- \nsion ; and to lay a copy of the Hew York Synod\'s plan and \nconfession before every presbytery; and that, if possible, every \nmember be consulted; and that the presbyteries offer what \nelse they think necessary for this valuable end, and give it in \ncharge to those of their members who are of the commission, \nto treat with the gentlemen of the New York Synod at Tren- \nton, in October. \n\nJohn Thomson was then labouring in the Valley of Virginia; \nand the moderator, Timothy Griffith, was ordered to write to \nhim on this head. \n\nBy a remarkable coincidence, the records of each of the \nthree presbyteries for that year are lost. \n\nOn the 4th of October, the two commissions met to treat \nupon the overture of union. From the Philadelphia Synod, \nthere were four Protesters, \xe2\x80\x94 Cross, Boyd, C\'atheart, and Alison; \ntwo who had adhered to them at the rupture, \xe2\x80\x94 Cowell and \nMoHenry; and two members ordained since, \xe2\x80\x94 Griffith and \nThorn. From the New York Synod there were present, of \nthose who urn- excluded by the protest, Gilbert and William \nTennent, Treat, and Samuel Blair; three of those who, in \nthose trying times, had as probationers and candidates been \nstrongly Identified with them, \xe2\x80\x94 Samuel Kinky, .lames Blair, \n\nand Eto&n; two who had signed the New York 1 \'n-sl -\\ ten\'s \n\nprbtesl against the exclusions \xe2\x80\x94 Pierson andPembertOn; and \ntwo im-\'.v mesnbers, \xe2\x80\x94 Lewis and Arthur. \n\n<>i" the New York commission, then- ware absent) Bum, \nPrime, Bostwick, and Brown. Cowell was oho8en moderator, \nand Arthur clerk. Leave had been granted by the New Fork \nSynod to their members not In commission to attend and have \nequal liberty of voting with those in commission. A Dumber \navailed themselves of this privilege: their name- are dqI \ngiven. Several who had not been present in forming the \ngeneral plan of union desired s private conference with their \nbrethren, that thoymighl be fully acquainted with eachotherVa \n\nsentiment-, and with the general COncessiODJ or preliminary \n\narticles mad.- by their committee. The eommiBsionem ad- \njourned till the next day. when the New York brethren, waiv- \n\n\n\n224 Webster\'s history or the \n\ning all other matters, immediately insisted that the protest \nshould, by some authentic and formal act of the Philadelphia \nSynod, be declared null and void. It is said to have been \nreported by some of the Old Side that the protest was to be \nconfirmed, and the New York Synod to be received on that \nfooting; and that this was the reason of their mentioning the \nprotest in particular. The debates on this head rose very \nhigh; and, no prospect appearing of coming to any conclusion, \nby reason of some of the New York brethren being unable to \nagree on the explication of their own plan, they unanimously \nagreed that each synod, at its next session, more fully prepare \nproposals for accommodation, and interchange them ; and that \nin the mean time there be a mutual endeavour to cultivate a \nspirit of candour and friendship. \n\nThe principal things to be considered by the synods were, \xe2\x80\x94 \n1. The protest; 2. The paragraph about essentials; 3. Of \npresbyteries. \n\nThe Synod of New York met May 16, 1750. There was a \nlarge attendance. They had lost Lamb by death, had received \nSpencer, and ordained Ayres and Reid. Gilbert and Charles \nTennent were absent, with Samuel Finley and all of the Suf- \nfolk Presbytery. They were not able to proceed to make fur- \nther proposals for union, the minutes of their last meeting and \nthe plan not being in the house. They expressed to the Phila- \ndelphia Synod their regret, and professed their design to enter \nupon that affair the next year. \n\nThe Philadelphia Synod met on the 23d of May, 1750. The \nvenerable John Thomson had come from Virginia to be pre- \nsent at this interesting period. Craig was also there. There \nwere besides, from Donegal Presbytery, Boyd, Elder, Zanchy, \nCaven, and Tate. From Philadelphia Presbytery, there were \nCross, Elmer, Cowell, Guild, and McIIenry. From Newcastle, \nCathcart, Alison, McDowell, Griffith, Steel, Hamilton, and \nHector Alison. There were fourteen elders. Thorn had de- \nceased, and no new member had been added. \n\nOn receiving the minute of the New York Synod in relation \nto the union, they joined them in regretting that a thing so \nmuch desired by them cannotbe prosecuted ; and, hoping to have \ntheir expectations answered by such proposals next year as shall \neffectually promote union, they would heartily join with them in \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 22o \n\nthe mean time in such measures as shall promote candour and \nfriendship. \n\nThe Synod of New York met at Newark in the following \nSeptember, 1750. A large attendance of ministers, but only \nthree elders. Among the absentees were Gilbert and Charles \nTennent, Samuel ajid John Blair, Roan, Eodgers, and Davies. \nTreat, William Tennent, Finley, Green, and Spencer were ap- \npointed to draw up proposals for union, and the synod approved \ntheir draught of a plan. They ordered the clerk to place a \ncopy in the hands of Samuel Hazard,* of Philadelphia, to be \nby him delivered to the Synod of Philadelphia when he shall \nhave received their proposals. \n\nThe Philadelphia Synod met in May, 1751, having lost \nDavid Evans and Samuel Caven by death. The attendance \nmall, \xe2\x80\x94 eleven ministers and ten elders. Being unpre- \npared to send proposals, not having their previous minutes at \nhand, they resolved to meet in the fall, that the Synod of New \nY"ik \'\xe2\x80\xa2 may consider our overtures and take proper measures \nfor concluding B union. We recommend it to them to use all \nendeavours to promote a healing spirit ; and we shall, through \ndivine assistance, endeavour to do the same, that our designs \nmay be brought to a comfortable issue." \n\nTen ministers and four elders assembled in September, \n1761, and. having seriously and maturely considered the aflair \nOf union, agreed to comply with the proposals laid down by \nthe Synod of New York in 1749 " aa closely and as far as we \nean exped to preserve our future peace and union." The dif- \nference \'"turcii the two plans will be seen by exhibiting them \nby Bide. \n\nTiiK plai ot Tin: mrov ornw Tout, m rea> oi m mran si mbla\xc2\xab \n\n0BRO D 1760, mit HUM Tin: i>u.riii\\, FBOFOmD in 1761. \n\nPBOrOfAI in 171\'.\'. \n\nl. That all names of diattootkmi \n\nDM of in luti- times be loivu-r \n\nahnlisne.l. \n\n1 That every meinl.er UNO) unto 2. Tli.it every memler gta !ii-: assent \n\n0t Nathaniel Basard, an elder in New V\xe2\x80\x9erk tr..m 1728 to 1746. \n\nin Philadelphia, mi elder In the Beoond Ohnreh, nad an \n\noriginal an<l a.-tive tru-tce of the College of V \xc2\xab JenOJ. \n\nBe irai the father "f Bheneter n a ad, to irhom ire are m largely Indented (bx \n\nthe preservation of the materials ..f ..ur ohQTOfi 1 \n\nLfl \n\n\n\n226 \n\n\n\nWEBSTER S HISTORY OF THE \n\n\n\nand receive the Westminster Confession \nand Catechisms as the confession of his \nfaith, according to the plan agreed to \nby the Synod of Philadelphia in 1729, \nand agree to the Directory as the gene- \nral plan of worship and discipline. \n\n\n\n2. That all matters shall be deter- \nmined by a majority of votes, to which \ndetermination all shall submit; but if \nany cannot in conscience submit to a \nparticular act or determination of the \nbody, he shall, after sufficient liberty of \nreasoning and modest remonstration, be \nobliged to withdraw from our synodical \ncommunion : provided always that this \nlast article shall not extend to any cases \nbut such as the synod judges essential \nin doctrine, worship, or discipline. \n\n3. That it shall be treated as a cen- \nsurable misconduct for any member to \ncharge any of his brethren with errors \nin doctrine, or immorality, except in a \nway of private reproof or judicial pro- \ncess ; and that none shall be judicially \ncondemned or censured without a fair \ntrial and process, according to the known \nrules of our discipline. \n\n\n\n4. That no candidate shall be taken \non trials by any presbytery without a \ndegree or certificate from the president \nand a sufficient number of tutors and \ntrustees of some college, testifying to \nthe sufficiency of his learning, except in \nextraordinary cases, in which the pres- \nbyteries shall be accountable to the \nsynod. \n\n\n\n5. That it shall be treated as irre- \ngular for any mini ster or candidate to \n\n\n\nto the Westminster Confession and Di- \nrectory, according to the plan agreed \non in our synod. \n\nAnd that no acts be made, but con- \ncerning what appears to the body plain \nduty, or concerning opinions that we \nbelieve relate to the great truths of \nreligion. \n\nAnd that all public and fundamental \nagreements of this synod stand safe. \n\n3. That every member engage that, after \nany question has been determined by a \nmajor vote, he will actively concur or \npassively submit to the judgment of the \nbody; or, if his conscience will not per- \nmit him to comply with either, then he \nshall be obliged peaceably to withdraw, \nalways reserving him a liberty to sue \xe2\x80\xa2 \nfor a review, or to lay his grievances \nbefore the body in a Christian manner. \n\n\n\n4. That it be esteemed a culpable \nevil, and treated as such, to accuse any \nof our brethren of error in doctrine or \nimmorality in practice, otherwise than \nby private admonition, or to spread evil \nsurmises that he is graceless or uncon- \nverted, till the accusation has been \nbrought before a regular judicature and \nissued according to the rules of well- \nknown church discipline. \n\nAnd that no person be excluded from \nany of our judicatures without regular \nproceedings, according to our known \nrules of discipline. \n\n5. That all candidates for the ministry \nbe examined either by the synod or its \ncommission, and be approved by them \nin the languages and philosophy, or be \nobliged to bring a college-certificate or \ndiploma that they are suitably qualified \naccording to the rules of that college, \nbefore they be admitted to trials in any \nof our presbyteries; and we promise \nthat we will encourage them to fall in \nwith this last, as the most honourable \nand customary. \n\nThat there be no intrusion into the \nbounds of any of our presbyteries or \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. \n\n\n\n227 \n\n\n\npreach or perform other ministerial of- \nfices in the congregations of other mi- \nnisters belonging to our body, contrary \nto their minds. \n\nOn the other hand, it shall be deemed \nonbrotherry for any minister to refuse \nhis consent, without weighty reasons, \nwhen amicably desired. \n\nC. That all the several presbyteries \nbelonging to both synods respectively \nshall continue distinct presbyteries as \nnow they are, and \n\n\n\nTint the several congregations and \none under the same \n- ;it j. re sent. \n\n\n\n7. That the DTOle g tatlon made in the \n: of Philadelphia in 17 11 be de\xc2\xbb \n\nelared beneefortfc void end of none \xe2\x96\xa0#> \nfeet, mid that the proposed anion anal] \n\nn"t be n 1 1 \xe2\x80\xa2 1 \xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x96\xa0 j- - r i to Imply an \n\nr cn-crit to the protest on our \n\npart. \n\n8. A* this ijnod doth beUere thai a \nglorious W"rk of God\'i Spirit \xc2\xab \n\nrii-i mi in the int<- religious appear* \n1 1 >i \xc2\xab .11 (^ ri we doubt not tin \xe2\x80\xa2!\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 \n\n[ peo- \nple nnd an ; : a Intermixed \nwith it,) it would be pleasing and de- \nsirable to u\xc2\xab, and what we b"i"j fur. tint \n\n\n\npastoral charges without the consent \nof the presbytery or minister first ob- \ntained, explicitly or implicitly. \n\n\n\n6. That our presbyteries shall be \nmade up everywhere of the ministers \nthat live contiguous, so that there shall \nbe no old and new presbyteries for old \nand new congregations to repair to and \nobtain ministers bearing party names ; \nand that any minister may, on applica- \ntion to the synod, have liberty to join \nwith any neighbouring presbytery he \nshall choose, if they think it for edifica- \ntion to allow him. \n\nThat such congregations where there \nare new erections, and each is able to \nsupport a minister, shall be continued ; \nthat where there aro two parties, and \nboth vacant, and neither is able to sup- \nport a minister, all care be taken to \nunite them; and that where erections \nhave been made by these divisive prac- \ntices to the disadvantage of former \nstanding congregations, the ministers \nsupplying them shall be removed, and \nall proper methods taken to heal the \nbreaoh. Wo hope few will be affected \nhardly by this, for they may find more \noomfortable settlements iu our nume- \nroni vacancies. \n\n\n\n228 Webster\'s history of the \n\nboth synods may come so far to agree \nin their sentiments about it, as to give \ntheir joint testimony thereto. \n\nThe Synod of New York received these proposals in the \ncourse of a few weeks, having met on September 26 of the \nsame year, (1751.) Samuel Blair, " the greatest light in these \nparts," had taken wing and flown to his heavenly home. \nThomas Arthur was also dead. There had been ordained, \nThane, Moft\'ett, Graham, Kennedy, Chesnutt, Cumming, Jona- \nthan Elmer, Todd, and Hugh Henry. Gilbert Tennent and \nCharles were again absent. The attendance of ministers was \nlarge. There were only eleven elders. \n\nThe Philadelphia plan was considered, and Pierson, Finley, \nSmith, Beatty, and the moderator, John Blair, were appointed \nto draw up an answer, which was approved by the synod, and \nis as follows :* \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" The proposals of the Synod of Philadelphia for union with \nthis synod were opened and read. The synod, after deliberate \nperusal of them, are pleased in observing any steps taken \ntowards the uniting the two synods, and that our brethren \nof the Philadelphia Synod profess a peaceable disposition, \nand determine to concur with our proposals as closely and \nas far as they can, in their present view of things. But, as \nthey have not seen fit to comply with some of the particu- \nlars proposed by us so closely as we could have wished, we \njudge it becomes our professions, and our endeavours for peace, \nto be candidly open and free in pointing out those things from \nwhich we disagree in their present plan of accommodation. \n\n" 1. Though the synod should make no acts but concern- \ning matters of plain duty, or opinions relating to the great \ntruths of religion, yet, as every thing that appears plain duty \nand truth unto the body may appear at the same time not \nto be essential, so we judge that no member or members \nshould be obliged to withdraw from our communion upon his \nor their not being able actively to concur or passively submit, \nunless the matter be judged essential in doctrine or discipline. \n\n" 2. We cannot agree that all the public and fundamental \nagreements of the Synod of Philadelphia should stand safe, if \n\n* Records, pp. 245, 246. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CIIURCII IX AMERICA. 229 \n\ntlii- is understood to extend to agreements made by said \nsynod since the rupture happened. \n\n" 3. AVe cannot see that it will consist with the peace and \nedification of the church to use any coercive measures to \noblige people to be under the ministry of those whom they do \nnot choose, or to dissolve and new-model presbyteries. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 4. Seeing by the goodness of Divine Providence we have \n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2rected, we see no necessity for the alternative \nof the synod or their commission examining candidates before \nthey be admitted to presbyterial trials. \n\nu As the Synod of Philadelphia had not our last proposals \nbefore them when they drew up the present plan of accom- \nmodation, we refer them to said proposals, as to what we \nfarther desire in order to our union with them." \n\nThe Philadelphia Synod met in May, 1752. Sampson \nSmith had been ordained. There were present fourteen mi- \nnisters and twelve elders. They considered the New York \nproposals, and their reply was as follows:* \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Upon perusal of yours, our pleasing views of a comfort- \nable anion, from repeated intimations of your readiness to \ncomply with what appeared reasonable, are considerably \nabated; especially as we apprehend yon receding further from a \nunion, and from your own former proposals in order thereunto, \nwhich we shall fully point out, being persuaded it is our duty, \n_ willing for and desirous of a reasonable accommodation. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2l-t. Ymi have repeatedly proposed that all former differ- \n- be buried in perpetual oblivion, which you apprehend \nfor the honour of our blaster, the credit of our profession, and \nthe edification of the church. Eow, consistently therewith, \ndo you in.-i-t that the protestation of the synod, in the yeaT \n1741, be declared void and of none effect? and thai this \ndeclaration shall be a term of union, since the synod have \nassured yon, and are willing to declare that, upon the union, \nthey shall ad and carry it towards you as it\' this protestation \nhad never been made, looking upon the design of the protes- \ntation answered by reasonable terms of union; and, if \nthing further be intended by your insisting that said protesta- \ntion be declared void and of no effect, we assure you i \n\n207. \n\n\n\n230 Webster\'s history of the \n\nwell satisfied that said protestation was made on sufficient and \njustifiable grounds, and we are not in the least convinced that \nthe synod acted wrong in said step. \n\n" 2d)y. You insist that presbyteries shall continue as they \nare, and declare you see no reason to dissolve the new- \nmodelled presbyteries. How is this consistent with your pro- \nposals, that all differences be perpetually buried, and that all \nnames and distinctions be forever abolished ? nay, how can \nyou reconcile it in your own minds w T ith the peace of this \nchurch, the valuable end to be aimed at by the union? \nBesides, we acquainted you that a uniting of presbyteries \nappeared to us so requisite to the peace of our church, that un- \nless your delegates had given us, by their concessions, ground \nto believe your synod would have consented to this, we should \nhave looked upon any attempt for union as vain and useless. \n\n" And your own former proposals on this head \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : that \ncongregations, as they are at present, should belong to the \nsame presbytery they now do, till a favourable opportunity \nof an advantageous alteration \xe2\x80\x94 gave us ground to apprehend \nthat you would consent, from the apparent necessity of the \nthing, to this advantageous alteration. \n\n" 3dly. You have formerly declared, that though your sen- \ntiments, of what you esteemed a work of God, continued the \nsame, yet you judged mutual forbearance your duty, since we \nall profess the same Confession of Faith and Directory for \nworship. But now you seem to insist on a joint testimony \nfor such a glorious work of God, in the late religious appear- \nances, as a term of union, by making it one of your proposals \nfor peace and union, that you hope both synods will go into \nsuch a testimony. How is this consistent w r ith your former \nprofessed sentiments of duty of forbearance in said case, and \nwith your declared sentiments, that no difference in judgment \nin cases of plain sin and duty, and opinions relating to the \ngreat truths of religion, is a sufficient reason why the differing \nmember should be obliged to withdraw, unless the said plain \nduty or truth be judged by the body essential, in doctrine or \ndiscipline ? And we think it strange you would insist on \nthis, or even mention it, as a proposal for union, seeing your \ndelegates before us conceded that both great and good men had \ndiffered from them on that head, besides your own declaration \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 231 \n\non that affair \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : that you douht riot but that there were \nseveral follies and extravagancies of the people and artifices \nof Satan intermixed with what you call a glorious work of \n\n- Spirit, plainly evince the difficulty of such a testimony, \nespecially to such who cannot easily be persuaded to declare \nthat these religious appearances were a saving work of God\'s \nSpirit \n\n" Besides, in order to such a testimony, in an affair confes- \nsedly difficult, that it be consistent with reason and a good \nSlice, we apprehend that it is your business and duty \nwho hope for and insist on such testimony, that you point \nout what you believe to be a glorious work of God\'s Spirit in \nthe late religious appearances, and what to be the follies and \nextravagancies of the people, and the artifices of Satan, that \nbo a distinct testimony be given for the encouragement of the \nand for preventing the other, and undeceiving many \namong the simple and ignorant who ma}* have mistaken the \none for the other, and yet continue in the mistake. \n\n"4thly. We have condescended, for the sake of peace, that \nall the ministers belonging to your synod, and all their con>- \ni _ itions, should belong to this body; but when intrusions \n\nhave been made by disorderly ministers into our congrega- \ntions, so as to render them incapable to perform their solemn \nElements to their pastors, we think these things that are \nso unjust ought to be rectified; ye1 inconsistent with the \n\n- of gospel ministers) you can find a salve lor this diffi- \nculty, we will gladly approve of it. \n\n" .".tlily. A- for our sentiments in other affairs, relating to the \nproposed union, we refer yon to our late proposals; which we \napprehend just and reasonable, and as yei see do jusl reasons \nede from, or make any material abatements of them; \nand particularly in regard to proposals for deciding affiura by \nmajority of rote, we apprehend it strictly Presbyterian and \nreasonable, and are nol convinced thai the alteration in that \narticle proposed by you, aboul what is essential and what not, \nry; cay, we apprehend thai Buch an alteration as \n\n: by yon has a had aepeetj and opens a d \xe2\x80\xa2 for an \n\nunjustifiable latitude both in principles and practice. \nu 6thly. We are much satisfied to hem- you propose thai \n_ men should bring colli \n\n\n\n232 Webster\'s history of the \n\nhave now, by the goodness of Divine Providence, a college \nerected. We are and ever were as much for this, and more, \nthan some of those brethren who once belonged to this synod; \nand we would put you in mind that there were colleges \nerected in reach of your youth before you had one in New \nJersey. But no regard was to be paid to our repeated desires \nand public votes that our young men should have education, \nand certificates from them, when it was proposed by our \nsynod ; and we think that our synod may find, among their \nnumber, men as well qualified to examine and judge of men\'s \nabilities as either the tutors, trustees, or rectors of your col- \nlege; so that we think the approbation of our synod, or \ncommittee, a good alternative, and yet will give it up if you \noblige all your candidates to bring college certificates, unless \nin extraordinary cases, and these shall be settled to prevent \nsuch disorders as we have seen and felt in time past. \n\n"At present, we are well pleased with any degree of a dis- \nposition towards peace and union professed by you, and are \nresolved to cultivate and improve, in ourselves and others in \nany measure under our influence, the same peaceable disposi- \ntion, and to concur heartily with you in any plan of accom- \nmodation reasonable and consistent with our profession as \nPresbyterians, and for the good of the church and honour of \nour Lord and Master." \n\nThe Philadelphia Synod\'s remarks were not considered by \nthe New York Synod in September, 1752. There had been \nordained, Worts, John Campbell, James Finley, and Robert \nSmith. Youngs had died. Jonathan Edwards preached the \nopening sermon : \xe2\x80\x94 "True Grace distinguished from the Expe- \nrience of Devils." Gilbert and Charles Tennent were again \nabsent. In October, 1753, they were present at the meeting \nheld in Philadelphia ; at which there were thirty-two minis- \nters and fifteen elders. Alexander Creaghead had returned \nto the synod ; Evander Morrison, John Smith, and Joseph \nPark had been received, and Maltby, Harker, Wright, and \nRobert Henry had been ordained \n\nThe New York Synod answered the letter from the Phila- \ndelphia Synod on the plan of union, insisting that the protes- \ntation of 1741 should be declared of no effect, and that the \npresbyteries and congregations should continue as they now \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 233 \n\nare. An agreement in a joint testimony in regard to "the \nlate glorious work of God" was also considered highly desir- \nable aud important The general tone of the synodieal reply \nwas firm, bat conciliatory. \n\nThe Philadelphia Synod, in 1753, did nothing towards the \nunion : they hud lost their two oldest members, John Thom- \nson and llugh Conn, and had gained none. In 1754, they \nhail lost, by death, Catheart and Griffith, and ordained \nMcMordie and Kinkead. The oldest minister sent his coun- \nsel.* The letter from the Synod of New York was read, \n\n\n\n* To the Reverend Moderator and worthy members of the Presbyter ial Synod of Phila- \nd\'./j\'hia, there met some few days after the date hereof. \n\nReveeend and Woutiiy Bhetiiukn: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nI would gladly have ben present with you, but my weakness of body hath \n\ni B6 anil la ri Is such b journey. I hope you will accept of this, my \n\ntag Bheonoe; yet I desire bo be present with yon, by write (by \n\nletter?) iu some tilings. \n\nI think 1 may asy, that there li one thing whieh layeth much upon my heart, \xe2\x80\x94 these \nwoeful divisions which are among ministers and people. It Is my earnest desire \nthat the Lord easy toneb your hearts boh when met, that bo yon may fall on some \n\xe2\x96\xa0 methods to have that breach made up which is betwixt us and those other \nMinisters whieh were once members of our church judicatories. A division in a \nchup-h hath many evils in it. Pint. It bringeth ministers of both Bides into con- \ntempt. Serondly. It makes some people of the one side hear the ministers of the \nother sidi- with prejudice. Thirdly, it hinders the success of the gospel preached, \n\nami the BoMeatJOB and good Of BOnlS. fourthly. It makes Satan rejoice, wicked \n\nand profane persona Boaff at religion, fifthly. It teadetb ont some persons to \ni in one another\'s calumiiies and to hold evil wishes to one another. We \n\nind Epiphanins: thongh both godly," Chrysostom wished that \nBpiphanins might die and never see Oypmi when sailing onto it. his oharge being \nthere; and Bpiphanins wished that Chrysostom might not die Bishop of Constan- \ntinople. The Lord t es ti fied bis displeasare at both their sinful Irishes, for beta \n\n-\xe2\x96\xa0) the followers <<f both were silenced in their sinful joy. Sixthly. \n\nIt pallets, down the government and rtiaajpflae In Christn house, which are walk \nand f eaeai whieh Qod hath appointed to preserre tho flowers of his precious \n\ntruths in the garden of his church from being trumpled under foot ; and they pal \n\nu stop to demsioni and errors. ] want words to o i pr es j the honid evil of the \n\npulling down the government and dJSdpUaoof Christ*! house; it is lv ^ r< . ;i ( mother* \n\nevil. By this, those that ahonld be mtUd will he nil mkn and dtsfatert to their \n\nand v "i ii qbs side, when otbn led in the leiist, will n ,n to tl ther \n\nahareh eenanrei \xe2\x80\xa2tbnsa east both themaetveB and their \n\nfuinilies from under the .-are of nny mini-ter. It l.adeth out to ru-li Judging and \n\ndting andeni amber, of either side, think thai the ool presa- \n\nr an union will be the way BO get \xe2\x80\x9eii union with the ..ther side, then, I \nthink, such a tneniher reasons MVOJ the greater distance \n\n\n\n234 Webster\'s history of the \n\nand, at first, it was resolved to send proposals to them ; but \nafterwards it was judged a better expedient to desire a con- \n\n\n\nfrom the other, this will tend to make the breach the wider. It is observable, that \nthose who have pressed much after peace and union in a church, and have been \nmost condescending in their terms in the time of divisions in a church, have been \nmost commended, and afterwards most loved, by the godly of both sides; all \nwhich appeareth from ecclesiastical history. \n\nBeloved brethren, I was informed (but whether the information be truth or not \nI can\'t tell) of two conditions of peace and unity which the other side requireth \nof our synod. First. That the presbyteries of both sides should be continued as \nthey now are, and meet all together in one Synod of Philadelphia. In my judg- \nment, I can\'t agree to this first condition ; but judge it most reasonable that pres- \nbyteries consist of ministers and elders of both sides ; as the congregations lie con- \ntiguous and near to one another, this will make for the conveniency and tend to the \ngood order and create brotherly love. But if presbyteries should be as they are \nnow, and only meet in the synod, this will give Satan a great handle to hinder \nbrotherly love and peace, and create and carry on a division in our synod again. \n\nThe second condition is, they require that it be acknowledged that there was a \ngreat and glorious work of God and reformation, or great and glorious times and \ndays, in our land and church a few years past. My thoughts are, that the days or \ntimes of late past in our Presbyterian church or land are not to be called properly \nglorious days or times, but properly the days or times of the Lord\'s pleading a \ncontroversy with our Presbyterial churches in this land for our sins ; yet I think \nthat God, in the midst of his anger, hath remembered mercy, and hath converted \nsome souls. \n\nIt is evident to me that the days and times of the Reformation from Popery \nwere glorious days and times, though then many delusions and errors sprang up ; \nbut observe and notice, the great instruments of the Reformation from Popery, or \nthe Reformers, were men coming from darkness to light more and more, \xe2\x80\x94 men \ncoming from errors to Christ\'s truths ; but they were not men falling from truths \ninto delusions and errors, as these ministers and members, the great instruments \nand ringleaders of that work of late called a glorious reformation, were. Surely \nthose are not glorious days and times, and a reformation of a church, when these \nministers and people, who are the chief instruments, are falling into delusions or \nerrors, pulling down the walls of church government and discipline, falling into a \nspirit of rash judging and false zeal. My thoughts are that the days of late \nwere days and times of the Lord\'s pleading a controversy with our church for \nour sins. \n\nI earnestly desire that both sides would bury in oblivion all the faults which \neach chargeth upon the other, and that no mention be made of any of these ; and \nto unite together again in the doctrine, discipline, and government of Christ\'s \nhouse, to carry on the interest of Christ and the good of souls. \n\nReverend brethren, our Lord and Master, Christ Jesus, the Prince of peace, \nsayeth, in Matthew v. 9, " Blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called \nthe children of God." Let us follow after peace as much as is possible. If peace \nwith truth be obtained, and church union, then this will crush Satan\'s interest \ngreatly, create brotherly love, advance the interest of glorious Christ, the good of \nsouls, and tend to the successfulness of the gospel in our parts. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 235 \n\nference with some of the members of that body commis- \nsioned for this purpose. They record as their reason that a \nvery paci tic temper Beems to prevail on both sides. Imme- \ndiately following .stands this minute : \xe2\x80\x94 \'\'Ordered, that Messrs. \nMcDowell and Sampson Smith represent briefly some of the \nmost dangerous opinions and practices of the \' Seceders,\' \nand get them printed; and that the books be divided among \nthe ministers, who are to sell them where these gentlemen \nare doing most damage. Memorandum : That no one piece \ni a sheet." \n\nThe Xew York Synod met in 1754, having lost Byram bj- \ndeath, PembertOD by removal, and gained Henry Martin and \nJohn Brown. In compliance with the desire of the Philadel- \nphia Synod, Burr, Bostwiek, William Tennent, Treat, John \nBlair, and Samuel Finley, were appointed to attend the next \n11 of that body, to confer about the union, but not to \nconclude any thing inconsistent with our former proposals. \nIt ir- to be observed, that two of the committee were per- \nsonally excluded by the u Protest," and two others were their \nBUM! devoted adherents. \n\nIn May, 1755, the Philadelphia Synod met; Elmer having \ndied, and Gillespie being absent through indisposition. The \nCommissioners from New York were present; and a committee \nappointed of three "Protesters," \xe2\x80\x94 Cross, Boyd, and P. \nAlison ; two, who adhered to them, \xe2\x80\x94 Cowell and Mcllenry; \nwith two ordained since, \xe2\x80\x94 Md>owell and Steel. The con- \nference occupied the whole of the afternoon of the 20th of \n\nThe \\ ( \\v JTork brethren proposed, that we should \nmutually forgive and forget, and wholly bury all past com- \nplaints and grievances in oblivion, and endeavour\', in the \nstrength of God, to treat each other hereafter as though \n\nthese things had never been : that, as the synods are two \n\n\n\nthe Lord Jesni Christ, the tola King and Bead of theChuroh, thi \n\nmbUes, mej be \xc2\xabiiii you In all your consultation! and determina- \nt i - \xe2\x96\xa0 r i - . direct and aid yon by lii^ Hoiy Spirit in every thing thai ootnetb before \n\na ipiritne] oonfort, the good of souls, the tme \nphureh, and Qod\'i glory, la the earnest mj.i ainoere desire of you \neerranl and brother in the work of the Lord, \n\nI \n\n/ Chrhtiana (Treat, Mnj 1"., IT". J. \n\n\n\n236 Webster\'s history of the \n\ndistinct judicatures not accountable to each other, they meet \nas two contiguous bodies of Christians agreed in principles, \nas though they had never been concerned together before \nor had any difference, which is true of a great part of both \nsynods. \n\nThat we should join the synods and presbyteries upon such \nscriptural and rational terms as ma} r secure peace, heal our \nbroken churches, and advance religion. And particularly, \nthey would have the "Protest" withdrawn, or declared null, \nbefore the "Union." \n\nThe synod, on hearing this result of the conference, re- \nsolved : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nThat they apprehend peace and union of the last im- \nportance to the church of Christ, and do adhere to their pro- \nposals, and can offer nothing further. \n\nThat, if it be asked by any, how we can join those who \nlately had such differences, we think every well-disposed \nChristian would be satisfied with being told, that we \nmutually forgive, according to Christ\'s command, and agree \nto maintain good conduct, through grace, for the time to \ncome. \n\nThat, as to the "Protest," we shall on the "Union" carry it \ntowards our brethren as though it had never been made ; and, \nas those who are aggrieved and obtain no satisfying redress \nhave a right to require their " Protest" to be recorded, so, \nnone but those who enter a protest can withdraw it or dis- \nannul it. \n\nThey added, that they thought it unbrotherly for the New \nYork Synod to meet in Philadelphia. \n\nThe New York Synod met in October; having ordained \nKnox, Greenman, and Hoge. In answer to the Philadelphia \nproposals, they resolved, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nThat they were lacking in distinctness concerning the con- \ntinuance of presbyteries and congregations as they are, and \nconcerning ministerial communion, as set forth in the para- \ngraph concerning essentials. That they could, with no pro- \npriety, insist on the disannulling of the "Protest," if they \nwill declare that they do not in a synodical capacity adopt it. \nThat, on their doing this, we propose to unite on the terms \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CIIURCH IN AMERICA. 237 \n\nproposed to them in 1740 and \'50, the article concerning the \n"Protest" being accepted. \n\nThat the synod, thus composed of both bodies, shall, \nimmediately after being constituted, proceed to hear and \ndetermine, if needful, the differenced between the "Protesters" \nand the "Excluded." \n\nThey gave as a reason for meeting in Philadelphia, that it \nWBfi Deeemavy for the convenience of distant brethren. \n\nThe Synod of Philadelphia, in 1756, was very thinly at- \ntended : they had lost Hamilton by death, received Alexander \nMiller from Ireland, and ordained Matthew Wilson and Mc- \nK-nuan. \n\nThey instructed their missionaries to the Southern colonies, \n!y, in all their public administrations and private conver- \nsation-. n> promote peace and union among the societies, and \navoid whatever may foment divisions and party spirit; and to \ntreat every minister from the Synod of New York of like \nprinciples and peaceful temper in a brotherly manner; "for \nwr desire to promote true religion, and not party designs*" \n\nThey Bent a copy of these instructions to the Mens York \nSynod, and answered their proposals unanimously as follows : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nu We are heartily desirous that the synods be united, and all \nthe presbyteries be united, as the members lie contiguous, that \nthe union In- in name, and in reality in love ami true affection. \nIn a Bynodical capacity, we declare that we neither do nor did \nadopl the Protesl us a term of ministerial communion: it was \nnever mentioned to our members, any more than any of the \nprotests delivered on tin- oceasion of those differences. AVe \nOnly adopt and desire i" adhere to our standards as we for- \nmerly agreed when united in one body. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2Wo are in e:inn--t tor peace and union; and we appoint \n\nthe commission of our synod, on timely notice given, to meet \nwith siieh members as the Synod of New Sork may appoint \nf.r this purpose, :it Philadelphia, or some other convenient \n\n. to adjust matters previous to a union." \n\nThere was a full attendance at the New Y>rk Synod in the \nfall. There hud been ordained Wnitaker, Bait* and Earns; \n( 11 -at as a correspondent, and Leydl also, of the Reformed \nDutch church in \\ew Brunswick. After much debating, they \n\ncame to the following agreement on the Bubjed of the union : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\n\n288 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\n" Though the Philadelphia Synod have not given a satisfac- \ntory answer to the particulars which were judged necessary to \nbe settled previous to an union, the synod, from an earnest \ndesire of a hearty and lasting union, do comply with their \nproposal of a mutual conference, and appoint Gilbert and \n"William Tennent, Burr, Davenport, Treat, Finley, Blair, Caleb \nSmith, Prime, and James Brown, to be a committee to meet \nwith their commission at Trenton, the second Wednesday in \nMay next, to fix upon a proper plan of union, to be laid before \nboth synods at their next meeting." \n\nTheir next meeting was on the 18th of May, there having \nbeen ordained Ramsey, James Finley, Dufiield, McAden, and \nReeve. \n\nThe Committee of Conference reported, that they found the \nPhiladelphia commissioners well disposed for union ; that they \ndeclared for themselves, and doubted not but their synod would \nreadily declare, that they do not look upon the Protest as the \nact of their body, nor adopt it as such; and that there ap- \npeared to be also an agreement on both sides concerning the \nnature and right of protesting, and other things formerly pro- \nposed as necessary to a union; and that it was agreed on \nboth sides, to propose to each synod to have their next meeting \nat the same time and place, to unite if matters shall at that \ntime appear ripe for it. Samuel and James Finley, John Blair, \nRobert Smith, and John Rodgers were appointed to prepare a \nplan as the ground of the union, and bring it in to the com- \nmission at their meeting. The synod, in view of so desirable \na prospect of union, agreed to meet at Philadelphia at the \ntime of the other synod\'s meeting, and to propose that the \ncommissions of both synods meet on the Monday before the \nsynod, to prepare matters for both bodies and their happy \nunion. \n\nThe Synod of Philadelphia met in the spring of 1757, having \nlost McHenry by death, and received John Miller. Thirteen \nministers were present, and nine elders. Boyd was chosen \nmoderator. Having heard the report of their committee and \nreceived the minute of the New York Synod, they instructed \ntheir commission to meet at the time proposed. \n\nOn the commission of the Philadelphia Synod were Cross, \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 239 \n\nFrancis Alison, Steel, Cowell, McDowell, Tate, McKennan, \nSmith, and Boyd, the moderator. \n\nOn the New York commission were Pierson, Burr, Spencer, \nPrime, James Brown, William and Gilbert and Charles Ten- \nnent, Davenport, Treat, Samuel Finley, Rodgers, and Bostwick, \nthe moderator. \n\nBefore the meeting Burr and Davenport died. Alison, who \nhad recently received the degree of D.D. from the University \nof Glasgow, preaehed before the two commissions from Eph. \niv. 1-8. The sermon was published with the title, "Peace and \nUnion recommended." Bostwick preached from 2 Cor. iv. 5. \nHie Bermon was published also, and reprinted in Scotland with \nthe title, "Self disclaimed and Christ exalted." The com- \nmissions met, Hector Alison, John Miller, Smith, and McDowell \nhaving been appointed, with the committee previously named \nby the other synod, to prepare a first draft of the plan. \nThe Bynod of Philadelphia on the afternoon of Friday accepted \nthe plan, with a few alterations they desired to be made in it, \nand requested the Synod of New York that the committee \nmay meet again and communicate the alterations each body \nmighl desire to the other. This was readily complied with. \nOn Saturday, the New York Synod maturely considered the \nplan with the amendments, and unanimously approved of it \nand agreed to it, ami judged it to be their duty to unite with \nthe Bynod of Philadelphia on the same. Each body having \ni to th<- amemlim-nts proposed by the other, the Synod \nof Philadelphia unanimously approved of it as a satisfactory \nplan. They then sent a message, desiring that the time and \nplace of meeting i te body may be agreed on. \n\nAt three p.m., in the Second Presbyterian Churcb, the two \nsynods met, Sampson Smith being moderator of the one, and \nSamuel Davies of the other. The plan of union was read and \nunanimously agreed to, the union was accomplished, and a \nnew book opened and the whole plan and articles of agree- \nmenl entered May ii\'.\xc2\xbb, IT \n\n\n\nWEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX. \n\nWhitefield reached Annapolis September 27, 1745, and \npreached eight times before the Legislative Council and As- \nsembly. He proceeded to Hanover, in Virginia, and saw there \nthe happy effects produced in part by the reading of his ser- \nmons, which had been published from notes taken at Glasgow, \nwhile he preached extempore. Blair and Tennent had just \nbeen there and administered the Lord\'s Supper. Whitefield \npreached four or five days, which was a fresh* encouragement \nto the newly-gathered flock, for others were engaged to serve \nthe Lord, especially of the church people, who the more readily \nhearkened to the gospel from him "because he was in orders." \nIn North Carolina he made but little stay and accomplished \nbut little. He remained some time in Georgia, and then sailed \nfor Maryland. There, " thousands had never heard of redeem- \ning grace : the heat tries my wasting tabernacle ; but, through \nChrist strengthening me, I intend to persist in preaching till I \ndrop." \n\nThe news of the Rebellion of \'45 seems to have produced \nlittle excitement in America. Whitefield preached, on the \noccasion of its suppression, August 24, 1746, a sermon, which \nhe printed with the title, "Britain\'s Mercy and Duty." From \nAnnapolis, he wrote, November 8, "Lately I have been in \nseven counties in Maryland, and preached with abundant suc- \ncess. The harvest is great here. I have preached to large \ncongregations and with great power." He made a circuit of \nthree hundred miles through Maryland and into Pennsylvania, \nup the Susquehanna as far as Deny. "Thousands and thou- \nsands were ready to hear, but nobody goes out scarcely but \nmyself." \n\nAt this very period Davies was labouring with Robinson in \n\n* Morris\'s Narrative. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 241 \n\nthat region. The revival was great in Queen Anne county \nand at Buckingham, but especially in Somerset county; in \nBaltimore county, it was like the first planting of the gospel.* \n\nTVhitefield spent the winter at Bethesda. In March, 1747, \nBrainerd published his journal with the title, " Mirabilia Dei \ninter Indicos." \n\nWhiteneld came to Bohemia by land, making a journey of \nsix weeks from Bethesda. " As I came along, I saw Mr. Davis. \nHe is licensed, as are the four houses ; but there is a proclama- \ntion issued against all itinerants. Jesus has been very gracious \nto us southward, and, as we came along, the desert seemed to \nblossom as the rose." He wrote, April 26, to Mrs. B., in \nVirginia, from Bohemia, "After two days\' abode here, I pur- \nI tod willing; to take a three weeks\' circuit in hunting for \nMaryland Burners. In Virginia, for the present, the door is \nshut; but I believe it will be open in the fall to more advan- \nI have QO thoughts of visiting it this spring. The cloud \nmoves another way. However, night and day 1 shall remember \nyou in your little hut." He was al Dover in Delaware on the \n8th of May: "all next October, God willing, 1 have devoted \nto poor North Carolina." Nor was he unmindful of Dover; \nsoon after, the Bo-ton ministers sent thither John Miller, who \nlor almost half a eentury was a burning and a shining light to \ntin- peninsula. \n\nE$e was al Wicomico on the lGth of May. In this ancient \n\nseal of Presbyterianism, Robinson and Daviea had laboured \n\nwith great success. w- < \'hrist\'rt strength is in some degree mag- \n\nnith-1 in my weakness, and my preaching is blessed to poor \n\nAmazing love I Maryland is yielding converts to the \n\nI gospel." "Methinks I see you rejoice and ready to \n\nSave the Marylanders also received the grace of God? \n\n1 tru-t some have indeed received his grace in sincerity. The \n\nharvest is promising. Sou and the other, dear neighbouring \n\nministers are always on my heart." Philadelphia, dune 6: \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2Mr. I\'., will let you know that the WOld has rim and been \n\nglorified in Maryland. Satan has attempted to stop the pro- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 rlastdng gospel in Virginia ; bui I belii \nhas overshot him.-eit\'." June 28; "To-morrow I Bel oul for New \n\n* Daties\'a printed Letter to Bellamy. \n16 \n\n\n\n242 Webster\'s history of the \n\nYork to gain strength. At present I am so weak, I cannot \npreach." July 4: "I have been in New York eight days, and \nhave preached twice with great freedom : once to a very large \nauditory, and did not feel myself much worse next morning. \nA pleasing prospect of action lies before me. People flock \nrather more than ever, and the Lord vouchsafes us solemn \nmeetings." Early in September he went to New England, and \nthen proceeded by land to the South. lie preached once in \nVirginia : the smallpox was spreading, and the Assembly did \nnot sit. \n\nAt Bathtown, a port of entry on the north side of Tar River, \nin North Carolina, he preached three times. " The Lord seems \nto have given me the affections of the people, and I am deter- \nmined in his strength to see what can be done." \n\nHe reached Charleston as early as October 25. " The barren \nwilderness was made to smile all the way. I trust good was \ndone in North Carolina, The poor people were very willing \nto hear." \n\nHe remained in Georgia and South Carolina till the close of \nMarch, when he sailed for the Bermudas. \n\nAt the commencement of missionary labours in the Valley \nof Virginia, Anderson had sent thither, with recommendations, \na preacher from New England named Dunlap. Gelston, An- \nderson, and Thomson visited Opequhon, Bullskin, and adjacent \nplaces. Craig was settled on the Triple Forks of the Shenan- \ndoah. McDowell and Hyndman were ordained as evangelists, \nprincipally with a view to Virginia; but the former made only \none tour, and the other died soon after being called to Rock- \nfish and Mountain Plain. Lyon, a probationer, and Caven, on \nbeing released from Conecocheague, visited the South Branch \nof Potomac, and the Eastern Branch also. In 1743, Robinson \nhad gone from Frederick county in Virginia, through Augusta, \nCampbell, Prince Edward, Charlotte, and Hanover, and through \nNorth Carolina, even to the Pedee River. In 1744, supplica- \ntions from North Carolina were sent to Philadelphia Synod, \nand a request was made that one of the members might be \nappointed to correspond with them. That duty was assigned \nto John Thomson, and he went to them, as he would have \ngone to a presbytery which had desired the synod that he \nmight correspond with them. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHrRCH IN AMERICA. 243 \n\nThe Synod of New York, in answer to pressing suppliea- \nin 1745. desired Robinson to go thither; but his failing \nhealth forbade, and he intrusted that important work to Davies. \nRodgere followed him, bat could not obtain permission to qua- \nlity himself under the Toleration Act. \n\nIn 1747, Byram, of Mendham, New Jersey, and Dean, of \nBrandywine Manor, went into Augusta and the neighbouring \noonntiea i \xc2\xabf Virginia. An extensive awakening followed, whieh \ncontinued till 1751. They were followed the next year by \nAlexander\' Gumming, who laboured much in Augusta and in \nN< >rth Carolina, and was the first of our ministers who preached \nin Tennessee.* In 1740, the Xew York Synod represented to \nthe Association of the Eastern District of Fairfield the neces- \noondition of Virginia* and urged them, but wholly with- \nout success, to send thither a minister or a candidate. In 1750, \n-\xe2\x80\xa2nt Todd, then just licensed, and Davenport, who pur- \njettle there, but found no suitable opening. "He \ni two inonths in Hanover, and did not labour in vain : some \nwove brought under concern, and many of the Lord\'s people \nBUch revived, who <an never forget the instrument of it."f \n\nTodd was installed in the tipper part of Hanover, in 1752, \nand < t-reenmau went thither as a missionary, and Robert Henry \nnh- at < \'uli ( \'reek. \nIn 171*, the Synod of Philadelphia resolved to send a mi- \nnister to apend eight weeks in As lall, and another as much \ntime in the spring, in the bark-parts of Virginia. Steel, of \n\nNottingham, and Xam-hy, of Hanover, went in 1748; Tate, \n\nof Donegal, and McHenry, of Deep Eton, in 1 741\' ; Griffith, \nof Pencader, in 1760; Sector Alison, of Drawjere, ami 8am- \n.-"ii Smith, of Ohestnol Level, in 17-">1 ; sfcKennan, of Red \nI een weekB in 1762; if oMordie, of Marsh Oreek, \n\nand William Donaldson, a probationer, in 17."\'-".; Tate ami \n\nKinkiad, of Ndiritoii, in 17~>4; Donaldson, Matthrw Wilson, \n\na probationer, ami klcKennan, in 175.",. \n\nTin- < >ld Bide had not settled one minister in Virginia during \nben 3 ean : they had \\< <n by death, ami had only ( Iraig \n\nami Black left The New Side had Davies, si Hanover, Todd, \n\n\n\nf Darica to Bellamy. \n\n\n\n244 Webster\'s history of the \n\nin Louisa, Alexander Creaghead, on Cowpasture River near \nWindy Cove, Robert Henry, at Cub Creek, John Wright, in \nCumberland and in the valley, John Brown, at Timber-ridge, \nand John Hoge, at Opequhon. These ministers, except Hoge, \nwere formed into Hanover Presbytery in October, 1755, and \nall ministers who might settle south or west of Hoge\'s congre- \ngation had leave to join it. \n\nWhitefield landed at Beaufort, South Carolina, May 27, 1754. \nHaving better health, he exclaimed, " Oh that I may at last \nlearn to begin to live!" He sailed for New York, and from \nthe close of June to the middle of September, he travelled \nfrom there to Philadelphia and back, proceeding occasionally \nas far as White Clay. "Everywhere prejudices were removed, \na more effectual door opened for preaching the gospel, and a \ndivine power accompanied the word." On Wednesday, July \n31, he preached in the morning at Newark, at New Brunswick \nat two in the afternoon, and reached Trenton at night. His \nlabours were blessed at Philadelphia and New York, and "we \nhad good seasons at the places between them. The shout of a \nking has been among us. In Philadelphia, in New Jersey, and at \nNew York, the Great Redeemer caused his word to be glorified !" \nHe set out on the 1st of October for Boston, with President \nBurr, and travelled as far as Portsmouth in New Hampshire. \n" Souls flew as doves to their windows : opposition seemed gene- \nrally to have subsided." He left Boston, November 7, and, \nthough he had thought, in September, that Providence pointed \ndirectly to Virginia and the Orphan-house, he remained in Mary- \nland from the middle of December till the close of the year. \n\nPeople came in great numbers to hear him, some as far as \nforty and fifty miles: prejudices seemed gone; the churches \nwere all open to him, and a happy work of conviction and \nconsolation visibly appeared. Many declared what God had \ndone for them during his former visits. He had just entered \non his fortieth year when he set out for Virginia, January \n17, 1755. "Fresh doors of usefulness, I trust, are opening \nin Virginia. The prospect is promising indeed. People have \nflocked from all parts to hear the word of God ; arrows of con- \nviction have fled, and I believe stuck fast. Seed sown several \nyears ago has sprung up and brought forth fruit." He reached \nCharleston in February, and sailed in May for England. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 245 \n\nIn 17o4, Beatty, of Xeshaminy, and Thane, of Connecticut \nFarms, went to Xorth Carolina, and the latter penetrated to the \nthinly-scattered tract between Broad and Saluda Rivers. The \nFrench War, long threatened, broke out, and the Southern \nIndians took up arras against the English. As a distressing \ndrought also was felt severely in Pennsylvania and in most of \nthe colonies^ the Provincial Government of Virginia appointed \nthe -"tli of March for a day of fasting and pra}-er. \n\nIn May, it was represented to New Brunswick Presbytery \nthat there were fourteen congregations in Xorth Carolina. \nHugh McAdcn, a probationer of Newcastle Presbytery, \nvisited theni in the summer, and seems, soon after, to have \nbeen ordained and sent thither as an evangelist. About this \nperiod, Creaghead took up his abode on Sugar Creek, in \nMecklenburg connty. Campbell, of Tehicken, in 1756 or \'57, \nminister of the Scottish settlers on Blount\'s and \nI Creeks and the northwestern branch of Cape Pear \n\nRiver. \n\nThe settlers in Western Virginia and North Carolina, being \nchiefly from Pennsylvania, carried with them all the propose \n.-\'\xe2\x96\xa0"ions and antipathies of the Old and New Side : the latter \nparty largely preponderated in most places, and all traces of \nmissionaries of the Philadelphia Synod were gone. Davies \nspeaks of the Old Bide as having but two congregations in \nVirginia in 1751. They had, besides Craig\'s and Black\'s \ncharges, in 1750, congregations worshipping at Brown\'s \ning-house in 1751, at Buffalo settlement, where John \nThomson spent part of his da^s, and on the South Branch \nof Potomac; in L752, at North Mountain, sis miles west of \nStaunton, South Mountain, Timber-grove or Timber-ridge, \nNorth River, embracing Lexington and New Monmouth) \nCook\'s Creek, near Harrisonburg, in Rockingham, and at \nJohn Hinson\'s; and also on Peeked Mountain and Calf- \npasture River. Black also supplied the settlers at Hawfield\'s, \nI and Eico, and on Little River in North Carolina. At all \ntie- settlements between Yadkin and Catawba, and at Reedy \n\nCre< \xe2\x80\xa2]<, they had adherents, and the missionaries paid es] ial \n\nattention to them ; but not one of them settled an Old \nminister. John Alison, a probationer, Bpent much time \namong them, but he returned to Lreland in 1766. Donaldson \n\n\n\n246 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nappears to have settled in South Carolina. The only congre- \ngations in Virginia which received a minister from the Phila- \ndelphia Synod, before the union, were the two in Rockingham, \nAlexander Miller having been installed at Cook\'s Creek and \nPeeked Mountain in 1758. \n\nWith the extension of territory, came a new depletion to \nthe Irish congregations. Creaghead, on forsaking the New \nSide in August, 1741, made immediate application to the \nReformed Presbytery in Scotland for assistants in the minis- \nterial work ; but no success seems to have attended his \nrequest, and, before Cuthbertson came, he had opened a \ncorrespondence with the Associate Synod of Edinburgh. As \nearly as 1750,* he wrote in behalf of a considerable body of \nsober people who could not comfortably or conscientiously \nunite with either branch of the Presbyterians. He alleged \nthat with neither synod would adherence to the Westminster \nConfession of Faith be deemed a test of orthodoxy ; that they \nwere lax in church communion and did not preserve the \npurity of religion. He, together with those in whose name he \nwrote, regarded themselves as bound by their Baptismal Cove- \nnant, and by the Solemn League and Covenant, to contend for \nthe whole of the faith. This appeal was made to the Burgher \nSynod ; and in answer to it, after much delay, David Telfair \nand Kinloch came to Pennsylvania, and Thomas Clark, from \nBallybay, in Ireland, with a number of families, to Salem, in \nWashington county, New York. A church was formed which \nworshipped in Shippen Street, Philadelphia, and others in \nOrange and Washington counties, New York. Before they \ncame, Creaghead had joined Newcastle Presbytery and be- \ncame a member of the Synod of New York; in 1751 or \'52, he \nsettled in Virginia. \n\nCuthbertson had been ordained by McMillan and Nairne,f \nthe first founders of the Reformed Presbytery in Scotland. \n\n\n\n* McKerrow\'s History of the Secession Church. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0}\xe2\x80\xa2 Nairne was the minister of Abbotshall, and left the Establishment and joined \nthe Associate Presbytery. When he went over to the Covenanters, the Seceders \ncalled him to account ; but the Reformed Presbytery, with Cuthbertson for mode- \nrator, served them with a solemn interdict to proceed no further. They, however, \ndeposed Nairne, who, after a time, returned to the Establishment, and, on a public \nacknowledgment, was restored to the ministry. When asked why, having left the \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 247 \n\nHe is said to have come to this country iu 1751 or \'52. He \nformed praying-societies after the model of the Mountain \nMen, one of which was in the TVallkill congregation, in \nOrange county, Xew York. He laboured in Chester and \nLam-aster counties, Pennsylvania; but his chief success was \non the west side of the Susquehanna. He had a discussion \nwith Evandcr Morrison at Middle Octorara. His assertion, \nthat the HTew-Side ministers urged their hearers to prepare \nthemselves to receive the free grace of God, was vehemently \ndenied. Early in September, 1753, Roan and Smith met in \ncommittee by appointment of Newcastle Presbytery, and \nFin l\xc2\xab-y and Davies, in conjunction with them, revised and \ncorrected a draft of a warning or testimony, drawn up by \nJohn Blair, against several errors and evil practices of Cuth- \nberteon. Among the errors they animadverted on were these: \n\xe2\x80\x94 That God has made over Christ and his benefits by a deed \nof gift to all that hear the gospel, so that every sinner who \nthe gospel offer ought to put in a claim to him, as his \nSaviour in particular; that saving faith consists in a per- \nsuasion that Christ is mine; and that he died for me in \nparticular. \n\nIt is not known whether "the Scotch bigot," as Davie- \nstyles Cuthberteon, took any notice of this paper; but it ap- \npeared just at the time when the missionaries of the Anti- \nBurgher Synod \xe2\x80\x94 Arnot and Gellatly \xe2\x80\x94 began their operations \nat Middle Octorara. An appendix to " The "Warning" was \ndirected against them. The presbytery seems to have passed \nover the peculiarities of the Covenanter system, and to have \nstruck at the doctrines* for which the BrsMnes left the Kirk \n\n\n\nk\'.i k OB S< unt Of her defeOtlonB, hfl had returnc\'l, lie -:ii<l he saw in her a rlmiiL\'e \n\nfor the better. The moderator said} " The only ekange in the kirk, thus fa, was \n\nfa the worse." \xe2\x80\x94 MrKerrow. \n\nthaaiel Haaard, "f New Y<>rk, wrote to Dr. Bellamy, December 8, 1766: \xe2\x80\x94 \nlearning, and piety. Mr. Bostwiok and Mr. Unit approve hi \npreaching." November 17, it."is : \xe2\x80\xa2* The .- t up a new mi \n\nbonne, about twenty-eeven bet wide and forty font long. Mr. Oellally has been \npraaebing in it bar weeks. Borne bMfaoattonj of his and his brethren\'s being \nnnsonnri in the article of Faith, ezeitfld him to declare their tentiaienta on it t" a \nvery numerous Mndttoryi in vindleation, lie pnbliely read the Datoh, French, \n1 Cboreb, and . which were esteemed. I believe, \n\nbj all that beard it, as being subsUuitially the same with theirs. If you are strong \n\n\n\n248 Webster\'s history of the \n\nof Scotland, the doctrines which were zealously upheld by \nthe best men during the Marrow Controversy, and which con- \nstituted the chief charm to Toplady and Boston in that an- \ncient and excellent treatise, \xe2\x80\x94 " The Marrow of Modern Divi- \nnity;" and its fellow, "The Gospel Mystery of Sanctifica- \ntion," by the mellifluous Stephen Marshall. \n\nThe Associate Presbytery and the Reformed were united in \ntheir testimony on these points : \xe2\x80\x94 1. Christ has died for the \nelect. 2. There is in the nature of saving faith an appropria- \ntion of Christ and his benefits. 3. The gospel is indiscrimi- \nnately offered to all. 4. The righteousness of Christ is the \nonly proper condition of the covenant of grace. \n\nIn 1754, the Old-Side Synod directed McDowell and Samson \nSmith to represent briefly some of the most dangerous prin- \nciples and practices of the Seceders, that they might be printed \nand sold where those gentlemen are doing most damage. \n\nGellatly prepared a severe reply to the New-Side brethren, \nentitled the "Detector."* All the charges made by Creag- \nhead of laxity he assumed to be true, and demanded whether \nthey, who had set the example of forming separate presbyteries \nand of dividing congregations, had any right to blame others \nfor ministering to those at whose call they crossed the ocean, \nand who were as conscientiously opposed to the New-Side \nmethods and peculiarities, as the New Side were to the dege- \nneracy of the Old Side. He warmly assailed the paragraph \nabout essentials, and the assumption that one may be a true \nfollower of Christ who did not believe all that Christ had \ntaught, or regard all that he had commanded as necessary \nduty. He also objected to the orations as well as prayers at \nfunerals, and to the heterodoxy of some who impugned the \neternal generation of the Son of God. At firstf the Burghers \nand Anti-Burghers freely united in one presbytery ; but the \nAnti-Burgher Synod in Scotland refused the Associate Pres- \nbytery of Pennsylvania any countenance or aid, until, that con- \n\n\n\nenough to set your shoulder against the whole Protestant world, then condemn \nthe Seceders as unsound in the article of Faith, and enter an endless controversy, \nwhich, I imagine, will never do twopence-worth of good; and, whether right or \nwrong at present, I am of opinion they will be right in a little time if you let \nthem alone." \n\n* Philadelphia Library. f Rev. J. P. Miller\'s Sketches. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAX CHURCH IX AMERICA. 249 \n\nnection was dissolved with all ministers who denied the sinful- \nness of the Burgess oath. This was soon effected, and the \nplaces of the excluded were supplied by a number of able and \neminent preachers of righteousness. \n\nSamuel Finley and Robert Smith replied to the pamphlet \nof Gellatly in a piece entitled the " Detector Detected."* They \nquoted largely from Blair\'s animadversions on Creaghead\'s \nreasons for leaving the Presbyterian connection, in disproof \nof the accusation of laxity in doctrine and decline from the \n"Westminster Confession in doctrine and discipline. They \nquoted the Irish Burgher ministers, \xe2\x80\x94 Samuel Delap, of Letter- \nkenny, and Thomas Clark, of Ballybay, \xe2\x80\x94 as authority for \ncharging the Anti-Burghers with forsaking not only the com- \nmunion of bad men and errorists, but the constitution of the \nchurch also, and with excluding from communion the best of \nmen. They said that Clark esteemed the treatment of the \nErskinee as a great impiety, and lamented the success the \nAnti-Burghers had in imposing on so many in Philadelphia. \nThe Anti-Burghers were not without success elsewhere: they \ngathered congregations in New York City, and in several other \nplaces in that province, at Octorara, Pequea, Chestnut Level, \nForks of Brandywine, Fagg\'a Manor, Oxford, Deep Run, in \nthe Forks of Delaware, in York and Adams county, and \nindeed in almost every Presbyterian settlement west of Sus- \nquehanna. They also spread to the southern and western \nlimits ..l\' emigration, and, nit hough small in numbers, they re- \nmained separated from all else, honourably distinguished, for \n\nthe most part, by knowledge of the truth and steadfast ad- \nherence to every jut and little of the law and the testimony. \n\nThe Covenanters were found wesi of the Susquehanna, ami \nit is believed that only throe ministers of thai persuasion came \nto this country before the Revolution. These were Cuthbert- \nson, Lind, of Conecocheague, ami Alexander Dobbin, ^>i\' \nAdams county; ami these all lived to join with the Ami- \nlers ami the Burghers in forming the Associate Re- \nformed Synod in 1782. \nThe congregations in New Jersey seem i,> have escaped \ndivisions) and to have had uninterrupted peace. The \n\n* Philadelphia i-i\' \n\n\n\n250 Webster\'s history of the \n\nonly two exceptions seems to have been in Amwell, where, \naccording to the testimony of a Church missionary, two hun- \ndred Presbyterians, in 1753, conformed to the Episcopal \nmode;* and on Black River, where the Separates or Strict \nCongregationalists established a congregation, still existing at \nChester. \n\nAt the union of the synods there were twenty ministers be- \nlonging to the Synod of Philadelphia, and seventy-two In con- \nnection with the Synod of New York ; yet the former, with \nsuicidal zeal, insisted on the amalgamation of the presbyte- \nries ; the ministers and congregations which were contiguous \nto be united in one body. To this the New Side objected \nto the last, though they had nothing to lose by it, and though \nit put the Old-Side ministers, with their congregations, en- \ntirely under their control and uncovenanted mercy. \n\nUpon this plan, Suffolk and New York Presbyteries re- \nmained unchanged. New Brunswick Presbytery received \nCowell and Guild from Philadelphia, thus leaving Cross and \nDr. Alison to be joined with the large Presbytery of Abing- \ndon, under the name of Philadelphia Presbytery, and to stand \nby themselves in a hopeless minority. The like discomfort \nawaited Craig, Black, and Alexander Miller, who were set off \nfrom Donegal to Hanover Presbytery. The Presbytery of \nLewes was erected, to consist of two Old-Side members \xe2\x80\x94 \nWilson and John Miller \xe2\x80\x94 and three New-Side men, \xe2\x80\x94 Hugh \nHenry, Harris, and Tuttle. With these exceptions, the Pres- \nbyteries of Donegal, and first and second Newcastle, remained \nfor a time unchanged. \n\nAt the rupture, the Synod of Philadelphia was left with \ntwenty-two ministers ; before the union, they received five and \nordained seventeen, and at the union, they had only twenty. \n\nThere was an amazing superiority in numbers in the New \nYork Synod, sixty-six having been ordained and fifteen re- \nceived. The latter were all natives of New England except \nMorrison, who was probably born and ordained in Scotland. \nAbout one-third of those ordained were also New Englanders; \nthere were two Englishmen and one Welshman ; of the re- \n\n\n\n* This is stated in Hawkins\'s Missions of the English Church. Is it not \napocryphal ? \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 251 \n\nmainder, half were born in Ireland, and the rest within the \nbounds of the synod. \n\nTo account for the difference of ministerial increase, we \nmust consider the difference of territory. The New York \nSynod had the old settled provinces of New York and New \nJersey wholly to themselves, presenting eligible settlements \nand likely to attract candidates from New England, The Old \n.Side had in common with them the provinces of Pennsyl- \nvania. Maryland, and Delaware, with the new settlements in \nVirginia and Carolina. The Old-Side congregations had been \nrent, and afforded barely a maintenance ; while the New-Side \ncongregations, gathered during the Revival, were vigorous, \nunited, and growing, and they furnished a very considerable \nnumber of candidates, as Roan, Dean, Davies, Rodgers, Todd, \nHugh Henry, Robert Smith, Harris, Ramsey, DurHeld, and \nMeAden. It is remarkable that Moses Tuttle was the only \nNew England minister who settled below New Jersey, and \nBleazez Wlrittieqey the only candidate who sought to labour \namong the Scotch and Irish; and there were scarcely any, \nles Spencer and (inhuman, who found a home in New \nBrunswick or Abingdon Presbyteries; \n\nThe difference must be resolved mainly into the influence \nof the great Revival; the Spirit was poured out from on high \non the young nun, and they forsook their trades and gave \nthemselves to the ministry. Roan, Bay, and Todd had been \nweavers, Oheenut a shoemaker, Tuttle a sailor, Laurence a \nblacksmith, and (\'. Tennent a saddler. \n\n\'I\'m nee the language of Friends, "a spring of ministry was \nopened ;" and on beholding tin- rapid oiling up of the ranks \nin that period with [\'ions, eealous, able, and. in many eases, \ndistinguished ministers, "who knoweth not that the hand of \nthe Lord has done this?" "He gave the word: great was \nthe company of them that published it." \n\nA singular circumstance is also i" !\xc2\xbb<\xe2\x80\xa2 observed, \xe2\x80\x94 the ceasing \nof tin- influx from [reland of candidates or ministers. Many \nyoung in- n from that country began to prepare for the Bacred \nwork after they had Been tin- grace of God here; but few or. \ndo graduates of Glasgow or Edinburgh came as tiny had \nformerly done; none, it is believed, came t<> the New York \nSynod, and very few, if any, to the other body. Not a single \n\n\n\n252 Webster\'s history of the \n\ninstance is known of an ordained minister from Ireland having \ncome over to unite with either synod, nor from England. \nThe Philadelphia Synod received from Scotland, Scongal, who \nsoon died, and Brown, who, in less than a year, sought his \nnative soil. The New Side received Evander Morrison, who \nmay have been ordained in Scotland, though it is not unlikely \nthat he was admitted to the sacred office in New England, \nwhere he preached in 1749. The application of the church in \nPhiladelphia for an assistant and successor to Robert Cross \nwas presented to the Presbytery of Edinburgh and to the \nIndependent ministers in England, and was disregarded. \n\nIt is interesting to observe, among the fruits of the Revival, \na turning from man\'s inventions to the Scriptural mode of \nchurch government. Whitefield told Erskine* that if, when a \ncandidate for the ministry, he had had the views held in 1740, \nhe would not have sought ordination from the hands of a \ndiocesan prelate. Edwards, a few years later, wrote, "I \nhave long been perfectly out of conceit of our unsettled, inde- \npendent, confused way of church government in the land ; \nand the Presbyterian way has ever appeared to me most \nagreeable to the word of God and the reason and nature of \nthings." \n\nBy the advice of Whitefield, the friends of the Revival who \nseparated from the First Church in Newbury, Massachusetts, \nadopted the Presbyterian form; and the people at Milford, \nConnecticut, in like circumstances, declared themselves sober \ndissenters from the standing order, worshipping after the \nmodel of the Church of Scotland. Horror of divisive prac- \ntices kept the Synod of New York from countenancing or \nwinking at any movements in New England to leave the set- \ntled ministry and gather Presbyterian congregations. There \nappears to have been only two of the Irish ministers in that \nregion who warmly espoused the side of Whitefield, \xe2\x80\x94 Moorhead \nand McGregoire. A few years after, Parsons, with his church \nin Newburyport, united with them. In 1758, they in a formal \nand explicit manner adopted the Westminster standards. This \npresbytery had no connection with the Synod of New York ; \n\n* Philips\'s Whitefield. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN" AMERICA. 253 \n\nbut in its difficulties with Abercrombie,* who, in 1753, charged \nthem with looseness in regard to subscribing the Confession, \nthey offered to refer the matters in controversy for final adju- \ndication to the synod at its session in May, 1758. \n\nThe original Presbytery of Boston was opened in 1745, by \nthe Rev. William McClenachan, A.M., of Blandford, with a \nsermon in the French meeting-house. The French church \ndisbanded in 1748, and their meeting-house passed into the \nhands of the Separates, who, with the Rev. Andrew Crosswell \nfor pastor, formed the Eleventh Congregational Society. The \nlast trace of this judicatory appears in the Records of Dutchess \nPresbytery, September 9, 1765, when the Rev. Samuel Dunlap, \nof Cherry Valley, was received as a member, the "presbytery \nto the eastward of Boston," to which he belonged, "being in- \ncapable of sitting by reason of the dispersion of its members." \n\nThe ministers on the east end of Long Island had been \nfavoured with great success during the Revival, and they were \ncalled t<> endure a great light of affliction. For Davenport had \nbeen the chief instrument used by God in reviving his work, \nand In- had left the impress of his Spirit on a large body of \nP&OUS people. They separated from their ministers, being \nunder doubt of their conversion, or from some like weighty \n:. Many, after Davenport\'s retraction, laid aside their \nextravagances of opinion and practice; but a greater number \nhad drunk so largely of them that their very bones were dyed \nthrough and throughout. They organized the Strict Congre- \ngational churches, with all the appendages of lay exhorteis and \n\nfemales praying in public. \n\non tin- mIi of April, 1717, the Refer. Ebeneeer White, of \nBridgehampton, Nathaniel Mather, of A.cquebogue, Bbeneaer \nPrime, of Huntingdon, BSbenezei Gould, ofOutchogue, Sylva- \n\nBUS White, of Southampton, and Samuel linell, of Kasthainp- \n\nton, \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 ministers on the island of Nassau," mej at Southampton, \nand, in view of the "broken state of the churches, the preva> \nLencj of separations and divisions, and the growing mischiefs \n\n* Robert Abercrombie, on being licensed, oame from Scotland to Nen England in \ntli \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 fill \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2! 17 l"\xc2\xbb, with testimonial* from the Presbyteries of Edinburgh and Kirk- \naldy, and recommendations from the Rot. Mr. Wilson, of Perth: ii<\' iras ordained \n\naneil a1 Pelhai Bo joined frith M \' h a n d and Mc O re g o ir e \n\niu fanning Boston Preobjtorj at Londonderry, April 16, 1746. \n\n\n\n254 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthose disorders are big with, did, after repeated addresses to \nthe throne of grace, some debate and serious consultations, \ncovenant to unite in a presbytery. They were satisfied that \nthe disorders were much owing to the want of some stated \nrules of ecclesiastical government, and were persuaded, accord- \ning to light received from the word of God, that Presbyterian \ngovernment in its most essential articles was consonant to the \nmind and will of the glorious Head and King of the Church, \nand will best answer the ends of government in the churches \nto which they sustain the pastoral relation. They regarded \nthe Westminster Confession as agreeable to the word of God \nand a suitable test of orthodoxy. They covenanted to endea- \nvour to engage their people to join with them, and to seek to \ndraw vacant and unsettled congregations to place themselves \nunder their care." At this meeting, the churches of Easthamp- \nton, Bridgehampton, and Southampton were represented by \ndelegates, who also entered into the covenant. A few weeks \nafter, they met, and there were favourable appearances in the \nchurches of concurrence ; but Southampton embraced the pro- \nposal nem. con. Mr. Mather died before April, 1748, some of his \npeople having forsaken him, and others "having a list that \nway." Soon after the formation of the presbytery, a gracious \nreviving cheered the pastors and united their people firmly to \nthem. \n\nThey joined the Synod of New York. It is pleasant to reflect \nthat each of these ministers except Gould, who through the \ndesertion of his people to the Separates was obliged to remove \nto Connecticut, lived to long life, in vigour to the last, useful \nbeyond most men, and closing their days among the people \nwho welcomed them in youth and reverenced them in age. \n\nThe Rev. Eleazer Wheelock,* afterwards President of Dart- \nmouth College, wrote from Lebanon, Connecticut, March 13, \n1749, to Dr. Bellamy : \xe2\x80\x94 " There are many things that have a \nthreatening aspect on our religious interests in these parts: \xe2\x80\x94 \nAntinomical principles, and the Korah-like claims which are the \nusual concomitants of them ; prevailing luorldliness and coldness, \nwhich has become a common distemper among us ; growing \nimmorality, justified by the mildness and errors of many high pro- \n\n* Bellamy MSS. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 255 \n\nfessors; a want of promising candidates for the ministry, and \nthe great difficulty that commonly attends the settling of any, \nchiefly through the strait-handedness of parishes toward the \nsupport of the gospel; the want of a good discrplinc in our \nchurches, and the difficulty upon many accounts of reviving it, \n&c. &c. I am fully of the opinion that it is time for ministers \nto wake up for a redress of these evils ; and I can think of no \nway more likely, than for those, who are in the same way of \nthinking about the most important things in religion, to join \nin a presbytery. Don\'t you see that Arminian candidates can\'t \nsettle in the ministry \'.\' Don\'t you see how much those want \nthe patronage of a godly presbytery, who do settle? For want \nof it, they get broken bones, which will pain them all their \ndays. Would not such a presbytery soon have all the candi- \ndate of worth under them, and, consequently, presently most \n\nvacant churches! Our wild people are not half so much \nprejudiced against the Scottish constitution as against our \nown. Many churches in these parts might easily 1"\' brought \ninto it, and my sou] longs for it. . . . For my part, I think it \nhigh lime that men who have been treated as Mr. Bobbins (of \nBranford) was, should have some way of relief, which I am \ninformed was the view of that honest Oalvinist who first \nmoved in that proposal ... Is there not some reason to hope \nthat hereby there will be a door opened for bringing things \n\nbetter posture among the Oalvinist party\'.\'\' You know \nh\'\xc2\xbbw God has overruled things in the Jerseys." \n\n:i after the Synod of Philadelphia had, in 1789, resolved \nthat all persons, before being received as candidates for the \nministry, should be examined by its committee and approved, \nJohn Thomson proposed to Donegal Presbytery to ;> s k tho \nsynod to establish a Bchool of its own. The synod, in the May \n\nOf that year, unauiuioii-ly agreed tO do BO ; and the hope was \n\nexpressed, that either Dickinson and Pemberton, or Anderson \nand Robert Cross, might be prevailed on to go home to Europe \nto prosecute the affair. Arrangement! were made t<> facilitate \nPemberton\'s going to Boston to prepare preliminary measures. \nThe commission, with correspondents from each presbytery, \nwai ordered to inert in August, and draw op proper directions \nfor the persons intrusted with this important mission. This \nmeasure, it\' adopted smeolmously, nni-t haws been carried \n\n\n\n256 Webster\'s history of the \n\nafter the withdrawal of the protesting brethren ; for " Gilbert \nTennent was hardy enough to tell our synod that he w r ould \noppose their design of getting assistance wherever we should \nmake application, and would maintain young men at his \nfather\'s school in opposition to us." \n\nThe commission met ; but no persons were present, either \nfrom New York or New Brunswick Presbyteries. Andrews, \nAnderson, Thomson, Boyd, Cross, Martin, and Treat attended, \nwith the correspondents, Cathcart, Alison, Black, Jamison, \nand D. Evans. They resolved first to seek divine guidance, \nand David Evans prayed ; they then charged Andrews to write \nto the Church of Scotland, and Thomson to prepare a circular \nletter to the congregations, and agreed to call the synod to- \ngether in September, to deliberate further on the matter. \n\nAndrews, Cross, and Treat were appointed to prepare ad- \ndresses, credentials, and letters, to be laid before the synod; \nbut, the war between England and Spain breaking out, the \ncalling of the synod was omitted. \n\nBy private agreement, the three Presbyteries of Newcastle, \nPhiladelphia, and Donegal met in committee at the Great \nValley, November 16, 1743, to consider the necessity of using \nspeedy measures to educate youth to supply our vacancies. \nThey resolved at once to open a school, and the synod in the \nspring took it under its care. The plan was to give instruction \nin languages, philosophy, and divinity, to all gratis; the school \nto be supported by yearly congregational collections. Alison \nwas placed at the head, and eleven ministers were appointed \ntrustees to visit the school and examine the scholars. No \npresbytery was allowed to "improve" any scholar who did not \nproduce a joint testimonial from the trustees and the synod\'s \ncommittee. The synod applied to the Trustees of Yale, to \nreceive their scholars at such advanced stages as their profi- \nciency warranted, and to admit them after a year\'s residence \nto a degree. Several ministers and gentlemen helped them to \nbooks to begin a library. They received a favourable response \nfrom Yale ; but it seems none of their scholars availed them- \nselves of the privilege. \n\nProfessor Hutcheson, of Glasgow, had* proposed to Alison \n\n* Alison to President Stiles, in MS. at Yale College. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 257 \n\nthe setting on foot of a seminary ; and in 1746, he opened a \ncorrespondence with him, bnt we do not know with what ad- \nvantage. In 1747, the synod determined to endeavour to pay \nthe arrears to the master, and to get the congregations more \ngenerally to contribute. In 1748, they raised his salary to \n,\xc2\xa340, intending to make it up by collections, and by " \'sessing" \neach scholar twenty shillings, and to defray any deficiency out \nof the yearly interest of the fund. In 1749, they declined to \ngive Alison leave to remove to Philadelphia, and promised him \n\xc2\xa330, reserving liberty to exempt as many scholars from tuition- \ns they please ; and giving him permission to charge the \nrest as he sees fit. Still, the point was not arranged to his satis- \nfaction, and they agreed to exempt only four of their own \nchoosing; leaving it to him to choose four others, who should \nenjoy the synod\'s bounty. He removed, in 1752, to Philadel- \nphia, as master of the Latin school, without consulting the \npresbytery or the commission. The synod overlooked this, on \nthe ground that it was "highly probable that in his new sta- \ntion he might be serviceable to the church in teaching philo- \nsophy and divinity so far as his obligations to the academy \nwill admit." \n\nThe school was removed to Elk, and placed under the care \nof McDowell, immediately on Alison\'s resignation. He had \n\xc2\xa320 from the synod, and an assistant. In 1754, he declined \nthe whole burden, but consented without charge to teach logic, \nmathematics, and natural and moral philosophy. The encou- \nragement formerly allowed him was given to his assistant, \nMatthew Wilson. It is said that many able ministers were \neducated during Alison\'s time in the synod\'s school, and that \ntwo Dutch Reformed ministers, born in this country, were \neducated by him.* \n\nThe synod also afforded aid to Samson Smith for his Bchool \n\nat Oheetnul Level, and procured him a yearly donation from \nthe British Society for Educating German Children in Penn- \nsylvania. \n\nThus, their efforts resulted in no great permanent institu- \ntion. The well-devised scheme <<\\\' making Alison a Bnbordi- \n\n\n\nI (if these wan the Rot. Jonathan Dubois, of Boatbamptoat Bucks count;-, \nIvania, a natire of I\'iloxgrove, New Jersey. \n17 \n\n\n\n258 Webster\'s history of the \n\nnate instructor in the college of Philadelphia enlisted the Old \nSide in the support of that institution, and drew them off for \nmany years from attempting to erect a college of their own. \n\nThe Presbytery of New York was probably mainly induced \nto press the forming of a new synod, in order to found a semi- \nnary of learning on an equal scale with those of New England. \nThe stand in regard to the Revival taken by Harvard and \nYale seemed to render this necessary, and had probably led \nto an attempt to establish a school at New London.* Although \nthis effort was unsuccessful, still, the causes in which it had its \norigin remained in full force. The obstinate refusalf of the \nauthorities of Yale to admit Brainerd to his degree, after his \nhumble submission, and in disregard of the personal repeated \nearnest solicitation of Dickinson, Pierson, Burr, and Edwards, \nsatisfied them that it was time to arise and build a seminary, \nsuited to the times, to be under the influence of those who \nsaw a glorious work of God\'s grace in the appearances con- \ntemptuously designated " a religious stir." A charter, to incor- \nporate sundry persons to found a college, passed the great seal \nof the province, tested by James Hamilton, Esq., President \nof his Majesty\'s Council in New Jersey. This charter the \ntrustees refused to accept, Tennent strenuously objecting to \nthe clause constituting the governor of the province, ex-oflicio, \na trustee. The college, however, was commenced at Elizabeth- \ntown: the newspapers, in April, 1747, advertise that, on the \nfourth week in May, all persons suitably qualified may be ad- \nmitted as students. On the death of Dickinson, in October \nof that year, it was removed to Newark, and placed under the \npresidency of Burr. Whitefield wrote to Pemberton, Novem- \nber 21, 1748, urging him to come to England, with one of the \nconverted Indians, in behalf of the college. \n\nGovernor Belcher! had from time to time, by letters, intro- \n\n\n\n* "That thing called the Shepherd\'s Tent" had heen set up by Rev. Timothy \nAllen, at New London, to educate "gracious youths;" but the Connecticut Legisla- \nture, in 1742, made it penal for private or unknown persons to conduct such semi- \nnaries, and ordained that none should be admitted to the privileges of the ministry \nof the standing order, without a diploma from Britain, Yale, or Harvard. The \ntent was shifted to the Narragansetts, and soon given up. \n\nf Dr. Alexander\'s Log College. \n\nX Life and Times of Lady Huntingdon. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. \'259 \n\nduced the college to the notice of Lady Huntingdon ; Whiter \nfield had drawn her attention to it also. In the early part of \n1750, Mr. Allen, and Colonel Elisha Williams, of "Weathers- \nfield, formerly Rector of Yale, came to England, with letters \nfrom Belcher and Burr. Whitefield introduced them to the \ncountess, at her seat at Ashby. A statement of the intended \nplan and enlargement of the college was drawn; and by her \nadviee it was printed, with a recommendation signed by herself, \nDoddridge, and Whitefield. Several of the Dissenting minis- \nter> promised their assistance. She was active in collecting \nconsiderable sums, and corresponded with many persons in its \nbehalf in England and Seotland. Whitefield lost no opportu- \nnity nf recommending it to the attention of those who could \neffectually further the object He wrote, in May, 1750, to \n>h-( ulloeh, of Cainbuslang, \'"concerning the Presbyterian col- \n. the Jerseys, the importance and extensive influence of \nwhich you have long been apprized of. Mr. Allen, a friend of \n(Governor Belcher\'s, is come over with a commission to nego- \ntiate tlii - matter; he hath brought with himacopy of the letter \nwhich Mr. Pemberton senl you some months past. This letter \nhath been shown to Dr. Doddridge and several of tin\' Loudon \nministers, who all approve of the thing and promise, their as- \nsistance. Last week I preached at Northampton, and conversed \nwith 1 >r. 1 \xc2\xbboddridg\xc2\xab\' about it. The scheme that was then judged \nmost practicable was this: \xe2\x80\x94 that Mr. Penxberton\'s Letter should \nbe published, and a recommendation of the affair, subscribed \n". Doddridge and otheog, should he annexed j that a sub- \nscription ami collections should 1"\' set on toot in England, and \nthat afterwards Mr. Alien should, go to Scotland. 1 think it \nan affair that requires despatch. Governor Belcher is phi, hut \na ni".-t hearty man for promoting God\'s glory and the good of \nmankind. The spreading of the gospel in Maryland and Vir- \nginia in a great measure depends upon it, and 1 wish them \nmuch success in the came of the Lard." Allen died in the \nsummer of the gaol-feyer, which broke out in London, ami \ncarried off four of the judges at the Old Bailey. \n\nIn 1761, the synod met at Newark, at commencement, and, \nat the request of the trustees, sent Burr, Treat, W. Tennent, \nami Davies, to New York, to obtain the consenl of hi.- congre- \ngation to his going. Pemberton had at the time no family ; \n\n\n\n260 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nand though dimming, his colleague, was to remain, and the \ntrustees offered to supply the pulpit, the people and Cumming \nunaccountably refused. In the winter of 1752, the trustees \nsolicited Davies to go with Gilbert Tennent to Great Britain \non this embassy. Whitefield wrote, June 8, 1753, " I am glad \nMr. Tennent is coming Math Mr. Davies : if they come with \ntheir old fire, I trust they will be enabled to do wonders." \nThe synod unanimously appointed them to this mission in \nOctober, and they arrived in London on Christmas day. The \nnext day they saw Whitefield, and he gave them recommenda- \ntory letters to Scotland. In London they had remarkable suc- \ncess, and collected \xc2\xa31100, though they had not expected ,\xc2\xa3300. \n\nDavies said,* April 7, 1754, "We have had most surprising \nsuccess in our mission, which I cannot review without passion- \nate emotions. Our friends in America cannot hear the news \nwith the same surprise, as they do not know the difficultiesf \nwe have had to encounter; to me it appears the most signal \ninterposition of Providence I ever saw." September 2: "I \nthink it an evidence of the remarkable interposition of Provi- \ndence in favour of the college, that, wherever I have stayed to \nmake a collection, it has doubled what was ever raised before \non a like occasion." \n\nMr. Hogg, an eminent Christian merchant in Edinburgh, \nwrote to President Burr, August 28, 1755, "I have the satis- \nfaction to acquaint you, that the collection ordered by the \nGeneral Assembly amounts to above \xc2\xa31000; of which fifty \npounds is from the Marquis of Lothian. The General Assem- \nbly, in May, renewed their appointment to all ministers who \nhave not collected, to do so with all speed. The surprising ap- \npearance of Providence, in giving Mr. Tennent and Mr. Davies \nsuch success, is indeed matter of great thankfulness and praise. \n"We would fain hope that it is a token for good that the Lord \nwill make that seminary of learning eminently useful in send- \ning forth labourers into his vineyard." \n\n* Diary, printed in Dr. Foote\'s Sketches of Virginia. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0j- The Rev. Dr. George Benson did not sign the recommendation without a sneer \nat subscription to creeds. He wrote to Dr. Mayhew, April 17, 1754, " I have \nendeavoured to enlarge their notions of liberty and charity, which appear to me \ngreatly confined. They are diligent and dextrous men, and have had great success." \n\xe2\x80\x94 Bradford\'s Life of Mayhew. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 261 \n\nTennent obtained \xc2\xa3500 in Ireland. It was supposed by Hogg \nthat the collections in Britain and Ireland would not be less \nthan \xc2\xa34000 ; probably this did not embrace the whole amount \ncollected. \n\nThe moneys collected by them enabled the trustees to \nerect a commodious building and lay a foundation for a \nfund for the support of the necessary instructors. New Jersey \nand Connecticut* each allowed a lottery for the benefit of the \neollege. \n\nGovernor Belcher was ever ready to aid in the good work, \nand his patronage was needed to the latest moment of his \nlife; for Burrf undoubtedly hastened his own end, by travel- \nling when sick to meet the legislature and to urge them to \nrepeal or not enact a clause recpuiring military duty of the \n\xe2\x96\xa0Indents. \n\nThe growth of the college is said to have had a powerful \ninfluence on Yale, and to have hastened the appointment of a \nprofessor of divinity. \n\nThe ostensible motive* of President ( \'lap. in urging this latter \nmeasure, was that the students of the college were required to \nattend the First Church in Xew Haven, and that neither the \ndoctrines, language, nor manner of the pastor, Mr. Xoyes, \nwere in any degree fitted to promote their orthodoxy or \nspirituality, or to fit them for the becoming discharge of the \nduties of the pulpit. In the Stiles Manuscripts it is charged \nthat his real design was to keep up the character of the insti- \ntution for orthodoxy, and to prevent the Jersey College from \ndrawing off students. (Map succeeded, it is said, by these \nconsiderations, in gaining a majority of votes and carrying his \npoint Elliot, of Killingly, Noyesj of New Haven, and Bug- \ngies, of Guilford, protested against the measure. In Septem- \nber, 1766, Naphtali Dagget, of SmithJtownj Long Island, one \nof ihe youngest members of the synod, was nominated to that \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 advertisements. In March, 17".l, fieorgc S|>:ifT<.nl, Amlrrw !.\'\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 I, \nWilliam Grant, John Bayre, A. ill/", William Henry, Hugh MoCnllougli \nBanmel n isard, manageri of the lottery granted by Connection! for the college, \nstate Hut there nr.- eight thontand eight bondred and eighty-eight tickets, and \nthree thonaand and eighty-eight priiea, \n\nBmith\'i pn I tee in inrVi sermoa on Belcher*! death, \ntilej MSB.\xe2\x80\x94 Tale Co \xe2\x96\xa0 \n\n\n\n262 Webster\'s history of the \n\nhigh post. He exhibited to the trustees, November 21, a \nconfession of his faith, declared his full and explicit consent \nto all the doctrines contained in our Catechisms and Confes- \nsion, and expressly renounced the prevailing errors of the \ntimes. He was inaugurated March 4, 1756. \n\nIn the following year there were revivals at Yale and at \nNassau Hall: the latter institution experienced the largest \nrefreshing.* Davies tells us that it began with the son of a \nconsiderable gentleman in New York, and was general before \nthe president knew of it. \n\nThe first appearance of it caused much opposition and mis- \nrepresentation. " This religious! concern was not begun by \nthe ordinary means of preaching, or promoted by any alarm- \ning methods ; yet some were ready to sink under its weight. \nIt spread like the increasing light of the morning. A wise \nand gracious Providence had brought about a concurrence of \ndifferent incidents, which tended to lead the students to \nthoughtfulness about their souls. These things, viewed in \nconnection, manifested the finger of God; the freeness of \nwhose grace appears by considering that, a little before this \nmerciful visitation, some of the youth had given a looser rein \nto their corruptions than was common among them. A spirit \nof pride and contention prevailed, to the great grief and almost \ndiscouragement of the worthy president." \n\nBurr! wrote to Edwards, February 12, 1757 :\xe2\x80\x94 " As I have \nhad more fatigue, so I have had more comfort in my little \nsociety this winter than ever. There has been more of a reli- \ngious concern than I have ever known : some of the most \ncareless and thoughtless are considerably reformed, and others \nsolemnly concerned." February 14: "Half the students join \nin the society. Much old experience has taught me to judge \nof these things more by their fruits than by any accounts \nof experience for a short season." February 22 : "I never saw \nany thing in the late revival that more evidently discovered \nthe hand of God. Mr. Spencer says the same. Certainly a \n\n\n\n* Bacon\'s Historical Discourses. \xe2\x80\x94 Connecticut Evangelical Magazine. \nf Gilbert Tennent\'s preface to his Sermons on Important Subjects. \n% Gillies. Obadiah Wells, of New York, to Bellamy, March 19, 11 \nFourteen have been converted in the senior class." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 263 \n\ngreat and glorious work is going on. For nearly a month, a \nreligious concern has been universal, not one student ex- \npepted. When it began, I called such as were hopefully \npious, and laid before them what I thought had obstructed \nthe work of God heretofore. Their conduct has been very \nprudent. Mr. William Tennent agreed as to the method \npanned, and has been very helpful by private applications." \nMarch: k- I never observed conviction of sin so rational, \nsolemn, and thorough." \n\nThus wrote Tennent, of Freehold,* to Samuel Fiuley, and \nhe sent the glad tidings to Davies : \xe2\x80\x94 " I went to the college \nla-t M< unlay, and .saw a memorable display of God\'s power \nand grace in the conviction of sinners. The whole house was \na Bochim. A sense of God\'s holiness was so impressed on \nthe hearts of its inhabitants, that all of them, excepting two, \nmed religious,) were greatly shaken as to the state of \ntheir BOUls. This gracious ray reached the Latin School, and \nmuch affected the master and a number of the scholars. Nor \ni confined to the students: some others were likewise \nawakened. \n\n"I conversed with all the present members of the college, \nexcepting one, who generally inquired, with solicitude, what \n\nthey should do to be saved; nor did I ever see any in that \ncase, who had more clear views of God and themselves, or \nmore genuine sorrow for Bin and longing for Jesus* This \n\ned work of the Most High so far exceeded all my ex- \npectations, that I was lost in surprise and constrained to say. \n1- it sol Can it he BO? Nor was my being eye and ear wit- \nfrom Monday till Friday, able to reeover lne from lny \n\nastonishment 1 fell as the apostles when it Was told them \n\nthe Lord had risen. They could not believe, through tear \n\nreal joy. \n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2My reverend brethren and myself were ( as those that \n\ndream. \' There was little or nothing of the passions in the, \n\npreachers during their public performances, Dior any public \n\ndiscourses during the hours allotted for study; only, at morn* \n\n. ad evening pi me plain and brief directiona \n\n\n\nPl Dt\xc2\xabd in the Log CoDegt, fr-m the oripn.\'il in the h.uil- of Pi \n\nm. \n\n\n\n264 Webster\'s history of the \n\nsuitable for persons under spiritual trouble were delivered. \nBefore I came away, several persons received something like \nthe gift of the spirit of adoption, being tenderly affected with \na sense of redeeming love, and thereby determined to endea- \nvour after universal holiness. \n\n"I cannot fully represent this glorious work. It will bear \nyour most enlarged apprehensions of a day of grace. Let God \nhave all the glory ! It was indeed as a tree of life to my soul. \nYea, it is still to me as if I had seen the face of God." \n\nIn March, Gilbert Tennent* was informed of an extra- \nordinary appearance of the divine power and presence there, \nand requested to come and see. "With this kind motion \nI gladly complied ; and, having been there some time, had all \nthe evidence of the reality of the aforesaid report that could \nbe in reason desired." \n\nDaviesf was informed by some of the students, that the \nson of a very considerable gentleman in New York, being \nsick at the college, was awakened to a sense of his guilt. His \ndiscourse made an impression on some, and they on others, so \nthat it was general before the worthy president knew any \nthing of it. Misrepresentations were sent abroad, and some \ntook away their sons ; but most were sent back. As early as \nJune, two or three had been drawn by wicked companions \ninto their former evil habits. He learned from Mr. Duffield, \na young minister, that there was a pretty general awakening \namong the young throughout the Jerseys. \n\nOf the four classes then in the college, twenty students \nbecame ministers of our church. \n\nTwo days before the commencement in that year, President \nBurr died. His father-in-law, Jonathan Edwards, was imme- \ndiately called to succeed him; but he died of smallpox, \nMarch 22, 1758. \n\n"An earthquakej spread a tremour through a great part \nof our continent on that melancholy day. How much more \ndid Nassau Hall tremble when this pillar fell !" His cha- \nracter has been drawn by many friends. Br. Cutler,\xc2\xa7 Church \nmissionary at Boston, said of him, " I have known the man. \n\n\n\n* Preface to Sermons on Important Subjects. j- Gillies. \n\nJ Davies\'s Diary. \xc2\xa7 Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 265 \n\nOf much sobriety aud gravity, and more decent in his lan- \nguage than Mayhew or Prince ; hut odd in his principles, \nhaughty, stilt", and morose. There are not less than one \nhundred subscribers from Scotland to his book." (August \n28, 1754.) \n\nGilbert Tennent, in the Philadelphia papers, April 6, 1758, \nexpressed his high sense of Edwards\'s excellencies: \xe2\x80\x94 "There \nv\\a- b great culm in his soul at his exit." After leaving \nmessages with Mrs. Burr for his wife and children, who Mere \nabsent, "he looked about, and said, \'Now where is Jesus of \nNazareth, my true and never-failing Friend ;\' and so he fell \nasleep and went to that Lord he loved." \n\nIn 17\'J2, " sixteen popular students," as Whitefield expresses \nit, were converted, soon after the induction of Samuel Finley \nto tbe presidency. The revival* began in the freshman class, \nspread through the college, and widely refreshed the sur- \nrounding country. Of the lour classes, twenty-live entered \nthe ministry of our church ; fifty of the students are said to \nhave united with the church. \n\nFour short years were not gone, before Finley passed from \nearth; but God, who had so graciously supplied each former \nloss, again displayed his kindness in sending Witherspoou, \nand preserving him to be its venerated head for a quarter of a \ncentury. \n\nBefore noticing any of the results which flowed from the \nunion of the synods, it is desirable that the "plan" or basis \non which these bodies event ually were incorporated should be \ngiven in full. It will be found in the "Kecords"! of the first \n\nmeeting of the Synod of New Fork and Philadelphia, which \nassembled at Philadelphia, May 22, 1758. Observations on \nthe oonseouencee of Its adoption will follow in a subsequent \n\nchapter. \n\nThis document is as follows: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nk -The plan of anion agreed upon between the Synods of \nNew Fork and Philadelphia, a1 their meeting at Philadelphia, \nM... 29, 1768. \n\nu The Synods of New Fork and Philadelphia) taking into \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 i>r. Woo i i. oil. of Freehold: printed Id Bohenok\'a Eistorioal Dutoonrie at \nPrinceton. \n\nrda of the Presbyterian Church i" Amefioa, pp \n\n\n\n266 Webster\'s history of the \n\nserious consideration the present divided state of the Presby \nterian church in this land, and being deeply sensible, that the \ndivision of the church tends to weaken its interests, to dis- \nhonour religion, and consequently its glorious Author; to \nrender government and discipline ineffectual, and, finally, to \ndissolve its very frame; and, being desirous to pursue such \nmeasures as may most tend to the glory of God and the \nestablishment and edification of his people, do judge it to be \nour indispensable duty to study the things that make for \npeace, and to endeavour the healing of that breach which has \nfor some time subsisted amongst us, that so its hurtful conse- \nquences may not extend to posterity ; that all occasion of \nreproach upon our society may be removed, and that we may \ncarry on the great designs of religion to better advantage than \nwe can do in a divided state ; and since both synods continue \nto profess the same principles of faith, and adhere to the same \nform of worship, government, and discipline, there is the \ngreater reason to endeavour the compromising those differences, \nwhich were agitated many years ago with too great warmth \nand animosity, and unite in one body. \n\n"For which end, and that no jealousies or grounds of \nalienation may remain, and also to prevent future breaches \nof like nature, we agree to unite and do unite in one body, \nunder the name of the Synod of New York and Philadelphia, \non the following plan. \n\n" I. Both synods having always approved and received the \nWestminster Confession of Faith, and Larger and Shorter \nCatechisms, as an orthodox and excellent system of Christian \ndoctrine, founded on the word of God, we do still receive the \nsame as the confession of our faith, and also adhere to the \nplan of worship, government, and discipline, contained in the \nWestminster Directory, strictly enjoining it on all our mem- \nbers and probationers for the ministry, that they preach and \nteach according to the form of sound words in said Confes- \nsion and Catechisms, and avoid and oppose all errors contrary \nthereto. \n\n"II. That when any matter is determined by a major vote, \nevery member shall either actively concur with or passively \nsubmit to such determination ; or, if his conscience permit \nhim to do neither, he shall, after sufficient liberty modestly \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 267 \n\nto reason and remonstrate, peaceably withdraw from our com- \nmunion, without attempting to make an}- schism. Provided \nalways, that this shall he understood to extend only to such \ndeterminations as the body shall judge indispensable in doc- \ntrine or Presbyterian government. \n\n"HE. That any member or members, for the exoneration \nof his or their conscience before God, have a right to protest \nagainst any act or procedure of our highest judicature, because \nthere is no further appeal to another for redress ; and to require \nthat such protestation be recorded in their minutes. And, as \nsuch a protest is a solemn appeal from the bar of said judi- \ncature, no member is liable to prosecution on the account \nof his protesting. Provided always, that it shall be deemed \nIrregular and unlawful, to enter a protestation against any \nmember or members, or to protest facts or accusations instead \nof proving theni. unh-ss a fair trial be refused, even by the \nhighest judicature. And it is agreed, that protestations are \nonly to be entered against the public acts, judgments, or \ndeterminations of the judicature with which the protester\'s \nconscience is offended. \n\n"IV. As the protestation entered in the Synod of Phila- \ndelphia, armo Domino 1741, has been apprehended to have \nI.--. 11 approved and received by an act of said synod, and on \nthai aooount was judged a sufficient obstacle to a union ; the \nsaid 9ynod declare that they never judicially adopted the said \nprotestation, nor do account it a synodieal act, but that it is to \n1m- eonsidereti as Che act of those only who subscribed it; and \ntherefore cannot in its nature be a valid objection to the union \nof the two synods, especially considering that a very great \nmajority of both lynods hare become members since the said \npi.. t. --ration was entered. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 V. That it shall be esteemed and treated as a censurable \nevil, to accuse any member of heterodoxy* insufficiency, or \n\nimmorality, in B calumniating manimr, or otherwise; than by \n\nprivate brotherly admonition, or by a regular process accord* \n\ning to on* known rules of judicial trial in cases of scandal. \n\nAnd it shall he considered m the same view, if any presbytery \n\nappoint supplies within the bounds of another presb} t.-ry \n\nwithout their concurrence; or if any member officiate in \nanother\'s congregation, without asking and obtaining his \n\n\n\n268 Webster\'s history of the \n\nconsent, or the session\'s in case the minister be absent ; yet \nit shall be esteemed unbrotherly for any one, in ordinary \ncircumstances, to refuse his consent to a regular member \nwhen it is requested. \n\n" VI. That no presbytery shall license or ordain to the work \nof the ministry any candidate, until he give them competent \nsatisfaction as to his learning, and experimental acquaintance \nwith religion, and skill in divinity and cases of conscience ; \nand declare his acceptance of the Westminster Confession \nand Catechisms as the confession of his faith, and promise \nsubjection to the Presbyterian plan of government in the \nWestminster Directory. \n\n"VII. The synods declare it is their earnest desire, that a \ncomplete union may be obtained as soon as possible, and \nagree that the united synod shall model the several presby- \nteries in such manner as shall appear to them most expedient. \nProvided nevertheless, that presbyteries, where an alteration \ndoes not appear to be for edification, continue in their pre- \nsent form. As to divided congregations, it is agreed that \nsuch as have settled ministers on both sides be allowed to \ncontinue as they are ; that where those of one side have a \nsettled minister, the other, being vacant, may join with the \nsettled minister, if a majority choose so to do ; that, when \nboth sides are vacant, they shall be at liberty to unite \ntogether. \n\n" VIII. As the late religious appearances occasioned much \nspeculation and debate, the members of the New York Synod, \nin order to prevent any misapprehensions, declare their ad- \nherence to their former sentiments in favour of them, \xe2\x80\x94 that a \nblessed work of God\'s holy Spirit in the conversion of numbers \nwas then carried on ; and, for the satisfaction of all concerned, \nthis united synod agree in declaring that, as all mankind are \nnaturally dead in trespasses and sins, an entire change of heart \nand life is necessary to make them meet for the service and \nenjoyment of God ; that such a change can be only effected \nby the powerful operations of the Divine Spirit ; that when \nsinners are made sensible of their lost condition and abso- \nlute inability to recover themselves, are enlightened in the \nknowledge of Christ and convinced of his ability and willing- \nness to save, and upon gospel encouragements do choose him \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 269 \n\nfor their Saviour, and, renouncing their own righteousness \nin point of merit, depend upon his imputed righteousness \nfor their justification before God, and on his wisdom and \nstrength for guidance and support. "When upon these appre- \nhensions and exercises their souls are comforted, notwith- \nstanding all their past guilt, and rejoice in God through \n\na Christ, \xe2\x80\x94 when they hate and bewail their sins of heart \nand life, delight in the laws of God, without exception, reve- \nrently and diligently attend his ordinances, become humble \nand self-denied, and make it the business of their lives to \nplease and glorify God and to do good to their fellow men, \xe2\x80\x94 \nthis is to be acknowledged as a gracious work of God, even \nthough it should be attended with unusual bodily commo- \ntions or some more exceptionable circumstances, by means \nof infirmity, temptations, or remaining corruptions; and, \nwherever religious appearances are attended with the good \n\ntfi above mentioned, we desire to rejoice in and thank \n( k>d for them. \n\n"But, on the other hand, when persons seeming to be \nunder a religious concern, imagine that they have visions of \nthe human nature of Jesus Christ, or hear voices, or see ex- \nternal lights, or have fainting and convulsion-like fits, and on \nthe account of these judge themselves to be truly converted, \n\nJi they have not the scriptural characters of a work of \nGod above described, we believe such persons are under a \ndangerous delusion. And we testify our utter disapprobation \nof such a delusion, wherever it attends any religious appear- \nBnces, ID any church or time. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Now, as both synods are agreed in their sentiments con- \ncerning the nature of a work of grace, and declare their \ndesire and purpose to promote it, different judgments re- \nspecting particular matters of fact ought not to prevent their \nunion; especially as many of the present members have \nentered into the ministry since the time of the aforesaid \nreligious appearances. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2!\']. on the whole, :i s the design of our union fa the ad- \nvancement of the Mediator\'s kingdom, and as the wise and \nfaithful discharge of the ministerial function is the principal \nappointed mean for that glorious end, we judge thai this is a \nproper occasion to manifest our sincere intention unitedly to \n\n\n\n270 Webster\'s history of the \n\nexert ourselves to fulfil the ministry we have received of the \nLord Jesus. Accordingly, we unanimously declare our se- \nrious and fixed resolution, bj T divine aid, to take heed to our- \nselves, that our hearts be upright, our discourse edifying, and \nour lives exemplary for purity and godliness ; to take heed to \nour doctrine, that it be not only orthodox, but evangelical and \nspiritual, tending to awaken the secure to a suitable concern \nfor their salvation, and to instruct and encourage sincere \nChristians, thus commending ourselves to every man\'s con- \nscience in the sight of God ; to cultivate peace and harmony \namong ourselves, and strengthen each other\'s hands in pro- \nmoting the knowledge of divine truth and diffusing the savour \nof piety among our people. \n\n" Finally, we earnestly recommend it to all under our care, \nthat, instead of indulging a contentious disposition, they \nwould love each other with a pure heart, fervently, as brethren \nwho profess subjection to the same Lord, adhere to the same \nfaith, worship, and government, and entertain the same hope \nof glory. And we desire that they would improve the present \nunion for their mutual edification, combine to strengthen the \ncommon interests of religion, and go hand in hand in the path \nof life ; which we pray the God of all grace would please to \neffect, for Christ\'s sake. Amen. \n\n"The synod agree, that all former differences and disputes \nare laid aside and buried ; and that no future inquiry or vote \nshall be proposed in this synod concerning these things ; but \nif any member seek a synodical inquiry or declaration about \nany of the matters of our past differences, it shall be deemed \na censurable breach of this agreement, and be refused, and he \nbe rebuked accordingly." \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 271 \n\n\n\nCHAPTER X. \n\nThis noble declaration* is for our church, what the Decla- \nration of Independence is for our country. It is a promul- \ngation of first principles, \xe2\x80\x94 a setting forth of our faith, order, \nand religion, as an answer to those who question us. It is the \nfoundation of our ecclesiastical compact, the bond of our \nunion. It is with grateful exultation, that we read, that this \ndeclaration was unanimously adopted, \xe2\x80\x94 that every member \nof the united synod set his hand to this testimony in behalf \nOf truth, order, and evangelical religion. \n\nEvery occasion of contention was shut out but two: one of \ntkexn \xe2\x80\x94 the remodelling of the presbyteries \xe2\x80\x94 had been forced \nin by the astonishing pertinacity of the Old Side. The other \n\xe2\x80\x94 the examining of candidates for the ministry, touching the \nsaving operations of the Holy Spirit on their hearts \xe2\x80\x94 was \nl.d by both sides as a necessary duty ; hut, as to the way \nin which the examination should be made, they differed \ntotally. \n\nTh.rc were many circumstances steadily concurring to \nproduce on these points alienation of feeling, and to make the \nunion merely nominal. Like the trickling of drop on drop in \nthe Blight crevice* of the anvil or the oarrow fissure in the dill\', \n\xe2\x80\x94of little moment till the freezing air distends them and the \nfcron IS bnnl in Blinder, and \'he mountain shakes, and the \n\nforest crashes beneath the falling fragments of the rifted rock, \n\n\xe2\x80\x94 so what, in the genial atmosphere of < \'hri.-tian all\'ection and \nbrotherly IdndneSS, would have distilled and exhaled unper- \n\nceive.i ami harmless, became, in the polar temperature ^\\\' \ndeclining piety, mighty to -hake and shiver the fabric and \n\nfoundation. \n\n* Dr. Hodge. \n\n\n\n272 Webster\'s history of the \n\nThe Synod of New York had the immense advantage in \nalmost every particular. It was superior in numbers : its \nmembers were in the flower of their age, largely endowed \nwith talent, occupying all the conspicuous places and com- \nmanding posts; they were of high character for public spirit, \nworth, and piety. Their zeal prompted them to undertake \nimportant enterprises, and to sustain them vigorously till \ncrowned with success. They had also large and growing con- \ngregations, and they were seconded in their labours by an \nable band of elders, and a goodly company of prayerful \nparents. There was a vital energy in their ministrations. \nIf their sermons were bare of ornament as skeletons, they \nwere compacted together with the joints and bands of doc- \ntrines, precepts, and promises. Though very dry to the \ncursory inspection of the caviller and the trifler, yet, like \nthe dead bones of Elisha, they gave life even to the dead. \nThe increase of candidates of an excellent spirit, adorned \nwith appropriate gifts for the ministry, was a cheering token \nthat He who ascended on high had accepted their works. \n\nThey had also a college, with a liberal charter, in a degree \nendowed, well officered, with a high and increasing repu- \ntation, under- pious influence, and visited with times of \nrefreshing from the presence of the Lord. \n\nThe Synod of Philadelphia, stationary for seventeen years \nin numbers, with few young men of distinguished promise, \nwith congregations mostly in obscure places and not remark- \nable for size, liberality, or zeal, with no charter for their \nschool at Newark, were under the necessity of placing their \ncandidates* in an institution largely under the benumbing \ninfluence of a paralyzing Arminianism. On the other hand, \nthe Old Side had more of the bearing and courtesy of the \nhigher circles, and were too ready to notice the deficien- \ncies of men whose thoughts had not been turned to the \nministry till they had been disciplined to handicrafts and \n\n\n\n* Of these, several went to England for orders, as William Thompson, son \nof Rev. Samuel Thompson, of Pennsboro\' : William Edmeston, Rector of St. \nThomas, in Frederick county, Maryland; Samuel Magaw, Rector of St. Paul\'s, \nPhiladelphia ; and Francis Wilson, from the Forks of Delaware, and brother-in- \nlaw of McHenry, of Deep Run ; and Matthew Tate, son of Rev. Joseph Tate, \nof Donegal, who also conformed. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 273 \n\ntillage. Their haughtiness was not unnoticed by their \nhearers; and the synod and the presbyteries had cause to \nlament the insulting arrogance they used in bringing appeals \nto their bar. \n\nThe New Side were men of like passions with others. \nThey were not blind to the contrast between them and \ntheir old antagonists. They repaid slights and coolness, by \nexercising, as a majority, their power over their brethren, \nafter the manner of conquerors towards a restive but helpless \nnation. \n\nAt the union, the three Old-Side ministers in Virginia were \nnot present; and, without being consulted, they were separated \nfrom Donegal Presbytery and annexed to Hanover Presbytery. \nAll the members of the latter body lived east of the Blue Ridge, \nexcept Brown, of Timber-riclge. They all three attended the \nsynod in 1759, and requested to be erected into a separate pres- \nbytery, which Bhould embrace also Brown and Hoge, of Ope- \nqnhon. It was a most reasonable request; for, even in our day, \nmofet ministers would think it a requisition equivalent to \ndebarment from presbyterial privileges, if they were obliged \nto go from Augusta, or Rockingham, to Hanover, and Louisa, \ntwice in a year. The brethren on the peninsula of the Chesa- \npeake had been favoured with a separate organization, al- \nthough they were only five in number, and could as easily \ni presbytery in Chester or Newcastle counties, after the \nunion, ae before. The territory embraced in Lewes Presbytery \nfamished few openings for new congregations, and its declin- \ning vacancies offered small inducement to probationers to \nsettle; while the Valley of Virginia was rapidly filling up with \na Presbyterian population, and its new congregations and its \nolder vacancies drew all the neighbouring eyes. The five \nbrethren in the Valley had pastoral charges; two of those in \n\nthe peninsula were only BOJOUmerS for a few year-. The others \n\nmight without inconvenience have been lefl in connection with \nNewcastle Presbytery; but it would have been fin- more for \nthe accommodation of those in Western Virginia to have re- \nmained with Donegal Presbytery^han to have been unequally \n\n1 with the distant mini-ters <^nst of the mountains. The \n\nmajority of the synod refused their request There were three \nNew-Side men in Lewes Presbytery to two Old-Side; hut, \n\n1H \n\n\n\n274 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OP THE \n\nin the new one asked for, the Old Side had a majority of \none. \n\nAt the union, no attempt was made to remodel the Old-Side \nPresbyteries of [Newcastle and Donegal and the New-Side \nPresbytery of Newcastle, which embraced ministers and con- \ngregations in the bounds of both. They were left as they \nwere for one year. In 1759, Donegal Presbytery was absent. \nIf they hoped, by not attending, to secure a continuance of the \nexisting state, they were disappointed ; for the synod directed \nthe two presbyteries of Newcastle to confer, and, upon their \nreport, it was ordered that three New-Side men, Robert Smith, \nRoan, and Hoge, with one Old-Side man, Samson Smith, should \nbe one body. The Presbytery of Newcastle then consisted of \nfour of the Old Side, Boyd, McDowell, Hector Alison, and \nMcKennan ; and of eight of the New Side, Blair, Samuel and \nJames Finley, Charles Tennent, Rodgers, Bay, and Sterling. \nIn no instance does any unkind feeling seem to have arisen \nfrom the collision of the two parties. Donegal Presbytery \nstood seven of the Old Side, Thomson, Elder, Zanchy, Steel, \nTate, McMordie, and S. Smith, to three New Side, R. Smith, \nRoan, and Hoge. The last rarely attended any meetings, and \nadded nothing but his name to the minority. It is worthy of \nnotice that at this time Duffield was settled in Carlisle, but he \nwas left in Newcastle Presbytery. The synod, on being asked \nwhether the congregations of Steel and Duffield should build \neach a meeting-house in that town, were grieved that there \nshould still be such a spirit of animosity, and, far from encou- \nraging any steps to perpetuate a divided state, enjoined both \nministers to unite their counsels and use their influence to \nbring about a cordial agreement between the congregations, \nthat a plan may be laid for building a house in common. \nThey built together in the following year. Duffield, soon after \nthe new-modelling, agreed to join Donegal Presbytery, though \nnot without apprehensions of unpleasant consequences. He \nwrote a letter to his uncle, Mr. Blair, in which he expressed \nhimself freely, and censured Steel for having underhandedly \nand hastily obtained his call to Carlisle. This letter fell into \nSteel\'s hands ; whether befWe or after it reached its destination, \ndoes not appear. This greatly embittered them, and came \nbefore the presbytery, and the letter was put upon the record. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 275 \n\nThe presbytery, in 17G2, differed seriously in the trial of \nSamson Smith. The majority rejected the evidence of several \nwitnesses, as being incompetent to give legal testimony: by \ntheir exclusion, the prosecution could not be sustained, and he- \nwas cleared. The rejected witnesses appealed to the synod, as \ndid also one of the minority of the presbytery; and a highly- \nstable committee, embracing a fair proportion of both \nparties, was appointed to go on the ground and hear the whole \nThey rejected one witness which the presbytery had \nrefused, and admitted another rejected witness to testify. The \nsynod approved of the admission of the latter, and by a great \nmajority disapproved of the rejection of the other: ten mem- \nbers declared themselves not clear to join in this disapproval. \nEwing protested very learnedly against the admission of the \nwitnesses, and declared that it would be criminal for him to \npay any regard or submission to any sentence passed by a judi- \ncature on Buch evidence. The synod replied, that they had \nonly determined that, for any thing the presbytery or com- \nmittee had offered, both the witnesses ought to be admitted to \nThe committee was reappointed, to meet at Little \nBritain, with full powers to hear and determine. \n\nBut new causes of difficulty had arisen. The presbytery had \nlicensed William Edmeston, although K. Smith, Roan, and \nDuffield declared themselves unsatisfied with the declaration \nof hi- religions experience. Roan appealed, and the matter \nwas left to tin- same committee. \n\nThere was a third appeal. Duffield had objected to the \n\nright of Steel\'s eld* r to -it in presbytery, because he had not \n\nordained. The presbytery overruled the objection, and \n\nRoan and Duffield appealed. This matter was deferred by the \n\nsynod tor several years. \n\nThe Old-Side congregation of \\\\Y-t Nottingham petitioned \nto be transferred from Newcastle to Donegal Presbytery, and \nthe granting of this request gave the majority an opportunity \nto strengthen the New-Side interest in that body. They \ngranted the petition, and annexed also the New-Side church \nof West Nottingham, Strain and his congregations, Chanceford \nand Slate Ridge, and Hum and his congregation, Little \nBritain. \n\nIn lT\'U, all the Second Presbytery of Philadelphia waa ah- \n\n\n\n276 Webster\'s history of the \n\nsent, and all of Donegal Presbytery but Robert Smith and \nHunt. In 1765, Robert and Samson Smith, and Tate, attended. \nThe appeal was decided respecting the ordination of the elders, \nand the judgment of the presbytery was affirmed. They were \nto be received as elders, because they had been elected by the \npeople, who had acquiesced in their appointment, though they \nhad never explicitly consented in the faafe of the congregation \nto undertake the office. The presbytery and the synod agreed \nin judging that it would be for the peace and edification of the \nchurch to have a public declaration of consent made in every \ninstance of accepting the eldership. \n\nThe Second Congregation of West Nottingham (New Side) \nmade a representation of the creeks and rivers to be crossed \nin order to meet with Donegal Presbytery, and was reannexed \nto Newcastle Presbyter}^. The majority of Donegal Presbytery \nasked to be divided, or to have the members added of late \nyears, ordered to return whence they had been taken. This \nled to a remodelling, obviously with a sole view to the prepon- \nderance of the New Side. They dissolved the old presbytery, \nand added Bay, of Deer Creek, to those on the west side of the \nSusquehanna, and formed them into Carlisle Presbytery, thus \nthrowing Samuel Thomson and Steel into connection with \nDuffield, Bay, Strain, and Hoge. By an equally arbitrary, un- \ncalled-for, and preposterous measure, all the members east of \nthe Susquehanna were formed, with Newcastle Presbytery, into \na body called Lancaster Presbytery. Beard, who had been \ninstalled over the First Church in West Nottingham, joined the \nsix others of the Old Side, in declaring that this arrangement \ngave them no relief, while their rights were infringed by being \ndistributed, unconsulted and unwilling, at the pleasure of the \nsynod. This had no effect ; and a hope was expressed, that in \nnew connections, the prejudices and animosity might subside \nand wear off. McDowell and Ewing dissented, and entered \ntheir reasons, apprehending that the act was contrary to the \nengagement at the union, that the remodelling of the pres- \nbyteries should be only for edification, and not for destruc- \ntion. \n\nIn 1766, the great majority of the synod refused to rescind \nthe minute of the last year, except so far as continuing Carlisle \nPresbytery. The effect of this would have been to restore \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 277 \n\nNewcastle Presbytery to existence, and to revive Donegal Pres- \nbytery, with the Susquehanna for its western bound. \n\nA like fate awaited the proposal to revive Donegal Presby- \ntery and leave Carlisle untouched, and also the plan to annex \nthe members of Donegal Presbytery to the Second Philadelphia \nPresbytery t\'< >r i >ne year. Matthew Wilson, Ewing, Patrick and \nFrancis Alison protested against these refusals, since only the \nexchanging a member or two in two presbyteries would have \nprevented the breach. Tate and Beard then declined the juris- \ndiction of the synod, declaring themselves members of Done- \ngal Presbytery and of the Synod of Philadelphia, as it existed \nbefore the union. The venerable Richard Treat, the oldest \nmember of the synod except Pierson and Cross, proposed \xe2\x80\x94 and \nthe Bynod agreed \xe2\x80\x94 that all should be as it was before erecting \nCarlisle and Lancaster Presbyteries. This, however, was no \nimprovement of the affair; for the New Side had gained Robert \nI \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2!\xe2\x80\xa2, at Middle Spring, and Slemons, at Marsh Creek, and \nirse had a stronger majority than before. They met and \nconstituted; but the seven dissatisfied brethren formed them- \nBelves into a separate Presbytery of Donegal, and ordained \nLang, at West Conococheague. They addressed the synod; \nbut qo notice was taken of their letter further than to record, \nthat, having adopted the leclinatnre of Beard and Tate, they \nar<- no longer members of this body. On hearing the paper a \nsecond time, they appointed a committee to converse with \nthem, and bring in an overture. They proposed to erect the \nmembers of 1 Donegal Presb} tery, east of Susquehanna, together \nwith Steel, with the old Dame, and to revive Carlisle Presby- \ntery, and add Roan, Thomson, and Lang. This was rejected, \nand the dissatisfied brethren were assured that any reasonable \nproposals would be beard on their withdrawing the declinature. \nRobert Smith asked and obtained leave to join Newcastle \nPresbytery; and Roan dropped his appeal in the case of Ed- \nmeston, on condition it Bhould be recorded, that he did not \nacquiesce in the judgment In 17^. Tate proposed to with- \ndraw the declinature, if the synod would annex Samson Smith \nand Beard to Newcastle Presbytery; Samuel Thomson and \nLang to Donegal; and Tate, Steel, Elder, and McMordie, to \n\nthe See,, ||d | *lv - I , \\\\ ,\xe2\x80\xa2 ,-y , , f | \' | , \\ | ;, , | ,\xe2\x80\xa2 | J,|, j a . The s\\!l"d ;\xe2\x80\x9e\xe2\x96\xa0,\xe2\x96\xa0,\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 | , m I \n\nStrain protesting that this was erecting a monument \n\n\n\n278 Webster\'s histoet of the \n\nof the former division, and would have the same effect as a \nrupture of the union, and would obstruct the success of the \ngospel ; that it was sacrificing the peace of the church, and in a \nmeasure the success of the gospel, to appease the wrath of a few, \nand that it opened the door for unrestrained passion to demand \nof the body whatever satisfaction a party might please. Eoan, \nDufheld, Cooper, and Slemons protested that bad temper and \nwant of brotherly love were the only motives the dissatisfied \nbrethren had to urge; that they had made heavy charges \nagainst their co-presbyters and the synod, and had been zeal- \nously engaged in promoting schism ; that to grant their request \nwas to admit their charges and justify their practice, and espe- \ncially to strengthen a presbytery* which, in the judgment of \nmany of the synod, ought not to be allowed an existence. \nThey protested against it as covering offenders from discipline, \nfurnishing a pernicious precedent, and leading to a waste of \nprecious time, which might be better employed than in a jour- \nney of one hundred miles to attend presbytery. \n\nThe Presbytery of Philadelphia tested, immediately after \nthe union, the sense in which Article VI. of the Plan of Union \nwas to be understood, \xe2\x80\x94 viz.: "Every candidate, before being \nlicensed, shall give competent satisfaction as to his experimental \nacquaintance with religion." John*Beard, a graduate of Nas- \nsau Hall, had been before Newcastle Presbytery as a candidate, \nand, without dismission or recommendation, applied to Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery, October 23, 1759, and Was directed to visit \nthe members of presbytery at their houses, and give them op- \nportunity of knowing his religious views and spiritual state. \nThis was reviving a rule that had been adopted in 1735, enact- \ning, "That no student be received to enter on trials in order to \nhis licensing to preach, until he shall repair unto the dwellings \nor lodgings of at least most of the ministers of the presby- \ntery, and thereby give them an opportunity to take a view of \nhis parts and behaviour." In May, they examined him, and \nprofessed themselves satisfied with every thing except what \nrelated to a work of grace on the soul. They proceeded to \nlicense him in August, 1760. \n\nIn May, 1760, Magaw offered himself to the presbytery, and \n\n* The Second Presbytery of Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 2(9 \n\nthey resolved, that they were bound to improve no candidate, \nuntil he had visited the ministers, that they might personally \nInspect into his experience. The presbytery heard his declara- \ntion of experience at a subsequent meeting, and deferred a judg- \nment on it. In August, 17i.il, they debated the question whether \nhis former declaration of experience was satisfactory. Four \nministers were satisfied, \xe2\x80\x94 Cross, Alison, Simonton, andEwing; \nseven were not, \xe2\x80\x94 Tennent, Treat, Hunter, Lawrence,Greenmaii, \nRamsey, and Chesnut. Magaw,* willing to give them all the \nsatisfaction in his power, offered to converse with them, that \nthey might further inspect into his state. The conversation af- \nforded them no additional light. The question was then taken \non proceeding to license, and five elders and four ministers gave \ntheir voices in the affirmative, so that, by a majority of two, the \nmatter was settled. The elders were Philip Wynkoop, of \nAbingdon, George Bryan, of the First Church, and Gunning \nBedford, of the Second Church in Philadelphia, M.Dubois, of \nPittsgrove, and John Cloyd, of Great Valley. The seven \nministers protested, but did not wish thereby to hinder the \nmajority from admitting Magaw to preach as a probationer. \nThrv unanimously approved his sermon. \n\nThe application of Beard to the Presbytery of Phila- \ndelphia, after having left the Newcastle Presbytery without \nbeing dismissed from that body, led to the proposal to \nthe synod in 1760 of this query, \xe2\x80\x94 viz.: Whether our stu- \ndents, bred in our colleges, have not a right to apply to \nany of our presbyteries for improvement for the sacred \nwork <>!\' tin- ministry! and whether they ought not to be re- \nceived on Bufficienl recommendations? It was not answered \n\ntill L764, and then as follows: \xe2\x80\x94 Any Student of divinity has \n\na righl to Btudy for his improvement under any approved \ndivine in the synod; but when he enters on trials, he shall \ncome under the care of the presbytery in whose bounds he \n\nn brought up, has mostly lived, and is best known; and \n\nif, tor convenience, he desires to come under some other pres- \nbytery, nothing Less shall be esteemed a sufficient recom- \nmendation but a testimonial from the presbytery to which be \nnaturally b< ral ministers of n, recommend- \n\n* M Philadelphia Presbytery. \n\n\n\n280 Webster\'s history of the \n\ning him as a candidate of exemplary piety and holiness of \nconversation. Montgomery and Talmage dissented from this \njudgment; but it has always remained as a law in the church. \n\nThe debate in respect to Magaw\'s experience led to the \nintroduction of this query in 1761 : \xe2\x80\x94 Whether, since holiness \nis a qualification requisite in a gospel minister, it is the duty \nof a presbytery, and possible for them, to make candidates \ngive a narration of their personal exercises, and upon this \nform a judgment of their real spiritual state towards God, as \nthe ground of admitting or rejecting them ? The answer was \ndeferred, as also the request of a number of the members of \nPhiladelphia Presbytery to be set ofl* as a distinct judicatory. \nIn 1762, the query was withdrawn as not clear. Those who \napprehended themselves particularly concerned in its. solution, \ndeclared it was a matter of conscience with them, and there- \nfore highly desirable to ascertain the true and proper meaning \nof the query, the precise thing to be considered. It was stated \nas follows : \xe2\x80\x94 Whether a candidate\'s declaration of his own \nexercises and experiences in religion, given in the way of nar- \nration, or of answers to questions put to him concerning them, \nshould be required by a judicature as one appointed, warrant- \nable, and useful mean of forming a judgment of his experi- \nmental acquaintance with religion, according to which judg- \nment they are to admit or reject him ? It was ordered that \nevery member should be called to speak what he thinks proper \nto the question ; after which, if occasion require, the question \nshall be debated and then determined. John Brainerd took \nthe chair, and the roll was called : two days and a half were \nconsumed in going through it. The vote was taken on the \n20th, and an affirmative answer was given, thirteen voting in \nthe negative, and one being non liquet. \n\nIt was also decided in the affirmative that this solution of \nthe query is a compliance with the plain sense and meaning \nof the sixth article of the Plan of Union, and with the order \nin the Westminster Directory to examine candidates touching \nthe grace of God in their hearts. \n\nThe dissatisfied declared, that the provision in the eighth \narticle for the continuance of presbyteries to act separately, \ntill it should be for edification to unite them, was a confirma- \ntion of the method used by the presbyteries of Philadelphia \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 2S1 \n\nSynod in licensing candidates. The Presbytery of New York, \nfearing a rupture, had chosen to be absent, and had sent, by \ntwo of their members, the following proposals: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. Presbyteries may continue to use the methods they \nchoose without blame or censure. 2. The mode in any pres- \nbytery shall be adopted by a vote of the majority. 3. They \nmay ask, in thesi, what the candidate believes to be the expe- \nriences of a real convert, and whether he believes be has ex- \nperienced this saving change. 4. Ministers majr be joined \ntogether in presbyteries, so that they may peaceably act accord- \ning to judgment and conscience in the discharge of this im- \nportant duty. \n\nThese were not acted on; but Treat, S. Finley, and Blair, \nwith Dr. Alison, Ewing, and McDowell, and A. Horton, were \nappointed to attempt an amicable accommodation. The synod, \nafter solemn prayer to God for direction, agreed that every \nmember of a presbytery may use that way which he in con- \nscience looks upon as proper to obtain a competent satisfaction \nof a candidate\'s experimental acquaintance with religion, and \nthat then the presbytery, as a presbytery, shall determine whe- \nther to take him on further trials. This agreement did not \nsatisfy a number of the synod. \n\nImmediately on this vote, and just before adjournment, the \nSecond Philadelphia Presbytery was erected, for one year \nat least, to consist of Cross, Alison, Ewing, Simonton, and \nLatta. \n\nThe vehemence on bbth sides is to be traced to two circum- \nstances: \xe2\x80\x94 the New side assumed that this declaration of expe- \nrience was the only method by which the piety of a candidate \n\nCOnld !>\'\xe2\x80\xa2 ascertained, ami that tin- dislike to it grew out of the \n\nopposition of the unconverted, and of their readiness to admit \noiler- like themselves into the ministry. Eence, John Blair, \nin his "Animadversions on a Pamphlet styled. Remarks on a \nlate Decision, and Thoughts on the Examination and Trials of \nCandidates," labours to show the necessity of holiness in \nthose thai bear the vessels of the Lord. The old side de- \nnounced this " inspection into the state towards God," as an \ninvasion of God\'e rights, an ascription to one\'s self 8f Christ\'s \nheart-searching power, and an Imitation of the lamentable \nexcesses of Davenport and his compeers. They claimed that \n\n\n\n282 Webster\'s history of the \n\nthere were other methods of complying with the Directory, \n\neven those always in use in Great Britain and Ireland and \namong ourselves from the beginning. \n\nBesides the cases of Magaw and Beard, there seems to have \nbeen only one other in which there was difficulty about the \ndeclaration of experiences, \xe2\x80\x94 that of William Edmeston, who \nwas licensed by Donegal Presbytery ; although Roan, Robert \nSmith, and Duffield, protested that they were not satisfied \nconcerning his spiritual state. By a remarkable coincidence, \nnone of these men continued in the work of the ministry. \nBeard was deposed ; Magaw never had a pastoral charge, and \ntook holy orders; Edmeston gave up his license and went \nto England, and, having been made a priest, settled in \nMaryland. \n\nHugh "Williamson had been taken on trials by Newcastle \nPresbytery, and, without being dismissed, went off to Connec- \nticut, and was "approbated" by some association. In May, \n1760, he asked to be received by Philadelphia Presbytery as a \nprobationer : there was a tie in the vote, and the matter was \ncarried to the synod in the form of two queries: \xe2\x80\x94 "Whether \nit is regular for our students of divinity, who intend to return \nand officiate in the bounds of the synod, to go into New Eng- \nland or elsewhere to be licensed?" and, further, "Whether \nany minister or probationer, ordained or licensed in Scotland, \nEngland, Ireland, Connecticut, or in any of the Reformed \nchurches, ought not to be admitted as a minister or proba- \ntioner if he produced sufficient certificates that he was orderly \nordained or licensed, and has behaved according to his cha- \nracter, provided he adopts our Confession and promises sub- \njection in the Lord ?" \n\nThe queries were deferred ; but it was voted that Mr. Hugh \nWilliamson, a probationer, who was licensed in Connecticut, \nbe received under the synod\'s care. He resigned his license \nin a few years, and served as a ruling elder in the First Church \nin Philadelphia. He became a practitioner of medicine, and \nrose to eminence in political life. It was he who obtained the \nletters of Governor Hutchinson of Massachusetts, through the \ninadvertence of a clerk in the office in London, and, handing \nthem to Franklin, he passed over to France. He represented \nNorth Carolina in the convention which formed our Federal \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 2S3 \n\nConstitution, and wrote a history of that State. He spent his \nlast years in the city of New York.* \n\nThe queries, "so often repeated," were not answered till \n1764:\xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Though entertaining a high regard for the Associated \nChurches of Xew England, yet we cannot but judge that stu- \ndents who go to them, or any other than our own presbyteries, \nto obtain license, in order to return and officiate among us, \nact very irregularly; and are not to be approved or employed \nby any of our presbyteries, as hereby we are deprived of the \nright of trying and approving the qualifications of our own \ncandidates: but if, in some circumstances, it be thought ne- \nry for the greater good of a congregation for a student to \ndo so, it shall be laid before the presbytery to which the con- \ngregation belongs, and be approved by them. \n\n" Though every Christian society should maintain communion \nwith others so far as they can with a good conscience, yet no \n\xe2\x96\xa0y is obliged to adopt or imitate the irregularities or defi- \neiencies of another, contrary to its own established and approved \nrules . \xc2\xbb1* procedure. If any society or body of men is known to \nbe of erroneous principles, or to be lax and negligent as to the \northodoxy and piety of those they admit to the ministry, as we \napprehend to be the case of the New Light in Ireland, and of \nBome other particular judicatures and individual ministers \nwho may, and, on this continent, sometimes do, convene toge- \nther a- a temporary judicature, for the single purpose of licens- \ning and ordaining a candidate; in such cases, none of our \nlyteriee are obliged to receive and employ in their bounds, \nas ministers or probationers, Buch persons, though producing \nrtificatee and professing to adopt our Confession. But \nit\' any minister or candidate comes well recommended by \non whose testimony we can depend, they are t<> he gladly \nsd, on t hei]\' adopting our Confession and promising sub- \njection in the Lord." \n\nIn 1765, an explanation was added to the answer, affirming \nthe undoubted right of presbyteries to converse with persons \nfrom foreign parts, so tar a- they may find it accessary for their \nown satisfaction, and not to receive them implicitly on h \n\n* BomoVi Memoira <>f Wfllhun \n\n\n\n284 Webster\'s history of the \n\ntificate, and a general profession of the Westminster Confes- \nsion ; and it is highly necessary to be more particular and \nexact in examining the principles of those who come from a \nchurch or judicature generally suspected or known to be erro- \nneous, or lax and negligent respecting the moral conduct or \npiety of their candidates and ministers, or who come from \nany number of ministers convened without any regular con- \nstitution, merely for the purpose of licensing or ordaining \nparticular persons. \n\nThis decision gave no small offence to the Old-Side men, \nwho resented highly the insult offered to the New England \nchurches. The rule, however, was not stringent enough, in \nthe judgment of the other side ; and, the emigration from \nIreland having greatly increased during the ten years preced- \ning the Revolution, the number of ministers from that quarter \nincreased. In 1773, Roan proposed that no foreign minister \nor candidate should be received until their whole testimonials \nand credentials had been laid before the synod, for the very \ngood reason that we had cause to distrust the faithfulness of \nmany foreign judicatories in licensing, ordaining, and recom- \nmending men who held not the great doctrines of the Re- \nformation. This overture was admitted by a very small \nmajority. \n\nThe whole Second Philadelphia Presbytery unanimously \ndissented, because it takes away the essential rights of pres- \nbyteries ; insinuates that they are unsound, or not trust- \nworth} 7 , and is uncharitable and inconsistent w T ith the love, \nrespect, and fellowship we owe to the Protestant churches \nabroad ; will prevent foreign ministers froni uniting with \nus, and induce them to erect separate presbyteries : it will \nfurnish a pretext for the synod to engross all power, and is as \nmuch an insult to the northern provinces as to Great Britain \nand Ireland. Rodgers, Caldwell, McWhorter, Montgomery, \nJohn Miller, Anderson, Read, and McDowell dissented, but \nentered no reasons. Matthew Wilson, Latta, King, and Lang \ndissented for substantially the same reasons as those given \nby the Second Philadelphia Presbytery. They asked, " May \nnot ministers who are pious and sound in the faith come from \nGreat Britain or Ireland?" \n\nThe synod replied that none of these brethren denied that \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 285 \n\nthere was so great a degeneracy in the churches of the mother- \ncountry as rendered it peculiarly necessary that much care \nshould be taken in admitting ministers and candidates from \nthence ; and that the presbyteries could not have the same \nmeans as the synod of information concerning their character, \nnor indeed such as was necessary to judge with any sufficient \ndegree of certainty concerning them. It was, however, agreed \nthat the overture be expressly declared not to extend to per- \ncoming from any part of this continent. \n\nRodgers moved that the operation of the overture be sus- \npended for a year. He afterwards withdrew this proposal, \nand, in the place of Roan\'s plan, it was ordered that presby- \nteries may, if they see their way clear, employ foreign minis- \nters, but not receive them to full membership, until their full \ntestimonials and recommendations be laid before the synod. \n\nIn 1774, Tate requested a review of the act, and a consi- \nderation of the power by which the synod restrains presby- \nteries from acting according to the best of their judgment, \nin things which, before the Bynod\'a act, were allowed to be \nlawful, and not forbidden by the word of God. Tims, Tate \nand his Old-Side coadjutors actually took the ground they \nbad condemned in the New Brunswick Apology as anarchical, \nand which the New Light in Ireland had always so stre- \nnuously maintained as the stronghold of their heresy. \n\nThe synod rescinded the act Witherspoon, Spencer, Hun- \nter, Blemons, Mitchell, Dofoeld, and Hezekiah James Balch \ndissented. Etodgers, Treat, and McWhorter brought in a \nsubstitute, which was unanimously approved, and which was \nlows : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2h being of the highest importance to the interest of the \n\nmer\'s kingdom thai church judicatories should maintain \n\nwith the greatest care orthodoxy in doctrine and purity in \n\npractice in all their members, the synod, in addition to the \n\nien1 of 1764 and \'65, do most earnestly recommend to \n\nthe presbyteries, to be very stricl and careful in examining \n\nthe certificates and testimonials Of those who come from \n\nforeign churches, and be very cautious not to receive them, \nunless they are authenticated by private letters, or other cre- \ndible and sufficient evidence; and the presbyteries shall lay \nthe Bynod the testimonials and all other certih\'cat \n\n\n\n286 Webster\'s history of the \n\nwhich they have received any foreign minister or probationer ; \nand, if the synod shall find them false or insufficient, the pro- \nceedings of the presbytery, in receiving him, shall be null, and \nhe shall not be owned as in ministerial communion with us. \nBut whoever shall come duly recommended from abroad, we \nwill receive them as brethren and give them every encourage- \nment in our power." \n\nAn important minute appears on the Records of 1784 : \xe2\x80\x94 \n" The synod, having reason, by information given since this \nmeeting, to apprehend the churches under their care in immi- \nnent danger from ministers and licentiates of unsound princi- \nples from abroad, do hereby renew their former injunctions, \nand strictly enjoin on every member of this body, under pain \nof censure, to be particularly careful in this respect." An \nattested copy of the injunctions and of this minute was sent \nto each presbytery. In 1785, John Hiddleson, a young minis- \nter of Belfast Presbytery, produced his credentials to the \nsynod, and asked to be received as a member of Newcastle \nPresbytery. "Witherspoon, Robert Smith, Miller, McFarquhar, \nCooper, and Woodhull, having examined his papers and con- \nversed with him, reported that he ought not, in their opinion, \nto be annexed to any of the presbyteries, but may, if he \nchoose, be committed to any of them, to deal with him as \nthey think best, and report what they do to the next synod. \nHe is not mentioned again. It is curious that William \nMcKee, of the same presbytery, presented his credentials on \nthe same day with Hiddleson, and was at once received. It \ndoes not appear that, up to the formation of the General \nAssembly, any heretical or unsound teacher, if we except \nHemphill, was received into membership from any foreign \nbody. \n\nThe desponding, complaining tone of the Church ministers, \nin their letters to the Venerable Society and the bishops, is so \nuniform as to be amusing. In New York, not a governor had \nbeen at church from Sir Charles Hardy\'s day, in 1743, to 1760. \nThe growth of their churches was hindered by sad, untoward \ncircumstances. Punderson, of New Haven, lacked the polite- \nness requisite for that post; Standard, of Bedford, was never \n\n* Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 287 \n\nagreeable to the people; Lyon, of Setauket, was perfunctory, \nand so covetous that his clothes were ragged. Only one was \ndestitute of moral character, \xe2\x80\x94 Nathaniel Whitaker, of Mary- \nland, who is denounced as the worst of men. Their gain \nfrom the Dissenters occasioned them no small uneasiness. \nWilliam McClenachan, from Ireland, had been the minister \nof the Presbyterian churches in Brunswick and Georgetown, \nMaine, from 1734 to 1744, and, after a short stay at Blandford, \nMass., he was installed colleague with the Rev. Thomas \nCheever, of Chelsea, near Boston, in 1748. He remained \nthere six years; and, having taken holy orders, he was sta- \ntioned as a missionary of the Venerable Society at Frankfort \nand Georgetown, Maine, "being a man* of uncommon forti- \ntude, and cheerfully disposed to undergo hardships." He left \nthis frontier-missionf with no credit to himself, and went to \nVirginia. lie engaged himself to a parish, and received \nBQCh marks of their favour that he ought to think himself \nunder obligation to Berve them. lie gave encouragement to \nthe expectation that if be could obtain the Society\'s consent \nhe would settle with them, lie came to Philadelphia in 1759, \nami produced a great impression at Christ Church. The \ncommissary, Dr. Jenney, was aged, asthmatic, and feeble. \nWilliam Sturgeon was the assistant minister, and another \nminister was needed. In May, seventy-four persons peti- \ntioned the vestry for McClenachan, and they granted him the \nuse of the pulpit as a lecturer, provided the subscribers would \nmaintain him. In June, he was elected assistant minister. \nProvost Smith and the commissary, though no very good \nfriends, united in opposition to hia Battlement Smith was \nBhocked at an extemporaneous prayer in Christ Church, in \nwlimh, after many complimentary titles addressed to the Most \nHigh, he said, " We thank thee thai we are not in hell." \nDr. Johnson, of New Xork, wrote bo the archbishop, >w I wish \nhe doee not occasion much disturbance at Philadelphia. I \ndoubt be u enthusiastical. 1I\xc2\xab- affects to act a part, like \n\nAVl.itrlield." \n\nThe Bishop of London wrote, March 25, L760, and declined \n\n\n\n* llawkiii-\' - Mkttoni of the RngHsb Church. \n\nf Dorr*! History of Ohrist Church, Philadelphia. \xe2\x80\x94 Albtnj DoomMnta \n\n\n\n288 Webster\'s history of the \n\nto license him, and directed the vestry not to countenance \nhim, but to assist him to remove to Virginia. They waited \non him with a copy of the letter. \n\nSeeing that, having been elected assistant, he was likely \nto be kept out of the post, the New-Side brethren took up \nthe matter warmly. He was an Irishman, as most of them \nwere. He was introducing evangelical doctrines into a pulpit \nwhere, from the beginning, an historical faith and a lifeless \nroutine had superseded the preaching of the cross. Eighteen \nof them, in May, 1760, addressed a letter to the Archbishop \nof Canterbury, stating their view of the case, and soliciting \nhis Grace to use his influence, to constrain the commissary \nto induct him, in obedience to the call of the people. The \nsigners were Gilbert and William and Charles Tennent, \nDavies, John Blair, Moses Tuttle, Charles McKnight, Ches- \nnut, Ramsey, Rodgers, James Finley, Kittletas, Roan, Brush, \nMoffet, McWhorter, Robert Smith, and Kennedy. This was \nnot without a precedent ; for the Presbytery of New Bruns- \nwick, by a formal vote, had prepared an address to the Earl \nof Holderness, secretary of state, in behalf of Governor Bel- \ncher, who had been assailed. The archbishop took no further \nnotice of the letter, than to send a copy of it to this country. \nThe Venerable Society declared that McClenachan would \nmeet with no countenance on that side of the water. It \ncreated a great outcry, when it was blazed about, that the Pres- \nbyterians had moved the Primate of England to compel the \nEpiscopalians of Philadelphia to receive a minister they had \nrefused to have. A pamphlet, professedly from a Covenant- \ning Presbyterian, appeared, giving an exact copy of the letter \nof the eighteen, and seeking to alarm the flocks by this \namazing defection of their shepherds from the simplicity and \nwell-known principles of the Covenanted Reformation ; for \nthey had used the official style, and, from their mode of \naddressing " his Grace," one might have fancied they intended, \nlike McClenachan, to apply for orders. \n\nIn May, 1761, there was an Episcopal Convention in Phila- \ndelphia. There were present Provost Smith, Campbell, of \nNew Jersey ; Craig, of Chester ; Reading, of Apoquinimy ; \nSturgeon, of Philadelphia ; Neill, of Oxford ; Barton, of Lan- \ncaster; Thomson, of Carlisle; Duche, of Philadelphia; \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IX AMERICA. 289 \n\nChandler, of Elizabethtown ; and Keene, of Maryland. They \napplied to the governor for his approbation and protec- \ntion during the sitting. He replied he had no objection, \nand would give all needful protection. On the 23d, they \nattended the commencement of the College of Philadelphia, \nand. on the 25th, sent to the synod the letter of the eighteen \nbrethren to the archbishop, with a complaint of such an inter- \nce. The matter was committed to McDowell, Caleb \nSmith, Samuel Pinley, Matthew Wilson, and Hector Alison. \nTheir minute was adopted, declaring that the brethren had \nacted improperly and without due consideration in the affair, \nparticularly in asking for the induction of McClenachan. \nThe members complained of declared, that they, like the rest \nof the synod, are opposed to induction, if by induction is \nmeant the forcible obtrusion of a minister on a people against \ntheir will, and that they only desired the archbishop to use \nhis influence in settling one whom they understood was the \nchoice of the congregation. The synod declined to notice \nthe doubtful insinuations made by McClenachan, and would \nnot put the eighteen on the unusual task of clearing them- \nselves, when there is no evidence against them. \n\nThe Old Side are said to have enjoyed greatly the awkward \n\n>n of their brethren, particularly when the pamphlet \n\ncontaining their letter was hawked and cried in the synod\'s \n\nhearing : \xe2\x80\x94 k \' Here\'s your eighteen Presbyterian ministers for a \n\ngroat. Who\'ll buy ?"* \n\nThe pamphlet was answered by a layman, who shows that no \nI ..inter, but some Episcopalian, had issued it, and that the \n\nsipiib had so pleased the clergy that they had departed from \nthe convention with their saddle-hags staffed with it. He \nadded that the application of the eighteen for holy orders \nI be exceedingly acceptable to the dignitaries of the \nChurch, who, for want of better candidates, gave the gown to \n\ndrunkards, dupes, and debauchee-. The retort Was hitler and \n\ninsulting in the extreme. It sneers at the defender of the \neighteen as being well known as , "thecnrsing prophet/\' and \n\nesbytcrians were sadly to he pitied if the eighteen \n\nwere tic- bed pari of their ministers. He then pictures them \n\n\n\nIflller\'l Ufa <>f Rodgers. \n19 \n\n\n\n290 WEBSTER\'S HISTORY OF THE \n\nwith some of their younger associates as having reached \nthe Bishop of London\'s palace, seeking admission into the \nministry of the English Church. John Blair is put forward \nas mistaking the bishop\'s porter for the bishop and opening \nin homely phrase the object of their visit. The porter intro- \nduces them to his lordship, who courteously asks, " Good \npeople, to what do I owe this visit?" There being some hesi- \ntation, Charles Tennent says, haughtily, " We\'ve come to get \nthe gown. We hear you give it to drunkards, dupes, and \ndebauchees ; and we want it." The bishop, in amazement, \nscarcely believes his ears ; when Roan obsequiously suggests \nthat, if his worship wants linen to his skirts, "sax hunder \nreeds fine, he is the man in the face of day to weave it." \nThis leads the others to declare their proficiency in their \nrespective trades, and into a dispute about their comparative \nskill ; and the bishop dismisses them with the advice to stick \nto the last and not look for the gow T n. \n\nMcClenachan is not named subsequently anywhere, to our \nknowledge. The letter of Provost Smith to the archbishop, on \nthe case, is transcribed into the Albany Documents, under the \nimpression that it was from William Smith, the prominent \nopponent of the Episcopal movement in New York. \n\nThe Episcopal clergy in the colonies had little ground to \ncomplain of the eighteen, for they were continually moving \nthe primate, and all in authority, to act against the Dissenters. \nTheir persevering resistance of the Incorporation of the Pres- \nbyterian Church in New York was \xc2\xbbnot a solitary instance. \nChandler, of Elizabethtown, admits that the counsel refused \nthe Incorporation, because William Smith, Esq. was a member \nof the congregation, and he had been active against encroach- \nments on our civil and religious rights. Dr. Johnson told his \nGrace that Smith\'s book was the principal cause of the com- \nplaints against the Church missionaries. The primate had \nserious thoughts of attempting to prevent the Society in New \nEngland for Propagating the Gospel from being incorporated ; \nand by his interference the charter was disallowed. Nor was \nit any new thing for the New England divines to bring before \narchiepiscopal eyes the misdemeanours of colonial Churchmen. \nHis Grace learned, through the Dissenters, that Beach, of New- \ntown, had vented certain errors ; and he called the attention of \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 291 \n\nthe clergy to the matter- The "Independent Whig and Re- \nflector" reached Lambeth; and pamphlets, which Dr. Johnson \nhad not heard of in Xew York, crossed the water and were \neven in bishops\' palaces. His Grace was amazed at the viru- \nlence of an anonymous writer on the "Benefits of Conformity," \nand wondered how the Dissenters could fail to see that such \nthings must rebound and injure them. \n\n"As the church doth hither westward fly, \nin doth dog her instantly." \n\n"There is nothing," said Dr. Johnson, "they will stick at: \nthey patronize monstrous enthusiasm, strolling teachers, and \nwild notions." \n\nDoddridge, in 1751, possessed the Archbishop of Canterbury \nwith the character of Davies, and the candour of his attempt: \xe2\x80\x94 \n"If the affair should ever come before the King, his Grace\'s \ndesigns are so pacific, that neither you nor any of the Dis- \nsenters will sutler any injustice he can prevent." \n\nIn November, 1757, Alison proposed to establish a maga- \nzine. He wn.tc against the Episcopal projectors in the "l\'hila- \ndelpliia Sentinel." \n\nIn May, 17o0, the synod resolved to have some correspond- \nence with the Consociated Churches of Connecticut, and pre- \npared a letter to be presented to them by Ewing, Patrick \nAlison, and Spencer, the moderator. They were charged to \npropose that each body should appoint certain ministers to \n\xe2\x96\xa0 her yearly, ai such place ae the General Association \nshould select. The letter was transmitted at once. Whittle- \n\nf the First Church in New Haven, says, "the first he \nbeard <>i\' the proposed convention was from Mr. Bill Smith of \n\nYork." \n\nTie- convention me1 at Elizabethtown, November \xe2\x80\xa2">, 17<i<i. \n\nPeter Van Schaak, afterwards an eminent counsellor, then \na youth, wrote, January l!7, 1769, " Our election in New York \nCity is ended, amC the Church i- triumphant, in spite of all the \nefforts of the Presbyterians. The Churchmen regard it u a \ncomplete victory t it is a lasting monument of the power of \nthe mercantile interest The Presbyterians think they have, \n\nas a religion- body, every thing to dread from the glowing \n\npower of the Church." In Aug:-;. 1769, Zubly, of Savannah* \n\n\n\n292 Webster\'s history op the \n\nsent to Dr. Stiles a copy of Makemie\'s trial, as being important \nat this crisis; it had been reprinted in the "Watchtower," in \nNew York, in 1755. \n\nThe counties east of the Hudson received the English part of \ntheir population from the adjoining townships of Connecticut. \nThey looked to the Association of Fairfield county for candi- \ndates and for assistance in all spiritual and secular affairs of \ntheir churches. Bedford, Cronpond, (Yorktown,) Hanover, in \nCortland Manor, (Peekskill.) and Salem, put themselves under \nNew Brunswick Presbytery in 1743. Rumbout and Fishkill \nwere received by New York Presbytery in 1751. Salem invited \nthe Fairfield ministers to ordain Mead as their pastor, in 1752 ; \nabout that time, John Smith, of Rye, joined New York Pres- \nbytery. Ten years after,* Kent, of the First Church in \nPhilipse\'s patent, and Peck, of the Second, met with Mead, of \nSalem, and, considering that they and their churches bad no \nconnection with any ecclesiastical body, did accept the plan of \ngovernment used in North Britain, and adopted the Westmin- \nster Confession, and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, as \nthe confession of their faith, and the Directory and Discipline \nto be their rule of worship and discipline. They resolved, in \nthe most amicable manner, to form themselves into a presby- \ntery, and, October 27, 1762, chose Kent moderator, and Peck \nclerk: at a subsequent meeting they appointed, Mead to attend \nthe synod in Philadelphia, and desire their incorporation with \nit. "The smallpox was so thick in the city," that he sent the \nrequest by letter. Full satisfaction was given by several mi- \nnisters of the good character of the applicants, and of their \nstanding in the churches, "and that no unfriendly views or dis- \naffection to the neighbouring Connecticut churches led them \nto desire to unite with us." The request was granted, and \nSmith and Graham, of New York Presbyter}\', and Ball and \nSackett, of Suffolk, were joined with them, under the name of \nDutchess County Presbytery. The new presbytery, hearing \nthat the only condition of union was the adoption of the Con- \nfession and the observance of the Directory, did heartily, \ncheerfully, and renewedly declare their adoption of them. \n\n\n\n* MS. Records of Dutchess County Presbytery : in the hands of Dr. Johnston, of \nNew Burgh. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. 293 \n\nThey soon after received the church in Albany under their \ncare, with its minister, AVilliam Hanna, and, in 1765, Samuel \nDun lop, \xe2\x80\x94 from a presbytery to the eastward of Boston, \xe2\x80\x94 the \nminister of Cherry Valley. Much of the territory covered by \ntheir congregations was neutral ground during the Revolu- \ntion, and was wasted by both parties: the ministers retired, the \nmeeting-houses were burned, and the people greatly broken \nin their circumstances. The presbytery was much weakened \nfrom this cause, and, being reduced in numbers by death, re- \nceived from New York Presbytery the ministers on the west \nside of the river, and took the style of Hudson Presbytery. \n\nThus passed the first half-century of the existence of our \nfavoured church in America. Who, on the survey of these \nyears, does not hear the angel-voice saying to her, "Hail, \nthou that art highly favoured!" Onward was her progress, \nthrough poverty, through neglect of the British churches, \nthrough the cramping, crippling subserviency of royal gover- \nnors to the monopolizing measures of the Establishment. \nWhat church, since the days of the apostle, has been adorned \nwith such a retinue, headed by Makemie, and spreading, \nthrough many of equal worth, to Bostwick, Rodgers, and \nDavies? Each presbytery was a constellation of pastors, "the \nglory of Christ." See, in Suffolk, Buel, Brown, and Prime ; in \nNew York, Pemberton, Cumming, and Bostwick; in East \nJersey, the Dickinsons, Burr, Pierson, the Tennents and the \nBrainerds, Cowell, Spencer, and Rowland. What an array \nthe New-Side Preshytery of Newcastle presented! \xe2\x80\x94 the Blairs, \nthe FinleyB, Etoherl Smith, Hugh Henry, Dean, Rodgers, and \nDavies. And, though Less celebrated, yet widely useful, the \nmen of the < Hd Side, \xe2\x80\x94 Gillespie, Alison, Thomson, Creaghead, \nBoyd, and McDowelL \n\nHow steady, how rapid, how permanent her enlargement! \nFrom Connecticut to North Carolina, at every frontier-post, \nshe Bet up her banners. Her standard-bearers in the extremes! \npoints were men who mighl have adorned the chief cities of \nany land. Craig, and Davies, and Drown, and Todd, in Vir- \nginia; ami Craighead, Campbell, Patillo, and MoAden, in \nNorth Carolina, \xe2\x80\x94 and, before all, Robinson. \n\nThey who Berved in the ministry were allured by no splendid \n\n\n\n294 Webster\'s history of the Presbyterian church. \n\nprizes ; they endured hardship as good soldiers of Jesus, for \nfrom him had they received their ministry. \n\nNo new theory, no philosophy of religion, gave them promi- \nnence and bewitched the people with the belief that they were \nthe great power of God. " That which ye have heard from the \nbeginning," "the word which began to be\' spoken by the \nLord," was the message they brought; and they delivered it in \ngoodly and time-honoured words. \n\nSound in the faith, lovers of learning, steadfast in duty, they \ntoiled silently, unitedly. He who hastens his work in his own \ntime commanded the blessing like the daily dew, even life for \nevermore. A little one became a thousand. " The Breaker \nis come up before them; they have broken up and passed \nthrough the gate;" and of them he said, "0 satisfied with \nfavour and full with the blessing of the Lord, possess thou the \nsouth and the west." \n\n\n\nPART II. \n\n\n\n^liograpljical \n\n\n\n\xc2\xa7iflgrap|ies. \n\n\n\nFRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\nA native of the county Donegal, he had probably studied at \none of the Scottish universities. \xe2\x96\xa0 In January, 1681, he was intro- \nduced to Laggan Presbytery by the Rev. Thomas Drummond, of \nRathmelton,* \xe2\x80\x94 the brother, we presume, of William Drummond, the \nfirst governor of North Carolina, and who afterwards, in Bacon\'s \nWar, suffered death as a rebel under Sir William Berkeley, Gover- \nnor of Virginia. f \n\nThe record of his ordination is lost. Two of his letters to In- \ncrease Mather, of Boston, are preserved in the library of the \nMassachusetts Historical Society. \n\nElizabeth River, Va., 22 July, 1084. \n\nReverend and Dear Brother: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nI wrote to you, though unacquainted, by Mr. Lamb, from North \nCarolina, of my designe for Ashley River, South Carolina, which \nI was forward in attempting that I engaged in a voyage, and went \nto sea in the month of May; but God in his providence saw lit I \nshould not see it at the time, for we were tosst upon the coast by \ncontrary winds, and to the north as far as Delaware Bay, so that, \nfalling short in our provisions, we were necessitated, after several \n\n- to the south, to Virginia; and, in the mean while. Colonel \nAnthony Lawson, and other inhabitants of the parish of Lynn- \n\ni. in Lower Norfolk county, (who had a Dissenting minister \nfrom Ireland, until the Lord iras pleased to remove him by death \nin August last; among whom I preached before I wen! to tin- \nSouth, in coming from Maryland, against their earnest importu- \nnity,) coming so pertinently in the place of our landing for water, \nprevailed with me to stay this season; which the more easily over- \ncame me, con.-idering the season of the year and the little eii- \n\n* Bdd\'l IrUh I\'n-sb. Church. f BuMTOft\'l SI \' \xe2\x80\xa2\'\xe2\x96\xa0 S. \n\n187 \n\n\n\n298 FRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\ncouragement from Carolina, from the sure information I have had. \nBut for the satisfaction of my friends in Ireland, whom I design \nto be very cautious in inviting to any place in America I have yet \nseen, I have sent one of our number to acquaint me further con- \ncerning the place. I am here assured of liberty and other en- \ncouragements, resolving to submit myself to the sovereign provi- \ndence of God, who has been pleased so unexpectedly to drive \nme back to this poor, desolate people, among whom I designe to \ncontinue till God in his providence determine otherwise concern- \ning me. \n\nI have presumed a second before I can hear how acceptable my \nfirst has been. I hope this will prevent your writing to Ashley \nRiver, and determine your resolution to direct your letters to \nColonel Anthony Lawson, att the Eastern Branch of Elizabeth \nRiver. I expect, if you have an opportunity of writing to Mr. \nJohn Hart,* you will acquaint him concerning me; which, with \nyour prayers, will oblige him who is your dear and affectionate \nbrother in the gospel of our Lord Jesus, \n\nFfrancis Makemie. \n\nIt is probable that Makemie came over to the people in " Mary- \nland beside Virginia," who had applied to his presbytery for a \nminister by Colonel Stevens in December, 1680. In the fall of \n1683, he travelled by land as far as Norfolk, and proceeded to \nCarolina. \n\nElizabeth Rivee, 28 July, 1685. \n\nHonoured Sir:\xe2\x80\x94 \n\nYours I received by Mr. Hallet with three books, and am not a \nlittle concerned that those sent to Ashley River were miscarried, \nfor which I hope it will give no offence to declare my willingness \nto satisfy ; for there is no reason they should be lost to you, and \nfar less that the gift should be ... f for which I own myself your \ndebtor. And assure yourself if you have any friend in Virginia, \nto find me ready to receive your commands. I have wrote to Mr. \nWardrope,! and beg you would be pleased to order the safe con- \nveyance thereof unto his hands. I have also wrote to Mr. Thomas \nBarret, a minister who lived in South Carolina, who, when he \nwrote to me from Ashley River, was to take shipping for New \nEngland. So that I conclude that he is with you. But, if there \nbe no such man in the country, let me letter be returned. \nI am yours in the Lord Jesus, \n\nFfrancis Makemie. \n\n\n\n* The minister of Londonderry. f Illegible. \n\nX Mentioned in Macdonald\'s History of Jamaica, as having been there as a \nminister and removed to Pennsylvania. \n\n\n\nFRASCIS MAKEMIE. 299 \n\nIn 1690, Makemie was residing in Accomac county, Virginia, \nand was engaged in the West India trade. The next year he \nvisited London, and conversed, among others, with Mr. John \nFaldo, an aged C\'liirrogational minister.* \n\nIn 1692, four hundred and fifty acres of land were granted him \nby certificate of Accomac Court. \n\nGeorge Keith, having been expelled by the Society of Friends, \ndenounced them as erroneous, and travelled in the Southern pro- \nvinces to establish his peculiar views. He saw a catechism which \nMakemie had prepared and published, and sent him word he would \nmake him a visit. He did so in July, 1692; and Makemie "scorned \nwith sharp retorsion" the charges of error, and his misconstruction \nof "my compassion of the tender souls in an American desart." \nHe declined a public dispute with him, knowing that Keith would \npara le his learning before the people, who were incompetent to \nof the genuineness, accuracy, Or relevancy of his quotations \nfrom ancient authors. Keith then wrote an examination of the \nism, and left it with Mr. George Layfield,| to be placed in \nMakemie\'s hands. On his way north he made, to the Rev. Samuel \n. in Delaware, a statement to Makemie\'s discredit, similar to \n\xe2\x96\xa0 made to Makemie concerning the London ministers. He \ncharged him, in his paper, with denying or wholly overlooking our \nneed of the influences of the Spirit, and with "running to the Pope \nand Church of Rome, by that dirty conduit to have his call to the \nministry conveyed to him." \n\nMakemie, in August, 1692, "satisfied his desire," and visited \nPennsylvania, and witnessed the ferment growing out of the rup- \nture with Keith. He soon after issued from the press, at Boston, \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2An answer to George Keith\'s libel on a catechism published by \nF. Makemie. H J This bears, in black-letter, \n\nIMPRIMATUR, \n\nIncrease Mather; \n\nand i- recommended by Increase Mather, James Allen, S. Willard, \nJ. Bailey, and Cotton Mather, as the work of a "reverend and \njudicious minister." \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa21 sin constrained to justify my office from these uncharitable \ncalumnies, and that grace might be magnified by giving this rela- \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2!m\\v H\'-nrv Wrote t., hi- father in Frliru.-iry, L68&-7, that Mr. Paldo, "H \n\ning with penal laws n w among the t\'n-t to \n\nI . idredt of j pie. Se published \xe2\x96\xa0 against \n\nt)i>\' Qo \nt in \xe2\x96\xa0 paper in the Britten 81 ite* Paper Office, \'in- oames <\xe2\x80\xa2!\' those inhabit \n\ntobed i" ill" Government | are prioked ; \nsmong \xe2\x80\xa2 oendante still reside there. \n\n\xe2\x99\xa6 in Lfbrarv of U us. n \xe2\x80\xa2 .-\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2., end in <\xc2\xbbM South dhoroh Library, Boston. \n\n\n\n300 FRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\ntion in the sight of an all-seeing and omnipresent God, that ere I \nreceived the imposition of hands in that scriptural and orderly way \nof separation unto my holy and ministerial calling, I gave re- \nquiring satisfaction to godly, learned, and judicious discerning men \nof a work of grace and conversion wrought in my heart by the \nHoly Spirit in my fourteenth year, by and from the pains of a \ngodly schoolmaster, who used no small diligence in gaining tender \nsouls to God\'s service and fear ; since which time, to the glory of \nGod\'s free grace be it spoke, I have had the sure experiences of \nGod\'s various dealings with me, according to his infinite and un- \nerring wisdom, for my unspeakable comfort." \n\nMakemie complains that Keith had published " no form of sound \nwords," to which reference might be made for his true sentiments; \nand that he had, "at the house of Thomas Eooks, in Onancock, \nand at Nuswuddux," and in London, taught that the Scriptures \nwere like a letter from an absent husband to his wife, which is \nneedful for her guidance and precious during his absence, but is \nsuperseded by the words of his lips when he returns. If Christ \nwere not present with his people, they would need the Scriptures. \n\nThis pamphlet is remarkable for printing Calume and Calumists \nfor the name of the Great Reformer of Geneva. \n\nHe had married* Naomi, the daughter of William Anderson, of \nAccomac. His father-in-law left him by will a thousand acres on \nMatchatank Creek, besides a release of the moneys lent him. \n\nAbout this period, he qualified himself, under the Toleration \nAct in Barbadoes, as a Dissenting minister, and in 1699 published \nin Edinburgh " Truths in a new light ; or, a Pastoral Letter to the \nReformed Protestants in Barbadoes, f vindicating the Non-conform- \nists and showing that they are the truest and soundest part of \nthe Church of England." He rejects the Liturgy, because of its \n" stinted composed and imposed forms of prayer, its use of a corrupt \nversion of the Psalms, and its rejection of their Scripture titles, \nprefixed by the Divine Author." After some objections to the \nburial-service, he asks, " Why it was denied to the living at the fune- \nral of the Rev. H. Vaughan, Dec. 28, 1697 ?" He laments that the \nvitals of religion are wounded and the doctrine of election assailed \nby church ministers as contrary to the Bible and discouraging to \npiety ; and pointedly asks, whether a sinner, without the special \nand entire grace of God, can repent, believe, regenerate, and save \nhimself? He prays that the God of all grace would bless the \nworld with a better spirit, and adds, that it is a paradox in Barba- \ndoes to hear of a Presbyterian minister taking up the cudgels in \ndefence of a fundamental Established Church doctrine against a son, \nmember, and minister of the English Church. \n\n* Spence\'s Early History of Presbyterianism. \n\xe2\x80\xa2j- Library of Harvard University. \n\n\n\nFRANCIS MAKEMIE. 301 \n\nBefore this publication, he returned to Accomac ; and tradition \nsays* that his preaching far and wide drew on him the anger of the \nVirginia clergy, and that he was seized and carried to the gover- \nnor at Williamsburg; and that his noble vindication obtained for \nhim the governor\'s license to preach throughout the Old Dominion. \nAs a result, it is thought, of his argument, the Virginia Legisla- \nture entered, April 15, 1699, the Act of Toleration on their Sta- \ntute-book. On the 15th of October,! "he did produce to Accomac \ncourt certificates from Barbadoea of his qualification there," and \nwas licensed to preach in his own dwelling-house on Pocomoke, \nDear the Maryland, and at Onancock, five miles from Drummond- \nton, in the house next to Captain Jonathan Livesey\'s. \n\nHe sailed fur England in the summer of 1704. He published in \nLondon, in handsome Btyle,$ "A Plain and Loving Persuasion to \nthe inhabitants of Virginia and Maryland for promoting towns and \nCO-habitation." It was dedicated to Edward Nott, Lieutenant- \nGovernor of Virginia, who is characterized as "having so large a \nStock of temper and unbiassed interest." He notes as " an un- \nacconntahle humour, and singular to most rationale, that in those \nprovinces no attempt was made to build up towns." As induce- \nments to do so, he urges that it would increase the worth of the \nwhole country, fill the land with people, make trade easier and less \nexpensive, would prevent many frauds, give employment to the \npoor, and be of great advantage to religion, education, and general \nwelfare. He reminds them that planting is overdone, the fields \n.stripped and drained; while the other course would bring artists \nand tradesmen, and, instead of depending on one staple, they \nmight carry on foreign and home trade. He mentions and refutes \nthe objections: it would cause a falling off from the cultivation of \n-, and that there could not be much trade in time of peace. \nThe growth of large towns would lead, say some, to cast off de- \npendence and allegience to the mother-country; but why, he asks, \nshould this thought DC improved against us, and not against Bos- \nton, Neil York, and other rising places? The closing objection \nhe -apposes to be thai the inhabitants arc against towns; for, tf \n\n(fere towns, there would 1"\' ordinaries; and that would lead \nto drunkenness. He answers, the giving away of liquor makes \ndrunkard-;; if then; W< re ordinaries, liquOT could only he ob- \ntained by purchase ; if there were towns, there would be stocks, and \nt/ould be placid in them. \nIn the -umiiier of L705, be Bailed for America, bringing with \n\n\n\nIgers. f Spin\' \'\xe2\x80\xa2. \n\n\xe2\x99\xa6 Libr. of llm-v. Coll Thi- wu probably prepared si the suggestion of \n\ncolonies in Qreat Britain; for tin\' British QoYernmenl irai ai this time \nearnestly pressing on the OovnaU In Maryland to M ereo1 quays and towns." M88. \n\nof Maryland Hi torleaJ Society. \n\n\n\n302 FRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\nhim John Hampton and George McNish. In the next summer, \nthey succeeded, through the interposition of Governor Seymour, \nin obtaining license of Somerset County Court to officiate as Dis- \nsenting ministers at four places on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. \nIn December, 1706, he was Moderator of the Presbytery of Phila- \ndelphia, at a meeting held probably in Freehold to ordain Boyd as \nan evangelist. \n\nIn company with Hampton, he immediately set out for Boston, \nand, having paid his respects to his excellency the governor at \nNew York, he was unexpectedly invited to preach. He left it to \nthem to find a place for the meeting. Neither the Dutch minister \nnor the elders of the French Church dared to invite him to their \npulpits without Lord Cornbury\'s consent. Anthony Young waited \non him to obtain permission ; but it was refused. William Jackson \nopened his house at the lower end of Pearl Street ; and there Ma- \nkemie preached on the Sabbath, January 19, 1707, and baptized a \nchild ; there being five present, and five above that, at the least. \nHis text was Psalm 1. 28 : \xe2\x80\x94 "And to him that ordereth his con- \nversation aright will I show the salvation of God." It was the \nsubstance of two sermons. \n\nAfter unfolding the text, he announced this doctrine : \xe2\x80\x94 A well- \nordered conversation is the only way to the kingdom of heaven. It \nis not causo regnandi, sed via regni. It is not the meritorious cause \nof salvation, but the way in which we must go, to enter into life. \n\nI. What is presupposed in a conversation ordered aright ? \n\nII. What is a well-ordered conversation ? \n\nIII. Why is it necessary as the way ? \n\nIV. What is necessary to advance it ? \n\nV. What usually hinders it ? \n\nIt closed with a practical application. \n\nThere was at this time a small Presbyterian congregation in the \ncity, which assembled in a private house to read the Scriptures, and \nto unite in prayer and praise. At what period they commenced \nthese meetings is unknown. Some of their number had long been \nresidents of New York. The names preserved by Dr. Miller, are \nDavid Jamison, Esq., Capt. John Theobalds, Mr. John Vanhorn, \nMr. William Jackson, and Mr. Anthony Young. \n\nJamison,* having been classically educated, had been taken up as \na "sweet singer" in company with Gib, in 1681, and imprisoned. \nHe was, by leave of the Council, carried off by Captain Lock- \nhart, " voluntarily," and, being offered for sale in New York, was \nbought by Mr. Clark, the minister in the fort, and permitted to \nteach school. Entering the office of Mr. Clarkson, Secretary of \nthe Province, he acquired a knowledge of law and was admitted \nto practice; he was an attorney in Lord Bellamont\'s time, and \n\n* Wodrow. \xe2\x80\x94 Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nFRANCIS MAKEMIE. \xe2\x96\xa0 303 \n\nafterwards Clerk of the Council. Governor Fletcher was his bene- \nfactor. By his zeal in religion, art, and management, he rose to \neminence. To him the Church of England owed its legal establish- \nment in the province. Governor Hunter describes him as the \ngreatest man he ever knew, and on the death of Mr. Mompessom \nmade him Chief-Justice of New Jer.-cy. John and Garret Van- \nhorn were merchants in the city in 1705.* \n\nOn Tuesday, Makemie went to Newton, L.I., having appointed \nto preacjb there the next day. He was arrested by Cornbury\'s \norder, and with Hampton was carried to Jamaica by the sheriff \nand lodged in the meeting-house. In the evening of Thursday, \nbeing brought before Cornbury, he demanded "How dare you take \nit upon y>u to preach in my government without my license? \nNone -hall preach in my government without it. The Act of \nToleration does not extend to the American Plantations, but \nonly to England. I know it is local and limited, for I was at the \nmaking of it. It extends to New York only by her Majesty\'s \ninstructions signified unto me, and is from her prerogative and \nclemency." \n\nMakemie was satisfied that "the law for liberty" had no limit- \ning clanse; but he said, kk lf extended to the plantations by the \nQueen\'fl clemency, our certificates are demonstration that we have \nComplied therewith." \n\nCornbury said, "The certificates are only for Virginia and \nMaryland. The law was made against strolling preachers, and \nyou are such. You shall not spread your pernicious doctrines \n\nNoble was the reply: \xe2\x80\x94 "As to our doctrine-, we lmve our Con- \n\ni of Faith, which is known to the Christian world; and [ \n\nchallenge all the clergy of York to show us any false or pernicious \n\ndoctrines therein; yea, with those exceptions specified in the law, \n\n(the articles not doctrinal,) we are able to make it appear that they \n\nare, in all doctrinal articles of faith, agreeable to the established \n\ndoctrines of the Church of England." \n\naey-genersJ said, the certificates were written under a \n\nCornbury caughl at the clerk\'s omission in their certificates \n\ne that they had signed the Articles of Religion, and at bis \n\nhaving preached in a private house. u You mnsl give bond and \n\nsecurity for V"iir good hehaviour, and al.-o bond and security tO \n\nii no more in my government." \n\xe2\x80\xa2\'If your Lordship requires it, we will give security for our be- \nhaviour; but to give bond attd security to preach no more in your \n\nexcel!. rnment, If invited and desired by any people, we \n\nneither can nor dare do." \n\n\n\n\xc2\xbb William Jaokaon ind John Young won fcloo shipped t" the Plantation! by t ho \n\nCouncil hum Scotland. \n\n\n\n304 \xe2\x80\xa2 FRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\n"Then," said Cornbury, "you must go to gaol." \n\nWhile he was writing an order for their commitment, Makemie \noffered to pay the attorney-general, who was present, for a copy \nof that paragraph which contained the limiting clause of the Toler- \nation Act. \n\nCornbury said, "You, sir, know law?" \n\nMakemie replied, "I do not pretend to know law; but I do \npretend to know this law, having had divers disputes thereon." \n\nThe mistake made in his name \xe2\x80\x94 Mackennan \xe2\x80\x94 in the first order \nwas rectified, and they were carried by the high-sheriff of the \ncity and county to his dwelling, "to be safely kept till further \norders." \n\nCornbury disregarded their petition to state for what they were \nimprisoned ; no habeas corpus could issue till Chief-Justice Mom- \npessom came from New Jersey. At the meeting of the Quarter \nSessions, they applied for his lordship\'s leave to take the oaths and \nbe qualified; "for we are resolved to reside in your lordship\'s go- \nvernment." He refused ; and when, by their attorney, they applied \nto the justices, the attorney-general put their application in his \npocket, not suffering it to be read. The justices declined to \nlicense Jackson\'s house as a place of worship for Dissenters. \n\nThe habeas was issued the 8th day of March, and my lord issued \na new order of commitment in due form, admitting the illegality \nof the other. The sheriff refused to execute the writ of habeas \ncorpus till they had paid "twelve pieces-of-eight" for their com- \nmitment, and as many more for the execution of the writ. They \nnow gave security, Dr. John Johnstone, of the Jerseys, and Wil- \nliam Jackson, being their bail. \n\nThe Supreme Court met on Tuesday, March 11, and they were \npresent; but the attorney moved, and it was ordered, that they \nappear on the last day of term. While the grand jury were con- \nsidering the case, Cornbury ordered Major Sandford, of Newark, \nto examine Jasper Crane, of Newark, and the Rev. Samuel Melyen, \nof Elizabethtown, concerning the discourse Makemie had with \nthem. The grand jury examined four witnesses, who testified that \nMakemie preached no false doctrine. They brought in on the last \nday a bill charging him with preaching without being qualified or \npermitted, and using other rites and ceremonies than those of the \nCommon Prayer. The trial was set down for the June term ; and \nMakemie, on his own bonds and those previously given, was allowed \nto depart. \n\nThe Presbytery met on Saturday, March 22, and adjourned till \nTuesday at 4 P. M. At that time Makemie and Hampton ap- \npeared ; and Makemie, " by way of exercise," and Wilson, " by way \nof addition," preached on Hebrews i. 1, 2. The discourses were \naDproved. \n\nIn June, he returned to New York with his man, and, pleading \n\n\n\nFRANCIS MAKEMIE. 305 \n\nnot guilty, the petit jury was called on the 6th. Not having the \nright of peremptory challenge, he objected against Elias Neau, \nwho had justified Cornbury\'s course. Makemie expressed sur- \nprise at such language from a Huguenot, so lately dragooned out \nof France. He was employed as a catechist by the Venerable \nSociety: "a good man,* but not in favour with the rector, Yesey." \n- strongly attached to the Church; "he would not condemn \nthe Dissenters, Leaving that judgment to God:" which, considering \nhow much the Church had invaded the divine prerogatives, was \nremarkably moderate. Neau was set aside. \n\nThe jury being impanelled, Makemie admitted having preached \nat the time and place signified. The attorney-general, Mr. Bickley,f \nread the Queen\'s instructions to the governor: \xe2\x80\x94 "You are not to \npermit any minister, without certificate from the Bishop of London, \nt<> preach without obtaining your leave." The attorney-general \nasserted the Queen\'s supremacy as head of the Church; cited the \nI Uniformity, ami the Queen\'s instructions. "I doubt not \nthe jury will find for the Queen*" \n\nMr. Regniere| replied, showing that the preaching was not pri- \nvate nor unlawful, For the law of the province was, that all pcr- \n\n- \xe2\x80\xa2 - profi Jsing faith in God by Jesus Christ his only Son, may \nfreely meet at convenient places and worship according to their \nrespective persuasions. The Act of Uniformity does not extend \nto New England, nor to this province; we have no more need of \nthe Toleration Act than they. \n\nMr. William Nicoll made merry with the attorney-general\'s \nargumenl ; he asserted the constitutions of the Plantations to have \nsettled, as by national consent, for those whose thoughts in \nreligious matters could not square with the national establish- \nment. \n\nMr. David Jamison said, "We have no Established Church here; \nwe have liberty of conscience by act of Assembly made in the be- \nginning of William ami Mary\'s reign. This province is made up \n\nof Dissenters and persons oot <\xc2\xbbf English birth." \nMakemie, having have, .-aid, c> He agreed with what the attor- \neneral had asserted before Lord Cornbury, \xe2\x80\x94 that the penal \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 - and the Act of Tohration were local, not reaching to the \n\nPlantations, lb\' showed that the Queen\'s instructions related \nsolely to minister-- of the Establishment. Why are we denied what \n|y given to Lutherans, < makers, and Jews?" \nattorney-general moved that the jury he directed t" I \n\nin a special \\erdict, and the chief-justice directed them to do e >. \n\n+ May Bickley, Esq., died in April, 1724. \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2If\'- \xc2\xab:>- \'\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2! ^ hamater-at-law." \n\n\xe2\x80\x94 Hew Vnrk I\' \n\nranla. \n\n\n\n306 FRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\nThe jury in a short time returned, bringing in a verdict of not \nguilty. This was the more remarkable, for the governors were \ncareful, when appointing sheriffs, to select such that the Church* \n-\'might be safe as to the juries;" even Governor Hunter claimed \ncredit for having displaced gentlemen from the Commission of the \nPeace, on Staten Island, because they were not as friendly to the \nchurch as the missionary at that post desired. Four of the jury \nwere Huguenots, \xe2\x80\x94 Bartholemew Laroux, Andrew Lauron, Thomas \nBayeux, and Charles Cromline. One, William Horsewell, was pro- \nbably a Presbyterian, named Horsefield, whose descendant was \nafterwards an elder. \n\nMr. Regniere moved that the defendant be discharged, but the \nchief-justicef declined; the next day his discharge was ordered, he \npaying the fees. These amounted to eighty-three pounds. The \nlegislature soon after denounced the iniquity of requiring a man, \nproved innocent, to pay the costs of an unjust prosecution. \n\nMakemie preached in the French Church, and proceeded to New \nJersey. Cornbury issued new processes to arrest him there, as \nconcerned in the authorship of the Jersey paper entitled " Forget \nand Forgive." A whole Sabbath was spent in vain search for him, \nand he was put to a fresh expense of twelve pounds to escape into \nConnecticut. He wrote from Boston to Cornbury, July 28, 1707, \nthat the authors of the paper smiled at his lordship\'s mistake, and \nthat he waited a time to confront his sworn accusers in court and \nconvict them of perjury: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"My universal known reputation makes me easy under the in- \nvidious imputation of being a Jesuit. I have been represented \nto your lordship as being factious both in Virginia and Maryland. \nI have lived peaceably in Virginia ; I have brought from Mary- \nland a certificate of my past reputation, signed by some of the \nbest men in Somerset county." \n\nHe printed, at Boston, the sermon! which occasioned his impri- \nsonment, with the motto, (Matthew v. 11 ; Acts v. 29 :) \xe2\x80\x94 " Preces et \nlachrymse sunt arma ecclesise." It is dedicated to the small con- \ngregation which heard it. "Had I been thoroughly acquainted \nwith New York, and the irregularities thereof, which afterwards I \nwas an eye and ear witness of, I could not have selected a more \nsuitable doctrine." This he ascribes to Divine Providence, and \nhopes it may be an inducement to awaken sinners. The dedication \nis dated March 3, 1706-7. \n\n\n\n* Governor Hunter : in Albany Documents. \n\nf " Mompessom was sent over as chief-justice to Pennsylvania, by William Penn, \nwith high commendations, but, receiving no encouragement, went to New York." \xe2\x80\x94 \nJanney\'s Life of Penn. Governor Hunter says, "His poverty exposed him to temp- \ntations." \xe2\x80\x94 New York Documents. \n\n% In the Library of Colonel Force, at Washington. \n\n\n\nFRANCIS MAKEMIE. 307 \n\nCornbury, "that noble patron of* the Church here, \'* was rebuked. \nby the Rev. Thorogood Moor, a Church minister, for debauchery \nand swearing. He refused to administer the Lord\'s Supper to a \nman of so evil a life as Lieutenant-Governor Ingoldsby. Corn- \nbury threw him into prison: he escaped on ship-board, and was \nlost "ii his voyage to England. \n\nCornbury was displaced soon after. Colonel Quarryf wrote, June \n28, 1707, \xe2\x80\x94 " Colonel Morris and Jennings, with two or three others, \nhad been very hard at work in hatching the most scandalous paper \n1 erer .-aw in my life. It was false, malicious, unjust, and most bar- \nbarously rude; they treated his excellency most inhumanly; they \ngot printed a scandalous libel and dispersed a vast number. They \nhad got an Assembly in the Jerseys to their mind." This libel was \nprobably the Jersey paper, which came out in February, while \nMakemie was in durance, and which so exasperated Cornbury. \n\nDr. John Johnstorte, of the Jerseys, a druggist in Edinl urgh, \nmarried Enpham, daughter of George Scot, of Pitlochie, and ac- \ncompanied his father-in-law in his ill-fated voyage to New Jersey. \nister, with her husband, Mr. Hume, dying at sea, he showed \nall kindness to his niece, who became the wife of William Hoge. \nDr. Johnstone resided at Amboy, and died there, September 6, \n1782, aged Beventy-three. His son Lewis married a daughter of \nColonel Qeathcote, of Scarsdale Manor; and his son Andrew \nmarried Catharine Van Cortland. \n\nMakemie published "A Narrative of a New and Unusual Ame- \nrican Imprisonment of two Presbyterian Ministers, and Prosecution \nof Mr. Francis Makemie, one of them for preaching one sermon \nin the city of New York. By a learner of Law and a lover of \nLiberty.\' 1 \n\nThis tract was reprinted, in 1755, by Hugh Gaine in New York, \nnnder the direction of Livingston, Smith, and other gentlemen, \ncone. ried in COnducti jig the "Watch Tower." In August, 17<J!\xc2\xbb, \n\nDr. Znbly, of Savannah, sent a fragment of it to President Stiles, \nas likely to be of great service iii the cause of liberty, if brought \nbefore the public. \n\nThe representations made to the British Government drew from \nCornbury the following letter! to the Right Honourable the Lords \nCommissioners for Trades sad Plantations: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xc2\xab Mv Lords i \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 I tronble your lordships with these lines, to acquaint you that, \n\n00 the 17th 01 January, L706-6, a man of this town, one Jack- \n\n\n\nmichaul, formerly of BflnpoWftd, Long Island. \nf Albany DooaoM \n\n; rranteribed for ""\xe2\x80\xa2 from tho Albany Documents by Mr. Joel Hani \nprinted, with my oonaent, iu Dr. Footo\'i Bketohet of Virgiuia. \n\n\n\n308 FRANCIS MAKEMIE. \n\nson, came to acquaint me that two ministers were come to town, \xe2\x80\x94 \none from Virginia and one from Maryland, \xe2\x80\x94 and that they de- \nsired to know when they might speak with me. I, being willing \nto show what civility I could to men of that character, ordered \nmy man to tell Jackson, they should be welcome to come and dine \nwith me. They came; and then I found, by the answers they \ngave to the questions I asked them, that one, whose name is \nFrancis Mackensie, is a Presbyterian preacher settled in Vir- \nginia ; the other, whose name is John Hampton, a young Presby- \nterian minister, lately come to settle in Maryland. They dined \nwith me, and talked of indifferent matters. They pretended they \nwere going towards Boston. They did not say one syllable to me \nof preaching here, nor did not ask leave to do it. They applied \nthemselves to the Dutch minister for leave to preach in the Dutch \nChurch in this town ; who told them he was very willing, provided \nthey could get my consent. They never came- to me for it. They \nwent likewise to the elders of the French Church : they gave them \nthe same answer the Dutch had. All this while they never ap- \nplied themselves to me for leave, nor did they offer to qualify \nthemselves as the law directs. But on the Monday following I was \ninformed that Mackensie had preached on the day before at the \nhouse of one Jackson, a shoemaker in this town ; and that Hamp- \nton had preached on Long Island ; and that Mackensie was gone \nover thither, with intent to preach in all the towns in that island, \nhaving spread a report thereto that they had a commission from \nthe Queen to preach all along this continent. I was informed on \nthe same day from New Jersey, that the same men had preached \nin several places in that province, and had ordained, after their \nmanner, some young men, who had preached without it among \nthe Dissenters ; and that, when asked if they had leave from the \nGovernment, they said they had no need of leave from any go- \nvernor ; that they had the Queen\'s authority for what they did. \nThese reports, and the information I had from Long Island of \ntheir behaviour there, induced me to send an order to the sheriff \nof Queen\'s county to bring them to this place ; which he did on \nthe 23d day of January, in the evening. The attorney-general \nwas with me. I asked Mackensie how he came to preach in this \ngovernment without acquainting me with it, and without qualify- \ning himself as the law requires? He told me he had qualified \nhimself according to law in Virginia ; and that, having done so, he \nwould preach in any part of the Queen\'s dominions where he \npleased ; that this province is part of the Queen\'s dominions as \nwell as Virginia, and that the license he had obtained there was \nas good as any he could obtain here. \n\n" I told him, that Virginia was part of the Queen\'s dominions \nas well as this province, but that they are two different govern- \nments, and that no law or order of that province can take place \n\n\n\nFRANCIS MAKEMIE. 309 \n\nin this, any more than any order or law of this province can take \nplace in that ; which no reasonable man would imagine could be \nallowed. Ik- told me he understood the law as well as any man, \nand was sari-tied he had not offended against the law; that the \npenal laws did not extend to, and were not enforced in, America. \nTo which the attorney-general replied, that if the penal laws did \nnot take place in America, neither did the Act of Toleration; \'nor \nis it proper,\' said he, \' that it should, since the latter is no more \nthan a suspension of the former.\' Maekensie said, that the Queen \ngranted liberty of conscience to all her subjects without reserve. \n1 told him he was bo far in the right; that the Queen was gra- \nciously pleased to grant liberty of conscience to all her subjects \nexcept Papists ; that he might be a Papist for all I knew, under \npretence of bring of another persuasion; and that, therefore, \nit was necessary that he should have satisfied the Government \nwhat he was. before he ventured to preach. He said he would \nqualify himself in any manner and would settle in this province. \n1 told him that, whenever any of the people in either of the pro- \n- under my government had desired leave to call a minister \nof theb own persuasion, they had never been denied; but that [ \nshould be rery cautious how i allowed a man so prone to bid defi- \n\nance to Government as I found he was. He said, he had done \n\nnothing lie could not answer. So I ordered the high-sheriff of \n\nthis city to take them into custody, and 1 directed the attorney- \ngeneral to proceed Against them as the law directs; which he has \n\ndone, by preferring an indictment against Maekensie fir preach- \ning in this city without qualifying himself as the Art of Toleration \ndirects. The grand jury found the bill; but the petty jury ac- \nquitted him. So he has gone towards New England, ottering \nmany Bevere threats against me. As I hope 1 have done nothing \n\nin this matter bat what 1 was obliged in duty to do, especially \n\nsine- I think it is very plain by the Act of Toleration it was let \nintended to tolerate or allow strolling preachers; hut only those \npersons who dissent from the Church of England should be at \n\nliberty to BOTVe God after their own way in the several places of \n\ntheir abode, without being liable to the penalties of certain laws. \n\n8 i I entreat your lordships\' protection against this malicious man, \nwho is well known in Virginia and Maryland to he a disturber of \n\nthe peace and quiet Of all the phi..- in\' COmefl into. He i-; Jack- \n\nof-au-trades ; he is a preacher, a doctor of physic, a merchant, an \nattorney, a oounsellor-at-law. and, which is worst of all, a dis- \nturber of governments. 1 should have Benl your lordships this \naccount Booner, but I was willing to Bee the issue of the trial. \n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 1 am, my lords, \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 Y\'.ur lordships\' most faithful, humble Bervant, \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2Nkw fOBX. Oct \n\n\n\n310 SAMUEL DAVIS. \n\nThe result of his visit to Boston is not known. He died in the \nsummer of 1708, leaving a widow and two daughters. Elizabeth \nsurvived him less than a year ; and his widow soon followed her to \nthe grave. Anne married Mr. Holden, of Accomac, and died in \n1787, childless, leaving a large property.* \n\nMakemie left one hundred and twenty English books to his \nfamily; his law-books to Andrew Hamilton, Esq.,| and the rest \nof his library to Andrews and his successors in Philadelphia. He \nleft four lots, with the buildings, to the Presbyterian congregation \nof Rehoboth, on Pocomoke, and to their successors ; but " to \nnone else but to such as are of the same persuasion in matters of \nreligion." \n\nHis portrait was destroyed in the burning of Dr. Balch\'s house ; \nbut his course of life portrays a man of learning, energy, talent, \nand public spirit. Dr. Miller, on the authority of Dr. Rodgers \nand of Dr. Read, of Wilmington, speaks of him as a man of emi- \nnent piety and strong intellectual powers, adding to force of \ntalents a fascinating address, conspicuous for his natural endow- \nments and his dignity and faithfulness as a minister of the \ngospel. His Catechism has escaped the researches of American \ncollectors. \n\nHe had two brothers in county Donegal (Ireland) alive at his \ndecease. Andrews baptized Elizabeth, a child of Francis Ma- \nkemie, February 2, 1730. It was he, probably, who appeared as \na commissioner from Warrington before Philadelphia Presbytery \nin May, 1739. \n\nIn the Bishop of London\'s palace, at Lambeth, are letters from \nthe Episcopal clergy in Maryland, stating that many fell away \nfrom them, by reason of the Dissenters in Makemie\'s day. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAVIS. \n\n\n\nHe was next to Makemie in point of years, and, like him, en- \ngaged in trade. He was residing in Delaware in July, 1692, \n\n\n\n* "She gave by her will \xc2\xa3100, to be disposed of yearly, for the support of a \nminister by the Session of Pitt\'s Creek, Maryland ; and \xc2\xa350, for the poor of that \nneighbourhood."\xe2\x80\x94 Sj<enre. \n\nf Was this Andrew Hamilton the father of James Hamilton, Governor of Penn- \nsylvania? Andrew was a distinguished lawyer of Philadelphia, whose argument \nin behalf of Zenger the printer, prosecuted by Governor Cosby, of New York, was \npublished in England as a most valuable assertion of the rights of persons charged \nwith libel. He died at his seat at Bush Hill, Philadelphia, August 4, 1741, at an \nadvanced age. \n\n\n\nJOHN WILSON. 311 \n\nwhen George Keith visited him. At the formation of the presby- \ntery he was prevented by business from performing the duties of \na pastor; and, on the failure of the people of Lewes to obtain \nMr. Golden from Scotland, he continued to supply them as much \nas the condition and posture of his affairs allowed. In 1715, \nhe joined with them in their request to presbytery to have a \nminister settled over them. On Hampton\'s resignation of his \ncharge, he removed to Snow Hill, and preached there probably till \n:h, in the summer of 1725. \n\nHe was present in presbytery only in 1709, when he was chosen \nmoderator. On the formation of the synod, he was appointed a \nmember of Snow Hill Presbytery. Through the death of Henry, \nof Rehoboth, and the declining health of Hampton, it was not \nOrganized. He and Hampton were not afterwards joined to any \npresbytery, because through sickness, business, and age, they could \nnot attend at so great distance as the ordinary places at which \nNewcastle Presbytery met. \n\nBpence, though residing at Snow Hill, seems never to have \nheard of him or his successor, Hugh Stevenson. \n\n\n\nJOHN WILSON. \n\n\n\nONI of the correspondents of Increase Mather, in the seven- \n\nteenth century, mentions the arrival of a Mr. "Wilson in Con- \n\nnt, and expresses a desire that so acceptable a minister \n\nmight settle in the colony. Whether this person was the one who \n\nfor many yean iraja the minister of Newcastle is unknown. \n\nAmong the "Colonial Documents"* at llarrisburg is one \nI by John Murray, in 1686, stating that William Huston, \n\nby hifl last will, gave three hundred acres on Christiana Creek, \n\nfour or fire miles from Newcastle, to John Wilson and his suc- \neessor. He asks the interposition of the Government, the land \nwithheld by Anthony 1 [owston. \n\n.\\- early ae 17 ir J, he preached in the court-housef at Newcastle, \nand. not being contented, removed. He returned in 1 7 o : \'\xc2\xbb ; which \ndissatisfied some, and made them anxious for the services of a \nChurchman. \n\nBe had no pastoral relation to thai congregation; and they \nwere very anxious to secure BdoNish, and gave him a oall. The \nmeeting-house at White Clay Creek was considered as a ohapel- \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 l by Bamnel ffuard, Esq. \n\nf Tlillj >t, in I\'o !\'\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 I ue Bpiaoo] ti II: i I \n\n\n\n312 JEDEDIAH ANDREWS. \n\nof-ease, the people in that neighbourhood being regarded as part \nof Newcastle congregation. \n\nIn 1708, the presbytery directed Wilson to preach alternately \non the Sabbath at Newcastle and White Clay, and monthly on a \nweek-day, and quarterly on a Sabbath, at Apoquinimy. \n\nIn 1710, he was succeeded by Anderson at Newcastle, and \nprobably devoted all his time to White Clay till his death, in \n1712. He conducted the presbytery\'s correspondence with divided \nor uneasy congregations, with Scotland, and with Sir Edmund Har- \nrison in London. \n\nHis widow was recommended by the committee for the fund, \nin 1719, " as a person worthy of regard as to her present circum- \nstances;" ,\xc2\xa34 were given her; and a discretionary power was \nlodged with Andrews to give, if necessity required, <\xc2\xa33 more. She \nreceived \xc2\xa35 yearly till 1725. \n\n\n\nJEDEDIAH ANDREWS, \n\nTiie son of Captain Thomas Andrews, was born at Hingham, \nMassachusetts, July 7, 1674, and baptized by the Rev. Peter Ho- \nbart five days after. He was the youngest but one of ten chil- \ndren. He graduated at Harvard in 1095. \n\nThe disturbance caused by Keith, in Philadelphia, prepared the \nway for the commencement of religious services by Baptists, Pres- \nbyterians, and Churchmen. There were nine Baptists, and a few \nIndependents, in the town. After the " Barbadoes Company"\' \ngave up their store, the building was used by the two denomina- \ntions in common whenever the service of a minister could be pro- \ncured. \n\nThe Rev. John Watts, of the Baptist Church* in Penncpek, \nbegan, (on the second Sunday in December, 1697,) by request, to \nofficiate at regular intervals. The Rev. Dr. Clayton, a Church \nminister, entered into an amicable correspondence with him, to \neffect a union with the national Establishment. In 1698, in the \nsummer, Andrews came to Philadelphia ; and Watts and his \nfriends, feeling uneasy at what seemed to them coldness, wrote to \nhim, proposing that each congregation should unite in worship, \nwhenever conducted by ministers of either body, acknowledged to \nbe sound in the faith and of good repute : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n* Morgan Edwards\'s History of Pennsylvania Baptists. There were nine \nBaptists in the town. \n\n\n\nJEDEDIAH ANDREWS. 313 \n\n" We do freely confess and promise for ourselves that we can \nand do own and allow of your approved ministers, who are fully \nqualified and sound in the faith and of holy lives, to pray and \npreach in our assemblies." \n\nThis letter, dated oOth of Eighth month, 1698, was addressed \nto Andrews. John Green, Joshua Story, and Samuel Richards. \n\nAndrews* replied : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nu To the church of Christ, over which Mr. John Watts is pastor, \nwe, whose names are under-toritten, do send salutation in the \nname of our Lord. ./, gut: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Brethren and Well-beloved: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Forasmuch as some of you, in the name of the rest, have in a \nfriendly maimer sent us your desire of uniting and communing in \nthe things of God, as far as we agree in judgment, that we may \nlovingly go together heavenward, we do gladly and gratefully \ne your proposal, and return you thanks fir the same; and \nMeSB Grod who hath put it in your minds to endeavour after peace \n\nand concord, earnestly desiring that your request may have a \ngood effect, which may be for the edification of us all, that we \nmay the mure freely perform mutual offices of \'love one towards \n\nanother\' for OUT furtherance in Christianity. But that we may do \n\nwhat we do safely, and for our more effectual carrying on our fore- \nmentioned desire, we have thought it might be profitable for oa all, \n\nand more conducive to our future love and unity, that we might \n\nsome friendly conference concerning those affairs before we \n; .11 a direel answer to your proposition, which we have confi- \ndence you will not deny. And in pursuance hereof we do request \n\nthat Bome of you (who you think host) may meet with us, or some \n. at a time and place which you s 1 1 .- 1 1 1 appoint, that what we \nagree upon may he done in order. \n\n! tbscribed, in the name of the rest, Philadelphia, November 3, \n\nJedbdlab Andrews. \n"John Green,! Saw el Rich lrds, \n\nDavid Cm i [NO, HERBERT CoBRT, \n\n.i"H. \\ i . LjBab, Daniel Green." \n\nIt was agreed to meet at the common meeting-house on the \n\n+ In B of Willi, Philadelphia, are recorded the teeta- \n\nt \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nDaniel Qreen, October 22, 1699. \n\nJohn Qreen, oordwainer, October I, 1711. \n\ni Qifflng, bricklayer, 1716. \nJohn v. in Lear, April 16, 17."J. \nI do not rtnl the oamea of Blohardi "r Cony. \n\n\n\n314 JEDEDIAH ANDREWS. \n\n19th of November. Three of the Baptists went from Pennepek \nto town, (Philadelphia,) and sent to Andrews\'s lodgings, which \nwere near. But he said, " he knew it not to be the day, but took \nit to be the second day after." The Baptists waited for him and \nhis friends till sunset. Watts went home, satisfied that the Pres- \nbyterians had not acted " in sincerity, how godly soever their \nwords may be." He, therefore, wrote to Andrews the same \nday :\xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Necessity constrains us to meet apart from you till we can \nreceive an answer, and are assured you can own us, so as we do \nyou. We remain the same as before, and stand by what we have \nwritten. No more at present; but prayers for you, and dearest \nlove to you in Christ Jesus." \n\nThis conduct of the Presbyterians surely needs no such heavy \ncensure as Edwards bestows, calling it " a dispossession unkind \nand rightless." The Baptists withdrew to the brew-house of \nAnthony Morris, " near the draw-bridge." Andrews soon after \nwrote to Thomas Revell at Burlington: \xe2\x80\x94 " Though we have got \nthe Anabaptists out of the house, yet our continuance there is \nuncertain ; therefore must think of building, notwithstanding our \npoverty and the smallness of our number." He was probably \nordained in Philadelphia, in the fall of 1701 ; for his " Record \nof Baptisms and Marriages" begins, 1701, Tenth month, 14th \nday. \n\nTalbot,* Church missionary at Burlington, writing to the \n"Venerable Society," April 24, 1702, says, \xe2\x80\x94 "The Presbyte- \nrians here come a great way to lay hands on one another ; but, \nafter all, I think they had as good stay at home for all the good \nthey do In Philadelphia, one pretends to be a Presbyte- \nrian, and has a congregation, to which he preaches." \n\nIn 1704, they left the " Barbadoes Store," to worship in the \nchurch they had erected in Buttonwood [now Market] Street. \nFive adults were baptized in 1705 and four in 1706. \n\nHe enters the baptism of his children thus : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"1707, Seventh month, 21. \xe2\x80\x94 Mary, daughter of Jedediah An- \ndrews and Helena his wife. \n\n"1709, Third month, 28. \xe2\x80\x94 Ephraim, their son, (born January 28, \n1708-9,) baptized by Mr. Hampton." \n\nThe church is said to have been of the Congregational order ; but \nit was represented by elders in presbytery from the first. An- \ndrews was punctual in his attendance on every meeting ; being \naccompanied by Joseph Yardf for eight years, in 1716, by David \n\n* Hawkins\'s Missions of English Church. \n\nf Joseph Yard, bricklayer, made his will in May 16, 1716. John Snowden, a \ntanner, was the father of Jedediah Snowden, an early trustee of the Second Church, \nand the ancestor of Isaac (father of Gilbert) Tennent, Samuel Finley, and Xatha- \n\n\n\nJEDEDIAH ANDREWS. 815 \n\nGiffing for six successive years, and frequently after by John \nSnowden, occasionally from 1723 by John Budd, and regularly \nfrom 1732 to 1746 by William Gray. \n\nIn 1711, when Christ Church could not be used, the Presbyte- \nrians offered the use of their church to the vestry. They declined \nit, preferring the Swede Church at Wecaco. \n\nIn 1714, \xc2\xa3,\\Q were allowed to Philadelphia out of the money \nsent by Mr. Reynolds of London, to " the support of God\'s work \nin these parts." \n\nThe presbytery, in 1707, "for propagating the interest of reli- \ngion," directed each minister in his congregation to read and com- \nment on a chapter of the Bible every Lord\'s day, as discretion and \ncircumstances of time and place will admit. All the ministers but \nAndrews complied ; and in 1708 it was recommended to him to take \ninto serious consideration the reading a chapter and making a com- \nment on the same. His backwardness to read a chapter in public \nworship strongly illustrates his tenacity of New England habits. \nI position of the Scripture Avas to the other members of pres- \nbytery a mOBt important service of the sanctuary; in it they de- \nlighted, and perhaps excelled. The repugnance of the New Eng- \nland divines to it was as uniform as it was unaccountable. "When \nthe new church was reared in Boston for Dr. Column, ancient men \nstood aghast at the report that a chapter was to be read from the \nBible morning and afternoon ; they apprehended it to be a premo- \nnitory symptom of the Liturgical mania. The entries* in Chief \nJustice Swell\'s diary are curiously illustrative. In 1713, Dr. \nColman bewailed, in one of his sermons, the prevailing neglect of \ntie- Scriptures in public worship. It is unlikely that Andrews ever \nconformed to the good old Presbyterian custom of expounding \nGod\'s word. \n\nBut he needed no urgency to comply with the suggestion to sup- \nply the destitute. His record of baptisms is proof of his journey- \nSopewell, Bensalem, Gloster, Salem, Burlington, Piles- \n. Rocky Hill, Ainhoy, and Staten Island. \n\nHe irafl recording Clerk of tin- prcsliytery and of the synod \ntill his death, conducted most of their correspondence, and was \n\nrelied on as signally gifted and successful in terminating happily \nthe disputes which, wedge-like, had been driven to the head in oon- \n\ninfl \xe2\x96\xa0nid among individuals. \n\nions Loss that so few of his letters to Cotton Mather \nand Dr. Colman are preserved. Tradition says that the [nde- \n\nn in oar ohnroh John Badd wife an agent of the Propria* \nr the sale of land in Ken .!\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0;.. William Gray was a baker, and executor \nii\'-r with Peter Chevalier, Gray preserved the B \not Bapt \xe2\x96\xa0\'\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 u i Marriages, ud placed it in the hand* of Edward Shippen, Esq.. \n\\ American yuurtrrly B rgirt eT \n\n\n\n316 JEDEDIAH ANDREWS. \n\npendent mode was laid aside by him in 1720 ; \xe2\x80\x94 a strange time to \ndo it, when the congregation were seeking aid from Boston to en- \nlarge their house. Nothing of the kind is hinted at in his letter \nto Colman in 1729, asking advice about his duty in relation to the \nAdopting Act. " As to affairs here, we are engaged in the en- \nlargement of our house, and, by the assistance we had from Boston, \nI hope we shall go on comfortably with that work." \n\nWriting to the Rev. Thomas Prince, 14th of Eighth month, 1730, \n" I am continually longing to come and see my mother once more \nbefore she dies ; but, the journey being long and multiplicity of \nbusiness continually taking me up, I am doubtful whether I shall \nget liberty to answer my desires." She died, Oct. 23, 1732, aged \nninety-nine, \xe2\x80\x94 to the last, pretty quick to hear and see, \xe2\x80\x94 leaving \ntwo sons and two daughters. \n\nIn September, 1733, he asked the synod " that an assistant be \nallowed unto him in the ministry." The request was unanimously \ngranted, " if, first, sufficient provision be made for his honourable \nmaintenance during his life among them." This, after long discourse, \nand after conference with some gentlemen of his congregation, was \nmodified so as to allow the congregation to call an assistant. Those \nwho desired an assistant were directed not to diminish but rather \nincrease their subscriptions to Andrews, because the present sub- \nscription was but scanty ; that none of the present subscription be \nalienated from him, but that all care be taken to get new ones for \nhim ; and that he have all the monthly collections. In the follow- \ning May, the presbytery acceded to his request, and gave him \nleave to remove if he saw fit. In the autumn, Hemphill came to \nthis country, was received as a member of synod, and took up his \nabode in Philadelphia until he should obtain a settlement. An- \ndrews invited him to occupy his pulpit a part of each Sabbath, but \nsoon regretted it ; for " freethinkers,* deists, and ?\xc2\xabo\xc2\xa3Am#s," flocked \nto hear him, while the better part of the congregation stayed away. \nAndrews attended regularly during the winter, and felt himself \nbound "to article against him ;" and the commission tried Hemphill \nand suspended him. Andrews tells Colman that he had never suf- \nfered so much as during this period, and that his mind was made up \nto leave his charge, although " the better sort" desired to keep him. \n\nThe congregation could not agree on an assistant ; but one part \nsupplicated the synod for Dickinson, and another for Robert \nCross. But while the matter was in debate, the friends of the lat- \nter asked to be erected into a new congregation, capable to call a \nminister for themselves. Their request was granted by a large \nmajority, with the understanding that they are not obliged to form \na distinct society, but may do so if they see fit. \n\n* MS. Letter in Am. Antiq. Soc. Lib. \n\n\n\nJEDEDIAH ANDREWS. 317 \n\nThe commission met in June, 173G, the endeavours for a re- \nunion of the congregation having been unsuccessful; they per- \nsuaded the friends of Cross to make a further effort, and Andrews \nheartily approved of the design ; but his friends would not consent. \nThe new erection had supplies till 1737, when Robert Cross ac- \nI their call; then the two congregations united, and were \nallowed ; \xc2\xa3o0 out of the synod\'s funds to buy a burying-ground. \n\nAndrews remained with the Old Side on the division. In 1744, he \nwrote to Column that Tennent was much more moderate and left \nhim a \n\nAt the close of a long, active, useful, and honourable life, a \nrumour was spread that Andrews had suddenly fallen by a disgrace- \nful act. lie was put on trial ; and his own hands recorded his \nBtatement of the mat tor, \xe2\x80\x94 his denial of drunkenness, criminal in- \ntent or act, and his confession of imprudence and foolish tamper- \ning with evil. He deplores the shame brought on the ministry, by \na levity so unbecoming his advanced life. No testimony appears \nto have been adduced; and he closes his labours as clerk of pres- \nbytery by recording that the sentence of suspension was passed on \nhim. In a few months he Was restored, and very soon after ended \nhi.- day-. 1 le made his will July 31, 1742, being in declining health ; \n25, 1747. He left his property to his widow \nduring her life; and, in case his only son should die without issue, all \nshould go to John, in Boston, son of his brother Benjamin. His \nlibrary consisted of -It;:) volumes, \xe2\x80\x94 58 folios, 78 quartos, 4~> octavos. \n\nFranklin,* in his .Memoirs, says that he regularly paid his sub- \nr the support of the only Presbyterian minister or meet- \ning we had. "He used to visit me sometimes as a friend, and \nnish me to attend his ministrations; I was now ami then \ndon to do so; once for five Sundays successively. Had he \nin my opinion, a good preacher, perhaps 1 might have con- \ntinued, notwithstanding tin casion 1 had for the Sunday\'s lei- \nsure in my c lurse of study; but his discourses were chiefly either \n\npolemic arguments, or explications of the peculiar doctrines of our \n\nml were all to me wry dry, uninteresting, and unedifying, \n\ni ungle moral principle was inculoated or enforced; \n\ntheir aim Beeming to be rather to make ua Presbyterians than good \n\nAt length lie took for his text, Phil. iv. 8: \xe2\x80\x94 \'Finally, \n\nbrethren, whatsoever things are true, honesty just, pure, lovely, or \n\nI Drt, if there he any virtue or any praise, think on these \n\n\n\n1 | Mercury, Jane 12, 1729, repre- \n\nbad i d drawn i i the preacher at Christ Churob \n\n; . meeting : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 (Tow \xc2\xabin I guard agatnil m; morning*! fell; \n\xe2\x96\xa0..a bar* it .ill. \n\n\n\n318 GEORGE McNISH. \n\nthings.\' I imagined, in a sermon on such a text, we could not miss \nof having some morality. He confined himself to five points only, a8 \nmeant by the apostle : \xe2\x80\x94 Keeping holy the Sabbath day, Being dili- \ngent in reading the Scriptures, Attending duly the public worship, \nPartaking of the sacraments, and Paying due respect to God\'s \nministers. These all might be good things ; but, as they were not \nthe kind of good things I expected from that text, I despaired of \never meeting with them from any other, was disgusted, and attended \nhis preaching no more. On Hemphill\'s defeat, (in 1735,) I quitted \nthe congregation, never attending it further, though continuing my \nsubscription many years for the support of its ministers." \n\n\n\nNATHANIEL TAYLOR \n\n\n\nWas probably ordained in Scotland in 1702 or \'3, and came imme- \ndiately to Marlborough, on the Patuxent. The settlement was made \nin 1690, by Col. Ninian Beall, who purchased a large tract on the \nPotomac and drew thither his friends and neighbours from Fifeshire. \n\nThe mouth of Patuxent was a great commercial emporium ; \xe2\x80\x94 \nThere George Fox and Edmundson anchored in 1651 ; and there \nChalkley and Richardson, who followed them as Public Friends, \nleft the ship. \n\nTaylor was a punctual attendant on every meeting of presbytery \ntill his death in 1710. His elder in 1707 was William Smith ; and, \nin 1708 and \'09, James Bell (Beall ?) \n\nMr. Foot, of Port Penn, supposes him to have been related to the \nTaylors,* who, as early as 1683, settled at Drawyers. He may have \nbeen a brother of Elias Taylor, who married Makemie\'s sister-in- \nlaw, Comfort Anderson. \n\n\n\nGEORGE McNISH \n\nCame to Maryland with Makemie and Hampton in 1705. Dr. \nReid says that he was from Ulster ; but Mr. Poyer,f of Jamaica, \ncalls him a North Briton. He preached at Monokin and Wico- \nmico; but, being poorly supported, he declined their call in 1710. \nThe presbytery left it to himself to determine the affair between \n\n* Historical Discourse at Drawyers. f Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nGEORGE McXISH. 319 \n\nJamaica and Patuxent, but advised him not to delay fixing him- \nself somewhere. \n\nMakemie states that there was, at the time of his trial, a Dis- \nsenting minister at Jamaica by a " during-pleasure license" from \nCornbury.* The chiefs of the sect petitioned Lord Lovelace on \nhis assuming the chair of State ; but his untimely death occurred \nbefore it was answered. " No sooner was his Majesty pleased to \nremove Col. Ingoldsby, he having administered the government \nfrom the death of Lovelace in 1709, but the very next day (April 11, \n17 1") the more violent of that sect took possession of the church, \nand detained it against the justice. He committed them. They \nwere released on bail, fined three shillings each, and the fines were \nremitted." \n\nOn Governor Hunter\'s arrival, "the two great patrons of the \nsect" waited on him, and, in the presence of Colonel Morris, dis- \ncussed the Mini-try Act of 1693; but he gave them no encourage- \nment, lie, however, removed some who were in the Commission \nof the Peace, and substituted, unintentionally, some who were not \nChurchmen. This drew on him the anger of the clergy, who sent \nmany strong representations against him to the crown. To answer \nthem, he sent minute specifications of his zeal, energy, and libe- \nrality in behalf of the English Church in New York and the \nJerseys. \n\nThe Presbyterians, on the day the Church missionary was ex- \npected in town, entered the parsonage and dispossessed Mr. Urqu- \nhart\'s widow, with her connivance; for her daughter by her first \nhusband was married to the Rev. Benjamin "Woolsey, an Inde- \npendent, at that time a student of theology. She was soon admitted \nH a tenant of the congregation. In the spring of 1710, the \nchnrchwardens and vestry, being all Independents, called "one \nMr. George McNish, an itinerant Dissenting minister;" but, at \nthe governor\'s order, Bar. Poyer was inducted, by Mr. Sharp, \nchaplain of the forces, Hunter advised Poyer to sue for the \nparsonage and Ins stipend, promising the use of his purse, and \noffering to hear the whole expense of the suit. The clergy in New \nYork, N- a Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, advised to the \ncontrary, and joined n a complaint to the Bishop of London, got \nup with all tgainst the governor, for having "lately ad- \n\n..i,.\xc2\xbb were professed implacable enemies of tho \nChurch, in the room of men of character, who were actually doing \n\njustice to the Church;" and also for QOt having "written to the \n\njudges to enforce them in their duty." The governor had con- \nsulted with Chief-Justice Mompessom, who said that any attempt \nto put Poyer in possessioD of the parsonage, without due course of \n\n* Lottcrs to the Venerablo Socioty: quoted by MucluiiaM in History of Ju- \n\n\n\n320 \xe2\x80\xa2 GEORGE McNISH. \n\nlaw, would be a high crime and misdemeanour. He wrote in his \ndefence to the Venerable Society; and his statements were fully \nsustained by Lewis Morris, Esq., Colonel Heathcote, and Mr. \nSharp, the chaplain. Mr. Yesey, of New York, and Mr. Hen- \nderson, of Dover, Delaware, were chiefly zealous in getting up this \npetition, Poyer being a weak man and used as a tool by Yesey. \nThe petition of the clergy prevailed ; and her Majesty, in council, \ngranted them leave to appeal in any suit, without limitation of \nsum, to the governor and council of the province. The petition \nwas resented by Hunter and his friends; and the Bishop of Lon- \ndon wrote, May 12, 1712, to Poyer: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"I must now entreat you for the future to have a care of foolish \nand unwary advisers. Pray, therefore, think your governors to \nbe wiser than yourself; and, if you miscarry under that conduct, \nyou will come off with reputation, for I must tell you that your \napplication over into England has done you and your brethren no \ngreat service. Be wiser, therefore, for the time to come. \n\n"The clergy," says Morris, "are a gigg (agog) to be meddling \nwith politics, \xe2\x80\x94 an inclination I wish our missionaries had less of." \n"All the Assembly which passed the Act of 1693 were Dissenters, \nexcept the speaker, (James Grahame, a relative of the Marquis of \nMontrose.) They knew nothing of the Church, and intended to raise \na maintenance for a Dissenting minister. The act, without wrest- \ning, will admit a construction in favour of Dissenters. \n\n"There is no comparison of our numbers anywhere but in the \ncity of New York. I believe, at this day, the Church had been in \na much better condition, had there been no act in her favour ; for \nin the Jerseys and Pennsylvania, where there is none, there are \nfour times the number of Churchmen there are in New York, and \nmost of them are so upon principle ; whereas nine parts in ten of \nours will add no great credit to whatever church they are of. Yet \nthe poor man Poyer and his friends, are weak enough to think \ntheir superiors in England will enter into measures to displace the \ngovernor, for not dragooning in their favour, as his predecessor \ndid." \n\nThe church was wrested from the Presbyterians ; but McNish, \non accepting the call, was put by the town in possession of the \nparsonage and glebe, and the stipend fixed by the Act of 1693 was \nraised and paid to him. \n\nPoyer complained, in 1713, that the governor had appointed \none Baird, a North Briton and a Dissenter, high-sheriff; and he, \nthough ordered by the justices, refused to thrust out the tenant \nwhom the town had placed in the parsonage. \n\nThe Venerable Society obtained from the Dissenting ministers, \nRobinson and Reynolds, the letter of Cotton Mather in relation to \nJamaica ; and, having seen the statements on both sides, agreed to \npay Poyer \'s expenses in an ejectment suit and in an action for the \n\n\n\nGEORGE MaNISH. 321 \n\nstipend. Ho commenced suit in 1716, and recovered of the church* \nwardena \xc2\xa316 lis. 3*2., and "proceeded to* such lengths that several \nof the principal inhabitants were harassed with severe persecutions, \nheavy fines, and long imprisonment; others fled out of the pro- \nvince, to avoid the rage of Episcopal cruelty." Their steadfastness \n\ntigmati?ed as obstinacy; and "they are encouragedf in it by \ntheir minister, a very designing man, who persuades them to what \nhe will." The Venerable Society were gravely informed that the \nmiller refused to grind rover\'s grain, saying he might eat it whole, \nH the hogs did; and the society, in consideration of his many \nhardships, sent him a gown, a cassock, and ten pounds. \n\nore McNish came, the people had unanimously, at their own \n\nexpense, built a meeting-house. In this he preached during his life. \n\nGovernor Hunter sent to the clergy in the province, copies of \n\nthe 7:M article of the Queen\'s instructions, requiring the vestry of \n\neach parish to admit the minister as a member of their body, and \n\nto transact no business without his presence. In January, 1713, \n\nPoyer met with the vestry and produced the instructions. McNish \n\nwas with them; and they refused to do any business till Poyer re- \n\nThis was duly represented to the governor and the society. \n\nThe Rev. Thomas Reynolds, of London, J wrote to Cotton \n\nMather, June 9, 1715, "I must now acquaint you that Mr. \n\nMcNish has not been forgotten by me, who have endeavoured, \n\nupon all occasions, to solicit the concern of the foreign plantations, \n\nand have stirred up my brethren to counteract the designs of the \n\nmaries. Endeavours have been used and much time Bpent \nfor this purpose. The society proceeds, and is not without hopes \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0ling bi.-liops to be sent into his Majesty\'s plantations." lie \n\nthat an agent be sent over; "and that if Mr. McNish or \n\nany other can send any thing which may afford matter of* further \n\nremonstrance to the Bociety, we pray he will do it with all expe- \ndition, and with authentic testimonials." \n\nIii the fall of 171 s . there was "a prospect of his going to \nBritain on important business;" but he did not go. \n\nPumry, of Newtown, having joined the presbytery, and the con- \nithampton having come under its care, it was, on \nthe erection of the synod, earnestly recommended to McNish and \nPumry to use their besl endeavours, with their neighbouring \nbrethren, to form a presbytery. In this they were successful; \nand, with the Rev. George Phillips, of Setaukct, they constituted \nthe Presbytery of Lone Island, and probably held their first \ning April 17. 1717, and ordained Gelston. \n\nThere fa a tradition that he had a grant <<[\' one thousand acres \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 l: \xe2\x80\xa2 r. I"-. I \n\nt Mr. Pqyer t., the \\ [ety. \xe2\x99\xa6 Mutlicr BfSS. Am. Ant \n\n21 \n\n\n\n322 JOHN HAMPTON. \n\nfrom the King on the "VYallkill in Orange county. Eager mentions \nhim among the land-owners in 1721. \n\nHe died March 10, 1722, leaving one son, who married* a daugh- \nter of Joseph Smith, of Jamaica, and removed to New Jersey, where \nhe was educated and licensed ; and whether ever ordained is not \nascertained. He resided in Orange county, New York, and, in \n1738, married Mary Fitch. He died at Wallkill, at the age of \nsixty-five, in 1779. His descendants remain there. Hef preached \nat Newtown, Long Island, between 1744 and \'46. \n\nMcNish gave reasons in 1716 for the absence of his elder. He \nwas attended at synod in 1717, by John Rhodes, and in 1720 by \nDaniel Smith. \n\n\n\nJOHN HAMPTON. \n\n\n\nWhether he was a native of Scotland or Ireland is unknown. \nLord Cornbury speaks of him as "a young Presbyterian minister \nlately come to settle in Maryland." He made application to Somer- \nset Court to be qualified, in Jan. 1706 ; the matter was referred to \nthe governor, and he went northward with Makemie, and, having \npreached at Newtown on Sabbath in "a meeting-house offered to \nrecord," was arrested with Makemie and carried before Cornbury. \nHe remained silent until the governor began to make out an order \nfor his commitment, when he demanded a license to preach, accord- \ning to the Toleration Act. Cornbury refused, and sent him to \nprison. \n\nHe was not indicted, the attorney-general having dropped his \nname when the matter was laid before the grand jury. \n\nHe was called to Snowhill in March, 1707, the salary to be paid \nin tobacco. He was "inaugurated" by McNish. \n\nHe was long in feeble health, and visited his native country in \n1717 for his recovery ; and the synod, in the following fall, accepted \nhis demission of the pastoral care of his people, because he could \nnot perform his duty to them "without apparent hazard of his life \nthrough bodily indisposition." \n\nHe made his will! October 28, 1719, and died before February, \n1721. His widow (probably his second wife) survived him and her \ntwo previous husbands, Colonel Francis Jenkins and Rev. John \nHenry, and died in 1744. \n\nHe also served Pitt\'s Creek; and the united congregations were \n\n* Macdonald. f Hiker\'s History of Newtown. % Spence. \n\n\n\nJOHN EOTD \xe2\x80\x94 JOSEPH SMITH. 323 \n\nrepresented in 1709 by William Fosset ; in 1710, by Benjamin Aid? \nlett,* (Aydelotte;) in 1711, by Adam Spence; in 1714, by Samuel \nHopkins; in 1715, by Nathaniel Hopkins; and in 1718, by Ed- \nmund Cropper. \n\n\n\nJOHN BOYD, \n\n\n\nA native of Scotland, came as a probationer, probably at the \nsolicitation of his countrymen, who, fleeing from persecution, settled \nin Monmouth between 1GS0 and \'90. AVodrow is said to have cor- \nresponded with the Scots in Jersey. \n\nHe was ordained by the Presbytery of Philadelphia, December \n2\'.*, 1706, at the public meeting-house, before a numerous assem- \nbly, lb\' had QO call, but laboured at Freehold and Middletown. \nlountry around Upper Freehold was, at that time, a Avilderness \nfull of savages.f \n\nThe people of Freehold wrote to the presbytery, about the settle- \n\nment of Mr. Boyd, in May, 1708, and the presbytery requested \n\nthem to consent to his preaching every third Sabbath at Wood- \n\nHe died in 1708, and his tomb remains to this day, while \n\nMakemie and the other ministers, most of them, lie in unknown \n\ngraves. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH SMITH. \n\n\n\n1 v Connecticut, the ancient barriers of Independency were swept \naway a- by an ice-freshet. The legislature called synods to ad- \njudicate; but every Btep only led further from the rigid mode of \n\nBeparating the world from all participation in the government and \n\n\n\n* The aydeloUe family ere Mill members, of our Qhnrdfa m Pitt\'s Creek. Aden) \nBpenec, - <>f Knowhili, .\xe2\x96\xa0nine iVmn Scutlund daring the \n\nI ition ; the Ute [rring Spa wu Ms descendant, t" irl i ire owe moon, P r \n\nliis gathering many Interesting materials of our early history. Nathaniel H \nstands at tin- bead of the li-t <>r elders, Indicating bis rank in society, Edmund \nCropper U mentioned as ettendin tery. \n\nf- Morgan Bdwar I New Jersey. Colonel Morris says thai \n\nma !\'\xe2\x80\xa2 the first wtl ement in Freehold; he preached several timet srbena mi \n\naemns, in Freehold. The i \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0.,- probably represented by John \n\n\n\n824 JOSEPH SMITH. \n\nprivileges of the church, and their children from the sacrament of \nbaptism. A pacification was agreed on ; but the Lord\'s Supper was \nnot celebrated for a long time in Hartford, and it was esteemed an \noffence that the aggrieved brethren sought a dismission to another \nchurch. It was grievous to the ruling powers that those who could \nnot walk with the church of Hartford were treated as brethren in \ngood standing by the church of Wethersfield. This led to the pur- \nchase of a large tract on the Connecticut, in Massachusetts, and to \nthe unanimous engagement of the proprietors, in the spring of 1659, \nto remove thither with their families. Besides a larger number \nfrom Hartford, the minister of Wethersfield, Mr. Russell, with \ntwelve heads of families, removed. Among them were Samuel \nSmith, and Philip his son, both men of good estate. Philip mar- \nried Rebecca, daughter of Nathaniel Foote, one of the early set- \ntlers of Wethersfield. " He* was largely employed in the affairs of \nthe town, a lieutenant of the troop, and, which crowns all, a man \nfor devotion, sanctity, and all that was honourable, exceeding ex- \nemplary. Labouring under ischiatick pains, he seemed ripening \napace for another world, filled with grace and joy to a high degree. \nSuch was his weariness of, and his weanedness from this world, that \nhe knew not whether he might pray for his continuance here. \nSuch assurance had he of the love of God, that he would cry out, \nin raptures, \' Lord, stay thy hand ; it is enough ! it is more than \nthy frail servant can bear!\' Such a man was, in the winter of the \nyear 1684, murdered, with a hideous witchcraft, that filled, all those \nparts of New England with astonishment." \n\nJoseph, son of Philip Smith, was born at Hadley, in 1674, and \ngraduated at Harvard, in 1695. About two years after, he married \nEsther, daughter of Cornet Joseph Parsons, one of the first settlers \nof Springfield. He preached for a time at Brookfield, Massachu- \nsetts, and came early in 1708 to Cohanzy, in West Jersey, at the \ninstance of his college classmate, Andrews, who said they were \n"the best people in this neighbourhood." \n\nThe settlement on Cohanzy was made from Fairfield county, \nConnecticut, and they named their new homes Fairfield and Green- \nwich, after the towns from which they came. It is said the church \nwas formed in 1700, and supplied by Mr. Black. The Rev. Thomas \nBridge preached at Cohanzy in 1702 or \'03, and was called from \nthere to be colleague to Mr. Bradstreet, in the First Church in \nBoston. He came to Boston in 1682,fwith testimonials from John \nOwen, Matthew Mead, and six other divines ; he soon after settled \nat Port Royal, in Jamaica, and then in New Providence and Ber- \nmuda. He died in Boston, September 16, 1715, aged fifty-eight. \n\n* Quoted from Mather\'s Magnalia, in the genealogy of the Foote family, by my \nhonoured and indefatigable friend, N. Goodwin, Esq., of Hartford. \n\n-j- MSS. in Massachusetts Historical Society: Funeral Sermon of Mr. Bridge. \n\n\n\nJOHN HEXRY. 325 \n\nSmith was ordained and installed at Cohanzy in 1708; but, com- \nplaining of the negligence in making up his support, he left, and \nreturned to New England. The presbytery ordered him to go to \nHopewell and Maidenhead and confer with them on such matters \nas may be propounded to him by them, concerning his being called \nto be their minister. \n\nHe preached for a short time at Greenwich, Connecticut, and \nabout 1713 was called to the Second Society, in Middletown, Con- \nnecticut, (commonly known as Upper Houses,) then newly formed; \nand was installed January 5, 1715, and died there September 8, \n1736, aged sixty-two. His widow survived him twenty-five years, \nand died May 30, 1760, in her eighty-ninth year. \n\nHe left a son, Joseph, and two daughters, Mary, the wife of \nRev. Samuel Tudor, of East Windsor, and Martha, the wife of \nRichard Hamlin] of Middletown. \n\n\n\nJOHN HENRY \n\n\n\nWAS Ordained by the Presbytery of Dublin, and came to Mary- \nland in IT 11 \'- 1 , having been invited, on the death of Makemie, to \nbe bis successor. He was admitted a member <>f presbytery in \n1710, having given good satisfaction by testimonials. Mr. Pierce \nBray presented a call tor him "from the good people of Reho- \nboth;" and Hampton and Davis preached at bis "admission." \n\n"lie* stood high as a citizen and a divine. lie left a strongly- \n\nbound octavo volume of manuscript, entitled \'Commonplace,\' of \nfrom three hundred t<> five hundred pages. It was a mass of reli- \ngious instruction, enforcing the prominent doctrines of the West- \nminster Confession in their length ami breadth, and urging the \nperformance of every christian duty. It was made up with great \ncar.\', aiid was more legible than many printed volumes. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2lb- married Mary, tin- daughter of Sir Robert King, the agent \nof Maryland in L690, and the widow of Colonel Francis Jenkins,t \nwho, with herself was the executor of Makemie\'s will, and who \ndied childless. Henry left two sons, both men of distinction, \xe2\x80\x94 \n: Jenkins Henry being Judge of the Provincial Court in \n1754, and residing in Somerset, Colonel John Henry sitting in \ntin\' House of I \'\xe2\x80\xa2 r county. ( >ne of his de- \n\n\n\nf Colonel J< ig then very old. Ho \n\ndied before 171". \n\n\n\n326 JAMES ANDERSON. \n\nscendants was Governor of Maryland, and was educated under \nSamuel Finley, at Nottingham. \n\n"His will is dated October 15, 1715; lie died before September, \n1717." \n\nThe elder from Rehoboth, in 1710, was Pierce Bray ; in 1718, \nJohn Dridden, (Dryden,) whose descendants still reside there. \n\n\n\nJAMES ANDERSON \n\nWas* born in Scotland, November 17, 1678, and was ordained \nby Irvine Presbytery, November 17, 1708, with a view to his settle- \nment in Virginia. f He sailed March 6, 1709, and arrived in the \nRappahannock, April 22 ; but, the state of things not warranting his \nstay, he came northward, and was received by the presbytery, Sep- \ntember 20. He settled at Newcastle. \n\nHe was directed to write, in conjunction with Wilson, to the \nSynod of Glasgow ; and the application was answered by sending \nhither Wotherspoon and Gillespie. \n\nIn 1714, out of regard to the desolate condition of the people in \nKent county, he was directed to supply them monthly on a Sab- \nbath, and also to spend a Sabbath at Cedar Creek, in Sussex. \n\nAn effort seems to have been made, after the acquittal of Ma- \nkemie, to have the city of New York supplied with a minister of \nour church. VeseyJ wrote to a friend December 2, 1709, " that \nthe Dissenting preacher is likely to gain no ground." His stay \nwas brief; but the people kept together, and met for worship, with \nfew interruptions, and with a gradual increase of numbers, till \n1716, when they took measures to form a regular congregation. \nThe next year found them strong enough to undertake the support \nof a minister, being doubtless encouraged by promises from the mi- \nnisters of Glasgow. They presented\xc2\xa7 their call for Anderson, by the \nhands of Mr. Thomas Smith and Mr. Gilbert Livingston, to New- \ncastle Presbytery during the first meeting of synod. They con- \nsidered the matter, and. having heard Anderson\'s reasons for re- \nmoval, referred it to the synod : a large committee was appointed \nto meet at Newcastle and "audit" the objections of his people and \nfully determine the affair. The commissioners attended the com- \nmittee, and Anderson was allowed to accept the call. \n\nPublic worship was held in the City Hall. The original friends \n\n\n\n* Miller\'s Life of Rodgers. f Anderson to Principal Stirling, of Glasgow. \n\nI Albany Documents. \\ MS. Records of Newcastle Presbytery. \n\n\n\nJAMES ANDERSON. 6ZI \n\nof Presbyterianism seem all to have passed away. Prominent \namong their successors were Patrick Macknight, Dr. John Nicoll, \nGilbert Livingston, Thomas Smith, "William Smith, and William \nLivingston. \n\nThe bold, free, handsome signature of P. Macknight, at the \nhead of the representatives, indicates his position as a merchant \nand a man of property. He was from the North of Ireland. \nDr. Nicoll waa a graduate of Edinburgh University, \xe2\x80\x94 a physician \nof eminence; he died October 2, 1743, aged sixty-four. Gilbert \nLiving-ton was the youngest son of Robert Livingston, son of the \nvenerable minister of Ancrum, \xe2\x80\x94 and was the grandfather of Dr. \nGilbert R. Livingston, of Philadelphia. William Livingston was \nthe nephew of Robert, and father of the Governor of New Jersey. \nThomas Smith was from England: he lived to an advanced age. \nWilliam Smith was a native of Newport-Pagnel, in England, and \ncame to New York in 1715 in the same ship with James Alexander, \nwho, like Smith, became distinguished as a lawyer and an opponent \nof an arbitrary executive, lie was afterwards a judge, and a mem- \nber of the King\'s Council. \n\nIn 171*, Dr. Nicoll, Macknight, Gilbert Livingston, and Thomas \n\nSmith purchased a lot on Wall Street, near Broadway, and, in \n\nthe following year, built a church. Besides the donations in the \n\nthe Legislature of Connecticut directed a collection to be \n\ntaken up throughout the colony for their benefit. \n\nCotton Mather* wrote to Dr. Nicoll (January 20, 1719-20) the \nfollowing letter " to be communicated:" \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nk - Brethren : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" We are very sensibly touched with grief at the information \nyon give ns of the strange difficulties under which your evan- \ngelical affairs are Labouring. But, since it is from you only we \nDave been informed of them, this gives us a little hope they may \nQOt grow to the extremity you may be afraid of. The opposition \nyour work Buffers from the great adversary is but an argument \nis d work of God; and if you keep Looking up to Him, who \n\nLfl infinitely Stronger than he that is in the world, yon may soon \n\nlee all the opposition happily conquered. But it would be a wis- \ndom in the opposers to consider seriously who and what they may \nting for. As for os, we have never yel had any disadvanta- \nrepresantations of worthy Mr. Anderson mad,- tons ; nor shall \nwe receive any thing to hi.- disadvantage withoul firsf giving him \nand yon an opportunity of vindication. May the glomus Lord, \n\n* Hatha MSfi American antiquarian Boolety. Wodrow wrote to Slather, \n1718, "i praenmo to give my Idndeel regard! to Mr Jam< Inder- \ni! to bear of the condition of our brethren \n\nad, and thereabout*.\xe2\x80\x94 Wt \n\n\n\n328 JAMES ANDERSON. \n\nwho knows the services and patience of his ministers, be near his \nfaithful minister, \xe2\x80\x94 a God of patience first and then of consolation. \nIt has been a trouble to us that we have been able to do so little \namong our people for your assistance in your laudable design of \nerecting an edifice for the worship of God." \n\nMacknight and Nicoll, with Joseph Blake, John Leddel, and \nThomas Inglis, representatives of the congregation, wrote (May 9, \n1720) a letter* of thanks to the Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, \nMembers of Council, and Representatives of the General Court \nof Connecticut. A twelvemonth before, they had applied to their \nhonours, " for a brief for a general and voluntary contribution for \nassisting in building our house of worship, which, being begun, we \ncould not finish without the charitable aid of others ; which was \ncheerfully and readily granted. Now, with rejoicing, we crave \nleave to acquaint this assembly that, by the assistance we ex- \nperienced from Connecticut, we were not only encouraged to go \non with our begun building, \xe2\x80\x94 which otherwise was like to drop \nand go to ruin, \xe2\x80\x94 but were able also to get it under roof, so that \nnow with joy we enjoy the ordinances dispensed to us therein. \nWe heartily thank you for your opportune, free, and voluntary \nliberal aid to a small despised handful, which, we hope, designs \nnothing else but the honour of the glorious Lord and the eternal \ngood of their souls and their children\'s." The sum raised in Con- \nnecticut was less than they expected, \xe2\x80\x94 " the charity of some \nhaving been cooled by false and malicious reports dispersed \nthrough the colony. However, we do not blame anybody but \n\' the accuser of the brethren,\' who hath indeed all along opposed \nthe good work with the utmost malice. But this does not in the \nleast discourage us, but rather demonstrates to us that the work \nis God\'s, who, as he has brought it this length, will undoubtedly \nfinish it in opposition to Satan and all his instigations." \n\nThe congregationf petitioned the King\'s Council (March 4, \n1719-20) to incorporate, by letters-patent under the great seal \nof the province, the ministers, elders, and deacons of the Presby- \nterian congregation in the city of New York. They style them- \nselves Scots, from North Britain, and state, that they have \nerected a house for the worship of God after the manner of the \nPresbyterian church. They urge their request on the ground of \nthe great inconvenience of vesting the title to their property in \ncertain individuals, which they must do until incorporated. This \napplication was signed by Anderson and the five representatives. \nThe president of the council was Peter Schuyler; the members, \nA. Depeyster, Rip Van Dam, John Barberie, Thomas Byerly, and \n\n* MSS. in Secretary of State\'s Office, Hartford. \n\nf Case of the Scots Presbyterian Congregation in New York. \n\n\n\nJAMES ANDERSON. 329 \n\nJohn Johnston. The vestry of Trinity Church appeared by coun- \nsel to oppose, and the request was refused. \n\nOn the 19th of September, they renewed their petition, \xe2\x80\x94 Go- \nvernor Burnet* being come to the province and appearing friendly. \nWith him there was a discrepancy between appearance and inten- \ntion. He was for the Church, right or wrong, by fair means or \nfoul: he rent the French congregation by his illegal interference, \nand deceived the Presbyterians by much fair speech. \n\nThe council were, A. D. Philipse, George Clarke, Robert "Wal- \nter, Caleb Heathcote, and John Byerly, \xe2\x80\x94 probably all Church- \nmen. Counsel was heard on both sides; and the council declined \nto act, because no instance had occurred of granting corporate \nprivileges to a body of Dissenters. \n\nTheir petition, dated May 10, 1724, was transmitted to the \n"Lords of Trade;" and the Attorney-General for Ireland, Rich- \nard West, gave his opinion that, in the general and abstract view \nof the thing, there was nothing in the request unreasonable or \nimproper. \n\nOn the 16th of May, 1730, the church was completed, being \neighty feet long by sixty feet wide. \n\nThe Synod of Glasgow and Ayr, in 1719, invested a collection \nin goods, and sent them to New York. The Synod of Phila- \ndelphia gave a tenth of the nett produce to aid in the support of \nAnderson, and sent to their Scottish friends "hearty thanks for \ntheir kindness to the interest of religion in these wilderness \nparts." \n\nThe letters to Boston ami Connecticut had referred to malicious \nreports, widely dispersed, against Anderson, and which had cooled \nthe charity of some towards the infant church. Gilbert Living- \nston and Thomas Smith were much dissatisfied, and complained to \nnod of tin\' Presbytery of Long Island in regard to the \nSettlement of Anderson. The synod heard their representations, \nand, by a large majority, decided that tho proceedings were regu- \nlar. The two gentlemen also complai I of two sermons of An- \n\nere read, and approved as orthodox and godly in \n\nBubstance, though the terms in some passages were not so mild \n\nand Boft as they could have wished. Dr. Niooll was present in \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0I elder; Andrews and Dickinson wrote to Livingston \n\nand Smith; Jones, Gillespie, and Evans wrote to the congre- \ngation. \n\nI gentlemenf petitioned the councD not to grant oorporate \nprivileges to the congregation, as this would confirm the property \n\n\n\n* The f tin\' Presbyterian Iftiniatei k and Long [aland" \n\nto Urn in \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 \' i high o plimenl bo bia (ataer\'a memory, lbs \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0in/. \n\n| Documentary Hi cork, third Tolome. \n\n\n\n330 JAMES ANDERSON. \n\nto Anderson and those who adhered to him. They asked that \nthey might be released from the bonds which they, jointly with \nMacknight and Nicoll, had given for the land and the building, \nas Macknight was about to go to Europe, and they had experience \nenough of Nicoll\'s instability and other faults. \n\nThe matter was not healed. The source of the difficulty is \nwholly to be guessed at. Andrews calls it " a squabble."* \n\nThe trustees of New Haven College sent missionaries, at the \nrequest of Smith, to erect a new congregation. The synod (in \n1721) approved of the action of Long Island Presbytery; but, \nhaving received a letter from the trustees, desiring the synod to \nsend some of their number to confer with them on the interest of \nreligion in general and the unhappy difference in New York, the \nsynod directed the presbytery to meet with them. The conference \nwas held at Stamford, in October, but was fruitless. The synod \napproved of the presbytery\'s management of the affair.f \n\nJonathan Edwards,J barely nineteen, preached to Smith and \nhis friends from August, 17-2, till April 26. He loved to re- \nmember the pleasant days spent there, and his delight in the so- \nciety of the pious Madam Smith and her son, \xe2\x80\x94 probably the Rev. \nJohn Smith, of Rye. \n\nThe separation terminated on Edwards\'s departure. \n\nIn the "Antiquarian Library" at Worcester, Massachusetts, is \na letter from Rebecca Nicoll, to Cotton Mather, (May 23, 1723,) \nrepresenting that the whole difficulty lies with Smith, and Grant \nand his son, and intimating that they were unreasonable. They \n" had a meeting by themselves ; but most of Grant\'s family went \nto the English church." Mr. Grant reports, " that the Boston \nministers engage \xc2\xa360 yearly to aid the separate meeting. "VVe \nhave a faithful pastor, as all who know Mr. Anderson acknow- \nledge him to be. It is a shame to send aid to humour a part of \ntwo families. Madam Smith has a letter, confirming the report \nof aid. Ten of the people are very scandalous. Mr. Jephson \n\n\n\n* The narrative given in the preface to the Records of the Trustees of the Con- \ngregation was drawn up twenty years after by William Smith, who takes no notice \nof this original difficulty between " the undertakers," but refers solely to the sub- \nsequent difficulty between Dr. Nicoll and the minister, and presents the view taken \nof the matter by Dr. Nicoll. Dr. Rodgers has added a marginal note, that Ander- \nson was a graceful, popular preacher, and a worthy man. \n\nf Morgan to Mather, October 31, 1722 : \xe2\x80\x94 " Our synod have justified all that the \nLong Island Presbytery have done in the affair of New York. I only stood up and \ndissented ; more would, but have been mistrusted to have had a hand in setting up \nthe separate meeting ; but all knew that I was against that being set up, for I look \nupon it as a very hurtful thing." \xe2\x80\x94 American Antiquarian Society. \n\nJ Immediately on being licensed, in consequence of an application from a num- \nber of ministers, who were intrusted to act in behalf of the Presbyterians of New \nYork, he went thither. "I had," Edwards says, " abundance of sweet religious \nconversation in the family of Madam Smith." After leaving, " sometimes I felt \nmy heart ready to sink with the thoughts of my friends in New York." \n\n\n\nJAMES ANDERSON. 331 \n\nand his family have returned to us. Her excuse for writing was, \n\'having been one of jour flock.\' " \n\nDr. Nicoll took a voyage to Scotland, and engaged the General \nibly to assist them; and, by their order, a large collection \nWBS taken up. \n\nNew troubles were in store for Anderson ; the representatives \nand elders complaining of Dr. Nicoll to the presbj\'tery and synod. \nWithout consulting the representatives, (trustees,) he had applied \nto the payment of the church debt, the money sent from Great \nBritain, and refused to cancel or deliver up the bonds paid with \nthe public money. He disregarded the presbytery, would not \nattend the synod when notified, and, as though the church were \nhis property, applied to Boston for a minister. The synod (in \n172tj) pronounced his conduct unjustifiable, and wrote to the minis- \nters in Boston not to countenance him till he gave satisfaction. \n\nAnderson at once desired liberty to remove from New York, and \nthe congregation was allowed to call another minister in an orderly \nmanner, as soon as they paid the arrears now due. \n\nHe was called, September 24, 1726, to Donegal, on the Susque- \nhanna, and accepted it. His removal did not heal the difficulty: \nthe- arrears were not paid till 1730. The synod gave leave to his \nfriends, Blake, Leddel, and Inglis, to "join as to sacramental com- \nmunion" with any of our neighbouring congregations. \n\nApplication was made by Andrew Galbraith to Newcastle Pres- \nbytery, August 1. 1721, for supplies for Chicken\'s Longus, (Chique- \nsalunga ;) and Gillespie and Cross were sent. Rowland Chambers \n\xe2\x80\xa2 1 the request next year. In May, 1723, Conestoga applied ; \nbut Hutcheson failed to go, being unable to obtain a guide thi- \nther; in tin,\' fall, he and McGill were sent to Dunngaal. In 1725, \nDonegal obtained one-sixth of Boyd\'s time; and he served them \ntill they called Anderson, lie was installed the last Wednesday \nin August, L727. In September, 1729, he gave every fifth Sab- \nbath to the people on Bwatara, and joined the congregation of \nDerry. \n\nThe Presbytery of Donegal held its first meeting October 11, \n:md consisted of Anderson, Boyd, Orr, and Bertram. As \nearly as September, 17:\'\'."i, the emigration to Virginia attracted the \nattention of Thomson, of Chestnut Level; and he proposed to Done- \ngal Presbytery to employ an itinerant in Virginia. The overture \n-imply approves ;" that is, fully, as in Romans xii. 8; \xe2\x80\x94 "He \nthai givetn, Let him do it with simplicity," \xe2\x80\x94 without stint or abate- \nment: so they concurred in bis plan heartily. Bach year brought \nup the case ox the back-parts of Virginia; and in April, L788,the \ntery approved of the plan of John I laldwell to ash the synod \nto send b deputation t" wait on the Virginia government and \nsolicit its favour in behalf of our interest there. The Bynod wrote \nrnor, and sent Anderson to hen- the letter, providing \n\n\n\n332 JAMES AKDERSON - . \n\nsupplies for his pulpit, and allowing for his expenses " in a manner \nsuitable to his design." \n\nCaldwell was a member of Thomson\'s congregation, having come \nwith four single sisters from county Antrim. He removed to Frede- \nrick county; then to Campbell and Prince Edward\'s. He was the \nfather of Caldwell, of Elizabethtown, and of Major John Caldwell, \nof Virginia, who was shot by a Tory during the Revolution. John \nC. Calhoun was his great-grandson. \n\nAnderson performed his mission satisfactorily. In April of the \nnext year, the presbytery blamed him for having sent Dunlap from \nNew England to Virginia without knowing any thing certainly of \nhis ecclesiastical standing. This was probably the Rev. Robert \nDunlap, who settled in Maine. \n\nHe married* Mistresse Suitt Garland, daughter of Sylvester \nGarland, of the Head of Apoquinimy, February, 1712-13. She \ndied December 24, 1736. He married Rachel Wilson, December \n27, 1737. His son, Garland Anderson, was one of the witnesses \nof Andrews\'s will, in 1742. He married Jane, daughter of Peter \nChevalier, of Philadelphia: he died early. His daughter Eliza- \nbeth married Samuel Breeze, and resided in New York, a woman \nof great excellence. \n\nAnderson died July 16, 1740, probably on his return from a visit \nto Opequhon, and just in the trying emergency when he was needed \nto stand in the breach. A worthless fellow sought to bring a re- \nproach on him after his death, and the presbytery promptly came \nforward with a declaration that he was high in esteem for circum- \nspection, diligence, and faithfulness as a Christian minister. f \n\nBlair, in his answer to " The Querists," speaks of him as pressing \nforward, at Fagg\'s Manor, to dispute with Whitefield, almost before \nhe had finished preaching. He afterwards, at Newcastle, proposed \nto have some conference with Whitefield, but was told that, since \nhe and his friends had made their queries public, he could have no \ncommunication with him except through the press. \n\nHis brother, the Hon. John Anderson,! of Perth Amboy, was \nmade, in 1712, one of the Council of the Province, in place of \nWilliam Pinhorne, Esq. Governor Hunter was obliged to excuse \nhimself to the government at home for having displaced an obsti- \nnate Churchman to make way for a man of sense who was a Dis- \nsenter. He died in March, 1736, aged seventy-three, being then \nPresident of the Council. \n\n\n\n* From his family Bible : copied by Mr. Hazard. \n\nf His correspondence with Principal Sterling, of Glasgow, is preserved in the \nAdvocates\' Library, Edinburgh. \n\n% Albany Documents. " A Scotch Presbyterian who had the command of a ship \nof the Darien Company, and enriched himself by plundering it." Rev. Mr. Hen- \nderson, of Dover, Delaware, wrote thus to England, to involve Governor Hunter in \ntrouble. \n\n\n\nNATHANIEL WADE. \n\n\n\nNATHANIEL WADE. \n\n\n\nNathaniel "Wade, a lawyer of Bristol, and a vehement republican, \nhad formed the project of emigrating to New Jersey; but, engag- \ning in Monmouth\'s scheme to overthrow James the Second, he un- \ndertook to head a rising in his own city. He was thrown into pri- \nson ; and his confession, often referred to by Macaulay, is in the \nHarleian Collection, 6845. He probably came to Massachusetts. \n\nNathaniel Wade, of Medford, married Mary, the eighth child of \nGovernor Bradstrcet, of that province. \n\nThe name of Nathaniel "Wade does not occur in any of the \ngenealogical researches I have seen, nor among the graduates \nof Harvard or Yale.* \n\nNathaniel Wade was ordained and settled at Woodbridge, in \nNew Jersey, by the ministers of Fairfield county, in Connecticut, \nbefore 1708. Woodbridge was settled from Newbury, Massachu- \nsetts; and Chief-Justice Sewall began to prepare for the ministry, \nwith a view of being their pastor. The church embraced several \n- l i families, and wad served for a season by the Rev. Archi- \nbald Riddel. \n\nIn May, 1708, letters from Woodbridge informed Philadelphia \nPresbytery of the difference about Wade, and they, besides writing \nto the ministers of Fail field county, directed Boyd, if his people \nat Freehold consented, and those of Woodbridge desired it, to \npreach in the meeting-house at Woodbridge every third Sabbath. \nTiny .-traitly e njoined that the meeting-house shall be the only \nplace of worship in the town, but Boyd "may preach at Amboy." \nTalbot, i in 1704, in representing to the Venerable Society the im- \nportance of a church in Amboy, said, "Though there be few people \nthere, many would come out of Woodbridge. \' \n\nIn September, 171". Wade desired to be a member of the pres- \nbytery, and was received, having satisfied the brethren, by "letters, \ntestimonials, and personal argmngs, that his proceedings gave just \nground For bis acceptance." \n\nwrote separately to those with whom he was concerned, \nand to those who were dissatisfied with him. To the latter they \n\nsaid, \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 You professedly own this judicatory." They had found, by \nWade\'s certificates, thai In- had a call and subscriptions even from \n\nBOme of them, and that his ordination was valid according to Scrip- \nture rules, lie produced certificates from persons whose integrity \n\n\n\n* Mary, the youngest ohfld <\xe2\x96\xa0!" tter, John Davenport, Bret minister of New Karen* \nmarried for her leoend husband a Mr. Wade. \nf Ji ii Church. \n\n\n\n334 NATHANIEL WADE. \n\ncould not be suspected ; and his joining the presbytery seemed \nto be from sincere intentions of being more useful, and he sub- \nmitted himself fully to our church government and discipline. \nThey therefore urge them not to weaken his hands, but to seek to \ncement the congregation.* \n\nHe sat in presbytery in 1711, with his elder, Thomas Pike, and \nresigned all pastoral relation to the people in Woodbridge. Divers \nof his congregation were present, for and against him ; and he did \nnot clear himself altogether of the grievous scandals charged upon \nhim. With trembling hands and tears in his eyes, he declared he \nwould no longer be "a bone of contention in that miserable town." \nThe presbytery sent Gillespie thither ; but, when the town met to \nconsider the getting of another minister, Wade, with ostentation, \ntold them that he was now more firmly fixed in Woodbridge than be- \nfore, and that he stood as fair to be voted for as any man ; pretend- \ning the intention of the presbytery to be that a vote should first be \ntaken for himself. The town was therefore constrained to send to \n"a coram of our number" for an interpretation of the presby- \ntery\'s intent. At the same time Wade visited Boston, and made \nto Cotton Mather such a statement as led him to encourage a Mr. \nWiswall to become a candidate for the vacancy. \n\nMather had heartily recommended Gillespie, and wrote several \nletters, \xe2\x80\x94 "the utmost he could do for poor Woodbridge." \n\nNo further mention is made of Wade, who seems to have re- \nmained in the town. It may be added that his opponents, John \nIlsley and William Sharp, were New Englanders ; and also all those \nwho drew off to Episcopacy. \n\n\n\n* Mr. Whitehead, of Newark, has kindly furnished me with the following docu- \nment from the Records of the Venerable Society, addressed, in 1711, to the Rev. \nMr. Vaughan, Church missionary at Elizabethtown and the adjacent region : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Sir: \xe2\x80\x94 The unhappy difference between Mr. Wade and the people of Woodbridge \nis grown to that height that we cannot join with him in the worship of God as \nChristians ought to do. It is the desire of some people here, that if you think it \nmay be for the glory of God, and no damage to the other churches, that you would \nbe pleased to afford us your help sometimes on the Sabbath as you shall think con- \nvenient ; we do it, not with any intent to augment the difference among us, but \nrather hope that it may be a means for our better joining together in setting up the \ntrue worship of our Lord Jesus Christ here amongst a poor deluded people. This \nis the desire of your humble servants, \n\nRichard Smith, John Ashton, Benjamin Dunham \n\nAmos Goodwin, Gershom Higgins, Henry Rolph, \n\nJohn Bishop, William Bingle, George Eubancks." \n\nRobert Wright, \n\nA house was placed at Mr. Vaughan\'s disposal. Monthly services were commenced, \nand a church was built near the meeting-house, \xe2\x80\x94 " probably the smallest you have \never seen, but amply sufficient for the congregation at this day." \xe2\x80\x94 Newark \nSentinel. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH MORGAN. 335 \n\n\n\nJOSEPH MORGAN. \n\nJames Morgan* came to Pequot, New London, Connecticut, about \n1647, with the first settlers, the younger John Winthrop being their. \nhead. His third son married Dorothy, daughter of Thomas Parks, \nEsq., in April, 1670. Their son Joseph was born Nov. 6, 1674. \n\nArrangements! were made by the town of Bedford, in West \nChester county, New York, Dec. 26, 1699, to secure him for their \nminister. It was settled from Stamford, Connecticut, and had a \nmeeting-house in 1680. They promised him a house and \xc2\xa3-k0. On \nthe 12th of June, 1700, they took measures to have him indicted, \nunder the Act of 1603, for settling a ministry He was ordained \nabout that time by the ministers of Fairfield county, and preached \nthe sermon according to the custom of that time. Two years \nafter, he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts, as one of the \nfirst class of graduates of Yale ; making it probable that in one \ninstance, ;it least, a degree was given where the usual course of \nstudy had been accomplished before the college possessed cor- \nporate privileges. \n\nWhen he began to preach, he used notes. Hooker would hardly \n\xe2\x80\xa2it to his being licensed, and Noyes, of Stonington, exclaimed \nvehemently against his performing his duty in that manner. He \npleaded hia inability to proceed without them ; and, they insisting \non their being laid aside, he made the attempt, and complied fully \nwith their advice. \n\nHe algo served the neighbouring town of East Chester. It had, \nin 1704, 400 inhabitants, mostly Presbyterians ; but difficulties \nsprang up, of which the Churchmen availed themselves. Colonel \nHeathcote, of Scarsdale Manor, a man of large possessions and great \ninfluence, informed the Venerable Society, Oct. ;">, 17<I4, that the \nminister} was about to leave the Independent Church at Bedford, \nand that the people were well-affected to the Church. He bad \nneed means to persuade Morgan to conform, and says he had pro- \nmised tO do BO; but be left, and removed to Cieenwich, Connec- \nti\'-nr, and preached there till 1708. \n\nlam Knight, in her " Itinerary of an Overland Journey from \nin to New fork in Deo. 1704,\' - 1;.~. \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 East Chester is a very \nmiserable, poor place, ami tin- people a poor, quarrelsome orew; \nand, having quarrelled about their minister, the governor, on find- \ning a vacancy, sent, them an Episcopalian, who supplied besides at \nthe French town (New Etochelle) and Merrinack (Mamaroneck.)" \n\nMakemie says, in 1706, that Bedford bad asked Cornbury\'s leave \n\n* Transcribed from Town B> rda by N. Goodwin, B \n\nf Bolton\'s Ili.-tnry of West CLcaUr Couuly. 1 Bolton. \n\n\n\n660 JOSEPH MORGAN. \n\nto settle a Dissenting minister, but that no answer would be given \nuntil a Scotch Non-juring parson had been consulted. \n\nIn 1709, Morgan settled at Freehold, in New Jersey ; and, \nbeing desired to preach in the fall of that year at the ordination \nof Dickinson in Elizabethtown, he resolved to take the same sub- \nject and treat it in the same manner as he had done at his own \nordination, nine years before. Thi3 he could not do in all respects ; \nfor one of the ministers frequently desired him to be brief, on ac- \ncount of the shortness of the day and the greatness of the work \nin hand. His text was Mark xvi. 16: \xe2\x80\x94 " The Great Concernment \nof Gospel Ordinances, manifested from the great effects of im- \nproving or neglecting them." \n\nThis sermon was printed at New York* by W. & A. Bradford, in \n1712, the preface being dated at Freehold, Dec. 12, 1709. It is a \njudicious, instructive discourse, appropriate to the occasion. The \nduty of suitable preparation for the ministry is enforced by the \nadage, "A tow lace ill beseems a silk garment." \n\nHis treatise on Baptismf is a review of " The Portsmouth Dis- \nputation Examined ;" the dedication \xe2\x80\x94 to Robert Hunter, Governor \nof New Jersey \xe2\x80\x94 is dated Oct. 28, 1712. He had then a great \nfamily, and little opportunity to devote himself to learned studies. \n\nHe was a correspondent of Cotton Mather ; and a Latin letter to \nhim, dated " Cal. III., Sept. 1721,\'\' is in the Antiquarian Library \nin Worcester. He had sent, by a Mr. Preston, a treatise against \nDeists, who sadly abounded in New Jersey. He says he had few \nbooks, \xe2\x80\x94 no dictionary but an imperfect copy of Rider\'s. His eldest \nson had been more of an impediment than a help to him ; his \nsecond son was at Yale ; and the third and fourth relieved him \nfrom the labour of the parsonage plantation. \n\nIt was amazing to see the happy change that had taken place. \nFormerly Presbyterians were scarcely less hated than Papists ; but \nnow they were regarded with favour, and openings presented for \n"fluent" preachers. There had been a happy display of saving \ngrace among his own people. He had laboured thirteen years and \nseen no work of grace, but in about two years is so strange a turn, \nthat I stand in a kind of maze to see it. \n\nIn the spring of the next year, he travelled through Connecticut, \nand on his return wrote to Mather from East Chester, May 28, 1722. \nHis object had been to procure ministers for New Jersey, but had \nfailed, there being ten vacancies in Connecticut. He expresses \nhis uneasiness about the introduction of Arminianism into Yale, \nbut is unwilling, on account of his obligations to the institution, to \nappear as a witness or informer. \n\nMather sent him some books, which he acknowledges under date \n\n* Connecticut Historical Society\'s Library. \n-j- Am. Antiq. Soc. Libr. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH MORGAN. 837 \n\nof Oct. 31, 1722, and transmits a manuscript for the press, de- \nsiring that his friend would furnish a preface. He was in cor- \nrespondence also with Governor Saltonstall of Connecticut, and \nwith Deputy Governor Gold. \n\nHe soon after printed a "Remedy* for Mortal Errors, showing \nthe Necessity of the Anointing of the Spirit to guard us from Error,\' \' \nand strongly insisting on the duty of examining candidates for the \nministry on their experience of a saving change. He appends a \n- ntences in Latin, wishing that our ministers would disuse \nnotes in preaching, they being so disagreeable to the Scotch and \nthe Dutch; concluding with the wish that all our churches were \nfurnished with ruling elders to assist the ministers. His next \npublication, on \'\'Original Sin," is in the Old South Church Library. \nIt was followed by another, entitled, "Sin its own Punishment." \n\nHis " Tteplyf to an Anonymous Railer against the Doctrine of \nElection" bears date "17th, Eighth month, 1724." Noticing the \nslur on Presbyterian ministers for receiving a maintenance, he \nBays he had been in the ministry twenty-seven years, and that, when \nhis people kept him free from worldly avocations, the work of grace \nwent on abundantly : they came from every quarter to receive spi- \nritual consolation. "It would even melt one\'s heart to see the \nhumiliation, self-abasement, and self-loathing that appeared in them, \nand their ilceing to the blood of Christ for relief, and to the pure \nj$raoe and good pleasure of God to draw them to Christ, and to \nBee tin- change wrought in these lovely souls." But when he from \nnecessity entangled himself in the things of this life, the scene \nchanged mournfully; but, on his being set free from this burden, \nhe witnessed again the same delightful success. \n\nBe telle Mather, Oct. 31, 1722, that he hopes the circulation of \nhis book may remove the prejudices " which half the country here- \naway, and almost the other halt* too, have against our Confession \nof Faith. Of all the engines Satan has formed against our sal- \nvation, the most effectual is Arminianism; especially so, because, \n\nwhile it owns most of the great articles of faith, it goes less feared \nand mistrusted, and, under the specious pretext of vindicating God\'s \nbenevolence and encouraging virtue, and such like, it privately \n- the work of regeneration under the fifth rib, and ia usually \nfollowed by Socinianism, and that by Deism.\'\' \n\nHi- boh Joseph graduated ;it Yale in 17i >: \'., and died i" early \nlife. IIi~ father " entertained" the audience at His funeral \\>\\ a \ndiscourse on I\'.-. cxxxvii. l and Job x. 2. ll<\' pxinted.it, with the \n\ntitle of "The DutyJ and Marks of /ion\'s Children." \n\nIn September, L728, the synod examined divers papers of com- \nplaints against him, and dismissed the accusation... They Pound no \n\n\n\n" Aim. Anti.|. BOO. HOT. f I oid. \n\nJ Dt. Spraguo\'u Collection in Seminary Library, Princeton. \n\nu \n\n\n\n338 PAULUS VAN VLECK. \n\nproof of his practising astrology, countenancing promiscuous danc- \ning, or transgressing in drink ; but some separated from him; and, \nthere being no hope of his promoting peace or union, he removed \nto Maidenhead and Hopewell. He published about this time a \nsermon on "Love to the Brethren," which reached a third edition \nat Boston in 1749. \n\nIn 1736, the Presbytery of Philadelphia resolved to call Dickin- \nson and Pierson as correspondents, and to meet on the 2d of No- \nvember to investigate the charge of intemperance brought against \nhim. The accusations were supported with much evidence, and, in \nmany instances, were fully proved. He was then of advanced age \nand of high reputation for piety ; but, on his denying all and seem- \ning wholly insensible, he was suspended until sincere repentance \nshould be seen in him. The synod left the case to the Presbyteries \nof Philadelphia and East Jersey, and approved of their course in \ncontinuing the suspension. He declined the jurisdiction of the \nPresbytery in Sept. 1738, but retracted it in October ; and the \nPresbytery restored him, at the request of the body of sober and \nreligious people, they expressing grateful remembrance of his \npast usefulness, and confidence in his hopeful ability to do them \nservice. \n\nThe synod approved of his restoration ; but his name is not men- \ntioned after 1740. \n\nIn 1739, Franklin printed for him a sermon on " The general \nCause of all hurtful Mistakes," from Pro v. iii. 5 : it was reprinted at \nNew London in 1741. \n\n\n\nPAULUS VAN VLECK, \n\nA native of Holland, and a nephew of Jacob Phenix, in New \nYork, was in that city in 1709, having probably arrived in the \nspring, as a probationer. Colonel Nicholson* directed the Rev. \nDominie Dubois to select a proper person to accompany the expe- \ndition to Canada and read prayers to the Dutch troops. Van \nVleck was presented to him ; and the Colonial Assembly, on the \n21st of June, directed Dubois, and his colleague, Antonides, to \ntake him and examine him before the next Tuesday, in the pre- \nsence of two of her Majesty\'s council, and ordain him. They did \nnot obey; and Van Vleck, on the 23d, prayed the Assembly to \ninsist on their compliance. The next day, Mr. Livingston laid \n\n\n\n* Proceedings of New York Legislature. \xe2\x80\x94 N. Y. Mercantile Lib. \n\n\n\nGEORGE GILLESPIE. 839 \n\nbefore the house a paper from the two ministers, stating that they \nwere not empowered, by the Classis of Amsterdam, to ordain. \nThe matter was dropped. \n\nIn September, 1710, he joined the presbytery, being the minister \nof the Low Dutch congregation of Neshaminy, in Bucks county, \nPennsylvania ; Mr. Lenard Vandegrift being his elder. By whom \nhe had been ordained does not appear. In 1711, one of his elders \nwas sent to presbytery^ to state that his absence was caused by \nhis being disabled through sickness. The next year he was charged \nwith bigamy : but the evidence was not sufficient to prove the crime, \nneither was his vindication such as to take off the scandal wholly; \nhe therefore consented, as the presbytery proposed, to desist from \npreaching till his innocence was completely established by proof \nof* his first wife\'s death. The day after the presbytery broke up, \nhe brought papers in his behalf, which were seen by all the mem- \nbers, and Left by them with Andrews, McNish, and Hampton, to \nconsider if they were sufficient to clear him of the imputation. \nThey thought they were Dot; besides, a new charge of falsehood \nwas brought. < )n inspecting a letter from his mother, they learned \nthat his wife was alive. Drunkenness, swearing, and "light car- \nriage" were al><> fastened on him. "He ran out of the country;"\' \nand. from 1715, he is passed over in silence. \n\n\n\nGEORGE GILLESPIE \n\nWas born in 1683, in the town of Glasgow, and educated in the \nancient university founded there centuries ago. He was licensed \nby Glasgow Pfcesbytery early in 1712, and came to New England \n\nin the spring, furnished with recommendations from Principal Stir- \nling t<\xc2\xbb Cotton Mather, and "certificates of his conversation." \nThe situation of Woodbridge had Keen made known to the ministers \nin Boston; .Mather heartily recommended Gillespie to that divided \npeople, lb- was "at first generally liked, Wing of an excellent \n\ncharacter and laudable carriage, and his management being to \nuniversal satisfaction." The hope of bis uniting the discordant \nparties was cheering; but Wade\'s factious course divided them still \n\nlie. re. \n\nIn September, the presbytery approved of his credentials; and, \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2if Providence make way for bis ordination bys call bom any \ncongregation, Andrews, filoNish, Anderson, and Morgan are \nordered t\'> ordain him." The presbytery recommended turn again \nto the congregation of Woodbridge: -"We shall strengthen Ins \nLamb} and encourage hi* heart t" try a while longer, waiting lor \n\n\n\n340 GEORGE GILLESPIE. \n\nthe effect of our renewed essays for peace and quietness among \nyou." \n\nHe wrote to the presbytery; and Henry prepared an answer, \ninforming him that the people of White Clay had petitioned for a \nminister, and, if he left Woodbridge, he was ordered first to supply \nthat people. \n\nHe was ordained by a committee of three, May 28, 1713, having \nreceived a call from the people of White Clay Creek. He preached, \nthe day before, on Gal. iv. 4, 5, and delivered an exegesis on "An \nChris tus pro omnibus et singulis sit mortuus?" These were to \ngood acceptance, as also his examination in the original languages, \nphilosophy, and theology. \n\nRed Clay, Lower Brandywine, and Elk River, besides White \nClay, seem to have formed his charge for several years. Abra- \nham Emmit, who subsequently appears as an elder from Elk River, \npetitioned for a new erection in 1719, and was refused. \n\nGillespie was zealous for strict discipline, and three times en- \ntered his dissent* when offenders were dealt with too leniently for \ntheir immoralities. He informed his presbytery that he would \npublish his animadversions on the synod\'s undue tenderness in a \ncertain case; but he was strictly forbidden by them to do so. \nThe Philadelphia papers, in 1735, advertise his " Treatise against \nthe Deists or Freethinkers, shewing the Necessity of Revealed Reli- \ngion: for sale by John Cross, at the Drawbridge, in Front Street." \nNo copy is known to exist. Was it occasioned by Hemphill\'s \ncourse ? \n\nHe is said to have organized the congregation of the Head of \nChristiana, and he served it till his death. \n\nZealous for the interests of the church, he was remarkably \npunctual in attendance on presbytery and synod, and in bringing \nsomething for the fund. \n\nOn the question of the Protest he did not vote, having in all the \nprevious trying sessions sought the peace of Jerusalem : he with- \ndrew with the excluded brethren, and joined with them, and pub- \nlished a letter to the New York Presbytery in their defence. In \nFebruary, 1743-4, he made a public, formal acknowledgment of \nhis error in having done so, before Newcastle Presbytery ; and he \nwas cordially welcomed to membership. Soon after, Franklin \npublished his " Remarksf upon Mr. Whitefield, proving him a man \nunder delusion: Rom. xvi. 17; 1 John iv. 1." \n\nIn discussing the terms of union, he objected to being required \nto acknowledge the events generally styled "the GreaW Revival," \nas "a glorious work of grace." He had seen so many sad issues \n\n* Morgan said, "Pious Mr. Gillespie entered his dissent" against the limited \nsuspension of Walton, in 1722. \n\nf In the hands of Rev. Dr. Dickey, of Oxford, Pa. \n\n\n\nJOHN MACKET. 341 \n\nof hopeful beginnings, so many lamentable things in the proceed- \nings of the chief actors, such sad confusions and wide-spread \ndivisions, that his heart trembled for the ark of God. \n\nHe died January 2, 1760, aged 77. Alison, who knew him, \ncalls him "that pious saint of God." It was left to a generation \n"that knew not Joseph" to lavish on his name epithets of con- \ntumely. A long life passed in the service of Christ, unchronicled \nby the men of his own day, is summed up in a few bare sentences. \nThe storm leaves a record of its progress and its power, but the \ndew and the summer breeze "return not void" to Him that sent \nthem ; though unobserved, they are not useless. Yet we would \ngladly see some record of a good man\'s life, \xe2\x80\x94 something more note- \nworthy than that, in 1750, the synod allowed five pounds towards \nthe building of his meeting-house, or that he urged his brethren to \nremonstrate against the opening of a play-house in Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nJOHN MACKEY \n\n\n\nTin: earliest congregation that had a minister was the first to \n\n1 me extinct. Colonel Anthony Lawson was the leading man \n\non the Eastern Branch of Elizabeth River, Virginia, when Make- \nmie cime there, in 1(383. His descendants resided at "the new \ntown," near Norfolk, until a recent date. George Keith, who was \noften in that neighbourhood, having a daughter married at Kicke- \ntan, (now Hampton,) said that Princess Anne county could not \nmaintain a Church minister, the tobacco was so very poor. The \ncongregation in I^ynnhaven parish, on Elizabeth River, is men- \ntioned by Commissary Blair as existing at the close of the \nteenth century. \n\nMakemie* owned a house and lot in Elizabeth River, and gave \nthem, by hi- will, to the congregation of Rehoboth, leaving it \ndoubtful whether the Presbyterians in Norfolk county needed no \naid, or were so greatly diminished that any efforts for the main- \ntenance Of "OUr way" in that neighbourhood would be useless. \n\nIii 1710, the presbytery Benl Word to Dublin Presbytery that "in \nall Virginia there is bul one -mall congregation :it Elizabeth River, \nand a t\'iu families favouring our way in Rappahannock and York.\'\' \nHenry, in 1718, made "complainl to the presbytery of the \nmelancholy circumstances Mi-. John Maokey, in Elizabeth River, \nlabours under." Hampton, being abort to write to him on an \n\nnee. \n\n\n\n342 THOMAS BRATTON \xe2\x80\x94 ROBERT LAWSON. \n\naffair of his own, was desired by the brethren to signify "their \nregard to and concern for him." The nature of his distresses, and \ntheir issue, with all his history, is unknown. Thomas Wilson, an \nEnglish Friend, mentions his stopping, in 1713, at the house of a \nPresbyterian widow in Lynnhaven Bay. \n\n\n\nTHOMAS BRATTON \n\n\n\nArrived in Maryland in the fall of 1711 ; and the next year, \nbeing detained by sickness, he sent to the presbytery a " certificate \nof his legal admission to the ministry." Robert Wilson, a com- \nmissioner from Monokin and Wicomico, presented a statement of \ntheir church affairs, and a call for Bratton, and a paper of sub- \nscriptions for his encouragement. Anderson wrote to him in re- \nspect to the call in favour of the people. He had probably preached \nfor them from his arrival, but the letter scarcely reached him \nbefore he was hurried aAvay. He finished his course in October, \n1712. \n\n\n\nROBERT LAWSON \n\n\n\nWas a member* of Dumfries Presbytery in December, 1G96. \nThe tobacco trade, for the first half of the eighteenth century, kept \nup direct communication between London and Virginia and Mary- \nland. The wants of Monokin and Wicomico speedily reached \nGreat Britain ; and, on the early death of Bratton, Lawson came \nover to supply his place. He was a native of Scotland; but, like \nMcGill, his countryman and companion across the Atlantic, it \nwas through Scottish merchants in London that he was directed to \ntheir correspondents in America. \n\nMr. Reynolds, of London, sent by him a letter to the presby- \ntery, engaging to pay \xc2\xa330 for the support of one or more ministers \nto spread the gospel "in the parts about you." At the presby- \ntery, in 1713, he produced ample testimonials of his ordination \nand good behaviour, and was received cheerfully. A call for him \nfrom Monokin and Wicomico was presented by the elder, James \n\n* Minutes of trial of Mr. Clanny : in the hands of the Rev. A. B. Cro3S, of Balti- \nmore. \n\n\n\nDANIEL McGILL. 343 \n\nCaldwell, and, being offered to him by the moderator, he took it \nunder consideration, with promise to give the people an answer as \nsoon as the circumstances of his affairs would allow. Ten pounds \nout of the sum promised by Reynolds were given to him. He died \nin November, a few months after his landing on our shores. \n\n\n\nDANIEL McGILL. \n\nOn the death of Taylor, Patuxent remained vacant, having \nonly occasional supplies. Failing to obtain McNish, they applied \nto their friends in London, who procured McGill for them. They \ntran-mitted him a call, and he accepted it in England, and laid aside \nall business* that could be advantageous to him ; he was unemployed \nfor nearly half a year in consequence, before he entered into ac- \ntual service in Marlborough. He joined the presbytery in 1713. \nIn 1714, bis elder was .bums Beall ; in \'14, Alexander Beall ; in \'15, \nWilson Scott. " On being interrogated touching the manner of his \npeople\'s deportment to him in his pastoral work, he made his answer \nwholly to their advantage, and with a pleasing earnestness to com- \nmend them, as made it apparent he had good cause for what he spoke." \n\nBut th.- presbytery, on the representation of the messenger, Mr. \nwas sensibly affected: they heard of Satan\'s devices, threat- \nening their gospel peace and mutual love. They made a few pro- \nto th in. \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 which it is in your power to make helpful to your \nit condition : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Particularly with firmness and godly resolution oppose all \ndividing measures. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 We apprehend the disproportion between the number of your \nelders and deacons may occasion some uneasiness in your session. \nWe need only represent unto you the ends and institution of Sorip- \nture deacons, and that there is no judicial power allowed them in \nthe Scripture. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 We expect your acquiescence in our last year\'s act touching \nMn-books, which we presume yon know to be agree- \nable to the laudable practice of the best reformed churches." \n\nIn the oeighbouri 1 of Bdarlborougb, in the town of Providence, \n\nin the town-laud of Sevan, \xc2\xab:i- the home of the Independent 3 \n\nwhen dri\\en from Virginia. The Soots from Fife, and the [nde- \npendents, had little In common in regard to ohurefa government and \ndiscipline, Here we see them approaching to collision. \nConcerning Scripture deacons, Diokinsoo has expressed himself \n\n* Syuod lU-conls \xe2\x80\xa2 \n\n\n\n344 DANIEL McGILL. \n\nstrongly in a pamphlet in vindication of Non-conformity, published \nin Boston in 1724 : \xe2\x80\x94 " We have no church stock, and therefore have \nno need of the office of deacons." \n\nThe congregation sent a representative next year, a Scotsman, \nArchibald Edmundson ; but a doubt was raised whether he ought to \nbe allowed to act as a representative in presbytery, in the absence \nof the minister. It was unanimously decided that he might. He \nwas the bearer of a letter from Patuxent, which was " read twice \nto our great satisfaction." \n\nAnother difficulty arose, and was considered by Newcastle Pres- \nbytery in 1718, during the intervals of synod. " Andros and Mc- \nKnish" (as David Evans spells ; his rare, curious handwriting being \nas uncommon as his spelling) sat as correspondents. A healing \nletter was written ; but McGill insisted that it should not be sent \nuntil the last paragraph was expunged. The letter was sent with- \nout alteration; and, at the next synod, a testimonial was given \nhim, he having no pastoral charge, and being uncertain how and \nwhere Providence may dispose of him." \n\nThe traditionf at Marlborough is that he was an austere, sulky \nman. In 1720, he asked the commission if he ought not to be \npaid by his people for the six months which elapsed between his \nacceptance of the call in England and his beginning to preach \nto them. About this, there was "a difference between his apprehen- \nsions and theirs," as there well might be at the end of eight years. \n\nThe synod in 1719, having received a letter from the people of \nPotomoke, in Virginia, requesting their care and diligence to pro- \nvide them an able gospel-minister, appointed McGill to preach to \nthem in order to settlement on their mutual agreement. Conn and \nCross wrote to the congregation on McGill\'s going to Potomoke. \nHe spent some months, and put " the people into church order." \n\nThey manifested by letter their approbation of his whole conduct \namong them, and desire him, but in vain, to be their minister. The \naffair of Potomac was referred to the Committee of Bills, and is not \nagain mentioned. This was probably Bladensburg, subsequently \ndescribed as on the East Branch of Potomac and Pamonkey; and \nprobably the advice of the synod about "dividing measures" grew \nout of the wish to have the western part of Marlborough congre- \ngation, living on Potomac, permitted to have a minister of their own. \n\nMcGill was called to Elk River, in Maryland, but, after a long \ndelay, declined. He was a supply for short periods in Kent, at \nBirmingham, on Brandywine, at Snowhill, White Clay, Drawyers, \nConestoga, and Octorara. \n\nHe died Feb. 10, 1724, his home being in the London Tract, \nNewcastle county, Delaware. He was a valuable member of \nsynod, a good preacher, and a learned man. \n\n* Quoted by Dr. Hodge, from T. Balch\'s MS. History. \n\n\n\nHOWELL POWELL. 845 \n\nBesides the following advertisement, nothing else has been res- \ncued, concerning him, from the river of oblivion : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1722. " Ran* away from the Rev. D. Magill, a servant clothed \nwith damask breeches and veBt, black broadcloth vest, broadcloth \ncoat of copper-colour, lined and trimmed with black, and wearing \nblack stockings." \n\n\n\nHOWELL POWELL. \n\nHowell ap Howell offered himself for admission in 1713 ; and \nthe presbytery, well satisfied of his ordination, advised him to procure \nwithin a year further credentials from some eminent ministers in \nEngland, whom they knew. Till then he shall be free to exercise \nhis ministry in all its parts where Providence shall call him, but \nnot fully to settle as a fixed minister." \n\nWhen Smith left Cohanzy, there came thither Mr. Exell. The \npresbytery wrote to them, in 1711, that they "wished the congre- \ngation bad taken better-advised steps for their provision as to the \nministry: by the best account they had of him, they judged him \nnot a suitable person to preside in the work of the ministry* \nThough invited to be present at our meeting, he neither came nor \nsent, intimating either a contempt or a supine neglect of ecclesias- \ntical judicatures. We cannot approve of some printed papers dis- \npersed by him among the people, as they contain, so far as they \nare intelligible, abundance of gross errors, \xe2\x80\x94 a great part consisting \nof oonsense and obvious self-contradictions." \n\nHe settled at Chestertown, in Maryland, and formed an Indepen- \ndent congregation. A grant of land for its use was made, in 1727, \nto Mr. Samuel Exell.f \n\nBy their messenger, John Ogden, Cohanzy sent a petition the \near, and the presbytery Bent them a written answer. \n\nEphraim Sayre, in their behalf, asked advice about the choice of \na minister, ana Powell was Bent. \n\nIn 1711, he sat in presbytery with his elder, Joseph Bealey. \nThough he had used diligence, ne had not received the required \ncredentials ; but the presbytery, being satisfied by so long trial and \n:il acquaintance, together with other considerable circum- \nstances, sustained, on mature deliberation, the unanimous call given \nhim from Cohanzy. Ee accepted it; and Andrews preached hu \nadmission sermon, < >ct. 11,17 l~>. \n\n1 |e died before September, 17 17. \n\nLnnalaaf Philadelphia. f !:\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0-.. a i; Oroa, Baltimore, Maryland. \n\n\n\n346 MALACHI JONES. \n\n\n\nMALACHI JONES \n\nOffered himself to the presbytery, Sept. 9, 1714, and they, \nbeing well satisfied of his ordination and other qualifications, did \nheartily accept of his offer, and admitted him as a member. He \nhad been ordained in Wales. He came to Abingdon, about eleven \nmiles from Philadelphia, where a church was organized in 1714 on \nthe Congregational plan : it soon adopted the Presbyterian method. \n\nBeing the oldest minister, he was frequently placed at the head \nof the commission and on the affair of the fund. \n\nAt the close of the synod in 1727, he, with David Evans, Webb, \nand Hubbell, brought in a protest, \xe2\x80\x94 probably against the delay in \nreceiving Pemberton, \xe2\x80\x94 and declared his intention to join no more \nwith them. He seems not to have retracted it ; for his death is men- \ntioned thus in the records : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Since our last, Mr. Malaehi Jones, heretofore a member with us, \nand Mr. Archibald McCook, departed this life." \n\nAndrews, in writing to Colman under date of March 7, 1729, \nadds, " P.S. \xe2\x80\x94 Ten days ago died Mr. Malaehi Jones, an old Welsh \nminister. He was a good man, and did good." \n\nHe made his will Sept. 28, 1727 ; he left three sons \xe2\x80\x94 Malaehi, \nBenjamin, and Joshua \xe2\x80\x94 and four daughters. He provides for his \nwidow two rooms and the little cellar, and charges his son Malaehi \nto give her comfortable maintenance, and to have her firewood cut \nand brought to her door, with five hogsheads of cider, whenever the \nplantation shall make so much. To each grand child he gave a \newe and a lamb. His will was proven March 25, 1729. \n\nHis son Benjamin was an elder at Abingdon in 1733, and a \nmember of Assembly from Bucks county in 1724. He and his \nbrothers adhered to the Old Side. \n\nThe elders who sat with Jones in presbytery were probably, in \n1715, John Parsons; and in synod, in 1720, Benjamin Armitage ;* \nin 1723, Joseph Charlesworth ; in 1725, John Hall, (a member from \nBucks county in 1740 ;) in 1726, Charles Hofty. George Renock \n(Renwick) attended synod as an elder in 1729. \n\n* He was frozen to death in a swampy meadow, in Dec. 1735, being an ancient man \nand feeble. Charlesworth died in 1748; Hofty, in 1742. \n\n\n\nROBERT WOTHERSPOOX \xe2\x80\x94 DAVID EVANS. 3-47 \n\n\n\nROBERT WOTHERSPOON, \n\nA native of Scotland, wrote to the presbytery in 1713, enclos- \ning his credentials as a probationer. The people of Apoquinimy \npetitioned that he might be ordained and settled among them ; but \nthey were informed that this could not be done until they presented \na formal call. They did so; and he was ordained to the sacred \nfunction and office of the ministry to the Presbyterian congrega- \ntion at Apoquinimy, May 13, 1714. \n\nGabriel Thomas,* in his work on Pennsylvania, published in \nLondon in 1695, speaks of Apoquinimy as the place where goods \ncome to be carted into Maryland. Settlements began to be made \non the three branches of Drawyers Creek, as early as 1671, \xe2\x80\x94 chiefly \nfrom Holland and England. In 1703, the Venerable Society was \nasked for fifty pounds, in aid of North and South Apoquinimah,t \nwhich were about to build Episcopal churches. They were styled, \nin Latin, Appoquenomen and Quinquenium, the last being the \noriginal name for St. (jreorge\'s, and had for their missionary, in \n1 7 < \'7 . .Mr. Jenkins, a Welshman, \xe2\x80\x94 the Episcopalians at St. George\'s \nhaving the Church services in their native tongue, the Welsh. \n\nI >n the 10th of May,! 1711, Isaac Yigorue, Hans Hanson, An- \ndrew Peterson, and Francis King, bought an acre of land and built \non it a meeting-house. The spot has been used ever since as the \nBite of the house of God. \n\nWbthersp\'oon, in 1715, bought a farm, which still belongs to his \ndescendants. He died in May, 1718. \n\nHans Hanson sat in presbytery in 1714; Thomas Heywood, \n(Hyatt,) in 17 15j and Elias Naudain in synod in 1717. \n\n\n\nDAVID EVANS, \n\nA n \\tivi: of Wales, was probably the son of David Etams, Esq., \nan elder in the Welsh Trad Churoh. A Baptist church was organ-* \nused in Wale* in 1 7 \' > 1 , and the members came to Philadelphia in \nSeptember of thai year. They remained a year and a half at \nPennepek, but could not hold fellowship with the church there, \n\n\n\n.\' Society\'s Library. t " \' \n\n:it Drawyers. \n\n\n\n348 DAVID EVANS. \n\nbecause of disagreement about laying on of hands after immersion. \nThirty thousand acres having been bought in Delaware, the newly- \narrived church removed thither and settled in the neighbourhood \nof the Iron Hill. \n\nWelsh Presbyterian congregations existed in Pencader, or the \nWelsh Tract, and in Tredryffryn, or the Great Valley, in Chester \ncounty, as early as 1710; for in that year the presbytery agreed \nthat David Evan had done very ill in preaching or teaching in the \nlatter place, and he was censured for acting irregularly and for \ninvading the work of the ministry. As the most proper method, to \nadvance him in necessary literature, and prepare him for the minis- \nterial work, he was directed to lay aside all other business for a \ntwelvemonth, and apply himself closely to learning and study under \nthe direction of Andrews. Liberty was given to Andrews, Wilson, \nand Anderson to take him on trials, and at their discretion to license \nhim. \n\nIn 1711, a committee of presbytery examined him, and approved \nof his hopeful proficiency, and he was allowed to preach as a can- \ndidate for one year, under the direction of Andrews, Wilson, and \nAnderson. In the next fall, David Evans a, candidate, was chosen \nclerk of presbytery, his penmanship being careful and in the \nextreme curious. The people of Welsh Tract and Great Valley \npetitioned that he might be ordained; but, though he had made \nconsiderable proficiency, it was voted that he should continue to \nstudy as before. \n\nIn 1713, he graduated at Yale College, and was sent at the \nrequest of the people to reside at Welsh Tract and preach there. \nThey gave him a unanimous call, and, after a thorough examination \nand the usual trials, he was ordained, Nov. 3, 1714. There being \ndivers persons in the Great Valley with whom he was concerned, \nthey were declared a distinct society from his pastoral charge. \n\nHe was the recording clerk of Newcastle Presbytery for six or \nseven years. For his services each member gave him a half-crown. \n\n"An opinionative difference" between him and Samuel James \ngave his brethren no small trouble ; they dismissed it and labored \nto pacify the excitement arising from it, but their healing letters \nand healing sermons did no good. He was dismissed in 1720, and \nwas called to Great Valley ; but he declined to accept it for several \nyears. He was one of the first supplies sent to Sadsbury, West \nBranch of Brandywine, and Conestoga. When he removed to \nTredryffryn, he was directed to spend one-fourth of his time at \nSadsbury. \n\nHe printed his sermon at the ordination of Treat, of Abingdon. \nOn page 49,* he says, "That it is a wonder to see any gracious, \n\n\n\n* Quoted by Franklin in his defence of Hemphill. \n\n\n\nDAVID EVANS. 349 \n\ntruly considerate, wise man in the ministry. It is no wonder to \nsee thousands of ignorant, inconsiderate, carnal ministers ; but \nit is a wonder to see any truly understanding, considerate, gracious \nones." \n\nHe brought in a protest after all the business of synod was \n\ndone in 1727 ; but after three years he declared his hearty concern \n\nfor his withdrawal, and desired to be received as a member again. \n\n9 declared his adopting the Westminster Confession and \n\nrhisms, lie was unanimously received as a member, and, for his \n\nas joined to Philadelphia Presbytery. \n\nEarly in the spring of 1738,* he presented to the presbytery his \nscheme for supplying the English Presbyterians in the Valley. In \n.\'>er, 1739, the presbytery met, and heard the charges brought \nagainst him by Timothy Griffiths for suspending his elders from \noffice. He was cleared, and the accuser blamed and debarred from \nchurch privileges; but the charges were renewed in the spring, with \na complaint of his heterodoxy, his not preaching enough in Welsh, \nand his church tyranny. The only point on which he was thought \ncensurable, was his laying aside the ciders and saying he would \nmake no use of them. \n\nAt his request he was dismissed, and accepted a call to Tiles- \nand Quihawken,t in West Jersey. Either the church or- \nganization at Pilesgrove had become extinct, or it was not to his \nmind; for a church covenant]; was signed, April 30,1741, by him- \nself and twenty-five others. Among the signers were [saac Van \n. Henry Nan Meter, Cornelius Newkirk, Abraham Newkirk, \nBarnet Dubois, Lewis Dubois, and Garret Dubois. \n\nHe adhered to the Old Side On the division of 1741: so did his \n\nSamuel succeeded him at Tredyffryn. Joel graduated at \n\nYale in 171", was licensed by Philadelphia Presbytery, September \n\n17. 17 11, and Bupplied W [bury and Deerfield. In April, 1742, \n\nMr. Vandyke, from Appoquinimy, desired that he might be sent to \nthen,. He died before May, 1743. \n\nHe printed in Franklin\'s Gazette what Samuel Finley calls \n"sullen remarks" on Tennent\'s letter to Dickinson; and, in 1748, \n\npublished his "Law and Gospel; <>r, Man wholly ruined by the \n\nLaw and recovered by the Gospel," being the Bubstance of several \nsermons preached in 1784, at Tredyffryn, from Galatians iii. 10; \n\nRomans i. L0. He adds tO his name A.M. and Y.D.M. \n\nThe following paper\xc2\xa7 is curious and interesting: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 US !:\xe2\x80\xa2 irds of Philadelphia Presbytery. \nt In tln> neighbourhood of Baton; probably Paul \nI v- i Jersey Historical Collections. \n\xe2\x96\xa0\\. fcOaboia, of Philadelphia. \n\n\n\n350 DAVID EVANS. \n\n\n\nA \'petition in the behalf of Jonathan Dubois,* a hopeful begin- \nner in learning. \n\nTo all our Christian Friends in Sopus or anywhere else, etc. \n\nThis is to acquaint you that Jonathan, the son of Barnet Du- \nbois, (the bearer hereof,) hath been at learning these three-quarters \nof a year, in order to the gospel ministry, and proceeds in learning \nhopefully, as also does his cousin John,f the son of Lewis Dubois, \nhis school-fellow. But, his parents not being well able to bear the \ncharges of his learning without assistance, we, therefore, on be- \nhalf of the said Jonathan, earnestly desire and beg, in the bowels \nof Jesus Christ, that his near relatives, and any others that are able, \nwould open their hearts and hands and contribute out of their \nearthly possessions for the carrying on of so good and necessary a \nwork, unto which the Lord and owner of all that you have, now by \nhis providence, calls you. AVe entreat you, Christian brethren, to \nmanifest the sincerity of your Christian faith and love, by being \nrich in good works, (1 Timothy vi. 17, 18, 19,) being assured that \nthey who sow bountifully shall reap also bountifully. I add no \nmore, at present, but all sincere wishes for your temporal, spiritual, \nand eternal happiness, by the mercy of God the Father, through \nthe merits of God the Son, by the sanctification of God the Holy \nGhost. Amen. And so rest \n\nYours, in the gospel of Jesus Christ, \n\nDavid Evans, Minuter. \n\nPilesgrove, in Salem county, in West New Jersey, May 7, 1745. \n\nBe it known to all whom it concerns that the moneys which \nBarnet Dubois formerly collected at Sopus and elsewhere, for our \npublic religious affairs, were honestly laid out according to the \ntenor of the petition." \n\nThe congregation of Pilesgrove had met with great discourage- \nments in their endeavours to have the gospel settled among them, \nand in 1739, the commission of the synod allowed them to build \non the site they had chosen. To accomplish the erection, they sent \na messenger to Esopus and other parts of Ulster, in New York, to \ntheir relatives, to solicit help. \n\nEvans is said to have been eccentric and high-spirited. His \npreaching gave such offence on one occasion to a person at Piles- \ngrove, that, rather than listen a moment longer, he jumped out of \nthe church window. \n\nHe died before May, 1751. In his will,J he expresses the hope \n\n* The pastor, for many years, of the Reformed Dutch Church, in Bucks county, \nPennsylvania. \n\nf Died in 1745, at New London, while pursuing his studies with Alison. \nj On record at Trenton. \n\n\n\nJOHN BRADNER \xe2\x80\x94 HUGH CONN. 351 \n\nthat his people would settle a student from the College of New \nJersey, and leaves a sum of money to be given to his successor for \nhis encouragement. \n\n\n\nJOHN BRADNER. \n\n\n\n< >\\ hifl arrival from Scotland, Hampton and Henry, on good and \nsufficient reasons, took him on trial, and licensed him in March, \n1714. lie was called to Cape May, and ordained May 6, 1715. \nlie removed, in 1721, to Goshen, in Orange county. New York, and \ndied before September, 1733. \n\nHis son, Benoni, is said to have been born in 1733. He gradu- \nated at Nassau Hall, in 1755; but by whom or where he was \nlicensed or ordained, does not appear : it was not in our connec- \ntion. He was settled at the Nine Partners, in Dutchess county, \nand in June, 1786, became the minister of the Independent Church \nin Blooming Grove, in Orange. Consumptive, and troubled with \nshortness of breath, he lived to the age of seventy-one, and died, \nJanuary 29, 1804, after a long and distressing illness. He was a \nof the Morris County Society for Promoting Religion and \nLearning, from its formation. \n\n\n\nHUGH CONN. \n\n\n\nHi; was bora a1 Macgilhgan, in Ireland, aboul 1685; and, hav- \ning studied at the school in Foghanveil, (Faughanvale,) he gradu\xc2\xab \nat the University of I Hasgow. \nThe trade from the Patapsoo to Ghreal Britain gave rise to a \nPresbyterian congregation in Baltimore county; and their appli- \ncation to the London merchants broughl their case under the eye \nof the Rev. Thomas Reynolds, minister in London; and, through \n\xe2\x96\xa0 Dcy, the Rev. Hugh Conn came over to be their minister. \n: letters by him to Beveral members of the presbytery, with \nthe pleasing intelligence thai he designed bo continue pis Bounty \n(whirl. I per annum) for the furtherance of the gospel. \n\nConn\'s credentials were approved; and in September, 1715, Mr, \nGordon presented a call for him from the people of Balti- \n\n\n\n352 HUGH CONN. \n\nmore county, and he was ordained on the third Wednesday of \nOctober following.* McGill, James Anderson, and George Gil- \nlespie officiated on the occasion, and installed him pastor of the \ncongregation of Patapsco. In September, 1719, he obtained \nleave to demit his pastoral charge, on account of his uselessness \nthere, from the " paucity of his flock. He immediately took \ncharge of the people on the East Branch of Potomac and Po- \nmonkey, \xe2\x80\x94 they having, by their commissioner, James Bell, (Beall,) \npetitioned Newcastle Presbytery for a minister. Bladensburg is \nthe modern designation of his field of labour ; Pomonkey being a \ncreek in that vicinity. He remained there till his death. \n\nHe seldom met Avith Newcastle Presbytery, but attended with \ncreditable regularity on the synod. He adhered to the Old \nSide. \n\nHe died on the 28th of June, 1752, while preaching at the \nfuneralf of a person who died suddenly. The subject^ he was \nupon gave him occasion to mention the certainty of death, the \nuncertainty of the time when it might happen, the absolute neces- \nsity of being continually prepared for it, the vast danger of delay \nand trusting to a death-bed repentance; for that, although we may \npossibly live some years, yet we may be called away in a month \nor a week, or, for aught that we can tell, death might surprise us \nthe next moment. This part of his discourse he was observed to \ndeliver with some elevation of voice, but had scarce uttered the \nword "moment," when, putting one hand to his head and one to \nhis side, he fell backward and expired, verifying, in a most extra- \nordinary manner, the truth of his doctrine. \n\nPresident Davies, in two of his printed sermons, refers to the \nmanner of his death. In one, preached before the New Side \nPresbytery of Newcastle, in October, 1752, he says, "Death may \nsurprise us in the pulpit, and leave the sentence unfinished on our \nlips. As Mr. Conn was observing, \' death may seize us the next \nmoment: just as he had expressed the word \'moment,\' he fell \nback in the pulpit and immediately expired." In his New- Year \nDay sermon, in 1760, he says, " Consider the uncertainty of \ntime to you. You may die the next year, the next month, the \nnext week, the next day, the next moment. I once knew a \nminister, who, while making this observation, was made a striking \nexample of it, and instantly dropped dead in the pulpit." \n\n\n\n* Records, p. 37 \n\nf Rev. Dr. Macsparran, in Updyke\'s History of the Church in the Narra- \ngansetts. \n\nX Maryland Gazette of July, 1752. \n\n\n\nROBERT OKR\xe2\x80\x94 SAMUEL PUMRT. 353 \n\n\n\nROBERT ORR, \n\nA probationer from Ireland or Scotland, having preached \n6ome time for the people of Maidenhead and Hopewell, presented \nhis credentials to the presbytery in 1715. They were approved ; \nand, a call being presented by Mr. Philip Rings, he was ordained, \nOctober 20, 1715, at Maidenhead, by Andrews, Morgan, Dickin- \nson, Evans, and Bradner, before a numerous assembly. His field \nembraced the ground covered by Pennington, Lawrence, Trenton, \n(First Church.) Trenton City, Titusville, and perhaps Amwell. \n\nThe ground for a Presbyterian house of worship in Hopewell \nwas secured by deed before 1700. The Churchmen obtained a \nl"t in 1708, and soon after built. Evans, the Church minister in \nPhiladelphia, baptized nineteen children at one time at Maiden- \nhead, in 1700. Andrews frequently went to Hopewell to baptize \nwhole households. In 1711, the united congregations, by William \nYard, asked assistance of the presbytery in getting a minister: \nthey had then Mr. Sackett preaching for them, who afterwards \nsettled at West Greenwich, Connecticut. Mr. Woolsey, of Long \nbland, also visited them; and a complaint was lodged against \nnot Hunter by Henderson, the Church missionary, in 1712, \nise Woolsey had been allowed to preach in the Episcopal \nchurch in Hopewell. \n\nOf Orr\'fl stay in Hopewell nothing is known. Andrews bap- \ntized his .-nil Henry, July 18, 1715. \n\nHe was dismissed from his charge in 1719, and received a \nBynodical testimonial, being uncertain how Providence would dis- \nof him. Through the loss of the Records of Philadelphia \n\xe2\x80\xa2ytery, his subsequent career cannot be traced. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL IT.MIIY \n\n\n\nWaA fche Bon* of Medad Pumry, of Northampton, M \nehusetts, \xe2\x80\x94 his mother being the widow of the Revj tarael Ohaun*- \nHe was born September 16, 1687, and graduated at Fate In \nl7"-~>. He trai a faithful recorder, and has [eft \xe2\x96\xa0 itoreef aoou* \n\nnid valuable information. \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Rikor\'a History of > \n23 \n\n\n\n354 SAMUEL PUMRY. \n\nNewtown, on Long Island, was settled in 1651, and had, for \nits first minister, William Leverich, \xe2\x80\x94 from 1658 till his death in \n1669. The Venerable Society were told, in 1704, that there \nwas a church or chapel there, in which, according to the Tolera- \ntion Act, a Dissenting minister might preach : there was also a \nhouse for a minister. When Hampton preached there in January, \n1706, there was " a meeting-house* offered to record ; but the \ntown were afraid to ask Cornbury\'s leave to settle a minister of \ntheir choice." \n\nPumry marriedf Lydia Taylor, of Northampton, July 23, 1707; \nand, being at Newtown in July, 1708, a call, signed by some \nscores of heads of families, was offered to him. On his accept- \ning it, the town sent two men to transport his family thither; \nand he and his wife and child were conveyed thither safely on the \n18th of September, 1708. The members in full communion, and \nthe rest of the people, making earnest request, the Rev. Solomon \nStoddard, of Northampton, John Williams, of Deerfield, and \nWilliam Williams, of Hatfield, ordained him, November 30, 1709, \nat Northampton, before a great congregation. He was heartily \nand unanimously accepted as a member of presbytery in Septemr \nber, 1715, he promising subjection in the Lord. The next year, \nthe reasons of his elder\'s absence were inquired into and sus- \ntained. This refutes the supposition, that there were no elders in \nthe congregation till 1724, when he stated his need of assistance \nin the work of the ministry. On his nomination, Content Titus, \nJames Renne, and Samuel Coe were elected, and ordained June 28, \nand " the members of the church were required and exhorted to \nacknowledge them as men in authority, and to be subject to them \nin their government in the Lord." \n\nIn 1722, he married a daughter of the Rev. Mr. Webb, of \nGreen\'s Farms, in Connecticut. \n\nOn the 24th of May, 1744, his absence from the Synod of \nPhiladelphia was excused on account of bodily indisposition. He \nhad preached for the last time on Sabbath, the 20th, from John \nxi. 15, and " was taken amiss in the evening, and died about eight \nin the morning of the 30th of June." \n\nThe "Church Record" adds, "He left his dear bosom friend \nand congregation to bewail an unspeakable loss." \n\nHis daughters married Philip Edsall and Jacob Ryker. \n\nHis son, the Rev. Dr. Benjamin Pumry, of Hebron, Con- \nnecticut, was a man of real genius, \xe2\x80\x94 grave, solemn, and weighty \nin his discourses, in manner animated, and full of zeal and affec- \ntion. In expostulating and pleading with sinners, he melted into \n\n\n\n* Makemie\'s Narrative. \n\nf Prime\'s History of Long Island ; Riker\'s History of Newtown. \n\n\n\nJOHN THOMSON. 355 \n\ntears ; with equal advantage he could set the terrors of the Lord \nin array, and the venders of Christ\'s love, \xe2\x80\x94 his glory and the \nsufficiency of his righteousness, and the hlessedness of all who are \nreconciled to God by him. He was one of the best preachers of \nhis day, and one of the most zealous and successful promoters of \nthe revival. For this his name was cast out as vile by the opposers \nof the \\v.\xc2\xbbrk. \n\nHe was ordained at Hebron in 1735, and died there in 1784, in \nthe forty-ninth year of his ministry, aged seventy-one. \n\n\n\nJOHN THOMSON \n\n\n\nCame from Ireland as a probationer to New York, in the sum- \nmer of 171"), with his wife and child. He was recommended by \nthe presbytery to the people of Lewes, in Delaware, and went \nthither. In the fall of 1716, they presented a call for him by \ntheir commissioner, "William Shankland; and he was ordained and \ninstalled on the first "Wednesday of April, 1717. \n\nIn 1723, a brick church* was erected. In 1727, Samuel \nBownas,f an English Friend, visited George\'s Creek, Duck Creek, \nMotherkill, Hoarkill, (Lewes,) and Cool Spring. "Friends are \nBeldom visited, and have few ministers. The Presbyterians and \nChurchmen have attempted to do something; but, the people \nbeing poor, and the pensions small, they gave out for want of \npay."\' \n\nThomson left Lewes in September, 1729, through want of sup- \nport, lie was invited to Newcastle; and the next fall he ac- \ncepted the call from Middle Octorara, sent by dames Garner. \nHi- installation was appointed for the second Wednesday in Octo- \nber) but, being harassed by disorders among his people, he re- \nmcved, in 17 B2, to Chestnut Level. Being m great Straits, the \ncongregations in Donegal Presbytery kindly made collections for \nhis relief in L788. Qui thankful acknowledgment was placed on \nthe record. \n\nHis proposal for sending an itinerant to Virginia being ap- \nproved, he was charged witn the duty, but was excused, because \nof the severity of the winter and the soaroity of provender. In \nthe winter of L788, he visited the Valley, and passed throngh the \n\n* Spence. f Friend*\' Library. \n\n\n\n356 JOHN THOMSON. \n\nRockfish Gap to Concord, Buffalo, and Cub Creek. " He* took \nup collections, to support preachers in itinerating in the new set- \ntlements, and was active in promoting the best interests of our \nchurch." In June, both parts of Opequhon supplicated for him. \nIn September, 1739, Alexander McDowell, from Virginia, was \nintroduced to the presbytery, having (probably at Thomson\'s \nsolicitation) determined to devote himself to the ministry. Thom- \nson asked to be dismissed from his charge, to remove to Virginia ; \nbut the presbytery would not consent. \n\nIn the troubles of the great rupture he had his full share. The \nstate of his congregation made it uncomfortable for him to re- \nmove ; he was poorly paid, and he turned towards Virginia, where \nhe had steadfast friends. He was not released till July 31, 1744 ; \nand then he at once made his home in the Valley. Donegal Pres- \nbytery intrusted to him and Black and Craig the charge of the \nmissionary operations in Western Virginia. An effort was made \nto bring him back to Chestnut Level. \n\nIn 1744, he visited North Carolina, and again in 1751. During \nthe last visit, he met with Henry Patillo, and engaged him to study \nfor the ministry. \n\nHe published at "Williamsburg, in 1749, f an Explication of the \nShorter Catechism. He was then labouring in Amelia. \n\nHis son-in-law having removed to Buffalo, in Prince Edward, \nThomson spent the closing years of his life with him, and died in \n1753, in Centre, North Carolina. | \n\nDuring the distractions following the rending of the synod in \n1741, he overtured the presbytery to suffer no person to be in- \nducted into the eldership, or to sit in any judicatory, without hav- \ning subscribed the Confession of Faith, \xe2\x80\x94 a vain remedy, when the \nagitators were as zealous for it as their opposers. \n\nHis book on the " Government of the Church," and his sermon \non " Conviction and Assurance," are as able, learned, judicious, and \nevangelical, as any of the writings of Dickinson and Blair. Even \nGilbert Tennent, in 1749, quoted largely from them, with high com- \nmendation, to justify the Old Side from the misrepresentations cur- \nrent against them, and to prove the expediency and the duty of \nuniting the synods in one body, bound together by a common faith, \nby mutual esteem, and by fervent desire for the peace of Jeru- \nsalem. \n\nIt was told to Thomson that himself had been pointed out by \nsome as an unconverted minister ; but, if Tennent spoke thus of \nhim, repeating the sin of Moses while God renewed the mercies of \n\n\n\n* Dr. Foote. f In the hands of Rev. B. M. Smith, of Staunton, Virgina. \n\nX Dr. Foote ; but Dr. Alexander said, \' \' He lies in the Buffalo graveyard, with- \nout a stone." \n\n\n\nJOHN PIERSON. 357 \n\nMeribah, it was to him as "waters that pass away,\'\' when he wrote \nhis "Irenicum." \n\nDavies knew Thomson as a neighbour in the ministry, and, in \n1751, speaks highly* of his judgment, and hopefully of his piety, \nand Bays, \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2Hi.- acknowledged the Revival had done much good in \nHanover, and rejoiced in seeing the prosperity of religion." \n\nHe did not live to see the union; but, on the proposal to prepare \nthe way for it, he hastened to Philadelphia from Virginia, to assist \nwith healing counsels. He lived long enough for Tennent to do \nhis writings justice, and to vindicate his sentiments: long enough \nto obtain, from the devoted admirer of Samuel Blair, unsolicited \ntestimony to his judgment and his delight in the promotion of the \nwork of God. \n\n1 [is discourse entitled "An Overture, urging the Synod to adopt, \nby a public agreement, the Standards of the Scottish Church," was \nanswered by Dickinson ; his "Examination of the New Brunswick \nApology" was a treatise on the government of the church, and \ncalled forth a reply from Samuel Blair ; his sermon on Convictions \nwas attacked by Samuel Finley, but is deservedly commended as an \nexcellent exhibition of the truth. \n\n\n\nJOHN PIERSON \n\n\n\n"Was born in 1G80, .and graduated at Yale in 1711. \n\nThe Rev. Abraham Pierson was an Independent, and, with a com- \npany of like Bentiments, came to Lynn, hi .Massachusetts, and from \nthence removed to Southampton, on Long Island. But, when the \nLong bland towns put themselves under the Connecticut jurisdic- \ntion] he, with those of the ancient way, settled Branford, in the \ncolony of New Haven, as their brethren in Hartford settled Bad- \nley, that they might not be partakers iii the growing laxity of dis- \ncipline. The colonies of New Haven and Connecticut united: and \nthe aged Pierson, like another Afoses, Baid to his people, " Ye have \ndwelt Long enough in this i int;" and they arose and took their \n\njourney and .settled the tOWS of Newark, in New Jersey. There \n\nhe died. Hi- -on, being "a moderate Presbyterian," left Newark, \nand became the Elector of Yale. His Presby terianism was that of \nConnecticut, is distinction from the Endependency of Ins father. \n\nW Ibridge had vainly i endeavoured, in L669, to Becure for in \n\n! _-\'T Pierson, then settled ixi Newark. They built \n\n* U\'ttiT to Ii.n.\'imy. I Newtrii SaatlfleL \n\n\n\n358 JONATHAN DICKINSON.. \n\na meeting-house thirty feet square, and, after passing through \nmany uncomfortable seasons, obtained a pastor who served them \nfaithfully through a long life. \n\nIn 1715, Andrews wrote pressingly to the people of Woodbridge, \nurging them to use utmost diligence to have a minister ordained \namong them. At that time, Pierson was preaching there, and a \ncall was offered to him the next year. He was ordained there, \nApril 29, 1717, before a very great assembly. Andrews, Morgan, \nand Orr were assisted on the occasion by the venerable Prudden, \nof Newark, and Dickinson, of Elizabethtown. \n\nHe is said* to have employed no elders in the management of \nchurch affairs ; but this tradition is inconsistent with the record, \nhis elder at synod, in 1742, being John Ball; probably, also, Moses \nRolph attended in several previous years. \n\nHe published a treatise on the "Intercession of Christ," and a \nsermon preached before the Presbytery of New York, May 8, 1751, \non " Christ, the son of God, as God, Man, Mediator." \n\nHis wife, Ruth, daughter of the Rev. Timothy Woodbridge, of \nHartford, died in 1732, aged thirty-eight. Dickinson printed his \nsermon at her funeral. \n\nIn 1753, he resigned his pastoral charge and settled at Mend- \nham, New Jersey, and was the minister there for ten years. He \nthen removed to Long Island, and resided on the farm of his \nsecond wife, Judith Smith. On her decease, he removed to Hano- \nver, New Jersey, and closed his days under the roof of his son- \nin-law, the Rev. Jacob Green. He died August 23, 1770, aged \neighty-one. \n\n\n\nJONATHAN DICKINSON \n\n\n\nWas the grandson of Nathaniel Dickinson, one of the first set- \ntlers of Wethersfield, Connecticut, who, with his minister, Mr. Rus- \nsell, and "the aggrieved brethren in Hartford," purchased and set- \ntled Hadley and the adjoining towns in 1659. His estate was \nrated, on his removal, at two hundred pounds, \xe2\x80\x94 one of the largest \nin the town. His son Hezekiah lived in Hatfield, where Jonathan \nwas born, April 22, 1688. He graduated at Yale, in 1706. His \nfather dying soon after, his mother married Thomas Ingersoll, of \nSpringfield. \n\nHe came to Elizabethtown in 1708, and soon after married Jo- \n\n* Dr. Azel Roe\'s MS. History of Woodbridge : quoted by Dr. Hodge. \n\n\n\nJONATHAN DICKINSON. 359 \n\nanna, the daughter of the Rev. Samuel Melyen, or of some other \ndescendant of Joseph Melyen, one of the associates in the purchase \nof the Elizabethtown Tract under Governor Nicolls\'s grant. His \nentry in the family Bible of the birth of his first child is, " Our \nson Melyen was born December 7, 1709." \n\nHe was ordained by the ministers of Fairfield county, Connecti- \ncut. September 2!>, 1709. Morgan, of Freehold, preached from \nMark xvi. 16. His field of labour embraced Rahway, AVestfield, \nConnecticut Farms, Springfield, and part of Chatham. He "was \nengaged in teaching, and in the practice of medicine. \n\nHe met with Philadelphia Presbytery as a correspondent, in 1715, \nat the ordination of Orr, and became a member early in 1717. \n\nHifl first publication was his sermon preached before the synod \nin 1722, on 1 Timothy iii. 17, \xe2\x80\x94 the expression of his views on the \nsubject of Synodical Acts, or Church Legislative Power. \n\nHe entered warmly on the Episcopal controversy when a heartless \nArmmianism and a hope of court favour led a few ministers in Con- \nnecticut to conform. In 1724, he published his " Defence of Pres- \nbyterian Ordination in Boston." A reply from a Churchman drew \nfrom him an answer, in which he says, "lligh-Churchism is pro- \nperly no more a part of the Church of England than a wen is of \nthe human body." \n\nHe published \'\'Remarks on Thomson\'s Overture, introducing the \nAdopting Act," in April, 1729; the "Reasonableness of Chris- \ntianity,"\' in 1732 ; the " Vanity of Human Institutions in Religious \nWorship," a sermon he had preached at Newark, June 2, 1732, on the \nintroduction of the Episcopal services into that town; the "Reason- \nableness of Nonconformity," in 1738 ; the "Witness of the Spirit," \nin 174" : U A Treatise da Regeneration," in 1744; the "Vindication \nof" the Sovereignty of I brace," in 1770 ; and " Familiar Letters to a \nGentleman," and a "* Dialogue, entitled a Display of Saving Grace." \nMr. Wetmore defended against him the doctrine of regeneration by \nbaptism ; the Bey. Andrew CrosweU condemned the w> Dialogue on a \n1 display of I hrace" as pernicious beyond parallel. Dickinson replied \n\nto him, and also tO the Rev. John Beaoh, who wrote against his bbob "ii \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 Sovereign ( brace." Beaoh rejoined, and Dickinson left, at his death, \nan answer unfinished. It was completed and published by his brother. \n\nThe Re?. Dr. Johnson, of Stratford, Conner tie in, controverted his \n\nopinions, under the name of Aristocles. The Key. Experience May- \n\n*ed two letters to him. To both of them he replied. \n\nIn IT l", he, with Burr and Pexnberton, communioated to the \nin Scotland for Propagating the Gfospel, the deplorable and \nperishing condition of the Indians on Long Island, in New Jersey, \nand Pennsylvania. They were appointed correspondents, and \nauthorised to employ missionaries. They engaged ATsariah Horton \nand David Brainerd, ami were forward to countenance them in \n\ntheir wink and to rejoice their spirits with hearty Counsel. \n\n\n\ndbO JONATHAN DICKINSON. \n\nHis former instances of joy in revivals, previously enjoyed, were \nmore eminent and remarkable than any of a late date. While he \npreached to youth, there was weeping, audible sighing, and sobbing. \nAbout sixty were added to the communion ; they were under a law- \nwork for a considerable time ; pungent and thorough conviction \nemptied them of self-righteousness, and drew them to Christ. \n\nThe disorders attending the awakening in New Jersey grew out \nof erroneous views of assurance and the witness of the Spirit. \nAntinomianism appeared, and denounced the practice of looking \nfor evidence of justification in the progress of our sanctification. \nThere was much arrogance in some who were called converts ; and \nmany upheld a preacher who had been suspended for dreadful \nscandals. These things called forth his " Dialogue on the Display \nof Grace" and his sermon on the "Witness of the Spirit." \n\nHis wife died April 20, 1745, aged sixty-three ; she was the mo- \nther of a large family, of whom only three daughters survived her. \nThe third child was named after his father, born Sept. 19, 1713, \ngraduated at Yale in 1731, and took the Master\'s degree. He left \nhis home ; and his father daily in the family entreated God for \nhim. At length he ceased to do so. His household noticed, but \nnone asked the reason, supposing that he had received privately \nintelligence of his end too painful to be uttered. His youngest \ndaughter, Martha, married the Rev. Caleb Smith ; another was the \nsecond wife of Mr. Jonathan Sergeant, of Princeton, the grand- \nfather of the Hon. John Sergeant, of Philadelphia ; a third mar- \nried Mr. John Cooper, probably of West Hampton, Long Island. \n\nBrainerd spent part of the closing year of his life under Dick- \ninson\'s roof, and solemnized his second marriage at Newark, April 7, \n1747. He rode back to Elizabethtown in the evening, " in a plea- \nsant frame,, full of composure and sweetness." \n\nDickinson died Oct. 12, 1747, of a pleuritic attack, in his sixtieth \nyear. Pierson preached at his funeral. The New York Postboy \ncontains a high eulogium on him. \n\nDr. Johnes,* of Morristown, who was with him in his last illness, \nasked him, just before his death, concerning his prospects. " Many \ndays have passed between God and my soul, in which I have so- \nlemnly dedicated myself to him ; and, I trust, what I have committed \nunto him, He is able to keep until that day." These were his \nlast words. \n\nIt is said thattidingsf of Dickinson\'s decease came toMr.Vaughan, \nthe minister of Elizabethtown, then lying on his death-bed, when \nhe exclaimed, " Oh that I had hold of the skirts of Brother Jona- \nthan!" They entered on their ministry in the town about the \nsame time, and "in their death they were not divided." \n\n* Austin\'s Preface to the Five Points, \nf Dr. Murray\'s Notes on Elizabethtown. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL GELSTON. 3G1 \n\nForty-six* years after his departure, " there were those who tes- \ntified that he was a most solemn, weighty, and moving preacher ; \na uniform advoeate for the distinguishing doctrines of grace ; in- \ndustrious, indefatigable, and successful in his ministerial labours. \nHis person waa manly and of full size, his aspect grave and solemn, \nso that the wicked seemed to tremble in his presence." \n\nBellamy speaks of him as ".the great Mr. Dickinson." Dr. Ers- \nkine said the British Isles had produced no such writers on divi- \nnity in the eighteenth century as Dickinson and Edwards; he wished \nII. r\\ . v had seen their treatises before he prepared his works. Dr. \nBodgera was often heard to say that he was one of the most vene- \nrable and apostolical-looking men he ever saw. \n\nFoxcroft, of Boston, was his friend through life, and, in his pre- \nface to his posthumous piece, expresses a high sense of his excel- \nlence. His works were collected after his death and published \nin Boston. A selection, comprising all that were not local in \ntheir design, was printed in Edinburgh, in an octavo volume, in \n1793. \n\nHis treatise on " The True Scripture Doctrine concerning the \nFive Points of Ejection, Original Sin, Grace in Conversion, Jus- \ntification by Faith," was issued at Boston, in 1741. Under the \ndirection of New York Presbytery, in 1796, a new edition ap- \npeared; and another was undertaken at Chamberabnrs in 1800.f \n\n\n\nSAMUEL GELSTON \n\nWl8 born in the North of Ireland in 1692, and came as a pro- \nbationer to New England in 1715. He waa received in the fall \nunder the oare of Philadelphia Presbytery, ami was sent to tho \npeople of Sent, on I Delaware. Though desired to stay, he left with- \nout tin- consent of presbytery, and wenl to Southampton, on Long \nIsland. There his brother Hugh resided: he. was called a- col- \nI .\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 with the pastor. Samuel Whiting and tin- congregation \nplaced itself under the presbytery\'s oare. The Presbytery of Long \nIsland, on its organization, took him on trial, and ordained and in- \nstalled him, April IT, 1717. His stay waa about ten years ; and, \n\nAu\xe2\x80\x9e\'. ^7. 17i>, he was received as a member of Newcastle I\'n-I.y- \n\ntnd took into consideration a call to Newcastle. The nexl \n\n!u\\il A u -tin, in lii^ l\'n-1\'.ic-i- to 1 1 1 \xc2\xab - hi v.- 1 *\xe2\x96\xa0 .i n t \xe2\x80\xa2*. \n\nf John Column, of Chambtnbnxg, tubaoribed foe 1 1 \' \xe2\x96\xa0 \n\n\n\n362 SAMUEL GELSTON. \n\nmonth, he was called to New London,* Chester county, Pennsyl- \nvania. \n\nThis was a new erection, which for two years had vainly strug- \ngled for a separate existence, the congregation of Elk River op- \nposing. The presbytery, May 11, 1726, had refused leave to a \nfew families residing on the northeast side of Great Elk, to build \na meeting-house, and have a part of their pastor\'s labours performed \nin it. The house was put up, and the synod confirmed the action \nof the presbytery ; but the next year they modified it, requiring the \nhouse to be removed to a point six miles distant from Houston\'s \nchurch. Only one person dissented from this decision, and from \nthe order forbidding any minister to preach in it, until removed. \nThe site pointed out, near the Indian town, towards Fagg\'s Manor, \ncannot now be ascertained. The house was not removed, and the \nsynod renewed its stringent order. The presbytery exacted of \nGelston an apologyfor preaching in the forbidden building, and laid \nhim under a solemn engagement to do so no more. In 1781, the \nmatter was terminated, by leaving the house where it was built; \nnone of the apprehended damage having accrued to the congrega- \ntion of Upper Elk. It is thought probable that the present New \nLondon Church stands on the very spot selected by the presby- \ntery, and so tenaciously refused by the congregation. \n\nRobert Finney, who was an elder in synod in 1721 from Elk \nRiver, was the principal mover for the new erection. In 1729, he, \nwith James Muir, protested against the synod\'s refusal to have a \nperambulation made of the bounds in dispute by indifferent men, \nand against their hearkening to the representations of those who \nwere bent on defeating the enterprise. \n\nThe arrangements for Gelston\'s installation in January, 1729, \nwere postponed, as a rebuke for having preached in the objection- \nable locality. He left his charge as early as 1733, and fell under \ncensure. Going into the Highlands of New York, many evil re- \nports arose ; but a committee of synod met at Goshen and saw \nreason to remove his suspension. He seems to have visited Vir- \nginia in 1735; for, in May, 1736, "both parts of Pekon wrote \nfor him" to Donegal Presbytery. He had joined that body about \na month before, and was sent to Opequhon, to Conestoga, and Cone- \ndoguinet. In the fall, he was directed to supply Pequea, and in the \nspring following, having informed the presbytery he was about to \nremove from their bounds, he was dismissed. In 1748, Robert \nCross wrote to him to repay the money he had borrowed of the \nsynod\'s fund ; and in 1753, a promise was made to remit all the in- \nterest in arrear, if he would forthwith pay the principal. \n\nHe is saidf to have died Oct. 22, 1782, aged ninety. \n\n* Rev. R. P. Dubois\'s Historical Discourse at New London, \n\xe2\x96\xa0j- Thompson\'s History of Long Island. \n\n\n\nGEORGE PHILLIPS \xe2\x80\x94 HENRY HOOK. 363 \n\n\n\nGEORGE PHILLIPS \n\nCAMS* of a distinguished Puritan ancestry, being the son of the \nRev. Samuel Phillips, of Rowley, Massachusetts, and the grand- \nson of the celebrated divine, George Phillips, of Watertown, who \nCame to New England, in 1630, with Sir Richard Saltonstall. \n\nGeorge Phillips was born June 3, 16*4, and graduated at Har- \nvard in 1686: he was employed as a licentiate at several places, \n- Jamaica, where he laboured till his removal to Setauket, \nfrom 1693 to 16: \'7. \n\nBrookhaven, an eight-sided township, the largest on Long Island, \ntried from Boston, in 1655. The place where the planters \nfixed their abode was called Setauket, from the Indian tribe which \nhad dwelt there. For thirty-five years, the town had for its \nminister Nathaniel Brewster, the grandson of the ruling elder of \nthe Pilgrim Church, of Plymouth. Asa colleague to him, Dngald \nSimeon was employed from 1685 to 1691, when he returned to \nScotland. \n\nThe town promised Phillips the gift of one hundred acres in fee, \nand the use of two hundred more for life. He was not ordained \nfrom 1697 till April 13, 1702. \n\nThe Second Meeting-house was planned in 1710, and the dis- \nagreement about the site wus not removed till 1714; when, by an \nappeal to the lot, it was decided to build on the old spot. This \nedifice was used till lsll; British soldiers occupied it in the war, \nand b-t\'t od it marks of bullets and cannon-balls. \n\nPhillips join <1 in forming Long Island Presbytery, in 1717. On \nit- extinction, he was connected with New York Presbytery till his \ndeath, in 1789. He Wafl never present in synod. \n\n\n\nBENRY HOOK \n\n\n\nCams m an ordained minister from Ireland, and was received \nby the synod in 1718; and be settled al Oohansy. Andrews \nwrote to Mather, t April BO, 17\xc2\xb1J: \xe2\x80\x94 "The week before last, by \nthe pressing importunity of the minister of < lohanzy, I went thither \nto heal -\'-me dineren n the two congregations there; \n\n* Thompson*! History of Lou Uand; Prime*! ditto. \n\nt Mutli.-r MSS., Am". Am: | \n\n\n\n364 JOSEPH LAMB \xe2\x80\x94 WILLIAM TENNENT. \n\nwhich being effected, contrary to expectation, such charges were \nlaid against hirn as have subverted him from acting there or any- \nwhere else." He removed to Delaware; and Newcastle Presby- \ntery met in Cohanzy to investigate the case. The synod judged, \nthough several things were not proven, yet it was due to rebuke \nhim openly, in Fairfield Meeting-house, and to suspend him for a \nseason. He was sent to supply Conestoga and St. Jones, in Kent, \non Delaware. Hans Hanson and John Burgess, commissioners \nfrom Drawyers or Appoquinimy, presented a call for him, March \n12, 1723: he did not accept till September 14, 1724, and Creag- \nhead, of White Clay, installed him. He was sent frequently, as a \nsupply, to St. Jones, and, in 1737, to Kent, in Maryland. He \ndied in 1741, and was buried on land he had bought in 1724, and \nwhich is owned by his descendants at this day. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH LAMB \n\n\n\nGraduated at Yale in 1717, and was ordained, by Long Island \nPresbytery, December 6, 1717, pastor of Mattituck, Long Island. \n\nBut few things are known of him, further than that his wife died \nin April, 1729 ; that he was appointed by the synod to supply \nJamaica, in April, 1737 ; and that, being called to Baskingridge, \nin New Jersey, he joined New Brunswick Presbytery, May 24, \n1744. \n\nBrownlee calls him "a Scottish worthy;" but he was probably a \nnative of Connecticut, for he was sent, in July, 1744, to supply \nthe Presbyterian Church in Miiford, in that colony. He died in \n1749. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM TENNENT \n\n\n\n"Was born in Ireland, and was a cousin,* on the mother\'s side, \nof James Logan, the Secretary of the Province of Pennsylvania; \nthe Rev. Patrick Logan having married Isabel Hume, a relative \nof the Laird of Dundas and the Earl of Panmure. Tennent mar- \nried, May 15, 1702, a daughter of the Rev. Mr. Kennedy, a dis- \n\n* Watson\'s Annals of Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM TEXXEXT. 365 \n\ntinguished Presbyterian minister in Ireland. The Rev. Gilbert \nKennedy, a kinsman of the good Earl of Cassilis, who sat in the \nWestminster Assembly, having been ejected from his charge in \nGirvan, Ayrshire, went to Ireland, and became the minister of \nDundonald. He was imprisoned, in 1670, by Boyle, Bishop of \nDown, and died February 6, 1687-t8. His brother Thomas -was \nthe minister of Donoughmore; and his grandson, Gilbert, suc- \nely minister of Lisburn, Killileagh, and Belfast, died in \n\nl;;.;. \n\nWilliam Tennent was ordained, by the Bishop of Down, a deacon \nin July, 17U4, and a priest, September 22, 1706. He resided in \nDown at the time of his marriage, then in Armagh, and, after \nentering into orders, in Antrim and Down. He is said to have \nheld a chaplaincy in a nobleman\'s family. \n\nA brief* family record states the births of Tennent\'s children, \nand their baptism by Church ministers. After having been| in \nOrders a number of years, he became scrupulous of conforming to \nthe terms imposed on the clergy of the Establishment, and was \ndeprived of his living. There being no satisfactory prospect of \nusefulness at home, he came to America with his wife, four sons, \nand a daughter, in .September, 1716. \n\n11 1. November --, 1718, at East Chester, New York, and \n\nremoved, May 8, 1720, t<> Bedford. In 1721, he took charge of \nin and Sinithfi.\'ld, in Bucks county, Pennsylvania. lie ac- \ncepted a call to Neshaminy in 1720. He had a school, at which his \nsons and others were educated, \xe2\x80\x94 the Latin being as familiar to him \nas hi- mother-tongue. In 1728, James LoganJ gave him fifty acres \non Neshaminy Creek, "to encourage him to prosecute his views* \nand to make his residence near US permanent." The presbytery \ndid not M-nd a minister to in-tall him; but the people, being asked \nin the meeting-house, declared their acceptance of him as their \n\npa-tor. He had two congregations, distinguished on the presby- \ntery-book as tin- Upper and lower. < hi obtaining the land, a log \nbuilding was erected, twenty feel square, in which his pupils \n\nstudied. Whitelh M Bays, eight ministers trained by him were \n\nMiii out before the fall of L789. Of these, four were his sons; \ntwo others were Samuel Blair and John Rowland. \n\nIn September, 1784, the uewly-formed congregation of Newtown \nasked tor one-fourth of his time; Km his upper congregation would \n1 1 \xe2\x80\x94 \xc2\xab - r 1 1 _ In June, 1786, he asked the presbytery if they con- \nsidered him the regular pastor of Neshammy: they replied that \n(hey did. Tin- people then carried the matter to the synod, who \nconcurred with the court below. Again Tenneni asked the preebyt \n\xe2\x96\xa0 plied as before. Two yean afteti, ;i \n\nlehed by Dr, alexwder, in tin- Log College. \nt Memoir uf Wax. Tennent, <\xe2\x96\xa0; Freehold. J Watson. \n\n\n\n366 WILLIAM TENNENT. \n\npetition, signed by sixty-six names, was brought, asking for an \nassistant. The presbytery called Boyd and Thomson to sit with \nthem in considering the matter: they came, and Tennent freely \nand cheerfully agreed to the people\'s proposal. It was arranged \nthat each party should pay their own minister, and the two should \npreach "day about." McHenry was chosen as assistant. \n\nHis people complained, September 18, 1739, that he had yielded \nhis pulpit to Rowland, against the synod\'s express order in the \nprevious May. When the presbytery entered on the consideration \nof the case, he disclaimed their jurisdiction, and withdrew; and \nthey did no more than beseech his friends not to suffer the like \nviolation of the synod\'s authority any more. \n\nOn the 10th of November, he came to Philadelphia to see White- \nfield, who rejoiced to welcome "an old, gray-headed disciple and \nsoldier of Jesus Christ, \xe2\x80\x94 a great friend of Mr. Erskine, but secretly \ndespised by most of the synod." Two days after, Whitefield went \nto Neshaminy, and, on his arrival, found Gilbert Tennent preach- \ning in the churchyard to three thousand persons. He stopped at \nonce, and gave out a psalm ; after which " Whitefield preached, \nand the people were unaffected; but, in the midst of my dis- \ncourse, the power of the Lord Jesus came upon me. The Lord \nbrought great things to pass." The revival was extensive and \npowerful there. \n\nTennent entertained Whitefield as one of the ancient patriarchs \nwould have done. Whitefield saw in him another Zacharias ; and \nhis wife appeared like Elizabeth. There were then " several \ngracious youth" in the Log College, nearly ready for the ministry. \nWhitefield wrote to a friend in Philadelphia, July 15, 1740, " I \nrejoice you have been at Neshaminy. I can say of Mr. Tennent \nand his brethren as David did of Goliath\'s sword : \xe2\x80\x94 \' none like \nthem.\' " \n\nTennent was regularly at synod during the exciting scenes of \nthe three years preceding the rupture, and concurred with his \nsons in all their measures. Regarding himself as cast out by the \nProtest, in 1741, he withdrew from the synod and joined New \nBrunswick Presbytery. He soon asked for an assistant ; and sup- \nplies were sent till 1743, when Beatty was called and ordained. \nRoan took charge of the school for a season. \n\nTennent finished his earthly course May 6, 1746, aged seventy- \nthree, having seen of his pupils, Samuel Blair, Rowland, McCrea, \nRobinson, John Blair, Samuel Finley, Roan, Beatty, Lawrence, \nand Dean, besides his four sons, make honourable proof of their \nministry, as men " allowed of God." \n\nHe lived and died poor. On his coming to this country, he bor- \nrowed from the synod\'s fund, McNish being his security. He \nasked, in 1724, for " some supply from the fund," in vain. On one \noccasion, the unpaid interest was remitted. His widow petitioned \n\n\n\nSAMUEL YOUNG \xe2\x80\x94 EGBERT CROSS. *367 \n\nfor the same favour : eight pounds were thrown off, on condition that \nprincipal and interest were paid at once. \n\nHis widow, Catharine, closed her days with her son Gilbert, \nand died in Philadelphia, May 7, 17">;i, aged seventy. Of his \ndaughter, Eleanor, we have no notice except of her birth, Decem- \nber 27, 1708. \n\nTo William TbnnhNT, above all others, is owing the pros- \nperity and enlargement of the Presbyterian church. Other men \nW6W conservative, and to their timely erection of barriers we \nowe our deliverance from the "New Light" of Antrim; others \nwere valiant for the truth, and exerted by the press a wide influ- \nence on the age; many were steadily and largely useful in par- \nticular departments and in limited spheres : but Tennent had the \nrare gift of attracting to him youth of worth and genius, im- \nbuing them with his healthful spirit, and sending them forth \nsound in the faith, blameless in life, burning with zeal, and un- \nsurpassed as instructive, impressive, and successful preachers. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL YOUNG \n\n\n\nWAfl received from Armagh Presbytery by the synod, Septem- \nber 23, 1718, and was appointed by Newcastle Presbytery to \nsupply Drawyers. In May, 1720, a number, (lately come from \nIreland,) having settled about the branches of Elk River, sent \nThomas Head ami Thomas Caldwell to present their case to the \n\n{presbytery. Young visited them, and countenanced their design of \nlaving the gospel settled among them. They were organized as \na congregation in .lime, ami they made out a call for Young in \n\nSeptember: he declined, and died before June 0, 1721, leaving a \nwidow. \n\n\n\nROBERT CROSS \n\n\n\nWah born near Ballykelly,* in Ireland. 1689; and hi- ore- \ndentil\'- u a probationer were approved by tin- synod in 1717. \nAfter Bpending some time in Newcastle, he was called to that \n\n* Near Lettcrkcnny, according to Mr. Ilazunl. \n\n\n\n368 ROBERT CROSS. \n\nplace on September 17, 1718; he was ordained and installed, \nMarch 17, 1719. Young preached, and Andrews was present as \na correspondent. The congregation of Jamaica, Long Island, \ncalled him, September 18, 1723, to succeed McNish. He ac- \ncepted the call ; and, on the failure of the Church missionary in \nhis suit for the ejectment of the tenants from the parsonage lands, \nhe was, by a vote of the town, (January 2, 1725,) put into pos- \nsession of them. \n\n\n\nGOVERNOR BURNETT* TO THE BISHOP OF LONDON. \n\n"New York, July 14, 1727. \n\n"My Lord:\xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" I have been informed by Mr. Poyer that there is an action \ncommenced by the Presbyterians of Jamaica for the English \nchurch, which they pretend was built by them, and taken from \nthem by violence by my Lord Cornbury. \n\n" I know nothing certain about their claim ; but if they take \nthe course of law I cannot help it ; but, they having committed a \nriot in taking possession of the church, the attorney-general here \nhas lodged an information against them, and I refused them a \nnolle prosequi upon their application, \xe2\x80\x94 that their rashness may be \nattended with charge and trouble at least, if not punishment, \nwhich may perhaps discourage them in their suit, or make them \nwilling to compromise it. My lord, &c, \n\n" W. Burnett." \n\nWhether they were indicted, or prosecuted, or convicted, does \nnot appear; but they proceeded in their suit for the church. \nThe defendant\'s counsel demurred to some of the plaintiff\'s evi- \ndences; but Chief-Justice Morris bade them waive it, for if the \njury found for the plaintiff he would grant a new trial. They \nwere very unwilling to do so ; but, knowing the man, and fearing \nthe worst from him, they consented. The verdict being for the \nplaintiff, the defendant\'s counsel moved at the next term before \njudgment for a new trial. It was refused ; and, on reminding \nMorris of his promise, he denied having made it, but said, on \nbeing urged, "A bad promise ought always to be broken." So, in \n1727, the Presbyterians recovered their church by due course of \nlaw. \n\nMorris was no friend to the Presbyterians, having been a pupil \nof George Keith. He was openly charged with having taken a \nbribe, and Governor Cosby suspended him from his office. He \nwent to England for redress, and published the grounds of his \n\n* Quoted by Macdonald. \n\n\n\nROBERT CROSS. 369 \n\ndecision in the Jamaica case. Cosby wrote in his own vindication \nto the Council, describing Morris as grossly intemperate, insuf- \nferably haughty, shamefully neglectful of the business of his office, \nand destitute of regard for truth. \n\nThe year after Cross settled in Jamaica, there were, according \nto Poyer, many infidels and eighty Church families in the town \nand the precincts of Newtown and Flushing. \n\nIn 1783, the Assembly granted the Vestry of Jamaica leave to \ndispose of sixty pounds; and the king was vehemently importuned \nto disallow the act, because the money would be given to the \nDissenters. \n\nCross was called to Philadelphia, in 1784, as assistant to An- \ndrews ; but the synod, on his leaving the matter to them, decided, \nafter calling upon God, not to place the call in his hands. Peni- \nberton* wrote to Welstead, of Boston, August 26, 1734, "You \nlive in a place of action, but we ... . have nothing before us but \nthe removal of Mr. Cross. The Jamaica people refuse to give \nhim up; the Philadelphia people insist on having him. lie de- \nclares himself willing to comply with the determination of synod, \nbut has no wish to part with his present people." \n\nWhen the commission was called together, in April, 1735, in \nthe ease of Hemphill, Pemberton and Cross preached, and both \nprinted their sermons, to vindicate themselves from the charges \ninoiight against them. Hemphill was amazed at so much insin- \ncerity in Cross, who had seemed to be much his friend. \n\nJn the fall of 1735, his friends in Philadelphia petitioned to be \nmad" a distinct congregation. Leave was granted in the next \nsummer, and they presented a call for him. He told the synod, \nthat he thought they could not determine the matter till his people \nhad been duly apprised, and that he thought it his duty to stay \nwith them. The matter was delayed a year, and both congrcga- \npresented their reasons. They were considered; and. after \nCalling on God for light and direction in the matter, they with \n\none accord united in recommending his removal to Philadelphia, \nHe is saidt to have been successful in winning souls. Hia \n\nwork in Jamaica had Keen to him delight fill, and for his work\'s \n\nsake he was eery highly esteemed. Elisabeth Ashbridge,! the \nQuakeress, said, "His people almosl adored him, and impoverished \nthemselvee I [ual the Bum offered aim in the city; but, failing in \n\nthis, they lost him." \n\nlie joined Philadelphia Presbytery, May 29, 17^7. The two \ncongregations uniting, he was installed, November 1"; and An- \nI reached from - Cor. iv. 7. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 1188. of Mmtchoietti BUtorleal Bo \n\nf Mw-.|..imi.i. j Prieoda\' Library. \n\n24 \n\n\n\n370 ROBERT CROSS. \n\nThe ministry of Whitefield in Philadelphia was extensive and \npowerful in its influence. Many were alienated from Andrews \nand Cross ; they did not preach, it was said, so as to alarm the \nconscience. Whitefield, when about to sail, wrote from Reedy \nIsland, Delaware, May 19, 1740, " Mr. C. has preached most \nof his people away from him. He lashed me most bravely the \nSunday before I came away. Mr. A. also preached against me." \nBut, subsequently, when the snow prevented the roofless " Great \nHouse" from being used, Cross offered his meeting-house to \nWhitefield, and he preached there, with a sweet and wonderful \npower. Then he entered in his journal his sense of the folly of \nexposing his opinion of ministers as unconverted : he saw it to be \na lording it over brethren. \n\nOn the death of Andrews, Cross had Francis Alison for his \nassistant; and, in 1753, application was made to Edinburgh and \nLondon for a colleague. The answer from Edinburgh is un- \nknown ; but Dr. Chandler recommended Mr. Richard Godwin, of \nLittle St. Helen\'s, in London, \xe2\x80\x94 " serious and reserved in con- \nversation, but very fluent in the pulpit." He (Cross) resigned \nthe pastoral charge, June 22, 1758. He maintained a corre- \nspondence with the ministers of South Carolina Presbytery. He \ndied on the 9th of August, 1766. His wife, who was born in \nNew York, in 1688, died in the same year with him. They left \nno children. \n\nHe was esteemed for prudence, gravity, and skill in the Holy \nScriptures ; it is added, \xe2\x80\x94 and for his genteel deportment. \n\nHe made his will on the 6th of June. "I do commit my soul to \nmy heavenly Father, of whose mere mercy and free grace I hope \nto obtain the full and free pardon of all my sins, through the merits \nand mediation of his well-beloved Son, my only Saviour and Re- \ndeemer, the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom I believe, and on whose \natonement and all-powerful intercession I solely depend for my \nacceptance with God and eternal salvation." He left to his bro- \nther, Hugh Cross, <\xc2\xa3100 in Irish money; "<\xc2\xa31000 proclamation to \nMargaret, only daughter of my brother William, who lives with \nme." He gave twenty-five pounds to the Widows\' Fund; and the \nproceeds of his library, excepting several books given to Mrs. \nHumphreys, to the poor of the congregation, specifying that \ntwenty pounds be given to the Widow Glen. His gold-headed \ncane he left to his executor, Mr. William Humphreys. \n\nAt this period, Davies and Tennent were in Great Britain, in be- \nhalf of the college; and they suspected Cross of having sent to \nChandler a copy of the Nottingham Sermon. They attributed its \nappearance there to the inveterate malignity of the Philadelphia \nSynod, though it is not unlikely it was officiously dispersed from \nhand to hand by the Rev. William Smith, a Churchman, who was \n\n\n\nJOHN CLEMENT\xe2\x80\x94 WILLIAM STEWARD. 3(1 \n\nthen in London, zealously moving for the Philadelphia Academy. \nCross, however, wrote to Scotland to excite prejudice against the \ncollege and its agents: his letter was put into "sundry hands,"\' \nand the Nottingham Sermon was industriously spread at Edin- \nburgh, among the members of the General Assembly. Tennent \nand Davies prepared an answer to the letter, which they stigmatized \nas a malignant, ungenerous, clandestine effort. \n\n\n\nJOHN CLEMENT \n\n\n\nPresented his credentials as a probationer from Britain; and \nthey were approved by the synod, September 18, 1718. A call \nwas presented for him from Pocomoke, in Virginia, called some- \ntimee I loventry, from the parish in which it partly lay, and ordinarily \nRehoboth, from the place where the meeting-house stood. His \nordination was appointed to be according to the usual methods, and \nto be performed by Davis, Hampton, and Thomson, and such mem- \nif Newcastle Presbytery as they might choose to call to their \nince. He was ordained in June, 1719; but scarcely a year \nelapsed before some of his elders sent a written complaint of him \nto the synod. It was given to him, and he prepared a written an- \nswer; but they suspended him. The suspension was taken off on \nhis full confession, and Philadelphia Presbytery employed him to \npreach at Gloster and Pilesgrove; but, on inquiry into hie manner \nof life, he was suspended again, and further mention of him ceases. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM STEWARD \n\nWas received as a probationer on the same day with Clement, \nand, being called to Monokin and Wicomico, was ordained <>n the \n\nsame day with him. For several yean be waited, in the hoi f \n\nforming a presbytery in the peninsula; but, in ITl\'o, by order of \nsynod, be joined Newcastle Presbytery. A new meeting-house \nwas built at Monokin, on land conveyed by deed, in 17^ (| . The \ncongregation had then eight elders. \n\xe2\x80\xa2 ward died in 17> I. \n\n\n\n372 JOSEPH WEBB \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN ORME. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH WEBB, \n\nThe son, probably, of the minister of Green\'s Farms, Connecti- \ncut, graduated at Yale in 1715, and became a member of synod in \n1720, being the pastor of Newark. He was attended by his elder, \nCaleb Ward. In 1724, he proposed to the synod a case of con- \nscience, but in such general and doubtful terms, that it was re- \nmitted to the presbytery. In 1726, a committee of synod, at his \nrequest, went to Newark to heal the difference there. The synod \napproved in 1727 of its doings. After all the business was done \nthat year, Jones, David Evans, Webb, and Hubbel put in a protest, \ndeclaring their intention to join no more with them. Webb re- \ntracted in two months after. \n\nAs early as 1732, difficulties in his congregation led the Church \nmissionaries to commence their service in the town. Dickinson \npreached on the " Vanity of Human Institutions in matters of Re- \nligion." Colonel Josiah Ogden had been suspended from church \nprivileges, because, for fear of losing his hay, he had gathered it in \non the Lord\'s day. He wrote to the synod in 1734, and Cross and \nPemberton replied ; but the letter did not satisfy him. Dickinson \nand Pemberton wrote the next year, Webb having opened the case \nmore fully to the synod. Ogden connected himself with the Epis- \ncopalians, and a Church missionary was stationed in Newark. \n\nWebb is said to have been dismissed from his pastoral charge in \n1736 ; his name is mentioned as a member of synod till 1740. He \nwas most punctual in bringing collections for the fund. He and \nhis son, a student in Yale College, were drowned October 21, 1741, \nwhile crossing the ferry at Saybrook, Connecticut. \n\n\n\nJOHN ORME, \n\nA minister from Devonshire, England, was received by the \nsynod, September 26, 1720. The congregation of Marlborough on \nPatuxent having, through their correspondents in London, engaged \nhim, he became their pastor, and continued with them till his death, \nin 1758. He remained with the Old Side. \n\nWhitefield preached twice at Upper Marlborough, and wrote, \nDecember 8, 1739, to Noble, of New York, " This afternoon God \nhas brought us hither. Some are solicitous for my staying here \nto-morrow. I have complied with thfiir request. These parts are \nin a dead sleep." \n\n\n\nMOSES DICKINSON. 373 \n\n\n\nMOSES DICKINSON, \n\nA TOUNGBB brother of Jonathan, was bom at Springfield, De- \ncember 12, 1695, his father having lived successively at Hatfield, \nHadley, and Springfield. He graduated at Yale in 1717, and \nsucceeded Orr, in Hopewell and Maidenhead, before September, \n1719, his siekness at that time having detained his brother from \nsynod. His first child, Mary, was born August 18, 1721. The \ndate of his ordination and installation is not known. He sat in \nBynod for the first time in 1722. Morgan wrote to Mather, in \nMay, 1721, of the astonishing marks of a work of grace around \nhim, and which were more plentiful among those who had been \nlonger under the means of grace; and, in September, he speaks of \n"magnum incrementum ecclesije" in Dickinson\'s congregations. \n\nHi.- was released fnun Hopewell and Maidenhead before August, \n1727. On the* dismission of Buckingham from Norwalk, in Con- \nnecticut, many in the congregation, having heard Gilbert Tennent, \nwere desirous of calling him; but the Fairfield Association thought \nght not tn be taken from so destitute a region as the Jerseys. \nThey advised them to call Dickinson, for whom they exp] \n\ngnat respect and value. He was invited to preach for them, June \n\n26, 1727. and was called on the lUth of August. Seventy-five \ntoted for him, and thirty-nine against him: they) objected to the! \ncall, not out of dislike to him, but because they felt bound in con- \nscience to regard their previous minister as their pastor. The ad- \njoining pariah of Wilton concurred in the call the next day. The \n\xe2\x80\xa2own sent the Ebb. Joseph Piatt to New Jersey to remove Dickin- \nson\'s family at their expense. \n\nA large manuscript m in the possession of the Ref!. (u-orgc Hale, \nof Bennington, entitled "Some Meditations on the Occasion of the \nRemoval of Mr. Dickinson, in 1727 ; delivered in Hopewell meeting- \nbouse, by BSnooh Armitage." Armitage was an elder, and came \nfrom Yorkshire in 171 D. \n\nDickinson preached the aermonat the ordination of Eliaha Kent, \nin Newtown, Connecticut, hi- predecessor, Mi\'. Beach, having gone \nto England and returned with holy orders and a commission as \na missionary. At Korwalk, an Episcopal separation took place; \nand, among others, Mr. Jarvis, a deacon, withdrew. It is doubtful \nwhether Bishop Jan is was baptised before or after bis father took \nthis step, and, consequently, whether he erer tasted any other than \nuncovenanted mer \n\nDickinson published several Bermons. <>u the death of hi bro- \n\n\n\n!:\xe2\x96\xa0 v. Di S rwulk. \n\n\n\n874 THOMAS EVANS. \n\nther, he completed his second "Vindication of the Sovereignty of \nGrace." \n\nFoxcroft, in his preface, highly commends the continuation. \nDickinson also prepared a treatise on the questions, Whether blind- \nness of mind is the primary cause of unbelief? and Whether re- \ngeneration is wrought by the Holy Ghost operating with the gospel, \nwhereby the sinner is enlightened and enabled to know the truth? \nHe took the affirmative side, in opposition to the new theology then \ncoming into vogue. It was read before the Fairfield County As- \nsociation and the trustees of Yale, and was approved by them. \n\nEarly in 1764, he sought an assistant in William Tennent, \nJr., the son of the patriarch of Freehold ; but, after his removal, \nduring the closing years of life, he pursued his work unaided. \n\nHe died May 1, 1778, aged eighty-three. Dr. Trumbull, in pre- \nparing his " History of Connecticut," had access to his manu- \nscripts; but they have been lost or destroyed. \n\n\n\nTHOMAS EVANS \n\n\n\nWas received by Newcastle Presbytery as a student from the \nPresbytery of Caermarthen, in Wales; and they recommended \nhim, (September 14, 1719,) after appointed trials of his ministerial \ngifts and high satisfaction in his blameless life, as a very hopeful \ncandidate. They licensed him, May 28, 1720. The congregation of \nWelsh Tract (where his relatives were among the wealthiest and \nmost highly-esteemed people) petitioned for him ; but the pres- \nbytery persevered in efforts to reconcile them to their late pastor, \nDavid Evans. The call was placed in his hands, March 12, 1723; \nand he was ordained at Pencader, May 8. Proclamation was made \nthrice at the door of the meeting-house, by David Evans, Esq., \nthat, if any had allegations to make against his life or doctrine, \nthey should do so before the ordination. \n\nHe was the brother* of Nathaniel Evans, a large proprietor in \nDelaware. He was an excellent scholar and a valuable instructor. \nAmong his pupils were Abel Morgan, f the Baptist minister of \nMiddletown, New Jersey, with whom President Davies acquired \nthe rudiments of classic lore, and who maintained a discussion on \nbaptism with President Finley. Evans was a bachelor, a book- \n\n\n\n* So I am informed by Joshua Edwards, whose father (Rev. Morgan Edwards) \ntook for his second wife the widow of Nathaniel Evans, \nf M. Edwards\'s History of the New Jersey Baptists. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER HUTCUESOX. 375 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0worm, possessed a fine library, and was continually adding to his \nstore. He was esteemed a truly pious man. \n\nHe was absent from the synod in 1741; but the Old Side ap- \npointed him, with two others, to defend the "Protestation" in print, \nif need be. He died in 1743. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER HUTCHESON. \n\nTin: Rev. Alexander Hutcheson, of Saintfield, county Down, \n(Ireland.) was one of the ministers of the Synod of Ulster to \nwhom Sir Arthur Forbes first spoke of the project of the llegium \nDonum. He died in 1711. Francis Hutcheson, Professor of \nMoral Philosophy in the University of Glasgow, took a deep in- \nin our infant church, and proposed to Francis Alison that \nthe Bjnod Bhould establish a seminary of learning. \n\nWnen Alexander Hutcheson was received by Newcastle Presby- \ntery as a probationer from Glasgow Presbytery, (September 10, \n17:^.) they transmitted a formal vote of thanks to that body for \nsending him to these parts. After supplying Drawyers, he was \ncalled (March 1_, 1723) to Bohemia Manor and Broad Creek, in \nranty, Maryland. After proclamation made, no objections \nbeing offered, he was ordained, June <!. Hie people were not \nnumerous or wealthy, and he asked to be dismissed; but the pres- \nbytery declined, and gave him aid out of the fond, and left him at \n\nliberty for one-third OX his time to supply vacancies which desired \nhim. \n\nII". with Gillespie, dissented from the act requiring a synodical \nexamination of candidates for the ministry; and they withdrew \nwith the Brunswioi brethren. Hntoheeon wrote to the Synod of \nPhiladelphia, expressing his opinion of the proceedings of both \nparties, and giving his advice. \n\nAugustin Herman, a Bohemian, a. Large land-purchaser, was \n"the first founder and Beater of Bohemia Manor." The "Manor" \n\xe2\x96\xa0 thousand acres, [n Whitefield\'s day, it was one \nof the most interesting portions of oui country. The Bayard \nfamily were his ehoicesl friends. He wrote from there, April 26, \n17 17. "After two days\' abode here, 1 purpose taking a three \n\ncircuit in hunting for Maryland sinners." 1754: " \nI into Maryland, and into a family out of which five, I \n\ntrust, have been horn of { \'"\xc2\xbb\\. To-day 1 -.nn forty." From St. \n_!, L740: \xe2\x80\x94 \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2We have had precious ti \n\n\n\n376 ALEXANDER HUTCHESON. \n\nBohemia. There were two thousand people present. I have not \nBeen a more solid melting since my arrival." \n\nThere is no mention, in print, of Hutcheson\'s having had a part \nin this good work ; every thing was swallowed up in Whitefield. \nHis influence was like the long summer-rain on the field where \nothers have cleared away the forest, gathered out the stones, \nploughed thoroughly, and cast in abundantly and in season the \ngood seed, which is the word of God. The rapid bursting forth \nof vegetation followed the rain : other men had laboured, and he \nentered on their labours. \n\nIn 1750, soon after the settlement of Dr. Rodgers at St. \nGeorge\'s, Robert Alexander made a deed of a lot to Peter \nBayard, James Bayard, Sluyter Bouchell, Benjamin Sluyter, Wil- \nliam Moore, John Moody, James Chew, Thomas Rothwell, and \nJohn Vandyke, trustees of the Forest Congregation, incorporated \nas the " Congregation of Bohemia and Appoquinimy." The ser- \nvices of Dr. Rodgers attracted to the Forest Church so many from \nBohemia and Drawyers that they were in danger of becoming ex- \ntinct. Hugh McWhorter, who had been an elder of Hutcheson\'s, \n(the father of Dr. McWhorter, of Newark,) became an elder at \nthe Forest. Hutcheson died in October, 1766. \n\nEmigration to Virginia and North Carolina reduced the congre- \ngations rapidly. In April, 1770, Bohemia Manor and Back \nCreek* petitioned Newcastle Presbytery to be considered as a \nseparate congregation; but no subsequent mention of them by \nname is made. \n\nThe Bohemia Church stood near Taylor\'s Bridge, and remained \nuntil 1809; only the tombstones are left now. Mr. Foot, of \nPort Penn, after much search, could not learn so much as the \nname of Hutcheson, or hear any mention of Whitefield\'s success \nin Bohemia. \n\nAn elder at Bohemia, on Hutcheson\'s settlement, was Dr. Peter \nBouchelle; another was John Brevard, | whose son Ephraim is so \nhonourably connected with the movement in Mecklenburg, North \nCarolina, for the assertion of our independence; another was \nManasseh Logue. \n\n\n\n* Mr. Foot, of Port Perm, says the Forest Church -worshipped at Back Creek \nand St. George\'s till 1750. \n\nf Brevard and Bouchelle were of Huguenot descent, as also was the Bassot \nfamily and the Bayards. Mr. Brevard, on the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, \nfled to Ulster, and then settled on Elk River, Maryland. He had five sons. Of \nthese, John married a sister of the Rev. Dr. Macwhorter, of Newark, and removed \nto North Carolina, in the neighbourhood of Centre Church, in Iredell county. At \nthe close of his days, his house, with its contents, were burned by the British, as a \npunishment for having eight sons in the rebel camp. General Davidson, who waa \nkilled at Cowan\'s Ford, on the Catawba, was his son-in-law. \xe2\x80\x94 Wheeler\'s Sketches of \nNorth Carolina. \n\n\n\nROBERT LAING \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN WALTON. 377 \n\n\n\nROBERT LAIXG, \n\nA minister from Great Britain, arrived in Maryland in 17:22, \nand supplied Snow Hill. In March, he removed to Brandywine \nand White Clay. In August, Ik- was suspended for bathing on \ntilt.- Lord\'s day, and, not receiving the sentence in a becoming \nmanner, he was deposed. Thomas Evans and Robert Cross ob- \njected to BO heavy a punishment; and the synod, on the ground \nthat he had sought relief under sickness by a water-cure, took off \nthe sentence and rebuked him. In 172*3, he, with the Bynod\'s \nadvice, demitted the ministry, because of his weakness and defi- \nciency; aid was given him out of the fund; and assurance was \ngiven that any minister prudently ministering to his necessities \nshuuld be reimbursed. He passed out of notice. \n\n\n\nJOHN WALTON \n\n\n\nGraduated at Yale in 1720. Morgan wrote to Mather* from \nKa-t < Shester, May 28, 1721, that there had formerly been n<> IV -- \nbyterian congregations within twenty miles of Freehold on the \nnorth and .-i.xty on the south. "Our ministrations were as little \ndesired as enjoyed] but now, new congregations (Allentown, or \nCrosswicks, and Cranberry) are formed, where formerly the people \n\nthought US as bad aliiio-t as Papists. [engaged I look, the two \nDickinsons, ami Webb, to preach to them: the appearances were \nenOOUraging. I also prevailed with one from Yale, of my own \n\ntown born, (New London,) and he had double the good effeel of \n\nall that were there before; but BOffiC things will make his labour \n\nuseless." \n\nMorgan wrote to Blather, October 8t, 1722, "Walton\'s \n\npreaching Was admired. People heard him with tears. lie had \nlike to have brought over all the people to our way: and his \niuiprudeneies and wickedness Bft Q1QQII to be admired," (won- \ndered at.) \n\nAndrews wrote to Oolman, April 80, 1 7 _\' J , "<>ne from Con- \nnecticut, that w;i< like in h:i\\e don.- much L r 1 jjj t he .1, \n\n. hi- aontengioal importunities and madness, lost bis honour, \n* MutluT MBft American Antiquarian E \n\n\n\n378 JOHN WALTON. \n\nand is gone." He had been preaching at Crosswicks; and the \nPresbytery of Philadelphia, in his absence, took the testimony, \nsuspended him, and published the sentence from the pulpit in \nwhich he had preached. Subsequently the charges against him \nwere regularly adjudicated and proved. His conduct to the pres- \nbytery, and his mode of speaking of them, were abusive and \nunbecoming. The synod had a conference with him privately, and \nallowed him several days to consider and prepare a written ac- \nknowledgment of his misdemeanours. His paper was accepted \npro tanto, and he was suspended for three Sabbaths.* His con- \nfession was to be read on the third Sabbath after the sentence, \nfrom the pulpit in Newark, in part, so far as related to his offences \nthere. He was to own the confession publicly, and then to be ab- \nsolved. On the day appointed, no minister being present, he \nread his confession and absolved himself. The synod refused to \nacknowledge such a proceeding, and remitted the case to Long \nIsland Presbytery, with Dickinson, Morgan, and Pierson as corre- \nspondents. Regardless of the synod, he preached at East Chester. \nThe committee, in October, 1723, were informed (by letter and \notherwise) of several scandalous allegations against him, and con- \ntinued his suspension. When Morgan rose to give him an exhor- \ntation, he exclaimed against their conclusion, renounced all sub- \njection to them, told them he wanted no exhortation from them, \nand rushed away in an angry manner. \n\nImmediately he advertised that he would teach in New York, \non Broad Street, near the Exchange, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew; \nand that during the winter he would keep an evening school. \n\nIn 1725, he requested the synod to leave his case to the Pres- \nbytery of Long Island ; but they consigned it to the same com- \nmittee as before. \n\nHe went to West Chester county, and preached at Rye and \nWhite Plains. It seems probable that, during the ministry of the \nRev. Christopher Bridge, Church missionary at Rye, there was a \ngeneral acquiescence of the town. On his death, in 1719, the \npeople desired Poyer, of Jamaica, f to come to them : he requested \nthe Venerable Society to send him, because the congregation said, \nif they could not have him, they knew whom they would have, \xe2\x80\x94 \nMr. Buckingham, of Norwalk. \n\n"The humble Memorial of the Presbyterians of Rye and White \nPlains" to| the Governor of Connecticut and the Legislature, \ndated May 11, 1727, is headed by John Walton, and is signed by \n\n\n\n* Morgan says, "We, who went out, (Philadelphia Presbytery,) wondered \nthat the synod restored him. Pious Mr. Gillespie entered his dissent." \nj MSS. in hands of Henry Onderdonk, Esq., of Jamaica. \n% MSS. in Secretary\'s Office, Hartford. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM M.MILLAX. 879 \n\nfifty others. It embraces names long familiar in West Chester, as \nTheall, Brundige, Lane, Purdy, Knapp, Hyatt, Bloomer, Turner, \nIlorton, Travis, llachiliah Brown, Sharkoe, Kniffin, Haight, \nMen-it, and Lyon. They were obliged to pay to the support of \nthe Church of England, \xe2\x80\x94 " our way is not established;" and they \nwere opposed by the Church parly, who lessened their number and \ntoo much strove to discourage and hinder; but they persevered \nbecause of their love of God\'s honour, and out of regard of the \npeace of their immortal souls. They formerly had hopes of \nsettling a meeting-house, and had got timber; but through long \ndelay it rotted. They had begun a meeting-house at "White Plains, \nand had covered it, but were in debt for part, and unable to finish \nit. Besides, they wished to build a meeting-house at Ryetown, six \nmiles from White Plains. They ask that a brief may pass through \nthe colony for their relief, and that the collections be paid to Mr. \nDavenport, of Stamford. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2Oh, consider the indefatigable industry of the Church of Eng- \nland to help poor places Have you a little sister without any \n\nWhat shall ye do for your sister in the day that she is \n\nspoken for? If she be a door, will ye not enclose her with boards \n\nlar? .... Is not one soul worth ten thousand worlds? Can \n\nyou be easy while wo perish? Surely, no." They add, "We \n\nhave made up a small yearly competent salary for a minister." \n\nThe Legislature refused the request. The trustees of Yale \nencouraged them to rt-new their application; and they held \'\'an \norderly meeting," October 4, 17^7 ; and, "as we have no law \n\nauthorising ua to appoint a moderator," the proceedings were certi- \nfied by "our justice, Caleb Hyatt." They add, that they are \nrequired to rebuild the Church of England. The trustees of Yale \nsent the Rev. Mr. Davenport, of Stamford, to present the petition \n\nto the house, and it was granted. The church was built at Bye, \nin May, 17-!\'. 1 ; and Walton disappears from view. \n\nDid he become a Bapti.-t minister, and settle at Morristown, \nJersey, and die there, 1768 ?* \n\n\n\nwilliam McMillan. \n\nIt was b Bad thing for our cause in Virginia that early death \nshould our Labourers there. There were many dis- \n\ncontents to hinder candidates from Bottling among the FeW \n\npeople favouring our way in Uappalianiioek and York, or the .-mall \n* Bills of Mortality of Morrlatown, N\' n Jersey. \n\n\n\n<580 william McMillan. \n\ncongregation on Elizabeth River. The former had obtained the \npromise of Anderson\'s service; but, when he came from Scotland, \nhe felt no inclination to abide with them. A representation was \nmade by some of the members of synod in 1722, "of the earnest \ndesire of some Protestant Dissenting families in Virginia, together \nwith a comfortable prospect of the increase of our interest there." \nConn, of Bladensburg, Orme, of Marlborough, and Stewart, of \nMonokin, each spent four weeks there. The people of Virginia \nwrote to the synod in 1724 ; Jonathan Dickinson was recommended \nto spend some Sabbaths with them, and the three brethren in \nMaryland were appointed each to preach for them four Sabbath \ndays. Jones and Andrews wrote to the people, and Dickinson and \nCross prepared an address to the Governor of Virginia. Only \nOrme went. The people again wrote, and the synod referred the \nwhole affair to the Presbytery of Newcastle. That body had met \ntwo days before, on the 14th of September, 1724; and, "a repre- \nsentation* being made of Mr. Wm. McMillan to the presbytery, aa \na fit and hopeful candidate for the ministry, they, being satisfied \nwith his testimonials, order him to deliver a sermon on Gen. xxxiii. \n2, at our next, and till then defer his extemporary trials. \n\n" September 17. \xe2\x80\x94 Mr. McMillan delivered a popular sermon on \nGen. xxxiii. 2, and underwent some tryals in extemporary questions, \nas appointed, in both which he was approven : the further con- \nsideration of his affair is deferred till our next sederunt at White \nClay Creek. \n\n" September 22. \xe2\x80\x94 The affair of Mr. McMillan being reassumed, \nthe presbytery took tryal of him in the learned languages, and \nwere highly satisfied ; and, considering the difficulties he lies under \nto attend another dyet for further tryals, together with the cleso- \nlateness of the people at Virginia, and being fully satisfied with \nthe tryals they have taken of him, do allow and license him to \npreach the gospel of Christ." He then subscribed a declaration \nof his adherence to the Westminster Confession, being the first \nwho is recorded to have done so. \n\nHe was ordered to supply the people of Virginia during his \nabode there, \xe2\x80\x94 Mr. Stewart to give them one Sabbath in October, \nand Mr. Conn one Sabbath in May. \n\nOf him we know nothing further; nor has the locality been \nascertained, which is designated as "Virginia." In the March \nfollowing his licensure, the people of Coventry petitioned for sup- \nplies, \xe2\x80\x94 making it probable that it was Rehoboth, on Pocomoke, in \nCoventry parish, with Accomac county, which contained "the \npeople of Virginia." Occasional supplies were sent to them till 1727. \n\n\n\n* Kindly transcribed for me, from the Records, by the Rev. R. P. Dubois, of \nLondon. \n\n\n\nTHOMAS CKEAGHEAD. 381 \n\n\n\nTHOMAS CREAGHEAD \n\nEs said by some to have been a native of Scotland. He was \nprobably the son of Robert Creaghead, the minister of Donough- \nmore. He was at Londonderry in the time of the siege : he left \nthe city in the midBt of that fearful and protracted leaguer, and \nremoved to Glasgow. His little work for communicants is practical, \nvaluable, and still frequently reprinted. \n\nThomas Creaghead is Baid to have studied medicine as well as \ndivinity ; and, after being settled in Ireland for ten or twelve years, \nhe came, in 1715, te New England. He was employed in the minis- \ntry at Freetown, near Fall River, Massachusetts. Cotton Mather* \nwrote to Mr. Hathaway, 22nd, Fifth month, 1718, regretting that \nunkind treatment of some of the people had prevented the settle- \nment of that gentleman\'s gracious and worthy relative in Freetown. \n" Y" i will excuse me that I earnestly entreat you to give a demon- \nstration of the wisdom that is from above, and encourage Mr. \nrhead in the work in which he is now engaged."\' 21st, Fifth \nmonth, 1719: "You can\'t be insensible that the minister whom \nour glorious Lord hath graciously sent among you, is a man of an \nexcellent spirit, and a great Meaning to your plantation. Mr. \n1 sad is a man of singular piety, meekness, humility, and in- \n\ndustry in the work of God. All that are acquainted with him have \nma esteem of him, and if he should be driven from among \nyou, it would be such a damage, yea, such a ruin, as is not with- \nout horror to be thought of." These entreaties were vain. Oreag- \nhead left in 1723, and is said, in President Stiles\'s papers, to have \ngone to th" .!\xe2\x80\xa2 n \n\nthe Baptist historian, said that he treated the people so \n\nabusively for their neglect to clear olf the arrears, that they, in \n\n-\xe2\x80\xa2. would Dot consent to settle another minister. They who \n\nWrong a minister of his salary are never bIok to rob him of his \n\n;_\' 1 name. They continued twenty-five years without the stated \n\nministration of the gospel, chiefly through unwillingness to pay s \nregular salary. A I sgregationa] church was organised in 1747, \nand the Rev. Bilae Brett was settled, bit support not being col- \nlected as a tax, but contributed at each man\'s pleasure. After \nthirty yean of faithful labour, he was dJsmissed. The church sever \nhad another pastor, and became extinot after the Revolution. \n1 tghead was received by Newcastle Presbytery, Jan. 28, l T _j I , \n\nand James Smith and .John Huge appeared as commissioner.-, from \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 M U Antiquarian 8ocicty \n\n\n\n882 THOMAS CREAGHEAD. \n\nElk, with a call for him. The next month, John Montgomery and \nJohn Campbell presented a call for him from White Clay. He \naccepted it, having leave to supply Brandywine every third Sab- \nbath ; he was installed, Sept. 22, Hutcheson officiating. In No- \nvember, 1728, his people, being now able to make up his full sup- \nport, asked for the whole of his time : the request was granted ; \nbut he was directed to supply Brandywine every fifth Sabbath, and \nto catechize there as formerly. \n\nHe removed to Lancaster county, and in September, 1733, a \ncall from Pequea being presented to Donegal Presbytery by Patrick \nMoor, commissioner, he accepted it, and was installed on Wednes- \nday, the last day of October. \n\nDonegal Presbytery always speak of him as " Father Creaghead," \nand his name stands first on their book, and on that of Newcastle, \namong the subscribers to the Confession. \n\nHis people having besought the presbytery to meet with them \nand hear their complaint against him, the case was opened in May, \n1736. The charge was that he had suspended his wife from church \nprivileges without consulting the session : he replied that, the reason \nfor this being known only to himself, the session were not compe- \ntent to advise ; besides, he had not resolved on it till the Satur- \nday night preceding the sacrament. The presbytery judged that \nhe was under a delusion or delirium of the head, and directed him \nto restore her, and not to insist on having his son John and his \nwife live under his roof.* His usefulness being at an end, he was \ndismissed, Sept. 7, 1736," and was sent to supply Monada, (now \nHanover,) Paxton, and Conedoguinnet. In November, Robert \nHenry presented a call for him from Hopewell. The difficulties \nabout the boundaries of Hopewell and Pennsborough were settled \nby allowing the former to build at the Great Spring ; from which \nit has since borne the name of Big Spring. Anderson and Thom- \nson objected to allowing him to preach until the trouble in his \nfamily was allayed. After considerable discussion, Mrs. Creag- \nhead, being present, was asked, and she said she had no cause for \ncomplaint against her husband. Alexander Creaghead was ap- \npointed to install him ; but, failing to do so, the service Avas per- \nformed by Bertram, of Derry, on the second Friday in October, \n1738. He is said to have expired in the pulpit, dropping dead \nafter pronouncing the benediction, at the close of April, 1739. \nHe lies without a monument, being buried, it is said, under the \ncorner-stone of the present meeting-house at Big Spring. \n\nHe is said to have been accompanied from New England by his \nyounger brother, who settled first at Donegal and was one of the \nfirst who removed to the vicinity of Carlisle. His family is ex- \ntensively spread through Western Pennsylvania. \n\n* Their dwelling at the Head of Pequea. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH HOUSTON. 3S3 \n\nThomas Creaghead is said to have left five children, \xe2\x80\x94 George, \nThomas, John, Margaret, and Jane, wife of Rev. Adam Boyd. \nGeorge probably remained in Delaware when his father removed \nto Pequea, and was a judge, and. in 1770, an elder from Lower \nBrandywine. He was speaker of the Council at the adoption of \nthe Federal Constitution. His son, Captain William Creaghead, \nremoved to Virginia, was an elder in Da vies \'a Church in Hanover, \nand died at an advanced age in Lunenburg county, \xe2\x80\x94 a man of great \nintelligence, public spirit, and piety.* \n\nFamily tradition represents one of Thomas Creaghead\'s sons to \nhave been a minister in Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, \xe2\x80\x94 making \nit probable that Alexander Creaghead, of Middle Octorara, was \nhis son. \n\nCreaghead was one of the pioneers of the Irish Presbyterians in \nNot England : he was employed by our presbyteries to correspond \nwith ministers on their arrival there, lie wrote to the Rev. John \nMcKinstry, afterwards of Ellington, Connecticut, and to the Rev. \nJohn Campbell, afterwards of Oxford, Massachusetts, to come to \nthese parts : 1"\' also wrote in L736, in the synod\'s name, to Boston, \nto the newly-formed Presbyterian congregation there. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH HOUSTON \n\n\n\nCame from Ireland to New England and was received by Newcastle \ntery as a probationer, July 29, ITi\'l, was employed at New \nLondon, ( \'onneeticiit.t during the absence of Mr. ffillhouse in his \nnative land. After preaching for a few months at Elk River, An- \ndrew Steel and Roger Lawson, commissioners From that congrega- \ntion, presented a <-u 1 1 for him in September. I [e accepted it, ( ><-t. 5, \nand Robert Finney, with two other commissioners, petitioned that \n.lit be ordained Bpeedily. fie was ordained on the 15th. \n\nIn March, IT-\'\'\'\', tin- presbytery proceeded to heal the difference \nwhich hail arisen on "settling the Beats" in the meeting-house on \nthe branches of Elk. They ordained that the minister\'s Beat should \nbe on the right of the pulpit ; that William Finney should have \nbis choice of the igned to William Eloge and Andrew \n\nSteel ; and that Roger Law-on an<l Abraham Emmet Bhould ex- \nchanj \n\nwho knew him well and rained him highly, mention! him in hi* \n\n! i the in -i t" broach U our c>- \n\nlottred i \xe2\x80\xa2 kthera. \n\n] M.- - - offloe, lie \n\n\n\n384 ADAM BOYD. \n\nA long, wearisome, and unwise contest grew out of Houston\'s un- \nwillingness to give a part of his time to the people living on the \nnortheast of Great Elk. He and the body of his people opposed \nthe erection of a meeting-house there, and were at last contented \nto admit, that they had received no damage, from establishing a \nseparate congregation at New London. \n\nHe was installed pastor of Goodwill or Wallkill congregation, in \nOrange county, New York, before May, 1740, and died in the fol- \nlowing October, aged forty-eight.* \n\nIn 1743, the synod agreed to remit his bond, dated July 25, \n1740, in favour of his widow and family. His descendants still \nremain in Orange county. \n\n\n\nADAM BOYD \n\n\n\nWas born at Ballymoney, Ireland, in 1692, and came to New Eng- \nland as a probationer in 1722 or \'23; and, being minded to return \nto his native country, he was furnished by Cotton Mather with a \ncommendatory certificate^ dated June 10, 1724. Having formed \nan attachment to a daughter of Mr. Creaghead\'s, he relinquished \nhis design, and was received under the care of Newcastle Presby- \ntery in July. He was sent to Octorara, with directions to supply \nNewcastle and Conestoga. In September, Arthur Park and Cor- \nnelius Rowan presented a call for him from Octorara and \n"Pikquae," which he accepted in October, and Cornelius Rowan \nand John Dever appeared as representatives to solicit his ordi- \nnation. He was ordained on the 13th at Octorara, Creaghead, \nGillespie, Hook, Thomas Evans, and Hutcheson, with his elder, \nDr. Peter Bouchelle, being present. \n\nSadsbury is the township, and Octorara the stream, which give \nnames to the congregation. They had supplies from 1721, and had \nbeen directed to "gratify" the ministers sent to them and not let \nthem go home unpaid. In Oct. 1727, the families on the west side of \nOctorara asked for one-third of his labours, and it appeared they could \nraise fifty-one pounds. It being shown that the site selected for their \nmeeting-house was nine miles distant by one road and eleven miles \nby another, from the Octorara house, Boyd was directed to spend \nevery sixth Sabbath at Middle Octorara ; Nottingham being called \nthe Mouth of Octorara, or Lower Octorara. The Forks of Brandy- \nwine composed part of his field till 1734. \n\n* Eager\'s History of Orange County, \nf Mather MSS. Am. Antiq. Soc. \n\n\n\nADAM BOYD. 0S0 \n\nTen days after his ordination. Oct. 23, 1725, Boyd married Jane, \nthe daughter of Creaghead, of White Clay. \n\nAlexander Creaghead, her relative, if not her brother, became \nthe minister of the adjoining congregation of Middle Octorara. \nIn the progress of the Great Revival, a large portion of Boyd\'s \ncongregation Left him and joihed the Brunswick brethren. He \ntherefore asked leave, Aug. IT, 1741, to accept the invitation \ngiven him by the fraction of Brandywine which adhered to the Old \nBide, and which offered him twenty pounds for half of his time. \n\nAt this period commences Boyd\'s account-book, full of minute \nmemoranda, extending down to his last days. He had used the \nbook for his exercises while in the grammar-school; it contains \nseveral sermons, in cramped, abbreviated letters. The first \nentry is : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Fforks records, fro., commencing 11th August, 1741." \nIt embraces the payments of each subscriber, with the offsets, the \ntime of their death or removal, and the attending circumstances. \n\nHe -ays his nlation to Forks was dissolved "most irregularly in \nin 1758, \' and that on the 1st of September, Octorara engaged to \npay for two-thirds of his time He had been joined by the synod \n\n1 1 Newcastle Presbytery, on account of the fewness of the members ; \n\nand on the union, he Beems to have acted harmoniously and eoni- \nft>] t ihly with his brethren, though the majority was of the New Side. \n\nAt the close of his life, he asked supplies for his pulpit ; and the \nNew-Side congregation, being vacant by the death of Sterling, united \nwith his people in calling Foster. Robert Smith, of Pequea, pre- \nsided on this occasion, May 2, 1768; and it was agreed to pay \n\nBoyd twenty-five pounds yearly during his life. He was able to be \n- ordination, and died Nov. 23, 1768. His widow \n\nBUrvived till Nov. 6, 1 7 7 \'. \xe2\x80\xa2 . lie left five daughters and five BOM. \n\nThe eldest, John, is said to have been licensed, and to have died \n\n: ThomU Bettled on a plantation, given him by his father: \n\nAndrew remained upon the homestead; Adam resided in Wilming- \nton, N.C., and commenced the Cape Fear Mercury,* in Oct. L767; \nhe iras a true friend of liberty, " much respected, and was a leading \nmember of the Committee of Safety. \' lie engaged to resume the \npublication of his paper, dan. 80, 177~>, and. the next year, ex- \nchanged the press for the pulpit, lie was chaplainf of the North \nCarolina Brigade. \nSamuel, the youngest, entered Mi\'. McDowell\'s school at ! \n\n\n\n*<\',.-. ipatton of North Carolina by the British, in \n\nthe .v.rth Carolina Union bfagaslna. Wheeler, in hi- Sketohea "i N \neaUs him an Bngliahman. Colonel Andrew Boyd, of Octorara, irril \nfher in law of tin* war in the Soothern colonies, mentions the report thai the Ui- \nmington, "Where, mj brother Adam la \n\xe2\x80\xa2: Bavin. \n\n\n\n386 NOYES PARRIS \xe2\x80\x94 NATHANIEL HUBBELL. \n\nthe summer of 1760, and became a student in the College of Phila- \ndelphia in 1764. He entered on the practice of medicine, and re- \nmoved to Virginia. \n\nHe was a man of property, and of great exactness, recording in \nwhat articles his salary was paid ; thus, John Long paid by publi- \ncations (as a magistrate) of marriages and estrays, and by a riddle. \nHis hearers seem to have been uniformly commendable in regard \nto his support : several remembered him, in their dying testaments, \nby small bequests. Many of them removed over the river, and to \nVirginia and North Carolina. \n\nHis marriage-portions to his daughters were large, according to \nthe notions of that day, and show the thoughtfulness as well as the \nliberality of the parents. A few of his sermons are in my hands. \n\nOn his tombstone is engraved : \xe2\x80\x94 " Forty-four years pastor of this \nchurch." \n\n\n\nNOYES PARRIS \n\nWas the son of the Rev. Samuel Parris, of Salem village, Massa- \nchusetts, so mournfully conspicuous in giving life and vehemence to \nthe delusion and the judicial murders for witchcraft. He was born \nin 1692, and graduated at Harvard in 1721. He preached at \nCohanzy from 1724 to 1729, when, having fallen under serious \nimputations, he in a disorderly manner withdrew to New England. \nDickinson was directed to write to Boston and state the circum- \nstances. \n\n\n\nNATHANAEL HUBBELL \n\nGraduated at Yale in 1723, and became the pastor of "West- \nfield and Hanover, New Jersey, in 1727, \xe2\x80\x94 the latter including the \npresent congregations of Morristown, Chatham, and Parsippany. \nThe Westfield* congregation gave him, as " a settlement" on his \naccepting their call, one hundred acres of their parsonage-lands in \nfee-simple. "A settlement" in land or money was the uniform \n\n\n\n* Rev. Jas. M. Huntting\'s Historical Discourse at Westfield. It would appear that \nHanover did the same. His house having been burned, Mr. Budd made a new deed. \n\xe2\x80\x94 Rev. Jos. F. Tuttle, Rockaway, New Jersey. \n\n\n\nGILBERT TEXXEXT. 387 \n\nNew England custom, and was frequent in Pennsylvania, it being \nunderstood that the minister was to spend hia days in their service. \nAt Westfield, all who chose bound themselves by a covenant to be \n1 according to their property, to make up whatever was de- \nficient in the pastor\'s salary. \n\nThe first time Hubbcll met with the synod, he put in a protest \nwith Webb and other-, and seems for years to have relinquished all \n\xe2\x80\xa2Onneetion with it. In 17o2, his name appears again on the Re- \ncur 1-. hut generally as an absentee. In 1730, he gave up the \ncharge of Hanover. \n\nJ I.- was present as a correspondent at the meeting of the com- \nmission in Hemphill\'s case; and, in one of the pamphlets in defence \nof that unworthy man, it is said that Ilubbell avowed that "any \nmethod of promoting a good cause was innocent and lawful." \n\nHe prosecuted a claim for arrears, which led to his dismission in \n17-1"\'. ju-t before his death. \n\n\n\nGILBERT TENNENT, \n\nThe oldest son of Tennent, of Neshaminy, was born in the county \nArmagh,* Feb. ."i, 17<)-\'5, before Ins father entered into orders. \n\nHe was converted, through the exertions of his father, at the age \nof fourteen, while crossing the Atlantic. He was educated by him, \nand was licensed by Philadelphia Presbytery in May, 1725. He \ned in tin- i\'all the degree of A.M. from Yale. The honorary \nof Master of Arts was conferred by that institution for the \n\xe2\x80\xa2 iic in 1774, and he was tin- third person on whom it was be- \nstowed, lb\' W8jS \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2allnl, |),-c. l^\'.l, fco N e\\\\ca-1 ]o, and, after remain- \nns time, abruptly left. The congregation and the Presbytery \nof Newcastle complained of his departure; and a Letter was pro- \nduced, declaring qui acceptance of the call. The Bynod concluded \n\nthat his conduct was tOO hasty and unadvised; and the moderator \n\nreproved him, and exhorted him to use more deliberation and cau- \ntion in future. The rebuke was, Bharp, and he took it meeily.f \n\nlie was ordained a1 New Brunswick, by Philadelphia Presbytery, \nin the fall of L726. lie would hare been called Boon after 1 to Nor- \nwalk,had not the Fairfield Association interposed their judgment that \nhe ought not to be taken from -\xe2\x96\xa0, destitute b region as the Jerseys. \n\nWhen he went to Ne* Brunswick, he found there several excel- \nlent persons who had been converted under the ministry of the \n\n" \xc2\xa3\xc2\xab\xe2\x80\xa2 \n| \\is. Beooi i- of v \n\n\n\n388 GILBERT TEXXENT. \n\nRev. Theodoras Jacobus Frelinghuysen.* That good man sent him \na letter on the necessity of rightly dividing the word, which ex- \ncited in him a greater earnestness of labour. He was distressed at \nhis want of success : though greatly admired and very popular as a \npreacher, there was no instance of a saving change in any of his \nhearers during the first year and a half after his settlement. A \nsevere fit of sickness gave him affecting views of eternity, and he \nwas exceedingly grieved that he had done so little for God. On \nrecovering, he examined many professing Christians, and found \ntheir hope to rest on sand. With these he dealt faithfully. Some \nwere apparently converted ; but others turned to be his enemies. \nHe preached much on original sin, repentance, and the nature and \nthe necessity of conversion : a considerable number around were \nhopefully converted, and at sacramental seasons there were fre- \nquently signal displays of the divine presence and power. " New \nBrunswick did then look like a field the Lord has blessed. Alas ! \nnow (1744) the scene is altered." \n\nAt Staten Island, \xe2\x80\x94 one of the places where he statedly laboured, \xe2\x80\x94 \nthere was, in 1728 or \'29, a more general concern ; and pretty many \nwere converted. Once, while preaching from Amos vi. 1, the people, \ncareless before, were so affected, that they fell on their knees to cry \nfor mercy,and the general inquiry was, " What shall I do to be saved ?" \n\nIn 1738, he laid before the synod "sundry large letters" which \nhad passed between him and Cowell, of Trenton, on the subject of \nthe true motive that should influence our obedience to God : whether \nit should be wholly a desire for God\'s glory, or whether, with this \ndesire, there should be a desire for our own happiness : Is disinte- \nrested benevolence the essence of holiness ? The large committee \nto whom the papers were referred, heard both parties, and delayed \ntheir decision for a year. They presented a wise, happy statement \nof the true doctrine ; but it did not satisfy Tennent. He again in- \ntroduced the business in 1740 ; but the synod, by a large majority, \nrefused to consider it. This he represented in his paper, which he \nread a few days after, on the deplorable state of the ministry, as a \nslighting and shuffling the late debate about the glory of God, and \nas sanctioning the doctrine that there is no difference between \nseeking the glory of God and our own happiness, and that self- \nlove is the foundation of all obedience. \n\nAt this time, he corresponded with Ralph and Ebenezer Erskine ; \nand Whitefield, in giving them his advice, enforces it by saying, \n" Our dear brother and fellow-labourer, Mr. G. Tennent, thinks \nthe same, and said he would write to you about it." \n\nOn hearing Tennent preach, Whitefield said, "Never before \nheard I such a searching sermon. He went to the bottom indeed, \nand did not daub with untempered mortar. He convinced me more \n\n* His Letter in the Christian History. \n\n\n\nGILBERT TBSFNBNT. 389 \n\nand more that we can preach the gospel no further than we have \n\nexperienced the power of it in our hearts. I found what a babe \n\narid novice I was in the things of God. He is a son of thunder, \n\npreaching must either convert or enrage hypocrites." \n\nWhitefield preached, Nov. 20, "about noon, for near two hours, \nin worthy Mr. Tennent\'s meeting-house, to a large assembly ga- \nthered from all parts ; and amongst them, as he told me, there was \na gr^at body of solid Christians; and again at three and seven. \n1 were brought under strong convictions, and our Lord\'s \ndisciples were ready bo leap for joy." Tennent sent him word, \nDec. 1, 1739: \xe2\x80\x94 " Since yen was here, I have been among my people, \ndealing with them plainly about their souls\' state, examining them as \nto their experience, telling natural people the danger of their state, \nexhorting them that were totally secure to seek convictions and \nthose that wen.- convinced to seek Jesus. I reproved pious people \nf.r their faults. There are hopeful appearances among pretty \nmany in the place I belong to." In April, it was said two had \nMtvingly converted in November. \n\nWhitefield wrote to him from Williamsburg, Virginia, Dec. 1">, \nX739, " I5e Dot angry because you have not heard from me. In* \n. 1 love and honour you in the bowels of Jesus Christ. You \nare seldom out of my thoughts. J trust the work goes on glo- \nriously in your parts: the hand of the Lord brought wondrous \n\nthings to pass before we left Pennsylvania Last night I \n\nread the affecting account of your brother John. Let me die the \ndeath of that righteous man. Oh, my dear friend, my brother, en- \ntreat the Lord that I may grow in grace and pick up the fragments \nof my time that nothing may be lost. Teach me, oh, teach me \nthe way of <!<h1 more perfectly. Rebuke, reprove, exhort me with \nall Long-suffering and doctrine: I feel I am but a babe in Christ. \n1 only wish 1 was more worthy to Subscribe myself your affection- \nate brother and servant in ( Ihrist." \n\nFrom New Brunswick, April 28, 1740, he writes, "God has now \nbrought me lier<-, where 1 am blessed with the conversation of Mr. \nTennent. [nd 1, be is a good soldier of Jesus; and God is pleased \n\nin \xe2\x96\xa0 wonderful manner tO own him and his brctlm-n. The C \n\ngations where they have preached have I n surprisingly convicted \n\nand melted down. They are unwearied in doing good, and ;j>< out \ninto tin- highways and hedges to oompel poor ainnere t i come in." \n\nTo Mr. Habersham be wrote from Savannah, June 26, 1740, \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2I like the Messrs. Tennent for preaching in this manner. They \nwound deep before they beal ; they know there is no promise made \nbut to him that believeth, and therefore they are careful nol to \ncomfort overmuch those that are convicted. 1 fear I have been \nincautious in this respect, and have often given comfort too Boon.*\' \n\nTo Mr. B , in Philadelphia, be wrote from Charleston, July 11, \n\n1740, "Koep ol ur friend, keep close to the dear Mr. \n\n\n\n390 GILBERT TENNENT. \n\nTennents. Under God, they will build up your soul on your most holy \nfaith. It gladdens my heart to hear of their success in the Lord." \nWhitefield went to New Brunswick, Nov. 6, and Tennent, of \nFreehold, met him, besides other ministers. It was settled that \nGilbert should go to Boston, though he pleaded inability for so \ngreat a work. His first wife had lately died; and he was so much \nsupported that he was able to preach her funeral sermon while she \nlay before him in the coffin. \n\nWhitefield wrote to Governor Belcher, at Boston, from Philadel- \nphia, Nov. 9, " Great things has the great Immanuel done for me and \nfor this people by the way. The word has been attended with \nmuch power. Surely our Lord intends to set America in a flame. \nThis week, Mr. Tennent proposes to set out for Boston; to blow up \nthe divine flame lately kindled there. I recommend him to your \nexcellency as a solid, judicious, excellent preacher. He will be \nready to preach daily." \n\nTennent took Long Island in his way ; and his labours were \ngreatly blessed. At Newport, there was a considerable concern. \nHe preached at Westerly, Rhode Island, from Matt. xi. 28, in going, \nand, returning, from Gen. iii. 9 ; rousing up the people, and filling \nBorne with great wrath. He waked up the conscience. \n\nHe arrived at Boston, Dec. 13. His first sermon was on " The \nRighteousness of the Scribes," and was speedily printed. It was a \nperiod of protracted and unexampled cold ; Long Island Sound \nwas frozen across. The Rev. Dr. Cutler, Church missionary at \nBoston, laments to the Venerable Society that " Gilbert Tennent* \nafflicted us more than the most intense cold and snow. Though \nvulgar, crude, and boisterous, yet tender and delicate persons were \nnot deterred from hearing him at every opportunity. The ill \neffects of Whitefield\'s visit might have worn off, if his followers \ncould have been preserved from writing; but they carried on his \ndesign with too great success." Dr. Cutler said to Dr. Zachary \nGrey, (Nicholls\'s Lit. Anecdotes,) "Whitefield has plagued us with \na vengeance, especially his friends and followers. Our presses are \nforever teeming with books. . . . While he was here, the town was \nas if it were in a siege ; the streets were crowded with coaches \nand chaises. He lashed and anathematized the Church of Eng- \nland. After him came one Tennent, a minister, impudent and \nsaucy, and told them they were damned. This charmed them ; and, \nin the dreadfullest winter I ever saw, people wallowed in the snow \nday and night, for the benefit of his beastly brayings. Many \nended their days under these fatigues. Both W. and T. carried more \nmoney out of these parts than the poor could be thankful for." He \npreached for nearly two months. The assemblies had been full from \nthe time Whitefield preached ; but under Tennent, the concern be- \n\n* Hawkins. \xe2\x80\x94 Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nGILBERT XBNHIBT. 391 \n\ncame more general and powerful. From the deep and terrible con- \nvictions he had passed through, he had such a lively sense of the \ndivine majesty, holiness, and justice, that the very terrors of God \nseemed to rise in his mind afresh when he brandished them in the \n:\' unreconciled sinners. Some of the most stubborn sinners \nwere made to fall down at the feet of Jesus in lowly submission. \nThe Rev. Thomas Prince says that v in private he was seen to be of \nconsiderable parts and learning, \xe2\x80\x94 free, gentle, and condescending: \nbe bad as thorough an acquaintance with experimental religion as \nany person I ever conversed with ; his preaching was as searching \nand rousing as any I ever heard. He aimed directly at the heart \nand conscience, to lay open numerous delusions and show the many \nsecret, hypocritical shifts in religion, and to drive out of every de- \nceitful refuge." \n\nHis preaching produced no crying out or falling down : he did \nnot so much preach the terrors of the law. as search man\'s delusive \nhopes, show their utter impotence and impending danger. He \nleft Boston, March 2, 1741, and preached his farewell from Acts xi. \n\xe2\x80\xa2J.\'-\\. Be was exceeding strict in cautioning sgain8t running into \ntorch. Yet, the opposers say, the congregations, while he \nted, expressed their religious joy by B hearty laugh, and that \nTennent laughed over those who were under conviction. \n\n11-- preached eight sermons at Plymouth, in March, with good re- \nsult-, on the -in and apostasy of mankind in Adam; on the blind- \nnese of the natural man in the things of God; on the utter inability \nof the fallen creature to relieve itself; and on justification through \nthe imputed righteousness of Christ. \n\nIn Maine, he preached -even sermons at Piseataqua, and three at \nEasl fork, going from thence to Hampton, N. II., and Greenland: \n\xe2\x96\xa0 I\' it-ui\'. uih, six or seven times, his voice drowned by the cries \nof the people in distress. In Massachuse\'tts, be preached throe \nsermone at Bridgewater, one from Matt. xi. J*, at Taunton, which \noed only a few, and was deep and lasting in only two in- \n11 \xc2\xbbrd, the Revi Peter Thatcher, then under greai de- \npression, came from Middleborougb to bear him, with sensible pre- \njudice, hut bad not heard three sentences of his prayer before he \nt\' tuad him to be a man of ( tocL " 1 desire to bless I Kwa for that ser- \nmon. 1 never san more of the proaonce and power bf God in \nprayer and preaching, and never fell more of the power of God ac- \ncompanying the word on my own heart. Every word made its own \n\n1 felt the weight of it. This revived in me the ministry \n1 under in my youth." At hliddleborongh, be preached from \n\nRom, vii. \'.\'. and .-aid he was mur BO -hut up but ODCO before in \n\nIn-* life. No one, bowever, perceived it. There was, however, no \neffeol a1 the time; bni the people were from that time inclined to \nhear, and half a dozen were awakened. At Lyme, the sermon, from \nEzek. xxxviii. \'.\xc2\xbb, was very dull. Parsons was afraid several times \n\n\n\n392 GILBERT TENNENT. \n\nhe would have nothing to say. One was convinced. Next day \nthe text was Luke xiii. 24 : the audience very attentive and deeply \naffected. There was much visible concern ; but the effects were far \nmore extensive than at the time appeared. At the East Parish of \nLyme, the two sermons were excellent, and were attended by a \ngreat, if not general, awakening. At Saybrook, he gave a plain, \nsearching sermon. At New Haven, he preached seventeen sermons. \nSeveral were in the college hall. The concern was general in the \ncollege and in the town. Among the pious students were Brain- \nerd, Bull, and David Youngs. They visited every room and con- \nversed with every student. Dr. Sproat, of Philadelphia, and Dr. \nHopkins, of Newport, were brought to the Saviour. Hopkins was \nabout twenty, \xe2\x80\x94 had lately heard Whitefield : he thought Tennent \nthe greatest and best man and the best preacher he ever saw or \nheard. "His words were to me like apples of gold in pictures \nof silver. I thought, when I should leave college, I would go and \nlive with him, wherever I could find him." A large number of \nthree upper classes entered the ministry : John Grant, Thomas \nLewis, Caleb Smith, Job Prudden, Aaron Richards, and Thomas \nArthur became pastors in our church. Tennent regretted, in \n1744, having kept no journal of this tour, \xe2\x80\x94 the brokenness of \nhis memory preventing his drawing up a full account of it.* \n\nIt being assumed that he had gone into New England on the \nsupposition of the unregeneracy and uselessness of the ministers, \nhe said that the reason of his undertaking the tour was to promote \nhis "progress in the Christian course, by that continual train of \nlabours and hardships I foresaw I should be engaged in and ex- \nposed to." He said it was admitted on all hands there was a \nlamentable decline in that region : but, if there were not, " do not \ngeneral rules admit of exceptions? In extraordinary times, when \nthe Spirit of God is poured out, may not extraordinary methods be \npursued without censure ?" \n\nHe reached home just before the division of the synod, and preached \nin Philadelphia, May 31, 1741, five times, and baptized eight adults. \nThe next day the Protest was introduced. He published at once \n"xVn Examination and Refutation of the Protest." He soon \nlamented the rupture and the sad aspect of the churches through- \nout the colonies, and yet suffered a new edition of the Nottingham \nSermon to appear. The rise of the Moravians troubled him \ngreatly ; and he preached against them at New York, and printed \nthe sermons on Rev. iii. 3 ; and Colman prefixed a preface. To \nthis, "Philalethes" replied, contrasting Gilbert with Tennent, and \n\n* Gillies. He preached frequently three times a day. Thirty of the students \nfollowed him on foot to Milford, and for this were fined by the rector. The unscru- \npulous author of the Account of the State of Religion in New England since Mr. \nWhitefield\'s Visit says, " The college in Connecticut is nearly broke up." Tenuent\'d \nlabours at Harvard College were blessed. \n\n\n\nGILBERT TENNENT. 893 \n\nplacing in opposite columns his self-contradictions, accusing hira \nof raising a hue and cry after Pharisees, and countenancing such \n\nunlearned exhorters as D 1 R s, S 1 K-h-r, and \n\nL-y-r P e. He without delay published, " The Examiner Exa- \nmined; or, Gilbert Tennent harmonious." \n\nIn 1744, he removed to Philadelphia and took charge of the \nSecond congregation : his feet were blistered in traversing the \nstreets and visiting such numbers of distressed souls. He called \non Franklin to point out suitable persons from whom to solicit aid \nin erecting a house of worship. The philosopher told " the enthu- \nsiast" to eall on everybody: he did so, and built the church. He \nceased his former method of uttering his discourses, and read them. \nHe lamented his "extravagancy in discarding a wig and wearing \nhis hair loose and unpowdercd, with a large greatcoat fastened \nwith a leathern belt for his outer garment." His ministry in Phila- \ndelphia was in the main unattended with encouraging success. \nAndrews s;iid to Samuel Mather, April 17, 1745, u We are pretty \nqniel a1 present. Tennent lets me alone, and is generally mode- \n1 lit many of his followers grow weary of him, and wish for \nWhitefield\'a return." Tennent now assumed that persons of \nmoral life, possessed of a knowledge of the principles of the Chris- \ntian faith, should be admitted to the communion, and argued stre- \nnuously against his own former practice. \n\nIn 174!\', he preached and printed his " Irenicum, a Plea for the \nPeace of Jerusalem,\'* to effect a union between the synods of New \nYork and Philadelphia. He did full justice to the brethren he had \neo bitterly assailed, and especially holds up Thomson \xe2\x80\x94 once the \nobject of his unsparing invective \xe2\x80\x94 as a worthy representative of the \nexcellent and estimable principles of his Old-Side associates. He \nfreely justifies them from the charge of being opposers of the work \n\nof < rod Or heart-enemiefl to vital godliness, \xe2\x80\x94 doing it as cordially as \nif lie bad not I.e. \xe2\x80\xa2]! foremost and loudest -in creating these unfavour- \nable impressions of them. \n\nDavenport wrote to Bellamy, May 29, 17~>:\'>. "Blessed be the \n\ngreat and \'i 1 ( J..-1 for a remarkable reviving and quickening \n\ngiven lately, about the beginning of Maroh, to Mr. William Tennent, \n\nand, about a fortnight after, to Mr. ( J. Tennent, before hifl wife\'s \ndeath and since." \n\nII - - od wife, Cornelia Depeyster, widow of Matthew Clark- \nson, made \xe2\x96\xa0 hasty Bight, Maroh L9, 17.",:5, aged fifty-seven; and \nearly in May he buried bis mother. \n\nil family being taken from ban, he oonsented.to go to Great \nBritain, in conjunction with Davies, to solicit aid for the college. \nThe expectation of M accomplished a companion in the embassy \n\xe2\x80\xa2uragement te Davies to undertake the arduous task. \n\nWhitelirld write, in June, lT-el, \xc2\xab 1 am glad Mr. TeiimiiL is \n\n\n\n89-4 GILBERT TENNENT. \n\ncoming over with Mr. Davies. If they come with their old fire, I \ntrust they will be enabled to do wonders." He sailed Nov. 17, and \nreached London on Christmas day. \n\nDavies was " deeply sensible of the kindness of Heaven in ordering \nhis father and friend to be his companion, not only for the right \nmanagement of the undertaking, but for his social comfort." \n\nTennent was cheerful and courageous on the voyage, and preached \nfrom John iii. 5 of a Sabbath evening. The sermon was judi- \ncious, plain, pungent, searching, and well adapted to do good. Hav- \ning no opportunity to address the people at another time, he said, \n" Where there is no good to be done, the door is not opened." \n\nThe next evening after their arrival was spent with Whitefield. \nTennent\'s heart was all on fire ; and, after having gone to bed, he \nsuggested to Davies that they should watch and pray : they rose \nand prayed together till three in the morning. \n\n" Tuesday, Jan. 22. \xe2\x80\x94 Observing at Mr. Chandler\'s that our col- \nlege would be a happy expedient to unite the German Calvin ists \nwith the English Presbyterians, Mr. Smith, afterwards Provost of \nthe University of Philadelphia, replied that a union would not be \ndesirable.\' Tennent immediately answered, \' Union in a good thing \nis always desirable.\' Mr. Chandler said, \'I have seen a very ex- \ntraordinary sermon against union,\' and reached him his Notting- \nham Sermon. Chandler had also read the examination of Tennent\'s \nanswer to the Protest. All that we could say had no effect. He told \nus he would do nothing for us. The next day we waited on him, \nand Tennent made honest, humble concessions : \xe2\x80\x94 that the sermon \nwas written in the heat of his spirit, when he apprehended a re- \nmarkable work of God was opposed by a set of ministers ; that \nsome of the sentiments were not agreeable to his present opinions ; \nthat he had painted sundry things in too strong colours. lie plead \nthat it was now thirteen years, and he had used all his influence to \npromote union between the synods. He produced his \' Irenicum,\' \nand the minutes of the synod, to show the state of the debate. He \nurged that, if the sermon was faulty, it was the fault of one man, \nand should not be charged on the whole body." Davies exerted \nall his powers of pathetic address ; and, in the end, Chandler gave \nthem his name and co-operation. \n\nThe sermon had been officiously dispersed through London from \nhand to hand, and Tennent was sadly discouraged ; and his success \nin obtaining funds amazed him and delighted him, as a gracious \n"regarding of the cry of the destitute." \n\nHaving, at Edinburgh, succeeded in obtaining from the Assembly \nan order for a national collection, Tennent went to Glasgow and \nto Ireland. He attended the General Synod ; and they agreed to \nmake a collection through all their bounds. The Presbytery of \nAntrim, "the New Light," Non-subscribers, fast sinking into Arian- \n\n\n\nGILBERT TEXXEXT. 395 \n\nism, did the same. He was advised to make private collections in \nDublin. He returned to London early in October, having received, \nin Ireland, above five hundred pounds. He received three hundred \nand sixty pounds for the education of pious youth for the ministry. \nHe sailed November 13, and reached home safely. \n\nBurr* wrote to Erskine, in May, 1T.J5, that the labours of Ten- \nnent had been blessed in Philadelphia ; in June, " he was more \nthan ordinarily engaged," and there was much to encourage him. \n\nHe joined with Alison, and the Presbyterians generally, in op- \n- the throwing oft\' of the Proprietary government. \n\nIn 1762, he began to need an assistant ; and, the congregation \nbeing regularly summoned, he presided, and, by a considerable ma- \njority, a eall was made out for Duffield, of Carlisle; yet he, with the \n\xe2\x80\xa2 s of the building, objected to the presbytery\'s considering the \ncall, until the question between the trustees and the congregation \nhad been submitted to arbitration. The presbytery decided that \nth<- eall was in order, and gave the commissioners leave to prose- \ncute it. Donegal Presbytery declined to place it in Duflield\'s \nhand-. The Rev. John Murray, from Ireland, was then called \nand ordained; but the synod would not acknowledge him, and he \n>n cast off. \n\n]\\>- died January 23, 17G4. President Finley preached at his \nfuneral. \n\nlb- made his will October 20, 1703, giving three hundred pounds \nand bis library to his son Gilbert, and directing that he should be \nput to learning, in the hope that God would prepare him for the \nministry. He provides also for his daughters Elizabeth and Cor- \nnelia, lb- oonstitated his wife,f his brother William, and the wcav \nshipful .John Lyal, of New Brunswick, the guardians of his children* \nthi-y being very young. Hi- sou was lost at sea. One daughter \nmarried Dr. William Smith, of Philadelphia; the other died young. \n\nA- in- drew near hi- end. every Bymptom of dissolution filled \nhim with comfort. His disposition, naturally calm, was sweetened \nby piety. \n\nTennenl was taller than most men, and every way proportion* \nable; grave and renewable; affable, condescending, and oommuni- \n\nHe was endeared by his openness and undisguised ho- \n\neminenl for public spirit and great fortitude ; bis mind was \n\nenriched by much reading, and his heart was laden with a rich ex- \n\nf>erience of divine grace. A- a preacher, he was equalled by few; \nii- reasoning ag, his Language forcible and often sublime; \n\nhi- manner, warm and earnest. Gdosl pungent were bis addressefl \nto the conscience. With admirable dexterity be exposed the falsa \n\nhop,- of the hypocrite, and searched the corrupt heart to the bot- \ntom, lie said of .-..mi. of his earlie-t sermons, that he 1 > \n\n* (iillica\'s Collections, Bonar\'a e\xc2\xabliti..n. f M** *\xe2\x96\xa0"\xe2\x80\xa2\'\'> Bp\xc2\xbbffard, wi\'low. \n\n\n\n396 GILBERT TENNENT. \n\nthem with tears of the Lord Jesus. A lady asked him, at the close \nof his life, concerning his mode of preaching while in New Eng- \nland, during the Revival. He replied, he hardly knew what he \npreached ; he had no time to study. The many years he had spent \nin diligent preparation, and his prevailing absorption in divine \nthings, nobly qualified him to preach without effort. The drop- \npings of his lips were as choice silver. \n\nHe was a mark for many archers. They emptied their quivers \non him ; he was sore wounded by their calumnies ; but he " shook \noff the venomous beasts," and lived, serving Christ, approved of \nGod and acceptable to men. \n\nThe publications of Tennent, like "the fourth part of the dust \nof Jacob," are not to be numbered. The earliest seems to have \nbeen a sermon preached in New York in March, 1734 ; in 1735, \n"A Solemn Warning to a Secure World from the God of terrible \nmajesty ; or, the Presumptuous Sinner detected, his Pleas consi- \ndered, and his Doom displayed;" to which is added the life of his \nbrother, the Rev. Mr. John Tennent. " The Necessity of Religious \nViolence to Durable Happiness," preached at Perth Amboy, June \n29, 1735; two sermons on the nature and necessity of sincere \nsanctification, contrition, and an acceptable appreciation of a suf- \nfering Saviour, preached at New Brunswick in July and August, \n1736. A volume of his sacramental discourses was printed in \nBoston, in 1739; his sermon on an "Unconverted Ministry," in \n1740; on the "Priestly Office of Christ," preached at New Bruns- \nwick, in 1741 ; on the death of Captain Grant, in 1756; on "Pub- \nlic Fasting," in 1749; on "Religious Zeal," in 1750; on the "Duty \nof being Quiet," and at the opening of the synod, in 1759. He \nwas struck by lightning ; and the eagerness of some to proclaim it \nas a judgment led him to preach a sermon and print it, on the \n"Righteousness of the Scribes," in 1740; his Moravian sermons, \nin 1742; "The Examiner Examined," in 1743; on a thanksgiv- \ning, and on another public occasion, and a third on Admiral Mat- \nfchews\'s victory, in 1744; on the success of the expedition against \nLouisburg, in 1745. \n\nHe published, in 1746, a volume of twenty-three sermons on import- \nant subjects,* embracing "Man\'s Chief End," "The Divine Authority \nof the Scriptures," "The Divine Attributes," and "The Trinity." \n\nA French privateer came into Delaware Bay in December, 1747. \nThe citizens of Philadelphia met in the New Meeting-house, and \nformed an association for defence. Tennent preached to them \nfrom Exodus xv. 3 : \xe2\x80\x94 " The Lord is a man of war." A large num- \nber of copiesf lay unsold when the British held the city, and were \ntorn up for cartridges. The sermon being attacked, he published, \n\n* It is said to have had "a florid preface" affixed by six divines, \nf Day\'s Pennsylvania Historical Collections. \n\n\n\nARCHIBALD McCOOK \xe2\x80\x94 EBEXEZER PEMBEItTON. 897 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0within a month, "Defensive War consistent with Christianity,\'\' \n\xe2\x80\x94 thf animadversions on which lie repelled, in 1748, by a third \npamphlet: \xe2\x80\x94 "Defensive War Defended." \n\nIn 1748, he printed a Fast-sermon, and one preached before a \nsacramental solemnity; in 1749, on the "Display of Divine Jus- \ntice in the Propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ;" in 1756, one before \nCaptain Vanderspiegel\'e company; in 1758, several on important \n\nSubjects; and, amid his closing "lays, he issued an "Address on the \nLate Invasion of American Liberty by the Stamp Act." Most of \nire wry rare, being scattered in public libraries. They are \nall creditable to his abilities, were serviceable in their time, and, \nhaving served their generation, have passed into oblivion. \n\n\n\nARCHIBALD McCOOK \n\n\n\nW kS received as a Btndent from Ireland, by Newcastle Presby- \ntery, in March, 1 7li*i, and was licensed, September 13, having sub- \n\nBcnbed the Westminster Confession, tie was sent to Kent, in \nDelaware, embracing Dover, St. Jones, and Mother Hill, was called \n\nMarch 28, 1727, and ordained June 7. Houston proclaimed, and \nThomson preached. He died before September. \n\nThe desolate condition of the people in Kent attracted the atten- \ntion of the presbytery in 1714. Anderson was sent as a monthly \nsupply; Gelston went as a candidate, in 1715; and the next year \nthey had occasional Bnpplies in connection with Cedar Creek, in \nCross preached for them monthly for several years, \nand Hook, Thomas Evans, Steward, and HntchesoD visited them. \nThey had also Mr. Peter Finch, probably from England, for a sea- \nson. After BfoCook\'e death, they had Bnpplies for several years. \n\n\n\nEBENEZEB PEMBERTON, \n\nTm: son of one of the paston in Boston, was born in 1704, and \ngraduated at Harvard in [721. When licensed, he was employed \nBj ohaplain at < lastle William.* \n\n* Robbina\'a Sccoii\'l (IimivIi, ll..aton. \n\n\n\n398 EBENEZEE, PEMBERTON. \n\nOn the dismission of Anderson, lie was sent by the Boston minis- \nters to New York ; and, at the request of the congregation, made \nin April, they ordained him in his native town, August 9, 1727. \nColman preached the sermon,* from Mark ix. 38. He dwelt on the \nyoung man\'s leaving his beloved mother, and the city in which his \nfather had laboured ; on his being called to the head-city of a pro- \nvince ; and on the goodness of God in having formed and endowed \nhim for his service, and inclined and spirited him for this distant \nand important work. He reminded him of the hand of God in \nuniting the affections of the flock on him, and presents, as a motive \nto faithfulness, the piety of his parents and grandparents. He \nbids him prepare the beaten oil and the sweet incense for the sanc- \ntuary, contend earnestly against the common errors of the day, \nmaintain the doctrine, worship, and discipline established from the \nbeginning, assert expressly the Trinity, the true and real Godhead \nof Jesus, and justification by faith, insist on the observance of the \nLord\'s day, and urge the duty of family worship and family govern- \nment. He concludes, " The God of New England, before whom \nour fathers walked, go with you and give the blessing of Abraham \nto thee and to thy seed." \n\nThe New York congregation informed the synod that they were \nsatisfied with all Dr. Nicoll\'s proceedings, and desired them to ad- \nmit Pemberton as a member. This they declined to do, but not \nout of any disrespect to him. They appointed a committee (all \nNew Englanders) to settle the difference between the Presbytery \nof Long Island and the congregation. The difficulty was settled \nby causing Inglis, Blake, and Leddell to make over by deed all \ntheir right to the meeting-house to the ministers of Edinburgh, and \nto Dr. Nicoll, in trust for the congregation ; and by requiring Nicoll \nto release those three from all bonds and obligations they were \nunder to him on account of that property ; and by exacting of him \na bond of two thousand pounds to the ministers of Edinburgh, not \nto alienate his right therein, and, when reimbursed, to transfer all \nhis right to them. They required also a bond from him of two \nthousand pounds to Pierson, Cross, and Dickinson, obliging him- \nself to concur with persons appointed by Edinburgh Presbytery, in \nselling such pews as the majority of the congregation chose. The \ncongregation was allowed to choose five representatives or managers \nof the property. Pemberton, at his request, was received as a \nmember, by the committee, without hearing what the presbytery \nhad to offer. The synod refused to sanction his reception, and \nthen proceeded unanimously to receive him, leaving it to him and \nthe congregation to join what presbytery they pleased. \n\nIn 1735, he was moderator of the commission at the trial of \n\n* Massachusetts Historical Society\'s Library. \n\n\n\nEBENEZER PEMBERTON. 399 \n\nHemphill ; and his sermon on that occasion, from Luke vii. 35, \nbeing cavilled at, he published it. \n\n"Whitefield came to New York in Xovember, 1739, and was \ndenied the use of the court-house. The commissary, before being \nasked, refused him the church. Dominie Bocl declined to admit \nhim to the Dutch Church, and Whitefield would not officiate in \nthe meeting-house tendered by the Presbyterians. He attended \nTrinity Church in the morning, and preached in the afternoon in \nthe fields, and in the evening in the Presbyterian meeting-housed \nPemberton wrote to him, that he had left the town under a uni- \nversal concern; and that, to meet the wants of the people, he had \nappointed a lecture. Many were deeply affected; and some of \nthe loose and profligate were ashamed, and set on reformation. \n\nWhitefield* wrote to him, November 28, 1739, "I have been \nmuch concerned, Bince I Baw you, lest 1 behaved not with that \nhumility towards you which is due from a babe to a father in \nChrist; but you know how difficult it is to meet with success and \nnot lie puffed up with it; and, therefore, if any such thing was dis- \ncernible in my conduct, oh, pity me, and .pray to the Lord to heal \nmy pride. All that 1 can say is, that 1 desire to learn of Jesus \nto be meek and lowly in heart; but my corruptions are so strung, \nand my employ bo dangerous, that I am afraid." \n\nHe irrote from Upper Marlborough, December 8, "Till now I \n\nhave had neither time nor leisure to answer your kind letter. \n\nI be God, who has opened the heart of some of his people \n\nat New Y<>rk to receive the word! May he enable you to water): \n\nwhat his own right hand hath planted, and grant to your labours a \n\ndivine increase! Oh that the Lord would be pleased to send forth \nexperimental labourers into his harvest! fox 1 fear, among you^ as \n\nwell ;i~ in other phiees, there are many who are well versed in the \n\ndoctrines of grace, \xe2\x80\x94 having learned them at the university, \xe2\x80\x94 but \nnotwithstanding are heart-hypocrites and enemies to the power ef \ngodliness. 1 use this freedom, because 1 love simplicity. I con- \nfess 1 am but a child in grace as well as years. \n\nAt his second vi.-it, October, 1740, " the Holy Ghost came \ndown ;is .1 mighty rushing wind." \n\nDr. Nie.,11; wrote to Nicholas Bpence, agent of the Church of \nScotland, that \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 the effects were visible in the town, particularly \n\nin our congregation and in my Own family. Little children fol- \nlowed Mr. Pemberton to his lodgings, weeping, and anxiously oon- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Whit.-fi.-l.rH Lottorn. \n\nt Pei i lecture, on sooonnt of the increased desire for re- \n\nr I, in hi- published journal, sooth at tin-, si \n\xe2\x80\xa2\' 8ome pretend to water what <;\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2! has planted, by setting op leotaret : thej daub \nwith antempered mortar, and say there li no need of giving an sooonnt ol yon* \nconver \n\n| Billies*! Collections. \n\n\n\n400 EBENEZER PEMBERTON. \n\ncerned about the salvation of their souls. The good Lord hath \nstirred up Gilbert and William Tennent, Burr, Mills, (of Ripton,) \nLeonard, (of Goshen,) and Davenport, and spirited them, in his \nmercy, to water it; but Satan is using (May 20, 1741) his utmost \nendeavours to drive some of them to extremes." Pemberton was \nsent for to Connecticut College, and preached twice a day while \nabsent. He printed his sermon preached at Yale, April 19, \n1741, immediately after Tennent\'s visit. The subject was, "Know \nChrist," \n\nIn May, he attended the synod, with his elder, Nathaniel \nHazard;* and both signed the protest against the exclusion of \nthe New Brunswick party. Hazard sat in synod as an elder in \n1728. His place of business was at the store of Thomas Noble, \nat the " Old Slip:" he advertises "likely negroes, and a prime lot \nof old Cheshire cheese." \n\nPemberton preached, September 13, 1742, at Stratfield, Con- \nnecticut, on the duty of committing our souls to God, from \n2 Tim. i. 12. This discourse was printed, as also the funeral ser- \nmon of Dr. Nicoll, his valued friend, the church\'s benefactor. f \n\nA petition was addressed by the congregation, March 12, 1746, \nto the associated ministers of Boston, seeking aid to enlarge the \nchurch. A copy of this document is preserved in Dr. Stiles\'s \npapers, signed by J. Royal, William Smith, Jeremiah Owen, Wil- \nliam Eagles, Joseph Millikin, P. Jackson, and P. V. B. Livingston. \nThey state that, when the church was first built, there were not \nmore than seventy or eighty belonging to it ; that differences grew \nup among the original undertakers of the building, and that for \nfour years after Pemberton\'s settlement, the congregation con- \ntinued small : after a time, six of the eight windows were glazed, \nhaving before been boarded. In 1739, showers of heavenly influ- \nence descended, with an increase of gifts in the minister. The \ncongregation grew till the floor was filled and three galleries ; and \nnow they needed to repair, enlarge, and add a steeple and bell. \nBeing about to engage an assistant minister, they would be \nunable, if not aided, to bear the whole expense of refitting the \nhouse. \n\nThe years from 1740 to \'50 were years of rapid increase. \nMr. Gumming was settled as assistant minister. Whitefield was \nin New York eight days in the summer of 1747. " People flock \nrather more than ever : the Lord vouchsafes us solemn meet- \nings." \n\n* A native of Newtown, Long Island, and descendant from one of the early set- \ntlers there. His son, Nathaniel Hazard, was the friend and constant correspondent \nof Dr. Bellamy; his second son, Samuel, was a merchant in Philadelphia, and a \nstea Ifast and invaluable member of the Second Church. \n\nf Dr. Sprague\'s Collection at Princeton. \n\n\n\nEBENEZER PEMBERTON. 401 \n\nHe wrote to Pemberton from London, November 14, 1748, \nurging him to come thither and solicit funds for Nassau Hall. In \n1739, the Synod ef Philadelphia had endeavoured to prevail on \nhim to "go home to Europe" to obtain funds for erecting a semi- \nnary. The Synod of New York, in 1751, proposed it to him: he \nhad* no family at the time, and wad willing to go; and a com- \nmittee was Bent " immediately" to treat with his people. \n\nIt was hist settled purpose to have gone; but his people and \nMr. Gumming hindered it. His intention of going caused great \nunea-iness among his people, and created dissatisfaction towards \nhim in the mind-; of some. \n\nBy death and removal,! he was left without an elder or deacon. \n\nMr. Hazard removed to Philadelphia. On the death of Dr. Nicoll, \n\ntrustees were chosen to manage the affairs, by those who were \n\nbound for the payment of the church debts, and out of their own \n\nnumber. TroubL The trustees complained because Pem- \n\nberton insisted on having, by virtue of his office, a seat in their \n\nboard and a voice in the temporal affairs. The matters in contro- \n\npassed from the presbytery to the synod in 175:2. They \n\nI that the church property belonged to those, without dis- \n\n:i of name or nation, who conformed to the general plan of \n\nottish Church, as practised by the New York Synod: that \n\nistors had no right, by virtue of their office, to preside ovelc \n\nthe hoard of trustees, and that Cumming was imprudent m insist- \n\ni doing so; that the trustees had acted faithfully and much \n\nto the advantage of the church. They commended Cumming \n\nfor insisting that parents who present children for baptism shall \n\npray ifi their families, and condemned the plan of carrying round \n\na paper to gel subscriptions to introduce a new version of Psalms. \n\n. Finley, and Beatty, as a committee, after careful inquiry, \nnominated brae] Sorsefield and David Vannorne;\xc2\xa7 and they were \n\ni elders. Though empowered to recommend Watts\'s Psalms \nif they thought proper, the committee declined to do so, recom- \nmending to both parties moderation and forbearance. \n\nIn 17-">o, Pemberton was blamed by some of the people for \nneglecting family visiting, the Bession for introducing Watts of \n\ntheir own a< -d, and both ministers for neglecting to recommend \n\niteohism in baptism, and for praying when asiced at funerals. \n\nThis was a matter of intolerable offence to the Scot-nun: they \noould not endure "orations" at funerals. The oommitti \n\ni these charges, and lamented the injurious and contemptuous \n\nPemberton died in June, 1 7 \xe2\x96\xa0". I . having, in hex last \n\xe2\x96\xa0 of ntlli.-ti.iii and pain." \nt Jonathan I \n\ndon. \n\nxty-tlireo. \n\n\n\n402 EBENEZER PEMBERTON. \n\ntreatment on both sides. No one opposed Cumming\'s request to \nbe dismissed ; but a number of gentlemen strongly remonstrated \nagainst giving up Pemberton. The committee advised him to \nstay for a while, and make a further trial ; and, if at the end of a \nmonth he had no success in healing the divisions, he was to be \nreleased. \n\nVisiting Boston, he received a unanimous call to the New Brick \nChurch, and immediately wrote* to the synod, desiring that he \nmight be set at liberty. He was dismissed ; and the Presbytery \nof New York addressedf a letter of high commendation in his \nfavour to the ministers of Boston. He was installed, March 6, \n1754. He was greatly admired, and his preaching was largely \nattended. But, towards the approach of the Revolution, his \npeople, being zealous Whigs, were pained by the sight of Governor \nHutchinson in the front \xe2\x96\xa0 pew, and standing high in the esteem of \ntheir minister. They withdrew; but the favour of Hutchinson \npreserved the church edifice from the desecration and ruin which \nbefell the other places of worship. His salary was poorly paid, \nand he generously forgave the arrears. The Baptists, being with- \nout a house, were welcomed to an equal use of the church, \xe2\x80\x94 Dr. \nStillman preaching alternately with the pastor. A vain attempt \nhad been made to secure the Rev. William Tennent, Jr., after- \nwards of Charleston, as a colleague. The want was, in a mea- \nsure, supplied by the Rev. John Lathrop, of the New North \nChurch, whose congregation had been despoiled of their sanctuary \nby the British; and, on the death of Pemberton, the two societies \nunited. The pastoral relation of Pemberton was virtually dis- \nsolved in February, 1774 : from that date he received no salary. \nDuring the war he retired to Andover, and died, September 9, \n1779. \n\nDr. Chauncey told President Stiles that Pemberton would go \nto the death for Edwards\'s distinguishing tenet: \xe2\x80\x94 refusing church \nprivileges to the unregenerate. \n\nHe published his sermons at the ordination of Wilmot and \nBrainerd. In 1750, he printed a memoir| of his mother, as a \npreface to her " Meditations," and dedicated it to her third hus- \nband, \xe2\x80\x94 Henry Lloyd, Lord of the Manor of Queen\'s Village. Her \nsecond husband was John Campbell, of Boston, the publisher of \nthe first newspaper in that town. \n\nHe corresponded with Doddridge. One of his letters, dated \nDecember 16, 1743, \xc2\xa7 is preserved; it was in answer to an inquiry \n\n\n\n* MS. Records of the Trustees. \nf Dr. Robbins\'s History of Second Church, Boston, \nj Massachusetts Historical Society\'s Library. \n| Doddridge Correspondence, by Humphreys. \n\n\n\nDANIEL ELMER. 403 \n\nconcerning the injustice said to have been done to the Moravians \nby the Dissenters in America. He denies that these was any \nground for such a story. " With us, they are evidently en- \ndeavouring to draw off the affections of the people from the \nsoundest and most zealous ministers in these parts." His valued \nfriend. Mr. Noble, had already forsaken him. \n\nDaviee said, " Mr. Price is by far the best orator I have \nhoard in London. lie is an affable, affectionate gentleman, and \nis the likest man to Mr. 1\'einberton, both in conversation and in \nthe pulpit, that I have seen." The Hon. William Smith, father \nof the historian, said, "His deficiency in delivery was natural, \nbut surprisingly mended with great pains taken." \n\n\n\nDANIEL ELMER \n\n\n\nWas born in Fairfield, Connecticut, in 1G90, and graduated at \nYale in 171:5. lie married BOOB after, ami, "for some time, car- \nried \'-:, the work of the ministry" in Brook fi. Id. Massachusetts. \nGeneral Court allowed the town twenty pounds for three \nyears, to aid in sustaining the gospel. Elmer received only half \nof this encouragement, having left before 1715. Where he spent \n\nthe ii\'\\t twelve yean is aot known. In 1728, he Bottled at Fair- \nfield, in Cohanzy. At the declaring for the Confession, in 17^!>, \n- the only minister who professed himself unprepared to act. \nTune was granted him to consider; and the next year he in- \nformed the Bynod that be had declared before the presbytery his \ncordial adoption <>f the Confession and the Catechism. \n\nWhitefield risked West Jersey in the spring of 1740. Gilbert \nTennent was there in the Bummer; and, while Wlritefield was \npreaching (November 19) on Wednesday, the Holy Ghost came \ndown \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 lik<- a mighty rushing wind" at Cohanzy. Some thou- \nsands were present. The whole congregation was moved, ami two \ncried "in. \n\nAt the separation in 1711. Elmer and bis elder, Jonathan \nFithian, though present at the opening of the sessions, Beeme to \nhave gone home before the Protest was Introduced. He ad- \nhered to the Old Side. The congregation divided: even his own \nurionaHy went to Greenwich t-. hear Andrew Hunter. \n\nFinley spent much time in the vicinity; and New Brunswick \n\n* Tho Kot. Dr. Joseph J. Foot\'s B \n\n\n\n404 HUGH STEVENSON. \n\nPresbytery was constantly importuned for supplies, and their most \npromising candidates were sent to Cohanzy. \n\nAt Elmer\'s request, Cowell, McHenry, and Kinkaid were sent \nby the synod, in September, 1754, to endeavour to remove the \ndifficulties he complained of in his congregation ; but all proceed*- \nings were stayed by his death. He lies buried in the Old New \nEngland town-graveyard, with this inscription : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" In memory of the Rev. Daniel Elmer, late pastor of Christ\'s \nChurch in this place, who departed this life, January 14, 1755, \naged sixty-five years." \n\nDr. Alison wrote to President Stiles, July 20, 1755, informing \nhim that the two parts of Elmer\'s congregation had united on his \ndeath, and introducing Mr. Thomas Ogden, whom they had sent as \ntheir messenger to Connecticut to procure a minister. \n\nElmer married Margaret, daughter of Ebenezer Parsons, of \n"West Springfield, Massachusetts, and sister of the Rev. Jonathan \nParsons, of Newburyport ; she was the mother of three sons and \nfour daughters. His second wife was a Webster, the mother of \ntwo sons and three daughters. \n\nHis son Daniel was born in 1714, and was the father of Dr. \nJonathan and General Ebenezer Elmer. \n\n\n\nHUGH STEVENSON, \n\nA student of theology from Ireland, was received under the \nCare of Newcastle Presbytery, May 11, 1726, and was licensed, \nSeptember 13. He was sent from time to time to supply Lower \nOctorara (now Nottingham) and Newcastle and Lewestown. He \nwas called to Snow Hill, Maryland, March 26, 1728, Edmund \nCropper being the commissioner. He accepted the call in June ; \nAnderson, Thomson, and Houston were appointed to examine his \ndiscourse, and Thomson, Stewart, and McCook to proceed with \nhis trials. He was ordained before June, 1729. \n\nIn 1733, while preaching in Virginia, he received harsh and \ninjurious treatment from some gentlemen. A copy of his repre- \nsentation was sent by the synod to the Church of Scotland, and \naid was asked to maintain some itinerant ministers in Virginia and \nelsewhere ; and especially was that venerable body urged to use \nits influence with the Government to lay " a restraint upon some \ngentlemen in said neighbouring province as may discourage them \nfrom hampering our missionaries by illegal prosecutions." \n\n\n\nJOHN WILSON \xe2\x80\x94 ELEXEZER GOULD. 405 \n\nIn 1730 or \'40, he opened a grammar-school in Philadelphia, \nbeing a teacher of high reputation.* Just before the introduction \nof the Protest in 1741, lie was suspended by the synod, having \nomitted his ministry and fallen into some irregularities. He died \n\'44/ \n\n\n\nJOHN WILSON, \n\nA MINISTER from Ireland, " coming providentially into these \nparts," presented his credentials to the synod in 1729, and was \nunanimously received. He preached ;it Lower Octorara, and made \na strong party in his favour. The Presbytery of Newcastle received, \nJanuary 27, 1730, a letter from Armagh Presbytery concerning \nhim; and they resolved not to employ him. He was then preach- \ning at Newcastle with much acceptance, and a misunderstanding \nsprung up between the congregation and the presbytery in regard \nto him. Robert Gordon,! Judge of Newcastle County Court, and \nProbate of Wills, wrote to the Bynod to interpose in the breach; \nThis brought under review the presbytery\'s action, and the Bynod \njudged that they had not acted with any Beverity towards him, but \nrather the contrary, lie removed soon after to lloston, and died \nthere, January 6, L733, aged sixty-six. \n\nIt IB BUppOSed that the ReV. John Wilson was his son, who was \n\nbum in Ulster and ordained pastor of the Presbyterian church in \np, New Hampshire, in 1734, and who died there, February \n\n1. 177 1 , aged Beventy-six. \n\n\n\ni:i;i:.\\i:/ki: gould, \n\nA VATXYi of New England, graduated at Yale m L723, and \nbecame the minister of Greenwich, in Conanzy, about the time \nElmer settled in Fairfield, in 1727. \n\nIn 1786, Philadelphia Presbytery \xc2\xbbm- informed ( ,f difficult] \nragregation ; and, he being absenl at the time set for oonsider- \ncase, they heard the complainants on two points: \xe2\x80\x94 \n1. Whether it be lawful in any case to have evidence which is \nt\'> be used in an ecclesiastical case, bwotd before a magistrate! \n\n\n\ni r h \n\n;. September, L786, ":i maa nmofe \n\n\n\n406 ELEAZER WALES. \n\n2. "Whether a congregation or a private member may, after \nproper means used, complain of their minister to the presbytery ? \n\nAn affirmative answer was given, and the complainants went \nhome ; and, the day after, Gould came. The others were sent for \nto return, but in vain. It was all happily reconciled soon after, \nhaving grown out of Gould\'s saying that if he had money he \nwould go to England. No notice was taken of it at the time, and \nwhen he afterwards expressed his scruples freely about "the \nPresbyterian way" in some things, it was surmised that only \npoverty kept him from going to England and taking orders. \n\nFurther difficulties occurred in the summer of 1739, and he \nremoved without being dismissed, and was installed in 1740 at \nCutchogue, Suffolk county, Long Island. \n\nHe united in April, 1747, with Ebenezer White, of Bridge- \nhampton, Nathaniel Mather, of Acquebague, Ebenezer Prime, of \nHuntingdon, Sylvanus White, of Southampton, and Samuel Buell, \nof East Hampton, in forming Suffolk Presbytery. A member* of \nGould\'s church was present, and approved of the plan, though not \ndelegated by the brethren. The majority being rigid Congrega- \ntionalists, a crisis ensued: separations, divisions, and alienations \nleft him with no prospect of support or of usefulness. He and \nthey mutually agreed to part. \n\nNo intimation is given that the Great Revival was felt at \nCutchogue ; it doubtless was, and the separation was owing not to \nthe matter of church government, but to the peculiar views of \nthose who were carried away by Davenport in the outset of his \ncareer, and who abjured him when he renounced his errors. They \nformed separate churches throughout the east end of the island, \nwhich bear to this day the name of Strict Congregational churches ; \nthe strictness being in the maintenance of the purity and exact- \nness of discipline of the primitive era. \n\nHe removed to Middlefield, the southwest part of Middletown, \nthen newly organized into a society, and was installed, October 10, \n1747. He removed in 1756, and died in Granville, Massachusetts, \nin 1778. \n\n\n\nELEAZER WALES \n\n\n\nIs not mentioned in the published genealogy of the Wales \nfamily, though undoubtedly sprung from it. \n\nNathaniel Wales, who settled at Dorchester, Massachusetts, in \n1636, was the father of Timothy, whose son Eleazer was born \n\n* Prime\'s History of Long Island. \n\n\n\nRICHARD TREAT. 40T \n\n"25th, Tenth month, 1657." He was probably either the father \nor grandfather of Eleazer Wale?, who graduated at Yale in 1727, \nand Bettled at AHentown, New Jersey, in 1730. \n\nCrosswicks, or CrcssweelcBung, was an early Quaker settlement. \nAn Episcopal church was proposed to be erected there in 1702. \nd probably refers fed it when, in his Latin letter to Mather, \nin 1721. he speaks of two congregations suddenly grown up twenty \nmiles from Freehold, and where formerly were only seven Presby- \nterian families. He began to preach there in May, 1720, and \nprepared the way for Walton- The Presbyterians had a meeting- \nMouse before 1722. In 17-\')<\xc2\xbb, the synod considered a supplication \nfrom Grosswicks, and directed Andrews to reply. Wales soon \nafter settled then\'; but be asked leave, September 19, 1734, of \nPhiladelphia Presbytery, to resign, on account of inadequate sup- \nport: his statement being confirmed by the representative of the \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0egation, Mr. Ingliss, he was dismissed. He was directed to \njoin with Andrews in writing t<> the Rector of Yale for a minister \nto visit the destitutions of Weel Jersey. He was called to Mill- \n\n. September 19, 1735, and joined East Jersey Presbytery, \nwithin the bounds of which it lay. \n\nHe was one of the first members of New Brunswick Presby- \ntery, and the only New ESnglander, besides Treat, who was ex- \ncluded by the Protest. He is mentioned incidentally, once or \n\n. in Whitefield\'s Journal, as having come to Am well and New \n\nBrunswick to meet him. His name is also seen in Brainerd\'s \n\ndiary, among the contributors to the support of his mission. \n\nai is entered as giving <\xc2\xa35 lis. \n\nMo notice appears of Kingston or Millstone among the con- \n\nitiona highly favoured during the Revival. \nWales died in\' 1740. \n\n\n\nRICHARD TREAT, \n\nBobs at Milford, Connecticut, September 2~>, 1708, was a de- \nBcendanl ox Dear relative of Governor Robert Treat, an early set- \ntler of that town. He graduated at Yale in 172."), and w.is or- \ni by Philadelphia Pre.-hytrry, :iud installed pastor of Abing- \n\nd\'.n, Pennsylvania, December BO, L78L David Evans preached \non the ocoa ion, ihowing that it was a wonder to see :i god!;.. \nBiderate man in the ministry. \n\nTreat, in I7;;: 1 , while bearing Whitefield preach, was convinced \nof his forma] Btate, DotwHhstanding he held and preached t! \n\ntrine- \n\n\n\n408 RICHARD TREAT. \n\nWhitefield* was at Abingdon, April 17, 1740, and says, " God \nhas lately shown mercy to him. He was deeply convinced, when I \nwas here last, that he had not experienced the saving power of the \ngospel. Soon after I went away, he attempted to preach, but \ncould not, and told his people how miserably he had deceived \nhimself and them. He desired them to pray for him, and has \never since continued to seek Jesus Christ, sorrowing. He is now \nunder deep convictions and a very humbling sense of sin. He \npreaches as usual, though he has not a full assurance of faith, \nbecause, he said, it was best to be found in the way of duty. I \nbelieve the Lord is preparing him for great services. I observed \na great presence of God in our assembly, and the word came with \na soul-convincing and comforting power to many." \n\nHe had before acted with the majority of the synod; but now, \nbecoming, in their judgment, " a ringleader in destroying learning \nand good order," he was excluded in 1741. With his neighbour \nTennent, of Neshaminy, he joined New Brunswick Presbytery. \nA division in the congregation ensued; and, when Philadelphia \nPresbytery met (March 19, 1742) at Abingdon, Treat demurred to \ntheir jurisdiction, and they referred the matter to synod. In \nMay, Benjamin Jones, Malachi Jones, Archibald McClean, Ben- \njamin Armitage, and others, asked the presbytery for advice ; and \nthey were directed to settle the matter as should be most for the \nglory of God. The next spring, the papers were laid before the \nsynod ; and, on their recommendation, the presbytery sent supplies \nto Abingdon as often as they could. \n\nWhitefield often preached in the graveyard to a great con- \ncourse from all the region round. Treat\'s labours were also \nlargely blessed. \n\nWhen the Presbyterians at Milford, Connecticut, asked New \nBrunswick Presbytery to ordain Jacob Johnson for their minister, \nthey declined, but sent Treat to heal the difference. He failed ; \nfor they of Milford, instead of succumbing to Congregational \ndespotism, made out a call for him, August 10, 1743. The pres- \nbytery advised him not to accept it, and sent them Sackett, of \nBedford, Lamb, of Baskingridge, and Youngs, of Southold. New \nHaven Associationf retaliated by closing their pulpits against all \nthe members of New Brunswick Presbytery. \n\nTreat published his sermon^ preached, in 1747, at the ordina- \ntion of Lawrence, in the Forks of Delaware, and on the death of \nPresident Finley. \n\nIn 1751, Abingdon Presbytery was formed, for the convenience of \nthe ministers of Brunswick Presbytery residing in Pennsylvania and \nWest Jersey. It was merged in Philadelphia Presbytery on the union. \n\n* Whitefield\'s Journal. f Tracy\'s Great Awakening. \n\n% Connecticut Historical Society. \n\n\n\nROBERT CATHCART. 409 \n\nHo died, November 20, 1778, surviving many years all who had \nbeen in our ministry before him, and being reverenced as a \npeace-maker and a man full of good works. He laboured to the \nclose of his days, having preached on "the "West Branch of the \nForks" (Allen township) shortly before his decease. \n\nThe Rev. Joseph Treat, colleague with Dr. Rodgers in the city \nof New York, was his sun. Another of his sons was settled there \nas a physician. \n\n\n\nROBERT CATHCART, \n\nA i.ickntiatk from Ireland, was received by Newcastle Tresby- \n\ntery, April 15, 1780, and was Bent to Bupply Middletown, Dela- \n\ncounty, Pennsylvania, and Brandywine, Kent, and Lewes, in \n\nDelaware. In December, he was called to Kent, but declined, \n\nand Bottled at Brandywine, and, probably, at Middletown. \n\nJn lTJ\'i, an address from some people in Birmingham, on \nBrandywine, was read in synod, and Mctiill was appointed to \npreach to them. The next year they were directed to apply to \n\nNewcastle Presbytery, and arc described as people on Brandywine, \n\nWhite (.\'lay, aiel the north side of Red Clay. Laing was the Bnp- \nply of White Clay and Brandywine in the spring and summer of \n.Hid tin\' 22d of August is noted by the presbytery for a re- \nmarkable freshet of White Clay Creek, as though it had risen in \nits might to wash away all remembrance of Larag\'s Sabbath-day \nbathing. In the fall, McGill was there; and then Oreag \nserved them for several yens, in L727, they called the Rev. \nk Vance, of Burt, [reland; and the presbytery sent the call \n\nto him in Ireland. In 17-\'.\', they had the services of .John Ten- \n\naent. A meeting-house being contemplated by the people of \nBrandywine and Middletown, the fears of White Clay Congrega- \ntion were aroused, and the intervention of the presbytery was in- \nfoked. Leave ^^ given them to build. \n\nIn 1740, Cathcaii began to preach in Wilmington. 1 The \nundertakers of the meeting-house, Captain Chambers ami Captain \nHutchinson, obtained a gift from the Bynod\'s fund of fifty pounds, \n\nand a loan of thirty pounds. \n\nI . ted th- Protest in 17 1 1 ; and, as Wl I \n\n* Thomea Chalklay, a Mead, in Beptember, 1786, being there, uys, "11 tea \n\'licit, I beliere, will be a floarunli \n\nif tho iuhubiuiit.i take euro to luc in the I \n\n\n\n410 WILLIAM ORR. \n\noften preached at "Wilmington and the vicinity, his congregation \ndivided, and the New-Side Church of Lower Brandywine was \nformed, \xe2\x80\x94 his own, in process of time, having taken the name of \nRed Clay. \n\nHe died in 1754. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM ORR \n\n\n\nWas received by Newcastle Presbytery, as a student from Ire- \nland, November 15, 1730, and was licensed: before 1732, they \nordained him pastor of Lower Octorara or Nottingham. \n\nThe Mouth of Octorara began to receive supplies in 1725, \nand asked for Stevenson in 1727: it soon after obtained one-third \nof Hutcheson\'s time. It is frequently styled Lower Octorara, \nand is named Nottingham for the first time in April, 1730. Un- \npleasant disputes seem to have grown out of the location of the \nmeeting-house, and still more from the desire of some to have \nJohn Wilson settled over them. There were some who "scru- \npled our way of adopting the Confession," being shocked at the \npossibility of having a minister admitted into our connection who \nhad a difficulty concerning an iota of it. \n\nDonegal Presbytery forbade its members, in 1732, to baptize or \npreach among the people living between Nottingham, Chestnut \nLevel, Donegal, and Swatara. \n\nNottingham informed the presbytery, in 1733, that they had \nagreed on the following persons for elders, and they were ap- \nproved : \xe2\x80\x94 Hugh Kirkpatrick, John Kirkpatrick, James Buchanan, \nJohn Luckie, John Moor, Hugh Fulton, David Patterson, John \nSmith, and John Mackadoo. \n\nJohn Kirkpatrick accused his minister (April 2, 1733) of preach- \ning false doctrine concerning election, \xe2\x80\x94 alleging that he had used \nagainst it the common Arminian flings. His explanations were \naccepted ; and a new complaint was made against him for having \nmarried the Rev. Mr. Campbell with a license, which seemed to \nacknowledge the jurisdiction of the Bishop of London. More \nserious complaints were made ; and Gillespie, Thomas Evans, and \nHouston were invited to sit as correspondents in considering them. \nTo this Orr objected ; but they proceeded, and acquitted him, \nthough they blamed his conduct during process as insulting, in- \ndocent, and reproachful. \n\nThe synod sent a committee to adjudicate on the spot an appeal \nfrom this sentence of acquittal. Gillespie, Hutcheson, Treat, \n\n\n\nWILLIAM BERTRAM. 411 \n\nThomas Evans, and Andrews met in November, 1734. They ob- \ntained from the presbytery an acknowledgment that they had \nerred in refusing to hear John Kirkpatrick\'s supplication and to \ngive him copies of certain papers. Though these refusals had \nbeen owing to want of time, and disturbance among the people, \nthey entered their acknowledgment on the records, and all of them \nfeigned it. Orr and his session made an acknowledgment of harsh- \nness to some and undue lenity to other offenders. The committee \nrestored Kirkpatrick and his adherents to church privileges, on \ntheir acknowledgment of rashness and imprudence in representing \ntheir minister\'s doctrine as false, and in abruptly and irregularly \nbreaking off from the session. \n\nThe presbytery in the following year declared that they could \nnot give Orr a certificate of good standing: he ceased to preach, \nand -aid he would not be at the trouble of carrying their certificate. \nHe then sued Paton and Steel, the representatives of the congre- \ngation, on the bond for his salary, and harassed them sorely. \nThe presbytery blamed his action as irregular, unaccountable, pro- \njfane, and disagreeable to tin- Christian character. Being dismissed \nfrom his charge, he deserted the bounds of the presbytery as a \nfugitive from discipline. He was ordained* by Gibson, Bishop of \nLondon, as a deacon, September 19, 1736, and was admitted to \npriests\' orders ton days after. He arrived in South Carolina, from \nEngland, in 1737, and took charge of St. Philip\'s and St. Paul\'s. \nIn March, 1743, he reported that the Indian tribe of Oushoes, once \nnumbering a thousand, were reduced to sixty-three; and that the \nnumber of his communicants in his church had increased from \neight to thirty-four. In 174b\', In- took charge of St. Helena parish, \nin Beaufort, and removed, in 175\'J, to St. John\'s, Colleton, lie died \n. in L755. \n\nII\'- was one of the eoclesiastica] court which, with Commissary \nGarden at its head, cited Whitefield in 1740, condemned him for \nCanonical irregularities, suspended and denounced him. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM BERTRAM \n\n\n\nr \xe2\x96\xa0 : ! i\' to the synod, in 1~:\'.l\'. mosi ample testimonials from \nthe Presbytery of Bangor, in [reIand,o\xc2\xa3 bis ordination, ministerial \nqualifications, and regular Christian conversation; and, having de- \nclared his full and free assent to the Confession and Catechism, \n\n* Dal< ; pal Churoh, South Carolina. \n\n\n\n412 WILLIAM BERTRAM. \n\nwas unanimously received, and joined to Donegal Presbytery. At \nthe same time, George Renick (Renwick) presented him an invita- \ntion to settle at Paxton and Derry, and at the first meeting of \nDonegal Presbytery he declared his acceptance of it. No regular \ncall was made ; but he was satisfied with the paper of subscriptions \nput into his hands. He was installed, November 15, 1732, at the \nmeeting-house on Swatara. The congregation then appointed re- \npresentatives : \xe2\x80\x94 "on this side, Thomas Foster, George Renick, Wil- \nliam Cunningham, and Thomas Mayes ; on the other side, Rowland \nChambers, Hugh Black, Robert Campbell, John Williams, William \nWilliams, James Quigley, William McCord, and John Sloan." \nThey executed to Bertram the right and title to the Indian town \nthey had purchased. He informed the presbytery that his wants. \nhad been tenderly regarded. \n\nRowland Chambers* appeared before Newcastle Presbytery in \nbehalf of the settlements towards Susquehanna, in September, 1722. \nJohn Harris, from Yorkshire, settled at the mouth of Paxton Creek \nin 1726; and soon after James, Robert, Joseph, and Benjamin \nChambers, from county Antrim, took up land at the mouth of \nFishing Creek. In 1729, Swatara had been allowed one-fifth of \nAnderson\'s time, and the next year Fishing Creek asked for sup- \nplies. Swatara called the Rev. John McKinstry, a minister from \nScotland; but he returned the call, and settled at Ellington, Con- \nnecticut. \n\nOn the settlement of Bertram, the congregation on Swatara took \nthe name of Derry, and the upper congregation on Fishing Creek \nwas styled Paxton. They gave the presbytery the list of the \nelders they had selected, and their choice was approved. \n\nBertram complained, in 1735, of "the intolerable burden" he \nwas under with the two congregations, and desired leave to confine \nhimself to one. Derry engaged to pay sixty pounds in hemp, corn, \nlinen yarn, and cloth, and he was released from the care of Pax- \nton, September 13, 1736. \n\nHe died May 3, 1746, aged seventy-two; and "his tombf may \nbe seen by leaving the main road, near Hummellstown, and tra- \nversing the cool, clear, spring creek to Dixon\'s Ford : there stands \nthe venerable Derry meeting-house on the banks of the Swatara." \n\nBertram\'s son was surveyor-general of Pennsylvania. \n\n* "1734, 3d of 10th month. Both of the proprietaries present. At the request \nof Rowland Chambers and Thomas Armstrong, one hundred acres each were granted \nto the congregations of Paxton and Derry, at a half-penny sterling yearly, for meet- \ning-houses." \xe2\x80\x94 Huston\'s Land Titles. \n\nf Mark Bancroft\'s Stories : in Atkinson\'s Casket. \n\n\n\nJOHN CROSS. 413 \n\n\n\nJOHN CROSS, \n\n\n\n~~ i led, by Dr. Brownlee, " a Scottish worthy," was received as a \nmember of synod in 1 7-iil. and settled at a place "called The Moun- \nack Of Newark." The remarkable revival in his congrega- \ntion there, in 1734 and \'35, is noticed in Edwards\'s ^Thoughts on \nRevivals." East Jersey Presbytery blamed him, in 1735, for not \nattending their meetings, and for moving from one congregation to \nanother without their consent. He was the minister of Basking- \nridge and Staten Island, and was one of the first members of New \nBrunswick Presbytery. He distinguished himself greatly by his \nseal and his success during the Great Revival. Whitefield was \njhed by meeting him and Gilbert Tennent on Staten Island, \nin 174<>, and by hearing from him of the wonderful things often \nBeen under his mini-try. \n\nII.- hail been absent from home, and had left Davenport to \npreach t<\xc2\xbb his people. "Whitefield went with him to Baskingridge, \nand found, on his arrival, Davenport with three thousand people \n\nassembled. Whitefield preached, standing in a wagon. Some cried \nd others wept. When this vehemence of feeling abated, \n\nI saw a little boy weeping as if his heart would break, and \n\nlifted him into the wagon. Whitefield was touched with the sight, \nand turned from his subject to dwell on the sovereignty of God, in \nmelting a child and having so many in security. A universal con- \noern immediately appeared: fresh persons dropped down, and the \ncry increased. At night Tennent preached in a barn on u Spi- \nlt\' -\xe2\x96\xa0 rtion;" Whitefield prayed and exhorted, and there was \nit commotion, \nnext day they went to New Brunswick, followed by athrong \nfrom distanl places. A deaf and dumb man from New \nGermantown lost no opportunity of being presenl on any of these \n\nii-; :itid to the end of life he amazed and delighted those \n\nwitnessed his delineations by looks and motions, of those \n\n. \n\n- told Whitefield, in 1789, of the wonderful things often \n\n, lii> assembly : at first, only eight or nine had been affected ; \n\nbut :i: . upwards of three hundred of* his congregation, \n\nwhich is not large, were effectually bronghl home i" Christ. He \n\nhad remarkable success on Staten [eland, in 1711. \n\nWhen Whitefield preaohedal Nottingham, the heavenly influence" \nided as the dew. Tennem followed; and, the meeting-house \n1 againsl Cross, he preached in the woods, amid an \ny. swooning, and overwhelming concern. \n\n\n\n414 BENJAMIN CAMPBELL. \n\nWhitefield wrote to Noble, of New York, September 22, 1742, \nwho had expressed his high admiration of Cross, " I do not won- \nder; he is a dear soul, and one that the Lord delights to honour." \nHe said of him also, "He is indeed one that I believe would re- \njoice to suffer for the Lord Jesus. Oh that I might be like- \nminded!" Tennent, on seeing these things in print, wrote to \nWhitefield, who replied, "I shall write to some friends about Mr. \nC.\'s principles. I thank you for your kind caution. My mistakes \noften humble me." \n\nThomson, of Chestnut Level, charges him with having required \nparents, on presenting their children for baptism, to own the \nSolemn League and Covenant of Scotland\'s Reformation. \n\nMore serious charges than this were laid against him, in April, \n1739, and, new complaints being made, he was called up by his \npresbytery and suspended, June 23,1742. Dickinson says, "His \ndreadful scandals came to light in the midst of the Revival, and his \nprevious high character for zeal and piety caused the enemies of \nGod to blaspheme and triumph." Dickinson regarded his princi- \nples as wholly Antinomian. A large body of people adhered to \nhim and welcomed his ministrations. In October, 1746, he asked \nto be restored ; but the presbytery refused, on the ground that they \nhad not sufficient evidence of his repentance. \n\nIn the time* of the great land-riots, he was accused, by the par- \nties who brought the ejectment suits, of being the counsellor of the \npeople who resisted the process, and of having, in connection with \nthe Rev. Daniel Taylor, \xe2\x80\x94 the Independent minister of Newark \nMountains, \xe2\x80\x94 encouraged them to liberate the prisoners, and to the \nlike deeds of violence. The actual settlers, it was said, pretended \na just title, having purchased of those who had obtained a tract fif- \nteen miles square, of the Indians, for a five-shilling bill and a bot- \ntle of rum. A New York paper, of December, 1747, suggests the \npublication of "Sermons to Violent Men," founded on Proverbs \nxxix. 7. \n\n\n\nBENJAMIN CAMPBELL \n\n\n\nA student of divinity from Ireland, was received by Newcastle \nPresbytery, November 5, 1729, and was licensed and ordained to a \ncharge in their bounds before September, 1733. He married be- \n\n* New York Papers. \n\n\n\nJOHN XUTMAN. 415 \n\nfore January, 1734 ; and his death "was reported to the synod in \nSeptember, 1735. \n\nMr. Legate, who came over with him, a fellow-student, is not \nmentioned after his being taken on trials by Newcastle Presby- \ntery. \n\n\n\nJOHN NUTMAN \n\n\n\nWas a native of Newark, New Jersey. His father (James* Nut- \nman) was from Scotland, and married a daughter of the Rev. John \nPrudden. Dr. Alden, in his "Epitaphs," says, "The old rule at \nYale was to rank the scholars on the roll according to the relative \nposition of their family." As Nutnian Btands at the head of the \ngraduates of 17i!7, we may (understand that he was of a family of \na iiished consideration. \n\nII was licensed by Philadelphia Presbytery, and ordained \npastor of Hanover, New Jersey, in 1730. Dr. Alden calls the \ncongregation Whippany: it included at first West Hanover and \nSouth Hanover. He appeared in synod, in 1733, to lay before \nthem the difficulties of his situation. A lot had been cast, with \nBacred solemnity, to determine the site of the meeting-house: the \npeople of West Hanover or Morristown, being dissatisfied with the \nlot, formed a separate congregation, and left Nutman with only a \nportion of his people and a proportionate diminution of support. \nThe synod blamed the resorting to the lot as unnecessary, and \ndirected the Presbytery of East Jersey to travail with the people \nto reunite, at least till they be better able to subsist apart; tailing \nin this, to grant him a dismission on his application. They dia \nnot succeed ; and West Hanover applied fco the synod, in 1734, for \n\nthe ordination of Mr. (\'loverly. The matter was left to Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery; and they met al Hanover, Augusl 8,1787, \xe2\x80\x94 \nmany delays bavins occurred,\xe2\x80\x94 and declined to ordain, though not \njudging the candidate unfit. The next year, the synod was in- \nvoked by Mr. Budd, a commissioner, to consider whether \\V.--t \nHanover was bound by the lot, which had been cast in the lap live \nbefore, t*> abide by a decision of a committee of Bast Jersey \nytery. The matter was ended by appointing a committee of \nministers to proceed to Hanover and bear both parties. \n\n\n\n* L>r. Stoorus\'a History of Pint Choroh, \' \n\n\n\n416 SAMUEL HEMPHILL. \n\nOn the 20th of July, 1738, Gilbert Tennent opened the com- \nmittee with a sermon on Ezek. xi. 19 : \xe2\x80\x94 " I will give them one \nheart." Andrews, Treat, and Cowell were there, with John Cross, \nGilbert Tennent, and his brother William. It appeared that, \nsince the lot was cast, West Hanover was one-half abler than \nbefore; and that Hanover was also much stronger, and, though \n" it was hard with them at present to support Mr. Nutman, yet \nthey were in growing circumstances, and able to support of them- \nselves. They had no mind to unite with the whole of the western \npart, nor on any of the former terms." The committee decided, \nthat it was now impracticable to comply with the engagements \nunder the lot, and that every good purpose would be much better \nanswered by there being two separate societies. All parties ex- \npressed their satisfaction with this decision. \n\nNutman resigned the charge in 1745, and engaged in teaching \nin Newark. He died, September 1, 1751, aged forty-eight. His \ndaughter was the first wife of Jonathan Sergeant, and the mother \nof the wife of the Rev. Dr. Ewing, of Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL HEMPHILL, \n\n\n\nWhile* a probationer in Ireland, preached to the vacant con- \ngregation of Burt, and gave offence by his doctrine to the Rev. \nPatrick Vance. When Hemphill\'s name was published in the \nsynod in the usual manner before ordination, Vance was present, \nbut made no objections ; but in private he spoke of him freely as \nerroneous in his sentiments. When Hemphill came to America, \nVance wrote to his brother-in-law, John Kilpatrick, (probably \nKirkpatrick, the elder at Nottingham,) intimating his opinion of \nthe man. Hemphill produced ample credentials to the synod \nfrom the Presbytery of Strabane ; and, having adopted the West- \nminster Confession and Catechisms as " the rule of his faith and \nthe guide of his practice," he was received as a member. He \npreached at New London with acceptance; but, Kirkpatrick hav- \ning showed Vance\'s letter to the ministers of Newcastle Presby- \ntery and to other persons, an investigation was made by that \nbody, and they declared themselves satisfied with his teachings. \n\n\n\n* Hemphill\'s Remarks on Minutes of the Commission: Old South Church \nLibrary. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL HEMPHILL. 417 \n\nAndrews* wrote to Colman from Philadelphia, June 14, 1735, \n" There seems to be now a more dreadful plot laid by Satan to \nroot Christianity out of the world than ever was known before, so \nthat all Christ\'s friends have reason to be awakened, and to do \nwhat they can to save the sinking ship. It has been, since Inst \nNovember, the most trying time with me that ever I met with. \nThere came from Ireland, at that time, one Mr. Hemphill, to \nsojourn in town for the winter, as was pretended, till he could fall \ninto business with some people in the country; though some think \nhe had other views at first, considering the infidel disposition of \ntoo many here. Some desiring that 1 should have assistance, \xe2\x80\x94 \nand some leading men not disaffected to that way of Deism, as \nthey should be, \xe2\x80\x94 that man was imposed on me and the congrega- \ntion. Most of the best of the people were soon so dissatisfied \nthat they would not come to meeting. Freethinkers, deists, and \nnothings, getting a scout of him, flocked to hear. I attended all \nwinter, but, making complaint, brought the ministers together, \nwho acted as is shown in the books I send you." \n\nHemphill said, Andrews invited him to preach once a day, and, \nbeing grieved at seeing multitudes come to hear him, went from \nhouse to house to prejudice the people against him. He called \nthe commission; and they met, April 17, l(Jo5.f \n\nPemberton was moderator: the members present were Creag- \nhead, Cross, Pierson, Anderson, Gillespie, and Thomson. The \nCorrespondents were Tennent, of Neshaminy, David Evans, Treat, \nBoyd, Hntcheson, Houston, Archibald, Jameson, Thomas Evans, \nCathcart, Hubbeli, and Gilbert Tennent. \n\n" Never was there! such a trial known in the American \nWorld. I was obliged, though with great regret, to article \nagainst him." \n\narticles were, in substance, these :\xc2\xa7 \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. The gospel is B revival, or new edition, of the law of nature, \nexcept two positive precepts, and the worship of God by a medi- \nator. Taught in \xe2\x96\xa0 sermon on Rom, viii. 8. \n\nJ. The Lord\'s nipper is a means of promoting a good life; but \nin it the believer has no communion with Christ. Sermon on \nGal. vi. 15. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 \'-. I [e deolaimed against salvation by the merits of Christ, as \nrepresenting God as .-tern and inexorable. He said Chrisl is \npreached up as n Ghana to fork up enthusiasm. Sermon on Acts \n\n.\\.\\iv. 1\'). \n\n\n\n* M88. of American Antiquarian Society. \n\nf Franklin wiati \xe2\x96\xa0 mod urtful, buidioni dialogue) and published It, many* \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0," ii irw dayi prei lowly, \nt Andrea I man. \n\nI .Minutes of the Oommiarfon: Old Bontb Church Library. \n\n27 \n\n\n\n418 SAMUEL HEMPHILL. \n\n4. Faith is a persuasion, founded on natural grounds. Mys- \nteries were only for those times in which the apostles lived. \nFaith and obedience are the same thing. Sermon on Mark \nxvi. 16. \n\n5. Cornelius was a heathen when the angel appeared to him. \nSermon on Acts x. 24. \n\n6. In preaching on Ps. xli. 4, \xe2\x80\x94 " Heal my soul," \xe2\x80\x94 he made no \nmention of original sin. He said, the passions and affections were \nright in themselves ; he did not include the blood of Christ among \nthe remedies of the soul, and advanced a peculiar notion concern- \ning hell. \n\n7. In preaching from Eph. ii. 8, he said, it referred to the hea- \nthen, and not to us ; and asked, Is not James as good as Paul ? \n\n8. In prayer, he prays for mankind, and not for the church, \nand thanks God that he has given us reason for a rule. \n\n" If I am mistaken," said Andrews to the commission, "I shall \nbe abundantly more ready to retract than to accuse." \n\nHemphill objected to Thomson and Gillespie, as having avowed \ntheir opposition to him ; but the objection was overruled. \n\nThough he had promised to produce his notes, yet he fell back, \nand put Andrews on proof of his articles. \n\nHemphill said he had promised to show Andrews his notes in \nprivate ; that he was not bound to furnish accusation against him- \nself ; and that it was contrary to the practice of the Church of \nScotland to require it of him. He adds, but "they had prejudged \nthe case already." \n\nTennent and his son, however, testified that he had told them \nhe would produce his notes to the commission. \n\nAndrews said, "I was put to a difficulty; for those that would \nhave been evidences did not attend, and I could not persuade them \nto it; and others that could, would not." \n\nHemphill says, "Andrews did produce two men; but their evi- \ndence was of no value." One of them, it is said, testified that he \nhad heard many of the things specified by Andrews, but he could \nnot repeat the exact words in which they were uttered, or name \nthe text of the sermon in which they occurred. \n\n" Thus the first week, from Thursday, p.m., was spent." \n\nOn Sabbath, Pemberton and Cross preached, and, Hemphill \nalleged, with the design of holding him up as a heretic to the \npeople. They, in self-defence, printed their sermons. \n\nOn Monday, he consented to bring his notes. "Then," said \nAndrews, "I left all to the ministers and meddled no more. As \nProvidence ordered, all my charges came out fair." \n\nThe notes were publicly read on Monday. Under the first \narticle, he admitted he had said, " This is no more than to live ac- \ncording to our nature, and have the government of ourselves in \n\n\n\nSAMUEL HEMPHILL. 419 \n\nour own hands. The gospel, as to its ultimate end and most \nessential parts, is implanted in our very nature and reason." \n\nThe commission unanimously felt themselves obliged to declare \nhis teachings unsound and dangerous, and suspended him. \n\nThey printed their minutes, and appointed persons to defend \nwhat was done, who published a vindication of the commission \nfrom Hemphill\'s remarks on their minutes. \n\n" Since then," said Andrews, in July, " there have been many \ndiscourses of doing this and that; and, though some are so angry \nas to stay away, yet most give their attendance. There is in the \npress an answer to the \'Abstract of the Minutes and a Vindication \nof his Sermons;\' what it will be, I know not. Upon the whole, I \nam weary of these things, though all carry fair ; and, though the \nbest of the people dread the thing, I intend to get away and \nleave them." \n\nFranklin was a pcwholder in the Presbyterian church, and \nattended with much pleasure on Hemphill\'s preaching; and, \nfinding that, though a fluent preacher, he could not write, he pre- \npared oneor two pamphlets in his defence, besides several columns \nin the newspapers. \n\n<>m- of ill\'-- was probably " Some Observations on the Pro- \neeedings against Mr. Hemphill, with a Vindication of his Ser- \nmons. A second edition of this pamphlet appeared in 1735. \nThe first issue was delayed by the illness of the printer. It is \nelaimed that, in all his discourses, Hemphill enforced Christian \ncharity and the necessity of a good life. "The old man [Andrews] \nadmitted that he was of an excellent temper." \n\nThe commission having expressed surprise at his adopting the \nConfession, he replied, he had done so only so far as the funda- \nmental articles woe concerned. That he asked the commission \nhow many articles they esteemed fundamental, and they said they \ncould not tell; hut, his defender says, "they would make all \nrundamental to serve ;i turn." The commission had said, they \n"were obliged to declare him unsound and dangerous;" he insinu- \nates that tie- declaration was made solely to save Andrews\'s \n\ncharacter, and that they had " no pattern for their proceedings \nbut that hellish tribunal, the Spanish [nquisition." \n\nA manuscripl note on one of the pamphlets 1 * states, that a \nQuaker woman appeared before the commission ami insisted on \nbeing heard in 1 [emphill\'e behalf. \n\nThe synod approved of the doing- of the commission; ami \nHemphill sent a -illy message, in writing, with a postscript: \xe2\x80\x94 " L \n\nshall think yOU do me a deal of honour if you entirely exeom- \n\nmunioate me." \n\n* Old Souih Chureli Lil.rury. \n\n\n\n420 ANDREW ARCHBOLD. \n\nIn July, 1735, he preached twice to a very numerous assembly, \nwhere the congregation generally met. \n\nHis pamphlet was soon answered; but, to the shame of his \nfriends, it appeared that the sermon* on Mark xvi. 16 was in the \npublished works of Dr. Clarke, the Arian, and those on Gal. vi.. \n15, Rom. viii. 8, and Ps. xli. 3, in the works of Dr. Ibbots, his \ncolleague ; Dr. James Foster, also an Arian, being the author of \nthe one on Acts xxiv. 25. \n\nFranklin f says, " Hemphill admitted that, by reading over a \ndiscourse two or three times, he could remember it so as to repeat \nit fluently from the pulpit as if extempore." " This, like a frost, \nnipped his popularity, and his adherents fell off like withered \nleaves, at once. Franklin upheld him, out of dislike to the old \nsynod, and because he preferred hearing a man preach the fine \ncompositions of others instead of his own ordinary or insipid pro- \nductions." \n\nAnother defence of Hemphill from Franklin\'s pen appeared, \nwith this motto : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" I never knew any good to come from the meetings of \npriests. \' \' \xe2\x80\x94 Tillotson. \n\n"Wherefore, rebuke them sharply." \xe2\x80\x94 Paul \n\nAndrew Bradford, of New York, printed, in 1735, a satirical \nrefutation of this piece : \xe2\x80\x94 " Remarks on Hemphill\'s Defence of his \nObservations, showing his orthodoxy, the excellency and meek- \nness of his temper, and the justice of his complaints : by Obadiah \nJenkins." \n\nThe horrid profaneness of his book is censured, and his rude- \nness in styling the synod men of impenetrable stupidity and \nreverend asses. He had said, that " original sin was as ridiculous \nas imputed righteousness," that there was "no need of spiritual \npangs and convulsions," and that " good works put men in God\'s \nway and reconciles God to them." \n\nHis plagiarism overwhelmed him : he slunk away into deserved \nobscurity. \n\n\n\nANDREW ARCHBOLD \n\nWas ordained by Newcastle Presbytery in 1733, and was sus- \npended in 1735. Two instances of his gross wickedness being \ndiscovered, he "wholly absconded." \n\n* Obadiah Jenkins\'s Remarks on Hemphill\'s Defence, \n\xe2\x80\xa2j- Memoirs. \n\n\n\nJOHN TENNENT. 421 \n\n\n\nJOHN TENNENT, \n\nThe third son of Torment, of Nesharniny, was born in county \nArmagh, (Ireland,) November 12, 1707.* His anguish when \nawakened was violent in degree. He had been subject to rash \nanger, and was for four days \'\'a rack of acute and continued \nanguish under dismal apprehensions of impending ruin and end- \ntisery from vengeance of a just and holy God." His con- \nsolations were eminent and conspicuous. \n\nHe was educated by his father, and was taken on trial by New- \ncastle Presbytery, November 21, 172S, when he delivered lv a \nhomily to universal satisfaction." He was licensed September 1>\', \nlTi".\', and went as supply to Brandywine, Middletown, Newcastle, \nand Middle and Lower Octorara. Reports being raised of his \nhaving spoken unwisely, Creaghead, Thomson, and Ilutelicson \nconferred with him, and were satisfied that the rumour was un- \nfounded. \n\nAbout this time Freehold became vacant, and the people were \nSO grievously divided, that there seemed no hope of their ever \nsettling a minister. Walter Kerr left his harvest-fieldf and went \nto Neshaminy to persuade Tenncnt to go home with him. He \n\ntotally refused; but Kerr told him, on leaving him, that he knew lie \nwould soon decide differently. lie sent after Kerr to say he would \ncome; but, on coming, he expressed his regret in having consented \nto visit a people who seemed given up by God for their abuse of \nthe gospel \n\nThen- was a German sect that styled themselves " The New \nBorn," and were widely spoken of for their follies and their sins. \nIn Monmouth, this name was applied in derision to those who nro- \n\nI to experience religion under the faithful labours of Freling- \n\nhuy-eii and the English minu \n\nTennent stayed only four or five Sabbaths; bul the Lord so \nblessed his labours] thai he was thoroughly per uaded Christ had \n\na full harvest tO bring home there. Ee said that, should they call \n\nhim, he would settle with them, poor and broken though they were, \n\nand though, by so doing, be Bnould be put to beg hi- bread. 1 Ie \nhad :i unanimous call, April L5, L780, and was ordained by Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery, November 19. Rightly dividing the word of \n\nI by l\xc2\xbbr. Alexander, from bit life by Gilbert Tennent. \nj- On lii- 1 return, he found thai bii neighbour* bad bul 1 \xc2\xbb i \xe2\x80\x94 grain and a) \nI the crop followed through tome accident after bo \ni i, and furnished seed to those who hsd so kindly reaped b \n\ni i to me by the Hev. Job P. B \n\nJ Ifilliam Tennent, of Freehold, In the Christian n \n\n\n\n422 WILLIAM TENNEKT. \n\ntruth, he avoided that "bane of preaching,* setting a common \nmess before his hearers and leaving to them to divide it among \nthemselves as fancy and humour directed." Wonderful success \nattended him; the place of worship was usually crowded with \npersons of all classes and persuasions, listening as for their lives. \nSometimes the body of the congregation was moved, minister and \npeople being wet with tears, many sobbing, and some carried out \nas if they were dead. There was "no public outcry." A great \nreformation followed; "all talked of religion, though all did not \napprove of the power of it." \n\nHe died April 23, 1732, aged twenty-five; for six months before \nhe was unable to preach, his pulpit being supplied by his brother \n"William. During his sickness, many came, inquiring what they \nmust do to be saved ; but the blessing on his labours to the con- \nviction and conversion of souls, was more discernible after his \ndeath. Almost in every neighbourhood were sin-sick souls, longing \nfor Christ, the dear physician. \n\nHis brother Gilbert appended to his "Presumptuous Sinner De- \ntected," a life of his brother, with his two sermons on the "Nature \nof Regeneration, and its absolute necessity in order to Salvation \ndemonstrated." Whitefield, on reading it, exclaimed, "Let me die \nthe death of that righteous man !" Dickinson prepared an epitaph \nfor his tomb. Dr. Alexander speaks of his sermons as in no way \nremarkable, but sensible, solemn, and earnest. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM TENNENT, \n\n\n\nThe second son of the minister of Neshaminy, was born in \ncounty Antrim, June 3, 1705. \n\nHe was early led to the Saviour, and, upon finishing his classical \ncourse with his father, he beganf the study of divinity with his \nbrother Gilbert. While preparing for examination before the \npresbytery, he fell ill with a pain in his breast and a slight hectic \nfever. His flesh dropped away till little hope of life remained; \nhis spirits sunk, and his hope of salvation was wellnigh gone. \nWhile conversing with Gilbert in Latin on his fears for his soul, he \nfainted, and every sign of life departed except a scarcely-percept- \nible tremour under the left arm. He was laid on a cooling-board ; \n\n\n\n* Gilbert Tennent. \n\nt Memoir of Tennent, of Freehold, by Dr. Henderson, and commonly ascribed \nto Elias Boudinot. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM TENXEXT. 423 \n\nbut the physician, a young man, his intimate friend, having put his \nown hand in warm water, felt the heart and affirmed that there was \nan unusual warmth. The eyes were sunk, the lips discoloured. \nGilbert, hearing a hope expressed that he was not yet dead, ex- \nclaimed, " What ! a man not dead that is as cold and stiff as a stake !" \nThe body was restored to a warm bed. and all probable means used \nwithout success. On the third day the tongue was Swollen and \nready to craek : the physician moistened the lips, and Gilbert \nblamed him for "feeding the dead." Suddenly the eyes opened; \nand, with a dreadful groan, the body sunk as if twice dead. In \nabout an hour the eyea again opened, the dreadful groan followed, \nand then all was deathlike. In an hour, however, there was a re- \nvival of the vital action: for six weeks he was so low that his life \nwas despaired of; in a twelvemonth he regained his health. \n\nBis own account, as given to his elder, Dr. Henderson, and to \nhie successor, Dr. Woodhull, was, that the three days seemed like \ntwenty minutes; that he felt himself wafted along under the guid- \n\nif a superior being, till at a distance he beheld an unutterable \n\nglory; he saw an innumerable host of happy beings, and heard \n\ntheir songs of praise with capture. He thought, "Well, blessed be \n\nI am Safe at last, notwithstanding all my fears." lie was \nabout to join the happy company, when one came to him and said, \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2Von must go back." It was like a sword through his heart: \nwith the shock he awoke, and saw his brother disputing with the \n\nII.- had lost all his knowledge; he did not know the Bible, nor \nhow to read, nor what reading meant. When he became sapable \n\xc2\xab\'l\' attention, he was taught to read, like a child, and, when reciting \nNepos, it appeared to him he had read the book before. Gradually \nhis knowledge and his health were fully restored. \n\nBe was licensed by Philadelphia Presbytery,.and, being railed to \nid his brother John, he was ordained by Philadelphia Presby* \nteij, I October 25, 1733. \n\nBit not large, but there was an excellent plantation \n\nattached to the parsonage: leaving the care of it entirely to an \n\ne became clogged with debt. He married the widow \n\nof Mr. John Noble, of New fork, and left to her the management \n\nOf all his affair.-. When his oldest child was about three or four \n\nof age, hia views of duty ohanged, and he saw the propriety \nof a minister\'s making reasonable provision for his household. \n\nAfter the remarkable outpouring of the Spirit on his brother\'s \n\nLabours, God continued to blesa his ordinances to the oonviotion, \n\nconversion, and consolation of proems \xe2\x80\xa2 thai every year \n\npr less were converted; bat there were fewer from ITI_\' to \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2H than formerly. Some, however, were awakened in 17\' 1. \n\nWbil . in bia journeys aero - te, on week- \n\n\n\n424 WILLIAM TEXNEXT. \n\ndays, in Freehold: "the new meeting-house" is mentioned in 1729. \nIn the next April, Tennent refreshed Whitefield by telling him \nwhat God was doing for hundreds in the Highlands of New York, \nwhere he had lately been. \n\nHis brother Gilbert mentions, in 1740, that his labours at that \ntime were remarkably blessed in Burlington county. Several reli- \ngious societies were formed there. \n\nIn 1757, a revival was granted to Freehold, equal in power to \nthat which was then descending on the College of New Jersey. \nBurr speaks of it, in June, as a remarkable revival : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"We have reason to remember it as the most glorious day of the \nSon of man. The assembly was large. The manner of administra- \ntion did particularly engage their attention. It appeared as one \nof the days of heaven to some of us, and we wished that, with \nJoshua, we could have delayed the revolutions of the heavens to \nprolong it." \n\nIn March, 1753, there was a remarkable revival and quickenings. \n\nDuring the exciting scenes in the synod, he appears to have been \na silent but steady supporter of his brother ; in all the fierceness \nof the pamphlet-warfare, not a syllable was uttered against him. \nHe visited Virginia, in company with Samuel Blair, and assisted in \ndispensing the Lord\'s Supper in Hanover. \n\nIn company with Rowland and two elders from Hopewell, in \nNew Jersey, he attended a sacramental occasion in Maryland, in \n1741 or \'42. Not long after, Rowland was indicted for having stolen \na horse in Hunterdon county, New Jersey. The time when the \ntheft was committed being the time when he was with them in \nMaryland, Tennent and the elders came forward and proved that \nhe was a hundred miles distant at the period alleged. Rowland \nwas acquitted, but was assailed with a storm of invective, as having \nescaped by perjury. Tennent was indicted, and the elders ; one \nwas convicted, and the other escaped only by taking advantage of \nsome error on the part of the prosecution. Able counsel appeared \nfor Tennent; but, instead of sending for the minister, or others \nfrom Maryland, to sustain his veracity, they proposed that he \nshould avail himself of a flaw. This he would not do ; and, just \nbefore the case came on, a man and his wife presented themselves \nto him, having come from Maryland in consequence of dreams of \ndanger portending, which only their presence could avert from him. \nThey must have been persons known in Trenton ; for their testi- \nmony was admitted, and the prosecution abandoned. \n\n"His manner was remarkably impressive, and his sermons, \nthough seldom polished, were generally delivered with indescrib- \nable power; what he said seldom failed to instruct and please. \nHe was remarkable for a pointed attention to the particular cir- \ncumstances of the afflicted in body and mind. Eminent as a \n\n\n\nWILLIAM TEXXEXT. 425 \n\npeacemaker, all were charmed with his converse. His hospi- \ntality and domestic enjoyments were proverbial. \n\n" More than six feet Wgh, of a spare, thin visage, erect carriage, \nwith bright, piercing eyes, his countenance was grave and solemn, \nyet at all times cheerful. He lived above the world, with such \nclear views of heavenly things as seemed to give him a foretaste of \nthem." \n\nTennent took a deep interest in Brainerd\'s mission, and for a \nSeason took the oversight of it. When Whitefield visited him, he \nsaw with delight the school, and marked the proficiency of the \npnpilfi under Tennent\'s fatherly care. The life of Tennent was \nlong. He devoted much time to the education of youth, and \ntrained several in philosophy and divinity. Among others who \nstudied theology with him were dimming, McWhortcr, and Oliver \nHart, pastor of a Baptist church in Charleston. He had the \npleasure of seeing his sons, John and William, awakened during \nthe revival at Princeton, under Dr. Finley; and of seeing another \nof great promise, but of loose habits, graciously brought back, on \na bed of sickness, to the Shepherd and Bishop of his soul. This \nBOD died soon after. Another died in the West Indies; and his son \nWilliam, a distinguished minister and patriot in South Carolina, \nwas suddenly called from earth, not long after his father\'s decease. \n\nUnlike Gilbert, he published but one sermon, \xe2\x80\x94 a plain, judicious \ndiscourse on Galatians v. 25. It was printed in Boston, in 1739*, \nin the "Sacramental Discourses." \n\nMany striking incidents in his life are so universally known, \nthat, beyond all the ministers of his day, he lives in the memory of \nthe people. \n\nIt has been supposed that he was a sleep-walker, from his \nhaving \n\n" p. mo to bed with ton toes on, \nAn 1 when he Waked up, one was gone;" \n\nsmartly said of him, by one who ridiouled his undertaking to \ngive advice to "His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury." The \n\nIsappeared; whether cut off by treading on glass in a som? \nnambulism,* or gnawed oil\' by rats, or how else, may be disputed. \nCan it be that Tennenl believed that he who contended with \nMichael for tin\' body of Moses strove also for bis, and, failing, \n\nWrenched Off the great toe\'.\'\' Such i.> the tradition. \n\n\n\n* A \xe2\x96\xa0 rapp \xe2\x96\xa0-\xe2\x96\xa0! by Dr. Alexander. \n\n\n\n426 SAMUEL BLAIR. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BLAIR \n\nWas born in Ireland, June 14, 1712, and came to this country \nwhen a lad. Where his parents* resided is not mentioned. " He \nwas blestf with early piety, and on his death-bed could recollect, \nwith delight, various evidences of gracious influence in his tender \nyears. He was made sensible, betimes, of his guilty state by na- \nture and practice, felt his total inability to deliver himself, saw \nplainly that he lay at mercy, and that it was entirely at God\'s \ngood pleasure to save or reject him. He was restless till he saw \nthe way of life, \xe2\x80\x94 that God could save in consistence with the \nhonour of governing justice, for that the obedience and sufferings \nof Christ in the room of sinners have made sufficient atonement \nfor sin. His soul approved of the divine glorious plan. Strict \nholiness was his choice. He grew in stature and in grace." \n\nHe studied at the Log College, became conversant with the \noriginal languages of the Scriptures, and had much critical learn- \ning, with a thorough knowledge of divinity. He was licensed, \nNovember 9, 173-3, at Abingdon, by Philadelphia Presbytery, at \ntheir first meeting after the Presbytery of East Jersey was set off; \nhe preached his trial sermon before them, on Romans iv. 5. He \nwas called, May 24, 1734, to Middletown and Shrewsbury, and \nalso to Millstone and Cranberry. He accepted the former, Sep- \ntember 19, and was dismissed to East Jersey Presbytery, and was \nsoon after ordained. When licensed, and when ordained, he de- \nclared his acceptance of the Westminster Confession, Catechisms, \nand Directory. \n\nMiddletown and Shrewsbury were among the towns first settled \nin East Jersey. A Baptist church was organized at the former \nplace in 1689. There was a Presbyterian church there before \n1711,| and "the spirit of mixed communion prevailed in both \nsocieties. The divisions among the Baptists rose very high ; and, \nas a healing measure, they agreed "to keep their own places, and \nnot wander to other societies." Blair met with little success, the \npeople in both of his congregations "being very irreligious." His \npastoral relation was dissolved, September 5, 1739, and he was dis- \nmissed by Brunswick Presbytery, October 12, to join Newcastle \nPresbytery. A sermon of his was published, about this time, in \nBoston, in a volume of Tennent\'s "Sacramental Discourses." \n\n\n\n* The name of William Blair occurs as an elder in 1729, and 1732, from Brandy- \nwine or Red Clay. f Finley\'s sermon at his funeral, \nj Morgan Edwards\'s History of New Jersey Baptists. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BLAIR. 4-, \n\nHis three sermons on Justification -were also published, and are \ncommended by Seward, in 1740, as full of solid divinity. \n\nAt the earnest invitation of the people of Fagg\'s Manor, he \nremoved thither in the beginning of November, accepted their call \nin the winter, and was installed in April. The place was newly \nsettled, from Ireland; the congregation had been formed in 1730, \nbut had never had a minister. Some of them applied* to the As- \nsociate Presbytery in Scotland, in 1735, but without success. It \nWati a great encouragement to Blairf to find some hopefully-pious \npeople among them at his first coming; but religion lay as it were \ndying, and ready to expire its last breath. "Having some view \nand sense of the deplorable condition of the land in general, the \nscope of my preaching for the first winter was mainly calculated \nfor persons in a natural unregenerate state. I dealt solemnly and \nsearchingly: four or five were brought under deep convictions. \nLeaving home in March, I obtained a neighbouring minister to \npreach a Sabbath in my absence." This was, in all probability, \nAlexander Craighead, of Middle Octorara. " He seemed to be \nearnest for the awakening and conversion of secure sinners. He \n.ed, from Luke xiii. 7, on the dangerous and awful case of \nBach as continue unregenerate and unfruitful under the means of \ngrace. Under that sermon there was a visible appearance of much \nsoul-concern; some burst out with an audible noise into bitter cry- \ning, \xe2\x80\x94 a thing unknown in those parte before." "A pretty light, \nmerry sort of a youth" came to Blair, on his return, under deep \ntrouble. The sermon had not impressed him; but, the next day, \nWhen be went to grubbing in order to clear new land, as he saw a \nlarge tree with a high top fall, the words "Cut it down: \ninmbereth it the ground?" came to his remembrance, and \nwent as a spear to his heart. "So must I be cut down by the jus- \nt i\'-\'- of God for the burning of hell, unless I get into another state \nthan 1 am now in." He came under deep and abiding distress: \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2his conversation since becomes the gospel of Christ." \nBlair\'s first sermon, on coming back, was from Matthew vi. 33. \n\nIii pressing the injunction, be urged that they had already too, too \n\nlong neglected to seek the kingdom. This catlike a sword; and \n.I could not contain, bat burst out into the most bitter weep- \ning. He besought them to moderate their passions, but so as not \nto stifle convictions, and to avoid hindering themselves and others \n\nfrom hearing what Was S]H>ken. The number of the awal.ened \n\ned very fast; scarcely a Bermon or a lecture through the \nwhole summer failed to produoe Impressions. \n< >i"ten these impressions were very great and genera] : Borne were \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0y of the Beeeuion Chnroh. \nf Letter In Christian n \n\n\n\n428 SAMUEL BLAIR. \n\novercome and fainting, others deeply sobbing ; some crying in a \nmost dolorous manner, many more silently weeping; a solemn con- \ncern on every face. Comparatively, a few were affected with some \nstrange, unusual bodily motions. Very few in the congregation \nwere without solemn thoughtfulness about their souls. The awa- \nkened had a rational, fixed conviction of their dangerous perishing \nstate ; they were much given to reading the Scriptures and good \nbooks. Excellent works, which had lain neglected, were perused, \nand lent from one to another. Blair preached on Fridays, through \nthe spring and summer, his great aim being to lay open the de- \nplorable state of man, by nature, since the fall, and the way of the \nsinner\'s closing with Christ by faith, and obtaining a right peace \nto an awakened, wounded conscience. \n\nMany afforded very hopeful, satisfying evidence that the Lord \nhad brought them to a true closure with Jesus Christ : several had \nhad remarkable and sweet deliverances. \n\nTowards the end of the summer, there seemed to be a stop put \nto the awakening and conviction of sinners ; and, for the next four \nyears, there were few instances of persons convinced. Blair makes \nno mention of the two visits of Whitefield. He made a torn - of \npreaching through New England in the summer of 1744. \n\nOf the rupture of 1741, Blair spoke when near his end, "It \npleased God to make me and a number of my brethren instru- \nmental in promoting what I always believed was a work of his \npower and grace ; but, somehow or other, our mother\'s children were \nangry with us who were instrumental in carrying it on, and unjustly \nexcluded us from communion with them." \n\nBlair published a "Vindication of the Excluded Brethren," an \nanswer to Thomson on the "Government of the Church," and to \nCreaghead\'s "Reasons for Forsaking our Church;" also, a "Trea- \ntise on Predestination." \n\nHis school produced such men as Davies, Rodgers, Cumming, \nJames Finley, Robert Smith, and Hugh Henry. "Each one re- \nsembled the children of a king." As scholars, preachers, pastors, \npatriots, \xe2\x80\x94 in their piety and their success, \xe2\x80\x94 a noble company, a \ngoodly fellowship, showing the church what manner of men the \napostles and martyrs were. \n\nBlair spoke* as one who knew the worth of souls, and felt in \nhimself the sweet constraint of the love of God and man. He \nwas grave and solemn, yet cheerful, even pleasant, facetious, \nwitty. \n\nDavies spoke of him as the incomparable Blair. "When, in \n1753, I passed the meeting-house where I had so often heard the \ngreat Mr. Blair, I could not help crying out, \' Oh, how dreadful is \n\n\n\nFinley. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BLAIR. 429 \n\nthis place ! this is no other than the house of God, and this is the \ngate of heaven.\' " \n\nHe was a man of great weight in judicatories : "they waited for \nhim as the rain." His zeal for the college made him journey when \nsick to promote its interests. After severe sickness in Philadel- \nphia, he was, beyond his expectation, restored to health and home; \nhe then laboured as one near his end to awaken the perishing, but, \nfailing, he changed his strain; "only he publicly reminded them of \na certain day, March 25, 1744, when he was enabled to set eternal \nthings before them with more than ordinary solemnity and pun- \ngency." \n\nHe then entered on a new course of sermons for the edification \nand establishment of the people of God, wherein he clearly ex- \nplained and satisfyingly confirmed the whole system of gospel doc- \ntrine, from the state of innocence to the consummation of all \nthings. He concluded the course with a sermon on 1 Corinthians xv. \n24, with which he may be said to have closed his public ministry; for, \nthough he afterwards preached twice, it was with so little strength \nand efficacy, that lie called them "supernumerary sermons." \n\nOn the 7th of April, 1751, apprehending his end to be near, he \nsent for the elders and two out of every quarter of the congrega- \ntion, and gave them his parting counsels. He asked them to col- \nlect tin- remnant of his debts and give their good countenance to \nhifl widow and his half-a-score of children. "Adhere to your own \npresbytery ; but, if the synods unite, be not obstinate and separate." \nIn seeking a successor, lie bids them not to expect from a young \nman. at the outset, all that they saw in him after many years of \nexperienced His son-in-law, Robert Smith, of Pequea, published \nhifl \'lying counsels, with several of his sermons. \n\nBlair bad, through a long course of years, an habitual assurance \nof his interest in the favour of God. His last words, a minute or \ntwo before his departure, were, "The Bridegroom .is come, and \nnow we shall have all things;" and, under a gleam of heaven, he \nbreathed bis last, on .inly 5, 1751. \n\nJl ion Samuel was early in life elected to the presidency of \n\ni Hall, and was settled in the Old South Church in Boston. \n\nHi- daughters married the Rev. George Duffield, Robert Smith, \nDavid Rice, of Kentucky, William Poster, of Octorara, and John \nCarmichael, of the Porks of Brandywine. \n\nHe wai above the middle stature, comely, ami well set ; in aspect \ngrave and venerable, with a clear understanding, quick apprehen- \nsion, prompt \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2locution, solid judgment, Btrong and lively imagina- \ntion, and tenacious memory. Hi- voire was clear and command- \ning; Ins pronunciation distinct and deliberate; his style natural, \nelegant, pure. He studied plainness, being naturally poetic, copi" \n\nOUS, and florid; preaching without notes, but seldom or m\\er eX \n\n\n\n430 SAMUEL BLAIR. \n\ntempore. His advise to Dr. Rodgers was, \'\'Speak slow; speak \nlow; be short." \n\nFinley speaks of him as gentle, prudent, cautious ; as having a \nglorious arousing view of God\'s power, the wisdom of his govern- \nment, and the riches of his grace, with a particular appropriation \nof them to himself and his. His was a divine calmness. \n\nDavies said to Bellamy, " The greatest light in these parts is \njust about to take wing." In his travels in Great Britain, he \nheard no one equal to his instructor ; not one whom he thought, in \nany way, to resemble or approach to him in the matter or the de- \nlivery of his discourses. \n\nIn his elegiac verses* he says : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Blair is no more! then this poor world has lost \nAs rich a jewel as her stores could boast. \nWhile, hovering on the verge of life, he lay \nEager for flight, and yet resign\'d to stay, \nHow oft did we, in agonies of prayer, \nWrestle with Heaven his sacred breath to spare I \nBut, ah ! his worth but cherish\'d our despair, \nAnd threaten\'d the denial of our prayer. \nSo great, so heavenly, so mature a mind \nRequired employment of a nobler kind. \nToo much refined in this dark world to bear \nThe humble place of Zion\'s minister, \nHeaven call\'d him to sustain some nobler function there. \n\nAn intellect as clear as blaze of day, \nSedate as midnight, boundless as the sea, \nFree as the wind, yet steady as the pole, \nPassive to truth, impatient of control \nFrom vulgar error ; regular and smooth \nAs genuine reason and harmonious truth; \nTruth link\'d to truth and thought to thought conjoin\'d \nSpontaneous rose in his harmonious mind ; \nHis rude, unstudied thoughts in order sprung, \nExpress\'d in equal order by his tongue ; \nClusters of ripen\' d sense on each young period hung. \nHis passions vigorous, yet by reason ruled, \nBy calmest reason kindled, temper\'d, cool\'d ; \nHis heart reserved as prudence, and confined, \nAnd yet as truth sincere, as weeping friendship kind. \n\nHis life, a fix\'d, unerring walk with God, \nA constant progress in the heavenly road ; \nHis heart, the rest of constant peace and love ; \nThere glow\'d the passions seraphs feel above; \nThere, pleased and unmolested, dwelt the heavenly dove. \nHis breath, like grateful incense, to the skies \nDid daily in refined devotions rise. \nHis soul exerted with his praying breath \nThe almighty importunity of faith ; \nHence guilty heads escape the falling blow, \nAnd blessings to unworthy millions flow. \nNations partook the bounty of his prayer \nAnd future times the benefit shall share." \n\n* Printed in the collection of his sermons published after his death, containing \nFinley\'s funeral sermon, and Robert Smith\'s account of his closing days. \n\n\n\nJAMES MARTIN \xe2\x80\x94 ROBERT JAMISON. 431 \n\n\n\nJAMES MAETIX, \n\nFrom Ireland, was the pastor of Lewes, in Delaware, in 1734, \nami died there in 1743. lie is said to have organized the church \nat < \'""1 Spring. \n\nWhitefield landed about five (o\'clock) in the evening of October \n3. 17;;\'.\'. at Lewestown; and, in reference to this event, he ob- \n. ,l We had not been long in the inn but two or three of \nthe chief inhabitants, being apprized of his arrival, came and \nspent the evening with us, and desired me to give them a sermon \non the morrow." \n\nlb- preached there, in 1740. to "as unaffected a congregation \nas be had Been in America. They wept, next day, when he por- \ntrayed the trial of Abraham\'s faith. Alas ! when I turned from \neatnre to the Creator, and to talk of the love of God in \nsacrificing his only Sun, I observed their tears dry up. I told \nthem of it; and could not but infer hence the dreadful depravity \nof human nature, that can weep at the sufferings of a martyr. \xe2\x80\x94 a \nman like ourselves; but when are we affected at the relation of \nthe sufferings of the Son of God?" \n\nThe Church missionary gives a different view. He says White- \nfield preached from a balcony, and that the enthusiasm of the \npeople was violent, but after a time it abated. \n\nMartin signed the Protest in 1741. His death is mentioned in \n\n\n\nMa,. 17 b; \n\n\n\nROBERT JAMISON, \n\nFrom Ireland, settled in Delaware, and was a member of Bynod \nin 17::i. \n\nFrom a manuscript of Joshua Evans,* an Independent, it \n\nappears thai there were Welsh Baptists al Duck Creek: j and that \n\ntlir first nam.\' of their meeting-nouse was Bryn-Sion, /.<\xe2\x80\xa2. Zion \n\nHill. The Presbyterian meeting-house was buill in 1 T - J - \' , on land \n\nMr. Dickinson. Thomas Evans preached the first ser- \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Quo! irda, in lii- ms ir.-i.i-. of the Btptiftaia DeUmurt) \n\n. Bl r.-m.iiii". \n\n\n\n432 ISAAC CHALKEK. \n\nmon in it, August 12, 1733, and administered the communion, \nNovember 9. At first the Baptists used the house, but after- \nwards worshipped in private houses. There was a great mortality \nin that region in the spring of 1737. Jamison began to preach, \nDecember 26, 1734. \n\nHe died in 1744 ; and, the congregation having neglected to \nhave the property conveyed to them by deed, it reverted, during \nthe long vacancy that followed, to the Dickinsons, and was made \nover to the Baptists in 1771. \n\n\n\nISAAC CHALKER. \n\nOf the family of Chalkers in Saybrook, Connecticut, graduated \nat Yale in 1728 ; and, after being licensed, he married, and re- \nsided on Long Island. He was ordained, in 1734, by East Jersey \nPresbytery, pastor of Bethlehem and Wallkill, in the Highlands \nof New York. John Smith, an elder from Bethlehem, sat with \nhim in the synod in 1735, and is almost* the only elder who, for \nfifty years, asked to have his dissent entered against a synodical \ndecision. The presbytery had ordained Chalker at a distance \nfrom his congregations; and he found himself in great difficulty \nat Wallkill, through a wide-spread report of his not having \nadopted the Westminster Confession. He had lost the good-will \nof Samuel Neely, of Neelytown. The synod judged that Chalker \nwas hearty in his adherence to our standards, and that Neely was \nto blame in exciting discontent. \n\nChalker left the bounds of the synod in 1743, havingf lost his \nstock of cattle in the extremity of the cold winter of 1741-2. \nHe also "lost a man," became very poor, and much in debt. In \n1744, he was settled in Eastbury, (Second Society in Glasten- \nbury,) Connecticut, with a settlement of three hundred pounds, old \ntenor, and a salary of one hundred and thirty pounds a year. He \npetitioned the legislature for relief, and aid was granted to him, \nbut not sufficient to set him free from his embarrassments. He \nremained until 1760, and died, May 28, 1765. \n\n\n\n* John Gardner, of White Clay, did the same in the case of Walton, \nf MSS. Connecticut State Library. \n\n\n\nBIMOH HORTON \xe2\x80\x94 HUGH CARLISLE. 433 \n\n\n\nSIMON HORTON \n\nWAS born in Boston, March 30, 1711. The family removed to \nEast Jersey in 17^7; and he graduated at Yale in 1731. He was \nDrdained, by East Jersey Presbytery, pastor of Connecticut Farms, \nNew Jersey, in 1734. He succeeded Pumry at Newtown in 1740. \nOn the death of Colgan,* Church missionary at Jamaica, Long \nIsland, the Dissenters prevailed \xe2\x80\x94 by their majority in the vestry \nin 1756 \xe2\x80\x94 to present to the governor " one Simon Horton" for \ninduction into the parish; but Sir Charles Hardy, who was then \nat the head of the Provincial Government, refused to induct him \ninto the cure. \n\nHorton seems to have resigned the pastoral care before 1773, \nas is supposed,! from his becoming sensible that he was not likely \nto do them good, by his plain and unattractive manner ; but, on \nthe removal of Bay, his successor, he acted as stated supply until \nhie death, May s , 1786, aired seventy-five. \n\nJ I" was sent yearly by New York Presbytery, towards the \nclose of his life, to supply the East and West Houses on Staten \nIsland. Davies heard Horton, during the synod of 1753, preach \non Sabbath morning "an honest, judicious sermon" on " Christ the \nWisdom and the Power of God." \n\nDuring the Revolution,]; he resided at Warwick, Orange county, \nwith his son-in-law, Benjamin Coe. The congregation of New- \ntown was so scattered during the war, that, at its close, there were \nonly five communicants in the congregation. The church was \ndilapidated through the madness of the British and the Tories. \n\n\n\nHUGH CARLISLE \n\n\n\nW\\- " admitted into the Newcastle Presbytery" before Septem- \nber, L785, probably from Greal Britain <>r Ireland. H<\' adopted \nthe standards a1 thai time; but, nut having seen the Adopting Act \n\nuntil lie met with the sy 1, " lie bad the same read t<> bim, and \n\ndid then concur in bis assent to the terms of it." At that time, \n\n\n\n;r:\\. \n\nf Kik- . : >\xe2\x96\xa0 wtown. I U\'i\'l- \n\n\n\n434 ALEXANDER CRAIGHEAD. \n\nNewtown and Plumstead, in Bucks county, obtained leave of Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery to employ him; and he joined that body in \nJune, 1736. Hugh Hunter and Anthony Thompson requested the \npresbytery that a call might be moderated for him. Treat was \ndirected to preside. The call was presented in May, 1737; but, \nin August, he declined it, on account of the distance of Plumstead \nfrom Newtown. He. continued to service them, and was sent, in \nNovember, to supply Amwell and Bethlehem, in Hunterdon \ncounty, New Jersey, with other vacancies. Martin met with \nPhiladelphia Presbytery, March 14, 1738, to request that Carlisle \nmight go into the bounds of Lewes Presbytery. He removed at \nonce, and is mentioned as a member of that presbytery in 1742 : \nsubsequently his name is not seen. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER CRAIGHEAD \n\nWas probably the son of the Rev. Thomas Craighead, and \nmay have been born in this country. He appeared before Done- \ngal Presbytery, January 5, 1734; and was licensed October 8, \nhaving preached from Prov. x. 9. He was sent to Middle Octo- \nrara and " over the river," being the first to whom that duty was \nassigned. He was called (April 9, 1735) to Middle Octorara, the \npeople promising sixty pounds, and declaring their ability to raise \nseventy-one pounds. He accepted in June, and was appointed to \nprepare a sermon on Col. ii. 7, a lecture on the first Psalm, and to \ndiscuss the question, Where revelation is necessary to salvation ? \nHe was ordained November 18, Boyd having preached from 2 Tim. \nii. 15. \n\nA zealous promoter of the " Revival," he accompanied White- \nfield while in Chester county ; and they made the woods ring, as \nthey rode, with songs of praise.* \n\nHe carried the gospel to the people of New London, in opposi- \ntion to the wish of the minister, session, and most of the congre- \ngation. A part of his flock complained of his introducing new \nterms of communion, requiring them, when having their children \nbaptized, to adopt the Solemn League and Covenant. He also \nwas charged with denying that ministers should be confined within \n\n* Whitefield, after preaching at Willingston,( Wilmington,) rode towards Not- \ntingham with Tennent, Craighead, and Blair, accompanied by many from Phila- \ndelphia, most sweetly singing and praising God, May 13, 1740. \xe2\x80\x94 Gillies. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER CRAIGHEAD. 435 \n\nthe bounds of one congregation, but should roam as evangelists; \nand with excluding from communion one who seemed opposed to \nthe new methods. \n\nThe presbytery came to his meeting-house in December, 1740, \nto adjudicate the case. He was preaching from \xe2\x80\x94 " They be blind \nleaden of the blind." It was a continued invective against \nPharisee preachers, and the presbytery, as given over to judicial \nblindness and hardness. "He railed on Mr. Boyd." The people \nwere invited at the close to repair to "the tent" and hear his de- \nfence, which was read by David Alexander and Samuel Finley. \n\nThe presbytery, though summoned to hear it, remained in the \nchurch, and were proceeding to business, when the people rose in \na tumult, and, with railing, compelled them to withdraw. When \nthey met next day, he, with his coadjutors, appeared; and, \nhaving read the defence from the pulpit, he declined their juris- \ndiction, because they all were his accusers. They suspended \nhim ; but resolved that, if he should signify his repentance to \nany member, a meeting should be called at once, to consider his \nacknowledgment and take off the suspension, lie sat in the next \nsynod; and. they having spent the first week in considering his \ncase without coming to any decision, the Protest was introduced \non Monday, and separated the conflicting parties. \n\nSome oi hi- people respected the sentence of the presbytery, \nand forsook him. lie asked the presbytery, just before the rup- \nture, to see to it that those persons fulfilled their engagements to \nhim. \n\nBe separated prom the Brunswick party at the first meeting of \nonjunct presbyteries, because they refused to revive the \nSolemn League and Covenant. Soon after, he published hie rea- \nloni for leaving their connection, putting forward, as his promi- \nnent inducement, that neither Bynod uor presbytery had adopted \nthe Westminster Standards by a public act. Blair replied to him; \nGilbert Tennent lamented his party-spirit and censoriousness^ \nCraighead addressed the Reformed Presbytery in Scotland, declare \ning his adherence to their news and methods, and Bolioiting helpers. \nlie issued a manifesto, setting forth his opinions, to draw together \n\nall who held the like sentiments. \n\nThomas Cookson, Bsq., one of his Majesty\'s justices for Lan- \noounty, appeared before the Synod of Philadelphia, Maj 26, \nIT 18, and, in the name of the governor, laid before them a paper \nto be considered. All other business was at once deferred, and \nthe paper, with an accompanying affidavit, was read. The synod 1 \nunanimously agreed, "Thai it is full of treason, sedition, and dis- \ntraction, and ;_ r i i< rting of the sacred oracle-, to the ruin \n\nof all societies and civil government, and directly and diametrically \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 it- prinoip have on all occasions \n\n\n\n436 ALEXANDER CRAIGHEAD. \n\nopenly and publicly declared. We hereby declare, with the greatest \nsincerity, that we detest this paper, and, with it, all principles and \npractices that tend to destroy the civil and religious rights of man- \nkind, or to foment or encourage sedition or dissatisfaction with the \ncivil government that we are now under, or rebellion, treason, or \nany thing that is disloyal. If Mr. Alexander Craighead be the \nauthor, we know nothing of the matter. He has been no member \nof our society for some time past, nor do we acknowledge him as \nsuch, and heartily lament that any man that was ever called a \nPresbyterian should be guilty of what is in this paper." \n\nDickinson, Pemberton, Alison, and the moderator, Cowell, pre- \npared an address to the governor. It was presented to him, with a \ncopy of the minute, by Andrews, Cross, and Cathcart. \n\nTennent said, about the same time, "His late and present divi- \nsive conduct we utterly detest and disclaim. I hope he is a pious \nman ; but, having more zeal and positiveness than knowledge and \njudgment, he has schismatically broken communion with us, and \nadopted the rigid Cameronian scheme. He is indeed tinged with \nan uncharitable and party spirit, to the great prejudice of real reli- \ngion in some places this way. May the Almighty forgive him and \nrectify his judgment!" \n\nHis success in forming praying societies is not known ; no minis- \nter came from Britain to his assistance. \n\n"With apparent sincerity, he objected to the deficiency of the \nsystem on which the Philadelphia Synod was constituted, and, with \nseeming sincerity, joined himself to the support of the languishing \ncause of the Reformed Presbyterian Church. He did not, how- \never, possess stability. Overstrained zeal is seldom permanent. \nThis man, having co-operated with the Covenanters with an ardour \nwhich appeared to some of them enthusiastic, left his profession \nand vows, and turned to the flocks of his former companions. The \nsocieties which he had forsaken continued eight years in this dis- \ntressed condition, until, moved by their entreaties, the Rev. John \nCuthbertson* came to them from Scotland, in 1752. "f \n\nIn 1751, he wrote to the Anti-Burgher Associate Presbytery in \nScotland ; but, though ministers were directed by the presbytery to \ngo in answer to his appeal, they failed to comply. \n\nHe is said to have removed to Windy Cove, on Cpwpasture River, \nin Augusta county, Virginia, in 1749 ;J but it was probably not till \nafter the ill success of his second application to Scotland. A \n\n\n\n* Through the kindness of the Rev. T. W. J. Wylie, of the Reformed Presbyte- \nrian Church, I learn that Cuthbertson laboured forty years at Middle Octorara, \nLancaster county, and joined in forming the Associate Reformed body. He died \nthere. March 10, 1791, aged seventy-three. \n\nj- Reformed Principles exhibited by the Reformed Presbyterian Church. \n\nJ Dr. Foote\'s Sketches of Virginia. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER CRAIGHEAD. 437 \n\nlarge* buttonwood-tree, close to the river-bank, marks the site \n\xe2\x80\xa2where stood his humble cabin. About a half mile above, stood his \nlittle log church; nothing now remains of it but a few Btones of \nthe back-wall of the fireplace, amidst a thick grove of pines. He \nand his people went to the house of God fully equipped to meet \nany sudden attack of savage-. He joined Newcastle Presbytery \nbefore the fall of ll\'A. On Braddoek\'s defeat, his congregation \nfled from the frontier, and a portion settled in North Carolina. \n\n11 e met with Hanover Presbytery, September 2, 1757, and, in \nJanuary, was sent to Rocky River, in North Carolina, and to other \nvacancies. He was called, in April, to Rocky River; and Richard- \nson, on his way to labour among the Cherokees, was directed to \nin-tall him. \n\nHe died in March, 17o\'o\', leaving behind him the affectionate \nremembrance of his faithful, abundant, and useful labours. He \nis -aid to have been a prey to dejection of spirits, as was also hi3 \nrelative, John Craighead, the pastor of Rocky Spring, Pennsyl- \nvania. \n\nThe first numerous settlement t between the Yadkin and Ca- \ntawba was three miles north of Charlotte. In 17."><>, there were no \nwhite inhabitants; but they poured in BO rapidly that, in 1 7 -"> \xe2\x80\xa2 > , the \nchurch on Sugar Creek was formed. Here was Craighead\'s home, \nand his burial-place: no stone marks his grave; but it is known by \ntwo large sassafras-trees, which grew, it is said, from the sticks \nbeing thrust into the ground, on which his coffin was borne to the \n\nII - -\'.n Thomas became a minister of our church in Tennessee, \nand rose to high standing. His third daughter married the Rev. \nDavid Caldwell, of Buffalo and Allemance. Her son, Samuel \n\nCraighead Caldwell, was licensed at nineteen years of age, and \nOrdained pastor of Hop. \xe2\x80\xa2well and Sugar Creek in 17\'. | L > . His har- \nmonious continuance id thai relation for thirty-five years is his \nBulogium. At one time, seventy were added to the church. \nI ! in 1826. Two of hi- -"ii- are in the ministry. \n\n\n\n* Rer. Samuel Brown, of Windy Cove. \nt Dr. Footed Bketehei of North I \n\n\n\n438 JOHN PAUL \xe2\x80\x94 PATRICK GLASCOW \xe2\x80\x94 SAMUEL BLACK. \n\n\n\nJOHN PAUL \n\nWas received by the standing committee of Donegal Presbytery \nas a licentiate from Ireland, December 10, 1735, and was soon after \ncalled to Nottingham. Thomson "served his edict," and he was \ninstalled the second Wednesday of October, 1736. \n\nHe preached at the ordination of David Alexander, at Pequea, \nin 1738, and was one of the first supplies sent to Deer Creek, \nMaryland. He died in 1739; and in June the commission remitted \nhis bond for twelve pounds, and, the next year, gave his widow one \npound out of the fund. \n\nHis tomb remains in the old graveyard near the Rising Sun: \nthe inscription, nearly obliterated, tells that he died at the age of \nthirty-three. \n\n\n\nPATRICK GLASCOW, \n\nAfter the ordinary trials, and after adopting the Westminster \nConfession, was licensed by Lewes Presbytery. Having a call to \nMonokin, he was, after the usual steps, and a repeated declaration \nof his adopting the Westminster Confession, ordained and installed \nin 1736. \n\nHe is not mentioned after 1741 on our records : he was or- \ndained after the Episcopal mode, and became the rector of All-Hal- \nlows, in Worcester county, Maryland. He died there, March \n23, 1753. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BLACK, \n\nA student of theology, from Ireland, was licensed by New- \ncastle Presbytery. The Forks of Brandywine, in Chester county, \nwere formed into a separate congregation. In September, 1735, \nDonegal Presbytery gave them leave to invite Black to preach as a \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BLACK. 439 \n\ncandidate for settlement. He was called, October 7, and was or- \ndained, November 18, 1735. Boyd preached from 2 Timothy ii. 15. \nA portion of his people preferred complaints against him, Septem- \nber 2, 1740, and requested the presbytery to call, as correspondents, \nCharles Tennent and Samuel Blair, when they took up the case. \nThis was just at the time of the extraordinary effects produced by \nthe preaching of Whitefield. The presbytery, in writing to Newcas- \ntle Presbytery for correspondents, requested the moderator that \nany of the members might be sent to their aid but Blair and Ten- \nnent, \xe2\x80\x94 alleging that the congregation, in asking for them, evinced a \ndesire to choose their own judges. \n\nBlack was put on trial November 4, to answer the charges \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. Of saying, "He sought not theirs, but them," while he did \nnot seek their salvation. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa01. I tf representing himself as weary through much labour in the \nministry, while he did not toil in the vineyard. \n\n8. < n drunkenness. \n\n4. Of lying, in speaking of the Revival at different times in dif- \nferent ways. \n\n5. of sedition, in sowing dissensions among the people. \n\n6. Of making no application of the truth to the states or cases \nof his hearers. \n\n7. For opposing the work of God then in progress in neighbour- \ning congregations. \n\nTh-- presbytery rebuked him for the drunkenness, and for slight- \ning his work: he acknowledged his fault, ami they laid no censure \non him at the time. In May, they suspended him for a season, \ntin- people complaining that much evidence had been industriously \nkept back nt the trial. The presbytery very soon after made \ninquiry on the spot, and restored him: the majority of his people \nfollowing the \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Brunswick Brethren," they released him from the \npastoral relation. \n\nThe new congregation of Oonewago, in Mouni Joy, (in Adams \ncounty,) Pennsylvania, called him in October, 17 11, and he was in- \nstalled tin.- Becond Wednesday in .May. He began to visit Vir- \nginia a- a missionary, and was sent to Potomac in 171\'!. Diffi- \nculties arose in his flock, and they asked t<> have Steel sent to \n\nthem. \nNorth and South Mountain, in Virginia, (the former six miles \nf Btaunton,) asked for him, Marco i>, \\~i\\-~>. He was dis- \nmissed from OonewagO in April; hut in the fall they BOUghi to re- \ngain him. A division took place: those who left him obtained \n\none-fifth of the t in, pastor of the- New-Side churchc- of \n\nPaxton and Derry. \n\nIn 17 17. he, \\sitli Thomson and Craig, was directed to take the \n\noversight of the i in Virginia. Be wu at the synod in \n\n\n\n440 FRANCIS ALISON. \n\n1751, and was directed to supply Buffalo settlement, and the adja- \ncent places, four Sabbaths; he also visited Hies, Eno, and Haw \nKiver, in North Carolina. \n\nHe took charge of the congregations of Rockfish and Mountain \nPlain before 1752. In 1759, he attended synod, and vainly \nsought to have a presbytery formed west of the Blue Ridge. \n\nHanover Presbytery decided that the people in Woods\'s Gap, in \nthe mountains of Albemarle, were not in his bounds, and erected \nthem into the congregation of Albemarle. They dismissed him \nfrom his charge, July 18, 1759. \n\nHe died August 9, 1770. The presbytery style him " an aged \nminister." \n\n\n\nFRANCIS ALISON, \n\nBorn in Ireland, in 1705, studied at the University of Glas- \ngow, and came as a probationer to this country in 1734 or \'35. \n\nOn the recommendation of Franklin,* he was employed by \nJohn Dickinson, of Delaware, the author of the " Farmer\'s Let- \nters," as the tutor of his son. Leave to take a few other pupils \nwas granted; and he is said to have had an academy at Thunder \nHill, Maryland.f \n\nThe commission, in 1736, wrote to him to officiate as a supply \nfor the new erection in Philadelphia. He was ordained pastor of \nNew London by Newcastle Presbytery before May, 1737. \n\nHe was a correspondent of President Stiles, who has preserved \nmany of his letters. He says, he commenced his school in 1743; \nand Professor Hutcheson, of Glasgow, having, in 1746, advised \nthe setting on foot of a seminary by the synod, he also opened a \ncorrespondence with him. The synod, failing in their attempt to \nendow a college, did what was in their power, and took the New \nLondon school under their patronage. They gave Alison twenty \npounds, (Pennsylvania currency,) with the liberty of choosing an \nassistant at a salary of fifteen pounds. In 1748, the salaries \nwere raised ; one to forty pounds, and the other to twenty pounds. \n\nAlison complained to Donegal Presbytery, that Alexander \nCraighead had intruded into his congregation, " to rend and \ndivide it against his mind, the mind of the session, and the de- \nclared opinion of the congregation in general." \n\n* Joshua Edwards, Esq. f Watson\'s Annals of Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nFRANCIS ALISON. 441 \n\nHe signed the Protest ; l\xc2\xbbut he agreed with the Xew York bre- \nthren in demanding that the whole proceeding should be reviewed \nin 1742; and he entered his dissent from the vote refusing this \nrequest. Though foremost on the Old Side, it does not appear \nthat any of his congregation deserted him. In 1744,* they \nerected the largest church in that region. The building was \nsixty-three feet long by thirty-eight wide, with long, low, brick \nwalls, an antique, Swedish, or hipped roof. The side of the edifice \nWas turned to the road; and it had arched doors and windows, \nwith imported leaden sashes. The pulpit was on the side; and the \npews were of forms, patterns, and colours as diverse as the tastes \nand the incomes of their respective owners. \n\nIn 1749, he was invited to Philadelphia, a grammar-school \nhaving been opened in that city by subscription. He asked leave \nof the synod to sit as a member of Philadelphia Presbytery: they \ndeclined, and promised him thirty pounds for educating their \nbeneficiaries, with liberty to charge at his pleasure for the tuition \nof others. The grammar-school in Philadelphia was incorporated \nin 1750, endowed in 1753, and erected into a college in 1755i \nAlison K-1\'t .New London before May, ll\'rl, without consulting \npresbytery or Bynod; but this was excused, owing to the pressing \ncircumstances of his position, lie took charge of the grammar? \nschool, and became colleague to Cross. Among his elders who \n\nsat with him in synod were the Hon. Charles Thomson and Mr. \nWilliam Humphreys. \n\nHe was made vice-provost of the college in 1755; and Nassau \nHall gave him the degree of A.M. in 1756, and the University \n\nof Glasgow Created him doctor of divinity in 17~>"I. lie was the \n\nfirst of our ministers who received that honour; and the Synod of \nPhiladelphia returned their thanks, for the favour, to the I\'ni- \nvei-i- \n\n< )u the union of the synod-, May 24, 1758, he preached from \n\nEph. iv. 1-7. \'I\'h\' 1 sermon was published, with the title, \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Peace \n\nand [Joins recommend. -d," and a note, suggesting that, as in the \n\nperusal it might to many -<em Long, they may conveniently divide \nit by pausing ;it the twenty-eighth page. \n\nlb- Went, with Colonel Bind, a- chaplain to the expedition to \n\ni Cumberland, and remained from August to November. \n\nTogether with Gilbert Tenneiit and the l\'roliyterians gene- \nrally, who were headed by Chief-Justice Allen, (father-in-law of \nnor .John l\'eim,i he opposed the throwing off of the Pro- \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Duboit\'i Btttorleal M one at New London. \n\n\\ The diploma wai transmitted to him through flu Bev. Jamei M |y, of \n\nNewry. \xe2\x80\x94 PhUadtlphia .V. h j-ijT. \n\n\n\n442 FRANCIS ALISON. \n\nprietary Government; and, as a reward* for his services in that \nmatter, Richard Penn gave Alison the splendid tract of one thou- \nsand acres at the confluence of the Bald Eagle with the West \nBranch of the Susquehanna. \n\nHe was the efficient agent in the establishment of the Widows \nFund in our church; and was wisely active in the convention with \nthe Connecticut ministers to withstand the gradual but determined \ninnovations of Churchmen and the Crown on our liberties as citi \nzens and Christians. \n\nAmong his correspondentsf were Dr. Gordon, of Stepney, \nEngland ; William Boyd, minister of Taughboyne, in Ireland, (who \nvisited New England in 1718,) and John Holmes, of Glendermot, \nboth able and zealous advocates for the subscription of the West- \nminster Confession ; and James Moody, of Newry, who differed \nwith them on that point. \n\nAlison was so much pleased with Connecticut that at one time \nhe thought of making it the retreat of his old age. Probably \nsome hint of this induced the people of New London, who had \nremained vacant since his removal, to send Elijah McClenachan \nand William Montgomery as commissioners to the Second Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery, with a call for him, August 14, 1765. He \ntook it under consideration, and returned it, November 26, 1766. \n\nAlthough his family could ill afford it, he set free his slaves by \nwill: "the good manf followed the dictates of his conscience, \nleaving his widow to Providence." \n\nHe died, November 28, 1779, aged seventy-four. His wife was \nan Armitage. He left a son (a physician, at Fagg\'s Manor) and \ntwo daughters: one of his sons died before him, at the age of \ntwenty-eight. \n\nAmong his pupils were Charles Thomson, Secretary of the \nContinental Congress, Dr. Ewing, of Philadelphia, Dr. Latta, of \nChestnut Level, Matthew Wilson, of Lewes, Hugh Williamson, \nand David Ramsay, the historian of North and South Carolina, \nand three signers of the Declaration of Independence, \xe2\x80\x94 Governor \nMcKean, George Read, and James Smith. He had the reputa- \ntion\xc2\xa7 of being the best Latin scholar in America. Bishop White \nwas one of his pupils, and, in his "Memoirs," speaks of him as a \nman of unquestionable ability in his department, of real and \n\n\n\n* Day\'s Historical Collections of Pennsylvania. But Judge Huston says that \nthe lands of the West Branch were laid out for officers of first and second bat- \ntalions of regiment under Colonel Boquet. Fifteen hundred acres on west side of \nthe mouth of Bald Eagle were conveyed to Dr. Alison, February 4, 17G9, and were \npaid for in full, April 3, 1772. \xe2\x80\x94 Land Titles. \n\nf Stiles\'s MSS., Yale College. \n\n+ Philadelphia Newspaper. \n\n| Morgan Edwards. \n\n\n\nDAVID COWELL. 443 \n\nrational piety; with a proneness to anger, which was forgotten in \nhis placableness and affability. Davies speaks of him to CoweU \na3 "our learned friend." \n\n\n\nDAVID COWELL \n\n\n\nWas born in Dorchester, Massachusetts, in 1704, graduated at \nHarvard in \\~\'-\'>2, and came as a licentiate to Trenton, N.J. , in IT-"\'.\'!. \n\nTrenton, which had formed a part of Hopewell, asked Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery, in September, 1734, to provide them a \nminister. In the next fall, CoweU began his labours there. On \nhis receiving a call,* the presbytery examined him on his religious \nprinciples and BentamentS, heard him preach from Rom. iii. 25, \nand, after a sermon by Andrews, ordained him, November 3, \n1786. \n\nA debate was maintained between him and Gilbert Tennent on \na most important matter: namely, "Whether a motive, to which \nthe natural man is susceptible, a regard to what he sees to be on \nthe whole most for his interest, is acceptable with God when it \nleads one to embrace Christ\'s salvation and God\'s service? \nCoweU disclaimed the affirmative, which Tennent charged him \nwith holding, and probably was equally unwilling to admit that \nour obedience to God is worthless if we be iniluenced by a desire \nfor our own salvation as well as the glory of God. \n\nlie took no part at the division in 1741; but he was fully op- \n| :\xe2\x96\xa0> the extreme measures of the Brunswick party. ]!<\xe2\x80\xa2 re- \n\nmained with tin- Old Side; but his intercourse with the New York \nbrethren, and his intimate friendship with Burr, was not inter- \nrupt. -1. \n\nIn 1749, the commissions of both synods met at Trenton, to \ntreat about a anion. Oowell was chosen moderator; but, m heated \ndiscussion arising about the Protest) they broke up, unanimously \nagreeing thai each synod more rally prepare proposals of recon- \nciliation, and that there I"- in the mean time a mutual endeavour \nto cultivate eandonr and friendship* \n\nBe was an early, an ardent, and an indefatigable friend of New \n\nand unwearied in his efforts t<> place Davies in \n\nthe presidency. II\'\' wrote t>> him,*} "Tin.- college ought i<> be \n\n\xe2\x99\xa6 \\< i im in the hand! of Mr. .1. v <\xe2\x80\xa2 iwelL \n\nf 1188. in the I I of Philadalphiai I \n\n\n\n444 DAVID COWELL. \n\nesteemed of as much importance to the interests of religion and \nliberty as any other institution of the kind in America. God at \nfirst, in a most remarkable manner, owned and blessed it. It \nwas the Lord\'s doing. He erected it; for our beginning was \nnothing. He carried it on, till it was marvellous in our eyes. \nBut it hath been under terrible frowns of Divine Providence: \nfirst, in the loss of Mr. Burr, the life and soul of it ; and then of \nMr. Edwards, from whom we had such raised expectations. May \nthe Father of mercies look with pity and compassion on the work \nof his own hands ! I am sensible that your leaving Virginia is \nattended with great difficulties ; but I cannot think your affairs are \nof equal importance with the college." \n\nUpon the union, he joined New Brunswick Presbytery, June 3, \n1758 ; and, the next year, Trenton asked for supplies. He died, \nDecember 1, 1760, having never married. Davies preached at his \nfuneral \xe2\x80\x94 himself so soon to follow \xe2\x80\x94 from Heb. iv. 11, having been \n" nominated by him to that service." \n\n" During* the short time I have been a resident of this pro- \nvince, he has been my very intimate friend ; and I have conversed \nwith him in his most unreserved hours, when conversation was the \nimage of his soul. I had only a general acquaintance with him \nfor ten years before. \n\n" The characteristics of his youth were a serious, virtuous, re- \nligious turn of mind, free from the vices and vanities of that \nthoughtless age ; and a remarkable thirst for knowledge : and I \nam witness how lively a taste for books and knowledge he \ncherished to the last. He appeared to me to have a mind \nsteadily and habitually bent towards God and holiness. If his \nreligion was not so warm and passionate as that of some, it was \nperhaps proportionally more even, uniform, and rational. His \nreligion was not a transient passion, but appeared to be a settled \ntemper. Humility and modesty, those gentle virtues, seemed to \nshine in him with a very amiable lustre. He often imposed a \nvoluntary silence upon himself, when he would have made an \nagreeable figure in conversation. He was fond of giving way to \nhis brethren with whom he might justly have claimed an equality, \nor to encourage modest worth in his inferiors. He was not im- \npudently liberal of unasked advice, though very judicious, impar- \ntial, and communicative when consulted. He had an easy, grace- \nful negligence in his carriage, \xe2\x80\x94 a noble indifference about setting \nhimself off; he seemed not to know his own accomplishments, \nthough they were so conspicuous that many a man has made a \n\n\n\nrelied upon his skill as a physician, and requested his presence when the students \nhad been inoculated for the smallpox. \n* MS. Sermon of Davies. \n\n\n\nDAVID COWELL. 445 \n\nbrilliant appearance "with a small share of them. He had a re- \nmarkable command of his passions ; he appeared calm and un- \nruffled amid the storms of the world, \xe2\x80\x94 peaceful and serene amid \nthe commotions and uproar of human passions. Remarkably \ncautious and deliberate, slow to determine, and especially to \ncensure, he waa well guarded against extremes. In matters of \ndebate, and especially in religious controversy, he was rather a \nmoderator and compromiser than a party. Though he could not \nbe neuter, but judged for himself to direct his own conduct, he \ncould exercise candour and forbearance without constraint or re- \nluctance; when he happened to differ in opinion from any of his \nbrethren, even themselves could not but acknowledge and admire \nhis moderation. \n\n" His accomplishments, as a man of sense and learning, were \nvery considerable. His judgment was cool, deliberate, and pene- \ntrating; his sentiments were well digested, and his taste excellent. \n1 read not a few of the best modern authors, and was no \nstranger to ancient literature. He could think as well as read ; \nand the knowledge he collected from books was well digested, and \nbecame his own. lie had carefully studied the Sacred Scriptures, \nand had a rational theory of the Christian system. \n\n"He had an easy, natural vein of wit, which rendered his con- \nion extremely agreeable: he sometimes used it with great \ndexterity to expose the rake, the fop, the infidel, and other fools \nof the human species ; it was sacred to the service of virtue, or \ninnocently volatile and lively, to heighten the pleasures of con- \nversation. \n\n"He was a lover of mankind, and delighted in every office \nof benevolence. Benevolence appeared to be his predominant \n\nVirtue, and gave a most amiable cast to his whole temper and \n\nconduct. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 That he might be able to support himself without oppressing \na BmalJ congregation, In- gave Some pari of his time to the study \n\nami practice of physic; in which In- made no inconsiderable figure. \n\nA friend of the poor, he Bpared neither time nor expense to relieve \n\nthem. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 I never had the happiness to hear iiim iii the sacred desk. \n\nIn prayer, I am sure, he appeared humble, solemn, rational, and \n\nimportunate, a- a creature, \xe2\x80\x94 a sinner in the presence of God. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2In the charier of the College of Nem Jersey, he was nomi- \nnated one of the trustees; ami hut few invested with the same \ntrust discharged it with so much zeal, diligence, and alacrity. \n: upon hi- prosperity; he exerted himself in this \nservice, nor did he forget it in his last moments. \n\n"The church has lost a judicious minister, and, a- we hope, a \nsincere Christian; the- world has Lost an inoffensive, useful mem- \n\n\n\n446 CHARLES TENNENT. \n\nber of society, this town an agreeable, peaceable, benevolent \ninhabitant, the College of New Jersey a father; and I have lost \na friend." \n\n\n\nCHARLES TENNENT. \n\n\n\nThe youngest child of Tennent, of Neshaminy, was born in the \ncounty Down, May 3, 1711, and was baptized by the Rev. Richard \nDonnell. He is said* to have learned the trade of a saddler. After \nstudying with his father, he was taken on trials by Philadelphia \nPresbytery in May, 1736 ; in June, at Neshaminy, he was examined \non the evidences of his piety, and was licensed Sept. 20. He was \ncalled, April 6, 1737, to Pilesgrove and vicinity ; but the call was \nnot put into his hands. He soon after was ordained, by Newcastle \nPresbytery, the pastor of Whiteclay. \n\nIn November, 1739, f Whitefield assisted him at the sacrament ; he \npreached from the tent to eight thousand persons. Among the \nhearers was Mrs. Douglass, the sister of Charles Thomson, Secre- \ntary to Congress, and the grandmother of the Rev. James W. \nDouglass, of Fayetteville. She describes Whitefield as bathed in \ntears during nearly all the service. It was a glorious day. The \neffect was happy and extensive. To his delight, he found there a \nfamily named Howell, who had heard him at Cardiff and Kings- \nwood. In the following year he was there on a like occasion ; some \nopposers being present, Whitefield felt peculiar pleasure in singing \nthe 23d Psalm :\xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"My table thou hast furnished, \nIn presence of my foes ; \nMy head thou dost with oil anoint, \nAnd my cup overflows." \n\nA separation took place in the congregation : the Old Side joined \nwith Elk River. On the union of the synods, some of the most \nzealous friends of the Revival forsook Tennent and went over to the \nSeceders, being unable to understand how it could be right to enter \ninto fellowship with those they had been taught to regard as heart- \nenemies to the power of religion. " Shouldest thou help the un- \ngodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon \nthee from before the Lord." Tennent was dismissed from his \ncharge in 1763, and settled at Buckingham, now Berlin, on the \n\n* Letter of a Covenanting Presbyterian. \nj- Log College, Whitefield\' s Journal. \n\n\n\nAARON BURR. 4-47 \n\nEastern Shore of Maryland. "There was a great stir about reli- \ngion,*\' said Da vies, in 1751, "some four years ago in Buckingham, \non the sea-shore, and a place called the Ferry, which were then \nwithout a minister." \n\nOf his success there little is known ; he was involved in difficul- \nties that threw a gloom over his closing days. He died in 1771. \nHis son, the Rev. Win. M. Tennent, was licensed before his death: \nhis granddaughter, Miss Stewart, died a few years ago, in advanced \nlife. \n\nHe is said to have been a good preacher, but high-spirited and \nhasty. L>uvies joins him with his brothers in high praise : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Surviving remnant of the sacred tribe, \nWliu knew the worth these plaintive lays describe, \nTenneuts, three worthies of immortal tame, \nBrothers in office, birth, and heart, and name." \n\n\n\nAARON BURR \n\n\n\nWas the son* of Daniel Burr, of Upper Meadows, in Fairfield, \nConn., a descendant of Jehu Burr, an early settler of Springfield) \nMass., and <>f the Rev. Jonathan Burr, who came from Redgrave^ \nin Suffolk, in 1604, and was the minister of Dorchester, Mass. \nAaron was born Jan. 4, 1715-6, and was baptized March 4. lie \ngraduated at Yale in 1785. \n\nThe year afterf he took his first degree, he spent in the college: \nand it is supposed that he then met with a saving change of heart, \nand became not only almost, bul altogether, a Christian. The re- \nlation of this important event 1 have extracted out of his private \n. and .-hall give you his own words, as follows: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2This year God -aw fit tb open my eyes, and Bhow me what a \n\nmiserable creature 1 was. Till then, 1 Bpent my life in a dream; \nand, to the great design of my being, had lived in vain. Though \nbefore I had been under frequent convictions, and was drove to a \nform of religion, yet I knew nothing as I ought to know. But \nthru I was brought to the footstool of sovereign grace; saw myself \npolluted by oature and practice; had affecting views of the divine \nI ; was made to despair of help in myself, and \nalmosl concluded that my day of grace had passed. These convic- \ntions held for Bome montns, greater at some seasons than at others ; \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 118. Utter tft N. <; Iwin, B*q., Hartford. \n\n| Poncnl Sermon, bj Rot. (\'.duo .SwitL. \n\n\n\n448 AARON BURR. \n\nbut I never revealed them to any, which I have much lamented \nsince. It pleased God at length to reveal his Son to me in the gos- \npel, an all-sufficient and willing Saviour, and, I hope, inclined me \nto accept him on the terms of the gospel. I received some conso- \nlation, and found a great change in myself. Before this, I was \nstrongly attached to the Arminian scheme, but then was made to \nsee those things in a different light, and seemingly felt the truth of \nthe Calvinian doctrines."\' \n\nHe was licensed in September, 1736, and preached his first ser- \nmon at Greenfield, Mass. While laboring at Hanover, N.J., he \nwas invited to Newark ; he was received by all with great regard ; \n"much love was shown to him," and, coming in "a day of tempta- \ntion and darkness," in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel, \nthe aspect brightened and all around beamed with peace. Within \ntwo months after beginning to preach, he went to Newark, and, full \ntrial being made of his gifts, he was ordained by the Presbytery \nof East Jersey, Oct. 25, 1737-8. Pierson preached, and Dickin- \nson presided and gave the charge. \n\n"There* was a remarkable revival there in the autumn of \n1739 : in March, the whole town in general was brought under an \nuncommon concern about their eternal interests ; and under some \nsermons the congregation appeared universally affected. In Feb- \nruary, 1741, there was another effusion of the Holy Spirit, princi- \npally upon the young. "When Whitefield preached at Newark, it \nwas nearly dark, and he could not see the effect produced ; but at \nnight, at worship in Burr\'s house, some young men, studying with \nhim, were greatly affected." Whitefield speaks of him as a young \nminister, "who, I trust, will come fairly out for God." \n\nIn the divisions at New Haven, f growing out of the progress of \nthe Revival, it was proposed in June, 1742, as a measure likely to \nsatisfy all parties, that Burr should be settled in the First Church ; \nand a committee, with the rector of Yale at its head, was appointed \nto treat with him. \n\nThe enemy sowed tares at Newark : there sprang up a spirit of \narrogance and censoriousness in some of the converts ; strange no- \ntions concerning assurance and the witness of the Spirit, were em- \nbraced ; and the great excitement about the ejectment suits, involv- \ning the property and the homes of nearly every one, and the land- \nriots, sunk divine things out of notice. \n\nThe College of New Jersey was, on the death of Dickinson, re- \nmoved in 1747 to Newark, and Burr was placed at the head. He \naccompanied Whitefield through New England in 1752, and visited \nEdwards. Having seen his daughter Esther, he wrote expressing \n\n\n\n* Dickinson, in Christian History, \nf Bacon. \n\n\n\nAARON BURR. 449 \n\nhis desire that, as he was unaUe to go to her, she would come to \nhim. Her mother accompanied her to New York, where they were \nmarried June 29, 1752. \n\nIn 1755, his pastoral relation was dissolved, as it was thought \nbest to establish the college in Princeton. Much urgency had been \nused to prevail on him to go to Great Britain in its behalf, but his \nmarriage prompted him to decline. It grieved him to see the stu- \ndents banded in parties, and exhibiting much alienation of feeling : \nthere was in a degree a reconciliation effected in the winter of 1757, \nand it was followed by a gracious revival. The hand of God was \nvisibly displayed in February, 1757; "much old experience" had \ntaught Burr to place little reliance on relations of experience. The \nstudents carefully observed his cautions about giving way to irre- \ngular heats, and silenced the gainsayers. Finley wrote to Davies \nan account of the good work, who said, " It was the most joyful \nnews I ever heard. It began with the son of a considerable gen- \ntleman in New York, and was general before the President knew \nof it." "The President," said Gilbert Tennent, "never shone in \nmy eyes as he dues now. His good judgment and humility, his \nzeal and integrity, greatly endeared him to me." Spencer had seen \nnothing mure evidently like a work of God, even in the Great Re- \nvival. The first Tuesday in April was observed as a day of fast- \ning and prayer. In the summer there were some backslidings ; \n"but," said Burr, "certainly a glorious work is going on." \n\nIn the summer,* being in a low state of health, he made a rapid \nand exhausting visit, in a very hot, sultry season, to his father-in- \nlaw at Btookbridge. lie Boon returned to Princeton, and went im- \nmediately to Elizabethtown, and, on the 19th of August, made an \nattempt to procure the legal exemption of the students from mili- \ntary duty. II\xc2\xab\' mourned with a friend, (probably Caleb Smith, of \nOrange, who bad just Lost his wife;) and on the 21st, being much \nindisposed, he preached an extemporaneous sermon at a funeral in \nIn, Buccessor\'e (Bey. John Brainerd\'s) family at Newark;. From \nPrinceton be wenl to Philadelphia on business of the college, and on \nhis return learned that Governor Belcher had died on the 31st. He \nprepared the sermon for bis funeral under a bigh fever, and at \nnight was delirious. He rode to Elizabethtown, and, on the 4th, \n\nf (reached, being in a Btate of extreme languor and exhaustion. I lis \nanguoc of countenance was noticed, bui especially the failure of \nhis harmonious delivery. Returning home next day, be sunk under \nnervous fever, and died Sept. 24, L757. The Rev. Caleb Smith \npreached lii^ funeral Bermon. William Livingston, afterwards \nnor of New Jersey . pronounced ins eulogium. It was printed \nin New York, and speedily reprinted in Boston. The following i- \ngiven as a specimen : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n* Hev. Culot. Smith. \n\n\n\n450 AARON BURR. \n\n" To have all the qualifications that render a man amiable or \ngreat ; to be the object of delight wherever one is known ; to pos- \nsess learning, genius, and sublimity of soul : can there be born a \ngreater blessing to the world ? To exert these shining endowments \nfor the benefit of mankind, and employ a great and elevated spirit \nonly in doing good and diffusing good : can a nobler use be made \nof the happiest talents ? Amidst such striking colours, in such a \ndegenerate age, who can mistake the picture of the excellent de- \nceased? Can you image to yourself a person, moderate in pros- \nperity, prudent in difficulty, in business indefatigable, magnanimous \nin danger, easy in his manners, of exquisite judgment, of profound \nlearning, catholic in sentiment, of the purest morals, and great \neven in the minutest things : can you image so accomplished a per- \nson without recollecting the idea of the late President Burr ? Few \nwere more perfect in the art of rendering themselves agreeable in \ncompany. His open, benevolent, undissembling heart inspired all \naround him with innocent cheerfulness, and made every one who \nknew him court his engaging society. Though a person of slender \nand delicate make, to encounter fatigue he had a heart of steel, \nand, for the despatch of business, the most amazing talents joined \nto a constancy of mind which induced success in spite of every ob- \nstacle. As long as an enterprise appeared not absolutely impos- \nsible, he knew no discouragement, but in proportion to its difficulty \naugmented his diligence, and by an insuperable fortitude often ac- \ncomplished what his friends conceived utterly impossible. To his \nunparalleled assiduity, next to the divine blessing, is doubtless to \nbe ascribed the present flourishing state of the College of New Jer- \nsey, which, from a mere private undertaking, is become in a few \nyears the joy of its friends, the admiration and envy of its ene- \nmies. \n\n" He was life and activity itself, and, though cut off in the bloom \nand vigour of his years, attained, with respect to his public utility, \nthe remotest period of old age. His every year was replete with \ngood works, and while others could boast here and there a shining \naction, like a scattered star in the vast expanse of heaven, his life, \nlike the milky way, was one continued universal glow. \n\n" In the Scriptures he was a perfect Apollos. These were his \nconstant study, the subject of his daily meditations. From these \nhe extracted his divinity, and the maxims of his conduct, and by \nthese he was made wise unto salvation. His piety eclipsed all his \nother accomplishments. He was steady in his faith, unfluctuating \nin principle, ardent in devotion, deaf to temptation, open to the \nmotions of grace, without ostentation, without pride, full of God, \nevacuated of self, having his conversation in heaven, seeing through \nthe veil of mortality the high destiny of man, breathing a spiritual \nlife, and offering up a perpetual holocaust of adoration and praise. \n\n\n\nAARON BURR. 451 \n\n"In the pulpit he shone with superior lustre. He was fluent, \ncopious, sublime, persuasive. The momentous truths and the awful \nmysteries of religion so strongly possessed the mind, that he spoke \nfrom the heart. His language was intelligible to the meanest ca- \npacity, and above the censure of the highest genius. He aimed at \nperspicuity, and inculcated the luminous and uncontroverted truths \nof Revelation. His invention was not so properly fruitful as inex- \nhaustible, anil his eloquence was equal to his ideas. He was none \nof those downy doctors who soothe their hearers into delusive hopes \nof tbe divine acceptance, or substitute external morality for vital \ngodliness. He scorned to proclaim the peace of God till the rebel \nhad laid down his arms and returned to his allegiance. He was \nan ambassador that adhered inviolably to his instructions, nor ever \nacceded to a treaty that would not be ratified in the court of Hea- \nven. He searched the conscience with the terrors of the law, before \nssuaged its anguish with the sweet emollients of a bleeding \nHeity. \n\n*\xe2\x80\xa2 What he preached in the pulpit he lived out of it. His life and \nhis example were a comment on his sermons, and by his engaging \ndeportment lie rendered the amiable character of the Christian still \nmore lovely and attractive. In him religion seemed to have set up \nher throne, and, as it were, donbled the beams of her majesty The \npastoral function he discharged with equal fidelity and success. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Pot public spirit and love of his country, who ever surpassed \nthis reverend patriot? Amid all the cares of his academic func- \ntion, he thought and studied, he planned and toiled, for the common \nweal. He had a high sense of English liberty, ami detested des- \npotie power ai the baneof human happiness. With him the heresy \nof Arias was not more fatal to the purity of the gospel than the \npositions of Pilmer to the dignity of man and the repose of states. \nOf OW excellent Constitution he entertained the justest idea, ami \ngloried in the privileges of a Briton. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 In propagating the gospel among the Indians, how assiduous! \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2With what dignity and reputation did ho sustain the office of \n\nPresident! He had the most moving method of instruetion j nor \n\ninferior to his capacity of receiving was his facility of eommnni- \n\nCating knowledge a No man had a happier talent of expressing \n\natiments, or calling latent truth from her deep ami profound \nNo man more capable of opening the mental soil to the \nkindly raya of science, or improving and fertilizing it with the \ngentle dews of exposition and comment. lb\' neglected no oppor- \ntunity of imbuing his pupils with the Seeds "1\' virtue. With ease \n\nnred their obedience and I \nDavies heard him preach a valedictory sermon, Sept. 28, 17 I, \n\nto the graduating OWeS. "Hie SUbjeOl was, \'And now, my son, \n\nthe Lord be with thee, and prosper thee.\' 1 was amased i" see \n\n\n\n152 AARON BURR. \n\nhow readily good sense and accurate language flowed from him ex- \ntempore. The sermon was very affecting to me, and might have \nbeen so to the students. \n\n" Sept. 24. \xe2\x80\x94 My drooping spirits were exhilarated by free conver- \nsation with him." \n\nHe printed his sermon before the synod in 1756, on Isa. xxi. \n11, 12 ; also a "Vindication of the Supreme Divinity of the Son of \nGod," in opposition to Emlyn ; and also a Latin Grammar. \n\nHe left two very young children, who were soon deprived of their \nmother,* and their grandparents also. The son, like his father in \nform, in face, in talent, in energy, in eloquence, in polished and \nengaging manner, in his influence over men, rose to the Vice-Presi- \ndency in 1800. Oh that such a father might have lived to train \nsuch a son ! alas, that a son of such a father should have lived to old \nage with the heartlessness of a profligate and the brand of a traitor ! \n\nThe daughter was the wife of Judge Reeve, of Litchfield, Connec- \nticut, and was a follower of her parents, as they followed Christ. \n\nDavies wrote to Cowell, Feb. 20, 1758, "Mr. Burr! My heart \nfails me at the sound of the dear, melancholy name. "What an illus- \ntrious triumvirate have the college, the church, and the world lost \nby the death of Governor Belcher, Mr. Burr, and Mr. Davenport. \nI was the more affected at the President\'s death, as a life so much \nless important than his was spared when in extreme danger about \nthe time of his illness. Since that, I have had frequent touches \nof affliction, under one of which I now languish, but, having ob- \ntained help of God, I continue unto this day. \n\n"As the death of these good men was undoubtedly gain to them, \nmay we not modestly conjecture that it will also prove an advan- \ntage to the world, though we are apt to lament them as lost? I \ncannot conceive of heaven as a state of mere enjoyment without \naction, or indolent supine adoration and praise. The happiness of \nvigorous immortals must consist, one would think, in proper exer- \ncise suitable to the benevolence of their hearts and the extent of their \npowers. May we not suppose, then, that such devout and benevo- \nlent souls as these, when released from the confinement of mor- \ntality, and the low labour of the present life, are not only advanced \nto superior degrees of happiness, but placed in a higher sphere of \nusefulness, employed as ministers of Providence not to this or that \nparticular church, college, or colony, but to a more extensive charge, \nand perhaps to a more important class of beings. And if, when they \ncease to be useful men, they commence angels, i. e. ministering spirits, \nwe may congratulate them and the world upon this more extensive \nbeneficence, instead of lamenting them as lost to all usefulness." \n\n* Mrs. Burr died of smallpox, April 7, 1758, aged twenty-six. Her father died \nat her house, a fortnight previously, March 22 ; her mother died on the 2d of the \nnext October. \n\n\n\nWALTER WILMOT \xe2\x80\x94 DAVID ALEXANDER. 453 \n\n\n\nWALTER WILMOT \n\nWas born at Southampton, Long Island, in 1700, and graduated \nat Yule in 1735. He waa ordained pastor at Jamaica, April 1:2, \n1738. Pemberton preached from Colossians i. 7, and Dickinson \nled, and delivered a discourse on "The Divine Appointment \nof the Christian Ministry, and the Method of its Conveyance." \nThis, with the charge which he gave to the people, was printed. \n\nHis wife died ut the age of twenty-three. Prime preached at her \nfuneral from Ezekiel xxiv. 16. The sermon was printed wdth her \njournal of her religions exercises. \n\nIn the Great Revival, Jamaica was favoured highly; AVhitefield \npreached there, and Gilbert Tenncnt, on his way to Boston, in the \nwinter of 1740. \'\'Our church," says Mr. Colgan to the Vene- \nrable Society, "has been depressed of late by those clouds of error \nand enthusiasm. Enthusiasm has of late been very predominant \namong us." \n\nWilmot did not survive his wife and his babe many months. He \nwas taken sick in the evening of the 15th of July, 1741, and died \non the 6th of August, lie was greatly beloved by his people. \n\n\n\nDAVID ALEXANDER. \n\n\n\nAi.KXAxi>Ku Davidson, b commissioner from Pequea, asked leave \nof Donegal Presbytery, in November, L786, to employ Alexander, \nwliM probably bad lately arrived from Ireland, lie may have been \neducated at the Log College, and licensed by Newoaetle Presby- \ntery, lb\' was at "Pacque" the uezl spring, but the West End | [Lea- \nbock) deeired Leave to build. In August, no call having been made \n\nOUt, Boyd was directed to convene the omgregat it \xe2\x96\xa0 i"i 08 a working- \nday. A call was j.ic-.-ut \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 I in I tatober, bttt, UOl being entirely iii \n\norder, was ool given t\'\xc2\xbb bun. In April, L7S8, the people promised \nhim, in addition, one year\'s lodgings; and be was ordained and in* \nstalled i .i presiding and preaching. \n\nThe Wesl End (Leaoock) petitioned that a portion of his time \nmight be given to diem. At length, in 1741, jusl before the nip- \nton-, Leacock was declared by the synod entitled to all the privi- \n:\' any vacant congregation. \n\n\n\n454 JOHN ELDER. \n\nAlexander let no man outstrip him in his violation of all rules \nin his treatment of those whom he esteemed "opposers of the \nwork." He intruded into Black\'s congregation to carry the gospel \nto a people burdened with a lifeless ministry. When* called, in \nOctober, 1740, to answer for his neglect to attend the stated meet- \nings, he excused himself on account of his bodily weakness, and \nbecause the presbytery were too superficial in examining candi- \ndates, and opposed the work of God, and the ministers chiefly in- \nstrumental in carrying it on ; and also because they opposed the \ncrying out during sermons. He withdrew, and refused to answer \na citation for intruding into Black\'s field. \n\nThe presbytery met at his church to consider a charge against \nhim of intoxication. He took the pulpit and preached. He \nacknowledged the intoxication at a funeral, and the presbytery \njudged it not so heinous as had been represented ; but they sus- \npended him till "satisfaction was given for his disregardful con- \nduct to us, and his refusal to submit to the government of Christ\'s \nchurch in our hands." Yet he was suffered to sit in the synod of \n1741, and he withdrew with the excluded brethren. The conjunct \nPresbyteries of New Brunswick and Newcastle appointed him, on \naccount of " the necessity in the Great Valley," to supply there. \n\nFrom that time he passes out of sight. \n\n\n\nJOHN ELDER \n\n\n\nWas born in Scotland, and educated and probably licensed there. \nPaxton and Pennsborough, having obtained leave to apply to New- \ncastle Presbytery for candidates, in August, 1737, Elder was sent the \nnext month to those vacancies. The people of Paxton asked for \nhim in November, and called him April 12; and he was ordained \nNovember 22, 1738, Black presiding. \n\nAs the Great Revival spread, it entered Elder\'s bounds, and he \nwas accused to the presbytery of preaching false doctrine: they \ncleared him, in December, 1740, but the separation was made soon \nafter, and the conjunct presbyteries answered the supplications \nsent to them the next summer, by sending Campbell and Rowland \nto those who forsook him. He signed the Protest. His support \nbeing reduced, he took charge of the Old-Side portion of the Derry \n\n* MS. Records of Donegal Presbytery : quoted by Dr. Hodge. \n\n\n\nJOHN ELDER. 455 \n\ncongregation. In a few years after, Roan became the pastor of \nthe New-Side congregations of Paxton and Derry, and on his \ndeath the two congregations united in receiving Elder as their \nminister. \n\nWhen associations for defence were formed throughout the pro- \nvince, his hearers, being on the frontier, were prompt to embody \nthemselves: their minister was their captain, and they were trained \nH rangers. lie superintended their discipline, and hifl mounted \nmen became widely known as the "Paxton Boys." He afterwards \nheld a colonel\'s commission from the Proprietaries, and had the \ncommand of the block-houses and stockades from Easton to the \nSusquehanna. In tendering this appointment to him, it was* ex- \npressly stated that nothing more would be expected of him that) \nthe general oversight. Hifl justification lies in the crisis of affairs. \nBay at York, and Steel at Conecocheague, and Griffith at New- \ncastle, with Burton and Thompson, the Church missionaries at \nLancaster and Carlisle, headed companies, and were actively en- \ngaged; for no one can conceive the dreadful state of uneasiness on \nthe borders from 1750 to 1763. Many a family mourned for some \nof their Dumber shot by the secret foe, or carried away captive. \nTheir rifles were carried with them to their work in the field, and \nto the sanctuary. Elder placed his trusty piece beside him in the \npulpit. Death often overtook his Hock as they returned to their \nscattered plantations. In 1756, the meeting-house was surrounded \nwhile he was preaching; but, their Bpies having counted the rifles, \nthe Indians retired from their ambuscade without making an \nattack. The next year, when leaving the meeting-house, they were \nmailed, and two OOr three weita killed. Friendly Indians would \ncome and stay with them in the summer. Murders occurred in the \nfall, and the criminals could not be found, having, it was supposed, \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 hiding-place among the Oonestogas. Blderf besought Governor \n\nHamilton to remove them, because, although on the whole a hann- \n\nibe, they harboured murderers. He engaged, September lo, \n\n1768, that, if this were done, he would secure the safety of tho \n\nfrontier without expense to the provinoe. \nThe proposal was sol accepted. A party of rangers determined \n\nto destroy the tribe, and they called ,,,, Blder, U one knowing tho \n\n;y of breaking up the den of miscreants, to had them on. \n\nThey were ready to set oil": he W8S then in his lifty-s. -\\ cut h year, \n\nand, mounting his hone, he commanded them to desist^ and re- \nminded them that they w. re about to destroy the iniiorent with the \n\n\xc2\xa7nilty. They replied, "Can they b<- [nnocenl who harbour mur- \neren pointed to instance! in which their wives and mo- \n\n\n\n. I! | i\'l, Bl |. \n\nj Redmond Conj ogl \n\n\n\n456 JOHN ELDER. \n\nthers had been murdered and the destroyers traced to the homes \nof the Conestogas. He still entreated, and, at last, placing him- \nself in their road, declared that only by cutting him down they could \nadvance. They then prepared to kill his horse, and he, seeing his \nefforts all fail, left them to take their course. They were chiefly, \nif not wholly, Presbyterians, from Paxton, Derry, Hanover, and \nDonegal; not all young men, but some of them of Elder\'s own \nage, their leader, Lazarus Stewart, having been a commissioner \nfrom Monada Creek in 1735. They did their errand thoroughly \nand mercilessly, destroying, in Conestoga and Lancaster, nearly \nevery remnant of the Indian race. \n\nThe Indians were removed from every exposed place to Phila- \ndelphia, and the citizens apprehended the "Pextang" Boys would \npursue them thither. The Governor published a proclamation, \nsetting a reward on the heads of Stewart and others. Elder wrote \nto the Proprietary, January 27, 1764, " The storm which has been \nbo long gathering has at length exploded. Had Government re- \nmoved the Indians, which had been frequently, but without success, \nurged, this painful catastrophe might have been avoided. What \ncould I do with men heated to madness? All that I could do was \ndone. I expostulated, but life and reason were set at defiance : \nyet the men in private life are virtuous and respectable ; not cruel, \nbut mild and merciful. This deed, magnified into the blackest of \ncrimes, shall come to be considered as one of those ebullitions of \nwrath caused by momentary excitements, to which human infirmity \nis subjected." His pay was suspended, and he promptly laid down \nhis commission. \n\nPamphlets without number, truth, or decency, poured like a tor- \nrent from the press. The Quakers took the pen to hold up the \ndeed to execration; and many others seized the opportunity to \ndefame the Irish Presbyterians as ignorant bigots and lawless \nmarauders. \n\nA dialogue between Andrew Trueman and Thomas Zealot \nspeaks of \'\'Saunders Kent, an elder these thirty years, that gaed \nto duty" just before the massacre, and while he "was saying grace \ntill a pint of whiskey, a wild lad ran his gully [knife] through the \nwame of a heathen wean." This, and much more that is worse, \nlacks the first requisite of a good lie ; it does not look like truth : \nit makes Irish Presbyterians talk like English Churchmen, to \nwhom the phrase "saying grace" is peculiar. "Gaeing to duty" \nis a thrust at family worship, in use among Presbyterians, but \nhighly ridiculous to godless "sayers of grace." \n\nThe Presbyterians replied that "the infamous Teedyuscung" \nconfessed that he would not have complained of the new settlers if \nhe had not been encouraged by prominent Quakers. They pro- \nduced affidavits that the Indians who were killed were drunken, \n\n\n\nRICHARD SAXCKEY. 457 \n\ndebauched, insolent, quarrelsome, and dangerous ; they refer to the \nChristian Indian, RenatUB, as notoriously bad. and assert that the \nIndian who shot Stinson, in Allen township, while rising from his \nbed, was secured, in Philadelphia, from justice, and comforted in \na good room with a warm bed and a stove. They also charged \nthat the representation in the Assembly was unequal, and that Lan- \ncaster, with a larger population, was allowed fewer members than \nother connti \n\nIn all the virulent attacks and retorts, Elder is never stig- \nmatized as abetting or conniving at the massacre; nor is his \nauthority or concurrence pleaded by the actors in their defence. \nLazarus Stewart, and forty families of his neighbours, removed, \nand settled Hanover, in the Shawnee Flats, in Wyoming, under \nthe Connecticut jurisdiction. Little did they think a few years \nbefore, when Elder marched them thither to disperse the New \nEnglanders on the Susquehanna, ami found, on reaching there, \nonly the burned cabins and the mangled bodies, \xe2\x80\x94 the savages \nhaving vindicated their title to the bind by an exterminating \nattack, \xe2\x80\x94 that they WOnld soon make their home there, and stand \n\nfor the defence of their hearths against the Pennsylvania troops. \n\nStewart, with many of his friends, fell in the disastrous battle of \nWyoming, duly \'\xe2\x96\xa0\'>, 1778. \n\n\'1\'he anion of the Bynods brought Elder into the same presby- \ntery with Kuan. Robert Smith, and Duffield, they being at first \nin a minority, but rapidly settling the vaeaneies with New-Side \nmen. Elder, by the leave of synod, joined the Second Philadel- \nphia Presbytery, May 19, 17G.S, and, on the formation of the \nGeneral Assembly, became a member of Carlisle Presbytery. \nHe died in duly, 17\'.\'2, aged eighty-six. having, for fifty-six \nyean, preached in the Old l\'axton meeting-house, two miles \n\n\n\nHarrisb \n\n\n\nurg. \n\n\n\nRICIIALI) SANCKKV, \n\n\n\nA nativi: of Ireland, was taken on trial by Donegal Presby- \n\nOotober 7, 1785: he irai Licensed, October 18, 1786, and \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 i to Monads Creek. This congregation is first mentioned \n\nin Octobor, 17o">, \xe2\x80\x94 Lazarus Stewart appearing to Bupplicate in its \n\nbehalf the next year. Bertram, of Deny, moderated the <\xe2\x80\xa2;\xe2\x80\xa2 1 1 \n\nwhich was brought to the presbytery for Sanokey by John Oun- \n\n.m and Etopert Green, June 22, 17:\'.7. It is from that time \n\n\n\n458 SILAS LEONARD. \n\nstyled Hanover. He accepted, August 31 ; but, it appearing that \nhis trial sermon was transcribed out of books, to give a false view \nof his ministerial powers, and contained most dangerous errors, \nhis presbytery rebuked him, and delayed his ordination. Gil- \nlespie remonstrated with the synod not to countenance such lenity, \nespecially as Sanckey had sent the notes to Henry Hunter, " who \nhad preached them to his own overthrow." Hunter had passed \nhimself off as an ordained minister of the New-Light Presbytery \nof Antrim, in the bounds of Lewes Presbytery ; and the synod, \nfinding his credentials of license genuine, but that he had not been \nordained, that he had been guilty of prevarication, and also that \nmoney had been given him to go to the Bishop of London for orders, \nresolved, nem. con., not to countenance him, especially as there was \n" ground to suspect his principles," until he has gone through the \nordinary course of trials in some of their presbyteries. He ac- \nquiesced; and, coming before Newcastle Presbytery with notes \nstolen from heretical divines, he was rejected. The synod blamed \nthe Presbytery of Donegal for not taking notice, in their minutes, \nof Sanckey\'s plagiarism, or censuring him on that account ; but, \nas he had been sharply rebuked, and his ordination delayed a \nconsiderable time, they declined to lay any other burden on him. \nHe was ordained, August 31, 1738, and removed, with many of \nhis congregation, to Buffalo, in Virginia, about 1760, on account \nof the incursions of savages. In that year he joined Hanover \nPresbytery, and was appointed to preside at the opening of the \nSynod of Virginia in 1785. He lived to a good old age, respected \nby his people and his brethren in the ministry. \n\n\n\nSILAS LEONARD \n\n\n\nWAS a descendant of James Leonard, who, with his brother \nHenry, came from Pontypool, in Monmouthshire, in 1652, and \nsettled at Raynham, in Massachusetts. They established a forge \nthere. Wherever any of the family took up their abode they \nengaged in the manufacture of iron, until it passed into a pro- \nverb, " Where is a Leonard, there is a forge." Such was their \nprobity and excellence that the Indian rule was, " Never hurt a \nLeonard." \n\nSilas Leonard graduated at Yale, in 1736, and was ordained by \nEast Jersey Presbytery, in 1738, pastor of Goshen, New York. \nHe was not a regular attendant on presbytery. The Revival \n\n\n\nSAMUEL CAVIN. 459 \n\nspread through the Highlands ; and he* was " stirred up and spi- \nrited to water what was sown" in the city of New York and other \nplaces. Tennent, of Freehold, and Robinson, came to his assist- \nance, and witnessed blessed results. \n\nIn 1742, he met with the synod, to endeavour to heal the \nrupture, but, failing in this, joined in protesting against the ex- \nclusion of the New Brunswick party, and against the passages in \nthe late pamphlets which disparaged the Revival. \n\nHe died in 17G4. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL CAVIN \n\n\n\nA licentiate from Ireland, was sent by Donegal Presbytery, \nNovember 16, 1737, to Conecocheague. This settlement was first \nmentioned in September, 1736, when the presbytery refused to \nsanction the employment of Mr. Williams, from England, who was \nthen preaching there. They had leave soon after to apply to \nNewcastle Presbytery for candidates, and Gavin came to "Cano- \ngogig." This congregation then embraced Falling Spring (Chara- \nbersburg) and Greencastle, Mercersburg and Welsh Run. The \nSeparation of the congregation into East and West was somewhat \nprecipitate, and without the consent of the presbytery. They ap- \nproved of it in August, 1738, the creek being the dividing-line, \nand " Alexander Dunlop the highest that belongs to the society on \ntin- west side." \'\'Several papers being read, and a pretty deal \nsaid by several persons," the call of the East Side was presented \n\nto Cavin; and he accepted it, April 4, 1739. The people, by \nJames Lindsay, commissioner, Bupplicated, in September, that his \n\nordination might he hastened, \xe2\x80\x94 their Subscriptions amounting to \nforty-su pounds, and they promising him what can lie had over \nand above, and that they will do what they can to procure a \nplantation for him to live upon. They had a meeting-house then \nnear Greencastle, and agreed that, the other should he at Falling \nSpring, though the people of Hopewell thought this too nigh \nthem. The ground at Falling Spring was given by Colonel Ben- \njamin Chambers, \xe2\x80\x94 a cedar-grove, on the hanks of the creek, where \n\nthe Chambersburg church now .-muds. \n\nCavin was ordained and installed November 16j AnderSOO \n* l>r. Nicull, of New York, in Gillics\'a Oollootiofll \n\n\n\n460 FRAXCIS McHENRY. \n\npreached from 1 Tim. vi. 11. In September of the next year, \nrepresentations for and against him were brought from Falling \nSpring. In the winter, he visited the settlements on the South \nBranch of Potomac. \n\nThe presbytery in Philadelphia, during the session of synod in \nMay, 1741, admonished him for his imprudent and unguarded ex- \npressions; and, yielding to his request, they dismissed him from \nhis charge at Falling Spring. He signed the Protest, and spent \nsome time, in the summer, at Anteidem, (Hagerstown,) Marsh \nCreek, Opequhon, and on the South Branch. After labouring \nsome time in the Highlands of New York, he was called, May 26, \n174-3, to Goodwill, or Wallkill. The remainder of his life was \nspent in itinerating in Virginia and the other vacancies: \xe2\x80\x94 at one \ntime, six Sabbaths on the East Branch of Potomac ; at another, \npreaching "between the two rivers." He was an occasional sup- \nply of Falling Spring and Conecocheague, and was invited, No- \nvember 6, 1744, to the " South Side of East Conecocheague." \n\nHe died, November 9, 1750, aged forty-nine, and lies buried \nin the graveyard at Silver Spring.* \n\nThe Conecocheague settlement espoused the New Side warmly; \nand the complaints against Cavin were, that he never asked about \nthe state of their souls, did not rebuke profanity, claimed for the \nnatural man power to do good, and called the vehement, im- \npassioned language of Alexander Craighead blasphemy. The Old- \nSide congregations remained vacant many years; and the New- \nSide congregation in vain called Rodgers and others, and was left \nto depend on occasional supplies. \n\n\n\nFRANCIS McHENRY \n\n\n\nMarried, before leaving Ireland, the eldest daughter of Hugh \nWilson, of Coote Hill, in Cavan, who emigrated with his family \nand friends, and was among the first purchasers at Craig\'s Settle- \nment, in the Forks of Delaware. \n\nMcIIenry appeared before Philadelphia Presbytery, November \n10, 1737, with recommendations from Monaghan Presbytery and \na letter from the Rev. Andrew Deane. He was examined as to his \npiety, and, having been licensed, was directed to supply Amwell, \n\nI * Kevins\' s Churches of the Valley. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL THOMSON. 461 \n\nBethlehem, and other vacancies in Hunterdon county. New Jersey, \nand to preach every third Sabbath at Newtown, Bucks county, \nPennsylvania. When Torment, in October, 1738, consented to \nhave an assistant, "to preach day about" at Neshaminy, McIIenry \nwas sent to spend every third Sal. bath, giving the rest of his time \nto Deep Run. In the spring, Neshaminy asked for half of his \ntime. A request being made for his ordination, the presbytery \nmet, July 12, 1739, at the meeting-house on the South Branch of \nNeshaminy: "he gave a modest but satisfactory account of his \nexperience of the influences of the Holy Spirit." Robert Cross \npreached; and he was ordained, September 18. In May, Deep \nRun asked leave fco call him; but the presbytery directed him to \ncontinue to serve Neshaminy. \n\nThe congregation of Deep Run* was formed in 1732: "William \nAllen gave the parsonage and church lot. It was probably styled, \non the presbytery\'s records, " Mr. Tennent\'s Upper Congrega- \ntion," until 1738, when the name of Deep Run appears. \n\nMeHenry took no part in the time of the exclusion, hut re- \nmained with the I >M Bide. \n\nA call for him from Nottingham was brought. May 28, 1742, \nby John Dick, a commissioner ; and the Rot. Adam Boyd at- \ntended, to urge the concurrence of the presbytery. Touched with \nthe deplorable condition of the people, they directed him to supply \nthem: be did so for a season, and then returned the caUL He was \ninstalled at Deep Run and Neshaminy, Maroh K>, 1743. \n\nIn the spring of 17o (l , he -pent eight weeks as a missionary in \nVirginia. He died in 17-37. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL THOMSON, \n\nA LK bhtiatb of Newcastle Presbytery, came as a candidate to \nth<- two societies of Pennsb trough in November, 17-".7. and was \ntaken under the care of Donegal Presbytery. Both societies \nunited on him; and Benjamin Chambers and Thomas Brown came \ni mera to ass for him in June] L788. Thomson was \nblamed before the presbytery for having written an offensive letter \nto the Proprietary, His friends pleaded that be had been shame- \nfully used by certain persons, and thai they had threatened to \n\n\n\n* Ucv. Dr Andrews\'s Hunulof the Doylestown I \n\n\n\n462 JOHN CRAIG. \n\ntake him out of the pulpit, and drag him at a horse\'s tail to the \nNew Town. Thomson was ordained, at Pennsborough, November \n14, 1739, pastor of Upper and Lower Pennsborough, Newcastle, \nand Silver Spring: Alexander Craighead preached from Ezek. \nxxxiii. 6. In March, 1745, Upper Pennsborough obtained the \nwhole of his time. In 1749, he was charged with an immo- \nrality, and was suspended. He was subsequently restored, and dis- \nmissed from Pennsborough. His congregation divided during the \nRevival. \n\nThe first congregation " over the river" was on the Conedo- \nguinet, and had supplies in 1734: the first were A. Craighead, \nand Bertram, and Gelston. In 1736, Anderson preached at the \nNew Town. In April, 1737, Anderson and Bertram were sent to \nConedoguinet. John Penn gave the settlers three hundred acres \nfor meeting-house and parsonage. They built their church first at \nthe Meeting-house Springs ; and in the old graveyard are to be \nseen the stones with coats of arms graven on them. \n\nHe was often sent to supply in Virginia. He was dissatisfied \nwith many things after the union, and withdrew ; but, on the final \nadjustment of the matter, he was annexed to Donegal Presbytery. \n\nHe died, April 29, 1787. \n\nHis son William took holy orders, and came to York and Cum- \nberland, as a missionary of the Venerable Society, about 1750, and \nwas the rector of St. John\'s, in Carlisle. \n\n\n\nJOHN CRAIG \n\n\n\nWas born in Ireland, September 21, 1710, but educated in \nAmerica. He appeared before Donegal Presbytery in the fall of \n1736, and was taken on trial the next spring, and licensed, \nAugust 30, 1738. He was sent to Deer Creek (now Churchville, \nMaryland) and to West Conecocheague. He spent the summer in \nthose places, and Conewago and Opequhon. West Conecocheague \ncalled him in the fall of 1739 ; but he declined a settlement in that \ncharge. \n\nIn 1737, the new-settled inhabitants of Beverley\'s Manor ap- \nplied for supplies; and Anderson* visited them, and settled the \nbounds of the congregations "in an orderly manner, by the voice \n\n* Rey. B. M. Smith, of Staunton, in Presbyterian Magazine, October, 1752. \n\n\n\nJOHX CRAIG. 463 \n\nof the people." Craig was sent, at the close of 1739, to Opequ- \nhon, Irish Tract, and other places in Western Virginia. He was \n"the coramencer of the Presbyterian service in Augusta." He \ngathered two congregations in the south part of the Manor, now \nAugusta county, and, in April, 1740, received a call from Shana- \ndore and South River. It is described in the call as the con- \ngregation of the Triple Forks of Shenandoah, but long since \nknown as Augusta and Tinkling Spring. On the 2d of Septem- \nber, 1740, Robert Poag and Daniel Denniston appeared as repre- \nsentatives, and took on them the engagements made by the people \nat installations. On the next day, after Sanckey had preached \nfrom Jer. iii. 15, Craig was ordained and installed. \n\nAt this time all things were working mightily " to draw the \nlingering battle on." "Having examined* the controversy, had \nfree communication with both parties, (New Side and Old,) he ap- \nplied to God for light and direction in this important matter, and \ncame \xe2\x80\x94 not instantly, but after time and deliberation \xe2\x80\x94 to clearness \nof mind to join in the Protest against the new and uncharitable \nopinions and the views of church government." The friends of \ntin- Revival passed through his bounds, but do not seem to have \nalienated Lis people to any large extent. They Were blessed with \nmuch -nee.\xe2\x80\x94 throughout the valley. \n\nHe attended the synod in 1741, and signed the Protest. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 < ioing downf from the splendid prospect of the Roekfish Gap, \nyou enter the bounds of the oldest congregation in Virginia, \nTinkling Spring, with its old stone church. Here, in a wooden \nbuilding finished by the widow of John Preston, Craig preached. \nHe was greatly opposed to the location of the meeting, wishing it \nmore central. " The people chose it, among other reasons, for the \nConvenience of the spring; and, it is said, "he never suffered its \nWater to eool bis thirst." \n\nTin- eburcii in Augusts was strongly fortified in the French War, \nrefusing to Bee from tin- savage. \n\nOn the union, be heartily joined with Hanover Presbytery, \nand was as forward as any in soliciting funds for Princeton \n\nCo||. \n\nlie resigned the pastoral oare of Tinkling Spring in November, \n17". I; and the sermon vrbjen he preached on thai occasion, from \n\n"2 Sam. xxiii. ">, is the only one of his dlSOOUneS that can be found. \n\nIt was printed, for the firs! time, in the " Baltimore Literary and \nReligious Magazine," in December, L760. \n\n"In this short disCOUT8e," he says, " I have collected together \n\nthe sum and substance of those doctrines 1 have declared to yon \nventy-five years past \n\nLetter of Craig; quoted t.y Mr. BttUh. t Dr- \' \n\n\n\n464 JOHN CRAIG. \n\n"I have long, often, and sincerely exhorted, entreated, invited, \nand besought you, in public, in private, in secret, to come and \ntake hold of God\'s covenant and Christ the Mediator thereof. I \nhope some among you have sincerely complied : I wish I could \nsay all that I have been so nearly concerned for or related to. \nBut now our near and dear pastoral relation is dissolved. And, \noh, how does my heart tremble to think and fear that too, too \nmany among you have not sincerely accepted of and embraced \nChrist on gospel terms ! Oh, how can I leave you at a distance \nfrom Christ, and strangers to the God that made you? I cannot \nleave you till I give you another offer of Christ and the covenant \nof grace. Let me beg of you, for your souls\' sake, for Christ\'s \nsake, to leave all your sins, and come, come speedily, and lay hold \non the covenant and the Mediator ; never, never let him go till he \nbless you. \n\n" Few and poor, and without order, were you when I accepted \nyour call ; but now I leave you a numerous, wealthy congregation, \nable to support the gospel, and of credit and reputation in the \nchurch. \n\n" For coming into the bond of this covenant of grace ; it is by \nfaith we take hold of it. This we do when we are thoroughly, \nclearly convinced of our sin, and misery, and undone state under \nthe covenant of works ; and do hence betake ourselves to the new \ncovenant, to the gracious method of salvation proposed to us in \nthe gospel through Jesus Christ and his righteousness, and do cor- \ndially approve of, and acquiesce in this noble contrivance, and accept \nof Jesus Christ as our only Mediator, Surety, and Peacemaker \nwith God, and in him do sincerely make choice of God \xe2\x80\x94 Father, \nSon, and Holy Spirit \xe2\x80\x94 to be our God and portion. On our part, \ngiving ourselves soul and body to be the Lord\'s ; engaging, in the \nstrength of our great surety, Jesus Christ, to abandon all sin, live \nfor his glory, and walk with him in newness of life, as becomes \nGod\'s covenanted people. This great work is carried on in all its \nparts by God\'s Holy Spirit, helping and determining our souls to \ndo all these things heartily, cheerfully, and sincerely." \n\nIn parting, he makes no complaints of them, and no boasting of \nhimself. \n\nHe remained in the charge of Augusta till his death, April 21, \n1774, " after fifteen hours\' affliction," aged sixty-three years and \nfour months. \n\n" The old people* in Augusta county have learned from their \nfathers that he was a man mighty in the Scriptures, \xe2\x80\x94 \' in perils oft, \nin labours abundant,\' for the gospel; and they hold his memory in \nthe highest veneration." \n\n\n\n* Dr. Foote. \n\n\n\nAZARIAH HORT03T. 465 \n\nCraig said,* when asked if he found suitable persons for elders \nin new settlements, where he had organized churches, " "When \nthere were no hewn stones I just took dornacks." \n\n\n\nAZARIAH HORTON, \n\nA brother of the Rev. Simon Ilorton, graduated at Yale in \n1735, and, on being licensed, probably by New York Presbytery, \nhe received \xe2\x96\xa0 call to a promising parish, Long Island, and was \nprepared to accept it. The case of the Indians on the island was \n1 upon him by the correspondents of the Scottish Society for \nPropagating the Grospel; and they prevailed on him to relinquish \nthe call. Hi- was ordained by New York Presbytery in 1740, and \nentered on his labours at the east end of the island in the midst \nof the Great Revival. f Thirty-five Indians were soon after bap- \ntized. Subsequently he had little or no encouraging success. Two \nchurches]; still exist, the remains of the fruit of his toil: one at \nPoosepatuok, on the Great South Ray, in the south of Brookhaven, \nthe other at Shinnecock, the largest settlement, two miles west of \nSouthampton. At the latter place he made his home, lie printed \ntwo yean of hie missionary journal. On the 18th of May, 1742, \nhe was at Smithfield, Pennsylvania, and he spent a fortnight in \npreparing the Indians on the Delaware for Brainerd\'s coming. He \nwent from there to attend the synod in Philadelphia, and signed \nthe Protest of the New fork brethren against the exclusion and \nrupture of 1741. He met with many discouragements in his work. \n\nIn his printed letter dated Southampton, September 14, 1751, he \nspeaks of having been annoyed by the Separates; this, together \nwith the diminished number of the Indians, and the hopelessness \nof doing them any good, led him to abandon the mission in L753. \nThe Indian- on the island numbered only four hundred in 1740. \n\nHe became the pa-tor of South Hanover, New Jersey, the con- \ngregation having been set off from Hanover in 17 1 s : for along \ntime it was called Bottle Hill, and now is known as Madison. \nBe was dismissed in November, 1776, and die^ March J, L777, aged \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Wo. \n\n\n\nud Graham, in Dp. Davidson*! History of ELentaoky. \nPi l! \xe2\x80\xa2 iv of Long [aland, \n\nj II- bad, for lii- aaaiatant, Miranda formerly nn [ndian trader, who I \nbonrad to mstmei tin- Dalowaro and Bnsqaohanna [ndlani; bat bj i \nlintmont \xe2\x80\x94 QOUt$. \n\n80 \n\n\n\n466 JOHN GUILD. \n\n\n\nJOHN GUILD, \n\nBorn in Massachusetts, graduated at Harvard, and came, pro- \nbably as a teacher, to Hopewell, New Jersey, in 1737. He offered \nhimself to Philadelphia Presbytery at their meeting, in Maidenhead, \nin April; and, when on their way to adjust the difficulties between \nHanover and the infant church of Morristown, the ministers \nstopped at Captain Edward Hart\'s, in Hopewell, and took him on \ntrials. On the 19th of September they examined his pious inclina- \ntions and dispositions, and licensed him. He supplied Hopewell, \nthen vacant by the removal of Morgan. There was much opposi- \ntion to him there ; and his friends, though they had a majority on \ntheir side, condescended for three months, and the presbytery gave \nthem leave to invite Davenport, and drew up a letter for the con- \ngregation to send to him. They, however, invited Rowland, then \nrecently licensed by New Brunswick Presbytery, in disregard of \nthe synod\'s act concerning the examination of candidates ; and he \npreached for them, although warned by Cowell that by doing so he \nwould create and foment divisions. In October, Benjamin Stevens, \nJohn Anderson, Samuel Hunt, and Joseph Birt, petitioned for a \nnew erection, \xe2\x80\x94 a division of the congregation ; and Enoch Armitage, \nThomas Burrowes, Edward Hart, and Timothy Baker opposed. \nThe synod, in 1739, on hearing both sides, condemned the friends \nof the new erection for their treatment of the presbytery, and for \n"improving" Rowland, knowing that the synod had not allowed \nhim as a candidate, and refused to form them into a new congre- \ngation until they submitted the location of their proposed meeting- \nhouse to the determination of the presbytery. They requested the \npresbytery, when determining the site, to call, as correspondents, \nNutman, Blair, Burr, Hubbel, and Wales. Whether this was done \ndoes not appear. The Revival was in progress in these congrega- \ntions ; Gilbert Tennent published several of the sermons preached \nto them during this period, and the division of the congregation \nwas effected as though the captives were going out of Babylon, or \nthe righteous were rising from their graves. \n\nHopewell asked Philadelphia Presbytery for Guild, May 22, \n1739, and they referred the matter to the synod. He was called, \nSeptember 18, 1739, but not ordained till November 11, 1741. \n\nHe joined New Brunswick Presbytery on the union of the \nsynods, June 13, 1758. The New-Side congregation abandoned \ntheir separate state several years afterwards, sold their church to \nthe Methodists, and became comfortably united with Guild\'s people. \nHe died in 1787. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL EVANS. 467 \n\n\n\nSAMUEL EVANS \n\n\n\nThe son of the Rev. David Evans, graduated at Yale in 17o9, \nand offered himself to Philadelphia Presbytery, August 5, 1740. \nThey inquired diligently touching the workings of the Spirit upon \nhim, and licensed him, January 8, 1741. The congregation of \nTredryffrvn, left vacant by his father, asked to be set off to New \nBrunswick Presbytery: the matter was referred to the synod. A \ndivision took place. He was soon called to Deerfield, and asked \nfor by the people in the Great Valley. He was ordered to supply \nboth. He was called, October 7, 1741, to Great Valley, and was \nordained. Ma y 5, 1742. Norrington had been rent asunder, and he \nwas directed to supply the Old-Side remnant. \n\nBe was suspected,* although he denied it, of being the author \nof a scurrilous lampoon, \xe2\x80\x94 "Tne History of a Wandering Spirit." \nIt was never acknowledged by anybody. Tennent, in his "Ireni- \ncum," clears the Synod of Philadelphia and its members of having \never approved of it or owned it. It was probably more severe than \nscurrilous; for even Blairf could only say, in defence of Whitefield, \nthat his education had been very defective. \n\nIn the affair of the School, the meetings of the projectors were \nheld at his house. He relinquished the pastoral charge in 1 TIT, \n\nwithout Consent of the presbytery, and made BOVeral voyages to \nEngland. His conduct was BO disorderly that the synod disowned \n\nhim in 1 T "> 1 . He was the father of the Rev. Israel Kvan.-. \n\n\n\n* Dr. Iff"l>ro. "The History of i Wandering Spirit" was printed in the General \n\n!\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 and Historical < \'limn id.-, for February, 1711. fThii Dumber is wanting in \n\nthe Philadelphia Library.) Blair replied to it in the April number, setting together \n\nn!l the dnsl the Saviour recorded in the Gospels, u the " History, by :i \n\nRabbi, >>f s Wandering spirit," oi famous In Palestine, in the June number \n\ntpplemenl t" the original m-t i\xc2\xab-i\xc2\xab-. asserting that it was Hi" production of i \nlayman, and thai Blair had not touched the case, for he had Ml forth the \xe2\x96\xa0 \nan enemy, bul they had given the Wandering Spii mony, \n\nthe Querhrta \n\n\n\n468 ALEXANDER McDOWELL. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER McDOWELL,* \n\nA native of Ireland, offered himself to Donegal Presbytery, Sep- \ntember 4, 1739, and is stated to have come from Virginia. The \nMcDowell family had settled on Burden\'s Tract in 1737 ; and it is \nprobable that Thomson, while visiting the new settlements, became \nacquainted with the young man and brought him to the presbytery. \nHe was licensed, July 30, 1740 : in the spring he was sent to Vir- \nginia, supplications having been made by North Mountain, James \nRiver, Rockfish, Joy Creek, Buck Mountain, South Branch of Po- \ntomac, and by the Marsh, in Maryland. He was ordained, October \n29, 1741, to go as an evangelist to Virginia; and in the fall he \nwas directed to itinerate in Newcastle Presbytery. West Cone- \ncocheague, White Clay, and Elk River, asked for him. He seems \nto have settled at Nottingham ; for, in 1743, he was, at the request \nof Alison, joined to Newcastle Presbytery, that he might answer \nthe supplication of White Clay and Elk River; and, as the price \nof this favour, Newcastle Presbytery was directed to supply Not- \ntingham for a year, and, in 1744, it was placed under their care. \n\nThe synod\'s school was intrusted to him, and was for several \nyears at Elk, and finally, in 1767, at Newark, Delaware. In 1754, \nhe declined to have the whole burden of the school. Matthew \nWilson was appointed to teach the languages, and to receive twenty \npounds yearly. McDowell, "from a sense of the public good," \ncontinued to teach the other branches. On the union he gave up \nthe charge of Elk, and it united with East Nottingham, under \nJames Finley, the latter being the New-Side portion which had \nwithdrawn from Elk River in 1741. In April, 1760, Coneco- \ncheague asked for him. In 1767, the school at Newark was char- \ntered as an academy by the Proprietary, John Penn. Dr. Ewing, \nand Hugh Williamson, M.D., visited Great Britain to solicit fund3 \nfor its endowment: they were very successful, and Ewing brought \nback six or seven thousand dollars. In 1771, Newark Academy \nhad seventy-one students. \n\nMcDowell died January 12, 1782, having never married. \n\n* A person of the same name, born in Ireland, graduated at Harvard University, \nand -was settled as pastor of the Presbyterian Church, Coleraine, Massachusetts, \nSeptember 28, 1753, and -was dismissed in 1761. \n\n\n\nHAMILTON BELL \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN ROWLAND. 469 \n\n\n\nHAMILTON BELL \n\nWas a student at Neshaminy in 1738. He offered himself to \nthe synod for examination, September 29, 1739, and, being recom- \nmended by the commission in May, 1740, he was taken on trials \nby Philadelphia Presbytery, and licensed, September 30. Having \nspent some time at Nottingham, he Avas received by Donegal Pres- \nbytery, October 1^7, 1741. and on the 7th of April he received a \ncall to Nottingham. He was also invited to Donegal and to Lan- \ncaster, ami to White Clay; but, having accepted the invitation to \nDonegal, lie was ordained pastor, November 11, 1742. The next \n6pring he was admonished, and in the fall he was suspended. In \nFebruary, 1744-~\xc2\xbb, he published his renunciation of the presbytery \nin the newspapers, lie "materially appealed" to the synod, in \nMay. 1744, and they, ;it his request, appointed a committee to meet \non the ground ami determine the affair. It met at Donegal the \nsecond Wednesday in June, ami deposed him; and the synod ap- \nproved the sentence in 1745. \n\n\n\nJOHN ROWLAND \n\n\n\nWaB a native of "Wales.* He studied at Neshaminy, and was \ntaken on trials by New Brunswick Presbytery at its first meeting, \nAugusi B, L738, in disregard of the act requiring, in accordance \nwith the direction of the Westminster Assembly, a degree from a \nuniversity, or, in lieu "t" it, a certificate from the synod\'s com- \nmittee. They licensed him, September 7, ami directed him to \nMaidenhead, the congregation having leave from Philadelphia \nPresbytery t" ask for supplies. Cowell, of Trenton, informed \nRowland that his going there would produce dissension; but he \nv., -ni. On the L9th,someof the people of Maidenhead and Hope- \nwell complained to Philadelphia Presbytery of his having done bo; \nBenjamin StevenS| John Anderson, Samuel Hum, and Joseph Birt \nfor a new erection, and for Leave to come under the cue \nof New Brunswick Presbytery; ESnoefa Aimitage, Thomae B \n\ndefenoc "f himself tot bating Mit*!*iH the Bt] \n\nPhiladelphia In \xe2\x96\xa0 huiuinn him t.. their pulpit \n\n\n\n470 JOHN ROWLAND. \n\nrowes, Edward Hart, and Timothy Baker appeared on the other \nside, and it was decided not to consent to their transfer yet. " The \npresbytery advised them that Rowland was not to be esteemed and \nimproved as an orderly candidate of the ministry." He, however, \ncontinued his labours ; and the presbytery referred the matter to \nthe synod, and his friends complained of the presbytery, and asked \nto be set off as a new congregation. The synod first heard the \nobjections of New Brunswick Presbytery to the act, and resolved :\xe2\x80\x94r \n" It being the first article in our excellent Directory, that candi- \ndates be inquired of, what degrees they have taken in the univer- \nsity, and it being our desire to come to the nearest practicable con- \nformity to its incomparable prescriptions, therefore, all candidates \nnot having a diploma shall be examined by the synod or its com- \nmission before any presbytery take them on trials." The proceed- \ning in licensing Rowland was declared to be highly disorderly, and \n"such divisive courses are to be avoided;" and Rowland was re- \nquired to submit to the appointed examination, and not to be ad- \nmitted as a preacher in the bounds till he do so. They condemned \nthe indecency of those of the congregation who had " improved" \nhim, in disregard of their presbytery, in uttering unmannerly \nreflections and unjust aspersions against their presbytery and the \nsynod. They refused their request to be made a separate congre- \ngation till they had submitted the matter to their presbytery with \ntwo correspondents from New Brunswick and three from New York \nPresbytery. \n\nThe church doors were shut against Rowland, and barns were \nopened. Gilbert Tennent preached for them, and administered the \nsacrament,* and printed the sermons, with warm epistles of dedi- \ncation to those who had heard them. Rowland laboured also at \nAmwell, \xe2\x80\x94 "an agreeable people;" and they asked to have him for \ntheir minister, October 4, but the presbytery chose to ordain him \nas an evangelist, and performed that service, November 6. \n\nIn a letter to Foxcroft, of Boston, Rowland says,f for the first \nsix months there was no marked success, he having strove to con- \nvince them of their lost and guilty state. Then he changed his \nmethod with immediate happy effect. A sermon, in May, 1739, \nfrom John xi. 28-29, "The Master is come, and calleth for thee," \nand another from Matthew xxii. 4, "All things are ready; come \nunto the marriage," were blessed to many souls. On the 6th of \nOctober, through misinformation, only fifteen assembled ; but, while \nhe preached, eleven were convinced, and cried out. He preached, \nDecember 30, from Isaiah xl. 6 : \xe2\x80\x94 "And he said, What shall I cry ?" \n\xe2\x80\x94 showing that man knoweth not what to cry until guided by the \nword and by the Spirit of God. In the evening there was a great \n\n\n\n* Sacramental Discourses. f Christian History. \n\n\n\nJOHN ROWLAND. 471 \n\nimpression made. At Maidenhead, while preaching on the "Para- \nble of the Net," many were entangled in the meshes: not a few \nslipped out of them as soon as they could. After service, July 24, \nabout fifty stopped at the "Christian house-," and the fifty-first \nPsalm was sung: the next day the mighty power of God was seen. \nThere were also amazing manifestations at Amwell, July 27, and at \nMaidenhead, August 23. There was still a great revival in Sep- \ntember. 1740. \n\nHe mentions that the zeal and diligence of the " Christian peo- \nple" were especially serviceable to the converts, in promoting their \n3S : while, in Amwell, the same good effect was secured by \n"both the husband and the wife being taken," in many instances, \nand brought into the fold. \n\nWhen the division took place, he was sent by New Brunswick \nPresbytery to the New-Side congregations in Pennsylvania, in the \ntrack of James Campbell, beginning at Fagg\'s Manor, as far as \nPennsborongh, (Carlisle, | and < lonecocheague, (Chambersburg,) and \nreturning by way of Pigeon Run, Christina Bridge, and Green- \nwich, in West Jersey. Charleston and New Providence, in the \nValley, asked for him. October 12, 1741. \n\nWhile preaching in the Baptist church in Philadelphia, on a \nThursday evening, during the session of Synod in 1 740, the audience \n\nadly overcome by his description of their wholly-mined con- \ndition as .-inner- ; and the distress rose to such a pitch that Gilbert \n\nTennent went to the pulpit stairs and cried out, "Oh, brother Row- \nland, lb there do balm in Gilead?" Then he changed his strain, \nand joyfully proceeded to unfold the way of recovery.* \n\nMr. Daniel Kinley, a teacher at Deer Creek, Maryland, wrote \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2low ni- from the lips of D&vieB, the following circumstance, which \n\nmay be Introduced with an explanatory statement of Samuel Blair: \n\n\xe2\x80\x94 \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Some believed tle-re was B good work going on, and they \n\ndesirod to be oonTerted: they saw others weeping, fainting, and \nlamenting, and they thought if they could be like those it would \n\nbe \\e|V hopeful uitll tlielll J hence, they elidea Volircd just to get \n\nthemselves affected by sermons, and if they could weep or be in- \nclined to vent their feelings by cries, DOW they hoped they were \nuieb-r conviction and in a very hopeful way."\' \n\nA woman in New .ler.-ey, hearing many cry out under sermons, \n\nbecame convinced of the necessity of peroeiving her undone con- \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 I i.i- ii- %. Ebenew i- Kinnenley, a Baptist minister residing in Philadelphia, was \n\xe2\x96\xa0 horrid harangue, and eras shocked al t \xe2\x80\xa2 i \xe2\x80\x94 "designing, artful, delud- \ning* 1 wnyof working <>u the p a Hi i \xe2\x80\xa2 m mstreted \xc2\xabitli the oongn Ration from \nthe pulpil ih ap in a tumuli against him. He defended \n. \n\nt In ii m- tram diTinee, in the hands of the Eler. A. B. \nCro\xc2\xab8. \n\n\n\n472 JOHN ROWLAND. \n\ndition before she could heartily embrace the gospel offer. She \nattended wherever she thought she might be affected ; but she heard \nthe most rousing preachers and remained unmoved amid a general \nmelting. She was concerned that she should be blind and past \nfeeling. She availed herself of an opportunity to hear Rowland. \nThe word was with power on many, but she felt it not. She desired \nto see him and open her case to him. She was shown to the room \nwhere he had retired after dinner. He Avas walking backward and \nforward, and, asking her to sit down, he continued walking in silence. \nHe stopped of a sudden, and said to her, with a solemn voice and \naspect, "Woman, did you hear there is a warrant out for you?" \nInstantly, struck with amazement, she replied, "No, sir." "No? \nnot know it? that is surprising indeed!" said he; and, with much \nsolemnity, he continued walking. She sat awfully silent and as- \ntonished, yet assured that there was no precept issued against her. \nHe stopped of a sudden: \xe2\x80\x94 "It is truly amazing indeed that you \nhave not heard of it. What ! not hear that there is a warrant out \nfor you? can such a thing be possible?" With fear and trembling \nshe replied, "No, indeed, sir; I never heard of it before." After \na considerable pause, he broke forth, with a pathetic, solemn voice, \n" Woman, whether you know it or no, I now tell you there is a \nwarrant out for you, and from the highest authority ; and further, \nI tell you, the warrant is now in the officer\'s hands. woman, I \nam the officer ; and I do here arrest you, in the name of the Eternal \nGod, for the murder of his Son." She almost fainted, and was \nimmediately struck with a sense of her lost and wretched condition. \nShe soon found by experience what conviction was, and her convic- \ntions issued in sound conversion. \n\nDavies spoke of him to Finley as eminently holy, and peculiarly \nendowed with abilities, natural, supernatural, and acquired, to win \nsouls to the blessed Jesus. At Maidenhead, Rowland was admit- \nted to use the meeting-house; but at Hopewell the New-Lights \nbuilt about a mile from Pennington, towards the Delaware. In \nthe middle of September, 1744, Tennent, of Freehold, organized \nthe church of Maidenhead and Hopewell. \n\nA remarkable adventurer, who has strangely escaped the notice \nof those who have transformed criminals into heroes of romance, \nappeared in the colonies about the middle of the last century. He \nwas known by the name of Tom Bell, and performed the exploit \nof successfully passing off, in the South, a transported convict \ngirl as a daughter of George II. Passing through Princeton in \nthe twilight, he was invited by John Stockton, Esq., to his house, \nwho addressed him as Mr. Rowland. Bell with much difficulty \nconvinced him of his mistake, the resemblance being so strong.* \n\n* Bell was slim, thin-visaged, of middle stature, with a heavy cough. His appear- \nance under different names is often noticed, but he never seems to have been appre- \n\n\n\nJOHN ROWLAND. 473 \n\nThe wretch went to a vacant congregation in Hunterdon county, \nwhere Rowland was known by face to few, and, introducing himself \nas Rowland, was invited to spend the week and preach on the Sab- \nbath. While riding with the ladies to church, he professed to miss \nhis notes, and his host took his place in the wagon, that he might \non horseback seek them, and be back in time for the service. The \npeople waited; but \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 Xor hide, nor hair, nor any trace, \nOf horse or man was seen." \n\nBell rifled a desk of money and escaped, proclaiming himself as \nMr. Rowland. Rowland at this very time, in 1741 or \'42, was with \ntwo elders of his, Joshua Anderson and Benjamin Stevens, and \nTennent, of Freehold, attending a sacramental service in Mary- \nland or Pennsylvania. On his return he was charged with the rob- \nbery, and gave bonds to appear at the court of Oyer and Terminer \nin Trenton. The chief-justice, who was well known for his disbelief \nof revelation, charged the grand jury on the subject with great \nseverity: after long consideration, they found no bill. With an \nangry reproof the judge sent them back again, with the same result. \nThey were sent back a third time, and, being threatened with \nsevere punishment if they persisted in the refusal, they brought in \na bill for the alleged crime. He was acquitted at once on the tes- \ntimony of Tennent, Anderson, and Stevens. The popular feeling \nWal against him ; his friends were indicted for perjury, ami hi\' with- \ndrew from the province, and settled at Charleston and New Provi- \ndence, in Chester county. \n\nIt was not an inviting field:* there was little piety or religious \nknowledge; but while lie was travelling, his ministrations were \nblessed to :i remarkable work of conviction. It was of short con- \ntinuance; in two months there was a cessation of the awakening. \nRowland, on becoming their minister, wisely set himself to build up \ntic converts in their mosl holy faith. \n\nIn closing his narrative, he says to Foxoroft, "This is very little \n\nof what I might have said." \n\nII.- died before tin- fall of 17 17. \n\nDr. Henderson, of Freehold, in his Memoir of Tennent, \nhe ] isse jed a commanding eloquence, and many estimable quali- \nties. W\'hitifiild said, " There WBfl much of the simplicity of Christ \ndiscernible in his behaviour.\'\' \n\nlid wide hi- bad hahil , and taught school Is Hanorer, \nVirginia. \n\nla Christian History. \n\n\n\n474 WILLIAM ROBINSON. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM ROBINSON \n\nWas the son of a wealthy Quaker physician, near Carlisle, in \nEngland. Having gone up in early life to London, he was ensnared \ninto foolish courses, which made him ashamed to return to his \nfather\'s house. He came to America, and taught school in Hope- \nwell, N.J., from 1729 until 1739. \n\nAt the commencement of the Revival, and probably under the \ninfluence of Rowland, his mind was filled with amazement, in con- \ntemplating the starry heavens, at the thought of his having lived \nso regardless of their Maker. " While meditating* on the beauty \nand grandeur of the firmament, and saying to himself, \' How tran- \nscendency glorious must the Author of all this beauty and gran- \ndeur be !\' the thought struck him with the suddenness and the force \nof lightning, \'But what do I know of this God? Have I ever \nsought his favour, or made him my friend?\' This impression never \nleft him till he took refuge in Christ as the hope and life of his \nsoul." \n\nHe studied at the Log College while he went on with his school, \nand was taken on trials by New Brunswick Presbytery, April 1, \n1740, and was licensed on the 27th of the next month. In August \nhe was sent to Craig\'s and Hunter\'s settlements in the Forks of \nDelaware, (Allen township and Mount Bethel,) to "Mr. Green\'s \nand Pequally (Panaquarry,) N.J. He was ordained an evangelist, \nAug. 4, 1741, and was again sent to the \'Forks.\' " \n\nHe declined the call to Neshaminy, which was presented to him \nAug. 2, 1742, and was directed to supply there and at the " New \nErection," in Nottingham. \n\n"His dear memoryf will mingle with my softest and most grate- \nful recollections as long as I am capable of reflection. The neces- \nsitous circumstances of many vacancies, and the prospect of more \nextensive usefulness, engaged him to expose his shattered constitu- \ntion to all the hardships and fatigues of almost uninterrupted itine- \nrations. Tracing his travels in sundry parts of Pennsylvania, \nMaryland, and Virginia, I cannot recollect one place in which he \nofficiated for any time where there were not some illustrious effects \nof his ministry. He had a noble, disinterested ambition to preach \nChrist where he was not named ; and therefore he took a journey to \nthe new settlements at the South, in which he continued two years, \noppressed with the usual difficulties a weakly constitution feels in \ntravelling a wilderness, and animated only by his glorious successes." \n\n* Miller\'s Life of Rodgers. \nf Davies to Bellamy. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM ROBINSON. 475 \n\nThe smallpox is said to have left lasting debilitating effects on \nhis frame, and to have disfigured his countenance and deprived him \nof an eye. \n\nJames River had applied to New Brunswick Presbytery in 1730, \nand again in 1741 ; but nothing seems to have been done in the \nway of granting supplies. In the winter of 1742, Robinson entered \nVirginia, and was seized near Winchester by the sheriff as an un- \nlicensed preacher, but was BOOn released. lie went up* the Valley, \nand spent the winter in North Carolina, where, by exposure., he \ncontracted a disease which clung to him all his days, lie had not \nmuch Buccess in that province: he penetrated as far as the Pedee. \nIn 1751, one hundred families on that river petitioned Hanover \nPresbytery for a minister. Returning, he preached with great suc- \n. Charlotte, Prince Edward, Campbell, and Albemarle coun- \nties lately Bettled by great numbers of Irish Presbyterians from \nPennsylvania. In Lunenburg, near the North Carolina line, there \nwere a few Presbyterians Bettled among a number of loose Vir- \nginians. He was the happy instrument of reclaiming many thought- \neaturee, and <>f founding a flourishing congregation. \n\nIn Hanover and Louisa, f Bar. James Hunt, Mr. Samuel Morris, \n\nand two other gentlemen, were, by the reading of "Boston\'s Four- \nfold State.\'" and "Luther on the Calatians," awakened to a .-ense \n\nof their perishing Btate: without being aware of any person\'s feel- \ning as be did, each absented himself from the parish church and \nits Lifeless ministrations. Being summoned to answer fur this \noffence, each man found his case was not singular. They agreed \nto meet :it each other\'s houses on the Sabbath and read the Scrip- \ntures and Luther\'s great work. For this they were frequently \n\nfined. A copy of the Bermons which Whitefield had preached at \nGlasgow, and which were printed from notes taken by a hearer, \nfell into the hands of Morris in L742: benefited by it himself, he \ninvited his neighbours to come and hear it. "The plainness and \nfervency of these discourses being attended with the power of the \n\nLord, many were awakened, and COuld QOt avoid Crying out. Weep- \ning bitterly and even giving Btrange and ridiculous indications of \n\ntheir concern. The house became crowded; the Lord was .-peaking \nas "ii Mount Sinai, with a roioe of thunder, and sinners, like that \nmountain, trembled to the centre. A goodly little number were \nhealed by the word, thai wondered and rejoiced understanding^ in \nChrist. A reading-house was built: having not been used to Bocial \nprayer, none of them durst attempt it. other readinz-hous< \n\nluiilt, and the Dumber of attendant- and the force OX divine inllu- \n\nencc much increa \n\nThe haler- were summoned^ to appear at Williamsburg, and on \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Tin- rivr ram aortaariy, m thnl going wuthuard\\t going up the ralley. \n\\ D \xe2\x96\xa0\'")\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0 ; Mi. Jmbm iiui.t: quoted bj Dr. Fottia \n\n\n\n4*6 WILLIAM ROBINSON. \n\ntheir way, being overtaken by a storm, they stopped at a poor \nman\'s house, on whose shelf lay a ragged copy of the Westminster \nConfession. The whole summary pleased them ; and, having received \nthe book, they presented it to Governor Gooch as the expression of \ntheir views. The Governor was a Scotsman, and, recognising the \nbook, at once said that they were Presbyterians according to the \nKirk of Scotland, and could not be molested. During the delibe- \nration of the Council, a thunder-storm shook the house and light- \nnings glared fearfully, and they were let go, with a caution not \nto disturb the peace. Being dismissed, they very naturally and \njoyfully regarded the storm as let loose to "still the enemy and \nthe avenger." \n\nA man going from Augusta* to Hanover for iron and salt, spoke \nof Robinson, and excited a desire to hear him. Some young peo- \nple from Hanover, being at Cub Creek, heard him ; and this led \nMorris, and his friends to send some of their number to hear him \npreach, and, if they approved of his doctrines, to invite him to visit \nHanover. They found him at the Rockfish Gap, and prevailed on \nhim to promise to come. \n\nHe travelled through most of the night to reach the place at the \nappointed day. Having seen his credentials, learned his doctrine \nand method of procedure, they were very eager to hear him. A \nlarge crowd assembled ; a venerable spreading oak, with embower- \ning shades, gave him and them shelter. It was the Sabbath, \nJuly 3, 1743 ; he preached from Luke xiii. 3. He preached four \ndays : the concourse increased vastly. " \'Tis hardf for the liveliest \nimagination to form an image of the condition of the audience in \nthose glorious days of the Son of Man. Many came through \ncuriosity, and were convinced of their entire ignorance of religion. \nThere is reason to believe there was as much good done by those \nfour sermons as by all preached in the next seven years." \n\nIn private he succeeded in removing some doctrinal errors, and \nin engaging them to use prayer and singing of psalms in their \nmeetings. They offered to remunerate him : he said, " I have \nenough;" but, overcome by their urgency, he took the money and \napplied it to assist Davies in his studies. \n\nWhen he came to Cub Creek, % the people were warned that he \nwould preach at the stand. David Austin, a half-breed, but terri- \nble as a full-blooded Indian, went to hear, and lay down at a dis- \ntance, as if to sleep. He rose on hearing the text, "Awake, thou \nthat sleepest," and pressed near to the stand, the people making \nway. He returned home in great distress: his convictions were \nagonizing, and his deliverance remarkable. He became an eminent \n\n* Davidson\'s Kentucky. f Mr. Samuel Morris : quoted by Davies. \n\nX Related to me in May, 1843, by Dr. Alexander. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM ROBINSON. 477 \n\nChristian ; troubled souls far and wide sought his counsel. The ex- \ncellent Mrs. Morton hud heard Davies and his compeers, and the \nSmiths and their associates; but she believed that none equalled \nl)avy Austin in skill to administer consolation to the disquieted \nand desponding believer. \n\nOn his way to Hanover, Robinson reproved a tavern-keeper for \nhis profanity. \n\n" Who are you?" was the rude demand. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 A minister of the gospel," was the reply. " Go with me, and \nyou may hear me preach." \n\nHi- promised to do so, if Robinson would preach from the \nwcrd-. " I am fearfully and wonderfully made," designing to jeer \nhis visage, Bcarred and Beamed. Robinson preached from the \ntext: the wicked man heard, and became a very pious and useful \nmember of the church. Davies was " the joyful witness of the \nhappy effects of the four sermons on sundry thoughtless impeni- \ntent- and sundry abandoned profligates. They have, ever since, \ngiven good evidence of a thorough conversion." \n\n11 is next field of labour was in "the Government of New York," \npn.bably in the Highlands. Gilbert Tennent heard that many had \nbeen awakened by his labours. \n\nIn 1745, :i most glorious display of grace began by his ministry \nin Wicomico, in Somerset county, Maryland. In Baltimore \nconn-;.-, there was a considerable revival; in Kent county and \n\n. Anne\'s, a number of careless sinners were awakened and \nhopefully brought to Christ. " The work was begun and mostly \ncarried on by that Savoured man, Mr. Robinson, whose Buocess, \nwhenever 1 reflect on it, astonishes me." \n\nThe last six months of his life he spent at St. George\'s, Dela- \nware, and took charge of the congregation. Of his labours there \n\nwe have no record. There was a revival there under his occa- \nsional visits previously and those of VYhitefield. It seems to have \nconstituted a part of Bohemia congregation, and to have enjoyed \nthe benefits of Wnitefield\'s visit in November, L740. It became a \nseparate congregation; and Robinson, in March, 174<i, took his \ndismission from New Brunswick Presbytery to Newcastle, with a \n\nif becoming their pastor. Rut his end was at hand. He \n\ndied, August l, 17 16. \n\nBlair preached at George\'s Town, August : \'>, a sermon, in oom- \n\nmemoratioD of him, from Zech. i. 7. 1L<- speaks of his abiding \n\nif the deplorable condition of the uuregenerate, and of bis \n\nliberality, often giving away, at n lime, twenty ami forty pounds. \n\nI Synod of wen rork, at its first meeting in September, L745j \nhaving considered the circumstances of Virginia, and the wide \ndoor that is opened for the preaching of the gospel there, are \n\nunanimously of the opinion, that Mr. Kobin.-on IS the DMMt suit- \n\n\n\n478 CHARLES BEATTY. \n\nable person to be sent, and do earnestly recommend him to go \ndown and help them, as soon as his circumstances will permit, and \nreside there for some months. \n\nRobinson was present at that meeting, and probably intended \nto go. On his death-bed, he left it as his last request to Davies \nto go to Hanover. To him he bequeathed* most of his books, \nhaving previously aided him with money. \n\nDavies had him in the highest estimation : \xe2\x80\x94 " Oh, he did much \nin a little time ! Who would not choose such an expeditious pil- \ngrimage through this world?" \n\nThe father of Dr. Moses Hoge had heard him preach near \nOpequhon, Virginia, and thought that his sermons lacked method. \nThey possessed a living power. " Thanks be unto God, who \nalways caused him to triumph in Christ, and made manifest the \nsavour of his knowledge by him in every place." \n\n\n\nCHARLES BEATTY \n\n\n\nWas born in county Antrim, Ireland, between 1712 and 1715. \nHis father died while he was a child. His mother, Christiana, \nwas of the Clinton family,! who removed from England to county \nLongford during the Great Rebellion, being attached to the \nRoyalists. Her brother, Charles Clinton, with Alexander Den- \nniston and others, took ship, in 1729, for Philadelphia. They \nsailed in May, and reached Cape Cod in October, and remained in \nNew England till 1731, when they began a settlement in Ulster, \nnow Orange county, New York. \n\nBeatty had received a classical education in Ireland to some \nextent, and may have profited by the instructions of the pastors \nof Goshen, Wallkill, and Bethlehem. Reaching manhood, he \nengaged in trade ; and, as was the manner of that day, \xe2\x80\x94 when, in \nthe country, few out of the seaport-towns had the capital to lay in \na supply of imported goods, \xe2\x80\x94 he travelled^ on foot, or with his \npack-horse, to display his " auld-warld gear" to the people in \ntheir own homes. Stopping at the Log College, he amused him- \nself by surprising Tennent and his pupils with a proffer in Latin \nof his merchandise. Tennent, perceiving at once that this was \n"no pedlar\'s Greek," replied in Latin; and the conversation went \n\n* Davenport to Edwards. f Hosack\'s Life of De Witt Clinton. \n\n% Dr. Miller : on the authority of Dr. Rodgers. \n\n\n\nCHARLES BEATTY. 479 \n\non in the Roman tongue with such evidence of scholarship, re- \nligious knowledge, and fervent piety, that Tennent commanded \nhim to sell what he had and prepare for the ministry. He \n"was not disobedient to the heavenly vision ;" for he who spoke \nto Saul by the way called Beatty to " this grace and apostleship" \nalso. \n\nHis kinsmen were not passed by in the Great Awakening : for \nLeonard, of Goshen, was specially " stirred up and spirited" to \nwater what Whitefield had planted in New York. Tennent, of \nFreehold, and Kobinson, laboured in the New T York Government, \nin the Highlands, with success. \n\nWhile pursuing his studies at Neshaminy, he was taken on trials \nby New Brunswick Presbytery, October 12, 1742, and was \nlicensed the next day, and was sent to Nottingham. He was \ncalled to the Forks of Neshaminy, May 20, 1743, and was or- \ndained, December 14, the excellent Tennent being present in pres- \nbytery then for the last time. \n\nBrainerd rejoiced in his society, having seasons of sweet spi- \nritual refreshment with him. lie went with him to assist Treat \nat the sacrament in April, 174", and in June rode from the \nForks, and preached in the afternoon to-a crowded audience at \nNeshaminy, with great freedom in setting forth the sorrows of \nGod\'s people and their comforting considerations. It was a sweet, \nmelting season, happily preparing them for the Sabbath. Beatty \npreached, and there appeared BOme warmth in the assembly. \n\nBrainerd assisted in the administration of the Lord\'s Supper, \nand. towards the close, discoursed extempore from the sacred \nword-. \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him," and was greatly \nfavoured with divine aid in addressing sinners. The word was \nattended with amazing power: many scores, if not hundreds, in \nthat great assembly of three or four thousand, were very much \naffected: "there was a wry great mourning, like the mourning of \n\n11a lad Killlllioii." \n\nB Stty and his wife, with Treat, came to see Brainerd at \nPrinceton in October, 171", when about to leave for the Indians. \n\nk - My spirit - sinerd, " were refreshed t<> see them ; but I \n\norprised and ashamed that they had rode thirty or forty \n\nmiles to visit me." They rode with him ten miles on his journey. \n\nThere they parted; but one special friend (Davenport) Btayed on \npurpose to keep him company, and to cheer his spirits. \n\n\'1 he Bynod sent him to Virginia nod North Carolina in 17~>1: \nand he accompanied Franklin, when he, with five hundred men, \n\ncame up to defend the frontier, after the bnming of the Moravian \n\nGhtadenhuetten, near Lehighton. Franklin \n\nnioirs. \n\n\n\n480 CHARLES BEATTT. \n\n" The chaplain was zealous, and lamented the backwardness of \nthe soldiers to attend the prayers and exhortations." Franklin \nsuggested that the spirit-rations should be dealt out under Beatty\'s \neye, after the religious exercises. This remedy secured uniform \nattendance ; but Beatty soon left, to go down into Bucks county \nand aid in recruiting. The synod, in 1756, judged it his duty \nto go with the Pennsylvania forces, if the Government should ask \nfor his services. He was again invited in 1759 ; but the synod, \non account of the state of his congregation, advised him not to \ngo. They advised him to comply with Colonel Armstrong\'s \nrequest, and go as chaplain to his regiment. \n\nThe Corporation for the Widows\' Fund sent him to Great \nBritain in 1760. He was furnished with letters from Davies, \nwhich were of the highest service to him. The General Assembly \nof the Scottish Kirk ordered a national collection to be taken up. \nThe Rev. Dr. Gordon, of Ipswich, wrote to Bellamy, October 27, \n1761, " Mr. Beatty is over in England collecting. Have had \nthe pleasure of his company. He is at my brother\'s, (Thomas \nField, bookseller, London.) Expect he will get three thousand \npounds before he returns/\' \n\nThe Rev. Provost Smith, of Philadelphia, took the ground that \nmuch of the money had been raised for the distressed inhabitants \non the frontier, who had been driven from their homes by the \nIndians. This involved Beatty in a long correspondence, to vin- \ndicate his character, and to prevent the fund from being per- \nverted from its rightful use. The corporation desired the synod \nto send two missionaries to the frontiers of the province; and \nthey, in 1766, appointed Beatty and Duffield to preach two months \nin those parts, and to do what else is best for the advancement of \nreligion, according to the instructions of the corporation. They \nleft Carlisle in August, Duffield going through Path Valley, \nFannet, and the Cove, and Beatty passing along the Juniata. \nThe Delaware town, on the Muskingum, one hundred and thirty \nmiles beyond Fort Pitt, was visited by them. They found a very \nagreeable prospect of a door opening for the spread of the gospel \namong the Indians. The white settlers were ready to exert them- \nselves to the utmost to have the gospel among them, but were very \nnecessitous from the distresses and losses of the war. \n\nBeatty was married, June 24, 1746, to the daughter of the \nHon. John Reading, of New Jersey. He took her to Great \nBritain, in 1768, to obtain relief for her from eminent surgeons ; \nbut she died, soon after landing, at Greenock. The journal of his \ntour was printed in London.* He also published two pamphlets \non the Indian missions, and a sermon, entitled, " Double honour \n\n* Philadelphia Library. \n\n\n\nJOHN HH7DH AX\xe2\x80\x94 TIMOTHY .^JOHXES. 481 \n\nis due to the laborious Gospel Minister, which he had preached at \nthe ordination of Mr. Ramsay, at Fairfield, New Jersey. \n\nTo relieve the College of New Jersey, he sailed for the "West \nIndies, but died, August 13, 1772, soon after reaching Bridge- \ntown, in Barbadoes. \n\nThree of his sons became ruling elders in our church. Dr. \nCharles ft Beatty, of Steubenville, Ohio, is his grandson. His \ngrand-daughter, the wife of the Rev. Henry R. Wilson, died while \nlabouring as a missionary among the Creek Indians. \n\n\n\nJOHN HINDMAN \n\n\n\nWas received as a candidate by Donegal Presbytery, Septem- \nber 3, 174U; and, Gillespie having represented to them "his im- \nuce and childish simplicity," they resolved, in the next \nApril, not to continue him. Soon, however, they were satisfied \nthat they might retrace their steps; and he was licensed, May 30. \n11<- was sent to Virginia, and was, in 1742, at James River and \nHead of Shenandoah, and at Opequhon and Bullskin. He \nwas ordained as an evangelist, to go to Virginia, November 11, \n1742; and w\xc2\xab find him at Opequhon, Rockfish, Potomac, "Cub \nGreek OH Round Oak." Rockfish and Mountain Plain called \nhim, Man-h 20, 1745; and, in June, John Woods appeared, as a \ncommissioner, to urge the request of Rockfish. lie was also \ninvited t<> Marsh Creek and Conecocheague. His name is not \nagain seen on the records. \n\n\n\nTIMOTHY JOHNESj \n\n<m Welsh descent, wan born at Southampton, Long Island, \nMay 24, 1717, and graduated at Sale b L787. Of the period \nbetween his having college and going to Morristown we have seen \ndo notice, except that, in that perilous time, when Bome" haply \nwen- found lighting against Goo," those who separated from the \n\n31 \n\n\n\n482 TIMOTHY JOHNES. \n\nFirst Parish in New Haven worshipped in the house of Mr. Timo- \nthy Johnes.* He went to Morristown, New Jersey, August 13, \n1742 ; stayed six Sabbaths : " fetchedf my family, and was \nordained, February 9, 1743," by New York Presbytery. \n\nAs early as 1735, West Hanover had separated from Hanover, \nand asked for the ordination of Mr. Cleverly. He was graduated \nat Harvard in 1715, and remained at Morristown till his death in \nDecember, 1776, aged eighty-one. He never married. His small \nproperty became nearly exhausted towards the close of life, and \nreduced him to hardships. \n\nThe congregation of Morristown " was, under Christ, col- \nlected, settled, and watered" by Johnes. He had a happy faculty \nof instilling successfully the principles of religion. He was much \nwith his people. He read accounts of revivals to them ; but no \ninstance of more than ordinary success is recorded during the \nfirst twenty-one years of his labours. Ninety-four were added to \nthe church in 1764 : " these were the sweet fruits of the won- \nderful effusion of God\'s admirable grace begun on our sacrament- \nday, July 1, 1764." "The LordJ Jehovah has rent the heavens \nand come down, and the mountains are fleeing at his presence. \nThere is something of this blessed work all around me." It was \na season of " deep feeling and much anxiety," arising from awful \napprehensions of the nature of sin and of the justice of God. \nFifty were added in 1774: "those that follow are the ingather- \nings of the divine harvest of 1774 ; \xe2\x80\x94 sweet drops of morning \ndew." \n\nAs the result of the revival of 1790, forty united with the \nchurch; four hundred and twenty-four under his ministry pro- \nfessed their faith in Christ. " Few men laboured more zealously \nor more successfully." \n\nThe American army passed the winter of 1777 encamped near \nMorristown. It was a disastrous stage of our public affairs : sick- \nness swept away the soldiers ; and the gloom was made horrible \nby the abounding profanity and the ceaseless gaming. Washing- \nton^ as the communion drew nigh, asked Dr. Johnes if member- \nship with the Presbyterian church was required by him as a term \nof admission to the ordinance. \n\nHe replied, "All who loved the Lord Jesus were welcome." \n\n" That is right," was the answer; and he sought, in the fellow- \nship of God\'s people and in the remembrance of redeeming love, \n\n\n\n* Bacon\'s Historical Discourse at New Haven. \n\nf Quoted from his memoranda by Rev. Albert Barnes, in his Manual of the \nChurch at Morristown, 1828. \n\nJ Quoted by Mr. Hunting, in his discourse at Westfield, from Dr. Johnes\'s \nLetter in the Connecticut Evangelical Magazine. \n\n(S The Rev. 0. L. Kirtland, in the Presbyterian Magazine. \n\n\n\nTIMOTHY GRIFFITH. 483 \n\non the Sabbath, relief from the scenes that appalled him, and from \nthe forebodings that oppressed his soul. The services were held in \nthe open air, even in winter, in a sheltered spot. \n\nThe church was at that time occupied as a hospital ; and often, \nin the morning, the dead wore found lying in the pews. Dr. \nJohnes, the son of the pastor, was intrusted with the care of the \nsick, and, through his judicious arrangements, the comfort of the \nsufferers was promoted, and the mortality checked. \n\n"Distinguished for his fidelity, his discourses were clear, plain, \npractical, persuasive. By an affectionate appeal to the heart, he \naimed to win men to the practice of holiness. Few congregations \nwere so thoroughly instructed in all that pertains to the practical \nduties of religion and in the great doctrines of grace." A lover \nof peace, his own people and the neighbouring congregations \nunhesitatingly reposed with confidence in his judgment and tried \nfriendship, lie was not lacking in firmness as a ruler in the \nhouse of God, having, in one hundred and seventy cases, sought \nthe welfare of the church by timely and wholesome discipline. \n\nIn 1791, an unworthy man was associated with him in the pas- \ntoral work. The truth, lung suspected, was finally made clear \nenough t.> secure his dismission in lT\'. ,; i. The late llcv. Dr. Rich- \nard-, while a candidate, preached to the aged man in his own \ndwelling, (then near his cud,) that he might judge of his fitness. \n11.\' received a pall just before the death of Dr. Johnes, who was \nremoved by dysentery, September 19, 171*4, aged seventy-eight. \n\n\n\nTIMOTHY GRIFFITH \n\n\n\nWas probably a boo of Timothy Griffith, an elder in th<- Great \nValley. lie taught a classical school in Philadelphia in 1737, and \ngraduated ;it Yale in L742. Newcastle Presbytery ordained him, in \n[748, as successor to Thomas Evans in Pencader. Understanding \nthe Welsh language, be was ordered by the Bynod to supply Tred- \nryfiryn oner a month for several years. On the death oi Diok, he \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 d to a farm in A ppo.|iiiiiimy, and resided 00 it till his \ndeath in 17">l. During that time, he probably supplied New- \ncastle and Drawyers, they being, like Pencader, divided by the \nSide, and left very feeble. \nWhen the pron hreatened with invasion, he was elected \n\n\n\n484 JOHN STEEL. \n\ncaptain of the company raised in Newcastle county in September, \n1748. \n\nHe was a missionary in Western Virginia in 1751. \n\n\n\nJOHN STEEL, \n\nA probationer from Londonderry Presbytery, appeared before \nthe commission in May, 1742; and there being some irregularity \nin his marriage, by reason of a pre-contract, letters were written \nto Ireland before any steps were taken in his case. He was sent, \nin April, 1743, to supply Rockfish and Roanoke, and in the fall he \nwas sent to Conestoga, being under the care of Donegal Presby- \ntery. He was ordained by Newcastle Presbytery before May, \n1744, and was, for a time, at New London. He removed to West \nConecocheague* in 1752, perhaps earlier, and remained till the \nUpper West Settlement (now Mercersburg) was broken up. He \nwas a man of great intrepidity : his church was fortified, and he \nled his men to attack the savages. In 1755, he received a cap- \ntain\'s commission, and held it many years. Several of his letters, \nin those difficult times, are preserved in the Colonial Documents. \nHe preached for a time at Nottingham, and then at York and \nShrewsbury ; and, on the union of the synods, he removed to Car- \nlisle and Silver Spring. Duffield had just before been called to \nBig Spring and the New-Side congregation in Carlisle. The call \nto Steel was made out April 20, 1759, and he was installed before \nJune, giving two-thirds of his time to Carlisle. Duffield resented \nthis, \xe2\x80\x94 his call being of an earlier date, and stipulating that two- \nthirds of his time should be given in town. The synod, in May, \n1759, lamented the unhappy state of feeling, and directed the two \ncongregations to unite in building a house of worship, and en- \ntreated the ministers to join their counsels to bring about a cor- \ndial agreement. In 1761, the church was built by a lottery, and \nused by both parties. \n\nHe withdrew from the synod, with the other Old-Side minis- \nters of Donegal Presbytery, and finally was permitted to join the \nSecond Philadelphia Presbytery. Pennf wrote to him, February \n24, 1768, to dispossess the settlers on the Red Stone and the \n\n\n\n* Rev. Thomas Creigh\'s Historical Discourse at Mercersburg. \n\xe2\x96\xa0J- Colonial Documents : edited by Mr. Hazard. \n\n\n\nJAMES SCOUGAL \xe2\x80\x94 CHARLES MeKXIGIIT. 485 \n\nYoughiogeny. In April, he assembled the people, and reasoned \nthe case with them. There were one hundred and fifty families on \nthe Youghiogeny. \n\nDr. Martin said, " He was a good preacher ; sound in his \ntheology." \n\nHe died in August, 1779. \n\n\n\nJAMES SCOUGAL, \n\nA member of the Presbytery of Paisley, having received a call \nfrom the Old-Side portion of Snow Hill and the Ferry, in Wor- \ncester county, Maryland, (it had been sent to him -with the con- \ncurrence of Newcastle Presbytery,) came to this country in 1743. \nHe produced sufficient testimonials of his piety, prudence, learn- \ning, soundness in the faith, and blameless conversation. \n\n" The place called the Ferry" is mentioned by Davies as the \nscene of a remarkable work of grace, at the time of his entrance \non the ministry. \n\nScougal died in 1746. \n\n\n\ncharles Mcknight \n\nvYa- taken up by New Brunswick Presbytery, June 28, 1741, \nand was licensed probably in the fall. In the oexl May. the \nof Delaware and Greenwich, in Warren county, New \n. asked l\'"t- him, as did also Staten [eland and Basking- \nridge. In August, Amboy rapplicated for his services, and \nGreenwich and Forks renewed their request. Staten Island and \nBaskingridge called him in October, ana he was ordained, Octo- \nber 12, 17 II.\', at the same time with Pinley and Soungs. He was \ninstalled, October 16, 17 11. ai Cranberry and Allentown. Allen- \ntown asked Buppliee in L788; Cranberry, at the same th \ntheir commissioner, John Chambers, askea advice, being troubled \nahum a proposal bo build their meeting-house m common with the \nChurch of England. \n\n\n\n486 JOHN BLAIR. \n\nWhitefield preached several times, both at Crosswicks and Allen- \ntown, on weekdays. \n\nMcKnigkt was dismissed from Cranberry in October, 1756, \nand Burden\'s Town obtained one-fourth of his time in 1758. He was \ncalled, May 28, 1766, to Middletown Point and Shrewsbury; and, \nin the fall, Trenton asked for him. He was dismissed from \nAllentown in October, and accepted the call to Middletown Point, \nShark River, and Shrewsbury, April 21, 1767. \n\nHe was seized by the British, and his church was burned. He \ndied, soon after his release, in 1778. \n\nIn 1789, Morgan Edwards said of the Presbyterian church at \nthe Point, "The place which knew it knows it no more." It was \nrebuilt by a lottery, and was only rarely used by the Presby- \nterians till 1820. Shrewsbury remained vacant till 1812; and \nShark River has long been surrendered to other denominations. \n\n\n\nJOHN BLAIR, \n\n\n\nA brother of Samuel Blair, was born in Ireland, in 1720, and \nwas educated at the Log College, and licensed by the New-Side \nPresbytery of Newcastle at its earliest sessions. He was ordained, \nDecember 27, 1742, pastor of Middle Spring, Rocky Spring, and \nBig Spring, in Cumberland county, Pennsylvania. These places \nhad been served by Thomas Craighead ; the first two being then \ncalled Upper and the third Lower Hopewell. They divided on the \nrupture, Hopewell having supplicated the conjunct presbyteries in \n1741, and Campbell and Rowland having been sent to them. Blair \ngave two-thirds of his time to Big Spring, and divided the re- \nmainder between the others. \n\nHe visited Virginia soon after Robinson. "Truly* he came to \nus in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ. Former \nimpressions were ripened, and new ones made on many hearts. \nOne night, a whole houseful of people was quite overcome by the \npower of the word, particularly of one pungent sentence; they \nwould hardly sit or stand, or keep their feelings under any proper \nrestraint. So general was the concern during his stay, and so \nignorant were we of the dangers of apostasy, that we pleased our- \n\n* Samuel Morris. \n\n\n\nJOHN BLAIR. 487 \n\nselves with the thought of more having been brought to Christ than \nnow appear to have been. There is the greatest reason to believe \nthat several bound themselves in an everlasting covenant to the \nLord." He visited* the New-Side congregations east and west of \nthe Blue Ridge, and also on his second visit in 1746. In that \nyear he organized the congregations of North Mountain, including \nBethel and Hebron, of New Providence, Timber Ridge, and the \nForks of James River, now New Monmouth and Lexington. \n\nThe incursions of the Indians led him to resign his pastoral \ncharge, Decemher 28, 1748. lie seems to have remained without \nBettlement till 17o7, when he succeeded his brother at Fagg\'s \nManor. lie continued his school with reputation. In 1767, he \nihosen Professor of Divinity and Moral Philosophy in the \nCollege of New Jersey, and officiated as President. On the acces- \nsion of Dr. Witherspoon, in 1760, he resigned, and accepted the \ncall to Wallkill, in the Highlands of New York, May 19, 1769. He \ndied, December 8, 1771. \n\nDuring the excitement growing out of the question concerning \nthe examination of candidates on their experience of saving grace, \none of the old Side published "Thoughts on the Examination and \nTrials of Candidates." On this pamphlet Blair published "Ani- \nmad versions," dated " Fagg\'s Manor, August 27,1766;" He also \nI med a reply to Harker\'s "Appeal to the Christian World," \nentitled " The Synod of New York and Philadelphia vindicated." \nHe left behind him a treatise on Regeneration, orthodox, and ably \nwritten: it was published shortly before his death, with the title. \n\nU A Treatise on the Nature, Use, and Subjects of the Sacraments; on \n! ieration; and on the Nature and Use of the Means of Grace." \nThe preface is dated " Goodwill, alias Wallkill, December 21, 1770.\' \n\nIn it he states that his opinions have undergone B change: and he \n\nbegs that those who attempt to answer his reasons for the change will \nnot throw dust. lie had formerly believed that, though the nnre- \n\ngeneratS ought to have their children baptised, they ought not to \n\na Iventure to the Lord\'s table. On this point he had changed his \n\nand his practice. He endeavours to prove thai there is qo \n\npropriety in excluding those who wi-h to partake of the sacra- \n\nthan there would be in excluding them from other parts of \n\npublic worship. It woe reprinted by Dr. James i\'. Wilson, in his \n\nCollection Of Sacramental Treat! i . \n\nBe married the daughter of John Durborrow, of Philadelphia. \n] Rev. John D.Blair, of Richmond, was his son. Sis daughter \nRebecca was the wife of Dr. William Linn, of the Reformed Dutch \n\n1 In New York City. The Kev. Dr. John Blair Linn, of the \n\n1 Ihurch in Philadelphia, vras her Bon. \n\n* Dr. 1 \n\n\n\n488 SAMUEL FINLEY. \n\nDavies said of him, in his elegy on Samuel Blair : \n\n"When, all-attentive, eager to admit \nThe flowing knowledge, at his reverend feet \nRaptured we sat, thou above the rest, \nBrother and image of the dear deceased, \nSurviving Blair! oh, let spontaneous flow \nThe floods of tributary grief you owe." \n\n\n\nSAMUEL FINLEY \n\nWas born in the county Armagh, Ireland, in 1715. His parents \nearly sought the Lord\'s blessing on each of their children, and he \nwas seriously impressed by divine truth in his sixth year. The \nfamily arrived at Philadelphia, September 28, 1734, and made their \nhome in West Jersey. He was in his eighteenth year, and had \nalready made some progress in preparing for the ministry : he \ncompleted his studies at the Log College. New Brunswick Pres- \nbytery took him on trials, August 4, 1740, and licensed him the \nnext day. He went into the bounds of Donegal Presbytery, and \nwas present at the trial of Craighead, in December, and abetted \nhim in his contumelious treatment of that judicatory. He preached, \nJanu*y 20, 1741, at Nottingham, from Matthew xii. 27, 28:\xe2\x80\x94 "If \nI by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom then do your sons cast \nthem out?" This sermon was published with the title, "Christ \nvictorious, and Satan raging," and was soon reprinted at Boston and \nLondon. Soon after appeared in print his letter in commendation \nof Whitefield. \n\nThe conjunct presbyteries, in August, 1741, sent him to Dover \nand Baltimore, and directed him to supply the new erection at Not- \ntingham. He then went into West Jersey, and his labours were \nremarkably blessed at Greenwich, in Cohanzy, and Deerfield, in \nGloucester county. Whitefield had passed through the region, and \nGilbert Tennent had laboured there. "There was a remarkable \nstir of a religious kind in Cape May." In the spring of 1740, \nAbel Morgan, the Baptist minister in Middletown, New Jersey, \n"was so affected by Whitefield\'s spirit that he went forth preach- \ning the gospel on the sea-coast" and other places in that province. \nHe came to Cohanzy, and Finley soon appeared: on Tuesday he \nwent to Cape May, and on Thursday Finley came. The mode and \nthe subjects of baptism became the topic of general discourse; \n"many of the disciples went among the Baptists, which caused \n\n\n\nSAMUEL FIXLEY. 489 \n\ngreat wrath."* Finley and Morgan had a debate which lasted two \ndays, with the usual result of greater estrangement of the parties. \nTwo elders and six members left the Presbyterian for the Baptist \nchurch. Finley published "A Charitable Plea for the Speechless;" \nMorgan replied. Finley vindicated the claim of infants to the \npromise and the seal of the promise ; Morgan put forth a re- \njoinder. Morgan Edwards says that Morgan\'s book shows him \nto have been a man of wit, of very genteel irony, and master of \nthe Greek. \n\nMorgan alludes to Finley\'s fondness for controversy. lie \nprinted, in January, 1743, a sermon, on 2 Thessalonians ii. 11, 12, \nagainst the Moravians, entitled "The Strength, Nature, and Symp- \ntoms of Delusion," and, in the same year, replied to Thomson\'s \nsermon on convictions, in a discourse headed, "Clear Light shining \nout in Obscure Darkness." In all of these early productions is \nmuch that is uncalled for, and much more that cannot be ap- \nproved. \n\nCohanzy and Gloster supplicated for him in May, 1742. The \npresbytery granted the request, and ordained him an evangelist, \nOctober 13: Robinson preached from Ezekiel iii. 17. lie went to \npreach for the Presbyterians in Milf\'ord, Connecticut; but Lieu- \ntenant-* rovernor Law put an odious statute, lately enacted, in force, \nand he was carried from one constable to another and transported \nas a vagrant out of the colony. In August, 1743, calls were pre- \nsented to him from Cohanzy, Nottingham, and Milf\'ord, and the \npresbytery sent him to Milford "with allowance that he also \npreach for other places thereabouts where Providence may open a \ndoor for him." Having preached at Milford, he went, on the 1st \nof September, to preach for the Second Society of New Haven, at \nthe reauesl of Mr. James Rerpout, the son of the former pastor \nof the Firs! Church, and the brother-in-law of the present pastor. \nThe Second Church, though regularly organised, was not reoogt- \n\nOised by the Civil authority or the New Haven Association; it was \n\nan indictable offence to preach for them. Yet Finley went; and, \non September 6, as be ires going to meeting, he was seized by the \nconstable and confined. The grand jury presented him on the \n11th, and judgment was given thai be should be carried oul of the \n\ncolony B8 a vagrant. The sentence was executed. Finley peti- \ntioned in October that the Assembly would review the case; pleas \nwere heard in abatement, and sic prayer was denied. During \nthese vista he made many friends, and maintained a mosi affec- \ntionate correspondence with Bellamy till his death. Hespenl siz \nmonths in Philadelphia, preaching to the ne* congregation. Se \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 V of N\'-w Jersey B ; \n\n\n\n490 SAMUEL FINLEY. \n\nwas called, in June, 1744, to Nottingham, and was the pastor there \nseventeen years. \n\nIn the summer of 1745, hy appointment of the conjunct pres- \nbyteries, Gilbert Tennent and Finley waited on Governor Gooch \nto repel the insinuations made against Roan, and the New Side in \ngeneral, as schismatics, defamers, and fanatics. The governor \nreceived them kindly, gave them permission to preach, and opened \nthe door for the preaching of New-Light ministers without moles- \ntation. They continued at Hanover about a week, and did much \ngood. The people of God were refreshed, and some careless sin- \nners awakened from their foolish trust in their moral conduct and \nreligious duties. Thus the dreadful cloud which overshadowed \nthem on Roan\'s persecution was scattered for a while: they con- \ntinued vacant for a considerable time, but the Lord favoured their \nreading-meetings with his presence. \n\nFinley\'s school soon became celebrated. Among his pupils were \nGovernor Martin, of North Carolina, Ebenezer Hazard, of Phila- \ndelphia, Benjamin Rush, M.D., and Judge Jacob Rush, (sons of \nMrs. Finley\'s sister,) Dr. McWhorter, of Newark, Dr. Tennent, of \nAbingdon, and, most celebrated of all, James Waddel, of Virginia. \n\nIn 1754, it was proposed to call him to New York: he was liked \nas a preacher, "but, his voice being uncommon low, it was thought \nhe would not suit" that congregation. \n\nWhen Davies was urged, after having declined the presidency, \nto act as vice-president of the college for six months, he would not \nconsent, on hearing from the messenger, Mr. Halsey, afterwards \nminister at Lamington, that some of the trustees preferred Finley. \nHe wrote at once to Cowell, of Trenton, " I recommend Mr. Fin- \nley, from long and intimate acquaintance with him, as the best- \nqualified person, in the compass of my knowledge, in America, \xe2\x80\x94 \nincomparably better qualified than myself. Though the want of \nsome superficial accomplishments for empty popularity may keep \nhim in obscurity for some little time, his hidden worth, in a few \nmonths or years at most, will blaze out to the satisfaction and even \nastonishment of all candid men. A disappointment of this kind \nwill certainly be of service to the college." \n\nIn a note to a sermon in May, 1758, he styles him "the best of \nmen, and my favourite friend." \n\nHe was elected, on the death of Davies, to be his successor; \nand, soon after entering on the office, there was an extensive re- \nvival in the college : about half the students experienced religion. \n\nHe died, July 17, 1766, while in Philadelphia, whither he had \ngone for medical advice. His state of mind was peculiarly happy \nand redolent of divine influence. Dr. Mason has placed, in strik- \ning contrast, his end with the closing scene of David Hume\'s life. \nTreat, of Abingdon \xe2\x80\x94 the last survivor, except Tennent, of Free- \n\n\n\nELIAB BYRAM. 491 \n\nhold, of the brethren cast out in 1741 \xe2\x80\x94 preached at the funeral of \nhis good fellow-labourer in that day of abundant harvest. \n\nSmall in figure, with a round, ruddy face, be was remarkable for \ngreat knowledge of the human heart, for uncommon sweetness of \ntemper, and polite behaviour. Many were his long and fatiguing \njourneys to carry the gospel to vacant and destitute congregations. \nAbundant in labours, fervent in spirit, He that sent him was Avith \nhim, giving him, in the establishing of many hearts with grace \nthrough his preaching, testimony that his work pleased God. \n\nHia first wife, Sarah Hall, died, at the age of forty-two, July 30, \n1761, \xe2\x80\x94 her mother being the second wife of Gilbert Tennent, \xe2\x80\x94 \nand lies buried at the " Rising Sun." His second wife was Ann \nGlarkson, daughter of Matthew Clarkson, Esq., of Philadelphia. \nson Ebenezer was a physician in Charleston; and his son \nWilliam Perroneau Finley is the President of Charleston College. \nDr. Finhy s daughter married Samuel Breeze, of Amboy, and \namong her descendants is the inventor of the electric telegraph. \n\nHe published, in 1749, his sermon at the ordination of Kodgers; \nin 1751, on the death of Samuel Blair; in 1754, at the opening of \nood of New York, from 2 Cor. x. 14; in 1762, on the death \nof Davies; and in 17\xc2\xbbi4, at the funeral of Gilbert Tennent. \n\nHe was the second minister of our church who received the \ndegree of Doctor of Divinity. The University of Glagow, having \nconferred it before on Alison, "adorned" Finley with it in 1763. \n\nAt Nottingham, he had for his near neighbour Samuel Blair; \nand Davies says of their intimacy, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Finley, who full enjoy\' J the unbosomM friend." \n\nAfter hia death, Mr. Ebenezer Hazard made persevering attempts \nto publish a collection of his works; but a sufficient number of \nsubscribers was not obtained. \n\n\n\nELIAB BYEAM \n\n\n\nWas born al Bridgewater, Massachusetts, and graduated at Har- \nvard University in 17 In. His ancestor, Nicholas Byram, settled \nat Bridgewater in 1660. \n\nHe became the minister of Bocsiticus, now Mendham, New Jer- \nsey, in October, 1743. Before 17 10, there had been a meeting- \nabouta mill\' and a half from the village ; in L745, a oew one \nwaa built in town, and continued in use \'ill L816. Etocsiticua was \nplaced under the care of Sen Brunswici Presbytery in L788, but, \nrequest, was restored to New York Presbytery the nexl year. \n\nBrainerd bad bin for his companion in hia first journey to tho \nSusquehanna, and apeaki of him with much affection. lie spent \n\n\n\n492 ROBERT STURGEON. \n\nsome time in 1746 and \'47 in Augusta county, and his labours were \nblessed : the awakening lasted till 1751. Falling Spring and Pro- \nvidence called him in 1747, having had experience of his faithful- \nness and ability; but he declined to settle in Virginia. He joined \nNew Brunswick Presbytery, May 22, 1751, and accepted the call \nto Amwell, June 25. He died before May, 1754. \n\nHe married Phebe, daughter of Ephraim Leonard, of Raynham, \nof an ancient and honourable family. His daughter married Jo- \nsiah Dean, of Raynham, the owner of the forge there, the manu- \nfacture of iron being the hereditary occupation of the Byrams and \nthe Leonards. \n\nHis brother Ebenezer moved with his family to Mendham, in \n1744, and died there, August 9, 1753, aged sixty-one. The Rev. \nDr. Philip Lindsley, of Nashville University, is the grandson of his \ndaughter Huldah. \n\nEliab By ram taught while at Mendham. Among his pupils was \nBenjamin Miller,* who had been in a remarkable manner converted \nunder the ministry of Gilbert Tennent and was baptized by him. \nHe began to prepare for the ministry ; but, adopting Baptist views, \nhe was immersed, and was the useful and honoured pastor of the \nBaptist church of Scotch Plains. His labours as an evangelist, in \nVirginia and North Carolina, were highly valuable in 1755. \n\n\n\nROBERT STURGEON \n\n\n\nWas a nativef of Scotland, and, having completed his studies, \nwas about to be taken on trials, when some circumstances caused \nthe presbytery to pause. He came to New England, and was \nlicensed by a council, greatly to the regret of Cotton Mather, who \nfelt that his conduct here had justified the course of the presby- \ntery. Wodrow lamented that there was so little of a safeguard in \nCongregationalism against hasty admission of unfit persons into \nthe sacred office. \n\nHe became the minister of Wilton, the Second Society, in Nor- \nwalk, July 20, 1726, and was dismissed in 1732. \n\nHe is said, in President Stiles\'s papers, to have been settled at \nBedford, New York, for twelve years. Bolton, in his "History of \nWest Chester County," represents him as being the minister there in \n1746. It seems scarcely probable that New Brunswick Presbytery \nwould have installed Sackett there in 1743, if Sturgeon then sus- \ntained any relation to that people ; but, when so many other ties \n\n* Morgan Edward\'s History of New Jersey Baptists. f Wodrow Correspondence. \n\n\n\nJAMES JleCREA. 493 \n\nwere sundered rudely, even this unbrotherly act may have been \ncommitted. \n\nSturgeon was present, in 1745, at the first meeting of the Synod \nof New York, as a member of New York Presbytery. His name \nis Dot mentioned after 1750. \n\nWilliam Sturgeon, who graduated at Yale in 1745, was probably \nii. Being recommended* by the Rev. Henry Barclay, of \nTrinity Church, New York, he was sent out at the expense of \nChrist Church, Philadelphia, in December, 1746, to receive dea- \ncons\' and priests\' orders in England. He returned in October, and \nwas inducted as assistant minister of Christ Church, and catechist \nof the negroes. He was agreeable to the people ; and, " considering \nhis youth and the stinted education given in the American colleges, \nhe discharges extremely well\'* his official duties. He resigned the \ncharge in 1700. \n\n\n\nJAMES McCREA \n\n\n\nWA8 probably from Ireland, and may have been a son of Wil- \nliam McCrea, a prominent elder from White Clay during all the \nexciting scenes in the synod which ended in the rupture. He \nBtndied at the Log College, and was taken on trials by New Bruns- \nwick Presbytery, October 4, 1T89, ami was licensed, November 6. \nAt that time Mnseinnecunk (Musconetcong) asked for supplies, and \nhe was called, April 1, 1740, to Lamington, Lebanon, Pepack, \nReadington, and Bethlehem. This call he accepted, but was not \n\nordained till August 4, 1741. \n\nPepack and Lebanon Bupplicated in 17\'\'*, and Lammintunck in \nthe fill of 170\'.\': the presbytery wrote to Mr. Edwards to send \nsome young men into their bounds. \n\nAmong Other separations which were especially cared for by the \nconjunct presbyteries, in August, 1741, were Pigeon Run and \nChristine Bridge, in Delaware. Campbell and Rowland were sent \nt.i them. In the next August, Pigeon Run and Newcastle pre- \nsented a call for McCrea, But without success. Pigeon Run was \nnearly midway on the stage-road from St. George\'s to Newcastle. \nOne stone in the graveyard indicates a burial then\' as early as \n1780. [twas probably united with the New -Side portion of Draw- \nyen in forming St. < r< i \n\nMcCrea was the father and Founder of the congregation of Lam- \n. or Bedminster. A portion of Ihe people procured his dis- \nOj November 11, 1755; but the greateel part of the congre- \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 i f Ctttrist Church. \n\n\n\nT \n\n\n\n494 DAVID YOUNGS. \n\ngation united in a new call to him, and the synod, believing that \nhis removal could be of no service, directed the call to be placed in \nhis hands, \xe2\x80\x94 adding, expressly, that his acceptance of it would not \nentitle the minority to supplies, or to be refunded their contribu- \ntion to the meeting-house. Bedminster, Lebanon, and Reading- \nton, (the White House,) presented their call, and he accepted it, \nOctober 26, 1756, and was installed, May 1. Charges were then \nalleged against him, which on investigation appeared baseless ; and \nhe was fully cleared. When he resigned, October 21, 1766, his \npeople engaged to provide for him, being near the end of his days. \nHe died, May 10, 1769. \n\nHis son, Colonel John McCrea, resided in Albany, and married \nthe daughter of Mr. Beekman, who built the Vanderheyden House, \nwhich, with its galloping horse for a weathercock, is placed safe \nfrom the tooth of time in the pages of Washington Irving. The \nsite was sold by Colonel McCrea\'s heirs, and on it now stands the \nPearl Street Baptist Church. \n\nJane McCrea, the second daughter of the minister, perished by \nthe hands of savages, near Fort Edward, while accompanying \nthem to meet, within the British lines, an American gentleman to \nwhom she was soon to be married. The Indians quarrelled as to \nwhich should receive the reward for conveying her to the place of \nthe wedding, and ended her life and the dispute with the toma- \nhawk. \n\nIt is said that Captain Jones, the suitor, entered the British ser- \nvice with the design of seizing General Burgoyne, and delivering \nhim to the Americans, as had been successfully done in the case of \nColonel Prescott and General Lee. \n\n\n\nDAVID YOUNGS, \n\nA grandson of the Rev. John Youngs, the first minister of \nSouthold, Long Island, was born in that town in 1719, and \ngraduated at Yale in 1741. Davenport was his pastor ; and he \nwarmly espoused the views with which that good man prosecuted \nhis ministry. In his class-mates Buel and Brainerd he found \ncongenial spirits. \n\nIn the closing year of his college-course, Tennent visited New \nHaven. The college had been so much moved by Whitefield\'s \npreaching, that the enemies of " the stir" represented it as being \nbroken up, and the students scattered to their homes. Tennent \npreached seventeen times. Among those Avho were savingly \nawakened were Dr. Hopkins, of Newport, and Dr. Sproat, of \n\n\n\nDAVID THORN \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN DICK. 405 \n\nPhiladelphia. The former speaks strongly of the eminent piety \nand zeal of Brainerd and Bnel, but of Youngs as excelling them \nin fervency of spirit, and of his successful endeavours for the \nunconverted. \n\nIt is probable that, on graduating, he, as well as Bnel, was \nI at once; for, on the 29th of May, 1742, Brookhaven, or \nSetauket, Lung bland, Bupplicated New Brunswick Presbytery to \nordain him. Why they passed by New York Presbytery is ex- \nplained by the fact that that body had not identified itself with \nthe peculiar measures of the Great Revival. New Brunswick \nPresbytery ordained him at their next meeting, October 12; and, \nin 174u\', the year after the Synod of New York was formed, gave \nhim leave, on account of its being more convenient, to join New \nYork Presbytery. He became a member of .Suffolk Presbytery in \nMay. 174\'.\'.\' \n\nfie died before May. 1752, leaving his people sadly weakened \nand discouraged by the success of the Separates in alienating \nmany of hi- early and Warmest friends from him. \n\n\n\nDAVID THORN \n\n\n\nWA8 probably a native <>f Delaware, and 8 descendant of Wil- \nliam Thorn, who, in November, 1674, was intrusted (together with \nEdmund Cantwell) with the public property at Newcastle, by Sir \nEdmund Andros. He was examined by the committee of Bynod, \nand approved as a candidate, May 28, 1745. He was ordained \nby Donegal Presbytery between Slay, 1746, and May, 1747. and \nsettled at Chestnut Level. \n\nI [e died in 1 7 -~. < \xc2\xbb . \n\nII - SOU William was the fir.-t minister at Alexandria, Vir- \nginia, and died in early life. \n\n\n\nJOHN DH\'K. \n\n\n\nP obably. born in Wesl Nottingham, Maryland, was ordained, \n\nrcastle Presbytery, November L2, 1746, pastor of the Old- \n\nSide portion of Newcastle and Drawyers, they being bo weakened \n\nby the rapid growth of the New-Side churches that they needed to \n\nunite thai they might support the gospel. \n\nHe died in 17 17 or \' i -. \n\n\n\n496 JOHN HAMILTON\xe2\x80\x94 HECTOR ALISON. \n\n\n\nJOHN HAMILTON \n\n\n\nHaving been examined by the synod\'s committee, was ap- \nproved, May 28, 1745, and was ordained, by Newcastle Presby- \ntery, in 1746, pastor of the Old-Side portion of Rehoboth and \nMonokin, Maryland. In 1750, he was the minister at Chester \nTown, Maryland. \n\nHe died in 1756. \n\n\n\nHECTOR ALISON \n\n\n\nWas examined by the synod\'s committee, and approved, May \n28, 1745. He was ordained by Newcastle Presbytery in 1746, \nprobably at White Clay. He was settled at Drawyers from 1753 \nto \'58. \n\nA curious instance occurs in the records of synod, in 1750, in \nthe omission of the name of a young man blamed for having \nhastily promised marriage. The lady was willing to release him ; \nbut she had a scruple whether it was lawful for her to do so. \nThe synod decided it was lawful, and called up the young man, \nand directed John Thomson to rebuke him in the presence of the \nsynod, \xe2\x80\x94 " it being necessary to show our detestation of such rash \nproceedings in young people." He submitted ; and Cathcart and \nThomson were directed to go with him to the young woman, to \nendeavour to issue the affair. They reported that they went to \nWhite Clay about Alison\'s affair, and that the parties subse- \nquently made a mutual release. \n\nIn 1750, he was sent for eight Sabbaths to Western Virginia. \nIn 1753, he asked for a dissolution of his pastoral relation. The \npresbytery referred it to the synod, and a commission was ap- \npointed, to meet at New London on the first Tuesday of August. \nThey determined the affair, and he probably removed to Drawyers. \n\nIn 1760, he was allowed to go as chaplain to the Pennsylvania \nforces ; and, in answer to a very pressing application made to the \nsynod in May of that year by the English Presbyterian gentle- \nmen in Albany, he was directed to supply there till July. He \njoined Newcastle Presbytery after the union in 1761, and was re- \n\n\n\nJOHN CAMPBELL. 497 \n\nleased in a little time from his charge at Appoquinimy. An ap- \nplication being made from Baltimore town on his behalf, a com- \nmission was sent there in November, who judged that the \nproposals were so unsatisfactory that it was inexpedient to suffer \nsuch a call to be placed in his hands, lie was dismissed from the \nten,\' in December, 1761, probably with a view to join \nSouth Carolina Presbytery, and settled at "Williamsburg, South \nCarolina.* \n\nOn his removal or death, the congregation were annoyed and \ndivided by Samuel Kennedy, from J)romore Presbytery, who had \ngiven no small trouble to the synod: and, although disowned by \nthem, he went south with letters of recommendation from the \nSecond Philadelphia Presbytery. \n\n\n\nDavid Brown, a minister from Scotland, joined Newcastle Pres- \nbytery in 1748, and, the next year, returned to his own country. \n\n\n\nJOHN CAMPBELL \n\n\n\nWas born in Scotland in 1713, and came to America in 1734. \nlie studied at the Log College, but it what period does not \nappear, nor in what occupation be passed, or in what place, the \nfirst thirteen years after his arrival. His home was probably in \nGreat Valley, in Chester county; for Charlestown and New \nProvidence petitioned New Brunswick Presbytery that, it\' he \n\nshould be licensed, they might have his services. At the same \n\ntime. May 19, 17 17, Campbell was taken on trials, and when he \n\nI, October 14, s call was presented for him, and. on \n\nthe 27th, he was ordained and installed at Oharleetown and Hew \n\nProvidence. \n\nOn the death of Rowland, Treat, of Abingdon, tools charge of \n\ncongregations, and had the assistance of David Brainerd at \n\nCharlestown at the sacrament, August 11, L746. This was on his \n\nli-t journey to the Susquehanna; and. on his return, he preaohed \n\nthen- twice "ii the Lords day. September 1 I, and spent the next \n\nday in composing a difference between certain persons. "There \n\ni to be a blessing od out endeavours." \n\nOn the STSt day of May, L758, Campbell W8S struck with palsy \n\n\n\n* Bct. J. A. Wallace, King\'s Tree, Soutli Carolina. \n\n\n\n498 JOHN ROAN. \n\nin the pulpit, when commencing the morning services, and giving \nout these words in the 116th Psalm : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Dear in thy sight is thy saints\' death ; \n\nThy servant, Lord, am I." % \n\nDavenport, under date of May 29, 1753, mentions to Bellamy \nthat, a few weeks before, Mr. Campbell, " a zealous and useful \nyoung minister, was struck in the pulpit with a dead palsy, and \ndied in little more than a week after." He was about forty. \n\nHis daughter Mary was but two years old at that time. She \nmarried General William Harris, of the Valley, and, after a \nwidowhood of twenty-five years, was gently called away in 1838, \nin her eighty-fourth year. She left six sons, of whom may be \nmentioned Dr. William Harris and Dr. Thomas Harris, of Phila- \ndelphia. \n\nThe churches continued vacant for many years, Charlestown \nyearly seeking supplies from Newcastle Presbytery, and New \nProvidence at length uniting with Abingdon and Norriton, in \nsettling Dr. William M. Tennent. \n\n\n\nJOHN ROAN, \n\nA native of Ireland, was brought up as a weaver. He studied \nat the Log College, and taught on the Neshaminy, probably while \ncompleting his theological course. He had, for one of his pupils, \nDr. Rodgers, of New York, for several years. He was licensed \nby the New-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, and sent to Hanover, \nin Virginia, in the winter of 1744. He continued for a longer \ntime than either Robinson or Blair, and the happy effects of his \nministrations were visible and lasting. In several places which he \nvisited in the neighbourhood, a religious concern commenced, \nwhere there was little appearance of it before, and increased ; and \nthis, with his free comments on the Established Church, led to a \nvigorous attempt to silence him, and suppress " the New Light" \naltogether. Affidavits were laid before Governor Gooch, charging \nhim with blasphemous language and saying that the adherents of \nthe Episcopal way were damned, and worshipped the devil. The \ngovernor delivered a vehement charge to the grand jury. An in- \ndictment was prepared, April 9, 1745, against Roan, (though he \nhad left the colony,) on the information of James Axford, for re- \n\n\n\nJOHN ROAN. 499 \n\nfleeting upon and vilifying the Established religion in divers ser- \nmons preached at the house of Joshua Morris, in James City \nparish, on the 7th, . s th, ami 9th of January, before a numerous \naudience unlawfully assembled. \n\nThe governor\'s charge was published. " Without a breach of \ncharity, we may pronounce that \'tis not liberty of conscience, but \nim of speech, they so earnestly prosecute." An order, for- \nbidding any meetings of Moravians, Muggletonians, and New \nLights, was issued, for which there was some show of reason, it \nbeing the memorable 174">. when the Pretender made his last \nattempt on the Crown. In the next month, the people of Hano- \niit Samuel Morris and three others to lay the case before \nthe conjunct presbyteries. They sent an address to the governor \nby the hands of Gilbert Tennent and Samuel Finlcy. Before \nthey arrived. Azford confessed himself perjured, by fleeing and \nnever returning. The indictment was tried, October 19; but the \nsix witnesses, cited by the attorney-general, fully proved that he \nhad ottered none of the expressions imputed to him. \n\nIt is probable that he had been ordained before this time. He \nwas soon after settled over the united congregations of Derry, \nPaxton, and Mount Joy. The latter was in Adams county, and \nu now Great Conewago. It was a division of Black\'s con- \ninn of Conewago, and had one-fifth of Roan\'s time. \n\nB ainerd passed through Paxton and Derry in the fall of 1745; \nbut in his printed journal no mention is made of Roan. As he \nrode along, September 11, he had a very importunate invitation \n\nto preach, \xe2\x80\x94 the people being gathered at the meeting-house; but \n\nhe could not, by reason of weakness. He was annoyed by the \nrudeness of irreligious fellows at a tavern where he Lodged in \nPaxton. "The Pextang Boys*\' were bearers of Roan, as well as \nler. \nunion of the synods placed Roan in Donegal Presbytery; \nand points of difficulty continually arose, which admitted of do \ncompromise. The licensing of William Edmeston was the oc- \noasion of much uneasiness. He was a student of Sampson \nSmith\'s and a prominent witness in his defence. These were no \nrecommendations in the eyes of Roan; and he declared himself \ndissatisfied with what the majority accepted as evidence of the \nyoung man\'s piety. Bdmeeton prosecuted Roan for various \nthings, to the effect thai he was a party and a principal mover in \n:i conspiracy to destroy Smith by perjured or dishonesl witi \nThe trial was protracted, and was in the lasl degree insulting; \ntrivia] questions without end wire asked, and persons were sworn \nas witnesses, seemingly only to annoy them. It ended in Ed- \nmeston\'s going to England for holy orders. Some friend recom- \nmended him to the Bishop of London for b parish in Maryland, \n\n\n\n500 DAVID BOSTWICK. \n\nwhich the Lord-Proprietary of Maryland very highly resented; \n"giving an idea," says Bishop White, " of the reception a bishop \nwould probably have, if sent over to that province." \n\nRoan, towards the close of life, informed the presbytery that his \ncongregations were deeply sunk in debt. He was sent on mis- \nsionary tours, and, at one time, spent eight weeks on the South \nBranch of Potomac. \n\nHe died, October 3, 1775, and lies buried at Derry meeting- \nhouse, on the Swatara, with this inscription : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Beneath this stone \nAre deposited the remains \nOf an able and faithful, \nCourageous and successful \nMinister of Jesus Christ." \n\n" Truths for once told on a tombstone," says the author of \n"Mark Bancroft\'s Tales." \n\nWilliam Graham, of Washington College, Virginia, was a mem- \nber of his church, and received from him the education preparatory \nto entering Nassau Hall, and his theological training. \n\n\n\nDAVID BOSTWICK \n\n\n\nWas born in New Milford, Connecticut, in 1721, of parents who \nwere from Scotland. He entered Yale College, but, before gradu- \nating, left, and completed his studies with Burr, at Newark. For \nsome time he was his assistant in the Academy. \n\nHe was ordained, by New York Presbytery, pastor at Jamaica, \nLong Island, October 9, 1745. Burr preached from 2 Timothy \nii. 16, and Pemberton exhorted the minister and people. \n\nDavies heard him preach, during the synod in 1753, an excellent \nsermon on Acts ii. 11. "He has, I think, the best style, extem- \npore, of any man I ever heard." He heard him the next evening \non "Godliness is Profitable for all Things," and was much charmed \nwith both his matter and his language. The next day being the \nLord\'s day, he preached in the evening, "When Christ who is your \nlife shall appear." "My pleasure under his sermon was renewed \nand increased." \n\nThe next year he was appointed on a mission to Virginia and \nNorth Carolina, but it is not probable that he went. \n\nHe continued at Jamaica ten years, enjoying the respect and \n\n\n\nDAVID BOSTWICK. 501 \n\naffection of his own people and of the town, with scarcely an ex- \nception ; for, at a meeting of the freeholders in the spring of 1753, \nonly three persons dissented from giving to the elders and deacons \ncertain lands, and the right to sell them for the support of a Pres- \nbyterian minister forever. \n\nThe troubles in the congregation of New York had not been re- \nmoved by dismissing the pastors, Pemberton and Gumming ; but \nan agreement had been effected in relation to the mode of electing \ntrustees, the enlargement of the session in reference to Psalmody, \nalso, and the administration of Infant Baptism. \n\n"By order* of the synod, in 1754, Samuel Finley and John Blair \ncame to New York to call a committee in the congregation of such \nmen as might be thought fit to act for that congregation ini-elation \nto a call and settlement of a pastor, as our elders appeared too in- \ndolent in the matter. The congregation was opposed by some of \nthe gentlemen with much vehemence, which much surprised the \nministers : they abused some publicly, and their behaviour more and \nmore convinced us that the church\'s real good was little their care \nor concern. They talk of putting to vote in the congregation for \nMr. Boetwick and Mr. Blair. We have been refused Mr. Davies. \nWe find that those who opposed Mr. Bellamy would oppose Mr. \nEdwards." They united with unanimity, in July, 1755, in a call \nfor Bostwick. The presbytery asked the advice of the synod, and a \nlarge committee of the most valuable ministers was appointed to \nmeet at Jamaica and determine the affair. Twelve ministers at- \ntended; but, not having sufficient light, they referred it to the com- \nmission. They appointed Bostwick to spend ten sabbaths in New \nYork, and provided a constanl supply for bis people. "Mr. Bost- \nwickt began bis ten weeks of probation (as also his trial of us) the \nfirst Sabbath in December, we have had a Seoeder minister | Rev. \nAlexander Gellatly) invited here, who has preached for a month \nfour discourses ;i week, in a house provided for him: he is ;i man \nof sense \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2up! Learning, ami, to all appearance, really pious. Mr. \nick and Mi - . Hail went to hear him in the evening, who both \napproved of hi- preaching." "No opposition} appears to Mr. \nvostwick: the gentlemen thai were opposed to Bellamy are very \nlealons for him. !!\'\xe2\x96\xa0 may !"\xe2\x80\xa2 settled, and a seceding congregation \nraised np, chiefly out of our congregation; though pious people of \nalmosl all denominations are very fond of Mr. Gellatly\' s preaching. \nPot my part, 1 like it eery much, and think it well calculated to cfc \ngood bere. It i-- ;i pity hi- principles are so narrow; hut this oity \n. long been fed with bread, perhaps s change will he health- \nful." His Labours among them eery much increased, and Btrength* \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Samuel Lowdeo t.. Bellamy, October ". 17". 1. \n\n1 N. Hii/.ni to Bellamy, I 1 X [bid., January 9, 1758. \n\n\n\n502 DAVID BOSTWICK. \n\nened the desire for him. The commission dissolved the pastoral re- \nlation, April 15, 1750", because so many fruitless attempts had been \nmade to resettle the gospel in New York, and there was so desirable \na prospect of his usefulness there. \n\nImmediately the Scots erected a small house of worship ; and in \nJune, 1761, the Rev. John Mason arrived from Scotland, \xe2\x80\x94 "a \ngreat philosopher, but not popular." He had rejected several calls \nfrom other churches, and was with great difficulty persuaded by his \nfriends that it was his duty to remove to New York from a people \nearnestly entreating him to remain. \n\n"As the congregation of Jamaica will necessarily be put to \ncharge in obtaining a resettlement of the gospel ministry, the com- \nmission-earnestly recommend to the church in New York to exer- \ncise a Christian generosity towards them, that they may be better \nenabled to settle another minister." \n\nHe was soon after installed in New York. One of his hearers, \nWm. Smith, Esq., in his "History of New York," gave this account \nwhile he was living: \xe2\x80\x94 "Of a mild and catholic disposition, with \npiety, prudence, and zeal, he confines himself entirely to the proper \nbusiness of his function. In the art of preaching he is one of the \nmost distinguished clergymen in these parts. His discourses are \nmethodical, sound, and pathetic in sentiment, and, in point of lan- \nguage, singularly ornamented. He delivers himself without notes, \nand yet with great ease and fluency of expression, and performs \nevery part of divine service with a striking solemnity." \n\nIn the winter of 1756, the prevalence of smallpox put him to \nstudy what is present duty, and the mind of Providence in regard \nto himself and his family. "I had rather die in the way of duty \nthan purchase life by running out of it. I have therefore con- \ncluded to stay : but I have thought it prudent to send my family to \nNewark. I see many people will venture to tarry when they have \nnothing in prospect but a little worldly advantage : and will it do \nfor a minister of" Christ, whose work is so very important, to leave \nit for such appearances of danger as will not influence worldly men \nto quit their worldly interests? If I have any more work to do \nfor God, he will carry me safely through ; to him I commit my \ncause, and through the blood of Jesus wait for eternal life." \n\nHe preached before the commissions of the two synods, imme- \ndiately previous to the union, in 1758, from 1 Corinthians iv. 25. \nThe sermon was printed, with the title, "Self Disclaimed and \nChrist Exalted," and in 1802, it was published in the second \nvolume of the "Evangelical Preacher," in Edinburgh, with a re- \ncommendation by Dr. Erskine. \n\nHe delivered a eulogium on President Davies, and followed him \nthe next year to a better world. He died, after a few days\' illness, \nNovember 12, 1763, in the forty-fourth year of his age, " being \n\n\n\nDAVID BOSTWICK. 503 \n\nremarkably supported." His health had been for a long time so \ndelicate that he needed an assistant : and the Rev. Joseph Treat \nwas called to be his colleague, in October, 1702. \n\n"As a preacher he was uncommonly popular. His gifts and \nqualifications for the pulpit were of a high order. His appearance \nand deportment were peculiarly venerable. He possessed a clear \nUnderstanding, a warm heart, a quick apprehension, a lively imagi- \nnation, a solid judgment. lie had a strong voice, and spoke in a \ndistinct, deliberate, and impressive manner, and with a command- \ning eloquence. He dealt faithfully with his hearers, declaring to \nthem the whole counsel of God, showing them their danger and \ntheir remedy; speaking with the solemnity becoming the import- \nance of the subject, in language pure and elegant, plain and affec- \ntionate, never below the dignity of the pulpit, nor above the ca- \npacity of any of his hearers." \n\nDr. Miller says, " He possessed pulpit talents superior to most \nof his brethren: his piety ami prudence were as conspicuous as his \nbrilliant gifts. His eloquence was such as few attain: the ardour \nof his piety, and the purity of his life, gave him a strong hold on \npublic esteem. His ministry in New York equalled the most san- \nguine expectations of his friends;" but he could not bring back the \nPresbyterian Society. \n\nNot long after his decease, his treatise entitled "A Fair and \nRational Vindication of the Right of Infants to the Ordinance of \nBaptism" was published in New York, and reprinted the next year, \nin London. \n\nHis widow died at Newark, September 22, 177*, aged fifty- \n?\'\xe2\x96\xa0.\' ii. Hi.- daughter Hannah was married to Mr. Barret, Major- \nGenera] McDougal, and the Rev. Dr. Roe, of Woodbridge. \n\nIn May. l~t;_\', the congregation purchased a parsonage; but, \ni being strengthened in numbers, established in peace, and \nfavoured with prosperity, a better benefit descended from heaven. \nShortly before hie the means of grace were attended with \n\na more than common blessing. A portion of its happy inlluence \nremained when Rodgers was metalled, in 17<i.~>. \n\nThe loss of In- eldeel son, in 1 T \xe2\x80\xa2 *\xe2\x96\xa0 i2 . was a heavy blow, "who was \nbo much the darling and hope of my family." In January, 17i;d, \n\ni id, "OIT church affair- are hut in an indifferent situation. \n\nUnhappily for us, the settlemenl of Mr. Treat has made some jar, \n\nand di satisfied a Dumber, though I hope not many. An attempt \nhi- been made by Messrs. Hazard, Wells, and others, to ereol an- \nother congregation, in which Mr. Thompson has been employed as \n\n: -her; hut with no success. Religion is indeed at a low ebb \nwith u-." Shortly before his death, the mean- of grace were at- \n\ni with a more than common j " thoughtf ulnese about \n\n\n\n504 THOMAS ARTHUR. \n\nreligion" continued; and this was probably a strong indr cement to \nRodgers to accept the call. \n\nBostwick said, in 1759, " There were some slight awakenings, but \nno genuine convictions; good people have not a right temper." \nHazard, whose heart was bound up in Bellamy, said, "Our con- \ngregation is yearly increasing in grandeur and finery, but, I be- \nlieve, has seen its best days as to godliness, perhaps for this age." \n\n\n\nTHOMAS ARTHUR \n\n\n\nGraduated at Yale in 1743, and was, on being licensed, em- \nployed for a time at Stratfield, Connecticut. He was ordained and \ninstalled, by New York Presbytery, pastor at New Brunswick, in \n1746. It seems not unlikely, from the remark of Gilbert Tennent, \nin 1744, that the congregation there was then sadly changed from \nits favoured condition when it was as a field the Lord had blessed ; \nand that his removal had been preceded or followed by some un- \nhappy occurrences, which led to its placing itself under New York \nPresbytery. \n\nArthur* was a good scholar, a graceful orator, a finished \npreacher, an excellent Christian ; steadfast, without a tincture of \nbigotry; cheerful in conversation, without the appearance of \nlevity; of an amiable and engaging behaviour; the darling of his \npeople. \n\nHe was one of the original trustees of New Jersey College, as \nwas also Mr. Johannes Leydt, the pastor of the Dutch Reformed \nChurch of New Brunswick. \n\nHis sermon at the ordination of Thane, in August, 1750, was \nprinted, and the trustees of the congregation of New York re- \nquested a copy, for publication, of his sermon preached at the ordi- \nnation of Cumming as their pastor, in October of that year. \n\nHe died, February 2, 1750-1, aged twenty-seven. His distemper \nwas violent, and soon affected his head ; but as death approached \nthe clouds scattered. He passed away calmly, leaving his soul in \nthe hands of Christ, saying, " I am not afraid to depend on his all- \nsufficient merits alone for eternal life." \n\nThe meeting-house was struck with lightning in June, 1752, and \nwas pretty much shattered. A long vacancy ensued in the pastoral \n\n* Obituary in New York Papers. \n\n\n\nANDREW HUNTER. 605 \n\noffice, during which Cumming probably supplied them from 1753 \nto 1761. About this time the congregation again came under the \ncare of New Brunswick Presbytery. \n\n\n\nANDREW HUNTER \n\n\n\nWas taken on trials by New Brunswick Presbytery, September \n11, 1744, ami was licensed May 28, 1745: he was ordained the \npastor of Greenwich and Deerfield, in West Jersey, September 4, \n1740. \n\nIn 1720, Gloster and Pilesgrove were associated in endeavours \nto "settle the gospel among them," and continued united till \n1738, when the name of Gloster ceases, and Pilesgrove and Deer- \nfield had the Rev. Daniel Buckingham as i candidate. Piles- \ngrove was anxious to make efforts to secure him permanently; but \nDeerfield refused. Anew meeting-house was needed at the former \nplace, and. after much contention, was placed, with the consent of \ntin\' commission, within six miles of Deerfield Church. This put \nthem asunder; and, when Pilesgrove and Quihawken called David \nEvans, the presbytery mournfully record that Deerfield is left. It \npassed over to the New Side, and united with Greenwich in settling \nHunter. \n\nGree nw ich was left vacant by Gould\'s removal at the commence- \nment of tli*- Revival; it was fully enlisted on the side of its prO- \n\nmeters. Whitefield preached in April and in October, 1740, at \nGreenwich and Gloster. Tennent had been there before hia Becond \n\nVisit, and, 00 the rupture, Campbell and Rowland Were bidden to \n\ncomplete\' their circuit by preaching at Oape May and Greenwich. \nGohanzy, <>r Fairfield, seems to have been highly favoured during \nWhitefields stay, while of (Greenwich, lie ~ :i y-- \xc2\xbb1 one time, none \n\nWere UiMVed. Ill Sept I\'llllnT, L746, lie preaehed three SernmUS \n\nthere tu large and affected auditories. Finley laboured with sea] \nand success in Deerfield and the adjoining congregations. \n\nHunter drew many from Fairfield to him: <ui the death-; of their \n\nrs, Klmer and Evans, both Fairfield and Pilesgrove passed \nover to the New Side and settled Ramsey and Greenman. winter \ngave up Deerfield in 1 T \xc2\xab i < \xe2\x96\xba, and died, duly 28, 177">. \n\n\n\n506 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAINERD, \n\nBorn of a respectable family at Haddam, Connecticut, April \n20, 1718, was early left an orphan. Losing his father at the age \nof eight, he was terrified at the thoughts of death, but soon \nturned from the care of his soul, esteeming religion a melancholy \nbusiness that destroyed his eagerness for play. At thirteen, \xe2\x80\x94 \nawakened he knew not how, \xe2\x80\x94 his concern was increased by the \nprevalence of a mortal sickness. The death of his mother, in \nMarch, 1732, exceedingly distressed him. Frequent, constant, \nand sometimes even fervent, in prayer, he took delight in reading \npious books, especially "Janeway\'s Token for Children." At \ntimes he was much melted in the duties of religion, and, being re- \nmarkably dead to the world, his thoughts were almost wholly em- \nployed about his soul\'s concern. In his fifteenth year, he went \nto Haddam, and resided there till nineteen, still attending secret \nprayer, though much addicted to the company and the amuse- \nments of the young. His conviction abated. Having gone to \nDurham, to work his farm, love of study prompted him to seek a \nliberal education ; and, at twenty, he entered on a course of learn- \ning in the house of Mr. Fiske, the minister of Haddam. He \nfinished his preparation for college with his brother, the minister \nof Eastbury. Naturally inclined to melancholy, he was now \nregular in life, sober in deportment, and settled on a self-righteous \nfoundation. \n\nWalking out for prayer, of a Sabbath morning in the winter of \n1738, it pleased God to give him of a sudden such a view of his \ndanger and of the divine wrath, that he stood amazed. He \nenvied the birds and the beasts their happiness in not being ex- \nposed, like him, to eternal misery. Day by day mountains \nseemed to obstruct his hoping for mercy, and the work of con- \nversion seemed so great that he thought he should never be the \nsubject of it. Spending a day in February, 1739, in fasting and \nalmost continual cries that his eyes might be opened to see the \nevil of sin and the way of life in Jesus Christ, God was pleased \nto make to him a considerable discovery of his heart : his en- \ndeavours that day became a means of showing him in some \nmeasure his helplessness. One night, while walking alone, such \na view of his sin opened to him that he feared the ground would \ncleave and become his grave. These many disappointments, dis- \ntresses, and perplexity, put him in a horrible frame of con- \ntesting with the Almighty, \xe2\x80\x94 with inward vehemence and virulence \nblaming his ways of dealing with man. "I found great fault \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAIXERD. 507 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2with the imputation of Adam\'s sin to his posterity, and wished \nfor some other way of salvation than by Jesus Christ. Being \nsensible of the necessity of deep humiliation in order to a saving \ninterest in Christ, I used to set myself to produce in my heart the \nconvictions requisite in such a humiliation. Scores of times I \nvainly imagined myself humbled and prepared for mercy." In \nthis distressed, bewildered, and tumultuous state, he was espe- \ncially irritated with the strictness of the divine law, and with the \nFact that faith was the condition of salvation. He could not find \nout what faith was, nor what it was to believe and come to Christ. \n" I could not bear the divine sovereignty." At last, on Friday, \nJuly 10, 1739, seeing all was in vain, he was brought to a stand, \nas being totally lost. The tumult was now quieted, and he was \nsomewhat eased of the distress he had felt in struggling with a \nof himself and of the divine sovereignty. He saw that, in \nall his performances, he had regard to nothing but his self- \ninterest: his duties were nothing but self-worship and horrid abuse \nof God. \n\nOn the next Sabbath, while walking in a thick grove and en- \ndeavouring to pray, though in a very senseless, stupid frame, un- \nspeakable glory opened to his soul in a new, inward appre- \nhension or view of God. "I stood still, wondered, and admired. \nIt was widely different from all the conceptions 1 ever had of God \nor things divine. My Bonl rejoiced with joy unspeakable to see \n\nsuch a God; and I was inwardly pleased and Satisfied that ho \n\nshould be over all for ever and ever." So captivated was he with \n\n[Cellency, loveliness, greatness, and other perfections of God, \n\nthat he had no thought at first of his own salvation, or that there \n\nich a creature as himself. u The way of salvation opened \nwith such infinite wisdom, suitableness, and excellency, thai 1 won- \n\nI should ever think of any other way. Could 1 have been \n\nin any Other way, my whole soul would have refused it. I \n\nWondered thai all the world did not see and Comply with this way \n\nof salvation entirely by the righteousness of Christ. \n\n"\'Stoddard\'s Guide to Christ 1 was, 1 trust, in the hands of \nbe happy mean- of my conversion." \n\n"While Spending some time in prayer and self-examination, the \n\xe2\x80\xa2 p .-hined into my heart that 1 enjoyed the full assurance of \nhi- EaVOUr for that time, and wafl unspeakably refreshed with hea- \nvenly enjoyment \n\nlb\' entered Vale College in September. IT-".\'.\', and enjoyed con- \nsiderable sweetness in religion all the winter, though ambition in \n\ni IldieS greatly Wronged the activity and rigOUr of his spiritual \n\nlife. The- ClaSS Was the largest that hail ever entered the insti- \ntution, and he stood at the bead of it. An attack of measles, in \n\nthe winter, made him de-pair of life; and in AugUSt, elo-e appli- \n\n\n\n508 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\ncation to study compelled him to go home in great weakness. He \ndid not return to New Haven till after Whitefield\'s visit. His old \ntemptation, ambition in study, sunk him into coldness and dul- \nness. The Great Awakening began in February, 1741, and he \nwas much quickened and abundantly engaged in religion. \n\nOn his death-bed he destroyed so much of his diary as reached \nfrom January, 1741, till April 14, 1742, because of the " im- \nprudences and indecent heats" into which he was carried by "a \ntincture of the intemperate and indiscreet zeal" then prevalent. \n\nGilbert Tennent laboured with great success among the students \nand the citizens. When he left, many people followed him to Mil- \nford. The scholars were fined for going without leave ; and \nBrainerd was accused of having said, he "wondered the rector \ndid not fear to drop down dead for doing so." In the spring, he \nwent over, with Buel, to Southold, and witnessed the glorious dis- \nplays of grace. \n\nIn the summer, Davenport came to New Haven ; and many who \nhad long disliked the preaching of the pastor, Mr. Noyes, \xe2\x80\x94 both \nhis doctrine and his manner, \xe2\x80\x94 now withdrew, and formed a new \ncongregation. The rector, Mr. Clap, disliked the preaching, and \ntook unwearied pains afterwards to form a church in the college, \nthat he and the students might enjoy ministrations more orthodox \nand attractive. But he was a foe to all violations of order ; and \nBrainerd incurred his displeasure for going once, when forbidden, \nto the separate meeting. \n\nBeing alone, with some companions in the hall, after the \ntutor (Mr. Whittlesey) had been unusually pathetic in his prayer, \nBrainerd was overheard by a passer-by to say, " He has no more \ngrace than this chair." This reached the rector; and he extorted \nfrom those who were present the information as to the person \nof whom Brainerd spoke. Being required to make a public con- \nfession, and to humble himself before the whole college, in the hall, \nfor what he had said in private conversation, he would not comply, \nand was expelled. \n\nThis was in the winter of 1742 ; and he went to prosecute his \ntheological studies with Mills, of Ripton, under the supervision of \nthe neighbouring ministers, Cooke, of Stratford, Graham, of \nSouthbury, and Bellamy, of Bethlehem. In May, he spread the \ntreatment he had received from the rector and tutors before a \ncouncil of ministers at Hartford, and they entreated the college \nauthorities to restore him to his former privileges, but without suc- \ncess. The Association met at Danbury, July 29, and, having exa- \nmined him as to his learning and experience in religion^ licensed \nhim to preach. His first sermon was from 1 Pet. iv. 8, and was \ndelivered at Southbury. " Had much of the comfortable presence \nof God in the exercise ; seemed to have power to get hold of the \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAINERD. 509 \n\nhearts of the people." Being forced hy the people to preach at a \nplace near Kent, .some Indians cried out in great distress, and all \nappeared greatly concerned. " Hired an Englishwoman to keep \na kind of school among them." \n\nOn the 17th of August, he began to see that he had erred in \nmany things. \'* It cuts and wounds my heart to think how much \nself-exaltation, spiritual pride, and warmth of temper have inter- \nmingled with my endeavours to promote God\'s work. Sometimes \n1 long to lie down at the feet of opposers and confess what a poor \nimperfect creature I am." He was regarded as one of "the most \ndisorderly strolling preachers," and had to use much care to \nimprisonment at New Haven for having preached to the \nSeparata Society there. lie came into the town, secretly, in the \nevening. Preaching, in October, at West Suffield, with clearness, \npower, and pungency, " there was some noise and tumult in the \nassembly that 1 did not well like, and I endeavoured to bear public \ntestimony against it with moderation and mildness through the \ncurrent of my discourse." \n\n" I cried to God to enable me to bear testimony against the \nfal-e appearances of religion, which breed confusion and hinder \nthe progress of vital piety." At Canterbury, where there had \nbeen a division, he preached in the meeting-house: M exhorted the \npeople to love one another, and not to set up their own frames as \na standard by which to try all their brethren." He went to see \nthe Rev. Solomon Williams, of Lebanon, who is supposed to have \nhad much influence in convincing Davenport of his errors, and \nwho wrote against the book id" his kinsman, Jonathan Edwards, on \nre<|uiring a profession of personal piety as a term of sacramental \nCommunion. "Spent several hours with him; was greatly de- \nlighted with his serious, deliberate, impartial way of discourse \nabout religion." \n\nAl N\'\\v London, January 28, 1743, "Found some fallen into \nextravagancies, carried away with a false zeal and bitterness. \n\nGod had not taught them with briers and thorns to be of a kind \n\ndisposition towards mankind." A few weeks after, Davenport \ncame, and foolishly made a bonfire of some pious books and gen- \nteel clothing. \n\nTo Bellamv he said, February I. 171-\'::. kk Last week I \n\npreached for Mr. Pish at Btonington. The Lord helped me to be \nall love there while 1 waa undermining false religion, so that, if \n\nthey had any inclination to quarrel with me, he helped me to love \nthem all to death. There \\sas mueh fal-e zeal among them. BO \n\niome began t<> separate from that dear man. II.\' wantato \n\ni in these parts more than any man on earth. Indeed, I \n\nbelieve you might do service there, if the Lord Bhould help you to \nsoftness." \n\n\n\n510 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\nAt Stonington, where there was also a rending of the church, \nhe insisted on humility and steadfastness in keeping God\'s com- \nmands, and that we should not make our own frames the rule by \nwhich we judge others. " I felt sweetly calm, full of brotherly \nlove, and never more free from party spirit. I hope some good \nwill follow ; that Christians will be freed from false joy, party \nzeal, and censuring one another. A few days ago, the Lord \nlet me feel as if I could rend heaven down on their heads if they \nwould not come to God; and that showed me that, while I was \nwarring against wild-fire because of that cursed pride there was in \nit, I might fall into an extreme that way. Oh, the Lord help us, \nor we shall wound the cause of God some way or other." \n\nIn after years he said, "When God sets before me my past \nmisconduct, especially any instances of misguided zeal, it sinks \nme into shame and confusion." "Longed to get on my knees and \nask forgiveness of everybody that had ever seen any thing amiss, \nespecially in my religious zeal." "Was grieved at the very \nthoughts of a fiery, angry, and intemperate zeal in religion ; \nmourned over past follies in that regard." \n\nThese things serve to show, like the acknowledgments of Daven- \nport, how much man did to mar God\'s work, while yet most truly \ndesirous of promoting his glory. \n\nHe had loyg indulged the hope of being sent to the heathen \nafar off, and of seeing them flock home to Christ; but his disgrace \nat college seemed to render it impossible. While at New Haven, \nNovember 19, 1742, he received a letter from Pemberton, desiring \nhim to come speedily to New York, to meet with the corre- \nspondents of the Scottish Society in relation to the Indians. \n" My mind was instantly seized with concern ; so I retired with \ntwo or three friends and prayed, and it was indeed a sweet time \nto me." Oppressed with the weight of the affair, but casting his \nburden on the Lord, he reached the city, November 24, and, the \nnext day, " was examined of ray Christian experience, my ac- \nquaintance with divinity, and some other studies, in order to my \nimprovement in that important affair of evangelizing the heathen. \nI was forced to go and preach to a considerable assembly, before \nsome grave and learned ministers." \n\nHaving now undertaken the missionary work, and thinking he \nshould have no occasion among the Indians for the estate left him \nby his father, (though afterwards he found himself mistaken,) no \nway presented itself to his thoughts wherein he could do so much \ngood with it as by educating a young man for the ministry. He \nselected " a dear friend," Nehemiah Greenman, of Stratford, ac- \nquainted him with his thoughts, and left him to consider of it till \nthey met. He was soon put to learning, and was supported by \nBrainerd till the latter died, Greenman having gone through his \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAIXERD. 511 \n\nthird year. He was, for many years, the pastor of Pittsgrove, in \nWest Jersey. \n\nHis expectation was to be sent at once to the Forks of Dela- \nware ; and he took leave of his friends as if never to meet them \nagain on earth. In the evening of the Lord\'s day, December 26, \nhe rode from New Haven to Branford, "after I had kneeled down \nand prayed with a number of dear Christian friends, in a very re- \ntired place in the woods. The next evening I preached from \nMatt. vi. 83, \'But aeek ye first,\' with much freedom, sweet power, \nami pungency: the presence of God attended our meeting. Oh, \nthe sweetness, the tenderness, I felt in my soul! If I ever felt \nthe temper of Christ, I had some sense of it now. Blessed be my \nGod! I have Beldom enjoyed a more comfortable and profitable \nday than this." Yet this was the thing set foremost in the \ncharges against Mr. Bobbins: "his earnestness in improving \nthose strolling preachers that were most disorderly, more espe- \ncially in one meeting carried on at his own house by Messrs. \nBrainerd and huell." \n\nThe Correspondents not wishing him to begin his labours in \nthe winter, he spent, by request of the people of East Hampton, \nfour weeks with them. \n\nWhile detained at Saybrook, he wrote to Bellamy, February 4, \n1T42-8:\xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Dearest Brother : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"I received the line yon sent me from Branford with satis- \nfaction, hut longed, if Divine Providence had permitted, to have \nseen yourself in the room of it. I hare been bo hurried of late, \nespecially this week, while a friend from East Hampton ha- been \n\nWaiting for me, that J despaired of writing to yon before 1 h\'l\'t \n\nthe shore, having Bundry other letters to write of absolute \njity. hut Divine Providence has given me this opportunity, \n\nfor want of wind to sail; and oh that my time in writing these \n\nlines, and yours in reading them, may be spent for the glory of \nour blessed Lord! Almost my whole time, since 1 left Branford, \nhas been spent in one continued Beries of spiritual distress ami \n\ninward 00nflict8, \xe2\x80\x94 though 1 have taken a journey to the eastward \nSince, in which 1 preached near twenty times, and BOmetimeS with \n\ndivine softness, tenderness, and Borne degree of power and pun- \ngency. All the praise be to the Great Donor of every good and \nEerfect gift! What I have endured in nay soul is perfectly \neyond expression and tin\' conception of any hut those that feel \n\nth\xc2\xab- same My distri wholly in privation ; ami, \n\nbeing unable to bear the distress, 1 am greatly inclined to amuse \naiel diver\', myself with some mean conversation, or something else, \nwhile my e m- for that criminal waste of time, and \n\n\n\n512 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\nfor attempting to please myself with any thing short of God \n\nHowever, I am persuaded that God has done and will do me good \nby these trials. Nothing could ever have shown me so much of \nmy insufficiency to make myself happy ; that our blessedness is \nnot, in whole or in part, in and of ourselves, but from God alone, \xe2\x80\x94 \nas these dispensations have done. Nothing kills cursed pride and \nself-conceit like it. Nothing destroys a positive, confident, dog- \nmatical spirit like it. So that, seeing we are dark and benighted \nand so infinitely vile and ignorant, instead of saying, \' I know,\' \nand \' I know as sure as God lives,\' &c, we shall be ready to say, \n* I don\'t know ;\' \' I am a poor, dark, ignorant, benighted worm ;\' \n\'Oh, the Lord only knows.\' Further: nothing makes me so \ntender towards all mankind in general, and towards those we hope \nto be our fellow-Christians in particular, though they and we \ndiffer widely in sentiment in some respects. This I have found \nby experience, to a remarkable degree of late, when I have had \nany dawn of divine light, so that I could even love a close, refined \nhypocrite, in the midst of all his nauseous actions. But, dearest \nbrother, I am afraid of extremes everywhere. I fear whether you \nand I haven\'t been too dogmatical with regard to our own frames \nand feelings ; i.e. set them up as standards, at least too much to \ntry others by, though I don\'t dare to say we have; but what I \nsee more and more is, that God don\'t deal with all his children aa \n\nwith me My soul has undergone inexpressible anguish \n\nyesterday and to-day; and the greatness of my work lies like \nmountains of lead upon me, though I had much rather go than \ntarry in these parts, and I\'d rather die than go or stay; not be- \ncause death is desirable, as sometimes; but, dearest brother, if \nthere is an object of pity on earth, and one that needs the prayers \nof all God\'s people, \'tis I, at present. Oh, therefore, pray for me, \nand tell your dear Christians to pray for me, that God would go \nwith me and help me; for, at present, I don\'t desire the Indians \nshould be converted, and yet I can\'t but go among \'em. \n\n" I expect to tarry four or five weeks at East Hampton, before I \ngo to York. I should be very glad if you would write to Mr. Pem- \nberton and enclose a letter in his for me, and do take some care of \nbrother Greenman, my scholar, for I can\'t hear a word from him, \nthough I have wrote to him : and when you write to me at York, \nlet me know where he is, and how he is. So, dear, dear brother, \nwishing you well for time and eternity, and hoping, after a few \ngloomy days more, to meet you in that world where sin and sorrow \nis eternally banished, I remain your benighted but very affection- \nate brother, David Brainerd. \n\n" P.S. Dear Brother: \xe2\x80\x94 I long to see you more than any friend \non earth, to converse with you of some dear topics. I wonder we \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAIXERD. 513 \n\nshould spend any time fruitlessly -when we were together, since \nnow I would give any thing for one hour; but I know not but we \nmust defer our communion and conference to the world of spirits. \nLord, let our Bonis meet there ere long, and rejoice for ever and \never. Amen, and amen." \n\nAt New York, the following letter from Bellamy was waiting for \nhim, dated March 7, 1 7 4 ;J : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Dearest Broth kr : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nk - Last night 1 received yours from Seabrook. I read it, and \nloved yo\xc2\xbb and pitied ynii, and felt a sweet mixture of grief, sor- \nrow, and joy. You seein dearer to me than all the world besides. \n- not from want of love 1 did not come to see you from Bran* \nford, nor is it from want of love I don\'t now set out for New York \n\nr you there; but, dear brother, we must travel far asunder, \ntin/, by your letter, 1 see \'tis thro 1 much the same wilderness. I \nhope we shall meet in the same blessed world at last. All your \n\ninflicts do and will work for your good; only keep on follow- \ning after the Lord, and verily he will be kind: Isa. xl. 31. I have \nheard that there is a great inclination* among some of the Indians \nabove Susquehanna, to . gospel, tho 1 at that place I hear \n\nmuch prejudiced, and are very surly. John Mae, the Mora- \nvian preacher, has been in all those parts, and, as he tells me, (I saw \nhim last wick.) has Btrangely got into the hearts of the Indians. \nBut, by-the-Way, I fear he is not sound in his principles: he would \nnot talk very plain, hut, so far as I could learn. If Beemed to hold \n\nuniversal redemption, free-will, and that the essence of faith is a \npersuasion of the love of Christ; and he Beemed to he more taken \nwith the blood ainl wounds of Christ than with Christ himself, and \nBeemed to talk a- if a law-work was not so very needful, hut all \nsinners have to do is to believe; hut yet 1 might misunderstand \nhim. 1 can\'t hut hope he i> a Christian; and yet he talks just as \nMoravians that 1 .-;iu at New Sfork; hut, the truth i-. the \nrians puzzel me more than any people 1 ever met with. \n. ... In general, I have had a >\xc2\xbbcn winter, loose from the \n\xe2\x96\xa0vs mi id. had clearness and freedom in writing; yet many times I have \n\xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x80\xa2 deserted far day- together, that I wonder 1 should ever pre- \ntend t" write May God always be with as, and teach \n\nas, and humble us, and bring ua to his kingdom at last. I love yon \nLord i uristiattt love yon dearly. \' \n\nOn Saturday afternoon, March L0, Brainerd rode to Newark, \nand bad some tweetnesa in conversation with Burr, and in praj ins \n. r. I h- preached q< *H tad gave me u sistan \n\nml enabled me to -p, ak with real tenderness, lore, and \n\n\n\n514 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\nimpartiality. In the evening preached again, and of a truth God \nwas pleased to assist a poor worm. I was enabled to speak with \nlife, power, and passionate desire of the edification of God\'s people, \nand with some power to sinners." \n\nOn Monday he went to Woodbridge, met with the Correspond- \nents, who ordered him to go to a number of Indians, among whom \nwas a hopeful prospect of success, at Kaunaumeek, " in the woods \nbetween Albany and Stockbridge." He wrote to Bellamy from \nScaticoke, March 26, 1743 : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" My Dearest Brother : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"When I received your last letter in N. York, which I imme- \ndiately answered, I was so wholly engrossed and confused that I \nwholly omitted mentioning some things you inquired of me, \xe2\x80\x94 viz.: \nwhen I expected to see New England again. I could not then \nhave guessed that I should see any part of it so soon, as I find div. \nprovidence has brought me just to the borders of it. Div. provi- \ndence has strangely and unexpectedly changed my course, so that, \ninstead of going among the Delaware Indians and Susquehannas, \nI am going to a tribe of \'em near Albany ; as nigh as I can learn, \nabout 18 miles northeast fro\'m Albany; for the Commissioners are \nnot willing I should go among t\'other Indians while they are sus- \npected of contention with the English ; and, knowing I must come \nnear, if^ not thro\' some part of New England in my journey to the \nIndians near Albany, my soul long\'d exceedingly to see you by the \nway, to communicate some things to you respecting religion, and to \nmourn with you over Zion, while labouring under so many unhappy \nburdens. 0, I long\'d, I long\'d for it exceedingly; but the Lord \nhas disappointed me. May I learn to be resigned ! However, in \nhope to see you, tho\' I was detained in the Jerseys and York till \npast 10 o\'clock on Thursday last, before I could get out of the city, \nand tho\' I had determined to be with these Indians at Scaticoke, \nnear Kent, on the Sabbath, yet I hoped to ride so hard as to save \na little time to see you. Aco\' y I rode near 50 miles after 10 on \nThursday, and yesterday designed to reach your place before I \nslept, which would have been something above 50 miles more, and \nso to have spent this day while noon with you, and then have come \nto N. Milford, and so to these Indians : but coming to Danbury \nyesterday, I heard that you were certainly set out for Boston, and \nso my heart sunk, and almost died, and I felt almost tired to death, \nand so tarried there last night, and to-day am come hither ; and \nthe Lord knows all my sorrows of heart and heavy burdens. I \nnever wanted to see yOu as I do now, to unbosom my griefs and \nfears to you respecting the cause of God. O, how is the interest \nof the Redeemer\'s kingdom attacked on every side ! God only \nknows what will be the issue and event of all the dark and threat- \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAINERD. 515 \n\nening aspects relating to religious matters. But, dear brother, let \nus watch and pray without ceasing, that God would enable us \n\nto conduct piously and judiciously in this difficult day I \n\nbelieve Antinomianism is likely to prevail in many parts of the \nland; but, dear brother, \'tis a tender point to touch; we had need \nbe very cautious in thinking of and treating with others that don\'t \nfeel as we do. Our frames and feelings alter and vary almost every \nday, so that I scarce know what to make of myself sometimes. \nLet us then, my dearest brother, put on utmost tenderness, love, \nmeekne-s, humility, and candour; and love our enemies to death, \n(for that\'s a weapon they can\'t withstand,) and let us love all that \ndon\'t think OB we do, even our enemies. \xc2\xbbSo shall we be the children \nof our heavenly Father : Matt. v. 45. \n\n"P.S. I shall not be above 18 or 20 miles from Mr. Sergeant. I \nshould greatly rejoice if you could come up and see me; it might \nlv he much for OUT assistance and comfort in our way towards \nZion : hut if not, I beseech you, dear brother, not to vex yourself \nso much with the blazing hypocrites, for they roar at you now very \nmuch. \n\n" The Lord be with you forever, and make you a pilgrim all the \nwhile you live in y" world." \n\nSergeant was a native of Newark, a graduate of Yale, who com- \nmenced his labours at Stockbridge in 1785; he had not much BUC- \nbaving never acquired the use of the Indian language though \n\nhe laboured assiduously. J lis advice was that Brainerd should \nmaster the language so far as to write it and understand it when \nBpoken, hut should communicate with the people through an inter- \npreter, and teach the Indian children the English language by the \naid of schoolmasters, lb\' died in 17 J\' 1 . \n\nThe Indians 4 to whom Brainerd ministered lived about fivemilefl \nnorthwest of New Lebanon, on the road to Albany: the place is now \ncalled Brainerd\'e Bridge, a toll-bridge having been built across the \nKayaderosseras I hreek by ;i person of that name. The Indians dwelt \nin the meadow at some distance below tin- bridge. In L828 there \nwere traces of their dwellings, orchard, and bnrying-plaoei The \n\nnearest white j pie spoke only Low Dutch; a Scottish Highlander \n\ne only person with whom Brainerd could converse. The \n\nIndians received him kindly, and wen- seriously attentive to his \n\ninstructions; two appeared under oonoern, ami one told him. r/ri- \n\nvately, that her heart had cried Un08 BUS heard him fust. 1 1 is \ninterpreter WSS an ingenious Indian, who had heeii taughi by Mr. \n\nnt, undent 1 both ESnglish end [ndian very well, and wrote \n\n* S. E. Dwight: Edwards\'s Works. \n\n\n\n516 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\na good hand. To instruct himself he translated English discourses \ninto Indian by the aid of an interpreter, as near verbatim as the \nsense admitted, and observed strictly how they use words, and what \nconstruction they will bear. He also composed several forms of \nprayer suited to their capacities and circumstances, and, translating \nthem into their language, prayed with them in their own tongue ; \nby translating several psalms, "we were soon after able to sing in \nthe worship of God." \n\nIn June he visited the Correspondents, and they granted his \nrequest to set up a school, and appointed his interpreter the teacher. \nHe then went to New Haven to effect a reconciliation with the \nrector, and soon after renewed the attempt. In the fall he attended \nthe Commencement, and consulted Jonathan Edwards, whom he \nmet for the first time : the Correspondents sent Burr to solicit that \nhis degree might be given him. He prepared a most humble and \nample acknowledgment. The authorities were so far satisfied that \nthey offered to give him the degree if he would reside a twelve- \nmonth in the college. The Correspondents would not consent to \nthis, and, though earnest application was made, the faculty would \naccept of nothing else. "I was witness," says Edwards, "to the \nvery Christian spirit he showed at that time;" the trial was the \ngreater, since, but for the displeasure of the heads of the college, \nhe would have taken the highest honours. \n\nBurr wrote to him May, 16, 1743, "I rec d yours of Ap 1 5, \nwhich was refreshing to me. I bless God he gave you so much \nfavour with Mr. Sergeant. I was not a little concerned about \nthe entertainment you would meet with from him. \'Tis blessed \nnews y* God inclines the hearts of y e Indians to receive and hear \nyou. I pray and trust you may see y e fruit of your labours to \nyour abundant rejoicing in the Lord. If God should make you \ninstrumental in turning many of these poor benighted souls from \ndarkness to light, how will it abundantly compensate for all the \nhardships and tryals you meet with ! My heart sometimes mourns \nfor you on account of your outward difficulties ; but I have more \nreason to rejoice with you for the consolations of God, which are \nnot small, I trust, to your souls. I wonder with you y* any Chris- \ntian sh d love the o ; and yet my foolish heart is often running after \nit, though it always gets a wound and a smart for it. that I \nwas wholly dead to it, y* I might live only to God ! When will it \nonce be ? D r Br., pray for me. \n\n"The ministers forbid my going to N. England, by reason of y e \nPresb y and Synod; and, some important affairs depending, by \nreason of something y l happened, I could not go before y e Synod, \nso can\'t be there for some time before Commence 1 . I shall write \nto rector and Mr. W \xe2\x80\x94 lsey ; so will rest of ministers. I doubt not \nof your having, a degree, but whether in this class is a question. \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAINERD. 517 \n\nBr. Johnson, -who is here, scruples it. I shall use all my interest \nto have the tiling accomplisht, for I think \'tis of importance. \n\n"I long to see you. The Indian interpreter, I hope, will answer \nour end. If he will not, what shall we do? for I can hear of no \nother. If you don\'t come down before, don\'t fail being at Com- \nmence\'. Then must be the time for your affair to be issued, \nwhen the trustees are together. I shall, God willing, meet you at \n2s. 1 1 \\ then, or week before. May the Lord be ever with you! Let \nus meet daily at the throne of grace. And for the happy day \nwhen we shall meet in heaven, to spend an eternity in singing \nto him that loved us, and washed us in his own blood." \n\nTo escape the confusion of living in a wigwam, he built a house \nfor himself on a knolL lie could not procure bread within ten or \nfifteen miles: he made- cakes of Indian meal and fried them. He \nBuffered much by sickness, and by riding frequently in winter to \nridge to pursue the study of the native language with Ser- \ngeant. \n\nIn March. 1744,* the Indians having removed to Stopkbridge, \n\nthe Correspondents directed Brainerd to go to the Forks of Dela- \n\n. At Sheffield he met a messenger from East Hampton bearing \n\na unanimous call for him. It was the fairest, pleasantest town OB \n\nthe whole island, and one of its largest and most wealthy parishes. \n\n\'"When I heard of the great difficulties of that place, I was much \nConcerned and grieved, and felt BOme desire to comply with their \nrequest." The people were unanimous in their desires to have him \nfor their pastor, and fora long time continued their earnest endea- \nvour, to obtain him. \n\nThe people of Millington, near his native place, sent their mes- \nr, very earnestly desiring his coming among them on proba- \ntion f.r settlement. "Resolved to go on still with the Indian \naffair." \n\nOn the gth of May he came to Vi<hkill. and, crossing the I In 1- \nio&) reached Goshen the next day, and then across the woods, \nthrough a desolate and hideous country above New Jersey. He \n\ncane-, on the 10th, to a -e: i )< liu-n t of Irish and Low-Dutch people, \n\ncalled The Minnisinks, twelve miles above the Porks. \n\nOn the 18th In\' cams to Lakhauwootung, (Lehigh,) within the \n\n.and was respectfully received by the king, and preached \n\nof the summer at hi- house. This was near the settlements \n\nof Hunter, at Mount Bethel, and Craig, in Allen township. \n\nAmon- the h-idi were some that appeared sober and concerned \n\n* Tli.\' i: ".. w. B I >. I\'- ibo i. . d :; Lift) of Brainerd, lays that :it tin- time ii\xc2\xbb \npol.l in- Brainerd owned the Aral edition ol Baxtorf\'e Hebrew L \n\nI at Ba I- in 1640. H \' I it with otter-skins, painted in the \n\nhim \' \xe2\x80\xa2 Jon \n.\'. mdon. \n\n\n\n518 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\nabout religion. After a fortnight spent with them and the Indians, \nhe set out to meet the Presbytery of New York, at Newark. Hav- \ning preached from Acts xxvi. 17, 18, and been examined on the \nusual course, and on his experimental acquaintance with religion, \nhe was ordained on the 11th of June. Pemberton preached from \nLuke xiv. 23, and said, at the close, "We trust that you are a \nchosen vessel designed for extensive service in this honourable \nthough difficult employment. We adore the God of nature, who \nhas furnished you with such endowments as suit you to this im- \nportant charge. We adore the Great Head of the church for the \nnobler gifts and graces of his Spirit, by which we trust you are \nenabled to engage in this mission with an ardent love to God, with \na disinterested zeal for the honour of Christ, and with tender con- \ncerns for the souls of a people that sit in darkness and the shadow \nof death. It is at the command of Christ that you go forth, who, \nby a train of surprising providences, has been preparing your way \nfor this important embassy." The presbytery universally approved \nof his trials, and judged him uncommonly qualified for the work \nof the ministry. \n\nIn the summer some of the Indians manifested serious concern, \nand continued, with diligence, affection, and becoming solicitude, to \nseek after salvation. In July, hearing of a number of Indians \nresiding at Kanksesauchung, (Catasaqua,) he preached to them, and \nthey invited him to come to their home on the Susquehanna, their \ntemporary abode being on the Indian land between Biery\'s Bridge \nand Cherryville.* This invitation gave him great encouragement; \nand, after a journey to New England, he set out, in October, with \n" dear brother" Byram, the minister of Mendham, New Jersey, and \nmade their way, for three days, over lofty mountains, deep valleys, \nand hideous rocks. His horse hung one of her legs in the rocks : \nnothing remained but to kill her and pursue his journey on foot. \nThey reached Opeholkaupung, (Wapwallopen,f) visited the Indians \nin their house, and preached four days. The Indians gave up their \nhunting design, end listened attentively. \n\nOn the way back, both he and Byram preached at the Irish set- \ntlement, where was a numerous congregation, and then returned to \nhis dwelling. His abode was at Lower Mount Bethel, where his \nhouse still remained at the beginning of the present century: it \nwas then called Hunter\'s settlement, and, on the records of New \nBrunswick Presbytery, Forks North, to distinguish it from Forks \nWest, or Craig\'s settlement, now known as Allen township. In \nthese places were Presbyterian congregations under the care of \n\n* Northampton county, Pennsylvania. \n\n-j- On the east side of the Susquehanna, above Berwick. The caving-in of the \nriver-bank discloses remains of pottery, arrows, &c, indicating a large settle- \nment. \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAINERD. 519 \n\nNew Brunswick Presbytery, which had been supplied for several \nyears with frequent preaching. \n\nTen miles from his house, on the east of the river, was Green- \nwich, where he occasionally preached. Once in December, in the \nintermission, he got among the bushes and cried to God for pardon \nof his deadness, and was in anguish and bitterness that he could \nnot address souls with more compassion and tenderness. \n\n"Lord\'s Day, February 17. \xe2\x80\x94 Preached in the wilderness, on the \nsunny side of a hill, to a considerable assembly of white people, \nmany of whom came near twenty miles, \xe2\x80\x94 from Kreidersville to \nMartin\'s Creek. Discoursed to them all day from John vii. 37; in \nthe afternoon spoke with great freedom and fervency. I think I \nwas scarce ever enabled to offer the free grace of God to perishing \nsinners with more freedom and plainness. Afterwards I was \nenabled earnestly to invite the children of God to come renewcdly \nto this fountain of the water of life, from whence they have hereto- \nfore derived unspeakable satisfaction. There were many tears in \n-.\xe2\x80\xa2liibl v ; and I doubt not but that the Spirit of God was there, \nConvincing poor sinners of their need of Christ.\'\' \n\nhi .March he made another short visit to New England * and on \n\n\n\n* To Ilcv. Mr. Sergeant) fan l\'eahody\'s Life of Brainerd: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Woouduuy, (Conn.,) 16th March, 171"). \n\n"Reverend and honoured Sir: \xe2\x80\x94 In November last, I attempted to Bend yon a line \n\nby Mr. Vim Schaiok, to inform yon of the state of affaire with as, and actually \n\nwrote : but, he Leaving New fork an hourejooner than 1 expected, 1 was disappointed \n\nAnd Dow I am in the greatest hurry, and can bat hint at things 1 would otherwise \n\nbe a little more particalar in. As to my affairs here, 1 took a journey, last ( >o- \n\ntober, t" Susquehanna, and oontinued there Borne time, preaching frequently to the \n\nIndians, in a place called Opcholhatipung, about fifteen or twenty miles down the \n\nin the place yon formerly visited. I supposed I had some encouragement \n\nthem, and 1 propose to visit them again, about the middle of next month, \n\nwith leave ol Divine Providence, and think to spend most of the summer in those \n\n: 11 Then is one peculiar difficulty in the way; the \n\nland these Indians live upon belongs to the Sis Nations,\xe2\x80\x94*.*., the Mohawks; and \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 doubtful if they will suffer a missionary to oome among their tribu- \n\n: I od their land". Vet tiii- difficulty, we hope, may be remove.! by the in- \n\nnnenec \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0! the Governor of Pennsylvania, who maintains a strict friendship with tho \n\nons, whose a pendente have endeavoured to engage in \n\nthis afl dr. May He who has the hearts of all men in hi- hands open their leans \n\n;ospel ! \n\n\'\xe2\x96\xa0I have, this winter pa-t, hal BOOTS eninurairenient among the Indians of tho \n\ne tribe than sver before. \\ rpirit of seriousness and oonoera has seemed to \n\nthem, and many of them nave been rery attentive, and desiroui of \n\nInstruction. Bui 1 have also met with manydisoouj \xe2\x96\xa0 that 1 Boaroely \n\nknow what 1 fetl am nol discouraged, but still hope thai the day \xe2\x80\xa2 >i\' < i i \\ ino \n\np., wit !i dl oome, when tiny shall become :i willing people. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2I long 1 I urol your affairs, sepeoially how tiling" are likely to turn out with \n\nup plan of a free boarding lonool, which Is an affair much npon my \n\nnldsi all my hi m nothing, whether it is likely to \n\nr D it \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2I ratty designed I \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\x94 *>\xc2\xabfag oonsiderable towards promoting that \n\n-ign; but whether I shall he uble to glvs any thing, or whether it will ho \n\n\n\n520 DAVID BRAIXERD. \n\nhis return met a number of ministers at Woodbridge, convened " to \nconsult about the affairs of Christ\'s kingdom in some important \narticles," \xe2\x80\x94 the preliminaries, probably, to the formation of the \nSynod of New York. Soon after, he waited on the governor, in \nPhiladelphia, to obtain leave to live at Susquehanna, most of the \nIndians having removed from the Forks. This journey gave him \nopportunity to join with Beatty in assisting Treat at the sacrament \nat Abingdon: "the assembly was sweetly melted by his preaching; \nscores were in tears ; there was a most amazing attention, and it \nwas a sweet season to many." \n\nEarly in May he travelled with his interpreter to the Susque- \nhanna, and went about a hundred miles up this river, as far as \nShamokin, and preached to several tribes by different interpreters. \nGoing down the river, he came to an island called Juniata, (Dun- \ncan\'s Island,) where the Indians appeared more free from preju- \ndices against Christianity than any others. \n\nWeak and feeble, he soon after went to Neshaminy and assisted \nBeatty at the sacrament: on Saturday the crowded audience was \nmelted while he preached. Towards the close of the administra- \ntion of the ordinance he discoursed to the multitude extempore, \nwith great assistance in addressing sinners. The word was attended \nwith amazing power ; perhaps hundreds in that great assembly, con- \nsisting of three or four thousand, were much affected, so that there \nwas a great mourning. On Monday he preached with a good de- \ngree of clearness, and some warmth ; there was great attention and \nsolemnity, and to God\'s people s^teet refreshment. \n\nPassing on to Maidenhead, he came to Cranberry to visit the \nIndians at Crosswicks. " My body was feeble, and my mind scarce \never so much discouraged about the conversion of the Indians as \nwhen I made my first visit to the Indians in New Jersey." Wed- \nnesday, June 19, 1745, he preached to a few women and chil- \n\n\n\nmy duty to do so under present circumstances, I know not. I have met with several \nlosses lately, to the value of \xc2\xa360 or \xc2\xa370 New England money. In particular, I broke \nmy mare\'s leg last fall, in my journey to Susquehanna, and was obliged to kill her \non the road, and I can\'t get her place supplied for \xc2\xa350. And I have lately moved to \nhave a colleague or companion with me, for my spirits sink with my solitary cir- \ncumstances ; and I expect to contribute something to his maintenance, seeing his \nsalary must be raised wholly in this country, and can\'t be expected from Scotland. \n\n"I sold my tea-kettle to Mr. Jonathan Woodbridge, and an iron kettle to Mr. T. \nW., both which amounted to something more than four pounds, which I ordered \nthem to pay to you for the school. I hope you will use the money that way; if \nnot, you are welcome to it for yourself. I desire my teapot and bed-ticking may be \nimproved to the same purpose. \n\n"As to my blankets, I desired Mr. Woodbridge to take the trouble of turning \nthem into deer-skins. If he has not done it, I wish he would, and send the skins \nto Mr. Hopkins, or, if it might be, to Mr. Bellamy. Please to remember me to \nMadam and all friends. I am, in greatest haste, \n\n"Your obedient, humble servant, \n\n"D. Beainerd." \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAINERD. 521 \n\ndren: the women readily set out, and travelled ten or fifteen miles \nto give notice of his preaching next day. Numbers were gathered : \nhe preached twice. Ob Saturday the power of God evidently at- \ntended the word: thirty were present, and several were brought \nunder great concern, and wept. Having preached on the first three \ndays of the week, they desired him to preach twice; and he did so \non Wednesday and [Thursday, on the Sabbath and Monday. This \nencouraging readiness to receive instruction, seems to have been the \neffect of the conviction which one or two of them met with at the \nForks, and who had endeavoured to show their friends the evil \nof idolatry. The like happy appearances cheered him at the \nForks, and on the 21st of July he baptized his interpreter and his \nwife: he had been awakened while hearing Brainerd preach to the \nwhites, in July, 1744. He was about fifty years old, and was \ngamed Moses Finds Fautaury. \n\nReturning to Crosswicks, he found that the labours and endea- \nvours of William Teniieiit had much promoted the convictions of \nthe people. A surprising concern appeared under Brainerd\'a first \n\nBfinnon: out of twenty adults, scarce two had dry eyes. \n\nFifty persona accompanied him to the administration of the sacra- \nment at Cranberry, ami were much affected; but especially on the \nMonday \'"they were Universally engaged about their soul\'s con- \ncent. One woman obtained comfort." \n\n( )n Tim day, there was nothing remarkable but their attention, till, \nnear the close of his discourse, -carcely three in forty could restrain \n\nnd bitter cries: they seemed in an agony to obtain an im \nin Christ* "The more 1 invited them to come to Christ, the more \ntheir distress was aggravated, feeling themselves unable to come.\'\' \n\nThe next day. aome fell Hat on the ground, crying incessantly fol \nmercy: persons from remote places, as soon as they came, were \n\nawakened. \n\n<)n the afternoon of the day following, the power of God seemed \nto descend on the assembly like a mighty, rushing wind, bearing \ndown all before it. Old people and little children, the boaster and \nthe drunkard, the oonjurer ami the murderer, were bowed down \nwith concern together. McKnight, of Cranberry, was present, and \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 While Mr. Brainerd urged upon them the absolute nec< \nof a speedy <-l >sure ^i\'\' 1 Christ, they were utterly unable I \xe2\x80\xa2 \nceil their distress. This prompted the pious to gather the \ni i congregation together, who soon seemed to be in the \nctremity, begging for mercy, and some unable to rise. \nA white pe . I trust, by means of it. Bavingly \n\nbrought to < Ihrist. [nd I. kj extraordinary was the concern, that \n\n1 am ready to conclude it might have been suffioienl to convince \n\nan atheiSt that the Lord \\s .i s there." Through the week he \n\ni \xc2\xbbly, and each day was a <\\.>y of the Son of man. \n\n\n\n522 DAVID BRAINERD. \n\nOn the Sabbath some of the white people could no longer be idle \nspectators : a great concern spread through the whole assembly. \n\nHe now busied himself in putting in execution a plan for settling \nthe Indians together in a body, for their advantage in receiving \ninstruction. On the 25th of August, he baptized fifteen adults and \nten children. \n\nAt the Forks there appeared a remarkable work of the Divine \nSpirit among the Indians generally. He then journeyed to Sha- \nmokin, a large town of the Delawares, and downward to Juniata \nhomeward, having little encouragement. In November, he bap- \ntized six adults and eight children at Crosswicks. One woman was \nabove eighty, and two of the men were above fifty years old. \n\nA sorcerer,* artful, able, profligate, gave him so much trouble \nthat he thought it would be great favour to the design of gospel- \nizing the Indians if God would take him out of the way ; but it \npleased Him to renew him unto repentance. \n\nHe now had need to learn a third language : the Delaware was \nof no use to him in his new field. At his suggestion, the Corre- \nspondents laid out eighty-two poundsf New Jersey currency in clear- \ning off the debts contracted by the Indians, lest their lands should \nbe taken away by their creditors. The opposers now raised the \ncry that Brainerd was a papist, supported by the Scottish friends \nof the Pretender to stir up the Indians to sedition and murder. \nOn the 27th of April, 1746, he administered the Lord\'s Supper to \ntwenty-three persons : there was a sweet, gentle, and affectionate \nmelting. They soon after removed to their lands at Cranberry, and \nwere molested with claims unjustly set up by men in power. \n\n"June 19, 1746. \xe2\x80\x94 This day makes up a complete year from the \nfirst time of my preaching to the Indians in New Jersey. What \namazing things has God wrought in this space of time for this \npoor people ! What a surprising change appears in their tempers \nand behaviours ! morose and savage pagans transformed into \nagreeable, affectionate, and humble Christians ! their drunken \nand heathen howlings turned into devout and fervent praises to \nGod ! It is remarkable that God has so continued and renewed his \nshowers of grace here ; so quickly set up his visible kingdom among \n\n* Peabody\'s Brainerd. \n\nf One hundred pounds Lad been collected to pay the debts of the Indians, to \nbuild a school-house, pay the teacher, and buy books for the children: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xc2\xa3 s. d. \xc2\xa3 s. d. \n\nNew York 23 10 2 \n\nNeshaminy and places adjacent 14 5 10 \n\nFreehold 12 11 \n\nAbingdon and New Providence 10 5 \n\nElizabethtown 7 5 \n\nKingston 5 11 \n\nFreehold Dutch Congregation.. 4 14 8 \nNewark 4 5 \n\n\n\nShrewsbury and Shark River 3 5 \nNew Brunswick Dutch Cong. 3 5 \n\nJamaica, Long Island 3-0 \n\nWoodbridge 2 18 2 \n\nMiddleton Dutch Cong 2 \n\nConnecticut Farms 1 18 \n\nMorristown 15 \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAISERD. 523 \n\nthose people, and so smiled upon them in relation to their acquire- \nment of knowledge human and divine. There is still an appear- \nance of the power of divine grace, a desirable degree of tender- \nness, religious affection, and devotion, in our assemblies. In eleven \nmonths, thirty-eight adults and thirty-seven infants were baptized. \nThey have inquired concerning the doctrines, to obtain light and \ninsight into them, and have manifested a clear understanding of \nthem. They took pains and appeared remarkably apt in learning to \nsing psalm-tunes, and are able to sing becomingly in the worship of \nGod." They were never put to any more trouble for their debts. \nSome charged Brainerd with striving to set them on murdering the \nwhites, and others attributed his compassion to the most abomina- \nble and vile motives. " From a view of these things, I have had \neeeasion to admire the wisdom and goodness of God in providing \nso full and authentic a commission for the undertaking and carry- \ning on of this work." \n\nTennent attested Brainerd\'s narrative. " I have been much \nConversant with the Indians at their own place and in my own \nparish, where they generally convene for worship in his absence. \nTheir conversation hath often refreshed my soul. It is my opi- \nnion that the change in them has been wrought by God, through a \nchar, heart-affecting sense of its being their reasonable service." \nMcKnight said, "I have frequently beheld with pleasing wonder \nwhat I am inclined to believe were the effects of God\'s almighty \nt accompanying his own truths. As far as I am capable of \njudging, they may be proposed as examples of piety and godliness \nto all the white people around them." \n\nAmid these glorious scenes, his outward man was perishing un- \naware to him. lie administered the eommunion for the third time \n\xc2\xbb flock on the 18th of July. Thirty-one Indians partook. Most \nof them were sweetly melted and refreshed : there was scarcely an eye \n\ndry when he took off the linen and showed them the symbols of the \n\nbroken body. The afternoon was a season of much enlargement \n\nami tender:. \xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 God crowned the assembly with his presence." \n\nIn his last journey to the Susquehanna, he went to Philadelphia \n\nand across the country through the white settlements, to avoid the \n\nhuge mountains and hldeOUS IfilderneSfl of the nearest route. llav- \n\n1 \'IVcat in the sacrament at Charlestown, he went with \n\nsix of his people on to PaxtOQ and up the river to Shaniokin, \nwhere things appeared as encouraging :is at first at CrosswickSi \nIl< went m far as Great [aland, now Lockhaven; and, having to \n\xe2\x80\xa2 at night, ami being without an axe, he climbed a young pine- \nand with his knife lopped off the branches for a bui Iter from \nthe dew. Bis linen was wringing wet with sweat in the night, and \nhe awoke, scarcely able to sit up. \n\nNeither at the Delaware town nor among the BhawnOCS had ho \n\n\n\n524 DAVID BRAISTERD. \n\nany encouragement ; but among the former a few appeared affected. \nThe increase of his disorder prevented his staying ; and he returned \nhome so exhausted that he was no longer able to keep a regular \ndiary. Reaching Elizabethtown on his way to New England, he \nwas so prostrated that he was obliged to remain through the winter \nat Dickinson\'s house. Four months passed before he was able to \nride so far as Newark : he was sinking with cough, fever, and \nasthma, having neither appetite nor digestion. On Friday, \nMarch 20, he walked among his people, inquired about their state \nand concerns, and, when they assembled, explained and sung a psalm. \nThis was his last interview with them, though he knew it not. \n\nThe Correspondents sent for his brother John to take care of his \ncongregation in his absence. He came, and Brainerd assisted at \nhis examination by the Presbytery of New York. Setting out for \nNew England, he reached Northampton apparently improved, but \nin confirmed and incurable consumption. Edwards found him \nremarkably sociable, pleasant, and entertaining in his conversation, \nsolid, savoury, and very profitable, meek, modest, humble, and with- \nout affectation. Even in asking a blessing or returning thanks, \nthere was something remarkable to be observed in the manner and \nmatter of the performance. He generally made it one petition in \nhis prayer in the family that we might not outlive our usefulness. \n\nRiding being recommended to him, he went to Boston, accompa- \nnied by Edwards\'s daughter, Jerusha, then in her eighteenth year, \nto whom he was engaged to be married. Soon after he came there, \nhe was brought so low by the breaking of ulcers and by fever as to \nbe almost speechless ; but he was not idle or useless. The Com- \nmissioners of the London Society for Propagating the Gospel con- \nsulted him about disposing of Dr. Daniel Williams\'s legacy, and \nintrusted to him the selection of two missionaries to go to the Six \nNations. Others gave Bibles for his Indians, and in many ways \ntestified their love to the heathen. \n\nHe met with the Rev. Andrew Croswell, who maintained the ex- \ntremest notions that had been advanced in the Revival, in his de- \nnunciation of Dickinson\'s " Display of Grace," and in a pamphlet, \n" What is Christ to me if he is not mine?" He claimed that the \nessence of saving faith and the first act of it was the belief that \nChrist has died for me in particular. In the presence of several \npersons, in a long conference with Croswell, he mentioned that the \nfaith defined by him had nothing of God in it, nothing above na- \nture, nothing above the power of devils, and was only a delusion.* \n\nOn his return to Northampton, he was able only to ride sixteen \nmiles a day : he grew weaker and weaker. He had the pleasure \n\n* Croswell replied in print that be honoured Brainerd as highly as those who \ncanonized him, but that he honoured also the great company who "were in Christ \nbefore him," and who savoured not tne new definitions broached at Northampton. \n\n\n\nDAVID BRAIXERD. 525 \n\nof having his brother John come to him, and of having the Coro- \nners in Boston allow two hundred pounds to support another \nteacher among his people. He wrote to Byram on the subject of \ntin.- examining and Licensing of candidates. "Oh that God would \nii 1 Bucceed that letter ! Oh that God would purity the sons of \nLevi, that his glory may be advanced !" Towards the close, his dis- \ntemper preyed on his vitals, in an almost constant discharge of puru- \nlent matter, by mouthfula, with much distress and pain. Delightful \nif heavenly things refreshed him. k \' Soon shall I see the Bible \ni ; the mysteries in it and in God\'s providence will all be un- \nfolded." In broken whispers, he -aid, "He will come, he will not tarry; \nI shall soon be in glory. 1 shall soon glorify God with the angels." \nHe revived; and, the next day, his brother John, who had re- \nturned to New Jersey on important business, came to him. "My \ndear brother! I love him the best of any creature living!" He was \naffected and refreshed with seeing him. After a day of unutter- \n_ my through bodily distress, amid much fear of dishonouring \n1 y impatience, he had. late in the night, much proper and pro* \nfkable discourse with his brother concerning his mission. At 6 \n\nii Friday, Oct. 9, 1747. he died, in his thirtieth year. \n\nrtly before him, his Bister, Mrs. Spencer, died; his brother \n\nIsrael died in the next .January, while preparing for the mini-try; \nJerusha Edwards died Feb. 14, 1748, after an illness of live days, \n\nii d by Brainerd a very eminent saint, fitted to deny herself \nI beyond any young woman he knew. \nEdwards* describee him as a singular instance of a ready inven- \ntion, natural eloquence, easy, flowing expression, sprightly appro- \nI in, quick discernment^ very Btrong memory, of a very pene- \nI is, close, dear thought, and piercing judgment. He \n\ngreal baste for learning) and excelled in it. To extraordinary \nknowledge of men and things, to uncommon insight into human \nnature, was joined a power beyond most nun of communicating \nhis thoughts and of adapting himself to those he would instruct \nami counsel. For the pulpit his gifts were extraordinary: his \nmanner clear, instructive, nervous, natural, moving. In prayer, \nhe was almost inimitable. He excelled in conversation, being \n. free, entertaining, profitable. In hi- knowledge of theo- \n\nae was an extraordinary divine, with uncommon ability de- \nfen ling truth and confuting \xe2\x80\xa2 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 Hon -ii i \xe2\x80\xa2 bl I \xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0\'\xe2\x80\xa2 i| I i^ wort how get \n\n"Verily I say unto you, wl this gospel -hall be preached \n\ni I that he hath il \xe2\x80\xa2 .-hall be -p..Leu \n\nr a memorial of him." \n\ntbliihed \nin Bog] \n\n\n\n526 WILLIAM DEAN. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM DEAN \n\nWas probably educated at the Log College. The first notice of \nhim is on the records of New Brunswick Presbytery, Aug. 3, 1741, \nwhen he was taken on trials. He was licensed, Oct. 12, 1742, and \nwas sent to Neshaminy and the Forks of Delaware. The Lehigh \nwas formerly called the West Branch of the Delaware, and the ter- \nritory bounded by the two rivers and the Kittatinny Hills was long \nknown as the Forks. It was inhabited by the Lenni Lenape, or the \nDelawares, and probably by other tribes: their cabins and cultivated \npatches did not deter the Proprietors from putting up large tracts \nof it as prizes in a lottery, besides conveying thousands of acres \nto William Allen, of Philadelphia. Two settlements were made in \n1735 or \'36, the one on the West Branch being called Craig\'s, \nand the one on the North Branch, Hunter\'s Settlement. The \npeople were from Ulster ; and at the second meeting of New Bruns- \nwick Presbytery, they presented their case, and Gilbert Tennent \nwas directed to go to them in the fall. Campbell and Robinson were \nsoon after sent, and, May 26, 1743, the Forks presented a call to \nDean. He declined it, and was appointed to supply there and at \nCape May ; at the same time, at the request of Newcastle Presby- \ntery, he was sent to the Forks of Brandywine and Pequea. \n\nIn the fall he was sent to Greenwich, in West Jersey, and, in \nOct. 1744, to Cohanzy and the Forks of Delaware. \n\nIn the next year he went with Byram, of Mendham, into Au- \ngusta county, Virginia : a great awakening attended their labours, \nand continued till 1751. He was ordained, before May, 1746, pas- \ntor of the Forks of Brandywine : three acres were conveyed to him \nfor the use of his congregation, and a meeting-house erected. In \nMay, 1747, a call was sent for him to the synod from Timber Ridge \nand the Forks of James River: the presbytery were directed to \nmeet and consider whether it should be put in his hands. \n\nHe died, July 9, 1748,* aged twenty-nine, and lies in the grave- \nyard at Brandywine Manor. Daviesf confirms the testimony \nrecorded on his tomb, that he was an active, zealous, faithful \nminister : he laments his early death, and speaks of him and Robin- \neon as our most useful ministers. \n\n\n\n* Dr. J. N. C. Grier\'s Historical Discourse at Forks of Brandywine. \nf Davies to Bellamy. \n\n\n\nJACOB GREEN. 527 \n\n\n\nJACOB GREEN \n\nWAfl born* at Maiden, Massachusetts, Jan. 22, 1722, (O.S.,)and, \nlosing his father in his second year, removed when a child with his \nstep-father to Killingly, Conn. He had a good mother, who care- \nfolly trained him in the fear of God: many were his serious impres- \nsions in ln.yhood, but especially at the age of seventeen, during the \ndreadful prevalence of the throat-distemper in 1738. He returned to \ntchusetts soon after, and began to study the languages. Falling \ninto the society of some young men who met for prayer, he joined \nwith them ; and, to his surprise, the minister propounded him for \nadmission to the Lord\'s table, though he had no comfortable sense \nof pardon. Entering Harvard College in July, 1740, he devoted \nhimself assiduously to study; he was charmed with "Whitefield, and \nfollowed him to Leicester, approving all he did, yet not awakened \nto any feeling of his Lost condition, and buoyed ap with favourable \njudgment of his state. Gilbert Tennent preached in the college \nhall at the close of January, 1741, on a false hope: he was over- \ncame With a view of his lost condition, and, retiring to the w Is, \n\nheard a man in distress, praying for mercy. The next day Ten- \nDent preached three times in Cambridge, and his mind was deeply \nle 1. About two months after, he began to obtain clear views \nof Christ and the gospel; nothing seeming so much to relieve Ids \ntroubled spirit as tie- words, "Who of God is made unto us right* \n\neousnees, wisdom, Banctification, and redemption." On graduating, \n\nin 1711, he taught School at Sutton, MaSS., and, at the solicitation \n\nof Whitefield, consented to go to the Orphan House in Georgia. \nAt ESlizabethtown, being released from his engagement, he put him- \n\nM-lf, by the advice of Dickinson, under the care of New York \n\nytery, and was licensed, Sept. 171"-. He was soon called to \nHanover, and was ordained in November, L746. \n\nBe married Anna Strong, of Brookhaven, Long Island, in the \n\nlext year. Ou her death, in 17.">7, he was lunch "stirred up" to per- \nform bifl work more BCaloUSly and faithfully. His second wife was \n\nElisabeth, daughter of the Rev, John Pierson, of Woodbridge. \n\nin 1750, the congregation of South Hanover, formerly called \nBottle Hill, now Madison, I; and a oew meeting-house \n\nwas erected on Hanover Neck, and another a1 Parsippany. Ho \nconfined hi- labours to Hanover in 1 7 \xe2\x80\xa2 \xc2\xbb7 . At this time he was \nelected Vice-President of the College, ami for a few months was \nnt the head of the institution. The support of a large family led \n\n* Account \xc2\xbbf Liiii- i by hla ion in the Christian Advocate. \n\n\n\n528 JACOB GREEN. \n\nhmi to engage in the practice of medicine, and he continued it for \nthirty years, conceiving that less than any other worldly business \nit took him off from his appropriate work. \n\nHe was diligent in catechizing, in endeavouring to promote piety \nin the young, and to encourage heads of families to guide their \nhouseholds in the good old way. He had been led by Dickinson \nand Burr to adopt the method of admitting to the sacraments all \nwho seemed desirous of leading a godly life : the reading of Watts \nand Edwards on the Terms of Communion changed his views, and \nhe,* first of all our ministers, took his stand that only those who \nwere hopefully pious should be received into church-membership. \nThe Presbytery of New York asked him to give them in a sermon \nhis views on Covenanting. He published a "View of the Consti- \ntution of the Jewish Church," embodying his opinions on that \npoint. \n\nHis labours were without much remarkable success till 1764 : he \n"shared in his own soul a small part of that blessing," and was \nunwearied in efforts to promote the good work. In 1774, he was \nagain honoured to win many souls. \n\nOn the breaking out of the war of Independence, he was fore- \nmost in his country\'s cause, and, against his will, was elected to the \nProvincial Congress. He was chairman of the committee which \ndrafted the State Constitution. A series of articles from his pen, \nsigned Eumenes, against a paper currency, drew on him much oblo- \nquy; and his sermon at the Continental fast, on "The Acceptable \nFast," roused the slave-holders of Morris county to come to his \nhouse with threats and insults. \n\nAbout this time he grew dissatisfied with the hinderances in the \nway of supplying our vacancies : \xe2\x80\x94 " firstf we make them gentlemen, \nand then ministers:" he proposed to Bellamy to establish two \nschools, one in New Jersey, and one in Connecticut, for educating \nmen up to a certain point in languages and philosophy, and then \nlicensing them. He wished to imitate the Baptist way, that our \ngrowing country might not be left unblessed with sound doctrine \nand firm discipline. Dissatisfied^ with the requirement of the \nsynod that students should study divinity two years after obtain- \ning a diploma, and that ministers should keep a register of births, \nbaptisms, &c, and with their practice of dissolving pastoral rela- \ntions to place men at the head of the college, he withdrew from the \nPresbytery of New York. Grover, of Parsippany, Lewis, of War- \nwick, Orange county, New York, and Bradford, who married Eliza- \nbeth Green, also withdrew; and, May 3, 1780, they formed Morris \nCounty Presbytery, "as we consider ourselves, in a scriptural \n\n\n\n* Macwhorter and Caldwell : in Bellamy Papers, f Letter to Bellamy, 1774. \nJ Letter to New York Presbytery, on withdrawing : MS. records. \n\n\n\nNATHANIEL TUCKER \xe2\x80\x94 DAVID BROWN. 529 \n\nsense, Presbyterians." He disliked the Congregationalism of New \nEngland as much as the Scottish mode of Prcsbyterianism. \n\nHis people adhered to the presbytery, and retained, by the advice \nof that body, their aged, honoured pastor. He published, in a quarto \npamphlet, "A View of a Christian Church, and Church Govern- \nment, representing the Case of the New Presbytery." He died of \ninfluenza, after a short illness, May 24, 1790. A revival of reli- \ngion* was then in progress, but so noiseless that the neighbouring \nministers did not know of it till they came to his funeral. Thirty \npersons, the gleanings of the harvest, came after his death to his \nson, Dr. Green, to seek spiritual direction, and to lament that they \nhad not turned at his reproof while he was yet with them. \n\nlie published sermons on "The Nature of Natural and Moral \nInability,"\' "The Sins of Youth Visited with Punishment in Sub- \nBeqnent Life," and "A Help to Heads of Families." An active, \ndevout man, he did much to enstamp on the community a high \nmoral and religious character. "An instructive, plain, searching, \npractical preacher, a watchful, laborious pastor, he was ever intent \non some plan for the glory of God and the salvation of his people, \nand, by the divine blessing, was happily and eminently successful." \n\n\n\nNATIIANAEL TUCKER, \n\nBOBB in Milton, Massachusetts, and graduated at Harvard in \n1744. Brainerd was present at his ordination by New York Pres* \nbytery, April \'.>, 1717. Edwardsf speaks of him as a worthy, pious \nyoung gentleman, having made his acquaintance shortly after \nBraineras death. Returning from a visit to his friends at Milton, \n\nhe was taken lick at Stratlield, Connecticut, and died there in De- \ncember, 1747. \n\n\n\nDAVID BROWN, \n\n\n\n"A ftfnrcsTBB of the gospel from North Britain, being admitted \na member of the Presbytery of Newcastle, took hi- place among \noa" in the Synod of Philadelphia in May, L748. He returned to \n\nind during the year. \n\n* Dr. Green, in SpragueV I ...<. f Life of Brainerd. \n\n84 \n\n\n\n>30 JAMES CAMPBELL. \n\n\n\nJAMES CAMPBELL \n\nWas born in Campbelton-on-Kintyre, in Argyleshire, and came \nto America in 1730. He was probably licensed by Newcastle \nPresbytery in 1735, and was "well received" by Philadelphia \nPresbytery, May 22, 1739. He spent the summer at Newtown \nand Tehicken, and on the 18th of September, the latter place, by \nFrancis Williamson and John Or, their commissioners, asked for \nhis services. The presbytery granted their request ; but he, "after \nmany struggles with himself, told the synod, in 1739, that he was \nunconverted, and dared not preach till he was born again. He \nhad been preaching four years, and was a regular, moral liver, and \nesteemed a very good man. Within these few months he was con- \nvinced of sin, and that he knew nothing experimentally of Jesus \nChrist, though he had pretended to preach him so long. He has \nlaboured under great distress of soul, and is looked upon by some \nas melancholy and beside himself; but Whitefield, after much dis- \ncourse with him at New Brunswick in November, really believed \nthese humiliations would prepare him for great and eminent ser- \nvices in the church. At the persuasion of Whitefield and Teunent, \nhe promised to preach next Sunday." \n\nSuccess attended his labours. In April, 1740, he told* White- \nfield that he was trying to bring back his people to convictions \nagain and take them off from a "floating joy." \n\nIn the spring, Newtown and Tinicum were transferred at their \nrequest by the synod to the care of New Brunswick Presbytery. \nTinicum is the name of the township in Bucks county, and Te- \nhicken is the creek on which the meeting-house stood. Campbell \ncontinued to serve them, and was sent to the Forks of Delaware \nand Mr. Green\'s as a frequent supply, \xe2\x80\x94 Mr. Green\'s being what is \nnow Greenwich, Mansfield, and Oxford, New Jersey. On the rup- \nture, he was sent to preach to all the New-Side vacancies, except \nJames River, in Virginia. He was followed by Rowland. \n\nIn May, 1742, he was directed to spend one-fourth of his time \nat Forks ; and, in August, Durham asked for a portion of his time. \nDurham lies between Tinicum and Easton, was settled at an early \nage and the manufacture of iron commenced. It was the birth- \nplace of the celebrated Daniel Morgan, the hero of the Cowpens, \nwho in old age became a Christian under the ministry of Dr. Hill, \nof Winchester. \n\nCampbell was ordained Aug. 3, 1742, and was ordered to divide \n\n* Seward\'s Journal. \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 531 \n\none-half of his time between Forks and Greenwich. He was in- \nstalled at Tehicken, May 24, 1744. A new meeting-house being \nneeded, a controversy arose as to whether it should be built on the \nold site or at the Red Hill. It resulted in fixing on the latter \npoint, and in the dissolution of the pastoral relation in Ma v. 174\'.\'. \nlb- rem >ved into Newcastle Presbytery, and preached at Cone- \ncochea^nie. Rocky Spring, and the neighbouring churcl \n\nIn 1758, he was dismissed to join South Carolina Presbytery, \xe2\x80\x94 a \nbody which, in 1770, proposed t<> unite with the Synod of New \nYork and Philadelphia. He became the minister of a band of his \nCountrymen settled on the left bank of Cape Fear River, above \nville, opposite the Bluff Church. \nIn the winter of 1789, Whiiefield preached, "not without effect," \nat Newton, on Cape Fear River, where among the congregation \nwere many settlers newly come over from Scotland. The rebel- \n- punished by the expatriation of many High- \nlanders to North Carolina: these retained the <!aelic speech, which \nmiliar to Campbell, being his mother-tongue; and he became \ntheir minister. \n\nThe Scotch-Irish began to flow in a steady stream southward \nfrom Pennsylvania before the French War, and\' drew to them, from \nland, large numbers. \npbell united with Orange Presbytery in 1774, and is not \nmentioned on the records after 17*0. \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. \n\n\n\nThe name of Davenport has been osed familiarly and of old \ntime to point a moral on enthusiasm; bul how little is known of \nhim ! Fev. men were more highly eulogized, living or dying, by the \n>f his own day; and his was a day Fertile in the: \nproduction) it men. But the sneers of Chauncey hav^ \n\nbeen adopted for true, as though the professed opponent of the \ndoctrin alts of the Greal Revival could be safely relied on \n\n: . in his new of facts, and impartiality, in his estimate \nof character. His statements cannot be verified; he traduce. 1 !\'\xe2\x96\xa0- \nmeroy and Wneelock, and made the hearts of the righteous sad by \nholding up to contempt and abhorrence s wort which was really a \nwork of God, and the men whom God made wise to win bouIs. \n\nWonderfully successful in his efforts to awaken the carel< \n\n. the Indian from heathenism, and to influence the pious for \ngood, Davenport was for a time successful in promoting a spirit of \nbitter, fanaticism, which tore asunder and consumed the \n\n\n\n532 JAMES DAVENPORT. \n\nchurches ; but let it be known (for it is so entirely lost sight of in \npassing judgment on him that we cannot suppose it to be known) \nthat the period of his excesses was one of acute irritating bodily \ndisease, and that his restoration to health was followed by an ample \nretraction of his errors and an entire amendment of his course. \nThe heaviest censure has been laid on him ; while the greatest leni- \nency has been exercised towards the Tennents and Whitefield, and \nhim who, like Hooker, is esteemed by all " the judicious," \xe2\x80\x94 Jona- \nthan Edwards ; for Davenport differed from them not in the spirit, \nprinciple, and matter of his teachings and actings. The close of \nhis career is as little visible in the current accounts of him as the \nmotions of the heavenly bodies after they sink below our horizon ; but \nto those who walked with him, " his path was as the shining light, \nbrighter and brighter to the perfect day." Men who longed to \nsee the salvation of Israel come out of Zion lamented for him, \nsaying, " My father, my father ! the chariot of Israel and the \nhorsemen thereof." They are ready for the battle ; but where is he \nwho shall set the battle in array ? \n\nThe name of Davenport was honourable. John Davenport,* a \nfamous minister in the city of London, came, with many of his \ncongregation, to Massachusetts in 1637. He was one of the \nfathers of the colony of New Haven, and, in all matters of public \ninterest in state or church, his advice was sought and ordinarily \nfollowed. His grandson was the minister of Stamford, Connecti- \ncut, from 1694 to 1731, and there, in 1716, James Davenport was \nborn. \n\nHe entered Yale College while Elisha Williams was rector. In \nthe classes above him were Sergeant, missionary to the Indians, \nParsons, of Newburyport, the excellent Elisha Kent, and Jonathan \nBarber. Wheelock and Pomeroy, Burr, Wilmot, and Bellamy \nwere his juniors. Conspicuous among the students for zeal and \npious joy was David Ferris. f Born in 1707, at Stratford, his pa- \nrents had moved in his infancy to New Milford, recently settled \nand almost a wilderness. Through the care of a pious mother, he \nearly felt himself accountable to God, and in his twelfth year was \ndeeply exercised. During a severe illness when about twenty, \nhorror and anxiety seized him : he made promises of amendment, \nbut these gave him no relief, and he sunk in despair. While at the \nplough one evening, he remembered, " The blood of Jesus Christ, \nhis Son, cleanseth us from all sin;" but he immediately thought, \n" It is too late." The text, however, came with power and authority, \nand his heart leaped up at the sight of a door of hope. "If his \nblood cleanseth from all sin, why may it not cleanse mine?" \n" Then a living hope sprang in my soul, and the way cleared be- \n\n* Trumbull\'s History of Connecticut: The Davenport family. \n\xe2\x80\xa2J- Memoir of Ferris. \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 533 \n\nfore me like a road through a thicket." His joy was unspeakable ; \nhe was humbled and "made subject to the cross." Jesus became \nhis director in all things ; a season of assault and sorrow followed, \nbut gave way to thanksgiving and gladness, "which did not leave \nme one moment for two years." \n\nA religions excitement* began at New Milford in 1720: many \nof the subjects of it separated from the church as carnal, and pro- \n1V-- I to enjoy assurance of salvation and sinless perfection. The \npastor, tin- Kev. Daniel Boardman, regarded Ferris as one of their \nlead\')--, and says that, on his entering college in 1729, he obtained \na great ascendency oyer Wheelock and Pomeroy and Davenport. \n-ays nothing of this in his own account; only that, while in \nNew Haven, he examined his principles, discarded the doctrine of \nelection, and could not join a promiscuous assembly of saints and \nsinners in singing the PBalme as a part of worship. When just \nabout to graduate, he felt that he could not accept a degree, and \nreturned home, much to the dissatisfaction of his friends. "The \npeople generally had undue expectation-: <>f my usefulness." He \ntold no one the reason of his actions, but, going over to Long \nIsland, be saw for the first time the people called Quakers. lie \n\nhad long thought there OUght to be such a people J be joined them, \n\nand removed to Philadelphia, and afterwards to Wilmington, resid- \ning there from 17o7 until bis death. December 12, 170!\'. lie spoke \nas a minister for the first time in 17")"). \n\nSurely the experience of Ferris was at the outset eminently \nscriptural: every thing in his history invalidates Boardman\'s \nstory that h<- appeared proud, haughty, and desirous of applause. \nWe might as easily credit Dr. Cutler, the Church minister of Bos- \nton, when he says of .Jonathan Kdwards, U I know the man: \n\nthough more decent in bis Language than Mayhew and Prince, he \nis odd iii bis principles) stiff, haughty, and morose." \n\nHow far this man influenced Davenport oannol be known; pro- \nbably very little, \xe2\x80\x94 certainly not in his doctrinal views, or bis attach- \nment to "the standing order" of the churches. As lor s i n^- i n lt , \n\nJ I enpOTt delighted in it to \n\nIt i- charged as a prime f.-mlt in Ferris that be was certain that \nnot one in ten of the communicants in New Haven would be saved. \n\nThis was when the half-way eovenant brought into ehureh-inein- \n\nbership all who were not openly immoral. He erred, in company \nwith Edwards, Whitefield, Tennent, and Blair, in ottering such \nan opinion. The Btate of the churches was Lamentable: the un- \nconverted in large numbers were in the communion and in the \n\nministry. \n\nAbsurdly enough, Ferris is blamed for saying he should have a \n\nhigher seat in heaVOU than tfoSeS, \xe2\x80\x94 an inference of his. natural \n* Quoted by Dr. Hodge from Chauncey\'s Seasonable Thoughts. \n\n\n\n534 JAMES DAVENPORT. \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nif not just, from the saying of the Saviour, that he that is least in \nthe kingdom of heaven is greater than John the Baptist, than \nwhom none greater had arisen among the sons of women. \n\nVery likely, had it been necessary, the " seasonable thought" \nwould have occurred to Chauncey of charging the Quakerism of \nFerris to the enthusiasm of Davenport. \n\nAt the age of twenty-two, Davenport graduated. He seems \nto have preached in New Jersey in the close of 1737 ; for Phila- \ndelphia Presbytery gave leave, March 12, 1738, to Maidenhead \nand Hopewell, (Lawrence and Pennington,) to send for him, and \nalso wrote a letter for them to him. He preferred to settle at \nSouthold, the oldest town on Long Island, left vacant in 1736 by \nthe removal of Mr. Woolsey, and was ordained by a council, \nOct. 26, 1738. \n\nHe began to preach at a time remarkable for increasing atten- \ntion to personal piety. Years had passed, in which languor in \nministers and worldliness and formality in hearers strangely con- \ntrasted with severe and extensive prevalence of disease of dreadful \nform and fatal character. The year 1734 was long remembered \nfor the desolating ravages of the throat-distemper among the young. \n\nThere were some slight awakenings; but throughout the land, in \n1737 and \'38, there was a general decline, like the sudden closing- \nin of winter after an early spring, destroying \xe2\x80\x94 at least injuring \xe2\x80\x94 \nthe premature vegetation. \n\nThe method generally pursued by those who mourned over the \nsecure state of the unconverted was to preach much on original \nsin, on repentance, and the nature and necessity of regeneration. \nIn every congregation there were many, esteemed as truly pious, \nwho, on examining and declaring the reason of their hope, were \nconvinced in their consciences or pronounced by the minister to \nhave nothing for their foundation but sand. Edwards* was com- \nplained of for announcing to some that he believed them to be in \nChrist, and to others that their hope was as the spider\'s web. He \njustified himself on the ground that he ought not to keep back \nfrom the godly the satisfaction he felt in perceiving the goodness \nof their state, and that he was bound with all authority to declare \nhis judgment concerning the self-deceiver. To this practice may \nbe traced the fierce opposition of some to the Revival, and the \nbackwardness of many sincere Christians to countenance the fa- \nvourers of such proceedings. \n\nThe practice was exactly suited to such a mind as Davenport\'s, \nand he pursued it to extremities. Though young, such was the \nfervour of his spirit, so unworldly was his life, that he was reve- \nrenced, and men rose up before him as before the hoary head. His \nexamination of "the states" of his hearers was rigorous and awful, \n\n* Tracy\'s "Great Awakening." \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 535 \n\nas though he were sitting as the refiner and purifier. He dealt \nwith them under the invigorating remembrance that "if thou sepa- \nrate the precious from the vile, thou shalt be as my mouth." He \nmagnified his office; and the people listened, when he unfolded the \nresults of his inquiry, as though they were to hear from him the de- \ncision of the Judge. He called the members* of his church of \nwhose Btate he formed a favourable opinion, brethren; the others \nhe styled neighbours, and withdrew as much as possible from inter- \nwith them. Afterwards he forbade "neighbours" to come \nLord\'s table; and we may imagine the distress, excitement, \nand exasperation that followed. \n\nAt that time every wind from England came laden with the \nfame of White-field. His great success awakened ardent desires and \nhigh expectations that America would receive a like refreshing. \n]> \'Israeli remarks, that tiny who live in an age of books cannot esti- \nmate the effect produced in the hall, on the baron and his retainers, \nby the tales of pilgrims from the Holy Land; and Ave, who live in \nan age ef newspapers, are still Less tjualified to imagine how the \nof the community, a hundred years ago, were shaken, as \nthe wood, by th" reading of a letter or the hearing of \na rumour that Grod had visited his people. Then, on the highways \na traveller was rarely seen, and each settlement, like Israel, dwelt \n\nalone. So, when the new.- reached them of Whitefield\'s progress \n\nas an evangelist, or as the angel in mid-heaven, having the ever- \nlasting gospel, it had free course; no other exciting topic divided \nwith it the popular mind. "And great were the searchings of \n\nheart.\'\' \n\nher peculiarity of that time was the cheapness of labour: \nrisions of employment in a household were as numerous as \nI of a sermon. There was no hurry: large portions of \n\n1 to family worship, catechising, and confer- \njona of family fasting; Bervants wore \nrequired to spend a considerable time in reading the Scriptures, \nand in retirement foreeorel prayer. The minister rarely riBited: \nie at Btated times, and for his coming every thing was pre- \npared as for an ambassador of the Great King on bis Blaster\'s \n\nAt Oysterponds, now Orient, a neighbouring parish, Jonathan \nemployed. Born al West Springfield, Massachusetts, \n\nJanuary 81, ITU. he graduated at Sfale in 17^", and was licensed \nwhen a!. out twenty. Having preached some time to the 1ml \n\ni in and blohegan, h< Island. Like-minded, \n\nt two spake often one to another, training greal expectations \nfrom the visit of Whiteneld to mi eowntry. An enemy hath said \n\n\n\n\n\n\n536 JAMES DAVENPORT. \n\nthat Barber meditated and fasted till he fainted, and regarded the \nimpressions on his mind as direct communications from heaven. \nIn March, 1740,* Barber visited Southold, and found his friend \ngreatly impressed with the twelfth verse of the 115th Psalm : \xe2\x80\x94 " He \nwill bless the house of Israel; he will bless the house of Aaron;" \ngathering assuredly from thence that the Lord had called him to \nawaken the ministry and to bless them. A meeting was held for \ntwenty-four hours : as a matter of course, opposers became more \ninveterate, moderate persons distrusted still more the warrantable- \nness of their pastor\'s proceeding, while his admirers and the new \nconverts were satiated with good. A mixed multitude came out \nof Egypt with Israel ; to them these unheard-of ways were as the \ncorn of heaven, and what was sorrowful meat to the wise-hearted, \nwho trembled for the ark of God, was to them as angels\' food. \n\nDavenport left home with "his man," or, as Chauncey calls him, \n"his armour-bearer." Before entering East Hampton, they waited \nfor a sign, as Jonathan and his armour-bearer did before discover- \ning themselves to the Philistine garrison. The sign was given : he \nentered, and twenty were soon converted. The late Dr. Davis, f \nof Hamilton College, says, " This was the first revival in East \nHampton ; many untoward and ever-to-be-lamented circumstances \noccurred ; yet lasting good was done, amid a great shaking and \ncommotion." \n\nWhitefield heard, April 28, 1740, of "two ministers on Long \nIsland who had large communications from God, and had been in- \nstrumental in bringing many souls to God. They have walked in an \nuncommon light of God\'s countenance for a long while together." \nHe met Davenport early in May, and styles him "one of the minis- \nters whom God has lately sent out; a sweet, zealous soul." Daven- \nport went to Philadelphia, and was there during the meeting of the \nSynod of Philadelphia: he joined with the Tennents, Blah-, and \nRowland, in preaching daily on the stand on Society Hill. To- \nwards the close of the synod, Gilbert Tennent and Samuel Blair \nasked for an " interloquitur" or private session; but they were di- \nrected to read their papers in the face of a great assemblage. \nThey charged, as characteristics of the state of the ministry, unre- \ngeneracy, Phariseeism, and opposition to the work of God, de- \nclaring that the church was burdened with a carnal ministry, and \nthat ministers said "there was no knowing the state of people\'s \nsouls," because, conscious of hypocrisy, they dreaded discovery. \n\nThese things on the part of Blair and Tennent were full of \npower on the mind of Davenport: they were a pattern to him. \n\nWhitefield passed the summer of 1740 in Georgia. At New- \nport, Rhode Island, a letter was put into his hand : " I could not but \n\n\n\nTracy. f Sprague on Revivals. \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 587 \n\nthink it was from one of the young ministers whom God has lately- \nmade use of in such a remarkable manner on the east end of Long \nIsland." It was from Barber, who had come thither with the full \nconviction that he should see him. Whitefield took sweet counsel \nwith him, and placed him at the head of the Orphan-House: this \noccasioned a bitter outcry against him, as an upholder of Quakerish \ndelusions and enthusiastic courses. \n\nDavenport spent the summer at Southold. In the fall he wrote \nto his mother that twenty of his people had been converted in \nabout two months; in almost all, the work of conviction seemed \nvery clear. He preached for a season at Baskingridge, in the ab- \nsence of Cross, the pastor, amid an awakening of extraordinary \nextent and power. In accompanying Whitefield to Philadelphia, \nin November, he twice narrowly escaped drowning in the swollen \ncreeks: he returned, after a few days, to New Brunswick, to remain \nthere a portion of the time which Tennent spent on Long Island, \nin his way to New England. Whitefield rejoiced to hear that the \nLord was with him, adding, "{Shortly, I believe, you will evan- \ngelize.\'\' \n\nThe winter he probably spent in his own parish, where the pass- \ning labours of Tennent were fruitful of good. \n\nIn July, 1741. Davenport went into Connecticut "to draw the \nlingering battle on;*\' and his high reputation g&Yfi him a signal ad- \nVantage. He was no stranger, but sprung from one of the most \nhonourable families in the colony. Whitefield* said of him, he \nknew no man keep so close a walk with God. Tennent said, he \nwas one of the most heavenly men he ever knew. Pomeroy said, \nhe v,int Far beyond Wnitefield for heavenly communion and fellow- \nship. Parsons said, in 1742, no man he had seen lived so Dear to \nGfrod and had bis conversation so much in neaven. "I greatly loved \n\nhim for fail piety." \n\n.\\- Stonington, one hundred were awakened by his first sermon. \n\nHe came to Westerly, Rhode bland, accompanied by the people \n\nin solemn procession, singing as they went* 1 1 * \xe2\x96\xa0 preached from John \n\n\\ . 1" : \xe2\x80\x94 M Ye will Dot OOmC nut" me thai ye may have life." It was \n\nand awakening, bat not extraordinary; yet there was a ery \nall over the bouse from conviction of sin. Twenty of the Niantio \nIndians were converted under hie preaching at Basl Lyme: "ho \ngreat blessing to many souls of that tribe, and of the Mohe* \ngan. tie iras eminently blessed in inolining them to receive reli- \ngious instruction, all the great pains taken by othevs having been \n\nfruit li \n\nI ing to Branford of a Saturday, the pastor, Philemon Bob- \nbins, asked him t<> preach. <>n their way to meeting on Sabbath, \n\n\n\nTracy. f Rct. Joseph Park, in I lb \n\n\n\n538 JAMES DAVENPORT. \n\nhe proposed to sing as they went ; but, though Robbins objected, he \nsung. He preached well: at the close of the afternoon service ho \nasked "his man" to pray, "but not with my consent- or liking," \nsays Mr. Robbins. Yet, for "improving" Davenport on this occa- \nsion, he was subjected to a series of annoyances from the New \nHaven Association for years. The Patent-Office contains no speci- \nmen of Yankee ingenuity equal to that exhibited by that body in \ntheir devices and machinations to ruin him. \n\nAt New Haven, he came in conflict with the pastor, Mr. Noyes, \nwho refused to submit to his examination ; but his preaching power- \nfully influenced Brainerd, and probably Buell and other students : \nBrainerd destroyed that portion of his diary in which he had en- \ntered "the irregular heats" to which he then gave way. \n\nAt Saybrook, the Rev. Wm. Hart, his classmate, declined ad- \nmitting him to his pulpit, because of his censures of the standing \nministry. Davenport warned the people of the danger of hearing \nunconverted preachers, as Tennent had done in his Nottingham \nSermon. " Truth coming from the lips of a godless man was as \ninjurious as water flowing from a poisoned trough;" and, as they \nclaimed that the signs of unregeneracy were conspicuous, all were \nguilty of self-murder on their own souls who did not forsake the \nhearing of them as enemies of the cross. "I see not," said Ten- \nnent, "how any that fear God can sit contentedly under the minis- \ntrations of opposers without becoming accessory to their crimson \nguilt." Samuel Blair said to the synod,* "Unless we can see \nhopeful, encouraging signs of a work of God\'s converting grace \namong ministers, we shall find ourselves bound in duty to our glo- \nrious Lord, to answer the invitations and desires of a people groan- \ning under the oppression of a dead, unfaithful ministry, by going \nto preach to them wherever they are. Let those who live under \nthe ministry of dead men, whether they have the form of religion \nor not, repair to the living." Tennent said it; Davenport echoed it. \n\nHe probably passed the winter with his people. Neither his \nfriends nor his opponents were idle. Burr wrote from Newark, to \nBellamy, Jan. 13, 1741-2,f "I can join with you in expressing \na very great value for that eminent man of God, Mr. Davenport. \nBut I dare not justify all his conduct, nor can I see through it. Our \ndear brother, Mr. Edwards, tells me in a letter, he thinks he does \nmore towards giving Satan and other opposers an advantage against \nthe work than any one person. My dear brother, if his conduct \nbe right, why do you not imitate him? I believe you don\'t see your \nway clear to do so in all things. I would ask you, what you think \nof his preaching : \xe2\x80\x94 whether it was well calculated to do good to \nmankind in general ? But I feel no heart to speak about these \n\n* Quoted by Dr. Hodge. f Printed in New York Observer. \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 539 \n\nthings. I have more reason to complain of my own deadness than \nof others\' imprudences. Put, my dear brother, as the Lord has \ngiven you such clear discoveries of his love, I hope you will appear \nopen and bold for him against all opposers, and also withstand \nPeter to the i\';ee when he is to be Idamed." \n\nA law* was passed in Connecticut, in May, 1742, such as Queen \nElizabeth might have sanctioned and Sachevercll applauded. If any \nminister preached without express invitation in a parish not under \nhis care, he was denied his salary for a year; and the ministers who \nI a candidate, or counselled a congregation, not under their \nparticular association, were also deprived of their support. Xo \nminister could draw lus salary till he had a certificate of the clerk \nof his parish that he had not been complained of in either of these \nthings. Ministers of the colony, preaching out of their own parish, \nin a place without the consent of the pastor and a majority of the \nthere, were bound over, in the penal sum of one hundred \npound-, not to offend again: persons not inhabitants of the c \nviolating the statute, were to be carried out of the land as vagrants. \nThe law allowing " sober dissenters from the standing order" to \n\nform i 18 was repealed. \n\nDavenport was seized in May, at Ripton, with Pomcroy, of He- \nbron, having met there at the request of Mr. Mills, the pastor, who \nfavoured the revival and was blessed in his labours. The news- \npapers state that in June, 17P2, Captain Blaekleach and Mr. Win. \nAdams, both of Stratford, complained to the General Court of the \nre to be apprehended from the great crowds gathered by \n\n: iort, and that thereupon he was taken up. They were car- \n\nried to Hartford, charged with having exhorted people to set the \nlaw at defiance. ( \xc2\xbbn the way Davenport exhorted, and. having been \nI aed by the General Court, was imprisoned, and sang all \n\nlvlward a friend, March 9, 1741, that the work \n\nrfully breaking out at Hart lord. There was a great \ncroud and tumult, as though Herod Btretched forth his hands a \n\ntime to \\e\\ certain of the church, and to kill dames. To \n\nthe honour Of Hartford be it told that such a sense of the horrid \ninjustice of the law was displayed, that the craven legislat lire \n\nCalled out forty men to mount guard for their protection. The \n\nof public sentiment had its effect; and, assuming that he \n\nd in the rational faculties of his mind, the Legislature \n\n; tied ab \xc2\xbbde on the island. \n\nl after he weni to Ma tts, bul was not countenanced \n\ni lie w ithdrew from the communion on \n\nthe Lord\'s day. at Ofaarlestown, apprehending the minister to be \n\n. He appeared befol - , liation, "and in a free \n\n* Trumbull. <:ul Society. \n\n\n\n540 JAMES DAVENPORT. \n\nand ready manner gave us such an account of the manner of God\'s \nwork upon him from his early days, and his effectual calling in .riper \nyears, as that he appeared to us a man truly pious."* They issued \na declaration expressive of their disapprobation of his course. He \nimmediately denounced them as the prophets of Ahab\'s court. This \nwas saying scarcely more than he had heard Gilbert Tennent say \nin the Synod of 1740, when Dickinson proposed to refer the con- \ntroversy about the reception of candidates to the Boston ministers : \xe2\x80\x94 \n" The most of them are dead formalists, if they have even got so \nfar as that." \n\nAt this time the Presbytery of Boston met in the French meet- \ning-house in that city, and was opened with a sermon by the Rev. \nJohn Caldwell, on the False Prophets, just after Davenport had \nconcluded "a warm, stirring exhortation"! in the open air. Cald- \nwell\'s sermon was printed : it was sharp and biting, placing extracts \nfrom AVhitefield\'s and Tennent\'s writings, as illustrative of the apos- \ntolic descriptions of false prophets, \xe2\x80\x94 with a frequent reference to \nDavenport\'s methods. \n\nHe was taken by the sheriff, and was desired to give bonds for \nhis good behaviour; he was kindly treated at the sheriff\'s house \ntill evening, when, refusing to procure bail, he was sent to jail. \n\nThe grand jury presented Davenport as a defamer of the minis- \ntry : he was treated as insane, and carried to his home. \n\nIn October a council! was held at Southold, at the instance of \nhis dissatisfied and neglected people : he was censured, but not dis- \nmissed. In March, 1743, he went to New London, and organized \na separate church, his followers making a bonfire of the religious \nbooks and the clothes he condemned. Among the books were some \nof Flavel\'s, the sermons of Fish, of Groton, and, as Chauncey \njocosely mentions, the famous sermon of Parsons, of Lyme. He \nadds, that Davenport contributed|| a pair of plush breeches, in the \nheat of his zeal, and that, for the want of them, he was obliged to \nkeep the house. Will it be credited, that he attributes the sickness \nwhich confined him to his bed, to his gross immorality ? He does \nso, without giving the name of "his intelligencer." Dr. Cutler\xc2\xa7 \nwrote to Dr. Zachary Grey, that Chauncey might have put many \nmore and worse things among his seasonable thoughts, had not the \n" timid pastors," who were "his intelligencers," declined to have \ntheir statements published. \n\n\n\n* Declaration of Boston Ministers, August 12, 1742. \n\nf Thatcher\'s Diary : quoted by Tracy. J Tracy. \n\n|| The newspapers all expressly state that the apparel was not burnt : " each bird \nwent away in its own feathers." \n\n\\ Nichols\'s Literary Anecdotes. He attributes the vilest profligacy and greedi- \nness of gain to Tennent and Whitefield. Decency forbids the printing of his \ncalumny. \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 541 \n\nHe was sick : " I had the long fever and the cankery humour \nraging at once, and was lame with inflammatory ulcerations : my \nspirit was void of inward peace, laying the greatest stress on exter- \nnals, and neglecting the heart ; I was full of impatience, pride, \nand arrogance." His sufferings were extreme: "his leg was sore \nand swollen from the knee to the ankle, and for much of the time \nthe sore ran day and night." \n\n"While thus laid aside, his brother-in-law, Wheelock, with the \nexcellent Solomon Williams, of Lebanon, addressed two letters to \nhim. A great change took place in him, and he passed over into \nNew Jersey, a man of another spirit, to visit the places where he \nfirst made proof of his ministry. In October, the congregations \nof Maidenhead and Hopewell asked leave of New Brunswick Pres- \nbytery to employ him with a view to his settlement. The presby- \ntery were pleased to hear him express "his conviction of, and \nhumiliation for, some things lie had been faulty in; but there were \nother things which he approved of, but they could not. They could \nnot, therefore, encourage the people to make out a call; but, inas- \nmuch as God bad begun to show him his mistakes, they were willing \nto use all means to obtain so desirable an end," and gave the peo- \nple liberty to " improve" him till the second Wednesday of May. \nThey referred the matter to the conjunct presbytery to meet at \nPhiladelphia. \n\n"By the gentle and laborious endeavours of Mr. Williams, and \nMr. Wheelock," says Dr. Trumbull, "he was brought to a deep, \nhumiliating, and penitent Bense of his errors, and of the false spirit \nunder which he had acted." lie published, July 28, 1744, a most \nample retraction of his errors in denouncing ministers, and exhort- \ning the people to forsake them, making impulses a rule of conduct, \nencouraging lay-exhorters, and singing in the streets; praying that \nGod would guard him against such errors, and stop the progress \nof those he had corrupted by word and example. \n\nHe also published a letter written to Barber, from Maidenhead, \nrejoicing in hearing from him nf the revival at the Orphan-House \nin Georgia, and lamenting "the awful affair of the clothes and the \nThese publications met with much contempt, "as though \nhis change in Bome few things would cover the uumerous evil prac- \ntices of his party, or undo the mischief they anil he hail done." \n\nNol through the press only, but by personal acknowledgments, \n\ndid he Btlive to repair the breach he had made. A gnat .repara- \ntion had occurred through him from the church of Btonington, and \non bis recantation he came there, "nut to be adored, but to he \ndenounced as dead and worldly." "He came,"" Bays Mr. Fish, \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2with such a mild, meek, pleasant, ami bumble spirit, broken and \n\n* Quoted by It. Hodge. \n\n\n\n542 JAMES DAVENPORT. \n\ncontrite, as I scarce ever saw excelled or equalled. He owned his \nfault in private, and in a most Christian manner asked forgiveness \nof some ministers he had treated amiss, and in a large assembly \npublicly retracted his errors and mistakes." \n\nHis friends who had mourned over his extravagance and virulence \nrecognised the hand of God in his repentance. Mrs. Moorhead \nrepresents him as visited on his bed by angels : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" The heralds rise and touch him with their wings; \nNow in his breast a holy shame there springs ; \nHe starts with rosy blushes in his face, \nAnd, weeping, sweetly sings to sovereign grace." \n\nHis friends, the Rev. Timothy Allen and the Rev. Timothy \nSymmes, seem, as well as Barber, to have seen their errors : the two \nformer found no place in New England, and came into New Jersey. \n\nDavenport became a member of New Brunswick Presbytery, \nSept. 22, 1746, having probably for some time been preaching in \ntheir bounds. They resolved to make an effort to unite the Old \nand New Side congregations in Hopewell ; but, at the time appointed, \nthey did not attempt it, seeing the way not at all clear. In 1748, \nhe joined New York Presbytery, with a view to settle at Connecti- \ncut Farms, near Elizabethtown. Having recovered his health, he \nspent two months, in the summer of 1750, in Virginia. Da vies \nspeaks highly of his labours, and the success of " that pious Enoch ;" \nhe was strongly urged to settle, and was inclined to do so, but the \nmatter was broken off. The winter of 1750-1, he spent at Cape \nMay, "with little or no success, except on the last day." In Octo- \nber, 1753, he was called to Maidenhead and Hopewell, but, on the \nday of installation, the people were found so negligent that the \ncommittee could not proceed. On their representing their sorrow \nfor their fault to the presbytery, he accepted the call, and was \ninstalled, Oct. 27, 1754. He was moderator of the Synod of New \nYork that year, and preached the opening sermon the next fall \nfrom 2 Cor. iv. 1. It was printed in Philadelphia at " the newest \nprinting-office, on the south side of the Jersey market," with the \ntitle "The Faithful Minister Encouraged."* \n\nHis stay at Hopewell was harassed by a number asking leave of \npresbytery to join adjacent congregations, and, in 1757, a petition \nwas presented for his removal. He died in the autumn of that \nyear, and, with his wife, was buried in the New-Light graveyard, \nabout a mile from Pennington, towards the Delaware. \n\n* Gilbert Tennent and Treat prefixed a commendation. " Let not the pious \nauthor be offended with our freedom in saying that his life adds weight to this dis- \ncourse, for the latter is but a copy of the former. Nor should it be forgotten that \nthe gracious God gave manifest tokens of his special presence when this discourse \nwas delivered; not only the speaker, but divers of the hearers, both ministers and \npeople, being solemnly affected." \n\n\n\nJAMES DAVENPORT. 543 \n\nHe left a son a few years old, \'who graduated at Nassau Hall \nin lTo\'.t; lie Btudied theology with Buell and Bellamy, and was \nordained, by Suffolk Presbytery, pastor of Mattituck, Long Island, \nJune 4, 1775. He was among the first on the island to restrict \nbaptism to the children of communicants. Subsequently he was \nsettled at Bedford, New York, and Deerfield, New Jersey, and \nspent the close of his life as a missionary in Western New York, \ndying at Lysander, in 1820, an amiable and excellent man. \n\nDavenport* bought a little white girl from a party of strolling \nIndiana for a bottle of rum : she knew neither her parents nor her \nbirthplace. He named her Deliverance Paine, and reared her as \nhis own child. She married, and removed to North Carolina, and \n\xe2\x96\xa0was the mother of the Rev. William Paisley. \n\nOf the extravagancies charged on him, many are plainly untrue, \ncoming from scoffers and worldly-wise men, to whom the great \ntruths of Christ\'s redemption were far more odious than any error \ninto which Davenport felL If he had been the only one assailed, \n;ht receive the testimony of Chaunceyand his intelligencers; \nbut when we knowthat Pomerov was carried to prison, and deprived \n(>[\' hi- salary for a year; that Allen and Bobbins were accused and \n\ncondemned on frivolous pretexts; that three ministers wen \npended for ordai Salisbury; that denunciations fell like \n\nhail on Whitclield, and that Buell and Prainerd were held up as \n\nstrollers and fanatics whom it was not allowable to improve; that \nPomeroy, Buell, Davenport, Moorhead, Blair, Croswell, and Row- \nland were classed as "common railers," "men whom the Devil" \n\ndrive- into tin- mini-try; that Dr. Cutler speaks with equal dislike \n\nof Dr. Cooper, Rodgera of Ipswich, Tennent, and Buell, Btyling \nDavenport a nonpareil, and lamenting that the enthusiasm \n\n(17 1-\'.; breaking out, and that Finley was twice carried out of Con- \n\xe2\x96\xa0.; as a vagrant, \xe2\x80\x94 it seems reasonable to doubt, whether \n\ni port may SOt have been greatly slandered. \n\nWho does not reject, with equal Bcorn, Chaunoey\'s assault on \n\nil character, and Cutler\'s insinuation that White- \nfield and Tennent embezzled what was collected for the poor, and \nrepeated the enormities of Hophni and Phineas at the door of the \ntabernacle 1 \n\nDavenport wa eloquent orator, moving, by dramatic \n\nskill, hi.- audience .\xe2\x80\xa2:- though they heard the groans of Him who \n\nIn preaching, lie exhausted himself: hi \ntortious of face and body probably grew out of his a.ute Buffer- \nringing tone in speaking was imitated and \n\nperpetuated for half a century among "the Strict C \n\ntionali-t," at the East and the "Separate Baptists" at the South. \n\n\n\nDr. i \n\n\n\n544 JAMES DAVENPORT. \n\nMrs. Moorhead* describes the closing part of his public ser- \nvices : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" The sacred man is to the shade convey\'d, \nOn camomile his aching temples laid." \n\nAmong other accusations laid against the New Lights was, that \nthey preached extempore. Croswell knew only two who did so, \neven occasionally, \xe2\x80\x94 Whitefield and Davenport; and "well they \nmight, for their minds were perpetually in heaven." \n\nSinging in the streets was " an enthusiastic foolery" in the eyes \nof Tennent, as well as of Dickinson. It was then not at all com- \nmon to sing hymns in public worship, even in New England. \nTwof from his pen were printed, \xe2\x80\x94 " Thanksgiving for Peace of \nConscience" and "For Joy in the Holy Ghost," \xe2\x80\x94 and are fully \nequal to most religious poems. \n\nHe was the constant correspondent of Jonathan Edwards ; and \nhe, writing to his Scottish friends, frequently transcribes the tidings \nhe had sent of the work of grace, as it appeared from time to \ntime. To these notices we are indebted for several interesting \nglimpses of our ministers and churches at that day. He was also \na valued correspondent of Samuel Davies and of Bellamy. \n\nBostwick, in his sermon at the union of the synods in May, \n1758, said, \xe2\x80\xa2" The last year, in particular with regard to ministers, \nmay be called the dying year, in which the God of heaven has \nsmitten the church in these parts with repeated strokes of sore \n\n\n\n* Lines, in Harvard College Library, \nf Harvard College Library : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n11 This is my Saviour\'s legacy, \nConfirmed by his decease : \xe2\x80\x94 \nYe shall have trouble in the world ; \nIn me ye shall have peace. \n\n" And so it is : the world doth rage, \nBut peace in me doth reign, \nAnd while the Lord maintains the fight \nTheir battles are in vain. \n\n"The burning bush was not consumed \nWhile God remained there ; \nThe three, when Christ did make the fourth, \nFound fire as meek as air. \n\n" So is my memory stufft with sin \nEnough to make a hell ; \nAnd yet my conscience is not scorch\'d, \nFor God in me doth dwell. \n\n" My God, my reconciled God, \nCreator of my peace, \nThee will I love, and praise, and sing, \nTill life and breath shall cease." \n\n\n\nDANIEL LAWRENCE. 545 \n\nbereavement in a close and awful succession. Scarce had we time \nto dry our weeping eyes for the loss of one of eminent character \nand usefulness, (Burr,) but the streams of grief were called to flow \ndown afresh for the loss of another, (Davenport,) whose zeal for \nGod and the conversion of men was scarce to be paralleled. And \nyet, for all this, the anger of Jehovah was not turned away, but \nhis hand was sunn lifted up again, and, with a dreadful aim and re- \nsistless Btroke, has brought down to the dust perhaps the greatest \npillar in tins\' part of Zion\'s buildings, (Edwards.) *Oh, how does \nthe whole fabric shake and totter! and what a gloomy aspect do \nthese providences wear ! as if God, by calling home his ain- \nbassadorSj were about to quit the affair of negotiating peace \nwith mankind any mure." \n\n\n\nDANIEL LAWRENCE \n\n\n\nWAS horn on Long Island in 1718, and is said to have been a \nblacksmith. He studied at the Log College, and was taken on \ntrials by New Brunswick Presbytery, September 11, 1744, and \nwas licensed at Philadelphia, May 28, 1745. \n\nThe original organization at Newtown, in Bucks county, seems \nto have died away; for Beatty was sent, in the spring of 174."), to \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2settle a church there." In the fall, Newtown and Peiisalem \n\n; for Lawrence; so did Upper and Lower Bethlehem, and \nHopewell and Maidenhead. At the request of the Forks of \nDelaware, be was Bent, May 24, 17 16, to supply them for a year, \nwith a view to settlement; and, in October, a call was presented \nto him. \\lr was ordained, April -, 1747, and installed on the \nthird Hal. lath in Jane. Treat, of Abingdon, presided and \npreached. \n\nThe Forks North and the Forks Wesl had been Favoured with a \nportion of Brainerd\'s labours, and were by m> mean- an unpro- \nmising field, having many excellent pious families. But it was a \nlaborious field,\xe2\x80\x94 a wide, dreary, uninhabited tract of fifteen \nmill-- lying between the two meeting-houses. Lawrence was not \ni \xe2\x80\xa2; and, for his health, be was directed to spend the winter \nand spring of 1761 at Oape May, then in very necessitous eir- \neumstanoee. Chesnul supplied the Porks in his absence. \n\nBis health -till continuing feeble, and there being uo prospect \nof bis being aide to fulfil his pastoral office in the Forks, I \n\njed. !!\'\xe2\x80\xa2 re m oved to Oape May. This was one of our \n\nthe first that i. \xe2\x96\xa0 \n\n\n\n546 SAMUEL SACKETT. \n\nand then remained vacant nearly thirty years. The Revival wag \nfelt there, but the congregation was feeble in numbers and re- \nsources. Beatty visited the people, and laid before the synod \ntheir distressed state. Davenport passed some time there, but \nwith no effect till the last Sabbath. Lawrence was called ; but a \nlong delay occurred before his installation, which was not till June \n20, 1754. Of his ministry little is known. The records mention \nhim as a frequent supply of Forks, and as going to preach, in \n1755, at " ~N*\\ England over the mountains." \n\nA meeting-house was built in 1762, the frame of which re- \nmained in use till 1824. \n\n" It appears* to be my duty, considering the relict of my old \ndisorder, to take and use the counsel which, I have heard, the \nRev. Samuel Blair gave, not long before his exit, to the Rev. \nJohn Rodgers : \xe2\x80\x94 in preaching, to speak low, to speak slow, and to \nbe short." \n\nHe died April 13, 1766. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL SACKETT \n\n\n\nWas a nativef of Newtown, Long Island, and was married, \nApril 6, 1732, to Hannah, daughter of Nathaniel Hazard, an \nelder in New York. He was probably engaged in business in \nWest Chester county, New York; and having, during the Revival, \ndetermined to devote himself to the ministry, he was taken on \ntrials by New Brunswick Presbytery, August 3, 1741. The \nminutes of the meeting at which he was licensed are not recorded. \nHe was ordained October 13. \n\nIn May, he was sent to the Highlands, to White Plains, to \nCronpond, in West Chester county, and to Cortland Manor. \nCronpond (Crumpond) is now Yorktown, and Cortland Manor is \nPeekskill. The old advertisements all name the locality John \nPeek\'s Kill. He was installed, October 12, 1743, at Bedford, \nand was directed again to visit the Highlands. He was sent as a \nsupply to the Presbyterian Society in Milford, Connecticut, and \npreached there. \n\nCrumpond obtained, May 19, 1747, the half of his time, \xe2\x80\x94 Bed- \nford being weakened by the Separates. He was charged with the \noccasional supply of Salem and Cortland Manor.;}; In December, \n\n* MS. note to his Sermons, in the hands of his descendants. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2j- Riker\'s History of Newtown. \n\nX Samuel Bayard advertises, in 1733, that thirty or forty new settlements had \n\n\n\nSAMUEL SACKETT. 547 \n\n1749, he -was released from the care of Crumpond. Daven- \nport* wrote to Edwards, April 9, 1751, "Mr. Sackett has lately \nbeen favoured with peculiar success in reducing (bringing back) a \nnumber drawn away and infected by the Separates; and some \nendeavours that I have since used with him have been, I trust, not \naltogether in vain. At Bedford there was something considerable \nof an awakening." \n\nIn 1751, he IS reported as a member of Long Island Presby- \ntery, \xe2\x80\x94 the newly-erected Presbytery of Suffolk being sometimes so \nstyled inadvertently by the synod\'s clerk. His field of labour \nlay, from the outset, in the natural and long-established bounds \nof New York Presbytery; but the Presbytery of New Brunswick \nwas selected by him and his congregations, as more congenial and \netnbracing more decidedly the cause of Whitefield and of the op- \nl churches in Connecticut. The Presbytery of New York \ni in the Revival, but disapproved of the misguided doings \nof those who seemed most successful in promoting the Awakening. \nSackett very naturally passed it by, to seek the fellowship of men \nmore decided and vehement, \xe2\x80\x94 of men prompt to succour the \nStraggling minorities that, like shipwrecked wretches in Nova \nZembla, dreaded to be borne down or congealed into lifeless \nrigidity by the ecclesiastical icebergs towering in appalling majesty \naround them. \n\nWhen Suffolk Presbytery applied to be received by the Synod \nof New York, they asked that some of its members might be \njoined to them; and Sackett met with them, May 22, 1751. lie \nresigned the care of Bedford, April 4, 1753, the affection- of the \npeople being alienated from him. I lis change of opinion in the \nmatter ef baptism, and adopting the views 01 Kdwards and Bel- \nlamy, bad much to do in unsettling him. Those to whom he \ndenie 1 baptism for their children refused to contribute to his sup- \nport : the presbytery assured them that they were bound to pay. \n\nII.- u.i- called by the Presbyterian Society, of Hanover, in Cort- \nland Manor, immediately on leaving Bedford, and settled there. \nHe rarely attended any meeting of presbytery. He was dis- \nmissed from Hanover, April 1. L760, and is Baid, in Bolton\'s \nHistory of West Chester, to have been installed at Crumpond the \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2;il\\ The pec, pie ,.f I 1 .1 1 1 < \xe2\x96\xa0 \\ . \xe2\x80\xa2 |". ho\\\\.-\\er. Solicited falS f< it 1 1 l\'l 1 , \n\n!\xe2\x80\xa2 - J7, IT 1 ;". The Church mSssionair^ there immediately \n\nwrote tO England that the NeW-Llght preacher had left the \ntown. \n\nTin- congregation of (.\'rumpondt was formed in 1788 \n\nI oat In Cortland Mutor in I i hundred ud lerenty-fife i \n\nI \' I. if.\\ \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2(\xe2\x80\xa2 Boll I \' niij. Ponds. \n\n\n\n548 TIMOTHY SYMMES. \n\nThe land for the meeting-house was given January 2, 1739. The \nchurch was burned by the American troops in July, 1779, to pre- \nvent it from being converted by the British to their use. Con- \ngress passed a vote to pay three thousand five hundred dollars for \nthe property destroyed : the payment is yet to be made. \n\nWhen Dutchess Presbytery was formed, he was annexed to it. \nIn 1768, he declined their jurisdiction. A committee, by direc- \ntion of the synod, met at Bedford, and settled the difference. \nTheir proceedings were approved of, except their having trans- \nferred him to New York Presbytery. He acquiesced in the de- \ncision, and was allowed to join New York Presbytery ; but, not \nlong after, he sought a reunion with Dutchess Presbytery. \n\nHe died at Yorktown, June 5, 1784. His tomb bears record \nthat he was judicious, faithful, laborious, and successful in his \nministry. \n\nHis son, born in 1735, died before him. \n\nIn September, 1711, Philadelphia Presbytery made certain \narrangements for Hopewell and its associate church, to take \neffect if they are not engaged with Mr. Sackett. This was pro- \nbably Richard Sackett, minister of West Greenwich, Connecticut, \nfrom 1717 to 1727. \n\n\n\nTIMOTHY SYMMES \n\n\n\nWas born at Scituate, Massachusetts, in 1715, and graduated \nat Harvard in 1733. He was ordained, December 2, 1736, pastor \nof Millington, a parish in East Haddam, Connecticut. The Rev. \nL. Hosmer preached from 1 Tim. vi. 20 : \xe2\x80\x94 " Timothy, keep that \nwhich is committed to thy trust." \n\nHe was dismissed on account of his fervour in promoting the \nRevival. He erred, with Croswell, Allen, and others, in denying \nthat we must seek the evidence of God\'s having forgiven our sins \nin our sanctification. \n\nHe is said to have preached at Acquebogue, Long Island, from \n1741 or \'42 till 1744. He met with New Brunswick Presbytery, \nMay 24, 1744, and was sent to the vacancies in West Jersey. \nIn May, 1747, he is mentioned as a member of New York Synod, \nand is said to have been settled at Springfield and New Provi- \ndence, in East Jersey, from 1746 to 1750. Dr. Prime says, " he \nwas the pastor of Connecticut Farms." Very probably Spring- \nfield did not become a separate charge for some time after, it \nbeing so near the Farms that each congregation hears the ringing \nof the other\'s bell. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAVTE8. 549 \n\nHis first -wife was the daughter of the Rev. John Cleaves, of \nIpswich ; and his Becond was Eunice, daughter of Franc-is Cogs- \nwell, Esq. \n\nHe settled at Ipswich, and died there, April 6, 1756, aged \nforty-one. \n\nHis son was a judge of the Supreme Court of New Jersey in \n17^ v . and was appointed Judge of the Northwestern Territory. \nHe died at Marietta. Ohio, in 1*14. His first wife, the daughter \nof the Rev. Samuel Barker, was the mother of the well-known \n(tor, Captain J. 0. Symmes, and of the excellent widow of \nthe venerated President Harrison. \n\n\n\nSAM TEL DAYIES \n\n"Was born near Summit Bridge,* in the Welsh Tract, in New- \ncastle county, Delaware, November 8, 1723. His father, David \n-. was a Welshman, a plain, pious planter. His mother was \n\nan eminent saint; and having, like Hannah, asked a son of the \nLord, and having in her heart dedicated him to the ministry, she \nnamed him Samuel. Bhe was his only instructor for the first ten \nyean, and early imbued him with her prevailing desire that he \n\nmight be a minister. Though otherwise careless of divine things, \nhe was mindful of hifl Hearings to death, and daily prayed to be \n\nspared to preach the gospel, lie was Bent to receive the rudiments \n\nof classical learning, under the Rev. Abel Morgan, afterwards the \n\n-\xe2\x96\xa0 minister at Middletown, New Jersey. Away from home- \n\ninfluences, he became mure estranged from God; but, at the age \n\nOf twelve, h" WaS awakened to see his guilt. vileiiess, . i T : 1 1 ruin. \n\nAfter much and long-continued distress, he obtained peace in be- \nlieving. This great even! boob place In 1786, probably under the \npreaching of Gilbert Tennent, whom he called bis spiritual father. \nIt was a d.iv of great deadness; but <i"d was then preparing many \n\nWonderful men tOt the gOOd day thai was at hand. \n\nII" commenced keeping a diary, which, after his death, wa \nmined by President rinley: it is a record of great distre \nmeasures of heavenly comfort. \n"About sixteen years ago," be said, in L767, "in the northern \ncolonies, when all religious concern was much out of fashion, and \ngenerality lay in s dead sleep In sin, having at besl but the \nform of godliness and nothing of the power, \xe2\x80\x94 when the country was \n\n* it. \n\n\n\n550 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\nin peace and prosperity, free from the calamities of war and epi- \ndemic sickness, \xe2\x80\x94 when, in short, there were no external calls to re- \npentance, \xe2\x80\x94 suddenly a deep general concern about eternal things \nspread through the country ; sinners started from their slumbers, \nbroke off from their sins, began to inquire the way of salvation, \nand made it the great business of their life to prepare for the world \nto come. Then the gospel seemed almighty, and carried all before \nit. It pierced the very hearts of men. I have seen thousands at \nonce melted down under it, all eager to hear as for life, and scarcely \na dry eye to be seen among them. Thousands still remain shining \nmonuments of the power of divine grace in that glorious day." \n\nAmid such animating scenes, under the preaching of Whitefield, \nBlair, Robinson, Tennent, and Rowland, Davies pursued his stu- \ndies. There were obstacles in his way, but his uncommon applica- \ntion was followed by surprising progress. Robinson supplied his \nwants. Blair taught him, not only by his words, but by his holy \nexample as a man and his inimitable excellencies as a preacher. \nHe was licensed by Newcastle Presbytery, July 30, 1746, at the age \nof twenty-three, and ordained an evangelist, February 19, 1747. \nHe was desired by all the vacant congregations. He was manly \nand graceful ; he had a venerable presence, commanding voice, em- \nphatic delivery ; his disposition sweet, dispassionate, tender. \n\nHe married,* October 23, 1746, Sarah Kirkpatrick, a daughter, \nprobably, of John Kirkpatrick, of Nottingham. She died, Sep- \ntember 15, 1747, with her infant son. He sunk, soon after being \nlicensed, into a consumptive state, and was a year in melancholy \nlanguishment of body. Supposing his end near, he went down to \nthe Eastern Shore of Maryland, " wheref was a most glorious dis- \nplay of grace, begun, I think, in 1745, under Mr. Robinson." The \nchurches of Buckingham, Queen Anne, and especially those in \nSomerset, were highly favoured, and were all vacant. "I never \nsaw such a deep, spreading concern in my life. In the extremity \nof a cold winter the attendance was numerous, and the people un- \nwearied; the indications of distress and joy were plain. Those \nwere the happiest days of my life." \n\nHe spent two months there, suffering with a hectic, preaching \nby day and delirious with fever at night. Bostwick says the first- \nfruits of his labours were glorious ; he was especially honoured in \nthe remarkable conversion of two gentlemen. He was sent, by \nNewcastle Presbytery, in the spring of 1747, to Hanover, in Vir- \nginia, to supply a few weeks, "when our| discouragements from \nthe Government were renewed and multiplied. A proclamation was \nset up at our meeting-house, on a Lord\'s day, strictly requiring all \n\n\n\n* Quoted from his family record by Dr. Foote. \n\n| Davies to Bellamy. + Morris\'s Narrative. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAVIES. 551 \n\nmagistrates to suppress and prohibit, by all lawful means, all itine- \nrant preachers: we forebore reading that day. Soon after, Davies \nCame, having qualified himself according to law, and obtained \nlicense for four meeting-houses. The people received him as an \nAngel of God, and earnestly urged him to settle among them." \n\n"I found them," he says, "sufficiently numerous to form one \nweary large congregation or two small ones, having three meeting- \n;n Hanover, one in Henrico, and one in Louisa." \n\n" Sundry congregations* in Pennsylvania, my native country, \n\nand in the other northern colonies, most earnestly importuned me \n\nttle among them, where I should have had at least an equal \n\ntemporal maintenance, incomparably more ease, leisure, and peace, \n\nand the happiness of the frequent society of my brethren." \n\nHe left them, intending to accept the call to St. George\'s, in \nDelaware ; but. a supplication signed by one hundred and fifty heads \nof families being sent to the presbytery from the people of Hano- \nver. Henrico, and three other places, in the spring of 1748, he \naccepted the call in April, and was installed in May. He was then \nslowly recovering; and, looking upon it only as the intermission \nof a disease that would prove mortal, he put his life in his hand, \nhoping to prepare the way for a successor, and willing to expire \nunder the fatigues of duty. \n\n11.- was accompanied by John Rodgers, then just licensed by \nKewcastle Presbytery: they waited on the General Court at Wil- \nliamsburg. Leave was refused to Rodgers to qualify under the \nToleration Art, and he was forbidden to preach in the colony, un- \nder penalty of a fine of \xc2\xa3500 and a year\'s imprisonment. In the \nfall, three other meeting-houses were licensed as preaching-places \nfoi 1 \'ivies, making -even in all, lying twelve or fifteen miles apart, \nand tin- people being greatly dispersed. lie preached often of a \nlay: many Church people attended seriously and regularly; \n"fifty "i- sixty families have thus been entangled in the net of the \ngospel." Davenport wrotef to Edwards, " I beard lately b bredi- \n\xe2\x80\xa2 miit of a remarkable work of conviction and conversion at \n\n| er, under Mr. Davies, to whose support, in bis preparation \n\nrice, Mr. Robinson contributed much, if not mostly, and on \ni \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 him his book.-." li mostly lay in the \n\ntw.. extremes, gentlemen and slaves, In three years he had three \nhundred communicants, ho], .-fully pious; there were also some real \nChristians, who, throui arupulousness, did nol \n\nadmission to the Lotus table. En the same period he baptised \nforty negroes on a credible profession; and upwards of a hundred \nof them wme often pr< -\xe2\x96\xa0 nl when he preached. "The remarkable \nwork" began as early as May, L749; and, in the summer of 17-M, \n\n* Davies to the Bishop of London. \n\n\n\n552 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\n"some were brought under concern, and God\'s people much re- \nvived" by the labours, for two months, of "that pious Enoch," \nDavenport. \n\nDavies was married, October 4, 1748, to Jean, daughter of John \nHolt, of Hanover. He regained his health, grew plethoric, and \nfrequent journeyings through his wide-spread flock gave vigour to \nhis frame. \n\nThe General Court* revoked, April 12, 1750, the license granted \nby the county courts to the meeting-houses on Owen\'s Creek in \nLouisa, at Tucker Woodson\'s in Goochland, Needwood in Caroline, \nand St. Peter\'s in New Kent. They gave as a reason that the \nright to license belonged to them, and not, as in England, to the \njustices of the peace. Davies thought the revoking was " not from \nan oppressive spirit in the court, but of misinformation, and of the \nmalignant officiousness of some private persons." He appeared \nbefore the General Court, and showed that if the Act of Toleration \ndid not extend to Virginia, neither did the Act of Uniformity. He \nwas opposed by the distinguished Peyton Randolph, the attorney- \ngeneral, and his request was refused ; though it was openly said \nthat Randolph met his match that day. He also addressed the \ncommissary, Mr. Dawson, to vindicate himself of arrogance, sec- \ntarianism, and all unkindness to the State Church. He was treated \nwith great courtesy at Williamsburg, particularly by Lieutenant- \nGovernor Gooch ; Colonel Lee, the president of the Council, told \nhim that a representation of the case had been sent to the Bishop \nof London. Fearing that undesignedly it might be imperfect and \nproduce a wrong impression, he wrote to the bishop, August 13, \n1750, but delayed to send his letter till the fall of 1751. He wrote \nalso, on hearing the news from Colonel Lee, to Dr. Doddridge, "his \nfriend, in all the unreserved freedom of friendship." Doddridgef \nmade large extracts and sent them to the bishop, who, under date \nof May 11, 1751, sent, in return, extracts from the representation \nhe had received of the matter, and wrote at large, mildly and kindly, \nsignifying his concurrence in the refusal to license a Dissenter to \npreach out of the county of his abode. \n\nOn receiving the papers, Doddridge despatched them at once to \nDavies, who transmitted to him a long, courteous, able reply, dis- \nclaiming for himself and the brethren of the New York Synod all \nparticipation in the effort to prevent the introduction of diocesan \nbishops into the Plantations; "for I was not without hopes it \nmight tend to purge out the corrupt leaven from the Established \nChurch, and restrain the clergy from their extravagancies, who now \nbehave as they please, as there is none to censure or depose them \non this side the Atlantic." \n\n* Dr. Foote\'s Sketches of Virginia. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0j- Printed in the Biblical Repertory, and in Dr. Foote\'s Sketches of Virginia. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAVIES. 553 \n\nIt having been said to the bishop that Davies obtained a license \nfor a house in New Kent, to gather a congregation where there \nwere no Dissenters, he replied "that two gentlemen, of good \n- and good character, \xe2\x80\x94 justices in their time, and officers in \nthe militia, \xe2\x80\x94 had asked, as a peculiar favour, that he would \npreach on weekdays, occasionally, in their county." On his con- \nsenting, fifteen heads of families, professed Presbyterians, asked, \nand the county court licensed their meeting-houses. \n\nBut t<> the bishop\'s correspondent it was grievous that Davies \nshould \'\'hold forth on working-days to poor people, his only fol- \n-. \' leading them to neglect their maintenance; and "this, in \nprocess of time, may be severely felt by the Government, and is \ninconsistent with the religion of labour." He replied, "A great \nnumber of my hearers are so well furnished with slaves that they \nare under no necessity of confining themselves to hard labour. \nThey redeem time from the fashionable riots and excessive diver- \nsions of this age. The religion of labour is held sacred among \nus, as the Qourishing circumstances of my people demonstrate. - \' \n\nquestion was, in a measure, put at rest by the licensing, in \n1752, of Todd, and, afterwards, of all others who desired to settle \n\nor itinerate. Davenport thought of removing thither; and \nDavies importuned Jonathan Edwards to take a pastoral charge in \nthe Old Dominion. But they still lay, in 1753, under "some \nillegal restraints, particularly as to t he number of their meeting- \nhouses, which is not at all equal to what their circumstances \n\nrequire, though they have taken all legal measures to have B BUffi- \n\nci\'-nt number registered according to the Act of Toleration." The \nSynod of New York "humbly and earnestly requested the con- \ncurrence and assistance of their friends in Great Britain with \n-, in the use of all proper means to relieve a helpless and \n\noppr. 1 people in a, point so nearly concerning their religious \n\nliberti \n\nAs early as 1751, some of the trustees of Nassau Hall impor- \ntuned Davies to go to Greal Britain, to " represent the affair, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\xe2\x80\xa2it and receive contributions. The application was renewed \nin the next fall; but he totally declined. Barry in 1758, the \ntrustees onanimously "voted hhn to undertake the voyage." lie \nconsented, on condition they would support his family and supply \nhis pulpit. They complied ; and he left home, September \xe2\x80\xa2">, \n\\- the Commencement, a1 Newark, (the L4th,) he de- \nlivered a thesis, \xe2\x80\x94 Personales Distinotiones in Trinitate sunt \nas, \xe2\x80\x94 vindicated it against three opponents, and received the \nof A.M. \nlie preached ->n Monday, October 8, after the adjournment of \nsynod, on [sa. Levi. I, 2. "Through the great mercy of God," \n:.iy heart was passionately affeoted with the Bubjeot* \n\n\n\n554 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\nThe venerable Gilbert Tennent, weeping beside me in the pulpit, \nwas refreshed with an information from my dear and valuable \nfriend, Captain Grant, of a person that was awakened by thia \nsermon. Oh, it is an unspeakable mercy that such a creature is \nnot thrown by as wholly useless !" \n\nAmid many other anxieties, he was " uneasy to find that the \ntrustees expected him to furnish himself with clothes in this em- \nbassy." He took counsel of the Hon. William Smith, of New \nYork, who assured him that the revocation of the license would \nbe a sufficient ground of complaint in England. \n\nIn Philadelphia he preached six times, \xe2\x80\x94 the audience steadily \nincreasing; and some, who stood aloof from Tennent and were \naccounted Antinoniians, attended, and were satisfied with his doc- \ntrine. These latter were probably Scotsmen, who were no Anti- \nnomians ; some of whom soon after received a minister from the \nBurgher presbytery, in Scotland, while others drew to the Anti- \nBurghers, who had much success in the city. He visited White \nClay, where he had once lived, saw his relations in the Tract, \nand was with "dear Mr. Rodgers" at the sacrament at St. \nGeorge\'s. \n\n" The venerable Tennent" was then about fifty. He refreshed \nhis young associate by his facetious and spiritual discourse. \nBefore sailing, November 17, 1753, Tennent sung, prayed, and \nmade an address. The voyage was completed before Christmas, \nin safety. \n\nReaching London, Whitefield sent and invited them to make \ntheir home with him. This placed them in a difficulty ; and they \nwere perplexed what to do, lest they should blast the success of \ntheir mission among the Dissenters, who were generally disaffected \nto him. " The advice," he observes, "of our friends and his, was, \nthat public intercourse with him would be imprudent in our present \nsituation." They visited him, privately, the next evening, when \n"he spoke in the most encouraging manner as to the success of our \nmission, and, in all his conversation, discovered so much zeal and \ncandour, that I could not but admire the man as the wonder of the \nage." On New Year\'s night, he heard him preach in the Taber- \nnacle, on the barren fig-tree. " The discourse was incoherent ; yet \nit seemed to me better calculated to do good to mankind than all \nthe accurate, languid discourses I have heard." Whitefield \nthought they had not taken the best method, in trying to keep \nin with all parties, but should "come out boldly; for this would \nsecure the affections of the pious, from whom we might expect the \nmost generous contributions." \n\nSixty-seven ministers signed a recommendation of their object, \n\xe2\x80\x94 Baptists joining with Presbyterians and Independents. While \nsoliciting their concurrence, they received two hundred pounds. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAVIES. 555 \n\nThey then printed five hundred copies of their petition to place in \nthe hands of their friends. Before the 7th of May they bad ob- \ntained seventeen hundred pounds in the city. William Belcher, \nE-\'j.. a Churchman, gave fifty pounds. Mr. Cromwell, a great- \ngrandson of the Protector, thanked him with tears, on hearing \nhim preach, and gave him three guineas. \n\nAt Edinburgh they were kindly received, although a letter from \nCross, of Philadelphia, had been dispersed to their disadvantage) \nand the Nottingham Sermon was industriously spread. The Com- \nmittee of Bills transmitted the petition to the Assembly, with \ntheir recommendation. On Monday, May 27, the petition was \nintroduced; and. their credentials being read, Mr. Lumsden, Pro- \nof Divinity at Aberdeen, spoke of the duty of the Assem- \nbly to promote such institutions among the Presbyterians in the \ncolonies, w \'who are a part of ourselves, having adopted the same \nstandard of doctrine, worship, and discipline with this church." \nHe was followed by Mr. MoLagan; and the petitions were agreed \nto \xe2\x80\x94 no objection being made \xe2\x80\x94 without a vote, granting a na- \ntional collection. The Scottish Society for Propagating Christian \n\nKnowledge issued a letter in their behalf. \n\nRev. John Adams, of Falkirk, said to Bellamy.* in 17-V1, \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 lb- did me the favour \xe2\x80\x94 and, indeed, it was a most obliging one \xe2\x80\x94 \nto pass two or three days at my house, and to preach to my con- \ngregation. I think, in my life, I never met with a more agreeable \nperson. How happy is America in ministers!" \n\nAt Glasgow hi- way was unexpectedly \'prepared by the kind- \nle-, of Governor Dinwiddie, of Virginia, who had written in his \nbehalf to his brother, provost of the town, and to his brother-in- \nlaw, Mr. McCulloch, minister of Cambuslang. The freedom of \nthe city was conferred on him and on President Burr, and all due \nh mour was given them. At Cambuslang, the people petitioned \n\nhim to print the sermon they had heard from him: many appli- \nto print a collection of them bad been made to him in \n\nAmerica, London, and Edinburgh. His sermon before Newcastle \n\ntery on |- ;i . \\\\\\\\. 1, _\', y,ith BOO t\' his poems, had been \n\nprinted in Philadelphia: they were 4 * very acceptable to sundry" \n\nin London, and he was pressed to let them pass an edition there. f \n\nHe thought Beriously "I\' finishing ami publishing some of them on \n\ninn home: "perhaps they may be of Bervice in place.. Ear \n\nfrom the Bphere of my usual labours." \n\nI. d Elavensworth, coming to Newcastle while Davies was \n\nthere, sent for him, and, after a long conversation, gave him \n\n\n\nt Mr. Briklae, afterwardi Dr. John Brehine, of Edinburgh, published the notei \n\n. muii on 1 Jului ii. J, vritli I \n\n\n\n556 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\nthree guineas ; James Bowes, Esq., member of Parliament for \nthe county of Durham, a man of vast estate, gave five guineas. \nBy his advice, he waited on the Bishop of Durham, who could do \nnothing, in a public character, for his design, but gave, as a pri- \nvate person, five guineas. Alderman Hankey, of London, gave \nfive pounds ; Samuel Ruggles, Esq., of Braintree, promised thirty \npounds, but gave fifty pounds. He visited the Rev. James Her- \nvey, and found all his expectations far exceeded in his society. \nHe also waited on John and Charles Wesley : " very benevolent, \ndevout, zealous men, and honoured with success." \n\nHe did not succeed in doing any thing for the relief of the Dis- \nsenters in Virginia, owing, among other causes, to the death of \nHenry Pelham, the Prime Minister, leaving the Government in \nconfusion. He obtained, however, the opinion of Sir Dudley \nRider, the attorney-general, in favour of the claim for license to \nthe meeting-houses. \n\nTradition* has represented that there was disagreement be- \ntween him and Tennent. How seldom truth is transmitted by \ntradition! "As we enjoyed the happiness abroad to pray to- \ngether in our room twice a day, we determined to observe the \nsame method in our lodgings, besides the stated devotions of the \nfamily." "How solitary shall I be till his return" \xe2\x80\x94 from Ireland \n\xe2\x80\x94 "a month hence!" "My father and friend arrived, and his \npresence and conversation was very reviving to me." \n\nDavies sailed direct # to Virginia, and, after being wind-bound at \nPlymouth five weeks, and a weary voyage of nearly eight weeks, \nhe landed at York, Feb. 13, 1755. \n\nThe second day after, he saw his family in health, and found \nthat "my favourite friend, Mr. Rodgers, who still dwells on my \nheart, had been universally acceptable, and hopefully successful, in \nHanover." Within the next six weeks, he wrote to a member of \nthe London Society for Promoting Religion among the Poor, giving \nan account of the distribution of the good books that had been \nintrusted to him. To poor white persons, he had carried " The \nCompassionate Address," " The Rise and Progress," and "Baxter\'s \nCall," with the best advice he could give; charging them to circu- \nlate the books and make them extensively useful. \n\nMany negroes came to his house, pleading for books; and "I \nnever did an action that met with so much gratitude as the distri- \nbution, to them, of books. Especially were they delighted with \nWatts\'s Psalms and Hymns ; for the negroes, above all the human \nspecies I ever knew, have an ear for music, and a kind of ecstatic \ndelight in psalmody. No books they learn so soon, or take so much \npleasure in, as those used in that heavenly part of divine worship." \n\n* Mentioned by Dr. Alexander, in the Log College. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAYIES. 557 \n\nA larger donation -was followed with happy effects, in inducing \nmore of the .-hives to learn to read, and in moving their masters \nto take new interest in their welfare. A friend* of Davies " pleased \nhimself with the prospect of making some of these new converts \nthe instruments of introducing Christianity into their own native \ncountry, by redeeming three or four of the best capacity and \nwarmest hearts, who dare face the dangers of such an attempt, and \neducating them at the new college at the Jerseys for missionaries. \nIf Buch can be procured, from eighteen to twenty years of age, \nwho retain their native language, the want of which has hitherto \nprevented all attempts of penetrating into these, to US, unknown \nregions, probably three years\' education would fit them fur the \npurp \n\nThe frontiers of Virginia were the scene of Indian ravages: the \n\ngovernor appointed the 5th of March, 1755, as a day of fasting; \n\nfor the drought of the preceding year had added the dread of \n\nfamine to the miseries of war. His energies were exerted to rouse \n\nintrymen to vigorous self-defence and patriotic fortitude. \n\n1 ..all of Jerusalem was built in troublous times; and. amid all \n\nthe harassing vexations of an intolerant State-church, congrega- \nin numbers, and were supplied with pastors. Three \nministers were Labouring near him, one beyond the Blue Ridge, and \nanother in North Carolina. Difficulties still existed in the way of \nprocuring license for additional meeting-houses. Davies thought \nof taking out Licenses in tin- Bishop of London\'s courts. The \n. in London, for the Promotion of the Secular [nteresta of the \niters, advised him that application should be made to the \nCounty Court, to the Governor and Council, and then to the \n\' tor alone, for Licenses when needed; and, being refused, to \n\ni place as if it hail been Licensed, and let the persoo prose- \n\nfor so doing appeal to the King in Council. "The corn- \nwill take carfl to prosecute the appeal." No occasion to \n\nappeal ever occurred. \n\nIn May, L754, there were considerable appearances of success in \n\xe2\x80\xa2 and Caroline, where he thought he had Laboured in vain. \n^respondent in Richmond county writes, in 1755, "When [ \ngo among .Mr. Davies\'a people, religion seem- to flourish; it Beems \nlike tie- suburbs of b< aven : it i.- very agreeable to see the gentlemen \nat their morning and evening prayers, with their slave- devoutly \njoining with them." \n\nh. was -\'Mi frequently to distanl vacancies, greatly to the regret \nof his people: in two months of 17>7, he travelled live hundred miles \nand preached forty serm ins. He wae not buoyed up by -anguine \nexpectations of buccoss, but burdened with a Bense of unfil \n\n* <;, tendon, of London, i \n\n\n\n558 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\nIn 1756, Todd assisted him at the sacrament : it was a refreshing \nseason to hungry souls. There were forty-four coloured communi- \ncants. "My principal encouragement is among the slaves. A con- \nsiderable number, in the land of their slavery, have been brought \ninto the glorious liberty of the sons of God." At the close* of \nthe year, there were remarkable revivings among the negroes of "his \ncongregation. " God did more by me than I ever expected." \n\nIn one of his long tours for preaching, his young companion, \nJohn Morton, rode ahead, to secure him a night\'s lodging at the \nhouse of his relative, Joseph Morton. The New-Light preacher \nwas welcomed, " and with him Christ and salvation came to that \nhouse." The heads of the family became eminently pious: their \nconversion was the foundation of Briery congregation. \n\nBenighted while going to visit "a little knot of Presbyterians" \nin Lunenburg, necessity brought him to the house of a Swiss family, \nnamed De Graffenried, on the borders of North Carolina; while \naddressing the servants, he reached the hearts of the master and \nmistress. \n\nAdverting to his experience in preaching, he observes, " Once \nin three or four weeks I preach as I could wish; as in the sight of \nGod, and as if I were to step from the pulpit to the supreme tribu- \nnal. I feel my subject: I melt into tears, or shudder with horror, \nwhen I denounce the terrors of the Lord ; I glow, I soar in ecsta- \nsies, when the love of Jesus is my theme." \n\nAged persons who sat under his ministry have said that his \npowers of persuasion seemed sufficient for the accomplishment of \nany good purpose. He introduced standard works into every \nfamily ; he infused into his hearers a delight in religious knowledge ; \nhis catechizings drew together old and young, to be examined, and \nto ponder the truths of God. "The effect of this discipline remains \nto this day." \n\nDavies was elected President of the College of New Jersey, \nAug. 16, 1758. The Rev. Caleb Smith went at once to urge his \nacceptance. Davies referred the matter to the presbytery, giving \na large written statement of his views and feelings. His people \naddressed the presbytery, f "not able to feel support under the \nmighty torrent of overwhelming grief" in the prospect of losing \ntheir pastor. "It was a peculiar, kind Providence that first gave \nhim to us. He has relieved us from numberless distresses, as our \nspiritual father and guide to eternity. The crumbling materials \nwhich compose this congregation will fall to ruins, and we shall \nnever be gathered together, we fear, and united in another minis- \nter. We are persuaded he is animated by noble motives, and that \nnothing but a conviction of duty will remove him from us. We \n\n* Wright, in Gillies. f Dr. Foote\'s Sketches of Virginia. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAVIES. 559 \n\nbeseech you to consult, and fall upon some other expedient for the \nrelief of the college, that will not rob us of the greatest blessing \nwe enjoy under God, and leave us a people forever undone." The \npresbytery wished JJavies to decide for himself: their judgment \nwould\' have coincided with his. Their diffidence of their ability to \nmanage affairs in a colony of so much difficulty greatly influenced \ntheir decision, and they advised him to remain. He acquiesced in \ntheir judgment, as the voice of God; but the day following, his \nanxieties revived: the question of duty was opened anew; he feared \nIn- might have dune the college an injury, and the more so on learn- \ning that the presbytery were not fully satisfied with their decision, \nllr therefore authorized Cowell, of Trenton, to say that in case \nthe trustees could not elect Samuel Finley with any tolerable\' \ndegree of cordiality and unanimity, and should think proper to \nrenew their election of him, he would accept. He highly recom- \nmended Finley, as incomparably better qualified than himself. \n"Like an inflamed meteor, I might casta glaring light and attract \ntin- gaze of mankind for a time, but the flash would soon be over." \nsent the Rev. Jeremy Ilalsey to persuade him to \nai-t ae nee-president during the winter, till the synod should sit : \nhe declined, and they re-elected him, May !\xc2\xbb, 1750. The Synod of \nNew fork and Philadelphia heard a supplication from his people, \nearnestly requesting his continuance with them, and seriously con- \nlidered it, and all the reasonings on both sides; then, engaging in \nsolemn prayer, they dissolved his pastoral relation. \n\nHe bade his people farewell, July 1, preaching iYoin 2 Cor. xiii. \n11: "When, after many an anxious Conflict, I accepted your call, \nI fully expected 1 was settled among you for life : whatever advan- \ni- offers hare been made to me, on either side Of the Atlantic, \nhave not had the force of temptations. It was in my heart to live \nand die with you. Such of you as know how little I shall carry \nfrom Virginia, after eleven years\' labour in it, must be convinced in \nyour own conscience, and can assure others, that worldly interest \nwas not the reason of my attachment." \n\nII- entered on his duties a1 Princeton, duly 26, and was inaugu- \n\nSept. 26. To bis ii\'-u charge he applied himself assiduously. \n\nThe work was familiar to him* He had trained for the ministry \n.John Martyn, Henry Patillo, and William Richardson, and pre* \npared for college Wright, of Cumberland, Hunt, of Bladensburgj \nand Oaldwell, of Blisabethtown. While in England, he met his \n\nformer DUpil, Thomas Smith. In governing and instructing, he \n\nilfttl and BUCCeS8tul; but his term Of service \\\\:ts short. lie \n\ngave himself Up tO Study, rising with the dawn, and continuing at \n\nhis toil till midnight. lie left oil\' his habit of riding, which his \n\nplethoric babit rendered bo accessary. \n\nAt the Close of IT\' - \'", a friend, mentioning the expectation of a \n\n\n\n560 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\nsermon from him on New-Year\'s day, told him that Burr had \nopened the last year of his life with a sermon on Jer. xxviii. 16 : \xe2\x80\x94 \xe2\x80\xa2 \n" This year thou shalt die." This may have turned his attention \nto it, for he preached from that text on New-Year\'s day. Being \nsick with a bad cold at the close of January, he was bled ; the \nsame day he transcribed a sermon for the press, and the next day \npreached twice in the college hall. The arm inflamed, the cold in- \ncreased: at breakfast, on Monday, he was seized with chills. In- \nflammatory fever set in, and he died in ten days, having recently \nentered his thirty-eighth year. Delirious through most of his \nsickness, he clearly manifested what were the favourite objects of \nhis concern. His bewildered mind was continually imagining, and \nhis faltering tongue uttering, some expedient for the prosperity \nof Christ\'s church and the good of mankind. To this fatal \nattack may be applied his account of his sickness in 1757: \xe2\x80\x94 \n"Blessed be my Master\'s name, this disorder found me employed \nin his service. It seized me in the pulpit, like a soldier wounded in \nthe field. My fever made unusual ravages upon my understand- \ning, rendering me frequently delirious and always stupid. When \nI had any little sense of things, I generally felt pretty calm and \nserene; death was disarmed. The thought of leaving my dear \nfamily destitute and my flock shepherdless made me often start \nback and cling to life. Formerly I have wished to live longer, that \nI might be better prepared for heaven ; but when I consider that \nI set out when about twelve years old, and what sanguine hopes I \nhad then of my future progress, and yet have been almost at a \nstand ever since, I am quite discouraged. It breaks my heart ; but \nI can hardly hope better. I very much suspect this desponding \nview of the matter is wrong, and relate it only as an unusual reason \nfor my willingness to die, which I n^ver felt before, and which I \ncould not express." \n\n" In my sickness I found the unspeakable importance of a Medi- \nator in a religion for sinners. Oh, I could have given you the word \nof a dying man for it, that Jesus is indeed a necessary and an all- \nsufficient Saviour. Indeed, he is the only support for a departing \nsoul. \n\n"None but Christ! none but Christ! Had I as many good \nworks as Abraham or Paul, I would not have dared build my \nhopes on such a quicksand, but only on this firm eternal rock. I \nam rising up with a desire to recommend him better to my fellow- \nsinners. He has done a great deal more by me already than I ever \nexpected, and infinitely more than I deserved. Oh, if I might but \nuntie the latchet of his shoes or draw water for the service of his \nsanctuary, it is enough for me." \n\nHe died, February 4, 1761. His father spent his closing years \nwith him, and died in Hanover, August 11, 1759, aged seventy-nine. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL DAYIES. 561 \n\nHis mother, as she gazed on him in his coffin, said, "There is the \nson of my prayers and my hopes, \xe2\x80\x94 my only son, my only earthly \nsupporter; but there is the will of God, and I am satisfied." \nDr. llodgers received her to his house, and there she finished her \npious course. Her son looked upon the most important blessings \nof his life as immediate answers to her prayers. \n\nSamuel Finley preached his funeral sermon. Bostwick, of New \nYork, delivered a eulogy on him in the college hall. "His man- \nner, as to pronunciation, gesture, and delivery, seemed a most per- \nfect model of the most moving and striking oratory. The God of \nnature and grace had furnished him with every valuable endow- \nment. August and venerable, benevolent and mild, he spoke with \ncommanding authority and melting tenderness. He seemed to \ncontrol not the attention only, but all the powers, of his audience. \n"With what majesty and grace, with what engaging and striking \nsublimity, what powerful and almost irresistible eloquence, would \nhe illustrate the truths and inculcate the duties of Christianity! \nSinai seemed to thunder from his lips when he denounced the tre- \nBjMBdow curses of the law, and sounded the dread alarm to guilty, \nsecure, and impenitent sinners. The solemn scenes of the last \nJudgment seemed to rise in view when he arraigned, tried, and \nconvicted self-deceivers and formal hypocrites. How did the balm \nof Gilead distil from his lips when he exhibited a bleeding, dying \nBaviour to sinful mortals as a sovereign remedy for the wounded \nheart and anguished conscience ! lie spoke as on the border! \nof eternity, and as viewing the glories and terrors of an unseen \nworld, and conveyed the most grand and affecting ideas of those \nImportant realities." \n\nB istwick* commends his engaging manner of address, his \nSprightly, entertaining conversation. Jonathan Edwards said, in \n1752, \'\'1 lately had the comfort of a short interview with Mr. \nDai 1, and was much pleased with him and his conversation: a \n\nman of rery solid anderatanding, discreel in his behaviour, polished \nand gentlemanly in his manners, as well as fervent and zealous in \nreligion." .John AngeU .lames says "that his sense of the power \nof an awakening style of preaching was strengthened by the p*> \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 ![\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 wrote I Bellamy, March IT. 1781, "The Iocs oaxmol be expressed. I \n\ni oBege happier in \xe2\x96\xa0 president <>r In \xe2\x96\xa0 more nourishing \n\ntatioas of his best friends, fon, who did not knon \n\nieWe wha( prodigious an nmon gifts the God of heaven had \n\n1 a to make him osefnl to the world. Batheisgone. Oh, what \n\nI been! \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 < thousand eoj mon on the death <>r Qeorge I \\. hare been printed \n\ni iiti\'.n Is In the press. Thej ii ire absoribed, i" Philadelphia, \nninety firs pounds for three yean to edu n,l New Fork and Philadel- \n\n1 I (bar ei See ban \xe2\x96\xa0 dew end bis i \n\n:t very little- esUte. \n\n86 \n\n\n\n562 SAMUEL DAVIES. \n\nrusal of the rousing sermons of Davies: admirable specimens, \nformed on the model of Baxter, of personal, hortatory, and impres- \nsive preaching. It is such preaching we want. In these striking \ndiscourses may he seen what I mean by earnest preaching." Some \nwho had heard him told Dr. John H. Rice that his preaching com- \nbined a solemnity, pathos, and animation, truly wonderful, "as \nseeing Him that is invisible," with a most tender, fervent benevo- \nlence to souls. He seldom preached without producing some visi- \nble emotion in great numbers present, and seldom without leaving \nsaving impressions on one or more. His manner, even as he \nwalked, was that of the ambassador of a great king. Saving con- \nversion followed from the impression made by his repeating in his \ntext the words, "Martha, Martha!" Many in Virginia who joined \nthe Baptists ascribed their convictions to their hearing Davies \npreach as he journeyed. \n\n"There is nothing," said Davies, "that can wound a parent\'s \nheart so deeply as the thought that he should bring up his children \nto dishonour his God here and be miserable hereafter. I am en- \ndeavouring to cultivate the minds of my children as they open, \nunwilling to trust them to a stranger. I find the business of educa- \ntion much more difficult than I expected. My dear little creatures \nsob and drop a tear now and then under my instructions ; but I am \nnot so happy as to see them under deep and lasting impressions of \nreligion." Only his daughter, who in countenance was his express \nimage, ever made a profession of faith. She never married. Wil- \nliam, his eldest son, a man of extraordinary abilities, became a \ncolonel in the Revolutionary War, and was occupied afterwards in \nadjusting the complicated accounts of the States with the General \nGovernment. Samuel was engaged in some mercantile business, \nand removed, with his family, to Tennessee. John Rodgers was a \nlawyer, a man of talents, and succeeded well in his profession. \n\nBesides the collection of his sermons so generally known, he \npublished a sermon on Isaiah lxii. 1, 2, and one addressed to the \nyoung, a copy of which is in the Connecticut Historical Library; \nand a volume of Miscellanies, containing his poems ; no copy of it \nis to be found, to our knowledge, in any public library. The title* \nof "Geneva Doctor" having been given him, in a satire by Arte- \nmas on the evangelical doctrines he preached, and the tears, the \ntremblings, and faintings that followed, he published "A Pill for \nArtemas," and in it evinced the power of his sarcasm. \n\nHe had an extensive correspondence in Great Britain. When \nBeatty visited Scotland on behalf of the Widows\' Fund, he sent \nby him to Mr. McCulloch, of Cambuslang, a treatise on the atone- \nment. McCulloch dying soon after, this massy volume of fair \n\n* Dr. Alexander, in the Biblical Repertory. \n\n\n\nJOHN BRAIXERD. 563 \n\nmanuscript lav unknown, until given by his granddaughter, Mrs. \nCoutts, of Brechin, to Dr. Burns, of Toronto, Canada West. It is \nspoken of by Dr. Burns as " valuable for its theology and its learn- \ning, greatly raising our impressions of his talents as a logician, and \nhis attainments in the literature of theology." \n\nDr. Rice well said, \'\'There arc few sermons extant superior to \nthose of Davies. Their chief and prominent excellence is doubtless \nthis: \xe2\x80\x94 they abound in clear, forcible, and affecting delineations of \nthe distinguishing doctrines of the gospel. The utter depravity of \nman, the sovereignly-free grace of Jehovah, the divinity of Christ, \nthe atonement in his blood, regeneration, and sanctification by the \nHoly Spirit, \xe2\x80\x94 these were his favourite themes: on these he never \nceased to expatiate, as the essence of the Christian scheme, the \ngrand Bnpport of vital and practical religion. \n\n"So luminous and striking are his delineations of true religion, \nand -ii accurately do they distinguish the genuine from its oppo- \nsites and counterfeits, that it seems scarcely possible for any one \nto peruse them attentively and yet remain ignorant of his real \n\nState. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 While intelligible to the meanest capacities, they are calculated \nto gratify persons of the greatest knowledge and refinement." \n\nAround Davie- grew up a valuable body of elders. Four of them \nlong survived him, \xe2\x80\x94 viz.: Mr. James Hunt, Mr. Samuel Morris, \nDr. Shore, and Captain William Craighead, all men of great \nworth. \n\nWe may say of Davies what he said of Ilervey: \xe2\x80\x94 "Blessed be \nGod that there was such a man on this guilty globe!" \n\n\n\nJOHN BRAINERD \n\nWas a native of Bast Haddam, Connecticut, and was the bro- \nth\'T of David Brainer<L Whiles student al college, hu brother \ned \xc2\xab>n him in letters the great matter of religion, fearing that \nIn- had not a proper sense of the ruinous consequences of the false \nreligion thai bad marred the blessed Revival.* lie graduated at \nYale, in L746; and, his brother\'! health failing, the Correspond" \n\n\n\nr how iini.-h of it there iru in tin- w.irM. "Many Batons Christiana and \nvaluable ministers ur.- boo easily impoood npon by tlii- false blase. Lot dm tall yon, \n\nb devil himself transformed into an angel of light. It alwaj \nwith every revival "f religion, and stabs and mnrders the oanse "t Goo, srhile it \npasses curreut with Titfl-imraning mnltitndes fur the height >\xe2\x80\xa2( religion. 1 \n\n\n\n564 JOHN BRAINERD. \n\nents sent for him to take his place. He came to Elizabethtown, \nApril 10, 1747 ; and, having been examined by New York Presby- \ntery on the 13th, he went the next day to the Indians at Cran- \nberry. He came to Northampton, in September, to see his dying \nbrother ; and, being peculiarly dear to him, he refreshed him much \nby his unexpected visit, and by comfortable tidings of the state of \nhis flock. Called to New Jersey on important business, he hastened \nback, and was witness of his brother\'s peaceful end. \n\nThe Scottish Society sustained him: he was ordained, by New \nYork Presbytery, early in 1748. In the outset he was cheered by \nthe access of Indians from distant parts, by the awakening of the \nunconverted, hopeful additions to his church, and the Christian be- \nhaviour of those converted under his brother\'s labours. Elihu Spen- \ncer and Job Strong, having been selected by the Society in Boston \nas missionaries to the Six Nations, spent the winter with him to \nprepare for their work. Strong wrote to his parents, at North- \nampton, January 14, 1748, " Though my expectations were much \nraised by the journals of David Brainerd, and by particular in- \nformation from him, they are not equal to what now appears to be \ntrue concerning the glorious work of grace. There was devout \nattendance and surprising solemnity in public worship : in the \ncatechetical lectures, their answers exceeded my expectations very \nmuch." \n\nGovernor Belcher bade him be sure of him as a father and a \nfriend to the missionaries this way, " and of all my might and \nencouragement in spreading the gospel of our God and Saviour \nwherever God shall honour me with any power or influence." \n\nMost of those converted under the influence of his brother \nadorned their profession. He travelled to the Forks of Delaware \nand to Wyoming several times, to induce the Indians to leave their \nunsettled life and dwell near him. Numbers came, from time to \ntime ; but he succeeded in doing little more than civilizing them. \nThere was something of a work of awakening all along carried on \namong his flock; some of the new-comers were awakened and \nhopefully converted, and, in general, the behaviour of the praying \nIndians was good and pious. Early in 1751, he had, through \nmercy, some special success: nine or ten appeared to be under \nconvictions, and about twelve of the whites near them, that used \nto be stupid as the heathen. Many others were thoughtful and \nserious. Two years of great mortality reduced their numbers ; but \nin October, 1752,* he had forty families near him, and thirty-seven \ncommunicants. There were fifty children in the school. "We \nhave a very considerable number of serious, regular Christians, \n\n\n\n* Genuine letter to a friend in England, giving an account of his mission, by \nKev. John Brainerd: 8vo, Lond. 1753. \xe2\x80\x94 New York Historical Society\'s Library. \n\n\n\nJOHN BRAINERD. 565 \n\nwho are an ornament to religion: but some have backslidden. In \nseven years at least forty have been savingly converted here, \xe2\x96\xa0where \nthere are not two hundred souls, old and young." In 1753, he \nbaptized one adult, a hopeful convert, but lost, by quick consump- \ntion, a young Indian, who had been a member of the College of \nNew Jersey tor nearly two years, preparing for the ministry. \n\nAs early as 1748 or \'49, Bome gentlemen, particularly Robert \nHunter Morris, Chief-Justice of New Jersey, a professed deist, sued \nthe Indians for their lands at Cranberry, under pretext of a will \nfrom the Indian king, which was undoubtedly forged; but "he is \na man of Buch craft and influence, that it is not known how it will \nissue." Braiaerd Bought to engage them in husbandry and in \nmechanical trades: to this they were adverse. Indolence and \ndrunkenness were their almost universal propensity, \xe2\x80\x94 Buell said, \n"their constitutional sin." \n\nIn 1751\', Brainerd, with only one attendant, spent a fortnight \non the Susquehanna t their horses were stolen, the guide was too \nlame to go on loot, ami they remained three days where there was \nno house. Saving no means but a salary of fifty pounds, he could \nnot take with him a number of disciples, who, by discourse and \nexample, might aid his endeavours among the savages. \n\nIn 175i\\ the General Court of Connecticut, on the petition of \nthe Correspondents, granted a brief for a general collection to aid \nhim in his school. Davies lodged with Brainerd, October 1, 1 7 ~> - \'. , \nand was pleased with his accounts of religion among tin- Indians. \nThe next day he took a view of the Indian town, and Was pleased \nat the affection of the poor savages for their minister and his con- \ndescension to them. \n\nBarly in 1753, he met with much trouble from the enemies of \nreligion, and his people were much distressed in relation to their \nlands. The Correspondents proposed that he Bhould remove with \n\nthem somewhere to the country of the Six Nations. The place \n\nproposed was Onoquaga, near the head of the Susquehanna, where \nSpencer had formerly laboured. Edwards thought the Oneidas, \nwho resided there, were the best-disposed of all the tribe.-, and \n\nWould do the utmost to encourage missionaries among them. \n\nBrainerd wrote to the i;. v . Gideon Eawley, who was ordained \na missionary in 175 1. \'1 rted \n\nsi \'. April 19, 1768. \n"Yours of the 2d instant I received last evening, which, with \nsome other letters from London and other parts of England that \neame to hand at the Bame time, was eery refreshing and comfort- \nable. Nothing in all the world ever cheers my spirit- like the ob- \ntion or news of something that give- ;i prospect of spreading \n\nthe ffOSpel among the poor Indian-. Tiii-. in the main, my heart \n: and when 1 have bee\' in this \n\n\n\n566 JOHN BRAINERD. \n\ndesirable business, or any thing I could think had a tendency to \npromote it, then only did I breathe niy own proper air and enjoy \nmyself. But, alas, I have been miserably fettered and pinioned \nsince I have been employed in this excellent undertaking ; the situa- \ntion of the Indians I have had the peculiar charge of, being at \nleast one hundred and fifty miles from any considerable number of \nIndians elsewhere, and my annual income far short of what was \nnecessary to carry on such a design. \n\n" I have never been satisfied with this place from my first en- \ngaging in the business, and have been, from time to time, engaged \nin endeavours to procure one better suited to the important \ndesign of spreading the gospel among the Indians ; but, as yet, \nProvidence has not opened a door for our remove. Of late, how- \never, there seems to be a great prospect of it. Some of our \nprincipal Indians have lately disposed of a great part of their \nland, on which they live, notwithstanding all we could do to the \ncontrary, and it is finally gone from them; bo that now they \nhave not enough to subsist upon long. \n\n" Just at this juncture there came a messenger from the Six \nNations, and two or three nations more, with wampum, &c, in- \nviting our Indians to go and live on Whawomung, on Susque- \nhanna, a place I have visited several times. The Six Nations \noffer to give lands to them and their children forever, and that \nthey shall be abridged of none of their privileges. Our Indians, \nafter two days\' consideration, thought best to accept the offer their \nuncle was pleased to make, and concluded to remove there about \nthis time twelvemonth. I was present at their consultations on \nthis head, and laid every thing before them in the best manner I \ncould, and then left them to determine for themselves. But, not- \nwithstanding all this, I don\'t see why the scheme of going to Ona- \nquaga might not be prosecuted ; for, if all things suit there, I am \ninclined to think our Indians would be as well pleased to move to \nthat place as Whawomung, if they had the same invitation to the \nformer as the latter. And, though they should be actually re- \nmoved as above, yet if we could be admitted to live among the \nOneidas, the report of our being there would soon cause them to \nsupplicate their uncle for liberty to come there too. \n\n"For my part, I am heartily willing to make trial, and earnestly \ndesirous, if the Lord in his providence should open a door, to \nspend my life in this service. But my taking a journey with you, \nthis ensuing summer, must depend very much on the determination \nof the Correspondents. As things appear to me at present, I am \ninclined to think we had better defer the journey till next spring; \nbut time and consultation on that head may better discover what \nis duty in that regard. Let us, in the mean time, be waiting \nupon God, and have our eyes to Him who only can make our en- \n\n\n\nJOHN BRAINERD. 567 \n\ndeavours effectual. I was never more desirous of prosecuting the \nIndian affairs than now ; and. though many things look discouraging, \nyet I cannot but hope that God will yet do glorious things among \nthe poor Indians. Let us be instant in prayer to God for so great \na blessing " \n\nThe Correspondents -wavered between "Wyoming and Onoquaga: \nthe prospect of a troublesome war made a mission in those distant \nregions disagreeable and dangerous; and, in the fall of 1755, the \nCorrespondents wholly dismissed him from the mission, that he \nmight preach as a probationer for settlement at Newark. \n\nThe Indians at Cranberry were kindly cared for by Tennent, \nof Freehold, who often visited them, and gave the synod, in 1775, \nan agreeable account of their being in better circumstances than \ntver about their lands, and in a religious point of view. White- \nfield preached to them, through an interpreter, and was charmed \nwith Tennent\'s assiduity for them. \n\nEdwards was not satisfied with the action of the Correspondents \nin releasing Brainerd from his post, but found it impracticable, by \nreason of Un. Brainerd\'s feeble health, to reinstate him or send \nhim to a oew mission. \n\nHe Bottled comfortably in the work of the ministry at Newark, \nand. in Jnne, L757,was favoured with something of encouragement. \n\nIn 1763, they aided in building a school-house, and allowed the \nteacher thirty pounds; and a yearly collection was ordered to \nmaintain the schooL It was reported to be in successful opera- \ntion in 177:.\', and he continued his supervision of it through his life. \n\nBis home was at Mount Holly. He had a meeting-house there, \nwhich was burned by the British in the Revolutionary War. Seven \nOther places were regularly and frequently visited by him. The \n\nsynod, in 1767, granted him twenty pounds, besides his salary, for \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 his extraordinary services in forming societies, and labouring \n\n_\xe2\x80\xa2 the white people, in that huge and uncultivated country." \nThe grant was renewed the next year for bis extensive Bervioea \nand Labour in those uncultivated parts. From 1 T < \xc2\xbb * > to 1770 he \nreceived from the congregations between Kg;: Barbour and Mana- \nhawken fifty-nine pounds nineteen shillings, though he had preached \nto them five hundred times. lb- continued to supply these \nnumerous vacancies, and the annual allowance of twenty pounds \nwas promised by the synod Cot thai Bervioe. In 177-\'\xc2\xbb, it was \nincreased to twenty-five pounds. The next year he gave an ac- \ncount of his labours and prospects of Buocees, and the interest of \nthe Indian Fund was reserved for him. \n\nIn 1777, lie removed to 1 \xc2\xbbe. -rib Id, and preached there till his \ndeath, March 21, L781. \n\nThe places where Brainerd bestowed bis labours on the i \n\n\n\n608 JOHN BRAINERD. \n\nhave long been abandoned: some of them Have been searched \nout, and once more favoured with Presbyterian ministrations. \nIn 1767, there was a new Presbyterian meeting-house at Barne- \ngat, and probably as early, was one at Manahawken. At the \nForks of Little Egg Harbour, or Mullica River, was Clark\'s \nmeeting-house, of cedar logs, and lined throughout with cedar. \nElijah Clark, a man of fortune and piety, was a ruling elder. \nThe land at Cedar Bridge, on which Blackman\'s meeting-house \nstood, was conveyed by Andrew Blackman to the Presbyterians in \n1774. The place of worship at Great Egg Harbour, or Champion\'s, \nwas probably near Tuckahoe. Brainerd preached near Bridge- \nport, on Wading River, under a spreading oak, which still casts its \nshade on land bequeathed by John Leak, for the use of the Pres- \nbyterians. The burial-ground is there, but the church has passed \naway. Steelman\'s was a mile north of Absecom; and Clark\'s Mill \nMeeting-house, where was a regularly-constituted congregation, \nwas in the northeastern part of Atlantic county, nearly one mile \nfrom Unionville. \n\nAs the agent of New Jersey College, he went, in January, 1758, \nwith Caleb Smith, to solicit the concurrence of the Council, con- \nvened at Stockbridge, in the removal of Edwards to the presi- \ndency of that institution. The Council, at the request of the \nEnglish and Indian congregations at Stockbridge, wrote to the \ncommissioners at Boston to appoint Brainerd to succeed Edwards : \nthey also wrote to the trustees of the college to use their influence \nfor this purpose. The Housatonic tribe offered a part of their \nlands to the Indians at Cranberry, to induce them to remove to \nStockbridge. \n\nAbout this time, the province of New Jersey purchased all the \nIndian title in their limits, and then bought for the Indians a tract \nof four thousand acres at Edge Pillock, in Evesham township, \nBurlington county. The governor requested Brainerd to resume \nhis mission. He was present at synod in May, 1759, with his \nelder, Joseph Lyon, and applied for advice whether it was his \nduty to comply with the proposal. Arguments on both sides were \nfully heard ; and, though tenderly affected with the case of New- \nark congregation, yet, in consideration of the great importance \nof the Indian mission, they unanimously advised him to resume it. \nWith this advice he readily and generously complied, giving up a \nvery comfortable settlement for hardships and an uncertain and \nscanty support. The annuity from Scotland was not renewed. \nThe synod gave him the interest of the Indian Fund, and, in \n17(31, allowed him one hundred and fifty pounds out of the general \ncollection : " It is agreed that, to the utmost of our power, we \nwill support Mr. Brainerd." He had under his care two Indian \ncongregations, embracing one hundred and twenty families. \n\n\n\nJOB PRUDDEX. 569 \n\n\n\nJOB PRUDDEN \n\n"Was the great-grandson of the Rev. Peter Prudden, whose \nministry \xe2\x80\x94 in Hertfordshire, on the borders of Wales \xe2\x80\x94 was at- \ntended with uncommon success. Many good people followed him, \nwhen he Sailed witli the first settlers for New Haven, that they \nmight enjoy his pious and fervent ministrations. He was of the \nstrictest order of Independents; and when the town of Milford, \nConnecticut, was settled, the church was "gathered to him" and \nthe six principal planters, as the seven pillars which "Wisdom \nhewed out, when shebuilded her house." (Prov. ix. 1.) "All those \nwho had desired to be received as free planters had settled in the \nplantation, with a purpose, resolution, and desire that they might \nbe admitted into church fellowship according to Christ." "Church \nmembers only should be free burgesses." \n\nWhen Mr. Prudden was installed, April 18, 1640, three of the \npillars, by the appointment of the church, laid on hands, even as \nthe prophets and teachers at Antioch laid hands on Barnabas and \nSaul, "separating them to the work whereunto the Holy Ghost \nBalled them." (Acts xiii. 2.) He died in 1656, aged fifty-six. \nMather, in his "Magnalia," describes him as "a zealous preacher, \na man of excellent Spirits, signally successful in reconciling ami \npreserving peace." He left a large landed estate at Bdgton, \nYorkshire, (England,) still possessed by his descendants. His \nsecond son, John, graduated at Harvard in 1668, and was the \nminister of Jamaica, Long Island, and of Newark, New Jersey, \nwhere he died, at an advanced age, in 17Jo. \n\nIn 1787, difficulties arose in the congregation in relation to the \nsettlement of Mr. Whittlesey as pastor, \xe2\x80\x94 a respectable minority \nling his doctrine as Armiman and his preaching as on- \nedifying. They urged their objections bo strongly, and with \nsnob apparent concern and conscientiousness, that the majority \nof the Council declined to ordain. The majority of the people, \nheaded by Deputy-Governor Law, insisted on their rights; and \nit was finally agreed to ordain him, and that the minority Bhould \nhear him for Bis months, and, if not satisfied, should settle a \n\nColleague according to their liking. They heard him two year-, \n\nbut weir more dissatisfied, and, m 1740, applied to the church, \n\nand then to the town, for relief according to the agreement. Kut, \n\nfinding them intractable, they asked advice of the Association^ \n\nbut they obtained neither advice nor eouiitenanee. They then \xe2\x80\x94 \n\naccording to the statute for the relief of conscientious Bcruplers\xe2\x80\x94 \xc2\xbb \ndeclared "their Sober Dissent from the Standing order eeta* \n\n\n\n570 JOB PRTJDDEN. \n\nblished in the colony, professing themselves to be Presbyterians \naccording to the church of Scotland; and agreed, November 30, \n1741, to set up a separate society, if thirty heads of families \nwould unite for that purpose. On the following Sabbath, they \nmet for worship at the house of George Clark, Jr.; and, on the \nlast Tuesday in January, they qualified themselves before the \ncounty court, according to the Toleration Act. In this act thirty- \nnine persons took part. The Rev. Benajah Case, of Simsbury, was \nfined and imprisoned for having preached for them on the 17 th of \nthe month. Whittlesey refused his pulpit, on Sabbaths when he \ndid not use it, to the ministers who came to preach for them. \nOne of them preached from the door-stone to an assembly of a \nthousand. \n\nWhitefield had preached at Milford,* Connecticut, with unusual \nsuccess, in October, 1740, and Gilbert Tennent was there in the \nnext spring. \n\nThe people made preparations to build a meeting-house in May, \n1742 ; but the town refused to allow them to erect on the Com- \nmon. The county court granted them liberty to build, November \n9 ; and, in that month, they raised it on land given by Bartholo- \nmew Sears. The Rev. John Eels, of Canaan, preached the first \nsermon in it, and the constable was ordered to apprehend him; \na like order was issued against the Rev. Elisha Kent, of New- \ntown ; but they both escaped his search. \n\nMr. Jacob Johnson,f a native of Groton, Connecticut, who \ngraduated at Yale in 1740, preached to them, having taken the \nnecessary oaths. Having made him a call, they applied to some \nmembers of New Brunswick Presbytery to receive them under their \ncare, and take Mr. Johnson on trials with a view to ordination. \nThey constituted themselves a church, and elected ruling elders. \n"Accordingly, said members did send to him pieces of trial : a \nsermon on Rom. viii. 14, and a Latin exegesis, \xe2\x80\x94 \'An regimen \necclesise presbyteriale sit Scripturae et rationi congruum?\' " The \npresbytery met, April 6, 1743, to hear the exercises, and John- \nson, with the commissioners, Benjamin Fenn and George Clerk, \nwere present; and, having taken the congregation under their \ncare and proceeded some length in the examination, they paused, \nand advised that a further attempt be made towards a recon- \nciliation with the First Church. If this attempt should fail, then \n\n* History of Milford. \n\nf Johnson graduated at Tale in 1740, and settled at Groton, Connecticut. He \nwas employed as a missionary among the Indians at Canojoharie ; and, for his \nzeal in ferreting out the evidence of the Connecticut title to the Susquehanna pur- \nchase, he was styled by Conrad Weiser, the Pennsylvania agent, " that wicked \npriest." He was called to Westmoreland, now Wilkesbarre, and was the minister \nthere for a number of years. Was this " New England over the mountains," to \nwhich Abingdon Presbytery sent supplies ? \n\n\n\nJOB PRUDDEN. 571 \n\nthey shall be allowed to have supplies ; and they sent Treat, of \nAbingdon, thither, to obtain further information for them. He \nspent two Sabbaths in June with them, and was called July 20; \nbut the presbytery, out of regard to the remonstrances of his \npeople, refused to put the call in his hands. They then requested \nthe presbytery to send them Samuel Finley. He preached two \nSabbaths, August ~2~> and September 1. For this offence he \nwas prosecuted, tried, and condemned. Governor Law ordered \nhim to l>e transported as a vagrant \xe2\x80\x94 disturbing the peace of the \ncommunity \xe2\x80\x94 by the constable, from town to town, out of the \ncolony. This treatment was considered, by some of the ablest \ncivilians in Connecticut and the city of New York, to be so con- \ntrary to the spirit and letter of the British Constitution, that, had \ncomplaint been made to the king in council, it would have vacated \nthe colonial charter. \n\nPomeroy, of Hebron, preached to them occasionally, and was \nwrested, and carried to Hartford, to answer to the General As- \nsembly for his conduct. \n\nIn May, 1744, New Brunswick Presbytery laid before the con- \njunct presbytery an important affair from the Presbyterian \nBoeiety of Milford. It was probably an application for supplies; \nf.\xc2\xbbr th<- presbytery, in July, sent Saokett, of Bedford, Youngs, of \nBouthold, and Lamb, of Baskingridge, thither, and advised the \npeople to try to get Mr. Graham\'s son for their minister. \n\nJob Prudden was a native of Milford. He graduated at Yale \nin 174\'!, and was licensed by New York Presbytery. He was re- \nceived under the care of New Brunswick Presbytery, October 10, \n174\xc2\xbb>, and was called to Milford, May 19,1747: two commissioners \nattended, and he was ordained and installed at that time. Up to \nMay, L750, they were taxed for the support of Whittlesey. \n\nThey were then released by the General Assembly; but not until \nt\'-n yean after, did the Assembly invest them with the full privi- \n;\' an eoolesiastica] society. \n\nWhen Norwalk* called William Tennent, Jr., in 17<>">, to bo \ncolleague with Moses Dickinson, he expressed to the presbytery \nhi- desire t" remain in connection with them. They accordingly \nappointed his father. Bait, Prudden, and Kirkpatnck, to install \nhim. The town, under a misapprehension\'^ of the design of the \ntery, resolved to withdraw the call unless Tennent united \nwith the Association and conformed to the Standing Order. In \nI e <>f things Tennent succumbed. \n\nPrudden| was a laborious, prudent, and faithful pastor, sound \n\nin doctrine, and experimental in his p reaching. Hi- people were \n\n\n\n\xc2\xbb MS. 1 B i | V iy. \n\nf L\xc2\xbbr. Hall\'s History of NorwolL J Ti uu.l.ull. \n\n\n\n572 THOMAS LEWIS. \n\nentirely and universally satisfied with his talents, meekness, pru- \ndence, and piety. They increased in numbers under his ministry, \nand lived\'down the rancorous opposition of misguided men. \n\nHe died June 24, 1774, aged fifty-nine, having taken the small- \npox while visiting a sick person. He gave one hundred pounds \nto " his Society\'s" fund, and bequeathed to it all his real and \npersonal estate. \n\n\n\nTHOMAS LEWIS \n\n\n\nGraduated at Yale, in 1741, in the class with Governor Living- \nston, Buell, Hopkins, Brainerd, and Youngs. He was installed \npastor of the North Society, in New Fairfield, Connecticut, March \n28, 1744. He was zealous for the Revival, and joined in inviting \nWhitefield to visit the colony. In common with Kent, Symmes, \nand Allen, he sought rest in a new field. \n\nBethlehem, in Hunterdon county, New Jersey, was a vacancy of \nPhiladelphia Presbytery, in 1786, and was, in 1745, divided into \nUpper and Lower. Lewis accepted the call thither, October 14, \n1747. Davenport learned from him that "there had been a re- \nmarkable work of conviction prevailing in his place since Decem- \nber, 1748. I think he spoke of about forty under some concern, a \nconsiderable number under strong convictions, and some hopefully \nconverted." In June, 1752, Kingwood had leave to build ; and in \nthe fall he had permission to divide his labours between Bethlehem \nand Kingwood. Out of this grew dissatisfaction : in May, 1754, \nhe was released from Bethlehem on the Delaware, now called Alex- \nandria, and two years after the pastoral relation was dissolved, \nMay 25, 1756. \n\nPreviously he had been employed for a part of the time at Ox- \nford, or Upper Greenwich, Oxford Furnace first asking for supplies \nin May, 1746. \n\nHe settled at Hopewell and Maidenhead, June 13, 1758, and \nwas dismissed, May 20, 1760. Smithtown, on Long Island, had \nhim for their minister from 1763 to 1769, when he became the pas- \ntor of Mendham, New Jersey. He died there, in May, 1778. \n\n\n\nANDREW STERLING ANDREW BAY. 573 \n\n\n\nANDREW STERLING \n\n"Was ordained by the New-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, in \n1747 or \'4 s , at Upper Octorara, the majority of the congregation \nhaving withdrawn from Boyd in 1741. On the union he refused \nto meet with the presbytery, because the Protest of 1741 had not \nbeen publicly disowned by the Synod of Philadelphia: he was at \nlength persuaded to regard it as the act of the individual signers. \nHe was very deaf, and this was fade standing excuse for neglecting \nto attend the presbytery, or call his session together; he was also \ncomplained of for not being thorough or regular in catechizing the \ncongregation, and also for refusing to settle with the people, that \nthey might know how much of his stipend was unpaid. lie was \narraigned, in 17*Jti, for an act of childish simplicity, or boorish dis- \n\n; of his ministerial character. It involved no criminality, \n\nrise to much scandal. The presbytery deposed him, in \n\n1766, on account of several previous missteps, and of there being \n\nno reasonable prospect, from boa deafness and other infirmities of \n\nad the public clamour, of his being at all useful in the minis- \ntry. He died BOOB afterwards. \n\n\n\nANDREW BAY \n\n\n\nWad a native of Inland, and a weaver by trade.* He was or- \ndained by the New-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, before 1748, and \nWas the pastor of Bound Hill, near fork, and of Marsh Creek, in \nAdam- OOUnty, Pennsylvania. \n\nThe Rev. Mr. Barton, Church missionary at Lancaster, was very \nsealous For the formation of associations to defend the frontiers; \nand he wrote, November \xe2\x80\xa2">. 17."..",, to the Provincial authorities, "Mr. \nPay heads a company at York." \n\nbrother Hugh graduated al Nassau Ball, m 1750, and was \na physician al Eerberl \' Roads, near Deer Greek, in Harford \n\ncounty. Maryland. Deer Greek, dou Ohurohville, had been sup- \nplied by Donegal Presbytery from 1788, bul its existence at \xe2\x96\xa0 \nchurch is said to be owing to the labours of Wnitefield. Kay be- \nsame the pastor in l"\' - \'". and many were his troubles there. \n\nB ud, hy l>r. Martin,*! to have been an eloquent man, bul \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Pamphlet \\<y a Oorenaiitiiu. I f M8. U tti r I Eta a. JJ. Gross. \n\n\n\n574 ANDREW BAY. \n\nwas charged with having a worldly, grasping disposition. He was \nannoyed by all sorts of vexatious prosecutions before the presby- \ntery ; and tradition, with her drag-net, has gathered the evil reports \nof him, and neglected the good. He was charged with drunken- \nness, before the presbytery; and all the proof was, that on the \nafternoon of a fast-day he had stammered in announcing his text, \nand had not been so clear in his division of the subject as usual. \nHe was charged also with taking up his neighbours\' horses and \nusing them; and the proof was, that he had confined a stray beast \nthat broke his fence, and had used no reasonable means to advertise \nthe owner, who, on taking her away, said she had been so well fed \nBhe hardly knew her. He was charged with heresy in having said \nthat to deny predestination was worse than murder; whereas he \nhad only said, that if the soul were of more worth than the body, \nthen he who destroyed the soul by turning it away from the truth, \nwas guilty of a worse crime than taking away the life of the body. \nBay had property ; and his success in adding to it seems to have \ndrawn upon him all the petty rancorous malice of the envious and \nthe lazy. In 1765, the synod heard Bay\'s appeal from the action \nof Newcastle Presbytery ; and, while disapproving their untender \nexpressions and the severity of their judgment and censure, yet, \nconsidering the ferment of the people, the virulence of the prose- \ncutors, and the necessity of compromising the differences, they \napproved what they had done. But they set Bay and his con- \ngregation off to the newly-erected Presbytery of Carlisle. In \n1767, Bay was sent by the synod to the South to supply the many \nvacancies which earnestly supplicated help, and he was directed in \ngoing to visit the South Branch of Potomac, and, in returning, \nWilmington, Newbern, Edenton, and Williamsburg. He appears \nto have travelled extensively in Virginia and North and South \nCarolina, and was solicited to settle at Three Creeks and the upper \npart of Catawba River. He also made a tour in New England, \nand was sent by the synod, in 1768, to the vacancies above Albany, \n"for which he is to receive six pounds." \n\nThe church in Albany was of Scottish origin, the majority of \nthe congregation being emigrants from that country. Some were \nJerseymen. There is a tradition that, owing, to a dislike of Mr. \nBrowne, the rector of St. Peter\'s, a number of families withdrew \nfrom the Episcopal Society and united with the Presbyterian \nchurch. The original application to the synod was made in 1760 \nin a very pressing manner by the English Presbyterian gentlemen \nof that city. Supplies were appointed; but Mr. William Hannah, \na licentiate of Litchfield Association, went there, and soon received \na call. He was a native of Litchfield county, and, having studied \na while with Finley, at Nottingham, graduated at King\'s College, \nNew York, in 1759. \n\n\n\nANDREW BAT. 575 \n\nHe went into Pennsylvania and laboured for a season at Shrews- \nbury and York; but Newcastle Presbytery declined to employ him, \nbecause, among other objectionable things, he practised medicine. \nThe Old-Side ministers* in Philadelphia recommended him to Al- \nbany, and a council was called to ordain him. It consisted of Mr. \nJohn Graham, of Southbury, Mr. Lee, of Salisbury, Mr. Gold and \nMr. Cotton Mather Smith, of Sharon. Dr. Bellamy wrote to them, \nOctober 1, 1701, beseeching them not to proceed, as Hannah had \nowned to him that he believed a man might be saved who held Til- \nlotson\'s scheme of doctrine. They ordained him, and the church \nplaced itself under the care of Dutchess Presbytery, and he was \nreceived as a member, October 18, 17*33. In May, 17<>7, the synod \nheard of some difficulties, and directed the presbytery to adjust \nthem; and in July they suspended him on the representation of the \nthree elders, David Sim, David Edgar, and John Macomb, that he \nhad accepted a civil commission from the governor to practise as \nan attorney. Hannah was licensed by the Bishop of London, June \n11, 1~~-A and settled in Culpepper, Virginia. \n\nDr. Rodgera visited the city, by direction of the synod, at this \njuncture, the congregation being in a distressing condition through \nthe debt on their house of worship. It stood on a hill, long since \nremoved, not far from the corner of South Pearl and Hudson \nIn it were four square pewa with canopies, \xe2\x80\x94 one for the \ngovernor and the Corporation, <<ur for Mr. John Shabov, a wealthy \nEnglish merchant, one for Mr. Robert Henry, and a fourth for \ndistinguished Btrangers. The minister officiated in a silk cloak, \nand tokens were served before the communion. \n\nThe synod, in 1768, expressed sympathy with the congregation, \nbut could give them no relief. In 1770, Bay attended, with his \nelder, Robert Henry.} ^ wa9 stat ed that the church had csst \n\xc2\xa32818, and that only \xc2\xa3811 had been raised to pay for it. Mr. \n\nHenry had advan 1 tll (| > , \'>. and was bound, with two others, to \n\npay the rest. They were cheerfully recommended to the assistance \nof all charitable and well-disposed persons. \n\nWhitefield visited Albany in the summer of 177\'), and preached \nto b large, attentive, and affected auditory. \n\nThe congregation, for its convenience, was annexed to New 5ork \n]\' ytery. Bay joined that body in L778, having accepted a call \nto Newtown, Long bland. The records of New xork Presbytery \nhave been rudely and wilfully mutilated: they commence on the \n\nll"th of dune, 177~\xc2\xbb, in the midst of Hay\'s troubles. The people \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 I! my. \n\n| Collectio] oal Society. \n\nj Mr. Henry \xc2\xab u \xe2\x96\xa0 merehnnl of gre\xc2\xbb1 worth. Hia son, John Vernor Beery, wn\xc2\xab a \n\nfork. Hie grandson li the Kcv. \n\nJames V. llinry \n\n\n\n576 JOHN GRANT\xe2\x80\x94 JOHN RODGERS. \n\ngave prudential and moral reasons for desiring his removal, and \nwere directed to present them in writing. The elders declined to \nprosecute, but stated generally the circumstances. He said he \nwould resign if fourteen persons desired it: there being thirty- \nseven present, they were asked ; eighteen desired that he should \ngo, and nine that he should stay. Further inquiry showed that \nthere were two to one against him. The pastoral relation was dis- \nsolved : the use of the parsonage till April was allowed him, but \nnot any winter wood, nor might he sow any winter grain. He ap- \npealed to the synod, in 1776: the act separating the pastoral tie \nwas confirmed, but they regretted that the matters relating to the \nglebe had not been left to arbitrators mutually chosen. Bay in a \nsolemn manner declared that he declined the jurisdiction of the \nsynod, and would not have any further connection with it. He is \nsaid, by Riker, in his "History of Newtown," to have died soon \nafter. \n\nHis wife was the daughter of Elihu Hall, of Nottingham, Mary- \nland ; his son, Elihu Hall Bay, was an eminent jurist, and Chief- \nJustice of South Carolina. \n\n\n\nJOHN GRANT \n\n\n\nGraduated at Yale in 1741, and was ordained, by New York \nPresbytery, pastor of Westfield, New Jersey, before October, 1746. \nHe died, September 16, 1753, aged thirty-seven. \n\n\n\nJOHN RODGERS \n\n\n\n"Was born in Boston, August 5, 1727. His parents came from \nthe city of Londonderry in 1721, and removed, in 1728, to Phila- \ndelphia, \n\nDuring the first visit of Whitefield to Philadelphia, in 1739, \nwhile preaching at night on the court-house steps, he pressed near, \nand held a lantern for his accommodation. Absorbed and deeply \ninterested, he became so much agitated as to be scarcely able to \nstand ; the lantern fell from his hand, and was dashed to pieces. \nWhen little more than twelve years old, he became hopefully \npious. \n\n\n\nJOHN R0DGER9. 577 \n\nResolving to enter into the ministry, he began to study the \nlearned languages, and, in 1743, was placed under Samuel Blair, \nat Fagg\'s Manor. He was a favourite pupil, and " profited beyond \nmany of his equals ;" for Davies says of Blair, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Rodgers, whom he as his own soul refined." \n\nGilbert Tennent was his instructor in theology. He put him- \nself under the care of Newcastle Presbytery in June, 1747, and \nwas licensed October 14. The winter was employed in supplying \nthe numerous vacancies earnestly supplicating at each session of \nytery. In the spring, at the urgent solicitation of Davies, \nhe went with him to Virginia. Governor Gooch repeatedly \ndirected the clerk of the Council to take the testimonials which \nRodgers presented, that they might be read, and that he might be \nlicensed under the Toleration Act. The General Court insisted \nthat no step should be taken till they should sit in council. At \nthe suggestion of the governor, after the Council had refused, they \nmemorialized the court; but in vain, for Rodgers was forbidden \n" to preach within the colony, under a penalty of a fine of five \nhundred pounds, and a year\'s imprisonment without bail or main- \nprize." lie regretted afterwards that he had not appealed to the \nkin;: in council, and have secured redress in his own case, and pre- \nserved others from being hampered in their missions by illegal \nand vexatious treatment. Doddridge thought that a favourable \nion might have been obtained and been extensively useful. \n\nBe spent the summer of 1748 in Somerset county, Maryland, \nwhere the revival \xe2\x80\x94 begun, in 174 ">, under Robinson\'s labours \xe2\x80\x94 had \nbeen more powerful than anywhere else in the colony. There \nDavies had spent the preceding winter. Rodgers was successful \nin winning souls; among others, William Winder, Esq., of Wico- \nmico, a gentleman <\xc2\xbbf wealth, worth, and high standing. lie gave \nup his Arminian notions and his Episcopal predilections, and \n\n1 ame a distinguished, exemplary, and useful member of our \n\nohnrcfa and a valuable ruling elder. 4 \n\nhome of Rodgers was at Captain Venable\'s, on the Head \nof Wicomico: it vrai the home "i Makemie. Captain Joseph \nVonable sat on the bench when Somerset Court licensed MoNish \n\nand Hampton to preach; and the meeting-house on Wicomico was \n\non Venable\'s land. \n\nThe summer on tin- Eastern Shore was one of the most pleasant \nand useful of his life, in a v.ry uncommon degree his labonrs \n\n\n\n* Mur cf bit nuni GoYornor \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2( Maryland. Hia daughter Leah \nJ. k Morris, "f Worcester oountv; and, being lefl \xe2\x96\xa0 iridow in 1795, he i \nto the hoine of her ton, Dr. Vf w M rris, tl D rer, Delaware. Dr. Morrle ho \n\nfor niauy years a ruling elder all 1 - rtat of tue church. \n\n\n\n678 JOHN RODGERS. \n\nwere blessed : the triumphs of the gospel were numerous and sig- \nnal, and, in several cases, remarkable. \n\nIn the fall, the churches of Monokin and Wicomico called him, \nas also did Pequea, Conecocheague, and St. George\'s. The last \nwas the feeblest ; but the presbytery urged him to accept it, and \nhe did so at once. \n\nThere Robinson had spent his closing days. Davies was the \nfirst choice of the people, and he would gladly have settled there ; \nbut he was constrained to go Virginia. Rodgers was ordained \nat St. George\'s, March 16, 1749. Finley preached, and Blair pre- \nsided. \n\nThe revival begun in Whitefield\'s early visits increased under \nRobinson, and still more under Rodgers. The congregation \nrapidly enlarged ; a new house of worship was erected, and was \nBoon too strait for them. When an addition was built, often the \naisles, the doors, and the windows, were filled with attentive and \nweeping hearers. Drawyers and Pencader could scarcely support \na minister, so many chose to go to St. George\'s and the Forest. \n\nNear St. George\'s, an Episcopal church had been built early in \nthe century. The services were conducted in the Welsh lan- \nguage ; and the Venerable Society sustained for many years mis- \nsionaries at North and South Appoquinimy, or, " apud Quin- \nquionem et Appoquinquionem." The congregation became extinct, \nseveral of the families connecting themselves with the Presby- \nterian church. \n\nThe Forest Church, near Middletown, had a third part of his \ntime. The meeting-house was built in 1750 : those who had been \nhearers and elders in Hutcheson\'s church at Bohemia united in \nerecting the building, under the style of the Congregation of Bo- \nhemia and Appoquinimy. Some families held pews in both \nchurches, and attended regularly at both. \n\nRodgers established and maintained successfully the public \nstated catechizing of the congregation, not confining the service \nby any means to the young, and connecting it with the annual \npastoral visit to every family. \n\nWith far-seeing sagacity, he raised among his people, in 1751, \nmoney to establish a permanent fund ; little thinking that, even in \nhis lifetime, the congregation would be so reduced in numbers as \nto owe to the annual proceeds of that fund the privilege of hearing \nthe gospel statedly preached. \n\nHe did not neglect the vacancies hopelessly sinking out of ex- \nistence all along the peninsula. He often visited them. At \nChurch Hill, in Queen Anne\'s, where the labours of Robinson and \nDavies had been greatly blessed, he baptized twenty-nine adults \non the same day in which many others were admitted to the com- \nmunion. \n\n\n\nJOHN RODGERS. 579 \n\nIn 1754, he declined, as soon as it was tendered, an invitation \nto vbit New York with a view to settlement. He was called \nthither in January, 176d; and the presbytery referred to the \nsynod for advice whether they should put the call in his hands. \nTennent and Finley both recommended him highly: "some* say \nhe is nearly equal to the late Mr. Davies." A few days after, he \nreceived a call from the Independent Church in Charleston. \nWhitefield was at St. George\'s soon after, and told him he thought \nhis work was done there ; but, though familiar with the condition \nof the two cities, he could not decide which call he should accept. \nThe synod, after considering the matter for three days, was nearly \nunanimous as to his duty to go to New York. The pastoral re- \nlation was dissolved, May 18, 1 "\xc2\xbb>."\xc2\xbb, and he was installed in his \nnew charge, September 4, having the Kev. Joseph Treat as col- \n: Johnes presided, and Caldwell preached. So fearful had \nthey been of not securing him, that they applied to Suffolk Pres- \nbytery to use their influence in their behalf, and, with their com- \nmissioner, sent Caldwell, of Elizabethtown, to plead for them \nNewcastle Presbytery. \n\nU A considerable revival of religion almost immediately ensued: \na large number were brought to the knowledge of the truth." So \nmuch did the congregation increase that, in the spring of 1706, \nthe foundation of* the Brick Church was laid, and the house was \nopened on New Year\'s day, 1768, \n\nA new attempt was made to obtain a charter, in March, 1766. \nLord Dartmouth, President of the Privy Council, sincerely \nfavoured it; but the Bishop of London appeared twice before the \nLord- of Trade and Plantations to oppose it. His lordship said,f \nth<- Churchmen in New York were fearful at that time that the \n\niters would unite with the Established church of Scotland. \n\nThe petition was rejected, August 26, 17*17. Dr. Chandler, \n\nChurch minister of EUaabetntown, boldly avowed, that the reason \n\nwhy it was refused was heeau-e William Smith, Esq., was one of \nthe petitioners. Hil Opposition to Church encroachments was not \n\nto I,.- forgiven. Pr. Johnson, of King\'s College, told Archbishop \nBecker that " the book by Smith was the principal cause of the \ncomplaints against the Venerable Society and the missionaries; \n\nthere is nothing the Dissenters will Stick at." \n\nDr. Lsidlie, of the Dutch Reformed church, and Dr. John \nMason, of the A Church, joined with Rodgera and the \n\nthree eminent lawyeri of bu congregation (William Livingston, \n\nWilliam Smith, and John Moriu Scott) in a number of puplioa- \ntiona 09 the impolicy and dangers of the introduction of bishops \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 BelUmi \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 -toot Episcopal Church Ui\'Ur:.i \n\n\n\n580 JOHN RODGERS. \n\ninto the colonies : " De Laune\'s Plea for Non-conformity" was \nprinted and widely circulated. \n\nGovernor Tryon was the bearer of a petition for a charter in \n1774, and obtained an order from the king in council, granting \nthe request. The charter was drafted, and passed the governor \nand Council, and was placed in the hands of Kemp, the king\'s \nattorney, to report thereon. There it laid till the Declaration of \nIndependence divested king, Council, and attorney of power \n\n" To tithe and toll in these dominions." \n\nIn the close of February, 1776, Rodgers, with many others, re- \nmoved their families from New York, expecting that a speedy \neffort would be made to seize the city and hold it for the Crown. \nPlacing his family with his son-in-law, \xe2\x80\x94 the Rev. William M. \nTennent, of Greenfield, Connecticut, \xe2\x80\x94 he became chaplain of \nGeneral Heath\'s brigade in April, and, on resigning, spent the \nwinter in Georgia. He was elected chaplain of the State Con- \nvention, and then of the Council of Safety and of the first legis- \nlature, and continued in the discharge of these duties till the \nburning of Esopus, in October, 1777. From that time till the \nwar closed, he laboured at Amenia, in Dutchess county, then at \nDanbury, Connecticut, and, for eighteen months, at Lamington, \nNew Jersey. \n\nOn his return to New York the parsonage was gone, having \nbeen consumed in the great fire, soon after the royal troops en- \ntered the city. The Wall Street Church had been converted into \nbarracks, and the Brick Church into a hospital, and left in a \nruinous state. The vestry of Trinity Church \xe2\x80\x94 " Whig Episco- \npalians" \xe2\x80\x94 offered the use of St. Paul\'s and St. George\'s; and \nRodgers preached in them, alternately, from November, 1783, till \nJune, 17 \xe2\x80\x94 . \n\nThe congregation had lost some valuable members, but it was \nstill large. The churches were repaired, almost rebuilt ; and, \nTreat having been dismissed, though a number warmly urged his \nstay, a colleague was sought; and, in a few years, another was \nneeded. A third church was built in 1796, and another minister \nassociated with the three others in one joint session. \n\nRodgers was the moderator of the first General Assembly, in \n1789. After 1803, he ceased to preach more than once on the \nSabbath, and, from that time, read his discourses, being then \nseventy-seven. He preached for the last time in September, \n1809. At the communion, in December, he attempted to serve a \ntable; but his recollection so entirely failed him that with the \nutmost difficulty he got through the service. " The tears of hun- \ndreds witness their mingled respect and sympathy for the beloved \npastor, now sinking into the grave." \n\n\n\nJOHN RODGERS. 581 \n\nHis memory failed, but no pious habit declined, no devout \naffection abated. In the evening preceding his death, he prayed \nwith his family, three times making supplication for his beloved \npeople. The next morning he proposed to convene the family for \nprayer, but soon fell asleep. He awoke speechless ; and, by \nexpressing his wonted hope and consolation, he waited his \nappointed time. At about four in the afternoon of May 7, 1811, \nin his eighty-fourth year, he entered into rest. \n\nSixty and four were the years of his ministry. Dr. Griffin \ntestifies that his influence, and that of McWhorter, in their old \nage, was most healthful, and kept alive in our church a remem- \nbrance of the years of the right hand of the Most High, a sense \nof the importance of revivals, and a longing for their return, such \nas was not to be found in New England. He overlived all the \nministers who had seen the Great Revival and had felt the evils \nof the disruption, ami who had rejoiced in the successful esta- \nblishment of the College of New Jersey, and the union of the \nchurch in the Synod of New York and Philadelphia. He lived to \nsee the gloomy clouds, that hung over our land so ominously for \nyean alter the Revolution, roll away, and to witness the enlarge- \nment and prosperity of our church beyond all the most sanguine \nexpectations of his youth. \n\nWhitefield, who had failed, though using the agency of the \nMarquis of Lothian, in procuring a Doctorate in Divinity for \nBurr, was successful, by the aid of Franklin, in obtaining that \nhonour for Rodgers from the University of Edinburgh, in 17\'\'> s . \n\nlie married, in 1752, the daughter of Colonel Peter Bayard, of \nBohemia, in Cecil county, Maryland, of whose family BIZ were \nConverted under Whitefield. She was the mother of Dr. John II. \n]\',. Rodgers,* an eminent physician and a ruling elder, and of the \nwife <\xc2\xbbf the Rev. Dr. Torment, of Abingdon. \n\nIt whs the good fortune of our church that Rodgers should \n\nhave had associated with him that admirable man. Dr. Samuel \n\nMiller; for through his indefatigable and wise care was ]ire- \n\n1. in hi- "Memoir of Rodgers," all that was then known of \n\nour early history. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 1 after b>.r only brother, who dlvl in 1700, aged ucveiileeii. \n\n\n\n582 AARON RICHARDS \xe2\x80\x94 CALEB SMITH. \n\n\n\nAARON RICHARDS \n\nGraduated at Yale in 1743, and was ordained by New York \nPresbytery, in 1749, pastor at Rahway, New Jersey. \n\nDavies, on the way from Elizabetlitown to the synod, in 1753, \ncalled on him, in company with Spencer and Brown, of Bridge- \nhampton. "A pious minister, under the deepest melancholy and \ntemptation, harassed with perpetual suggestions to cut his own \nthroat. Davies gave him his best advice, with an account of his \nown melancholy some years ago." The gloom continued, with \nintermissions, through his life, although it is said that naturally he \nwas of a remarkably gay and lively turn. \n\nDuring the war of the Revolution he retired for a season, to be \nout of the reach of the enemy, who had carried off McKnight, of \nShrewsbury, and Roe, of Woodbridge. He supplied the church of \nSouth Hanover while absent from home. For many years he was \nsent yearly to preach at the East and West Houses, on Staten \nIsland, \xe2\x80\x94 the congregation being so small as to receive no more \nministerial services besides, except a similar visit from Horton, of \nNewtown. \n\nTowards the close of his days Richards sunk under hypochondria, \nand became a prey to imaginary terrors; and, in 1790, he ceased \nto preach. The congregation made the kindest arrangement for \nthe comfort of his family, and petitioned the presbytery to dissolve \nthe pastoral relation. The Rev. Mr. Chapman,* of Orange, was \nsent to confer with him ; but, by the advice of his family, he did \nnot speak to him of the matter : they expressed their satisfaction \nwith the measures of the people in their behalf, and acquiesced in \ntheir petition. He was dismissed, May 3, 1791, and died, May 16, \n1793, in the forty-fifth year of his ministry, and the seventy-fifth \nyear of his age. \n\n\n\nCALEB SMITH \n\n\n\nWas born in Brookhaven, Long Island, December 29, 1723, and \ngraduated at Yale in 1743, having been converted in his sixteenth \nyear. He was the son of William Smith, a descendant of the \n\n* MS. Records of New York Presbytery. \n\n\n\nTIMOTHY ALLEN. 583 \n\nprincipal early settler of that town. New York Presbytery \nlicensed him in April, 1747, and ordained him, November 30, 1748, \npastor of Newark Mountains, now Orange, New Jersey. His pre- \n\xe2\x96\xa0Veoessor, the Rev. Daniel Taylor, graduated at Yale in 1707, and \npreached for some time at Smithtown, Long Island, and died Janu- \nary s , 1748. This congregation is probably the one alluded to by \nAndrews, in his letter of March, 1729, as "back of Newark," and \nas being the only one in the province that did not conform to \nthe Presbyterian mode. It retained the Independent form until \nTaylor\'s death. \n\nSmith was an untiring friend of the College of New Jersey, \nmaking long journeys to collect funds, and going to Virginia to \nprevail on Daviefl to accept the presidency. \n\nHe was not an attractive preacher: his monotony and his lia- \nbility to vertigo in the pulpit tire mentioned in his funeral sermon. \nHe was indefatigable in study: he delighted in prayer, and excelled \nin pastoral visiting and catechizing. \n\nHis first wife was Martha, the youngest child of President \nDickinson: she died, August 20, 1707, leaving three daughters. \nHi- second wife was Rebecca, daughter of Major Isaac Foote, of \nBranford, Connecticut^ \n\nSmith died October 22, 1702, aged thirty-nine. His only son, \non reaching manhood, went to the South, and was never heard of \nby bis friends. \n\nA -holt memoir of Caleb Smith, with some extracts from his \ndiary, was pnblished. He printed his sermon on the death of Burr, \nand his charge at the ordination of Thane. \n\n\n\nTIMOTHY ALLEN \n\n\n\nI- -aid to have beet much umlcr the influence, while in college, \n\n.id Ferris, to whom greal prominence is given by Chauncey, \nin bis "Seasonable Thought-." as the originator of the eccentric \n\nnid oonrse of Davenport. 4 Chauncey inserts, at length, a \n\nletter from Allen, while a sophomore, to the Kev. Daniel Buss, :i \n\nclassmate of Davenport, and a/hose name is broughl forward, as a \n\ndisturber of Israel, by those who cried "Peace when there was no \n\nTh.- letter is dated July 1, L784. Allen thought he had \n\n\n\n* (in\'- nf Or. f\'tiinmo.-v\'s "Intolligenoen" msntfona Allen u joining with Datan* \n\nport in milking the DOOftn "f olotlu - IB I plotl l\'""ki ut N>-w 1. \n\n\n\n584 TIMOTHY ALLEN. \n\nnot long to live, and ought to commence preaching without finish- \ning his studies : " The arm of the Lord is not shortened, and there- \nfore He does not need the aid of human learning." This boyish \neffusion was treasured up by Mr. Clap, the rector, and Allen was \nregarded with distrust and coldness. \n\nHe graduated in 1736, at a time when the town and college were \nfavoured with a reviving : among the fruits of it was the conversion \nof Burr. \n\nHe was the pastor of West Haven, Connecticut, from 1738 to \n1742. His zeal in promoting the Revival drew on him much oppo- \nsition from the ministers who held the New Light in contempt. \nAllen preached clearly and fully the truth concerning man\'s help- \nlessness through the inveterate enmity of his heart to God. He \nasserted the inefficacy of all means to convert the natural man, \nand the absolute necessity of the ne*w-creating power of the Holy \nSpirit. The New Haven Association laid hold on his expression \nthat the Bible could not, of itself, or by any man\'s efforts, do the \nunregenerate sinner any more good than the reading of an old al- \nmanac : for this they deposed him in 1741. Turell, in his " Dialogue \nwith a Parishioner," suggests that, if the reading of the Bible and \nan old almanac be of like value, a statute should be made declar- \ning it to be a desecration of the Sabbath, and punishable by the \nmagistrate, for sinners to read the Scriptures on the Lord\'s day. \n\nAfter the arrest of Davenport by the Connecticut magistrates in \nMay, 1742, it was* impressed on many minds that they must go \nforth and erect a "shepherds\' tent" at New London, to educate \npersons of the right stamp for the ministry. The school was \nopened under the care of Allen. The New Haven Association de- \nnounced it as "that thing called a Shepherds\' Tent." The Synod \nof Philadelphia, in writing to the Rev. Thomas Clap, Rector of \nYale, in 1746, say, " We shall be shy of the proposals of the New \nYork Synod, until they show us in what way they intend to have \ntheir youth educated for the ministry, and be ready to discourage \nall such methods of bringing all good learning into contempt as \nthe Shepherds\' Tent." \n\nThe act of the legislature in October, 1742, prohibiting the \nestablishment of seminaries by private or unknown persons, was \nespecially directed against it, and compelled its removal to Rhode \nIsland. \n\nWhen Jonathan Dickinson published his dialogue on " A Display \nof Divine Grace," the Rev. Andrew Croswell, of Groton, Connecti- \ncut, published a reply, stigmatizing it as a most dangerous book, \nand of the worst tendency. Allen and Symmes, with several \nministers in New England, prefaced the pamphlet, giving it their \n\n* Tracy\'s Great Awakening. \n\n\n\nISRAEL REID. 585 \n\nconcurrence, and especially testifying against Dickinson\'s inex- \ncusable error in teaching that the proof of our justification must \nbe found in the evidences of our sanctification. They fancied that \nLihertinus, one of the speakers in the dialogue, was designed as an \nodious caricature of the friends of the Revival. Dickinson replied \nthat it was intended as a display of the Moravians, whom his assail- \nants, equally with himself, regarded as dangerous and Antinomian. \nHe reminded them that the Antinomian doctrines were in vogue in \nBeveral parishes of Southold, Long bland, and that in East Jersey \nmany people, though duly warned, followed and upheld a scandal- \nous, deposed, and excommunicated minister. \n\nThe Shepherds\' Tent becoming cheerless as Jonah\'s withering \narbour, Allen removed to Long Island, and probably laid aside, \nwith Davenport, the extreme views he had held. He met with Suf- \nfolk Presbytery, June 14, 1748, and laid before them " the absolu- \ntion" by which the censure laid on him in New England was taken \noff. He joined New Brunswick Presbytery, October 12, 1748, \nand supplied Hopewell and Maidenhead for three or four years. \nFrom 1763 to \'50 he laboured at Woodbridge, and was a member \nof New York Presbytery till 1761, although he was installed at \nAshford, Massachusetts, October 12, 1757. He became the minis- \nter of Chesterfield, in that State, at the age of seventy,* and \npreached, by the request of the people, at his own installation, \nJune 16, L786. His labours were not in vain. Ue rested from \nthem May 1, 17t\'4, though then in vigorous health, with mind and \nbody little affected by the weight of almost a century. He de- \nparted January 12, 1806, in his ninety-first year, full of the com- \nforts of the goepeL \n\nAfter his return to New England, he published a large number \nof ooeasiona] sermons. \n\nDr. Trumbull says, he was a man of genius and talents, an \nable and zealous defender of the doctrines of grace from the pul- \npit and the press, of strict morals, and a powerful and fervent \n\niher. \n\n\n\nISRAEL REID. \n\n\n\nTin: Synod of Philadelphia, in May, 1717, appointed the com- \nmission to be the committee for the school, to meet the second \nWednesdays of October and March, and "then to examine Mr. \nIsrael Eteid, and to give him a certificate if he be approved." Ho \n\n* History <\xe2\x80\xa2( fFwtan M :isaachuactts. \n\n\n\n586 DANIEL THANE. \n\ngraduated in the first class sent forth from the College of New Jer- \nsey ; and, being licensed by New York Presbytery, he placed him- \nself under the care of New Brunswick Presbytery, October 12, \n1748, to answer the supplication from Bound Brook. He was \ncalled, December 6, 1749, and ordained pastor, March 7, 1750, \xe2\x80\x94 \nthe first graduate of the College who became a member of synod. \nDavenport says, "he was encouraged by tokens of good among his \npeople in 1751." \n\nNew Brunswick asked for one-fourth of his time in April, 1768, \nand Millstone made the same request the next year. He died, \nNovember 28, 1793. \n\n\n\nDANIEL THANE \n\n\n\nIs said to have been a native of Scotland, and to have studied \nat Aberdeen. He graduated at Nassau Hall in 1748, and was \nordained, by New York Presbytery, pastor at Connecticut Farms, \nNew Jersey, August 29, 1750, when Arthur preached, and Caleb \nSmith gave the charge. \n\nIn 1754, he was sent by the synod to Virginia and the Caro- \nlinas. Ramsey, in his "History of South Carolina," says that he \npreached in the fork of Broad and Saluda Rivers, where there were \nonly six families. These were driven away by the Indians, be- \ntween 1755 and \'63; but they returned and set up congregations, \nserved in after-times by Dr. Joseph Alexander, Mr. Simpson, and \nMr. Tate. In 1808, there was a flourishing congregation, with a \nmeeting-house, on the spot where Thane preached, in 1754, under \na tree. \n\nHe is said to have been dismissed from Connecticut Farms in \n1757 ; and, on the union, the synod left him at liberty to join either \nthe Presbytery of Newcastle or Lewes. He was settled in the \nunited congregations of Newcastle and Christina Bridge, and, in \n1763, he dissolved the pastoral relation himself. He was accused \nof drunkenness, but was cleared by the presbytery on the ground \nthat the appearances which were against him might easily be ac- \ncounted for from his disordered state of mind and body. He died \nsoon after. \n\nDr. Hosack, in his "Memoir of De Witt Clinton," says that \neminent man was under Thane\'s tuition, and that he was the minis- \nter of New Windsor, in Orange county, New York. \n\n\n\nENOS AYRES\xe2\x80\x94 ELIHU SPENCER. 587 \n\n\n\nEXOS AYRES \n\n\n\nWas probably a pupil of Bellamy, to whom he -wrote from \nElizabethtown in September, 1745, mentioning the erection of \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2the Biimard" of New York, and the estrangement of our minis- \nters from Whitefield on account of his seeming to favour the \nMoravians. \n\nHe graduated at Nassau Hall in 1748, and his name stands \nfirst on the roll of alumni. \n\nHe was ordained by New York Presbytery, before May, 1750, \nas the minister of Blooming Grove, in Orange county, New York, \nand died there in 17G5. \n\n\n\nELIHU SPENCER \n\n\n\nWas Imrn at East Iladdam, Connecticut, February 12, 1721, \nand was a descendant \xe2\x80\x94 as was also David Brasnera \xe2\x80\x94 of Jared \nBpencer, one of the first settlers of that town, and who, with four \nbrothers, came at an early day to New England. He graduated \nat Yak- in 174o\\ \n\nThe Commissioners at Boston* of the London Society for \nPropagating the Gospel among the Indians had received from \nItate of the famous Dr. Williams a sum for the maintenance \nof two missionaries among the Six Nations. Having a very high \nesteem of Brainerd, they intrusted to bin the affair of finding out \nand reeomWioinHng puteble persons. He recommended Spencer \n\nand Job Strong, t u undoubtedly," Said .Jonathan Kdwards, "well- \nqualified persons, and of good abilities and learning, and of pious \ndispositions." They spent the winter with John Brainerd, at \nBel i. in New Jersey, to acquire \xe2\x96\xa0 knowledge of the Indian \ntongue,! with tlie other sooomplishmentfl ancoosary for the mission. \nBpencer passed the rammer with Jonathan Edwards, ami aooomr- \npanied him to Albany, to be preeenl at an Indian treaty. \n\nJohn Bminerd had intended to accompany them when they \n\n9. B. Dwight\'i Lift of Rdwasda \nt A .- I ale, uti\'l H oatiTC .if Northampton. Hi- health <ii\'i not permit \n\nbit going to I : i ttlod -it Torringford, Oonueotleat, \n\nused i\'.v all \' north "f \n\nMuniuii\'l, exoept kht [roqn \n\n\n\n588 ELIHU SPENCER. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2went to the Susquehanna Indians ; and Governor Belcher assured \nthem, once and again, of his kindness and respect, and that they \nshould have all his encouragement and assistance, by letters to \nthe king\'s governors where they may pass, and to the sachem, or \nchief, of those Indians. They were discouraged, as to their in- \ntended journey, by learning that the Susquehanna Indians greatly \nobjected to entertaining them without the consent of the Six \nNations. They were subject to them, and stood in great fear of \nthem, and insisted that they should go to the Six Nations first. \nSpencer and Strong went with Governor Shirley to treat with the \nSix Nations about receiving missionaries. The Oneidas were par- \nticularly dealt with : they appeared free and forward in consent- \ning. Edwards regarded them as superior in moral qualities to all \nthe other Indians, and says they were held in high esteem by the \nother nations of the confederacy. \n\nHaving made his arrangements as to the field of his labour, he \nwent to Boston, and was ordained, September 14, 1748, as a mis- \nsionary to the Oneidas. Delay occurred from the want of an \ninterpreter ; but, in the winter, one was found, and the people of \nNorthampton engaged to support her. It was a woman who had \nbeen a captive among the Caughnawagas, in Canada. He pro- \nceeded in the winter, with his interpreter, to Onoquaqua, (now \nUnadilla,) in Otsego county, New York, on the head-waters of the \nSusquehanna, one hundred and seventy miles southwest of Albany, \nand one hundred and thirty miles distant from any white settle- \nment. \n\nHe continued there till the spring, through many difficulties \nand hardships, having little or no success ; for his interpreter was \naccompanied by her husband,* a Separatist, and he showed what \nspirit he was of, there in the wilderness. He differed with \nSpencer, and opposed him in his measures. His wife refused to \ninterpret but one discourse a week, and did that very unfaithfully. \nShe utterly declined assisting him in discoursing to the Indians, \nand conversing with them through the week. \n\nHe left in the spring ; and, not being able to find another inter- \npreter, or a fellow-missionary, he was released from his engage- \nments. \n\nHe prepared a vocabulary of the language, complete, and of \ngreat value. \n\nHe was called to Elizabethtown, and installed, September 7, \n1750. Edwards said, " He is a person of very promising \nqualifications; and will hopefully, in some measure, make up the \n\n\n\n* Probably Daniel Marshall, who afterwards became a Baptist preacher, and, \n\xe2\x96\xa0with Shubael Stearns, removed to Virginia, and was largely successful in pro- \nmoting religion. \xe2\x80\x94 Morgan Edwards\'s MS. History of the Virginia Baptists. \n\n\n\nELinr spencer. 589 \n\ngreat loss that people have sustained by the death of Dickin- \nson." \n\nHe married Joanna Eaton, of Eaton\'s Town, near Shrewsbury, \nNew Jersey. \n\nIn October, 1753, the synod directed his pulpit to be supplied \nall the time he shall be absent at the request of his Excellency \nGovernor Belcher. Probably he was desired to attend, with the \nNew Jersey Commissioners, the Congress at Albany, in the sum- \nmer of 1754, to which seven provinces sent delegates, to treat \nwith the Indians, and, in the judgment of the Hon. William \nSmith, to transact the most important business the British Colo- \nnies ever engaged in. Franklin presented a plan for the union of \nthe colonies in a general government : it was unanimously adopted \nby the Congress, but rejected by the king. \n\nResigning his pastoral charge in 175U, he removed to Jamaica, \nbut "never came under any obligation to that people to stay with \nthem." In May, 17"> s . he prepared to go as chaplain to the New \nYork forces in the expedition against Canada. \n\nUnder dale of July l2. 1759, he sent to President Stiles a sum- \nmar, view of ecclesiastical atl\'airs in New York and New Jersey. \nOn the Bd of November, he sent some corrections and additions, \nand informed him that he had removed his family to Shrewsbury, \nto reside with his mother-in-law. He laments being so far from \nNew ESngland; hut comforts himself that he could keep up a cor- \nrespondence with his friends there, by the boats going to New \nYork. \n\nHe joined New Brunswick Presbytery, on dismission from Suf- \nfolk Presbytery, .May - { K 1761, and supplied Shrewsbury regu- \nlarly, going, occasionally, to Middletown Point and Amboy, south- \nward. In October, 1762, he was directed to spend one-fourth of \nhis time at the latter place; and, in 1704, to visit the sea-coast \ntoward- Egg 1 [arbour. \n\nIn 17.">"), in answer to pressing supplications from North Caro- \nlina. Spencer and John Brainerd were appointed to go thither; \nbut the disturbed state of the oeuntry after Braddook\'s defeat pre- \nvented their going. I,, m.iv, 1764, the synod, considering the \nimportance of having the congregations in that colony pro- \nperly organised, sen! Spencer and MeWherter to form societies, \nhelp them in adjusting bounds, ordain elders, dispense the sacra- \ni . instrucl tin- people in discipline ami the bee! way to obtain \nthe stated ministry. A collection was ordered in all the churches, \nto defray their expenses, and make them a proper acknowledg- \nment for the damage they may sustain in their domestic affairs. \n\n: eoord ha- been found of this \\i-it. lie was called to < lathy\'s \nSettlement, now Thy atira, and to Fourth Creek, and was requested \nto settle between the Yadkin and Catawba- \n\n\n\n590 ELIHU SPENCER. \n\nNew Brunswick Presbytery supplied Shrewsbury and Sharp \nRiver in his absence. On his return, Rodgers and his people re- \nquested the synod that he might supply them four Sabbaths before \ntheir pastor left them. He received a call, September 28, 1765, \nto St. George\'s and Appoquinimy, in Lancaster Presbytery. He \naccepted it, and removed thither. The Forest Church, as the \nlatter was commonly styled, continued nearly as large and pros- \nperous as under Rodgers; but symptoms of decline appeared. \nSome left as soon as the morning service closed ; and this steadily, \nand so much increased, that the afternoon service was given up by \nhis successor. \n\nAt the end of four years, owing to the ill-health of his family, \nhe returned to Shrewsbury ; and, a few days after being released, \nhe was called, October 17, 1769, to Trenton and Lawrence. He \njoined New Brunswick Presbytery, May 17, 1771, and seems never \nto have been installed. \n\nA delegate from the Provincial Congress of North Carolina peti- \ntioned the presbytery, December 26, 1775, to send him thither, to \nunite the people in the cause of independence. McWhorter went \nwith him. They accomplished little, as Franklin predicted, on \nthe first mention of the scheme. \n\nHe died, December 27, 1784. Possessed of fine genius, great \nvivacity, eminent and active piety, he edified the church by his \ntalents and example, and "finished his course with joy." His \ntalents were prompt, popular, excellent: he was one of the most \nready extempore speakers of the day. \n\nHe published a pamphlet on the \xc2\xb0 Origin and Growth of Epis- \ncopacy." \n\nAmong his grandchildren were the Hon. John Sergeant, \nThomas Sergeant, one of the judges of the Supreme Court of \nPennsylvania, and the widow of the venerable and beloved Dr. \nMiller. \n\nWhat must Spencer have been ! Loved by Brainerd and Ed- \nwards in his youth; the successor of Dickinson and Rodgers in \nthe pastoral work ; selected by the governors of two colonies as \nchaplain to the forces on important expeditions ; intrusted by the \nsynod with momentous responsibilities among the new settlers in \nCarolina ; and performing those duties so well, that, at the lapse \nof ten years, the Provincial Congress called him from his distant \nhome, to allay the conscientious scruples deterring the Scots from \nthrowing off their allegiance to Britain. \n\n\n\nSILVANCS WHITE. 691 \n\n\n\nSYLVANUS WHITE \n\nWas born in 1704. His father, Ebenezer White, came, with \nhis parents, from England to Massachusetts at an early age, and \nwas the minister of Bridgchampton, Long Island, from its first \nOrganisation as a parish in 1696. His son graduated at Harvard \nUniversity in 17Jo, and was ordained, by a council, November 17, \n17_:7, pastor of the church of Southampton. He married Phebe, \nonly daughter of Hezekiah Howell, of that town. \n\nWhile in almost every town on the island, there were confusions \nand divisions growing out of the Great Revival, Southampton \ngeems to have dwelt in peace, united in their minister. In the \nformation of Suffolk Presbytery, White and his venerable father \ntook an active part, and .Southampton promptly and unanimously \nplaced itself under its care, April 37, 1747. Bridgehampton was \nin circumstances of great difficulty: a separation had occurred, \nand much animosity existed. The presbytery "treated with the \nVenerable and aged pastor to resign." He consented to do so ; \nand then, on the settlement of James Brown, they spent much \ntime at Mr. Job Parson\'s, with the people of the Separation, on \nthe point, whether they had not violated the rules of the gospel \nhi their treatment of Mr. White. "Much seeming stiffness" ap- \npeared; but, at length, sixteen men and twelve women signed an \nacknowledgment "that, though according to their present light \nthey were right as to the cause, they were wrong in the manner.\'\' \nThe aged minister signed a full, humble avowal, that, under M the \niid awful Qk)WO ttf a holy (Jod, in a time of much disorder, \ntemptation, and provocation, he had spoken unadvisedly with his \nlip-; and a.-k<d forgiveness for having spoken to the disparager \nneat of a work of grace, while intending to condemn what seemed \nfraught with evil.\'\' The S parates wen- then received back. \n\nOn the 8d of Ootober, he wrote to the presbytery, expressing his \n\nopinion that they had been treated with too much lenity. They \nreplied, M the Object of church government was edification, not \n\ndestruction." \n\nSouthampton -hand in the great revival of 17\'U. \n\nWhite lived, in uninterrupted health, through a ministry of fifty- \nfive year-, and, after a week\'.- JUnflflflj died, October 22, L782, his \nmind not enfeebled by age, and hi- hope strong and cheerful. He \nlived, honoured and revered, happy ill the affections of a large and \n\nwarmly-attached congregation. He left seven Bona and one (laugh- \nter: most of these lived to advanced age. They removed; but his \n\nion. Dr. Henry White, remained in UU native town, and died there, \n\nat the age of ninety, in L8 1". \n\n\n\n592 SAMUEL BUELL. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BUELL \n\nWas born at Coventry, Connecticut, September 1, 1716, and \n\xe2\x96\xa0was* the only son of a wealthy farmer. Awakened at the age of \nseventeen, he early became devotedly pious, and, determining to \nengage in the ministry, entered Yale College at the age of twenty- \none. He enjoyed the intimate friendship of Brainerd and Youngs, \nand freely opened his heart to them. During his residence in New \nHaven, Whitefield, Tennent, and Davenport preached there, with \nblessed results on the students and the town. In May, before \ngraduating, he went over to Southold, the scene of Davenport\'s \nlabours, and found Burr, of Newark, preaching there, it being a \ntime of refreshing. \n\nBuell purposed to spend the usual time in studying divinity ; \nbut, by the advice of Edwards and others, the zealous friends of \nthe Revival, he was licensed in the fall of 1741, and went forth \nas "a strolling preacher." \n\nAbout a monthf after graduating, he was reconciled to Mr. \nNoyes, the pastor of the First Church in New Haven, and was \nlicensed in a regular manner by the Association. \n\nHis ministrations were not lifeless : he notes at one time in his \ndiary that then, for the first time, when he preached, no tears were \nseen. Wheelock wrote to Bellamy, December 27, 1741, " The \nLord is with Mr. Buell of a truth; hell trembles before him." \n\nHe came to Northampton, January 27, 1742, Edwards before \nleaving home having left to him the free use of his pulpit. " From \nwhat I had heard of him," says Mrs. Edwards,! "and of his suc- \ncess, I had strong hopes there would be great effects from his la- \nbours." Religion was then at a lower ebb in the town than it \nhad been of late. "A number of the zealous people from Suf- \nfield" came with him, and continued some time. His first service \nwas a lecture preached in the afternoon ; in the latter part, one or \ntwo appeared much moved, and after the blessing, when the people \nwere going out, several others. To the mind of Mrs. Edwards, \nthere was the clearest evidence that God was present in the con- \ngregation on the work of redeeming love ; and, in the clear view \nof this, she was all at once filled with such intense admiration of the \nwonderful condescension and grace of God in returning to North- \nampton, as overwhelmed her soul, and immediately took away her \n\n\n\n* Memoir in Connecticut Evangelical Magazine. \n\n| MS. Journal of Rev. Ebenezer Parkman, in Tracy\'s Great Awakening. \n\nX Diary: quoted in S. E. Dwight\'s Memoir of Edwards. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BUELL. 593 \n\nbodily strength. They remained in the meeting about three hours \nafter the exercises were over: during most of the time, her bodily \nstrength was overcome, while her heart was lifted up in adoration \nand praise, and she conversed with those near her in a very earnest \nmaimer. \n\nBoell and others returned home with her; and, while conversing \non the Divine goodness, the intenseness of her feelings took away \nher bodily Btrength : and her mind was so impressed with a sense of \nthe love of Christ and bis immediate presence, that she could with \ndifficulty refrain from leaping for joy. The next day, before going \nI tang, she sunk down twice, helpless, and was carried to her \n\nLed faint with joy while contemplating the glories of the heavenly \nWorld. The next two days she could not refrain leaping for joy. \nBuell spent almost the whole time in religious exercises with the \npeople, in public or private, they continually thronging him: they \nwere exceedingly moved, crying out in great numbers in the meet- \ning-house, and some lying for twenty-four hours motionless, with \ntheir Bensefl locked up under strong imaginations, as though they \nwent to heaven and saw unutterable things. One day, at meal- \ntime, while Buell sp\xc2\xab>ke of the glories of the upper world, Mrs. \nEdwards was so affected with views of the great Comforter that \nher Strength lied, her limbs grew cold, and for an hour she con- \ntinued expressing to those around her deep and joyful sense of the \nI ce and divine excellence of the Comforter. The next day, \n\nPomeroy broke forth in the language of j<>y, thankfulness, and \npraise, and, for nearly an hour, led them to rejoice in the visible \npresence, and adore His infinite goodness and condescension* \n"Words were not made, he said, to express these things. " \n\nBuell remained a fortnight after Edwards\'s return: the whole \ntown -remed to be in a continual commotion day and night; great \n\nnumbers were believed to be the subjects of hopeful conversion. \nThe effects were the most amasing in the case of professors. "The \ninterposition of Satan soon became very apparent, and caution and \n\npains -afy tO keep many of the people from running \n\nwild." \n\nI [i then -et out on a tour toward i Boston. \n\nThe letter on "Tie- State of Religion in New England since Mr. \nWhitefield\'s Visit," statet that Boston had just been risked by"a \nStrolling preacher, who lefi oollege last year, ignorant of the Erst \nprinciple- of learning, not able to -peak two sentences correctly;" \nand, though he uttered "only stupid stuff, you could not add one. \nto his aucuenoe*" Se adds, "The church of England incn \n\nbul Dr. Cutler speak- another language: \xe2\x80\x94 "The ill effects \n\nof Whitefield\'s risit would bave worn off, but others with his spirit \n\ni on the design with too great success." He enumerates \n\nJ. , along wiih Tennent, Rodgsrs,and Davenport, among " those \n\n38 \n\n\n\n594 SAMUEL BUELL. \n\nwho afflict us, and through whom the enthusiasm was still breaking \nout in 1743." \n\nBuell was thought to be in a consumption when he was ordained \nby a council, in 1743, as an evangelist, \xe2\x80\x94 a thing almost unknown \nat that time in New England. The New Haven Association classed \nhim and Brainerd with "strolling preachers that were most dis- \norderly.\'\' \n\nThe Society in Canterbury having settled a minister in opposi- \ntion to the communicants, the latter withdrew, and were excluded \nfrom the use of the meeting-house. Buell was threatened with \nprosecution for having preached to the Separate meeting. One of \nthe instances of sinful conduct charged on the excellent Philemon \nBobbins, pastor of Branford, was "his earnestness in improving \nstrolling preachers, more especially in a meeting carried on in his \nown house, by Brainerd and Buell, to the dishonour of religion, \nthe just offence of many, and the destruction of peace and gospel \norder." Robbins replied, "I cannot but think the meeting car- \nried on by them had a good effect ; but it had some unhappy attend- \nants, and I believe neither they nor I could carry on a meeting \njust in that form again." \n\nBrainerd, in his small circuit in the winter of 1742-3, met \n"dear brother Buell, spent some time with him, and preached my \nsermon on Deuteronomy viii. 2, before him. I love him dearly ; \nbut I see the Lord has not dealt with him just as he has with me." \nBuell, while lamenting errors and extravagance, happily avoided \nthe mistake of seeing nothing but wildfire and false religion on \nevery side. He probably said to Brainerd, as Wheelock did to \nBellamy, April 11, 1742, "I am sorry to hear of your low liv- \ning, and that religion runs so very low with you. Blessed be \nGod, it is not so with us ; there is much of the presence of God in \nthese parts. I verily believe that one thing that clogs religion \namong you is people\'s so frequently censuring one another, and \nbeating down weak Christians. I think it less wrong to religion, \nunder present circumstances, to let two hypocrites alone upon a \nfalse foundation for the present, than to pull down one of God\'s \nchildren. The way to discover hypocrites is to build up God\'s \nchildren: hypocrites can\'t eat children\'s bread; if they do for a \nwhile, it won\'t nourish them, and they will soon show their condi- \ntion : but, if you pull down Christians with them, they all look \nalike ; it is hard to distinguish until they are worn out with trouble \nand discouraged, and others that are setting out are discouraged by \nthe sight." \n\nIn 1745, he was on his way to the South, when he met with \nBurr, who had just returned from attending a council held at \nEasthampton, to heal the divisions and secure the settlement of a \npastor there. Tennent, of Freehold, and David Brainerd and \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BOLL. 595 \n\nDickinson, had been members, and the last drafted the views of \nthe council. Burr had recommended the people to call Buell, their \nfirst choice being Brainerd; and he now urged Buell to go thither \nat once. \n\nEasthampton was settled from New England in 1648, and had, \nfor the first thirty-six or thirty-eight years, the Rev. Thomas \nJames, and then the Rev. Nathaniel Huntting, for half a century. \nDavenport came there in 1739, and under his first sermon twenty \nas.]-.- converted: this was the first dropping of a shower of hea- \nvenly influence. One hundred were renewed to repentance; but \nthe vain imagination seized some that this outpouring of the Spirit \nwas, as it were, 8 renewing of the gospel dispensation, and that \nthe enuvert- were bound to come out froin among them who could \ngot approve of the new ways and the new notions. It was like the \nrunning of a ploughshare through the greensward, causing the \nrammer rain to gully out the soil down to the foundation of the \nhills. A large separation from Mr. Huntting ensued, with the ordi- \nnary average of reproaches and recriminations. His extreme age \nmade the good pastor anxious, in 1744, to retire from his charge. \nA majority of the people made out a call for a minister; but the \nwant <>f harmony was so great that the council refused to proceed \nto the ordination. \n\nUnder these circumstances, on the 9th of October, Buell came \nin the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ. His first \nsermon was from 1 Corinthians ii. 2: \xe2\x80\x94 " 1 determined to know \nnothing but Jesus Christ) and him crucified." "Notwithstanding \nthe many untoward and ever-to-be-lamented circumstances attend- \ning the revival under Davenport, about sixty were added soon after \nettlement of Buell. By his efforts and faithful preaching, \n\nharmony was in a good measure restored, and lasting and danger- \n\non- consequences prevented." lie was installed, September 19, \n1746: Edwards preached on the occasion.* \n\nIn April, 17 17, he assisted in forming Suffolk Presbytery. The \n\nquestion was debated among his people, whether those who had \nseparated from Mr. Huntting in 1711. not being communicants, \nshould he admitted to church privileges without an acknowledg- \nment of then- fault. The Presbytery of Suffolk decided that all \nbaptised persona were subject to discipline, ami thai they ought to \n\nmake penitential reflections on their conduct. They directed, t \nOctober 26, 17 1\'.\'. that they should publicly make this acknowledg- \nment: \xe2\x80\x94 "I acknowledge that my separation from the Rev. Mr. \n\nHuntting*! ministry, and speaking reproachfully of him in a time \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 :it difficulty and ignoranoe of church government, tl. \n\ni ,,. ||, . ... | , . . ... \nf Prime ii \n\n\n\n596 SAMUEL BUELL. \n\nseason of special Divine influence, was contrary to the order of the \ngospel, and the rules of discipline in Christ\'s visible church; and \nsuch divisive principles as were the spring of my separation, I now \nrenounce with sorrow, desiring forgiveness of all whom I have \noffended, and resolve, by Divine assistance, upon a regular course \nfor time to come." \n\nHis preaching* was in demonstration of the Spirit, in great \nplainness, with a remarkable degree of animation. He was often \nheard to say he would not be in the condition of the unconverted \nsinner for thousands of worlds, even for one hour ; for, in that \nhour, he might die and be lost to eternity. He was never heard \nto utter a prayer, however short, in which petitions to the Holy \nSpirit did not form a prominent part. In May, 1749, he gave \nDavenportf an account of a very considerable work of awakening \nat that time in his congregation, especially among the young. \nHe afterwards spoke of it as a small harvest in comparison with \nthe great ingathering of 1764. Eighty were added to the com- \nmunion during the first eighteen years of his settlement. He \nwrote, on the 27th of March, 1764, to the Rev. Jonathan Barber,! \nof Groton, Connecticut, "For many weeks God has been pre- \nparing his way: his own children have been remarkably re- \nplenished with love, holy joy, and unutterable groaning for the \noutpouring of the Holy Spirit. Our assemblies have been nume- \nrous and solemn : sermon after sermon seemed to fasten arrows of \nconviction in the hearts of sinners. But, for a week past, heaven \nand hell have seemed to meet and reign here. God\'s people have \nalmost all been favoured with such manifestations of the Divine \nglory, and such communications of light, love, joy, and comfort, \nand been under such labouring pains, and in such agonies of dis- \ntress, as though soul and body could scarcely contain. I could \nnot have believed it till I saw it. But oh, the agonies and cries, \nthe piercing cries and importunities for mercy ! Afternoon and \nevening we remained in the house of God till nine o\'clock. There \nwere upwards of a thousand persons present, and all impressed : \npews, alleys, stairs, seats, contained distressed souls. The power \nof God came like a flash of lightning, bowing our assemblies, and \nproducing the most amazing agony of soul, and cries. My house \nwas early filled and until ten at night. Scores of people were \nunder great concern, and many children, of from eight to twelve \nyears." He adds, in allusion to the miracle of Zarephath, \n" When the vessels are full, the oil will be stayed. My own spi- \nritual exercises have been in proportion to this extraordinary \n\n\n\n* Dr. Davis. f Life of Edwards. \n\nX Stiles\'s MSS., Yale College. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL BUELL. 597 \n\nHe wrote for the press, "as a hurried man," under date of Sep- \ntember 25, 1765, an account of this signal mercy. It first ap- \npeared on the 18th and 19th of March, and thirty or forty were \nfound to be under exercise of mind. The next meeting was ob \nthe 22d : one hundred came to converse with him, of whom six oi \n\xe2\x96\xa0even were above seventy. Some had been under concern since \nthey heard Davenport, and BOW their anxiety hopefully issued in a \nsaving chau \n\nBe was greatly aided by "a body of solid, judicious, old dis- \nOne hundred and fifty were added to the church; ninety- \nnine ob one Sabbath. \n\n\\ thaniel Hazard, of New York, wrote to Bellamy, June 18, \n1764, "I have ju-t been down to the east end of Long Island, with \nmy wife, to see the work of God going on there, and to believe for \nmyself: and. I must declare, I never beheld any thing equal to it \nin my life. The fear of God falls upon all flesh there, and heaven \nseems to have come down to earth: and their religion, like holy \nJob\'s, makes them abhor themselves. Go and see." The Rev. \nJohn Murray, afterwards of Newhiiryport, and then recently ar- \nrived from Scotland, wrote to Moorhead, at Boston, that he had \noften desired to Bee such remarkable displays of grace as he had \nheard of from him, and that now he had seen what exceeded all \n\nhe had heard. "Not," he adds, "that all was to his mind; but, \n\nwhile so much metal is put into the pot, you must expect some \ndross. The people scarcely consented to be dismissed at eleven" \n\nat night, and the Separates were ready to renew the extrava- \ngancies of Davenport. \n\nThe awakcBing was general throughout the island. Buell \nlaboured extensively, and made a tour through ESast Jersey: his \ninstrumentality was highly honoured. Whitefield, during the \nBummer of 1764, says, M My late excursions ob Lobs Island have, \n\n1 brOSt, been blessed." These excursions were made at the oloSS \n\nof January, 1764 1 he preaohedeal Basthampton, Bridgehamp- \n\nton. Soiitliold, and Shelter Bland. Buell does not name White- \nheld, but - iv-. *\xe2\x80\xa2 In the beginning of the year, there appeared \nsome hopeful tokens that the Lord was preparing his own way for \nI gracious risitation." Whitefield wrote from Boston, in May, to \n\nColonel DeriBg, "An I is Slither Bland become a Patmosf \n\nBlessed be God 1 What eejUMH a God in Christ do for his \npeople?" \n\nBuell mentions that they did riot DM the WOT&OOnvertto relation \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 who -.cii,cd truly regenerated. \nDuring the war of the EtevolntioB, hie church was Bpared from \nthe deseeratioD and injury which the British troops bo commonly \ncommitted on the i-land. I!-- was a decided Whig, bul eBJoyed \n\nthe friend- 1 . n and Sir William Ki>kine. lie \n\n\n\n598 SAMUEL BUELL. \n\nwas a gentleman in his manners, cheerful and sprightly: they \nliked his society, and treated him with deference. \n\nThe Rev. Henry Davis, D.D., President of Hamilton College, \nwas in his fifteenth year, when, " after a long and alarming season \nof apathy, the Revival commenced in 1785." It was a novel and \nan affecting scene. The impression of the events was, in 1833, \nstill wellnigh as strong and fresh upon his mind as the events of \nyesterday. " Buell was eminently a man of God : the things evi- \ndently uppermost in his mind, and which lay with most interest on \nhis heart, were the glory of God and the salvation of souls. \nThere were many living in Suffolk, in the vigour of manhood, who \nhad been brought to seek and embrace Christ through Davenport. \nBuell had not wholly lost the fire of his youth. He dwelt much \xe2\x80\x94 \nas he ever had done, but now with more than usual directness and \npower \xe2\x80\x94 on the character and perfections of God, his sovereignty, \nhis eternal purposes, the strictness and purity of his holy law, the \nmercy through the atonement of Christ, the native depravity of \nthe heart, its entire alienation from God, and man\'s total help- \nlessness. The work was powerful. In six or eight months, \nmore than one hundred were enrolled among the children of \nGod." \n\nSoon after this he lost his only son, who died February 7, \n1787, aged sixteen, with a good hope through grace. In 1791, \nanother season of refreshing was granted, and forty were \nadded to the church. On the 1st of January, 1792, he preached \nan historical discourse of great interest. \n\nHe died July 19, 1798. \n\nHe was the intimate friend of Brainerd. He acted a prominent \npart in the great awakening of 1741-43, and related to Dr. Davis \nevents in which he was personally concerned, which filled him with \nastonishment. He was one of the very few men of that time whose \nsubsequent labours were much blessed. President Stiles said, \n" That man has done more good than any other that ever stood on \nthis continent." \n\n" Buell was ardent in temperament, laborious in study, well \nread in the history of the church and the writings of the fathers, \nand a thoroughly-learned theologian. As a preacher, he was more \npopular in his manner than was common at that day, exhibiting \nclear and forcible views of truth and duty. His earnest, melting \nflow of soul convinced his hearers that he would gladly pluck \nthem as brands out of the burning. He embraced cordially, and \npreached with great distinctness and emphasis, the characteristic \ndoctrines. The excesses of his own early labours he had reviewed \nwith cool and prayerful deliberation: he looked on them with \nregret and humiliation. Except in seasons of revival, he had \nlittle intercourse with his people. At other times, he rarely \n\n\n\nJOHN MOFFAT. 599 \n\nvisited any but the sick, and was never present at the religious \nconferences." \n\nA very considerable number of his sermons was published, and \na poem, " Youth\'s Triumph," dated January 20, 1775. \n\nBe was married throe times: his widow survived him nearly \nfifty years. His daughter, the widow of the Rev. Dr. "Woolworth, \nof Bridgehampton, died at Homer, New York, in 1845, aged \nseveiitv-iive. He buried eight of his children, and saw all the \nfriends of his youth, and of his riper years, descend to the grave \nbefore him. \n\nHe mentions that, in a certain year, he wrote out all his ser- \nmons in full, but preached entirely without notes. His vigour re- \nmained till old age, and, almost at the close of life, he rode four- \nteen miles, and preached, and returned home. At the age of \neighty-live, the degree of D.D. was conferred upon him. \n\n\n\nJOHN MOFFAT, \n\nProbably from Scotland, graduated at Nassau I lull in 1749. \nHe was ordained, in 1751, pastor of Wallkill, in Orange county, \nHen Fork, by New York Presbytery. Difficulties arose, whioh \n\nled to bis dismission, and the formation of an Associate church \nin .Welytown, which obtained, in 1705, the llev. Hubert Annan \nfor it- minister. \n\nMo flat resided in the bounds of Newcastle Presbytery, in 1773, \nwithout charge, and without being employed in the ministry. Ho \nlivid, to the close of his days, at Little Britain, in Orange \neonnty, and engaged in teaching. De Witt Olinton* was one of \n\nhis pupils. \n\nHe died April 22, 1788. \n\n* HosUCk !.|Q. \n\n\n\n600 JOSEPH TATE. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH TATE \n\n\n\nWas received as a licentiate, by Donegal Presbytery, April 1, \n1748, and was sent to Lower Pennsborough, (Silver Spring,) \nMarsh Creek, and Conewago. On the 14th of June, he was \ncalled to Donegal ; and, soon after, the Rev. Andrew Bay, of the \nNew-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, accused him of having \npreached false doctrine at the Three Springs, (Big, Middle, and \nRocky.) He was acquitted, October 25, and accepted the call \nfrom Donegal, \xe2\x80\x94 they giving seventy pounds to buy a plantation \nand seventy pounds salary. He was ordained, November 23, \n1748 : Samuel Thomson presided. He spent eight Sabbaths in \nthe following fall in Virginia. \n\nImmediately after his installation he was married, December \n15, 1748, to Margaret, the eldest daughter of Boyd, of Octorara. \nHer father gave her, besides a silk gown, a bed and its furniture, a \nhorse and saddle, and nearly every article for housekeeping; all \nof which are carefully entered in his book. \n\nTate found little or no satisfaction on the union, the two parties \nin the presbytery being so nearly equal in numbers, and so tho- \nroughly divided in sentiment. He withdrew, and, finally, had \nleave, in 1768, to join the Second Philadelphia Presbytery. He \nwas sent by the synod to Western Virginia and North Carolina ; \nand, in the following March, he was called to Coddle Creek. The \npresbytery asked his congregation, Should the call be placed in \nbis hands? and they immediately requested that his relation to \nthem might be dissolved. A committee was sent to reconcile the \ndifference, and they did not prosecute their demand for his dis- \nmission. \n\nHe died October 11, 1774, aged sixty-three. Dr. Martin says, \n" He was eccentric, but fearless in reproving vice and the errors \nof the day." \n\nHis son, the Rev. Matthew Tate, graduated at the College of \nPhiladelphia, was licensed by Newcastle Presbytery, and was em- \nployed as a supply in several presbyteries. He visited the new \nsettlements west of Albany, and went to the Southern States. \nHe received holy orders as a deacon from the hands of Bishop \nWhite, and was rector of St. Matthew\'s, South Carolina, from \n1789 to 1792, when he removed to Beaufort, and had the charge \nof the parish till his death, October 7, 1795. \n\nHis mother married James Anderson, the son of her husband\'s \npredecessor, and her daughter Jane married his son. \n\n\n\nSAMPSON SMITH. 601 \n\n\n\nSAMPSON SMITH, \n\nFrom Ireland, was received as a licentiate by Donegal Presby- \ntery, April 3, 1750. The records for the next nine years being lost, \nwe know not certainly the date of his ordination, which waa re- \nported to synod in May, 17~>J. In the spring of 175-, he spent \neight Sabbaths in Virginia. He succeeded Thorn, at Chestnut \nLevel, and was married by Tate to Agnes, the third daughter of \nBoyd, of Octorara. lie had an academy, which had B high repu- \ntation, and it was continued by him till his death. \n\nThe union of the synods placed him in connection with the New- \nSide ministers, and, a charge of intemperance being preferred \nagainst him, he looked on them as the movers of it, and the abet- \ntors of his defamers ; while they regarded the Old-Side men as de- \ntermined to clear him by excluding all the evidence on which the \nprosecution relied. There were doubtless many things to blame on \nboth Bides. Two of the presbytery were his brothers-in-law, ami \nhis father-in-law had been invited to sit ami vote as a correspond- \nent ; while, on the other hand, the New-Side men were hardly en- \ntitled to be regarded as impartial judges, lie was acquitted, and \nthe prosecutrix appealed to the synod. The synod ordered a com- \nmittee to meet at Little Britain and take up the whole matter de \nnovo. The synod, in reviewing the minutes of the committee, \njudged that the punishment inflicted was less than the evidence \nwarranted; and in this they showed the leaning of the majority \nagainst the Old-Side men, who were in a hopeless minority. The \nevidence of two rude girls who, in the midst of unbecoming con- \nduct with B parcel Of ma students, were driven, by Smith, out of a \nchamber with blows and harsh words, was hardly entitled to be \nled: they said he was drunk : he said they were shameless, \nand that blows, not words, were the reproofs the case demanded. \n\nBe withdrew from the synod, and, on the final yielding of the \nsynod, he consented to join Newcastle Presbytery. He did so, in \n1768, and was suspended the next year, but restored in 1771. The \nsynod then sent him to the South Branch of Potomac for six \nmonths, and the next year for two months. His suspension was \nrenewed in 1771, and aeverremoTed. He was struck by lightning, \n\nand died. \n\n\n\nROBERT McMORDIE \xe2\x80\x94 CHAUNCEY GRAHAM. \n\n\n\nROBERT McMORDIE \n\nWas ordained by Donegal Presbytery, in 1754, pastor of Upper \nMarsh Creek and Round Hill.* He released, in August, 1760, \nMr. McConaughy, whose bond he held for the sure payment of his \nsalary. In the following January he was dismissed, the presbytery \nalleging that there was a coolness towards him on the part of his \npeople. This he denied. He accepted, in 1762, a call to Hanover. \nHe also withdrew, and was allowed to join the Second Philadelphia \nPresbytery in 1768. The next year they sent him south, and the \nsynod sent him, in 1772, to Virginia and Carolina. In May, 1777, \nhe was called to Tinkling Spring, New Dublin, Reedy Creek, and \nFourth Creek. He went south again in 1784. \n\nHe was a chaplain in the war of Independence, and a member \nof the Order of the Cincinnati. On their roll it is entered that he \nwas " deranged" on a certain day, \xe2\x80\x94 a military use of the word, to \nsignify his retirement from the rank of chaplain. \n\nHe died May 22, 1796. He was married, December 12, 1754, \nto Janet, the second daughter of Adam Boyd. The Rev. Robert \nMcMordie Laird was a descendant of his. \n\n\n\nCHAUNCEY GRAHAM \n\n\n\nWas the son of the Rev. John Graham, of Southbury, Connec- \nticut, whose three sons entered the ministry : John, the eldest, was \nsettled at Suffield, Connecticut, and Richard Crouch, the youngest, \nat Pelham, New Hampshire. \n\nChauncey was named after his grandfather, the Rev. Mr. Chaun- \ncey, of Hadley. He graduated at Yale in 1747. His father was a \nnative of Scotland. He was a zealous promoter of the Great Re- \nvival, and grieved much that he saw no fruit, and that every fast \noccasion was attended with some gloom and the frowns of God. \nBut on February 17, 1741-2, he wrote to Bellamy, f "I bless \nGod there is some stir in my own house : I hope God is about to \ndo great and glorious things for my poor Chauncey; he has been \nunder soaking convictions a considerable time, and has a great ten- \nderness of conscience, and seems bent on the way for Zion. Do \n\n* Near York. f Bellamy papers. \n\n\n\nCHAUNCET GRAHAM. 603 \n\npray for him especially." Soon after, Southbury was graciously \nvisited. \n\nHi.- father, in October, 1744, visited Hopewell and Lawrence, \nNew Jeney, as a candidate for settlement. New Brunswick Pre* \nbvtery at that time advised New Milford, in Connecticut, and New \nBrunswick, to try to get his son John; and they wrote to the Con- \nBociation at Danbury to send him to those places. \n\nChauncey Graham was ordained by a council, January 29, 1750, \npastor of liumbout and Poughkeepsie, in Dutchess county, New \nYork. Rumbout, near Fishkill, was orga ni sed as a church, July \n\n8, 1748; Poughkeepsie was "gathered" in July, 1750. The Rev. \n{Slisha Kent,* of Philippi, wrote to Bellamy, January 29,1749-50, \n\n"The council consisted of Messrs. Stoddard, Case, and Judson, \nand their messengers, and one messenger more. I think it\'s a pity \nMr. .Mills and the rest of you sent for, did not attend. It would, I \nam persuaded, have prevented the ordination at Fishkill, or had a \ntendency to have united the church and others disaffected, in \nCase it had gone on. To me it looks dark when ministers are back- \nward to appear in rach eases and set according to the light they \nhave for God, leaving all consequences with him alone. I hear \n\nsome of the council say they have reconciled the contending par- \niee; 1 doubt the wound is only skinned over: however, time will \ndiscover how it is; we must hope for the best. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 By what 1 can hear, I am the only person blamed in New Eng- \nland that the ordination did not go OU before; but this I know, we \nwere all agreed in it, it was no1 best it should go on, Mr. Graham \nnot excepted. If it does well, I hope I shall be so happy as to re- \njoice in it ; I think I can say, wherein I have acted in the business, \nit has been with some degree of uprightness." \n\nHi- preached, September 10, 1751, a sermon against the Sepa- \n. which he published, with the title, "Enthusiasm Detected;\' 1 \nand this may have h-d to hi> giving up 1 \'oughkeepsie, September \n29, 1752. He published a sermon, preached February 25, 1761, \non "Why do the heathen rage?" It was in the midst of the \nFrench War. Be demands, "What\'s the matter with the Indians?" \nand proceeds to -how the causes why the fury of the savages had \n\nbeen let loose Ofl the frontier. Having accompanied the troops as \n\nchaplain, his congregation inquired of the presbytery, in IT*\'\'!, \nwhether, by accepting the chaplaincy, his pastoral relation had not \nbeen dissolved. The reply was in the negative. \n\n1 [e aai annexed to I tutohess Presbj tery on its being received by \n\naod in 17<> : ;. The records for many years are in his clear, \n\nbeautiful hand. Be preached at the opening of its sessions, in \n\nAlbany, September 9, 1765, on the federal holiness of children. \n\nI \n\n\n\n604 SAMUEL KENNEDY \xe2\x80\x94 BENJAMIN CHESNUT. \n\nThe presbytery requested him to publish the sermon. He speaks \ncontemptuously of those who hold that "saving grace is the only \nqualification for participation in the sacraments," and charges \nthem with acting like "petty deities\'" in scrutinizing the heart. \n\nBeing dismissed from Rumbout. he supplied Fishkill, and opened \nan academy there. Among his pupils was the Rev. Dr. John H. \nLivingston, that eminently pious minister and able divine, so use- \nful in the Reformed Dutch Church. \n\nWhitefield, writing July 20, 1770, speaks of congregations on \nthe North River, "large, attentive, and affected," and mentions \nFishkill and New Rumbout. \n\nHe took his dismission from the presbytery in 1773, and died in \n1784. \n\nHe married the daughter of Theodorus Van Wyck, one of his \nelders : his son, T. V. W. Graham, was a judge of probate, and an \nelder in the church in Albany. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL KENNEDY, \n\nBorn in Scotland, graduated at Nassau Hall in 1749, and was \ntaken on trials, by New Brunswick Presbytery, on the 26th of De- \ncember of that year. He was licensed, May 18, 1750, and was \nordained minister of Baskingridge, New Jersey, June 25, 1751. \nHe exercised the office of a physician and a teacher. His labours \nin his appropriate work were blessed to the upbuilding of the \nchurch and the increase of believers in numbers, in sound know- \nledge and godliness. \n\nHe died August 31, 1787. \n\n\n\nBENJAMIN CHESNUT \n\n\n\nWas born in England, graduated at Nassau Hall in 1748, and \nwas licensed by New York Presbytery. He was received under \nthe care of New Brunswick Presbytery, October 3, 1749, and was \nordained, September 3, 1751. He was settled at Woodbury and \nTimber Creek, New Jersey. When Lawrence was sent to spend \nthe winter of 1751 at Cape May, Chesnut supplied his pulpit, in \n\n\n\nJAMES BROWN*. 605 \n\nthe Forks of Delaware. At his request he was dismissed from his \ncharge in May. 1753, though he continued to supply the congrega- \ntions for a while. He whs sent to Fagg\'s Manor, to Forks of \nDelaware, and to Charlestown and New Providence. He seems to \nhave become the stated .-apply of the two last-named congregations, \nand t\'\xc2\xbb have Bottled there in 17o6, on a promise of forty-four \npounds yearly. In 1763, there were seventy pounds due: thero \nbeing do prospect of las being paid, he was dismissed by Philadel- \nphia Presbytery, in May: hut, in November, the congregations \noffered to make ap fifty pounds yearly, ami the presbytery left it \nto him to accept it or not. He appears to have gone to the Smth. \nin the fall of 1765: in 1707, he was sent to Timber Creek. He \ntaught school about twenty miles from Philadelphia, and died in \nITT.",. \n\n\n\nJAMES BROWN \n\n\n\nWas probably born in Connecticut, and graduated at Yale in \n1717. lie was licensed in October of that year, at one of the \nearliest meetings of Suffolk Presbytery. The venerable and aged \nJSbenezer White, of Bridgehampton, being greatly distressed by \n\ntie- Beparatioo of BOme of his people, Brown was sent for, to endea- \nvour to unite the people upon him, and prepare the way for the \n\niation of the pastor, lie was successful, and was called soon \nafter. His ordination took place June 14, 1748. Azariah Horton \nprayed; Sylvanua White preached from Titus ii. 7, 8; Prime "in- \ntroduced the solemnity," propounded the questions, and prayed; \nBuell gave the righl hand of fellowship; Prime exhorted the peo- \nple, and lounga closed with prayer. Buell* wrote to Jonathan \nEdwards of the revival which at that period blessed East 11 amp- \nton, and "of a yet greater work at Bridgehampton, under the \n\nministry of Mr. Brown, a very pious and prudent young man." \nHe needed all prudence: some oi the people of the separation had \nreturned to their duty, but were restive. In August, 1749, Dr. \n< \xe2\x80\xa2 of Bridgehampton, having recently experienced e bl< \n\non hi- soul, desired the presbytery to take measures for allowing \n\nhim in a BOOTl time to pnaeh. They deferred the matter. A.b0Ut \n\nfchia period, the Rev. John Paine] established a Separate Church \n\non Strict Congregational principles, and a meeting-house wa- built \n\n\n\n* i\' rd*. Suffolk Prwbytery, \n\n\xe2\x99\xa6 Mr. Paine iru \xe2\x80\x94 l j > \xe2\x96\xa0 t \xe2\x96\xa0 I \xe2\x80\xa2 - * - 1 irhOt itandlng tt tha \'J\'">r of b utbold, \n\nin April. \n\n\n\n606 NAPHTALI DAGGET. \n\nmidway between Bridgehampton and Southampton. Brown was in \nvery melancholy services, and implored Bellamy most piteously, \nyear by year, to visit his people and endeavour to allay the heart- \nburnings and establish just principles of religion. He did much \ngood, amid all his trials. The signal refreshing of 1764 left an \nabiding influence till the Revolution. The loss of health compelled \nhim to lay aside his pastoral work in March, 1775: he died, April \n22, 1788. The congregation remained vacant till 1787, but was \nblessed with a great revival in 1783. \n\nBrown was "distinguished* for the soundness of his theological \nviews, and ably defended the doctrines of the Reformation." \n\nIn recording his dismission, the presbytery refer to his melan- \ncholy circumstances, and speak of him as a sound, orthodox, judi- \ncious, spiritual preacher, laborious and successful. \n\n\n\nNAPHTALI DAGGET \n\n\n\nWas born at Attleborough, Massachusetts, in 1727, and gradu- \nated at Yale in 1748. He had been taken on trials by the moderator \nand Mr. Youngs, of Brookhaven, and, on appearing before Suffolk \nPresbytery, was licensed, August 9, 1749, "till next session," \naccording to their custom, and was sent to Smithtown. Obadiah \nSmith and George Phillips, Esq., presented a call for him, May 22, \n1751 ; and he was directed to prepare a sermon on Titus iii. 5, 6, \nand an exegesis on "An Christus, qua Mediator, remittat peccata?" \nHe was ordained, September 18, 1751, being the first pastor ever \nsettled in Smithtown. Brown, of Bridgehampton, preached from \n1 Timothy iv. 24 ; Prime, of Huntingdon, stated the grounds of \nPresbyterian ordination, "took the engagements" of pastor and \npeople, "managed the incorporation" of three men and four women \ninto a visible church ; "White, of Southampton, gave the right hand \nof fellowship ; Horton, the missionary to the Indians, exhorted the \npeople ; and Youngs closed with prayer. His stay was short, the \npresbytery learning, November 6, 1755, that "he had been dismissed \nby a vote of the congregation." The presbytery, sensible that the \nsupport had been inadequate, regularly released him from his \ncharge: soon after, he was elected Professor of Divinity in Yale \nCollege. \n\nPresident Stilesf said that the design of Mr. Clap in having a \nprofessor of divinity appointed was to keep up the character of the \n\n* Dr. Prime. \xe2\x96\xa0}\xe2\x96\xa0 Stiles\'s MSS., Yale College. \n\n\n\nNAPHTALI DAGGET. 607 \n\ncollege for orthodoxy, and to prevent Jersey College from drawing \naway the students. He gravely notes down the names of those \nFellows whom Clap could influence, and the motives by which \nthose who were undecided were brought to concur with him. \n\nThe legislature,* in 1753, resolved, that one principal end in \nerecting colleges was to supply the church in this colony with a \nlearned, piotlS, and orthodox ministry; and, for this end, it is ne- \neeassxy that the students have the best instructions in divinity, and \nhave the beet patterns of preaching set before them; they, there- \nfore, recommended a genera] contribution in all the religious Booie- \n\xe2\x96\xa0>\xe2\x80\xa2 Bottling a professor of divinity. Owing to the French War \nand extraordinary taxes, the friends of the measure did not avail \nthemselves of this recommendation, but took up subscriptions, and \nhappily succeeded. \n\nThe rector and the Fellows nominated Dagget, in September, \n1755, to be Professor of Divinity, though he had been ordained \nonly fair years. Upon their application to the presbytery, he was \ndismissed, and went to New Haven in November, and preached \nwith general approbation. When he had preached about four \nmonths in the college, a day (March 3, 1756) was spent in exa- \nmining him on bis principles in religion, his knowledge in divinity, \ncasuistry. Scripture history, chronology, and antiquity, and on his \nskill in Hebrew. Qn all those points he satisfied the Corporation. \nThe next day he preached from 2 Corinthians ii.2, gave his full \nand explicit consent to all the doctrines of the Westminster Con- \nfession, and to the rules of church discipline established in the \nChurches of this colony, and renounced the principal errors pre- \nvailing at the time. He was then Inaugurated. \n\nThe next movement was to organize a church in the college: \nthis was done, in 1 7 ">T, without asking the consent of the Associa- \ntion, on the assumption that a college is, of its very nature, a reli- \ngion- institution. \n\nA revival followed Dagget\'s entering on his professorship, though \nnot of great extent. \n\n< >n the decease of President Clan, he was elected his successor, \n\nand held that office from 1766 to 1777. He retained his profeSBOr- \n\nShip till his death. \n\nWhen the British attacked New Haven, in July, 1779, he was \nwounded while passing alonj He died, in 1780, of the \n\ninjuries n <\xe2\x80\xa2 \n\nlb- mat an instructive and excellent preacher: his sermons, \nenriched with ideas and sound divinity, were doctrinal, experi- \nmental, and pungent II aoceptabli to the legislature, clergy, \nand people. 4 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Tr . :cUt. f Trumbull. \n\n\n\n608 JONATHAN ELMER \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN TODD. \n\n\n\nJONATHAN ELMER, \n\nBorn in New England, graduated at Yale in 1747, and was or- \ndained, by New York Presbytery, pastor at New Providence, New \nJersey, in October, 1750. The congregation, originally styled \nTurkey, was, on the formation of New Brunswick Presbytery, \nplaced under its care, but, on its petition, was restored the nexj \nyear to its connection with New York Presbytery. \n\nOf the first forty years of his ministry, we find no notice beyond \nthe fact that he preached from Jeremiah xliv. 4, at the execution \nof Morgan, the Tory who shot Caldwell in cold blood on Elizabeth- \ntown Point. \n\nElmer said that, though born a Congregationalist, he preferred \nthe Presbyterian system, especially because it allowed of appeals \nfrom the primary courts. \n\nAfter serving his people for twoscore years, a violent opposition \nto him commenced ; charges were tabled, and he was acquitted. \nSubsequently eighteen articles of complaint were exhibited against \nhim ; but the prosecutor refused to proceed, on learning that, by the \nrules of our church, if on the trial it appeared that they had been \nlaid malignantly or rashly, he must be censured openly. His dis- \nmission was asked for in August, 1791 : ninety of his congregation \nremonstrated, but the majority insisted. The presbytery, after \nmany fruitless but faithful attempts, dissolved the relation : Elmer \nappealed, and the synod, in session at Albany, in 1793, sustained \nhis appeal. He immediately resigned, and was dismissed, October, \n1793. \n\nHe acted as stated supply at Millstone, and occasionally at other \nplaces, and died June 7, 1807. \n\n\n\nJOHN TODD \n\n\n\nIs said to have been a weaver: he graduated at Nassau Hall in \n1749, and was taken on trials by New Brunswick Presbytery, May \n7, 1750. On the pressing appeal of Davies, the synod, about ten \ndays after, recommended the presbytery to endeavour to prevail \nwith him, on being licensed, to take a journey to the Southern \ncolonics. He was licensed, November 13, and went to Virginia. \nA call was laid before the presbytery, May 22, 1751, and he was \n\n\n\nJOHN TODD. 609 \n\nordained on his acceptance of it. He was installed, by Hanover \nPresbytery, pastor of Providence, in Louisa county. This was \n"the upper part" of Davies\'s field, and had, on his urgent recom- \nmendation, called Edwards,* when dismissed from Northampton, \nand had offered him one hundred pounds. "While yet in doubt of \nhis acceptance, Daviefl wrote to Bellamy, entreating him to use his \ninfluence with Edwards, or, if that were vain, to come himself. He \ndescribee them as a people capable of appreciating solid, judicious \npreaching of the best kind. Daviea delighted in him, and speaks \nof him as his favourite friend: he relied on his judgment in cases \nof importance, and styles him his cautious and prudent friend. \n\nWhitefield thought, in September, 1754, that Providence seemed \nto point directly to Virginia and the Orphan-House; but in De- \ncember he spoke doubtfully: \xe2\x80\x94 "Is the call to Virginia? Who \nknows but an infinitely-condescending God may improve me \nthere?" In January he was at Todd\'s: "fresh doors of useful- \nness are opening, I trust." He lamented he had not come sooner. \n*\'A spirit of conviction and consolation appeared in every congre- \ngation." \n\nToddf wrote to Whitefield, June 26, 1755, that "on the day of \nhifl departure multitudes were longing to hear more; the people of \nGod drowned in tears, hardy gentlemen weeping for their neglected \nsouls. I returned home as one that had sustained some amazing \nloss, and with the desire that 1 might contribute more than ever to \nthe salvation of souls. I have had the comfort of many solemn \nSabbaths since I saw you, when the power of God has attended \nhifl word for sundry weeks together; and in my auditory, which \nwas crowded, often I could scarce see a face where tears did not \nindicate the concern of their souls. These appearances have not \nwholly Bed." \n\nL\'olon.l Gordon, of Lancaster county, said, on hearing him at \nthe administration of the sacrament, November 1, 1761, "I never \nheard :i sermon, hut one I heard from Mi - . Danes, that I heard with \nmore attention and delight. Oh, if the Lord would he pleased to \nsend ofl a minister of as much piety as Mr. Todd!" \n\nlie corresponded with the Rev. Dr. Gordon, of Stepney, near \n\nLondon, and obtained, through him. Scientific apparatus and valu- \nable hooks. These In- gate to the Rot. David nice, to aid Tran \n\nsvhania Presb vterv in founding a school. \n\n* Todd died July 27, L798. \n\nHi- daughter married the Kev. l>r. Daniel hfcOalla, ^i\' South \n\nI ina. \n\n\n\n* Bellamy papers. f Gillie*. \n\n39 \n\n\n\n610 CONRAD WORTS \xe2\x80\x94 JAMES FINLET. \n\n\n\nCONRAD WORTS, \n\nProbably licensed* in Germany, in consequence of some diffi- \nculty with the Dutch Reformed Coetus, applied to the Presbytery \nof New Brunswick. The High-Dutch congregation of Rockaway, \nin Lebanon township, New Jersey, addressing the presbytery, \nthey referred the matter to the synod, and, after their committee \nhad taken the measures suitable to prevent injury or offence to the \nDutch Reformed body, they took the congregation under their care. \nWorts was taken up as a probationer, September 3, 1751, Rock- \naway asked for him, May 9, 1752, and he was ordained their pastor \non the 5th of June. \n\nIt being likely he could be more useful in another connection, he \nwas dismissed, October 21, 1761, and probably entered into the \nGerman Reformed body. \n\n\n\nJAMES FINLEY \n\n\n\nWas born in county Armagh, Ireland, in February, 1725, was \neducated under Samuel Blair, at Fagg\'s Manor, and accompaniedf \nWhitefield to the Orphan-House in Georgia. He probably studied \ntheology with his brother Samuel, at Nottingham ; he was licensed \nby Newcastle Presbytery, and ordained pastor of East Nottingham, \nor the Rock, in Cecil county, Maryland, in 1752. This was a \nseparation on the rupture from Elk River: the two parties united \nin 1760, McDowell giving up the charge of Elk. He engaged in \nteaching, and some of our best ministers were trained under his \neye. \n\nA large emigration to the Redstone country began as soon as \nthe lands were exposed to sale. Finley crossed the Alleghanies in \n1765, and again in 1767, in company with his elder, Philip Tanner; \nand, by direction of the synod, he supplied Ligonier and the va- \ncancies beyond the mountains for two months, in 1771-2. His son \nEbenezer removed in 1772, and became an elder in the congrega- \ntion of Dunlap\'s Creek. Thirty-four heads of families in the com- \n\n\n\n* The newspapers state that in 1752 seven German ministers arrived in New \nYork. f Whitefield\'s Letters. "Old Red Stone;" by Dr. Joseph Smith. \n\n\n\nJAMES FIXLEY. 611 \n\nmunion of his church took up their abode in the "West ; most of \nthese were valuable men, and became elders and pillars of churches. \nThree of Finley\'s sons removed; and he asked a dismission from \nhis charge, that he might follow them. His people, with affecting \nsolemnity, earnestly protested against the granting it, for he was \nbeloved greatly, and useful, and needed not to remove, being well \noff in the world; and that it would be an irreparable loss to part \nwith him, especially when all around them were vacancies and no \nprospect of supplying them. lie appealed from the judgment of \n\nthe presbytery, and the synod dissolved the pastoral relation. May \nIT, 1782. He was not dismissed to Redstone Presbytery till April \n\n26, 17 x -">. and lie was received by that body, June 21. lie was \ncalled to Rehoboth and Kound Hill, both in the Forks of Youghio- \ngheny, in the fall of 17 s 4, and remained there till his death, Janu- \nary 6,1795. \n\nHe published a pamphlet, \xe2\x80\x94 "An Attempt to set the Levitical Pro- \nhibition in relation to Marriage in a true light." He was greatly \ngricv.d at the decision of the synod in restoring to church privi- \nparties married within the forbidden degrees, and still more \nfor making such marriages censurable only so far as they showed \n\nnntendernese to the scruples or prejudices of well-disposed persons. \n\n\'This discussion probably led the synod, in 1782, to direct him to \n\nprocure a copy of the Adopting Act of 1 Tii\'. \xc2\xbb. He could not find \n\none. In protesting agtfnst (he decision, he said, "Upon the whole, \n\nalthough 1 desire not to promote uneasiness, yet, knowing it to be \n\nmy duty to testify against the declensions and dangerous innova- \n\nii our church, 1 am obliged by conscience to act as 1 do in \n\nud may go further, be oflendecl who will." \n\nThree of Ins sons, Joseph. Michael, and William, were elders at \n\nith. Hi- Bon John Evans Finley settled at Fagg\'s Manor, \nand was the minister of Bracken, in Mason county, Kentucky, \nduring the Great Revival The Rev. Robert M. finley is a grand- \nson oi James Finley. \n\nOn removing 4 to the West, the Supreme Executive Council of \nPennsylvania intrusted important bosim bs to him, and commissioned \nhim a- i justice of the peace and s judge of the Common Pleas; \n\nSmith: iii.Mi i- Pennsylvania Archives. \n\n\n\n612 EVANDER MORRISON \xe2\x80\x94 ROBERT SMITH. \n\n\n\nEVANDER MORRISON \n\nWas probably a minister from Scotland. He resided in Con- \nnecticut in 1748 and \'49, and was allowed* twenty-six pounds for \nbis services at East Hartford during the sickness of the pastor in \n1748. In September, 1752, he was directed by Abingdon Presby- \ntery to supply Tehicken and the Forks of Delaware. The next \nyear he joined Newcastle Presbytery, and laboured at Middle \nOctorara, then just occupied by Cuthbertson, of the Reformed \nPresbytery. The New Side and the Covenanters worshipped in \nthe same house, at different times. Morrison and Cuthbertson \nwarmly debated the points in controversy, with the usual result, \xe2\x80\x94 \nincreased alienation. \n\nHe succeeded Whittlesey at Slate Ridge and Chanceford. No \nmention is made of him, that we have seen, after 1756. \n\n\n\nROBERT SMITH \n\n\n\nWas bornf in Londonderry, and came with his parents to Ame- \nrica in 1730. They made their home at the Head of Brandy- \nwine. They were pious people; and no doubt their instructions \nand example prepared him to receive, at the age of fifteen, " with \nmeekness, the engrafted word" from the lips of Whitefield, on his \nfirst visit. He studied with Samuel Blair, and was licensed by \nthe New-Side Presbytery! of Newcastle, December 27, 1749, and \nwas married, on the 22d of the next May, to Miss Betsey Blair, \nthe daughter of his preceptor. He accepted a call, October 9, \n1750, to Pequea and Leacock, in Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, \nand was ordained and installed, March 26, 1751. He confined his \nlabours to Pequea after October 9, 1759. \n\nThe earlier years of his ministry were signally blest ; the sub- \nsequent period was unmarked by any distinguished display of \ngrace, but silent, gentle influences from heaven steadily distilled \non the work of his hands. He lamented\xc2\xa7 that the young gene- \nrally, and so many of his older hearers, were living contentedly \n\n\n\n* Connecticut Ecclesiastical MSS., Hartford. \n\n| Assembly\'s Missionary Magazine. J Record in his Bible. \n\n\\ Bellamy papers. \n\n\n\nROBERT SMITH. 613 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0without Christ. The Anti-Burghers drew away some of his \npeople, who enjoyed the ministrations of the father of the \nlate excellent and Rev. Dr. Alexander Proudfit, of Salem, New \nYork. \n\nThe school at Pequea was prolific in valuable men. Several \nof the pioneers in the Redstone country were trained there, in \nacademical Btudiee and theology. Dr. McMillan and Dr. Samuel \nMartin, of Chanceford, were his pupils : the latter regarded him \nas superior in natural gifts and scholarship to his distinguished \nBona Samuel Stanhope and John Blair. He was of eminent piety, \nu living in heaven." "As a preacher,* his great excellence lay in \nStrong and convincing appeals to the conscience, in the various \nknowledge he discovered of the workings of the human heart, and \nthe tenderness with which he led the penitent soul to its true hope \nand rest." "Well acquaintedf with all the subjects necessarily \nconnected with theology, remarkably able in exposition of the \nScripture, he spent much time in meditation and prayer, and was \nentirely abstracted from the world." lie published several ser- \nmons : of only a few of them are any copies to be found in any \npublic, library. Bis two sermons on "Saving Faith" were \nreprinted in Scotland, in the " Evangelical Preacher," and are \ns;iid by Dr. Martin to have been the best ever written on that \nsubject. \n\nThe depreciation of the Continental currency,]: and the emigra- \ntion beyond the Alleghanies, led him, in August, L782, to ask the \nPresbytery to release him from his charge. They delayed for ;i \nyur, at the earnest request of the people; and, in April, 17M, \nthe <ongregation having engaged to compensate in part for his past \nlosses, and t<> give him yearly four hundred bushels of wheat, he \nwas prevailed OU to stay. It was his privilege to have three SOnS \n\nenter the ministry: \xe2\x80\x94 Dr. Samuel Stanhope Smith, President of \nNew Jersey College, Dr. John Blair Smith, President of Hampden \n\nSydney and >>f I oiOD College, and Dr. William Ramsey Smith, \n\nminister of Wilmington, and subsequently settled in the Reformed \nDutch Churoh. During the blessed revival in Prince Edward \ncounty, Virginia, in which the labours of his sun John were bo \n\nhighly honoured, the aged man went thither, and "when he BaW \n\nthe grace of God, he was glad; \' for he was a g 1 man, and full \n\nof the Holy Ghost, and of faith; 1 and he exhorted them, with \nfull purpose of bearl to cleave unto the Lord." He spoke of it \naj quite equal to the wodi of power and grace which, In his \n\n\n\nI Dr. M \n\none it Cedar Ghrova \n\n\n\n614 ALEXANDER CUMMING. \n\nearlier years, he saw, when Whitefield, and Tennent, and Blair, \nwere in the land. \n\nHe was moderator of the General Assembly in 1790. \n\nReturning from Philadelphia, he reached Rockville, Chester \ncounty, on Saturday evening, and, on Sabbath morning, was \nfound lying on the roadside, with his faithful horse beside him. \nHe died in a few days, April 15, 1793, greatly honoured and be- \nloved, aged seventy-one, after a ministry of forty-two years. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER CUMMING \n\n\n\nWas born at Freehold, New Jersey, in 1726. His father, \nRobert Cumming, from Montrose, Scotland, was an elder, and \noften sat in synod. \n\nHe was educated under his maternal uncle, Samuel Blair, and \nstudied theology with his pastor, William Tennent. Licensed by \nthe New-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, in 1746 or \'47, he was \nsent by the synod, in compliance with pressing supplications, and \nspent some time in Augusta county, Virginia. He was the first \nPresbyterian minister that preached within the bounds of Ten- \nnessee. Remaining some time in North Carolina, he married \nEunice, daughter of Colonel Thomas Polk, the President (in May, \n1775) of the Mecklenburg Convention. \n\nHe was a stated supply in Pennsylvania for some time. Though \nnot ordained, he opened the Synod of New York with a sermon, \nin September, 1750. In the following month he was ordained, by \nNew York Presbytery, and installed collegiate pastor with Pem- \nberton, in New York. \n\nUnanimously called, his clear, discriminating mind, his habits \nof close study, his instructive and excellent preaching, his happy \nfaculty of disentangling and exhibiting difficult and abstruse \nsubjects, peculiarly attracted and delighted his more cultivated \nhearers. The Hon. William Smith, in writing to Bellamy, says, \n" His defect in delivery was not natural, but the effect of bad \nexample: his elocution, however, is not, and cannot ever be, as \nprompt as yours." But before the second year of his ministry \nclosed, the presbytery was called to consider the difficulties which \nhad arisen, and, in 1752, referred the case to the synod. The \ncomplaints against him were, that, when disabled by sickness, he \ndid not invite Pemberton to preach; that he insisted on his right \nas pastor to sit with the trustees, and manage the temporalities ; \nfor encouraging the introduction of Watts\'s Psalms, and for in- \n\n\n\nALEXANDER CTMMLXG. 615 \n\nsisting on family prayer as a necessary prerequisite in every one \nto whose child he administered baptism. \n\nlit- requested to be dismissed, October 25, 1753, because his low \nstate of health would not allow him to go on with his work in the \ndivided, confused state of the congregation. No opposition was \nmade, and he was dismi \n\n(.\'umming joined with his parishioners, Livingston, Smith, and \n. in publishing the " Watch-Tower," the "Reflector," the \n"Independent Whig," \xe2\x80\x94 spirited, patriotic appeals against the \nsteady encroachments of the royal prerogative on our constitu- \ntional liberties. \n\nIn feeble health, and with little prospect of usefulness, he re- \nmained without charge till February 25, 1761, when he was in- \nstalled pastor of the Old South Church in Boston. He preached \non that occasion, and Pemberton gave the charge, and welcomed \nhim. " 1 do it with the greater pleasure, being persuaded, from a \nb.ng and intimate acquaintance, that you are animated by the \nspirit of Christ in taking this office upon you, and that you desire \nno greater honour or happiness than to be an humble instrument \nto promote the kingdom of our adorable Redeemer." \n\nWilliam Allen,* of Philadelphia, Chief-Justice of Pennsylvania, \nto Dr. Mayhew, of Boston, in 17\xc2\xbb>o, and thanked him for \n\nthe gift of two Eft rmons, "which, you hint, were preached on ae- \nof Mr. Cumming\'s reveries; for I can call nothing that \n\nc >me\xc2\xa3 from him by a better name, DOT ought I, if he continues to \n\nbe tli\'- same man be was with us. He offered himself to the con- \nion heii-. of -which I am a member: though the greater part \n\nare moderate Calvinisms, they could not relish his doctrines." \n\nAfter charging Humming with teaching that works are dangerous \nto the soul, faith being every thing, he adds, " He may be a pious, \n\nwell-disposed man, but 1 believe he is a gloomy, dark enthusust, \n\nand a great pervorter of the religion of Jesus Christ as taught in \n\n| |] e|." \n\nTo Allen and Mayhew, dimming seemed "an extravagant \n(anatlC." It W8S a wonder bow he could have been admitted a- \n\nminister in Boston. Vet he was condemned as a Legalist by the \nfavourers of the other extreme. \n\nAndrew CrOSWell, a zealous follower of I );ivenport, had settled \nin Boston. He published a Bermon, with tin- title, "What is \n\n1 \xe2\x96\xa0 to me if be i- not mine\':" presenting the view \xe2\x80\x94 perhaps \ndistorted \xe2\x80\x94 of Marshall, in his "Gospel Mystery of Sanotiiica- \ntion," and lleney, in his "Theron and &spasio. \' Cumming re- \nplied, taking the ground of Bellamy. It was perhaps bis earnest- \n\ni ii this point that arrayed his Scottbb bearers against him in \n\n\n\nill\'s Life of \' \n\n\n\n616 HUGH HENRY \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN KINKEAD. \n\nNew York. They had the Erskines in great reverence : they \nloved the doctrines which rallied Scotland\'s best men against the \nAssembly\'s decision in the Marrow controversy. Smith speaks, \nin his history, contemptuously of the opposition, as of the lower \nclass ; and Robert Philip brands it as a cabal of ignorance and \nbigotry.* The fact that these persons called the Rev. John \nMason from Scotland, and that they and their children constituted \nthe congregation of Dr. John M. Mason, is a sufficient refutation \nof these charges. \n\ndimming died August 23, 1763. " He was full of prayer, \nwith a lively, active soul in a feeble body." This was the testi- \nmony of the excellent Dr. Sewall, with whom he was joined as \ncolleague in Boston. \n\n\n\nHUGH HENRY \n\n\n\nGraduated at Nassau Hall in 1748. He was one of the \nstudents trained by Samuel Blair. He was ordained, by the \nNew-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, pastor of Rehoboth, Wico- \nmico, and Monokin, in 1751. At that time the harvest, following \nthe labours of Robinson and Davies in Somerset county, " seemed \nnearly over, though considerable gleanings were still gathered" \nafter his settlement. Davies spoke of him at that time as likely \nto prove an extensive blessing to that part of the colony of \nMaryland. \n\nHe died in 1763, greatly esteemed. \n\n\n\nJOHN KINKEAD \n\n\n\nWas born in Ireland, and is mentioned, on the records of Phila- \ndelphia Synod, as a licentiate, in May, 1752. He was, at that \ntime, sent to the Valley of Virginia, to supply from the middle \nof November till the first of March : " in case he receives a call, \nhe shall continue eight weeks only." McKennan supplied his \nlack of service, and his reasons for not having gone were sus- \n\n* Nothing of this sort is intimated in the private correspondence of the leading \nmembers of the congregation. \n\n\n\nJOHN KINKEAD. 617 \n\ntained. " A member of the congregation of Norrington applied \nto the synod, supplicating the ordination of Mr. Kinkead, as fast \nas our Btated rules and methods will permit. The synod, at con- \nsiderable length, heard the reasons offered by the Presbyteries of \nPhiladelphia and Newcastle why they could not attend on the \ntrials and ordination, so as to answer the request of the con- \ngregations. The congregations of Great Valley and Norrington \nBelonging to Philadelphia Presbytery, they ordered that said pres- \nbytery should attend the trials and manage the ordination; and, \nlest a delay should be occasioned by the paucity and distance of \nthe members, Mr. Cathcart is ordered to correspond with said \npresbytery as an assistant." He was ordained, and the synod \nordered him " to correspond with Newcastle Presbytery in \nAugust." \n\nIn 1754, he spent three months in Virginia, and was dismissed \nfrom his charge, and was publicly disowned by the presbytery, in \n\nI T~>7. Immediately on the union, (May 31, 1758,) Philadelphia \nPresbytery directed Gilbert Tennent to write to him, and inform \nhim that he most desist from preaching at Middletown, (now in \nDelaware county, Pennsylvania,) as it was offensive to the con- \ngregation and to the presbytery. He was informed of the time \nof the next meeting. The records of the presbytery furnish no \nfurther notice of him; but, in 1759, at his request, the synod ap- \npointed a committee to converse with him. " lie came next day, \nand gave in a paper to the synod, as, he says, for his own cx- \noneration, in order to his continuing a member. The synod, \nhaving never excluded him, concluded to consider and deal with \nhim as a member. The minute being read to him, he refused \nmembership notwithstanding." \n\nWindham, in New Hampshire, obtained his services, and he \nWas settled there in October, 1760. They had supplicated the \nsynod in May; and Dr. Alison ami Mr. Ewing were directed to \n\nwrite to them a recommendatory letter in favour of Kirkpatrick, \n\nwho was going with the New Jersey forces the ensuing cam- \nKinkead was dismissed in April, 1765; and, in IT 1 !\'. 1 , it wafl \n\nII particularly represented to the synod that lie is, by many, given \n\nout to he a I\'re-I.ytrriaii minister, though his conduct i> noway \nCognisable by us for he ha- never hem a member of any of OUI \n<\xe2\x96\xa0 the union." \n\n\n\n618 ALEXANDER MILLER. \n\n\n\nALEXANDER MILLER, \n\nFrom the parish of Ardstraw, asked, in 1753, to be permitted to \npreach as a minister of the synod, acknowledging that he had been \ndegraded by the General Synod of Ireland, the sub-Synod of Lon- \ndonderry, and the Presbytery of Letterkenny ; but offering the \nminutes of the presbytery in proof that he had been treated hardly \nand unjustly. Several of the members had already written to \ntheir correspondents in those bodies, and they refused to encourage \nhim till they received answers; and they warned all under their \ncare not to receive him as a minister till he was fully cleared. He \nappeared before the synod, June 2, 1755, and begged that they \nwould endeavour to procure a reconciliation between him and the \nSynod of Dungannon or the Presbytery of Letterkenny. McDowell \nwas directed to write to Messrs. William Boyd, of Taughboyne, John \nMarshall or John Holmes, of Glendermot, and enclose his peni- \ntential letter of acknowledgment. The next spring, the congrega- \ntions of Cook\'s Creek and Peeked Mountain, (now Harrisonburg,) \nin Rockingham county, Virginia, supplicated that he might be \nreceived by the synod as a member, and installed as their pastor. \nThey resolved to wait until the ships came in from Ireland in the \nfall, and if they brought a letter from the synod of Ireland accept- \ning his acknowledgment, or if no letter came, then Black and \nCraig were to install him, provided they find his conduct in that \npart of Christ\'s vineyard such as becomes a gospel minister. In \n1757, the supplication being renewed, he was unanimously received \nas a member, and Craig was appointed to install him before the 1st \nof August. \n\nThe Presbytery of Hanover cited him to answer certain charges, \nat a meeting to be held, as he said, four hundred miles from his \nhome. He attended, but found that Todd had prevented the meet- \ning, and subsequently, on the day the presbytery was appointed to \nmeet in another place, Todd and two other members came to Mil- \nler\'s meeting-house on their sole authority, ordained a man, re- \nceived charges against Miller, judged him, and adjourned to an- \nother place. The presbytery annulled these proceedings; but \nMiller declined their jurisdiction, and they, disregarding his de- \nclinature, found him guilty of unworthy behaviour, and deposed \nhim, May 3, 1765. He appealed to the synod after a delay of \nfour years, and without giving notice to the presbytery : the pres- \nbytery was ordered to attend the next year, that the synod might \nhear both parties. Dissatisfied with this, he renounced the synod, \nand was disowned ; and all presbyteries and congregations were \nforbidden to employ him. \n\n\n\nJOHN MILLER. 619 \n\n\n\nJOHN MILLER* \n\nWas born in Boston, December 4, 1722, his parents having come \nfrom Scotland in 1710. He experienced the power of religion \nunder the ministry of Dr. Bewail, and studied theology with Mr. \nWebb. He began to labour in Kent county, Delaware, in 1747 or \n\'4*, and was ordained at Boston, in April, 1749. He took charge \nof Duck Creek, and gathered the congregation in Dover. One of \nWhitefield\'a letters ia dated Dover, May 8, 1747 ; and it is likely that \nthrough his suggestion the Boston ministers engaged Miller to \nenter on this field. \n\nHe was married, November -\'-\\ 17">1, to Margaret, daughter of \nAllonby Millingtun. Esq., of Talbot county, Maryland. \n\nII" joined the Old-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, after May, \n1756, having until then formed no ecclesiastical connection in the \npeninsula. It may naturally be supposed, that the settlement of \nMatthew Wilson decided him to join thai presbytery, in preference 1 \nto the New-Side body. En L768, the Presbytery of Lewes was \nformed of the brethren of both Bides; and it seems to have been a \nhappily-united and harmonious body. \n\nII" visited Accomac county, and appeared before Lancaster \nytery to represent the destitution of the Eastern Shore, and \nthe prospect of building up our interest; and they ordained Samuel \nBlair, Jr., and sent him thither. \n\nHe died in July, 1791, and was buried at Dover. His eldest son, \n\nJohn, entered the Revolutionary army as a surgeon, and died Feb- \nruary 28, 1777, aged twenty-live. Mrs. Miller died November \n\n2_\'. 17 s \'.\'. aged sixty. His son Edward Miller, M.D. was a dis- \njhed physician in New York. His congregation at D&ck \n\nCreek i now Smyrna) built a handsome churchy after his death, \n\nand tried to secure tke pastoral services of his son Dr. Samuel \nMiller. \n\nIt was the unhappinees of the congregation- after his death to \n\na heretical teacher, and they dwindled and \n\nalmosl became extinct. The Brick Church!; remained closed \n\nfor a Dumber of year-, until Mr-. Leah Morri- \xe2\x80\x94 a daughter of Mr. \n\nWinder, who had been brought, by means of the labours of Dr. \n\n:- while a licentiate, to embrace the Confession of our \nchurch, and who became a pioUS man and a ruling elder at Wic- \n\nmico \xe2\x80\x94 removed in her widowhood to reside with her son l >r. W. W. \n\n\n\nBiographic*] Diotioi \ni m- Letter 1 1 i\'i 8 und< U to bland \n\nj Memoir of Mr-, blorrii : la i>r. Gh \n\n\n\n620 WILLIAM McKENNAN \xe2\x80\x94 MATTHEW WILSON. \n\nMorris, at Dover. At first she secured occasional supplies to \npreach in the court-house, and in May, 1825, the church was again \nopened for public worship. She died February 2, 1826. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM McKENNAN \n\n"Was probably a native of Drawyers, Delaware. He was \nlicensed by Newcastle Presbytery before May, 1752, and was sent \nby the Synod of Philadelphia to supply North and South Moun- \ntain, Timber Grove, North River, and Cook\'s Creek, and at John \nHinson\'s, in Virginia. He spent seven or eight months in the \nSouth. \n\nBefore May, 1756, he was settled at Wilmington and Red Clay : \nhe resigned the former in 1794, and continued in the charge of the \nlatter till his death. \n\nDr. Martin says, he was venerable for his years and his piety. \n\nGovernor McKinley,* who after the battle of Brandy wine was \ntaken prisoner by the British in his own house at Wilmington, left \nproperty to him by wifi. \n\n\n\nMATTHEW WILSON \n\n\n\nWas born in New London, Chester county, Pennsylvania, Janu- \nary 15, 1731, and was educated under Alison and McDowell. He \nwas licensed, by Newcastle Presbytery, before May, 1754, and was \nemployed to teach the languages in the synod\'s school at Newark, \nMcDowell taking the other branches. He was ordained, before \nMay, 1755, pastor of Lewes and Cool Spring, Delaware; and he \nwas sent, for three months in the following spring, to Virginia. \n\nIn 1768, John Harris, who had served the New-Side congrega- \ntions, left them, and the fractions united, and Wilson added Indian \nRiver to his charge. Though most steadfastly attached to the Old \nSide, he had a great dislike of the Scottish ecclesiastical system ; \nand he had a favourite plan of church government, which he twice \npresented to the synod. \n\n* Rev. George Foote: History of Drawyers. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH PARK. 621 \n\nHe was engaged as a teacher, a physician, and a pastor, and was \neminent in all these professions. He was skilled in jurisprudence, \nand highly esteemed for his counsel. He was zealous in the cause \nof American Independence, and inscribed the word "Liberty" on \nhis cocked hat, that no one might doubt his sentiments. He died, \nMarch 30, 1700. His son, James B. Wilson, succeeded him for a \nshort season; and he was even more distinguished than his father. \nAfter he was settled in Philadelphia, the Governor of Delaware \nwrote to him to retain him as counsel for the State in case the \nPenns should sue. He replied that he had examined the papers \nin his father\'s possession, and was satisfied that the Penn claim \ncould not be resisted in law or equity. \n\n\n\nJOSEPH PARK. \n\n\n\nIt is not unlikely this was the missionary who was sent, by the \nLondon Society, to the Indians at Westerly, Rhode Island, in \nIT-\'):): his labours were wholly unsuccessful until the coming of \nDavenport. Accompanied by many Christian friends, he marched \ninto the town in solemn procession, singing as they walked. He \npreached from John v. 40, \xe2\x80\x94 a solemn, awakening sermon, but no- \nthing extraordinary: a cry arose all over the house from a sense \nof .-in and danger. A great change speedily followed throughout \nall the neighbourhood. One hundred and six were added to the \nchurch in Westerly, besides sixty-four Indians. \n\nThrough his kindness to a poor person, in giving her shelter \nunder hil rout\' while Buffering with the smallpox, so many injurious \nreports arose that he was obliged to publish a narrative* clearing \nhimself of having spread that dreaded disorder. \n\nlie began to preach at Mattituck and Ac<iuebogue, \xe2\x80\x94 "broken \n\nchurches, "sadly shaken and reduced by separations in 17">1; and, \n\non appearing before Suffolk Presbytery, May ~ { .>, 1752, they exa- \nmined him on his BOUndneSfl in the Earth and his experience of \n\nreligion, and then received him. A call was presented at that \ntune by James Beeseand Nathaniel Warner, and the presbytery \n\nmet at Mattituck, .June !\xc2\xbb, for hifl installation. In the two places \n\nthere were only seven men ami fifteen women in the communion* \n\nBuell preached from 1 Timothy i\\. I6j Sylvanus White presided, \n\nami charged the pastor ; Drown exhorted the people, ana Throop \nBe was unrated, February 1 1, 17.">\'\', and u not mentioned \n\nagain. \n\n* Harvard Library. \n\n\n\n622 SAMUEL HARKER. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL HARKER, \n\nOr, as the name is sometimes spelt on New Brunswick Records, \nHarcour, was probably of Huguenot descent. Remarkable* for \nsize, vigour, and strength, he spent his youth in manual labour. \nHe graduated at Nassau Hall in 17 \xe2\x80\x94 , and was taken up by New \nBrunswick Presbytery, December 6, 1749, and was licensed No- \nvember 6, 1751. Roxbury and Hardwick asked for him, June \n5, 1752 ; and, being called to Roxbury, on Black River, in Morris \ncounty, New Jersey, he was ordained there, October 31. \n\nHe challenged! Abel Morgan, the Baptist minister of Middle- \ntown, and who had debated on infant baptism with Finley, in \nWest Jersey; and they disputed on that point for two days at \nKingwood, in Hunterdon county. "Some proselytes," says Mor- \ngan Edwards, " being found in the Baptist camp, and some from \nHarker\'s being missing, some shook their heads and others opened \ntheir mouths." In 1752 or \'53, a man named Heaton, who, with \nthree brothers, had moved from Wrentham, Massachusetts, to es- \ntablish iron-works on Black River, near Schooley\'s Mountain, be- \ncame a Baptist because he could not find a text proving infant \nbaptism. This led Robert Colver, who lived there, to advertise \na reward of twenty dollars for a text proving infant baptism. \nHarker carried a text to him and demanded the money: being \nrefused, he sued him ; but the justice ordered Harker to pay the \ncosts. On the Black River dwelt also a small number of Rogerenes, \nor Quaker Baptists, from Groton, Connecticut. \n\nThe presbytery heard, in October, 1757, that he had imbibed \nand vented certain erroneous doctrines, and were about to proceed \nagainst him, when they learned that he had left his charge and \ngone as a captain with the army. Laying the matter before the \nsynod in May, Gilbert Tennent, Treat, Samuel Finley, and John \nBlair were appointed to deal with him in such manner as shall \nappear to them most suitable for his conviction. By order of \nsynod, in 1759, a committee met at Mendham and examined a \npaper containing Harker\'s principles, and were happy to find that \nhis sentiments were correct, though far from being happily and \ncautiously expressed. Thus, by "all men\'s being in the covenant" \nhe meant that the covenant, in the proposals thereof, respects the \nwhole human race; and, by the assertion that "the regenerate \nwere not probationers for heaven," he intended to teach that they \nhave a sure and unfailing title to heaven, being interested in the \n\n* Dr. Foote : Sketches of North Carolina. \n\n-j- Morgan Edwards\'s History of the New Jersey Baptists. \n\n\n\nSAMUEL HARKER. 623 \n\nmerits of Christ. They could not, however, convince him that he \nwas in error in teaching that by the tenor of the covenant of grace \nGod has bound himself to bestow savin;: blessings on the endea- \nvours of unregenerate men, and has predestined men to salvation \nupon a foresight of their compliance with the terms of the cove- \nnant. The synod, on hearing this report, thought it expedient to \ntry yet whether further converse may convince him. and agree \nthat he meet with Samuel and dames Finley, John Blair, and \nRobert and Sampson Smith, at Nottingham, in November; and, on \nhis return, with Gilbert Tcnneiit. Treat, Ewing, and l>r. Alison. \nBt with these committees without any benefit, 4 * though the \n\ninterview lasted two days and one evening.* 1 Having prepared \nhis sentiments for the press, he asked the synod, in 1761, to read \nrformance, and, it they would convince him he was wrong, he \nWould amend What was so; otherwise he would think himself obliged \nto print without delay. This they would not do, but declared their \ndisapproval of some of his opinions. The book soon appeared, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2An Appeal* to the Christian World," \xe2\x80\x94 and was forwarded, in \n\nNovember, 1 7\' > 1 , by Bostwick, to Bellamy. ,V A most shockingf \n\nbad 1 k : it may serve to show the inconsistency of the modern \n\nfashionable divinity." The Bynod, in 1763, condemned the two \n\npropositions in which he was declared erroneous on a previous \nlion, and al-o a third: \xe2\x80\x94 "that the covenant of grace is in such \na sense conditional, that all, by the general assistances given under \nthe gospel, have a sufficient ability to fulfil the conditions of it, \nand BO, by their own endeavour-, to insure regenerating grace ami \nsaving \'>!\'\xe2\x80\x94 in_ r ~." They therefore declared that they could not \nContinue him as a member, and that he is disqualified for preaching \n\nor exercising his mini-try anywhere. The congregation of 1 \xc2\xbb 1 : i \xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x80\xa2 k \n\nRiver was thrown into confusion on hearing this, and wrote to Dr. \nrs to call a meeting of the synod without delay. lb\' COn- \n\nBulted New Brunswick Presbytery; and they judged that it was \nnot desirable, for that all the gooa to be expected could be accom- \nplished by Bending a committee thither. Accordingly, in August \nthey Bent Hait, McKnight, and Kennedy; and, Boon after, the \nBranch of Black Btver asked for supplies. McWhorter,J of \nk, wrote to Bellamy, January 28, 1.764, "I think 1 don\'t \n\nlive in a printing pari of the world. 1 see l.ut \\ery few new 1 ks. \n\nThere i- ;i gentleman in our province who has lately published a \n\npiece, and, being one of our Bynod, he was censured for it last \n\nd, \xe2\x80\x94 to wit, Mr. Marker, whether it has been able to travel \nso far \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2- t" your parts, I can\'t till. It pleases some for the \nArminianism it contains, or because it takes the promi \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 i- i.. I,.- (band in wj public librwy. \n\n| N. Il:i/..\'U\'I : IVll.ii , \xe2\x99\xa6 li.M. \n\n\n\n624 JOHN WRIGHT. \n\nGod which are yea and amen in Christ Jesus, and endeavours to \nmake them yea and amen in a natural man\'s good endeavours ; and \nbecause he now and then turns off some of what he looks upon to \nbe asperities and unrighteous severities in the holy law of God. \nHe is evidently a very inaccurate writer, a man of little reading, \nand has no settled scheme that will, in any tolerable measure, hold \ntogether. I am afraid some will attempt to answer him who, \nthough they may hold more truths, are as far from any well- \ndigested scheme of religion as he. I should be extremely glad, if \nhe lay in your way, you would drop some reflections which might \nhave a tendency to make him know his standing." \n\nJohn Blair published an answer to his " Appeal to the Christian \nWorld," entitled, "The Synod* of New York and Philadelphia \nDefended." \n\nHarkerf married Rachel Lovel, daughter of a French Protes- \ntant residing at Oyster Bay, Long Island, a most excellent woman. \nOne of his daughters married Dr. Caldwell, of Lamington, who, \ndying early, left her with an infant, \xe2\x80\x94 the Rev. Dr. Joseph Cald- \nwell, President of the University of North Carolina. Another \nmarried Judge Symmes, of Marietta, Ohio. \n\n\n\nJOHN WRIGHT \n\n\n\nWas born in Scotland, and, while living in Virginia, enjoyed \nthe friendship of Davies. He graduated at Nassau Hall in 1752, \nand was admitted to special intimacy by Mr. Burr,;}; being of a \nvery good character for understanding, prudence, and piety. On \nleaving college, he travelled in New England, and visited Jonathan \nEdwards. Davenport wrote to Bellamy, \xc2\xa7 May 29, 1753, " Mr. \nWright, who was licensed last winter, (by Newcastle Presbytery,) \nis to be ordained in about a fortnight, to go to Virginia and Caro- \nlina." He was the principal supply of Hanover while Davies was \nin England ; and, on his return, he found that he had conducted \njudiciously and to admiration. \n\nIn 1761, he wrote|| to Mr. Peter Munford, (Montford,) of the \nFishkills, a friend and benefactor of his; and, "after an agreeable \nrecollection of a former intimate Christian intercourse, exhilarates \nhis drooping soul by the particulars of what King Jesus does \namong the wild Virginians. I settled, about seven years ago, \n\n\n\n* Philadelphia Library. f Dr. Foote. \n\nX Dwight\'s Life of Edwards. \xc2\xa7 Bellamy papers. || Ibid. \n\n\n\nJOHN WRIGHT. 625 \n\nabout the middle of James and Roanoke Rivers, in a very scat- \ntered congregation, and among a very ignorant people, destitute \nof any kind of religions knowledge, though mostly of the Church- \nof-England persuasion. Upon my first preaching here, they were \nawakened and awfully alarmed; and, in about nine weeks, many \ngot engaged in a most solemn manner for my settlement with \nthem, and promised me a decent maintenance: which invitation I \nted before Newcastle Presbytery; and I may say, to the \nof a good and a gracious God, that we never saw the \nnatural spring since but \' the Day-spring from on high hath \nvi.-ited us.\' \n\nu 1 preached here first in March, 1754, and completely settled \nthe October following. On the last Sabbath of the succeeding \nJuly, I received to the Lord\'s table about one hundred souls \xe2\x80\x94 \nmostly from the Church of England \xe2\x80\x94 who were never com- \nmunicants before. Thirteen months after, I received about ninety \nmore; and, at every sacrament since, an addition has been \nluad.-, on a moderate calculation, of about thirty; and I always \nhave two sacraments in a year. Rut this spring and summer \n\nled all the seasons I have been acquainted with, in Vir- \nginia, for conviction and conversion: the work is more universal \nand powerful. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 Religion seemed to be sunk exceeding low, while its enemies \nwere very lively, hoping there was now no God in Israel, and \neven the children of the kingdom drooping through unbelief. I \n\nll] of fears myself, lest we had provoked the iloly One of \nIsrael to depart from us forever; but even then the stability of \n\nwenant, and his unchanging regard to his own glory, propped \n\nittering faith, and led me to preach in another channel. \nalmOSl a new thing to myself ami my hearers, \ninsomnoh that 1 could say it was good for us to be afflicted with \ndiscouraging fears. People gren more ami more engaged, and \nsinners were awaked in an uncommon manner and degree; and \nirhal supported my hopes wis I could Bee the Sun of righteous- \nihixung upon the negro quarter in tin- darkest and Btormiest \nI \xe2\x96\xa0!\' our spiritual winter. When the revival began, it Bpread \n\npowerfully among the blacks than the whites, so that tlmy \n\nOrowded to me in great numbers, solemnly engaged and deeply \n\naffected, to know what they should do to be Baved, I received to \n\neonununion, between the second Sabbath in dune and the firsl in \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 ne hundred souls, among whom were forty-six \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2our enemies were exceedingly confounded, and the children \nof the kingdom exceedingly humbled, \xe2\x80\x94 consequently, more joyful \n\nnnd highly exalted than e\\er. A greal number were then arnbi* \nLights, who before hated and Boomed the \nM \n\n\n\n626 JOHN WRIGHT. \n\nname. Some of our bitterest enemies were conquered, and made \nwilling to deny themselves and take the cross. \n\n" About five years ago I baptized some few negroes,* and they \nkept dropping in one after another, till, about two years ago, I had \nfifteen admitted to communion. At this time, I baptized two \nleading fellows of one Colonel Cary, who has now twenty slaves \nin full communion in our church. The work has ever since been \nspreading among that gentleman\'s slaves, and others round; and \nI believe there are now about three hundred Ethiopians solicitously \nengaged after the great salvation. Could I solemnize the Lord\'s \nSupper in the centre of my congregation this fall, I might have \nhopefully one hundred black converts at the table. I have now \nabove one hundred catechumens under examination for baptism, \nbesides fifty or more I baptized since last May. \n\n" 1. When I came first here, there was not a shadow of a con- \ngregation. Mr. Davies, Robinson, Cumming, James Finley, \nBrown, Davenport, and Henry preached a few sermons in their \ntransitu, and, I suppose, there might be four or five pious souls \nin all my bounds when I came ; and yet, amidst the whole of the \nwork, there has been scarcely any tincture of enthusiasm. The \nLord kept the converts low by a constant view of their own \nhearts, so that they were rather tempted to unreasonable diffidence, \nthan, like the Separates, inclined to go and preach to others. \n\n" 2. Those who were first taken among the whites, though none \nof the grandees, were yet accounted responsible, honest people; \nand, when the husband or wife was awakened, the same ordi- \nnarily happened to his or her consort, unless in few instances, and \nthere the person exercised was uncommonly supported under the \ntrial of the other\'s opposition, and the trial generally was not \nlong. \n\n" 3. Those among the negroes who were first baptized were the \nmost honest, upright, leading men among their tribes, which greatly \ncontributed to spread religion among their fellow-slaves ; and their \nmasters, overseers, and stewards generally fell in with religion \nbeyond all expectation, and thereby they were greatly en- \ncouraged. \n\n" 4. The opposition has been, and still is, violently strong, but \n\n\n\n* "I am a member of a society in London, which lays out a large sum of \nmoney every year in books to be distributed gratis among the poor. When I pub- \nlished the arrival of my nomination of books, I called upon the negroes to accept \nof them all. Few of them became scholars, but they seemed exceedingly attentive \nand affected on receiving the books. The work spread amazingly among them. \nLast year I had nine hundred and forty-eight books, this year eleven hundred and \nfifty-five. This, in the hand of a gracious Providence, with the prayers of a great \nnumber of very holy souls in and about London, is the cause of this glorious work \namong them." \n\n\n\nJOHN BRIGHT. 627 \n\ndoes not hinder or retard the work: it enter? into their families, \nand takes hold of their children, husbands, and wi \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 5. T \xe2\x80\xa2 re are as few apostasies as ever I knew in a work of \ngra< f bo large an extent, among uncultivated Bonfe.** \n\nWright was installed in Cumberland by Davies and Henry. "At \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2rament on the last Babbath in July. 1755, two thousand \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0were present : there were one hundred and eighty communicants, \n\neighty being new ones. There wen- general awakenings for \n\nsundry Sabbaths before, and new instances of deep and rational \nconviction. Jn August, of \xe2\x96\xa0 Lord\'s day, I saw above a hundred \nweeping and trembling under the word." Davies said, in the next \nsummer, ** Wright\'s labours continue to be blest. v There was \nmore of the power of God that spring, summer, and autumn, than \never. There were remarkable revivings in Davies\'s congregation, \namong the negroes; in Henry\'s, among the young: in Wright\'s \n:al, but eminently among the young. "After the \nsacrament io September, 1 don\'t know that there were two un- \naffected hearts in my congregation. On the third Sabbath in \nNovember, there was a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit; \nChrist triumphed among us; convictions were more deep and pun- \ngenl than formerly." \n\nIn the middle of May. 1757, Wright preached at "Willis Creek \n\nfrom Acta xvii. BO, having had do Buccess before, and thought it \n\nwould be the beginning of better days. I la\\ ing been sicklythrough \n\npring, he relapsed in June : .Martin and Henry assisted him \n\nat the sacrament. <m Friday, a congregation assembled, and he \n\nventured to talk from \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0All things are ready." This was a word \n\nin Mason to Baint and Binner. M We had a prelibation of what fol- \n\nllonry preached firom Rev. xxii. 17. I never saw the \n\nif Christ triumph as thm. One B. \\V. had heeii three years \n\nunder temptation. \n\nSuch miserabies as I.\' said he, on Friday, \'have no place at \nd\'a table.\' \n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x96\xa0 \\ \xe2\x80\xa2 rou then willing to give op all your part and portion in \nChrist?\' \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2 .No; not for a thousand world-.\' \n\nl4 On Sabbath, Wright took him aside, and gave him a token, \nwhich be accepted with great reluctance. In fencing the first table, \nthis poor object, and, going to him with the bread, he said, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2 I cannot take : I feel do faith.\' \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2 But don\'t you want < \'hri-t \'.\'\' \n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 % \'^ \xe2\x80\xa2 : hut 1 am not worthy of him.\' \n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2 \\r<- you not ready V \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x96\xa0 I am lost withoul him.\' \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2 Are you oot labouring and heavy laden? \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 k 1 am crushed under the load of Bin. 1 \n\n\n\n623 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\n" \' Then Christ calls you by name to come to him.\' \n\n" He took the bread, and stood up. Being a tall man, he was \nseen by all, as, stretching out his hands, with the most affecting \ncountenance, he said, \' Lord Jesus, I am lost without thee. I \ncome trembling. I would fain be a partaker of thy broken \nbody; for I am undone without thee. Lord Jesus, have mercy \non me!\' " \n\nNo spectator can ever forget that solemn transaction between \nChrist and that poor sinner. The whole day was " one of the \ndays of the Son of man." Thirty-six new communicants were \nreceived. \n\nHe was a correspondent of the publisher of the " Glasgow \nChristian History," and, it is said, of John Wesley also. \n\nAnd must this glowing account of zealous labours and great \nsuccess end abruptly with the statement, that Wright was sus- \npended, by Hanover Presbytery, in 1763, and never restored ? \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\nThe synod received, in September, 1753, a letter* from Pem- \nberton, of New York, informing them that, owing to dissensions \nin his charge, his hope of usefulness was gone, and that a \nunanimous call from a congregation in Boston was ready to be \nplaced in his hands. He desired that a committee might be sent \nto New York without delay to issue the business. Several mem- \nbers of the congregation made a representation of their divided \nstate ; and a committee was appointed, with full powers to do as \nthey judge necessary for the healing of divisions and for the best \ninterests of religion there. Tennent, of Freehold, with his elder, \nSamuel Ker, Burr, Beatty, Bostwick, Spencer, and Caleb Smith, \nmet in the city, October 24. No opposition was made to the dis- \nmission of Gumming ; but, being sensible of the many difficulties \nPemberton laboured under, they allowed him a month\'s time to \nmake a further trial, and left him at liberty then to remove or \nabide, as he saw best. \n\nDuring the month, even the gentlemen who were fearful that \nhis departure would endanger the peace of the congregation were \nsatisfied that he should go ; and, on the joint recommendation of \nPemberton and Gumming, the congregation (November 19) sentt \n\n* MS. Records of the Trustees of the Congregation. \n\nf The letter was signed by Nathaniel Hazard, James Jauncey, John Smith, \nJoseph. Forman, and Nathaniel McKinley. \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. 629 \n\nObadiah Wells, to request and entreat the Christian and charitable \nI\'ice of the Rev. Joseph Bellamy, of Bethleni, Connecticut, \nin coming and preaching to them a few sermons, and aiding them \nby his counsel and advice. " \\Yc know of no more powerful \nmotive we can offer to excite you, than by telling you, from very \ngood accounts we have from several worthy ministers among us, \nthere is an undoubted prospect of your being instrumental in \nhealing our breaches and uniting our congregation. 1\'emberton \nand Cumming, also Mr. Vanhorn, the rider, and others, wrote to \n\nhim to spend a Sabbath with them, being in great hopes* that, by \nthe blessing of heaven, it would be of singular advantage to the \nit of religion, and, perhaps, a means of composing our dif- \nferences."f \n\nBellamy was born in 1719, in New Cheshire, Connecticut, \n\ngraduated at Vale in 1785, and was settled, in 1740, in kk the \n\neast part of the North Purchase," a new parish set off from \n\n\xc2\xbbury, with the name of Bethlem. He was then one-and- \n\ntwenty ; and, having observed that, on the failure of their people \n\nt" Bupport them, ministers commonly went to work, and were then \nblamed for neglecting their duty, he declared that he would accept \n\ntheir call only on condition that he might give himself wholly to \nthe -acred office. A gracious revival blessed the fust years of his \nlabour. At Wallingford, also, he was greatly favoured with suc- \ncess. He approved of Davenport\'s cause long after others, like \nEdwards and Burr, thought that " Peter should he withstood to \nthe face." His own spiritual comforts declined, religion ran low \n\namong his people, and, amid desertion and anguish, he received \nsuch impressions of the nature, evil, and mischiefs of false re- \nligion as changed the whole course of his foldings, and moulded \nanew his whole BVStem of opinion. " The delusions^ which 1 saw \ntake place in New-Light times have engaged me, as well as the \n\ndivided state of the Christian world in general, to devote mj| \n\nwhole time for above twenty years to inquire into the nature of \n\nChristianity. 1 have conversed with all men of genius, into whose \n\ncompany 1 have had aCCCSS, in New England; I ha\\e read all \n\n1 could come at: 1 think 1 have found the truth. 1 have \n\n* Pemberton. \n\nt Obadiafa Wells "wu <\xe2\x80\xa2! ii t.. go to Bethlem, by the Rev, Mr, Poml \n\nM- David Vanhorn, elder, and Mr. 1\'. V. !\'. Livingston, a trustee, and sundry \n\nOther persona in \'li<- < ajegatton, My orders were to desire Mr, Bellnmj to \n\n.\xe2\x80\xa2..I,,,, to Hew York, iui\'I presvob \xe2\x96\xa0 few sen is, to trj to heal our unhappy \n\ni to think of u suitable minister For ns; only not to return i \nhim wioi no\'. I h i i \xe2\x96\xa0 in\'\' before thai some of bit oon \n\nmnofa i: itisfled with lii* ministry, thai \'t^ \n\neluded be musl remove. This made me with joy engage in the affair, hoping the \n\nopen to favour poor, nnh ippj \nIi \n\n\' i. \n\n\n\n630 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\npublished my sentiments in the most open and undisguised man- \nner," in the "Nature of True Religion Delineated." \n\nThis book, so celebrated, so widely influential on the doctrinal \nsystems and the views of experimental religion of all evangelical \nchurches in our land, was sent by Dr. Erskine to the venerable \nRobert Riccaltoun, of Hobkirk, to be " perused with the unre- \nlenting eye of a critic." " The book* is written with so good an \nintention, such zeal and warmth for what he takes to be true re- \nligion, and the whole executed with the true spirit of an original \nauthor, that it is a very disagreeable task to point out blemishes in \nso much beauty. \n\n" There seems to me a great many essential lineaments wanting, \nnot a few which do not belong to it, and some which, I think, are \n\ndirectly inconsistent with it It is well known what influence \n\nthe course of one\'s studies, the writings he has been most con- \nversant with, his company, and the circumstances of the world \nabout him, must have upon a writer. Our excellent author seems \nto have been not a little unhappy this way, as we see by his pre- \nface I am sorry to say that he appears to me deeply \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nthough I dare say insensibly \xe2\x80\x94 tainted with the evil disease of \nregarding the nature and fitness of things, and the eternal truths \nthence arising in the imagination, as the only thing worth a philo- \nsopher\'s notice. By his title, and the whole of his manner, he \nseems formed upon that very fashionable writer, Woolaston, and \nhis fellows, the modern philosophical divines. Their fantastical, \nunmeaning terms \xe2\x80\x94 the nature of things, moral fitness, the true \ntaste or moral sense, moral beauty, with much more such affected \ncant \xe2\x80\x94 run through the whole of his book. He carries them so far \nas to prescribe law to the Almighty, and dictate with assurance \n\nwhat he may do Had he designed it only as an argument \n\nagainst the men he deals with, on their own principles and con- \n* essions, I should have been pleased with it, as you are in that \nview, though even then I could only have considered it as argu- \nmentum ad hominem; but when he gives it as a delineation of the \ntrue religion, I must compare it with the Scripture plan; from \nwhich I think it differs very widely, both in the manner of laying \nit, and even the matter itself. \n\n" Instead of founding religion, or the love of God and our \nneighbour, \xe2\x80\x94 as God himself has done in his record, \xe2\x80\x94 on the love of \nGod in Christ, and the plain facts by which it is evidenced and im- \nprinted, he runs out into metaphysical excursions to raise and \nestablish a sort of idea of God and his essential, and what he calls \nhis moral perfections, (in the very words and phrases of that sort \n\n\n\nRiccaltoun to Erskine. \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IX NEW YORK. 631 \n\nof men,) abstracted from, and previous to, any discoveries lie has \n: f himself in Christ.*\' \n\nThe impression made by his visit to New York was beyond the \nsanguine expectations: the Soots, who had formed themselves \ninto a - iciety, were beyond measure charmed with him; \n\nthe most fervently pioafl were drawn to him with the warmest \nattachment. The closing day of the year was observed as a day \nof fasting and prayer with great solemnity; and then a call was \nunanimously made out for Bellamy. M r. Yanhorne signed the call \nwith an express declaration of his dissent, and wrote, January 8, \nJL754, to inform Bellamy that "four of the trustees, both of the \nelders, and a number of persons of considerable importance to the \nate of the church, are entirely opposed to the choice, not \nfrom any opinion to the prejudice of your piety or abilities, both \nof which they think well of; but because their appears to them \nsomething very disagreeable in your delivery and method, which is \npeculiar to people your way." \n\nThe presbytery met on the 9th, concurred in the call, and also \nto Bellamy, and to the association of which he was a member, \n\nUrging the call, and desiring that if the way were not clear for his \nremoval at once, to allow his spending several weeks in the city. \nYanhorne wrote again, on the 9th, that some objected that "you \ndon\'t preach SO free and generOUS a gospel as we have been used \nto and i- agreeable to us: you do not preach so much in a gospel \nstrain as would he agreeable. If your sentiments with regard to \nchurch communios are such as Mr. Bdwards\'s, it would infallibly \n\nmake the rent in our church much wider, as the bulk of our people \naxe against it, and most \xe2\x80\x94 I believe I may say the whole \xe2\x80\x94 of our \n1." \nThe Hon. "William Smith, one of the oldest members of tho \n\nehttrch, high in reputation SS a counsellor, a j ii\'l LT<-, a patriot, and \n\n. wrote, on tho 1 1th, it being "expected of me to inform \ny to inform your judgment in this un- \ntil affair, there are aboul half a dozen persons on whom the \n; and support of this congregation do depend, who did \n\nli" ( concur in tin- vote, \xe2\x80\x94 because, L. One or two of them think that \n\njudg nt in divinity tends too much to Legalism; -. Sou art; \n\n:ted of having notions too Btrict in the article of visible \nchurch communion; \xe2\x96\xa0">. four discourses here were not sufficiently \nlical, proportionate, and coherent; b As to the an of de- \nlivery in a jusl modulation of voice and gesture ; 5. Yon have \n. (Ugh studied prayer a- a gift, and as a work of the head, \n\n..<\xe2\x80\xa2(\xe2\x80\xa2<\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0, -ary iii a minister who leads the worship of B \n\xe2\x80\xa2i will plea \xe2\x80\xa2< fleet as to your consent to the SYUOdi- \n\ncal determinations in the settlement of our constitution, and the \n\n\n\n632 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\nmethod of worship prescribed in the Directory, and used in this \nchurch, neither of which I think can be altered without damage. \n\n"We choose you for our minister because \'tis thought you are \nfurnished with divine knowledge, natural abilities, aptness to teach, \nand a capacity to address the consciences of men, and, with the \ndivine aid, are likely to promote real religion among us." \n\nThe Scots Presbyterian Society "thought fit," in a letter on the \n14th, signed by Ranal McDougal and William Nicholson, "to \ngive Bellamy notice that we all heartily agree to the call, and fear \nyour refusing may prove fatal to the union of this church." \n\nThe council was called and convened at Bethlem, January 24. \nNathaniel Hazard, Jr., and Captain James Jauncey, appeared as \ncommissioners with the call, and presented their reasons in writing, \nat length, and with much earnestness, dwelling on the union of all \nparties on him. Bellamy presented his views in writing : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" My people give me salary enough, are very kind to me ; I love \nthem, and, if it be the will of God, I should love to live and die \nwith them. There are many difficulties in the way of my going to \nNew York. They are a difficult people, \xe2\x80\x94 don\'t like my terms of \ncommunion. Some of their great men are against my coming : I \nmay possibly do to be minister out in the woods, but am not fit for \na city. I may die with the smallpox, and leave a widow and \nfatherless children in a helpless condition ; my people will be in \ndanger of ruin : it breaks my heart to think the interest of reli- \ngion must sink among my people, the youth run riot, and the little \nchildren be left without an instructor. I humbly desire, therefore, \nthat nothing may be done without the utmost deliberation, and that, \nwhatever advice you may see fit to give me, you would let me and \nmy people know what grounds you go upon. Behold, my life, and \nall the comforts of my life, and my usefulness in the world, and the \ntemporal and eternal interests of my people, lie at stake ; and you \nmust answer it to God if you should give me any wrong advice for \nwant of a thorough and most solemn and impartial weighing of the \naffair. May the infinitely-wise God direct you ! \n\n"I pray you to consider me as one of your most unworthy breth- \nren, almost overwhelmed with concern, and just ready to sink \nunder the weight of the affair, and quite broken-hearted for my \nkind and dear people. \n\n" The council* voted it was my duty to go if the consent of my \npeople could be obtained, and casting all the blame upon them. \nUpon this they were, some of them, so exercised and afflicted as, \nof their own accord, to come to my house and take Mr. Hazard \nalone, before I knew it, and tell him, \' We have done wrong : let \nyour people make another application, and you will obtain your \n\n* Bellamy to Burr. \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. 633 \n\nend.\' Mr. Hazard, on his return, telling this to Mr. Graham, \nBtirred him up to write to New York and encourage a second at- \ntempt."\' The call was at once renewed. \n\nHis friends in New York, "although* he had discouraged and \ndisheartened them more than all his people together, wore per- \nsuaded that the Lord would convince him and them that it was his \nindispensable duty to come. Mr. Lawyer Smith says, lie will \nundertake to answer all your people\'s objections, if they have any \nreal regard to the interest of religion. The Rev. President Burr \nis sent for over to us. that every reasonable objection arising out \nof difficulties among OUTSelVeS may he removed. The Moravians, \nI imagine, boast and glory from their numbers increasing from our \nchurch. The Baptists have been preaching here also last week, \nFebruary 4." \n\nThe venerable Tennent, of Freehold, wrote, February 20, to \nurge hlfl considering the matter anew, "principally because by \naccepting the call you will, under God, save from utter destruction \na rery large and once flourishing congregation. The call is vastly \nmore unanimous than it would have been, without a special inter- \nposition of Providence, to any one living, such is their rent state. \nAnd. I may add.it i.- the earnest desire of our ministers." Robert \n\nSmith, of Pequea, also addressed him: and two of the elders of \ntiie Second Church, Philadelphia, \xe2\x80\x94 David Chambers and Samuel \nHazard, \xe2\x80\x94 applied themselves to secure the influence of Graham, \nof Southbury, in favour of poor New York. \n\nThe presbytery met on the l!7 t li of February, and concurred \nwith the congregation in renewing the call: they wrote to Bellamy, \n\nand also to Graham, and also to the Eastern Association of Fair- \nfield county, to join witli the Association of Litchfield county ill \nadvising aDOUt his removal \xe2\x80\xa2\'The eyes of that society are in- \ntently fixed upon him, as the only person that is likely to unite \nthem; aiel BCaTOS any appear again-t his coming." \n\nEdwards, who had attended the council, was urged by Bellamy \n\nto attend the meeting of the ( lonsociation : he wrote from Stock- \n\n. February 28, 1754, M \'Tis wholly needless that 1 should \n\ncome again 00 the atl\'air of your going to New York, ami altO- \n\nr improper, as 1 suppose now the affair will properly be re- \nferred to the Association or Consociation. And, besides, 1 think I \n\ncan do more good by writing than by coining. 1 wish vmi had \n\nbeen \xe2\x96\xa0 little more particular in your information, [desire yon \n\nWOttld write to me again SS - i a- possible. I have a mind to \n\nwrite a htter to the moderator of your Association. Hut only I \n\nwant to know miieh more about the matter, that I may know the \n\nhow to write. Please to inform me whether Lawyer Smith \n\n* N. B \n\n\n\n634 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\nhas received my letter, and what he writes to you ; and what has \nbeen done at New York and at the presbytery, and what, and after \nwhat manner, application has been made in that affair, and what is \ngoing to be done further. Probably, I shall have a mind to write \nto some others, besides ministers, about this affair. Therefore I \ndesire you to be particular, and full, and speedy in your writing to \nme. Particularly inform me when the Association meets on this \naffair."* \n\nMr. Obadiah Wells wrote from New York, February 28, " Things \nhere, to appearance, ripen apace for so desirable an event, [as ob- \ntaining you for our pastor,] and much beyond what I ever expected. \nWilliam Smith, Esq., is most sincerely engaged in it beyond all \ndoubt, and has, by his indefatigable labours, made true proselytes \nof Messrs. William Livingston, Morine Scott, Whitehead Hicks, \nand his own son William, who are all gentlemen of the law, and \nall now very desirous to have Mr. Bellamy. Also Mr. William \nP(eartree) S(mith) is much altered, as I am informed, and Mr. P. V. \nB. Livingston. As to Elder Vanhorne, he seems to be the only \nobstinate person that I know of; Moravianism has, to a deplor- \nable degree, infatuated that poor unhappy gentleman. Our trus- \ntees have voted two hundred pounds per annum, salary, and a sub- \nscription is going about for fifty pounds more for four years: in \nthat time our church will be out of debt, and then \'twill no doubt \nbe able to do it all without a subscription. \'Tis my opinion that \nsuch a salary, with the perquisites, will make a handsome living for \na family like yours. Neither are our people unmindful of doing \nsomething, by way of remittance, to the good people of Bethlem, in \nregard to their settlement." \n\nBellamy noted at the bottom, "But what if the trustees won\'t \nvote it [,\xc2\xa350] at the end of four years ? they won\'t be so likely to \ndo it then as now. \n\n"N.B. \xe2\x80\x94 Nothing is said of their voting my terms of admission \ninto their church." \n\nThe Rev. John Graham, moderator of the Fairfield Association, \nhad written to Lawyer Smith, January 24, and, on his reply of \nFebruary 19, he "wrote the best apology for the state of his \nchurch and congregation which he could, consistent with truth." \nOn the loth of March, he wrote again that the state of affairs was \nsuch that " I cannot but hope the ministers of Litchfield Associa- \ntion will most readily advise his accepting the call. All difficulties \nwith regard to a suitable provision for his maintenance are entirely \nremoved, the salary fixed on the public revenues of the congre- \n\n* "If it should really so come to pass that you should remove to New York, my \n\xe2\x96\xa0wife desires to buy your negro \'woman, as she supposes she will do better for the \ncountry than the city. She will probably come along through your place some time \nin April, when she will talk with you about it." \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. 635 \n\ngation, and an addition thereto by private subscription. As to the \nfew votes that did not concur at the first, they are almost to a man \neffectually gained. The rest, being two or three, I do not despair \nof. Not one man among us will make any faction or disturbance; \nand there is the greatest prospect of the most unanimous approba- \ntion of Mr. Bellamy as our minister, of any man that 1 know of in \nAmerica." \n\nMr. Bmith also drew a long and very able and pathetic appeal \nto the church of Christ in Bethlem: it is dated March 15, and \nmed by .John Stephens and William Eagles, deacons, in be- \nhalf ox the whole Presbyterian Church at New York, and by Cap- \ntain Jeremiah Owen, oldest trustee of the congregation. "This \ncongregation, from the smallest beginnings in 1715, through strug- \ngles and difficulties, has at length, though very lately, become the \nU08l important church in this Province, with regard not only to the \ngeneral interest of religion among those of the Presbyterian de- \nnomination, but also as to the political influence it has in the safety \nand protection of all its sister churches. \n\n" Were we not fully persuaded that Cod has chosen Mr. Bellamy \nfor the ministry of this church, we durst not desire your consent\' \nto his removal. \xe2\x80\xa2 \n\nBostwick wrote to Bellamy on the same day. Ill health had \nprevented him from attending the presbyteries; yet "my concern \n\nfor the interest of religion in that congregation will not permit DM \nto be inactive. That Providence opens the way for your labour \nthere is exceeding evident, from the unanimous and persevering \n\nimportunity <>i\' the people: in this the hand of God is evidently \nseen. The case of New York is really necessitous and distressing*, \nand if they fail in this attempt there is the utmost danger of their \ncoming to ruin.\'\' \n\nMr. .John Smith, the early friend of Edwards, wrote in the \nsame -train: "they will Scarcely unite on any other minister, and \nwill dwindle a\\say to nothing. It\' you can\'t >.e it VOUT dut V to \n\nGod to come among us we are a gone people, our congregation \n\n]i undone, Mini religion is ruined, \xe2\x80\x94 they arc in general so fixed OB \nyour comii \n\nAmong the many letten of invitation sent to Bellamy was "a \nplain one,\'\' dated Mareh 1 8, from John EtobinBon, the collector of \nthe pew-rents: \xe2\x80\x94 "1 am daily conversant among the whole con* \nsregation: they are all impatiently expecting your coming. We \nKeep together, though with many silent Sabbaths. As to the \nfew objections, they told me their Boruples hinged on the shortness \n\nOf the tryal Of you. I pray Cod may direct your way to us \n\nspeedily. < Jen. xxiv. 1\'.\' aid \n\nBellamy had well Considered the whole matter, and had drawn \nDp a little book of " I Ibjectionfl :" \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\n\nC36 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\n" 1. As to my worldly support. It will take three hundred \npounds per annum to maintain a minister with any considerable \nfamily ; but I must have at least eight at my removal, which, in a \nfew years, may probably increase to twelve or fourteen. But at \nNew York they have not been used to give their ministers half so \nmuch as three hundred pounds ; and, if they are persuaded to it, it \nis to be feared that there will afterwards be murmuring and dis- \ncontent among the people, which would render my life miserable, \nand destroy my usefulness. Their way of maintaining ministers by \nsubscription, I am told by those I may fully credit, is uncertain, \nand not safe for a minister to depend upon ; whereas, there is no \nuncertainty attending our way in these parts. My people give \nme salary enough, and are willing to pay it, whereby I am under \nadvantages to attend quietly to the work of the ministry, and run \nno risk. \n\n" 2. My removal to New York must be attended with great \ncharges. I must resign my house and farm for the use of the \nnext minister for a number of years, or pay my people eight hun- \ndred pounds, Old Tenor, upon account of the settlement I formerly \nreceived of them. \n\n" It will cost at least two hundred pounds, York money, to re- \nmove my family, and furnish a house at New York, in order only \nto make as decent an appearance as we do now here. We have \nevery thing decent for a country minister already. It is not \nreasonable that I should be at this extraordinary expense out of \nmy own estate, since it would be altogether not for my own, but \nfor their sakes. And can it be supposed they will cheerfully be \nat so much cost and trouble, when it would be so much cheaper \nand easier to get a young, unsettled man ? \n\n" 3. The only profession of faith required among them, in \norder to an admittance to special privileges, is in these words: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\' You do declare your unfeigned assent unto the articles of the \nChristian faith, as they are contained in the Scriptures of the \nOld and New Testaments;\' \xe2\x80\x94 but the ancient Pelagians, Socinians, \nand all other heretics, would make this profession, and might, \ntherefore, be admitted to special ordinances upon this plan, and \ncould never consistently be excommunicated, which would be \ndirectly contrary, I think, to the express words of Scripture, \n(Tit. hi. 10,) and also to the sense of the Church of Scotland. \nAlthough what we judge to be orthodox, in every minute circum- \nstance, may not be necessary to be professed in order to enjoy \nchurch privileges, yet I am of opinion that, as to the main and \nmore essential principles of the Christian faith, they ought to be \nexplicitly professed and assented to; otherwise, I cannot so much \nas guess what a man\'s principles are by the public profession he \nmakes. \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. 637 \n\ni: 4. Aa to the covenant in use at the administration of baptism, \nI perfectly approve of it: only there is one alteratioi I should \niii-i-t upon, \xe2\x80\x94 viz.: instead of , * Yon are desired to give up your- \nself, and this your chill, to God,\' thus: \'You do now give up \nyourself, and this your child, to God;\' because, otherwise, they \ndon\'t bo much as profess to do the wry thing which gives right to \nbaptism, and which the very form itself supposes to be necessary; \nfor why Bhould they he so much as desired to give themselves and \ntheir child to God if their doing so were not at all needful to its \n\nregularly baptised? \n\n. My people are. and have been ever since my settlement \namong them, remarkably satisfied with my ministry, ready to \nsupport me, ready to receive instructions and reproofs; and my \nministry has been blessed among them, which has increased a \nmutual endearment among us : by all which I am under great ad- \nvantages to do good among them. Nor could they easily, if pos- \nsibly, be brought to be willing to part with me: and, if i Bhould \n\nthem, they would be in very great danger of ruin, for it \n\nwould lie extremely difficult to find a man that would unite \nI \n\nThe substance of these objections lie had communicated to the \nu of New York, in a letter concluding thus: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n14 Gentlehbh : \xe2\x80\x94 1 am heartily concerned for the welfare of \nyour congregation, and am willing to do any thing that is my \nduty to promote your prosperity. But these difficulties, which \nhave been mentioned, arc real, and of great weight; and, besides \n\nall that has been said, 1 and my family must run the venture of \n\nour lives the first time the smallpox comes into the city. \n\n" it is the part of :i wise man to sit down and count the cost: \n\nit becomes a prudent man to foresee the evil. It will doubtless \nbecome your congregation and church, and the presbytery, to \n\xe2\x96\xa0 things thoroughly, and. perhaps, hereby all parties \nconcerned will be satisfied that it will not be best bo make any \nfurth.-r attempts for my removal." \n\nTo the Consociation he said, that, after his representations of \nthe difficulties, " the congregation are still resolute, pleading they \n\nare undone if fchej fail Of BUOCeSS. Now, what 1 ha\\c to offer is \n\n: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa21. I cannot apprehend it to be right to removes minister \nfrom ;i people, where both are well agreed, unless in oases of \nspecial necessity; nor (2.) can 1 think s minister is obliged to part \nwith all the delights of s peaceable and quiel life, to be put at the \nhead of a congregation attended with so many difficulties, unless \nthere be a rational prospect of doing so much good to souls, and \nto the interest of the Redeemer\'s kingdom, as makes il a duty to \nI \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 all the o ills for : nor (8.) can 1 be \n\n\n\n638 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORE. \n\nwilling to go myself, and take my family, into the way of the \nsmallpox, as in the present case, unless the affair be so circum- \nstanced that the interest of the Redeemer\'s kingdom makes it my \nduty. \n\n" I am sensible that the people of New York plead that a great \ncongregation lies at stake, and, if they are ruined through my \nbackwardness to go, are ready to say I must answer for it; and \nministers in those parts, by letters, urge and press it upon my \nconscience in the most solemn and affectionate manner, as matter \nof indispensable duty. To all which I reply, if it does appear to \nbe my indispensable duty to remove, there is no more to be said. \n* The will of the Lord be done!\' I ought to go, all selfish con- \nsiderations to the contrary notwithstanding. This is the point to \nbe judged ; but, I conceive, it cannot be made out to be my duty to \nremove, unless it can be made to appear: \xe2\x80\x94 1. That some settled \nminister should be removed to supply New York. 2. That no \nother can answer as well, or better, or be removed with as little or \nless difficulty. 3. That there is a prevailing probability that my \nremoval would, all things being considered, do more good and pre- \nvent more harm there, than it -will occasion here." \n\nThe church of Bethlem met on the 25th, and voted, that the \nDeacon Hezekiah Hooker, Esq., Jabez Whittlesey, and Samuel \nStrong, with Captain Josiah Averett and Mr. Samuel Slater, be a \ncommittee to represent the church before the Consociation. On \nthe 26th, the New York Pleas were heard ; and the church com- \nmittee asked for a copy, and to have the affair adjourned, that \nthey might answer, in writing, in due time. Their answer was, \nthe reiteration of Bellamy\'s four points : \xe2\x80\x94 that the burden lay on \nthe New York commissioners to prove that it is right to remove a \nsettled minister against his own wish and that of his people ; that \nit is necessary some settled minister should be removed to New \nYork ; that it is necessary that Mr. Bellamy be that man, and \nthat he is likely to do more good there than here. The church \nvoted, by a full majority, on the 26th, that Mr. Bellamy should not \nremove to New York. \n\nMr. Slater presented his reasons. The Bible says nothing of \nremoving ministers. We look upon it that he is the gift of God to \nus, and that it is of the Lord\'s mercy we have such a teacher, and \nthat we should pray he would continue him to us. But if he is \nremoved, a door will be flung open for poor mortals to speak evil \nof the ways of God, and of our religion ; and we may lament, \nand say, as Moses did, " Lord, what will become of thy great \nname?" \n\nThe Consociation adjourned, and advised Bellamy to visit New \nYork before they met in May. He accordingly came there early \nin April, and remained six Sabbaths. On Monday, April 8, Mr. \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK:. 639 \n\nObai.liah "Wells wrote to him, that a club of deists had heard his \nforenoon sermon the day before ; and that one of them, in a very \nengaged manner, in their meeting in the evening, told them it was \ntin- bet time he sh-mM meet with them, as he was fully convinced \nof their madness and folly, and that he would hereafter seek for \namendment of life. lie added, that \'\xe2\x80\xa2another prayerless person \ncame yesterday to a conclusion to set up the worship of God in \nhis family. These things give me great hopes that God is about \nto do glorious things for poor New York through you." \n\nBut, on leaving, Bellamy informed the elders and deacons, that \nit wa> plain that at least ten families were Opposed to his settle- \nment, and that he ihoald think it his duty to declare to the \ncouncil, that he did nut think, as things stand, it would be For the \nglory of God and the interest of religion for him to be removed. \nBfe Besought them to make Q0 further attempt. But a new aspect \n\nwm placed on the affair by the following paper from the Scots \nPresbyterian Society : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2 To 1*4 Kiln and DtOCOtU of the Presbyterian church in the city of New York, and to \nthe trustee* of the Congregation, x<: \n\n\'-Gkntlemkn: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"There are many considerations which make us Tory desirous 1 \n\nthat all matters of uneasiiie-s may be removed, and a BoKd and \nlasting peac lished in the congregation, and that without \n\ndelay. Imbed, it was proposed to omit saying any thing about \nthese affairs until all things were ripe foe the settlement of a \n\nminister, and then to refer all to a presbytery or synod; but, \nnevertheless, if our difficulties can be settled amongst ourselves, it \nwill undoubtedly be most for the real satisfaction of the eon* \ngregation, and lay the most solid foundation for a Easting peace, \nas well as tend to encourage a minister to settle among as. We \nwould, therefore, in behalf of ourselves end our adherents, humbly \npropose the following scheme of accommodation with relation to \nI i I \'-aim-, the Confession of Faith, and the trusteeship, about \n\neach of which there has been so much uneasiness and ouitro- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 l it, A- to the Psalms, notwithstanding we are m much at- \ntached to our old Psalms as ever m were, yet, for peace\' sake, we \nwill resign the point, and say m more. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2lMIv. A- to the Westminster Confession and Catechism \n\nadopted by this church, we request no more than that the minister \n\nand 1 admit none t0 Sealing ordinances but those who \n\nare qualified as said Confession and Catechisms teach they ought \nr> be, and that laid Confession and Catechisms be recommended at \nthe baptism of children, agreeable bo the practice of the Church \nland. \n\n\n\n640 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\n" 3dly. As to the trusteeship, we consent that it remain as at \npresent ; and at the expiration of three years from the first day \nof January, a.d. 1755, \xe2\x80\x94 by which time, it is supposed, the present \ndebts of the congregation will be paid, \xe2\x80\x94 we only request that, from \nthat time and forward, two new trustees may be annually chosen \nby the congregation ; and that such men may be chosen as are \nknown to be wise, able, and faithful men, hearty friends to the \nreligious as well as the temporal welfare of the congregation. \nAnd on this foot we consent that the trusteeship should continue, \nand be established forever; or if, in time to come, any incon- \nveniences should arise which we do not now foresee, we desire \nnothing further than peaceably to refer all to the presbytery and \nsynod. \n\n" And, to conclude : As we hope all our controversies are at an \nend, we desire to forgive, and be forgiven, as to what is past ; to \nbe at peace, and to live at peace, and seek the peace and pros- \nperity of our church, and to do all that in us lies to encourage the \nspeedy settlement of a minister among us. The above we sub- \nscribe, with this condition : \xe2\x80\x94 that the Rev. Mr. Joseph Bellamy be \nour minister. \n\n"We are, in behalf of our society, gentlemen, your very \nhumble servants, \n\n"Jonas Wright, Jacob Reijker, Ronald McDougald, Peter \nClark, Robert Gulleland, Alexander McDougald, Duncan Camp- \nbell, Robert McAlpine, William McKinley, Alexander Wiley, \nWilliam Nicholson, John Durham, Samuel Lowden. \n\n"We shall be satisfied if the following form be used in Bap- \ntism : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"Baptism is a seal of the Covenant of Grace, and is to be ad- \nministered to such as profess their faith in Christ, and their obedi- \nence to him, and to their children. You are now come to present \nyourselves before the Lord, to dedicate your child to God in bap- \ntism, according to divine appointment. \n\n" You believe the articles of the Christian faith as they are con- \ntained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, a sum- \nmary whereof we have in the excellent Confession and Catechisms \nwhich are adopted by this church, and you do now give up your- \nself and this child to the Lord, to be justified by the righteousness \nof Christ, and to be sanctified by the Holy Spirit ; and you pro- \nmise that if this child live to years of discretion, you will bring it \nup in the knowledge of the true religion you have now professed, \nand in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and like pious \nDavid you will bless your household, will pray with and for your \nfamily, and, with good Joshua, you resolve that, as for you and your \nhouse, you will serve the Lord. \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW" YORK. C41 \n\n"These things, by the grace of God, you promise to perform. \nThe vows of the Lord are upon jou : the Lord make you and us \nmindful of our sacred engagements.\'\' \n\nTo all this the elders and trustees agreed on the 27th of April, \nwith this further: \xe2\x80\x94 "that if the debts of the church and congrega- \ntion are not paid at the time any two trustees shall go out of office, \nthe two succeeding trustees shall indemnify and save them harm- \nless from all personal engagements that they are under for or on \naccount of the debts of the church and congregation." \n\nBellamy again addre.-sed to the church and congregation a dis- \nsuasive from further attempts : \xe2\x80\x94 "Perhaps there is scarcely B minis- \nter in New England under more happy circumstances than I am in \nmy present situation ; and perhaps there would seareely a minister \nin North America be under more difficult cireumstances than I \nwould be at the head of your congregation. Nothing* therefore, can \nmake me think it my duty to remove, unless it be the most urgent \n- ;y; and nothing can convince mfi el Buoha necessity but \nactually making the moat thorough trial elsewhere." \n\nBj the advice of Burr, they persisted; he wrote to Bellamy, \nMay 1 1. -\'Tis my advice that the matter be prosecuted. The fer- \nment ; jgation are now in, makes it appear more necessary \nthat their case should be represented in the best manner, and I am \ni tied Messrs. Tennent and Spencer will do it thoroughly. \nThe matter lies before the Consociation: their voice, therefore, I \n\nh\'-].e, will be the voice of God. If you entertain the least jealousy \n\nof the want of a cordial brotherly affection from me, yon greatly \nwrong me, or that I should not be highly pleased with having you \n\nneighbour. There being a little appearance of this in your \n\nBanner of writing makes me Bay this much. I shall nut ocntci to \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2u and pray for you, that <iod would make your duty plain \nyou. \'Tie best, in my opinion, you should wait the result of \n\n1 iation. While 1 am persuaded that the messengers \n\nfrom \' tery will do their utmost to gain it in favour of \n\nBT< w York, 1 would satisfy you, if 1 bad \xe2\x80\xa2\'\' few noun with you, that \nyou ha-, e no cause of discouragement from the conduct of the pea- \nMr. Thomas Grant \xe2\x80\x94 pn.bably one of the promoters of the |epa- \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 eting in Anderson\'s day \xe2\x80\x94 sent his hearty concurrence in the \npecially because "your endeavours in this short time, with \nthe blessing of God, visibly appeared to increase this congregation, \n: iily in numbers, but in true, sincere piety. Scripture, a \n\na no man lightetO a candle and pulteth it \n\n:\' and, without flattery, your Association ad the \n\nsame in confining you to that obscure place, when yi.nr labour and \n\nmuch wanted here. It is true you bave some opposition, \n\nI iderable number to your friends; jot they \n\n\n\n642 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\nare gentlemen of estates and politeness who have been great bene- \nfactors to the church. I think it unreasonable they won\'t comply \nwith the majority, when they concurred with the presbytery that \nthe call of a minister should be by vote, which was by such great \nodds in your favour. I am in hopes that when your residence is \ndetermined among us, they will abate their unreasonable prejudice, \nand am of opinion that in adversity they would be your dearest \nfriends. I believe if you had never preached or been known in \nthis place, one of our synod might have done; but you have so \ndeeply engaged the affections of the congregation, that they will \nnot hear of the call of any other." \n\nThe Consociation met, May 24 ; Mr. Hazard and Captain James \nJauncey being commissioners, and Spencer and Tennent, of Free- \nhold, appearing on behalf of the presbytery. A letter was pre- \nsented from the Rev. James Brown, of Bridgehampton, Long \nIsland, pressing their consent to his removal ; and another from \nSamuel Finley, arguing the most exposed post requires the ablest \nman for its defence. He also wrote to the congregation, answer- \ning the four points concerning the removal of settled ministers. \nThese are both full of excellent sense, and of great weight. " That \npious Enoch," Davenport, wrote also to the Consociation: the frag- \nment begins thus : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n"The whole visible church may be justly conceived with weep- \ning eyes, and in great distress, stretching out her hands to you, \nwhile New York is entreating ; New York, I say, which appears to \nbe in threatening danger of being awfully broken, if not ruined, if \nMr. Bellamy don\'t settle there ; and, oh, what a blow would this be \nat the whole church ! \n\n"Dear ministers of that Christ who purchased the church with \nhis most precious blood, sets her as a seal on his heart and on his \narm, and will at last raise her to eternal glory, can you, oh, can \nyou refuse to hear the cries of this same church in agonies on this \noccasion ? And oh, if you do hear, how may you find through grace \nunspeakably more comfort and satisfaction in this exercise of self- \ndenial than in all self-gratifications put together, and have the \nblessing of many souls ready to perish coming upon you ! \n\n" I humbly submit these considerations to your impartial and \ndeliberate judgment. May the great and glorious Head and King \nof the church favour you at all times, and especially your present \nconvention, with his gracious direction, presence, and blessing ! \nand may you be led to such a conclusion in this important affair as \nshall be most agreeable to the divine word and will, as shall justly \nafford you the most peaceful reflections all your days, and on a \ndying bed, as shall be approved and applauded by the great \nJudge, and as shall be rewarded with a crown of glory that fadeth \nnot away ! \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. 643 \n\n"Permit me now to take leave, humbly and earnestly begging an \ninterest in the secret prayers of you all for your most unworthy \nbut affectionate brother and fellow-servant." \n\nThe Hon. William Smith also wrote, "We have had the pleasure \nto observe that Mr. Bellamy\'s interest in the affection and esteem \nof this people is, by this second interview, greatly increased, and \nthe prospects of his usefulness surprisingly enlarged. Our congre- \ngation has regained its flourishing appearance, and is at present \ngenerally more numerous than in times of its former prosperity. \nThe very opposition itself has changed its nature, and, instead of \nbeing a bar in Mr. Bellamy\'s way, is now a very strong motive to \nhis acceptance of our call. The springs of that small non-concur- \nrence with the vote of this congregation were for some time hid \nfrom me by my belief of public professions, but at length are \ndearly discovered (as to some persons) from a favour to a modern \nscheme in divinity, to which Mr. Bellamy\'s principles are entirely \nopposite; which scheme, if it should prevail among us, would \nutterly ruin this church, to prevent which Mr. Bellamy\'s gifts in \nestablishing truth and confuting error are now more apparently \nneedful than ever." \n\nBellamy informed Mr. Smith of the decision of the Consociation, \nMay -\xe2\x96\xa0\'>: \xe2\x80\x94 \'\'I represented your case as it was, and declared that, \nwere I an unsettled man, 1 would, notwithstanding all the difficul- \nties in the way, accept your call, and submitted to the council to \ndecide whether it was right I should be removed: they judged it \nwa- not. Indeed, Mr. Tennent urged me to declare absolutely that \nit wa- a duty for me to remove; hut I apprehended that the council \nwere the proper judges of that point, not I; nor would such a \ndeclaration have carried a vote in the council, without the consent \nof my people too." \n\nAnd now the devout and honourable women, of whom there \nwere not a few, made their appeal to Bellamy. Miss Nancy \n\nSmith wrote, Jttne -. "I mourn under the stroke, and pray that \n\nGod may not lend leanness into your soul. I think you have not \n\nObeyed the voice of the Lord. 1 love you, and shall ever pray \n\nthat yon may be a mat blessing to the church of Ohrisl : hut I \nfear for you, that like donah you have disobeyed the word of the \nLord. A- for myself, il would speak it to the praise of sovereign \nand glorious grace,) I have been supported, and, after the melan- \noholy tidings, enabled to rejoice in God\'s government; hut how \nshort-lived are my comforts! 1 feel a very distressing sense of the \n\nLord\'s hand: all look- like judgment. I mourn for sinners: the \n\nfields were white unto harvest, ami all, alas ! is blasted, through Mr. \nBellamy\'s r e c o rvodness. Have you not reason to fear your x i \n\nwill resent it, and make you and your people I tod tO e:ich other? \n\n1 know it\'s hard for your people; hut let them consider how gfoj \n\n\n\n644 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\nrious it would be, by resigning their minister, to have this Sodom \nbecome a Zion. Oh that duty to God might constrain them to \noffer up their beloved Isaac ! \n\n"Your labours have not been in vain among us: there appears a \ngeneral seriousness among the people. I hear many have set up \nfamily worship, and some are under concern about their souls." \n\nMrs. Ann Mercier, " being unwell in body, distressed in mind, \nand troubled on every side," wrote the next day, "Oh that God in \nthe midst of judgment would remember mercy and incline the \nhearts of your people to make our case their own, and so to send \nyou to us ! and oh that in mercy he may send one to them to feed \nthem with the bread of life ! Seeing the call is so loud for your \ncoming here, and that we cannot unite on any other, let me entreat \nyou to consider our deplorable condition, and to represent it to \nyour people, and beg them to let you come." \n\nMrs. Elizabeth Breeze, the granddaughter of Anderson, wrote \nalso, but her letter has not been found. \n\nThe Scots were not behindhand at this juncture in pleading, \n"still firmly trusting that God would send him to New York :" \nthey feared that "the ten families" had an undue weight on his \njudgment. \n\nObadiah "Wells presented another view: \xe2\x80\x94 that some of the people \nof Bethlem saw that their minister was no longer at home with \nthem ; that they plainly perceived his heart was in New York ; that \nthey feared his usefulness was at an end among them ; and that for \nnot consenting to his removal, heavy judgments were in store for \nthem. He therefore besought him to think with all calmness, and \ndeclare himself freely to his people, "and for this once appear \nboldly on the Lord\'s side." \n\n"Mr. William Smith is gone (June 10) to Albany, on the treaty \nwith the Indians, and will not be home under three weeks, when our \npeople will make another attempt after Mr. Bellamy." \n\nMr. Samuel Lowden wrote on the 12th, because "the melan- \ncholy state of this church is enough to make the dumb break their \nsilence. The congregation still design to prosecute the invitation, \nseeing it is backed with the most solid evidence and encouragement \nthat can be expected. They are more unanimous than ever: some \ndeistical persons, who have been convinced by your preaching, long \nmuch for your coming. Y\'our labours here have been crowned with \nsuccess, in that several have set up and continue worship in their \nfamilies ; deists brought under conviction, secure sinners awakened, \nand a universal concern, not only in this congregation, but in sun- \ndry of the Dutch, English, and French churches, who have pro- \nmised to come and join with us, should you come here. There\'s a \nprospect of seeing old men and tall Christians as cravers of your \nministry here." \n\n\n\nTHE CIIURCH IN NEW YORK. 645 \n\nMr. Smith, " though in the midst of the most important business \nthat ever occupied the British colonies, in which seven of them are \nunited in the present Congress," wrote, "with great inconvenience \nand haste," to Mr. Graham, "to press his furtherance of the speedy \nremoval of Mr. Bellamy. I beseech you to charge the call of Pro- \nvidence home opon the consciences of Mr. Bellamy and the people \nof Bethlem. Were I not fully satisfied of a call of God to Mr. \nBellamy t>> remove to New EoTk, and that his work lies there, I \nwould not, for any consideration, write one syllable more to pro- \nmote his removal: hut, as it is, 1 eannot be silent while I see any \nlaining." \n\nTo Mr. Hazard, Mr. John Smith, and Mr. Jauncey, he wrote, \nadvising them t<> _ .. m in union, "and do all you \n\ncan to .rain the consent of Mr. Bellamy\'s people. I am informed \nby some gentlemen here that it is likely Mr. Bellamy\'s people \nmay consent, and that two-thirds are gained already. I intend to \ny interest in writing to Mr. Edwards." \n\nTo Bellamy he wrote, " Your eall to New York is very clear \nto me and many others, whose eyes are single, and who, without \nsidtish attachments, make God\'s glory their governing end. I \nseen two mini-tors of the Consociation, who tell me Bethlem \npeople relent, and now think it is their duty to resign you into the \nhands of God and to the disposal of his providence. Another of \n\nthe mini-tor.- of that Consoeiation -uppo-es that VOU may do very \nmuch to load them into a sen-e of their duty, and. if I undo- \n\nhim, thinks you had not done enough. 1 refer the case to God, \nand beg that Satan may not he permitted to binder you." \n\nMr. John Smith, Mi-. Jauncey, and Mr. Hazard wrote, on the \nthat they do not "choose to proceed to do any thing \nMr. Lawyer Smith returns. He\'s a gentleman we respect, and \nwhose judgment we value. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 Mr. President Burr came to town last Saturday, ami preach* 1 \nccellent Bermons to us yesterday. He has been aboul a \n\nthe people, and says it is his opinion that it is best, and there is \nit -till to try and get you. Let your people \ndemand what they think proper, [as a C0mpen8a1 ion for the settle- \nment given Mr. Bellamy ij we are determined to comply with it if \nife." \n\nMi-. Hazard made another vi-it to ! \xc2\xbbct lihin. The CODgTegatiotl \n\nmet on the second Friday in duly, and declined to consent to the \nremoval of their pa-tor, and Bellamy immediately communicated \nthe result to the cnurcb of New York : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2Want of union among yourselves has embarrassed tl \n\npt from the very first, and been the principal can e of your \nent. Had yon been onite I, 1 believe mv people would \nhave \xe2\x80\xa2 \n\n\n\n646 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\n" Things looked very hopeful soon after Mr. Hazard left us; but \nseveral things happened which gave a fatal turn to the affair. \n\n" There are about half a dozen men among my people engaged \nto have me go, and a few more that will just barely consent; but \nthree-quarters declared, in their society-meeting, that they con- \nscientiously thought it not my duty to go. My people, \'tis pos- \nsible, would have consented, had they not been tampered with, \nand made to think that my representation of the state of New \nYork was not according to truth. They heard, soon after the \ncouncil met, that I had been imposed on, which gave their minds a \nnew turn : once, above half the people seemed convinced, now but \none-quarter. \n\n" I being so blamed by Mr. Graham and Mr. Tennent for not \ndeclaring, and also by the people at New York, and likewise the \ndanger of my people\'s breaking to pieces if I sat still, forced me \nto call my people together when a messenger and letters came up \nfrom New York, although I knew that the application was irregu- \nlar. But I never proposed to my people to do any thing but to \ngive the case a rehearing, upon a regular application, until I heard \nhow things were going your way; and then I put quite another \nquestion to them, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : whether they were fully convinced it waa \nmy duty to remove from them ? which was voted in the negative ; \nand so my society, in a very critical moment, was saved from \ndivision and confusion. \n\n" My people met yesterday, and I had a long discourse with \nthem ; and I am astonished to consider how honest, cool, candid, \nserious, friendly, conscientious, they appeared to be under trials so \nvery great. \'Tis pity so kind a people should lose their minister. \nIt touches me to the very heart; and I would now pronounce \nthe final sentence, \xe2\x80\x94 that I would never accept your call were not \nthe case so difficult. Yet, notwithstanding this is the inward tem- \nper of my heart toward my people, yet, from conscience and judg- \nment, I pleaded your cause with them for some hours to the best \npurpose, and I never saw a people behave so well in so difficult a \ncase; like dear children hanging round a kind father, who en- \ndeavours gently to pull their hands to him, and inwardly bleeding \nwith love towards them all the while. They thought there was not \nthe least reason to resign me to you, unless you would be at the \nwhole cost of settling them another minister. By this, they say, \nyou would give them nothing. You would only leave them as you \nfound them, in that respect ; while they give you, out of mere com- \npassion to you and conscientious regard to the interest of religion, \nwhat they esteem a gift of very great worth." \n\nTo Mrs. Mercier he wrote, " Others wonder at my backwardness \nto come to New York, and even doubt my integrity ; but you know \nbetter. You have seen the anguish of my heart, and my con- \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IX NEW YORK. 6-47 \n\nscientious desire to do the thing that is right. I never thought I \nwas fit for New York : I never saw my way clear to remove. \nIndeed, rather than your distrest congregation should go to ruin, \nI would still be willing to run the venture, and trust myself in the \nhands of an all-sufficient God, who, when I am weak, can make me \nStrong, and who can take care of me wherever I he. Oh that \nGod would scud you a man that is fit for you, and that your con- \ngregation might be humbled under the hand of God in this day \nof trial !" \n\nlie sent his final refusal, July 18, 17o4. Upon the request \nof some members of the congregation, the synod, in Septem- \nber, appointed Mr. Samuel Finley and John Blair to supply \nthem the next Sabbath. " l\'lai-cd " be Go, I. who, in the midst \nof judgmeo us great mercy, in sending his servants \n\ndaily with a meal for us! By order of synod, Messrs. Finley \nand Jil.iir cam.\' here to call a committee in the congregation, of \nsuch men as might be thought fit to act in things relating to a \ncall and resettlement of a minister, as our ciders appeared too \n\nindolent in the matter. But the congregation was opposed by \n\natlemen with much vehemence, which much sur- \nprised the ministers. They abused some in the public con- \nion, and convinced the people more and more that the \nchurch\'s real good was little their care or concern. So you see \nwhere we are .-till. Tiny talk of putting it to vote in the con- \ntion for Mr. Bostwick and Mr. Blair. Mr. Finley\'s voice is \nding low, though pretty much liked, and, is thought, would \nnot Buit ibis congregation; but, I believe, can\'t obtain either. We \nhave been refused Mr. Davies. We 6nd those that opposed you \nwould oppose Mr. ESdwards also. The various accounts among \nministers and people hindered their making any attempt for Mr. \n\nI. uds." \n\nCaptain Jaunoey wrote again in the fall, to open the negotia- \ntion anew. Bellamy replied, November 20, "1 have read ami \nconsidered your letter, ami 1 heartily pity your oase. \'Tis your \ness to unite in a man; \'ti.- the presbytery\'s business to get \n\nhim. You could not unite in Mr. 15., and the presbytery could \nnot find it ill their heart to plead yOM 0886. We ha\\e heard ft \n\nfood character of Mr. Rodgers; ami, If he is what 1 have heard, \nadvise you, if possible, to get him: but, whether you can unite \nin him or not, there i.-i do hope of removing Mr. lb, as things uow \nstand." \n\nRodgers, however, declined the invitation by the messenger who \ncanie. l n. Mr-. Breese wrote (December L8)to Bellamy, desiring \nhim to pay the congregation a \\i.-it. lie replied, January l. \n\n* Samuel LowJeu t<> Bellamy, Ootober ". 1764. \n\n\n\n648 THE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. \n\n" Mr. Wells told me that Mr. Vanhorne said that, although I pre- \ntended to be so backward, yet I was trying to crowd myself in all \nthe while. \'Well,\' said I, \'I do not intend to set my foot in New \nYork till they have a minister settled.\' I heartily wish you pros- \nperity in your attempts to get a faithful minister. To hear you \nare well settled will give me the same joy a tender parent feels on \nthe recovery of a sick child from the sides of the grave. Once I \nthought God called me to put my life in my hand, and try to save \nyou from ruin, and I acted accordingly in the integrity of my \nheart. But God, in his providence, has released me from the \ndangerous work. I do not believe it is, or ever will be, my duty \nto remove and settle at New York. I have never complimented \nwith New York, in the pulpit or out of it. I do not want court- \ning ; and to have a poor distressed people beg and pray, it almost \nbreaks my heart." \n\nIt was said by the Rev. Noah Benedict, at the funeral of Bel- \nlamy, that one hinderance to his acceptance of the call to New \nYork was his apprehension that it would not be pleasing to some \nof the ministers of our church. " \'Tis true," said Bellamy to \nBurr, " the conduct of the presbytery, when they were at New \nYork, had made me suspect how the case stood ; but your letter re- \nmoved my uneasiness. And, \'tis true, their conduct at the coun- \ncil in New England awakened my suspicions again ; but then their \ntelling me, in private, so solemnly, that it was my duty \xe2\x80\x94 urging me \nto declare, blaming me for not declaring \xe2\x80\x94 stunned them again." \nYet these suspicions he vented in very strong terms at Commence- \nment at New Haven, especially condemning Bostwick\'s behaviour \nin the matter. Hearing of these censures, Bostwick took means \nto learn Bellamy\'s reasons, and was thus enabled to clear himself \nentirely. He had said to Bellamy, over and over, that it was his \nduty to go to New York ; and he had also said, after hearing the \nstatements of those who opposed him, that his heart smote him for \nhaving made an unfair representation on the testimony of the \nother side. He also contradicted the report, that there were some \nhundreds brought under great convictions by Bellamy\'s labours in \nthe city. " It has been an affair attended with the most mis- \ntakes, jealousies, evil surmises, &c. that ever I knew in the whole \ncourse of my life. Many false reports have been spread abroad, \nand many corrupt passions excited on either side. I wish the \ngreat Governor of the world may overrule all for his glory." \n\nA reconciliation was effected, and a pleasant correspondence \nmaintained till Bostwick\'s decease. \n\nDr. Trumbull says, Bellamy " was a large and well-built man, \nof commanding appearance, with a smooth, strong voice, that \ncould fill the largest house without any unnatural elevation. He \npossessed a truly great mind, preached generally without notes, \n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH IN NEW YORK. 649 \n\nhad some great point of doctrine commonly to establish, and \n"would keep close to his point until he had sufficiently illustrated it; \nthen, in an ingenious, close, and pungent manner, he would make \nthe application. When he felt well, and was animated by a large \naudience, he would preach incomparably: though paying little \nattention to language, he would, from the native vigour of his \nsoul, produce the most commanding strokes of eloquence, making \nhis audience alive. There is nothing to be found in his writings, \nthough sound and valuable, equal to what was to be seen and \nheard in his preaching. His pulpit talents exceeded all his other \ngifts. It is difficult for those who never heard him to form a just \nid. -a of t!,,. force and beauty of his preaching. No man was more \nthoroughly set for the defence of the gospel." \n\nHe wrote to Hazard. January 22, 1755, k \'To serve your con- \nion in any thing will ever rejoice my heart, and to see you \nwell settled would be to me like life from the dead. \n\n"Last night, just after receiving your letter informing me that \nyou had quite given over all thoughts of me, and were turning \nyour eyes towards Mr. McGregory, of Nutfield, and desiring my \nopinion, there came into my study a religious, judicious man, who \nhas moved near an hundred miles to sit under my ministry. He \nis a pretty good jn<}\'j:r for a layman, and has heard Mr. McGre- \ngory about fifty Bermons. From him 1 learn that Mr. McGregOTy \nhas had the smallpox, \xe2\x80\x94 which, to be hired, I would not have for \nall New York. Is of a good appearance: all religious people looB \nupon him as a good man, and do greatly flock after him whenever \niroad to preach: he preaches very solemnly. \xe2\x80\x94 much \n\xe2\x96\xa0lore politely ami genteelly than I do. His preaching commands \nM much attention as mine does. His language is not BO flowery \na- Mr. Boetwiok\'s, but manly, nervous, flowing, neat; his delivery \n\ngood, hi- voice strong; his preaching reaches the heart, and is much \nthan Mr. Bostwick\'s. Se ia prudent and guarded in his \npreaching: preaches often on gospel Bubjects. He is a man of \niment, no trimmer, used I i the wars; very free and sociable \nin conversation, with words at will in the pulpit, an active man, a, \nfull friend to the late work of God in the land. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 1 am of opinion that he might strit your religious ] pie and \n\nthe Scotch as well as I Bhould have done. Mr. Vanhorne and the \ngentlemen would like him better, although I don\'t think they \n\nWould be quite suited. \'Tfe my advice, you do unitedly make \n\nyour strongest efforts to u r ct him, being much more likely to >uit \n\nthan any man 1 know of in New England. As ROOD a- 1 can, L \n\nwill gel Mi - . Edwards\'s opinion, and Bend you. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0 1 am as much a friend to your congregation as I whs that \n\ndreadful Monday when your people cried about me, and broke my \n\nheart; hut 1 am, and ought to be, governed by oool, sedate r< \n\n\n\n650 ROBERT HENRY. \n\nI pray you, leave off scolding at the presbytery : it does your con- \ngregation great damage. But what shall we do? Read the \nProverbs of Solomon through, with a desire to know your duty, \nand you will find a hundred things pat to your case." \n\nThe Rev. David McGregoire was the son of the first pastor at \nLondonderry, New Hampshire, and was ordained pastor of the \nSecond Church in that town (now Derry) in 1735, and was, at \nthis time, in his forty-fifth year. In January, by the advice of \nthe presbytery, the congregation, in an informal manner, (for \n" there* was no vote, nor any thing like a regular call,") sent an \ninvitation to him to become their minister. President Burr at- \ntended the meeting of Boston Presbytery, in April, at Pelham, to \nurge that body to consent to his translation. He returned, and \nbrought an account of a considerable prospect of obtaining Mr. \nMcGregoire; but "I did not observe any remarkable rejoicing \namong many of the people occasioned by it. They are quite still. \nMr. Spencer, and Mr. William Livingston, [afterwards Governor \nof New Jersey,] are now gone to Boston, to have the matter \nfinally determined. Mr. Burr expects he will accept the call \nbefore he comes to see us. I fear he knows little of our circum- \nstances. Did he only know this one thing, \xe2\x80\x94 that the people\'s af- \nfections are still attached to Mr. Bellamy beyond any man living, \n\xe2\x80\x94 it would be very discouraging to him." \n\nThe presbytery met, May 14, at Boston, and declared they had \nno authority to remove a minister out of their bounds. McGre- \ngoire saw no encouragement to adventure himself among a people \nso divided among themselves, and with so many cleaving, with \nunabated desire, to Bellamy. \n\n\n\nROBERT HENRY, \n\nA native of Scotland, graduated at Nassau Hall in 1751, and \nwas soon after licensed by New York Presbytery. In May, 1752, \nTehicken, in Bucks county, Pennsylvania, asked leave of Abing- \ndon Presbytery to employ him, and, in the fall, the synod, having \nheard from Davies the necessitous yet hopeful prospects in Vir- \nginia, sent him thither. He preached for some time without being \nlicensed by the governor, and was unmolested. Newcastle Pres- \nbytery ordained him before 1753, his field of labour being in \nwhat was then Lunenburg county, and where Robinson had been \n\n* Hazard to Bellamy. \n\n\n\nROBERT HENRY. 651 \n\ngreatly successful. lie -was installed, by Hanover Presbytery, \n\'June 4, 17oo, the pastor of what are now Cub Creek, in Char- \nlotte, and Briery, in Prince Edward. \n\nAfter his installation, Todd* and Davies preached five days, \nwith " comfortable evidences of the presence of God with us every \nday. Many were awakened. One was the nearest image of the \ntrembling jailor I ever saw. Divine power was felt by many \nhearts who had never heard a New Light before." Davies was in \nLunenburg in June, 1756, and preached eleven or twelve times \nin thirteen days, with encouraging appearances of success. "I \nthink Mr. Henry\'s and Mr. Wright\'s labours continue to be \nblessed in those parts. At the sacrament, in that wilderness, \nthere were two thousand hearers and two hundred communicants: \na considerable number of thoughtless creatures are solicitously \ninquiring about religion." Davies said, in 1757, " My honest \nfriend Mr. Henry has had remarkable success, the last winter, \namong the young people."\' \n\nCreek nras settled from Pennsylvania. Caldwell, who \n\ndrew the attention of the synod to the new settlements in the \n\nvalley in 1738, havin g ended hie days on the Roanoke, Donegal \n\nytery Bent supplies to Cub (\'reek, on Round Oak, in 1744; \n\nand the synod sent Black to Buffalo, and Craig to Roanoke, in \n\n1751. \n\nThe Briery congregation grew out of the conversion of Joseph \nMorton and his wife. Be bad been noted for his skill as a land- \nhunter, f \xe2\x80\x94 in finding eligible tracts in the unsettled wilderness. \n\nThe horses ran wild through the WOOds, "against which no teller \nhad come up:" "horse-pens" were prepared on the creeks to cap- \nture them. A most beautiful, gentle mare, taken by Morton in a \npen, was given to his wife. \n\nLittle Joe Morton and his wife were eminently pious. lie was \nthe first elder, and, until tliey bad a settled minister, inure like a \n\nthan an elder. He convened the people on the Sabbath, \nread a sermon, and catechised the children. Few have left behind \nkvour of piety, lie was oever spoken of without vene- \nration. His widow long Burvived him, \xe2\x80\x94 k, a mother in Israel." \n\nTheir children all became pioii.-, and a large number of their \n\n[children. \n\nIn May, 1".">"), llenr\\j refreshed MoAden by the relation of his \n\nSeveral were hopefully brought in, ami source s Sabbath \n\nj i without some appearance of the power of God. Wright \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 nteeii werfl awakened, in 1~.">7, under an OOCfl \n\n\n\n\xc2\xbb ounce. \n\n+ l>r. Ala mitt. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 q\'i Journal: in Dr. Foote\'l Sketches of North Carolina. \n\n\n\n652 JOHN SMITH. \n\nlecture of his. He had two hundred communicants, besides forty \ncoloured members." \n\nHe also gave a portion of his time, every fourth Sabbath, to \nFalling River. Morgan Edwards* says, " There was an \' awful \ndelusion\' on Falling Creek, in Pittsylvania, soon after the Sepa- \nrate Baptists came there." \n\nHe removed to Steel Creek, North Carolina, in 1766, and died \nMay 8, 1767, \xe2\x80\x94 a plain man,f of devoted piety. As he rode on \nhis solitary way, he dropped the bridle, and, lifting up his heart \nand voice and hands in prayer, suffered the quiet, faithful beast to \ntake his own time. Often his horse stopped at Mr. Morton\'s door, \nwith his good master still engaged in worship, as if alone in the \nforest. \n\nFaithful in his preaching to all, his principal success was among \nthe servants. He led them to Jesus, and they became eminent for \ntheir growth in grace and knowledge of the truth. \n\nHis widow long survived him. \n\n\n\nJOHN SMITH \n\n\n\nWas born in England,! May 5, 1702. \n\nHe is said to have received a degree from a university : perhaps \nhe graduated at Yale, in 1727, though not marked in italics in the \ncatalogue. \n\nHis father, Thomas Smith, with a few others, forsook the \nministry of Anderson, and, by the aid of the trustees of Yale Col- \nlege, obtained Jonathan Edwards, then nineteen, to preach for \nthem. He referred with delight to his pleasant intercourse with \nMadam Smith and her son John. \n\nHe was admitted the minister of Rye and White Plains, in \nWest Chester county, probably May 15, 1729, being ordained by \nthe Fairfield Association. The long tract of forty years, like the \nArabian desert, is relieved by no cooling stream, no living ver- \ndure; \xe2\x80\x94 nothing but a solitary date, scattered here and there, \nmeets the eye, as it wanders over nearly half a century of the \ngood man\'s toil. \n\nHe came with Edwards, in 1752, and met the Synod of New \nYork. Soon after, he joined New York Presbytery, and became a \nmember of Dutchess Presbytery in 1763. \n\n\n\nMS. History of Virginia Baptists. f Dr. Alexander. \n\nBolton\'s West Chester County. \n\n\n\nELEAZER WHITTLESEY. 653 \n\nThrough infirmities of age and disorders of body, he asked for \nan assistant in August, 1758. The Rev. Ichabod Lewis, twin- \nbrother of the Rev. Dr. Lewis, of Greenwich, was ordained, as his \ncolleague, pastor of White Plains and Sing Sing. Rye is not men- \ntioned again in the presbytery-book. \n\nSmith died, February 26, 1771, \xe2\x80\x94 an able and useful minister, \nworn "tit with labour. \n\n\n\nELEAZER WHITTLESEY \n\n"Was probably a native of Bethlem, Connecticut. He came to \n\nBurr, at Newark, with a letter from Bellamy, in the winter of \n\n1741--: \xe2\x80\x94 "Mr. Tennent* and I have encouraged him in his \n\nDOW under my care, and makes good progress in \n\nlearning. I tru-t the Lord has work for him to do. \n\n\'-.Vi;. \xe2\x80\x94 lie was not converted in the way that you think neces- \n\nand that I have thought so, though now I am now in some \n\ndoubt of it. I have met with others of God\'s dear people, who \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0"11 of such a particular submission as we have insisted on, \n\nthough the Bttbstance of the thing may be found in all." \n\n!!\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 afterwards Bpent Borne time at Nottingham; and Finley, on \n\xe2\x96\xa0ending him to college in 1747, speaks of him as having made con- \nsiderable proficiency. \n\nHe graduated at Nassau Hall in 1749, and was licensed by \n\nytery BOOn after. "Writing to Bellamy, May B, \n\n17-~>". from Mr. Foley\'s, he Baj - he had been directed to ride abroad \nin March and April, (and supply vacancies,) and, "this week, I go \nto Deer Creek.\' He complains of being unable to study, or to \nmade preparation for the pulpit, on account of "what yoo call \nmelancholy, but what I call by another name;" ami that, in conae* \n\n. his days passed M in painful idlei \n\ni al in Baltimore county, in 17 l\'i and \n\'47, that it seemed bo Daviee like the firs! planting of religion \nthere. It was in what ii now Harford county, and extended irom \nCreek to Slate Ridge and Chanoeford. In 1751, Whittlesey \nwas a>> \'ir to lettle thete. No notice of him appears, except \nwlnir, in the records of Newcastle Presbytery, a man asked to be \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 1 to church privileges, who had been debarred for ill \nof the late Mr. Whittl< \nA log ohuroh was pat np near Muddy Creek, in Peach Bottom \n\n\n\n: to Bellamy. \n\n\n\n654 NEHEMIAH GREENMAN. \n\ntownship, in York county, soon after the " Barrens" were settled ; \nfor much of York county, like the Valley of Virginia at the same \nperiod, was destitute of trees, though, since the savages have passed \naway, forests of noble growth adorn the Valley and the Barrens. \nThe Indians* suffered fire to run through them every year, and \ndestroyed the young saplings above the ground, but the roots con- \ntinued uninjured; and, when the fires were no longer permitted, \nthese large roots sent up a strong growth of shoots, which in thirty \nor forty years became very fine timber. In the Log Church \nWhittlesey preached: there gathered the congregation of Slate \nRidge : his labours extended to all the neighbouring settlements. \n\nThe late Dr. Martin, of Chanceford, said that Whittlesey formed \nthe Slate Ridge and Chanceford congregations. \n\nFinley tells Bellamy, July 3, 1752, that Whittlesey, "whom I \ntenderly loved for his zeal and integrity, left my house on a \nThursday morning, cheerful, and in pretty good health, and \npreached the next Sabbath at Muddy Run, not designing to con- \ntinue there longer. On Monday he was taken sick with pleurisy, \nin a cold house, and a cold time ; continued in pain until Saturday, \nand then gave up the ghost. The last words he was heard to utter \nwere, \' Lord, leave me not.\' The Susquehanna River was frozen, \nand no messenger could come to me till all was over. He died, \nDecember 21." To Bellamy he bequeathed his watch, and re- \nquested Rodgers to take his horse at what price he pleased. \n\n\n\nNEHEMIAH GREENMAN \n\nWas born at Stratford, Connecticut, and was probably a de- \nscendant of the Rev. Adam Blackman, the first minister of the \ntown. \n\nDavid Brainerd had a special friendship! for him, and by his \ncharitable expenses he was educated. When he undertook the \nIndian mission, thinking he should have no further use for the pro- \nperty left him by his father, he set himself to discover how he \nmight spend it most for the glory of God. No way presented \nwherein he could do more good by it than by educating for the \nministry a young man of good abilities and well disposed. Brain- \nerd met him at Southbury, December 11, 1742 : \xe2\x80\x94 " Conversed with \na dear friend to whom I had thought of giving a liberal education, \n\n* Huston\'s Land Titles. f Brainerd\'s Life : Bellamy MSS. \n\n\n\nNEHEMIAH GREENMAN. 655 \n\nthat he might be fitted for the gospel ministry. I acquainted him \nwith my thoughts, and left him to consider of the matter till I \nshould see him again. Three days after, he conversed again with \nhim ; and he appeared much inclined to devote himself to the sacred \nwork, if God should succeed his attempts to qualify himself for \nit." He soon commenced his studies, and was supported till the \nend of his (Brainerd\'s) life, not, however, without much self-denial: \nfor among the Indians he found his mistake in supposing he would \nhave no need of his patrimony. \n\nBrainerd had a special friendship for him, and -wrote to him from \nBoston, when he was expecting daily and hourly to enter into the \neternal world, "I have a secret thought, from 6ome things I have \nobserved, that God may perhaps design you for some singular ser- \nviee in the world. Oh, then, labour to be prepared and qualified to \ndo much for God." He pursued his preparatory studies with \nBellamy.* \n\n11<\' graduated at Yale, in 1748, and was licensed by Suffolk \ntery rery Boon after, \xe2\x80\x94 on the 3d of October. The first year \nof his ministry he spent at Moriches and Quogue, now AYesthamp- \nton. Being in feeble health, he left, and laboured at Fire Place. \n11.- was called, April 4, 17- r >U, to the New Society, in South Hano- \nver, N<v. Jersey. New Brunswick Presbytery, May ~2\'2, L751, \nsolicited him, and Pomeroy ami Rowland, of Connecticut, to come \ninto their bounds, lie was probably ordained by New fork Pres- \nbytery while labouring at South Hanover, New Jersey. He joined \n\nAbingdon Presbytery in May, 17 \xe2\x96\xa0">\xe2\x80\xa2!, and commenced preaching at \nPilesgrove, and was installed on the ;~>th of December. \n\nThe old name was given up, and the town was called Pittsgrove, \nin honour of the great Earl of Chatham. \n\nGhreenman suffered from delays in paying his salary, and the \nu-aial consequence followed: \xe2\x80\x94 an alienation of some who Beemed to \nbe pillars. In March, 177 s , he fled into the wilderness to escape \nthe indignities largely dealt to Presbyterian ministers by the Bri- \ntish troops. He remained with his family six months al Egg Har- \nbour, preaching, and almost resolved to settle there; for his congre- \ngation ministered not at all to his necessities. On his return, they \ncomplained to the presbytery that the sacrament had nol been \nadministered since April, 1777: he told his wrongs, and was dis- \nmissed, April 9, 177\'.\'. \n\nHe died before the next November. \n\nM ter Amy accompanied him to Pittsgrove, and married the \n!,\'\xe2\x80\xa2 r. Jonathan Dubois, pastor of the Reformed Dutoh Church in \nSouthampton, Bucks county. Her son, the Rev. Uriah Dubois, was \nthe pastor of Doylestown and Deep Run. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 i: iv. tr I t M.jCullocb, of Cambu-lunp, July 6, 17\'.". \n\n\n\n656 JOHN BKOWN. \n\nGreenman spent a part of his time at "Aloes Creek:" there was \na church at Logtown, on Lower Alloway\'s Creek, in 1750 ; it has \nbeen extinct for many years. \n\nHe gave one-fourth of his time to Penn\'s Neck, (probably Qui- \nhawken :) it first appears in 1747, asking supplies of New Bruns- \nwick Presbytery, and it had for a time a pastor ; but it is now for- \nsaken. \n\n\n\nJOHN BROWN \n\nWas born in Ireland, and graduated at Nassau Hall in 1749 ; \nwas licensed by Newcastle Presbytery, and sent to the Valley of \nVirginia. In August, 1753, he was called* to Timber Ridge and \nProvidence, the commissioners of the congregations being Archi- \nbald Alexander and Andrew Steel. He was ordained at Fagg\'s \nManor, on Thursday, October 11, 1753. Davies preached from \nActs xx. 28, "with a good deal of inaccuracy and confusion, \nthough with some tender sense of the subject. I have hardly ever \nthought myself in so solemn a posture as when invoking the God of \nheaven, with my hand on the head of the candidate. May the \nLord be his support under the burden of that office which he has \nassumed, I doubt not, with very honest and generous intentions !" \nHe speaks of him, in 1754, as a youth of piety, prudence, and \nzeal. \n\nMcAden was with him at Timber Ridge, on the first Sabbath in \nJuly, 1755, \xe2\x80\x94 a day of fasting on account of murders by Indians: \n"there was great attention and solemnity." \n\nIt was under a sermon preached by Brown, from Psalm vii. 12, \xe2\x80\x94 \n"If the wicked turn not," \xe2\x80\x94 that the Rev. Dr. McWhorter, in early \nyouth, was impressed and led to the Saviour. \n\n* The call is preserved, with its long list of signers, and is -worthy of preserva- \ntion: \xe2\x80\x94 "We being, for these many years past, in very destitute circumstances for \nwant of the ordinances of the gospel statedly among us, many of us under distress- \ning spiritual languishments, and multitudes perishing in our sins for want of the \nbread of life broken among us; our Sabbaths wasted in melancholy silence at home, \nor sadly broken and profaned by the more thoughtless among us ; our hearts \nand hands discouraged, and our spirits broken, with our mournful condition and \nrepeated disappointments of relief in this particular. In these afflicting cireum* \nstances, which human language cannot paint, we have had the happiness, by the \ngood providence of God, of enjoying a share of your labours to our abundant satis- \nfaction; and, being universally well satisfied with your ministerial abilities in gene- \nral, and the peculiar agreeableness of your qualifications to us in particular, as a \ngospel minister, we entreat you to have compassion on us, and accept this our \ncall and invitation to the pastoral care of our immortal souls." \n\n\n\nELIPHALET BALL. 657 \n\nBrown married the daughter of John Preston, a native of Ire- \nland, who settled at Tinkling Spring, Virginia, and became the \nancestor of a long, honourable line of Prestons, Browns, Brecken- \nridges, McDowells, and Marshalls. \n\nBe resigned the care of Timber Ridge* in 177G, and removed, \nin IT\'-\'T. to Kentucky. He died in 1803, aged seventy-five; his \nwife died in l v, .\xc2\xbb2, aged seventy-three. His eldest daughter mar- \nried tlf Rev. Thomas l>. Craighead, of Tennessee. His eldest son, \nJohn, was three times elected a member of the United States \nSenate, from Kentucky; he married the only sister of the Rev* \nDr. John M. Mason, ami died in 1837, aged eighty. His third \neon, James, was the first Secretary of State of the Commonwealth \nof Kentucky, a member of the United States Senate for many \nfrom Louisiana^ and. fur six year-, minister to the Court of \nI \xe2\x96\xa0. Hi.- fourth son, Samuel, was an eminent physician and a \n\nProfessor in the Transylvania Medical School. \n\n\n\nELIPHALET BALL \n\n\n\nGRADUATED at Yale in 1748. On the resignation of Sackett, \nin 17"-;, Bedford had leave of Suffolk Presbytery to go to the \n\xe2\x80\xa2 egational Associations for a candidate: at a pro re n<it<i \n, _r. December 11, lT-e!, they presented Ball as their choice. \nFor an exegesis, they gave him "An Christus pro omnibus mor- \ntuui Bit?" They met at Bedford, December 81, and the next day \nexamined him, and heard him preach from Romans iii. 28. When \nSaekett came, they resumed the examination for his sake. <>u the \n2d of January, 1764, Mr. Silliman prayed, Joseph Parke preached \nfrom 1 Timothy iv. 6, Prime presided, Sackett gave the right \nhand, and Daggel exhorted the people. \n\nIn May, 17-.7, they mei a week earlier than Qgual, because of \noomplaints made against him, and adjourned to meel al Bedford^ \non-the-Main. Be was charged with using his neighbours\' fowls \nwhich frequented his bam; with imprudent levity and unguarded \nairiness of deportmenl : with Betting aside the elders, and managing \ncontrary to the Presbyterian mode; and, while professing oo< to act \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 it irai Mllad Hi I \n\nla iimt .li-ti -. being overgrown by tha ]"\xe2\x96\xa0:> \xe2\x80\xa2 \n\nlr\xc2\xabfl keeping down ili" iboota from the \nmenl of the Indiana, the irhita nan \xe2\x96\xa0*\xc2\xab tl \n\n- \n\n\n\n658 HUGH KNOX. \n\non the strict plan, requiring a full profession of godliness in all \nwho presented children for baptism. The presbytery judged that \nhe was not blameworthy, as was alleged, and gave him some cau- \ntions with respect to his natural turn and the formula suitable for \nbaptism. Thus, for a time, were allayed " the jars and matters of \nuneasiness." \n\nHe was joined by the synod, in 1763, to the newly-formed Pres- \nbytery of Dutchess county. He had, for several years, no small \ndifficulty with his session : two elders were dismissed from their \noffice by him and the other elders ; and the presbytery admitted \ntheir right, in common with every other body in church or state, \nto purge itself. Mr. John Lawrence appealed to the synod from \nsome other decision of presbytery ; and, having declared all the \ngrievances he had to allege against his pastor, it was decided that \nthey were too trivial, even if true, to warrant any judicial censure, \nand could in no way justify any in forsaking Ball\'s public minis- \ntrations. He was dismissed, December 21, 1768, and when his \nsuccessor resigned, in 1772, he resumed the charge, and remained \ntill 1784. Having spent four years at Amity, in Woodbridge, Con- \nnecticut, he removed, with a part of the Bedford congregation, in \n1788, to Saratoga county. The settlement was named Ball Town, \nbut has long since become widely known as Ballston. He died in \n1797. \n\n\n\nHUGH KNOX \n\n\n\nCame from Ireland in 1751, and the Synod of Philadelphia, \nhearing that he and Mr. John Alison were desirous of being taken \non trials, directed them to meet Newcastle Presbytery at Elk River. \nProbably they did so ; for Alison was soon licensed, and was exten- \nsively employed as a missionary in the Southern provinces. \n\nKnox gave up all thought of the ministry, and led a life of \nworldly gayety, teaching for a support. He was recommended, by \nDr. Francis Alison, to Rodgers, of St. George\'s, and was em- \nployed as a teacher near Middletown, Delaware. He attended the \nForest Church on Sabbath mornings, and kept his tavern-compa- \nnions in a roar, of an evening, by imitations of Rodgers, \xe2\x80\x94 imitations \nso complete that Mr. David Witherspoon, the keeper of the house, \nand an elder in the Old-Side Church of Drawyers, imagined that \nit must be Mr. Rodgers himself, until he entered the room. Soon \nafter, he shook off these follies, and entered Nassau Hall : at the \ncommencement he requested Mr. Rodgers, who with great surprise \n\n\n\nHUGH KXOX. 659 \n\nsaw him there, to forgive him, and not publish his delinquencies, \nfor his mimicry had been the means of his conversion. \n\nHe graduated in 1 ~.">4. and probably studied divinity with Burr. \nThe Reformed Dutch Ohurch in the island of Saba requested \nytery to Bend them a minister. They proceeded \nto ordain Knox, in 1755, and were so much pleased with bis trial \nBermon, on the " Dignity and Importance of the Gospel Ministry," \nthat they unanimously requested its publication.* \n\n11 \xe2\x80\xa2 bad, on receiving from the Rev. Jacob Green, of Hanover, \nNew Jersey, a copy of his Bermon on the sinner\'s faultiness and \ninability, corresponded with him freely on his peculiar opinions on \npoints. In 1769, he published "A Letter to Mr. Green, "f \nexpressing his high regard for him, and fur the candour and charity \nhe displayed towards him. \n\n\'I\'ll\'\' Rei . I \'!-. I keen, in an article on the New Haven speculations \n- inability to constitute\' a world of free agents, in \nwhich sin Bhould not enter, states that a similar theory had been \nadvanced by Mi - . Knox, in this pamphlet. We arc indebted to the \nzeal of Bishop Eobart for rescuing Knox\'s pamphlet from oblivion, \nby embalming it in the Churchman\'s Magazine for 1808 and \'09. \nto show the wretched sophistry of Hobart; for he has \n\nappended to it a note in which he praises the ninth article of "our \nchurch" for saying that "IT (original sin) dcscr\\cth <!"d\'s wrath \nand damnation," and for implying that the persons in whom origi- \nnal sin is do not deserve it: a distinction not unlike that of the \nbaron bishop, who fought afl a baron only, and gave some anxiety \nthereby to his friends, who feared that the devil, in clutching the \nbaron, might not be able to carry him off without bearing the \nbishop along. \n\nKnox appears in this letter as a man of acute mind, clear ami \n\nus in thought and expression, candid, and open to convic- \nti\'Mi. Green bad probably known the difficulties thai he felt "it \nsome part- of the aopkinsian Bcheme; and on the publication, in \n1767, of hie Bermon from Romans ix. 19, on the sinner\'s faultiness \nand spiritual inability, he wrote to Knox, sending him a copy. \nThis occasioned Knox\'s pamphlet, lie thanks him for his Bermon \nand hi- eery kind letter, and then says, " 1 entirely approve of, and \nilly adhere to, that scheme of religion which tends to exall \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2el humble the creature. 1 think God can oever be exalted \n\nhigh enough in the thoughts of the creature, nor the Binful \n\ntare sunk low enough in tat own thoughts. Could 1 imagine that \n\nue article in my creed which favoured the opposite false \n\nabominable doctrine, 1 would tear it off with indignation, and tear \n\n\n\niry. \n\n\n\n660 HUGH KNOX. \n\naway that part of my heart which had harboured it." He then \nadds, that "absolute, unconditional reprobation" seems abhorrent \nto every just view of God, and assumes that it was held by Green, \nwhereas no man was further than he from supposing that reproba- \ntion follows any one, but as the just punishment of his sin, and is \nnot always conditional on the blameworthiness of the sinner. \n\nKnox was staggered, and very reasonably too, by such expres- \nsions as these : \xe2\x80\x94 "God has willed, ordered, and in his way caused, \nthe quantum of sin in the world ; and this, too, as a necessary and \nglorious display of his holiness." "If God had ordered less sin in \nthe world, it would have proved him to be not a good and holy, but \nan envious, being." He supposed that, "of all possible plans of a \nworld, God adopted the one which was best on the whole." He hesi- \ntated at supposing that God might have made a world of free agents \nwithout the possibility of their falling into sin. He conceived that \nGod could not, in consistency with his perfections and the free \nagency of the creature, make a system of free accountable crea- \ntures without the possibility of sin\'s entering into the system. He \nmade a distinction between Adam\'s liberty in a state of innocence, \nand that of sinners under a dispensation of preventing restraining \ngrace. \n\nHis repugnance was strong to the Hopkinsian notion of benevo- \nlence, and of the necessity of sin to the highest display of God\'s \nglory, and to President Edwards\'s doctrine of the necessary con- \nnection between moral effects and their causes, or the motives \nwhich produce them. "Make it," says he, "appear clear on your \nprinciples [those of Edwards and Hopkins] that God is exculpated \nfrom the charge of having any causality in producing sin, and I \nam satisfied. Consider me in the humble capacity of a learner. I \nhave such a firm persuasion of your piety, and such a respect for \nyour judgment and candour, as will keep me from uncharitableness \nin thought or language towards you. There breathes such a spirit \nof kindness and goodness through all your letters as secures both \nmy affection and my gratitude. \n\n"The distinction betAveen natural and moral inability, I have \never thought an important and useful one, when well stated and \nexplained. My worthy and excellent friend, President Burr, was \nthe first who ever gave me an idea of this distinction. He did it \nin three sermons, preached from Joshua xxiv. 19 : \xe2\x80\x94 \' Ye cannot \nserve the Lord, for he is an holy God.\' He acknowledged they \nwere the substance of Edwards\'s book relative to that subject, and \nexpressed a pretty strong desire of having them printed, as some \nof the most useful and important he had ever preached. I would \ndefine moral inability thus : \xe2\x80\x94 A natural and contracted disinclina- \ntion or aversion to the exercises of piety and moral virtue, which \nbecomes faulty and criminal by our resisting the motives which \n\n\n\nHUGH KXOX. 661 \n\nWould have overcome it ; and neglecting, by prayer and other \nduties, to apply to God, through the Redeemer, for those influences \nof the Holy Spirit, by which it would have been wholly subdued, \nand <>ur volitions and actions engaged on the side of piety and \nmoral rectitude. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2Tin- system of the ancient Calvinists is well jointed, and hangs \n\'it Calvinism, as held by President Edwards\'s admirers, \nto me as different from it as Arminianism, \xe2\x80\x94 a middle thing \npatched up out of both, \xe2\x80\x94 and ought to be called \'Edwardism.\'" \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 1 greatly question," he say-, "what you say on p. 19: \xe2\x80\x94 \'They \nhave all the powers that can be conceived in the nature of things \nfor a .-inmr to have; for they have light in the understanding; \nsee the reasonableness and fitness of things, and the obliga- \nthey are under.\' I always thought the understanding was \nsadly darkened and blinded by the fall ; that the natural man could \nnot know nor discern the things of God, and that it required the \nDOWer of renewing grace tO cure this faculty of its blindness; but \nI find that Mr. Hopkins and you make out this faculty pretty \nsound and Vigorous, as though it had Buffered little, if any thing, \n\nby the original aposti - \n\nThese extracts Bpeak favourably of the spirit of the man, and \nshow that he was a strenuous opponent of Hopkinsianism, Unfor- \ntunately, he resorted to b bad hypothesis in order to get rid of one \nnot -o bad, anticipating therein the New Haven divinity, and fol- \nlowing, if we may believe the Edinburgh Review, in the step- of \nBishop Butler, Dr. Balguy, and Archdeacon Paley, \n\nWhat effect the pamphlet produced, who answered it, and whe- \nther the Now York Presbytery took notice of it, are among the \nthings unknown. \n\nYah- College gave him the degree of A.M. in 1768, and the \nUniversity of Glasgow made him i Doctor in Divinity. \n\nIn 177-\'. his church was destroyed by a hurricane; and. a1 the \nrequest of New fork Presbytery, the synod, in 1778, appropriated \nof the collections for pious uses, to aid him in re- \nbuilding. The presbytery corresponded with him yearly, through \nDr. Rodgers, and expressed their regret on hearing, after the Revo- \nlution, ox the declining condition of his Hock. Tney asked him if \nthere was nol wme way in which they could aid him. \n\nIn the recordi of Norwalk, Connecticut, is entered the baptism \nof his -on Hugh, \'" 1-781, who graduated at Yah- in L800. \n\nHe spent the olosin f his life in St. Croix, and died \n\nther<- in < totober, 1790. \n\nThe celebrated Alexander Hamilton,* in early boyh 1. was \n\nI under the instruction of Dr. Knox, who, delighted with the \n\n* Lift \n\n\n\n662 HENRY MARTIN \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN HOGE. \n\nunfolding of his mind, took a deep interest in his welfare; and \nKnox\'s fervent piety gave a strong religious bias to Hamilton\'s \nfeelings. Knox espoused the American cause warmly, and main- \ntained a pleasant and familiar correspondence with his pupil. \n\nHe published two volumes of sermons on interesting subjects at \nGlasgow, in 1772. A copy is in the library of Nassau Hall. \n\n\n\nHENRY MARTIN \n\n\n\nGraduated at Nassau Hall in 1751, and was licensed by New \nYork Presbytery. Hopewell and Maidenhead asked for him, in \nMay, 1752. He was accused of having behaved ill, in preaching \nas a candidate at Tehicken, and refusing to settle, as they thought \nhe had encouraged them to expect ; but New Brunswick Presby- \ntery examined the matter and justified him. He was called to \nNewtown and Salisbury, in Bucks county, in May, 1753, and was \nordained and installed by Abingdon Presbytery, Apfil 9, 1754. \nHe died before May, 1764. \n\n\n\nJOHN HOGE, \n\nA son of William Hoge*, " an exile, for Christ\'s sake," from \nScotland, in the days of the persecution. After some time spent \nin Amboy, he removed to Delaware, and from thence to the Swa- \ntara, in Dauphin county, Pennsylvania. He was among the first \nsettlers on Cedar Creek, in Opeckon, Virginia. \n\nSamuel Gelston went there, as the first missionary of our \nchurch, in the fall of 1735. " Pekin wrote for him" to Donegal \nPresbytery in the next May, and he was sent. Anderson visited \nthe place in 1737. Craig and Thomson were there in 1739, \xe2\x80\x94 \n" both parts of Opeckon" having written for Thomson. In April, \n1740, Cavin was at Bullskin and Opeckon : Lyon and Anderson \nwent thither. Year after year came its supplications. It also \nasked for Lyon in 1740, and for Hyndman in 1742. With the \n\n* MS. Life of Dr. Moses Hoge : by Rev. J. B. Hoge. \n\n\n\njohx hoge. 663 \n\nloss of Donegal Records, after 1750, disappears the last faint \ntrace of the visits of the Old-Side ministers to Frederick \ncounty. \n\nLying on the road by which the Valley of Virginia was entered, \nOpeckon had the benefit of the New-Side ministers, as they went \nflown to the numerous vacancies. Robinson preached there, and \nBO probably did John Blair and Roan, Gilbert Tennent and Fin- \nley, William Tennent and Samuel Blair. A supplieation for sup- \nplies, and in particular fur the opportunity of a probationer from \n(\\-dar (\'reek and Opeckon, was brought to the Synod of New \nYork in May, 174 s , after Dean and Byram had preached there \nwith Bi \n\nIn 174s,* John II gi graduated at Nassau Hall, but was dis- \ncouraged, by the New-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, from enter- \n-; his genius should not be fit for the ministry. \nering in his purpose, he gave the presbytery more aatlS- \n:i in his trials than was expected, and he was licensed, Octo- \n\n11.- was ordained in 1755, and settled at Cedar \nl His father gave the ground on which Opeckon Meeting- \n\n11;- brother James was one of his elders, but \n\nwithdrew, and united with an Associate congregation in Pennsyl- \nvania. James Hoge thought, in the solemn ezeroises of his early \nlife, \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 I would be willing to travel\'}" round the world, if I could be \nsure to meet with Christ, and get him to take me in his arms, ami \ntell me that he Loved me, ami would save me." \n\n( in the union, Hoge was annexed to Donegal Presbytery. In \n1760, he had charge of T nscarora, Opeckon, and Back Creek. \nHe rarely attended ecclesiastical meetings. In April, 17<iL.\\ he \nlamented the sad deficiency of his people. Cedar Creek ami \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2it promised forty-five pounds a year, and the arrears \n\namounted to twenty-five pounds. He resigned, ami removed into \ni ylvania, and was on,- of tin- first members of Huntingdon \n1\' . being without charge. \n\n\n\nf m TruM-i" being used in the North of Ireland m tTnonymoni with going on \n\n\n\n661 NATHANAEL WHITAKER. \n\n\n\nNATHANAEL WHITAKER \n\nWas born* on Long Island, February 22, 1722, and graduated \nat Nassau Hall in 1752. He was ordained, and settled in the \nbounds of New York Presbytery, in 1752. In 1759, he was called \nto Chelsea,f near Norwich, Connecticut. It was conditional : \xe2\x80\x94 \n" provided he be first liberated from his charge in the Jerseys." \nThis church was Presbyterian in its organization, and was in its \ninfancy, having six communicants, and no house of worship. The \ninstallation took place in the open air, February 25, 1761 : the \nsermon, by the Rev. Benjamin Lord, of Norwich, was printed, with \nthose parts which, out of mercy to the shivering people, had been \nomitted in the delivery. \n\nWhitaker had fine talents, and was very prepossessing. He \nengaged in traffic, and "pierced himself through with many sor- \nrows." His people accused him of being greedy of gain and neg- \nlectful of their interests : he charged them with violent and un- \nchristian conduct. \n\nThe meeting-house was completed in 1766. The Connecticut \nBoard of Correspondents for Evangelizing the Indians selected \nhim to go to Great Britain with the Rev. Samson Occum, of the \nMohegan tribe, to solicit funds for a mission school. Philip sup- \nposes the project to have been set on foot by Whitefield. He had \nfrequently, in previous years, urged that Occum might be sent \nover. \n\nLady Huntingdon;}; warmly advocated the cause ; Romaine, and \nVenn, and Powley, (son-in-law of Mrs. Unwin,) exerted them- \nselves at Leeds, Huddersfield, and Halifax. A considerable sum \nwas collected at Newcastle, where, at Whitaker\'s particular desire, \nJohn Wesley preached. \n\nThey returned after eighteen months\' absence, having had \ngreat success, and prepared the way for founding Dartmouth Col- \nlege. The University of St. Andrew\'s conferred on Whitaker, in \n1767, the degree of D.D. \n\nWhile in England, he published several sermons on " Recon- \nciliation to God," in which he endeavours to prove, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nThat the renewed soul is reconciled to God\'s original essential \nproperties and character as absolute Lord and Governor of all ; \nthat the ground of reconciliation is the sacrifice of Christ, and the \n\n\n\n* Rev. Joseph B. Felt\'s History of Salem. \n\nf Calkins\' s History of Norwich. \n\nj Life and Times of Lady Huntingdon. \n\n\n\nXATHAXAEL WHITAKER. 665 \n\nmeans of it ; the knowledge of Christ crucified, and the power of \nthe Holy Spirit. \n\nThat the sinner is, by regeneration, imbued with a new temper \nand a taste and relish for divine things. \n\nThat Christ\'s work has not rendered God in himself anymore \nlovely to the unrenewed heart; and. \n\nThat the sinner is not renewed by "objective light." \n\nThe difficulties with his people biased afresh on his return, and \nhe accepted a call to the Second Church in Salem. Massachusetts* \n\nMay \'\xe2\x96\xa0\'. 1769. He had written to them a month before, insisting \non the adoption of the Presbyterian system. He declared that \nhe never was so perfectly >iek <>t\' the Congregational method, and \ndemanded that he should have a full negative on the proceedings \nof the church, and that no church act should be valid without \nhim. This Btrange demand was accounted a part of the Presby- \nterian System by the New England divines; and Jonathan Ed- \nWards tells us that the chorcfi of Northampton conceded to his \ngrandfather, the venerable Stoddard, in accordance with his Pres- \nbyterian principles, "a negative on all their proceedings, and \nr as 1 heard, disputed it." lie was installed, July 28$ \n\nBut Salem, though by interpretation signifying ** peace," has \nbeen the Bcene of much theological warfare. In 1773, the people \ndeclared that they had not acquiesced in Whitaker\'s proposals. \nHe, with fourteen friends, withdrew, and formed a Presbyterian \ncongregation, and united with Boston Presbytery, November -7, \n177-). The presbytery dismissed, without censure, those who with- \ndrew from him, and, a council being called, declared these persons \nto be the Third Church. His friends erected a house of worship, \nand the property was conveyed to him, as founder ami sole pro- \nprietor, for the ose of the congregation only so long as it con- \ntinued orthodox in faith. It was burned, October 6, 1771; and, \nin the spring, Dr. VYhitaker, ami his elder, Mr. Nathaniel BUsbeej \nmet with the Synod of New York ami Philadelphia, a- corre- \nspondents, to a-k aid to rebuild. The Bynod commended them to \n\nthe charity of all. They completed their new church in February, \n\nWhitaker, on the breaking out of the war, espoused warmly the \nof independence. He engaged in the manufacture of Bait- \n. and five hundred pounds were subscribed to enable him to \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 the head of the turnpike." The town gave him \n\n18, I77\'i, to sink cisterns to procure nitre. In a few \n\nweeks he furnished the authorities with ninety-two pound-, and \n\nsoon after with two hundred and eighty-two pounds. Ontb \xe2\x80\xa2- \n\nof the Boston massacre, in 1771, he printed a sermon on \n"The Fatal Tragedy in hung and, on the proclamation of \n\n\n\n666 NATHANAEL WHITAKER. \n\nindependence, another, entitled "An Antidote to Toryism." At \nthe termination of the struggle, he reprinted the latter, with \nanother, \xe2\x80\x94 "On the Reward of Toryism." \n\nThe Synod of New England was formed, May 31, 1775, by \nforming the three Presbyteries of Londonderry, Salem, and \nPalmer. It met only once or twice ; and, in 1782, only the Pres- \nbytery of Salem remained, with barely a quorum. Whitaker was \nagain in trouble. The church resolved to adopt the Congrega- \ntional form, November 28, 1783, and called a council, which dis- \nmissed him, February 10, 1784. He was shut out of the church, \nMarch 25. Salem Presbytery justified him, and the Rev. Mr. \nCleveland, of Chebacco, defended the people and the council. \nHe published a history of the case, and then a confutation of the \npamphlets on the other side. \n\nHe removed to Maine, and, after vainly attempting to establish \na presbytery, he went to Virginia, and died, January 21, 1795, \nin poverty, at Woodbridge, near Hampton, at the age of sixty- \nthree. \n\nHis son Jonathan graduated at Harvard, in 1797, and became a \nCongregational minister with Unitarian sentiments. \n\nThe Rev. William Hart, of Saybrook, who was declared by \nDavenport to be unconverted, attacked the sermons on " Recon- \nciliation" on their appearance in this country. He held them up \nas new, objectionable, and of the invention of Samuel Hopkins. \nWhitaker replied, in 1770, and retorts on Hart that he held, \nthat, as all men have a conscience, they have a taste for and an \nadmiration of holiness : asserting, on the contrary, that there is a \nnatural enmity of the heart to God, \xe2\x80\x94 " an inward, partial, in- \nterested affection, contrary to the inward sense of righteousness." \nHart, also, attacked Hopkins, and occasioned the publication of \nhis treatise on holiness. He had represented Whitaker as teach- \ning that man is turned devil. Hopkins replied,* that, before Hart \nlet Whitaker go, he blackened him, and made him look like a \ndevil. \n\nThere was another Nathanael Whitaker, who was a native of \nMedford, Massachusetts, and studied at Harvard. In June, 1742, \nit is mentioned, in the public prints, that he had sailed from \nBoston, to enter " into orders." He was settled in Maryland; \nand Archbishop Seckerf was informed, in 1759, on unquestionable \nauthority, that he was one of the worst of men. \n\n* Essay on Holiness. f Rev. Dr. Samuel Johnson: Albany Documents. \n\n\n\nBENJAMIN HAIT \xe2\x80\x94 BENJAMIN TALLMADGE. 667 \n\n\n\nBENJAMIN HAIT \n\n"Was probably a native of Norwalk, Connecticut. He graduated \nat Nassau Hall in 17.j4. While a student, he went, in company \nwith Davies, from Newark to New York. "A promising young \nBan," he observes. "I had an agreeable conversation with him \non original sin, and the influence of the flesh upon the spirit to \nincline it to sin." He was taken on trials by New Brunswick \nPresbytery, as soon as he received his diploma, September 27, \n1754, and was licensed, October 2a, and sent to supply the Forks \nof Delaware. \n\nOn the records of Forks his name is spelled Iloit, as it was \nuniformly pronounced. In the next May, Ainwell and the Forks \nasked for him, and he was called to Fagg\'a Manor. Ainwell \npresented a call, NoTember 11, 1755, which he accepted, and \nwas ordained, December 4, L755. He continued there till May, \n1765; and. 1 . t - i 1 1 ur dismissed, he was called, in November, to Wall- \nkill. He settled at Connecticut Farms, and died there, June 27, \n177\'.\'. \n\nMr. Bait\'s BOO was a merchant in Schenectady, and married a \ndaughter of the younger President Edwards. \n\n\n\nBENJAMIN TALLMADGE \n\nWas born at New Haven, Connecticut, January 1, 1725, and \ngraduated at Yale in 1717. On the death of Youngs, be was sent \nfor, in May, 1752, by the people of Brookhaven. Be waa or- \ndained at large by Suffolk Presbytery, October 23, 1754. Park \n: i; Buell preached, from ha. liii. I; Prime presided, and Bet \nforth the nature of Presbyterian ordination; Daggel gave the \nright hand of fellowship, Brown exhorted the people, and Thomas \nPaine closed with prayer. \n\nThe church in Brookhaven had aoi escaped rending, and was \nin a deplorable, languishing condition; bo be was not installed. \n.\\ " Separate" meeting-house iras pu1 up, two miles beyon \ntauket. John Churchman, in the exercise of the ministry among \nI Is, travelled on Long Esland, in 1769, and, applying For the \ndm of Tallmadge\'a church, iras refused. Be ireni to "the Sepa- \n\ng that, "haying c \xe2\x96\xa0 out from as, they bad laid \n\nbigotry; hut, on making known bis object, they refused him \n\n\n\nDOS ABNER REEVE. \n\npromptly, \xe2\x80\x94 as promptly as any Friend\'s meeting-house would have \nbeen refused to a Separate or a Presbyterian." \n\nTallmadge married the daughter of the Rev. John Smith, of \nRye. His son, Colonel Benjamin Tallmadge, of Connecticut, was \na distinguished officer of the Revolution. \n\nHe was a highly-honoured minister. \n\nHe died, February 5, 1786. \n\n\n\nABNER REEVE, \n\nBorn in Southold, in 1710, and graduated at Yale in 1731. \nLicensed in 1735, he preached at Smithtown ten or twelve years, \nbut was laid aside for intemperance. After Mr. Throop was set- \ntled at Southold, Reeve* was led, by his faithful care and minis- \ntration, to repentance, and was admitted to resume his license by \nSuffolk Presbytery, they being satisfied there was a saving change \nin him. Moriches and Ketchabonock obtained his services, and \nhe was ordained and installed, November 6, 1755, in the Western \nMeeting-house. Brown prayed ; Throop, by the request of Reeve, \npreached, from 1 Cor. ix. 27 ; Prime presided, Park made the or- \ndaining prayer, Tallmadge gave the right hand of fellowship, \nBuell exhorted the people, and Dagget closed with prayer. \nBeing dismissed, in 1763, he settled at Blooming Grove, New \nYork, soon after. Adopting the Independent scheme, he with- \ndrew from New York Presbytery in 1770, and was the minister at \nBurlington, Vermont, till his death, in 1795. \n\nHis son Tapping graduated at Nassau Hall, in 17 \xe2\x80\x94 , and was \n\nthe tutor from to . He married the only daughter \n\nof President Burr. He resided at Litchfield ; was eminent as a \nlawyer, a judge, and a Christian. His law-school was in great \nrepute. \n\n* MS. Records of Suffolk Presbytery. \n\n\n\nMOSES TUTTLE \xe2\x80\x94 JOHN HARRIS. 669 \n\n\n\nMOSES TUTTLE \n\n\n\nThe son of John Tuttle,* of New Haven, was bom in that \ntown, June 25, 1715, and is said to have followed! the- sea before \ngraduating at Yah\' in 1 74 ~>. In 1747, he was ordained the first \nminister in Granville, Massachusetts, and was dismissed in 1753. \n"He was," Bays Dr. Cooley, of Granville, "an orthqdoz and \nfaithful minister: his short ministry hew was blessed with pros- \nperity and peace." Jn 1756, he was a member of the New-Side \n\nytery of Newcastle, and was then employed in Kent county, \nDelaware. On the union, he was joined tO Lewes I\'rohytery. \n\nIn November, 1 T * - : \xc2\xbb , the Corporation for the Relief of Poor and \nMinisters paid him twenty-five pounds, he being in ex- \ntreme poverty, and intending to return to the place whence he was \n\ndriven in the late war. Soon after \xe2\x80\x94 in 17<>4 \xe2\x80\x94 he belonged to New \nYoik Presbytery, and withdrew in 17\'\'.\'.\'. The cause which im- \npelled him, .Mr. Reeve, of Blooming Grove, and Mr. Dorbe, of \n\n. to tin- Btep, about the same time, is unknown. \n\nHe died at Sonthold. Long Island, it is said, in April, 1771. \nII- * i- a brother-in-law of Jonathan Edwards, having married, \n\nin 17 16, lii- Bister Martha, daughter of the Rev. Timothy Edwards, \nof Will [sor. Dr. Cooley says, " The good man, after his dismission \nfrom Granville, preached in various places, and died in peace, in a \n\nge." \n11 - daughter Esther, widow of Mr. Amos Cady, of Vernon, \nConnecticut, was living there in October, 1 > \xe2\x80\xa2"\xc2\xbb 1 . at the age of \nninety-live, in the possession of her memory and other faculties. \n\n\n\nJOHN BARRIS \n\n\n\nG lDUATSD ar Nassau Hall in 1758, and, soon after, October \nmined by the New-Side Presbytery of Newcastle, with \na view to his being taken on trials. Daviee speaks of bin as a \npromising candidate. II" acquitted himself to universal \n\nIt would seem that be had resided in Virginia; for \n\n\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 . I. . . EUrtford \nnip. 1 \n\nDg PropI \n\n\n\n+ Having signed th>\' letter t" t > \xc2\xbb *- arehbUhop, be reoeiTei \xe2\x96\xa0 notioa fron tha \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 ;tcr to the \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 i \xe2\x96\xa0 t." \n\n\n\n670 WILLIAM RAMSEY. \n\nFinley,* writing to Bellamy to " second the present application to \nMr. Edwards," says, (August 1, 1751,) "Our presbytery was \nprovidentially sitting when Mr. Harris came along from Virginia ; \nand we sent a letter to Mr. Edwards, to signify our hearty con- \ncurrence with our brethren in Virginia, in their address to him," \nto settle in the Old Dominion. He was the bearer of the pro- \nposals to Edwards. \n\nIn 1756, he was ordained pastor of Indian River, near Lewes, \nDelaware, and resigned in 1769. In the spring of that year, he \nwas sent, by the synod, to Virginia, North Carolina, and " those \nparts of South Carolina that are under our care." In 1771, the \nsynod ordered him to supply at Hitchcock\'s and Cartridge Creek, \nin Anson county, North Carolina, for three months. He joined \nOrange Presbytery in 1774, and was set off, with five others, \nin 1784, to form South Carolina Presbytery. \n\n\n\nWILLIAM RAMSEY, \n\nThe sonf of James Ramsey, a pious man, from Ireland, was \nborn in Lancaster county, Pennsylvania. His youngest brother, \nDavid, born in 1749, was a physician in Charleston, and distin- \nguished as an author as well as for his worth. William Ramsey \ngraduated at Nassau Hall in 1754, and, while preparing for the \nministry, was selected as a suitable person to unite the divided con- \ngregation of Fairfield, in Cohan zy, left vacant by the death of \nElmer. Dr. Alison! furnished their messenger, Mr. Ogden, with a \nletter to President Stiles, to assist them in seeking a candidate, both \nparties being anxious to come harmoniously together. Ramsey \nwent to Connecticut, and was licensed by the Association of the \neastern district of Fairfield county, in order that he might appear \nbefore the people free from all that could alienate any from him. \nHe was received by Abingdon Presbytery, May 11, 1756, and was \nordained and installed at Fairfield, December 1, 1756. \n\nHe died November 5, 1771, aged thirty-nine, greatly lamented. \nHis brother-in-law, Dr. Jonathan Elmer, pronounced a glowing \neulogy on his piety, talents, and excellence. It was printed. \xc2\xa7 \n\nHe lies buried in "the old New Englandtown" graveyard, || with \nthis inscription: \xe2\x80\x94 "Beneath this stone lie interred the remains of \n\n\n\n* Bellamy papers. f Memoir of Dr. Da-rid Ramsey. \n\n% Stiles MSS. \\ New York Historical Society\'s Library. \n\n|| Communicated by Dr. John Barron Porter, of Bridgeton, New Jersey. \n\n\n\nHUGH McADEN. 071 \n\nthe Rev. "William Ramsey, M. A., for sixteen years a faithful pastor \nof the Presbyterian Church in this place, whose superior genius \nan>l native eloquence shone so conspicuously in the pulpit as to \ncommand the attention and gain the esteem of all his hearers. In \nsituation of life he discharged his duty faithfully. He lived \ngreatly respected, and died universally lamented." \nlie married Miss Sarah Sealy, of Cohanzy. \n\n\n\nHUGH McADEN \n\n\n\nWafl horn* in Pennsylvania, and graduated at Nassau Hall in \n17.V;. Licensed in 1755, by Newcastle Presbytery, he was Bent at \nonce on a mis-inn to the South. Leaving Kirkpatrieks. in Not- \ntingham, Jane 3, he passed to Conecocheague, and, crossing the \ni sc, travelled along the Valley <>t* Virginia. It was a Beason \nof great distress: tin- dreadful tokens of long-prevailing drought \nmet bis eye every day; the uneasiness occasioned by the war was \nchanged to terror by the news of Braddock\'s defeat, and he met \n\nthe ] pie flying from Virginia, for security, into North Carolina. \n\nsited the new settlers in South Carolina, on Broad River, \n\nl; er, Waxhaw, and Catawba; and, returning, was invited \nto divide his time between Cathy\'s Creek (Thyatira) and Rooky \nRiver, North Carolina; but the Btate of the people, ool united \namong themselves, led him to decline. After preaching among the \n\nHighlanders, he passed three Sabbaths at the Welsh Tract, \n\nand was called by the people there, and at GrOShen. Be Was "f- \n\noained, by Newcastle Presbytery, in 1757, and probably returned \n\nut once to the South, En May, 1759, be was dismissed to accept \n\nthe calls, which had then been in his hands some years. Goshen \n\nthe Grove congregation in Duplin county, and the Welsh \n\nTract being On Cape hear River, in Hanover county, he joined \nI :\';. L8, L759, and in March, 1768, he was \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 II co, D . B er, and County Line. Subsequently he \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 the congregations of Crier\'.-,, Red House, and Pittsylvania. \n\nIn 177". with -ix other ministers, he was Bet off to form Orange \n\nHe died January 20, 1781, two days after the British \n\n.army passed by. Systematic in study, in visiting, in examining, \n\nhe faithfully fulfilled bis ministry, and Left behina an honourable \n\nmemory. \n\ntohea <jf North CtrftN tl *i >\xc2\xbb whioh \\t printed iii- journal <.f hia \n\n\n\n672 GEORGE DUFFIELD. \n\n\n\nGEORGE DUFFIELD \n\nWas born in Pennsylvania, in October, 1732, and graduated at \nNassau Hall at tbe age of twenty, and was a tutor there from 1754 \nto 1756. He was ordained by the New-Side Presbytery of New- \ncastle, in March, 1756, and was directed by the synod, in the next \nSeptember, to the several vacancies to the southward. In the \nspring of 1757, there was a revival of religion at Fagg\'s Manor, \nunder Mr. Duffield. He was soon after sent by the synod to Hano- \nver, in Virginia ; and he accepted a call to Carlisle and Big Spring \nearly in 1759; reluctantly, and with uneasiness, he joined Donegal \nPresbytery. He was installed the third Wednesday of September. \nIn April, 1763, he was called to the Second Church, Philadelphia ;. \nbut Gilbert Tennent, with the trustees, opposed the call being \nhanded to him : the presbytery transmitted it to Donegal Presby- \ntery, and they decided not to present it to him, without even con- \nsulting his congregations. An appeal being taken by the Second \nChurch, the synod ordered a rehearing, because the presbytery had \nacted without sufficient light. The matter was dropped, but was \nagain renewed in January, 1768, a joint call being made for him and \nStrain, of Slate Ridge. This also the presbytery declined to give \nhim. In 1765, he was sent to Carolina. \n\nHe gave up Big Spring, and was installed, November 14, 1769, \nat Monaghan, to give it one-third of his time. Roan presided, and \nCooper, of Middle Spring, preached. The First Church in Phila- \ndelphia,* having taken up land on Society Hill, proposed to the \nSecond Congregation to join with them in erecting a house of \nworship : they declined. The First Church proceeded to build, and \nobtained a charter of incorporation for the united committees of \nthe First and Third Churches. The Pine Street Church presented \na call to Patrick Alison : he accepted it, but in a short time re- \nturned it. Samuel Eakin, a licentiate of Lewes Presbytery, was \nsettled, in opposition to the wishes of Dr. Ewing: on his removal, \nDuffield was called; in 1771, the session objecting, the Second \nPhiladelphia Presbytery declined to consent to its being prose- \ncuted. The synod gave them leave by a large majority, but the \npresbytery refused to receive Duffield as a member. The synod, \nin 1773, judged that he had good cause of complaint, and declared \nhim to be the minister of the Third Congregation, and ordered that \nhe be put upon the list of the aforesaid presbytery. At the re- \nquest of the people, they were set off to the First Philadelphia \n\n* MSS. of Samuel Hazard, Esq. \n\n\n\nABRAHAM KETTLETAS. 673 \n\nPresbytery, and the elders were authorized to resign if they could \nacur in the .settlement of the minister according to the wish \nof the congregation. \n\nHe alone patriot, "an early, decided, and uniform \n\nfriend of his country." In early life, he was remarkably ani- \nmated in his public addresses, and very popular; his manner was \nalways warm and forcible; his talent of touching the conscience \nand Beizing the heart was peculiar. Abundant in labours, pecu- \nliarly qualified for planting churches, zeal to do good exposed him \nich called him away. \n\nBe died February 2, 17\'. ,( >. His first wife was a daughter of \nSamuel Blair; the second, of Colonel JoLn Armstrong. \n\n\n\nABRAHAM KETTLETASf \n\nWAS burn in the city of New York, December 26, 1732, and \ngraduated at Sale in 17.~r_\\ He was early impressed with a sense \nof religion. He was probably licensed by New fork Presbytery, \n\nand was installed at Kli/.abethtown, September 11, 1757. J lis stay \n\n. having left before September 29, 1760. In the next \nspring lie appealed from the judgment of New York Presbytery, \nand earnestly requested the synod to endeavour to remove the diffi- \nculties between him and his brethren. The presbytery bad borne \nony in a moderate manner against what they disapproved in \na brother for whom they had a very high esteem, and did uot in- \ntend to Buspend or exclude him; and, to remove all misunderstand- \ning, they condescended, at the request of the synod\'s committee, to \ne him as though no censure had ever passed on him. The \nwas not healed, and he withdrew before May, 1765. \nHe married the daughter of the Hon. William Smith, of New \n\n! at Jamaica, having no pastoral charge. Being \n\nfamiliar with the three languages then spoken in the province, and \nan eloquent Bpeaker, he often preached for the Dutch and French \nchurohes as well a- the Presbyterian. \n\nI. ing warmly into the Btruggle for independence, his safety \n1 him to hi\\e Long bland, and, until the olose of the war, \njourned in New England, lie was elected, in 1777, a mem- \nber of the convention to form a Constitution for the State of New- \nYork, but he did not attend. lie w;i, a political writer of I \n\nlie died September \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 re published. \n\n* Dr. Green, at hi* IuiktuI. \n\n48 \n\n\n\n674 JOHN MARTIN\xe2\x80\x94 EBENEZER PRIME. \n\n\n\nJOHN MARTIN \n\nStudied with Davies, was taken on trials by Hanover Presby- \ntery, March 18, 1756, and was licensed August 25. He was widely \nemployed in supplying vacancies, and was called to Albemarle, \nApril 27, 1757. \n\nThe New England Society for Propagating the Gospel resolved \nto support a missionary to the Cherokee upper towns, if the Scot- \ntish Society would do the same. Martin was ordained, June 9, \n1757, being the first minister of our church ordained in Virginia. \nDavies preached from 1 Timothy iii. 1. Martin engaged in the \nIndian mission, January 25, 1758: the prospects were at first \ncheering, but, the Cherokees having joined the French on the \nbreaking out of war, the enterprise was abandoned. He settled in \nSouth Carolina, and is mentioned in 1770 as subscribing for seven \nsets of the two additional volumes of Davies\'s sermons, published \nin London. \n\n\n\nEBENEZER PRIME \n\n\n\nWas born* at Milford, Connecticut, July 21, 1700, and gradu- \nated at Yale in 1718. He was ordained by a council, as colleague \nto the Rev. Eliphalet Jones, at Huntingdon, Long Island, June 5, \n1723. "A diligent student, extremely exact and systematic, he \nkept a register of the texts, places, and times of preaching, with- \nout a single omission, for more than fifty years." In the Great \nAwakening, his labours were much blessed; "the power of God \nwas marvellous." Convictions of long continuance then issued in \njoy and peace. There was a great and general awakeningf at \nlluntingdon in 1748, and it was still prospering in the next j-ear. \nThis was immediately after the formation of Suffolk Presbytery: \nso wisely and so prayerfully did they seek to stay the progress of \ndisorder, and so graciously did the Lord smile on their attempt to \nbuild up the broken churches. \n\nIn the summer of 1758, he expressed to the presbytery his \ndoubts of the Scripture warrant for licensing probationers for the \nministry, it being his judgment that investiture with the office \n\n*\xe2\x96\xa0 Dr. Prinie"s History of Long Island. f Buell, in Edwards\'s Life. \n\n\n\nEBENEZER PRTME. 675 \n\nof tlie gospel ministry was necessary before one could preach ; \n\n_\xe2\x80\xa2 office-work, to be performed not without, but in \n\n[uence of, solemn ordination." His brethren yielded bo far \n\nordain in every instance where the candidates professed that \n\nthey could not in conscience reoeite license. Such a cotira \n\nflicting with all Presbyterian usage and with the order of the synod \n\nin 1764, he opened his views to the synod in 1771, and they, not \n\nneed of their BOUndneSS, Could not repeal the art. yet, \n\n: full confidence that he would never consent to ordination in \n\nscept after making the necessary trials, hit him to \n\nown course. The year 17\'i ; ! was a year of disquiet \n\nat Huntingdon, and. according to the ancient custom in mu-Ii \n\njuncture-, the -acrament of the Lord\'s Supper was not adminis- \n\nI for twelve months. Happily, in May, 17\xc2\xab>4, "the g] \n| of the J- - d -oleum and thoughtful, not a few \n\nwounded deeply, and groaning under burdens insupportable; some \nunder shuddering honor and fearful apprehensions of Divine wrath. \nglorious work of grace :_ r oe> on here-." and. in September, he \nsaid, "God has poured out his Spirit in a surprising manner upon \n\xe2\x80\xa2pie." \n\nTh.- disquiet was owiilg to the desire <\xc2\xbbf the people to settle a \n\ncolleague, and Borkpatrick, of Amwell, was their choice: they had \n\n\xe2\x96\xa1com the presbytery to prosecute the call, October -\xe2\x96\xa0"\xe2\x80\xa2. 1763, \n\nbut he could Hot he obtained. PHme refused to have a licentiate \ny the pulpit as a candidate for settlement ; and on the 1th of \n\nJune, 17\'il, the presbytery, having heard both sides, decided that \n\nwhen the congregation resolved to admit a licentiate to preach to \n\nthem, the pastoral relation should hi\', ipso facto, dissolved. Soon \n\nafter. I Imour, a licentiate of the Eastern Association of \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Id. who had previously preached in the Presbyterian c< \n\nin Blandfbrd, Massachusetts, was invited in an irregular \n\ntly to the dissatsfacl i m of many in the town, and \n\nIn December, L765, they asked leave to hear \n\n.1 licentiate of Dutchess Presbytery: he was soon called, \n\ntill October 30, 1 T < "\xc2\xbb * \xc2\xbb , and his short stay was \n\nfull of trouble. Many filt that the pastoral relation had been \n\n. bo that, although two hundred and thirty persons op- \njigned, and was dismissed April 4, 1773. \n\n.lied Matthias Burnet, also a licentiate ; but i ; \n\nami, in March, 177."\xc2\xbb, they Bought for Ebenezer Bradford, a) \nordained; but, after much hesitation, he also refused. In t! \n\nI was held by the British, and much wanton and malig- \n\ndone to the dwelling, library, and other property \n\ntnister. He died in the tall \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0( I \n\nMOOtinf "I* tli.- niiviil "I \n\n\n\n676 JOHN MALTBY\xe2\x80\x94 HENRY PATILLO. \n\n\n\nJOHN MALTBY \n\nWas the son* of Captain William Maltby, of New Haven. His \nmother was a sister of James Davenport, and a descendant of the \nRev. Abraham Pierson, first minister of Newark. Being early left \na widow, she married the Rev. Eleazer Wheelock, of Lebanon \nCrank, Connecticut, the founder of Dartmouth College. She was \na woman of great worth, and died while her son was in college. \nHe graduated at Yale in 1747, and was a tutor in Nassau Hall \nfrom 1749 to \'52. Probably he studied divinity with Burr. Ap- \nplication being made by the people of Bermuda to Pemberton,f he \napplied to Bellamy and Wheelock to point out a suitable person. \nMaltby was ordained by New York Presbytery, in 1753 or \'54, and \nwas for a number of years the much-loved pastor of the church on \nthat island. The Rev. Mr. Fowle gathered a flock there early in \nthe eighteenth century, and was succeeded by Josiah Smith, subse- \nquently minister of Cairhoy and Charleston. Maltby was fol- \nlowed by Dr. James Muir, afterwards of Alexandria, Virginia; \nafter whom they had Enoch Mattson. In 1770, Maltby was dis- \nmissed to South Carolina Presbytery, and is said to have laboured \nin Charleston ; but, his health failing, he removed to Hanover, New \nHarm \n\n\n\nHENRY PATILLO, \n\n\n\nA native of Scotland,^ was in a counting-house, in Virginia, \nand, probably through the influence of Thomson, was on his way \nto Pennsylvania, with a view to study for the ministry, when he \nmet Davies at Roanoke. This was in 1751. He went with him \nto his house, and pursued a course of instruction under his care, \nand was licensed, by Hanover Presbytery, September 29, 1757, \n"agreeably to the practice of the Church of Scotland." He had \nspent some time in teaching, and was married to Miss Anderson. \nHe " desired to do good," and was sent to Hico, (Dismal Swamp,) \nAlbemarle, Orange, and Cumberland. He was called to the \nchurches of Willis Creek, Byrd, and Buck Island, and was or- \n\n\n\n* History of the Davenport family, by A. B. Davenport. \n\nf Bellamy papers. \n\n% Dr. Foote\'s Sketches of North Carolina. \n\n\n\nHENRY PATILLO. 677 \n\ndained July 18, 1758. He was dismissed from Ins charge, Octo- \nber, 1762, and spent two years in Cumberland, Harris Creek, and \nDeep Creek. He then removed to North Carolina, and was in- \nstalled, October 2, IT65, at Hawfields, Eno, and Little River. \nHe was a delegate, in 1775, to the Provincial Congress. In 17 v| >, \ncame the minister of Grassy Creek and Nutbush congrega- \nlargely made up of converts under the ministry of Davits. \naim three hundred acres in fee, on condition of his \nstaying with them for life. \n\nHe was one of the first members of Orange Presbytery, and \npresided at the organization of the Synod of the Carolinas. \n\nllf published a small volume,* containing, among other things, \nhis letter, "On Predestination," to Francis Asbury, dated Gran- \nville, Jim.- 14, 17 x 7, and a defence of his conduct in admitting to \nthe Lord\'s table persons holding Arminian sentiments: on one oc- \ncasion, .-ix or < \xe2\x80\xa2 : -_r 1 1 1 Methodist preachers, and a number of their \npeople, after due notice, received the sacrament at his hands. \n\n4 a long life.t he was stripped of his property, \nan 1 reduced to want, on account of the failure of his son in husi- \n\nfor whom he had been an indorser. He and his aged wife \n\nare Baid to have adorned the doctrine of God their Saviour by \ntheir submission and patience under this trial. \n\nHe died in Dinwiddle county, Virginia, in 1801, aged seventy- \nfi\\--. \n\nTo originality of genius and superior powers he added piety, \npublic spirit, and faithfulness in his ministry. Like his teacher 1 \nand model, Samuel Davies, he paid much attention to the coloured \npeople, and was Successful in doing much good among them. \n" < >f the religious negroes in my congregation, some are intrusted \nwith a kind of eldership, bo as to keep a watch over the others: \nany thing wrong seldom happens." After the Revolution, he \nlamented that tie- supply of L r I I ks from abroad ceased, and \n\nthat he had none to give auay to the servants. \n\neral instances "t" unworthy men from abroad coming to the \n. ind occasioning trouble, with disgrace to the ministry, led \n\nhim to writ.\' to tii\'- Bynod "t" the Carolinafl not t" admit any \n\nforeign ministers to labour in their bounds, Donating it better to \nlaymen discharge the -acred function, or even leave the \nchurches entirely vacant. He rejoiced greath in the revival under \nJohn I\'.. Smith, in Virginia, and welcomed the young men who, \nunder his influence, cut. red the minis! \n\nPal llo hid "often thought thai the popular Congregational \nform, joined t" the Presbyterian judicatures as a last resort, \n\n\n\n! Ie\\ \\ I! I", \n\n\n\n678 WILLIAM RICHARDSON. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0would form the most perfect model of church government that \nthe state of things on earth admits of." The errors which after- \nwards carried away Barton W. Stone and the New Lights in one \ndirection, and Thomas B. Creaghead in another, received counte- \nnance, in some measure, from Patillo. He was inclined to assume \nthe pre-existence of the human soul of Christ, and the peccability \nof his human nature. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nWILLIAM RICHARDSON \n\nWas born in Egremont, near White Haven, in England, and, \ncoming to America, became a resident in the family of Samuel \nDavies, and studied with him. Davies speaks* of him to his cor- \nrespondents in Scotland as though he were known to them: he \nwas then under his roof, and would assist him in distributing \namong the negroes the books sent out by the Glasgow Society. \nHe was taken on trials, by Hanover Presbytery, June 9, 17-37, \nand "was licensed in the next January, and was ordained, July 13, \n1758, in Cumberland county, as a missionary! to the Cherokee \ntowns in North Carolina. Davies preached, on the occasion, on \nthe love of souls a necessary qualification for the sacred office. \nTodd gave the charge. The Indians taking up arms, the mission \nwas abandoned on the breaking out of the French War. In \n1761, he connected himself with the South Carolina Presbytery; \nand, in 1763, he was the minister in the Waxhaw settlement. \nHaving no children, he adopted his nephew, William R. Davie,J a \ndistinguished officer of the Revolution, Governor of South Caro- \nlina, and minister to France in 1799. Governor Davie died in \n1820, aged sixty-three. \n\n* Gillies. f Brown\'s History of Missions. J National Portrait Gallery. \n\n\n\nBIOGRAPHICAL INDEX. \n\n\n\n1708.... \n\n\n297 \n\n\n1725.... \n\n\nBIO \n\n\n1712.... \n\n\n811 \n\n\n\n[On the left hand, are the names of the parties whose memoirs are giren in this work. The column \nto the right, shows the place of their nativity, so far as known to the author. The third column indi- \ncates the year in which they were bom. The fourth column shows the date of their ordination, or \ntheir recognition as minii-ti-r- in Qm l\'r. ibrtsslan i liur.h; aud the next Miami] intimates the year \nOf their decease; while that OS the runt hand polnti cut the page in the wurk where tueii I \nbiographies will he feuud.j \n\nName. Country. Pate of Birth. Ordination. Peath. PAOfl \n\nFrancis Makemie Ireland 1680. \n\nDaris Ireland \'.\' 1705. \n\nJohn Wilson 1702. \n\n\' ,...167 I \'\' - 1746 812 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa01 Taylor Scotland 1690 1710 318 \n\nI !. Ireland 1706 1770 318 \n\nBcoflandT 1706 1720! 822 \n\nBooQand 1706 828 \n\n.\' Smith Mateachnsetta 1708 1786 828 \n\nJohn Benry [Wlan 1 1710 1717 825 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 :i Scotland 1678 1709 1786 826 \n\n; i- M kssachusetta 1708 888 \n\nJoseph Morgan C onectient 1 \xc2\xab\'\xc2\xbb7 1 1700 \n\nI eck Holland 1710 \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 Scotland II B8 1718 1760 889 \n\nJ. In. Mackey 841 \n\nThonuu Bratton 1712 1712 842 \n\nRobert Lawson Scotland 1718 1718 842 \n\nl MoQiH Scotland 171:: 1721 848 \n\nWale* 1711 1717 845 \n\nWale* 1711 I72i\' 846 \n\nRobert I 171 1 17ls ::i7 \n\nWalw 171 1 1748 847 \n\ni Iner Scotland 1718 r \n\nnn [reland 1686 l T l _ \xc2\xbb 1752 \n\nOrr Ireland? 1716 \n\ngunnel Pumry H ....1687 1718 17 M \n\nj. .i.ii Thomson fretani 1717 \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 \n\nJohn Plerson N ...1717 177"... \n\n,...1717 1717 \n\nE G ton [reland 1692 1717 1782 I \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0...." k IT02 \n\ni H [reland 1718 \'7ii \n\n.i i Connecticut? 1717 1749 864 \n\n\\ Dl Ir.la.Pl 1678 17 is [748.... ! \n\n\n\n680 BIOGRAPHICAL INDEX. \n\nName. Country. Date of Birth. Ordination. Death. page \n\nSamuel Young Ireland 1718 1721 367 \n\nRobert Cross Ireland 1689 1719 1766 367 \n\nJohn Clement Great Britain 1719 371 \n\nWilliam Steward Great Britain 1719 1734 371 \n\nJoseph Webb Connecticut 1720 1741 372 \n\nJohn Orme England 1720 1758 372 \n\nMoses Dickinson Massachusetts 1695 1722 1778 373 \n\nThomas Evans Wales 1723 1743 374 \n\nAlexander Hutcheson Ireland? 1723 1766 375 \n\nRobert Laing Scotland? 1722 377 \n\nJohn Walton Connecticut 1721 1768? 377 \n\nWilliam McMillan 1724 379 \n\nThomas Creaghead Ireland 1724. \n\nJoseph Houston Ireland 1693 1724. \n\nAdam Boyd 1692 1724. \n\nNoyes Parris Massachusetts 1692 1724. \n\nNathaniel Hubbell Massachusetts 1727. \n\nGilbert Tennent Ireland 1703 1726... \n\nArchibald McCook Ireland 1727. \n\nEbenezer Pemberton Massachusetts 1704 1727. \n\nDaniel Elmer Connecticut 1690 1728. \n\nHugh Stevenson Ireland 1729. \n\nJohn Wilson Ireland 1667 1729 , \n\nEbenezer Gould New England 1727. \n\nEleazer Wales Massachusetts 1657 17c \n\nRichard Treat Connecticut 1708 1731. \n\nRobert Cathcart Ireland 1730. \n\nWilliam Orr Ireland 1730. \n\nWilliam Bertram Ireland 1674 1732. \n\nJohn Cross Scotland 1732. \n\nBenjamin Campbell Ireland 1733. \n\nJohn Nutman New Jersey 1703 1730. \n\nSamuel Hemphill Ireland 1734. \n\nAndrew Archbold 1735. \n\nJohn Tennent Ireland 1707 1730. \n\nWilliam Tennent Ireland 1705 173c \n\nSamuel Blair Ireland 1712 1734. \n\nJames Martin Ireland 17! \n\nRobert Jamison Ireland 1734. \n\nIsaac Chalker Connecticut 1734. \n\nSimon Horton Massachusetts 1711. \n\nHugh Carlisle Ireland? 1735. \n\nAlexander Craighead Pennsylvania?. 1735. \n\nJohn Paul Ireland 1736. \n\nPatrick Glascow 1736. \n\nSamuel Black Ireland 1735. \n\nFrancis Alison Ireland 1705 1737. \n\nDavid Cowell Massachusetts 1704 1736. \n\nCharles Tennent Ireland 1711 1737. \n\n\n\n1 1739.... \n\n\n381 \n\n\n1 1741.... \n\n\n383 \n\n\n1 1768.... \n\n\n384 \n\n\n\n\n386 \n\n\nr 1745.... \n\n\n386 \n\n\n3 1754.... \n\n\n387 \n\n\n\' 1727.... \n\n\no07 \n\n\n1 1779.... \n\n\n397 \n\n\n1 1755.... \n\n\n403 \n\n\n) 1744.... \n\n\n404 \n\n\n1 1733.... \n\n\n405 \n\n\n\' 1778.... \n\n\n405 \n\n\n) 1749.... \n\n\n406 \n\n\nL 1778.... \n\n\n407 \n\n\n) 1754.... \n\n\n409 \n\n\n1 1755 \n\n\n410 \n\n\n! 1746.... \n\n\n411 \n\n\ni \n\n\n413 \n\n\n: 1735 \n\n\n414 \n\n\n) 1751.... \n\n\n415 \n\n\n\n\n416 \n\n\ni 420 \n\n\ni 1732.... \n\n\n421 \n\n\n! 1777 \n\n\n422 \n\n\nt 1751 \n\n\n426 \n\n\ni 1743 \n\n\n431 \n\n\n: 1744 \n\n\n431 \n\n\n: 1765 \n\n\n432 \n\n\n1734 \n\n\n432 \n\n\n\n\n433 \n\n\ni 1766 \n\n\n....434 \n\n\ni 1739 \n\n\n438 \n\n\ni 1753 \n\n\n438 \n\n\n1770 \n\n\n....438 \n\n\n1779 \n\n\n....440 \n\n\n1760 \n\n\n....443 \n\n\n1771 \n\n\n....446 \n\n\n\nBIOGRAPHICAL INDEX. 681 \n\nXame. Country. Date of Birth. Ordination. Death. pagb \n\nAaron Burr Connecticut 1715 1737 17-37 447 \n\nWalter Wilmot Long Island 1709 1738 1744 463 \n\nDavid Alexander Ireland 1788 463 \n\nJohn Elder Scotland 1788 1792 454 \n\nDavid Sanckey Ireland 1780 457 \n\nSilas Leonard Hffwwnmliliiwlli 1788 1764 468 \n\nSamuel Cavin Ireland 1701 1739 1750 459 \n\nMc Henry Ireland 173\'.\' 1757 400 \n\nSamuel Thomson 1739 1787 401 \n\nJohn Craig Ireland 1711 1740 1774 ! 12 \n\nAzariah Hoiton Massachusetts 1715 1740 1777 465 \n\nJohn Guild M 1741 1787 466 \n\nSamuel Evans Pennsylvania? 1742 467 \n\nAlexander McDowell Ireland 1741 1782 488 \n\nHamilton Pel! 1742 409 \n\nJ..lm Rowland Walet 1738 1747 409 \n\nWilliam BoUnaon 1711 1746 474 \n\nCharlee Beatty Ireland 1712-15.. ..1748 1772 478 \n\nJohn Bindman 1712 481 \n\nTimothy John.- Long Wand 1717 1748 1794 18] \n\nTimothy Griffith Penneybrania 1748 1764 481 \n\nJohn Steel Erebnd 1711 177:\' 184 \n\nScotland 1 1743 1748 186 \n\night 1712 177s 485 \n\nJohn Hair Ireland 1720 1742 1771 486 \n\nSamuel Finley Inland 1715 1742 1768 486 \n\nEliah By ram Bfaaeaohuaetni 1748 1764 4\'.*1 \n\nScotland 1732? 492 \n\nEreland 1741 1769 498 \n\nLong Island 1719 1742 1752 494 \n\nI era Delaware 1746 1780 196 \n\nJohn Di.-k Maryland 1746 1747 494 \n\nI unflton 1746 L766 496 \n\n1746 198 \n\n- itlaad 1748 491 \n\na pbell 1718 1717 L7M 491 \n\nJohn Roan Freland 17 1". 1775 \n\nk Oenneetleaf 1721 1746 1768 606 \n\nThomas Arthur L728 L746 LI \n\nHunter 1746 17M 606 \n\nBrainerd Ooanaetieni 1718 1744 17417 \n\n1719 1746 1748 686 \n\nQreen M i ...1722 1746 I \n\nel Tonka* U 17(7 1717... \n\nBrown Scotland 1748 \n\n1712 \n\ntin.-.-t i.-.it 1716 1788 1767 \' \n\nLong Man. 1 1718 17(7 1768 646 \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Long bland 1741 L784... \n\n\n\n682 BIOGRAPHICAL INDEX. \n\nName. Country. Date of Birth. Ordination. Death. page \n\nTimothy Symmes Massachusetts 1715 1744 1756 548 \n\nSamuel Davies Delaware 1723 1747 1761 549 \n\nJohn Brainerd Connecticut 1748 1781 563 \n\nJob Prudden Connecticut 1715 1747 1774 569 \n\nThomas Lewis New England 1747 1778 572 \n\nAndrew Sterling 1747 1766 573 \n\nAndrew Bay Ireland 1747 1777? 573 \n\nJohn Grant 1716 1746 1753 576 \n\nJohn Rodgers Massachusetts 1727 1749 1811 576 \n\nAaron Richards 1719 1749 1793 583 \n\nCaleb Smith Long Island 1723 1748 1762 582 \n\nTimothy Allen 1716 1748 1806 583 \n\nIsrael Reid 1750 1793 585 \n\nDaniel Thane Scotland 1750 1784? 586 \n\nEnos Ayres 1750 1765 587 \n\nElihu Spencer Connecticut 1721 1750 1784 587 \n\nSylvanus White .Massachusetts 1704 1747 1756 591 \n\nSamuel Buell Connecticut 1716 1746 .1798 592 \n\nJohn Moffat Scotland 1751 1788 599 \n\nJoseph Tate 1748 1774 600 \n\nSamson Smith Ireland 1752? 601 \n\nRobert McMordie 1754 1796 602 \n\nChauncey Graham Connecticut 1750 1784 602 \n\nSamuel Kennedy Scotland 1751 1787 604 \n\nBenjamin Chesnut England 1751 1775 604 \n\nJohnes Brown Connecticut 1748 1788 605 \n\nNaphthali Dagget Massachusetts 1727 1751 1780 606 \n\nJonathan Elmer New England 1750 1807 608 \n\nJonn Todd 1751 1793 608 \n\nConrad Worts Germany 1752 610 \n\nJames Finley Ireland 1725 1752 1795 610 \n\nEvander Morrison Scotland 1752 612 \n\nRobert Smith Ireland 1722 1751 1793 612 \n\nAlexander Cumming New Jersey 1726 1750 1763 614 \n\nHugh Henry 1751 1763 616 \n\nJohn Kinkead Ireland 1753? 616 \n\nAlexander Miller Ireland 1757 618 \n\nJohn Miller Massachusetts 1722 1749 1791 619 \n\nWilliam McKennan Delaware 1756 620 \n\nMatthew Wilson Pennsylvania 1731 1755 1790 620 \n\nJoseph Park 1752 621 \n\nSamuel Harker 1752 622 \n\nJohn Wright Scotland 1753 624 \n\nThe Church in New York 628 \n\nRobert Henry Scotland 1752 1767 650 \n\nJohn Smith England 1702 1763 1771 652 \n\nEleazer Whittlesey Connecticut 1752 653 \n\nNehemiah Greenman Connecticut 1750 1779 654 \n\nJohn Brown Ireland 1728..., 1753 1803 656 \n\n\n\nBIOGRAPHICAL INDEX. 683 \n\nName. Country. Date of Birth. Ordinstion. Peath. pagb \n1754 17 7... \n\nKnox Ireland 1766 17 >8 \n\nMartin 1754 17G4 1 2 \n\nSootland 1756 662 \n\nlelWhitaker Long bland 1722 1752 1726 \n\n1 in Bail Connecticut 1766 177 \n\nJ tin TaUmadgfl Connection! 1726 1751 1786 \n\nI lonneoticut 1710 175-3 1795 008 \n\nPuttie Connecticut 1715 1747 1771 669 \n\n1750 \n\nWilliam Pennsylvania I\'-j- 1766 1771 670 \n\nI Pennsylvania 1781 671 \n\nI Doffield Pennsylvania 1782 1756 1790 0,72 \n\nHew Fork 17G2 1798 \n\n1 tin 1757 074 \n\n1 r Prime Conneotiont 1700 1728 177\'.\' \n\nanectiont 1768 T 1771 676 \n\nBootiand 1726 17-".^ 1801 076 \n\n1 England 1758 078 \n\n\n\nALPHABETICAL LIST OF BIOGRAPHIES. \n\n\n\nName. page \n\nAlexander, David 468 \n\nAlison, Francis 440 \n\nAlison, Hector 496 \n\nAllen, Timothy 583 \n\nAnderson, James 326 \n\nAndrews, Jedediah 312 \n\nArchbold, Andrew 420 \n\nArthur, Thomas., 504 \n\nAyres, Enos 587 \n\nBall, Eliphalet 657 \n\nBay, Andrew 573 \n\nBcatty, Charles 478 \n\nBell, Hamilton 469 \n\nBertram, William 411 \n\nBlack, Samuel 438 \n\nBlair, John 486 \n\nBlair, Samuel 426 \n\nBostwick, David 500 \n\nBoyd, Adam 384 \n\nBoyd, John 323 \n\nBradner, John 351 \n\nBrainerd, David 506 \n\nBrainerd, John 563 \n\nBratton, Thomas 342 \n\nBrown, David 529 \n\nBrown, David 497 \n\nBrown, James 605 \n\nBrown, John 656 \n\nBuell, Samuel 592 \n\nBurr, Aaron 447 \n\nByram, Eliab 491 \n\nCampbell, Benjamin 414 \n\nCampbell, James 530 \n\nCampbell, John 497 \n\nCarlisle. Hugh 433 \n\nCathcart, Robert 409 \n\n684 \n\n\n\n1 Name. pack \n\nCovin, Samuel 459 \n\nj Chalker, Isaac 432 \n\n; Chesnut, Benjamin 604 \n\nClement, John 371 \n\nConn, Hugh 351 \n\nCowell, David 443 \n\nCraig, John 462 \n\nCraighead, Alexander 434 \n\nCreaghead, Thomas 381 \n\nCross, John 413 \n\nCross, Robert 367 \n\nCumming, Alexander 614 \n\nDagget, Naphtali 606 \n\nDavenport, James 531 \n\nDavies, Samuel 549 \n\nDavis, Samuel 310 \n\nDean, William 526 \n\nDick, John 495 \n\nDickinson, Jonathan 358 \n\nDickinson, Moses 373 \n\nDuffield, George G72 \n\nElder, John 454 \n\nElmer, Daniel 403 \n\nElmer, Jonathan 608 \n\nEvans, David 347 \n\nEvans, Samuel 467 \n\nEvans, Thomas 374 \n\nFinley, James 610 \n\nFinley, Samuel 488 \n\nGelston, Samuel 361 \n\nGillespie, George 339 \n\nGlasgow, Patrick 438 \n\nGould, Ebenezer 405 \n\nGraham, Chauncey 602 \n\n\n\nALPHABETICAL LIST OF BIOGRAPHIES. \n\n\n\n685 \n\n\n\nName. page \n\nGrant, John 676 \n\nGreen, Jacob 527 \n\nGreenman, Nehemiah \n\nGriffith, Timothy 483 \n\nGuild, John 466 \n\nHait, Benjamin 067 \n\nHamilton, John 496 \n\nHampton, John 822 \n\nBarker, Bamael 622 \n\nHarris John 609 \n\nHemphill, Samuel 410 \n\nHenry, Hngh 010 \n\nHenry, John I 26 \n\nHenry, Robert 050 \n\nHindman, John 481 \n\nJohn \n\nHook, Henry 363 \n\nHorton, Axariah 46fi \n\nHorton, Simon \n\nH inston, Joseph \n\nHnbbeH, Nathaniel \n\nIlniit\'-r. A in hew 506 \n\nII utcheson, Alexander B76 \n\nm. Robert 4ol \n\nJohnes, Timothy 181 \n\nlialaohi 846 \n\n\n\n|y, Bamnel.... \nKettletas, Abraham. \nKinkead, John \n\nKnox, Hngh \n\n\n\n.604 \n.018 \n\n\n\n\xe2\x96\xa0-\xe2\x80\xa2 877 \n\n884 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 uuel 648 \n\n1. 842 \n\ni - r> s \n\n572 \n\n. John B 11 \n\n.1 I \xe2\x96\xa0 \n\n\n\nM H tin, Jamei 481 \n\nMartin, John 674 \n\n\n\n\n\nName. page \n\nMiller, John 019 \n\nMoffat, John 5\'J9 \n\nMorgan, Joseph 335 \n\nMorrison, Evander 012 \n\nMcAden, Hugh 671 \n\nMcCook, Archibald \n\nMcCrea, James 498 \n\nMcDowell, Alexander 408 \n\nMcGill, Daniel 043 \n\nMc Henry, Francis 400 \n\nMeKnight, Charles 485 \n\nMcKeunan, William 020 \n\nMeMprdie, Robert 802 \n\nMcMillan, William 379 \n\nMoNiah, George 318 \n\nNutman, John 415 \n\nOrme, John 872 \n\nOrr, Robert \n\nOrr, William 410 \n\nPark. Joseph 621 \n\nParris, Noyea 886 \n\nPatillo. Henry 678 \n\nPaul, John 438 \n\nPemberton, Ebenezer 397 \n\nPhillips, George 303 \n\nPierson, John 867 \n\nPowell, Howell 846 \n\nPrime, Ebeneier 676 \n\nPrndden, Job \n\nPttmry, Bamoel \n\n. William 870 \n\nLbner I \xe2\x80\xa2 B \n\nRaid, brael \n\nBiohards, Aaron \n\nI ion, William \n\nJohn 498 \n\nBob iii-oii, William 17 1 \n\nRodgers, John 676 \n\nRowland, John \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Bamnel 648 \n\ny. Biohard 467 \n\n\n\nsmith, Calel \n\n\n\n686 \n\n\n\nALPHABETICAL LIST OF BIOGRAPHIES. \n\n\n\nName. pace \n\nSmith, John 652 \n\nSmith, Joseph 328 \n\nSmith, Robert 612 \n\nSmith, Sampson 601 \n\nSpencer, Elihu 587 \n\nSteel, John 484 \n\nSterling, Andrew 573 \n\nStevenson, Hugh 404 \n\nSteward, William 371 \n\nSturgeon, Robert 492 \n\nSymmes, Timothy 548 \n\nTaylor, Nathaniel 318 \n\nTallmadge, Benjamin 667 \n\nTate, Joseph 600 \n\nTennent, Charles 446 \n\nTennent, Gilbert 387 \n\nTennent, John 421 \n\nTennent, William 364 \n\nTennent, William .1 422 \n\nThane, Daniel 586 \n\nThomson, John 355 \n\nThomson, Samuel 461 \n\nThorn, David 495 \n\nTodd, John 608 \n\n\n\nName page \n\nTreat, Richard 407 \n\nTucker, Nathaniel 329 \n\nTuttle, Moses 869 \n\nVan Vleck, Paulus 838 \n\nWade, Nathaniel 888 \n\nWales, Eleazer 106 \n\nWalton, John 377 \n\nWebb, Joseph 372 \n\nWhitaker, Nathaniel 664 \n\nWhite, Sylvanus \xe2\x96\xa0~/.U \n\nWhittlesey, Eleazer 668 \n\nWilson, John 311 \n\nWilson, John 405 \n\nWilson, Matthew 020 \n\nWilmot, Walter 483 \n\nWorts, Conrad 610 \n\nWotherspoon, Robert 347 \n\nWright, John 024 \n\nYoung, Samuel 307 \n\nYoungs, David 494 \n\nThe Church in New York 628 \n\n\n\nRESOLUTIONS \n\n\n\nSYNODS AND PRESBYTERIES. \n\n\n\nThe well-known ability of the author prompted the adoption, by \nBev< ral of the synods, and many of the presbyteries, of resolutions \nencouraging the extensive circulation of this History, and we publish all \nive received up to the time of going to press. \n\nThe following resolutions were passed unanimously by the \n\nSYNOD 01 BTHW J HUSKY. \n/*, It is well kn..wu that the late lUv. Richard Webster Kft. at the time \nof lii- death, a manuscript II i ~ t \xe2\x96\xa0 > ry of the Presbyterian Church iii America. \xe2\x80\x94 a \n\nwork full of antiquarian research ami facts of great value to all Presbyterians, \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nari\'I that the Intrinsic value of the work, together with the fact that the family \nof the author are interested iu its sale, renden its extensiTe circulation desirable: \n\nre \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n> \'1 cordially and earnestly recommend this History \n\nof tin- r Church (about t" be published) to the ministers and churches \n\nonder "ur aare, and likewise express the hope that suitable effort will be used to \n\nlarge e numb u possible within the bounds of the \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2it we wouM respectfully raggesl to our Presbyterian Board of Pui>- \ntbe irorh in bands "f their oolportenrs, for the \n\xe2\x96\xa0i among all our churohesi \nit. K. Bon \n\nfollowing wu also adopted ananimooeb/ bj the \n\nD OF PHTXADBLPH] L \n\ni Webster left f"r pnblioation a manuscript \n. Church in Imerioa, \xe2\x80\x94 a work of deep reeearoh and \n\nii \n\n\n\n690 RESOLUTIONS OF \n\nof great value to all Presbyterians, \xe2\x80\x94 and the family of the author are interested \nin its sale, its extensive circulation is desirable : Therefore, \n\nResolved, That this synod cordially recommend the History of the Presbyterian \nChurch to the ministers and churches under our care, and earnestly request that \nevery effort be made to secure the sale of as large a number of copies as \npossible. \n\nResolved, That we would suggest to our Presbyterian Board of Publication the \npropriety of placing the work in the hands of their colporteurs, for the purpose \nof securing a more general circulation among all the members of our church. \n\nS. M. Andrews, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nAlso, the following presbyteries : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nPRESBYTERY OF NEW BRUNSWICK. \n\nResolved, That this presbytery cordially approve of the publication of the \nHistory of the Presbyterian Church, by the late Rev. Richard Webster, believing \nthat the well-known industry and habits of patient investigation which he for so \nmany years gave to the whole subject of the antiquities of the Presbyterian \nchurches in this country will make it all that might be expected. \n\nResolved, That the work be recommended to the patronage of all the churches \n\ntinder our care. \n\nA. D. White, \n\nStaled Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF FORT WAYNE. \n\nResolved, That we heartily commend the work to the churches under our \n\ncare, as well as to individuals, as worthy of their confidence, entitled to their \n\npatronage, and adapted to their profit. \n\nWilson M. Donaldson, \n\nStaled Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF DONEGAL. \nResolved, That the presbytery have learned with great pleasure of the pro- \nposed publication of .the History of the Presbyterian Church, by the late Rev. \nRichard Webster ; and, in view of the intrinsic value of such a work, especially \nfrom so competent a source, as well as the relation which the enterprise bears to \nthe family of the lamented deceased, would cordially recommend the forthcoming \nvolume to the patronage of the members of our several congregations. \n\nJohn Farquhae, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\n\n\nSYNODS AND PRESBYTERIES. C01 \n\nPRESBYTERY OF LONG ISLAND. \n\nResolved, That we heartily commend to the churches under our care, auJ to \nthe community at large, the forthcoming History of the Presbyterian Church in \nAmerica, by the late Rev. Riehard Webstar, and that we esteem it our privilege \nit the widest circulation possible within our bounds. \n\nT. McCauley, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF SOUTII CAROLINA. \n\nResolved, That, inasmuch as the work promises to be a standard volume of \nJue to the Presbyterian churches, and as the family of the self-denying \nand laborious author have an interest in its sale, we recommend that the members \nof this presbytery make special efforts in procuring subscribers for it. \n\nT. L. McBrtde, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF BEDFORD. \n\nI !at the members of presbytery be requested to act as agents in \ntheir nspectrre charges, to procure subscriptions for the new work about to be \npublished, entitled \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2 The History of the Presbyterian Church," by the late Rev. \n\nWilliam Patterson, \n\nStated Clerk: \n\nPRESBYTERY OF CARLISLE. \nRenohed, That presbytery reoonunend to the pastors and sessions under its \npussible, the circulation of the History of the Pres- \n\nb, by the lata Etar. Biohard Webster. \n\nJama P. Ei inn or, \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Clerk. \n\nPBWBTTBB1 "V m:\\v.\\-tle. \n\nr, in regard to the publication of \xe2\x96\xa0 iii-toryof \niron, by tin* lata Bsr. EUehavd Webster: whereupon it was \nyterj do hsrsby earnestly re oo n un snd this forthcoming \nwork t .- under it I \n\nI\'. l>i BOIS, \n\nBHBBIBR. \nph M. WOson, of Philadel] I \npnbllsh a wa Chnrofa in thU country, do \n\nI \n\n\n\n692 RESOLUTIONS OF \n\nprepared by the late Rev. Richard Webster, and recommend it to the ministers \n\nand churches under our care. \n\nS. H. Brown, \n\nStaled Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF NORTHUMBERLAND. \nResolved, That presbytery would earnestly commend the History of the Pres- \nbyterian Church, by the Rev. Richard Webster, deceased, to the attention and \npatronage of the officers and members of our churches ; and the ministers of pres- \nbytery are requested to publish this resolution from their pulpits. \n\nIsaac Greer, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF MAURY. \nResolved, That we cordially and earnestly recommend the History of the Pres- \nbyterian Church in America, by the Rev. Richard Webster, to the members of all \nour churches, and to all others. \n\nJ. Stephenson Frierson, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF RARITAN. \n\nThe Stated Clerk laid befoi-e presbytery a communication from Mr. Joseph M. \nWilson, of Philadelphia, in relation to the History of the Presbyterian Church, by \nthe late Rev. Richard Webster, of Mauch Chunk, which he is about to publish for \nthe benefit of the family of the author : whereupon it was \n\nResolved, That this presbytery highly approve of this enterprise, and cordially \nrecommend it to the patronage of our churches, and, furthermore, request our \npastors and ruling elders to use their endeavours to obtain subscribers to the \nwork in their respective congregations. \n\nA true extract : P 0. Studdiford, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF CHEROKEE. \n\nResolved, That the History of the Presbyterian Church, by the late Rev. Richard \nWebster, \xe2\x80\x94 now in course of publication by Joseph M. Wilson, \xe2\x80\x94 be cordially recom- \nmended to all the churches and members under our care. \n\nJohn F. Lanneau, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF ERIE. \nA letter having been read \xe2\x80\x94 from J. M. Wilson, publisher \xe2\x80\x94 relative to the \nHistory of the Presbjtf erian Church, by Rev. Richard Webster, deceased, it was \nResolved, That this presbytery do cordially recommend said history to the \n\n\n\nSYNODS AND PRESBYTERIES. Q9\xc2\xa7 \n\nfavourable notice of ministers and members of churches throughout our bounds, \nas an interesting and valuable contribution on a subject of great impi rtance to all \nlovers of the doctrines and order of the Presbyterian church ; and also to their \nacceptance, in view of the benevolent objects designed by its publication, as well \na? of it- intrinsic excellency. \n\nExtract from Minutes of Presbytery of Erie, January 7, 1857. \n\n8. J. M. Eatoh, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI. \nResolved, That this presbytery feel a deep interest in the publication of the \nabove-n:u:n 1 History, and WOUH earnestly recommend to our ministers, elders, \nand members t" subscribe for the .-nine, and Bend their names and subscriptions to \nMr. J M. Wilson, of Philadelphia, the publisher. \n\nJamks S. Montgomery, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF MISSISSIPPI. \nResolved, That this presbytery take a deep interest in the circulation of this \nwork, and earnestly recommend it to all the members of the church within their \nbounds; and, further, express the hope that each member of the presbytery, and \nthe elders of our churches, will exert themselves to obtain subscriptions, and \nforward the same to Joseph M. Wilt o, 27 South Tenth Street, below Chestnut, \n\nPhiladelphia. \n\nR. Thick, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPEHSBYTEBI OS PALMYRA. \n\nWhereas, W> i that Joseph M. Wilson, <>f Philadelphia, is about to \n\npublish \xe2\x96\xa0 History of the Presbyterian Church, by the hue Rev. Richard Webster: \n\nre \xe2\x80\x94 \n\niH-iid to nil ""I- minister! and elders t" procure tho \nwork, and to ml I i the fcmtn\xe2\x80\x94 of i-ur churches so for as practicable. \n\nA. 1\'. FOBMAV, \n\nClerk. \n\nPBBBBTTBBI OF L01 ESI LB \\. \n\nt. i_v be reqc sut tho \n\nbyterian Church to the church \n\nird the same to Joseph VL \n\nbia. \n\nJon a. Ban i n, \n\nI\'lcrk. \n\n\n\n69-4 RESOLUTIONS OF SYNODS AND PRESBYTERIES. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERY OF STEUBENVILLE. \nResolved, That the History of the Presbyterian Church, by the late Rev. Richard \nWebster, \xe2\x80\x94 now in the course of publication by Joseph M. Wilson, of Phila- \ndelphia, \xe2\x80\x94 will, no doubt, be both instructive and interesting, it be recommended \nto as many of the members as may find it convenient to subscribe for the same, \nespecially as it is published for the benefit of the family of Mr. Webster. \n\nJohn R. Agnew, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF TUSCALOOSA. \nResolved, That Presbytery earnestly recommend to the pastors and members of \nthe churches under our care the History of the Presbyterian Church, by Rev. \nRichard Webster, now in course of publication, as, from the well-known reputa- \ntion of the author, it will be a volume of great interest and value. \n\nC. A. Stillman, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF HUNTINGDON. \nResolved, That pastors be requested to interest themselves in the circulation of \nWebster\'s History of the Presbyterian Church. \n\nROBEET HAMMII.L, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nPRESBYTERY OF CONCORD. \n\nWhereas, Mr. Joseph M. Wilson, of Philadelphia, is about to publish a History \nof the Presbyterian Church, prepared by the late Rev. Richard Webster; therefore, \nResolved, That this presbytery would cordially recommend to all our ministers \nand members of our churches to supply themselves with the work. \n\nR. H. Lafferty, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\nSECOND PRESBYTERY OF PHILADELPHIA. \nExtract from the Minutes of the Second Presbytery of Philadelphia, at Brides- \nburg, October 8, 1856:\xe2\x80\x94 \n\n" Presbytery earnestly recommended to all its members, ministers, and elders, to \ntake such action in their respective congregations as, in their judgment, will best \nsecure a wide circulation of the Church History prepared by the late Rev. R. Web- \nster, and now in course of publication by Mr. Joseph M. Wilson, of Philadelphia." \nA true extract. Jacob Belville, \n\nStated Clerk. \n\n\n\nPRESBYTEBIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. \n\n\n\nAt a meeting of the Executive Committee of tiie Presbyte- \nrian HISTORICAL 80CTETY, held on August 5th, 1850, the undersigned \nWas appointed to draw up a statement in reference to the plans and \nobjects of the Society, and to append it to the Rev. Richard Webster\'s \n1 sbyterian Church. In conformity with this resolution, \n\nthe following statement is respectfully presented to the public: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nThe PBE8BTTKBIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY was organized at the meet- \ning of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United \n\n, in the city of Charleston, South Carolina, in May, \n\nAt the anniversary meeting of the Society held in the city of \n\nBuffalo in May, 1^54, some amendments were made in the Constitution, \n\nchiefly with a view to secure tlie co-operation of all branches of the I\'n 3- \n\n1 ehnrch. These amendments were more definitely inoorp \ninto the Constitution at the anniversary meeting held iu the city of \nPhiladelphia, in May, L856. The Revised Constitution will be found \n\xe2\x80\xa2 in. nt. \nyterian Bistorioal Society aims at accomplishing the follow* \n\n: \xe2\x80\x94 \n\nI T. "\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0! flu materiak \xe2\x80\x94 manuscript, published, <>r traditionary \xe2\x80\x94 \nwhich serve t.> illnstratc toe history of the Presbyterian Churoh in the \n1 Lmerioa. \n\nII. To pr e t e rm the* materiaU aaft from danger, and a c c e ss i ble to \nall, at a location oonvenienl for general refer nee. \n\nIII. To promote th< knowledge at the history thus collected ai \n\nThis will be done, in part, by the oiroulatioo of an Annual \n\n\n\n69b PRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. \n\nReport and Address ; by public meetings, held from time to time in dif- \nferent parts of the Church, at which papers on historical subjects may be \nread and discussed ; and by the publication of such of the writings of the \nPresbyterian fathers, and of other historical memorials, as may be deemed \nexpedient. \n\nThe mode in which co-operation can be efficiently and successfully \nexerted may be in the following, among other forms which may suggest \nthemselves to your independent reflections : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. By every presbytery, in all the churches represented in the So- \nciety, taking measures to induce each minister to write, without delay, \nthe history of the church or churches which he serves, \xe2\x80\x94 the whole col- \nlection to be arranged in historical order, and prefaced by a general \nhistory of the presbytery, by some person or committee appointed for that \npurpose; the latter committee also to secure the history of vacant \nchurches. \n\nThe following points in the history of the churches are of special im- \nportance, \xe2\x80\x94 viz. : the circumstances of their organization; the names of all \ntheir ministers and elders ; number of communicants at different periods; \nrevivals; donations to benevolent objects; candidates for the ministry; \nforeign missionaries; schools for education of children, &c, \xe2\x80\x94 in short, all \nthe details of the religious or secular history likely to be interesting. \n\n2. The presbytery may do a very important historical service by ob- \ntaining a biographical sketch of every minister in their body who departs \nthis life; and also of elders, or prominent laymen, as may seem desirable. \nA biographical sketch of our deceased ministers, in particular, is absolutely \nnecessary in elucidating the history of the Church. The following points \nare of special biographical interest: \xe2\x80\x94 Age and place of birth; whether \nof pious parents ; at what college and seminary educated ; circumstances \nof conversion ; when licensed and ordained ; his various fields of labour ; \nincidents and characteristics of his ministry or public life; name of wife \nand of children ; publications ; circumstances and date of death, &c. \n\n3. In the third place, the presbytery is requested to co-operate in \nobtaining, for present use, a complete list of all the ministers of the \nPresbyterian Church, from the beginning, with the dates of their ordina- \ntion, and their names written out in full, with the name of the ordaining \npresbytery-. This can be done: \xe2\x80\x94 1st. By each minister giving his own \nname, with date of ordination and the ordaining presbytery, to some \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. G97 \n\none who will transmit the whole list of the presbytery to the Society. \n2d. By each presbytery authorising seine person, who may volunteer to \n\ndo the work, to transcribe from the records of presbytery the nam< \ndates of all the ordinations from the organization of the presbytery. By \nthese means immediate information can be obtained, on the points in \n:i, whioh is an object of great interest, as records amy be destroyed, \ndeaths may ensue, and other providential hinderances may occur. \n\n1. It is extremely desirable for every minuter to transmit to the So- \nciety a eopy of every published sermon, or other religious and literary \nproduction of his pen; and also to send a manuscript sermon, to be \ndeposited among the archives of the Society as a memorial connected with \nthe current history of the Church, \xe2\x80\x94 which will, with the lapse of time, \npossess increasing interest t \xe2\x80\xa2 Pn sbyteriaufl generally, as well as to those \nspecially concerned in such collections. \n\n.". Each n m \xe2\x96\xa0\' \xe2\x96\xa0\'\xe2\x96\xa0 /\xe2\x96\xa0, elder, and member of the congregation may oo- \n\nby collecting and transmitting old Bermons, pamphlets, news- \n\n. I< tters, books, manuscripts, portraits, or any relics of \n\nthe olden time, which throw light upon our annals. A copy of all the \n\nPresl .\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0 tan ; >ks, pamphlets, and periodicals, is also desired, \xe2\x80\x94 it \n\nbeing the purpose of the Booiety to publish annually an historical account \n\nof the current literature of the Presbyterian Church, and tu collect all \n\n1 1 i < \xe2\x96\xa0 publications \xe2\x80\x94 past, present) or future \xe2\x80\x94 whioh illustrate its lite- \nrature. \n\nSaving thus frankly stated the objects of the [nstitation and tho \nrefianc - them, the co-operation of every presbytery and \n\nof all the members of our congregations is respectfully Boliorted, in the \nted, or in whatever way may best suit their con- \nvenience. \n\nIt will be bo n at onee thai i work of do ordinary magnitude and dili- \nefore the Ohuroh. Much historical research, Literary labour, \n\xe2\x80\xa2 toil, and miscellaneous drudgery, must be endured for history\'s \nand the Church\'s Bake. Considerable expense will also be Involved in \ncarrying into execution plans for cultivating a field so extensive, \nlong left a oomparatively-negleoted waste. The Booiety will endeavour \nto meet honourably all necessary and reasonable claims for remuneration j \nhut they know too well the ministers and members of th< I \nohurohes not to suppose that, in b work like tl till bo \n\n\n\n698 PRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. \n\nspontaneously and gratefully rendered. History presents interesting and \nimportant topics of investigation ; and the particular history of the Pres- \nbyterian Church, in its different branches, has materials of doctrinal, \necclesiastical, literary, evangelistic, and political value, which invite the \nfree and full investigations of her most devoted and ablest sons. \n\nAll which is respectfully submitted. \ni C. Van Rensselaer, \n\nChairman of Executive Committee. \nPhiladelphia, March, 1857. \n\nP.S. \xe2\x80\x94 In this connection, it is deemed proper to append the \nCHARTER of the Presbyterian Historical Society, which has \njust passed the Legislature of Pennsylvania. The Constitution of the \nSociety will be found in the Act of Incorporation. \n\n\n\nAN ACT TO INCORPORATE THE PRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. \n\nSection 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives \nof the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met, and it \nis hereby enacted by authority of the same, That David Elliott, "William M. \nEngles, W. R. De Witt, Albert Barnes, George H. Stuart, J. B. Dales, J. \nT. Cooper, James Hoge, Charles Hodge, Samuel Hazzard, Samuel Agnew, \nRobert J. Breckinridge, William Chester, George Howe, William B. \nSpragug, Henry A. Boardman, C. Van Rensselaer, John C. Backus, John \nLeyburn, William S. Martien, Alfred Nevin, Thomas H. Skinner, John \nA. Brown, Samuel H. Cox, Peter Force, Edwin F. Hatfield, George Duf- \nfield, George Duffield, Jr., Henry B. Smith, Matthew W. Baldwin, Henry \nJ. Williams, B. J. Wallace, J. N. McLeod, John Forsyth, James Wood, \nThomas Beveridge, James M. Wilson, T. W. J. Wylie, S. J. Wylie, \nThomas Smyth, M. L. P. Thompson, and J. F. Stearnes, and their asso- \nciates and successors, shall forever be, and they are hereby, erected and \ncreated a body politic and corporate in deed and in law, by the name, \nstyle, and title of the Presbyterian Historical Society, and by that name, \nstyle, and title shall have and enjoy perpetual succession, and be able aud \ncapable to purchase, receive, take hold, and dispose of real and personal \nestate, to sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, to receive and make \nall deeds, transfers, conveyances, and assurances, contracts, and agree- \nments whatever, to have and use a common and corporate seal, and the \nsame to break, alter, and renew at pleasure, and generally to do and per- \n\n\n\nPRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. 699 \n\nform any act, matter, and thing necessary to promote the objects and \n. of this act of incorporation, with full power to enact and repeal all \n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\xa2-illations, and by-laws which may be found expedient or desirable: \n7\' , That Boob rules, regulations, and by-laws .shall not be \n\nContrary to OT inoonirififflll with the Constitution of the United States or \nof this Commonwealth. \n\nSect. 2. That the fundamental articles of the Constitution of this So- \n-hull be B\xc2\xa3 follows : \xe2\x80\x94 \n\n1. This Society shall bo known by the name of the Presby- \nterian Historical Society. \n\nArt. 2. The objects of this Society shall be to collect and preserve tho \nmaterials Mid to promote the knowledge, of the History of the Presby- \nterian Church in the United States of America. \n\nArt. 8. Any branch of the Presbyterian Church, whose adinissiou shall \n\nbe approv.-.l by the Society at its annual meeting, shall become an integral \n\npart of the same. The branches now constituting the Society are \xe2\x80\x94 The \n\nterian Church whose Genoa! Assembly net in the First Presbyter \n\nrian Church in New V(,rk City, in one thousand eight hundred and tit\'ty- \nsix ; The Presbyterian Church whose General Assembly met in the Pres- \nbyterian Church on Madi.-on Square in New York City, in one thousand \nSight hundred and \' he Associate Reformed Church, the \n\nrian Church, and the Reformed Presbyterian Church. \n\nArt. 1. Aii-, ]\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 : ome a member of this Society by the pay- \n\nment of one dollar annually, and shall thereby be entitled to receive a \n\ncopy of the annual report The payment of tan dollars at one time, or in \n\nannual | ; all eoii.-tituto a lite-member. \n\n.1//. o. The offioen of the Society shall be a President, one Vioe- \n| eh of the ehurchee represented in die Society, I a Cor- \n\ni . and Recording Secretary, a Treasurer, and an Executive Com- \n\nmittee, of which committee at least one member shall be from each of the \nS iety: all the omoera shall be elected at each \nannual meeting of the Society. \n\nArt. 6. The annual meeting of the Society shall be held in the oity of \nPhiladelphia on thi j in .May. \n\nCommittee shall be oomposed of ooi less than \ncine dot more than . fof whom the Corresponding Seore- \n\ni i irer shall be members ex officio^) to whom shall b \n\nthe work of devising and executing measures, to secure the objeota \nof the - \'i hey -hall make an Annual Report of their pro\xc2\xa9 \n\nnt the Annivi ting* shall oause u address or addrossoi to be de- \n\nduring the meeting of the General aasembl] or Synod of eaoh \ni id shall have pow< r to issue publi- \n\nfrom time to time, and to provide means fox defraying th< \n\n\n\n700 PRESBYTERIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. \n\nsary expenses of their operations. The Executive Committee shall meet \nquarterly, on the first Tuesdays of February, May, August, and November, \nand at other times, if deemed necessary by any two members, on the call \nof the chairman. Vacancies occurring in their body by death or other- \nwise may be filled at any regular quarterly meeting. \n\nArt. 8. The formation of a library, containing publications and manu- \nscripts, shall be regarded as a prominent measure to be accomplished by \nthe Society. The Executive Committee shall have charge of the library, \nand shall appoint a Librarian. Publications, manuscripts, and other his- \ntorical relics, may be placed on deposit in the library, to be returned to \nthe persons depositing the same on their written application. \n\nArt. 9. This Constitution may be amended by a vote of two-thirds of \nthe members present at any annual meeting : Provided, That notice of \nsuch alteration be proposed at a preceding meeting of the Society. \n\nSect. 3. That the officers and members of the Executive Committee \nof this Society, until others are regularly chosen under the provisions of \nthis act, shall be those now in office, namely: \xe2\x80\x94 President, Thomas H. \nSkinner, D.D.; Vice-Presidents, K. J. Breckinridge, D.D., LL.D., William \nB. Sprague, D.D., Edward F. Hatfield, D.D., Colonel Peter Force, John \nForsyth, D.D., John N. McLeod, D.D., Thomas Beveridge, D.D.; Secre- \ntary, J. B. Dales, D.D.; Treasurer, Samuel Agnew, Esq.; Executive Com- \nmittee, C. Van Kensselaer, D.D., J. C. Backus, D.D., Samuel Hazzard, \nEsq., George Duffield, Jr., B. J. Wallace, H. J. Williams, Esq., G-. H. \nStuart, Esq., J. B. Dales, D.D., and Joseph T. Cooper, D.D. \n\nSect. 4. That the annual income of the real estate held at any time \nby the said Society shall not at any time exceed the sum of three thou- \nsand dollars. \n\n\n\nP.S. \xe2\x80\x94 All donations for the Presbyterian Historical Society may be sent to Samuel \nAgnew, Esq., 821 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, \n\n\n\nA\'\'>"-;. uadelphla. \n\nW. II.. Philadelphia, \n\nI.. Summit Hill. Pa. \n\nBar. 0. \xe2\x80\xa2\'.. 81 Louis, Ho. \n\nJ. \\\\\\, Tauiaqua; Pa. \n\nille, 0. \nAdam, Bar. M I\'.. Dyknaa\'flStetfoiifN.T. \n\nB. I... rheoLSem., aJlegbeny, l\'a. \nAgnew. Bar. J. B., Bteubenrille, U. \n\nSamuel, Philadelphia. \n\n0, l\'n. \n\nAlexander, Pranoia, Potter\'s F"rt, Pa. \n\ni,-r .n: Orier, Kishacoqtdllas, P i. \n\nAlexander, J. I . D i> . Princeton, N..F. \n\nJ. B . I. inisriUe, By. \nAlexander, John, Kishacoquillas, Pa. \nAlexander, B., M.l>.. Clinton, Ua. \n\n!\'\xe2\x80\xa2 ton, N.J. \n\nelphia. \nrakttn, l.i. \ntown, N..I. \nAllen, John, Wj \xe2\x96\xa0 c, Pa. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 . John, Wiluamsbui \nAlH-oii, Andrew, Banting l \xe2\x80\xa2 \nAllium, John, In U una, Pa. \nAlli-"M, Mrs. M iry, Bontfa \xe2\x80\xa2 l< n, P l \nAlii-\'ii. Bobarl k . \\ Henri \n\nal B., Newton, V.f. \nBnmmerBald, \nd, Junes A., Clinton \n\nI i. - 1 . Ifo. \n\nM II., Hunting. I \n\nB r Theo.8em.Columl \n\n. bui /, P i. \n\nh Chunk, I\'ll. \n\nPhiladelphia. \n\n\n\nAnsley, J. A., Augusta, Gkv \nAnsley, W. J., Augusta, Ga. \nAnthony, J. J., Sholocta, Pa. \nArchibald, E. A., Pleasant Ridge, Ala. \nArchibald, .1. H., Pleasant Ridge, Ala. \nArhii. Mrs. Allison, West Chester, N.V. \nArm-. Ber. Clifferd 8., Bidgehury, N.T. \nArmstrong, B\xc2\xbb, Gtarmantown, Pa. \nArmstrong, J., IfeigSYille, 0. \nArmstrong, J. D., Bomney, Ya. \nArmstrong, Ber. John, Basleton, Pa \nArmstrong, Bar. R,, Adena, 0. \nArn.-ii, \\v. II., Ptorenee, Ala. \nArthur, William C, Baltimore, Ml. \nAtkins, Layton T., Fredericksburg, V i. \nAttefcbury, B. .1. ;\'.. Trenton, N.J. \nAtwator, L II ., D.D., Prineeton, N.J. \n\\x:.!l. Kcv. C, Qalonn. 111. \nAyrault, Son. Allen, Geneseo, N.T. \n\nBar. John w\\, Pig i Creek, Ifo. \n\nBackus, John (\'.. I\xc2\xbb.I>.. Baltimore, Ml. \n\nJohn I\'.. D.D., Behaneetady, N.V. \nBoar, M Bmora, Md. \n\nBailey, Benjamin 8., Biohmond,0. \nBailey, James, Kishacoqaill i \n\nJ mcey, h i\\ I (reel \\ i \ni\'.. i\'.i\xc2\xbb.. Columbus, Mi--. \nBaird, Bar. J. H . Loal B (ran, Pa. \n\nBalrd, Bar. B.J., B Ibnry, N.J. \n\nB dear, BBaa, aJtoena, P i \n\nI .. Qoinoy, III. \n\nBar. John P., \' \n\nm P, Am.iia. North Salem, N.T. \n\nBaldwin, Bar. J. a.. Newark, v.\'. \n701 \n\n\n\n702 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nBank, Ephraini M., Greenville, Ky. \nBanks, Gen. E., Lewistown, Pa. \nBanks, Hugh S., Newburg, N.Y. \nBarber, Augustus S., Woodbury, N.J. \nBard, Rev. Isaac, Greenville, Ky. \nBarefoot, John, Milroy, Pa. \nBarker, Ralph, West Chester, N.Y. \nBarnard, Rev. Alfred, West Chester, N.Y. \nBarnard, John, D.D., Lima, N.Y. \nBarnes, Mrs. E., Tamaqua, Pa. \nBarnes, James C, D.D., Somerset, Ky. \nBarnes, J. Edward, Tamaqua, Pa. \nBarnwell, Robert, Indiana, Pa. \nBarr, Rev. Andrew, Crestline, 0. \nBarr, Rev. J. C, Princeton, 111. \nBarrett, Rev. Myron, Newton, N.J. \nBates, Davis, Milroy, Pa. \nBathgate, R. D., Sinking Valley, Pa. \nBayard, James, Philadelphia. \nBayard, Col. N. J., Rome, Ga. \nBeadle, Rev. E. R., Hartford, Conn. \nBean, J. S., Augusta, Ga. \nBeard, Benjamin, Hardin, Iowa. \nBeard, John, Philadelphia. \nBeard, William, Hardin, Iowa. \nBeattie, Rev. D., Scotchtown, N.Y. \nBeattie, Rev. James, West Chester, N.Y. \nBeattie, Rev. R. H., Salisbury Mills, N.Y. \nBeatty, C. C, D.D., SteubenviUe, 0. \nBeatty, John, Milroy, Pa. \nBeatty, John, Philadelphia. \nBeatty, Ormond, Prof., Danville, Ky. \nBeck, C. F., M.D., Philadelphia. \nBeck, T. W., Rodney, Miss. \nBeebe, Capt. E. H., Galena, HI. \nBeebe, Mrs. Sarah, Galena, 111. \nBeisel, William, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nBelden, E. L., Theol. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nBelford, George, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nBell, George, Milroy, Pa. \nBellas, Thomas, Philadelphia. \nBellville, Rev. Jacob, Hartsville, Pa. \nBemiss, J. W., M.D., Rodney, Miss. \nBenedict, A. W., Huntingdon, Pa. \nBenedict, G. C, North Salem, N.Y. \nBerry, J. M. S., Paris, Mo. \nBertsch, Daniel, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nBertsch, Daniel, Jr., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nBetts, N. N., Towanda, Pa. \n\n\n\nBeveridge, Rev. A. M., Hoosick Falls, N.Y. \nBeveridge, Rev. T. H., Philadelphia. \nBeveridge, Thomas, D.D.,Xenia. 0. \nBick, George, Port Carbon, Pa. \nBigham, John, Baltimore, Md. \nBillington, H., Sunbury, Pa. \nBingham, Rev. W. R., Wai-ren Tavern, Pa. \nBird, A. D., Hazleton, Pa. \nBissell, Rev. S. B. S., New York. \nBittinger, Rev.E.C, U.S.N., Philadelphia, \nBlack, A. W., D.D., Sewickleyville, Pa. \nBlackburn, Rev. A., Bristol, Tenn. \nBlackwell, Rev. H., Flint Hill, Mo. \nBlackwood, John F., Hamburg, Ga. \nBlackwood, William, D.D., Philadelphia. \nBlair, Brice X., Shade Gap, Pa. \nBlair, D., Huntingdon, Pa. \nBloom, Joseph, White Haven, Pa. \nBoal, Hon. George, Boalsburg, Pa. \nBoardman, H. A., D.D., Philadelphia. \nBoggs, A. C, West Liberty, Va. \nBoggs, Rev. John M., Independence, Iowa. \nBoiling, A., Richmond, Va. \nBones, Mrs. S., Augusta, Ga. \nBorden, John, Philadelphia. \nBossert, John J., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nBosworth, Rev. E., Baltimore, Md. \nBouton, Edgar M., Galena, 111. \nBower, Rev. E. R., Wappinger Falls, N.Y. \nBowers, Aaron, Theo. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nBowers, C, M.D., Newton Hamilton, Pa. \nBowman, Rev. J. R., Eutaw, Ala. \nBoyd, Alexander, Philadelphia. \nBoyd, David, Philadelphia. \nBoyd, Miss Jane, Washingtonville, Pa. \nBoyd, Mrs. Jean L., Philadelphia. \nBoyd, Joseph E., Mt. Vernon, Iowa. \nBoyd, J. Howard, Baltimore, Md. \nBoyd, J. S., Theol. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nBoyd, Mrs. Margaret, Rising Sun, la. \nBoyd, W. B., Petersburg, Va. \nBoyle, Edwin, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nBoyles, James, Philadelphia. \nBrace, R. J., Trenton, N.J. \nBracken. Rev. T. A., Independence, Mo. \nBrackett, Mrs. S. A., Rock Island, 111. \nBradshaw, Rev. F., Bridgeville, Ala. \nBrank, Rev. R. G., Lexington, Ky. \nBrearley, Johnes, Lawrenceville, N.J. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n703 \n\n\n\n. Joseph G., Trenton, N.J. \niidge.R.J..D.D.,LLL\xc2\xbb..Danville,Kj \nBreed, Bar. W. P., Philadelphia. \nBriahin, Duvi 1. \\ Pa. \n\nBrodhead, A. G., Jr., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \n\ni. A. J., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \n\ni, L. \\Y., White Haven, Pa. \n\n.. Ih mas, B lekport, Pa. \nBrothweU, Miss Fran a, Pa. \n\nBroughton, J. I!.. 1: \nBrown, Rev. Allen II., May\'s Landing, X J. \n\nI: -. An lr.w. Philadelphia. \nBrowu, D., Philadelphia. \nBrown, Mrs. I)., Prinoeton, N..T. \nBrown, Geo. w., M.D., PortOarbon,Pa. \nBrown, Jamea, Angual \nBrown, John, White Haven, Pa. \nBrown, Joaeph, Wilkes! are, Pa. \n\nteville, Pa. \ni II., Frankfort, Ya. \n\n. \n\nBrowi Pa. \n\n. 111. \n\n. Wallace, Mill Hall. Pa. \n\nBryan, R. 1\'.., Holtidaysburg, Pa. \n. w illiao F., Peoria, 111. \n. 8., Bri Igetoo, N.J. \nBuck, Mi- g Sarah II., Bridgeton, N.J. \nBudman, Kiiat Sarah, Danville, Pa. \nBnfoi \n\n. Rome, Pa. \nBullock, - 1 M Chunk, Pa. \n\nBurdett, Bar. at, Philadelphia, \nB J. < \n\n<\xe2\x80\xa2, Pa. \ni \xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x96\xa0 B . I \xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x96\xa0 . i. i . \nmore, M I. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x80\xa2 !. N..I. \n\nI \n\nN.Y. \nL W., M in- J. Chon .. Pa \n\nB a. i\xc2\xbb.. ii ; : d ;\xe2\x96\xa0 I org, Pa> \n\' Hon. 8 . n \n\n< I . Uleghenj Citj \n\nI n. lie., ii, \n\nI G H.i \n\n1 I. mi. \n\n11, Hugh, Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nCampbell, James E., Rising Sun, la. \nCampbell, John W., Brimheld, 111. \nCampbell, Joaeph, Jr., Belleville, Pa. \nCampbell, J. N., D.D., Albany, K.Y. \n\nCampbell, J. 0., Belleville. Pa. \n\nCampbell, Ruben, Belleville, Pa. \n\nCampbell, S. C, Kuoxville, IVnu. \nCanfield, W. P.., Baltimore. Md. \n\nCanning. Mark, Philadelphia. \n\n. Bev. William. Cambridge, Wis. \n\nCanaine, Andrew, Franklin, la. \n\nCarnahan, Rev. D. T., Baltimore, Md. \nCarnahan, Jamea, D.l\xc2\xbb., Princeton, N.J. \nOut, F. B. C, Charlottesville, \\ a. \n\xe2\x80\xa2 \'air, John, Trenton, N..I. \nCarroll, Rev. IS., Clover Hill. N..1. \nCarroll, Mies Josephine, New York. \n\nCanon, Mrs. Mary, Marion, N.C. \n\nCanon, Thomas, Philadelphia. \n\nCarter, John, Bloomsbury, N.J. \n\nfart r, Bobert .s; Brothers, New Ionic. \n\nh Chunk, Pa. \n\nCastner, Wesley w.. l\'.l mnabnry, N.J. \nCater, Bev. Edwin, BaddreUs, B.C. \n\n("hi, Christopher, Sinking Yalley, Pa. \n\nCattail, Bar. w. c. Bneton, Pa, \nCatto, Bar. William T., Philadelphia. \nChamberlain, John, Pontiac, Mich. \nChambers, CoL Geo;, Chambenbux . Pa. \nChamben, John s., Trenton, N.i. \nChapin, Lyman, Albany, [f.Y. \nChapman, J. EL, m rach Chunk, Pa. \nChapman, R. Sett, B.D., Aah iville, N c. \nChappin, Thomee, Jr., Columbus, Qa. \nash, Soranton, Pa. \ni. i... ii.it., Philadelphia. \n\nm \'- -I. \nr, William, i>.u., Philadelphia. \nCbilae, Bradley, White Saves, Pa. \n\ni \xe2\x80\xa2 s., Hartford, Conn. \n1 . v. .. Ifllroy, Pa. \nChrist] in, Bev. L n.. Philadelphia. \n\n.1 \\.. M.lllint.i^n. Pa, \n\nchurch. B*arvi \nClark, UiaaAnnie I\'... W \nchirk, John, llaoomb, Dl. \n\nClark, William I ., ii \n\n\n\n704 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nClarke, Freeman, Rochester, N Y. \nClarke, Henry S., D.D., Philadelphia. \nClarke, Rev. Joseph, Chauibersburg, Pa. \nClarke, Robert C, Augusta, Ga. \nClarke, Samuel S., Peoria, 111. \nClayton, Rev. J. A., Clarkston, Mich. \nClegg, Isaac, Mt. Pleasant, Iowa. \nClift, Joseph, Holmesburg, Pa. \nClifton, William B., Louisville, Ky. \nClose, H. L., Milroy, Pa. \nClose, W. T., Milroy, Pa. \nCobb, Rev. A. P., Philadelphia. \nCochran, Rev. William P., Hansons, Mo. \nCoffee, Alexander D., Florence, Ala. \nCoffee, Mrs. John, Florence, Ala. \nCollins, Charles, Philadelphia. \nCollins, Rev. Charles J., Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nCollins, Hon. Orestes, AVilkesbarre, Pa. \nColt, Charles, Jr., Geneseo, N.Y. \nColt, Rev. S. F., Towanda, Pa. \nColwell, Stephen, Philadelphia. \nCandict, Rev. J. B., Stillwater, N.J. \nCondit, J. W., M.D., Dover, N.J. \nCondron, James, Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nCone, Ephraim, Geneseo, N.Y. \nConnitt, Rev. G. W., Deep Run, Conn. \nConnor, E. T., Summit Hill, Pa. \nConrad, Rev. L. L., West Manchester, Pa. \nCook, Cyrus, Rome, Pa. \nCook, Rev. Darwin, Rome, Pa. \nCook, Watts, Scranton, Pa. \nCook, William G., Trenton, N.J. \nCook, Ziri, Rome, Pa. \nCooper, A. B., Prairie Bluff, Ala. \nCooper, Rev. Charles W., Pontiac, Mich. \nCooper, John, Philadelphia. \nCooper, Rev. Joseph T., Philadelphia. \nCooper, Rev. S. M., Walker, Pa. \nCopp, Rev. J. A., Chelsea, Mass. \nCorey, Rev. Benj., Perth Amboy, N.J. \nCorl, Nathan, Boalsburg, Pa. \nCorning, Erastus, Albany, N.Y. \nCortright, N. D., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nCoryell, M., Hazleton, Pa. \nCoulter, Rev. David, Lexington, Mo. \nCouper, James, M.D., Newcastle, Del. \nCouper, William, Newcastle, Del. \nCovert, Daniel, Franklin, la. \nCovert, George L., Franklin, la. \n\n\n\nCovert, P. G., Franklin, la. \nCowell, Mrs. Sarah, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nCox, Alexander, Boalsburg, Pa. \nCrabb, Rev. John M., Bryan, 0. \nCraig, J., Augusta, Ga. \nCraig, Samuel, Bordentown, N.J. \nCrane, Walter B., Rondout, N.Y. \nCraven, Rev. Elijah R., Newark, N.J. \nCraven, H. L., Th. Sem., Princeton, N.J. \nCrawford, Alexander, Baltimore, Md. \nCrawford, Rev. A. L., Indiantown, S.C. \nCrawford, Armstrong, Sinking Valley, Pa. \nCrawford, E.D., M.D., Thompsontown, Pa. \nCrawford, Mrs. Eunice, SinkingValley,Pa. \nCrawford, Holmes, Chambersburg, Pa. \nCrawford, Joseph, Sinking Valley, Pa. \nCrawford, J. R., Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nCrawford, Rev. Robert, Crookville, Pa. \nCrawford, Rev. Thomas M., Slatehill, Pa. \nCreveling, Jacob V., Washington, N.J. \nCreveling, John A., Bloomsbury, N.J. \nCrook, William T., Crookville, Pa. \nCrooks, H. L., Galena, 111. \nCrouch, George, Bethel, Pa. \nCrowell, Rev. James M., Parksburg, Pa. \nCullen, William, Rising Sun, la. \nCumming, S. J., Monroeville, Ala. \nCumming, Thomas, Williamsburg, Pa. \nCummins, Col. Wm., Kishacoquillas, Pa. \nCummins, Williamson, Belleville, Pa. \nCunningham, R., Mifflintown, Pa. \nCurran, Rev. Richard, Petersburg, Pa. \nCurtin, Hon. A. G., Belief onte, Pa. \nCurwen, John, M.D., Harrisburg, Pa. \nCuttler, J., Hardin, Iowa. \nCuttler, W., Hardin, Iowa. \nCuyler, Mrs. C. C, Philadelphia. \nCuyler, Theodore, Philadelphia. \n\nDale, Rev. James W., Chester, Pa. \nDales, Rev. J. B., Philadelphia. \nDana, Ara, Tunkhannock, Pa. \nDana, Daniel, D.D., Newburyport, Mass. \nDaniel, Hugh, Green Tree, Pa. \nDaniel, Mrs. R. T., Richmond, Va. \nDaughtrey, M. F., M.D., Portsmouth, Va. \nDavenport, Mrs. Mary, Hazleton, Pa. \nDavid, S., Knoxville, Ala. \nDavidson, A., Louisville, Ky. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n705 \n\n\n\nDavidson, Robt., D.D., N. Brunswick, X.J. \n:i. R., Troy, N.V. \n\nW.. Augusta, Ga. \nRer. J.Le B m,S.C. \n\nB., Titusville, N.J. \n\xe2\x80\xa2J Pa. \n. Kiioiville, Tenn. \nan, Fnakfta I \n\n_\\ Pa. \n\nm Hamburg, N.V. \nDelancy, N., Kio.xville. Tenn. \n\nN. M., Williamsbnrg, 0. \n\nVS., Philadelphia. \n\nBoIHdsysburg, Pa. \n. Cfannk, Pa. \n:i. Aqnffla, Mermaid, DeL \nDexter, Mrs. B., Maneh Chunk, Pa. \n\xe2\x80\xa2. . John N., Kittanim \n\n.. Pa. \nDickson. Rev. Cyras, Baltimore, Md. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0.. .1 unea N.. Philadelphia. \nDiskson, Robert M., Vernon, Iowa. \nDiehl, Joseph, Danville, Pa. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2h, Robert, D.D., Rnoa v.. \nDock, Res. I). 0., Oxford, M- . \n\n-\'\xe2\x96\xa0pli, Tulip, Ark. \n\nr, W. A., Princeton, N.J. \nJ. V., Springfield, 111. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\'i.rly. Pa. \n\nPhiladelphia. \n\nI \' \xe2\x96\xa0 . .i mi. Tamaqo \n\nn i. I. \\ \' i. \n\nMill Ball, Pa. \n1( ,M \n. Pa. \n\nI I \nDoraheimi \n\nlentown, v.i. \n1 1 M b Chunk, Pa, \n\nD \xe2\x96\xa0 - irgi Pa. \n\nD I\'M iob Chunk, Pa. \n\n.. Pa. \n\nDrake, < Ma \n\nii. i. ry J.. Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nDu Bois, Edward, Taniaqua. Pa. \nDudley, Rev. J. D., Dover\'s Mills. Va. \nDuttield, Rev. George, Jr., Philadelphia. \nDuffield. Rer. J^hu T., Princeton, N.J. \nDuncan, Samuel, Sinking Valley, Pa. \nDuncan, Mrs. S. P., Port Gibson, Miss. \nDungan, C. B., Philadelphia. \nDunham, A. W., Clinton, N.J. \n\nDonlap, James, Philadelphia. \n\nDonlap, J. E., Theol. Sem., Columbia, S.C. \n\nDonlap, John, Bpringfii \n\nDunlap, Robert, Blanch Chunk, Pa. \n\nDonlap, Mftj. N\\ . B., Coates\' Tavern, S.C. \n\nDnnwody, John, RosweU, Ga. \n\nDwart, William L., Suubury, Pa. \n\nDyaart, Alexander, Sinking Valley, Pa. \n\nI eepb, Hollidaysburg, Pa. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 . G. E., Cornersville, Tenn. \nMiss, Philadelphia. \nBamilton, Baltimore, Md. \ni: i ton, ReTi William, Smyrna, Pa. \n\nK.it ii. Rer. 8. M. J., Franklin, Pa. \nRer, B. B., Westfield, N.J. \n\nJl li ii. Philadelphia. \n\nBckard, Rer. J. B\xc2\xbb, Washington, D.C. \n\nH in.. Rahiray, VJ. \nEdwards, James, Albany, N.V. \nE hrards, Rer. J., Bouth Hanover, la. \nBells, Ber. W. w.. Carlisle, Pa. \nElliott, David, D.D., Allegheny Cily, Pa. \nElliott, Rer. George, Alexan \nElliott, Mr-, ii. <;.. Philadelphia. \nElliott, Then. II., Philadelphia. \nElmer, Son. L Q. C, Bridgeton, N.J. \nBbner, Urn., M.i>., Bridgetoi \nKNtun, vs. P., M D., Colnml \n\npton, N.Y. \nEmery, w m. P., l\'i mington, N J. \nBnglo, kb I B Gta m tntown, Pa. \n\xe2\x96\xa0 nrtille, Pa. \n\nEngle, - . Belief . Pa, \n\ni Josepl P., Philad< Iphla. \n\nm. M., D.D., Philadelphia. \ni i . Liberty Corners, J. \n\nr., w,n. John B., Mi\'. \n\n\n\nr os \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nEspey, Mrs. Agnes, Rising Sun, la. \nEvans, Rev. R. R., Germantown, Tenn. \nEverhart, James B., West Chester, Pa. \nEvins, Col. S. N., Spartanburg, S.C. \nEwing, Amos, Battle Swamp, Md. \nEwing, Rev. C. H.,WestPhiladelphia,Pa. \n\nFaires, J. W., Philadelphia. \nFaris, Rev. John M., Steubenville, 0. \nFarley, Mrs. S. R., Colliersville, Tenn. \nFarnum, P., Holmesburg, Pa. \nFarquhar, Rev. J., Lower Chanceford, Pa. \nFarris, Rev. R. P., Peoria, 111. \nFarrow, James, Spartanburg, S.C. \nFeay, Joseph, Williamsburg, Pa. \nFegley, Nathan, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nFell, Mrs. M. A., Waverley, Pa. \nFellows, A. W., Summit Hill, Pa. \nFenton, Rev. Jos. F., Kirkwood, Mo. \nField, James, Philadelphia. \nFillmore, Rev. J. 0., Batavia, N.Y. \nFine, Hon. John, Ogdensburg, N.Y. \nFinlay, Rev. J. B., LL.D., Kittanning, Pa. \nFinley, Rev. J. P., Paris, Mo. \nFinley, Rev. Robert S., Metuchin, X.J. \nFinley, W. R., M.D., Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nFish, Jonathan, Trenton, N.J. \nFishback, Charles, M.D., Shelbyville, la. \nFisher, Rev. James P., Johnstown, N.Y. \nFisk & Little, Albany, N.Y. \nFithian, George, Philadelphia. \nFithian, Joseph, M.D., Woodbury, N.J. \nFitten, John H., Augusta, Ga. \nFleming, John, Shelocta, Pa. \nFleming, John M., Colliersville, Tenn. \nFleming, Morton, Shelocta, Pa. \nFleming, Porter, Augusta, Ga. \nFleming, Rev. W. A., Farmington, HI. \nFoote, W. Henry, D.D., Romney, Ya. \nFord, Rev. C. E., Williamstown, N.J. \nForesman, Rev. R. B., Middaghs, Pa. \nForest, Joseph, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nForman, Mrs. A. H., Easton, Pa. \nForman, Rev. A. P., Hannibal, Mo. \nForsyth, A. R., Greensburg, la. \nForsythe, Rev.W. H., Mt. Pleasant, Ky. \nFoster, Asa L., Council Ridge, Pa. \nFoster, John C, Jr., Bethel, Pa. \nFoster, Rev. Julius, Towanda, Pa. \n\n\n\nFoster, Thomas, Galena, HI. \nFoster, Wm., Boalsburg, Pa. \nFowler, M. P., Tamaqua, Pa. \nFowler, Peter, V. B., Newburg, N.Y. \nFrazer, Simon A., Hinesville, Ga. \nFredericks, J.F., Th. Sem., Allegheny, Pa- \nFreeman, Alfred, M.D., New York City. \nFreeman, E. B., Scranton, Pa. \nFrew, H. B., Mifflintown, Pa. \nFrierson, John M., College Hill, Miss. \nFrisbie, Chauncey, Rome, Pa. \nFrisbie, Zebulon, Rome, Pa. \nFrothingham, Rev. W., Johnstown, N.Y. \nFrymire, John, White Haven, Pa. \nFuller, Charles, Scranton, Pa. \nFuller, E. C. Scranton, Pa. \nFuller, Mrs. Harriet, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nFuller, J. S., Scranton, Pa. \nFulton, Mrs. Sarah A., Philadelphia. \nFulton, William F., Sumpterville, Ala. \nFuthey, J. Smith, West Chester, Pa. \n\nGahgan, Daniel, Boalsburg, Pa. \nGalbraith, Rev. R. C, Baltimore, Md. \nGale, E. Thompson, Troy, N.Y. \nGamble, Archibald, St. Louis, Mo. \nGarvin, W., Louisville, Ky. \nGaston, Rev. Daniel, Philadelphia. \nGates, Jabez, Germantown, Pa. \nGayley, Andrew, Philadelphia. \nGayley, Andrew W., Philadelphia. \nGayley, James F., M.D., Philadelphia. \nGayley, Oliver, Parkesburg, Pa. \nGayley, Rev. S. A., Battle Swamp, Md. \nGayley, Rev. S. M., Media, Pa. \nGayley, Rev. S. R., Shanghae, China. \nGazlay, Rev. Sayrs, Williamsburg, \nGibboney, D. C, Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nGibson, David, R,omney, Va. \nGibson, George S., M.D., Baltimore, Md. \nGibson, John, Philadelphia. \nGibson, J. W., M.D., St. Louis, Mo. \nGibson, William J., D.D., Walker, Pa. \nGiger, Rev. G. M., Princeton, N.J. \nGilbraith, Rev. J. N., Kirkwood, Mo. \nGilchrist, Charles, Hat Creek, Va. \nGildersleeve, W. C, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nGilfillan, Henry, Philadelphia. \nGillespie, James, Oxford, Miss. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE TRESEYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\nrot \n\n\n\nGillespie, M i;i<ing Sun, la. \n\nI la, Pa \n\nGilliland, John, Potter\'s Mil\'-. Pa. \n\n:. Pa. \nI\'a. \n\'.\'. iariiu 1!.. Aeademia, Pa. \nGiven, Rev. James, Bakerstown, Pa. \nHenry, Hunting\' Ion, Pa. \nB -v. Win. R., German Valley. N.I. \n- OtevOla, N.J. \nI. A., Tr.-n.Mit. I\'a. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0-. Ala. \n\nno, N< peek, Pa. \n\ntopeok, i\'a. \npeek, Pa. \n1 i LA.,1 \n\nG a,J.SlB th. I\'ll S.-iii..l*rincetnii.N..I. \n\nW. H.. i> .!>.. I & otland, \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 , (la. \nhndria, Pa \n\n\'!.. M.I\'., 1\'. -rrysvillc, Pa. \ni\'!\' I]. liia. \nG John Philadelphia. \n\n.. w. u.. Woodbmy, N.J. \nI a I \'.. I \xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2!\xe2\x96\xa0\xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0 . v.i. \nW. H.. Biohmond, V i. \n\n!1.. n 1>.. M-ini-hiM, Tenn. \n1 iho, i\xc2\xbb I\'.. Beaton, Pa. \nIphia \n\nH DO. II.. Phil , : \n\nntea, N.J. \ni . ii.. Portemille, Tenn. \nal \xe2\x96\xa0\'.. s..i. \n\nVI. \n\ni . .. .i ;,!, B . Philadelphia \nFork. \n\n\\A . \n. Henry D., Philedelphhia \n\nI r.\'iui i_\\ win.- Ha&or, Pa> \nHo, \n\ni. 111. \n\nI \n\n\n\nCrier, M. C, Philadelphia. \nGrimes, Bar, J. 8., Salem, 0. \nGriswold, John L., Peoria, 111. \nGroninger, Jacob, Perrysville, Pa. \nGrove, Rev. T. A., Wegee, 0. \nGrubb, William A., Philadelphia, \nGubby, Rev. James, St. Louis, Mo. \nGuitcau, Rev. S., Baltimore. M\'l. \nGuthrie, Rev. H. W., Mackinac, Mich, \nliutlirie, Miss M argaret, Cedar Creek, Bjt \nGwatheney, Mrs. H. B., Richmond. Ya. \nGrwin, Hon. James, Iluntingilon, I\'a. \nCwviui, Samuel, Louisville, Ky. \n\nHageman, William L., Williamsburg, 0. \nHagerty. Joseph, Sinking Valley, Pa. \nHaggarty, Miss Mary, Belleville, Pi. \nHaines, A.W.. Thee! Ban., Allegheny.Pa. \n\nft, t.. Elisabeth, \\..i. \n\nT, George Pennington, N.J. \nHall, J. A., Huntingdon, Pa. \nHall, John, D.D., Trent. .n, N.J. \n\nHail, Wilfred. Philadelphia, \n\nBalsey, L., D.D., Blooming Grove, N.Y. \n\nHal-ey, R.-v. L .1.. bonjsrille, Ky. \n\n1 1 .\'-.\xe2\x96\xa0.-. Btephen A.. Istoria, L. t., N.Y. \nHaley, &.C.,Jr M M.D., White Haren,Pa. \nlej . Bar. Win.. Bough Creek, \\\'a. \nIlamill, Bar. Bobert, Boaiabni . Pa, \n\nllainill. Rev. S., Lawren.-cvill.-, V \'. \n\nHamilton) Alfred, D.l>., Coohranvi \nHamilton) llias C. Philadelpbiai \nHamilton, Junes, Annapolis, 1 1 \nHamilton, James, Washington City, D.O. \nHamilton, K. it., Hollidaysborg, Pa \n\nIndiana Pa \nii md, u-v. \\. H . Bloomsbury, N.J. \n\ni w. k.. Partamooth, \\\'a. \nHanewinokel) ?, W., Biohmond, Va \n\\ \\i., Florence, via. \n\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x80\xa2. i: . I\'H. Philadelphia. \nM. \\ .. Philadelphia. \ni rille, M C. \nI Bar. L G . Bnmmil Hill, Pa \nHarper, June., Philadelphia \nJohn m.. Philadelphia \nphia \n\n\n\n708 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nHarris, Rev. John S., Guthriesville, S.C. \nHarris, William D., New York. \nHarrison, A. S., Huntingdon, Pa. \nHarrison, J. R., Princeton, N.J. \nHarshberger, A., M.D., Perrysville, Pa. \nHartz, Miss Mary, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nHarvey, Joseph, Philadelphia. \nHarvey, Samuel, Germantown, Pa. \nHassinger, Rev. Peter, Moro, 111. \nHassler, CharlesW., Washington City,D.C. \nHatch, Rev. L. D., Greensborough, Ala. \nHautz, D., M. D., Alexandria, Pa. \nHay, Rev. Samuel H., Camden, S.C. \nHays, Christiana, Williamsport, Pa. \nHays, John, Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nHays, John R., Williamsport, Pa. \nHazard, F., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nHazlett, Andrew, Allenville, Pa. \nHazlctt, Mrs. Ann C, Kishacoquillas, Pa. \nHazzard, Samuel, Sr., Philadelphia. \nHeacock, Rev. Jos. S., Kingsborough,N.Y. \nHeadings, John, Allenville, Pa. \nHeaton, Reuben, Tamaqua, Pa. \nHeaton, Mrs. Sarah, Tamaqua, Pa. \nHeberton, Rev. A., Williamsport, Pa. \nHeberton, G. Craig, M.D., Philadelphia. \nHeebner, Abraham, Port Carbon, Pa. \nHelm, Rev. James I., Princeton, N.J. \nHenderson, Mrs. C, Florence, Ala. \nHenderson, Rev. James, Newville, Pa. \nHenderson, Joseph, Shelocta, Pa. \nHenderson, Thomas, Franklin, la. \nHendrick, J. T., D.D., Clarksville, Tenn. \nHenry, Alexander, Columbia, Ky. \nHenry, Mrs. Alexander, Philadelphia. \nHenry, E., Nescopeck, Pa. \nHenry, George, Philadelphia. \nHenry, George W., Philadelphia. \nHenry, Rev. James V., Jersey City, N.J. \nHenry, Mrs. John S., Germantown, Pa. \nHenry, Rev. P. B., Bridgeton, N.J. \nHenry, Rev. Robert, Belfast, Ireland. \nHenry, S. C, D.D., Cranberry, N.J. \nHenry, William, Kishacoquillas, Pa. \nHepburn, A., M.D., Williamsport, Pa. \nHepburn, Rev. S. C, Goshen, N.Y. \nHeroy, Rev. P. B., Bridgeton, N.J. \nHerron, James B., Hillsborough, 0. \nHeston, Elisha B., Boalsburg, Pa. \n\n\n\nHetrick, Andrew J., Elizabeth, N.J. \nHeugh, Walter, Philadelphia. \nHewett, Benjamin L., Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nHewett, Joseph N., Williamsburg, Pa. \nHewit, N., D.D., Bridgeport, Conn. \nHibben, Hon. A., Haddrells, S.C. \nHickok, Rev. Milo J., Scranton, Pa. \nHileman, Philip, Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nHiles, James, Oxford Furnace, N.J. \nHinchman, Reuben, Salem, N.J. \nHinsdale, Rev. H. G., Oyster Bay, N.Y. \nHitchcock. Rev. R. S., Baltimore, Md. \nHoagland, 0. M., Bardolph, 111. \nHodge, Rev. A. A., Fredericksburg, Va. \nHodge, Charles, D.D., Princeton, N.J. \nHodge, Hugh, M.D., Philadelphia. \nHodge, Rev. J. A., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nHoffman, Josiah, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nHolby, John, Greensburg, la. \nHollenback, Mrs. Sallie, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nHollond, Miss H., Philadelphia. \nHolt, B. S., Baltimore, Md. \nHolt, Mrs., West Chester, N.Y. \nHood, A., Bridgcville, Ala. \nHood, John, Sr., Kittanning, Pa. \nHood, M. G., Philadelphia. \nHood, Samuel, Sr., Philadelphia. \nHope, Levi, Oxford, Miss. \nHopkins, John, Scranton, Pa. \nHornblower, Rev. W. H., Paterson, N.J. \nHouser, Sophia, White Haven, Pa. \nHouston, Robert, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nHouston, Rev. S. R., Union, Va. \nHoward, Mrs. B. C, Baltimore, Md. \nHoward, Pleasant C, Hat Creek, Va. \nHoward, W. D., D.D., Pittsburg, Pa. \nHoward, William T., Hat Creek, Va. \nHowe, Alvah, Bedford, N.Y. \nHowe, Mrs. Anna M., North Salem, N.Y. \nHowe, George, D.D., Columbia, S.C. \nHowell, Rev. J. L., Dobbs\'s Ferry, N.Y. \nHowsley, Rev. Alban S., Greenville, Ky. \nHoy, James, Trenton, N.J. \nHoyt, H. F., Theol. Sem., Columbia, S.C. \nHoyte, Rev. James W., Nashville, Tenn. \nHudson, Wm. A., Shade Gap, Pa. \nHuey, William, Shade Gap, Pa. \nHughes, Rev. James E., Baltimore, Md. \nHulburt, Chauncey, Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n\'09 \n\n\n\nHul-hizer, Daniel, Stewartsville, N.J. \nHumphrey, E. P., D.D., Danville, Ky. \nHumphrey. Hugh, Albany. N.Y. \n\nhrey, James E.. Keokuk, Iowa. \nHumphrey. J. L>., Tuwanda, Pa. \nHunt, G. !\'.. li ::.-;\xe2\x96\xa0. Miss. \nHunt, Rev. Thomas P., Wyoming. Pa. \nHunt.!-. J\' .\xe2\x80\xa2. . :. Mb.. Tamaqua, Pa. \nHunter, Rev. John, Danville, Ky. \nHunter, \' Banbury, l\'a. \n\nHunter, William, Kent, l\'a. \n\nn, Pa. \nHunt . RUiootfe M \n\nHosted, Bev. John, Zion, Bid. \n\nMaueh Chunk, Pa. \nHutohinson, SamL B., Moooh Chunk, Pa. \nHutchinson, Saml. N., Maach Chunk, Pa. \n\ntmsburg, Pa. \nHyadman, Hugh, White Han \nHyndi l\'a. \n\nHyndman, Mark. Maueh Chunk. Pa. \nirtsvflle, N..I. \n\n:\xe2\x96\xa0 v. T. W.. Greenville, 111. \n\nIngham, Samuel I>.. Trenton, N ..I. \nInvillk-r-. C. E. de, Philadelphia, \n\n.iik"-, Florence, Ala. \nIrvine, William 11., Holhdaysburg, Pa. \n\nIrwin.\' \'., II"l!i\'lay-liurg,Pa. \n\nIrwin, I: kdana, Mo, \n\nPhiladelphia. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\'\xe2\x96\xa0 iffiam, Hollid \xe2\x80\xa2;. \' oi \xe2\x80\xa2. Pa, \nJ \n\nirg, Pa. \n\ni \n\nP i. \n.\' \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0.. thoo W., P \nJaoqoi ..v. \n\nhiu. \n\nI \' \n.1. I... I\'. \xe2\x96\xa0 \nI \n\n\'\xe2\x96\xa0.V. \n\n\n\nJewett, Rev. D., WilkeebarrS, Pa. \nJohnson, Mrs AmeliaG^Holli day sbnrgJPa. \nJohnson. Jamee T.. Boalabarg, Pa. \nJohnson, Rev. John, Sybertsville, Pa. \nJohnson, L., Philadelphia. \nJohnson, Rev. 0. M.. New Hampton, N.Y. \nJohnson, Stephen, Unionville, S.C. \nJohnson, William H., Newton, N.J. \nJohnston, 1). 0. N., Steubenville, 0. \nJohnston, Francis, Philadelphia. \nJohnston, Robert, Bethel, Pa. \nJohnstone, Rev. W. 0., Philadelphia. \nJ \\ -. Benjamin, OrangevHle, Pa \nJones, Rev. Charles J., New York. \nJones, Hon. Joel, Philadelphia. \nJones, Bey. John, Boottsville, N.Y. \n\n. Joseph H., D.D., Philadelphia. \nJones, Paul T.. Philadelphia. \n\nBamnel B., D.D., Bridgetou, N.J. \nJones, Siiimn. Boranton, Pa. \nJordan, A.. Banbury, Pa. \n\nJoseph, John M., Maueh Chunk, Pa. \nJunkin. l\xc2\xbbavidX.,I).H.,Hullid : iy>hurg.Pa. \nJunkiu, J. M., M.D., Holmesburg, Pa. \n\nKaufman, Rev. J. H., Baltimore, Bid. \nSeek, Charles I.., White Haven, Pa. \n!. ien, Peter, Efosoopeck, Pa \n\nK.llam, B. L, Maueh Chunk, Pa. \n\nKeith .v W Is, St. Louis, Ho. \n\nKelly, Rev. David, Rook Maud, ill. \nKelly, John P., Perryavflle, P \xe2\x80\xa2 \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 I\'ll. M.i\xc2\xbb., Aoademia, Pa. \n\n. Charlottesville, \\\'a. \n\nJohn T., Baltimore, Ml. \nKennedy, Mj David 8., Wen I ark, \nKennedy, D., D.D., Troy, W.l \nKennedy, Rev. Jamee P., Dickinson, Pa, \n\niy. John, Leu I m \xe2\x96\xa0 Pa, \nKennedy, Rev. R, W. B . P \n\nKennedy, T B., Chaml \nKennedy, William, nfaueh Chunk, l\'a. \nth, Bcllevillo, P >. \nKerr, <;\xe2\x80\xa2 Ml. \n\nKerr, James, Ulenvil \xe2\x96\xa0 \nKerr, Joh \n\nPa. \n\n\n\n710 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nKing, Mrs. B., Roswell, Ga. \nKing, Jacob, Holmesburg, Pa. \nKing, James Roswell, Roswell, Ga. \nKing, Joseph L., Knoxville, Tenn. \nKing, R. H., Albany, N.Y. \nKing, T. E., Roswell, Ga. \nKinkead, James M., Williamsburg, Pa. \nKinzy, P., Hazletoa, Pa. \nKirkham, Mrs. Thomas, Florence, Ala. \nKirkpatrick, Rev. J., Jr., Trenton, N.J. \nKline, Rev. A. L., Tuscumbia, Ala. \nKnauss, Rachel, White Haven, Pa. \nKneeling, W. B., Th. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nKnickerbocker, Mrs. J., Waterford, N.Y. \nKnighton, Rev. F., Belvidere, N.J. \nKnowles, L. D., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nKnowlson, James S., Troy, N.Y. \nKnowlson, R. J., Troy, N.Y. \nKnowlson, Mrs. R. J., Troy, N.Y. \nKnowlson, Richard J., Sand Lake, N.Y. \nKnox, A., Philadelphia. \nKnox, Rev. J. H. M., Germantown, Pa. \nKocher, Conrad, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nKolb, Frederick T., Tamaqua, Pa. \nKough, Jacob, Indiana, Pa. \nKrebs, John M., D.D., New York. \nKutz, Henry C, Philadelphia. \n\nLadd, Rev. Francis D., Philadelphia. \nLadson, George W., Milledgeville, Ga. \nLafferty, Rev. R. H., Charlotte, N.C. \nLaman, George, Philadelphia. \nLane, Rev. Charles W., Talma ge, Ga. \nLane, Rev. C. R., Tunkhannock, Pa. \nLane, George, Fort Montgomery, N.Y. \nLane, John G., Meigsville, 0. \nLane, Rev. John J., Wrightsville, Pa. \nLanier, T. C, Pleasant Ridge, Ala. \nLanterman, William, Moro, 111. \nLashell, James M., Allenville, Pa. \nLathrop, A., Willimantic, Conn. \nLatimer, Misses, Philadelphia. \nLatta, Rev. James, Parkesburg, Pa. \nLatta, Rev. W. W., Honey Brook, Pa. \nLauderdale, W. E., Geneseo, N.Y. \nLawrence, Rev. S., Milroy, Pa. \nLeaman, Rev. John, M.D., Blue Ball, Pa. \nLee, Edward W., Ballston Spa. N.Y. \nLeeper, Samuel, Columbiana, Ala. \n\n\n\nLeet, J. D., Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nLeggett, C, Mauch chunk, Pa. \nLeisenring, Mrs. A.M., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nLeisenring, John, Council Ridge, Pa. \nLeisenring, Reuben, Council Ridge, Pa. \nLemon, R. M., Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nLewis, Asa S., College Hill, Miss. \nLewis, J. L., Shelocta, Pa. \nLewis, Justus, Rome, Pa. \nLewers, Dickenson, Summit Hill, Pa. \nLowers, Dixon, Summit Hill, Pa. \nLeyburn, John, D.D., Philadelphia. \nLibrary, Alexander Soc. of Inquiry, Phila. \nLibrary, Bd. of Domestic Missions, Phila. \nLibrary, Bd. of Education, Philadelphia. \nLibrary, Bd. of Foreign Missions, N.York. \nLibrary, Bd. of Publication, Philadelphia. \nLibrary, Classical Institute, Media, Pa. \nLibrary, Edge Hill School, Princeton.N. J. \nLibrary, Henry Institute of Science, Phila. \nLibrary, Judson College, La Grange, Ga. \nLibrary, New York State, Albany, N.Y. \nLibrary, Presb. Ch., Dobbs\'s Ferry, N.Y. \nLibrary, Presb. Ch., Frankford, Pa. \nLibrary, Presb\'n Hist. Soc, Philadelphia. \nLibrary, Roseland Fem.Ins.,Hartsville,Pa. \nLibrary, Second Presb. Ch., Troy, N.Y. \nLibrary, Theol. Seminary, Allegheny, Pa. \nLibrary, Theol. Seminary, Danville, Ky. \nLibrary, Theol. Seminary, Princeton, N.J. \nLibrary, Th. Sem., Ref. Presb\'n Ch., Phila, \nLiggett, E., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nLimaster, W. P., Memphis, Tenn. \nLine, S. M., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nLingle, Thomas, Potter\'s Fort, Pa. \nLinn, Samuel, Hillsborough, 0. \nLippincott, Charles, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nLippincott, Thomas E., Holmesburg, Pa. \nLisa, Mrs. Mary M., Galena, HI. \nLittell, Rev. Luther, Mount Hope, N.Y. \nLivermore, Alonzo, Sunbury, Pa. \nLockhart, Robert, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nLockwood, C. N., Troy, N.Y. \nLockwood, H. N., Troy, N.Y. \nLogan, S. A., Johnstown, Pa. \nLogan, Rev. Saml. C, Constantine, Mich. \nLong, Thomas, Summit Hill, Pa. \nLombaert, H. J., Altoona, Pa. \nLongshore, Mrs. Ann, Weatherly, Pa. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n11 \n\n\n\nLorance, Rev. James II., Courtland, Ala. \nN.Y. \noklyn, N.Y. \nLoucks, Peter 0., Peoria, 111. \n\n, liar, v. . i \'.. p.M..springplace,Ga. \n\n! . veville, Del. \n\nMd. \n\nLoreland, ton, Pa. \n\nJohn T., Dnbnqne, Iowa, \n\xe2\x96\xa0 . l\'.R, New York. \nLowrie, Rev. John M.. \n\na, Pa. \n. Uexander, Bhel ota, Pa. \nLull, Augustus A.. Pontine, Mich. \nQenrj B., Bridget n, N.J. \n\\.v. \n\n. I\'ll. \n\nN.V. \n\nLyon, Willinm M., Pittsburg Pa. \n1 w., Hardin, Iowa. \n\ni ::. I\';l. \n\nGriffith, BoaUburg, Pa \n\n1\'i.iladelphia. \n\n[phi*. \n\n. N\'.J. \n\nPa. \nPhiladelphia. \nItaddin, L, D . i\'.. Philadelphia. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 . Princeton, N..J. \nD rid, D.D., I \nVUm Beta . B \n\'\xe2\x80\xa2\'. illi-iti, EL, Philadelphia. \n\nr,\\.V. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Pa. \n. John, Henry, III. \n1\'.. M.I\' , Tamaqi \nEphm., Bcfa \n\n\' \xe2\x96\xa0 \n\nM H-: \n\nP. ] i . Md. \n\nPhiladelphia. \nM irrin, \n\n\n\nMason, Rev. J. D., Davenport, Iowa. \nMason, W. P., New York. \n\nK W., M.P.. Scranton, Pa. \nBfassey, Ann, Port Kennedy, Pa. \n\nMateer, Rev. Joseph, Curllsville, Pa. \nMathesun, A. 8., Columbus, Ga. \nMaster-, Rev. F. R., Mattewan, N.Y. \nMathews, E. M.. Oxford, Miss. \nMattes, Charles F., Scranton, Pa. \nMatthews, Rev. James, Danville, Ky. \nMaybftft, Thomas. M.D., Kent, Pa. \nUayne, James 8., Princeton, N.J. \nMcAkese. Rev. D. Bt, Montgomery, N.Y. \nMcAllister, II. N., Bellefonte, Pa. \nMcAllister, James, Philadelphia. \nMcAllister, John, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nMoArthar, John, Philadelphia, \nMcAuley, Rev. R. M., Philadelphia. \nMcAuley, Rev. Win. II., Uuiontown. Ala. \nMoCahen, James A., Hollidayebnrg, Pa. \nMeCaU, \\h-. II. K., Btewortsrille, N.J. \n\nM.-Calla. K.v. W. 1... Ashw 1. La. \n\nMcCalliater, Rev. J. K., Booh bland, DL \n\nM\'l\'amaiit. Mr-. Mary, Tipton, l\'a. \n\nMcCanagher, John, Wilkesbarre, l\'a. \n: .mi. Haddrells, B.C. \n\nMeCai \xe2\x96\xa0 ut.in, N..I. \n\nKoCarter, Mr-. t;ii/.a, Newton, N.J. \nMoGarter, J. .lame-, Newton, N.J. \nMoCarter, Mary EL, Newton, N.J. \n\nM< (\'alter, Tli-ma- N., N\'.wton, N.J. \nK.v. Jain.-. Philadelphia. \n\nMoCaek H, EL, Clauselville, Ala. \nMoChesney, EL, M.D., Sheloota, l\'a. \nMeClay, Samuel, M.D., Milroy, l\'a. \nIfeCleUan, k. n . Galena, 111.\' \nMoCtalan i. EL t.. a bona, l\'a. \n\nm i. M, - Jane, Bellerille, l\'a. \nMeCierkin, John, Portersville, Tenia. \n\nis 1 1-.- v\\ \'1\'.. \\\\ \'ilkc-lmrr.-. l\'a. \n\nOUnton Depdl \nMeCloskey, P>.. Phomlzrille, Pa. \n\\. K.. Ohamberebni \n\nII. K.. Ohamberaborgi Pa. \nMoClure, John, Philadelphia \n\nL.WilliamsporLPa. \nMoOonn, John T., Tro \n\n\n\nr 12 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nMcConnell, John. Philadelphia. \nMcCoray, M. M., Monroeville, Ala. \nMcCoray, Neal, Monroeville, Ala. \nMcCord, J. D., Pittsburg, Pa. \nMcCord, Rev. W. J., Tribe\'s Hill, N.Y. \nMcCorniick, Hugh, Belleville, Pa. \nMcCormick, Rev. W. J.,Yonguesville, S.C. \nMcCoy, Daniel, Shelocta, Pa. \nMcCoy, John A., Peoria, 111. \nMcCrea, James, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nMcCrea, William, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nMcCreary, Irvine P., Moulton, Ala. \nMcCue, Miss A. E., Mechanicsburg, Pa. \nMcCullough, William, Belleville, Pa. \nMcCullough, William, West Chester, Pa. \nMcCune, Clement, Philadelphia. \nMcCurdy, David, Philadelphia. \nMcDonald, Rev. S. H., Belleville, Pa. \nMcDowell, John, D.D., Philadelphia. \nMcDowell, Robert, Slatington, Pa. \nMcElvain, J. N., Litchfield, 111. \nMcFaden, Archibald, Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nMcFarland, Rev. D., Elmwood, HI. \nMcFarland, W., Kent, Pa. \nMcFarlane, Andrew, Milroy, Pa. \nMcFarlane, W. K., Minneapolis, Min. Ter. \nMcGill, A. T., D.D., Princeton, N.J, \nMcGill, William, Franklin, la. \nMcGlashau, Cyrus, Meigsville, 0. \nMcIIenry, Stephen, Philadelphia. \nMcllwain, Rev. A., Indiana, Pa. \nMclntyre, Archibald, Germantown, Pa. \nMclntyre, J.A.,Theo.Sem.,Allegheny,Pa. \nMcKee, James, Kent, Pa. \nMcKee, Mrs. Lilley, Greensburg, la. \nMcKee, Samuel, Columbia, Ky. \nMcKee, W. B., Theol.Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nMcKeen, Col. Thomas, Easton, Pa. \nMcKeen, Mrs. Thomas, Easton, Pa. \nMeKeever, William, Summit Hill, Pa. \nMcKennan, Rev. Jas.W., West Liberty, Va. \nMcKibben, Chambers, Chambersburg, Pa. \nMeKinlej-, B. B., Philadelphia. \nMcKinney, A., Philadelphia. \nMcKinney, A. F.,M.D.,Germantown,Tenn. \nMcLean. D. V., D.D., Easton, Pa. \nMcLean, Rev. Hector, Melrose, N.C. \nMcLean, James, Jr., Summit Hill, Pa. \nMcLean, S. C, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \n\n\n\nMcMullin, John S., Philadelphia. \nMcMullin, Rev. J. P., Pleasant Ridge, Ala. \nMcMullin, Rev. R. B., Knoxville, Tenn. \nMcMullin, Rev. S. H., Newburg, N.Y. \nMcMurray, A. S., M.D., Philadelphia. \nMcMurray, Rev. Jos., Newportville, Pa. \nMcMurtrie, J., Summit Hill, Pa. \nMcNair, Rev. John, Clinton, N.J \nMcNair, Robert, Macomb, 111. \nMcNeil, B. F., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nMcNeill, W. H., Columbus, Ga. \nMcNite, William, Shirleysburg, Pa. \nMcOmber, Philip H., Ballston Spa, N.Y. \nMcPheeters, Joseph, Philadelphia. \nMcPherson, James, Port Kennedy, Pa. \nMcVicker, James, Washingtonville, Pa. \nMead, Miss Loretta, North Salem, N.Y. \nMead, Sarah, North Salem, N.Y. \nMears, H., Hazleton, Pa. \nMears, H. H., Hazleton, Pa. \nMears, John S., Shelocta, Pa. \nMebane, Rev. Wm. N., Madison, N.C. \nMenaidi, A. E., Wysox, Pa. \nMerle de Aubigne, J. H., D.D., Geneva, \n\nSwitzerland. \nMetcalfe, Rev. A. D., Macon, Tenn. \nMetcalf, Rowland, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nMetz, John, Williamsburg, Pa. \nMeyer, M. H., Dobbs\'s Ferry, N.Y. \nMiles, George, Huntingdon, Pa. \nMiles, Samuel, Baltimore, Md. \nMillard, Walter, New Hamburg, N.Y. \nMillen, Hugh, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nMiller, Charles H., Huntingdon, Pa. \nMiller, Mrs. C, Danville, Pa. \nMiller, Jacob, Huntingdon, Pa. \nMiller, Joseph, Bethel, Pa. \nMiller, Rev. J. E., Stroudsburg, Pa. \nMiller, Gen. J. W., Spartanburg, S.C. \nMiller, Rev. L. Merrill, Ogdensburg, N.Y. \nMiller, R. Allison, M.D., Huntingdon, Pa. \nMiller, Samuel, Memphis, Mo. \nMiller, Sarah, Sybertsville, Pa. \nMiller, William, Philadelphia. \nMiller, W. T., Spartanburg, S.C. \nMilligan, William, Potter\'s Mills, Pa. \nMilliken, D. F., Kishacoquillas, Pa. \nMilliken, John, Academia, Pa. \nMilliken, Thomas J., Academia, Pa. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\nMilton, John, L \n\nMiner, Mrs. Joshua, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nMitchell, Joseph B., . Pa. \n\nMitchell, Joseph G., Qermantown, Pa. \nMitchell, W. C, Mi r ... Pa. \nMitchell. William H.. D.D., Rosen \nMotlV\' inoeton, N.J. \n\nN.Y. \nMontgomery, Mi-. Jane B., Danville, Pa. \n\n:.\xe2\x80\xa2:;.-. BoT.J \n\nMoodie, Thinner, Columbu-. ". \n\n- B., Louisville, Ky. \n\n\'\xe2\x80\xa2\xe2\x96\xa0 a; i.. N..I. \nW., Sinking Valley, Pa. \n. Pa. \n\nJohn, Maoch Chunk, Pa. \n\n. Pa. \n\n- imuel, Mauoh Chunk, Pa. \n\n- unuel, Philadelphia. \n\n. Pa. \nil lUidaysburg, Pa. \ni , v.. D.D., Biohmond, Vu. \n1 1 ii. T. W., Lewistoe \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0\'. ill] mi E., w i \ni. D., West Chester, N.V. \nGilbert, Harmony < \n. .1. .1. A.. Bridesburg, Pa. \nMist I. . Hartford, Conn. \nM n i: . Thistle, MA \n\ni rg, Pa. \n\ni i\' . Mountain Home, Ala. \n\\. L, J mi \xe2\x80\xa2 - Greek, 111. \nih, Springfield, <>. \n,Bem. t Colan] \n\'i ,mi>. Waterloo, Pa, \nB . ; \n\n. Ky. \n\nB ,8hepberdsi \n\\rtlnir. Bethel, Pa. \n\n. Del. \ni! illidaysburg, P k \n\nSinking \\\'ai \n\n\'i ..ik. \n" \nMullen, John, Mancfa Chunk, Pa. \n\nM.m.l h.N.Y. \n\n\n\nMurkland, Rev. S. S., Richmond. Va, \nMurphy, Be?. Thomas, Frankford, Pa. \nMurphy, W. R., Trenton, N.J. \nMurray, J^sijih A.. Dillsburg, Pa. \nMurray, Nicholas, L>.1>., Elizabeth, N.J. \nMurray, William, Dobbs\'s Ferry, N.Y. \nam, G. W., D.D., Philadelphia. \nMyrick, Mrs. II. A.. Pontine, Mich. \n\nNace, Jacob D., White navcn, Ta. \nNajriney, J. D.. Milroy, Pa. \nNassau, 0. W., D.D., Lawrenecville. N.J. \n;. Bev. Joseph E., Warsaw, N.V. \nNeedham, B., Seranton, Pa. \nNeil\', John EL, Williamsburg, Pa. \nNeil, John, Kent, Pa. \nNeifl, William, I>.!>.. Philadelphia. \nNelson, John, Annapolis, 0. \nNelson, B., Philadelphia. \nNesbitt, Joseph, Norristown, 1\'\'. \nNevin, Alfred, D.D., Lancaster, Pa. \nNevin; K.\\. l>. B., Sewioklyville, Pa. \nNevus, William. Quinoy, 111. \nNew, i\'. B., Ml\'.. Bodney, Miss, \nNewell, Bev. George W., Orangeville, Pa. \nNewell, Bar. T. M.. Waynesville, 111. \nNewlands, Mi-. Pranois, Troy, N.Y. \nNewton, Bev. Thomas II.. St. Louis, Mo. \nNicholas, William P., Newton, N.J. \n\nNich.\'ls, Ktv. Jaini\'H. lii-in-f,., \\A. \n\nNiokle, James, Battle Bwamp, lid. \nNixon, Bev, J. Howard, Cambridge, N.V. \nNix. m, J. T., Bridgeton, VJ. \nNixon, W. <;.. Bridgeton, N.J. \n\nJr., M.D., Philadelphia, \nNorton, I\'- , Newton Hamilton, Pa. \nNotaon, W., M.D., Philadelphia, \n\nM. B. a., Newburyport, \n\n\\:a. \nsrille, Ala. \nBar. John W., N ihviUe, Trim. \nOkeaon, Banrael, Aoademia, Pa, \n\nv... Ubany, N.Y. \nOlmsteed, II. M.. Philadelphia, \nOlmstead, Bar. J. M , Philadelphia, \nOrblaon, William P., Huntingdon, Pa. \nT., Philadelphia, \n\n\n\n714 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nOit, Rev. Franklin, Kent, Pa. \n\nOrr, John, Sinking Valley, Pa. \n\nOn - , Robert, Philadelphia. \n\nOrr, Rev. Samuel, Gordo, Ala. \n\nOrr, Thomas, Philadelphia. \n\nOsier, J. T., Princeton, N.J. \n\nOsmond, Rev. Jonathan, Bald Mount, Pa. \n\nOsmond, Rev. S. M., Lambertville, N. J. \n\nOwen, Rev. Griffith, Baltimore, Md. \n\nOwen, Hannah, Sr., Jeffersonville, Pa. \n\nOwen, Rev. Roger, Chestnut Hill, Pa. \n\nOwens, William J., Trenton, N.J. \n\nPaddock, Mrs. E., Pontiac, Mich. \nPage, Rev. J. A., St. Louis, Mo. \nPainter, Rev. Joseph, Kittanning, Pa. \nPalmer, B. M., D.D., New Orleans, La. \nPalmer, Rev. Edward, Pocotaligo, S.C. \nPalmer, John J., West Chester, N.Y. \nPalmer, S.C, Philadelphia. \nPardee, Mrs. Anna M., Hazleton, Pa. \nParish, Mrs. Phoebe, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nParke, Rev. N. Grier, Pittston, Pa. \nParke, T. H., Battle Swamp, Md. \nParker, Mrs. Dr., Port Gibson, Miss. \nParsons, Rev. W. S., Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nr.iteriek, John, Tamaqua, Pa. \nPatterson, Andrew, Academia, Pa. \nPatterson, A., Williamsburg, Pa. \nPatterson, A. L., Independence, Pa. \nPatterson, Mrs. George, Springfield, Md. \nPatterson, James, Academia, Pa. \nPatterson, James, Dobbs\'s Ferry, N.Y. \nPatterson, J. H., M.D., Baltimore, Md. \nPatterson, John, Academia, Pa. \nPatterson, John, Philadelphia. \nPatterson, -Mrs. Mary, Academia, Pa. \nPatterson, N. Summit Hill, Pa. \nPatterson, Robert M., Princeton, N.J. \nPatterson, Robert, Richmond, 0. \nPatterson, Rev. R., Oakland College.Miss. \nPatterson, R,ev. Wm., Poundridge, N.Y. \nPattison. James, Waterloo, Pa. \nPattison, Robert, Holmesburg, Pa. \nPatton, Hon. R. M., Florence, Ala. \nPatton, Robert, Philadelphia. \nPatton, Thomas J., Knoxville, Ala. \nPaul, Sampson, Walterborough, S.C. \nPaull, Rev. Alfred, Wheeling, Va. \n\n\n\nPaxton, Rev. Thomas N., Marion, N.C. \nPaxton, Rev. William M., Pittsburg, Pa. \nPease, Erastus H., Albany, N.Y. \nPeck, Rev. Thomas E., Baltimore, Md. \nPeebles, Matthew W., ^Bloody Run, Pa. \nPeelor, Jacob, Indiana, Pa. \nPemberton, Ebenezer, Albany, N.Y. \nPerkins, Elisha H., Baltimore, Md. \nPerkins, Rev. Henry, Allentown, N.J. \nPeters, A. F., White Haven, Pa. \nPettigrew, John, Shelocta, Pa. \nPettigrew, John G., Philadelphia. \nPettingell, Moses, Newburyport, Mass. \nPharr, Edward, M.D., Houston, Ga. \nPharr, Rev. Walter S., Park\'s Store, N.C. \nPhelps, Mrs. C, Pontiac, Mich. \nPhillips, Rev. B. T., Rondout, N.Y. \nPhillips, George C, Selma, Ala. \nPierson, Rev. D. H., Elizabeth, N.J. \nPierson, Rev. George, Florida, N.Y. \nPierson, Rev. N. E., Unionville, N.Y. \nPiffard, Miss S., Piffard, N.Y. \nPinkerton,J.A.,Theo.Sem.,Allegheny,Pa. \nPiper, G. W., M.D., Philadelphia. \nPiatt, Ebenezer, New York. \nPiatt, W. H., Scrantou, Pa. \nPlumer, George, Independence, Pa. \nPlumer, W. S., D.D., Allegheny, Pa. \nPolk, James A., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nPollock, Hon. James, Ilarrisburg, Pa. \nPollock, Samuel, M.D., Williamsport, Pa. \nPorter, Alexander, Springfield, 0. \nPorter, Rev. David H., Savannah, Ga. \nPorter, James M., Jr., Easton, Pa. \nPorter, J. Barron, M.D., Bridgeton, N.J. \nPorter, John, Alexandria, Pa. \nPorter, Hon. J. M., LL.D., Easton, Pa. \nPorter, Robert, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nPorter, W. A., Philadelphia. \nPotter, R. B., Philadelphia. \nPotter, W. W., Boalsburg, Pa. \nPotts, Joseph C, Trenton, N.J. \nPotts, Stacy G., Trenton, N.J. \nPowell, Joseph B., Port Kennedy, Pa. \nPowell, S. D., Philadelphia. \nPowers, F. H., Theol. Seni., Allegheny. Pa. \nPratt, Rev. H. B., Bogota, New Granada, \n\nSouth America. \nPratt, N. A., D.D., Roswell, Ga. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n715 \n\n\n\nPrentice, E. P., Albany, N.V. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 v. farad, Annapolis, 0. \nPrice, Rev. K.. \n\nP., Mauoh Chunk, Pa* \nBer. Thorns , aek,Mb. \n\nPrimrose, William, Philadelphia. \nProudfit, B.,Troy, N.V. \n\nCia. \nPurcel, B. H., Blooms!. my. N.J. \nPorrianoe, Rot. <;. D., Baltimore, Ml. \nPurrianee, J., P.P., Oakland Call \nPurrianee, Mi-- M., Baltimore, .Ml. \n\nQuirk, John P.., Keokuk, Iowa. \n\nWilliam, Mils \n\nskald, N..1. \nPa. \nRankin, lamei R>, AaheriRi \n\nRankin, N.V. \n\nkenidge, N.J. \n. Rot. 11. v.. Ben fork. \nRankin, William, .Jr., Ken fork \n\nm, Albion, Albany . N.V. \nRansom, 8amue] \xe2\x80\xa2\'., Albany, N.V. \nRaphael, William, Botmeebui \ni .1. D., Monnl Bbi noser, \xc2\xab>. \n\nI, Rot. Most ,8] rii . \nI B J. i>.. Banbury, Pa. \n\nRedd, Williai \n\n3i hi., Allegheny ,Pa \n. \\ May, n.v. \ni \xe2\x96\xa0 \xe2\x96\xa0 B K . . " .-. r i. \n\nI \' \n\n. \xc2\xabi. \nh, r.ii\'i^-\'t. ii. v.i. \n\n- .iil.urg, 8.C. \n\ni i burg, Pa. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 Mr- i. .i.. v. . . i or, P*. \n\n1 I h l\xc2\xbb.. Piiil i\'l"!phin. \n\ni. ii , Busebethport \n\n: , u inian i\'., Kings! i \n\n\\|... \nPh. \n\ni. . v. Mam, LonfarU \n\n\n\nAugustus G.. Trenton, N.J. \nRichman, Moses, Jr., Salem. N.J. \nRiddle, Joseph B., Hollidaysburg, Pa. \nRiddle, Rev. Wo., Oakland College, Misa \nRiddle, William, Port Gibson, Hiss. \nRigfater, Mrs J. F., Maucli Chunk, Pa. \nRipley, Rev. J. B., Philadelphia. \nRipple, Isaac, White Haven, Pa. \nRittenhpase, Rev. J. M., Bart, Pa. \nP.. i.l. ins, GeorgeS., West Chester, N.V. \nRoberts, Rev. 11. M. Hflfeborough, 111. \nRobertson, Theodric, Richmond. Va. \nRobertson, Wm. C, Delaware City. Del \n\n:,. Rot. W. W.. Fulton, Mo. \nRobeson, Mrs. Sarah, HoIEdaysburg, Pa. \nRobinsen, Rev. C. S., Troy, N.V. \nRobinson, II. Miles, Palmyra. Mo. \n\n. Rer. Stuart, Danville, By. \nRobinson. William, Gillespie, 111. \n\n.. Wiiliam, Kent, Pa. \n\nRobison, II. \xc2\xbb\'.. Bhade Gap, Pa, \nRobison, Jobs II.. Perrysville, Pa. \nRobison, Ii \n\nT. (\'., WashingtonviOe, Pa. \n\nRookn t, Charles ii.. Mauoh Chunk, Pa. \n\nRodenbough, Rer. II. B., EagtofiUe, Pa. \nRodgers, James B., Philadelphia. \n\nJames P.. Mount Joy, Pa, \nRodgers, B. B . D.P., Bound Brook, N.J. \n. ;:. P., l\xc2\xbb.l\'.. Albany, \' \n\nRer.J.M., Middletowo l , ..int,N.J. \nMi., Boranton, Pa. \nBoiler, Joshua, WflUamsburg, Pa \nRoller, Joshua H., WilUamsbu \nRoop, Edward, Philadelphia. \nPhiladelphia. \nJ .in.\'-. Mauoh I\'iiunk, Pa. \ni it , Philadelphia. \n\nRoth, P.. Bybertsrille, Pa, \nB \xc2\xab\xe2\x80\xa2-. Bar. John, Belli] \n\nm, Woodburj . N J. \nNea \\ oris. \nRowland, c \\ \n\ni.Wm.i; , M.h., BattieBwamp,Md. \nBuddie, John, Mauoh Chunk, Pa \nRumple, Bar. \xe2\x80\xa2\' . Bemphill 1 \nRoadie, I. J . T. j t n.v. \n\n\n\n716 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nRussell, Rev. D., Pike, N.Y. \nRussell, E. A., Jr., Middletown, Conn. \nRussell, James, Sinking Valley, Pa. \nRussell, Lawrence, Trenton, N.J. \nRussell, Rev. P., Fillmore, Pa. \nRutter, Rev. L. C, Chestnut Level, Pa. \nRutter, Nathaniel, Wilkesbarre, Pa. \nRyerson, Hon. Martin, Newton, N.J. \nRyors, Alfred, D.D., Danville, Ky. \n\nSalkeld, J. H., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSargent, Winthrop, Philadelphia. \nSartain, John, Philadelphia. \nSaunders, Rev. H., Trowbridge, Wis. \nSaye, Rev. J. H., Unionville, S.C. \nSaye, Robert H., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSayre, David A., Lexington, Ky. \nSchenck, Rev. W. E., Philadelphia. \nSchott, James, Philadelphia. \nScott, A. G., Knoxville, Tenn. \nScott, Miss C, Adams\'s Mills, 0. \nScott, Ezekiel, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nScott, George, East Palestine, 0. \nScott, Geo. K., Theo. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nScott, Rev. James, Holmesburg, Pa. \nScott, James, D.D., Newark, N.J. \nScott, James A., Richmond, Va. \nScott, John, Huntingdon, Pa. \nScott, John W., D.D., Washington, Pa. \nScott, Joseph, Independence, Pa. \nScovel, Rev. Alden, Bordentown, N.J. \nScranton, George W., Scranton, Pa. \nScranton, Joseph H., Scranton, Pa. \nScranton, Selden, T., Scranton, Pa. \nScribner, R,ev. William, Red Bank, N.J. \nScudder, Jasper S., Trenton, N.J. \nSechler, H. B. D., Danville, Pa. \nSellars, Jacob M., Williamsburg, Pa. \nService, L. N., M.D., Schuylkill Falls, Pa. \nSeward, Rev. A., Port Jervis, N.Y. \nShade, George, Holmesburg, Pa. \nShafer, Thomas H., Rahway, N.J. \nSluuffer, G. W., Shirleysburg, Pa. \nShane, Joseph, Richmond, 0. \nSharon, J. D., Mifflintown, Pa. \nSharp, Richard, Council Ridge, Pa. \nSharp, S. M., Theo. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nSharp, S. McD., Chambersburg, Pa. \nSharswood, Hon. George, Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nShaver, Peter, Mount Union, Pa. \nShaw, Rev. P. H., Greenfield Hill, Conn. \nShaw, W. D., Alexandria, Pa. \nSheadle, Henry, Kishacoquillas, Pa. \nSheafe, Mrs. J. F., New York. \nShearer, Miss Ellen, Washingtonville, Pa- \nShearer, J., Jeffersonville, Pa. \nSheddan, Rev. S. S., Rahway, N.J. \nSheets, A., Grand view, 0. \nShepard, Furman, Philadelphia. \nSherrerd, John M., Belvidere, N.J. \nSherrerd, Samuel, Scranton, Pa. \nSherrill, Rev. R. E., Dancyville, Tenn. \nShields, Rev. Charles W., Philadelphia. \nShields, James R., New Albany, la. \nShinn, Rev. James G., Philadelphia. \nShoemaker, C. D., Forty Fort, Pa. \nShotwell, Rev. N., Milroy, Pa. \nShumaker, J. H., Academia, Pa. \nSilliman, Rev. A. P., Clinton, Ala. \nSilliman, R. D., Troy, N.Y. \nSimonton, Rev. William, Williamsport, Pa. \nSimpson, F. T., Washington, Ga. \nSimpson, G. W., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSimpson, Rev. J., Portrush, Ireland. \nSimpson, J., Summit Hall, Pa. \nSimpson, J. B., Anderson, S. C. \nSimpson, Miss M., Farmington, HI. \nSimpson, Thomas, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSimpson, Thomas P., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSinclair, William D., Trenton, N.J. \nSingletary, Rev. W. H., Claiborne, Miss. \nSites, S. E., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSitgreaves, Hon. C, Easton, Pa. \nSkidmore, Joseph R., New York. \nSkinner, E. W., Albany, N.Y. \nSlaughter, Mrs. E., Port Hudson, La. \nSlaughter, John R., Socotapoy, Ala. \nSloan, G. W., Theo. Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nSmalley, E., D.D., Troy, N.Y. \nSmith, Andrew, Wegee, 0. \nSmith, D. D., North Salem, N.Y. \nSmith, George W., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nSmith, H. A., Clauselville, Ala. \nSmith, Isaac R., Philadelphia. \nSmith, Rev. James, Rochester, Pa. \nSmith, James, H., New Hamburg, N.Y. \nSmith, Mrs. Jane, Milroy, Pa. \nSmith, Rev. J. Henry, Charlottesville, Ya. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n17 \n\n\n\nSmitb. J. K., Manoh Chunk. Pa \nSmith, .1. P., Moro, 111. \n\n\xe2\x96\xa0 irton, N.J. \nSmith, Joseph, Hollidaysbni . \nSmith, Joseph, L>.1>.. Baltim \nSmith. Matthew, Mooch Chunk, Pa. \nSmith, 0. P., Milroy, Pa, \nSmith, Boborl B., 11 \nSmith. R. I).. Williamsburg^ \n\nrartetovo, Pa> \ntenia, Pa \nSmith. William J., Soomsbary, N.J. \n\nI \'. V., Bil mi ogham, Iowa. \n.1 imes P., Philadelphia. \n\nurleston, S.C. \nBmythe, R.v. w. M.. Cahaba, Ala. \nI ... Richmond) Va \n: : inkfbrd, Pa \nrille, Rev. James, Bridgeville, Ala. \n. BridgeviBe, Ala. \n. debug, Pa. \nDhelooi i. Pa \n\nPj-ilman. EL I. \n\n1 B . D.D., Newcastle, Del \nw. r... D.D., Albany, N.V. \nil. I.., Philadelphia, \ntel, Annapolis, < \xc2\xbb. \nBprole, W. T.. D.D., Newburg, N.V. \nBprooU, BU v. \\. w . Chester, Pa \nStaekbouse, Caleb, Phcenixville, Pa \n\noa, 111. \nE \n\n0., Colombo*, G l \n\ni. A. P., I...ui-vill.-, Ky. \nk, Pa \n\n. i Imotbj, Mt.r \n\ni BOA, \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2;. Pa \n\\\\ illiam, Pl( Ua \n\nI Lin. \n;. Chunk, Pu. \n\nphia \npro, I\'. i \n\nPa \ni i-i, Mttford, [reload. \nC.H., B.G \nfork, \n8 \n\n\n\nStewart, James, Bloomsburg. Pa \nStewart, James, Bloomsbory, N.J. \n.Stewart. Jessie, Bloomsbory, N.J. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2. Mrs Nancy. Sinking Valley, Pa \nStewart, R., Williamsburg, Pa \nStewart, William, Bloomsbory, N.J. \nSI wart, William, Philadelphia \n\n. William C, Philadelphia. \nStewart, William J., Belleville. Pa. \n31 lee, EL 1\xc2\xbb.. Weath o-ly, Pa. \nStillman, Rev. C. A., Gainesville, Ala. \nStirling, John, Manch Chunk, Pa. \nSiitler. Jonathan, Hollidaysburg, Pa \nStoddard, Mrs. Sarah. White Haven. Pa. \nStorms, John J., Dobbs\'s Ferry, N.V. \nStorrs, Miss Patsey, Richmond, Va \nStott, Charles, Washington City, D.C. \nBtraban, Rev. F. G., Hopkinsville, By, \nStratton, Rev. Daniel, Salem, N.J. \n\nStratton, Thomas B., Trenton, N.J. \n\nUnion, N.J. \nStroble, Jacob, Zion, Pa \nStrothers, J. EL, Mauofa Chunk. Pa. \nStryker, J. T., Sinking Valley, Pa \nStryker, Thomas J.. Trenton. \\..i. \nStuart, George n.. Philadelphia \nBtaddiford, P.O., i\xc2\xbb i\'.. Lombertville,N.J. \n. Rev, T. B., Greenfield Bill, Conn. \nSullivan, lira, \\. B. t Colliersville, Tenn. \nSummerville, (i. w., Pleasant Bid| \nBmnmey, A. T.. Asheville, N.C. \nSnmmey, l\xc2\xbb. P., aaheville, N.C. \nSutton, John, [ndiana, Pa \n\nSutton, William, Springfield, <>. \n\n:i I... Ilai ] \xe2\x80\xa2 \nSwank. Philip, Manoh Chunk, l\'a. \n\nSwartwood, John, Manoh Chunk, l\'a. \n\nSwart/ell, ,l.,hn. Milrov. l\'a. \n\nSwift, i:. r.. D.D., Ulegheny City, Pa \n\nSymington. \\\\ m., l\xc2\xbb. I \' ilaml. \n\nBymmea, & i i\' m.. Pli u at, 1 1. \nSynani . la \n\nT , Trenton, V.I \n\nTabb, K. M., EUchmond, Va \nTahnage, s. B . D i\' . \n\nii . Northumberland, Pa. \nbni . Pa \n\nbl, allegha . \n\n\n\n718 \n\n\n\nA LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE \n\n\n\nTaylor, Rev. C. H., Ballston Centre, N.Y. \nTaylor, David H., White Haven, Pa. \nTaylor, Hon. George, Huntingdon, Pa. \nTaylor, John, White Haven, Pa. \nTaylor, John M., Shelocta, Pa. \nTaylor, Justus F., Albany, N.Y. \nTaylor, Mrs. S. M., Philadelphia. \nThacher, George H., Albany, N.Y. \nThayer, Rev. Lorenzo, Windham, N.H. \nTheu, George W., Augusta, Ga. \nThomas, Dubre, Shelocta, Pa. \nThomas, R,ev. Enoch, Beverly, Va. \nThoma>, Israel, Shelocta, Pa. \nThomas, W. H., Knoxville, Tenn. \nThompson, Ira, Milroy, Pa. \nThompson, James, Milroy, Pa. \nThompson, J. B., Clinton, Ala. \nThompson, J. J., Martha Furnace, Pa. \nThompson, Lefferd, Bloomsbury, N.J. \nThompson, Moses, Boalsburg, Pa. \nThompson, Mrs. R. C, Oxford, Miss. \nThompson, Rev. S. H., South Hanover, la. \nThompson, Mrs. S., Milroy, Pa. \nThompson, Rev. W. H., Bolivar, Tenn. \nThorpe, John D., Cincinnati, 0. \nTimlow, Rev. Paul J., Marietta, Pa. \nTimlow, Rev. R. H., Newburyport, Mass. \nTitus, B. Wesley, Trenton, N.J. \nTodd, Rev. Isaac, Milford, Pa. \nToomer, Joshua, Haddrells, S.C. \nTownsend, D.W., Th.Sem., Allegheny, Pa. \nTownsend, Peter, Lewistown, Pa. \nTownsend, T., Albany, N.Y. \nToy, John, Philadelphia. \nTreadwell, George, Albany, N.Y. \nTully, Rev. A., Harmony, N.J. \nTully, Rev. David, Ballston Spa, N.Y. \nTurbett, Stuart, Perrysville, Pa. \nTurbett, William, Perrysville, Pa \nTurner, Jesse, Port Carbon, Pa. \nTurner, Thomas, Knoxville, Tenn. \nTurner, William, Kent, Pa. \nTussey, David, Sinking Valley, Pa. \nTyson, James L., M.D., Philadelphia. \n\nUmsted, Rev. Justus T., Keokuk, Iowa. \nUpham, M.A., Troy, N.Y. \n\nVail, George, Troy, N.Y. \n\n\n\nVaill, Rev. Thomas S., Knoxville, ni. \nVan Artsdalen, Rev. G., Colerain, Pa. \nVan Cleve, A. H., Trenton, N.J. \nVanderbilt, Mrs. H., Brooklyn, N.Y. \nVan Duzen, S. R., Newburg, N.Y. \nVannuys, C. D., Franklin, la. \nVan Pelt, R., Elizabeth, N.J. \nVan Rensselaer, A., New York. \nVan Rensselaer, C., D.D., Philadelphia. \nVan Rensselaer, C, Jr., Burlington, N.J. \nVan Rensselaer, H., New York. \nVan Rensselaer, P. L., Burlington, N.J. \nVan R,ensselaer, P. S., New York. \nVan R,ensselaer, S., Albany, N.Y. \nVan Rensselaer, W. P., Port Chester, N.Y. \nVan Schoonhoven, J. L., Troy, N.Y. \nVantries, S., Potter\'s Mills, Pa. \nVanuxen, F. W., Knoxville, Tenn. \nVaughan, Rev. C. R., Lynchburgh, Va. \nVenable, Rev. H. I., Oakland, 111. \nVermilye, A. G., Newburyport, Mass. \nVermilye, J. D., Newark, N.J. \nVermilye, Thomas E., D.D., New York. \nVermilye, W. Romeyn, New York. \nVeuve, Rev. P.de,Th.Sem.,Princeton,N.J. \nViele, Stephen, Troy, N.Y. \nVon Spreckleson, Mrs. J., Baltimore, Md. \nVosburgh, J. W., Albany, N.Y. \nVoss, E. W. de, Richmond, Va. \n\nWaddell, John M., D.D., Oxford, Miss. \nWadsworth, Rev. Charles, Philadelphia. \nWait, Miss Mary F., Greenville, 111. \nWalke, J. H., Richmond, Va. \nWalker, Alexander, Shelocta, Pa. \nWalker, Cyrus, Macomb, 111. \nWalker, H. J., Williamsburg, 0. \nWalker, John, Shelocta, Pa. \nWalker, John R., St. Louis, Mo. \nWalker, Peter, Philadelphia. \nWalker, R. F., Shelocta, Pa. \nWallace, Rev. D. A., Nashville, 111. \nWallace, Mrs. Elizabeth, Muncy, Pa. \nWallace, James, Meigsville, 0. \nWallace, Rev. James A., Kingstree, S.C. \nWallace, Rev. R. M., Brownsville, Pa. \nWallace, W. C, Lawrenceville, N.J. \nWaller, Rev. B. J., Bloomsburg, Pa. \nWalton, John, Summit Hill, Pa. \n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. \n\n\n\n19 \n\n\n\nWalton, W. A., Angnata, Ga. \n\n..sis, Albion, N.Y. \n\nN.Y. \n\nvv. \n\nLevi, Rochester, N.Y. \n\nI . T. L>e Laeey, Paris, Ky. \nN.J. \ni, Joseph, D.D., Greensburg, la. \n\xe2\x80\xa2.. L I.., Lotderille, Ky. \n. H.Y. \nWaeson, John D., Albany, N.Y. \nWalk i.nille, Yu. \n\nI;, v. a. M . Behna, Ala. \nfollidayaborg. Pa, \nWateon, J\'.hu, Bordentoim, N.J. \nate, Ma \n. William E., Bordentown, N.J. \nPhiladelphia, \n\\ \'. independence, Pa. \n\nWi -t Libert] \n\\ . \xe2\x96\xa0 iter, <>. \n\n11 Point, N.J. \nv \n\n\' i . 1 1 ,\xe2\x80\xa2:. i .r., Pa, \nI \n\nrtrille, N.J. \nRer. II. II., I. \n\n\'>\'\xe2\x80\xa2 in., W\'vilu- \xe2\x96\xa0 \n\n: I P., Fred \xe2\x80\xa2 - i \xe2\x80\xa2. 7a. \n.1, D.D., Philadelphia. \n\ni-liaiiii-l, Jr., Cinoini \nI \n\nN.J. \n\nW , Philadelphia. \n\nVV. \n\nI i\xc2\xbb.. Trenton, N.J. \n\n\xe2\x80\xa2, Ya. \ni , Knoxville, \nWhite, Duncan, Philadelphia, \nWhite, John, B \nWhite, Robert, Philadelphia. \n\xe2\x96\xa0 \nWbitohill, Mi \n\n.. | \n\ni B klttaore, M-l. \nlaqua, Pa \n\xe2\x96\xa0 innk, Pa. \n; . Oolombna, I \n\n\n\nWilcox, Hon. G. 11., Rodney, Miss. \nWilcox. .1. B.j Ang ista, <ia. \nWilcox, Timothy, Scranton, Pa. \nWiley, Yancey, College Bull, Miss. \nWill, Adam, Eaileton, Pa. \n\nWillcox, L. F.. La Grange. Qa, \nWilliams, Rev. P. T.. New Hamburg.N.Y. \nWilliams, James C, Philadelphia. \nWilliams, J. D., Pittsburg, Pa. \nWilliams, Owen, Mauoh (.\'hunk. Pa. \nWilliams, Rot. W. *\'<.. La Orange, Ala. \nWilliamson, Rot. A.. Warren Grove, N.J. \n\nin, Rot. James, Athena, Pa. \nWillis, Rev. 11. P. B., Memphis, M , \nWilson, Alexander, Millville. N.r. \n. Alexander, Pittsburg, Pa. \n, . Pa. \nMrs. Catharine, Boalshnrg, Pa. \nCharles, Hillsborough, 0. \nWilson, David, PerrysvUle, Pa. \nWilson, Benry 11.. D.D.,8ewioklyville;Pa. \nReT. II. N.. Hackettstown, N.J. \nn. New fork. \n. J.M.. P.M., Grindstone Point, Mo. \nWilson, John, Bordentown, N..I. \nWilson, John, Philadelphia. \n\nWilson, John, Jr., Philadelphia. \n\nWilson, Rot. John, Portersrille, Tenn. \nWilson, John K.. Bewiekl] Bottom, Pa. \n\nJohn, Br., Bellevilh \nWilson, Mrs. Martha, Sinking Valley Pa \nWilson, Mise M. \\ . She] hi i Isville, Ky. \nWilson, Napier, Colnml ia, Tenn. \n\nk [aland, ill. \n\nv. \n\nWilson, Son. Wm., LambertvUle, N.J. \nWilliam D., Philadelphia. \n\n. P., i:. Hi fo \n\nI ,. \n.\'.in. v.. Mo i \xe2\x80\xa2- Id, V.. \nWD on, w. W. f Mimintown, Pa, \nWinne, John, I \nWinning, ROT.Bobt,] \n\n:,, \\. J., Snmmi( B \n\nr i. \nPi \n\n\n\n720 \n\n\n\nLIST OF SUBSCRIBERS, \n\n\n\nWitherspoon, A. J., Linden, Ala. \nWolfe, G. R,, Milroy, Pa. \n\nW , Philadelphia. \n\nWood, Rev. Charles, Philadelphia. \nWood, Rev. D. T., Middletowu, N.Y. \nWood, Edward P., Lawrenceville, N.J. \nWood, F. M., Princeton, N.J. \nWood, James, D.D., Philadelphia. \nWood, Rev. Jeremiah, Mayfield, N.Y. \nWood, John R., Lawrenceville, N.J. \nWood, Rev. M. D., Walterborough, S.C. \nWoodruff, Jonathan, Rahway, N.J. \nWoods, J., D.D., Lewistown, Pa. \nWoods, Rev. J. E., Bentonport, Iowa. \nWoodside, John, Waterford, Pa. \nWork, Samuel, Holmesburg, Pa. \nWork, Rev. William R., Pottstown, Pa. \nWorrell, Rev. C. F. ( Perrinesville, N.J. \n\n\n\nWorthington, W., M.D., West Chester, Pa. \nWray, Wm., Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nWright, Rev. William, Quincy, 0. \nWurts, Rev. J. H., Princeton, N.J. \nWycoff, Cornelius, Richmond, 0. \nWycoff, C. W., Richmond, 0. \nWycoff, Isaac, Richmond, 0. \nWyers, Wm. F., West Chester, Pa. \nWylie, J. D., M.D., Oakland, 111. \nAVylie, Rev. T. A., Bloomington, la. \nWylie, Rev. T. W. J., Philadelphia. \nWynkoop, Rev. S. R., Wilmington, Del. \n\nYorks, William, Danville, Pa. \nYoung, G., Holmesburg, Pa. \nYoung, 0. F., Rome, Pa. \nYoung, William S., Philadelphia. \n\n\n\nADDENDA. \n\n\n\nAdamson, William, Philadelphia. \nAlexander, T. T., Columbia, Ky. \nAllibone, S. Austin, Philadelphia. \nBennett, Mrs. P., Newburg, N.Y. \nCampbell, John, Mauch Chunk, Pa. \nClements, Thomas, Philadelphia. \nConnell, Henry, Philadelphia. \nCraig, James, Philadelphia. \nCraig. William, Philadelphia. \nCrane, Rev. Wm. H., Tallahassee, Fa. \nCross, Rev. A. B., Baltimore, Md. \nCurran, John P., M.D., Philadelphia. \nDowns, Thomas, Philadelphia. \nDoyle, Richard, Academia, Pa. \nEdgar, Rev. Cornelius H., Easton, Pa. \nFindlay, Charles, Baltimore, Md. \n\n\n\nFinney, Rev. William, Churchville, Md. \nFleu, Charles, St., Germantown, Pa. \nGabel, John, Philadelphia. \nGorham, John B., Newburg, N.Y. \nGuy, Robert, Philadelphia. \nHaldeman, John, Philadelphia. \nHodge, Rev. Samuel, Lyons\'s Store, Tenn. \nJackson, Alexander, Philadelphia. \nJohnes, Edward R., Newburg, N.Y. \nLivingston, George, Bellefonte, Pa. \nMaxwell, William, Easton, Pa. \nMcKinney, D., D.D., Pittsburg, Pa. \nPaul, James, Philadelphia. \nPike. Rev. John, Rowley, Mass. \nSprat, J., Philadelphia. \nStorrie, Thomas, Philadelphia. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDeacidified using the Bookkeeper process. \nNeutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide \nTreatment Date: June 2006 \n\nPreservationTechnologies \n\nA WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION \n\nCranberry Township. PA 16086 \n(724) 7 \n\n\n\nLIBRARY OF CONGRESS \n\nIHOlIVllllllilllll \n\n016 129 242 4 \n\n\n\n\n'