To the Members of the Methodift Societies.
t- <f>u/y
" /fa L-/*■/{/
:. Z?aJ%.
t)EAR BltEtHREttk
R. Kilham's Monitor having fallen into my hands, I beg leave to
Jk.vJX. trouble you with the Following remarks upon a very fmall part of it.
This book, I am bold to affirm, abounds with fuch barefaced and abomi¬
nable falfehoods, as have not been equalled by any one who ever wrote
fcgainft the Methodifts, in fo narrow a compafs : and although it is eXceed-
ingly painful to me to expofe him. as one of the groffeft Slanderers that
ever fet pen to paper, yet my duty to Con, and my love to my brethren,
oblige me to do it.
In page 8, of his preface, he fays, It will give me another opportunity
" of (hewing my love to the preachers in general, and to the conneftion at
" large : " Let us examine how he difcovers his love to the preachers ; and
I am inclined to think, that we (hall fee that word mod aftonifhingly veri¬
fied, «' The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."
In page 17. He gives us an extraft from a certain Manufcript, the au¬
thor's name, he fays, he is not at liberty to mention. I know the author
Well, and have read the Manufcript fometime fince, but it is a doubt with
me whether he had any authority to publifh it, as the author informed me
that he wrote it at a time when his mind was exceedingly irritated, by the
ill ufage which he thought he had met with. But if the writer of that Ma¬
nufcript was no better informed, why does Mr. K. try to make the world
believe (page 18.) that from the year 1784, Mr. Wefley's power in govern¬
ing the conneftion was little more than nominal. When he cannot but
know, that till the lad Conference which Mr. Wefley attended in 1790,
he exercifed his power in as full and compleat a manner, as he ever did at
any time whatfoever.
Is it not beyond meafure aftonilhing, that he fhould reprefent the Man-
chejffer Conference as deltroyirg all the Addreffes lent to them by the
people, without perufing them, p. 19 ; when he knows, as well as I do,
that thofe addreffes were only for and againjl the Sacraments, &c. And
that as we agreed to take up the Plan juli as Mr. Wefley left it, we alfo
agreed to deftroy all thofe addreffes, it being quite needlefs to read them.
But what is ftill more aftonifhing, if poffible, is that in p. 20. he fays,
" That he does not know whether the members of Conference oblige them-
felves by oath or by a folemn promiie not to reveal what pafles among them."
Does A. K. mean to proceed in this way, and lie for lying's fake, and fo
put it in the power of every one who ever a'tended a Conference to con-
tradift him ? * I have attended 35 Conferences, and I folemnly declare,
that I never in my life knew an oath taken or propofed to be taken by any
one. Nor has any promife of fecrefy been required, except with regard to
Rationing the preachers, till a proper time ; or when a doubtful charafter
has been fpokcr. of, the perfon not being prefent. I would afk any one of his
admirers, what degree of credit they fuppofe, a man of candor can give to
any thing he fays, after having publifhed fuch known willful falfehoods as
this to the world ! ! !
Did I not fee it with my own eyes 1 fhould not have believed it poffible,
that A. K. could tell the world as he does (p. 23.) « That the Conference
" has the abfoiute difpofal of all monies collected for various purpofes
" in our conneftion." The difpofal of all monies ! Has Mr. K. loft every
degree of fhame ! Do not all the Stewards throughout the connexion
know, that this is as barefaced a falfehood as ever proceeded from the tongue
or pen of any man who ever (poke or wrote fince the world began ! Can
he believe that the Conference has the fole difpofal of one tenth, or even
one twentieth part of the money collefted in our Society ? I believe
not.
Is it poffible for any one to give a more unjuft reprefentation of the
Diftrift Committees than he has done in page 24, 25 ? And can any
perfon who has read the articles of pacification, believe one word that he
fays ?
Is not his reprefentation of the preachers giving up their right to preach
in the New Chapel, as appointed by Mr. Wefley's Will, p. 26. equally un¬
juft? for it is very well known that nothing of that kind was done, but with
this laudible intention, that they might be upon a level with the reft of their
brethren. Yet Mr. K, has the alfuranee to tell us that this is left upon
record in the great Ledger ! This faid Ledger Ircn-mrvr before me and
the words are thefe, " We therinderwritten; being appointed by the' Will
«' of the late Rev. J. Wefley/as a Committee, to preach in, and to ap-
*' point Preachers for the New Chapel, in the City-Road, London, and alfo
" for"--
* One would fuppofe that A. K, is under an engagement to publifh all
the lies and idle tales that any one will be wicked enough to fend him. I
advife him therefore to take for his Motto in the next Number of his Mo¬
nitor, the following words of Jeremiah xx. 10, " For I have heard the de-
" faming of many, fear on every fide. Report, fay they, and we will re-
" port it." Only let him alter the words thus : « Report, I fay, and I
♦« will report it. Only invent lies, and I will publifh them."
" for the Methodift Chapel in Ring-Street, Bath, do engage, that wc wilt
" ufe all the rights and privileges given us by Mr. Wefley, in the prefent in-
" ftance, in entire fubfervience to the Conference." To this they all figned
their names. And wherein did the injuftice of this tranfaftion confift? Thefe
men were all members of the Conference : Was it not highly reafonable that
they fhould aft in concert with their brethren ? How would any one wifli
them to exercife their powers, but in unity and harmony with the reft of the
preachers ? And wherein was Mr. Wefley's Will violated ? Has any¬
one of them been hindered by the preachers from preaching in that Chapel ?
Surely no. What ground then for this wonderful inference of Mr. Kif
ham's, " But nothing was facred with the Manchefter Conference tha
" flood in the way of their own aggrandizement." Here I am quite at a
lofs, I cannot underhand what is intended by aggrandizement. I have tra¬
velled twenty-nine years in connection with Mr. Wefley, and five years
fince, but I can in nowife conceive that I, or any one elfe, are in a higher
ftation, or in eafier or happier circumftances now, than we were before Mr.
Wefley's deatjh. Some of us certainly, have had a very confiderable increafe
of care and labpur, of various kinds, and Mr. K. feems very defirous to add
to it all in his power: But as to any real advantage which any of us have
got, they muft have wifer heads than mine who can find it out.
It rnuft be acknowledged to his praife, that A. K. as fteadily follows the
good old maxim as any one who has gone before him, (viz.) -Throw dirt
enough and fome of it will flick. And accordingly, be informs fil| readers
how much fome of the preachers gain by felling the Books, and that they
will allow their fellow-labourers nothing for affifting them, (p. 27.) But
did he never know an inftance to the contrary ? Nay, does he not know
that little as it is which the preachers have for their trouble in felling the
books, yet it is cuftomary for them to (hare the profits with their fellow-
labourers, when they are affiftcd by them ? Nay, does he not know, that
it has fo happened, that an Affiftant has given the whole profits for years
together to his fellow-labourer, when he was not affifted byYhirfi at all, be-
caufe he knew, that he wanted it more than himfelf ? If K. does not
know of any fuch inftance, I do. But if he himlelf has afted according
to the plan which he reprobates, and has fo cruelly treated his brethren,
and fuppofes that every one is as unkind and ungenerous as he has "been, I
beg leave to allure him, that he is greatly miftaken. And I take the liberty
tolell him yet farther, that he is as vile an accufer of the brethrctras-"
appeared fince I can remember.
Suppofing the preachers fhould gain as much as he fays they do, by
felling the books, would any thing but the fmallnefs of their income make
this appear confiderable ? Let A. K's. fnends judge. I will begin with,
his own circuit laft year and give you a fpecimen. The commiflion money
is as follows.
Alnwick,
Edinburgh
Glafgow,
Newcaftle,
Sunderland,
Hexham,
Barnard-Caftle,
Upon reading this ftatement need any one who confiders the prefent
times, be filled with altonilhment to think what a preacher with three,
four, or fix children, will do with fuch large fums of money! Let it be
fuppofed that a preacher with five children, is ftationed for twenty years
together in fome of the very beft Circuits, and that he gains £. 10 every
year by the books, and that by the merciful providence of God, he is able
to lay by the whole for the ufe of his children, fo that at the end of
twenty years he has the enormous fum of £. 200 to divide among his five
children, this, it is well known, would amount to the immenfe fum of
£. 40 apiece ! What would A. K. and his generous-hearted friends fay
then ? Why he might then publifh a new edition of his Monitor. But
when was there, or when will there be fuch an inftance ? Not while the
world ftands, I believe.
It is but too evident that A. K—'s grand defign is to make the preacherj
appear as contemptible as he poffibly can ; but it is matter of thankful
that many of them have nothing to fear from any thing he can either fayj
do : they are too well known by the people, to luffer any thing from
pen, however deep he may dip it in the gall of bnter reviling.
B-Jt it would be endlefs to take notice of all the falfehoods which
has pubHfhed, and therefore I leave it to thofe who have more ti
their hands than I have got at prefent.
£•
S*
d.
£•
s.
d.
5
O
6
Dewfbury,
1
18
6
2
4
6
Halifax,
6
2
8
1
11
3
Bradfoitb,
4
12
-4
6
14
8
Birftal,
2
8
5
7
15
0
Huddersfield,
8
11
6
5
1
8
Wakefield,
9
11
6
3
11
8
Leeds,
8
5
2
lam your affeftionate Brother,
4
J- PA* ;VSON.
Ur7-£
ft*
/face s <&-£>■/e