pledge could release him from this his prior obligation. This principle he happily illustrated by a reference to the oath of a privy councillor-from which, and his loyalty and duty to the sovereign guaranteed thereby, no subsequent private engagement could release him."

This piece of information we have copied from the Watchman newspaper, being desirous to rest our case upon statements made in the interest of the Conference. A similar sentiment to this of Dr. Bunting is, in another report, attributed to his son, and is there said to have been applauded by the Conference. This may or may not have been the case; but the serious violation of honourable feeling implied in such applause is more than established by the following resolution of the district meeting on Mr. Walton's case, which was undoubtedly sanctioned and confirmed by a formal vote of the Conference:

"That the attention of this meeting having been incidentally directed to brother W. T. Radcliffe, this meeting expresses its sympathy with him, and its persuasion that he has acted an honourable part."

What can be said of these things, but that the power of the Conference was, in this instance, directed to the breaking down of the integrity of one of its members, and the encouragement of the perfidy of another? Here is a body of professedly Christian ministers who set themselves to destroy moral principle in their associations with each other! They reward baseness and punish fidelity. Such proceedings as we have described must go far toward nullifying any religious influence possessed in connection with them, and will do more harm by the vicious lesson they teach in the form of example, than the preaching and praying of the whole "collective pastorate" can remedy.

The Bunting doctrine was thus expressed, with a superior clearness and point, by Ralpho of old:

"For breaking of an oath and lying,

Is but a kind of self-denying

A saint-like virtue; and from hence
Some have broke oaths by Providence;

Some, to the glory of the Lord,

Perjured themselves and broke their word."

The same subtle reasoner has also successfully anticipated the principle of the Radcliffe resolution.

"Quoth Ralph, Honour's but a word

To swear by only in a lord;

In other men 'tis but a huff

To vapour with, instead of proof,
That, like a wen, looks big and swells,

Is senseless, and just nothing else." †

We must here bring our story to a conclusion. In doing so, we wish it to be understood that ours is but a portion of the tale. The facts we have left untouched are more numerous, and some of them more interesting, than those we have brought forward. Our object has been merely to select such a line of these facts as might clearly exhibit the principles we have felt it our duty to expose. We are also conscious of having weakened the effect of much that we have said, by adhering, as far as possible to the Conferential statement of the matter in hand. Had we availed ourselves of the counter statement, which we believe to

*Hudibras, Part II. Canto 2.

+ Ibid.

be, in most instances, the more truthful of the two, our narrative would have gained considerably in effect. We have, however, had the advantage of convicting the real offenders out of their own mouths.

A few words directed respectively to the Wesleyan community and the general public will finish our task.

1. We have a very precise conviction in our own minds as to the course which those Wesleyans who desire to reform their body ought to pursue. They ought to demand a re-assertion of and practical adherence to the compact between Preachers and People, which was made in the year 1797. They should content themselves with nothing less than the establishment of the authority of their own local meetings, as conceded to them by this compact; and the repeal of all subsequent regulations of the Conference which have interfered with its spirit and design. In seeking to secure this end, they will be seeking for no innovation, and will thus obtain the largest possible degree of sympathy from their brethren; and, if they succeed in their endeavours, they will furnish themselves with the means of accomplishing any after-purpose they may approve. At present, all efforts at Wesleyan reform are rendered abortive by the power which Conference has and exercises, of expelling from the societies those who make such efforts. Let that power be put an end to, and a fair field for exertion in this direction will be afforded. Let the business of all meetings of Preachers be confined to matters in which Preachers, as such, are concerned; and let the People have the same right to conduct their own affairs in their own meetings, as the Preachers have in theirs, and the foundation of a good government will be laid. Lay delegation to the Conference would not of itself remedy the evils of Methodism, however just it may, in theory, be. It is the extension of Conferential power, whether lay or clerical, to the destruction of all local authority, which requires first to be corrected.— Lay delegation will, if it accord with the wishes of the people, be consequent upon this correction of the radical evil; but it ought to be regarded as subordinate in importance to measures which may immediately touch that evil. The real strength of the cause of Wesleyan reformation is to be found in the Address of the London South Circuit, to the Conference of 1828, and the defence of that Address in Reply to the Rev. Richard Watson. Mr. Watson was the ablest writer that has ever appeared in connection with Methodism, and he put forth his whole strength in his answer to this London Address; but if ever any man was thoroughly beaten in an argument, he was beaten by the Reply which he received. Our advice to the Wesleyan public is, to adopt and carry out the principles of that Address. The trustees of Methodist chapels have, at any time when they choose to exert it, the power of compelling the Conference to comply with the wishes of the people. They are personally responsible for heavy chapel debts, and might successfully demand, in any dangerous crisis which affected their interests, an indemnification for their pecuniary responsibilities, or power to dispose of the property they hold. The Conference would find itself quite unable to resist or to meet such a demand; and it therefore only requires a large body of trustees to use their power on the side of popular right, in order that that right may be secured. We have great respect for Methodism itself, though we have great contempt for the pettifogging domination which Dr. Bunting and his followers dignify

by that name. We are unaffectedly desirous that the religious influence of the Wesleyan Connexion should be strengthened and extended; and it is because we regard the present policy of the Conference as eminently detrimental, if not destructive, to the religious character and efficiency of that Connexion, that we have lifted up our voice against the continued imposition of the yoke of bondage under which it so fearfully groans.

2. The questions we have mooted deeply concern the general public, as well as the Wesleyan community. They do so, inasmuch as every man who has the cause of truth and liberty at heart, is interested in every invasion of its rights which takes place around him. The public has here, however, a more direct interest than that. Since we commenced this paper, we have received a copy of The Minutes of the Committee of Council on Education for 1848-49. These Minutes contain copies of the trust-deeds in connection with which Government aid is given to Wesleyan schools. Those deeds give to the Wesleyan Conference a power over such schools which is virtually absolute. They prescribe that the schools shall be "always in union with the Wesleyan Methodist Education Committee, and be conducted upon the principles and in furtherance of the educational ends and designs of the said Wesleyan Methodist Conference." Let it be remembered that the Conference consists only of the ministers of the body, and that the Education Committee is appointed by the Conference alone, and the effect of this arrangement upon the interests of religious freedom must immediately be seen to be dangerous in the extreme. The Conference becomes thus furnished with public money for the carrying out of its authority, as far as that authority can be extended to educational measures. The Privy Council contributes to the support of its agents in the form of schoolmasters. Methodism is, in this way, exalted into a religious establishment upheld by the State. Is this to be borne? Will the constituencies of the kingdom consent that the priestly tyranny of Wesleyanism shall be paid for out of their pockets? These are questions which must be urged, in and out of Parliament, until a satisfactory answer to them is obtained. We wish it to be specially observed that the view of the case we are now presenting relates to the peculiarities of the Wesleyan polity. We hold that national education, if it exist at all, should be applied irrespective of any religious sects; but even those who approve of such education in a sectarian form, will see the necessity of providing for an efficient popular control in the administration of the educational machinery. Such a control does not exist in connection with the mode of administration which the Privy Council has sanctioned in this Wesleyan instance. That mode is neither more nor less than the exercise of Conferential power. It is true that a local Committee of Management is provided for in the deeds to which we have referred. But the constitution of that Committee is deceptive in its apparent concession of popular supervision. The Committee will be in every instance the easy tool of the Conference and its agents. Nor is this all. The local Committees, however constituted, would be found powerless, by reason of their subordination to the General Committee, which is solely appointed by the Conference. We have inquired, for instance, how the schoolmasters are actually selected, and have been informed that they are provided by the General Committee,

the local bodies having no power to choose schoolmasters in opposition to its will. It will thus come to pass, that the same principles of government by which the subserviency of the ministry is secured, will produce an equal subserviency throughout the pedagoguey. There is, moreover, now in process, a scheme for the establishment of a Wesleyan Normal School, with the aid of Government funds, which will put the corner-stone upon this edifice of clerical supremacy. We may, perhaps, direct attention at some future time to other parts of these Minutes of Council which possess a character similar to the support of Wesleyan polity we have just noticed; but in the meanwhile we earnestly exhort all who respect the welfare of their common country to prevent the employment of the national resources to the consolidation of the worst ecclesiastical system which this land contains.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE.

August, 1849.

- patet, non alio modo vel quæri vel reperiri sensum verborum in libris sacris, quoad humana opera intercedit, quam quo in humanis vel solet vel debet.— J. A. ERNESTI.

JOB XXXiii. 25: "His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth."

A specific notice this of one part of the afflicted patriarch's experience; of his pitiable disease, and his recovery from it, in the event of his contrition! "The Book of Job" is not a history, though facts are the basis of it; nor is it, strictly, either a dramatic or an epic poem. Fiction and Truth are mingled together in it; and there are omissions, if not incongruities, which rather obscure its excellences as a piece of writing. Thus, the issue of the sufferer's personal malady, does not seem to have obtained that share of the author's regard for which the reader might look. Nothing is said of his bodily health and comfort being restored, though the restoration of other temporal blessings is expressly mentioned.

In the verse before us, however, so happy a change would appear to be intimated: "his flesh shall be fresher than a child's," &c. Compare the language with that of the historian [2 Kings v. 14], in describing the new and healthy state of the commander of the King of Syria's armies: "he [Naaman] went down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, and his flesh came again, like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean." Surely the attentive reader of "the Book of Job" will think upon this incident and image!

So far as we discern, the termination of Job's "bone and flesh" being "touched," would naturally be fatal. We may well suppose this complaint incurable by human skill and power. It called, as Naaman's leprosy did, for miraculous interposition; and the removal of it was essential to the patriarch's enjoyment of other blessings with which he might be favoured. Accordingly, I am of opinion that his contingent

Chap. ii. 5, 7.

repossession of health and vigour of body is now suggested by Elihu. "This might be vouchsafed, if he duly humbled himself before the Divine Throne." Submission and Repentance, we know, ensued; and it is but reasonable to infer that the boon was not withholden. trast verses 19-23 with verse 25.*

John xii. 26: "If any man serve me, let him follow me."

Con

John xiii. 36: "Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards."

John xxi. 22:"Follow thou me."

These passages throw light upon each other. In these and in some few besides, the emphatic word is FOLLOW, which, nevertheless, has not here a general but a specific import. "FOLLOW thou me:" the command goes beyond "obedience to the Saviour," and enjoins, “walking in the path of self-denial, pain and death, which the Saviour trod." A definite, not a vague, imitation of the Saviour's example, is therefore pointed out.

Acts xviii. 18: 66 he had a vow."

66

of

Acts xxi. 23: “ we have four men who have a vow on them." Vows are not an article of the Christian Law. All the individuals referred to in these texts, as having vows upon them," were native Jews, and therefore bound, for the present, to an observance of the Mosaic Code. It should be added that these are the only passages the New Testament in which the mention of a vow occurs. Let not the fact be any longer overlooked by those among my readers who either make or recommend promises, which, in truth, are of the nature of vows.

If it be alleged that promises, or assurances, such as I have in view, are voluntary, so, I reply, were vows under the Jewish Dispensation. Men took them upon themselves, not as being compulsory, but of their own free will. The obligation of the vow was consequent on its being made-nay, in virtue of its being made. "I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back!" This was the language of the stern Genius of Judaism. It is not that of the Gospel; of" the perfect law of liberty;" of "the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus." Christianity as little prescribes and recognizes vows, as it does any will-worship, any ordinances, commands or prohibitions of men [Touch not, taste not, handle not. Its rule, universal and permanent, is, "Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon or sabbath."

Engagements resembling vows tend to ensnare CONSCIENCE, of the rights, the integrity and the faithfulness of which the Gospel is pre-eminently careful.§

Perhaps I may be asked, Of what character was the vow which Paul discharged for himself; and what the vow which, jointly with four of his countrymen and fellow-believers, he fulfilled at Jerusalem? I do not hesitate at answering that, in both cases, it was the Nazarites' vow.||

One effect of Job's malady, was extreme depression of spirits. Throughout the Book there are many references to it in this view.

† Judges xi. 35.

Coloss. ii. 16.

§ Rom. xiv. passim.

|| Numb. vi. 1-22; and Lardner's Works [1788], Vol. I. pp. 208-212.