CIHM ICIMH Microfiche Collection de Series microfiches (l\/lonographis) (monographies) 1 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiquet 1QQd r C [ Technical and Bibliographic Notn / Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. I y| Coloured covers/ I I Couverture de couleur |~~1 Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couveicure resteuree et/ou pellicula Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes geographiques en couleur D D n n n Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or Mack)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge interieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certeines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une resteuration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela eteit possible, ces pages n'ont pas ete filmees. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplementaires: This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de rMuction indiqu« ci-dessous. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a et^ possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut4tre uniques du point de vue Wbliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methode normaie de f ilmage sont indiqu^ ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagees □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restsurees et/ou pellicultes n^Pages discoloured, steined or foxed/ L--I Pages decolorees, tachetees ou piquees □ Pages detached/ Pages detachees QShowthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Qualite in^le de I'impression □ Continuous pagination/ Pagination continue □ Includes index(es)/ Comprend un (des) index Title on header taken from:/ Le titre de I'en-tite provient: □ Title page of issue Page de titre de la □ Caption of issue/ Titre de depart de la □ Masthead/ G livraison livraison Generique (periodiques) de la livraison inv UX ISX 22X 26 X »X H ■■ -~™ 12X 16X 20X 24X ^""^ ' 711 X 9^w The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Hamilton Public Library L'exemplaire f ilm6 fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Hamilton Public Library The inages appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and In keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — •► (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6. et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les sxemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont film^s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration. soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiimds en commen9ant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUiVRE". le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent 6tre film6s d des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST ChAPT (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART No. 2) jd -APPLIED IN/MGE 1653 East Main Street Rochester. New York 14609 (716) 482 -0300 -Phone (716) 288- 5989 - Fo» USA A SERIES OF ARTICLES. LATKLr fUBUMilBD r.\ THE t t » 1 CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN, STIGMATISING "THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN CANADA." A« UATINO tttCOIDR: FROM THE WESI.BY IN B"I)T, I AND THE ikwERS THERETO, AS rUHLIgniD ]lf TRR '^JAWA^ CHRISTIAN AOVOCATE." ■ ALSO A PAPER PUBi;ISHED IN THENORTHERN ADVOCATE, AUBURN, N. Y.. 1P44 BT THB AUTHOt OF « THB UNION OONglDERBD. HAMILTON: IwUMtW) AT TBI OHRttTIAN ADVOCATE OFFIOI, JOHN gTREKT. lIDOOOI.yTTT. \ H'Z o, A SERIES OF ARTICLES. tATKLT ri7BMf!«KD Ilf THB :^^ov « « CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN," SnGMAnislNG "THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN CANADA," A3 lUVINO 8?CHD«D FaOM TIIK WKSLKYAM BODT, AND THE ANSWERS THERETO, A3 rCOLIBtno IN TUK CANADA CHRISTUM ADVOCATE.' AUO A PAPER PUBLISHED IN THE NORTHERN ADVOCATE, AUBURN. N. T., 1844. 8T THB AUTHOR OF "THE UNION CONSIDBWtD." HAMILTON: PRTNTM) AT TBK CHRISTIAN ADVOCATB OFFICE, JOHN STREET. MDCCCLXIII. vj^.uaejviif INTROJ)UCTrON. The following pages hare beeo called into esisten,.» ,., »eve..l aniol,» wtiol, Lave b« wH..„ ,y ZZZ^TTr "' GmrJian, and certain contributor, to ^ha^ i • '"""" "..oiber, of tl,e M. J5. Church in Oalt 7'° ' ""''°'"'"'°'' *"" of this country while at (17.? , "^ "' ''""' "'•' ^"l"^""" uutry, wniie, at the saino tune, strono- brnfTiP.-lv .,♦* i ~^h, the «„..., ., ,. ,,„„,. ,, l:-:-:-;:.;: -a. been nr^d by no^erol ^ I l^r^r-j' »7'?"^™'-. controversj-intopanrpMel foj „ that T , °' """» *'' r *t on the i,L of the^it::: ;■ :r;'° -^^ ^* ^' '- "^° chth i?c:!::;rthro: -'''i^^- »'"■« ^--o^i- %u.op., vanaaaby the General Conference of tho M li' PI. l- Umted State, and the recogaition of our branch of ^ T " ''" Family by the Parent Bod; we deem i 7 '^''"* *''*'^'''^ remark* anH • ^ - '^ ""P*' ^ "^'^^ some further ^. we find m the Z)a% Ckrislian Ad'docate of Mav isrn .v. ^ organ of the American General Confer. \L ^' ' ^^' ""^''"^ itemB :- Conference held at Buffalo, the following ''J. M. Fuller presented the oredentia.« of Rev Thoa W.K . Delegate from th^ Methodist, E Church of P T ^'^'' BiHhop RichardBon, of the M E CH t I n ^ *^^ ^^onferenoe. Webster, one of thJ Re JseltLXr^^^^^^^ ^^^ '^^'^^^ by Bishop Morris to Z Confe Z tl sL"?' '^^^''^" ^"^'"^^^ the General Conference of the ME .! '"T^ -'^^ *h« «ddrea«.f eace, and Biahop Ames inc^d if^he ^T " """^ *" *'" ^^'^^^ Lunierenue -o tw , ^p^. j,u«r«55 tae IV INTRODUCTION. Thill follow, the BWiop's speech "« with sLter ch";;r:r«, ^/ifrZef:™^ '°"'"''"« °" «— p'-o- *; r r "^^ "- *- ^^^^^:°^^ - "~ h.. credeiilul. a„d the address of htf , t'»»6'»ce, who preKDtol . ^«-r,. «r.«e„tt then rltd^rtCree'.'' """''■' ''^'•'' Kev Eiiooh Wood, OeL J "o^ltS^.^^M T °' ^ ^""'^""-^ Wesleyan Ci„rd, i„ this Cl Col '„'" "''"•'*°' *» ^aaada Brother Hurlburt .„ the Co„Zl.« °'"*°°'' «"*»P M-H' introduced Mr H. thcB briefly addressed the Co.fereBoe. J:^;,''^' "^'"^ ^— . »'M., the ,5th, is the r^-^ speech. -J..-. .."^t.^^'^^y*" Conference." Here follows his delegate from that Church '^^^^^^^ ^«^- *f'- ^^-^diner, a Conference. ' ^^''^^J^ ^^^^^1* «»e« ^ddreesed the Genw,| «-e per.,., ^i „„ ^/J "* «»*'<"«- »«« Mi^m^ by tie iilr,' mTRODUOTION. ence now. He srhaps Bishop to prepare an in Canada. I Correspond- ?ate from the ft communi- ho presented ! read bjr the we find the icate of the Conference ; Rev. Asahel the Canada i introduced i following e the Bev. bllows his dvocate of er Smith, tfdiner, a e General ites from hurch, as •a by tKe ««bject of the recogniuon of the Methodist E,,iHcopal Church in C«.ada by ho Parent Connexion, wc here quote fron. the SpoocheB of the Am r.an Dolegate. dehvered at the Canadian Goueral cVnfereuco, held m toboiirg last August. Dr. Pet^r Cartwright of the Illinois Annual Conference says -" I »« happy to meet with you under present circumstances, as one of tTe Repre^ntutives of the American General Conference. I have « distinct m t}u> Umted States. I commenced to travel in 1804. This countrv was supphed with Preachers by Bishop Asbury. The work her'^lw greatly untd it became an Annual Conferenc; in 1824 In 828 oo m Canada, the General Confere oe, held in Pittsburg, permitted th*' heTetr ?• "''1" ' ^'""'^ "° '^' ^^''*- Btipulatio;s':ot netessa^ I was alw ; 'infav ^'p"'"""*^ ^^'' ^^"^ ^«««'«- '^' old Preachers 1 was always ,n favor of your recognition, and of fraternal roktions years K*v. F. A. Blades, of the Detmit Annual Conference, observed-: "I hardly feel at liberty to trespass upon your time at present' but I said Amen to the remarks of Dr. Cartwright. However Taffordl much pleasure to meet with you. At Job saS Tm^ tre/a^d' ^^:^j.z ^i^^fzz^Tz I "" ^ - " long negl .d. I have been r.Zr::;-^l:^r7yZ connecting himself with us, which wer! very L7;i^Zil7'ftZ:: hers. In connectu, i.^ his ca.e, I commencel to examin! y ur history wh.ch I had before too much neglected. I felt then, and f^ now, that you ought to have been recognized by us, as bone of ur It and flesh of our flesh. At the Buffalo Conference I acted in bringL tS about, and for this reason, perhaps I am one of the first ReprZtatite 1 then felt an interest in your Body, not nou> abated. I aJglTrm 'I' Bros. Webster and Richardson, whom I met at Buffalo. Irefoice 1 1 ES'ptit^^ ^" '"^ ''-'' "'^"^^-^^ ^^^^^ ^'-^ ^- ^ - Rev. G. iiuker, of the Black River Annual Conference, remarked:- tl (I mTBODuorroN. ™rk» of My B,oU,„,„. „ i T-?'' ■>"' "o"- b«l I c„„o„r m the re- »Mo off „„ rt„ ..„ ,„ ,J > : i'jJt;; 'f-'. I "°«M ™.y likely y, I am plc„«d to bo here and L '"'"■ ''"""' "''^ «R«in to con,e..c„„. „^,,,. „„, ,„ „":;i„':,^::i;fr-' -"''-^ <■'« °- Notwitl,«toudi„,. ttao „ln **"■ " *"«''•" Gcn„l Co„fcro„oe, the Kditor of L S -i' '"" °' "'" '"" ^""'""» following p,^, p„„i,^ i„ .wita„?; "■ " " "'■" "f>P«" i" a« M. >;. Church of this eoun ;trC t" "' ""V"""'' ""•■ f'" «■« Moth„di,t Body by our A^o/cau fiX TST' ""'^ "' » ~*S not proved the contrary 0„ u,r° v ' "* ''" "'e^ 'k"' "e have the reader to decide. ' ""' '"''J"' '" "«" « «« other,, „e w™ i-l:. "B't:frh;'frVS:'r 'J'^ ^'"■"■^ - ««». .. ;' Smith, and many other warmjieart J bJ^.u '"'"*' ■"• *""'»"•. «■ U-' Buffale Oeneral Conference, JZ^- ^ZTZ:"'' "'"°"' ™ «' «' *» to r,a,cmber. Theee Brethren, a/r,?""" ™ "'■° -»'"•'» «bb respected Bishop,, their able S«etari« "'f' ™"«''l« ■™J juatly o»l«m and I„„i„^ re.pect of our rp'oin M ""'■°""»- "«'« *« *«uld daily ascend to Heaven fcr th^'lnd fo T. "T?' •'"■■ f'"^"- onfcal n,on,e„., „„j ,, ^^^^ ™^"d fc the,r beloved Zion at tUi, to crush out the Southern Rebeliiou reZ,T rr ""^ "*'"' *' N"'* awe and prosperity to the American ZZl ^'"°"' ""'' ''""« »«"■■ si!' ficKiV *';■ .lii^ '"7 >'>.i'r-;;i/,o-> nlisHj;, *'- Conn^en e? What now light has there been given to the subject? Would it not be iiLt ^ consistent for the Wesleyan Church of Canada to a krlkdge the Triu Meaford, October, 1862, ^'"" """"'^' ^- »• ,**^*/j^P',~^*',^J'®^® ''"'y °"« o*" th« three American Ministers who ^t^'i^ the late M. E. Conference in Canada-the Rev. Dr. SShT- L vS™" *\' '''*™'*f «f K?P'-«««»tative; the others were therrndoly Z li -? «' ''^ understand it, the General Conference did not iitcnd by sendmg a Representative, any recognition of the Canada U E Church as the legal suececsor of the original Methodist body which extedhm t r^ vT'^n ""'i^ '•'" ^"'^^'^ Conference. We believe it is customa y for the M. E Conferences in the United States to receive Deput S from the seceding Methodist bodies of their own country' 3tiTZ appoinUng the late Deputations they have only followed out tSs p^Hc The General Conferen<)e has alre^uly formally decided this point Ttdli 80 a number of years ago when the question was regularly^ubmittcd o to the Wesleyan Conference of Canada, the General Conference has di' Ja ^°"'".'^^."«t>'"^ and fraternal letter was received by us with much joy *nd satisfaction, and we join in giving thanks to ouriommou Lord S Master who made us one in Him at the first, and has preserved ul Si?.f ^u**M' «f our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all Srongh us'''^''"^'"' """^ °^* "**^*' "wnifest tic savor of His grace ■ i -,- ^'^Miv'Ol^ lis THE •^L'AttDIAN C()RHEC"r«0. ((I in ike United tC^'Z e^.^f "'!? ^'" ^^^''-iS^;'^^^^:^,^^ ^pnitua union otVthose whom God hatieo-^'^"'' impediment to the rhere hve among us still mJ^l^^^tS t^'''^''VJv ^^^'^ ^''Seth^^^ States into Canada, and who ha^L ^^^^^hi Methodism from the Bishop Asbury, traVeled IZ ^TUT^Ht '^^' ^PP^i»^nient ftom back to reach their Circuit 'vZ \ *** *^« ^^aaada lines on hnZ. paternal yearnings for thar;J;tio?oTt/'f' ^^""'^^^ ^ther stUl^S penal dominionrwhile the WnSr I^Jh ^^ ^ ,'''^''^"* withi^ the Im the same ff>pi;r,..=. >• J'ounger brethren ear v U„-„ . 7. "^r the mo feeling,." ^"""e/-' brethren earty lea„ ,„ ,j,„pa,iije^ To THE EmroK op the "P p ''» ' v THE "PWPrcfPT4XT ^- C. Advocate." ^ -t., a short communication^u porUnrrv^'r'""'' '' *^« ^Oth «g^ed ''E.H./'i„,WchthewrTteTevl ,\ '""^ "^^'^^^«'.^'" ^^ ^^on ai the recognition of oTr Chu ' ^k"^ ^f ^^^ neighboring Republic, and asks some "r^ *^' P^'^"' ^"^^ J» t^e the Delegates of the General Conl^"/ "^ '^^^^'^'^^ '^ ^^^ -^t of Church in the United Sta^t thotrera, Cont '''^^'^'' ^P'^P^^ i'Piscopal Church in Canada T„ ,n ^^^^^''^^'^e of the Methodist "E. H.," the Editor of the " ctrdi "" ^*'' ^"^'^^^" ^'^^ -«de by " We believe only one of tl ' tht aL li ™t- ^'^ '^"^"'"^ -"-^s' ate I. E. Conference in Can^7!ttrW pf "t" f^ ^"^'^^^^ *^« the character of Representative: the oihtT ^,^^*^"«'^^*ttended in -^W this is an eggrogious er or-af ,;? T^''' " ^'^^*-«'' we will presently give from tho 'Zufny ■7'' ^^ ^r^*''^^^ ^hich the readers of the " Guardian " wilr T ^"^smuations, to m./.arf Methodist Episcopal ChurcHn V. . u^""^ '" *^^« recognition of the Methodist Episcopal Chu" hi :he n > !. ^""""^^ ^^"'^^^"^« ''^ *h« Conference, held in Buffairiu i860 s^mc f ''"w '^"" *^« ^^^^^ inanifested great annoyance a the kL .""'' ^''^'^''' ''^'^"^ bave on that occasion, de yL the f^t of "^ ^ P'''° ^^^'^^ *« ««r Delegates .known in Canada SLs^l^^^l^ "''^'*^^"°' ^^^^-^'^ ^* - weU •the Delegates from the M E Chul t T' '' *^" '"*'^^' «« ««>« o^ introduced to the General Confer- ' - "°"°*'^' ^''^ ^ec«i^d and - tonfercuco «y j5,.i,op Morris, at the sftme ti«ie I THE Ot-'ARMAN CoURKl'TED. tgh the link sup. nrc'ion is formed Episcopal Church 'is ancestral bond iat we should be pediment to the ' joined together. hodism from the ppointment from a lines on horse athers, still feel within the Im- lo sympathize in 'E.' BD.— No. I. Jl ^" of the 29tii Meaford," and deep mort'tfica- ' Ijodjr in the 3 to the visit of dist Episcopal the Methodist thus made by ^ing remarks: attendled the — attendeii in y as visitors," Jxtracfc which ate"— 'and is s, to mislead aition of thp Jrence of the the Generial friends have ir Delegates 'M it is well 'le, as one of eceivod and !s«ime tithe and in the same manner as a; ,»r. Scott, the Dele?;ate from the Irish Conference, and in precisely t'lv ^^-imo manner as were subsequently Dr. S.tinson and the Rev. Mr. Hurlburt, occupying the same platform, and being made receipieuts of the same fraternal courtesies. Rev. James Gar- diner, our other Delegate, on his arrival, as also our Bishops, were intro- duM to the Conference and treated with the same brotherly cordiality. The Addresses of the Wesleyan Methodists of England and of Ireland, of the M. E. Church in Cana^la, and of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada, were all tead in open Conference, refered to the same Committee, and disposed of in precisely the same way. ■^ No Deputations were received from any seceded body of Methodists in the United States, nor was any Delegate appointed to any such body therein. So much for the recognition. It is noj; our wish, at present, to open up afresh the old question of originality between ourselves and the Wesloyans, unless the subject is forced upon us by them. But if it is, we shall not flinch from the duty we owe to the (Dhurch ana ''ho people of this Province. We are able and ready to defend our position as the original Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada, as established in this country in 1828, and pirprtwied evir ,since. We were present at Buffalo when the Delegates to the M. E. Church in Canada were appointed, as were also Bishop Smith and Rev. James Gar- diner. Bishop Richardson had returned to Canada before the close of tho Confererice, in consequence of ill health. But in order to settle the point in dispute, we will quote from the " Daily Christian Advocate," of the 5th day of June, 1860, a paper published by authority of the American General Conference, and which contains tho official actions of that venera- ble and justly respected body. The following is the extract refered to above : — ... /' The Address to the Irish Conference was read, and on motion, was adopted. ■)o *Tbe Address to the Epi.scopal Churches in France and Switzerland was J read, and on motion, was adopted. < ! Mr. Brown, of Providence, suggested whether in view of the lateness of •our seaaion, and the press of business, it would not be proper to dispense ;^Ritli the re'«. tk" *« Address be .f^ej pointed i„ exactly the «« „,a „er wf^'^T *" «* '»<'j'. 'ere'^ tkat Reva. G. Baker, F. / mX ^ T'' """"^ "J' «» »»' ««le« •".pableofunderatandWltiro™! v' '''■■ ""'""gH were ,Zt -«..-ng between their ow dH LTh'^T '\' °""" ->' *« -l."." « " the Editor of the " G„S.'„!°t^ '"'""*" ""Vied .hem. ireanme, however, that the forj^ "*' «"««pondent W» *e M. E. Church i„ he U S^: Sr""' T "" '"«'»*«' leJI" N„l„ith,ta„di the prlt; of ,t °T'' " ''™' ™ *>' P»i«- Ckriat, the „„,iet^ „f thdHLf 1 "'""' ''""'^ « »>inSe„ „f "»" -ging in thei „..t C IIT" "P^" *« »"W, „helli™ C«wrigl,., he and hi, e„neaJe''oa™ h„„d*T ^"''^ ""*"•« <>'' »'• J General Conference in cZZZi° "J'" '° ^ P™«-' " ;; ">e P«««. ehnrch k, their chiM™ i„ 17"''. *° '"'"'"^ 8'^« «'«- «,ee«d hreth™ an,o„« 'rj^^^T??: ,Th.^5ht^,4 ..« GUARDIAN' ("OKRKCTKD. U Jrs Of the Methodist i in the Daily, therefore cannot be tiall not be put in I>elegation to bear that Dr. Nathan t Delegation, opted. le appointment of , as Delegates to ch in Canada. >pted. nd week of Jan- » of the world. 'k pay the ex- sred. ressea be signed the Wesleyan Hit Episcopal ^^y, were ap. *o our readers w^ere quite as >f the relation legated them, >ndent. Wo ■ized sheet of hat point, ministers of t>ly rebellion ness of Dr. 8 present at J J greetiog sib t|be stay. »njigitt«cred views, earnest piety, and brotherly love, have made themsehcs places in our hearts, and have wound still more closely ihe ties which bind us to our Fathers and Brethren in the United States. The difficult circum- stances under Which they came to us, causing us the more liighly to appreciate the visit. They have our sympathy and earnest prayers for themselves, their church, and their country, in this, their time of adversity and sore trial. „ ., ^ , Thomas Webster. Hamilton, October 30th, 1862. RECOGNITION OF SECEDING BODIES. " Christian Guardian," Nov. 12, 1862. The Rev. Thomas Webster, ex-editor of the "Canada Christian Advocate," writes to that paper correcting our impression that only one of tiie three American brethren, who attended the Episcopal Conference at Cobourg, was there in the character of Delegate. Our impression arose from seeing their names published as from their respective local Confer- ences, which led us to suppose they were there merely as visitors; but Mr Webster states that they all belonged to the Deputation, in which, as he ought to know, we dare say he is correct. However, it is a matter of httle consequence, since the number of Delegates does not affect the ques- tion raised by our correspondent. We stated that our American brethren were accustomed to receive Deputations from the Coufcrences of seceding bodies t» their own amntry, and their receiving one from a seceding body m tills country, would have no more significance— would not necessarily imply any other kmd of recognition. Mr. W. says there were no such Delegates from seceding bodies at the last Buffalo Conference, on which we are not able to speak ; but we know they do receive such Deputations and send Deputations in return, at the American Conferences, as the re- ports of such Deputations have been published in their papers. What wo say la, that the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada, of the presmt, is re<»gnued by the General Conference as the Methodist Church of the past : and the extract from their AMress to us, which we gave two weeks aco as well as tiie r^lar decision of the General Conference, when the ones- Hon was formally submitted to them, are sufficient to show that we are oorreot. Any one can see, however kindly our seceding brethren may have been received at the last Conference, that only one could have been recognued as the regular successor of the early Methodist Church. It is simply absurd to^say that both are the true legal inheritors of the richis and the prestiges of t_e Methodist Church first planted in Canada. Our Brother Webster thinks the correspondent of the " Guardian" betrayed deep mortification " that his seceding brethren were received in a friendly way. It would be strange, certainly, if the General Conference I-KslL'I^fiu X? *°™®^ deliberate decision on the subject, renounce its r^s-^^.- t-o tite otaer i%alw Metaodrst bodiea throughout the world, and become the patron of seceeeion and division ; but we have no disposition to ill v.: 13 ll In ill T'"- "IMRDI.i.v co»ll£CTU). qaestion the liebt or urminViv «p ;, ' — tie different ^^no.nu!tZ:%' ll^^^^^^ feelings between contrary we think all Mothodistf o'At t^bf .' ^!:;''^' ^^*"*^^ ^n the to 1. '?,^' '^''^'^""^^ acknowle.].^ the ri.,Et ^J^ ^^'•""g'lout the worW ; to act on their conscientious convictions l„" ?^ *^.'*^ '^^^^ 'i«ve seceded :- - ..,0 ,,,.„. ,„,^ „ :a"S -^-- - .^j VVe may be permitted to say, however th., : talk to argue that a body is the old oSi^'* '* fPP«^^« *« be all child's CannT"' of the old Ixn^.^TuTt'^^^''-^'''^^^ Canada, just as there are '' Weslevnn MpfJ? -J- ^^Jf^^P'""' Methodists '^ in won ,n the title of a Church doSot It H? I" '^' ^*^*««' but a The simple facts arc, that the Genei'arro J?""' "^ ^"^ «°^*- the secession in Canada, decide the Wnl ^lonference did, at the time of possessor of the rights of the fort r^SC-^r'^ ^^ C^«-Vesleywi friflat, to be kwmn by the name of tlie ^|«tJwd|B|t Episcopal Chur r,on^r«n«»»> ; aoW the f^ocietk* having pri'vjouf.ly p^titiwed f^f U,f>( i* M ¥ rnn oWAa^ux coafttcfm,. course cbrdmlJy agreed the^Z~~vu^. ~~- -ot stop here. It adop e^ the tl '* '''^"'^'•^^' ^^-ever did - guaranteeing tb the minL^ and i r?- *'«"''*'*«*ional prin^;?^ «ontin.e Episcopal in its ole'L^ " "''P' '^^^ '""^ Church Z^^ powers vested in the members Tt^Il y''^'" ^'*h regard toThe ^^«W in the Di«cip,ineof 1^29 trall^r'^"""''*^^^^^^ crdrseroy the plan of ^rl^iJJ^^';'^.^ '<> '^--oyEpi^^ ^ With these guarante.3 the Societies! .T""*^'^*'**'^''^^ ^^ ^enroll the.sel.cs with i^.7^:7lTt:.f'^'^^^^^ Deacons were of Divine appoinSi aLf ?w ^'"'"^ *^^* ^Ide™ and oyerse^rs in the Church of ChrrVot^n^^^ Bishops w.r. Scriptu^l t' f««'-3t Episcopal Church •caL^'L«:'^^ ^ ^^- -n^til" ^esleyan friends, seceding from th^ .r^M""*'^ ''*«'^' ^Me o«^ Ciaurch without Deacons or Bishops "i"^^^^^^^ '"^ ^^'-^'^ * «eW 'n British North Amerik Th.^blZ^.^^'^^^^^y^" Methodist Church ecclesiastical body. It ,,, be re.aXd iu' if ^"'^"^^ "P""^ ^ ^--S since be^n again changed. If the,rK !k ^ '''''^' *^^' t^e „an,e hni governing the aff.i,/of i^ ^Z^'Z'l T ^^^^^'^ -aprWe of J'duals, to secede from the M. E Church'in n "T"'''' ''^^'' «« ^dU a newn,„,e and system of rule.^ ^^t a S:'^/' ""^^ ^'^^^^ «»de. Conference, and give up their indeZdeL I '"' ^''''^ the British Conference to the British Conferenrfo/rr?"'''^ ^^"^ -' ''^ '^.V »»d for them to claim that thev are sUll tl JT^' '^'^ ^'^- *te Church '-Oaiiada, as established iua828 isltlt '*^*^*^'^'^' ^P'««PPal ChuS . Our brother of the-O^^dian-or'"''^*"^^^^^ that both are the true W.I - ^ • °^'^««» '^I* h'^itajAy absW*. who have adhered to *>.^ „ .. '"^^a- Abde^aavwo vu «nd .to connected them,elve. wi* XjZ V'^ *" *'" "^Ut^ "anne, .h« ,„ey =.„n„. > ^4* p^'Tf ■«*'»*'J POW« h, »„.k^ on. .l„.dy received, wi.hn„. JLi.^,'!':"" '»'° Confe^nce, or *„j b««e„ ,k. En,„.h „„, ^i„„ c *r:'r.:r,,-r°r» "'•^ —- r:-:i tnis point. I f^ THK aUARDlAN COHRKCTXi). IM ■erence, however, did 'tational principles, the Chni-ch should With regard to the »ce, it is posintHly ^<^^i **ot i^nge or tendencji^r/ amdw d hundr^^ds iricke^ ? that Eld6ra and M were Scriptural f thus comstituted, adhered, while mr ve formed ii nev *^ o/" ntinistertf Wethodist Church cy upon a foreign at the name ha« 'vee incapable of ' "ght, as iiidit • organize undei; rom the British ^ery act of their ion or rejection, left, the Church iiscppal Church r absurd tei Ray Prestiges of th* '• Those only he Church, as ?hts and pres- not those who »eit niSiistrj^ •W0r in suchi ewe, or di-op y for, it«iap. lion eacisting "•^^ putnt. . .: One of the stipulations is as follows :--" AU and every the acts, admis, ■ions, expulsions and appointments whatsoever of the Canada Conference, the same being put into writing, and signed by the President, or by the minister appointed .as his associate or co-Delegate, shall be annually laid before the ensuing British Conference, and when confirmed by their vote shall be deemed, taken, and be to all intents and purposes valid, and obligatory from the respective times when the same shall have been ordered ot done by the said Canada Conference." Ddes this resemble the inde- pendent position of the M. E. Church of 1828 ? Is it not rhther a state of ecclesiastical vassalage without a parallel among Protestant chxxch^ throughout Christendom ? In another paper I may glance at other public documents which will tend to show the abject dependence of our seceding Wesleyan brethren apona^oreignpower.^^^^,^. j^^^^^^^^^^^ ' ^^ Hamnton, November 14th, 186^ -tw^ii^^?^AS^Bs;^]^.,^ ii'''i'!!l"* t-ii,. Kir ' i «l4i%i To THB Editoh op the " Christian Guardian." THE EX-EDITOR OF THE "CANADA CHRISTIAN ADVO- .„.) GATE" CORRECTED. >> ,. _Mb. Editor,— I observe in the " Canada Christian Advocate"^ of tne 0th ingt, a. communication from a certain correspondent of said paper ] professing to be a reply to the short notice ^hat your humble servant s^it to tne Lruardian a week or two ago, and.jour remarks in reference to ..the same. As this writer in the " Canada Advocate " professes to be able md. ready \o defend the position assumed by the Church to which he toelongs, 1 thxuk it would have been much better for him to have con- descended to answer my query, than to have called in question my motives ..9r imputed them. As you very properly remarked, Mr. Editor, the ,.»umberof Delegates does not eflfect the question to which I referred in mv former ^letter. And as far as this would-be-able correspondent of the .Canada Advocate is concerned, permit me to say, that in all his wordy letters, he does not answer the question ; he only makes a mess of it, and ,,jt is confusion woree confounded. What I asked was the original relation, •^r^^ii^olS'''^^'^^'^^^'^^ years ago, refused to permit Delegates .from the Canada M.E. Church to sit in the Conference. The correfpon^ dent of the "Canada Advocate" says they were recognized by the y^neral Conference. Query— in what sense were they recognized? Not 6urely,as the original M. E. Church of Canada. This is the point at issue .Vome now, good brother, yes or no. Keep to the point. What, I would 8Bk, was the nature of the address sent by the M. E. Conference of Cana- oa to the General Conference in Buffalo in Iftfin ? Did «"♦ *^s* ad4 *** w Pe,<|^tf^owie(%ed as a seceding body ? And wae it not wejved "S u TMi airAHDUM ftOHHBcnn. liN Hi i thii light? Let those ang^kfer »h#i fc««* un ~ ^ ' •ddresfl ? "■"**' '^''*' '^»»*- What gays the author of thi, Meaford, November, 1661 '^"»"' «"''«'-eiy, jj jj BBO^THER WEBSTER-^? CHUHGH li)ENTITy. "CHBISTiAN Gi;AEDiAM,"KdV.2eth 1865 "Can;': ?d;oJat^'",}rt^lt ^Sr.-^"^ ^-«^ ^^^^^ »« the nensof the poof '' he gav6 tff thevht J^r «t"'*^..*'*« ^«««J"«'ve- f^^x:,:^^^^^^^ that th, e^.,. from fact; we i^jaiced in the soirif^of T-if" I 5"»" ""«^^'='- departure we expressed a wish that it wereTnLri™^"' '^^'"^ *^"« n-anlfested! that It might lead to the oneneS 77ueMJt"^'^''i'' ^'^P' «'^ 8ter-we regret to see in a not verv alfnKi • *x ^^'^- ^"^^^^^ Web- of try ng to prove that the wLwJn Tefw^^^^n^'^^^ *<> '^« '-Sk by uniting with the BritiX cSe JL ^1.^ .^h"^ lost its identity, reasoning that seeh.s to satisfy our S nLflU *^/ P*"*"*' ^tjle of deal for we do not wish to oflLd V.K "^?®^ *« ^^d »* impossible to wholly lost sight of the ^eS raTseJ^ U^ '' "'"'^"l" ^«t h7hL who wished to know the precS natul^f nfV^. ".^'"^P^^^^^* "E. »- or'tJ^''^''''^ '^'^^^^etenlSwJjL":^''''' of the General &. Church of Canada as the originalBodv ZT^k/!^^"*** theWesleyan have re«,g„i^d two C«aadiaf Si^lJ 'twl!?'* ^'^'^ "^""^ "«* l^'Wy 0.ne™l?onS^ aS'5lteSf!J^^^^ -Win. tO the enough ih fonner years Si«?J ' '^''"^ **»** ^"^ ^^^ Iw^rd ofSn those pnmipl^-^l^X , ^**^r ?«n*»iM that w« "seoeS f^! ^^gbt£SThatT"dirS;™'^ three orde« of mimCfbat^£ We wonder if the V^J^^^eS£'T^^^ ^' "^'^ '^» of hb U ^ It* Identity when it was constitnfiS • if V^^*"* ^^'""'^ *» Australia eimadito Coufereaee l«e S S J i: *.'*"*''* connexion ? Bid thp a Union ? Snt we forbear l^Tl-l f ^^'^ ^^' "gl**^ ^^ they Scted dealing on the part o^S: C J^JLT'* **?* ^^« waJ^S her conservative principles a??rfh^ ^1-"''*''^°** there is no tehanije in ^^her Web^ ?vidSrSls rtL^v^•^^^ ""il'^'' Methodist Si iu^lon of fM rti«K-ii « "^ '^'^ that this is so, fbi- he ham^ ^^*^JrSr^' -~ •>."... v.«ni«mioe-wHich was the dt^^timkmr'' ''" '"" TNI UUARDIAN CORRKC-rKD. $s thfl author of tliia E. H. ►ENTITY, 862. long letter te the nts the conclusive- It ih^ee JklegAim nply took histtard that the Canada another departure ? thus njanifested, Bssed a hoj)6 also s. Brother Web- Beeds to the t«sk 1 lost its identity, peculiar style of I it impossible to nae. But he hm 3ndent " E. H, " ihe General Con- BftdtheWesleyan ottW not t)(>ssibly quently they did relating to the avi) heard often "«eceded from nifiters; but he idea of his owh. iriddhtitywhen rch in Attstrtlia aon? Did the /onferenee e6in- •t, how fcouW it WTien a Church slation to some i th6 Free and » thfey e^t6d wafi n6 double s no change in thodist Ixjdifes. Urn. To TH*. iiDlTOft OP THii " C. C, ADVOCATE." THE " CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN ' CORRECTED —No. ut, DkaR Sir, — The Editor of the " Christian Guardian," in his issuo of the 26th inst., denies having admitted that we had proved the appoint- ment, by th6 General Conference in the United States, of the three Delegates who attended our last General Conference. He says he simply took our word for it. We are greatly obliged to our good Brother for taking our word on s;o important a matter, yet we must contend that wo did prove, by an extract from the " Daily Christian Advocate " of the 5th of June, 1860, — published by authority of the General Con- ference — that the General Conference at BuflPalo, did appoint Revs. Gardiner Baker, F. A. Blades and Dr. Peter Cartwright, Delegates to the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada. Though the extract referred to did not prove the fact with sufficient elearaesg to the mind of the Editor of the "Guardian," to all unprejudiced minds, we have no doubt, it w.'is fully eoBclusirc. The Editor of the "Guardian" observes; — ^'Brother Webster — we t^ret to see in no very amiable spirit — proceed** to the task of trying to prove that the Wesleyan Methodist Church lost its identity by uniting with the British Confcreace."' In r^rd to this extraet we wish to state Firstly, That it is not our wish to indulge in any unkind feeling towards our Wesleyan friends, or the Editor of the " Guardian," but on the contrary, to treat them with Christian courtesy ; nor are we conscious of having indulged in any other feeling in this controversy. Secondly, We think that we have proved tiuii the Wesleyan Methodista did secede from the M, E. Cburch in Canada in 1833. But the subject is by no means exhausted, and, if necessary, we can adduce further proof If the discussion is distasteful lio otttr Brothel*, he ought to recollect that it was himself who called the attention of the public to the subject at this time. So long as our Werieyan friends persist in their attempts to fix upon our Church, before the public, a eharaeter whieh belongs not to it, but to their own Church ; 80 long-life and health of mind and body being spared to us — will not we desist from the "task" of maintaining the identity of our Church with the Original M. E. Church in Canada. The "Guardian" complains that we "have wholly lost sight of the (Question raised by his correspondent "E. H.," who wished to know the T:^int: uarux^ ntalttte of that aetioo is very easy F" to be noderstood. ■ soept by those who 18 THE CICARbuw CORRKcT^o. (I! } t»V received „„ f|.|.j,.,„ „, ,he fl" , """• " "« " folW. : S'»le»,ovcn », thcj, received j,,„ R.l,,.!, 1 , , ^ '" "'" ""iled •r: "'■■ «'"'«^™ i'*»«'c. fvol c ::M:.?t' "■: "~ "^ - Confore„e„. Our Addro», WM received In,) H "" '">»' »1» I™b «ferre,/,„ fc. c„,„,„;„„,. ,„ „„ ° "°^, ""* '■'"'<' '" «P«n Conference, md Our Delegate, wore invito! t„ „ee,n , ""'""' '" "■"» 'Wr* Representatives of the Churches alread! rlf^ 1 °' "" ""^ "'»» "■? Delegates were ,,pp„i„,ed ,„ reprelt h > '"■. /f "' """"^ """ Dmted Slate, in „„r General ConS ee « ?™°?' '^""''™«'= '" «>» ference at Buff*, a, published °.'„C^"'"'«'<"' ''« Oo-ra. Con- Ad^cate .• OP ,,,„ 5th, ,,„„e 2nd a:d I S"' "' """"^ «"»«" The Editor of tl,o " Guardian " lo • \ ,x Methodist, of Au.rioa 10."-. id a'tri ^H ^T' ^^ *^« ^^esle^an Pa«y ?" *'*^ ""^'^ *% first adopted Epi^o- The Methodiats in America at that period worp «• , ' *'^-^ '-'^ the immediate direction of 3Ir. Weslev nl.^ T^^^ "^'"'^^ ««der -tered among them, and holding Sconner^^ -^^ "'"^"^^« '^^-- longer r., ™ned, as far as imeri;? "»*«'l,sm felt himself „ bound hi,„ to the BstaUished a™: in °t.T7"'i^^ *» «« »W* *» V" sone thousand, of the p»7e i^No ,tl ""i"* ■*=»*« diBorganiation of the Badi* ri„, , '" """'' •' ™eriea " for advice- -I,,, of tW ordinances-he fool ir ?' • « '* *'"■ '■"'"'j' -l^- ^ ".taselfto have compet^: .iC : ^ ■"'.» 7"1-'», id feeling he invaded no man's riKhts!!hZ7 }" °'^'""' *«"■ i-to a, ehnroh-i ^eMothodis. .:„ ^JZ ^rer^h^'MrVt^"' "■"'"*'" U-% that he „ .,V.-«1 1*, B„i^„„ 7„ :, .f; ;«'*7 states very e,. tHK aVASDl.V.N CUHRKCTCi '* It was M follows ; tho M. E. Church "•ch in tJio United iVeslcyan brethren '"rch in Canada, ' the eaiuc way as )tt from the Irish ' Conflrcnco, an^ '■ Addresses from d as were theirs, atform with the 8 wei;o also thp nd finally three nfercnce in tho lanner, three to 'rdian," and all B General Con- ^tiily Christian f the Weslejan iopted Episco- wieties under nanqes admin- e societies as Uck thejhad -dged bytha t liims^f no 5 ties which advice- ~:Jj,: %de. : •', and feeling churoh, — as Lim to form es very «- >^i tosqiy other, 80 also did tho preachers and societies, and tho church was aocord- ingly organized with that form of church government. Tims it will he «^>n that the Episcopacy of tho Church in the I ,atf?Je that distinguishes tho Methodist Rn'iL fT"^'"" "'^ '^"''^ ?»•»"*'- States fro. the W.,eyan M^tt^ X'L l' ^" ''• '"'"^ •JI on one side. The onJy equivalent J/"^'*"'^-^*^ conoosaions were . The question is not oxa'^ly t ^^^^ ^"'^^ * ^nion ?" ject of . legal rights ;' but iL we LE k "', "'' ""^"^"^ »^* ''"t" the question, we will proceed to T;^^ ^^ ^^^^ «^' -»»«"« to «v^o -plate?:;:: Sd'r i^^sir^^^ r-' ^^-^ *^-* *^« - that it would ^.0 endanger son e of S. , '^T^ '' '''^' ^^h but Parliament for an Act to o lie the "litfd ^if ''' ^^u"* *'^^ '^^^^ ^^ property, ,nd to otherwise le" ""' «•«« <>' «k» '..lomptcdioal.ili.kj '' '^^'^ f™ ""« which it ha, Jlamilton, November 28th, 1863. Thomas Webstbb. Ol'R SECEDED BRETHREN " CHRI«TiAN GUABDIAN," D«C. lOt^ 1862 Brother Webster savs « ^n u i • r-iind being spa,^d to «s, we will not dlS f-^' "T^ ^"^^^^ «*" »^y W4 the identity of our Chu;ch Jt" Tk.* S!!?.^,'." l^«,*?«k of mai^t^tUnl Tn. n.«n.„g i, ,hat .hiic life i;.ty i^o'Si,^ H.t::;^;/''*??'^;: TRI titlARUlAN CORKKCttV. it ler of ovory prinei- 3h in the United e conoossions wero *», for the Bacri- lited Presbyterian Union ?" t arguiog th« Aub- wishing to ev^o 'nre that the ooa, f each body, but it they applied tq >ld their church hey hav« )jeoomo Ja Presbyterian 'for 1861. See 10 act of Union ml organization, 'ty, nor effected s made by our f every distinc- re from princi- tho face of the lat from which t which it has J or connection lim to consult WKflSTKB. ol body And maintaining of (DHiuida.'' T-ll Ifth* last word will be any comfort to him, he is most heartily welcome to it; though we believe it is not generally considered a proof of a person being right. But what ho undertook to prove was tliiit the General Conference at Buffalo recognized his body as the original Methodist Church of Canada. We proved that they did not, by an extract from their ilddress to the Wesleyan Conference; to which brother W. does not make any reply. Neither docs he reply to the last query of E. H., whose first letter called brother W. out. He says " thoy (tlio General Conference) received our Delegates as the representatives of the M. E. Church in Canada;" but this does not prove that they recognized them as the original Church, but simply thAt they received them by the name they give themse ve.t. He says, " our representatives were presented and introduced "; so would any representatives from any other Church have been ; so are lay men often " presented and introduced." Ho says " our address was received and road in open Conference, and referred to the Committee on Correspond- once." Yes, and so, often, are addresses from Temperance and other Societies read and referred. He says "and it was answered "; yes, and so are addresses from private parties answered. He says " our Delegates were invited to occupy seats upon the platform "; so are lay men and other non-official parties sometimes invited to the platform. Ho says " finally, three Delegates were appointed "; why, so are Delegates often appointed to attend other bodies, without intending thereby to recognize them as original Methodist bodies. What has all this to do with proving that they were recognized as the original Methodist Church of Canada ? Tho General Conference did, by formal resolution, at an early date, recog- nize the Woslcyan Church as the original body ; they did so again in their Reply to our last Address. All the original 3Iethodist Conferences in tho world so recognize tho Wesleyan Church in Canada, and tlio highest legal authorities in Canada hftvc formally establislicd its claims to be the original body. The thing has been decided over and over by the regular civil and eccleaiastical Courts which had authority to decide ; what nonsense for our good brother W. to say that he will contradict them all " while life and health remain !" Brother W. seems to think that Episcopacy is such an essential thing, that the lack of it, is fatal to our identity as a Church ! If he was a Romanist or a High Churchman, wo could understand tho argument. In the mouth of a Methodist it is simply absurd, as it is well known that the standard Methodist writers in the States do not regard it as essential, but as a merely prudential arrangement. Besides, we have the substance of the American Episcopacy in our Church, just as the British Wesleyan Church at home has. Wo shall have brother W. preaching up tho Apostolical Succession next. This unimportant change was repfularly made, by the proper authorities, and is sanctioned by all other original Methodist Conferences throughout the world. Brother W. does not aeem to be able to distinguish between the identity of a iorfy, and the similarity of rules and regulations. Tho same body may ahep many of Jta rules, and of its agencies, and yet tho body, as a coiporation, continue the same. Th^refbi'o so may a Church. Hifs reply to our remarks respecting rtthef !/'i '•HB BVAKVU^ COKR^OT »!>. inatances, furnished bv tho i ■ . ~~~ ' - Thi3 m^ TiTt, ^'^ ^^^ Editor of thp "n n . THE " CHEISTIAN GUlRnrtv ^^ ^^^^'°«-^^^." t'-^ve been not a litH '"^' '^^'^ ^^^tor of tho "C , •■~^^' "^- other character than that i„ f '^t' ^'^^ '''^^'^'^^^d by th'b .?'*''' *^ ^^"gth, to inake remart , "'^ ^^'^^ ^^«^ sent ■ nr7 . "^"^ ^" '^^^ having been preae Z , 7 "' ^'^'S^'^' ^^'om oh ; f?''^'"^" ^* «'>">« J^-ing been reS !'" T'""'' '^'^^— t S:' "' ^^^ "'- ^elogatos would hat 2 ' '"''^' ^'■' &^- Whether T?"''®°«'««« ^«^-o our De]e.atorf. " "" "''''"'^ *« ^^ clas el^-.f J'^' ^^^^^^^^'^ ^-« -'-ttod to ^ 1/' ^'^ -' «-.-e of n„; : j/J^.,^^'^- of the not, whatever ..X"^"; «" «- occasion rel^l ]T-^ '"'^'"^" •'»«t that, and noth '*'' "^ "lo reception o^ ' ^"* '* "matters delegate;. '"^'""^ '"^^ -,. the recep'lr ',;:: f T ^'^Vte, T'- -tract, given iu,, , "'"'^ ^« t^e We«Jeyan P-d the -cognition of rnt^^^f-'/'^^ " ^-> Advocate -' f n Conference of the M v nu ' ^^urch in Can-.,), i, ? ' ^"^3^ ^«"t> by that bo,! ot ?,'r'' " *^^^ United Su^l f ^ ^^"^^^ Conference, is a Z;,/ ^'"''^-^'^tcs to ropreson 1 ' "^ ^« 'PPoint- *«« the first Jot(,n-„f P i/ ""'''•'?^t n^istako when J, "'■E- ^'- ^vhich called u. 17, ^° '''''^ that it = !' na,^ the erroneous THK GUARDIAN CORAECTBl*. 2tt we gave up some '^ ?o ^"1- as we can isideration." tu;, ^-1^' to the Engjfi' tto writer to have ,:^^f ,^Jo».- to hi ;jf 'hood to makJ •''^'« V the Unioa «'o»s in Hudson's '• ^r« PAY about nissiona 1 A(H to , -— • • ^i.(U to «f« not equal one •^ne meanneas of; re." ^I>— No. IV. ^'an," seems to • H^e labors to "' I^elegates, to ' ^odj in soQjg ^ding, at some s. and hy men erance Socities the Wesleyaft teetotallers as -Kditor of the 'cgatos having 3»t it matters '»' Delegates, fie Wesleyau ocate," fully the General ^'^ «Ppoint- "r General Tts that it * •wonoous statements of the Editor of the " Guardian," wlien replying to E. H's. queries, which we undertook to correct. For the information of the " Guardian," and his very astute correspondent, wc have to say, that our General Conference never asked to be recoo-nizcd by the parent body as a seceding body; neither did the United States General Conference, nor their Representatives to our General Conference, give the slightest intima- tion that they so understood our position. [See the Speeches made by the American Representatives in our General Conference.] So frivolously absurd a question really deserved no answer. ^ We deny that the Canada Conference had the legal or Methodistical right to abolish the mode of Church Government established in 1828. They had no more right to do so, than the seceding States had a right to violate the Constitution of the United States. Their action in 1833 waa as much a revolutionary measure, as were the seceding ordinances of said States. When those, subsequently known as Wesleyans, seceded from tho M. E. Church in 1833, all who did not consent to that ecclesiastical revolutionary action of the Canada Conference, remained members of the M. E. Church in Canada, sustaining their relations in, and collectively constituting the original body. This constitutional minority being no more bound in right, or justice, by the Acts of tlie Revolutionary Confer- ence, than are the loyal American citizens, resident in the seceding States, in right, or justice, bound by the action of the Revolutionary Legislatures of the said States. The Church was organized by the consent of both Preachers and Societies, they liaving unitedly petitioned the American General Conference to set the Methodists in this country off as a separate and independent Church. Can the " Guardian " find an example in Church history for the arbitrary steps taken by the Canada Conference in 1833? Are the Wesleyans in Canada adhering to the preferences of Mr. Wesley, in regard to the system of Church Government designed by him for the Methodists in America ? That the AVesleyans have been declared to be the original body by the highest legal autliority, as asserted by the "Guardian," we deny. A majority of the judges decided, in 1837, that the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada, as the originfil body, was the lawful owner of the Church property. T'losc who had intrigued to bring about the union, could not leave their friends in such a dilemma. New judges were ap- pointed. aGrreeino- in nnininn with r"l.;nP-T.i=*:^.x t>„i,: . _.. i .i . .■> - , • •• c --- -f 5..1.1- .-.(..v j-i-juiiisvu , aiiu iiica, iQcre being a majority on the other side, the previous decision was reversed. •4 TW otr^amA.-, coukkcti,!,. M Tljifi leaves the auestinn ;« „ • • ' of tte " Guardian," i, neither h^t i « T " '""''«' "«^ -'"■"ri'r tbe recent „« „f a, ,|„^ ^^j^-^'^'. »" to„,, „„ ,„a„i^^„^ ^^^n J_ Poes not the Editor of th^ u n a»ao,ities i„ Canada differ^ a, wW*" " '"T "" «■« ^'^^'^ k^^ The " Guardian " says "Br W j beetween the identity, of L body andThr^-T-*" ^''^^' '' ^^^-^t^nguisl, t^ons." ^< The same body may altcrt T^"'"'^ '^ '^^'^ ^"d re^^ «>d yet the body, as a coZatn 5 ''''' ^"^^^' ^^^ of its a^e^d^ can distinguish very easii;Te ."^ ^ "^ *'' ""^•" ^^^ ^hl k we' wmilarity of rules and re-^alanr i "^'°*'*^ °f a body and ill - a bod, can so entireT;^:^^:' ^ -f ss, ''^^ ^ -tt : prerogatives of preachers and peol '!, T " ''''°'^^' ^"^•^^t^ the a bod, 4,000 miles distant, leav2 Itht T' ' ^'^^^^^ ^ndage of Z '"!,"'^" '^' '^^ ^tin^ran'^r; "f^V-^ '""" self,7avel,; independent body e..sting before anvo^tf t''" ^'^ ^' '^' «"ginal d'd not simply a^ter certain ulesbtr °^"'' ^^^^ ^^^«- ThTy r— nt and rules, and adoptldVel^^^^^ «*^^^^ -«4 Imagine a case. Suppose that t^P ''^'^'^^'^^^^ P«%- «bould so ".,,^.. its'^hole e« ^^^^ '' ''^ ^^^^ of Tor , to gove f rp^^^^^^^^^^ as to abolish the city renting to receive a Mayor yearly wl! ^°"'^^'' ^'^ ^^gland-^on subordinate City Council of Wo ^ '^^ '' ^'''^^- ovrthe tbe Toronto Corporation sho Jd b ^Te ^f f. ''^' ^^^'^ ^«* P^-^ t tbe X-ondon Corporation. WouW such u' '''' '''^''''' '^ rejection of CJorporation of the City of Tor? f T\ *'*""^*^o°s, on the part of th b^ bound to submit t fu J JeX ' '''^' " ^^«"^^' ^ -o^^d b Ll' -ovations be considered s t^ "ir "T * ^^^"^^ ^^ ^ pur good Brother seems seriou Iv off. . /u "^ '"^^^ ^'^^ ^«ncies ?'■ l«^t, that so far as we could see the on. ^'°'"'° ^^ remarked bour was a monetary one. Does X ^0^^ ^"^ ''' ^^^ -"«- ^dT ^rge amounts received annually from tJ^''" ^«"«^^^^ as nothing the Wesleyan Missionary Societv in ...""''"'' ^^ *^« Province bv 1 -ceived from En,lLJ2'LtT '' *'^ ^^'^ ^^-dred 'j^^d -^ved by his body from the saWtL tr *'^ ^'^^^^^'^^^ «^ ^«nt AreourPaHiamen.ry..J::^:t:,t:^ _ ^ r-vauj auairsthatit TM (lUAROlA.I , ib higher court when fc legal authority" iciently proved in he highest legai 8 upon the ques. e writer of thia 'e to distinguish Jes and regula- of its agencies, "VVe think we body, and the we cannot see y, alienate the s appendage of self, save only the original made. They ^/I'sh rights, tical policy. y of Toronto lish the city ngland— con- ide over the 5t passed by rejection of part of th? d the people such radical jencies ?" rted in our 'fices made, "thing the nee, by the 3d pounds of pounds irs that it requires a large amount of " hardihood " to make their contents public ? Has our brother been taking a Rip Van Winkle nap, that he is not aware that the circumstances to which we merely alluded has been a matter of public notoriety throughout the length and breadth of the Province for more than a quarter of a century ? Neither can we claim the prestige of having ^rst made it '• public." Will the Editor of the " Guardian " please tell us what consideration caused the dissolution of the union in 1840; and, of what material the chain was composed, by which the Government succeeded in again drawing these two bodies together ? Would these two bodies i.avo ever again been ro-united, if it had not been for the monetary consideration ? If the " Guardian " is desirous of information touching any of the above points, we have a number of pamphlets relating thereto, with extracts from which we can favor him. Though the article under consideration is from beginning to ending a tissue of . Well, mistakes and misapprehensions ; we will not call them misrepresentations and '•' slanderous falsehoods." We perceive that it is easier for our Toronto friend to designate our arguments " nonsense," and call our facts hard names, than to refute the one, or disprove the Qther. The Editor of the "Guardian" asks, "When will tho meannesn of sectarian jealousy learn to blush ?" We cannot tell, but may, with some probability, expect that millennium of modesty, when the " Guardian " ■ has learned to see himself as others see him. Thomas Webster, Hamilton, December 12th, 1862. BROTHER WEBSTER ONCE MORE. " Christian Guardian," January 7, 1863. Brother Webster, the ex-Editor of the " Canada Christian Advocate," told us that he would contend — right or wrong — " while life and health remained," that his seceding body were the original Methodist Church of Canada ; but the case is getting worse for his handling. He ought to know that the question between us was, " Whether the .4»i«m-a» Geiz/rcU Conference recognized it as the legitimate successors of the original Methodist Church. We have shown that the General Conference did fcfrnudly decide the question '.n favour of the Wesleyan Church, whin it was explicitely submitted to that body ; that it has never reversed that decision ; that the late Buffalo Conference did not say one word, directly or indirectly, recognizing our seceding brethren a^ the original body ; and f.naf. if rim^ a-vm*AciclTr in if a A fifif.Aaa in T}AT\lir vcuxr^t^tvxXmn fl».« W acI aw a m ! ... ~ ....^ .J., ... .„ ! ,, ... .~..y.j^ ..„.„,,,„., ,.,„. -T TT^SVJSH Conference. One would think all this was (»iough, and Brother W, aocB f M TH» OtfARDIAIf CORRECTED. not try to meet it at all W-. i ' '^rU^-jf • «•: ;, "" ''''' '- ''- ^'"*' -'^ -^esthe recognized or not, the C l^rp, i"' 'V'"" ^^ '-"^-^^ia^' that wl.tl, «ot expect to con -i„co Jn" m f. ,.T 'f ''i'''^'^ "''^ ^Jic orioinaH 'ch w^^?^ and healtJi rem-.in !, ^ '"'"• " J'*3 h;.s taken a xnw tnr \ \^- ^^ <^ '^'^ had no ri4t to e^.:,, '•^''^'^'^'"Mvhoeontond t t t ?/r "'^ ^'/^^"'"^ J'f« it is mere]Y,,hoihor\] ^ ^» re "G 'PHI QUARDIAf CORUKCTKB. 17 nt, and mdes the mg that, whether ''^ '^«cb-- ^Ve do :"*»''"1 " while life •"lada Conference 'J i resident with !i-nmenf' at all- 10.S011 for life, or •csident were the It one word for ^er, according to :?es thought the «'as essential to " ^'^^Jiop " was iiajority of the > !'d()pt such an * HioJ, Church Iiat this Ilioh •>.a]l3Iothodist '•'S''t to make "»•'•' This is ^'«t J^piscopal lel, a >superan- ; afterwards I tj Council to ^S^j if it was nada M-ere to ^y the first iconie a help- ? nothing of e fiction, the means that manage our itisnothiuff its r :ceived Missionary England ? y from the isideration ^terial the ^'ing these gain been ii me ve pomts. we have a number of pamphlets relating thereto, with extracts from which we can favour him. ' The above is false from beginning to end ; there is not one particle of truth in what is cither assorted or insinuated in the above two paragraphs. The Canadian Wcsloyaii Coiifcroiifo has never received a penny from Government ! Before the first Union, the English Missionary Com- miitie received a small annual grant in aid of its missionary work in this Province. After the Union, the English Committee still received it; the Canada Conference never accepted a Government grant, and it had no power to control the Committee in London. The Superintendent of Mis- sions in Canada was the agent of that Committee, and no Canadian Missionary ever received one penny of addition to his salary on account of that grant. When the Clergy Reserves ((uostion was settled, and the existing claims upon it were commuted, it was the London Committee that commuted; and the whole matter is in their hands to this day. When the last Union was effected in 1847, the London Committee agreed to pay a certain amount annually to the (Janada Missionaiy Fund, in consideration of our undertaking to support the Missions they handed over to us — an additional expense twice as great as the amount they were to pay. They were to pay that amount whether they continued to receive the annual amount from Government or not, so that the Canadian preachers had no interest whatever in said grant ; tiioy never received one penny of benefit from it, directly or indirectly, and they had no control whsitever in tha matter. As to the late Union having been brought about by any money consideration, the Canada Connexion became responsible for the support of all the English Conference Missions, while the English Mission Fujd was to contribute one thousand pounds annually to aid in supporting those Missions, which sum was very far indeed from meeting the additional expense to the Canadian Fund. And then— will Brother W. attend ? — the Canadian Blissionary Committee voluntarily, without any hint or suggestion from England, relinquished its claim tor the thousand pounds, and nobly undertook to support all our missions— and adding those of Hudson's Bay Territory — from our own resources. That is, from a sense of duty and from a spirit of self-reliance, we gave up our claim to a thousand pounds annually. This was the kind of " money consideration " that actuated the Wosleyan Church in Canada ! Yes, tb.ere was a money consideration ; but it was the consideration of Avhat we were glad to undertake to^. y, and not any thing we were to nceice, that engaged our attention. We shall rejoice in all the good our seceding brethren legitimately do by preaching the gospel ; but we are bold to advise them, if only for their own respectability, to try to get on without their perpetual and petty slanders uj^n their Wesleyan brethren. We try to mind our own business ; we seldom hear our Episcopal friends referred to among ourselves, except in a friendly way ; we shall rejoice to hear that they are the means of salvation to thousands of sinners: wo wish tfl act in a neijrh- bourly spirit towarda them, and h/)pe that, nt least before the Millenium, we will air be one again, for wliich wo would like to help prepare the way. H THl ii •I'AROlA.t CoailKcTM. Jiave not vet irni "^°*^™«nations. Wo If , '** *^o best war of- di«i„„. ^" «^' «- .1.0 pa«i„„3 aiwl;/*i;"t^r *- ""^ « "ui ot attempts at The EpLsconaJs of r . ^^^^^^^^'TION. what theyknowT °^<^«nada are evidentJv «. u- ^**tates. CouJd the thinl^ f \ -^^ *he EpiscoDal rhT T® "^''^^owledged «^»ting circumZcr^/^'-^h'ehtheyeSLtrof/^ i''" ^"ited Scotch Jadj once safd to he7M-"?'^ '^'^ ^^ "an onT^. ' ^^'''°^' ""^er h«!- the Catechism and w) ]''"^«t<3r, who appear tnh ^V'*' « certain ywd jou, sir, I'll teJl yon i}h!i-j""«*' then God\ad* ?.? ?^*^" ^J^* Missionarr mono'v ff- V'^^.^^ve so many VemK^ ^^ *^^ «ther night pal MethSiSn 'the n r' ^?P* '» «'e sack S f '^.""^ ^^^^^ ^ Sh and mo]c-hi,J tog\£ ^^^f.^'J^^ of the line' tLs if^r"^ *^« ^P^"^ tnemorabJe 10th of plf *^^ '"'^ ^^ her Maie.fv^ f^/ description of a f the„,emherro?'/;,%^^^^^ ^'ow^^i U^ S\^""'^ ^ the by the General Conferennl J ff"*'^ that there s n , Z! •"?''" to maay of Canada; exceSS^^^^J^nited Sta4 o? thTS?'*'"" ^^*^«^«r ^o/e than once, y^f hat 7.f^'!!"° ^ that of ?riendJv 1^^^"^ ^^»^«h body continue in this tirJ^ f ^'i'^^- ^nd should Th^ ^^'?^' to which, to stand on the^deftnstf and t'' ^^ ^^-£, ' Cyt."* ^' *^*' other side of the xvitJlu x , P™^<* from faef<, n^ • ^ "^ neces.«arT from the true and pn-lv *^T ^^'^ ^^t Tnovvn bv .H '"^ '"."« f™'" ^h^ furnishacopyofalefterT"' ^^^^^^^^'^t Church '\?- «»^3^ «« ^^c.^^, time since gone to I, !' ^T the pen of one of ti • * P^'^^^nt we mav pfMethodis^^hewSIJ'" '^'r ^"format c^rrfsZr''"?'''''^'^ ^t summer, at W^^^ -^ Episco^s. who aSSl' V"«, ^-d« follows: TheWesleyansw^^:„, ^'""^ ^nd substance J }^r^°"^*'''«««o Some time after onp of -.^ introduced to the Cnnfif ' "^ ,heJieve, was as the Wesleyan breZenwlT ^'*^^" stated to thefoT"' ^^ *^« ^'^W which wi adSd it''* *^ "'^^ ^ ''ommuniLS „n rr that ««« o^f ckamess and abii y to 1/?"'"''.^^' ^t some en^ *! '5^ C?°fer«nce, that the Wesleyan Body in f^^""^ documentary tSfi."'*/^*'* "'»<* •--' -Wai^e regarded, ^.;^^; TUK Ut'AKUlAM CURRBOTBb. at the weapons of a nt them in askin* 'nd m the seconi » the best way of f some few who ■^ 01 attempts at ■T>IAS." ^t fuss to prove le acknowJedeed «f the United ', (which, under y,as a certain 3 been teachi&K God made the the Irish, but lie day ever he ^that it TvouJd ae other night aise so much d the Episco- S a mountain 'cription of a iards on the wn to many ion whatever opal Church ^g, to which, 'era of that e neceawiy 8 from the as seceders It We may hops, some 'action : two kinds ^onfereoco ^e, was as e Bishop, lat one of 'nference, th much '■gument, t]af\Aiai,m. ^cedcrf. Some of our brethren thought ho was a little too severe and personal in some of his remarks, and otliers thought ho was not. After he had taken liis seat, a member of the Conference made a motion tliat the Episcopal brethren from Canada be permitted to make a rejoinder before the Con- ference, but it was objected to on the part of the Conference, and after a short debate was voted down ; but iu the course of the debate a brother remarked, that the Episcopals had better first be introduced to the Con- ference. But, after the question was decided as above stated, the Bishop took occasion to remark (as I understand it,) that the Episcopals iu Canada were not recognized by the Wesleyan Connection in England as belonging to their body, and that our general Conference did not recognize them as identified with the M. E. Church in this country, therefore, it was not in accordance with the custom of our Annual Conference, to give them a formal introduciion, seeing they were not known as belonging to the Great Methodist Body in Europe or America; that they were on the same footing with other christian denominations, and as it was not customary to give Ministers of other denominations a formal introductiqn to the Conference, it would be a violation of usage to give them an intro- duction and the right to address the Conference. The Bisliop also stated that he Wiis personally acquainted with many of their brethren and preachers in Canada, and regarded them as good Christians, and could and did fellowship with them as a Christian sect, as he did other deiionii- nations, but did not consider them idemified with us — the Great Methodist Body." J. Allky. The above Is so mUch to the pohit that we thought a better thing could not be done than to copy, feeling thoroughly convinced in our own mind, that, unless Brother W . be worse than blind, he must see the connection and union subsisting in the Methodist Church throughout the world, and that the only way to obtain such recognition a« that which he talks ayd -writes about, is just to lay down their arms, and return back again to tbo Methodist Church they left, and against which they have ever been set in 'battle array, and are its very woi-st enemies to this day. Mr. Wesley formed the Methodist Church in Eurojye and America, his sutjcessors have extended their labors, Und Affiliated Conferences have ris&w—FucioHs have from time to time arisen and other Bodies have been formed i'^ opposition to the parent Body ; numbers have left the old l-induiarks, ana the sailors r>maining in the old ship were obliged to deal with them as a certain crew did with Jonah, All that we wish to say about them, (artd all that we would say), if they would only let us aioae, is, P'otfc bf to their m,emory. Consistency is a jewel, — if you are Methodists, we say, come back again, the Church you left is just the same in her Doctrines flod Discipline as when you left it, and maintains this uniformity througliout the world, and should her Creed and Constitution change — why then she will be no longer Wesleyan Methodist. As, however, you evidently like something else better, be content to hQEpis-'P'ls, and doa't want a uuon with a people from whom you srcetle. This is hiding with the hare and runningwith the hnunds. The Episcopal rMcrhodiht Umjinrk i 4 t; '■> •Vaadian t'onnicTi*. fiEJIPER p^K^^TRUS. To THE Editor OF Tnr-.p ^ . THE '' CHRISTIAN CTJ t pn ^^^^'o^ATfi." I>..aS.,-AfW; '^''" ^^««^^OTED._Ko v people, he attcnptsto " • !! '' P'-'^^^'^'^in^' .Jt ft.f , ''*-"'^* "^ *^« '"'^^'ses into the bd of ,, ?/'''^ ^''""-oh, and bvX / ^^'^'^^ ^'«'' «"•' in fJi.-c, '^ »^"ol that the 31 p ru , "^ ""^ '"♦''•'•ns misIPTl *i • ...The organ of the WosW.nb , * ''' proceeding, J„f"fT°''' " <>»"° i" Lpi ',"'""*■ ••""' »« •i>.o«di..»:°':'?" '".•■• P=™o;irs to have i)eon teachin'' her the C^itechisni, and who dcmauded of her to .say tjiut God made the Zr<:,7<— she answered, ,' Well, if 1 must, then 'dod' made the Insk, but mind you, sir, III tell ypu, if he did make th.m )io'll'.rue the' day he did it.' " Does our good Brother consider the cases analogous ?. If he does, he has certainly proved, to tho .satisfaction of Iiis readers, that if God made the IrLh, tho American G eneral^ Con f(!rcnco recogn izcd the 3L ihoilist Episcopal L hwch in panad lykniiiic threatens them accordingly. Quail then, ye Method- ists of the United States, and '^como. bending on your knees to th« Wesley ans, or they will make you ' rue the day you ever recognized said M. E. Cluuvli.' The late iuiolent attack mndo by a correspondent of tho "Guardian " upon Dr. Teft, and upon Dr. Thomson, the Editor of the Christian Ad- vocate and Journal, is, it is presumed, dcsignei as the first instalment of the punishment to be inflicted upon the American 3Iethodists by their atuiable, Wodoyau BRETUEEN ! It is not at all i^robablo, ln.wever, that the American preachers or poopla w ill be deterred from following any course of proceedings upon which they have determined, by sneering remarks or threats, however deeply put forth by an anonymous writer in the "Guardian," although he evidently haa the approval of the d'^ditor. We direct the special attention of the reader to the paragraph above quoted, as a siwcimcn of the arguments made use of by the Wesleyans, to prove that the M. E. Church in Canada has not been received upon the same footing as. themselves by the parent body in the United States. The next item in the article from which w« have already quoted is an. eitrak purporting to be from a letter written by the late lamented BLshop Alley.' ; This letter may have been written by Brother Alley, or it uiay be a forgery. It docs not appear to be directed to any one, and is witt«)»i day or 'date. If it'was ever Avritten by Brother A., it must have been _-i-.-., _.„,,, .a,., oiioti nit.ae, matij jcafs sm-cc ai me uxacK r«.iT3r Kiosast- ence, to damage the 'M. E. Chureh in tho estimation of ou lAmtrican 32t Til .U'ARPUJ, Vf^tiHUi'V^. Chn.HM, Advooalo.- And »l>. j ° '"' »"'»««' w the " \r,rtt. -•'^^ *« M. E. C„..eh.'"' "^™"*' "f»" "»i"g .0 C.„ada, h! ^-^ It the present crusade Of tho EM.W p .^ »n .nuod efforts „„,de b, „,e ; ™ „ .^"'f'" " H .he pe,.i„ J^,^ 'n the estimation of th\. a • "^ ^"^"^•'' to dama.re n..r « ^^ ^k«". .he f™d,/j*H„„?r",.cf ■ "'•■' ™* '-* br;r Church ,„ ,hi, p„,i„„<, „ ,h, !„ ""ffj """'l-K between the J^E* deeided ad™„t.ge over tL M rcTu'r "' *'*^-" ""I « ™y ■»«n.a .nade by thL both t h„l / "' '"'"™' •"• ""'cc. ,.,4t.t unemployed to di,p,aee i^^e i;";be"''r'^ »" "» -he^e^ ihe brethren of the Bhol- v r. c^n^ende honorat!e, and the Rev G B^kf """ '^" ^°"^' «-- -de the r ^"^^."f ti^e Delegates appoLt^d and I '"™^"' '' '^^' ^-^rence ^ence in Canada Ja«t AuguTbetr/n! 1 . "'"^^ '' «"•• ^^neraj Con body ^ thoir children in this /an? = ^'^^ ^"-% greetings of the l^Z week' ' *''"' ^''^'^' attend to the " «„„ ^. , ' *«»«'Jr,., "^^^^ ^"*''<^'*°s" editorial next ^'•""{Itnn, January 9th, 1863. -^ Thomas Webstir. VHl et!AIU»A!1 UORBICTI*. «» well an manj tiic VVcsloyaus at «'v«d, to believe original M. K, "^ character and after the period is ''istonishiupnt, Sioprosontations t the matter hy tfie " Northern nada, ho united and his allies, ■ calumniea at kittle cause to pertinaciously ur connection "rds bringincr " the M. E. States. It ia d also to the rethren from ' during the had a very then in the ct inisstate- me was left ''athers and 3 made the 'onference, neral Con- thc parent rial next BSTKlt. To Tni! EmT' i 01 the "C. C. Advocate." THE "CHRISTIAN Gl ARDIAN " COllRKCTKD.— No. vr. Dear Sir, — Ii> thv •• (iuurdian " of the 7th iiist.. the Editor states, that " Brother Webster, the ex-Editor of the ' Canada Christian Advo- cate,' told us tliat he would contend — ri^'ht or wrong — ' while life and health remained,' that his Hccediiig bndy wore the orlgiiwil Methodist Church of Canada." This Hontenco in partly truo and j>artly otherwi.so. That we have made up our mind not to allow the " (.Juardiun," or the body of which he is the organ, to niisreprcHcnt tbo M. E. Church in this country, or in any other, without correcting the niisstatenients of our assailants, is strictly true ; but that wo have Maid that we would contend, "right or lorong^' that the M. E. Church in Canada is the original body, we deny. We do not admit any wrong in miiintiiining the truth. We contend that the M. E. Church is absolutely the original Methodist body in this Province, and we have proved it to be so in a work entitled, " The Union Considered," and also in our letters to the " Northern Christian Advocate," and in many other publications. We are aware that the defence of our position as the original M. E. Church, is not palatable to our seceding brethren in Canada, and is regarded by them as bein" ex- ceedingly wrong; yet, notwithstanding their assertion to the contrary, thousands in this country and in the neighboring Rebublic, have long since been convinced that the M.E. Church is the very identical body organized in this Province in 1828. This is unquestionably not very agreeable to the " Guardian " and its friends, and hence their repeated attacks upon our people, hoping thereby to make their unauthorized proceedings appear plausible and acceptable to the public. If the " case is getting worse for our handling," it must be very grati- fying to a party laboring so indefatigably to injure their neighbors in the eyes of the world. We have not only stated but proved, by extracts from the " Daily Christian Advocate," that the M. E. Church in Canada was recognized by the parent Church in the States, but that our Delegates were received and treated just as were the Delegates from the Wesleyan Church in Canada, and the Delegate from the Irish Conference ; our Address answered, and Delegates sent to convey the fraternal sentiments of the parent conne ction to their children in this country. Our opponents have hitherto contended that we were of a seceding body, and therefore such courtesies could not _- w.»..w^«.».»» «, .„^ . ..-«,^ ^"■'-'"s -LtfRj^ t-.- iiiTrtr itrasuu held, meant every thing ; now, their being extended, moans nothing. ijicir uCitig with- J4- i .Im ■""• "''•^*'^^-^-'' ^0«««cT|,X,. *'<"'( iinios, •■ \ vrnyi !:::* i" ^""™* '^« * ^- -0..M : , ' 7'- <;- ^ -non. t/„;,,,^ ^:''- "-' ^'- Wo.lo,.n„ 'Tut-,, .S|,„,vood ,iH? nr , '^'' *"■« I>'seip- *'»1«- "PPoal lo ..r^^^'O, final; nnv o/uu V ll' y''"'' •'"^''«'^- VS •'"^oo It oxp„i,v,„;,\.^7'^ "^"•'•"■•"•d.s, cau.s.,J r'jt r","'"^'^ actions in ~ "s i-'"*^ into writing, THl •VARDlAN CORRICTM. nn ^^^U ^•V^'",^ T^'^"^' "'" V ^'^^ ^^'"'■''^"'' ••^Pl-intod a. l.is Associate to all n.tonts nn.l ,nu-,K>HC.. valid and .,l.li,-.,torv. thua (ho .^ V , ' ' whon the same shall hnvv Ikhm. ord.,-.! or d;,.,, y . u'3l C^ Und Is it then piod Urother of lh.> - (i.nrdiin/' -mH p„r,. »aMir,-,.(h> gj-owthfi-om onr ''own ,nviudi,.s and inn.in.rion/' to^u- t u, ^ ho ^ tha« roHtvR.tcd ,n .11 i(. :„n., has ho.-on.o a d.p.nd.nt of tho iJlyt^^^^^^^^^^ all it8 acts must bo thns snbndit.-d lor .■onlirn.ation ? ' IS porn>.ttod to oxornso in tho •• uum.^omcul of Uh own -.fl-u ' ' T V .n ' their asp.rnt.ons m that direction two. so v.tv lin,it.'.l l not Lnul --^be \x- '. mon, 1,1. lin;;li,s!i (.ijiilorcnoo i.-i snnroino Iho Kditor of tho -'(^un-dian " ^tit,w "'n, >/' i m- , f^ronc. has novor rocoivod a ,.Z .Von;l ovor . '""t' ^S^- 'i^r' Canada (.'onlorrnco novc-r acvopt.-d a (iovonm.cn (Irant m." i 1 powor to control (ho Oonnnitloo in London.' *-"•'"^ •'»«• 'f I'^d no Wo shall now, in the (irst ulnoo orovo ih-,t »l,^ r< i n n that altiioudi tho ('and (' lir ' ' <'OVcrninont pUrona-o, and theG.>vor,rnt (i.n t, r rK;M.:M''r''" "'^ '?''r T''^'' ' rocoivosit atloastindin. .1 r '■/{ ''^'^uiy, yet tho Cluiroli Oontbronce ioii a tho T' •- ^^ "'^' i >v...Muor of uhioh, the Canada, ''^*" And now for tho evidence on tho first noint lieu V,, „.^^.. u .iollowi:i,;;;Lunan::;:l''" ^'"'" ■" "'^^'--'=^ Comeroncc, in tho " twif^lvi t hl'Tl' '"'' '" ^P«r'«» "^^ ^'^^l'^^'^ of til. British Confei^jroo. Lfrt^'!.^ I'lli."''*"' ""'"«^ ^''*y «^'" -^-^^ Oovorunicmt Aid induponeS^or ^'^M^om^rKih^r^fo^. t^.ntn.yr««t. intended to benefit lh;*W^i;y«n 3C 'l'H» •UARUUit OORKKCriUJ. n SS':^Sr;lu^:,.^^""'^-"^'^* '-'""^^^^b- to bo p,ac^ .e the t'on. This i,h,a. hnwovcrwi 1 £ Itlb •'"''''''.'"* *"■■ ''''" ^^''^mina- '"'nforenco pas«ed the following ^II .natters affeoli,,. h o i • ' ".i tl r^"*- '\"'^'' *''" ««vern,uont on Mothodist ()luu-ch ii^ c';„.,| ;. ' ''''^'""•' '"*^-''-^"^t« «f the Wosloyan The p.irtico nam..' '"" ^"" •■'*^"^'' '-efolution, as IloprcsoiitativoM of th« lannda Co.itlTcnco, whilo tliov 7'""'' '" ^'''<''^^»ml addressed a letter to liord John Riisseil, dated August 20th, l^"*^' ^^om which we make the lollowinu cxtracN — nnd fhoT^ivuk r'; f"^""'" r^'/^'J^^^''^^^' f ••'*'""'^"t- tl'--^* both M,.. Ryersort '•ffieial or^^.,n of tl^Veskn- rinfJ " ^^'- ^^y'^''''] '^^*''^ Editor of the tho right ^the c;t:\o1; ;;. ;s;!::rtho S;;;? f ct^t?^:^"^^' ^id iron, the casual and territorial ;ovenue I „ 1 si « • ^ Toll? Mr. Ryorson in the san.o capacity, defended and s '^oWed no "sur s S the division of the annua nrocoods nf tlu. Plnn„,, « '}'l«'rieH measures for Christian denoniinations iif U^j;;!: jlnad^' ^'^'^'^ '""^°S«* ^"^i*^"" But thp ''Guardian " says that tho Weslovans here conJd n^f «. * i the London Comn.ittee in ^gard to the CJovennnent S-f,?t u "^'f they are averse k, the prineii';ie involved in Sin / Iv K> '""•'' the foregoing; and, also, in 'the folio win, extracfr^^n/tC^X'?^^ '" "nion, whorem tho Canada Conference, throuc^h its Renr 'Z// ^ becomes a joint applicant to the Govorn.nent fo^I o Grr T t^^^^^^ morcly placed, by mutual consent, in the hands of the Wos^ev.l^Mfsl^'"^' " That a joint application bo made on behalf of the Commifw «f 4i, Wesleyan Missionary Society, and the RopresentativL JtZ r J''" Conforence, to the Imperial and Colonial authorh es that th. , "i^'"° oforo. allowed as a Government Grant in BuZr of W I Z ^^'^ »n WoMorn Canada. m«v U ^.J I" '.^ "^P?^'* "^.^^^'^y"" Missions T8B OCAKDIAN OOKUOTIB. placed at the RVERSON." jrson was not I pleading so liis deiioniina- d, when it is e same year, rinient for thi; brencc. Tho Ryerson 50, he following tev. William vcrnniont on >o Wesloyan ttivoM of tho. a letter to ve make tho Ii'. Rycrnort wrong for te, we may adicted by !itor of the 1, at large, to receive "nd 1840, nasures for ;8t various lot control I<»w much 'C seen in 3les of re- lentativcs, It being ^lissonary le extract ee of the Canadian im here- Miasionn i^CTJoyan M|Mioiiary Soc.oty, jo assist that Society in the support and extension of Missions m Canada." (See Wrsi-7jr,nDisdp/mi, page U7. ^°"^ " -«ii ■ r« '"^ ^^-"^ •^'""'''y "PP"'"*^ ^«'- V tJ'e two bodies, or their authorized Iteprosentatives, and having been paid to the officer jointly designated a. the party to whom the applicants wish it paid, how can our Wesleyan brethren say that they "have nevef received a penny from Government, and have no contrbl in the matter ?" imIllL',/5'' •' T'"""^ '''■■'■'^ P^r' *''"* *^° Wesleyan Church is as much mphoated in the reception of the Government Grant, as if the Canada tonferencc got it so ciy and directli, from the Provincial Troasnry. The Wejleyan Conference, through its Representatives, joins in the applicatioti t^ fhn £!" •' *»^„"? '"d.oatm* to whom they wish it paid, become parties to the receiving of 1 ; and ,t is paid out to support the Mission work directly under the direction of the Canada Conference. yxrl^ °o™« pow, in the second place, to point out the sums paid into the Wcsleyan Mission Fund by the Provincial Government. 1.vSf M- ■• TT ^^^^%^}\y'^ letter to Lord John Russell, dated " Wes- eyan Mission House 77 Hatton Garden, London, 29th of April. 1840," "!f "P t'^ tM u ^«^'''-T*^"t ^'^^ P«id to the Wesleyan Mission Fund *0,omd," we extract tho following :— f7^oV?'n^^^^"?o^f'?^''''°^^^^«^— I" 1841, £777,16,6; in iB 142, £719,8.10; in 1843. £662.2 2 : in isxi 4?iuto' 9 O. ?Mi m 1849. il7.^9,8,10; in 1850, £^74.0.10" I^, I '" '"^ w«<^o the deaiil H? ™'^ '''"^''^ b«on ignorant of b nd (],e public ? Was (l,o iS of n , ^^^"'^ '^''' '^ ^i'^^J a veil c^n ^"T^"' '^^nuary 14th, 18^? Thomas Webst^M: €W«BIHAJI eOMUMTSP. ^50, both years timt nei-iod to ^ould bo £3500 'nminting. No 'f England, tho and, have boon eveflueis of the 3<5}ety receiTfld rovinoe. The iot one particle ! of the abdrc on ignorant of arootypo Wes- r^^^yavcil can sent; into the cl.iini on the British Con- fer Canadian '''fisleyanB, for eJy coTiie into i connoxiooal claimants of > the article* i6t receive a efited by it, ■e it to the By what n Ministers : to such a ight to be ve tim6 t6 if. 7/ '» ^ Jing letter ^wp w^ks ine-tenths qufi^tion. ut' oorr^s- li'macif qif t v/JS aitMking hi« Church. He spcakaof the " repeated assaults," and of '• th«i present crusade of the Editor of the < Guardian ' and his allies." This ijr what we wish to correct. We have never attacked our Episcopal frierida in any way. We have alwaya striveo to live on friendly terms with tiiciut. %ithqr have we said anything a^iiioet them in this discussion. A corr: rijHpondont of the " Guardian," ia the first place, wrote to inquire whetherr it was true, aa some of our ISpiscopal brethren, in various places, wer«» representing, that tho General Conference of the United States had' receded from its former ground, and that it now recognized the seceding Episcopal MothodistB of Canada as the criginal Church. In reply, wfr: explained that it had not dona so; that it had merely given them S) friendly reception on general grounds. Now this is the onlj question, fcad' to this, Brother Webster should have confined himself Instead of doing, that, however, he has attacked the duttoc/cr of the Wesleyan Church ; h» has made a variety of insinuatio'is, and has revived tho unplc.isant things, which unhappily wore said nl tho time of the secession. Now we are anxious uot to revive old animosities. It is not the best way, and we feel it our duty to cultivate brotherly relations with all tho Methodirit Bodie* of the country. We bog Brother Webster to remark this particular fact— '^; that he has had the bu.siaess of attack all to himself. He must have? observed that we abstained from attacking our Episcopal brethren ; Uiat . we have not said one word against them as ministers or people, though h«7 has sought to engage us in a wrangle of prrfconalities. Wo have kept .to the defensive, and perhaps our old friend knows that we mipht, if wr choose, say some things on the hii:itory of their secession, that would not be welcome to him. The question is simply one of fact. Has the General Conference receded from tho ground it took nearly twenty years ago, in.; rejecting the application of j\lr. W.'s friends to be recognized as the. original Methodist Church of Canada ? We say, and liavo proved, that they have not abandoned that old ground. Let him disprove this. We. know, he may talk "while life and health" lasts, but to talk to ib* pjarpose is an other matter." , ( _m^^ To THE Editor of the " C. C. Advocatk." ; .'{ .K odi THE " CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN " CORRECTED.— No. ^^!*^ ^^ ^,B. .... .Hi) Dear Sir, — In our sixth number we promised to take a review'*f> thQ Indian Missions iu this Provinde. . "I In 1832, the year before the Union was consummated, there were 1,09(V- lodians in connection with the Church, and " 400 children in the Mir-' sion Schools." In 1840, seven years afterwards, there wero only 85(y' Ibdians in Church Fellowfhip, "and about 250 children in the Mission' Schools." Such was the result of the first seven years of tho Union, as It regarded the Indian Mission, notwithetanding that the Wesleyan M}«-« «onar^ Society had drawn from the revenues of th6 country about tX^,-' o5&',. DSStoes %>hat was ODt&iudd froiii the soutelies and tHenQsof Sio Obttreb. And now. aft*r the i»bor« of thirty years, snd addinj?: ♦©' "^ 13 then they have ex^TdlToMl aT:'^''^f «° *boI„dian llSSJi? members, as the Suit ofth^lZt o"T"'/ .^-"^ *» '"^'•^"Be oHSs ^irty years. This sum doesn^t incTud^l ^°^''" ^^'««'«"« «"• over «^9 074 whieh was the WesJeyan's share of h?^"^^ Society, nor of the rf the Clergy Reserve Fund. The resuk in , ^'1' '* '^^ commutatioa «on dunog the existence of the fim IW ^"'"^ '° ''^^ ^^''^^ PopuS^ There wer. ring the seven years fnLlL- ?l """' '^^'^ '"ore striking in^case of 9,;i64 meu,bers; SurinTt^erven^^ ^'T^^"^ '^' Union an w*s only aa increase of 316 memfc™ '' n ^''" '^-"^ ^^^^ Unidn there unnecessary. The result proves thTtth^'"'"''''^ "P^'' ^^^ «bove aj' testcful to the people. But TupnliL h "r"'"'" ^'''^ exceedingly d"! Mission Funds, backed un L .F • ^ ^^ (^overnraent Grants to fhn English Conference, the wllXs of 'cfnT/ ^^^ GoverlLt and repudiated their former priSe^ 1 ^r'' '''''■'S'''^^d Public opinion Christian Church, and coWed tn 1 '* '''P'°^^'^ «tate support to the ^ii^tl-'J. Scotland, TdThe'RltTthor'rr '' *'' ^hurcS: wluch, they have secured large amounts of f hi f/° ^^^''^' ^y ^eans^ Md tb 8 includes their mSberX in t^'^^^^^""'^ ^^^ n«niber ' 54 lol M^ M. E. Church m Canada, althortmifia.i''* """'"'tip of 't^nurj in L-^e amou^r*. li^-^^ ^^^ «•« there art T years. . 1 the nioni^ rease of 765 ions for over tributions of , nor of the Jommutation hite popula. >re striking, ie Union aa Unibn there e above are ediDgly dia- nts to the nment and Jic opinion, 'ort to the e Churches means of Fund, this semi- ids of the ty 16,039, ny of this Is, so that r 54,405, r Canada, anference. a Confer- ition, and ieyans do )ership of sred over in 1833 printing ers Were linisters ismatica Jy in all from all is sup- Ucaves. IMlilkil bodies^ the lieofde'hsvenn tinquestion&blo right to know how such faods are being expended, and what advantago the country is deriving from such Vast expenditures. Therefore we conceive that the details givcu above are Ue business of e ery man in Canada. Before concluding we must notice dome etatoments contained in the "Guardian " of the 21st inet. The article seems to ba a sort of attempt to justify one of the "Guardian's" correspondents, and is, aho, we presume, designed as a reply to our fifth number. ' The Editor of the " Guardian " asserts that neither himself nor his party have made any assault upon the 31. E. Church, but wc arc the assailants. Our Brother's powers of memory seem sadly defective. He needs but to review his own paper for some short time past to find proof of the incorrectness of this stateuicnt. Who made the attack upon our people in 1833, because they would not consent to go with the unir and be transferred, property and all, to the new made Church, as tht Russian noble transfers his serfs Avith his estate? Who made the attack on our Conference held in Palermo in June, 1834, comparing ito proceedings to " a tempest in a tea pot," and our Ministers to " Asses clothed in lion's skins?" Who went to Watertown, N. Y., and there attacked the 31. E. Church of Canada, and succeeded, for a time, to prevent an opportunity for even a reply ? Who misrepresented our Church, her ministers, and her aflairs general- ly, to our American brethren on all available occasions ? Who followed up, year after year, those attacks in their intercourse with the people, and through the " Guardian," when our Church, having been deprived of her organ, could not reply ? Who attacked our Church and its ftlinisters before a large Committee at the late General Conference in Bufialo ? Who commenced the present controversy with the M. E. Church, and are now laboring to convince the public that our body seceded from the Wesleyansin 1833? Who commenced an attack lately at a Missionary meeting near Frank- ford, on the Sidney Circuit, on our people, because of the recognition of oar Church by the parent connection in the States, denying that any such recognition had taken plac ? Certain Wesleyan Ministers, Did they think that our Ministers and people would put their hands upon their mouths, and their mouths in the dust, not daring to utter a word in sclf-dcfensc, because Mr. ****+- and his friends had spoken? If they d.'d, they soon discovered their mistake, as our ministers, the next evening, in the same vicinity, met the attack made upon themselves and their connection, and refuted the erroneous statements of their assailants. Then one of these must attack the Sidney friends through the "Guardian," aad its Editor must come out with a sort of endorsement of his corres- pondent, and an assertion that we are thu attacking party. Such has aiili is the coarse of procedure toward as of our peace loving brnthrcn, wbe oohr " wish to be let aloDe," Wwiflja 4fr '"■ •'-'tolAH ViHUUUn il Mtt. brother, a-ainst I u ''"'^'' " "^e have kent M *;, j. '-u^.^^;^. queries ? Agai, o„ v Z^*" '« '"^ receding bodv /, ^ '^' ^^^^ ^ou t^i«t we nii'h P ^T*^ "^'"^f^^^^^- says - KL"" ^""^ ^«P^y to £. fi/-^ -cession th^' ;„ j^t^^^^-- s-^V soiV thb! 'l Z f '''''''' ^"-^- «n tHs point br 2."''^^^""'° to him" w°" ^^"^ ^»'''-^rv of thei»n that,.J'M'^;,^';^i^;;^s^ seem to suppo^J.^^;? " ''*;<> -f in fonned' predecessors an r^lf /" '''^' ^'^^'^Pcctintr ouM'hn , "^ *^'' '"'^J««t. i£- "lust. be verv n^l ^ .'^"^s liavo aJready said H o^ . ''l '^'''° ^^^ and your ' ?^^«««re of sece.iioltmV^°"'-^'^ °"^ "P«" S^e M e"' ri 'S^^^^^ «6 without sayino- invtt- , • ■'^" f^ct a person „-,;«.i I ■ °S0, ho wnt«a «f words MnU\^^^ ?'• ^y •'^'"Ply avoidfni f ' -^ "^'"^ ^ ^oJio volS ■■ He e'ntfrely abanrlL ,1'^% to the supptrt of?n {^'^^''''^^^'mGnt^t reversed it{ W.ct l' ''''"'^' '^ ^&^P'''^'', PTopoS^! from Canada; Zth'Z' ^^''''''S tl'o^laims of the l'"''"^ ^'^^' withJield we ask u6 1 the fail, limitj, so >ut bcing^', ( // '»«! 3fft .;« > Off// WC(T ^4 una his* I'olum^, l Jtitudel' St ^oir- 'StioA' ? t£e •Jterttioo Blade in the Discipline, to meet all other arrangements under the Union ! Then ho takes the articles of the second Union to prove that Certain changes were made under the first Union I He says the Church property IS under the control of the En.sjlish Conference, which, if the brnther was not evidently incapable of argument, we should call a wilful i»i8re|wc»Bntation. Bat what hivs tho second Union to do with the question f ,^ He next virtually abandons his audaciously false assertion, that the fkfU^fa. Conference was tha receiver of tLc Government Grant. He could r»Dt,,however afford to make tho amenria in a frank manner, but seeks to prove that the Canada Conference used "every effort" to secure that «^mn1,,tor itpelf,,and that it did receive it " indirectly " from the Govern^ ment, through the English Committee. Wo sUited before that the J^nghsli Committee received a grant for its iMissions/;r/?/-e the first Union and that tt, and not the Canada Conference, had always eontinued to receive it since. We said that our Conference could not control the Lopd9n Umraittpe, and Mr. W. trios to prove the reverse by one of the aytices of tjie second Union. In that article tlic EnLcIi.^h Conference requires the Canadian Representatives to join them 'in indicating a wish to •have the grant paid to the En-Hsh .Afissionary Treasurer,— which ;^^ves all that we said ! But Mr. W. could not see that it refuted all his slanders. He brings forward, as a proof of his assertion, an application to the Government to be permitted to ''commute" thecrant; and yet this wry^document is signed by the agents of the iJ^ir/w/i Missionary Society proving again ail tliat we asserted ! Surely allowance must be made for Mr. W. ; It IS not las fault that he cannot understand; but his bitterness pj Bpirjt IS without excuse. He makes a great ado about tho fact that 4«e. names of several Wesleyan Ministers were returned as the recipienta ot the gratot. He; must understand this, for it has been explained rfr peatedly. The rule adopted by the Government was, that the amount J8Ce)¥?4 by any olergyman should oease at his death. It was easy to ^PP^;>W8 rule to tbe Churches of England aad Scotland, because the ««C(unt3 were paid to particular persons; and the Government requested ^iW, VVe^l^yan Mi38ionary Society to give in the names of a few Minister* mj«a/ recipients of certain amounts, which should eeaso with tiieur.a^tl*. , Jkit :none of these Ministers ever received anything, their n?4rtes boiftj^, put. down merely in compliance with a mode of . traosaotine pjjbiJO biwmess. W<3 therefore repeat that the Canada Conference never xec^v^ a penny from the Government, and that they had not the least fpwer.to Qqntrol tlw London Committee, which mosi assuredly would not lHive"«JlQ,w^ anj dictation in the matter. We assert, in addition, that do A^immim'mmi^^r received, any benefit from the Government Grant; it was an a.ssistance,:^5(), the- English Missionary Society, but no benefit t« pMwi#Ji4ministpraherfl. The Canadian Missiorw of that Society would feWB;heqo *iMJ>port«*iwt^i»»tip«if'k«rrf'if«ig».,^.j4^^,M»t^ .WM-ii.We. miyMf. Out (iw m OCARDUM tJOtRBCm. n|yl!^;lrd b^^;^,:^- society, and eh. the co™»„,^ brefhren. But the fa?t is thaT sToJerof vfrT/ . * ''''"'^*'-''' "'^ »»« nwde out of tho above, and haveTl f til 1"*^ ^"''T "*"'•*«« ^*^« beet. of the Soccdcrs. AVe did hone M,nv ? i I "^"'" ^"'''^ '« ♦r**' of soue table kind of warfare ; hut ifset^ sole "f Th "tr' f^ ^'^'^ ^""^ aptitude at it as ever We LivTlJ^ a *''^"'^ '>""^"' ba^c as creat exposing these baelcbitin! intnti ns for "Tu tr"^" *»''»"'^'''^ "^ ^r has furnished us the opp^rtunUv An5 „ft '^'i ^'^ ^'^ ""P^dence our Episcopal friends.^^he attach h^^fnU 'l^'' ""'.^""^ "«* '^''^^^ original question merely rolatPrl ♦« fk • • "" ^®^" ^''O'" b«m, for the fcrence ohhe States ^ ^ *' '^'^ P^^'^'"" ^^'^^^ bj the General Co« THE " rlVZ^'''"''^ °' '"" " ^- ^- Advocate." THE "CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN" CORRECTED.-No v„r ''Guardi:^'',;:^,^^f,J:f^^^^ ^-^«' *^« Editor of the ed m our articles Nos. G a?d 7 It be abioT'''?^ ^^'^' ^^«*« ««°t»in- commeneeshispresenttiradeil-rfolt^:^ <^ru inly fai, before hZ '' Vo'The "feT ' ^ " ^^ l'^''^" b- breath" ^^Jl made u few weeks ago he'writes I replv ioTh"'^'.'''^^''^ '^' " ^"ardiaa " person might write a folio voluLwhh^„?''^'*'"^ "^'^''^^ I" «»ct a ^voiding the question by a mu tkude oTwordV?'"?/"^*'''"^' ^^ ""Plj •Jong statement of distorted invented f^/JK^^^^ the^support of any particular proiTsitil."^' ^^^'^ ^^ ^"^^ °*>* «Pl>ly tJ ;; a ;iltS ofTorrsigTifW riS. " '"J''''^"*'^'"' -«*»jn-g willing to admit that ourZoodin ' IttL —;"/"'' *^""' *hat he if can that which signifies nothJrTS '"•]"• ^'^mfied something. How however, that the" tUr^TrU E ^fc^^^'d t'o ''^''' 'i'"'''^- ^« f"«y that the Wesleyan Methodist Church nfh;,? ^- ^^Y^' ^^^ «««**{», nest pretty well out of the pubHc i^evenues of ♦^'"'""'^ '*'"' ^««*'»^'^ i^ to divert attention from ihi.T . revenues of the country. The att^mnf • "IbUo volumorTuKm ,),. ?"' "" ''"""i"" •» !"■«," or to »rih ■5 -^i"'^r«d ^-^i' j„r.oX-;siro?t'p;i:i"^^^^^^^ ■"^•^« I TnW ttUARDIAIf CORRRCTM). 45 cominuttttnn OSS t<»' waste lerer of his 08 have been «ntaining hat he is ?• How ^e fanoy w to the liaps not >r of the contain, ered it« attempt hat the under- write Against Pfoarir bv fhn t^Tl'"'.- n^Y '■«''"?;"'*»"" "^th^ M. R. Church in Canada by the JJuftalo (.oncn.l (^onloronco, has bocn so fully proved over and over £Z^ ""J' "" ^"r'' ""derstood, that wc too consider "that point is settled, and now only refer to the matter hero, because the " Guardian " tries to make a contrary impression. The fact that our Delegates were received just in the Humc manner a. were the Wesleyans, our Address rolerred to the same comtuitteo, answered in the same way, and Delecatcs cTnlnder '" ^^«"*-«»''«. '« B»ffi«icnt proof of all fo^rVhich weC The ''Guardian" says, "All the rest of his talk is just got up to concea h.s defeat on tins question." Those who arc conscious of having m.tiJ f 'T^ bo considered quite competent judges of the best Trt?? 1 ^•'^^'•"f « d«5-'«t ; not J'^ving been placed in such a position ourself, we have not found it necessary to provide for such an exi^ncy. VVe however are quite willing that our readers shall decide as to who is right upon all the points in dispute. Our opponent now admits that other changes were made in tho Discipline at the time of th Union, besides "th°o printing of the word fuTw V" '^'^ P^'"' '^ '^' ""r"^ ^^•'^^'^P-" Ho might do well to Jint out how these changes were made, as also the nature of these alterations, .ind^their effect upon the Institutions of the Ohurch and the country at of Ti?o fi.2""'f'" " V't''."''''?*;?" *^ °"^* ^"^''°f^ ^""^I'^d to the articles of the first and second Lnion. We referred to the articles of the first ihl'^V Ttt"- *" T^""^^''^ *?""■ ""constitutionality, and to the articles of the second Union to prove that which the "Guardian" had declared to be false, viz: that the Wcsleyan Methodist Conference of Camida had become a helpless dependency of the Briti.sh Conference ; and further to nZ wft t ^-'-'t .^"'r" ^^"''''^' ^'^^'"^S'^ i*« Representative ,dS r nf ? w ,^"S^'ft ^'t .*° P™'"'"'^ Government Grants for the sup- K /^rY'/^^^''" H''"'""^ "' ^^'^ Province. And these -facts" we have established beyond .successful contradiction. As to the fact that all the Church property deeded since tlie last Union can be controled by the ±|nglish Conference, we need only refer the reader to the Wesleyan Discipline pubhshed in 1850. "i-aieyaa • ?° if^" second paragraph tho « Guardian " says of ns " He next virtually abandons his audaciously false assertion, that the Canada Con- terence was the receiver of the Government Grant. He could not, Srv7T>.5Ti, n ™''f' the am.«Ja in a frank manner, but seeks td Grant for V^? Canada Conference used 'every effort ' to secure that Ixrantfor itself, and that it did receive it 'indirectly' from the Govern- ment through the English Committee." We give the above for *hc amusement of our readers, to whom,-that which it pretends to an- nounce,— will be as new as to ourself Surely none, but the most wilfuUv perverted menta vision, could discover in the articles alluded to, the slightest approach to an abandonment of any assertion we have ever madft respecting tne course pursued by tho Canada Conference with regard to the Government Grant.. Wc have a«scrtcd~and proved the assw^tion- 40 THR auAnr>iA?i connnnrKn I I 'i^recUy or i^id^rectly ^nrJl^T^^^^^ whnthrr lo thoir own .hmvin,/ tUey lw i^ijr. ^ r/";"''*;*'- ^^"•'- '^••'^^"•'1*"^' W^deyan MetluHli^t m.V^l,^, X'f 'T *'"' -^'^■"^i"'> «f the tbat the C..nj;.reueo c.f ,h. W. K , ' Vl! hcSlTJ n"'''T-''^l""''^P^^^^^^ every cfjort iu it.s powor to socurr ih „. T! '''"r"'' '" ^'■»""^''- "■•'«'l .paiaovertotJaMV^3I.,^Jl,„K.hi 1 '.ol;^'^^^ |-se Grants ha., beou 1»V thMiovenuiient from th^ It.... './?'•".• ' t '"'"'"••J mr. y bo sent Missionary TrcuHuror, bv the] :;;. /S^r L' w" /' »'- WcJev.a member of tlio British Conferenoe LfX 7"- ?*^', "*' '°'"'' o***^'" iattUl.^^ >li.^.iouuiy T^e.^uTu-fr;] o ' *'"« *,""'« «<' recoivod r.re put arc .n,t to Mi^^ioa 8la i-'^;,. " , ' r'^f ' erson w]>6 may iave doubts as to " h ' , tt. >"./ . been- Ml the practice of recmvin.- GovernmLt G.lnL ■'<^«H]:""'^ have by consulting the nbove works. " ^°'*'"""^''' ^^"'^ot^^.- <-'"' satisfy himself But the"Guardiaa" continites •_" Surelv dlow.,,, . . , for Mr. W.; it is not his fault fhnf J,«^^ Y "™"' - '"ust be made df spirit is Without oxc;!'.-'""'^'*' ^'*^«*^ understand, but bitteme,s3 ' ■^^ *o the "bifct<}rBe68ofs.pirif maaifestedhv H.fl ,>.,*• • ^^ versv. the f.«n,^;^ np.^L.». _f f..i ",'*"*'^^" »> the parties in this fmitwu J'HK UtAHDIAN OuRKEOT Kb. 47 iTit«; whnthrr Lrui. tcnoi-tlint,' tcnuinn of the d and proved, (J.-in.id.i, used > Uovornnien' Iv, wnsono of I'l t'lirther, we ts havn boon ' irifiy ho 3011 1 tlio ^Vestev/iii ' soiiM) other — ^to rise tht! ivod rre put •cachfrrs, wh(. I mil, cTeatol >y tl;o coniii- las exaniitiiHl ^0 " (Janad.a ." He that !ic followin,!^ find 1840." i"g >ill the vs down to to tho pro- ms v^iid to wp-u paid, , lns2)ec.tor 50o; " . nv W mentioned yarn have fv himself be made bittemesa '•^mti our IVidiid at tlic "<}nni-di;m" office, that wo fully uiidointand this (iowm- liiont (frant qucMtion. and, also, tiio dodge resorted to by Wcsloyan preaohcrH, who say tliat the ('nnfcrenrc Amn not roooiv<> the llrant from the (iovoriunont, thonuii it trocs into tho IMi.ssion Fund. The Ohnrch, however, gets it. and the mem/) rs of the Wedeyan Conference are m much boiu'Htt<;d by thi.s nioney, ns they me by the ,s:imo amount of any part of the Mi.ssion FundH. ■ But we nuist make another rpintation ; the Editor of the "Huardian" referring to us siys, " He uiakoH a trreat ndo a1)mit the fart that the Man1e$ of Hoveral We«Ieyau ]Ministers were retu rued as the recipients of thedrnnt. Tie mu^t niider,ct;iiid tlii^. for it has been explained repeatedly. The nilo adopted by the (i()veinin"Tit was, that the ainniiiit reeeived by any ClerL'ynian shduld eease at hi"? death. It v.-as easy to :ipplv tliis rule to the Churches of Finland and .'-'eMtland, bcoanfe the\;'Tiount.s\vere paid to partieular paiiies; and the Onvernnient rerpie-^ted that the We«ley.an MiKsion.iry Soeiety <>ivo in the nnmos of a few .Miui.sters as the novrmU r.'cipioiit.s of eertiiin nnioun(=*, which ,«houId cease ■with their death. But none of these Ministers ever reeeived nnythin;.';, tlieir names beinc: put down merely in compliance with a modennransactini.: public business." So it is admitted at hi'^t, that certain We.«leyan ■Nlinisters. members o' the Canada Coul(>renee, " were returned as recijiients of the (irant.'' Ca wo vrondcr, then, in view ol' this adui i.-^.-ion, that the as.sertiou tliat the AVesleyan 3Ielhodisis liave received (iii\rrnment Gran t.^, should excite tTie indignation of the '• Guardian," and shouhl be el :n ,. ; -izcd by him as an audac-.ously falac assertion ? Is it not str,- thai men so* npjiosed ti^ state fMipport for the C!iristi."n Cliureh as the Wesleyan (jdiiferenee pretends to be. and so very indcpeiTfcnt U'O, s-hould allow' itn ibicinbcr.s to be made nominal tooL-i for tlie purpo i- of oldaininp funds lor the English Missionary Conunittee. and from which i'unds. the Wesleyan MothodiBt Church in Canada was to derive no 'vuelit; f^iifl'erina; the lianics of these members oi' their body to bo returned to the Government,. and to appear in the public accounts as the recipients of state endowments, when Ihcv had so loudly proiosted .ngai-e.;! .'^tate appro[)riation8? What think you. gentle reader, of the morality ul' ;ueh conduct as this? What of its con- sistency ? But .again, '• it wa; easy to apply this rule to the Churches of England and Scotland." And why? simply !■ cause however much you may disapprove of the principle by which thay are actu.atcd, they were honest, daring to appear wiiat they really were, and openly accepting of the oifer of Government bounty, while the Wesleyans wished to take the state bait, and yet setnn to f.pposc its being taken, trusting to the broad mantle of the British Conference to conceal the dotible-doaling. The Wesleyan Mis.sionaries in Canada rcaj.ing the gain, while the English ^Mtsmonary Soeiety bore the opprobrium. '-But," says the 'Guardian,' " none of t^iese Ministers ever reeeived anything." Why, then, were not the names of the actual recipients given ? We pr3surae the nioney %v«8- . used for some puri)ose. recognized as legitimate by the body. Avery fine r-tirrtvtx:u iibiie jmr:::e55 iitrS.iO oOifiiu aWiiCyjrxHu trie CJoirern'jMfnt. til rough the agents of the Parent body, on a preteiif« 48 THB GUARDIAN roRRJCCTJBi>. I I ■f W w opiDioD. of V/e,kym MiLtere Xn „£ n ' '""*• . -f '"" individual then, were the names of iudiSlMii^ ^\"'''''r^ ^^™-" Why, commutation ?" If it was the IW Bodt H '"'^""'''^ "" '' ^""^ '^ were not the names subuiitto,! nA V "'"* ^^ interested, whv c-nce ? The fuet It tt nlmes tatTarrill'r ■' ^ '^"^'''«^ ^-^'- names of members of the Canadian bodv.? i'-''r^ commutation, were mj? of the Government thatir^s nortL F l^ r.^'""*f ' *^'^ ""J^rstand- which was interested in and H J 7« ^^"Kl'=^h but the Canadian body Why is the Gra,;f:xp^id^ inSl If •^^""^'"^'^u^^^^^^^ «-"'«' here? Why is it not sont t,. v T^ ' \^ ^^"^ »o* ^'encfit any one vincial Chesi, to bo appSia^d ?S^'£ " !i"T? ^"^ ^^"•«»' ^"^ ^^e^ro- " Guardian' 'please e^/pkf" tl pobts f' " '""*'"•'''' ^^"^ ^'^^ Hamilton, February 12th, 1863. Thomas Webster. From thk " Guardian " of BIarcii 18, 1863 Ho misrtpresTnt'u^; ItL" "thrlr". "^?- ^^ '^«'"-- «^ ^O'^"- neither to his head nor hTsholrf T^^hout, which wc shall attribute to "defend" his '"chuVc'h '- and to '."^ f '*'f ^' ^'^ «^J««* »"« b««n been misrepresented.- Nobody ha attE. ?"' <^T «?f '^ " ^^ "^an takes exception to Tu^. h '^'al^'d^to ,^ «"f 7" ^'^ ' OuaSn • second Union." No wo dTd m.t wn ? i '"^ "!"'''''' "* *'»« first and articles of the 5fco« J iTniontn' ^« *«"k o^^-^Pt'on to his brindnR the the English Missionary Co„"^ittee„d rit v d a^^lt^V "^"''?^ *'^"* Government to assist thi>i.. T.,^:„ xr-. ^""* "t money from the before the first Su td ttt 1^0 ' tT°"';'T ^"* f *«^ *''''' ^^^'^ ^5. aided in supporting. S mL of, w " --5 \T l^' ""'"" Committee they reeeiySd thoVantornTso S'nfw'''*"'*^ ^T ^ono «o whether s^onaries, who would have Jl'ivod t;. ?"• "'',>»«fit to the Mis- Treasurer any way. What Mr W „ I T'""*' Z™"" **»« Missionary f..ren«« »-! /_. ^. '^'^iJ"* ^^i^- ^v. asserted was. that thn rv. /„ n./ ■"■^ ""d .„...«,„« Preachers had received the Grant iv^m Gove™: TUB QUARDIAN COKRECTBD. 49 ssion work, advantage Provincial 2 that the individual stained by gn to the ic English •" Why, a basis of sted, why h Confer- tion, were iderstand- ian body, c Grants, any one the Pro- Will the B8TER. i words, ittribute t»as been it "has aid any whore it wholly ognijsed ardiau ' rst and ing the [e says, rnment d that om the is was imittee bother » Mis- ionary overn- ment. And this is what ho shnniofully will not withdraw, although he dare not repeat it in unequivocal languago. The English Missionary Committee spent it in Canada because they received it for Canada but they would have supiwrtod their Missions here just the same if they had received no Grant. We repeat, Canadian Missionaries received no benefit, though the fund of the Homo Society did. Mr. W. writes away without any regard to candour, and seems to have a boundless confidence in tlio prejudices of his readers. His abusive I-inguago is sure to be its own antidote, and his distortions of facts arc tlie most monstrous we have ever seen ; we hope ho is mistaken in his opinion, that seceders will not stay seceded without this kind of secession pabulum. Such a morbid apjwtite always betokens the nearness of decline and death. To THK Editor of the " C. C. Advocate." THE " CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN " CORRECTED.— No. IX. Dear Sir, — As the Editor of the " Guardian " is out with another article relative to our Church relations with the parent connexion, I hope you will be able to admit this reply in your next issue. The first part of the article is unworthy of observation, and, we will, therefore, proceed at once to notice such portions of it only as demand attention. Referring to your Correspondent, the Editor of the " Guardian " says: " We repeat, lie has wholly abandoned the attempt to show that the General Conference has recognized them as tlio ^original' Methodist body." It would only be a loss of time to dwell upon a point so fully discussed already. For the satisfaction of the public, however, we will here produce the testimony of Dr. Peter Cartwright. The reader will doubtless con- sider him good authority. The statements made by the Editor of the " Guardian " stand directly in opposition to the official remarks of Rev. P. Cartwright, F. A. Blades and G. Baker. Dr. Cartwright said in his speech before the General Honferenoe at Cobourg : — " I am happy to meet with you under present circumstances as one of the Representatives of the American General Conference. I have a distinct rememberance of the original relation of your Body lo the Methodist Episcopal Church in t/ie United States. * * * "I was acfjuaiuted with your ancestors, the old preachers. I was always in favor of your recognition, and of fraternal relations years before it was carried out, and it afforded mo the greatest pleasure when consum- mated." Here, then, is the evidence of a venerable Minister, who, it is likely^ was traveling in the Methodist connexion long before the world rejoiced m the possession of such a clear headed, and impartial inhabitant /.A'«^.,, who wore ..//or;.nr wrv f /' <^''^'-'^''''" " or tho three foronce to Oan.da. as he lo^Il ' , .^'J,,/."/'' ^^VV'"""''^"''" ^^^"^™^ ^on. . .^nd 18(>0, and fully , S -, ds o .7' ( 'h r^"" "^ ''*" ^«2^^' 1«28 . ^•ocollcctM.h.piod,c..onr]),oi^^ t^ '"'•^^^'r.- «"o^f^^"n ■ . .Vnd M-ayinto the connectional fund of X C« '^^^^^^^^ rropriated by mcn.hers of that bodv r tho ^"''f'T'^'^ ^^^ is ap- llio .aW^,. of .uch of their Si s ^ .^"T:!^^ "'^^^^ lu.mstprial labor. A^V have established h.o Zv^l ''''"'" ^'°'^'^ "^^ nnd y4,«,,,, that the K.litor of tl.e "^ u:„'df i ' l Z^' '";'7-'^^' "^ ^^'^^^ ^ r,fute, which tho Provincial (;o^v • m .„ ^''" "^* '°'^" "^^^ to A-«o«;5 ^0 ^6- true. "^ m^'wed person n> this country. Wee iron, the "ueceiv;; ^ S J'^fl^;"'^?;^-,; V'- British Co,,,, Wesleyan iMissionary Society in (Snndr ,* *'', * '^.J.'-C!»surer of thje n>«ke to the Canack ^ZSrZo'^^n'^J^'^f'^''''''''' does, that The only difference is tlu". th H'l.o r n'T' •^"^•' '^'' '""^cy ? the odiL of state I.a^^.:*:u''L;'^^^^^^^^^ hopes to esjpo , through the Missio,,^,.rk,cltv ui^l I '■' f :^'^: J^'^'P^ *'^« A IVent.Society." See ^\\5 v' , \r S' *^'% '^■••"' "^ «™"*« f^'^'" tho where it i, evLnt t],at the/r! oh^r^T^^/^rr? % ^^^'^' ^'^^ 135.' the Wesleyan- Ministers hai ^]or e .t'ben ^fiff ' "'[^ ^'^^ >''^'''^- ^^ .hey have received .ince 188'! J'^ L P,'' :fi,?%,^\'r'"-- -^>3 , l)ecamc ;.,„^, .,^,;,/.,v,^.^5 and direct, r.. «•.«'.' of tI' ^^^'-^'.J^'l^'^ they monopoly airainst whicli '-f>oii of a baiieful noblyVitc^ed." «nt s,ppj«fth t w'adn'lit^o'"^'"'' ^''""'''^^'^ '' Governn.enf Cmnts in que.Sorjnve Jl; I ''' ."""l"'"* ^^'''t tho d' s unB uuaadia:* cuiuiectjsd. ft] 135. ^•n ■fiho State for rclijiious purposes, and the Cancula Conference to use it, then it would be proper for tiic Canada Cont'erencu to r(!oeive it directly, i opcoly.and ntanly, fiTna the (j^overnment. But inwtead of doiiiji; this. i/tc?/ . get it mvertiiji and aire groatJy uanoyedj wiien the tratk is publicly : stated. ' ' ' • Thomas Wedster. •iHamilton,' March 20th, 1803. •>\\f. Mff* I'i, '■; ' . ■. ^vi^rth^Jr^ jIrOJI THR " fiUARPIAN'* OP APUIL I/ISGS. vd'[Uiali;w h MK. WJiBSTEll'S ilEITEUATIONS. vi'h ^Otif 'Sg<^.iifnnt: iri the " Cunida Advofiite " rel'ii.ses to d(>nl with onr 'tftori'MtioilR of his evasive* and HJaiv "otis distortion of facts, and hopes by "eimple reitflratioti toiiiakV' his reud-rs fov;r"t our I'opile^. PJvdn after the ^tiftde'niablo truth k.H been stilted to him. ho wilfully rofi\so'- to present the •fewi ;nH th^y are. We bc-^in to bollove liin nii::Tepre,'?eiitation9 to bo some- tiling "worse than bhiiiderH. • ■ H^ now aijjiiin asserts t « :'iO Cananda Epi:.eo])als v.erc reeo.'jnizcd by ■ flie'Gbiicra! Ooiiferonee ?Jaited ^>tat«-,aH identical witli the efirly ■ Methodist Chiireh in tlu;- jrfuvince ; and his proof is that I>r. Cartwright ih H speech at (joljourir, as ilia' speech is rejM /e.f if • J^ "' •""'* "^ '^ ^^s. It is Mr meetings', and in ne"si^;'e^l^^^^^^^ at public the great Wesleyan CWerenTonno^^n/l-.V'*7 y'^'' P^*' ^J^** thousand dollars of incom6 from it. nwn^'i *^ '^ ''^«° ^^^n^'ed nexion of Canada, whoTe la "e Lome Cm ' ?h"^ *'' Wesleyan Con- unmterruptedpros^rity,madeitoneof^Ln .• fl P^?'^' «"^ ^^o^ in the country, and an obiS of mo^f £1 • '''* '"^"'''*'^' denominations some others,--we saWt Kch TL If'T^ '°^y. *" ^'•- Webster and two great bodies as Tel n. hemseL« f. ^yP««"My represent these the Indian Tribes oTlh^VnXy '" ^'^''^ *"^^ ^^'"^ «° b^^alf of ^^^r^t^^^^^ aid for m England thought it ri-ht to allmr ?l,! r^l Wesleyan Committee assistance, in christianSing and XSnrtrratl^^^ 'T^- 'P"'' «'»'»» colonics, in rescuing fron- fin and n n ?£ 1 !-t" '*b«"^»°es of its had taken possessiol of we da^e 1^*. * l^rT. ^?^l' ^^°«« '«°ds it Bin to answer for, Thev wiM If^ * >T ^ °^* *^^^ *^«y ^^^^ any great to satisfy envious and jSlou"^ events deem it necessar/tf try on yhe effect of the "osJ^l fnr t^I • ^^"'^ '^^^' "'^^^^'^ ^^ depending enjoying unbounded religious" nrosnerltr "^r" ^^^''^^""'' denominations feious prosperity. It appears to us that Mr. W. THE OUAUULVN CORUECTED. 53 ou<'ht, before tliis, to have learned by experience that there is more lost than "ained by abusin-^' other churches. He has already had quite a number of pamphlets Vinted, each filled with the same unmeaning reiterations, and the same unfounded assertions and statements ; but wo believe his attempts at authorship in this small way have thus far been si-^nal failu- ' If his pamphleteering ambition is still unsatisfied, and he should y .loncy to spare to pay for the printing, he is welcome, just for varit.j, .o insert these remarks in his next production. Though his letters are wholly unworthy of notice, yet it is necessary some times to expose the false nature of mischievous assertions, even when proceeding from parties destitute of any talent but that for misrcpvesenting. To THE Editor ov the '• C. C. Advocate. X. THE <' CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN " CORRECTED.— No. Dear Sir,— The '"' Guardian " of the 1st inst. contains another editorial designed as a reply to my last communication. It ?o very- evident that the remarks of Dr. Cartwright at Cobourg last August, with regard to the recognition of our Church by the American Brethren, has caused our amiable friend at the " Guardian " office to cxi>erience strange and painful sensations. We have only time now to remark so far as it respects the question of recognition, that it is probable that Dr. Cartwright, who was lent to the M. E. Church of Canada as one of the Representatives from the M. E. Church in the United States, is quite as capable ot under- standing his official position, as is the "Guardian's" Editor, and the reader is left to decide who is the most relialle person- Dr. Cartwright or the Editor 0^ the ■' Guardian." The "Guardian" has again alluded to the celebrated Government Grants. We are pleased with this, as we have not had time heretofore to fully enter upon this subject. Our friend still insists that the Canada Conference has never been benefited by the vast sums of Government ftw5/t money which that body has received for the Wesleyan Methodist Church in this Province, through the British Missionary Committee, for nearly thirty years. Our readers will remember that wc have positivchj prov(dm former numbers from Government documents now in our posaession, that the Grants in question were designed for Canada, and that they have been paid by the Government to the Wedcyan Methodist Church iti this country. Why does not the Editor of the " Guardian " denj tho_ correct- ness of- the pnbUc accounts, as published by Inspector Generals Hmks^and Caley ? Because he dare not do so. We repeat it, and the Editor ot the " Guardian " knows it to be a f\«ct, that the Canada Conference is just as much benefited by the aid they have been receiving from the Frovincial Chest, as that body is from any similar amount from any other iurd tlia. has passed through the hands of the Canada Conference ; unless, indeed, that God has made it a curse to them instead of ajjenefit. ^^ ^^ With regard to the Giaiila lliw Editor of the "Gnaiuian ?^iyf-, •" like manner Mr. Webster reiterates his indecent slanders and abuse with t4 THK aOARDIAN COUREcieU. coufoss, we have do^ and To^d'Tost'^^IS^^^^ , T''-' - the recipients of Government nitron irrp^Tl,;^ • ? Wesleyans are remarks, "He protends S f ho Si" r?"^ '"^^"^ *^« "Guardian" sought to receive utetneito? he'' G.^^^^ ba« hy^eritically iissumcd the reHponsibi'ily of recoivinTiJ '' Sw ^ British Committee ''Guai^ian/'the'reisno^...e«Tb hisL^^^^ ^t^r^f »»>« ment know, and the peonle know JLh^ {ou know, the Govem- pcsitivfy gets the mo?7and "- tt Vhr th^^^^^^ takes the "responsibility "of receiving in^n • f^S'ish Committee Treasurer. la ^^.■•nn\i:' 'r^T^^'i:^^ 2^^:' ^^^^^^^ and such as he, who have industriously represented -./inTr ^'*'''"' and in newspapers and pamphlets, for Silrt^rars pa t^lS'tT" '"^'Z Wesleyfin Conforonce in Eneland with it<. Jil„ i li^ fv * *^'*-' S«-eat of income from its own p^opl^a J the wJ "p''^ '^•^"'""'^ ^""'^"-^ whose large income from^heL.l. 3 ^i'^''" • ^"""^^^''" ^^ Canada, madeito^neof the ToS il^nt 'denomt"^^^^^ object of most distressing envy to Mtw2,£^'aI *^' "^u"*''^' ""'^ «° it is such as he who hvpocriticaMv vlntL wu '''"^ others-we say Helliug themselves for 4SryU&:^^^^^^ of this country." ^ ^ ° '**^"^^^ <^*^ the Indian Tribes connection with the E^t, bol^ °et £ So ^'''''f''!: ^''^''^ ^ ;;a paltry trifle," and th^t this sS iTs '^2oT::Sf Z"":! ^T f^' Tribes of this country." We are s-l«d fW ? • / ?^ *''® ^°'^>«n admitted the truth in W- \Z ttVm^^ h^LtdL^nthe"^*^ positive manner, that the Canadl Conference has never rSoi" < a '"'''* from Government." Now he acknowledges that ZmZt^^l^^^ been received, but intimates that these two ™?wprft,? H-^i-i^*^ ^^ that account sell themselves to thrS,verm?nT ?^ ' -^ ■ '^ u°"' ^'^ Book, that " a tree is known by its frui s™ and tho 7^ '° '^' ^'^^ from the facts in the case, and the course nSslfl ''if 'w"'?* J"^g« certain general elections since 1833 as TwhShTthe Ltd!^^ T "* has sold itself to the Government or not w/ ^^, ^'onference that it is such "paltry trifl^rwth'X^GoTe^nSt'^^^^^^^^^ magnitude, given to religious communities for poHtical pL^^eTtli cause of our groat Provincial debt. Government ne«k4t^ln,r religious bodies, except for political purposes and 1^1 nf if f.*,'' receive state support, a's well i the A^ZSJatTon l^^cT^'tst^^^^ patronage, should be watched bv the nponl« wJfK „ • i ''^^^^^^ S"*" paid Cliurches have ever been inKentTntovertad.ri '^'^ ^?'T enemies of civil and religious liberty. The Gove^Grant^r''^^^^^^^^ was not given on behalf of the " In^dian TribesTfTh s c^uX " i7^Z Idea of It has been urged ujion the Canadian public for the S't qft in order to try, if possible to pomiari.^ th« ±"Z:^'' "''^ ^'^ ^0 years, If.heWosleyans in England^and Canada arcirrich and powerful in THE aUARIHAN t'ORRKCTEl). '00 and an both countries as the " Guardian " represents, is it not strange that they should have become a sort of Goveniment paupers, seeking to secure every penny they can from the revenue of the Province. In 1830 when the Wesleyan Ministers were in connection with the M. E. Church in Canada, they held the following liberal sentiments. Speaking of the United Pres- bytery of Upper Canada the '• Guardian " of the 23rd of October, 1830, declares, " This respectable body, when lately deliberating upon the most scriptural and eflBcient means of enlarging the boundaries of their Church, and supplying their destitute congregations with the Ministry of the word, did not determine to apply to His Majesty's Government for a portion of the public taxes, or a moiety of a baneful monopoly against which they themselves had previously remonstrated." Such were the sentiments of Wesleyan Ministers in 1830, who now stand connected with the Canada Conference. But since the Union, they can plead for state support, accept of it, and apply it to the Institutions of the Church. How great the change? Immediately after the Union, the seceders cast their principles to the winds, and, through their Representa- tives, applied to the Government " for a portion of the public taxes, or a moiety of a buueful monopoly against which they themselves had once so nobly remonstrated." Alas, how are the mighty fallen through the love of filthy lucre ? In Dr. Stinson's Pamphlet, page 31, we find the following :— Application was made by the Canada Conference, through its Representatives, for the exclusive management of the yearly Grant. It is said by R. Vernon Smith, under Secretary of state for the Colonies, and dated Downing Street, 15th of April, 1840, that the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Upper Canada did apply to the Government for state support His words to Dr. Alder are: — " His Lordship desires me in reply to inform you, that he has already received from the Governor General, a dispatch on the sub ject to which your letter relates, accompanied by a representation from Mr. Ryerson, explaining the nature of the financial relations between the British Wesleyan Conference in England, and the Conference of the Wes- leyan Methodists in Upper Canada, and urging the claim of the latter to the exclusiie management of the yearly G/antJ*^ Let the reader remember that Mr. Secretary Smith declares in his dis- patch, that Mr. Ryerson, on behalf of the Canada Conference, urged the Government to pay his Conference the Grant. But as " the upper mill and lower mill fell out about the water," or in other words, as the Wesleyan Conference in England, and the Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada, quarreled about the " loaves and fishes," the Government refused to give it to either of them until they should settle the dispute. This they did, and then jointly applied for the Grant and received it, the English body agreeing to hand the money over to the Canada Conference, and the Canada Conference, on their part, agreeing to surrender every particle of their independence to the English Connexion. See articles of Re-Union ; Wesleyan Disci])line 1850, pages 114, 115, 116, 117 and 118. See also Model Deed, commencing on page 118 of the said Discipline. ^6 tllE GUARDIAN CORRECTBD. turned the cvcn^.ful eltS fof 1336 in f S ^''^T^. And it should be remembered that at the BraXd Welvatrrf*"'"* '^ that body issued a circular for the nurnL nf nfl.. ^^^'^^^n Conference, election in favor of John. A McBdand I.^« r^""^ *^! ^"'1 ^'"^'''^^ motives which have actuate! anrBtm ctuat the S^^^^^^ ^ *" *^« regard to civil matters, the public can easlf; determine ^'"^"'°^ ^" after1hr":;S:fc^^^ S'-tly Methodist Church U P " 5. • 5' ""'1 l^' '"'" *^^* ^^^^ " Wesleyan the Province for 1837 lurZ ';"""■ ^^^l''^^ '"^ *^^ expenditure of Jffr/T«T r£4 80of Pn '^^"*«'^^ '^^*^ '5«««?'-«^^ and ninety pounds unneccSsarv '?f ?i,l ^ST"''"*' "P"." '-"'^ ^"^*^ "^"^ figures as th^ are ...g a gentleman »uj Ms „1J ncg?o imntSam SeM^t f u-'' coloured .orvant had been at eCr^f fine Su„4.y SL"Vh^ We do not cpcct the British or Canadian Conferences to consult us as THE QUARPIAN CORRECTED. S7 •n and the I '* became purpose of a words of itatives of ■27,1840, upon all t Church Jrnment." anference, it general As to the Perenee in Sliortly VVesleyan iditure of / pounds these are accounts, lie Clergy lind, and urch has ! respect- ' and his g- The 3t in the number ; to Sam how did e reply, imber of " Oh, de time ft their J of the me. If sd dem, le door 1." er they of the rnment saction ence as t us as to whether they will take state support nr not. But this will not prevent us from exposing the fallacies of the " Guardian," and pointing out to the people of this land, that the Government v lid not make the appropriation with a design to either christianize or civilize the " Indian Tribes of this country," But it was made for political purposes, and, as far as possible, to damage the influence of the Methodist Episcopal Church in this Pro- vince. And, also, to buy oft' Methodist opposition to the secularization of the Clergy Reserves. This was done so that the English Church might get at least the Lion's share of the spoils. The "Guardian" and his friends know well how far the scheme was successful. Is it not strange that two such powerful bodies as the English and Canadian Conferences pretend to be, with their hundreds of thousands of dollars, should bo so anxious to prey upon the revenues of the country ? The " Guardian " cannot point to a sentence in the original dispiitch where the slightest inti- matii)n is given that the Grant wius originally designed to enlighten the " Indian Tribes of this country." But as said before, this is the Canada Conference's version of the aftair, in order to throw dust in the eyes of the people, and, if possible, to popularize the unrighteou.s transaction with the membership. There are several important points we have not been able to refer to in this communication, but as we may probably have occasion to discuss these subjects in future numbers, we will bring this article to a termination. We will only remark in conclusion, that our good friend in Toronto, affects great contempt for what he calls our "pamphleteering ambition," •while, at the same time, he expects a place for his last " production " in our forthcoming Pamphlet. Wo are always pleased to accommodate a neighbour when we can reasonably do so. And all we ask now in return for the favor is, that the "Guardian" shall give our work a respeoiful notice, and as it contains both sides of the controversy, to recommend its sale among the Wesleyan people. Is there anything unreasonable in this friend "Guardian" ? Thomas Webster. Hamilton, April 7th, 1863. The following article was published in the " Northern Advocate," AuWrn, N. Y., in 1844, in short communications, and points out most clearly the position we maintained before our American Brethren at that period' — a position from which we have never departed in this country or the United States. The reader will perceive in glancing over these remarks, that the first Union had been dissolved, and that two Wesleyan Bodies in this Province were then occupying the same ground, and they were both recognized by the American General Conference of 1844, With this example before the world, it is simply ridiculous for the Editor of the " Guardian," or any one else, to say that it is irrpossible for the United States Methodists to recognize two Bodies of Methodists while they ate occupying the same ground. 08 THE GUARDIAN COBRKCTKD. For the "Northern Advocate." - Tho^'^rin^c" nT''~;^ ^"\^T •"'■^'•'"^'^ '^'' '^' Rev. J. Alley's our fathers ZdZ^;JTZ^VnZ'Sr.' '^^r^' '"^"'^^ '^'"-^ present position of iho^MitholtXcop rChS^ earnest solicitude for our wellfare as wcllT, tholt '°. ^'*""'^«- His will long be re».o.ubered by tie friends of our heln "^T y-^''*"*'*^ "" "«' UMBOS of the MeC^^ E„iS^™ rhir'°"':u'''?':'v" "»" " «« 'h" At your General Conference, held in Baltimore 1820 =« i x , circuits m connection with the preachers nethonnT' ?'j "* *^« States. "^ ^isaops, as were the Conferences in the United '. ».r..., .. h„ ^^„, ^a 18 the general wi,h oC the ■ninwters' anrn^g,;; THB GUARDIAN CORRKCTED. of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper Canada to be organized into a separate and independent body, in friendly relations with the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States, and whereas the General Conl'er- ence has been pleased to comply with our wish in this icspct. iind litis authorized anyone or more of the pmeral superintendents of the Mi;thodi.>,t Episcopal Church in the United States, with the assistance of any two or more elders to ordain a general sajwrintondent for the said Church in Upper Canada, (when such superintendent shall have been elected by the Canada Conference,) be it therefore resolved, that it is expedient and necessary, and that the Canada Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, do now orj^auize itself into an independent Metliodist Episcopal Church' in Upper Canada, with a fjeneral sujierintendent, to be known by the name of the Methodist Episcopal Cliuich m Cai;ada." " Kise and Progress of the Methodist Church," p. 4G2. A discipline was accordin.!,ly prepared and published in 18-'i), enti- tled " The Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada," And it is our opinion, tiiat disci|iline secured to the societies their just'rij^hts and privileges, and was a sei-u,ity that tlie Methodist Church in Canada should continue to be Episa/pal m ifs f.,rm. if Gnv- trnment, although set off from the parent cuiinoction as an " iii(h'{)t!ndent Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada." Wit"h this impression, thou- sands attached themselves to her communion, and were happy and eon- tented under the administration of her government. In 1832 and '33, without consulting the societies, the'preachers resolved upon abolishing the Episcopal Mode of government, forming a union with the English connection, and adopted the descipline, economy and form of church government of the Wesleyan Slethodists in England. To prove this we have only to quote the second article of " Union," which is as follows: " That, (as proposed in the second and third resolutions of the Canada Conference,) in order to effect this object, the di>cnpltne, economy and farm of church fiovernwent m generul of the Wesleyan Methodists in England, be introduced into the societies in Upper Canada, and that in particular an annual presidency be adopted." In order to fully accom- plish these designs, a new discipline was published in 1834, called " The Ductrif.es and D scip/ine of tlie Wesleyan MethodUt Ck,i ch /« British N'/rth America,'' containing the new constitution or form of church government, which differs very materially from the Methodist Episcopal Church, published in 1829. The Conference assumed the sole responsi- bility of this vital change in the constitution and government of a Church which was established in Canada by the mutual consent of preiichers and people. The societies were not consulted but submission roquircu and insitti-d u/)on by the Conference. Some of the societi ^ submitted to this innovation, upon their hereto- fore acknowledged rights, cheerfully, and others did so reluc.antly, while others contended that the measures of Conference in effecting the •' union," were high-handed, arbitrary, and unconstitutional, and that i.i,„_j,f„_^, fi.™ nu.jynh w:is not bound bv thoir acts. The power to attach the members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Cwiada, to the We*- TUB OUABDIAN OOBaKCTJiD. leyan Methodi.st Clniroli in British NnrtJ, a„ • viduul con.sent, w.,h uIh.mU i..!| 1 i •» "'^'' America, without their indi- luodo of clmvch ^Cnu '7t "S^ V"''-'^"^^ ^^»''« "«>^ dinciplino and tho Methodist J-Sscom C^^^ ""T "^ *''^' ^"^"^ '"^"'ber.s of 80, or follow the IwJr ,,t i„ \ "i^?'^"' ""-//r '' ^''^''y *« '^'"''in Porhaps it is boHf , eLrk ^/^ r ' ',"' "'« «"ti«h Conference, again ?ha„,ed thd: nan'TuJ^' W^:; Meth'r'^ri^V''^ ?"'^^«"- -ia," by which nanio they are .1 prZtlZ^itS''''' ^'""' " ^^''"- conjniittee in Enc.Iand in IH-^i) it iiuT Conference and miHsionary Blon w,«, exorcised toward the'soc I iesLT '*'"' r" ^'^'''' ""^ '"'"'P"^ duce the. to ^V-npiy withlheXS' S V'^tKdt'^ar'^^^^^^^ clearly appear IVom the fullowinL^ extrn/.fw f. i T^ ^T'^ ^'" ™orc Conference on American affdrs^ ^S T W /r'"-'""' "^ '^^ ^"♦'«'> be directed to address a lettc-r to the nrLl i^ V"««'«n"y coinnattee &c.. under the care of o^m ssWiL Tn uf "n ''"V"'.^^''^«^ of the judgment of the CoXr and" ff P.?" ' ^f^^^' "^'""^"« ^^e^n ^id.g to put thon,selves a mJ "i./;tdr?h ^ ""."^ '7'^'^*^^^ *'- American preachers, with the TiSn f f « L •^r*°'/'^ '^"'■*^ "^ t^e theni to it as the committpo S^ • ^ '"''^ considerations to incline bishops of the Am^riZt rectri^stSl rect'"^" •, ''\ '^^^ *»»« private and offiei.,1 members, trustees Ic under tho «""'^^'' ^«"«r *« the can preachers in the province of T nw^r f'' a ^ ''^'■*' ""^ *''« ^weri- thcn;selves and ^/m ' r^^rrLidrthc^L^tof 7^ « V^^ P"* Bangs' History of the M V o\. i t V^ ^^^ British ministers." from'^Bi.hop^^Mes letter tr'tlL'^n'' ?^- ''i''i'^- ^^^*'-:;fc trustees, .tc., of the Method^ f1^ , J^^^'^'^f ""^ "ffi'''*l "lembers " It no; bec^iltr du 5 trefort?tfor^ "/^^^ ^^»"da.'' and to advise you in the most affk-t ion ntlT ^""^ ""^ *'''' agreement, yourselves ani ^«- c/^^rlnr te^f'ouT jfrL^^^^^^ P"^ their societies and chapels in tho Tinner J^J '''^':,/{^"»»^' brethren, as This communication il you we corSs fs . ot"" ""i" ^^'i^"' ""^^^^r «ur«. for any want of affection ibr our Sshhri ""'?^^^^thout pain; not tionof those tender and ^Z:Z^S^^^^^^T ^' ""^ a necessity is hud unc.n u^ It U « rZZlff ■ xr " *^ y""' But fore, our seemme: to give vou nn W . -u * measure J'or^tve, there- tended that bccauac these measures were M„/ ;„ ^ / ^^"^ '"'"■ Canada oreaelu r. w«,. . !. , ^ .'*""' .'" Confmnct and the _. • , ^^"jc/ence ana the •«,pu«: ,n uumoeis the priucipai part of the TUa UUAKDIAX tiOKUJCCTlW. Ul Conference, ami travel upon most of the circuits, that therefore the societies were bound to submit to the measure, however repulsive to their views and feelings, and that those who refused to do so, unchurched themselves nnd forleitcd their cliaj)e(s. The members of the M. E. Church in Canada objected not to the mere matter of a few ministers from Enfrlaud being introduced to the connection, but to the new measures adopted by the Conference, the principles involved in those measures, and the manner of their adoption. We can not think that the Conference, without consulting the membership, had any moral or constitutional risrht to abolish the form of Church government which had been ostablished in compliance with the well-known wishes of tho private members as well as of the preacherf", any more than they had to abolish the general rules of the united societies, or to divert the produce of the book concern from its legitimate use, the power uf ihe Oonferenco being, in our opinion, as much limited in the one caiv is m the . ther. We aro lod to this conclusion not only from a cai 'fid exanr.ition of the plain lettc of the discipline of 1821), but by the a ts .(" youi aeneral Conference, and the views of some of your most abh ,!.«'^ 'n t'.c Guardian of A..m.al Oouf.,-on t ' > ;f A «>»cun-ont vote of thrco fourths of •■•Ml or:''^'- "> c-i.an.v ^^a I olhon i ' 1 .f '"^"'.""'•■■'Pl'erH define the r.gl^t '• to make otherwise ■' mv f tU fr.'^'^T"'''' ''''"""'^'^ » l>«rfbot *i'A Wt to attach so;Xt.oX''"^-?';''^^^ ^°«*^-iO' tl^o '■ C:iu..u•^--[urhidain;^thuuT.oac inJ^;''"''' ''''''"^ P^^^''""" ^^ "over united thcni.selve. • aa^ ■ ♦ • • 7^'"''*^'' ''^ ^^'^'i^'' tl^cy had «!'-JJ I'^ahs," Uk>; di".pprotiof ny'!";?'^ ^'T'^''. ♦'"•'*' " pron^ring ^vl-'I' Ik.. p,;,vod a\.a,jr Mo id s u'vlf'^'Tr '' " '"^'««"r« ^- wurthvol- it, 1„.-..|,.„;. .'"", ^''";''""^' •'""1 >a« ended in laaaao^- wurthy oi" its l)^..,;,,,,;,,,,, iv. ,, , , - - ... » extracts thaftho liudta io " S Su r"^ '^"'^'''' '" *''« ^^''^'poing ••'"tfcy tVnm »11 encroach ...Nnu I. n"'''' j'^'^'^'i-'es of Chriati- ■"i.kin^i,' iaroadH upon the doc-tr , . l:!''. "' P';"'"^"""?? tlumi from Irom th»ch«r;=.P «(■ Ji i ", J_ '^. .\- ^- V'""-.^'!' "» Canada - ---• • "^ iVom th» chnrge ol' soliism. bm.r,.hf" -sir ••"ift 1^ a I(oit,mnt« branoh oftJie-fircnt' V,;'^'," "J;Hc uBna,{.i Uonferenoe, ' «"lov«n fHniiiv tHJt OUAKUIA^ CORBKOTEH. >K) Tho uiembcr.s of the Blnok lliver Oonl'orenco will doubt 1*h« rccolKvt tlmt at their Oonfcreuco of 1.S42, certain Wcsioyan tinnisters. ift oonnor- tionwith the Cauntla (Jonfcreneo. iniulu nn ntfnek upon tho M. W. (Jhurjcli iu Canala, and aasorted that tlie Cai ida Confeninco litid not srivon np its independence Ht tlic tiunsunnnatinnof i..o t'niou. Wo JitWnu thcconti'.wv , it: will, tlierli,u:ed trovince, and which h.-^d existed soven yeaiv. In conscqiifme of this prucr cling m\ the part <.f the Wesh'van Conf.'renCe in England, the Wesloyan Methodist Chnreli in t!anada ncrujries fho position of nn iiidependnit body, iia it existed bofore tho adoption "of t?l.; conventional Union with tho Conference in England in J 8:5:1." It does not appear neco.saary to nso any argnniont to prove what is so clonrly implied and admitted in these extracts. We think it niu^t iipiSenr evident to every imp.Hrtial person, that tho Wesleyan Mcthodistn of the Canada Conferfnoc cannot, in truth or justice, claim to be the on^ina/ and indtpcndent 31. E. Church which was established in this eonntry in ,1828. , . . . , . • Tho Canada Conference lias not only given up its independence. nn\ violated the restrictive limitations, but, acconiing to Dr. Coke, they hiivc forauken tho praetiee of the '-primitive (Church, ns exemplified iii the word of God.' and abolished the " best form of Church government rtf tho world." His words are, "I believe that tho Episcopal form of ChuWjh covornment ia the beat in the world, when the Episcopal power is under due regulations and responsibility. 1 bdiovo that it id well t^ tollow t^e exftraplo of the primitivo Church, as exemplified in the uvrd of f/r)/ hy setting apart jjfrsons for great minisfirial purposes by tlie impmifm of hands, but especially tliuso who are appointed for office* of ahe Jfjit raw/k in the Cburchi" ,,.,/. \l , What protestmit Church or denommntiou would wish to have their ministers clothed with tho powers elHimed by the Canada t!ohferen<>e. To change tho government nnd usagcM of the ('"liurch at pleasure— to inske jlnd it«mako difVeronfc orders of 'i)iini8t^-;+— to nbyogato long-esUibliKMl and venerated ritoB,and to dis|wn«c with not mily ^ortfttn foiwrt ot'rtrdin|i- tion but with ordination itself among " ih(»Hu who fivfi sppnintM; inr offidjB of the fir^t rank in thoChurch," as tvoU as fro doftroy the nrHiv of u THE CUARmAX CORRKCTED. ^s\t:T^::^z t^ifJrttzt rr^^v^-.^— - different regulations-take pSon oftt k ^k"*^ Chnstmns under been deeded in j^ood faith to the Churoh ^^'^ p^T^ V'^^F'^^y ^hich had and usages-trfating with scorn ami ?^'V*\P""'^*'^' government object to their measures and aSnt. "''"^'"'P^ .^^ose who would dare preferred the g^d oTd^t 1 o?nrr "'"''' *^^™ because they Wesley dosiened for AmeTi/a %2 T,"''' government which Mr. da ConferenSr And Tan any one whn' ^^.P^^^^-^ «'«™«d by the Cana- and religious libertrbo rrnrisodtW ,5' ''' ''"^ '^' rights of civil refused fe submit toehZZusrumXn?;:^^;:^" '^"'^'^' ^^^ beloved Church t aeair in Belleville on the 10th of February, 1 H35. Several ministers who had not attended the Conference at Young Street, were present at Belle- ville It was then deemed expedient and necessary for the tonterena^ having no general superintendent to call a meeting of the General Lon- fercnee, compose*! of elders, in conformity with the following clause of Discipline —" If there be no general superintendent, the Annual l^onter- cnce or Conferences respectively, shall have power to call a General Con- ference if they judge it necessary, at any time Discplme ot I8i.), p. 20 After due deliberation, this was accordingly done, and the Kcv. John llevnolda, (elder.) was elected general superintendent pro tcm. On the 25th of June, 1835, the Conference met again at Trafalgar, and on the 26th the necessity of obtaining a Bishop, and having linn duly apimuited and consecrated according to the provisions of the Disciplin.!. was carefully discussed. The Hamc subject was resunic.l on Satunlay, the 27th. and the Conference recommended the snperiiitendoiit to call a mooting of the General Conference, which he did foithwitli. KIders pro,K(iit— John Reynolds David Culp, Joseph Gatchell, Dani.il J'ickc^t and John H. Ilueston.' The General ConfercJice elected tlie llov. Jolm lleynolds Buperintendent, in strict conformity with the fourth section of DiHisipliiie, p 23 which is a« follows :—" QueMion 2, If by death, cxpnlsion, or otherwise, there be no Bishop remaining in our Clmrcli, what shall wo do? Answer The General Conferenee shall elect a Bishop, and the Kldexs, or any three of them, who shall he appointed by the General Confi^-ence for that purpose, shall ordain him according to our form of ordination." Mr Reynolds having been duly appointed ))y the General Conference, vian on Sabbath the 28th, ordained superintcndiint in the regular wny, by the laying on of the hands of Joseph Gatchcll, David Cnlp, and IJaAiel Picket accordin<^' to our consecration service. We consider tlie^e proe(«d- ings Methodistic'il, not only from the plain letter an.f spirit of the Di?»i. ««-- • because a man is a travel nff pnjhbvter he is of an nr,L • ^' presbyter? He is BuperiorlaUei btt n^tl !£..'' "T'^ ^^i' neceflsity^the " travchn^ presbyters" bavin" left it and LZTlt ^ selves to the En;ilish Conference jtlio " local prel^vtS." or nll^'"" bytera, who remained, being in point of orderetSo tr ifpr^^ terfi were; justi&able m calling ,a Conference; oomposinl ^0^ Conference ekotnij. a Bishop and ordaining 1dm 310. to th. prov,s,on3 of our ecclesiastical economy. What other alt^nS had Vi who disapproved ot the Union and believed it to be an ili-advLd meatufo a violation of the laws and usages of the Church, and a gross trcsmssuDS the liberties of the societies. It is evident that they M^e obS eE to ^juzethj subnat. to proceedings which thoy believed to be unlsSu tional, unnecessary and njurioas to Methodism, or to nio a dec S etand against the aggi^ssive act-- of ihe Confeveme, or to S some o tr denomination of Christians, or leave the Christian Chu -eh alS'etW Those presbyters with a portion of the membership, chose rather to Sen our r« es than to abolish them, and were determined to walk i7lie -oSd paths 1 he Conference was therefore reorganized in order to carrv on more effec ually the workof God in the wayin\hich He had delighted ^o own and still delights to own and bless. "wigatea to Our opponents have asserted in Canada, and in the United States that 'a few dissatisfied local preachers got together a year and a halfVlJ the Union ook place, and formed a Church of their own ma^unf'' This we most posi ively deny, and as our impugners have not aUemnfed to prove the assertion by shewing any change m'ade by us eitheirTdoc trine, discipline, government or usage; we ^ill at present only uneoulvo TTnln Sf^' groundless accusation; and leave\ur brethU Ttle' United States upon an inyestigation of the case to say who has be! guilty of removing the ancient land-marks. The, M. E. Church in Ca^ ada met with great opposition from the advocates of the S. tC we .locked out of alrrost all the chapels, denounced from the pulpite^ factious schismatics and by a certain portion of the press, as rebels' Z the government; while the Canada Conference Methodiso afte' 1833 arrogated to themselves the right of being considered as «C7joval to government, and ot possessing the only legimate claim to bethe " Me h^ d 8t of Canada." But as " this man is no friend to Cse^ar 't n. eland,r, tl.e M. E Church in Canada ''caringlVnoneTihe '.^^1^" held on the even tenor of her way. Muag^, The OanAd:i O.nviforonna v.<,_o..»J iU- .,' L .•'■'' ' * THE aUARI)IA»t CORaECTKDi 6t 'old 671^227 78f procured from England, from the people of Canada, and from' the Government, for missionary purposes alone ; * besides the large amounts raised, and expended annually in the rej,nilar work and the aid afforded by the government to the Cobourg Academy, without which it mntit have gone down. f And at the end of these seven years of immense expenditures, labor and vexation, the Union was abandoned in 18-10, the minutes for that year, shewing an increase of only 315 mem- bers above the number returned on the minutes for 1833. Facts like these speak for themselves; the require no comment from me. The M. E. Church in Canada, " scattered and peeled," stript of the chapels, and in many instances, destitute of means to rebuild others, has every yeai-. Lad a respectable increase and has now two Annual Confer- ences composed of seventy preachers, 4 districts, 40 circuits and stations, with a membership of 8,810. Will our American brcvhren say that notwithstanding the Union has proved a most signal failure, and has been abandoned after seven years' trial, as an unwise measure ? J Will they say that because the Confer- * " In 1833 we had twenty-five per cent, more Indians in Church Communion, and forty per cent, more Indian children in our Mission schools than we have at the present time," (1840.) Rev. E. Ryerson's speech before the special Conference. f So offensive was the Unioa to the people of Canada, that nearly one half of those who subscribed for the erection of the Upper Canada Acad- emy withheld their subscriptions. See Christian Guardian of Nov. 25th, 1840. " There is no reason to believe, that the Upper Canada Academy, ever would have beeu greatly embarrassed, had not nearly one half of the subscriptions been withheld after the Union." I " I do nat regret the opposition I have experienced — the reproaches I have incurred — the labors I have endured ; but I do regret — and every day's reflection adds fresh poignancy to my regrets — that in carrying out a measure which I had hoped would have proved an unspeakable blessing to my native country, I have lost so many friends op my youth. No young man in Canada, had more friends amongst all Christian denomina- tions than I had when the TV.ion took place. Many of them have become my enemies, I can loose property without concern or much thought ; but I cannot loose friends, and meet them in the character of enemies, with- out emotions not to be described. I feel that I have injured myself, and injured this connection, and I fear injured this Province, not by my obstinacy, but by my concessions. This is my sid and not the sins laid to my charge." Rev. E. Ryerson's speech before the Special Confer- ence, 1840. Is it not a matter of astonishment after such " concessions " from Mr. Ryerson, that our Wesleyan friends leave no opportunity unimproved^ either in Canada or the United States, to " injure,'' if possible, the M. E. Church in "ublio ostimationi and for no other reason than- because we would not be partakers of their " sins." No other " tin " can be laid to* our " charge." i; ca 'i'Hfi UtAKDIAN COllRECTK >». "7" '° ine world,") which they themselves in trn"^^ government, ("the i^inisLran?SLl,a^eu^Slvt^r f'' "^^«°«-«r a body o^> and code of Jaws, rules, or re"u LtTon^ TsJZ ' '?''^ «^' of doSe have bound themselves to abide by them ^^P]?'"/ '°^ exp<3dirnl. and 'capnce.'- Much less to u^l, ^^^v f "I'f '^ S''^^^*':^ ^^im or nd nyure those who conscientious " ,- - i V^V'^ '^".'^ ^^''^ *« overthrow them Scriptural and who were . wSir". ?M " "■'l^^ P^*^«'" ^elievW ^it the time of the TTnion, in Ini^f::..^/^^^ ^'^^ *h« changes mad! cont-n^d to maintain un^lt^^^^^i^ ^S£:^T "^T ^^'^'r rules of the united societies and ., "' """^« of the gospel, the general redeem. I thorn from you, and^Twh d^S^?|f ""* "^ ^he Churchfas we aro detoonined to o4r -e. i-VtlTers „d hv-'^^^^^^ '" tenaciously eWe a^d ri^ht hand of fellowship, only •£ we con •"'"' ''' "'^ ^'^"^ W the upon the pn...iples laid down Lj yourteC f ' ^^fry on our work should you (,,. induced to w4S ft a "'"'" «b««rvance. But you and our love for the inltitutions of ?"" u\ ""^ ff^-^titude to d cate our righteous adherence to The M ? Vk T'^f '^^ '^^^^ vin- ^Z'^^l!^'*i-- "P- her walls, w:uM Lf f.^' jt^ ^^^^ who ^^i«tmgu.shed characte4ics and^ti;:?tt l^aVoSfbod;^ ^^ ^" ^^ y ^T'r "^^" wuicnman upon her walls wn„W u ''""\''"' wn^n those v Belleville, MarcJi, 1844. Thomas Websteb. I ^r