Chapter IV: Mission to Georgia. 1735‒””””1737 (2)

“DEAR SIR,—I am unwilling to lose the opportunity of writing
to you, by Capt. Thompson, and inquiring after the welfare of
yourself, your brother, Mr. Ingham, Mr. Delamotte, and the
whole colony of Georgia. I have read the journal of your voyage
to that new settlement, and can, with pleasure, discern the
footsteps of Divine Providence towards you.... Our dear friend
Mr. Broughton is curate at the Tower, and has undertaken to
preach to the poor prisoners in Ludgate every Tuesday in the
afternoon. Mr. Whitefield and Mr. Hervey propose to enter into
holy orders this next ordination. May they become burning and
shining lights in the Church! Sir John Phillips has been, for
several weeks, hindered from attending the societies, by reason
of sickness and infirmities. He piously allows Mr. Whitefield
£20 per annum. Several of Mr. Broughton’s late parishioners at
Cowley forget not the assembling of themselves together. Your
friends at Oxford continue to exhort and edify one another.
Tell me what progress you make in spiritualizing your flock;
and what probability there is of the Lord opening the door of
faith to the Indians.... May the God of love keep you all knit
together in the bond of charity, and may you at last receive a
beautiful crown at the Lord’s hand, and enter amongst angels
and archangels, to sing everlasting songs of praise to the Lord
Almighty. I desire your prayers for me and mine.

“J. THOROLD.”

The next was from James Hutton:—

“_September 3, 1736._

“DEAR SIR,—I am this day twenty-one years old. Mr. Whitefield
has taken orders, and is in town to supply Mr. Broughton’s
places at the Tower and Ludgate prison. Mr. Broughton reads
prayers every night to a religious society that meet in Wapping
chapel. Mr. Morgan is obliged by his father’s orders to study
physic at Leyden, where the name of Wesley stinks as well as
at Oxford. I had the happiness of seeing your good mother,
who came to town, in her way from Gainsborough, to Mr. Hall
first, and thence very soon to Tiverton. Mr. Law visited her
at Gainsborough, and again at London. Your mother desired her
blessing to you, and would have wrote, but had no time. She
prayed for you and blessed you. If all matters relating to
receiving your fellowship are not exact, write fresh ones,
and send over. Take care to inquire carefully and strictly
concerning the mission of the Moravian bishop. I will make what
inquiries I can. A great deal depends upon the validity of
ordinations.”[175]

At the same time, Hervey at Oxford wrote:—“I am still a most weak corrupt creature. But, blessed be the unmerited mercy of God, and thanks be to your never-to-be-forgotten example, that I am what I am! You have been both a father and a friend to me. I heartily thank you, as for all other favours, so especially for teaching me Hebrew.”[176]

William Chapman, a student of Pembroke College, wrote as follows:—“Your kind concern and repeated endeavours for my spiritual good, while at Oxford, will not suffer me to think that you have utterly lost all remembrance of me. I sit every evening with Mr. Hervey, that great champion of the Lord of hosts, and read five times a week to a religious society in St. Ebbs’ parish. God and the angels be with you!”[177]

Wesley, before leaving England, had begun to read the mystics, and on November 23, 1736, addressed a long letter to his brother Samuel, showing that, though he had been in danger of embracing their bewildering heresies, he had now abandoned them. He writes:—

“I think the rock on which I had the nearest made shipwreck of
the faith was the writings of the mystics: under which term I
comprehend all, and only those, who slight any of the means of
grace. I have drawn up a short scheme of their doctrines, and
beg your thoughts upon it, as soon as you can conveniently.
Give me them as particularly, fully, and strongly as your time
will permit. They may be of consequence, not only to all this
province, but to nations of Christians yet unborn.

“‘All means are not necessary for all men: therefore each
person must use such means, and such only, as he finds
necessary for him. When the end is attained the means cease.’

“‘Men utterly divested of free will, of self-love, and
self-activity, are entered into the passive state, and enjoy
such a contemplation as is not only above faith, but above
sight—such as is entirely free from images, thoughts, and
discourse, and never interrupted by sins of infirmity, or
voluntary distractions. They have absolutely renounced their
reason and understanding; else they could not be guided by a
Divine light. They seek no clear or particular knowledge of
anything, but only an obscure, general knowledge, which is far
better.’

“‘Having thus attained the end, the means must cease. Hope is
swallowed up in love. Sight, or something more than sight,
takes the place of faith. All particular virtues they possess
in the essence, and therefore need not the distinct exercise
of them. They work likewise all good works essentially, not
accidentally, and use all outward means, only as they are moved
thereto.’

“‘Public prayer, or any forms, they need not; for they pray
without ceasing. Sensible devotion in any prayer they despise;
it being a great hindrance to perfection. The Scripture
they need not read; for it is only His letter, with whom
they converse face to face. Neither do they need the Lord’s
supper; for they never cease to _remember_ Christ in the most
acceptable manner.’”

Such was the mystified balderdash which Wesley had been in danger of adopting. He concludes his letter thus:—

“May God deliver you and yours from all error, and all
unholiness! My prayers will never, I trust, be wanting for you.
I am, dear brother, my sister’s and your

“Most affectionate brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[178]

At the end of the year 1736, Wesley and Delamotte set out, on foot, to Cowpen, missed their way, walked through a cypress swamp, with the water breast high, and slept on the ground in their wet clothes, which during the night were frozen, and in the morning were white as snow. They then started for Frederica, fell short of provisions, used bear’s flesh, and proved it to be wholesome. Arriving on January 5, 1737, they found the people, as they expected, cold and heartless. Wesley’s life was repeatedly threatened; and, after spending twenty more days in this unhappy place, he departed from Frederica for ever. In his passage to Savannah he read a volume containing the works of Nicholas Machiavel, and formed the deliberate opinion, “that if all the other doctrines of devils, which have been committed to writing, were collected together in one volume, it would fall short of this; and that should a prince form himself by this book, so calmly recommending hypocrisy, treachery, lying, robbery, oppression, adultery, whoredom, and murder of all kinds, Domitian or Nero would be an angel of light compared to that man.”

Wesley had now been fifty-two weeks in America, twenty-four of which he had spent at Savannah, and the rest at Frederica and at other places between the two. He remained forty-six weeks longer. How was he occupied? And what were his troubles?

Delamotte was teaching between thirty and forty children at Savannah to read, write, and cast accounts, and Wesley catechized them every Saturday and Sunday afternoon. Every sabbath he had three public services, at five in the morning, twelve at mid-day, and three in the afternoon; and then at night as many of his parishioners as desired it met at his house, with whom he spent an hour in prayer, singing, and mutual exhortation. A similar meeting was held in the same place every Wednesday night, and selecter ones on all the other evenings of the week.

There being no immediate prospect of commencing a mission among the heathen, Wesley, Delamotte, and Ingham consulted together, and agreed that the last mentioned should return to England; and accordingly, after spending exactly fifty-five weeks in Georgia, he embarked for home, having literally done next to nothing either for the colonists or the Indians, with the exception of composing, in Dr. Byrom’s shorthand, a catalogue of half the words in the Indian language,[179] in a house built for him near the Indian town, a few miles from Savannah. The chief object of sending Ingham to England was to obtain more help for the colonists. In a letter dated February 16, 1737, and addressed to a friend in Lincoln College, Oxford, Wesley writes:—

“There is great need that God should put it into the hearts of
some, to come over to us, and labour with us in His harvest.
But I should not desire any to come unless on the same views
and conditions with us; without any temporal wages, other than
food and raiment, the plain conveniences of life. For one or
more, in whom was this mind, there would be full employment in
the province: either in assisting Mr. Delamotte or me, while we
were present here; or in supplying our places when abroad; or
in visiting the poor people in the smaller settlements as well
as at Frederica, all of whom are as sheep without a shepherd.

“By these labours of love might any that desired it be trained
up for the harder task of preaching the gospel to the heathen.
The difficulties he must then encounter God only knows;
probably martyrdom would conclude them. But those we have
hitherto met with have been small. Persecution, you know, is
the portion of every follower of Christ, wherever his lot is
cast; but it has hitherto extended no farther than words with
regard to us, unless in one or two inconsiderable instances.
Still, every man that would come hither ought to be willing and
ready to embrace the severer kinds of it.”[180]

Meanwhile, Oglethorpe’s troubles had begun. From a letter which Wesley wrote to him, on February 24, 1737, we learn that Sir Robert Walpole had turned against the general, and parliament had resolved to make a strict scrutiny into Georgian affairs. The trustees had charged Oglethorpe with misapplying moneys, and with abusing his entrusted power. Wesley adds: “Perhaps in some things you have shown you are but a man: perhaps I myself may have a little to complain of: but oh what a train of benefits have I received to lay in the balance against it! I bless God that ever you was born. I acknowledge His exceeding mercy in casting me into your hands. I own your generous kindness all the time we were at sea. I am indebted to you for a thousand favours here. Though all men should revile you, yet will not I.”[181]

Sinister rumours were circulated in reference to Wesley, as well as Oglethorpe. Hence the following hitherto unpublished letter, endorsed by Wesley thus:—“The Trustees’ Letter, June 17, 1737, fully acquitting me:”—

“_Trustees of Georgia to the Rev. J. Wesley._

“GEORGIA OFFICE, _June 15, 1737_.

“SIR,—The Rev. Mr. Burton has this day laid before the trustees
a letter from you to them, dated Savannah, March 4, 1737,
wherein you express a concern that they should receive an
accusation of your embezzling any part of their goods, and
likewise a desire to know the name of your accuser.

“The trustees have ordered me to assure you, that they are very
much surprised at any apprehensions you have of such accusation
being brought before them. No complaint of any kind has been
laid before them relating to you. They have never as a board,
nor has any of them privately, heard of one; nor have they the
least suspicion of any ground for one. They would not (if they
had received any) form a judgment of you without acquainting
you with the accusation, and the name of the accuser. At
the same time, they believe you will think it reasonable to
let them know who has informed you that any such accusation
has been brought before them, and that, for the future, you
will not believe nor listen to any private informations or
insinuations, that must make you uneasy, and may lead you to
distrust the justice of the trustees, and the regard they have
for you.

“The trustees are very sensible of the great importance of
the work you have engaged in; and they hope God will prosper
the undertaking, and support you in it; for they have much at
heart, not only the success of the colony in general, but the
progress of piety among the people, as well as the conversion
of the Indians. They are very glad to find that Mr. Causton
has seconded your endeavours to suppress vice and immorality,
and that a reformation gains ground, as you observe it does.
The trustees will take into consideration your application in
favour of Robert Haws, and have a regard to it.

“I am, sir, your most obedient servant,
“BENJAMIN MARTIN, _Secretary_.”

The following letter, also now first published, refers to the same subject, besides containing other information which we hope will be found not devoid of interest. It was addressed to “The Rev. Mr. John Wesley, at Savannah, in Georgia:”—

“OSSET, _October 19, 1737_.

“DEAR BROTHER,—By your silence one would suspect that you
were offended at my last letter. Am I your enemy because I
tell you the truth? But perhaps I was too severe. Forgive me
then. However, I am sure that, by soaring too high in your own
imaginations, you have had a great downfall in your spiritual
progress. Be lowly, therefore, in your own eyes. Humble
yourself before the Lord, and He will lift you up. I do assure
you it is out of pure love, and with concern, that I write. I
earnestly wish your soul’s welfare. O pray for mine also. The
Lord preserve you!

“Could you, think you, live upon the income of your fellowship?
If you can, do. The trustees are indeed very willing to support
you, and they take it ill that anybody should say you have been
too expensive. But the Bishop of London (as I have heard),
and some others, have been offended at your expenses. And not
indeed altogether without reason, because you declared at your
leaving England that you should want scarcely anything. I just
give you these hints. Pray for direction, and then act as you
judge best.

“Charles is so reserved: I know little about him: he neither
writes to me, nor comes to see me: what he intends is best
known to himself. Mr. Hutton’s family go on exceedingly well.
Your friend Mr. Morgan (I hear) either has, or is about
publishing a book, to prove that every one baptized with water
is regenerate. All friends at Oxford go on well. Mr. Kinchin,
Mr. Hutchins, Mr. Washington, Bell, Turney, Hervey, Watson,
are all zealous. Mr. Atkinson labours under severe trials in
Westmoreland; but is steady, and sincere, and an excellent
Christian. Dick Smith is weak, but not utterly gone. Mr.
Robson, and Grieves, are but indifferent: the latter is married
to a widow, and teaching school at Northampton. Mr. Thompson,
of Queen’s, has declared his resolution of following Christ.

“Remember me to Mr. Wallis, Mark Hind, and the Davison family,
Mrs. Gilbert Mears, Mr. Campbell, Mr. and Mrs. Burnside, Mr.
and Mrs. Williamson.

“Yours in Christ,
“BENJAMIN INGHAM.”

Wesley’s ideas of religion, at this period, may be gathered from the following extracts from a letter, dated “Savannah, March 28, 1737,” and addressed to “William Wogan, Esq., in Spring Gardens, London.”[182]

“I entirely agree with you, that religion is love, and peace,
and joy in the Holy Ghost; that, as it is the happiest, so
it is the cheerfulest thing in the world; that it is utterly
inconsistent with moroseness, sourness, severity, and indeed
with whatever is not according to the softness, sweetness, and
gentleness of Christ Jesus. I believe it is equally contrary
to all preciseness, stiffness, affectation, and unnecessary
singularity. I allow, too, that prudence, as well as zeal, is
of the utmost importance in the Christian life. But I do not
yet see any possible case wherein trifling conversation can be
an instance of it. In the following scriptures I take all such
to be flatly forbidden: Matt. xii. 36; Eph. v. 4, and iv. 29;
Col. iv. 6.

“That I shall be laughed at for this, I know; so was my Master.
I am not for a stern, austere manner of conversing. No: let all
the cheerfulness of faith be there, all the joyfulness of hope,
all the amiable sweetness—the winning easiness of love. If we
must have art, ‘_Hic mihi erunt artes_.’”

Again, in another letter, written to Mrs. Chapman a day later, he says:—

“You seem to apprehend that I believe religion to be
inconsistent with cheerfulness, and with a social friendly
temper. So far from it, that I am convinced, as true religion
cannot be without cheerfulness, so steady cheerfulness cannot
be without true religion. I am equally convinced that religion
has nothing sour, austere, unsociable, unfriendly in it; but
on the contrary, implies the most winning sweetness, the most
amiable softness and gentleness. Are you for having as much
cheerfulness as you can? So am I. Do you endeavour to keep
alive your taste for all the truly innocent pleasures of life?
So do I. Do you refuse no pleasure but what is a hindrance to
some greater good, or has a tendency to some evil? It is my
very rule. In particular, I pursue this rule in eating, which
I seldom do without much pleasure. I know it is the will of
God, that I should enjoy every pleasure that leads to my taking
pleasure in Him, and in such a measure as most leads to it. We
are to do nothing but what, directly or indirectly, leads to
our holiness; and to do every such thing with this design, and
in such a measure as may most promote it.

“I am not mad, my dear friend, for asserting these to be the
words of truth and soberness; neither are any of those, either
in England or here, who have hitherto attempted to follow
me. I am and must be an example to my flock; not indeed in
my prudential rules, but, in some measure, in my spirit and
life and conversation. Yet all of them are, in your sense of
the word, unlearned, and most of them of low understanding;
and still not one of them has been, as yet, in any case of
conscience which was not solved. As to the nice distinctions
you speak of, it is you, my friend, who are lost in them.
We have no need of nice distinctions; for I exhort all, and
dispute with none. I feed my brethren in Christ, as He giveth
me power, with the pure, unmixed milk of the word; and those
who are as little children receive it, not as the word of man,
but as the word of God.”[183]

These are important letters, as tending to refute the commonly received opinion, that, at this period of his history, Wesley was morose, sour, gloomy, and in fact thought that cheerfulness was inconsistent with religion. His views and some of his practices might seem to many to be peculiar; but he was a cheerful and happy man, even amid the vigils, fastings, and solitudes of Georgia. Some of his views were novel, but they were not incompatible with happiness. He writes: “When I first landed at Savannah, a gentlewoman said, ‘I assure you, sir, you will see as _well dressed_ a congregation on Sunday as most you have seen in London.’ I did so; and soon after I took occasion to expound those scriptures which relate to dress; and all the time that I afterward ministered at Savannah, I saw neither gold in the church, nor costly apparel, but the congregation in general was almost constantly clothed in plain clean linen or woollen.”[184] This wears an aspect of anchorite severity, but still Wesley and his plain-robed followers were happy.

In April, 1737, Wesley began to learn the Spanish language, in order to converse with his Jewish parishioners. Easter being in the same month, he “had every day in this great and holy week a sermon and the holy communion.” Finding that a clergyman in Carolina had been marrying some of his (Wesley’s) parishioners, without either banns or licence, he set out for Charlestown to put a stop to such proceedings. Mr. Garden, the Bishop of London’s commissary, assured him he would take care no such irregularity should be committed for the future. At Garden’s request, Wesley preached a sermon on, “whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world”; which led a man of education and character to object—“Why if this be Christianity, a Christian must have more courage than Alexander the Great.”

Returning to Savannah, in the month of May, Wesley found one of his congregation, who had been exemplarily religious, turned a deist; and expressed the opinion that bad a religion as Popery is, no religion is worse; and that a baptized infidel is twofold worse than even a bigoted papist. This was only one of Wesley’s trials. A wicked woman, whom he had offended, decoyed him into her house, threw him down, and, with her scissors, cut off from one side of his head the whole of those long locks of auburn hair, which he had been accustomed to keep in the most perfect order. After this, he preached at Savannah with his hair long on one side and short on the other, those sitting on the side which had been cut observing, “What a cropped head of hair the young parson has.”[185]

At Whitsuntide, four of his scholars, after being instructed daily for several weeks, were admitted to the Lord’s table, and many of the other children evinced a remarkable seriousness in their behaviour and conversation. This was doubtless a cause of great joy both to Wesley and his friend Delamotte, each of whom taught a school, and, like all schoolmasters, met with discouragements. A part of the boys in Delamotte’s school wore stockings and shoes, and the others not. The former ridiculed the latter. Delamotte tried to put a stop to this uncourteous banter, but told Wesley he had failed. Wesley replied, “I think I can cure it. If you will take charge of my school next week I will take charge of yours, and will try.” The exchange was made, and on Monday morning Wesley went into school barefoot. The children seemed surprised, but without any reference to past jeerings Wesley kept them at their work. Before the week was ended, the shoeless ones began to gather courage; and some of the others, seeing their minister and master come without shoes and stockings, began to copy his example, and thus the evil was effectually cured.”[186]

In the early summer of 1737, Whitefield wrote to Wesley, telling him of his success in England. A young country lad had brought him a peck of apples seven miles upon his back, as a token of gratitude for the benefit he had derived from Whitefield’s ministry, and had such a sense of the Divine presence that he walked, for the most part, with his hat off his head. God was also moving on the hearts of some young ladies. Whitefield continues:—

“The devil, I find, has a particular spite against weekly
communion; but I am in hope we shall have the sacrament
administered every Sunday at the cathedral. It would have been
mentioned to the bishop ere now, but Oxford friends advised to
defer it till next summer.

“But now I have mentioned the bishop: alas! how should I
tremble to tell you how I have been continually disturbed with
thoughts, that I, a worm taken from a common public-house,
should, ere I die, be one myself. Your earnest prayers, surely,
will not be wanting for me, that I may not split on that most
dangerous of all rocks—worldly ambition. Parsonages, I believe,
are providing for me; but I trust Satan will never catch me by
pluralities, or induce me to take upon me anything inconsistent
with the duty of a disciple of Jesus Christ. I hope our friends
all continue steadfast and zealous at Oxford. My love to the
young merchant, whose example I hope we shall all be enabled
to follow, if God requires our assistance in Georgia. O may
you go on and prosper, and, in the strength of God, make the
devil’s kingdom shake about his ears! I received benefit by
your father’s ‘Advice to a Young Clergyman.’”[187]

Whitefield’s dream about being made a bishop is amusing; and yet Providence and grace made him greater than a bishop.

Wesley still felt intensely anxious respecting the heathen. In July he met a Frenchman, who had lived several months among the Chicasaws, and wrote to Dr. Humphreys as follows:—[188]

“Concerning the conversion of the heathen, where is the seed
sown, the _sanguis martyrum_? Do we hear of any who have sealed
the faith with their blood in all this vast continent? Or do
we read of any church flourishing in any age or nation without
this seed first sown there? Give me leave, sir, to speak my
thoughts freely. When God shall put it into the hearts of some
of His servants, whom He hath already delivered from earthly
hopes and fears, to join hand in hand in this labour of love;
when out of these He shall have chosen one or more, to magnify
Him in the sight of the heathen by dying, not with a stoical
or Indian indifference, but blessing and praying for their
murderers, and praising God in the midst of flame with joy
unspeakable and full of glory, then the rest, waxing bold by
their sufferings, shall go forth in the name of the Lord God,
and by the power of His might cast down every high thing that
exalteth itself against the faith of Christ. Then shall ye see
Satan, the grand ruler of this New World, as lightning fall
from heaven!”

Oh for missionaries like these! Wesley’s notions are right. Men going merely because others send them, or men going merely to obtain a livelihood, are not the men to convert the inhabitants of lands like Africa, India, Japan, and China. To make an impression there, men must be animated with the martyrs’ spirit. Church history, including the history of missions, affords abundant proof of this. Mere duty-doing ministers are bad enough in England, but they are vastly worse when among the heathen. Money spent upon them there is worse than wasted; for their cold perfunctory labours produce, upon the whole, a bad effect instead of good. The greatest boon the church could now receive from the hands of God would be a multiplication of ministers and missionaries like those which Wesley was sighing for in Georgia.

From Wesley’s private manuscript journal, we learn that in July, by going from house to house, he took a census of his parishioners, and computed that there were in Savannah 518 inhabitants, of whom 149 were under sixteen years of age. Frederica was without a minister, though three hundred acres of land had been granted by the trustees for a church establishment in that unhappy town.[189] Other places with scanty populations were equally destitute. New Ebenezer had the Moravians; and Darien had Mr. M’Leod, a serious, resolute, and pious Presbyterian: but this seems to have been all the ministerial agency existing in Georgia. Hence the following letter, addressed by Wesley to his friends at Oxford:—

“SAVANNAH, _September 8, 1737_.

“... Long since, I begun to visit my parishioners in order,
from house to house; but I could not go on two days longer. The
sick were increasing so fast as to require all the time I had
to spare—from one to five in the afternoon. Nor is even that
enough to see them all, as I would do, daily. In Frederica and
all the smaller settlements here are above five hundred sheep
almost without a shepherd. What a single man can do is neither
seen nor felt. Where are ye who are very zealous for the Lord
of hosts? Who will rise up with me against the wicked? Whose
spirit is moved within him to prepare himself for publishing
glad tidings to those on whom the Sun of Righteousness never
yet arose? Do you ask what you shall have? Why, all you desire:
food to eat, raiment to put on, a place where to lay your head,
and a crown of life that fadeth not away! Do you seek means
of building up yourselves in the knowledge and love of God? I
know of no place under heaven where there are more than in this
place. Does your heart burn within you to turn many others to
righteousness? Behold, the whole land, thousands of thousands
are before you! I will resign to any of you all or any part of
my charge. Choose what seemeth good in your own eyes. There are
within these walls children of all ages and dispositions. Who
will bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord,
till they are meet to be preachers of righteousness? Here are
adults from the farthest parts of Europe, and Asia, and the
inmost kingdoms of Africa; add to these the known and unknown
nations of this vast continent, and you will indeed have a
great multitude which no man can number.”[190]

While Wesley was thus longing for help, events were transpiring, by which he himself within three months was driven out of Georgia, and obliged to return to England. This was the closing scene in Wesley’s missionary life, and though a painful one it must not be shirked. All the facts in the writer’s possession shall be given, and the reader shall have materials to form his own opinion. The chief actors in the scene, besides Wesley himself, were Sophia Christiana Hopkey, Thomas Causton, and William Williamson.

Causton was one of the first company of emigrants, and landed in Georgia with Oglethorpe, in February, 1733. He was a man of no substance, and his character was not as good as it might have been. In fact, he left England in disgrace, having practised a fraud upon the public revenue. He was naturally proud, covetous, cunning, and deceitful. By his clever rascality he wriggled himself into Oglethorpe’s favour, and, on the arrival of the few emigrant gaol-birds in the Savannah river, was appointed a sort of dictator of the infant settlement, and had charge of the stores which the trustees sent over for the use of the colonists. We have already seen that, even when Wesley left for England at the end of the year 1737, the inhabitants of Savannah were not more than 518 in number, of whom only 369 were adult males and females. This was no large kingdom; but Thomas Causton was a large man, because he was at the head of it. Indeed, the molehill empire seems to have magnified itself to the utmost extent possible, by the introduction of law, the establishment of courts, the appointment of officers, the election of juries, and the adoption of everything else within its power which was likely to make it a pompous minikin miniature of the great system of government at home. Causton was “chief magistrate,” and of course a “chief” had subordinates under him. There was a recorder, also a bailiff. There were constables, and tithingmen, and other great functionaries, all armed with solemn authority to rule, govern, and keep in order, first themselves, and then about five hundred men, women, and children, including John Wesley the Oxford priest, and Charles Delamotte the merchant master of almost a ragged school.

“The ocean is in tempest tossed,
To waft a feather and to drown a fly.”

Of all the great powers, however, in this log-built village of five hundred souls, Thomas Causton, in his own estimation, and in fact, was greatest. The other Tom Thumb magistrates were ciphers in his august presence. Sometimes, indeed, he would ask their opinion in public on the state matters of the great city of Savannah; but it was principally to have the pleasure of uttering an opinion of his own, directly opposite to theirs. Juries he threatened without the least compunction, and especially when their verdicts disagreed with his inclinations. As his power increased, so did his pride, haughtiness, and cruelty. The court in which this fraudulent refugee—we beg his pardon, this “chief magistrate”—expounded law and dispensed justice, was guarded by eight freeholders, with an officer to direct their movements, all armed with guns and bayonets. Seated, in such high dignity, and so far above his fellows, upon the judicial bench, it was beneath his office to sit uncovered; and hence he almost invariably wore his hat, even when administering an oath. Should any foolish wight be bold enough to oppose, in the least degree, his arbitrary proceedings, the “chief magistrate” at once threatened the impudent recusant with the stocks, the whipping-post, and a lodging in the log-house prison. Even his fellow officials were treated with scant respect. In December, 1734, the trustees sent a Mr. Gordon from England, to act as magistrate; but Causton, not liking a compeer, refused him provisions from the store, and he was obliged to leave. Indeed, Causton, who had sufficient cleverness to induce Oglethorpe, despite his roguery in England, to make him magistrate in Savannah, seems to have used the same worldly cunning in allowing none to be his subordinates except those whom he could, with the utmost ease, twist to his own purposes. Mr. Bailiff Parker, mentioned in Wesley’s journal, had nothing to support himself and his large family, except what he earned by his daily labour as a sawyer. He was a man of no education, and was an absolute slave to liquor. Another bailiff was a man of the name of Daru, nearly seventy years old, and crazed in both body and mind; and another was R. Gilbert, who could neither read nor write. Causton’s despotic career was of short duration. The same grand jury which found, under Causton’s guidance, ten bills against Wesley, immediately proceeded to examine the official doings of their own illustrious “chief magistrate;” and found charges against him, to the effect that he had grossly abused his power as keeper of the public stores, and that he had hindered people settling on the lands that the trustees had allotted them. These and other charges, dated September 1, 1737, were sent to England; and the result was—Causton, in October, 1738, was turned out of all his offices, and the store was sold to pay the trustees’ debts; Causton’s certified accounts were refused by the trustees as incorrect; William Williamson was made recorder, and Henry Parker (the drunken uneducated sawyer above mentioned) was made first magistrate; and, finally, Causton, the great man who prosecuted Wesley, and drove him from Georgia, settled down at Oxstead, three miles from Savannah; and there, we hope, he lived a more honest life than he had done in England.[191]

Sophia Christiana Hopkey was the niece of Thomas Causton’s wife. William Williamson, who became her husband, was a young adventurer, who arrived in Georgia a short time after Wesley did.[192] And now, with these explanations, let us look at the miserable business, which, in a life of Wesley, cannot be omitted.

Wesley landed in Georgia on February 5, 1736, and seems at once to have become acquainted with Miss Hopkey. Oglethorpe, Charles Wesley, Ingham, and fifty other settlers set out immediately for Frederica. The young lady went with them; and, on March 22, Wesley wrote to his brother concerning her as follows: “I conjure you, spare no time, no address or pains, to learn the true cause of the former distress of my friend. I much doubt you are in the right. God forbid that she should again, in like manner, miss the mark. Watch over her; keep her as much as possible. Write to me, how I ought to write to her.”[193]

Miss Hopkey was a young lady of good sense, and elegant in person and manners. She was introduced to Wesley as a sincere inquirer after salvation, and soon took every possible opportunity of being in his company, and requested him to assist her in studying French. Oglethorpe also did his best to help on a courtship. Meanwhile, Wesley was seized with fever, which confined him for nearly a week; and the young lady (who would hardly allow Delamotte to do anything for his friend) attended him night and day. She even consulted Oglethorpe what kind of female dress Wesley liked the best, and therefore came always dressed in white, neatly and simply elegant. Young Delamotte began to be suspicious, and asked Wesley if he meant to marry Miss Hopkey. Delamotte’s question puzzled Wesley, but, perceiving that Delamotte was prejudiced against the lady, he waived an answer. The next step taken was to consult David Nitschmann, the Moravian bishop. Nitschmann’s answer was: “Marriage is not unlawful; but whether it is now expedient for you, and whether this lady is a proper wife for you, ought to be maturely weighed.” Wesley’s perplexity was increased, and he now resolved to submit the matter to the elders of the Moravian church. When he entered the house where they were met together, he found Delamotte in the midst of them. On naming his business, Nitschmann said: “We have considered your case; will you abide by our decision?” After some hesitation, Wesley replied, “I will.” “Then,” said Nitschmann, “we advise you to proceed no further in the matter!” Wesley answered, “The will of the Lord be done!” “From this time,” says Henry Moore, “he avoided everything that tended to continue the intimacy with Miss Hopkey, and behaved with the greatest caution towards her.”[194]

The whole of this is painfully ludicrous. Mr. Moore, in a manuscript letter before us, says that he had the account from Wesley’s own lips, and that he is not aware that it was ever given to any one except himself. He adds that Dr. Coke knew nothing of it, and that Wesley refrained from publishing the whole of the affair in his printed journal, _chiefly_ through tenderness to General Oglethorpe. It might be so; but we greatly doubt the correctness of Moore’s assertion, that, from the time Wesley consulted the Moravian elders, he “avoided everything that tended to continue the intimacy.” Wesley was in love, and, like all lovers, he did, not wicked, but foolish things. Let us look at some other facts.

At this period, the summer of 1736, Wesley’s method of preaching, and his manner of life, excited great attention in the small settlement of Savannah; and there were not a few who charged him with making the people idle by summoning them so frequently to public prayers. His more than ordinary friendship with Miss Hopkey was also a subject of common conversation.[195] He was looked upon as a Roman Catholic—(1) Because he rigidly excluded all Dissenters from the holy communion, until they first gave up their faith and principles, and, like Richard Turner and his sons, submitted to be rebaptized by him; (2) Because Roman Catholics were received by him as saints; (3) Because he endeavoured to establish and enforce confession, penance, and mortification; mixed wine with water at the sacrament; and appointed deaconesses in accordance with what he called the Apostolic Constitutions.[196] He was, in point of fact, a Puseyite, a hundred years before Dr. Pusey flourished.

Miss Hopkey was put under his ghostly care. She was one of his early morning congregation, and constantly went to his lodgings, in order to be further instructed.[197] He fell in love with her; and there can be little doubt that he made proposals to marry her, and, if his own inclinations had been carried out, the marriage would have been completed.[198] The following extracts are taken from his unpublished journal.

1736. October 16.—Frederica. “Poor Miss Sophy was scarce the
shadow of what she was when I left her. I endeavoured to
convince her of it, but in vain. And to put it effectually out
of my power to do so, she was resolved to return to England
immediately. I tried to divert her from her fatal resolution
of going to England, and, after several fruitless attempts,
I at length prevailed. Nor was it long before she more than
recovered the ground she had lost.”

“October 25.—I took boat for Savannah with Miss Sophy.”

“In the beginning of December, I advised Miss Sophy to sup
earlier, and not immediately before she went to bed. She did
so, and on this little circumstance what an inconceivable train
of consequences depend. Not only—

‘All the colour of my remaining life’

for her; but perhaps all my happiness too, in time and in
eternity.”

“February 5, 1737.—One of the most remarkable dispensations of
Providence towards me began to show itself this day. For many
days after, I could not at all judge which way the scale would
turn; nor was it fully determined till March 4th, on which day
God commanded me to pull out my right eye; and, by His grace,
I determined to do so: but, being slack in the execution, on
Saturday, March 12th, God being very merciful to me, my friend
performed what I could not.”

What is the meaning of this? Two other extracts from the same journal will show.

“March 7.—I walked with Mr. Causton to his country lot, and
plainly felt that, had God given me such a retirement with the
companion I desired, I should have forgot the work for which I
was born, and have set up my rest in this world.”

“March 8.—Miss Sophy engaged herself to Mr. Williamson, a
person not remarkable for handsomeness, neither for greatness,
neither for wit, or knowledge, or sense, and least of all for
religion; and on Saturday, March 12th” [four days after!] “they
were married at Purrysburg,—this being the day which completed
the year from my first speaking to her. What Thou doest, O God,
I know not now, but I shall know hereafter.”

Such is Wesley’s own statement. The disappointment was a most painful blow. Forty-nine years after, he wrote, in reference to this event, “I remember when I read these words in the church at Savannah, ‘Son of man, behold, I take from thee the desire of thine eyes with a stroke,’ I was pierced through as with a sword, and could not utter a word more. But our comfort is, He that made the heart can heal the heart.”[199] He also wrote to his brother Samuel at the time, who replied, “I am sorry you are disappointed in the match, because you are very unlikely to find another.”[200]

With this evidence before us, it is difficult to give credence to Henry Moore’s assertion, “that Wesley never allowed himself to _determine_ on a marriage with Miss Hopkey.”[201] But in addition to all this, there is the testimony of the young lady herself, contained in her affidavit, given to the Savannah court, and which Wesley inserts in the private journal already mentioned. In that document she avers that she was committed to the care of Mr. John Wesley, the missionary, by her relatives; that he proposed marriage to her; and that he further proposed that, as she might not like his present wandering way of life, he would settle in Savannah. She adds that, about three days before she married Williamson, she was visited by Wesley, who urged her to tell him whether she had not been overpersuaded or forced to agree to marry Williamson by her friends, and whether such a marriage might not still be prevented. He also added that, if there was anything in his way of life (by which she understood him to mean fastings and other mortifications), which she disliked, he would make all these things easy to her, in case she would consent to marry him.

Such is the substance of Sophy’s statement. How is it possible, in the face of all this, to believe Henry Moore’s statement, that there was no intimacy between Wesley and Miss Hopkey, from the time that he consulted the Moravian elders?

We grudge the space that has been devoted to this subject; but perhaps the following reasons will be accepted by the reader, as an apology for the tax upon his patience.

1. The matter, though trivial in itself, has been made important by the conflicting statements of the biographers. Mr. Moore says Wesley never came to the determination to marry her. Dr. Whitehead says he did intend to marry her. Southey agrees with Whitehead; Mr. Watson presumes that Mr. Moore is a better authority than Dr. Whitehead; Mr. Jackson seems to think the same. We have given all the facts within our reach, and leave the reader to form his own opinion.

2. Though the courtship of young people is an ordinary, commonplace sort of thing, inconceivably great events were dependent upon the result of this. John Wesley was thirty-three years old, and was perfectly justified in seeking to obtain a wife; neither is there anything to be found fault with in his intercourse with Miss Hopkey, unless it was his silly simplicity in asking the opinion, if not consent, of the Moravians. The young lady, also, was beautiful, and accomplished, and, to all human appearance, pious. Her uncle was a respectable rascal; but that was no fault of hers. We know nothing to her prejudice before she became a wife, except that it might have been more decorously prudent if she had allowed Delamotte to nurse Wesley in his fever instead of doing it, day and night, herself; and that there was certainly an impetuous haste, not to be commended, in her marrying Mr. Williamson only four days after he first proposed to her. Excepting this, the friendship, courtship, or whatever else the reader likes to call it, between Wesley and his “poor Sophy” seems to have been sincere, pure, honourable, and, in the opinion of Oglethorpe, who was not ill qualified to judge, desirable. But, supposing the courtship had ended in marriage, is it likely that we should ever have heard of Wesley at Bristol, Kingswood, Kennington Common, and Moorfields? Is it likely that there would ever have been any “United Societies of the People called Methodists”? Should we have ever heard of either the Methodism of the past or present? Perhaps an equally great work might have been witnessed; but the great Head of the church must have wrought it by other agencies and means; for had John Wesley married Sophia Christiana Hopkey, the probability is that, instead of returning to England and beginning the greatest religious revival of modern times, he would have settled in Georgia, and, like another Xavier, have spent a most spiritual and devoted life in converting Indian and other kinds of heathen. The results of such a life might have been glorious. Who can tell what might have been its influence upon the civilisation and perpetuation of the nobly formed aboriginal inhabitants of the vast American continent? Would America, in the decline of the nineteenth century, have been inhabited by European strangers, or by educated, civilised, hardworking, prosperous descendants of the wild Indians of the woods? These are useless questions, because questions none of us can answer; but the mere suggestion of such points will serve to show that Wesley’s courtship in Georgia was pregnant with infinite momentousness. “The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of isles be glad: clouds and darkness are round about Him; righteousness and judgment are the habitation of His throne” (Ps. xcvii. 1, 2).

3. Then a third reason, for dwelling at so great a length on Wesley’s courtship, is, that the courtship was very improperly mixed up with the subsequent troubles which led to his almost forceful departure from the Georgian colony. But this brings us to the remainder of Wesley’s Georgian history, which shall now be given as succinctly as possible.

We have already seen that Wesley was an extreme ritualist. He himself, nearly a dozen years subsequent to his flight from Georgia, gives us a specimen of his high church bigotry and intolerance. Having inserted in his journal a beautiful letter written to him by John Martin Bolzius, he, under the date of September, 1749, remarks: “What a truly Christian piety and simplicity breathe in these lines! And yet this very man, when I was at Savannah, did I refuse to admit to the Lord’s table, because he was not baptized; that is, not baptized by a minister who had been episcopally ordained. Can any one carry high church zeal higher than this? How well have I been since beaten with mine own staff!”[202]

Wesley still paid pastoral attentions to Mrs. Williamson as one of his parishioners. Her not too accomplished husband took umbrage at this, and, eight days after her marriage, forbade her attending his place of worship, or ever to speak to him again.[203] Notwithstanding this interdict, however, we find her on the 3rd of July at a sacramental service, at the conclusion of which Wesley mentioned certain things which he thought reprovable in her behaviour. This made her extremely angry, and, three days later, Causton, accompanied by the bailiff and the recorder, came to demand an explanation. Wesley gave his visitors to understand that, in the execution of his office, and acting without respect of persons, he might find it necessary to repel one of Causton’s family from the holy communion. He further told the “chief magistrate” what the people of Savannah were saying against his magisterial proceedings.[204] All this made the coming storm more threatening.

Some weeks elapsed; and then, on August 7, five months after her marriage, Wesley refused to allow Mrs. Williamson to join in the Lord’s supper. The next day, Mr. Recorder issued a warrant for the apprehension of “John Wesley, clerk,” and commanding the constables and tithingmen to bring him before one of the bailiffs of Savannah, to answer the complaint of William Williamson for defaming his wife, and refusing to administer to her the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, in a public congregation, without cause; “by which the said William Williamson was damaged one thousand pounds sterling.”

Wesley was arrested and brought before Mr. Bailiff Parker and Mr. Recorder Christie. His answer to the charge was, “that the giving or refusing the Lord’s supper being a matter purely ecclesiastical, he could not acknowledge their power to interrogate him concerning it.” The bailiff told him he must appear at the next Savannah court; and Williamson demanded bail for his appearance, but the officials ruled that Wesley’s word was in itself sufficient.

Two days later, Causton called on Wesley, and demanded that he should send to Mrs. Williamson, in writing, “the reasons for repelling her before the whole congregation.” Wesley complied, and wrote as follows:—

“_To Mrs. Sophia Williamson._

“At Mr. Causton’s request, I write once more. The rules whereby
I proceed are these:—

“‘So many as intend to be partakers of the holy communion shall
signify their names to the curate, at least some time the day
before.’ This you did not do.

“‘And if any of these have done any wrong to his neighbours, by
word or deed, so that the congregation be thereby offended, the
curate shall advertise him, that in anywise he presume not to
come to the Lord’s table until he hath openly declared himself
to have truly repented.’

“If you offer yourself at the Lord’s table on Sunday, I will
advertise you (as I have done more than once) wherein you have
done wrong. And when you have openly declared yourself to have
truly repented, I will administer to you the mysteries of God.

“_August 11, 1737._

“JOHN WESLEY.”

On receiving this, Causton began to read, to as many of the people as he could collect together, extracts from the letters which Wesley had written to himself or to his niece, from the beginning of their acquaintance, adding comments of his own, to Wesley’s disadvantage. Others of Causton’s family were assiduous in their endeavours to convince their neighbours that Wesley had repelled Mrs. Williamson from the communion because she had refused to marry him. In the midst of all this Wesley writes: “I sat still at home, and, I thank God, easy, having committed my cause to Him, and remembering His word, ‘Blessed is the man that endureth temptation; for when he is tried he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love Him.”[205]

Meanwhile, Causton desired Mr. Burnside, the trustees’ secretary, to sign a certificate to the effect that Mrs. Williamson had been for ten months past as constant a communicant as any other, and that she had been of unblamable behaviour. Mr. Burnside said he could not sign it with a safe conscience, knowing it to be false. Upon which Causton severely reproached him, and discharged him from his employment. However, a number of names were procured to the certificate, though, Wesley adds, the first part of it was shamefully untrue, for Mrs. Williamson had omitted communicating nine times in three months; in other words, had only communicated once a month instead of once a week.[206]