Chapter XIX: Letters—1725–1735 (3)

“Thus far I have written with my own hand, both to you and your
brother, for many days together; but I am now so heartily tired that I
must, contrary to my resolution, get my son Whitelamb to transcribe
and finish it. I have done what I could, with such a shattered head
and body, to satisfy the scruples which your brother has raised
against my proposal, from conscience and duty; but if your way of
thinking be the same with mine, especially after you have read and
weighed what follows, you will be able to convince him in a much
clearer and stronger manner.

“The remaining considerations I offered to him were for the most part
such as follow:—I urged, among other things, the great precariousness
of my own health, and the sensible decay of my strength, so that he
would hardly know me if he saw me now; the deplorable state in which I
should leave your mother and the family, and the loss of near forty
years’ honest labour in this place, where I could expect no other, but
that the field which I have been so long sowing with good seed, and
the vineyard, which I have planted with no ignoble vine, must be soon
rooted up, and the fences of it broken down,—for I am morally
satisfied, if your brothers both slight it, Mr P—— will be my
successor.

“I hinted at one thing, which I mentioned in my letter to your
brother, whereon I depend more than upon all my own simple reasoning;
and that is, earnest prayer to Him who smiles at the strongest
resolutions of mortals, and can, in a moment, change or demolish them;
who alone can bend the inflexible sinew, and order the irregular wills
of us simple men to His own glory, and to our happiness. While the
anchor holds, I despair of nothing, but firmly believe that He who is
best will do what is best, whether we earnestly will it or will it
not. There I rest the whole matter, and leave it with Him, to whom I
have committed all my concerns, without exception and without reserve,
for soul and body, estate and family, time and eternity.[326]

“2. As to the second part of my letter concerning R. Ellison,[327] I
have charity crammed down my throat every day, and sometimes his
company at meals, which you will believe as pleasant to me as all my
physic. But this is beyond the reach of all my little prudence, and
therefore I find I must leave it as I have done, in some good measure
before, to Him who orders all things.

“3. The third part of my letter is in relation to my son Whitelamb,
and is of almost as great concern as the former, and on some accounts
perhaps greater.[328] You will find the whole affair contained in a
letter I lately sent to Mr Oglethorpe, and in my son Whitelamb’s to
myself. The letters are so full, that they have exhausted what we had
to say on that subject; and nothing at present need or can be added. I
desire you therefore to weigh the whole with the utmost impartiality;
and, if you are of the same mind with myself and your mother, who
entirely approves of the design, that you would yourself write to Mr
Oglethorpe, as I promised you would, and send him your thoughts, and
use your good offices about it.

“And now, as to my minute affairs, I doubt not but you will, as you
gave me hopes when you went into Devon, improve your interest among
the gentlemen, your friends, and get me some more subscribers, as
likewise an account whether there be any prospect yet remaining of
obtaining any favour from the Duke of Newcastle, in relation to the
affair.[329]—Yours,

“SAMUEL WESLEY.”[330]

-----

Footnote 325:

His son-in-law, who was a doctor at Epworth.

Footnote 326:

Samuel Wesley, jun., wrote to his brother John the day after he
received this letter from his father; and a sharp correspondence was
carried on between the two brothers, until the 4th of March 1735,
which was within two months of their father’s death. John, however, at
that time, remained as firmly convinced as ever that he could serve
God and his Church better at Oxford than he could if he removed to
Epworth.—MOORE’s _Life of Wesley_, vol. i. p. 231.

Footnote 327:

This was the rich man who married Sukey Wesley, and whom Mrs Wesley
spoke of as being little inferior to the apostate angels in
wickedness.

Footnote 328:

This again shows the high importance which Samuel Wesley attached to
the mission in Georgia; and is proof sufficient that had he been
alive, the going of his two sons, John and Charles to that colony,
would have had his hearty approval.

Footnote 329:

The Duke of Newcastle was at this time Secretary of State, and had
probably been requested to obtain the consent of Queen Caroline to
allow Mr Wesley to dedicate to her his “Dissertations on the Book of
Job.”

Footnote 330:

_Wesley Family._

-----

The last letter we shall introduce is a review of his life, and therefore an appropriate conclusion of the present chapter.

It has been already mentioned that Mr Wesley had a brother, named Matthew,Jwho practised as a physician in London. There does not appear to have been much intimacy between the two brothers; but, after the fire at Epworth in 1709, Matthew took to his house his brother’s two children, Hetty and Susan; and afterwards in 1720, he, in a similar manner, took Patty, who lived in his house for twelve years, and to whom, on her marriage, he gave a dowry of £500. Matthew Wesley was a man of considerable wealth; but he had obtained it by unwearied diligence, and by the utmost economy. He knew next to nothing of the troubles of a family, and was ill-qualified to judge of family expenses.

In 1731, accompanied by his man-servant, he started from London to Epworth on a visit to his brother. He travelled under a feigned name, and intended to take his brother by surprise; but his man not being so taciturn as himself, the secret oozed out, and the family were prepared for his coming. The first day after his arrival he spoke little to the children, being employed in observing their behaviour, so that he might know how he ought to like them. He was strangely scandalised at the poor furniture of the parsonage, and at the meanness of the children’s clothing, and wondered what his brother had done with all his income. He always behaved himself decently at family prayers, and, when Mr Wesley was absent, said grace before and after meat. On his return to London, he wrote a severe and caustic letter to his brother, accusing him of bad economy, and of not making provision for his large family. Part of this strange epistle was as follows:—

“The same record which assures us an infidel cannot inherit the
kingdom of heaven, also asserts, in the consequence, that a worse than
infidel can never do it. It likewise describes the character of such a
one: ‘He provides not for his own, especially for those of his own
house.’

“You have a numerous offspring; you have had a long time a plentiful
estate, and have made no provision for those of your own house, who
can have nothing in view at your exit but distress. This I think a
black account; let the cause be folly, or vanity, or ungovernable
appetites. I hope Providence has restored you again to give you time
to settle this balance, which shocks me to think of. To this end, I
must advise you to be frequent in your perusal of Father Beveridge on
_Repentance_, and Dr Tillotson on _Restitution_; for it is not saying
Lord, Lord, will bring us to the kingdom of heaven, but doing justice
to all our fellow-creatures; and not a poetical imagination that we do
so. A serious consideration of these things, and suitable actions, I
doubt not, will qualify you to meet me where sorrow shall be no more,
which is the highest hope and expectation of yours,

“MATTHEW WESLEY.”[331]

-----

Footnote 331:

_Wesley Family._

-----

This is an unjust, unfeeling, disreputable letter, and it is certainly surprising that Mehetabel Wesley, when her uncle died six years after, should have so eulogised his character as she did, in her elegy, published in the _Gentleman’s Magazine_ for 1737. He might be a man of much learning and information, a good judge and lover of poetry, and clever in his profession; but the above epistle makes one doubt that he was “a man of truly benevolent mind,” and prepares one to receive Patty Wesley’s statement respecting him, written a year before the time of his Epworth visit, viz., that he was not converted, nor what he ought to be.[332] He seems to have been highly esteemed for his professional ability and services; but a stranger to pure, earnest, heartfelt godliness. He treated John Wesley’s mission to Georgia with ridicule, and told Charles that, “if the French had any remarkably dull fellow among them, they sent him to convert the Indians.” Charles says he checked and silenced his uncle’s art and eloquence by repeating the lines of his brother:—

“To distant realms the apostle need not roam,
Darkness, alas! and heathens are at home.”[333]

-----

Footnote 332:

_Ibid._, vol. ii. p. 324.

Footnote 333:

C. Wesley’s _Journal_, vol. i. p. 59.

-----

A few months before his death, Samuel Wesley replied to his brother’s accusations, in a long letter, twenty lines of which were written by himself, about one-half of it by Mrs Wesley, and the remainder by his son John, who acted as his amanuenses. The letter, which is without date, is written in a serio-jocose style, and is headed “John o’ Styles’ Apology against the imputation of his ill husbandry.” A friend is represented as reading Matthew Wesley’s letter to his brother, John o’ Styles, and as reporting the brother’s answer to the charges brought against him. The pretended narrator says:—

“When I had read this to my friend John o’ Styles, I was a little
surprised that he did not fall into flouncing and bouncing, as I have
too often seen him do on far less provocation, which I ascribed to a
fit of sickness he had lately had, and which I hope may have brought
him to something of a better mind. He stood calm and composed for a
minute or two, and then desired he might peruse the letter, adding,
that if the matter of fact therein were true, and not aggravated or
misrepresented, he was obliged in conscience to acknowledge it, and
ask pardon at least of his family, if he could make them no other
satisfaction. If it were not true, he owed that justice to himself and
his family, to clear himself of so vile an imputation. After he had
read it over he said he did not think it necessary to enter into a
detail of the history of his whole life, from sixteen to upwards of
seventy; but he would make some general observations on those general
accusations which have been brought against him, and then would add
some balance of his incomes and expenses ever since he entered on the
stage of life.

“The sum of the libel may be reduced to the following assertions:—1.
That John o’ Styles is worse than an infidel, and therefore can never
go to heaven; which secondly, he aims at proving, because he provides
not for his own house; as notorious instances of which, he adds, in
the third place, that in the pursuits of his pleasures he had produced
a numerous offspring, and has had a long time a plentiful estate, and
great and generous benefactors, but yet has made no provision for
those of his own house; which he thinks, in the last place, a black
account, let the cause be folly, or vanity, or his own irregular
passions.

“_Answer._—If God has blessed him with a numerous offspring, he has no
reason to be ashamed of them, nor they of him, unless perhaps one of
them. Neither does his conscience accuse him that he has made no
provision for those of his own house; which general accusation
includes them all. But has he none, nay, not above one, two, or three,
to whom he has given the best education which England could afford, by
God’s blessing on which they live honourably and comfortably in the
world? Some of them had already been a considerable help to the
others, as well as to himself; and he has no reason to doubt the same
of the rest, as soon as God shall enable them to do it. There are many
gentlemen’s families in England who, by the same method, provide for
their younger children; and he hardly thinks that there are many of
greater estates but would be glad to change the best of theirs, or
even all their stock, for almost the worst of his.

“Neither is he ashamed in claiming some merit in his having been so
happy in breeding them up in his own principles and practices—not only
the priests in his family, but all the rest—to a steady opposition and
confederacy against all such as are avowed and declared enemies to God
and his clergy, and who deny or disbelieve any articles of natural or
revealed religion, as well as to such as are open or secret friends to
the Great Rebellion, or to any such principles as do but squint
towards the same practices; so that he hopes they are all staunch
High-Church, and for inviolable passive obedience;[334] from which, if
any of them should be so wicked as to degenerate, he cannot tell
whether he could prevail with himself to give them his blessing;
though, at the same time, he almost equally abhors all servile
submission to the greatest and most overgrown tool of State, whose
avowed design it is to aggrandise his prince at the expense of the
liberties and properties of his freeborn subjects.[335]

“Thus much for John o’ Styles’ ecclesiastical and political creed;
and, as he hopes, for those of his family. And as his adversary adds,
that ‘at his exit they could have nothing in view but distress, and
that it is a black account, let the cause be folly, or vanity, or
ungovernable appetites;’ John o’ Styles answered: He has not the least
doubt of God’s provision for his family after his decease, if they
continue in the way of righteousness. As for his folly, he owns he can
hardly demur to the charge; for he fairly acknowledges he never was,
nor ever will be, like the children of this world, who are accounted
wise in their generation, in doting upon this world, courting this
world, and regarding nothing else: not but that he has all his life
laboured truly both with his hands, head, and heart, to provide things
honest in the sight of all men, to get his own living, and that of
those who have been dependents on him.

“As for his vanity, he challenges an instance to be given of any
extravagance in any single branch of his expenses through the whole
course of his life, either in dress, diet, horses, recreation, or
diversion, either in himself or family.

“Now if these, which are the main objections, are wiped off, what
becomes of the black account, or of the worse than infidelity which
this _Severus Frater et Avunculus Puerorum_ has, in the plenitude of
his power, urged, to exclude those, who, for want of equal
illumination or equal estates, think or act differently from himself,
out of the kingdom of heaven?

“As for the plentiful estates, and great and generous benefactions
which he likewise mentions, the person accused answered, that he could
never acknowledge as he ought the goodness of God and of his generous
benefactors; but hopes he may add, that he had never tasted so much of
their kindness if they had not believed him to be an honest man.

“Thus much he said in general, but added as to particular instances,
he should only add a blank balance, and leave it to any after his
death to cast it up according to common equity; and then they would be
more proper judges whether he deserved those imputations which are now
thrown upon him.

“_Imprimis._—When he first walked to Oxford he had in
cash, £2 5 0

“He lived there till he took his bachelor’s degree,
without any preferment or assistance, except one crown, 0 5 0

“By God’s blessing on his own industry he brought to
London, 10 15 0

“When he came to London he got deacon’s orders and a
cure, for which he had, for one year, 28 0 0

“In which year, for his board, ordination, and habit,
he was indebted £30, which he afterwards paid, 30 0 0

“When he went to sea, where he had for one year £70,
not paid till two years after his return, 70 0 0

“He then got a curacy at £30 per annum for two years,
and by his own industry in writing, &c., he made it £60
per annum, 120 0 0

“He married and had a son; and he and his wife and child boarded for
some years in or near London without running into debt.

“He had then a living given him in the country, let for £50 per annum,
where he had five children more; in which time, and while he lived in
London, he wrote a book, which he dedicated to Queen Mary, who for
that reason gave him a living in the country, valued at £200 per
annum, where he remained for nearly forty years, and wherein his
numerous offspring amounted, with the former, to eighteen or nineteen
children.

“Half of his parsonage was first burnt, which he rebuilt: some time
after the whole was burnt to the ground, which he rebuilt from the
foundations; and it cost him above £400, besides the furniture, none
of which was saved, and he was forced to renew it.

“About ten years since, he got a little living adjoining to his
former, the profits of which very little more than defrayed the
expenses of serving it, and sometimes hardly so much; his whole tithe
having been in a manner swept away by inundations, for which the
parishioners had a brief, though he thought it not decent for himself
to be joined with them in it.

“For the greater part of these last ten years, he has been closely
employed in composing a large book, whereby he hoped he might have
done some benefit to the world, and in some measure amended his own
fortunes. By sticking so close to this, he has broke a pretty strong
constitution, and fallen into palsy and gout. Besides this, he has had
sickness in his family for most of the years since he was married.

“His greater living seldom cleared above £160 per annum, out of which
he allowed £20 per annum to a person who had married one of his
daughters. Could we on the whole fix the balance, it would easily
appear whether he had been an ill husband, or careless and idle, and
taken no care of his family. Let us range on the one side his income,
and on the other his expenses while he has been at the top of his
fortunes, taking them at the full extent:—

“His income about “Expended in sickness for
£200 per annum above forty years,
for near forty
years,[336] £8000 0 0 £——————

“Expenses in taking his
livings, repairing
houses, &c., 160 0 0

“Rebuilding part of his
house the first time, 60 0 0

“Rebuilding the whole
house, 400 0 0

“Furnishing it, ——————

“Eight children born and
buried, ——————

“Ten (thank God!) living,
brought up, and educated, ——————

“Most of the daughters put
out to a way of living, ——————

“To three sons for the
best education I could
get them in England, ——————

“Attending the convocation
three years, £150 0 0

“Let all this be balanced, and then a guess may be easily made of his
sorry management.

“He can struggle with the world, but not with Providence; nor can he
resist sicknesses, fires, and inundations.”[337]

-----

Footnote 334:

“This is a sly hit at Matthew Wesley, who is supposed to have been a
Dissenter, and who was thought by some to be indifferent to all forms
of religion.”—See _Wesley Family_, vol. i. p. 86.

Footnote 335:

This shaft seems to be levelled against the Duke of Newcastle, or
perhaps Sir Robert Walpole.

Footnote 336:

The value of the Epworth living, during the time that Mr Wesley held
it, was never more than £200 per annum. Mr Kirk states that the same
living is now worth £952 per annum.

-----

Such was one of the last letters that Samuel Wesley ever wrote; or rather, we ought to say dictated, for such were his afflictions and weakness, that nearly the whole of it had to be written by his wife and by his second son, who penned it from his lips. It is an ample refutation of the unnatural charges brought against him by his brother; and scatters to the winds the vague ideas of all those who, in modern times, have been apt to think of Samuel Wesley as being, upon the whole, a good-hearted sort of man; but, at the same time, in some way, a spendthrift, and one who very culpably neglected the interests of his wife and family. All this is unfounded, unjust, and cruel; the result, not of research, but of indolent ignorance, which has too readily taken for granted, that which it ought, first of all, to have examined.

-----

Footnote 337:

_Wesley Family_, vol. i. p. 239.

-----