Chapter XXV: Part 25

He alleged that the appointment of commissaries had been a failure, and that, as a consequence, such appointments had ceased for near twenty years. The result of this was, the episcopal clergy in America had no ecclesiastical superiors to unite or to control them; they were independent of each other; and the people were free from all restraints of ecclesiastical authority. For want of bishops, candidates for the ministry had to come to England for ordination, at great hazard and expense; and, because of this, numerous congregations were without ministers. In the province of New Jersey, there were twenty-one churches and congregations, eleven of which were entirely destitute of clergymen, and there were but five to supply the pulpits of the other ten. In Pennsylvania, there were in the city of Philadelphia three churches, and but two ministers; and, in the rest of the province, the number of the churches was twenty-six, and that of the clergy only seven. In North Carolina, there were six clergymen, to supply the wants of twenty-nine parishes, each parish containing a whole county. Another argument adduced by Dr. Chandler was “the impossibility that a bishop residing in England should be sufficiently acquainted with the characters of those coming to them for Holy Orders. To this it was owing, that ordination had been sometimes fraudulently and surreptitiously obtained by such wretches, as were not only a scandal to the Church, but a disgrace to the human species.” Dr. Chandler further stated that the white population of America numbered about three millions; and that, of these, about a third were professed members of the Church of England; “the Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists were not so many; and the Germans, Papists, and other denominations, amounted to more.” Besides these three millions, however, there were, in the different colonies, about 840,000 negroes, most of whom “belonged to the professors of the Church of England.” And there were also the native Indians, the conversion of whom had been almost altogether neglected. It was proposed that the “two or more bishops” to be sent should “have no authority, but purely of a spiritual and ecclesiastical nature; that they should not interfere with the property or privileges, whether civil or religious, of Churchmen or Dissenters; that, in particular, they should have no concern with the Probate of Wills, Letters of Guardianship and Administration, or Marriage Licences, nor be judges of any cases relating thereto; but that they should only ordain and govern the clergy, and administer confirmation to those who might desire it.” It was also proposed that they should be supported, not by _tithes_, but by “perquisites such as the people might freely grant them;” by the interest arising from a fund already in existence for the purpose, in connection with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts; and, if need were (which was not likely), by the levying of a tax at the rate of fourpence in £100.

Such was the substance of Dr. Chandler’s temperate “Appeal,”――an appeal which embodied the general views and feelings of the clergy and members of the Church of England in America. Considerable excitement existed previous to its publication; but now the subject became one of the great controversies of the day. An American writer affirms that “it had more to do with the American Revolution than is generally supposed.”[572] The _American Whig_, a weekly newspaper, stoutly opposed the scheme of Dr. Chandler. So also did the _Philadelphia Centinél_. Their articles on the subject were reprinted in several of the colonies; and a general agitation followed. The chief opponent, however, was Dr. Chauncy, minister in Boston, who, more than twenty years before, had made a vigorous onslaught upon Whitefield and his co-revivalists. The general apprehension was, that the taxation of the colonies, and the proposal to send them bishops, were parts of the same system, the object of which was to infringe upon the political and religious privileges of the people. Chauncy and his friends were afraid, and perhaps not without reason, that the power and influence of the government were being used to give ascendancy to the Episcopal Church. They were angry with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts for sending so many of their clergy to New England, where they were not wanted. At this time, there were at least five hundred and fifty educated ministers in the province, and not a town, unless just settled, without a pastor. Besides, the clergy thus sent were arrogant. They spoke of all the inhabitants of the town, in which they lived, as _their_ parishioners, and as bound both by the law of God and the state to be in communion with the Church of England. Other churches were represented as mere excrescences or fungosities, and their ministers were declared to be unauthorised, and their ordinances invalid. All this naturally created opposition among the non-episcopal churches. And, further, though Dr. Chandler professed that the bishops to be sent would be no burden to the population, the people feared it would be otherwise. Already the support of the episcopal clergy had been thrown upon the community in South Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland; and it was thought to be possible and probable that the bishops, if sent, would have to be sustained, at least in part, by the public taxes.

Amid this state of things, Whitefield commenced a correspondence with the Archbishop of Canterbury, respecting the conversion of his Orphanage into a College; and a remembrance of the facts just noticed will help to a better understanding of some parts of that correspondence. The letters are too long to be inserted _in extenso_, but their substance shall be given. They were first published in the month of May, 1768, with the title, “A Letter to his Excellency Governor Wright, giving an Account of the Steps taken relative to the converting the Georgia Orphan House into a College; together with the Literary Correspondence that passed upon that Subject between his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Reverend Mr. Whitefield. To which also is annexed the Plan and Elevation of the present and intended Buildings,[574] and Orphan House Lands adjacent, By G. Whitefield, A.M., late of Pembroke College, Oxford, and Chaplain to the Countess of Huntingdon. London, 1768.” (8vo. 31 pp.)

In his letter to “Governor Wright,” Whitefield mentions the deep interest which his Excellency and the Council of Georgia had taken in the scheme to convert the Orphan House into a College. He relates that, since his return to England, in 1765, he had exerted his utmost efforts to accomplish this; but various circumstances had impeded the fulfilment of his plan. He had “delivered a memorial into the hands of the late Clerk of his Majesty’s most honourable Privy Council.” The memorial had been “transmitted to the Lord President;” and the Lord President had submitted it “to the consideration of his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury.” He (Whitefield) had had “a literary correspondence” with his Grace; but the correspondence, and the negotiations, were now ended. He, therefore, wished to lay an account of the whole transactions before his Excellency, and the Council and Assembly of Georgia, and also before “all the other American colonists, and the public in general.”

Whitefield commenced his correspondence with the Archbishop on June 17, 1767, and terminated it on February 12, 1768, within six months of his Grace’s death.

He begins by reminding the Primate that the Lord President had submitted his memorial to his Grace’s consideration, and that the Earl of Dartmouth had put into his hands a copy of the intended charter for the College. The Archbishop had made “judicious corrections,” and had suggested that the charter should provide that the president of the College should be a member or minister of the Church of England. In reply to this, Whitefield writes:――

“I cannot in honour and conscience _oblige_ the master of the
Georgia College to be a member or minister of the Church of
England. Such an obligation has greatly retarded the progress
of the College of New York; as, on the contrary, the letter
signed by your Grace, Proprietor Penn, and the late Dr. Chandler,
engaging that the College of Philadelphia shall be continued on
a _broad bottom_, has promoted the growth of that institution.
The trustees of that seminary (as your Grace is pleased to
observe) have agreed ‘That their provost shall always be a
minister of the Established Church.’ But they are not thereto
enjoined by their charter. That is entirely silent concerning
this matter. Their agreement is purely voluntary. The wardens
of the College of Georgia will not be prohibited by charter
from following the example of the trustees of the College of
Philadelphia,” if they choose.

“The first master will assuredly be a clergyman of the Church
of England. By far the majority of the intended wardens are, and
always will be, members of that communion; and, consequently,
the choice of a master will always run in that channel. I
also desire that some worthy duly qualified minister of that
Church may be always found for this office. But, as persons of
all denominations have been contributors, I dare not confine
or fetter the future electors. The monies for the erecting
a college in New York were given by persons of all religious
persuasions, in confidence that the college would be founded on
an enlarged basis; and great numbers think themselves injured
by its being confined within its present contracted boundary.
Hence, many fine promising youths are sent from the college in
their native city to that of New Jersey. I dread giving the same
occasion of offence, and, therefore, am determined to avoid it
in the wording of the Georgia College charter.”

The Archbishop had further suggested that the charter should provide for the daily use of the liturgy of the Church of England in the College, and that the doctrines to be taught in it should be specified. Whitefield objected to these suggestions, and wrote:――

“For the same reasons, I dare not enjoin the daily use of our
Church liturgy. I myself love to use it. I have fallen a martyr,
in respect to bodily health, to the frequent reading it in
Tottenham Court chapel. It has, also, been constantly read twice
every Sunday in the Orphan House, from its first institution to
this very day. The wardens, likewise, when the power is devolved
upon them, may determine this point as they please. But I cannot
enjoin it by charter; and have, therefore, in the accompanying
draught, not only omitted the paragraph concerning public prayer,
but also that concerning doctrinal articles.

“Your Grace further wisely observes, ‘His Majesty should be
well advised, whom he names for the first master.’ I trust he
will be so. I believe the Earl of Dartmouth will be so good as
to present the first master to your Grace’s approbation; but,
in the meanwhile, you may be assured the lot will not fall upon
me. My shoulders are too weak for such an academical burden. My
capacity is by no means extensive enough for such a scholastic
trust. To be a Presbyter at large is the station which Divine
Providence has called me to for near thirty years past. During
that space, I trust my eye has been single, and my views
disinterested; and my highest, my only ambition is that the
last glimmerings of an expiring taper may be blessed to guide
some wandering sinners to the practical knowledge of the great
Shepherd and Bishop of souls.

“I desire to bless His name, that I have been spared long enough
to see the colony of the once-despised Georgia, and the yet more
despised Orphan House, advanced to such a promising height. My
honoured friend and father, good Bishop Benson, from his dying
bed, sent me a benefaction for it of ten guineas, and poured
forth his dying breathings for its future prosperity. That your
Grace may be instrumental in promoting its welfare, when turned
into a College, is the earnest prayer of, etc.,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”

On July 1, the Archbishop acknowledged the receipt of Whitefield’s letter, and stated that he had put Whitefield’s draught of a charter for the College into the hands of the Lord President, who had promised to consider it, but, meanwhile, desired to know how Whitefield proposed to endow the College. Whitefield replied to this three days afterwards to the following effect:――

“The present annual income of the Orphan House is between four
and five hundred pounds sterling. The house is surrounded with
1,800 acres of land. The number of negroes employed on this
land, in sawing timber, raising rice for exportation, and corn,
with all other provisions for the family, is about thirty.
The College will also be immediately possessed of 2,000 acres
of land near Altamaha, which were granted me by the Governor
and Council, when I was last in Georgia; and 1,000 acres more,
left, as I am informed, by the late Rev. Mr. Zububuhler.[575] By
laying out £1,000 in purchasing an additional number of negroes,
and allowing another £1,000 for repairing the house and building
the two intended wings, the present annual income may easily and
speedily be augmented to £1,000 per annum.

“Out of this standing fund may be paid the salaries of the
master, professors, tutors, etc., and also small exhibitions be
allowed for orphans or other poor students, who may have their
tutorage and room-rent gratis, and act as servitors to those who
enter commoners.

“At present, I would only further propose, that the negro
children, belonging to the College, shall be instructed, in
their intervals of labour, by one of the poorer students, as
is done now by one of the scholars in the present Orphan House.
And I do not see why provision may not likewise be made for
educating and maintaining a number of Indian children, which,
I imagine, may easily be procured from the Creeks, Choctaws,
Cherokees, and the other neighbouring nations.”

Such was Whitefield’s scheme. Further correspondence followed. The Lord President expressed the opinion that the head of the College must be a member of the Church of England, and that “the public prayers in the College should not be extempore ones, but the liturgy of the Church, or some part thereof, or some other settled and established form.” Whitefield’s reply is dated, “Tottenham Court, October 16, 1767.” He again objected to any clause being inserted in the charter, making it _obligatory_ that the head of the College should be a member of the Established Church. He reminded the Archbishop that “by far the greatest part of the Orphan House collections and contributions came from _Dissenters_, not only in New England, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Scotland, but in England also.” He stated that, since the announcement of the design to turn the Orphan House into a College, and of the approval of that project by the Governor, Council, and Assembly of Georgia, he had visited most of the places where the benefactors of the Orphan House resided, and had frequently been asked, “Upon what bottom the College was to be founded?” To these enquiries he had answered, indeed, he had declared from the pulpit, that “it should be upon a _broad bottom, and no other_.” He then continues:――

“This being the case, I would humbly appeal to the Lord
President, whether I can answer it to my God, my conscience, my
king, my country, my constituents, and Orphan House benefactors
and contributors, both at home and abroad, to betray my trust,
forfeit my word, act contrary to my own convictions, and greatly
retard and prejudice the growth and progress of the institution,
by narrowing its foundation, and thereby letting it fall upon
such a bottom, as will occasion general disgust, and most justly
open the mouths of persons of all denominations against me. This
is what I dare not do.”

Whitefield concludes by telling the Archbishop, that, as the influence of his Grace, and of the Lord President, “will undoubtedly extend itself to others of His Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council,” he will not trouble them again about the business, but will himself “turn the charity into a more generous and extensively useful channel.”

Thus the matter ended. Whitefield tried to convert his Orphan House into a College; but, because the Lord President of the Privy Council, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, insisted that it should practically be an institution of the Church of England, by insisting that its provost should be a member of that Church, his design, together with that of the governor and rulers of Georgia, was frustrated. He was well aware, that, in the present state of excited feeling among the non-episcopalians of America, it would have been worse than useless to turn his Orphanage into a Church of England College. His decision was, at once, just and prudent. When the correspondence with the Archbishop was concluded, Whitefield wrote as follows “To his Excellency James Wright, Esq., Captain-General and Governor-in-Chief of the Province of Georgia”:――

“Thus, may it please your Excellency, concluded my
correspondence with his Grace; and, I humbly hope, the Province
of Georgia will, in the end, be no loser by this negotiation.
For, I now purpose to superadd a public academy to the Orphan
House, as the College of Philadelphia[576] as constituted a
public academy, as well as charitable school, for some time
before its present college charter was granted in 1755.”

Whitefield then suggests that the Orphan House estate, which, for three years, had been neglected, should be vigorously improved, so as to make permanent provision for the maintenance of indigent orphans, and to convert the Orphan House itself into a suitable academy for opulent students. He proposes to send from England proper masters to “prepare for academical honours the many youths, in Georgia and the adjacent provinces, waiting for admission.” He expresses his willingness to settle the whole estate upon trustees, with the proviso, that no opportunity should be neglected “of making fresh application for a college charter, upon a _broad bottom_, whenever those in power might think it for the glory of God, and the interest of their king and country, to grant the same.” And he concludes by hoping, that, in this way, his “beloved Bethesda will not only be continued as a house of mercy for poor orphans, but will be confirmed as a seat and nursery of sound learning and religious education, to the latest posterity.”

On Whitefield’s return to London, in the month of June, 1767, he continued his correspondence with Rowland Hill. The latter had left Cambridge, for the long vacation, and had returned to Hawkstone, the residence of his father. Here he was warmly welcomed by Richard, his elder brother, who, like himself, had lately become a village preacher, and a visitor of prisons; but his parents were profoundly grieved at his religious irregularities; and his walks, amid the beautiful scenery of his father’s grounds, were often sorrowful. To cheer him and his brother, Whitefield wrote as follows:――

“LONDON, _July 14, 1767_.

“Blessed be God, for what he has done for your dear brother!
A preaching, prison-preaching, field-preaching esquire strikes
more than all black gowns and lawn sleeves in the world. If I am
not mistaken, God will let the world, and His own children too,
know that He will not be prescribed to, in respect to men, or
garbs, or places, much less will He be confined to any order,
or set of men under heaven. I wish you both much, very much,
prosperity. You will have it. This is the way: walk in it.
Both the Tabernacle and the chapel pulpits shall be open to a
captain or an esquire sent of God. The good news from Oxford is
encouraging.[577] Say what they will, preaching should be one
part of the education of a student in divinity. _Usus promptos
facit._ Write often and let me know how you go on. What says
your friend Mr. Powys. God bless him, and help him to go
forwards!”[578]

A week later, Whitefield wrote again:――

“London, July 21, 1767. I hope, ere this comes to hand, you
will have taken your second degree. A good degree indeed! To
be a preacher,――a young preacher,――a mobbed, perhaps, a stoned
preacher,――O what an honour! How many prayers will you get, when
I read your letter at the Tabernacle! And the prayers of so many
dear children of God will do you no hurt. When we are fighting
with Amalek below, it is good to have a Joshua praying for us
above. Jesus is our Joshua――Jesus is our intercessor. He liveth,
He ever liveth to make intercession, especially for His young
soldiers. Yonder, yonder He sits! Whilst praying, He reaches
out a crown. At this distance, you may see written in capital
letters, ‘_Vincenti dabo_.’ All a gift――a free gift, though
purchased by His precious blood. Tell churchmen, tell meetingers,
tell the wounded, tell all of this. Tell them when you are
young; you may not live to be old. Tell them whilst you are
an undergraduate; you may be dead, buried, glorified, before
you take a college degree. Tell those who would have you spare
yourself, that time is short, that eternity is endless, that the
Judge is before the door. God bless you! God bless you! Yours in
Jesus,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”

Before proceeding with Whitefield’s history, extracts from three other letters, to Rowland Hill, may be welcome:――

“London, August 6, 1767. The enclosed made me pity, smile, and
rejoice: pity the writer’s ignorance, smile at his worn-out
sarcasms, and rejoice that you are called to be a living martyr
for our common Lord. Fear not; only go forward. You know Jesus,
and, by preaching, will know more. If you write, let him know
that Jesus has revealed Himself not only _to_ you by His word,
but _in_ you by His spirit; that you look upon those whom he is
pleased to term _fanatics_, as the excellent of the earth; and
that you choose rather to suffer reproach with them, than to
enjoy all the pleasures of sense, and all the preferments in the
world.”

“London, August 8, 1767. God be praised, if another of your
brothers is gained! What grace is this! Four or five out of one
family! It is scarcely to be paralleled. Who knows but the root,
as well as the branches, may be taken by and by. Steadiness and
perseverance, in the children, will be one of the best means,
under God, of convincing the parents. Their present opposition,
I think, cannot last very long. If it does, to obey God rather
than man, when forbidden to do what is undoubted duty, is the
invariable rule. Our dear Penty[579] is under the cross at
Cambridge; but _crescit sub pondere_. I should be glad if any
one’s exhibition was taken from him for visiting the sick,
etc.[580] It would vastly tend to the furtherance of the Gospel;
but Satan sees too far, I imagine, to play such a game now.
Let him do his work――he is only a mastiff chained. Continue to
inform me how he barks, and how far he is permitted to go in
your parts; and God’s people shall be more and more stirred up
to pray for you all, by yours, in our all-conquering Emmanuel,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”[581]

“London, August 26, 1767. Go to Jesus. Learn to pray of the
threatened apostles. (Acts iv. 23–30.) I am afraid they will
only threaten. If an expulsion should be permitted, it will
take place, I believe, only for a little time, and will soon
be repented of. Thousands of prayers were put up for you last
Monday, at the Tabernacle letter-day. The verses sung were
these:――

‘Give him thy strength, O God of pow’r!
Then, let men rage and devils roar,
Thy faithful witness he shall be:
’Tis fixed, he can do all through Thee.’”

While Whitefield was acquiring new friends, he was faithful to his old. The friendship between him and Wesley was never tenderer than now. During the month of August, Wesley held his annual Conference, in London, and wrote:――

“1767, August 18. Tuesday. I met in Conference with our
assistants and a select number of preachers. To these were added,
on Thursday and Friday, Mr. Whitefield, Howell Harris, and many
stewards and local preachers. Love and harmony reigned from the
beginning to the end.”[582]

Such a re-union of old friends, fellow-labourers, and fellow-sufferers, must have been delightful. A trio, like Wesley, Whitefield, and Howell Harris, was a sight worth seeing,――three great reformers, because three great revivers of pure and undefiled religion.

In reference to this Conference, Thomas Olivers remarks:――

“Mr. Whitefield not only attended the Conference, but also
invited the preachers to the Tabernacle, ordered them to be
placed round the front of his galleries, and preached a good
sermon, to encourage them in their holy calling. When he had
done, he took them to his house, by ten or twenty at a time,
and entertained them in the most genteel, the most hospitable,
and the most friendly manner.”

Olivers, who was one of the preachers thus entertained, continues:――

“While Mr. Whitefield lived, he was glad to confirm his love
to the members of Mr. Wesley’s Societies, by preaching in their
chapels, by sitting at their tables, by lying in their beds, and
by conversing with them, late and early, in the most friendly
and Christian manner. When he preached in Mr. Wesley’s pulpits,
in the north of England, he several times did me the honour
of making my house his home. On all such occasions, multitudes
can tell what expressions of the highest esteem he frequently
made use of, in exhorting Mr. Wesley’s Societies; in keeping
lovefeasts, and watch-nights with them; in his table talk; and
as he travelled with them by the way. Nay, strange as it may
seem, he has been known to say, that he found _more Christian
freedom_ among Mr. Wesley’s people than he did among his own in
London. As to the preachers in connexion with Mr. Wesley, these
have frequently received very great marks of Mr. Whitefield’s
esteem. In private, he conversed with them, as with _brethren_
and _fellow-labourers_. In public, he frequently said far
greater things in their favour than Mr. Wesley thought it
prudent to say. He never seemed happier than when he had a
number of them about him. When he had opportunity, he gladly
attended our Conferences; sometimes _listening_ to our debates,
and at others _joining_ in them. On these occasions, he more
than once favoured us with a suitable sermon; and often said
such things in our behalf, as decency forbids me to mention.”[583]

A testimony like this from a man of great acuteness, and inflexible veracity, is more than ordinarily valuable. Immediately after Wesley’s Conference, Whitefield was anxious to make another of his gospel tours. Writing to his old assistant, Thomas Adams, on August 14, he says:――

“I have been sick; but, blessed be God! I am better. Who knows
but I may be strengthened to take a trip to Scotland. This itch
after itinerating, I hope, will never be cured till we come
to heaven. Though laymen occupy the pulpits, both at Tottenham
Court chapel and the Tabernacle, the congregations increase.
‘Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord
of hosts.’ No weapon, formed against Sion, shall or can prosper.
Our Thursday morning six o’clock lecture at the Tabernacle is
crowded.”

Whitefield was not able to extend his “trip” as far as Scotland; but he travelled what he called his “northern circuit,” reaching, at least, from Sheffield to Newcastle. He started about the beginning of September, and, on his way, preached at Northampton and Sheffield. He arrived at Leeds on Thursday, September 10,[584] accompanied by the Countess of Huntingdon. Here, they were joined by Captain Scott, who preached to amazing crowds.[585]

From Leeds, Whitefield proceeded further north. He preached at York; and, among many other curious entries in the old book of the Methodist Society in that city, is the following: “1767. September 16. By expenses on account of the Rev. Mr. Whitefield, 14s. 9d.”

On reaching Newcastle, he wrote, as follows, to Mr. Keen:――

“NEWCASTLE, _September 20, 1767_.

“MY DEAR, VERY DEAR FRIEND,――Preaching and travelling prevent
writing. Through unmerited mercy, I am well; but, for several
reasons, I decline going to Scotland this fall. I have a blessed
Methodist field, street-preaching plan before me. This afternoon,
in the Castle Garth. To-morrow, Sunderland. Next day, at
Mr. Romaine’s mother’s door (at Hartlepool.)[586] Then to
Yarm, etc. You may venture to direct for me at Mr. William
Shent’s, peruke-maker, at Leeds; but send me no bad news, unless
absolutely necessary. Let me enjoy myself in my delightful
itinerancy. It is good, both for my body and soul. I have been
enabled to preach in the street at several places; and hope
to go to Guisborough, Whitby, Scarborough, Malton, York, Leeds,
Liverpool, Chester, Manchester, etc., etc. You shall know
particulars as we go on. Tender love to all friends. Golden
seasons! Golden seasons! Grace! Grace!”

Immediately after Whitefield’s departure from London, Bartholomew Carrol and three other burglars broke into his house, stole a large quantity of linen and other articles, were arrested, and committed for trial at the Old Bailey.[587] In the following letter to Mr. Keen, Whitefield refers to this unpleasantness:――

“Thirsk, September 28, 1767. Never was I so long a stranger to
London affairs before. What part of the paragraph is true, about
the commitment of several persons for a certain robbery? I hope
that death will not be the consequence to any of the criminals.
Father, convict, and convert them for Thy infinite mercy’s sake!
I should be glad to ramble till their trial is over. I trust
there will be no necessity of my appearing in person. To-morrow,
God willing, I go to Dr. Conyers.[588] He earnestly desires to
see me. Where the next remove will be, I know not. Be pleased to
direct to Leeds. Every stage, more and more, convinces me, that
old Methodism is the thing. Hallelujah!”

Two days after the date of this letter, Whitefield was at Leeds, and wrote: “I have been enabled to go forth into the highways and hedges, into the streets and lanes of the towns and cities. Good old work! Good old seasons! Help, help to praise Him, whose mercy endureth for ever!” Whitefield’s labours were still of sufficient importance to attract the attention of the public press. _Lloyd’s Evening Post_ of October 2 had the following announcement: “For about a fortnight past, the Rev. Mr. Whitefield has been travelling, and preaching, at York, Thirsk, Yarm, Hartlepool, Stokesley, Sunderland, and Newcastle, where his congregations have been very numerous.”

Whitefield was requested to visit Fletcher at Madeley, but the distance, and the season of the year, deterred his going. He, however, spent two or three days at Huddersfield,[589] with Venn, who had recently lost his wife by death. While in Venn’s home of sorrow, he wrote:――

“Huddersfield, October 6, 1767. How is death scattering his
arrows all around us? The call to us is loud, very loud. Its
language is quite articulate. ‘Watch and pray, for ye know not
at what day or hour the Son of Man cometh.’ What is this world?
Nothing, less than nothing. What is the other world? An eternity
of endless misery or endless bliss. We have no time to trifle,
to be light, foolish, or worldly-minded.”

It ought to be kept in mind, that, in all the towns mentioned in the foregoing extracts, Wesley and his preachers had already formed Societies, and that Whitefield went among them, not as Wesley’s rival, but as his helper. For many years, in his country excursions, Whitefield, without ostentatiously professing it, acted in this capacity,――an important fact, which Whitefield’s biographers, for some reason, have not noticed. Whitefield and Wesley were never firmer friends than now. Writing to Mrs. Moon, of Yarm, a few weeks after Whitefield’s return to London, Wesley says:――

“In every place where Mr. Whitefield has been, he has laboured
in the same friendly, Christian manner. God has indeed
effectually broken down the wall of partition which was between
us. Thirty years ago we were one; then the sower of tares
rent us asunder; but now a stronger than he has made us one
again.”[590]

On reaching London, Whitefield, in a jubilant strain, wrote to his old helper, Thomas Adams:――

“LONDON, _October 12, 1767_.

“MY VERY DEAR TOMMY,――Good-morrow! This comes to enquire how you
and yours do. I am just returned from my northern circuit. It
has been pleasant, and, I trust, profitable. Praise the Lord,
O our souls! Everywhere the fields have been white, ready unto
harvest. I am become a downright street and field preacher. I
wish the city, and want of riding, may not hurt me. No nestling,
no nestling on this side Jordan. Heaven is the believer’s only
resting place. Mr. Joss has been much blessed here.”

If possible, Whitefield was more popular than ever, as the following extract from _Lloyd’s Evening Post_, of October 30, will tend to show:――

“Wednesday morning, October 28, was preached, by the Rev. Mr.
Whitefield, at his Tabernacle near Moorfields, a sermon, for the
benefit of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge among
the Poor, by distributing Bibles and other good books, before
a very polite audience of upwards of six thousand people, and
above forty ministers of different persuasions. Near £200 was
collected.”[591]

In reference to this remarkable service, on a busy week-day morning, Whitefield simply says: “I would reflect upon Wednesday with humility and gratitude. Lord, what am I? ‘Less than the least of all,’ must be my motto still.”

Whitefield’s text on this occasion was “Thy kingdom come.” The collection was four times larger than usual, and eighty persons became new subscribers. After his sermon, Whitefield dined with the ministers present at Draper’s Hall, and was treated with great respect.[592]

The troubles of Rowland Hill and his associates, at Cambridge, have been repeatedly mentioned, and are alluded to in the following letter, addressed “To the Rev. Mr. Fletcher, Rector of Madeley, near Bridgenorth, Shropshire”:――

“London, October 22, 1767. What more offences! Surely, my dear
friend, you must have done Satan some late harm; otherwise, I
think, he would not be so angry. I hope he has lost some ground
in the north. Street and field-preaching were made very pleasant
to me, and, I trust, they were equally profitable. Our truly
noble Lady Sussex sends good news from Bath. She recovers
strength apace. There is hot work at Cambridge. One dear youth
is likely to be expelled. Mr. Lee is suspended without private
admonition, or having a moment’s warning. What would become of
us, if a hook were not put into the leviathan’s jaws? Adieu! In
great haste, but greater love, I hasten to subscribe myself, my
dear sir, yours in our all-conquering Emmanuel,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”[593]

The storm, which, in one of the universities, burst a few months afterwards, was already brewing. The Methodist students, both at Cambridge and Oxford, were in trouble; and Whitefield did his best to comfort and encourage them. Hence the following extracts from his letters, written at this period:――

“London, October 23, 1767. By your brother’s letter, it appears
the hour of expulsion is not yet come. Surely they will not be
so imprudent, or act so contrary to the laws of English liberty.
I long to know what statutes they say you have broken, and what
concessions have been made. Your diocesan will make a strict
enquiry. I wish you could recollect all circumstances; the
rise and progress of the present contest; with all the various
pleadings, threats, conferences, _pro_ and _con_. If confined
to college, this will be a good exercise for you. You may lodge
it in court, as a proof whether you understand to write plain
English, or sound, practical, experimental divinity. This can
do you no harm; it may do good. Do, therefore, set about it. Who
knows? Sauls may yet become Pauls.”

“London, October 24, 1767. Supposing you made this addition to
the motto of your coat of arms,――‘_Nemo me impune lacessit_?’ He
who toucheth God’s people, toucheth the apple of His eye. That
is a very tender part. I am glad your diocesan is expected soon.
I have no expectation of his beating a retreat. ‘To arms! to
arms!’ must be the watchword now. The company of the Son of Man
is never so sweet as when He walks with us in the fiery furnace.
Nothing can stand before an honest, truly Israelitish heart.
Those who endeavour to entangle Christ’s followers in their talk,
will, in the end, be entangled themselves.”

“London, November 14, 1767. All know my mind. Go forward, I
think, is the royal word of command. We may then indeed have a
Red Sea to pass through; but the threatening waves shall become
a wall on the right hand and on the left. I am ashamed to find
so many silenced by mere _bruta fulmina_.”

“London, December 1, 1767. You meet like apostles now; but, when
they met between the time of our Lord’s death and resurrection,
what trouble did they endure, for fear of the Jews? But be
not discouraged. Continue instant in prayer. A risen, an
ascended Jesus, will yet appear in the midst of you, renew your
commission, and endue you with power from on high. O think of
this, ye little college of cast-outs! Do not deny Him in any
wise.”

On the day the last extract was written, the Earl of Buchan died at Bath. For some time, his lordship had been in declining health. In Bath, as long as his health permitted, he was a most regular attendant at the chapel of the Countess of Huntingdon, and was in the constant habit of hearing Whitefield, Wesley, Romaine, Shirley, Venn, Townsend, Fletcher, and other Methodist clergymen, who supplied the pulpit there. His death was most triumphant. A few days before its occurrence, Lady Huntingdon went to see him, at his particular request. As soon as he could speak, he said: “I have no foundation of hope whatever, but in the sacrifice of the Son of God. I have nowhere else to look,――nothing else to depend upon for eternal life; but my confidence in Him is as firm as a rock.” Among his last sayings, were the words, “Happy! happy! happy!” Thus,――

――“on his dying lips,
The sound of glory quiver’d.”

“His lordship’s departure,” wrote Lady Huntingdon, “was not only happy, but triumphant and glorious.”

The event, to these grand old Methodists, was too important to pass unimproved. Whitefield was summoned from London; and, for five days, in the chapel of the Countess of Huntingdon, a series of services were held, which, probably, have no parallel. “The corpse of the late Earl of Buchan,” says _Lloyd’s Evening Post_, of December 16, “lay in state, at the Countess of Huntingdon’s chapel, from Sunday to Thursday night. Two sermons on the occasion were preached each day by the Rev. Mr. Whitefield and others.”

The story, however, will be best told in the words of Whitefield himself. To the Reverend Walter Shirley, Whitefield wrote:――

“Bath, Tuesday, December 8, 1767. The Earl of Buchan sweetly
slept in Jesus last week. His corpse lies deposited in the
chapel of good Lady Huntingdon, and is not to be removed
till next Friday morning. There have been public prayers and
preaching twice every day. The noble relatives constantly attend,
and all is more than solemn. Great numbers, of all ranks, crowd
to see and hear. The Earl died like the patriarch Jacob; he
laid his hands on, and blessed his children; assured them of his
personal interest in Jesus; called most gloriously on the Holy
Ghost; cried, ‘Happy! happy!’ as long as he could speak; and
then――you know what followed.”

In another letter, Whitefield wrote:――

“Bath, Wednesday, December 9, 1767. All has been awful, and more
than awful. Last Saturday evening, before the corpse was taken
from Buchan House, a word of exhortation was given, and a hymn
sung, in the room where the corpse lay. The young Earl stood
with his hands on the head of the coffin; the Countess Dowager
on his right hand; Lady Ann and Lady Isabella on his left;
and their brother Thomas[594] next to their mother, with Miss
Orton, Miss Wheeler, and Miss Goddle on one side. All the
domestics, with a few friends, were on the other. The word of
exhortation[595] was received with great solemnity, and most
wept under the parting prayer. At ten, the corpse was removed
to good Lady Huntingdon’s chapel, where it was deposited (within
a place railed in for that purpose), covered with black baize and
the usual funeral concomitants, except escutcheons.

“On Sunday morning all attended, in mourning, at early sacrament.
They were seated by themselves, at the feet of the corpse;
and, with their head servants, received first, and a particular
address was made to them. Immediately after receiving, these
verses were sung for them:――

‘Our lives, our blood, we here present,
If for Thy truths they may be spent;
Fulfil Thy sovereign counsel, Lord,――
Thy will be done, Thy name ador’d!

Give them Thy strength, O God of pow’r!
Then let men rave or devils roar,
Thy faithful witnesses they’ll be;
’Tis fixed――they can do all through Thee.’

Then they received this blessing: ‘The Lord bless you and keep
you! The Lord lift up the light of His countenance upon you! The
Lord cause His face to shine upon you, and give you peace!’ and
so returned to their places. Sacrament being ended, the noble
mourners returned to good Lady Huntingdon’s house, which was
lent them for the day.

“At eleven, public service began. The bereaved relations sat in
order within, and the domestics around the outside of the rail.
The chapel was more than crowded. Near three hundred tickets,
signed by the present Earl, were given out to the nobility and
gentry, to be admitted. All was hushed and solemn. Proper hymns
were sung, and I preached on these words, ‘I heard a voice from
heaven, saying unto me, Write, blessed are the dead that die
in the Lord.’ Attention sat on every face, and deep and almost
universal impressions were made.

“The like scene, and if possible more solemn, was exhibited in
the evening; and I was enabled to preach a second time. A like
power attended the word, as in the morning.

“Ever since, there has been public service and preaching twice a
day. This is to be continued till Friday morning. Then all is to
be removed to Bristol, in order to be shipped for Scotland. The
inscription on the coffin runs thus:――

“His life was honourable,
His death blessed;
He sought earnestly peace with God;――
He found it,
With unspeakable joy,
Alone in the merits of Christ Jesus,
Witnessed by the Holy Spirit to his soul.
He yet speaketh:
‘Go thou, and do likewise.’”

These were strange scenes, but who can find fault with them? And who can estimate their permanent influence upon the eleventh Earl of Buchan, and upon his illustrious brother, then only seventeen years of age, but afterwards Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain?

Whitefield continued preaching at Bath, Bristol, and Kingswood, till December 21, when he set out for London. Meanwhile, the young Earl of Buchan had also come to town, from his father’s funeral in Scotland, and, at once, associated himself with Lord and Lady Dartmouth, Mrs. Carteret, Mrs. Cavendish, and a numerous circle of distinguished persons, the friends of Whitefield and the Methodists. Whitefield refers to this, in the following letter to the Rev. John Gillies:――

“London, December 28, 1767. The present noble Earl of Buchan,
I believe, has got the blessing. He seems to determine to know
nothing but Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. He has behaved
in the most delicate manner to the Countess, and other noble
survivors. He stands here in town against all opposition, like
an impregnable rock; and I humbly hope will prove the Daniel
of the age. He has already been thrown into a den of lions;
but he has One with him, who stops the lions’ mouths. You will
encourage all God’s people to pray for him. What if you wrote
him a line? I am sure it will be taken kindly; for I know he
honours and loves you much.

“I am now fifty-three years old. Did you ever hear of such a
fifty-three years’ old barren fig-tree? So much digging, so
much dunging; and yet so little fruit. God be merciful to me a
sinner! A sinner! A sinner! A sinner! He is merciful! His mercy
endureth for ever! He yet vouchsafes to bless my feeble labours.”

The young Earl of Buchan did not disappoint Whitefield’s hopes concerning him. Besides maintaining the dignity of the Scottish peerage, and becoming an ardent lover and promoter of literature and the fine arts, he made a public avowal of his religious principles; and, though this drew down upon him the laugh and lash of wits and witlings, he defied their sneers, and dared “to be singularly good;” and, acting under the advice of the Countess of Huntingdon, appointed Venn, Fletcher, and Berridge to be his chaplains.[596]

Benjamin Franklin, the poor printer, was now a man of great distinction. He had visited Holland, Germany, and France; and, for the last two years, had been in England. The degree of LL.D. had been conferred upon him by the three Universities of St. Andrew’s, Edinburgh, and Oxford. In France Louis XV. had shown him marked attention. But, in the midst of all his honours, he still respected his old friend Whitefield. The following letter, which the great preacher addressed to Franklin, is highly characteristic of the writer:――

“TOTTENHAM COURT, _January 21, 1768_.

“MY DEAR DOCTOR,――When will it suit you to have another
interview? The” (Bethesda) “College affair is dormant. For above
a week, I have been dethroned, by a violent cold and hoarseness.
Who but would work and speak for God while it is day! ‘The night
cometh when no man can work.’ Through rich grace, I can sing, ‘O
death, where is thy sting?’ but only through Jesus of Nazareth.
Your daughter, I find, is beginning the world. I wish you joy
from the bottom of my heart. You and I shall soon go out of
it. Ere long we shall see it burst. Angels shall summon us to
attend on the funeral of time; and we shall see eternity rising
out of its ashes. That you and I may be in the happy number of
those who, in the midst of the tremendous blaze, shall cry Amen!
Hallelujah! is the hearty prayer of, my dear Doctor,

“Yours, etc.,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”[597]

Not long after this, Franklin wrote to Whitefield respecting the disturbances at Boston, which resulted in the American rebellion. Though his affection for Whitefield was undoubtedly sincere, he found it difficult to conceal his scepticism even when writing to his friend. The following is an extract from his letter:――

“I am under continued apprehensions that we may have bad news
from America. The sending soldiers to Boston always appeared to
me a dangerous step; they could do no good, they might occasion
mischief. When I consider the warm resentment of a people who
think themselves injured and oppressed, and the common insolence
of the soldiery who are taught to consider that people as in
rebellion, I cannot but fear the consequences of bringing them
together. It seems like setting up a smith’s forge in a magazine
of gunpowder. I _see_ with you that our affairs are not well
managed by our rulers here below; I wish I could _believe_ with
you, that they are well attended to by those above; I rather
suspect, from certain circumstances, that though the general
government of the universe is well administered, our particular
little affairs are perhaps below notice, and left to take the
chance of human prudence or imprudence, as either may happen to
be uppermost. It is, however, an uncomfortable thought, and I
leave it.”

No wonder that Whitefield endorsed his friend’s letter with the words, “_Uncomfortable_ indeed! and, blessed be God, _unscriptural_; for we are fully assured that ‘the Lord reigneth,’ and are directed to cast _all_ our care on Him, because He careth for us.”[598]

Lady Huntingdon was multiplying her chapels; but none of them were episcopally consecrated. Whitefield, the Wesleys, Romaine, Madan, Fletcher, and other Methodist clergymen preached in them as far as they had opportunity; but, it was evident, that, without lay evangelists, the work would be impeded. Captain Scott, Captain Joss, Thomas Adams, and others rendered efficient help to Whitefield in his London chapels; but they were not sufficient to meet the growing wants of himself and the Countess. Hence, her ladyship began to make preparation for the training of converted and zealous men to supply the existing pulpits, and to extend the work. At Trevecca, not far from the residence of Howell Harris, stood an ancient structure, part of an old castle, erected in the reign of Henry II. The date over the entrance is 1176. This venerable ruin belonged to Harris, who rented it to the Countess, for the purpose of its being turned into a sort of ministerial college. The repairs were now in hand, and Harris acted as supervisor. In a letter addressed to him, she wrote:――

“London, February 22, 1768. I think the work cannot be finished,
for the furniture, before June; and, therefore, conclude the
opening of the school must be delayed until the end of August.
I shall be glad to have an exact account of the expenses as they
go on.

“What must I say of this poor city? Religion is _fashion_, not
faith. Disputing and church party is the subject of all I see.
Mr. Wesley and Mr. Whitefield hold up their heads above it.
Sandeman principles make some noise. May my soul and spirit,
life, mind, and talents, be ever devoted to Christ alone!”[599]

The proposal of her ladyship was to admit none into her school except such as were truly converted to God, and resolved to dedicate themselves to His service. They were to be at liberty to stay three years, during which time they were to have their education gratis, with every necessary of life, and a suit of clothes once a year. Afterwards, those who desired it might enter into the ministry, either in the Established Church, or among Protestants of any other denomination. The plan for the examination of candidates was drawn up, and approved of by Romaine, Venn, Wesley, and others; and Fletcher was fixed upon to be the president.[600]

Little did the Countess think that the time was near when such a provision would become more important than either she or any of her advisers had imagined. A storm had long been gathering, in both the Oxford and Cambridge Universities; and now it burst. A correspondent of _Lloyd’s Evening Post_[601] wrote as follows:――

“St. Edmund’s Hall is the place where a lady sends all those
who have a mind to creep into Orders. The other day, several of
the undergraduates of that Hall disobliged their tutor; and this
one spark set their whole Methodistical foundation on fire. The
tutor went immediately to their visitor, and laid open all their
proceedings, upon which he appointed a meeting of the heads of
houses, where seven of them, one of whom is a gentleman commoner,
were accused of their several offences. One, I think, was for
procuring a false testimonium;[602] another for preaching in
the fields before he was in orders; a letter was read publicly,
which the tutor had received from a gentleman, testifying that
this man had made him a very good periwig only two years before;
two or three for frequenting illicit conventicles; but another
was accused only of ignorance, impudence, and disobedience,
and is acquitted. All the others were expelled, not only for
the offences I have mentioned, but, likewise, for preaching
doctrines contrary to the Church of England.”