Chapter IV: Part 4

On Wednesday, June 29, Whitefield reached Trevecca, “where,” says he, “I met a whole troop of Jesus’ witnesses. At five in the evening, I preached. After I had done, Howell Davies preached and prayed. About eight, we opened the Association with great solemnity. Our Saviour was much with me, teaching and helping me to fill my place in a particular manner. About midnight, we adjourned; but several of the Brethren sat up all night, and ushered in the morning with prayer and praise. About eight, we met again, and were greatly delighted at the simple accounts the superintendents brought in of their respective Societies. We continued doing business till two in the afternoon, and broke up with much solemnity and holy joy. We had great union with one another.[57] Indeed, Jesus has done great things for Wales. The work is much upon the advance. I was surprised to find so much order. Brother Howell Davies has been blessed to the conversion of a young clergyman, rector of St. Bartholomew’s, London.”

The “young clergyman,” just mentioned, was the Rev. Richard Thomas Bateman, “a man of high birth and great natural endowments.”[58] About the year 1740, he left his rectory in London, and retired to a small living in Pembrokeshire. He was wholly unconverted, and was the clergyman who preached against Whitefield only two months before Whitefield’s present visit to Trevecca. His text was 1 John iv. 1, and his sermon was full of railing against the Methodists, charging them with hypocrisy, enthusiasm, and kindred crimes. He continued in Wales about four years after his conversion, preaching with great power and success; and, then, in 1747, returned to his rectory in London;[59] opened his church to the Wesleys and Whitefield; and was present at Wesley’s yearly Conference in 1748.[60] Among others with whom he formed a friendship was the celebrated Joseph Williams, of Kidderminster, who wrote to him as follows:――

“KIDDERMINSTER, _June 10, 1747_.

“It did me good to hear you pour out your soul in prayer before
your sermon, and to feel you bearing mine along with you to the
mercy-seat. I have great expectations from your coming to London,
and am solicitous about the good fruits thereof. Many a fervent
prayer have I put up for you on that account. I want to know
whether God has touched any hearts by your ministry. God has
not wrought this great change in you, at so ripe an age, merely
for your own sake, but for the sake of many. He has much people
in the great city yet to be called; and, having called many by
Mr. Whitefield, and the Messrs. Wesley, and their fellow-helpers,
He has now appointed to call many more by Mr. Bateman,――many
who perhaps would not come within hearing of any of the others.
I want to know if you have gathered the firstfruits, as a
pledge of a glorious harvest. I want, also, to know how your
parishioners and others, particularly clergymen, behave towards
you. Will you not favour me with a letter? I trust you will.
Let it be a long one. I love long letters from my fathers and
brethren in Christ.”[61]

Like the other Methodist clergymen, Mr. Bateman had to encounter considerable opposition; but this is not the place to pursue his history.

To return to Whitefield. When preaching his _first_ sermon on Hampton Common, Gloucestershire, a young man, Thomas Adams, prompted by curiosity, came to hear him. Adams was converted, and, being converted himself, he endeavoured to convert his brethren. For some time past, he had been one of Whitefield’s preachers, and had been eminently successful “in Hampton,[62] and the adjacent country, in calling sinners to the knowledge of Jesus Christ.” Having formed a society at Hampton, Adams, on Saturday, July 9th, was quietly singing and praying with its members, when, all at once, the house was surrounded with a mob, which, for weeks past, had “breathed out threatenings and slaughter against” Adams and his friends. Adams, in a letter to Whitefield, shall tell his own story.

“The mob, which consisted of near a hundred persons, were
now about the house, making a terrible noise, and swearing
prodigiously. I went down to them, and opened the door, and
asked them what they wanted. I told them, if they wanted my life,
I was willing to deliver it up for Jesus’ sake; but withal I
desired to know why they either disturbed me or sought my life;
for I was not aware that I had given them any just cause for
either. Some of them said I had, by bringing in false doctrine,
and impoverishing the poor. I told them, that they could prove
neither, and that their accusation was really false. They seemed
somewhat at a stand; when about five of them began to be more
exasperated, and took me, in order to throw me into a lime pit.
I told them, they need not force me, for I was willing to suffer
for Jesus’ sake. But while they were pushing me along, some
neighbours took me in their arms, and carried me into one of
their houses.

“On Sunday morning, about twenty of the Society met again. We
spent the morning in prayer. In the evening I preached; when
in came the mob, demanding me to come down. I asked, by what
authority they did so? They swore they would have me. Then said
I, So you shall. So they took me to the lime pit, and threw me
in. I told them, I should meet them at the judgment. They let
me out, and I came home, and kneeled down with the people there,
and prayed to God, and praised Him. After that, I exhorted them
from 1 John iii. 1–3. When I was concluding, in came the mob
again, and took me to a brook to throw me in there. I told them
the law was against them, but I was willing to suffer anything
for Christ. They said, if I would forbear preaching for a month,
they would let me go. I told them, I would make no such promise.
So forward I went. One of them threw me in, and I went to the
bottom; but I came up again, with my hands clasped together. One
or two of them jumped in, and took me out. Then another pushed
me in again, and much bruised and cut one of my legs against a
stone. I came home talking to them. Many advise us to prosecute
them; but, if they are quiet, I am content, and can say from my
heart, ‘Father, forgive them.’ I should be glad if you would be
here on Sunday next.”

It so happened, that Whitefield could not be there “on Sunday next,” for he had to preach four times at Bristol fair; but he set out on Wednesday, July 20th, and five days afterwards wrote as follows:――

“HAMPTON, _July 25, 1743_.

“On Thursday last, I came here, and expected to be attacked,
because the mob had threatened, that, if I ever came again, they
would have my black gown to make aprons with. No sooner had I
entered the town, than I heard the signals, such as blowing of
horns and ringing of bells, for gathering the mob. My soul was
kept quite easy. I preached on a large grass plot, from these
words, ‘And seeing the grace of God, he exhorted them with full
purpose of heart to cleave unto the Lord.’ As it happened, I
finished my sermon and pronounced the blessing, just as the
ringleader of the mob broke in upon us. One of them, as I was
coming down from the table, called me a coward; but I told him
they should hear from me in another way. I then went into the
house, and preached upon the staircase to a large number of
serious souls; but the troublers of Israel soon came in to mock
and mob us. As you know, I have very little natural courage;
but I leaped downstairs, and all ran before me. However, they
continued making a noise about the house till midnight, abusing
the poor people as they went home, and broke one young lady’s
arm in two places. They threw brother Adams a second time into
the pool, by which operation he received a deep wound in his
leg. They wheeled young W―――― H―――― in a barrow to the pool’s
side, lamed his brother, and grievously hurt several others.
Hearing that two or three clergymen were in the town, one of
whom was a justice of the peace, I went to them; but, instead of
redressing, they laid the cause of all the grievances at my door.
By the help of God, I shall persist in preaching myself, and in
encouraging those who, I believe, are truly moved by the Holy
Ghost. I know of no law of God or man against it. As I came out
from the clergymen, two of the unhappy mobbers were particularly
insolent, and huzzaed us out of the town.”

To avoid a recurrence to these disgraceful proceedings, it may be added, that Whitefield and his friends commenced an action against five of the ringleaders of the mob; that they were tried at the Gloucester Assizes on March 3, 1744; and that they were found guilty. Whitefield, immediately, wrote a full account[63] of the whole affair, and, from that account, the following extracts are taken:――

“Several of our brethren, both in England and Wales, have
received much damage, and have been frequently in great hazard
of their lives. Wiltshire has been remarkable for mobbing and
abusing the Methodists; and, for about ten months past, it
has also prevailed very much in Gloucestershire, especially at
Hampton. About the beginning of July, 1743, for several days,
the mob at Hampton assembled in great bodies, broke the windows
of Mr. Adams’s house, and assaulted the people to such a degree
that many expected to be murdered, and hid themselves in holes
and corners, to avoid the rage of their adversaries. Once,
when I was there, they continued from four in the afternoon
till midnight, rioting, giving loud huzzas, casting dirt upon
the hearers, and making proclamations, ‘that no Anabaptists,
Presbyterians, etc., should preach there, upon pain of being
first put into a skin-pit, and afterwards into a brook.’ At
another time, they pulled one or two women down the stairs
by the hair of their heads. On the 10th of July, they took
Mr. Adams out of his house, and threw him into a skin-pit full
of noisome things and stagnated water. They also put one of our
friends, named Williams, into the same pit twice, and afterwards
beat him, and dragged him along the kennel. They likewise led
Mr. Adams a mile and a half to Bourn brook, and threw him in, and
so injured his leg, that he went lame for near a fortnight.

“Both the constables and justices were applied to, but refused
to act; and seemed rather to countenance the mobbing, hoping,
thereby, that Methodism would be put a stop to, at least, at
Hampton. For a season, they gained their end. There was no
preaching for some time, the people fearing to assemble on
account of the violence of the mob.

“Upon my return to town, I advised with my friends what to do.
For several reasons, we thought it our duty to move for an
information in the King’s Bench against five of the ringleaders,
and fixed upon the riot which they made on Sunday, July 10,
when they put Messrs. Adams and Williams into the skin-pit and
brook. But, before this was done, I wrote a letter to one whom
they called captain, desiring him to inform his associates,
that, if they would acknowledge their fault, and would pay for
curing a boy’s arm, which was broken the night I was there, and
would mend the windows of Mr. Adams’s house, we would readily
pass all by. The rioters sent me an insolent answer, and said,
‘There should be no more preaching in Hampton.’ Finding them
irreclaimable, we moved for a rule of court in the King’s Bench
to lodge an information against five of the ringleaders. The
rioters were apprised of this, appeared by their counsel, and
prayed the rule might be enlarged till the next term. This was
granted.

“Meanwhile, they continued mobbing. One Saturday night, at
eleven o’clock, they broke into Mr. Adams’s house, when there
was no preaching, made those who were in bed get up, and
searched the oven, cellar, and every corner of the house, to
see whether they could find any Methodists. Some time after, they
threw another young man into a mud-pit three times successively,
and abused the people in a dreadful manner.

“The next term came on. We proved our accusation by twenty-six
affidavits; the rule was made absolute, and an information was
filed against them. To this they pleaded ‘Not guilty;’ and the
cause was referred to the assize held at Gloucester, March 3,
1744. Being aware of the great consequence of the trial, we kept
a day of fasting and prayer through all the Societies both in
England and Wales. Our Scotch friends also joined us. We had
about thirty witnesses to prove the riot and facts laid down in
the information.

“Our counsel opened the cause with much solidity and sound
reason. They shewed, ‘That rioters were not to be reformers, and
that His Majesty had nowhere put the reins of government into
the hands of mobbers, or made them judge or jury.’ Our witnesses
were then called.

“The counsel for the defendants then rose, and, I think, said
all that could be said, to make the best of a bad matter. One
urged that we were enthusiasts, and that our principles and
practices had such a tendency to infect and hurt the people,
that it was right for any private person to put a stop to
us, and whoever did so was a friend to his country. The other
counsel was pleased to mention me by name, and acquainted the
court, that, ‘Mr. Whitefield had been travelling from common to
common, making the people cry, and then picking their pockets,
under pretence of collecting money for the colony of Georgia;
that he had now several curates, of which Mr. Adams was one, who,
in his preaching, had found fault with the proceedings of the
clergy, and said, if the people went to hear them, they would be
damned.’”

Whitefield then proceeds to give an outline of the evidence in favour of the defendants, and the substance of the judge’s charge; and continues:――

“Upon this, the jury were desired to consider their verdict.
There seemed to be some little demur amongst them. His lordship
perceiving it, informed them, ‘they had nothing to do with the
damages; that was to be referred to the King’s Bench; they were
only to consider whether the defendants were guilty or not.’
Whereupon, in a few minutes, they brought in all the defendants
‘guilty of the whole information lodged against them.’

“I then retired to my lodgings, kneeled down, and gave thanks,
with some friends. Afterwards, I went to the inn, prayed and
returned thanks, with the witnesses; exhorted them to behave
with meekness and humility to their adversaries; and sent them
home rejoicing. In the evening, I preached on these words, ‘By
this I know that Thou favourest me, since Thou hast not suffered
mine enemy to triumph over me.’ Next morning, I set out for
London.”

We must return to Whitefield’s travels. When he left the rioters at Minchin-Hampton, on Saturday, July 23, 1743, he returned direct to Bristol; and, on the following day, “preached four times in the fields, to congregations as large as those at the beginning” of his career.

On Saturday next ensuing, he came to Exeter, where he spent three days. He writes:――

“EXETER, _August 2, 1743_.

“I preached, last Saturday night, to a great body of people.
Several of the clergy attended, with whom Exeter abounds. Some
went off; others stayed till I had done. All was quiet; and our
Lord soon made way for Himself into the people’s hearts.

“Yesterday evening, I preached, on Southernay Green, to upwards
of ten thousand. It was just like a Moorfields congregation. God
was with us of a truth.

“The people were very desirous of my longer continuance here;
but so many things concur to call me to London, that I leave
Exeter to-morrow morning, and preach in my way to town. I am in
my element when evangelizing.”

One of the things which brought Whitefield, in such haste, to London, was the necessity of consulting his friends concerning the steps which ought to be taken in reference to the Hampton rioters; but there were also other matters scarcely of less importance.

In the beginning of this year, 1743, Count Zinzendorf had declared war against Whitefield. He had heard him preach, and, in the plenitude of his power, had said to the young evangelist,――“You must first formally recant the _abominable doctrine_ of reprobation, so contrary to sound reason; and then preach openly _free grace_ in the blood of the Lamb, and an _election of grace_ as taught in the Scriptures, which is quite different from the doctrine of predestination which you teach; and if not, our Church must necessarily be opposed to you.”[64]

Probably, Whitefield cared but little for Zinzendorf’s imperious censure; but, in the month of August, another incident occurred, which touched him more deeply.

John Syms, for years past, had been Whitefield’s travelling companion. He seems also to have acted as Whitefield’s secretary. He was his confidential friend. During the last two months, Whitefield had written Syms, at least, eight letters, giving an account of his every-day proceedings, and all of which are published in Whitefield’s collected works. Strangely enough, all at once, the faithful Syms wished to leave Whitefield and to join the Moravians. Whitefield was extremely reluctant to part with him; and told James Hutton, that, “he could not discharge John Syms, his agent, believing it to be the Saviour’s will that he should stay with him, and do the work with which he had entrusted him. Whitefield wished Hutton to advise Syms to continue with him; but this could not be done, inasmuch as Syms had said he was called by the Holy Ghost to leave him; and the Brethren could not advise him against his own convictions.”[65]

The result was, Whitefield lost his secretary, travelling companion, and major-domo. John Syms was received into the Moravian fellowship; and continued one of the Unitas Fratrum until his death, in 1756. He was buried in Camberwell churchyard, where there used to be a memorial of him and of his sister, Mrs. Sarah Osborn.[66]

Another matter demanded Whitefield’s attention, even more important than the retention or otherwise of Secretary Syms.

John Wesley was now in the north of England; Charles Wesley was in Cornwall; Whitefield was in Devonshire; Spangenberg was in London; John Nelson was in Yorkshire. The Moravians were an organized body of Christians. The Calvinistic Methodists were formed into a connexion. And Wesley had large and flourishing societies in London; Bristol, Newcastle-on-Tyne, and other places. Somehow, Wesley formed a project for bringing the three communities into closer union with each other; and, for that purpose, proposed that a conference should be held in London.[67] He himself travelled from Newcastle; his brother Charles hurried from Cornwall; Whitefield came from Exeter; John Nelson trudged from Birstal. What was the result? Charles Wesley writes:――

“Gwennap, Sunday, August 7. My brother summoned me to London, to
confer with the heads of the Moravians and Predestinarians. We
had near three hundred miles to ride in five days. I was willing
to undertake this labour for peace, though the journey was too
great for us and our weary beasts, which we have used almost
every day for these three months.

“Friday, August 12. By nine at night, I reached the Foundery.
Here I heard the Moravians would not be present at the
conference. Spangenberg, indeed, _said_ he would, but
immediately left England. My brother was come from Newcastle,
John Nelson from Yorkshire, and I from the Land’s End to good
purpose!”[68]

What did John Wesley say? To a Moravian, who, in 1746, taunted him with having opposed reconciliation and union, he wrote:――

“Alas, my brother! what an assertion is this! Did not I come,
three years ago, in all haste, from Newcastle-upon-Tyne; and
my brother, in five days, from the Land’s End, to a supposed
conference in London? Was this standing out? But with what
effect? Why, Mr. Spangenberg had just left London. None besides
had any power to confer with us. And, to cut us off from any
such expectation, James Hutton said they had orders not to
confer at all, unless the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the
Bishop of London, were present. There cannot be under heaven a
greater mistake than this, that I ever did stand out, or that
I do so now. There has not been one day, for these seven years
last past, wherein my soul has not longed for union.”[69]

It is impossible to determine, with certainty, whether Wesley’s wish was for the Moravians, the Calvinistic Methodists, and the Arminian Methodists to be amalgamated into one connexion; or whether he merely wished that, by mutual explanations and concessions, they might cultivate a better understanding with each other, and so avoid all unnecessary collision, and unite, as far as practicable, in advancing the work of God; but one thing is certain, through no fault of his, the attempt was a failure. Ten months later, Wesley instituted a conference of his own.

No authentic information exists as to the part which Whitefield took in these proceedings; but, a few days after the proposed conference should have met, Wesley, “to cut off all needless dispute,” wrote down his sentiments, as plainly as he could, on the “three points in debate” between him and Whitefield, namely, “Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, and Final Perseverance.” The paper[70] doubtless was put into Whitefield’s hands, and must have satisfied him of the sincerity of Wesley’s friendship; though Arminian Methodists, as Mr. Jackson says, will think “it leans too much towards Calvinism.”

In one thing, Whitefield and Wesley were agreed; namely, that their Societies should not separate themselves from the Established Church. Hence the following letter, written, by Whitefield, soon after the date of the intended conference:――

“LONDON, _August 20, 1743_.

“How wonderfully does our all-wise Redeemer order things for
the trial of His children! Alas! alas! how apt are they to judge,
censure, and be needlessly prejudiced against each other!

“In our last Association, we agreed not to separate from the
Established Church, but to go on in our usual way. The motion
to separate was made only by a very few, of more contracted
principles. By far the greater part most strenuously opposed
it, and with good reason; for, as we enjoy such great liberty
under the mild and gentle government of his present majesty,
King George, we think we can do him, our country, and the cause
of God, more service in ranging up and down, preaching repentance
towards God, and faith in our Lord Jesus, to the multitudes
who will neither come into church or meeting, but who are led,
by curiosity, to follow us into the fields. However disorderly
this may seem to bigots of every denomination, yet, it is a
way to which God has affixed His seal for many years past; and,
therefore, we have no reason to turn to the right hand or to
the left, but to press forwards, and to do our utmost towards
enlarging the kingdom of our Lord Jesus.”

Whitefield’s wife was near her confinement; and, at the beginning of September, had a narrow escape from an untimely death. Whitefield himself shall tell the story.

“LONDON, _September 2, 1743_.

“My wife has been in trying circumstances, partly through the
unskilfulness of a chaise-driver――I mean myself. Being advised
to take her out into the air, I drove her, as well as myself,
through inadvertence, into a ditch. The ditch might be about
fourteen feet deep. All, who saw us, cried out, ‘They are
killed!’ but, through infinite mercy, we received no great hurt.
The place was very narrow near the bottom, and yet the horse
went down, as though lowered by a pulley. A bystander ran, and
caught hold of its head, to prevent its going forwards. I got
upon its back, and was drawn out; whilst my wife, still hanging
between the chaise and the bank, was pulled up by two or three
kind assistants. The chaise and horse being taken up, and our
bruises being washed with vinegar in a neighbouring house, we
went on our intended way, and came home rejoicing in God our
Saviour.

“Not expecting my wife’s delivery for some time, I intend making
a short excursion, and then you may expect further news from
yours, etc.,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”

Northampton, among other places, was visited by Whitefield, in the “short excursion” just mentioned. His friend Hervey had recently become curate at Weston-Favel; and, perhaps, it was this circumstance which brought Whitefield into this particular locality. Be that as it may, the visit became a memorable one, from the angry feelings it excited among some of the leading Dissenters of the day.

Others, besides clergymen and Presbyterian ministers, were unpleasantly perplexed by Whitefield and the Methodists. Dr. Doddridge, though one of the most liberal-minded of the Dissenters, found it difficult to look with favour upon the proceedings of _some_ of the Methodist evangelists. Hence the following extract from a letter, addressed to the Rev. Mr. Witton, son-in-law of the celebrated Philip Henry:――

“NORTHAMPTON, _June 8, 1743_.

“I am much concerned at the anxiety and disturbance which
Mr. Wesley’s coming into your neighbourhood has occasioned. You
are pleased to ask my advice, and therefore I give it.

“I think the gentlest methods will be the most effectual.
Opposition will but give strength to the faction, if it be
attended with violence and heat. Should Mr. Wesley come hither,
as perhaps he may, and excite such a flame among the weaker part
of my hearers, I would appoint some stated season for meeting
once a week, with a few steady and experienced brethren of
the church, that an hour or two might be spent in prayer and
consultation, as new incidents might arise within the sphere
of our personal observation. I would endeavour to renew my zeal
in preaching the great truths of the gospel, and in visiting
and exhorting my hearers. I would, with great meekness and
compassion, and yet with great solemnity, admonish the persons
attacked with the contagion, and lay open before them the absurd
nature and tendency of the views they had rashly entertained;
and I would, as God enabled me, pray earnestly for them.”[71]

Among others, who wrote to Doddridge, respecting Whitefield, was the Rev. Robert Blair, D.D., author of the well-known poem, “The Grave.” In a letter, dated July 28, 1743, he says:――

“I wish you would give me your opinion of Mr. Whitefield, a
man who has made abundance of noise in the world. I never in my
life knew any person so much idolized by some, and railed at by
others.”[72]

Soon after this, during a visit to London, Doddridge seems to have attended Whitefield’s Tabernacle, and to have taken part in one or more of its services. Perhaps the influence of Colonel Gardiner, one of his correspondents, had induced him to do this. Whatever the inducement, however, the act itself created alarm among the London Dissenters. Hence the following, addressed to Doddridge, from Dr. Isaac Watts:――

“STOKE NEWINGTON, _September 20, 1743_.

“I am sorry that, since your departure, I have had many
questions asked me about your preaching or praying at the
Tabernacle, and of sinking the character of a minister, and
especially of a tutor, among the Dissenters, so low thereby. I
find many of your friends entertain this idea; but I can give no
answer, not knowing how much you have been engaged there. I pray
God to guard us from every temptation.”[73]

This is mightily amusing. Dr. Doddridge, the theological tutor of the Dissenters’ College, daring to preach or pray in Whitefield’s Tabernacle! What a sin against all ecclesiastical and ministerial propriety! The poor Doctor, however, went further than even this. He allowed Whitefield to preach in his own pulpit at Northampton! This seemed to perfect the enormity. Among others who took the Northampton professor to task for his eccentric conduct, was the Rev. John Barker, an influential minister,[74] in London, who wrote as follows:――

“_November 4, 1743._

“It is an honour to our interest that you stand so well with
the sober and moderate clergy. For this reason, I was troubled
to hear of the late intercourse between you and Mr. Whitefield,
the consequence of which, with respect to the Church, it is
easy to foresee. I was willing to think well of the Methodists;
but, after a candid attention to them, their proceedings appear
not to me to be wise and good. Their devotion is unseasonable,
irregular, and injudicious. Their sermons are low and loose.
Their spirit appears to me turbulent, unruly, and censorious.
They practise upon weak people and poor people. They call them
to pray and sing when they should be in their business or their
beds. They disturb the peace and order of families, and give
great uneasiness in them. What they pretend to above their
neighbours appears to be mere enthusiasm. Their people are
slothful, or mopish, or dejected, or pragmatical, rather than
sober, discreet, judicious, exemplary, regular Christians;
and I have no expectation but that Methodism, like any other
enthusiasm, will promote infidelity, and turn out to the hurt
and damage of religion, and the souls of men. Though I judge
not their hearts, views, and motives, but admit those are secret
things which belong to God, yet I thought it needful, very
lately, to warn my hearers of these people’s errors, and advise
them to avoid them.”[75]

Doddridge’s chief castigator, however, was Nathaniel Neal, Esq., son of the Rev. Daniel Neal, the historian of the Puritans. Nathaniel was an eminent attorney, secretary to the Million Bank, and author of “A Free and Serious Remonstrance to Protestant Dissenting Ministers, on occasion of the Decay of Religion.”[76] He wrote not fewer than three long letters to Doddridge, filling nine printed octavo pages, and dated respectively, Million Bank, October 11, October 15, and December 10, 1743. He addresses Doddridge with great deference and respect; but, evidently, in great alarm, lest Doddridge should irretrievably injure his position and character, as the chief of the Dissenters’ tutors, by countenancing the proceedings of the eccentric Methodist.

In the first of his letters, he writes:――

“It was with the utmost concern that I received the information
of Mr. Whitefield’s having preached last week in your pulpit. I
attended the meeting of the trustees of Mr. Coward’s benefaction
this day, when the matter was canvassed, and I now find myself
obliged to apprize you of the very great uneasiness which your
conduct herein has occasioned them.”

Mr. Neal proceeds to tell the Doctor that his “regard to the Methodists” was injuring him in the opinion of his friends, and was giving an advantage against him to his “secret and avowed enemies.” He adds:――

“In the case of such a public character, and so extensive a
province for the service of religion as yours, it seems to me
a point well worth considering, whether it is a right thing to
risk such a prospect as Providence has opened before you, of
eminent and distinguished usefulness, for the sake of any good
you are likely to do amongst these people. Your countenancing
the Methodists has been the subject of conversation much oftener
than I could have wished. The trustees are particularly in
pain for it, with regard to your academy; as they know it is an
objection made to it, by some persons seriously, and by others
craftily.”[77]

In his third letter, Mr. Neal expresses a holy dread lest Doddridge should be “engaged amongst men of weak heads, and narrow, gloomy sentiments, who may and ought to be pitied and prayed for, but whom no rules of piety or prudence will oblige us to make our confidants and friends.” He continues:――

“There are letters shewn about town, from several ministers
in the west, which make heavy complaints of the disorders
occasioned by Whitefield and Wesley in those parts. One of
them, speaking of Mr. Whitefield, calls him ‘_honest, crazy,
confident_ Whitefield.’ These letters, likewise, mention that
some ministers there, who were your pupils, have given them
countenance; and you can hardly conceive the disrespect this has
occasioned several ministers and other persons in town to speak
of you with.”[78]

Poor Doddridge, with the best intentions, had stirred up a nest of ecclesiastical hornets. He had to make the best of the affair; and part of his answer to Mr. Neal was as follows:――

“_December 12, 1743._

“I am truly sorry that the manner in which I spoke of Mr.
Whitefield, in my last, should have given you uneasiness. What
I said proceeded from a principle which I am sure you will not
despise: I mean a certain frankness of heart, which would not
allow me to seem to think more meanly of a man to whom I had
once professed some friendship than I really did.

“I must, indeed, look upon it as an unhappy circumstance that
he came to Northampton just when he did, as I perceive that,
in concurrence with other circumstances, it has filled town and
country with astonishment and indignation.

“I had great expectations from the Methodists and Moravians; and
I am grieved that so many things have occurred among them which
have been quite unjustifiable. I suppose they have also produced
the same sentiments in the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, to my
certain knowledge, received Count Zinzendorf with open arms, and
wrote of his being chosen the Moravian Bishop, as what was done
‘_plaudente toto cœlesti choro_.’ I shall always be ready to
weigh whatever can be said against Mr. Whitefield; and, though
I must have actual demonstration before I can admit him to be
a dishonest man, and though I shall never be able to think all
he has written, and all I have heard from him to be nonsense;
yet, I am not so zealously attached to him as to be disposed
to celebrate him as one of the greatest men of the age, or to
think that he is the pillar which bears up the whole interest of
religion among us.

“I had heard before of the offence which had been taken at
two of my pupils in the west, for the respect they shewed to
Mr. Whitefield: and yet they are both persons of eminent piety.
He whose name is chiefly in question, I mean Mr. Darracott, is
one of the most devout and extraordinary men I ever sent out,
and a person who has, within these few years, been highly useful
to numbers of his hearers. Mr. Fawcett labours at Taunton; and
his zeal, so far as I can judge, is inspired both with love and
prudence. Yet, I hear those men are reproached because they have
treated Mr. Whitefield respectfully; and that one of them, after
having had a correspondence with him for many years, admitted
him into his pulpit.

“I own, I am very thoughtful where these things will end. In
the meantime, I am as silent as I can be. I commit the matter to
God in prayer. I am sure I see no danger that any of my pupils
will prove Methodists. I wish many of them may not run into the
contrary extreme.”[79]

These are long, almost tedious, extracts; but they are of great importance as plainly shewing that, at the beginning of his career, the Independents looked upon Whitefield with as much suspicion as many of the clergy of the Church of England and many of the Presbyterian ministers of Scotland did. It was a heinous sin against all the proprieties of their Church, that Doddridge and two of his ordained pupils had countenanced the preaching of this young, popular, powerful, and successful evangelist.

We again return to Whitefield’s wanderings. In the _Scots’ Magazine_, for 1743, under the heading of “Marriages and Births,” the following announcement was made: “October, 1743. At his house in Hoxton, the wife of Mr. George Whitefield, of a son.” This event seems to have occurred during Whitefield’s “short excursion” to Northampton and its neighbourhood. Hence, under date of October 5th, he writes: “The last evening of my short excursion, I preached from a balcony, to many thousands, who stood in the street as comfortable as at noonday. Upon retiring to my lodgings, news was brought me, that God had given me a son. This hastened me up to London, where I now am, and from whence, after I have baptized my little one, I purpose to set out again on my Master’s public business.” Ten days after writing this, the untiring Whitefield was at Avon, in Wiltshire, and did not return to his wife and infant son until seven weeks afterwards. Perhaps, this was not an example of either connubial or paternal behaviour to be commended; but let it pass. The following extracts from his letters will furnish an idea of his labours, in the west of England, during the next _two_ months:――

“COLLUMPTON, _October 25, 1743_.

“I wrote to you on the 15th instant at Avon. In the morning, I
walked to Tytherton, and preached. After sermon, I baptized four
boys, each about three months old. The ordinance was so solemn
and awful, that Mrs. Gotley[80] (who is a Quaker) had a mind
immediately to partake of it. When I go to Wiltshire, I believe
I shall baptize her and her children, with some adult persons
who have tasted of redeeming love. About one o’clock I preached
at Clack, in the street. I then rode to Brinkworth and preached
there, and, afterwards, administered the holy sacrament to about
two hundred and fifty communicants. Some strangers, from Bath,
went home filled with our Redeemer’s presence. I have also
preached at Chippenham. We had a wonderful time in Wiltshire.

“I hope I managed all things right about the affair of the
Hampton rioters. They have compelled us to appeal unto Cæsar.
Evidences shall be examined in the country, in time enough to
send the examinations to town.

“On Saturday last (October 22nd), when I came to Wellington, the
Rev. Mr. Darracott[81] persuaded me to stay there, because the
country people had come from all quarters several times to hear
me, and had been disappointed. I consented, and preached in his
meeting-house, in the evening, to a large auditory. The Rev. Mr.
Fawcett,[82] formerly pupil to Dr. Doddridge, came there, and
stayed all night. The blessed Jesus gave us much freedom in
conversation. I hope both will be instruments, under God, in
promoting a good work in these parts.

“Sunday morning, I preached again in the meeting-house; and, in
the evening, to seven thousand in the field.[83]

“On Monday, at ten in the morning, and at two in the afternoon,
I preached, at Collumpton, with much freedom and power; was
kindly received, met some reputable Dissenters, and am now
setting out for Exeter.”

Whitefield seems to have made Exeter his head-quarters for nearly a fortnight. Hence the following letters:――

“EXETER, _October 28, 1743_.

“I have a strong conviction that our Lord intends doing
something in the west. Since my arrival here, letters of
invitation have come from many parts. The common people begin
to feel. I preached this afternoon on Southernay Green. Even
some of the polite were much affected. I believe I shall think
it my duty to stay in these parts for some time.”

“EXETER, _November 6, 1743_.

“On Monday last” (October 31st), “I went to Axminster, and
preached to about two thousand without; and afterwards exhorted
within the house where I lay. The next day, I preached to a
greater number of people; and, at night, gave an exhortation,
and met the Society. Our Lord vouchsafed us a gracious blessing.

“On Wednesday, I went to Ottery; but, just as I named my text,
the bells rang. Upon this, I adjourned to a field, whither the
people ran in droves. As I stepped into the inn, before I went
to the field, a clergyman came, who asked me by what authority
I preached, and said it was a riot, and that the meeting
was illegal. I answered him, as I thought pertinently, and
afterwards went and shewed him my authority, by preaching on
these words, ‘Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel
to every creature.’ In the evening, I returned to Exeter, where
some hundreds were waiting to hear me expound. The Lord makes
this place very comfortable to me. Prejudices fall off daily,
and people begin not only to discern, but to feel, the doctrines
of the gospel.

“Postscript.――Ten at night. It would have pleased you to be here
this evening. I question whether near a third part of Exeter
were not attending on the word preached. All was solemn and
awful, and the Lord gave me much assistance from His Holy Spirit.
Help me to praise Him.”

From Exeter, Whitefield proceeded to Bideford, where he wrote as follows:――

“BIDEFORD, _November 11, 1743_.

“The Rev. Mr. Thompson, Rector of St. Gennys, Cornwall, is here.
God willing, I will go with him to-morrow. There is also another
clergyman about eighty years of age, but not above one year
old in the school of Christ.[84] He lately preached three times
and rode forty miles the same day. The Dissenting minister and
his wife were very hearty; and, perhaps, here is one of the
most settled female Christian Societies in the kingdom. I cannot
well describe with what power the word was attended. Yesterday,
in the afternoon and evening, it was just like as at Edinburgh.
The old clergyman was much broken. A young Oxonian, who came
with him, and many others, were most deeply affected. I suppose,
there were upwards of two thousand, in the evening, in the
meeting-house. Dear Mr. Hervey,[85] one of our first Methodists
at Oxford, and who was lately a curate here, had laid the
blessed foundation.

“So far from thinking of nestling at London, I am more and more
convinced that I should go from place to place; and I therefore
question if I shall see London for some time.

“Postscript.――Seven at night. To-day has been as yesterday, and
much more abundant. I am here, as in Scotland and New England.
Here is work enough for three months. The weather is very
favourable; range, therefore, I must and will.”

On Saturday, November 12, Whitefield accompanied Mr. Thompson to his rectory at St. Gennys, Cornwall, where he seems to have remained a fortnight. Hence the following:――

“ST. GENNYS, _November 25, 1743_.

“I am glad that the Lord inclined my heart to come hither. He
has been with us of a truth. How did His stately steps appear
in the sanctuary last Lord’s-day! Many, many prayers were put
up, by the worthy rector and others, for an outpouring of God’s
blessed Spirit. They were answered. Arrows of conviction fled so
thick and so fast, and such a universal weeping prevailed from
one end of the congregation to the other, that good Mr. Thompson
could not help going from seat to seat, to encourage and comfort
the wounded souls. The Oxonian’s father was almost struck dumb;
and the young Oxonian’s crest was so lowered, that I believe he
will never venture to preach an unknown Christ, or to deal in
the false commerce of unfelt truths.

“I could enlarge, but I must away to Bideford, just to give
Satan another stroke, and bid my Christian friends farewell; and
then return the way I came, namely, through Exeter, Wellington,
and Bristol, to the great metropolis.”

Whitefield arrived in London at the beginning of December, and wrote the following hitherto unpublished letter to “Mr. Howell Harris, at Trevecca, near the Hay, South Wales, Breconshire.”

“LONDON, _December 6, 1743_.

“MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,――I thank you for your kind letters and
kind present. Our Saviour will plentifully reward you for all
favours conferred on me and mine.

“I rejoice exceedingly that the word runs and is glorified
in Wales. I hope to rejoice together with you at the next
Association. Great things have been doing in the west. I believe
Mr. Thompson, of Cornwall, will come with me into Wales. I have
thoughts of removing my little family to Abergavenny in a short
time; and to leave that house for you and yours to live in, till
I come from abroad again, if you will be pleased to accept of it.

“I can easily forgive our dear brother Beaumont;[86] but,
I think, he and his wife have dealt very unsimply in respect
to their marriage. I pray our Lord Jesus Christ to bless them
exceedingly, and to prevent all ill consequences that may arise,
to the people of God, from such a procedure.

“I intend being here but a few days; and I have many things to
say to you when we see each other face to face. Oh, my brother,
my dear, very dear brother Harris, Jesus is better and better to
me every day. I have had close attacks, but strong consolations.
I would write much, would time and business permit; but I must
bid you adieu. My tender, tender love to all. My dear wife and
Mr. Grace send their most cordial respects. The Lord Jesus be
with your dear soul, and give you to pray for, my dear, dear,
dear brother,

“Yours most affectionately in Christ Jesus,

“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”

“P.S.――Mr. Mason, the bookseller, is dead; also Mr. Dubert’s
wife. About seven of our friends have lately died in the Lord.
Courage, my dear man,――courage; we shall go ere long. Yet a
little while, and He that cometh will come, and will not tarry.”

In less than a fortnight, Whitefield was again on the wing. On Friday, December 16, he rode to a place “five miles beyond Reading.” The next day, he got to Clack. “It rained and snowed much for about seven miles,” says he, “and the way was dangerous; but the blessed Jesus kept us in safety.” On Sunday morning, he preached, and administered the sacrament to the Wiltshire Societies, at Tytherton;[87] and, in the evening, he preached at Brinkworth. He writes: “They were good times. I have a cold, but our Lord warms my heart. To-morrow (December 19) I must away to Gloucester. Oh, follow, follow with your prayers.”

Whitefield was now on his way to a new sphere of labour. All readers of Methodist history are well acquainted with the disgraceful and terrible riots which took place at Walsal, Wednesbury, Darlaston, and West Bromwich, in 1743. In the former part of the year, both the Wesleys had preached here, at the peril of their lives. As recently as October 20, John Wesley had been all but murdered by the godless ruffians of the neighbourhood; and now, at the end of December, Whitefield came.[88] The following extract is taken from a pamphlet, entitled, “Some Papers, giving an Account of the Rise and Progress of Methodism at Wednesbury, in Staffordshire, and in other Parishes adjacent; as likewise of the late Riot in those parts.” Printed by J. Roberts, London. 1744. (8vo. 30 pp.)

“Mr. Whitefield was at Birmingham, where there is a Society,
about Christmas last; and you may suppose great numbers would,
out of curiosity, flock to hear a man who had been so much
talked of. He was also invited to Wednesbury, where he preached
in the streets for several days. He was invited to Birmingham
by a Dissenter. His stay was not above a week or ten days,
and, towards the last, his auditors were not so numerous, and
the behaviour of some of them not over civil. I do not find
the number of the Methodist converts to be near so numerous
as was at first apprehended; and those few of them, who were
of the communion of the Church of England, are, in general,
very regular in their behaviour, and in their attendance at
church. The Dissenters constitute the greater number, and are
their greatest admirers, particularly of Mr. Whitefield. About
Wednesbury, some of their converts have been raised into strange
and unaccountable ecstasies; but I cannot find there have been
any of the like instances at Birmingham.”

Such was the testimony of an unfriendly writer. Whitefield’s own account is as follows:――

“_December 31, 1743._

“What do you think? Since my last, I have stolen a whole day
to dispatch some private business; however, in the evening, I
expounded, at Birmingham, to a great room full of people, who
would rush into my lodgings, whether I would or not.

“On Sunday morning (Christmas Day), at eight, I preached, in
the street, to about a thousand, with much freedom. I then went
to church and received the sacrament, and afterwards preached
to several thousands in the street. As no minister would preach
in a house at Wednesbury,[89] where a weekly lecture used to
be kept up, I was earnestly entreated to go; and, after my
afternoon’s preaching at Birmingham, I went and preached there,
at six in the evening, to many hundreds in the street. The word
came with power, and only one or two made a noise. We afterwards
had a precious meeting in private.

“On Monday morning, about eight, I preached to a large company
in a field. By eleven, I returned to Birmingham, and preached
to many thousands, on a common near the town. The soldiers were
exercising; but the officers, hearing that I was come to preach,
dismissed them, and promised that no disturbance should be made.
All was quiet, and a blessed time we had. In the afternoon,
at three, I preached again to about the same company, with the
same success. Then I rode to Wednesbury, and preached there, and
afterwards exhorted. About one, I went to bed exceeding happy.

“In the morning, I broke up some fallow-ground at a place called
Mare Green, about two miles from Wednesbury. Much mobbing had
been there against Mr. Wesley’s friends. A few began to insult
me. Several clods were thrown, one of which fell on my head,
and another struck my fingers, while I was in prayer. A sweet
gospel spirit was given to me. I preached again at Birmingham,
to larger auditories than before, about eleven in the morning and
three in the afternoon. In the evening, I expounded twice in a
large room; once to the rich, and once to the poor; and went to
rest happier than the night before.[90]

“In the morning (Wednesday, Dec. 28), I took my leave of the
Birmingham people, who wept much, and shewed great concern at
my departure. I then went to Kidderminster, where I was kindly
received by Mr. Williams, with whom I have corresponded for
near two years. Many friends were at his house. I was greatly
refreshed to find what a sweet savour of good remained to
this day, from Mr. Baxter’s doctrine, works, and discipline.
I preached, about three in the afternoon, to a large auditory,
near the church. Some unkind men, though they promised not to
do so, rang the bells; but our Saviour enabled me to preach
with power. In the evening and next morning, I preached in the
meeting-house.

“I then (Thursday) went with Mr. Williams to Bromsgrove, and
was kindly received by one Mr. K――――y, a good man, and several
others, among whom were two or three Baptist ministers, and
one Independent. In the afternoon, I preached in a field. Some
rude people kicked a football, and sounded a horn; but the Lord
enabled me to preach with boldness. About six, I preached in the
Baptist meeting-house; left Kidderminster at eight, and reached
Worcester at ten. Mr. Williams and another friend accompanied us.

“The next day, I reached Gloucester, very thankful, and
rejoicing greatly in Christ for giving me such a delightful and
happy Christmas.”

This is a notable letter. Whitefield was now on the ground where Wesley and his friends had been nearly murdered; but all the inconvenience suffered by Whitefield was a little noise at Wednesbury, the throwing of a few clods at Mare Green, the ringing of the church bells at Kidderminster, and a game at football and the sounding of a horn at Bromsgrove. Compared with Wesley, the lines fell to Whitefield in pleasant places.

The observant reader will also notice Whitefield’s enormous labours. In four days, in mid-winter, he held nineteen services, twelve of his sermons being preached in the open air, and three in Dissenting chapels. The opportunity of thus serving his great Master was Whitefield’s idea of spending “a delightful and happy Christmas!” No wonder that his Master blessed him, and filled him so full of joy at midnight hours.

But little more remains to be said respecting Whitefield’s career in 1743. In common with his friend Wesley, he was again and again fiercely assailed by the public press. He was pilloried in the famous Dunciad of Alexander Pope, as follows:――

“So swells each windpipe; ass intones to ass,
Harmonic twang! of leather, horn, and brass;
Such as from lab’ring lungs th’ Enthusiast blows,
High Sound, attemper’d to the vocal nose!
Or such as bellow from the deep Divine;
There, Webster! peal’d thy voice, and, Whitefield! thine.”