also been marked by a circumstance that cannot fail to give considerable pleasure to the friends of the Connexion on the one hand, and to all the friends of religious freedom on the other. I now allude to the manly, noble, and Christian confession made by the Rev. James Everett in relation to the Rev. Alexander Kilham. When called upon to speak, Mr. Everett said, "Before I say what I have to say by way of speech, I wish to put myself right with the friends. I have a confession to make. I make it candidly, honestly, and fearlessly, that I have, in common with many other Wesleyan ministers and people, been brought up in error with regard to Alexander Kilham. In my ignorance I thought him a mischievous man. I say now, that I was mistaken. Mr. Kilham was the first Methodist reformer. He was sixty years before his times. He had the clearest and most comprehensive views of the great questions affecting the interests and liberties of the church. In justice to my present connections and in justice to Mr. Kilham and his admirers and followers, I make this confession." The meeting received the above declaration with feelings of intense pleasure. It will doubtless tend to remove the unkindly feeling which may have been cherished against Mr. Everett, in consequence of what he has written respecting Mr. Kilham; and it may prompt the liberal portion of the great Methodist family to seek information concerning a man who, nearly sixty years ago, anticipated all, and more than all, that most sanguine and liberal reformers of the present day have sought to realize. Alexander Kilham was one of the most clear-headed, disinterested and self-sacrificing men of his age, and is unquestionably destined to be regarded as the exponent of a system of ecclesiastical polity that will excite the admiration and conserve the freedom of the Church through succeeding generations.

G. H.

["The First Methodist Reformer, or a True Estimate of the Rev. A. Kilham," may be had from the Bookroom at threepence each, or 20s. per hundred net.-ED.]

OPENING OF A NEW ORGAN AT TIPTON, DUDLEY EAST CIRCUIT.

On Sabbath, November 6, 1853, three impressive sermons were preached to crowded and attentive audiences.

Those in the morning and afternoon by the Rev. G. Dunne, of Edinburgh; and that in the evening by our own esteemed minister, the Rev. T. Boycott.

The organ was purchased of Mr. Holmshaw, organ builder, at Birmingham, and is a neat, chaste, sweet-toned instrument. Mr. W. Finch, jun., very efficiently presided at the organ. The very liberal collections taken up on the Sabbath, together with donations obtained by the indefatigable exertions of Mr. Boycott, and our valuable friend Mr. D. Dudley, have entirely paid off all expenses, so that now we have not only got an excellent organ, but have it free from debt. What cannot be done when the people have a mind to work?

H. B.

TEA MEETING AT NOTTING-
HAM.

A Tea Meeting of a most interesting character was held in the upper vestry of our chapel, Nottingham, on Friday, Nov. 11th, to celebrate the marriage of Miss Amelia Higginbottom to Mr. G. A. Keyworth, of Hastings. It was the wish of the amiable bride that her father should treat all the old and poor members of the Church to a cup of tea, in commemoration of the festive occasion. Accordingly, on the above date, about seventy of the old folks sat down to regale themselves to their heart's content with "the cup which cheers, but not inebriates." It was a most joyous and interesting occasion, just exactly to our liking. Appropriate addresses were delivered by Mr. Higginbottom, F.R.S., Mr. Cooper, Mr. Harrison, two of the aged sisters, and the ministers of the Circuit. A resolution was passed, expressing the good feelings and wishes of the meeting towards the new married couple; and after suitable prayers for their welfare, and the usual benediction, the friends separated, evidently much delighted with the enjoyments of the evening. This example, realizing the requirement of our Saviour (Luke xiv. 13), is worthy of imitation.

H.O. CROFTS.
J. RAMSDEN.
Nottingham, Nov. 18, 1853.

A MAN too busy to take care of his health is like a mechanic too busy to take care of his tools.

Ir is wise not to seek a secret, and honest not to reveal it.

46

DUDLEY EAST CIRCUIT, TIPTON.— The sermons in aid of our Mission Funds, were preached on Lord's day, Nov. 27, by the Rev. F. Hemmings, of America. In the evening of the 28th we held our public Missionary Meeting. Mr. N. Fellows having been voted to the chair, discharged his duties very efficiently. The meeting was addressed by the Revs. F. Hemmings, G. Dunn, J. Wood, G. Grundy, and T. Boycott; also by Messrs. E. W. Bailey, W. Hargrove, and R. Ewens.

The whole of the services were of the most interesting, instructive, and profitable character. The congregations were good, the feeling excited in favour of the cause enthusiastic, and the collections were several pounds in advance of last year. B. W.

OLDBURY.-On Sunday, Oct. 31, sermons were preached in the Tabernacle, Oldbury, in the morning by the Rev. G. Dunn, from Edinburgh, and in the evening by the Rev. W. Wilshaw. On the Tuesday evening following, a public meeting was held, over which Mr. J. Brooks presided, introducing the great subject in a very suitable and energetic speech; after which the Missionary cause was ably advocated by the Revs. J. Medicraft, T. D. Crothers, G. Dunn, T. Boycott, and G. Grundy. Although we were unable to secure the services of the deputation appointed, the collections were nearly £3 above those of the previous year. G. GRUNDY.

DURHAM.-Sermons, in aid of our Missions, were preached at Durham, and New Durham, on Sabbath, Nov. 13th, by the Rev. G. Hallath. On the Monday following, a missionary tea meeting was held in the Town Hall, Durham, after which a public meeting. R. S. Stanley, Esq., of Newcastle, kindly and efficiently presided; and the meeting was addressed with great effect by the Revs. G. Hallath, T. Griffiths, S. Goodall, T. Cartwright, and J. Bramwell, J. Love, and R. Thwaites, Esquires. On Tuesday evening, a meeting was held at New Durham, presided over by R. Thwaites, Esq., and addressed by the Rev. G. Hallatt,

BIRMINGHAM.-Two sermons were preached in behalf of our Missions, in Oxford-street Chapel, on the 27th Nov., 1853, by the Rev. T. D. Crothers, of Bilston. On the following day the missionary meeting was held. Our friend, Mr. Turner, took the chair, managed its duties well, and placed a £5 note on the plate at the collection. The Rev. S. Woodhouse read the report, and speeches were delivered by the Revs. J. Medicraft, T. D. Crothers, Mr. Watkin (a gentleman of colour), and Jno. Stokoe. The meeting was one of very great interest, and the collections overtopped those of last year a little.

Dec. 2nd, 1853.

JNO. STOKOE.

DUDLEY CIRCUIT.-On Sunday, Nov. 13th, 1853, sermons were preached on behalf of our Missions, at Pensnett, Woodside, Five Ways, and Netherton, by the Revs. S. Woodhouse, of Birmingham, A. McCurdy, of Longton, P. T. Gilton, and Mr. C. Y. Potts. Public meetings were held at the above places on the four following evenings; that at Pensnett being addressed by the Revs. A. McCurdy, John Stokoe, the circuit preachers, and Messrs. C. Y. Potts, and John Raybould; that at Woodside, by the Revs. A. McCurdy, and J. Stokoe, in connection with the circuit preachers; and those at Five Ways and Netherton, by the Rev. A. McCurdy, and the ministers of the circuit. The congregations were, upon the whole, very good; and the collections in all the places were considerably in advance of last year.

The writer would just remark, that Five Ways has come out nobly this year. Although the Society numbers but forty members (ten of whom are poor widows), it has contributed nearly £10 to the Mission Fund; and, before the Conference year closes, it is intended to increase the sum by a juvenile effort.

Pensnett, Nov. 22, 1853.

J. M.

47

IN introducing the opinions of beloved ministers and friends on the subject of a change in our connexional name, a few observations may be

necessary.

1. In discussing this question, it will necessarily happen that free remarks and animadversions will be made upon other denominations. The subject involves the examination and claims of other Christian communities, and remarks, some commendatory and some depreciatory, will be made. We ask the forbearance and kind construction of other denominations, assuring them that no evil is felt or intended. We love all them that love the Lord Jesus, and would not willingly give offence to any.

"Let

2. In discussing this question, we must prayerfully watch over our own spirit. There must be no self-will, no obstinacy, no ill-feeling, nothing said or done to injure God's church. We are brethren; nay, more, brethren of the same denomination. Our Heavenly Father commands us to "keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace." He says, nothing be done through strife or vain glory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves." "Be of the same mind one toward another." "Be kindly affectioned one to another, with brotherly love." These and a host of similar injunctions come from God, and are especially necessary to be remembered just now. By God's help we will obey them. We will have continued peace and concord. The enemy shall have no place among us in this friendly discussion. Not a breeze of contention shall ruffle our present calm and peaceful state of feeling as a Christian church. In conformity with this the opinions of those who differ from us shall be respected by ourselves and heard by others; and we freely state, further, that if our proposal be not acceptable to a large majority of our friends, and cannot be carried with perfect peace and love, we shall hasten to withdraw

3. The state of opinion at present. So far as we can judge from letters sent, the feeling is all but unanimous in favour of a change. Not a single correspondent contends for the suitability of our present name, or pleads for its continuance. Indeed, its disadvantage was felt years ago, when the deed poll was drawn up, and a clause inserted in that document, providing for effecting the change legally and properly. See the important and excellent letter of our invaluable friend Mr. Ridgway.

So far as we have the means of knowing, the name "Presbyterian " is not liked by our friends generally. Besides, the objections named in our former article, many think that its prefix or adjunct to Methodist, is like diluting Methodism; and some fear lest it should prove suggestive of other changes, and be the harbinger of alterations, which hereafter may mould Methodism amongst us into something very different from what it is, or at least from what it ought to be "Christianity in earnest." This apprehension may be unfounded, but it exists, and we do not think it safe or wise to disregard it.

Candour compels us to admit that while a large majority of our correspondents deem "Presbyterian Methodist " objectionable, not a few prefer "Methodist Free Church," to "Wesleyan Free Church." For ourselves, we are almost as much in favour of one as the other. We do not attach the idea of despotism to the name of Wesley which some of our friends do, nor does the Methodist world in general. Look at the Wesleyan Association, with their

constitution; and look at the Wesleyan Methodists in America, who have washed their hands of slavery and priestism, and adopted a system as liberal as our own; and again, look at the Wesleyan Reformers of the present day; all these retain the name Wesleyan. What does this public fact speak? It speaks this, that with the name of Wesley they merely associate the doctrine, the ordinances, and the earnestness of Methodism, but not its despotic polity. However, we contend not. If Methodist, though given as a name of reproach and derision, be approved by our friends, by all means let it be retained.

The kind and candid spirit breathed in the letters of Messrs. Stacey and Clericus commands our respect, and though we cannot see eye to eye with these brethren, we thank them for their dignified and Christian attitude. Yet, after all, these esteemed brethren have said the name Presbyterian will be associated in the popular mind with Calvinism, Arianism, or Statechurchism, and it would, we fear, be found a hard task to reconcile a thorough Methodist body to that cognomen. It avails but little to send us to the European continent, or to America, to look at the application of the name Presbyterian there. There is this broad factLook where we will and when we will, so far as we are aware, there is neither age nor nation in which Presbyterian is the cognomen of a church, but it stands in connection either with Calvinism, Arianism, or State-churchism! It is this factthe universal association of that designation with one of these three dogmas, so widely different from our sentiments-that renders its adoption by us so inappropriate and undesirable.

Our friend Clericus writes as if we proposed "Free Methodist" as our designation. No such thing, my brother-Methodist Free Church, not "Free Methodist." As to Free Church being already used by another body, and that body being Calvintisic in doctrine, it is true; but it

is equally true that "Free Church” is not generally associated in the popular mind with Calvinism. Indeed, the very word FREE is itself inimical to Calvinism, for it is in perfect harmony with a free and universal salvation; but Calvinism is not.

Two or three of our correspondents think that "Free Church" has an antagonistic bearing towards other denominations. We reply, that if we called ourselves simply "The Free Church," the objection might apply. But the name Methodist Free Church cannot possibly have any antagonistic bearing except towards a Methodist Church which is not free. We would not willingly offend the brethren of any such church, nor do we think that the name Free is any more calculated to offend than our principles are calculated to offend. The truth is, we believe ourselves to be "Free." We are Free," not only in doctrine but "Free" in every branch of our polity. Our people have a Free voice in all our courts of administration and government; and if even more Freedom were required, we have power to adopt it; for we have in our Free Poll Deed a Free principle, which admits from time to time of adopting such alterations as the Freely expressed wishes of our people may require. If we are thus Free in fact-and our noble forefathers struggled and suffered to obtain it for us-surely it cannot be inconsistent to adopt a name expressing our freedom. And if it be not egotistical for the Reformed Church of Scotland to call itself the Free Church of Scotland, it cannot be egotistical for us to be named METHODIST FREE CHURCH.

After all, we contend not. If a better name than either can be chosen, or one commanding more general assent, let it be so. We shall be glad. Any name yet mentioned is better by far than the one we have. Let us have continued harmony; let us have earnestness and prayer; let us look up to God for guidance; and we shall be divinely directed and blessed.

SINCE the wisest of men has spoken so well of "a good name," there can be but one opinion of its desirableness; hence so much anxiety on the subject in its application to persons, peoples, or systems, and hence so much consultation respecting it, and so much satisfaction at having chosen the most appropriate.

The revered founders of our Connexion, it is true, were more concerned for principles than for appellations. The name of the body, therefore, was a very secondary consideration with them, probably more of temporary convenience than of formal deliberation. Their great object was to assert Scriptural liberty; in short, to reform Methodism, and not to divide it.

Nor

was it until they found power impregnable, and their prayer rejected, that they separated themselves from the Wesleyan community, and formed a denomination for themselves.

There can be no doubt that the Separatists were called "The New Connexion of Methodists," as the most simple and natural distinction from the old Connexion of Methodists; but the parent body, as might have been expected, speedily changed their name to Wesleyan Methodists, or Wesleyans. So that the relative distinction of New and Old Connexion ceased betwixt us, and the term "New" no longer applies to us, for we have passed our first ubilee, and are well stricken in years. This might have been overlooked had there been any redeeming value or significance in the name; but there is none!-for it neither defines standing, doctrine, nor constitution.

I grant its innocence and pleasing recollections; but the former is unfortunately compromised by its incorrectness; and, as to the latter, they are not bound up in an unmeaning name, but in the happy associations with an historical event an event which it is impossible to forget-and with the enjoyment of that scriptural system which it is our privilege to hold fast, and which it will be our honour to transmit to posterity.

For the change of name, whether as to persons, families, or nations, we have the highest authority. In this changeable state of things such alterations are incidental, nay, unavoidable;

and whenever an appellation becomes inapplicable or inconvenient, and no longer desirable, it appears to me to be the duty of all concerned to adopt another the most fitting and descriptive that can be selected, only taking care that it has not been appropriated by any other community, and that it shall not pass away as ours has done.

I can see good reason why this should be done in our case, and done now. First, because we have deferred it too long already; secondly, because the ground becomes every year more narrowed, and the difficulty of fixing upon a suitable name is increased in the same proportion; thirdly, because the friends cannot quote our present name, or answer inquiries to their satisfaction; fourthly, because it reflects no honour on the principles or policy of the Connexion to go on from year to year under so questionable a standard; and, lastly, because this is the septennial period of making whatever alteration may be demanded by the lapse of time and change of circumstances; and it would be unpardonable either to lose the opportunity or not to make a choice adapted to our liberal and comprehensive system!

I know many prudent friends will caution us against so dangerous an experiment, because of its influence on our deeds of trusts and charitable institutions- but the object may be attained without any danger of this kind. All that is requisite will be to preface the denomination with an adopted name, adding, "formerly called the New Connexion of Methodists." And this will only have to be given in setting out the title of our deeds, and for a reasonable time, and all will easily slide into the new name, and that be paramount as was formerly the other.

The Wesleyan Methodists may safely be followed in a matter of this kind, confessedly of vital importance; nor would I have the Connexion rely on any private opinion, but be welladvised thereon, that nothing may be left to chance and uncertainty, but the alteration be made with the greatest prudence and circumspection.

I recollect, at one of our Conferences, having heard the New Covenant appellation brought as an argument against the change, that being for ever new,

E