_Extract from the Dispatch of May_ 9, 1813.
The promise made in last Sunday’s Dispatch, that a description should
every week be given of some conventicle preacher noted for ignorance and
absurdity, was at the time rather premature, and the fulfilment of it
must be suspended for two or three weeks longer; because I wish to mark
out a boundary of separation, like an impassable chasm, between the
character I have hitherto been developing, and those I intend hereafter
to criticise. However great may be the mass of folly, ignorance, and
fanaticism, which prevail throughout most of the low conventicles of this
metropolis, and however injuriously they may operate on the human mind,
their effects are innocence and virtue, compared to the influence of that
guilt which I have exposed, and which I am prepared to expose still more
effectually in any Court of Justice. I believe that the poor silly
visionaries who deal in pictures, in miracles, and monstrous conceits,
are not wilfully or practically vicious, and that they have _lashed_
themselves into a belief, of what they preach; therefore I cannot think
of dragging them forward so close upon the heels of Mr. John Church, as
to hold out an appearance of their belonging to the same society. Some
interval of time, therefore, is necessary for the distinction which I
wish to draw. When I come to speak of them it shall be in a spirit of
playfulness, and not with a feeling of abhorrence. Respecting the last
mentioned person I should have been silent ever since the 18th ultimo,
had he preserved that _silence_ which a sense of common decency would
have pointed out to any other person, except himself. After having been
held to bail for the purpose of being tried on charges not to be named
among Christians, he ought to have abstained from entering his pulpit,
and shunned the very light, until his character was cleared to the
satisfaction of his congregation, who ought to have deemed it a sacrilege
to be present while he attempted to promulgate the doctrines of Christ in
a place of divine worship. But one would think there was a congeniality
of sentiment and of _sympathy_ between the pastor and the flock! Indeed
this latter remark is founded upon something more than conjecture: for a
great number of persons who are in the habit of frequenting the obelisk
chapel, have taken up the cause of their preacher with a zeal that cannot
easily be accounted for in any way but _one_. They will investigate no
charge; they reject all evidence. Their _Temple_ is open, and their
_High Priest_ is in as much _favour_ as ever he was. They are, I am
told, raising money to carry on prosecutions against those whom they call
his calumniators; but it is probable that the money will be expended in
_some other place_, besides Westminster Hall. I have been threatened
with an action as will appear by the following notice, which was left at
my office last Friday se’nnight, and which for the amusement of the
reader I publish _verbatim_ and _literatim_.
To Mr. R. Bell the Editor and Proprietor and also—to Mr. Robt
Barber—the Printer, of a Certain Weekly Publication or Newspaper
Calld the Weekly Dispatch and to all others whom It doth shall or may
Concern.
My name appearing In some of the Above-named Newspapers and In other
Publication Issued by Some of you or by your Directions I do
hereby—give you and Each of you, Notice from, henceforth to Desist
from the further Printing or Circulation—of Such Papers and that In
Case My Name, or any (thing) Respecting (me) or Tending, to Inflame
the Public Mind against me, Shall appear In any future Publications
Sanctioned or Authorisd by you or Under you Direction’s I shall
Commence Such Legal measures, against you for the Same As the Law
Enable Me and Counsel shall advise and I Do hereby—give you and Each
of you further Notice that (as) I am about to Commence—and acxtion
against you for the Publication above alluded to, that you do not
Part with or alter, or In any manner mutilate the manuscripts from
which Publications were Printed.
Date—this
30 Day of
April 1813
John Church.
This precious composition (no attorney could write any thing like it)
bears the real signature of John Church which exactly resembles that of
the letter he wrote to Cook of Vere-street. I now then call on him to
put his threat into execution; I call on him to bring his action against
me; and he may depend on it, I shall be prepared with my _proofs_ and my
JUSTIFICATION. I repeat what I said in my last, that I bear this man no
resentment of a personal nature, I can have none towards one I never
spoke to, and never saw but once, and then in his pulpit. My sole object
is to do that which the civil power seems unable to do—to prevent one of
the most horrid of vices, from being propagated through the medium of
pretended sanctity. The person of whom I am speaking, has called at my
office, and expressed a wish to see me (_this was very like bringing an
action_!) fortunately I was not there at the time; and I now desire that
neither he nor any of his associates may call on me, for I will speak
with none of them except in a Court of Law.
* * * * *
_To the Editor of the Weekly Dispatch_.
Banbury, May 5, 1813.
SIR,—In your Paper of the 25th ult. in an article relative to John
Church, you say, “The Magistrates sent him away from Banbury.” As some
persons might, from this erroneous statement, conceive that the people to
whom he preached then, heard with indifference of his vile propensities;
we beg of you, in justice to them, to correct this error. It was the
Trustees of the Chapel who gave him his immediate dismission from their
place, on the first intimation of his destestable practices, to which
they could attach any credit.
We are, Sir,
Your humble Servants,
JOSEPH GARDNER.
THOMAS GARDNER.
* * * * *
_The following are the letters referred to in pages_ 8 & 9.
Honoured Sir,—In reply to your letter concerning Mr. C. I can only
inform you, there was a report against him of a very scandalous
nature; but how far his culpability extends, it is quite out of my
power to determine. He was absent from hence when the rumour first
spread. The Managers of our Chapel took great pains to enquire into
the origin of such reports, and the result was, they sent Mr. C.
positive orders never, on any account, to return to Banbury again;
which advice he has hitherto wisely observed. Now, Sir, after giving
you the above information, I beg leave to conclude the subject, by
referring you to your own comment hereon.
(Signed) S. HALL.
Banbury, March 7,
1810.
The next extract exhibits the confession of Wm. Clarke, of Ipswich.
Having been called by providence to Colchester, I went to hear John
Church preach in a barn, was invited to Mr. Abbott’s; was prevailed
upon to sleep with John Church; I did sleep with him three nights;
after being enticed to many imprudences, I was under the necessity to
resist certain attempts, which, if I had complied with, I am fearful
must have ruined both soul and body; the crime is too horrid to
relate.