THE PULPIT AND PRESS ON THE SITUATION IN MISSOURI.
Ministers of Peace—Course Pursued by the St. Louis _Christian
Advocate_—Rev. Dr. M‘Anally its Editor—Candid, Truthful,
Honest—The Cause of its Suppression, and the Imprisonment of the
Editor—Ministers of the M. E. Church, South. Labor and Pray
Earnestly for Peace—Days of Fasting, Humiliation and
Prayer—Ministers who became Political Partisans had no use for
such days-“Breathing out Threatening and Slaughter”—Spirit of
the Northern Methodist Press—False Publications for a
Purpose—One Mr. John Stearns and the _Western Advocate_—Glaring
Falsehoods—Excitement in St. Louis and Throughout the
State—Persecution of Ministers in Kansas and Reign of Terror
along the Border—Rev. W. H. Mobly and Rev. John Monroe in
Southwest Missouri—Systematic Efforts to Break up the M. E.
Church, South, and Disperse her Ministers—Editorial in _St.
Louis Advocate_—_The Central Again_—Impressions Abroad—Baptists
and Presbyterians Implicated—“Religion in Missouri”—Missouri
Conference at Glasgow—St. Louis Conference at Arrow Rock and
Waverly—Conference Stampeded by the Rumor of a Gunboat—Author
Arrested.
That the ministers of the gospel in Missouri did not commit themselves
to the strife of war, but sought to promote peace and good order in the
State, may be learned from the frequent counsel given to their
congregations to remain at home, and “as much as lay in them live
peaceably with all men.”
Many a young man was prevented from going to “Price’s army,” or any
other, by the timely advice of these men of God, and many a wife and
mother rejoice to-day in the life and love of husband and son only
through the godly admonition of faithful pastors. Some few ministers, it
is true, were led astray by popular excitement, or forced to quit their
homes and flocks by causes heretofore mentioned, and then they preached
privately what they practiced publicly. But such cases were too rare to
involve the whole ministry as a class, even by the weakest implication.
Neither were the ministers of the gospel as a whole, nor the ministers
of any one Church in Missouri, disloyal to the Government of the United
States or the Provisional Government of this State. But the very
Churches and ministers that had to suffer the most direful penalties, in
the destruction of property, the persecution, imprisonment and murder of
ministers in the subsequent years of the war, were now doing more than
any other in the State to prevent the war and promote the public peace
and tranquillity.
The St. Louis _Christian Advocate_, edited by the Rev. D. R. M‘Anally,
D. D., contained a series of very able editorials, running through April
and a part of May, 1861, on “_The Times_,” “_The Duty of Christian
Men_,” “_The Time for Prayer_,” “_To the Ministers and Members of the M.
E. Church, South, in Missouri and Kansas_,” “_The Times—A Word to our
Patrons and Friends_,” and kindred topics, in which the people were
warned of the character of the danger that threatened, advised to remain
at home, cultivate their lands and pursue the avocations of peace and
piety in the fear of God, as the best means of promoting good order in
the State, and at least mitigating the horrors of war.
That paper was candid and earnest in warning the public of the magnitude
of the rebellion and the unprecedented unanimity and courage of the
Southern people, and when the Northern press generally represented the
boasted strength of the rebellion as too puerile and insignificant to
involve the National Government in any serious trouble or protracted
war, that paper sought truthfully and conscientiously to disabuse the
public mind, and thereby prevent the many disastrous blunders committed
by an underestimate of the military resources and strength of the South.
How much of suffering might have been prevented, and how many thousands
of valuable lives might have been spared to the country, to say nothing
of the millions of treasure, had the advice of that paper been taken and
the timely warnings of its honored editor been heeded. But, like all
gratuitous counsel that is unpalatable, because truthful, it was
contemned, the motive of its author suspected, and the existence of its
medium considered dangerous.
Very many of the religious papers of the border States had already been
suspended, and the continuance of this one was a doubtful problem for
many months before its suppression.
Dr. M‘Anally’s ideas of right and wrong, of truth and error, of justice
and righteousness, were derived from the old standards. He had no
patience with the new standards of virtue that grew out of party
fanaticism and war expediencies; new fangled notions, dissimulations,
prevarication and moral travesty “he could not away with.” He had not so
learned the responsibilities of public journalism, and hence his
simple-hearted appreciation of right led him to expose the wrong
wherever it existed. His honesty required him to denounce the
wide-spread dishonesty of the times. His simple love of truth caused him
to make honest and truthful reports of the “News of the Week” according
to the actual facts, without reference to the interest of this party or
that party, this army or that, this commanding officer or that. In this
his paper presented such a contrast with the press generally that it was
sought and read by thousands of both parties, and accepted by the
unprejudiced as the most reliable paper then published.
But _because_ it was truthful, and honest, and candid, and popular, and
reliable, it was pronounced disloyal and dangerous; and because it would
not serve the cause of cruelty, confiscation, conflagration, desolation
and destruction, and with the venom of a viper hound on the barbarous
hordes with fire and sword to the commission of the foulest deeds of
war; nor with sanctimonious hypocrisy sanctify the implements and
instruments of blood and death, and canonize the vilest thieves, and
robbers, and murderers; for these reasons the paper was set down by the
enemies of the M. E. Church, South, as in the interest of treason and
rebellion, and _by them_ the military authorities wore induced to
suppress the paper and arrest and imprison its editor. Of his arrest and
long confinement in the Myrtle Street Military Prison, St. Louis, the
reader will be more fully informed hereafter.
That the ministers of the M. E. Church, South, who suffered more than
others during the war in Missouri, did not provoke the strife nor
enhance its malignity, but, on the contrary, labored earnestly and
prayed fervently for the return of peace to our distracted country, take
the following from the St. Louis _Christian Advocate_, of June 18, 1861:
“FASTING AND PRAYER.
“_To the Ministers and Members of the M. E. Church, South, in the
Missouri and St. Louis Conferences._
“DEAR BRETHREN AND SISTERS: _Whereas_, our once happy and prosperous
country is now involved in the calamities of civil war, which
threatens ruin to all our cherished hopes and interests; and whereas,
God alone, in the exercise of his sovereign and gracious
dispensations, can avert the terrible evil; and as he has promised to
be inquired of by those that fear him, and to interpose for those who
reverently and submissively supplicate his mercy and seek his Divine
interposition, it therefore becomes to every Christian community both
a high privilege and a solemn duty, in such times of serious and
alarming trials, humbly and reverently to prostrate themselves before
the mercy seat and supplicate that aid and deliverance which God only
can afford.
“And, as I have been requested by many ministers and laymen of both
Conferences (in view of my seniority as a minister) to designate and
recommend a day of fasting and prayer, I would, therefore, most
respectfully recommend that Wednesday, the third day of July, be set
apart and observed for this solemn purpose, and that appropriate
religious services be held in all our places of worship; and, in
accordance with the expressed wishes of many, and, as I think, in
accordance with manifest propriety, I tender most cordially, in behalf
of the whole Church, an invitation to all Christian people of the
State to unite with us on that day, humbly and devoutly to supplicate,
in behalf of our common country, that God, who can turn the hearts of
men as the streams in the south, would forgive our sins and in his
merciful providence hasten the return of peace to our country—our
entire country.
“ANDREW MONROE.
“_Fayette, Mo., June 5, 1861._
“The undersigned do most cordially approve the above proposition, and
earnestly recommend its observance throughout the State.
“JOSEPH BOYLE,
“E. M. MARVIN,
“H. S. WATTS,
“P. M. PINCKARD.
“_St. Louis, Mo., June 12, 1861._”
In compliance with this recommendation the churches of the State were
generally well filled with devout worshipers, and the prayers of tens of
thousands of earnest Christians ascended to the Lord of Hosts that his
anger might be turned away, that “our country—our whole country”—might
be spared the further calamities of war, and that “we might lead a quiet
and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.”
These public calls to “humiliation, supplication and prayer” were
frequent in occurrence and general and fervent in response; and the
unpolitical ministry in those days presented a spectacle of touching
moral sublimity, in their fidelity to the Church and their unselfish
devotion to the cause of peace and righteousness in the midst of
universal strife and war, that deserved a higher consideration and a
better fate, while it prepared them for the scenes of suffering and the
thrones of martyrdom that yet awaited them in the not distant future.
It has not escaped the observant, however, that the ministers who
committed themselves and their pulpits to the purposes and prosecution
of the war had more days of feasting than fasting; more seasons of
glorification than humiliation; more days of thanksgiving than
supplication; more banners and bonfires than confessions of sin and
prayers for peace. If any of them observed a day of fasting, humiliation
and prayer in the proper spirit, during the whole war in Missouri, the
fact has wholly escaped the author’s mind. Their prayers, for the most
part, consisted in “breathing out threatenings and slaughter,” and in
inflaming the dangerous passions of men by the most unblushing
blasphemies and the most envenomed imprecations.
The scenes and services which dishonored the gospel and disgraced the
pulpits and those who occupied them in certain quarters during the war
can not now be recalled without the most painful sense of humiliation
and shame. It would be an outrage upon public decency and taste to
reproduce even the best specimens of them in these pages. We have
oblivion for the facts and pity for the fanatics; and if a faithful
record of the sad history we have made should require any further
allusion to such scenes, it will be made with mingled shame and
commiseration.
While the ministers in Missouri were striving manfully and humbly to
allay the bitterness of strife by frequent calls to public humiliation
and prayer, and by wise and godly counsels of peace and quietness,
designing men who had left the State, and some even who remained in the
State, were at work, through the different media of reaching the public
mind, trying to arouse the suspicions and inflame the passions of those
in power against the only real “peace-makers” in the State. Specimen
extracts have already been given from the _Central Advocate_ of
Missouri, and it may not be out of place to insert one from the _Western
Christian Advocate_, of Cincinnati, of June 12, 1861:
“’METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH,’ MISSOURI.
“We had a call from Mr. John Stearns, late a resident of Miller
county, Mo. He was formerly of Pennsylvania, but for some years had
resided in Missouri, and has been a member of the M. E. Church over
thirty-five years. He gave us the names of two of his neighbors who
had, been hung for their Union sentiments, and for being members of
the ‘so-called’ Northern Methodist Church. The leaders of the mob
hanging these men were members of the M. E. Church, South. Mr. Stearns
says further that he was informed through a friend that he himself was
to be hung Saturday, June 1st, but that he defeated the attempt by
escaping the previous night. The man who led on the mob of Jefferson
City in riddling the Methodist Episcopal Church there, of which the
expatriated Rev. Z. S. Weller was pastor, was the son of Claiborne
Jackson, the Governor of Missouri. Mr. Stearns tells us that but for
the M. E. Church, South, there would be no secessionism in the State.
The preachers and members of that denomination see that the triumph of
Unionism is their death knell, and hence the fury and despair which
characterize their fight.”
It will not be unkind to say now that such stories were manufactured
to order and published for effect. The war has come and gone, and
passion and prejudice have been measurably displaced by peace and
order; and yet, to this day, the hanging of two of Mr. Stearns’
neighbors, in Miller county, Mo., has only come to the knowledge of
the people of Missouri through the _Western Christian Advocate_, and
upon the authority of one Mr. Stearns, “formerly of Pennsylvania.”
But that this assertion is not made without good authority, read the
following extracts from two letters, as only a sample of many others on
hand:
“PLEASANT MOUNT, Miller Co., Mo., July 4, ’61.
“_Mr. Editor_: I see in your issue of June 20th a statement from one
Mr. John Stearns, who says he has been a citizen of Miller county for
some years, and that two of his neighbors were hung for their Union
sentiments, and for being members of the M. E. Church, North; that he
himself barely made his escape by starting the night before.
“Now, as to the hanging part, Mr. Stearns has grossly misrepresented
the people of Miller county. There has never been any person hung in
the bounds of the county, under any pretext whatever, much less for
their political or religious creed; and Mr. Stearns knew when he made
the statement that it was false. In fact, I doubt whether there has
ever been such a man in Miller county, at least I have found no one
who has ever known such a man, and I have inquired of the Sheriff of
the county, and the Clerk of the County Court, as well as of a number
of citizens who have lived here ever since before Miller county was
organized, and none of them have ever known such a man as John
Stearns; and if it were necessary I could get hundreds of the most
reliable men of this county to bear testimony to the truth of the
above, &c., &c.
“(Signed) THOMAS J. SMITH.”
Another letter, written by Wm. M. Lumpkin, July 2, 1861, says:
“I was born and raised in this (Miller) county, and can safely say there
never was a man hung in this county to my knowledge. I have served a
good time in this county in the capacity of Deputy Circuit and County
Clerk, and County School Commissioner, and I have never heard of such a
man before as Mr. John Stearns,” &c.
The statements were denied at the time, and means instituted to
ascertain their truth or falsity, but up to this time no information of
such hanging has come to light. But the article served its purpose, and,
like one that appeared a short time before in the New York papers, about
the hanging of a Rev. Mr. White near St. Charles, Mo., where no such man
had ever been seen, known, or heard of, and many others of a similar
style, character and purpose, it passed away much sooner than the
prejudices and passions it excited, and which were left to expend their
fury upon those who made no “fight,” and whose “death knell” was not
heard in the triumph of Unionism, except only as it was uttered from the
pulpits and pens of “false prophets.”
About this time there was intense excitement in St. Louis, especially
over the capture of Camp Jackson, the burning of bridges on the Pacific
Railroad, and the retreat of Governor Jackson and General Price from
Jefferson City. This excitement was greatly increased by the soldiers
firing into promiscuous crowds of citizens along the streets, in which a
number of citizens, with some women and children, were killed and
wounded; and also the battle of Boonville, in which it was reported in
the _Missouri State Journal_ and other papers that Gen. Lyon’s forces
had been badly cut to pieces, but which the knowledge of the facts
afterward modified to some extent. The small engagement between the
Federal and State forces at Rock Creek, near Independence, Mo., about
the same time, added somewhat to the general excitement, which by this
time had spread throughout the State.
Along the border of Kansas the people of the State were kept in constant
alarm by the depredations of what were called at that time “Kansas
Jayhawkers.” Many families were robbed, houses burned and preachers
forced to fly for safety, as the following extract from a letter to the
_St. Louis Christian Advocate_, from the Rev. N. Scarritt, a highly
esteemed minister and a presiding elder then laboring in Kansas, will
show:
“In addition to this, some of our preachers in the southern portion of
the Conference have been compelled to quit the field and leave their
work for the present, on account of the violence of civil strife so
prevalent in that section.
“Our preachers there have taken no part in the political questions that
are involving the country in so much trouble. They have been peaceable,
law-abiding citizens, leaving politics alone, and devoting themselves
exclusively to the peaceable work of preaching the peace-making gospel
of the Prince of peace.
“Yet, though this has been their known and acknowledged character, it
has not been sufficient to protect them from the rage of fanaticism and
outlawed violence. Several of them have had their horses stolen from
them by the Jayhawkers. Repeated threats of hanging, shooting, &c., have
been made against them by the jayhawking tribe, though no attempt, so
far as we know, has been made in the form of any overt act to execute
these threats.”
In Southwest Missouri several of the ministers of the M. E. Church,
South, were robbed and otherwise maltreated, amongst them Rev. W. H.
Mobley, now gone to rest, and Rev. John Monroe, one of the oldest
ministers of any Church in Missouri. These occurrences began to attract
attention by their frequency and atrocity, and it was soon discovered
that a systematic effort was being made to so annoy, and harass, and
persecute the Southern Methodist ministers that they would have to
abandon the State, and leave their churches and flocks to be seized and
absorbed by others.
The following editorial in the St. Louis _Christian Advocate_, of July
25th, indicates but too plainly the condition of things then being
forced upon us at this early period of the war:
“_Traveling Preachers._—We are sad, sad indeed, when we think of the
privations and sufferings of many of the traveling preachers of our
Church in Missouri during these troublous times. The treatment some of
them have received has been severe, not to say cruel. Bad men have
sought to implicate them in measures with which they had nothing to do,
and have them annoyed and distressed merely that private _piques_ and
personal animosities might be gratified. A number have literally been
driven from their work, either by the malice of their enemies or by
pressing want. Some, it may be, have acted imprudently—have become
partisans in the strifes now going on, and thus, in part at least, were
the authors of their own troubles. We have, at present, only a word to
say. We hope that the preachers will remain at their work as generally
as possible, that they will devote themselves to their work to the
fullest possible extent, reproving, exhorting, comforting, etc., with
all long suffering and kindness. In these times we must all suffer, more
or less, and let us suffer with our people, and be sure that we suffer
for righteousness’ sake and not as evil-doers. God rules, and they that
serve him in spirit and in truth shall find him a very present help in
time of trouble.”
The purpose to destroy the M. E. Church, South, in Missouri, was not
only formed, but expressed also, and the Northern Methodist papers were
then earnestly engaged in the effort to convince those in authority, and
to fasten it upon the public mind, that but for the Southern Methodists
treason and rebellion could not exist in Missouri. Such declarations as
the following, taken from the _Central Christian Advocate_, of August 7,
’61, were of weekly publication in the most conspicuous places in their
papers, and industriously circulated in the centres of military power:
“_A Ruined Church._—An excellent brother, for the present a local elder
of the M. E. Church, South, in Missouri, under date of July 27th, writes
to us as follows: ‘I shall endeavor to advance the interests of the
_Central_; I have no Christian fellowship with traitors and treason. Dr.
M‘Anally has ruined the Church in this country, and I hope to see the
time when a loyal Church will occupy this entire ground.’”
This, also, may be of a piece with the Gardner, the Miller and the
Stearns stories, but it was none the less effective in its object on
that account; and the license given to bad men to commit worse crimes by
such publications was only equaled by the malicious motive that
conceived it, and its influence upon the army, officers and men.
To further show what impressions were made at home and abroad upon the
public mind by false publications, let the following item, taken from
the Philadelphia _Banner of the Covenant_, of nearly the same date, be
noted:
“_Religion in Missouri._—The Baptists in Missouri, the largest
denomination, are about unanimous in favor of secession. The M. E.
Church, South, the same, with but few exceptions. The Presbyterians, the
third in numbers, are about equally divided. The M. E. Church, North,
the fourth in size, are unanimous and earnest in favor of the Union.
Half of their membership and one-third of their ministers have been
driven from the State.”
But for the exceptions in the M. E. Church, South, another paragraph in
the same paper would reveal the author of the above information. It is
as follows:
“Rev. Mr. Shumate, of Missouri, having been appointed to the chaplaincy
of a regiment, asked leave of absence for a few days, made a flying
visit to Indiana, and returned with two companies which he had recruited
for the regiment.”
The papers were filled with statements designed to prejudice the
authorities and the public against the old ministers of Missouri, which
had much to do in bringing upon the ministry and Church the peculiar
character of persecution which distinguishes the history of those times.
Henceforth the Baptist ministers of the State will have to share largely
in the persecutions and trials of their less fortunate Southern
Methodist brethren, and not a few of the Presbyterian ministers were
implicated in the same way, and had to suffer for being in Missouri.
Tho Missouri Annual Conference, M. E. Church, South, had been appointed
to meet in Hannibal, Mo., in September, 1861, but on account of the
general excitement in that portion of the State, and the deep prejudices
created by false statements against the ministers of that Church
throughout the State, it was deemed by them unsafe to attempt to hold
the Conference session in Hannibal, and it was removed to Glasgow, on
the Missouri river.
This Conference, by formal resolution, deprecated the calamities of
civil war, and affirmed its loyalty to the Government of the United
States and the Provisional Government of Missouri, attended to its
regular minute business, with Rev. W. G. Caples presiding in the absence
of a bishop, made the appointments of the preachers and separated to
their several fields of labor, all with as much dignity, quietness and
decorum as ever characterized a body of consecrated divines. Many of
them met in Conference, worshiped and wept together for the last time.
Before they could convene again a number of them had ceased at once to
suffer and to live, and had gone to mingle with the blood-washed and
white-robed beyond the flood.
The parting scenes of the preachers at this Conference were truly
touching and solemn. Many of them seemed to be impressed that the trying
scenes through which they were yet to pass would not only “try men’s
souls,” but consign many of their bodies to the grave and send their
souls “under the altar.” What names were on the “death roll” no one
could divine, and yet the general fact was scarcely concealed from them,
“that in every city bonds and afflictions awaited them.”
The St. Louis Annual Conference had been appointed to meet in
Warrensburg, but for the same reasons that influenced the Missouri
brethren to go to Glasgow the St. Louis Conference session was moved to
Arrow Rock, Saline county. The Conference convened September 25, 1861.
After organizing, with D. A. Leeper in the Chair and W. M. Prottsman
Secretary, and transacting some little committee business, the
Conference adjourned to Waverly, believing that more preachers would
meet them there, and that they would be less likely to be disturbed in
their deliberations. How much the report of a gunboat coming up the
Missouri river, or a military transport with reinforcements for the army
at Lexington, influenced this movement to Waverly, statements differ. A
Methodist Conference stampeded by a rumor, and fleeing for very life
across a whole county, scattering Bibles, hymn books and saddle-bags in
their flight, was quite a novelty; and whether it occurred or not the
report of it was enough for the malicious on the one hand and the
mischievous on the other. The very thought of it was so novel and
ridiculous that it inspired some youthful poet to immortalize the scene
in song, and his failure was due rather to the absence of the genuine
muse than to the existence of some basis and a persistent attempt at
clever rhyme.
The author himself was spared the novelty and notoriety of the occasion
only by the untimely interference of a small detachment of Colonel
Nugent’s command, then posted at Kansas City.
I had announced on Sabbath to my congregation that I would start to
Conference the next day, stating where it would be held, and about how
long I expected to be absent.
On Monday morning early, in company with Mr. H. B. Conwell, a
brother-in-law and a steward in the Church, I started for Conference.
Just as we were passing out of the city on the main road to Independence
we discovered a small squad of soldiers riding slowly about half a mile
ahead of us. To avoid molestation and detention we took a by-road that
would intersect the Westport and Independence road, on reaching which we
discovered the soldiers still ahead of us, and began at once to
conjecture some designs upon us. They had halted by a peach orchard and
were helping themselves when we drove up. They very politely gave us of
their peaches and requested us not to go ahead of them.
We traveled on behind them for some distance, when the officer in
command stopped to talk with a farmer by the road side who knew me well,
and asked when we drove up if I was on my way to Conference.
“What Conference?” asked the officer.
“The Conference of the M. E. Church, South, at Arrow Rock,” I replied,
quite indifferently.
“What, that secesh concern? I’ll see to that. No such body of traitors
can meet in this State.” And with the last words he spurred his horse up
with his command and detailed four men to put us under arrest and guard
us to Independence.
With “two behind and two before” we were ordered to “drive.” Thus we
traveled until we reached Rock Creek, two miles from Independence, when
an orderly was sent back who dismounted and ordered us to “halt.”
“I want you men to get out of this,” he said.
“For what,” I asked, mildly protesting against the proceedings.
“I want to send this buggy and horse back to camp,” he replied. “We have
use for such things sometimes to ride our wives and children out a
little.”
“Where is your camp?” was asked by Mr. Conwell, at the same time
declaring that the horse and buggy belonged to him. And when informed
that their camp was in Kansas City, at Col. Nugent’s headquarters, he
asked—
“Then why can’t you send us back to Kansas City in the buggy, under
guard if you like? We live in Kansas City.”
“No,” said he; “no use talking. If you are loyal men you can afford to
walk ten miles for the sake of the Government; and if you are disloyal,
we are not round hauling rebels. _Get out!_”
We did not wait for another invitation, but got out; and when we found
that it was not _us_ but _our’s_ they wanted we felt somewhat relieved,
took a luncheon to stay the appetite, and then the roof of the stage an
hour after, which safely landed us back whence we started.
Mr. Conwell soon obtained his horse and buggy, and a message to me, that
if I would stay at home and attend to my own business I would not be
molested; but it would not be well for me to make another attempt to go
to Conference.
The preachers in the city of St. Louis and in Southeast Missouri could
not reach the Conference. The session was short, the minute business
only receiving attention, and the presiding elders left to make the best
disposition of the preachers in their respective districts that the
circumstances would allow. The preachers separated to their several
homes and fields of labor with about the same feelings and in about the
same spirit that characterized the parting scenes at Glasgow two weeks
before. Many of them to pass through scenes of trial, persecution,
suffering, desolation, blood, and fire, and death, ere another
Conference could be held.
Looking back now upon those perilous times, it is “marvelous in our
eyes” how that these faithful men of God “endured hardness as good
soldiers,” “not counting their lives dear unto themselves so that they
might finish their course with joy, and the ministry which they had
received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.”
The history of the Church furnishes few such instances of moral heroism
as these men exhibited, even in that early period of the war troubles;
and when, afterward, the Baptists, Presbyterians and Catholic priests
became our fellow-sufferers, and augmented our moral strength, the moral
heroism was complete, sublime. The spirit of consecration to Christ and
his cause was equal to the extremest perils of property, health and
life.