"4. Any member who, without a sufficient cause, is absent from this meeting, or does not fulfil his appointment, pays two-pence, for the use of the poor.

"5. If any of the members are sick, they shall be visited twice a week.

"Bristol, March 12th, 1790.

JOHN WESLEY.”*

Two days following, Mr. Wesley makes this entry in his Journal:- "Sunday, March 14th, 1790, was a comfortable day. In the morning I met the Strangers' Society, instituted wholly for the relief, not of our society, but for poor, sick, friendless strangers. I do not know that I ever heard or read of such an institution till within a few years ago: (1785 :) so this is one of the fruits of Methodism." +

A similar Society was established in Liverpool in 1787.

The late Dr. Adam Clarke was one of the principal instruments in establishing institutions of a like nature in Bristol and Bath, in 1789 ; in Dublin, 1790; and in Manchester, Nov. 7th, 1791: our venerable Founder, in his last letter to Mr. Clarke, written only three weeks before his death, says, "You have done right in setting up the Strangers' Society." That established at Manchester first obtained the title of Strangers' Friend Society.

In July, 1793, Mr. Campbell, a bookseller in Bath, published an account of the benevolent Society in that city, entitled "The poor Stranger's and Sick Man's Friend," with the following motto from Melmoth :"I consider a generous mind as the noblest work of the creation. A man whose mind is warped by the selfish passions, or contracted by the narrow prejudices of sects or parties, if he do not want honesty, must undoubtedly want understanding." He apologizes for its brevity by saying, that 66 an abler pen will shortly lay before the public a full account of its rise and progress, the principles upon which it acts, and the benefits that have accrued from its formation. I trust the members of every denomination of Christians in this city, into whose hands this tract shall fall, will lay aside those shameful party prejudices which the ages of barbarism and tyranny gave birth to, and support cheerfully, according to their ability, so god-like an institution. 'He that is above all is rich unto all, and his tender mercies are over all his works.'

"Christians should be bright transcripts of their Lord.' A few years since, (1785,) the late Rev. John Wesley, whose benevolent mind was ever employed in forming plans for the instruction and comfort of the indigent and ignorant, formed a Society in London, from amongst his people there, for the purpose of visiting, and administering to the temporal and spiritual wants of the wretched, which are to be found in such great abundance in the cellars and garrets of that immense metropolis.

"The amazing success that attended this institution very soon induced the Methodist societies in Bristol, Leeds, Manchester, Dublin, &c., to form similar associations, all which have been attended with like benefit.

"In 1789, a few poor, but benevolent, members of the Methodist society, who met in New-King-street chapel, in this city, being stirred up by the example of their brethren in those places, united themselves together upon

the same principles. The good that was produced in a short time, by the labours of this little company, was astonishing: several of the miserable beings they visited, many of whom were found in wretched habitations, lying on shavings or straw, without scarcely a rag to cover them, surrounded with filth, filled with disease, and destitute of nourishment, were, through their instrumentality, converted to God, and died happy in the faith of Christ; and several who recovered evinced signs of a work of grace being begun in their hearts, many of whom are now truly converted to God.

"The Rev. Adam Clarke, who that year (1789) happened to be stationed in Bath, greatly encouraged and strengthened their undertaking, by his earnest recommendation of it from the pulpit. The Preachers who succeeded him have likewise done the same. The Rev. Mr. Bradburn lately (1792) preached a sermon at the chapel in New-King-street on its bebalf, and collected upwards of £12. Since the year 1789, this Society has relieved above eight hundred persons, many of whom have also died in the faith.

"The Society in Dublin was established by Mr. Clarke in 1790, on a similar plan to the one he set on foot in Bristol the preceding year. It was pre-eminently distinguished in the grant of £50 from the privy purse, on the visit of George IV. to that city in the summer of 1821." *

It has been observed, that Mr. Clarke was the principal originator of the Strangers' Friend Society in Manchester. In a letter to Mr. Rodda, Mr. Bradburn says, "Mr. Clarke and I have instituted a new Society, called the Strangers' Friend Society: it succeeds beyond our most sanguine expectations: it is very affecting to hear of the good done every week by it." Mr. Bradburn stands for Birmingham in the Minutes of Conference for 1791; but was, in fact, at Manchester, where he had been stationed the year preceding.

"Manchester," says a modern writer, was not the birth-place of this institution, although it there first received the compactness of a Society; for Mr. Clarke, together with Mr. Wesley, had entered on the benevolent design in Bristol; and then two or three Rules † were put together, and printed on a piece of paper,' said Mr. Clarke, 'about the size of my hand.""

"In the two years which I spent in Manchester," says Mr. Benson, "(1792 and 1793,) the sum given away each year was about £500. Great care is taken in the distribution of this money. The utmost caution is used, that those only be relieved who are in real want, and incapable at the time of obtaining a necessary supply from other quarters." §

In the year 1800, the various benevolent Societies of the above description in the metropolis were concentrated into one body, and the government placed under one general Committee, chosen from the subscribers. The late William Marriott, sen., was elected Treasurer, and Robert Middleton, Secretary. Sub-Committees were formed for each district, and suitable persons appointed as Visiters.

If so much good, as has been shown, were effected by means of these Societies at the close of the last century, who can estimate their present

* Adam Clarke portrayed, vol. i., p. 284.

+ Inserted in pp. 665, 666; and in Myles's Chronological History, p. 181. Adam Clarke portrayed, vol. i., pp. 307–310.

§ Vindication, &c., p. 24.

benefit to the nation, upon the enlarged scale on which they are now prosecuted, and under the distinguished patronage which is now afforded? To God alone be the glory!

City-Road, May 1st, 1845.

WESLEYAN HYMNOLOGY.

THOMAS MARRIOTT.

(To the Editor of the Wesleyan-Methodist Magazine.)

Ir would appear to be a matter still in question, what it is that constitutes the primary and peculiar end of poetry; some eminent judges having decided that its sole end is the gratification of the reader,* whilst others have maintained that it includes also his instruction and improvement.† Perhaps these apparently incompatible opinions may be so far reconciled as not to be absolutely contradictory to each other, provided that we take the first of them as describing the proper end of poetry, abstractedly considered, and the second as declaring what is generally, in point of fact, the object of the poet. One would say, generally; for it can hardly be denied that in many instances poetry is the pure overflowing of a mind delighted with its own imaginings, and simply eager in the gladsomeness of its ecstasy to pour forth its fulness upon others; whilst, on the other hand, it is equally unquestionable that in most cases the original purpose is to promote the information and improvement of the reader; and where the ability of the writer and the nature of the subject will admit of it, the style of poetry is selected in preference to that of prose, as being the form in which instruction and improvement may be the most pleasingly, and therefore the most effectually, conveyed.‡

These observations apply to poetry in general, and to a considerable portion of what is called "sacred poetry," as well as to that poetry, which, simply because of its being conversant with subjects of inferior character and interest, is technically called "profane." The gratification of the reader either is the sole object of the writer, or is at all events included in his object. The poetry of the composition is directly intended to please the imagination, just as the painting of the artist is designed to please the eye. But is this intellectual and imaginative gratification an object which may be advantageously, or even legitimately, aimed at in compositions purposely designed for use as aids to devotion, whether in public or in private? Perhaps some may be disposed to maintain the affirmative on this question, upon the ground that the intellect and the imagination, as well as the affections, ought to be drawn, or may with great advantage be drawn, into all acts of devotion and worship, and that the offering is imperfect and incomplete, as not including the entireness of man's spiritual nature, unless these faculties sustain some part in it. As to the engagement of the intellect, there can be no dispute. We must needs pray and sing not only "with the spirit" but "with the understanding also," (1 Cor. xiv. 15,) or we shall only "offer the sacrifice of fools." But as to anything like an excitement of the intellectual taste, or an indulgence of the imagination, as constituting integral elements, or even useful auxiliary adjuncts, in exer

*Sit ergo hic UNICUS poetice propositus FINIS, ut mentem sensusque hominum DELECTET. (Copleston's Prælect. Acad.)

+ Aut PRODESSE volunt, aut DELECTARE pocta. (Horat.) Delectando pariterque monendo.

cises of devotion, there appears to be considerable reason for serious doubt, if not for positive and decisive objection. Not only may it be inaintained that devotion, in its simple character abstractedly considered, excludes them both as being extraneous to its essence; but it may also be disputed, and it may even be denied, that it is greatly, if at all, assisted in any case by any special excitement either of intellectual or imaginative taste. Else one might learn to regard, with somewhat more of tolerance than we are wont to do, the practice of the Romish Church in introducing images and pictures into immediate connexion with their worship, that practice having been frequently defended, by Protestant as well as Popish writers, upon the very ground of its aiding, in an important degree, the instruction and the devotion of the people. So a modern Protestant writer, in his “History of Popery," says, "In an age of ignorance the symbols of a creed were found useful aids in teaching the multitude the historical facts of Christianity; and we find many ecclesiastical writers defending the use of symbols and pictures in churches, who would never have consented to their becoming objects of worship." "Experience," it has been rightly said, "is the test of truth;" and let this test decide the point in question, so far as the gratification of the taste and the indulgence of the imagination are concerned. The Romish Church has very largely employed the enticing and noble arts of architecture, sculpture, painting, and music, to charm the taste and fascinate the imagination of its votaries; and the result has been that, with lamentably few and slight exceptions, their devotion has degenerated into superstition, and "the power of godliness" has been forgotten in the form in which its worship is embodied.

The bar which may thus fairly be proposed against the positive encouragement of anything that would specially provoke the exercise of intellectual taste or the play of the imagination, in immediate connexion with services professing to be purely devotional, will operate two ways, as it regards the literary character of devotional compositions. In the first place, it will lead to an avoidance, in such compositions, of anything that might be likely to offend the taste or shock the imagination. In the second place, any compositions being once admitted into regular and settled use, it will impose it as a law, that, for the sake of those who use them, and on account of the peculiar purpose to which they are applied, they shall be exempted from any such exhibition of their poetical or literary merits or defects, as would be likely to divide the attention of the worshipper, in the use of any particular hymn, between the sentiment of the hymn and the form in which it is expressed. It is surely desirable, as being most in accordance with the character of a spiritual service, and most conducive to the edification of the worshipper, that the vehicle of devotional sentiment should become (as to any critical attention to its poetical or literary character) comparatively imperceptible, the beauties and the blemishes in its composition being alike lost and hidden in the heat and lustre of the consecrated fire which glows within it; and that, in all cases, the entire attention of the worshipper should be absorbed in the spirit of the composition, without any reference, in his own mind, to any thing relating merely to its form.

There may be no serious objection against a general criticism of the literary or other merits of a Collection of Psalms and Hymns, provided that such criticism be purely general. In this respect, Mr. Wesley has supplied a model of the criticism which may safely be admitted, in his Preface to his own Collection. "May I be permitted," he says, "to add a few words

with regard to the poetry? Then I will speak to those who are judges thereof with all freedom and unreserve. To these I may say, without offence, 1. In these hymns there is no doggerel; no botches; nothing put in to patch up the rhyme; no feeble expletives. 2. Here is nothing turgid or bombast on the one hand, or low and creeping on the other. 3. Here are no cant expressions; no words without meaning. Those who impute this to us know not what they say. We talk common sense both in prose and verse, and use no word but in a fixed and determinate sense. 4. Here are, allow me to say, both the purity, the strength, and the elegance of the English language; and, at the same time, the utmost simplicity and plainness, suited to every capacity. Lastly. I desire men of taste to judge (these are the only competent judges) whether there be not in some of the following hymns the true spirit of poetry, such as cannot be acquired by art and labour, but must be the gift of nature." Here all is general; and so no particular hymns or passages being expressly pointed out as claiming, on account of their poetical or literary merit, a special admiration, there is no danger, from such a commendation, of the suggestion to the mind of the devotional worshipper of anything which can at all divert him from the spiritual sentiment and feeling which the hymns are designed to assist and express. But let the poetical and literary beauties of a hymn be made prominent to his attention, by critical remarks on the entire hymn, or on particular expressions contained in it, and, unless the criticism has been comparatively unnoticed, or be wholly forgotten at the time, the mind is unquestionably liable to the very serious disadvantage of being diverted from the spirit of devotion to its form, and that "melody to the Lord" which should be found in the heart of the worshipper is, in so far, lost in the melody of poetic numbers, just as the vocal song which should be heard from "the great congregation" is sometimes hushed into comparative stillness by the attractive music of the directing choir or

organ.

A criticism which would go to give prominence to literary or other faults and blemishes in devotional compositions, is still more seriously objectionable; as such criticism is more likely to be remembered than that which would indicate their beauties; and the intellectual disgust with which the remembrance of it is associated, is apt to induce a more powerful and injurious diversion of the mind from the true use and object of those compositions, than is involved in the intellectual gratification which is naturally connected with reminiscences of criticism of an opposite description,

The learned and estimable author of the work which has recently appeared, under the title of "Wesleyan Hymnology,"-after the liberty which he has taken with a volume bearing such a sanction as that which is implied, to all Wesleyan Methodists at least, in the authority of Mr. Wesley, and the perpetuated imprimatur of the Conference,-will not be unprepared to excuse this public expression of regret that, in certain portions of that generally interesting, and, in some respects, valuable, compendium of illustrative criticism, he should appear in any degree to have been accessory to a mischief so alien from the praiseworthy and important object which the work is avowedly, and very sincerely doubtless, intended to promote. He must have credit, indeed, for having ascertained and brought to view, by his own research as well as by the aid of others, much that is truly excellent in Mr. Wesley's "Collection of Hymns for the Use of the People called Methodists." But it may fairly be questioned, whether his strictures, grammatical and theological, be in all cases justly founded; and it is