To the Editor of 'Lloyd's Evening Post' Editor's Introductory Notes: 1760 15 London, November 22, 1760. SIR, Just as I had finished the letter published in your last Friday's paper four tracts came to my hands: one wrote, or procured to be wrote, by Mrs. Downes; one by a clergyman in the county of Durham; the third by a gentleman of Cambridge; and the fourth by a member (I suppose, dignitary) of the Church of Rome. How gladly would I leave all these to themselves, and let them say just what they please! as my day is far spent and my taste for controversy is utterly lost and gone. But this would not be doing justice to the world, who might take silence for a proof of guilt. I shall therefore say a word concerning each. I may, perhaps, some time say more to one or two of them. The letter which goes under Mrs. Downes's name scarce deserves any notice at all, as there is nothing extraordinary in it but an extraordinary degree of virulence and scurrility. Two things only I remark concerning it, which I suppose the writer of it knew as well as me: (1) that my letter to Mr. Downes was both wrote and printed before Mr. Downes died; (2) that when I said, Tibi parvula res est See letter of Nov. 17, 1759. ('Your ability is small') I had no view to his fortune, which I knew nothing of, but (as I there expressly say) to his wit, sense, and talents as a writer. The tract wrote by the gentleman in the North is far more bulky than this; but it is more considerable for its bulk than for its matter, being little more than a dull repetition of what was published some years ago in The Enthusiasm of the Methodists and Papists Compared. See letter of Feb. 1, 1750. I do not find the author adds anything new, unless we may bestow that epithet on a sermon annexed to his Address, which, I presume, will do neither good nor harm. So I leave the Durham gentleman, with Mrs. Downes, to himself and his admirers.

The author of the letter to Mr. Berridge is a more considerable writer. In many things I wholly agree with him, though not in admiring Dr. Taylor; but there is a bitterness even in him which I should not have expected in a gentleman and a scholar. So in the very first page I read, 'The Church, which most of your graceless fraternity have deserted.' Were the fact true (which it is not), yet is the expression to be commended Surely Dr. Green himself thinks it is not. I am sorry, too, for the unfairness of his quotations. For instance: he cites me (a page 53) as speaking of 'faith shed abroad in men's hearts like lightning.' Faith shed abroad in men's hearts! I never used such an expression in my life: I do not talk after this rate. Again, he quotes, as from me (b page 57), so, I presume, Mr. W. means, 'a behaviour does not pretend to add the least to what Christ has done.' But be these words whose they may, they are none of mine. I never spoke, wrote no, nor read them before. Once more, is it well judged for any writer to show such an utter contempt of his opponents as you affect to do with regard to the whole body of people vulgarly termed Methodists 'You may keep up,' say you, 'a little bush-fighting in controversy; you may skirmish awhile with your feeble body of irregulars; but you must never trust to your skill in reasoning' page 77). Upon this I would ask: (1) If these are such poor, silly creatures, why does so wise a man set his wit to them 'Shall the King of Israel go out against a flea' (2) If it should happen that any one of these silly bush-fighters steps out into the plain, engages hand to hand, and foils this champion by mere dint of reason, will not his defeat be so much the more shameful as it was more unexpected But I say the less at present, not only because Mr. Berridge is able to answer for himself, but because the title page bids me expect a letter more immediately addressed to myself.

The last tract, entitled A Caveat against the Methodists, is in reality a caveat against the Church of England, or rather against all the Churches in Europe who dissent from the Church of Rome. Nor do I apprehend the writer to be any more disgusted at the Methodists than at Protestants of every denomination; as he cannot but judge it equally unsafe to join to any society but that of Rome. Accordingly all his arguments are levelled at the Reformed Churches in general, and conclude just as well if you put the word 'Protestant' throughout in the place of the word 'Methodist.' Although, therefore, the author borrows my name to wound those who suspect nothing less, yet I am no more concerned to refute him than any other Protestant in England; and still the less, as those arguments are refuted over and over in books which are still common among us. But is it possible any Protestants, nay Protestant clergymen, should buy these tracts to give away Is, then, the introducing Popery the only way to overthrow Methodism If they know this, and choose Popery as the smaller evil of the two, they are consistent with themselves. But if they do not intend this, I wish them more seriously to consider what they do. I am, sir, Your humble servant.