{"id":"jw/letters/1781a/05-to-edwal-jackson-in-barnard-castle","corpus":"jw-letters","type":"letter","author":"john-wesley","title":"A 05 To Edwal Jackson In Barnard Castle","title_alt":[],"text_basis":null,"date_composed":null,"date_precision":"unknown","date_note":null,"numbering":{"bicentennial":null,"jackson_running":null,"sugden":null},"source_edition":{"editor":null,"title":null,"edition":null,"place":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"volume":null,"pages":null,"scan_url":null,"scan_page_ids":null},"transcription":{"derived_from":null,"corrected_against_scan":false,"corrector":null,"corrected_on":null},"modernization":"none","license_text":"Public Domain Mark 1.0","license_apparatus":"CC BY 4.0","wikidata":null,"prev":null,"next":null,"part_of":"jw-letters","editorial_note":null,"source_id":"jw-letter-1781a-05-to-edwal-jackson-in-barnard-castle","passage_ids":["jw-letter-1781a-05-to-edwal-jackson-in-barnard-castle-000"],"word_count":324,"themes_auto":["means-of-grace","works-piety"],"open":true,"closed_reason":null,"legacy_ids":["jw-letter-1781a-05-to-edwal-jackson-in-barnard-castle-000"],"passages":[{"id":"jw-letter-1781a-05-to-edwal-jackson-in-barnard-castle-000","author":"john-wesley","source_id":"jw-letter-1781a-05-to-edwal-jackson-in-barnard-castle","source_title":"A 05 To Edwal Jackson In Barnard Castle","source_type":"letter","year":null,"chunk_index":0,"text":"To Edwal. Jackson, In Barnard Castle, Date: CITY ROAD, January 25, 1781. DEAR SIR, Yesterday, looking over the Monthly Review for last October, at page 307, I read the following words: Sir William's vindication Lieut-General Sir William Howe had criticized Galloway's Letters to a Nobleman, and cast serious reflections upon him. See Green's Bibliography, No. 352; and letters of June 8, 1780, and Aug. 18, 1790. (of his own conduct) is not a feeble attempt to rescue his reputation from the obloquy thrown upon it. Mr. Galloway's book is here answered paragraph by paragraph, and several misrepresentations of important facts and circumstances proved. I cannot quite agree with this. I think (1) no unjust obloquy has been thrown upon it; (2) that his vindication is a very feeble attempt to justify his conduct; (3) that he has not answered in a satisfactory manner any one paragraph of Mr. Galloway's book; and (4) that he has not proved any misrepresentation of any one important fact or circumstance. I think also that the account he gives of Mr. Galloway is a very feeble attempt to blacken his character; for a full confutation whereof I refer the candid reader to his own answer. As to the scurrility Sir William speaks of, I see not the least trace of it in anything Mr. G. has published. He is above it. He is no 'venal instrument of calumny'; he abhors calumny as he does rebellion. But let him answer for himself; read only the tracts here referred to, and then condemn him if you can. I am, dear sir, Yours, c. PS. I have been frequently attacked by the Monthly Reviewers, but did not answer because we were not on even ground; but that difficulty is now over: whatever they object in their Monthly Review I can answer in my monthly Magazine; and I shall think it my duty so to do when the objection is of any importance.","word_count":324,"source_url":null,"themes":["works-piety","means-of-grace"],"created_at":"2026-01-30T05:16:19.841842"}]}