Wesley Corpus

the afternoon went over to Mr. Hick's, at Wrestlingworth, through such roads as no chaise could pass : So we had the pleasure of riding in a farmer's cart. Itwas such amotion as I never felt before : But to make amends, the church was so filled as I never had seen it; and Iwas enabled to speak with unusual plainness. Surely some received the truth in the love thereof ! Thur. NOVEMBER 1.-I gave a fair reading to Dr. Gerard's "Essay on Taste." I should have wondered, but that I had read his " Plan of Education ; " wherein he advises to read Logic last. Such an advice could never have been given but by one thatknew nothing about it. Indeed, he has hardly aclear idea of anything. Hence it was natural for him to produce this strange performance, wherein he talks prettily, but quite wide of the mark, stumbling at first setting out ; for genius is no more invention, than it is sense or memory. Fri. 2.-I set out early, and about noonpreached at Barnet, to a small, serious congregation. I then went on to London. Sat. 3-. I had a long conversation with Mr. Clulow, on that execrable Act, called the Conventicle Act. After consulting theAct of Toleration, withthat ofthe fourteenth of QueenAnne, we were both clearly convinced, that it was the safest way to license all our chapels, and all our Travelling Preachers, not as Dissenters, but simply " Preachers of the Gospel ; " and that no Justice, or Bench of Justices, has any authority to refuse licens- ing either the House or the Preachers. Sun. 4. The congregation at the new chapel was far larger thanusual ; and the number of communicants was so great, that I was obliged to consecrate thrice. Monday, 5. In my way to REV. J. WESLEY'S [Nov. 1787. Dorking, I read Mr. Duff's " Essay onGenius. " It is beyond all comparison, deeper and more judicious than Dr. G.'s Essay on that subject. If the Doctor had seen it, (which one can hardly doubt,) it is awonderhe would publish his Essay. Yet I cannot approve ofhis method. Why does he not first define his term, that we may know what he is talking about ? I doubt, because his own idea of itwas not clear ; for genius is not imagi-