298 
that Mr. Wesley recommended the 
aforesaid book to him, in consequence 
of which he purchased and read it. 
That, some time after, Mr. Wesley re- 
commended the same book to his bro- 
ther, the Rev. Charles Wesley, at Mr. 
Rouguet’s house, as a book that would 
open his eyes ; and that,in consequence 
of such recommendation, Mr. Rouquet 
immediately produced the said book, 
and, in the presence of Mr. John Wes- 
ley, lent it to Mr. Charles Wesley, who 
took it home with him ; and after some 
time returned it, with Mr. Rouquet’s 
name written on the cover, in Mr. C. 
Wesley’s hand-writing. This iden- 
tical book was in Mr. Rouquet’s pos- 
session in 1776. 
The “ Reply to Mr. Fletcher's Vin- 
dication” contains letters from Mr. 
Rouquet, dated Noy. 6, 1775, and Mr. 
Pine, Noy. 7, 1775, to Mr. John Wes- 
Jey, with Mr. Wesley’s letters in reply. 
Those gentlemen call upon Mr. Wes- 
ley for an’explanation of his denial of 
having ever seen the book above 
alluded to. In his first answer to Mr. 
Rouquet, dated Nov. 8, 1775, Mr. 
Wesley still said that he remembered 
nothing of the book, neither of the title 
nor the argument; but be promised to 
send to the bookseller’s for the book, 
and afterwards to write again. This 
letter began thus, “‘ Dear Jemmy.” 
Tu Mr. Wesley’s second letter to Mr, 
Rouquet, dated Nov. 13, 1775, his tone 
was altered to “ Dear James,—I will 
now simply tell you the thing as it is, 
As I was returning from the North to 
the Leeds Conference, one gave me 
the tract which you refer to, part of 
which I read on my journey. The 
spirit I observed to be admirably good, 
and I éhen thought the’ argument con- 
elusive: in consequence of which, I 
suppose, (though I do not remember 
it,) L recommended it to you and 
others. But I had so entirely forgotten 
it, that, even when it was brought to 
me the other day, I could not recollect 
that I had ever seen it.” This letter, 
after some other observations, not ne- 
cessary to my present purpose, con- 
cludes 'thus :—‘* If you have a mind. to 
press this thing further, do, and let it 
stand as an everlasting monument to 
all the world of the gratitude of James 
Rowquet and William Pine.” 
In a-subsequent letter to Dr. Caleb 
Evans,’ dated ‘Dee. 9, 1775, tobe 
found also in the above collection, Mr. 
Wesley admits again his having scen 
3 
~ 
Mr, Jennings on the Prevarication of Mr. Wesley. 
[May 1, 
and recommended Mr. Parker’s book ; 
he also admits several other expres- 
sions and opinions attributed to him, 
but adds, “I am now of another mind.” 
Upon a review, therefore, of the 
whole of this controversy, it is indispu- 
table that Mr, John Wesley brought 
the book, entitled, “An Argument in 
Defence of the exclusive Right of the 
American Colonies to tax themselves,” 
from the North of England, where 
some person gave it to him, to Bristol ; 
that, when in that city, he strongly re- 
commended it to Mr. Pine to put 
extracts from it into his newspaper ; 
that he also strongly recommended it 
to the Rev. Mr. Rouquet, and to his 
brother the Rev. Charles Wesley, as a 
book that would open his eyes; and 
yet, notwithstanding all this, Mr. John 
Wesley positively denied ever having 
seen it with his eyes, till, by a concur- 
rence of circumstances, not to he con- 
troverted, he at length, and very un- 
graciously, admitted his error, or some- 
thing worse. 
This, sir, whatever may be the confi- 
dent tone of Mr. Watson, is no misre- 
presentation nor exagyeration, but the 
plain history of the case. The reader 
will give whatever credence he may 
please to Mr. Wesley’s statement ; but, 
if it be true, his whole conduct in the 
controversy’ was most strange, and 
very unlike a person who had nearly 
forgotten the circumstance. — That 
many respectable persons in Bristol, 
who knew the circumstances well, did 
think at the time that Mr. Wesley 
« prevaricated on the occasion,” there 
is no doubt; and epithets were privately 
applied to him which I should be sorry 
to repeat. 
Mr. Watson accuses Dr. John Evans 
of being a liberal; I suppose I must 
hardly expect to escape vitaperation 
for this offering at the shrine of truth ; 
but most certainly I shall not imitate 
Mr. Watson’s illiberal freedom of im- 
puting motives and applying epithets 
which he would have done better to 
have omitted: it is to be lamented that 
disputants forget too often, when op- 
posed, the principles with which’ they 
profess to be actuated. : 
Mr. Watson’s allusion to Dr. John- 
son is rather unfortunate; for, notwith- 
standing we would hope better, things, 
it doés, somehow or another, almost 
always happen, that persons who re- 
ceive pensions from a government, 
support that government, right or 
wrong. 
