36 INTRODUCTION. 
insisting on casting off ecclesiastical connection with the classis of Amsterdam ; 
the other, the “conferentia,” which struggled to maintain that connection. The 
weight of learning was on the side of the latter; but zeal, industry and more 
practical preaching distinguished the former. The controversy was finally settled 
in 1772, chiefly through the agency of the reverend Dr. John H. Livingston and 
the reverend Dr. Laidley of New-York, and the reverend Dr. Eilardus Westerlo 
of Albany, and the reverend Dr. Theodoric Romeyn of Schenectady. 
In 1805, Dr. William Linn commenced, in the Albany Sentinel, a series of 
strictures upon a work then recently published by the reverend John H. Hobart, 
afterwards bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church, entitled « A Companion 
for the Altar,” in which the peculiar claims and tenets of the Episcopal ministry, 
in regard to divine ordination, were set forth. Mr. Hobart’s doctrines were de- 
fended with great ability by Thomas Y. How, Esq., under the signature of “A 
Layman of the Episcopal Church,” and by the reverend Frederick Beasly of 
Albany, under the name of “ Cyprian.” Dr. Linn rejoined, and thus drew into 
the controversy bishop Moore, who assumed the name of “ Cornelius ;” bishop 
White of Pennsylvania, under the name of “Detector,” and Mr. Hobart, under 
the signature of “ Vindex.” Dr. Linn, under the signatures of “Umpire” and 
“Inquirer,” defended himself with great ability against these new antagonists. 
These essays constitute a part of our theological learning. In 1806, the reverend 
John M. Mason, D.D., reviewed these essays in the Christian’s Magazine. What- 
ever may be thought of the merit of the controversy, it is universally admitted 
that the review was written with extraordinary force and brilliancy, logical acu- 
men and point. It excited great interest, and the whole controversy is worthy of 
a reperusal. Dr. Mason is remembered as a man of ardent temperament, great 
genius, high hterary attainments and deeply versed in all the learning of his pro- 
fession, and as a fearless commentator on the tendency of passing events. He 
employed the whole powers of his intellect in expounding the scriptures, and 
excelled in eloquence and persuasion all his contemporaries.* The reverend 
* M. C. Parrerson’s Address on Primary Education, 
