1799-] Letter to Mr. Horfey—Teftimony in favour of Mr. Horfey, 19 
charge you would retreat, and you have 
‘pointed to your fhelter. You {peak of the 
reputation you have long fuftained. Do 
you with us to believe that it. has been 
“what is commonly termed evangelical? 
‘To which of the faints will you turn for 
a teftimonial? You next appeal to the 
ftudents—proh pudor!!!—and appeal to 
them as the moft, the on/y competent 
judges. What then do they afirm ?— 
that you taught, and they received the 
doétrines of Calvinifm? Calvinifm was 
their fcorn; yet, if in your labours {o 
ftrangely unfuccefsful, whence your long 
acquiefcence, and your at laft public ap- 
cobation of them? But do you yourfelf 
eae the articles in queftion? and if 
not, how could you faithfully teach them ? 
Since you have iffued the challenge, I 
fear not to declare what to the unbiaffed 
mind will furnifh the needful conviftion. 
Does the anfwer to the queftion in the 
Atlembly’s Catechifm relative to the tri- 
nity, form any part of your faith? To 
me you dare not affirm it. » Concerning 
Jefus—a heavenly voice has faid, <¢ let 
all the angels worhhip him.”’—Azgels 
obey :—But I well remember the occafion 
when you exhorted, and not for the firft 
time, your hearers to diflent from them. 
I fometimes addreffed Jefus as the object 
of our worfhip, and by it incurred your 
marked reprehenfion. Am I not ftating 
a fast? and is it not a fact according 
with the previoufly formed ideas of your 
charaéter, held by the ferious part not 
only of the town, but of the county of 
Northampton? A Lindfey in one con- 
nection, and a Belfham your own prede- 
ceflor in another, renouncing their fitua- 
tions, when a change of opinion made it 
impoffible confcientioufly to retain them, 
have afforded an example not unworthy 
to be followed. We refpeé& the rare in- 
tegrity that can thus part with emolu- 
ment, even while we enter our proteft 
againit the principles of thofe gentlemen 
by whom, in the prefent cafe, fuch in- 
tegrity has been honourably difplayed. 
I regret you have been fo exceedingly im- 
prudent as to call for this difclofure ; but 
thall confole myfelf, if the {mart it pro- 
duces be the happy means of bringing 
you to: genuine and public repentance. 
Por a feries of years, awful thought! you 
have been fending forth men who have 
diminifhed and contaminated many a once 
flourifhing congregation. But againft 
you, this, it feems, can involve no re- 
flection. What! does the fruit difcover 
nothing of the tree, or the ftreams give 
us ho prefumption of the nature of the 
fountain? Strange furely it were, that a 
Prieftley fhould train up determined Cal- 
vinifts, and a Jonathan Edwards fill New 
England with Socinians! Yet if, as pre- 
tended, the principles of Coward’s truft, 
have been by you inculcated on the {tu- 
dents, I have fuppofed a cafe which has 
been long and fadly realized in the late 
Academy at Northampton. You fpeak 
of a wounded reputation; have yeu laid 
yourfelf open to no cenfure on this head 
refpecting me ?—I forbear, and anxious 
to convince you that I have afhrmed no- 
thing which I fhould fhrink from avow- 
ing, [ comply with the intimation you 
give, and fignmyfelf |DavibdSaAviLe. 
London, Fan. 10.1799» 

To the Ediior of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
BY inferting the following paper in your 
Magazine for the next month, you 
will oblige many of your readers. 
W. O. Manninc. 
lew College, Manchefter. Dec. 22. 
IN confequence of an article, which 
appeared in the laft number of the Month- 
ly Magazine, refpecting the late Acade- 
my at Northampton, we the underfigned, 
who have all been lately or formerly ftu- 
dents in that feminary, voluntarily ftep 
forward to bear our public tefimony to 
the fidelity of our theological tutor, a- 
_ gainft the unfounded and malicious m- 
finuations to which he has perfonally fe- 
plied. ‘This we do by ftating the fol- 
lowing facts: That Dr. Doddridge’s 
printed leStures were the text books. It 
is well known that Dr. Doddridge was a 
gentleman intimate with Mr. Coward as 
a friend, and that his fentiments were 
fuch as he (Coward) cordially approved. 
His lectures were the books preferibed by 
the truftees, for the very purpofe of di- 
recting’ the conduct of the tutor, and en- 
furing conformity to the will of the tefta- 
tor. Thefe were mvariably'ufed. ‘That 
thofe doftrmes, which are moft particu- 
larly diftinguifhing of the Calviniftic fy- 
ftem, were fo far from being withheld or 
oppofed in a clandeftine manner, that they 
were fully ftated, and frequently intro- 
duced by Mr. Horfey, (as many of us 
perfectly recolleét) as doétrines in which 
Mr. Coward’s will required us to be well 
inftruéted. While this ftatement fuffici- 
cently confutes the bafe infnuations con- 
tained in the MiffionaryMagazine, we may 
at the fame time further declare, that cur 
tutor did nothing to compel us to be Cal- 
vinifis, or to tretend that we were fo if we 
C * were 
