History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

preserved a copy his executors suppressed it; but Asbury, to defend himself for the doings in 1787,
revealed, as already quoted, how indignant Wesley was over the action — his name left off the
minutes, thus disowning him; Coke, his commissioner, degraded; Whatcoat ignored as his appointee
for Superintendent, and his assignment of Garrettson as Superintendent for Nova Scotia annulled,
not by the Conference, but by Asbury reading him out as presiding elder for the Peninsula of
Maryland. Coke probably bore with him, as there was no more direct and speedy transit, the "long
and loving letter" of the brethren. They read it over together, and Coke did what he could to mollify
the venerable father and founder of Methodism, but what must have been the chagrin, and what the
astonishment, of Wesley!
The Irish Conference over, with eleven of the preachers, they cross the Channel and arrive at the
English Conference, held this year at Manchester. The story is told again, and more of the facts leak
out. It was at this Conference undoubtedly that Rankin heard of the deposition of Wesley and
exclaimed before he received the details, "That is Frank Asbury's doing." It savored of his prejudice,
but it was near enough to the truth for practical purposes. Asbury had kept up his confidential
correspondence with Shadford, and it was probably about this time also that Shadford disclosed to
Wesley — the events were such as to bring out all seeming confirmatory evidence — a part of the
correspondence bearing on the subject now fermenting the English preachers. It came out in a letter
Wesley wrote to Beverly Allen, once, as has been seen, in high repute among the American
Methodists. It is under date of "London, October 31, 1789," when he was eighty-six years of age. The
third paragraph reads: "He [Asbury] told George Shadford: 'Mr. Wesley and I are like Caesar and
Pompey — he will bear no equal, and I will bear no superior.' And accordingly he quietly sat by,
until his friends, by common consent, voted my name out of the American Minutes. This completed
the matter and showed that he had no connection with me." This letter disturbed the equanimity of
Asbury greatly, and this allegation, specially, he felt called upon to explain away, if possible. The
genuineness of it has been fully proved, and Asbury never denied that he employed such language
in his confidential letter to Shadford. During the Morrell-Hammett controversy, which led to its
publication, Hammett having received it in his correspondence with Wesley, Asbury became aware
of it and in his Journal makes the brief comment: "Mr. H. [Hammett's] quotation of a clause of my
confidential letter to brother S-d [Shadford], is not altogether just." In a letter of date August 6, 1806,
he farther explains: "On the momentous matter you wrote, I must be prudent. I have suffered by a
change of things with Mr. Wesley. When it was thought some persons should come from England
to preside, George Shadford was in contemplation. I wrote to him, and it was applied to Mr. Wesley;
what a mistake!" That is, there was a time when Wesley thought of superseding Asbury and among
those spoken of as a coadjutor, was Asbury's former bosom friend, Shadford. Now, Asbury
acknowledges that, learning of it, he wrote to Shadford that such an arrangement would not answer,
as he and Shadford would be like Pompey and Caesar, etc. But his qualification amounts to nothing,
inasmuch as Shadford would have been the appointee of Wesley, so that Shadford did not
misrepresent him under any misapprehension of Asbury's final meaning. This matter occupies
considerable space in the McCaine-Emory controversy, and the latter squirms under it, and ends with
a denial of it, and says the letter was forged. But the view just given offers the only extenuation of
its well-established facts.
Dr. Coke remained in England until after the Conference of 1788, busying himself with Wesley
in the mission work of the societies, having practically abandoned America, for reasons every reader