This estimable lady did not long survive. She died in six months--just after her husband had returned from America. In a letter from Rev. E.
Grindrod, dated March, 1834, he says, Mrs. Marsden died, after a short illness, on 22nd February. She was one of the most amiable and pious of women. Her lite was a bright pattern of every Christian virtue. Her end was delightfully triumphant.
The following is an extract from Dr. Ryerson"s diary of this year:--
After many earnest prayers, mature deliberation, and the advice of an elder brother, I have decided within the last few months to enter again into the married state. The lady I have selected, and who has consented to become my second wife, is one whom I have every reason to believe possesses all the natural and Christian excellencies of my late wife. She is the eldest daughter of a pious and wealthy merchant, Mr. James Rogers Armstrong. For her my late wife also entertained a very particular esteem and affection, and, from her good sense, sound judgment, humble piety, and affectionate disposition, I doubt not but that she will make me a most interesting and valuable companion, a judicious house-wife, and an affectionate mother to my two children. Truly I love her with a pure heart fervently I receive her, and hope ever to treat and value her as the special token of my Heavenly Father"s kindness after a season of His chastis.e.m.e.nt. If thou, Lord, see fit to spare us, may our union promote Thy glory and the salvation of sinners!
Dr. Ryerson"s marriage with Miss Mary Armstrong, took place at Toronto, on the 8th of November 1833.
FOOTNOTES:
[38] While in England, Dr. Ryerson received the following note from Rev.
Dr. J. P. Durbin, in which he said: After I parted with you at my house, I felt a strong inclination to engage your correspondence for our paper, at least once a week, if possible, for the benefit of our people and country, through the Church. Can you not write us by every packet?
Information in regard to English Methodism will be particularly interesting, especially their financial arrangements. Do inquire diligently of them, and write us minutely for the good of our Zion.--H.
[39] In Epochs of Canadian Methodism, Dr. Ryerson says:--When the writer of these Essays was appointed a representative of the Canadian Conference to negotiate a union between the two Conferences in 1833, he carried a Pet.i.tion to the King, signed by upwards of 20,000 inhabitants, against the Clergy Reserve Monopoly and the Establishment of a Dominant Church in Upper Canada. This pet.i.tion was presented through Lord Stanley, the Colonial Secretary. Page 221.--H.
[40] Dr. Ryerson has left no record in his "Story" of the negotiations for this Union. His report, however, on the subject will be found on pages 193, 194, Vol. iv. of the _Guardian_ for October 16th, 1833, from which I take the following extracts: On the 5th June, Rev. Messrs.
Bunting, Beecham, Alder, and myself, examined the whole question in detail, and prepared an outline of the resolutions to be submitted to the British Conference, and recommended that a grant of 1,000 be appropriated the first year to the promotion of Canadian Missions. On the 2nd August these resolutions were introduced by Rev. John Beecham (Missionary Secretary). They were supported by Rev. Jabez Bunting, Rev.
Jas. Wood (now in his 83rd year), and Rev. Robert Newton. A Committee was appointed to consider and report on the whole matter consisting of the President, Secretary, and seven ex-Presidents, the Irish representatives (Messrs. Waugh, Stewart, and Doolittle), and fifteen other ministers. This Committee considered and reported these resolutions, which were adopted and forms the basis of the Articles of Union. Hereafter, the name of our Church will be changed from "The Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada," to "The Wesleyan Methodist Church in British North America."--H.
CHAPTER XI.
1833-1834.
"Impressions" of England and their Effects.
On my return to Canada, after having negotiated the Union of 1833 with the English Conference, accompanied by Rev. George Marsden, as first President of the Canadian Conference, I was re-elected editor of the _Christian Guardian_, and continued as such until 1835, when I refused re-election, and was appointed to Kingston; but in November of the same year, the President of the Conference appointed from England (Rev.
William Lord) insisted upon my going to England to arrange pecuniary difficulties, which had arisen between him and the London Wesleyan Missionary Committee.
Except the foregoing paragraph, Dr. Ryerson has left no particulars of the events which transpired in his history from the period of his return to Canada in September, 1833, until some time in 1835. I have, therefore, selected what follows in this chapter, from his letters and papers, to ill.u.s.trate this busy and eventful portion of his active life.
The princ.i.p.al circ.u.mstance which occurred at this time was the publication of his somewhat famous "Impressions" of public men and parties in England. This event marked an important epoch in his life, if not in the history of the country.
The publication of these "Impressions" during this year created quite a sensation. Dr. Ryerson was immediately a.s.sailed with a storm of invective by the chief leaders of the ultra section of politicians with whom he had generally acted. By the more moderate section and by the public generally he was hailed as the champion, if not the deliverer, of those who were really alarmed at the rapid strides towards disloyalty and revolution, to which these extreme men were impelling the people.
This feature of the unlooked for and bitter controversy, which followed the publication of these "impressions," will be developed further on.
_October 2d, 1833._--On this day the Upper Canada Conference ratified the articles of union between it and the British Conference, which were agreed upon at the Manchester Conference on the 7th of August. (See note on page 119.)[41] At the Conference held this year in York (Toronto), Dr. Ryerson was again elected editor of the _Guardian_. He entered on the duties of that office on the 16th October.
_October 30th._--In reply to the many questions put to Dr. Ryerson on his return to Canada, such as: "What do you think of England?" "What is your opinion of her public men, her inst.i.tutions?" etc., etc., he published in the _Guardian_ of this day the first part of "Impressions made by my late visit to England," in regard to public men, religious bodies, and the general state of the nation. He said:--
There are three great political parties in England--Tories, Whigs, and Radicals, and two descriptions of characters const.i.tuting each party. Of the first, there is the moderate and the ultra tory. An English ultra tory is what we believe has usually been meant and understood in Canada by the unqualified term tory; that is, a lordling in power, a tyrant in politics, and a bigot in religion. This description of partizans, we believe, is headed by the Duke of c.u.mberland, and is followed not "afar off" by that powerful party, which presents such a formidable array of numbers, rank, wealth, talent, science, and literature, headed by the hero of Waterloo. This shade of the tory party appears to be headed in the House of Commons by Sir Robert Inglis, member for the Oxford University, and is supported, on most questions, by that most subtle and ingenious politician and fascinating speaker, Sir Robert Peel, with his numerous train of followers and admirers. Among those who support the distinguishing measures of this party are men of the highest Christian virtue and piety; and, our decided impression is, that it embraces the major part of the talent, and wealth, and learning of the British Nation. The acknowledged and leading organs of this party are _Blackwood"s Magazine_ and the _London Quarterly Review_.
The other branch of this great political party is what is called the moderate tory. In political theory he agrees with his high-toned neighbour; but he acts from religious principle, and this governs his private as well as his public life. To this cla.s.s belongs a considerable portion of the Evangelical Clergy, and, we think, a majority of the Wesleyan Methodists. It evidently includes the great body of the piety, Christian enterprise, and sterling virtue of the nation. It is, in time of party excitement, alike hated and denounced by the ultra Tory, the crabbed Whig, and the Radical leveller. Such was our impression of the true character of what, by the periodical press in England, is termed a moderate Tory. From his theories we in some respects dissent; but his integrity, his honesty, his consistency, his genuine liberality, and religious beneficence, claim respect and imitation.
The second great political and now ruling party in England are the Whigs--a term synonymous with whey, applied, it is said, to this political school, from the sour and peevish temper manifested by its first disciples--though it is now rather popular than otherwise in England. The Whig appears to differ in theory from the Tory in this, that he interprets the const.i.tution, obedience to it, and all measures in regard to its administration, upon the principles of expediency; and is, therefore, always pliant in his professions, and is even ready to suit his measures to "the times"; an indefinite term, that also designates the most extensively circulated daily paper in England, or in the world, which is the leading organ of the Whig party, backed by the formidable power and lofty periods of the _Edinburgh Review_. The leaders of this party in the House of Lords are Earl Grey and the Lord Chancellor Brougham; at the head of the list in the House of Commons stands the names of Mr. Stanley, Lord Althorp, Lord John Russell, and Mr. T. B. Macaulay. In this cla.s.s are also included many of the most learned and popular ministers of Dissenting congregations.
The third political sect is called Radicals, apparently headed by Messrs. Joseph Hume and Thomas Attwood; the former of whom, though acute, indefatigable, persevering, popular on financial questions, and always to the point, and heard with respect and attention in the House of Commons, has no influence as a religious man; has never been known to promote any religious measure or object as such, and has opposed every measure for the better observance of the Sabbath, and even introduced a motion to defeat the bill for the abolition of colonial slavery; and Mr.
Attwood, the head of the celebrated Birmingham political Union, is a conceited, boisterous, hollow-headed declaimer.
Radicalism in England appeared to me to be but another word for Republicanism, with the name of King instead of President. The notorious infidel character of the majority of the political leaders and periodical publications of their party, deterred the virtuous part of the nation from a.s.sociating with them, though some of the brightest ornaments of the English pulpit and nation have leaned to their leading doctrines in theory. It is not a little remarkable that that very description of the public press, which in England advocates the lowest radicalism, is the foremost in opposing and slandering the Methodists in this Province. Hence the fact that some of these editors have been amongst the lowest of the English radicals previous to their egress from the mother country.
Upon the whole, our impressions of the religious and moral character, and influence, of the several political parties into which the British nation is unhappily divided, were materially different in some respects, from personal observation, from what they had been by hear-say and reading.
On the very evening of the day in which the foregoing appeared, Mr. W.
L. Mackenzie (in the _Colonial Advocate_ of Oct. 30th), denounced the writer of these "Impressions" in no measured terms. His denunciation proved that he clearly perceived what would be the effect on the public mind of Dr. Ryerson"s candid and outspoken criticisms on men and things in England--especially his adverse opinion of the English idols of (what subsequently proved to be) the disloyal section of the public men of the day in Upper Canada and their followers.
Mr. Mackenzie"s vehement attack upon the writer of these "Impressions"
had its effect at the time. In some minds a belief in the truth of that attack lingered long afterwards--but not in the minds of those who could distinguish between honest conviction, based upon actual knowledge, and pre-conceived opinions, based upon hearsay and a superficial acquaintance with men and things.
As the troubled period of 1837 approached, hundreds had reason to be thankful to Dr. Ryerson that the publication of his "Impressions" had, without design on his part, led to the disruption of a party which was being hurried to the brink of a precipice, over which so many well meaning, but misguided, men fell in the winter of 1837, never to rise again.
It was a proud boast of Dr. Ryerson (as he states in the "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," page 385), that in these disastrous times not a single member of the Methodist Church was implicated in the disloyal rebellion of 1837-8. He attributed this gratifying state of things to the fact that he had uttered the notes of warning in sufficient time to enable the readers of the _Guardian_ to pause and think; and that, with a just appreciation of their danger, members of the Society had separated themselves from all connection with projects and opinions which logically would have placed them in a position of defiant hostility to the Queen and const.i.tution.
But, to return. The outburst of Mr. Mackenzie"s wrath, which immediately followed (on the evening of the same day) the publication of Dr.
Ryerson"s "Impressions," was as follows:--
The _Christian Guardian_, under the management of Egerton Ryerson, has gone over to the enemy,--press, types, and all,--and hoisted the colours of a cruel, vindictive, Tory priesthood.... The contents of the _Guardian_ of to-night tells us in language too plain, too intelligible to be misunderstood, that a deadly blow has been struck in England at the liberties of the people of Upper Canada, by as subtle and ungrateful an adversary, in the guise of an old and familiar friend, as ever crossed the Atlantic.
In his "Almanac," issued on the same day, Mr. Mackenzie also used similar language. He said:--
The arch-apostate Egerton, alias _Arnold_, Ryerson, and the _Christian Guardian_ goes over to Strachan and the Tories.
_Nov. 6th._--In the _Guardian_ of this day Dr. Ryerson inserted an extended reply to Mr. Mackenzie, and, in calm and dignified language, gave the reasons which induced him to publish his "Impressions." He said:--
We did so,--1st, As a subject of useful information; 2nd, To correct an erroneous impression that had been industriously created, that we were identified in our feelings and purposes with some one political party; 3rd, To furnish an instructive moral to the Christian reader, not to be a pa.s.sive or active tool, or the blind, thorough-going follower of any political party as such. We considered this called for at the present time on both religious and patriotic grounds. We designed this expression of our sentiments, and this means of removing groundless prejudice and hostility in the least objectionable and offensive way, and without coming in contact with any political party in Canada, or giving offence to any, except those who had shown an inveterate and unprincipled hostility to Methodism. We therefore a.s.sociated the Canadian _ultra_ tory with the English radical, because we were convinced of their ident.i.ty in moral essence, and that the only essential difference between them is, that the one is top and the other bottom. We therefore said, "that very description of the public press which in England advocates the lowest radicalism, is the foremost in opposing and slandering the Methodists in this Province."
That our Christian brethren throughout the Province, and every sincere friend to Methodism, do not wish us to be an organized political party, we are fully a.s.sured--that it is inconsistent with our profession and duty to become such. Out of scores of expressions to the same effect we might quote quite abundantly from the _Guardian_, but our readers are aware of them.
That the decided part we have felt it our duty to take in obtaining and securing our rights in regard of the Clergy Reserve Question, has had a remote or indirect tendency to promote Mr. Mackenzie"s political measures, we readily admit; but that we have ever supported a measure, or given publicity to any doc.u.ments from Mr. Mackenzie, or any other political man in Canada, on any other grounds than this, we totally deny.
Mr. Mackenzie"s attack rests on four grounds: 1. That our language was so explicit as to remove every doubt and hope of our encouraging a "thick and thin" partizanship with him, or any man or set of men in Canada; or, 2. That we did not speak in opprobrious, but rather favourable terms, of His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor; or, 3. That we expressed our approbation of the principles and colonial policy of Lord G.o.derich (now Earl Ripon), and those who agree with him; or 4. That we alluded to Mr. Hume in terms not sufficiently complimentary. If Mr.
Mackenzie"s wishes are crossed and his wrath inflamed, because we have not entered our protest against His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor, we could not do so after we had learned the views of His Majesty"s Government, in a reply of His Excellency to an address of our Conference about two years ago,[42] when every unfavourable impression had been removed, and when good-will was expressed towards the Methodists as a people; we have not so learned to forgive injuries--we have not so learned to "honour and obey magistrates,"--we have not so learned our duty as a minister, and as a Christian. We, as a religious body, and as the organ of a religious body, have only to do with Sir John Colborne"s administration, as far as it concerns our character and rights as British subjects; His Excellency"s measures and administration in merely secular matters lie within the peculiar province of the political journalists and politicians of the day. If our offering a tribute of grateful respect to Lord G.o.derich, who had declared in his despatches to Canada his earnest desire to remove every bishop and priest from our Legislature, to secure the right of pet.i.tioning the King to the meanest subject in the realm, to extend the blessings of full religious liberty and the advantages of education to every cla.s.s of British subjects in Canada, without distinction or partiality, and in every way to advance the interests of the Province;--if honouring such men and such principles be "hoisting the colours (as Mr. Mackenzie says), of a cruel, vindictive, Tory priesthood," then has Mr. Mackenzie the merit of a new discovery of vindictive cruelty, and with his own definition of liberty, and his own example of liberality, will he adopt his own honourable means to attain it, and breathe out death and destruction against all who do not incorporate themselves into a strait-jacket battalion under his political sword, and vow allegiance and responsibility to everything done by his "press, types, and all?"
Mr. Mackenzie did not reply to Dr. Ryerson in the spirit of his rejoinder. He was a master of personal invective, and he indulged in it in this instance, rather than discuss the questions raised on their merits. He, therefore, turned on Dr. Ryerson, and, over his shoulders, struck a blow at his venerable Father and his eldest Brother. He said:--
The Father of the Editor of the _Guardian_ lifted his sword against the throats of his own countrymen struggling for freedom from established churches, stamp acts, military domination, Scotch governors, and Irish government; and his brother George figured on the frontier in the war of 1812, and got wounded and pensioned for fighting to preserve crown and clergy reserves, and all the other strongholds of corruption, in the hands of the locusts who infest and disturb this Province.
Dr. Ryerson"s simple rejoinder to this attack on his Father and Brother was as follows:--
The man who could hold up the brave defenders of our homes and firesides to the scorn and contempt of their countrymen, must be lost to all patriotic and loyal feelings of humanity for those who took their lives in their hands in perilous times.
_Nov. 14th._--As to the effect of the "impressions" upon the country generally, the following letter from Hallowell (Picton) written to Dr.