[May —, 1804] — to Ezekiel Cooper

It is evident that, though there is no date attached to the letter, it was written at the General Conference in Baltimore. Under date of May 7, 1804, Asbury refers in the Journal to this debate and the attack upon the ruling eldership. In spite of the fact that he says he did not take part in the conference debates, he is presenting his side to Ezekiel Cooper. He urges Cooper to argue the case. There was much discontent in this conference. There were 204 elders in the church, and only 111 were present. Before the end of the conference only 70 were present. In those days the discontents went home when they could not carry a point. It was the last conference when the three bishops were together. Coke was not there in 1808, and Whatcoat died after two years. Asbury made the comment to Daniel Hitt in the letter of August 22, 1804, “I think never did a General Conference sit longer with more ado, and do less, and perhaps the less the better.”

BALTIMORE, MD.

[May —, 1804]¹

[TO EZEKIEL COOPER]²

My Brother:

He that ruleth over man should be just. I am deeply sensible of the difficulties that will always attend my speaking or entering into the debates of either a general or yearly conference. If I have gained anything by serving you to my 33rd year of my age in America it is your confidence and affection. I wish some person will [see] when it comes to elders, (or one that has the charge of circuits, changing class leaders,) that the characters and standing of those men may be considered, as also the number that were put out of office in a certain City³ and the men that were imprudently put in. Then let it be seen that all the men upon that floor are presiding elders,⁴ as having charge of district, circuits, towns, or stations. The elders of stations say that it is their right of office to rule, who is Lord over them? A few men a thousand miles distant from them may write to them. The presiding elders have given up their right of a station, or circuit, to be at the will of another. They hold their appointment 4 years or during pleasure, the pleasure of the Episcopacy, and great displeasure of the circuits’ eldership, at least of some of them. I conclude then they have beaten these presiding elders, being Romans untried, and condemned. I hoped it was correction, but I am now afraid it was in some designed as destruction. These presiding elders have not asked this office, they have said we are not fit for the office in our own estimation; the Episcopacy say fit, perfectly fit, who is fit, a sense of your own unfitness will make you diffident, humble, and diligent. The elders of stations, what I would call local presiding elders, in towns, cities, and circuits, do not stand at the will, or at the change of another as to office, go where they may. In short every deacon that has the charge, every elder, that has the charge of a station or circuit is a presiding elder in a sense, and there would be no help for the greatest abuses of power was it not for the presiding elders interposition and quartermeetings. I beg you would state the case of those ejected leaders. Many will know where you mean.

I am,

F. ASBURY

P.S. I think of all the men in the connection, we ought to guard against these office right men, the local presiding elders for 3 or 4 years⁵ in a town or city that can change or suspend leaders of 20 or 30 years standing, but let it be known for what fault. Are they erroneous or are they immoral? Then expel them. Henry Willis is called a local preacher by some but how many miles has he ridden in the year attending every other Sabbath at Frederick Town, 30 miles a day a man so afflicted as he is, mark that— Garrett Biblical Institute Library