was torn off with a part of the quarter. Had the leather been firm, my foot probably would not have been released.

Life often depends on circumstances, which are beyond human intention, or fore-thought. The way of a man is not in himself. A horse is a vain thing for safety. A life preserved by God's interposing providence, ought to be devoted to the kind preserver.

May 16, 1759, I was married to Miss Elizabeth Dwight, younger daughter of Capt. Seth Dwight, of Hatfield. This connection laid a foundation for much family comfort. She has ever been a great blessing in her place, and in all her relations.

Oct. 19, 1767, my fourth child, Samuel, aged ten months, died with the rattles. His mother was with her friends at Hatfield. O, what agonies he felt, wholly unconscious of the moral cause. When, in his suffocation, he earnestly whispered "Pa—, Pa—,” stretched forth his trembling hands and directed his anxious eyes to me, I plainly perceived what confidence he placed in my ability to relieve his distress. He seemed to wonder at my neglect. What relief I should have felt, if I could have told him my potence! His earnest looks toward an impotent parent, whose attention he had before experienced, admonished me to direct my faith toward that heavenly Parent, who wants neither goodness, nor power.

im

My steady aim in preaching has been to promote real religion în temper and practice, and to state and apply the doctrines of the gospel in a manner best adapted to this end. Keeping this end in view, I have avoided unprofitable controversy. I have never started objections against a plain doctrine to shew my agility in running them down. I have been careful not to awaken disputes, which were quietly asleep, nor to waste my own and my hearers' time by reproving imaginary faults, or indifferent customs. Among these I have reckoned the fashions of dress. I was once, and once only, requested to preach against prevailing fashions. A remote

inhabitant of the parish, apparently in a serious frame, called upon me one day, and pressed the necessity of bearing my testimony against this dangerous evil. I observed to him, that as my people were generally farmers in middling circumstances, I did not think they took a lead in fashions; if they followed them, it was at a humble distance, and rather to avoid singularity, than to encourage extravagance-that as long as people were in the habit of wearing clothes, they must have some fashion, or other, and a fashion that answered the ends of dress, and exceeded not the ability of the wearer, I considered as innocent, and not deserving reproof. To this he agreed; but said, what grieved him was to see people set their hearts so much on fashions. I conceded, that as modes of dress were trifles compared with our eternal concerns, to set our hearts upon them must be a great sin. But I advised him to consider, that to set our hearts against such trifles was the same sin, as to set our hearts upon them; and as his fashion differed from those of his neighbors, just in proportion as he set his heart against theirs, he set his heart upon his own. He was therefore doubly guilty of the very sin which he imputed to others. And I desired him to correct his own fault, which he could not but know, and to hope that his neighbors were less faulty than himself, and less faulty than he had uncharitably supposed them to be.

I could not but reflect, how easily men deceive themselves, and how necessary it is, that we often apply the questions which our Saviour puts to the hypocrite, "Why beholdest thou the mote in thy brother's eye and considerest not the beam in thine own?" It is very unhappy if we make a censorious spirit toward others, a sign of grace in ourselves. "Let nothing be done through vain glory, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself."

As I enjoyed the friendship of my people without interruption, so I was happy to see them in peace among themselves. They were undisturbed by any religious controversy, until the year 1772, when the baptistical controversy arose, which, for a short time, gave them some disquietude, and me some concern.

Some years before my settlement, a baptist society had been formed in that part of this town, which was afterward the second parish. They had settled a minister of public education, respectable talents, and a liberal mind; the Rev. Edward Upham. A few members of the baptist society belonged to my parish. The society being small, his support failed, and he removed to Newport. The second parish afterward settled a minister, under whom both denominations united with apparent cordiality. The members of the late baptist church covenanted with their pedo-baptist brethren to commune at the same table. In 1772 Mr. Upham returned to occupy a farm, which he owned in the place. At the instance of some of his former hearers he resumed his ministerial functions, in consequence of which there was a considerable defection from the second parish; and three, or four families within my parish, who had been his former hearers, now attended his ministry. He preached, a few times, at private houses in my parish, and administered baptism to two or three subjects. On these occasions he introduced the baptist controversy. At the same time, pamphlets in opposition to infant baptism and sprinkling, were industriously circulated among my people; particularly Anonymous letters to Bishop Hoadly. I felt it my duty to preach on the controversy. The sermons which I preached were soon published at the desire of my people, and have been several times re-published.

The people who withdrew from my ministry, shewed no bitterness. They appeared to act on principle; they treated me with friendly respect, occasionally attended my meeting, requested

my presence in their family afflictions, and always seemed to be gratified by my visits. Such as survived Mr. Upham's ministry, returned to enjoy mine. One of them, I recollect in particular, requested the assessors to assess him in the parish taxes, for, he said, he wished to aid in supporting the gospel, where he enjoyed it. He desired communion with our church, to which he was cheerfully and unanimously admitted.

Those baptists in the second parish, who had covenanted to commune with the pedo-baptists, were stedfast in their covenant. The church, thus composed, remained unbroken, even after the parish was almost in a state of dissolution. The baptists in this town appeared, in that day, to be generally men of candour and integrity.

While the baptistical controversy was existing among us, a gentleman from a respectable town, at some distance, then vacant, conferred with me to know, whether I would accept an invitation to settle in that town. Though the question was unexpected, I needed no time to deliberate on an answer. I told him, I felt my insufficiency for the place mentioned to me; at present I perceived no disaffection to me among my people; I was decently supported by them; and my removal at the present conjuncture, however lucrative to myself, might be peculiarly dangerous to them; I therefore thought it my duty to stand in my lot.

The paper currency, which in 1775 began to be emitted for carrying on the revolutionary war, subjected me to the same embarrassments, which were experienced by many of my brethren. My salary being reduced to a small pittance, I was obliged to attend to agricultural cares and labours more than I chose. My ministerial labours were also increased by frequent conferences and lectures, and by the pastoral visits, to which a sickness prevalent for three successive seasons, indispensably called me. And my health began to be sensibly impaired. In the beginning of

the

year 1778, the small pox became so rife in my vicinity, that I judged it prudent to innoculate myself and family, as none of us had had the disease. In March we went into the hospital. We all had the disease favourably. But not considering the debility naturally consequent to the disease, and to the regimen during its continuance, I immediately resumed my ministerial labours, which were much increased by instances of danger and mortality in the hospitals, where no other minister could attend. I soon felt my constitution yielding; in August I wholly desisted from my work. In December I had, by journeying and other means, regained so much strength, that I ventured into the pulpit; but after about four months, my complaints returning, I took leave of the pulpit, little expecting ever to stand and speak there again. However, after about eighteen months, I had collected so much strength, that from a seat in the meeting-house, I spake to my people about fifteen minutes; but by that time I was so overcome, that, leaving the assembly to pray and read among themselves, I retired to my house and to my bed. Feeling no lasting injury from this short exercise, I ventured to repeat it, and by October was able to perform one short service in a day.

My people were now in a state of great tranquillity, faithfully attending at God's house, patiently hoping and waiting for my recovery, satisfied with my poor and short performances, and such better supplies as I sometimes procured for them, and, when both these failed, accepting the pious and charitable labours of the deacons and other christian brethren. But in this encouraging period, there was an occurrence which much disturbed the harmony of the people, and probably retarded the return of my health.

Toward the end of October, 1780, a John Watkins came into the parish, and began to preach in its extremities without my knowledge. He came originally from England, but directly from France, in an American ship, on board of which was a young