Rev. John Murray, from England, landed on the shore of New Jersey in 1770. He came hither much oppressed in spirit on account of severe afflictions in England, and had determined not to place himself before the public again as a preacher. His published biography tells us how differently the arrangements were made by Providence respecting him. It is a remarkable record, that of his meeting with Thomas Potter, who declared that he had been long waiting for the minister who had now come, that he must preach in the new meeting-house which had been builded for him; and who, in face of the preacher's refusal to comply with his request, declared that the wind would not change for him to leave in the vessel until he had delivered his message. After a severe mental conflict the stranger consented to preach on the following Sunday. Due notice was given, and the house was filled with attentive listeners. There had been some other preaching of Universalism in different places in America previous to this time, as there were here and there those who cherished the faith and made public avowal of it. Dr. George de Benneville, a fugitive from France because of religious persecution, established himself near Germantown, Pa., as a physician, and being a devout believer in Universalism, took occasion often to advocate it in public, with much effect. This beginning on the part of Mr. Murray, however, opened the way to a systematic, permanent movement, and led to the establishment of Universalist churches. He preached much in New England, and was settled in Portsmouth, N. H., and afterwards in Boston, where he remained pastor of one church for nearly thirty years. In his preaching at first, Mr. Murray did not design to establish a separate sect. He was welcomed by ministers and their followers into orthodox pulpits, until his outspoken views respecting the salvation of the race raised a strong opposition against him, which made him an object of persecution, and marked him as the propagator of a dangerous heresy. Thus excluded from Christian communion and fellowship by other sects, it was but reasonable and just that the believers in Universalism should assume for themselves the rights and privileges of a distinct and independent Christian fraternity; so that other sects were responsible for the separation of this branch of the Christian church from themselves. It has been justly said by another:--