Mr. Fletcher’s connection with Trevecca College terminated in his resigning, in consequence of a dispute which arose out of certain minutes by the Wesleyan Conference in opposition to the doctrine of predestination, first brought into prominence by the great Geneva reformer, Calvin. Lady Huntingdon invited all in connection with the college to write their sentiments respecting them, adding a strong hint that all who did not repudiate the views contained in Mr. Wesley’s minutes must prepare to quit. Mr. Fletcher wrote strongly in favour of his friend Wesley, and resigned his appointment. These expressions of his views brought him in opposition to his patrons, the Hills, two of whom, Richard (afterwards Sir Richard) and Rowland, used their pens in defence of Mr. Fletcher’s opponent, a brother-clergyman named Toplady, then the great champion of Calvinism. Mr. Wesley, who had laid the train which led to the explosion, either from want of time or inclination to remain on the field, left two of his preachers to sustain the shock, and these proving unequal to the task, Mr. Fletcher was left to fight the battle single-handed. This he did in a series of cleverly-written works, entitled “Checks to Antinomianism,” in speaking of one of which in a letter to a friend, dated March 20, 1774:, he says:—“I do not repent of my having engaged in this controversy; for though I doubt my little publication cannot reclaim those who are confirmed in believing the lie of the day, yet it may here and there stop one from swallowing it all, or at least from swallowing it so deeply.” Two years after he says—“I have almost run my race of scribbling; and I have preached as much as I could, though to little purpose; but I must not complain. If one person has received good by my ten years’ labour it is an honour for which I cannot be too thankful, if my mind were as low as it should be.” A not very friendly critic, the _Christian Observer_, speaking some time afterwards of this discussion, says:— “We have no hesitation in saying that we believe Mr. Fletcher’s motives in writing them to have been pure and upright. We also think that in his manner of conducting the controversy, now happily almost forgotten, he had decidedly the advantage of his antagonists. He was an acute and animated disputant; a brilliant imagination rendered his argumentation imposing, splendid, and dazzling, while it enabled him to paint the doctrines of his adversaries in the darkest and most odious colours; and whatever may have been the merits of the cause which he defended,—into these we do not mean to enter,—he was undoubtedly superior in talents and learning to all his opponents.”