The peace of this poor lad’s mind however is completely destroyed, so fatally has the event preyed upon him:—so far so as to fill the bosom of his aged father with such a spirit of indignation and revenge, that he actually came up to London with a full determination to be the death of him who had thus ruined the peace of his beloved son, while the mother’s mind was not less distracted than that of the father. In consequence of this, the father entered J. Church’s meeting house, with two loaded pistols, one in each pocket, but under the excess of agitation, he fainted away, and was carried out of the place. There are various other documents which are too voluminous to notice at present. The point to which I now wish to direct the attention of the public is, the extraordinary circumstance of a man continuing to exercise the functions of a christian pastor with such heavy imputations as these hanging over his head. He knows that the whole neighbourhood rings with accusations; he knows that some hundreds of publications containing charges so severe, that my statements compared to then, are “lenity and compassion,” have been sold in St. George’s-fields; and why has he not brought his action against the printer in order to let the world see that they are false. The printer is a respectable and _responsible_ house-holder residing in the neighbourhood. He has sent forth from his press many hundred sheets of paper filled with direct allegations of criminality against Church: and I again ask, why does not Church take that step which an honest _innocent_ man would take in vindication of his character, namely—that of bringing an action for damages, wherein evidence to their truth or falsehood may be _legally_ admitted? Why has he gone to Union Hall with a counsel at his elbow, and called on the magistrates to do no more than require the printer to _suppress_ the publication of these printed papers, which request the magistrates have complied with, on the ground that such publications tended to a breach of the peace? I hope that no person—and I am confident that no reader of the Weekly Dispatch will be so foolish as to join in any riotous proceedings. But is Christianity, in the mean time, to continue suffering under such a slander as that of being promulgated by a man who is even _suspected_? A Clergyman of the Church of England, under similar circumstances, would be immediately suspended by the Bishop of his diocese. And is there no power in the state that can impose a temporary silence on a dissenting minister, until an investigation shall take place respecting accusation publicly exhibited against him? Is not the ruling power of the state as interested in preserving the morals of dissenters as of any other class of subjects?