"A moderate use of tea of a due strength seems better adapted to the fair sex than men, for they, naturally being of a more lax and delicate make, are more liable to a fulness of blood and juices; as also because they have less exercise or head-labours, than which nothing braces better, or gives the fibres a greater springiness; and because they are less accustomed to drink wine, whose astringency corrugates the fibres, and enables the vessels to act with greater briskness and force, so in some measure answers the end of the labour." He holds that tea in a dietetic point of view seems in general not only harmless, but very useful, but considers it impossible to say "beforehand with what healthy persons tea will disagree, till they have used it; where it disagrees, it should immediately be left off, for there is no altering or compelling a constitution. However, where it agrees, it excels all other vegetables, foreign or domestic, for preventing sleepiness, drowsiness, or dulness, and taking off weariness or fatigue, raising the spirits safely, corroborating the memory, strengthening the judgment, quickening the invention, &c.; but then it should be drank moderately, and in the afternoon chiefly, and not made too habitual." John Wesley, a few years later, attacked the use of tea. In 1748 he published a small tract, "Letter to a Friend concerning Tea," in which he accused tea of impairing digestion, unstringing the nerves, involving great and useless expense, and in his own case, and that of others, inducing symptoms of paralysis. But, in the first instance, he preached against tea, not because he thought it injurious, but because he wanted money. The whole of the London Methodists were at that time very poor. The Rev. L. Tyerman, in his "Life and Times of the Rev. John Wesley," says,--