The esteem in which this man and his wife have been held is shown, among other things, by the failure of the Congregational church to expel them. In fact, where could that church lay a finger upon any violation, on the part of these members, of the teachings of Him in whose name that church was founded? Their names remain on the roll of Congregational church members. Yet by brethren in that church they have been scorned and injured, and their children have been lashed for venturing to follow with exactness New Testament precepts and examples. In trouble and sorrow, under the despotism that had assumed the very authority of that Lord whom he himself had learned to trust so unreservedly, the mortal life of James Rogers approached its close. Yet, wondrously upheld by faith in God the Father, Christ the Saviour, and the presence of that Comforter which had been promised to all true believers, he was enabled to look far beyond all earthly gain or losses, all worldly disappointment and the injustice and uncharitableness of men, to the eternal blessings and rewards of heaven. Although religious preambles to wills are not unusual at this period, they are generally of a set form, with slight variations; but that which James Rogers dictated, to his son John, was an evident expression of his religious faith couched in his own words: “I do know and see that my name is written in the book of life.”[58] ----- Footnote 58: See Part I, Chap. I. For full preamble, see “James Rogers and His Descendants,” by J. S. Rogers, Boston. ----- A noticeable feature of this will is the evidently anxious intention of the testator that the court shall have as little as possible to do with the settlement of his estate, and that his children shall carefully avoid any litigation concerning it. (Part I, Chap. I.) Five years elapsed between the writing of the will and the decease of the testator; and in the meantime a codicil was attached to it. [It is certainly very lamentable that even one of the children of James Rogers considered it necessary to set aside the last request of so loving and generous a father, by entering upon any suit at law in regard to the settlement of his estate, and this after the first so amicable agreement on the part of each to fully abide by the terms of the will. But it is still more lamentable that, through lack of careful examination into the facts of the case, those children who positively refrained from the slightest action contrary to this request of their father, should be included in the sweeping statement of the New London historian (_Miss Caulkins_): “his children, notwithstanding, engaged in long and acrimonious contention regarding boundaries, in the course of which earthly judges were often obliged to interfere and enforce settlement.”[59] ----- Footnote 59: