“The author of the ‘_Checks_’ has promised to his readers an answer to the Rev. Mr. Toplady’s piece, entitled, ‘_More Work for Mr. Wesley_.’[314] His reason for postponing the finishing of _that part_ of his ‘_Logica Genevensis_’ was the importance of the ‘_Equal Check_,’ which closes the controversy with Mr. Hill. He saw life so uncertain, that, of two things which he was obliged to do, he thought it his duty to set about that which appeared to him the more useful. He considered also that it was proper to have quite done with Mr. Hill, before he faced so able a writer as Mr. Toplady. And he hoped, that, to lay before the judicious a complete system of truth, which, like the sun, recommends itself by its own lustre, was perhaps the best method to prove that error, which shines only as a meteor, is nothing but a mock-sun. However, he fully designs to perform his engagement in a short time, if his life is spared.” Footnote 314: This was published in 1772, and will be noticed shortly. This was prefixed to the _first_ edition of the following work, which, at that time, was in the press: “Zelotes and Honestus[315] Reconciled; or, an Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism Continued: Being the First Part of the Scripture Scales to weigh the Gold of Gospel Truth,—to balance a multitude of opposite Scriptures,—to prove the Gospel-Marriage of _Free-Grace_ and _Free-will_,—and to restore primitive harmony to the Gospel of the day. With a Preface, containing some Strictures upon the Three Letters of Richard Hill, Esq.; which have been lately published.” Footnote 315: “Zelotes,” says Fletcher, “represents any zealous Solifidian, who looks upon the doctrine of free-will as heretical: Honestus, any zealous moralist, who looks upon the doctrine of free grace as enthusiastical.” This was Fletcher’s largest work. It was published in two parts, but it was continuously paged, the whole making a 12 mo. vol. of 444 pages. Mr. Hill’s “Three Letters” were published in 1773, just after the publication of his “Finishing Stroke.” The letters have been given in a previous chapter. Fletcher had answered them privately; and now, in a preface to his present work, he replied publicly. After stating that Mr. Hill’s pamphlet “had been hawked about the parish of Madeley” by the newsman, he proceeds to say:— “Mr. Hill quits the field; but it is like a brave Parthian. He not only shoots his own arrows as he retires, but borrows those also of two persons, whom he calls ‘_a very eminent minister in the Church of England_’ and ‘_a lay gentleman of great learning and abilities_.’ As I see neither argument nor Scripture in the performances of those two new auxiliaries, I shall take no notice of their ingrafted productions.