Methodism in Northern Illinois during the closing decade of the first half of the nineteenth century was in much the same condition of decline as we have seen characterizing it in Western New York. There were many who perceived this, and who grieved over the desolations of Zion, sought to withstand the general defection from God and from the principles and practices of original Methodism, and who were crying mightily, “O Lord, revive Thy work.” Though regarded by the majority as fanatical troublers of Israel, whose groans and tears were not justified by the conditions of the Church, God finally heard their cries, and sent the revival for which they had so long and earnestly prayed.

     In June, 1856, Dr. J. W. Redfield, on the invitation of the Rev. David Sherman, pastor of the Methodist Episcopal Church at St. Charles, Illinois, conducted a revival meeting in that town. Mr. Redfield was a Medical Doctor, and also a Local Preacher in the Methodist Church. He had a remarkable experience of conversion in early life, and subsequently an equally clear experience in the sanctifying grace of God. He began to exercise his gifts for Christian work immediately after his conversion by visiting the people in the community where he lived, and inviting them to the schoolhouse to prayer-meeting, where he exhorted them to seek the Lord with extraordinary ability for one of his years.

     He seems at first to have engaged in these labors with no idea of preaching, but simply prompted by his love for the Savior and for the souls of men and women. The people, however, perceived the call of God upon him for the work of the ministry. Nor was it very long before his duty in this direction was made known to himself by the Holy Spirit. It was when he thought to desist from the labors in which he had been engaged under the impulse of his first love, that he felt restrained by the Spirit, and finally felt a powerful conviction that he was divinely called to preach the Gospel.

     Happy would it have been for him had he always remained true to this conviction. But, as is the case with far too many, he debated the matter, and drew back from following his conviction from time to time. Finally he resolved to obey God, entered the work of the ministry, and was remarkably used of God in the salvation of men. Yet, after all this, he ran away from duty, and for a considerable time acted the part of the Prophet Jonah. This time he went farther from God than he had ever been. He turned infidel, gave himself to the study of anatomy, and to the investigation of natural, mental ~and moral science, and barely escaped landing in Materialism and Atheism. While thus fleeing from duty he also contracted a presumptuous marriage engagement, from which for many years he reaped, according as he had sowed, a harvest of bitter consequences.

     After having been chastened, and all but killed, for his rebellion against the call of God, at the solicitation of a Methodist preacher in Lockport, New York, he yielded to God and consented to take the way the Lord had shown him. He finally allowed the Methodist preacher to present his name to the Church as a candidate for a license to preach. The time came for the meeting at which his case was to be considered. After a brief examination he was about to retire, that the case might be considered in his absence; whereupon one of those present asked how he stood on the question of Abolition. He answered, “I am an Abolitionist of the strongest type.” “Then I shall oppose the recommendation,” said the brother who had raised the question and who was a sympathizer with pro-slavery sentiment.

     Dr. Redfield secretly wished that his recommendation would be rejected, as he seemed to think that would relieve him of responsibility in the matter. So to make them doubly sure that he meant it, when he said he was an Abolitionist of the strongest type, he now said, before retiring, “I wish it distinctly understood that if I am granted a license to preach, and that shall add anything to the influence I now possess, I shall certainly use it for God and the slave. So now your eyes are open, and you know what I am and what to expect.” Again it was said, “We will contest the matter.”

     He retired; the vote was taken immediately, and he was licensed to preach. Before he had finally settled it to obey God and preach the Gospel he had a premonition, or conviction, that unless he did thus yield, he would be struck by lightning. Strangely, the people had scarcely reached home from the Church where he was licensed before a thunderbolt descended upon it. He was greatly impressed by this circumstance.

     When, some time after this, lie finally received his Pentecost and gave himself to his God-given calling, he was marvelously used of God in the conversion of sinners, in the sanctification of believers, in the quickening of the Church, and in the general promotion of the work of God. He held only a Local Preacher’s license, and the Methodist Episcopal Church at that time had no provision for evangelists; but he gave himself to evangelistic labors, for which he was specially fitted, both by natural endowments and by his remarkable Christian experience. Neither time nor space admits of even a sketch of his evangelistic labors here, but if any one doubts that he was among the greatest evangelists of the nineteenth century, let him read “The Life of Rev. John Wesley Redfield, M. D.,” by the Rev. Joseph Goodwin Terrill, and be convinced.

     He labored on, much of the time against great opposition for years, as a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church; but finally found his place among those who had been proscribed as “Nazarites” in Western New York, and as “Redfieldites” in Northern Illinois, and at the Pekin Convention at which the Free Methodist Church was founded was a delegate from Illinois, and thus became one of the honored founders of the new denomination. Previous to this he had received a stroke of paralysis, from which he was considerably disabled; and subsequently he was the victim of two more strokes, which terminated his earthly career. But his end was triumphant. His body rests at Marengo, Illinois, and a small marble shaft above his grave bears this fitting inscription: “HE WAS TRUE TO HIS MOTTO—FIDELITY TO GOD.”

     Mr. Sherman, who had invited Mr. Redfield to St. Charles, had known him in New England, and, having been transferred to the Rock River Conference, and being deeply desirous of seeing the work of holiness promoted on his charge, had given him a pressing call to come to St. Charles and assist him in a series of revival services. Many of the more devout members gave their hearty endorsement to the Doctor’s labors, and a remarkable revival followed, in which, notwithstanding the unfavorable season of the year, many were converted, and many also claimed to receive the experience of entire sanctification.

     The successful character of this meeting, evidenced not only by the numbers saved, but also by the remarkable spirit of prayer and of labor for souls poured out upon the St. Charles society, led to Mr. Redfield being pressed with invitations to labor in various towns in Northern Illinois and Wisconsin. In consequence he remained in the West some two or three years, laboring effectively in those places where open doors invited. Elgin, Marengo, Woodstock, Aurora, Quiney, Galva and other communities in Illinois were greatly blessed through the faithful labors of this man of God. He also conducted revival services at a number of important centers in Wisconsin.

     “The revivals at Marengo and Woodstock were wonders of grace,” says the Rev. J. G. Terrill. “At the latter place, lawyers, doctors, the sheriff and other citizens were brought to Christ. Some of them became ministers of the gospel.” [1]

     Under the Doctor’s labors in Illinois a number of men and women were raised up who were afterward to become influential in molding the character of the Free Methodist Church. Foremost among these we mention Edward Pay-son Hart. He had professed conversion before Doctor Red-field’s advent to Illinois, but after hearing him for some time, perceived that his own religious experience did-not conform to the New Testament type. He finally committed himself wholly to God, sought and found not only the witness of a renewed heart, but also the sanctifying baptism with the Holy Ghost. He soon recognized that God was calling him to preach the Gospel, withdrew from the Masonic Lodge, entered the ministry of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and finally united with the Free Methodist Church in 1860, labored successfully as pastor and as District Chairman until 1874, when the General Conference held at Albion, New York, elected him as General Superintendent, which name was changed to Bishop at the General Conference of 1907. He served continuously and with great acceptability in this office from the time of his first election until October, 1907, when, because of a nervous trouble seriously impairing his voice, he asked to be relieved from its duties. He and his most estimable wife are now living in comfort and amid pleasant surroundings at Alameda, California, which has been their home for many years. Mrs. Hart was wholly sanctified while but a girl, under Dr. Redfield’s labors in Illinois. Both have for many years been a mighty inspiration to the Free Methodist Church.

     Joseph Goodwin Terrill, who, as a boy, had been converted in a series of revival meetings held by his mother in her kitchen, at Aurora, Illinois, also received under Dr. Redfield’s ministry a baptism with the Spirit, under the permanent inspiration of which lie developed into a mighty man of God. As a “boy preacher” he was sent for to become the minister of a band of persecuted saints, who had rented and fitted up the dining room of an old hotel at St. Charles, as a place of worship. He went, and they began a series of meetings in which a hundred souls were saved. This meeting also resulted in the forming of a Free Methodist society, and in the erection of a new Church edifice. The “boy preacher” developed rapidly, and at length became one of the most able and eloquent preachers of the Free Methodist Church, a vigorous and entertaining writer of books and contributor to religious periodicals, a wise Church legislator, a musical author of fair ability, an enthusiastic leader in Sunday-school Convention work, a man who filled nearly all the important offices within the gift of the Church, and who at the time of his death, in 1895, was its Missionary Secretary. In all his manifold relations to the Church he was powerful in molding its character for good.

     Another product of the Redfield revival was C. E. Harroun, Sr., who was brought out into the light of full salvation in the first meeting Doctor Redfield held in St. Charles. Feeling divinely called to preach the Gospel, like St. Paul he “conferred not with flesh and blood,” but gave himself at once and fully to the work of preaching Jesus Christ; and, as Bishop E. P. Hart has aptly said, “In all his after life never could do anything else so well.” For some years he preached at different points in Illinois and Wisconsin. Later he labored in Iowa, Kansas and Missouri. He was a number of times delegate to the General Conference, where he displayed much wisdom in counsel and legislation. His last labors were in Oklahoma, where for several years he assisted his son, the Rev.

     C. E. Harroun, Jr., in the work of the Oklahoma Conference, and where he also continued to live after age compelled him to superannuate, and finally passed peacefully to be with God. Bishop Hart has said of him: “In his ministrations he has, to a greater extent than any of his fellow laborers, both in pulpit and in altar work, retained the peculiar style and methods of Dr. Redfleld. A fine singer, a powerful preacher, at times, as the Spirit moves him, congregations are aroused to a pitch of intense excitement.” [2]

     I. H. Fairchilds, a local preacher, who was led into the light of full salvation at the Marengo revival, also developed into an itinerant preacher of much usefulness, and later became quite prominent in starting and building up the Free Methodist Church in that part of Illinois. -

     Then there were also a goodly number of lay members who courageously rallied to the support of the work of holiness in the Doctor’s meetings at various places in Illinois, and who bravely withstood the opposition and persecution that soon developed, remained uncompromisingly faithful, and finally figured prominently in making the early history of the Free Methodist Church. Among them should be mentioned Father M. L. Hart and his wife, parents of the Rev. E. P. Hart, General Superintendent (Bishop) of the Free Methodist Church since 1874. It was Father Hart who bore the invitation from the official board to Doctor Redfield to come from Elgin, twenty-five miles distant, where he was then laboring, and conduct a series of meetings at Marengo. This noble couple for their fidelity to God were finally made to feel the opposition and tyranny of the Church, in common with others of like spirit, to a degree that cost them the for. feiture of their Church home, and were among those who in the beginning identified themselves with Free Methodism, and gave their most earnest service to its work during the remainder of their days. “Mother Hart” had been led into the experience of holiness years before under the labors of the celebrated James Caughey.

     There was also the family of Bishops, who were prominently identified with Doctor Redfield’s work, and later with the formation and subsequent history of the Free Methodist Church. W. D. Bishop, one of the sons, is now a superannuate member of its ministry in the California Conference; another son, M. F. Bishop, is an honored layman of the Church; and Martha, a daughter, familiarly called “Mattie,” is the faithful and devoted wife of Bishop Hart.

     Nor should we fail to mention J. M. Laughlin and his godly wife. Mr. Laughlin owned the magnificent grove near the village of St. Charles, which became historic as the location for many years of the famous “St. Charles Camp-meeting,” and also as the place of holding the first Western Laymen’s Convention. This Convention resulted in the formation of the Free Methodist Church in the West, and finally in the organization of the Illinois Annual Conference. Mrs. Laughlin is said to have been a woman of quick discernment, intense spirituality, and who was deeply experienced in the things of God. They both toiled and sacrificed for the welfare of Free Methodism until the good Lord bade them cease from labor and enter into rest.

     We would also mention “Mother Cobb,” “who for many years was the only living witness to the experience of perfect love in all those parts ;“ who had then “walked in the steady light of it for more than forty years ;“ and who “lived for nearly twenty more in the light of that experience, when God took her home.” Though she never became a Free Methodist, she did much to foster the movement. “Mother Coombs” was likewise one of the “elect ladies” of that region and of those days—”a woman of deep piety, clear understanding, and consistent life,” who feared not to stand by the truth and those who preached it, whatever might be the consequences.

     The Church of this later period owes more than it can properly appreciate to the faithfulness of these men and women of God, and the many others associated with them, “of whom the world was not worthy,” and “whose names are in the book of life.”

     One of the most prominent and influential laymen of Northern Illinois was the Honorable Benjamin Hackney. He was born in Canajoharie, Montgomery County, New York, May 15, 1805. Very early in life he was thrown upon his own exertions for a livelihood. The first money he ever earned was earned by working on the Erie Canal, and though he did not then make any profession of religion, he gave what he had earned toward the erection of a Methodist Church in the neighborhood where he lived.

     He soon mastered the carpenter’s trade, also the details of business life, and finally undertook several contracts for the building of canals in his native State. He was prominently connected with the Chemung Canal from its first inception, and after its completion acted as its Superintendent for a number of years. This was considered a very honorable position, inasmuch as it was a State appointment, conferred upon him by the Legislature. On resigning this position he accepted a contract on the Delaware and Hudson Canal, and eventually occupied a similar position on the Erie Canal.

     On November 24, 1831, he was married to Miss Helen Bradley, of Chemung County, New York, with whom he lived happily until her death in August, 1852. Her sickness and death became the means of his awakening to feel his need of Christ, and of his thorough conversion to God. He erected a family altar, and for nearly two years led a praying life before experiencing a change of heart. Finally, in the spring of 1854, while walking in meditation, he paused for a moment beneath a mountain ash in a corner of his yard, and lifting his eyes toward heaven, called upon the Lord Jesus to help him. In a moment the long-sought peace and blessing came into his heart—the assurance of sins forgiven and of acceptance with God.

     In September of the same year he was married to Mrs. Lydia T. Evans, who made him a most agreeable help-meet in things temporal and spiritual, who finally nursed him through the long illness which terminated his life, and who survived him for more than a decade.

     When Mr. Hackney moved to Aurora, in 1844, he took with him $20,000, and located on a farm, now embraced within the city limits, and which he afterward platted into town lots. He lived to see a house built on each of them, except several which he gave as sites for the erection of Churches. In 1847 he brought his family to Aurora, from which time he was intimately identified with the development and success of the city until his death. When the Galena and Chicago Union Railroad was projected, he became one of the projectors and incorporators of the Aurora Branch Railroad, from Turner’s Junction to Aurora, the road from Chicago to the Junction, thirty miles, being then the only railroad in the State. Considerable difficulty was naturally experienced in starting this enterprise, he having to negotiate the bonds, which could only be done by his personal endorsement. “Benjamin Hackney may in truth be said to have been the original projector of the now famous Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad.” He was also its first General Superintendent.

     Mr. Hackney acted as Superintendent of the road for a number of years, and might have continued in the position longer, had not his conscience, after his conversion, disapproved of the running of trains on the Sabbath. He expressed his convictions to the directors, who refused to heed them, whereupon he decided that he could not in honor longer hold his position, resigned the same, and immediately offered his stock for sale, declaring he would not become rich at the expense of obliging poor men to break the law of God.

     Mr. Hackney was also one of the first movers in the founding of Clark [now Jennings] Seminary. He contributed $5,000 towards its erection, and later was compelled, through the financial failure of some and crookedness of others, to give enough more to make a total of $25,000, or $500 more than he had on moving to the State.

     In 1859 the Rev. Seymour Coleman, of the Troy Conference, settled in Aurora; and, a vacancy having been made in the pulpit of the Methodist Church on the east side of the river, he was requested to fill the place for the remainder of the year, which would be about six months. He consented; and, as was his usual custom, he gave particular attention to the subject of entire sanctification, emphasizing the privilege and necessity of the experience on the part of all believers Mr. Hackney at this time was one of his parishioners, and had the privilege of the clear and safe teaching of this holy man of God. In the fall of that year a camp-meeting was held near the city of Aurora, under the direction of the Rev. Luke Hitchcock, Presiding Elder. It was a meeting of remarkable interest and great power. On Monday morning Mr. Hackney, under deep conviction for the experience of sanctification, met “Father Coleman,” as he was commonly called, and said to him, “I have laid all at Jesus’s feet; what next ?“ “Oh, just leave it there,” said Father Coleman, and turned immediately away. Mr. Hackney was somewhat annoyed at being answered and left in this abrupt manner when he was undergoing such a soul struggle; but presently his better judgment prevailed, and he said to himself, “Yes, that is the way; if I have given all, I must leave it there ;“ and while lie was thus meditating and trusting in Christ, suddenly the witness of the Spirit came that the work was done. He was accustomed to refer to this matter often as an illustration of Father Coleman’s wisdom in dealing with seeking souls. Regarding his new-found experience he testified on this wise: “I have dealt in canal stocks, in railroad stocks, and in State stocks, but never received such returns as from the stock I have in Jesus.”

     The same fall many of the society desired Father Coleman to be placed in charge of the work another year; but, because of his preaching so plainly and thoroughly on the subject of holiness, he was regarded as being identified with “Redfieldism,” for which cause the Presiding Elder and other influential persons opposed the plan, and another was appointed. In December came the separation at St. Charles, twelve miles away; the expulsion of the Bishop family of McHenry County followed in March; then the first Western Laymen’s camp-meeting in June, immediately following the adjournment of the Methodist Episcopal General Conference at Buffalo, New York, where the last ray of hope for the redress of the expelled eastern preachers and their sympathizers died out, when their appeals were refused entertainment by that body. Mr. Hackney was at the camp-meeting with a large tent, boldly identifying himself with those who were persecuted for Christ’s sake.

     In August, 1860, Mr. Hackney and certain other laymen called another camp-meeting at Aurora, and invited Father Coleman to take charge of it, but he declined. The Rev. B. T. Roberts was then invited, and accepted. The meeting was largely attended not only by those who subsequently became Free Methodists, but by many Wesleyan Methodists as well; and from that meeting dates the revival of holiness among the Wesleyan people in Illinois.

     Soon after this a Free Methodist society was organized in Aurora. Mr. Hackney became a member, and remained in the fellowship of the Aurora society, always aiding in the work by his fervent prayers, godly counsel, and liberal benefactions until his death. He subscribed $500 toward the erection of the Free Methodist Church building, which cost, together with the lot, something over $4,000; and in addition to the payment of this subscription he contributed more than $2,800 cash toward its total cost. He also built the parsonage, costing $1,311, at his own expense, and gave it to the society. Then in his will he provided that $5,000 should be given to the society as an endowment, the same to be invested, under direction of the trustees, on real estate worth double that amount, the income only to be used toward the support of such pastors as should be appointed to the charge by the Annual Conference. He likewise provided for leaving the Sunday-school $1,000 to be similarly invested, and the income to be used for books and other needed equipments; but as this was to come out of what remained of the estate after other provisions of the will, amounting to $50,000, were met, the funds appear to have fallen short, so that it was never realized by the school. It shows, however, that he was accustomed to devise liberal things.

     The Rev. J. W. Redfield was appointed pastor of the newly formed society, and it was during his labors in that capacity that he was stricken with paralysis, which finally terminated his earthly career.

     Mr. Hackney was a man of clear convictions, and of the courage which enabled him to avow them boldly and stand by them at any cost. His devotion to principle was well known, and could not be excelled. He was a man of calm and clear judgment, free from personal bias, and from everything that savored of rashness or inconsiderateness; but he would allow no influence of public opinion, popular favor, personal friendship, political relationship, or prospects of financial loss or gain to swerve him from his sense of right and convictions of duty.

     As an evidence of his sound judgment he was chosen to represent his district in the State Legislature, and did so with credit to himself and his constituency. He was also chosen to represent the Illinois Annual Conference at every session of the General Conference so long as he lived, which position he always filled with much dignity, and with extraordinary wisdom. He was one of the strongest pillars of Free Methodism among the laymen of his day.

     A chapter might be written regarding the beneficence and philanthropy of this good man; but suffice it to say that his faith in God and his devotion to the welfare of men amounted to a passion with him.

     At his death the city papers each published - an extended sketch of his life, one of them concluding thus:

     “And so has passed away another of the founders of our city—a man, in his youth, of iron constitution; a man of nerve and commanding will—well fitted to cope with the obstacles to civilization and empire. He has gone in the ripeness of his years, crowned with the respect of his fellow-citizens.” [3]

     The thoroughness of Dr. Redfield’s labors in Northern Illinois at length began to provoke opposition from superficial, false, and fashionable professors of religion. As is customary in such cases, this opposition first manifested itself among the ministry; and the first decided outbreak of it occurred at St. Charles, where certain changes had taken place since the Doctor first began his work there. Under his early labors there many were converted and sanctified. His preaching had stirred things to their profound depths, bringing to light some horrible hidden iniquities. Drunkenness, theft, adultery, and other gross iniquities were unearthed and confessed.

     During the next two years the Rev. Charles French served the charge as its pastor. He invited the Doctor at various times to return and assist him in revival work, but such was the attitude of certain prominent members with regard to helping on the thorough work he felt called to do, that Dr. Redfleld thought nothing could be accomplished, and so declined the invitations.

     Mr. French was followed by the Rev. S. G. Havermale. His spirit seemed to be such that it was thought by Mr. Redfield’s friends that the two could work together harmoniously. A large majority of the members finally signed a petition and presented it to the official board, asking that Doctor Redfield be invited to return to St. Charles and hold another meeting. A fair majority of the official board voted to grant the request. But such was the determined opposition of the minority, that the decision of the matter was finally left to the pastor. He decided not to invite him, and so notified him by mail.

     The Rev. D. C. Howard succeeded Mr. Havermale as pastor in 1859. Doctor Redfield had about concluded arrangements to go South, and as he was soon to leave, there was a great desire on the part of a large majority of the Church, and also on the part of the outside community, to hear him preach before he should leave. Accordingly Elisha Foote and J. M. Laughlin called on the pastor, and requested him to invite Doctor Redfield to preach. The pastor refused their request. Among his reasons for so doing, he said: “I have been sent here to guard this pulpit against Redfield and Coleman.” On being asked, “What have you against them?” he replied: “Nothing; I believe them both to be good men; and they are doing good; but they must be sacrificed for the good of the Church.”

     As the Baptist Church was without a pastor, one of Dr. Redfield’s friends suggested to them that they invite the Doctor to occupy their pulpit the following Sabbath. The invitation was given, and Dr. Redfield preached to a crowded house. Arrangements were then made for him to preach the next Sabbath. But during the week certain influences were at work which led the Baptists to cancel their part of the arrangement.

     The Universalists then offered their Church; and, as it was too late to withdraw the appointment, the offer was accepted, and the Doctor preached there. Of course, a good many of the Methodist people went to hear him. On Monday, Pastor Howard appointed a committee to see the leading members of his Church who had attended the Redfield meeting, and inform them that it would be necessary for them to confess that they had done wrong, and pledge themselves to do so no more, if they desired to retain their membership in the Church. If unwilling to make such acknowledgement and promise, they could have their choice between two courses. They could take letters in good standing from the Church; or, declining this, they would have to accept expulsion.

     These people did not feel that they had done any wrong to be confessed, nor did they wish to take letters of removal from the society. That day the pastor went away to counsel with one of the Bishops. It is supposed that he went to Evanston, to lay the matter before Bishop Simpson. On his return he reported having consulted a Bishop, who gave it as his opinion that the official board was competent to declare those members withdrawn who had been to hear Dr. Redfield preach. Acting upon this advice, on Wednesday evening, they declared fourteen persons withdrawn—”among them one who was not a member of the Church, and never had been, as the list of membership would have shown.” That was a woman named Monroe, who had been dead for many years. Five of the thirteen members were members of the board of trustees, of which there were but nine.

     Doctor Redfield preached, with freedom and power, on Monday and Tuesday evenings, and several souls were converted. But when he saw the trouble that was likely to ensue, he ceased his labors there, and the following week started on his contemplated journey to the South.

     Thursday evening found those “withdrawn” members in their usual places at the weekly prayer-meeting. They were not allowed, however, to participate in the exercises. at the close of the services they were formally “read out” of membership in the Methodist Episcopal Church. Following this, about fifty more asked for their Church letters, but instead of granting their request the pastor offered them letters of withdrawal, which they refused. Believing that in due time the wrong inflicted on them would be rectified, these good people soon rented the dining-room of an old hotel as a place of worship. Joseph G. Terrill, a local preacher from Elgin, visited them about this time. He was the boy converted in the revival held by his own mother in her kitchen. They invited him to become their preacher. He consented, and, under his labors, the revival broke out to which mention has already been made in this chapter.

     It was soon found necessary to form some kind of organization to care for the large number who had been converted. Accordingly a Band was formed, which adopted the General Rules of the Methodist Episcopal Church, with the exception of the rule on slavery. In the meantime the Methodist society had elected five new trustees to serve in place of those declared “withdrawn,” which was in plain violation of the statutes of Illinois, the statutes making no provision for declaring vacancies in such a manner. Besides these persons, among those declared “withdrawn” were old, tried and worthy members of the society, men who had been chiefly instrumental in building up the Church property.

     On the 27th of April, 1860, convinced that their grievances would find no redress from the General Conference, these persecuted “pilgrims” organized themselves into an independent Church, taking the name Free Methodist. At that time they numbered one hundred twelve. The five trustees “read out” of the Methodist Church as “withdrawn,” were elected trustees of the new Church at its incorporation. Their names were Elisha Foote, John M. Sangle, Ira D. Tyler, Warren Tyler, Ephraim Collar.

     A friend of the new society, who still belonged to the old Church, submitted the question regarding the method pursued in the expulsion of the “Redfieldites,” as they were contemptuously called, to the next session of the Rock River Conference. The Conference approved the administration of Mr. Howard, but declared against the pursuing of such a course in the future.

     Not far from Marengo lived the Bishop family, already referred to in this chapter. They numbered five—all members of the Methodist Church at a place called Franklinville. This place had been visited with a gracious revival in which many were both converted and sanctified. The work there continued to move on with power. Finally the Presiding Elder came out in plain terms and warned the people against the use of such dogmatic terms as sanctification, holiness and perfect love. Then the preacher in charge began to weaken, and finally took a decided stand against the distinctive work of holiness.

     When the time came for the Annual Conference to hold its session, Father Bishop and others went, and urgently petitioned for a change of preachers; “for,” said Father Bishop, “we will not pay Methodist preachers for fighting Methodist doctrine.” Their petition appears not to have been heeded; for after the adjournment of the session both the senior and junior preacher returned. This indicated that the war against “Redfieldism,” as the holiness movement was called in the West, was to be continued, in an effort to banish it from the Conference. So now the battle was set in array, and the conflict was renewed in good earnest.

     Father Bishop opened his house for a Monday night holiness meeting, to which the holiness people rallied in large numbers from Woodstock, Queen Ann Prairie, South Elgin, Crystal Lake and the intervening country. This meeting was kept in the hands of laymen; and, though the preacher in charge came, proposed to lead it, and finally declared he would remove it to the Church, all his plans to capture the meeting in the interest of the opposition miscarried. The work went steadily forward, and souls were converted and sanctified at nearly every service.

     The sequel to the story is told as follows by Bishop E. P. Hart, son-in-law of Father Bishop, and who was personally familiar with the circumstances:
 

     Living two miles east of Father Bishop was a family by the name of Best, and, as their name indicates, they were to be classed among the superlatively good. The family consisted of father, mother and four boys. The boys were young, but were being carefully taught and trained by the mother, who was a woman of superior intelligence as well as of superlative piety. Outside of this family the neighborhood was wild and reckless. There had been no preaching there for years, and many of the young people had never heard a Gospel sermon. The place later became favorably known as “The Brick Schoolhouse.” I. H. Fairchilds, the local preacher spoken of before, sent an appointment to this schoolhouse and a series of meetings was held. Many of the holiness people attended, among them the Bishop family, and as a result of the meetings floods of mercy broke on the community and fifty or more were saved. If I remember aright a Methodist Episcopal class of forty was organized on an adjoining circuit as a fruit of this meeting. * * * A good work was going on, and for a few Sabbaths Father Bishop and family felt they ought to attend meetings at the schoolhouse and did so. This served for a pretext, and they were soon cited to trial for not attending public worship and class at Franklinville Church where they belonged. There were persons whose names were on that Church book who had attended neither public worship nor class for years, and some of whom were avowed Mormons, and others who gloried in being Universalists; but they were not troublers in Israel. -

     The day for the trial arrived and these people who were stanch Methodists, and who had come from Methodist stock a century old, appeared at the Church. But they had hundreds of sympathizers, for they were well and favorably known throughout all that region. So on the day of the trial, to the dismay of the preacher, the Church was filled. Finally the preacher came in and informed the accused that he had concluded to have a private trial and to hold It in the parsonage across the street. Father Bishop, who knew something of Methodist law, quoted Baker on the Discipline and said, “A trial should be private only at the request of the accused, and we demand a public trial; for,” said he, “if we have done anything worthy of bonds or of death, we refuse not to be bound or to die.” But the preacher took his committee and went over to the parsonage to go on with the trial, and the saints went on with a love-feast. As one after the other their heads went off, ecclesiastically, the preacher would come into the Church and announce the fact.

     William, the eldest son, in preparation for the ministry, had been attending the theological school at Evanston. When he went he took a Church letter, but concluded not to put it in at Evanston, so on his return home had it with him. When the preacher declared him expelled, William said, “Brother W., you can’t expel me: I hold a letter.” “Let me see it,” said the preacher. William feeling a little suspicious, held up the letter, when the preacher, as if to get a better look at it reached up, and, taking hold of the corner where his own name was signed, with a sudden jerk tore his name from the certificate. At this a young woman by the name of Sponable, with a piercing shriek, fell in a burden at the feet of the preacher. It was getting uncomfortably warm for the pastor, and he started for the door; but a stalwart saint stood against the door and refused to let him out He then rushed into the pulpit and with loud and earnest protestation, declared he did not tear the letter. The saints looked on him with pity and prayed the Lord to have mercy on him.
 

     A copy of the original bill of charges against W. P. Bishop, and also of the Church letter from which the preacher in charge who gave it tore off his name and then denied doing so, is herewith subjoined. First, the bill of charges:
 

     “William D. Bishop: You are hereby charged with neglect of duty and disobedience to the order and Discipline of the Church,

“1. Specification. In neglecting the public worship of God at the Franklinville Church where you belong.

“2. Specification. In neglecting to meet your class.

“FEANKLINVILLE, March 20, 1860.

A. C. Coquillett, C. L.”

     “Bro. Wm. D. Bishop, you are notified hereby to appear at the Church in this place next Friday at 2 o’clock P. M. for trial on the above.

L. WHIPPLE, Pr. in Charge.

“FRANKLINVILLE, March 20, 1860.”

     The following is the Church letter:

     “The bearer, W. D. Bishop, has been an acceptable member of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Crystal Lake charge, Rock River Conference.

“FRANKLVILLE, Aug. 20, 18

L. W

“P. S.:
     “Bro. Bishop has license to exho

     The author of these pages copied the foregoing documents from the original papers, which were loaned him for the purpose by W. P. Bishop’s brother, Dr. M. F. Bishop. The preacher who gave the foregoing letter was L. Whipple, whose name is signed to the citation to trial on the bill of charges. In attempting to tear off his signature from the Church letter, he succeeded in tearing off all but the initials, “L. W” These, with the handwriting, which is the same as that of the citation on the bill of charges, which is signed by “L. Whipple, Pr. in charge,” is evidence as to who gave the letter, and at the time of -this writing there are a number of living witnesses to the fact that they saw him tear his name from the letter in question. If this matter appears to any as of trifling significance, let it be remembered that the case is cited here as illustrative of the spirit and methods employed against Methodists of that time in Northern Illinois who manifested sympathy with the reform movement sneeringly termed “Redfieldism.”

     Having been most unrighteously excluded from the Methodist Episcopal Church, to which they had long been devoted, the Bishops were at a stand for a season as to what course to pursue. Finally Father Bishop drew up articles of association to which they and many of those who sympathized with them, subscribed, thus forming themselves into an Earnest Christian Band.

     The foregoing instances are samples of the general spirit of opposition to spiritual religion prevailing at that time in the West as well as in the East. They are also illustrations of the unjust and cruel methods by which it was sought to rid the Methodist Church in Illinois of “Redfieldism,” which was a synonym for the work of holiness in the West, as “Nazaritism” was in the East. Great blessing had uniformly attended Pr. Redifeld’s labors in the West, hundreds having been clearly converted (as many as five hundred in a single meeting), and also hundreds having received the sanctifying baptism with the Holy Spirit. The Churches had been greatly quickened, and a loftier standard of righteousness had been lifted up for the people generally. “Could the Methodist Church have been persuaded to take care of the work,” wrote Dr. Redfield in a private letter to a friend, “rather than to contend against it, it might have spread farther, and a more glorious harvest have been reaped.” They failed to recognize their opportunity, however, failed to know their day of gracious visitation, and so the spiritual harvest that might have been for their enrichment was allowed to be gathered by others, though not without great sacrifice, and experiences of much anguish.

[1] “History of St. Charles Camp-meeting,” pp. 5, 6.
[2] “Reminiscences of Early Free Methodism,” p. 9.
[3] The information in the foregoing was gleaned from an article by the Rev. J. G. Terrill in the Free Methodist of July 27, 1871, and an editorial of the Rev. B. T. Roberts in the Earnest Christian of 1871.