ssurances. The co-delegate,
Rev. J. Ryerson, also said that--

He never thought of pledging Dr. Ryerson to silence on any of these
questions, and he was sure the Conference would not ask him to do
so, as the Conference never gagged any man.

The _Independent_ then proceeds:--

Dr. Ryerson has been most unfairly treated. He has not denied
having made application for re-admission, but only an application
with pledges of silence. The resolutions of Conference, in 1854,
accepting his resignation and warmly acknowledging his past
services, and, in 1855, consenting to his re-admission, were never
communicated to him, and were suppressed by the _Guardian_. This
was most unmanly and unjust.[145] The matter now before the
Conference was introduced at the Toronto District Meeting in his
absence, and without notice being given him.[146]

He uttered some memorable things in his eloquent defence.

I believe the true foundation or test of membership in the Church
of Christ is not the acute angle of a Class-meeting attendance, but
the broad bases of repentance, faith, and holiness. I can have no
sympathy with that narrow and exclusive spirit, the breadth of
whose catholicity is that of a goat's track, and the dimensions of
whose charity are those of a needle's point, whether inculcated by
the Editor of _The Church_ on the one hand, or by the Editor of the
_Guardian_ on the other. He would give no pledges, had no
concessions or promises to make; would be accountable to the rules
of the Church as others, and would stand in that Conference on the
same footing as other members, or not at all. While he subscribed
to all that had been said as to the utility of Class-meetings, and
reiterated the grounds on which he had recommended and maintained
them; yet, on the ground of Scripture obligation he demurred, and
averred, in the language of Mr. Wesley, with whom they originated
and who best knew their true position in the Church, that they are
merely prudential, not essential, not of Divine institution.

The Editor of the _Independent_, in conclusion, said:--

We congratulate Dr. Ryerson on his successful defence.... We should
esteem it a dire calamity, could any dishonour be attached to his
name. He is one of the most devoted, conscientious, able and
successful officers