Had Dr. Ryerson "yielded to the dictation of Sir
George Arthur's government, and the interference of the London
Missionary Committee, one-seventh of the land of the Province might now
be in the hands of the Church of England. But the course of the
_Guardian_ in this matter, however right, brought upon [the Canadian
Methodist Church] calamities and sufferings of seven years'
continuance."

About a month before the Conference of 1839 met, Sir George Arthur
received a reply, by the hands of Dr. Alder, from the Missionary
Committee in London (signed by Dr. Bunting and the other Secretaries),
which he published in the _Patriot_ newspaper. Dr. Ryerson inserted the
letter in the _Guardian_ of the 22nd May, with these remarks:--

We copy from the _Patriot_ a letter, addressed by the Wesleyan
Missionary Secretaries in London to Sir George Arthur, disclaiming
"all participation in the views expressed in the _Guardian_ on the
ecclesiastical questions of this Province."

He then goes on to show that the views expressed in the _Guardian_ were
identical with those embodied in the proceedings of the Wesleyan
Conference in Upper Canada from the beginning, and that they were
explicitly avowed and understood by both parties at the time of the
union of the Conferences in 1833.

The object of the publication of the letter was evidently twofold: 1st.
To put a weapon into the hands of the friends of a dominant church in
Upper Canada. 2nd. To paralyze the efforts of Dr. Ryerson to secure
equal rights for all religious bodies, and thus to weaken his powerful
influence as a champion of those rights.

It was a noticeable fact that all of the disclaimers from the British
party first appeared in the Church of England organs, and were there
triumphantly appealed to as the unbiassed expression of Methodist
opinion from headquarters in England. In supplementing Rev. John
Ryerson's Historical Narrative of events at this period, Dr. Ryerson
stated, in substance, that:--

It was soon found that Sir George Arthur had thrown himself into
the hands of the oligarchy on the question of the clergy
reserves--he would not consent to have them applied to any other
purpose than the support of the clergy, and was anxious to have
them revested in the Crown. When Sir George's views and plans were
brought before the Legislature, I opposed them. The Missionary
Committee interposed (at Sir George's own requ