ARTICLE SIGNED "CANDIDUS."
[Boston Gazette, July 1, 1771.]
MESSIEURS EDES & GILL,
The Layman, who again appeared in Mr. Draper's last Thursday's Gazette, is sollicitous to know why Candidus "pitched upon the specific Number seventeen, as present at the late Convention of the Clergy, and voting for an Address to his Excellency the Governor; and further, he asks, Whether "it was not purposely done to throw an undeserved Reproach on that reverend Body." - I will endeavour to answer the Layman in a Manner not "militating," as he charges me with having done before, "with my assumed denomination." - I mentioned that "specific number," because I was told by several reverend Gentlemen who were present at the Convention, that the Address was bro't on early, when only twenty-four had got together; and that of this number, seventeen only voted in favor of it. I own I thought it unlucky, that the precise Number seventeen should appear to countenance the Address, because I agree with the Layman that it has of late become an "obnoxious Number." I have Reason to think I was truly informed; if it was a misrepresentation, the Reverend Doctor who presided at the Meeting, may set us right, if he thinks it worth his While. I am still of Opinion, that is immaterial to my Purpose, whether twenty-four or thirty Gentlemen were present, when the Address was carried through; either of those numbers being very inconsiderable, when compared with the whole Number of Congregational Ministers in the Province, which is said to be at least four Hundred. Allowing that the Number, after the Address had passed, was augmented to Sixty, and that Fifty of them were against reconsidering the Matter, it is not certainly to be inferred from thence, that all those Fifty would have voted for an Address, if they had been present when it was first proposed. But however that might be, the Propriety (to say the least) of calling it, An Address of the Congregational Ministers of the Province, when not more than about One in Seven of them were present, or in any Likelihood ever had heard that any Address was intended, yet remains a Question: And I again say, I should be glad to see it reconciled with that Simplicity and Godly Sincerity which we often hear inculcated from the Pulpit. - The Layman supposes, that it is with the Convention as "with other Corporate Bodies, convened at stated Time and Place " - Now other corporate Bodies are notified of the Matters to be transacted at Time & Place; but no Notice was given to "the Congregational Ministers of the Province" that an Address to his Excellency the Governor was to be proposed; and as this is said to be the first Instance of an
Address to a Governor ever made by the Convention, it is not likely that seven-eighths of them, who were absent, ever had it in contemplation. But after all, I would ask, "with Modesty, Decency, and Charity," and with Humility too, all which I take to be excellent Christian Graces, as well as Sincerity; by what Authority is the Convention of the Clergy, as it is called, constituted "a corporate Body"? I am nevertheless, with all due Respect to the Ministers of the Congregational Churches,
Your's,
CANDIDUS.
P.S. Perhaps an Address of Thanks from the Convention of the Reverend & very venerable Dr. Chauncy, for his excellent Defence of their ecclesiastic Constitution, at a Time when they stood in need of so able a Defender, may be judg'd by some to be rather more in Character than a political Address to the Man in Power C.
Postscript the 2d. I am inform'd that it was first propos'd to address his Excellency at Cambridge, after Dinner on the Day of Election, and that the Reason assign'd for it was, because it had been unjustly asserted that his had stood Sponsor at a Christening - The Truth of which Assertion, however, it is also said, might have been made evident by enquiring of a worthy Clergyman of the Church of England in that Town, C.