Extract from the confession of William Clark, of Ipswich.
“Having been called by Providence to Colchester, I went to hear John Church preach in a barn, was invited to Mr. Abbot’s; was prevailed upon to sleep with John Church; I did sleep with him three nights; after being enticed to many imprudencies, I was under the necessity to resist certain attempts, which, if I had complied with, I am fearful must have ruined both soul and body: the crime is too horrid to relate.
Wm. Clark.
Richard Patmore, J. Ellisdon, C. Wire, H. T. Wire. Witnesses.
P.S. This took place in March last, 1812.”
The peace of this poor lad’s mind is completely destroyed, so fatally has the event preyed upon him;—so far as to fill the bosom of his aged father with such a spirit of indignation and revenge, that he actually came up to London with a full determination to be the death of him who had thus ruined the peace of his beloved son, while the mother’s mind was not less distracted than that of the father’s. In consequence of this, the father entered John Church’s meeting-house, with two loaded pistols, one in each pocket; but, under the excess of agitation, he fainted away, and was carried out of the place.
The following will cast some light on the preceding:—
“Colchester, September 16, 1812.
“Sir,
“Last evening I had an interview with Clark’s father, who wishes him to comply with your wishes. I mentioned to him respecting Church’s conduct, and I find the last night to be the worst. Likewise that he would have committed the act had not Clark prevented him. The particulars I told you when in London, but find them worse than what I described to you. They are not able to be at any expense; but if the gentlemen wish to prosecute, and to pay Clark’s expenses up to London, &c. he will have no objection to come when you please to send. I need only say I wish you to inform the gentlemen, and give me a line.
I am, dear Sir, your’s, &c.
C. Wire.”
In addition to the above testimonies, a very long narrative of atrocities committed by John Church; while he resided at Banbury, has been written by a minister at that place; but the facts are too disgusting and shocking to be published.
In the month of April, 1813, a Mr. Webster, who was employed in the house of Messrs. Evans and Co. eminent Hop Merchants, in the Borough, having, this being the time the first public exposure of Church’s character took place, asserted his readiness to prove Church’s infamy, was immediately seized upon by a fellow of the name of Holmes, and another creature of the name of Shaw, a sort of attorney in St. George’s Fields, who had been employed by Church, and dragged to a lock-up-house in the Borough, on a charge of riot, of which the following account appeared in the Morning Chronicle.
Riots at the Obelisk.—Tuesday, a Mr. Webster, who is employed in the house of Messrs. Evans and Co. eminent Hop-Merchants, in the Borough, was charged at Union-Hall, by a person of the name of Shaw, with committing a riot and a breach of the peace, on Sunday morning, at the Obelisk, in St. George’s Fields, near the entrance of a chapel belonging to a preacher named John Church. The magistrate said, that as Mr. Birnie, who had, on a former day, heard another case similar to this, was absent, they wished the case might be deferred until next day, and desired Mr. Webster to attend accordingly. The prosecutor observed, that it would be dangerous to allow Mr. Webster to be at large, and desired that he might be kept in custody or held to bail. The magistrate asked if there was any person present ready to be bail for his appearance. Mr. Robert Bell, the Editor of the Weekly Despatch, who accompanied Mr. Webster as his friend, a housekeeper, in Lambeth, said he was ready to bail him. The prosecutor then said, he had also a very serious complaint to make against Mr. Bell, for the article which he published in his last Sunday’s newspaper, respecting Mr. Church, and he had one of the papers in his hand. Mr. Bell told the Magistrates that he was ready to meet any complaint of this kind, that he conceived it to be his duty, as one of the guardians of public liberty, and public morals, to send forth the statement in question; that he could prove the truth of every thing he had written and published. The worthy magistrate then asked Mr. Webster if he would promise, on his honour, to attend next day, which Mr. Webster assured him he would do, and retired. It is necessary to mention that Mr. Webster had been kept in a state of imprisonment during the greater part of Sunday, and all Sunday night.
April 7, 1813, Mr. Webster having appeared again before the magistrates, disclosed, in the course of the examination, the fact of Church having, some years since, made an attempt of an abominable nature, on the person of his younger brother, the magistrate, struck with horror, immediately stopt all proceedings against Mr. Webster, and desired his brother to be brought forward. The office was cleared of all persons, except the parties immediately concerned; the brother’s deposition was taken, and a warrant was issued for Church to appear there the next day.
On Wednesday, J. Church appeared, in consequence of the warrant issued the day before for his apprehension on a charge of abominable practices, attended by a number of his deluded followers. Mr. W. Webster having deposed as to his attempts on him, Church was ordered to find bail for his appearance at the next Middlesex Sessions, and Mr. Webster bound over to prosecute. The magistrate observed that from the length of time which had elapsed since the offence had been committed, he thought a jury would not feel justified in finding him guilty. Mr. Johnston, a young gentleman of the law, who attended for Mr. Webster, replied, that it was not the time for them to discuss what was likely to be the verdict of a jury;—that he had recommended Mr. Webster to prefer an indictment against Church, and Mr. Webster had come to that resolution; and whatever might be the result of the trial, the evidence relating to the conduct of Church would be of that disgusting nature as to stamp his name with eternal infamy and disgrace. Church’s attorney observed that it was a conspiracy amongst another sect to ruin Mr. Church’s character. This Mr. Johnson denied and said that it was merely a desire to bring him to merited punishment. Mr. Johnston also said that if Mr. Church acted like a man of prudence, and consulted his own interest, he would desist from preaching until the indictment had been tried, as it would be the means of preventing a breach of the peace, but this he declined; and Shaw; his attorney, said they should follow their own advice. Mr. Johnston informed Church’s attorney that it was Mr. Webster’s intention to indict, or bring an action against him for an assault and false imprisonment.