CORRESPONDENCE.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 5, 12 October 1871, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

[llk do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our Correspondents. Name and address of the writer must appear on the copy to ensure publication:] To the Editor of the Thames Guardian. Sib, —Several letters have appeared in 1 your columns on the concert projected for I the benefit of the Anglican and Wesleyan j Church Building Funds, but abandoned. Each of your correspondents seems under | some misapprehension, which I sbou'd be glad to remove. The facts briefly sia'ed are these : —Our f-iends of the Church of England wished io repeat a concert in beha'f of their bu ; ld'ng fund, but their committee could engage no building suitable in size and position except the Tbeaire Boy a', Tip's, however was larger and more expensive I B’aii they cared io venture oil alone. They j there fore invited the alliance of }he We - i 1 cyans on equal terms. The offer, as j s ated in 1 he advertisement, was conl'aHy accep t'd by the pevon to whom it w made, on the supposition that the We:.Icyans generally wou'd take the ma ter up hear dy and do their share in* making it a success. But preliminaries had scarcely been arranged when it beeame manifest i'. at, t j.’gh the Wesleyans general l )’ were sensible of the friend.' iucss

and liberality of the offer and of the pecuniary advantage that might result from it, they did not so approve of all parts of the scheme as to encourage the hope of their earnest support. The Wesleyan representatives on the committee, therefore, felt themselves in honour bound to acquaint the secetaiy with the conclusion at which they had unwittingly arrived, so as to give their Church of England friends the opportunity of retreating from what wouhl be a very disadvantageous position for themselves.

The cotnmiilee accordingly met, and by general agreement the joint concert was abandoned, pfou will; see then that the Wesleyan representatives took the course they did, not because they hesitated to receive a share of the proceeds of an entertainment such as that proposed, but only because they could not see their way clear to render that practical aid which was part of the bargain. I regret that any one should attribute to us the ridiculous selP-i igbieousness described by one of your correspondents. I Irust that this affair, although a failuie, will not at ah result in discouraging friendly intercourse between two chinches so nearly related. —I am, &c., One of the Wesleyan Committee-men. ♦