REASON taught the old Romans, the injustice of condemning any man before he had his accusers face to face, with licence to answer for himself; and revelation saith to Christians, In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. 2. COR. xiii. 1. And upon personal offences, our Lord requires us to give each brother two opportunities to speak for himself, before he is arraigned before the church; and then says, If he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen Man and a Publican. And he assures us that none have a right to be in his church, who are not be­come as little children. MAT. xviii. 3, 15, 18. And what holiness would soon prevail in his church, if his laws were obeyed therein! Lordship is of the Gentiles; and by them hath the Holy City, been long troden under foot. MARK x. 15, 42. REV. xi. 2. The church hath been labouring, like a traveling woman, for de­liverance from Antichristian Tyranny; and this labour hath now come to a point among our churches, as the following facts will shew.

THE Warren association was formed as a friendly conference, without claiming any jurisdiction over the churches. In September, 1772, they elected me their Agent, to use my best endeavours, by the advice of their committee, to obtain the establishment of equal [Page 4]religious liberty in this country: And for that end we published these five reasons, in 1773, against comply­ing any longer with the certificate laws of the ruling party in New-England, 1st. Because it implies an ac­knowledgment, that civil rulers have a right to set one religious sect above another, which they have not. 2d. Because they are not our representatives in religious affairs, and therefore have no right to impose religious taxes. 3d. Because their doing it emboldens the ruling party, to assume God's prerogative, so as to judge the hearts of all who put not into their mouths. 4th. Be­cause the church is presented as a chaste virgin to Christ; and the placeing of her trust and love upon any others for temporal support, is playing the harlot, and so the way to destroy all religion. HOSEA ii. 5. 5th. Because this practice tends to promote envy, hypocrisy, and confusion, and so to the ruin of civil society,^* But Mr. Ebenezer Hinds disliked our drop­ping that practice; and he was so much offended with the language of our memorial against it, to our legisla­ture in 1775, that he did not attend our association again in seven years. He wrote to them in 1779, to reprove them for continuing me as their Agent: To which they returned a respectful answer. He wrote again in like manner, in 1780, when they made him no reply. In September 1781, Moses Thomas went to the association with a complaint against elder Hunt's church, because they had excommunicated him the winter before. This the association took so much notice of, as to publish a Note in their Minutes, that they claimed no jurisdiction in points of discipline; but recommended it to neighbouring churches, that if they were properly applied to, they would afford such assis­tance as was in their power. Thus matters lay for above eight months, and then three churches were ap­plied to, for assistance in council upon his case, on June [Page 5]11, 1782; the time when I was obliged, by an ap­pointment in said Minutes, to be in the county of Albany.

OUR church sent deacon Alden, and two more delegates to that council; and elder Hunt's church chose a committee to attend upon them, and to give them what light they could in the affair: Each of the committee were nominated, and then were chosen by the church, by lifting up of hands; until elder Hunt was nominated and seconded, without any objection, and he concluded it sufficient, without putting his own choice to a formal vote. Yet because that formality was omitted, elder Hinds was so earnest to prevent his having liberty to speak before the council, that he ac­cused him of injuring the truth, for saying he was one of that committee. However, two thirds of the coun­cil obtained satisfaction that said excommunication was just. But Hinds was so uneasy about it, that he car­ried a long paper of accusations against Hunt to your church; and Alden brought another to ours; but I refused to read it to our church. In September 1782, elder Hinds went again to our association, to whom another complaint was carried from Moses Thomas, but the moderator did not think proper to read it pub­lickly. Hinds continued so uneasy with Hunt, as to write a letter to the association against him, in Septem­ber 1783; but it was not read to them. After which I procured a meeting at Ebenezer Nelson's; on January 13, 1784, when Hunt gave Hinds such satisfaction up­on all the points that he complained of, that the con­troversy seemed to be settled betwixt them; until in the evening Hinds again brought up his accusation against Hunt, of his injuring the truth, in saying he was of that committee. Upon which I arose, and said, ‘I solemnly warn you against going on in this way, you will ruin yourself.’ In March following, he came to my house, and told me, he would not take the warning at my hands. On April 26, I wrote to him, and reminded him of the divine rules in MAT. xviii. 4. [Page 6]LUKE xxii. 26, and then said, ‘It appeared to my conscience, that you indulged a severity towards brother Hunt, that you would not receive as right towards you, from any man in the world.’ To this he wrote an answer on May 1, wherein, after trying to justify his severity, he said, ‘Pray my good friend; don't let that or any other man separate us, as MARK did greater and better men than we.’ To this I re­plied on May 31, and said, "I am very certain that our chief danger does not lie in that place. It is ex­actly here, You have from time to time laid com­plaints before me against your brethren, for which you have broken fellowship with them, and, in the case in hand, with an elder, so as to refuse to hear him preach, without ever allowing me a hearing thereof in a gos­pel way." This he denied, and wrote to our church for a hearing upon it; and they granted it, on August 11, 1784. But then he refused to state or support any charge against me, and insisted upon my proving the truth of what I had writen, nine miles from my wit­nesses. This appeared so unreasonable, that our church dismissed the case, to be settled betwixt ourselves, and Hinds went off; upon which deacon Alden arose, and railed at our church, at a high rate, and his holding with Hinds in that line of conduct hath moved him to forsake our meeting for above three years past.

Elder Hinds made three attempts more to croud that case into our church, without letting me know what it was that he denied in my letter; but not being able to do it, he was forced to grant me a hearing in your church, April 29, 1785; when he owned that he had from time to time informed me of actions that he was offended with in his brethren, and who were cen­sured therefor; but he said my words meant that he had done it before they were censured, and that his doing it was the cause of their censure; a meaning which I never thought of till that day. On May 4, 1785, I wrote a plain state of these facts to your church, and then said, "the main support of Antichrist, from his first [Page 7]rise to this day, has been by teachers accounting them­selves so much greater than the churches, as to unite all their influence against dissenters from their judgments, and then calling in the [...]ular arm to support them, and to enforce all their measures." And I informed you, that as elder Hinds had openly broken fellow­ship with me, you must not expect that I should join with him again, until he explicitly renounced those evils. This he hath never done; but in general terms he deni­ed that he held them, before our mutual council of Nov. 16, 178 [...], and then denied the truth of facts, in four particulars, without giving a fair opportunity for supporting them by evidence, by which means the council said in their result, that the crimes I had charged him with were not sufficiently proved to them. At the same time they fully justified the result of the council of March 15, 1785, in their condemning your censure upon brother Samuel Nelson and others, because they did not allow that Hinds's confession was equal to the offences that he was judged to be guilty of by your mutual council of Sept. 28, 1784. On May 24. 1786, I wrote to elder Hinds, and stated plainly the four points wherein he denied the truth, before the council of Nov. 16, 17 [...]5, without giving fair opportunity to prove them, and desired that these things might be settled in a gospel way. This he hath not answered; but he hath since been guilty of the followlng evils.

First, He published a pamphlet last summer, called A History of [...], wherein are sundry things, concern­ing our former separation from the ruling sect in New-England, which are directly contrary to fact.

Secondly, In your church meeting October 8, 1784 he declared that he was sorry he had reported so many that [...], and promised not to do so [...] pamphlet he hath violated that promise to a high degree.

[Page 8] Thirdly, Though he readily went to the council cal­led by an excommunicated man, June 11, 1782, and tried to debar elder Hunt from the privilege of answer­ing for himself, after which he brought and read accusa­tions against him to your [...] in his absence; yet Hinds hath now accused me of being worse than the heathen, only because I went to the council of June 15, 1784, called by seven of your aggrieved brethren, and heard some complaints against Hinds in his absence, and then adjourned to give him opportunity for ans­wering thereto. p. 8, 9.

Fourthly, In said pamphlet he hath plainly manifested the same temper that he had, when he refused to come to the council of March 15, 1785, at their earnest re­quest, to give them what light he could in cases that were to be laid before them; and now he hath accused them with lying, without so much as subscribing his name to the accusation. p. 11, 12.

Fifthly, Though our church requested a free confer­ence with yours upon the affairs between us, on the 11th. instant, to give and receive light as God should direct, and received a promise of that privilege; yet when we came to the meeting, and I attempted to give the rea­sons why I could not retract those former charges that I had laid against elder Hinds, he, and a party with him, positively refused to grant me that liberty; I there­fore appeal to all your consciences, whether he ought not to be excluded from your communion until he offers gospel satisfaction for the foregoing offences to others, as well as to your injured brother.