No Account yet of the $20,000 at Dawn.
Mr Editor:ー
Please give meNewman, William P.

place to make my defence. "I am no pugilist," though heaven says, "defend thyself;" hence, I am for the physical destruction of fiendish manstealers, and the influential death of public robbersーespecially those who clothe themselves in priestly habiliments, that they may the more effectually carry out their mendacity, in the name of the poor; and perfectly succeed in plundering the ignorant. I notice in the North Star of Jan. 19th, a letter from Rev. Hiram Wilson, in which he makes a personal attack upon me and my characterーinstead of anwering my inquiries, put to him in Christian kindness and for his own good.ーThe public has the right to demand of Mr. Wilson an answer to the interrogations referred to, from the fact, that he stood at the head of the missionary operations in Canada, and the public charities were, as a general thing, committeed to him for the benefit of the distressed there.
The Christian donors should and will hold him responsible for a faithful applcation of, and an accounting for them. If he fails to do these, he cannot escape a righteous public distrust and indignation. The logic of Mr. Wilson's letter may do for his pupils at Dawn, but never for their friends abroad. The letter is unfair, unkind, and unchristian in its purport; and had I a will for my pen, I would make its author regret that he ever wrote it. I am indisposed to exhibit the uncomely port of my brethren, and am truly sorry that Mr. Wilson has compelled me to write and publish what I am now doing. All know, who have ever heard me speak of Mr. Wilson, that I have done it in terms of kindness and confidence, while, at the same time, I have frankly expressed my dissent from his general modus operandi or plan. But "with all his faults, I love him still." I hope his heart is right, though his head is undoubtedly wrong.ーWould to heaven, that the Christian's head and heart, though distinct as the trinity, were one in its love!
My review of the letter shall be as laconic as possible. But read it through patiently, if you desire to know the truth. 1. Mr. Wilson accuses me of being "Much excited." This I positively deny. Read my letter and see. Being so himself, he judged I was too.ー2. He says he has "no compunctions of conscience about the said letter." If he has not, he ought to have, from the fact that the letter is not true, as we shall see. I think in it he speaks of himself as an itinerant preacher, and missionary, &c. Now, HE KNOWS that he has not preached in five different colored congregations in Canada, aside from Dawn, for as many years. Does he deny it? 3. He says his letter was "unoffending, which infringed upon no one," This, too, he knows to be untrue. Will he deny that it was an attempted refutation of an extract from my Journal, published in the Christian Contributor of Aug. 23d, 1848? Had it not been for this fact, I should have taken no notice of the letter. He talked to me about the extract, and expressed his sorrow at its publication. Did not the Executive Committee of the Dawn operation goad Mr. Wilson to the writing of that letter? 4. He seems surprised, and cannot understand how his letter should suggest the resolutions to me. This, he says, "I am unable to see." An unwillingness to see, will check the operation of the laws of suggestion. Everybody knows that it is one of the most natural things possible, for ONE untruthful document to suggest another; and especially when they both emanate from the same source, and one of them got up from malice, and the other to cover up iniquityーone advocated by the Dawn mendicants, passed for public service by the perjured spoil-seekers of the people's donations, and a few good but led-astray men, and published by a man who has treated me as Judas did the Saviourーthe other drawn up as a bank, to stop the current that was about to wash away the gold dust from the Canadian missionary streams;ーboth of which are as black as the smoke of the pit, and as false as the records of the infernal regions. 5. He charges me with having "some private antipathy," This is also untrue, if it means malice or hatred.ーHeaven is my witness this day, that I have no malice or hatred in my bosom against any creature of Godーno, not even against Satan himself. This statement is made, like many other of Mr. Wilson's, without knowledge; and I hope he will take it back for his own credit's sake. He cannot know my soul better than I do myself. Are we to understand him as saying, "I am God?" 6. Mr. Hill may be all and even more than Mr. Wilson says he is; but certainly his being at Oberlin is no proof of it, nor is his being in a high place there, as everybody knows who is acquainted with its history. I hope Mr. Hill's heart is better than his head. I leave him in the hands of a holy and a just God, and shall continue to pray for him as I do for Mr. Wilson and all my enemies. I truly trust that I shall have some better evidence of Mr. Hill's friendship than I have had, as I belong to the oppressed ones of whom Mr. Wilson speaks. I am disposed to adopt only the views of my beloved and devoted friend, Prof. George Whipple, who wrote me not long since on the subject, and who saysー"I think Br. Hill erred in publishing the resolutions, but I believe he did what he thought the cause of truth and justice to Mr. Wilson demanded." Mr. Hill either knew or supposed there was something wrong about the resolutions, or he would not have withheld from the public the names of the Chairman and Secretary of the Conference. This I believe; and does Mr. Hill deny it? 7. Mr. Wilson says, "In all fairness, Mr. Newman should have introduced the resolutions to which he alludes, or said nothing about them." Every child ten years old, and almost every fool knows better. The logic of this is, if a man, in writing for a newspaper, is reminded of something that happened in the city of London, and he mentions the fact, then he must, "in all fairness," paint the city of London for the pages of the paper, or say nothing about it. Such nonsense is unworthy a man of education. I am not at all sorry that Mr. Wilson introduced the resolutions and their source. He is truly welcome to all the pleasure arising from the supposed injury their publication does me. It is very doubtful whether they emanated, as it is said, from the Conference. There is good reason to believe that they were written out of, and sent or brought to it, and by one, too, who is not a member of it. Does Mr. Wilson deny this? Let him say so. I confess I feel myself honored by the misrepresentations of abuse of any conference, called by the name of that great and good man, John Wesley, that is so degenerated as to have a known blasphemer and cut-throat minister to preside over it. It should have been said, that the resolutions were signed FOR, and not BY the Chairman of the Conference. They were, I believe, drawn up and passed more from hatred to me than love to Mr. Wilson.ーDon't he believe it too? Will he deny it?ー8. Before I examine the preamble and resolutions, permit me to say, that I am a close communion Baptist preacher, and quite popular, as such, among my Methodist brethren in Canada, (I shall be pardoned for this seeming self-praise; I state the fact because it seems necessary,) both Episcopals and Wesleyans. For this, I was hated; and the more so, from the fact that some of the Wesleyan members would not hear some of their own ministers preach— some who are big ones in the Conference too, but would come and hear me. Do they deny it? Let them say so.ー9. The Sydenham Wesleyan preachersーthe institution dronesーthe money-mongers, were desirous of rendering me, if possible, unworthy of public confidence, because they feared (what is now coming to pass) a revelation of the darkness of Dawn, and thus shield themselves from public suspicion and odium. 10. As it respects the public meeting and statements at Oberlin, it seems it is uncertain what I said. I believe I said that Rev. Hiram Wilson did not preach in the colored churches in Canada. And (1) because he did not at that time. (2.) He knew that the colored people there did not want to hear him.ー(3.) He was, and is still, almost universally disliked by the colored people. Does he deny it? (4.) I intended so to say, if I did not. ー (5.) W. H. Day, Esq., who was Secretary of the meeting, tells me that the language used by me was, that "Rev. Hiram Wilson did not preach among the colored people in Canada, because he knew that they did not want to hear him." (Mr. Day will correct me if I have misstated it, for I write from memory.) Mr. Hill takes the affirmative of this question, and he is bound to prove it true, or his testimony is not to be taken. But to the statement of Mr. Hill. This letter, as read in the Conference, says, "at which meeting the said Wm. P. Newman stated that Rev. Hiram Wilson could not preach in any colored church in Canada." But the Conference says, in the first resolution, he "was not allowed to preach," &c. Is there no difference between could not and not allowed to? Thus the Conference is guilty of falsehood, by affirming that I said what I never did say, and even what Mr. Hill admits I did not say. Is it worthy of confidence? ー It is also said, "after the reading of the letter" (Mr. Hill's) in the Conference, it "was asked whether any of the seventeen delegates knew of a disposition existing in ANY of the churches where they travelled to close their doors against Rev. Hiram Wilson, or prohibition from preaching in any of their places of worship." Mark! "Every delegate stated, without hesitation, that no such feeling or spirit existed in their neighborhood." This I affirm is base falsehood, in proof of which, I give the testimony of Dea. George Johnson, and Rev. henry Cooper, of Dawn. Permit me to remark here, that Dea. George Johnson is one of the trustees of the Dawn school, and is regarded by all who know him (and they are not a few) as a Christian gentleman, and one of the first gentleman of color in Canada, and Rev. Henry Cooper is now the Pastor of the True Wesleyan Church at Dawn. Geo. Johnson says, "I will take oath at any time or place, that Mr. Robert Jackson, of the Queen's Bush, C. W., a member of the Wesleyan Conference, did oppose the passage of those resolutions by the Wesleyan Conference against W. P. Newman. If he voted for them, it was after I left the house. And further, I affirm, the day after they were passed by the Conference, I asked Rev. Peter Curtiss, a member also of said Conference, why he voted for said resolutions, when he knew they were not true; and he said he knew it, but the only reason why he did it was, that he did not wish to appear obstinate." Rev. Henry Cooper statesー"I did not vote for the resolutions in the Conference against Br. W. P. Newman, because I knew they were not true. I know that Mr. Wilson was denied the privilege of preaching in the colored Wesleyan Church at Dawn, by father Robert Warren, Sen., the Steward of the church.
"George Francis, Sen.
"Witness, Charles H. Harrison."
DAWN, C. W., Oct. 21, 1847.
Who has lied? Is the Conference worthy of confidence? Nay, verily! 11. But the testimony of neither Mr. Hill no Wilson is to be taken, for they are personally concerned in this case. And further, it seems that either one or both of them are guilty of forgery in this matter, for which they deserve the public odium or penitentiary. In the first resolution, as published in the Oberlin Evangelist of Oct. 13th, 1847, over the signature of Mr. Hill, the last clause of it reads thus: "This Conference deems it its duty to say, that the said report is entirely incorrect." This is what Mr. Hill says the Conference said. But Mr. Wilson says, Mr. Hill has lied, for the Conference did not say so, but said, according to the resolutions published in the North Star, Jan. 19th, 1849, "This Conference deems it their duty to say that the said report is founded in falsehood." From this, it is difficult to know what the Conference did say; but we know that it did say enough to show they were a set (or the most of them) of detestable hypocrites, and that they were aided in their hypocrisy by two men, one of them a professed minister of the gospel of truth, and the other a so-called religious Secretary of the Oberlin Institute: and that their object was to injure an innocent man. God will judge them! Mr. Wilson saysー"The resolutions alluded to by Mr. Newman are the naked truth, my own experience and consciousness bearing testimony and concurring with the statement of the Conference,"ーthe resolutions of the Conference, as published by Mr. Hill. Then Mr. Wilson has forged a part of the first resolution, as published by himself; hence, by his own showing, he is a vile hypocrite. Has Mr. Wilson forgotten the fact, that the colored people of Toronto were about to mob him when he lived there? And also that the people of Dawn, but a few years ago, talked of doing the same thing? This I learned from good authority. Has he forgotten that he told Mr. George Francis that the colored people did not want to hear him preach?ーHas it slipped his frail memory, that he told me he had "no heart to go out and preach among the colored people, from the fact, that when he went where they were, they did not even invite him in their houses to get a bite to eat, and that he had to buy himself a sixpence loaf of bread, and eat it by the wayside"? Has he lost sight of the undeniable fact, that they would not permit him to preach in the colored church at Dawn? If Rev. J. H. Fairchild, Rev. Nashville-flogged Amos Dresser, and S. B. Cox, Esq., a gentleman of color and distinction, who were the committe that wrote to Rochester, and of whom Mr. Wilson speaks, but fails to give the public their language, will say that I said what Mr. Hill affirms I did, I should be disposed to think I did say so, and that it was a mere slip of the tongue, though it was true, as I have already shown. "In all fairness," neither Mr. Hill, nor Mr. Wilson, nor the Conference is to be believed in this matter, for I have proved them false in fact.ーDid not Mr. Hill either know or believe that there was something wrong about these resolutions? hence, he withheld from the public the names of the Chairman and Secretary.ーDoes he deny this? If he does, let him say so. 12. The second resolution expresses the confidence in and good will for Mr. Wilson by the Conference, and its appreciation of his efforts in Canada. Of the sincerity of such expression, the public may judge, when I tell it, that I have a letter in my possession, written by Peter B. Smith, and dictated by Josiah Henson, Sen., both members of the Conference, which affirms just the opposite of this. I would insert it here, but it is too long. Do they deny it? For the truth that such is the purport of the letter, I refer to President Mahan, of Oberlin, to whom I showed it! Mr. George Johnson saysー"I will testify at any time and place, that I have heard some of the very men who voted for the passage of those resolutions against W. P. Newman, among whom are Peter B. Smith and Josiah Henson, Sen., say that they had no confidence in Hiram Wilson; and further, Mr. Henson said, 'Wilson is a rascal!'"ーHas Mr. Henson forgotten that he told me he had "no confidence in Mr. Wilson," and that he wanted "to get a colored man in his place"? Does he deny it? 13. In the third resolution, they call Mr. Wilson "our brother." If he "is a rascal," as he is called, and the Chairman highly appreciates his "labor," then he appreciates the labor of a rascal, and it follows that he himself is one. 14. Mr. Wilson says, "When I wrote to the Liberator, I had then no official connection with the Dawn Institute, and have not at present." I affirm positively, that Mr. Wilson told me, when at Dawn in November last, that he had "accepted the trusteeship in the place of friend F. Stover," for the Dawn school. Does he deny it? And also that he was then acting as Chairman of the Ex. Committee of the same school. This, too, I dare him to deny. 15. He tries to get out of answering the interrogations by saying, "I do not feel called upon to answer sixteen interrogations, over the heads of the Trustees and Committeemen." Mr. Wilson has been the President of the Institution till very recently, and he is the one, and the only one, upon whom we ought to call for such information. Besides, the donations of the people for the poor were given to him, for the most part, to be faithfully applied for their good, and we hold him responsible to see it done, and to give us an account of it.
This is as much as we can spare room for this week. The remainder will appear in our next number.

No account Yet of the $20,000 at Dawn.
[CONCLUDED.]
16. Mr. Wilson accuses me of sustaining the Dawn institution as a curse. He says of me, "For he was here, acting officially in the midst of the curse, for nearly two years, sustaining and increasing it." This is positively false. I arrived at Dawn June 22d, 1845. I took charge of the school, I think, the first week in July, and was elected a member of the Ex. Committee, and its Secretary, in that month. As soon as I had time, I examined the books, &c., and the accounts of the agents particularly, which, I believe, was within some three or four months afrer. These I found anything but satisfactory; hence, I introduced certain resolutions in the Ex. Committee, forbidding the agents to beg anything more until they had settled up their accounts &c., and published to the world what they were doing. I urged the calling home of Mr. Hanson, who was then in the East; and the language of one of the resolutions was, "The agents are doing what nobody knows but themselves" These resolutions were adopted by the Ex. Committee, and entered on their book. The Committee instructed me to call Mr. Henson home, and I did so, by writing to J. W. Alden, of Boston, as I did not know where a letter would reach him. So much for sustaining the cause. But further: when my first year expired there, the agents had not settled their accounts satisfactory to me; and when the Ex. Committee wanted me to teach another year, I told them I would not, for it was my fixed and settled purpose to leave as soon as they would (or rather could) settle their business, and make a fair and honorable report to the public. Will Mr. Wilson or the Committee deny this? I was dissatisfied from the time I found out how things were, till the time I left, with their management. If they deny it, let them say so. Being unable to get things right, the Trustees met in September, 1846, at which time I presented my resignation, a copy of which I here give:
"To the Ex. Committee of the Trustees of the British American Institute:
GENTLEMENーI herein present you my resignation as a Teacher in your Institution. I do it, because of your present administration, and in view of the unchristian and murderous treatment I received a few day since from one with whom I am associated. I cannot and wil not consent to be recreant to my trust, and treacherous to the cause of God and the poor, to please my persecutor, (Mr. Henson,) or any one else. Should you refuse to sustain the present administration, or sanction such detestable conduct, and pursue that course worthy of the cause, and satisfactory to the public and me, and approved by God, I am your humble servant,
"W. P. Newman.
"Dawn, C. W., Sept. 10, 1846."

Rev. James Roaf, D. D., of Toronto, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, said, when he read my resignation to the meeting. "Mr. Newman is right, perfectly so, for so doing." Who can believe, in view of these things, I sustained the curse! The murderous conduct referred to was Mr. Josiah Henson's threatening to cut my throat, knife in hand. He got on his knees, in the presence of the Trustees, and begged my forgiveness, and I had hardly said, "I forgive you," before he put at me again like a lion. At the request of the Trustees and Committee, I took back my resignation, and remained in connection with the institution about one month after, when the influence of Mr. Henson broke up the school. Myself and Mr. Wilson were then misrepresented to the Trustees by a traitor, things not being settled, and that resulting in my leaving the institution instantly. Thus my nearly two years' connection with the Institution turns out to be about fifteen months, and two of them spent in labor to overthrow the curse. 17. Mr. Wilson saysー"I am furnishing instruction to rising of 50 scholars." He should have told the public that these are the children of the neighborhood, or at any rate, four-fifths of them are, and the rest the youth of the settlement, and not strangers from afar, as he would have us to believe. He should have added, also, that the parents of these are and always have been charged tuition for the instruction their children received at Dawn. These scholars are no charge to the public, for they board at home. They have not and do not receive any of the $20,000 which has been given for their education and support. 18. I said in the article referred to, that was in the Christian Contributor, that the Dawn school managers had "received, since its commencement, over $10,000 in cash, clothing, &c."; but the truth is, they have received over $20,000 in cash, clothing, &c, Thousands of this were begged in the name of the common schools in different parts of the Province, but they have not received $500 in cash, clothing, &c., for five years past. And much of the clothing was begged for gratuitous distribution among the poor; but they did not get it, as they know and will say; nor did the missionaries laboring in different parts of the Province get it. Does Mr. Wilson deny this? Let him say so.ー19. Mr. Wilson says, "I have been eyes to the blind, and feet to the lameーI have fed the hungry and clothed the naked." I can simply say, that those who have received eyes and feet, know it of course; but the "fed and clothed" saying should have been the other way. The poor fugitives (or rather the use of their name, and without the consent, too, of but a few) have fed and clothed Mr. Wilson, and his family too, since he first went among themーkeeping three hired servants in a small family for a long time, until there was a great fuss about it. 20. I conclude by saying, I make no profession to perfection in all that I have done in Canada; nor do I say that I am without fault in every particular, but I can say, that I have the sweet consciousness of having intended to do what is honorable before God and just to my fellow men; but if I knew myself to be a notorious liar, a cut-throat preacher, a blasphemer and a hypocrite, and that I had ever given any good ground for being accused of wickedness to such a degree as to have a steamboat stopped to take me off as a horse thief, I never should want to be Chairman of a Wesleyan Conference.
W. P. NewmanNewman, William P.

.
Cincinnati, O., Feb. 13, 1849.
P.S.ーMessrs. Editors:ーI hope that not only you, but the editors of the Christian Contributor, American Missionary, Oberlin Evangelist, Ram's Horn, and all who love the just and true, will publish and review my writing and Mr. Wilson's on this subject, and give your opinions to the public. It is now time that it was undeceived on this subject.
W. P. N.