Page:Neatby - A history of the Plymouth Brethren.djvu/124

112 of this system—and this is one object of my labour everywhere. At the same time, my hostility is against a system, not against individuals.” Newton can scarcely be said to make light of his determination to oppose Darbyism; nevertheless, Darby afterwards felt justified in accusing his antagonist of lying. This was the more remarkable that the opening words of Newton’s printed statement were: “You ask me to give you on paper the substance of what I said at our recent meeting”. (The italics are my own.)

That Newton really made at the meeting a reference to some of the western counties, I have very little doubt. The question of what he had said was one of the subjects of enquiry on the part of a considerable number of leading Brethren at a later stage of the quarrel. Darby asserts that his own account of the matter was then borne out by the witness who most favoured Newton, the “only modification” being “that, instead of saying that he trusted he should have at least Devonshire and Somersetshire under his influence for the purpose, he understood him to say, that wherever he could get influence in Devonshire, Somersetshire, and Cornwall, he should seek to do the same thing. Mr. N. himself at last said, as I understood, that as everybody said he did, he supposed he did say as alleged. Lord C[ongleton] at last asked Mr. R. [Newton’s supporter] whether, if he had read that paper, he should say it was an untrue account of the meeting. He replied he must, but that Mr. N. was so angry (so chafed, I believe, was the word) that he did not think he ought to be charged with what he did say.”

This is Darby’s narrative, and it is possible that Newton, Rhind, and Lord Congleton would all have demurred to the report. But even taken as it stands, it