London Primitive Methodism - Our Conference City 1917

Transcription of article published in the Primitive Methodist Magazine by Joseph Johnson

LONDON is a city unique in its vast area and also in its immense population and world-wide influence. It is not only the centre of the world’s commerce, but it is the heart of the British Empire, politically, socially, and even religiously, it may be considered the capital of the world. For many generations it has been expanding in area and growing in population until now, if you were to add together thirty-five of the largest Cities and towns in England, including such great centres as Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Bristol, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield, etc., you would have a smaller city than London.

It is no exaggeration to say, that it is in every respect the greatest city of both ancient and modern civilisation. Those of us who have lived within its borders during the last thirty years have witnessed great improvements. But there remains yet much to be done to make it the model and ideal city, which all true Britishers desiderate. Although undoubtedly the richest city in the world, yet here we have poverty, which is more bewildering and perplexing than that of any other city in the British Empire. Viewed from some standpoints, this great city paralyses us with its problems. Every social and religious worker is impressed with the multitudes of people who live sordid and apparently hopeless lives.

Frankly, I do not hesitate to declare that, as a sphere of evangelisation, no city presents finer opportunities for effective effort in soul-winning, and in moral and spiritual regeneration. Here I would record my sense of gratitude for the numerous Christian influences permeating London’s life. If it were not for these regenerating and saving forces London would speedily become a mass of corruption, and a world-wide menace to purity and righteousness. Every form of church life and creed is to be found in London in varying degree. The evangelical and Protestant Churches have struck their roots deep, and are centres of gracious ministry, and the Free Churches rank with the foremost in the exercise of healthy Christian influences.

The place of the Primitive Methodist Church in London to a superficial on-looker appears poor and paltry as compared with the immensity of the city, and we grant that such an impression may be excusable, but when we recall the circumstances under which Primitive Methodism was introduced into London, and the crippling difficulties experienced in getting permanently established, we are compelled to acknowledge with wonder and gratitude whereunto it has grown during the past ninety-five years. It may be truly said that out of its poverty Primitive Methodism has established itself in London, and to-day enjoys a commanding position among the Free Churches of the Metropolis.

The first record we have of Primitive Methodism operating in London dates back to the year 1812—two years after the first society class was formed at Standley. A member having removed from the neighbourhood of Mow Cop to London, and being impressed with the spiritual needs of the Metropolis, sent a pressing invitation to the leaders of the infant cause in Staffordshire to send missionaries to London. Accordingly Hugh Bourne and James Crawfoot came and conducted a few services, only remaining a fortnight, when they returned home without doing anything in the direction of establishing a church in the Metropolis.

After the lapse of ten years we find the Leeds Circuit at its December Quarterly Meeting, 1822, with a few pounds to credit, which prompted them to consider the need of extension. It was thought at the time to use this surplus money in sending a preacher on a missionary tour to Sunderland, but, on further consideration, it was resolved to attempt the evangelisation of London, when Paul Sugden and W. Watson were chosen for the purpose. They travelled by stage coach, and reaching what is now Gresham Street, in the very heart of the city, they found themselves with only one shilling left between them, and this they gave as a gratuity to the coachman. Being now penniless, and having no gratuity to offer the conductor, as was expected, they tendered their apologies to him, at the same time explaining their position and the purpose of their journey to London. He being a Christian man, and a member of the Baptist Church, saw the situation immediately, and his sympathy led him to invite the two missionaries to accompany him to his home for breakfast, and purchased from them a hymn-book, with a view to furnishing them with a few coppers toward their further expenses. Their initial experiences were numerous and varied, but within a month they boldly acquired the use of a quaint little chapel in Cooper’ s Gardens, Shoreditch, thereby securing a permanent centre for their activities. Watson soon returned North, and the Leeds Circuit, still bent on its purpose, sent John Coulson to supply Watson’s place. Walking the whole distance from Leeds to London, Coulson arrived with three shillings only in his possession, and at once set to work to get the new cause firmly established. For some reason or other he was immediately recalled and another appointed in his stead.

Some form of trouble then developed which greatly paralysed and hindered the work in the Metropolis, and Hull Circuit was urged to come to the rescue. Accordingly early in January, 1824, William Clowes left Hull—then a veritable centre of fervid spiritual life—and undertook the superintendence of the London work. Though scarcely more than twelve months had elapsed since the Leeds missionaries—Sugden and Watson—had arrived, yet Clowes’ found that the work of the Cooper’s Garden Church had spread to several other parts. What, however, greatly distressed Clowes was, that not a single centre, where the Church was established, could be regarded as respectable, and that there were no funds available for the maintenance of the mean, shabby, little rooms that had been secured for divine worship and the activities of the Church. On his personal responsibility therefore he secured the loan of £100, discharged all liabilities to date, and took steps to bring the workers into unity and accord. The ministry of William Clowes in London was an unqualified success, for within two months after his arrival the membership had reached eighty-six, and before the end of the year it exceeded two hundred. As a result of his judicious care and oversight, followed subsequently by the statesmanlike policy of the Rev. John Flesher, the foundations of the Primitive Methodist Church in London were firmly laid. The experiences of William Clowes in London during those twenty-one months were not without interesting variations. During the first summer of his visit, when conducting a camp-meeting on Stoke Newington Common, a cow was driven into the audience, causing considerable disturbance. At Westminster on another occasion three men dressed themselves up as devils, and in this grotesque form rushed from a neighbouring public-house, howling and dancing, in order to spoil an open-air service. In Southwark, Camberwell, and other localities Clowes met with terrible hostilities, but undaunted he pursued his campaign with unflagging zeal.

London eventually became a self-supporting circuit, and subsequently was divided and sub-divided, until now Primitive Methodism in the Metropolis has no fewer than one hundred and twenty churches, forty circuits and mission centres, and a church membership approximating ten thousand.

Primitive Methodism is represented in twenty-four of the twenty-nine Metropolitan boroughs—the five boroughs where we are not represented being the City of Westminster, Chelsea, Shoreditch and Finsbury, representing a population of considerably more than half a million. In Holborn Borough, whilst we have no organised church, we have, thanks to the foresight of Sir W. P. Hartley, the magnificent centre known as Holborn Hall, now recognised as the headquarters of the Primitive Methodist Church, where the Conference Sessions are to be held this year. It has five floors, the two upper of which are divided into offices, all are well let, and yield a considerable revenue. The second floor is divided into committee rooms, which are in frequent use; the first floor has one very large hall and a smaller hall, both of which are often let for public functions, and will be increasingly so in the future, whilst the ground floor is let off, part as bank premises, and part as public refreshment rooms, both yielding a handsome rental. In addition, there is the new and spacious Publishing House premises. It is a noble pile of buildings, and gives our Church a status in the Metropolis of no mean importance. The premises are freehold, and though there was a debt on them of £41,500 at the last Conference, it will be gratefully remembered that Sir William and Lady Hartley, in recognition of God’s goodness in sparing them to celebrate their golden wedding, generously made a gift of £10,000, which is to be paid in four yearly instalments for the reduction of the debt.

The three London boroughs in which we have the greatest number of chapels and members are, Poplar, Hackney and Islington. Poplar has six chapels, Hackney five, and Islington three. In the Borough of Lambeth we have also five chapels, but the aggregate membership is not large. In Camberwell and Wandsworth Boroughs we have three chapels, and a similar number in Battersea, one of the smallest boroughs. In Bermondsey, with its mean and drab streets, we are represented by St. George’s Hall, Old Kent Road—headquarters of the South-East London Mission, where there is a membership of upwards of three hundred —St. James’ Road Mission, and Union Road Chapel, Rotherhithe. Southwark Borough, with its squalor and poverty, embraces Surrey Chapel Central Mission, Blackfriars Road, and East Street Chapel, Walworth, the trust deed of which is the model trust deed of the Connexion.

Bethnal Green Borough takes in Cooper’s Gardens Memorial Church. St. Pancras Borough embraces New Camden Chapel (King Street) and Kentish Town (Grafton Road) Chapel, both of which have been powerful churches in their day, but, owing to the degenerating character of the neighbourhoods, are now “down-town” churches. Paddington Borough embraces Harrow Road and Kilburn Lane chapels, whilst Fulham Borough takes in Bayonne Road and Wandsworth Bridge Road chapels. Woolwich Borough also embraces two chapels, Robert Street, Plumstead, and Eglinton Road, Woolwich. In each of the following boroughs we are represented by one church only:—Kensington (Notting-hill), Hammersmith (Dalling Road), Greenwich (Creek Road), Stoke Newington (Crossway), Lewisham (Stanstead Road), Marylebone (Seymour Place), Deptford (Besson Street), Hampstead (Mill Lane), whilst Stepney embraces the Whitechapel Mission, with its Working Lads’ Institute and Brunswick Hall, which for many years past has exercised a most humane and beneficent ministry to the poor and friendless of that congested neighbourhood. These several boroughs, where we have only one church in each borough, represent an aggregate population of upwards of one million. Outside the Metropolitan boroughs, in what is generally known as Greater London, Primitive Methodism is represented by several vigorous churches, though in no case have we a single church with a membership of four hundred.

What shall we say of the honoured men and women who have contributed to the growth and expansion of Primitive Methodism in London? We cannot forbear mentioning the following ministers:—George Tetley, John Verity, John Oxcroft, John Flesher, Thomas Holliday, William Harland, John Ride, John North, Edward. Bishop, James Garner, William Lister, and Edmund Rawlings, of an earlier generation; whilst of a later generation, many of whom we have known, are Thomas Penrose, Samuel Antliff, John Rackham, William Scafe, John Phillips, Jesse Ashworth, George Lamb, Joseph Toulson, Joseph Sheale, Mark Simmonds, John Hammond, William Wray, William E. Crombie, William Suttle, Richard S. Blair, Henry Fleming, William Welford, John Fletcher Porter, David T. Maylott, Robert R. Connell, and others of, sainted memory, whilst among lay helpers the following sainted men and women deserve special mention:—Mrs. Tappin, Mrs.Gardiner, John Frisken, Mrs. Elizabeth Maynard, John Wilson, Jabez Barlow, William Twort, Edward Church, Thomas Church, William Yarrow, Edward Hurcomb, John Garrud, William and Mrs. Brightwell, T.B. Johnson, F. Hensey, Thomas Maynard, John S. Parkman, David Berry, Martin Gleghorn, James Johnston, Captain McCulloch, James Wood, John D. Kemp, J. D. Dobson, James Gledhill, George H. Sellers, and last, but not least, John Moseley.

We have avoided mentioning names of outstanding men who are still with us, but surely no one will begrudge the mention of such veterans as Revs. George Shapcott, Thomas Jackson, James Flanagan, and Tolefree Parr—all of whom have laid the Connexion under deep obligation for their many years of zealous and unstinted labours for the evangelisation of London.

In view of the fact that suitable freehold sites of land are not easily acquired, and, when available, are usually very costly, and further, that leasehold sites are invariably hampered by heavy ground rents, it must be granted that the achievements of our Church under God’s blessing have been of no mean order.

In later years a great and promising movement was initiated through the generosity of Sir W. P. Hartley, which, but for the terrible War still in progress, would have meant, in the course of this and next year the practical extinction of all our chapel debts. If that scheme could have been successfully completed, it would have been a great relief, as well as an immense impetus, to our London churches for future work and expansion. Primitive Methodism in London is proverbial for its generosity and its self-denying work. It is specially noteworthy that in no part of the Connexion is more generous support given to the ministry than in London, and pro rata to the membership more ministers and agencies are supported than anywhere else in the Connexion.

London is worthy of increased attention on the part of our Church, and would respond to a wise and vigorous effort for its evangelisation. It would pay splendidly to decide on the erection of, at least, one new church in London every year, and, given the right man in the right place—a man of tact, ability and devotion—in a few years many new circuits could be created.

References

Primitive Methodist Magazine 1917/386