“got rid of Captain Hall” many years earlier,—a statement that must, in view of Hall’s independent character, be received with some reserve; with arbitrarily settling every particular in which he felt interested by his own authority, even in defiance of the opinion of all his colleagues,—and so forth. In these accusations there was probably a measure of truth. Long afterwards, amidst wholly different circumstances, Newton certainly showed the arbitrary temper with which Darby charged him. That first-rate men found it difficult to work with him, that he surrounded himself with those that were unable to withstand his imperious will, and with their help carried things at Plymouth with a high hand, cannot be positively asserted when we have little evidence beyond the accusations of his implacable foes; but it is at all events in keeping with his known disposition. Still, all Darby’s Narrative goes to show that the meeting was in a quiet condition. Darby’s comment was that they made a solitude and called it peace; but even this implies that at least there was no open discontent.
Newton, on his part, charged his adversaries with “radicalism”. Darby had by this time taken up very strong views against the formal recognition of elders. If a meeting were in a good condition it would recognise its God-given rulers; what it would do if it were not in a good condition, I am not aware that he explained. The pity is that he could not bring himself to avow frankly his change of principle. Of this characteristic infirmity Dr. Tregelles, discussing the events of 1845 a few years later, took a perfectly fair advantage. He tells us that, in 1831 or 1832, Newton was appointed Elder of the Plymouth meeting, with (he believed) a special duty to restrain unsuitable ministry; that Darby “requested Mr. Newton to sit where he could conveniently
