in others. … Sir A. Campbell gave his judgment in a few grave and weighty words, quoting as his verdict, ‘Dead flies make the ointment of the apothecary to stink; so doth a little folly one who is in high reputation for wisdom and honour’. During an interval between the meetings he remained in the room, with his legs resting on one of the benches, looking desolate and dejected.”
This account of the conference seriously qualifies the version that has long been current among the Darbyites. William Trotter of York, an ex-Methodist minister, is more highly spoken of by every one that knew him than almost any other Plymouth Brother; and his untimely death, while he was yet under fifty, was felt to be a heavy loss of the kind that Christians can least afford. Such a man is entitled to a charitable judgment if, under the impression that the ark of God was imperilled, he was betrayed into an unworthy action in its defence. His Whole Case of Plymouth and Bethesda vies with the Narrative of Facts itself in advertising its own untrustworthiness. With regard to the Bath meeting, Trotter states that “the brethren who had been rescued from the doctrinal errors of Mr. N. … made further confession, full and ample, as to their implication in the charges made against the untruthful, immoral system of Ebrington Street. They acknowledged that these charges were just. One, at least, of those who signed their names to ‘the Plymouth Documents’ … confessed that these documents were justly chargeable with trickery and falsehood.” Trotter, who was not present, claims Robert Howard of Tottenham as his informant. He may have misunderstood Howard, but in any case his statement is self-stultifying, and no authentication can help it greatly. He speaks of “further” confession, but I can find no trace of any made previously; and in
