PHRAIM B. HUBBARD was born in Duchess County, New York, February 28, 1792. His father, of Connecticut ancestry, moved to Deerfield, Portage County, Ohio, in 1802, Ephraim being then ten years old. His early life was the usual toil and privations in a new country. His education was gained in the primitive log school-house. But the thirsty soul can drink water from goblet or gourd. Hubbard learned rapidly, and acquired information which placed him high among his fellow-citizens, and eventually raised him to a seat in the Ohio Legislature.

      July 1, 1817, he married Miss Mary McGowan, whose father was an early emigrant from Maryland. After raising eight children, and filling faithfully the duties of domestic and social life, she fell peacefully asleep, October 13, 1839. Hubbard was re-married to Miss Jerusha Reed, and is enjoying life at eighty-three.

      The Methodists pre-empted Deerfield. The Hubbards gave assent to their assumed claim, all except Ephraim. He held membership with them about four years, but he openly protested against the creed and discipline as a direct challenge of the rights [311] of the King. He felt relieved, however, of responsibility on the subject, as he had been cordially received with expressed opposition to it as an unauthorized usurpation of the place of the Word of God in the government of his church.

      About this time a Methodist class was formed in Smith Township, under the leadership of Gideon Hoadley. This class solicited Hubbard to unite and assist them. To this he consented on condition that he should not be required to assent to the "discipline." This band of Christians, acting on their inherent rights, and, in this act, setting aside the rules of the Methodist church, unanimously agreed to his terms. Accordingly, himself and his wife, who was a Baptist, became members the same day. With the same noble sentiments, his brother-in-law, Samuel McGowan, a Baptist, and his wife, a Presbyterian, offered themselves for membership. Some demurred, alleging that the rules of the church should be enforced. Bro. Hubbard asked them to delay a decision for two weeks, and to search the Word of God for authority to guide their action. To this they assented; and at the end of that time, no precedent or other authority for a period of probation being found, McGowan and his wife were cordially received.

      As soon as this was known by the authorities of that church, Presiding Elder Swaize came with the circuit rider, Rev. Mr. Taylor, denounced these whole proceedings as a violation of the rules of the discipline, and declared the class dissolved.

      But this was not the last of it. The most of the class were so dissatisfied with this invasion of their rights as men and Christians, that they held [312] themselves aloof from any farther union with the M. E. Church, and stood ready for the coming light, which was soon to result in a practical and permanent union of these and many others on New Testament grounds. The leader of the class, Bro. Hoadley, being one of this number.

      As the history of a religious movement is identical with that of its chief actors, I insert some notice and experiences of Bro. Jonas Hartzel, associated with the origin of this church, and long identified with it.

      He was born October 19, 1803, in North Hampton County, Pa., In 1805, his parents settled, with several other families of the same name and kindred, in Deerfield, then quite an unbroken wilderness. Now let his own pen continue the recital:

      "On the second day of June, 1825, the marriage contract between myself and Miss Alice Wallahan was consummated. In religious profession we were divided; but in religious tendencies, industrial habits, domestic economy, and love of home, we were happily united.

      "Soon after this my mind became more seriously affected with my religious condition. My wife being a Methodist, we occasionally attended Methodist preaching. This brought before me the complications of Calvinism and Arminianism. Sovereign grace put on the more orthodox face, but free grace wore the more pleasant smile. But the effect was uncertainty and doubt, and this was followed by skepticism in the current religion of the times. Meanwhile I said nothing in relation to my troubles, until in an evil hour I communicated the state of my mind to my father. It was, as we then called it, a sacramental occasion. I attended all the sessions until Monday morning.

      "My father saw from my movements that I did not [313] intend to go to meeting. He came to where I was at work, and asked: 'Jonas, an't you going to meeting to-day?' To which I said: 'Father, you know my business is urgent, and going to meeting is doing me no good; I go to our meeting, and our preacher preaches unconditional election and reprobation; I go to Methodist meeting, and the preacher will preach an opposite doctrine from the same text. Father, there is something wrong. We all say we are influenced by the same spirit; we are all reading the same Bible; we are all traveling the same road to the same heaven. The different parties acknowledge each other to be Christians, but each party says my way is the right way, and I can not tell which way is the right one.' To this my father made no reply, but as he turned away, I saw the falling tear. My regret for this freedom was bitter. I threw down my tools, and I was in the meeting-house as soon as himself.

      "Not long after this a new trouble sprang up. Having returned from meeting, and dinner over, my wife asked: 'What evidence is there for infant baptism?' This question, coming from this source, produced strange emotions. Knowing that the subject of baptism was not under discussion in our respective families or neighborhood, added no little to my surprise. 'Alice,' I said; 'why do you ask me this question?' 'If there is any evidence in the Bible for infant baptism, I want it, for I never had any confidence in my baptism,' was her reply. 'Well,' I replied, 'I can satisfy your mind.'

      "I took down the Scriptures, and read those passages upon which I had always relied for defense. I read them, but the reading was of no avail. I must draw inferences. The Lord only knew the deep mortification I suffered. My witnesses were against me. I saved appearances as best I could, laid up the book, and said we would talk upon this subject at another time. I now saw the difference between the controversialist and the impartial [314] instructor. I could no more mislead my dear wife, than my own soul. Before this, I saw infant baptism in 'Suffer little children to come unto me,' in the baptism of Cornelius, Lydia, the jailer, Stephanas, and their households; and when hard pressed by an opponent I could find it in circumcision, but under these new circumstances it had departed, given up the ghost without a struggle or a groan, and left me in mourning.

      "Between denominational pride and conviction there was a fierce contest for a short time. But I finally resolved to be true to my convictions, and I made an honest surrender. I said, 'My dear wife, I can give you no Bible evidence for infant baptism, for there is none. I am now convinced that it is a human device; and neither we, nor so much as one of our extensive family connections are in the church of Christ, according to the law of the Lord.'

      "I now became more confirmed in the conviction, that there was something wrong in the denominational exhibitions of Christianity. I had been misled by wise and good men. I also discovered that I had never read the Scriptures, to form sentiments for myself. My religion consisted in opinions, rather than faith. I had been acting upon the credit system, and I was determined to abandon it at once. This led us to the only reliable source of knowledge. We now began to read the Bible as we had never read it before. The question of infant baptism was now disposed of, and we regarded ourselves as unbaptized. Then we examined the specific passages in the New Testament on faith. This was the subject of my greatest trouble. Sometimes I thought I had a hope, and again I doubted. I knew I had never felt and experienced what others said they had, and I attributed my darkness to unbelief. Yet I knew I did believe. But, in our classification at that time, there were four kinds of faith--speculative, historical, dead, and saving faith--the latter only was of saving [315] value. This faith I supposed I had not, and had no means of obtaining. The first three might be the result of the Scriptures, and were of no avail; while saving faith was the direct gift of God. This gift was the burden of my daily prayer. In our course of reading we came to this Scripture: "And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.' John xx: 30, 31.

      "I exclaimed! 'This faith I have had from my childhood!'

      "I said, adopting the language of David, 'The Lord has brought me into a large place.' This discovery came like a flood of light. The gospel in all its facts and phases assumed new and lovely aspects. The gospel appeared intelligible, and its promised blessings accessible. This was to us the beginning of a new life and new joys. We had new incentives to read the Bible."

      Samuel McGowan was a devout man, possessed of solid mind, with great power of analysis. One day he met Jonas Hartzel, his brother-in-law, and said: "I fear Alexander Campbell has fallen into a grievous error." "What is it?" "In the last number of the 'Christian Baptist' he maintains that baptism, preceded by faith and repentance, is for the remission of sins." Hartzel replied: "I have advocated that for some months past myself. In defending anti-pedobaptist views with other folds, I referred to Acts ii: 38; where it says, 'Repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.' I found this to be a new and unanswerable argument against infant baptism." [316] "Well," said McGowan, "I guess you'll read the 'Christian Baptist' now!"

      Thus the investigations ran, till the Hartzels, Hubbards, McGowans, Finch, and others agreed to form a society for the investigation of Scripture subjects. They were fully awake to the sad condition of the Christian churches, so called, divided, alienated, contradictory in doctrine and work, and that this state of things was not only unauthorized by the word of God, but contrary to it. And they were equally convinced both of the truth of the Holy Scriptures, and the unity of their teaching on all practical subjects. This noble band of men and women bound themselves together to find out that truth, and to walk together in it. They resolved to meet weekly, and semi-weekly when convenient. This was in March, 1827. Bro. Hartzel's pen may proceed with the story:

      "There were in this little band the following persons: Cornelius P. Finch, a Methodist preacher, and his wife; Ephraim B. Hubbard and his wife, he an active Methodist and his wife a Baptist; Samuel McGowan and wife, he a Baptist and his wife a Presbyterian; Peter Hartzel and wife, he a Presbyterian and his wife a Baptist; myself and wife, myself a Presbyterian, but not a communicant, and my wife a Methodist. There were a few others. The first three named were our chief speakers. We assumed that the Christian religion, in its fullness and perfectness, was recorded in the New Testament, and what could not be there found, or what could not be read from this book was no part of Christianity. We also assumed that this was an intelligible document, for, if not adapted to the common intelligence of mankind, it could not be received [317] as a revelation from God to man. In these predicates we agreed.

      "Our work was now before us, and we had a will to do it. But little did we know of the magnitude or the difficulties of the work to which we had committed ourselves. Our meetings increased. Some came in from feelings of opposition, others from motives of curiosity. Stephen M. Hubbard, a Methodist preacher and a worthy man, attended occasionally, and participated freely and affectionately in our discussions. Our number at one time, I think, was twenty-two. The three most popular church parties were all represented among us, both in number and intelligence; therefore our discussions took a wide range. Sometimes we discussed the intelligibility of the Scriptures, their all-sufficiency for the purposes of enlightenment, conversion, Christian perfection, church government. Then the 'special call' to the ministry; how does faith come; how many kinds of faith; which is first in order--faith or repentance; can a sinner believe and obey the gospel, acceptably and savingly, without some superadded spiritual influence from above; should an unbeliever pray for faith; is the gospel a dead letter, or does it possess inherent, quickening power; when, where, and by whom was the gospel first preached. The difference between the first and second commission which Christ gave to his apostles; apostolic succession; the abrogation of the Mosaic dispensation; the subjects, mode, and design of baptism; should a sinner be baptized on the confession of his faith in Christ, or on an approved experience. All these subjects were under earnest discussion for about one year.

      "These were great questions, and on account of our old theologies, they were exceedingly perplexing.

      "No doctrinal standard was appealed to. All human authorities were ignored. The Bible was our book; Jesus Christ and his apostles were our umpire; and our work [318] was personal in its object. We were sick of denominationalism. All save Bro. Finch and his wife, had a religious opponent in his or her own bosom. Primarily our objects were to save our souls from sin, and to sweeten our domestic enjoyments by a return to that gospel which was from the beginning. We had but two alternatives between which to choose; either to transmit religious partyism, with all its bitter fruits, to our rising families, and live and die in that state of doubt and uncertainty, vascillating between hope and fear, the inevitable result of a mixed profession, or to find relief by going back to the old record, to 'look up the old paths and walk therein.'

      "Now for the practical results. In the month of May, 1828, we determined to enter into church relations. The question of baptism came up. It was suggested by one of the senior brethren who had been immersed, that those of our number who did not yet see their way clear, might come into membership on their former baptism, until such time as they might see their duty more clearly. To which I replied, that myself and wife had been desirous to be baptized for some months past, but were waiting an opportunity; and we would not stand out-door and do in-door work. This at once settled the question to favor of immersion as a condition of membership.

      "Immediately brethren Hubbard and Finch were requested by the meeting to visit Adamson Bentley and Marcus Bosworth, to obtain their attendance to preach for us, and administer baptism, and assist in a formal church organization on the New Testament basis. On Saturday, preceding the second Lord's day in June, 1828, these brethren came. Before preaching, a few were baptized, and more on the day following. Then thirteen 'gave themselves to the Lord and to one another.'

      "The test to which our investigations conducted us was a rigid one. To abandon long cherished opinions, and to dissolve endeared church relations, requires strong [319] faith and great conscientiousness. Especially is this true in the case now before us. One profession may be exchanged for another, one creed for another, and one party name for another without much sacrifice or loss of reputation. But to abjure party, creed, and name, and espouse the simple gospel, involves reputation, and, in the case of ministers, standing, character, and support.

      ". . . . . This congregation grew in favor with all who gave us a candid hearing. In less than six months our number was about sixty. Seven of these were strong men, and did more or less evangelical work in the region round about, and the Deerfield church became a radiating point, a center of Christian influence."

      November 7, 1828, Walter Scott first preached in Deerfield. His reputation had preceded him, and expectation was high. The house was filled densely at an early hour. His victories in other fields plumed his hopes, and prepared him for the occasion. It is to be spoken of that remarkable man that he seldom came into an assembly unprepared. Though attentive to all that was about him, his theme absorbed him, and it was matured. I have often seen him with his face bowed almost to his knees as he sat waiting the moment for opening, with his hands covering it, evidently lifting his soul like Jacob for a blessing. On this occasion the people were on his heart, and each soul was a kingdom to be won for Christ. His first sentence commanded every ear. "The world has been wrong three times, it has been well nigh ruined a fourth." Proceeding through the Patriarchal, the Jewish and Christian dispensations, he shed on each such a flood of light, that the whole Bible seemed luminous. The sermon lasted three [320] hours. At the end of his discourse on the Patriarchal dispensation he paused, and turning to Sister Jane Davis, a sister from Wales, of fine musical powers, he said: "Sister Jane, sing us one of your songs." Then resuming, he opened the Jewish age to their understanding. "Sister Davis, another of your beautiful songs." Then gathering up his strength he presented the Christian institution, the full and complete development of God's mercy to lost man.

      The effect was perceptible every-where. Eleven souls accepted the offered mercy. Capt. Amos Allerton and Capt. Horace Rogers were of the number.

      Capt. Allerton was an influential citizen, of fine social qualities, good intellectual abilities, high toned, generous, sensitive, quick of discernment, and frank, almost to a fault. Tall, heavy frame, not muscular, but of immense physical power. Yet this fine ship carried no faith. Having heard of Scott and his doings, that he baptized people and promised them heaven, sometimes taking them by force into baptismal floods, he went to the meeting fully intent on seeing fair play, and not permitting such performances in Deerfield. And he was just the man for such a venture, had there been a call for it. How was he taken aback when he beheld a small man, of gentlemanly manners equaled by few, delicate in build, with every evidence in lineament, and form, and speech of the gentlest and the noblest of natures! He was disarmed of all his useless purposes, and he resolved to hear him carefully and candidly. He caught his first word and his last. As the great dispensations moved on before him in that grand [321] discourse, like panoramic illuminations, he saw what he never saw before--order, system, plan, arrangement, and development in the Bible history of human redemption. As the eloquent preacher approached the conclusion, Allerton's skepticism had vanished, and he felt his heart moved, as never before, by the view of the Savior, suffering on the cross for the sins of the whole world, opening there the fountain where all must come, and wash and be clean.

      As the preacher said, "Clear the way and let the people come and confess their faith in Jesus Christ and be pardoned," Allerton started with a decision so quick, and a step so prompt, that Scott felt alarmed at seeing him crowding so resolutely along. No sooner was he seated than Scott's fears subsided, and he felt as Ananias after the Lord had said to him "Behold, he prayeth!"

      This community presents a favorable example of steady and continued growth. Her elders, C. P. Finch and E. B. Hubbard were men of distinction as speakers. Bro. Finch had been a circuit rider among the Methodists. With the frankness of character for which he was distinguished, he quickly saw, and promptly embraced the principles of this appeal for a restoration of primitive Christianity. "Ye may all prophesy, one by one, that all may learn, and all be comforted," (1 Cor. xii: 31.) No church better exemplified this Scripture. Thus the church was able to "edify itself in love;" and moreover from them "sounded out the word into every place." All the churches within a radius of thirty miles felt the power of this congregation. Many became highly competent teachers, as Peter Hartzel, Samuel [322] McGowan, Alex. Hubbard; and several rose to eminence, such as E. B. Hubbard, J. Hartzel, A. Allerton, C. P. Finch, and John Schaeffer. From her came the Laughlins--Milo Laughlin, of Missouri, and A. J. Laughlin, of Indiana. While depending on their regular steady meetings, they have enjoyed the labors of most of the preachers--Henry, Hayden, Bosworth, Brockett, Lanphear, Perky, the Erretts, Belding, M. L. Wilcox, Streator. And time would fail to tell of their glorious work in Christ. From her have gone, besides those named, W. W. Hayden, W. L. Hayden, and M. P. Hayden, the three sons of Daniel Hayden, all fully educated, and all giving themselves to the ministry.

      It should be recorded in honor of the power of woman, too frequently left in the shade, that to the influence of one female in their number is largely and justly due this early Christian enterprise. The firmness of character needed to support faltering resolution was found in the inflexible purpose of heart of Mrs. Polly Hubbard, the wife of Bro. E. B. Hubbard. To her devotion to truth, to her clearness of perception of it as taught in the gospel, to her marked and consistent evenness of character and firmness of mind, her husband was greatly indebted for encouraging support in many an hour of fierce trial, to which their position and principles were subjected in those times of conflict and debate.

      The same honorable mention should be made of several others, the wives of men whose names have won renown. To their prudence, firmness, and cheerful devotion to the cause, and endurance of toil and reproach, equal to their husbands, is to be [323] credited a full measure of the success of the gospel in Deerfield.

      In the year 1834, there was an accession to the reformation from the ranks of Lutheranism of one of their ministers. The recital of his change of views presents so much information, that it can not rightfully be withheld from the reader. We refer to the case of Rev. John Schaeffer, of Columbiana County. We are thankful that we can give it from Bro. Schaeffer's own candid and careful pen:

"DEAR BRO. HAYDEN:

      "By your request I will give you a brief history of my life, exclusively on those points you suggest.

      "1. The place of my nativity is Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. My religious training was that of the most ultra order of the Lutherans. Being of poor parentage, I did not enjoy the advantage of a collegiate education. At the age of twenty, I was placed under the theological instruction of Rev. John Wagenhals, a fine scholar from Germany, and a gentleman in the true sense of that word. I studied the theology of the Lutheran church one year, after which, by his influence I obtained, when examined, a license to preach, sprinkle infants, catechize, and solemnize marriage contracts; but denied the right of administering the Lord's Supper, and a voice in the synodical and ministerial sessions. This was to assist me in the prosecution of my studies for another year. After which I obtained license after being examined in theology, by which I was clothed with all the ministerial functions, save a voice in the ministerial session, which privilege was consequent upon ordination; and by this license I was constituted a candidate for ordination, and put on probation in the ministry for three years; after which term, upon examination of my orthodoxy in the Lutheran faith, I [324] was ordained, by the imposition of the hands of the ministerium, to the office of pastor. I remained with the society but one year in the capacity of a pastor. My entire stay with that religious order was five years, save two months; viz.: one year as catechist, three years as candidate on probation, and one year as ordained minister or pastor.

      "2. The agencies that led me to reform in many of my religious views were, briefly, these: While yet on probation, on a visit to my father-in-law's house, I had an introduction to Bro. Jonas Hartzel by his sister, who, after a few months, became my companion for life. Our conversation soon turned on the subject of religion, which was the common topic of those days, and in the course of our interview he propounded this question: 'Which in the order of salvation stands first, faith or repentance?' I answered in all the honesty of my soul as I was taught, and as I was teaching, not suspecting, in the least, the possibility of a negative to my answer, 'Repentance precedes true and evangelical, or saving faith.' Bro. Hartzel replied: 'Do you hold that repentance is pleasing to God?' 'Most certainly, else he never would have commanded it.' Bro. Hartzel replied: 'The apostle Paul says, Hebrews eleventh chapter: Without faith it is impossible to please God.' This was enough for me on that subject. I confessed my error, and from henceforth I no more preached repentance before faith, nor justification by faith alone.

      "This was the first time my confidence in Lutheranism was ever in the least shaken. I felt the very platform on which I stood tremble beneath me. My mind became much agitated. The idea of being wrong on this cardinal point, prompted the inquiry, may we not be in error in others also? Moreover, the whole religious world was arrayed before me, in all their diversified views and opinions on religion. They all lay equal claims to divine [325] truth and right. I was forced to lay aside all my former prejudices, and come to the charitable conclusion that we are all alike but sects and parties, and all wrong, being in opposition to each other. With me it was a settled logical fact, that two opposites can not both be right; it is possible that both may be wrong, but impossible for both to be right.

      "From these reflections I came to the conclusion, that Lutheranism may be as rich in error as any other ism. Hence the word of God was my only refuge; for all regard the word of God infallibly true.

      "After I became connected with the Hartzel family I was brought into frequent contact with Bro. J. Hartzel. The main difficulties in my way were the questions relating to infant church membership, predicated on the perpetuity of the church state, which received its visible form when Abraham was ninety years old, and received the covenant of circumcision. These were the topics discussed when we met. Our debates were warm and animated, and I thought that neither of us had much to boast when we laid our armor off. His sister, my wife, who was a Disciple sentimentally, long before we were married, also greatly aided in revolutionizing my views on these subjects, by propounding questions, and leaving me to struggle under their weight to work out a solution, without ever attempting a vindication of her questions. This prudential course had its desired effect. I never had any difficulty respecting the action of baptism. I well understood before I completed my theological studies, that pouring and sprinkling were substituted for baptism by the authority with which the ministers professed to be clothed; believing themselves to be the successors of the apostles in office, embassadors of Christ, having the keys of the kingdom of heaven committed to them. Believing all this, I was fully satisfied that I was doing God service in sprinkling a little water on the face of an innocent babe [326] in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Bro. Hartzel and I engaged in a written debate on these subjects, during which time I availed myself of all the aids in my power, both from books and from my preaching brethren. I did this in disguise, not wishing that the secret workings of my mind should be made manifest. It was customary with the ministers when they met on a visit, in order to pass the time more pleasantly and profitably to themselves, to take up a debatable question and discuss it. On one occasion I took the negative of infant baptism with the pastor of the German Reformed Church of New Lisbon. He being a scholar, and a man of experience, I discussed it with a good degree of energy, paying due deference to his age and superiority. He frankly confessed that infant baptism could not be positively sustained from the New Testament, and closed the debate with this remark: 'It is a good old practice, and I would have my children baptized if the whole world should repudiate the practice.' On another occasion, with the pastor of the Lutheran church in Carrollton, I took the negative of the same proposition. He made the same concession as the former, but his concluding remark differed, viz.: 'So we believe and so we preach.' I will refer to one more case: Conversing with the pastor of the Lutheran church in Canton, he discovered in me what I did not so fully realize myself, and thought my sentiments ran in the direction of my arguments. When we gave each other the parting hand he said: 'I fear the next time I shall hear from you, it will be John the Baptist'--my name being John. So the aid I sought against my opponent, made me weaker.

      "In the meantime I had in charge about thirty catechumens, instructing them in the religion of our fathers, qualifying them for the act of confirmation, in which act they voluntarily assume their baptismal vows made in their infancy by their sponsors or god-parents. The time [327] had arrived when it became my duty to ascertain whether they were all baptized. After asking several in the class and receiving an affirmative answer, the following colloquy ensued: A young lady whom I asked, Are you baptized? answered, 'I do not know!'

      "Ques. 'Do you not know that you were baptized?'

      "Ans. 'No.'

      "Ques. 'Did your parents never tell you that you were baptized?'

      "Ans. 'My parents told me that I was sprinkled when I was a baby, but I know nothing at all about it.'

      "The argument was overwhelming. A personal duty changed into an item of faith, robbing the believing penitent of one of the greatest privileges, to know that he has put on Christ in baptism through faith in him. It clinched the nail Bro. Hartzel had so skillfully driven. I immediately dismissed my class, returned home, and said to my wife, 'I shall never sprinkle another infant while I live.' She congratulated me on my resolution, expressed her gratitude and joy, and remarked; 'I never believed you would remain a pedobaptist many years.' This resolution of mine soon became public. On the night of the same day, Mr. Stewart, one of the deacons, called on me to come and baptize an infant of his brother's, which lay at the point of death. I informed him I could not comply without a divine warrant; I am fully convinced that heretofore when I sprinkled infants I did it in ignorance, on human authority. I gave him my reasons. The effect this announcement had on his feelings could not easily be described. He left. The child died that night. It was buried the next day, and I was not called upon to conduct the funeral services. In a very few days it was published throughout all my congregations that I had refused to discharge the ministerial obligations I was under to the Lutheran church.

      "I wrote a letter to Bro. Hartzel, informing him of [328] my full conviction of the truth, and desired him to send an appointment and baptize me. This brought our debate to a close. He cheerfully responded to my call, sent an appointment to the Phillips congregation, filled it in company with Bro. E. B. Hubbard; preached on a subject adapted to the occasion, after which my happy wife and myself were immersed by Bro. Hubbard, in the presence of a goodly number of my Lutheran brethren and sisters, March, 1834.

      "In the month of June following the Synod convened in New Lisbon. I addressed a letter to their honorable body, presenting it by the hands of Bro. Benj. Pritchard. The proposition for a hearing was discussed, and when a vote was called, the nays had it by a good majority of the preachers. Thus I was excluded from their fellowship as a heretic, greatly to the dissatisfaction of many of the laity, who judged that I ought to have had a hearing, and the right of self-defense. Thus ended forever my religious connection with the Lutheran church.

      "You ask me to relate some of my struggles and privations connected with this part of my history. I will answer you briefly: When this religious tie was sundered I was left in a very destitute condition. My salary at the time was four hundred dollars, which, added to marriage fees and other perquisites came to near five hundred dollars. My year was expired within two months when I came out from among them. My convictions of truth did not allow me to dissemble, and preach, and practice error two months longer for the salary. Neither did I ever receive a farthing of it, though it was collected in several of my congregations, and ready for delivery.

      "I had thirty acres of land, less than half paid for, without team or means to cultivate it. I was without money; forsaken of fathers and mothers. But my friends did not all forsake me. The Lord reserved to me two very wealthy men, members of the church from which I [329] seceded--Mr. Brinker and Mr. Switzer. They ever were, and they remained, my warmest friends. My departure from their doctrine only heightened their respect for me. They claimed it was the strongest evidence of my candor and honesty to leave a society that supported its ministers, and become identified with a people that repudiated salaried preachers. They both lent me generous, substantial aid, and remained my most ardent friends till their death. Some of the brethren were also benefactors to me, especially George Pow and A. Campbell. The church of Bethany presented me one hundred dollars, besides some valuable gifts.

      "I preached every Lord's day, and sometimes during the week. The brethren received me kindly, heard me gladly, thanked me heartily, invited me cordially to preach for them, but never seemed to consider that I lived just like themselves, by eating and drinking, and that my time was my only means of support. Consequently I had to 'dig.' I was not ashamed to dig; but one thing I plainly discovered and felt most seriously, that my sun had forever set so far as time for suitable preparation to hold forth the word of life was concerned. One of the congregations agreed to pay me one dollar a visit every four weeks, or one-fourth of my time. This was ominous of better times. Another congregation promised me fifty dollars for one-fourth of my time. A certain brother and sister, who always appeared to have a very high regard for me, were exceedingly hurt because Bro. Schaeffer was receiving a salary for preaching. I received only thirty-seven dollars of the amount, and unwilling to give further offense, I never asked for the balance.

      "I am glad that a change has been effected in this particular. Ministers are now cared for as justice and equity demand.

      "In reflecting on the past and the present, my losses [330] and privations, I always come to the conclusion that I was the gainer. The exchange of error for truth, I esteem a great gain. When my spirit has been almost crushed, and my physical nature almost exhausted by hard work, the consideration that I have found the light of the gospel has always revived and strengthened me.

	"Yours fraternally,
"DEERFIELD, O., August, 1872.	JOHN SCHAEFFER."

      The writer of these chronicles regards it important to present a correct, if not an exhaustive, history of the struggles and self-denials of the early preachers of the "reformation." Bro. Schaeffer's modesty would not have permitted him, unsolicited, to speak of his own case as he has in the above communication. From one, learn all. His story is not an exception. To a great extent they all went to the warfare at their own charges. The growth of justice in this particular was slow, and not a few were compelled to abandon the ripened fields of evangelical enterprise by the stern law of necessity. It is certainly ground of much regret that a brother of Bro. Schaeffer's excellent endowments of mind, manners, and education, a gift to the cause while he was young, a fluent speaker in his native German, could not have been amply supported, and employed to open the gospel to his own people, a work for which his experience was so good a preparation. [331]

[EHD 311-331]