for Mr. Cook, at mr. halladays Richmond Budgs Dean St.
There is another letter bearing the two-penny post mark of the 20th of October, which I have also seen.—It is as follows:—
I received your note this morning in Bed, as I have contracted such a Dreadful cold Being wet on tuesday I am very much grievd i have not been able to comply with the request concerning Mr. C— But I shall certainly keep my eye upon him and Do him all the Good it lays in my power where ever he is he knows my Disposition too well to impute any remissness to my conduct But I cannot Do impossibilities as I have Lately had and have now Got so many Distressing cases in hand Beside, I will Be sure to call on you as soon as I can— But am not able to day
Badly directed to Mr. Oliver, or (Holloway) No. 6, Richmond’s buildings, Dean Street, Soho.
The next document is a letter dated March 7, 1810, from a person at Banbury named Hall, who says that there was a report there against Church of a very scandalous nature. And that the managers of the chapel, after making enquiries into it, sent him positive orders never to return to Banbury again.
Then follows a letter from Wm. Clarke of Ipswich, a young man between 19 and 20 years of age, which contains an account of attempts too horrid to be published in this paper. I have within the last four days seen the written confession (frightful indeed it is) of this poor simple young man, whose mind was bewildered by the canting exhortations of Church; and I have heard the whole of his statements corroborated by the oral testimony of a Mr. Wire who resides at Colchester, and knows Clarke very well. The circumstances related by Clarke, would have furnished an ample ground for a criminal prosecution had he made his complaint _immediately_ after the _assault_ was committed:—but suffering under the influence of ignorance and fear, he kept it a secret too long, and afterwards accepted of a pound note from Church. A case was laid before two eminent barristers, to have their opinion whether such a prosecution could be carried on with any prospect of conviction. Their opinion, which I now have before me in their own hand writing, is, that after the long concealment of a Charge, a Jury would pay no attention to his evidence, unless he was confirmed in his story by other evidence.