the Rev. W. Turner , Jun. , MA., Lives of the eminent Unitarians

[119] of attention: ‘A calm review of the whole case suggests various apologies for the part which was acted by the Trinitarians. They attached incalculable value to their opinions, and saw that those opinions were in danger of being subverted by the influence of the ministers whom they invited, and long considered orthodox. They also saw that the places of worship which they had built at considerable expense were gradually becoming subservient to the dissemination of views which many called blasphemous and fatal. Moreover, their fears were increased by the well known fact, that what they deemed heresy was not openly inculcated; but that some friends of Peirce and Hallet carried on a secret mode of proselytizing, which appeared likely to be more hurtful to their cause than open warfare. And if on one side it be asserted that Mr. Lavington and his party were guilty of deceitful transactions, it cannot be denied on the other that the heterodox occasionally concealed their opinions on important topics, and endeavoured to give them a popular colouring. That the heterodox ministers wished for peace is very evident; but it is a question whether, in pursuing what they believed to be a Christian object, they did not sometimes resort to unworthy compromises. These considerations are perfectly compatible with a full appreciation of the difficulties in which they were placed, with high admiration of many parts of their conduct, and with firm persuasion that the cause of religious truth and religious liberty is deeply indebted to them. In the first place, they dared to inquire and decide for themselves, when it was the universal custom to be guided implicitly, ’