mm.
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
Uarlington JVLemorial J_/ibrary
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2010 with funding from
University of Pittsburgh Library System
http://www.archive.org/details/narrativeofproceOOgrah
NARRATIVE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICATORIES
REFORMED CIirRCH IN NORTH AIMERICA,
RELATIVE TO
THE EEVEBEJ^B DAVID GRJIIMM.
*• These principles and proceedings, odious aiid contemptible as tliey are, in effect are no less injiidicious. A wise and genei'ous people are roused by evLT}- appearance cf oppressive, unconstitutional measures, M^iether those measures are supported only by the power of government, or masked under the forms of a court of justice. Prudence and self-preservation will • bilge the most mode^'.ite disposiduns to make common cause even with a. man whose conduct they censure, if they &'-e him prosecuted in a way which the real spirit of the Lxvvs will not j.i-t;f\ .■" Juniut.
PITTSSURCSII
rRINTED BY £. ENGLT^.S AND GO. ATOOD-STRluET.
1811.
TO THE
CITIZENS OF PITTSBURGH, AND ITS ^^CINITY,
WHO WERE SPECTATORS AND AUDITORS OP THE GREATER PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS
RELATED I^T THE SEQUEL^
IS HUMBLY INSCRIBED,
BY THEIR
MOST OBEDIENT,
AND DEVOTED SERVANT,
THE AUTHOR,
PREFACE,
THE object of tills publication is to give a correct statement of die pro- ceeding's of the Reformed Church in America, relative to Mr. Graham. Tiic author was not at liberty to choose that species of composition which he might /— 7 conceive most congenial to his own taste. The historical manner necessari- I ly imposed itself upon him, being alone adapted to conduct to a knowledge of facts, by a regular and connected detail. In accounting for facts, which is die province of an historian, he has indulged himself sparingly. The facts are re- cent, and generally speak for themsehes. To many of them is applicable tlie O assertion of the eloquent apostle, in his defence before Agripp a: "These "*• things were not done in a corner." The excellence of a nan-ative, being in ■^^ proportion to the correctness with which it copies facts, the author has kept ^ this rigidly in view. Frequent references are had to the proceedings of the Irish Presbytery. These ai'C not dragged into die naiTative, and interwoven with it, at the pleasure of the author. They constitute a part of the original proceedings, and must, of necessit)^ appear in the copy. The epistolaiy me- thod has been adopted, as best suited to give a familiar representation of facts, and to facilitate the perusal, without breaking die unity of die naiTative. Aware that a prosecution of diis kind, however interesting die materials, or ■^^ elegant die execution, expires with a day, the author has paid litde attention ^^ to its embeUishment. Nodiing could exceed the hurry widi which it has been published. Numerous and pressing avocations, rude and imperfect materi- ^^^ als, public anxiety, the harshness and discordancy of the subject upon the s^' feelings of the writer, and the incessant spur of the compositor, have com- .^ bined in hastening diesc sheets before the public, widi all dielr imperfections. ^^ Several repetitions, and perhaps apparent conti-acEctions, may appear. The similarity of the subject, discussed in different judicatories, will account for the repeddons. The apparent contradicdons are to be ascribed to the diffi- CSt culties attending the execudon. Each separate sheet, soon as written out* "^^ went to press, and it was not undl the whole was published, die wTiter had ■ an opportunity of contemplating the parts, united as a whole. Should the
^
PRErACE.
witnesses, or any others, complain of the brevity of any part, it Is a hopeless case. The writer wished to g-Ive every satisfaction. He has been so solicitous to effect tliis, as to endanger tlie sale of the publication, by swelling it into an unusual pamphlet-size. To have done more, might have occasioned lerlous embarrassment. No person can be more sensible than the writer, that the Narrative is deficient in some instances, redundant in others, and inelegant in all. Its abruptness at one time, and insufferable prolixity at another, he has reviewed with concern. Should it be attacked upon principles of taste and criticism, the author will not undertake to defend it ; but as a rude and faith- ful portrait of original facts, he holds himself bound, on all proper occasions, to appear its advocate. — No apology, surely, will be required for tlie produc- tion itself It has, it is trae, an individual for its subject, but the rights of that individual are the rights of humanity. He has been long tormented and abus- ed by a few obscure and perverse individuals. He has at length wrested himself from the grasp of his oppressors, and lodged his appeal with his God. He has thrust himself upon the attention of an impartial public. To this re- dresser of human wrongs, under God, he has long and anxiously looked for- ward, hoping in its presence to abash his adversaries. Here he has taken his stand, in the presence of God and the American people. Above is the banner of liberty ; lo, how it waves ! The generous eagle perches above his head, and the propitious stars shoot a gladdening ray. Here he intends to hold up to public execration, tliose deeds wluph were perpetrated in secret, and, in jus- tice to himself and his fellow-men, to have them read, and reviewed, and re- probated. If any thing can screen the measures adopted against him from this fate, it will be the obscurity of those who concerted them. This is to be re- gretted. To fall bravely is the consolation of a good and great man, but to pe- rish in secret, under the assassinating knife of a coward, jpves a keenness to tlie edg'e of anguish.
NARRATIVE.
LETTER I.
I have erery where seen confederacies of various sorts, and I have always found in them the same species of men. They march, it is true, under standards of different colors; but tliey are always those of ambition.
St. Pierre.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
AT your request, I shall proceed, at intervals, to give you a Narrative of the proceedings of the Reformed Church in this country, as they respect Mr. Graham. You are already suffi- ciently acquainted with his manner of life from his youth ; his standing with the Secession Church; his declining that cominu- nion ; his application to the Reformed Church in Ireland ; the treatment he met with ; the manner in which he eroigrated, and the footing on which he appeared on. his arrival in America. With his own proceedings, and the proceedings of his brethren towards him, both in Ireland and America, since his arrival, I profess myself intimately acquainted. The facts which I know, I propose faithfully to narrate, leaving it with you, to judge be- tween Mr. G. and his brethren.
Before I enter upon the narrative, it is necessary I should introduce you to an acquaintance with the pastors of the Re- formed Church in America, who are to make the principal figure in the piece. These are the Reverend Messrs. Gibson, Donally, Williams, M'Master, Black, Wylie and M'Leod, who, in 1808, when Mr. G. arrived, constituted one presbytery, their highest judicatory.
Gibson had formerly occupied a congregation in the north of Ireland, but owing to his indiscretion in bearing a testimonij which, in his mouth, consists in a virulent and unedifying op- position to constituted authorities, he was compelled to emigrate. This gentleman's disposition has not, in the least, been affected by change of climate. With equal vociferation and virulence, he continues to inveigh against society in every form, and is equal- ly unfortunate in provoking the resentment of his fellow men. He furnishes an exa.nple, that no modification of society can allay a turbulent spirit. His general indiscretion, has prevented him from acquirng any influence in the management of eccle-
10
siastical affairs. Unqualified, both by disposition and circumstance to maintain his independence, his place has of course, been surrendered to his brethren. You can hardly conceive a more humbling sight, than this hoary headed senior, standing up in one of their judicatories, delivering his opinion. The Inquisition could not be supposed to excite a greater panic than he appears to feel, lest he should interfere with the judgment of any of his brethren, and by this means provoke their animadversion.
Donally's character is little known, owing to his local situation, which renders it impracticable for him to co-operate ■with his brethren in the government of the church. It is said he is possessed of an independent mind. Perhaps the encomi- um is the more profusely dispensed, that he has seldom an op- portunity of displaying his independence. Nothing would sooner dispose me to suspect him destitute of this inestimable quality, than the declaration of his brethren, that he possesses it. I dare affirm it, that merit among these people, is in an inverted propor- tion to their commendations. Nothing is so formidable to a des- potic faction, as genuine independence of mind ; nothing naore delectable, than a tame and abject disposition. From the one they have every thing' to fear ; from the other every thing to hope. It becomes their interest to confound distinctions, and metamorphose character. They commend where they ought to censure, and they censure where they ought to commend. They holdup di fierverted medium, through which they call upon the people to contemplate human character. These are credulous enough to imagine, they have apprehended it distinctly, nevei* dreaming of the imposture that is put upon them by influential characters, in whom they implicitly confide. In no community, perhaps, is this drivelling and contemptible practice niore pre- valent, than the one which is the subject of these strictures. It infallibly indicates a corrupt constitution, and a policy which would degrade even a civil community ; but which becomes utterly detestable in a gospel church.
Williams is deficient in genius and learning. By despotic measures he has been thrust upon a congregation, destitute of almost every ministerial qualification. He is exceedingly accept- able to his brethren, who, regardless of his fitness to serve in the gospel of God's Son, find it convenient to give some weight to a character, which they are certain to turn to their own advan- tage. He is too glaringly deficient, to hazard an encomium on his talents ; but they have adventured to pronounce him a per- fect prodigy for piety. With his piety I have nothing to do ; it is not a proper subject for criticism — but this I dare say, Wil- liams would never have degraded this aspiring community, but for the unresisting and eternal compliance with the measures of his brethren, which the indolence of his constitution abundantly presaged.
11
M'Master possesses parts above contempt; but these have languished for want of cultivation. At an unseasonable period of life he commenced an education, which can scarcely be said to merit the name liberal. With swollen and clamorous pretensions to independence of mind, and a few hackneyed phrases, such as, force of mind.) force of character^ vigour of intellect, indefiendence^ &c. he is one of the most complete dupes you have ever wit- nessed. His little mind has crept forth like the tenc'rils of a French bean, and clasped itself round one of his brethren, in whose presence he cannot command a single thought, that is not stamped with the venality of a slave. His body alone is his own ; that is M'Master ; all the rest is borrowed. — Under such incum- brances as GinsoN, Williams and M'Master, any community would groan. Should it, in its virtuous struggles for its rights, look up to such characters, it looks in vain. Persons of this de- scription, like articles vended in market, always become the property of the highest bidder. Although by the constitution of the Presbyterian church, they have confided with them an equa- lity of power; they have neither inclination nor ability to pre- serve it. It is more congenial to their disposition to secure inglorious ease, by partmg with their power and independence, than to struggle against the encroachments of ambitious brethren. Their incapacity to appreciate the value of the power they pos- sess, or what is worse, to use it with discretion and firmness, throws the principal weight of authority into the hands of a few^ and introduces despotism. Owing to such drivellers, the rights of the community are prostrated at the feet of restless and un- principled individuals.
Black, Wylie, and M'Leod, commenced preachers toge- ther. The whole business of the community devolved upon them for some time, without even 7iominal aid. This, with their contiguity of situation and frequent intercourse, has given them all the influence of a little triumvirate. They have engrossed the power, and continue to manage exclusively the affairs of their church. The two former are, however, rather nominal than real rulers. At the most, they act as a check upon M'Leod, who, with more ambition and intrigue than all his bretliren together, has rendered himself nearly absolute.
Black is a mere creature, possessed of small talents, a large quantity of pedantry, and a sophistical turn. In the art of quib- bling he ranks high, and bears off the palm from all his brethren for buffoonery. He is one of your clamorous and verbose gentle- men, who seem to think wisdom consists in much speaking, and erudition in loquacious pretensions to it. He is, perhaps, more deficient in taste than any of his brethren, and is not troubled with too nice a sense of honour. He is one of the many who feed with a rancorous rapture on the catalogue of others distresses, and is perpetually agonised by envy, jealousy, and the oilier
12
ghostly spectres which unceasingly haunt a little mind. Having a large proportion of the community allotted exclusively to him- self, and endowed with a sonorous voice, and an eternal flutter of speech, he has acquired considerable popularity ; but with as little real esteem or conviction of personal worth, as can well be imagined. He has not been outstripped by any of his brethren, for an illiberal treatment of his people, or an illegal and capri- cious use of power to gratify his passions, or bitter invectives against other communities. Although accustomed to play the despot at home, he is exceedingly tame and complacential abroad, and is perfectly contented to resign all pretensions to a knowledge of the management of ecclesiastical affairs. These he
tamely surrenders to W and M'L , who flatter him in
return, by laughing immoderately at his buffoonery, and employ- ing him to write out their transactions. Not unfrequently, how- ever, they pounce upon him, and consign him to that state of degradation, to which he appears to have been constitutionally allotted.
., Wtlie is a man of acquisitions, rather than natural powers. He is indebted, for superiority over his brethren in a knowledge of science, to indefatigable application, rather than to any ori- ginal superiority of genius. In that knowledge which is indisi pensably requisite in preaching the gospel, I mean theology, humanity, and belle lettres^ he is unusually deficient. An acade- my occupies his principal attention — ministerial duty being only a secondary object with him. Unskilled in the management of church affairs, he discovers the imperiousness of an ecclesiastic, without the sense or the demeanor. When he appears in a judi* catory, he discovers more of the schoolmaster than the presbyter, constantly judging and deciding with the austerity of an acade- mical disciplinarian. There is no man more a slave to his pas- sions, although none with higher pretensions to the dignified government of intellect. Attack him on the side of sensibility, and he is alike easily flattered, cajoled, irritated and soothed. His is not the generous attachment of the man of honor, nor the stately indignation of a noble mind ; but the fickleness of a coquette, with the peevishness of age, and the resentment of a termagant. His attachments exhaust themselves in flattery, and his aversion in low scurrility. This imbecility of character, with an exclusive attention to secular pursuits, give M'L a de- cided superiority over him, although much his inferior in literary acquisitions. Composed of such materials, and thus circum- stanced, he ceases to be an object of emulation, and becomes an instrument too inviting not to be played upon by men of cunning
and address. M'L is perfectly able to appreciate all this,
and unceasingly practises his intrigue upon him. Sometimes the
matter is managed so palpably, that W takes the alarm,
and storms and rages no little ; but, in general, it is conducted
13
with z finesse which bids defiance to detection. From these deli- neations of W 's character, Avhich I dare say will be found
correct, little, beneficial to the community to which he belongs, is to be expected. His caprice disqualifies him for anything which requires resolution and perseverance. This is not the worst. He has pride enough to project, although he has not energy to exe- cute. Let another set his limits, let them be such as he cannot easily transgress, within them let him be put in motion and pro- pelled by his feelings, and while they remain intense, he will execute with despatch ; but let W coolly discuss, and pro- ceed rationally to execute, and he will inevitably desert his un- dertaking. With all his attainments, were it not for the occa- sional interposition of more discreet counsels than his own,
W 's measures alone would have been sufficient, long since,
to have sunk the community. It is rather surprising that his bre- thren, who are perfectly aware of all this, should have permitted
W to act such a conspicuous part in the prosecution of Mr.
G. But it was a desperate case. As M'Leod expressed himself, " the matter was at issue between Mr. G. and the church, and one must fall." It being a venture, where so much was hazarded, every circumstance required to be in proportion. To place at the head of the prosecution a desperado, was perfectly congenial to the undertaking. It will be a lasting monument of the courage of W— — , and may not improbably convey a high opinion of his spirit and enterprise.
IM'^Leod possesses more energy of mind than any of his brethren, but it is the wildness of genius, untutored and un- ' checked by cultivation. He labours under all the disadvantages of a supei'ficial education, and uniformly mistakes pedantry for learning. The resources of his mind are very considerable ; but, as might be expected, they are wasted for want of being placed under the direction of a cultivated taste. He is possessed of a consciousness of his superiority of talents, which, added to a sot- tish self-sufficiency, a stoical apathy, an unconquerable rudeness of manner, and false vievvs of magnanimity, impress a convic- tion, that he is destined to occupy a high standing in a commu- nity, where such things are in high demand. Ambition is his ruling passion. The general imbecility of his brethren concurs with his own policy to place him at their head. He is much more of the politician than the ambassador of Christ, and owes his su- periority over his brethren, not to a reputation for eminent piety, but to manoeuvre and intrigue. You have, perhaps, never seen a more perfect disciple of Machiavel. His dii'ecting princi- ple, from which he never departs, is, that the end once proposed must be gained. If fair and honorable means accomplish it, it is well ; if not, there are other resources, of which he does not hesi- tate to avail himself. You will, perhaps, hear with surprise, that this gentleman, although a professed minister of Christ,
14
practises upon human nature as he finds it, to gain his own pur- poses, with as little reserve as a minister of the Dey of Algiers, and appears as little concerned to have human nature regenerated ; and that this practice, although most detestable in a minister of Christ, is regarded by his brethren as his principal excellence, and, therefore, worthy of imitation. They have found out, that it is the great secret of ruling successfully, and to govern, being the rage with these gentlemen, that they should take the hint with avidity, or practice upon it to the extent of their several capacities, is not to be wondered at. In a word, M'Leod has pros- trated the community. To effect this, he studies to keep him- self disengaged from every pursuit which might interfere with his ecclesiastical plans ; and seems to have but one object, which he steadily keeps in view, to extend his own influence, in pro- portion to the growing extent of the community. A church about to be organised in a widely extended continent, and under plausible pretensions to superior pui'ity of principle and prac- tice, was an object which this man's ambition must have seized •with avidity. To engross this object, no expedient is left unes- sayed. While he contrives to be employed to write out systems for the people, he exerts his policy no less effectually, in drag- ging the influence of his brethren within the vortex of his own. No community has ever hastened with more rapidity to the abso- lute government of one. It is a despotism in miniature. If you except the open avowal of the infallibility of a man, you will find in its government every other essential of popery. And although this doctrine is not so glaring, as to become an article of their creed, it is, in effect, maintained. The judicatories of this church insist, in the most unqualified manner, upon submission to their decisions, threatening punishment to any who may question their legality, and positively refusing to admit the people to have recourse to the usual expedients, for the exoneration of con- science, such as protest, expostulation, or remonstrance. Only admit what can be demonstrated, that their judicatories are un- der the influence of one man, and that their decisions are no more than his dictates, stamped with the mere form of Presby- tery ; that these decisions are enforced upon the people, without respite or qualification, on pain of church censure ; and you have one of the most perfect ecclesiastical despotisms, not excepting popery itself. This is conceived' by these gentlemen and their deluded adherents, as the ultimatum of discipline. This, how- ever, may be questioned, since there are thousands of slave- holders in the United States, who enforce their mandates with at least as absolute an authority, and are so tenacious of their pre-eminence over their uncomplaining slaves, that they deign to converse with them only upon the end of the whip.
I have thus introduced the subject, with a brief sketch of the characters of those who compose the judicatories of this com-
15
mjunity. I have regarded them chiefly in the light of rulers. With this view of them alone, the following narrative is con- cerned. Having ascertained the characters of the rulers in this body, it will serve to explain the detail of facts which follows. From what you know of the dispositions of Mr. G. his aversion to despotism, his candor m stating his opinions ; in short, his constant wish to think and act for himself ; you will readily infer, that so soon as these dispositions Avere shewn, he must have been very unacceptable to such gentlemen as are described above. And that they finding him equally inflexible to either intrigue or despotism, should have contrived to reduce him with the pub- lic, and finally to divest him of his office, is as natural, as that any given cause should produce its effect.
Yours, &c.
LETTER II.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
HAVING made you acquainted with the gentlemen who are principally concerned in these strictures, I proceed to the nar- rative. On the second of August, 1808, Mr. Graham arrived with his family in New- York. He had sailed from Gravesend, in England, on the 12th of June, after a stay of about six months in London. Immediately after his arrival, a kind Providence placed him, in the character of tutor, in the family of Peter Jay Munro, Esq. With this gentleman he remained until the No- Tember following ; when, by the friendly aid of Mr. Munro, he procured a valuable school in the city. Mr. Graham having un- derstood that a committee of the Presbytery of the ^efoi-med Church was to meet at the celebration of the Lord's Supper, at Coldenham, wrote a letter, addressed to the committee, wishing to be taken under the protection of the Reformed Church, The committee acceded to his wish, and despatched an official letter to Ireland, to obtain requisite documents respecting him. In the interim, God countenanced his exertions as a teacher. Some of the inost respectable and influential characters in the city be- came his patrons, particularly the Honourable De Witt Clinton, Mr. Munro, Mr. Catline, Mr. Lynch, &:c.
Mr. Graham, perceiving that Providence smiled upon his ef- forts, conceived a wish to remain in the character of a teacher, until he should liquidate the small svim of debt wluch hehgd left
16
unpaid in Ireland. This he suggested to some of his brethren, who did not give it their approbation. Th^y appeared extremely solicitous that he should resume his office, and decidedly op- posed every measure v^^hich might interfere with his application to be restored. About the 1 st of January, 1809, Mr. Wylie visited New-York. He called upon Mr. Graham, heard his histoiy, ac- knowledged his admiration of the Providence which had con- ducted him to America, and solicited him to apply for immediate restoration. Mr. G. began to think seriously of re- suming his office. The ardor which Mr. Wylie had inspired, was still more enflamed by his letters, which immediately followed. One of them, which is dated from Philadelphia, March 24, 1809, is as follows :— -
" My clear Sir — I received your letter about a week ago. I attended to its contents. I remain precisely of the same mind with regard to your affairs, as I was when I had the pleasure of seeing you. The adjustment will be no difficult matter. With, or without documents from Ireland, I am inclined to believe it will terminate in the same way. You will meet in the month of May, brethren, whose hearts glow with affection, and whose under- standings are unprejudiced against you. I expect nothing but unanimity in the matter. I hope you will make no engagements in the teaching line, or any other, which would interfere with your coming on at our next presbyterial meeting."
Similar professions of friendship, and solicitations for Mr. Graham's restoration, were expressed by Mr. M'Leod. This gentleman, owing to his residence in the city, had frequent op- portunities of conversing with Mr. Graham. He warmly coun- selled him to relinquish every pursuit which would interfere with his restoration to the ministry — remonstrated against his proposal to continue in New-York, until he should be able to li- quidate his debts ; and not unfrequently insinuated his fears, both in public and private, lest Mr. Graham should sacrifice his office to some more lucrative employment.
Nothing was more dear to Mr. Graham's soul than the office of the ministry, of which he had been divested. He longed to re- sume it, but he wished to resume it honorably. He knew this to be best effected by liquidating those debts which had been dwelt upon so inviduously by his enemies. He would have pre- ferred teaching until that should have been accomplished. But the fascinating charms of his office, with the persuasive eloquence of his brethren, overcame him, and he determined to embrace the first opportunity, to humbly supplicate the judicatories of the church, that his office might be restored-
In the month of May, 1809, Mr. Graham appeared before the Reformed Presbytery, which met in Philadelphia. He professed it to be his wish to continue under the protection of the churcli, and to be dealt witli in order to restoration. All the materials
17
requisite to enable tiie Presbytery to deliberate, were now in their possession. The Irish documents had arrived, and Mr. Graham was present to answer interrogations, and to explain> when either should be deemed necessary. With these advan- tages, the Preabytery proceeded to discuss and decide. They sustained the act of deposition inflicted by the Irish church, heard explanations from Mr. Graham, sustained his prayer for restoration, inflicted presbyterial censure, restored him to the standing of a private member, and proceeded to take measures towards his restoration to his former ministerial standing. A committee was appointed to meet in August for this purpose.
Mr. Graham returned to New-York, and resumed his school. He had the satisfaction to learn by letter from his brethren in different parts, that the late decisions of Presbytery were pecu- liarly gratifying upon rcilection. They appeared to look forward with unusual solicitude, to the appointed meeting in August. Mr. Graham's feelings gladly mingled with theirs. He congra- tulated himself upon the unsolicited and fervid affecticn of his brethren. He regarded it as a welcome harbinger of peace and comfort, which lie had hitherto eagerly sought for in that con- nexion, but which he had sought in vain.
On the 12th of August, 1809, pursuant to the appointment of the Presbytery of May, the committee proceeded to restore Mr. Graham to the office of the holy ministry. His engagements "in New-York continued to oblige him until the November following. Notwithstanding his restoration, therefore, he continued to teach. Meanwhile he was appointed by the committee Avho re- stored him, to supply the congregation of Mr. M'Leod during an absence of scm.e weeks, on Presbyterial business. Here I fix the date of that scries of persecution, v/hich Mr. Graham has, since that period, sustained. Its origin v/as, to external observation, nearly imperceptible, but it gradually developed itself. It grew up amidst rotten professions of friendship, subtlety, 8.nd intrigue, which for a time concealed it from public view. And it had been always concealed, but for the violence of those passions which nursed it. Cunning and finesse naturally yield to the impetuo- sity of fear, anger, envy, and malignity.
A letter, which now lies upon my table, written by Mr. Gra- ham, addressed to Mr. Wylie, and dated from New-York, No- vember 3d, 1809, Avill serve to rcilect some light on this inter- esting part of the narrative. It proceeds thus :
" Reverend and -very dear Sir — I have expected a letter from you with unusual impatience. I could fill my letter with interro- gatories respecting your health, family, avocations, congregation, &c. of which your frugality and reservedness in writing, allow mc to remain as ignorant, as if I never had either the pleasure of your acquaintance, or an assurance of your friendship. But if you are silent, 1 shall be selfish ; and to be revenged, shall write a
C
18
long letter rcsppecting myself. Of my avocations »» preacher and teacher, with the circumstances of time, place, prospect. See. you can be acquainted by the bearer. I shall, therefore, proceed to write you matters which few know, and which those few will find their interest either to conceal or misrepresent. I shall be the more explicit, that I place unbounded confidence in your friendship, and am convinced of your concern for the interest of the church. Passing over the indiscreet conduct of Dr. M'Leod's relations, since I returned Avith my office to New-York, I am compelled to make a feAv strictures on his own : which 1 do with more confidence, knowing your mutual friendship. Shall I suppose any ©f the ministers of the meek Jesus, any of the pas- tors of the Reformed Church, or any preacher who gives the smallest degree of credit to the gospel, capable of prostituting the sacred ofiice to purposes so base, as endeavours to blast the growing reputation, or the usefulness of a brother ? Or could any be guilty of such heaven-daring impiety, such base deceit, are you acquainted Avith language adequate to paint the crime ? — You, my friend, will do more than conjecture my meaning, when I inform you that there is some preacher, >vhich Dr. M'Leod has had occasion to allude to frequently of late, and to whom he never alludes without apparent symptoms of pain — " Who *^ preaches himself' — Who is much addicted to figures — Who ad- " dresses himself to the lighter faculties in the language of romance « — and feeds a hypocritical taste for the sake of pofiularity — Wh% *' affects an appearance of uncommon sanctity ; but did they know " his character — Who is possessed of a vanity and pride which can- " not brook the least neglect— ^Takes offence slightly ■> and would pro- " bably seekre-uenge" &c. These are the express terms without the slightest variation, uttered once and again with the true pathos, with which the doctor appears, in the most of his exhibitions, to be totally unacquainted. But every man who feels, will be elo- quent, and I have no doubt, did the doctor feel oftener, upon subjects of infinitely more importance, he would be less com- pelled to use indiscreet methods to secure his popularity — Is this the man who compliments himself so often with the epithet •magnanimous ? Is this the person who boasts of giving a tone of sentiment to the church in America ? Are these the fruits of the gospel which he preaches, and the sentiments he conveys ? What am I to expect in that church, of which he can boast himself the leader ? Are these the first fruits of my connexion with the Reformed Church in America ; what then must be the harvest ? If, without any provocation but preaching the gospel, I am so basely treated by my brother, who takes care to convince the people that he esteems me highly, can I ever, upon reflection, bring myself to think, that in making so many sacrifices, I have *«t«d wisely \ Does it not appear that the same genius of ma-
19
lignity is pursuing me in America as did in Ireland ? How can I expect to be useful in a church, where persons Avho are idolized are employed, both in the pulpit and out of it, in stigmatizing my character, and spreading evil surmises against me ? Or what confidence can I put in a people who regard me as a stranger, and are enjoined, with all the eloquence and energy of one whom they regard as a demigod., combined with the sacred veneration of the pulpit ; to view me as an object of suspicion, a vain man, a hypocrite, envious and revengeful !"
At the solicitation of a number of Mr. Graham's friends, he for several weeks continued to occupy Dr. M'Leod's pulpit on the evening of each Lord's day. The fury of M'Leod and his relations, however, compelled him at length to decline officiating further. He chose to remain unengaged as a preacher from February, until April, when he completed his engagements in New- York, and repaired as a supply to Baltimore.
Shortly after Mr. Graham's I'estoration, he supplic^ed the Northern Presbytery for permission to remain in New-York six months longer, as a teacher, his prospects in the depart- ment of teaching being at that time very attractive. The Pres- bytery consented. In April following the engagements termi- nated. In the meantime, his brethren had concerted and adopted measures to have him settled in Baltimore. Mr. Wylie in par- ticular, had interested himself. The interest he took will appear from the foUoAving extracts, from a letter of his to Mr. Graham, dated November 13th, 1809. "I hope, sir, you will pardon the " freedom I have taken with regard to your future settlement. " I have been, negociating with the professors of Baltimore " college for a respectable birth for you, provided you should " think proper to pitch your camp in that city. I am fully per- " suaded there is no vacancy, among our conncxioiis, where a " better field presents itself for a display of your popular talents. " You would soon, in all probability, collect a reputable congre- « gation in that place. With the professors of the institution al- " ludcd to, I am perfectly faluiliar. I mentioned you to them. " They were delighted with the prospect. They will wait till " next May for you. They wrote me on the subject. I promised " to consult you and report to them. I hope you will permit me " to make a favourable report," Sec.
Similar communications were frequently made to Mr. Graham by Mr. Wylie. The rest of the brethren concurred Avith him. All agi'eed that Baltimore was the most suitable place. At their solicitation, therefore, although without any presbyterial ap- pointment, Mr. Graham repaired to Baltimore as soon as his engagements in New-York were completed.
Upon Mr. Graham's first visit to Baltimore, his settlement there was rendered probable. The probability lessened, upon paying a second visit. He gave no encouragement to the few
"2^
brethren who were there ; and he positively refused to make any engagements with the president of the college. He wished time to consider. He feared the principles of the Reformed Church would not soon become popular there, and conceived \ the in- crease of the small congregation to be very problematical.
In May, the committee which had been authorised to take cognizance of Mr. Graham until the meeting of synod, met in Philadelphia. He was presented with a scale of appointments, enjoining him to visit the vacancies in the north, during the summer months, and then to repair to the western country. He was also appointed a member of committee to co-operate with his brethren to the west, in receiving and disposing of whate- ver calls might be forwarded for his acceptance. Baltimore was still regarded as the ultimatum of all discussions on the subject of his final settlement ; but order required that other vacancies should be indulged in forwarding their calls.
Mr. Graham having fulfilled his appointments, to the north, set out in August for the west. Shortly after his arrival, a commit- tee of presbytery met. Mr. Graham was presented with two calls, one from Baltimore, the other from Cannonsburgh. He accepted the latter.
In the May of 1810, immediately succeeding to the unhappy- winter which Mr. Graham passed with his brethren of the same community in New-York, he aided at the celebration of the Lord's supper in the congregation of Mr. Wylie. Dr. M'Leod co-operated also. His enmity and influence combined, alienated the affection of Mr. W. from Mr. G. What his letters during the winter had begun, he had now an opportunity of completing. On the same occasion, Mr. Graham delivered a discourse " on the utility of learning to a preacher, and of its abuse in evange- lical discussions." With the latter part the brethren were much offended, particularly Mr. Wylie, who appeared to think it in- tended to reduce his popularity with his people. These feelings, stimulated as they were by M'Leod, became permanent. The
rejection of the call of Baltimore, gave fresh disgust to W .
If any thing was wanting to produce a most perfect revolution in his breast, it was accepting the call of Cannonsburgh.
M'Leod and Wylie were now ripe for any attempt which might either divest Mr. G. of his office, or at least prevent his acquiring influence in the community. Each had his personal quarrel to avenge, and both seemed to dread his growing popu- larity. This was particularly the case with M'Leod, whose am- bitious projects to enslave the community, he easily perceived, were suspected by Mr. Graham. Am.bition is ever jealous. Jt'I'Leod had, from his earliest acquaintance with Mr. G. disco- vered suspicions of his one day interfering with his plans. The independent conduct of Mr. G. toward him in New-York, had heightened those suspicions, and what v/as wanting to confirm
21
them he had from Wylie, who had obtained Mr. Graham*s con- fidence.
These gentlemen did not content themselves with the usual methods of resentment. They determined to aim at once at the ministry of Mr. Graham. Nothing was wanting but a well-con- certed plan to accomplish their wishes. They determined to at- tack Mr. G. in those parts of his character which were rendered Tulnerable, by his emigration from Ireland, and to propagate sus- picion relative to a dereliction of Reformation principles. Mr. M'Leod paid a visit to Mr. Wylie about the month of January, as soon as the report of Mr. Graham's reception of the call of Cannonsbui'gh may be supposed to have reached them. Dur- ing a stay of some weeks, the matter was discussed in every possible point of view, the conspiracy was formed, and measures were concerted to have it carried into effect. These measures, which were immediately developed, consisted in the propagation of reports pernicious to Mr. Graham's character, studied at- tempts to awaken tlie suspicions and destroy the confidence of the people, and indefatigable exertions to procure materials for conducting a process against him. Every person in the commu- nity, of any tolerable standing or influence, and particularly those who were known to be inimical to Mr. Graham, were se- lected, as proper objects of confidence. In short, the reverend ministry, the eldership, and those of the community in whom they could confide, became panders of detraction. The less dis- cerning part of the community, and those that could not be trusted, were surprised to learn that something, they could not learn what, was in agitation relative to Mr. Gmham. They were taught to believe it was something serious, and would probably issue in his degradation. These measures were pro'secuted with a subtlety which bid defiance, for some time, to detection. They were contrived to poison the sources of secret friendship and confidence, as they respected Mr. G. and to so efPcctuaHy preju- dice the minds of the people, as to prepare them for those unjust decisions which were to terminate the scene.
A copious extract from a letter, addressed by Mr. G. to one of his brethren, will give further satisfaction on this part of the narrative. It is dated from Cannonsburgh, March 12th, 1811.
" The conduct, sir, which your brethren have adopted, as it respects me since my arrival in America, has been inconsistent. What has been practised for some months past, has been worse than inconsistent — it has been malicious. Upon my arrival, you employed every means to impress upon my mind, your wish that I should be restored, and to suggest your belief of the tyranny and cruelty of your Irish brethren. How often have some of you uttered, in my liearing, and in the hearing of others, that you easily accounted for the treatment I met with in Ireland ? You did more than insinuate, that I had suffered most unjustly, and
22
that the proceedings of the Irish presbytery were capricious and illegal. You took occasion to assvire me that I should meet with brethren in America, apprised of the true state of things, and prompt to redress my grievances. All this you did unsolicited. At this time God had brightened my prospects. I was often put in mind of the seducing influence of a respectable situation, such as I then occupied, and the criminality of an attempt to abandon the ministry. I expressed a wish to remain in that situation for three years, believing, at the end of that pei'iod, I should be able to liquidate my debts, and should, with more respectability, re- turn to my office. Against this some of you demurred, still in- sisting upon the necessity of resuming my office, both as it re- spected my own vows, and the destitute situation of the Ame- rican church. Every method, which you thought likely to prevail upon me, to offer myself for restoration, on the May ensuing, 1 809, was adopted. I consented to appear at your Presbytery. I did appear. Your measures relating to restoration, were pro- posed with much zeal and address, and followed up with ala- crity. God appeared to open a door. Such was the community of interest, and unity of operation which prevailed, that nothing re- mained for me, but'|merely to ' consent. The decisions were so rapid and auspicious, and your friendship so warm and energetic, that my interest united with my inclination, in agreeing to every thing proposed. To be short, you agreed unanimously to re- store. I have no objections that you should reflect upon your conduct, and either call yourselves, or sufi'er to be called by others, foolish, rash, and by every other degrading epithet. But, sir, this is a disgraceful resource. A Presbytery to voluntarily plunge itself into circumstances, which, at the best, admit only of a schoolboy's apology. After my restoration, as if that great duty, as you had conceived it, had been, in iJisofactOy fatal to the respect you owed both your own character and mine, you made daily encroachments upon your fraternal professions of friendship. Was it that I began to utter heresy? No; neither you, nor your Irish brethren, have had courage enough to charge me with heresy. Was it that you thought me too contemptible to occupy your pulpits? I have your hand-writing, adulatory enough, and can appeal to other documents, that this was not the cause. Or was it, that I practiced any vice, public or private, derogatory to ministerial usefulness ? No ; this you have never been able to prove. What then was the cause ? Why did my brethren cease to discover an attachment, labour to disparage my exhibitions, studiously remind the people of my fall, exevt them- selves to obstruct their confidence, use undue methods to pre- judice one another, so soon as I began to co-operate with them in the ministry ? This was an effect so contrary to what could be rationally expected, that it must have had some very singular cause. Whatever the cause may have been, it is certain
23
your brethren found their interest in concealing it, while they either could not, or would not, conceal the eftect. Grant me the evidence of the historian to be legitimate, and indulge me with the same liberty in accounting fov facts, and without either a charge of undue suspicion, or a breach of charity, I shall account for your conduct — You did not immediately cuter into a conspi- racy to divest me of my reputation and usefulness. The prowess was slow and gradual. By some unaccountable fatality I re- ceived the welcome of a brother, was introduced into your pul- pits in the usual way, with a shew of respect; but left you usually much dissatisfied ; and had the mortification afterwards to leari^^ you were each in your turn ripe for any plot which might be cal- culated to reduce me with the public.
It will amuse you, sir — I hope it will do more — to suggest a few things, which, to the reflecting part of mankind, will speak for themselves. Do you know any thing of the conduct of your friends in New-York, immediately after my restoration ? Had I fulminated the anathemas of popery, or raked up and vindicated all the heresies of all ag^s, or blasphemed most horribly the pre- cious name of the God of the gospel, they could not have been more convulsed. The contemptible friends of the still more cow tem/itible Stavely, were hurried into paroxysms of envy and jealousy, which they could not conceal. Even the seraphic Doc- tor* exhibited symptoms of a hectic nature. A crouded house — bursts of approbation — a stranger to have his temple bound — • the seraphic doctor looking on, were things not to be endured. Racks, gibbets, torture, and death — How sheepish would the great man look at his friends — how ghastly Avould they smile on him. — O eloquence, thou impostor, romance, metaphor, mere sound, sing-song, bombast, fiddling, nonsense, every thing that is base, contemptible, and dreadful. " Horrible shadow, unreal mockery, hence ; hadst thou taken any shape but that, even the rugged Russian bear, the armed Rhinoceros or Hyr- canian tyger, the doctor's firm nerves would have borne it." How may we suppose the gentle and persuasive accents of a once injured apostle, fell upon the ears of Diotrephes ! The bowlings of the forest must not have been more harsh and dread- ful. Poor Diatrcphes, " you loved to have the pre-eminence." Who would not have pitied you, sweating and groaning under the captivating discussions of the apostle ? Who would not find an apology for the malicious words which you prated against him? Unfeeling persons might, perhaps, blame you for m^ejv
* About this time Mr. M'Leod, at the solicitation of th? Rer. Dr. MilUr, vas dubbed D, J), by tlie seminary of Middlebm-y.
24
eefiting* the apostle's letters, and refusing to receive the bre- thren, and casting them out of the church, who presumed to re- ceive them. But they had no conception of what ycu must have suffered. Unfortunate Diotrephes, all your pretended sanctity, and all your solemn and swelled appeahs to heaven, could not repress suspicions, that your motives were none of the purest, in traducing the apostle. Presumptuous Diotrephes, you sacri- ficed the prosperity of the church, to your own ambition. Conr- temptible Diotrephes, you constructed a shield of pious preten- sions so thick and massy, as to enable you to hope, you should not be detected. While your intriguing measures were prac- tised to secure your popularity, you hoped, at least, to escape the censure of the world. But in vain. The masterly pencil of an amiable, and persecuted apostle, has sketched your character, and, to your merited disgrace, the portrait has been handed down, to meet the accumulated contempt of succeeding ages.f
" You can easily, by this time, account for the conduct of
M'L '. If not, hundreds will assist you in it. But how shall we
account for the treacherous inconsistency of Wylie. They are still living to whom this gentleman has both spoken and written in the most polite and flattering terms, respecting me. From no man have I ever received more fervid and impressive demon- strations of unbounded confidence and friendship. Will his own imbecility, and M'L 's intrigue, account for such a revolu- tion ? If they will not, I can only add, the circumstance of a dis- course, preached in his pulpit and presence. May, 1810, with the galling disappointment which he appeared to sustain, at mjr ncceptance of the call of Cannonsburgh. Any one of these cir- cumstances, artfully plyed by M'L , would pi-obably have
been sufficient ; all of them combined, was certainly too much for W 's constitutional imbecility."
I have thus conducted the narrative until Mr. G ^'s accep- tance of the call of Cannonsburgh, in November last. I shall, iii my next, take up the occurrences which immediately followed.
Yours, Jkc.
* This happily alludes to a circumstance which ought not to be concealed, Mr. Graham's letters were usually addressed to tlie care of Doctor M'Leod. About the time in which the ungenerous treatment of Mr. G. was at the worst, tlie doctor blushingly handed him a letter, which had been broken open in his house, with an unmeaning apology !
t See the tlurd epistle general of John.
25
LETTER III.
MT DEAR FRIEND,
ON the 20th of November, 1810, Mr. G. accepted the call of Canonsburgh. This was a very unacceptable measure with the brethren. It contributed largely to lead to the plot which was afterAvards framed. Canonsburgh congregation is situated con- tiguous to the charge of Mr, Black. The bounding line between them is the river Monongahela. At the time Mr. G. accepted the call, Mr. Black was paying a visit to the brethren in the south. He and the reverend brethren, particularly W. and M'L. had concurred in pointing out Baltimore as Mr. G.'s destination. They had sedulously labored to make impressions on the minds of the people in the western country prejudicial to Mr. G. pre- vious to his arrival. These were soon dissipated. But the dispo- sitions which gave rise to these disingenuous measures among Mr. G.'s brethren, were not to be easily conciliated. So soon as Black retui'ned from the south, he manifested an extreme dis- like to Mr. G.'s settlement. The general attention paid to Mi\ G. was not to be quietly borne by a peevish and jealous mind. Black and a few blind partizans had recourse to the usual expe- dients in such cases. A general torrent of abuse was poured in from the reverend brethren and their confidents in the east, to the timely aid of Black and his party. Fresh scandal came with every post. The confidents were put in possession of the con- sfiiracy. It was customary with Black, when exhausted with the drudgery of slander, to terminate with a remark, that " Mr. G. would soon be degraded." To follow this gentleman through his dirty work, at this time, would be an endless and an irksome task Mr. G. was his song, his jest. He had hardly a thought or a word for any other subject. He literally lived upon defamation. "JXv^. sacred pulpit itself was profaned, to gratify his vitiated palate. The gospel, in his mouth, became a vehicle of calumny. That precious talent, confided with ministers, to save men, was, by this man, basely prostituted to ruin a brother. I ought to men- tion, however, injustice to him, that he is not alone in this im- pious practice. It is become so common, among the brethren in this community, that its turpitude ceases to affect. To mangle each other in this way, is regarded by these gentlemen as a mas- terly stroke of policy.
What, in this narrative must surprise you, is, that while ca- lumny was undulating in all quarters, to the remotest parts of the community, it never once reached the ears of Mr. G. until a few weeks prior to the meeting of Synod, in New- York, in May
b
26
last. It was some weeks, after his deposition was currently talked of among the people, that he accidentally learned such things were in agitation. This produced sonne alarm. He had, indeed, ever since his collision with M'Leod, anticipated much unhappiness in that connexion, and had calculated upon attempts to censure and degrade him, should the slightest pretext at any time be furnished. Such pretexts, Mr. G. understood at this time, were in existence — but what they were, or whence they originated, he could not learn. In this state of mind, proscribed by his brethren, already degraded in their councils, the people looking forward to some extraordinary development of charac- ter, suspected, insulted, abused, yet ignorant of any thing which would justify the conduct of his brethren, or raise such imputa- tions in the people, Mr. G. set out to meet the Synod.
Some business of importance required Mr. G.'s attendance in New-York. A Presbytery, he was informed, would probably hold in Philadelphia, previous to the Synod. The Presbytery did sit. Mr. G. could not, for the reason mentioned above, wait upon it. At that Presbytery, Mr. Cooper, commissioner from the congi'e- gation of Canonsburgh, presented the prayer of the people, re- questing the instalment of Mr. G. The Presbytery, after a de- grading scene of prejudice and enmity to Mr. G. after a whole hecatomb sacrificed to the genius of malevolence, and after col- lecting the reports which they themselves had industriously pro- pagated, ordered them to be condensed into the form of reasons for refusing to grant the prayer of Canonsburgh, and to be ti-ansmitted to the Synod. Here the secret counsels of the fac- tion began to develop themselves. These reasotis, which they afterwards abandoned, finding them untenable, gave a public shape to their measures, and, as w^s designed, led the way to the institution of a process against Mr. G.
On the evemng of the 15th of May, the Synod, according to appointment, opened with a discourse. On the morning of the 16th it commenced its sederunts. Having completed the catalogue of its members, read a number of written rules for directing its proceedings, and the minutes of the last session, the court was ■ about to enter upon business, when Mr. Graham begged leave to offer a few remarks.
Mr. Graham began by calling the attention of the court to one of its own regulations, just read. Rule iv. p. 23. of the printed minutes of session 2d, 1811. " After the choice of the moderator, and clerk, new members, if any such there be, shall be intro- duced." Mr. G. remarked, the conduct of tlie court was not con- formed to this regulation. They had, since the choice of mode- rator and clerk, read these rules ; they had read the minutes of the last session of Synod; they were now addressing themselves to the business which lay before them ; they certainly appeared to consider the catalogue of their members completed, and most
27
asiuredly taught him to believe, by acting in direct opposition to the common practice of the church, and one of their own rules, that he was designedly overlooked. He expressed his surprise, that he who had been recognised a minister of the gospel, by this church, in his restoration, and consequently entitled to all the privileges of a. regular minister, in full standing with the church ; who had for two years occupied a seat in the judicato- ries of the Reformed Church in Ireland ; who had been recog- nised a member of the Northern Presbytery of the church in America, as their records of May, 1810, would shew; who had sat a member of two committees of Synod in Philadelphia, in May, 1810; who had, by presbyterial appointment, co-operated ■with his brethren, as a member of committee, of the Middle Presbytery, which met in Canonsburgh, November 20th, 18 10 ; — that hei, notwithstanding these several public and explicit recog- nitions of his office, should have been overlooked, in completing the catalogue of the members of this court. He alleged, that although no pastoral relation had been constituted between him and any congregation under the inspection of this court, yet this circumstance could not depi'ive him of the right of exer- cising ministerial power, which was not relative^ originating in a relation to the people ; but essential, pertaining to the office. That ecclesiastical power, being a constituent of the ministerial office, every minister ex officio, had a right to demand a seat in a judicatory which met professedly to manage the general con- cerns of the community to which he belonged. That he knew of no exception to this, unless when a superior judicatory con- vened by delegation. That upon this broad presbyterian (princi- ple, he might demand his seat, after referring the court to the minute which respected his restoration. If, however, he thought the demand would provoke discussion, he would rather, for the present, w^ave his right, and wait an invitation to occupy an hono- rary seat; which the lienor of this court, the respect due to the acts of its inferior judicatoi'ies, and to the ministerial office vested in him, and the practice of reputable churches, time immemo- rial, taught him to expect. He hoped none would attach indeli- cacy to this last suggestion. If they should, he alleged that in declining to vu-ge what was his right, and leaving it with the discretion of the court, to admit him to a seat, he had evinced a disposition rather conciliati7ig than indelicate. He was well aware these observations would have come with a better grace from oije of his brethren ; but howeve^- he might have cause to regret their silence, he did not conceive it his duty to imitate their ex- ample. To be compelled to stand forward singly, to demand his rights, or to solicit what it would have been the honor of this court to have conferred unsolicited, w^as his misfortune, not his crime. He highly appreciated genuine modesty, but could not think it called upon him to make a tame surrender of his best
28
privileges. That delicacy which would Suffer an opportunity for the performance of a great duty, or the enjoyment of a great privilege, to pass unoccupied, without endeavour, must certainly be false. Mr. G. concluded by expressing a hope, that the court would call him to an immediate discharge of the duties of his office.
These observations occasioned much embarrassment. The court had made no provision against a solicitation so unexpect- ed as that of Mr. Graham. They appeared to be in danger of mistaking each other. Their desultory observations, without any- definite object in view, and delivered vi^ith hesitation, rendered it obvious, that to admit Mr. Graham to a seat would interfere with a preconcerted plan. The reason, however, which they agreed at length to oppose to his wish, was, " Mr. Graham is not known to us as a minister, he must have a formal intro- ductioH."*
Mr. G. observed, in reply, that after exercising the ministe- rial office for near two years among them ; after a personal ac- quaintance with every member who composed the court ; after co-operating in the dispensation of the supper, with a majority of his brethren, now present ; after sitting repeatedly a member pf the judicatories of the church ; after being recognised by the re- cords of these judicatories as a co-presbyter ; it might have the appearance of urging formalities to an extreme, to talk of a for- mal introduction. He was not, however, an enemy to formality- he respected order. He begged not to be misunderstood, as if, in urging his rights, he had designed to interfere with the ordi- nary practice of the church. It was his duty to advocate his rights, by insisting upon holding a seat in this judicatory ; it was their duty to have him put in possession of this right, according to th»^ established usages of the Presbyterian church. He still urged it as his right, and alleged, that the proper season for adopting these formalities which were necessary to invest him with it, was, before the catalogue of the members should be con- sidered as completed. That it was the uniform practice of eccle- siastical judicatories, on observing brethren present, who were not constituent members, to either invite them immediately, without any formality, to a seat, or before proceeding to any other business, to have recourse to whatever measures they might deem necessary for introduction. That he had waited pa- tiently to see whether the court would proceed in this way, and that it was 'not until he had perceived the list of members com- pleted, and the court proceed to rejid its rules, and to propose to go on with its ordinary business, that he had been constrained to
* This was a niere subterftge, it being evident by their neglecting tiie proper season specified by their own rule for die introduction of Mr. G. that they had previously determined not to invite him to a seat.
£9
roquest their attention to what appeared to him their duty. He had been, moreover, induced to urge this as a becoming expedient, having learned, that some defamatory reports were in circulation against him ; that it was probable, allusion might be had to these during the session of Synod ; and that should explanations be necessary, it would be extremely painful to him, and he thought degrading to the court, should he be compelled- to make them under all the disadvantages attending a commoii spectator. He further urged, that if it were an extraordinary thing, perhaps indeed unprecedented, that a Presbyterian mi- nister should be present with a judicatory of the community to •Mrhich he belonged, which did not meet by delegation^ and should be permitted to rank with the spectators ; how much more extraordinary would it appear, should he have been con- strained, for reasons deeply interesting, to request a seat, and have been refused I Had the subject not been introduced, he observed, his not being invited to occupy a seat with his breth* ren, might, in a great measure, have passed unnoticed ; but now that it had been partly discussed, it behoved the court to weigh well the reasons which would justify them in a refusal, as it would be tantamount to a judicial degradation.
The court adhered pertinaciously to its objections, refused to recognise Mr. Graham, and ordered a review of the minutes of the last meeting of Synod. They made further additions and amendments.*
Having had some time to collect themselves and to reflect, they began to perceive, they had dismissed Mr. Gi'aham's affair in a very imperfect state. It Avas resumed, at the motion of one of the members, accompanied with a proposal, " that all the ijii- nutes Avhich respected Mr. Graham, in the several judicatories of the church in this country, and that other papers, which might have a relation to him, should be read, in order to ascer- tain his ministerial standing, and see whether the court was ob- ligated to recognise Mr. Graham as one of its members. "f
To this very extraordinary motion Mr. Graham objected. He said the Presbytery of 1809, at that time the superior judicatory, had appointed a committee, with full power to restore him, and to dispose of him to the meeting of Synod.:}: That consequently
* One amendment, in particular, consisted in inti'oducing' a resolution which had been neglected in tlie original constitution of the S}Tiod, viz. " That all the deeds of the Reformed Presbytery in America, previous to tlie constitution of the Synod, should be recognised."
f Tliis, it must be acknowledged, was a very extraordinary way of intro- ducing a member. It evidently shewed that what was manifest, which abne ought to have conducted their counsels, wovdd not answer their purpose, and that to support their unpresbyterial measures, tliey found themselves compelled to ti-avel out of tlie beaten track in quest of information.
* This committee was ordered to direct the appointment of Mr. Graham, from the time of Iiis restoration, " until the subsequent meeting of the superior judicatory."— Pr/w^ed Extracts, p. 9.
50
to that committee, out of respect to the appointment of a coWt, whose deeds they had recognized, they were bound to look for the standing of Mr. Graham ; that nothing could more glaringly violate that appointment, or more manifestly disclose some si- nister purpose to be answered, than a motion, that the minutes of the several judicatories should be read; that to call in, or even admit, at this stage of the business, extra persons, appeared to him a breach of order and decency so flagrant, as to require no comment. He had no objection to the motion on account of any inconvenience to which it might eventually subject him; on the contrary, circumstances, well known to his brethren, and parti- cularly grievous to him, compelled him ardently to wish a gene- ral investigation of all papers which might respect him. But he viewed the motion solely upon the footing of order ; and bearing as it did upon him, he conceived it his duty to object to it. He added, that it was not without pain he had perceived among his brethren a disposition to anticijiate. Their measures were all ominous. They evidently portended something disastrous to him. He hoped, however, they would not persevere in a measure, which would inevitably commit themselves, by transgressing the limits of orderly enquiry, or anticipating judgment,- merely to baffle his wishes.
Notwithstanding these expostulations, the motion carried; and, regardless of the power confided with the committee, they pro- ceeded to read such records and papers as respected him, both in Ireland and in America.
From these papers it appeared, that Mr, G. had waited upoa the Presbytery of 1809, praying to be absolved from the sen- tence of deposition ; that he had been restored to the office of the holy ministry in August following ; that he had taught school in New-York from the time in which he was restored, until Api-il, 1810 ; that he had received appointments from the committee, which he had fulfilled ; that in November last, he had accepted a call from the congregation of Canonsburgh ; that the people of Canonsburgh had forwarded a petition to the Middle Pres- bytery, which sat the 13th inst. praying the instalment of Mr. Graham; and that the Presbytery had refused instalment, for reasons which they had now forwarded to the court. — The rea- sons were produced and read, as follows : 1. " The engagements under which Mr. Graham was laid, at his restoration, appear not to be fulfilled. 2. His treating subsequent engagements with levity. 3. His character being publicly implicated by an adver- tisement. 4. Charges of swindling in Belfast, unknown to our courts at his restoration. 5. Imprudence and extravagance in this country. 6. Attempts to sow the seeds of discord among the brethren in the ministry. 7. Attempts to injure his brethren in their own congregations. 8. General incompetency to manage the pastoral charge of a congi-egation."
These reasons, which had been rashly framed by the Presby- tery of the 13th, while their passions bestowed an importance upon vague report, and stimulated them to adopt without en- quiry, were afterwards abandoned, with the exception of No. 4 and 6, Upon cool reflection, they found that there were no en- gagements of a pecuniary nature stipulated, at the time of res- toi'ation ;* that subsequent engagements were not treated Avith levity ; that Mr. G.'s character was not even slightly injured by the advertisement ;t that Mr. G. was not extravagant in this country ; that he had not attempted to injure his brethren in their own congregations, 8cc. The eight reasons, therefore, were never henrd of after the Synod. Their ardor to prosecutCi precipitated them, in the very first instance, into absurdity.
The Synod followed up the paper of reasons, by reading an extract from a letter of the Irish Presbytery. It is dated from Maghera, March 27, 1810, and proceeds thus: — " No official account has reached us respecting the reception that you gave Mr. Graham, in May, 1809. — We are not, then, called upon to give our opinion relative to that affair. But if we can rely upon the accounts that individual persons among us, have got fi'om America, we cannot but wonder at the rapidity with which he seems to be stepping forward to occupy the place of a public teacher in the church. If ever that situation were to be occupied by him, we would expect it to have been after a long trial of th©. sincerity of his repentance, and the correctness of his conduct : and also after he had liquidated all the debt he owed in Ireland, We cannot see how the wound given to religion in this place, by him, can be healed in any other manner. If it be not in his power to pay his debts, at present, we would consider that, as the voice of God to him, not to become a pi'eacher. Before he was received by us, he was obliged to pay the debts that he owed to Seceders, and was assisted, likewise, by Covenanters in so doing. Otherwise it is likely he never would have preached in our connexion. And we much doubt if his becoming a Pres- byter with you, in his present circumstances, will tend t»
* Extract of the minute of tJie committee appointed to restore Mr. Graham, Milton, August 12th, 1809.
" Mv. Graham being present, was called upon to declare, whether it contlr nued to be his desire, to be restored to the office of tlie ministry. He declared it did. Having promised a stedfast adhcrenee to the cause of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, and submission in the Lord, to the Nordiern Presbjtery, in subordination to the S}aiod of said church, after prayer for special direction, by the moderator, Mr. Graluim was, ]n the name of the Loi'd Jesus Christ, re- atored to the office of the holy ministry."
Gilbert M'Master, Clerk,
In U:is CjXtract there is nothing of engagements or stipulatioiAS, relative to pecuniary matters.
t §ae Mr. G.'s defence in the subsequent pages.
32
strengthen our union with you, to promote the honoi* of reli- gion, or to restore the lost character of Mr, Graham. We wish well to Mr. Graham — we hope better things than those that are past will be seen about him. It would give us joy to hear that he was a member of your court, in a lawful and honorable way ; but our past experience of his folly — the cry of swindler and rogue that is lifted up here, by the multitude of his creditors— the upbraidings of those who wish to see the hedge of discipline, in our church, levelled as low as in their own — and our fears of his conduct in future, excite in our minds an alarm, that we can scarcely describe, in case he be admitted to the ministerial of- fice, without further trial of his conduct, or pi'e sent remuneratioi* of those he has injured.
Signed by order of the Presbytery^
John Alexander, Pres. Clk.'* After enquiring of the court, whether there existed any moro papers which they wished to have i*ead, and being answered in the negative, Mr. Graham craved the liberty of speaking, and spoke as follows :
" Reverend Moderator — I am at a loss to know in what lan- guage I ought to address you, what I ought to publish, or what \o conceal ; how far I ought to go, adapting myself to existing circumstances, or where I ought to stop. The formalities which a court imposes, will unavoidably oblige me to pay no attention, at present, to many things which deeply impi'ess my mind. I must address you, as if you, in the character of a court, were profoundly ignorant of the very things, which, I am persuaded, you are perfectly acquainted with as individuals. I am, more- over, unable to precisely ascertain in what point of view I ought, at this moment, to regard my standing with the church. I had requested, in the morning of this day, to be permitted to occupy a seat among you, to which I thought I was entitled, having learned that something disreputable to me, would, in some shape, meet your attention. Had this been granted, I should have known the precise i-elation I hold to the court, and how to conduct my observations. You knoAV many other advantages I should have derived from this single circumstance, which I can- not help thinking still is my right. By denying it, I am placed in a degraded situation, while no reason has been assigned, why it should be so. My remonstrances, animadversions, and reason- ings, will want force and respect ; and although a single charge of delinquency, neither in this court nor any other, has been ad- vanced against me, I shall, in despite of reason and of justice, be regarded in the light of a delinquent. Whether this be a st( tuation in which you, sir, haVe a right to involve any of your brethren, I shall not pretend to say. — When I reflect upon thft past, I blame my own credulity, and can have few objections that thgse wh© contemplate the awkwiu-d appearance I make at
33
this moment, should call me a/oo/. Perhaps, sir, I ought to ad- dress you, as though you knew nothing of the matter. But, sir, it is a difficult thing, in the fervor of interesting discussion, to keep a distinction so nice in view, as between what a man meai>s and judges out of court, and what he knows and judges in it.
I do not intend to make a single observation at present upon the merit of the paper addressed to this court by the Middle Prcksbytery of the 13th instant, containing its reasons for refusing the prayer for my instalment. That Presbytery has pledged itself to resume these reasons, in the form of charges, at its next meeting. Then, and not before, will be the time to meet it. I cannot, however, altogether repress the language of com- plaint, believing, as I do, that I have been ungenerously treated by several of my brethren, as it relates to the things alluded to in the paper of reasons. I am sorry to be constrained to mention any circumstance, or make any allusion, which might even re- motely impress the mind of a single individual, that any of my brethren treat me with want of confidence, or discover a dispo- sition to do me an injury. It is equally unpropitious to us both ; to them, from the circumstance of my being a stranger ; to me, who probably ought, every thing considered, to bear a great deal without murmuring. These considerations, I confess, would strike me dumb on the occasion, were it not that I have gathered information from reputable sources, on my way hither, and since I arrived, that it is contemplated, i\?iy Jirmly determined, by my brethren, to degrade me. I am the more confirined in a belief of the truth of this communication, from the circumstance of my being indirectly degraded by this court, in refusing me a seat. I wished an interview with my brethren since I came on, per- ceiving the necessity of mutual explanations. This, no doubt, would have corrected mistakes on both sides. But eve.n this was not granted. I am the less accovmtable, therefore, for any mistakes into which I may run, in the observations I am now to offer.
About three or four weeks ago, sir, I was given to under- stand there were reports in circulation injurious to my character. This I received, not by any direct communication from any of my brethren, either of the ministry or the laity, but only through the medium of common report. However improbable it appear- ed, that any thing unpropitious to the character of a minister, should be in circulation in the community to which he belonged, and should be concealed from his knowledge ; yet I did not fcej altogether disposed to treat it with neglect. I began to enquire what the reports were, and how they originated. I soon learned, they were communicated from my brethren in the north and east ; that the persons to whom the communications were made, were strictly enjoined to hold them a secret ; and that something, I <iould not learn what, was to be preferred against me at this
E
/ /
34
time. I wrote some of my brethren, requesting them to consult their own honour, by acquainting me with any thing^prejudicial to my character which they knew. They in return talked seri- ously of charges, but not the most remotely insinuated what they were. These letters I have in my pocket. This appeared the more extraordinary, as I was not conscious of having done any thing to merit such treatment. I wrote again, more pressingly. Still my brethren were silent. One of them, however, my rever- end neighbour,* was not idle. Although he absolutely i-efused, after many solicitations from friends, to see me on the subject, and put me in possession of what he knew ; yet he propagated, with unremitting zeal, insinuations, and sometimes direct re- proaches. Persons were confidentially entrusted with this, that, and a third report ; and after being solemnly obligated to retain the secret, were usually dismissed with an impression, that something still more dreadful would be developed in due time. This gentleman has proceeded so far as to declare, in religious societies, that I should be deposed. f The alarm, sir, has been great in tlfe western coxmtry. The people have been taught to look forward to this period for something decisive. I have never, notwithstanding the greatest exertions before I left the western co'untry, and on my way hither, been able to learn with certain- ty, that charges would be preferred, and much less what they were. I have been compelled, out of a solicitude natural to man, to apply to persons who were in the confidence of my brethren, as I came on to this place, and have beseeched them to acquaint me with every thing they knew. Their usual reply was, they knew nothing but some vague reports, respecting pecuniary transactions, concerning which, when I explained, they appeared satisfied. I applied, in what I thought to have been a friendly and confidential conversation, to the very gentleman who has pledged himself to prove what is contained in those papers, (Mr. Wylie) and that only four days prior to his sitting in the Presbytery— and he with vehemence assured me " he knew of nothing." Still understanding that something was whispered about among the people, and suspecting his duplicity, I again applied, in the presence of Mr. Hazelton, a member of your court, and still he asserted as before. I put the same enquiry, on my arrival in New- York, and received a similar reply, even after the principal part of my brethren, who are now in Synod, had made their appearance. I do not complain of the Presbytery, in collecting reasons, and transmitting them to this court. I re- joice that there is a prospect of having introduced to public no- tice a number of distorted and false reports. I have looked for-
* Mp. Black.
f Mr. Black declai'ed openly. In a religious society, in the liouse of Thomas Algeo, Pittsburgh, some weeks before the meeting of Synod, that Mr. <Jrali:im should not return a preacher to the west.
35
ward to this period with solicitude, my state for some weeks past being a state of wretchedness, proceeding from the con- cealment of the measures, which, it will appear, have been sys- tematically adopted, to reduce me in the estimation of the church and of the public. I cannot help thinking, the manner in which some of my brethren have conducted themselves, has been disingenuous ; and I fear there is to© much reason for dreading the consequences. I only wish these slanderous re- ports might be put into some shape to meet discussion, and that I may have an opportunity, speedily, of exposing their false- hood.
With regard to the Irish letter, I feel myself aggrieved. It specifies no new charges, but is not the less calculated to injure — its design being manifestly to destroy my reputation, without the formality of an investigation. Did the same spirit actuate my brethren, at present, which did in 1809, the reiterations of reproach which that letter contains, would be treated as they deserve — I should then have that protection from insult and in- jury, which this court is bound to furnish, and should not be compelled to stand forward singly to defend myself Did the let- ter contain nothing but a repetition of charges already investi- gated and decided upon by both the Irish and American Pres- byteries, I should not drop a single animadversion upon it, be- lieving, as I do, that to upbraid with those things, for which, whether true or false, they have already inflicted the highest censures, is a violation of all decency. But the letter contains positive and unqualified falsehoods. I feel pained, at being com- pelled to treat an official letter of a sister judicatory, in this manner. But if the Irish Presbytery has, in its zeal to destroy my prospects, forgotten itself so far as to make communications not strictly true, I am not, out of an unmanly and unprincipled deference to its authority, to desist from exposing them. If they have placed themselves in a situation so degrading, they must blame their own temerity. Jx is stated in that letter, that ^' before I was received into the Irish Presbytery, I was obliged to pay the debts I owed to Seceders." That I owed a few small debts to Seceders, when I applied for admission to the Irish Presbytery, I admit : but that these debts were paid before my admission, or that the payment of them was, in any sense, a con- dition in order to admission, I deny. These very debts consti- tute, at this instant, a part of the debt which I owe in Ireland. I pledge my office, and all that I hold dear, upon the truth of what I affirm, and call upon the Irish Presbytery to prove what they have stated. It is further asserted, " that the Irish church aided me in liquidating those debts." Sir, I am astonished how a respectable judicatory could deliberately write and com- municate such glaring falsehoods. They cannot be ignorant, if their ardor to injure would permit them tD reflect — that this
36
i||atemcnt i« untrue. At least, the best construction I can put on it, is, that, as usual, they have gathered up the loose reports of the country, and have engrossed them in a presbyterial letter. I do, upon my veracity, assure you, sir, that I never received a single penny from any person, or persons, under the inspection of the Reformed church in Ireland, to aid in the payment of debt. Nor do I recollect more than two solitary instances, in virhich I received something more than w^hat is usually given as a com- pensation to travelling preachers. In one instance I received about tvv^o guineas and a half from the Dervock congregation, a few sabbaths after my admission ; on another occasion, about three pounds (Irish) from the congregation of Newtown-Ards. These I state as facts, and again call upon the Irish Presbytery to prove what they have asserted. I am too well satisfied, that nothing would be more gratifying to some of my brethren, than to find me in a lie. I the more willingly hazai'd my vei'acity, and shall be contented to submit to any censure, if I shall be found to have deviated from the tiiith in this matter. But, sir, so far from it being a truth, that my debt was paid, on my application to the Irish Presbytery, the contrary is true. I was embarrassed ftfresh. I shall tell you how my debts were paid. Although I ap- peared before them soliciting admission upon a declinature, and from full standing in a i-egular church, I was denied admission, and advised to suspend my office four weeks. At the end of that time, I had specimens of trial assigned, and was informed, if I had any hope of being admitted, to remain silent six weeks longer. At the expiration of six weeks, I was referred for admission to the meeting of Pi'esbytery, which was to sit at the end of four weeks. At the end of four weeks, by a political movement, which aroused my indignation, and by taking hold of the expressions of irritation, I was referred to a committee five weeks after. The committee found the matter consigned to them too weighty, and again referred it to the Presbytery, to meet about eleven weeks after. Thus, sir, I was cajoled out of my office. My hands were tied up. I was prevented from entering upon any employ- ment for my support," being tantalized from week to week with the hope of admission. To wantonly preclude me from the use of the only lawful means which God had put in my power, for thirty weeks ; to compel me to have recourse to the expedient of ex- posing to public sale a well selected little library, to answer pres- sing demands ; to be tantalized during this protracted scene of oppression, with interrogations, why I did not pay my debts ? and rude commands, to go and pay them ; to have the few per- sons to whom I was debtor stimulated to madness, by Mr. Stave- ly and his accomplices ; to be compelled, owing to the indis- creet conduct of the Reformed Church, to travel and defray my expences in all qvxarters, as a strangei', even after I was admit- t-ed ; — in the same way that I have been compelled to stop at a
37
tavern in Philadelphia, on my way hither, and to live at a boarding-house, as I do at present ; — these, sir, were the expe- dients to which the Irish Presbytery had recourse, to enable me to pay my debts. With what effrontery, then, they can venture to send abroad such affirmations as that letter contains, con- scious, as they must be, of the treatment I met with, I am at a loss to conjecture. As to the terms " swindler and rogue," See. which they love to bestow upon me plentifully, I have only to observe, th?t to call one by these names, and in the same letter to reproach him for not paying his debts, appears a gross in- consistency. Debtor is a relative term, and implies a creditor, which is not true, of rogue and swindler. A debtor pays his debts, and is discharged from obligation and danger ; a swindler is punished. It is impossible that one can be regai'ded, as it respects the same transaction, in the light of both a swindler and a debtor. These appellations are the more grievous, that they have never been proven. They are terms of popular fury, which have been snatched with avidity from the mob. A pity it is, that such flagrant violations of propriety, should pass with impunity.
There is one thing I must be indulged in attending to. That letter loudly reproaches me for not paying my debts since I ai'rived in America. This is the more plausible, as it is gene- rally believed a gracious Providence placed me in an eligible situation, shortly after my arrival. Let us see whether it were practicable to have paid any considerable sum prior to the date of that letter, admitting my circumstances to have been pros- perous. That letter bears date March 27th, 1810. I arrived with a small family in August, 1808. I spent until November in the country, on a small salary, which barely supported my family. In November I commenced teaching in New-York, with suc- cess. I bless God, who raised me friends, although not in the Reformed church. I had their patronage — Providence smiled— my affairs prospered. Allowing time for the remittance of a bill, an account of Avhich could have reached the Irish Presbytery be- fore March, 1810, it must have been remitted by the beginning of November, 1809. But from November, 1808, when I com- menced teaching in New-York, to November, 1809, when the remittance must have been made, was only one year. Now, sir, let any man of common discernment consider, that I came into New-York a stranger, with a family, without my office, without money, without any necessary of life, and say wiiether it eould be rationally expected, that in one xjear I should commence house-keeping, support a family, and remit bills for the payment of my debts ! Were there no other document to prove the un- reasonable animadversions of the Irish Presbytery, this would be sufficient. I admit, I did not pay my debts within the period to which the Presbytery alludes ; yet I made a small remittance,
38
and can prove, by the most reputable witnesses, that I had made arrangements to pay much more. These arrangements were af- terwai'ds deranged, partly by my admission into this church, and partly by a corrective dispensation.
Sir, I have been uniformly tender on the subject, as it relates to the Irish Presbytery. I had hoped to have my sufferings, with their reproaches, overwhelmed in oblivion. Time, the successful physician, in the most desperate cases of this description, I had fondly hoped, would have conciliated the hearts of my Irish brethren, especially after they had exhausted the censures of the church upon rate. It pains me to learn, that neither time, nor distance, nor censure, has in the least availed to allay that spirit of malevolence towards me, which has uniformly bewray- ed itself in all their proceedings. I cannot easily impose re- straints upon myself any longer. The Presbytery has placed it- self in a situation, by its letter, demanding just reprehension. Its appearing out of season, being designed to expostulate against my restoration, precludes any effect it might have had, and, indeed, precluded the necessity of animadversion. If it can be supposed to have any effect, it must be against the church •which restored me. Well aware as I am, however, that it has been thrust in at this stage of the business, to answer purposes ivhich begin to develop themselves, I have conceived it worthy of attention.
If I am rightly informed, the reading of the Irish letter is to be regarded as the watchword of a prosecution, and the contents of the letter as the grounds of the prosecution itself. It is in contemplation, I have understood, to have, by some means, a re- investigation of the Irish affairs. This letter is to be followed up by another, and I must to the torture again. This compels me to make a few observations, more gravely, perhaps, than what the subject demands.
It appears to me, this court does not correctly perceive the relation they occupy to such communications as the Irish letter contains. Is it possible they can be ignorant, that every stricture or animadversion made upon a brother, whom they have admit- ted, and obligated themselves to protect, is made upon them- selves ?
Subjects demand different treatment, according to the form they assume. If the paper now read, consists of charges, as- suming the form of a libel, there appears nothing difficult in knowing how they ought to be treated. The Irish Presbytery is the plaintiff, I am the defendant, and this court is the judge. But if the paper be exfiostulatory or remonstrativc^ the Irish Presbytery expostulate with you, while I am supposed to have no more official concern in the discussion, than any other of my brethren. The foi'mer supposition would lead you to commence an ecclesiastical process against another ; the latter calls upon
39
you to defend yourselves. This is a distinction so necessary, and the difference of manner to which it conducts so obvious, as not to be mistaken.
The Irish Presbytery have transmitted to this court two kinds of official papers, at different times. In May, 1809, you received documents, acquainting you with certain charges preferred against me, of the steps that had been taken, and of my deposi- tion. I appeared before you at the same time, praying to be re- stored to my office. You rightly judged, the matter required your interference. You did interfere. Your first decision sus- tained the charges and the deposition. Or, as one of my brethren expressed himself on that occasion, perhaps with more force than elegance, " you stepped into the shoes of the Irish Presbytery." You next instituted a re-investigation of the charges. You deci- ded. A portion of ecclesiastical chastisement was inflicted afresh. Whether the attention you then paid to the Irish docu- ments was more or less, or of the exact quality and description which they required, I will not take upon me to say. You judged. I submitted. There the matter ended.
After a long interval of two years, your attention is called to more "documents from Ireland. Those that now lie on your ta- ble, are, as they regard me, substantially the same with those communicatetl two years ago. And should others be transmitted in future to this court, we have reason to believe they will be of the same description.
Such papers point out themselves clearly the measures which they require to have adopted. They imperiously call upon this court to vindicate their own conduct, not to try mine ; to either acknowledge their decisions to have been premature, or to con- firm them afresh.
My present standing, the result of your dccisipns, numbers me among you. Defamatory papers, predicated upon any thing which may have happened previous to my deposition, meet me now in a situation, in which any private feelings I may entertain, are to be entirely overlooked. Had I been detached from the church as formerly, documents of this kind had assumed a different aspect, and I should have been cortipellcd to meet them upon less advantageous ground. But as it is, I shai*e the supposed blame only in common with my brethren, and any individual interest Avhich I may have in the disposal of those papers, con- stitutes only a part of the general interest of this coui't.
I am well aware, sir, a certain kind of policy would dictate, the Irish Presbytei-y ought to be gratified, and that this court would consult its own character, by shifting the burthen from their own shoulders, and placing it on mine. Nothing is more easy than this. It is only to call these papers by the name of a libel ; to suppose the charges they contain new, at least better illus- trated than they we-re before, . and I must once more to the
40
rack. This, too, will have its advantages. By this means yjon shall be thought, in the first instance at least, to hazard little. The measures to which the style of these papers would naturally direct, would be a firm and decisive adherence to your own de#- cisions, which would have the appearance, at least, of opposition — yes, might probably terminate in a rupture. But by adopting the lattei', you will join issue with the Presbytery; you will strengthen the bands of friendship, especially if you be deter- mined to have me degraded. The inconsistency of your plans, and the impotency of your decisions, will more easily escape detection. Those who may be but partially acquainted with the subject, will hail you wise, and the wretched delinquent shall become an object of public execration.
But, sir, honesty is the best policy. Such a process will ha\'e its disadvantages. While it will justify you on one hand, it will i«nder you vulnerable on the other. There are still three par- ties who will be able to analyse this policy, and regard it as a tacit acknowledgment of the rashness of your decisions. These are the Irish Presbytery, yourselves, and a discerning public. Should you institute a second process, you, in efiect, say, that you judged prematurely. No policy, no sophistry, will prevent the thinking part of mankind from drawing this conclusion. Retrace your footsteps, institute a second trial, and you in fact obliterate your records, and acknowledge your imbecility. I shall not be so insidious as to insinuate, that this would be gra- tifying to our Irish brethren — but certain I am, however it may be disguised, it will be disgraceful to you. Were there papers from Ireland charging me with recent delinquency, you would secure your dignity by ordering an investigation. But I will not say the same, if you suffer yourselves to be dragged into a re-in- vestigation of charges of four years standing : charges once and again the subject of ecclesiastical discussion, both in that country and in this, rendered hideous by popular report, raked from every dunghill, and hallowed, by being engrossed in the form of Presbyterial documents. You never will be able to obviate the objection, why did you not wait, why hasten to a decision, or to repel the odium which is affixed to weak and impotent coun- sels.
Before I conclude these observations, I feel myself compelled to regard the conduct of the Irish Presbytery towards me, in a light not very favourable to their character. To those who are but a little acquainted with the treatment I received from cer- tain leading members in that Presbytery, from my first applica- tion to them for admission, the extreme measures to which they have had recourse, will appear perfectly consistent. It is not my design to defame my brethren ; but, sir, there are seasons when a man is bound to speak out. The severest tei'ms are re- prehensible only when misapplied. I shall not say their conduct
41
is carried to a malicious length, but I shall say it is forced be- yond the limits of moderation and reason. It is well known that a certain person, who has monopolized the management of the affairs of the Irish Presbytery, eagerly anticipated my fall. It is equally well known to some, that his conduct, and the conduct of others through his influence, contributed to hasten it. After the accumulated wrath of parties forced me from my country, that Presbytery proceeded, with a despatch unusual, to depose me. I was not so much as cited, although they knew my ad- dress, to appear to make my defence. On the contrary, I had written them, begging them to postpone a final decision, until I should appear, either in person, or by an official letter. My offi- cial letter was afterwards written, but knowing my hand-writing in the address, it was not relieved. In the course of a few months after my departure, witliout a shadow of defence, and upon a mere verbal statement furnished by tvvo persons,* one notoi-ious for falsehood^ and the other for intoxication^ I was deposed. A copy of their proceedings, specifying the charges, and their sentence, was transmitted to you. They had then done as much, as in reason ought to have been ex}>ected. It was natural to sup- pose, that upon depositing their documents with you, they would cease to consider themselves further concerned. This would most unequivocally have been the case, had they been actuated by pure motives alone. But, sir, they felt too much, to suffer them to be idle. They could not surrender a matter wholly into your hands, in which their passions were so deeply concerned. Although the moment they prepared their first documents for the American church, their power expired, as it respected me, yet they found themselves compelled to interfere with your con- duct. It is your prerogative to manage the affairs of the Re- formed church in this country, independent of sister judicatories. This prerogative they have invaded.
In their zeal to injure, they have overlooked the modifying, the almost creative power of circumstances. They have never had an opportunity of hearing from myself an explanation of the motives which actuated me in leaving Ireland, or the causes which impelled me to it — for this they ought to have made some allowance. The destitute state of the church in this country, demands extraordinary exertions — here, again, they ought to have made an allowance. A preacher may be useful in one country, whose usefulness has ceased in ajiother- Admit that all the Irish Presbytery has charged upon me were true; admit that my office would at present be a mere incumbrance in that country, will it be too much for me to assert, it is not so in America ?
* Daniel Parks and Samuel Tayx.ob. F
42
I grant it is in the power of circumstance to^nake my boast- ing void. God may permit me to fall, or unceasing measures may be plied to sap the confidence of my brethren, to impreg- nate them with the essence of Transatlantic'prejudice, and com- pel them to regard my uprightest motives and best actions in a suspicious light. In either case, my usefulness should be blast- ed. But as yet it is not so^ — and let us not anticipate distress. Now, sir, here is another circumstance, to which the Irish brethren must have attended, had they permitted themselves coolly and dispassionately to consider the matter. I shall not say some allowance ought to have been made, for the length of time in which I have been known to the American, which is equal to the whole time I lived in the Irish church. Had our brethren in Ireland suffered themselves to be guided in this matter by the spirit of the gospel, would they not rejoice to hear of the church's approbation, and of my prosperity ? Would they not gladly catch at every propitious circumstance, and make the amplest allowance ? W6ukl they not cease to ply with a malicious assi- duity, their insinuations and hackneyed charges, and permit the American brethren to think and act for themselves ? Would they not offer up thanksgivings to God, and congratulate them- selves and their brethren, upon Icaniing, that Mr. Graham is not the person, which, in the hurricane of Jio/iular abuse, they had conceived him to be ? Yes, sir — But their honour, yes, sir, their hoiiour I —
Considerations of this kindj sir, detract ve>y considerably from the importance of any papers which the Irish Presbytery, may, either now or in future, present to this court or the world. Indeed if followed up as they ought to be, they would dislodge the angry spirit which animates their proceedings, and meta- morphose them into things perfectly harmless and innocent.
There is one thing which these papers manifestly exhibit ; that is, an incurable hatred. It is a lamentable thing to think of a number of reputable men, meeting to devise means to harrass and persecute one, who had once the misfortune to be one of their number ; to see them conjure up charges, which ought to have slept in peace, to carry distress after him to a far dis- tant country, nearly four years after he had quitted their com- munion and country, and almost as long after they had inflicted the highest censures of the church. All denominations of men, and every iadividual who has fled to this country, have found it an asylum from persecution. Forced from their countries, they have found a home here, whither th,e fury of the despot could not reach them. Why, in the name of all that is rational, ^vhy can it not furnish an asylum to me ? None ever sought its shores more inhumanly treated than I had been, or with higher expe<Jtations of having a period put to their woes. Why, I ask again, must I be an exception to the general treatment of the many thousands
43
of emigrants, who at this moment occupy this continent in peace ? Woukl not every person hold that despot in abhorrence who should pursue the trembling exile to his place of banishment, and put him to the torture afresh ? And shall such conduct, though shielded by the most pathetic appeals to piety and order, escape your just detestation ? It remains with you to adopt wise measures, and to teach all men, that while your ears shall be ever open to the remonstrances of reason, your hearts and hands shall be firmly united to resist oppression.
I have thus, sir, adventured to make a f^w strictures upon the papers which relate to me, and the conduct of the Irish court. They may have been probably loose and incoherent, being the effusions of the moment. Perhaps, too, they may have discovered too great a portion of irascibility. If they should, I shall not undertake to defend them, my object being solely to dissipate t^he daj'kness which has constantly overhung the Irish docu- ments, and to present truth, unaccompanied with either embel- lishment or ribaldry. Whatever expressions, therefore, I may have uttered too harsh, I hope my brethren will forgive, when they consider the trepidation and acuteness of the feelings, which a scene such as this is calculated to excite."*
Mr. G. concluded by requesting a copy of the reasons assign- ed by the Presbytery of the 13th, for refusing the prayer of the petition from Canonsburgh, and an extract of that part of the Irish letter which respected himself; and begged the court would put this matter into some shape which would meet their attention, as a subject of legal investigation. It was agreed Mr. G. should have the extracts, and that his affairs should be the or- der of the day for the afternoon.
Soon as Mr. G. sat down. Dr. M'Leod arose, and observed, " he had determined to reply, but that Mr. Graham's concluding remarks had completely disarmed him." The brethren were si- lent, and appeared to experience the same feelings on the sub- ject with Di-- M'Leod.f They concluded the sederunt with a mo- tion, Avhich carried, " that Mr. G.'s business should be the order of the afternoon."
Upon reflection, the gentlemen found they had committed themselves. They had departed from the road which ecclesias- tical procedure had, in all ages, pointed out. They had anticijiated a process against Mr. G. and had not waited until circumstances demanding such a step, had regularly occurred. There was no other way of mitigating- the impressions which they had commu-
* This speech the Synod clerk afterwards most shamefully metamorphosed in tlie printed extracts, p. 19. No person, who is but even a litde acquainted with Mr. Graham, will readily belicA'e that he uttered the preposterous jargon which is put into his mouth in those garbled records.
\ We shall see how this conduct comports with tl\e minutes which they af- ti?rwards published, and the process which they conducted against Mr. G.
44
nicated of their unfiresbyterial measures, than to dwell largely upon the supposed delint]uency contamed in the papers read. It became a necessary piece of policy, to divert the attention of the people, from their own rashness and disorder, to the impli- cation of Mr. G.'s character. A swaggering Synodical deed was, therefore, prepared during the interval, enjoining the Middle Presbytery to " institute a process against Mr. G. and refusing to admit him to a seat in Synod, until said process should be completed."* Thus the business was dismissed.
* " Whereas, it appears to tliis Synod, by autlientic documents from Ireland, that the Rev. David Graliam, who had been alicehtiate in the Secession church, was charged by that connexion M'itli intoition to defraud his creditors ; and was not received by the Reformed Presbytery until his accounts had been set- tled— And it also appears, that in a short time after his ordination, he was deposed from the office of the holy ministry, by the Reformed Presbytery of Ireland, because he had been found guilty of repeatedly assertijig falsehood, and committing fraud in iiis pecuniary transactions ; because he, in violation of his oi"dination vows, absconded from his congregation ; and because, in presenting a false certificate to certain ministers in I^ondon, he had committed forgery. It appears, by the records of tiic several judicatories of the church in America, that the said INIr. Graham did acknowledge the justice of tliat censure, did profess deep humiliation for liis offences, did request to be restored to the office of the ministry, and did botli promise, and exhibit tlie prospect, of a speedy ability to perform the promise to liquidate all his debts in Ireland, and was accordingly absolved from the censure, and reinstated in his office. It also appears, that, after his restoration, Mr. Graham did petition the Reformed Presbytery of the northern district of the United States, for permission to con- tinue in the capacity of a teacher in the city of New- York, for a specified dme after his restoration, in order to enable iiim to discharge his debts — which per- mission was readily granted. It, moreover, appears, that said Mr. Graham has been called to the pastoral charge of the congregation of Canonsburgi), under the care of the Reformed Presbytery of the middle district of the United States, and has accepted that call ; and that said Presbytery has hitherto abstained from carrying the settlement into effect ; and, wliereas, a fama clnmosa exists, to the grief of the godly, and to the great scandal of religion, and of tliis church in particulai-, that said Mr. GraJiam, after having made tlie aforesaid profes- sions of humiliation for his sins and scandal, and of a resolution to discharge his debts ; and after having pledged his word by letters to Ireland, speedily to do so, has disappointed these expectations — has not only discharged his foreign debts, but also has involved himself in this country ; that he has not proved true to his contracts ; and that instead of diat exemplary humility and dili- gence, in christian and ministerial duties, to which his own promise had pledged iiim, and which former falls imder scandal, and consequent censure, might be expected to produce in a mind truly penitent and pious, his deportment is equi- vocal, frivolous and extravagant. And further, that in the reasons urged by the Middle Presbjtery for refusing to install Mr. Graham in Canonsburgb, are implicated charges which demand a process for trial.
Now, therefore, to the end diat the purity and edification of Uiis church be promoted, that her faithfulness to God, and the dignity of her discipline be duly supported, it is hereby enjoined, by this Synod, on all the subordinate judica- tories, to abstain from any steps toward die settlement of said Mr. Graham in ■ any congregation, until said fama clamosa be fully tried. It is also enjoined upon the Reformed Presbytery of tlie middle distiict, under whose inspection Mr
45
Nothing could exceed the confusion of the whole of this busi- ness. The court first set out with ordering; the general business which lay before them — they were then called to order at the solicitation ofMr. G. respecting the introduction of a member — they boggled a little upon that subject and dismissed it — they again resumed it, as if by accident, in the course of reading the minutes of their judicatories — they attended to the paper of rea- sons, only as they criminated Mr. G. and without discussing their relevancy, or pretending to sustain them — they introduced papers from Ireland before they had finished the reading of their minutes which had been ordered — they ordered Mr. G.'s case for discussion in the afternoon^ but had a deed prepared in the interval to set aside the order — and they finally agreed to refuse Mr. G. a seat in Synod, upon vague report, and while they per- mitted him to occupy his office.
Mr. G. had uniformly discovered a wish that the Synod should finally discuss his case, since they had taken it up. He resumed his request in a still more specific form, on the last day of the session, and urged as a reason, the incompetency of the Middle Presbyteiy to try the cause, the whole of its ministerial members having prejudged it, which he proposed to prove. The court refused to resume the subject, or to cognosce the compe- tency of the members of the Middle Presbytery.
We, the undersigned, who were present during the time to which the above transactions refer, do attest the truth and cor- rectness of the narrative.
Thomas Hazleton, Ruling Elder and Member of the court. Joseph Cooper, Commissioner from Canonsburgh.
Yon will be surprised, my dear friend, that all this time no attention was paid to the eight reasons of the Presbytery of the loth. You will be ready to enquire, for what purpose were they forwarded to Synod ? If any legitimate end was had in view, it must have been to have the act of the Presbytery justified, by
Graham now i-^, to institute, with all speed, a process, which slialltry the truth, of tlic aforesaid fama clamosa, and so defend the reputation of Mr. Graham, if thecharg-es be luifounded, and defend the reputation of the discipline of this church, by the exercise of suitable censure, if he is found g'uiltv- And it is, moreover, enjoined upon all the other judicatories, and all the members of the church, to aid the said Presbytery in procuring all necessary information to bring- the said trial to a just, impartial, prompt, and faithful issue. And it is fur- ther ordered, that tlie said Mr. Graham shall not be admitted to a seat in this SjTiod until said trial is held and completed ; and that a copy of this determi- nation be delivered by the clerk of this court, duly cei-tified, to tlie Presbjtery of the middle district, and to the congregation of Canonsburgh.
Extracted, by order of coiu-t, fi-om Uie minutes, at die request of Mr. Graham.
JOHN BLACK, S. Clk.
J\'ev)-\ork, 17th M^ 1811."
46
sustaining their paper of reasons. If this was the design, it was defeated, for the paper was never once alluded to, after the reading. The only end besides this, which could be supposed to be in view, was to expose Mr. G. If we admit this to have been proposed, there is a consistency. It is in perfect unison with the conduct of the persons who composed the court, who uniformly manifested a wish to prejudice the public against Mr. G. by ca- lumniating papers and reports ; but who seemed studiously to avoid a fair investigation. Their fixed intention was to degrade Mr. G. in public estimation, to prepare the way for a judicial degradation. They knew, where the mind is prejudiced, the slightest pretext will do for the disgrace of the object of preju- dice. They displayed a knowledge of human nature by the mea- sures to which they had recourse, but they discovered a destitu- tion of evangelic piety. Mr. G. understood their policy. He had learned by bitter experience, that their ecclesiastic govern- ment was conducted upon the principles of caprice and intrigue. He saw that they were determined either to degrade him in their communion, by a constant and systematic opposition ; or to compel him to abandon it. The former was to him much more an object of dread than the latter. He also knew it was imprac- ticable to have either respect or testimonials, adopt what plan he would, on leaving them. Under all these circumstances, he wish- ed to hasten out of their communion, and ior that purpose con- ceived it most eligible to stimulate them to action, and to pre- pare to defend himself with courage. Rather than have recourse to tame submission, in a case of injustice so flagrant, he deter- mined to put his mean adversaries to defiance, and lodge his appeal with God and an impartial public. In this view his above remarks will appear perfectly consistent. It was impos- sible to deal animadversions upon the conduct of the Irish Presbytery in terms too harsh. To treat with mildness such conduct as they had uniformly adopted against him, would have been an abuse of speech. It is only to be regretted that he did not anticipate their conspiracy against his reputation and office, and snatch himself sooner from a community, where imposture is matured into a system, and whose repulsive manners fostered in obscurity, have enabled it to elude public reprehension.
I am, 8cc.
47 LETTER IV.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I PROCEED to call your attention further to the narrative — Upon the return of the members of the Middle Presbytery, May 24th, they constituted and proceeded to take order on the cas& of Mr. Graham. The court opened by reading the deed of Synod. They next read a letter Avhich had been addressed by Mr. Wylie to the Synod, surcharged with calumny, containing his judg- ment relative to Mr. G.'s case, and begging the Synod to pro- ceed to " striji the ivolf of the sheep's clothing."*
It was then moved by Mr. Wylie, " that Mr. Graham be sus- pended from the exercise of liis office, and that the trial of his case be deferred until the month of August." The motion was seconded with ardor, and quick as lightning would have carried, but that Mr. G. was permitted to speak, in compliance with his "request.
He objected to the constitutionality of such a measure, before the court had enquired into the relevancy of the alleged charges, the source in which they originated, or the probability of proof ; or had heard what explanations he might have to offer. He conceived it cruel and oppressive, to dispense one o£the high- est censures of the church, while as yet not a single charge was preferred in form against him. He informed the court, that should they proceed in so arbitrary a manner, he should be com- pelled to protest^ against their measures. He hoped they would first proceed to put vague reports into some shape, and distri-
* Tliis gentleman was so involved in the business of a school, that he could .not wait upon the Synod. He, however, contrived a very convenient method of attending' to both. While he taught school during the day in Philadelphia, he judged at night of tlie proceedings of tlie court in New-Y,ork, and despatched fus judgmerit. What an expenditure of labour and expence would sucli a me- thod of transacting business prevent ! ^linisters of Clu'ist need not lose many houi'S in the management of the weiglitiest concerns of tlie church. They have only to snatcli a moment from some lucrative employment, to transmit their opi- nion in writing to a few, who can be easily obtained to drudge in ecclesiastical business. Iftliis method should be objected to, we can oppose fact to the ob-
jecdon, which is always tlie most con^•incing. Mr. W , at one hundred
miles distance from tlie court, on a case of great moment, a discussion involving the reputiUion and the office of an ambassador of Christ, after as much delibera- tion as a more money -making-business would permit, sat down and wrote " strip the wolf of die sheep's clothing," and addressed this as liis official judg- ment to the S\-nod. What a happiness that such judgments are of little weiglit in die true church of Christ ! Amidst such confusions as these, an office con- ferred 6i/ fA« Redeemer, must stand as imperishable and unshaken as a rock, attacked by fo^ and vapours. His " gifts and caUmgs are without repentance.''
48
bute the charges into some specific form, before they would gravely talk of any decision upon the case.
It was contended by the court that it was afama clamoaa ;* that Mr. G. had no right to receive it in the form of charges^ nor to have the witnesses ?iames appended ; that it was hard to say what should be the number or the nature of the charges, or nvho should be the witnesses, as the Synod had enjoined all the subordinate judicatories, and all under them, to aid in collecting charges ; that they might be growing until the moment the court should enter upon trial, and that as scandalous reports, they should be at li- berty to take them up, without assuming the form of charges, specifying witnesses, or alloiving time for defence.
Mr. G. begged leave to remonstrate. He could not see the force of the reasoning of the court, and thought their practice would generate, if adopted, into oppression. It was vain, how- ever, to remonstrate, since the court had given its opinion. He would, however, beg leave to object to a procrastination of the trial. It appeared to him not only unnecessary, but, all things considered, unjust. That the Presbytery of the 1 3th had decreed to try the matter immediately after the return of the members from New-York, witness their minute ; that the Synod had en- joined an immediate investigation, and had taught Mr. G. to be- lieve, it would not be unnecessarily delayed ; that there appeared to him, no satisfactory reason for delaying it, nor any valuable purpose that would be answered by it ; that he knew, in cases of great enormity, when the scandal was publicly circulated, and generally beliex'ed, when the witnesses could not be conveniently had, and the usefulness of the church officer was desU'oyed, un- til the case should be investigated, suspension and procrastina- tion had been practised. Even then it was not customary to postpone the matter more than ten or fourteen days, i. e. when suspension was used as a precaution. But here was a motion re- quii'ing suspension for some months, wliich, whatever gloss the court might put upon it, would be o. punishment ; a serious pu- nishment, while not a single accusation had yet made its appear-
* Fama Clamosa sig'iii^es a crying or clamorous rej)oi't. A process instituted upon it, differs from other processes only in tins, that there is no formal accuser necessary. It may be .assumed upon public report. But when instituted, it is subject to the same laws wilh a process which requires an accuser. See Stuart's Col lectio. vs, book iv. title iv. sections 9, 10, 11. The jargon which the court utt^ered, ujDon tlie mode of instituting' and conducting a process on a fama clamosa, was jjrobably the result of ig'norance, but more probably of design. They found confu,sed and indefinite views best ad.ipted to their pur- poses. A process which would admit of scurrility for argument, report for proof, would have been the most eligible for them. A fama clamosa, l>oth on account of the difficulty of the phrase, and the confused manner in which it fins been generally treated, might be more easily manufactured to subserve thc-ir designs. It is sometimes the interest of lanvkss factions te illustfate, but oftcnsr to darken and perplex.
49
ance in form, much less had been proven, while the reports al- leged were not enormous, nor publicly circulated, nor generally believed, nor was his usefulness in the least affected.
It was observed by the court, that Mr. G. could not be put in possession of the extracts which he had demanded, nor Avas the court prepared to take up the case, as time ought to be allowed to collect charges, in obedience to the injunction of the Synod, and, therefore, the trial must be postponed.
Mr. G. replied — As it respected himself, extracts had been asked of the Synod, the clerk was ordered to write them, and engaged to have them in readiness upon his appearance in Phila- delphia— he hoped he had fulfilled his obligation.
Moderator. " The extracts are not prepared, nor cannot, in time for an immediate trial."
Mr. Graham. " You engaged to have them for me, upon your appearance in Philadelphia, and this in open Synod."
Moderator. I did not."*
Mr. Grahain. " I appeal to your brethren who were present.'* ^Here the court interfered, and ordered Mr. G. to sile?ice.^
Mr. Graham. " I do not insist further upon it. I hope the court ■will not imnecessarilij delay the investigation — .the principles of justice call for an immediate discussion. Should this court per- sist in refusing my request, it may compel me to measures, which they may have as much reason to regret as I shall."
Moderator. " You are a culprit, and have no right to expostu- late."
Mr. Graham. ^' I am not a culprit ; you are labouring to pre- vent it, by refusing to put me on trial. I beg the court to hear me. I request, thatthe clerk of the Synod, who engaged to fur- nish me with extracts, should have a competent time to prepare them, say one day or two, and that the Presbytery immediately after i-esume its sittings."
Moderator. " This cannot be granted."
Mr. Graham. " Put the question to the court."
Moderator. " You have no right to direct us."
Mr. Graham. " But I have to request. I shall not, however, insist upon this. Rather than unnecessarily delay the investiga- tion, I shall engage to meet it without the extracts, and dXjive minutes warning. I only request, what I believe is my right, to
* Mr. G. had himself applied to the S\-nod for the extracts. Mr. Hazelton afterwards applied. The Synod, in both instances, ordered Mr. Black, the clerk, and who was tlie moderator in the Presbytery now sitting', to have them prepared for Mr. G. on his return to Philadelphia. Kis denying this in Presby- tery was in perfect harmony with his declaring In open S} nod, " that he knew notliing of the charges contained in the paper of reasons, until he came to Piii- ladelphia," although hundreds can prove that he himself had industriously propagated tJiem, •evei'al weeks before he lelttke v»est.
U
50
have a liberty of appealing to your records, and having them read, as I may see it necessary, in the course of the trial."
Moderator. " That you cannot have, they are private property ; they are put into my hands to be kept ; I cannot suffer you to draw upon them in any nvise—^1 have received them to have them, printed, and you shall see them when they are seen by every person else."
Mr. Graham. " I desire these observations to be recorded in the memory of every person present. You were enjoined by the Synod to furnish these extracts, and now you refuse them, until you present them to the world ; I shall not see them until they can no longer be kept from my view. You are, moreover, deter- mined to print imperfect and mutilated extracts.^ as they respect me, "w^ith all the farrago of slander and defamation, raked up from every quarter, and that too before the matter has assumed the foi'm of charges, been discussed or decided. If it is not arbi- trary and oppressive, to hold up a man's character in printed do- cuments to public odium, unaccompanied by the slightest investi- gation or defence, I know not what is. Depend upon it, sir, your declarations will do you little honour."
Moderator. " It is z.fama clamosa., and not to be subjected to the niceties of formal investigations— it will be published only as a fama clamosa."
Mr. Graham. " The phrase fama clamosa is very broad and undefined indeed, and much in use by -vindictive and arbitrary ecclesiastics.
You have now, sir, denied me even the liberty of appealing to such of your I'ecords as might be conceived useful to me in making my defence. You have, at the same time, reserved to yourselves a liberty of availing yourselves of these documents in the course of the trial. If you are authorised to appropriate these to the trial, you must either use them indiscriminately and without regard to either side of the investigation, and then you shall grant my request; or you intend to use them only against me, and then you are partial, and unqualified to produce a just judgment." Here they availed themselves of the document of the ^ynod^ w'hich, Mr. G. contended, applied equally to both sides, Otherwise it was glaringly partial. It was next moved, "that so much of the business should be gone into by presenting the libel, and hearing the deposition of witnesses, as would lay fur- ther ground of suspension." Mr. Wylie abruptly called upon several witnesses, if they were present, as if he meant the court •hould proceed to hear the witnesses, before the charges had been preferred. He explicitly professed himself able to prove charges of swindling, 8cc. not, however, to the court where Mr. Graham was restored. He called the witnesses. Mr. G. begged them to consider the illegality of their proceedings, and how un- tonstitutional it would be to open the case by deposing evidence
51
against him, without previously allomng him at least ten days, to make objections to the. -witnesses, as was decreed in books of discipline.*
Mr. G. moreover, objected to Mr. Wylie's sitting in judgment, being libeller^^ and having committed himself so manifestly in his letter to the Synod. Here Mr. W. observed, " he had wrote his judgment." Mr. G. " Yes, before you heard the cause." Mr. Wylie was, notwithstanding, sustained, the moderator assigning for a reason, ludicrously enough, that it was ^fama clamosa. Mr. G. next observed, that Mr. Black, the moderator, had prejudged the case before he left Pittsburgh, and objected to his sitting on the trial. This was overruled. Here Mr. G. observed, that it was not a matter of much moment, since they were manifestly con.' spiring against him ; that he had been expressly told by a member of Synod before he left New- York, he must be degraded. Mr. W. withdrew his original motion. It was then moved, that to prove the libel should be the order of the day for to-morrow. Court adjourned.
Philadelphia, May 28M, 7 o'clock, A. M.
The Presbytery resumed its sitting. Mr. G. was presented with a libel in form, as follows :
" Whereas, a Fama Clamosa exists to the grief of the godly, and to the great scandal of religion, and of this church in parti- cular, that you, Mr. D. Graham, minister of the gospel, are guilty of the following scandalous practices :—
I. Of \vithdra wing that profession of repentance, on the footing of which you were restored to the exercise of the office of the holy ministry, which appears by the following proofs :
1. Your own words in open court.
2. Your attempts always to justify your conduct against the Irish Presbytery, representing yourself as the injured person.
II. Of employing your ministry to the injury of the chuixh, as appears by the following evidences :
1. Your endeavouring to sow the seeds of discord among your brethren in the ministry.
2. Your calumniating and abusing the foreign ministerial con- nexions of this church.
3. Your abusing and calumniating the Synod of the Reformed Church in North America.
4. Your calumnious conduct in Mr. Wylie's congregation, in conversation with Dr. M'Kinney.
III. Your being guilty of swindling in Belfast, in matters un- known to this church at the time of your restoration, viz. In ob- taining money from Mrs. Martin, by means of a false token from
* See Stuart's Collections. Bode iv. Title iv. Section 10. •J- Mr. Wylie had, since the court commenced, undertaken " to prove tlie charges," which brought him under the denomination of a libeller.
52
Mr. Becket. Also attempting to obtain money from said Mrs. Martin, on the day after your elopement from your congregation. In borrowing money from Mr. Moore of Belfast, for your brother, for which you became responsible, while there is every reason to suspect you did not intend paying it.
Witnesses — Oliver M. Becket.^ William Jamison, Andrenv^Jami*' son, Jolni Jamison.
Now, therefore, this court do charge you, Mr. David Graham, with the above scandalous sins ; and hereby put you on your trial agreeably to the requisition of Synod ; at the same time availing ourselves of whatever is alluded to in the minute of Synod.
Signed by order of Court,
JOHN BLACK, Moderator. SAMUEL B. WYLIE, Presb. Clerk. Philadelphia, May 25, 1811."
Upon receiving a copy of the libel, Mr. G. enquired why the tight reasons framed by the Presbytery of the loth, and trans- mitted to Synod, were not inserted in the body of the libel. It certainly betrayed an impotent, yet fixed design to injure him, to form reasons replete with reproach, and hold them up to pub- lic animadversion, and not allow him an opportunity of exposing their falsehood. It was still more extraordinary, that while these reasons, which imperiously demanded discussion, were abandon- ed, the court had constructed the two thirds of the libel out of occurrences which had transpired since the meeting of Synod. To call these things by the name of ^fama clamosa, and to con- stitute them a ground of prosecution, manifested at once an un- reasonable determination to prosecute, and the poverty of the materials for a prosecution.
The court had, moreover, overlooked the fama clamosa speci- fied in the Synod's deed.* This shewed botli the Presbytery of the 13th, and the Synod, had acted prematurely. They had each in their turn invested reports with an official and important dress, and they had each in their turn been compelled to abandon them. They were perfectly aware, from the first, that it Avas contrary* to the laws of the church, not to have an explanation from him- self, nor to enquire after the origin of the charges, and the probability of proof, before they should have gravely talked of commencing a prosecution. They had, however, a design, which could not be accomplished, by attention to correct discipline. It was, to prejudice the public mind, by an official detail of scandal. This they knew could be in a great degree accomplished, with- out the necessity of proof. For " vt^ho could think of a court of Christ (would the public say) dealing in mere detraction? Cer- tainly there must be some ground for such reports, otherwise these
* See the deed, p. 44.
holy men would never have agreed to exiwse them." This the court knew ; and, to do them justice, they had drawn sufficiently deep upon the credit due to ecclesiastical judicatories. They ought, however, to have calculated more rationally, and either to have adopted no charges but what they had a reasonable hope of proving, or, seeing they had detailed them in their courts in the face of the public, to have prosecuted them so far as to allow Mr. G. an opportunity of explaining and defending himself. As the matter stood, he had been exposed in a public and authoritative manner, the pernicious impression was communicated, the deep injury was effected, and the slanders which accomplished it were suppressed. This was manifest injustice ; he hoped the court would consider it.
To this no answer was given, but " that he was not to frame the libel, and that he was impertinent to dictate to the court."
Mr. G. next objected to the third charge in the libel, as un- constitutional, relating, as it did, to offences, which, if they were committed at all, must have been committed before he left Ireland.
The court observed, that " he had withdrawn his evidences of repentance, and they were, therefore, at liberty to prosecute him upon the old charges, for which he had suffered deposi- tion."
Mr. G. contended, that it was not true he had withdrawn his evidences of repentance ; that it had not been proved he had, and that to bear such a ponderous inference, it was necessary the premises should be established by p-refi'agable proof.
After a scene of great confusion, and much warm altercation, on this subject, during which the moderator became so disorderly as to forget his seat, and to address a member of court, as mo- derator, Mr. G. begged to permission to speak, and spoke as follows :
" Reverend Moderator — This is a m.atter which must not be shuffled aside by sophistry, nor crushed by a WKnton use of power. The seat you occupy, sir, you hold under Christ; and if you prostitute ir'to disingenuous reasoning or oppressive mea- sures, you ought to recollect, he is swift to punish. Two priests, as dignified by offiee as you are, presumed to abuse that office. They offered strange Jire, emblematic of th^i fulse zeal and afipa- rently malevolent ardor^ which my brethren but too obviously display, and they perished with the stained censers in their hands * You are about to institute a process viponthe footing of charges, for which I have already suffered much. The third charge in the libel respects things which are supposed to have existed pre- yious to my leaving Ireland. Either these things were known to the Irish church previous to the censures they dispensed, or
* Leviticus, chap, x.
54
they were not. If they were known, it is proverbially unjust to resume them as subjects of ecclesiastical investigation, under any pretence whatever. If they were not known, the general charge of fraud which that court pretended to establish, and for which they inflicted censure, embraced them. In either case, it is ille- gal to put them into my hand in the form of a libel.
You will permit me, sir, to be explicit upon this subject, it being a point of constitutionality and of right. I shall admit you are able to present a more minute detail of the underparts of former charges, certain circumstances which were not formerly mentioned ; but these no rr\ore constitute separate charges, than the several circumstances accompanying intoxication, form so many grounds of charge, distinct from intoxication itself. I see a man drunk in the streets, he jostles one, insults another, and laughs at a third. I am called to give testimony against him. He is charged with intoxication. I mention the above circumstances. These are regarded, not as so many distinct charges, but as facts concurring in evidence to establish the original charge. The original charges against me are still in your hands. They are either recorded in your minutes, or contained in the original documents from Ireland. To them I appeal. They stood in the investigation of the Irish Presbytery in four distinct charges. One of these charges me with fraud.* It is followed up with several circumstances, which they conceived to prove and ag- gravate the misdemeanor. Are not the libellous representations contained in the third item of the libel reducible to the above ? If they be, still the charge is the same. More perspicuity and force of evidence, arising from circumstances not formerly at- tended to, cannot either change the nature of the charges, nor add one to their number. These circumstances, it may be said, render the original charges more demonstrable, and give them aggravation. True, but did not the Irish Presbytery sustain them as clearly proven, and can they be more than proven ? Did not the Irish Presbytery believe them sufficiently aggravated to call for deposition, and was it in their power, or is it yet in their power, to inflict a greater censure ? Did not this court, in 1809, sanction the judicial proceedings of the Irish Presbytery, i. e. sustain the charges as they had done, and approve of the act of deposition ?t And is it possible that volumes, written out in the plainest hand, filled with evidence and aggravation, could have produced more ? No, they could not then, nor can they yet, with all the additional perspicuity and weight of evidence, do more than believe the facts to be true, and give their full assent to the sentence of deposition. If the charges are in substance the same as formerly ; if they were sufficiently clear and flagrant
* See printed extracts, p. 5. art. iv. ^ t See printed extracts, p. 7.
55
to call for their being sustained, and for consequent deposition ; if they have been as clear and circumstantial in a legal sense, as to justify a positive decision, first in Ireland, and afterwards in America, what in the name of common sense can be intended by suggesting the propriety of a re-investigation ? Will any one say, in justification of this measure, the facts maintained here are new, and evince with greater perspicuity and force, the truth of the charges ? What 1 had you not evidence sufficiently clear to compel you to sustain the truth tAvo years ago, and can you, or do you, expect more than proof, by a discussion of the same charges ? But if these imputations be true, the conduct is more aggravated than we expected. What ! more aggravated than to merit deposition ! more aggravated than the colouring given to the charges in the original Irish documents, which I blush to mention ! No, my brethren, you knew every thing worth the knowing, and you knew it through a medium which added distortion and enormity to a few simple facts easily accounted for ; what you did not know, and what of such this libel may be supposed to contain, are the dregs of popular reproach, excrescences which have shot forth rank from the passions and prejudices of a few interested individuals. Instead of indulgence, they demand the pruning knife. They are distempered effusions which call for the hands of the physician, not of the judge.
With what pretensions to reason and order shall I be called upon to answer these calumnies ? such they are, such I can prove them to be. If there is the slightest pretext for shifting the enormous loadof defamation and unprovoked reproach which this libel contains, upon my shoulders, let it be shewn. Let it be made appear, that the libel contains charges which have never been discussed, and founded upon conduct since 1807 ; let it be shewn that it appears in the proper time, and that your previous decisions have left the case open for its discussion; let me, let the world, be satisfied, that there is a necessity for de- grading me to the situation of a culprit, and placing my office in a hazardous predicament, and I shall consent to a trial. But let no person imagine that I shall be either duped or intimidated into a compliance. I wish to hear something more than decla- mation : nor will invidious references to the copious defamation ■which is contamed in the Irish papers convince me that I am lawfully inculpated. You have already judged and decided, and I fear you cannot retrace your former steps without disgrace.
But why, brethren, could you dream of putting me, a brother, to the torture unnecessarily. It is only two years since I had your sympathy. In the midst of all the charges that are now im- pertinently forced upon you, and of the overivhelming eloquence of your Irish brethren, you felt for the victim of their indignation ; you spoke, you acted, as if you believed him compelled to adopt desperate conclusions. You believed his conduct extenuated by
56
a multitude of circumstances, which your brethren had not an opportunity of knowing. Some of you have gone so far as to think the hurricane of temptation which overset me was almost irresistible. You even adventured to communicate your opinions to others, that there was something about the whole of the con- duct rath&r calculated to do honor to the party, than to disgrace him.* You v/rotc, you spoke, you acted, after my restoration, for a little, as if you believed you had done your duty, and appeared to exult in what you had done. Compare this with the present frame of inind v/hich my brethren appear to possess, and it will require some ingenuity to explain away the apparent inconsis- tency. Have you, sir, or any of my brethren, received provoca- tion from me, or are you in possession of any solid circumstance, or any other than groundless reports and unreasonable suspi- cions, which has transpired since your last meeting in 1809, to compel you to repent of your conduct in admitting me to fellow- ship, or to plot my disgrace. I declare most solemnly I know of none. And if you, or any of you do, be candid and produce it. It is not in your libel. This you shall be convinced of perhaps, when it shall be too late. If you cannot produce something of this liind, sir, depend upon it there is a contrast between your con- duct in 1809 and 18 11, too flagrant to escape detection. I speak in the honesty of my heart, when I tell you, there appears a chasm in the uniformity of your transactions as they respect me, so great, that no artifice, no policy, no tortured explanation of any thing now before you, will be able to repair. Unless I sup- pose some dislike has been taken by some individual or indivi- duals, who have had address enough to make it general, by work- ing upon the passions or sensibilities of their brethren, I am vitterly at a loss to account for the sudden and unexpected turn which my affairs have taken. Allow me but this as a key, and I shall unlock the mysterious cabinet, and expose the policy which lurks within.
After all, sir, suppose I should consent to a second trial upon the Irish affairs, what security could this court give mc, that this would be the last trial on this subject, and that I should afterwards enjoy protection ? All the security they can propose, is their decisions. These I have already had, yet I am not se^ cure. With as little formality and as much freedom, as if no such decisions ever had existed, has a paper relative to the very case on which you have decided, been put into my hands. Who will guarantee me, that nothing like this shall ever occur again ? I refuse to take for my security protested decisions, and hope, if
* Mr. Wylic, in the month of April, 1810, wrote Mr. Knox, President of Union Collcg-e, Baltimore, that till the circumstances of Mi". Graliam's emigrn- tion to America being knowi), they Mere caleulated to do hixft hon«r. I'liii. Mr. G. had frojn Mr. W. himself.
57
if this court stiil insist upon trial of the Irish charges, they will assign some reasons for a measure so extraordinary, and conde- scend to direct me to something which will satisfy me, that I am not again to be abruptly torn from my seat as a feilov/ presbyter, and rudely and wantonly exposed to ruinous and destructive prosecutions.
Permit me, sir, to entreat you to think and reflect maturely be- fore you advance in this business. You are charged w^ith rash- ness in one instance already, and do not attempt to vindicate your conduct by rushing again into measures prematurely. The issue I admit may be serious. It will be so, if this court suffer them- selves, either by their own feelings or the seductions of their brethren, to be seduced from the direct path, which if I nastake not, consists in defending their own conduct, not in impugning mine. If you still persist, without law or reason, to institute a second trial upon old charges, the oldest member in this court may live to repent it. The measure I believe to be unconsti- tutional. Whatever is so, is dangerous as a precedent. It will be as much the interest of every member of this court, as it will be mine, to oppose it. The case is mine to-day, but it may be yours at a future pei'iod. And are you certain, sir, that this very- case will not be drawn upon as a precedent to inflict unnecessa- ry distress ? You have only the existing belief of the interest you have in the feelings of your brethi-en, to assure you that it shall not. And, sir, believe me the security which originates in feel- ings is very uncertain. If a fixed principle be wanting, and precedent against you, you may arrive at a situation such as mine, in which you will exult sparingly in the professions of fraternal fricndnhifi.
But, sir, admitting a right to review these charges and even to reverse decisions, the delinquent has suft'ered punishment for his delinquency, and can that be reversed ? No sir, in the midst of the destruction of your records and decisions, the fact of pu- nishment actually inflicted, will stand as imperishable as a rock. Have I not suffered punishment ? you cannot deny it. In Ireland and in America ? Yes. Can the Synod annul that punishment ? No, no more than they can create a world. — Again, does not the ad- mission of a trial involve in it the probability of a verdict against the defendant ? Certainly. And should the court in the issue of this trial find such a verdict, what would follow ? Punish- ment. But we have had one punishment already, and this makes two. Two punishments for the same offence 1 How, sir, will this comport with justice? You, sir, have great power. Perhaps you scarcely know the plenitude of your power. But great as it may be,' sir, you will certainly tamper with your reputation, if you put yourselves in a posture which may lead you to punish twice for the »ame delinquency. What no court upon earth which is not law- less and absolutely despotic, would attempt, will I trust be treated
H
58
by this court uith the horror it deserves. Sophistry, xeal,logi<* and metaphysics, may find you in subtle distinctions, false conclu- sions,and perplexing- debates, which in opposition to the most genu- ine deductions of reason, may furnish a pretext for the measure. But, sir, however these may do for the purposes of argument, they arc too unsubstantial to support the reputation of a " court of Christ."* Facts, solid arguments, irresistible evidence, clear cases, candid discussions, just decisions, are the only suitable materials for them to deal in. Jesuitism and finesse, chicanery and sophistry, intriguing metaphysics, are every where detestable, but incomparably more detestable in a church of Christ.
I therefore object to the measure as unconstitutional, vrhich proposes to institute a trial respecting charges of four years standing, which, if not with all the circumstances contained in this libel, were yet in substance, investigated and decided upon first in Ireland, in 1808, and afterv/ards in America, in 1809 — I further object to the constitutionality of a measure which calls for a second trial, while the judges and the charges are the same, neither more nor less, than they were in 1809, when this matter' was investigated and decided."
It was objected by the court, " that the court was not the same ; that the Presbytery met and proceeded to judge the case under the authority of the Synod, v.'hich being a court superior to a Presbytery, it had a right to enjoin a review of the conduct of the Presbytery which dealt with Mr. G. for restoration ; and if it saw proper to annul its proceedings, and order a reinvestiga- tion. That it had ordered a reinvestigation."
Mr. G. " The Synod has not ordered a reinvestigation. I ap* peal to its deed, which see. Again, I shall admit the courts are different ; yet in the organization of yourselves into a Synod, you must of necessity have agreed to sustain all deeds which you made while you existed in the form of a Presbytery ;t I shall however admit, that you have now a power to review those deeds, and either approve or disapprove ; but even with this admission, sir, one would think, it is your owni Presbytery you have to deal ■with, and not me. By taking up a case, and investigating and de- ciding, a Presbytery interposes its presence between the delin- quent and the Synod. You must first remove their decisions out of the way, before you can come at me. But you cannot re- move those decisions and be consistent ; for you have already sanctioned them.
It may still be replied, a Synod has a power to re-examine the records of its several Presbyteries, and that since a Presbytery decided upon my case, it is jiot unconstitutional in this Synod to re- view its proceedings, and if found necessary, to annul its deci-
* This was the hackneyed appellation which the members of this court after- wards constantly employed to justify their decisions.
t This had been forg-otten in'the origipal constitution, but was supplied in form at the late meeting' of Synod.
59
sions, or to authorise a Presbytery to do so. I admit it was a Presbytery investigated my case. I admit a Syiiod has the pow- er to review the proceed'mt^s of a Presbytery, and to reverse its decisions ; and yet I deny that this Synod can review, much less reverse the decisions of that Presbytery which judged in my case ; least of all, that it could authorise an inferior court to review, reverse and reinvestigate, without the grossest inconsistency. That Presbytery was placed in a situation, widely different from any Presbytery existing under the inspection of a Synod. The Pres- byteries which now exist in this church, are imder the inspection of the Synod, and are necessarily amenable to the Synod as a superior court. It is therefore in the power of the Synod to call these Presbyteries to an account.
But that Presbytery was never, even for a second of time, under the inspection of the Synod of this church nor of any other. It was never an inferior court, existing under a superior. It trans- acted business as the highest court in this church, and from its decisions there was no appeal. It virtually possessed as much power as it respected the members of this chmxh, as if it had been clothed with the form of a General Assembly. There was no period in which that Presbytery had less power than this. While a Presbytery, so empowered and modified, existed, it, was impossible in the nature of things, that a court superior to it could be organized. This observation you acknowledged with all it* force, when you found yourselves reduced to the necessity of dis- solving and annihilating the Presbytery before you proceeded to organize your Synod.* You found it impracticable, to reduce ihat Presbytery to an inferior court, or to erect a superior, while it re- mained in existence. And, sir, when you annihilated that Pres- bytery, and organized a Synod, you did no more than transfer the power which the Presbytery originally possessed, into a court with another name. You gave this Synod the very same extent of power over its Presbyteries which that Presbytery held over its committees. That is, sir, this Synod has no more power over the church, than that Presbytery had. I believe, sir, you should find it very inconvenient to contradict this. Now, sir, none of the Presbyteries which at present exist under the inspection of this Synod, will furnish a parallel to that Presbytery which judged in my affairs. Your existing Presbyteries are only parallel to the committees of that Presbytery. If you wish a just parallel to that Presbytery, I refer you to the Irish Presbytery, or to the Pres- bytery of Scotland, who each hold themselves independent judi- catories, from which thei'e is no appeal. — These things premised, we shall easily ascertain whether this court, or even the Synod, has any power to disturb the transactions, or reverse the decisi- ons of the Presbytery. I say it has not. That Presbytery never Stood amenable to the Synod. How could it, when the Synod
* See printed extracts, page 13.
60
did not begin to exist until that Presbytery had expired ? Courts which may legally i-everse the deeds of other courts, require a paramount authority ; but the Synod had not an authority para- mount to that Presbytery, which supposes that they co-existed together ; nor has even at this moment a power superior to that, which the Presbytery while standing, possessed. It Avas the highest court ; this Synod is no more. It had power adequate to manage all the concerns of the church ; this has no more.^ It was independent of every other court, amenable for its decisions to none, and from it there was no appeal. I should be glad to know whether more can be affirmed of the Synod ? and if more cannot be affirmed of it, if it has not a paramount authority, if it never had a power over that Presbytery, if it possesses only the power of that Presbytery under another name, if that Pres- bytery by no constitutional law stood amenable to it, nor to any- other ; how then should the Synod, without a flagrant violation of the constitution of that Presbytery, pretend to review its trans- actions, in order either to sanction or reverse its decisions ?
•Permit me to ask you, sir, what would be the consequence of not recognizing the Presbytery's deeds, or of reviewing any one of its transactions judicially, with an intention to have a reinves- tigation ? it would lead to a review, a reinvestigation, and proba- bly a reversion of the whole of its transactions and deeds. What reason can be assigned for reinvestigating one part which would not equally apply to another ? If you, sir, be at liberty to call for a reinvestigation of the part that concerns me, I have an equal right to call for a reinvestigation of those deeds which respect you, or any other of my brethren. If not, evince the propriety of singling out this solitary instance from a mass of particulars, while the rest must sleep in peace. I must not be told the court has a right to do what it pleases. The engine of power may si- lence, but it cannot convince. It is not what this court can do, but what it can do with propriety ; what it can do agreeable to those laws, by which a court such as this is, ought to suffer itself to be regulated. I believe such a measure to be unconstitution- al, that is to say, I believe it contradictory to the approven stand- ards of the Presbyterian church ; for as yet it appears we have no constitution peculiar to ourselves to direct in church govern- ment. I have taken the liberty to assign the reasons, as the evidence on which my belief rests.
Were it possible, sir, to institute a fair and impartial investi- gation of my affairs, from first to last, no pei'son would have more reason to rejoice in it than I. I have to regret that I have been condemned unheard. That neither by person nor proxy, word nor writ, have I had an opportunity to defend myself. When it is considered that the same Presbytery which has written the Irish document has been so indefatigable in its efforts to crimi- nate me J was my judge ; that they had the sole and exclusive
61
management of the trial ; few will be surprised, if I should most ardently wish a reinvestigation. But this can only be reach- ed by the agreement of all the parties concerned to cancel all their records, and to assume the matter in its original shape, allowing the defendant those privileges which he enjoys by the constitution of all courts. To this, I as one of the parties, shall most cheerfully agree. Nay, if but a single brother will give it as his probable opinion, that the other parties will consent to it, I shall engage to have them petitioned. But to talk of a re- investigation of delinquency, while the former investigation stands recorded, and the decisions unrepealed, appears very extraordi- nary. What kind of a trial must that be, whei'e decision is past before the case is heard ? I have seen a trial of this description. A United Irishman who was tried with the rope about his neck.* I have once already been called to defend myself against these very charges ; the very instant after, it was carried unanimously to sustain the decisions of the Irish Presbytery respecting these charges.f I saw the palpable absurdity at the time : But I also saw the awkward situation of the court. They wished to pre- serve the respectability of their sister court; at the same time, 1 could easily discern their dispositions were favourable to my cause. I cheerfully submitted to this p'iece of mockery, and pro- ceeded to offer a few observations in explanation and defence, as if I had not recollected the court had just determined, before I began, to abide by previous decisions ; that is to say, not to hear me. My defence might have a place in their breasts, but it was impossible it could have a place in their judicial proceed- ings. Such, of necessity, must be the trial which I should novr expect. The Irish decisions and your own are still to be ad- hered to, the charges are to be sustained as fully proven. Although neither I, nor any person on my behalf, ever heard the witnesses examined, nor have I even now an opportunity of so much as knowing who these witnesses were. There is no person present here who knew any of my affairs in Ireland, unless by report ; and therefore no person to refer to for evidence or explanation ; and what is still worse, were I with all these inconveniencies to submit to a trial, I have not even the possibility with which the blackest criminal may indulge himself, the feeble hope, of a ver- dict in my favour ; for the verdict of the Irish church was against me, and these decisions must not be overthrown. Again I ask what sort of a trial is this likely to be ? v/ill my brethren consi- der these things, and cease to sport with their own character ?
* Radamanthus the judg-e of hell, " castigatque, audltque dolos," first pun- ishes, then hears. This was the mode adopted by the Centurion with Paul ; " he oi'dered him to be apprehended and bound with chains, and dien gave liim a hearing-^ enquiring- who lie was, and what lie had done."
f Conduct of the Presbytery in 1809, see printed exti-acts, page 7.
62
Shew me, sir, that it is in your power to institute any thing that merits the name of a trial, respecting old charges, annnl your de- cisions, prevail with the Irish church to annul theirs, let the Irish Presbytery libel, let the witnesses be examined in the pre- sence of the defendant, let me have time to make my defence, and I shall consent to a full and unreserved investigation. But if by a trial be meant, that I am to appear at your bar on the strength of charges already discussed ; and that I am to be call- ed upon to make a defence, which you have predetermined should have no weight, and all this to make way for a new decision, which may, for any thing known to the contrary, divest me of vny office J if this I say be the trial which is contemplated, what man of common sense would seem surprised, should I decline it ? ra- ther who would not conceive me an egregious blockhead, most unworthy of the ministerial office, were I to submit to such an indignity, such a flagrant violation of justice?"
Notwithstanding these expostulations, the libel was sustained in the precise form in which it was presented.
The court next passed a sentence for Mr. G's suspension. Against this too he remonstrated ; but in vain. He firotested against the act of suspension, as follows :
" For the exoneration of my own conscience, and on the be- half of justice and truth, I David Graham, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, do protest against the proceedings of this court, and appeal to the Synod, for the reasons which follow :
1. The court being chiefly composed of persons who hare prejudged the case.
2. Because this court, in every step of its procedure, commita itself, and proves its incompetency to judge ; being manifestly destitute of the essential requisites of a judge, viz. impartiality^ and a love of justice, which they have discovered in numberless instances ; particularly — in constructing a libel upon the pretext of a/awc clamosa and recent immorality, whereas the two first charges are predicated upon things of a private nature, which have transpired since the meeting of Synod, not more than four or five days ago ; and the third upon matters which, if they ex- isted at all, must have existed before the year 1807, and Mr. G's emigration from Ireland. — In forming a libel without discussing the relevancy of the charges, contrary to all the approven stand- ards of the Presbyterian church — In agreeing to pass a sentence of suspension, without first enquiring into the grounds of the libel, the probability of proof, the publicity of the charges, the general belief attached to them, or their destructive tendency as to his usefulness.— In postponing the investigation of the libel for three months, after agreeing to inflict suspension, which made suspension in this case a serious punishment, before any crime was proved ; and that too after the moderator repeatedly inform- ing him that it was perfectly optional with him (Mr. G.) whe-
63
thcr the trial should immediately take place, or be deferred ; anrf after signifying his wish that the case should be immediately dis* cussed.— In the general display of malice by the several members of the court against me— .such as exclaiming, rje ought to appoint a day of humiliation to co?ifcss our sins in admitting Mr. G. into i/ur cotnmunion — The stink oj" this man's reputation is intolerable — ■ ♦Sz/ doivn, Sir, sit down, Sir, you are very ijnfiudent, you are ex- teedingly impertinent ; if you do not be silent we shall call an Cjfficer to turn you out — Let Mr. G's stenographer take notes ; vihen he publishes, it will be recollected, this is the Mr. G. for whom a reward was offered, &c. — In hasting to pass a sentence which aggrieves your brother, refusing at the same time to listen to the remonstrances of reason, or to be conducted agreeably to tlie order of the church,"*
Upon presenting the moderator with a copy of the above pro- test, Mr. G. desired thac it might be recorded, with its reasons. The court demurred against entering the reasons, and finally agreed that neither reasons nor protest should be recorded — that the appeal to Synod should not be sustained, and that ISIr. G. should be cited to attend upon a Presbytery at Pittsburgh, August loth, 1811. Mr G. replied that he should wait upon the Pres- bytery, although in refusing to sustain his appeal they had acted unconstitutionally ; that their refusal to record his protest was equally illegal ; and that he was determined, agreeably to eccle- siastical law, to abide by his protest.f Mr. G. read his protest" soon as the court agreed to inflict the suspension. While he was yet standing, the moderator proceeded, with his usual des- patch, to pronounce the sentence ; and lest the court might suppose the sentence had taken effect, Mr. G. repeated tlie words of the protest, but without the reasons. Mr. Hazelton, a member of court, protested at the same time, and had his pro- test recorded.
It was next moved that the depositions of certain witnesses^ who they presumed could not be forward at Pittsburgh, should be taken. To this Mr. G. objected as contrary to books of disci- pline, which always allowed not less than eight days, nor more than fourteen, to prepare objections to witnesses, if necessary.^; To this no other reply was made, than, that the court should pro'
* The court was so prompt in passing the sentence of suspension, that they passed o\ev the usual tbrmality of enquiring' at delinquents, " whether thef profess themselves wiUing' to submit to die court in the Lord." Tlie suspensioa of ]Mr. G. was a thing so very desh-able and delicious, that the court was to be excused if tiieir feelings outstripped thiiir reason. It was a paro.xysm of zeal, not to be checked by stoical reflection, or trammelled by cold regulations. *' Come," said Jeliu, as he drove on furiously, " come and see my zeal for the Lord."
j- Seethe DEFENCisin Pittsburgh.
i See Stuart's Cohections, book^4th, section 4tb, title 10th ; and Mr. Gra- kam's Defence in ths subsequent pages.
64
ceed to take the dejiositions^ and Mr. G. might he firesent to cross- examine the witnesses.^ and object to them if he chose. Adjourned until 2 o'clock, P. M.
Philadelphia, 2 o'clock., P. M.
The court proceeded to take the depositions of certain wit- nesses, as follows :
Mr. Reily was called and sworn. He deposed " That when about to leave the western country (thinks in the month of Octo- ber last) he called at Mr. Hazelton's, in Pittsburgh, where Mr. Graham was; that he" (Mr, Reily) Messrs. Gormly, Kirke, Ha- zelton, and Graham, spent the evening together at Mr. Hazel- ton's ; that the theological seminary and the students, became a subject of conversation; that Mr. G. observed, he feared the seminary would go to nothing, for that the young men in the western country had refused to attend it, and that Dr. M'Leod, he had understood, had written a letter to Mr. Milligan, asking him on to New-York, to finish his education."
Mr. Reily cross-examined by Mr. G.
Q. Did Mr. G. appear to wish the injury of the seminary?
A. No, he appeared to regret that it would come to nothing.
Question by Mr. Wylie — Q. Did not Mr. G. appear to you to discover a disposition hostile to Dr. M'Leod I
A. I thought he did.
Mr. G. proposed to call upon one of the students, who he perceived was now present (Jonathan Gill) to witness his zeal and exertions to promote the interest of the seminary. The court observed, it was not necessary, as they had no ground to suspect Mr. G. was unfriendly to the seminary. The part of the deposition of the witness (Mr. Reily) which they felt disposed to regard, was that which testified a disposition in Mr. G. hos- tile to Dr. M'Leod.
Oliver M. Becket was called. Before the court proceeded to swear him, Mr. G. alleged, that Mr. Becket being a stranger, it was necessary, according to the usages of ecclesiastical courts, that he should, previous to his being admitted as a witness, pro- duce a certificate, attesting his good moral character. To this the moderator replied, it was not necessary — he had no doubt Mr. Becket was a better character than the culprit at the bar. Mr. G. next objected, that the gentleman who appeared as wit- ness was interested in the issue of the prosecution in pecuniary matters ; that he was in that predicament which books of disci- pline had declared, disqualified a person from being a witness. To this objection no attention was paid. The court proceeded, with a haughtiness which added insult to injustice, to swear Mr. Becket.
Oliver M. Becket deposeth — " I think, to the best of my recollection, in the fall of the year 1807, Mr. Graham calletl
65
upon me, in the town of Belfast. Previous to this, Mr. G. and I were upon a very intimate footing, and at several times finding that he did not stick strictly to the truth, I determined to hold no more correspondence with him. However, Mr. G. with his ac* customed impudence, called upon me (I cannot exactly say the day, but I think the month of October or November, 1807) and asked me for the loan of two guineas to purchase a pair of boots. Mr. Becket had received a pair of new boots ; he asked the loan of them, to go to a tea-party to a Mr. M'Nair. I refused to lend him the boots. He immediately repairs to the house of Mrs. Martin, to the best of my knowledge, as I was informed by Mrs. Martin, Mr. G. gave Mrs. Martin my compliments, and told her, that I desired him to get two guineas — on which she gave him the two guineas. The next day I called at Mrs. Martin's house, when she asked me if I gave her credit for the two guineas that I had given Mr. G. an order to obtain from her. I told Mrs. M. at the same time, that I neither knew what she meant, nor did I e%'er give Mr. G. or any other person, an order to obtain money of her. Mrs. M. made reply, that when her and I was settling accoi^nts, that she certainly would keep them two guineas cut of the amount of my bill ; and that I not only had a right to pay them two guineas, but the several other sums Mr. G. stood in- debted to her, as it was through me she gave Mr. G. credit for the different times he had lodged wi»h her. In the course of some time, on me furnishing Mrs. M. with her bill, she subtract- ed the two guineas out of the bill, which I objected to pay, al- leging that I never had given Mr. G. any order to receive two guineas from her on my account. And told Mrs. M. that if she was so simple as to give Mr. G. money on his own word, as she could not be unacquainted with the character of Mr. G. that it must be at her own risque. Mrs. M. said then, that she allovved she acted a simpleton in the case, and as it was through me that she had lent not only that money, but some other sn^all sums that he stood charged with in her books ; that she would have the pleasure of quitting taking her liquors from me. I then thought it was better to pay Mrs. M. the two guineas than lose her custom. I did pay her the two guineas. I think there was about a month or six weeks elapsed before I had heard that Mr. G. had left Ireland. At the time that Mr. G. left Ireland, I heard a great many stories in circulation about Mr. G. a great part of which I did not believe. I never had an opportunity of knowing any thing of Mr. G. until I came to America. When I came to America, I understood that Mr. G. was teaching In New-York. The second day after, I furnished him with his account, 25/. 8*. 9d. sterling. At the same time I wrote hin^. a letter, the copy of which I hold now in mv hand, which the moderator may read i£
I
66
he pleases. [^Lefter read.*^ Mr. G. on receiving, my letter, treated me with silence. The way I knew that Mr. G. received the letter, he told me afterwards he had received it- I wrote him a second letter, and a third letter, all of which I have every reason to be- lieve he received, and still never answered. I think it was about a year ago I understood Mi'. G. was in Philadelphia — at your house (Mr. Wylie.) When I understood he was at your house, I wrote him a note, (the words I do not recollect) to come and settle his account. The man who I sent with the note returned me for answer, he would call at my stoi^e in the course of the day — and in the course of the day he did call once, accompanied by yourself. When he came into my store, he charged me with insulting him by letters. I denied ever intending an insult, and related all the circumstances. I am not certain whether Mr. G. denied receiving the money from Mrs. M. or not ; nor do I po- sitively say that he did make use of my name to Mrs. Martin or not. If my recollection serves me, he left the store and called in the evening. Mr. W. seemed to have got some things from a conversation with Mr. G. (He supposed this.) At which time Mr. Wylie requested I would write Mrs. M. and he would •write, and he would likewise write a Mr. Henderson of Belfast — as letters from these people might alter his opinion very much respecting Mr. G. But as Mr. G. had positively denied the above charges, I think at the time Mr. W. offered, if I would wait, and if he found the letters to correspond with what I had said, he would be accountable for the money. I immediately wrote Mrs. M. and have received no answer, and Mr. W. to the ¥est of my knowledge, told me he had wrote Mrs. M."
Mr. Becket cross-examined by Mr. G.
Q. Was it by a written or verbal token Mr. G. received the money ? — A. A verbal token.
Q. What time did you settle with Mrs. M. for the two gui- neas ? — A. In December, 1807; does not recollect the day.
Q. What time did your business go into disorder I
A. In the winter of 1808.
Q. Was not Mrs. Martin a tavern-keeper? — A. Yes.
Q. What time elapsed after Mr. G.^s leaving Ireland before you heard of it ? — A. I think about a month or six weeks.
Q. You have stated, you did not hear of Mr. G.'s departure for at least one month after you paid Mrs. M. did you ever write him on the subject ? — A. No.
* Of this letter Mr. G. did not receive any extract from the elerk, in despite of every argument which Mr. G. could use, and after repeatedly writing-, a part of the extracts were still withheld. The letter, however, contidned a demand upon Mr. G. to the firm of Becket & Nimock, and one of two guineas paid (aa Pecket wrote) to Mrs. Martin on Mr. G.'s account, accompanied with a threat, that should net Mr. G. make immediate pa^-ment, he should be compelled to It.
67
Q. Do you believe Mrs. M. ever mentioned the circumstanea to Mr. G. ? — A. Never told me she did.
Q. Do you know whether ever Mrs. Martin mentioned this circumstance to Mr. G. before his leaving Ireland?
A. She never told me she did.
Q. Did not Mr. G. engage, in the presence of Mr. Wylie, to pay you the sum he owed Mrs. Martin, so soon as you should produce authority to receipt it ? — A. Yes.
Q. Were you not acquainted with Messrs. M'Fadden, Moore, Henderson and Fulton, of Belfast ? — A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever mention it to any of them ?
A. No, not before Mr. G.'s leaving Ireland.
Q. Did you ever afterwards mention the subject to any person ?
A. Only to Mr. Nimock of Colerain.
Q. How soon did you mention it to him ?
A. On the next day, or the day following Mr. G.'s passing thi'ough Belfast on his flight, as Mr. Nimock w^as pursuing him for debt.
Q. Where was you at the time the Irish Presbytery sat on Mr. G.'s affairs ?--A. In Belfast.
Q. Are you certain that Mr. G. made use of a false token ?
A. I ajn not; nor will I positively say he made use of my name.
Q. Are you prepared positively to state that Mr. G. swindled you out of two guineas?
A, I am not ; nor do I think Mr. G. capable of such a thing.
Q. Are you certain the sum you paid Mrs. Martin was two guineas, and not two pounds ?
A. I am not certain, but to the best of my knowledge it was two guineas ?
Q. You shewed the account in a list with other accounts when I called upon you in company with Mr. Wylie, have you that account to produce ? — [Here the witness examined certain pa- pers which he had in his pocket, but said he could not find that account.3
Q. Have you a receipt from Mrs. Martin, or any documents to shew you paid the money ? — A. I have not.
[On being cross-examined respecting his demanding the pay- ment of a bill due Mr. Nimock of Colerain, he acknowledged, that for some years he had his store in Belfast, and Mr. N. in Colerain ; that he had not Nimock's name upon his board in Belfast, nor had Nimock his name in Colerain, yet the partner- ship continued.]
Q. Did you not fail in Belfast ? — A. Yes.
Q. Did Mr. Nimock fail when you failed ? — A. No.
Q. How was that, when you were in partnership ?
[Here the witness hesitated, and after some time said, Mr.
68
Nimock had no share in his business in Belfast, but he had a share with Mr. Nimock in Colerain.]
Q. Was it publicly known that this partnership was existing between you ? — A. No, it was by a private contract.
Q. Did Mr. G. engage to pay Mr. Nimock's account, so soon as you should produce authority to receipt it ? — A. He did.
Q. You acknowledge a note to have been given by Mr. G. to Mr- Nimock, as security for the payment of the bill; had you the note to produce when you madfe this demand, or have you it now ? — A. I have not.
Q. Have you authority to receive the money ?
A. No, no written authority.
{^Here Mr. Becket alleged tlje reason why Mr. Nimock had not given him full authority to receive the money, was because Mr. Nimock had written, he expected to be paid by the Cove- nanters in Ireland.]
During the cross-examination of Becket, the court discovered a criminal partiality. Their clerk (Mr. Wylie) refused to record those questions and answers, which appeared to go to the excul- pation of Mr. G. alleging as a reason, that " if Mr. G. thought there was any thing dropped which might be useful to him, he might have it taken down for himself." When Becket appeared to stymble, and became embarrassed, which he did often, the court interfered, and under pretence of ascertaining the mean- ing, the witness was diverted from his direct answer, and ano- ther, manufactured by some member of court, was put into his mouth, and entered on the minutes, notwithstanding the remon- strances of Mr. G. In one instance, in particular, Mi\ Graham asked the witness — " If he would positively assert that Mr. G. swindled him out of two guineas by a false token ?" His direct answer was—" I do not positively say it, nor do I think Mr. G. could be capable of such a thing." It was modified by a member of court (Mr. Wylie) who was also clerk, by saying, " Your meaning is, you refuse to put a name ufion the deed ,•" and was entered accordingly. And although Mr. G. upon reading tha minutes at two different times, objected to it, and even asked the question again and again at the witness, who as often replied, that " he would not positively say, neither did he think Mr. G. could be guilty of such a thing," yet the court would not be pre- vailed upon to correct the minute.*
William Jamison sworn.
Deposed, " That he was coming past Mrs. Martin's door ; that she called him to her, and asked him what he thought of
• When this extraordinary piece of conduct was animadverted upon, Mr. Wylie observed, in justification, that the witness would certainly not have ex- culpated Mr. G. but that he perceived a counsellor's clerk present, and dreaded » prosecution.
69
their great Graham now ? He said it was a delicate subject ; she replied that she was not willing to give it up, mentioning the story of the two guineas ; that Mr. G. came to her, and ask* ed her if she knew a gentleman of the name of Becket in Bel- fast I* She said she knew him very well. Then he gave his compliments for the loan of two guineas, and she gave it ; that the said (Eo the best of his recollection) Mr. G. called upon Mrs. Martin for five guineas, and said he was going somewhere to preach, and would pay it on his return ; that Mr. Moore told him Mr. Graham had borrowed of him seven guineas, to aid his brother in going to college. [Here Mr. G. begged the court not unnecessarily to delay the business, as he felt no disposition to deny that he had become surety for a small sum of money to David Moore, of Belfast, to aid his brother in prosecuting his studies ; that he acknowledged the debt justly due, and should it not be paid by his brother, who was in easy circumstances (and who he had reason to believe had already paid it) he should still hold himself accountable for it.]
William Jamison cross-examined by Mr. Graham.
Q. What do you know of the affair of Mrs. Martin ?
A. Nothing but by report.
Q. Who informed you ? — A. Mrs. Martin.
Q. Did Mr. G. make use of a false token to obtain two guineas from Mrs. Martin ? — A. I cannot tell.
Q. Did Mr. G. apply for five guineas to Mrs. Martin on his way from his congregation ? — I cannot tell.
Q. Have you authority from Mr. Moore to receive the seven guineas my brother owes him \
A. No written authority, but was told by Mr. Moore, if I should see Mr. G. to get the money from him and keep it, for he would rather I had it than Mr. Graham. — Mr. G. " Then you are a party concerned in the matter, and have no right to be heard as a witness ; besides it appears strange that either you or Mr. Moore should imagine, I ought to pay a bill, where legal security has been given, without pi'oducing the instrument which obli- gates to pay the sum.
Q. Do you know any thing of Mr. Becket ? The witness stormed, and the court interfered, ordering the witness not to answer such questions. Mr. G. proceeded to assure the court he had a right to ask such questions, to invalidate the evidence of witnesses ; that it was a practice in all courts where justice reigned ; that by such means, error and falsehood were usually detected, and truth obtained ; that he would insist upon his right, and that the witness having sworn to tell the -whole truth, could
* Compai-e this with that part of Becket's oath where he swears that Mrs. Martin assigned as a reason why he should pay the two guineas, tliat he (Mr. Uecket) had introduced Mr. Graham to her, and that it was upon /»« accaimf fthe had lent ether small sums.
70
not refuse to ans-wer without incurring a charge of perjury.. — la the mean time, the witness was withdrawn, a gentleman was despatched to Becket's store to crave his attendance, who ap- peared in a short time " breathless and faint." The questions were resumed, and the witness stood forward to answer. He de- posed, that Mr. Becket had failed in Belfast, and was arrested ; that he accovmted with his creditors ; that he understood he had carried a large quantity of property to America, and that he had been arrested for the goods since he arrived in Philadelphia ; knew nothing of his moral character ; did not learn that he had forged bills in Belfast ; knew nothing against his veracity ; had very little acquaintance of him ; heard he had changed his name, Sec. Sec. &c.
Andreto Jamison sworn.
He knew nothing of the affair of Mrs. Martin, nor of the mo- ney borrowed of Mr. Moore ; was in Glasgow at the time it was borrowed. After it was understood that Mr. G. had emigrated, Mr. Moore had ordered Andrew Jamison to seize the trunk of John Graham (Mr. G.'s brother) who was at that time in Glas- gow college. Mr. Graham had brought the said Andrew Jamison before the council-chambei', and had recovered his property. Much low irrelevant stuff about Mr. G.'s brother, and his suit with said Jamison, was deponed, to the great satisfaction of the court"— the clerk, with all due gravity, recording every syllable, as though it had been the responses of an oracle. Mr. G. during this degrading scene, discovered indignation, calling the court mean and contemptible, to permit such ribaldry to be tolerated before them, and inserted on their records relative to a young man of amiable deportment, whose bravery and generous con- duct, although a boy, had been stamped with public approbation, and whose merit, as a professional character, had raised him to the first grade of respectability; adding, it was still the more ungenth manly to treat his character illiberally, as he was not present to answer for himself.*
John Jamison sivnrn,
Deposeth— That he knew nothing of the affair of Mrs. Mar-
* Jolm Graham, brother to Mr. G. was early devoted by his parents to the ministry. He went through a classical education, and attended tlie g-o-w}i classes one session, in Glasgow, with a design to devote himself to tlie study of theo- logy. The illiberal treatment which his brother met with from the Reformed Presbytery of Ireland, disgusted him with the ministry, and deterred him from the prosecution of theological studies. He immediately turned his attention to physic, passed his examinations in London in 1808, and entered for a surgeon in the land service of tlie British king. He was appointed to the medical staff of Sir John Moore, who fell in Spain. Mr. G. waited upon him when he fell, and in tlie act of administering aid to his general, received a wound. He was carried to Haslar Hospital, England, where he recovered, and, for his gallant conduct, was gazetted " surgeon and apothecary to the British forces." He is at present in the West-Indieg.
71
tin, nor Mr. Moore ; that he would relate what he knew of Becket. The fourth evening after he came to Philadelphia, he understood there was a vessel arrived from Ireland with passen- gers. The following morning Mr. Becket walked into Robert Kean's, where he (Jamison) boarded. He (Mr. Becket) was «tyled Mr. Moore by some of his fellow passt-ngers. Jamison asked him why he had changed his name. Becket answered he had not changed his name, for he was called Oliver Moora Becket ; — that he was styled Oliver Becket in Belfast ; that he brought an immense quantity of goods with him, reported to amount to SI 2,000, and was, shortly after his arrival, put into jail in Philadelphia; that in a conversation with Mr. Graham, he (Jamison) mentioned that Mr. Becket had represented Mr. G. as indebted to the firm of Becket and Nimock ; that Mr. G. pur- posed to visit Becket in company with him ; that they under- stood, when they arrived at the store which Becket had lived in, that he was in jail ; that he (Jamison) asked Mr. G. if he would go to the jail to see Becket, and he replied he would not. Deposition of Doctor M^Kinnexj. Doctor Archibald M'Kinney of Philadelphia, deposeth and solemnly swears, that his first knowledge, as far as he recollects, of Mr. David Graham, was by the favourable letters he received from his brothei-s in Europe, respecting said Mr. Graham. That the said Mr. Graham, owing to this introduction, and a further personal acquaintance, had the confidence of Archibald M'Kinney, and his friendship, until, perhaps, the morning he left this city ior New-York, on his journey to the late Synod. He further de- poseth, that he has personally known the Rev. Samuel B. Wylie eleven years or more, and nothing had happened before his last interview with Mr. Graham, which would destroy the confidence he had in Mr. Wylie, as an honest man, and minister of the gos- pel. Further, OJi hearing of Mr. Graham being on his way to Philadelphia, he gave notice to numbers of his personal acquain- tances, that he expected Mr. Graham to preach. Shortly after Mr. Graham arrived, Archibald M'Kinney had an accidental meet- ing with Mr. Hazelton, and learned, with some degree of sur- prise, that Mr. Graham did not intend to stay during the time of the. administration of the sacrament, and enquired the reason of Mr. Hazelton, who insinuated that Mr. Graham had been badly treated by Mr. Wylie. He then, in company with Mr. Ha- zelton, visited Mr. Graham at a late hour, and appointed a friendly interview with him next day at ten o'clock, which accordingly took place. After some friendly conversation as usual, the sub- ject of his hasty departure was introduced, at which I manifested my surprise. " Mr. Graham insinuated that he had been most malevolently treated by some of his brethren, and among the rest, by Mr. Wylie." He enquired if I had not heard of charges to be preferred against him. I told him I had not, and listened to
72
him with some degre© of surprise. " He then, in the course of the conversation, proceeded to charge his brethren, and par- ticularly Mr. Wylie, for whom I was most interested, with in- venting foul calumnies against him, withovit bringing any direct charge." " Mr. Wylie he charged with writing over th» mountains to IVlj\ Black against him, letters containing circum- stances relative to Mr. Becket's affair," which affair, if I had heard of, had been forgotten — and Messrs. Wylie and Graham's interview with Mr. Becket, I until that moment had no know- ledge of. When from facts which that moment came to my mind, I endeavoured to justify Mr. Wylie, " he persisted to demonstrate to me with very warm colouring, that Mr. Wylie, let his conduct be viewed, in whatever point of view, was guilty of a breach of faith to him, and had not acted honestly." On my enumerating facts to him, which led me to exculpate Mr. Wylie, and which yet to me, are evidence of his innocence, he told me that he perceived in me, a disposition to defend Mr. Wylie. I . told hixTi I had, and also to defend himself, insinuating to him at the same time, that though I was a friend to Mr. Wylie and him, I was more a friend to truth- " He then asserted that Mr, Wylie was a tyrant here, and Mr. Black would be one over the mountains, if he had liberty" — That Mr. Wylie was a weak man, neither of which was I pei'fectly prepared to believe. Some of the above alluded to facts, which then and now led me to believe Mr. Wylie innocent of those charges, were as follows : I knew, that formerly, Mr. Wylie was Mr. Graham's warm friend — ex- erted every nerve, as I thought, to defend his character, and ad- vance his popularity. I had every reason to believe all this, when Mr. Graham and his family were in Philadelphia last, and that the same sentiment pervaded the congregation. From this time, until some time in January or December, I never recollect of hearing an insinuation, or any thing like it, from Mr. Wylie, de- rogatory to the honour of Mr. Graham, but rather a studied care of his character. I then received a letter from Europe, reflecting on the character of Mr. Graham, and the church here for ad- mitting him to his office. I undertook Mr. Graham's defence, and that of the church here, in a long letter of eight pages, which I wrote to Ireland in January last. This letter I read to Mr. Wylie in confidence, thinking he would be gratified by any attempt to preserve the character of Mr. Graham. Nor did he give me one insinuation that he was not. Nor when I had this interview with Mr. Graham, had I reason to withdraw my confidence from him. I considered our conversation confidential. I told him I would keep my ears open. I had heard what he asserted, and would be able to give him the result of my impressions by the next time I •aw him. But immediately I found, that these charges were not communicated to me alone — that they were communicated by insinuation or otherwise, either by Mr. Graham, Mr.'Hazelton or
73
Mr. Cooper, to others in the congregation. Thisled^me to make further enquiry into the business— to review the evidence before me~.to review my acquaintance with Mr. Graham, Dr. M'Leod and Mr. Wylie. And the result was, that my imagination recoiled at the idea of being made a dupe, and seduced from the path of duty, in a confidential way. I considered, and do now consider, ■while under those impressions, all confidence I'emoved. When I was making this enquiry to satisfy myself, I had no wish, nor did I expect, to be called here as an evidence. I have been called however. Any other questions, by any of the parties, I will an- swer to the best of my knowledge. (Here follow answers to questions put to the witness.) That Mr. Graham by his conver- sation with A. M'Kinney, prejudiced him against Dr. M'Leod, " That Mr. Graham said he had been rascally treated by M'Leod." " That Dr. M'Leod led Mr. Wylie."-.That he did not think that he (M'K.) could be led by any body — And used as a motive to his (M'K's) studying theology, that he would form a counterpoise against M'Leod's tyranny in the church, or words to that amount. Signed by A. M'Kinney.
(^A True Copy. J Signed by John Black, Moderator.
The Court dissolved, purposing to meet in Pittsburgh, Aug. 13, 1811. The correctness and truth of the above narrative is attested by
Thomas Hazelton, Ruling Elder, and Member of the Court. Joseph Cooper, Commissioner frotn the Congregation of Canonsburgh, James Page, Counsellor's Clerk.*
Thus terminated one of the most scurrilous and abusive scenes- Language could not paint the excess of malevolence which Mr. G's brethren displayed.! The intervening weeks between the
* Mv. Graham, convinced of the partiality and malevolence of his brethren, had provided himself with an expert writer. The yoimg man was present, and carefully minuted all that passed during the two sederunts in which the libel was presented, and the depositions were taken. His papers, from which a great part of the above narrative is extracted, are attested in form by himself, and are in tlie hands of Mr. Graliam.
t It will be matter of surprise to some, that these men should have committfed dicmselves so manifestly, and so frequently, and should have paid so little at- tention to their reputation. But tlie surprise will cease when tliey ai-e informed, tliat all tilings ti-anspired in the presence of not more tlian twenty spectators, wlio w<»re industi'iously picked up by the coiut, with all their prejudices rankling in tlieir hearts, and v,-ho had been previously initiated into the mysteries of tlic proaecutirm. The greater part of Mr. Wylie's confl:regation knew nothing of the sittings of Presbytery until after tliey were completed ; and some of them manif(;sted no small disgust, in conversation with Messrs. Graham, Hazelton and Cooper, at the privac v with \\hlch matters so important had been transacted. Perhaps It was the tii-st Presbytery held in Uie centi-e of any minister's congre-
K
74
session of Presbytery and August 13th, were devoted to the cxr ercise of similar passions. An unremitting and ardent correspon- dence was every where carried on, the professed object of which was, to collect charges and proofs against Mr. G. Mr. Black in particular, equipped with all the above defamatory pa- pers and depositions, addressed himself to the destruction of Mr. G's reputation, with much perseverance. His usual prac- tice was, to lug out his papers, and read and explain, to all who were disposed to hear, and in all places. The street, the field, the store, the church, the festive board, the social circle, were each in their turn occupied by him in reciting and lec- turing scandal. The congregations to whom he dispensed defa- mation under the pretext of preaching the gospel on the Lord's day, were usually convened on the following Monday, to hear the papers read. They were expounded with ardour and inter- est, and, if fame speaks truth, with no small quantity of misre- presentation and falsehood. Some who could not perceive the turpitude of this gentleman's conduct, were prejudiced ; the greater part remained in suspense ; some ventured to express their abhorrence of his conduct, and that of his brethren. The congregation of Canonsburgh treated the tyrannical deeds of the jndicatories with a laudable contempt, and adhered to Mr. G. on the footing of his protest.* Letters from all quarters were poured in upon them to prejudice their minds. Mutilated, gar- bled, and false minutes of the judicatories were printed and cir- culated. They had not the desired effect. Their conduct became daily more an object of suspicion. The measures they employed to effect their purposes, served only to expose themselves. Few who knew the state of the case, attempted their apology ; while the greater part could not help regarding their measures with abhorrence.
I have conducted you to the concluding scene before the Presbytery in Pittsburgh. It shall constitute the subject of my future letters.
Yours, &c.
gation, without a previous public Intimation from the pulpit. This omission wnt the more remarkable, that Mr. Wylie knew the Presbytery would sit, and that he occupied his own pulpit on the preceding sabbath. But it was a contemplated assassination to which secrecy was eseential. * See their paper ef resolutions on that subject. No. 2, in the .'Ippeudix.
NARRATIVE,
PART n. THE TRIAL AND DEFENCE
MR. GRAHJIM,
BEFORE THE REFORMED PRESBYTERY IN PITTSBURGH,
August 13 — 20, 1811.
■ It was the solitary, vindictive malice of a monk, brooding over the infirmities of his friend, until he thought they quickened into public life, and feasting with a rancorous rapture upon the sordid catalogue of his distresses. Now let him go back to his cloister. The chuixh is a proper retreat for him. la Lis principles he is already a Bishop." — Jumu:
LETTER I. ,
if we consider the envious man in delight, it is like reading' the seat of a fiant in romance ; the magnificence of his house consists in tlie many limbs of men whom be has slain. — A d d i s o n.
MY BEAR TTRIENB,
I PROCEED to acquaint you with the transactions of the Presbytery in Pittsburgh.
On the loth of August last, pursuant to appointment, the members of Presbytery met and constituted. Present Rev. Messrs. Wylie, Black, Williams, ministers — Messrs. Gormly, Mitchell, Renfrew, ruling elders.
The gentlemen had rightly judged they had undertaken full as much as they could execute without aid. Either at their soli- citation, or because the matter was congenial to the feelings of Mr. M'Leod, he appeared with his brethren, and was, of course, invited to occupy a seat.
Mr. James Slater appeared as commissioner from Canons- burgh, informing the court that the congregation had appointed an elder to represent them in that court, and wished to know whether he would be allowed to take his seat. The court re- fused to admit him, alleging as a reason, that he had been ap- pointed by a congregation who had adhered to Mr. Graham upon the footing of his protest, that they were, therefore, disor- derly and rebellious, and, as such, their deeds could not be re- cognised.* But observed further ; if there were any elder in that
* In this the court discovered eitlier ignorant or erroneous views of Presby- terian church government. Protests and declinatures are a part of ecclesiastical law, jusdy provided, to secure individuals against oppression. " There is a warrantable declinature (or protest) where a judicatory is declined as having committed injustice in some uiterlocutor sentence." i. e. a sentence passed after the commencement of a trial, and before it is completed. (Stuart's Collections, book iv. title 5th, section 9.) The protest which Mr. G.jpresented, and to which he and the people adhered, was pi-ecisely of this description. According^ t©
'78
•ongrcgation wht) had not co-operated with the people, he would be admitted to a seat. Mr. Slater replied, that if such a person could be found, he had not the appointment of the people, and could not, therefore, represent tliem ; we, said he, on our part, refvise him.
The court called for the minutes of the Presbytery which sat in Philadelphia in May last. Mr. Graham objected to the par- tiality of the statement contained in the minutes, particularly that part which represented him as standing up at the command of the moderator, and receiving the sentence of suspension with all due solemnity. No part of the minutes read appeared to him to represent matters in their true light ; they were shamefully garbled, but that which represented him submitting to the sen- tence of suspension, was not merely a misrepresentation — it was a glaring falsehood, which he undertook to prove. Here the court interfered, and ordered him to silence.
The clerk was ordered to read the libel preferred against Mr. Graham in Philadelphia, and the depositions which were there taken. He proceeded to read the libel and the depositions, viz. the deposition of Mr. Reily,* of Oliver M. Becket,* of William Jamison,* of Andrew Jamison,* of John Jamison,* and of Dr. M'Kinney.*
Mr. Graham had acquired a perfect copy of the transactions of the Presbytery of Philadelphia. The minutes last read by the clerk corresponded In substance, and, in general, in words, with those retained by Mr. G. Still there were some exceptions. One of considerable moment was an answer to a question put to Becket, whether he " would positively say that Mr. G. had swindled him out of two guineas ?" His answer was, " He would not positively say, neither did he think Mr. G. could be capable of such a thing."t Instead of this answer, it was minuted in the Presbytery's records, " refused to put a name on the deed." Mr. G. proposed two persons of unblemished character to swear what he asserted ; he had also the answer in three different hands, Mr. Page, Mr. Hazelton, and his own. The court agreed it should be corrected. Mr. Wylie, the clerk, further observed, in reading the minutes of cross-examination, that he had not writ- books of discipline it was -warrantable ,• to call them, therefore, disorderly and rebellious, while they adhered to a warrantable act, and continued to profess amenability to the judicatories of the church, discovered an unacquaintance with tile laws of the church. The rejection of an elder from tiie congregution of Canonsburg'h, was a violation of Presbyterian church government. It was more. It was tyrannical. For if protests and declinatures cannot be practised upon without subjecting to church censure, then protests and declinatures are de- clared to be illegal, and there remains nodiing to check the insolence of ty- ranny, or secure the rights of the jlfeople.
* See pages 64, 68, 70, 71.
t See page 67.
79
ten out the questions, nor taken clown every answer, but if Mr. G. had been more particular, he supposed the court would allovr him to avail himself of all painiculars he possessed. The court consented.
It was moved and carried, that " Mr. G. should now be asked whether he would engage to submit to the court in the Lord l" To this question Mr. G. I'eplied, that he engaged most cheerfully to submit to the court in the Lord, adding, " I desire it to be recollected, I have pronounced the words in the Lord emphati- cally."
Mr. G. was now called upon to -p^e&d guilty or not guilty, to the charges specified in the libel, either in whole or part. Mr. G. replied, " that it appeared very extraordinary to put such a question at this stage of the business. He hoped they did not intend to mock him, by calling upon him to plead guilty or not guilty, after they had taken a great number of depositions to prove the charges, and had individually, as he was prepared to prove, endeavoured in all directions to impress convictions, that the charges were proven." Mr. M'l^eod, in support of the mo- tion, read a passage out of the draft of a book of discipline, and observed, " that it shewed a disposition in Mr. G. to equivocate ; that it was a man's duty to confess his sins, and that i,t might, if Mr. G. should plead guilty, save much trouble to the court." Mr. G. " The court is certainly out of order, when it calls upon me, at this time, to confess or deny the truth of the charges. This, however, is a necessary consequence of other premature decisions. It was the duty of the Presbytery in Philadelphia, in- stead of pvitting a libel into my hands, and proceeding immedi- ately to suspend without any discussion, to have first enquired into the rise, occasion, propagators, and probable pi'oof of the charges upon which the libel was framed, to have then given a copy, to have i"ead each charge, and heard my answers, in order to discuss their relevancy, and upon sustaining them as I'elevant, to have then called upon me to confess, and in case of denymg the truth of the charges, then to have had recourse to probation. For proof of what I have asserted, I shall take the liberty of I'c- ferring the court to Stuart's Collections, book iv. title iv. section 9, 10, 11, 13. " Yet Presbyteries may proceed against ministers, when 2ifama clamosa of the scandal is so great, that for their own vindication, they find themselves obliged to begin the process without any particular accuser, after they have enquired into the rise, occasion, broachers and grounds of the said common fame.
" After the Presbytery has considered the libel raised against the minister, then they order him to be cited to get a full copy, with a list of the witnesses names to be led for proving thereof, and a formal citation is to be made in writ, either personally or at his dwelling house, bearing a competent time allowed to give
80
in answers u-nto the libel, and his just defences and objections against witnesses, at least ten free days before the day of com- pearance, and the citation should bear the date when given, and the names of the witnesses to the giving thereof, and the execu- tion bearing its date, with the names and designations of the wit- nesses, should be made in writ and signed by the officer and witnesses : which being accordingly returned, he is to be called.
" If the minister compear, the libel is to be read unto him, and his answers thereunto arc to be read, in order to the discussing of the relevancy. If the Jibel be found relevant, then the Presby- tery is to endeavour to bring him to a confession.
" If the minister accused do appear, and deny the fact, after the relevancy is found, the accused is to be heard object against the witnesses, and allowed to be present at the examination."*
Here, sir, is a case exactly in point — it is a fama clamosa — the order of procedure is plaili and intelligible. Did the Presbytery - of Philadelphia proceed in this way ? Did they enquire into the grounds of the fama damosal Did they proceed to discuss the relevancy of the libel ? Did they, having found it relevant, call upon me to confess ? Did they finally proceed to call witnesses ? No, sir. They put a libel into my hands, without a word said, either relative to the grounds of the fama clamosa^ or the rele- vancy of the charges; they next proceeded to suspend me, with- out so much as asking me had I any reason to offer why sentence should not be passed ; and with equal despatch they proceeded to take depositions. And now, sir, after a series of disorderly steps, after witnesses have appeared to cori'oborate the charges, you call upon me to confess or deny the truth ! This is indeed extraordinary. Why not wait until you have all the evidence you can accumulate upon this occasion ? And if you fail in probation, you may then call upon me with much more propriety, to confess. Do not, however, sir, imagine that I am disposed to screen my- self under the forms of law, or to take any undue advantage of
* Whatever peculiarities may exist among the several sections of the Pres- iMerian church, tliey all agi-ee in those point i of law, which may be designated the dictates of co?nmoK fie«,?e. The Associate Reformed Church of America has adopted the same mode of procedure in tlie conduct of processes, as copied from tlie i-ecords of the Assembly by Stuart. (Constitution of the Associate Reformed Church, p. 517. sect. 6, 7.)
" If the offender appear, o]- if, having refused to appear, he be proceeded against in his absence, the Hrst thing to be considered is t\\& relavancy of the libel ; that is, whetiier the thing cliarged, even supposing it to be proved, is really censm-able. To the relevancy, the person accused liuth always a right ta object ; but the judicatory must judge of the weight of his objections.
" If, on due consideration, the libel be found not relevant, all further pro- ceedings are precluded of course ; but if it be sustained, the oflFcnder is to be interrogated respecting the matter of fact. If he acknowledge it, the way is pre- pared for a decision ; but if he deny it, the judicatory is to examine the proof by which it i$ supported : and previously to g-ne hiaa a list of the witnesses."
81
the error of the court. I oppose your demand solely upon the principle of right, and to suggest the propriety of more caution in future. Had the last court put the same question to inc, in or^ der to aid them in ascertaining truth — had that been the object, I should most gladly have given them every information, made every explanation, and uttered every confession in my power. In that case, both they and I should have acted consistently. But to imagine they can do that now, which they ought to have attended to in the very formation of the libel, and to call upon me to make a declaration, which is manifestly intended t6 open the way for calling upon witnesses, after the witnesses have near three months since made their depositions, and after a wanton publication of them in all directions, is indeed absurd. I refuse, therefore, to answer the question, and wish to have recorded as my reason for refusal, that the question is unseasonable, and a compliance with it would be disorderly.*
It was moved the court should proceed to probation of the se- veral charges of the libel. To this they agreed. Mr. G. begged the court to take up each charge for' probation in the order in which it was presented in the libel, which was customary and reasonable. To this the court consented.
The clerk proceeded to read the libel, see page 51.
Having read the libel, the clerk returned to charge first—
" Of iviUidrawing that profession of repentance, on the footing ff ivhich yoit nvere restored to the exercise of t lie office of the holy ministry, ivhich appears by the follonving proofs : Your oton words in open court ; your attempts akvays to justify your conduct against the Irish Presbytery,refiresenting yourself as the injured person."
The first proof to which the court referred in proof of this charge, was their pi-inted extracts, p. 19. "He urged in support of that claim, that he ought not to be considered as accused as a culprit at the bar ; and yet, he requested this court to try his cause : he afterwards withdrew this request. That he did not know in what light to view himself; and that he stood as a fool before the court. That he was represented ssfojid of speaking ;
* To manifest further the absurdity of the question put to Mr. G. after depo- sitions had been taken — Mr. G. must have answ ertd either g-uilty or not guilty. Had he answered g-uilty ; could this have stayed tlie prosecution, when evidence had been aii-eady taken ; Certainly not. Nor v/ould have even invahdated in the least degree the evidence, tlie court being obligated to regard as the groimd of their judgment, not liis denial of die truth of the charges, but the evidence be- fore them. To have answered in the negative could then have been of no us* w hatever. Again — supp'jse lie had answered in Uie affirmative, it v.oi.dd have prevented further labour in quest of proof ; but it would also have superseded tlie use of the evidence which die court in PhiladeljMiia liad painfully acquired, and in setting- aside the use of the evidence, it ^^'ould have exposed the igno- rance and unskilledness of the court, which procured it. Such was the dilemma in which the court had involved itself. It called for an answer which would be either luseless, or would reflect disgrace upon the court in I'inladslphia.
L
82
thiit the popular opluion is that he is good at it ; that he tvould therefore try it : that the Irish Presbytery asserted falsehoods about him, were his eiiemies and persecutors. He insinuated that the scandalous crimes for which he had been deposed^ and for which he \xA.diprofessed repentance^ were only fictitious. That he has now no character ; that he had a respectable character among the Seceders, who, h^ said, libelled him for intention tK) defraud. That ever since he joined the Covenanters^ he was abused and per- secuted., and that this court loere worse persecutors than the Irish ; that when 'he came to America, he was solicited, seduced, invei- gled into the church ; that he was kept in the dark, and treated as a person unft for society. That no charges against him are proved ; and that Stuart's Collections support his right of being admitted to a seat in Synod, without waiting for a formal introduction, or an examination of his ministerial standing."
The second proof in support of the first charge, was an extract from the minutes of the Presbyteiy in Philadelphia, of which the following is a correct copy :
" Two o'clock, A. M. eodem die et loco, same, members — • The court proceeded to the examination of witnesses relative to Mr. G.'s case ; this they thought proper to do at this time, that Mr. G. might have an opportunity of cross-examining the evi- dence in Philadelphia, and who could not attend at the trial in Pittsburgh. Mr. G. attended accordingly, and did cross-examine such witnesses as he thought proper. Mr. G. abused the court in the most scurrilous and indecfent manner ; he declared they were a mean set, a dirty set, and incapable of trying him ; that Mr. Wylie was a tyrant and a weak man, and that he could prove it ; that Dr. M'Leod was a tyrant, and had treated him rascally, and that he could prove it, with a great deal more of the saiTie kind of abuse and vulgarity, too gi'oss to be inserted in the Presbytery's records."
Mr. G. observed, upon this part of the evidence being read, hat he did not wish to anticipate his defence, but he could not help observing, the sorry expedient to which the prosecutor was compelled to have recourse, to support the charge. The charge was preferred on the morning of the 25th. Whatever intempe- rate language he might have used, was in the afternoon of said day, occasioned by the glaring partiality and meanness of the court, during the deposition of the witnesses. It was rather a novel thing to prosecute upon proof which happened after the charge was preferred. Such a precedent was dangerous, and ought to be discarded with abhorrence. Upon this principle man would be violently bereaved of some of his dearest rights. The most innocent should be liable to ruinous prosecutions. This court might charge any of its members, or any under their in- spection, with the most flagrant criminality, and having entered a process against him, might suspend him from privileges, and
85
sist the process for years, until proof should be obtained. It was indeed impossible to say of what inconveniences to society it would be productive, to commence processes for crirnes, which looked forward for proof, to something which was to happen af- terwards, Mr. G. observed, he never read but once of a prose- cution of this kind. It was the case of the Roman captain, who, in violation of the laws of even a heathen policy, .y?rs; bound Paul, and theii proceeded by scourging, to enquire after charges and to extort proof.
Mr. Wylie, a member of court, requested leave of the court t» depose upon oath a certain conversation which he had with Mr. G. and which would go to support the first charge. Mr. G. ob- jected to Mr. W. as a witness, he being prosecutor and libeller. Mr. Black, the clerk of Synod, Mr. G. observed, had, upon read- ing the eight reasons sent on from the Presbytery of the 13th May, informed the court that Mr. Wylie had pledged himself to pi'ove the charges ; tnat Mr. Wylie had personally pledged him- self in the Presbytery of the 24th, to prove them. This certainly placed him in the light of an accuser and libeller. But should he not be sustained by the court as a formal accuser, he was one of the court, and the court being the prosecutors on the fama cla- mosa, Mr. Wylie was consequently a prosecutoi'. It was contrary to the dictates of reason and justice, that a prosecutor should be 9. witness. Mr. G, called upon the court to allude to a single pre- cedent, where one of the judges became a witness, and still con- tinued to sit as judge? Here the moderator mentioned the case of judge Roberts, who, he had understood, had acted in one case or more in the character of both witness and judge. Mr. G. objected to this as a precedent. No civil court could establish a precedent to an ecclesiastical judicatory. Besides the moderator had stated a case for which there was no proof But suppose such a thing might be practised in civil courts, the case was not parallel. It was the jury, not the judge, who tried the case in a civil court. Nor was it ever known that either judge or jury were the pro- secutors. So tenacious and tender was the civil law of the rights of the parties, that persons even under suspicion of collusion or malice, without assigning a reason, might be rejected from sit- ting on the suit. But in an ecclesiastical court, the members were both judge and jury. No suspicion, however strong, nothing but direct proof would turn them out of their seat. In the case pend- ing, the members Avere, moreover, the prosecutors, the libel having been taken up upon a /ai}in clamosa. In such circum- stances, therefore, to admit Mr. Wylie, or any member of court, to be a witness, would be manifest injustice. Mr. G. appealed in proof of the correctness of his remarks, to Stuart's Collections, book iv. title iii. section 18. " Albeit judges cannot be both judges and witnesses, yet he is a witness and judge too of what he sees and hears in judgment, for these are counted as not tour." Upon
84
this Mr. G. commented thus ; a judge in no case and much less in acaseofyawm claiJiosa, where the judge is the proJecut-o^, can,accor(ling to this passage, be a witness. He can in no sense be admitted as a witness to defiose evidence. If he is a witness at all, it is only of what passes before him in judgment^ i. e. dur- ing the trial of the case, not of what happened out of court. And this Avhich he sees and hears in judgment, he does not as a wit- ness depone upon oath. It is not requisite he should. His brethren are all witnesses of it as well as he. It is a matter nottour, i. e. public — upon which he proceeds to form his own judgment. The author introduces this observation with an abruptness and un- concern, as if he meant to convey, that a contrary practice, the admission of judges to depone evidence in any case, was a viola- tion of equity so flagrant, as to require no remarks. If Mr. Wylie then intends to witness, to contemplate and judge, as a matter of public notoriety what passes in the court, this right as a judge he possesses ; but if he mean to depone as a witness upon oath, things which he has not seen and heard in judgment, i. e. in this court, or in some other where he has sat as judge, he intends to do what is opposed to the dictates of reason and justice, and to the laws of the church. Mr. G. further observed, that Mr. Wylie was not upon the list of witnesses, which were given to him (Mr, G.) to support the libel ; that the laws of the church required, he should have had a complete copy of the libel and the witnes- ses, at least ten free days before the trial ;* that Mr. Wylie's name was not among the witnesses, and that, therefore, he was authorised to object to him as a witness, and the court were bovind to reject him, according to the laws of the church.
The court refused to sustain Mr. G's objectioiis,*- although they did not advance a single reason for so flatly opposing the laws of the church. They alleged that Mr. Wylie should be admitted to give evidence, and that they had heard nothing to dispose them to think otherwise.
Mr. G. begged leave of the court to offer further objections. He regretted to be compelled, after adducing proof so clear and decisive against a member of court becoming witness, to offer, objections Avhich would implicate Mr. Wylie's reputation. He said, that according to the rules of the church, and he believed of the state, enmity or malice disqualified a witness, and if pro- ven, were relevant to cast him; that were he even not suspected of malice, he was notwithstanding bound to purge himself of it; and that even admitting he was under the influence of neither enmity nor malice, yet if he could be charged with partial coun- sel, it was relevant to have him laid aside He appealed to Stuart's Collections, book 4, title 3, sections 15, 16, " If the de-
* See Stuart's Collections, book iv. title iv. section 10 — Associate Reforaied C»nslitution, page 516^ section 1. on Citations,
85
fender appear, he may object against any of them, (i. e. the wit- nesses) and if the objection be relevant, the witnesses are to be cast. The objections of infamy or ejimity,, are relevant to cast any witness." " Though there be no relevant objection against the Avitnesses, yet they are to be solemnly purged of malice^ — and o^ partial counsel, hy which some understand prompting or con- sulting for making of the process." Mr. G. then proceeded to charge Mr. W. with enmity and malice, alleging in proof the facts which follow: 1. His voluntarily exposing a letter written him by INIr. G. in the month of October last, under the impression of the warmest and most devoted friendship; exposing it with the malevolent design, not only of injuring Mr. G's reputation with his brethren, but as a document to support a public charge against him ; and that too, while, contrary to the directions of our Saviour, and the approven standards of the church, he neither by •word, nor writ, acquainted Mr. G. with the offence. In proof of this, Mr. G. referred to the Synod in New-York, where the let- ter was publicly read, and that too before any charge was legally preferred. This conduct being so glaring and treacherous a breach of friendship, and so flatly opposed to tlie order of the church and the spirit of Christianity, whatever construction Mr. Wylie might put upon it, or whatever motives he might offer in apology, Mr. G. presumed proved treachery, preconceived dis- gust and enmity. 2. His conduct to IMr. G. relative to Oliver M. Becket, which Mr. G. stated thus : — Mr. Becket had demanded of !Mr. G. the payment of two accounts.* During Mr. G's stay at the house of Mr. Wylie, August last, Mr. B. sent a note in a very peremptory and insulting tone to Mr. Graham. Mr. G. put the note into Mr. Ws hands, observing that he had every reason to suspect Mr. Becket's intentions Avere dishonest, and that he vi'ould see him immediately. Mr. W. proposed to accompany him. Mr. G. enquired at Becket whether he had authority from Mi'. Ximock and Mrs. Martin to receive their accounts ; and upon finding that he had not, informed Becket that he would not pay the sums until such authority should be obtained ; and that soon as it was obtained, he woitld make pavment. Becket instantly flew into a passion, abused Mr. G. and charged him with obtain- ing the money of Mrs. Martin in his name fraudulently, told a story of a pair of boots and a tea-party, to which Mr. Wylie ap- peared to pay great attention. The conversation terminated with Mr. G. and Becket agreeing to leave the matter in suspense, un- til Mr. Wyiie should write Mrs. Martin and Mr. Nimock upon tiic subject ; to which Mr. W. readily assented. Mr. G. stated, that Mr. Wylie, instead of suspending his judgment until he Siiould hear from the original creditors, had communicated his
* See pag-es 64 — 68, where Becket's oath and cross-examination are stated, -^w? -ilso iiy G's defence.
86
belief of the report ■which Becket had made. This Mr. G. com- plained of as a grievance, convinced that however little credit the story would have as it came from Becket, it would gather impor- tance from the sanction of Mr. Wylie. That Mr. W. not only had circulated his belief priva.tely, but had made it the ground of a charge before the Presbytery of the 13th of May, and had in a letter to the Synod given his judgment, upon the presump- tion that the charge could be fully proven ; and all this in op- position to his own engagement, that the matter should remain in suspense until he should hear from Ireland ; upon no other testimony than the mere verbal statement of Becket, who him- self had represented as a person of evil fame ; while he could not but suspect that the charge, if it had existed, must have met the attention of the Irish Presbytery previous to Mr. G's depo- sition. What made the case of partiality and enmity more fla- grant was, that Mr. W. who would not give credit to the high colouring, as he called it, of the Irish records, should now be- lieve the mere statement of a person of Becket's character, and should, after betraying the confidence which Mr. G. put in him, without acquainting him, have it brought forward publicly as a charge against him. 3. His conduct to Mr. G. comparing his professions of friendship when Mr. G. passed through Philadel- phia to New-York, with his malicious and unprovoked conduct in the Presbytery of the 13th and of the 25th, and his letter to the Synod. When Mr. G. appeared at Mr. Wylie's house, he treated him with the usual shew of respect, and acted his treache- rous part so well, that Mr. G. was induced to put confidence in him, to converse with his usual candor and freedom, and concluded Mr. Wylie's friendship for him had not been in any degree impaired. In the presence of witnesses, he and Mr. W. had conversed over the affair of Becket, of London, and of the distraction occasioned by Mr. Black's inviduous conduct in the west. Mr. G. stated with freedom to Mr. W. the reports which he had heard, and which had been circulated by Mr. Black, of certain charges to be preferred at that time against him, and with interest and ardor enquired at Mr. W. if he knew of anj such charges, or of any reports which would implicate him in a process. He with equal interest answered, he kneiv of 7ione, and insisted with much earnestness, that Mr. G. should stop and aid him in the dispensation of the Lord's supper. These con- versations happened on the 8th and 9th of May ; and in the Pres- bytery of the loth, after the most scurrilous abuse of Mr. G. in his absence too, Mr. W. exclaimed repeatedly, " Mr. G. must be denuded of his office ; if such a man be kept in the church, I shall not stay in it." During the session of Synod which immediately followed, he had written what he ealled an official letter, of a most scandalous nature, labouring to pervert the judgments of his brethren, and begging them " to strip the wolf of the sheep's
87
cloathlng." These specimens of Mr, Wylie's conduct Mr. G. said, demonstrated a complication of vicious principle. It was treacheiy combined with deep rooted enmity ; malice labouring under the affected shew of brotherhood. Mr. G. further alleged that the interest which he in particular had taken in the prosecution, his pledging himself repeatedly to prove the charges, his aiding in framing them, out of court, which by the way, was an unprece- dented way of framing a libel ;* and his prompting Becket and the Jamisonsf to appear as witnesses against Mr. G. not onlj evinced undue motives in the prosecution, but that he was more- over guilty of what books of discipline called " partial council, or the consulting and prompting for making of the process." Mr. G. added, he humbly presumed, he had proven in the clearest manner, that Mr. W. was a prosecutor ; that he was a judge was evident ; that he was malicious and inimical to him, and had prompted in making up the process, and as such was guilty of partial counsel, he had proven in part, and Avould by calling upon, witnesses, proceed to demonstrate fully ; and that if any of these things satisfactorily proven was I'clevant to cast a witness, the whole taken together not only disqualified Mr. W. from being a witness, but from being a judge. Mr. G. referred the court to Messrs. Thomas Hazelton and Joseph Cooper, as witnesses, to prove malice, enmity and partial counsel against Mr. Wylie.
The court appeared embarrassed, particularly Mr. W. who admitted the statement of the facts by Mr. G. but denied the in- ference of malice, enmity and partial counsel ; and alleged that a* he admitted the facts, it was unnecessary to call upon witnesses. Mr. G. insisted the witnesses should have liberty to depose. After some impotent attempts by the court to evade the depo- sitions, the witnesses were admitted and sworn. T'homas Hazelton* s dcjiosition.
Thomas Hazleton deposed to this amount — That he accom- panied Mr. Graham to Mr. Wylie's; that the London affair came up, respecting a certificate ; that Mr. G. denied it was a
* On the evening' of the 24th, it was agreed that the libel should be the order of the next morning. On the next morning the libel was presented, as it had been framed in private, and passed without a moment's discussion. It was, in the fidlest sense, a libel framed out of court. Tlie libelled person had no oppor- tunity of objecting or explaining. And when, after it was read, he attempted to object or explain, he was answered by saying, " Pity tlie man, pity tlie man ! Does this require any answer, Moderator ? No. Who would answer a persoA infatuated !"
t Mr. Wylie had been in tlie habit of holding a coiTespondence with Becket. He acknowledged to Mr. G. before Mr. Hazelton, he had conversed with Becket lately, who told him he did not intend to bring up the aftair of Mr. Nimock. Andrew Jamison had been suspended from privileges for some time on account of a charge of fornication. Immediately before tlie Presbjtery in Pliiladelphia, Mr. Wylie had used miicb exertion to have the business settled, and had him restored to his standing- iii the fthurch ! Cwnfessed by Mr. W. before tlie com-t in Piltsburg-h.
forgery, saying- that it contained nothing but what was strictly true, and that it was subscribed not by the name of any member of the Irish Presbytery, but by a fictitious name, and could not legally be called a forgery ; and said, in mitigation of the cir- cumstance, that he and his family were in a very alai'ming situ- ation ; that Stir. Wylie made warm professions of friendship to Mr. G. ; that he called upon him where he lodged, and appear- ed friendly ; that he had m.ade such impressions of friendship on Mr, G's mind, that he (Mr. H.) cautioned Mr. G. against being too credulous, and feared there was duplicity in Mr. Wylie ; that he heard Mr. G. ask Mr. W. " if he knew of any charges to be brought up against him ?" Mr. W. replied, " he knew of none." That Mr. W. had asked Mr. G. to stop and assist him at the sa- crament ; that in a conversation with Mr. Wylie, Mr. Cooper being present, he (Mr. W.) expressed himself ii\ words to this amount — that he was sorry for the misunderstandings which had taken place between Mr. Black and Mr. Graham, and hoped they ■would all return good fiiends from the Synod ; that Mr. Wylie had written to the Synod where he (Mr. H.) was present, a letter, praying them " to sti'ip the wolf of the sheep's cloathing," or words to that amount ; and that in the Presbytery afterwards, Mr. W. discovered great enmity to Mr. G. ; that he called Mr. G. *' a hypocrite, a fictitious character," and said, " Mr. G. himself knew he Avas such a character." He called him " an infatuated man," and called upon the court to pity him ; and refused in some instances to put down the words of the witnesses as they expressed them.
Josefih Cooper's deposition, Deposeth — Mr. Wylie appeared to me to be friendly to Mr. Graham in Philadelphia, on his way to the Synod, before the Presbytei'y ; and Mr. G. went away declaring his confidence to us in Mr. Wylie's friendship, and expected things were not so bad as they had appeared to be. Mr. W. said to us that he wished Mr. G. would stay till Mr. Black would come, and if there was any misunderstandings betwixt them, they might all be done away, and part good friends ; and that the people wanted him to stay, and to assist him at the sacrament. The Presbytery met in Philadelphia on the Monday after Mr. G. left Philadelphia for New-York. Mr. W. then manifested his prejudice with the rest of the Presbytery against Mr. G. and said, if he (Mr. G.) would be continued with them, he (Mr. W.) would not continue with them. After they had mentioned a number of reports injurious to Mr. G's character, they then appointed Mr. Black to draw up reasons why they did not answer the prayer of Canonsburgh con- gregation's petition, concerning Mr. G's instalment, and to send them to Synod. Mr. W. also sent his judgment to the Synod, with a prayer to " strip the wolf of the sheep's cloathing," that the flock may be. saved. Mr. Cooper confirmed the truth of what
89
Mr. Hazelton had witnessed respecting the enmity which Mr. Wylie discovered in the Presbytery after the Synod, in the seve- ral instances which Mr. H. had mentioned.
Soon as the above depositions were completed, Mr. G. asked permission to speak, and observed that he was now at liberty to mention a further circumstance which affected the veracity of Mr. Wylie. He said he had understood Mr. Wylie had declared with vehemence, and repeatedly, in the presence of witnesses, in the house of Samuel Scott, that the conversation which he and Mr. G. had relative to the London affair, was private, between Mr. W. and Mr. G. alone, and when Mr. Scott said that both Mr. Hazelton and Mr. Cooper had said it was in the presence of wit- nesses, in particular in the presence of Mr. H. Mr. Wylie replied once and agtiin, that " they were both liars," and " he could swear to the contrary." Mr. G. further remarked, it was evident, from, the deposition of Mr. Hazelton now given, and from Mr. W^ylie's admitting the fact, that IVIr. G. and he were not alone, but that at least Mr. Hazelton was present during the above conversation ; and that if Mr. Wylie had expressed himself as was represented, in Mr. Scott's, he certainly was guilty of falsehood. Mr. G. then requested to call upon Mr. Scott and John M'Haffey, to witness to the expressions of ]Mr. Wylie at Samuel Scott's.* Samuel Scott 8ivorn.
Deposeth — On last Wednesday Mr. Wylie came to his (Scott's) house. A certain conversation took place between Mr. W'ylie and him in the kitchen, concerning Mr. G. and the conversation Mr. W. and he had in Philadelphia. He told Mr. W. that it was very strange that Mi*. W. should say there vjere no charges against Mr. G. and treat him friendly, and then send charges to the Sy- nod. Mr. W". told me he had got charges enough from Mr. G. to send the letter to the Synod. I asked Mr. W. what the charges were ? He said they were the charges which came from Irela.nd, and forging a certificate in London. I told Mr. W. I thought it strange dealing with Mr. G. to declare to him in his own house that he had no charges^ 7ior knevj of none. He likewise told me, that Mr. W. and Mr. G. had a conversation in his own house, by themselves, and Mr. G. gave him enough to make charges of. I told him that Mr. Hazelton and Mr. Cooper had a conversation with Mr. W. before Mr. G. went to Synod ; that he knew no charges against ?.Ir. G. and Mr. W. hoped they would come good friends from the Synod. He likewise told me they were
* As a specimen of tiie zeal of the present members of com-tto unduly work upon the weaknesses of tlie people, to die prejudice of Mr. G. Messrs. M'Leod, Wylie, Black, &c. the week before the txlal, iiad, v.\ military phrase, made a diversion throiig'h Mr. G.'s congregation. They iiad each in turn laboured to sow tlie seeds of suspicion and calumny, with unsparing- hand. But with what success, a few days afterwards dlscovei"ed. Tiie Ui»gi"ucefiil revel with wliicli they closed the scene will speak tor itself.
M
90
both liars^ and he (Mr. W.) could swear it. He likewise asked me, would I believe him (Cooper) before the court ? I told him I Avould, for I looked upon Cooper as an honest man.
Cross-examined by Mr. Wylie.
Q. Did you not say you would believe him before my oath ?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recollect I told you not to be angry ? — A. I do.
Q. Did you not say you would as soon believe Mr. Hazelton and Mr. Cooper, as an angel from heaven I — A. Yes, I did. [This question was som^ time after repeated, when S. Scott replied, I have said it. Mr. Wylie said he pitied him, and after a few such phrases, sat down.]
[Here Mr. G. attempted to speak, but would not be permitted.]] John M^Haffey sivorn, deposeth.
Mr. W. was asked the reason why, when Mr. Graham went to Philadelphia, he was told there were no charges against him. Said Mr. W. that is not true. Said I, we were informed, that he was told there were no charges against him. Said Mr. W. do you believe that ? Said I, I do. Said Mr. W. I could stvear to the con- trary. Said I, be that as it may, I believe the report I got from Mr. Hazelton and Mr. Cooper, as well as if I had been eye and ear witness to it. Said Mr. W. then would you bfelieve my oath, if I would swear it ? Said I, I would think hard that I should not believe your oath. Well then, said he, you believe these mens' words, you must then have my oath before you believe me ; I thank you for the compliment.
Cross-examined by Mr. Wylie.
Q. Were you not in a passion when we conversed together I
A. No more than I am at this moment.
Q. Did not your face color up and get red ?
A. I did not see my face, but if it did, I did not feel it.
Mr. Graham begged leave to remark upon the depositions, that Messrs. Hazelton and Cooper's evidence established two facts ; 1st, that the conversation respecting London was not private be- tween Mr. W. and Mr. G. but that Mr. Hazelton was present ; 2d, that Mr. W. had declared, both to Mr. Graham and them- selves, that he knew of no charges to be brought against Mr. G. The evidence of Messrs. Scott and M'Haffey proved that Mr. Wylie had said, the conversation with Mr. G. was privately by themselves, and that he could swear it ; that he had denied his saying that he knew of no charges against Mx'. G. and would swear it, and had called Messrs. Hazelton and Cooper liars, be- cause they had represented to the contrary. Mr. G. alleged the charge of lying was thereby fully substantiated against Mr. Wy- lie, which, in addition to what had been proven before, was cer- ttiinly relevant to cast him as a witness. [_During these observa- tions Mr. G. was frequently interrufited, and ordered to silence.^
91
Mr. Wylie made a« impotent attempt to exculpate himself from the criminality alleged against him. He observed, that he thought it his duty to expose Mr. G.'s letter, illustrating it with his usual elegance, by supposing a friend of his were to call his wife a whore, was he obliged to conceal it ? He admitted he had treated Mr. G. fiolitely, but not friendly. He admitted the facts stated, but denied malice, enmity, partial counsel, and falsehood. He pitied the witnesses, and said they were disqualified by their passions to produce any thing in evidence Avorth attention, at th» same time he admitted they were honest men. He denied using the term liars^ in Mr. Scott's, and supposed the people in the BACK WOODS were so prone to such language, that they thought he- had used it. He concluded, by leaving it with his brethren to de- fend his character, and to judge whether he ought to be set aside as a witness.
Mr. Wylie was succeeded by Mr. M'Leod, who, in a violent and vociferous speech of some length, with evident paroxysms of rage and disappointment, declared that Mr. G. had forfeited Mr. Wylie's confidence ; that Mr. W. was no enemy to Mr. G. He pitied him ; he loved him as a man, at the same time he could not help abhorring his conduct ; that nothing had appeared to militate in the court against Mr. Wylie as a witness, and con- cluded by moving that Mr. Wylie be admitted to swear. The motion was seconded and carried.*
Mr. G. begged permission of the court to speak, which was spurned at with indignation.
Mr. Wylie was sworn , and deponed as follows :
I think, to the best of my knowledge, on the day after Mr. G.'s arrival in Philadelphia, in the month of May last, he called at my house, in company, as far as I recollect, with Messrs. Hazeltoii and Cooper ; that after various desultory conversation, Mr. G. had reference to the affair of Becket, and after various unimpor- tant observations, declared, that Becket's character was so infa- mous, that no person of understanding could put any credit in his representations ; that he himself would not have regarded it, had it not been for the impression it made upon his good friend Mr. Wylie. Mr. W. replied, he must confess, he did feel im- pressed with the circumstance and conversation which passed in his presence, and if it were weakness, it must be referred to his constitution. Mr. G. replied, that his brethren in the ministry were bound to protect his character, and illustrated the principle by the following similitude — that if he (Mr. G.) had heard in Pittsburgh, that Mr. W. had been found in a brothel in Philadel-
• The agitation and malevolence to Mr. G. which M'Leod discovered during his remarks, excited general disgust. And, as was to be expected, after such an accumulation of irresistible evidence against Wylie, it was the general opi- nion that M'Leod had vociferated nothing but bombast.
92
phia, ought he (Mr. G.) to give the report any credit ? Ought he not rather to spurn it as a calumny ? Mr. Wylie replied, he ought, undovibtedly, and assigned as a reason, that Mr. W. was a man of vuiblcmishcd character. Here he (Mr. W.) supposed a case, which he alleged to be a parallel, viz. that if Mr. W. had been actually found in a brothel, several years, say two before ; had been converted in court; had confessed the crime, professed pe- nitence, and submitted to censure, and then he (Mr. G.) had heard in the back woods that Mr. W. had been seen in a bro- thel, he might believe it. Mr. Wylie assigned his reasons for believing the story of Becket, and thought the man who had forged a certificate in London, might be guilty of a forgery in the petty sum of two guineas. Mr. G. declared his astonishment, that any person could conceive a clergyman of respectability, as he at that time was, and in a place he was well known, and where the imposture could be instantly detected, should be thought to use a false token for two guineas ; and said that he was not guilty of forgery in London, and that his conduct respecting the certifi- cate was both honourable and proper.
Ci'oss-examined by Mr. Graham.
Q. Did not Mr. G. in conversation, observe, that yoxi (Mr. Wy- lie) were not at liberty to declai^e your conviction of the truth of such a representation as Becket's, without proof, at least without first receiving some account from Ireland ?
A. Words to that amount may have been expressed.
Q. Did you not, sir, in May, 18 10, write president Knox of Bal- timore, that Mr. G.'s conduct, all things considered, was to his honour ?
[Here the court interfered, and ordered Mr. G. to keep to the point, and told him (Mr. W.) he had no right to answer such a ques- tion. Mr. G. alleged, in defence of the question, that it was a just one ; that if answered in the affirmative, which it certainly must, it would involve the witness in a charge of inconsistency, and that as such, he had a right to put it. He was sternly ordered to silence by the court.]
I have now, my dear friend, laid before you, with the most scrupulous accuracy, the sum total of the evidence adduced to support the first charge, viz. " Of withdrawing that profession of repentance, on the footing of which you were restored to the exercise of the office of the holy ministry." This evidence, you will perceive, is distributed into three parts — a speech which Mr. G. is said to have uttered before the Synod ; words which he is said to have dropped before the Presbytery which met after the Synod; and Mr. Wylie's deposition.
You will reflect maturely, and satisfy yourself, whether an insi- nuation,z.s the Synod's minute has stated it, or the irritable lan- guage which the Presbytery's records represent Mr. G. as using, even admitting them true, were sufficient to lay a ground for a
93
prosecution ; you will determine what weight is to be attached to Mr. Wylie's deposition, after the facts produced in evidence against him ; you will finally judge whether, upon the whole, the evidence adduced in support of the first charge, merited a reply.
Yours, &c.
LETTER II.
Revenge from some baneful cornei- shall level a tale of dishonour at tliec,
which no innocence of heart or integrity of conduct shall set right. ^The
foitunes of thy house shall totter, — thy character, which led tlie way to tliem, shall bleed on every side of it, — thy faith questioned, — thy works belled, — thy wit forgotten, — thy learning ti-ampled on. To wind up tlie last scene of tliy tragedy, cruelty and cowardice, twin ruffians, hired and set on by malice in the dark, shall strike together at all tiiy infii-mities and mistakes : — The best of us, my dear lad, lie open there, — and trust me, — trust me, Yorick, -when to gratify a private appetite, it is once resolved upon, that an innocent and an helpless creature shall be sacri- Jiced, "'tis an easy matter to pick up sticks enoiu from any tfucket -tohere it has strayed, to make afire to offer it up luithr — Sterne.
MT DEAR FRIEND,
IN my last, I laid a faithful narrative before you of the evi- dence brought to support the first charge. I am now to attend to the remaining charges of the libel. In doing so, I shall take them up in the order in which they occuiTed, and were presented by the court.
Having, upon the morning of the first day of the sitting read the depositions of the Presbytery in Philadelphia, and adduced the evidence for the first charge, it was moved that the remain- ing charges should be passed over, and that they should proceed to take in certain papers purporting to have been from New- York.* These were in the possession of Mr. M'Leod, who, you
* An immense auditory had waited upon the trial the first day. The court had very sagaciously conceived, the people would not so generally attend on the following day ; and with an eagerness wliich few could mistake, they called for M^Leod's packet of slander. In ordinary cases, it would have been a maste-rly
94
■will soon learn, had sacrificed both his jieace and his refiutation-, to carry on the prosecution.*
Upon the court desii'ing him, he proceeded to read, with much apparent pomp and gravity, but not before he had acquainted a large and respectable auditory, that the object of the papers which he was about to read, was not to prove the charges in the libel, but only that there was a Jama clamosa existing respecting Mr. G. [Here Mr. G. objected to the cruelty and injustice of a court, who had met professedly to prove a libel, to proceed to spread calumnious reports against him. He was sternly com- manded to silence. He begged the court to hear him, and not to proceed with such an unrelenting obstinacy to impugn his cha- racter, when they acknowledged themselves there was no proof, and where the professed object of the court was to propagate evil report. The members of the court united their voices, and with violent vociferation and gesture, ordered him to silence.]
M'Leod stood up and read No. 1, as the court pompously phrased it. No. 1 was the Irish letter read in Synod, which see, page 31.
No. 2. The Irish letter dated from Maghera, Nov. 17, 1810 — see the printed extracts, page 18.
No. 3. A letter purporting to have been from a Mr. Hender- son, and out of which a paragraph was read relative to Mr. G. expressing his sorrow at his being admitted into the church, and followed by a bitter invective against his reputation.
No. 4. A letter from Mr. Alexander to Mr. M'Leod — which contained the following paragraph :
" I hope, dear brother, you will be good enough to present the- above epistle at your next meeting of Presbytery or Synod. The last time I wrote to you, I gave you particular answers to the queries you made respecting Mr. Graham, and still remain to be of the same mind — that nothing short of Mr. G's paying his debts will restore his good name, and that promises now given, after so many promises, will be considered as so many lies told over again. I also told you those circumstances in Mr. G's his- tory that were favourable — and these induced me still to hope he might still be useful in the church, if he could get honourably into it. I hope what I then said in freedom, did not offend you or Mr. G."
Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, consisted of testimony purporting to have; come from Peter Dustan, John Hone, William Codman, Steyen B. Munn, and Thomas Thornton, of New-York. They were in
stroke of policy ; but in the present instance it was of no avail. The auditory became more numerous daily, and the court had the mortification to see th« unprecedented imposture of M'Leod exposed to a much greater audience, tlian that upon which No. 1, 2, 3, &c. from New-York, descended with the impetus osity of a cataract. * See Uie defence.
95
substance as follows : they charged Mr. G. with having broken a contract respecting a school in New-York ; with beating a boy of Mr. Mui'ray unmercifully, with a passionate and extravagant disposition, and one of them, Peter Dustan, had represented Mr. G. as using profane Avords. These testimonies were afterwards found to be in the hand writing of Mr. M'Leod, without any sig- natures appended,* as such they must have been Jv7-gedy ?ir\d sn'e^ therefore, deemed unv>^orthy of insertion in the narrative.
No. 10 was a letter purporting to be from JohnB. Murray, in answer to one written by Mr. M'Leod. f
No. 11. James Parke's letter, urging a demand of three gui- neas against Mr. G. on his father's behalf.
No. 12. James Wilson's letter to John Black, dated
Bedford, July 22, 1811.
" I have received two letters from you since I wrote you, but you had not received my last letter. You, however, give me the information I requested. I am distressed for the state of our church in that country ; but I hope the people will, ere long, return to their right mind. I find that, which indeed I expected, the letters I wrote to the western country have been shewn to G. He is enraged. He has written a long letter to Judge Walker, abusing me and the Synod. Poor man ! he is not aware that his character is too well known here, for him to change it by bold assertions. In his letter to the Judge, he states, that while ha was here on his way to Synod, I bestowed merited censure on his brethren for their pei-secution of him — one falsehood. 2d. That, unsolicited, I offered to write to some of the brethren, ex- postulating with them on this persecution — another falsehood. 3d. That I wrote to the brethren every thing which he had said to Hie in confidence, and treacherously influenced their minds against him — this is a falsehood. I doubt he has no regard what- ever to truth. Now such a man must soon destroy himself."
No. 13. A letter from James Nesbitt of Colerain, which had been addressed by Daniel Fisher of New-York, signifying that he (Nesbitt) was heir to Samuel Taylor, to whom Mr. G. had owed 100 pounds, by promissory note, and empowering Mr. Fisher to recover it, v/hich it appeared Mr. Fisher had refused.
No. 14, was an advertisement read by Mr. M'Leod, which had been published in New-York, by Daniel Baehr, merchant
* See the defence.
f The Editor has to regret that he has not a copy of John B. Murray's letter, written at the solicitation of IVIr. M'Leod. Eitl:ier it was not given to Mr. G's clerks to be transcribed, or it has been misbiid. The letter was one sui generis. It spoke o^pointi7ig the finger of scorn at Mr. Graham, whom it designated a ■aretch, a monster, a hypocrite, a ivolf, &c. &c. It represented Mr. G. as treating a bo)'^ of John B. MuiTay unmercifully ; that Murray had sued Mr. G. in the Mayor's Court, and was cast ; that lie had renewed tlie prosecution in the Su- preme Court, and had cast Mr. G. in fifty dollars, with costs.
96
taylor, representing that Mr. G. had left an address with said Baehr to Union College, Baltimore ; that he had enquired after it, and no such college could be found ; that he had, therefore, published the matter, Sec.
No. 15. A letter from James Jennings, stating that there was no such college, as Union College, in Baltimore.
No. 16. 'A representation made by Mr. M'Leod of a conver- sation which he had with Ezra Sergeant, bookseller, New-York, wherein Mr. Sergeant had stated that Mr. G. had owed him about §60, for books ; that he had paid him his bill in May last, but had still credit in his books to nearly that amount ; that Mr. Sergeant had understood Mr. G. was a teacher in Canonsburgh, and discovered surprise at learning that Mr. G. was not installed ; and that Mr. G. had pi'oposed paying him §100 yearly for books, and wished a running account to that amovmt.
No. 17. A letter from Mr. Knox to Mr. Wylie, complaining that Mr. G. had taught him to expect he would accept of a place in the college, which place had been vacated and kept for him for some time. Here Mr. G. enquired at Mr. Wylie whether he had in his possession a letter which Mr. Knox had written him prior to the letter read, in which, as Mr. Wylie had expressed in a letter to Mr. G. " Mr. Knox seemed to think he required to make an apology for his treatment of Mr. G." The letter was not to be produced ; on which Mr. G. desired that it might be attended to, as an instance of evident partiality.
No. 18. was a letter from Mr. Boggs, addressed to Mr. M'Leod, Vfherein he vindicated the conduct of the Irish Presbytery rela- tive to Mr. G. — which, as usual, was followed up with invective.
The court next proceeded to call upon such as they under- stood had Mr. G's confidence, particularly Messrs. Hazelton, Cooper, Slater, Wylie, Church and Wallace. These gentlemen, of unblemished character and exemplary piety, had conceived the motives of the court in calling upon them, to have been ty- rannical and impious. They unanimously refused to give evi- dence in the case, assigning for reasons — that the court appear- ed to them to have acted under the influence of prejudice and malignity against Mr. G. from the commencement; that their design in calling upon them, was manifestly to torture their con- sciences, to extort something from their confidence against Mr. G. ; that they regarded the conduct of the court in the light of an Inquisition, and of the persecutors of the reformers, in en- deavouring to rack the consciences of men to criminate others ; that they thought it their duty, to testify against them in their illegal proceedings ; that they had nothing to evidence that would not be to Mr. G's honor ; but that they abhorred the principle vipon which the court proceeded, and would think it criminal to comply with their requisitions.
97'
The court pi'oceeded to call upon several witnesses, who did depone. My dear friend, I must now beg a boon. You will rea- dily admit that it vv ould be a grievous and endless task to present you with a full narrative of the transactions of two or three days spent in lecturing witnesses. Th^ greater pan of the evidence which followed on the part of the court, was perfectly useless, and appeared to be intended for no other purpose than to exhaust the attention of the people, before Mr. G. should begin his de- fence. The objects which the court directed their attention to now, were three : to prove that Mr. G. had calumniated the judi- catories— that he had involved himself in debt in the westera country — and that he was labouring to make a party. To prove one or more of these, several witnesses were called, as follow : Samuel Sraith. Who deposed to this amount—That Mr. G. had complained of the conduct of his brethren, particularly Mr. Black ; that he never heard Mr. G. call them persecutors ; and that he did not know the sum with v/hich ^Ir. G. was complimented by his friends in Pittsburgh.
John Stevenso7i deposed to this amount — That Mr. G. had acted upon his protest ; that he did not know the sum of money which Mr. G's friends had given him ; he could not tell for what purpose it was given. This was in answer to such questions as these. Was it to pay his Irish debts, he received that money? Who gave you the subscription paper ? Who were they who sub- scribed it ? To this last question Mr. Stevenson replied, I cannot be particular — I subscribed it for one, and would do it again.
Walter Bell deposed to this amoxuit — That he heard Mr. G. preach since the Synod ; that a paper v/hich he thinks Avas a re- monstrance, Avas drawn up, which the session and people signed; that they agreed to stand and fall with Mr. G. ; that he did not kear Mr. G. give the Synod or Presbytery abusive names ; that it was not Mr. G. but Thomas Hazelton and Joseph Cooper, who gave an account of the treatment he (Mr. G.) had received ; and that he heard Mr. G. say, he would preach as long as the people would hear him. Question by Mr. G.— Do you know of any thing erroneous in my doctrine, or immoral in my conduct ? No ; but as far as I know, both in the pulpit and out of it, a very becoming conduct.
Zachetis Wilson deposed to this amount — That Mr. G. had acted upon his protest ; [proceeded to relate the representation they had got of the Synod and Presbytery by Mr. Hazelton and Mr. Cooper.] Questions put hxj Mr. Graham. Do you know any thing immoral in my conduct ? No ; nothing but what is every way becoming a minister of the gospel. Q. Did you ever hear any of my brethren say any thing to my prejudice ? A. I heard Mr. Black had said to an elder (S. Wylie) that Mr. G. was a popular man and a great preachex-, but that his motives were
N
98
Tanity, and the like ; which left an impression on my mind that Mr. G. was a hypocrite. Q. Was any thing beyond the stipend justly due, given me before I went to Synod ? No ; I do not know of any.
William Tomond deposed to this amount — That he met with T. Hazelton and J. Cooper in John Wallace's, after the Synod ; that they represented the conduct of the Synod and Presbytery as cruel and unjust; that they said the members of Presbytery had called T. Hazelton infatuated, and Mr. Graham deranged. Question by the court. What did William Church say of the mat- ter ? A. He said that Mr. G's brethi'en were jealous of his abi- lities. Q. What further did he say ? A. That if an inch was cut off Mr. G's tongue, it would settle the business. Q. What did you say to Church ? A. I told him there were as able men in the Presbytery as Mr. G. Q. What did Church say to that ? A. He said I was an impudent fellow. Q. What did you say to him ? A. I said he was an impudent scoundrel. Q. Very well ; did you and he come to loggerheads ! A. No.*
Gedrge Kirk deposed to this amount — He gave a narrative of the representation which Messrs. Hazelton and Cooper made after their return from Synod ; told of a paper drawn up and signed by the session and the people of Canonsburgh, stating their grievances, and agreeing to remain upon the footing of the protest ; that this paper was signed by all, with the exception of himself; that during the time the people reasoned the matter, Mr. Graham was not present. [Here he gave a tedious account of the reasonings of the people ; proceeded to tell how he had received the Synod's deed from Mr. Black, to have it published in the congregation, but did not publish it, because Mr. G. had said no such slanderovis stuff should be read to the congregation convened by him for public worship ; but if he (Kirk) or Mr. Black chose to call the people together, he had no objections ; to which he (Kirk) replied, he would have nothing to do with it; proceeded to tell of a conversation he had with William Chui'ch, and John Wallace about a subscription paper, 8cc. Sec. Question by the court. What time did Mr. Hazelton go out to Canonsburgh ? A. In the spring. Q. Do you know whether Mr. G's brother-in- law paid his (Mr. G's) debts ? A. I cannot say. Q. Did he pay a debt for Mr. G. to Mr. Jennings ? A. I cannot say ; Mr. Jennings told me that debt was paid. Q. Did you hear Mr. G. had got money out of the Bank in Pittsburgh ? A. Yes. Q. How much ? A. About 300 dollars. Q. How much money did the congregation
* This is a correct specimen of the rational and edifying manner in which die prosecution was conducted. The witnesses were kept explaining, lecturing, and answering questions, whole hours together, to as little purpose as this. What in tile name of common sense had Mr. Graham to do with Mr. Tomond and Mr. Church calling e.acli other scoundrels ? Or what object could the court have in view by. the mysterious question, Did you go to loggerheads ?
99
advance ? A. T do not know any thing but by report — I heard about 300 dollars. Q. Did you hear he had got money from Robert Finney ? A. I cannot say but from report. The court — \V^e only enquire after report. Did you hear it was to pay his Irish debts? A. I did not.
James Millar was called to depone. He objected to the prac- tice of the court, in calling to be a witness, without warning some time before, which he understood was customary with the church. He wished some time to think. Mr. M'Leod exclaimed vv^ith a sneer, let him go and say his prayers. To which Mr. Millar replied, I do not say my prayers. After a short time, James Millar appeared, and asked the court if he was to be at liberty to tell the whole truth, and upon that condition he would submit to be qualified. The court answered in the affirmative. He was sworn, and deposed to this amount' — That he had heard by a boy, William Huston, who said Mr. Black told him Mr. G. had got g300 in Pittsburgh, and gSOO from a drover on the way to the Synod ; that he saw a letter written to William Church by Mr. Hazelton, which represented the instalment not granted, and that Mr. G. was frequently ordered by the Synod, with a stamp of the foot, to be silent ; that he conversed Avith William Church and John Wallace upon the subject of Mr. G. and his brethren, and they seemed to fear much lest it should come to a breach. Question by the court. Did you ever hear Mr. Graham preach 1 A. Yes ; I heard him three times, and I bless God I did hear him. Q. Did you disclose to Mr. Graham a private conversation you had with Mr. Black ? A. I did not. [Here the witness was beginning to advert to the conversation, but was prevented by the court, by telling him he must not inculpate any of its mem^ hers.]* Question by Mr. Graham, Did those with whom you conversed shew any enmity or ill will to the Synod or Presbytery ? A. No ; it was much otherwise. Q. Had you any conversation respecting Mr. G. Avith Mr. Williams, since the Synod I A. Yes. Be so good as to give a short narrative of what passed. Here the court interposed its authority, and told Mr. Millar he must not inculpate any member of the court. Mr. Millar expostulated, observing he had sworn to tell all the truth, and begged the court to hear him. The court ordered him down. He persisted wishing them to let him exonerate his conscience. After much altercation, during which the court frequently ordered him down, and the auditors discovered marked disapprobation of the partial and ty- rannical proceedings of the court, James Pvlillar withdrew,
* Mr. Black had occasioned much vexation of mind to tliis pious man. He had before the Synod, in order to prejudice him ag-ainst Mr. G. told him a number of slanderous reports ; and when lie was done, called upon Mr. Millar to pledge himself solemnly not to divulge them. Mr. Millar reinonsti-ated ag^.inst Mr. Blact's conduct, and told him, he ought to acquaint Mr. G. himself. With this h onest advice Mr. Black never thought proper to comply.
100
Bp/iGsitlon of Dr. M^Lrod*
Dr. M'Leod prefaced his deposition by several solemn and swelled appeals to heaven, in confirmation of the purity of his intentions, of his own piety, and the piety of his ancestors for many generations. He said he could moreover appeal to all who knew him from a child, during the time he passed his studies, and since he entered the ministry .f
Dr. M'Leod of Nev/-York testifies and says, that he has no ill ■will against the Rev. David GrahaBi ; that he sincerely wishes his welfare in time and through eternity ; that he feels for him and for his family, and that nothing but a regard for truth, and the honor of that religion, which Mr. Graham has, in his opinion, scandalised by his personal and ministerial deportment, induces Dr. M'Leod, in obedience with the ninth commandment, to dis- close what has come within the sphere of his observation.
He will accordingly relate facts and words, which, in his judg- ment, evidence that Mr. Graham is in the habit of uttering false- hood ; appears destitute of piety ; is guilty of hypocrisy ; and de- signs to make his ministry an engine for procuring lucre to gra- tify personal vanity.
I. Dr. M'Leod received from Mr. Graham a letter some time after his arrival in New-i'ork, and before Dr. M'L. ever saw his face, putting himself under the cai-e of the church, and request- ing that order be taken in the case. Mr. Thornton, the intimat© friend of Mr. G. informed Dr. M'L. that Mr. G. was anxious for restoration. On the first interview, Mr. G. himself confirmed this, and de<;lared to Dr. M'L. his anxiety to be re-admitted to preach ; and in a letter from Mr. G. to the Northern Presbytery, uses these words: "I esteem it my greatest honor and felicity to be numbered with you in the ministry." In the spring of 1809, JMr. G. also expressed to Dr. M'L. great eagerness to'be re- stored, and yet he denied before Synod that he was anxious for
* The same objections militated against Mr. M'LeocI's being' a witness, as did against Mr. Wylie. His malice, enmity and partial counsel wei'c still more palpable than those of die other. He was a judge and a prosecutor. The reader is referred to the perusal of the objections stated and proven against Mr. Wylie, in pages 83 — 87. Mr. G. did not proceed to repeat. He considered it a prostitu- tion of time and argument, and «alculated only to vex and mortify his own feel- ings. M'Leod, tlierefore, as a witness, gained easy admission. It is not surprising he laboured to make way lor the evidence of Wylie.
f It is generally reported of Mr. M'Leod, that at an early period of life he enlisted a common soldier, some sa}', went aboard die British fleet ; th.at after spending some years in the service, he deserted from on board a British vessel, upon the American coast, and shordy after commenced his education in Sche- nectady. This account is given of him by a number of Scotch families resident near Schenectady, who collected money to aid Mr. M'Leod in the prosecution of his studies. Admitting this to have been fact, Mr. M'Leod ought to have lodged an appeal widi his fellow-soldiers, in behalf of his exalted piety. This vras a period of his life some might be tempted to suspect more than any other. It demanded still greater and more solemn protestations.
101
restoration, and asserted that he was inveigled and seduced into that measure.
2. Mr. G. confessed to Dr. M'L. at the first interview with, him, that he had framed for himself in London a certificate from the Reformed Presbytery in Ireland, to which he subscribed fic- titious names, and that he did this in order to be admitted into, or continued in, the friendship of the Rev. Rowland Hill, George Burder and Mr. Waugh, that he might, through their favour, obtain bread for his family, then in danger of starving. He con- fessed his having deceived his creditors, who purchased at hi* auction, and declared that he expected for his conduct nothing short of degradation from his office. He spoke of the conduct of the Seceders in Ireland to him as mean and malicious, and of the ministers of the Covenanted church in terms of the highest respect ; he confessed his guilt, and that he merited the highest censure ; and yet afterwards Dr. M'L. heard Mr. G. both in Phi- ladelphia and New-York, declare that the Irish ministers of the Covenanted church had persecuted him, and that it was malice and jealousy that induced them to censure him, or words to that amount.
3. Mr. G. complained to Dr. M'L. of the opposition made to him by the proprietors of the Greenwich school, denying their right to expect that he would teach on Wednesday afternoon ; to limit his school, and to ascertain the number of scholars, and grant no vacation in August — and yet, in the course of conver- sation Mr. Graham indirectly admitted, that it was agreeable to his contract with Mr. Dustan.
4. Mr. G. as I understood from others, was in the habit of re- presenting his old sermons as composed at the spur of the mo- ment ; and Dr. M'L. heard him intimating this to have been the case with his discourse before Presbytery in Philadelphia,, ;a»d two sermons in New-York, which Mr. G. himself informed [Dr. M'L. had been taken out before, and in his possession.
5. Mr. G. made many promises to Dr. JM'L. of preacliing for him, and disappointed him ; he often sent him written apologies for the disappointment, and he afterwards declared he had been previously determined not to preach in Dr. M'L's pulpit at all.
6. Mr. G. declared repeatedly to Dr. M'L. after he had visited Baltimoi'e, his determination to settle thei*e ; spoke of the agree- ments made with the church there ; informed him of his design to settle in the north ; and asserted that Dr. M'L. was unfriendly to Mr. G. ; that Mrs. M'Leod never invited Mrs. Graham to tea, or words to that amount, neither of which is correct.
II. The subject of practical religion is delicate ; but the truth must be disclosed. Dr. M'L. from the very commencement of his intimacy with Mr. G. has been afllicted at his conduct, in al- ways waving conversation on subjects of experimental religion, and his never appearing to take any interest in the .affairs of the
102
church ; but what respected the state of congregations as to their ability to afford a settlement.
Mr. G. was totally neglig^ent of fellowship meeting while he lived in New-York ; he never, as far as Dr. M'L. knows, except once, and that was accidental, attended society during the year and a half he lived in New-York and its vicinity ; he never at- tended the lectures delivered to the societies and congregation on the testimony, or the public examinations ; he was very negli- gent of public worship ; his conversation on the Lord's day was more loose than Dr. IVi'L. was accustomed to hear; he never ap- peared humbled for his former scandal as he ought ; his whole manner was otherwise ; he never in his prayers, so far as Dr. M'L. could observe, referred to his own case, or gave evidence of his being suitably affected by the injury he had done to religion, but had frequent allusions to his personal enemies ; he declared that he was vexed at Dr. M'L's prayers about him, and did appear uneasy at the fact of having public prayers offered for his contri- tion and sincere repentance.
III. When Mr. Graham was affectionately and solemnly charged by Dr. M'L. on the evil of his conduct, and the danger of it both to himself and to his family, he confessed, with sobbing which nearly prevented utterance, and melted Dr. M'L. into tears ; that he must have appeared in a very bad light to Dr. M'L. that Mr. G. hiinself had been acting a fictitious character ; that it was not natural to him. He confessed that from his gene- ral conduct and behaviour in Dr. M'L's presence. Dr. M'L. could not but have a bad opinion of him ; that he assumed that tone and character, thinking it the way to procure respect from men ; that it was not natural to him, and that he did not approve of it him- self. He on this occasion, and repeatedly from the commence- ment of their acquaintance, professed for Dr. M'L. great esteem and Jconfidence in his integrity ; he insinuated that he had rather been tried in Synod, where Dr. M'L. was present, than in the Middle Presbytery.
Mr. G. frequently attempted to procure by flattery the confi- dence of Dr. M'l-. he spoke to Dr. M'L. of his acknowledged ta- lents ; of his knowledge of theology ; of his supei'ior critical skill ; of his influence and reputation in the church abroad, in such an artful manner, as if Dr. M'L. had not always been suspicious of a man who had already been repeatedly and publicly branded for falsehood, might have put him off his guard. Mr. G. in such conversations insinuated, as Dr. M'L. believes, a desire to make himself a party man in the church with Dr. M'L. he was chagrined on having this offer rejected, and displayed vexation on the pic- ture drawn by Dr. M'L. of the harmony, the unanimity, and per- sonal friendship which existed among the American ministers ; he declared this vexation openly as reflected upon him, although there was nothing but Mr. G's own conscience that would justify
103-
the application. Mr. G. expressed uneasiness at several of Dr. M'L's public exliibitions. If Dr. M'L. spoke against superficial preachers, Mr. G. took it to himself, and was offended; if he made remarks on solid talents and intesi;rity, Mr. G. was offend- ed ; if Dr. M'L. discussed any subject on which INir. G. had preached before, Mr. G. said it was in order to cast him in the shade, and expressed himself offended. Mr. G. after disappoint- ing Dr. M'L's congregation repeatedly, and absenting himself some sabbaths from public worship, was called on by Dr. M*L. Mr. G. complained that he could not preach with freedom in Dr. M'L's pulpit, because the style of preaching used by his brethren did not suit him; and he specified particularly that of Mr. Wy- lie and Dr. M'Leod, complaining that too much learning, too much matter, and too much argument were introduced into the discourses, saying that the press was the vehicle of such discus- sions, and that a sermon should be a mere persuasive oration- he promised, however, to preach for Dr. M'L. the following sab- bath, but did not perform ;t.
IV. Mr. G. confessed to Dr. M'L. that he had employed his ministry in London to keep his family from suffering, although this led him to forgery, and being very suspicious that his motives were not the good of the church. Dr. M'L. observed very atten- tively Mr. G's conduct.
Mr. G. proposed to open in New-York a place to preach in, with a design to get some money, and confessed tiiis to Dr. M'Leodv He often, after hearing from Mr. Wylie, in the winter of 1808 — 9, the prospects in Baltimore, expressed a greater anxiety tlian formerly for being admitted to preach.
Mr. G. changed his mind, altered his purposes, and without respect for church order, expressed a desire to be settled in Bal- timore, or VValkill, or Albany, immediately, as the prospect of emolument presented itself; he was also reluctant to go any where, even as a supply, where the prospect of compensation was not good.
Dr. M'L. heard Mr. G. abusing those persons that had been his friends, and had given him pecuniary accommodations, in an illiberal manner, when they ceased to bestow money, and others^ have given him similar information. So far as Dr. M'L's know- ledge extends, Mr. Graham used money very sparingly for every thing but the superfluities of life.
The truth of which is testified by
A true copy. Alexr. M'Leod.
Cross-examined by Mr. Graham.
Q. Did not these transactions and conversations, to which you have alluded, happen before the month of May, .1810 ? — A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever inform Mr. Graham, either by word or writ, that you determined to complain of his conduct to the church ?
104
A. I believe not. ' Q. Did you not ask Mr. G. to assist you at the dispensation of the Lord's supper in the month of January, 1810, and did he not assist you ? — A. Yes.
Q. Did you not repeatedly ask Mr. G. to preach for you after- wards, and did he not preach at your ivritten request, a whole day for you in the month of Api-il, 1810 ? — A. Yes.
Q. Did you then discover to Mr. G. any unwillingness to hold communion v/ith him ?
A. I had my fears and my grievances, but do not recollect to have stated them.
Q. Did you not aid Mr. Wylie in dispensing the supper in the May of 1810, in company with Mr. Black, Mr. M'Master and Mr. Graham ? — A. I did.
Q. On that occasion, wiien Mr. G. discovered to his brethren an unwillingness to hold comaiunion on account of the treatment ho had received, did you not say to Mr. Wylie you had nothing against Mr. G. and you should wish misunderstandings removed, or words to that amount ? For the truth of this, before the witness had time to answer, Mr. G. appealed to Mr. Wylie. It was ad- mitted.
Q. Did not Messrs. Wylie, Black, and M'Master, on the fast day evening, labour to have you and I reconciled, in the house of Mr. Wylie' ?--A. Yes.
Q. Did you not declare again you had nothing in your heart to prevent you from fellowship with Mr. G. and propose to do every thing in your power to have difficulties removed l — This was ad- mitted.
Q. Did not your brethren, after Mr. G. had represented the treatment you had given him in New-York, agree, and say, that " Dr. M'^Leod's conduct to Mr. G. was imfirudeiit and inausfii- cious ?" — Before the witness l?ad time to reply, Mr. G. appealed to Messrs. Wylie and Black for the truth of the fact. It was ad- mitted.
Here Mr. G. proceeded to ask him relative to that interview. Did not the brethren labour to bring us together ? Did they not at last prevail ? Did not you and I approach each other and shake hands, in evidence that no further misunderstandings existed, and that we were restored to mutual confidence ? Did you not with a sigh and tears, put both your hands on mine, and with earnestness exclaim, may the bowels of Christ cement the union, or words nearly stich, and did not our brethren appear to rejoice ? [Mr. Wylie said he could have shed tears of joy on the occasion.] All the facts were admitted by M'Leod, Messrs. Wylie and Black, only that M'Leod quibbled a little upon the term conji- dence, and denied using the phrase, may the bowels of Christ cement us, but admitted he may have used words to that effect. Dr. M'Leod perceiving himself involved, appeared to wish to
105
smooth the matter, and to insinuate that this was merely a per* sonal accommodation ; that there was a difference between a cor- dial confidential reconciliation, and an external accommodation; that he intended only the latter, and chiefly what was personal, Sec. To this Mr. G. replied, he had acknowledged the facts, it remained for him (Mr. G.) to make a proper use of them. That either he was sincere or he dissembled. If he was sincere, it gave the lie to what he had now sworn ; if he dissembled, it was ;i deep and aggravated dissimulation.
Q. Why did you not then mention these grievances ?
A. Mr. G's case has cost me many tears and prayers ; I loved him and admired his talents, and laid up these things in my mind.
Q. Did I not converse with you before my restoration, and ask your advice about remaining three years a teacher to pay my debts, and did you not oppose it ?
A. I remember something of a conversation of this kind, but will not be certain of the language used.
Q. Did not you, I may say all the ministers present, hear me say with much earnestness, before the Presbytery of 1809, that unless my brethren could restore me to their confidence, I did not wish to be restored to the ministry ? — This question pro- duced some embarrassment, but was at last admitted.
Q. Did I ever tell you I preached on the spur of the moment ?
A. It was upon infoi'mation by others.
Q. Can you recollect any particular instance in which I refused So converse on practical subjects ? — The witness could not re- collect. I often wished to converse in this way, but did not wish to urge the conversation.
Q. In the conversation in which you represent me as charging myself with being a fictitious character, did I not state to you, your distance compelled me to adopt a polite demeanor to sup- port my dignity, and that coldness, of which you complained, was Hot natural to me.
A. I do not recollect all the conversation, but it is probable some such conversations might have happened.
Q. Was not the conversation to Avhich you allude, on the morning of the last day of the Synod, in May last ?
A. I believe it was.
Q. Was the payment of my debts a condition in my restora- tion ?
A. I believe the Presbytery thought you would pay your debts
Here the witness, unsolicited, contrived to foist in a lubricated story of a debt, for which he understood INIr. G. had been almost arrested, during his sitting in a Presbytery," which M'Leod phrased a debt of honor, (by which Mr. G. supposed he meant a gambling debt) how a gentleman had paid it for hi^u, &c.
O
106
Q. Did you acquaint Mr. Thornton that you designed to 'make use of his name ag-ainst Mr. G.
A. Would not say he did.
Q. Did you ever ask Mr. G. for an explanation of those parts of his conduct which gave you offence ? — The witness now ap- peared to have gotten upon his guard, and would not come di- rectly to any question afterwards put. The amount of the answer to this question was, he had not, and his reason was, he had despaired of Mr. Graham's usefulness in the church.
Q, Did you not know that I taught evening classes generallr during my stay in New-York, in particular that I taught the He- brew upon the evenings of the religious societies ? — After some shifting, the question was answered in the affirmative.
Q. Have you the letter which Mr. G. wrote to the Presbytery «f the North, to which you make your allusion ? — A. No.
Q. Will you positively say that I used the word jealousy^ in speaking of the motives of the Irish Presbytery ?
A. It might not be exactly that word, but it impressed my mind so. [Upon this Mr. G. observed, there is no word will ex- press the passion jealousy, but the term jealousy itself.]
Q. Was not Mr. G. in an eligible sitviation when he was re- stored ? — A. His situation was precarious.
Dviring the latter part of the cross-examination. Dr. M'Leod affected not to understand Mr. G's questions, explained, lectur- ed, and narrated to a great length, and, regardless of the ques- tion put, went off to ill-natured reports and invidious allu- sions. Questions were asked respecting the charges of hy- pocrisy, want of piety, 8cc. to which no satisfactory answer could be obtained. He concluded by challenging Mr. G. the examina- tor, to " proceed and ask him more !"
So soon as the evidence on the part of the court was finished, Mr. M'Leod offered a number of observations upon the rele- vancy of the charges, alleging that, if it Avould appear the charges were proven, they would infer the censures of the church. He proceeded to paint the charges in exceedingly dark colors, and concluded by moving "their relevancy.
Mr. Wylie proceeded to sum up the evidence. He dwelt largely upon the several articles, but especially on those, which, although least proved, seemed to imply the greatest guilt. He admitted, " Becket's evidence v;as inconclusive.'' Alleged if the first charge were proven, Mr. G. stood chargeable with all the old charges. He proceeded to read the several letters over with much aggravation and distortion, but not before he had read to the court a passage from the Associate Reformed Testimony on Proof, see page 520. He dwelt much upon the protest, as- serted Mr. G. had submitted to the suspension, justified the conduct of the court, and pronounced Mr. G. a madman Jit for Bedlam. He accounted for Mr. G's admission among them, from his imfiosing address, his distrets, and their want qf sus/iicion,
/
107
and asserted they could shed tears of blood for ivhat they had done. He was extremely verbose on that part of the evidence which belonged to Mr. M'Leod, using the expression very fre- quently, " now if Dr. M'Leod be not a perjured villain, such a thing is so." He frequently appealed to heaven for his motives, and in justification of his own conduct, and appeared to feel much hurt, at finding their measures had become unpopular. He disco- vered much passion and interest, and Avhat njay indeed surprise no little, he never once adverted to a factor circumstance calcu- lated to favor !VIr. Graham. No counsellor perhaps ever took a more active or decided interest against a defendant. He dwelt with much satisfaction on the Irish business, and was no little pathetic on the profane words, which, in the firetcndcd letter of Dustan, Mr. G. was represented as using. Instead of bringing the charge and the evidence together, and shcAving the perspicuity and force of the evidence, his mode of reasoning was, "■ if the matter be so and so, I will not positively say," Sec. During the trial thus far, the covirt scarcely ever discovered a disposition to conduct the prosecution with either order or justice. They pre- sented uniformly a hostile front to Mr. Graham. He was never listened to in objecting to any thing as illegal, although it was his undoubted right. When he would have suggested any thing to the court explanatory or remonstrative, he was put to silence, with marks of indignation and aversion. Every thing he attempt- ed to urge in support of his views of the prosecution, or to aid in it, was perverted and misrepresented in the minutes ; and when he objected, he was either answered by silence or a com- mand to order. Others complained of the manner in which the m.inutes represented their condvict, as a serious grievance, but could obtain no redress. Several persons were implicated and exposed designedly, in the course of acquiring evidence, merely because they were known to have been friendly to Mr. G. It was a subject of general remark, that nothing favorable to Mr. G. was insei'ted in the records of tlie court ; and it was no less flagrant, that while the most uncommon exertions had been used to procui'e materials for the prosecution against Mr. G. the members had studiously avoided to obtain or mention any cir- cumstance which might have set any matter in a light favorable to him. Notwithstanding this, they brow-beat the people for in- sinuating that the court and Mr. G. were two parties, and pre- cluded Mr. G. from the exercise of his rights as counsellor for himself, under the plausible pretext, that as an ecclesiastical judicatory, they must not be regarded in the light of a party.
This, my dear friend, closes the witness on the part of the court. Seven tedious sederunts were spent in accumulating the evidence which I have laid before you. Few, during this period, who witnessed their proceedings, who did not heartily despise and abhor them. Crouds of the most reputable, pious, and lite-
108
rary people of Pittsburgh and its vicinity attended. The matter had somehow produced unusual interest. It appeared to be the doings of the Almighty, upon a plan different from the ordinary establishment of things. Out of the thousands who attended, hardly any discovered satisfaction. The universal impression which the judicatory made upon the public mind, even before the commencement of Mr. G's defence, was, that his brethren •were emnous and malicious fieisecutors. In a word, their mea- sures were conducted with so little order, and such manifest in- justice, that they became an object of general and public exe- cration. I know not, my friend, whether, after receiving the above faithful statement of facts, you will agree with some of the most discerning who witnessed the prosecution, that nothing meriting the name of proof has yet been adduced. And that, •were it -not that Mr. G's reputation had been so bandied about both in public and private by these gentlemen, it would have been a complete waste of time to have proposed any thing de- serving the name of a defence. Mr. G. had, however, long wish- ed for a favorable opportunity of endeavouring to dissipate the clouds with which his character had been enveloped. God had now given him such an opportunity. With what degree of suc- cess he embraced it, will appear in my next.
Yours, Sec.
LETTER III.
Who does the best his circumstance allows.
Does well, acts nobly, angels could no more. — Youn«.
MT DEAR FRIEND,
WE have left Mr, G's character groaning under an intolera- ble load of perverted facts, gross misrepresentations, groundless fabrications, and direct falsehoods. We have seen a coui't deter- mined to accomplish his ruin, toiling in irrelevant evidence, par- tial statements, and disorderly procedure. Although nothing has been legally advanced to criminate Mr. G. yet Ave feel for our friend, and cannot help discovering a solicitude to see and hear something which may restore our good opinion, and rest our Goiifidence in him upon its former basis. After all the filth
109
through which wc have drudged, we are compelled to regard him, no otherwise impure, than as a clean well bred man, acci dentally besmeared by tumbling in mud, or bespattered by a rude clown who gallops across him, on the way. We are now to contemplate Mr. G's struggles, in order to shake of the incum- brances imposed upon him by conspiring brethren. You will ad- mit he labored under every disadvantage: 'proscribed by his brethren in Ireland ; his reputation clouded from the first mo- ment he seriously applied for admission to the reformed church ; chargeable with rash steps which justified the criminations of his adversaries in some degree ; pursued by his brethren in Ame- rica, who it was supposable ought to have been best acquainted with him ; a stranger hunted by numberless reproaches ; a cul- prit at the bar of a partial judicatory ; a number of literary men, combining their talents to render him suspected and odious, pro- fessing the process against him to have originated in zeal for the glory of God, heaping censure upon him under pretended forms of law, laboring to undermine his reputation for veracity, and thereby depriving him of the last and only resource of an in- nocent and abused, stranger ; appealing to heaven, almost eveiy moment against him ; swearing him destitute of piety, mercenary and hypocritical, and presenting him to the public with a load of crimination, the work of years. — These were the disadvanta- geous circumstances in which our friend stood before the bar of the reformed church on the 16th of August last. In these cir- cumstances he commenced his defence, which was first done by the calling upon a few witnesses ; his solitary situation, as an abused, afflicted stranger, Avould not allow him to call upon ma- ny.
The court signified their wish to hear witnesses, if Mi*. G. had
anv to produce.
Mr. Graham called upon Thomas Hazelton. The court re- fused to admit him as a witness, assigning as a reason that he had refused to act as a witness when called upon by the court. Mr. G. urged that the witness's proposal to make oath before the court, evidenced he had changed his mind ; that upon mature reflection, however he might have been disgusted with the con- duct of the court, he perhaps now concluded, upon the whole, for the sake of justice, it would be more his duty to submit to be qualified and depone. Mr. G. was ordered to silence, and m- formed, the witness should not be admitted. Mr. G. begged the court to consider what a disadvantage must result to him from the measure ; that Mr. Hazelton had been his inseparable companion on the way to the Synod, that the principal stress of the defence he intended to make, rested upon him, that if they rejected his evidence they would for the same reason reject the evidence of Joseph Cooper and James Slater, who were in the
110
same predicament. He hoped, that even admitting the form of law might be in their favor, which he believed was not, thejr would not take an advantage of it, and preclude the possibility of making a perfect defence. The court became more preremptory in its tone, and decreed, that none of those persons should be permitted to be a witness.*
* This was an act of mjustice so violent, that the court could not but calca- iate upon public odium in consequence of it. To repel this if possible, they had deliberated during the nig'ht, and on the next morning' proposed and adopt- ed, what they called an amendment to the minute of yesterday, which was intro- duced by Mr. M'Leod, with a bombastical speecJi, contrasting^ civil and ecclesi- astical law, inveighing against juries, referring in a very edifying manner t» the code de criminal in the Edinburgh Review. Montes parturiunt. — Bear Doc- tor, why all this mighty fuss ? You had committed an act of manifest injustice yesterday. You certainly did not mean that ecclesiastical law, or the usages of tlie church, were better adapted to tolerate injustice, than the laws of civil judicatories ! Let us hear your amendment.
** An amendmentioffered by Mr. M'L. and agreed to, for refusing to admit Mr. Hazelton and Mr. Cooper as witnesses : These men viz. Hazelton and Cooper, when called by the com-t to give testimony, refused, and were acordingly guilty of contumacy. 2. There manner of refusal evidenced to the court that they were decided partizans against the court ajid in favor of the accused. 3. The fact of their refusal is a violation of the ninth precept of tlie moral law. 4-. To take tlie oath of such men, under such circumstances, would on the part of the court, be a connivance with the sin of taking the name of God in vain."
Permit me, doctor, to inform you, your^rs* reason is contrary to churck law. You were not at liberty to pronoimce tliem contumacious until you had cal- cd them three times, and they had refused to witness ; see Stuart's collections, Book 4th, title 3, section 14. Viz. " If witnesses refuse after three citations to compeer, then they may be proceeded against as contumacious." Your second reason is predicated upon an Invlduous distinction, which when you found it to suit your purpose, you reprobated, viz. " against the court, and in favor of the accused." You had not many hours before corrected some of the witnesses for speaking in tliis way, and had told them in the spirited and sublime lan- guage of metaphysics, that the suit was between Mr. Graham and a fama tlamosa, and not between the court and Mr. G. Besides you charge these gentle- men with a manner so culpable, as to render it sinful to take their depositions, and yet you have not told what the manner was. No doubt, sir, you meant their motives. This was the best subterfuge you could adopt. Tiie instant you take refuge in the heart of others, your opponent loses you. This mode of stating a feason, has all tlie virtue of rubbing a magical rirg ; it renders you invisible. Your third reason, sir, requires to be qualified. It is not every refusal to be a witness, which amounts to a breach of the ninth commandment. You can teach otherwise when you choose. You ought to have made it clear to those per- sons that it was their duty to be witnesses. You did not. You only revealed the arm of power. That did not convince them. But .after time to reflect they came to conclude it was their duty, and not to perfomi It would be a " violation of the ninth precept of the moral law." Now when they have acquired clear- ness, you wiU not permit them to do their duty. Your reason recoils upon your- selves. You refuse to admit tliem to obey the moral law. It is j ou, sir, it is your court, who have violated the ninth precept of the moral law. Your fourth reason is only an inference. Had you established your precept it would have been a conclusion, but not a reason. Your premises are false. These men were not contumacious, I challenge you to prove it. These men were not parti-
Ill
Mr. Graham, aware that the depositions of Messrs. Hazel- ton and Cooper, would be indespensably necessary to his defence, and that the court had rejected them with a deliberate intention to injure him, requested those gentlemen to repair to a magis- trate, and make their depositions. They did so, and returned with evidence legally deponed, which Mr. G. presented to the court. They refused to accept of it, alleging that the oath had beenm- temfierately made, that they were smfully partial to Mr. G. that as they supposed, they and he were embarked on the same bottom ; and that to receive their depositions " would be a connivance at the sin of taking the name of the Lord in vain." How easy those gen- tlemen could find occasion to cast these witnesses, men of cha- racter and of approven piety ! Compare their conduct in this instance, with their receiving the deposition of Oliver Becket, and admitting Mr. Wylie to depone after flagrant presump- tions of malice, enmity and falsehood, clearly proven. These gentlemen ought to have been rejected, and it is not improba- ble, the admitting them to swear was " a connivance at taking the name of God in vain," at least it was in direct opposition to the laws of the church. But here were men of generally ap- proven character, against whom no presumptions of malice were alleged. Yes ; but they were passionate and obstinate : aye, there's
the rub. Admitting this, what had it to do with receiving
the depositions which had been made legally elsewhere ? was it not enough to pacify the tender consciences of the court, that they refused to qualify them ; must they also rejectjthe depositions ? Be- lieve me, gentlemen, neither your tenderness of conscience, nor the alleged intemperateness of the witnesses, will screen you from a charge of one of the most impudent and impious acts of injustice ever attempted before a civilized public.
After some alterations, it was admitted, " Mr. G. might make whatever use he chose of the depositions on his defence, but they could not be entered on their records.''
The depositions are as follow. — Thomas Hazelton deposeth in these words.
" When I first heard of Mr. Graham's arrival in this country, I wrote immediately to the Rev. Mr. Wylie for a statement of Mr. G's affairs. I received an answer shortly after, stating that he un- derstood that Mr. Graham had been by some misfortune involved in debt in Ireland, and in consequence thereof, in a precipitate manner left his congregation and went to London, where he had presented a false certificate to some ministers, for which he un- derstood the Irish Presbytery had deposed him from the office of
aans ; I challenge you to prove it. These men had not violated the moral la\r by refusing evidence. The court was still sitting, the case pending, and the dis- •ussion open. Your reasons ar« u fallacious as youi- intentions were impure, in •ejecting the witnesses.
112
the ministiy. But he thought that the embarrassed state of Mr. G's affairs would mitigate what criminality was attached to Mr. G's conduct ; that he had favorable impressions of Mr. G. inas- much as he refused, although solicited by a number of people in New- York to commence an independent preacher, and rather chose to refer his case to the Reformed Presbytery in this coun- try. In the May of 1809, I understood that Mr. G's case was to be tried in Philadelphia, at which time I went down with Mr. Black. Before I saw Mr. G. I enquired at Mr. Wylie, personally, respecting Mr. G's affairs. He gave me to understand, that, from all the documents he ever saw on the case, there could be very little blame attached to Mr, G's character ; but for the sake of recognising the deeds of the Irish Presbytery, they must en- ter a process against him — and at the same time said he never saw a man he felt more interest in than Mr. G.
Mr. G. delivered a discourse, and afterwards the members repaired to Mr. Wylie's house, and resumed the consideration of Mr. G's case. The impressions v/hich I received from the court was, that the embtirrassed circumstances under which he labored in Ireland and in London, were calculated to drive any man into desperate acts. I recollect one remark made by Mr. W. to this amount, " that if he had been placed in Mr. G's case, he thought he would have done worse." Mr. Black also said that Mr. G's resigning, or proposing to give up his pre- sent lucrative employment, with the explanations given by Mr. G. was sufficient to satisfy him with respect to the upright in- tentions of Mr. G. However, it was agreed by the court, that Mr. G. should be rebuked for his elopement from his congrega- tion ; for presenting a false certificate to certain London minis- ters, with a weakness which appeared in his contracts of a pecu- niary nature. Mr. G. submitted, and was rebuked, and absolved from all scandal attaching to his former conduct. Some of the members wished his immediate restoration to the office of the ministry. Mr. G. objected thereto himself. Others of the mem- bers said that it would not look well in the eyes of the woiid ; that an immediate restoration would be calculated to give them an idea that we were so anxious to obtain a man of parts, that we would go oyer all bounds, and that it would be better calculated to establish Mr. G's character ; that we* should defer it until some time in August. — After I heard of Mr. G's restora- tion, I was introduced to the hearing a letter read by Mr. Black from Mr. M'Leod, wherein there were a number of dark insinua- tions, which v/ere calculated to impress my mind, that Mr. G's preaching was rather for popularity than edifying to the godly. From the confidence I had put in Mr. M'Leod's veracity, I began t9 be prejudiced against Mr. G. About January, 1810,1 received
• jMi-. Hazelton was a member of court in Philadelphia, 1809.
113
a letter from Mr. G. in which he hinted at some things that ap- peared in Mr. M'L's conduct, and conceived himself very ill treated by him and some of the elders. Another letter appeared from Mr, M'Leod, which was read in the hearing of Mr. Gormly and myself, by Mr. Black, wherein Mr. G. was represented as changing his mind with respect to his place of settlement; that he made application for being taken under the jurisdiction of the Northern Presbytery, and that the Head of the Church would dis' cover the man one day. When Mr. Riley came to Greensburgh, the first Sabbath day he was there, I understood Mr. Black was preaching in Greensburgh, and saw Mr. Riley. I called on Mr. Black when he came home, to enquire about Mr. G. I was told by him that Mr. Riley informed him, that there was something wanting in Mr. G's preaching, notwithstanding his flowery preaching, which could be found in Mr. Williams, notwithstand- ing of his weakness ; and in short Thomas, said Mr. B. ive are not able to fiut a name on it. When some of the Canonsburgh con- gregation was moving for a moderation of a call for Mr. Riley, I was in conversation with Mr. Black respecting the Canonsburgh congregation having a suitable minister. I reasoned with him to endeavor to prevent a moderation, until Mr. Graham would visit them, as we did not know what Providence may do in this case. Said Mr. B. Mr. G. will not suit the people of this country, for no place will answer him but frippering through a city. After Mr* G'S arrival in Pittsburgh, I was prejudiced against him, until I heard Mr. G. preaching the first Sabbath ; I then began to think that we must have been deceived, and found a general murmur in about two or three weeks after, among the people on whom such previous impressions were made.
Thomas Hazelton further deposeth, respecting the transac- tions after Mr. G. went on to Synod in May last — When we ar- rived in New-York, Mr. Graham and I called on Mr. M'Leod. He asked me up stairs, where he began to enquire at me respect- ing our disturbance in the west. I gave him a statement of the affair. He asked me if I thought it possible that Mr. Black and Mr. G. could live good neighbors in the west. I answered I knew nothing to prevent it in Mr. G. that I knew he wished to be friendly with Mr. B. He said he did not understand Mr. G. well, he did not like to see one of his brethren calling on him in the way of a polite visit, and no ftirther friendship appearing than would exist among strangers. I answered, that in existing cir- cumstances, nothing else could be expected ; for before Mr. G. came to the western country, there Avas letters circulated that were calculated to prejudice the minds of the people against him : and since Mr. Black returned from the south, he was in the habit of informing numbers, that there Avas certain charges to be preferred against Mr. G. at this Synod, for which he would be deposed. Mr. M'L. stiid that he knew nothing of these impro-
P
lU
pricties, but said if he could be persuaded that Mr. G. was at- tached to the reformation cause, all these reports from Ireland, or any thing he had said or wrote about Mr. G. would signify- nothing, and began to interrogate me upon the footing of my ac- quaintance with Mr. G. if I thought he was attached to the cause of the Redeemer. I answered that, as far as I knew him, I was persuaded he was ; and, as an evidence thereof, I believed that the most pious and firm covenanters in the western country were firmly attached to Mr. G. Here Mr. M'L. began to inveigh against Mr. G. and said that he feared, after he gained some more influence, he might set up his standard one day beside their standard, and make a party — and said, if this was the true state of the case, it was better for them to cut him off at once, and then began to tell me the Irish debts were not paid. I said it was true, but if men were to be brought to the bar for being in debt, I thought there were few of the ministers would stand clear. He then said that Mr. G. had obtained money to the amount of §500 from my brother in Baltimore. I told< him it was false, like a great many other things that was circulated in the western country, and gave him a relation of those things, at which he de- clared he received a great deal of satisfaction from our interview. The Synod met to transact business on Thursday the 16th May. The moderator and clerk was chosen, the names of the mem- bers enrolled and read, when Mr. G. rose and begged leave of the moderator to ask if his name was not to be enrolled with the members of this court ; he said it was a delicate situation he was placed in ; that he was obliged to introduce himself, the business which properly belonged to some of his brethren ; also said he would not have urged it so instantly, if his suspicions had not been roused respecting a disposition in his brethren to degrade him. The court ordered the clerk to read the minutes relative to Mr. G's restoration, and afterwards a letter they had received from the Irish Presbytery. Mr. G. still insisted that he should, as a co-presbyter, have been introduced to a seat in Synod, and urged the necessity of it ; that if they were going to prefer any charges against him, that he should not be found in a degraded situation before they entered a process, and Mr. G. began to shew the court that they were acting very inconsistently in taking up old charges which they had decided on before, and that he would pledge himself, his office, character, and all that was dear to him, that there were falsehoods stated in that Irish letter, and made some criticisms on the conduct of the Irish Pi-esbytery to- wards him, and particularly on Mr. Stavely, who he said pursued him from the time he had preached in the bounds of a congre- gation which was designed for his son. The moderator inter- rupted Mr. G. and said he must not insult the court. One thing in particular was in the Irish letter, that the Covenanters in Ire- land had paid the debts Mr. G. was due Seceders, before the Irish
lis
Presbytery received him, which Mr. G. denied, and declared it false ; that he had received from two congregations to the amount of five guineas of extra money ; but that instead of paying his debts they had involved him afresh, in depriving him of an op- portunity of preaching the gospel, and in consequence thcreofj was obliged to sell his books. Mr. G. farther said, it was impos- sible to know upon what ground he was to stand in this court.— Mr. M'Leod held a paper in his hand, and addressed the modera- tor by saying, that if he was to allow Mr. G. to speak in this manner, they would get no business done, and began to read what he moved as an opinion which the Synod might express on the case, and accordingly they proceeded to adopt what was in that paper as their opinion, in which opinion Mr. G. was not to have a seat in that Synod, and the Middle Presbytery was to take up his business with all possible speed.
Thomas Hazelton further depones — That he called in Mr. Sargeant's, bookseller, New-York, with whom I understood Mr. G. had a running account. Mr. G. asked Mr. S. in my presence, if he had been uneusy about the money he was due him, or if the advertisement which Baehr had inserted in one of the New-York papers, made any impression on his mind respecting Mr. G's integrity. No, said Mr. S. your character is too well known in New-York for such a passionate man as Baehr to injure you. No, sii', I had not the least uneasiness, for if you were to write to me from any part of the United States for fifty or one hundred dol- lars worth of books without the money, you should have them, cheerfully.
Mr. Cooper, Mr. G. and myself called at Mr. Thornton's in New-York. We drank tea with him. I mentioned to Mr. Thorn- ton that Mr. M'Leod had told me that you (IVIr. T.) were the man that informed him that Mr. G. endeavored to become an Inde- pendent preacher on his ai'rival. He said, surely Mr. M'L. was misinformed ; for, said he, I was one of the men who insisted on Mr. G. to become an Independent, but he refused. Mr. T. said he then began to enquire for a tuition, &c. He also said, that if Mr. G. had staid in New-York as a teacher, that he was satisfied, by information even from one of the men (I do not recollect his name) who joined the persecution with Murray, that they would have continued their support, and Mr. G. might have had a school at this time which would bring him three thousand dollars an- nually, for there was never a teacher in New- York as much es- teemed while he continued in that character, and would yet suc- ceed, if he would come to the city. Mr. Cooper also enquired of Mr. T. respecting the Magazine-street church — he stated it as correct. Mr. Cooper also received the same information, inmy presence, from one of Mr. M'L's own hearers (Mr. Ratcliffe and his wife) that there were tv/o men sent to treat with Mr. G. about taking charge of that congregation, and that the offer they made
116
Mr. G. was 6001. a year, and 600/. of a present the first sermon he would preach. Mr. Thornton also told, in my presence, that Mr. M'L. and his congregation had treated Mr. G. very bad ; and said to Mr. G. it is very little pity of you, I warned you enough about having any connexion with them in this country ; for, said he, the family connexion that exists between M'Leod android Stavely is the cause of all this affair ; and, said he, while you con- tinue SiXXiOli^ them his /lersecuting spiric nvill folloto you."
Thomas Hazeltom.
Sworn and subscribed before me the 15th day of August, 181l»
L. Stewart.
Joseph Cooper deposeth— " That the Synod refused to let Mr. Graham have a seat; the Synod read a parcel of things against Mr. G's character, and would not suffer him to speak in vindica- tion of it. Mr. Hazelton moved, and was seconded, that the clerk cf the Synod be appointed to furnish Mr. G. with extracts fi'om the minutes, concerning the things about which he Avas to be tried, and to be given to him before his trial ; accordingly Mr. Bla-ck was appointed to have them ready for him. The Presbytery meets in Philadelphia after the Synod. Mr. Hazelton moved that the extracts be given to Mr. G. according to the appointment of Synod. Mr. Black said they were not ready. Mr. G. insisted to have them, and told the court that he would give him another day or two to have them ready. Mr. Black answered and said, he would not get them until every other body would get them— that is, when they are printed. The Presbytery proceeded to suspend Mr, G. from the exercise of his office, and Mr. G. pro- tested against their proceedings, in his own name, and in the name of all his adherents, and told them to enter his protest on the minutes ; and Mr. Hazelton protested, and told them to enter his protest on the minutes also. The Presbytery refuses to try Mr. G. and he labors, but to no purpose, for a trial. Becket "Was asked on his oath by Mr. G. if he swindled him out of two guineas \ He answered and said, " I do not say that you did, nei- ther do I think that you are cajiable of doing it.''' Mr. G. asked Becket on his oath, if he made use of his name to Mrs. Martin, in order to get two guineas from her ? He answered and said, *' / do not say it, neither do I think that you did." Mr. Wylie told Becket that he could swear to the best of his knowledge, and Mr. G. charged Mr. W. with putting words in the mouth of the wit- ness. Mr. Wylie refuses to take down Becket's cross-examina- tion, and told Mr. G. " if he seen any thing that answered him, he might take it down for himself." The Presbytery wished to have Mr. G's clei'k removed."
Joseph Cooper.
Sworn and subscribed before me the 15th day of August, 1811.
L. |Stewart.
117
"James Gormly called and sworn, deposeth — That he heard a great many reports relating to Mr. G. particularly the taylor's business of New-York, and of a pair of boots ; and it was from a member of the court. (Here the court interfered, and told the ■witness he must not say any thing to implicate a member of court*) Questions by Mr. Graham. Q. Were you enjoined not to reveal these reports by that member of court ? A. I was, and I did keep it quiet until I went into a store ; when a man mention- ed these things, asking me if I heard them. Q. Did you under- stand, that man had received them from the same member of court ? I undertood so. Q. Do you know any thing of paper* being read publicly before the congregation, which were injuri- ous to my character ? A. Yes, I heard them read in this house in the face of the congregation, and it was Mr. Black (I may- name him now.) Q. Did he explain and make comments upon them to give them a more black appearance ? Yes. Q. Did this
• Mr. G. suspected the /affja clamosa to have originated with his brethren. He believed them the chief propagators of the scandal alleged against him. His object in the questions put to the witnesses, was to have those suspicions established by legal proof. It was customary with the court when the witnes- ses were interrogated upon any subject, where they were coiiscious a direct answer would reflect upon their conduct, to interrupt the witnesses by saying, " you must not implicate a member of the coiu"t." These gentlemen in the dignified character of a court of Christ, had sworn the witnesses, as they wero lo be accountable to Almighty God, to tell the truth, the -a/hole truth, and in Jiome instances explained to the witnesses, tliat " though it vias to implicate ths •wife of their bosjms" they must tell the truth ; yet these very men had the hardihood in numberless instances, and while the above observations were glow- ing upon the minds of the witnesses, to prevent them from discharging tlieir oath. Their pretext, " lest they should implicate the court" was sophistical. To legally implicate a member of the court was one thuig, to make use of his same in giving a narrative of the -whole truths was another. The former was not immediately the object of the witness, die latter he had just obUg.ated himself upon oatli to pei-form. The assertion that tlie witness must not inculpate a memberof court is predicated upon a principle which is false. It proceeds up- on a supposition that members of an ecclesiastical court cannot be objected to legally, however much a party who appears at tlieir bar, may have been aggrieved by tliem, or whatever may be their enmit}', malice or partial dis- position towards liim. It is a supposition which conducts to absolute despotism. It compels the party to prosti-ate his conscience and character at the feet of a judicatory. It demonstrates, with the force of a volume of logical deductions, that the radical principles upon which tlie Reformed Presbytery conduct tlie go- vernment of the church are tyrannical. But even admitting die justness of the assertion " that witnesses may not inculpate members of the court," it would notapplyto this judicatory. They had voluntarily degraded themselves to the situation of witnesses. As such they laid themselves open to the attack of the defendant. If he could justly inculpate tliem, it was both his duty aivi his interest, to invalidate their evidence against him. It was their duty to submit to it, in order to do him justice. The objection made to the witnesses, indicated the situation of the court relative to tlie prosecution, to have been desperate. They were conscious that the reports pernicious to Mr. Graliam had been in- dustriously propagated by themselves ; and they had recourse to tliis unjust ei- pe^ent, to screen themselves from meritedcensuj-e.
118
member of court carry papers about and explain them in order to defame Mr. G's character ? Yes, I heard him read and ex- plain several papers after the Synod, and defend the character of Becket. — James Gormly further deponed ; that he had heard, by a flying report, that Mr, G. had got 300 dollars in Pittsburgh, and 300 from Robert Finney ; that he heard some of the mem- bers of the court before the Synod make a jest and table talk of Mr. Graham ; heard before the Synod from a member of court M. G. would be silenced ; that Mr. Hazelton would soon be back in town again, for he would not do, wanting preaching ; he knew of no means which Mr. G. ever used to alienate the minds of the people from Mr. Black, although he had sat with him several ■weeks in a religious society, when he drew his (Jas. Gormly's) affections by his good behaviour ; but there were two parties in Pittsburgh ever since there was a minister among them ; (here M'Leod wished to stop the examination of the witness, wh« went on,) that he never knew of any improper means used by Mr. G. to make a party ; that those who are called Mr. G's par- ty did not appear to wish to make a breach in the congregation, but lamented it ; that he never heard Mr. G. say any thing; against the Irish Presbytery; that he never seen any thing about Mr. Graham, but what was very becoming &c. Sec.
Samuel Wylie called, says he knows of no money being given by the congregation of Canonsburgh to Mr. G, either by gift, or as advance stipend.
Robert Finney was called by the court and sworn, deponeth in answer to questions put to him by the court, that Messrs. Hazelton and Cooper borrowed 200 dollars of him, but he was not certain to what purpose ; that he was in Philadelphia in the month of April last, and had a conversation with Mr. Wylie, ■who told him (R. Finney) that Mr. Graham had not engaged to go to Baltimore ; that he never knew of any thing to Mr. G. but what was exemplary. [Here Mr. G. put certain questions to the witness which the court would not permit him to an- swer.]
Defiosition of S. Angles.
Being called on to state any circumstances I may know rela- tive to the moral character of Oliver M. Becket, I am induced, by a regard for truth, and in compliance with the wishes of those ■who have requested the information, to observe :
That about 5 or 6 months ago, whilst I was employed in the office of the collector for the Port of Philadelphia, Oliver M. Becket, personally unknown to me, had impoi^ted some molasses, the duty on which did not amount to ^50, the sum necessary to obtain credit on a bond ; and that to secure the duties agreeable to the regulations of the office, he deposited his check on one of ■the banks, for the probable amount of said duties, until the molas- ses should be guaged. That, either on the same or following
119
day, the check was presented at bank, and refused ; either be- cause Mr. Becket had no money m the bank, or because he had neverkept an account there. Which of those reasons was assigned, I do not correctly remember. The officer having charge of the vessel in which the molasses was imported, was directed not to land it ; but the landing had taken place immediately after the check was given. The molasses was sold, and then in the store of the purchaser, where it was seized by the Surveyor of the Port, and marked for the use of the U. S. but was afterwards releas- ed to Mr. Becket or the person who purchased from him, on the duties being paid. Though a merchant may sometimes over- draw a bank without any improper motive, yet the circumstan- ces under which Mr. Becket's transaction took place, operated very powerfully on the minds of those employed in the Custom- House, against the rectitude of his intentions.
S. Engles. Sworn and subscribed before me the 14th day of Aug. 1811.
L. Stewart.
John Stevenson was called and sworn. He deposed — That in a conversation with a member of the court, (Mr. Wylie) be- fore Mr. Graham was restored. He (Mr. W.) informed him, Mr. G. would be exculpated from several of the charges alleged against him ; that on being asked what would be the conse- ejuence should the Irish Presbytery neglect to send on the pa- pers. He (Mr. W.) observed, we (meaning the Presbytery) were not to be imposed on ; that should documents not appear, they "would act without them ; that the Irish Presbytery had always acted with indifference towards them. Questions by Mr. Graham — Q. Did you ever hear it affirmed of me, I would turn out a SniiiLDS, and quit the principles of the Reformed Church ? A. I did. It was from Samuel M'Leod, who said he was informed so by those that ought to know. He (S. M'Leod) was told at the same time, that Mr. G. had transgressed, andAvouId undoubtedly transgress again, and that he Avas told so by a minister, who is now a member of this court, (Mr. Wylie). Question by Mr. Wylie. Did My. M'Leod tell you I told him so ? A. He said he received those impressions from a conversation he had with you. Question by Mr. Graham. At what time did Samuel M'Leod say he perceived a change in Mr. Wylie's conversation towai'ds me ? A. After a visit from a reverend brother (M'Leod) from New- York. Q. About what time was that? A. About the middle of last winter— After that he observed an entire change. Q. Did you ever hear any thing of the treatment I met with in New- York \ A. Yes. [The court interfered.] Mr. Graham begged permission of the court to hear the witness. The witness pro- ceeded thus : I heard that Mr. G. was a popular preacher, and that it had injured him ; that Mr. G. had supplied in Dr. M'Leod^
120
congregation; that Mr. Agnew, his (M'L's) father-in-law, had written for him ; that he had returned before half the time pro- posed, and appeared much incensed upon his return. Here the witness was interrupted, and asked by Mr. M'Leod— -From whom did you hear this ? A. From a woman, who came from New- York, whose name is Mrs. Prescot ; I likewise heard it from several members of the congregation in Philadelphia, and the report was general, and to this amount : That he (Mr. G.) had preached in the church in New-York to the satisfaction of the people, and that from the return of the pastor, hints were thrown out from the pulpit, intimating all was not right, and that it wa» the cause of much injury to Mr. G. Questio7i by Dr M^Leod-^ Did you ever converse with Mr. G. on this subject ? A. I may have conversed about it when he was present, but do not recol- lect that he made any remarks. Q. Do you know of any divisive measures prosecuted by Mr. G. ? A. No. Q. Do you know any- thing of Oliver Becket ? A. Yes, a little. Mr. Graham' — Please to relate what you know. Witness proceeded : — I had but a slight acquaintance with Becket. He called at my house in Phi- ladelphia, and told me had been in partnership with Thomas M'Nair, of Colerain, a relation of my wife, which I have learned was a falsehood. I was advised by Mr. Wylie to have no con- nexion with Becket. I was told he had left Ireland with goods to a great amount, for which, since he arrived in Philadelphia, he had been put in jail. I have learned from a letter which 1 received some time ago, that he has lately been put into jail, for large sums of money with which he had absconded, and was ar- rested in Baltimore. Here the witness produced the letter, dated July 2, 1811, from Philadelphia, and subscribed Martha Synith. The part which concerned Becket is thus : — " It will be newa to you that your friend Becket is laid up secure enough. He fled from the city with vast sums, as we are informed, and the pur- suit overtook him in Baltimore, and brought him back ; and he is in prison here, and I know not what will be the consequence." [This Mr. Wylie admitted to be fact.] Q. Do you know any thing of Andrew Jamison, who has witnessed in support of the libel I A. I understood Jamison had absconded from his employer, but am not perfectly acquainted with the circumstances. Here Mr. Wylie explained. He said, a girl had asserted she was preg- nant to Jamison ; that she was an indifferent character ; that it appeared she only wanted money ; that she proposed to take 825 from him (Jamison) and be satisfied ; he was advised to lay aside his privileges for some time ; but was restored to privilege after an investigation of his case, before the last dispensation of the Lord's Supper* in his (Wylie's) congregation.!
* Observe, the Lord's Supper was dispensed in May last, about the time ia which Wylie was displayingf much ardor and alacrity iii kwiting up «hargea
121
Questions resJimed by Mr. Graham. — Bid you hear a member of the court (Mr. Black) read papers of a defamatory nature respecting me ? A. Yes, I did hear Mr. Black read papers of that kind, at his own house. Q. Did he use any illustrations or comments upon the papers, or attempt to defend the character of any of the witnesses? A. Yes, he explained, and attempted to defend the character of Becket, and wished to insinuate that it was dangerous to make free with his (Bccket's) character ? Q. Have you known any thing immoral about Mr. G. ? A. I never did, but the reverse.
The clerk of the court (Mr. Wylie) had uniformly neglected to record any thing favorable to Mr. G. He had not recorded a single syllable of any of the depositions which appeared in his favor. Mr. G. after the depositions were finished, asked of the court a reason for such extraordinary conduct. No reason would be assigned. Mr. G. observed, " their records, since the com- mencement of the prosecution in May last, had uniforrrily injured him, and that their recent omission was in unison with what went before."
I have now, my dear friend, given you a bri^f digest of the evi- dence, adduced from liviiig witnesses, which may be regarded favorable to Mr. Graham. I Avill not call it exculpatory, fur no legal evidence has yet appeared to inculpate ; but it happily bears upon the case as explanatory, and is calculated to place perverted facts and sayings, in their proper light. It restores to disfigured incidents their true aspect. It darts a cheering ray through the darkness in which Mr. G's brethren had enveloped him, and enables us once more to recognise our much injured friend. We have followed himAvith feelings tremblingly alive for his reputation aud usefulness, and have seen him overwhelmed with reproach : we now begin to contemplate him enierging. We have traced him to his last effort before the judicatories of that church, to shake off the incumbrances of calumny. His de- fence I shall communicate in my next.
Yours, 8cc.
against Mr. G. Wylie had pledged himself to pro\e the libel. He stood in need of Jamison's aid.
f Jamison's case was investigated before Mr. Wylie and his session, and dismissed with despatch. W;is it that Jamison might glorify the Redeemer iu the communion of die supper ? Or, was it that he m:;^iit co-operate wiiU Wylie, in accoiTiplisliing the ruin of Mr. Gralum r O Priestcraft, tliou ai-t a bittei* draught !
122
LETTER IV.
MR. GRAHAM'S DEFEJ^CE.
To proceed then to the articles on which I am accused. These are many and grievous ; some of tliat kind against whicli the laws denounce severe, nay, the utmost punishments. But the whole scheme of this prosecution dis- covers all the rancour of enmity, all the extravagance, and virulence, and insolence of malice, wliicli is neither right, nor constitutional, nor just.
JLeland's Demosthenes.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I NOW proceed to Mr. Graham's Defence. I have no hope of rendering it so interesting as it was when delivered by himself. The interest wliich the matter excited, the ardor of the speaker, and the inexpressible aptitude of numberless minute circum- stances, pendent on the moment, I Avill not pretend to convey. Your imagination will help to supply the deficiency. If you paint to yourself a number of individuals sitting in judgment, affecting to act for God, having toiled near four days among reports to accomplish the degradation of one of their brethren ; thousands of respectable spectators, who had witnessed this, filled with in- dignation at the glaring injustice of the scene, and impatient to hear the defendant; the defendant himself, stimulated on the one hand by a long series of oppression — on the other, attracted by the attention of an impartial public, relying, under God, upon the firmness of his cause, proceeding to a detail of facts, urged with interest ; unceasingly appealing for the correctness of his ob- servations, to the members of the court, the auditory, the church, the world ; — paint this, and you may have an idea of those cir- cumstances which conferred a degree of interest upon this part of the scene, which I should in vain attempt to communicate bjr the most accurate expression of Mr. Graham's language or ideas. I am convinced you, my friend, are too well acquainted with the difference betv/een what is spoken and what is written, and th« disadvantages of the latter, not to make every nlloirjince.
123
The court having, on the afternoon of the 16th, signified their permission that Mr. Graham should offer his defence, Mr. G. proceeded.
ttEVEREND MODERATOR,
I am happy in being permitted at length to make some reply to the reports and surmises (for facts there are none) which are accumulated on your table in the form of testimony. It is not because I conceive a defence necessary, from legal proof, for certainly nothing deserving that name lies before you ; but from a conviction that it is my duty to endeavor to dissipate the clouds of calumny which have been industriously collected, that I should think of occupying the attention of the court for a mo- ment. A simple detail of facts, with a few explanatory remarks, will constitute the chief part of my defence. In entering upon it, I cannot help observing the inconveniencies under which 1 labor, owing to the confused method which has been pursued in the prosecution. I had reasonably enough expected, the investiga- tion would have been confined to the libel ; that nothing which was not specified there, would have appeared in judgment ; but to my astonishment, no less than to my disadvantage, the libel Avas soon dismissed, to make way for the introduction of old charges, which had leng since received merited attention, and had been dismissed, and of new reports, under the notion of a fama da- mosa. Instead, therefore, of confining my reply to the libel, I find myself compelled to pursue the involved windings of my prosecutors. They have dwelt with a never-ending and invidious satisfaction, upon the documents from Ireland. Those who have witnessed the prosecution, perhaps, are not ail aware, that the whole of the Irish affairs was discussed, first in Ireland in 1808, and in America in 1809 ; and that after bestowing censure, I was admitted to re-occupy the office of the ministry. The stress which has beed laid upon these documents, is calculated to per- vert and mislead the judgment, and to impress a conviction, that they never before were a subject of investigation ; at least, that they had not been decided. You will permit me. Sir, to direct the attention of the court to these documents for a moment.
[Here Mr. G. read the Irish documents from the printed ex- tracts, pages 5, 6, 7.]
Here, Sir, I am ciiarged with " absenting myself from my congregation (in Ireland, A. D. 1807) for a number of months, without assigning reasons for my conduct." This, moderator, I admit. In the month of December, 1807, I quitted my congre- gation, and without presbyterial leave, I quitted my country. This, Sir, was my crime. I acknowledge it. I trust I shall ex- ercise penitence for it. But it is a crime for which I have long since suffered the censures of the church, and ought not to have appeared in this court against me. Besides, the criminality at-
124
tached to this rash step -will, I humbly presume, be greatly ex- tenuated by attending to the circumstances which led to it. I de- clare most solemnly to you, Sir,'what never has, what never can be contradicted, that I tound iTiyself compelled to this unjustifia- ble measure by the viruletice of fiarty, not political, but religious ; which stands confessed, the most bitter and overwhelming source of human calamity.
I have only here to detail facts, for the truth of which I appeal to hundreds in the communion of the church in Ireland. I had been educated and licensed in the Secession church. In the year 1804, I purposed leaving it, and connecting myself with the Irish Presbytery which calls itself Reformed, chiefly on account of a docti'ine relative to the extent of the Mediatory Dominion, which was at that time in dispute. Having it in contemplation to make application to the Reformed Church, and being young and inexperienced, I availed myself of the counsels of Mr. Stavely, senior. He was the oldest member of that church — A man desti- tute of education, but whose popularity with the vulgar was un- bounded. His ambition was still more unlimited than his popu- larity. With no education, with a sonorous voice, v/ith contracted views of theology, but with no small share of duplicity, low cun- ning and intrigue, this man has continued to have the exclusive management of the Irish Presbytery. He most cheerfully coin- cided with my view's, and profusely dispensed his counsels. I was a suitable object for such a person — Unsuspecting and credulous, I was the more likely to become an €asy prey. He counselled me to make my exit from the secession church upon the footing of a declinature, and to continue in the interim, between that time and the meeting of the Reformed Presbytery, to preach to those, if any, who should adhere to my declinature. I rigidly followed his advice. I was also instructed that my declinature would be my certificate, and that with a copy of it in my hand, I should be in- stantly admitted into the church. All this I believed. After preaching to adherents five weeks, and with the declinature in my hand, I appeared before the Irish Presbytery, praying admission. Was it that the discipline of that court was essentially at enmity with common sense ? Or, was it that my juvenile popularity had stolen upon the ear of my aged counsellor, that the decision of the court was so contrary to what I had been taught to expect ? Both of these causes may have contributed; but it was, not with- out reason, chiefly ascribed to the latter. Well-meaning, but ill- advised people, had, upon the supposition of my being instantly admitted, petitioned the court from difi'erent parts of the country for a hearing. As Providence would have it, these petitions ori- ginated in apart of the country which the old gentleman had se- lected as a fertile spot for his only son, v/ho was recently licensed. To degrade, batter and disfigure the stranger, who threatened to derange his prospects, was a piece of policy perfectly congenial
125
to his feelings. Instead of being admitted upon the strength of nijr declinature, as he had taught me to believe, it was agreed, *' that they should enquire at the fiublic whether there were any thing to be objected to Mr. Graham^ s doctrine or conduct ; that a month should be given for this Jiurfiose.^ and that in the mean time Mr. G. desist from /ireaching."
I leave it with the discerning part of mankind to examine the propriety of calling upon public suffrage respecting the doctrine and conduct of a person, who had preached and acted with ap- probation but five weeks before, as a licentiate in a respectable church, and who, on the very day on which he declined their au- thority, had exhibited a part of his trials for ordination. The pro- ceeding to suspend a person from the exercise of his office, who was not under their jurisdiction, without any ostensible cause, was a violation of order and decency so flagrant, as to occasion not even a momentary doubt. While Mr. S. aimed to enervate my reputation by this public act, in eliciting reproaches from my late friends, perhaps too justly indignant at what I had done ; within the above month, he paid a visit to several parts of the church, in the vicinity where I had preached, pursuant to his own advice," on my declinature, and suspended and censured those who had heard me. With an ardor which was desei'ving of abetter cause, and setting discipline at defiance, he thrust himself upon the congregations of his brethren, appeared at the head of their ses- sions, and doomed the people to punishment. Let the candid and the feeling judge, how it must have operated upon the feelings, of an innocent young man, who had been more than ordinarily- caressed by the church in which he had been educated, unac- customed to hear the harsh din of censure, to have his character wantonly bandied about like an execi'ated effigy. The tedious month at length expired. A few abusive and insulting reports had been industriously picked up. They appeared in the form of charges. Even the people who had sustained me as a reputa- ble licentiate, had heard and sustained my specimens of trial, and ordered the remainder, on the very day I declined their autho- rity, suffered themselves to be seduced by the flattering prospect of having me lowered in the public estimation. After a very for- mal attention to these charges, on the 9th of May, 1804, I had the satisfaction to hear myself pronounced innecent, and my cha- racter relieved from the load of ignominy, under which it had tot- tered during the last four weeks. But I must not yet be admit- ted— no, not even after public suffrage had combined with my declinature to open the way for admission. I have specimens of trial assigned me to occupy my time six weeks longer. In the mean time I am again enjoined not to preach. To suspend me was not enough. The respectable community from which I had received my license must next be insulted. It would have con- taminated the Reformed Presbyterian church of Ireland, to have
126
the gospel preached by virtue of a license obtained from any other. To enquire after the reason of a measure so preposterous was vain. I did enquire the reason. None would be given. Such was the practice of the church. If you chose to dignify this with the name of reason you might. After a fruitless remonstrance, I submitted, for by that time I had learned, if I wished to be ini- tiated into their mysteries, I must submit to be blindfolded. I re- tired to my disconsolate study, where I dragged out a misera- ble existence for six weeks longer. Dui'ing this time, I had not even the sympathy of my fellow men. Indeed I did not merit it. Owing to a fatality which had doomed me to submit to the exe- crable treatment of that church, I refused to be admonished. I had imbibed a respect for their principles. I did not like to re- turn to my irritated friends. I saw myself egregiously abused, yet I was not to be shaken. At the time appointed, I delivered the specimens of trial. They were sustained ; and the business in toto referred to the next meeting of Presbytery. This was done Avithout pretending to assign a reason, and again I was strictly enjoined not to preach. I demurred. It was fruitless. I submitted. The matter, however, made a too powerful impres- sion, my spirits became depressed, I appeared to hasten to a state of consumption. I had lost, almost in^ecoverably lost, the good opinions of my fellow men. My old friends pronounced me ungrateful, and rejoiced in my affliction. Other communities pro- nounced me mad, to submit to such treatment. The Reformed Church was constitutionally insensible. They applauded the va- lour of their senior, who could with so much prowess reduce an aspiring young man. I appeared at their Pi'esbytery, calculating with certainty upon admission. But the old man was become in- veterate, and the young gentleman vras not ordained. By some unaccountable stroke of policy, I was called upon to make some concession which seemed to implicate my character. I had thus far submitted ; but to reflect indignity upon my character, to gra- tify the depraved feelings of this intriguing old man, I would not consent. He had charged me with schismatically rending tho church, alluding to those of his people who would not submit to be censured, on account of hearing me preach upon the footing of my declinature. Having asserted it, he would compel me to acknoAvledge it, and after bestowing the appellations of rascal and villain, very plentifully, clenching his fists to strike, and vo- ciferating repeatedly, with a countenance distorted with rage and revenge, that, if I should be admitted, he should abandon his seat, it was determined that neither at that time should I be admitted. Thus terminated this degrading scene. Here, sir, is a salutary specimen of the early treatment I have met with from this community. One would suppose I am reciting the annals of an Irish guard-house, rather than a Reformed Church.
127
This cooduct was too gross to escape censure. The Refbrm- ed Presbytery was now stripped of its mask, and those who had hitherto labored to justify its measures, were ashamed. Nothing could bring Stavely and his accomplices to feel, but a sense ot danger. They apprehended their popularity would suficr, and were seriously alarmed. Several sagacious persons advised, to resume my standing as a preacher upon my declinature. This the Presbytery, and the more discerning of the people, fear- ed. Such was the abhorrence with which their measures were regarded, that to have been compelled to have recourse to my ancient ground would have rent their church. To prevent this, all their vigilance and energies were exerted. Letters, petitions, and messengers were dismissed from all quarters, entreating me to desist from preaching, affecting to sympathise with my situa- tion, and to reprobate the proceedings of the Presbytery. Some pledging themselves that ample concessions would be made by Mr. Stavely, and the business should be accommodated without delay ; others menacing the Presbytery with declining their au- thority, and putting themselves under the protection of the Scotch Presbytery. Once more my credulity, and the depression of spirits which had resulted from this scene of persecution, over- came me. I desisted from adopting any definitive measure until the 5th of September, on which a committee of Presbytery had purposed to ordain Mr. Stavely, jun. The week preceding, I had been solicited to pay a visit to Mr. Stavely, sen. in hope of con- cessions and private accommodation. I was accompanied by one Thomas Mitchell, a man of a robust and vigorous constitution — and it was well I was so, for Mitchell assured me on my return, that the old gentleman had writhed and twisted himself with so much agility, in order to escape Mitchell's gripe and get upon me, who was sitting at his table, to beat me, that he felt his arms still aching. Bravo, reverend segnior. You are deservedly at the head of your party. Even a banditti of robbers would be proud of the chivalrous spirit which you possess. Could you have command- ed the manifold tortures of the inquisition into operation, with as much facility as you shook your withered arms, I should have died a thousand deaths. Your impotency is matter of joy. Had you been as potent as you are ambitious and malignant, you had bathed in blood the deluded church which submits to your des- potism.
On the 5th of September I appeared before the committee- Do not be astonished sir, I have prepared you for it, my woi'thy old antagonist, had not spent his rage. He challenges me in the presence of his brethren " to meet him time and place, and we should put an end to this business like gentlemen." This was not done until he had a pledge upon my honor, that I would not go to law with him. Detestable impostor 1 Your hoary head may, for any thing I know, come down to the gvare in bloody
128
but God forbid I should be your executioner. You have suffi- ciently impressed my mind, audi believe the minds of others,with indelible convictions of your impiety ; and that revenge must be fell indeed, which could wish to add to the distraction of mind, which hurried you on to such foul measures as those. Wretched must be the proficiency of that disciple of Christ, rather repro- bate must be that man, which after a high profession of piety of 40 or 50 years standing, could swagger with a clenched fist in a court of Christ, or challenge a brother preacher to fight a duel. It will be an argument of an age vitiated to an extreme, should your conduct cease to be abhorred !
It is unnecessary, almost, to add, that the Presbytery found it- self reduced to the necessity of disapproving of the conduct of Mr. Stavely. But they had not the courage, to arraign him at their bar, or even reprove him sharply to his face. With all his sins upon his head, unatoned and unaanealed, he continued to oc- cupy his seat, and to order the destinies of the church. After tliis scandalous outrage, they found it expedient to use entreaty. I was solicited to prepare for admission by their next meeting of Presbytery. I did so. The terms of admission were proposed, but before 1 should be admitted, something was w^anting to quiet the turbulent spirit of Stavely. They had felt for the wounds which he had inflicted upon his reputation and had perceived they had sunk in public estimation. It was proposed at this interesting cri- sis, when they had me now in their power, as a desperate remedy, that I should make some concessions. Concessions for what I They could not tell. I was urged not to demur. It was insinu- ated, as a rite of little moment to lay the evil spirit. In short I tindersood it was designed for purposes exactly similar to those proposed, by David's playing skilfully in the presence of Saul. Neither they nor I wished to see the evil spirit come upon the chief ruler. It would have been cruel to refuse a boon so small. The concessions were played off skilfully, although I solemnly declare, I neither knew them, nor know now what they were. But they answered our immediate purpose. The evil spirt was hushed, but not expelled. Iwas admitted.— After a suspension on the rack of thirty weeks, after my office and reputation most inhu-. manly mangled, after my health was reduced, and my heart near- ly broken, after being reduced to the necessity of parting with my books to answer demands, and after I had been insulted again and again, and hunted for the precious life, I was admitted a licentiate of the Reformed church. — I soon found however that the admission was rather nominal than real. Rancor and revenge still brooded on the heart of Stavely. The members of the Pres- bytery were still his slaves. To treat me with distance, and practice illiberality and insults, became the watchword of the par- ty. To villify and affront me were a meritorious act. In every part of their communion, which had not been perfectly aware of the
129
treatment I had received. I was treated with insolence and con- tempt. Common decency would have been expected to a stranger, but the accustomed civilities of life were absolutely denied. Such was the indefatigable attention paid to this subject, that a dispo- sition to traduce me gained upon the people daily, until at length it threatened to overwhelm me in the very congregation whither I had fled as an asylum. To it you may trace my emigration to America.*
My treatment from first to last in that Presbytery, which con- tinued three years, was conducted on principles hostile to the happiness of man, and destructive of society. I became at once an object of disgust, and my cries under the torture, only ren- dered me more hateful, and them more obdurate and unrelen- ting.t
* Mr. G. oug-ht ever to bless God, for the happy issue in which this scene of illiberal ti'eatment terminated, in the possession of an asylum in a free land.
It is to be regretted, he had benefited so little by experience : Tliat he suf- ferred himself to be seduced by the fair speeches of those who lay in wait to deceive. He had known enougli of the candor and friendship of tlie Reform- ed church; he had perceived its unjust and tvi'annical proceedings, to be the result of a depi'aved and vitiated taste, rather tlian incidental occurrences. He had no apology for confiding' with it, his reputation and office, a second time. He had experienced the Reformed church the same in all countries. Its government an inquisition ; its discipline grafted upon the vilest passions of the human heart. If it have human happiness for its object, it certain- ly promotes it very indii-ectly. By those who wish to make die trial, it will be found, witli a few excepiions, a sink of anarchy and misanthropy containing' a thousand things repulsive to a generous and candid mind.
f This was a consequence to be expected, from a number of men vmder the tlesig'nation of a court, suffering themselves to be regulated by passion and ca- price. They had no code of laws, to which one could appeal, wlicn one felt disposed to demur or remonstrate. They never pietended to appeal to any. Their uniform way of manag-ing business was, to predetermine in private, what wa§ to be transacted in public. It was no matter what evidence appeared, or how clear and fair the matter stood — ihey had already decided. If t;iey deigned to reason, which the fl agrant injustice of the case sometimes requh-ed, tlieir reasoning was designed to darken and bewilder. They threw clouds upon what was already too clear for their jjurpose, and recurred, in the darlsSiess which they had produced, to their predetermined decisions. Having- notlnng to direct them but their fears, attachments, ambition and jealousy, every thing was con- ducted in subordination to these. In such a community, the most unprincipled is often the leader. Wiien die passions, and not fixed principles, are the stand- ju'd, the desperado who excites fear, or the intriguing dissembler, who gains upon the good opinions of his brethren, will be found to preside. No peopie, .who had the least respect for character, could have bella^■ed as tills Presbytery did. But what have they to feai-, who under the pretext of religion have been taught to treat their fclloA- men widi c<intempt, and who have the matter so well arranged, that tile people dare look no v. here else for direction or suc- cor, witliout believing in their consciences that tliey have violated their prin- ciples.
Reformed Presbyterians, permit mc to solicit your attention to this subject
a little. Do yon not feel for tlie reputtation oi' your brethren ? Are you not griev-
R
130
The Reformed Church was not the only source of bitterness, after I acceded to it. The disposition of my old friends to reta- liate, on account of the offence which they had taken at quitting their communion, combined with the unprovoked enmity of the Reformed Presbytery. Among the former I had been much ca- ressed. The wrath, incident to provoked friends, stimulated them to conspire my hurt, upon relinquishing their communion. They only waited an opportunity. This opportunity was soon furnish- ed by my settlement. I had been presented with two calls in the Reformed chufch.' One of them solicited me to the pastoral charge of a congregation, the principal part of which consisted of my old acquaintance, some of whom had declined the Seces- sion church at the same time I did. It was in the parish which gave me birth, and where I had spent my boyish days* Of this call I accepted. The principal part of the religious communion which surrounded us belonged to the Secession. They conspir- ed with the disaffected of the Reformed church to watch my steps. They agreed in wresting my words, and in misrepresent- ed and indignant with their conduct ? I am well aware they did not forsee all the consequences. They perhaps never dreamt their manreuvres should meet the public eye ; at least they knew their remedy — only raise the hue and cry, of he- retic and apostate, and tlie spirit of enquiry should soon be laid. But, sir, you was not an original actor in this scene, and however you profess attachment to your brethren, I hope so much virtuous shame yet remains, as to bring you to the blush, in the presence of such criminal absurdities. Whetlier, sir, do you most admire the generosity of your brethren, in the specimen of liberality whicli they practised upon a young stranger, whom they had inveigled, or their au- dacity in defending tlie barbarous conduct of their ruthless chief? Would yoa not think it for tlie honor and salvation of that Presbytery, to take shairie and confusion of face unto itself, to employ their discpiline, in one instance at least, rationally, by correcting Mr. Stavely, and ridding themselves of that load of guilt which remaiiis unexpiated ? It is a poor apology to saj;^, he was never for- mally criminated. It is sapng- in fact your discipline is radically, and perhaps irremediably defective, and the administration of your church vitiated to an ex- treme. Would it not have been more consistent in the Irish Presbytery to have discovered a little spirit in defending tlieu* owti honor against the impudent measures of Mr. Stavely, tlian in calling upon the American church to renevr the persecution of one who had already suffered too much ? Do you not think, sir, tliey would liave consulted botli their own honor and yours, by sujjpressing their dastardly m.alice ? And are you not seriously ashamed, that your Ameri- can brethren suffered tlieir passions so far to seduce them, as to take measures to despatch the victim which the Irish Presbytery had singled out ? But they were kindred spirits. They felt alike on this subject, and d)ey acted accordingly.
* Mr. Graham was born and raised in the p;irish of Ballyrashane, county An- trim, Ireland. At the time he quitted the Secession church, many of his fellow- parishioners imitated his example. Those also connected themselves with the Reformed church, and co-operated with others, in order to have him settled among them as their pastor. They were successful. Mr. G. was ordained on the nth of December, 1805, in the parish to which he owed his birth, in the midst of his most familiar acquaintances. Let this be recollected by those who ignorantly and impiously inveigh against his reputation and office.
131
ing my actions. They embittered my life beyond description, by their incessant reproach. Two years I spent in this unhappy si- tuation. During this time I had contracted some small debts, particularly in purchasing a farm, pi'ocuring farming utensils, commencing house-keeping, See. The wrath of party at last spent itself upon me, with so much uni*elenting vehemence, that I despaired of ever being happy, in either the Reformed church or my native country. I, in short, became tlie victim of despond- ing melancholy. I concluded there was no hope of amelioration. I determined both to abandon my congregation and my country. Mv utmost wish was to enjoy society, unembittered by resentment, disaffection, or malice. I had not a friend in the Reformed cluirch whom I could trust with my secret. Their unprovoked suspi- cion and aversion, precluded the possibility of either asking their counsel, or putting confidence in it. My secret continued my own. It preyed upon my spirits — When I determined to quit my country. I was involved in a sum of debt. It was compara- tively small, but to me it was serious. I conceived, if I should make known my intentions, I should meet with little sympathy. It would have no other tendency, I thought, than to alarm my creditors. Had I been determined to remain in my congrega- tion, the article of debt could not have injui'ed me ; but upon revealing my wish to emigrate, I well knew, situated as I was, it would not only destroy my reputation, but probably subject me to the gripe of my creditors. With all these gloomy im- pressions before me ; what I had suffered most unreasonably from the Reformed church ; what I had suffei^ed from my friends of the Secession ; the threatened destruction of my respectability and usefulness ; the danger of disclosing my circumstances, and the probable prospect of yet being happy, I determined to emi- grate privately. I did emigrate, accompanied by no other than Mrs. G. and without having acquainted any, unless my younger brother, with my design. This, sir, I acknowledge. I acknow- ledge it as my crime, into which I was impelled by stern occur- rences, combined with a too exquisite sensibility. Surely the circumstances which conducted to it will enlist the feeling heart, and greatly mitigate the delinquency.
The Ii'ish documents, sir, charge me secondly with " present- ing a false certificate to niinisters in London." This I admit, sir, I have acknowledged my repentance for it, and do still ac- knowledge my repentance. Were it not that some of my bre- thren have commented on this article with an aggravation which I am persuaded it does not deserve, I should not have offered a word in mitigation of the offence. But I am compelled to ani- madvert and explain.* We are, sir, the creatures of circum-
* The court had, during the whole prosecution, dwelt with an invidious aa- Hsfaction upon the Irish papers. These very papers which tliey had before them m 1809, when they agreed to restore Mr. G. to the ministry. They founi
152
stances. One -wroni^ step is necessarily followed by many others^ before an opportunity is presented of either detecting or amend- ing it. If the original offence which I have given to the religious' world, admitted of extenuating circumstances, much more the transaction in London. What feeling heart, conscious of the in^ firmities of humanity, and acquainted with the circumstances in ■which I was involved, would not make many allowances. I has- tened from Ireland to London. When I arrived, I possessed only eighteen guineas. I was accompanied by Mrs. G. far advanced in a state of pregnancy. I, equally unknowing and unknown. No person, who has not visited London, can have any conception of the alarming situation of a person, circumstanced as I was. I sat down gloomy and distressed, cast about in my mind what was best to be done, I was unacquainted with business, and had I understood it perfectly, there was no possibility of succeeding without an introduction. I used every effort, by advertising in the newspapers, and forcing myself upon the attention of indi- viduals, particularly agents for academies, to obtain the place of a librarian, a writer for some pei-iodical publication, a translator^ or a teacher in an academy. I did not succeed. There was only one resource remained. I had been a preacher. Although I had forfeited the exercise of the office, I still believed I was not yet judicially deprived of it. This afterwards proved correct, for my suspension did not take place until March following, which was at least four months after my arrival in London. I had, moreover^ the habits of preaching unimpaired. In this crisis, surrounded with the most alanning and excruciating circumstances, threat- ened with the horrors of want, and anticipating every moment the confinement of Mrs. G. and the increase of my family, I de- termined to frame a note of introduction to one of the ministers^ bearing that I was a clergyman, in possession of my office, and on my way to America ; all of which was literally true. This I presented. It had the desired effect. The horrific blackness which had collected around me dissipated, and, like Jacob's lie, it be- came instrumental in procuring the blessing. By a train of cir- cumstances, to which this occasion gave rise, I was provided for in London, until, by a most singular providence, God opened a door to emigrate to America. This, sir, is the " head and front of my offence, no more." It is the offence with its extenuating- circumstances, and differs as much, I humbly presume, from 2
that these documents, followed up with their own official sanction, contained some specious ground for crimination ; and ahliough both they, and their Irish brethren, had previously judged and decided upon them, their desponding cir- cumstances compelled them to have recourse to them in the late prosecution. It appeared they .designed by a tedious and virulent exaggeration of tliese do- cuments, to prejudice the people. They were not without hope, of so com- pletely confounding the matter wliich lay before them, as to impress the minds •f their auditors, that the Irish charges had never before been discussed.
153
deliberate attempt to impose, as a man's stealing bread, in the jaws of starvation, differs from public robbery. If there is anjf^ tiling more necessary to offer in extenuation of the offence, it is, that no living creature was in the least degree injured by that certificate. Perhaps, few illegal steps have been productive of more real good, and less positive injury. When I reflect upon my situation in London, I am struck with a kind of involuntaiy inipulse, exciting me to bless a compassionate God, that I was restrained from greater acts of violence.
The Irish documents have charged me further, "with con-- tracting debts without a prospect of payment." This, sir, is not true. This I never acknowledged. My debts, at the time I emi-' grated, did not amount to more than 220/. Irish money, or about 900 dollars. The farm which I then occupied, has, since my de- parture, sold for half that sum. My farming utensils, furniture, books, &c. were equal to the other half. I possessed property which amounted in value to every cent I owed — how then could it have been asserted of me, any more than those of the many thousands who are in debt, but have property to answer it, that I contracted debts Avithout probable means of liquidating them ? Had I been certain that I should have been permitted to dispose of this little property advantageously, I knew I could have an- swered the principal part of the payments. But I despaired of this. I determined, therefore, to abandon my prop>erty and my country together, and to trust the Supreme Disposer of all, for future means to satisfy the demands of my creditors. To take the advantage, therefore, of my absence, and make one of the most difficult assertions in the world, that I " contracted debts without probable means of liquidating them," was as ungenerous as it was untrue.
The Irish documents, sir, charge me further with " artifice, fraud and swindling," in contracting my debts.
On what grounds, Sir, does this serious charge rest ? I. " Having procured a sum of money from Widow Rea, and be- ing importuned to pay it, obtained money from Samuel Taylor, an elder in the church, for the express purpose of paying her, which he did not." Admit this transaction to be exactly what it is here stated, is this swindling ? Had they proven, that Mr. Taylor gave the sum, not only expressly for the purpose of pay- ing Mrs. Rea, but that he (Mr. Taylor) agreed to acknowledge the payment of Mrs. Rea as a full discharge for the money he lent, then supposing the money not paid to Mrs. Rea, the Pres- bytery had been correct in calling the transaction by the name of fraud. But if Mrs. Rea has still Mr G's. promissory note, which she certainly has, she is not swindled. Again, if Mr. Taylor re» eeived Mr. G's promissory note for the money lent to pay Mrs. Rea^ v/hich he certainly did, (witness the letter of James Nes- bitt, read in your court, demanding the payment of tlus sum by
134
virtue of Mr. G's promissory note) then Mr. Taylor was not swindled. Admitting- the fact to be what it is here stated, wliat would it amount to ? Certainly this — that Mr. G. obtained a sum of money of Samuel Taylor, for which he gave him his promis- sory note, telling Mr. T. at the same time, that it was to pay- Mrs. Rea, and that Mr. T. found out afterwards, Mrs. R. wa» not paid. Now, all this, sir, is perfectly consistent with integi'ity. The debt contracted with Mrs. R. on a promissory note, is con- sistent with integrity. The sum borrowed from Mr. T. on a pro- missory note is consistent with integrity. The informing Mr. T. at the time the note was given, that the sum would go to pay Mrs. R. was consistent with integrity. The devoting the sum afterwards to the payment of a more pressing debt, was consis- tent with integrity. All the parts of the transaction, separately and conjunctly, therefore, are perfectly consistent with the most rigid integrity. What then could induce the members of Pres- bytery to attribute to such a transaction, the terms " falsehood^ artifice and swindling !" The only circumstance in all this, upon which malice itself could ground a surmise, is that where they represent me saying, I would pay Mrs. Rea, but did not. Now, sir, to justify this surmise, they were bound to prove that at the time I borrowed the sum, and informed Mr. T. that I designed to pay Mrs. Rea, I actually designed otherwise ; and then it would amount only to a falsehood, but not to fraud. But this they have not proven — this they could not prove. My devoting the money afterwards to some other purpose, will not prove it. For I may have seriously determined to devote the money to one purpose when I borrowed it, and may have afterwards been compelled to devote it to another. This article, sir, as ranked by the Irish Presbytery under the head of falsehood, artifice and swindling, can evince nothing but an abuse of terms, a fell dispo- sition to injure, and an unprecedented attempt to butcher cha- racter !
2. " Immediately before he left the country, he obtained sti- pend from his congregation in advance, that he might satisfy some creditors, which he did not, nor account with his congregatioa for it." This, sir, I regret to be compelled to say it, is a direct falsehood. I received no stipend in advance ; and so far from not accounting with the congregation, they are indebted to me. This transaction is as follows: — Some time previous to my leaving Ireland, I received of Samuel Pollock, of Dumbo, on the behalf of that part of the congregation, the sum of three pounds, sixteen shillings, in part of the price of a horse, which for two years before they had purposed to bestow. This, sir, must be the transaction which, with a little distortion and ag- gravation, must have furnished ground for that part of the state- ment which says, " I received stipend in advance." — The con- gregation, sir, owed me at the time of my departure. I was paid
135
my stipend quarterly. It was 52 guineas per annum, or on© guinea per week. On the first of November, I had been paid in full. From that time until the II th of December, when' I quitted the congregation, was about six weeks. This, at the usual rate, was six guineas. On the night I departed, I ^3.rs my younger brother the amount upon the congregation, Aviih directions to settle for the three pounds, sixteen shillings, I had received as a gift, and to give the balance of the six guineas to Daniel Parks, from whom I had received three guineas in loan. This account jny brother wrote me he presented, but was not accepted, the congregation assigning as a reason, that " Mr. Graham had not completed the quarter, which was their time of payment, and therefore there was nothing due." This, sir, is the transaction— I pledge myself for the truth of it — to which the Presbytery al- ludes, in the second item which they adduce to prove artifice and swindling. That I received stipend in advance, I repeat it, is a falsehood ; it Was the price of a horse. That I did not account with my congregation for it, is a falseoood ; for whether you view the sum of three pounds, sixteen shillings, as a gift or as stipend, the congregation had six weeks of my time for it, or by contract, six guineas. That " I did not satisfy any of my creditors" with this small sum, is certainly more than the Presbytery would have said, had they considered their own reputation. Had the Presby- tery a list of my creditors, or of my debts ? Are they certain that all my creditors informed them, I did not give them the said three pounds, sixteen shillings ? How did the Presbytery come to know, that not one of the number of creditors I had, received either the whole or a part of this little sum ? Certainly, sir, nothing ought to have been advanced in a case of so much magnitude, but what was well documented ; and where, sir, v.here, I ask you, would they find men who could swear, or men ot character who would even positively assert, that this sum did not go to some one of my creditors I
The third item, sir, is as folloAvs : — " The week before he went away, he obtained money from Daniel Parks, which he pronnised to pay in a few days, but did not." I shall merely observe upon this, that I received three guineas from D. Parks ; that I gave an order on the congregation who were indebted to me, v/ith di- rections that part of the sum should go to pay Mr. P. ; that the congregation not accepting the account, consequently he remained unpaid ; and that I hold myself responsible to Mr. P. for the sum of three guineas. The person who can find artifice and swindling in this, must be deficient in a knowledge of the terms. Even admitting the fact stated to be true, that I did not pay at the time specified, it amounts to no more than protracting payment ; and although it is a practice by no means commendable, yet were every person, who in the business of life protracts payment, and •lisappoims his creditors; to be designated a swindler, a very great
136
proportion of mankind, perhaps of the reverend court who use4- this language, should class under the head of swindling.
But, sir, it would be an endless task to attend to the excep- tionable parts of the Irish documents separately. I deny the fourth item adduced in support of ai'tifice, Sec. ; that I either informed, or directed any person to inform, my creditors, on the morning of my auction, that I would pay them in a few days. The statement contradicts itself. If my necessities were such, that I called upon my creditors to make prompt payment for the articles they should purchase, it is unreasonable to suppose, I should teach them to expect immediate payment, or that they should have believed me, had I done so. Again, sir, I affirm the fifth item to be false, which asserts, that by insinuations^ and ivithoui amj return^ I ob- tained money of Samuel Taylor. I obtained money of him upon my promissory notes. Was this a mere insinuation ? A demand of payment by James Nesbitt, predicated upon these promissory notes, has been read before this court. These promissory notes, as legal security, will constrain payment in America, as well as in Ireland. Are these to be ranked with mere insinuations, or to be pronounced artifice, juggling and swindling ? My trans- actions with Mr. Taylor are perfectly conformable to those laws by which credit in all parts of the world is regulated. How then could the Presbytery assert that I made no return^ or bestow upon legal transactions the invidious name of insinuations ?
I shall only observe upon the sixth and last item — That I may have asked money of Alexander Kennedy is very possible j that he was Mr. Taylor's clerk is possible, although it was ge- nerally understood he had a share in the business ; but that I ask- ed this money in collusion with Kennedy, to defraud Mr. Taylor, as the statement invidiously insinuates, is what the Pi'esbytery ought to have substantiated by legal pi*oof, before they had ven- tured to adduce it in support of a charge.
These, sir, were the disingenuous measures to which our Irisk brethren were compelled to have recourse to degrade me. Ta have contented themselves with the mere assertion that I was in .debt, would have been justice, but would not have answered their purposes. They found it necessary to give a little prominenof to the parts, and by an artful transition, to bestow the name of .fraud upon honest debts. This they found the more practicable, ;that I was not present to defend myself, and that the irritated .creditors felt no disposition to oppose their measures by a cor- rect statement of facts. The method which they adopted in pro- curing these statements, to which they afterwards gave the name of documents, was unprecedented. Not one of those persons whom they dignified with the appellation of witnesses, was sworn. Their verbal statements were sustained as facts, and without anj explanation on my part, they were recorded with whatever co- loring disaffected persons thought proper to bestow. Do any
137
of the items, sir, adduced to prove fraud actually evince it. Where is the proof? Certain facts are stated, but Avhere are the witnes- ses to support them ? What a perversion of justice, what an as- sassination of character is here ! Either, sir, the Irish Presbytery- must present the proof on which they ventured their grievous statements abroad, or they must lie under the imputation, of a licentious and impious attack upon one of their brethren.
How do matters now stand between the Irish Presbytery and myself ? I agree "with the Irish Presbytery, that I quitted my congregation abruptly, and violated my ordination vows. I agree with the Irish Presbytery that I framed a certificate in London. I agree with the Irish Presbytery that I contracted debts in Ire- land. But I deny that I ever defrauded or designed to defraud any man. This they were obligated to prove. This they have not proven. This they can never prove. I put them, I put my prose- cutors, I put the world to defiance, to prove I have ever de^r frauded. I have contracted debt ; I acknowledge that debt, and I am determined to liquidate it to the last farthing.
These explanations, sir, I offered at the solicitation of the Presbytery who took measures for my restoration in 1809. I appeal to the members of this court who were then present, whether that explanation and this, do not correspond. You have, in your printed extracts of that court, alluded to certain " ex- planatory remarks" and acknowledged, " that they were receiv- ed by the court as, in some instances, a mitigation of the crimi- nality of his (Mr. G's) conduct."* The explanation there given, ought, at least in substance, to have appeared upon your records. Had they appeared, they would have precluded the use of those remarks which I have now been compelled to offer. — There is one thing I cannot refrain from observing. These documents were not printed in 1809 ; they were not in the original manuscript prepared for the press, and in the possession of Dr. M'Leod ; they do not even now, when printed, contain my explanatory re- marks. These circumstances compel me to suspect partiality and inimical intentions in my brethren. Indeed I can hardly conceive how a church which wished to preserve the usefulness of one of its ministers, could prevail upon itself to expose him soAvantonly, so unnecessarily, as those printed extracts have ex- posed me. No, sir, were there no other circumstance, this alone would speak for itself
I have made those strictures, sir, upon the Irish documents, with a design to remind my brethren of those things which I have acknowledged to be correct^ Siiid for tu hick J have professed refien- tance ; to refute those calumnies which have sprung up among the people, have received the sanction of ecclesiastical judicatories "without investigation or proof, and have been published along
• See printed extracts, page 7. S
138
■«rith the printed extracts of the late Synod, to destroy my repu- tation. I hope none will mistake this for a defence, as if the Irish documents had never before been the subject of investigation and decision. I fear this is the impression v^^hich some wish to make, by dwelling so largely upon them. I do not wish it to be under- stood, that I have by my reply, countenanced such a violation of decency. You are well aware, sir, that these charges, whether true or false, were sustained by the Irish Presbytery ; and that they proceeded to rest upon them, the highest censures <}£ the church. Your Presbytery of 1809, sanctioned the proceedings of the Irish Presbytery. Your own records pronounce me absolved from the scandal attached to those charges, and restored to the office of the ministry. To publish these charges, to introduce them into this court, and comment upon them in this trial, are measures so glaringly unjust, as to require no labored illus- tration.
I have asserted, the Irish Presbytery proceeded to punish on the presumption the charges were proven. For proof of this, I refer you to the Irish documents, dated Colerain, November 10, 1868, printed extracts, page 5. " After mature deliberation, " the committee agreed that the Rev. D. Graham be deposed " from the office of the holy ministry." I have asserted that your judicatories in America have recognized the proceedings of the Irish church. In proof of this, I refer you to your own re- cords; printed extracts, page 7, dated May I7th, 1809. " After " perusing this (the Irish) document, it was moved that this (the " American) judicatory recognise the act of the Irish Presbytery, " deposing Mr. Graham ; and it was unanimously agreed to re- " cognise it. The Presbytery adopted as its own, the sentence *' of deposition, passed by its sister judicatory." I have asserted, that your judicatories absolved me from the scandal, delivered me from the sentence, restored me to my office. I refer you for proof of this to your own records, printed extracts, pages 8, 9. *' After much deliberation on the case of Mr. Graham, it was *' resolved to take measures for his restoration to office — he was *' solemnly rebuked—and absolved from the censure under which " he lay, so far as it respected his private standing, and restored " to the privileges of christian communion." Again ; page 7. " It appeared from the minutes of the Presbytery that — a com- " mittee was appointed with authority to restore him (Mr. G.) *' The minutes of said committee testified, that Mr. Graharai "had been by them restored to the holy ministry."
■ Here, sir, we have the most decisive documents, the record* of the judicatories themselves, attesting, that these charges have been investigated, and that I have been punished, ab- solved, i-estored.— With what pretensions to justice, I again ask, have these charges been produced, on this occasion ? How will
13*
my prosecutors apologise for a measure so disorderly and op- pressive ? Their object is manifestly to confound, darken and perplex the investigation ; and through the clouds conjured up at this crisis, to prejudice the public mind. Alas ! Sir, while they toil in dragging into public notice, things which ought to have existed no where but in the private records of the church ; while they are commenting upon, and aggravating for hours together, those rash steps for which I have been doomed to the severest censure; while they are laboring ',to prejudice the minds of my fellow men afresh ; while they are propagating scandal out of occurrences of several years standing, from which scandal their own records pronounced me absolved ; — While they do so, ean they be ignorant that they are violating all order and all law ? What man, not the consummate slave of party, would not feel it his interest to oppose such proceedings ! What ho- nest, reflecting mind, would not abhor a procedure so hostile to the rights of man ! Or how can confidence be reposed in the government of judicatories, who support without evidence, and condemn without hearing ; who punish for a crime, absolve from, the offence, restore to privilege, and afterwards resume the charges with as little ceremony, as if no decision had been previ- ously passed ! But I dismiss a matter, the inconsistency of which is so palpable ; and proceed to call the attention of the court to
the LIBEL.
You will permit me, sir, before I enter upon the merits of the libel, to premise a few things relative to its constitutionality and grounds. If I be not egregiously mistaken, I hold in my hand a paper bearing the designation of a libel, which, whether avc .view it as to its origin or form, is indescribably disgraceful to those who framed it. It possesses not a single requisite of a li- bel. It has originated in a source unprecedented and illegal. This I shall undertake to prove.
1. It appears, from an accumulation of evidence before the court, that the fama clamosa which aliened the nvay to this process, has been chiefly propagated by my brethren. I beg no person will suspect me for an undue solicitude to traduce my prosecutors. I am compelled to sift the case, to detect illegal measures, and to expose them to merited censure, in order to do justice to my cause. My brethren cannot tax me with either indelicacy or disorder, while I labor to drag into public view, those secret measures which have plotted my ruin. They have laid them- selves open, sir, to my attacks, upon the most scrupulous prin- ciples of justice, by assuming the character q/* witnesses. Let THIS BE RECOLLECTED. I avcr, then, that this process, with the causes which gave rise to it, has originated with my brethren- There are sufficient documents before you, sir, to justify this assertion. Even before I made my appearance in the western country, we are instructed by the deposition)* of the witnesses,
140
in thft indiscreet measures which were industriously em» ployed, to obstruct the people's confidence in me ; that one of my brethren (Dr. M'Leod) poured in letters from the east, with " dark insinuations" and ominous predictions, that the " Church** Head ivoidd discover the man (Mr. G.J one day ;"* that another was in the habit of exposing- these letters, with his usual com- ments, and that he was laboring to impress the iijnds of his confidents with such expressions as these — " Mi: G. is a pofiular man., but his jnotix<es are -vanity ^and the like"*^ — " JVo place will an- swer him (Mr. G.) but frifipering through a city"^ — and when lan- guage failed this gentleman, he had recourse to such butchering phrases as this : there is something the matter with Mr. G. but " weave not able to put a name on it .'"§ After my arrival in the west, the deponents substantiate the following facts : That one of my brethren (Dr. M'Leod) spoke, in a confidential conversa- tion, of " cutting off Mr. G. at once," merely because no person would undertake to guarantee him, that Mr. G. was '•^ a friend to the Redeemer., and t*i Reformation princi/dcs ;*' that he propaga- ted reports of " money borrowed in Baltimore to a large amount" which was false, and expressly asserted, that " Mr. Graham must be dcgraded."\\ Sufficient evidence is before you, to ac- quaint you with the alacrity and zeal of another brother (Mr. Wylie) in propagating similar reports ; in particular, that he prompted Becket ; that he published his story, with similar re- ports, in a letter directed t-^ New- York ;1j that a short time pre- vious to this trial, he exerted himself to defame Mr. Graham, within the bounds of his own congregation ;* that some time about the middle of last winter, he expressed himself " Mr. G. ivould turn out a Shields" i. e. an apostate ; " that he would un- doubtedly fall again, as he had fallen once"] See. You have the most copious and explicit documents before you, to acquaint you with what assiduity a third brother (Mr. Black) drudged, in propagating scandal in the west. One witness suggests a con- versation with Mr. B. in which something defamatory to Mr. G. was communicated, with an imposition of solemn obligations, not to divulge it-t Another informs you, that he heard a great many reports, relating to Mr. Graham, particularly the tailor's business of New-York, and of a pair of boots, and that it was from a mem- ber of the court (Mr. Black) ; that he was enjoined not to re-veal them ; that Mr. G. was Mr. B's jest and table-talk ; that Mr.
* Narrative, p. 112, 113. f ^^'^^ P- ^'^- * P- ^l^. § p. 113. \\ p. 114.
II See Wylie's oath ; his letter to the Synod, to which tlie depositions of Messrs. Hazelton and Cooper refer, painted with high coloring: the scandalous storv which he had from Becket. It fully supports what is affirmed above. It is further confirmed by the free circulation of it through Wylie's congregation.
* See the depositions of Samuel Scott and John M'HafFey, p. 89, 90. t See the deposition of John Stevenson, p. 119.
t See the deposition of James Millar, p. 99.
141
Black carried about fiajiers and exfilained them, in order to defame Mr. G's character,"* See. And that " since Mr. Black returne^l from the south (?. e. after Mr. G. had arrived in Black's neigh- borhood) he was in the habit of informing numbers, that there w&re certain charges to be preferred against Mr. G. at the Synod, Jbr which he would be dejiosed." Afotirth (Mr. Riley) discovered so much zeal, that, on seeing Baehr's advertisement, he applied first to one, and then to another, to write a letter with the adver- tisement enclosed, and transmit it to one of the members of Mr. G's congregation, who lived his nearest neighbor, and at last suc- ceeded.f I have it also from good authority, that a ^fth (Mr. M'Master) addressed a letter to your reverence, moderator, with such an enclosure. — Yes, sir, although I could not get my eye upon one of those precious advertisements, they were so plenti- fully scattered through the western country, that some of mjr disaffected neighbors, who were trusted Avith the plot, could boast they had Tivo of them,and that Mr. Black had more."' Fron> those scraps, sir, picked up in the course of this tedious trial, notwithstanding the most vigilant and prompt measures to pre- vent all such information, you may ascertain the source of the fama clamosa, upon which the libel is pi'edicated. They consti- tute an index of discovery. Like a few scattered fragments of ore, they indicate the existence of a mine in their neighborhood. Those who consider them, will be at no loss to ascertain the medium through which those charges were propagated, nor yet the source in which the process took its rise. I trust, for the ho- nor of humanity, such practices are as rare as they are disingenu- ous. Had the charges been notorious, the prosecutors would havp consulted their honor in taking them up. But if they have been also the propagators of the scandal, which is but too obvious, it gives to the prosecution a most disgraceful appearance. When J. view these transactions, sir, in connexion with this prosecution ; when I am compelled, by irresistible evidence, to contemplate my judges in the light of propagating the very scandal on which they are waiting to give judgment, I cannot help anticipating pernicious consequences. This is an unusual way of addressing a judge, sir, but in the existing circumstances, it appears th* most rational.
• Seethe deposition of James Gormly, p. 117, 118, and of Thomas Hazelto^ ip. 113.
f This gentleman had flattered himself with the hope of the congreg-ation of Canonsburprh. After Mr. G's arrival in the west, that hope vanished. Ebullitioiji of spleen followed. The advertisement was, of course, gulped down with shark- like avidity. The gentleman to whom he first applied, to aid him in his dirtf work was George S later, of W.allkill. The person with whom he succeed- ed was James Clarx, of .Xewburgh. The virtuoso to whom he addre«edi$ WAS. John M'Farland, of Canonsburgh.
U2
9. This libel was ft'amed without any regard paid to its rele- vancy or grounds, contrary to the general and approven princi- ples and practices of the church. No charges, not even a Jama clamosa, ought to be framed into a libel, until the nature of the charge be enquired into ; the source in which it originated ; the grounds upon which it rested, and the probability of proof. I re- fer for proof of this to the general directions given in the New Testament, for the commencement of processes against offen- ders— such as the direction given by our Lord in the 18th of Matthew, respecting a private case, which may at length become public. The words of the apostle, 1 Tim. v. 19. « Against an el- der receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.* Gal. V. 12. "I would they were cut off that trouble you." The apostle was aggrieved by their offences ; yet he would not, al- though invested with apostolical authority, commence a process against them. Matters were not ripe for it. He wisely calculates ©n consequences, and confineshimself to wishes, rather than pro- ceeds to acts. These Scriptures, shew, at least, that judicatories are bound to use great caution in receiving reports ; to enquire how offences have become public, and to beware of entering pro- cesses on slight grounds. I refer further to Stuart's Collections, a digest of regulations adopted by the Reformed church, in their purest periods of reformation, and to which reference is had by all Presbyterian churches in common. — Book iv. title iv. section 9.
" Yet Presbyteries may proceed against ministers, when a fama clamosa of the scandal is so great, that for their own vindi- cation, they find themselves obliged to begin the process without any particular accuser, after they have enquired into the rise, occasion, broachers and grounds of the said common fame."
Book iv. title iv. section 3 — " The relevancy of the libel is the justness of the proposition, whether the matter of fact subsumed be proven or not ; and, therefore, if the thing offered to probation be obviously irrelevant and frivolous, it ought to be rejected, and not admitted to proof. For nothing is to be admitted by any- church judicatory as the ground of a process for censure, but what hath been declared censurable by the word of God. The relevancy of a libel is so much to be regarded, that, I think, it is unlawful for any to be either witnesses or members of inquest upon irrelevant libels. What ? Is not this to be a witness against thy neighbor without cause^ Prov. xxiv. 28. It was a truth that Abi- melech the priest gave hallowed bread, and the sword of Goliah to David ; yet it was a bloody sin for Doeg the Edomite, to in- form the wicked king against the Lord's priest."
This, sir, is to the point. For example — If I, as a minister set for the defence of the gospel, justly suspected one of my bre- thren guilty of an ambition which threatened the injury of the church, and should communicate my fears to a brother in con- fidence ; or if in a confidential conyer&ation with a friend of the
us
•hurch, I should complain that I had received evil treatment ; is this to be sustained as a relevant charge ? Certainly not. This would preclude all confidence, prevent the use of precaution* against growing evils, destroy freedom of speech and enquiry, compel one to suffer by another without daring to complain, and is, upon the whole, directly calculated to rob the individual of his right, and to introduce a despotism. — These are things not accounted censui'able by the word of God. Now, sir, permit me to ask, did the judicatory which put this libel into my hands, use these precautions ? I am certain they did not. I may be mista- ken however, — if I should, I call upon the members of this court to correct the mistake, by making it appear that such precau- tions have been used. I recollect upon receiving the libel, it wa» moved, " Shall the court sustain it ?" and it was sustained with- out a single observation of any kind, respecting either its form •r its merit.
3. A libel ought, after specifying the charges, to have append- ed to each chai-ge the name or names of the witness or witnesses to be produced in support of it ; and a copy of this, with the witnesses thus disposed of, ought to be presented to the ac- cused at least ten days prior to the time appointed for trial. Fop proof of this, sir, I refer you to Stuart's Collections, book ir. title iii. sect. 2. " The moderator is to infoi'm the offender ap- pearing, of the occasion of his being called, and to give him, if desired, a short note thereof in writing, with the names of the ■witnesses that are made use of against him, that so he may be. prepared to defend himself, which is agreeable to the commoa principles of justice and equity." Ibid, book iv. title iv. sect. 10. " After the Presbytery has considered the libel raised against the minister, then they order him to be cited to get a full copy, with a list of the witnesses names to be led for proving thereof, and a formal citation is to be made in writ, either personally or at his dwelling house, bearing a competent time allowed to give in answers unto the libel, and his just defences and objections against witnesses, at least ten free days before the day of compearance.'** These, sir, are precautions so obviously just and necessary, ati to admit of no reasonable objection. The principal advantage resulting from this measure te the defendant, is that he has an opportunity of preparing to object to the witnesses, which may- be a work requiring time, particularly if the witnesses be disre- putable or malicious. This right the defendant loses, if the wit- nesses' names be either suppressed, or if they be called upon to depose their evidence sooner than ten days after the libel has been put into the hands of the accused. I have been deprived of my rights in both these respects. The libel has been furnished
• See also Associate Reformed Constitution, page 518, sect. 7. General Ai. sembly's Confessiou of Faith, page 310, sect 4.
144
without a complete list of witnesses ; and even those specified, are not arranged under the respective charges which they were designed to support. Witness the libel itself. I objected to this informality upon first seeing the libel before the Presbytery, May 25th ; but could procure no other amendment than the name of one witness which had been left out, to be appended to the end of the second charge. To have the remaining witnesses' names disposed of at the end of the charge which each was to prove, I found impracticable. I was, therefore, compelled to retain the libel in its present unconstitutional form. This is not all. The de- position of the witnesses was taken the afternoon of the very same clay in which I received the libel ; Avhereas they ought not, until at least ten days after. The disadvantages which accrued to me from this illegal step, I might have had reason to regret. I had sufficient ground to object to some of the witnesses, but was not prepared, owing to the haste with which this part of the process was conducted, to introduce my objections, supported in a legal form. This hazardous situation my office has been placed in, by overlooking the established and approven order of the church.
4. A libel ought to condescend upon the time and jilace^ in which, that which gave rise to each charge happened. Stuart's Collections, book iv. title iii. sect. 2. " The libel must condescend on time and. place, when and where the facts and offences libelled were committed, that so the offender may not be precluded from proving himself to have been alibi^ and so impossible for him to have done such a deed, or so offended at the time and place li- belled." Constitution of the General Assembly, page 309, sect. 2. " And, in the accusation, the times, places and circumstances, should be ascertained, if possible ; that the accused may have an opportunity to prove an alibi^ or to extenuate or alleviate his crime."
This, Sir, is a precaution as just as the former. It is not de- signed to enable the guilty to escape detection, but to aid the innocent. It will I'eadily be admitted, that malevolent or selfish motives may prevail upon persons to conspire the ruin of an in- dividual. By obliging them to specify the time and place when and where the things of which they accuse the object of their hatred happened, they are placed under restrictions which may eventually detect their guilt, and save the innocent. These fine and subtile circumstances, Avhich sanguine conspirators and false witnesses seldom pay attention to, often become a net to involve them. It is one of the ways by which a sumer makes snares with his own hands, to catch himself. By this means, the defen- dant has it in his power to expose their falsehood, and protect himself, by proving that neither at that time^x\ovin that place ^ did such a thing as he is charged with happen. Has this just mea- sure been attended to by the framers of this libel ? No. This libel charges me with withdrawing my " professions of repcn-
145
tance," and refers for proof, to my own words in open, court; but does not say what couvi, or at what time. I^might have been in Ireland, Barbadoes or Japan. It might have been this year, last year, or seven years ago. It does not even tell us what kind of a court, whether civil or ecclesiastic ; whether a Mayor's court, a court of errors and appeals, a supreme court, a session, a pres- bytery, a synod, ov an assembly ! We are referred further for proof, to my " attempting al-ivays to justify 'my self against the Irish Presbytery." This is equally indefinite as the former. But perhaps the phraseology e>:e>npts^the libellers here fi*om the necessity of specifying time and place. If they intended by re- presenting me as always justifying my own conduct before the Irish Presbytery, that I was incessantly engaged in this business, it was perfectly unnecessary to allude to any paUicular instance, or to specify time and place. For what one is always doing, in this acceptation of the word, he is doing at alt times, and i?i all places. But, if by this they intended, that I was in the habit of doing so only at times, as occasion offered, then they ought to have had reference to some particular times and places, in which these exceptionable expressions must have been dropped. The second charge is not more specific. I am charged with employ- ing my ministry to the injury of the church, of sowing the seeds of discord, of calumniating the Synod." Sec. At what times, or in what places, these three grievous charges happened, is never once suggested. In the third charge, the place is mentioned, but the times are, as usual, unspecified. Here again, the libel is ma- nifestly deficient.
5. The illegality of the libel further appears, in stating as a faina clamosa, or common fame, charges which had not, at the time of the formation of the libel, been generally circulated. The first charge, which consists in withdrawing my evidences of repentance, was not a subject of common fame. The facts upon which it is grounded, viz. " my own words in open court," and " my always attempting to justify myself," were not gene- rally known, not even in this community, which bears but a very small proportion to the public at large. The words which I am charged with uttering in open court, from your own expla- nation, refer to what I uttered before the Synod. Admitting 1 had dropped these words ; it was in the presence of not more than forty persons, chiefly of Mr. M'liCod's congregation. These were principally obscure persons, who were not in the habits of corresponding with influential persons in all parts of the United States. Had they been most solicitous to circulate this supposa- ble offence, they had it not in their povy-er. But even admit these forty persons were delegated from all quarters^ purposely to make a report of every noxious sentence I uttered, they had not sufficient time between the 16th of May, on which I am charged with uttering the fatal words, and tlio 25th of the same raouth,
T
14G
when the libel was framed. How then eould these words consti- tute a fama clamosa ? My attempting to justify myself against the Irish Presbytery, in the view in which it is stated in the libel, viz. as a charge of criminality, was not a subject of common fame. In the greater number of places where I have preached in the United States, I have never so much as once mentioned the Irish Presbytery ; and where I have mentioned it, and alluded to the conduct they practised towards me, I have never advanced any circumstance but what appeared to me rigidly just ; nor have I ever before understood from any quarter, that any strictures I may have made on that subject, were regarded as criminal. I admit, there has been, and is, a common fame, that the Irish presbytery treated me unjustly; but I believe I can have it proved, that my reverend brethren, both in this court, and out of it, have contributed, at least their share, in spreading this re- port ; and that many others, who have for some years past emi- grated from Ireland, together with letters received from it, have also aided in circulating the fame. Should I then admit that I have aided in communicating an impression of injury sustained from the Irish Presbytery, it is no more than my brethren have done, and hundreds both in Ireland and America. I am not novf debating whether the justification of myself against the Irish Presbytery, be lawful or unlawful : I speak of it merely as a sub- ject of general fame. Considering it in this view, I deny that I have in all places attempted to justify myself, or that all places in this country, where the report of the evil treatment I have met with from the Irish Presbytery has been circulated, have re- ceived it through me, or that it is generally known I have been in the habit of representing myself as injured by the Irish Pres- bytery. This you must be conscious is not true. This the framers of the libel ought to have considered, before they committed themselves so manifestly, by calling it a general fame.
There is not a single thing specified under the second charge, which was a subject of common fame, at the time the libel was framed. It was not a common fame, " that I was endeavoring to sow the seeds of discord among my brethren." Admitting the letter Avritten to Mr. Wylie to have been calculated to do so, it •was written in confidence to him alone, as private as it is possible for any communication to have been. How then could it be a fama clamosa ? Mr. Reily's evidence charges me with nothing criminal ; but such as it is, it refers to a small friendly party of five persons. It was private, and even with the adventitious aid of the indefatigable Rcily, had not become ■Bifama clamosa. " My calumniating the judicatories," were not things generally known. It was not publicly known that I was suspected of such things, much less that I was guilty. These are chiefly grounded upon the occurrences at Synod and Presbytery, in May last. But above all, how could a conversation had with Dr. M'Kinney, an obscure
\
147
individual in Philadelphia, on the 8th of May, have become so public before the 25th, as to constitute z.fama clamosa I It would have taken the winged Mercury, with the trumpet of fame, to have disposed of the few obscure occurrences which fell out in the Synod in New- York, and in conversation with Physician M'Kinney, in a manner which would have justified the framers of the libel in arranging them under the head of a fama clamosa. I cannot but regret that my prosecutors should have had so little respect to their own character, as to pronounce occurrences so very private and obscure, ^fama clamosa^ " existing" as they love to fihrase it., " to the grief of the godly, and to the great scandal of religion, and of this church in particular."
6. I object to the language of the libel, as vague and incorrect, and calculated to mislead the mind. For example : I am charged with " withdrawing evidences of repentance," and as a proof of this, I am further accused of" attempting to justify myself against the Irish Presbytery." By which, if the language conveys any meaning, it must be, that to justify myself against the Irish Presbytei-y, whether I had or had not grounds to do so, was criminal. Again, in charge second — The four particulars into which it is distributed are called evidences., whereas they are distinct charges, demanding proof. This, sir, is rather a novel way of proving a charge, to refer for proof to things which themselves I'equire to be proved. Farther, in charge third, I am accused of the positive fact of swindling, in matters unknown to this church at the time of my restoration. By tids church., here, must be meant either the section of the Reformed Church iii America, or the whole Reformed Church. If the section of the Reformed Church in America be meant, it makes the language of the libel fallacious and inconsistent : for the church in this country has identified itself with the Irish Presbytery, in relation tx) the Irish charges. Printed Extracts, p. 7. "The Presbytery adopted as its ow?2, the sentence of deposition passed by its sis I ter judicatory." The two sister judicatories mvist therefore be meant. But before the libellers Avere at liberty to assert that this charge was unknown before my restoration, they were bound to make it appear, not only that it was unknown to the church in America, but also in Ireland. This tliey have not doAe, and con- sequently, for any thing they know to the contrary, they have li- belled me on charges which have been already discussed. The first instance of swindling is stated to have consisted in obtain- ing money by 2l false token from Mr. Becket. This is incorrect. If I obtained money by a token from Mr. Becket, then there was no swindling in the case. If by means of z. false token, the libel says I got this false token from Mr. B. ; consequently, he is the delinquent. To prove the fact of swindling, it is further sta- ted, " I attempted to obtain money," &c. Here- the fact is con- founded with the attempt. Besides, it is not stated by what means
148
I attempted. It might have been by trading certain articles for money, or by calling on a debt due me. There are several ways of obtaining money. Pray, sir, which of them was intended ? I forbear to take notice of the absurdity of charging a positive fact upon suspicion^ as it is stated in the last of these items ; or of the manner in which the resolution is expressed at the close of the libel, viz. " availing ourselves of whatever is alluded to in the minute of Synod." Observe, a/Zz^rfec/ to, not-contained in, the mi- nute. This would frave been too definite ; hut alluded to, a phrase as indefinite, as the most malicious prosecutor could have wished. This incorrect and vague mode of expression is the more inex- cusable, as it appears in a libel, than which nothing ought to be more clear, distinct and explicit. The two first charges of this libel are predicated upon sins of infirmity. The wordsuttered in open court, in the moment of irritation ; the letter written to Mr. Wylie ; the language with which I am charged in abusing the judicatories ; the conversation with Dr. M'Kinney. These, grant- ing them to have existed, were the ebullitions of a lacerated and fermented soul. They proceeded from a heart laboring under oppression. They were momentary, and ought to have expired with the irritable circumstances which gave them birth. They were improper subjects of an ecclesiastical process. For proof of this, I refer you to Durham on Scandal, which is generally appealed to as a standard on thi^ subject. Page 51— "Every thing offen- sive is not public, or immediately to be brought before a church judicatory. Of this sort are, sz'ras of hifirmitij, which possibly may be offensive for the time ; yet the person's way being consider- ed, they are to be thought to proceed from his infirmity, they be- ing incident to such who are in some serious manner watchful over their way, and, therefore, are not the object of discipline, which is to curb and restrain the more gross humors ot profes- sors ; otherwise the exercise of discipline in reference to infir- mities, would utterly prove an entanglement both to officers and members, and so occasion more stumbling, contrary to Christ's scope. Of this sort also are offences that may proceed from mens* carriage in legal pursuits and civil contracts which may offend % yet cannot they be legally convinced to have broken a rule, when the strain of their way is legal." Page 60. " There should be no rigid insisting in what is personal, in rei"erence to any of the ju- dicatories. As suppose, they should sometimes get snarling an- swers, or unbecoming words, or be met with by irreverent carriage ; in that case, there would be condescending, and what is offensive beside, would be insisted on, and these personal things forborn." Here, sir, are cases precisely in point. The circum- stances mentioned, are perfectly analogous to the greater part of the charges contained in this libel. They are pronounced by this very judicious writer, as unfit /o be brought before a church judi' catory. In this again my prosecutors have offended.
149
Finally, I have to complain that the libel is deficient, in omit- ting to state a number of criminating articles, v/hich were collect- ed from different quarters by the Presbytery and Synod, publicly read, declared to be 3. Jama clamosa, and transmitted as such to be read in the congregation of Canonsburgh. If there was any ground fey;, these charges, why are they not in the libel ; if there was not, Vf^y publish them, and authorise them to be circulated in that part of the country where they were most likely to injure ?
Such, sir, is the libel, against which I am called to defend my- self. Such is the scandalous paper, under which my chai-acter groans. At the foot of this illegal, unjust, unconstitutional in- strument, my office — that sacred oihce with which the Redeemer invested me, by your hands — lies prostrated. Had it been merely an informal paper, I should have spared the court and myself the trouble of animadverting on it. But it is unjust. It contains charges, whose relevancy was never discussed ; charges which the prosecutors themselves first propagated ; charges grounded upon infirmity ; charges which ought not to have made their ap- pearance in public ; charges of a personal nature, where the par- ties offended are my judges ; charges on motives, of which no human being can be judge ; charges of more than four years standing, which were previously discussed, and for whicii I have suffered ; charges which may or may not be criminal, according as they are explained by circumstances ; charges on mere sus- picion ; charges vaguely expressed, with a manifest design to be- wilder; charges where the witnesses' names have been designedly and illegally suppressed ; charges where circumstances are ad- duced as proof, which themselves require to be proved ; where circum.stances of time and place are unconstitvitionally admitted ; where attempts are confounded with facts, and indefinite allusions are made, against which it was impossible I could purpose to defend myself. For such a paper, sir, there can be no apology. My prosecutors have boasted of the quantity of materials which the public laid to their hands to commence a process ; they have had sufficient time ; they have had the aid of the Synod, with all its subordinate judicatories, in furnishing matter.* And, to do them justice, they have not been idle. Why then, in the midst of such a plenty of rank and gross materials of scandal, have they been compelled to present a libel, composed of infirmities, of irri- table expressions, of personal offences, of obscure occurrences, and charges long since investigated and dismissed ? Why com- pelled to have recourse for proof, to treacherous friends, to con- fidential conversations, to inquisitorial torture, friendly letters, unguarded words, to the members of this court, at the risk of their reputation, to forged letters, and such characters as Oliver M. Becket? Rank is the prejudice, deep and injurious the de-
* See Narrative, p. 44.
150
sign, and great the poverty of matemals, which this contemptible piece of writing irresistibly demc^strates. I now dismiss the unjust materials of Avhich the libel is composed, and its uncon- stitutional form, and proceed to consider its merits. We shall now see, sir, that the proof adduced in support of the libel is not less exceptionable than the libel itself.
Theirs; charge, sir, is — Of nvithdraiving that profession of re- fientance^ on the footing' of luhich you were restored to the exercise of the office of the holy ministry.^ which appears by the folloiving proofs : Your own words in opencourt ; your attemfits ahvays t9 justify your conduct against the Irish Presbytery^ representing yourself as the injured person.
This charge is one, I have understood, upon which my prose- cutors ai'e determined to lay great stress. They have even gone so far, in the language of absurdity, as to tell us, if this can be proved, that I have withdrawn my evidences of repentance, they shall be at liberty to try me on the Irish charges, for which I have been already deposed. They have asserted, that this charge alone, if proven, will be relevant to deposition ; for, sir, ns?y prosecutors never calculated on less than deposition. If this charge does it, it is well ; if another does it, it is well ; if no charge does it, it is well. Still they are determined to' have me deposed. Whatever my prosecutors, however, may think, a charge, or charges, which would infer deposition, ought to be of a very heinous nature, and well supported. This charge, sir, is a most absurd one. It is a charge equally incapable of either proof or defence. It is incapa- ble of proof Who would dare to give testimony on oath, that any man had withdrawn his repentance ? To the truth of what one perceives by his senses, he may bear witness. He may attest also what passes within himself. But the repentance of another, is what he neither can perceive by his senses, nor experience within himself. It is a something, of which no wise man will pretend to be a competent judge, much less would he hazard his salvation on the truth of it. We are not to be surprised, sir, if we should find the prosecutors have failed in proof of this charge. It is a thing which no witnesses can legally establish. It is diffi- cult to prove repentance, but abundantly more difficult to prove the want of it. You may, perhaps, find some who will venture to depone upon oath that this man fears, that man loves, a third re- pents, but you will hardly find any man of probity who will affirm, as they must answer to Almighty God, that this man does not fear, that man does not love, and a third does not repent. The charge then is, in its very nature, incapable of legal proof, and consequently absurd. It is equally incapable of legal defence. How is it possible for a person, charged with wanting a certain habit or disposition of mind, to prove, to the satisfaction of others, that he possesses it ? He may assert, but his assertions may be con- tradicted. He may act as » person would do who is actually
151
possessed of that habit or disposition, but his actions may be sus- pected. How then can he, in a legal and formal manner, refute objections, or destroy suspicions ? It is impossible. The thing is in its very nature, incapable of being demonstrated. No persoa will, no person can, affirm upon oath, that another actually f>os- sesses that habit or disposition. Repentance is a disposition of the heart. No one will undertake to prove, that another {asses- ses it. He could scarcely be willing to affirm it upon oath of him- self. All he can do is to assert and act. But his assertions and actions may still be suspected, and he may find it impossible to defend himself against ill-natured surmises and invidious charges- My prosecutors must not, therefore, allege, because I cannot pro- duce witnesses that I have not withdrawn my repentance, that they are at liberty to conclude, the charge is substantiated. To produce witnesses in such a case, is what no reasonable man will believe is practicable. When I assert, allude to circumstances and to facts, I produce all the evidence which any man couid do, charged with wanting any virtuous disposition. I could rid my- self at once of this embarrassing charge, by saying, that it is one of a most unprecedented nature ; that it is one incapable of dis- cussion at any earthly bar; that it puts the plaintiff on proving, the defendant on rebutting, and the coui't on judging, what no created being can prove, can rebut, can judge. But, sir, the charge being designedly intrigiieing, subtle, and embarrassing-, it demands some attention. What proof is adduced to support it ? Has any person appeared, to sv/ear that Mr. G. has either spoken or acted in such a manner, as would justify any one in concluding he had withdrawn his repentance ? No, neither of them. The proof is what might have been expected. It consists in certain words, which nobody has been able to repeat, in iminuaiions, in the opi- nions of my prosecutors, and in garbled conversations. These, sir, are the materials with which they have gone to work, to prove, that the unhappy object of their hate is destitute of the grace of repentance, a charge which the most sanguinary persecutors, in the darkest ages, v/ould have been ashamed to have preferred against the unoffending disciple of Christ ! Let us hear the proof. 1. Printed extracts, p. 19 — " He insinuated that the scan- dalous crimes for ivhich he had been dejioscd, and for nvhich he had professed repentance, were only fictitious." 2. Minutes of Presby- teiy. May 25 — " He (Mr. G.J declared, they (the court ) %vere a mean set, a dirty set, and incapable of trying him ; that Mr. Wylic was a tyrant and a weak man ; that Dr. M''l.eod was a tyrant, and had treated him rascally, and that he could proi<e it." 3. Mr. Wy- lie's deposition — " He (Mr. G.J said he was not guiUy of forging in London, and that his conduct respecting the certificate was both honorable and proper." These, sir, are the whole of the evidence adduced before this court, to prove that I have withdrawn my re- pentance. The first expresses itself in language no stronger than
152
insimiation i the second is a collection of irritable expressions, which must have been dropped the evening after the libel was put into my hands, and consequently had no reference to it at the time it was formed ; the third is a garbled clause of a conversation, deponed by a witness, against whom malice, enmity, partial coun- sel, and falsehood had been established by unexceptionable proof. Is it possible, sir, ray prosecutors can have forgotten their own reputation so far, as to suppose, a charge of so mucli magnitude, as they affect to think this charge to be, is to be established by such proof as this ! Let us see whether this be not much too slender to support the fabi'ic which these gentlemen are toiling to rear. An insinuation I what is that ? Where are the fatal words which Mr. G. uttered in open court ? These words, it would ap- pear, have been seized with avidity, as an infallible index of Mr. G's heart. Certainly they ought to have been here. But they are not. We have got a substitute for them. It is the impression they made, or the opinion that was formed of them. " He insinuated,''' says the minute. This is no proof, sir. I repeat it, sir, this is no proof. It is not my words in open court. It expresses an opinion. Is it possible any member of this court can trifle with his own understanding so far as to call an insinuation by the name of proof ? much less an insinuation as the opinion of another ? Is opinion proof? Is insinuation proof? Who does not know we are prone to form opinions as we are affected ? And how wretch- ed should the state of society be, should men be liable to be con- victed upon opuiiou ? I call for direct proof. I am charged with uttering words, upon which a very serious inference is estab- lished. Produce the words. They are the premises. Reason, justice, right, require they be produced. But admitting such words had laeen uttered as would have positively expressed and not merely insinuated, I Avas sorry I had professed repentance-— still would it appear extremely doubtful whether this court ought to avail itself of them, and that for two reasons. 1. It was the duty of the court, when these words are said to have dropped, to have taken cognizance of them. It was its province to call me instantly to order, and to demand an explanation. Supposing that explanation had not given satisfaction, they might have agreed to censure ; and then had I not submitted, they should have had ground to have referred the case in an orderly manner to the Presbytery to which I belonged. But was any thing like this done ? Was I called to order ? Was I called on to explain ? Was I pronounced censurable ? Did tlie deed which was drawn up, afterwards enjoining a process against me, take any notice of this ? So far from this, was not Dr. M'L. the only person who even attempted to speak in reply to the observations I had de- livered ? and did not he observe in apologv for not speaking, «■ that the words with which I had concluded had completely dis-
153
*' armed him." That is, he admits them as a full apology for whatever had dropt oft'ensive to the court ; and did not the court accede to his remark by their silence ^
Now, sir, does not this shew, that either the court had not then felt the force of this insinuation, or that they conceived the cir- cumstances in %vhich I was placed a sufficient apology ? at least it shews, to resume the matter afterwards is contrary to the or- der of the church. I appeal for proof of this to Stuart's Collec- tions, book iii. title vii. sect. 4. " In libelling of such inju- " rles (viz. verbal injuries) there is requisite, that the pursuer *' did presently resent the injury, and thereby did signify his dis- " satisfaction therev/ith : For if he was of such a temper as not *' to signify any resentment thereof at first, the law will not al- " low him to repent of that good humor."
S. x\dmitting these words alluded to had actually been uttered, it is very doubtful whether this court should sustain them as proof. I appeared at the Synod hill of my wrongs. My character had been basely treated for some months before, by some of my brethren. I had suiTeredin secret, and was the more chaffed, that I found it hard to detect my calumniators. I had the mortifica- tion to learn, the people in ail ciiiarters were prejudiced against me, without having any imuiediate prospect of removing those prejudices. My sufferings in Ix'eland occurred afresh to my la- cerated mind. I suspected treachery, misrepresentation, false- hood, and persecution, and my ominous mind pointed me out a scene of pain, such as that from which I had just escaped. I found the asylum to which I had fled, polluted by the unhal- lowed breath of slander. I had been virtually degraded, by ex- cluding me from a seat in court. I had just heard reasons read, from the middle Presbytery, destructive of my charactei', for which I knew there were no grounds. I had heard a letter read from Ireland, charging mc with nothing new, but repeating what both they and the American church had already discussed, judged, and upon which they had both finally decided. I saw the drift of these papers, and the effects they were likely to produce on the public mind ; add to this, every look, gesture and measure of my brethren indicated hostility. Thus circumstanced, I spoke. With feelings tremblingly alive, excruciated by reflec- tions on the past, and gloomy anticipations of the future, I drop- ped a few observations. What the hurry and trepidation of the moment must have been, I leave it with the feeling and the gen- erous soul to conjecture. I may have uttered words unadvised- ly. It is probable I did so. But that these words should have laid, in part, the ground of suspension in another court, while they were not so much as taken notice of in that court where they are said to have dropped ; or that recourse should be had to them in proof of any thing, but of a heart laboring with oppression, and endeavoring to escape from it, is more than can be justified.
U
154
But I have stated the minute, Avhich says " he insinuated that," he. as the opinion of the court. Even this is doubtful. I appeal to the original minutes. That it appears in the printed minutes cannot make it the opinion of the court. If these mi- nutes have been correctly copied, there must have been an origi- nal minute, which mvist have been the result of some discus- sion respecting these words. Now I call upon the members of that court here present, to say whether there was any discus- sion on these words in the Synod, whether an opinion upon them was taken, whether a minute respecting this was record- ed ? If not, the opinion expressed in the printed extracts, is not the opinion of the court, but of the clerk or of the committee apoint' ed to publish these extracts.
Will this court regard as proof, an extra opinion of the clerk or committee, expressing a belief of an insinuation, about words whose merits have never been taken up and discussed ? Words which have not been proven ? Words which if they were utter- ed, were uttered in circumstances, which Solomon has said, will make a wise man mad ? Shall words, for which the court seemed satisfied that a sufficient apology was offered in the concluding observations, shall these words be had rccovirse to, as premises fully establishing ground for the weighty conclusion, " that I have " withdrawn my evidences of repentance ?"
I am not certain, sir, of all the ideas I may have dropped, much less of the precise terms I may have employed, but I shall candidly state to this court, what have ever been my views of the offences with which I have been charged, which occasion- ed my deposition, and of the proceedings of the Irish Presbyte- ry. They are the views, which when I have spoken upon this sub- ject, either publicly or privately, I have uniformly presented. 1. As it respects the manner in which I was treated upon my application to the Irish Presbytery, I am persuaded it Avas un- generous, and in many instances cruel. 2. My conduct, in quitting my congregation abruptly, I have always held in abhorrence. For it I have professed repentance, do now profess repentance, and I trust, shall continue to profess repentance. Yet, I have both the public documents of the judicatories of this church,* and the ardent expressions of my bi-ethren out of judicature,t that the criminality of this rash step, was greatly mitigated by the circumstances which led to it. 3. I have always been in the habit of acknowledging my repentance, lor the certificate which was presented to one of the London ministers. I believe it still to have been a disgraceful act ; yet, circumstanced as I was, I have always regarded it, as greatly mitigated. I am not alone in this
• See printed extracts, pa^e 7.
f See Mr. Wylie's letter to Mr. Haaeltop, and his conversation, as stated up- on oath, Narrative pag'e 112.
155
opinion, sir. I have Mr. Wylie's word for it, who is a member of your court, that he wrote Mr. Knox of Baltimore, " Mr. G's sonduct when fully known, was calculated to do him honor ;" one of the witnesses deponed, that Mr. Wylie, in a letter written him, writes " he thought the embarrassed state of Mr. G's affairs would mitigate what criminality was attached to his conduct ;''* farther, that he heard Mr. Wylie express himself to this amount, relative to the subject, "that had he been placed in Mr. G's situation, he thought he would have done worse."* It appears, sir, my brethren were at one period precisely of the same mind on this subject, which I have been always. It is they, sir, who have changed, and not I. When Mr. Wylie at one time, says " he would have done worse, situated as I was, and that my conduct, if known, would do me honor," and at another, swears against me, to prove I have withdrawn my repentance, merely because I attempted to extenuate my conduct, when he was aggravating it ; whether is it Mr. Wylie or I who have been inconsistent ? My brethren, sir, have changed their mind, or at least their measures, and the stigma of that change they wish to affix upon me. But overlooking those inconsistencies, sir, does Mr. W^ylie's deposing that I called my " conduct in London hon- orable and proper," prove any thing to the purpose ? That part of the deposition you must take in connexion with Mr. Hazel- ton, who depones, that in the conversation " the London busi- ness came vip, respecting a certificate ; that Mr. G. denied it was a forgery, saying that it contained nothing but what was strict- ly true, and that it was subscribed, not by the name of any member of the Irish Presbytery, but by a fictitious name, aiid could not legally be called a forgery.'' What does all this amount to, sir ? Why, a conversation took place betv/een Messrs. Wylie and Graham, Mr. Hazelton being present. Mr. Wylie ill-naturedly threw into Mr. G's teeth the London certificate, calling it a for- gery, with a design to insult ; Mr. G. resented his insolence, by telling him it was no forgery in the legal acceptation of the word, and assigning his reasons, and had in his zeal to defend himself from insult, further asserted that all things considered, the London affair was honorable. Mr. Wylie, previously determined to have Mr. G. degraded, greedily snatched at this expression of the moment, and manufactured it into a grave and solemn proof of Mr. G's having withdrawn his repentance. This you will recollect, sir, is the same Mr. Wylie, against whom has been proven, enmity, malice and falsehood, and who at one pe- riod, used expressions still more stroag in justification of Mr. G's conduct in London, than that to which he has now sworn, with an intention to strip him of his office !
4. I have uniformly acknowledged my debts in Ireland. I have
* See Narrative page 112.
156
even admitted, that a part of them may have been imprudently' contracted. This is the more likely, as they were contracted at an early period of life. But 1 never have acknowledged any frau- dulent design upon any man, nor do I think my creditors have been defrauded by my emigrating from Ireland. 5. I never have, to my recollection, imputed blame to the Irish Presbytery, any further than 1 have perceived thera laboring to multiply charges, and torturing fair transactions into crimes. I am of opinion, that the breach of my ordination vows, the liOndon certificate, and the disappointment of my creditors, demanded censure. Had the Irish Presbytery confined itself to these facts, which alone were capable of proof, and conducted their process legally, I should never have quarrelled for the censure they dispensed. But, sir, I blame them for unnecessarily nnd unjustly destroying my cha- racter, by attaching to my transactions the name of swindling. I blame them for conducting the process against me with too much haste; that contrary to the rules of the church they never cited me to appear, although it can be proven they knew my address ; that my letters, in which I craved delay, and offered explanations, were not attended to ; that I was condemned without being heard, either in person, by proxy, or by letter, in my own defence ; that the witnesses who appeared against me were exceptionable cha- racters ; that even these witnesses were suffered to tender their depositions without an oath ; and that charges were sustained as facts, ruinous to my character, upon this feeble and inconclusive evidence.
These explanations I offer with the greater confidence, that every one of my reverend brethren, now present in this court, heard me make them, in substance the same, and at much greater length, befoi^e the Presl)ytery of May, 1809. I can well recollect, my brethren now present, v/hiie I offered these explanations, " with a greedy ear devoured isp my discourse." There was no objection then to my free and honest strictures ; no cry that they evidenced a hard heart, and deficiency in evidences of repen- tance. There was a general conviction of the integrity of my re- marks, and a kind of involuntary burst of disapprobation at some of the treatment I had met Avith. You spoke freely of the high co- loring of the Irish documents, and called the proof against me ex parte evidence. That was the time to object to the insufficiency of my evidences of repentance. I affirm, and I call upon my pro- secutors to contradict me, that I at that time attempted " to justify myself against the Irish Presbytery, and to represent my- self injured," as much as ever I have been in the habit of doing any where. By what strange and inexplicable process has it hap- pened, then, that the very explanations which I then offered as evidences of repentance, where I was guilty, and of conscious integrity wherein I was innocent, have been now construed int»
157
the opposite extreme, and stated as a proof that I have " vrith- drawn my evidences of repentance ?"
Reverend sir, I care not for consequences, nor will the forma- lities of any court prevent me from doing justice to myself. I never have acknowledged that part of the documents of the Irish Presbytery tliat charges me with fraud. If I have, let my prose- cutors bear witness, and establish the fact by legal proof. I must not be told roundly that I have acknowledged it — it must be proven by unexceptionable witnesses. The court which took measures for my restoration paid no attention to these charges. They merely recognize the act of deposition, without concern- ing themselves about the grounds on which it rested.* They did not put the charges alleged by the Irish Presbytery severally. They knew I had been condemned without hearing ; they said the documents were highly colored ; they heard my explanation ; they perceived the effect it had in stripping the Irish documents of their aggravated aspect, and presenting the transactions as just and honorable, upon which they had bestowed the name of fraud. They received it accordingly. I did not confess myself guilty of the charge of fraud, as is now unjustly insinuated. I endeavored to impress a very different conviction, and you can bear me witness I was not unsuccessful. This I have vmiformly done. This I did in your hearing. This I did with your approba- tion. In doing so, you did more than insinuate that I performed a duty, and what was a duty then, cannot, as it is stated in the libel, be a " scandalous sin" now.
I have now shewn you, sir, that this charge is in itself absurd ; that it is alike incapable of proof and defence ; that no legal proof has been advanced ; that my words in open court have not appeared ; that irritable expressions, especially when overlooked at the time they dropped, ought not to be heard in a process ; that I have always spoke consistently of the Irish transactions ; that with the same dispositions and expressions upon that sub- ject, with which I appeared before the Presbytery of 1809, 1 now appear ; and that Mr. Wylie's deposition goes to demonstrate a change in him and my brethren, but not in me. You will find it your honor, sir, to discard this charge as unsupported. Believe mrC, sir, nothing can be more prepostex'ous, than forcing a mean- ing upon another's words, which he strenuously contends he did not intend. How much more absurd would it appear in a court to degrade itself by a contention so ignoble. My prosecutors having manifestly failed in proving the charge, it now remains for me to assure this court, I have not ceased to repent of the offences which I have acknowledged. I never designed to convey any such impression. I may have used words which might lead to a sus- picion of this kind. This was no more than an infelicity of ex-
• See printed extracts, page 7.
158
pression, to "which every man is liable, and never more than when he appears before a tribunal, or is overwhelmed by acute and painful circumstances. If, in opposition to these explana- tions and solemn assurances, the court insist upon the charge, I shall only add, that of my heart they can be no judges, but by my expressions ; and I leave it with this court to determine, whether, expressions dropt (admitting them dropt) in the hurry and trcfiidation of the moment, accompanied with a too exquisite and irritable sensibility to human woes ; or, expressions uttered after mature deliberation, coolly and dispassionately, ought to be regarded, as best calculated to express the real dispositions of the soul, and which ought to be conceived, as laying the most solid and rational ground for the judgment of a court of Christ ?
I proceed, sir, to consider the second charge, with the proof adduced to support it.
Charge II. Of employing your ministry to the injury of the thurchf as appears by the follotoing evidences : Your endeavoring to sow the seeds of discord ainong your brethren in the ministry ; your calumniating and abusing the foreign ministerial connexion* ef this church ; your abusing and calumniating the Synod of the Reformed church in North America ; your calumnious conduct in Mr. Wylie's congregation, in conversation with Dr. M'-Kinney.
To prove the first hem of this charge, sir, two things have been adduced ; a letter written by me to Mr. Wylie, and the de- position of Mr. Reily. The letter to Mr. Wylie is dated from Pittsburgh, October 8th, 1810, and is as follows :
" Reverend and dear brother — I have received a letter from Mr. M'Leod, and one from our friends in Albany. Wallkill did not proceed with a call. Albany supplicated for a moderation, but were refused, it being discovered that they were a part of Mr. M'Master's charge; that they were not an organized con- gregation, and that they could not instal Mr. Graham to teach school, 8cc. While our sagacious disciplinarians in the north are saciuficing my prospects to punctilios, to cover the basest motives, they are no less solicitous to impress the people to the west, that my motives in preaching are " vanity, and a thirst for popularity," &c. Unmanly and ungenerous conduct ! But they are aware they have nothing to fear, and that the basest things with which they can be charged, allow them only an opportunity of displaying their magnanimity, and extorting fresh bursts of admiration from their duped brethren. You, sir, could you let yourself believe it, are as much the object of their machiavelism as I am. They have not used such freedoms with your charac- ter, but I have often been mortified to find they had reduced you much beneath your level. And if I am not egregiously mistaken, you will, in a few years, have as little influence to boast of in the chureh, at least to the north, as I have at present. Were a great question at this moment to be agitated, you should be surprised
159
to find how much your opinion should be cast into shade. I caa recognise, in the single instance of a pressing invitation, which Mr. Milligan has received from your friend M'^Leod, to repair to New-Yoi'kto finish his education, as much inti'igue, as in any instance he has displayed respecting myself. Should you not thank me for this information, you Avill do me the justice to be- lieve, that I feel beyond what lam capable of expressing, to per- ceive such talents and attainments as you possess, left unguard- ed, and likely in the issue, to stand eclipsed by those whose ac- quisitions are much inferior to yours, but whose intrigueing dis- position supplies the place of talents. Do, my dear brother, be- lieve me cordially sincere and concerned for your honor, when I express myself so. This heart knows the place yeu occupy in it, and I write thus because I love and esteem you. As it respects myself, what I have suffered has awakened me to a state of vigi- lance, which must forever preclude the possibility of practising upon me, whether by force or fraud. I beg you to write TuQ, and lend me your salutary advice," i^c. See. A true copy.
Signed by John Black, Moderator.
This letter, sir, I acknowledge. Whether it goes to establish the charge of prostituting my ministry, will depend, not so much upon the phraseology of the letter, or the glosses of my adversa- ries, as upon concomitant circumstances. You will forgive me, sir, for treating so gravely, such ludicrous attempts to destroy character, and annihilate the office of an ambassador of Christ. He has not confided our offices with us upon the supposition, that we are destitute of the passions and infirmities of men, or be- cause we may not be guilty of a weak credulity, which may fre- quently subject us to the treachery and caprice of others. Low and contemptible indeed, sir, must the views of those men be, of the ministerial office, who think it is to be shaken, much less de- stroyed, by a few bold expressions tabled on the heart of a de- ceitful friend. When we contemplate persons industriously pick- ing up a few exceptionable words or phrases, to attack an office conferred by him whose " calling- is luii/iout rt.pentance^^ we are bound to commiserate their weakness. Methinks I hear our Re- deemer addressing the members of this court, as he did the zea- lots who brought the woman taken in adultery, " He that is with- out sin, let him cast the first stone." That brother v/ho has never offended, by his writing or his speech, in the way in which I am here charged, " let him throw the first stone."
Every thing about this libel, sir, is represented by my accusers to be inexpressibly impious. Never had a few simple facts the honor of being dignified by terms of such " thundering strength and learned sound." The former charge has been impiously swell- ed into " lyin^ against the Holxj Ghost." This charge has beei» blown up into a siaeequaJIy terrific. This letter particularly, hat
160
been represented as calculated to produce in the church an ef- fect similar to that of an ea'-thquake. Let us cautiously approach this tremendous epistle, and see whether it be entitled to all that grandeur of mischief which has been attributed to it. Let us con- sider it in point of fact.
In the summer of 1810, I visited Walkill and Albany. I found it extremely inconvenient to support my family in New- York, and determined they should accompany me. They did so. How- ever solicitous I might have been to itinerate through the seve- ral parts of this scattered community, yet pressed by incessant applications for the payment of debt, on accoimt of which my character was suffering, and anxious to see my family in a com- fortable situation, I felt a strong inclination to become station- ary. Our people in Albany were few. They appeared cordially attached. I had practised habits of teaching with considerable success. I understood the prospect in Albany, as a teacher, was flattering; and from all I could gather, our ecclesiastical pros- pects were not less brilliant. Impelled by circumstances, I be- gan to conceive serious designs of settling in Albany, and if possible, before the winter. There were, however, obstacles of a serious nature in the way of settlement. Our brethren in Albany •were few. My intention to remain among them was novel. I had reason to believe my thoughts on that subject would be disrelish- ed by some of my reverend brethren, particularly those of the Middle Presbytery, who had been sanguine in the expectation I would accept of a call from Baltimore. Add to this, I had an ap- pointment to visit the western countiy in the end of the summer. The fulfillment of this appointment, circumstanced as I was, I conceived unreasonable. I wrote Messrs. Wylie, M'Leod and M'Masters on that subject, stating my difficulties, and begging their advice. The letters I received in answer, are in my pos- session, and by permission of the moderator, I shall read them.
[Here Mr. G. read the letters, which agreed in consenting, that Mr. G. should remain in the north, and should not proceed to fulfil his appointments to the west, if he conceived it necessary to desist.]
I perceived from these letters, although there was a compli- ance with my wish, it was reluctant. Perceiving this, tenacious of my respect for presbyterial appointments, anxious to see the western church, and to prevent murmurs on all hands, I deter- mined at once to set out for the western countiy, endeavoring ta recommend my distracted affairs to the Disposer of All.
Before I set out, I wished to encourage myself and the people with a prospect of a speedy return to the north. Our fi'iends were so very few, that unless I trespassed upon my usual reserve, and suggested some hope of success, it was hardly conceivable they would apply for the moderation of a call. I had formed an attach- ment to Albany, and had suggested the praliawiiity of success. I
161
had communicated iny thoughts upon the subject, to the mem- bers of the Northern Presbytery, who appeai'ed to approve of it. The Presbytery was to meet immediately after I left Albany. The people were determined to petition. The members of Presbytery appeared well affected, and always spoke and wrote of Albany as a vacancy. This was the state of affairs on quitting the north. Shortly after my arrival in Pittsburgh, I received a letter from Mr. M-Leod, Avhich, Avith the permission of the moderator, I shall read. [Here Mr. G. read the letter, signifying that the petition of Albany was not granted by the Presbytery, because the Presbytery could not think of moderating a call for so few, nor installing Mr. G. to teach school ; and because Albany was a part of Mr. M'Master's congregation.] At the same time, I received a letter from Mr. Rogers, of Albany, agreeing with Mr. M'Leod's reasons, and complaining upon the Presbytery for hard treatment. Our few friends found themselves disappointed. I felt aggrieved with the reasons assigned, " that the people of Albany were of Mr. M'Master's congregation, and that I could not be ordained to teach school." Albany was nearly as strong as Baltimore, and had better prospects as it respected the church. My brethren would not instai me to teach in Albany, yet they had agreed to instai me to teach in Baltimore. With regard to the people of Albany forming a part of Mr. M'Master's congregation, I had never dreamed it — the people were them- selves unconscious of it. Neither Mr. M'Master, nor Mr. M'Leod had ever the most remotely insinuated it ; although we had discussed the subject. On the contrary, I can produce do- cuments to shew, that both these gentlemen, and the Presby- tery, had been in the habit of regarding Alb?.ny as a vacancy.
[Here Mr. G. produced a letter from Dr. M'Leod, dated from Schenectady, August, 1809, congratulating Mr. G. upon his re- storation, informing him that the people of Albany had deter- mined to petition the Presbytery respecting him ; describing the eligibility of Albany as his place of settlement ; proposing he should open a belles lettres class in it, to aid him until the congregation should increase ; and begging to know at Mr. G. what answer the Presbytery should give to the petition of Air bany.]
In this letter, Mr. M'Leod, a member of the Presbytery under whose inspection Albany people are, writes of them as a vacant congregation, petitioning Presbytery respecting me, wishing to know what encouragement I shall give them, and using argu- ments to prevail upon me to settle there irpmediately. This was not the solitary opinion of an individual. The Presbytery acted upon the petition of Albany, as a vacancy, and gave me appoint- ments, on condition I should find it convenient during the. win- ter of 1810, to fulfil them.
X
162
These measures, compared with the decisions of the Presby- tery, in which the petition of Albany was rejected, were not con- sistent. In 1809 they are heard as a vacancy; in 1810 they have their petition rejected, because they form a part of Mr. M'Mas- ter's congregation. I was provoked at such inconsistency. I was aware of M'Leod's intrigue. I suspected his motives. I felt hurt at the suggestion of my tampering with a part of another man's congregation. In this mood I sat down to write the letter which has excited so much interest, and which has been produced in evidence against me. Upon a review of the inconsistent conduct of my brethren to the north, I had too much reason to suggest to my friend in confidence, " our sagacious disciplinarians to the north were actuated by base motives."* The circumstances to which I allude, as it respects the west, were letters and reports, prejudicial to my character, which reached the west, from some of my brethren, before my arrival there, representing me as " vain^ preaching the gosfiel /or /lofiularity, a mere harranguer" &cc. Sec. This certainly merited no less censvire than to call it " immanly and ungenerous conduct." But I cannot be thus particular. You are aware, sir, of the circumstance on which I ground the repre- hension which I reached my bi'ethren, when I call them duficd, and speak oi false magnanimity. If I acquaint my friend with the undue methods which have been employed to " reduce him be- neath his level,'' it was because I loved him, and had often wit- nessed such attempts to reduce the estimation in which I held him. Much of this information I had from Mr. Wylie himself.
[Here Mr. G. adverted to numerous instances, in which Mr. W. had complained to him of Mr. M'Leod's undue attempts to reduce him with the church.]
The circumstance of Mr. Milligan to which I allude, I did not fabricate. I received the report of Mr. Brown of Greensburgh. I perceived in it the hand of Joab. I was conscious of the weak- ness of Mr. Wylie, and I thought it my duty to put him on his guard. The respect I express for him in that letter was real. So devout was my attachment to him, that, although I had seen him trepidate a little through M'Leod's influence, had any one suggested the possibility of treachery in him, I should have re garded it, almost, as an unpardonable offence.
Let this letter, sir, be next considered as a confidential commu- nication. We had known each other at college. From my arrival in this country, he had professed the most ardent friendship. I
* Mr. G. was correct in assigriing ba»e motives to his brethren in this transac* tion. M'Leod acknowledged before the court, in the course of his remarks, thafc " they did not wish to have Mr. G. settled in Albany ; they feared Iiis sedition, (». e. M'Leod feared Mr. G's opposition to his ambition) and wished to have him settled in Baltimore, where he would have less influence, and could do less hurt." Compare this with Mr. M'Leod's approbation of Mr. G's design in set- tling in Albany, and you have a correct specimen of his intrigue.
163
appeal to his letters. [^Here Mr. G. read" a letter, in which Mr. Wylie appeals to God for " the place ivJnch Mr. G. had in his heart."] Can any thing evince a more glowing attachment than these documents ? Mr. W. took the most lively interest in my affairs. Was it to be wondered at, that I should unbosom myself to a person who had my confidence so unboundedly ? What would I have Avithheld from this man ? A friend is a suitable re- pository of fears, hopes, and sorrows. Mr. W. was emphatically mine. Letters passed between us to this effect. These only ex- cited our appetite, but did not satiate. We longed to have an in- terview. When this happened, we freely unbosomed ourselves to each other. A'either qfus thought of solving seeds of discord. We wished to correct mistakes, and place matters in a true point of view. I informed Mr. W. of the treatment I had met with from M'Leod. He, with equal frankness, disclosed the substance of letters and reports, which he had upon that subject. He had re- ceived information to that effect from different quarters, and par- ticularly from some of the students who attended the theological lectures in New- York. He frequently called M'Leod a stillet- To-MAN, in allusion to a Spaniard, or perhaps a Highlandman^ who carries his dirk under his plaid. He expressed his fears of M'Leod's intriguing disposition, and complained of several in- stances of personal injury he sustained by him. These ai'e things, six*, which I considered sacred to friendship, and should never have exposed them, but to meet the low measures, to which my prosecutors have been compelled to have recourse. I regard such things with contempt ; but if I am pulled into the mire by a ruffian, I must struggle through mud to get out. Friendship, sir, obligated Mr. W. to be cautious in taking offence, but still more cautious in exposing it to the injury of his friend. What offence will not friendship pardon ? What infirmity will it not mantle ? How can we confide too much in the integrity of a friend ? And when the friend betrays, who will not rather abhor him for his treachery, than censure the imprudence of the vic- tim whom he has betrayed ? Let no person be so absurd as to object, that Mr. W. on the supposition he thought his brother injured, was compelled to disclose it. How could he know Mr. M'Leod was injured, until he explained with Mr. G. ? Besides, it is preposterous to suppose that the letter could injure Mr. M'Leod, if Mr. Wylie was offended with Mr. G. on the account of it. The letter was only known to Mr. G. and Mr. W. It could not injure Mr. M'Leod with Mr. G. These things, whether he wrote them or not, he believed. It could injure Mr. M'Leod with Mr. W. only on the supposition, that Mr. Wylie believed it. But he did not believe it. He was offended with it. The best thing he could have done for his injui'ed brother, if he really be- lieved him so, was to burn the letter, and to call upon Mr. G. for an explanation. All the evil consequences arose fi'om the in-
164
discretion of Mr. W. in exposing the letter, and from his treach- ery in betraying one brother, and inflaming the mind of another. I call upon this court, upon this auditory, to judge, what would be the state of society, upon the principle that Mr. Wylie's con- duct be justified ? It is not an enenjy oan injure, it is a friend. A friend who is conversant with the infirmities of his friend, who sees him in his most unguarded moments, who becomes the de- pository of his fears, sorrows, and secrets. Should a friend b,e at liberty to expose his friend with impunity, there is an end to friendship. Confidence will degenerate into credulity, and the deceitful wretch who feeds with a rancorous rapture upon the catalogue of his friend's infirmities, will be no longer an object of execration.
Further, sir — Mr. W. professes to be a christian, and to sub- ject himself to the laws of Christianity. Admitting him to have been offended, he is acquainted with the order he ought to have adopted ; he has practised, as a ruler, upon it. It was a private injury, the law respecting the mode of obtaining redress, is ex- plicit.* What then did the laws of Christianity obligate him to ? Are men at liberty to burst through all ties of friendship, of con- ■fidence, and of Christianity, at once, upon receiving an offence ? No, the world itself has stamped infamy upon the treacherous friend ; and while religion affixes odium to him who takes the advantage of the infirmities of his brother, it points out the path of duty. It calls upon him who is offended to seek an explana- tion, to forgive seventy times seven times. It pronounces him, an " ungodly man, who digs up evil." Has Mr. Wylie at- tended to its directions ? Has he acquainted his offending bro- ther with his offence ? Has he asked an explanation ? Has he labored to have those occurrences set in a true light, at which he took offence ? Has he employed his influence as a mediator between his two brethren, to have them conciliated ? No, sir. Much the reverse. It never was the most remotely suggested to me, although I had several interviews with Mr. W. that he was the least offended, until this letter was read in open Synod. The matter at one leap is carried into the public, with the coloring of a bitter adversary, with the bravado, that Mr. W. " would not hold confidence with such a man." Poor apology ! the most ab- ject and abandoned villain could do exactly as Mr. W. has done. Perhaps he could not aggravate his treachery by an apology so handsomely framed. It will, sir, take all the sophistry of even Mr. W. to convince any unprejudiced mind that he has not vio- lated every law of order and decency, or to screen him from me- rited odium. I feel for the reputation of this court, for having so far connived at a piece of conduct so execrable. The laws of the
* See Matth. 18— Stuart's Collections, p. 259— Also, Ref. Test. p. 512— Gen. Assem. Con. p. 309. 3— Brown on Scandal, p. 328. 9.
165
church obligate a court to censure those who proceed disorderly in the conduct of a process. That Mr. W. has done so, needs no further comment — and that this court must share the blame and divide the disgrace with him, if he be not corrected, is no less obvious. It is ct'rtainlj' no small evidence in favor of my cause, that before my prosecutors coo Id advance a single step in the prosecution, they Avere obliged to violate the most sacred rules of friendship, of honor, and of Christianity !
It has become a popular and a laudable thing, sir, to treat me in this ungentlemanly and dishonorable manner. We have more instances than this in the prosecution. The friendly board, the rites of hospitality, the confidential conference, the open and in- genuous conversation, have all been violated. I have been watch- ed, taken, under the guise of friendship, into their houses, the subject of my sufferings has been introduced, severe strictures have been made upon the conduct of my enemies ; I have been haunted and attacked in every shape and form, in order to wrest from me something to be preferred in support of a charge. Such disgraceful conduct will certainly punish itself.
But let us proceed to another instance of treachery and mean- ness. It is the evidence of Mr. Reily. What has this man vio- lated the ties of brotherhood, and betrayed the generous freedom of conversation at the hospitable board, to witness ? Why, really nothing. I did not speak unfriendly of the seminary. I afiiieared to regret it should not succeed. I did not say any thing disrespect- ful of M'Leod, but he thought " / discovered a disfiosition hostile to him." This gentleman wished to witness something; he was placed like Doeg, in the company where I eat bread ; he had no fact to state against me, but spleen will always have a resource. He had his own prejudices, and these he states under the color of a charge. — And what, suppose I had made free with M'Leod's character, is this more than he has done with mine ? Who knows but what I had reason to feel indignant at some treatment re- ceived from M'Leod ? Why not complain ? Is M'Leod a Pope ? Is he infallible ? If I am wronged, have I not as much right as another man to complain ? If M'Leod wronged me, is he not as liable to be complained of, as another man ? Ought my brethren to make that a public charge, and call it by the name ot a scan- dalous sin, which they have so liberally practised upon myself? How is it, that which is laudable in them, is a crying sin in me ? This, too, was a private offence. Still more private than the former. The witness does not even say that I uttered any thing criminal, but " I appeared," Sec. i. e. there was something in my heart, which his penetrating discernment could discover. This is the order of the day, sir. There is something about me which plain men cannot see, but which my lynx-eyed brethren can easi- ly detect. This keen, discerning Reily saw through me. Still the matter rested with my disposition. It was in my heart. This vras
166
jkretty private indeed. But by a little chicaneiy and ^*f <;««<•, it is manufactured into a fama clamosa, is charged in the most public manner as a scandalous sin, and I am suspended from the exercise of my office, and my office itself put in hazard for it. For what? Not for any act which I committed, nor any word which I uttered, but for a disposition concealed in my own heart. This is indeed carrying a prosecution to its ne plus ultra. In England a man may not speak evil of the king, but he is permit- ted to think evil of him, without punishment. The most despotic and absolute tyrant, not excepting liis holiness at Rome, has ne- ver thought of punishing for the dispositions of the heart. Dr. M'Leod, is, I suppose, the first created being, who has ever been so far honored, as to have a prosecution commenced against a man, and punishment inflicted, for thinking evil of him.
The second item, which charges me with " calumniating the foreign connexions of this church," alludes, I suppose, to what I have said of the Irish Presbytery. To utter severe animadver- sions, founded in truth, is one thing ; to utter calumny, is another. Of the former, there is proof before the court ; of the latter, there is none. Calumny is an injurious representation of charac- ter, founded in falsehood. That I have been guilty of this, re- quires to be evinced, before the charge be sustained. It is easy to color my conduct with strong language. Let it be proved that I have calumniated the Irish Presbytery. They are not in- fallible. They may have injured me. I can prove that yourselves have said they injured me. If so, how is this court certain, that they did not give me sufficient ground for my animadversions ? and if they did so, I have not calumniated them, however strong the language may have been. I have never understood, that any Hian, out of deference to any other man, or class of men, is obliged to desist from a just vindication of his own character. If you know of any authority, I beg you will mention it. If a number of clergymen could be capable of entering into resolutions to rob any member of this court of his wealth, would he not find it his duty to defend himself ? and yet we are told by the Spirit of God, " A good name is better than riches." The members of this court can bear me witness, that I have spoken with the utmost delicacy and reserve of the Irish Presbytery, both in the judica- tories, and out of them. I would always have endeavored to do so, had they attended to any reasonable limits in their strictures on my conduct. It was very painful for me to be obliged to use se- vere animadversions. But there is a time when it would be cri- minal to be silent. If the Irish Presbytery placed themselves in a situation so awkward, as either to compel me to submit to in- jury, or to defend myself by opposing them, I am not to be ac- countable for that. I have opposed their representations ; and before this court be at liberty to pronounce me guilty of calumny, fhey are obligated, by every tie of justice, to first ascertain that
167
rtie statement of facts I have made is false, and that consequent- ly my animadversions are unfounded. I must not be told, the Irish documents are to be received as proof. They aftect to state facts. I deny these facts. It becomes the Irish Presbytery, or some others for them, to prove their statement correct. It is a very convenient way to ruin a character, by first raking up tho reports of the country, and stating- and writing them in one court, and then drawing upon them as proof in another. I have suffered much in this way. It is an ingenious method of carrying on a pro- secution ; but it is liable to many objections. It is a method of procedure which every court, that is concerned to preserve its dignity, and to impress a conviction of justice, will be cautious in practising. We have had documents after documents from the Irish Presbyterjr on this subject. Although from the first they contained representations in many instances liable to objection, I felt delicate in exposing them. Had they desisted from unneces- sarily dwelling on them, I might have consented to bury the matter in oblivion. But they have repeated them, repeated them with additions, with additions more aggravated than the original representations. It is, therefore, high time for me to step for- ward, particularly as these matters have been published to the world, and to call upon the Irish Presbytery, to prove certain things which they have officially communicated. I do so. I deny I have calumniated them, and I call upon proof, legal proof, not garbled words, not the aggravated coloring of prejudiced men.
The third item, which charges me with " calumniating the Synod," needs no reply. It is charged in direct contradiction to the rules of the church. It alludes to irritable expressions, the offspring of human infirmity, and is, therefore, an unsuitable subject of public prosecution. It was not attended to where it hap- pened, although I was at that time not a delinquent, but a bro- ther in full standing; and the laws of the church, will not allow the judicatory to repent of the forgiving spirit, which then in- duced them to pass it over. It is an irregularity of that descrip- tion, sir, which by the laws of all legislative or executive bodies, subjects the persons who transgress, in the first instance to be called to order. If they neglect to do so in the proper season, which is the instant the irregularity happens, they should only expose themselves, by taking it up afterwards as a subject of prosecution. This irregularity, foisted into the libel, is an addi- tional evidence of the poverty of the process.
But what, sir, shall I sav, of the last item of this charge^ viz. " My calumnious conduct in Mr. Wylie's congregation, in company with Dr. M'Kinney." Let us hear the Doctor. [Her® Mr. G. read Dr. M'Kinney's deposition, which see, Narrative, page 71.]
I shall not pretend to defend myself against Dr. M'Kinney's tleven years' aequaintance with Mr. Wyliejnor his letter of eight
168
pages, nor his rensons for believing and thinking this and that, nor his surjirise^ nor his doubtful opinions, about who circulated the reports in Mr. W's congregation. This medley of facts, views, opinions, feelings, and determinations, upon oath, is as degrading to the understanding of the witness, as to any coui't who would permit it to appear in a deposition. — Nothing cer- tainly, can be more illegal, than, to proceed to convict one, on the inward dispositions and experiences of a witness.
The part of the deposition which is designed to operate against me, mustbe that which states my animadversions upon Messrs. M'Leod, Wylie and Black. And will any person be so absurd as to suppose, if these gentlemen were conspiring against my of- fice, and the happiness of myself and family, that I was crimi- nal in complaining of it ? complaining not publicly, which I might have done, but privately, to one who swears, that he himself regai'ded the conversation as confidential, and with no other object in view, as the deponent deposeth, than to procure correct information, on what must be admitted, to have been deeply intei'esting to us both ? Sheill mankind, in general, be per- mitted with impunity to reveal their grievances, and must I be an exception ? Must I, above all others, be doomed to punish- ment, merely because I have dared to complain ? It is base, it is hateful tyranny. Had my accusers, first enquired after the grounds of my complaint, and finding I had none, commenced a prosecution against me, they had been justifiable. But to in- stitute a public prosecution against me, on the language of complaint, before they had examined the causes of it, is tyran- ical, with a witness. Every man, sir, will make common cause ■with me in this. It is such a palpable invasion of the rights of man ! This, sir, is further liable to all the objections I have al- ready offered. Even admitting it to be ci'iminal, it was private, and thei'efore subject to the laws, by which a private process ought to be conducted. It was a personal thing, and therefore, \mfit matter for a public prosecution. I can account for such an impudent violation of the rules of the church, only one way. Dr. M'Kinney, sneaks with his story to Mr. Wylie. Mr. Wy- lie's pride is hurt. He was, at that very nick of time, toiling in the formation of a libel aga,inst Mr. G. He could not resist the opportunity, of lugging it in as a charge. He found, although, it was of no gi'eat moment, it could be proved ; and, desperately situated as he was, pi'oof was a dear thi^rg, and not to be ne- glected. I cannot help expressing my astonishmeij^j at the con- duct of my prosecutors. Is it possible they could be so igno- rant of ecclesiastical propriety, as this process would indicate ? Or rather, has not an angry and just God, permitted them to proceed in this matter with an overgrown sotlishness and stu- pidity, to correct them for a systematic prostitution of church power ?
169
But, sir, dismissing this, I am shocked at the treacherous spirit, which publicly, and in despite of a sense of sin and shame, is fostered in this community. That persons should be countenanced in an indecent violation of confidence and friendship, is an alarming reflection. Let that society beware who deals too freely in the violation of the laws of honor and of friendship. I know, sir, it is not only tolerated, but applauded in the present case ; but depend upon it, sir, the triumph which false friend- ship and dishonorable measures achieve, will be of uncertain duration.
Bad as the world is, sir, it is prepared to treat with contempt such abuses as these. Had these persons been able to injure me, it is manifest they would have done it. And what is it they might not have had in their power ? They swear they were friends, and that our " conversations were confidential." I bless God, who has preserved me, from having any thing to repose in them, or from reposing any thing in them which would havc- seriously injured. How much is every man in the pov/er of his friend ? And how fatal might friendship prove, were it always productive of such bitter fruits as these i' But the weaklings who suffered themselves to be seduced into these measures, are not so much to blame, as those who prompted them. It is the in- triguing, vindictive ecclesiastic, who practises upon the infir- mities of his fellow men, and who stimulates them into irregu- larity, to gratify his pride and revenge, v/ho ought to be treated with merited execration. Look next, sir, how this driveller gets rid of his confidential honor ! He considers all confidence removed. Why ? He did not wait to examine the matter, or en- quire after the ground of the case. This v. ould have been too painful a process. It would have been unpopular too. He re- quired only to review his acquaintance Avith Dr. M'Leod and Mr. AVylie. This broke the spell, and like a disenchanted knight in romance, Physician M'Kinney recovered his liberty.
I proceed to the third charge, sir.
Your being guilty of sivindling in Belfast, in matters unknown to this church at the time of your restoration, viz. In obtaining monei^ from Mrs. Martin, by means of a false token from Mr. Becket. Also attempting to obtain money from Mrs. Martin, oji tfis day after your elofiement from yo'ur congregation. In borronving mo- ney from Mr. Moore of Be/fast, for your brother, for iv.hich you. became responsible^ while there is every reasoii to suspect you did not intend paying it.*
• The investig-ation of this charge, even admitdng' there had been presump- tive groand for it, was uiicoiistitatiunal. It respected transactions of long- stand- ing, which, if they at all existed, must have been before tlie Irish Presovterr, jind have preceded Mr. G's deposition. For a conviction of tlie illegality of tliis part of the pri>secution, see Mr. G's speech4)sfore the Presbytery in Pliiladel- phia, p 53 — 6u.
Y
170
Here, moderator, is a very grievous charge indeed. One winch, if it can be substantiated, subjects to civil penalties. I hope my prosecutors were aware of this. However they may feel disposed to trifle with their character about evidences of repentance, and indications of hostility to the church, it is presumable they would not hazard their reputation and even punishment, by a charge of high criminality, without some reasonable prospect of proof. What proof have we gotten ? Before I reply, I must beg the at- tention of the court to the charge, as it is distributed into three separate articles. If this distinction be not attended to, we may be led into the mistake, that there is only one fact to be sulistan- tiated, and that all the evidence goes to support it. The first item is the case which respects Oliver Becket. His deposition^ and that of William Jamison, I shall read. [Here Mr. G. read the depositions, with the cross-examinations, which see, Narrative p. 64 — 69.] I shall take the liberty of presenting to this court a let- ter, addressed by O. Becket to me, dated from Colerain, Ireland, May 25th, 1809, and received by me, at Greenwich, New-York, the August of the same year. [Here Mr. G. read the letter. It began My dear friend ; stated that from December 7th, 1807, he (Becket) had been out of business on account of failure, until the November before he wrote, viz. Nov. 1808, when his brother procured for him the house in Avhich Wark & Waddle had lived, Colerain, where he had set up the grocery and spirit business, but complains it was on a low scale. He begged Mr. G's advice about coming onto New-York. Pie informed Mr. G. of the out- cry which had been made after his departure ; said he did not believe what was reported, and that he believed Mi\ G. did not design to defraud any man out of a single shilling; but that he was drove to do as he did by his embarrassments ; hoped that Mr. G. would shew this to be the case ; and concluded by informing Mr. G. that his (Mr. G's) brother, had gone to Spain in the me- dical staff of sir John Moore, and had received a wound. Sec.*]
* This letter, with six more papers, chiefly letters from M'Leod and Wylie., to Mr. G. were presented by Mr. G. to the court, in the course of his defence. The next day Mr. G. demanded them. He was told he could not hare the ori- ginals, but he slioald have copies. After the court dissolved, Mr. G. sent one of his clerks to Mr. Wylie, the clerk of the court, for tlie copies which the coui-t had promised. He informed him they were not prepared, but should be left with Mr. Black. Afier Mr. Wylie's departure, the clerk called on Mr. Black, who informed him, the papers had not been left with him, that Mr. W. had car- ried them on to Philadelphia ! Mr. G. wrote on immediately to counse l l&r Bkowne to have the copies forwarded, from whom he has received no answer at tliisdate, October 25th. It is to be regretted the papers have not arrived. They were important, and should have been inserted at full length. Tiiey are referred to, however, and their substance given, with a correctness which wiJJ be liable to few exceptions. Should the papers afterwards be put into the iiands of Mr. G. those wlio may have cujiosity to see them, shall have the freest ac- cess. The author of this narrative hits been told, since the com-t, tliAt the c>er-
171
Let us return, sir, to the point with which we set out. It Is the charge of swindling O. Becket, by means of a false token. The tedious depositions we have read, are intended to prove the charge. — Noav, sir, admitting we should give the fullest degree of credit to what both the witnesses have deponed, to what will it amount ? Only, that Mr. G. got two guineas of Mrs. M. by presenting the compliments of O. Becket, and that O. Becket paid the said two guineas for Mr. G. I call upon my' accusers, I call upon this court, and upon all who may either have heard or read these depositions, to analyze them with the most curious and scrupulous attention, and say, whether they go to esia.blish more tlian this. Now, sir, all this may be safely admitted, and yet the charge remain destitute of proof. I am charged, not with ob- taining two guineas of Mrs. M. not with using Becket's name in procuring it, but ivith using his iiame without his knowledge, or using 71 false token. This is the thing to be proved. Does Jami- son prove it ? No, he informs you he understood by Mrs. M. that Mr. G. got two guineas of her by presenting Becket's compli- ments. This is all. Does Becket prove it ? No. Becket does not prove it, he proves the contrary. — Becket does not prove it. He asserts, that he understood by Mrs. M. Mr. G. made use of his name, that he Told Mrs. M. he had not given Mr. G. an order to receive it, and that he settled with Mrs. M. for the two guineas. When he asserts Mr. G. made use of his name, and that he paid the two guineas, he asserts nothing to the purpose. This may be safely admitted. The question at issue is, did Mr. G. use his name without his authority ? To make it appear that he did, there is nothing in Becket's deposition but a conversation he had with Mrs. M. at two different interviews, in which he says, " he told Mrs. M. he had never given Mr. G. any order to receive two guineas from her on his account." This looks like proof. But nothing can be farther from it. The witness does not positively assert upon his oath, that he had not given Mr. G. an order to receive two guineas from Mrs. M. on his account, but he asserts that he told Mrs. M. so. The texture of this oath is fabricated with exquisite skill. The Avitness is only swearing to what he expressed in conversation to Mrs. M. and yet it is so artfully
^-men are determined to suspect the genuineness of the letter attributed to Becket. It may be, and should it be so, it will be perfectly in unison with their unj ust proceeding's, and especially with the meanness discovered in traitorously carrying off Mr. G's papers, and detaining tliem. We appeal, for proof of the genuineness of tliis letter, to the intrinsic cA^dence of the lettet itself ; to the hand-writing of Becket, whicli, had the court suspected, would have beea sworn to ; to the post-mark of Colerain ; to one person, at least, who can swear to the time Mr. G. received it, August, 1809 ; to two persons who saw Mr. G. in May last, toss his books, in Philadelphia, which had been packed from May, 1810, in quest of it ; and to the hundreds of reputable spectators who saw the court examine the letter at the time it M^as produced in evidence, and sustain it witliout a single objection, to its genuineness.
172
contrived, that one would Imagine he is actually sweanng that' he gave no order to Mr. G. to obtain the money. He had ex- pressed a falsehood to Mrs. M. but he has not courage enough to confirm it upon oath. He artfully evades it, by deposing to the fact, that he told Mrs. M. but not to the truth of what he told her. That Becket told Mrs. M. so, may be admitted ; but that what he told her Avas true, is the thing to be proved. I shall not dispute with my accusers, whether Becket has been in the habit of communicating to Mrs. M. to my prosecutors, or to hundreds besides, that he gave Mr. G. no authority to use his name, but I shall dispute the truth of the assertion. I may have told that one of -my brethren is a drunkard ; should I be called upon to prove the charge, and should I state upon oath before this court, that I. had told it, would this court sustain it as proof? Whether the conscience of the witness, or the dread of a prose- cution may have deterred him, is doubtful ; but certain it is, he has disappointed the expectations of his employers. We may readily admit, he had tauglit them to expect more ; that at least, he would roundly assert, Mr. G. had defrauded him, by using his name without his knowledge. But when it comes to the point, he shrinks, and instead of a round affirmation, sends them away with a conversation he had four years ago Avith Mrs. M. Again, BECKEr proves the contrary. When interrogated upon his exa- mination, after he had lost sight of his fabricated story, whether he would positively assert that Mr. G. swindled him out of two guineas ? He replied, " / do not saij it^ nor do I think you (Mr. G.J capable of such a thing.''* Here, sir, is a direct and intelligi- ble assertion. My accusers saw the destructive force of it when it was delivered. We are not to be surprised they exerted them- selves unreasonably to suppress it.f It was not a mere squib, sir; it was a barrel of gunpowder discharging its fury upon their little fabric at once. Is this the proof, sir, which was intended to con- vict me of swindling ? It cannot be possible. No two points in the universe are in more direct opposition, than the object which this witness was called upon to prove, and the proof he offers. It is not merely a destitution of proof; it is a certificate to the con- trary. The witness has said incomparably more in favor of my cause, than if he had simply denied I defrauded him. He has ex- pressed himself in the strongest terms, of his conviction of my integi'ity. " He thinks me incapable of such a thing." Poor Becket 1 He was conscious, in demanding of me the payment of a bill due to another, without any authority, he had exposed himself to merited disgrace, and probable punishment. He con- trived to cover his imposture, by circulating the calumny on
* See Narrative, p. 67, attested by Mr. Page, coimsellov's clerk, in wliose hand-writing the answer may be seen, by applying to Mr. G. See, also, J. Coopei''s deposition, page 116.
■J- See Narrative, page 67, 68,
173
which this charge is predicated. After the conspiracy was formed to direst me of my office, my accusers found they had need of him. He had engaged to furnish them with no ordinary material* for a prosecution. How they must have been electrified with th© prospect! When the crisis arrived, either, Eeckct's conscience or courage failed him, his passions subsided, and awed by the dread of the God by whom he had sworn, he affirms once and again, " I do not say Mr. G. swindled me, neither do I think him capable of it."
Here, sir, I might stop ; and full of the injuries I have sus- tained by this prosecution, might interrogate my prosecutors— With what audacity dared they to publicly criminate any maa with the high misdemeanor of sy/indling, Avhen they must havo been conscious they had no better evidence to adduce than this ? I can appreciate their intention. It was not to have me excul- pated. It was, to conjure up clouds of suspicion, and to awaken the sleepless tongue of slander.
But, sir, let us sift the case further. Let us not be contented with the conviction that the charge has not been proven. Let us shew that it cannot be proven ; that there is not the most re- mote ground of suspicion ; that probability is against my accu- sers : thus, sir, shall we shiver the cheek-bone of calumny.
That I acknowledged the receipt of two pounds of Mrs. M. and purposed to pay it to Becket, on producing Mrs. M's receipt, has been proven by the deposition of Becket himself, and the- acknowledgment of Mr. Wylie ; but that I obtained that sum by a false token, or, which is the same thing, used Becket's name, without his knowledge, is extremely improbable. 1. That Mr. G. a minister sufficiently known and respectable to command credit in Belfast, as all the witnesses agree, should apply to Mrs. M. who lived in the same street with O. Becket, (North-street) and should make use of his name, without his knowledge, for the sum of only two pounds, not to extricate out of some pressing difficulty, but to purchase a pair of boots, is indeed improbable. The improbality is heightened by the deposition of the -witness, who states, Mr. G. went the same evening to a tea-party ; that he saw him the next day ; that Mr. G. lodged at Mrs. M's when in Belfast ; that he saw Mrs. M. next day ; that they (Becket and Mrs. M.) talked over the matter, and that neither of them mentioned the circumstance to Mr. G. That Mr. G. might have committed such an outrage, had Becket lived a considerable dis- tance from Mrs. M. ; or had he been on his way from his con- gregation, not to retux'n ; or had he been pressed by some seri- ous difficulty ; or had the sum been large — is possible. But that he should commit such an imposture upon persons who lived within cry of each other, for the paltry sum of two pounds ; and that he should remain in town after it, lodge at Mrs. M's, and sec Mr. B. and no mention of the matter by either Mrs. M. or Mr.
174
B. or any apology by Mr. O. is not probable. 2. That Mr. G. should l>ave committed such an imposture on Mrs. M. and Mr. B. and should, as the witness has deposed, have remained at least a, month or six weeks in his own congregation, before he (the •witness) understood he had left Ireland, and that neither Mrs. M. nor the witness, should have written Mr. G. upon the subject, nor even mentioned the circumstance to Messrs. M'Fadden, Moore or Henderson, with whom the parties were all intimately ac- quainted, nor have mentioned to any other before Mr. G's quitting Ireland, especially, if as the witness states, he (the witness) had previous to the reception of the two guineas, determined to hold no more correspondence with Mr. G. — is improbable. The im- probability is increased, from the consideration that the witness, as he deposes, had been assured by Mrs. M. on the next day after the money was received, she should hold him accountable for it ; and further still, that the witness, as appears from his letter, was at that very instant embarrassed. It is not veiy proba- ble, that a person of Becket's character, in the jaws' of bankruptcy, would have submitted quietly to have his embarrassments in- creased by an imposture. 5. What renders the report propagated by the witness and my accusers, altogether incredible, is, that had Mr. G. been conscious of having committed so mean and base an action, he should, after having returned, and remained some time in his congregation, during which pei'iod he must have been cei'tain Mrs. M. must have detected the fraud, have, as the second part of the charge states, applied on the next day after he eloped from his congregation, to the said Mrs. M. for five gui- neas more ! 4. It is certain from the evidence of the witness himself, that Mr. G. did not commit a fraud upon him, who roundly affirms upon his cross-examination, that " he (Becket, the very person who had fabricated the story, and who had re- presented himself as the object of the fraud) " he would not say it," that Mr. G. had defrauded him. " he did not think he could be capable of such a thing." 5. Becket deposes he paid the money to Mrs. M. which is hardly possible, if he had been defraud- ed. The reason he assigns on his deposition, viz. lest he should lose Mrs. M's custom, is destroyed by his letter. By his deposi- tion, he settled for the two guineas, in December, 1807. By his letter, he failed on the 7th of December, 1807, and did no more business in Belfast, nor any where else, until Nov. 1808. How then could he be induced to settle with Mrs. M. to prevent her, as he states, " from quitting to take her liquors from him !" The reason which he represents Mrs. M. as urging his settlement for the two guineas, viz. " that it was through him (Becket) she had given Mr. G. credit not only for that, but other small sums, lodging," &c. is contradicted by Jamison's deposition, who states that Mr. G. on applying for the two guineas, " asked her if she was acquainted with a gentleman of the name of Becket." 6. The
175
•manifest contradictions in Becket's deposition, and between th» deposition and his letter, and his general conduct, render it highly probable, that Bccket and my accusers, in representing- him de- frauded, have propagated a falsehood. His deposition contradicts itself. In his direct testimony he deposes, that it was in the month of December he paid the money to Mrs. INI. and that it was a month or six -weeks after that, when he heard that Mr. G. had left Ireland ; yet in his cross-examination he states, that he saw Mr. Niraock, his partner, on next day, or day following ]\Ir. G's passing through Belfast, (the 12th or 13th of December) who was foilov/ing Mr. G. with his bill. He deposes, an account against Mr. G. to the firm of Becket and J^'imock, after his arrival in America; although he admits, that for some years before, and when the account v/as contracted with Nimock, he had his store in Belfast; that he had not Nimock'sname upon his shew-board, nor had Nimock his in Colerain ; that when he failed, Nimock did not fail, which inconsistency he explained by saying, there was only a private contract between them, and yet he charged Mr. G. with the account to a public firm and fiartnershifi. The contradictions between the deposition and letter*irc still more glaring. " My dear friend," says the letter; " with his accus- tomed impudence," says the deposition. The deposition is ob- viously intended to criminate Mr. G. and communicate an im- pression that Becket was defrauded. Tiiis letter states his con- viction, that it wa-s Mr. G's embarrassment, " and not any dispo- sition to defraud any man of a single shilling, which drove him to do as he did." The inconsistencies, sir, are too numerous to ad- mit of separate attention. His general character, sir, is before you. It is not the character of mere report. It is established hj legal documents. The witnesses inform you, that he carried with him immense property from Ireland, on account of which it ap- pears, he was put into jail shortly after his arrival in Philadel- phia ; that he was in jail when Mr. G. and John Jamison called at his store ; that he had changed his name upon leaving Ireland ; that he had excited strong suspicions against the rectitude of his intentions, in a transaction at the Custom-house, by drawing a check upon a bank where he kept no account ; that he repre- sented himself in company with Thomas M'Nair, which was found to be a falsehood ; that Mr. Wylie advised INIr. Stevenson to have no connexion with him ; that he has lately fled from Phi- ladelphia with vast sums, that the pursuit overtook him in Balti- more, and imprisoned him in Philadelphia ; and Mr. Wylie has admitted that he is in jail at present.
But I am sick, sir, of following the absurdities of Becket, and iny accusers. They will speak for themselves. Becket's nefarious attempts, and the exertions of my brethren to screen his repu- tation, and work up his evasions, tfontradietions and insinuations^
176
itxto positive proof qf a heinous charge, will be a reproach not- easily wiped away.
My heart recoils from the scene of iniquity which appeared in open court, in the fulsome attention paid to this gentleman. If our church had been sinking, like a ship in the waves, Becket could not have been embraced with more avidity, as a rock to save her. What must have been the infuriated zeal of my pro- tsecutors, Avhen a stranger, wanting testimonials of his character^ under public defamation, was introduced as an only witness, in a suit where he was gainer, and on a charge of the most enormous nature, again a brother minister of the gospel !
I have not a word fui'ther of the spotless Becket. I believe lie was in this case a mere machine, acted upon by the passions of others. However this may be, a just providence has, since that time, developed his true character — ^Like other fearless sinners, " he made a pit, and digged it, and himself hath fallen into the ditch which he made 1"
The proof, sir, adduced in support of the two last items of this charge, merits no reply. When the witness was asked rela- tive to the case of Mrs. M. he answered he " knew nothing but by- report.'' Because it has been reported, must it therefore be true ? If persons were to lose theiv characters, and be adjudged guil- ty of a crime upon report, who could be safe ? Half a dozen of designing, and malicious men, might so contrive it, were they certain of escaping with impunity, to rob half the nation of their reputation. It is the business of this court to try reports* by bringing them to the touch-stone of proof, not to take reports for truth, or to imagine that people will be so dviped as to con- clude guilt, merely because a court can with gravity take down pages of depositions proving nothing.
A report is neither more nor less than a report. The swearing to it only proves, that such a report existed, but not the truth of the report. All that these witnesses have deponed, is no more than what I would have freely admitted upon their word, that it ivas reported^ I had asked five guineas of Mrs. M. and had ob- tained money from Mr. Moore ; I call for proof of the fact.
With regard to Mr. Moore's affair ; It is too absurd to demand a moment's attention. I acknowledge the fact, that I became res- ponsible for my brother, and my intention of paying, should he fail to do it. Mr. Moore has my note, which will compel pay- ment in America, as well as Ireland. Were he to empower an attorney at this moment, he would recover it.
But would I even admit what I am charged with on suspicion, ». e. " That I did not intend paijing it^'' what would be the con- sequence ? Still it would not be fraud. If a principal take a sum of money, without a design of paying it, he is guilty of fraud. But the same, will not apply to a surety. Is it necessary in order to evince an honest disposition, that every surety should intend
to pay the sitm for which he becomes responsible ? The th6ught is absurd. It may be fairly presumed, that not one surety, of a thousand, goes surety for another, intendhig to pay the sum. This indeed avouUI make security a very rare thing. And shall that be charged fo my account, under the infamous designation of swindling, which the most honest and reputable of mankind are every day practising, Avithout a suspicion of fraud ! If it would be unjust in a principal, to calculate upon the surety's payment of tl^o debt, it would be no less preposterous in a sure- ty to become responsible, with a design to pay it. It would be absurd, sir, to consider a surety in the light of the original debtor, or to regard him, as obligated to pay the sum, on any- other supposition, than that the original debtor does not pay it. I will not insist upon this. I shall treat it with the contempt it merits. Those who dared to publish such transactions as this, with a design to criminate, ought to be punished, rather than reasoned with. It is enough,' sir, that my accusers have been compelled at last, to take refugj in their own suspicions. To charge with the crime of swindling, and rest the proof upon suspicion, was indeed a desperate attempt. It was rather an ex- travagant mode of procedure, but T)eriectly harmonises with all the parts of this prosecution. My prosecutors commenced their proof with an iKsixr .vxiox-^Thsy terminate, with an enchanting propriety, in a SUSPICION.
I have thus, sir, dwelt upon the libel to an irksome length. I have done it, not because I conceived the proof adduced in support of it, required a labored defence, but to expose the futility of the reasoning, and the illegality of the process. Could I give credit to my prosecutors, that by procuring these charges, they wish- ed to allow me an opportunity of exculpating ra.yself, I should now congratulate the court and myself upon the exculpatory evidence, and faithful detail of facts, I have been enabled to otfer. But I cannot flatter myself with the hope, that what I have done will produce satisfaction, while I reflect upon the gene- ral conduct of this prosecution. The clearest evidence is now bcfox-e this court, to prove the libel itself is illegal, and the evi- dence intended to evince it, to be inconclusive. To eitlier recapi- tulate, or add to what I have said, would be a prostitution of time and speech. It may be presumed, that upon the most rigid principles of justice, no criminality, as alleged in the libel, at- taches itself to my conduct. I will admit it displays infirmity, but this charges no more, then what could be picked up, by any adversary, from a close in^^pection of any man's conduct for a single day. I am persuaded, upon a correct review of the above particulars, few will think with my prosecutors, that there were grounds for a legal process. They must be compelled to regard it, an impotent attempt to destroy character. Divested of its mask,
Z
178
the prosecution exhibits a pre-determination to injure, eccasionetl by the rankest passions of the human heart. Had my accusers suffered themselves to be regulated by the wholesome laws of the church, not one of all the above charges would have ap- peared, much less the evidence adduced to support them.
Reverend Moderator — I now dismiss the libel, and with it I ought to dismiss my task. You have no authority to inculpate me any further, nor am I under any obligation to pay attention to any thing that is not contained in the libel. You know the order of the church, sir. It combines with the dictates of justice, in affirming that no court is at liberty to prefer charges against any man, without a competent time to prepare his defence. I am vmable to express what I feel, when I reflect upon the mode of conduct adopted by my brethren. To call upon witnesses upon sight, without previously acquainting either the witnesses or me, that were to be called, or what they were called upon to witness, was doing me manifest injustice. But this was nothing, when compared with what follows. How shall I represent it I — My brethren, who are obligated by the relation I occupy to them, to exert themselves to procure evidence for, as well as against, to hear no reports in evidence, not to sustain reports as sych, but to examine their truth or falsehood, not to offer any thing against me but in legal form ; have with indefatigable perse- verance and toil, drudged in collecting, not evidence but report, and have without any previous warning officially announced these reports, without any intention to have them examined, but merely to shew that a/ama clamosa, or reports to that effect, exist. Nerer was there, sir, so lawless and wanton a prostitution of character. Never was there a precedent set for such conduct as this. For a court to professedly become the organ of defa- mation, intimating at the same time, that it had no disposition to investigate the case, that its object was merely to sheAvthe existence of a report. What character could stand before such conduct ? It is the acute affliction of good men, in all ages, to have their reputation loadened with reproach ; but I shall ven- ture to affirm, never did a judicatory of a Reformed Church, or any just court, become itself the propagator of Calumny, profes- sing at the same time, its object was not to examine whether any ground existed for the report, but only that the report itself ex- isted. To convict upon report-— what court of equity ever did so ! I cannot put terms on this step of procedure, nor will it be possible to sufficiently impress my fellow men, with the compli- cated injustice which is done to my character.
Here, sir, are reports, purporting to have originated in Ireland, in Scotland, and America, pernicious to my character. Admit, this, sir. Is it not possible that a man may be belied in one coun- try, and that the report prejudicial to his character, may accom- jpwy him to ano^cr ? Ought not the object of this court be, to
179
take legal measures, to ascertain whether these reports have ori- ginated in truth or falsehood I Ought they not to have allowed me some time to prepare to defend myself against them ? And should the report be found to have originated in truth, would it not have been soon enough then to have constituted it a ground of judgment? But instead of this, sir, the reports are at once jjourcd upon the attention of this court, and a crouded and repu- table auditory. I hear them for the first time, in common with all who are present, if I make a defence against them it must be upon sight, and yet the scene of the report may be in Ireland, Scotland, or, at the least, in New- York, at four hundred miles distance, and this after I had twice written to my brethren, since their arrival in Pittsburgh, to favor me with a full copy of every thing which they intended to produce against me at this time. This, sir, the laws of the church obligated them to do, unsolicit- ed ; but to have neglected, after solicitation, to designedly con- ceal, Avhat they were obligated in justice to communicate, and to produce it abruptly, with the most aggravated coloring, in the hearing of thousands, while they not only knew I could not make a defence, but had done so with an intention to take me at an ad- vantage— O sir, this is too much ! What soul, the least fired with generosity, independence, or a love of justice, that would not feel an honest indignation rise at such conduct as this ! — The intention of the court to circulate and establish a defamatory re- port, without investigation, is oppressive and cruel. It is, sir, intended, I can perceive, to impose upon the minds of the spec- tators, by confounding report with fact. You say, when you com- mence this endless detail of scandal, " It is not to prove charges, but only to shew there is a report existing against Mr. G."* But long before you have finished your papers and verbal statements, and depositions, not " to prove charges, but to shew an evil re- port exists," your auditors have lost sight of your short observa- tion, with which you set out, and are impelled into a belief, that you are establishing, not the report, but the t7-uth of the charges. Indeed, sir, their own good sense compels them, con- trary to your caution, to draw this conclusion. Scarcely any man of common sense, who would attribute but even a small share of credit to the motives of this coui't, could impose upon himself the belief, that its members should have drudged so indefatigably to collect mere reports, and spend whole days together in read- ing and stating what they had gathered, not to exculpate the de- fendant, but to lend its official sanction to defamation !
Before I proceed to animadvert upon this part of the process, let it be remembered, sir, that you have pledged yourselves, your o!)ject was only to " prove that a report existed ;" that the ATTACK made upon me, in the face of the public, without pre-
* See pag^e 94.
180
vious warning, or time to collect materials to defend myself, was UNGENEROUS, nay, cruel ; and that should I not be successful in defending myself agaiast these reports, no judgment can in JUSTICE BE GROUNDED ON IT. Thesc tilings premised, sir, I shall beg the attention of the court to a few explanatory remarks. There has been alleged, sh-, as an apology for this extraordinary conduct, a sentence appended to the libel, where the Presbytery reserves to itself, the power of " whatever is alluded to in the deed of Synod,'' But neither in this sentence, nor in the deed of Synod, IS there any thing to justify this licentious attack upon my reputation. How could I gather, sir, from either of those, that letters from all parts should be presented, containing reports against me ? How could I, ignoiant as I must have been of what v/as contained under the mysterious word alluded lo, like the Abracadabra of the ancients ? How could I prepare to defend myself against it? But, sir, leaving this matter, as admitting of no apology, I feel for my assassinated reputation ; and for its sake alone, not from a conviction that it is my duty to countenance these illegal proceedings, I shall attend to the rumors which my brethren have painfully collected, carried, and propagated so publicly on this occasion.
To the Irish letters, which have been read to prove the exis- tence of pernicious reports, I have already svifiiciently attended, in the commencement of my defence. The letter which is as^- cribed to Mr. Henderson, of Scotland, admitting it to be genuine, merits no attention. I have not the pleasure of Mr. Henderson's acquaintance. I have learned he is a good man, but, like others, no doubt liable to imposition. The character he has of me, must be through the medium of the Irish Presbytery. This accounts fully for his bitter invective. I hope he will live long enough to learn that I am not the person to whom he alludes, in language so pathetically uncharitable. Mr. Alexander and Mr. Boggs are members of the Irish Presbytery. I refer you to my strictures upon the conduct of that Presbytery, in reply to them. — But what reply, sir, shall I make to the packet of testimony presented by Dr. M'Leod, purporting to have come from Messrs. Dustan, Thornton, Hone, Codman, and Steven B. Munn, New-York ? Al^- though 1 could not account for it, I did suspect, upon those papers being read, that they were genuine. Others have labored, since the commencement of this trial, under the same impression. It was not, until the last sederunt, when I called for these letters to have them transcribed by the clerks, I perceived the mistake. What must have been my surprise, what must be the surprise of this court, what must be the surprise of this auditory, on being informed, these papers, purporting to have come from several gentlemen in New-York, are in the hand-writing of Dr. M'Leod,
* See speech before the Synod, page 34—44 ; and the defence, p. 122 — 138.
181
without any signature ! These pernicious, defamatory, and over- whelming papers, sir, are fabricated ! These papers, beginning with the law- phrase, Mr. Hone, Mr. Thornton, Sec. testificth and tait/i, bearing, to be testified by those gentlemen, in the case of the Rev. David Graham, and ending with the pompous expression, testijied before Dr. M'^Leod, minister, Sec. — These papers, sir, are every syllable in the hand-writing of one, and that is the hand- writing of Dr. M'Leod. [Here Mr. G. held up the papers in the sight of the court and auditory, calling upon them to examinft them and detect the forgery.] Ves, sir, I repeat it, these testi- monies, that thundered on the public ear on the evening of Tues- day last, that tore with a savage violence the character of Mr. G. have been audaciously and impiously fabricated. Detestable, un- precedented conduct ! What insanity must have seized my pro- secutors 1 Written testimonies, presented without authority, passing the court without detection, adverted to in summing up the evidence as legal testimony, characters given of persons both for and against, without their knowledge, gentlemen represent- ed " rash, /lassionate, too exguisitehj sensible, and therefore apt at one ti7ne to contradict ivhat they affirmed at another, deductions to be made from ivhat they ivonld say, Isfc. and all this by impudent- ly thrusting their names and testimonies upon this court without their authority.* This unprecedented imposture had surprised rae less, had it been acted by any other than Dr. M'Leod, who has dwelt with an overwhelming and never-ending eloquence upon my certificate in London. Here was only one paper, with no real name appended, stating truths, and framed in the most dis- tracting circumstances, to save from perishing. There several papers are fabricated, real names of living and public persons are made use of to sanction them; they represent falsehoods, and have been framed, not to rescue from destruction, but with the savage intention to infallibly destroy ! I have not words for so complicated a villainy — Every person must think of it in a way which no power of description can equal 1 — Let us turn our at- tention to a part of the picture no less dark. It is the letter pur- porting to have been from John B. Murray. Should I admit, sir, that Dr. M'Leod has been successful in his application to this gentleman (the letter represents itself an answer to an applica- tion of Dr. M'Leod to John B. Murray, for a chai'acter of Mr. G.) and that the letter is genuine, not fabricated, it will do little ho-
* The court, after these fabricated testimonies were presented, proceeded with great gravity to enquire at Dr. M'Leod after the characters of the gentle- men. Some of them were represented as rash and passionate, and, tlierefore, great deductions to be made when in a passion — Tliese were Dustan, Munn, Oodman, and ^lurray ; Mr. Tliornton was represented by M'Leod as a person of an exquisite sensibility, which might dispose him at one time to contradict what he said at another ; but all the gendemea were, in general, represented as persons of veracity.
182
Ror to my prosecutors. John B. Murray had, as that letter repre- sents, sued me for whipping his refractory boy. My worthy friend, Mr. Thornton, became my security, a man of strict veracity and undoubted integrity, who proved a firm and generous friend, when both Dr. M'Leod and his faction were laboring to injure me, by destroying his confidence in me, and the confidence of others ; a man who would, in the honesty of his heart, reprove me himself, if he perceived any part of my conduct reprehensible, but would be far from giving Dr. M'Leod authority to make an invidious and destructive use of his name against me. Murray, sir, who had expressed himself in his rage that he would prose- cute Mr. G. to his ruin, and whose letter sufficiently disgraces him, by the revenge it discovers, and the language it employs, had entered the suit in both the civil and criminal court. His violent designs were disappointed in three courts. [Here Mr. G. presented a short narrative of the trial.] He commenced the suit in the supreme court. The letter read, says he has cast me. If it be so, the fact is recent. It is possible it is so. I shall admit it is so, and that the expenses may amount to 200 dollars. What then ? Is the object of this to impute blame to my conduct ? This is unjust. Before this court be at liberty to do so, it must institute the process, and try the matter legally. Will it follow that I must be criminal, because the suit has gone against me ? The thought is big with absurdity. Is it to prove, as Dr. M'Leod has acknowledged, that I have contracted del)t in this country ? This would be a detestable perversion of right. If I am involved in expenses by a law-suit, where I have stood merely upon my defence, is it not to be classed with those accidents, for which no man can be accountable? It is my misfortune, sir, not my crime. Should any merchant in this reputable auditory send a rich vessel to sea, should she be drifted against the rocks and shipwrecked, and should he be rendered incapable to meet his payments by the accident, would he not be pitied rather than blamed ? And shall that be a crime in me, which no man can avoid, which was as accidental as shipwreck ? Contemptible ab- surdity. Unhappy situation, where a man's misfortunes are in- troduced under the coloring of criminality.
Be assured, sir, my prosecutors shall have little cause to tri- umph in their correspondence with John B. Murray, as it re- lates to me. I had only one inveterate enemy in New- York ; one whom Dr. M'Leod has represented to myself as criminally obstinate in that matter ; one who boasted often of his intention to ruin myself and little family, because I had the effrontery to chastise his insolent boy. It was John B. Murray. To this man, Dr. M'Leod, my brother, sir, applies in his distress for some- thing to prefer against me. He has not applied in vain. He ob- tained, as he might have expected, a letter replete with scur- rility and bitter invective- — A letter, which no man in this audi- tory would not think it his disgrace to acknowledge. It is, how-
183
ever, in unison ■with what went before, and let us dismiss it. T» James Park's letter, urging the payment of three guineas on his father's account, and authorising Mr. Wylie to receive it, a suf- ficient reply will be found in my strictures upon the Irish docu- ments.* James Wilson's letter merits no reply. It consists in bold invectives, without proof. I had seen a letter of tliis gentle- man, a stickler of the party who had conspired against me, and as treacherous and destitute of honor in the measures to which he has had recourse, as any of thcni. It was addressed to an elder of my congregation, lie had acted his part so well, upon my way down to the Synod, that I conceived him a warm friend. 1 was astonished at his villainy. This letter was stuffed with in- vective. I had the honor of Judge Walker's acquaintance. I wrote Judge Walker, stating my views of Mr. W^ilson's conduct. I charged him with inconsistency. I knew it was probable he would see the letter. I had no objections he should. I felt pained at the idea, that Judge Walker, whose acquaintance any person in this assembly would conceive an honor, should be misled by Mr. Wilson. I was aAvare, that the person who could behave as he had done, would attend to no honorable limits in his animad- versions. In endeavoring to defend myself against such a person, I believe I discharged a duty. That Mr. Wilson conducted him- self exactly as I have represented him in his own letter, if he denies, I cannot prove. But I leave you to judge, whether it is not highly probable he did so from these circumstances: — That I stopped, and detained two other gentlemen, from Thursday until Monday, that I might gratify him in preaching on Sabbath. It is not very presumable I would have done so, when there was no obli- sjation to any man, but to one who appeared at least a friend. It is equally improbable I should content myself so long, in the ferment- ed state of my mind at that time, in any place, where the persons would not enter warmly into my views of the subject. It is a narrow shift, sir, to endeavor to destroy one roan's reputation, by the bold assertions of another. Mr. Wilson charges me with false- hood. I charge him with both falsehood, deep deceit and delibe- rate injury. I charge him with assassinating my character in pri- vate, while he pretended friendship. It remains for you and others to judge, whether either be culpable, and which is so.
I am happy to have it in my power to correct the story of Baehr under which my reputation has bled, without sympathy, since December last. In May 1810, sir, I quitted New-York. I had previous to this, had an account with Mr. Baehr. I owed him a balance, for which I gave him my promissory note at six months. You, sir, and all my brethren can bear witness, that at that time it v/as contemplated I should settle in Baltimore in the end of the summer, and that I was invited to accept of a
184
professorship in the new College. [Hers Mr. G. presented letter* trom Mr. Knox, President of the college, stating that a place in the College had been vacated for his acceptance.] I therefore gave Mr. Baehr my address, on Union College, Baltimore. When the note became due, I was in the West. The calls were not present- ed for my acceptance until the 20th of November. I had accepted the call of Canonsburgh. I wrote Mr. Baehr my ad- dress. About two days before my letter arrived, he had, after finding that I was not in Baltim.ore, published the advertisement, which my reverend brother M'Leod has read in your hearing. Upon hearing what Baehr had done, I sent on his bill. I hold his receipt in my hand, with the note I gave him. [Here Mr. G. presented them.] I thought of punishing him, but deferred it until I went down to Synod. I called with him, accompanied with Messrs. Hazeiton and Cooper, who are both present, and shall be called upon if the court think fit, to attest upon oath what passed. Baehr acknowledged he was sorry for the mistake, and proposed, should I bind myself in §1000 security, that I would not make use of the paper he should give me, in a suit against him, he would give a paper v/hich would present the matter in a correct point of view, and to my exculpation. I refused to give the security. He uttered himself in the presence of wit- nesses, with a wish I should make whatever use I chose of it, to this amovuit, that he regretted the mistake, that it arose from a misunderstanding, that he entertained a high opinion of Mr. G's integrity, and had received the payment of his bill honora- bly. This can be proven at this moment, if necessary. [The court did not call for proof.] My brethren, sir, could have ex- plained these things, and therefore have defended my character from the disgrace, occasioned by the licentious attack of Baehr, had they been so disposed. It was my not becoming stationary in Baltimore that occasioned it. Of this they were perfectly aware.
But as it is, I believe it will never injure my reputation. I believe there are few who will not conceive it a most disgrace- ful thing, to take the advantage of such an occurrence, under such circumstances as I have stated. With regard to Union Col- lege, that is the name by which I understand it. How I come by it, I will not, I cannot say. There are persons in this house, who can prove (Messrs. Hazeiton and Cooper) that they heard Mr. Thornton of New-York say, that he hea.rd me call it Union Col- lege, even after my first return in April 1810, from Baltimore. The address of my letter both to Mr. Knox and Mr. Sinclair, will shew it. One thing I cannot, I must not suppress. The very man (Dr. M'Leod) who has presented the advertisement, wrote me a letter after Baehr was paid, stating that Baehr was satis- fied, that he had promised to him (Dr. M'Leod) he would coun- teract the advertisement, by another, that, if he had the manlinest
135
to do it, he had not seen it, and advisinc^ Mr. G. against prose* cuting Baehr, observing as a reason, " the matter was now bu- ried, and there would be no use in a resurrection." [[Here Mr. G. produced the letter.] Yet, sir, this is the very gentleman who has pulled this matter out of the grave, who has given it a resur- rection— a resurrection under the most aggravated circumstan- ces, after himself had allayed my thoughts on the subject, and had consigned the matter to oblivion, and myself to tranquility; after I was thereby sufficiently put off my guard, and he was aware, had renounced all designs of defending myself against it, with the help of this deceitful stratagem, it is unexpectedly pro- duced. This, too, will punish itself. The misrepresentations re- lative to Mr. Sergeant, as read in court by Dr. M'Leod, in his own hand-writing, have been sufficiently corrected by the depo- sition of Mr. Hazelton, who has represented a conversation be- tween Mr. Sergeant and myself, wherein Mr. S. expressed him- self warmly of the conviction he entertained of Mr. G's integrity.* It is not, however, improbable, sir, that Mr. Sergeant, after con- versing with Dr. M'Leod respecting me, may have been agitated. This is no moi'e than might be expected. It is the only way I can account for Mr. Sergeant's inconsistency. It would appear, Mr. M'Leod told him, I was not yet settled in the west, which certainly would excite some surprise on the part of Mr. S. But this will be easily corrected, sir, by assuring Mr. S. that I am settled in the west. The letter of Mr. Knox, sir, written pri- vately to Mr. Wylie, and complaining that he had been disap- pointed by my not settling in Baltimore, is to be corrected by a letter which I hold in my hand. [Here Mr. G. presented a let- ter, from Mr. Knox, which informed Mr. G. that a place in col- lege could not be vacated before August or first of September.!] I wrote Mr. Knox in October, immediately after my arrival in the west. His disappointment could not, therefore, be more than a month, if any thing. I had not written Mr. Knox, that I would positively fill a place in his college in August or September. If I had, it ought to be produced. But, sir, so far from my treating Mr. Knox improperly, it is the reverse. I have Mr. Wylie's letter in my hand, which will shew, that there Avas more than a suspicion, Mr. Knox had not treated me well. [Here Mr. G. presented the letter, containhig the following remarks : " I had a letter from Mr. Knox. There was nothing in it new, only a
* See page 1 15.
I The letter is dated Baltimore. April 30, 1810. Tlie part which refers to tlie above transaction is thus : — " The result of my conversation with Mr. Sinclair, after your depailure, was favorable to you and }oiu' interests. His opinion, how- ever, was, that it would be tlie first of August or September next, before you could remove, and be settled here, so as to give any regular attendance — and also before we could no-:v with propriet}', get rid of our present assistant-instruc- tors, so as to leave a vacancy for you. In die course of that tiijie, we think that all these obstructions, on both sides, may be removed.'*
A a
186
promise of a place when the seminary would be more completely organized in the new building, with an assurance that this was really the design, both of himself and colleague. He seemed sen- sible that this negociation nvith me, compared with his treatment of ijoUf required an afiology." The letter is dated, Philadelphia, May 7th, 1810.] This, sir, requires no comment. Mr. Wylie had forgotten I had such a letter.
It now only remains, sir, that I call the attention of the court to the deposition of Dr. M'Leod. I shall not be so invidious as to dwell upon Dr. M'Leod's sweaiung himself and his ancestors, to the fourth generation back, possessed of genuine piety, while al- most in the same breath, he deposes, as he must be answerable to Almighty God, that I am a hypoci-ite. I shall proceed at once to remind my brethren of a transaction between Dr. M'Leod and myself, in the month of May, 1810, in Philadelphia. It was, as you will recollect, on the evening of the day of fasting, previous to the dispensation of the Supper. Of the members of this court were present, Messrs. Wylie and Black. Upon Dr. M'Leod and 1 meeting in Mr. Wylie's, it was perceived we were not happy together. Mr. Wylie, to whom I appeal for the correctness of the statement, applied to each of us in turn, to endeavor a reconcilia- tion. Dr. M'Leod declared he had nothing in his breast against Mr, G. to prevent him from holding communion nvith hi7n. It was proposed we should have an interview. The brethren met. Dr, M'Leod again declared before them, he had nothing against Mr. G. I proceeded to give a narrative of the treatment I had met with from him and his friends, during the last eight months in New-York. I shall take the liberty to recal it to your recollec- tion. [Here Mr. G. related a story of the aid which he furnished on a sacramental occasion, in Dr. M'Leod's congregation, in the most unfavorable circumstances ; and that immediately after, Dr. M'Leod despatched a letter to Mr. Wylie, presenting, in the most pathetic coloring, his own (Dr. M'Leod's) oppression on the oc- casion.*] Upon my restoration, August, 1809, I had been ap- pointed by the Presbytery to supply Dr. M'Leod's congregation in his absence. I did so, for five weeks, at the end of which he returned. His conduct, and that of his friends, became insolent and insufferable. His preaching, and particularly his prayers, were generally believed by strangers, (who, often disgusted, left
* Letters of this description vvei-e posted in every direction during tliat win- ter. The writer of this has seen a letter from Dr. M'Leod, dated JMarcli 6, 1810, wherein he states, that Mr. G's aid dispensed in his pulpit, would not average at more than a discourse in the montli. Why, Doctor, there are thousands can prove this toibe a wilful, palpable falsehood ! Let us hear what follows .- " I lec- ture on the testimony to very crouded assemblies, on every Wednesday night." O, Doctor, this is too much, indeed it is. The matter, sir, divested of its coloring, stands exactly thus : You were lecturing on the testimony every Wednesday night, in the kitchens of Andrew Gifford and John Agnew. You miglit be croud- ed, but it was impossible you could have a cronded a^sfmbly .'
187
the meeting-house) to consist of libellous insinuations against his brother minister. His constant theme was, the motives that might be supposed to actuate preachers. These, Avhen applied in his prayers afterwards, in the most audacious and impious manner, to his brother preacher, left his duped people at no loss to know who the doctor meant. His low friends were continually at it, sir ; and when they ran out of materials, were supplied by the Doctor. O, sir, it was a most disgraceful scene. Every thing, both sacred and common, was basely prostituted by this man and his relatives, to overwhelm the stranger. At first, it was done with a degree of cuiming that eluded observation ; but by and by, as the Doctor gained upon the prejudices of the people, it became more palpable. He could not treat me with common civility. I was frequently insulted in his house, and at his table. Those, whose feelings were congenial to his own, co-operated with him, in insinuating crimination, and rousing suspicions. I was fre- quently informed of their conduct by strangers, who at the same time requested I should take no notice of it, as the people were generally accounting for it in a way which did me honor. I con- tinued to preach on the evenings of the Lord's days, until about the beginning of January, when the Doctor's malevolence trans- ported him beyond all bounds. He attacked my expressions from the pulpit. His friends insulted me in the streets. They were indefatigable in their efforts to spread scandal. Those of them who had at first paid a becoming attention, so hotly the spirit of faction raged, informed me they would " no longer be friendly, for theij fierceived Dr. M'-Leod was jealous." I was compelled, during the time I aided on the Sabbath evenings, to eat my dinner sometimes at a tavern, and when I came down warm, in keenly freezing nights, found myself under the necessity of hunting the town for a close carriage, to preserve my health, and to carry me to my family, at the distance of two miles from town. I shall give you a specimen of the savage conduct of M'Leod and his party. During the winter, I sustained the rupture of a blood- vessel, which confined me two Aveeks. I early informed Dr. M'Leod. The use he made of it on the two Sabbath evenings, was to represent himself disappointed by Mr. G. and to insinuate he was badly treated. Mr. G. was at that very instant confined to his bed, and so \veak, through loss of blood, he could not step across the room. This the Doctor knew. Judge, sir, what it is this man would not sacrifice to his low ambition, his drivelling popularity. The general conduct of his congregation was no less illiberal. If I except a very few,* they never once called to en- quire after the health of my family, although in general, during that winter, sickness prevailed in it to a great degree. And to
• Among these few I allow a distinguished place to Mr. Daniel Fisher, mer- chant, to whose polite, friendly, and unremitting attention, I owe jnucJi.
188
complete the scene, sir, they continued somehow to impress the public, that they had made me a very liberal compensation for my Sabbath-evening labors, while I do assure you, sir, most so- lemnly, I have never yet received one cent. This circumstance I should not have mentioned, had I not learned they had circu- lated a falsehood, which has been improved to my prejudice, by giving an additional argument for my extravagance. For proof of these outlines of the scene of ungenerous treatment I met with in New-York, I refer you to the deposition of John Stevenson, to Mr. Wylie, who acknowledged he had reports to this effect from the students who attended the theological seminary in New-York, and to the deposition of Thomas Hazelton, relative to a conver- sation with Mr. Thornton. After this, sir, and much more, against which Dr. M'Leod could not defend himself, the matter being notoi'ious, you all agreed " that the conduct of Dr. M'Leod to Mr. G. was imprudent and inauspicious." You then exerted your influence to have us reconciled. He frequently professed his willingness it should be so. I demurred, because I had suf- fered so much, and so undeservedly. At length I was prevailed on by the persuasion of my brethren. We shook hands. Dr. M'Leod exclaiming in words to this effect, " May the Redeemer cement it (meaning the reconciliation) by his bowels." My bre- thren rejoiced. Mr. Wylie has candidly confessed, he could have shed tears of joy. We went up to the house of God together. We held communion in the gospel, and professed love and fellowship, over tlie symbols of Christ's body and blood. Now, sir, all this happened after my residence in New-York. I never returned, after that communion, to reside in New-York. I instantly moved my family. All the grievances which Dr. M'Leod's oath contains, must have existed prior to that time. All this he has, upon oath, acknowledged. Either, therefore. Dr. M'Leod at that time be- lieved me guilty of those things Mdiich he now lays to my charge, or he did not. If he did believe me guilty, and professed he had nothing to offer against holding communion with me, shed tears, and used a most solemn expression upon our reconciliation, and afterwards sanctioned it, by holding fellowship with me in the Supper of the Lord, he is guilty of a most horrid and impious dissimulation ! If he did not then believe me guilty, and felt at perfect liberty to use the same common cup of blessing with me, without reluctance, I fear it will infer, as it respects his present oath, a sin of still greater enormity ! One of these awful predi- caments he has hurried himself into, in his zeal to overwhelm me. I leave it with himself to choose which it is. He will find it impossible to extricate himself, by all the tortuous paths of so- phistry, out of this dilemma. My heart recoils from the thought, of a man for whom I had once a high esteem, professing most so- lemnly, that he had nothing in his breast to prevent fellowship, and confirming the affirmation over the body and blood of the
189
Redeemer, in the presence of God, angels, and men, while, at the same time, as appears by his oath, he was prepared to swear falsehood, impiety, hypocrisy, and simony, against the very per- son to whom he made these solemn professions, and with whom he eat, in three days after, of that body, and drank of that blood 1 Let us attend to the manner and matter of this unnatural de- position. Dr. M'Leod, sir, admitting there were real gromids for the testimony he has given, has answered upon oath, he ne- ver informed me he intended to comfdain of my conduct to the church. In this, he is aware, he acted disorderly. — His charges, moreover, are of a peculiar kind ; they are not to be ranked un- der any of the heads of the libel. They, therefore, required a se- parate discussion. This libel ought to have been regularly pre- ferred, Avitnesses called, and time given to make a defence. What a violation of church ordei' — what an abuse of character and of reason is here ! A man to keep up his charges until the defendant is about to make his reply to the charges already discussed, and then attack with new charges, merely that he may take the defendant at an advantage, and disconcert and stab him before he is aware of the treachery. This disorder, sir, is aggravated, by permitting the accuser to swear to them, and still much more, if he be the only witness. I cannot, I must not dwell on it. It is a mode of proceeding big with disorder and mischief. In the field of battle, such stratagems xnay pass for ge- neralship, but they are perfectly detestable in a church of Christ ! —And now, sir, what has Dr. M'Leod to witness ? If we except his first charge, viz. falsehood, the remaining charges are unfit subjects of an ecclesiastical process. Want of piety, hypocrisy, Sec. are not mateinals for judicial investigation. Facts, facts only are suitable objects of enquiry for this court. Who would under- take to prove, I mean to swear, any man destitute ot piety ? This oath, sir, is one of a most extraordinary kind. With dis- cerning men, it will require no comment. It will be enough that the witness undertook to swear a man a hypocrite. But the doc- tor gets out, by saying it is his judgment that Mr. G. is guilty of these things. Detestable subtei^fuge. This is affirming nothing but his own belief Who does not see through this sophistry ? The doctor does not undertake to swear positively to the fact of falsehood, want of piety, hypocrisy, &c. but he swears to his own belief. Examine the preamble to his oath. Will you admit of this as evidence ? Would you convict a man upon it ? If I should ad- mit that Dr. M'Leod, in his judgment., thinks me guilty of these things, which he has sworn he does, would that be sustained as proof that I am guilty ? This is all you have, sir. The Doctor does not swear to the truth of the charge, but to his own opinion of it. It is just such an oath as I would have expected ; so artfully contrived, so exquisitely framed, as to convey the idea that Dr. M'Leod is swearing that Mr. G. is guilty of falsehood, want of
190
piety, &c. while, in fact, he is only swearing, that is his judgment. Now, sir, I admit it may be his judgment, but I deny the fact; I deny his judgment is correct, and I refuse to be robbed of that which is more dear to me than life itself, my character, upon the judgment of Dr. M'Leod. Do, my brethren, only reflect coolly what would be your own case, or the case of any man in this com- munity, were he to be deprived of his reputation by the opinion which his enemy may entertain of him ! I beseech you assert your independence. Discharge your duty to your God. Treat this strange deposition as it deserves. The matter of it is such, as no man, who has any respect for his soul, would positively swear to. The Avitness, therefore, has cautiously, although cun- ningly, confined his oath to his own judgment of what he asserts. " Dr. M'Leod, (says he,) will relate facts and words, which, ia HIS JUDGMENT, evidence," 8cc. &c. I ti'ust, sir, my bi'ethren will not expose themselves, by gravely pronouncing the oath of Dr. M'Leod, in proof of any thing alleged against me. It would be absurd. The witness has made oath only in support of his own judgment, which, by the way, only shews you he has prejudged the case, and would compel him, in a court of equity, to abandon his seat as judge. In a word, sir, Dr. M'Leod may be a great man, and a pious man, and every thing excellent in the judgment of his admirers ; but, sir, he is my adversary, a man, in Avhose heart the tormenting arrows of envy and hatred rankled. He has, under the influence of these hateful passions, formed a judgment of me ; to that judgment he has had the imprudence publicly to swear. By his judgment, sir, I refuse to be judged. I believe it a disorderly and shameful subterfuge. I challenge my opponents to defend the practice. Dr. M'Leod, in swearing to his opinion of me, under such evident marks of enmity, and after such manifest and indefatigable exertions to have me criminated, has only ex- posed himself.
However odious and detestable this proceeding may be, some attention is due to the facts, which are in a distorted, detached, and perverted manner, presented in the deposition — To prove, not the fact of falsehood, but the judgment of Dr. M'Leod, six items are introduced. Any man, who examines them attentively, will perceive they are garbled to serve a purpose. Facts are al- leged, making up the two ends of the story, and forming an appa- rent contradiction. These demand only an explanation to make them consistent. The most honest representations, sir, are liable to such perversion. Were it not, perhaps, too ludicrous for the occasion, I would say, Dr. M'Leod's representation of facts, to fabricate proof of falsehood, reminds me of what is said in the pamphlet of Billy Bluff, the Irish politician : We have the two ends of the story ^ but it wants the middle. Dr. M'Leod has given us the two ends, but before he was at liberty to form even an opi- nion of falsehood, he ought to have applied to me to supply the
191
middle. [Here Mr. G. at somelfength pointed out, in the most clear and satisfactory manner, the inconsistencies, and insidious representations of this part of the deposition.] The second asser- tion made, in the judgment of the witness, is, avant of piety. This may be true, sir. The best of us have reason to fear in this quarter. Is Dr. M'Leod certain he possesses piety himself? O yes, he lias sworn to it. The public affirmation, upon oath, of his judgment upon this delicate subject, disgraces the understand- ing, and develops the uncharitable heart of the witness. Dr. M'Leod could never prevail on Mr. G. to converse on pious sub- jects. He must, therefore, be an impious wretch. Those who know Dr. M'Leod, will be astonished to hear of his charging any man with evading pious conversation. He may bring the same charge against all his brethren. I have witnessed them often to- gether. I have heard him and them talk obscenely, jest, and tra- duce character. I have seen them smoke segars and drink bran- dy,* but never heard them talk piously. [Here Mr. G. assigned satisfactory reasons for conversing on money matters with the witness, and for non-attendance on the societies in New- York, The first was occasioned by the difficulty of procuring a subsis- tence in any of the vacant congregations ; the last on account of evening classes taught by Mr. G. in New-York.] The third charge, sir, is hypocrisy. I am shocked at the circumstance to which the witness alludes in proof of it. He has acknowledged himself, upon oath, that the conversation which he has gai-bled, took place on the last morning of the Synod, ^lay 20th. The substance of which was, that he, in a feeling manner, remon- strated against my cold and polite visits. I justified myself, by alleging, I could not do otherwise, unless I should prostitute nay independence. I had not the confidence of my brethren, and I thought it the most effectual way to secure myself against de- gradation. This, sir, the witness has not represented in the light in which it happened This is all the ground my brethren have, to charge me with calling myself a fictitious character. [This, and the following items, Mr. G. explained to a gi-eat length,] I appeal to the state of the vacancies in this country ; to my in- fatuated attachment to this communion; to my submitting to re- linquish a lucrative employment, and to carry my family through the country; to my general deportment, which has been charged with too little attention to the value of money ; to the many ge- nerous offers and brilliant prospects I have sacrificed upon the altar of this church ; to the small compensations generally made to our preachers ; to my residence in this part of the country, as
* Mr. G. alluded here to a famn clamosn, existing' at tliat monicnt, of intoxi- cation, charged to Messrs. M'Leod, Black, and Wylie, on the evening- tlievliad made a diversion tliroiii^h Mr. Grahum's consncg'ation. Two affida\'its, unsoli- cited, r-.!id regularly made before a magistrate, were put into Mr. G's hands, intended to pruve the ahove charge.
192
fully calculated to rebut the unfounded calumny, that I am in the habit of making use of my ministry, any more than any other minister, for the purpose of procuring filthy lucre.*
I have now, sir, dismissed the fama clamosa. The attempts used to develop my private transactions, will meet, sir, by every enlightened and liberal mind, with the contempt it merits. The supposition, that a person, situated as I have been, could have paid debt, is preposterous. During my stay in New- York, which was only one year and five months, I did not realize more than fifteen hundred dollars. My first six months produced only five hundred. The following six promised double that sum, but fail- ed, owing to the case of John B. Murray. The last six were spent in procuring not more than four hundred and fifty dollars. My prospects were still brilliant. I was rising triumphant from the stroke of Murray, at the time I resigned my school, and bet gan to itinerate. My brethren have been successful in snatching me from eligible circumstances and handsome prospects. They have never had the honor to replace them. The generality of the stories of my extravagance in circulation, sir, are false. We may form a correct conjecture of how matters stood, as to report, with our brethren in NeAv-York, by the groundless calumnies propagated in this part of the world since I arrived. While sit- ting at my books, I have been represented dashing about in splen- dor and fashion ; my house garnished in the most expensive manner ; my purse supplied out of the bank of Pittsburgh ; enor- mous debts contracted in all quarters ; my helpmate calumniated by extravagance and folly, and even my infants have shared the common fate of their persecuted parents. Everything about me has been prostituted at the shrine of malevolent brethren, to give their aching heart a momentary, but a diabolical satisfaction. While my brethren have been using the most unhallowed ex- pedients to rob me of my office, they have, in the hearing of many hundreds present, labored to blast my character as a teach- er of school. Impious, inexorable malice. Not satiated yet. "The veriest gluttons do not always cram." I had thought, when I reached this peaceful and obscure country to the Avest, I should have found an asylum from unnatural persecution — Avhere, in the language of the Poet,
Where from the ways of men laid safe ashore,
I'd smile to hear the distant tempest roar.
I have met with a bitter disappointment. The spirit of faction has condensed its energies around me, and threatened to
* This deposition being, upon the Avhole, an impious and subtile attempt to injure Mr. G. a violent attack upon the dearest rights of man, :iiid a conxct spe- cimen of the odious measures which persons in that community are prone to have recoui-se to, in prostituting the character of their fellow men, the writer of this thinks proper to intimate, it shall probably meet with separate atienllon.
193
bury my prospects in the ruins of my office. But the Lord God Omnipotent reigncth. I have suffered much, sir, for this community. I may have been imprudent in some instances, but I have sacrificed much vipon the altar of this church. Do me jus- tice, sir. Disavow this mean prosecution. Restore me to your good opinions. I have done nothing- to forfeit them. Should you persist in your designs, I trust God Avill provide me in an oppor- tunity to dispense the duties of my office. He is at this moment providing me an asylum in the hearts of my fellow men, who have appeai-ed, to witness this scene. Their just opinions of it have been like cooling water to a thirsty heart. I can recognise in it the finger of God, " who carries the councils of the fro- vvard headlong." I can perceive him opening a door, before my adversaries had power to shut. On his good providence who has never failed me, I mean to cast that office with which he has invested me, my bleeding reputation, and my family. This mat- ter shall be tried at a bar where there shall be no shuffling. Until then I trust, I shall be enabled to commit my difficult case to his management.
Mr. G's defence was followed by a long speech of M'Leod — in which he dwelt chiefly upon the Irish transactions, and on low stories which had been circulated. He attempted to justify tho conduct of the court. He ridiculed the people of Pittsburgh, for their sensibility at one time, and in the most crafty manner, la- boi'ed to prejudice their minds against Mr. G. at another. He spoke of despising' Mr. G, of plucking the vizard from his broiv, and lashing him 7iaked through the world. He spoke much in justi- fication of his own conduct, and frequently appealed to heaven for his uprightness in the matter. He conchided by reading the following resolutions which he said he would not yet move.*
After M'Leod had spoken to a great length, and begged a respite, as he was exhausted, the inhabitants of Pittsburgh, publicly presented Mr. G. with a sealed letter, containing an inclosure.t
Upon Dr. M'Leod's reading the above resolutions, and before they were moved, Mr. G. asked, and obtained with some difficulty, liberty to speak. He animadverted upon the injustice of the pro- ceedings, of all the judicatories in his case, demonstrated the propriety of the ground he occupied, upon the footing of his protest, for which, he appealed frequently to the laws of the church, which he read. He observed, he thought the court, from the beginning, incompetent to try the case, adver^^ed with seve- i-ity to its glaring partiality, and said he w(ul<^ never have thought of submitting his case to its investigation, but to have im opportunity of justifying himself, before God and his fellow
* See the Appendix, No. 5. f See the Appendix, No. 1.
Bb.
194
luen. After a speech of considerable length, he concluded, hy saying he now saw how the matter would terminate, the resO' iiitions of M'-Leod we're the ioc&in of alarm, and proceeded to read his DTECLiNATURE, whilc lie presented a copy of it to the clerk of the court, viz.
I, David Graham, for the exoneration of my own conscience, and the consciences of all who may adhere, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the head of the chui'ch, do decline the au- thority of this court, and of all the judicatories in this chui'ch, and all further communion with it, for the reasons which fol- low.
1. Their imperfect and erroneous views of Presbyterian church government ; their ecclesiastical government being manifestly founded in tyranny.
2. Their harsh and unedifying view of the gospel, exhibiting it chiefly, as theoretical and controversial, without a practical ap- plication of it to the hearts of the auditors.
3. Their mal-administration, both in Ireland and America, consisting in their general and open display of impiety in their judicatories ; particularly, levity, injvistice and cruelty.
4. Their open toleration of criminal passions, such as malice, enmity, hatred, he. Their nianifest display of prejudice, and their attempts to justify those passions, prejudices and actions, which is a prostitution of the gospel.
To this, I solemnly call God, angels and men, to witness. I in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, take my stand on the blessed scriptures, professing to recognise the doctrine, worship, government and discipline, of the Reformation Church.
WE, tlie undersis^ned, who g'ave regular attendance during the above trial and DEFENCE, and recorded tlie proceedings, having seen Mr. Gi-aham's Nar- rative, do attest its correctness. Thomas Cowan,
John M'Clelland.
Having, at the request of some members of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Pittsburgh, attended during part of tlie trial of the Kev. David Gra- ham, for the purpose of taking down the testimony ; and having perused the Narrative of Mr. Graham, do declare that I believe the proceedings, as far as I have a knowledge thereof, to be correctly stated.
Pittsburgh, J\''ov. 5, 1811. fc. Pent land:
Concluding- e/dstle, addressed by Mr. G. to the Moderator of the
Presbytery. Reverend Sir,
Above you will sec my reasons, for declining your authority, and all further communion with your church. I have only to re- gret that my experience did not profit me sooner. Its fruits have appeared rather out of season. I trust, however, God will be glorified by these infirmities, which drove me into your commu- nion, and detained me in it, in opposition to every thing rational.
195
The causes of the treatment I have sustained, may still in a great degree be enveloped in darkness ; the effects will speak for themselves. The purposes which the Supreme Ruler had in view by such a dispensation, I may not be able fully to ascertain. Some already appear ; time will disclo^ the rest. It will require but little of the spirit of divination, to predict the result, as it may respect others. Your snares will be suspected, and avoided. Candidates for your communion, will benefit by my experience. I appeared before your church, soliciting admission, in the most auspicious circumstances, and you know the reception I met with, and the bai'barous scenes which ensued. Others cannot rea- sonably expect to fare better. I know nothing but a conscious and contemptible insignificance which can protect a stranger from insult among you, or secure your patronage and esteem. Even your church may benefit by tliese lessons of experi- ence. I am not without hope, a few lashes, well applied, may curb the insolence of their power. Your Irish friends at one period, rendered themselves so vile, that like penitential Monks, tJiey were obliged to whip themselves, to save their reputation. They must now submit to be chastised by another. Should these strictures provide candidates for admission among you, in future, ■with a humane reception, I shall be happy. Who knows, but when you are presented in cool blood, with a portrait of your conduct, and contemplate its hideous aspect, you may stand abashed, and begin to contend with your natural ferocity, and others may find you just and gentle ?
I am well aware, sir, this merited retaliation, will prevvoke the •stale rancor of your party. I congratulate myself upon being conducted to a position so advantageous. I have ap[>ealed to the tribunal of the public. I rejoice to think I have got an impartial judge. To this righter of human wrongs, under God, I have long looked forward, hoping in its presence to abash my mean ad- versaries. What a change to you, sir ! from the bar of the re- formed church, where equity cannot enter, to the triljunal of public opinion. Those unrighteous discussions which you hoped had been either wholly suppressed, or only partially re- corded in your courts, or overwhelmed in oblivion, shall be heard. To none is public opinion, an object of more just dread, than to oppressors. If any thing can screen the oppressive measures of your church, from more accumulated contempt, it will be your obscurity. To bring a people who are hardly known to the tribunal of a generous public, promises but a very partial redress of the wrongs they have inflicted, while it aggravates the original injury.
By those who are only partially acquainted with you, it will be asked, why did I not sooner disentangle myself ? Rather let them be surprised I have been disentangled at all. The touch of the torpedo is not more benumbing than your communion. When
196
they know they have behaved in a manner to merit your con- tempt, and forfeit your confidence, they contrive, either to waste the resources of the mind or to destroy your reputation. The former they accomplish by illiberality, insult and invective. Sus- picion, misrepresentation and calumny, are the materials with which they go to work, to effect the latter. You become either so depressed, you have not resolution to relinquish their communion, or so conscious of a want of reputation, that you despair of suc- ceeding any where else. No community, not Rome itself, appears to have matters so contrived, as effectually to precipitate into des- pondency, madness and ruin, the unfortvinate wixtch who pro- vokes their malevolence. I sought their communion with a repu- table character, in the bloom of youth, and in the most propiti- ous circumstances. But like the enchantments of Romance, when the spell is dissolved, these inestimable blessings suddenly disap- peared. Rinaldini's banditti never divided and carried off thieir booty with more unrelenting despatch, than these gentlemen picked up and carried off my reputation, popularity and pros- pects. I can say with propriety, in the language of inspiration, " I went to them fvill, and have come away empty."
The name of Patrick M'Keogg, is still fresh in the memory of many. He treated you with too much reserve and delicacy. Had his modest assertions, but strong insinuations, met my eye, as legibly as this meets yours, I had saved you the trouble of another tragedy. Him you rviined !*
I know your strength, sir, and wish a parting word upon it. Are you not determined to bewilder the minds of your people, and to envelop in darkness these transactions which threaten your disgrace ? Should the truth force itself upon them, like the feeble ray throu.gh a prison window, are you not prepared to raise the hue and cry of dereliction of principle, and make an extravagant use of the term heretic and apostate ? I know you are. There is another church, to whose proceedings yours bears a sti'iking resemblance, who would do the same. But, sir, do be honest and candid for once. Tell them, Mdiat I am certain you believe, that you have in reality no monopoly of principle, and that although Mr. Graham has declined your community, he re- tains his office and his bible. The term apostate, sir, has a fierce aspect, but is perfectly harmless when misapplied. It will serve to rouse the prejudices and stifle the enquiries of your party. Thus far you will find it very convenient for your purposes. But you cannot be so weak as to imagine, it can have any eifect upon the thinking part of mankind, other than to excite their con-
* Tins unfortunate man was educated a member of the Secession Church. He obtained licence in that communion. He afterwai-ds applied for admission to the Reformed Church of Ireland. He was admitted. The unfeeling- treatment he met vvitli, it is said, broke his heart. He died a short time after, attributing the causes of his death, as it is currendy reported in the North of L-eland, to the manner in wliich he had been ti-eated !
197
tempt. But you will vociferate principle, principle, sir, the tes- timony. I rejoice to see a testimony so replete with evangelicaf truth as youi's. It is generally an amiable and correct specimen of the gospel. I have felt for your testimony, as I would feel for the friend that I love, when I have seen it degraded by your ab- surd glosses and profane practices. I have seen you, with re- gret, make the same use of it, that degraded and worthless cha- racters often make of a respectable relation. But, sir, can you be ignorant, the truths stated in your testimony are common pro- perty, which no community has a right to monopolize ? And that to systematically oppose these truths, is the same thing as not to avow them? I can conceive these doctrines, as far as scriptural, appropi'iated by other communities. I can, moreover, conceive, a most worthless and desperate community, capable of forming and writing out a code of excellent regulations, Avhich they de- sign as a lure or a protection, while they uniformly practice upon a system of latent principles, directly opposed to the former. I have read of a certain sect, upbraided with making void the law through their traditions. Now, sir, whether are the public prin- ciples which are neglected, or the private principles which are practised, the real principles of such a community ? May not another community, who wishes to practice on these regulations, transfuse their energy and excellence into a code for themselves ? Is there any monopoly of religious principle ? May not one man, as well as a thousand, appropriate the doctrines of the gospel ? You dare not answer these interrogations in the negative. Do not, then, imagine any injury is done you by those, who, dis- gusted with your practices, wish to derive their principles, in common with you, from the same divine source. I have no ob- jections to your appropriation of your own testimony, and your practising upon it, but I have an objection to your using it as an incantation to defend you from merited censure. I alloM' a brave and gcnerons soldier to use his shield for the defence of his vital parts, but will not consent that he degrade it by defending an imposthume. You, sir, by an incessant cry of principle, keep your people in constant alarm, to the neglect of experimental religion. Your policy is bad, but what shall we say of your piety ? It is the mal-administration of your courts, and the irreligion of your people, not external opposition, which menace your destruc- tion. If you would not exclusively adopt a political creed, and assume the form, as well as the essence of a political community, spend more of your time in testifying against your practices at home, than your enemies abroad. It is a most preposterous thing, to imagiiie, that the whole, or even the greater part of religion, consists in testifying against others. And yet you are become so habituated to this absurdity, that to oppose it, is to oppose your testimony, and to hazard the reputation of a heretic.
Before I conclude, sir, you will permit me to remind you, the plan of the above prosecution, was laid in secret. It was first
198
developed in your Synod. There you determined to carry it intoefiect. You have done so, and in doing so, you have refused to listen to the language of reason, or to be directed by the salu- tary la,ws and practices of the Presbyterian Church. You have in this instance discovered'consistency in nothing, but that repul- sive contumacy, -with which I have perceived you and the Irish judicatories uniformly receive the remonstrances of reason, and the opinions and practices of reputable Presbyterian Churches. You had predetei-mined in your usual way, to carry this measure into effect," and from what I know of the management of eccle- siastical business among you, I was not to expect you would re- linquish it. No, you systematically begin with the decision, and end with the debate. You single out your victim, and neither shame nor reason, will compel you to abandon the pursuit. No one of your courts have I ever seen, in which there was not at least one sacrifice made to the genius of despotism. It was not to be expected by those who knew you, that the first Synod of your church, and the first meeting of that Synod, should be conse- crated without blood. From tlie suspicious conduct of some of your brethren, within the last 12 months, and some hints I received early in the winter, I might have concluded, I was to be the victim. Those suggestions which I could not suffer my- self then to entertain, I have now seen realized. You, sir, and your brethren have had the mortification, however, to see your plot unsuccessful. Your object was to degrade me in your church. Had your measures been less intolerant, and conduct- ed with a shew of respect for decency, you might probably have succeeded. It is to be rejoiced at, you did not. The disgrace which you contrived for another, like the recoiling flame, rolls in upon itself. It will be long remembered, by the few who know any thing of you, that you commenced your Synodical adminis- tration, by an act of tyranny. You have laid the basis of your Synodical fame among the most degrading passions of the hu- man breast. But to you who so insatiably aspire after publicity, it will be a consolation, that an evil action is heard at a great dis- tance, and longer recollected than a good one. You have set every thing legal and just at defiance. Your courage must have been great. Let this be an additional consolation.
Thus far, sir, I have taken the liberty to address you, as the representative of your brethren, who constitute the judicato- ries of the Reformed Church. Your own deportment as it respects me, is too gross to admit of chastisement by the pen. Should it ever rise to a dignity commanding public notice, and should I feel disposed to retaliate, you are aware of the expedients to which I ought to have recourse.
I have the honor to be, Sir,
Yours &c. DAVID GRAHAM.
Sept. 5th, 181 1.
APPENDIX.
No. I.
liCtter presented to Mr. Cfi-aliam by the citizens of Tlttsburgli, in the pre- sence of tlie court, August 19, 1811.
To the Rev. David Gi'a/unn. Sir — To enable you to witlist;incl persecution, and relieve yourself from pe- cuniary embarrassments, we present inclosed. Six hundred and eighty Dollars, the amount contributed by a large number of the inhabitants of this ]>lace, per accounts. — In the pleasing- hope it may assist, under Providence, in continuii\g your usefulness to society, We are your Friends,
THE SUBSCRIBERS, Pittsburgh, August 17, 1811.
[To this note were appended about one hundred names of the most reputable and distinguished citizens of Pittsburgh.]
Mk. Graham's reply to the above letter. To the Citizens of Pittsbxirgh. Permit me to express the grateful sense of your conduct which I feel. Situated as I am at this moment, under tlie lash of calumny, plied with eagerness by un- feeling brethren, tlie sympathy of my fellow-men is peculiarly animating. That love of justice which you have so convincingly displayed ou tliis occasion, will be its own reward. I do not more regret the occasion which has enlisted your sympathies, than I feel gratified in the interest which you have taken in it, un- solicited. I shall ever consider it my honor and happiness, to endeavor to reflect an humble lustre on the monument which this day you have erected to your pwii independence and love of justice.
I have the honor to be, gentlemen,
Your most obedient, and humble servant, Pittsburgh, Aug. 19, 1811, DAVID GRAHAM.
No. IL
A re^solution adopted by the congregation of Canonsburgh, after receiving aa official account, by their representative ruling elder, and commissioner, of the proceedings of the Synod and Presbytery, relative to Mr. Graham.
Whereas it appears, to tlie grief of the godly in this church, and to the great scandal of religion, that our spiritual rulers have, for a number of years past, conducted the judicatories in America in a tyrannical and unconstitutional man- ner, availing themselves, in theLi' discussions, of nothing in the form of law, and refusing to adopt or acknowledge any known standard of church, govern- ment and discipline — And whereas, conscientious christians who have at anj time demurred against their proceedings, have had their grievances increased — And whereas, this arbitrary disposition, accompanied with manifest malice, has become very apparent in tlieir late conduct towards die Rev. D. Graham:
1. In maliciously circulating reports for the last nine months, with the great- est industry, aiming at the destruction of Mr. G. and for this jiurpose adopting what appeared to them the niost effectual measures, such as framing a plot for his deposition, frequent correspondence with each odier respecting the best manner of accomplishing it, opening a cori'espondence with all characters in the church, where either their influence or m.olevolence might promise them aid, and laboring, through tliem, to prejudice the cliur;h against Mr. G. while at the same time, every precaution was used to conduct the matter so secretly, that neither Sir. G. nor his friends should be able to ascertain their manoeuvres or designs.
2. In refusing to admit him to occupy a seat In Synod, alUiough no process- Iiad as yet been instituted against him.
APPENDIX.
3. Ill entering upon the deed of Synod, as a preamble to what they called a fama clatnosa, scandalous offences, which never had been alleged against Mr. G. with others wlilch had been years ago investigated by the Irish Presbytery, and for which Mr. G. suffered depositioii, believing, as we do, that to di-ag these things again into public, is cruel and unjust.
4. In proceeding to suspend Mr. G. on the footing of certain charges as a fama clamosn, which wei-e not a fama clamosa, having never been circulated, while they declined other things which they had made public by tlieir letters and communications ; also upon the footing of things, which, if they happened, must have happened previous to Mr. G's leaving Ireland, and which it is illegal and oppressive now to resume. Also suspending, wliile they peremptorily re- fused to discuss tliese charges, and even without tiie usual form, of enquiring at Mr. G. whether he would submit in the Lord.
5. In refusing to record his protest, altiiough deUvered in the form which the law of the church prescribes.
6. In uniformly discovering the most manifest malevolence to Mr. G. during their proceedings, refusing the benefit of tlie former minutes until they should be printed ; calling upon a person of infamous character, and as an only witness, in a case wherein he should be gainer should he succeed, and when Mr. G. ob- jected to him, was told by the court, that " he (the witness) was a much better character than Mr. G." Also, the clerk refusi)ig to take down tliose things which appeared to favor the cause of Mr. G. with a general torrent of reproachful lan- guage, and every method adoj^ted, fair or foul, to asperse Mr. G. and arrive at the end with which they set out, viz. his deposition.
On a conviction, therefore, of a prostitution of church power in general, for some years, with an unprecedented display of mahce in the particular case of Mr. G. and' still more particularly as it respects this congi-egation ; fully con- vinced tliat the conduct of our rulers has been capricious and unjust, and havmg but too much reason to conclude their object is to govern the church by violence rather than by studying to attach the people to the government of the clmrch, and to themselves in love : — We, the subscribers, do therefore conceive it our duty, to make a stand against these gi-owing evils ; to call upon our rulers in a constitutional manner, to redress those grievances, and to adhere to the protest offered to the Middle Presbytery in Philadelphia, May 25, 1811, by Mr. G. on behalf of all who might adJiere, and hereby v/e do so agi-ee ; and moreover, that we shall adhere to tins ground, until we shall have documents sufficient to convince us, that our rulers have abandoned their arbitrary measures, have adopted a salutary plan of discipline and govermnent, and have done justice to their Reverend brother, Mr. Graham.
No. III. Resolved, That bothihe first and the second articles in the libel are sup- ported by sufficient proof; tliat there is strong presumptive evidence in behalf of the third; and that botli the existence of tlie fama clamosa, charged agahist Mr. Graham, under the authority of Synod, and the truth of tlie general charge of bad moral character, wliich is therein made against him, are supported by- ample testimony : and that tlie whole display of facts relative to Mr. Graham, is fully relevant to the censures of the church.
ERRATA.
For prosecution, pasre 7, line 18, read production— For proiuess, p- 23,^. 7, read process— For imputations, p. 26, 1. 14, read suspicions— For persons,^ p. oO, l. 7, read papers— For A. M. p. 32, /. 19, read P. M.—For means, P- 1^'/%' ''^"'* knoivs—For insiduous, p. 40, 1. 25, read invidious— For -winch, p. 42, . 2o, reaa ■who— For prove, p. 50, 1. 17, read produce— For unreasonable, p. 81, 1. 15, reaa -unseasonable— For Presbyterians, p. 129, 1. %from the bottom, read Presbyterian —For three, p. 182,1. 15, read tfiese—For letter, p. 184, 1. 5, read Utters.
'»#api