A Statement of the reasons which induced the students of Lane Seminary, to dissolve their connection with that institution

A STATEMENT

OF THE

REASONS WHICH INDUCED

STUDENTS OF LANE SEMINARY,

TO

DISSOLVE THEIR CONNECTION

WITH

THAT INSTITUTION.

CINCINNATI:
1834.

iiJnfif<i<Wtfiiiti.|iyiiLU'18n rnilnwg iinr(r>.

without assigning reasons either to them, to the individual dismissed,
or to the community.

These prohibitory enactments have driven us from our beloved
institution. Sustaining relations to the church of Christ now rendered
somewhat peculiar, duty to his cause demands from us an explicit
statement of the grounds of our secession.

We believe free discussion to be the duty of every rational being.
Itistheactingout of the command " Prove all things.'" It is inquiry after
immutable truth, whether embodied in the word, or hid in the works
of God, or branching out through the relations and duties of man.
We are bound to conduct this search, wherever iimaij lead, and to
adopt the conclusions to which it may bring us. And, whereas, the
single object of ascertaining truth is to learn how to act, we are bound
to do at once, whatever truth dictates to be done. Tliis duty of dis-
cussion and action is not confered by human authority, and we have
no license to resign it upon entering into any association, literary or
political. Free discussion being a duty is consequently a right, and as
such, is inherent and inalienable. It is our right. It was belbre we
entered Lane Seminary: privileges we might and did relinquish;
advantages we might and did receive. But this right the institution
^■could neither give nor take away." Theological Institutions must of
course recognize this immutable principle. Proscription of free
discussion is sacrilege! It is boring out the eyes of the soul. It is the
robbery of mind. It is the burial of truth. If Institutions cannot stand
upon this broad footing, let them fall. Better, infinitely better, that
the mob demolish every building or the incendiary Avrap them in
flames; and the young men be sent home to ask their fathers "what is
truth]" — to question nature's million voices — her forests and her
hoary mountains " what is truth!" than that our theological semina-
ries should become Bastiles, our theological students, thinkers by per-
mission, and the right of free discussion tamed down into a soulless
thing of gracious, condescending sufferance. But who can doubt the
practicabihty of governing, especially theological, students consistently
with these principles. Authority is not nullified. Faculties have their
legitimate powers still. It is theirs to inform their pupils that free
discussion is a paramount duty, and a right, which the faculty have
neither power nor inclination to take away.

It is theirs to direct the inquiries of their students ; but they must
have a care to direct them wholly by principle. If they find the stu-
dents disposed to shrink from the practical results of their discussions,
or to flee in panic when called ultraists, or to reverse their decision at
the bidding of a mob, it is theirs, as faithful leaders, to inspire them

with I'rebh courage and impL-l them forward, li' a .-^tudfiit thould not
nubiiiit to bv directod tfi, jiriiici])h-, it is conclusive evidt'iice that he
is not lit to suarcli afler pniR-ijde; and in such case the I'acuhy have
uiiqufdt lotted power to discipline or dismit-ri.

If it be objected that Huch a .system of governiuem its habh; to abuse
by students, we answer, be it so. Moral agency is abused by every
sinner. Liberty is liable to abuse, and so is religion. Heaven was
abused by devils and Paradise was prostituted by Adam. The beet
principles, as well as the best things, are most liable to abuse, liut
tiiere is a remtdy; the same that God adopted with the fallen angele
and our first parents, — Espultiuii, We know of no other. Inhibition
of free discussion is ruin, not remedy^

h'ut jM'rhaps it may be asked, " were the laws in question really in-
tended to have this bearing!" We answer; those of us who were
present at the beginnii>g of the term, waited several times upon the
faculty, to hear rAeir exposition of the laws. We give them credit for
the exertion of their utmost powers to exhibit the laws in a favorable
light, but still we are compelled to say that we were only confirmed
in our disapproval of the laws by these interviews. And we add with
pain and grief, that all their communications upon the subject were
not only unsatisfactory, but, according to our principles, radically de-
fective. We looked in vain for that profound veneration for free
inquiry which makes every consideration of popularity, gain and
safety, bow before il. Discussion was recognized rather as a privilege
which could be granted at the discretion of the faculty, than as a, duly
and a ri^ht above their bestownient.

We noticed, also, a little contrariety in their sentiments at different
times, with regard to the laws in question; for though they stated in their
written exposition that they saw " nothing in these regulations which
was not common law in all welt regulated institutions," yet afterwards
they expressed their deep regret at the action of the trustees upon thie
tnatter, a.ssuring us that they had labored hard to keep it out of their
hands. The prominent defect, however, running throughout their
expositions, we conceive to be, sanctioning the principle, that the cxci'
ting nature of any question, is good ground for forbidding its discus-
sion, and that the unpopularity of moral action, warrants its total dis-
continuance. Here is the point of utter difference between us. The
ground of our secession is thus fully conceded. We never supposed
that we should be prohibited from discussing questions which have
already fought their way to the throne of public opinion. Anddoubt-
Ies8 we could now return to the Seminary and teach our Sabbath schools,
and talk about missions, and temperance — (steering clear of the wine

question,) the year round, witliout molestation. But this is a mere
mockery of discussion, so long as a perverted public sentiment can 6ay
to us, "• hitherto shall thou come and no farther.^' Whatever may have
been the motive of the board of trustees, they have driven the plough-
share across the whole field of inquiry. There is not one subject of
discussion, not one benevolent enterprise that is not thus placed at the
mercy of a capricious populace.

The time may yet come when the prosecution of temperance will
rouse the fiend in man; then temperance must be arrested and rolled
back. The demon of mobs may yet denounce our peace societies,
our moral reform, and our Sabbath cause, and they too must perish.
He may menace our Sabbath schools, and they must be discontinued.
Next he may mark our missionary operations, with his imperial veto,
and then in vain will the heathen cry to us for help, and point to their
funeral pile, their bloody Moloch, and devouring Ganges. Like their
idol gods, we shall have no ear to hear, no arm to save. Emboldened by
success, the demon may drag our ministers from the pulpit, strew our
altars in desolation, and raze our sanctuaries to the ground. Who can
tell] If we quail at his first feeble hiss, how long before he will roar
out of Bashan and thunder from Edoni!

The folly and wickedness of making public sentiment the standard
by which theological students are to determine duty, has already been
presented to the public, by one of our number, in a letter addressed to
tho editor of the " Western Monthly Magazine.''''

We avail ourselves of an extract from that comnmnication the more
readily, because it was read to the president of Lane Seminary, at his
request, previously to its publication. He gave to its sentiments his
unqualified approbation, and it was published with his knowledge, and
hearty approval.

"What! are our theological seminaries to be awed into silence upon
the great questions of human duty! Are they to be bribed over to the
interests of an unholy public sentiment, by promises of patronage or
threats of its withdrawal! Shall they be tutored into passivity, and thrown
to float like dead matter in the wake of the popular will, the satellite
and the slave of its shifting vagaries! Are theological students to be
put under a board of conservators, with special instructions tostifle all
discussion, except on the popular s\die] In selecting topics for discus-
cussion, are the students to avoid those which are of great public con-
cernment, whose issues involve all human interests, and whose claims
are as wide and deep, as right and wrong and weal and wo can make
them! In taking sides upon such questions, the student must needs
inquire not where is right and what is duty, not which side is worthy of

8

Bupport, nol what will iiuickon the church, turn the nations from thiir
idold, pioneer into being ilie glories ot' the millennium, and cauee
ewth to hloom with the hues of heaven. Ah! tuch interrogatories are
all out of place. The only questions becoming theological students,
are, which side of the question is popular: which will be huzza'd and
hosanna'd! Which will tickle tlie multitude, and soak a sop for the
Cerberus of poj)ular favor!"

We say then, with Dr. Beecher, that theological students, in deter-
mining duty, are not to regard the obstacles which grow out of a hostile
public sentiment. But how shall duty be determined] We answer
by investi^aliun and discussion. We introduce another extract from the
name letter, showing the importance of investigation and discussion,
and their intluence on the heart and intellect.

*' Whom does it behoove to keep his heart in contact with the woes
and guilt of a perisliing world, if not the student who is preparing for
the ministry? What fitter employment for such a one, than gathering
facts, and analyzing principles; Dnd tracing the practical relations of
the prominent sins and evils and all-whelming sorrows of his own age;
especially when all these heave up their mountain masses full upon
his own vision, and at his own door — and still more especially, when
these accumulated wrongs and woes have been for ages unheeded] Is
anything better adapted toquicken sympathy and enlarge benevolence,
than deep pondering of the miseries and the wrongs of oppressed hu-
manity, and thorough discussion of the best means for alleviation and
redress! It is false both in fact and philosophy, that any thing is lost to
the student, by engaging in such exercises. Instead of his progress
being retarded in the appropriate studies of a theological course,
(which should certainly be his mai« business,) it will he accelerated.
Whenever intellect moves in the sublimity of power, the heart gene-
rates its momentum. It is when the deep tides of emotion well out
from full fountains — that intellect is buoyed upward, and borne on-
ward in majesty and might. A subject so deeply freighted with human
interests as that of slavery, cannot be investigated and discussed intel-
ligently and thoroughly, without amplifying and expanding the intellect
and increasing the power of its action upon all subjects. Let our in-
aiitutions engage in discussing subjects of great practical moment; such
as slavery, temperance, and moral reform: let them address thomselvee
to the effort, let it be persevered in through an entire course, and they
will introduce a new era in mind; the era of t/w/>o«oi/e power and practical
accomplishment. But besides the general impulse given to thought and
•niotion by contact with subjects of vast practical moment, a large amount
of definite knowledge upon tuch subjects must be acquired. The mind

9

should have a household familiarity withal! their principles and bearings;
tlie interests affected, the wide relations to right and wrong, and the
ultimate effect upon human joy and wo. This applies with tenfold
force to theological students. He who would preach in the nineteenth
century, must know the nineteenth century. No matter how deeply
read in the history of the past, if not versed in the records of his own
day, he is not fit to preach the gospel. If he would bless the church
now, he must know her now; where she is, and what her moral laditude;
must scrutinize her condition — inspect her symptoms — ascertain the
mode of previous treatment, and compare it with the prescriptions
contained in God's book of directions, where the case is described.

"Is a man prepared 'rightly to divide the word of truth, giving to
each his portion in due season,' who is ignorant of prevailing sins and
evils, the moral movements of the day, the spirit of the age, the causes
of existing inefficiency, and the nature, position, and relative power
of those counteracting causes, which defeat instrumentality, both hu-
man and divine, and roll the world away from the millennium^ It is an
axiom with universal mind, that discussion, discussion free as air, is
the grand desideratum for ehciting truth. If our theological seminaries
pursue any other course, they will fall behind the age. This kind of
training is as important apart of the preparation for the ministry, as an
acquaintance with the principles of interpretation, or a knowledge of di-
dactic theology. In short, our theological seminaries will only mock the
exigencies of the age, and the expectations of the church, unless they
hold their students in contact with these exigencies, that when they
have finished their preparation, and are thrown into the midst of them,
they may know where they are and feel at home,"

We heartily concur with Dr. Eeecher in approval of these senti-
ments.

All the giant sins which have ever made havoc in society, have been
tolerated and sanctioned by public sentiment. He that moves with
the tide of this public sentiment, is a part of it, augments it, and can-
not absolve himself from the responsibility of its effects. If it be
wrong, it is not enough that he silently withdraw his original contribu-
tions, leaving the remainder to sweep on unresisted. It is not enough
that he neither votes for iniquity himself, nor solicits the votes of others.
If he would be guiltless of blood, he must do his utmost to unite
against it the suffrages of the world. A moral agent cannot determine
duty by proxy. He must investigate for himself.

Perhaps it may be said, " Let the right and duty of investigation be
conceded; but whence the obligation to discussV When infinite in-
terests are pending, all available aid is demanded. Discussion is the

10

slAndard test for the detection of fallacies and the revelation of truth*
It 18 the furnace where gold and alloy separate. It is the fan which
drives the chatf and wheat aaunder. It is the court of errors where
thf decisions of individual tribunals are reversed or confirmed. In
the search after truth, can we dispense with such aid, when available,
and be guiltlessl

The ripht of discussion stands on the same basis with that of con-
versation; the interchange of civilities; and social worship: all of which
belong to us as social beings, and are in no sense lost by connection
with a Theological Institution. What is discussion but conver.sation
regulated by rules for the purpose of facilitating an interchange and
comparison of sentiments? And if the infringement in the one case
is a palpable violation of natural rights, it is equally so in the other.

But, if the right of free discussion be allowed, it will be abused; and
against the abuse there is no remedy. Students often engage in un-
profitable conversation, and thus abuse Iht right. Shall conversation
therefore be made contraband, and the selection of topics a tax upon
the resources of the faculty J Shall theological students play the mute,
except when the strings of their tongues are loosed by those in author-
ity? On this subject, we introduce an extract from the "Standard," a
religious periodical, published by the trustees of South Hanover College,
and Theological Seminary, and edited by the professors of the same.

In coimiienting upon the laws, they say, "If we were at liberty to
speak freely on this subject, we should question the propriety of adopt-
ing any resolution forbidding free discussion among the students of a
public seminary. This is a matter which we think nmst be left to the
students themselves; and if any student should abuse this privilege, so
as to injure the Institution, let him be cutoff from all the privileges of
the Institution. We think this a nmch safer course than to attempt to
regulate the discussions of students in any other way."*

• VVi' cannot forbear introducing, in this connexion, short extracts from able ar-
ticles, published in the Ohio Observer, edited by two gentlemen, the one a teacher,
and the other a trustee, of Western Reserve College; and from the Pittsburgh
fViend, edited by Professor JVevin, of the Western Theological Seminary. Thej
»re decisive, as vsill be seen, in their reprobation of the laws in question.

We might multiply similar extracts from other journals, but these are sufficient.
The Observer says, " It is too late in the day to pass ex post facto laws, or chain
down literary, and especially theological students, exclusively to Hie hac hoc, and
by force of law forbid their discussing any of the great questions of politics, morals,
or religion, which agitate the world. Nor do we believe it consistent with the high-
est interests of the young gentlemen in our literary and theological seminaries to do
this, if it were practicable. If the orticersof an institution, when they know the will
of the trustees, cannot, or will not regulate thij business, by the power of moral in-

STATEMENT.

The undersigned, recently members of Lane Seminary, having
withdrawn from that Institution, desire to lay before the Christian
public, the considerations which have influenced them; together with
the circumstances which have mainly contributed to such a result.

Of those who have now severed their relationship with Lane Semi-
nary, some attended its earliest recitations, and these, with a large num-
ber of the remainder, entered its first theological class in the fall of 1833.

The circumstances of our matriculation were pecuharly impressive.
We were connected with an institution freighted with the spiritual
interests of the West. We were numerous, without a precedent, in
the beginnings of similar institutions. The Valley was our expected
field; and we assembled here, that we might the more accurately learn
its character, catch the spirit of its gigantic enterprise, grow up into its
genius, appreciate its peculiar wants, and be thus qualified by practical
skill, no less than by theological erudition, to wield the weapons of
truth.

But the responsibility of the post we providentially held, as the first
class in a Theological Seminary, outweighed all other considerations,
in our estimate of duty. The friends of the new Institution expected
of us, that we should be letters of commendation to the western
churches, and that our scholarship, piety, and practical usefulness,
would be the earnests of its future success.

Our probable influence over succeeding classes, was also matter of
deep solicitude. God, the church, the ministry, the wantsof a sinking
world, summoned us to such a course of holy living and self-denying
action, as our successors might with safety imitate; to breathe a spirit
which might well inspire them; and to leave behind us mantles which
they might fitly wear.

We aimed, therefore, to make such a disposal of our influence, as
would contribute to place Lane Seminary upon high moral ground, and
thus greatly elevate the standard and augment the resources of minis-
terial efficiency.

As a primary step, we were led to adopt this principle, that free dis-
cussion, with corresponderU effort, is a duty, and of course a right.

We proceiil.d upon iliin principle, witliout molestation, in oui
8ludii'ri,ut our recitationd and lectures.

Wo applied it to missions, at home and al)road; and we acted imme-
diately, through liberal contributions. Wo took up temperance. Dis-
cussion was needless, duty was plain, and we aclcJ. With the Sun-
day school cause, we proceeded in like manner. Next moral relbrm
came up. We e.xamintd it, in a series of adjourned meetings; light
was elicited, principles were fixed, and action followed.

With the same spirit of free inquiry, we discussed the question of
yclavery. We prayed much, heard facts, weighed arguments, kept our
temper, and after the most patient pondering, in which we were sus-
tained by the excitement of sympathy, not of anger, we decided that
slavery was a sin, and as such, ought to be iimnediately renounced.
In this case, too, we acted. We organized an anti-slavery society, and
published facts, arguments, remonstrances and appeals.

We threw ourselves into the neglected mass of colored population in
the city of Cincinnati, and that we might heave it up to the light of the
sun, established Sabbath, day and evening schools, lyceums, a circula-
ting library, &c.; choosing rather to employ our leisure hours in offices
of brotherhood to "the lame, the halt, and the blind," than to devote
them to fashionable calls and ceremonial salutations.

We have outraged no man. We have scrupulously performed all
Seminary duties, as our instructers will testity. We are not aware of
having done any thing which could have been left undone, without a
surrender of principle. On the contrary, we mourn that we have done
so little, and suffered so little, for those who have lost every thing in the
vortex of our rapacity, and now, all manacled, trampled down and pal-
sied, cannot help themselves.

The faculty have repeatedly, and to the last, assured us, that our
demeanor toward them has been respectl'ul, that our conduct in the
wiiole tenor lias been such as to sustain law and order, that there was
nothing to prevent them from giving us upon our withdrawal certif-
icates of regular standing, Avhich they accordingly did. The ground of
our secession from the Seminary, is, that free discussion and correspon-
dent action have been prohibited by law. We are commanded to dis-
continue our anti-slavery society. We are prohibited from holding
meetings among ourselves, and from making statements and communi-
cations at table or elsewhere, without permission. A committee of the
board of trustees is set over us to exercise censorship, and vested
with discretionary power to dismiss any student whenever they may
deem it necessary so to do, without consultation with the faculty and

11

To the above sentiments we cordially subscribe. Let just retribution
overtake the wrong doer; but let the guiltless pass unharmed. If there
have been a wanton misapplication of time and talents, bring down
the penalty, without sparing or pity; but only where it is deserved.
Make not the crime of the guilty, a pretext for general seizure and con-
fiscation of the rights of the innocent. Better that a generation of
students should be expelled, than that discussion should for a moment
wear a shackle.

By the right of free discussion, we do not mean that we have the right to
employ, for that purpose, the time appropriated to other duties, nor
that we have the right to occupy the public rooms without permission,
nor to conduct the discussion otherwise than in the spirit of christian
kindness, nor to suffer preparation for the exercise, to interfere with
the regular duties of the Institution. But we do mean, that during
hours expressly devoted to that object, or during intervals of time un-
consumed by other requisitions, we have the right io select, and inves-
tigate in concert, or discuss, subjects of our own choice.

The following propositions, which we believe to be self-evident,
embody our views.

fluence, let the trustees remove them, and supply their places with those who will
do it. But we disapprove of any thing resembling a gag-law. And we fear not to
hazard our reputation as true prophets, on the truth of the assertion, that both the
trustees and faculty of Lane Seminary will yet rue the day, when they adopted and
published the report from which the following resolution is extracted. For auo-ht
that we know, there may have been many things wrong among the students of the
Seminary; if so, let the faculty correct the abuse by moral power, without an at-
tempt, which, to say the least, looks like an effort to shut out the light of truth and
exclude free discussion."

Remarking upon the proceedings of the trustees, the Friend says, " The time will
come when such illustrations will be needed on the page of history, to convince the
world of the reality of that strange monomania, by which, in this age of enlightened
and energetic philanthopy, a question so immeasurably and eternally momentous as
that of slavery, can be treated by American freemen and christians, as no better than
an impertinence or a visionary phantom. It is a moral abomination, of which good
men ought to feel themselves ashamed, in this day of liberality and light. If the
stu ents of Lane Seminary are not capable of thinking and acting for themselves on
a subject of this sort, with at least so much of the meekness and wisdom of Christ, as
is sufficient to shield them from bringing a reproach upon religion, they cannot be too
soon remanded to their homes, as unfit altogether for the sacred office to which they
aspire. If the young men who belong to our theological seminaries cannot be trust-
ed to inquire and act freely, in a case so deeply implicated with the great principles
of christian duty, we say, candidly, they are not fit for the place thej- occupy; and
it were better these institutions should be emptied of them altogether, than that it
should be found necessary to uphold their credit by means of a legislation so magi»-
teriai and intolerant as that which is now under consideration."

1-2

Propositions. Every man lias the right freely to investigate every
subject siibinitted to his consideration. He hat) the same right to con-
duct this investigation in cuncerl teilh others; provided it be done at
such tiiiu' and place, as not to encroach upon the rights of others. We
bt'lieve that these rights are not derived from man, that they are inse-
parable from accountable agency, and inalienable, and, of course, are
neither surrendered nor forfeited by membership in a theological
seminary. Furthermore, we believe, that to prohibit theological stu-
dents from peaceably assembling for the examination of great moral
questions, in hours unappropriated to other duties, is an open violation
of their rights.

The following rule, adopted by the board of trustees, contains such
prohibition, viz.

^^ '* Rile iJnd. The students shall not hold general meetings among
themselves, other than those of a religious or devotional character, or
for purposes associated with the course of studies; nor deliver public
addresses, or lectures, at the Seminary or elsewhere, in term time,
other than those connected with ordinary religious exercises; nor make
public addresses, or comnmnications, to the students when assembled
at their meals, or on other ordinary occasions, nor be absent from the
Seminary, in term time, without the approbation of the Faculty, or,'*bf
such person as they shall designate for that purpose."
^ That the design and full bearing of this rule may be clearly seen,
we annex principles and opinions expressed in the report of the Exe-
cutive Committee. — "The Committee are further of the opinion, that
no associations or societies among the students ought to be allowed in
the Seminary; except such as have for their immediate object, improve-
ment in the prescribed course of studies." The board of trustees, at
the meeting at which they enacted this rule, "approve and adopt" the
sentiments of this report by a formal resolution, and thus afford an
exposition of their desig^n and intent in the enactment of the rule.
Again, the report says — "The plan of instruction is intended to be
60 arranged as to occupy as much of the time of the students as a due
regard to their health, and other proper considerations, will admit."

The reasons which the board assign for the above declarations, are
the following — "Associations and discussions foreign to the course of
instruction, distract the attention and retard improvement. If the
topics are matter of public interest and popular excitement, the mis-
chief is peculiarly aggravated."

It will be seen that this rule, as expounded by the opinions and
principles of the legislature which enacted it, forecloses all rational
expectation that free discussion will be tolerated in the Seminary.

13

What matters it whether free discussion be proscribed in its own
name, or under some other designation? Wliether //se//" be specified in
the act of outlawry, or some of its constituent parts and inseparable
appendages'? Take aAvay the right of assembling, and of speaking
when assembled, and he v.ho, from the materials left, can construct,
free discussion, nmst be blessed with uncommon invention. But by
this rule, free discussion is made to depend upon a condition — "the
approbation of the faculty." The will of others is a peculiar tenure
by which to hold inalienable rights!

But waiving all objection on this head, what rational ground is left
for the hope that discussion will be unshackled? The faculty is the
executive power of the Seminary, and as such, bound to execute
faithfully its laws, according to the true intention of the legislative bodv
enacting them. The principles contained in the above extracts sufi
ciently instruct the faculty in the discharge of their duty. But the
board are still more explicit. In the report already alluded to, they
say, in regard to discussion on the subject of slavery^' that every tiling
tending to keep alive a spirit of controversy on the subject in question,
oiiffht to be excluded from the Seminary,''^ In conformity with this sen-
timent, an order was passed for the discontinuance of the obnoxious
society.

But to remove the possibility of error, the board, during the meet-
ing at which the rules and orders were passed, and the report ap-
proved and adopted, further direct, that certain " suggestions be com-
municated to the faculty in explanation of their vieics relative to the
regulations adopted." In these "suggestions" the following statement
is made. "On the subject of slavery, the board are of opinion, that
public discussions ou^A/ to be excluded from the Institution.'^ Now, we
ask, will the faculty of Lane Seminary permit the subject of slavery
to be discussed in the Institution, when the board of trustees formally
declare to them their conviction that it ought to be excluded? To ex-
pect such permission from them, before discussions upon slavery
become popular with the community, argues either ignorance of facts,
or insensibility to evidence.

But suppose the faculty should grant permission to discuss subjects
aside " from the prescribed course," and unpopular with the comnm-
nity, yet there is another power behind the throne, which overshadows
it. We refer to the extraordinary powers granted to the executive com-
mittee, in the second order passed by the board of trusteesJj" Ordered,
That the executive committee, have power to dismiss any student
from the Seminary, when they shall think it necessary so to do.'*^

Necessary for what? Has a law been broken? The faculty should dis-

IJ

14

cipUne the offender, and if incorrigible, dismiss him. But what arc
the functions with which this order clothes tlie executive committeei:
Why, just what the order imports; "to dismit-s any atudent wlien
they (ihall think it necessary so to do." But why nece^■«a^yT Were ad-
ditional "law.s," "rules," "orders," and "suggestions" needed! then
why not supply the demand to the fulll Or was this "order" re-
garded as the abstract of all law! It surely contains the epsence of all
ix>wer — summary judgment for the student at least, if not justice^
Laws, constitutions, charters, judges, juries, all form of trial, vexatious
balancing of conHicting testimony, all intricacies of casuistry, with
wear and tear of patience in nice adjustment of the scale of equity, all
these are dispensed with; and the executive committee are authorized
to dismiss any student when they " think it necessary so to do!" No
opportunity afforded the student to rebut charges, confront wilnessee,
meet an accuser face to face, plead a jusiihcation, or prove an alibi.

The faculty dismiss for misconduct; the executive committee "when
they think it necessary so to do!" Thus far the letter of the law.
Let history testify to its practical operations, and be the commentator
upon its sj)irit. As soon as the board had clothed the executive com-
mittee with this extraordinary power, a meeting was immediately call-
ed to exercise it. A resolution was introduced for the dismissal of a
member of the theological class; for dismissal, not trial. That indivi-
dual had never been cited to answer to charges, and was accused of
no conduct unworthy a christian, or a man. The only allegation made
was that he had introduced into the Seminary and propagated abolition
sentiments. At the same meeting of the committee, another resolu-
tion wa.s introduced for the dismission of another member of the theo-
logical class; the president of our anti-slavery society. These resolu-
tions were nut rejected as informal, but pronounced in order, and
adjourned over from meeting to meeting with other business, to await
the return of Dr. Beecher. After his arrival, the resolutions were
withdrawn. To be dismissed from a theological seminary for a suflS-
cieni cause is a stigma not easily effaced; and the sufficiency of the
cause is always supposed, unless the contrary be shown. \Vho will
hazard his reputation by joining a Seminary where he is liable every
moment to a forcible out-thrust, branded with indelible disgrace, and
that too, while strictly complying with every requirement of the In-
stitution! Has any theological student the right thus to trifle with
that " immediate jewel of the soul," that indispensible requisite to use-
fulness— "a g-ood name?" Reputation, as well as intellect, is moral
capital, loaned by God to be invested for his glory, and he is a mad-
man that trusts it to the convov of chance on a sea of prejudice anil

15

passion. Such power lodged in such a body and thus exercised, ie
despotism full grown and to the life. The Pope excommunicates only
when " he thinks it necessary so to do." The Inquisition order to
the rack only " when they think it necessary so to do." The Divan
consign to the bastinado and the bow-string only " when they think it
necessary so to do." The Star Chamber and the Council of Ten tor-
tured, banished, and brought to the block, only "when they thought
it necessary so to do." Eighteen hundred thirty-four, has nominated
a new candidate for the catalogue, and added another star to the con-
stellation. The executive committee of Lane Seminary thrust from
ihe Institution " any student when they think it necessary so to do."
And is it in view of this, that the laculty of Lane Seminary say in
their ^^ declaration'^ to the public, dated Oct. 17, " we approve of, and
will always protect and encourage, in this Institution, free inquiry,
and thorough discussion!" Is free inquiry " protected and encour-
aged" in an institution Avhere students are liable to dismissal for such
causes? Was it in view of this order, that the faculty said in their
" declaration," " we see nothing in these regulations which is not com-
mon law in all well regulated institutions, since they merely commit
the whole Jiianagement of the internal concerns of the Seminary to the
discretion of ihefacultyV Aiter attempting to exercise the authority
vested in them by this order, in the manner above mentioned, how
could the executive committee " concur" in this declaration of the fac-
culty, " as a correct exposition of the intentions of the boards" If they
know this to be "a correct exposition of the intentions of the board,"
and ii dissmissing' students belongs to the " tH/erna/ concerns of the
Seminary," then they, by attempting to exercise that power, have as-
sumed authority which was contrary "to the intentions of the board."
In their "declaration" the faculty say that they regard this order "as
aimply vesting the executive committee with trustee power in certain
cases." Why the need of vesting this particular trustee power in the
hands of the executive committeel Have not ihe faculty sufficient au-
thority for the dismission of students] Or is it to secure the dismissal
of students in " certain cases," without compelling the faculty to
" adopt yb»- /Aewise/ue* severe or arbitary regulations," — and thus pro-
cure to be done by the executive committee what,/ro77i motives of fol-
icy, it is thought not best for the faculty to do. But we are not left to
conjecture on this point; — the trustees have spoken so explicitly as to
leave no room for doubt. In their "suggestions" to the faculty, the
board of trustees say, that in the government of the students, "there
is little danger of too much restraint," — that "it is no objection to the
rules now adopted, that in practice they may be sensibly felt by tlie

pupils ts a i-ontinued re-^traiiit on tlieir niovt'iiu'iits." They also say,
their " ohjtjct u to secure to the/ai ulty a more direct and certain injluence
over the conduct of the students, withoi't the neckj»sity ot auoitinu roR
THiMSELVEs severe or arbitrary regulations.^^ We pa»B this without
coiiuiient. We do not wonder that the preBidentol' the board, begged
:u< he did, thai thin extraordinary order might not be pulilished to the
world, and that not a lew members oi the board, who voted for the
"order," greatly desired to keep it secret, and voted against ita pub'
lication. *

We have already expressed our dipsent J'rom the doctrine laid (\h-wii
by the trustees, that " no associations or societies ought to be allowed
in the Seminary, except such as have for their inmiediate object, im-
provement in the prescribed course of studies." Repudiating the doc-
trine, we refuse compliance with the "order" based uj>on it, and
quietly withdraw from the sphere of its action. The order is as fol-
lows: "Ordered that the students be required to discontinue those so-
cieties (the anti-slavery and colonization societies) in the Seminary."
We cannot comply with the order, 1. Because it would be the surren-
der of a right. Upon this point we have already enlarged. — As mem-
bers of the anti-slavery society, we cannot comply with the order, 2.
Because we formed our society to operate against the system of slavery
and all its allies: and until that system is abolished, and those alHes
retreat from the field, the considerations which called it into being,
forbid its dissolution. Is this a tinie to destroy our society, when truth
is fallen in the streets, and judgment turned away backward? When
the pulpit is overawed, the press panders to power, conscience surren
ders to expediency, discussion to proscriprion, and law to anarchy!
When the heart of the slave is breaking with the anguish of hope de-
ferred, and our free colored brethren are persecuted even unto strange
cities?

Is this a time to lay our lianJs upon our mouths, when the ambas-
sadors of Christ hold as merchandize, and sell for filthy lucre, the mem-

• Our anticipations have been reabzed! Since our withdnnval from Lane Senii-
narv, tve have learned that the rules referred to in this paper, and which were alleged
to be " nothing but cocunion law in all wtU reg-ulated institutions," have been some-
what inoditicd, and the power to prevent, or interfere with the discussion of the stu-
dents, is couimitled golel)' to the faculty. While thus the rigor of the laws appears
to be softened, their */>tr»7 remains essentially the same. Even now, the students of
(.ane Seminary have no more iVeedoin than pertains to the press, while under a cen-
sorship. Kveu now, in this particular, they have but the liberty of the CJeorgpia
»litve>, who may hold "general meetings," when their masters ptrmit them " so
to do."

17

i)ers of his own body; and, with the price of blood in their hands, atill
break the sacramental bread! When the shepherds of God's flock,
instead of carrying his lambs in their arms, tear them from the fold, and
hurl them to be rent by wolves — and yet are caressed by the church,
accounted faithful shepherds and worthy of all honor] No! — with
heart, and soul, and mind, and strength, we answer, No! We cannot
betray inviolable trusts; we cannot break our plighted faith; we cannot
surrender inahenable rights; we will not shout hosanna in the train of
arbitary power, nor plot treason against humanity, nor apostatize from
God. No! God forbid that we should abandon a cause that strikes its
roots so deep into the soil of human interests, and human rights, and
throws its branches upward and abroad, so high and wide into the sun-
light of human hopes, and human well-being.

Having stated at length the main grounds of our withdrawal front
the institution, we proceed to notice the reasons officially assigned by
the board of trustees, for their extraordinary movements.

The fundamental principle with whicii they start, is this: — "No
seminary of learning, especially no theologico.' one, should stand be-
fore the public, as a partizan on any question upon which able men,
and pious christians differ." This beins; the central point of their doc-,
trines, whence all the rays diverge, it is no marvel that they terminate
at last in practical quandary and absurdity.

"Able men and pious christians, differ" upon the subject of home,
and foreign missions: Some believing that they should be conducted
only by ecclesiastical associations: Others, that voluntary associations
are preferable. Some be'.ieve that licentiousness should be discoun-
tenanced by organization in societies; Others deprecate such measures.
Some would circulate the bible, without note or comment: Others,
ORly with the prayer book. Some, suppose that camp meetings are
one of the glorious instrumentalities of the church: Others, that they
should by no means be tolerated. Some that extemporaneous preach-
ing is vastly more useful than any other: Others, are horrified at such
an idea, and aver that the reading of written sermons is destined to
convert the world.. Upon these and numerous other points, " able
men, and pious christians differ."

it the doctrine laid dovrn by the trustees, be correct, no societyi
which takes any ground whatever upon such subjects, should be form-
ed in theological seminaries. To express opinions, to unite in action,
to form societies, on either side of such questions, is to act with a
party ~io be a " partizan." Whether " corporations have no souls,"
or otherwise; — we have in this doctrine, testimony from a high source,
that theological seminaries have none: -or at least, that they have ab-

18

Bolution from accountability and that the moral agency botliol'stctden(»
and faculty, while they are connected with the institution, has, by
special indulgence, leave of absence — on furlough. But an inetitU'
tion founded upon tlje principles laid down by the executive com-
mittee is an impotsibility. Where shall we look for materials out of
which to conrtiruct its faculty and students! Where can be found a
sufficient quantity of neutrals, non-coinmittalo, non-descripts, and
nullities for such an emergency? Such commodities are not on sale
in the western market, and we know the east too- well, to recommend
importation from that quarter.

The particular reason assigned by the trustees in justification of
their action at this juncture, is, ^Uhe proceeding'$ among the ttudentt on

the SIJBJECT of SLAXTRY."

Frequent allusion is made to these proceedings in the documents
already referred to. The report alleges that discussions on this sub-
ject, "distract the attention and retard improvement." It speaks of
" miscliief," " party spirit," *' heated torrents of unextinguishable ran-
cor," " agitated minds," •' whose judgments are not well settled:" and
it declares that " the government of the institution cannot, with due
regard to its usefulness, longer delay to adopt decisive measures on
the subject," and then gives "an outline of the regulations requisite
to remedy the existing evils," — one of which regulations is, the adopt-
ing of a rule "providing for discouraging, and discountenancing, by
all suitable means, such discussion and conduct among the students,
as are calculated to divert their attention from their studies, excite
party animosities, stir up evil passions among themselves, or in the
community, or involve themselves in the political concerns of the coun-
try." The board "approve and adopt" these charges, pass the regu-
lations requisite, and give their "suggestions" to the faculty. In these
"suggestions," the loardsay, that discussions on the subject of slave-
ry ought not to be permitted because "so nmch of excitement and
party animosity has already arisen from this source." They add, "It
is evident to all who are accustomed to observe the signs of the times,
tliat there is at present in our country among all classes and depart-
ments of community, a strong and growing propensity to insubordina-
tion— a disposition to set up individual notions or constructions in
opposition to lawful authority, to justify resistance to law by private
opinion against its policy or propriety. When such a spirit developes
itself in midnight riots, or public rebellion against the laws of the land,
we all regard it with horror; yet is but the workings of the same spirit
which arrays the students of our colleges in hostility to the regulations
establislied by their constituted rulers. If allowed thus in youth it

19

may become most pernicious in agei And if indulged at all among
the reputable and the educated, what must we nOt expect among the
profligate and ignorant 1 If students of a theological seminary are
allowed thus unconsciously, but most efficiently to act in alliance with
the rioters and nullifiers of the day, we may well despair of the repub-
lic." "Entertaining such views the board have regarded it as no

objection to the rules now adopted that they may be mert with decided
hostility by some indiscreet individuals among the students, or that irt
practice they may be sensibly felt by the pupils as a continued restraint
upon their movements.'*

The grave charges contained in these' docttmehts demand an exam--
ination. But we will first inquire what measures the trustees have'
taken to procure specific information as to the facts in the case.

In their report, the committee say " they have considered the subject
referred to them, and collected such information as their opportunities
have afforded." We regret that their intercourse with us, while
members of the Institution, was such that they could not possibly have
very extensive "information."

There has been on the part of tlie Trustees who aided in the passage
of these rules and orders, an almost total non-intercourse with all the
students except those whose views were similar to their own. They
have received vague rumors and acted upon them, without affording
us an opportunity to refute or explain. They have made the false
reports of those who have become hostile to us on account of our " pro-
ceedings on the subject of slavery," the ground of public accusation
and of enactments deeply affecting our reputation and rights. As an
illustration of these general statements, we give the particulars on a^
speciiiic point. J^ot one of the board was present at the regular annual
examination of the several classes in July last; although one of the
charges brought against us is neglect of study and diversion of attention.
Surely this was a favorable "opportunity" to have acquired specific
"information" on that point,"inasmuch as the examination continued a
week, and two thirds of the trustees, and all the executive commit-
tee reside but two miles from the Seminary. Even the Examining
Committee, though specially invited to be present by letters from the
Faculty, were all absent during the whole examination. Further ; not
a member of the board of trustees has been present at a single recita-
tion of the students, since the discussion upon the subject of slavery
last winter. The number in the board of trustees is twenty-five ; of
these, two-thirds reside in Cincinnati. We feel bound to add, that we
are all known to three members of the board, who are also members
of the executive committee. They are acquainted with us, and all

90

our operations, intimately. Eacli of these gentlemen opposed the pas-
•agt' of the laws, both in committee and in the board: and they stood
alone.

In an official communication from the board to the patrons of the
In.'^titution, it is affirmed that " the slavery tjuerttion wa-s becoming the
primary object of attention, taking precedence, in the interest of the
jitudents, of the great pur{)o.so.s for which tlie Int^titution was char-
tered."

W'f are aware of no such duproportiotiaie interest, as is here spoken
of. It is true tiiat of our pittance we have given to the cause of anti-
slavery; but we have as individual members of the Anti-Slavery Soci-
ety, contributed more than Ihrie-fold more to other causes. Tliis plainly
indicates our continue<l and unabated interent in the various benevo-
lent operations; while our progress in the prescribed course of study,
the faculty themselves being judges, proves that there has been no
withdrawtuent of attention on this score.

And we add that, though we have had repeated and urgent invitations
to deliver public addresses on the subject of slavery in various places
throughout this region of country, yet we have all uniformly declined
these invitations, without an exception.

1. But we now proceed to ask what is the proof that our " procee-
dings upon the subject of slavery" have diverted our attention froi7j
our studies and retarded our improvement ?

Did the examination at the close of the year furnish such evidence!"
That was the touch-stone. Many witnessed its application ; let them
testify. Our professors have testified both at home and abroad to our
proficiency in study, and our familiarity with the various subjects pur-
sued during the year. Are tkey competent witnesses?

In addition to the faithful performance of the duties usual in a theo-
logical and literary seminary, the niembersof the theological class have
had, during the whole year, a society, the immediate object of which
was, imjjrovement in the prescribed course of study. One hour each
day, and, for a considerable portion of the year, one hour and a half,
was devoted to theological investigation, criticism and discussion. The
time requisite for this purpose was taken from those hours not appro-
priated to any Seminary duty. To the objects of this theological asso-
ciation alone, was devoted four-fold more time than was expended in
discussion on the subject of slavery, and in efforts for the elevation
of our colored brethren in the city. Our evening schools and Lyceum
lectures among them were so managed, that, by rotation in labor, it was
not necessary for each individual to devote more than one evening in

five or six weeks to the business of instruction. Finally, we dismiss
the charge by remarking, that if the trustees, or even one of them, had
been present a single hour during the annual examination, or had at*
tended one recitation in the Seminary during the year, they would
have gathered by observation, some data for an opinion.

2. What is the proof that the Institution has been *' in a state of
anarchy," that we have been "at open war with the faculty," and
that the "discipline of the Institution has been entirely prostrated 1"
Professor Stowe, in a sermon preached in the chapel of the Institution
after the close of the last term, expressly declared all such representa-
tions totally false. He vindicated the character of the students, asserted
their diligence in study, their respectful demeanor towards the faculty^
their obedience to law, and their christian deportment. The public
eulogies, pronounced by Dr. Beecher upon his pupils, during his
recent tour, we need not press into our service. They were uttered
in Boston, New York, and other places, in the hearing of thousands,
and are remembered. In a letter written by Dr. B. while on his return
from the east, to one of our number, he speaks of the students as " a
set of noble men whom I would not, at a venture, exchange for any
others."

It is a singular coincidence that the student, to whom Dr* B, wrote
the letter, from which the above is an extract, and to whom he says in
conclusion, " I am as ever, with much respect and aflection, yours,"
was, on the day in which the letter was written, accused before the
executive committee as a disorganizer and dangerous member of the
Institution, and a resolution introduced for his dismission. In conclu-
sion, under this head, we assert without the fear of successful contra-
diction, that every law and requisition of Lane Seminary has been
implicitly obeyed by us, and that the utmost harmony has existed
between the students and the faculty. Difference of opinion upon the
subject of slavery has never interfered with the reciprocal interchange
of courtesy and affection.

3. We are accused of giving the Institution a partizan character,
and of committing it against the American Colonization Society. An-
swer. Of the twenty-five trustees of the Seminary, at least twenty-
one are decided Colonizationists and universally known as such. AH
the professors also are in favor of the American Colonization Society,
together with the superintendent, and the general agent and financial
secretary. During a series of Colonization meetings got up last spring
in the city, and intended, as is believed, to bear upon the interests of
the Seminary, Dr. Beecher and Professor Stowe were the principal

speakers. Their speeches were written out for the press and were

published. These have been copied into newspapers, in all parts of
<he country.

Nor is tliis all. The pen of Professor Biggs has been brought into
requisition for the support of the American Colonization Society. He
has been employed during the vacation, in writing a aeries of essays
upon this subject, which have been published in the Cincinnati
Journal.

Surely, if the unwearied efforts of the trusteet*, and of llie oflicere
of the Institution, could give it a partizan character, it might be set
down as the partizan of Colonization doctrines and measures.

But further; some of the students, during the summer, after con-
sulting with the President on the subject, and under his auspices,
organized a Colonization Society. True, the society never held any
public meetings in the Seminary, and we were first appri.sed of ite
existence through the newspapers; — yet the Board inform us that it
■was organized " mainly with a view to counteract the peculiar senti-
ments of their opponents." Yet notwithstanding all this array of
trustees, faculty, and students — authority, office and intluence, and
ill these sanctioned by the public sentiment of the whole West — the
Anli-slavery Society among the students gave the Institution a partizan
character ! ! There was no complaint that the Institution had a par-
tizan character previous to the debate on slavery, and yet all the the-
ological professors, twenty-four of the trustees and almost all the
students were supporters of the Colonization Society.

4. It is alleged that we have injured the prosperity of the Seminary.
Let facts answer the charge. We have the names of forty students
who were intending to have entered the Junior Class of the theolog-
ical department at the commencement of the present term ; and three
who were intending to have entered the Middle Class. They all signi'
fied their intention a/ier the results of our discussion on the subject
of slavery were fully known to the public, and before the e.xecutive
committee had published their report. We have the names of more
than forty students who were intending to have entered the literary
department in full view of our anti-slavery proceedings. The major-
ity of them expressed their determination previously to any action on
the part of the executive committee; and but one of them, to our
knowledge, was influenced to this determination by the jiassage of the
laws in question. From letters received by us, we know that many
others, whose names are not in our possession, had resolved to join the
institution after our proceedings were before the public, and prior to
ihe doings of the executive committee.

23

We know that at least twenty-four of the /Aco/ojg-icaZ students above-
mentioned, have been deterred from entering, by the passage of the
"rules and orders;" and the literary department has been almost
entirely prostrated by the extraordinary conduct of the trustees. We
are not apprized of the reasons which have deterred the remainder
from joining the Seminary, but can only say, that their minds have
been changed since the proceedings of the executive committee, and
of the trustees, were published.

We aver then, that the present dilapidated condition of the Semi-
nary is not in consequence of " the proceedings among the students
on the subject of slavery ;" but has been caused by the "decisive
measures'' of the trustees, in their attempt to exclude free discussion
from its halls.

The Cincinnati Journal recently asserted, that several students were
known " who had resolved to go to Princeton, N. J., unless the aspect
of things could be thoroughly changed in our Seminary," and that
such students would now doubtless come to Lane. The term has been
in operation six weeks; it is believed that every new accession this
term, with a single exception, has been in spite of the laws. This if
known to be the case with most of the new students.

5. As to the charge that our discussions and conduct on the subject
of slavery, have excited among ourselves "party animosities," "evil
passions," "bitter party prejudices," &c., we only say; not one of us,
whose names are hereunto subscribed, can recall a single instance in
which there has been any personal animosity between the members of
the Anti-Slavery and Colonization Societies. It has been with us a
constant source of gratitude to God , that in all the discussions in which
we have been engaged, there has never been a descent to personali-
ties. We state a fact which will illustrate the liberal bearing of the
majority of the Seminary, towards the minority. In the election of
officers for societies, and in making appointments for public exercises;
also in the appointment of committees to responsible duties, a much
larger number was selected from that portion of the school, whose sen-
timents on the subject of slavery differed from the majority, than they
would have been entitled to by their relative proportion to the whole
number. If these brethren possessed superior Jitness for office, and
the discharge of responsible duties, their appointment argues at least
candor and good will, on the part of the majority. If they did not
possess superior fitness, their appointment certainly evinces a dispos-
tion in honor to prefer them.

6. In the report of the committee, it is made ground of accusation
that " the anti-slavery society of the Seminary, was organized without

21

the consent of the trustees, or the faculty; and the discussions con-
nected with it were without the absent, and af»ainst the advice of the
facuUy." \Ve answer. There was no law or usa^eof the Institution
making it the duty of the students to procure the consent either of the
faculty, or the trustees, to hoUl any discu.^sion, or form any society in
the Seminary: and it is not pretended that the discussion and the
organization were foi-hidden by the facuhy or the trustees; although
they knew of both. We had previously forined a society for Inquiry
on Misiiions, a Society for Mutual Improvement, a liiblo Society, a
Foreign Mission Society, and a Society for Miscellaneous Discu.-sion,
without asking their consent, and no exception had been taken. Be-
sides, the preaiuble and constitution of the Anti-Slavery Society were
read to Dr. I'eeclur, previous to publication, in compliance with hir^
re<iuest, and, in its entire spirit and sentiments, received his sanction.
At least two memliers of the faculty applied for copies of the docu-
ment, which they distributed in different parts of the country, through
the Post-office. All the professors, except one, attended parts of the
debates. But " the Anti-Slavery Society was organized without the
consent of the trustees!" Indeedl

7. Another high-handed misdemeanor is charged against us. It lias
been industriously reported, that one of the students of the Seminary
boarded, for a time, in a colored family. The news of this outrage
has caused so many ears to tingle, and excited such a fever heat in
the community, that we yield to the entreaties of some oi our friends
in this vicinity, and state the yac/*. 1st. It is nol true that any indi-
vidual, while a student at the Seminary, has boarded in a colored fa-
mily. '2d. It is true, that one who had previously taken a dismission
from the Seminary for one year, did engage in teaching a colored
schoool in Cincinnati, and a part of tlie time while thus engaged, did
board in a highly respectable and worthy colored family. 3d. It is also
true, that the individual took boarding in the colored family at his own
suggestion, not only without the advice but without the knowledge
of any of our number. 4th. It is also true that when we were inform-
ed of it we were divided in opinion as to its expediency; some of us
thinking it unwise, and others decidedly approving, it; believing that
thus the teacher could secure more entirely the confidence and co-
operation of the individuals to whose good he was devoting himself —
could acquaint himself with far more ease, and to a vastly greater
extent, with the influences exerted upon his pupils at home, together
with the internal relations, the family management, and all their do-
mestic habits, tempers and manners; and thus, far more intelligently

25

and effectually promote the elevation of the deeply injured class whose
improvement he was earnestly seeking.*

8. But this is not the climax of our grievous offending. We have,
forsooth, "promenaded the streets with colored girls;" " left our cards
at their houses," &c. &c. As this is one of the sentimental tales of a
light periodical, something must be pardoned to the spirit of poetry,
and something to a propensity quite hartnless fox fancy sketches. We
have only to say, all the information in our possession, touching this
subject, was derived from the periodical above-mentioned. If that
claims for itself such an exclusive monopoly of knowledge in these
matters, as to constitute it authority, we presume not to dispute its
prerogative. Having propounded no category of grave questions to
our brethren upon this weighty matter, we have not, of course, an
authenticated list of answers. This much we say; if any member of
the Seminary has, at any time, walked with a colored young lady,
either in the city or out of it, no one of us had any knowledge of it.
The only occasions ever given for such reports, to our knowledge,
were the following. The brother spoken of above, who had previously
discontinued his connection with the Seminary, did in two instances
walk with colored women. Both of these women were married;
were of middle age, and one of them, at least, the motherof full grown
children. Further, both these women were his own pupils; they had
toiled out the prime of life in slavery, and were enjoyiiig in his school
the only opportunity they had ever had for learning to read. In one
of these instances, he overtook the woman as she was going to obtain
relief for a person in disti-ess — she had never been at the place, and
enquired the way of him. He went with her, and kindly pointed out
the house. In the other case, he went with the mother of one of his
scholars to a religious meeting, of a Sabbath evening. The woman
had been but a short time in the city, and did not know the place of
meeting. The same individual has, in two instances, walked to
church with a young lady, whose complexion is such, that she has
been admitted for years past into the female schools of the city, and
has never, in any instance of which we have known, been suspected
even of the crime of color.
We have gone into this minute detail for two reasons — 1st, To give

* Since writing the above, we have been reminded that one member of the Insti-
tution did board, two weeks, with a respectable colored family, during the raca^ion,
while engaged in gratuitous instruction of the colored people. This individual, be
it known, had been a slaveholder, and having repented of his sin, and emancipated
his slaves, proceeded to do works meet for repentance, by efforts to elevate a race
in whose degradation he had personally aided.

c

the facts of the case; and to ehow liow little credit is to be given to
vague rumors, when they pass through such a magnifying medium as
common fame; and, 2diy, That we might have an opportunity of de-
claring that we are, and have always been, at an equal remove on the
one hand, from that ostentatious display of superiority to opinion
which would induce a vaporing bravado to strut before the public eye,
eaying, " come see my zeal for an equality of colour;" and, on the
other hand, from that compound of pride, prejudice, and scorn, which
would either blush with shame, or redden with rage, to sit at the same
table, kneel at the same altar, occupy the same seat at church, or board
in the same family, with worth, respectability, and virtue, " if guilty
of a skin not colored like its own." While upon this point, we take
pleasure in stating a fact, highly honorable to the president of Lane
Seminary. At the close of the last term. Dr. Eeecher Invited the stu-
dent^i of the Seminary to take tOa with him, together with the profes-
sors and their faniilies, and some gentlemen from the city. When the
company were assembled, the Dr. expressed his regret to some of us,
and has t'requently done it since, that our colored brother, James
Bradley, was not present; and said, if he had dreamed of his being ab-
sent, he would have gone himself and insisted upon his coming.

[It may not be known to all, that this brother is a native of Africa;
was stolen in childhood, and sold into slavery, in South Carolina. A
year and a half ago, he purchased his own body, and joined this Insti-
tution. He now leaves it, unwilling to surrender, again, inalienable
rights, or to aid in the destruction of a society of which he is a beloved
member, and officer, and which he assisted in organizing, for the re-
demption of his poor perishing brethren.]

There are many other objections, insinuations, &:c. which, though
txitling in themselves, wear an extrinsic importance in the present
excited state of the public mind, and contribute much to the preju-
dicial circumstances in which we stand. We would be glad to take
them up, one by one, and settle them; but the space which has been
already occupied with more essential matters utterly forbids.

In conclusion, we withdraw from Lane Seminary, not because the
trustees and faculty claim the right to exercise a supervision over the
students. This right we cordially recognize. JVb/ because they are
colonizationists and oppose the Anti-slavery Society, nor because we
are abolitionists. Kut because our hterary pursuits grew wearisome,
for they were our delight. Js'ot because labor was a drudgery, for we
loved it. JVo< because we have been disappointed in any of our anti-
slavery measures, for we hope throughout eternity to sing the praises
of Him, who has so signally blessed and united us. But we leave,
because the authorities above us have asserted the right to suspend

27

free discussion upon their own arbitrary wills. Because they sanction
the principle of prostration to public sentiment, corrupt and desperate
as it is, by avowing the doctrine that discussion must be directed accor-
ding to the popular will. Because they unwarrantably infringe upon
our social privileges and rights, by interdicting such conversational
statements and communications, with the publication of such interes-
ting information "on ordinary occasions, at the table and elsewhere,"
as are indispensable to the social convenience and comfort, and con-
tribute to the mutual affection and improvement of a band of brethren
engaged in the same pursuits, and constituting one family. Because
they will allow us no alternative but abandoning the cause of universal
liberty and love, or withdrawing from Lane Seminary.

The Institution was endeared to us by associations as noble, and by
hopes as sacred, as our hearts could cherish ; but the great principles for
which we contend, are dearer far. Nor can we be induced to com-
promise them, by selfish prospects however alluring, or by creature
favor however fraught with honor and applause.

We leave Lane Seminary with sentiments of grateful affection for
the advantages which, during our membership, it so largely afforded
us, and, apart from the grief we feel in being obliged to withdraw
from these advantages, our heartfelt sorrow is, that in crushing the high
and sacred principle of free inquiry, its ruling authorities have given
a death blow to the spirit of its glory, and have dragged it down to a
dishonored level with those institutions where mind becomes the
crouching slave of prescription, and is stifled under the incubus of
ipse dixit authority; — Institutions, where that which the vindication
of God's law demands, and the requirements of his love call for, is
interdicted — Institutions, where that which the necessities of mind
require to gird it for the exigencies of an eventful age and the warrings
of a ruined world, finds no toleration, — in which the cries of liberty,
prostrate and bleeding, and of truth, reviled and outlawed, are un-
heeded ; but where all that fashion will countenance, and public favor
applaud, and patronage support, and power defend, find ready admis-
sion, a hearty welcome and a bountiful reward, — where siding with
the strong against the weak, with the doers against the sufferers of
wrong, is the stipulated condition of membership, and the sole pass-
port to favor.

Finally, we would respectfully remind the trustees, that men, though
students of a theological seminary, should be treated as men, — that
men, destined for the service of the world, need, above all things, in
such an age as this, the pure and impartial, the disinterested and mag-
nanimous, the uncompromising and fearless, — in combination with the
gentle and tender spirit and ensample of Christ; not parleying with

28

wrong, but calling it to repentance; not tlattcring the proud, hut plead-
ing the cause of the poor. And we record the hope, that the glorious
stand takin upon the Bubjeci of discussion, ajul up to the cloee of the
last session, maintained by tlie Institution, may be early resumed, that
BO the triumph of expediency over right may soon terminate, and Lane
Seminary be again restored to the glory of its beginning.
Cincinnati, December 15, 1834.

JOHN J. MITER,
ALEXANDER McKELLAR,
EDWARD WEED,
JAMES STEELE,
COURTLAND AVERY,
AUGUSTUS HOPKINS,
JAMES M. ALLAN,
JOS En I D. (JOULD,
HUNTINCTON LYMAN,
JOSIAli WARD,
GEORGE CLARK,
JAMES A. TIIO.ME,
JOHN W. ALVORD,
GILES WALDO,
CHARLES CROCKER,
RUSSELL J. JUDD,
URIAH T. CHAMBERLAIN,
MARIUS R. RORINSON,
CHRISTOPHER C. CADWELL,
ABRAHAM NEELY,
ISAAC H. WRIGHT,
AMASA FRISSELL,
ISAAC GRIFFITH,
DAVID S. INGRAHAM,
LORENZO D. BUTTS,*
JOHN T. PIERCE,

CALVIN WATERl.URY.
WILLIA.M T. ALLAN,
MVUON A. (JOUDlNti,
THEODORE D. WELD,
JA.MES BRADLEY,
SAiMUEL II. THOMPSON,
ENOCH N. BARTLETT,
SAMUEL WELLS,
AMOS DRESSER,
HENRV P. THOMPSON,
HENRY B. STANTON,
CHARLES P. BUSH,
JOSEPH H. PAYNE,
JOHN CLARK,
DEODAT JEFFERS,
LUCIUS H. PARKER,
GEORGE WHIPPLE,
SERENO W. STREETER,
EZRA A. POOLE,
WILLIAIVI W. CALDAVELL,
HIRAi^I WILSON,
AARON M. IIIMROD,
ISRAEL S. INIATTISON,
ASA A. STONE,t
WILLIAM HAMILTON.

• Rlr. Butts desires to state, that he re-entered the Seminary at the coiunience-
aient ol'the prcsetit tern), and remained a member several weeks: but, upon reflec-
tion, having become satisfied that the new laws infringe upon inalienable rights, he
now withdraws from the Institution. He fully subscribes to the principlts set forth
in tliis eaj/ose; but, having been absent a considerable part of the last term, he is
igiiorant as to many o[ the /acts.

f Mr. Stone wishes it to be stated, that he did not return to the Seminary until
seme time after the students had left, and after the faculty had published their ex-
position of the laws: but that he considered what they had done altogether insuffi-
cient, and therefore dissolved his connexion with the Stminarj-, and signed the
above.

K. 15. Siviibl of cur bulhren, who coincide with us in stntiniint, aie not able
to affix their names to this document, in con8e(|uence of being several hundred mile«
from the Seminary.

The above expose has been prepared more than five weeks; but at the earnest so-
licitation of certain iiidividuids, we have consented to citlay its publication until the
present time.