Weekly North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1858, 1855-12-19

DRS. SMITH AND DEEMS.

-. t-
The Petersburg papers of this week contain full
ana interesting accounts Of the trial before the Vir.
g'nla Conference now going on, of DR.: William A.
smith, on charges of falsehood &C., preferred against
him by DR.. c. F. Deems, of this State.
On Monday, the evidence on the part of the ac-
cuser was closed and that for the defence was COM
menced. DIR. Smith submitted his points, which he
proposed to prove. and preaced them with some re-
marks. AS we have published the charges preferred
by Dr. Deems against DR.. Smith, it is but Just that
we should also publish what Dr. Smith expects to
prove in self-defence and against DR.. Deems We
copy from the Petersburg Express:
II POINTS TO BIZ PROVED BY DIR. wM A. SMITH,
l. Testimony to rebut the evidence of the accus-
ing witnesses, tc.wit: --..-
1. In the remarks they testify made in nv one.
ming speech before the PHtsborough Conference in
1854
Q. Rebut the account they give of the causes
which led to the raising of the Comnittee of settle
ment, and the further account they give of Bishop
Picrce's statements about that COMMITTEE.
T. kebut the account they give of my remarks
before the Conference after the report of this Com.
mittee was submitted to the Conference by Bishop
Pierce, Chairman of Committee and after the Con-
ference had adopted the report and by separate
vote passed Dr.. Deems's character.
4. Rebut the declaration more than implied in the
remarks of my accuser and attempted to be proved
by the testimony of Rev. G. W. Lans,orne, to-wt:
that the private Conference had with portion of
my friends, members of the Conference at Norfolk,
twelve months since, "a midnight attempt to
assassinate his 3D. 81 character submit testimony
to rebut the calumny, and to confirm Mr.. Lang
horne's account Of this meeting by showing that
the meeting its object and the statements from me
on which my friends gave their advice were all
known to Bishop Pierce.
H. propose t. submit direct testimony to prove
the following points,
l. That &. +. Deems is not man Of vcracity, for
the reasons: lst. That he wrote the Christopher
Duncan letter, which in itself great outrage
and disgrace to any gentleman in Deems relations
to the Tucker family to have written but in Deems
relations as Christian Minister, it an insuBer-
able outrage.
O. That he has denied being the writer Of this let
ter IN repeated instances; or what is worse, preva
ricated about It in dSgracefu to any gen.
tleman not to say Christian Minister.
3. That Il few evenings before the session of the
Virginia Conference, QS4s) the r. G. Adrocate reach
cd r. NJ. College, containing an announcement by
the Rev. j. E. Edwards Of Deems resignation as
Professor, on the ground of his preference for the
pastoral work, but which announcement was in vio-
lation of Deems asseverance to that no such an.
nonncement should be made until [ should be pre-
pared to announce his successor-that Prof Blanche
called his (Deems) attention to an announcement
obviously premature and he "blamed" " the Rev. j.
E. Edwards for the publication, 1. e. denied having
authorised him to make it, and affirmed that he had
only written him confidential letter informing him
of the fact o. his resignation.
4. That he made similar denial in the presence
er denial in the presence of COL Geo. Rogers, and
Rev. II. q. Leigh, OH another occasion.
g. That it was nevertheless true that he had made
a we'll defined arrangement with Mr.. Edwards to
nounce his resgnation-that Mr. Edwards did not
do it until urged by Deems, who was dissatisfied
tar1 he ok .lt,r.
ed in letter to Mr. Edwards that he had authorised
his announcement in the Richnond Christian Adoo-
cate and denied as distinctly in the same letter,
that he had ever denied to any that he gave Ed
wards that authority in question: but that he did not
vindicate Mr.. Edwards until threatened with ex-
posure.
6. That on the 25th of December, 1S4S, l met him
in friendly conference on the more material points
which have stated in the presence, (as mutual
| friends, (of Rev. H. G. Leigh (now deccaSed,) and
! Col Geo. Rogers, of the county of Meckenburg.
Va (and both at that time trustees of the Collegc)
| that then he was humated by being constrained
to the reluctant admission that he the author of
the Christopher Duncan" letter, and that he had
repeatedly denied to of the gentlemen present,
| that is, the Reverend Ii. g. Leigh, that he the
| auhor-that | acceded to his appeal to spare his
| honor C. e.) not make him responsible for his con-
duct the ground of his asseverance that he would
| in reasonable time, make an apology to Mr.. Tucker
and family, and disabuse the minds of the members
1
made, that he was not the author of the " Christie
! pher Duncan letter and that l waived the COM
| plant in regard to the Rev. Mr. Edwards publica-
ton the ground, that he could and would satisfy
! brother Edwards that he misunderstood him.
| 7. That he never redeemed his obligations in Ell
ther Of the above named instances; but the con.
trary by showing letter from Rev. L. NJ. Lee, con-
firIned his friend Gloss in the belief that he not
the author the Christopher Duncan " letter; and
further denied to the Rev. Mr.. Edwards that he had
| ever made any such denial given me any such
| assurance.
| 8. That he (Deems) himself violated the agree
ment or settlement at Pttsboro', few Jays after
the close of the Conference; and he his friends
| acting in his behalf publicly through the secular
| papers of North Carolina, violated the settlement in
terms calculated to mplicate my character, and pre-
iudice the patrons of the College in North Carolina
| against me.
Also direct testimony to the following points, to-
| wit:
l. That chlritably bore with him in two settle
ments had upon the matters between
O. That did with charitable intent forbear to
bring charges against him at his Conference in 1854
until he constrained me to do lt-as he has himself
said. ..-.
g. That charitably allowed him to 60 before the
| Committee of settlement at Pittsboro, 1854, ano
make his own disclaimers and explanations in my
absence and that he used the privilege to deceive
the committee by actually making false statements
| And
| T. That in my address to the students of the Col
lege spoke no. hing that not strictly true; anC
that both in the statements made before them anc
in any other similar statements proved to have
been made before others in regard to the Pttsboro
trial and settlement, was fully justified by the re
latons sustained to the persons parties to whom
l made the statements.
IT.