Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1866-06-26
Rev. w. M. Ferguson and the AS
. sembHy. .

EDITORS ONO STA ZESAAN:
was not member of the last General
Assembly, and perhaps am, on tHat ac-
count, better able to judge of the impress
sion which their acts are calculated to make
upon the public mind than one who was in
the midst of the storm. All Presbyterians
have by heart that declaration of the Form
of Government" which is placed so near
the beginning of the book for the express
purpose it would seem, of arresting our
attention first of all" that all Synods and
councils may err through the frailty in
separable from humanity" We are there
fore certainly justified in scrutinizing their
acts and judging of them i'll the light OF
the example of Christ and the word OF God.
AS regards the expulsion of Rev. Mr..
Ferguson by the General Assembly, let me
ask few questions:
lst. Did our venerable court act with
that deliberation, calmness and considera-
ton which are desirable in all the acts of a
body sitting under the commission and
acting in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ?
ID. Did they give Mr.. f. that time for
reflection and consultation with his friends
as to insure satisfactory explanation, If
any was demanded in the premises?
3D.. Was the punishment-to wit: eXpul-
sion, proportional to the olfense? Was it
not notorious that great excitement prevail
ed both in and out of the body, and is not a
court liable to err when intlicting punish-
ment under the most intense excitement
and passion? r .
4th. Was there prayer made for guidance
in that particular emergency, when the aid
of the Holy Spirit was so greatly needed,
that injustice might not be done either to
Mr. +. or the Presbytery which he repre-
ghDfRny
9th. Was there an appeal to the example
of Christ and his Apostles? or did they act
in the premises with regard to that char
ity which so eminently- distinguishes the
conduct of the head of the church when
dealing with sinners, even to say nothing
of members Of his spiritual body?
9th. On the other hand, was it true, as
reported, that the only appeal was to other
deliberatiye bodies wholly secular, and not
governed by the-law of love? ..........., ...
| 7th. Is it not true that Mr.. F's. offense
after all toaS one of indSScretiors and that the
statements made OF which the Assembly
complain, We're not much overdrawn, and
does not even the correspondent of the
Evangelist, a New School paper in New
York, characterize Mr.. Galloway's speech
in terms almOstas derogatory as thoseiused
by Mr.. F.?e., I.-a .isgral. I. ID .elT .ral.
Sth. Was it not the common expression
ofscores, both Of the friends and opponents
of Mr.. Galloway, that his manner was
most unfortunate--that it was uncouth and
boorish-that his speech injured the cause
he was seeking to aidAand that it was al
together most uubecoming and unseemly
exhibition upon the floor of such a bodyG
Now, sirs, as already stated, 1 was not a
member of the Assembly, nor even in st.
Louis, during the enactment of these un-
fortunate SCENES But / have been led to
ask myself theoquestion@-a thousands
are asking the same question-was not the
excited court, unjust and cruel to Mr.. Fer
guson, outof allproportion to his offense,
which almost can be only characterized as
an indiscretion, and injurious to theyener-
able court of Jesus Christ, sitting and pro-
Tossing to act in his name? 1A4-- +2-4- 4
'4a9' .afm 70 Yours, &c, JUsTICESy Y