Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1868-10-20

Tending properly his important property
rights In that building aud lot, against
the unrighteous DEGREES Of the Court OF
Appeals Of Kentucky, which had de-
clared the church property should be re-
turned 10 the control OF it's old elders,
Watson and Gault We plain people
would have supposed that church Laza-
rms. enabled BY church poor.fund subsidy
Of sixty dollars month TO clothe himself
ain purple and fine linen, aud fare
su mptuously every day." could hardly
be suffering so much from the invasion
OF his church property rights as to excite
the sympathy Of the learned judges, ana
secure . so swift redress. But he did
Learned jurists do not always see things
as we common people do. while, tnere-
fore, the Federal Court could not think
of such discourtesy TO the. Kentucky
Court Of Appeals as to say that watson
and Gault should not have the property
decreed to them by that Court, yet, by
one of those sipgularly refined and in
oenious distinctions which learned ju-
rists glory in, the Federal judges discover
that the Court Of Appeals did not happen
TO tell Watson and Gault that they might
use and manage tl.sir own property and,
therefore, il is competent TO the Federal
Court. while admitting their right TO hold
il, vet, 10 direct these gentlemen TO hold
il fer the use of the " Lazarus, and the
benevolent dogs who kindly came TO
lick his sores." Divested OF all techni-
caIities and figures, we take the decision
to be, that though the Court OF Appeals
of Kentucky declare the cow to be Wat
son and Gault's COW, the Federal Court,
without interfering with their judgment
in the case, may simply order Watson
and Gault 10 hold the COW fast, while
Rev. Mr.. Hays milks her.
We are content, however, to leave these
nice legal distinctions to the learned
Judges, with the DEGREES founded upon
them. But in regard to certain opinions
expressed in rendering the Judgment,
touching the Presbytery of Louisville
and Synod Of Kentucky, we must take
the liberty Of suggesting few inquiries
to thoughtful men. As we are informed,
the question was not before the court on
its merits, yet the judges are pleased to
say: =
pursuance of this order 1.-THE ipso .tdcso
order) of the General Assembly, the
Presbytery of Louisville which met in
June, 1866, by enrolling, as entitled to
their seats therein, persons whom 1t was
prohibited to so enroll was dissolved, and
that the Synod of Kentucky which met
in October, 1866, was dissolved for the
same cause. etc etc.
at seems further to the court that this
order, made by the General Assembly in
May, 1867 declaring the Synod and
Presbyteries of Kentucky no true and
lawful Presbyteries), has reference
wholly to purely ecclesiastical matter,
and was then within the proper sphere OF
the authority of the Assembly, and that
as such this court and all civil courts are
bound to respect it as furnishing the con-
elusive, iucontrovertible evidence re-
spscting the matter therein declared ,eic,
Now setting aside other views of this
matter, we wish simply to offer some
going to show that if this is
the view Of the Presbyterian system taken
by the civil courts, then, of all forms OF
the Christian Church extsnt, Presbyte-
is the very worst; that no honest
and honorable man ought to support it
and that to give funds for its endowment,
or property for its use, is but to patronize
a huge imposture, destructive, so far as
its influence goes, of civil and religious
liberty. But want of space compeis us
to postpone these views till our next issue: