The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1870-02-09
he general object, whether-it comes here or

1
not.
While I cannot give the precise explana-
tion of the facts I am about to mention, no
doubt you can readily do so, after little
inquiry, as they concern not merely your
Presbytery, but the churches nearest to you,
Including your own. West Hanover report
ed to the Assembly $525 as contributed for
Sustentation last year; while reported that
I had received $249O2 from West Hanover
during the same period. On comparing the
list sent you with that given in the minutes,
you will find very little resemblance between
them in other particulars also. report
eight out of the twenty four churches as con-
tributing; the Minutes report nineteen con-
tributing churches. Further, the largest
church in the Presbytery, which has the
good fortune to enjoy your pastoral services,
is represented in the Minutes as contributing
S88; while | state that this treasury re-
q but S19.17 from your church Here
is discrepancy which no doubt may be sat
isfactorily explained, but when your state
ment as to the absence of "errors by defect,
when applied to comparison of statistical
reports to the General Assembly and the
treasurer's report, would hardly hold good.
So the church which is but seven miles from
your home-that at Farmville, the third in
size in the Presbytery-reports $50, of
which received nothing. The second
church in size--that at Charlottesville
ports $11Oi in the Minutes; I report $1O9 60,
besides $53 80 for Disabled Ministers, etc.;
so that here is an 'error by defect.
But I presume 1 have said enough to justi-
fly my declining to make up my accounts
from the Minutes of the Assembly. | will
only repeat, in connexion with this point,
that 1 had supposed it was well understood
that my letter to DIR. Wilson was compiled
from the Treasurer's books and not from the
Minutes of the General Assembly.
AS to the other point in your letter, l can
only say, as I wrote to you before, that if
the 5000 you speak of is intended for this
treasury, hope it may be sent without my
drawing upon your Presbyterlal treasurer
for it. AS 1 intimated to you, if were to
draw upon him for it, then correspondence
would be necessary to find out what churches
had contributed the amount-all of which
would be avoided in the way l suggested to
you. And besides, am sure you are too
familiar with business matters, and know too
well how delicate thing it is to draw on
any one, where the only authority is an in
formal suggestion from third party, to in
sist seriously upon my taking this course. l
have this further dificulty-that it is impos
sible for me to become collector of the
churches contributions. very cheerfully
perform the duties Of treasurer but the
General Assembly has not appointed me col
lector; and l do not wish to assume the
Office
1 cannot conclude without expressing the
opinion that there is no ground for the NOR
tifcation you express, or for the application
of the term "culprit' to your venerable
Presbytery. You show that there is none
by your reference to the deep poverty Of
your people. If we do what we can, surely
we should not be mortified by our inability
to do more. Yours truly.
JAMES WOODROW,
Treasurer of Sustentation.