Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1873-01-16
We Would that Men
Should do to You do Ye Even SO
to Them.' s....-

Without desiring to impugn the mo-
tives of any gentleman, or detract from
the christian character of single mem
ber of the Presbyterian Church, from
its Pastor to the most humble member
thereof; yet, one cannot but say, tha'
the manner in which the charges
against DIR. West were attempted to be
investigated by the Session or Church
Court with sacrilege by one member
of the Court, called the Court Of JesasS
Christi it is difficult to think otherwise
than that this saying is true, "Ob, what
n rarity is charity, under the Sun"
The charges against the DIR. were OF
a public character, il was matter talk
ed of upon the street, it Was a matter
which nearly every one in town had
heard report to greater or less extent;
il was no private affair. DIR. West re-
qnested that in justice to himself, the
trial be public, at least, that the wit
nesses who had been summoned on
either side should hear all the testi-
mony, that they might also judge, and
that the knowledge of evidence should
not be confined to the Court alone. he
did not shrink from fair open examin-
alton of the several charges, but he was
denied that privilege. True the mod
orator had the power to have the IN
vestigation, after the f'shion OF long,
long ago, in the dark ages, when jesuit
inuuisition ruled in secret, and COM
mitted atrocities, which the christian
world this day contemplates with hor-
ror. 1t is but the same principle, but
not carried to the same extent. What
harm would the granting ofthe request
do? Would the Church be hurt? If
they decided right they would be sus-
tained Dy these witnesses. Ii they
made mistake, could they in honor,
object to be corrected by the judgment
of others, particularly when the repu-
tation of a fellow member of their own
Christian Church was at stake?
The moderator was not bound in
duty to make such ruling, and thus
the earnest protest of the
accused, but in his discretion he saw
proper to exercise such power. Did
he feel that he was the Head Of a
Court, which none has stood higher
since the "meek and lowly Nazarene"
reigned upon the earth? Did He ever
hold secret courts d? Did Christ ever
thus refuse an appeal for full justice?
No, it was not extending the hand of
christian fellowship to DR.. West; more
than that it was an imputation against
the integrity of the witnesses on both
sides,-no single witness to be permit
ted to hear any part of the testimony
of another until after they themselves
had testifed-suchw was the order-well
the court had such power. The disci-
pline says: "No witDess afterwards to
be examined, except member of the
Judicasory shall be present during the
examination of another witness on the
same case, unless by consent OF parties" "
DIR. West consented, requested, DE-
SIRED it, who was TO object but tie
Court OH the other side? They object
ed. Had they been placed in the posi-
ton of the accused, and thus refused,
they would have 1elt that the Court was
not representative one, and was not
out the gospel of Brotheriy
love rs laid down by the great Head of
the Church through which this Church
Court claims jurisdiction, yet, at the
same time repudiate its doctrine and
precepts.
This Court done another thing which
is neither sanctioned by Law or Chris
tian Church Government; there were
several distinct charges, some seven
specifications. The question was asked
the accused, guilty, or not guilty, his
answers to the several charges We're in
writing, the pleas to the charges were
different, to some he plead not guilty.
to others not guilty as charged in the
specifications, but this did not suit the
Court the plea must be guilty, or not
guilty; any reasonable man can see that
that was not fair, suppose he had been
guilty of part and innocent of the