, 1874-03-21
The Interior" n1anifesttny 6hreWd-
ness at the Expense Of
Falr-Dealing.
That Paper Lending Itself to Unjust Mis-
: representation.
It's Unfounilod Statement that an Attempt
Had Decn Mato to Subject It to
- an Ex.parte Trial.
patton's Assault upon Swing Not "CrltioIsm." In
Any Proper Sonsa Of the Word.

To the Editor a The Chicago Tribune:
S1n: 1t cannot have escaped tho constant
readers Of tho Interior TINT that journal nome. !
times shows, In its management, q good deal Of
"the wisdom Of tho Aorpont" It Ia not dl,cays
wlse. Often, indeed, It ii far otherwise. But
tho intelligent rcader must give 1t credit for dis
plnying, in Its last isauo but ono, unusual
ehrowdnesH. He might, indeed, ob}oct that this
ahrowdncas Ia manifested
At THE ExrENBE or MAoNAN1s1rrT
aud falr-denling, towards those who differ from
It. Dut this would hardly be reasonable, from
tho sEmplo fact that extorminators Of horosv aro
| not expootod to be magnanimouB. It would not
do for them to bo addicted to melting moods.
Theirs s atern duty, and nnv weak and woman-
iah tenderness for tho foolinga Of othora would
| unfit them for tho discharge of that duty. 30
much may DO Haid by way of apology for the m
terror. which lont itself in Its last IBs'c to tho
work Of emphasizing and spreading abroad atill
| moro widely, certain erroneous notions which
Ind bosn formed OF tho action recently taken by
several minister's of tho presbytcry of Chicago.
| What was that action, and what was tho
ground Of It? It has been widely represented
Is an a.tack upon u man whose only ofrenae was
that he had exercised
| HIS uNQuEsT1oNEp RIGHT
to criticse publicly the published views Of another
| man. What woro tho facts7
Profs. Patton and SWING had boon engaged
in n controvorsy-bogun and pursued with groat
energy by tho formcr-upon the question OF
Inspiration, and upon that alono. Often, and
at groat length, Prof, Patton lind discussed tho
published views Of Prof. Swing upon this sub
ject, aud had pronounced them unsouud. No
body ever questioned, or thought Of question:
| Ing, his editorial right to do 30. Finally he
published long and elaborate article, which
was wholly devoted to this sasno subject Of In
spiration. except tho concluding paragraph of
six or eight lines. In that paragraph, Prof.
Patton charged Prot. Swing with rejecting at
tho Fundamental doctrines Of tho Christian tai til,
which lie enumerated ono by QUO. Fit be said
tint ho mndo no chargca-that ho only expr es-
aod doubts-1 answer, that that apecies Of ndi-
rection was ,oorss than opou, direct chdrges
would havo been. An Indictment 30 sweeping
as this, involving not only tho doctrinal sound
noss not ony the good name, but also tho moral
character Of tho accused, ought, it would Beeu,
to hnye boon accompanied md supported by a
vary strong array OF proof. Was thore my auuh
plooIs7 Not ono limo,
NOR WORD.
There waa not even . hut exproa8al that any
proof existed, or could be brought forward.
Tie roader was left to infer that Prof. Swing
must DO y reflector of every doctrine Of tho
Chriatinu system becauso, and only because, in
tho Judgment OF Prot. Patton, ho was not
eound upon tho subject Of Inspiration. And 1t
WAS just this wholesale and sweeping. condcm-
ictsm, against which moat Of the ministors Of
this CITY, to whom tho Interior cavaler1y rofors
% "esteemel gentlemen" demonstrated: At
tor they mndo their remonstrancc, and two
weeks after this singularly ill-tuiged aud hasty
condemnation, Prof. Patton undertook to aus
thin his charges by proof; with what SUCCESS do
J not hero inquire.
J The steps Of his procedure thus far, thon, are
I'm Erate proF Gtpin nrH
: published the sentence to tho world. He did
this without trial. and 1oi{hott criticism, tho
! rights Of which are no1o held forth as shelter
and refugo. Two weeks afterwards he-not
tho PreHbytery-tlied him and condemned
him again. One week lator still he -gave
notice that he would try linn before, Pres,
bytery. whore ho hopes ho will be condemned
again, the third time, aud whoro !, too, he is
qHiity, hopo hewill bo condemned, But whether
) that result is reached OF not, Prof. Swing Mill
J still bo
J and mucll-conde1nnod man. Tho atepR Of tho
PROCESS ought to have been royorsod. The first
should have been last. aud tho last first.
But the one important thing to notice Is. that
gious interests Of Chicago at hoalt," did not
, protest, aud never dreamed Of protesting
against the Interiors exercise Of the right Of
criticism. And this the Interior very we'll
knows. Why, thon, docs it 30 total; mis-
represent the gentleman whom 1t estecmB
Men do not usuaily act without motive
They may misstato anothcrs opinions through
misnke or from desisn aad wit o hope
, Tho Independent, Evangelist, Presbyterian Ban
, ner, aud CongregutonGtast, whoao structures the
interior, quotes, evidently misconcolyo, lt toto
. city So does tho Rey. a1r, Craig, whose hiel-
! wrought rebuko, drawn out in q long article,
, contains not single word TINT is III point. It
is simply rIgnt-royal TIT against an antagonist
whom his own imagination has created.
But the Tnfcrfor E1ebo TINT those iournnfb and