The New York herald., 1874-11-14
dow Secrets Will Crop Out When
Men Disagree.
THE RELIGIOUS OATHS.
The Issue Of Fact Between Bishop Coke
and Professor Seymour.
Statements by Ministers Of
the Gospel.

mscusslon Wnlcn mas Deen going on IN regard TO
the action OF the recent General Convention Of the
Episcopaians. AS will be seen, II Is an emanation
Rom the Rev. Dr. Seymour on an issue OF veracity
setween him and Bishop Coke:
DIR. Seymour's Explanation.
One or the most a.niul and distressing results OF
she long secret session vi the General Convention is
me I0rclng upon me direct issue OF veraclty with
snc Bishop OF Western New York. In regard to
thls would cheeruily keep sileace and bear the
injustice dia u concern only the question OF the
sired; but, since It bears wholly upon the dis
charge ol my present duties as acting Dean OF the
y ,sa n ~ @nnapp my aHsty SO oIg rn Us
eharges which would weaken the confidence of
ehe Church IN the institution. On the seventh
nay Oh the secret session, and only about two
hours before the time fr3t liked lUr the decisive
vote, Judge sheney, OF Virginia, read tue lrst the
following letters He had 1t IN his possesslon
have been told, ioar days before it was read and
I'm informed that when asked by one OF my
enssa on the c9n that he was apeea ns
charged only TO read 1t to the House aud to show
20 the a
was TN the possession OF the House, and that
she proceedings were secret" Wnen tne obliga.
Non OF secrecy was removed a copy was unatt tam
sf the printer" The nrst sight Of them was
hon was decided, when received proof sheets
containing the letters. And since then Mr.. VIII
Ms q a 81 ihSoSn soS oxs ae
brought before the House OF Deputies, on the last
day oi the secret session, has publshed letter in
cOrrOboration OF them, which he inserted in the
last number Of the Daily Churcltn,an, to which, oil
course that issue beln the last there could be
reply through the same channel mention these
iac's, not to complain OF anything which others
nave done consclentlously, or which they
seHee but Ds Simply to expan psra the DrSy s
advantages under which have laDored in learn
ing the exact nature o. tue charges and the neces-
eary delay that has occurred In preparing my de-
fence. Moreover, the charges against me rest
solely on the statement OF one man, and
x1A nrl nhspaf nhot nlclu
says, that somebody else says, that
ne remembers hearing said, year ana a half ago.
which follows next alter tue letters OF Bishop
Coke; and every word OF the evidence given by the
Rev, Mr.. Grafton and others who were present
and knew the tacts Of their own knowledge, Is
giyen under the solemn sanction OF an OATH The
result IS humby left In the bands ol God and to
GEORGE f. SEYMOUR.
GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, Nov. s, 1874.
yResa -, y,,ad sissoe ste coxs,s In LETTER w.,,,
afternoon the 2lst Of octoberl 90,
MY DEAR Jupcr sxrrm-rhe facts are Substantially as
Hnss Ssse tnstsa % es sSs n amy
iesnonals might be multiplied in his favor without
class OF facts, ana | suppose DR.. s. himself would
nsS sa a os y ae M as
pr sas a j h o haze tho
Moy Eucharist and the provisions Of the Ebric Tor its
These hnss bseane Known to me ID the discharge Of
Sc ana dy a. " ana "a member o. so
forced to confess TO inc that win his kowledge ana
or hs @ II as
permitted TO lecture to students Of The seminary in
private iroon' on his peculiar views Of the HOLY Ea-
Hdaea Il nave desired G an Of STATING the
yon we'll know however the nbossibiiy 81 assembling
ha! board or any fair Proportion q them has
The acts ought to ps n howeyer
ties ''sA m'"'''''' '1assS1' Hy SSSS%E
Tho Hon. Judge SIXTH.
STATEMENT IN REPLY.
1t Is not true that | ever 'IntrOducedu Father
Grafton as "a volunteer Professor" 'wthin the
walls OF the seminary having never introduced
or even invited hlm to the seminary Ia any ca
1t is not true that "permitted" Father Grafton
''to visit and tndoctrinate the students last wi IL
ter" or at any other time, baving never been
asked Tor, aud having never given, any PERMISSION
II Is not true that he 'was permtted- by me
''tO lecture to students OF the seminary In a pri-
vate roon,'' as II were ashamed or afraid TO ask
n 70 40 oV It m tn mas Se
openly in the chapel or library, and with the
knowledge Of the Faculty.
knOwledged,o any such action as Is denied in the
above three paragraphs; ior have never thought
II honest to confess or acknowledge what never
had done.
It is not true that was "forced" to confess It;
for no cOmpusion can well draw from me, to my
own prejudice, q false confession OF a thing which
] never had DONE Every statement ever made by
me at any time on this subject has been freely and
1t Is not true that the bishop has "my own ac.
knowledgment that permitted Father Gralton'
made any acknowledgement OF the sort.
1t IS not true that Father Grafton lectured at the
semnary "wlth y my knowledge and consent ior
thereto.
Il is not true that tho object OF Father Graftons
lectures was to incucate "hts peculiar Vows Of
the Holy Eucharist" Tor the students who were
present testify that there was only one incidental
alluson to the Holy Eucharist during the two
evenings.
1t is not true that in this incidental alluston
sextravagant and false views OF the Holy Eucha-
Tist were lnculcated." unless 1t be 'extravagant
and iaIser to say that the bene1t received IN the
ssny o e S Of 's the deVoS y rne n
Hucing sometimes even to the recovery from
1lsproof Of the assertion OF Romanists that
saCramental grace among us Is without efficacy.
me ~ e. Gexpanation R here given Is Is drawn from notes
enc o the students present, but which ! never
saw OF beard OF until alter my confirmation was
defeated
1t is not true tnat in Tits matter there was "a
very gross abuse Of power" on my part; for there
was no exercise Of power at all, nor any knowl-
edge, at the time. on which any power could be
exercised.
1t ls not true that Bishop Coke obtained his
version OF the matter when nc was In the SENT
nary as q 'visitorn OF the same tn the spring OF
1885, for at that visitation the moment the acr or
Father Gralton's lectures was mentlc.. stated
the possibility OF ms,. 20 fhat those ~ Lectures
@ We,; usvcreo without my knowledge or consent,
~" 'na' q dad known OF them IN time should
svrtalny have prohibited them. The Bishop tnen
asked how such Q man was allowed TO set IoOt
upyn the seminary grounds At all, and used very
harsh language touching Father Grafton, saying
marched him or the grounds" or words to that
cncct. 1t was IN reply to this denial OF . right
know that some Things were said " hicb have been
altogether misapplled. II should DC remembered
that the seminary students are almost all college,
graduates and that the seminary course corrc-
spends to postgraduate course. No American
college undertakes to prevent students rom ever
YecelvlnRa lrIen0 as visitor IN their private
rooms unless previous permission has been re-
ceived rom the President In postgraduate
course such d severity oi exclusion would not be
submitted to for moment, and ought not TO be,
0y any body Of American young men. II would be
more apsurd, II possible to require 1t OF young
preparing Tor any other procession, such as the
law or medicine. IL has never at any TIME been