, 1874-10-21

dlolRry Committee, mud 10 gAvo Patton the right
10 bring tue proabytery Of Chicago into court.
Ho Will mako his argument against tlc verdict iii
tic Swing caso to-day. We underaland that itn
'nain points will bo tho following:
Tho Judgment should bo royerEod OIL account
OF tho irrogularity, tho hurrying to decision,
tho prejudice tho 1nistalos, and the
injustice Of tho Proabytory. Tho lrrog-
ulas'ty waH throcfold. Thu ovdonco re-
cciTod waa not confined to tho charges
and specifications. Thus auing'a counsel was
allowed to moot proof Of tho hcterodoxy of scr-
mons by proof Of orthodoxy Of lecturos talhs,
esc. Again, the beat attatnablo evidence was
not produced. HoarBay evidence about sern1o,,H
was accepted, wheu tho Hermoua themselves
might have hcen got from tho accused. Finally,
lho Moderator WIS permitted 10 vote, and to de-
liyer written arguments In the caso. Dy hurry
Ing to dcuieion, Laird Colllor's tosti,nony,
which Tas material ami attainablc, was 1ost.
Tho prejudice Of tho prcsbstory waa shown by
personalities, by loud remarks about "alowlng
coloss," and being on tho "winniug eidc." by
public indorsemont Of laxlty Of views, and by
tho oieouBeion Of tho trial nj conflict between
o'd and Nov School preabytoraniH1n. The
Prcsbytory mado twolYo mistakes. First, 1t ro-
gnrdcd tho formal plea OF "not guilty" aa owl
denco. Second, 1t gayo weight to SWINGS dec-
lRratlon that he WAS New School Presbytc-
rian, despite bis failure to dotlno bis tlea OF New
School Presbytorianiam. Third, 1t accepted his
yagle statement thut he held various doctrines
in their "oyangelical senso" as proof that hc
hold them rightly. Fourth, 1t regarded his QUO
tation Of the Articles Of Faith 40 rcason for hts
acquitsal, although tho Articles do not contain
so'ne Of tue important doctrines hold by tie
Church and alleged to be- denied by SWING
Fifth, It hold that evidence to prove
hercsy must romoyo all possible doubt.
Sixth, it assumed, without proof. TINT Swing
accepted the "Auburn Declaration" Seventh
It dccldod That it must either acquit Swing Or
unpeach his integrity. Unwil1lngness to do tho
lattor Influenced its decision. The confirmation
Of tho charges would have proved nothing what
ever againBt iis moral character. Elghth, the
presbytcry hold TINT tho prosecutor mutt prove
AA4s AoheA@oA u tAo AcGuSeA* hAeleho tAe blut
legal doctrine Is that . man ia presumed to in-
tend tho natural consequences Of his acts.
Ninth, q separate vote wns not taken on every
specification aud thon OH each charge. Tenth. q
resolution WA passed. that tho voto On tho spcci-
Acationa should be tin THAR moral Henso aa
implying tho guilt or Innocence of tho st.
cuacd." This influenced votes unfairly. Many
mombers Of tho Prcsbytery who wore unwilling
to volo to sustain tho specifications would havo
yotod that they were true. Eleventh, Swing was
acquitted when lo did not dissyow the specific
errora imputed to him, Or ayow the doctrines
which he Was accused OF dsbeiiovipg. ThiB WIS
contrary to tho rule laid down by the General
Assembly in 1886 in tho Craighcad case. Twelfth,
SWINGS peculiaritics woro wrougfully condoned
on the ground that he preached to peculiar
audience. Tho last and most important Of tho
Eve grounds for reversing tho verdict IL tho ILL
justice Of tho preBbytory. The latter waa bound
to ut loast consure SWING but it did not do 10. It
waa bound to convict him. The case against him
Was cleurly made out. 10 provo this, Prof.
Patton will roview all the evidonce Rtd argu-
menta Of tho trial. This summary will include IN
elaborate speech. which wtll doubtless raise ita
authors already high reputation "a roaaoner
and scholar, whatever the hearer or reader may
think Of the intense sort Of religion shown IN
prosecuting the appeal.