Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1877-11-10

before he would have penned such paper.
He stood there to confess no crime, and he had
never been charged with it until the trial took
place: and when he heard OF the action OF
| East Hanover fresbyery he would not have
been more astonished had he heard that Rich
mond city had been swallowed by an earth
quake. When he penned his statement ne
was in state of mind just BORDERING 90 ut
condition for the mad house, and when he was
irving to make clean breast OF everything, to
save the committee, that State OF mind vas
used 10 the presbytery as a proof OF his de-
pra7itv. When be read for the first time what
be was charged with, and feeling that be was
friendIess, he was tempted to cast oil all sorrow
by throwing himself into the river.
His third ground Of appeal was that the Ian.
puare of the indictment was ambiguous, and
| leads to the inference that he used the money
for his own purposes, which was not true; and
while be was willing to confess that he had been
guilty of wrong, and gricvous wrong, be did
not confess that he intended crime; what he
did was for the good Of the Church.
In the fourth place he appealed to the Synod
because the whole proceedings were uOconsll-
tutional, and commented at leugth on the &C
tons of The Individual members Of the presbg-
terry. TIE rcp.rt Of the case reminded hlu,,
he said, OF courts lha! had existed IN this
couaGry whose object was not acqnltaI, but
conviction.
The fifth ground 81 the appeal WAS that the
evidence was contradictory lie reviewed the
testimony, eilulnrntcd upnn 1t, aEd explained
the statements Of the several Witnesses.
the sixth paint was that the action was
unils! and unconstitutional 10 that the sentence
contained bull Of cycommuncallon 10 dis
puisr. He said that the book Of discipline had
not been complied with, aud in proof OF the
assertion quoted from The back.
His seventh aud last ground Of appeal was
because long ministry Of faithful devotion ~
The church entitled him to redress against
proceedings 50 VI Just, the effect of which
would be his utter destruction, and in coDcu,
sion threw himself into the arms OF the Synod
cxppcing from them justc, and mercy
Aitcr the address OF DR.. Baird, Rev. Dr.
Pryor explained the remarks 10 the address re-
lcrripe to him, 10 regard 10 expressing his
opinion before the case was tried. lie did not
deny that he made the remark referred to by
Dr. Baird, but it Was not until the opinion OF
tic members Of prcsbytery had been called
lGr
\ motion to adjourn was made and LOST.
Rev. DR.. Armstrong. from East Hanover
PreShytcry, in reply to Dir. Baird, said that he
found himself in as painful position as he
had ever occupied and he would not open his
lnnulh tli! Tor tic fact that he had been aI'-
pointed 10 represent his prcsbytery, and he
Intended TO do his duty faithfully, conscien-
tously. and 10 the fear OF God. He intended
not to fellow DR.. Baird, but simply to discuss
the great facts connected with the case. The
first charge was that DE-. Baird had used the
money OF the Publication Committee for his
own use, and the second charge was that he
used his official signature to obtain that money;
all Of which, he contcndcd, Dr. Baird had con-
ltssed 10 his prayer. The only thing he denied
10 the indictment vas the amount Of money
used, aud that he con!cssrs by the c!carest
implication. The paper presented by DIR.
Band was hard to understand, and they, the
pFeshytcry, summoned witnesses to enable
thcm to understand it only, and they tried Dr.
Baird on the paper presented, and not upon
| The evidence. lie was surprised to hear Dr.
Baird urge that he was guilty OF no crime lie
did nut believe that Dr. Baird, when he com.
mence1 his caursc, Intended to commit crime,
but neither do the majority Of defauters
lie did not believe DR.. Baird wanted to make
money for himself and family, but tho great
crime Of The country IS ambition, and the
| eighth commandment is violated from this
cause to day moro than any other. lie con.
tended that there was 80 lrreeularty in the
trial, ard asked the Synod if man who had
50 outrageously violated the eighth command
mrui was to be allowed to 60 out in the world
holding license from them to preach The COS
pei Of Christ? Was he to be restored before
he had, by life OF righteousness, removed the
disgrace resting upon him.
| The Synod then adjourned, with prayer by
| Rev Dir. Juokin, till $50 o'clock this mOroing.
TO pAY-MoRNING SESSION
ihe Synod was called to order by the Mode
rator this morniog at $50, and, after prayer by
| Rev. Samuel Brown. and the reading OF the
minutes OF yesterdays session,
| Tie order of the day was suspended, aud
| Col. Preston presented the report Of the com
| nitee on the religious welfare Of the colored
people, which had been recommtted to the
committee for correction, recommending that
| co!orcl evangelist be employed, ADD it was
adopted without debate.
REPORTS Of committees on the records Of
| Pccshytcrcs were presented aud adopted.
Rev DR.. II. g. Alexander presented the re.
| port Of the committee on bills and overtures 10
reference to the division Of Chesapeake Prcsby
terg, as follows -
The standing Committee On Bills and Over
| lures. to which was referred al overture from
the Chcasancakc Presbytery to the Synod Of
| Virginia, asking for the erection Of q new Pres
bytery, to coosist of all the churches in con,
ncxion with Chesapeake Prosbytery 10 the
State of Maryland (which was also referred
with the accompanying petitions from certain
churches and ministers involved) report that 10
the judgmeot ofyour committee the prayers en-
bodied 10 the overture should be granted, and
recommend that the said Prcsbytery be styled
the "Presbytery Of Maryland" and that the
line between the Presbyterics be the State line
of Maryland.
That the Prcsbytcry Of Maryland be ordered
TO meet on the first Wednesday, 18th day OF
December, 1877, aud that Rev. J. &. Hammer
preach the opening sermon and preside udtl
The organization Of Prcsbytcry.
Rev. Dr.. W. ". Patton, President Of How
ard Uoiversity. Was invited to sit az a cores.
ponding member.
\ communication lrom the Synod Of North
Carolina was presented aud appropriately re.
fcrIrd.
Ga motion Maryland Prcsbytcry was assessed
So and Chesapeake Presbytery SIS.
The case of Rev. D.. l.. i. Baird was then
resumed