The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-05-16

Y
UNHAPPY SITUATION OF THE WRITER.
Messrs. Editors.-I herewith hand you q
letter lust received from my brother, Il. T.
Baird. My time has not come to treat
OF the transactions to which he refers.
therefore submit my brothers paper with
out word OF my own.
Very respectfully,
SAMUEL J. BAIRD.
Nessrs. Editors,-I have seen your jour
nal containing an account OF nay so-called
" trial" by the Presbytcry OF East Hanover,
and vou may Judge Of my surprise at some
Of the proceedings OF the Prcsbytery. l
know the whole matter was painful III the
last degree, and have no disposition to
charge anybody in the Presbytery with IN
tentionaIly doing me any injury; but never
thelcSs they have done so. My statement
which i sent TO Presbyterv was written in
the greatest hurry imaginable, at one sitting
and in pencil. My time was completely
occupied in aiding the Committee OF Pub
lication to examine into my affairs, in trans
ferrnS the business to my successor, and
in making out the needful information for
the committee on which to base their annual
report, MS we'll as in arranging my private
books. papers, and affairs; so that l could
scarcely command time to do it ut all.
In the condition OF mind which you
nav Judge I have been in from all that
has uasscd over me in the last two
months, it could hardly be expected by
any one that it would be such q paper rs
could have prepared under other circum-
stances. And though DR.. Brown did not
see the statement, it was prepared at MS
own suggestion He may be surprised that
il is not as clear and logical as I can some
times make such things, but was surprised
that | could write it at all. I wish to say,
then, that after carefully reading it over as
calmly as l can, find many defects in it.
In some places the meaning I intended ls
not clear. Some things which l thought
were In it are not there, and the object OF
some OF the statements is not fully given.
The synopsis of it as given by you is very
inaccurate, partly by the misprlntinS OF
words, so that in some places it is wholly
unintelligible even to Inc, and in some
places it is Injurious to me. | could not
consult any one in Richmond, because when
there was any matter on which wished to
do so the members OF the committee de-
cined on the ground that they could not do
it with propriety because they were parties
not disaualify them, however, for being my
Judges.
The evidence on which the heaviest GEN.
sure which it was within the power Of the
court to intiict was denounced against me
has greatly surprised me, and the trial itself
is sui qeneriS there is no other like 1t, l
suspect, in ecclesiastical annals.
NATURE OF THE TRIAL.
]. The Presbytery did not do what
agreed and requested that it should do. l
requested it to take up the case on my state
ment and issue it summarliY, not knowing
that anything had been alleged against me
further than had acknowledged. Instead
OF doing that, however, they proceed, not
to q summary judgment on my paper, but
to . profesSedly ly formal trial; which proved
however, to be wholly partisan, because,
after multitude OF things had been al
legged against me, Of which I did not
dream and never had heard whis-
per. and on n trial OF which I had
no knowledge, the account ends with
the statement, there ooas no Evidence for the
Defence! | had waived forms and technl-
calities to enable the Presbytery to take the
case I'D and give Judgment on the statements
OF nv paper without formal process: but, in
stead, they make new and different case
make my statement part OF 1t; and IN
stead OF waving forms and technlcalltles,
they only waive my rights. And so, With
out notification, without time for prepare
tion. without being informed who the wit
nesses against me were to be, without the OPP
portunity Of presenting rebutting testimony,
or positive testimony, without having the
right to have the witnesses examined III my
presence, in about ten hours am deposed
from the ministry and suspended from the
sacraments; and all this i'll my absence.
MISTAKES CORRECTED.
Q. Twas surprised that mistakes made In
the evidence were not corrected by MEN,
bers who were there, and knew the facts.
For example, as to how the knowledge OF
nv difficulties came to the committee. The
evidence all goes to show that it was not
made known to the committee, or any MEM
Der thereof, by me, but by Dir. j. a. Black,
OF the PRESBYTERIAN Board at Philadelphia.
The facts are these: I wrote letter about
my difficulties to Mr.. Black and some others,
asking them to aid me in the adjustment OF
nv affairs. and told them had not yet made
the matter known to the committee, but was
going to do so as soon as l could see exactly
what arrangements / could make. Mr..
Black came on to see me, and after
full and frank conversation with him
he asked me il I had yet informed the
committee. told him no; that | had not
vet gotten my statement ready. lie ADVISED
me to do it ut once, as / could write 1t that
night, TO this assented. | Immediately
went to see DR.. Hoge, the chairman OF the
committee, and told him in general the
state of my affairs, and said l wished next
TO make written statement to
him and some other member OF the COM
mittee, as less embarrassing than full
meeting. Accordingly, the next morning
asked Mr.. Black as friend to 90 with me
and read nv statement for me to Drs. HQge
and Brown, which he did. He subsequently
,aw other members OF the committee and
.alked with them about these matters. Now,
here were two ministers present IN the
Pregbytery who knew these facts, and 1t
yould not have been an act OF injustice II
they had stated them. especially as IN the
statement above referred to, which l had
written the previous night in pencil, told
hem to what amount the committee was
involved. ..s*.
5. In my letter to Mr.. Black I had said
hat at least one OF my creditors had posi-
lively refused to grant me an extension OF
ime, and that that would bring my matters
o a crisis in few days. But this debt is
lot mixed up with the committee, as it is
wholly personal; and subsequently / re-
eived note from the party granting me
N extension. The statement" therefore,
which has been published by DR.. Brown is
Incorrect in saying pressure was made by
he eastern creditors OF the committee. 1t
vas not. But on the other hand, IN re-
1okk ,1,s sIa S1nkn nSnFr fn