The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1877-05-17

tnlpgS, tne6 these IactS were known % eAl
who cared to know them" such audacity
cOmpels the reflection whether the suggestion
of the Brazos Presbytery about Islander, and
the attention of the Presbytery of Louisville
to those who utter it, was at all out of place.
Who and what are the conductors of the %
serper, or any other journal, that they can
thus cast either frebrands or mud over the
Church with impunity?
Before leaving this matter of the printing
Office, it is proper to remark, that there is no
reason to doubt the benevolent purpose OF
DR.. Baird in establishing it; that the Com
mittee has derived decided benefit from 1t;
and that the whole arrangement was laid be-
fore the General Assembly by the Committee
in 1868.
The Observer goes on to give its opinion
about the improperly of the Secretary being
engaged in other things, lin respect to some
of which it conveys an erroneous impression)
while enjoying full salary from the Church.
Strange to say that among the things OBJ
jected to is "his preaching, - and receiving
compensation for it. What wealth of Wis
dom ought to be gotten from the Observer as
to the right ordering of all things in the
Church, if the Church could only know it !
No Professor in Theological Seminary was
ever known to supply church on the Sab
bath, was he? No one ever owned farm
or taught a school, did ne? Editors of reli-
gious newspapers are commonly ordained
ministers. Are they not as much bound to
devote themselves to spiritual matters as
others; do none of them own farms, or look
after money? We are far from exCusing
any departure from ministerial work, but
when judgment begins on, others let the
Judge look well to the cleannesS of his own
garments.
The Observer next gives series of re-
marks, to the effect that there has been a
suspicion for number of years, that full
confidence could not be placed in It's (the
Committees) published accounts that only
last May the General Assembly received
overtures asking for an investigation, but ii
was refused, &c, &c.
As soon as these recent troubles in the
Committee we're discovered, there was nc
doubt that the Observer would pervert it from
its legitimate signifcancy, and cuttiDgly say,
"Ab, ha! Didn't we tell you so?' But its
triumphing shall be short; mark how tale
shall putt down. Let these points be noted
l. That the criticisms and discussions
which have appeared in the newspapers and
elsewhere, have always been based upon the
accounts of the Committee as they eCere pre-
ssnted. Upon this basis their vindicatior
has always been complete, as the whole
Church knows, and as the General Assem-,
bly, after the most careful examination BY
its best business members, has always de,
elsred.
2. When an investigation was asked last
year by the Presbytery of Nashville and The
Synod of Memphis, they represented that
they had no charges whsteVer to make; thai
there was some doubt or suspicion among
some, but that it was entirely vague in its
character. And yet upon such basis they
asked for an investigation by special COM
mittee, aided by an expert, and Of the affairs
of Publication from its foundation! Now let
any one take the report of the able Standing
Committee of which the Rev. DR.. Burgett, Of
Mobile, was chairman. Here is an extract:
"Touching the overtures above mentioned, call
inc for statement in detail of assets &c. and the
appointment Of special committee to examine I'D
interim into all the operations OF the Executive
Committee and report to the next Assembly 1t is
a sufficient answer that, inasmuch as all that is
asked for is covered by the general Report aud ac-
oompanying documents presented to this Assem-
blv, and inasmueh as no charges OF any kind have
been preferred rejecting against the Executive
Committees management OF these matters, the
Assembly deems that the object of such overtures
has been substantially accomplished, and that,
therefore, nothing further is needed.
Let any one read the discussion on this
report. Here for example is what Prof. W.
Il. Wsddel, of Georgia, said, "He was a
member of the Standing Committee, and the
resolution before the Assembly was passed
after mature elaboration. Here was Syn
cd and Presbytery insisting on an iovesti-
cation, and DR.. Baird demanding it. There
we're no charges, no specifications. He went
to members of these Presbyteries, and found
nothing on which committee could proceed
to investigate, which was not covered by the
investigation of the Standing Committee"
That resolution, and the ext expressing
confidence in the Committee, we're adopted
with but one dissenting vote. When, there
fore, the Observer speaks of the refusal Of the
Assembly to heed the "mOdest suggestions
Of reforming kaOwn abuses, and Of looking
for Others" it states what is palpably con-
1adic.ed BY every fact in the case. The
Executive Committee, and every member of
the Assembly, would have readily favored
the investigation, had any one come forward
and declared his belief or suspicion that any
specified matter was concealed or wrong
So far IS cur accounts and books showed, all
was declared correct, after a most labOriouG
examination.
We hold the Observer then in this vice :
If It did not know or suspect more than was
to be seen on the face of the papers before
the General Assembly, what right has it to
represent the. Assembly as Sinking its duty
in deelinipg 60 east discredit upon one of it's