The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-07-21
For the Central Presbyterian.
DIR. Plumer and Columbia
Seminary. III,

seminary. sE .r
MesSrS. Editors, Many of the reli-
glous newspapers, north and south, in re-
viewing the actions of our late General
Assembly have taken notice of the diff
ference made between Dr. William S.
Plumer and other professors, in the clos
ing of the Theological Seminary at Co.
lumbia. The question is asked, "Why
was DIR. Plumer removed from his chair,
while other professorships though tenn
porarily suspended, were not vaoated2H
To this inquiry, in the judgment of your
correspondent, no answer at all satisfac-
tory, has been given. Many others Il
know entertain the same opinion. The
number of such is doubtless large both
within and without the Church. If so,
the Assembly and the Southern Church
are likely to suffer much damage in, pub
lie estimation. IN. - =,
To DR.. Plumer, personally, the action
taken can and will do no injury: for he is
well-known rate home and abroad. His
character, and service, andgworks, have
given him an honored place in the opin-
ions and hearts of Presbyterians, and of
others, in America and Europe But if
by a constructive indignity or. even
harsh discourtesy the Church should seem
to cast dishonor upon one of her oldest,
ablest, and most faithful ministers
whose life and tolls make a bright and
blessed page in her history-she brings
thereby upon herself sad reproach and
she casts, besides, the shadow of a very
trying apprehension of GOODNESS and neg
lect over the future of all her minister's
My purpose in this communication is to
guard this threatened danger
was not commissioner to the AS
sembly, but being present at it's sessions,
had the opportunity of hearing it's dis
cussions and of conversing freely with its
members. I heard the speech of DR..
Plumer before the Assembly 1t was
brave, manly, clear and candid-and, at
times, touchingly eloquent. The course
of action adopted by the Board of Direc-
tors and which was proposed to and rati-
fed by the General Assembly, was &C
cepted by the Assembly as the best, which
as whole, could be adopted in the en-
barrassed and broken-down condition of
the Seminary. In the judgment of the
members of the body-as I learned by
conversation with many of them-there
seemed to be neither time, at the adj
vanced stage Of the sessions at which the
matter was considered, nor possibility, in
the exhausted state of the Seminarys
finances, of maturing anything more sat
isfactory than what the Directors had
proposed Besides, it was assumed, that
the Directors, or the majority Of them
who proposed the action, were fully &C
quainted with the demands of the case,
and that their official Judgment ought to
be taken by the Assembly as determine
tive. And as the Board, through its rep
resentative, openly and emphadcally dis
claimed all intention Of Offering any in
dignity to DR.. Plumer, and indeed as
serted the very contrary, the members
were made to feel, that acceptance of the
proposed course of action carried with it
no reflection upon the venerable professor
Many Of the majority believed that the
emeritus position assigned to DIR. Plumer
was q full and sincere evidence of high
regard and confidence. Every one Il
think, without exception) to whom /
spoke-and / conversed with n1ony-dis-
claimed all thought of even reflection
on Dr. Plumer and very many expressed
in strong terms their admiration and rev.
erence for him believe that full
canvass of the majority vote would re-
veal'the fact that most, if not all of them.
held the grand old soldier of the cross in
high esteem and generation. However
difficult, therefore, it may be to recon.
Gle the action of the Board Of Directors
as ratified by the General Assembly with
this state of feeling, land candidly con
fess that what was done, considered by IT,
SET, does seem to me unjust and unkind
to DR.. Plumer), yet it is due to the AS
sembly and the Church, that the public
should have evidence that no shadow of
reproach was intended to fall on the