Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1881-03-08
A Card.

In May, 1857, my father, the late Rev.
DIR. Robert ]. Breckinridge, was mem.
Der of the General Assembly of the Pres
byterian Church, and Chairman of its
Committee to which was referred the
matter of the new version of the Bible,
then proposed by the American Bible
Society to replace the authorized ver-
sion. AS chairman, he made report
condemning the proposed action of the
society and denying its power to do
more than print and circulate the re-
ceived version of the English Bible
For his action in that Assembly he was
assailed with bitterness, to which at
tacks he made no answer until the
Synod of Kentucky, in October, 1857,
condemned the proposed action OF the
society, and on October 30th. 1857 he
published pamphlet of eight pages in
the various attacks made upon him. In
the succeeding Winter the society re-
ceded from the position it bad assumed,
ceased to issue the new version, and
thus ended the controversy.
In the January humber of the Scrib-
ner (seen by me for the first time to-
day), there is an article entitled "The
Bible Society and The New Revision"
and ascribed to Charles S. Robinson,
D. D., in which the author goes out of
his way to revive O miserable SANDER
against my father, and for the purpose,
apparently, of avoiding responsibility
for it and of giving it an air of respecta-
bility and truthfulness, ascribes it to
'some theclogians."
The special sentence 1 aliude to is as
follows, to witt
"Dr. Breckinridge collapsed rather
suddenly, for he found he had as much
on his hands as he could attend to at
the moment, in repelling the awkward
charge of plagiarism which some theo-
logians were pressing: he had published
a volume of divinity and they said he
pilfered the best part of it from Stapfer."
Page 1853.
The charge, if true, is wholly irrele-
want to the matter in issue-wh0lly for
eign to the subject this matter is wri-
ting about; and could have been made
only from motives of personal malice.
1t is written of the dead. 1t is con-
cerning one who, whatever may be said
of him, was for nearly forty years a
minister of the Gospel, who did some
service for his Master.
The charge is credited to "s0n1e heO-
loqions," ''they said," by which the
and this slanderer shields himself be-
hind the anOnym "theolOg1ans," the
unnamed "they."
It is given as q reason for a collapse,
when this author knew that the contro-
versy ended because of the complete
overthrow of the assailants of, and the
frank surrender of the society to, the
views of those who agreed with my
father, so that the reason assigned for
the revival of this slander is false with
in the personal knowledge of him who
goes out of the way to revive it.
At the time this slander was first ut
tered my father thought he had some
reason to believe that its real authors
were of those who assailed him because
of his action concerning this proposed
new version of the Bible; and after q
lapse of twenty-three years, it is re-
vived under such circumstances as to
render it probable that he was not in
correct.
| At that time he published the follow
ing sentence concerning this slander:-
| "All that / have answered to such
charges was that they were false and
malicious, in letter and in spirit; that
the whole attack was conspiracy fol-
definite and wicked ends-ferociOus in
its manner, infamous in its conception
and that / could treat it no otherwise
than would treat brutal attempt at
personal assassination"
And now that he is dead. I, his son
in the presence of that God, whom he
loved and served, and of all brave anG
upright smen, of whom he was lofty
type, do denOunce this revival of tha
slander as "lalse and malicious" "infa-
nous in Its conception" and dishonor
ing and contemplate in it's execution
and this I submit to the judgment of al
good men.
VIM G. P. BRECKINRIDGE.
Lexington, Ky., Feb: I'd, 1881.