Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-07-02
ROMANCE OF A MISSENT LETTER,
s0r How the Fate of q Chair in the
Lane Theological Seminary
Was Decided.
GREAT RELIGIOUS WIRE PULLING


IsS
| troversy, and creed is set mp against creed
like Greek against Greek, it is little wonder
! if some charges dissipate while others ag.
gregate, or that claims are made that politi.
| cal methods are introduced and practiced by
| churchmen instead of the Golden Rule. Per.
| haps there is as often two sides to religious
| controversies as to secular ones, and with
| one as the other just as difficult to separate
| fact and fiction, right and wrong, as to dis
| tinguish between tweedle-dum and tweedle-
| dee.
The Cincinnati Commercial Gazette of YES
terday and the day preceding, somewhat
| sensationally and yet emphatically Illus
trates the foregoing. 1t alludes to the re-
| cent attacks of the New York evangelist
upon Rev. DR.. W. H. Roberts, Stated Clerk
of the Presby terrain General Assembly and
Professor of Homiletics at Lane Seminary
1t states they have led up to many conflict
ing stories which it is for the interest of all
parties to straighten out. 1t states that one
of the most outrageous has been to the effect
that DR.. Roberts owes his present influential
position at Lane to fraud. 1t prints, in order
to have disapproved, what it styles 1.-The
story which is the foundation of all the
stories-perhaps the father of all the lies
would be the correct phrase-as it has been
common rumor' in P1ttsburg for years."
Where the Fine Work Was Done.
The story referred to appeared in the Gin
cinnati Commercial Gazette of Tuesday, and
ran as follows:
"The following version of the case of DR..
William IL. Roberts and the Western Theo-
logical Seminary is given by the very highest
authorities of the seminary, and is an old
story in Pittsburg. When the Chair of The
ology in the institution was vacant some
years ago committee of the Board of Trus-
tees was appointed to find suitable man
for the position. They settled on DR.. Will
lam c. Roberts. A prominent member of
the Board met him in the East shortly after
and came to the conclusion he might be
secured. The committee of the Board
at once instructed their secretary to
write to DR.: William c; Roberts and
find out whether he would accept a call
If it were made out. As they were in a hurry
the letter was sent to the General Assembly
at Minneapolis. The letter came into the
possession of DR.. William H. Roberts, owing
to similarity of names. He took counsel
with members of the Lane Seminary Board
of Trustees as to what he should do, with the
intention that the matter must soon be set
tied. The Lane Seminary Trustees saw an
open door for themselves, and agreed on DR..
William II. Roberts as the man they wanted
for their Seminary. They telegraphed to
Cincinnati to call a meeting of the Lane
Seminary Trustees at once AS there was need
of great haste. The meeting was called and
DR.. William II. Roberts was elected to the
Chair of Homiletics in Lane. The
Western Theological Seminary Committee
not hearing from DR.. VIM. c. Roberts, wrote
to him second time, and told him of their
former letter He asked Dr. VIM. H. Roberts
for the letter and received an evasfve reply.
The Western Theological Seminary Commit
tees Secretary then wrote to DR.. VIM. II.
Roberts asking for the return Of the letter.
An evaSive reply was received. They wrote
the second time demanding the letter. DR..
VIM. II. Roberts replied that he had de-
stroyed the letter, but he sent copy ''true
and faithful" 1t was addressed to Dr. Will
G.. Roberts. received
the Board of the Western Theological Semi
nary great Indignation was expressed, one
Trustee saying:
Refused Even Ministerial Courtesy.
"'Gentlemen, there is moral obliquity here
which no explanation can remove. This in
dignation continued so bitter in Pittsburg
for two or three years that when DR.. William
FL. Roberts wrote to an elder in the Shady
side Presbyterian Church asking for "A
Days Preach, no reply was made. 1t is
well known a decided coldneSS existed for
some time between Dr. William c. Roberts
and Dr. William Ii. Roberts as result of the
transaction"
In the Gazette of Wednesday appeared
various interviews upon the subject, which
however, did not throw much light upon
the subject. Dr. Roberts himself, when seen
in relation thereto, said: 81 do not propose
to reply to it. You probably can get more
accurate information from others. l won't
be interviewed on that subject. l have
mass of correspondence on my table that
relates to these late attacks on me that
would prove mighty interesting reading to
the Presbytery Just now"
DIR. William McKibbin was called upon
and asked what he knew regarding chat let
ter" and its misappliance. DR.. Mckibbin
fatty refused to be interviewed on the sub
ject stating that he wished to a"oid any
controversy, but admitted that he was
member of the Board of Directors of the
Western Theological Seminary when charges
of a similar nature had been made. Further
than this he would say nothing. Later in
the day, however, DR.. Mckibbin wrote the
following communication, which he sent to
the Commercial Gazette, bearing upon the
subject. He defends DR.. William H. Roberts,
but does not tell the whole story:
To the Editor of the Commercial Gazette:
"As member of the Board of Directors of
the Western Theological Seminary at the
time at which the alleged occurrences in
connection with the receipt of the letter
mentioned in your Issue of yesterday, and
also as familiar since my coming here with
the part borne in the matter of DR.. Roberts
transference to Lane Seminary, by the rep
resentatives of that institution, wish to
express it as my firm conviction that full
disclosure of the facts would leave the in
tegrity of Dr. Roberts unimpeached and re-
veal the great Injustice done him in the at
tack made upon him in your columns yester-
day: WILLIAM MCKIBBIN.
"WALNUT HILLS. June 80"
Where the Fatal Letter Landed.
1t was stated in the Gazette's Wednesday
article that Captain Z. X. Monfort, one of
Une trustees OF u0e 1Iane seminary, was Sa1Q
to be familiar with the causes that led to the
call upon DR.. William H. Roberts to accept
the Chair of Homiletics at Lane. He was
present at the meeting when DR.. William II.
Roberts name was suggested, and had talked
with others of the trustees, who had sug
gested that DR.. Roberts be "called" when the
General Assembly of 1884 at Minneapolis, ad-
journed. This was the time that the letter
missent was alleged to have been opened by
DR.. Roberts. Accordingly he was seen and
stated to the Gazette that, "SOme four
years ago, in November, 1887 there was some
talk about DR.. w. II. Roberts and his ac-
ceptance of the Chair of Homiletics at Lane
Seminary. don't remember now the nature
of the attack, but DR.. Roberts wrote to me
asking me to make a written statement as to
how the trustees came to select him for that
cnalr: Dr. Roberts evidently mas that letter,
and it would clear up the whole matter.
remember the way his name was suggested"
Now, at this point is where THE DISPATCH
steps in and furnishes to its readers the
letter IN question, in an endeavor to throw
all possible light upon the question and let
the evidence and facts speak for themselves.
The letter is as follows:
CINCINNATI, Nov. 8, 1887.
Prof. William n. Roberts, d. D.:
In response to yours of November 8,
will say: The Executive Committee of the
Lane Seminary Board of Trustees appointed
the members of such court who were dele
apolis, a special committee to make inquiry
about persons who had been mentioned
for the vacant professorship of Practical
Theology at Lane Seminary, and If possible
recommend man for the place, with power
to call meeting of the board. Such In
quiries having been made without satisfac-
tory results the committee were at sea- Two
p5 pI ene number, Dr. j G. M9nfort .annl and NE ME-
church to the hotel were talking about the
impression you had made upon them In the
Assembly, when one of them said: How
would DIR. Roberts do for the vacant chf1r?'
Iod