Glasgow Courier. — 1846-05-14 (Glasgow, Strathclyde, Scotland)

UNITED ASSOCIATE SYNOD. EDINBURGH, TUESDAY, MAY 6. CASE OF THE RSV. WM. MARSHALL OF LEITIL—The first matter taken up by the Synod to-day was the case of protest and appeal y e s Rev. eagainst a deed of the PresbytberTy ofas W Edinburgh,camemMarshall b ofo dater e the h 7°e p t f Leith, le lath3rtery of Edinburgh from the Presbytery of Glasgow, who not only transmitted certain cams, but appointed a deputation, consisting of Drs. Beattie, King, Robson, and Eadie, to represent them in the matter. These papers were seven in number, and consisted, with one exception, of letters which had passed between the Rev. Wm. Marshall and the Rev. Dr. Heugh of Glasgow. Mr. Marshall's first letter to Dr. Heugh is dated 31st March. In this letter he says :_"Judging from your public conduct on some occasions not long gone by, I felt that it was with difficulty —very great difficulty indeed—l could give you credit for true piety; and some vile reports affecting your private character, which have come to my ears, make me now feel that I should neither be doing justice to you nor to myself, were I not applying to you for some explanation. You will oblige me, therefore, and at the same time discharge no more than a Christian duty, by letting me have a speedy reply to this letter, which, you will understand, is altogether private. In the first place, I have been informed that on a late occasion you were guilty of grossly unchristian conduct towards a worthy brother in the ministry. It is said that this brother minister—who has a high character both for integrity and for acuteness—believing that he had heard you, in your own house, instruct one of your servants to tell a lie, deemed it necessary to state to you his impression in writing, for the purpose of satisf3ing his conscience; and that instead of receiviug his complaiitt in the spirit of meekness, as you were unoqfu irooneapbol ob. one. In dobtoo o, dyeonuo ofintrotiloi iht hoos as sent n tohl aiar ano da tot slownedre rf our!! and insisting that he should retract and apologise I * * * In the second place, I have been informed, that shortly after the last meeting of the United Secession Synod in Glasgow, you were written to by Dr. Marshall—my father—for an explanation of words used by you in public, to the effect that there was sin lying upon him; and that you, in reply, gave him to understand that you had used the words not in an unchristian spirit! You must be aware that any living hypocrite could give the same explanation of any slander, however, gross; and I have good reason to be persuaded that the impression produced on the mind of Dr. M., and of others to whom he may have communicated the circumstance, must be anything rather than the belief that you are a Christian indeed, whatever may be your pretensions. With precisely the same propriety might the bloody assassin pretend that the murder with which his mhaelot hands arefo toe stainedthi rid, was l adooe? f o haveinobbeedronicoefotromtled ie thatsi command.xthyooorare theperson referred to in an article said to be written by Dr. Ritchie, and published some time ago in ' Dalrymple's Secession Magazine, now called The Secession Witness.' In that article a certain silvery doctor' is said to have 'told the thing that is not.' The substance of the story alluded to is, as lam informed, that shortly after the appearance of Dr. Marshall's Letter in the Free Church Magazine,' you happened to meet with Dr. R. somewhere OR the sea-coast, and spoke to him of the 'Letter' in such terms as to convey to his mind a most injurious impression regarding Dr. M.'s Christian character—that Dr. R., much astonished, and doubting, as he well might, the truth and candour of your statement, proceeded forthwith to the house of a friend, and procured a sight of the magazine—that on meeting you again, a short thee after, he gave you t ul y, n doeor s t, ad found nd that e in it no oag seenuod fir. whatever r forLetter,y leea do hi to regaer—e f and that 3ou then replied with an air of indifference, and in your own consequential manner, that you yourself had never read the article, or had read it imperfectly! • 5 * In the fourth Ooeudr mbyartkheet, rotoohistiooio morning, place—Several years ago, when at college in Glasgow, I heard I