erasures and interlineations, to make the record correct, to read at the opening of the next session of the Assembly. Such erasures are very frequent. Sometimes they are made by order of the Assembly. I do not know, except from report, who made the cancellation on these papers. It was not done by me, nor did the Assembly order it. The Assembly of 1838 ordered the cancellated portions to be recorded on the transcript of the minutes. [Mr. Randall objecting to the witness going into the acts of 1838, and Mr. Hubbell claiming the evidence to show that the cancellation was unauthorized, Judge Rogers said it might be given as relating to the minutes of 1837.] Mr. Krebs, interrogated by Mr. Ingersoll, proceeded the paper which I read, stating my views of the duty of the clerks, I asked leave to have inserted in the minutes, but no motion being made to that effect, I did not feel at liberty to insert it. It did not, therefore, belong to the Assembly, and I afterwards published it.

Interrogated by Mr. Randall, the witness said: I know not where the original of that paper is. I requested Mr. Engles to publish it in the Presbyterian, and gave him the original. I read it by permission before Mr. Ewing withdrew his resolution, first making an extempore statement, and then reading the paper. I cannot tell where the original of Mr. Ewing's resolution is. Such papers are usually destroyed as soon as copied. The copy on the minutes is correct.

Dr. John MDowell, interrogated by Mr. Hubbell, said: to understand how the marks of cancellation occurred on these papers, I would refer you to page 498 of the minutes of the Assembly of 1837.

"The Stated Clerk, with Dr. Cuyler and Mr. Grant were appointed a committee to revise the Minutes, and prepare them for publication.”

These minutes, on the rising of the Assembly, were put into my hands, either as stated clerk, or as chairman of the committee. The committee met several times in my study on different days, and made various alterations, striking out the parts which you see marked with a cross. The obliterations had been made before. That this matter may be understood, I should say that it has been customary for the whole minutes to be read over to the Assembly, when they are finished, but occasionally they are in haste, and have several times appointed a committee to do what the Assembly ought to do. Sometimes they delegate the power to a committee to make the corrections. It was under such that we acted powers in 1837. Mr. Ewing's motion having been withdrawn, we thought that it ought not to be a matter of record. Mr. Grant, one of the members of the committee, differed from us in opinion, on this point. The pledge given by Mr. Krebs I never have had it never came to me in any form. As soon as the revision was completed, I think about the first of August, the minutes were sent to press. Interrogated by Mr. Wood. The statements made by the clerks formed no part of the minutes. We left out every thing, as if the transactions had never happened. The remarks made do not now These crosses appear, but the fact that they were made does.

were made by the committee. The obliterations I know nothing of.

Interrogated by Mr. Hubbell. The statement which I made was never on the minutes. The statements of neither of the clerks was filed. Mine was not in writing. I can give the substance of it if it is thought proper.

Judge Jessup, in continuation. My recollection is that the matter was as it has been stated. In the forenoon Mr. Ewing offered his resolution; and in the afternoon, Dr. M'Dowell and Mr. Krebs offered their statements. Dr. M'Dowell made a statement of his views of his duty as clerk, of which, though I cannot repeat the whole, a part is impressed on my memory. After Mr. Ewing's resolution had been discussed for some time, the Assembly adjourned till afternoon. In the afternoon Dr. M'Dowell asked leave to offer a statement; and said, that he did not feel willing to give a pledge, as such, to the Assembly; but would state his views. That he did not think he could properly exercise any discretion in the matter. That he was only a ministerial officer, and, as such, would carry out the views of the Assembly; and that he should feel himself bound to do so, as long as he held the office, whatever his opinion might be as an individual. It is impressed on my mind that he added, if he found himself so situated that he could not carry out the views of the General Assembly, consistently with his principles, he would resign. I am not sure that he said so. This is all I recollect.

When Mr. Ewing rose and withdrew his resolution, it was said either by him or some other, that the explanations were satisfactory; leave was asked to withdraw the motion, which was granted by a vote taken.

The plaintiffs called Rev. Miles P. Squier, to prove the rejection by the clerks of the commissions from the presbyteries within the excinded synods.

Mr. Squier, interrogated by Mr. Randall, said: I was a commissioner to the General Assembly of 1838, from the Presbytery of Geneva, within the Synod of Geneva. The commissions of the commissioners from the excinded synods were handed to myself and Judge Brown, of Ohio, on Thursday morning, the day on which the Assembly met, and were by us tendered to the clerks, Dr. M'Dowell, and Mr. Krebs. Dr. M'Dowell, speaking in the name of the committee said, "We are not permitted by the instructions of the Assembly to receive these commissions; we cannot do it. Were I to exercise my own judgment I might act very differently, but I am bound by the instructions of the Assembly."

I have no doubt these [a file of papers handed to the witness by Mr. Randall,] are the identical commissions which Judge Brown and I presented to the clerks. There were about fifty of them. They were stated to be commissions from presbyteries within the four excinded synods. No objection was made to their form. They were not received, examined, or opened by the clerks. I desired the gentlemen present to take notice of the refusal. This was in the committee-room of the Seventh Presbyterian Church, between

nine and ten o'clock in the morning, the place and time, at which it had been advertised, that the clerks would be in waiting to receive commissions.

Cross-examined. Interrogated by Mr. Hubbell, the witness said: I had no other objection to say to Dr. Elliott, that the Presbytery of Geneva belonged to the Synod of Geneva, except that presbyteries, as regards the General Assembly, are not under the jurisdiction of synods. It would, therefore, have been irrelevant to say so. I came from the Presbytery of Geneva,-had been preaching the winter of that year in the congregation of Junius, in that presbytery, as a stated supply-was a member of that presbytery. The churches in that presbytery, with not more than one exception, were governed by ruling elders. That exception, if any, must have been the congregation of Middlesex.

Interrogated by Mr. Ingersoll.-With regard to my own presbytery, it is as I have stated. About the others I cannot speak absolutely. I know of no churches that are strictly Congregational; I do not know that all have sessions. If there be any churches connected with us in that country, within the bounds of the synod and beyond, which have not sessions, they have, by vote, put themselves under the care of some presbytery. I believe the elders in all those churches are for life; I know of no other elders than those chosen for life. I do not know that all those churches have elders chosen for life. I know of none which have committee-men. I presume there are some churches in some of the presbyteries where all questions are submitted to the male members of the church; I have parol evidence that there are such in that region. In the presbytery to which I belong, all have sessions except one, and for five or six years past my attention has been chiefly confined to that presbytery. Several years ago, I belonged to the Presbytery of Buffalo; there were then some churches connected with that presbytery, that had not appointed ruling elders. I am unable to say how many. This presbytery now belongs to the Synod of Genessee. They were the smaller number, and smaller churches, I should say. In the new churches there not being many male members; hardly enough for the formation of an eldership; in some instances the appointment of elders was delayed. In the mean time such a church was represented in the presbytery. I have no knowledge of subsequent changes in the Presbytery of Buffalo. Frequently these churches afterwards chose ruling elders. I now reside one hundred miles from them, and therefore do not know much about them. Interrogated by Mr. Ingersoll, the witness said: I do not know [being pointed to page 534 of the minutes of 1837, containing the reports of the Presbyteries of Onondaga and Cayuga] whether all these churches have elders; I know of none which have not. I am not so extensively acquainted in Onondaga as in Cayuga. I am acquainted in Auburn, and both churches there have ruling elders. I am unacquainted of my own personal knowledge, with the fact how many churches there are in the Presbytery of Onondaga which have ruling elders. I have not travelled much in Onondaga. The seventeen counties in which I travelled, as agent for the Home

Missionary Society, were west of that presbytery. Some of the presbyteries have been formed since that time. In 1816, when I settled in Buffalo, Geneva was the only presbytery in those seventeen counties. The following presbyteries have since been formed: out of Geneva, in 1817, were formed Ontario, Niagara and Bath; and in 1819, the Presbyteries of Rochester and Genessee were formed, all by the Synod of Geneva. At a later period the Presbytery of Tioga was created by the same synod. Also the Presbytery of Angelica, by the same synod. In 1821, the Synod of Genessee was formed by the General Assembly, containing, I think, the Presbyteries of Ontario, Rochester, Niagara and Genessee. Still later the Presbytery of Niagara was divided by the Synod of Genessee; the part north of Tonnewanta Creek retained the name of Niagara, the other took that of Buffalo. The Presbytery of Chemung was subsequently formed by the Synod of Geneva. I do not know that any church was ever represented in the Presbytery of Ontario by a person not either a minister or a ruling elder. I know nothing about it. I know persons, who, when I was a member of the Presbytery of Niagara, fifteen years ago, were members of that presbytery, from churches that had not yet organized an eldership. To the best of my recollection, there were but a small number of such churches, and these among the smaller and newer ones. Each church belonging to a presbytery has one representative. I judge there were churches in some of these presbyteries, which, in the feature of not having elderships, were Congregational. There is one church which has the reputation of belonging to Bath Presbytery, which has no ruling elders-the church of Prattsburg. I do not know that this church was ever represented in presbytery. I do not know of any such in the Presbytery of Rochester. I am acquainted with all the principal churches in Rochester, but not with all. To the best of my knowledge, those churches which have not yet formed elderships, elect one from the male members to represent them in presbytery. I have never been present at any such election.

Interrogated by Mr. Hubbell, the witness said: I know of not a single church formed wholly or partly on the accommodation plan [that is, the "Plan of Union,"] being partly Presbyterian and partly Congregational. There are, I should think, between thirty and forty churches in the Presbytery of Buffalo. At the time I was acquainted with it, seventeen or eighteen years ago, there were some churches in that incipient stage which I have described. The common language in presbytery was, "While you are too young to form elderships, let the male members govern the church." I cannot say that all the churches, which were thus initiate, fifteen years ago, have now become consummate. I know that many of them have. The churches of Angelica, I have always understood, had sessions; I know of none in that presbytery that have not. I do not know, however, that all have. I do not know that all in Genessee have ruling elders; but I know none that have not. When I belonged, a number of years ago, to the Presbytery of Niagara, I had reason to suppose there were some churches that had not sessions in that presbytery.

Re-examined by Mr. Randall.-The representation from the Presbytery of Watertown which were referred to on the minutes of 1837, p. 528, is always according to the number of ministers, and so far as I know, always has been. It is so in all presbyteries. A minister without charge, as, for example, the president of a college, always counts one in presbytery. The right to a seat commences with his ordination. I know of no individual, of the whole number of five hundred and nine ministers, within the bounds of the four excinded synods, who is not a regularly ordained Presbyterian clergyman. All were such; but I must be understood as meaning, that we received clergymen from the Dutch Reformed Church, and from the Associations of New England, without re-ordination; the terms of correspondence did not require that they should be re-ordained. In all the presbyteries with which I am acquainted there. are a sufficient number of Presbyterian Churches to constitute the presbyteries. Striking out all the churches about whose Presbyterianism there has been any question, there would have remained a sufficient number regularly organized to send commissioners to the General Assembly of 1837.

Mr. Randall here interrupted the witness, to give in evidence the commissions of the delegates from the excinded synods to the General Assembly of 1838.

Mr. Squier in continuation, interrogated by Mr. Randall.-I was present at the organization of the Assembly of 1838. After tendering the commissions to the clerks, I gave them for keeping to Mr. Nixon. I introduced him to Dr. Mason, and then went into the house-found the house very densely occupied at the south end, a large proportion of the gentlemen in that part of it being of the Old School party. The sermon was preached as usual, and at its close the moderator, Dr. Elliott, announced that after the usual prayer he would proceed to constitute the Assembly. This prayer being finished, he took his place in front of the pulpit, and made a prayer, at the close of which Dr. Patton rose and said, that he held in his hand certain resolutions which he wished to offer. Dr. Elliott said that was not the time to present resolutions. Dr. Patton said that he was anxious to present them at that time. Dr. Elliott stated that they could not be received, as the roll was the next thing in order; and I think, stated that the clerks were ready to make their report. Dr. Patton stated that he had the floor before the clerks, and that his motion related to the roll. The moderator told him he was out of order. Dr. Patton appealed from his decision. The appeal was seconded, to the best of my recollection. The moderator refused to put the appeal to the house, saying to Dr. Patton that he was out of order. Dr. Patton then took his seat, and the clerks made their report. Dr. Erskine Mason then rose, and addressed the moderator, saying that he held in his hand the commissions of certain commissioners from the presbyteries within the bounds of the Synods of Utica, Geneva, Genessee, and Western Reserve, which had been refused by the clerks; that he now tendered them (holding them up to view) for the purpose of completing the roll. The moderator inquired of him if those presbyteries were within the