Mr. Preston.-How happened you in the first place to get into the neighbourhood of Mr. Boardman and Mr. Latta, in the midst of the Old School men?

Witness. It was merely by accident, so far as I know. I went in just before Dr. Elliott finished his sermon, and entered from the grave-yard. My going to that quarter of the house was purely accidental. Indeed, it was accidental that I went at all. I had some business up Market street, and I merely stopped in out of curiosity to see what was going on. I had understood there was to be some fuss. I anticipated as much, as they had been quarelling for some time. I thought I would like to see and hear what was passing.

Some question being raised respecting the correctness of the witness in regard to Mr. Latta, Mr. Randall said, the minutes show that Mr. Latta was a member of the Assembly, both in 1837 and 1838.

Plaintiffs called Mr. Elihu D. Tarr. Interrogated by Mr. Randall, the witness said: My profession is the same as your own. I attended at the organization of the General Assembly of 1838, in Ranstead court. I sat three or four pews behind Mr. Cleaveland. I heard him put the motion that Dr. Beman take the chair as moderator. He put it clearly and distinctly. I heard the "ayes" from a large number of persons. I heard the question reversed. I distinctly heard the reversal, and heard a few "noes" in the northwest part of the house directly afterward. I was surprised at the vote, as I had understood that the Old School party had the majority, and was surprised that they did not vote the motion down. This caused me to take more particular notice. I am confident that I cannot be mistaken. It was from the south-west part of the house that the noes came. Did I before say "north-west?" As I looked toward the pulpit, they came from my front, and to the right of that.

Cross-examination. Interrogated by Mr. Preston, witness said: I am certain that I heard the noes distinctly. I have attended the legislature of this state. There were probably from three to half a dozen noes, but I did not count them. I heard the question put in regard to the clerks, and if my recollection serves me, there were more noes on that than on the former question; but about this, I am not so certain. I think certainly there were answers in the negative, but whether more or not I can't tell. To the best of my recollection, the question was reversed, on each of the motions. They were all reversed. I distinctly heard the reversal. The negative was put on all the questions which were put by Mr. Cleaveland, Dr. Beman and Dr. Fisher. I heard the motion made in regard to Dr. Fisher, but don't recollect whether there were any noes on that vote. I can't say whether there were any or not. I was in the neighbourhood of and surrounded by the New School party, and was very near Mr. Cleaveland. Up to the time of the General Assembly of 1838, I did not, strictly speaking, belong to either the Old or the New School party, though I inclined to the Old School. The proceedings here and those of the majority in the Assembly of 1837 determined me. I am now opposed to the

Old School party, and a decided advocate of the New School proceedings. I was formerly a member of the Presbyterian church of which Mr. Winchester was the pastor, afterward of Mr. Boardman's, and I am now a member of Mr. Rood's church. Mr. Rood, my impression is, belongs to the Third Presbytery of Philadelphia, but I cannot say certainly. When I removed to the Northern Liberties, I went to his church, without asking whether he was New or Old School.

66

Mr. James W. Paul called by plaintiffs. Interrogated by Mr. Randall, the witness said: I am a member of the bar. I attended the organization of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, in May, 1838. I was in the gallery, immediately in front of the organ. I heard Mr. Cleaveland put his motion. I distinctly heard the motion put, and the vote in the affirmative and negative. I am satisfied that the question was reversed. The "ayes" were uttered very loudly, and the "noes" in a lower tone of voice. They were few and scattering. I am fully satisfied that the question was put in the negative. Such was my impression at the time. I think I cannot be mistaken in saying that the question was reversed. Knowing Dr. Beman to be a very prominent man in the New School party, I thought it very strange that such a nomination should pass without a stronger opposition from the Old School men. There is no question that there was sufficient time for the question to be put and reversed, if put rapidly, though the interval was not long between the affirmative and negative vote.

Mr. Randall. You say that there was time, if the reverse of the question was promptly put?

Mr. Ingersoll objected to this as a leading question.

Mr. Randall. If the reverse was promptly put, was there time for it?

After a short colloquy between the counsel, the witness continued. My recollection is, that there was ample time for the reversal. But I did not expect to be called to testify as a witness, and therefore did not charge my memory with what passed. I speak from recollection merely. I am a member of the First Presbyterian Church -Mr. Barnes' Church.

Hon. Henry Brown called by the relators. Interrogated by Mr. Randall, the witness said: I attended the organization of the General Assembly of 1838. I heard Mr. Cleaveland make his motion, and put the question thereon. I heard him reverse it very distinctly. I am absolutely certain that I heard him reverse the question. I cannot be mistaken in this. I sat on the west side of the east aisle of the church, one pew east of Mr. Cleaveland, and two or three north of him. The question was put distinctly, in a very clear voice, and might have been heard all over the house. There was immediately a very loud "aye," and one individual responded aye much louder than any other. Mr. Cleaveland then reversed the question, I should say, with despatch, but not so rapidly as to prevent him from speaking very distinctly and clearly. I have known a question to be reversed more rapidly than this was. After he reversed the question, I heard several noes on

the west side of the house, and to the south of where I sat, and two or three in the eastern part of the house, one of them very near to me. I am confident that I heard him distinctly put and reverse the question, and that there were several "noes." I was a member of the General Assembly of 1837 and of that of 1838, from the Presbytery of Lorain, in the Synod of the Western Reserve. I acted with the body which held its sessions in the First Presbyterian Church during its session of about two weeks. There was a man near me who voted aye very loud.

Mr. Randall.-Did you know him?

Witness.-I was not acquainted with him previous to that time, but was afterwards told that his name was Foster. He was a ruling elder from the Presbytery of Montrose, in this state. I think he spoke twice as loud as any other person in the house. I took hold of his arm and told him not to halloo so loud next time. Mr. Randall. Then you know that the little gentleman with the loud voice was not Dr. Beecher ?

Witness. It was not Dr. Beecher. He did not at any time stand on the top of a pew, but towards the close of the proceedings I think that he sat on the back of one.

Cross-examination.-Interrogated by Mr. Preston, the witness said: I did vote on all the questions. I said "aye" every time, or at least I intended to do so. My commission was rejected by the Committee on Commissions, Mr. McDowell and Mr. Krebs. I cannot tell whether all those whose commissions were rejected, voted on the questions put by Mr. Cleaveland, Dr. Beman, and Dr. Fisher. I can't say about others. I myself voted in the affirmative on all the questions, and presume that others did. I know that one did. I could not see them all in so large an assembly.

Counsel. Have you not expressed a doubt whether these questions were reversed?

Witness.-I have not. I have heard stated, a doubt in regard to the reversal of the questions, which I do not feel. I distinctly heard the question reversed, on the motion in regard to Dr. Beman; distinctly, on the choice of clerks; and I believe that it was reversed on the appointment of Dr. Fisher, in a plain, distinct voice, the two former louder than usual. I have never doubted, and do not now feel any doubt as to this matter. I cannot say that every question was reversed, but I have no doubt in regard to the questions on Dr. Beman, Dr. Fisher, and the clerks. I was one range of pews east, and two or three pews north of Mr. Cleaveland. He was at the east end of his pew, and I in the middle, or the west end of mine. We were probably ten, or it might be a dozen feet apart.

Mr. Hubbell.-Has there not been a suit brought in your name against Dr. Elliott, Dr. M'Dowell, and Mr. Krebs, for an infringement of your rights?

Witness.-There is one suit in my name, among those read from the docket.

Mr. Hubbell.-Are you not aware that there have been five suits commenced?

Witness.-Perhaps there are five, I was not very particular about

that matter. I left it to my counsel, with entire confidence that it would be managed correctly.

Mr. Thomas Elmes called by the plaintiffs.

Interrogated by Mr. Randall, the witness said: I belong to the First Congregational Church of this city. The church of which Mr. Todd is pastor. I have no connexion with the Presbyterian Church whatever. I have not heard the testimony of the witnesses which have been examined, with the exception of one or two to-day. I attended at the organization of the General Assembly in Ranstead court, on the 17th of May, 1838. I went in at the west door of the house, from the burying-ground, and stood leaning on the rail of the pew near the door. I heard Mr. Cleaveland's motion very distinctly put, the motion for Dr. Beman to take the chair. I heard the affirmative very distinctly, and several negatives, say two_or three, after a short interval. I stood near the moderator. Dr. Miller was between Dr. Elliott and me. Dr. Elliott hammered and called to order, and Dr. Miller tried to hush the noise. He put his hand up as though to stop the tumult, and used some expression like, "Let them go through." Dr. Miller, I think, stood up at this moment. He had before been sitting. This was about the time Mr. Cleaveland was endeavouring to read his paper. The tumult was the calling to order, very loudly, in the neighbourhood of the moderator. All the noise, pretty much, that I heard was in that part of the house. I know the Rev. George Duffield. He is now in Detroit, as I understand. I have never known him to use a cane. I have known him for several years, but more particularly for about three. When in Philadelphia, he staid at my house for some time. I never saw him use a cane. His deportment was always very gentlemanly. I never heard him use coarse language. He is far from doing so.

Cross-examined by Mr. Preston.-I did not see Mr. Duffield present at the organization of the Assembly of 1838. He did not walk there, or come away, with me. The reason why I could not hear all distinctly, was, that there were calls to order. The moderator called to order very loudly, and thumped with his hammer; and others around him called order loudly. There was a good deal of stir and bustle. This was what I meant, when I spoke of tumult. I perceived no other noise, or movement, until Mr. Cleaveland had made his motion. When that motion had been put, Dr. Beman stepped into the aisle, and others at the same time. The affirmative vote was very numerous. There were a few noes. I did not hear the negative distinctly, but some said "No." I did not hear any noes mixed with the ayes. There was a pretty loud burst of ayes, then a few scattering ones; then, after a short pause, a few noes. I heard Dr. Mason nominated as clerk, but I do not know by whom. I do not distinctly recollect hearing the motion put, but I think Mr. Cleaveland put it. I did not hear any noes on that question. Dr. Miller was between me and the moderator, somewhere near the moderator. Mr. Cleaveland was fifteen or twenty feet from me. I would not like to say, that I distinctly saw Mr. Cleaveland when he made his motion. I can't say that Mr. Cleave

land put the question for the choice of clerks: it might have been Dr. Beman. I belonged to the Congregational Church at that time. I was once an elder in the Presbyterian Church, and was a delegate to the Assembly that met at Pittsburg. I can tell how I voted there. I sympathize with those who do right. I don't know what is understood by Old School or New School. I don't belong to either. Other people must judge which I belonged to. I profess to be a Calvinist; was an elder in the Fifth Presbyterian Church. Mr. Duffield was pastor of it a short time. I was a Presbyterian while I was in that church: I have since become a Congregationalist, to get out of the quarrels of the other church. I don't recollect ever saying that this was a contest between Presbyterians and Congregationalists, or that the Presbyterians were struggling for existence. Mr. Preston. Is it your opinion that it is such a struggle? Mr. Elmes. I never did conceive it to be so. I have never thought or stated that that was the real struggle. I joined a Congregational Church in Maine in 1812. I was ordained an elder in 1828. I became a member of the Presbyterian Church in 1815. Several years I belonged to the Sixth Presbyterian Church. Two years ago, I again entered into connexion with the Congregational Church. I had been a Congregationalist first in Augusta, Maine. I joined Mr. Todd's church in the beginning of the spring of 1837, after the church was completed, because it was convenient for me, though I probably should not have left the Presbyterian Church, if it had not been for their quarrels. The church is in Tenth street below Spruce.

Rev. James M. Davis, called by the plaintiffs, interrogated by Mr. Randall, said: I am a minister, am preaching to the Presbyterian Church at Fairmount. I attended at the organization of the Assembly of 1838. I remember Mr. Cleaveland's motion. I was standing half way down the middle aisle when he rose, and heard his prefatory remarks. I heard Mr. Cleaveland's motion distinctly, and the reversal with equal distinctness. I heard from eight to ten negative voices. My impression was, that they came from the quarter where the Old School brethren sat. I was expecting them from that quarter, and think I do not mistake. There was considerable confusion when Mr. Cleaveland commenced. There were calls to order by the moderator, and by persons at his left; but they soon desisted, and, at the close of his remarks, the house was still. His last sentence has been repeated by every witness. When he made his motion, the house was very still; all the noise had subsided by that time. I formerly preached at the First Presbyterian Church at Manayunk, belonging to the Third presbytery. I sympathize entirely with the New School.

Cross-examined by Mr. Preston.-I heard the reversal of the question. It was put distinctly as the affirmative, but more rapid. I think it was distinct enough for every one in the house to hear it, if disposed to hear, as I was. An individual might have made so much noise, that he could not hear. When it was put, the house was quiet. I was about the middle of the aisle. Dr. Beman came out of the pew by my side, and put the question on the appointment