A R E V I E W 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Report*, tfiriirmte ani Arguments, 
 
 AS PRESENTED 
 
 IN THE CASE OF TRINITY CHURCH, 
 
 TO THE LEGISLATURE OF NEW-YORK, 1857. 
 
t 
 
 ) 
 
A REVIEW 
 
 Of the Reports, Evidence and Arguments, as Presented 
 in the Case of Trinity Church, 
 
 TO THE LEGISLATURE OF NEW- YORK, 1857. 
 
 When error once gets the start, as it too often does in this 
 evil world, truth finds it hard to win the race. The passions, 
 the prejudices, the interests of men, are like so many wires 
 spread over the land, vibrating to the electric touch of falsehood- 
 These telegraphs, swifter than Morse's, are the willing abet- 
 tors of designing men, and carry their messages in every direc- 
 tion. On the other hand, Truth, old-fashioned creature that she 
 is, delighting not in modern inventions, keeps to the old mail- 
 coach, "her swift-sure line," and makes slow progress through 
 the mud and mire, or on the hard road she has to tra- 
 vel [after error. But the race [is not always to the swift! 
 So even old Trinity, " in her four-wheeled chariot," as a face- 
 tious divine lately pictured her, may hope to overtake the 
 nimble-footed rumors, falsehoods, and misrepresentations which 
 designing men have made current, though swifter in their course 
 than Atalanta of old. She would be sure to outstrip them if 
 she would only adopt the expedient of Hippomenes, and throw 
 down her golden apples to stay their course. 
 
 It is strange how often the fables of ancient mythology find 
 antitypes in the realities of modern history. We find a coun- 
 terfeit presentment, a summary account of the whole course 
 of proceedings against Trinity Church, in a fabulous story 1263 
 1 
 
N4T7 
 
 2 
 
 years B. C. It is the story of the Argonauts after the Golden 
 Fleece. All these expeditions have had but one object — to 
 fleece old Trinity. The ghosts of the old Argonauts have risen 
 up in the numerous progeny of Aneke Jantz and others ; and 
 when these have been laid by the voice of the Law, they have 
 started up afresh in the more proper shapes of claimants 
 for ghostly rights long defunct, advocates who appear as 
 " spiritual mediums," to diffuse more widely the solid advan- 
 tages of the golden fleece, now guarded by the Dragon 
 Corporation of Trinity. But these Argonauts have been ship- 
 wrecked in their vain attempt to pass the Scyllaand Charybdis 
 of the Senate and Assembly, or crushed between these Sym- 
 plegades. 
 
 If we were believers in the doctrine of Pythagoras, we 
 might think that the soul of Jason had at length passed into 
 the body of the Chairman of a Committee of the New- York Sen- 
 ate, and that under his guidance the new ship Argo, built in the 
 docks of New- York, would soon return from Albany freighted 
 with the golden prize ! The potent aid of the party, which 
 seems most interested in wool, is hoped for in stripping from 
 Trinity her golden fleece. If they can only lull to sleep that 
 watchful dragon, the public, the flaying process will soon be 
 accomplished. But all their incantations, though more subtle 
 than those of Medea, cannot overcome the power of Truth. 
 Let, then, her voice be heard. 
 
 But has not this voice been heard ? Have there not been 
 reports of a Senatorial Committee, testimony of trust-worthy 
 men, and arguments of learned counsel ? Yes — there have 
 been all these, and more. Perhaps too much, rather than too 
 little. Truth, like the Eoman maiden, beneath the Sabine 
 shields, may be crushed under the multitude of pretended de- 
 fences. Our design is not to increase the superincumbent 
 mass, but to strip off the useless bucklers, under whose weight 
 she is now hidden, and crushed to the earth. That is the end 
 and object of this Eeview. 
 
 The authority for every word here uttered shall be estab- 
 lished by the documents printed and published under the di- 
 rection and sanction of the Senate. Out of these, in which 
 
3 
 
 there is no small admixture of chaff, let us try to sift the 
 grains of Truth. 
 
 A brief glance at the rise and progress of the proceedings 
 in the present case will further our object. It is usual— we 
 might almost say a law established by universal precedent — 
 where Legislative bodies are called upon to act in disturbance 
 of existing interests, which have long enjoyed the quiet protection 
 of law, that the case should be presented in the shape of a mem- 
 orial, bearing known and responsible signatures. This seems a 
 needful safeguard against improper legislation. Thus only can 
 a Senate be preserved from imposition, and the rights of others 
 be protected from the expense and vexation of needless disturb- 
 ance. The present proceedings against Trinity Church had 
 not this fair, honest, and righteous beginning. They began on 
 the motion of a single senator. Whether he was impelled by 
 his own interests and prejudices, or some other hand held the 
 concealed wire which gave him impulse, was not known to the 
 Senate, or those most interested. For all the Senate, or the 
 public knew, he might have been the representative of some hos- 
 tile sect, of Brigham Young, or Fanny Lee Townsend ! It was 
 not until after the Report of the Committee in January last, 
 that the Senate, or the friends of Trinity, learned anything of 
 the real movers in this matter. Then it was that they gathered 
 from the witnesses — for in this strange judicial proceeding of 
 a legislative body, there is no distinction between witnesses and 
 accusers, judges and jury — that the real movers in the present , 
 proceedings, were those who had been foiled in similar efforts 
 before the Senate in 1846, and unanimously rejected by the As- 
 sembly in 1847 ! It was wise to keep these parties in the back 
 ground. More recent discoveries have shown, that among the 
 most active movers in this matter, are those not of the Episco- 
 pal Church ; one of whom, their Goliath of Gath, though not 
 quite so invincible, nor battling openly as this manly champion, 
 owns that he has been engaged for two years past in this work. 
 The sling and stones of simple truth may be too mighty even 
 for the chain armor of party politics ! 
 
 The first resolutions were passed in the hurry and crowded 
 business of the close of the session of 1855. In their intention 
 
4 
 
 and in the points they touch, as well as in those they omit, and in 
 their limitations of time and space so as to exclude some of the 
 noblest deeds and gifts of Trinity, they show a designing and 
 a skilful hand. These resolutions were answered by the Vestry, 
 fully and fairly ; whereupon, again without any memorial from 
 any body, the hidden impulse again acted, and just in the nick 
 of time, and just in the most effective way. A few minutes 
 * before the close of the Session of 1856, the Report of the 
 Church was referred to a Committee clothed with vague and 
 plenary powers to act as they like. One long connected with 
 the New- York Argonauts is made chairman, and so the ship 
 Argo, commanded by the Honorable Mark Spencer, once more 
 puts to sea with a roving commission. Well may Trinity 
 tremble for her golden fleece ! After cruising around for 
 some months in search of witnesses and other sources of infor- 
 mation, they dropped anchor in New- York harbor, in the 
 month of December. 
 
 Here they remained and examined witnesses of their own 
 selection for parts of five days. Of these witnesses and their 
 evidence, we shall speak hereafter. Some think that the guar- 
 dians of the golden fleece were indulging in a short nap at 
 this time, lulled into repose by their confidence in the hono- 
 rable material of which this Committee was composed. On 
 the whole it was, we are inclined to think, better that the 
 Vestry let the Committee alone at this time. Their choice of 
 the witnesses summoned by them ; their selection of the ques- 
 tions asked ; the judicious brevity of some examinations ; the 
 prolix disquisitions drawn out from others who were made to 
 swear not only to their own opinions, but even to their own in- 
 terpretations of law (which we deem rather hard swearing, 
 especially on a Church question), make as plain as daylight 
 the animus and intention exciting and governing this investi- 
 gation. Its end was not truth, but the fleece ! 
 
 The Committee having, in this judicious manner, obtained 
 just the facts they wanted, on the testimony of chosen wit- 
 nesses — a soft compound of opinions and judgments, and hear- 
 say evidence, which they sought to harden into solidity by the 
 compression of oaths — evidence which any court of law would 
 
5 
 
 have driven from the judgment-seat — give to the Senate the 
 result of their expedition, in what they call a Report ; but 
 which is in fact a mere ex parte argument for which they well 
 deserved a fee from their clients, the opposers of Trinity ! As 
 this Report of the Argonautic expedition has been completely 
 thrown into the shade by a second more brilliant effort, still 
 more deserving of a fee on the part of their clients, we shall let 
 it rest in its merited obscurity ! 
 
 One good effect, at least, it had. It thoroughly aroused the 
 Corporation of Trinity Church to a sense of the extent and 
 spirit of the hostile forces arrayed against them. Men of 
 high honor, who have never thought of advancing a selfish in- 
 terest by the power entrusted to them, who have ever sought 
 honestly and truly to discharge their duty to the Church, they 
 were slow to believe that such a confederacy could be arrayed 
 in this free land, and under this just government, to despoil 
 the trust of which they were the guardians. Men who acted 
 always in the light of day, they were no matches for those 
 who, without fear, but not all without reproach, were working 
 against them in the dark. In the voice of this Report comes 
 to them the assurance — "They have taken crafty counsel 
 against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones : 
 they have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a na- 
 tion, that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. 
 For they have consulted together with one consent — they are 
 confederate against thee. The tabernacles of Edom and the 
 Ishmaelites ; of Moab and the Hagarenes ; Gebal, and Ammon, 
 and Amalek ; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre ; 
 Assur also is joinecf with them; they have holpen the children 
 of Lot." 
 
 Astonished at the character of the testimony and report, as 
 well they might be, which had thus been brought against her, 
 the Vestry of Trinity Church now demand that her witnesses 
 s hall be heard — witnesses who shall swear to factsnot to opinions ; 
 witnesses who shall testify what they do know and what they 
 have seen ; who shall not kiss the Word of everlasting truth to 
 give weight to their speculations about the worth of property, 
 in order to place a body of the most honorable men in the 
 
6 
 
 community beside Ananias and Sapphira, in keeping back part 
 of the price of their land! With presumption, we must use 
 the true word, which the dignity of a Senator, not of Venice 
 but of free America, will not excuse, this Committee imply 
 that it was a gracious act of condescension on their part to 
 hear this side of the evidence, a wonderful exhibition of patience 
 that they,* for several days, "quietly listened also to the very 
 long arguments of the counsel from whom the objection pro- 
 ceeded." Are they not the movers in this affair ; the disturbers 
 of their own peace and quiet ? And they even venture to 
 charge the Corporation with regretting " that so little had been 
 made of the opportunity afforded them in the City of New- 
 York, when the Committee made a written communication to the 
 Vestry before they commenced talcing testimony. " The Vestry 
 replied to this in a " written communication." More than this 
 they could not do with propriety, as all the other witnesses 
 were called by a regular summons. More than this, we sup- 
 pose, they never would have done, had it not been for the out- 
 rageous ex parte character of the testimony and report. 
 
 Well, this condescending and most patient Committee hear 
 this evidence of faithful and true men — Bishops, Priests, and 
 Laymen, of honorable renown in the Church of God. Nay, 
 we are wrong in saying they all hear it ! Notwithstanding 
 their professions of Job-like patience, in listening to the side 
 they did not want to bear, there is the usual variance here be- 
 tween the fact and the assertions of their Report. The Hon. 
 A. J. Parker, the learned and able Counsel of Trinity Church, 
 thus speaks to the Committee (Arguments, jd. 38) : "I regard 
 it as a great misfortune to us, in this case, that some of our 
 testimony was taken in the absence of Mr. Ramsey, and the 
 greater part of it in the absence of Mr. Noxon." These 
 gentlemen, however, may feel happy in being thus relieved 
 from part of the responsibility of this partizan Report. Well, 
 we may suppose the Chairman, who heard it all, and perhaps 
 some friend slightly interested in this case, holding solemn 
 council over the matter. We can imagine the learned Chair- 
 
 * Report, p. 3. 
 
7 
 
 man seeming, as Judge Parker said those ought to be who 
 assume the judicial character, " like a piece of blank paper" — 
 when he beholds all this testimony of his chosen witDesses, and 
 his beloved Report demolished by the collision of the new 
 evidence ! What shall be done ? His Report, the locomo- 
 tive, and the long train of evidence, are all a hopeless wreck, 
 and the passengers, the witnesses, are so maimed and injured, 
 that they can do him no more service ! Fortunately there is 
 at hand a veteran engineer who has driven, for many years, 
 locomotives on the State roads, who has had many a collision, 
 in which locomotive, cars, and passengers, have been smashed 
 up, and who has always managed to take care of number one, 
 and escape unhurt, and who, although he ran the train off the 
 track on the last line, has lately been made first engineer on 
 a new road, parts of w r hich are very dangerous. The veteran 
 answers the despairing gaze of the Senatorial engineer with 
 a look of calm assurance. To the question, u What shall be 
 done ?" He answers, " Clear first all this rubbish off the track, 
 and fire up another engine." " But we've got to drag that 
 fresh train of evidence after us, and I'm "afraid if I put head 
 enough of steam on, it will blow us up !" " Oh, never fear, ' go 
 ahead,' and I'll uncouple the cars which give us any trouble, 
 and leave them behind !" " But then the company will miss 
 the cars, and I will be called to account." " Never fear, they 
 are so much crowded with business just now that they will 
 only look at the locomotive, and never mind the cars." 
 
 That some such plan as this was hit upon by the Chairman 
 and his advisers, a further examination will make evident. 
 The last Report quietly drops all the evidence likely to give 
 any trouble, or which is irreconcilable with the former Report 
 and testimony. When troublesome, evidence must be referred 
 to, it shapes and moulds this to fit, sometimes even by the 
 alteration of language ! It passes quietly by all the difficulties 
 which would interfere with the desired conclusions; is silent 
 about facts of which it dare not speak, and most loquacious 
 in setting forth its favorite opinions and conclusions. All this 
 we will prove by quotations from the two documents. With 
 this understanding of its past history, we are now prepared to 
 look at the question as it stands plain and clear before us. 
 
8 
 
 Let us take two different views of this question. First, as 
 a matter of right, let us see in what shape this question should 
 iustly have come up before a legislative body. This will prepare 
 us for a second and more important consideration of the matter 
 of fact, viz. : the strange form in which this question lias actually 
 been presented before the New- York Senate. 
 
 I. As a matter of right, let us see in what shape this ques- 
 tion should justly have come up before a legislative body. 
 
 We suppose that it would require no very deep or profound 
 knowledge of Blackstone to settle it as an axiom of common 
 sense, that there should be no intermingling of the legislative 
 and judicial functions. Legislators should never attempt to 
 clothe themselves in ermine. The question regarding the right- 
 ful possessors of the property of Trinity Church, or any other 
 property, is purely a legal one. We hold that it is a question 
 belonging to the Courts, not to the Legislature. But even 
 those who think that it may be forced upon the Legislature, 
 cannot differ from us in the position that its merits are to be 
 determined by the acts of the past, and not by the misdeeds 
 of the present. In this view, we are happy to find that the 
 learned Committee of the Senate fully and entirely agree with 
 us. Among the many points of difference, and their name is 
 legion, we are most happy to discover one of agreement ! We 
 trust the following declaration was not lost upon the Honor- 
 able Senate : 
 
 " The objection which is raised to the proposition to allow 
 ' all the inhabitants in communion,' &c, to vote for vestrymen, 
 for the reason that it may create tumult or confusion, is one 
 of little weight, compared with a right vested under ancient 
 grants and acts. It may become an unwieldy corporation; 
 but in looking at the right of the beneficiaries, we can hardly 
 be called upon to take into account the difficulties which may 
 attend the annual elections." — (Seond Report of Select Com- 
 mittee, p. 8.) 
 
 We accept this from the Committee of the Senate, as a true 
 view of the real question at issue. They here declare that 
 consequences, however disastrous, are not to be considered, 
 because they furnish an objection " of little weight, compared 
 
9 
 
 with a right vested under ancient grants and acts" If, as they 
 justly argue, mere consequences are not to be regarded, how can 
 any weight be given to antecedents which do not touch these 
 " ancient grants and acts?" By their own showing, the only 
 question which could be entertained by the Senate, was whether 
 a repeal of the Law of 1814 toas called for, because it un- 
 justly affected tl a right vested under ancient grants and acts" 
 By the showing of their own Committee, then, it is no mere 
 presumption of private judgment. The proper course of the 
 Senate, when this matter was presented, should have been to 
 appoint a Committee of the most learned lawyers of their own 
 body to investigate this great question of law, and then to give 
 the result in the shape of a report upon these legal points. If 
 such a Committee, sufficiently learned in the law, could not be 
 gathered from their own legislative ranks, the law officers and 
 Judges of the State were easy of access. We do not happen 
 to know to what profession the members of the Select Com- 
 mittee belong, but the manner and result of their labors have 
 not impressed us with any profound veneration for the depth 
 of their legal attainments. 
 
 The Resolutions of Inquiry, adopted by the Senate, were 
 the first steps from the direct course. This led to the second 
 false step, the appointment of a Committee, with inquisitorial 
 powers, to pry into matters not within the province of legisla- 
 tion, and which did not, as the Committee itself shows, really 
 affect the question at issue. This was, indeed, a long stride 
 from the straight path of just legislation over freemen, and it has 
 led the Committee and Senate into the maze of a labyrinth, in 
 quest of the truth which was plain and straight before them. 
 If such important interests were not involved — if truth and jus- 
 tice and indefeasible right were not at stake, it would be al- 
 most amusing to follow the strange windings and turnings of 
 their erratic course. There is a sort of fascination to the hu- 
 man mind in following the devious steps of error, as lights and 
 shadows diversify its track, giving it the charm of variety ; 
 while there is less delight in the straight and even path of truth 
 on which the broad daylight only shines. We admire the jus- 
 tice, and the high-souled magnanimity of this Select Committee 
 
10 
 
 of our Senate, when we hear them nobly resolving to uphold 
 the right, fearless of consequences, unterrified by calamities 
 which may ensue, and which the Bishops of New- York and 
 other witnesses have proved will be great. No " tumult or 
 confusion" (p. 8 of Report) of Church or State— no "difficulties," 
 however appalling, shall affright their souls in the stead- 
 fast purpose of maintaining " a right vested under ancient 
 grants and acts." Visions of old patriots and Senators arise 
 before us, and we almost hear, in this triple voice of the Com- 
 mittee, the tones of Solon, Lycurgus, and Brutus. But the 
 vision fades, as mortal visions too often do, when we further 
 hear these same voices, in which the noble resolve had been 
 expressed, not to shrink from "right, 5 ' because of the evil which 
 should ensue, resting the whole strength of their case on proof s, 
 that because the present holders of this right, " vested under an- 
 cient grants and acts" had not wisely used their powers, therefore, 
 it should be conveyed to other hands. Thus the heroic souls, 
 which were unterrified by future consequences, are overwhelmed 
 by past consequences. Truly, " circumstances alter cases !" 
 
 After themselves laying down this just principle, from which 
 there is no escape, that this was a question of right, determined 
 alone by ancient grants and acts, the Select Committee rest the 
 great burden of their proof upon what ? Upon Law — upon the 
 tenor, and words, and provisions of " ancient grants and 
 acts ?" Let the evidence of their own selected witnesses, and 
 their own Reports, answer. These documents are accessible 
 to every reader, and they will settle the truth or falsity of this 
 Review. We challenge any reader of these to disprove the 
 correctness of the assertion, that, according to these documents, 
 the merits of the question presented for the decision of the 
 Senate, by their Committee, are made to rest wholly upon 
 the manner in which this trust has been administered by those 
 who have held it since 1814. The " right vested " in the pre- 
 sent Corporation of Trinity Church, is to be disturbed by new 
 legislation, not because of " ancient grants and acts," but be- 
 cause of the errors and sins of the Vestry. They have not 
 built free Churches ; they have not endowed charities ; they 
 have not given lots ; they have given too much to high church- 
 
11 
 
 men, too little to the " low ;" they have undervalued the 
 amount of their property, &c, &c, therefore they may no 
 longer be stewards ! 
 
 Between two and three pages of the first Report out of the 
 twenty-seven, are alone devoted to the discussion of the ques- 
 tion as one of law and "right vested under ancient grants and 
 acts" and this consists mainly of the reiterations of the 
 opinions and views presented by the single witness who testified 
 on this point — the Hon. Luther Bradish. We suppose it was 
 rather hard to get lawyers to give opinions, under oath, as to 
 disputed points of law. Yet, prefixed to his extended views of 
 this question, appear the words, " Luther Bradish, sworn /" 
 Another eminent lawyer among the witnesses, Mr. Cambre- 
 leng, attempts no such solemn exposition. In the second Re- 
 port of the Committee, parts of Jive pages out of the tiventy-one 
 are given to the discussion of the law points, and all the rest 
 devoted to a discussion of the maladministration of the Yes- 
 try, and a vindication of the assertions of the first Report on 
 this subject ! This appears the more remarkable, as two learned 
 lawyers, thoroughly acquainted with the subject, Mr. Gouver- 
 neur M. Ogden, and Hon. A. J. Parker, argued the case be- 
 fore the Committee, on " the questions of fact" and " the 
 questions of law." Both these arguments are distinguished 
 by signal ability, and by the clearness and force with which 
 they place the questions before the Committee. They are brief, 
 terse, and pointed, without one needless word. The Commit- 
 tee hardly deign to notice these, except to say (p. 3) that they 
 were " very long," and they " quietly listened " to them ! 
 Perhaps, as the learned counsel did not swear to their own 
 arguments and opinions, they were so lightly regarded. 
 They however show, in this treatment, their disregard of 
 the evidence presented by the Yestry. Indeed, this Commit- 
 tee entertain quite an original view of the office of a Report of 
 a Committee. It has been usually understood to be a digested 
 account of the facts and arguments presented before them. 
 This Select Committee appear to consider it as a statement of 
 their own views and opinions, quite independent of the evi- 
 dence, and the arguments addressed to them ! We can 
 
12 
 
 only thus understand, not only their omissions and contradic- 
 tions of important evidence, as we shall show hereafter, but 
 also their entire silence as to the unanswerable, as we think, 
 arguments on the "questions of law," addressed to them by the 
 learned and distinguished Counsel of Trinity Church. 
 
 We are compelled to think, however, unwillingly, that this 
 Committee were influenced by a partial desire to make out a 
 case against Trinity ; that they lost sight of their duty as 
 Senators of this great State, in looking after the interests of 
 those for whom they appear as advocates, when their Report 
 magnifies and dwells upon every point of adverse evidence, 
 though not bearing upon the question at issue, and passes 
 over, 4< in solemn silence," the great points of the case, as pre- 
 sented by Judge Parker, in his arguments, on "the questions 
 of law." A very brief summary of these unnoticed points will 
 establish this conviction. 
 
 We can discover no special reference to the following points 
 of law, made by the Counsel of Trinity Church. 
 
 1. That nearly all this evidence, on both sides, is entirely 
 foreign to the main object — the repeal of the law of 1814. 
 
 2. That the original charter of 1697 provided that the 
 Wardens and Vestrymen should be elected 1 by the majority 
 of votes of the inhabitants of the said parish? in communion of 
 our Protestant Church of England, within our City of New- 
 York. 
 
 3. By the act of 1784, in addition to communicants, those 
 now allowed to vote, 1 who shall either hold, occupy, or enjoy 
 a pew or seat in the said church, and shall regularly pay to the 
 support of said church? &c. The plea that the words, in said 
 church, apply to all communicants and pew-holders in the 
 Episcopal Church of New- York, is disproved by the title of 
 the Act, which is called " An Act for making alterations in the 
 charter of the Corporation of Trinity Church?' &c. And these 
 words are further explained in the second section, where 
 power is given to the Wardens and Vestrymen to call and in- 
 duct a Rector to the said church, so often as there shall be any 
 vacancy therein. 
 
 4. That from 1784 to 1812, a period of twenty-eight years, 
 
13 
 
 though from 1793 there were other churches, no one out of the 
 parish voted or claimed a right to vote. That this claim was 
 made, but not allowed, by two or three persons of another 
 parish, in a contested election. This claim led to the applica- 
 tion, on the part of the Vestry, for the law of 1814, entitled, 
 'An Act to alter the name of the Corporation of Trinity 
 Church in New- York, and for other purposes.' " 
 
 In this connection, Judge Parker quotes from a letter ad- 
 dressed, on the 12th April, 1812, by the Rector, Wardens 
 and Vestry of St. Marks : — 
 
 We have learned, with regret, that some of our Episcopal brethren 
 assert the claim of a general right, in all the Episcopal Churches in this 
 island, to vote at your elections for Churchwardens and Vestrymen. 
 Whatever color may be given to this claim by any ambiguous words to 
 be found in your charter, we sincerely take pleasure in declaring, that the 
 congregation of St. Mark's, which we represent, have no desire to assert 
 the claim, and that we will, at any time hereafter, cheerfully unite with 
 your respectable body, in an application to the Legislature, if the measure 
 shall be thought expedient, to explain the charter, and confine the right 
 of voting to the congregations of the churches under your immediate 
 government. 
 
 5. It is an erroneous impression, that the property of Trinity 
 Church is held in trust for the benefit of others. A careful 
 examination of the charter will show that the property was 
 given to the corporation alone, as its own absolute property. 
 That this erroneous impression on this subject has grown out 
 of the original name given to the corporation. That the grant 
 made to " The Rector and Inhabitants of the City of New- 
 York, in communion of our Protestant Church, &c, is a grant 
 to the Corporation, in conformity with old titles. That exactly 
 similar titles exist in the cases of St. Peter's Church, Albany ; 
 of the Church of Fishkill ; Grace Church, Jamaica, Long 
 Island, and in the first Church at Poughkeepsie." 
 
 6. The original charter, giving power to the church officers 
 "to choose, nominate, and appoint so many officers of our 
 liege people, as they should think fit, and shall be willing to 
 accept the same, to be members of the said Church and Cor- 
 poration." 
 
 7. That a person can be a parishioner in but one parish. 
 
14 
 
 8. That a change in chartered rights cannot be made by 
 the Legislature alone, but requires also the consent of the Corpo- 
 ration. This point is alluded to by the Committee. In'reply 
 to it, they say that as they have come to a conclusion to intro- 
 duce a bill to amend the act, and not for its repeal — this 
 question does not properly arise." 
 
 A reference to the amendment reported, will show that the 
 " old bottles" will hardly hold this " new wine." 
 
 9. The lapse of forty-three years is conclusive against any 
 supposed individual claim of a corporator. It is a lapse of time 
 twice that required to bar a claim to real property ; seven 
 times that which would bar an action on contract, &c. 
 
 Surely these, and many others like them, were points which 
 might well have claimed the special notice of this Committee. 
 
 Their fair discussion would have suited better the dignity 
 and object of this Report to the Senate than its present com- 
 position, from the vague, one-sided, and hear-say evidence and 
 gossip of uninformed and prejudiced witnesses. All such tes- 
 timony is powerless against the convictions, and the evidence, 
 and the arguments, which must have influenced the Legislature 
 of 18] 4. It is no disparagement to the wisdom of the present 
 Senate and Assembly to say, that the action of such a body 
 of men, of whom the Empire State may well be proud, carries 
 with it a weight of authority deserving their highest venera- 
 tion. No urgent calls of interested parties, no special plead- 
 ings of partizan committees, should drive them to cast reproach 
 upon the wisdom of the past, of noble patriots whose honored 
 names have even been defamed in this unholy cause. Sooner 
 far should they burst the chains of party bondage, than rudely 
 break the golden links by which memory connects them with 
 the honored dead — the illustrious legislators of 1814. We can- 
 not better refer to them than in the eloquent language of Judge 
 Parker, in his argument before the Select Committee : 
 
 At that time, the office of Attorney-General of this State was filled by 
 that eminent jurist and good man, Abraham Van Vechten, and the mat- 
 ter was referred to him by the Assembly for his opinion. He reported as 
 follows: That he has examined a printed copy of the charter granted 
 in the year 1697 to the rector and inhabitants of the city of New- York, 
 as then established by law, and the acts altering the said charter, together 
 
15 
 
 With the bill referred to in the resolution entitled, ' An Act to alter the 
 name of the Corporation of Trinity Church, in the City of jNfew-York, and 
 for other purposes/ and he is of opinion that the purpose of the said bill 
 will not defeat or vary any existing vested rights under the said charter 
 and acts." 
 
 Gentlemen — The Legislature of 1813 that passed that act, was one of 
 the ablest that ever assembled within this capitol. Among its members 
 were Daniel Cady, Elisha Williams, J. Rutsen Van Rensselaer, Josiah 
 Ogden Hoffman, Nathan Sanford, Morgan Lewis, Erastus "Root, and Mar- 
 tin Van Buren, the most able and distinguished men of the day — men 
 not likely to fall into the error of invading, by their legislation, the vested 
 rights of any citizen; and there were several others in that Legislature 
 whom I ought, perhaps, to have named in that list. Six of those distin- 
 guished men, whose portraits now- grace these walls, and who are looking 
 down this day upon our doings, were concerned in the passage of the act 
 of 1814, either as members of the Legislature or of the Council of Re- 
 vision. The bill did not pass the Legislature in silence ; it was discussed 
 and examined. When it came before the Council of Revision, objections 
 in writing were made by Chancellor Lansing, which, on further examina- 
 tion, were abandoned, and finally voted against by their author. Those 
 were honest days, Mr. Chairman, when a public officer, who had been 
 misled by an erroneous impression, might well be expected to acknowledge 
 his error and correct it. I hope, sir, all that honesty has not yet, in the 
 expressive language of the Rev. Jesse Pound, " died out." For this 
 honest and frank correction of an opinion by Chancellor Lansing, his 
 memory has been recently defamed by an editor of a newspaper in the 
 City of New- York, who has disgraced himself before the public, by im- 
 puting to the Chancellor that this change of opinion was obtained by 
 corrupt means. Shame upon such licentiousness of the press; shame upon 
 the man who will thus assail the memory of the honored dead — and the 
 greater be the shame if the slanderer be the editor of a newspaper called 
 "religious." A cause must be desperate that requires a resort to such 
 disreputable means. 
 
 Having thus shown, in accordance with the declaration of 
 their own Committee, how this great question of right should 
 have been presented before the Senate of New- York, and how 
 it was not so presented by their Select Committee, it remains 
 for us to show : 
 
 II. As A matter of fact, in what manner and form it was 
 presented. 
 
 We presume most of our readers are familiar with the judi- 
 cious Hooker's noble eulogy of Law, wherein he says, " her 
 voice is the harmony of the world," and he represents "all with 
 uniform consent, admiring her as the mother of their peace and 
 joy." All who are familiar with the places where National and 
 State Laws are born, must own that, like other infants, their 
 first entrance into this terrestrial sphere does not add much to 
 " the harmony of the world ;" and whatever they may be in 
 
16 , 
 
 their maternal state, in their nascent condition, they are not 
 the promoters of our peace and joy. The halls of legislation, 
 the cradles of law, are not the chosen abodes of harmony and 
 peace. Disturbing elements within and without are ever at 
 work, in unsettling old laws, in originating new ones. Private 
 interests, party ends, popular passions and prejudices, are busy 
 in the work of legislation. Men of clearest minds, of strongest 
 principles, of most honest aims, are not unaffected by these in- 
 fluences. It is hard to escape the malaria of the atmosphere 
 we breathe. We might well suppose that when an old law 
 was to be changed, or a new one made, the advocates of the 
 measure had only to produce their strong reasons, to allay 
 doubts, to answer objections, and when conviction was brought 
 home to the minds of the Legislators, the act would follow. 
 
 Whatever it may be in other cases, this is not the manner 
 in which the case of Trinity Church has been presented to the 
 New-York Senate. It has not, we boldly assert, been pre- 
 sented as a question of right, but as a question of 'prejudice, 
 resting almost wholly, as the learned counsel for Trinity de- 
 clares, on evidence entirely foreign to the main object of the in- 
 quiry. What has been the design of this cloud of testimony, 
 which has risen around the real question before the Legislature, 
 unless it has been to hide the clear sunlight of truth ? The 
 December fog, which gathered round the Committee in New- 
 York, and whose density seemed to increase every day, it was 
 expected would roll after them up the Hudson, and settle 
 around the Capitol at Albany. In its vapory folds, the real 
 question has been obscured, but the sunlight can penetrate the 
 thickest mists of earth. 
 
 We have shown that the Select Committee, either straving 
 in this fog which others had raised around them, or wilfully 
 shutting their eyes, had lost sight of the real question before 
 them. We must now show that from the witnesses summoned 
 by them, from the character of the evidence, and from the Reports, 
 the movers of this matter in ihe Senate, and the Committee, 
 and those who have helped their investigations, have proved 
 themselves only anxious to excite prejudices and uphold inter- 
 ests hostile to Trinity Church. We only ask a fair hearing, 
 
17 
 
 with the records accessible by which we may be condemned if 
 our statements or conclusions are untrue. 
 
 1 . The witnesses summoned by the Committee. 
 
 Among these we cheerfully admit, are men of the highest 
 respectability and character, upon whose integrity we would 
 be the last to throw the faintest shadow of suspicion. But no 
 man, however honest, is above the influence of prejudice. As 
 mists cloud the brightest scenes of nature, so prejudice may 
 obscure the clearest minds. It may be the real conviction of 
 these that the property of Trinity Church should be possessed 
 by all the churches in New- York, especially the one to which 
 they belong ; they may dislike the policy of the Vestry, or ab- 
 hor the church principles which prevail among them ; they 
 may think this property should be distributed to other objects 
 and in a different method ; they may desire to build what they 
 call free churches, or endow favorite charities ; they may be 
 hostile to the Episcopal Church or to all churches, and have 
 violent feelings against all ecclesiastical endowments, and de- 
 sire the secularization of this property, and thus have strong 
 prejudices on this subject. They have full right to enjoy their 
 feelings, and their prejudices, and their private convictions, 
 but these do not specially qualify them to be fair witnesses in 
 this important case. Yet this seems to be the rule by which 
 the Committee of the Senate was guided in their choice of 
 witnesses ! We might have thought they would have recog- 
 nized the fact that every disputed question has two sides, but 
 the great qualification of their chosen witnesses seemed to be 
 that they should have something to say against Trinity ! Ac- 
 cordingly, all those who were forward in the movements of 
 1846 and '47 appear in the list of witnesses. On this head 
 nothing better can be said than the words of Mr. Ogden, in 
 his clear and forcible presentment of the questions of fact be- 
 fore the Committee, (p. 34.) 
 
 And let me in this connection call the attention of the Committee to the 
 witnesses that are supposed to substantiate the charges against the Vestry. 
 Three of them are assistant ministers of Trinity Church, who have come 
 to Albany to explain their testimony, and have vindicated the Church ; two 
 are vestrymen, who spoke of matters since explained ; eleven others testi- 
 fied, merely, as to the values of lots ; Clayton, as to the lettings of pews 
 2 
 
18 
 
 in Trinity Chapel; Wiley and Webb, as to immaterial matters ; and Dr. 
 Muhlenburg, whose motives no man would impeach, testified, as he him- 
 self says, on information merely, so far as concerns any facts in dispute, 
 and certainly under an entire misapprehension of the ability of Trinity 
 Church. Leaving out those I have just named, all the other witnesses are 
 of two classes, and of two classes only. They are clergymen who have 
 applied on behalf of. their churches to Trinity Church for aid, and have 
 been unsuccessful in their applications ; or they are parties to this con- 
 troversy, whom it suits now to remain concealed, but who were engaged 
 in the same contest in 1846-47, as appears in evidence, and who, it may 
 be seen by the public prints, are at this moment the most active in the 
 game attempt which was made in those years, with the exception of Dr. 
 Tyng, who, not then in New-York, was not on the former occasions a 
 party, but is now among the most violent. They sought, under cover of 
 the clamor they intended to raise, and the popular prejudice they hoped 
 to excite, to procure on the instant the repeal of the Act of 1814. Actu- 
 ated, then, by the strongest interest, and, if there is any force in my com- 
 ments upon the course of these proceedings, attached with all the blame 
 and odium that ought to fall upon the authors of the present attack, they 
 came before the Committee to testify to suspicions, rumors, and hearsay, 
 attributing unworthy motives to gentlemen, if not so high in position, at 
 least as respectable as themselves. That they are gentlemen of respecta- 
 bility and character, I admit, but their positions cannot justify disreputable 
 conduct, though prompted by party prejudice, and narrow, distorted views. 
 
 As a striking illustration of the animus and strong feelings 
 governing these witnesses, we quote from the letter of the 
 Rev. Dr. Taylor of Grace Church, excusing his non-appearance 
 at Albany, at the summons of the Committee. After expres- 
 sing " the most perfect respect for the Committee," he adds : 
 
 "While I thus freely and sincerely express my respect for your Com- 
 mittee, and my regret at not being permitted to aid them as I best could, 
 in their important labors, yet you must permit me to say, Mr. Chairman, 
 that none of this respect, and nothing of this regret is intended by me to ex- 
 tend to any hired agents of Trinity, at whose instance, as I take it, the 
 summons now before me was issued. 
 
 During the meetings of your Committee in this city, every opportunity 
 was afforded to the Corporation of Trinity Church, either to summon wit- 
 nesses or to propose cross-interrogatories to every witness before your Com- 
 mittee ; and if in their superciliousness or reckless negligence they did 
 not avail themselves of their privilege, the consequences must rest upon 
 themselves. The vexatious course they are now pursuing, of attempting 
 to drag gentlemen from their business and their homes at this inclement 
 season of the year, from whom they well know that they cannot ob- 
 tain one word of evidence in any way useful to Trinity Church, has no 
 other earthly object than to gain time, and thus to defeat, by posij^oning 
 one of the most salutary measures of reform that has ever claimed the at- 
 tention of the Legislature of the State." 
 
 The Reverend writer, it will be seen, expresses his " regret 
 at not being permitted to aid " the Committee " in their im- 
 
19 
 
 portant labors." The direction of his testimony shows to what 
 these " labors " tend. The " aid" of the witness, "the labors " 
 of the Committee, harmonize in loving concord, only disturbed 
 by thoughts of " the hired agents of Trinity," wickedly " at- 
 tempting to drag gentlemen from their business and their homes," 
 with the vain, purpose of getting the whole truth out of them, 
 which the Vestry, in their " reckless negligence," thought they 
 would give of themselves. One who desired to " aid " the Com- 
 mittee's pious " labors," feels justly indignant at the very thought 
 that any of their chosen witnesses should be exposed, " at this 
 inclement season of the year," to the rigors of a cross-examina- 
 tion. We wonder it did not strike one of the Doctor's acute- 
 ness, that if " gentlemen " had minded " their business," and 
 not been " busy-bodies in other men's matters," there would 
 have been no occasion to drag them from their homes. 
 
 Grace Church and others may, in the estimation of some, 
 monopolize all the "gentlemen" of the city, but among those 
 who are stigmatized as " the hired agents of Trinity" — we hope 
 their gentility is better than their pay— are some who stand in 
 this community on as high a level even as the Rector of Grace 
 Church. In the comparison some might be reminded of the 
 familiar dialogue, "Are you the man wat's going to ride?" 
 " Well, I'm the gen'leman wot's going to drive you." So much 
 for the chosen witnesses of this Select Committee. 
 
 2. We have now to speak of the character of the evidence 
 sought by the Committee. Of course, from what has been said 
 of the chosen witnesses, it was for the most part against Trinity. 
 The sole witness who testified on the question of right, which 
 the Committee has declared to be the only question to be re- 
 garded, was the Hon. Luther Bradish. His testimony is thus 
 characterized by Mr. Ogden in his argument : 
 
 " Controverted positions, disproved over and over again, passed upon 
 after careful arguments by counsel far abler than Mr. Bradish, before the 
 Committee of the House of Assembly in 1847, and overruled by their de- 
 cision then, are expected to derive new efficacy supported by an oath, when 
 presented at this day as the ground for the decision of the Senate. 
 
 u Again, to point out another instance showing the entire unreliability 
 of the testimony of Mr. Bradish, I call the attention of the Committee to 
 the fact that the act of 1814 had passed both houses on the 2d of April, 
 1813, [see p. 95 of Mr. Bradish's testimony in the first Report of the Com- 
 
20 
 
 inittee,] and the pamphlet of Col. Troup is dated on the 6th of September, 
 1813, more than six months after the act had passed both houses. Yet 
 Mr. Bradish says, [p. 101 of first Report of this Committee,] that as an 
 inducement to the passage of the Act of 1814, it was urged "as morally 
 certain, that the future increase of the population of the city would strongly 
 recommend to the Corporation of Trinity Church, the policy of dividing 
 its Corporators, and setting them off in separate Churches, with suitable 
 endowments, and to enable the Vestry to do this in a mode free from all 
 legal doubts, was an object of the bill. The bill xoas dtawn and passed 
 accordingly" Yet the truth is, that the bill was drawn, and passed both 
 houses six months before Col. Troup said anything respecting it in the par- 
 agraph alluded to, and from which Mr. Bradish derives his authority.' 
 
 All the other evidence, almost without exception, may be 
 characterized as having nothing to do with the question, sel- 
 dom or never positive, claiming little direct acquaintance with 
 the facts of which it testifies, speaking on the information of 
 others who themselves heard others say so and so, setting forth 
 opinions and private judgments, and then swearing to their cor- 
 rectness. We unhesitatingly pronounce the greater portion of 
 the evidence taken before the Committee in New- York as the 
 most vague and unsatisfactory body of testimony ever pre- 
 sented before a judicial tribunal. Much of it is the merest 
 gossip and scandal, such as they say a certain sex at a certain 
 age indulge in around the tea-table ! Not one of these witnesses 
 was subjected to a cross-examination. There is nothing strong 
 or positive about this testimony, except the oaths, which would 
 have been listened to in a court of law. Yet upon this the 
 Committee base their first Report, bringing the gravest charges 
 against the Vestry, supported by the evidence of those who 
 own that they know little or nothing of the subject ! 
 
 We have only space for a few illustrations as proofs of the 
 above assertions. The Rev. Jesse Pound swears that (p. 83) 
 " he was considerably acquainted with the proceedings of 
 Trinity Church in managing their fund. I do not consider the 
 trust has been administered in such a way as best to promote 
 the object for which it was given." Or, as we may expound 
 his meaning, the Vestry did not advance the glory of God and 
 the good of man, in the person of the Rev. witness, by paying 
 off the debts and supporting him in a church which has proved 
 itself to be in an unfavorable situation. Trinity was surely 
 not answerable for the falling off of the congregation. 
 
21 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Tyng swears (p. 86) concerning the statement 
 in the report of Trinity Church relative to St. George's 
 Church — u To the best of my knowledge and belief it is not 
 correct," That the Doctor's " best knowledge'' on this subject 
 is none of the best, a poor foundation for "belief" to rest on, 
 is shown by the Rev. Dr. Berrian's positive testimony upon cer- 
 tain knowledge. (See testimony, p. 37.) 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Taylor (p. 104) heard " a very worthy minis- 
 ter" say that his w r arden had told him that he, the warden, had 
 applied to the Comptroller of Trinity Church for aid in their 
 pecuniary embarrassment. The reply was, "We can give you 
 no help, for your minister voted against us at the last Conven- 
 tion." This case would be very strong, and its tragic conse- 
 quence very lamentable, if the power rested in the Comptroller 
 to give such a reply. Such applications can only be decided 
 by the voice of a majority in Vestry meeting. As a conclusive 
 proof of the worth of such kind of evidence, we learn that W. 
 H. Harison, Esq., the comptroller at that time, has denied pub- 
 licly, over his signature, that such an occurrence ever took place. 
 
 Mr. John D. Wolfe (p. 105), formerly a Vestryman, testi- 
 fies — "Have never seen a list of the corporators; the Vestry- 
 men are not allowed to see it, that I know of." The Rector 
 (p. 35) testifies positively, as a fact he knows of that this list 
 is accessible to the Vestrymen at any time, and open to the 
 inspection of the corporators at the annual elections. 
 
 Mr. Stephen Cambreleng, (p. Ill), with his usual candor, in 
 reply to the question — " Are you intimately acquainted with 
 the affairs of Trinity Church?" answers — "I cannot say that 
 I am." The same degree of candor would have ensured a simi- 
 lar answer from every adverse. witness. 
 
 The Rev. R. S. Howland, and the Rev. J. G. Geer (p. 118), 
 testify to the fact, that the generous offer of the former was not 
 responded to by the Vestry of Trinity Church. But the evi- 
 dence of these excellent and devoted clergymen does not reach 
 the point, as they had no knowledge of, or, at least, do not de- 
 clare, the reasons which influenced the Vestry in not acceding 
 to the request alluded to Their evidence, moreover, so far 
 as it goes, helps to disprove another charge — that of partiality 
 
22 
 
 to those called 11 high churchmen." We have never heard the 
 worthy clergymen classed among the so-called, " low.'' 
 
 We might cite further instances, but we must conclude with 
 this which suggests the great radical defect, impairing, if not 
 destroying, the force of almost the whole of the testimony ad- 
 verse to the Corporation. The Rev. Dr. Taylor clearly points 
 out this defect (p. 104), when he declares his unfavorable 
 opinion is formed " from my outward observation of their 
 acts." The acts of the Corporation, in denying requests, and 
 in the application of their means, may appear in a very un- 
 favorable light to outward observation, when this may give no 
 just view of their character. Reason, judgment, common 
 sense, which should guide a body of rational men, whether 
 they be a Vestry or a Senate, are subjects of inward observa- 
 tion. The doors of the Senate are open, and their debates, 
 showing the reason of their acts, are heard ; so the public can, 
 and will form correct opinions of their doings. Not so with a 
 Vestry. And we hold, that no evidence, from mere " outward 
 observation," like most of that on which the first Report was 
 based, can fulfil the solemn character of sworn testimony — 
 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ! 
 
 Evidence against the acts of a body of men, who sit with 
 closed doors, framed from mere observation, can never convict 
 them of wrong. It does not touch the reasons which induced 
 the outward acts, and by which alone the right or wrong of 
 these acts can be determined. Such, we think, from a careful 
 examination, is the prevailing character of the evidence given by 
 the chosen witnesses of the Select Committee. 
 
 As a striking illustration of the end for which this evidence 
 was taken, and the manner in which it was drawn out, 
 we are indebted to Gil Bias. There are too many points of 
 resemblance. Our readers may remember that the inventive 
 Ambrose de Lamela, with a view to the fleecing of Samuel 
 Simon, a wealthy Jew, but who had become a convert to the 
 Church, assumed the character of an officer of the Holy Inqui- 
 sition, Don Raphael that of his Secretary, and Gil Bias that of 
 an Alguazil. The preliminary inquiry was first made of a land- 
 lord in the neighborhood, who had some acquaintance with 
 Simon. 
 
23 
 
 "Mr. Secretary, with his paper already in his hanc^and pen 
 behind his ear, took his seat, pompously, and made ready to 
 take down the landlord's deposition, who promised solemnly, 
 on his part, not to suppress one tittle of the real fact. So far so 
 good," said the worshipful commissioner. " We have only to 
 proceed in our examination. You will only just answer my 
 questions, but do not interlard your replies with any comments 
 of your own. Do you often see Samuel Simon at church ?" 
 "I never thought of looking for him," said the drawer of corks, 
 "but I do not know that I ever saw him there in my life.'"' 
 " Very good," cried the Inquisitor. "Write down that the 
 defendant never goes to church." u I do not say so, your wor- 
 ship," answered the landlord, "I only say that I never happened 
 to see him there. We may have been at church together, and 
 yet not have come across each other." " My good friend," 
 replied Lamela " you forget that you are deposing to facts, and 
 not arguing. Remember what I told you, contempt of court 
 is a heinous offence ; you are to give a sound and discreet evi- 
 dence, every iota of what makes against him, and not a word 
 in his favor, if you knew volumes." " If that is your practice, 
 upright and impartial Judge," resumed our host, ' l my testi- 
 mony will scarcely be worth the trouble of taking. I know 
 nothing about the tradesman you are inquiring after, and 
 therefore can tell neither good nor harm of him, but if you wish 
 to examine into his private life, I will run and call Gaspard, his 
 apprentice, whom you may question as much as you please. 
 The lad comes and takes his glass here sometimes with his 
 friends. Bless us, what a tongue ! He will rip up all the 
 minutest actions of his master's life, and find employment for 
 your Secretary till his wrist aches — take my word for it." " I 
 like your open dealing," said Ambrose, with a nod of approba- 
 tion. " To point out a man so capable of speaking to the bad 
 morals of Simon, is an instance of Christian charity, as well 
 as of religious zeal. I shall report you very favorably to the 
 Inquisition." 
 
 So much for the character of the evidence before the Com- 
 mittee of the Senate. 
 
 3. The Reports. — We now come to the last, but not the 
 least, demonstration of the prejudice and partisan feeling influ- 
 encing the prominent actors, in this remarkable attempt to 
 legislate property out of the hands of its rightful possessors — 
 the two Reports of the Select Committee. The first was, for 
 the most part, in accordance with the evidence, a fitting super- 
 
24 
 
 structure jpr such a foundation, and on that it must stand or 
 fall. Built, as we have shown, on the sand of prejudice or 
 partial and imperfect knowledge, and not upon the strong 
 foundation of truth, it could not withstand the force of the 
 " Testimony introduced on the part of the Vestry." As this 
 overthrew all its positions, and contradicted all its statements, 
 by positive assertions of truth ; as its infirm Law could not 
 stand up against the strong legal arguments of able counsel, 
 and its false testimony was overwhelmed by the evidence of 
 well-informed witnesses, a new effort was necessary. Then 
 came the second Report, louder than the first, as if the Com- 
 mittee had only used the new evidence for wadding, and ram- 
 med it down hard to produce this stunning effect ! 
 
 As much has been claimed for the evidence of the witnesses 
 against Trinity, because of their high respectability and char- 
 racter, a word may surely be said in behalf of those who have 
 given testimony in her behalf. The Clergy and Laymen who 
 have appeared for her, will hardly suffer by a comparison 
 with those arrayed against her. The greater knowledge, the 
 more certain information which their position secured, will 
 more than counterbalance any alleged partiality on the part of 
 men, whose honor and integrity are above the reach of sus- 
 picion. 
 
 The " testimony introduced on the part of the Vestry," to 
 counteract the ex parte evidence gathered by the Committee, 
 covers some hundred and thirty pages of printed matter. The 
 arguments of the able counsel of Trinity, directed against the 
 assumptions of the ex parte Report of the Committee, occupy 
 sixty-six more. The second Report of the Committee, which 
 we should rather call a Reply to the evidence of the Vestry 
 and the arguments of their counsel, is contained in twenty-one 
 pages. The witnesses and the learned counsel of Trinity were 
 made to feel that they were meeting an adverse body, when 
 they came before the Committee, as its Honorable Chairman 
 often spoke of il ourside, !) which meant not the side of truth, 
 but the side opposite to Trinity. The tenor of the cross-exami- 
 nations by the Committee made them appear in the light of 
 opposing counsel ! We may well ask whether this was a 
 
25 
 
 proper appreciation of the responsible office of those who held 
 the place of Judges? The Hon. Mr. Parker begins his argu- 
 ment with these words, which were not contradicted: "I 
 address the Committee as a judicial body." Their Report to 
 the Senate should therefore have had the. impartial character 
 of a judicial charge. It sinks, by an unworthy degradation, 
 into the special plea of an attorney who has to contend against 
 the evidence ! The positive testimony of the witnesses on the 
 part of the Vestry, weighs down the light, vague, and negative 
 evidence of the opposing witnesses ; so the Committee threw 
 themselves along with their Report, into the scales, to " make 
 the balance true !" 
 
 If any one, with an unprejudiced mind, will carefully read 
 the testimony and arguments of the witnesses and counsel, 
 introduced by the Vestry, and then compare this with the Re. 
 port, their convictions will be strong on this point. Our space 
 will only permit us to give a few samples ; enough, however, 
 to show the quality of the whole compound. 
 
 The following sweeping statement, which almost makes one 
 whistle, will fitly introduce our readers to this Report : — 
 
 " It will appear, from a careful examination of the mass of 
 evidence presented by Trinity Church, that every point of 
 importance set forth in the previous Report of your Committee, 
 is here abundantly corroborated." — Report, p. 12. 
 
 We have tried hard to find some proper epithet, suited at 
 once to the respect we owe to a Senatorial Committee and to 
 the truth, to characterize this statement. We dare not use the 
 mildest euphemism, so we conclude with the canny old Scot, 
 that " it's mair discreet just to whistle !" If our readers will 
 take the pains to compare this statement with the testimony of 
 the Rector, Dr. Haight, General Dix, and others, they may 
 find it hard to imitate our discretion. 
 
 In immediate connection with the above, is the following 
 repetition of a disproved charge : — 
 
 li Additional evidence proves the difficulty in obtaining a 
 copy of the list of corporators, only one copy appearing to have 
 been ever aiven, and that not until after a formal vote of the 
 Vestry. The list is stated to be inaccurate also, Mr. Verplanck 
 believing that " many" names are omitted from the list of per- 
 sons entitled to be entered." 
 
26 
 
 In what manner this "additional evidence proves the diffi- 
 culty," will appear by the following, from that of Rev. Dr. 
 Berrian (p. 35) : 
 
 " Q. Is the list of the corporators of Trinity Church kept in 
 the joint charge of the Comptroller and Rector? A. There 
 seems to have been some misapprehension on this subject. 
 The list is kept in the vestry office, and is under the sole cus- 
 tody of the Comptroller. My only agency in regard to this 
 list is, to make an annual statement on the meeting of the Ves- 
 try, immediately preceding the election of wardens and vestry- 
 men at Easter ; of the names of the new communicants, which 
 have been added in the interval, and the decrease of the nam- 
 « ber in the same period, by death, or removal, in order to ren- 
 
 der the list more accurate and complete. This is done regu- 
 larly every year, and how one vestryman, if accustomed to be 
 in his place, and giving any proper attention to the business 
 before him, could have been ignorant of the purpose for which 
 it was done ; or another, having never seen this list, a privilege 
 which he had a right to demand, but which he never appears 
 to have claimed, is to me a matter of surprise. 
 
 "Q. State whether the book containing this list is usually 
 taken to the place where the election of wardens and vestry- 
 men is held ? A. I know that it is frequently, if not uniformly, 
 and I believe that it is open to the inspection of any persons 
 present, who may have the curiosity to examine it." 
 
 The following i: additional" item is from the testimony of G. 
 C. Verplanck, Esq. (p. 96). : 
 
 "Q. State whether there is any order of the Vestry prohib- 
 iting free access to the list of corporators ? A. There is no 
 order to that effect; the superior officers have never refused to 
 my knowledge any one. 1 cannot say what the clerks may 
 have done. The books lie in places open all day, at least, and 
 the one containing the pew-holder corporators is in the outer 
 office, where pew-rents are collected, and frequently examined 
 by any one I think who has the curiosity. The book contain- 
 ing the list of communicant corporators is kept in an inner 
 office on an open desk ; I never knew the examination of it 
 refused." 
 
 We find the following declaration of Senatorial reporting 
 on this same page 12 : 
 
 " No contradiction is offered to the statement in your Com- 
 mittee's Report as to the singular pew-leases first given at Trinity 
 
27 
 
 Chapel. The explanation is, in substance, that it was a measure 
 of over prudence, adopted in order to prevent the intrusion of 
 pew-holders who "had no sympathy" with the Vestry. The 
 measure was condemned at the time by some of the Vestry 
 themselves, and is defended now by none." 
 
 These are Mr. Verplanck's words, (p. 98) : — 
 
 " The motive of those, however, who carried it through, was 
 that of the precautionary prudence against the intrusion of a 
 body of pew-holders who had no sympathies with us or any 
 other church. It was recommended by a committee and 
 approved hy a majority of the Vestry. It was repealed before 
 it could have any practical effect." 
 
 No reference is here made to " sympathy with the Vestry,'* 
 but to those whose sympathies were of a secular rather than an 
 ecclesiastical tendency ! No notice is taken of the important 
 fact that the effect of the erection of Trinity Chapel was to 
 increase the Church accommodations for the poor, downtown. 
 This fact is thus stated by Dr. Haight, p. 7 : — 
 
 "The arrangements in regard to the pews at Trinity Chapel, 
 to which I have referred, were these : The Vestry offered to 
 each party holding a pew in either of their three down-town 
 churches, who might be desirous of obtaining a pew in Trinity 
 Chapel, to credit him with the amount of the rent of his pew 
 down town on condition that, while he occupies the pew in 
 Trinity Chapel, the Vestry should be entitled to the use of the 
 pew down town. The pews which thus come into the posses- 
 sion of the Vestry have been thrown open by them for general 
 use, without charge. As the number of pews of this class is 
 quite large, as I have before said, Trinity and St. Paul's have 
 become, in a large measure, free churches, and St. John's 
 measurably so, and these churches are of such a character, 
 architecturally and otherwise, as to secure the attendance of 
 the poor to a much greater extent than has been found practi- 
 cable in humbler edifices." 
 
 We find the following remarkable statement on page 9 : — 
 
 " In the Vestry itself, the supposed monopoly of knowledge 
 and power by the Standing Committee is declared not to exist. 
 The Rector testifies that the reports made by that Committee 
 are overruled by the Vestry, 'scores of times or as Mr. Ver- 
 planck more quietly expresses it, this reversal takes place 
 sometimes and in unimportant matters.' " 
 
28 
 
 The word li unimportant," which appeared in the Report, 
 as printed by the Committee, is said to be a clerical mistake, 
 but even this correction does not alter the tenor or drift of the 
 sentence, or make it in accordance with Mr. Verplanck's testi- 
 mony, viz. : 
 
 " Q. What do you say as to the alleged control of the Stand- 
 ing Committee ? A. On some subjects, it is necessarily great 
 — as to the valuation of property, and the terms on which 
 property should be sold — they being familiar from long and 
 daily experience with the value of our property in detail. On 
 other points, such as allowances or gifts to churches, the Ves- 
 try form their own judgment, and frequently refer matters 
 back to them for re-consideration ; sometimes, and in important 
 matters, rejecting their Eeport, and making or refusing grants, 
 in opposition to their recommendation. A case in point has 
 just been referred to in this examination. It is that of the 
 Church known as St. John the Baptist, a donation to which 
 the Standing Committee had reported against, and which, after 
 full consideration and debate, was granted, nearly to the 
 amount asked." 
 
 The Report, after alluding in a very disingenuous style (p. 
 10) to the very strong declarations of Gen. Dix, the Rector, 
 and various other witnesses, in relation to the influence of 
 " party divisions" in affecting the appropriations of the Vestry, 
 thus concludes in direct opposition to the evidence (p. 11): 
 "Among all the stipends now and of late years granted, the 
 only one that is stated in the evidence, to be given to a 'low' 
 Church clergyman, amounts to 8300 a year." 
 
 Now, Mr. Verplanck, agsinst whose evidence this Commit- 
 tee seem to have some special spite, had merely referred to 
 the following, as one among the appropriations to institutions 
 of charity (p. 95) : 
 
 " Another stipend is a charity rather than a church donation, 
 to a minister, the Rev. Mr. Cook, the German missionary at 
 Ward's Island and in the city among German emigrants ; I 
 think the allowance is $300. I suppose I may add, as there 
 has been an allusion to it in a previous question, that he is a 
 ' low' Churchman ; and I never have known of any objec- 
 tion being made to the motion I make every year for the ap- 
 propriation." 
 
29 
 
 The Committee, in saying that this was the only " stipend" 
 now and of late years given to a " low" Churchman, had forgot- 
 ten the following testimony of Dr. Haight: 
 
 " In looking over the list of parishes, whose churches have 
 been mortgaged to Trinity Church, I find eight, the clergy and 
 lay delegates of which, for a series of years, on all leading ques- 
 tions, spoke and voted differently from the Rector and lay de- 
 legates of Trinity. Two of these are mortgaged for $25,000, 
 two for $20,000, one for $5,000, the other three for smaller 
 sums. So, also, in regard to the churches which have received 
 grants of land and money, or annual stipends. I find nearly 
 thirty which have taken the same independent course in Com 
 vention, without regard to the course of Trinity. My opinion 
 of the clergy and laity of the Diocese ol New- York is such, 
 that I do not think it would be practicable for any Corporation 
 to buy their opinions or their votes. Of the churches last re- 
 ferred to, six received gifts of money and land, and twelve re- 
 ceived gifts of money alone, two received gifts of land and a 
 stipend, three received gifts of land alone, six received gifts 
 of stipend alone. My knowledge of the votes of the lay dele- 
 gates and clergy of the several parishes, is derived from the 
 fact that, for a series of years it became my duty at every Con- 
 vention to call the ayes and noes on very many questions : 
 
 And then in their remarks upon this proportion in the do- 
 nations, they seem to regard the Diocese of New- York as 
 equally divided between the " the high " and " the low," and 
 that Trinity only doles out a small measure of her bounty among 
 the lower half. Whereas the proportion of her gifts bears a very 
 fair ratio to the number of this particular class in the Dio- 
 cese. 
 
 The Report states (p. 14,) that they do not understand the 
 Church to deny the gross valuation of their property, at 
 $6,487,050. The testimony leaves the first statement made 
 by the Vestry unchanged ! 
 
 The Report declares, (p. 17) "no direct attempt is made to dis- 
 own or disclaim the representations urged by Col. Troup, in or- 
 der to obtain the Law of 1814." We have already quoted the 
 strong disclaimer of Mr. Ogden, and now add the following from 
 Mr. J. R. Livingston's testimony, (p. 129.) 
 
30 
 
 " Q. Is it true, as stated in the Eeport of the Committee, foot 
 of page 16, that Colonel Troup's pamphlet was an inducement 
 to the Legislature to pass the Act of 1814 ? A. It cannot be 
 true, from the fact that the act was passed on the 2d of April, 
 1813, and the pamphlet bears date the 6th of September fol- 
 lowing. 
 
 The Report says (p. 18), "Nor does there appear to be any 
 manner in which responsibility can be secured ecclesiastically, 
 any more than civilly." Here is Bishop Potter's testimony, 
 (p. 23). 
 
 " Q. Is not the administration of this fund entirely and 
 absolutely separate from all the religious and ecclesiastical 
 care of the Church, as a religious society ? A. I think not. 
 
 " Q. Wherein does she exercise any control ? A. The im- 
 mediate disposal of this fund is ordered in the presence of and 
 by the Rector, Wardens and Vestrymen, of the parish. They 
 are both immediately responsible to me as the bishop of the 
 diocese, and are amenable to the Church of this diocese assem- 
 bled in Convention. I do not mean, however, to be understood 
 that I supervise the details of appropriations, or that my assent 
 is essential to the validity of any grants by the Vestry. 
 
 The Report (p. 20), pretends to derive from the evidence 
 the following arguments, to show the necessity of widening 
 the sphere of the corporators, so as to include among them 
 sufficient wealth and intelligence for the choice of Wardens and 
 Vestrymen ! 
 
 " Dr. Haight describes the congregation at Trinity as made 
 up of strangers, young men, transient residents, and the poor. 
 Dr. Vinton testifies that the congregation at St. Paul's is com- 
 posed mainly of strangers, clerks, mechanics, artizans, porters, 
 washerwomen, hucksters, and miscellaneous poor, making their 
 living as daily laborers. Dr. Higbee says that these removals 
 have "gradually and surely deprived Trinity and St. Paul's of 
 their regular congregations, and parochial spirit, responsibility, 
 and efficiency ?" and that they " diminish and weaken, in a con- 
 tinually increasing ratio, the constituency of the Corporation, 
 thus destroying the equilibrium of the parish, and undermining 
 its foundations as an institution of public charity." As an un- 
 avoidable consequence of this sweeping change, both in the 
 number and the character cf the corporators, it has been found 
 impossible to " keep up the standing of the constituency ; ' and 
 Dr. Berrian excuses the present state of things on the ground 
 that in former times there was " a wider range than now for 
 
31 
 
 the choice of distinguished and intelligent vestrymen," quali- 
 fied to administer so important a trust. 
 
 Now let us turn to the testimony, and see what these Rev- 
 erend gentlemen really say, for we have learned by sad ex- 
 perience not to depend on the quotations of the Report ! 
 
 Dr. Haight says (p. 4.): " The congregation at Trinity 
 Church is large, and composed in great part of strangers, tran- 
 sient residents, young men, clerks, &c, and the poor, upon 
 none of whom is any tax, in the form of pew-rent or otherwise, 
 laid for the support of the ministrations of the Church." 
 
 There is a slight difference between the words of the Report 
 "made up of," and the language of the evidence "composed 
 in great part of!" There are a few more left of the old sort, 
 permanent worshippers in Trinity yet ! 
 
 Dr. Vinton says (p. 60.) : " At St. Paul's Chapel, the only 
 one I speak of, the congregation is composed of three classes : 
 first, the old families retaining their seats ; second, strangers 
 from the hotels, clerks, an(J sojourners of the city, engaged, for 
 the most part, in mercantile business ; third, mechanics, arti- 
 zans, porters, washer-women, hucksters, and miscellaneous 
 poor, who obtain their living by daily labor." 
 
 The Report omits as unimportant a the old families retaining 
 their seats," some of whom are not quite beneath the notice 
 even of State Senators. 
 
 Dr. Berrian and Dr. Higbee were both speaking of the past, 
 not the present state of things. But surely a Senatorial Com- 
 mittee can change tenses as well as laws ! 
 
 We might further show many errors of omission and com- 
 mission, such as any reference to the fact that three of the 
 Clergy, and one of the Vestry, had corrected the wrong im- 
 pression given to their evidence ; the blank silence, or even 
 more questionable utterances of the Report as to the gifts, 
 endowments, charities, provisions, for free churches, for mission- 
 aries, for " its own" and other poor, &c. But the whole Re- 
 port and Testimony must he read, to show how strongly the 
 main drift of the former runs against the current of the latter. 
 The Committee, however, may find themselves mistaken in 
 their estimate of the popular tide ! 
 
82 
 
 But, really, we have followed these vestiges of Senatorial 
 creation far enough, perhaps beyond our reader's patience, 
 to show the beautiful concord between the Testimony and the 
 Report ! The Committee have used their Senatorial powers 
 to grant these a divorce, and as the parties can never agree, 
 we had better allow them to remain separate. Perhaps, we 
 should rather say, as. a Select Committee, they have used their 
 appropriate powers in selecting approved extracts from the 
 testimony. Still this does not account for the omission of 
 those parts which bear most strongly upon the great questions 
 at issue. It may be that they believe in a Church without a 
 Bishop ! Thus only can we account for their omission, among 
 many other important points, of the solemn testimony of 
 Bishop Potter and Bishop Delancey, as to the fraud which 
 would be committed, and the evils which would arise from 
 the repeal of a law, which by the limitation of time, has be- 
 come " a statute of repose.'*' 
 
 We venture the supposition, we /' know nothing," that the 
 members of this venerable Committee are citizens of some 
 larger town, perhaps of our metropolis. There is a dryness 
 and a hardness in their Report, which speak nothing of the 
 verdure and the freshness of rural scenes. Thus only can we 
 account for the fact, that our country friends are not warned of 
 the dangers and the evils which this proposed measure will 
 bring upon them. They must be as green and verdant as their 
 own beautiful meadows, if they do not see this. The bounty 
 which has flowed to them, in gentle rivulets and quiet streams, 
 our rapacious and greedy citizens are seeking to dam up and 
 bring into a general reservoir for city use. The country may 
 only become awake to this fact, when they see their Croton 
 distributed in the pipes and bath-tubs of New-York. Then, 
 woe to the politicians, and the political party, by whose aid this 
 result has been accomplished ! They will know the palsy 
 which, by an eternal ordinance, will ever blight the hand dar- 
 ing to touch that which has been consecrated to the Most 
 High. 
 
 Lest some may think that a fervid imagination is trying to ex- 
 cite them by its own dreams, we add the sober testimony given 
 
33 
 
 under the solemnity ot an oath, by Bishop Delancey of the 
 Western Diocese of New-York. 
 
 u The repeal of the law would be disastrous to the whole 
 Church of the State, outside the city. 1. By raising the ques- 
 tion, as to the right of dispersing any of this property out of 
 the city, which is denied by some, but which, the present Cor- 
 poration has admitted, and has temporarily acted on. 2. By 
 leading, almost necessarily, to the division of all the property 
 among the city churches. 8. By thus cutting off all the feeble 
 country churches from the "benefit of this favor. 4. By stop- 
 ping what has been a stream of most salutary and fertilizing 
 benevolence to religious, charitable, or educational institutions 
 in the rural districts." 
 
 "We impeach no man's motives, but we speak our honest 
 convictions, when we say that an attempt to stop, or to direct 
 the present quiet and beneficent flow of the bounty from Trin- 
 ity Church, is the act of no friend to the best interests of the 
 Church or of the State. Who are they that are clamoring for 
 this change ? Are they the poor, or the needy, whose calls 
 have been despised or neglected ? The leaders in this move- 
 ment are rich men and rich congregations, many of whom have 
 already had their full share of property, which has ever been 
 used, according to the best intentions, if not the wisest, for the 
 glory of God and the good of man. 
 
 Our humble voice may never reach the ears of a single Le- 
 gislator. If it does reach them, we say, pause, deliberate well, 
 before you disturb that which has long reposed in the rest of 
 the eternal shelter which Law should throw around Right. 
 Enough already are the disturbing elements in the political 
 atmosphere. Add not to the agitations of the State the ele- 
 ments of deeper excitement. Let the Church and her pro- 
 perty alone. The State has enough to do in taking care of it- 
 self 
 
.CJWC