Chicago Daily Tribune Newspaper, May 7, 1874, Page 2

PROF. SWING. Proceedings of the Third Day of thq Trla.l Examination of Judge H. G. Miller. Te Tells What Ho Rememhers About * Ministerial Calling” -~ My, Shufeldt Turns Out to Be an Unprofitable Witness, All He Know Was Prof. Swing Was Unsound ‘on Infant Dam- - nation, Testimony for the Prosecution Closed . ==A’ Continuance Refused. Mr. Waite Declares Prof, Soundness. Swing's The Bookmakers' War. Tha Prosbytery reassembled yosterdsy morn- Ing at the First Presbyterian Church. Tho sudi- snco was large nnd fashionable. The Modora~ tor, Dr. Mitohell, opencd the oxorcises with silesit prayer. ¢ The usual wasto of time with regard to tho ecord of Monday and Tucaday was indulged in. It was & notaworthy ciroumstauce tiat.tho ad- herents of the two parties ranged themselves on cither side of the houso, thoso of the gront horeay-oxtorminator gathoring like tho shesp on the right hand of tho judgment scat, whilo the beretic and bis sapportors took their proper place on his left. All the pretty women wera on tho Swing sdo, The wrangliog over tha taking of tostimony was resumod. H, 6. MILLER, Mr. Henry G. Millor was called, aworn, and examined by Prof. Patton. Q.—Aro you & momber of the Fourth Prosby- torian (Swying's) Church ? A.—No, sir; I am not. Q.—Have you beon? A.—I wad prior to the union of tho North and Wostminister Churchos. My mombership continned but a short timo after the nnlon of the two churches. Q.—Dp to what time wero you s hearer of Mr. Bwing 7 A.~I think to about June, 1871. Q.—During thocourse of your momberahip in that church, under his preaching, did you hear im prench a sermon on tho subject of tho bristian ministry 7 A.—Not during that time, Dr. Noyes snid the sermon specislly reforred to waa in tha house in a printed form, and, if the prosecntor waa willing to bave it submitted 1n svidence, thore would bo no necoesity for the Yostimony. Prof. Patton was satiefied with that, sskiog it ho sormon was printed entirs. Mr, Noyes had not scen it, and was unablo to 18y, Ho presumod that svon an sbstract would be quite aa reliabla as the memories of wit- nogses. - ; “Prol. Patton rojolned that, if tho report wea not in full, ho should not regard it s primary svidence in tho onse, to such au extent as to ox- lude Mr. Millar's testimony. Q.—Will you bo kind enough to state the doc- Irine preached ¥ Did I undorstaud you to say unt you heard the sermon? A.~He did nut preach tho sermon whilo 1 was a member of that shuroh, I heard him preach a sormon at Stand- wd Hall danng Decembor 1871, or January, 1872. In this dicoourse, tho subject of tho min- Isterinl calling was a prominent ono,—I think it nas ihe leading subject. Q—DBs kind encugh toatate tha doctrine of that sormon, bo tho bost of your recollction, as 1t nffects tho Christian ministry. A.—I cannot, tram recollectlon, ropraduce tho frame-work of tho disgoursa o as to convey to the mind, per- baps, the way it which this topia precisoly was troated. Tho eubstance of it was, to atatoitin 1 fow woids, that n call to the ministry was rather dotermined by the nabural fitness of a person for that vocation than euything alse. [Lnughmr.] That was the aspect in which t was presonted in tho dizcoarse. The doa of & divino appointment ond di- vino conseoration of the offico was not roforted to, as I recolloat it. The discourss was of a nature which led me tosttpposo that ho was uot taking any special view of the subjeot, but tather covering the wholo ground. In other words, the ministdrial calling~ waa rogarded or treatod ns of the eame character as tho coll of & person to any profesaional pursuit, and, thors- foro, was to be determined moro by the natural itness of theperson for that pursuit, as ho ootildl discover It, than anythiog else. Q.—Was sny distinect spelogy drawn between tha other profossions of life and the Christina minfatry 2 A,—Other profossions were spoken 6f 5 the calling of the lawyor to his profession, and of the merchant to his business ; they were spblten of in tha shmo light. Q.—Was thare any rofoiencs {b that sermon to the iden that the origin ot the Christian min- istry ia the result of & division of Iabors that the nooessities of the oaso ¢alled for a olass of men tobo mimsters ? A.—There might bhave boon ; and I think ho did stats that the nocessitics of society originated this division of labor, Ho rather gave a secular view of it, 3 By Mr. Glon Wood—Did you tnderstand from thal dizcourse that Mr. 8wing canve‘)'ud the idea that God directs all men who reek Him for direc- tion, and the Christian man has A much reason to cxpect Qod will direct him to any line of busi- ness, o5 the man who *may bo directed to the miustry has to expeet Godwilldirect him thera? A~Idonot think the sbjoct was brought out In that way at all. . Q.—I want to know whether ths subject was freated in a way that gave you that fdea? A.—My jdea of 1t was that evorything of & dlvine nature was elimiuated, presenting the mrbjeot ih & view fu which X nd nover boen ac- stustomed to reghrd if. Q.—Was.not the subgcct 8o troated as to con- voy tho idon thnt the Divine Miud mannges the affulrs of men? A.—No, sir; that was_uot the iden he was endodvoring to impross as 1 under- stodd it." Thatis an idea that is very froquently puforeed by ministers. By Dr. Patterson—Q.—Was thoro anything in tue sormon inconsistent with the idea that 8ov.l does order thoe affairs of men and direot them all to thoir sevoral pursuits ? A.—~That featuro of the gospol ministry tvas entlrely loft out, I do not know bitt ha spoke of a sense in which men were callod to tleir difforent voeatlons, but all prafessions wore futhor put on tho samo plane, 3a I regarded it. I think that was thoe leading Ides of the discourse, Q.—Your memory 14 not distinet in regard to it ¢ Q.—My memory is protty distinctin ro- speet to what Xhavo stated, Ithink it is quite distiact, Q.—Suppoge & man bad not & normal fitness for tho. minfstry, would you suppose he was called of God? "A.—L would not undertake o aiswey that question, Tho Moderator ruled that tho quostion was jmproper, a8 it involved a mora muiter of opinion., " p'l‘nu Witness:-T do nat suppose anybody but & theologlan could know that, Prof. Swing sald e had learned thinb the man- nacript of the sermon bad been given totue Inlér-Ocean nfter the sorvices, and It was likely that i 1t could bo got from the files discusaioh would be avolded, His imvreselon wne that Judge Miller bad quoted very alosely from.the xeal sermon. By Mr, Halsoy—~Q.—Did the sermon contain he 1dea of & special call or designation to tho ministry—a differing from other callings? Itdid piot, As I rocollect it, nowhore in the ser- won was any such distinction mude. By Mr, Barbor—Q.—Would you now ba bot- tor eatisfled with tho stelements in the sormon 28 printod thon with your own memory 10gard- ing them? A.—Unless the sormon, a printed, would convey some such {dea as Lsm trylng to convoy, I whould not bo eatiafled with it, bo- eauso my recolloction of that fact ia very dis- M § thoy might view rontly, bul shat it the way I'yiowod it, That is all I osn **Frot. Pation said he had n his handy o abe Dr, Swazoy as paator of: tho Ashland Avenuo Ohurch, and hie offered i in avidenoa, [ . M. Noyes hoped he would hold it {n aboy- anco for whilo, a8 & mousonger had heen sout to tho Inler-Ocean offico to fot the papor which contalnad tho outire sormon. + Prof. Patton agreed to do no, and then ra- marked that ho proposed to initoduco Mr, Goorgo A, Bhufoldt as o witness: but, as that montlemau was not preseut, and ‘would not be. for hinlf an hour, ho proposed to read the - | DOOUMENTARY NYIDENUE. Mr. Noyes wantod to know what he meant by " documontary evidongo."' . Prof, Patton-roplied that ho moant tho sar mona embracod “:n tho volumo called !* Truths for To Day," and other sormons mentionod in the stipulations. Time would be saved if the altuuuun for the defonso wore examined at that mo, Mr. Noyes wonld not consent to this. The Moderator ruled that, as the connsel for the dofonso preforred to follow the usual course, and not introduce hiy testimony until that for tha prosecution was all in, s motion to take & ro- cenn vas in ordor. J The defenso agreod to conslder the documonts in evidonco just ne if thoy had besn read. MR, BHUFELDT, At this moment Mr. Blufeldt camo futo the room aud waa aworn by tho Modorator, aud ex- amined by rrof, Patton. Q—. Wil leyuu bo kind enongh to toll the Prea- bgtol whother you ever received s lottar from the Hov. Mr, Bwing In rospect to the five points of Calvinism? A.—Bomo time in the year 1867, or the eatly part of 1868, I published nn article in Tue Cuicdao TRIBUNE critiolzing s sermon that bad been delivered by Prof, Bwing, sod in that article attacked tho dark side of Catvinism, Mr, Swing wrote me a porsonal lettor, Q.—Hunve you that letter? A.—I have not, Nelther of thom, BSeveral passed betwaon us, The lettera wera dostroyed in the flre of 1871, snd all I can say about tho mattor now is from 1y recollection and improsaton. Q.—Will you bo kind enough to give us your rocollection? A.—Mr. Bwing repliod to ‘that published lettor, stating that a public discussion of thess matteis would probably bo noither ine | toresting to ua nor to the publo: and, I think, seid if -1 had suything to sy on tho subject ho would bo glad to hear from mo. -'I then wroto him anothor letter, in which I rapeated all the charges, stating, a3 I romembor, that to ms the Calvinistlo doctrinos, whilo tnoy might' have been tolorated in the sixteonth century, were un- worthy of the intelligence and advanced condi- tion of tho human mind to-day [laughtor]; that 1did not underatand how it was that a man who had aray of intellizonce could beliove in these $hings ; that thoy woro monatrous to man and ropulsive to God gnnghtorfll: that I did not bo- llevo an, hudidm cliove them unleas they wero schooled in the mta of a doad theology, and did :mt _‘nflect enough to got out of them. {Laugh- or. Tho Modorator reminded the audlonce that thoy ought not to forgoet tho encreduess of tho proceedings, and should restrain thoir feolings, whatever thoy might bo, ) ‘The witnoss coutinued : Mr, Bwing answerod that lettor, and I think ho drow the form of n treo, grounded, as Irecollect, in the Christian Church, and tho body of the troa was the Chris- tlan roligion, and tho branches woro named— marked off 88 offshoots—aftor the doctrinos of Oalvinism—among othors, * predestination” or “election,” *absolute total dopravity,” *‘snlva- tlon by grace,” * perseyorenca of the saints,” “infant damnation,” and several others, which were outgrowths, He enumoratod or montiouod sovoral of these Eulnts. which ho had long sinco ropudinted. Which ones thoy wore, par- tioularly, I do not mnow romember,” I thinlke ‘that ho denied ' the doctrine ofs tho absoluto total dopravity of man, if thereis qualification, Balvation by grace’ he did not ropudiate, Infant damnation Lo did. I think there wers throe pointa that woro ropudiatad. Q.—Waa thore any roference to tho five points of Calvinism ? A.—I think the flvo points of Calvinism woro embraced mithin the branches of s troe. . Q.~—Do you remember whether he distinotly donied ons or more of thoss five pointa? A~ Well, I think that Mr. Bwing was speaking I defense of tho Churol, and tho attacks Ihad mado upon it. Q.—The question is, whether he denled ono or more of the five points of Calvinism ? A,~I do not think ho used the: word ** denied.” I think the exprossion was that he had * long since repudiased,” or * long sinco sbandoned,” Q.—Long slnce abandoned what, sir? A.—T think that was tho exprossion. * Long since abandoned these——" Q.—Do I underatand you to say that ho afirmed that ho had long sinco abandoned ons or moro of tho fivs points of Calviniem? A.— Well, now, whotbor tho exprossion was that Ae hnd Jong since abandoned them, or whethor they bad long sinco boon abandoned, i should not liko to Bay. Q.~~Was the thing sbandonod ono of the poiuts of Calvinism# ~ A.—Yes, I think it was. Q.—Da you know how many of tho points of inism trere abandoned? A.--Well, thera wero s number of things on this tree that wore atandoned. [Laughter.] Q.—Had you ever written him a lettor detall. ing tho five pointa of Calyinism? A.—Yos, and Iguess more than the five poluts. [Renawed Iaughter.] Mr. Barber hoped the Moderator srotld en- force order. It was cortainly not in keepin with the dignity of the cowrt to indulge lucg answera. . Tho Moderator romorked that Lo conld not control the answers of the witness. By. Mr. Barber.--Q.—Did his [Bwing's] ra) l[yre~ for to your allusion to she five poiuts of d’fl [vine istmn ? ~A.—Yes, J thinl it did, Q.—Did ke say how m“fl of thoss points he had abandoned 2 A.—Woall, I think there woro three subjects named on this troe, which ho said Lie hiad abandoned or wore abaudoned, Q.—Was “ predestination ” one of thoss mub- Jocts ? A.—Well, sir, I do not rotnembor whoth- er it wag or not. Q.—Was “ depravity " ono ? A.—Yuos, I think that absoluts, total depravity was. I think that was qualified. £ Q.—Waa the * Pérasveranco of ths Baints " one? As~I do not remember, sir, whether it was or not, I think, in relation to * total de- pravity," somothing was enid abous thore boing an element of goodness in man ; that ho did not consider thot man was abeolutely totally de- gn\vedxi or what mijghe porhaps bo called “total epravity." . . . —Were ¢lection and depravity two of those five points 2 A.—I think that this queation of “total depravily ” was one of tho flve points, when taken in its abaolute senso, Q.—Do you romember whather * prodestinne tion ** waa ono of the brauches of the troe whioh be snid had boon abandoned ? A.—I think it wag. Prof. 8wing,—Q.=What was the object of tho fotter ? \Vas it to bring the Christian religion up into a bettor ltmflflx ero, or was it to ridiculo it in some way? A,—Woll, sir, thore was nothing liko ridicule on the part of Prof. Swing of the Christian religion orof any of its points, 1 considerod the lsttor a3 a dofonso of tho Church or the Coristian religion, from the at- tacks that I had made upon it, Q.—Cau You ntme to us the five points of Cal- :lu‘i]sm ? A.—Wnll, sir; I think thas is doubtful 0-day, Q.—I had forgotton abaut that tree. I remem- ber now, sinco hearing your evidonce, something about it. DId [ indicate certain limbs a3 broken oft? A.—Broken oft, or dropped down. Q.—But the mnin body I presonted as ‘nnlng still allye and growing, I'supposs? A.—I thin! the body was marked *‘tho Chtistlan religion," Whether it was 5 living troo or & dend trec I do not Eu{pnsul ought tu atmwor; but X suppose you intended it for a living treo. Q.—There wero no leaves on it, were there? .—No, sir, I think thoro were no lehves. [Smile.] By Mr. Noyes—Q.~-Do you romember tvhothor there was auything in tho way of definitions in Prof, Swing's lotters to you? A.~Dofinitions of what? £ Q.—Well, of tho fivo points? For instancs: Any distinot designation of them as being tho flva points, or any one of the five poihts, of' Cal- Vinlsm? A.—No. I do not think they twere marked In the treo as belng points of Calvinfsm, 1think the branches wore marked, one *‘Pro- destinatioh" another ¢ Balyation by Grace," or somothing in that way ; ut I donob think thoy were desiguated as pointarof Oalvinism, Q.—Are you entirvely sure in your own mind {hat bo rejocted nuy of theso five pointa ? Prof, 8wlng—I would change the queation, Do you think that infant damastlon is ono of thode five points that I rejectad? A.—1 think you rejectod infont damuation, I do not undore m‘m that that is ouo of tho five points of Cale yinlsm, although it was put there [on the trag) 28 an outgrowth. Q.—In yonr mind do you make any distinction betireen * oleotion " sud * forcordination P Iave you learned any of thosse distinotions in - theol- ogy? A.—It ia s long time since I wstudied tho cafochiem, [Laughtor.] By Dr, Patteraon—Q.—Are you sure that it swas the five polnts of Calvinlem that lie spoko of whon he satd that * somo of those points had beso abondoned,” inasmuch as he rpoke of in- faut damnation as ono of then, or was it somo of tho points on the troe? A—Well, it way oluts on the treo, but those points X under-, stand to be somo of tho points of Calviniem, Q.—And you includoed “infan damuation?" A1 do nol romember exsctly, bub my impret- :|.dohor THE CHICAGO DAILY TRIBUNE: THURSDAY, MAY 7, 1874. ‘fant damnation " yas n port of:ithe Galviniatio creod, and that, ho statod that that waa a! 4, or {ha$ hé ropudinted it, . 3 - Q.—Yon. oaunot stato, oxcopt in rogard (o 8 ‘quaiified dofinition of * totnl dupmfl, Farhothor any othor of the points wore roforred fo as hay- ing boon abandoned? A,—I think thoro woro throo of theso doftoitions or polnts on 'the treo that had beon abaudoned ; my improssion : is ‘stract of 'the setmon, publishod in Tiin Taws- | sion In duak X chargod & hnt tho doatsine'of */in- | 3 Prot. Tatton desird tho Clork to enter his unE, which wes preached ' at the lnsinllation of- dlasont, Mr, Noyes asked it tho proscontor's ovidenao was all in, " Prof. Patton aaid ho would offor in ovidenco & sormon pronched_by Prof. Bwing at the fustall- ton of tho Roy, Dr, Swazoy, and publishod in Tne Trpuse Doc, 12, RENUTTING TERTIMONY. Mr, Noyos wished to iave the statoment of tha that thore woro. ‘The inforonce T drow wae tlint |«Elders of the Fdurth Church admitted ss evl: they wero partof tho fivo polutaof tho Cal- vinintie crood. . X Q.—I would a8k, ‘aithough it'may not bo vory | rolovant to tha queation, whether gau foopt . in any sonss tho Christian religion?, A.—Ido not think that is a pertinens w‘nsflon to-duy.s Q.1 wish to kuow, on the quostion of tho admissibility of your testimony, whether you | believe in tho existonce of God? +'A.—Well, geutlemen, if you did not want my teatimony yon ought not to havo called mo. [ Prol. Pattou urged shat, 8o far as the witnoss' opinion of tho Ohristian roligion waa concorned, thoy wanted xo information, v 5 r, Bhufoldt—TI have no objection to annwor- ing any question any genilemen prasent ma; dosiro to put to mo, ~ Whether I bnvo intell- fimm‘ onough to auswer it, ia another quostion. Chat & finite Long can comprehiond - an infinite one, or that man can comprehend God, I do not beliove, T beliovo in a groat, First Pinoiple,— the Oreator ; but who Godlis, or what Ho does, no man can tell mo. = Dr, Pattorson—The purpose was not to sliow any disrespoot to tho witnoss, It was simply a Tluallfln as to the admusaibility of his testimony, it it wore_important. I do ngt deem it so epecially, In onso the witness doos not believo in the oxistonce of God, I suppose this court would rogard hinonth as difforont from what they would in caso ho did. Tho witness atates thnt he doos baliove in God. B Mr. Bhufoldt—I do not conslder it & matter of disrespeot on the part of the gentleman to pot such a question a8 that to mo, = DBy Ar. Wallace,—Q,—Did you understand hlm to sny that Lo had abandonod the doctrine of {* Persovorauce of tho Buinta"? A.~Idonot know, att, Thore wore threo things in that e that he said bad baen abandoned. [Laughe or. Q.—How many branches were thore on that treo ? A.~Thoro were a good many, . Some wore named and some were not. % By Mr. Faris,—Q.—Did he say he denied, or tho public had abandoned, the doctrine of tho damnation of infants, in such & way as to imply that it had ovor boon a part and parcel of the Calvivistic system? A, —1I think. **infant damnation " was put on that troo as au out- grmvlll of Oslvinism, Itdid not make n great ionl of differonca to me whothor it was ono of tho Qve points or not, By Dr. Pattorson—Q,—Was ‘“‘infant damna- tion ono of tho branches that Prof, Bwing spoke of a8 having falien down ? A.—That was ono of the threo ; Iam sure of that. By Mr, Blackburn—=Q.—\Was tho articlo pub- lished in Tur Tninuns occasioned by hearing Prof. Bwing pronch? A.—No, sir. ~ I nover heard him bubt ouce inmy life, and that long since that time, It was oocssionod by & pub- lished sermon of his, Q.—Wes 1t dosigned to bo in oriticism of what Prof. Bwing had preached 7 A.—I do not know whethor it was or not.. I presume it was. I suppose I might Lave thought he was too ortho- dox. [Lnughter.] Q.—You underatood him to bave expressed an abandonment of thres things in that troo, what~ over thoy were ? _A.—Yes, air. Q.—Did youunderstand that ho had abandoned your reprosentation of those thm?s, or the Ohuroh's ropresentation ? A.—Well, whothior the prououn * I or “ wa " was usad, 1t being 80 long ago, I csnnat remember., The impros- sion I got from it was that thres things bad long since boon abandoncd by the Church. My gon- eral imprension would be that ho said * £," but my inforonce was shat ho was dofending tha Ohurch, Q.—Did the lottor convey the idea thatthe things ebandonod by Mr, Bwing wore thiugs which ho hed once heid ? A.—1 should thini that the thinga obandonad had beon once hold by tho Churen, That was the inferonce I drow. Whether he bad held thom Limaclf or not, I do not know. I supposed thin lottor was writton in windiention of the Ohurch. By Mr. Glenwood—Q,—Aro you sure that * total dopravity * was one of /the threo thioga nbnmlunux ? A~Yos, in the sbsolute total Aenfo, Q.—Cnn yon tell ua what the third ono was ? A.—WIill any gentleman name tho five points to me, [Laughter], Dr. Beoher.—I do not holisve thero is aman in the house who ¢an do it. Prof, Bing.—Wo will: call upon the proso- outor to doit. [Renowed lnughmr.‘] : By Mr. McLoad—Q.~\Wero thores just five main branches on tho troo? A.—My improssion is that thore wore mors, Q.—I understood you to sny that there were more tben five branchos, but that thero were not more than five main branches—that the othors ware outgrowths ? A.—I do not know with how ‘much artistio skill the tree waa drawn, or exactly how many branchea shere wore. It was simply a rough eketch, and what might be callod & main bmnci, or what might be called & less important branch, I do not now know. Q.—Was infant_damnation ono of the main branshes? A.~I do not know whother it was n main branch or an inferior one. [Laughter.] THAT CONTINUANCH AGAIN. This eoncluded the oxamination of the mitnoss, and Prof, Patton statod that all tho teatimony for tho prosscution, excopt that of Robort Laird Collfer, was in, and as Alr. Colller was an fm- portant witnogs, and it was not possibla to scoure {nin tafiumony, Lo aaked for & continuance of two months, Mr. Noyes said it must be obvious that thoro oxisted no reason for granting the requost of the prosecutor for a continuance, It was clear that affidavits already submitted would robut Mr. Collier's avidongo, eyen wore that evideuce such 08 tho prosccutor desired. Tho Kentucky afil- davit was notoriously erroneous, ‘I'he daponent thero~swore that Mr. Collier had exchongod ulpits wits Mr. Swing, Which overybody in the Bouna kuevw to be & mistake, When such a mis- take was made, it dostroyad the valuo of all afiidavita or ofmrgau by the doponcnt. Mr, Shorey’s afiidavit bad been submitted, te prove that the lotter from AMr. Swiug to Mr. Coullor did not by any meaus prove a umty of viow, Mr, Bwinog testifled that that was tho only lotter writton by lum to Mr, Collior, and bad tostiflad that be never agreed with Mr. Collior in his viewa. Dut the I'resbytery exercised no power aver Mr, Collior to compel bim to appoar as a wituous, and it would ba usoless to continuo the trinl for the mere purpose of sooing whother he would voluntarily do so. Judging from Liobark Uollier’s_lattor in Tue Trmuns, it was to e supposed that lio wouldirapudiato coming Into the Presbytory, and dicclosing the secrots of a pree tonded conversalion, or of & privata cor- respondonco. ko was astonishod that the prosccutor should mnke the roquest for & cou- tinuance, He appealed to the Presbytery fu tho intoreats of thoir conmon fuith and of thls Zion, o procood at once to finlsh the oase. If Mr, Collier's testimony wero availabl it would not bo worth a straw for other renson¥ than that it was rebutted in advauce, Ilis testimony, un- pupported, could not conviet 3r. Swing of boroay, }mll‘ a8 the Prosbytery knew vory woll, :\g_r. Shufeldt's testimony Was not worsh auy- ing. LET THD PRINCIPAIS ARGUE. The Rev. Dr, Ewazng moved that both prose- outor and defendabt be nllpwed to arguo the motion for » continuauce, and be given all tho tims they dotired, Tho Prosbytory should thon rotire and dotormine upon its opinion, *Phe Rev. Dr. Patterson saw nothing to bo ained by tho motion, The Presbytory would fio in precisely the samo position as at presont, 1f it provailed, Phe motion of Dr. Bwazoy was lost. The reverend gahtloman then moved to go in- to socrot mossion, which motion was also de fented. Mr, Hurd moved that the roquest for a con- tinuance'be not granted, Prof, Patton #ail he had asked for a continu. :finkn on tho ground of the allidavits from Kon- ucky, g 3 ELDER LCE OPPOSED tho motion for a continuance. 1Ile oalled atten- tion to tho position in which a continusuce would ‘{flncu tho Fourth Ohurch, Its object was to hold tho pastor and officors of tho churoh fu & moral dplllory, in which they would confined for two months. At tho same time it wave the d)mueuumr time to play upon them with Lis artlilevy, for he was unfortunatoly the aditor of a Christian paper. T'he spiritusl work of the Church would beimpaded, if not dostroyed, A continuauce would bo ciuel, to the congroga- tion a8 well ns the pantor, The manly course of tho proseoutor wos to withdraw, if be could not procoed, , Ho asked no favors—Noe asked jusiics ouly, Heand hiu tellow-ofileers implorod the Court not to dowolish the Church by such action, On tho flrst day of tho. yoar, tho congregatinn had mot in tho Fourth Churel for tho nret time siuce tha fire, from all quarters of the clly, and thanked God for its rostoration, Aud nqw came this proposition to hold them up beforo the world undor a bau for $wo mouths, 'Tho pratext upon which tho request wau anked, was a0 flimsy that ho could not bieliove the Dresbytory woul n\:nenlu It. Ho wished to Lave the question met at once, "I'ho motion to yefuso ko graut the requcat was (:An;led, with one dissouting YDlW.-—I"ll‘Ol- Pate ou'e, doneo, Drof. Patton. wantod to know what kind of evidonco that was, Mr. Noyes said it was the same sort 25 tho sor- mona of Prof, Bwing, If It were nocossnry to lm'v‘n the Eldors sworn, thoy could be. Tho oy, Dz, Pattoruon sald that the proseeu- tion had brought in witncsscs to givo their ovi- donco of - improsslonn tbat Mr. Bwing did not Eraaoh ovangolically, - T'hin testimony wus re. utting ovidonce of ‘such impressions, boing im- prosuions that ha did ao proach. D DProf, Petton thought it incompotont, Iir. Noyos phid it the promecuttou demurred, he would havo to call tho Eldors and. havo them testify. Otherwiss Lo .would bo satisfled to havo the atatomont of the Eldera submitted. The Modorator said tho great objeation to the papor wad that it gave no opportunity for cross- oxamination, Mr, Noyes thon callod the first witness for the dofango, TOTACE F. WAITE, who testifiod as follows : Examined by- Mr, Noyes.—Q.—Did you evor hear Drof. 8wing proach upon the dfvinity of Olulat, or tho deity of Christ ? A.—I do not ro- member any distinot sermon upon the subject, but X remember of its often beiug reforrod to in his sormons, & By Prof. Patton—Was tho sormon dolivered from manmcript 2 A.—All of Mr. Bwing's sor- mons, using tho worda in thoir diroct nonso, are in_manuzoript. Prof. Patton objectod fo tlie testimony. It was nob cnmgflcnl for the body to receive parol testimony whon they could havo the written sermons, Mr, Noyes insisted that parol testimony had ‘been recoivod on written sermons. Prof. Pattonanswered: ** Only on those which could not bo produced.” Dr, Pattorson remarked that he understood that tho sermons alluded to by tho witness had been destroyed iu the fire. s . ‘The Modcrator decided that tho tostimony was admissible. 3 Prof. Patton appealed from the doclsion, but subsoquontly consented to the continuance of tha exzmination of tho witness, Q.—Have you lioard Mr. Bwing preach upon tho Atonemont of Christ,—the porson of Christ? A.—1 have heard bim proach over since ho be- crmo pastor of tho Wostminoter Church, when T was in tho city, and have beard his Wodnesday evoving loctures. Q.—Did yon ever honr him proach any sermon that produced upon your mind the conviction that he loanod, iu_over ro slight 'n degreo, to- ward tho Unitarian faith? A.—On the con- trary, instond of lonnlng toward it, I have hoard from him onco, I ramembor distinctly, n sormon dolivered bofore tho fire, the strongest argu- mont I evor listoned to in my lifo sgainst Unls tarianism, and ho covsiantly torches tho dog- trines of the Trinity, and the doity of Christ, Q.—Did you evor hear Prof. Bwing preach upon the subject of future retribution—the final sopuration of the rightcous and tho wicked? A.—TI have, on threo or four occasions. One Wednesday evening, cithor provious or subse~ quent to tha doubls boing expressed in tho In- terior,~tho lowson was in Matthow,—that ques- tion wag disoussed by Prof. Swing, explained to Lis church, sud ho tnught tho dootrine of future punisbment. Q—Did you ever hear Prof. Swing preach any sermon that was in any way in conflict with any of tho " evangelical dootrines of Chrlstianity? A.—I haye, 1 bolieve, sll my life, sat undor Presbyterian prenching, and the daotrines Lo hns taught mo hdve boon puch as I havo been wont to listen to. I do not profess to be a theologian. Q.—Aro you oue of the olders of the Fourth Church ? A.—Iam, sir. Q.—Were you one of the elders of Westmin- ster Church ? A.—I was, sir, Cross-examined by Prof, Pallon : Q.—Whntdo you mean by the divinity of Christ ? A, —Tho doity of Chriat, o Q.E\'\;hlt do you monn by the deity of Christ? .—God. Q.—What do you moan by the Trinity 2 A.—~T do not know a8 T'céan give you an oxact theolog- icol answor. I undorataud by tho Trinity that thero aro three persons in tho Godhond, co- oqual with each othor, Q.—What do you understand by tho word evangollenl? A.—That isa word that Lins, por- hops, o wide meaning, and might bo difeult to doling with exnotnaess, Q.—Do you regard the ‘word evangelloal ns nocossary to convoy the idoa that a man would be accoptable to tho Preabyterion Church? A— {\ lmnu may bo evavgelical and not a Presby- orian, Q.—Whon was the sormon you rofor to roachad ? A.—Just before tho union of the ostminster with tho_ North Churahi; snd ho showed the differonce betweoun & Unitartan and a Presbytorian, and how much better Presbyterianism was than Unitarianism, Q.~Do you remembor tho distinction which he drew? A.—I romembor some of the points, bounuee the argumont made a vory strong im- preasion upon mo. I cannot give tho lnnflmgn. Q.—Whas wore tho points? A.—Ouo of them was that Unitarinns did not recogmizo Christ ag God, but gavo him a high degree of manhood; and ho said tho Presbyterinn foith was botter, beoauss it went further, and not only made Him a man, but a God, Q.—Ditl ho Hgp the word * God" {n that con- nection,—made lim o God? A.—He used the word, porhaps, with the ordiuary sense, a8 o definition of Christ, or the divinity of Christ, uning it, a8 I undorstood it, In the sonso of the deity of Ohrist. —DId you over hear him speak of Christ, and use the word * deity"? _ A.—T to not 10~ member that I ever did ; but I bave heard lim use the word divinity iu such o sengo that thore could bo no doubt that ho meant * doity.” Q.—What do you understand by future pun- fsbroent 7 A.—TI understand what I alwaya have been taught in the Proabyterian Churcli,—that the wickod aro pnmshed in'the fuluve state, Q,—Are tho evangelioal churches alono in bs- lieving in future punisbmont? A.—I hardly knnw'fmw to angwer that question, bocause [ have & sortof tulo; but I'do not read much of what would be called hioterodox reading, Q.—The fact that a man belioves in futuro punishiment would nob excludo him from the niversalist Churoh ? A.—Ido mot know, I nover heard a Universalist sormon in my life. T have beon told that many Universalists do be- i:uvo in n future punisbment, but that is only OATBLY, Q.—DId you say Prof. Bwing has taught_the d?ctrine of “future punishment”? A.—Yos, Bir, Q.—Ia that thie most pronouncod way in which bo oxpressed his teaching 7 A.—Ie hns ox- prossed himsolf to this effect, pnr).mlm iu Bfl\'nte conversation more than otherwise; that there is uo quostion ab all that the Greok words in the Bible could not be translated, and that the Bible did not teach anything eolgo than eternnl puniah- ent. . —Yon havo heard him dlstinetly avow his belief in eternul punishmont ? A,—Yos, vir, Q.—In privato conversntions, did you eny? A.—Doth in publio and in private. He iain the habit of giving familiar lectures on Wodnosdny ovening, taking up passages of Beripture sud oxplaining them, Q.—Is Lthere any difforence batween his lec- tures and his sormons ? A.—Yes, iu thia one respoot : in the lectures ho 18 less formal, Ido not underatand that any differont doctrine Is taught in tho ono than {n” tho othior; but whon Lo takes yp o pusa?‘go of Soripture and explaing It vorso by verso, thord {8 moro polué to It than in n disgourso. Q.—DId you evor haar him teach the dootrino of oterunl punishment in the pulpit? A.~Yes, air, % Q.—Cnn you recolléct tha circumstancos? A, —I think 1'can recollect to or three. Q.—Do you romember tho language ho used ? A.—No, sir, I do not. Q.--i)n you remember the lino of argument lio used ?_A,—No, air, Ido not. Q.—But you aro positive that he preached In his pulpit that doottine ? “A.—Yes, sir. 5 Q.—Ix thet & circumatance you would naturally romembor? A.—No, sir, because I did not question for a momont what Lo taught, and it would not make mdy improseion upon my mind, And I was surprised when I heard it questioned by anybody, and hencs recolloct the scrmona in n{\luh Do oxprestod thosa dootrines. Tho hour of adjournment having arrived, aftor preyor by Mr, Ely, the Presbyrery adjournod uu- 1110 o'olocls thiw morning, ————— “pIE BOOE-MAKERS' WAR. To the Elitor of Ths Chicao Tyibune: 8y Wo notico in this moruing’s Tninune an articlo headed *'The Book-Mukers' War,” in which an unwarrantable r@ ok is made upon us a8 publighors. Wo wore not befora aware of the oxistence of war, o had only heard of & little outside slir misbing on tho part of Januen, MoClurg & Co. At-thils time we will ot atterapt to answer in full Jansen, MoClurg & Jo.'s stnterments in refoi ‘oico to our publication of ! David Brijog'e Bors |, mons,"” but have & fow worls to say in our own dofonse, Wo wish to say, first, that Prof. Swing was opprised . of* our' intention of publish- Ing ;& volumo of Mhis sormons tho samo day. that wo_bought tho storcotypo platos of Mardor, Luse & Co. Ilo ‘made 1m0 objections to our’ bringing ont the volume, but sosmed. interestad in tho ontorpriso, and eug- gosted tho addition of moveral Inter serimons to anlarge our volumo, Wo Liave seon Prof, Bwing from time to. time duriog the printing of onr book, and have mado soveral corrootlons in tho sermons, at bis requant, ‘Wa do not clnim that Prof. 8wing lins ovor au-~ thorized our publication, not “supposing requires his cousont to publish sermons wihioh have already beon printed in the papors, On no occasion hias Lrof, Bwing sald ho dostrod us to rolinquish the issuing of our hool, and, therofore, it will not *bo nont out ngainst tho Rlfihnn aud in doflance of tho person who wroto ‘Wo rmn&mn a8 clearly as Jouson, MoOlurg & COo.'can, the **usages and conrtosios of the trado,” Tho question thoy now ralso wo are willing to submit to o committee' of Eastorn publishors, The fact that Janson, MoClurg & Co. pub- 1ishod a volumo * Truths for 'o-Dny " doos not debar ng from esuing auolher voluma of on- tively difforent mattor, eallod * David Swing's Bormons,” and, unloas thoy can show a public aunouncoment of other works by Prof. Swing, wo fail to seo any discourtesy on our part, We concode that **The Westorn News Company” Liave & porfoct right at this moment to issue an- othor volume by Prof. Bwing, under a difforont titlo, without Infringing auy rules of courtesy; ay Janson, McOlurg & Co., or oursolvos,havoaus nounced no othor booka by this writor. It may bo interosting to the publio to know how Jansen, McClurg & Co. beeamo tho publish- ors of **'I'uths for L'o-Day ;" also, whother they have any arrangemont with Prof, 8wing to -pay him a copyright, or & contract with him for fu. turo books. ~Wo hove nuthority for eaying that no suchcontract exists. ‘Was not “Trutha for To-Day® orlglnally in- tended by Prof. Swing for 8. 0. Griggs & Co.? and did not Janson, MoClurg & Co. obtain Prof. Swing's sanction uuder a misapprehension, ho suppoing that Lo was treating with ono of the firm of 8. 0. Griggs & Co. #_ On this polnt pos- sibly Mr. Grigrs may have somothing to eay, Our book contalns no_sormons publishied in “ Trutha for To-Day,” It is not published un- dor Prof. Bwing'a direction, but wo have said to Lim that wo shall pay him 'tho usuul copyright pard to authors, on sl books mold. We have copyrighted our book as David Swing’s Bor- mons.” Lhe lettor published from Prof, Swing to us, was evidently written at the request of Gon. McClurg, and by him brought o us in an unsoaled envelopo. A it has not been out of our possession sinco its receipt, we will nak Lo Juson, McClurg & Co. fonnd out its con- tents, oxcopt b{mnding our private correspond- enco,—& gross breach of business courtosy. W. B. Krex, Cooxe & Co., 118 &nd 116 Stato streot, F S OUTSIDE OPINIONS, Dho Bpringfleld (Mass.) Republican says thet thio question at lusuc on tho trinl is the capacity of tho old boitle of Presbyterianism to contain Prof. Bwiug's new wiue of liberal thought. Prof, Patton io certain it is impossiblo. Tho articlo concludos: 1t ia o grave question for the Clurch, not th e man David Bwing wil boa lving fufiucnce, whether he ba called & Presbytarian or not; but Presylerianism may woll prus®to usk if it can atford fo lose 8o much Iife- ‘Vlood from the deap heart of Christ pa wells ont in the ‘work and words of such = maen, The Congregational Church, these many years, han had witin its domnin » greater herotlo than even Prof. Bwlng, but it has wisely left him undistarbed, Tho Councll tbat re- cently considored bis Churth’s infraction of Congro- gational polity” yrudently refrained from discipline, 1lenry Ward Beecher may continus te contravens and sotaslda dogmas and systoms with royal nudacity 3 Congregationalists know {hat ho is_their crown and lory, and dare not disown bim. Tho mertinots of oology have nothing to do with catholia souls like biu and David Bwing's, Thoe Boston Lilerary World, in & review of “ Truths for To-Day," says it has been unable to . Alscover anything alarmingly heterodox in them. Thoy nro decidedly liboral, sud mark an inde- pendont departure from fho prescxibed paths of orthodox thonght ; but of Lercsy, ns defised by modern standards, thero soems no taint. Lhero is littlo argument in the book, but somothing the world needs far more, an apprehension of the practical religion for which humanity is longing, Mr. Swing’s style must be moro of- Tective in tho pulplt than in print, for it has's cortaln vohemence unpleasnnt to the reador, THE COURTS. Miscellaneous Business Transuaotod Yesterduys Alfred D, Bellamy and soveral others filed o bill againet Mary B. Gibson, Lliza B. Scribs, Aux gustus AL Scriba, E.B. Bushnoll, J. F. Bush- noll and wife, Orspmus Dushnell, A, W, B, Platt, and N, C. Plats to constriie a clouse in o deod. It appoara that one Orsamus Bushnell in 1836 owned the L. i of the 8. E. X of Sec, 33, 88, 14, In 1857 he dold the north 20 acros and the gouth 20 acres to cottain parties, and short- 1y aftorward conveyed tho fomnindor, undor the deslgnation of tho middlo 40 acres, to com- plainaots’ grantors. This part was subsequently moro cotroctly dosorlbod as tho north 40 acres of tho south 60 aores. Bushbolls hours ioslst thab tho middle 40 scros dosigmates o tract running north aud south through the whols, 80 acies, while complainants inwist it is m- tended to convoy & ntrlg running east and west, including 40 mores, and thoy Ule thuir bill to have the Court approve such’s dotlmtion, BILIA TO CLEAR TITLE, Milford D. Buchanan_filed a bill in the Supe- rlor Court ngainst the Intéruational Bank and Samuel J, \Vsn!kor, to clear up the titlo to Blook 8B, in the L. 3¢ of Seo, 81, 8, 14. -DBuchanan wnys thet iu 1871 A. 0. Badgor; bein thu owner of this block, conveyed tho W. 3¢ of it, in trust to seoure the payment of o note for $6,G08,60, nado for the accommoda~ tion of 8.3, WWalker, The L. 3¢ was also con- voyel to soiire anothor notd, ‘hesd nolds wote indorsed snd given to the Intornational Bank of Chicago, to socuro ndvances, but tlo advances hove loog - éinco boen puid. In 1872 Badgor sold the block i1l question Ly Walker, and Walker shortly after couveyod it (o Joha D. Kiuney. Hoio turn conveyed it in trust to so- oute threo notes for 90,066.06 encly, payabls to Walker's order. ‘Che Commerclal Loun Cowm- pany, in Aoy, 1873, l)urclmuou these threo notes of (\'nlkur or & valuablo cout piderntion, on tho bupposition that Kin- noy's trust-deed was o ficst lien, Ona of theso notes \vns not paid at maturity, and the Llock Waa Kold At huction, and bid 11 by complaiasnt. e cluims that the notes of Badger to Walker Lliavo beon entisflod, Walker baviug patd ail the adyauces ho procured on them, and Lie is now. entitlod to their posseseion, and it is asked that the trust-dood given to securo thom may bo do- clared paid, and no cloud on Lis title. 11ENE. 2 Judgo Drummond will bogin Friday morning, callings the March nd Mey calontar of the Clr~ cuit Jours, 'ha call will'be twounty cased a day, _.dudgo Forwell is engaged fu heaving the dis vorco tase of Boys agatusé Doas, A largo crowd is in attendance, but tho cvidenco is of such u charaoter bt it will not boar publleation, BANKRUPTCY ITENS, . In tho mattor of tho Warior Propriotary Medi- cine Company, an ordor was mada that the As- siguos carty on tho busiuess in the ordiary couzee of trado until further hotice. Charles T I'rneschor, of LaSalle, filed a vol- untary potition. His aseols smount to about 1,400, whilo Lis Habities figure \IE $2,000. Tho onsp waas reforred to Register Grant, A_hearing and ereditora' mocting was ordored for Juno § in tha case of Mayhon, Daly & Co. A similar ordor was modain thecased of B.J, David, J. T, Reado ot al,, Btsphen M, Staples, 1.7 Bushorland, W, A. Coltier, John Iiigbie o al,, W. W. Churob, oud V, M. Ayars, Tho procceedings agninst C. H. Bookowith woro dismixged absolutelyy In the mattor of J, Il Daniels, the Chicago, Wilmington & Vermilllon Coal Company filed a patition’ stativg that they. had purchinsed of Daniols tho 8. 34 of Beo. 8 and tho N, B. { of Bee, 7, 82, 9, for 208,600, The purchaso price hga bl been nalfl, but Daniely uogleoted to give o decd, The land was taken In tho nawme of J, . Joy, s formor Tresident of the Company, but for” the benetit of the Company. Thalaud hias bean kthoduled among Daulold’ assotd, and petitionor aske thab Dautols be decreod to exeoutoa deed with rolonss of ull dower rights, A rulo was mnde on the As- siguee to show coure within fivo days why the petition should not bo granted, TILE COUNTY COURT. . Tu the mattor of the eatate of Clark 1illing- hest, his will wao proven, and loltora testa~ mentary wera {ssued to Heury . and Mary A, ‘Lillinghast, under an approved bund of $26,000, Tn tho mattor of the cktato of Henry lauor, his will was proven, and lettors testamoutury wore lssued to Ileury Olcever, undor an ap- proved boud of 81,800, Frodoriok Marquardt's will wan proven, and lottors tostamoutary wore issied to Davis Marquaxds, sud lly” individual boud of $50,000 was approved, In the maitor of the eatate of Honry Mil ward, the fnventory, nprml:nmunt. and widow's award, nad appralsement of partnorship-nssots woro approvod, % 't claim of Jomos Talbott for §200. againat tho ontate of Gaorgo Granga, was sllowed, * Lucindn 0. Road wasappointod Adminiatratrix of tho eatnto of tho Jatn 1, Ln Lolle Huwking, undor an approved bond of §2,000. THE OALL, Junor Roaeny, 820 to 833, Junar Boor, 163, 166, 168 to 170, 1 Jivas Tnsw, 423, 4,767, 1,490, 317, 101, 2,540, V178, 102, 103, 100, 108, 112, 113, 116, 118, . Jupok Jauesox, 160 to 167, and 159 to 170, Jupax MoRozERTs assista Judgo Gary, . JUDGMERTB, d ! Surxuton Oounr—Coxreasions—Gifford Nuddock & Co, v. Osrl Utescll, $510,24,—Ciaarlos Schiffor v. Ernst BeblTer, $175, + . Jupar GAwY.—8, W, Parker v, Jamos B, Rob $15),54,—Thomas Allison v. Ohatlen Harma, $4 11, I, Frombold ct al, v, Jool Bullard, $343.5 T, Blowart et al. v, 3. 6 Darnes, $107. W. Gamypboll, Aesignas, o O, 1, Kinsley, §410.37,—Patrick O'Noll v, Thoman Oallll, $437.63,—F, W. Leinbach et al, v, Reuben bf, Huffman, §230,10,—nuorah McKay, Adminiatratrix, v, Edwin Edwards and IL 0, Bdwardo, £317,—Cratie Brothorn' Manufaciuring Oompany v, Jox sophi Mons and J, 8, Itsod, $3,160,—Carrie K, Shierinan’ v. John B, Young, $1,224,80,—Jaraca 11, Tortor v, John- McLiwon, $117,50,~85lvestor Slbloy ctal. v, John Ao ‘Allistor, 507,23, —Unfon Foundry -Works v, Jobn 1, Walsh, $7.14,—W.-H, Komp v, W, J. Towkabury, $107,50,—A. M, Dyornv, J. Mona and . B, Reed, $1,010, Ticlined P, Derfokson v. Martin Garroll, 369, 18,~W, ¢, Qoudy et al., v. 8, J, Walkor, $510,—1iark DoJong vo P, W, Duniie and John Scanlon, §303,78.—1, J, Towla v, B, A, Leo aud W, E. Templo, £520,70,—Ber- furd Hecht ot al, v, 1T, IL, I 1 Barubart ot al, v, J, M. Hirscl, Read ot al,, v, Samuol J, Walicer, $1,012 son’ et al, v. J. 5, Shaw, §,040,68,~11. M, Doles v P, 0, Hullatrom, $470.61.—A. I, Yalmor et sl, v, Willinm Rameay, $81,19. - Jupos JAMESON,—, LT, Ransom v, Malcomb Fraz- or, $170,85,—Charlts Comatock ctal,, v, D, G, Buf- terflold snd T, F. Butlorfield, ~$1,380,43.—E. B, Oremiux v, Antoine Warnor, $600. OInouIT CounT—CONFEASIONS,~—John H, Rasp v, Matthow Nolies, $200, R Jupoe RooEus,—M, McNany v, Gbriatian Duaso, B. Surlovant aud 'J, Bueso: vordiel, §102.60.— Michinol Koarnoy v, William Filzgorald ; verdiot, $10.95, xnd motlon o noie tral. unas Boori,—E, C. Hastings v, John Olark § ver- diot, $200, and motion for new trinl, L CO-OPERATION. The Bovereigns of Industry Co=operne ttvo Union. To the Editor of The Chicagn Tribune : Bir: Into-day’s TrivUNE, under the head of Co-oporative Production, after quoting the Pall Afall to show thnt co-oporative distribution is, to o certain oxtent, succossful inEngland, you ndd : “ Production on co-operative principlos is, how- over, ntill on trial. The stors has naturally pro-~ coded the shop. In Chicago'this stato of things is rovorsed. Wo have two co-operative ‘shops, but n utore ia stilt in aboyanco.” Unfortunately, this statemont 18 but too true, and the working pooplo have but themselves to blame for the fact. With the ominently succoss- ful oxamples furnished by the English and Beotch soclotioa bofore us, whby should wo in Amorica not enjoy alt the advantages which they havo shown us aro Within ourreach? Taco but one advantage which thoy possess which is not cqually t our command, That arises from tho fact that, in those conntries, the inhnbitauts, to a great oxtont, pess thoir ontire lives in thoir native towns, and so becomo better acquaintod, end have more confidonco in onch other’s integ- rity, than is possible in & community like ours, whore our places of abode are coustantly chang- ing, and honoe we do not, to noarly the same ox- tont, becoms soquainted and nequiro such a con- fidonce, Aside from this single disadvantage, Iam of the ‘opinfon the percentaye is in our favor, Is there auy means by which this disadvantago can be overcomo? Bupposo the industrial clasies in each soction or noighborhood in Ohteago organ-' iza themsolves into societies for mutunl assist. anco and improvoment. They dovoto ona even- ing of oach woek to meetings for soctal and edu~ cational exercises, Thoy thus bacomo poquanint. ed, aud learn each other's good sud bad traits of 'charactor. Then, by tha difforent sociotics gxchangiug vlsics, tlioy become naguaintod with their brathren in othor neighborhoods; ahd soon tho elemont of confldonco in thoss who are worthy is established, while those unworthy bocome known. “1n such an organization there should bo no_distinction on sccount of sex or natlonality. Tho only test sliould be hurmony of interosts and good morsl choractor. Theso should b fully investigated before en npplicant is admitted. Xor protection in these cesonliala, such an; organization must necessarily be, toa cartain extont, secret, and its membors obligated touse all honorabl eand necossary moans to acoure the end sought. We alroaty hiavo such an organization in the Sovereigns of Induatry, Its membership is al- ready sullicient to enablo it to mecure many of tho advantagos of co-oporative purchm:g; but those cannot bo attained as fullyns dosired with~ out capifal, It thereforo ecems lo your corre- spondent that the time is ripo for establishing a co-oporative distributiog sgenoy in Chicago. To this end, books of snbsoription -have been oponod for the cnpital stook of tho Bovoreign of Industry Co-oporative Union ; omount of stook, $5,000 ; shatas, $10 each; only membors of the Order tobo sharsholdors, end no individus! to hold more than {lve sharcs. It is proposed, for tho bouefitof any whomay wish to romove beyond the reach of this agenay, that, upon o reasonable notioe, any membor eliall be cntltled to recoive the nmount of his paid-up sharcs and dividends in monoy or goods; and, in crao of sickucss or lose of eniployment, any mombor to be ontitled to oredit in goods to the same amount, Inall othet tetds, business to bo cash, both in buying and sclling, As there will bo no nceessity for advertising, nor losncs from bad dobts, nor ex-' puua&'va)ydhad-u stote, no sitnstion whero high rents prevall will bonocoded; and, ascnsh al- ways buys oliéapor than credit, it is thought taot goods can bo afforded Bt oobsidernbly lower pricoy than usually Emnu; In ghort, thnt most kinds of gaoils can be furnished to members. of tho Order at aboiit wholezale prices. As the Btook in this stors will ba mndo to pay at least 10 por aont futorest, it will e tho best suvings-bank for its membors in oxislonae. That these rasulls are attalnablo, wo balisye thero {8 no possible doubt. Inview of thesd promises, it behooves evory person engnged in industrinl putsuits, who wishes to improve his condition, to bocomo a momber of thia Order. Such nrrangemoents have nlready beon madse that any momber can #ave ‘more overy month than iho ot of hocoming & membor without capilal, With capital wo aro certasin every sharcholder can #ave yonrly the full amount of stook allowed to any individual in reduction of prices, and got at lenat Iawtul intorest on his mouey. Cnicago, My 3, 1874, . W. Earox, " on, on, ¢ Qosoporative Productlon? 1o the Kditor of The Chioago Tribiene Bm: As n friond of Oo-oporation, I feel thankful for your article in Sunday's issuc undor tho abeve eaption, So far a8 you favor tho prine aiplo a8 applied to businoas oporatiohs and pro- ductions, 1 favor you; but 1 go further. Why not take up the principle, and make it tho main- spring and arbiter of oll aotlons? And, in pro- portion as it entors into buman conocerns, the progont imporfoct competitive systom of action would be done away with, 3 1t soems vory plain and dosirable that some humane privciple; should acon.bocome the rule, and not the exception, of all mction betwoon mon. Tlus wonld produce a 1ight eondltion of things on barth, amE thovelote, ansivor tho onds of tho higher law of production. For examplo ; if, aya city, wo co-onerats to tmwido oursolves with smple faollition for gote tng water, by tho construction of n couplo of Iako-tunnels, and by similar menns inprove our conditioh in_tho liboral way wo bave gons about the park and bouloyard mattor, why not unite 1n the work of building up in othor ways,—tluns glvingto olhor dny:)mmnnta or foaturos of lifo the incaloulable bonofits and prostigs of the rinciple P If the prinoiple of Co-operation, in ts ulmflllultyl—thnc 18, umixed with Compotie tion,—be firat intelleotunlly underatood by the peaple, and thon Iutu)llgouu{ applied in sl bagos of action, ms will inevitably bo e cave whon suek uudoratanding comes, there will be -larger viows tnken for bumen good, there “will bo groat success In productive operations, and contifmp- tion will be monsured according to the needs of {mnplu and thelr capaelty to enjoy. No incon- fvo will oxist to ontico anybody into spooulative manipulation of tho ropulta of produotion. In ehiort, under & co-oporativasystem of things, tho cirommnstancos and conditions of tho pnol)lu, in- caviduslly and soverally, will be changed. Yon caunot faicly judgo of Co-operation. through ocompotitive lous, ones, it may be looked for- watd to without fear by the most consorvative, for there can hardly be concelved o worse system for humans to live undor than the prouont one of Compatition, . OapeEN WuITLoCK. Ou1oado, May 3, 1874, —In Switzorland thero is a Inw whiok compels syery newly-movried conple to plaut nix treos immud!ntol); aftor tho coremony, akd $io on the birth of overy ohlld ; Jupax Gary, 01 to 121, excont 84, 9044, 08, o, |, SPORTING. First Chicago Game of the White and Red Stockings, Tho Former Successful by a Score of 4 to %, ———— _ The English Racos. . DASE mALL T TAE CHICAGOS AND RED STOOKTNGH. Yeatordny nftornoon tho Ohicago nino playod o practice-gamo with tho Rod-Btooking Club, of 8t. Louls, on tho grounds at tho cornor of Btate and Tiwenty-tbird stroots. It wes tho fint base. ball ovent of any. Importanco in this clty since the opening of tho scason, and was nlso thefirat :gama In which Ohicago was ropresontod by her own profeasional nino on hor own soil sinoe 1871, Thore wero abont G00 porsons presant, who manifeatsd conoidorable interest in tho sport, It would bo unfair to clogoly “cxiticiso the play of olthor club, or to analyzo tho game in dotail, as both minos had but recently steppoed from tho cars aftor a day's journey, aud besidos, the aftornoon was much t00 cold for ball-playiug. It may bosnid, how- o\-orL that the Ohiodgo playors did not appear ta Lhe bost adyantago. ~ Their opponents even age Imowledged that it was tho poorest gamo the; Iiad peen thom play, ‘T'he resnlt of the contes! whilo it did not ontirely satiafy thoso who undors ntood tho relative morits of ths clubs, waanovore theloas creditable in o gront dogroo to our nine, Lho scoro was 14 to 7in their favor, and tha diaparity would have been much greator but for ono or two unfortunato plays in tio fnfleld, and somo mufls of difticult fy-catches outside. Meyorls at timos did not fill the position of third biso half a3 woll as hocan do it whon thora is a necorsity for prompt, sure, and enore getic action, but thon o lame shouldor was oxe ouse cuough for him, The fielding of Troncy and Cuthbort, at contro and left fiold respoctives 1y, was alao opon to coneidorable advorao eritl chim, but it is bottor that captiousness should bo oscliewed until the nino, a8 A whole, hnn had o fair opportunity to show what it can do with an egual match. -"Both men are waquestionably ul‘nlln_xl, a8 overy admiver of base ball knows. Tho right field ‘wau “well covored by Glonn, and the inileld, with the oxcoption montioned, wes i« orbly playod. Malone was capeoiall Euhhld tho bat, hnvlnz .nyflpm:fl::; bolls, and onpiuriug some oxooedingly diflicult fouls. Devlin {s bound to onvinbla nnmo as a first-basoman, and ‘fi::?h:dfl bettor Luzry up and gotinto piaylog trim, or elsa Iiinos will rival him “in pla; Brg tho poaltion of second baso. Forco aho\md’ great ekill yestore day as shortstop, aod convinced o great ‘many .thnt ho is without an oqunl in that line of duty, Lo ning was captained in oxcellent stylo by Malono, * Ho not only undoratands how to play Limsolf, but how to make others. play also. Yosterdsy's gomo was not n fair test of the battiug power of tho nine, and comments on that branch of play ‘will ba deforred until n moro favorablo occasion. The 8t, Louis pitcher is certainly a akillfal smatsur, delivoring balls that are very difficult to bat, >'The Bt. Louia club fs o crack amatour organe ization. It numbors several unusnallygood bate iors, acd is romarkably strong in noarly all of tho fleld positions, It was wook at third base yostorday, but, gonerally speaking, tho ball was cleverly stopped and acouratoly thrown., Rofore ence o tho scora will sliow Iun{bhs Chicago nino was whitowashed four times, a foat which ro- quires somo aharp flelding o accomplizh. Tollowing is TOE 800RE: CRIGAG0, 3[5,1;,,-” WEDB. . [0 R1D|ZA FEEE EEEN 34 2!2! .g a 1§ 3| 59 o 1 % 31 dlof o o 41 HE R 9 g1 11 ot ) 7\ 15} T8 Inninge— fin’{}‘."l’.‘ 3:}:%:-1’ o i e Fintaof Gumia—1 hote a4 o minstos. This atternoon the Chicago and Red Stockings will again compoto, and there will aléo be games betwoon them to-morrow and Baturday aftore noousd, = TIE GANE AT THE EABT. | - Bostox, May 6.—Bostons, 10 ; Athlatlcs, 4.. i THE TURF, ' THE ENOLISH BACES. Loxpox, May 6.—Abt the Nowmarket first epring meeting to-day the raco for tho 2,000~ guinea stakes wna won by Atlantie. Reverboras tion second. Ecoseais ihird. Tho last betting waa7 to 1 agninst Atlantic, 12 to1 againat Re- vetboration, and 7 to 4 rgainst cossals, Twolve rau, IIE CHICKASAT JOCKEY CLUB MEETING. Mzuris, Tenn., Moy 6.—This has boon a geatul day for tho Jackoy Olub. An imniense crowd witnessed tho races, and many Indies were prokont. Tho weathor was beautiful, the racing tine, and the track in good order. Tho firat xace was & milo dash for all agos, Club purso $150. Vandalite, Quits, Ida Well Litlen Borry, Jolin McCormick, Chnis Daylo, ang Mary L. started. Quits was tho groat favorite, selling for as much as all tho othors, but tho winpor turned up in Vandalite, an outsider in the hetunfi. Sho took thio load at the start, never was honded, and won by s lougth, 1ds Wolls socond, Quits'thurd, the othors not plaosd. ‘Timo, 1:!1‘1:6. Tho socond raco was for the Mannor stake, mile hants, for 8 yoars' old, £35 entraves feo, with 8300 ndded ; closod with eight subscribors, Two camo to the post—George H. Reces® Moonbosm, by Planct, out of Edena and Pino ; . 8l Maho's Mollie MoCown, by Brows Ie, out of Viole Moonbeam. wag the favorite threo to one bofore thoe start, and won as sha plesed by four Iengthsm tho flrst heat, and tha same distauco in tho dccond Lent. In tholast’ heat, Moonbeam ran in front all tho way. Pree vious o the start Molllo got away with hor ridor, and ran two miles beforo sho was stopped, Bha tvan allowed forly mivutos to come up after the run away. Mr, Pine asked pormiesion to withe draw, #8_ho lnd nochance. ‘Cho Judgos would nob adwit the clalm, Time, 1:50}, 1:68. Tho Littest Foolls Errands . From the Pall JMall Gaselte, An_interosting cavalende wliil pass throngh tha Continent this summer,. 'Sorgt. Dates, * it ix waid, will, on May 10, lasve tho United Biates for Europe with two ox-#oldiers of France and Ger« many, ond, aflor passing through London, will " procoed to Calais, Jn London are rangoments are to be made with an ex« doldior of cach of the other countries of Europs to join him in tho * Grand- Interuationnl March of the Ninatconth Conwury.” The Sor- geant end tha ex-soldiors, cack bomring the standard of his own country, aro to maroh ffom Calms to 8t. Peteraburg, through the capitals of of the Continent. Negotintlonus ure In progross ta persuade an Irish Home-Rulor to carrythe groon tlngz of Erin. A whito silkk baoner, with tho wotta. “Tenve on Iarth," {s also to bo oarriod— if pensiblo, by o nu[r"m. Tho progroes of thesa standard-borrors will bo a magnificent epcce taclo and will' bo watehed whlf the despest in- terest by tho clvilizod world ; but to rouder the “‘Grand’ Intornational Maroh of tho Ninotoonth Cenbury " o really ntriking sucooes, Sorgr. Batos and hif companiovs shonld pay o visit with thoix fiags tosomo rogular bloodihirsty barbarians, Wy not Jand oo tho wost const of Africs and mavol straight to Coomousle, 'mklui Europs on tho return journoy—Xing Toffeo bri ing up tho procession with bis umbrells, lent by the South Kensington Musoum for the ocoasfon ? i e What the Coming Kace Wil Do with ‘Fhetr Dead. Iyom Lord Lytten's * Caniing Race,” While thosa two woro talking my attention was drawn to o dark motaliio substance ot tha furthor ond of tho room. It wus about twont; foet iu longth, narrow in proportion, and al closed around, éave noartho roof thero wore some umall ronnd holes through which might be ssen nrod light, From tha intorior emanated & rioh, gweot perfume, Then the um'rflm covered by & Toni coremont, way teridorly litted by six of the neavesb kinsfolly, and born toward .tho dark thing I had described, X prossod forward to sco what huppanod, A sllding door or panol a one ond wny liumi up—ihe body doposited within on a uhelf—tho door_revlosed—a spring ot tho side touched—n suddon whishing, sighing: sound Boord from within, and, lol at'tho other ond of the machiue the lid foll down, sud & small hand- ful of smouldering dust dropped iuto s patora and sald: ¢ Bohold how great is the Maker. o this littlo dust o gave form, and lifo, and soul, 1t noods not this littlo dust for Him ta renow form, aud life, and soul to the boloved oho we sliall soon oo wgain.” On the lid of the phtorn wa# ongraven tho namo of the doceased and thoso words, ©* Liens to ua” (hore thadate of WNL))‘ iRoonllod . from uy" (hoxo the data of denth), - . .