The New York Herald Newspaper, December 16, 1875, Page 4

= BISHOP TAVEN'S POLITICS, - General Denunciation of the Boston Third Term Speech. - , Statements from Methodist Ministers of Boston, | (.,,\!\ Philadelphia and Baltimore, THE TRUE STORY. The Bishop’s Presidential Support Promised Long Ago. Six Hundred Preachers Indorsed | and Sustained It. ——_—-—_— APOLOGISTS AND JUDGES. ls the Methodist Church Committed to Grant's Renomination ? MASSACHUSETTS EXERCISED. ¥IEWS OF METHODIST MINISTERS ON THE THIRD TERM SPEECH—EVERYTHING NICELY l- BANGED TO HELP THE COLORED MAN’ IN THE SOUTH, Bosroy, Dec, 14, 1875. ‘Those enthusiastic third term utterances of Bishop Gilbert Haven, at a Methodist gathering in this city, last week, seem to have stirred up ihe advocates and opponents of Cwserism all over the country, Bishop is a very clever fellow, of average worldly intel- lect and the perfect embodiment of Methodist Christi, anity, as his exalted position in the chureh will indicate but it was never believed of hii that he would become the renowned political hero which he finds himself to- day. Indeed, it is hard for his old friends to realize that itis the same jolly, auburn-haired “Gil Haven,” who lived out in Malden, who has now developed into | the eminent pioneer and chieftain of that band of relig- lous patriots whose mission it is to make Genera Brant his own Presidential successor in 1876, ‘The cir- sumstance aptly illustrates the truth of the old adage, | that some men are born great, some achieve greatness | ind some have greatness thrust upon them, This migma sort of a saying, it should be added, squally applicable to the President and the Bishop, but \t is left to the public to determine under which head tither one or both should be classified. WHAT SOME METHODIST PREACHERS THINK. It is the custom of the Methodist preachers of Boston id vicinity to assemble once a week for the purpose at formally discussing some chosen subject bearing | apon the prosperity and wellare of Methodism, Their neetings are held in the famous Wesleyan Hall, in Bromfeid street, and here it was that the Heratp cor_ respondent found a hundred or more of the clergy in souneil to-day, tbject for discussion on this occasion would be the vemarkable address which was delivered by Bishop Aaven last week. of Christianity is promoted or retarded by Sunday tamp meetings. The discussion waxed warm for up- ward of two hours, and then the subject was laid over for further consideration next week. When the meeting bad dissolved there were numerous circumstances in- dicating that THIRD TERMWISM AND BISHOP HAVEN was the matter uppermost in the minds of many of the preachers, been formally brought up before adjournment, and it is . hot impossible that it may yet form a topic of discus. sion at some future session. While it is undoubtedly true that a very great majority of the Methodist clergy- men are in favor of giving General Grant a new execu. tive lease of the White House it is also equally certain shat a few are indignant that Bishop Haven should be popularly credited with the leadership. THE ZION’S HERALD EDITOR ON THE RAMPAGE, Among those thus inclined to discourage the threat- ened importance of the Bishop’s famous address none are more emphatic and outspoken than Bradford K. Peirce, the accomplished editor of Zion’s Herald, the wanaard and recognized Methodist organ of New éngland. “That speech of Bishop Haven’s,” he said, when in- lerrogated by your correspondent, “has been most shametully exaggerated all over the country. Asan *xpression of the Methodist Chureh on the matter of General Grant for a third term it amounts to nothing— aothing whatever, sir; nothing.” “Il suppose the Bishop uttered the words attributed to him?” “Well, I don’t know what is attributed to him exactly, except that a Philadelphia paper represented that lie nominated General Grant for the third term, and that the nomination was indorsed enthusiastically by the Methodists, and this has been copied extensively in the New York and other papers all over the couniry. It carries the impression that the question of nominating General Grant was properly belore the meeting, and that it was decided unanimously in the affirmative. It Was po such thing, I will tell you how it was:—The Bishop was making a speech on another subject—some- thing about provection for the treedmen of the South— and in the course of his remarks he complimented General Grant Jor guarding their rights, aud Unally sud that he hoped to see him renominated and re- slected, After this remark he continued his speech on she subject under consideration, thus showing that bis ulusion to General Grant was simply incidental. There was no cheering or throwing up of hgts, as has been jescribed, and what Jittle enthusiasm there was I look apon a8 more complimentary to Bishop Haven than any one else.”” “Have you published anything about the matter in Zion's Herald?” | asked. ‘0; but I sball this week. I shall simply say that the whole thing has been exaggerated and magnilied in ® most ridiculous manner.” THE BISHOP STILL NOMINATING. In the course of my conversation with Mr, Peirce he informed me that be bad just receivea a Jetter from the Bishop in Syracuse in which he explained what he said Mt the Boston meeting. This explanation, as under- stood by your reporter, was that the Bishop asked the orethren at the meeting to \ PRAY POR THE KENOMINATION OF GENERAL GRANT, and pray they did. He also stated in his Jetter that the nomination had been well received in Syracuse aud other places which he had visited since leaving Boston, THK MATTKR IN THE BOOK CONCE in the Methodist Book Cur Down under “FRIEND OF THE | country are in favor of a third term for General GrantY” | Bishop Simpson in reporting him as expressing « hope The | is | I had confidently anticipated that the | In this I was disappointed, how- | pver, for the matter in dispute was whether the cause | Indeed, several had hoped it would have | | tlemen need be given. Wesleyan Hall, most of the preachers assemble after | participating in the discussions of the forenoon, «In a commercial sense it may be termed « sort of M Exchange. Many of these gathered thix atternoon en paged in conversation on the matter of Bishop Haven’s speech. Dr, Upham, of Lynn, with whom your correspondent talked, declared that there was a great deal more siz nificance in the Bishop's speech thau many of the preachers cured to admit, He did not think that the Romination, as made by him, was altogether ‘ini dental.” On the contrary, he’ believed the utterance to have been deliberately premeditated, aud he knew tase majority of the preachers shared in the same r ANOTHER THIRD TERM SPEECH. Ome of the preachers reminded your correspondent that the patriotic Bishop made a third term speec! jown in Faneuil Hail on the Saturday eveuing pr eding the Jate State election. He came out boldly aud said that he hoped to see General Grant renominated, and the remark was r ed with a few hisses, At shese manifestations the Bishop suid that at the last tlection he did not vote for Grant, asa yreat many of his hearers had done, but within {he Jast four years he had seen his mistake, and now he was going tw support him if he had an opportunity. ‘The same meeting was xddressed by Pres of Taft's College, and Wendell Puillips, m are solid third termers, E TRUK STORY Having discover din my peramba Wesleyan Buildin: at there was tions around the division of opinion to how the Bishop happc to become #0 enthusi+ Matic in bis admiration tor President Grant, | endeay ured jy yet at the trath of the affair, ‘The Bishop him- aeif boing absentin Western New York it was imposst ble to get his version of the affair, and thereiwre I waited upon the Rey. J, W. Hamilton, pastor ot the First Methodist Church, in Temple street, where the celebrated address was velivered. “The occasion,” explained Rey. Mr. Hamilton, & necting Of the Methodist preachers, who were tt by invitation, and the Tract Society was aiso present | mmyitation of the preac There were pot less than SIX HUNDRED PREMENT, and the majority of them were Methodiet ministers,” “Was the speech incidental or was it pre-arranged /”’ T asked. “That spoech of Bishop Haven Hamilton, “wae a matter of apy tinent and was ¢ termined upon fully Wree weeks belore and by my own suggestion. It grew out OF astatene had ten made in the preach eeting by Fst meme Episcopal Church X¢ che first authorized representation of the South thodists since the war—concerning the eondition vlored newered Preacher Methodists in the Southern Stuses, aud was the result | hodist | NEW YORK HERALD. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1875.—TRIPLE SHEET. | of a common desire to hear directly and more in detail from the Bishop himself the actual condition of alairs within his jurisdiction, I ought to explain,” coutipued Mr. Hamilion, “that it had been stated that Bishop Haven could not be invited to occupy any of the pulpits of his denomination in the South, and that a Methodist winister uf acolored church could not be fraternally | treated by a Southern pastor of the Methodist | Chureh, “Now, as 1 said before, it was the | intention of’ the preachers n assembled to get from Bishop Haven a px 1 account of alfurs | in the Southern States in reference to the Methodist | Church. His address was delivered at the close of the tract conference iu the Temple ehureb, and the line of his thought was the treatment of the colored man by the Southern people, and of the Methodist in particular on account of its interest in the wellare of the colored race. Toward the close ‘of his specch the Bishop said, with much warmth, that there Was po man more respected at the Soath than the one who had conquered the thern people, and no man could better protect the | interests of the colorea people than the man who had / set them free, and he beheved that man would never compromise their interests. The Bishop hoped, in preachers view of these facts, that the Methodist would never go back on their own record and disre- | gard the pred man by throwing bim overb “i ... | jon of n said that he personally desired the re-ele Mand. he believed it to be the duty of election,” . | the Ulysses 3. Grant, the Methodist preachers to pray for his re “Well, what followed after this!” Lasked. — “At the conclusion of the speech Rev. Dr. Sherman, the presiding elder of the Boston district, made a mo- tion, im effect, that the preachers had listened with | PLEASURE AND APPROVAL | to the address of Bishop Haven, and he called for a | rising Vote, inviting all present to participate in the Voting. A&I suid betore, there were fully 600 present, aud not a couple of hundred, as you have been in- | | formed, When the vote had been declared in the | | affirmative some one in the audience called loudly for | | the negative vote, At this Rev. Dr. Woodruft, of Fall | River, arose and said that he hoped there would be no | negative vote taken, as they all knew that the motion was intended as a compliment to the Bishop, A rising vote on the question of making Dr. Sherman’s motion | unanimous Was then taken, and the best ewaence that | the vote was unanimous was the fact that when the | atives were called for not a single person stood up. | There was considerable of playlulness in the proceed- ings all through,” added Mr, Hamilton, *‘and the seri- | ousness of the’ matter has only been formed by the | | promimence whica the newspapers have given it.” THE METHODIST CHURCH. “But is it not a tact, Mr. Hamilton,” Lasked, ‘that | the majority of the Mcthodist preachers throughout the | “Lwill tell you how thatis, Itis much the same | with the preachers as itis with Bishop Haven, He is opposed to the third term on principle, but yet he is in favor of the re-election of General Grant, and the same | is undoubtedly true of the great body of Methodist preachers throughout the northern and western States. Like Bishop Haven, they think that there is no man who willso zealously guard the interests of the colored race as General Grant. There may, in some cases, be | other reasons why our denomination will support hun, | but that advanced by Bishop Haven is the chief one.” POWER AND INFLUENCE OF THE CHURCH, Farther on in our conver-ation Mr, Hamilton said that | here in Boston the strength of Methodism in the | | United States was not understood outside of its own | denomination, and hence it was that the Boston press | had attached so litle importance to this address of | Bishop Haven, declared to himself when the remurks were made that they would create a | sensation throughout the country, and he was not sur- | | prised that his prediction had been veritied, The sirength and power of the Methodist Church, he said, | were immensely beyond those of any other deuomination im America, and Were constantly gaining. Its great toothold, he explained, was m the West and South, wod hence it was that its influence is so little appre- ciated here in New England. INTEREST THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. Rey. Mr, Hamilton said that he was surprised at the feeling which speech of the Bishop had stirred up throughout the country. His daily letters now upon | the subject, he said, were becoming so numerous tbat it was with difficulty he found time to attend to them, | They cdine trom all parts of the country, and the ma- | jority of them are from Methodist preachers, A LETTER FROM BISHOP HAVEN. Among those which he had received this morning was one rom Bishop Haven, at Syrucuse. The Bishop was inclined to be jocose over the sensation he had created, but he said seriously that he hoped the Metho- dist preachers would not go back on their record—all of which means that he bopes they will pray for the re- | nomination amt re ou of General Grant, The Bishop also stacea in his letter that he had written @ communication to a New York journal which he thought would please his frends. VIEWS OF AN EX-CONGRESSMAN PREACHER. member of Congress trom the Western Massachusetts Bishop's speech in the lightot a huge joke. “It has all been worked up by the newspapers,” he said, “and is hardiy worth .talking about. If it was regarded us worthy of notice by the preachers they would probably | have discussed it at their meeting to-day.’? BUL THR MATTER WILL NE AGITATED, | Notwithstanding the imsigniticem e which Mr. Trafton | and a few others of the preachers attach to the ques- | Uion, I am persuaded in the beliet that it will yet be the | | theme of continued discussion, vot only by te preact- | ers of Eoston and vicinity, bat by Methodist clergymen throughout the country. ‘In fact, I shall be greatly mistaken if the matter is not precipitated upon them at the very next meeting of the Boston preachers, VIEWS OF PHILADELPHIA METHO- DIST PREACHERS. | 4 GENERAL DESIRE TO CONDEMN THE SPEECH AND EXCUSE THE SPEAKER. Pur.apetrura, Dec. 14, 1875. The unanimity with which the Methodist clergymen of thig city, over a hundred in number, agree in con- demning the extraordinary conduct of Bishop Gilbert | raged the tcelings of the Methodists of this portion of the country. I have spoken with scores of the clergy of his denomination upon the Bishop's opening Presi- dential campaign, but have not found one who at- tempted to Justify it. garded with affection by his brethren, but there is a decided tendency to praise his motives while very em- phatically disapproving of his judgment. His name is | which so expre: | low; but, you know——."? As will be seen from tho conversations given below, almost every man desired | to excuse and condone the Bishop's offence, and to | throw the mantle of charity around the utterances of | one whom they seemed to regard as well-meaning and | sincere, but impulsive. He appears to stand unique Hl among his brethren, and but little surprise was ex- | pressed at tie indiscretion of this ecclesiastical Hotspury | whose sincerity they love, bat at whose judgment they | shrug the shoulders and shake the head. | It is noteworthy that a very large majority of the | Methodist clergy of th.s neighborhood—seven-tenths, | one of the gentlemen himself stated it to be—are ‘ardent admirers aud supporters of President Grant, and would be willing to vote for hin again for another term, But this is said to be because the Methodist Church here has always been au anti-slavery and re- publican Church, and it is due to the common sense of Tant’s most enthusiastic advocates among its to say that they, one apd all, indignantly de- nounced the idea of identifying the Methodist Church, orany portion of it, with a movement for the nomina- tion of President Grant or any other candidate for any | political office, There was such a gratifying | vNaniMiry | in the opinions expressed upon the Bishop's action, that the statements of only a few of the reverend gen- Those whose names follow are only some of many. Others could easily be quoted but they would only repeat what is below set forth! | In some cases the affectionate regard for the erring Bishop was so great as to make the “interviewed” re- Juctant to give their outspoken opinions, and many re- | fuel to add their names to swell the ranks of those who have been compelled to regret his conduct. Some, | | it wall be scen, denied that the Bishop had done as | charged, claiming that the reports in the secular press were untrue, and the card of Dr, Vincent was referred to ag contradicting the story, AN IMPORTANT THING, Rey. R. M, Hatfield, D. D., of the Arch street church, | one of the most prominent clergymen of his denomina- tion in Philadelphia, said:—‘lt is contradic that Bishop Haven really nominated Grant for a third term, and that the meeting indorsed it, I think you will find that to be the case, If he did so, it was an imprudent thing to do, The Methodist Church is not a political Chureh, It would be the last to support any such action of one of ite bishops. If he did so it was apen his own rcsponsi- bility General Grant is nota member of the Motho. dist Charels; be 1s only an attendant, Although proba bly the majority of our ministry in this ueighboriood have voted for him, it'was because he was a republican, If you ask my personal opinion, I say 1 am in favor of a third term, and i( Hishop Haven says the same thing he haga right to his as an individual; but beyond this he eann It would be very injudr mito t President ata chureh would very thing to prevent vlection, You ean depend upon it that if y did nominate Grant he did not act ay the of avy portion of off Chureh in the ree, 1 du wot attach the sm im. the matter, You know what kind of » Haven ix, don’t you’ Then you can Bishop Hav representative slightest di portanve vw a roan Bist understaud, perhaps, that it would not come trom bit as from any otver source, The Methodist Church would w Hit such Whietation for « tome vot to euel one 0 er, ub appeal | was u Methodist?!” | what was done at the meeting. | recognized in the di 1 found Kev. Mark Trafton, of Brookline, formerly a | Haven in his mal apropos nomination of President | | Grant for a third term, 18 conclusive proof he has out- | Personally he is evidently re- | | generally mentioned with that peculiar smile and shrag | ively says, “Ob, well, he’s a good fel- | Methodist was indignant. Many stop! their papers the man was not elected, No, sir, our | Chureb ta poli It will not tolerate | euch iterterenee. ‘ood | man, with the bes! as you say depend ups tho will nol be supporte: | NOT AM L CHURCH | The Rev, Thomas A. of the Paul street | church, Frankford, was v in regretting the p Have: —"The Methodist Church is not a political Church, and the conduct of any bishop or officer of our denomination who brings before a Chureh gathering, or who ep vors in any way to associate us, as a Church, with ement | regard as Very indiscreet and unfortunate, srot what has happened, andaim most anxious sure the people of this country outside of our Chureb—it they do not know alroady—that. Methodists will not indorse any » policy. In what Bishop Haven said he most assuredly did not act ax the voice of any party in our Church. On the contrary, every Methodist whom have talked with disavows and deprecates such a course, No; 1 ao not think the Bishop’s conduct means ’ uny- thing but the expression of his own wivbes. The” preachers’ moetinge (betore one of which his speech was given) are unoilicial bodies. They are not recognized in the discipline of our Church, At them the clergy come together solely as individuals, not as the repr ves of their respective charges, and whatever they muy do carries no official weight. Our Church would’ be the last to give its official sanc- tion to any nomination for political office. In what I have said I'think you will find that I am supported by Ube opinions of others. ‘The Bishop's conduct was un- wise.’? The Rev, mt any political m A CONTRADICTION. . W. Thomas, Presiding Elder of tho Sus- quehatua district of Pennsylvania, said, emphati- cully;—I deny the thing, sir, intoto, Bishop Haven has been inpnr ieee he repraeeiiian. Did not you see Mr. Vincent's card? The Bishop never nominated Grant fora third term, He was speaking of the condition of the South, and may have expressed his desire Lo see | him re-elected, but [ do not believe he went so far as to nominate him,’ ‘The Hexavp correspondent ventured to remind the Elder thut the published proceedings of the meeung in the Boston papers not ouly gave the Bishop's words, in which he besought his brethren to pray for Grant's renomination, but also reported a resolution advocating a third term, Which was declared to have passed unapi- mously, “Well, it isn’t true. Mr. Vincent's card expla The resolution that Wits passed was one merely thanking the Bishop lor lis address. The Heratp has done an injusuce to for athird term, If they quoted from a Philadelphia aper, you kuow what the character of that paper i*. N meeting of ininisters Was not a representative body. They had no status except as individuals, ‘Thoy would have no right to discuss the third term question, nor avy other political matter. A preachers’ meeting, at which this action 1s said to have been taken, 18 nob | cipline of the Church. It'is not a | representative body, and when preachers attend it they | do so as individuals.” | WHOM I REPRESENTED, |. ‘The Rey. C. F. Turner, Presiding Elder of the South | Philadelphia district, upon Wing asked what the Bos- ton meeting meant aud whom he thought Bishop Ha- ven represented in his action, said, smiling:—“Oh, he | represented Bishop Haven, We ull know the Bishop. He imprudently gave utterance to bis political opinions | at the wrong time and place. That's about all the sig- | nificance there is in the matter. "7 ‘NOT WORTH ATTENTION," Rey, John Walker Jacksou, D. D., of the Ebenezer church, thought that the matter was not worth the at- | tention that was being given to it, He did not see why | the newspapers should raise such a commotion about what Bishop Haven is reported to have said at the | Boston preachers’ meeting. | “Suppose a Cath st had said it?” inquiringly and inidly suggest nierviewer,”” “Well, {don’t sec how there could be much more of | an excitement than there is now, But there 1s nothing in the story, Dr, Vincent's card in the 7ribune contra- | dicts the thin, Dr. Jackson suid, however, that if the Bishop did as report | certainly did not represent his Church, | OBLIGED TO DISAPPROVE, | ‘The Rev. W. C, Robinson did not wish to say much on the matter. He heard what Dr, Jackson had said, however, and was of tne same way of thinking, Meth- odists were opposed to mixing chareh and polities, an he did not see how the Bishop could expect any sym- pathy or support, This gentleman, like several with whom the writer spoke, hardly seemed to ve aware of the importance of the question the Bishop’s move has raised, and of the consequent excitement and alarm in | the worid outside the Church. \ SAVE ME PROM MY PRIENDS. | The Rey, J. F. Chaplain said:—*My first thought on reading it Was that President Grant might well exclaim, Ir Bisuop Haven desires | ‘Save me from my friends !? | very meurs to prevent it, I regard mis speech as inju- dicious, but very characteristic of the Bishop, whois | an impulsive min,” | Church in his third term advocacy ¢”? |“ sCertaimy not, (Emphatically. | Chureh is ‘not a pohtical Church, sir, But (smiling) everybody knows Bishop Haven, 'No, sir; 1 have not talked with very many other ministers on the subject but I have not iound one who approves of his course,’ | “WELL, WE DON’T KNOW, |. The Rev, Mf. H. Sisty said at first, “Well, we dou’t know, but time may ‘show the Bishop to be right,” | when’ the correspondent asked Lim bis opinion of | Bishop Haven’s reported action, He contidued at | some length to expatiate upon the possibilities that | might arise which would make it expedient to elect | Grant for a third term. He had voted for him, and he | would again, ‘The reverend gentleman did not seem to comprehend, without considerable explanation, that | his opinion was wan ed as to the propriety of the Bis! The Methodist op’s conduct in nomimating a President ut such a time | | and place. When he fully understood this to bg the great question, Mr. Sisty coincided with his brefuren | m thinking it lujudicious. . His language way not quite | as positive as theirs, however, As to whether the Bishop | represented others: Well, he didn’t know, “but there might be a good deal behind it, There might be a very | strong party in the church who—” ‘The reporver Wax becoming interested, “See here, now, brother, interrupted two clergymen standing near him, “how do you know that? Are you sure t’? “Oh, no,” said Mr. Sisty, dehberately. “I only | | thought tbat there might be —. | “Well, brother, then you should be very carefal what you say about it.’ “Do’ you approve or disapprove of Bishop Haven’s | action ?*’ asked the reporter, “Ob, I disapprove. J meant to say that,” | JOCULAR. The Rev. G. W. Mac matter was popularly misunderstood, “Il have no | doubt,’ saidlie, “that the Bishop spoke in a jocular manuer. I don’t think it was really a nomination, Anybody that knows Bishop Haven would understand the thing. Ithink the people are neediessly alarmed | aboutit. Of course, I think it was wroug in kim,’? i POLITICS IN THR CAURCH NOT TOLERATED, | The 1. C. Pearson expressed his views to the | Same effect as lis associates. There was no party in | the Methodist Church engineering tor the election of Grant, or any inan, he thought. not be tolerated, Methodists would not submit to being dictated to as to whom they shall vote for. Church always had been free from such influences. he acted improperly, and | “Dues he represent any portion of the Mothodist ghlin thought that the whole | | | district, inclined to look upem the matter of the | to have President Grant re-elected he bas taken the | | 1 Such a thing would | Their | He | quoted the circumstance referred to by Dr. Hatfield, | about the candidate for the judiciary, whose election- eering circulars were seut out with a Methodist news- paper, a scheme which nearly killed the newspaper aud the politician tuo. ‘THK METHODIST MINISTRY FOR GRANT. Rey. John uth, Moral Instructor in the Eastern Penitentiary, disapproved of the action ut Bishop Ha- yeu. As far as he (the speaker) was concerned, he was in taver of a third term fur Grant. He was a little mouarchical ia his views, inasmuch as he believed in giving to our government more stability by electing our ralers for long terms, We were shaken up by elec- lions too frequent He supposed that seven. the Methodist mivistry here were republicai would vote for Grant, “But their personal opinions of no consequence. No Methodist minister woutd dare to inter Would submit to such dictation | The Rey, M. D Kurtz, of Norristown, was of the gen- | eral mind, He excused the Bishop, however, from ntion and th nsequen et would be, yough has been nto show the feeling of 1 Methodist, Expressions such ax the above could be multiplied by the score, Every minie- ter whuin your vorrespondent could tind prolessed to believe that the action o: Bishop Haven was outot place and unwise, There were also others who declined to give any public expression of their views because of their affection for the churchman Whose unprecedented action bas brought this storm about bis ears, FROM BALTIMORE, ‘H DISCUSSED WARMLY AT A | WEEKLY ME NG—A CONDEMNATORY RESO- } LUTION—VIEWS OF THE CLERGY, | Batrimonn, Dec, 13, 1875. | Baltimore, asa rule, i eminently conservative. The ear of the people does not readily #ttune itself to popu- lar eries, nor are the 8 swayed to uny extent by the magnetisin of individual leaders, News of the st exciting character seldom creates more than a ripple upon the sinooth surtace of current sentiment, and such undsual events as the Cuban massacre or the Louisiana imbrogho in the past bave led to nothing more serious than a mild protest in the shape of a re- ectably attended meeting in some concert hall, When, therefore, the OPINIOY HAVEN’S SPE: mas: telegraph w made public the speech of Rishop Haven the teae! and preachers of Boston it hot supposed bis remarks would be received here with much outward manifestation of ors was approval or disapproval, Thinking people would 4 them with regret that a man of the Bishop's standing should give utterance to rentimeuts ein politics, and no Methodist church | tight that he did not realize | so alien to his sacred culling, and the bulance of the community would not bother itself much about Bishop Haven or his idiosyncracies Such, however, was not the case, Baltimore has been stirred to its protoundest | depths, ussion iu all circles. It meets with universal con- i upon the future of the country or the course of the Methodist Church in the Presidential campaign as for the injary done to that very respectable deuomimation in this elty. THR METHODISTS IN BALTIMORE are the sturdiest and most numerous opponents of the The specch bas been the topic of general dis- | ynation, Bot so much for any beuring it may have | 0 mi ‘ ion political iveply deplore the conduct of the | Bishop in tarning asi introduce partisan matters int h, | PITOHING IN, erate character has been waged between them. The State Legislatures and the City Councils have been be- sieged by the respective contéstants—the latter solicit- ous for the appropriations that haye vecn made for their charitable institutions during a period embracing mauy years and the former clamorous for the abolition of all State aid to sectarian institutions and in favor of taxation of church property, ‘The Methodists have planted themselves squarely on the principle that Church and Stste should be separate and distinct in the most enlarged meaning of the term, while the Catholics have been alleged to be turtively drawing the meshes tighter about the politicians, that they might in tho future reap some mysterious advantage from their close relations with the higher powers. The exciting and closely contested political campaign through which the State has just passed had coupled with it an added significance trom the fact that the great body of Methodists were relormers almost toa man. Of course, I reter to the Methodist Episcopal Church proper, and not the organization known as the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. It | was boldly asserted by the democrats, and as conti- dently denied by the reformers, that the old Know Nothing element, which was composed to a very largo extent of Methodists, constituted the “bone and sinew”? of the new party. Certain it is that the two Churches were pretty squarely arrayed against each other, and that many worthy citizens opposed the new party, be- cause they deprecated anything that savored of a mix- ture of religion and politics. THE SPEECH OF BISHOP HAVEN. A great magnate of the Methodist Episcopal Church nominating General Grant for a third term comes so close upon the heels of their previous declarations toat the Methodists are completely paralyzed, and all classes of citizens, to say the least of it, thoroughly disgusted. The tormer say that incalculable damage has been done to the mterests of the Church upon the eve of a comprehensive effort for a revival in religion, while the latter point to their declarations during the campaign, and say that if Church and State are to be the order of the day they can see no choice between the intolerance of Catholicism and the bigotry of Methodism, The strenuous exertions made by the re- formers to expose the trauds perpetrated at the late election have been relaxed, and people are beginning to question ewch other as to the propriety of pursuing Lueir researches further if at the end they are to find themselves in league with a body of men pledged to | elect Grant for a third term in defiance of the spirit of the constitution und the — precedent set by the most illustrious of our Presi dents, Such has been the general tenor of the discussions upon Bishop Hayen’s utterances, and the whole matter culminated to-day at a mocung of the ‘Preachers’ Association,” Itis customary in this city to hold a weekly meeting of the preachers of the Methodist Episcopal Church stationed at this point for the discussion of questions connected with the doctrine and discipline of the denomination. The local preachers and presiding elders have the privi- Jeges of the floor and visiting clergymen are always heartily welcomed, ‘To-day there was A% UNUSUALLY FULL ATTENDANCE, among whom may be mentioned Bishop ‘Ames, Rey, J. 0, Peck, D. D., of Mount Vernon place church} Rev, H. Stevenson, D. D., Madison avenue church; Rey. William H. Chapman, High street church and Presi- | dent of the Association; Rey. Watson Case, Mount Oli- | vet church und Secretary of the Association; Re A. E. Givson, eter street church; Rev, W. 8, E wards, D, D,, Caroline street church; Rv. William B. Edwards, D, D., Eastern avenue churh; Dr. Ro H. Na: jor, D. D., Fayette street church; Rev, R. N. Baer, Broadway church; Rev, Jos. B, St:tt, First church; Rey. Joseph France, D. D., Whatcoat church ; Re Harisock, Emory churelt; Rev. L. 'f, Widerman, Columbia street church; Rey. Dr. Thomas Dougherty, Wilham street church; Rey. ©. W. Baldwin, Croos | street church; Rey. W.’A. Kuntz, Greeumount avenue church; T. P’ Morgan, Protestant Episcopal; Rev. H. B. Ridgaway, of the New York Conterence; Rev. Joel Brown, Rev, J. A. Price, Rev. D, W. Carroll, Rev. J. A. Davis, and Rey. A, A. Reese, D. D., Chaplain United States Army, now on leave of absence. ‘The question to have been discussed, as the order of the day, was the bropriely of praying for physical benefits, but owing to the very general desire to dis- pose of Bishop Haven’s case it was passed over and inade the order of the day for a subsequent mecting. ‘A paper was offered to the meeting, signed by Revs, A. 3. Edwards, D. D., A. E. Gibson, D. D,, and Joel Brown, which was about as follows, though those en- guged in its discussion refused point blank to allow members of the press to inspect its contents :— Wherens Bishoj is reported to have made u: odint Ej ly tov idates, we repudiate ‘A number of those present spoke to the resolution, among whom were Revs, Gibson, Price, Frauce, Carroll | aud Davis, ‘The tenor of the speeches was opposed to the attempt of Bishop Haven to speak for the whole body of the Church, and some of the reverend gentle- men Waxed warm over the mdiguity that had been offered to the organization by the ill advised, imperti- nent and silly action of one of their bishops. When the comments, by no meang flattering, on the conduct of Bishop Haven had reached that port where the bounds of courtesy became, as it were, invisibly entwined with the verge of duty and 4 motion to table had signally failed the venerable Bishop Ames arose to pour oil on the troubled waters, While he disapproved the course of his brother Haven and in all kindness deprecated the attempt to raise a question which would not down at any one’s bidding, he thought the seuse of the meet- ing bad been tested by the vote upon the motion to | table, and at his suggestion the gentleman who offered the paper withdrew it from the jurther consideration of the body, A Vigorous effort was made to suppress a report of the proceedings, but there were those present who regarded this method of dealing with the question | neither advantageous to the interests of the Church nor consonant with their dignity as high and worthy officers. * INDIVIDUAL OPINIONS. In conversation with some of the ieading clergymen, after the adjournment of the meeting, the writer dis: covered that there was a very sore feeling among them, and many upbesitatingly denounced the conduct of Hishop Haven in po measured terms, ‘The mildest re- gretted very much the precipitancy with which he riment of Public Inst ork,” through the medi the sectarianism of some uted to the children mo present time. [refer pa which Mr. Mareus Wilson Harper & Brothers the gibhshers. I consider them more suitable as Sunday sool catechisms than public school readers, and thifk that a great many of our citizens will agree with mf after giving the same their personal perusal, Very tply yours, Y MNSKCTARIAN CITIZEN, ction of the city of New of your valuable paper, w reading books distrib. ity pul cularly to school readers of the author and Messrs, New York, Dec, 15, 18} FOSTER’S To vax Epiton ov run Hi In my opinion the se Foster’s letters is the oner known as the Order Sona of Amorica— order which original the State of Pennsylvania pnd has its strongholds in that State and New Jersey} There are a few camps, however, In New York Ste, Its ritual and constitu- tion express views exactly in accordance with Grant's on the question of the urfon of Church and State. In fact, 1 was known in the Order some years ago that Grant was an ac ‘Tho Order is little known to the public, seldom appeying on parade, and then is known as « beneficial orgaijzation, which’ ostensibly it ix, But it hay often dipjbd into local politics with success, notwithstanding it is forbidden in its laws, The Order would unquestinably support Grant for a third term, as his views gre an open expression of thew principles, The old Kuow Nothing party mottdes, such 48 ‘Americans to Rul) America,” “Let None But Americans be Placed on Guard,’ occur in the writings of the Order, and none but persons born on American soil can enter its doors, ‘The ritual in aise when I was a member was written by ‘Ned Buntline” and full of dramatic incidents calculited to impress and terrify, Grant was undoubtedly initiated in this ritual; although, as Mr. Foster says, @ pemon might be admitted by a duly authorized person by simply subscribing to its oath and la M. BUGABOO, ALD:— et society referred BEE CS eal THIRD TERM NOTES. pea Wet Grant has already favored the polfey of declaring good portion of his subjects banditti; he already re- gards all who cross him as guilty of “lacsa majestas.”” Ought not these facts to ptick another nail into the coffin of the third term?—fickmond Enquirer (dem.) A few Methodist brethren have an idea that Grant is the head of the MethodistUhurch. His Des Moines specch and his Message contained a low bid for the sup- port of Protestantism in a crusade against Catholi- cisin,—Cincinnati Enquirer (dem.) Grant is not afflicted with religion personally, but “his eyes are sot” for a third term, and he plays every card in his hand. Bishop Haven understands himself — Cincinnati Enquirer (dem,) ;: We think we are not mistuken in the drift of popular sentiment when we say itis gradually coming te the conclusion that the time and the occasion will demand the renomination of President Grant.—New York Com- i (rep-) For two years we have predicted the renomi- nation of Grant, ‘The selection of another would drive the republican party into bankruptcy. Its prin- ciples have vanished with the occasion that called it into existenee, What remains to hold it together is the cohesive power of public plunder, and Grant is master of the situation. —Lockport (N. ¥.) Union (dem.) If General Grant bad any hope of a renomination for athird term, which is not probable, it has been effec- tually suppressed by the injudicious action of Bishop Haven and by the Foster-Blaine letter.—Harlford Courant—Congressman Hawley—(rep.) ‘The tnird term idea is not quiescent any longer, and the renewed discussion of the question, aroused by Bishop Haven, is very likely to commit the third term project to the grave once more, and long before the conventions begin to consider anybody's nomination, — Philadelphia Inquirer (rep.) ‘The question whether Grant has ‘seen Sam”? still remains open.—Harrisbury Patriot (dem.) CROOKED WHISKEY RING NOTES. General Grant could have stopped the indictment of General Babcock allogéther had he so desired, Why, then, should it be pretended that he desires to shield the latter !—Chicago Inter-Ocean (rep.) Mr. Henderson, too small to sink his personal malice, and notwithstanding the President was the very head of the prosecution against the accused persons, took ad- Vantage of his position to insult and malgn the latter and hold him up to the jury as # party tothe very crimes he was seeking to punish. It was a most con- temptible act,—Chicago Inter. Ocean (rep.) It was for the Court, and not the President, to take cognizance of any improper language, and his interfe- rence has laid him open to the graye suspicion that he 1s determined to interpose the strength of bis preroga- tive—or what he assumes to be his prerogative—be- tween an offender and the justice of his country if that offender shall be traced to the interior of the White House.—Baltimore Gazette (dem.) It would have been better if the President had | waived the strained point against himself, which he, or some friend for him, picked out of General Henderson’s speech, instead of jeopardizing a great prosecution by @ personal quarrel with the leading prosecutor.—St Louis Republican (dem.) It 18 announced that General Babcock will baye no official connettion with the White House pending his trial for complicity 1n the whiskey frauds, the private secretaryship falling to Mr. Luckey, The retrement of General Babcock would have becn quite proper at the time he asked for the court of inquiry.—St Louis Kepublican (dem.) The dismissal of Gene acted, but were disposed to believe that the speech of the Bishop was but the expression of individaal sent ment, and that it by no means grew out of, or was sus- tained by the preachers and teachers whom he ad- dressed. The Key. Watson Case suid, that Bishop Haven was a very free and outspoken mau: that he was always fearlessly in favor of retorms, and that this was not che first time he had drawn upou himsell we unfavorable criticism of the conservative portion of the Cuurch, His (Haven’s) act in presiding over the Woman's Sullrage Convention was more offensive thin this last outbur=t, MR, CASE said he did not believe Bishop Haven’s address in Boston "was a set speech, but simply an impulsive declaration drawn trom him, which atthe tine he Delieved to be for the good of the Church, He had no doubt but that ove-hall or two-thirds of the Methodist preachers in Baltimore were favorable to Grant, bat they were uot disposed to say so olticiaily. | Haven bud been a great ubolivonist, and at the last General Conterence the coiored people wished to have a bishop of their own color. The Conterenee was unwilling to grant their request, but located Bishop Haven at Atlanta, under the impression that this would be satistactory to them, He further said thut Have: was the only Bishop who launches out in that w. careless of tue matter under discussion or what ef it wouid have upon the country, and he could not be justly esteemed a representative of the Board of Bishops, He thought the meeting to-day had acted properly in not coming to a Vote upon the paper presented, as that | was a matter for the consideration of the Conterence, MK. NKOWN said he asked himself what would be thoe of Pr Me is feelings, and tants generally, fa high digi c ureh to sustwin Lim, ‘ould be an outourst of indignation Ubroaghuut the length and breadth ot the land, and therciore Bishop Haven was reprehensible in pursuing any such course, DR. KDWARDS, avery prominent clergyman in the Methodist Church, said to the Writer that Bishop Haven had no right to | speak tor the Church and he dig not think there was any Likelihood of his example juliowed by oth Nobody in the Chureh, as tar as he had wny knowledge, indorsed Haven’s se would the Methodists have mdorsed then Church,” suid he, * OL propose to be assucnited with the advocacy of uny man or purty for the Pres. deucy.”” Another minister, who stands very high in the Church, but who did not desire bis name to b> made public, ‘said:—"Bishop Haven dou't care wout he says about anything or anybody. He ia a good fellow, but he slashes about pericetly regardless of whom he hits or Whut tnay be the couscque aud 18 BOL supposed to represent anybody but hinweif. NON-COMMITTAL CLURGYMEN, ‘The mayority ot the men ot the Methodist per | suasion Were Hon-committal, indulging the vai hope that by maintarning a poliey of silence this sean. | dal m the Chureu (for so it is regarded here) will soon die out, ‘The geueral impression, howe is that it hous imilicted a terrible blow on Methodisin in this com munity, and that the waning fortunes of the republi party Which had begun to brighten ander the itlue Of the retor ut, are now beyond redemptior in favor of haa t made whede ot Mishop Si queutly hew the topu the on the Church by advocating ia his oflicial capacity the renounation of the President for a third term, ‘They were equally decided in their denial of any knowledge of anti Catholic aseociations tor political purposes, | though che latter does not twily with the te THE ANTL-C SECTARIANIS:! To THe Eprron ov Tie Hur. The non-sectarianism of the public schools belng at the present ume one of the most promment political topics of the day—so much so that even the “President of the United States” deems it of sufficient importance to mention it m his annual Message to Congress—I ‘Well, that Was not expressed, | believe, But every | Rotman Catholics, For years & war of whe most des | Would most respectfully call the attention of the “De- , friend. | but that he has himse THOLIC 3 which warrants the inference and justifies the accusa- tion that U. S. Grant, President of the United States, | | Mr. Johu il. Denny was added to the comunite has been guilty of wicked aad corrupt malfeasance i office, for which he, too, should be indicted and sen- tenced to accompany his official triends to the Peniten- tiary. The order aismissing the man who brought to fession of a guilty knowledge.—Chicayo Times (dem.) Henderson no doubt feels flat enough now, He prob- ably wishes that he had bitten off a long piece of his foolish tongue before he let it wag at the President, — Buffalo Commercial (rep.) lf Mr. Henderson knows anything, damaging or otherwiso, about the case, wouldn’t it be a very easy matter to go on the Witness stand and testify under oath {Pittsburg Gazette (rep.) The dismissal of Henderson was a piece of folly, The President lost his temper without stopping to consider the possible, probable, inevitable consequences to his the strategy and self-control of the old soldier discerni- ble as of the prudence aud forethought of the states- man.—Springfield Republican (ind. rep.) It is argued that the President from his high position | could well ufford to overlook this (Henderson's) inex- cusable conduct, With that we take issue, It is about time that people began to regard the President of the United States as a citizen, entitled to all the rights of acitizen, 4 man entitled to the ordinary courtesies which obtain among men. —Philadelphia North Ameri- can (rep.) How Grant's public virtue differs from that of great men—Audrew Jackson, for instance! It 1s said that during Jackson’s administration a little fellow of a postinaster in Kentucky kept annoying the friends of | ©Old Hickory” by swearing most profusely against the | General, His case was reported several times, and his removal called for most earnestly, General Jackson, alter continued importunity, was led to examine the case indeed, but he also learned that’ the fought under him at New Orleans, was vot removed. When asked whut it meant the old reviler had », Orleans bas my permission tu be postmaster and cuss me for the balance of his days,”’— Williamsport (La.) Sun (dem.) Even to this day the indignation of the President is not expended so much upon the thieves who deceived and used him as upon the strong and bold lawyer who expresses the natural indignation of honost- men upon this sorry subject.—Cincinnati Commercial (ind.) Tho worms that craw! over wounded gladiators just now are regular army worms, Grant will have to sweep them away irom the White House,—st. Louis Republi+ can (dem.) ‘That the President able blunder and friendship f the facts tu been guilty of an unpardon- has allowed his partisanship,and Babcock to outweigh the demands of duty ish quite sufficient warrant tor believing; beon interested’ personally in the contemptible raseality of defranding the revenue we cannot, will not, believe. —Detroit Free Press (dem.) Alter all that has come and gone there is bat one thing that jcate tho President and his alter ego trom the awkward position in which they have placed themselves, Let thom waive all technicalities and place Joyee and McDonald on the witness stand when Babeoek is tried, If they cannot afford to confront these two convicts im the witness stand the caso will look bad, very bud. —Kansas City Times (dem) | Henderson was an act | In this passionate outburst there 18 as little of | | 4 } The Postmaster | neral replied, “Any man who fought the British at | | door, but it had been locked by the sexton, PACIFIC RAILROAD OF MISSOURI. ————--—_—. HOW THE STOCKHOLDERS HAVE BEEN SWIN- DLED—THE MEETING YESTERDAY AND THE RESULT, At threo o'clock yesterday afternoon a meeting of capitalists—principally stockholders of the Pacific Rail- road of Missourli—was held at No. 25 William street, Mr, Robert 1. Cutting, Jr., took the chair, A report was read by Mr. N, Lowdrey, of tho Stock- holders’ Commi, a suit bad beep e Atlantia ned Missouri Paci ceivers, appointed by the they were acting against the best interests holders. The mortgage was made July 19, 1875, ant antedated May 1, 1875, making the, drst coupons fall due, for the full six months’ interest, November 1, 1875; and on November 3, 1875, Messrs, Baker and Pierce had ready # printed com- plaint in a fore-losure suit in the name of George E. Ketchain—a name to the committee unknown, Such Was the haste of the directors to sell out their stock that they not ooly caused @ bill to be prepared and printed in advance, but Mr. Baker, one of the direc- tors, controlled the suit, and gave notice, accepted, or cuused itto be given, of a motion for a receiver at Omaha, in Nebraska, while the courts were open and in session in St, Louis, expecting, nd doubt, to impose upon Judge Dillon, at Omaba, in the absence of the stockholders, Their object wax de- feated, at the cost of a journey of one ot the committee to Omaba, and the employment of counsel at that place, It was so flagrant @ wrong that Baker himself telegraphed to Omaha not to file the papers or to make the motion. ‘The foreclosure papers on the third mort- gage have since been filed in St, Louis, ‘The committec sent printed copies of the resolution passed by the stockholders at their meeting on the 6th of November to the directors, asking them to resign and to clect stockholders in their places. This they de- clined to do, alleging, through their attorney in court, ‘a willingness and desire to respoct the wishes of thé stockholders, but evading the issues. ‘The directors of the company seem ambitious to mauage the property, but they only own stuck in the company as follow: Shares, Samuel Hayes, Pres’t James Baker, W. H. Coffin... D. R. Garrison. , Oliver A. Hoyt. M. J. Lipman, Andrew Pierce, Total.......seee0e At the present market pri Samuel N, Webb. , O, Stanard, John J. Lansing. Jas. B. Yeatman. 1. B. Ragur,. Webb M. Samuels, D, K. Ferguson... seeeeees aoe 208 valued, say $2,717. The present ianagement came into control of the com- puny practically in March, 1871, and openly in March, 1872, At that time it was mortgaged for— First mortgage. Second mortguge, «$7,000, 00¢ 2,741,000 sakenteces. 741, 0.0 have been as follows :— Gross, . Net. + $3,213,000 $973,000 see 8,500,000 915,000 3,59 5,000 y4u, 400 508,000 No report 5000 1,402, 715 13,000 1,451,869 187 seeeseee $200,000 Partly estimated ‘The gross earnings, per mile, of the Atlantic and Pacitic Railroad for the same time (1874) are .reported by the company at $4,155, If proper charges are made the Atlantic Pucitic for the use of the terminal facilities of the Missouri Pacitic at St. Louis, the earnings would show more favorable to the latter, The terminal tu- cilities at St, Louis haye cost the Missouri Pacilie several millions of dollars. Yet the Atlantic Pacific us¢ the same almost gratuitously—they simply pro-rate on thirty-seven miles of ratlroad—St, Louis to Pacifi¢ City. mm NOW FOR THE SWINDLE. July 19, 1872, they made or increased the real estate mortgage, $300,000 600,008 October 1, 1873, the Curondelet branch Septomber 1,” 1872, they” issued income DoudS f0F.......++++++++$1,000,000 December 15, 1874, ‘they’ ‘issued improvement bonds. 3 000,090 July 19, 1875, third’ mortgage ' bonds, which ‘coutains 4 provision to retire by exchange the income and improvement bonds 4,000,000 se ecesecceseesncsceses +, 800,000 In addition to the above they clan that the Missouri Pacific is liable tora pro rata amount of equipment bonds, fixed at $500,000, and that the Missouri Pucifia is in debt to the Atlantic and Pacitic in about $1,300,000. On the other hand, it is claimed that there aré $600,000 or more of the third mortgage bonds not yet issued, and the Court has granted an injunction prohibiting the issue, transfer, disposition or pledge of ‘ny income bonds, improvement bonds or third nrort- gage bonds. The present directors claim that this large increase of debt, say $4,800,000, hus been expeuded upon the road in betlerments aud procuring additional property, It ig stated in the circular issued Lo the stockholders by A. B, Baylis and others in October, 1875, that Mr. Pierce esu- mutes the bet earnings of (he company irom that ume to and including the mouth of February, 1876, at $350,000. What the gbjoct of such an cstimate was euch stockholder can judge tor himself, The fact 1s that the net earnings lor the months of October and November alone were $300,000, leaving the months of December, Jannary and February to be added. There is no doubt but that on its merits your stock is worth much more than its present market value, and that its value has beon designedly depreciated by the directors to promote what they conceive to be their interest in the foreclosifry of the third mortgage bond, The report is dated December 16, 1875, and is signed by the committee;—N, A. Cowdrey, Peter Marié Gcorge It. Fearing, F. "A. Ovis, Williain H. Morrell, Jacob Cromwell and A. W. Shepard. At the mecting yesterday Mr. W. H, Morrell, sec- retary of the last stockholders’ meeting, ‘mado his report, embodying the above figures and Inet an) those gentlemen were empowered to till vacancies. dir, George It, Fearing moved thata tinunce committee of three be uppomted to take charge of the tunds col- lected under the motion of Mr. & V. White, the as- light the: evidence of Baboock’s guilt is Grant's con. | Seasments aot, $0. exseed $85 per hundred” shares of stock. Tne following gentletnen were appointed :— Robert L. Cutting, Jr.; W. H. Morrell, and Frank A. Ous, ‘The meeting was harmonious, and each shareholder seemed desirous to aflix his signature to a document addressed to President Hayes, demanding a now ele tion of directors and the reformation of the abusca complained of. A NEW STOCK EXCHANGE NEEDED, (From the Evening Mail of yesterday.] ‘The Hexatp will have the sympathy of the best clase of ‘operators’! in Wall street, and of the businesscom- munity generally, in {ts attacks upon the sort of gam- bling that has been done of late yours through the agency of the Stock Exchange, once the medium oj honest and ‘‘square’’ speculations and the register of something like honest valuations, and now a gigantie combination for “gulling’’ unwary investors, for de- ceiving the public, and for the mutual exercise of its members in sharp practices in default of a regular sup. ply of green victims from outside, For every thousand shares of stocks recorded as sold at the Stock Ex- change not more than ten shares are actually trans- ferred. All the rest is fictitious, deceptive and mtended to deceive. Any outsider who now goes into Wall street with a view of profiting by his judgment as to actual varues ‘Will find that prices are raved or lowered at the will of afew men Who control the Stuck Exchange, and that h make as good a guess as to all the stocks that ct enough im price to make them ‘speculative”” as the oldest A cbitués of the Exchange. The result ia that “the boys’? have all the fun to themselves, They can “skin’’ one another, but that doesn’t pay. ‘They an get “points” from persons supposed to be in the fidence of one of the great operators, but the latter « | bave an unpleasant way of disappoimting their most in- case of his cussing enemy, He found it a very virulent | p y wp He | of friends or foes with surly equanimity. timate “iriends,” and impartiaily.gobole the tittle bet The hones! commission business, which ayed to be profitable to the Dost men in the street, has vanished almost entirely. Icis a great question whether a new Stock Exchange, formed by a combination of respectable, high ininded and honorable operators and commission men ought not to be organized, leaving the present organization to Ve run by gamblers, sharpers and swindlers, DON’T LOCK THE DOORS. To te Eprror ov 18 HeraLp:— During the service at Trinity chapel on Sunday morm ing un aged Jady, who Was sitting near the doorway ow ‘Twenty-sixth street, was apparently taken sll or over come by the heat and made an effurt to leave by that After fruit less efforts to open it she sunk back upon one of the seats infront, in seemingly a fainting condition, toa to reach the door in the other end of the building, flicial was notited and he burried up, un- ny the door, permitted her to pass’ out, should they’ be locked? Certainly not tor ry causing any disturbance cf the worship, because it would create much more to pass down tue long uisles to the other door than to permit egress at this entrance way. Will the gentlemen of the vestry Fectily this matter? VIATOR, MER MAILS. ‘The Post OMice authorities yesterday despatched by the steamer Dakota 34,340 letters and forty-two bags of papers; by the Columbus, 3,014 letters and two bags of papers, and by the Lou, 261 letters und two of pupers, makiug @ total of 87,616 lotters aud forty: ‘bags vf papers si]