A. It was the table occupied by the clerk in the upper gallery, standing at the top of the passage way. Q. Did those representatives who were in favour of continuing Samuel Bettle, manifest any excitement or conduct themselves arbitrarily and improperly on that occasion? A. I have no recollection of any thing of the kind; but on the contrary, I thought there was a good deal of patience exercised during the three hours' session of the representatives. Q. Was there a conclusion come to by the representatives at that sitting, to postpone the further consideration of that subject, till eight o'clock the next morning, or until any future period? A. There was no conclusion of that kind; and the fact that those persons at the table continued writing until the meeting convened, (which, however, was but a short time,) shows that they did not understand any such conclusion to have been come to; and I have no recollection of hearing such a proposition made; if it was made, it must have been by some individual between the breaking up of the representatives, and the convening of the Yearly Meeting. Q. Halliday Jackson, (a witness who has been examined here,) has spoken of an interview between you and himself, at the close of a meeting at Byberry, I think, in Eleventh-month, 1826, relative to a communication made by you in that meeting. Will you state what passed upon that occasion? A. I attended a meeting at Byberry, appointed by George and Ann Jones, the precise time I do not now recollect; in which I spoke near the close of it. When I came out of the house, in company, I think, with Asa Walmsley, we got into conversation near the door, and Halliday Jackson observing us, came towards me, and said in a very rude and passionate manner, "Thee has come here this morning, with a lie in thy mouth." I think I said very little more to him than that it was not so. On going to Isaac Comly's, where I dined, without mentioning to him what had occurred, I inquired of him, whether what I had said in the meeting that day was untrue: he replied, no; and then asked why, did any one say it was? He was then in the station of an elder in that meeting, and I should suppose must have been better acquainted with the members of it than Halliday Jackson was; and had there been the least ground for Halliday's charge, I think Isaac Comly's candour, would not have allowed him so flatly to contradict it. Q. Is he the brother of John Comly, and has he gone off with him in the secession? A. He is so, and has gone with him. Q. Is John Bunting, spoken of by you, also one of that party? And the said William Evans being cross-examined on the part of the complainant and Stacy Decow, further saith: Question by Mr. Price. Did you leave the meeting of the representatives when the doors were opened and the people thronged in? and A. I was at the clerk's table at the time the doors were opened; when those who were there also dispersed, I went down out of the gallery, but whether I left the meeting immediately, I cannot recollect. Q. From the inquiry you made of the person writing at the table, I infer you did not hear what had passed among those around the table, that led to the writing that was going on? A. I did not hear any thing that passed among those individuals around that table: they said nothing as the meeting convened; but simply dispersed, while I was at the table. Q. Was it stated to the meeting of the representatives, as a ground of objection to John Comly's serving as clerk, that he had been holding private meetings to divide the society? A. I do not distinctly recollect that it was mentioned; and yet, I think, I made some remarks myself alluding to it. There was not, however, much discussion respecting John Comly on the part of those who were not prepared to release Samuel Bettle; they confined their remarks very much to him, as not yet having fulfilled his services. Q. Is it customary to appoint the clerk of the Yearly Meeting every year? A. It is customary either to continue the same clerk, or appoint another in his place. Q. Are all who were appointed on the committee, by the select Yearly Meeting, members of the same society that you are? A. Three of them are deceased, the rest are members of the religious Society of Friends. The question is again read to the witness, when he further answersI am a member of the religious Society of Friends, to which they also belong. Q. Did those who are deceased continue to belong to the same religious society during their lives? A. They did so. Q. From what select Preparative Meeting did the report of unsoundness in the ministry come, which occasioned the appointment of that committee? A. I am unable to say what Preparative Meeting it came from: that part of it which speaks of persons travelling amongst them propagating sentiments derogatory to the character of our Lord, went up from the Preparative Meeting of the Monthly Meeting of the southern district. Q. Do you yourself and Jonathan Evans belong to that Preparative Meeting? A. We do. Q. Yourself and Thomas Evans are sons of Jonathan Evans? Q. When a report is made to a meeting of the society by a committee, is it usual for those who did not concur in committee, formally to dissent on the presentation of the report? A. It is not usual. Q. When the committee of the Meeting for Sufferings, which reported the disavowal of the responsibility of the society for the writings of Amicus, made their report, was it accompanied by the extracts spoken of, as part of the report? A. It was so. Q. Who presented those extracts for the consideration of the committee? A. I do not know. Q. Do you know who selected or prepared them? A. I do not. Q. Do you know who prepared the declaration issued by your Yearly Meeting in 1828 ? A. It was prepared by a committee of the Meeting for Sufferings, whose names I do not now recollect. Q. Can you not recollect any of them? A. Well, I can recollect a few of them; and if it is proper, can state that part of the committee, but it will be very imperfect. I think John Cox, Hinchman Haines, Joseph Whitall, Samuel Bettle, and myself, were part of the committee-but my recollection of them is so imperfect, I am not certain as to all these and I think there was a considerable number more. Q. On whom did the labour of its composition principally devolve? A. I drew up a sketch of the declaration, which was afterwards modified, and added to, by the committee. Q. You say you were informed by one of the committee that reported the extracts, that there was no division in the committee-who was that person? A. I think my father stated to me that there was no division in the committee in relation to it. Q. Have you no information by general repute, or otherwise, as to who prepared those extracts? A. I have no general repute on the subject, nor did I ever hear, that I have any recollection of, who did prepare them. Q. The extracts themselves do not mention the authors, books, or pages, whence they were made? A. They do not. The testimony being read over, the witness, on recollection, adds to his answer, last but one, that he has no further general repute on the subject, than what has been communicated through an anonymous pamphlet which has been circulated, entitled "The Hole in the Wall," in which there are certain caricatures, designed to represent, as he has understood, various members of the Meeting for Sufferings; and one of them, Jonathan Evans, pointing to the extracts, and sitting at a desk preparing them. If information thus given constitutes general repute, I have such repute, but not otherwise. WILLIAM EVANS. And further this affirmant saith not. Affirmed and subscribed at the house of William Ridgway, in Camden, in the county of Gloucester, this 5th day of April, 1831, coram, J. J. FOSTER, Master and Examiner. Adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow morning. Wednesday morning, April 6, 10 o'clock. Examination continued. Present as before. JOHN PAUL of Philadelphia, a witness produced on the part of Joseph Hendrickson, alleging himself to be conscientiously scrupulous of taking/ an oath, and being duly affirmed according to law, on his solemn affir mation, declareth and saith: Question by Mr. Sloan. Are you a member of the Society of Friends? A. Yes, I am a member of the Society of Friends, and have been a member from my childhood. Q. What is your age? A. I am fifty-nine years of age. Q. Were you a representative to the Yearly Meeting of 1827 ? A. I was appointed a representative by the Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, to the Yearly Meeting of 1827. Q. Will you state what occurred in the meeting of representatives, in their meeting held that year, for the purpose of considering the name of a suitable person to be nominated to the Yearly Meeting for their clerk? A. At the rise of the first sitting of the Yearly Meeting, the representatives were directed to remain together to agree upon, and propose to the Yearly Meeting a Friend to serve it as clerk, and one to assist him. They accordingly, after the rise of that meeting, drew together, and before they were settled John Comly's name was offered in nomination for clerk. Samuel Bettle was also named. It was stated that it was usual for the representatives, previous to considering any new nomination, to consider whether they were prepared to release the clerk that had acted the preceding year. Several Friends expressed, as their judgment, that the time for releasing Samuel Bettle had not yet arrived, and they united in his continuance. The friends of John Comly insisted, that as he was first named, the consideration of his appointment ought first to take place. A number of Friends expressed their sentiments in favour of one or the other of the names proposed; and in support of the nomination of Samuel Bettle, it was stated that no objections had been made to his services as clerk. His opponents were also reminded, that at the close of the Yearly Meeting the preceding year, several of them had expressed their satisfaction with his services. It was also stated, that it had been reported, and believed to be a fact, that John Comly had held a number of meetings a short time previously, for the purpose of making a division in the religious Society of Friends, and was, therefore, very unsuitable to be appointed as clerk to the Yearly Meeting. A number of representatives again expressed their sentiments, some in favour of the one, and some in favour of the other of the persons whose names were proposed as clerk. The friends of John Comly claimed to have the majority, and therefore, he ought to be appointed, as they alleged: it was stated that the majority ought not to govern; that it never had been the practice of the society to go by majorities; and in the present case, there would be injustice in it because it was represented, that Abington Quarterly Meeting, and Bucks Quarterly Meeting, had each of them doubled their representatives, and that the southern Quarterly Meeting had added one half more to the number of their representatives than they had usually appointed. They, however, urged that the question should be settled by a vote; by the majority: and Abraham Lower called upon John Watson to go to the clerk's table, and take down the names of all those who were in favour of John Comly. He was urged to this by some other individuals; but a number of elderly respectable Friends objected to any question among the representatives to the Yearly Meeting being settled in that way; stating, that it was a novel procedure, and what had not been countenanced by the society. John Watson, finding that there was so great opposition to the proposal, excused himself on that account, and declined to go to the table. Abraham Lower, still bent upon his purpose, proposed, that those that were in favour of John Comly should go over to the eastern side of the house; he rose and took a few steps in that direction himself, and a few others rose also: but the measure : was again opposed, and protested against, by a considerable number of Friends: and that effort failed also; that effort to take the sense by a majority. One individual, I recollect, after protesting against that method, as being contrary to the usage of society, stated, that it could not be conceded to the Quarterly Meetings of Abington and Bucks, and the Southern Quarter, (who had increased their representatives, as was stated,) to effect their own views by thus taking the other Quarterly Meetings by surprise; and the representatives were competent, if that mode was insisted upon, and ought to determine who had a right, and who had not a right to vote, or to be heard on the occasion; I don't know that I have the precise words, but such was the substance; that it could not be expected that all the representatives, so increased by the Abington, Bucks, and southern Quarters, had a voice equal with the representatives of those Quarterly Meetings, where but a small number of representatives were appointed. These remarks caused considerable excitement in several of those who favoured the appointment of John Comly. Cephas Ross, I recollect, made a pretty long harangue on the occasion, in which he, as I thought, very irreverently declared, that "he had received his commission from God Almighty, and would give it up to no man." I think he made use of those words twice, in the course of his communication. The representatives finding they were not likely to agree on either of the names that was proposed or nominated for clerk, it was proposed that John Cox should report to the Yearly Meeting, "that way did not open in the minds of the representatives to release Samuel Bettle." This was objected to by a considerable number of the friends of John Comly; and it was suggested to alter the phraseology, so as that John Cox should report, "that the representatives could not agree upon any name to offer to the meeting as clerk." This proposition seemed to be approbated by a considerable number of the friends of John Comly, which seemed to alarm Abraham Lower, and he arose and cautioned his friends to "take care what they were about; if there was no name reported to the Yearly Meeting for clerk, Samuel Bettle would be the clerk." The subject continued under discussion for a short time, and it appeared to gain more advocates. Abraham again rose, and expressed himself, I think, nearly in these words, or entirely so, as near as I can recollect: "My friends, I want you to understand what you are going to do: if there is no name reported to the Yearly Meeting for clerk, Samuel Bettle will be the clerk, as a matter of course." The proposition, however, seemed to be united with more fully than any thing else that had come before the representatives, and it was concluded that John Cox should make the report as before stated; and the representatives were about to disperse, when Abraham Lower again told his friends, that if there was no name reported to the Yearly Meeting, Samuel Bettle would be appointed the clerk: and called upon all those who were favourable to the appointment of John Comly, to come up to the clerk's table, and sign a report to that effect. He went up to the clerk's table, in the upper gallery, I think, and a few others went up with him, perhaps eight or ten individuals, and the representatives dispersed: the time to which the next sitting of the Yearly Meeting stood adjourned having nearly or quite arrived, the representatives opened the doors to withdraw, and the meeting assembled, while those I have mentioned, were in the gallery, I think; I then went out of the house as Friends were coming in. |