MEMORIAL TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 1854, ON THE FINANCES.

The undersigned, one of the special Committee of Finance, appointed by the General Assembly in 1851, requests the privilege of presenting to the General Assembly, and of entering upon their printed Minutes, some statements in regard to certain opinions expressed in the Report of the Board of Trustees of the General Assembly of the present year, so far as said opinions relate to the basis of the Report made by the special Committee to the Assembly of 1852.

The funds of the General Assembly were principally invested in mortgages and other authorized securities of the State of Pennsylvania, until the years 1834 or 1835. Such investments were also kept separate, so that each Trust Fund was charged with its proper capital, and received its income according to its capital. In the years 1834 and 1835, when the Trustees made new investments, they threw all the funds into a common stock, and managed their affairs on the principle of making pro rata dividends. It appears, however, that in 1835, a distribution was made of their property among the several Trust Funds, so that the true position of each fund could be readily ascertained at any future time.

The Assembly of 1851, wishing to restore to each fund its true capital, appointed a Special Committee of Finance to inquire into the matter. This Committee adopted the distribution of 1835, as the true basis on which each fund was to recover its capital, after deducting the losses which have subsequently accrued. The Committee further maintained, that the Board of Trustees had no right to manage the funds in this blended form; one of the unjust results of which was, that after the assets of some funds were lost and others remained whole, an equal dividend of losses was made. It was believed by the Committee that the stock which was safe, was not justly chargeable with the losses on stock which proved to be bad. The Report of the Trustees of the present year adopts as its basis the distribution of the blended stocks to their several funds on the principle of dividing losses among all the funds, and then giving to each its proportion of the remainder.

The question is, Was the distribution of the property of the Board among the several funds in 1835 an authorized distribution? The Report of 1852 is based upon the assumption that the distribution was by authority.

The report of 1852 is drawn up from the detailed statement entered into a book of the Treasurer of the Corporation. The distribution of the property among the several Trust Funds is recorded from the very beginning, in 1802, when investments were first made. Many new investments were made in 1834 and 1835; and the interest or right of each fund in the new investments is recorded, even to fractions of shares of stock. This distribution of the property which, it will be noted, was made before any losses occurred, appears on the book of the Treasurer of the Corporation, which book was furnished to the Special Committee of the Assembly, from the Treasurer's Office. The undersigned believes that this distribution in the Treasurer's book must be taken at this day to have been made and adopted by the Corporation, unless the contrary appears. A Corporation cannot, after so many years, repudiate so important an act as this, recorded by one of its own officers, and acting prima facie under its eye and authority. There must be at least some evidence that the act was unauthorized. The onus probandi is on the other side.

Two facts, undisputed and indisputable, stand in view. FIRST: The Board of Trustees did authorize, and did make a distribution of its funds corresponding in character to that in the Treasurer's book. The Committee of 1854 admit, that "in some of the Annual Reports of the Trustees, detailed statements of the several Trust Funds were said to be exhibited." This fact is, indeed, distinctly recorded in the Report of the Trustees, made to the General Assembly in 1836, and found on page 304 of the Minutes, as follows: "A detailed account of the several investments of stock and other securities appropriated to the different funds, is also furnished." And that these financial exhibits were sanctioned, not only by the Financial Committee for the year, but by the Board of Trustees also, appears from the following additional clause: "To these exhibits the Trustees respectfully refer the Assembly for particular information in relation to the state of the several funds under their charge." There can, therefore, be no doubt whatever that a distribution o

the property of the Board among the several Trust Funds was actually made, and sanctioned by its authority, as appears by the last resolution.

The SECOND fact is, that a book is now in the Treasurer's Office, which contains a financial exhibit, corresponding in all respects to the references made to it in the Report of the Trustees to the Assembly of 1836. This exhibit, furthermore, was made in the same financial year in which the Report, referring to it, was presented to the Assembly, and it is admitted by all to be in the handwriting of the Treasurer.

These two facts it is very difficult to set aside. The Committee of 1854 state they have made "diligent search" for these financial exhibits accompanying the Reports of the Board; but they have failed to obtain them "either from the Minutes of the General Assembly, or of the Trustees, or from the papers filed." The undersigned respectfully suggests whether there is not a fourth place, where a search might have been advantageously instituted, namely, among the books of the Treasurer's Office. The official place of the accounts does actually contain exhibits exactly like those referred to, and they are recorded by the official officer of the Board.

The suggestion of the Committee of 1854, that "the distribution and apportionment of the Trust Funds was probably made by the Treasurer without the order of the Trustees,” the undersigned, with all due submission,to the authority of the honoured members of the Committee, considers entirely untenable in view of the two facts already presented. He will further state, that this distribution is recorded, with every appearance of the same official sanction as all the other recorded transactions. It has its place in a book which contains official reports, balances, certificates of settlements, &c., and is headed " Accounts of the stocks of the Trustees of the General Assembly, May 9th, 1835." If this distribution was "probably made by the Treasurer, without the order of the Trustees," then many other very improbable things are equally probable. Besides, the undersigned would deem it a serious impeachment of the mode in which the Board transacts its business, to suppose that such illegal and impertinent intermeddling of the Treasurer should not only never have been rebuked by the Board, but have been allowed to stand upon its official records, unaltered to this day.

The Committee of 1854 assert that the subsequent distribution of the income of the Board on the principle of blended investment, proves that no distribution of the capital was made in 1835. This Committee, however, have already admitted that "in some of the Annual Reports, detailed statements of the several Trust Funds were said to be exhibited;" and the Report of the Trustees of 1836 declares that there was attached to it a "detailed account of the several investments of stock and other securities, appropriated to the different funds." The inference of the Committee of 1854, that the subsequent blending of the funds shows that the distribution was without authority, cannot be correct and valid; for the Report of 1836 says that such a distribution was actually exhibited to the Assembly in that year, although the income for that year was distributed on the principle of blended investment.

The Committee of 1854 state, that there is no special vote on the minutes of the Board authorizing the distribution on the Treasurer's book. To this objection, the obvious reply is, that the subject was under the control of the Finance Committee and the Treasurer that the latter was subject to the authority of the former-and that the exhibits made by their joint action were presented to the Board of Trustees, who approved of the whole Report and its documents, and ordered it by a specific vote to be sent up to the General Assembly. The Board thus confirmed the Report of the Finance Committee, and sanctioned the distribution.

The fact that this distribution of the funds among the different trusts was authorized, is further established by the transactions of 1839. In 1839, the Board of Trustees appointed a Committee to ascertain the condition of the funds in the following words: " Resolved, That be a Committee to ascertain and report to this Board what are the funds in the possession or custody of this Corporation; and from what sources, in what manner, and on what trusts the same have been received." This Committee was subsequently "authorized to employ some person to prepare a detailed statement thereof, under the direction of the Committee." The information presented in the elaborate Report, made by this officer, selected by the Committee, who was no other than the Treasurer himself (a new Treasurer appointed in 1836,) corresponds with the financial exhibits of 1835, and thus gives the testimony of at least two Treasurers of the Board that the basis of the Report of 1852 is the true one.

The undersigned further states, that the Report and the accompanying exhibits, made by the Trustees in 1836, received the sanction of the Assembly on June 2d of that year.

The Financial Committee of the Assembly reported that they have examined the books of the Treasurer and find them in perfect order, exhibiting all the different funds of the Church in a clear and perspicuous manner," &c.; whereupon the Assembly adopted the following resolutions, viz: "Resolved, That the General Assembly approve the proceedings of the Board of Trustees, as detailed in the Report of May 10th," &c. Even if the distribution, found on the books of the Treasurer of that year, had been an altogether arbitrary one, and originally made by the Treasurer without authority-neither of which suppositions is admitted by the undersigned-yet the General Assembly had a right to sanction that distribution. If the blended funds could not be all distinctly traced, the Assembly had the right ex necessitate rei to order an equitable distribution. Such a distribution appears on the Treasurer's book in 1835-it is distinctly alluded to in the Report of the Trustees of 1836-and it was sanctioned by the Assembly of 1836-as has been shown. If these facts are so, then the rights of the cestuy que trusts must be held to have VESTED, and cannot now be lightly set aside. Notwithstanding the subsequent blending of the income of funds, it is believed that the Assembly should go back to the distribution, made in 1835, before any losses accrued, and to require that henceforth the income be disbursed according to the distribution of the principal of each separate fund, as it then appeared on the books of the Corporation.

The undersigned begs leave to say, in conclusion, that he has no desire to prolong a controversy, which practically makes no very great difference in the amount of the different trusts, however it may be decided. If the General Assembly shall adopt the basis of the Report of the present year, and undo the proceedings of 1852, all parties will probably regard it as a final settlement of the question. In making the statements contained in this paper, the sole object has been to show that the basis of the Report made to the Assembly in 1852, is correct.

If the Report of 1854, controverting the basis of the Report of 1852, is printed in the Minutes of the Assembly, the undersigned, in justice to the former Committee, requests that this paper may go along with it; the Report of 1852 having assumed the distribution of 1835 to be correct, without supposing at that time that there was any necessity for stating the reasons of their opinion.

May 15th, 1854.

All of which is respectfully submitted,

C. VAN RENSSELAER,

A Member of the Committee of 1852, and a Trustee of the General Assembly.

The above paper having been read in my hearing; I concur in its statements, and au thorize my name to be attached to it.

May 16th, 1854.

STACY G. POTTS, Chairman of the Committee of 1852.

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARIES.

FORTY-SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY AT PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY.

The Board of Directors of the Theological Seminary at Princeton, N. J., present to the General Assembly the following as their forty-second Annual Report:

Through the year now closed, the following forty-two new students have been received into the Seminary, viz:

On certificate from the Associate Reformed Theological Seminary at Oxford, Ohio, James Hall Brookes, graduate of Miami University.

On certificate from the Theological Seminary at Cincinnati, Ohio,

James H. Burns, graduate of Hamilton College.

On certificate from the Theological Seminary at New Albany,

Andrew J. Reynolds, graduate of Woodward College.

John N. Young, graduate of Jefferson College.