“Very well; but I want to understand what you know about Mr. Heward,” said the counsel for the defence.
“I’ve said already I ken naething about Mr. Heward. Lord bless me! it’s no a man, it’s a principle we’re thinking of. No, I deny that; it’s no an oath. ‘Lord bless me!’ is a prayer, if you will be at the bottom o’t. We’ve a’ muckle need to say that. I say the presentee is of the Heward school of infidelity; that’s the objection I’m here to support.”
“But, my friend,” said a member of the presbytery, “it is necessary that you should be more precise. It is necessary to say, you know, that Mr. Heward rejects revelation; that he——”
“Moderator, I call my reverend brother to order,” said another minister; “the witness is here to give evidence about Mr. Campbell. No doubt he is prepared to show us how the presentee has proved himself to belong to the Heward school.”
“Oh ay,” said the witness; “there’s plenty evidence of that. I took notes mysel’ of a’ the sermons. Here’s one of them. It’s maybe a wee in my ain words, but there’s nae change in the sense,—‘My freends, it’s aye best to look after your ain business: it’s awfu’ easy to condemn others. We’re all the children of the Heavenly Father. I have seen devotion among a wheen poor uninstructed Papists that would put the best of you to shame’—No, that’s no what I was looking for; that’s the latitudinarian bit.”
“I think it has been said, among other things,” said another member of the presbytery, “that Mr. Campbell had a leaning towards papal error; it appears to me that the witness’s note is almost a proof of that.”
“Moderator,” said Colin’s counsel, “I beg to call your attention to the fact that we are not discussing the presentee’s leaning towards papal error, but his adherence to the Heward school of infidelity, whatever that may be. If the witness will inform us, or if any of the members of the court will inform us, what Mr. Heward believes, we will then be able to make some reply to this part of the case.”
“I dinna ken naething about Mr. Heward,” said the cautious witness. “I’m no prepared to enter into ony personal question. It’s no the man but the principle that we’re heeding, the rest of the objectors and me.”
“The witness is perfectly right,” said a conscientious presbyter; “if we were tempted to enter into personal questions there would be no end to the process. My friend, the thing for you to do in this delicate matter is to lead proof. No doubt the presentee has made some statement which has led you to identify him with Mr. Heward. He has expressed some doubts, for example, about the origin of Christianity or the truth of revelation—”
“Order, order,” cried the enlightened member; “I protest against such leading questions. Indeed, it appears to me, Moderator, that it is impossible to proceed with this part of the case unless it has been made clearly apparent to the court what Mr. Heward believes.”