Transcription of page 18 of A Review of the Discussion Relative to the Mount Carroll Seminary, containing some or all of the text of "Mt. Carroll Seminary", by Nathaniel Halderman.
school room? Why name certain regulations to which they should subscribe, such as "keeping of Saturday nights," having their Sabbath to commence with the setting sun on Saturday night? Was Mr. G. then willing to enter into the "Shylock bond" and "consummate the fraud," he charges upon the Principals in "their introduction of a 'Bible basis',&c.?" How could he so calmly contemplate such an "unholy wedlock," when he was to be one of the parties. I see no way in which this inconsistency can be reconciled, except we admit as true, an assertion Mr. G. has made, "that he as a Presbyterian could conduct an institution without its being sectarian, while a Baptist could not, because of the nature of their faith. Though not a word or act might come to the knowledge of pupils, yet the exclusive nature of the Baptist creed would render the school sectarian in the highest degree." Then Mr. Gray must have thought to secure a controlling influence in the school—make all to subscribe to Presbyterian regulations, &c., without any "violation of charter;" without any "moral fraud;" without any "unholy wedlock with infidels;" without any "change of basis;" without any "Bible basis." Surely here is a mystery I will not attempt to unravel. I will only add; what a pity it is, since the ladies in their choice of a home in a christian church, were actuated by motives of policy as Mr. Gray has insinuated, that they were not far sighted enough to join his church and thus have avoided all this criminality which now (in his eyes) necessarily attaches itself to their every act as Baptists! Really, I believe had they been willing to receive a few gratuitous lessons from him and put them in practice, they would have done so. How ungrateful he must think them for all his earnest advice and deep solicitude for them about the time they were deciding this momentous question.
As regards the visits of Rev. Estee at the Seminary I would premise this point with the remark that I do not consider it Mr. Gray's or any other individual’s business, who or how frequently visitors are received by the Principals at their own house, providing such visits do not in any way interfere with the rights and privileges of pupils or prove detrimental to the interests of the school, hence those Principals should not condescend to make a public expose of their register of visitors. I will simply say that the ladies whom Mr. Gray anathematises so vehemently, hold themselves in readiness to give their oaths if required, regarding the statements made on this point in the letter of June 2d. Now for a moment glance at the comparative weight of testimony. Here are six teachers of undoubted veracity, professing and I doubt not, truly possessing christianity, the majority of whom were in the Seminary during the whole time of