"Minutes of Upper Marsh Creek Presbyterian Church Session from the year 1776 until 1788, during the ministry of Rev. John Black"

[The first page is just a second half of a meeting, the first part of which has been lost. Punctuation has been added here and there, to make for easier reading]

.ticular marks of immaturity. She also further declares the said child was born the day after Mr. Black's ordination, & further saith not.

The Session, after mature deliberation, do judge that they have not any evidence to convict the above Robert Morrow and Rebekah, his wife, of antenuptual fornication, But that it is very probable the child was prematurely born & therefore that they be admitted to have the same baptized.

Concluded with prayer.

April 26, 1776 Upper Marsh Creek

The Session met according to appointment U.P.P.S. Col. McPherson, Sam'l Edie, Jas. McAllister, Jas. Russell, Walter Buchannan, Quintain Armstrong, Jas Riddel, David Moore, Thos. Latta, Elders --with Mr. Black M'dr. Absent Esq'r McConneaughy, Sam'l McConneaughy, John Flemming.

Elizabeth Porterfield appeared and charged a certain Oliver Brown, a married man, with being the father of a bastard child born of her in the year 1770.

The Session, having sufficient evidence that said Oliver Brown had been regularly cited to attend the judicature of the congregation in order to stand trial with regard to the above charge, & also that it was his fixed determination not to attend, judge it propper to admit said Elizabeth Porterfield by oath to fix the above charge upon G. Brown in his absence.

Accordingly--

That Oliver Brown, a married man, prevailed on her to yield to his lustful desires, & had carnal knowledge of her body, by which means she became pregnant with a child. That s'd child was begotten on the second day of January, 1770, and born on the 21st day of the following September--that he had criminal correspondence with her several times before, but not after, the begetting of the child, and that G. Oliver Brown and none else is the father of the child then begotten of her & further saith not--

As the above Eliz. Porterfield makes application to have her child baptized on giving that satisfaction which the church requires, The Session do judge that considering the heinousness of her guilt in acting so with a married man, she shall give public satisfaction before this Cong'n two different Sabbaths, after which she may be admitted to privileges.

Concluded with prayer.

Upper M. Creek, Aug. 16, 1776

The Session met according to appointment U.P.P.S. Walter Buchannan, Sam'l Edie, Quintain Armstrong, David Moore, John Flemming, Jas. Riddel, Sam'l McConneaughy, Elders with Mr. Black M'dr.Absent. Col McPherson, David McConneaughy, Jas. McAllister, Thos Latta, James Russell.

James Taggert, having made application to this session for privileges in the Church, and report having been made to us that his child was born some considerable time before nine months after his marriage, the Session refused admitting him to privileges until this matter should be cleared up.

Accordingly--

Notice having been previously given of this days meeting to all persons concerned, James Taggart appeared and produced a certificate under Mr. McMurdie's hand, by which it appears that said Jas & Mary his wife were married together on the 8th day of Sept. 1774.

Agnes Walker, who performed the office of midwife unto said Taggart's wife in the above case, being solemnly deposed, saith-

That the child that was then born of Mary Taggart was exceeding weakly and not likely to live, and that it was and is her opinion according to the best of her knowledge, the child had not come to a state of full maturity. Being asked whether the childs nails were full grown- she responded, they were not. Being asked at what time the child was born, she answered, on the 17th day of May, & further saith not-

After mature deliberation, the Session came to the following judgement, viz. that they have not sufficient evidence to convict the above Jas Taggart & Mary his wife of antenuptual fornication, but that on the contrary, there is a probability of their being innocent in the premises and that they be admitted to have the child baptized.

Concluded with prayer.

Upper Marsh Creek, Dec. 13, 1776

The Session met according to appointment. Present were Wm Black M'dr, with Col. McPherson, Sam'l Edie, Quintain Armstrong, James Russell, Jno. Flemming, Tho's Latta, Sam'l McConneaughy, Elders. Absent Walter Buchannan, David McConneaughy, David Moore & Jas McAllister.

Began with Prayer

The Session resumed the consideration of Moses Boyde's affair, which had been left in statu quo by the Session May 12, 1773, and finding that further light can be obtained relative to it, do judge that they have not sufficient evidence to convict said Moses Boyd of antenuptual fornication. But inasmuch as some complaints have been lodged against s'd Moses lately for unchristian conduct, particularly undue wrath & heat. The Session are of opinion that he ought to be seriously dealt with and admonished by the M'dr of Session and that, upon his promising an amendment & endeavors to guard against such conduct in future, he may be admitted to privileges in the church.

Concluded with prayer.

Upper Marsh Creek - June 20th 1777

The Session met according to app'mt. U.P.P.S. John Blac, M'dr, Samuel Edie, Quintain Armstrong, Jas Riddel, Jas Russell, Jas McAllister, Tho Latta, David Moore, Elders.--Absent, David McConneaughy, Col. McPherson, Sam'l McConneaughy, Walter Buchannan, Jno Flemming & Jas Ewing.

Jno. Flemming is now come

Sam'l McConneaughy is now come.

Walter Jenkin, having made application to this Session for baptism to his child, and a common fame founded upon some strong circumstances having prevailed that said Walter Jenkin was guilty of fornication some years ago with a certain Jane Warnock, then his father's servant, & also since that a certain Elizabeth McClellen, having before a magistrate sworn that the said Walter Jenkin had carnal knowledge of her body.

The Session could not admit him to privileges until the church should be satisfied touching the premises.

Said Walter denied both charges and offered to produce evidence to exculpate himself- To give him the opportunity of so doing this day was appointed & Walter Jenkin, being present when asked whether his evidences were come, answered in the affirmative & named Samuel Russell as an evidence in the case relative to Eliz. McClellen- who being called and solemnly sworn- saith-

That Elizabeth McClellen was spinning wool at his father's, to the best of his rememberance, sometime in August or September, 1775. That one night during the said time of her being there, Walter Jenkin also lodged there, that this deponent & Walter went to bed together and arose together, and he does not know of said Walter arising in the night or being out of the bed from the time they lay down together until they arose in the morning, he also says the said Eliz. McClellen & some more of the family sat up some time after he & said Walter went to bed, but could not tell whether they went to bed before he fell asleep or not. & further saith not--

David McConneaughy is now come.

Walter Jenkin, being asked whether he had any other evidence named William Porter, who, being called and solemnly sworn, saith--

That Eliz. McClellen was in his house sometime before the 14th of June, 1776, and said, I think, that the 14th of said month, her full time was in to be delivered of a child, that she had sworn to be Walter Jenkins, but said McClellen went till that day, three weeks being Friday night, and then took her labor, and was in labour all night, and then about break of day next morning, told my wife as she informed me, even in an extacy of sorrow, that she had ruined herself, soul and body, or words to that effect, for the child was --- another man, and said that she thought she never would be delivered until she told the above. At the same time wanted to speak with me. Accordingly I went to her and asked her if she was clear of Walter Jenkin. She answered no she was not. And also that she thought it was his until she went past her time, although at other times she told my wife that as soon as she had sworn it to Walter Jenkin her conscience smote her.

Doubting she was wrong, this my wife told me, according in a very little time after I spoke with her she bore one dead child and she lived about eight weeks after her delivery and always asserted the foregoing relation as far as I know- & further saith not.

The next person named by Walter Jenkin was Thomas McClellen who being solemnly sworn declares as follows--That about four years or five ago, his sister Eliz. McClellen was deluded by a certain Rob't Moore to go with him one night in order to be married, as he said, she returned next day and not being able to give any good account of her conduct was severely rebuked by her father, that shortly after she left his, the deponents house & that in the time of her absence became pregnant with child which she swore to Walter Jenkin, that he this deponent took occasion several times to deal solemnly with her, lest she should have wronged Walter Jenkin, but that she always asserted that he was guilty with her & particularly that a few days before her death, the Rev. Mr. Dobbin & himself, this deponent, went to visit her & that the question was asked concerning the charge against Walter Jenkin, and that she still persisted in saying he was guilty with her.

Being asked whether the s'd Rob't Moore had not obtained from s'd Eliz. McClellen some bond which he had as surety for her share of her father's estate, he answered in the affirmative & that this is the substance of what this deponent knows respecting the above charge & further saith not.

Jas Mays was next - and saith-- That he was present at Wm McClure's Esq. where Walter Jenkin & Eliz. McClellen were there face to face some time after she had bourn a child to s'd Walter. That there he had heard s'd Walter putting such questions too & receiving such answers as these from Eliz. McClellen. Q: "Where was the child born which you have sworn to me?" Ans: "At Jas. Russels." Q: "At what time?" Ans: "On the 14 of Sept. 1775" Q: "Was it begot in a bed or on the floor?" Ans: "In a bed." Q: "Were you alone or had you company?" Ans: "I had company." Q: "Who was with you?" Ans. "Jas Russells two daughters." and further saith not.

The Session deliberated some time on this matter, as far as they went, and are of opinion that, as the former part of charge has not been entered upon at all this day, nor any evidence addressed to determine it, that therefore, it is best to leave the whole matter open till a future day, that Walter Jenkin may have time to make his defence & not to enter any judgement at present concerning any part of the premises.

Friday, Nov 27th 1777

The Session met according to appointment U.P.P.S. The Rev. John Black, Mod'r. With Col. McPherson, Sam'l Edie, Walter Buchannan, Quintain Armstrong, Sam'l McConeaughy, James Ewing, Jas Russel, Elders. Abs't- David McConneaughy, David Moore, John Flemming, Tho Latta, James McAllister, & Jas. Riddel.

The Session resumed the former complaints against Walter Jenkin. And, as Jean Warmack formerly mentioned (was Jean Gordon), cannot be prevailed upon to appear before this Session to give evidence respecting s'd Walter in the former part of the charge, but yet conducts and speaks in such a manner as to give the greatest ground for suspicion that he is guilty & no other evidence can be obtained & as sundry things respecting the whole appears to the Session to be involved in considerable obscurity. The Session came to a resolution to take the advice of Presbytery concerning the same, and not to come to any final judgement at time

Concluded with prayer.

Friday, April 10th, 1778

The Session met according to app'mt. U.P.P.S. The Rev. John Black with Col. McPherson, David McConneaughy, Jas. McAllister, Jas Riddel, Jas Ewing, Jas Russel, Tho Latta, Sam'l McConneaughy, John Flemming, Quintain Armstrong, David Moore, Elders.

Col. Kennedy appeared and laid in a paper containing some complaints against Wm. McCreary which is ordered to be kept in retentis. [see * below]

The Session then called upon William McCreary and interrogated him concerning the said complaints. (in the judgement of the Session) who acknowledged in substance the things contained therein, but said that he mentioned them only as a matter of report and fame(?) to him, that he was under the influence of anger when he spoke, and that he was sorry he spoke in such an unguarded manner.

The Session then came to the following judgement viz. That tho' Wm. McCreary does not appear to be the malicious inventor, or even propagator, of these scandalous reports upon Col. Kennedy. Yet that he was criminal in being so far under the influence of passion, and in mentioning in so unguarded a manner reports that are injurous to character without sufficient foundation, and treating character so untenderly- & that therefore he be rebuked and admonished by the moderator in Session - and that this judgement of Session be made public on some day of meeting of this Congregation.

William McCreary complies with the above judgement.

Concluded with prayer.

*"William McCreary charged my with forcing the men over the North River without orders and Durst not go over My Self and went and Cist my Mistres and Booted the Seate out of my Britches. This is the charge by me

David Kennedy"

August 27th, 1778

The Session met according to apptm't, began with prayer.

The Session resumed the consideration of Walter Jenkin's case.

The Session finding by one of their members that tho' Walter Jenkin had sufficient previous notice to attend this meeting of Session & was even desired this day by the said members to come (the member being sent by Session for that purpose) he does not appear, and has farther declared to said member, that he has determined not to appear. And as Jean Warmock (now Jean Gordon) who was said to have born a bastard child to said Walter Jenkin some years ago is now present, Session judge it proper and their duty to take examination & qualification touching the premises.

Accordingly-

Jean Gordon being called and solemnly dealt with declares upon oath-

That several years ago when she was a servant to her Uncle Moses Jenkin, her Cousin Walter Jenkin, on a certain night coming home late, came to her bed upon which she was there lying and then & there had carnal knowledge of her body, in consequence of which she became pregnant with a child. She further declares as above that the said Walter Jenkin had carnal knowledge of her body some time after that in her father's Still House, that she bore a child which was begotten by him, the s'd Walter, at a certain Mr. Murry's, Maryland, & that the said Walter Jenkin & no other is the Father of s'd child, and further saith not.

The further consideration of Walter Jenkin's case deferred

Concluded with prayer.

Thursday, Sept. 17th, 1778

The Session met and constitute by prayer.

Present Rev. John Black, M'dr with Walter Buchannan, & Sam'l Edie, Sam'l McConneaughy, Quintain Armstrong, James Riddle, James Russel, Tho Latta, James Ewing & David Moore, Elders. Absent- Col. McPherson, David McConneaghy & John Flemming. Col. McPherson is now come.

William Buchannan having a considerable time ago proposed himself as a candidate for full communion in this Congregation & some objections being laid in against him founded upon his very irregular conduct at a certain vandue on account of which he was debarred now appears and submits himself to the judgement of the Session.

The Session upon examination finds that the s'd William Buchannan was at the time above referred to intoxicated with liquor, that he quarreled with diverse persons, particularly with his brother in law whom he said Wm now acknowledges. Upon serious consideration therefore of this atrocious nature of his crimes as being so scandalous in themselves, so contrary to the Christian temper & rule & so to God- the Session judge that he be rebuked and admonished in the face of the Congregation & that upon his profession of repentance, he be admitted to the Communion of the Church.

The Session again resumes the consideration of Walter Jenkin's case, and think it their duty to issue the matter, altho' Walter Jenkin be not present, inasmuch as he has been regularly notified of the meeting of Session & that it was his business to attend & moreover because they have all that evidence which can be rationally be expected & what in their opinion is sufficient to found a judgement.

After maturely deliberating on the nature and weight of the evidence and supported also by the opinion of Presbytery, the Session judge that tho' Walter Jenkin does not appear, in all probability the Father of the children born by Elizabeth McClellen, yet that he was guilty of whoredom with her and that he is also guilty in the case of Jean Warmock (now Jean Gordon) and moreover as in the case of examination, said Walter manifested to the Session a most wicked disposition in offering to exculpate himself of both crimes by solemn oath, tho' they are now so clearly proved against him, to testify their abhorrence of such complicated wickedness, and in some degree proportion centure to crime they further judge that said Walter be rebuked and admonished for these his offenses in the face of the Congregation when convened for public worship, after which he shall be kept in a state of suspension till he gives evidence of repentance, & that then submitting to another rebuke and admonition in the open Congregation he may be admitted to Communion in the Church.

Concluded with prayer

Upper Marsh Creek May 5, 1779

The Session met - began with prayer.

Mary Porter having represented to the Mod'r that her character was injured by a certain Andrew Branwood & his wife, members of Mr. Dobbin's Congregation, they having, as she says, obtained by undue influence, a paper from under her hand which she now understands contained in it some things which she did not think were in it when signed & the truth of which she denies & desires that some measures might be taken by this Session for having her character set in its proper light- and gave Mary Ann Hope as an evidence in the whole.

The Moderator, being by Session empowered to give a citation for the evidence, and also to request the attendance of Andrew Branwood & his wife at this days meeting, which they have all answered by their appearance.

The Session entered on the consideration of the matter.

Andrew Branwood produces a paper as from his wife representing that Mary Porter, about Aug last charged her for saying some things that reflected upon her former conduct, and said that ill things could be said of her sister Jenny (Andrew Branwood's wife's sister) & that she was ill belied or she had good luck that she, the said Jenny had not a child as well as she, and that to a married man, for she kept him untimeous company &ct. Andrew Branwood also related that a short time after this conversation was between his wife and Mary Porter, he together with his wife & sister in law, Jenny, came to the said Mary and got her to sign a paper to this effect (the paper he has not present) that she acknowledged she had blyed the character of Jenny Gibbon in saying that she had good luck or was ill belied if she would not have had a child as well as her & that to a married man, & all this without just foundation.

Mary Porter represents the matter thus- That in the conversation refered to above, she only said that Jenny Gibbony was ill belied, or if it had not been for her good luck she would have been I as bad a box as her, by keeping company to a married man-And with regard to the paper she signed, she says that as Andrew Branwood threatened her very much with the Session & Civil Law if she would not sign the paper he had drawn up & as she was at that time destitute of friends and unacquainted with the nature of the writings (as she could not read it) she was scared to sign it, tho' as it was read to her she affirms it contained no acknowledgement of having belied the character of any person.

It appears by the acknowledgement of both parties that Mary Ann Hope was present both the times & transactions referred to above & therefore the Session judged it proper to take her to evidence in the case.

Mary Ann Hope being sworn, saith-

In regard to the conversation between Mary Porter and Sarah Branwood referred to in the foregoing representation, that she was present at it and heard Mary Porter ask Sarah Branwood if she had told Jean Stewart that she, s'd Mary, & Sarah Porterfield might hold their tongues & not make fun of her daughters, for that s'd Mary was an idle hussy &ct. Sarah Branwood said she did say so, and did not allow for daughter to keep any such idle hussy's company. Mary Porter said, Sarah, your own sister was ill belied, or if it had not been for her good luck she would have been in as bad a box as me. Sarah Branwood said, what mean you by that, you have had a child, has she wrought for one like you. Mary Porter said, no, but by keeping untimeous company with a married man.

With regard to the paper which Mary Porter signed and the transactions of that time, she saith that Jenny Gibbon wanted something from under her hand. For this reason, that if it should be cast up to her afterward that it had been said of her she had had any correspondence with a married man, such as Mary Porter mentioned it might appear s'd Mary spoke passion & did not mean to prove any thing against her.

Sept. 28 1779

The Session began with prayer

Febr'y 10th 1780

The Session met. Began with prayer

Thomas Ewing came before the Session in order to make it appear that his wife, whom he had left in Ireland some years ago, is now dead.

The Session find that s'd Thomas has been guilty of criminal correspondence with Eliz. Ewing, daughter of a member of the Session, and that acknowledging the fact, he desires to marry the woman & to be restores to Christian privileges on making proper acknowledgements.

The Session called to prove the death of his wife. S'd Thomas produced a letter as from his wife's brother in Ireland, bearing the date at Glen McQueen, July 28th, 1776, carrying in its face that it was brought by a certain Lieut. Mansfield, bound for New York.

Which letter mentioned the death of s'd Thomas's wife & one of his brethren. It appeared on inquiry that s'd Thomas never mentioned the death of his wife to any person till seven or eight months after he received the letter. When he told it on the way to James Ewing, father of the woman above mentioned.

After examining into all the circumstances of this matter, as far as appeared necessary, the Session are of opinion that however it may be a truth that s'd Ewing's wife is dead, they have not as yet rec'd sufficient evidence to prove it. But as s'd Thomas informs the Session, his letter came enclosed I a letter to a certain Oliver Spence, which as well as his own mentioned the death of his wife &ct. The Session advise s'd Thomas to brig s'd Spence before them- or his attestation on oath respecting this matter, properly authenticated under the seal of the county where he resides, after which they will be ready to give him a further hearing.

Concluded with prayer.

March 31st, 1780

The Session met-began with prayer.

James Russell, a member of this Session, requests that the Session would enquire into the rise and foundation of a report that has prevailed upon his daughter Mary. To this effect, that she miscarried of a bastard child to Hugh Black last summer or fall.

And moreover complains-

That Miss Jannet McMurdie (beside many other mean contemptible things) has injurious asserted that the boys who came to his house slept with his daughters and that he approved of it.

The Session agree to meet on Friday next to take into consideration the things referred to in the above request and complaints.

Ordered that the Mod'r give citations for such persons as Jas Russell shall inform him, are necessary to give testimony in the above case & for Jannet McMurdie ordered that Mr. Martin be requested to assist & moderate in our next meeting.

Concleded with prayer.

April 7th 1780

The Session met according to appointment, together with the Rev. Jas Martin, who sat as Mod'r.

Began with prayer

Miss Jannet Boyd, who, according to Jas. Russell's request, was cited to appear this day to give testimony respecting the report upon Mary Russell, came into the Session and being solemnly sworn, saith-

That some time last year, being at Mr. Edie's together with Elizabeth McClure, said Elizabeth informed her that it was reported that Polly Russell had miscarried & that Hugh Black should have gone to the doctor for a creditable Elder's daughter in the Congregation. Eliz. McClure was also present (being previously cited) and conversed with upon the subject, who says, she remembers nothing about it at all, or whether she said or did not say what Jannet Boyd hath sworn, or whether she heard it from another.

The Session find that both by the appearance of s'd Elizabeth ad by the solemn declaration of her father & mother, she is, thro' a disorder in her head, scarcely capable of moral action, and especially that her memory is so impaired that she cannot retain anything for any length of time, and that from this and every other consideration, nothing further can, with propriety, be done with her in this inquiry. A note from under Dr. Ambrose's hand was also produced declaring that Hugh Black never asked him for any medicine nor rec'd any from him, but one dose of salts about three years ago when coming from Camp.

And as the father & mother of s'd Elizabeth both declare, that they ever knew of any such reports upon Mary Russell, nor heard any such conversation in their family-- The Session judge upon the whole-

That the above report is altogether groundless, however it might have arisen whether from the malice of any one cannot now be found out, or from the weakness of s'd Elizabeth, and that s'd Mary Russell's & Hugh Black's character stand free, entirely free from any ground of such imputation, and ought to be so received- by all---& that this judgement shall be read in the face of the Congregation.

With regard to the complaint against Jannet McMurdie jun'r, she was cited but does not appear, but McMcMurdie, her father, this day delivered a letter to Mr. Martin, the present Mod'r, from Mr. McMurdie, directed to Mr. Black. The stated Mod'r, which letter calls in question the night of this Indicature to summons any of Mr. McMurdie's family because (as she affirms) none of them ever promised subjection to Mr. Black as their minister. And moreover contains serious objections against the propriety of our findings respecting her daughter, and concludes with a strong intimation that she looks upon Mr. Black as having a premeditated design to injure Mr. McMurdie & her family.

The Session, therefore, cannot but conclude that as Mr. McMurdie delivered the letter himself (which was open) he must acquiesce in & approve of it.

That Mrs. McMurdie has in her own name and in the name of the family declined the bar of this judicature, especially as she alleges in her letter, we have only a right to deny them privileges, if under any reflections, and consequently, that the family look upon themselves not under our care or jurisdiction.

In fine, the Session concludes that the above complaint cannot, in present circumstances, be farther prosecuted before them, and that Mr. McMurdie's family must be considered as excluding themselves from privileges in this Congregation until they manifest different sentiments & temper.

Concluded with prayer.

May 24th 1780

The Session met according to appointment, began with prayer.

John Mays, who some time ago made application to the Session for privileges, and was denied them on account of the declaration of a certain Elizabeth McClelland, charging him on her death bed & in the hour or solemnity, as being guilty of fornication with her, now appeared & denying the charge, proposed to prove that s'd Elizabeth McClelland was not at his father's house at the time this act should have been committed.

The Session find the state of the case is this- Elizabeth McClelland, having sworn a child to Walter Jenkin, did, in labor, say she tho't the child she was and had sworn to Walter Jenkin was John May's, affirming at the same time, that Walter Jenkin was guilty with her. And this declaration she persisted in till her death, which was not long after her delivery.

The Session is of opinion this matter as it is ---- is attended with difficulties too great for us to surmount, and therefore, agree to refer the case to Presbytery & it is thereby referred.

Concluded with prayer.

Sept. 15th 1780

The Session met, began with prayer.

Jean Thompson, having some time ago tabled a complaint against Agnes McGinnis in having reported her to be a drunkard, which is contained at large in said complaint, and ordered to be left in the hands of the Session. In other consequence of which citations were given for evidence & this day appointed for hearing the matter.

The parties being present, the charges were read to Agnes McGinnis. Agnes's acknowledged all the charges as having reported them, except two, viz., that, respecting Jean's being in the Secedar's (?) Meeting House: & that when two strange men were at Widow Thompson's - with regard to which she says that she did not report Jean Thompson as drunk or intoxicated at these times.

Robert Spear, being addressed as an evidence, declared upon oath, that he heard Agness McGinnis relate both the above particulars, and that she represented Jean Thompson as intoxicated at both times.

Adjourned until Oct. 4

Concluded with prayer

Session could not meet on October 4 on account of rain

Adjournment continued until Oct 13

Wed. Oct. 4th, 1780

The Session could not attend by reason of the rains, except the Moderator & two or three members, by whom the adjournment was continued until Friday the 13th inst.

Oct. 13, 1780

Session met. Began with prayer

In the course of conference upon the subject the said Robert Spear declared to Session that Agness McGinnis was hired by him to wait upon his wife during her illness in childbed, that when on this service with him, he heard her report the above particulars on Jean Thompson, that she slept less or more every day during her stay there, beside her regular rest at night, & that a day or two before she left his house, she was drunk.

Agness McGinnis acknowledged that she was under the influence of a bad temper when she reported the things contained in Jean Thompson's complaint & did not act from Christian principals, but still maintained she was not the author of them all, that other persons had related these stories to her, on Jean Thompson, except two, of which she herself had personal knowledge.

The Session asked what the particulars were of which she possessed personal knowledge.

Agness McGinnis answered that when the Rye was reapt & that when the two strange men were in the house ---

The Session then asked what reason she had to think Jean Thompson was intoxicated at these times, to which she could give no satisfactory answer, nor did she mention any thing in the temper, speech or conduct of s'd Jean that could give any just ground for suspicion that she was intoxicated.

With regard to these reports which she had heard from others, Agness McGinnis said that some of them were told her by a little girl, a bound child in the family of Widow Thompson. S'd Jean's mother, who, she acknowledged was not fit to give evidence in any count, & consequently whose word was not sufficient to fix the character of any person. That some of them were told her by a certain Ann Parker & some by Wm. Brennar.

Both these latter persons were cited at the request of Agness McGinnis, only Wm. Brennar appeared, but a certificated under the hand of Ann Parker, signed in the presence of two witnesses, was laid before the Session, declaring that she ever saw Jean Thompson the worse for liquor, nor ever was the author of any such thing to Agness McGinnis.

Mrs. Morrow, the neighbor referred to in one of the charges, was present, and declared that she never saw Jean Thompson coming to her house, but in a Christian, regular, sober manner.

Wm Brennan was interrogated whether he had ever told Agness McGinnis any of the things contained in Jean Thompson's complaint, as s'd McGinnis reported he did. He replied, that one day, going from Lower Marsh Creek Meeting House, he took Agness McGinnis on his horse behind him, that going along thus, she talked of various things respecting Jean Thompson & seemed particularly inquisitive to know whether s'd Jean was not addicted to strong drink, that in the course of the conversation, he had mentioned that on a certain day, when he and James Willson were cleaning ground at Wid. Thompson's, none being at home but Jean, they were not called to dinner, but found nobody there, that they took some victuals, and went to their work again, but denies that he said Jean was drunk, or that she was found on a gooses nest ( as Agness reported it) or that he reported her as addicted to liquor at all.

James Willson mentioned above was present, and declares that he remembers the day referred to by Wm. Brennan, and that the facts were as he reported them, also adds that there was not the least ground to conclude that the s'd Jean was disordered by liquor.

As Session cannot finish this business today, it is deferred until the first Wednesday of Oct.

Concluded with prayer

Friday, Oct. 13th, 1780
The Session met, began with prayer

The parties above were present & Wm Brennan, who was examined at our last meeting, but not sworn. The question was then put, shall Wm. Brennan now be sworn. It was objected against by Agness McGinnis. Whereupon, the Session judged it unnecessary & improper to qualify him, as the party who addressed him as an evidence on her behalf objected against it.

After deliberating upon the whole, the Session came to the following judgement: That the reports spread by Agness McGinnis upon Jean Thompson, are entirely false & groundless, without the shadow of a cause or reason, and that the s'd Jean hath supported an unblemished character from her infancy, maintaining a regular, sober, Christian conduct, in the estimation of those who have been long & early acquainted with her. So her character ought to stand in this fair light still, not withstanding the malicious attempt that hath been made by Agness McGinnis to destroy it. That Agness hath, thro' the whole disposition to search after, to raise, & to spread calumny upon others, that by this and also by drinking liquor to excess, she hath rendered herself unworthy of Christian Communion. And lastly, that she shall stand excluded from Christian privileges till, by a tender, humble, Christian walk, she manifest repentance - upon which, and being rebuked in the face of the Congregation, she shall be restored to Christian Communion.

Ordered that the judgement be read to the Congregation.

Concluded with Prayer

Upper Marsh Creek, Dec. 4, 1780

Session met, began with prayer.

Miss Jean McMurdie, who had been formerly cited before the Session on a complaint of Jas Russell, but did not appear, & with regard to which complaint, no issue could be made, because she refused proper subjection to the authority of this judicature- none appeared & explicitly declared & acknowledged herself subject to the authority of the Session in the Lord & that she meant to continue subject to it as the other members of the Congregation, according to the Presbyterian plan, so long as Providence fixed her residence in s'd Congregation. Whereupon - the Session agree to take the s'd complaint under consideration, and appoint to meet on next Friday for that purpose, to which the parties agreed.

Ordered that citations be given, by the Mod'r, for such persons as the parties shall desire to give evidences.

Concluded with prayer.

Friday, Decem'r 22nd, 1780

Began with prayer

The Mod'r, with five members of Session, met & tho' the number was small & they, with reluctance, engaged, yet as many evidences appeared who could not well attend again & the parties also willing, we proceeded as far as we could. The Session entered upon the trial referred to above, at our last meeting.

Rebecca Reed appeared & objected against the marriage of Stephen Griffin Jr. who was published to a certain Mary Donaldson last Sab.- alleging that he was under prior engagement to herself. Stephen Griffin Jr., being present, denied there were any engagements of that nature between them. In consequence of which, the Session order the publication to stop until inquiry can be made into the state of this matter, and require the parties to attend at our next meeting prepared to give what light they can on this subject.

The matter respecting Jas Russel's complaint was opened by reading such complaint - Miss Jean McMurdie denied the charge, as it is written I said complaint. Jas Russell was called upon to support it, who addend Miss Anney Lecky & Hanna Duncan, who delivered a paper to the Mod'r containing the substance of what they were willing to be sworn to, as to what Miss Jean McMurdie had related to them. After a considerable time spent I conversing with them respecting the solemnity & importance of an oath, they were successfully sworn to the truth of what was contained in said paper, which is kept by the Mod'r, and ordered to be affixed to the minutes of this Session, together with the questions and answers upon it.

Miss Jea McMurdie as allowed to make her defence. She acknowledges that she reported certain things to Miss Duncan & Lecky, but said she was not the author of them - that she had them by report from others, and would not undertake to prove they were true, and to support this added the following evidences: first, Jannet McClure acknowledged that she had told Jean McMurdie that on a certain night of a day when there was a husking frolic at Jas Russell's, it, being very wet, so that the persons there could not go home, the young men & women lay promiscously in bed in a room, that Miss Polly Russell had come into the room & said that Miss Anney McKnight was n bed with her Uncle & Aunt, & that she had got them all fixed now, upon which, Matt'w Black bid her come to him, whereupon she blew out the candle and went to bed. That Miss Betsy Russell took off her handkerchief & asked this declarant to do the same, which she refused to do. That Jas Russell came to door some time in the night, with a candle in his hand, and said that they were all well placed, but he could place them better. Miss McMurdie's acquiesces in this. Miss Martha Jenkin acknowledged that at Jas McClure's con a certain day, being asked before Miss Jean McMurdie whither she did not remember that on that night when the frolic was at Jas Russell's, s'd Jas came to the door & said that they were all well placed, but no so well as he would have them. She had said she did not remember it, & had also added that she heard that Eliz. Porterfield had reported that when Jas Russell went to his bed, he told his wife who were placed together. Miss Jean acquiesces in this.

Jas McConaughy tabled a complaint against James Galloway, which is ordered to be kept by the Mod'r until the Session shall have time to enter upon the consideration of it. The further consideration of Jas Russell's complaint &ct deferred until Thursday next, at 11 o'clock, at which time the parties & evidences that have not been examined today are required to meet at this place.

Concluded with prayer

Thursday, Dec. 28th, 1780

Session met, began with prayer

Resumed the consideration of Jas Russell's complaint. The parties being present, and also some of the evidences who had not been examined at the last meeting. The Session proceeded to their examination

Hugh Gallagher, being called, declared that, going home from meeting & happening to ride along with Miss Jennie McMurdie, Young Walter Buchannan rode past them in haste. Upon which, Miss Jenny observed, he was in a hurry, that he said, perhaps his company was before him and likewise said that if some of the neighbors had heard what he heard of his brother, Bob, they would be very much displeased. That she then asked him what it was. That he replied that he had heard that he (Bob Buchannan) should have come to a certain house, and the Landlord, when lighting his to bed, should have showed him the bed that he was to lye in, but told him the girls' bed was not far off. He might go and sleep there if he pleased. That she (Jannet McMurdie) said she had heard that story often & very well believed it, for he did not think any parent would be so ungrateful to his child & that this, to the best of his knowledge, is what passed between Miss Jenny McMurdie & himself on that occasion.

Miss Jannet Edie was also addressed, and delivered a paper to the Mod'r, containing what she told Miss Jennie McMurdie, which was acquiesced in by s'd Jennie & ordered to be kept as part of these minutes.

The two other evidences, Mrs Morrison & Mrs Hall, we are informed, cannot attend this day, thro' weakness and indisposition of body. And therefore, the Session cannot farther proceed at present, nor yet fix a day for our next meeting, but agree that as soon as we are informed said witness can attend, we will appoint a meeting and give public notice thereof.

Concluded with prayer

Feb. 28th 1781

The Session met according to appointment. Resumed to consideration of Jas Russell's complaint against Miss Jean McMurdie.

Elizabeth Morrison, and evidence cited by the instance of Miss Jean McMurdie, appeared & delivered a paper to the Mod'r, containing a relation of what she had told to Miss Jean concerning Jas. Russell's family & signed under her own hand, which is ordered to be kept in mt's Martha Hall, the only remaining evidence does not yet appear.

The Session, having proceeded so far in this trial, think it not prudent upon the whole, for them to issue it. Notwithstanding there does not appear to us anything in the nature of the case too difficult for us to determine. Our reasons are: 1st, This Session, being under complaint before Presb'y by Mr. McMurdie's family, and the matter not yet determined. This family might themselves think and endeavor to persuade others that this Session was predjudiced against them & therefore had given partial judgement.

2ndly, Mr McMurdie & his daughter have manifested much dissatisfaction with the mode & principles of the Session's procedure in this trial, insisting that Miss Jean be sworn to the exclusion of the evidences by her adduced in her own behalf, and others should be sworn to facts which the Session judge improper, from which it appears to us probable that regard would not be paid to our judgement that is necessary to make any judgement useful to the parties.

3rdly, The Session desire to give Mr. McMurdie's family, and all others, a convincing proof that we are so far from being disposed to take any advantage of that family, that we have, not only not proceeded to a judgement, but have even not taken the dipositious of those evidences against which they objected, lest it should be said we had shut the door against them beyond remedy.

From all this, we hop the Pb'y will bear with us in referring the matter to their judgement. That they will take it up at their next April Session in this place & issue it. And we do accordingly leave it.

Ordered that the parties concerned do attend the meeting of the Presbytery next April in this place for this purpose.

In the course of the above inquiry & process, the Session find that sundry reports have been propagated upon Jas Russell & his family & from the peculiar situation of which we think it would not answer a good end for us to proceed with the inquiry. Therefore, we further request the rev'd Pb'y to appoint a Committee of their Body to sit at the time of their next April meeting at this place, to enquire into & issue the case respecting the rise, the truth or falsehood of said report.

Concluded with prayer.

March 16, 1781

The members of Session met according to appointment to take into consideration the complaint of Jas. McCaughy & George Orr against James Galloway.

The parties appeared & signified to the members that they had accommodated the difference between themselves on the following terms, and had also agreed that a record thereof should be made in our minutes to prevent all misrepresentations in future. The terms are-

James Galloway acknowledges that he reported the matter concerning George Orr & James McGaughy's to James Gregory & his wife, that he did it in anger & under the influence of passion, and was not actuated by Christian Principles, that he is truly & heartily sorry for having mentioned it at all. Nevertheless, maintains he is not the author of the report, that is was told him by another, though he now believes from several circumstances that the report is false and groundless.

James McGaughy & George Orr acquiesce in this acknowledgement as satisfactory, and declare their reconciliation to Jas. Galloway as a Christian, & all profess the desire & resolution to live with each other in love and friendship for the future.

Thursday, Sept. 20th, 1781

The Session met according to appm't, to take into consideration the complaint of Jas. Ewing against Walter Buchannan, a member of this Session. Began with prayer.

The Parties being present and prepared for the trial, the complaint was read.

The Session, finding it necessary to examine the witnesses, Andrew Porter was adduced, & being sworn, says-

That he was present at the conversation referred to in Jas Ewing's complaint, that, being otherwise engaged, he did not attend to the beginning of it, but hearing Walter Buchannan & Jas Ewing speaking, (as this deponent thought) a little warm, it excited his attention to what might be the reason, that he then heard Jas Ewing ask Walter Buchannan if he knew any thing about the land that was in dispute between him and Wm Buchannan, that Walter Buchannan replied, he did, and that the Morrisons has taken that land unjustly from N. I. Simpson, but when And'w Buchannan married into the Morrison family, he claimed no farther than the field that was then cleared. He also said, to the best of this deponent's rememberance, that the taking of that land was as great a piece of roguery as was ever done in York County & that if Mr. Ewing kept it, he would be as bad as him, or as great a rogue as him. The deponent is positive as to one of the phrases (but not which one). The deponent further says that he heard Walter Buchannan say, there was a great Judge before whom he s'd Ewing must appear to give a account of these things, & mentioned the wronging of the widows & fatherless.

The deponent farther saith that Walter Buchanan asked Jas Ewing if he intended to cut any timber outside of the field, that Jas Ewing replied, he intended to cut as far as his line, that Walter Buchannan answered, if he did so, as fast as he cut and built, he would cut and throw down if he were the Buchannans.

Quest: Did this deponent hear Walter Buchannan say that he would tell the Buchannan's to cut and throw down as fast as Jas Ewing built.

Ans: I do not remember it.

Quest: Did this deponent hear Walter Buchannan say Jas Ewing's land was not surveyed. Ans: yes. And further saith not

Benjamin Davison, adduced as an evidence, declares upon oath theat he was present at the conversation referred to in complaint, that he heard Jas Ewing ask Walter Buchannan if he thought he came clandestinely into that land? That Walter Buch'n replied, do you think I don't know what clandestine is, it is stealing. I don't say you stole that land, but if Jaseph Morrison sold you to that line, he had great need to take care that he was not wronging the widow and the fatherless." That Mr. Ewing said, "suppose I hold to that line, will I wrong the widow & the fatherless" That Mr. Buchannan replied, " I am not to judge, you and your maker may deal for that." or words to that effect.

Quest: Did this deponent apprehend that there was any anger or heat between Jas Ewing or Walter Buchannan at the above conversation?

Ans: When Mr. Ewing asked if he came clandestinely into the land, I did apprehend that he was a little warm, but at other times, both appeared cool, & I think parted good friends.

Ques: Did this deponent hear Walter Buchannan say Jas Ewing's land was not surveyed & warranted?

Ans: Yes, but that Jas Buchannan & And'w Porter, then present, both said it was warranted & surveyed, On which that matter ended

Ques: Did this deponent hear any conversation about the Porter's Corner?

Ans: I heard Mr. Buchannan say that he thought the Porter's Corner was in another place than what the Porters said.

Ques: Did this deponent hear Jas Ewing speak any thing of appealing to temp'l Judges?

Ans: I do not remember.

Ques: Did this deponent hear Walter Buchannan speak any thing about cutting timber outside the field?

Ans: I do not remember.

Ques: Did this deponent hear Walter Buchannan say any thing of a supreme Judge?

Ans: I do not remember.

Ques: Who introduced the above conversation?

Ans: To the best of my rememberance, it was Mr. Ewing - and further saith not.

The Session, having now heard the evidence and parties at length, came to the following judgement: That this Session do not look upon it their business at all to determine any thing about the civil rights of men & therefore will say nothing about Wm. Buchannan's claim. Yet they are of opinion Jas Ewing was an honest purchaser, that therefore, he ought not to be considered as acting an unjust part in endeavoring to support his claim in a legal way. And moreover, as justice is now regularly administered by fixed laws & contests about civil property may be regularly ended, the Session judges that it was wrong to say any thing that might encourage violence not authorized by law in supporting such claims.

Notwithstanding, they have reason to think that Walter Buchannan spoke from an apprehension, that the Buchannan's were, originally, wronged. Upon the whole, that Walter Buchannan be exhorted & cautioned by the Mod'r to be more cautious in these respects & that peace & love be recommended the parties in future.

That William Ewing gave this deponent a side of soal leather of the common country tanning in Philad'a, and that he put it into said Ewing's wagon on the street. That he drove s'd Ewing's wagon on the street. That he drove s'd Ewing's wagon home, and that he knew not of any leather being in it at any time, but the one side of soal. That the leather was put into the wagon o same day they left the city, a short time before their departure, which this deponent alleges was about the middle of the day, & further saith not.

John White, being adduced as a witness and sworn, saith - That Wm. Ewing told him ( this depn't) in Philad'a, that he wanted to buy his sides of soal leather - one for shoes & another for boots - that on the road coming home, on the other side of Conastoga, they came to a place where leather was hanging out - it being a tan yard. That William Ewing was there lying in this deponent's wagon & said that he must go out and buy some leather. That this deponent told him he need not do so, for he could get leather as good & as cheap in York Town. That then William Ewing did not purchase any there & when they drove to York, it was late at night & they did not halt there at all, but before they left the city, he saw a side of soal leather of the common sort in the tavern where they lodged, which he understood to be Walter Buchannan's & that he also was a side of the same in s'd Walter's wagon about two miles on this side of the city, as they were returning & further saith not.

John Simpson, being adduced & sworn, saith - That he was in the company with Walter Buchannan, John White, William Ewing, & George Byers, who were down at Philad'a with their wagons. That on their return, some two or three miles on this side of the city, a number of items were sitting on Walter Buchannan's wagon, that they began, in diversion, to throw several things belonging to one another out of the wagon, that among other things, a side of soal leather, belonging to Walter Buchannan was thrown out. That the most of them went out, and this deponent asked William Ellis & James Lindsay, who were walking behind, whether they had gathered up the things which were thrown out, to which they replied that they had. Particularly this deponent asked them respecting the leather, and one of them, this deponent does not remember which, answered that it was taken up & safe being put in Wm. Ewing's wagon, which was next behind. That on the evening of the same day, he was in Wm. Ewing's wagon, and saw there a side of soal leather, which he apprehended to be Walter Buchannan's. Upon being questioned, this dep't further saith that he himself and John White were the persons by whom the things were thrown out of the wagon, that the leather was thrown out by himself, that Geo. Byers & Wm. Ewing had gone out of the wagon before, or just as they began, this diversion & that he believed Walter Buchannan was asleep & further saith not.

John White was then asked upon the oath he had taken, whether he remembered the throwing out of these things, who replied that he did remember it, but could not be positive as to the leather.

James Ellis, being asked in like manner, answered, that he does not remember any thing about it at all.

A complaint having also been introduced by Walter Buchannan Jr. against Jas Ewing for drunkenness, and several evidences being present, the Session thought proper to take their depositions today, that they might not be required to attend a future meeting.

Philip Shafer, being adduced as an evidence & sworn, saith-

That on the day of Benjamin Davidson's vendue, in the evening, Jas Ewing being at the vendue, was very much drunk, That he came into his house staggering & holding by the walls, and partitious to keep himself up. That he saw said James drinking liquor more than once that day & that s'd Jas lay on the floor and slept a good while before supper, when he was awakened and had supper given to him, after which he tarried all night, that this happened last spring & further saith not.

That about two weeks ago, he saw Jas Ewing at Dolan's Tavern. That he had some liquor there & drank of it, that he rode a young, foolish creature, which he found difficulty in mounting, that this deponent helped him on & followed him about half a mile when he found s'd Jas standing by the roadside, who told him that the beast he rode had fallen, or he had fallen off it (this deponent will not be positive which) that this deponent then offered him his horse, which s'd Jas refused until another person, being present & offering to ride home with him, s'd Jas took the horse, got on, rode away, but that this deponent cannot say he was drunk, or incapable of transacting his business.

Adjourned till the 29th day of this month. Prayer.

Upper Marsh Creek, Apr 5th 1782

The Session met according to appointment, began with prayer-

Stephen Griffin Sen'r appeared upon a citation of this judicature to answer to a form and particularly to a charge given under the band of Mr. Jn'o. Semple, one of the Commissioners of this County, setting forth that the s'd Stephen had made a false return of his land upon oath returning but 341 acres and some odd perches. When at the same time it appeared by A-t'd McClean dep's surveyors certificate, he had 583 acres & 84 perches, with the usual allowance-

Said Stephen was heard on his defence, he acknowledged he had the quantity above mentioned of 583 acres &ct, and also that in making the return upon oath he had mentioned the quantity 341 acres but that he corrected it immediately & told the Commission it should be 382 acres - He also said that being interrogated by the Commissioner whether this was a just return? He answered, no- there is a little outside of my line, the precise quantity of which I do not know, but it is perhaps 15 or 20 acres.

The Session then interrogating him respecting his not returning all the land within his lines, to which he replied, that soon after he obtained a Deed for his land, he had allotted a portion of it for one of his sons, & had fixed in his own mind where the division should be & he tho't the part allotted to his son would leave as near as he could guess the 382 acres, which he had returned, & that tho he did not mention this to the Commis'or when on oath, yet he had it in his mind, and fully intended to give it to his said son, he performing certain conditions or accepting it on those conditions.

The Session further enquired whether he had ever made a conveyance of this land to his son. He assured he never had made a legal conveyance of it to him. Being asked if he did not then think the property and title were still vested in himself? He answered, he tho't not, as he certainly designed to convey it to him, provided he accepted of the terms. He also said tho' it might seem as if he designed to wrong the public by concealing his intention & so saving his son from paying tax for that land, yet he alleged many of the citizens held large tracts unsurveyed, who made great profits yearly off them & yet paid little tax, as the precise quantity they held was not known.

Question by the Session- Did Stephen Griffin ever make a return at other times, especially on oath?

Stephen answered- he had, for four or five years back, made the same or nearly the same return.

The Session, in deliberating upon this matter, judge it to be of great importance, both to the person immediately concerned & to the Church at large & therefore defer issuing it until Session be fuller.

Concluded with prayer.

April 26, 1782.

The Session met according to appointment, began with prayer.

Stephen Griffin being present, the consideration of his case was resumed, Ordered to read minutes of last Session.

This question was then put by the Session- Did Stephen Griffin's son ever signify his acceptance of s'd land upon the proper terms? At first he did, but Sometime after said that it would not suit him- that he would not be able to settle upon it, and that it would perhaps be best to sell it altogether, and to give him his share in money, s'd Stephen also added, that his son had once proposed to him if he would make him legal conveyance of s'd land he would give him as high a mortgage upon it as he pleased, for security in paying the other children what land he allotted to them- but he himself (s'd Stephen) refused to convey it, judging it not so safe for the children as to keep it in his own hand, and lastly said that he had altered the terms or conditions respecting that land in his own mind already, and that such was the changeableness of the times, he might alter them again if he should live a few days.

The Session having now obtained all the light it is probable will be got upon the case after serious contemplation agree to refer the whole to Presb'y.

Concluded with Prayer.

Sept. 11, 1782

The Session met according to appointment with the Rev. Mr. James Lang & Joseph Henderson, who had been previously invited to our assistance on this occasion, began with prayer.

Mr. Lang chose Mod'r & Mr. Edw'd Crawford a member of Mr. Lang's Session being also present and invited sits as a correspondent member.

Resumed the consideration of the case respecting Stephen Griffin, Sen'r who is present. Ordered to read the minutes of Session formerly taken upon this affair.

Upon Conversation with s'd Stephen further respecting this matter, The Session could not obtain any evidence of facts to alter the state of the case as formerly given & therefore proceeded to form a judgement thereon. Accordingly-

The Session judge that s'd Stephen Griffin was fully vested with the property of 583 acres & 84 perches when he made a return of but 389 upon oath, and that no art of his (which he has mentioned) could in any sense he considered as giving his son a title to any part of it- that upon his own state of the case, from first to last, it appears he must have tho't so himself- that he was guilty of such equivocation & mental reservation as is altogether with that reverence & regard which is due to the solemnity & obligation of an oath, and lastly, that for this he shall be excluded from the distinguishing privileges of the Church until he manifest a just sense of his crime and repentance for it, after which he shall be rebuked and admonished by the Mod'r in Session & this judgement read to the Congregation. Upon which he shall be admitted to ordinances.

Stephen Griffin refuses to comply with the judgement of Session.

Concluded with Prayer.

Dec. 9th, 1784

The Session was began with prayer. Robert McCalla having reported that James McMullen some time ago endeavored secretly and fraudulently to take a note out of his pocket as he rode one night behind him, which not said James had given him for L8..10s in order to obtain a sue bargain in the purchase of his land and the parties with their evidence being cited & appearing this day the Session proceeded to the trial.

Robert declares that he is not able to prove the fact itself by any indifferent evidence, as it was, he says on the road after night when he & s'd James were riding by themselves alone, but addressed Mrs. Martha Blair & Bruce Blair to prove certain circumstances respecting the same.

Mrs. Blair, being solemnly sworn, saith, that on a certain night, in her house, Robert McCalla & James McMullen being present, her son wrote a note which James McMullen gave to Rob't McCalla on account of his not choosing to keep Rob'ts land, which he had some time before bought at vandue, that while the note was a drawing another of her sons came to her & asked if he might give James McMullen the article of agreement that was between said James & Robert respecting the land, that she replied, by no means, until both are agreed that it shall be given up and that she took the Article from her son and put it in her bosom, that the note was drawn, signed & delivered to Robert McCalla, and that then she gave the article up, and both parties seemed well pleased with what was done, that after some time, they both went away as this deponent thought to their own homes. But after a little she heard some hollering and said to a man that was in the house that she apprehended, James McMullen had lost a pair of wooded heels which he had got there, that then her son, Brice, took a candle and went to see what was amiss, that after some time, he, with James McMullen & Rob't McCalla, came back, that then Robert accused James of having robbed him, taken his box in which the note was, out of his pocket, and threw it in the bushes, that he caught his hand in his pocket, and that he would have him severely punished for it, or words to that effect.

And the dep't also saith that James McMullen denied the charge, alleging that Rob't had done it himself with a view to scandalize him, and moreover that they both came to her house next morning, that Rob't said he would go to Esq'r McClean and prosecute James, that they then talked about doubling the note, as this deponent apprehended that the matter might be ended, upon which she heard James asking Rob't how long time he would give him if he doubled the sum, to which Rob't replied, no further that he could see him, upon which James told him he might take his best gates & further saith not.

Brice Blair, being sworn, saith that Rob't McCalla had advertised a vandue, that on the day of the sale, James McMullen bought Rob'ts plantation and entered into articles for the performance of the bargain, that some time after, James began to sue, & that on a certain night he and Robert met at this dep'nts father's house to settle the matter, at which time James gave Rob't a note of eight pounds, and ten shillings in order to get clear of the bargain. That they both seemed satisfied & went away as the dep'nt apprehended to their respective homes, that about a half or quarter of an hour later, he heard somebody hollering for a light at the end of the lane before his father's door. That he took a candle and went to the place where he found Rob't & James, that Rob't said Jas McMullen had robbed him, that he had taken his tobacco box & note & that he had caught his hand in his pocket.

This deponent further saith that Jas McMullen said Rob't supposed had lost the box out of his pocket & blamed him for it, but that he was clear of it. That then they al searched for it and Rob't found the box but as far as this deponent could know, the note was not I it, that they then searched more for the note, but could not find it. Upon which they all went to the house and after some time the two parties went home, that in a short time, this dep'nt & another man went with a candle to make a further search for the note, when they found it lying on the road & on the very ground which as this dep'nt apprehended, they had before searched.

That on the next morning, the parties met at his father's when he heard one of them, he cannot tell which, saying to the other, how shall we settle this night's work?, that Rob't said if James would give him the double of the note he would make it up, that James asked him how long time he would give him for the payment of it when Rob't replied, I will trust you no further that I can see you, whereupon, James told him he might take his best gates.

Q. Was the candle burning when the box was found?

Ans. The night was windy, & I had the candle covered between my hands when Rob't said, I have found the box. I asked him if the note was in it, he answered no, but I could not tell whether the box was open or not.

And further saith not.

The Session proceeded to determine the matter in debate, and judge that the evidence is not sufficient to fix the charge on Jas. McMullen, at the same time, the circumstances were such as that Rob't McCalla cannot censured for slander, and on the whole agree to caution and exhort both and so dismiss the matter.

Thursday, Sept. 29th, 1785

The Session met according to adjournment, began with prayer.

The parties being present and some of the witnesses, the Session resumed the consideration of Walter Buchannan's & Wm. Ewing's cause.

William Wilson, being adduced as an evidence respecting James Ewing & sworn, saith:

That he was in company with James Ewing at Dolan's Tavern. That there was a considerable number of people there at one time or other during their stay, perhaps a dozen. That there was a good deal of spirituous liquor drink among them. That when James Ewing went away, this deponent apprehended he was somewhat intoxicated. That he followed him shortly after and found him standing on the road. That he told this deponent (to the best of his knowledge) his horse had thrown him & had left him.

That then James Ewing still appeared intoxicated to this deponent. That s'd James got a horse of one McGowan, who was present, and this deponent rode home with him. That in riding along, he altered his opinion respecting his James intoxication, as he conversed sensibly, and rode without assistance. That on one occasion particularly, he was induced to change his former apprehension and conclude that it was not liquor entirely which occasioned what he had before observed in s'd James, viz. that as they came along, James was seized with a weakness and desired to be helped off his horse. That after sitting sometime, he got on his horse without help, except putting his foot in the stirrup, & rode home. That s'd Jas informed his that he was subject for sometime past to such weaknesses.

Upon being questioned, the deponent further saith that he was a considerable time in James Ewing's company that day at a Saw Mill before they came to the tavern. That Jas did not then appear to him to have drank any spirituous liquors & that he came to the tavern before s'd James, & further saith not.

William McDonnal, being adduced & sworn, saith: That he was in company with Jas Ewing at Dolan's Tavern. That he saw him drinking punch. That this deponent apprehended that s'd Jas was in liquor, tho' he will not say he was drunk as he talked sensibly.

Ques: What made you think that Jas Ewing was in liquor?

Ans: I saw Jas Brown having a plate of beans which he was eating & after I had turned round, I saw Jas Ewing having a plate with beans which he had brought out to the porch to eat, but it appeared to me that he could not steady himself to eat them until he leaned himself upon the rail of the porch. & further saith not.

Wes, Nov'r 16th, 1785

Began with prayer

The Session met according to appointment. Resumed the consideration of Wm Ewing's, Walter Buchannan's & Jas. Ewing's cases

The parties were present & altho' no evidence further appears, yet they are willing the cases shall now be issued upon the evidences already given.

Accordingly, the Session proceeded to deliberate and judge of them respectively, and with regard to the charge of Walter Buchannan against Wm Ewing for keeping & using a side of his soal leather, the Session judge that it is not at all supported by any evidence adduced before us, but on the contrary, Wm Ewing's character stands fair and unblemished, and altho' from John Simpson';s report to Walter Buchannan, s'd Walter had reason to think at first that his leather had been thrown into Wm. Ewing's wagon, yet he was faulty in fixing a charge of such an atrocious nature publicly upon s'd Ewing without better evidence. And that for this, s'd Walter shall be admonished before the Session, and this judgement read before the Congregation for the vindication of Wm. Ewing's Character.

With regard to the charge of drunkenness brought by Walter Buchannan against James Ewing: The Session judges that it not supported except in the instance at Benjamin Davidson's vendue, when it appears, from the evidence, that Jas Ewing had at least made too free with spirituous liquor, for which he shall be admonished & cautioned in Session.

Both parties submit.

Concluded with prayer

April 26th, 1787

The Session met according to appointment, began with prayer

John Connor, having made application for the ordinance of baptism to his child, & it having been intimated that the child was born some considerable time before nine months after his marriage, The Session chose to defer the baptism until proper inquiry shall be made into the matter, and appointed s'd Connor to bring certificated of his marriage, and the midwife by this day. Accordingly:

The parties appeared with Mrs. McGaughy, who performed the office of Midwife on that occasion, and the Session proceeded with the investigation of the case.

By a certificated under Mr. McMordie's hand, it appears that John Connor & Mary, his wife, were joined together in marriage on the 29th day of June 1786, and by their own declaration, that this child was born on the 26th day of February following.

John Connor & his wife, being called upon solemnly & seriously, declare their innocence in the above case, & alledge (the wife in particular) that she had received some damaged that might occasion the birth of the child, viz, that going one day to her father-in-law's, she fell off a fence, & that on the same day, as she was getting on a high creature, it pulled her down three times, & that she did not find herself well from that time until the child was born. Moreover alledging that she was much alarmed & frightened by the situation of Mrs. Fletcher.

Mrs. McGaughy, being called, declares that when she performed the office of Midwife in the above case, she heard the partied mention that the did not expect that the child would be born at this time, but that the indisposition might arise form the injuries rec'd by Mrs. Connor, that it appeared to her that they did not expect the birth of the child at that time as they had not made the usual preparations. That yet she cannot say that she saw ay mark of prematurity on the child, that it was a small child, and that she had seen children as well grown as it which were supposed to be born as much before nine months.

The Session conclude, for the present, that as the child was born one month & three days before nine moths after the marriage, and o particular mark of prematurity upon it, it is best to defer the matter for further consideration & advice.

Concluded with prayer.

June 16th, 1787

The Session met with Mr. McKnight, who, being invited, sits as a correspondent member. Began with prayer

Resumed the consideration of affair respecting John Connor & his wife Mrs. Wilson, mother of s'd John, being present, declares that the child before mentioned was very weakly, and for the space of three weeks, took very little nourishment. That it did not like to be stirred, but that when stirred, it would make a little noise and then fall quiet again.

That about three weeks after its birth, it took a brash of sickness and when an attempt was made to take blood of it, but a few drops could be got out of both feet. She further declares that Mrs. Connor came to her house and stayed some days, on account of the terror she was in from the situation of Mrs. Fletcher. That she informed her that in coming she had fallen from the fence & had been some considerable time at it by her petticoat & that she took unwell before she left her house. She also further declares that she observed s'd child for more than three weeks to be more disposed to sleep than what is common to infants. Mrs. Wilson was sworn to the truth of the above declaration.

The Session, after deliberating on the above case, judge that although the evidence in favor of John Connor & his wife be not so clear & explicit as they could wish, yet it renders the case at least doubtful, and, as they bore an unsuspected character before marriage, the Session cannot, on the whole, condemn them as guilty of antenuptual fornication, nor debar them from the Communion of the Church.

Concluded with prayer.

June 29th, 1787

The Session met according to appointment, began with prayer

James Riddle, a member of this Session, tabled a complaint against Jas Black ( who is also present) setting forth that the s'd Jas Black had expressed himself in an unchristian manner, at John Murphey's, innkeeper, and also that he had said that this complainant had sworn falsely.

James Black acknowledges both the charges, or things complained of, that he makes no defense respecting the first - that he intends to produce evidence in support of what he has said respecting the second.

As it is now the beginning of harvest, & not likely that a full Session can be got until the throng of harvest business be over, the Session think it best to adjourn sine die - and to take up the business when circumstances will admit.

Concluded with prayer

May 24th, 1788

The Session met according to appointment to resume the consideration of the affair between Jas Riddle & Jas Black.

The parties being present, Jas Riddle produced the qualification to which Jas Black referred when he charged him (s'd Riddle) as having sworn falsely, & also a deposition of Wm Riddle which corresponds with s'd James's.

In order to support the charge against Jas Riddle, James Black produced a number of depositions, which were read & ordered to be kept in retentis.

The Session, having obtained all the light the parties had to give on the subject, came to the following judgement, viz.

That Jas Black has not by any means supported the charge of false swearing against Jas Riddle, and that he be rebuked and admonished by the Moderator in Session for having publicly exhibited so high a charge against a man, & especially an Elder in the Church of Christ, which he cannot support, as also for this unchristian expressions, and that this judgement be made public to the society.