"SIR-Take notice that the depositions of witnesses will be taken in this cause, on behalf of the defendant, Joseph Hendrickson, at the house of William Ridgway, innkeeper in Camden, on the second of June next, at the hour of ten in the forenoon, before Jeremiah J. Foster, Esquire, one of the Masters of the High Court of Chancery of New Jersey. G. WOOD, Solicitor, And of counsel with Joseph Hendrickson."

Yours, &c.

Trenton, 15th May, 1830.

"To Garret D. Wall, Esquire, Solicitor, and of counsel with the complainant, and the defendant, Stacy Decow."

In pursuance of the above notice, I, Jeremiah J. Foster, one of the Masters and Examiners in the High Court of Chancery of the State of New Jersey, did attend at the house of William Ridgway, innkeeper in Camden, in the county of Gloucester, on Wednesday, the second day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty, at the hour of ten in the forenoon, and did then and there proceed to take the depositions of all such witnesses on the part of the defendant, Joseph Hendrickson, as before me for that purpose were offered, in the presence of the parties, or such of them as would attend, and in the presence of Jeremiah H. Sloan and Abraham Brown, Esquires, of counsel with Joseph Hendrickson, and of Samuel L. Southard and Eli K. Price, Esquires, of counsel with the complainant, Thomas L. Shotwell, and Stacy Decow, one of the defendants, which said depositions as aforesaid taken, together with the entries of all exhibits made; and also the admissions and concessions of the parties by their counsel respectively, do follow, all in the own handwriting of the subscriber; the original exhibits being respectively signed with the name of the subscriber, and marked and numbered correspondent with the marks and numbers mentioned in the said depositions, entries, and admissions.

VOL. I.-8

J. J. FOSTER, Master and Examiner.

Bettle

The counsel for the defendant, Joseph Hendrickson, opened the examination by reading and offering in evidence, a subscription for raising a school fund, dated 17th of Twelfth-month, 1792. [See Appendix.]

Admitted by both the parties, as well complainant as defendants, that this is the original subscription to the school fund, of the Preparative Meeting of Chesterfield, in the county of Burlington. It is thereupon marked by me, Exhibit No. 1. Exhibit No. 2, Thomas L. Shotwell's bond, named in the pleadings. Exhibit No. 3, the mortgage mentioned in the pleadings.

SAMUEL BETTLE, a witness produced on the part of the defendant, Joseph Hendrickson, alleging himself to be conscientiously scrupulous of taking an oath, and being duly affirmed according to law, on his solemn affirmation, declareth and saith, that he is a member of the Society of Friends-has always been a member. My ancestors came with William Penn, and were the first settlers of Philadelphia. I was fifty-six years of age yesterday-as a member of that society, I have been in the habit of constant attendance on the meetings of the society for worship and business, for many years past; and indeed ever since I was of sufficient age-have been clerk, and assistant clerk, for the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia for the past twenty years-was assistant clerk six years, and clerk fourteen years. Witness considers himself familiar with the doctrines of the Society of Friends-has acquired his knowledge of their doctrines from the frequent perusal of standard works containing them, and hearing such ministers as have been eminent and approved in the society-has always heard the approved ministers of the society, preach in accordance with the acknowledged doctrines of the society, when their subjects have been doctrinal. Question by Mr. Sloan. State what are the doctrines held by the Society in reference to what is generally termed the Trinity? The counsel for the complainant, Mr. Southard, objects to the question, and to any and every question respecting the religious opinions or doctrines of the society. The witness answers. The society have avoided the term Trinitythey however hold the doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as stated in the New Testament, and they prefer confining their statements of views in relation to that doctrine, to the terms used in the New Testament. They have avoided the use of the word person, and three distinct persons, as not, in their apprehension, scriptural; and as conveying, in their apprehension, an idea too gross for so sublime and spiritual a subject. I have always understood that in all other respects, the society hold fully the doctrine as held by other Protestant sects of christians avoiding the term person, being the only difference between them of which I am aware, in reference to this particular doctrine.

The Society of Friends do believe in the doctrine of the atonement, and have always so believed. They believe, and what they understand by the term atonement is, that our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, suffered without the gates of Jerusalem, offering himself up a propitiatory

sacrifice for the sins of the whole world-and that by this offering, through faith, repentance, and obedience, man may become purified. from sin. Their creed on this doctrine is in the words of the New Testament; they take it as they find it. Witness uses the term creed here, as synonymous with belief. It is believed by the society, that in no other way than by the atonement of our Saviour, can man be purified from sin. This is the way appointed by God-that is, by the offering up of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, without the gates of Jerusalem; by the efficacy of which, through faith, repentance, and obedience, remission of sins is received. This has always been fundamental with the society.

They believe that Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, agreeably to the declaration of the Evangelist, John, in substance, that "in the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." That the word was made flesh, or took flesh, and dwelt among men-and that this word that was made flesh, was the same Jesus that was born at Bethlehem, miraculously conceived and born of the Virgin Mary, for the great, and necessary, and holy purposes mentioned in the New Testament, indispensable through the inscrutable counsels of God, for the salvation of man. This is also fundamental, and always has been. In addition to what the witness has said above, respecting the " Trinity," he now further saith, that the society believe, and hold, and always have so believed, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one, "these three are one," they always express it in that way. The society also believe in the resurrection and ascension of the body of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as it is clearly expressed and taught in the scriptures, corroborated by his speaking from heaven in his glorified state, declaring in his own words, "I am Jesus of Nazareth."

The society believe that the scriptures were given forth by holy men as they were inspired by the Holy Ghost-and they have always received them as the outward test and rule of doctrine-and that all doctrines which are inconsistent with the doctrines of the scripture, are to be rejected. Barclay is very full and explicit on this subject, and very strong language he uses. These doctrines are the ancient doctrines of the society, and have always been held by them since my acquaintance with them. The peculiar views of the society expose them to much objection, suffering, and misrepresentation. When speaking of their peculiar views, the witness does not mean particularly their doctrines above mentioned as differing so much from other societies of christians, but more particularly their testimonies against wars, oaths, and in relation to ministers, and other things, which have exposed them to suffering, and very frequently to misrepresentation. Hence, witness believes, that no religious society whatever, has published, so frequently, and so fully, their religious doctrines to the world, as the Society of Friends; and this has arisen out of the peculiar circumstances in which they were placed, as I have mentioned.

For these doctrines, witness refers to George Fox's letter to the governor of Barbadoes, contained in his journal, to a declaration presented to a committee of the British parliament, in 1689, to a declaration presented to parliament in 1693, to Barclay's Catechism and Confession of faith, and to Barclay's Apology-this latter work was originally written in the Latin language, and has been translated into different languages,

and largely circulated, for the very purpose of making known the doctrines of the society. We are bound by the doctrines contained in this work, and the society is every where identified with the sentiments, opinions, and doctrines, laid down in this work.

Witness also refers to "Evans' Exposition" of the doctrines of the Society of Friends, as containing a true and comprehensive view of the doctrines of the society. Also Barclay's "Anarchy of the Ranters," a work on church government.

Exhibit No. 4. A small book, entitled a "Catechism and Confession of Faith," being the same work above mentioned.

Exhibit No. 5. A volume, entitled an "Apology for the true Christian Divinity," &c. by Robert Barclay, printed at Philadelphia, in 1808. Exhibit No. 6. A volume, the same above called "Evans' Exposition," second edition, printed at Philadelphia, in 1828.

Exhibit No. 7. A treatise on church government, mentioned above by the name of "Anarchy of the Ranters."

The witness further saith that these works here exhibited, as well as all those mentioned by him, are regular standard works in the Society of Friends, and have been acknowledged and published by them at different times, in the regular way of publication established by their discipline. These doctrines have always been considered as fundamental, and promulgated as such by their approved ministers-they were so reputed when the witness first had knowledge of the society, and still continue to be so. These books are circulated now by the society as containing its doctrines. A departure from, or disbelief in, these doctrines, is always considered by the society as an evidence of unsoundness in the faith. The society does not presume to look into the heart, but when doctrines are promulgated and taught, directly opposite to those by which the society is bound, and held together, it forms a subject proper to be dealt with; individuals of the society known to the witness, have become members of the Episcopalian and Baptist societies, in which cases the fact was recorded, and the individuals respectively dismissed, as they could not properly belong to the two societies at the same time. As far as witness knows, in every instance where a member has adopted different views and doctrines from those held by the society, they have been dealt with-they are bound to do so by the discipline; they exercise a pastoral care over their members, but do not impose any coercive restrictions upon the consciences of men. The society has always exercised the right of disowning members for unsoundness in its faith and doctrines, as well as for a departure from its testimonies. The society shows that its practice has been in conformity with the rules laid down by Barclay, who is considered a standard authority on these points. The doctrines, principles, and rules, of which the witness has spoken, are still recognised by the meeting of which he is the clerk-this meeting is held in Philadelphia, in Mulberry street, and has been for the last twenty years. The meeting has been regularly held at this place on the third Second-day of the Fourth-month, in each and every year, for the last twenty years. There has been for some time past a secession from this Yearly Meeting, of some part of its members. This secession may be considered as having taken place in the year 1827. Those persons who thus seceded, hold a Yearly Meeting in Philadelphia; it is so understood that they do-witness does not belong to them-he understands that their meeting is held on the second

Second-day of Fourth-month, yearly, just one week before the commencement of the meeting to which the witness belongs; the men's meeting is in Green street, and the women's meeting in Cherry street; they are generally known and distinguished from the society from which they have separated, by the name of Hicksites. They are thus called from the name of their founder, Elias Hicks, agreeably to a well known principle in ecclesiastical history; as in the cases of Luther and Calvin, their followers have been called Lutherans, and Calvinists, and in like manner the followers of Elias Hicks, are called Hicksites.

The persons who attend those Green and Cherry streets meetings, are not in unity with the Society of Friends. Elias Hicks is not now living. He was not in unity with the Society of Friends at the time of his decease. He had formerly been a member of that society. He was disowned for differing from them in essential points of christian doctrine. The witness was asked to state some of the material points in which he differed from the Society of Friends. Mr. Southard objects to any proof of the doctrines of Elias Hicks, or the causes of his disownment, until it be shown that a connexion subsisted between him and the complainant, or Stacy Decow.

The witness proceeds to state the material points as aforesaid, and says, the denial of the proper divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, making him a mere man, utterly denying and rejecting the atonement, denying the divine authority and authenticity of the holy scriptures; these are all that the witness means to present; there are many other doctrines and points of difference, but it would be difficult to state them all. He had some notions of an atonement for the legal sins of the Jews, but how he made it out the witness does not know. In saying that he utterly denied the doctrine of the atonement, he means the christian atonement, as made known in the New Testament, and as held by Friends, as witness has before mentioned.

These doctrines as above stated were taught and promulgated by Elias Hicks, and are generally reputed to have been held by him. After the separation above mentioned, Elias Hicks was generally and publicly reputed to be in unity with, and an attendant on, the meetings of those who had separated, and who held their meetings at Green and Cherry streets. Witness saw him in the street in company with persons belonging to, and going towards that meeting, and has been repeatedly told by those who saw him there, that he was in their meetings. To which latter observation of the witness, the counsel for the complainant objects as hearsay evidence.

The witness further saith, it was generally reported that Elias Hicks delivered his discourses in public, at these meetings in Green street and Cherry street, and was an accepted minister with them, and satisfaction with his services was minuted in their general meeting. Witness has heard other ministers of the same party, preach and promulgate the same doctrines imputed to him.

These persons went off in the separation, and were disowned by the Society of Friends; one of them, to the knowledge of the witness, was disowned for that and for his doctrines, the others were disowned also, but witness does not know whether for their doctrines, or discipline. A considerable number of those who separated, and who have organized, those meetings, have been disowned; very generally they have been disowned; the witness can only speak as far as his knowledge and informa