The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-03-28
TIE TRIAL OF DR.. TALNAGE.
4 TRorfNF &C. .tf'Nf ~ HhCI>j0N ~
IOLIOu' mr. Lt AhN or L.IB.

to the Christian Ut Work six Nitnesses
who Refuse to ippear, and their Criticism
Of the JrinI-A Reporters Oncr to TcStify.
There was an orderly throng at tho trial
Of the Rov. T. Dewitt Taimago in BROOKLYN
yesterday afternoon. and 80 there was no re-
newai OF the thrcat to conduct the trnl in secret
The point Of interest ut tho opening OF the
trial was tho protest which Or. Van Dyke read
ngainst tho action OF the Prosbytery in voting
TO sustain the Moderatcr's decision not to adj
init as evidence interviews with Dr. Talmasc.
published In newspapers of this city and
Brooklyn in connection with his sudden re-
tiremcnt from the editorship OF the Christian at
Work in October. 1876. on which arc bnscd two
Of the Specifications under the charge OF false
hood and dcceit Tue counsel for the prosccu-
ton wero reinforced by Lawyer Tcunis Bar-
gen to Offset the assistance which United States
District Attorney A. w. Tcnncy is supposed to
give to tue counsel for DR. Talmagc.
DR.. Van Dyke said that he waived tho COM
plant which he had announced he would make.
90 US to complete tho record Of the trial in tho
event OF an appeal. He. however. insisted on
his pra.cstlgainst the action u the Presbytery
excluding reports Of lntervtNf'witf DrsTm-
mage. He protested against the Modcrator's
decision that the trial was governed by the COM
mon law OF evidence. as in civil and criminal
courts. He was compelled. he said. to mako
this protest by tho fact that tho Moderator au-
thoritatively announced for the government Of
this trial principles which. in the judgment OF
DR.. Van Dyke. are unconstitutional and dan
gerous to the purity and pence OF the Church.
He protested that the so-called law of evidence
is vague and indefinite. 1t is not written in
any statute and is not e1pounded by any rec
oGnized authority. 1t is only Il matter Of infer
ence from the practice Of secular courts under
the common law as that practice is varously
modified in different countries and in different
States by statute law. The application OF this
principle would require OF the Presbytcry. and
especially on the part of its Moderator. an
amount OF legal information which they cannot
be reasonably required to possess. and which.
in fact. they do not possess. The law OF evil
dence was made by Judges for juries. and the
fact seems to explain many OF its peculiarities
1t is largely founded on the distrust OF Judges
in regard to the capacity OF the jury to weigh
the value and credibilty OF testimony. To ap-
ply law which has grown up under such con-
ditions to n judicatory Of the Church. and to
put its exposition into the hands of a
Moderator who is not necessarily better quail
flied to sft evidence or to enforce the practice
OF secular courts than the other members was
in Dr. Van Dykes judgment. u manifest ab-
surdty. The secular court can only try men
for acts. whereas an offence. according To the
definition of the Book Of Discipline" Is any
thing in the principles or practice Of church
member which Is contrary to the word OF God
Chap /. sec. g. The Presbytery is not a mere
court OF law. but court Of equity. This Is not
trial by jury. hut n trial before bench Of
Judges, every one of whom has an equal com
potency to Judge Of both the law and the owl
The second ground OF protest is the ayowed
design for which the documents were offered;
The genuineness OF the reports Of the alleged
Interview with DR.. Talmage was not insisted
upon at this stage OF the trial. But their publ
cation nj that time was presented as fact
which needed no proof 70 show the clrcmm-
stances under which certain conduct Of DR.. Tai
mage had taken place. in order to enable tho
Presbytery to comply with chapter l. section B
OF Book OF Discipline, which requires the pres
byters To take into view all the circumstances
which give a different character to conduct.
ind render il more or less offensive" The fact
that three reports OF interviews with Dr. Tai
mage we're published within one week under
editorial sanction. in three respectable nrwspA
pers. and tnut these reports which, agreeing in
their meaning. differ IN their language. crcated,
"A violent presumption OF the genuinenos IS
sufficient to throw the burden Of proof on the
party whose interest IL may be to deny Il.
Whether they are formally admitted rs evil
dence or not. he is bound 10y every principle ot
the benefit OF such denial II he can honestly
The iinal reason for Dr.. Van Dykes protest
WAS that the decision would give occasion in
the public mind Tor the suspicion that the tech
nicalities OF the law OF evidence and tho in
Renuity OF professional counsel are being em-
facts in this case.
The protest was ordered to be put on file.
MI Eliphalet Remington's cross examination
was resumed after he had corrected the testi.
mony OF the day before so that the record
stood that before DR.. Talmage LEFT the Cli.ishan
al Work. he had not consulted with any min-
lister or ministers with reference 10 accepting
an official position on the paper.
Dr. Spear then began to out his questions
saying again that he wished To apologies TO the
witness for anything he might have 10 say.
Mr.. Remineton-I am not quite sure that an
Insult is any the less an insult with adlsclalmer
Dr. spear-I don't mean to insult you sir. ]
mean, simply TO refer to my earnestness oil
Mr.. Remington-My firm had Post OfficC
box in New York. the number OF which was.
think. 1904. the paper lthe Christian at Work
had subscr ption list Of about 5000. twas .
losing concern, and 10 not know what Mr.. Al
announcing that % had large subscription lis
ana adyeItis az patroIfse' ! did not Tram
the alVertsement Nr, A,lord may nay,
by advert,s n. or he may have written 10 mo
30 fGr as ! remember now. the advertisement
edge or consent ~ the time. | think my frs
information about the advertisement was wheI
he sent the Advertisement 10 me in "a letter.
Q.-Ihe 4lAeftIsenirnt says Apply 70 lrln
cipas. onlyy A.-Ihe words. principals
only" IRE IN brackets in the advertisement, an,
had Tor their design 10 solicit only the applica
ton OF principals. not agents. desiring Ia pur
cnase. On tho iace,oi the advert isement Il wa
designed Ia conceal the name oi On" pnpcr 10 b
sold from the pubic. Tor Il would have been ~
injury for the name Of the paper to have berl
disclosed Tho advertisement was a bona lld
attempt to sell the paper. | did not call DIR
Tamage's attention 20 II. and. 50 far IA | know
tits advertisement WAS without his knowledge
or consent. IL was re'ugniznd that l should
mukrthe hest disposition ui the paper rs woul'
be In the interest 81 those a. whom the pnpe
WAS indebted The amount Of the debts ha'
paid for he paper was SO large that the stock o
the paper WIS practically worthless. DIR. Tai
mage WAS The owner OF one Share.
Q.-Ihen the Tact was t'hat for three month
before DR.. Tamage lett the paprr it was advrr
tsed Tor sale ln disguised ilrni over tue fHls
name OF 4. J.. ForiY Al can't recognize YOU
definition % H. could not effect the sale OF tn
same without the consent Of the Joint owners
Nh. Dickinson Wts financial manager OF IN
paper or H. agent.
IL rr'errure 10 tho letters from DR. Talmag
10 tho witness introduced IN evidence on Tues
day. Mr.. Remington testified that the letter
came into the hands Of the prosecution by IN
own agency. he brought th" letters Ia the trim
thinking That they would he pertinent The
hr added: " | have not boon Voiunt"cr helpe
III gettin. up tui, triHi %! Dr. IHimAge."
Q.-Do ynu know that Or. THlmage intende
70 act deceitluy ia Withdrawing lromthe Chrt'
haa al Hdrky Al interpreted the intentlO
from the Not. am unable to look into Or. la
inugo's mind. | 90 not know it 10 be- n fact
do not know that DR., Tnmage thought that
was planning Ia the summer and fall Of 1876 I
sell the paper without his knowledge, or plan