The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-04-10
DIR. VAN DYKES TESTIMONY.
Why NE WAS LED TO THINK DR. TAI
MAGE GUILTY or F1LSEHOOD.

At the opening " Yesterdays session OF
the trial Of Dr. Talmagc by the Brooklyn Pres
bytcry some OF the brethren had n good hul,h
over caricature OF their body printed in n
comic paper The large throng in attendance
seemed to look forward with eager interest to
the examination OF the Rcv. Dr. Henry J. Van
Dyke who Ia asserted to Doe DR.. Talmngc's chief
opponent. Tho examination OF DR.. Van Dyke
was on the specification. which accuses DIR.
Tamago Of having falsely accused the Row. I.
W. Hathaway Of dishonest practices and then
denied that he had so accused MIR. Hathaway.
DR. Van Dyke said he had been II member Of
this Presbytcry since its organization. ana "a
pastor In Brooklyn for twenty six years. He
called to see Dr. Tnlmage about Nov. .. 1876.
concerning two articles which appeared in the
Presbyterian of Philadelphia. The first arti-
Gle" said DR.. Van Dyke. of which was the
author. appeared on Nov 4. and an article criti-
cising the one had written in the Presbyterian
appeared the next week called to sec DR..
Talmago about those articles. and although tho
servant girl said that Dr. Talmage was ut home.
could not see him. MS she added that he could
not be seen"
Tho article written by DR.. Van Dyke con-
tnined the following paragraph:
pT Talmasc sersiny .. Gorular preacher Iic /;
not hamp,rd 10y anS gi ny notion. as 10 iTr m,th.d
Is always hrenged H. audiences are numbered by
by hundred. M as b. church orc naninall irce.
stcTisHi. nnicr thc name d .1o.cr io~"' wbai
other churches can ny the old name 81 new rents
Tor the support of the Cos. cl IN that particular church
g benevolent ob, Ct. outside And yet In spite of an
s,, a., a !, e I,.pcn't; n rs Sn9,en
that church has rolled ANON itself IN than ~, Ncrrs
makns It.. present nl,iicin sewer siIl0,, ami com
s"rroM mSs a.. W ' :; '" T rnI m Tor
u % o.. D. its
g esianl SHIN 90, Which are rin nron newian-l,i no
d. b. egT,H ~ waati "a ed ptgr rcas"9i nor ~
coui rivc other example, to prove th., uu.ton And we
could suggest the reh cau. and cure for the state ol
The present ON I'M, iaiun subject = AUeusriS
The last part Of the article. which is not
printed above. referred 10 n book just printed
by DR.. Spear. The Moderator questioned its
relevancy but Mr.. McCullagh said that it all be-
longed IN the case and that the witness insisted
on all Of it being read.
DIR. Van Dyke-I never mentioned DR.. Tai
mage in any other article viii h l ever wrote,
except that one. l never made any corrections.
for believed that the article was correct. and
still believe the assertions TO bo correct.
On Saturday. Nov IL. 1876. there was nm ar
tcle in the Presd y',iidt signed " Burlcigh." /
saw Dr. Tamage. The substance OF our con-
tion began 10y Or. Tnlmage imrelrhin the
correctness Of the article signed Augustin."
told him that was respons bile for T. and that
Il 1t was not correct, and II he would xiv" me
the true facts. and allow RE 10 use his name MS
authority, ! would send it To the ,pnper and
have II published the next week. He said that
he was not familiar with the statistics. aud he
also refused to ggi the correct statement
ssers,N SO that 1 could got them.
article led finally TO his demanding my guthor-
ty told him that had obtained the facts
partly by observation, partly by what knew OF
the church y history. and thut besides lnu tho
testimony Of some of the present officers OF the
church; l. declined 10 tel him, and he asked
me IL Mr.. Hathaway was ono OF them. ! said he
was not. but said. You must understand me.
asked Mr.. Hathaway about this mater and he
into an assent To- the truth Of the facts had re-
cited to him" DR., TalmngA then said. Now |
You ought to En"w." IL i ihen hat Mr nath.
awny WAS dishonest AMI uniruthful man that
over town. and That tho Tahernncle had be,ome
very much embarrassed hy this fact and that
Mr. HlthHwav's last wear OF financial admins
tration Of the Iah"rnaclo had nearly ruined the
Tanorua'l-. Then b" said that Mr.. Hathaway
i had ,mi5n'Cd nirt p,d or m,1"p n I
made a cnnrI, against Mr.. Hathaway which left
upon nay mind u.' impression that he accused
Mr. Hathaway Ui b .us dciauit'r. although
DIR. Tamu.,e d.nl "a a'i"rwarl that he had used
that word. and | accepted MS denial | was
greatly TROUBLED. rom the fact thar ~ director
Of Princeton SEMINARY. had used my ~ r-
in behalf Mr. Hathaway. dug not kn (which
these Things wot. true. hov oull you send him
of TO Priurc.nn witt such - H. s.,l that
that Tia, wa inr5nsi-tau,. / Getcrrm.nei To- 10
nothing about Mr. Hathaway, but simply 10
The witness then described Mr. Hnthaway's
subsequen, interview with him IN his study,
when the witness told Mr. Hathaway what Dr..
Mr.. Hathaway was IN the witness study.
Q-Snre that interview have You ever TAXED
In January. 1871 have mover had any conversa-
ton with Pr Talmage. | have touched my hat
salutod him in Presbytery have mad no talk
with him.
Q-Wert You aware Of any common fame. as
the book defines, charging Dr. TRmage with
falsehOod and deceit IN connection with his
charging Hathaway with dishonest practices
Al WAS aware that there was q common tame
against DR.. Talmage, charging him with false
hood and deceit but | DO not think that the
matter involving Mr. Hathaway was 4 matter II
common fame. | never heard il talked about.
Prior to the action Of the Presbytery in refer
ence to tins specification, there was no common
fame rs to that particular alleged id.sehOod and
deceit.
Q.-Is 1t now your judgment as a minister Of
tho Gospel and a Christian teacher that there
was any necessity for reyiving this matter for
the purposes Of a trialf Al decline 10 an
Q.-Is such a course kindly and hrothery
and according 10 the - ~ Il IN" GospcIf A.
means to do anytnin- unkind or unbrotherly
or anything not according to the spirit Of the
Gospel ~ DR.. Tamage's case.
not 1T to be in the Presbyterian Church, and
ought 10 be got out? Al may have expressed
an opinion TINT DR., Talmagr would be happier
outside ol the reshyteran Church thnn Inside
| said that le was not in sympathy with The
Church, md thought h. was not possessed OF
the Qunl'il 'Ntlons 10 be q Prcsi ytcrian, | held
that opinion. and may have expressed II.
Whon MIR. Millard arose DR. Van Dyke said
that n had observed that Mr.. Willard had, in
cross examination, manner which would. TO a
nervous man. b" very irritable. He WAS thcre-
fore afraid 10 trust himself under Mr. Willard 4
MANIPULATION, II The lattrr went at MIN as he
did At Sum" witnesses. Mr. Willard laughingly
said that ho took the suggestion kindly.
Q.-Nhy is II any moro ue ,os~ary 10 puh sh
the indebtedness ~ "a church than tho iudcbt
edness Of n iirinf A-The cascs are not at al
parallel The mrmh 'r- ~ thu Prrshytpry have
right to know the ind"' tcdness Of any church
In which they are interested, Just a. much ms
member Of a firm has right to know its in
debtedness. think stated the ltcs correctly
except that they were a Little below the mark.
Mr., Willard put q long question about pr
Talmage and MIR. Hathaway and several broth
rem took exception To- the question as contain
ing an mputation upon Mr. Hathaway. an(
PresbYtor Jones said that the action oil MI Mil
lard WIS certainly dishonest.
Mr.. Mlllard (coOllyl-Tn0t's a dscOurtcsy
Preshyter Jones (excitsdly stand by N