New-York tribune., 1879-03-28
THE pRnCFEDINGS.


After the usual preliminaries of calling the
Toll and reading OF the minutes by The clerk the Rev. j.
Milton Greene. the moderator asked DR. Van Dyke II ne
had any matter TO bring before the Presbytery Dr.
Van Dyke called attention TO the fact hat he
had stated at the close OF the previous
session that lie should enter his protest of
this session. Then drawing paper from his pocket.
he said that he mpeed 10 4naEe this protest be-
cause the moderator, excluding the testimony, an
nounced principles which were, in his opinion uncon-
situuOna and dangerous t. the peace ana purity O the
church The arst ground OF protest was the announce
nent of the principle that the Plesbyteiy
WAS guided by the English law Of evidence.
This law Dr. Van Dyke clpimed, vague and IN
definite was not written in any statute, and was not
expounded by any recognized authority. II was also
substantially the creation OF successive generations OF
iudces In the courts OF law, and was made by
Judges for jurles. The jurisdiction OF iudlcatory OF
the church. he stated, different from that Of
a secular court that the rules Of evidence
shoud be less rigid. The impartial application Of the
principlo would deprive the defendant Of one OF his
most valuable constitutional rights. The PrcsbyterY
was not mere court OF law, but court OF equity. The
second ground Of protest was the avowed design
for which the documents offered. In the
third place. the fact that the reports OF tbe in
tervievs we're published within week in three re-
spectacle newspapers created "voient proSumpuOn'
of their commences The fourth reason Tor protesting
was the bearing Of the decision upon questions coat-
of the case. The fifth ground was that the
Decision would give occasion in the public
mind for the sspcon that the cchnicaiies OF the law
of evidence aud the ingenuity OF professional counsel
were being employed to ObstUct thorough lhvestga-
'T It n The Conclusion Of Dr. Van Dykes statement Dr.
Spear moved that the protest be accepted ah entefeu
the records OF the BrOcuyn FFeSDy etS. NaIIGu ,
Dr. spear before beginning hs questions MS MS
wished to make the same apology that hS dld men
If any earneStness o. ms seem,fu vbi"S
MT Remington tartly Responded that if the
question contained an insult the Insult was as none i
point t%ccI n,c u name "a l. Ford Offering The chris.
subscription list at that time was between
exTenses, but was involving him in considerable
loss He was asked what he meant then by adveftlsng
naiTonace and replied shat h. did not know what Mr..
hifords moan'nG was He did not write IT, or , have
any couvrrsation With MI Afford about 1t, 1urlher
than him that he might nd ,n PuFenasSr rem sS
by advertising. He did not ma any Ia9t Wv WIN m III m % n
naper lie could not 1t was only offered for sale. and
purchasers referred 20 the Office
TRYING TO GET AT THE DECEIT.
The minato by Mr.. Millard was then begun
as follows:
o-I understood You TO say that you wrote to Mr..
Crosby that you we're unwilling to come here as wit
ness1 Al did.
o-And you have stated. believe, that you have no
feeling in this matter; no personal feelnga A-No
personal feeling.
o-Wbat made you then come more than two hundred
miles from home at your expense, and stay here
several days TO testify in this casef A-Because l
could consistently reiuse to respond to the request
O-Why not consistently What was II made u your
Auty TO come ABecause OF the history Ci the trans
action ..., 49,. .o, ,ro,o oo,,,,o,,od IN cor,e
did yonG Al did not understand that was con-
Po"B9t YOU felt that you had mission to come here
and testify ASo mission Sst saat 81 u tSe SeS Tlg S1S
eonupctaA wit TamageS withdrawal from
1he paVer, and what followed - =. $500 A.-o 49,,
pSs down Un Dr. Taimage AyNo slr; no, sir.
Q-was IT TO put yourself rlghtt An sense, yes
made aay false statements in connection with his with
drAws from tue paperf Al don't kho" "he'ner
oDo you state iI now siri A-There were state
Inents made which were reported as coming from hls
Thai Is not the question about what is reported
D9 you nov sSfs' in eo11ectinn with the Withdrawal
from that pspcrt Al do not kno~n IL as an aDsoiate
Q-Do you now state as Of your own knoyedee s that
he did anything decetfu IN connection %,H the WITH
O-What was iJi The manner in which he inserted
q What deception was there about thati Att was
deceivp9 those with whom he had been associated
Q.-In what particular Am withdla"ihe WITHOUT
sDeceIyine them in making them think he not
going TO withdraw Al regarded We act as one OF
opDo You know ,ha, after he determined 10 with
Draw that he opportunity to let the propTetors
know IN any other way than he did, by putting that into
the paperf Al don't know.
O-How then, did he deceive them, or have any op,
rortunty do its Alt was deception os regarded
ba tbe psper should be presented 10 those who had
charge OF Il as though IL had not been ehangea ae
Though it was the regular edition. ,. -
o-Do you know taat DR.. Talmage did thatf A--Sot
absolutely . s + L,o,u a, %
OL-Do you know IL 10 any wayt Al knowN az
NV belief; don't know II as fact -
O-Do you know that he knew IL was donef Al 40
o'oYSu mean 10 say then that you don't swear and
canot swear OF your Owh knowledge, that Dr Iamage
made any false statement or ola any deeel9 scs ID
DATE OF THE LETTER OF RESIGNATION.
o.-You brought here with you Two letters, that IL
struck you might bear the One OF those letters