The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-11-12

about az many against it This YVES
the extent OF bis knowledge in the
matter. The examination of Dr..
b jggs was resumed by Col. Bullitt,
but DR.. Daniel had already pumped
him dry, aud Col. Bullitt is evidently
sboriog to find any questions to ask.
DR.. Bog So testimony has been amsz-
ing and crushing to the Conversee.
THE PRESBYTERIANC CHURCH VS.
CONVERSE AND CONVERSE.
The Presbytery OF Louisville
(Southern) resumed this pro
tracted trial at IL O'Clock m. today,
according to adjournment, the Pres
byterisn Church bsiDg represented
by Drs. Daniel and Boggs, the prose-
cutors, and the defendants being ably
sustained by Thomas w. Bullitr, their
counsel.
ORIGIN OF THE TRIAL.
This famous tial had its origin,
II is said, in an editorial which APP
peared in the Christian Ob@rrer me
time during the last autumn, charging
that there existed among the friends
OF Prof. Woodrow q plan for disrupt
ing the Southern Presbyterian Church,
and bringing forward the names of
three preachers in Memphis, Tenn,
with the plain intimatlen thst they
were concerned in the contemplated
schism. Thereupon the three preach.
ers-Drs. Martin, Daniel and Boggs-
published in the Memphis APPEAL a
statement to the effect that no further
defense on their part was required
than that they should make known
to the good people OF their coDgrega-
lions and OF the vicinity that the
Ctristidn Observer, which hsd ss1ailtd
their loyalty to the church, had for
macy years borne bad reputation as
to veracity.
After come pretty warm discussion
in the papers it became apparent that
II the Messrs. Converse did not bring
the matter before their Presbytery it
would be done by some member of
the Pfesbytery. Anyhow, they took
the initiative and had meeting called
in January for the purpose OF consid-
ering their request for full investigs.
ton, and inviting the Memphis
preache to come aud table charges
againat them. These gentlemen APP
peared at the first NEE ing, and when
the Converses demanded 10 Presbytery
whether the Memphis preschers had
anything to nllege in regular form
they at once tabled charge Of vic at
ING the ninth commandment, under
many ecfications-about twenty
FIVE, in all. AS soon as the in
dictment WAS presented the Con-
verfes filed q demurrer, and stren-
uously urged the Pes 'ytery to dismiss
it, on the ground that 1t was 80 frivo.
lous and indefinite that they did not
know how to plead it'll The Presby-
terry, however, overruled their de.
murrer, and though the OInvsrses
warmly protested, ordered them to
enter plea. They then, with much
hesitation and long delay, pleaded mo
guilty." and the Presbytery ordered
the trial to proceed.
The prosecutor summoned a num-
Der Of Witnesses from Louisville, from
the State OF Kentucky, and from the
Southern church at large to testify as
to the reputation Of the Christian Oh.
server and its editors, and proposing to
Ijrove that that reputation was, as
they had affirmed it to be, bad as 10
veracity. To all these inquiries as to
reputation the Conveises fled excep-
tons, on the ground that they were
not pertinent to the issue These ex-
ceptions, persistently urged befJre the
80, ,saaion annni,taI 20 koLa taoti
mony by Col. Bullitt, the counsel for the
defendants, caused the trial to drag its
tedious length along; but the commits
sion finally overruled them and or
dered the questions TO be forwarded to
the wito esses. Appeal was then taken
TO the Pfesbytery, thereby causing
further delay. But the Pfesbytery
sustained the commission and pre-
sCrlbed form for all such questions
nearly identical with that used in civil
courts for the same purpose. In
answer to these questions very inn
portant testimony, bob written and
oral. has been elected from some OF
the most prominent citizens of Louis
vile, among them Col. w. N. Halde.
man, Of the Courier Journal; Henry V.
Escott, ruling elder in DR.. Wither-
spocn's church, aud Col. B nnett II.
Young, all OF whom testified that the
reputation OF the paper-,he Christian
Observer Yves bad, and also that of it,
editors. Testimony OF the same sort
was given by DR., +. w. Bedipger,
president Of the Bellewocd Seminary,
DR.. Charles r. Hemphill, pastor OF the
Second Presbyterian Chu CHI, Louis
vile; the Rev. VIM. Irvine, stated
clerk OF the Louisville Presbytery ;
the Rev. 8. M. Neel, pastor OF
the Presbyterian Church, Shelbyville,
KY; DR.. I. A, Biocklin, the Nestor
OF the Presbyterian Church in Ken
lucky; Rev. DR.. ,E. M. Green, pastor
Of the Presbyterian Church, DAnville,
KY; Rev. DR.. N. NJ. Brown, of ViT-
ginia: Rev. Dr. ]. b. Adger, of South
Carolina; Rev. DR.. O. A. Shllman, OF
Alabama; Rev. DR.. r. p. Farris, OF
st. Louis; DR.. Olsby, Of Georgia; W.
r. Lyman, Of New Orleans, who
mentioned Drs B. M. Palmer, Mark.
ham, Bndwell and many eminent
laymen as having expressed the same
opinion Of the Chrisiidn Observer and
It's editors, OF these gentlemen, at
least twelve (two.thirds Of the whole)
are pronounced "anti-Woodrow men"
THE INSURANCE MATTER.
In addition TO these witnesses on
general reputation, four have been
examined as TO the alleged crooked.
ness Of the Converses touching a life
insurance policy. The testimony as
to this ugly insurance Transaction is
briefly as follows:
j. S. Bergman, cashier Of the Pres
byterau Mutual Assurance Company,
d. poaad that December Sd. 1854. he