The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-11-13

was on that ar0uuu excused Ior nlb
sct. Tho Presbylery sustained the
demand Of Dr.. Daniel, and ordered
Col. Bullet TO ne urn the interroga-
tories TO the commission at once, that
they may 60 to the witnesses. DR.. j.
/ Martin has bsen on the witness
stand most OF the time today, and has
given the coolest SORT OF comfort 10
the C1nversts by his calm, clear tes-
timony as to the facts.
More Damaging TestInOuy Against
the COnveTses.
Counsel for the defense fought deg
perately in support OF demand that
the prosecution should be put upon
the witness stand at the time preferred
blythe &C used, but the Pfesbyiery re-
fused the demand by vote Of 10 to
IL. Having gained their poiut the
prosecution submitted, and asked to
be recorded, the following paper,
which went upon record:
To the Presbytery Of Louisville:
Three times duing this trial the
counsel for the defense has demanded
that the prosecution should take the
witness stand and testify. These de-
mands the prosecution have hereto
fore resit ted On constitutional grounds
alone, claiming their right to intro
duce their own testimony in their
own way. By vote Of IL to 16 the
court last night sustained the prose-
cution. by oveHuling the motion OF
counsel for defense. The prosecution,
having obtained the principle for
which il was coptendiog and, by these
repeated demands, being relieved
OF all possible suspicion OF being eager
TO test ~ sgainst thu accused, now
calls the Rev. W. E. Boggs, ID. D., to
the witness stand.
Eugene Daniel-This examination
was postponed, however, on account
OF the absence OF the Rtenographer.
Rev. J. 4. Oozby's deposition was
read, in which was much damaging
evidence as to the verscity OF the Con-
verse;. The most damaging OF all,
was statement TO the effect that the
Rev. DIR. John leighton Wilson said
TO him on his Or. Wilson's) death
bed, and only few days before he
died, and in full knowledge of the
fact that he WAS soon TO die, that he
had never been engaged in any public
controversy that those Observer men
did not misrepresent him.
w. o. Dodd, an eminent lawyer 81
Louisville, tvs fled that ne had heard
OF the bad reputation Of the CJnver es
for at least ten years psst. He had
not sought any inform alton about
them; IL had come 10 his knowledge
like the weather, or any other com
monplace feet; he had not thought
them worth talking about.
THAT sPRCIAL TO THE APPEAL.
In January, 1856, just after the first
met ting Of the Louisville Prcsby tery,
the Christian ObserUer published
a telegram that had appeared
in the Memphis APPEAL, together
with editorial comment insinuatiDg, II
not alleging, that it had been sent in
some way by the prosecutors, or at
their inst'gation. On this point Col.
Heating had written TO DrS. Boggs and
Daniel as follows;
Rev. Drs. Boggs and Daniel;
GKNTLEMRN-In answer TO yours
of this date, / have TO say that the dis
patch (speciall from Louisville, pub.
lished in the APPEAL of January 18Th,
was sent to us by Mr.. Lew Brown Of
the Cotirier-Jotundl, who ia alone re-
sponsible for the views and opinions
therein Expressed. With high respect,
your friend, J. NJ. HEATING.
Col. Heating further test fed on
cross examination by the defense, that
none OF the editorials ia the APPRAL
in any way connected with this case
or any o her matter of controversy in
the church, had ever been suggested
or counseled, or 10 any wOy Influenced
by any OF the Memphis preachers. He
alone WIS responsible for their senti-
ments and for their publication.
THE "cHRIsrrAN OBSERVER IN 1873"
Counsel for defense fought desper.
ately to exclude certain testimony
going to show that the General As.
sembly Of the Presbyterian Church
in the United States had, upon
careful invt igation Of certain state
ment published by the ChTaian %
server declared it without foundation
and therefore false.
THE 'CHRlSIlAN OBSERVER IN 1855
The Rev. J. VIM. Finn, of New Or.
leans, testified that in 1888 the Christian
Observer had made false report of the
action Of tho Assembly on the qups.
lion OF fraternal relations, and when
the attention Of the editors was called
to the fact, instead Of correcting Il, they
stIenuously attempted to make good
their published statement as true.
Mr.. Finn submitted in evidence, as
part OF his sworn statement in this
case, that SirieeR honored brethren,
who were present OF thst Assembly,
who attended closely to it's proceed
ings, agree in affirming the truth OF
his charge against the truthiulness of
the Observers report in that matter.
The names Of these sixteen brethren
are as follows: The Rev. Drs. Alexan-
der Martin, Q. Il. Hemphill, O. A..
Shllman, James Woodrow, w. T.
Richardson (ol the Central Presbv-
teT1dnl, Jos. Blrdwell, I. A. Brackin,
X. Z. fatris, r. X. Smoot, Joseph r.
Wilson (Stdted Clerk of he ASsembly).
n. M. Woods, W. O. Clark. Judge j .
ID. Armstrong, Messrs. ]. Adgor
Smyth, w. Il. Lyman and ID. ]. Garth
man,
THE REv. t. +. CONVERSE IN 1869.
II appeared from the testimony Of
DR.. Boggs that tbs bad reputation Of
Il. E. Converse is at least sixteen or
seventeen years to bis (Dr. Boggs's)
own knowledge. Thst Mr.. r. L. Con.
verse was missionary in China for
one year CISCO His conduct in China
raised the question Of his repulati n
for veraciiy and truthiulness among
other things. This he knew, because
ne tDr. Boggs) wss a membtr OF the
Foreign Missions Committee, end had