New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-01-10
THE ANDOVER HERESY CASE.
DEMAND FOR THE RECORDS OF THE BOARD OF
vIsIToRs-DR. sEELyE's REFUSAL
TO ANSWER

TO ANSWER.
Lawrence, Mass. JAM e.-The hearing before ex-
Governor Robinson OF the Andover Seminary case
was continued at Andover to-day. Professor Bald
wn for the appellant asked that tho parties 10 the
hearing 60 to Lowell. where Secretary Marshall is
Sick In order to inspect The records. Judge French
objected and the commissioner thought IL was not
djgnifed action for all to 20 after witness. and
saw no necessity for It. inasmuch as the records not
having been produced upon demand. he would submit
secondary evidence to show their contents Notice
was served the Board OF Visitors By the appellant,
demanding all the records OF the trial of the Andover
professors well all letters. papers or kilograms
on file which had been received by the Board OF
Visitors IT'S president pertaining TO the Andover
case. The counsel for tho visitors said he would
send notice TO tho secretary again. but would NOT
produce the records himself
Professor George Harris testified that the printed
statements as published in the pamphlet entitled
Andoyer Case are correct Copies Of the state
ment were presented 30 the Board of Visitors. Pro-
fessor Harris detailed his conversation WITH seelye,
president OF the board at its meeting when the latter
agreed that tho four professors should have oppor
tuny to malns statements. DR. sceye in converse
ton had indicated that he understood Dr. smyths
to DO that Of all the others. Counsel for the COM
plsinant at tho time OF the trial objected 30 bunch
ing the cases No evidence ever put in for the
professors other than that offered for smyth. The
nouncaton OF the Doatu regarding tho nnding IN me
trial the professors admitted after considerable
objection and legal sparrfng. An attempt made
By Professor Baldwin to show by Professor Harris
that the ideas known the New Theology, referred
10 by Dr. Eusts IN connection with DR.. smyth, were
identical with the views Of the acquitted professor
regarding future probation, fabity OF the Scriptures
etc. Two hours were consumed In the discussion Of
this point but the commissioner decided not admit
theological views Numerous exceptions 10 the CON-
mssioncr's ruling taken By the appellants
sci regarding this matter
l. A. W. Kelly. licensed clergyman OF Andover,
proved the most forgetful witness yet before the
commissioner. He for several years the private
secretary Of Professor T. a. Park knew he had writ
ten many letters but could remember none Of them.
and was sure he had never written 10 the Rev.
Smith Baker, Of Lowell When letter was pro-
duced. however purporting TO be from Park to Baker.
the witness identified IT, Professor Baldwin desired
10 intrndlcc a letter, which finally admitted.
despite the protests OF Judge French. Witness did
not remember that Dr. Park visited Dr. Eustis at
Springfield any time during the fall of 1886. He had
written letter 10 the latter for Professor Park.
Professor Tucker was next called. His testimony
was about repetition Of that Of Dr. Harris regarding
tho trial before the Board OF Visitors In Boston.
Counsel for tho respondent tried In vain to mako
Professor Tucker admit that the Of tho professors
were considered separately from smyth's
The OF DR.. seclye, who last Friday refused TO
answer the appellants question: was discussed. and
the paiter was hnally reported by the commissioners
for the Supreme Court The decision Of that body
Al 20 whether President Ecelye is compeled 10 answer
or not will be- awaited When II Is received taking
Of the testimony win be continued