New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-11-06
A TALK WITH DIR. BRIGGS.
HE WOULD HAVE LIKED A TRIAL.
WIDESPREAD SATISFACTION AT THE RESULT
WILL THE CASE DE APPEALED

Tho dismissal of the OF the Kew DE- briSSs III
the NewYosh Prcsbytery by tho overwhelming vote OF
"a TO 30 was cause # mingled pleasure and dis
turbsnee among Presbytehans yesterday. 1t is only
fair to say, however, that the sense OF pleasure APP
peared to outweigh In every instance tnat OF ais
pleasure disturbance The friends OF Dr. Briggs ui-
doubtedly accept the verdict Of the Presbytery as
triumph yet they do not In any respect Indulge IN
confident belief that this Is the end Of the controversy
though their hopes strongly incline in that direction
The friends OF the accused professor hold to the con-
victon that the paper read by Dr. Briggs before the
Presbytery Wednesday was q complete vindicaaon
OF his position They claim that In this document ne
dsavowed completely every charge of heresy that had
been presented against him, and hence the PresoyeT
had no grounds which TO base further proceedings
on the other hand. it Is held that Dr. Briggs did not
within the compass Of his response alone make
complete dlsavowal
There is feeling among his opponents that tho
members Of the P;csbytery temporarily carried on
their feet, TO speak, by the na1,J bearing OF the
defendant, his impressive conduct OF his defence and
tho elegant dic3n OF his address, and losing sight OF
essentials they will find in careful reading OF the
document that he failed entirely to disavow certain
beliefs which 1t is alleged he advanced in the utter
ances which made the foundations Of the attempted
trials twas Thought by some that the supporters OF Dr.
Briggs rushed forward TO secure dismissal because
In his response or demurrer "ObJectiohs,' or
whatever his reply may be termed, he had presented
his entire defence and there danger in coming to
trial lest his should have been weakened by tho
comprehensive character Of the document which he
applied. But relief Is afforded this ground, what
ever the understanding might previously have been.
By the statement OK DR.. Briggs himself, 10 tho effect
that he came to his trial with thoroughly prepared
defence, independent entirely of the answer read be-
fore the Presbyery in the early hours Of its session
on Wednesday.
TIE QUESTION OF APPEAL
nnftt IN
the to the Synod is disputed by the friends OF
Dr. Briggs purely technical grounds. The trial has
been dismissed by the Presbytery on nearly twothrds
VOTE yet there third Of the membership which dis
sens. st Dr. Briggs has appeal and yet he stands
In the position Of defendant II the committee winch
appointed b. this Presbyery, which now decides by
nearly a two-thirds vote that the trial should be
dismissed In the light Of Dr. Briggs solemn response,
shall discIaim any power Of their creator over them
and carry the forward then it becomes test case
In ecclesiastical law and the end OF the controversy Is
deferred for several years. There Is belief however
that the reply OF DR.. Briggs TO the charges pre-
scented comes 10 be studied and understood IN oonnec
ton with his objectionable utterances, there Will
be developed purpose TO close THE controversy at the
point 1t has now reached and AVOID all further us
turbance within the Church.
The views Of DR.. Briggs of Colonel j. j. McCook, oil
the prosecuting committee, and of Henry Day. mem
Der OF the board Of directors of Union Theological Sem
mary, are given here.
WHAT DR.. BRIGGS SAYS.
Dr. Briggs wac visited by "a Tribune reporter at his
hom. last evening lie said Il stand by the opinion
that the PresbytcFy Is party and am the other;
that the committee Of prosecution is IN no sense
party. That committee simply represented the Pres
byery and amenable TO the PresbytcEy and could
be dismissed by the Presbytery at its pleasure !
hold that she Ppsbytery had the right when it heard
my objections 10 do what it pleased, either to dismiss
the case to amend the charges and Specifications, or
to send them back to the committee for amendment.
1t decided to dismiss the the ground OF my
paper as one Of three reasons. could take 10 ex-
c-ption 10 that decision. II was not in my interest
that the Presbytery should dismiss the case but 1t was
because, understand it. there was no case nave
claimed from the beginning that there was no case.
do not believe II IL possible for any committee following
the Book Of Discipline and the Westminster Confession
and Catechism, TO make valid case against me. II
supposed there was any valid case against me l
would retire from the church and unite with another
denomination 1t is because l there IS no
case against me that stay in the Church which, on
the whole. / prefer TO any other denomination
II think the matter appealed from. on the claim
n, the committee to represent the Presbyterian Church.
IS much more serious matter than my case. and that
must be settled before anything else can be DONE
II the committee did not represent the Presbyterian
Church they had no power Of appeal, and II the
Supreme Court should so decide their appeal would
he thrown out Of court. While in many respects It
would be for my interest to have trial and acdmt-
tai Of all charges and while in some respects s'ahd
at present before the public with charges
against me that have not been tested. NJ
the same time the Presbytery has virtually
declared the charges and specifications in their present
form invalid and that there is no case against me-
HE HAD IT'S DEFENCE PREPARED.
"I am willing in the interest of the peoce and
harmony OF the Church to suffer any slight mlsuhder
standing or even censure that may arise respecting my
views I was all ready for the trial had carefully
prepared myself and had my defence ready in wrtlng
on every charge that had been made against me. II
ANYBODY ha, suffered wrong have suffered wrong
in not being able 10 make any defence and yet l
am perfectly willing TO waive ii in the interests
OF peace and harmony which are greater than any
narsonaI interests feel that the whole the
general public understands my position, and that the
press Is open 10 me To say whatever I am disposed
10 say and / regard the press "a proper place for
theological controversy and not ecclesiastical courts
claim that my paper presented to the Presbytery,
was strictly legal document that it did not transcend
in the slightest degree attempt TO file objections
TO the suicency Of the charges In form and In legal
effect claim that did not enter into the merits
Of the question except so far as was Obliged
~ do 50 in order 10 reject the invalid
InfereEccs msqu0tatlons and inslnuations OF the
charges and specifications and that had right
TO make any legal objection whatever either TO the
form or to the contents OF my answers q strictly
legal document Not knowing what the course Of
the trial would be, had prepared my defence In
much longer document, which it would take many
hours to read answering every one Of what consid
cred 10 be the really five distinct charges underlying
the charges and specifications OF the committee. l
claim that the questions at issue between me and my
opponents are either exra questions beyond the
definitions OF the Westminster Confession else
tons In which adhere to the Confession and my OPP
ponents do not"
COLONEL J. J. M'CooK's VIEWS
too true and loyal Presbyterian said Colonel
NcCOok dissent from the action OF the tudieatrcs
OF the Church, except so far as am compelled TO GO
so from my Official relations with this particular case
ms a member Of the prosecuting committee. Ny I'M
preston IS that the Church at large will consider that
the rrsnnn slIAv for the nnsonnd views uttered bY