New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-11-22
THE PREsBYTERY.
a COMPLAINT TO THE NETWORK SYNOD.
DR. sHEDD, DIR. BRIGGs's COLLEAGUE. AT THE
HEAD OF THE LIST.

DR. SHEDD, DIR. BRIGGS'S COLLEAGUE, AT THE
HEAD OF THE LIST.
The complaint TO the synod of New York from the
recent decision of the Prcsbyery dismssng the case
against Professor Charles A. Briggs has been filed with
the Rev. Dr. ID. Alexander the stated clerk OF the
Presbytery II follows closely the appeal OF the
Prosecuting Committee to the General Assembly puo'
ished In The Tribune last Tuesday but It's cmei sis
ncance is in the list Of thirty names at the head
OF which stands that of the Rev. DR.. W. g. T. shcdo'
for nearly quarter Of century professor IN inc
Union Seminary where for seventeen years nc was
colleague OF DR.. Briggs. The second name IS ''is Vi
DR. r. n. Booth the pastor Of the Rutgers hSefSee
Church and director OF the Seminary. Dr' W. H.
6ealer the secretary of the American Tract eoco's
DR. c. S. Robinson. of the Thirteenth street |n",0'
john c. Tucker of DR.. Van Dykes Churoh' hooei.
Eeggs and other elders Dr. John Halls Church, ana
the Eve members of the committee TINT preferred inc
charges against Dr. Briggs are in the iist
The complaint begins thus: We. the undersgneu'
ministers ruling elders of the Presbyterian ohurch
In the United States Of America, SUBJECT ana euo
hitting TO the Jurisdiction Of the Presoytery OF Ne"
York do hereby hur1by, but most earnestly, complain
to your body in accordance with Section So OF the BOOK
of Discipline OF the action and decision OF the so rre
bytery OF New-York taken at Its meeting OIL INC fui
day OF November A. ID. 1901, in the scotch tresp!-
terrain Church in the city of Newfora, In dsmlssng
the case of the Presbyterian Church in the United states
of America against the Rev. Charles a. Briggs, d. d.,
end also Of the delinquency Of the said Presbyery ana
in 30 complaining We do respectfully set forth He'e
follows history Of the case from the appointment Oh
the committee of inquiry April l3 to the dismissal
of the case on November 4. Twenty-one reasons 1or
the complaint follow. The first two are these:
In this that the Presbytery Of New.Ycrk while pro-
cesdns IN such provisions Of Section % OF
the Of Discipline permitted the accused to READ In inc
hearing udcaory before he was required TO plead
'cuty' or guilty" and admitted TO its records anu
naf,er viii
the sucency charges and specifications IN FORM anu
legal which in fact and is as denonna'ea
BY said accused Response to the Charges ana spc'
ncaoos Submitted to the Presbyery OF newborn oS rV
lessor Charles Augustus Briggs, d. Dr. which paper Is
hereby part Of the record OF the proceea
ings In said case. which said parer or response
consisted TO great extent OF statements ="
fact or arguments the merits OF the case.
That the said statements Of fact arguments the merits
OF the case should been admitted or CONSIDERED
by the said Juditay this stage OF the trial. ana he
admission and consideration OF the said paper or ne
sponse' far said paper was an answer upon NV
merits To the charges specifications and in 80 far as
was in fact presentation OF the upon its merits or
the defence OF the accused. error and Irregular
In this that the said Prcsbytery Of New.York dunna
the proceedings OF said Presbyery in said case under
the provisions OF Section 90 Of the Book Of Discipline ana
before the said accused was required to plead guilty
or mot guilty" aud when the said Presbytery shouio
have considered nothing but the preliminary objections
raised by the accused TO the sunciency oil the
charges and specifications In form and legal effect per
mtted the Rev. Henry van DYKE D. d., Rev Francis NJ
Brown, D. d. Rev. ]. Hall Mcll'aine jr, d. d.. Rev
Thomas s. Hastings. D. D., Rev Henry NJ fleld D. D..
and Rev Spencer L. Hitler members Of the said
Presbytexyl make pleas for the defence OF tho
accused. which said pleas involved the merits oil the
case while the sa Prosecuting Committee was heard only
touching seency Of the charges and specifications in
form and legal effect and debarrcd from presenting
either testimony argument touching the merits OF the
case although the Prosecuting Committee offered 10 the
dcatory TO prove and sustain each and Of the
charges and specifications by competent evidence and ont
Of the Scriptures and by the Standards Of the Presbyterian
Church without receiving such evidence or hearing the
arguments Of the Committee in support of
the same the Judcatoy voted dismiss and did dismiss
the case
Extracts are given from the addresses Of Dr. van
DYKE DIR. McIlvaine, DR.. Hastings, DR.. Crown Dr.
Field the Rev. Spencer Hitler to show that these
members Of the Fresbytery voted TO dismiss the case
for reasons other than the insccncy Of the charges
in firm and legal effect. and presented to the Presby
tery as for voting 20 dismiss the case certain
statements which given. The following Is the
prayer OF the synod:
conclusion, your compliments your venerable
BODY the Synod New-Yorx the reversal In whole
Of the Of the said Prcsbytery OF New-fork as
missing said and for such other octon as in your
wisdom best in order to secure and preserve
the purity and peace OF our beloved Church.
These the compliments:
William q. r. Shedd Robert Russell Booth George l..
Sheaer. Tucker j. Ford Sutton, Charles s. Rob-
inson Peter Carter Kiaen Van Rensselaer, Alexander p
Ketehum James Yearance L. c. Murray Levi H. Parsons.
W. NJ Onderdonk Francis d. Griffin, Philo S. Ely. Will
lam r. worrs George NJ. Jnques, George Nixon Abbott
L. Waite. William &. Stitt Alexander W. Sproul john
c. Lowre, Thomas &. Wall, Waiter Carter, George IL
Brown, William Campbell Even Mcintyre. John Patoi
Iobert Beggs George Birch, Joseph j. Lampe, Rob-
trt Il. Sample John j. Stevenson, John j. McCook
V1cSaD cTTrDENTS, Nm SOCIETY,"