New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-11-16
DR.. SMITHS DEFENCE.
POINTS MADE BY TIE ACCUSED PROFESSOR
IN HIS AG.iUNENT.
ARRAIGNING THE CINCINNATI. PREsDYTERY'
rRosECCTING COMMITTEE FOR TIE
ALLEGED AMBIGUITY or THE
ARRAIGNING TIL
CHARGES AGAINST I'm.

CHARGES AGAINST HIN.
Cincinnati. Nov 15.-The trial " the Rev. Dr. Henry
Preserved Smith by the Preshytcry OF Cncihhau Io'
erroneous teachng while II has not yet cro""'u l"e
church with listeners. Is assuming more ma more III
teresting proporticns. When the hour for opening
dis morning there only haltdo1cn per
present. hat In few MINUTES the entire com
m!ttee had assembled. except four members. "ho oy
their absence from llcall will lose their votes under
the rule Of the Prcsbytcry. These were IN" Rev
MesSrs. Acomb. Carson and Pollock and fl1cr j.
Borette. Four elders absent yesterday, making
tho court consist Of only sixty mine judges Tas
absentee rule II r already limited h furnishing loop
hole Of escape for members who may be convinced
that Professor Smith IS right but do not want to put
on rr"c"i vote 10 that effect II IS asserted that
PROBES Smiths defence. rcnd yesterday mas maze
serious Inroad, upon the oppc sition.
At the opening Of the session to-day the rrudihe
Of the minutes NJ yesterdays session by Temporary
Clerk Francis. rased storm 81 objections Ihe c'crh
had recorded that the question Of the eligibility OF
himself and two other minister. the affirmative vote
was almost unanimous. Quick objection was MADE
to this br members who declared TINT NJ least
onc-third Of the Presbytcry voted in the negative
II waa voted 10 amend the minutes IN that particular
Then It appeared BY further reading that the clerk
had Incorporated In the minutes rs own speech,
made upon the motion inst referred TO, and had not
included The remarks II other persons who fad spoken
II ordered that speeches he put In as exhibits
Professor Smith then bcgnn the reading OF his dc
renco the second charge which contained the gva
men OF tho charges against him, namely, that he
taught that the inspired author Of Chronicles had
been guilty Of asserting errors OF historical fact and
If suppcsang sundry historic truths. He read rapidly
for more than three hours, with hth effort at ora
torca effect but IN a manner that kept his argument
before his hearers. Professor Smith began his ar
raignment Of the committee az follows
ait Is plainly the intention VI the committee 10 as
sert that the Holy spirit did control IN" INSPIRED
writer's In the composition Of the Holy scriptures 50
as 10 make their utteranccs absolutely truthful, l. e.
FREQ from crrr In their natural and intended sense
Now. ask why \ not tho natural sense the Intended
sensel or |, the Intended sense something different
from the natural scnse cannot help seeing In this
plrn,c an obscur,y that seriously mars the force pi
th. proportion. The Intended sense intended by
whomr II by the Divine Author, We shall agree II
hy human authority doubt whether any Will affirm
n In the face " Peters assertion thnl the Prophets
sought and searched diligently who prophe'"d OF mo
grace which should come unto you. searching what
time or what manner the spirit OF Christ when was
In them, did pont ont or, II ans assert
,ho, the Intention Of tho Divine Author Is
necessarily the union OF the human author this pIopo
ton IS AZ least d.hniAdc In The first 'h1ptcr OF
cn-sis for example. It can hardly he doubted that
the intention NJ the human nuthOc va, To describe
natural work OF SIX natural days. Probably the ma
Iorty OF these Who hear me bell that the in''nto"
-, m. Holy srirt was 10 describe geologic work Of
,t creative dav.' 80 tho question whose lui'itlon
the committee means In their phrase IS not 'upcrfuo'
And in that view alone the language Is ambiguous,
md should be amended. For II ministerial standing
is 10 depend on \ Jungle with word the sooner
We know II the better
Professor smith then went oI 10 object 80 The charge
Tint II was insufficient in legal effect IN hat while II
afYrms certain doctrine TO le fundamental II brings
oo evidence that IL Is fundamental. Taking mp ga,
feoture he went on 10 show that the COMMITTEE" had
not induced any criptura text TO supp III" postum
they hnd a,.uin,d. The >tr"ners test 81 al. upon
which tho committee relied. was TINT IN II ilmplY,
M IG where II (, declared that all scripture Is gwen
hy ,nspiration a God ard Ia profitable Tor doctrines
ctc- He asked why the committee did no, quote the
revised version OF this text, which reads every
SCRIPTURE inspired OF God Is profitable. etc. ii'
argument was u Mt the word Inspired described inc
quality not the origin. Of The scripture.
II was dark when he finished his argument ana al'cr
n brief prayer the Ircshytcry adjourned. ON the way
from tho church Professor smith met several en-
,hu,iasic friends who warmly congratulated MIN on
Ms argument. ,
Tie prosecution will begin rs reply tomorrow