Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1892-05-27
WHEELING W. VA FRIDAY MORNING. MAY %, 1892.

Court TO refer appeals back 10 the SYNOD
The General Assembly has been reluctant
to entertain appeals direct from Presoy-
teries. Qualifications" in the words OF
the appeal, was never designed IN the In
terest of the prosecutors, and, so far as we
can learn, has never been used in their in
terest To entertain this is 10 establish
dangerous precendent.
Third-The appeal cannot be entertained
because it would deprive the defendant Oh
right.
Fourth-The appeal cannot be entertain
ed, because it might deprive more than q
hundred ministers and elders OF the Pres
bytery of New York, who have taken ac-
tion in the case by their complaint TO the
Synod, of their right OF complaint.
A complaint against the action under
which this committee is acting is now
pending in the Synod of New York, signed
by ia members Of the Presbytery. Only
by this chmplaint could the Presbytery act,
in order to have the issue decided.
This complaint cannot come before this
body, but in the Synod il must be heard.
Sixth-The appeal cannot properly be
entertained because it should be consoll-
dated with complaint from some OF the
parties before the Synod. The committee
has an appeal here and similar complaint
before the Synod.
Seventh-The appeal is irregular be-
cause notice was given to the Presoytery
of the appeal TO the Synod of New York.
The appeal 10 the Assembly seems 10 have
been an afterthought. The committee had
exhausted their rights by that notice.
Eighth-The appeal cannot be enter
tanned because a complaint TO the Synod
signed by more than one-third Of those who
were present and voting in presbytery acts
as a STAY until the Synod decides whether
the committee has the right TO exist, and
therefore the right to appeal. The appel
ants have wronged the defendant oy their
course in passing over the Synod and hold
ing I'D the defendant as though he were
guilty of heresy, even after the dismissal
of the case by his pres0ytery Ihe case Is
pending before the Synod of New " ork.
In conclusion DR.. Briggs said: "Mr.
Moderator, Ministers and Elders have
limited my argument to one simple point,
that is the appellants, if they are appel
lants. which we do not concede, II they
have the right to appeal, under any CIR
cumstances, which is open 10 grave DOUBT,
they ought TO go to the Synod of New York.
''The reasons they present why you
should entertain their appeal are Invalid.
You could not admit them without prelu-
dicing the cause of the defendant, usurping
the authority which belongs to the lower
court ana 2cIlnS IN d HdSlyi AISSeA "uN
revolutionary manner.
"Obiections have been presented against
the entertainment of the appeal which
seem 10 be lnsuperable. The law OF ap-
peals does not justify passing over the
synod in the interest Of the appellants.
The precedents of appeals before the Gen
eral Assembly are against this appeal TO
entertain it would be 10 deprive defendant
of his right.
The reading of this paper took just an
hour and twenty-five minutes. The moor
was given to Col. McCook, of New York,
on behalf Of the appellants.
Mr.. McCooB asserted that the past MS
tory of the case showed that this committee
is committee OF prosecution and an
original party.
This committee was appointed as pro-
scouting committee and every act has been
done in the name of the whole church. he
Quoted from a book of discipline the
grounds Of appeal, one of which Is the re-
fusal to receive important testimony ana
said in this the presbytery erred, as 1t did
also in fastening TO the conclusion which
is recognized ground of appeal.
The moderator then stated the question
was whether the appeal be entertained.
The motion was carried in the Affirmative
The question then was upon report OF the
minority ItCOullllCuhAhB bhNN VIZ
sent back to the Synod OF New York,
which was laid on the table.
The majority report was then adopted:
Then arose the question over records OF
case.n DIR. Mcpherson stated that the
book in the house bearing that title con.
tanned the minutes Of the Presoytery ana
other papers together with stenographlc
reports Of Briggs trial on the charge OF
heresy.
The question was whether the books con-
tained the true records. DR.. Briggs OBJ
jected to this book purporting o6e the
records as inaccurate.
Judge Saylor made the point that the
stenographic report was not report OF the
acts of the Presbytery but Of occurrences
1t was then moved that the stenographlc
report be eliminated. A lengthy wrangle
ensued and it was finally decided that the
record in the case consist Of the minutes as
written and of the official stenographic re-
port as sent up by the stated clerk OF the
New York Presbytery.
Judge Strevell, OF Montana, gave notice
of protest against the admission OF the
stenographic report, because OF th' belief
of the constitutional rights Of DIR. Briggs
had been invaded by the As jmbly.
Adjourned tilfto-morrow.