New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-11-29
committee TO amend its charges as 1t had uohe'
Or LaInDe continued

| Ponds Extract 90, 20 Fifth'a'e' New UTE.
committee TO amend its charges as 1t had dohe'
| DR.. Lampe continued: CO.,
Tho Cralehead cs.c has been referred TO- anu d ~"
no,oncc !, souch In thi, case IL may be well 10 make
= concise statement Of II here There are sono pun
| #, ,h,, drrision 70 whvh think Dr. BiiGgs "ouIu
seriously 0, cct The Synod OF Kentucky Lad Nrtu'iy
| on the recommendation OF the freSol"'! VI '''
| v,,i, .u.ucnd,I Mr. traighead from the ministry
The Assembly thought the Synod had och !" Wv
| haste hut said that the Synod miGht nave PIo'V"oi
instantly 20 condemn the error Of Mr.. CralahNds DOOR,
- ,ho Assembly did in the OF the Gospel ran" Oh
| ~ & DAVIS, The Assembly expressed thr cIAnion hat
IN statements which may fairly be Interpreted 80 a. I"
Involve no hcretica doctrines the more favorable cons'uc
| I sbouId @ allowed; to this agree n the more
,vorate construction is contrary to the EVIDENCE
.rhn most 81 the charges against Mr.. Crai2hc'd were
,yai-simplc charges in the air One charge was tns
e had perverted 1.-THE sentiments OF the pi'och'rs anu
-,o,s +, our connection and In another, with mi'e
coor,nr OF facts sustained BY quotations from MS
,ook M reference either Bible or the Confession
and without record OF the oral testimony given IL was
with such charges before them that inc A>S'hoN VIZ
properly said that man ought not 10 VI Vo"uo -
differences from his statements
mi, MN, have been their meaning. for they after
vorI said: "But while the General Assembly are
Of the opinion the charges against MI Oi"-'" arc
not clearly and fully supported by the references h'y
lind IL TO be their that the impressions ""'h
.hcv haye received from hearing extracts from THIS us
course are very unfavoabe and they do believe h'I MI
Craghead by preaching and printing this sermon u''
subject himself Justly censurc." And perhaps a.
bearing on the present they sud; "But they
cannon approve the conduct OF Mir CpiGhcad when De-
for. the synod. lie indeed manifested oiF ana ii
rendtnt spirit that would rot be conIOll'd oy a"'oS
and there wa, not exhibited due respect io' the Syh"i
a. an ,cknoulcdged judicaory OF the Church OF IhrS'
His conduct not respectful and concliatoTy "ni'h
certainly return that their tenderness 10 NJ" '
for but IL that Of bold ana comment co''''0"
who .o,s his opponents defiance. The publication o.
Of Mr.. Crligh'hd tiNr NJ ia"
% earnestly cltrcatel BY the Syno' hot % o'"
against the OF the Confession and tc ic''ES
of his Christian brethren roprehensoe a.
far AZ evidence before than the first preaching OF H.
THE ORDER OF THE LAST GENERAL AsSh''bLh
Dr. Briggs has appealed decision oil the Sup'em"
Court III our Church which found In Oh" record
There is however decision OF that court IN ieice"c'
70 this judicial which demands our careful a'Nh
ton II -oys: -.
.rhc case 3, remanded to the Presbytcry OF NewYork
FOR new tal with directions the said Prcsby'ey
70 proceed pass upon and determine 'he sunni '''
Of the charges specifications IN iof ana i'e' ''
and 70 permit the Prosecuting Committee 70 amend the
specifications or scs chaging ;hc ecneid nature
NJ the same IT, in the fuihcrancc Of justice, 1t b.
necessary 10 amend that the case may BE- Di"ush 20
issue and tired the merits thereof as speedily as may
be piactcablc.'
In sending down this order Supreme Court OF
Church since II had charges and specifications under
cons deration must have held the charge sufficient Ia
their general put the accused on tn"
defence and IN" ficht anu po.T tNnE '" VI" ~" -
70 follow directions Of that court ana win The
least possible delay Join the issue and uy the ease
This il no doubt unpleasant business u ~ an Dut Il
is the orderly way Tor PfcsDytcrlanS t. sct" such
dnicuc-. becomes US members OF this court
Of The Church Of Christ 10 conduct the tfi'l Ia
Good spirt ,atlcnty and with and thorough
ness which shall commend the judgment which we
nay record o confidence OF our Church at large
TRYING TO SHORTEN THE INDICTMENT.
After DR.. Iampe hal taken lis seat DR. George
Alexander. of the University Place Church, offered
the following resolution:
Resolved That Prcsbytcry in con'd Of obioc
oToIod by the a"cu 3D. requires the committee to
amend the charge, and -pecincauons by striking out
charges and :.
Dr. J. Ford Sutton offered this resolution as
substitute:
Resolved. That in the Judgment this court the Oh.
iecons fled by the defendant in This case as to Tho
suncicncy in legal effect Of the amended chaigrs ahd
Specifications, roo wei taken.
DIR. SUTTON DEFENDS us MOTION.
Dr. Henry Van Dyke, OF the Brick Church.
said that, as DR. Sutton's n,ction referred t. II
totally different subject than DR.. A"Nandcr's
motion did, it could not possibly b. substitute
for it, Dr. Sutton replied Is follows:
think oil those WHO have the oLainol in1 ctnont
h.f,ye ,1cr,, together with Dr. irr.o objections Will
see very ccailv, have seen v'ly clearly, cai ih'
ld spcoincc tons objected 10 arr July contained
I
before ard now, zig. think joining Win nay
brother wonder the desire for speed procedure. tho
thing De doao j, - decide that The obc' tom
which have Just been flied by tine defendant - the
legal fon Of the specifications and charges
are nos well taken. W. understand perfectly VOL
every mcmb,r this court unccr-tands there Is
nothing n tai, Indictment which j. not covered en-
trcly by old indictment. And - y tho dffcn4ont-
disclaimer mater urging that his N'aatF IS
called In question the matte. stnds upon hi, book.
lie has never condemned his Lojk lie la, never re-
tsc,cd one clclcc that book. r. stil sands. Ana
vet our broc-r .ays II did not mean 1t 50; did not
mean n teach and a." ut there - stand ia tn
book and 10 is going IS mission throughout tic world
I: has been published broad ost AID hnN been s forth
I on the wings press II Is GOING all over IN"
world 10 Las not ctcd BY brothc- although
lie dlsavows thot mfa0ng put upon II Is his
meaning understanding. now, IT seems To mc INA;
that q valid objection In this court The thing 10
be done proceed to inquire int the nanin; II
this and On biothcr's disclaimer VIII stand
long he docs not recall and condemn what he mas
said in his book.
DR. VAN DYKE SUPPORTS DR. ALExAN DER
! DR. Van Dyke replied 10 DR.. sutton as follows:
Mr. Moderator make point Of Older that -ub'ttutc.
although may totally reve.c an original motion. must
pertain necessarily the same subject and that DR.
Sutton's with which should agree ia pAr1 docs
not tain 20 the subject Dr. Alexander, Tho
subject AlcNandcrs motion f. that the commiti"
amend charges and specifications by stlking out
charges 4 and 7-not the ground that they are In
sufficient I'm form le.al effect but the ground that
they are charges and that IL j. not IN the Interest Of
justice thcIancc OF this trial ~ permit them L.
remain therefore make the point % order that Df.
Sut.On's substitute order | it viii
Prcsbytcry II get IL before In this form
The most important question Is whether willing
10 sustain these objections 70 charges and the
which have been clearly and simply and I;
TO me very conclusiycy stated before to-day.
have a large contract hands. Let Us not en-
large all bounds OF possibility by bringing
charges be tried here at this date There can
be no doubt whatever there is essential difference