New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-10-22
DIR. BRIGGS IN THE SYNOD.
TIE PRESBYTERIANS REFUSE TO ENTER
TAIN Mr.. BROWNS COMPLAINT.
THEY DECIDE THAT AS THE CASE IS on TRIAL
IN NETWORK. IT Is INEXPEpIENr TO
TAKE ACTION NOW 80 PERSONAL
STATEMENTS AND RETRACTIoNs.


who have been here sin, Tuesday defending the fti
and listening to the story Of the work accohphs'cI
by the Presbyterian Church throughout ths SVA'e ana
New England, finished their sessions TO day and started
for their homes. The entire forenoon SESSION WIS
given to the DISCUSSION OF the complaint OF Professor
FIanci, Brown OF Union sem nary, against tie acu)h
Of the New-Yorl Pc.bytery in the case Of bis fleru'
Dr. Blggs. After ncaly three hours Oi debate WHICH
bordeied upon the personal several times the S3'u'
by vote OF l22 to 40, decided that the ooihP'uht
was IN ORDER but that II ihcXpcdcnt ID taAe
action at the present time because the case Of d.
BIIccs is again before the Nrw-fork Prespytcr!'
where the compainants may have their remedy IN
their own hand. and II II he found iiehcieht lheS
may bling the again before the synod b. appear
complaint
The debate To day apparently the talk Of men
eager 10 set home, the seemingly forced allegiance 20
this or that Principle to which they had coui'l'"u
Themselves before coming to Albany. Inc ars"-
ments were more than once nterspersed Win "a
p;tssions which would have undoubtedly been 5lotci
ou bv the recording ANGELS tears il they had not
been recalled. one Of the most honoiei members OF
the BODY was told by a brother presbyter that his
statement wa, not true, ecce-a,ti al terms bing used
a. n matter OF course: ".e,uitlcal expectancy ana
miserable appeal were also heard. The speeches
were mostly side, but the result ot Inc No'o
lid not convince the Impartial observer mat ue
audience hal been deeply Impressed b. them nome
If
or scholarly argument the mastery address delivered
by Professor Brown YESTERDAY and il vote hid been
taken when he sat down the members Of the body
fc,l that the result would have been dit r"n
The majority report OF the Judicial committee, rec
commended that Ia" rrr>bytcri tihe no action oh
the complaints Of Dr.. Brown and IN" ll3 members Of
Prc,lyery. The resolution bcfor" the synod lo4iny
WAS an amendment cutting oil Oh" recommendation
which would leave the complaints in order, ard whch
wa, the exact report Of the fur members OF inc
minority.
Professor Will, j. Bccchcr Of Auburn Theological
seminary here presented IN amendment 10 IN" ma
prtv report. which was really substitute Tor us
recommendations. It was ths:
In the matter of judicial case so. 3 III" committee
find, complaint to lie VI order, O, rr, nrno"t
limc. for the following rca-ors ,.,
Ftr,r The case. through ID" oc'i9n q TIE 'cnrrm
Assembly, aud of the Irc,byt'Ty or NW \ ork is Hsh
before tie rc>bytcry and the complananr may tN''
have their remedy in their own hand. ,.., ,,-,u
secondly IN the remedy there be found InNulh
Gent they VIII aficrwsrd have opportunity ly app'al
or complaint TO bring the cas-" again bcfor" tn" SYNOD
DR.. pcechcr defended hi, amcndmegt In speech
showing tho tremendous responsibilities nvovd IN
tho acti N before the synod Tho ccn,tuonality Of
oririnal pnrlcs7 the right Of complaint and the
rasenc b. u the syn ID" were all bound mp In The
complaint 81 Professor Brown. II" synod should not
be hurried 10 decision days week, or n necessary,
months should he given II tn" matter. The troubl"
with Or. Micr's recommendation was that II would
mean to the public At large, though not q logical de
duciio1 that the synod judged III" case OF IN" com
plalnants AGAINST tho companants. Ii was con'pi'u-
cn.iy unfair aud unjust. r said - declare IN" com
plan m order aud then declare that the compliments
shall not have q hearing.
Or. +. II. Narlins. On" ~ Nh" most c1lably ten
porcd in the synod. Whose fac" + b'"d'lon
in the Ncw-York presbytery. followed Dr. Becchcr
llc liked thu address. Of the Auburn professor. but
not nj, recommendations Then in burst Of
rightcou, indignation tho speaker referred to The
frirhtul tanslc7 caused by the appeal Of the com
mitcc that carried the t. Portland. overriding
the Assembly. This. he assured the Synod, was the
fountain Of all It's 4 moment later he referred
again % tho matter n that miserable appeal but
added in the same breath; Excuse the word
brethren; take It back" Non-actlon hc insisted,
was adverse action in this case.
The Rev. r. b. Williams. Of Mendon, and Dr. L. f.
Richards, Of stamford. spoke In behalf OF the com
palni but tho synod impatient, and when Dr.
Richards rat down James Tcrcance. Of New-forh,
moved the previous question.
shame | protest said DR.. Wilton Merle smith.
Il New-York. n director OF Union Seminary, and
protest. protest" was heard from various parts
NJ the room. The question was withdrawn and Dr.
smith began TO speak on tho impor rance OF the
question before the house. DR.. c. ;. Robinson OF
Ncw-l York asked the moderator II It were relevant to
60 over AL this sorry again and again.
NV remarks will be as rclcvgn' TO tie amend
ncnis a. any that have been given 10 day said Dr.
smith.
Il presume So" replied Dr. Robinson. in quiet
tone.
Dr. smith spoke torcbly against the doctrine OF
Jc,nircal cxpcdiency" which seemed likely TO be
adop 81. " Let justice BE- done. though me heavens
iaHr ,ild the speaker. II great wrong has been
doq Dr.. 10 J. il. MssiiTnnc also Of SeV-york poke
briay against the decision OF such important qu"s
ti,, ,rffY i'm
he present the gravest crisis In ne history OF
he synod and surcd the members haf me , com
General smith, or Pouehheepse. CAV" II a. ms
iAc the decisions Of the Court Of Appeals, but that
doesn't change matter, they have to obry men, cha
Dr. Robinson said that be had had q talk with inc
chairman Of the last General A,scmblys Judicial
Committee. and he had asked him s2me question,
Rmnalo. the man who wrote tho report at Portland
agan which Dr. Brown ha SPOKEN ,h Dr 1'H WAS
raised whether he YVES commissioner lie said that
y dispute the right Of Dr.. smith to rprcscnt lls
pre- cry" from tho rear Of the ROOM The
speaker. the Roy. W. Van srhoonhoyen Of tn" huiao
lie vote al the election but In n ringing voice Ut.
Inc REMARKS ot the brother are intrusive, II not
impudcnt. For III" Information Of the synod VIII
say that I could speak n stated clerk though not
ny '~c,io" -s~ed by tho stated clerk Of my prc,by
terry, Later Er. Van schoonhovcn Withdrew his re-
Of them amid tho applause Of the house The stated
CicrE then e,poncd that The Judicial commitlce and
the General Assembly recognized the Plrch committee
ms a committee OF prosecution. Or. Brown arcs and
while expressing his sorrow at differing with Dr
smith laid that thc records appeared To him to show
Tho very contrary regarding the Assembly. Dr.
ijcccher's amendment was then adopted 10y nsns
vote Of 100 10 40 and the amended report by similar
vote.
Whenever the Church has chance = vote on trcse
questions" said a member Of the Prosecuting Com |
niiicr. whenever the Presbyterian Church has Il
rhnnc, 10 vote on these questions II always votes
right. II voted NJ Detroit At Portland. and has
voted to-day at Albany. You cnn always trust
# when n has q chance to vote"
Tho synod disposed Of an immense amount OF routine
matter before rs final adjournment. II meets next
year ut Rochester.