New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-12-02
FEELING SHOWN AT PROF. SMITHS TRIAL.
DR. M'KIBBEN CALLED TO ORDER by DR..
CURTIS-NEED OF sERGEAST-AT-
ARMS SUGGESTED.

Cincinnati Ohio Dec Tho deepest feeling en-
cendered since the trial Of Professor Smith BY the
Cincinnati Presbytery was developed to-day DE-
Curtis, who had been known as one OF the foremost
friends Of Professor smith. suggested that Professor
smith be allowed to some new matter IN
troduced in the closing argument OF the Prosecution
Committee by Dr. McKibbcn. Leave being granted
Professor Smith briefly explained his meaning III IN"
two articles cited against him. and repeated his CAIN
that they did warrant the Interpretation put upon
them by the prosecution.
Dr. McKibben asked Professor Smith what these
words meant in his pamphlet "The candidate does
not engage be Jealous In maintaining the doctrines
OF the Westminster Confession Of Faith
"They mean what they say" said Professor Smith.
You heard Professor smith say In your presence
resumed DR.. McKbben. that mlDstcr need not Keep
his ordination VOWS
Instantly Dr. Curtis his feet and called DR..
McKibben 70 order for distorung the language OF
Professor Smith al, it ca,ustry Of the gospel Of
Christ" continued Dr. Curtis. that DR.. Mckibben
would have Presbyterian ministers preach -
One member OF the court wanted scrGcants alarms
appointed to promptly exclude from the house all
who made dsordcrly interruptions. The Moderator
declared the entire interruption out Of order, and
Dr. McI<ibbcn finished his argument
1t was moved TO take up tic second charge. Elder
Fulton offered rs an amendment that the Prcsbytcry
first determine the first charge. Thu member has
been recognized on the side OF Professor smith,
and 1t Is thought he felt hopeful that the first charge
would not DO sustained and wanted the prestige OF
acqutta before entering the others motion to
table the amendment carTied-yeas; 2O nays, -.
The second charge then taken up. This Is
the vital one OF the Indictment, 1t relates Ia Pro
| fessor smiths views the inspiration OF the
Scriptures. The charge IL based his pamphlet en-
titled Biblical Authorship and Inspiration; which
was originally read before the PresDytcry In dis
cussion upon an overture to the General Assembly
demning the teachings OF Professor Briggs. Of Union
lhcolOeical Seminary some testimony lnir~ duced
10 show the identity of the pamphlet. And that Ii
had extensively circulated. Professor smith. IN
xaminaton enteavored t. ascertain who we've III,
au hors OF the overture which gave rise 20 his paper
The prosecution objected, but II ovcrucd. and
the witness answered that one was the author.
Professor Smith then asked who were the authors.
This brought Dr.. McKbben TO his feet II: said
that IL It should appear that this line Of inquiry
Intended 10 bring out private matter not bearing on
the merits Of the case, lie would demand censurc
Of the accused man. member Of the court objected
TO this language being II threat. Professor smt
finally wi hdfew his question.
Dr. Curtis stated that he wished 10 withdraw the
language used by him In calling Dr. Mckibben 10
order, and TO have the words regarded not having
been spoken
Later II was brought out by Professor Smith that he
had In private conversation offered 10 withdraw from
circulation his pamphlet II desired by the Prosbytery
but the prosecution again objected saying that II
that were done they would bring witnesses tc show
that while he was willing 10 suppress the look be
not willing to dsavow Its teachings. THIS testimony
WAS stricken out. The case was then adjourned
I'LL Monday.