New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-12-01
THE GREAT HERESY TRIAL.
DIR. BRIGGSLACKS THREE VOTES
A ROLLCALL OF TILE PRESBYTERY ON AN
IMPORTANT MOTION.

PARAGRAPH IN THE CHARGES RETAINED By
THE CLOSE VOTE OF 20 TO es-TIIE DEFEN.
DANT VALVES CONDITIoNALLY ONE
OF HIS PRELIMINARY
OBJECTIONS.
Tho Briggs heresy trial was continued yester.
dav in the Scotch Presbyterian Church, and at
Z D. m. the court adjourned until this afternoon
al > o'clock The floor of tho church filed
with the members of the Presbytery and friends
who came early to secure seats from which they
could hear to advantage The galleries were
filed. scores Of the fair sex being present ana
seemingly as eager 10 catch every word and as
quick to note the force of the points made as
though they could enforce their views with
vote. Mrs. Briggs and Mrs. Birch occupied their
reserved seats opposite each other in the gal
eres near the pulpit. Several clergymen from
other Presbyteries and from other denominations
are apparently taking as much time from their
pastoral duties as though they were obliged to
answer to the rollcall at each session.
TWO OF DR. CRIGGS'S OBJECTIONS VOTED DOWN.
After the calling Of the roll at the opening OF
the session Professor Francis Brown, OF the
Seminary, moved that the first objection offered
by Dr. Briggs in his demurrer on Monday he sus-
tained Dr. Henry van Dyke, Of the Brick
Church SAID tldJ lie cOuld not NOl" III thc
tive; since the General Assembly had ordered the
Presbytery TO proceed with the trial, it must do
so or be in open rebellion against the Assembly.
The motion was lost, and similar one made
by Dr. Brown in reference to the second objection
shared a similar fate. When the third objection
was reached Dr. Briggs waived it, except such
parts of il as came later in his demurrer. long
discussion followed the motion Of DIR. Brown TO
sustain the fourth objection. lie SAID tnat the
citations from the Scriptures and the Standard
should be- transferred from the specifications to
the charge He said:
d. Brown-wh regard 10 the fourth objection little
more might be eoid. L move that this objection DO
sustained The objection II object 10 the relevancy
Of all the proofs Scripture, Confession ana Cate-
chisms'' The point Is you will see by reading "hau
follows these proofs in the amended charges
placed under the specifications instead oil being conhcoa
with the charges The infelcity Of that is this Quota
tions from the Standards OF the Church and from the
Confession arc leghately introduced for the purpose
OF sustaining the charge. and OF showing that view
which Is brought In In conflict with distinct doc
trne Of the Standards and OF the Scripture.
When these citations connected with the specihca
ons then Pesbytey is called upon TO consider noe
whether citation from the Standards and rom the
Scripture ssaln the charge, but whether there be any
thing in specification that to conflict with the
Standards and with the Scripture The specifications
however, are for the purpose OF sustaining ths
charge. Just the citations from the Standards ana
from Scripture are brought the purpose Of proving
the doctrine against which offence is alleged, so the
specifications brought for the purpose OF proving
the offence against doctrine. II therefore,
clearly the interest Of justice that the citations from
Standards and from scripture should be connected with
the charge and with the several specifications. II
Is A very simple matter II there delay about IL.
IL is simple questl,n, and 1 hope there viii be ne
discussion about IT, fer think it is not question that
calls for argument and the objection may be overcome
by simply transferring all these proofs from the spenea
ton to the charge.
Elder A. p. Ketchum-This matter seems TO be very
light matter my excellent friend but IL does not strike
quite lightly as that This is a very sweeping OBJ
lection object the relevancy OF all the proofs from
Scripture Confession and Catechlsms" II IS VII for
my fend dnerentae this matter as he has done it.
but the objection stands just have read IL and II
understand rightly strikes the heart out of this II
be well taken. The charges cannot stand for moment,
a. understand it, unless proofs from SCRIPTURE Con-
fes,lon and Catechlsms are relevant think myself that
has place preliminary objection think that
when evidence is offered to the charges. then Is
e time to determine whether 1t is relevant or not relevant
Dr. Brown and DR.. G.. l.. Shearer spoke next
and then Dr. van Dyke offered this amendment
to DR.. Browns motion:
Without sustaining the general objections to the rel
eyancy proofs from scripture. Caechism and Con.
fessions Prsbytery Of these
proofs from the Specifications to the charges
THE COMMITTEE TAKES AN EXCEPTION.
After a number of members had spoken the
motion as amended was adopted by rising
vote-7l to 56-and Colonel John J. McCook read
this exception, which was entered upon the
records
The Committee of Prosecution take exception and ask to
upon the record an exception to the action OF
the Pesby the OF the proofs
from Scripture Cateclsm and Confession from the spec
ncatons to the charges.
c. H. Woodbury.. of the Madison Square Church.
offered the following resolution:
Resolved. OF the fifth objection Of the defendant
that the last laragraph OF amended charges from the
words the Presbyterian Church,at the bottom OF page
35 TO the end 0 the sentence)-be stricken out.
The paragraph to which exception is taken is
as follows
The Presbyterian Church in the United States OF Amer
lea represented by the undersigned prosecuting committee
or- I'm dcnce the whole OF the said inaugural address,
both the rst and second editions aud all the WORKS he
said Rev Charles \. Briggs, ID. D. quoted therein IN 80
far as they bear upon this case also the appendix ID c
second edit ON Of said address, and all the works OF the sad
po 1ha,,es , Briggs D. D. quoted therein in SO far as
thew hear upon this the whole of the Holy scriptures
na the whole Of the standards Of the Presbyterian Church
I'm the United States OF America
DIR. wYIIE OFFERS AN AMENDMENT
DIR u. G. wylie. of the Scotch Church, tried to
bring the parties together by Offering an ameha-
ment He said:
n- wvle-If can GET second. 1 would like to move
70 amend the motion by nstructng the committee 70 amehd
the last pragraph OF the charges by stating speciheay
b, rortons OF the Holy Scriptures OF the Standards and
y, ,h works ot the Rev Charles A. Briggs. d. D., they
,n,ond IN prcscnt as evidence in the case.
M woodburvI cannot occede that motion. and for
tho cason they have already ctd he A'' Oh serp
,,, ard OF the Standards which they ase The DEFENDANT
o, no n conflict With that they should be at liberty
20 st forth other, something submit that ought not 70
,o ,ro,,ed them at this stage OF the case.
Mr. K,tchum-I think we shall he al glad to hear
, ,o Prosecuting Committee before ,he discussion OF
,h, norton f., concluded. In the meantime permit me to
saw that IL tina, what i objected 10 mas been
,,ducd very largely the interest OF the defendant,
- A. tho moon recently made said TO have been made
.nInv in the interest Of the prosecution Now dis