Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-05-26

" A
THE BLIND MINISTER
that cases should go from court to court in
regular orGer always il the defendant de.
manded il At the foundation the appellee
had the right to all the courts which the con-
stitution established as courts Of trial He had
studied the question of Presbyterian citizen
ship and the rights they had under it.
Here Dr. hetcham's time expired.
No SET PROGRAM
Mr.. Thomas McDougall Of Cincinnati took
the floor, the moderator stating that the chair
man Of the Judiciary committee had asked that
he be given the floor.
Inquiry was made by DIR. Herrick johnson If
there was an arrangement about the order of
speakers.
The moderator stated that such was the case,
as he conceived that it would be fairer than to
have general scramble for the floor.
The chairman of the judicial committee
stated that for hispart he had made no such ar
rangement
Mr.. McDougal said that he understood that
the chairman Of the judicial committee desired
him to open the debate. but if there was any
question he would yield the floor to Mr. Hinck-
ley, who was recognized first.
AGAINST THE REFERENCE.
1t was agreed that no list Of speakers should
be followed. and Mr.. Robert H. Hinckley Of
Philadelphia took the floor and made an argu-
ment against referring the case to the synod Of
New York. He claimed that the New York
presbytery did not try the case upon the
merits. The question before them was whether
DR.. Briggs utterances were consistent with the
standards Of the church. The verdict reached
was practically mot guilty, but don't do it
again" As WAS shown by Col McCook, this
case was purely one of doctrine, and the gen.
eral ASSEMBLY was the final court to decide
such questions. He believed that the peace Of
the church demanded the speedy settlement Of
this question He said that they had nothing
to do with Martineau and his finding God when
they knew that he died denying the redemp-
ton of Christ. They had had no concern to
wander in the dark corridors of the Romish
Church. He questioned whether scholarship
could go so far as to question the impregnable
rock Of Scrip lures, and he believed that the in
augural address sought to weaken this faith in
the Bible.
The speaker was called to order at this point,
and the moderator, in reply to a question. said
that the speaker evidently thought that he was
discussing the question.
He then continued, and said that he consid-
cred the doctrines involved were vital and
fundamental, and he urged that the case be set
tied without further delay. He thought that
the peculiar ideas which the presbytery Of New
York did not indorse ought not to 60 unre-
buked. so that people could continue to say
the Bible.
REV. DIR. THos. c. HALL.
The next speaker to come to the platform
was the handsome DIR. Thomas C. Hall Of Chi
cago. He made a ringing speech. He said he
wished to speak to this motion not a. a ques-
| ton of doctrine. The question was whether it
was wise and expedient to entertain it here or
send it back to the synod. He declared that if
DIR. Briggs was the wors: hereto in the world it
| would not be worth their while to violate any
of his constitutional rights. The consequences
Of such a course would grieve the church for
many years. They had heard q disclaimer so
| frank and free Of the reckless charges made
that they were sure that il the case went to the
synod there would not be the slightest quib-
bling on DIR. Briggs part to object to the fullest
inquiry. II this case went to synod every one
of them would have his rights protected
II they wanted to bring the church into con-
tempt, they should trample on the rights o. the
one they wished to get rid Of. He asserted that
such a course would only raise rebellious feel
ing. He urged that justice and peace demanded
their adhering to the constitution, and pro-
tecting the constitutional rights Of every man.
They all had the interests of the church and
Christ at heart. When DIR. Briggs got on the
platform and said he believed in the Scripture
as the onl- rule of faith and practice, he had
right to make the fullest explanation. These
brethren, he said, had demonstrated in their
lives their faith in Christ. Their church was
built upon the one foundation. Jesus Christ,
and their faith in Him. He urged that they
calmly consider this matter. have it 60 to the
synod in the regular way, and considered by
the assembly in due time.
MR.. MDoUGALL
Mr.. Thomas McDougall of Cincinnati argued
that the court was here to discharge its duties
as members o: the general assembly. Why
should not they try the case? The appellee had
hat al -
| placed in jeopardy twice. This was not a
political gathering. but an assemblage with
constitutional rights and duties. The appellee
had said that il the referred back to
the synod he would waive his constitutional
rights.
Mo- exclaimed DR.. Briggs from his seat.
Il thought YOU would say that" continued
Mr.. McDougall. IF this case goes to the synod
his friends will assert the constitutional rights
of the appellee and claim that he could not be
put in peril of his life twice." He believed that
| if this case was allowed to leave the assembly
| it would never be in their power again TO
determine the important questions raised. He
argued that DR.. Briggs was not the judge of his
faithfulness to the standards Of the church. He
| spoke of the minister that confessed to having
broken all the commandments, but he thanked
God that he was still a Christian.
He earnestly pleaded that the assembly pro-
coed to do its duty and try this case in
Christ's name and spirit, and settle whether DR..
Briggs is loyal or not to his ordination VOWS.
DIR. BRIGGS MAKES STATEMENT.
Dr. Briggs rose when Mr.. McDougall ended
and asked to make correction.
1T is very clear to the house" he said. 'that
Mr.. McDougall has put me in false position.
only wish to explain what meant
There were severalpr protests and the moderator
said not now.
DIR. Dufeld said information was always in
| order. He insisted on the justice Of letting DIR.
Briggs correct any misstatement.
The moderator then said he would hear DR..
Briggs briefly.
Dr. Briggs stated he had not said he would
waive any of his constitutional rights il
the matter were sent to the synod Of New
York. What he did say WAS that he would use
every effort he could to facilitate a determine
ton of the questions raised by that body that
the synod Of New York should decide all these
questions OF constitutional right, and that
whatever way the synod decided them they
, might be appealed to the next general assem-
bly,. so the general assembly would finally de-
eide the question anyhow.
Mr.. Shepherd wanted to put question to the
appellee, but the moderator ruled him out OF
order Mr.. shepherd appealed and the moder-
ator sustained.
DIR. FULTON.
DR.. Robert II. Fulton of Philadelphia was the