Morning journal and courier., 1893-05-25
NEWS By TELEGRAPH.
From All Quarters.
.APROrHSq BYDR. BRIGGS
He Argues Before the Pres
byterian Assembly.
FAIR GATES ORDERED wide OPEN.
Commissioner Massey Sends
In His Resignation.
THE RACES ON The GRAND CIRCUIT.
Charter Oak Can Go Else
where If Desirable.
THE RACES ON The GRAND CIRCUIT.
mr. BRIGGS SPEAKS

where If Desirable.
DIR. BRIGGS SPEAKS.
He Protested Against the Entertain
| Ing of the Appeal by the Assembly
He Was Not to be Put in
Jeopardy n Second Ttme-Punish-
nent for Heresy Might Destroy a
Mans Ecclesiastical Life.
WASHINGTON, May 24.-It was about
$50 O'Clock this morning when the Pres
byterian general assembly was called to
order. There was nothing of very great
Importance done at the morning session
with the exception of the adoption of a
committees report that week in March
be SET apart for self-denial and prayer
in behalf of the cause for foreign mis-
sions.
When the afternoon session opened
every bit of available seating and stand
ing room was occupied. Professor Briggs
TOOK a seat few feet distant from DR..
Birch, chairman, and Elder McCook, mem
Der of the prosecuting committee. The
other members of the committee were also
present Accompanying Professor Briggs,
IA counsel or friends, were DR.. Fraser of
Newark, trustee of Union seminary;
Elder s. II. Cuteheon of Detroit, and Pro-
lessor Francis Brown, one of his associ-
ates in tho seminary. After the opening
prayer Moderator Craig convened the as
sembly as a court.
Rev. George D. Baker, chairman, report
ed that the judicial committee unanimous
ly recommended that the prosecuting COM
mittee be allowed one hour to open its
case; that five hours be given to Professor
Briggs, and that the committee be given
two hours in which to close, to be extended
If desired to four hours. DR.. Briggs stated
that he had a number of complaints now
before the New York synod and still more
ought to have the permission to have them
read.
DR.. Craig said that when Dr. Briggs
came to the point in his argument where
he might desire to introduce these COM
plants the moderator would interrogate
the house as to what 1t would then do The
moderator said the time was accepted
Rev. DR.. W. F. Birch, chairman of the
prosecuting committee, then took the floor.
down a decree to the Presbytery of New
York, ordering it to try this case upon its
merits, and gave it liberty to amend the
indictment In accordance with the nature
of the same.
We ARE here, said the doctor, to invoke
this supreme court to put an end to the
dissension and disputation, which the New
York Preebytery vainly endeavored to
silence. frst by the dismissal of the case
against DR.. Briggs and, second, by the 40
quittal of DR.. Briggs, qualifying both the
dismissal and the aoquitsal by the positive
disclaimer of any approval Of the contro-
verted statements Of the inaugural address,
ss to critical or theological views and man
ner Of expression.
The form in which the final Judgment
of the Presbytery WAS returned gives the
impression that the alleged errors of Pro-
fessor Briggs were unimportant and that
no essential doctrine had been contradict
ed. There had been q tendency to mini
mize the full force of the Indictment. DR..
Birch stated the errors charged, declared
they were fundamental and said that of
those who have supported DR.. Briggs not
ono In one hundred would subscribe to the
inaugural address. He took issue with
the statement that had been made that the
Presbyterian church was justified In toler-
ating what in other churches Is called
broad church principles in defiance of the
of the teaching of Scripture and church
standards.
DR.. Briggs arose to reply and to protest
against the entertaining of the appeal by
the assembly. The question was not, he
said, whether or not DR.. Briggs teachings
were proper, but whether or not the sp-
peal could bs lawfully entertained. The
law of the case at this stage forbade the
consideration of its merits. If there was
any want of form or detail in the appeal
the general assembly could not lawfully
take jurisdiction. The language of the
appeal, DR.. Briggs said, obviously in
cluded something beside the final
Judgment of the Prssbytery of
New York, for 1t referred to
actions and decisions of the Presby terry,
and until this extraneous matter had been
taken out of the appeal the general as
sembly could not entertain 1t. The law
prescribed that the final judgment could
Presbytery and the reasons therefor. The
decision to dismiss formed no part of the
final judgment and could not, therefore,
be appealed from. It might only be com.
planned of. And, so of the counsel advice
and exhortation given by the Presbytery.
The only relief therefrom was by appeal to
the synod OF New York.
DR.. Briggs asserted that the final judg-
ment of the Presbytery in his case was
really declared by the moderator of the
Presbytery on December 80, 1892, and from
that appeal should be taken, if from any
action of the Presbytery, and not from
be put in jeopardy q second time because
of a mistake by the court which tried him
at date subsequent to that on which the
final judgment was really delivered. DR..
Briggs also opposed the entertaining of the
appeal on the ground that 1t was a we'll es-
tablished principal of law that public
prosecutor could not appeal from a verdict
of aequittal. The punishment for heresy
might affect or destroy o mans ecclesias
teal life, and 1t became pertinent ques-
ton whether or not a man could be twice
placed in jeopardy of his ecclesiastical life
after having been fully tried and acquitted.
member OF the assembly to the effect
that If any man found himself teaching
views in opposition to those of q majority
of the Presbyterian church he was in honor
| bound to leave the church. This, be eaid,
was not q question Of majority, but of
law and of right. Any attempt of ma.
| iority of the church to exact FROM brother,
minister or teacher anything more than
what WAS required by the conditional
standards might be good club law, but it
was not good ecclesiastical law. Maiori-
/ tlco uaL bcCA opRooSN " Shohko W
Improvement and to enforce their rule was
to make 1t impossible for the church to
rectify error. For Presbyterian minister
who felt called to preach the gospel or
who stood for great principle there was
no course open, but to remain In fellow
ship with the church.
| A much more fundamental question was
at stake, said DR.. Briggs, than any princi-
pie of law or doctriue yet discussed. That
was whether the Presby terrain church
should be considered as merely voluntary
religious society or q church of Jesus
Christ.
The court was for discipline, not for
government; for trials of law, not for def
nitions of faith and morals The public
prosecutors were pushing the Presbyterian
church into an inconsistent and dangerous
position. They were endeavoring to 80.
cure new definitions of dogma by final
judgment in a heresy trial, when they
l ouohf IN aim IN asc ura the m nv oyerturea