The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-05-27
Judge Purnells Motion to Remand the Case to
the Presbyterian Synod Of New fork. Is
Desired by the Professor. First Rejected.
Judicial Committee Instructed to AR
rangefor Beginning the Trial To-day.
Spirited Debate in Which Some Of the Com
missiOners Seemed TO Forget They We're
Members of "Court Of Jesus Christ"



The Presbyterian General Assembly Decides
toEntertsin the Appeal ofthe Prosecutors
WAsHINGToN, May 26.-By vote Of 409
TO l45 the Presbyterian General Assembly
this afternoon decided TO entertain the sp-
peal In the case or DIR. Briggs. and she as
sembly will proceed with his trial to-moE-
row morning The roll call on the resoln-
ton of the judicial committee that the
appeal be entertained began at s:15 r. NJ. IL
was taken amidst an almost painful silence,
during which the defendant watched with
feverish anxiety the progress of the vote
by the tally kept by his friend Professor
Bro mn. who sat at his elbow. All over the
house. in the galleries. and everywhere. the
vote was followed on the cali of members
by interested ones who -coulc net wait fo1
the official announcement of the result
While the roll was being called Moderator
Craig yielded the chair to ex-Moderator
William c. Roberts, ID. D.. and himself
voted aye"
When the clerk had finished the call.of
the Synod of New York. and Professor
Briggs found that his position. in favor of
sending the appeal to that synod. had been
approved by majority OF its commission
ers outside Of his own local pretbytery.
the commissioners from which did not vote
he seemed relieved end rose from his half
leaning position over Professor Brown TO
the upright pose he had maintained
throughout the trying ordeal Through
the long hours of the morning Dr. Briggs
sat almost MISUNDERSTANDING the words
of'the speakers with the utmost attention.
There were meny evidences of feeling. and
several of the srsalers took advantage of
the opportraity preesnted by their posi-
tion TO srraiec the defendant. 90 shake
their fingers sterosy st hsr. and otherwise
to express their cenast.nstion. As one
brother expressed i.. '.tney forgot for the
time being that they were members of the
court of Jesus Christ" 1t was an interest
ing spectacle. IL was Q scene aud q gath
ering never TO be forgotten.
POINTS FROM THE DEBATE.
The assembly lost little time in reaching
the Briggs case this morning. DR.. Knee
land X. Ketchum, Of New jersey, was
recognized by the moderator on the ques-
ton, shall the appeal be entertained"
He favored sending the case Of Prof.
Briggs back to the synod. and said that at
the end of the debate he would offer reso-
luton to that effect He had not one
particle of sympathy with bis friend. Dr.
Briggs. He wanted il understood that he
believed in the ld-fashioned docrrine-tDe
strict Interpretation Of the Bible without
rising above the mysteries IN tt-but he be-
lieved DR.. Briggs had certain rights which
should be respected. Hero DR.. Ketchum's
time expired.
Elder Hinckley. of Philadelphia. was
next given the floor. He said that the
Prestytery of New York had evaded the
main Issue. The trial should have been
fair and square on the question Of the
on a side issue raised by himself. Mr..
Hinckley proceeded 10 discuss the views
held by DE-. Briggs and 20 denounceIthem.
Rev. Thomas Z. Hal of Chicago. made
DIR. Briggs. He said that the continued
prosecution of the defendant by the assem-
bly, would raise rebellion in the hearts Of
those members who sympathized with the
of the difficulty and in the interests OF
harmony, and that was TO send the case 20
the synod. Dr. Briggs had constitutional
right TO be tried by the synod.
Something of sensation was created by
the next speaker, Elder McDougsn. of Cin-
cinnati. who made an attack on Dr. Briggs
He referred 20 certain remarks which the
Doctor had made in his Speech in his own
defense. and said thai hs had offered. IL the
case was sent back TO tie synod. TO waivs
q constitutional right.
mo- said DR.. Briggs interrupting.
"Ah. thought So" said Mr.. MsDougall-
You will get the case back 30 the synod.
and then you will insist upon ell the con-
stitu utional rights that you can think or
The Elder continued In q bitter strain. 1nd
now and then o murnur OF surprise swepr
over the assembly.
TRIED To SHOUT HIM DOWN.
DR.. Briggs asked fer moment in which
TO reply TO q misrepresentation of himself
which he asserted Mr. McDougall hac
made. There were cries Of mo. no.D Hear
him." ETC., the negatives beng strongly in
the majority.
"Dr. Briggs has right TO protection.1
said Dr. Duffield. the venerable professor
of Princeton, s'and if his words have been
misrepresented be ought 20 be given an
opportunity TO explain them"
Even TO this appeal there were loud cries
of NO, no." but the moderator finally de-
cided TO give Dr. Briggs one minute when
he explained that he had not offered 10
waive any constitutional rights before the
synod, but had said that be would leave
the settlements of those rights to the de-
cision of the synod.
Tho bitterness of spirit manifested in
MIR. McDougalPs remarks brought TO the
surface much of that subdued feeling
which has been kept under cover so long.
There were half O dozen commissioners
on their feet as soon as DR.. Briggs had
made this explanation. They wanted 90
reply toshis accuser. DE. Fulton. of Phila-
delphia. was. however. recognized, and he
suggested that the speech which had jusf
been heard would have sounded better on
the question OF conviction. rather than
upon a simple question as 20 whether thsz
appeal should be entertained. As for tina
feal question under consideration, be was
personally sure that. although the assmbly
might have a majority IN favor of trying
the case here. public opinion was over
whelmingly against such course
DIR. johnson, of Chicago. said that it was
n legal point only that WAS TO be decided.
The rules of the church said that appeals
should generally be adiudicated by the
next court higher than the one from which
the appeal cane; that is the only word IN
the rules affecting this point. and its cnly
Interpretation Is 30 send the matter back 70
the New York Synod.
DIR. McGaw. of Toledo. said that he did
not believe that DE-. Briggs was heretic-
There was no necessity for haste. The
truth would not suffer by waiting year.
He was for peace. and the question was
what course should be taken 20 secure
peace earliest That course waa surely 70
send the case 10 the synod.
KANE HITS THE RELIGIOUS PRESS
Elder Thomas Kane. OF Chicago. favored
sending the case TO the synod. He said ai
the outset that be was no Briggs man: thai