St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-10-20
EXCITED PREACHERS.
Briggs Case Comes Up Before the
PRESBYTERIAN SYNOD,

ROCHESTER, N. z, Oct. 19.-Excite-
ment was intense at the session of the
Presbyterian synod today when it be-
came known that the judicial committee
which had been in session nearly all
night had agreed on its report and was
ready to submit it. The main portion
of the report pertaining to the Briggs
case read as follows:
judicial case consists of five COM
plants in November, 1892, against the
action of the Presbytery of New York.
The first represents the Presbytery of
New York in the case of ReY. Charles
A. Briggs, D. D., and is signed by
Charles A. Briggs and five others. The
second is against the refusal of
the presbytery to sustain the first
objection made by the defendant to the
amended charges in the case of Rev.
Charles A. Briggs, d. D., and is signed
by G. A. Briggs and Francis Brown.
The third is against the refusal of the
presbytery of New York to entertain
the second objection made by the
amended charges in the case of
Rev. Charles A Briggs, D. D., and is
signed by 9. A. Briggs and Francis
Brown. The fourth is against the pres
bytery for refusing by vote of 20 to IS
TO strike out from the amended charges
in the case of Rev. Charles A. Briggs,
DID,, the concluding paragraph, which
is signed by q. A. Briggs and Francis
Brown. The fifth is against the action
of the presbytery of Dec. l, 1892, in
voting that the evidence offered
by the prosecution be consid-
cred competent, which is signed
by Q. A. Briggs and Francis Brown.
The judicial committee take this occa-
sion to confirm the right of all complain
ants in the Presbytery to ask relief
from the synod whenever they are
aggrieved, and all loyal PresbyterianS
acknowledge the largest liberty under
our constitution and form of govern
ment in seeking true adjustment of
their difficulties. But in this case we
recommend that these complaints be
dismissed for the following conSidera-
tons:
The above mentioned five complaints
all relate to occurrences on the two
trials of DR.. Briggs by the presbyterY of
New York. The merits of that case
have all been heard on appeal in two
general assemblies. In the general as
sembiy of 1898 the whole case was heard
at great length, and a final Judgment
was rendered at that time by that as.
semblY covering the whole case. This,
incur opinion, clearly and finally dis
poses of all interlocutory questions in
these cases, no matter when these cases
were pending.
The report was read by Rev. DR..
Miller, who added, Il am glad to be
able to add that no minority report will
be presented. The vote was harmon
ious, one of the brethren asking to be
excused from voting and his request
was granted"
No court, in the opinion of the major
ity of the committee, ought to accept
the interference of an inferior court IN
that matter.
No inferior court ought to demean it
self by so doing. Nothing is to be
gained by this body in taking up the
case in detail. 1t means the whole case
over again ad mauseum. Suppose it is
all talked over again and voted upon
with the same result. what does
it amount to ? Suppose an adverse result
is reached: does this synod wish to be
put on record as against the result
announced? Is there peace In the
tocsin? Let us rebel against the gen.
eral assembly. Is it not better to say:
Let US accept the decision of the gen.
eral assembly and 60 forward?' Some
will say it is an acceptance of power
that will prove tyrann1cal. Well, you
can send representatives to the general
assembly instructed as you choose.
Rev. DR.. Francis Brown at this
iuncture suddenly appeared and asked
TO be heard for ten minutes. A dozen
Conservatives jumped to their feet to
object. The voice of a Liberal was
heard: LET US at least have free
speech" Great applause followed. Prof.
Brown then addressed the synod in
opposition to the adoption of the
report. He was followed by John q.
McCook, who urged that the old wound
be not reopeued. Rev. Stephen Hop
kins gained the floor and said with some
heat that the general assembly had ar
rived at its decision by the exercise of
''brute power" A voice: ~ demand
a retTactioD."
Mr.. Hopkins I will say by exercise
of its power.
T. Voice-Sit down.
Mr.. Hopkins-I will not sit down.
nave the floor and demand the right to
be heard.
! Mr.. Hopkins was then called to order
by the moderator, and left the platform
with much show of indignation.