The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1893-06-01

Mr.. McDougall-Why, DR.. storrs, you
will find 1t on page -
Rev II. Milton Shields. OF New Mex
iCo-Is the statement quoted in DR..
DR., Briggs inaugural2 II not, it is not
before the assembly.
This colloquy was carried on in the
midst OF great confusion, cries OF
"order' rising from all parts Of the
house and the moderator and Mr.. Nc
Dougall both trying to be heard. DR..
Craig said that Mr., McDougall would
show, or try to show, that his statement
was justifable.
Mr.. McDougall Ito Mr.. shields)-1f
DR.. Briggs will withdraw his statement,
! will Withdraw mine.
DR.. Storrs--But MIR. McDougall said
that DR.. Briggs said that God was un-
truthful, which is bIasphemy and un-
pardonRbIe,
Mr.. McDougall-I said that Isaiah
said thus and SO, and that in the new
testament the Lord Jesus Christ said
Isaiah said thus and so, and DR.. Briggs
said that Isaiah did not write that part
OF the book in which these quotations
are found,
Elder Shephard, OF tho North Phila-
delphia preshyteryvigo gorously protested
against the utterance and conduct OF
Mr.. McDougall, but Elder Purne!l, OF
Baltimore, pleaded for fair treatment OF
the speaker.
Elder McDougaII, the storm having
calmed down, concluded: "Christ said
no man can come unto the Father but
byme.' DR.. Briggs says that Martineau
found God through the reason, and that
Newman found him through the church.
Whom will you believe-Chrlst or Dr.
Briggs"
An extension OF half an hour to the
afternoon session enabled the clerk to
progress in tho roll through the synod
OF Oregon. Tho assembly then took II
recess until 7:46 p. IN.
The call OF the roll was resumed at
the evening session. Members who de-
sired to speak be given the floor when
their names were called. Only small
par Centage, however took advantage
Of the privilege,
THE FINAL VOTE.
1t was S:45 o'clock when the moder-
ator put the question: "shall tho spec.
ifcations OF error bo sustained2" and
DR.. Roberts, the stated clerk, read the
first specification, in substance that the
Presbytory OF New York, on objections
made by DR.. Briggs, required the prose.
cutting committee to amend the manded
charges aud specifications by striking
out charge four.
The specification was declared to be
sustained by vote OF 2S2 to 100.
THE OTHER SPECIFICATIONS.
Specification second to twelfth iucfu-
sivo, under the first ground of appeal,
all relating to Irregularities in the pro-
ceodings Of the New York presbytery,
were sustained soriatum, some by tally
and some nero by viva voce, or standing
vote.
The Briggs men showed their greatest
strength on specification fourth, which
alleges that the action OF the presby-
terry in giving DR.. Briggs au opportu-
nifty to reply to alleged new matter
without specifying the new matter was
irregular Tho vote resulted 23S to 1876
sustaining the specification.
The second ground OF appeal alleged
the receiving OF improper testimony,
and was based upon three specitfca-
tions. They set up that the defendant
should have been sworn; that the state
ments and matter interpolated by
the defendant into the record was
permitted to remain and quotation and
extracts offered by defendant was re.
ceived as evidence without his having
been sworn. On tho first specification
a division was taken, the result being
that the specification was sustained 265
to lS5. The others were sustained by
viva voce votes.
The fourth ground OF appeal alleged
manifestation of prejudice in the con
duct Of the case" and Of its six specif.
cations the Briggs men carried two and
came within two votes Of carry
ing another. On the first spocil.
cation which alleged that Revs.
George Alexander, Antiono Arreghi,
Henry NJ. Field, Thomas S, Hastings
and Henry VanDyko made prejudiced
statements on the floor and afterwards
voted in the presbytery not to sustain
each and every one nj the specifications
and charges, q viva voce vote was taken
only, and tho moderator declared the
specification lost
Specification second, third andfourth,
alleging that the presbytery did not
try the case on its merits, attempted
to terminate it without attaining tho
ends Of discipline and evaded the issue,
were sustained by viva voce votes.
Specification fifth, alleging that Reys.
Francis Brown, Henry NJ. Field,
Thomas S. Hastings, ]. Hall McIlluainO
and Henry VNnDyke, members Of tho
presbytery, voted to sustain the &C.
cused after they had boon charged in
the appeal with prejudice, was lost by
viva voce vote,
Specification sixth alleged that sun
dry directors, officers and professors oil
Union theological Seminary voted to,
acquit the accused upon each aud
every specification and charge after
they had approved Of DR.. Briggs
inaugural address which contained tho
alleged erroneous doctrines, holding
and publishing Of which tho accused
was there OIL trial. A viva voco vote
was followed by count aud tho stated
clerk announced that 1t stood 236 to
234, but suggested that another count
be taken on account OF the closeness Of
tho vote. There were cries OF mo"
however and tho clerk proceeded to
read the fifth ground OF appeal.
Tho dtth and last ground OF appeal
contained "speCitiCatioDs Of orror," and
II charged "mistuko or injustice In tho
deciaion." Tho specifications charged
error in the failure to convict
tho defendant on competent
charges, tho iucte being admitted