The sun., 1893-06-01
PROF. BRIGGS DEFEATED.
THE APPEAL FROM TIE NEW ToRR
PRESBTIERY SUSTAINED.

taIninG tho Appeal stood ssa 20 I1o-
Elder McDoueni OF Cincinnati Causes .
Lively Row at the Artcrnoon Session.
WASHINGTON. May 31.-Tho speech making
| In tho trial OF Prof Charles A. Briggs. D. D..
before the General Assembly OF the Presby-
| teran Church was finished at about oclook
this evening. Then the voting was begun on
| tho five grounds OF appeal with thirty-four
| specifications. q separate vote being taken on
| each specification. Tho voting resulted In
sustaining oil the grounds OF appeal and all
| the specifications except two. The appeal OF
| the prosecution from tho verdict OF the New
York Presbytery acauittine DR.. Briggs OF the
charges against him was then sustained. tho
vote being as follows: Number Of votes cast.
400: to sustain tho appeal. 2oS: to sustain In
part, S5 total to sustain. 1888; not to sustain.>
l16. This is equivalent to a verdict OF guilty.
Before proceeding to vote the assemblyf
engaged in half hours devotion. Whiles
this exercise was In progress the principal
actors In tho trial made their appearance.
Dr. Frazier did not take his accustomed
place ut the table set apart for Dr. Briggs'a
friends. and tho defendant himself was no-s
ticeablo by his absence. His faithful and DEF
voted wife. however. occupied her accustomed
place In the north gallery.
After an opening prayer and the reading Of
tho minutes Moderator Craig. at OK A. NJ. COM,
vened the Assembly into q court, and the last
stage but ono Of the famous case OF Prof
Briggs was entered upon.
Fifteen minutes were exhausted in q desul-p
tory discussion OF tho order OF procedure.i the
result OF which was that tho Assem- bly, ordered
the roll to be called. The Commissioners as
called. were to give the reasons for their votes,
speeches to be limited to three minutes.
Whilo this preliminary was being sottled DR..
Briggs quietly came in and took his seat
Under the call OF the roll the Rev. D. n. Free-
land Of tho East Florida Presbytery was the
first to respond. He had n deep regard for tho
honored professor he said. who was n mem.
Der OF his own parish. but he could not side
with him in his claim that the Bible was errant
He held to the old creed and II the true blue
flag must go down he would 60 down with 1t.
The Rev. Anthony G. Junkin Of Los Angeles.
CAL. said every doubt had been scattered to
tho wind by the admissions OF the defendant
His error in tho speakers opinion was the
most oi the errors now ailetins ~ the i Ghursh se"
The Rev. d. j. Sanders Of the Catawba IN. O.
H ssd ar sd Of tho
showed hi IN that he could not do otherwise
than sam os5 sand that all tn.
land there were y9ung ministers min % from Union
seR1a rSr in thS GsaW
drop this thing. and would have done with it
ministers OF tho church.
The Revs. William II. Single Of Canton and
WIZ asore afsPpi 9incotoa Ii thseosS uaushteri nsEhse
~ ,ou1d N no ErSst dsfenSSs bs,wssn ne
Tho first four grounds Of appeal are tech.
rinainS declaration With which Dr. Hsrrlok
Il o sa o t6s
defendant MS to the meaning Of his doctrines
t were to be accepted as long az his % moral intsg.
you'd be to STAMP him not only as false
mont that the New York. Presbytory passed.
Hon q hs a
minister from Chicago who has been SO zeal:
Gus suppoSrt%er % Of DR., briegs q, said that II il
ordained. Ho held the views which were in
danger OF being cast out. to the confusion OF
y have never found in twenty years exc
81 man in India who found God through his
reason. believo the doctrine to be unsound
Charge Based upon that, doctrine. Upon
other charges Or. Lucas said he would vote to
AEfHt That ios the Asssmbly should vote to sustain
the s BSss Of $syRne
aEssas Es4 sthsrs he f. G 9 Ind
upon tho views ot Dr.; Briggs. how was it to 6e
eaaG be ss rs fs you sre
doubt. so arc wo in doubt. no continued.
ths and as give Dr. Briggs
John eRd Hayss Ip the @
DR.. Johnson V or any any one else to t' get up here @
and tell us what pr. Briggs believes. He has
sS Ga a sSd So s 90 hs
ten years age he began teaching these doc
a S ass
testing t.a against them. One or the other must
Ex- Moderator William C. Young of Kentucky
said that he could say from tho depths. OF his
heart that tho views of pr. Briggs contained
not only to the teachings Of tho Presbyterian
Church, but to the fundamental beliefs of
~ believe that my, years from. now, said
Frank & q Eilct Of Flint; M"h I've " will n,se sec
the Church cvanreiical. Tho ref9rmers in all
aRes have aptagoni2ed the Church believe
he Is "penns ag0r put oi whh may rbS2n s2ms
which wwo have p?, no now" t",,,r orr,vos t,o
fore tho recess the Modentornrose and said:
Or. BrieGs i very weary Of this rrocseeding.
Moderator from further nttcndiance as party.
GMrGFG GTn"nt M Mt Tnsnehs ns rhIreb amid buz,
from on tha t'."ss "ssa@r"s ii" looked tired and sad sad.
and seemed glad to get away.
At the afternoon session the Row. Henry NJ
Storrs when his name was called. said
Y" cometo you to-day after u ministry of
netwren forty and tifty years. and should be
IN So 10 my personal history II did not hold
dear above ~ else the Bible But say to all
thcS" sci oars. Go where YOU will learn all
yuu can of the origin and history o! all II books
ami Nrng il to me. for it will throw additional
lign' .npon what hold to be the perfect wor! Of
God ~
lrof John T. Dufleld OF Princeton College
contcnded that the Assembly must deal with
lr"f; lTiGEs Of tri9n Seminary Grecis sely as II
was not u personal question. Every man was
under an obligation to preserve the purity OF
the church. The question to be decided was
whether the teachings Of DR.. Briggs were in
accord with the standards Of tho Church. No
critic. higher or lower. cou d determine what
portion oi tho Bible WAS tho word OF God.
Elder Thomas McDougali Of Cincinnati, an
opponent o! Dr. l'riggs. caused n lively row on
the ilour. unelEallcd in the course Of the trial.
except when Dr. Briggs challenged the truth