Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-05-26

Cnurcn. rising In regular order from session to
assembly. Unless some extraordinary reason
could be given why this case should leap the
synod the case should not be entertained here.
The peace Of the church and its true prosperity
demanded the remission of the case to the
synod. No man was aggrieved or suffering in
his own rights They would not get rid Of the
contention by deciding it at this time. Men who
were trembling in the balance who wanted to
be loyal to the church might be tempted to
rebel against a hasty decision who never would
raise protest against a deliberate decision.
Was there any reason to believe the synod of
IL the appellants won there they would come
up another year reinforced with public opinion
on its side, while TODAY public opinion wait
Ing with bated breath to see as to which side
1t would give its plaudits.
JOHN RANDOLPH.
The next speaker was Mr. John Randolph Of
this city, who impressed upon his hearers that
they were sitting as a court to decide solemn
question. He said that he favored the general
assembly entertaining the appeal which is now
before it. He thought that the reasons given
the assembly entertaining this appeal. DIR.
Briggs had complained Of grave errors i'll his
case. He was entitled to a final decision. The
postponement Of this case would be to court
that could not give final decision. He had
heard the argument made by DR.. Briggs, and he
interests Of justice and DIR. Briggs in order
that the assembly may determine whether the
judgment Of the presbytery in this case should
stand. But II the assembly should refuse to
entertain the appeal it must come back again
to this assembly. reference to the synod
would throw the responsibility of decision upon
another body, Of which only small proper
ton Of the members Of the present body would
be members
II the assembly decide to entertain the APP
peal precedent would be established for all
time. He raised the question whether a person
puts his ecclesiastical life in peril in way not
covered BY his ordination vow. II the assem-
bly, decides this case, the decision will be
whether a minister's ordination vow covers
his obligation to submit to its conditions.
The assembly would take. by entertaining
the appeal, complete jurisdiction Of the case
and all the interiocutory pleas, 80 that none OF
DR.. Briggs rights would be harmed.
Another reason for sustaining the appeal was
that it would be for the glory Of God and the
peace Of the church. 1t would then be deter
mined as to what could be taught in the semi
naries.
REV. HENRY D. LINDSAY.
Rev. Henry D. Lindsay of Buffalo, the mex
speaker, said he wanted to speak only on the
question Of appeal. He did not want to dis
not even prepared to say how he would vote on
that question. They had all admired the skill
with which the moderator had controlled and
soothed this great assembly Of busy minds.
The only fear Of clamor that should annoy
them was the noise raised by aggrieved parties
tho clamor that might follow any injustice on
their part. If 1t were sent back to the synod
surely the prosecutors would not be aggrieved.
Surely the Presbyterian Church could
not be aggrieved, for it only said that the next
superior court should decide this question. He
cited the case of Rev. Geo. Bourne's appeal.
~ oDl oil hat Raw Mr.
Bourne preferred to be tried by the assembly
DIR. Briggs has told this assembly that he pre-
ferred to be tried by the synod Of New York.
1t seemed to him that il they tried the case
here the person aggrieved would be DR.. Briggs
IL they sent the case to the synod there would
be no one aggrieved.
JUDGE WILLS
Judge Wills Of Gettysburg. the next speaker.
said he wanted to answer DIR. Fulton that the
church Of God was the party that would be ag-
grieved by protracted delay Of the decision Of
this case-that was the party that would be
most aggrieved. A brother who had preceded
DR.. Fulton referred to another matter that he
believed should not be taken into consideration
here-public opinion-the secular press for
sooth! They were not here for the purpose Of
pandering to public opinion. The only ques-
tion was whether they should entertain this ap-
peal coming up here from the presbytery
As he understood DR.. Briggs he had not raised
question Of expediency, but had plead to the
jurisdiction Of this court and he had declared
his purpose, If the case went back to the synod,
to further urge there his plea to the jurisdic-
ton of that court. Why should they send this
legal question down to the next lower court for
decision? What evils might not result from
such course? DR.. Briggs would not suffer by
their entertaining the appeal 1t was for his good
that this case should now be disposed Of and that
DR.. Briggs should be at rest and doing good great
good for this church. He urged that they
should not send the case back and have the
case distracted for two years longer. This case
he insisted, was regularly before them. 1t was
case in which they were trying an alleged
offense. He argued that the law Of the church
provided for appeal from an inferior to a supe-
rior court without prescribing that it should be
to the next superior court. He submitted that
the discussion of the case had made it Of such
importance as to make it an exception to that
general rule Of appealing to the next higher
back on technicalities. to come up again to try
their patience. He believed the interest OF the
church demanded the hearing Of the case now.
FATHER OF THE CHURCH.
The moderator next recognized Rev. Dr.
Angler Of Boston, who was spoken Of az the
father Of the church. DR.. Angler began his re-
marks by expressing the hope that when the
moderator reached his age-and he was not an
old man, only eighty -four-that he would be as
strong physically and vocally he was. The
moderator thanked him and also smiled his ap-
probation Of a verse of poetry which the aged
minister recited, describing the beauty Of Old
age. DR.. Angler gave some details Of his per-
soual life and said he was graduate Of the
Union Seminary, and spoke Of its growing
prosperity. He said that it would continue to
prosper in spite Of DR.. Briggs, the gates of hell
and the general assembly. The latter reference
caused the assembly to break out in laughter
which continued for some minutes.
As soon AS he could be heard Dr. Angler pro-
ceeded to say that he was not in favor Of re-
viving the DAYS Of Latimer, Rideley, Pavana-
ro!a and other martyrs. He believed that
Moses wrote the Pentateuch. but he was not
sure that Isaiah wrote the prophecies and that
Job and Esther were historical characters. That
was his faith. but he believed that he lived in
an age Of light and progress. His mother had
large family also. Now times have changed,
he added. Again the court INDUCED in laugh
ter and the moderator wrapped for order. stating
that the court had given way to more hilarity
than he entirely approved of.
DIR. Angler, however. said that he had only
few words to saw, and he closed with relating
the story of the Good Samaritan. claiming that
the priest and the Levite we're on their way
to the meeting of the general assembly of their
church to discuss grave questions and there
fore they did not have time to attend to the
needs of the man who had fallen among thieves
The Samaritan rescued and succored him be-
cause he in him a son of Adam and
brother. Before the venerable doctor could