The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-05-24

gested that all expressions of approval or
disapprovai be prohibited. Moderator
Craig emphasized this suggestion and
called for absolute quiet 80 that the men
upon whom such great and tremendous
duty involved might be able TO hear calmly
and dispassiona teIy all that might be said.
I'm the name of God and the Presby terrain
Church. said DE-. Craig. II beg you to
keep perfect quiet i should be mortified
beyond the possibility of expression If any
man were TO be disturbed BY any evidence
of disapproysl 1 would, If IL be In my
power, stamp 1T out with ruthless hand"
THE MAJORITY REPORT.
Dr. Baker, chairman of the judicial COM
mittee. then presented the report on the
Briggs case. prefacing it with short adj
dress In which he said that he regretted
the committee was not unanimous. and
that two reports would be presented.
In conclusion, he said: Let us resolve
that we will sternly frown upon and utterly
discountebance any suggestion. from what
ever quarter il may come. OF schlsln or d.
vision IN our dear church" The majority
report follows
In the case Of the Presbyterian Church In the
United states Of America against the Rev.
Charles "A. Briggs. ID. d.. being ali appeal To tho
General Assembly, from the decision and final
judgment OF the Presbytery OF New York. the
port that they find:
First-That the appellant in this case Is the
fresoyterlan Churcn IN the United states OF
America, represented by Its prosecuting commit
tee. appointed by the Presbytery of New York.
aud, as such, is entitled to conduct the prosecu-
ton until final issue be reached.
5econd-That the appeal and specifications OF
error alleged has been filed in due time.
Third-They. therefore, submit resolutions
that the appeal be entertained; that three hours
be allotted TO such hearing, viz: One and one
half hour to each party. and. after hearing from
the members OF the assembly three hours being
allotted TO such hearing the assembly shall then
vote upon the following resolution:
Resolved. That the appeal from the decision
and final Judgment of the Presbytery OF New
York. rendered Jan. 8, 1898. be entertained by
the General Assembly. and 1t is ordered that the
case proceed to trial. in accordance with the pro-
visions or the Book OF Discipline.
DIR. Baker also presented q supplement
tai report. giving the following principal
reasons which influenced she commit
tee in reaching the conclusions declared:
First-The Book of Discipline provides in ex-
press and unambiguous terms for an appeal di-
reotly from the presbytery TO the General AS
emily such an appeal directly 10 the ne, Generai
Assembly Is, therefore, plainly permissible when
the gravity OF the issue and the circumstances
OF the case rerder II advisable.
second-In the final decision OF the grave Is
involved in this case, and IL is only the GEN.
eral Assembly which can give the final decision,
IL is eminently desirable that the assembly max
Ing such decision should. as far as practicable.
be representative OF the entire church. TO keep
the church In continued agitation and nncer-
constitutional prerogative to determine the mat
ter at the present time, Is. in our Judgment. to
unjustifiably TO evade the solemn duty in the
providence of God devolved upon US, and would
make US responsible for the prolongation OF
condition of affairs in our beloved church which
tmperils Its purity and peace and hinders IL In
the fulfllment of its legitimate mission.
THE MINORITY REPORT.
The minority report signed by three
members, was read by tho Rev. S. j.
Nicolls, ID. D., of st. Louis. He said he
knew that in making q minority report be
and his associates were under suspicion al
ready as appearing to oppose the appeal.
This was not their attitude; they were not
antagopizing the claim of power in the as
sembly TO. entertain the appeal. The
minority report was read as follows:
We recommend that the majority report be
amended by striking out all that follows begin.
ming with the recommendation that the appeal
he entertained and issued and substitute the fol-
lowing 1--WE find the appeal In order, and
recommend that the parties be heard in accord
ance with the provisions OF the Book or Dis
cipline" We ask this for the following reasons:
the Se e a s.me
judges the same by advising the assembly TO do
what the Book of Discipline says shall be de-
termined only after the parties shall have been
heard. The improperly OF recommending that
The appeal be entertained and issued in this case
that one OF the points involved In il is whether
the appeals shall be entertained by this assem-
bly, or referred to the synod of New York
secOnd-Ihe majority report, in form, pledges
the committee in advance to entertain the APP
peal. the parties not yet being heard, and yet
this same committee is entitled to Sit Judge and
vote III this case as members of the judcatOry.
Third. The majority report IA contrary both to
the etter ana Split OF the BOOK OF josephine; as
rl.nctiOns of the judicial committee in this case
are limited To finding the appeal in order and
Is not right to recommend TO the assembly that
tEe appeal shall be entertained and issued
For these reasons we recommend that IL shall
be amended SO as to conform with the law OF the
church.
Dr. Nicolls said the minority did not diff
fer IN principle from the majority. They
were ready 20 have the case tried by the
assembly. The committee divided upon
the meaning OF the word "Ap-
peal" to which he called attention.
The majority report fixed for the
assembly the very form OF the verdict.
which il was to be asked to reach. The
minority thought this was not regular nor
III conformity to law. Ii the majority re-
port should be adopted the assembly would
thereby nave prsotieaiiy declared itself
upon the case before the parties had been
heard. The minority did not deem it
proper tn PREJUDICE the case. and. therefore,
refrained from bringing in their individ nal
case should not be weighted with pre-
judgment of the judicial committee-to
that the minority objected.
WOULD NOT LET BRIGGS SPEAK.
The first resolution of the majority re-
port was adopted mem con. Then q motion
TO pass the second resolution was offered.
F.. Mr.. Cutcheon. of Detroit. moved to strike
out the limitation of time of debate by the
parties IN interest to three hours, but the
assembly refused To remove the restriction
AT this point Prof. Brggs rose as if to ad.
dress the assembly. Immediately q buzz
OF comment swept over the house, while
he and the moderator engaged IN an AMI
mated colloauy upon his right to be heard
at that time. Prof. Briggs yielded to DR..
Craig and resumed his seat. This was the
prelude of an incident that created some
comment on the floor. The moderator
said:
II would suggest In the interest of broth
erly kindness and peace"
Say Justice" exclaimed q voice from the
gallery. which was said TO be that of Prof.
Henry Preserved Smith, of Cincinnati who
Is under condemnation of the Cincinnati
Presbytery for teachings similar to those
OF Professor Briggs.
You wait" ret0rted Moderator Craig,
sternly. Don't you put words into nv
month. speak for brotherly kindness and
peace. which are higher than Justice, for
out of them come justice"
The moderator then said that Professor
Briggs had asked him the privilege OF
speaking. but that he had insisted that the
Professor had no right TO speak at that
time. DR.. Craig said. however. that there