The record-union., 1893-05-26

terlan General Assembly adopted the
recommendation Of the Judicial Commit
tee that the six complaints against the
New York Synod, growing out of the
Briggs trial, be referred to the judicial
Committee for trial. 1t also adopted,
without dissent, recommendations on
overtures from Presbyteries concerning
appeals from Presbyteries direct to the
General Assembly; that such appeals are
proper as to all matters relating to policy
OF the church, but an overture from a
Presbytery as to pending judicial case,
such as that of Professor Briggs, advising
the General Assembly as to what action
1t should take in such a case, is irregular
and unprecedented in ecclesiastical pro-
cedure, and that the proper way for the
Presbyteries to influence pending cases is
through their respective commissioners
on the floor of the General Assembly.
After appointing a committee to ascer-
tain whether the Worlds Fair would be
open on Sundays, the assembly resolved
itself into court. and Professor Briggs
resumed his speech in defense of the ac-
ton of the New York Presbytery in his
case, and in opposition to entertaining an
appeal therefrom.
The assembly passed a resolution de-
claring the Worlds Fair grounds to be
merely a bonded warehouse, and ap-
pointed committee to wait on Secretary
Carlisle to ask him to treat it as such and
close it on Sunday, as all other bonded
warehouses are.
Customs officials, however, say that is
impossible. There is no way in which
the exposition building containing the
bonded exhibits could be closed like
bonded warehouses except by placing a
lock OH them.
The committee waited on Attorney
General Olney this afternoon and were
delighted at learning of his instructions
to District Attorney Milchrist, which
were to appeal to the Federal Courts to
close the grounds on Sunday.
After recess DR.. Briggs spoke bitterly
about the omission from the brief of the
prosecutors of the question put to him to
test his faith, and his answers thereto.
What right had these appellants to omit
such matters as they pleased from the
official or semi-oflicial documents ?" He
wished to make an explicit denial of the
charge that he had preached doctrines
against the fundamental doctrines Of the
church.
Il affirm that l believe" he said, turn
ing with outstretched hands to the audi
cnce, "the Holy Scriptures to be the
work Of God"
After briefly restating the points made
yesterday, DR.. Briggs said in part: 1.-The
Presbytery in New York, the largest in
the Presbyterian Church, after a long and
patient consideration of the merits of the
case, gave a verdict of acquittal. Would
the General Assembly be willing to give
the same amount Of time and patience to
consideration of the merits of the case if
the appeal is entertained? If You over
ride all provisions of the constitution and
the maxims of the civil law, the usages
of the civil and ecclesiastical courts, in
order to entertain the appeal, and then
rush to a hasty decision, you will strike
deadly blow az the constitution and dis
cipline of the Presbyterian Church"
DR.. Briggs then reviewed the history of
the case through various stages in the
Presbytery and General Assembly.
1.-The General Assembly," said he. can
not entertain this appeal without doing
violence to the sense of right which is
exhibited in the Constitution of our
country, in the maxims OF common law.
in the statutes Of our commonwealth and
the practice of our civil courts, without
establishing an entirely new and danger
Gus precedent in ecclesiastical law. with
out doing a grave injustice to the defend
ant and to the Presbytery of New York.
and without undermining public conf
dence in the purity of Presbyterian dis
cipliue. Is not this too heavy a cost 10
pay for the sake of securing the con-
demnation of one man, however obiee-
tionable he may be? Is il not too great n
strain to put upon the Constitution, in
order to gain decision on questions of
doctrine which may be more clearly and
satisfactorily defined by procedure pre-
scribed in the form of the Government?
The common law lays down this funda-
mental principle, which applies to this
case, if to any. 1t is for public good that
there be an end to this litigation.
The General Assembly cannot take
this case under consideration. The mat
ter is in the hands of the Synod of New
York. That Synod has thrown its shield
over defendant, and will protect not only
him, but its own rights Of hearing the
case without having its jurisdiction
interfered with rashly by this Assembly.
1t was bad policy for the church to have
the intervening of the courts overleaped.
Ii the Assembly entertains this appeal.
the glory of the Synods will have de-
parted, and those who thus succeed in
breaking down this precedent will drive
6 coach and four through the breaches in
the palace of justice. If the assembly
should decide to come to the final decision
of the New York Presbytery, it would
not be a final decision for the defendant
The Presbytery and Synod could not ac-
cept it as either constitutional or valid.
Before q decision could be made" con.
tinued Briggs, lit will be necessary in
the interests of common sense and ius-
tice. to have interlocutory appeals passed
upon. They are in the hands of the New
York Synod, and it is attempted to brush
aside all these in efforts to bring the
matter to speedy conclusion, when the
time saved could not be more than a wear
Here in the Capital of the Nation it i:
being attempted to override some of til,
commonest principles of law, in order t,
crafty the vain ambition of these prose
cutors.
Briggs closed with an appeal that tn
case might go to the Synod of New York
If that was done he would aid in the ful
solution of the case. and then If 1t wer
sent back to the next General Assembly
he would abide by its decision, whateve
= l., raj