Waterbury evening Democrat., 1893-05-24
ENTERTAIN THE APPEAL
The General Assembly Ready
 for the Briggs Case.
THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Majority Against the Doctor-Views of the linorIty-The Accused Not Allowed to Speak and Told That the Time for Him to Talk Had Not Come.

WASHINGTON, May 24.-Ihe Judicial Committee of the Presbyterian General Assembly, in its report on the Briggs case, recommended that the appeal from the decision of the New York Presbytery be entertained.
 The special order for 2:30 o'clock yester- day, the hour of meeting, was the report of the judicial committee on the Briggs case Immediately after the opening prayer, Dr. Baker, chairman, was recog- nized, and addressed the Moderator and Assembly as follows:
 q had earnestly hoped that but one re- port would be presented by our committee. But in this I have been disappointed. I presume the failure was inevitable. take, however, comfort in the thought that there is something better than even unanimity, and that something is fidelity to con science It is fidelity to conscience which has compelled the major -ity report, and it~4s fidelity to conscience that has compelled the minority report. While we speak the truth with all badness, let us speak it ever in love; and shall we not all resolve that whatever be the de- cision, and God only knows what that de- cision is to be, we will, as loyal Presbyteri- ans, abide faithfully by that decisions Let us resolve that we will sternly frown upon and utterly discountenance any suggestion from whatever quarter it may come of schism or division in our dear church. Re- calling our ordination VOWS, let us submit ourselves to one another in the Lord, loy- ally abiding the decision which shall be reached by our constitutional methods.
 The report was as follows:
 ''In the case of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America against the Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., being an appeal to the General Assembly from the decision and final judgment of the Presbytery of New York, rendered January g. 1899, the judicial committee begs leave respectfully to report that they find:
 ''1-That the appellant in this case is the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, represented by the Prosecuting Committee appointed by the Presbytery of New York, and as such is entitled to con- duct the prosecution until the final issue be reached.
 "2-That the appeal and specifications of error alleged have been filed in due time.
 "3-They therefore submit resolutions: That the appeal be entertained.
 "That three hours be allotted for such hearing, viz, one and one half hours to each party, and after hearing from the members of the Assembly, three hours be- ing allotted for such hearing, the Assem- bly, shall then vote upon the following resolutions:
 Resolved, That the appeal from the de- cision and final judgment of the Pres bytery of New York, rendered January 9, 1893, be entertained by the General Assembly, and it is ordered that the case proceed to trial in ac- corlance with the provisions of the Book of Discipline"
 The report is signed by the following members of the committee: George D. Baker, chairman; John T. Duffield, John s. Hayes, James T. Leftwich, James M Maxwell, D. J. Sanders, John Peacock, J. S. Randall, Edward T. Green, Thomas McDougall, Cyrus L. Pershing. William Fulton, George w. Cummings, H. M. Graydon and James L. Orr. The minority report which was read by the Rev. s. J. Niccolls, D. D., of St. Louis, | is as follows:
 The undersigned members of the Judi ! cial Committee feel constrained to submit to the General Assembly the following minority report:
 We recommend that the majority report | be amended by striking out all that fol | lows beginning with the recommendation that the appeal be entertained and issued and substituting the following: "We find the appeal in order and rec ommend that the parties be heard ill ac- cordance with the provisions of the book | of discipline"
 | We ask this for the following reasons: 1-The majority report, by recommend | ing that the appeal be entertained and issued, prejudices the case by advising the | Assembly to do what the Book of Disci | pline says shall be determined only after | the parties shall have been heard. The | language of the books is as follows: | 1.-The Judicatory may then determine, after hearing the parties whether the ap- l peal shall be entertained" The impropriety of recommending that the appeal be entertained and issued il this case, is the more apparent when it is | remembered that one of the points involved in it, is whether the appeal shall be en tertained by this Assembly or referred tC the Synod of New York.
 2-The majority report, in form. pledges the committee in advance to entertain the appeal, the parties not yet being heard and yet this same committee is entitled tC sit, judge and vote as membars of th' Judicatory.
 The Majority report is contrary both tC
 the letter and spirit of the book of disci
 pline as stated in rule 90, section IA, chap
 ter 10, which is as follows
 | 'When due notice of an appeal is gIveI
 and the appeal and the specifications O
 the errors have been filed, in due time the | appear Sldll De COuSlueTeu III OIuSf. III
 judgment, the notice of an appeal, tn
 appeal and the specifications of the error
 alleged, shall be read and the JudicatorI
 may then determine, after hearing tn
 parties, whether the appeal shall be enter
 tained"
 It will thus be seen that the function
 of the Judicial Committee in this case ar
 limited to finding the appeal in order an,
 recommending the method of procedure
 and that it is not it's right to recomment
 to this assembly that the appeal shall b
 entertained and issued.
 | For these reasons we recomend that il
 shall be amended so as to conform wit
 the law of the Church.
 This report was signed by Messrs
 Myers, Thompson, Foster, Stebbitts an' | Niccolls.
 After short comment on the report b
 Dr. Niccolls, it was finally decided t
 act upon the first resolution of the majori
 ty report, which was adopted.
 Then a motion to pass the second reso
 lution was offered. MT. Cutcheor, of Dc
 troit, moved to strike out the limitation (
 time of debate made by the parties in ill
 terest to three hours, but the Assembly re
 fused to remove the restriction. | AL. D. 4