The herald., 1895-10-12

trial reopened.
First the report of the meeting of the
presbytery of May was placed in evil
dence by the defense.
P. D. Young, stated secretary of the
presbytery, was put Oh the stand and
asked whether or not he sent any call to
the accused other than a notice Of the
pro-rs-nata meeting. Witness said he had
rot.
Rev. Burt Estes Howard then testified
in his own behalf. He began bv stating
the sual preliminary answers to ques-
tions ordinarily asked by counsel. The
prosecution rose and offered to allow H.
L. Gordon to act as attorney temporarily,
which courtesy was received with thanks
by Mr.. Howard. Moderator Thomson
stated an objection on the grounds that
it was contrary to the rules of the pres
bytery. He submitted the matter to the
judicatory, however, and the courtesy
was allowed.
Rev. Howard testified in detail to the
facts already outlined in his bill of OBJ
jections. He went over the whole case,
answering directly upon all points relat-
ing to the meeting, SO often referred to,
of the committee from the presbytery.
He said: "Under the circumstances in
which the request of the com mittee was
made, should have acceded to 1t, from
L
cause I believed that my position was a
conscious one. As to the notes of Mr..
Thomson, 50 frequently used in this trial,
I must say in justice to him, that my ex-
captions TO them are not personally di-
rected against him, but as to the possible
errors that may have appeared in them."
"Did you ever deny the authority OF
the presbytery"
81 did not"
"Was there any agreement at that
meeting for the called session for Mon
day nightP
Referring to the address made ny the
accused on June 80, 1856, full report of
which appeared in The Herald of July l,
Mr.. Gordon asked:
''What was your intention or the point
aimed at in that spesch?"
II delivered that address, not intend
ing to influence the vote of my hearers
or bias their opinion upon the questions
then at issue, but strictly to get the mat
ter correctly before my congregation.
stated at the beginning and at the con-
clusion of my talks that the institution
should always be placed above the indi.
vidual, and that l desired, above all
things, the best interests of the church,
and not my own.'
Upon the statement quoted in the
charges claiming that Howard advised
his congregation not to submit to the
presbytery but to abide by the decision
of their pastor and session in refusing to
submit to the presbytery's authority,
claiming if they did SO that the presby-
terry would sever them from the denom-
ination and disband them as a church,
and further advising them to refuse the
action OF the pres by terry, claiming there
by that they would be cast forth and that
he would go forth with them without the
gates of denomination. the accused said
that what he then uttered was brought
forth by statements made to him that thu
presbytery intended to take such action.
and he said what he did with view to
getting the truth before them ana as a
warning. Great stress was laid upon the
point that Mr.. Howard did not intend
to lead the church out of Presbyterian
ism, ths reverend gentlemen speaking
with much feeling upon the matter. de-
nying positively any and all inslnuations
or charges so stating.
Mr.. Howard was then asked If he ever
had made any effort towards effeoting a
settlement of the difficulty existing be-
tween the church and the presbytery, to
which be replica that he had.
On Cross examination he was asked II
he had refused to submit to the authori-
ty OF the presbytery in dividing the
church. "As regards the corporation, l
did" SAID the witness.
do you recognize your obligation to
this corporation as superior to that of the
ChurchH' was next asked.
I'm this case l cannot make such dis
tinction.''
IF the ecclesiastical body has been
merged in the corporation then your pas
toral relation is merely a relation to q
corporation with religious purposeF'
my relation Is partly SO, yes sir.
There is dual relation existing under
those circum stances.
Now as regards your address, was it
not intended to foietstall or take the
place of the discussion to the congrega-
tion o. the matters to be submitted to
them?"
II had no intention of the kind. My
purpose was to set the matter before the
congregation in a clear and impartial
way
On redirect examination Mr.. Howard
testified that he intended no threat to
leave the church on the occasion of his
address.
your address was merely a sort OF a
prophecy. then?'
eyes, sir; a sort of prophecy-a proph-
ct is not without honor save in his own
country
Only one or two minor questions were
asked by the judicatory at large, from
which nj additional facts were addncei.
"Have you ever expressed an iacllna-
ton to establish an independent oh urch?"
was then asked by 4. H. Hartley.
Never to my knowledge, came the
prompt response from Mr.. Howard.
This concluded the testimony of the
defense. A statement to the effect that
witnesses. J. G. Moody and M. N. Avery
would testify substantially as other wit
nesses for the defense was then read and
filed, when the defense rested it's case.
On the part OF the prosecution, X. Fl.
Hartley was recalled in rebuttal to give
further testimony regarding ths alleged
compact in which it was agreed to ask
but one question at the meeting of the
mmittee of the presbytery with the
pastor and elders of the First church.
Mr.. Hartley testified that there was an
animated discussion upon the point ard
practically an agreement of that nature
Though in his opinion, not an Official
agreement.
Regarding the difficulties on the occa-
sion Of the aforesaid meeting, witness
said there was some difficulty, especially
the matter of recording that gentleman's
Witness said his interference was brought
about through his zeal to have Mr.. How.
ard amend his answers, as they appeared
to him prejudicial to the presuytery and
not sucn as he would make upon more
80 Der consideration.
Replying TO question as to whether
the conference was conducted in good
temper witness said he was himself very
indignant at times, and believed he no.
tieed the same feeling on the other side
OF the house.
A few flashes OF sarcasm blszed from
Mr.. Hartley's testimony which found q
hearty reception on the part OF the judi
cat0ry. This final pyroteChniC display