The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-05-23

posed amendments, and no sooner had Dr.
 Lyons replied that the representatives
 would enter the council after the council
 itself had adopted the amendments, but before the other churches had ratified such action, the call for question ceased was voted down and the Rev Neal l.. Ander- son of Montgomery who was thought to have been in harmony with the move, took the platform.
 Council of Discord.
 He began: .I believe the proposed sub sttute is not a council of peace as has been suggested, but one of the greatest
 discord. If we adopt these articles I be- lieve we would stultify ourselves by
 adopting a paper that would not mean
 even as much as does the Pan-Presby- terian alliance
 I want to impress with all earnestness,
 and that is the church supports our original report. In your committee, care fully selected the majority was l6 to 10, and two-thirds of the presbyteries voted in favor of adoption
 "Then I don't believe we should sub ject ourselves to the indignity of allow l ing the council to say whether we should enter it, go to the door, knock and beg to enter. Neither should we be subject to the indgnity of having two-thirds of our judicatories say we will not abide by this decision which is against our constitution
 Rumbling In the West. l "This is the time for us to make a souare. clean cut adoption or rejection. Suppose we adopt Virginia, I am in- 1 formed would not secede, but If we re- | fuse. I tell you it would mean the snuff | fling off of our border synods. l wonder | if our friends from the east have put | ba prrnfIDd and heard the rumfling of the west, which shows per l fectly clear that unless we give them something clean and clear cut the church 1 in the west is going to clamor for organic | union. In the name of the dear Master plead with you to stop this qubbling, and | give us action"
 The cause of the rejection of the sub
 stitute was the point brought out by a question of Dr. Dobyns of St. Joseph, | Mo. "Is 1t possible for this council to enroll our representatives who ask to stand on an entirely new platform? Can this council sent by the various assem-
 blies change the very organic principles upon which 1t was established Tor our benefit?" He said 1t would be little less than impudent for ''us to come now after
 counicl is formed and ask them to change
 their organic articles"
 Another important factyh he brought out
 was that such action would be ridiculous in asking this council to amend the ar ticles so that no amendment could be
 made except with two-tnirds vote of all
 the churches. and except the mere indi- vidua1 council to do it, and he called attention to the fact that MT. Glasgow, in favoring the substitute, had given up all his argument on unconstitutionality. Presents virginia's Views. The Rev. Dr. Campbell of Virginia spoke at length, calling attention to the ten presbyteries in his state against adop- | tion, to the fact that Virginia had never failed the country in the great crises of its history, that great men are not always right, that this is a day of fads, and the question should be put off five years. The Rev. J. P. Robertson of Sherma n, Tex, said he opposed the substitute for three reasons, that it placed the church in an invidious and ridiculous attitude.
 that 1t takes away the benefit hoped to be
 derived from the council. and that the
 powers of the council should no more be
 feared than those of The Hague tribunal. Dr. McPheeters said he was heartily desirous of many of the ends desired in the articles, especially of a court of ar bitration, and cooperative administration, but that he raised all his noise bscauna