Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1845-02-07


We found the Bishop as before, in his study
his front study. He took us into the back
room, think, and closed the door IIe- adj
dressed himself TO Mr. Beare, and expressed his
regret that any circumstances should have oc-
Cured TO offend the feelings OF Mrs Beare !;
that he had great regard for him and his
wife, and had certainly not intended to wound
her feelings. MI Beare asked him, in sub
stance, whether he denied the allegations Of
Mrs Beare, to which he answered in the mega
tive but said, she had put misconsiruction
upon what had occurred. think il right to
state, that at this interview the Bishop was
much affected. Tears stood in his eyes as he
made this declaration, and Mr. Beare was also
much affected. The protestations Of the Bish-
op as 10 his having no improper Intention
were repeated several times. If am not much
mistaken in my recollection, the question was
more than once put by Mr. Beare TO the Bish-
op, whether he meant to say that Mrs Bearers
assertions were not true; to which, as often as
il was proposed, which believe was more
than once, the Bishop answered that he did
not; but that she had misconstrued his mo-
tives. There does not any thing else occur to
me at this moment, in regard TO the CONVERSE
ton or occurrences at that interview
Dr. Muhlenberg gives substantially the same
testimony DR.. Higbee somewhat different, altho
not materially.
DR.. Minor testi6es that on leaving the Bishop
after the second interview, DR.. Hgbee said what
lie he told
These were all The charges, and we have given
the substance Of the testimony by which they were
supported. An effort made the part of the
Bishop TO affect the credib,y of some of the wit
nesses by contradicting them in immateriahpoints,
but in our view with poor success
The grounds principally relied upon in the de-
fence were, that the divine law required two or three
witnesses to condemn an Elder, list Timothy, 18th
chapter, 10Th verse; while in this case each charge
is supported mainly by one witness only; that the
charges stale, and therefore the testimony de-
served less credit that their extreme improbable
ty was of itself satisfactory evidence of their I'M
truth and that if true they not any evidence
of present impurity unilness for The sacred Of
flee. De- Nss-
lie was found guilty by majority of the Court
of the lst I'd, 9th, 9Th, 9TH, and sth charges and
was suspended 9.
We have examined the testimony with some
care, and cannot see how they could have come TO
men are ncarceraled for life and deprived of life
this case proves the guilt of the accused Yet we
apPrehend that the Bishops friends will remain I'M
convinced, and will place more faith in his word
than in cloud of witnesses, or in the verdict OF
the spiritual court.
We should be glad to give copious extracts from
the opinions Of the different members of the Court
but must be content with making an extract or two
from the very sensible and able, and we think the
most able opinion, of RL Rev. Bishop Hopkins of
this State.
II was eloquently urged on behalfof the
Respondent, that the whole proceeding was 10
be discountenanced because il disturbed the
peace Of the Church-because il was the off
spring of party feeling, engendered by theo-
logical controversy, and because il was brought
forward by conspiracy to destroy the Res
pondent's character and usefulness from mo-
lives of personal enmity.
Now TO this preliminary statement could
attach no weight whatever because the first
part of il involved what deem serious error
IN principle, and the remainder was based up
on an error in fact, totally unwarranted by the
testimony and on the lace of il bearing the as
pect of very odious charge against consid-
cradle number OF the clergy and laity of the
Church, including the three Presenting Bish-
ops, and the witnesses, whose characters are
certainly unimpeachable. For we cannot for
get that the Counsel on the one side not only |
denied the accusation in positive terms, but o. |
penly invited the proof OF this alleged conspira-
cy, and formally waived their right to object 10 |
II, although in strictness it was irrelevant 10
the issue On the ground OF their consent,
several members of the Court, of whom was
one, expressed their willingness to listen to the
evidence; and yet the Counsel for the Respon- |
Ianf declined iha ~ hnc Cni of II
ed them. Under these circumstances should |
have thought it due TO candoJ to withdraw
this gratuitous and offensive charge. And | |
confess myself unable TO discover how the rep |
etition OF il in any form could be justified, even
under the largest allowance for the art of rhe- |
torica application. A -
The error in principle, according to my |
view of the matter, lies in the supposiion that |
the peace Of The Church can ever be invaded |
by just administration Of discipline, since
there is nothing more important to her peace
than the right performance of this very duty. |
We might as well be told that the peace OF the |
community will suffer by the prosecution Of Of |
tenders against the laws Of the land, as that the
peace of the Church can suffer by the prosecu-
tion OF offenders against the sacred rules Of her
divine institution. The inspired niunclions of
st Pau are numerous and weighty on this
very point. = a.
The witnesses who have come forward to
prove these specifications are manifestly infiu-
enced by no resentment, and so far are they
from having volunteered their testimony, that
they appear to have been urged to fu6lment
oftheir trying duty by a conscientious sense of
their Christian obligations, involving no small
share of endurance and seIcdenia Several Of
them sustained the most minute examination
and cross-examnation for more than five hours
together. The ladies who passed through this
painful ordeal deserve much praise for the gen
tie frmness and strict propriety which marked