New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1845-01-16
zhe Case OF Bishop 0mderdonh-Why
Publish.


To tie Editor of The Tribune:
In your Journal of this morning you ask Why the cStmo-
lny the OF Bishop OndenohS should be published IL
true believe. You that Bishop O. has int
ton OF resisting the decision the late Court but his friends
Cor rather very many them intend pursue oppos tic
corse They reglrdthe proceedings OF the Court egur.
and consequently OF effect they believe them to a
been prompted By spirit Of. patty yndcvencss which 10 d
the celebrated Carey ordination" and one hs
hesnted to declare, from the pupt that he no
prepared say, whether lie weuld attend Convention
over winch Bishop did not, OF night, preside. On the
other hand very lny deem the Bishop 10 have been guilty
guilty, too ofhcts that even the wording would scon these
Of course look upon the decision of the majority of the Court
Just Some OF them OF the opinion that the senl ence
Of degradation should have been substituted for that Of
pension merely There still third party who, while they
that Bishop o. hss been highly mptuden IN his
duct, ncqu HIM % all improper motives and these
decided the degree punishment that should have been
inflicted upon him. Now, Messers. Editors, with all this
rety OF opinion existing matter Of general interest.
think that the public have right 10 demand the publ
Of the whole proceedings. We think that the
Bishop requires that ii he he innocent, ms ina0cency aay
he Established before the tribunal OF public opinion that Tint
confidence ami respect which ne hes LONG enjoyed not
Be withdrawn from him. even in ms changed position. We
ns that justice To the eleven Bishops who convicted their
brother requires that the public may the OF tho
cae. presented daring the Iai, warranted the verdict
dee they actuHted by unworthy motives, md
had ut heart only the interests of the p h. Church. the require
OF Justice and the establishment OF Truth We think
oo that Justice tho OF tina, Court To the Six who
who favor OF acqHtllns the accused demands itthat
the public may whether they justified in DOING.
To the forming OF opinion i'll the matter the public
should know who were the witnesses, and 10 what weight the
testimony of each entitled How shall these things be
known how shall how cau public opnlon-he only trbu
nal here which Bishop o. appeal from the verdict
deed against hun By majority of his O!dejusy decide
the guilt of the Bishop, unless all the
he laid before them We aware, Sir thai there oth
ers who equal rights with those whom have already
alluded Some regard, know, should be had the feel
ngs of the witnesses but we why they
sheud object TO the publication of their testimony. II they
noted their part becomes tem they have nothing
fear from the public: who, hnvo doubt; Will duly ap
their motives and The painful but imperative duty
which they have discharged. Moreover will no, the same
spirit the consciousness OF innocence which led them the
Cour OF Bishops sustain them still? We believe will
Capdot compe the add, that his opinions formed
from that have reached him, at present, unuvor
Die TO BshopO bat still he 10 conviction and hc there
FORE hopes that those who have the work hand will not fail
curry the conditions unde, which the saio OF the min
aes the late Court made aud that they should b, pub
shedand hn whou, delays the earne,t
wish Of MORE THAN ONE.