The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-10-20
The Case ofR,sbon Diane.

The following is q brief notice by the Presenting
Bishops the action the Court assembled trial
of Bishop Doane-
The undersigned, on the 3Oth of March last under
circumstances with which the church and the public
in general acqusnted signed presentmsut of the
Right Rev Bishop Dome, OF New jersey. This docu-
ment contained charges, not merely, many have sup
posed, Of recsessness extravaganza in pecuniary
matters but of crimes anu iumorates IN connection
with the same which Indignantly reprobated by all
upright men The trial of this presentment ap-
pointed by the presiding bishop Tor the cath of June
Before that day. gentleman engaged as counsel for
Bishop Doane applied though not in that character for
posponement OF the trial declaring on the behalf Of
Bishop Doane that he would take advantage of the
postpopement On this representation, without the
knowledge and much against the wishes of the under
signed postponemen till the 9TH Of October grant
ed by the late venerable presiding bishop.
Inc under sgnsd were subsequently, aPprsed that Sc
whether this not illegal 1t has been proved
by the result that the objection would have been fatal to
the presentment Under this we'll founded apprehen-
sion the undersigned prepared another presen ment
dated on the ed July aud including all the contents
had been omitted either accidentally from doubts Of
the availability of the evidence The first presentment
not formally withdrawn and the tal OF the second
fixed also for the th of October In both instances
the place appointed was Camden.
The Court assembled consisting of Bishops Hopkins,
Lee Johns, Eastburn Chase Potter Uphold Green and
Rutltdge. The attendance Of six other bishops was
prevented by sickness in their persons or their families
and seventh had been ready attend ut the time first
appointed. but found ii impossible to make second
journey. Three others were also absent On the
could not otherwise attend the court Adjourned
the first day from Camden TO Burlington, the place Of
his resid. nee.
when the Court next met, an application was re.
ceIyed from Committee OF the Convention of the Do.
esenTation on behalf Of that Convention. By majority
vote the Court granted this application and
medialoy after the reading Of the presentment offered
by the undersigned which was the second, the commit
tee admitted and read agument for the stay of
all further proceedings The alleged ground that
between dates the first and second present
~ as Is
fed the innocence and integrity Of its Bishop This
Inquiry which was conducted BY seven layn,en with
the attendance of scarcely any the witness whose
evidence the presen msnt rested and of OF the
most important. and without examination cl
fessediy pe proceeding II without legal forcr
moral value and the committee hal power try
their verdict had Of the weight Of acquittal
The undersigned presented written reply of this
ment. Both documents before the public, and will
be found al in the printed Journal OF the court which
will speedily appear.
Pursuant TO this application. motion made that
in consequence OF the inquiry thus made ny the Conyen
ton of New Jersey before the cate Of the second
sentiment the Court should declare that it call
Cd proceed further with the charges which had been
made previously 10 that inquiry and that the Con-
yention had pledged itself to inquire into any others and
special convention had been called With reference TO
these which had been subsequently made, these also
should be dismissed
of any application from body un6noTn party 10
the trial the undersigned and argued with
eanestnes propotiopate 10 the great interests at issue
The accused bishop was repeatedly heard and urged
with great yehemence that the court should acceie to
the prayer OF the committee and dismiss the present
ment without trial.
On the seventh day OF its session tie Court
decision Eight bishops gave their opinions in favor
OF rhe resolution to dismiss the presenment and six
againstit
The opinions in its favor those OF Bishops lie m
FER. hcCoskry. De Lanoey Nottingham, Chase Upf3.d
Green and Butedge against it those Of Bishop Hop
lbs Smith. Lee. Johns, Etstb1rn aui Potter.
A the legality Of the postpor emen had been affirmed
by two three Of the Bishops whose opinions
given in favor of the dismissal the iersigued
thought 1t right to offer the first prs-sn ment Ths
rejected. The result is, tbrsforB, that while
the charges made in strict conormaDcs vtn the
have been dismissed, il has been without The slightest
consideration of their merits They hsvs sot been
iuted they have not been tried and uay not re-
tracted.
The undersigned, having discharged their duty fully,
without favor and the utmost % their ability
rely with confidence the moral feeling and
Judgment OF the church fr the approval Of their
duct The remaining responsibility rests upon Their
brethren. WILLIAM MEADE.
CHARMS p. MciISAINE,
GEORGE BURGESS.
PHiLApEIPHIA October &c, 1852.