New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-05-31
O preacher present with him in your study At

Cross srom,a(d ~ IT. Perry-Brother Bangs has not
used any TO prejudice my MIMI agos., nr !, a.
Pes'e relative to the investigation nor OF any O'' ~
Der Of the Committee my knowledge.
The next specification wss reSdi
"In preparing Charge committe. bere ne snt Re S
COMMITTEE before be read The whole Committee
Brother Perry vGs examined-Q Did the fresFAng
Elder show you the Charge before the sudden e vas IA
A. No sir dad he show the Charge nor any par'
Of before the official reading neither before nor Asr
Lor did n ad any part vi il
@ Had you any kno sleige Of the eIis sace Of thai
Charge before the official reading OF =
A. AL know about rhe Charge delivered is this Dur
ing the progress OF the inv paper ia me
band OF the Presiding Elder which ssrwari recognized
as the paper from which he rad tbs Charge
G. Coud that paper have been written between the tine
the testimony closed and It's delivery
A. II Brother Bapgs's Charge writ read fc0m
the paper Il could not; had il Aerwsrl in the Com
nittee-room while celebrating 1t appeared % be same,
in substance; did not notice him writing the Che1ye
have written some during the night.
@ Was the character Of the Charge agreeable to the
fnong Of the Committee
The Charge discussed principles st law the hndng
was the testimony they were essentially d feFeat and
G. Was there sny application Of those principles OihE
10 the case Of Brother Pease 10 the Charge
Ne sir; there a request that we Shouli Apply
them ourselves.
A. There was reference to the principles touched by
the allegations there assumption OF facts there
the most impartial submission IN the testimony to the
The hour for adjournment here arrived and the Confer
ence adjourned 10 p Pm.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Conference met pursuant TO adjournment.
On the Bishop announcing that he ready hear the
case Mr. Pease said that he bad but very little testimony
more Offer and the Witnesses were not present but 1t
the other side would proceed they could huh AZ soon as
their witnesses arrived.
Mr. Perry said he WAS not ready would be proper that
the prescott should close their but they would 70
i. floI ,,faw liza zrN ffn a. fna
lowing points Of law the Char fer opinion AMI dc on;
Isl Who Is the proper prosecuting officer when com
plants made against preacher IN the interval OF the
I'd. Is it the duty Of the Presiding Elder. when
plants made against travelling preacher in the inter
val of the Annual Conference, to bring him before Com
mitee of Investigation
Sd Whose duty is it. in the inve stigation of of
complaint. to Judge of the admissbily of testimony
4 Have The Stewards the right 70 take the funds Of the
Chuch and pay preacher than has been estimated
10y Committee for lis support, and approved by the
Quarterly Conference
Is il proper in the investigation of complain agalst
ureacher lin tho interval between the sessions of the Con
ftrenccl before Committee to admit written test nony "a
ken exparte and without notice given to the opposite
6th Whose duty is it. in the investigation of complaint
TO determine what is proper matter TO record in the pr.
Ceedngs that kept % be ransmedtO the Conference
acc riding to discipline
DR. Floyd was then called i do not recoect any con
versation having taken place previous TO the meeting
any how brother Pease should be- tried
Cross. examined by Mr. Pesse-DO you recollect Mr.
Bangs deciding that properly under the third
part of that section
A. There was conversation on that subject previous to
the trial
@ Do you recolect my saying he must send home two
of bis COMMITTEE then, and OF your replying the remain
Ger mast be laymen r.
A. remember that such remarks were made think
It WAS before organized for business.
Mr. Nash was cslled-Q. DO you recOllect any CONVEX
saon relative the particular section of Discipline under
which this investigation should he had
A. / asked the question myself The Presiding Elder
1 -. . aha q r4rf - Hraf
three questors and answers There was some convers
ton whether It might not be brought under the Sd
question when Brother Pesse remarked that in that ease
the Presiding Elder wond have To send home two of his
committee, and some said thu remainder should be
h, and after conversation. the Presiding Elder
decided that tie case should be brought under the first
ton recollec' remark being made that the might
be made to involve injustice do not distinctly recolsct
il We organized at the time think the prayer fol
lowed this conversation, hut cannot recoect but there
something Of organization before this conversation
O. Did ask any question of Brother Bangs, he pro-
ceeded along reading question by question OF the dsscrp
ton
A. recorect none but that already stated.
Brother Hill was examined-My memory confirms the
memory of the preceding witness but his memory retains
more than mine did.
Brother Scudder was called-My memory confirms the
statement made by the others The for bringing the
case under the third section, that part of the
ton bill of charges involved moral character and in
Did Brother P.ase or his counsel make any obl-c.
ton the nfonay of the charges, or to being arragned
under that specific section.
do not remember that they did did not hear Dr.
Bond object
Question by Mr. Pease-You said you agreed substan.
sahtaly tell me how it differs crcun sanaly will
put the question in another way In what does your reco
lection dierl
A. In nothing
Dir Pease-We then, you don't ciGer in anything you
agree exactly, and want that noted.
TIE resolution Of the Quarterly Conference OF the Second
St Church was read, complaining that Rev; Mr., Pease
Withheld SOC there and requiring the Ruling Elder to take
IrOp6r measures In the premises.
The xt specification was for not directing correct
record 10 be kept.
DR. Floyd was called.-Wil you state what reasons
we're assigned by the Committee for not flowing the pro-
test Of Brother Pease TO 60 on the record
Objected to, as the Committee were not on trial AMI
ruled Cut
O. What reasons were assigned BY the Presiding Elder
for uliT 2 out the protest Of Mr. Pease
A. The Presiding Elder consulted with the Committee
WHO were Of opinion that the protest contained unruth
and do OF know that be assigned any reason publicly
third party The protest read that he prot sted against
evidence net bcrg allowed to show lie quo amino Of the
prosecution and that there another Committee threat
ened by way Of intmidating the witness
hr Perry commended that this protest untrue and
contained mpuiaton on the Presiding Elder and the
Con mitiee
He offered to call testimony to prove its untrnth
DR. Bond objected and said he could bring evidence to
prove that the Protest true but il would open too wide
field
Objected to and ruled out
O. Was there any testimony ruled out going 10 show the
qu0 amino in which the prosecution originated
A. Not to my knowledge.
O. Wasihere aDgusg used BY the Presiding Elder caIcu
lated TO inmidate the defendant aledging that there
were matters in that might require another COM
mii'ee
objected to and ruled out
HnnoS-I do not recOlect that there was any attempt
made prove the quo Of the prosecution the part
Of the defense the defendant took exceptions the ruling
] think the exceptions noted in the Record think
they ought 10 have been.