New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-10-14
Ia W INTELLIGENCE.

SUPREME CoURT-sPEcIsL TERs-Before Judge EDMoSos
Motion for Injunction as to Ecclesiastical Court to
Teeesssosi Court against william Walker late Rector Of s.
Thomas Church, Brooklyn
FpMoSps THE view taken by OF one feature of M case will
render unnecessary examination many Of the questions
discussed in the shall therefore be silent regard
me only ground which this Court exercise any jud
Ton IN h case Vi that the threatened action OF the defendant
affect the civil rights OF the plaintiff for the protection of which be
The tights which here invoked purpose oremp.
ton from taxation and the performance Of certain civil duties
ground epouth the beeomes material to say
that the ony which of the cass is 10
inquire Wheeler there in the deendan, to do
The act which sought to be rsr,ncd
bis judgment bana can be
,sns their action or Of vasns is foundation any
which pars belong thew have authority TO act at an In
Sh word s can pao Gully wAehs the defendant has the
Cenhning the question before within tbeso limits
t"'-That the presenting board properly
srdTha BENZ onderdOnk the Bishop Of the diocese and
alone competon, 20 do the act complained Of
laws this church the are sensble to t only by
board Rs be sPpouS BY ss BhoP or
nt,ney BY the clerical the standing
In this that hoard ppOutcd Bishop but by the
andns committee prior to that time sentence Of indefinite
had been pICPOaReed ssnst the bishop and he se.
con tsee Law as well as Sera meb or Sy the later Alone
does not clearly appear and impossible
case sspressnted whether the the
n,I Af , TN thai has elapsed and AZ the preceding that have
S to 1Sr n. The q %D, Sw O9s,
qus OF the parry mpeschns them satisfactory evidence the
Bet assuming this be otherwise regarding as made out that
the sppon'm' NJ Of the Board Of Inquest by the whole ns
Their principle which the question
that when the defendant entered upsu hi. due. A,
SsS s a as1es s SDos Af Hnd he
sss 70 ne Pann wsye persons 70 act as trer Of The Oieaa
s ss I S fS ss 5 Ss'Sp The y:1 ggsa by moving
1hrorehout the whole Of those proceedings does that
The psn4s specifically raised the obcesn
eepons oil PROCEEDINGS had Such resarvssa
any objection to the proceedings be should have made them m zine
and rSod ,em 0s specifically that they could
sseOrs ssdips .Svsrssy into PrSsrscsed sOs
hsn asIos rs, in which he has induced the party
Thu. PRINCIPLE founded so faith an.
1n sSns ~sAoS, ~SS wi,SSus Gs S ~sss e.spot
e1 FssH,y srpeS oar Court Of ApPesb But
Plsins smith The cOur, held the
sSs and sy s prccSsdns. sSea . he Suprsns oSt
psns Cont a. al t@ when ssy ep wss aSn h che a pr
rs. and that they made
Been eyis;s i IKE ocss hsd Secs sse IN xa AsS
that hoe objections h been made and the Judgment Of the sa
The & s e sS'P e tn: *: s sss g @
s si he sOOi PIOes ding on the PessDss then the
Ss g. ~ S' sssS 3 s:y: been ds The g,.insa
as. isS SSs ed Sssps ne s. ssS
isl him ssssp . ih Other ObeeOa prOr proceed
hkf ~ ne sale have roscNed practically
nj BY sohui~eo nv
ctnee een1teut VIA the post havc
The Ptesentment The trial Of which Hitherto opposed Il
effect asurd BY the hhhoa Bhop h.s provided
for the son Of tosrd fe te be
teote beVe been vial 70 y proceeding 10 trial
odertd before e eeessAl susTy the acess vested in
ycu. hereby rosnoved"
subsequent be.d s.n tbs. which will PERM.
he count proposed % exist ishal comply With the Of
aey aforesaid given ~ BY selecting saa LIST
&c srd h. urged the RhoP particularly and urgently request
h,n serve and 70 assure eh each one tha; such his aeci
ded and esTncst wish
lwas ser this that oer rroodns ~e had and the tsa pro
eeeeed On the s the psnts appeared In and y his
eeease examined the aud proceeded throughout without
ssans The objection forth
st h otsutn q he BShoss judgment By lbs
81 nesicn Of his viii
tneF tse circumstance the objection one which the
pni might waive without Affecting the capacF OF the Bishop 20
oct aud ~fh might have then 05vzed ty
eae Of od faith and scund pne lee OF sw b. regarded hav
The oeeeon which have considering the action
% the sandrf u;itee bere Bishops the
ere which eoe to his capacity that 0adedOak
he the Court fer trial
This s the plaintiff upon same principles be
ceftd having waived fer when he notified
hat be about roeecdns he charges ohjecns
~ proceed he sved bis desire and
ssd be language which hsys already quoted he sdaed