The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-10-10
Supreme Court-Spccial Term.
Before Hon. Judge Edmonds.

Mr. Stoughton applied to the Court for an injunction
against the defendant Bishop Wainwright the Proy''o1
al Bishop of this pocess To restrain si, ifon carrying
int ss- of the Protestant Episcopal Board OF
Trial which found the plaintiff guilty Of adultery Inc
affidavit OF Dir Walker sets forth that ne was uuy Vi
daned minister of the order Of Presbytcr or o.
the Protestant Episcopal Church. and in August 1852,
economically resident in New York in September 1913 he
was removed Connecticut and continued 10 resiae
there till January 1851 and was not Yor, ' On the
9th of January, 1851, the Right Key Thomas ohca
sSwns Hm Mas% had d not
to evil report in religion or OF NE
during the three ss T n r Yo Of and rec
tor Of ST. TLomass Church, in the city of Brookyn he
further that Bishop onderdonk of the
sole and exclusive right to exercise ecclesiastical ursdc
ton throughout this docess. In February, 1851, the
standing committee of the diocess Of New York. alleging
that the plaintiff, from public rumor, was under
the mputation of having been guilty of offence
whilst rector of Union Church. and resident of Connect
emit appointed five persons to investigate and examine the
ease bishop Onerdonk did take part in the proceed
ings and the plaintiff contends that the standing
reported that they reformed the duty gned them
and after patient investigation, they unanimously Of
the opinion that offences Of misconduct Of which he was
that the lid william F. Walker, Rector of ST. Thomas
Church, in Brooklyn, New York be presented and the
Walker for an eeceascal trial. on the charges Of
adultery and lying pursuant to the provisions Of the
such case made and provided First, the charge Of
adultery the commissioners do present that on Thurs
y, r.
apsbyter Of the oiocess of Connecticut and Rector of
Union Church, Humphreysvile, went to the Tontne
and entered his the books OF the said hotel M
Walker OF Seymour, Conn" as alone and unac
eompanied by any other member Of his family; that
bedroom in the third story assigned to him, which
he occupied the only occupant from that time till the
succeeding Monday; during such occupation several
occasions the low voices of and woman and sounds
of kissing distinctly heard in Walkers room
which excited the suspicion Of individuals in the hotel
the Sunday following Mr. Walker told the proprietor of
the hotel the first time that his wife had been with
him in the bedroom the three previous nights and on
leaving hotel he paid for the lodgings Of woman
his wife, whereas the Commissioners charge that the wife
OF William 4 Walker at Humphreysyle at the time
and with him in New Haven but that some other
woman was with him in his bedroom, and charge him
with having committed the crime Of adultery The second
1peGcaion sets % that While Nh Walker d was at a the
locked he opened it, and she entered and did not
any one there except Mr. WALKER but after performing
duty, the chambermaid raised the valance of the
tedstead and secreted there, "a full grown young
woman" who was not his wife; the made her
H wase said the Young was hi his
which statement the Commissioners allege false
which constitutes one of the charges of lying Another
Haven. : 80 ''' ND''' '~ ''"N WV : -"
ca the first speciAcati the majority of the Board
Of Presbyter found him guilty and declared that in their
opinion the sentence of deposition or displacement from
the ministry Of the church. should be pronounced upon
the accused.
On the second specification that sunday the 5th of
January the chambermaid discovered "a full grown
young woman" under the bedsead the majority OF the
Board found the accused not guilty.
Mr. Ogden in reply, read from the that twelve
presbyters of the diocess named by Bishop Vain
wright and submitted to Mr. Walker to select five to con-
sute the court before which the charges to be
tried Counsel also read from Mr. Walkers letter to the
bishop.
i" Regretting that it has not appeared to you
Just to take different order in respect to (Which
had hoped you would cause to dol have, never
thsess resolved, in reliance upon Almighty succor
practically 10 your cody judgment by the
Submission Of my will and to seek to hasten by the
suit thereof to determination the unhappy matters al
fecting
This scqniescence consistent with the position have
hitherto assumed The proceedings contemplated will be
under and in virtue of episcopal ordering The episcopal
judicial mind in our system inherently, necessarily will
impress each judgment given.
1.-THE presentment which have hitherto opposed is
in effect allowed by the bishop, and the bishop has
provided for the constitution of board for the trial of it,
Objections that hitherto have been deemed vital my
proceeding to trial. once and again ordered before
the ecclesiastical authority of the diocess vested
In you hereby removed | not not held
snenabe to mistaken exercise Of episcopal
authority of aymen. am not now called to consent TO
such degradation Of the clerical character giving
up that great principle for which struggle in the church
carried from colonial times unit! its formal settle
ment in 1882, which was required of me, involved, to
wit the exclusive liability of clergyman to clerical
Rev. Jesse Pound, one OF the persons named by the
Bishop triers rejected by him. and that the
Rev. DR. Hawkes., another trier was on former commit
tee which gave judgment in the matter and therefore,
these objections left him, Mr.. Walker panel of but ten
TO select from Then he states that three others of the
psne-the Rev. Drs Kiss and Van Pluck, and the Rev.
Mr. Chaupcey-are personally Objectionable to him, AMI
not be impartial lie therefore asked for some other
TO be substituted for them.
appears that in the month Of February, 1851 board
Of ers consisting of three Presbyters and two aymen
were appointed under protest from Mr. Walker After
hearing testimony in support Of the charges and est
rnony produced for the accused, the Board found him
guilty. The Board was constituted by the authority Of
Bishop Wainwright and the plaintiff s'presen at tho
trial.
The affidavit of the Rev. Benjamin j. Iaight states that
the Rev Jonathan NJ Wainwright duly elected Pro-
yisona Bishop Of this Docess at regular convention Of
n
B. I. Onderlonk suspended in 1915. Counsel there
fore submitted that the defendant in this day
authorized order the trial. that the trial properly
conducted and the Board legally constituted.
Mr. Stoughton submitted that offence alleged to have
been committed in another Diocess not tabc here
and that If the accused could be tried here the
prescribe that the trial should be ordered and conducted
b the Bishop OF the Doces and he contended that Bishop
ondsrdonk such bishop his Of suspension be-
Ing indefinite in point Of time and therefore void coun,
members only Of the Standing Committee are authorized
70 order the trial.
The matter stands adjourned Monday evening five
e'csck.
By Hon Judge Morris.
DECISION AS TO ASSESSMENTS.
OCT. S.John C. Thling dgt The Mayor, dc, and the
Sired CONFERENCE.-The cause argued upon com
raint and demurrer: The facts presented by the com
The plaintiff owns several lots of ground the city Of
New York described in the complaint An ordinance OF
the corporation Of Sd May 1919, organizing the city gov
eminent, contains the following scclon--
The bureau the officers OF which shall be called the
Assessor Of Streets is charged with the duty Of making
the estimates required by law for building wells paving
and regulating streets, constructing sewers &c. any
other Improvement directed by ordinance of the Com
mon Council In making their assessments they shall
in DO assess upon house or lot, upon land,
whether improved or unimproved more than onethrd
Of the value there fixed by the of the ward
in which the same shall be situated
The aggregate value of the plaintiff sproperty fixed
by the of the ward is 81 S0thc third Of
which o4cobut the of the streets for the
improvements specified in the complaint assessed this
property Ss52 co. being 1872 90 beyond the limit rescrb
ed by the ordinance of the Common Council. The Com
mon Council confirmed the assessment The property
has been at ersed by the Street Commissioner for sale,
TO satisfy the assessment The plaintiff claims that this
excess makes the assessment void, and entities him
to perpetual injunction against the Corporation and
Street Commissioner from collecting the assessment.
The only power the corporation possess to the i'm
provements mentioned in the complaint TO be made is
given by the city charter modified by subsequent laws
Sections 5 and 200 the act reduce laws relating
particularly TO the city Of New York into act contain
all the power which the corporation possess upon
this subject and also prescribe the power and duties of