, 1863-03-04

bfcrc commissioner, and that Ethc
prpcarance Of tht Testimony otherwise taksn 0!
Witnesses is wholly voluntary with themselves:
tharc arc resident in tho city Of Cleveland in tic
State Of Ohio. two Witnesses. named Sebastian
timony is very material in 6as,alf Of your ofator
who have distinctly stated taat they were present
at tue time and place when and where your oratoz
!E charged with having comllttcd acts Of iulp7o.
pric!y With certain persons named in said FRO
tended charge, and that no such act or iDptopri
cty as charged wae committed OF your oratot-that
one Of the said witnesses, the taid Sebastian l.
this Etatr1n Mt some weeks ago publicly In onc ol
oEr Chicago papers, over his own signature; thai
| ycuI orator. knowing that there va. no power nu
der said Canon to compel attendance or Testimony
took measures 10 ascertain what thry could testify
TO- and found that tiey ean 4 thry will, disprove
eEtrely alt the materials Of the pretended charge.
That your orator had good reason to believe, up c
the slst day of Febtuary last. thnt esid wincssc:
would Voluntarily come to this suit and give thei
testimony IN hie behalf; aud that on that tsy you
orator was informed, for The arkt time, thai the,
world not testify on the said trnl before tht eait
Rishop. and that they gave as their reason for no
70 doing, that they were rrlated to some Of tht
pattica IN the pretended charges. and therefore
| iEcy would not testify in said trial
On the 2s1 Day of February last; yo1r orator III,
| ed being SunGnyl communicated to the ssid Hirfl
% the :craly Of the tcsti1nony Of the s:d wit
ncsecp in his behalf, and the fact that he had onl
tic dag before learned that they wonla not com
EHtd tftal On LHC u 3lp4I!ss A.4a4 III .Au
ficu thereto the further fact of the PRESENT
necunat;ou of his counsel-that their professions
| Guf;ts II Cudcred It almost Impossible for them
f.yntr ary Of their time to your orators hustnes
| nrf intcrcst-apd upon these facts asked from tn
| rofd Bishop postponcmcnt Of tafd trial to II
lure t:ny: ttat Jo1r orator in making said np7lcz
tlon, 1,e,, hoping that he might possibly snecee
" 3,i,thrr efforts Iii irducfng the said Everett an
his aid wife voluntarily to appear ana TESTIFY
taid triaf, to fend OF allow thc1F FtcstmonF 70
taken On i commission from the said Bishop; tna
SoN1 o5ator requested reply from The said lisao
io htf said request at his earliest possible conrs
nente that on tho 18th of the past month your o.
as4s 9 received from thc said Bishop reply to ii
nsan seqneff, declining TO grant your orntc
4or sueh refusal. not any insufrciencT Of the ca,
on o1 maj 1ufticc did not renuirc il bnt that Id
| Sald tcofa,e Gfren, ". II. Noherts and T,hnmo
smith had for Tcakous which thrr ~ ~ ~, aIc,
basely refused {ae tho said BIehon fnGormnd ~,
orator. to concur In any such arrnnrnnnnr4 W.
orator submits and charges that H. I'll n, ou
ofthe Diocese Of Illinois has cxcccd"d ~ nlsho
given him in the said Canone in thst h. 3n.t,.
led proceeding against your orator upon H. =
; formation Of ono person alone, nj you9 prator +
lievre and charges, and that person in, ~ yopr
ator is informed and verify believes. the asa JoS
o Wilkineon; III that, further, he had fixed the tn
4 Of your orntor's frihl upon fuch alleged charc
J without giving -FOUR orator thirty days pecvio
notice thereof astcr the constitution Of the Cor
or tribunal before whom your osstor IL to he trir
in ttet i,t iae refused postponcncnt o: tile tis
L | OF lis t::al, az 6.owl By your otatof, bls:a;