, 1864-11-02

to merely technical violations Of the letter
OF euoh cspons I'd that IN regard 70 "Lettera
Dimlscory,," but That it sas IN VlaT odenses
p44tskiog Of toe ssafs.:ffF clerexmsn ~ g. sha,,
come tempt .su,ly into ang diacase, under
Ma. fnnnts.;u,, OF baytng elsewhere been
on,1,V nr az, c,Ime or IL isdemeauor, by vio-
}stion OF t.. canon CT other Wise, Or u aey-
clerp1m g ptf' Ell vj1ufblne u any diocese,
ebai1 mtsb thsye in any Of these respects. the
Hishop. my probable eauss, may admontsh
t,,e1, ntf a. and forbid him to ohclate
sas. t s,,.h diGcese. 4 and such prohi-
hitinn shall continue in force until the BIsh.
m Of the first named diocese be satisfied of
tie t Innocence Of said clergyman, or until he
w Nv It ia perfectly. clear that when this
canon authorizes the Bishop upon proba-
h7e cause y to admonish, &C., 1t hts reference
to 4 crimes and nisdemeancts In regard to
which q q probable cause NAV or may not
exist, But 1t is absurd TO taK aoout "psob-
able cause" III regard to the failure to deltv.
~ a LITTER within six months ffem the date
~ settlement The Bishop knows whether
f,a haa received such letter, and the fact OF
six months settlement is trtable by the rec
ords Of the church with aosointe certaanty.
You sannot predicate "pfogaote cause" Of
an offense Of This character. but cue conclu-
sion ri the cannon removes all doubt. Tue
e1erovman when silenccd Is 90 to remain un-
tn vnn ~ are !. satisfied Of his Innocence OF uu-
III be be acquitted on trial NOW Il you sf-
lence a. clergyman for officiating, six
months ard ,atteoa t~o qays hog 7nnm m,saoqs T.
f1e to remain silencedf The canon which, If
It applies to this of1epse at all, must govern,
sss I1ntil YOU are satisfied OF bis innocence
or be is acquitted on trial." and 30 you say
in Yonr letter to tbs Yestry. But 1t he has
gone two days over his time; you ssa eannot M be be
81 aconitted on trial. for bis technical guilt
is proven absolutely by the record The re.
enfr is. that for this perfectly trivial and
fechnicaI violation Of tho nsked letter OF the
canon, he must remain Bifenced untll some
higher authority comes In to cnt the Knot,
although he may offer you bis letters the day
alter lis lips are closed. Thls 7eddesio ad a6.
su1du,n, mode Of reasoning not always 10.
gitimate, but emfnently so In regard to the
construction of g doubtful statute, shows
that this capon will bear no such interpreta-
ton as you have given it.
But perhaps you will say, II the clergyman
shows you iEst he had no criminal intent,
and offered to Immediately present his let.
ters.- on would remove tie suspension, be-
cause you would be "salisfied Of his inno-
cence." II you take this position, can only
say it Is The precise, point to which de.
signed to force you, bt cause It gives up your
fn1ire CAFE It sdmits that there can oe no
violation oi the l2th canon IN regard to tue
aletters'' which would authorize Jon to pro-
coed under the other canon In regard to dis.
clpli1e above quoted. unless the technical
violation is accompanied BY criminal In
tent, and this admission imposes upon you
IN opportunity OF explanation before you
Perhape 1ou further say TINT II this canon
is only :" "d,rectory,n then It would not be In
your power to compel clergyman from au-
other diocese to submit to yonr rfghttul
{o sSf4fS4 a
clergy man rtfaBes Tor an unreasonable time
to pre- eert his letters, after Jou have remind
ed him of the canon, and given him proper
opportunity for explanation, 1t would tnen
present c1ee of contumacioue disregaru Of
the canon and of your authority, which Woald
call for Jonr lnterposltlon, It would be like
the criminal or fraudulent intent, to which /
have above alluded, is qualifying the othe--
wise inert character Of directory laws In o.:
secular crdeB. do not see how this canu4
cap, consistently with itself, and With that
universal principle OF jusstce which controls
| the construction Of all doubtful statutes, re-
cetye any other Interpretation than the one
beg you not to mtsquote or misunder-
stand me- My position is simply this That,
under the settled rules OF Interpretation In re-
! gard to penal enactmente, all respectable secu-
| 1sr cUnrts would hold, that neglect to present
the 's.::Lettets Dimlssory" Tithia tae slx
| or mi6demeanor" in the purvleW Of the
| canon, t4n1ess such neglect was Wilful md
contumacious; and therefore inplJfog crln-
| fna1 intent, in the ecclesiastical sense Of that
term; ana they would further hold, that the
| Bishop would have no right to assnns such
criminal intent at the beginning, as the basis
OF 1ie action, but that on the contrary, be-
fore sileDcfpg, he must give the clergyman
| supposed to be In default an opportunity TO
be heard. And TO assist your reflections In
this view, which seem to be entirely new TO
you, in regard to the canon, quote Latin
maxim, tEan which there is none more COM
mon among the members OF my profession
when discussing questions Of this Etnd !:
"Qmi haeret IN lsts7u, haeTet in eoriic<," to
! which one Of our law writers gives the fol-
lowing free but correct translation: '*He
who Considers merely the letter, goes but
! ek1n.deep into the meaning.n
] think have disposed of the first count
( In yonr IN" ictment. pass to the second
That MIR Cracraft has ot11ciated in tho Con-
gregational Church without liturgy or vest
| ment. :..-
You now quote az your law In reference
! to thfs, the canon requiring the clergy to use
| the book of Common Prayer. The only re-
/! ply necessary 10, as stated in my former let.
/ ter, that on the occasion to which you a1lude,
Dr. Crac1aft only read his sermon, and Dr..
theretoie violated either the letter. or spiril
Of the canon. But permit me to inquire
whether you hold that this canon is to receive
a construction SO rigid as to forbid your cler'
II from ever making an eztemporaneous
prayer? In my college days at Union, mans
der The tntelage Of Df. Potter, the present
Bishop Of Pennsylyaufa- / have never seen
him since, but let me say, en- pauaHt, BY Wa5
OF tribute to your order, that there Is no 9th,
er man living in this country for whose mora!
and intellectual qualities have 10 profound
/ Hor mn
your church, and In the hundreds Of times
have heard him pray in the daily service o.
the Coil. re Chapel. never saw him uEe tht
Book Of Common Prayer.
/ have now only. to speak OF your remain
Irg charge against Dr.; C1ac5aft which re- r..
preaching. think, no one who has had thu
patience 10 follow me thus fur will hesitate
to say, sthfne lIae lacAryrnde" His denHncla
tlon oi the rebellion led to the Withdrawal
from The church Of the two or three personi
who have left it,-lt was this that led to TIT
threats, publicly made here. that Jou WON'T
coon suspend him If be did not cease t
preach the duty Of suppressing the rebellion
By arms,-It was this that brought from Dir
Myers bis challenge Of Sept. 21st; aid his tar
ther letter OF the 24th, published IN tn
Tm<s OF the 2Sth, and It was th3s-5eu VII
from you, tHo days later, your LETTER to u
comtortable position in regard to this, yol
: non assume the 1oIe Of injured innocence
and say that ill you did was to receive 'fot
. mai complaint, and pass It where IT. belong
. ! nmph, 'swhat possible responsibility did thi
/ impose upon me, OF forming any Judgment
! making any inquiry, or taking any teshmc
N.Y. 1 viii tell you 'what responsibility
. Sir, By the authority Of the very canon whic
/ You quote, md come OF the provisions c
) which Jou so strangely overlook.
/ Section 1st, Canon 3. Tit II, quoted b.
j 5cu, reads as follows: III clergyman c
I tlts Church, belonging to any Diocese, sha
!. in ary other Diocese conduct himself In snc
q Hay as is contrary to the rules Ut th
r Church, and divraeeful to Ais office, the cecil
d slas tical authority thereof shall give aot!s
= thereof to the ccclesfasttca authority Whei
d he lB calouica}iy resident, e1hs5;tsng .slth u
i taJora.atio,s 9ieen, reasonable grounds fur p
: sunttng It's c117e<fntss."
+ Now, do you not observe that. before r
3 mand,ng Dr. Cracrett for trial to OHIO Q
3 the cha5ge that he had s'condacted himself
such way as Is contrary to the rules Of th
. Church aud dlsgraceful to his Office" 81
s were absolutely required by this Canon
s ! aecerta}n, .jadielally, the propaole truth
K | such charges, because you We're required
!, exhibit to the Bishop Of Ohio, with your /
i formation, easonabis grounds tor prssnt
the very Canon you quote requires you.
h perform precisely the came Judicial fanctlt
4 that & magistrate performs when be holds
+ bail man charged With crime, or that
n Grand Jury perform when they find an Indie
II fnens? A p7snla 5aeie case must 90 made 0
r before you can act, And yet, by what stran
d infatuatien is it, that In the very next Ct
It nmn after quoting the Canon, and direct
l. in its teeth, you inquire "what pos
h bic responsibility did this impo
d upon me Of forming any judgment, MAXI
:, ahy inquiry, or taktng any testimony" He
t. can you say, as you do. s4y, ~ have !
ID knowledge Of what he said or what he did