, 1864-10-27

oe5e Who can; With the most convenience,
d,sGhasge dsnf gge,tsnes M c IS have IA bsen reported
to % him, At such tlms ~ may bo convenient
ana rpple plleRi FED TO- this canon and the duty 1t
,mnosed upon me In the following langusge,
III ~ vii afprd NE pleasure TO furnish your
rariah with temporary services during f4
racanc7, according to Canon XVI, Of the
diocese Of Illinois, Or In any way to counsel
Of assist Jou~"
diff rent:
kindly Offering to furnish cur parish with
fsmnotar7 services during our vacancy.
WHIT charming cou3escension In this meek
and lo8Iy prelate. Does he suppose that at
Ter Wantonly depriving US, nuheard, OF
psstor y hom we honor, and by letter m
nn1esnmptfon - In calling him without his
ieaye, Tie door Of our church will open to
Nv IL rpxman whom be may choose to send
- ~ If lie Bishop desires to have the doc.
trine preached that rebellion Is no Sin. and
Jeff Davis no traitor, he must ne content
= tth the eoho Of empty PeRe. ~ se tu's qtaa taa
lar + Of Vour oRn learned profe:sion, and will
aT4t Hayins. t Sir go far IN Jour article band
semelY EXPOSED Bishop" "as q foo1 ana
tS rant,'' s'senselesa bigot," " man Wita
the intolerance Of Iand lackered eyer M ' Wiz Z,
fhe surfacc polish Of the Rev. Cream Cheese
Inn art, hound to find tha vital principle .tot
tie monster yon have so ingen1ously put TO-
gether. n,.,,,.,r, nr,nc,
ple, at least none at the time sprang up 80
lnstinctively to your mind tor thus ugly ctea'
ture as intense polit'cal pat1zansnaP.a ntPa,ot,,r
You ask without fear OF contradiction'
{Your own tupulses at the time offered none,
/ am sure.1 lean this grave action OF Ihe
| Hlshou be explained upon any other ~
| pothesis than bis own quick 81 myathy With
| the sehellfonf Gould be have been taus
swift to pnt 9pon trisi n .asnang aissn1shIssn hsn
! from bis clerical functions until bis grace
should benignly coudescend to be satisfied
| Of his Innocence, unites be had peen I'm"
! PEELED thereto by his own intense dislike
Of honest outepoken loyaltys"
oas 41s1S bont Is tf pis nc and % i've ss 9s sta:
tfed the article, I have been hauat.
ed with the idea that 1t was throughout
| q LIBEL, as Kent defines 1t, Ha malicious pub
lication. pressed either in-prtuting o.. writ
/ ing, tending to 1njure the reputation, and
expose to public hatred, contempt or ridi:
have not disciiplnatton to. see why it is not.
But In Judge Of the Supreme Court, euch
| IN offense must be deemed to be impossible.
| Grit is probably then only tour de forct, to
chow how iDgenionsly' an arti4e can BE-
framed and printed, having all the superficial
| licatton," and yet avoid the whole laW de
teanddlis n.agnatum. The imitation Is ad-
| mirab]y done, and Wou1d deceive many far
better Judges than myself.
|: / am the more satisfied that am incou-
petent to sppreciate the nice distinctions Of
which y2u. own MIND IND Is ,e,p e.paele on r'sSading
Tune,, from which have quoted above. TIE
immediate object of that "Note" is to re-.
! cover come ground, which, It. had been hint.
| ed that Jou mad lost with the Democratic
party" Ito which, am told, you are some
! what indebted for your Office and to relieve
| yourself from the inevitable: reproach Of
that point for the public ear, Will, doubt
not, be fanly egtimated. But you say In It
| something for mine. I" adtere to The fullest
e1tent to al T IsaA IN that eounu.ieasion touch
! Ing tho p4ucxdings Of tbs Bishop, but I disc'ain,
emyt.sfntton e. :: ,ng partt3sn tx;" Piease &
| ration have already taxed you for IN
opinion, as a lawyer and a judge, and / now
offer you literary exploit, and that Is to
take your article, and while adherlne fully
to Its language and its sentiments, dtscrimi-
nate the 'tpartizansnip from what you say OF
|
n1e 1T Il as eminent nmone t1e 1n sscnriosities 20 nf
iite.ature.n for gubtie bn1lysis.= and nentsi
ipcenuity az unerrtne as 4 chamic4l abaorb-
| ent- -.
l. What ycp charge the Bishop with doing.
without a show Of reason ior ths imppta.
t;on as aoa,nst him onn ronrsa1f do tnwarda
the Bishop, and that. Is, Impute a
false charge, condemn him unheard, aud
! put him upon proving bis Innocence. The
ihis H. 'rehemenne, m Of fha yaccrsatIon ue9 and
the Recommendation of The ssntrnces ynnr arti- W
~ sns ,es1I sho eae yon1 dnas
/ sir that A0"~'.'' ~" >@oDs
"75T Mhst. st1'1 trov and all that bove dana u,
rtpnTd To esrtai,, sermons and ,ectnres o.
a;ctsd ~. - con,ainea IN n
a nararranh If nv iettpr to the ward1ns. AZ
Fi1,nws.
Iii III havr alan rece,ved formal cono,1atnt
that nr Cracrsft ia. At fiftT+rent ttuoes. tn.
tra5 a., 1,nistira, enh,srts f1to Yha nn,o}+ m
!, ~ wnre nnhecnr1;nr. and offen.,ye to r.
an1ctsh1e nortion nf The roneTegation. WIN
| hsvs heen nh,;sed. from tbe rsiteTated rrier-
auce, to absent themselves from public
WoYst,n,,,
viii Fou do me the faror of exactlv weieh-
INTO he sanctuary Of YOUR leeal la judicial
oninion. 10 whIch t haga already f|sd for rsf-
| nre ' ' 49, ~.
| 4 ssicr1nal complaint was put into my
hands; the trial OF It did not belong to my a.
1izaiction, ,and passed 1t where 1t did belong.
| impose On me Of forming any Judgment, max.
| ipe auY inquIrY, OF taking any testImonys It
| wss q matter with which, judlcially, / had
| nothing to do, and did nothing. I have
not officially faulted Dr.. Cracraft for those
! se1mons and lectures, on auy ground what
| I houo Esr Ifra nj hat "a
said or What he did. In them, nor
could I repeat one single word
| or EXPRESSION. Responsible persons
affirmed in proper manner that he had done
wrong in them, which they are bou1d to sus.
tain. I am not It Is In q court where have
no authority. ..,s ..
But further, what does nv statement OF
even lbs comp]aint raY.. Is Il that Dr.. era.
craft had prenched sesmons on political sub.
iectt, and therefore IL ipso facso wrong
feel sure that / certainly have not said that
but you shall determine when you speak as
a legal construetionist. I say, for 60 un-
derstood the complaint from curBoEy read
ing, " Sermons which in manner and matter
we're unbecoming and offensive to respec-
table portion Of his congregation" That le
toeay, that the misdemeanor Was imputed to
Dr.. c. that he had thua offended in manner
and matter In come part Of his preaching. ]
have oppressed no opinion whether the Of.
fense ts really an tndtctable one, for I never
heard alleged the specific language, nor heard
|'the testimony even p,su1a jacte. know, oi
coutEe, that 3 clergyman might thus offend
by his rudeuess, bis personality aud
bis violations or individual aud so.
cisl right, that careless, opinIonated
6eromlnF and offensive in manner and mat.
teT.n IN any snbieet. much nore In the del
; ;cafe c1aes nnnn1ar1v knoEn AZ noIiticsi
Bnt al Ia Dr. Cracraf[,s offenge. in HAT re.