, 1865-09-14

EI01k y eNltiAG1ltE VI l[Aue4EIt NAs AaI,+A -@
tylannical, We then opened cur church again
to Mr. Cracraft.
:. The documents hereinafter published, sue"
the various steps taken Ia connection with inc
trial Of aIr. .Crncraft. 1t will appear that on
his admission Of having violated the canon u
regard to Letters Dimissory, and certificate
Of trunsfGr, be vas sentenced to receive an
The Bishop Of Ohio, and which will be found
herewith.Y Tie shop Of Ohio then gave him
q Letter Dfmfssory, which was In the usual
form, except that II most properly contained
. reference to the charges preferred against
him BY Bishop, Whitehousc, and pronounced
cred" This letter was forwarded by Mr..
Cracraft to Bishop Whitehouse, who, Us al
ready stated, declined to receive 1t.
sAnd here; having acknowledged our own
tlulntfon of the canon, md profftred to. make
such amends therefor as the Convention may
think proper, we change our position, and r.
quest from this body due protection Against
what We are obliged to term the tyra9py Of
The Bishop. We claim that unless thikN'on-
tcntf0n Is prepared to cut us of forever from
the Church, which sc do not conceive to be
possible, VIC arc entitled to have tho Letter
Dimlssory OF Afr. cracrnft accepted, aod to
settle him US The Rector Of our Parish; The
Bishop declines to receive the. Letter, on
the ground that 1t Is "seriously qualified
as 10 the standing and character" Of
Alr. Cracsaft. The canon does not impera-
lively prescribe any FORM II says the Letter
"may be" in q certain form, which It gives.
and this form, the Bishop Of Ohio has fol-
lowed, except that in the conclusion he refers
to the charges made against Alr. Craera0, and s
pronounccs him TO bo 7'purgcd aud acliveter'
from them. Can charges from which cler-
gymaD is pronounced, by the proper Judicial
authority, to he "pnIged and delivered" be
honestly considered as qualifying a his stand
Ing and character =! This Is q contradiction
In tcr1ns-
: but tho Bishop gives another reason in his
letter to Bishop McIlvaino, for refusing to re-
cclye the Letter DiInissory.' lie says he con.
kidcrs the proceedings in Ohio as evasivc OF
the complaint and offences, and lcaving rca-
sonable question whether the canon has been
properly complied WITH" The p5oprlety Of
tcErity Of tic eminent prelate who prcsidcs
over thc Diocese OF Ohio, 1t does not belong
to- Us to consider. But ne hare right to
osk, In what school OF conon, Or civil law, the
Daahop Of Illinois learned that he had right
to Eo behind the judicial action Of the Bishop OF
Ohio, and abandon the position Of accuser for
that Of final Judge. By what authority does
he undertake to revise these proceedings? lie
had preferred charges against a clergyman to
the Bishop Of Ohio. That Bishop alone had
Jurisdiction In tho case. lie tries it, pro-
nounces, and administers the sentence; de-
delivered" and tie Bishop OF Illinois, being
| advised thereof, says the proceedings are not
| satisfactory to him, and that the clergyman Is
not "purgcd and delivered" Is there any
warrant lur such au extraordinary assumption
Of nuthority-for a proceeding go shocking TO
Our sctist Of justice, and so inconsistent with
civil liie?
!, lie says further TINT Mr.. Crucraft Is still
inhibited from officiating in this Diocese md
lie las recently issued q circular letter, m.
.no1ncing taid Inhibition Us still in force, and
! giving the same reason In both lottcrs-that
| he Is not satisfied Of his innocence, or that
lie has been acquitted On trial" Thla phrase,
We beg the Convention to observe, Is bor.
I rowed IRON q section Of tho cauun that up
| plies only 10 the trial Of "sojoutncrs," and
not Of resident clcrgymcn. es is clearly shown
in the annexed letters or bishop McIlvafnc,
aqa has therefore, no application to the case IS
Libit Is dawn from tie same section, and
.vaine did not exist IN reference ia
Mr.. Cracruit. hut If this section oi
the canon were applicable IN this case,
What right would the bishop Of Illinois have
TO say that he YVES "nol satisfied o! hfs ilno'
ccnce." lie Las been pronounced BY the
fhrcn h ,bc clargcs. fIe chargcs have ceased
10 affect his clerical character, and what docs
I: matter to the aceuser, whether this result
has been reached BY gu acquittal on trial, OF
| hy the Administrations Of such punishment as,
~ ing Jaasne9Ea " anI propet r. ha, i, ~ ~
@ nahnd ,9f ~ u,irer.,ea,, 'v1 trn,n H.
| charges. The accnser has nothing to do with
the mode. He must take the word Of the
authority having Jurisdiction Of the case
When he Is pronounced By TINT ~.
t.olty 70 " pnsm " 11u aGH' LET siea,
niS statu. lng ea!nu y HE'LL. ~ uaa oee1 1;s ~
aaltled on 1Ie . iIas. anu Inc nasnoP makine III
were not the tfue Tale, then en- u wonlt Gc II II
me power OF INC bislop o. Illinois, NJ 1nls 81! 2!
any similar case, TO kecP clergyman undel
Inhibition during his whole nie, 1or sone
technical violation o. the canon, ande[ pse
aenee lnat na was aoa ~, s tats .hn ~ sno es, I,S.
& 'ahces no,ha1 a am1f ,ta.s ~ tnIhI X
nro1er sn,,or;tv md ~ t1r of1cn nSono1nce
.pnfsea aug .'..a,aT aeasesSo' NV suci eous'f''e'
''9n can can, DC tolesa'ea. .,o ,,,,,, .,,,,,,.,o;
WI ~ sGGn ~ " NV rrnGta n,.I ptonsae.
49,! at n',ant ~ VIA wv ~ .nno,' nnu ~.
tt;I. ~" ~. H. ~ Rts,n, ~ m,,nn;s h.. - NJ
t ,;,se snse ~ II,o ettcg m,,Iasarv n nT NJ
cInnrou ~ 'e ~ ihis ~ he ass,1mes tbc ~ rish,
~ Sac4 IT, },tac3afs 1 a,,t ~ thr 11n,n3t ,nE3n
~ ~ {Jmc oT ia in If hc retnn,ns IN iii
nnis .nd r3r+1,n,lv ri ,icstroy The Church #
Goi.s,.ur,, @ .,uT Thcsr NAV hn ob,ects Trrr dra,
~ tI,a E;shon.s 1ror, hSIf /. It n,a.si,i. lin
this Convention viii sanction e1ic, tyranny
rs trc f.hnrrh nrcnarrd ia sav. Tint i,niess ,
noris3, sclects 4 Rector who IL nrTec
Rcctor Mt Mi. Iayt parishes no richi:
which Dishons arc bound 10 respect
Wc WIRE fccblc nnrisil without uin}stcr
Ey no agency Of ours. the Rev. Nr. Cracruf
established Ills homo among ns, Having a
command cther means of Eurport. he care,
little for salary, und only sought to labor Ii
},is Naster's Vineyard, He coNid niye Us &c,
vices beyond onf pecunIavv power TO com
maud. IIc entered upon lis work with Crca
ncccnfaucc and SUCCESS. Tic future Of on
nnrish 1,riehtened. II be or the yestry troyts
Grcsscd q canon. IL wos unwlttlncly done, m,
Eif IND 1,cen With fiji knowiedE., the ofienc
wos of a character involving mo- norai turpI
nn1,o,,rnisv iar crn1anation. mr. clcrnynna,
Il rrcmanac1 1naer charnes. 10 Ohio. iii III T
nrc 1o1d 3,e ccn m 1o1,rcr minister n mr. snfr
nNa1 wants I1is case IL I,eor1I hv fhe nrnpe
nnt1.or;tIcs of Ohio. nnd he IL rciur11ed H. II
1 1ritI n ccri1fIcate from the Eisl.on wh
a,ope Ind jurisdiction, 10 decide upo,
hfs .ofus. that hr Is purprd md tjr
iiycred, The accusing Dithon rnniiy nrr1
1 nnnnces Tho statement of lis distinruiihe,
nrotl,nr n he false nn,l ihe iudicfo1 n3occni]
tnws nf },;s Nlnrcse a shan,. 1iron,Ins the ~oi
If nccnsnr 10 ossnmcs tl,nt of f,,dTs and il
| 1,ttcr contcmnt or tfosc canons whose zea{on
4 ~uardisn he claims to bc. and usurpinr
r1o,Tcr nr nnnfsh1ncnt IN Which he Inc =,
l,o., 4s~,+ tho,, 10 7ror,5, hnra IN 1arr
n,reca c6ntr,,,ntion on tie PARISHES Of lis III
nresc Fur thr beneHt az bis nsiraie nurse
Hc se},,scs M t1,c 1cttc1 DImissorr takesf fs fTnr
rs rs snistnntia,1ys lie rieht of sett1In- a % Rcs
snr md condemns rs to snIrjtnni faIn{ne !,
Continuing In force m Inhibition which b
never had The mower to issue. and frora whic
ri nrrtct1co Of iustifcatiou u taken ayay. +,
fle Hlcliycrnnce which Nr. Cracrni1 Ind RI
ceiycil at the hands Of those annointcd b
fbc canons Of the Church 10 trr lin. Is thi
ri0ht or Il If yron,rP
And nnw nhserTe. where docs this cxfrn
ordiuary pfoccedlng Of The Bishop place us
The cnta ii III. Craeraft has been heard an
thus dna,ly disposed Of. Tie I,as RECEIVED hi
q dr2;yeTnfee, y but thc BisLop Of IlIInois II
G,ses to he bound by Tie t.cisIon Of th
triiN1oaf Ia which he himself nnuenlcd. Yc
lt n.ea.s. s " ,a.,nr o.,+n,rI I1nfa5 - T.,te