Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-07-29
CHICAGO.
CGntinued Argument la the Church
laSe

Continued Argument la the Church
Case.
CHICAGO, July 2S.-In the Superior
Court Of this city, Jnjge Jamison presid-
ing, cases having hearing assembled at
o'clock this morning, and Hon. nj. W.
Fuller resumed his argument on behalf Of
Rev. Mr. Cheney. He cited numerous
authorities in support Of the bill upon
which the Injunction was granted. de
dWelt at some length on the facts that
went 10 show that the ecclesiastical court
WAS Improperly constituted, and laid
special stress upon the fact that the law of
the land should be recognized 10 ecclesias-
teal courts,
He cited evidence TO prove that common
law principles had always held, and do
now bold good in such cases, and he chal-
lenged any one to show rule, a line, or
a word in the canons of the Diocese Of llli-
nOis which was contrary 10 the application
Of common law in their courts. Conse
qaeatly the right of challenge could aOt be
refused. If, as the counsel foI the prose-
cution held, the assessors are in point OF
fact associate judges, .hen he would refer
TO Blackstone, which showed that the right
TO challenge judges formerly existed, AMI
at the present day this is replaced by the
right of 4 change Of venue.
The ground Of one Of the exceptions
made WAS that one OF the assessors who
WAS to Judge o. the law and fact, and TO
see that the trial was fairly conducted,
had already formed and expressed an
opinion. lie proceeded 10 chow that in
the law governing courts martial the
criminal for good and just reasons may
challenge after the jurors have been
sworn. rhe!humanity Of the commo law
10 the matter of the right OF challenge
was dwelt upon.
He next referred 10 that part Of the ar
gumenfiof Mr. Judd wherein he compared
the ecclesiastical court TO the trial Of the
President of the United States, and had
ssid that Senators 10 such cases cannot be
challenged. Mr. Fuller read from volume
thre. OF the trial of Mr.. johnson, where
Senator B. +. Wade was challenged, which
challenge, however, waS for good reasons
Withdrawn.
He held that canon No. 20 really
intends that the right of challenge shaIl
be given. In what part of the canon, he
Incurred, is it laid down that this right OF
challenge shall be refused? We challenge
the Rev. Mr.. Snyder, and have witnesses
to show that he was disqualified from sit
ting az assessor. The right of challenge
was absolutely denied. The next question
in the exceptions filed TO the jurisdiction
objection 10 the citation, is that it af
firmatively asserts powers as belonging tC
the Bishop not given him by the canon.
Al this point the court adjourned until
afternoon. At the reassembling of thu
& L.,II,r ,,pesay,al IL.
lie claimed these exceptions we're such 81
should have been sustained, in as much a.
they went to the jurisdiction of the court
and that this court had the right TO exam
inc into their objections and decide wheth
er tbe ecclesiastical tribunal was proceed
ing in conformity with the laws Of tn
church.
1t had been charged that there ha
been a waver by the interpOsition Of
plea, but this plea had never been deliv
cred, and WAS recorded by the member
the court who was under the suspicion {
bias, and in the face Of protest.
j., Mr.. Gow3y closed the case. His aTgI
ment WAS devoted entirely to its legal a
pect. IL the complainant had not denle
his guilt, his hands not being clean IL
court could not interfere. lie then n
viewed the steps which had been taken b.
fore the church court, intending that al
pearaDce before the court was submissiC
10 the court, but he did not press the poin
Hethen reviewed the question of ten
poral interest upon which inteTpositiC
was asked, arguing that there was no Buf
otent showing that the salary would nece
sarily be stopped and if il WAS stopped Il
contract with the church was not ret up
show that if illegal proceedings were TAX
he could not still recover under his CO
tract with the church.
He claimed that the bill also failed
aver fraud, but il does state irreparable
Jury and the possibility of multiplied
of suits lie denied that the Hill I'll
porled either, nor does the bill show q
there il no remedy at law, aud the 1
must be dismissed.
lie then considered the contents Of 4
bill, which he found 10 be an spplicati
of one Court 10 enjoin another, tribur
in The prosecution OF its rightful aulhOr
t. direct the discipline Of a minister.
He had failed TO find any suthoIity
warrant tOr such interference. A court
equity WOuid not restrain prosecution
Law, unie-s 10 enable the procurement
evidence, until al least Judgment il tai
and an equitable defence may be set
lie concluded by saving that
proceedings IN oIganiz,ng the ecclesia asli
court il not regular, were under the cal
beyond the reach - investigation, as d
did not go 10 jurisdiction, and ClaiI
that there wss complete wayer on
part Of Mr.. Cheney, 10y Reason Of his h
ing excepted TO the pTesentment. I
- concludes The arguments. The court
render its decision on Friday.