The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-05-20
LEGAL IMTHLLIQHMCH,
The st. Clements Church Difficulty.

court or common PtedS-JudQe LudLOuO.
The matter of the application for an Injunction to
restrain the vestrymen of ST. Clements Church from
dlsmissing Rev. Mr.. Patterson, the rector and
his assistant, Mr.. Stewart came up this morning.
Judge Ludlow stated that he had received a letter
from Justice OF the Supreme Court, setting forth
That that Court could not take this question,
that 1t would not be considered want OF respect
for this Court to hear the matter. He therefore
requested that the argument should be proceeded
with.
Affdavits of Mr.. PATTERSON anf others were read
in which 1t was charged that number OF those
other churches and not Of st. Clements; that no
tenure OF service was agreed upon stated at the
OF Messrs. Patterson and Stewart; that majority Of
the congregation desired Messrs. PATTERSON and
Stewart to remain and that the vestrymen had
In opening the argument for the plaintiffs Rev.
mr. Batterson ana Others, Mr. Hanson said that this
case was peculiarly free from dispute to facts
and the Intervention OF the Courts was ask for 10
protect certain property rights in the Church, and
10 prevent an illegal act which would rrepara
BILE injury to the congregation and the Church. IL ia
known that there is pending a suit in the Supreme
Court to determine the very existence OF this vestry
and yet Notwithstanding the pendency OF that suit
these vestrymen have undertaken to perform one
Of the grayest acts that could by any possibility
OF EDWARD vi the power OF the vestry to discharge
a pastor was denied.
Judge Ludlow suggested that In the case referred
10 the question was financial one, but in this case
there was question behind all that. viz, whether
vestry de Jacto with the sanction OF the Episcopal
body, could under the canons OF the Episcopal
Church remove the rector.
part OF the parish and member OF the vestry, and
that any act done without his presence and consent
was void; The power to disfranchse a member
rests with the body ITSELF unless delegated, and
nowhere in the canons of the Church can there be
found Vesting the power OF dismissal OF a rector
IN the vestry. The parish or CONGREGATION can
alone remove the rector, and that renewal must be
approved by the ecclesiastical authority OF the
diocese, In this case an attempt was made to re-
move the minister or the church without any charge
or trlal-a proceeding unwarranted, and against
justice and right
N renl Mr.
case was before the court at ALL 1t would have
been more decorods for the parties instead OF rush.
ing into court to have tried to have the matter arb
trated outside OF the court This is the first time
within half century that any OF the members OF
this denomination have had resort to civil tribunals
TO determine their disputes. 1t was a matter OF
pride that, however they may have differed In the
Episcopal Church as TO discipline, etc., they had
of a dismissal from the ministry eff the Protestant
Episcopal Church. but for the reetorship OF this
church, and his resort should be to an action at law
TO receive salary.
AS to the power OF the vestry he argued
that they are officers in body to perform their
work fully and not bY halves. The election of a
rector in case OF vacancy is vested by the charter
and bylaws in the vestry and, e1 necesSitate the
power OF removal must reside IN them. This is but
the severance OF connection that is without term
and 1t cannot be pretended that when he has an
action at law that he can by injunction tie up the
hands OF the Vestry and continue these disorders In
the church for another year. He recognized in the
fullest sense the right OF men to worship according
to their conscences but 1t struck him being most
members Of a church, accepting it's is0OTi1s TnIes
and formulas, should, the moment they become SO
associated act contrary to those rules and formulas
and when trouble arises, as in this case say eve are
martyrs TO the cause Of faith" If they do not ike
the formulas there Is very simple thing for them to
the Court how the vestry are acting, so long as il
appears that they are acting within the scope OF
their powers And In this they acted with great
caution, and their action received the Appreciation
OF the ecclesiastical authority
At the close Of the argument the case was held