The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1874-04-09
The Cheney Case.

Tho Cheney case In Chicago Is not ont
oI such general interest as the Tichborr
case In London, nor has It been 30 costly
to the litigAnts, but Is still "cause cele,
bre" and In some respects Of more rea
Importance than the Tlchborne suit. NJ
principle was involved in the latter, tn
interest mainly growing out Of the doubt
Gs to the identity Of tho claimant and tht
extraordinary impudence Of the claim sc,
up, il not good one. In the Cheney
case the relation Of an individual churct
to the ecclesiastical body Of which 1t is I
part, and the extent to which doctrins
differences may be INDUCED In withou
iorFeiting the rights Of nemberBhlI
under ecclesiastical and civil law enter
the case and form, In fact, ito princl-
pal features, The Cheney case Is NOW
nearly Eve years old, but 1t is not ye,
ended, the hearing Of the case Of CalkiHl
vs.. Cheney, which had occupied twenty
four days in the Cook County Circui,
Court, being concluded Saturday last and
the case taken under adviSement. The
Chicago Tribune gives the following out
line Of the case up to the present time:
In the summer Of 1869, the Rev.
Charles Edward Cheney, rector of Christ
Church, Chicago, was put upon his trial
before an Ecclesiastical Court, composed
of the Rev. Samuel Chase, D D., the Rev,
Henry N. Pierce, DID,, the Rev. A. h.
Snyder, the Rev. /. N. Benedict, and the
Rev. John Benson, selected under the
Diocesan canon providing for such pro-
ceedings, upon the charges Of violation
Of the Constitution OF the Protestant
Episcopal Church, establishing Book Of
Common Prayer, offices, articles, etc., and
prescribing that no alteration or addition
should be made therein or thereto, except
at two sessions Of the General Convention
Of that Church; and also Of violation of
his promise TO conform 10 the doctrines
and worship Of the Church.
On the second day OF the trial, and be.
fore any evidence was taken or heard,
the proceedings were enjoined BY the
Superior Court Of Chicago. The case in
this Court was carried BY appeal to the
Supreme Court. and the decree reversed
in January, 1871. The ecclesiastical trial
was resumed in February. In the mean.
time, however, the Rev. Henry N. Pierce
had been consecrated Bishop Of Arkansas,
and did not and could not appear as a
member of the Court. The accused
therefore objected to any further pro.
ceedings, upon the ground that he could
not be tried by four Presbyters when the
canon secured him the right Of selection,
and this had been made 10 the number Of
FIVE. The Rev. Messrs. Chase, Benson,
Benedict, and Snyder went on, never.
theless, and found the respondent guilty,
and sentenced him to suspension until he
could promise to conform In future, and ex.
press Contrition Tor the past, which sent.
ence was soon after pronounced by Bishop
Whitehouse. Alterwards,-Dr. Cheney
officiating Notwithstanding the sentence,
-he was again impleaded before sec
ond Ecclesiastical tribunal for disregard.
ing the prior sentence, and found guilty,
and sentenced to deposition from the min.
istry; which sentence was pronounced by
Bishop Whitehouse. -
The Rev. DR.. Cheney still officiating
under employment by the Wardens and
Vestrymen Of Christ Church, who were
directed 10 continue his services by vote
OF the congregation. On the 2Sth OF May,
1879, q bill in chancery was filed ln the
Circuit Court OF Cook county by Messrs.
Calkins, Clesvelsnd, and Jennison, insist.
ing that the Bishop Of the Diocese Of Lii.
nois had inherent power to discipline the
clergy oil the Diocese, and that the War
dens and Vestrymen were guilty OF q
breach OF trust 10 continuing to permit
Mr.. Cheney's mluistrations, and praying
for an Injunction, No averment was
made in the bill that the congregation Of
Christ Church had deviated or departed,
or that any portion Of the congregation
had done so.
To this bill some Of the defendants filed
a demurrer, and Others q remprrer. Alter
lengthy argument upon the motion for 10.
junction and the demurrer 10 the bill,
Judge Williams denied the motion and
overtuled the demurrer.
The defendants who had demurred then
Joined In the answer, and the case wes
brought TO issue. The answer denied the
Of the alleged sentence upon Dr..
Cheney, and set up that the property
oil Christ Church was acquired and con.
veyed Tor the use Of the congregation as
such, and not as 3 congregation Of the
Protestant Episcopal Church; that there
are two great parties In the Protestant
Episcopal Church, who hold two diane.
trIcally.opposite beliefs upon orders, sac.
raments, etc, and the rule Of the church,
as whole, is the rule Of toleTatinr each
school OF beliefs, and that this property
was accumulated for the promotion Of The
views OF one Of those schools, viz the
Evangelical or Low Church; and from
the. Doctrines, Discipline, and Worship
thereof the congregation had not depart.
ed. The inherehent power ofthe Bishop
to proceed outside Of the constitution and
canons Of the church was emphatically
denied. Much testimony was taken on
both sides, and particularly on the thee.
logical and devotional aspects Of the
case.
For the complainants, the depositions
Of Hon. Murray Hoffman, Professor Sey-
mour, DR., Fulton, Bishop odenheimer,
Bishop Whitehouse, Bishop Kife, DR..
Dix, Dr.. Adams, John Henry Hopkins,
Dr.. Locke, Dr.. Chase, Dr.. Dean, the Rev.
Messrs. Kinney, Stocking and Townsend,
upon the general church and theological
questions involved, were read; aud those
OF Messrs. Calkins, Woodruff, Jennison,
Otis, and the Rev. Messrs Cheney,
Knowles and others, as 10 the trial Of the
Rev, NJ. Cheney, and the circumstances
attending the acquisition and situation Of
the property. r0 ut.