The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1879-11-13
AN IMpoRTANr DECISION.
n nnnss n,iSinnss. Wv

| LAaui ahRAAbk AhpNt AAuLb De OulIG6uot VI
priest Of the French Catholic Church 4
that city, for $4,000 damages, on III
ground that the defendant used his ecclea
iastical authority to break up the plain
tifFs business, resulted yesterday in
verdict of S3,4S3 for the plaintiff. Tn,
jury were only out an hour or SO. Iii
said that while they were out, efforts wer,
made by the defense to settle the suit, Il
prevent tho decision going on record, l
will go to the Supreme Court upon excep
tons. The facts in the case were not O
so much importance as It's extreme novel
ty, and the ruling of Judge Bacon con
corning the Massachusetts, law applicable
to it. The Church and State being legally
independent in this country, the broad
question was whether ecclesiastical disci.
pine can be carried SO far as to interfere
with mans civil rights.
The facts at issue were simple and in
great measure acknowledged by both par.
ties. Parker was haCkman Of Holyoke
in December, 1876, when Father Chini.
guy, q French Catholic priest who had
been converted TO Professionalism, can g 10
Holyoke to lecture about his change OF
creed. OF course he was obnoxious 10
the Romanist clergymen, who warned
their people against attending Chiniquy's
services. When it came to Father Du-
fresne's ears that number OF his parish
had heard the renegade, he called upon
them to give him their names. Later it
appeared that Parker attended the seryi.
ces and did not acknowledge his error,
and he was excsmmunicated from the
church. Then, according to the plaintiffs
declaration, the priest ''fraudulently, viii.
fully, violently and maliciously intending
to injure the plaintiff in his business
spoke ito large number OF people assem-
bled in his meeting house" as follows: 81
forbid any person belonging 10 this
church having or using any hacks belong.
ing to that hackman that has been to
Chiniquy's Church, and, il you do employ
him, shall turn you out OF the church,"
also, on another occasion, he said to .
larger company, "If anybody hires the
hacks Of that man that goes to Chiniquy's
Church will turn him out OF the church; Z"
also, at yet another time, the priest did
hinder, deter and interfere with the
plaintiff in the free exercise Of his bust
ness, as follows: "Iforbid any OF my con-
gregation from employing any hacks Of that
man that goes to hear Ohiniquy preach,
and il they do I shall turn them out OF
the church. II you do hire that man
l shall not baptize your children, at
tend your funerals or marry you" The
declaration further says that certain
funeral party went TO the church with
Parker's carriages and the priest turned
them away, saying, "When you know bet
ter than to como in those hacks l will do
your work, and not BEFORE" and that the
priest also said to bis parish, II forbid all
members OF this church from hiring the
hacks or carriages Of Joseph Parker, or
using them, on the pain Of exCommunica-
ton from the church" To this declara-
ton Dutresne made answer that if it
should appear that he uttered the words
alleged, such acts "were committed in the
proper exercise Of his priestly duties and
authority as q duty settled and in
stalled the pastor OF the French
Roman Catholic Church OF which the
plaintiff was o MEMBER" and he de-
MED that they were uttered unlawfully
or maliciously to injure the plaintiff bust
ness, "but in the lawful exercise Of his
authority aforesaid, and for the proper
regulation and discipline Of his said
church and the congregation worshipping
therein, and by the authority and consent
Of his ecclesiastical superior, and in the
proper discharge Of his duties and func-
TONS" The case was brought into court
last March, and continued to allow the
plaintiffto amend his declaration, which
was done by annexing long schedule OF
persons who, he claimed, were intimida-
ted from dealing with him. A long array
Of witnesses testified in behalf OF both par
ties as to the facts alleged, and the amount
or absence OF damage.
Judge Bacon's charge yesterday morn
ing covered the law OF the case as follows:
This case rests upon the principle OF law
by which a man has q remedy Il another
interieres with his lawful business by
fraud or by threats and intimidation, and
so injuries it. The changes in the course
OF trade or travel, or the competition OF
those who are engaged in the same trade,
may absolutely ruin mans occupation;
and deprive him OF the means Of gaining
a livelihood. In such cases there Is no
remedy. But 1t Is not lawtRl for man
to interfere with another mans business
by fraud, or by threats OF intimidation
against those who trade with him. Any
person who Is deprived oil his livelihood by
such threats has remedy against the
party who makes them. Hyou are keep.
ing q store and D man threatens your
customers with Injury Of some kind, and
so irightens them that they dare not trade
with you, he lays himself liable TO an 40.
ton. Now, this is case in which there
may be some feeling. You areto try this
case not as members Of any particular
communion, but as American citizens un'
der solemn oath to do that which Il
right between the parties, irrespective Of
the Communion to which you belong. The
verdict should rest solely upon the law "a
given to you by the court, and the evidence
in the case.
1t being admitted that the plaintiff wa
engaged in the business OF using hacks II
the city Of Holyoke, the question L
whether the defendant wrongtully anG
maliciously interiersd with that business
by threats and intimidation OF any one, 81
as 10 prevent the customers Of the plaintiff
from hiring hacks Of him. II is sllegec
that he did this by the use OF certain
Language, which Is set out in the declara
ton. The Jury must find, in the frs
place, by q fair preponderanoe otevidence
that he did use the words set out In thl
counts, or some one OF them. The materia
part 81 them Is that which relates 10
threat, or what the plaintiff CONSTITUTES as
threat, to those who employed him
That must be proved before YOU
can find for the plaintiff. Ant
you must remember that the evidenc
Of the defendant aud his witnesses va