The daily gazette., 1880-03-30
A Mistake Corrected. r. i.

III WHICH occurred tne IOliOWinS SELL
tence: al raa.r l....I ..,... ...-.., ,,',,
"To the Annual Conference Mr..
Hagany accordingly appealed, with
Revs. j. 4. Caldwell and /. L. Cooper
as counsel, and there secured a substan-
tial victory" .F tri5a ao p-T 80
If / am the person first named as
counsel for Mr.. Hagany, it is mis-
take. Yet, it is, apart from circum-
stances which havecom tony knowl-l
edge, 30 unimportant that it would
hardly call for public contradiction
from me. was not counsel either di-
rectly or indirectly, secretly or OPEN
y for Mr.. Haganyor any other party
in that case. Mr.. Hagany asked me
to be assistant counsel for him, but l
declined. DR.. Cooper also wrote to
me asking me to assist him in the case
as he could not come to Wilmington
to attend to it in person. ] wrote him
that for personal reasons" / conld'
not do SO. These reasons are partly
known to the public, and need not
mention them. On my way from
Dover, last Tuesday, / was informed
that some person had whispered it
around" among the preachers that
was the cause of the Hagany case be-
ing carried to Conference. This state.
ment, in substance, learned was Cir
culated at particular juncture, "and
was designed to accomplish a certain
purpose" which was we'll known TO
the brethren who heard it. All the
parties involved in the case know that
the statement was incorrect, and they
knew it then as well as they know 1t
now. All the way through, from be-
ginning to end, / have positively and
absolutely refused to have anything to
do with the case, or to touch 1t In any
manner, save to give to the different
parties at different times my opinion
Of certain points of law which were
supposed to be involved in it. AL the
parties, except the Presiding Elder,
have sought my opinion at different
times, and to each and all who did SO,
| have expressed my views with equal
freedom and clearness. With the
merits of the case, or any of the facts
relating to it, have not at any time
or in any manner meddIed in the
slightest degree. 1t has been my life
long practice to attend to my own bus
iness, and never to meddle with that
of other people. should have made |
this statement on the floor of the Con-
ference had l known while there of
the misrepresentation that were being
made. The first person who approach
ed me and asked my opinion of the
law involved in the Hagany case was
the late pastor of Asbury Church.
This he did over year ago at the
Conference held at New Castle. Our
lodgings were assigned to the same
room, which, however, we occupied
together but short time as had to
return home every evening. During
that short interval, however, with
every appearance of unabated friend
ship, and In the freedom and conf
dence of brotherly intercourse, he
stated his point of law and gave him
unreservedly my opinion at his own
request. Pending Mr.. Hagany's trial
his counsel called at my study repeat
edly and sought my opinion on various
questions of church law, which as he
stated had arisen from time to time in
the case. While l refused in positive
terms to touch the matter in dispute,
or to inquire into the facts further
than they were stated or suggested by
the legal points presented, l felt en-
tirely free to give an opinion of these
points. One of the points, well re-
member, related to the constitutional
right of an expelled member to appeal
to the Quarterly Conference, and l
gave precisely the same opinion which
the Bishop expressed in his late ruling
in the case. . y
After the appellant was refused his
appeal he called to see me, and, after
stating his case, desired to know what
was his legal remedy. l pointed it
out to him from the Discipline, which
was to appeal from the Presiding El-
der's decision to the Bishop, who
should preside at the next session of
the annual Conference. This he did,
and the ruling of the Bishop accorded
exactly with the opinion which had
expressed, and remanded the case to
the Quarterly Conference. There it
will be seen that l acted the part of
counsel, no more for one side than for
the other, which indeed was for neither;
but only as an humble individual Civ
ing a simple opinion, when asked by
either party to do so, which opinion
had no official authority, nor any thing
to make it effective OF binding upon
any party. If any body acted simply
on my opinion in that matter given in
the manner stated, it was no just cause
of offence on my part to any body else
under the sun. ~, Hr
My name has also been mentioned
in connection with another matter, as
l have been informed since returned
from Conference. Some months ago
certain pamphlet was put in circula-
ton which contained severe criticisms
on the conduct of the then pastor of
Asbury Church. A copy of it was
handed to me by some person on the
street but | laid it aside without
reading it until the lapse of several
weeks, when my attention was called
to it. l did not know until then that
there was any thing offensive or per-
sonal in the paper, and had no know
ledge of the existence Of such publi-
cation till it was handed to me, or Of
the design of any person to write such
a paper. To mention my name in
connection with either thar publica-
on or the Hagany matter at the time
it was done, and for the purpose for
which it was done, was to represent
me in false position to my brethren
and now that l have corrected the
Misrepresentation for their informa-
ton, dismiss rhe matter and l shall