Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1882-06-09

WHEREAS charges Of untruthfulness, deception and
creating disturbance among the churches have been
made against Rev. David Shurtn, a member Of this
body, therefore
Resolved, That we hereby withdraw fellowship from
him until the 9Th day Of August next, at which time
he is invited TO appear before body at Wilmington
and show reason why he should not be finally dismiss
ed without papers
Resolved, That the scribe be instructed to send
copy Of this minute to the brother, and also to The
Congresationallst and The Vermont Chronicle.
The suit was commenced August Il, 1877,
and was tried by the Windham county court
Judge Ross presiding, at the September term,
1873, when verdict was rendered for the
plaintiff to recover $2729i damages. The
case was then taken to the supreme court on
exceptions to the rulings Of Judge Ross on
the trial. The case was heard at the Febru-
airy term, 1879, by Judges Pierpoint, Redheld
and Powers, who decided that defendants ac-
ton before and as n member Of the associa.
ton, and the publication of the preamble and
resolutions which were the result of that ac-
ton, were privileged Also that defendant
could not be held liable in the action unless
actuated in what he did by malice towards
plaintiff; that the burden was ON the plaintiff
to show this, and remanded the case to the
county court for q new trial
The plaintiff, Shurtlef, then caused the
case to be removed to the U. S. circuit court
for trial, and it was heard at the present term,
as before stated.
1t appeared that plaintiff is over GO years
old 4; that he formerly resided in Blandford,
Mass, where he was in trade and was a mem
Der of the Congregational church, but in 1860
was accommodated therefrom upon charges
preferred by the senior deacon thereof; that
subsequently he was admitted to membership
in the Congregational church at Westhe.d,
! Mass, by an en- pdrte council convened upon
his application, and before whom the Bland
ford church did not appear to protest
He then, in 1866 or 1867, pursued q course
of study for less than year at the Hartford,
Conn, theological seminary; and in June,
1867, went TO Bloomington, Orleans county,
Vt, and engaged himself to supply the pulpit
of the Congregational church in that place
| He became a member of the Orleans county
association, was ordained a minister of the
Gospel in February 1865 and a short time
thereafter was duly installed as pastor Of the
church at Bloomington. He continued there
until March, 1869, when, owing to some trou-
BILE arising between him and the church and
society, q council was called, and, after pro-
tracted hearing, he was dismissed therefrom
without the usual papers of commentator
and recommendation.
| He then came to Windham county and
| preached two Sundays at Jamaica, but soon
engaged himself as acting pastor of the Con-
gregational church at Fayetteville, where he
remained about three years. During this pc
Rod he was admitted without being required
to produce papers showing his good standing
in the association of which he was last mem
Der, but upon his assertion that he had such,
to membership in the Windham county asso-
citation. During his acting pastorate at Fay
| etteville, plaintiff got into trouble with Dea-
| con Stedman, which finally resulted in the
| accommodation of Stedman from the church
His conduct in this matter alienated from him
many of the members of that church and So
ciety, and the feeling became so intense that
several members of that church and society
preferred charges of unministerial conduct
against him; which charges, and specifca-
tions accompanying them, were referred 10 a
committee of the association, of which Rev.
| Amos Foster of Putney was chairman. The
committee met at Brattleboro in January,
1872, before whom the compliments appeared
with the defendant, DIR. Stevens, as their coun-
sci, and the plaintiff with Rev. Joseph Chand-
Ter as his counsel. At this meeting Mr.. Brig
ham, in behalf of compliments, formally
withdrew the charges but DIR. Stevens then
and there said that the charge which had been
made, accusing the brother of not having the
usual and regular papers of commentator
and recommendation, certifying to his good
standing in the ministry, from the council
which dismissed him at Bloomington, he
should follow up, as it was not only due to the
churches, but TO the Rev. Mr.. Shurtleff, that
he should not be made to rest under such a
charge, if untrue.
At subsequent meeting of the association,
Mr.. ShurtleiT, upon the friendly and brother
ly suggestion of DIR. Stevens asked for an in
vestigation into the charge reserved, and
which had previously been made against him.
1t was found that tho papers which he held
from the council that dismissed him were in
formal, inasmuch as they did not contain the
usual words of recommendation and COM
mendation to the churches. The association,
however, voted TO continue him as a member,
hoping and trusting that by an upright and
cody life he might become eminently useful
in the ministry, and outgrow the prejudices
which had arisen against him.
He resigned his acting pastorEte in Fayette-
vile, and, after preaching a few Sundays in
different places, went to New Boston, N. H..
where he remained few months, when trou'
BILE arose there, and letters of inquiry into his
ministerial standing here were received by
certain members of the association. In 1874
he became acting pastor OF the church in AL.
stead, N. H., and soon unfavorable reports
regarding him were put in circulation, which
also led to inquiries from that people az TO his
standing as a Christian minister while in this
county.
In June, 1875, he went to Shirley, Mass,
and became acting pastor of the Congrega'
tional church there. During his second year
in Shirley, serious trouble arose between pas.
tor and people, and inquiries began to be in.
stituted into his past life and ministerial stand
ing whore he had formerly been. Rev. Horace
Parker, a member of the church in Shirley,
wrote letter of inquiry to Rev. Mr.. Burn
ham, then pastor of the Fayetteville church
Mr.. Durham sent the letter to defendant
Stevens, with a request to answer it; which
DIR. Stevens did, giving brief history of the
plaintiffs ministerial life, and the complaints
of trouble in the churches wherever he had
ministered. May 3, 1874 day or two after
he received DIR. Steyenss letter-Mr. Parker
wrote to DIR. Stevens as follows:
Dear Brother: If you can, do stop THU
man from making more trouble in the church
es. He is unfit for the office and work of the
ministry. He belongs to no organization
here, and we cannot reach him.
On the 18th and 10th of May following, the
association met in regular quarterly meeting
at West Townshend. Rev. Mr.. Burnham wal
moderator, and Rev. Mr.. Goodrich, scribe
The defendant, DR., Stevens, brought the case
of Mr.. Shurtlif before that body, and read
his communication from Rev. Horace Parker
of Shirley. The matter was very generally
discussed by the clergymen present, and al
were of the opinion that some sort of actor
ought to be taken. Matters within the knowl
edge of Dr. Stevens Revs. Durham, Ohm
, stead, Baldwin and others were stated over al
grounds upon which to base their action, anC
among others was the fact that he had STATED
to some of the brethren that the only charge
on which he was accommodated from the
! church ut Blandford was for selling a medi
) cinal preparation which contained alcohol
. whereas it had been brought TO their knowl
I edge, through the records of that church
that he was also charged and found guilty o.
several other serious complaints affecting hi
Christian life and conduct as a member o.
that church also, that he had stated to seve
= raj of them that the church in Browningtor
I was anxious to retain him another year at an
' increased salary, whereas they had evidences
to the contrary also the further fact, which