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

the whole, however Il was deemed the wiser
course to withdraw fellowship temporarily
and give him an opportunity 10 be heard AS
the result Of this interchange of sentiment,
Rev. Mr.. Merrill of West Brattleboro drafted
and presented to the association the preamble
and resolutions above set forth, which were
read the moderator then called upon each
member present for an expression Of opinion,
and, II being shown that the preamble and
resolutions embodied tho unanimous feeling
Of the members Of the association, the de-
PENDANT, DIR. Stevens, then formally moved
their acceptance and adoption, which was car
ried without dissenting vote.
In pursuance Of this vote, Rev. Mr.. Good
rich, tho scribe, on the 21st day of May, for
warded q copy of said preamble and resolu-
tons TO Mr.. ShurtleiI at Shirley, and also
copy to the Oongregationalist and Vermont
Chronicle newspapers, in which they were
subsequently published. It was for this pub
LEGATION that the plaintiff claimed damages
He testified that it caused him great trouble
in mind, producing nervous prostitution, from
which he had never fully recovered that for
several weeks he was unable to sleep nights,
aud as n consequence would rise from his bed
and walk the railroad track between Shirley
village and Aver Junction, Mass. II further
appeared that the plaintiff was present at Will
mington on the 18th of August, but refused to
proceed to a hearing unless specific charges
were made whereupon the association APP
pointed q committee, Of which DR.. Stevens
was chairman, with instructions to formulate
charges in the case, which they proceeded to
| do, and the meeting was then adjourned TO
meet at Putney, August 2S, for hearing Of
the same. At this meeting the plaintiff APP
peared, and trial was had upon the charges
presented, and the association voted to make
their withdrawal Of fellowship final, and to
| dismiss him from their body without the usual
papers. This action was also published in the
| UNCONVENTIONAL newspapers before mentioned,
| but Of this the plaintiff did not complain or
seek to recover damages in this suit.
1t was also shown that for some months
| prior to any correspondence between Rev.
Mr.. Parker and DIR. Stevens and the puhlica-
| ton of the action of the association, plaintiff
was in serious trouble with his church and
society in Shirley; that he consulted with
members of his parish there ms to what he
had better do, informed them that lie was
suffering from nervous prostration, was una
BILE to sleep nights, and that he had frequent
ly resorted to the railroad track between Shir.
ley and Aver junction by reason thereof.
| That his troubles were of such moment that
he finally wrote and sent in his resignation,
April god, which was promptly accepted by
the church and society.
Evidence was introduced tending TO show
that DIR. Stevens entertained unkind feelings
towards plaintiff, and that he was actuRted in
What he did by motives of i-will. This,
however, was fully overcome by evidence on
the part of DIR. Stevens which tended to show
that he never entertained other than kind and
brotherly feelings towards him, and that in
what he did he was actuated only by n sense
of Christian duty to himself, his brethren, the
erring brother, and the churches at large.
A large amount of testimony was introduced
upon the question as TO whether the action OF
this association on the 18th and 10th Of May,
1877, came within the usage of the Congre
gatona church as understood and prncticed
by Oongregationalists, so as to bring the pub
LEGATION of said preamble and resolutions
within tho rule Of privileged action on the
part of the association and those who had Ia
do with it. Upon this point the plaintiff call
ed as witnesses Rev. DIR. Mears of Worcester
Mass, and Rev. DR.. Marvin of Lancaster
Mass; defendant called, besides President
Bartlett of Dartmouth college, Rev. w. A.
Robinson of Homer N. Y, and Rev. Mr.
Genoud Of New Hampshire, the following
Vermont clergymen: S. X. b. Perkins, Chas
S. Smith, A. A. Smith, A. L. Barber, f. w
Olmstead, Charles Burnham, G. II. Merrill
Amos Holbrook, Lewis Grout and the defend
ant, DR.. Stevens.
The charge of the court was clear concise
and entirely comprehensive, carving out tn,
several issues involved in the case so that the
jury were enabled to apply the evidence bear
ing upon each point, and make no mistake il
arriving at Just conclusion. The court oc
cupied about 40 minutes in giving his chsrg,
to the jury, who retired, returning in a shor
time with verdict for defendant. And thu
ends long and unfortunate litigation.
Messrs. Martin d Eddy and Hon. J. X
, Batcheder of Arlington were counsel for tn,
plaintiff; Hon. G. b. Eddy. Col. A. f. Walk
er Of Rutland, and Col X. Haskins, wer,
counsel for defendant.
Henry A. Bowers who was conYicted OF