Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1886-02-14
DR., ARMSTRONG'S CASE,
What Is Thought Of 1t Down In
Atlanta.
Found Guilty of Violating His Ordi-
nation Vows BY Failing to
Live as An Example
TO His Flock.
. Albania c0nslls.ion Of The s.h.

AGaRta Constitution Of the 6h.
DR.. Armstrong was convicted on some
of the specifications, but was acquitted on
the charges Of immoral conduct on Long
worth street.
About ten o'clock yesterday morning q
young man appeared at St. Phillips rec
tory bearing the official announcement
from the bishop. The communication
covered about two pages of letter paper,
and was a copy of the verdict ofthe eccles'
issticsl court. 1t is said in substance that
the doctor was not guilty Of the charges OF
immoral conduct 10 Longworth street but
found him guilty Of conduct on other &C.
cssions not in accordance with his ordina-
ton VOWS. Just what that court did not
say. There is no official knowledge on
the subject. but it is generally understood
that the findings OF the court we're by q
hare majority and that the minority con-
tended srrenuously for a verdict of not
guilty.
THE BROKEN vow
The following is the vow that the doctor
has been convicted of violating
will you apply all your diligence to
frame and fashion your own life and the
lives of your family according tc the doc.
trine of Christ, and to make both yourself
aud them. as much as in you lieth, whole
some examples Of the flock Of Christi
The finding of the court is substantially
that DR.. Armstrong conducted himself in
O manner Inconsistent with aud in viola
ton of his ordination VOW, but that the
testimony establishes no &C: Of adultery.
o. this verdict the court authorizes the
! bishop to suspend DR.. Armstrong from his
minlstrations for such time as the bishop
deems best.
NOT TO EXCEED TEN YEARS.
II is understood that this leaves the mat
ter entirely in the discretion of the Biehop,
who, in view of the absence Of any evil
dence or reason to believe DE-. Armstrong
immoral or corrupt, may deem the sus-
pension already had sufficient punish
ment for toe indiscretion, and restore Dr..
Armstrong at once to his pulpit and PEG.
pie
Under the decision Of the court the sus.
pension must bs temporary. DR.. Arm
strong cannot be removed.
While nothing definite has been given
to the public, it is said that Dr.. Armstrong
in replying to the communication Of the
Bishop, will again present the facts heard
By the court, aad will urge either that a
new trial he granted orthst the court erred
in finding against him
During the day DR., Armstrong was
called on by many. friends, among them
some of the
MOST PROMINENT MEN
in the city. He was quite cheerful and
bore his severe trial bravely. Nothing new
can happen in the case until the answer is
prepared for the bishop. Further than
what has been stated, DR.. Armstrong was
not willing to indicate what his course
would ne, but said he would consult with
his counsel, Mr.. Hoke Smith, and Senator
Davidson. and whatever conclusion he and
they might reach, would be properly com
munlc9ted to the bishop
A gentleman VINO is a member of st.
Phillips church. and who has been present
At the ecclesisstical court from its assem-
bling to i,s adjournment, and who heard
every word that was uttered during the
progress OF the trial, asserts most positive
" that there was not one word or line of
evidence that reflected untavorsbly upon
the reputation Of DR.. Armstrong as q
Cnristian or n gentleman.
There was
nc EVIDENCE, WHATEVER,
sustaining the charge Of iutoxicstiou,"
said the gentleman. The expsrte state.
ment made several months ago by a news.
paper reporter who 6rst published the scan.
dslin the Cincinnati Post, was admitted by
the court at the request Of the prosecution,
after the reporter who had heen brought
here to testify had a%bsconded. The testi-
mony Of a man named Foote, who thought
Or. Armstrong; speech W "a thick and his
appearance Indicative Of recovery from
dissipation was answered by the testimony
of Mr.. NJ. Halstead, who spent an hour
with DR.. Armstrong Immediately after the
time when Foote met him, was positive and
unequiVocsl that DR.. Armstrong was not
intoxicated, but that bis manner
INDICATED ABSOLUTE s%oBRIETY.
This testimony the conrt excluded be.
cause Mr.. Hals:ead declined to take the
cauonicai oath. The commissioner who
took his testimony, however, certified that
be affirmed that he would, and had testified
to the exact truth"
What else2'
"Colonel Hounsel, a we'll known lawyer
OF Cincinnati. who was With DR.. Arm.
strong NJ the time Foote met him and who
went with him to see Mr. Halstesd, also
gave his testimony before the commission.
ers to the fact that DR.. Armstrong was not
into xicated Mr.. M"ullauey, ticket agent
Of the Cincinnati Southern railroad, who
was frequently with DR.. Armstrong, while
he was in Cincinnati, WIS before the court
in person, and was subj cted to rigid CROSS
examination. He left the stand with his
testimony 10 DR.. Armstrong; sobriety M
shaken, 80 that the charge of intoxication
against DR.. Armstrong had no foundation
in any testimony whatever, and rested sole,
" upon the ex.parte statement Of the
newspaper writer and the impression of
Foofe that DR.. Armstrong; articulation
was thick"
What was there to rebut that2'
The positive statements Of three re-
spectacle gentlemen, Murat Fslstesd,
Colonel Hansel and Mr.. M0llaney.'
What about Hunts hotel?
Mr.. Hunt, proprietor Of Hnnts hotel,
testified to DR.. Armstrong;
HAVING DRANK BEER
in his house, to his own impression that
the doctor WAS under the influence. but re-
fused to swear that he was intoxicated or
I-.1 Ill II. r. " ( L |