St. Paul daily globe., 1889-06-25
AN old CHURCH SORE
At Length Scared Over by
a Supreme Court De-
ciSiOn.
DR.. West and the First Pres
byterian Church Set
at Rest.
Sealed Verdicts Cannot Be
Received in Criminal
Trials.

Necessity Of Railroad Bridges
Various Supreme Court
Decisions.
The supreme court yesterday ap-
proved the order of the trial court in
the appeal. Rev. Nathaniel West, appel
liant, VS.. the First Presbyterian Church
of st. Paul, respondent. 1t was an
action brought to recover upon con-
tract alleged to have been entered into
between the parties, whereby the
plaintiffs services as a minister of the
Gospel were engaged at an agreed sal
ary of $1,000 per year. He alleges that
he commenced his labOrs Jan. l, 1886,
and continued until May 1, 1887; that he
has been paid therefor to Nov. l, 1886,
and seeks to recover the amount of sal
ary at the rate stated for six months
ending May l, 1887. The defendant de-
nies the consummatiOn of any contract,
but admits that call was extended to
cepted by him, and that he never con-
sented to become pastor of the church,
though he preached during the year
1856, except for six Sundays. According
to the usage and form of government of
the Presbyterian church, the call is
made by the congregation duly con-
vened, and the amount of compensation
or salary is fixed by it and inserted in
the call. But the pastoral relation can
only be established with the consent
and under the authority and direction
of the presbytery having Jurisdiction.
Judge Vanderburgh files the opinion
and says the call and proceedings of the
parties under it are subject to the
usages and discipline of the church, and
the courts will not interfere any further
than is necessary to ascertain and pro-
tect the strict legal rights of parties.
In this instance the call of the congre-
CATION was in the customary form, was
approved by the presbytery, and placed
in the plaintiffs hands, and was held
by him without final action or uncOndi-
tiOnal acceptance on his part, and he
was suffered by the presbytery to hold
it in the meantime awaiting his deter.
mination or conclusion in the matter.
This is sufficient evidence that he had
not accepted. Meanwhile, while per-
forming pastoral duties, much dissatis-
faction appears to have arisen in the
church and congregation, and at meet
ing of the latter, held December, 1886,
resolutions were adopted reciting the
fact that plaintiff had not accepted the
call, and that it was deemed unwise
under the circumstances that the pas
toral relation should be established, and
requesting a return of the call to them
by the presbytery and directing the
officers of the church to notify the plain
tiff that his miniStratiOns were not
longer desired. For aught that appears
from the record this meeting was regu-
larly called, and as respects the ques-
ton under consideration here there is
no reason to doubt that the resolutions
adopted were full and fair expression
of the will and determination of the
right to order the trustees to close the
doors of the house of worship, and what
authority the presbytery may exercise
in such cases over the officers of the
church, the religious services and the
supply of the pulpit are questions en-
1irely foreign to this discussion. AS re-
spects the civil obligations of the de-
fendant we are unable to see why it was
not competent for the congregation,
under the circumstances of this case, at
that time to signify their refusal to
accept plaintiff as their future pastor or
to engage to pay him as such and the
withdrawal of their petition for his in
stallation. And that was a matter
peculiarly within their province to de-
termine. In any event, whatever view
NAV be be taken of the effect of their
ecclesiastical relations as to the status
of the call, it would seem clearly in the
power of the congregation to put an end
plaintiff undertaken in expectation of
accepting the call and while consider
ing it, and to terminate their liability
for future compensation under that re-
lation. The plaintiffs contention is
that because he performed and they ac-
cepted and paid him for services in pur
suance of the call for the time alleged
the contract became obligatory upon
them for future services until released
by the presbytery, though he still held
the call to accept or reject at his option.
But the engagement to pay the salary
of pastor, under contract like this,
is civil contract, to be made by the
congregation, and is dependent upon
the acceptance of the call and the es-
tablishment and duration of the rela-
tion.
The court is of the opinion that $500
is due DR.. West as salary for the months
of November and December, though
the jury rendered verdict for 1854;
but the appeal was not rested on the
ground of the inshfficiency of the YER
dict. And there is no sufficient assign
ment of error covert ng this point.