Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-03-19
THE COLCLAZIER CLAIM.
Arguing the Case Before the Washing
ton PreSbytery.

Mr.. I. 6. Kimball finished his argument in
behalf of Assembly church before the presby-
terry last night after speaking five hours. He
argued against the validity, in morals or law,
of tine claim of f. NJ Colclazier against the
church, based on a loan of 5000 made to the
church thirty years ago through persons pur-
porting to be agents aud trustees of the church.
When Mr.. KimbsIl concluded Justice Strong, a
member of the committee OF the presbytery
that investigated the matter, argued in favor
OF the validity Of the claim.
Mr.. kimball's argument was directed TO show
that the board of trustees who contracted the
loan was Illegally constituted and had no legal
authority, and, further. that the church had
never received any benefit of the loan, and the
congregation as body knew nothing of il nm
I'll steps were taken TO enforce the payment A
piece Of testimony he produced that created
something OF a sensation was a letter from the
late Rev. John G. Smith, of the 9th-street
church, the founder of the Assembly church.
written about the time that a sale of the latter
church was advertised, denouncing the loan
transaction as wrong both TO Mr. Colclazier
and to the church.
Il don't suppose" said Mr.. Kimball in ex-
planning his theory, these trustees really
meant to commit wrong. but the idea was
that they would borrow this money to help ont
their pastor and that the congregation need
never know anything about it; that he would
pay it back and all would be made right"
referring to facts stated III the argument con-
corning the payment for organ, Mr.. Kim
ball stated IT as his conclusion that the pastor
Rev. Mr.. Caruthers. had collected the money.
but instead of paying 1t for the organ put il in
his own pocket and gave the organ manufac-
turers, Jardine 4 Co., his notes
QUESTIONING The LETTER.
DIR. Sunderland calling attention to the let
ter of DIR. Smith, said that while he did not
question the genuineness of the letter, yet. as
there was a record book OF the Fourth church
containing Dr. Smiths writing. he thought il
would be well for the members of the presby-
terry 10 compare the two specimens Of hand
writing for themselves.
A number of the members acted upon this
suggestion.
In conclusion Mr.. KimbaII said the church
claimed that there was no legal or moral obliga-
ton resting upon II. He claimed that the adop-
ton of tie pending report would place a stigma
upon assembly church. If such action was
prompted b. sympathy for this old man. then
all the churches should assume the burden of
his relief. No doubt there we're members in
al the churches now who were members at
that time. Why shouldn't all the churches paw
the debt! As for himself he felt no obligation
10 pay tins money except as a charity. Ii it was
put on this ground then the question was an
entirely different one. But he thought that if
the attempt was made to put the obligation on
all the churches then no doubt the presbytery
would regard the matter III another light
JUDGE srRoSG's ARGUMENT.
When Mr.. kimball had taken his seat. Judge
Strong took the floor. He thought the As
sembly church were mistaken in believing that
no moral or legal responsibility rested upon
them for the payment of this debt. II they
thought the debt was just one be had no
doubt that they would be anxious TO nav it,
The agents of the church in this case were at
fault. though an innocent fault il might be- but
sun fault. JOnceding every claim made by
the church, he maintained that the liability on
the church remained. In regard to Dr. Smiths
letter he stated that there is no evidence to
show that this letter ever left Dr. Smiths study
Mr.. kimball said that he had in his safe at
his Office the reply of Mir. yarnen to Dr.
Smiths letter.
We will admit that the letter is genuine
responded Judge Strong, but what then? Dr.
Smith did not know the facts"
In concluding Judge Strong said that the
church had made mistake. and the only effect
of the action of the presbytery would be to
inform them that in the opinion of their breth-
zen they had made a mistake. Neither the fact
OF excessive interest or the operation of the
statutes of limitation impaired the moral
responsibility TO discharge the debt. II had
been contracted by the agents of the church. a
portion, at least. had been used for church pur-
poses. and Its reputation could not be justified
on moral grounds.
Upon the conclusion of Judge Strong's argu-
ment the presbytery, at 1880, adjourned until
this morning.