Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-03-19
PREACHERS AND LAWYERS.
They Discuss the Colclazier Case Before
the Presbytery.


the Presbytery.
DIR. BARTLETT AND JUDGE DRAKE HAVE A TILT
DR. HAMLIN DOES NOT WANT TO SIT DOWN IN
PUDDLE OF GOOD FEELINa-sEvERAL PROPOSE
TIoNs OF SETTLEMENT.
DR.. Fullerton took the floor in the Washing
ton city presbytery this morning to argue the
case of Colclazier against the Assembly church.
on trial before the presbytery, sitting. as one
member described it, as a court of conscience.
DR.. Fullerton was the minority of the commit
tee that reported on the case. The practical
conclusion of his report was the same as that
of the majority-that the church should now
pay the claim. His reasoning, however. was
somewhat different, and he was inclined to ac-
cept as true all the facts commended for bv
representatives of the church-that the loan
transaction was fraud by which Mr.. Colcla-
zier was victimized by designing men, and that
the congregation had nothing to do with the
transaction, and never received any benefit
from the money.
In his address this morning Dr. Fullerton
said he admitted that the force of legal deci-
sions would make the church responsible, bar
ring the defense of the lapse of time or the
question OF usury. The men who contracted
the debt, he insisted, did commit fraud and it
was so declared by court after court They
committed fraud, he said, in giving a deed to
property they had no right to convey.
1T was mistake" interrupted Judge
Strong. 1T is very harsh to apply the wor d
fraud to it."
As to the memory of the dead pastor, Rev.
Mr.. Carothers, DIR. Fullerton asked: Was this
dead man just to himself? The fact was, he
said, that he was the principal instigator in
getting $4,000 from this old man. and in form
ing scheme by which the money was to be got
IA ia hav
to pay it. Was it not, he asked, an unjust
transaction to ColclaZier to get him to accept
worthless security?
If the Assembly church believed that it would
not be sin to pay this debt, DR.. Fullerton
thought, they should pay it. He insisted that
there was liability on the church, but, he said.
the presbytery should say, I'VE don't think
that you, the congregation OF Assembly church,
have intended to do a wrong, or have ever done
any wrong, excepting the slight wrong of neg
Letting consequent moral obligation"
DIR. BARTLETT's CONCLUSIONS.
DR.. Bartlett, following DR.. Fullerton, spoke
Of the proceedings as "A very fascinating en-
tertainment." He referred to the various dis
putants and the skill with which they had
handled their sides. He referred to DR.. Sun
derland as THE best cross between first-class
lawyer and a frst-class preacher that have
ever SEEM" He thought dispassionate mind
should take a fair view of it. He thought there
were three parties in the case-Colclazier, the
church and the presbytery, and every one of
Zier as being in the wrong in making usurious
loan. He accepted DR.. Fullerton's argument
as clear exposition of the status
OF the church in this matter. He arraigned
the presbytery for solong permitting this thing
to go without thorough investigation and
handling. He thought the question ought to
be settled as the tower question was, where the
building committee, the architect, and the
builder were each required to assume one-third.
The church, he said, should take a third of
this obligation, the presbytery third and Mr..
Colclazier third He thought this would be
the way Of settling it, and when it was settled
they should hold prayer-meeting with Brother
Colclazier in the midst of it.
DIR. RAMsDELL's VIEWS.
DR.. Ramsdel read as an expression of his
views a series of resolutions setting forth that
in the opinion of the presbytery the outstanding
note should be settled forthwith, but at the
same time disclaimed any intention of imputing
to Assembly church any purpose or willingness
to do a wilful wrong. The resolutions recon-
mended also to the members of the presbytery
to aid by their contributions in paying this
sum.
DR.. Sunderland said he was in favor of action
that would forever lay this specter beyond the
power of resurrection. Il would rather" he
said, referring to DR.. Bartlett's proposal to
arraign three parties, make two criminals
than three. Let the old man rest
Let the old church rest" said DR.. Bartlett,
with a laugh.
Let the old presbytery rest" added DIR.
Sunderland.
Give us a rest" said DR.. Hamlin.
Yes, said DR.. Sunderland, ''give us all
rest" Proceeding, DIR. Sunderland said he
thought the surest way was to divide it up and
wind it all up right here.
MR.. LYMAN's PROPOSAL
Mr.. Lyman, speaking as he said, on his own
responsibility and not for Assembly church,
suggested, after briefly reviewing the facts
in the case, the adoption of resolution that
this presbytery, without judgment as to the
moral or legal responsibility of the parties to
the controversy, will assume. as a matter of
charity, to pay such sum, not exceeding $500,
as Mr.. ColclaZier would be willing to accept
With such settlement, Mr.. Lyman said. there
would be no heartburning. Mr.. LYMAN in
sisted that any judgment imposing this claim
upon the Assembly church as an obligation
would not settle the question.
DIR. Sunderland favored Mr.. Lyman's propo-
sltlon with the word charity" left out He
wanted to leave out every word that assumed
to pass upon the question of charity or obliga-
ton, and then having the presbytery assume
to pay the claim and take from Mr. ColclaZier
voucher of satisfaction.
MIR. Lyman said that if the matter was put in
that way he could assure them that Assembly
church would do its full share.
IN THE PUDDLE.
DR.. Hamlin remarked that they colld not dis
pose of case like this by simply sitting down
in puddle of good feeling. As there were
facts here, he thought they should settle the
matter according to the facts presented, and
not as matter of sentiment.
DIR. Bartlett said for his part he was willing
to sit down in the puddle. In discussing the
case he referred to the majority report of the
committee as being drawn in a judicial spirit.
as though the committee thought this was a
proceeding in which some penalty should be
inflicted
Judge Drake was sitting at table immedi-
ately in front of Dr. Bartlett.
Il deny" he said, holding up the report
"that there is any such thing in it
Il say that there is" said Dr. Bartlett en-
phatically, leaning over toward the Judge.
"Where?" said Judge Drake springing ND
quickly, and in the movement bringing his
closed hand holding the report very close to
DR.. Bartlett's face.
ION every page of it," said Dr. Bartlett
firmly
IF you wish to deal in generalities of that
kind" began Judge Drake
Il will go into particularities" said DIR. Bart
lett. ''You can't write page without putting
things of that kind in it."
You are making it personal matter" said
the Judge.
THE MODERATOR MoDERATEs.
The manner of the two disputants was some
what aggressive. This and their language
brought the moderator, DR.. Childs, to his feet,