Los Angeles herald., 1892-05-15
THE ELLIS CASE
ATTEMPT TO PROVE EXISTENCE OF
MALICE.
Hugh Fraser Accused the Deposesa
Minister of Being "MoralIy
Color Blind.''

The suit of Rev. John w. Ellis against
the Presbytery of San Francisco for
100000 damages because of dismissal
from the Central Tabernacle pulpit and
consequent evils, was resumed in Judge
Wallace's court yesterday, says the San
Francisco Chronicle of Friday. The en-
tire day was devoted to the examination
and occasional ross-examination of the
plaintiff.
After testifying to the proceedings
held at a meeting of the board Of
trustees OF the church on February o
1891, during which the matter of ac,
counts was briefly discussed, DR.. Ellis
explained the circumstances under
which petition for his reinstatement
was framed by the congregation in the
latter part of May, 1891. The original
petition, signed by fifty,five mem
bers of the congregation, was offered in
evidence. 1t bore ample testimony to
the righteous character of DR.. Ellis,
commended his untiring energy in the
advancement of the tabernacle, and
prayed for reconsideration of the de-
cision rendered by the ecclesiastical
tribunal in the case of the deposed pas
tor. The witness testified that the
effect OF the presbytery's action on the
congregation was to confirm their belief
in the pastors innocence. In obedience
to their desires he had subsequently re-
turned to his former position. Soon
after, the witness said, a meeting was
called by the trustees, ostensibly to
discuss the financial condition of the
church affairs, but, during the session,
they contrived to turn the discussion
upon the pastorship question, and the
matter resulted in the dismissal of the
plaintiff.
A number of other instances were
cited to demonstrate that malice consti-
tuted the sole cause of the presbytery's q
action. 1t was shown by a number of
letters, as proof OF the plaintiffs high
standing, that DR.. Mackenzie had at and
before the time of the dismissal fire
quently communicated with DIR. Ellis
with view of consolidating the First
and Central churches, and that the con-
gregation of DR.. Mackenzie's church
held the plaintiff in the highest esteem.
Much testimony was also elected to
prove that the preliminary proceedings
of the committee constituting the tribu-
Ahi WOiC VI q LudllClOuS duu uuu6CcSEd-
rily secret character. The plaintiff
claimed that while present at several Sc
cret conferences the committee had as
sumed a guarded, mysterious air, and
had endeavored by various methods to
draw from him some self-condemnatory
statement. He further claimed that he
was not properly informed of the pro-
ceedings against him; that no full ex-
planation of the impending storm was
given him, and that he first learned of
the whole matter from the columns OF
the Chronicle while he was on visit to
Los Angeles.
During the afternoon session DR.. Ellis
called attention to the frequent insults
heaped upon him as indications of
malice on the part OF his associate
ministers. One of the committee, he
asserted, had called him morally color
blind" He also claimed that the argu-
ment OF the prosecuting attorney in the
presbytery court, Rev. DR.. Kerr, ex-
hibited wholly unwarranted spirit of
enmity. He had, the witness said,
called him rascal, referred to his
"hypocritical" methods and used other
opprobious terms.
The trial will be resumed on Monday.