The daily morning journal and courier., 1895-12-14

was mdue a matter or uluCh Pupl'N Ni'- cussion. The minister accused, whose trial was the subject of discussion ey MT North, was acquitted, and the de- lays and hesltations in the trial were not creditable to the civil management while adapted greatly to embarrass the ecclesiastical proceedings,
 The Zlons Herald, published in Bos- ton, reprints the above entire and adds the following editorial statement:
 This trial of Presiding Elder North of the New Haven district for "eon- tempt of court" was the sequel of an- other case.
 One of our preachers in New Haven | had been accused of crime to the prose- i cutting attorney of the city. By what i was deemed the fault of the prosacut- 1 ing attorneys office, the accusation was i published in a sensational way in the ! New Haven papers. Thareupon the preacher demanded a trial in the city court; and the presiding elder, conti- dent of his innocence, supported him in making the demand. After months of delay, in which all efforts to secure a trial had failed, the presiding elder 1 printed an open letter in one of the city papers, addressed to the prose- outing attorney, demanding in the ename of the church that the preacher be granted trial in the court or that the prosecuting attorney should declare that he had no evidence upon which to bring him to trial Immediately after this the case was brought to trial and the preacher was acquitted.
 A private conversation about this case which the presiding elder had with a man in the city of Merlden was made the basis of an alleged interview" which was published in the most sensa- tional style in the newspapers. lmme- diately the presiding elder was arraisn- ed for contempt of court. A criminal complaint was brought against him.
 which covered not only the alleged "in- terView," but also all that he had said through the papers during the preced- ing months in his efforts to secure a trial in the civil court for the accused preacher. He was arrested, held under heavy bonds, and submitted to crim- inal trial in the city court, which lasted two days, at the end of which the judge before whom the case was tried sus- pended judgment. This left the matter in such a status that Dr. North could not publish any explanation of the case without the liability of being adjudged as actually in contempt
 We are informed that his address was received with great satisfaction by the Preachers meeting at New York, and his efforts to save an accused minister from destruction and the church from scandal were most heartily approved.
 The latter of the above editorials gives 8 very clear outline of the case. and makes the fact plain that the principal offense for which a criminal complaint was brought was not the alleged '.interview" in Meriden, but rather was the persistence of the pre- siding elder which compelled the city attorney to give a court trial to a preacher whom he had, as he himself admitted allowed to be published ia the newspapers as accused of crime. This is in exact accord with Judge Ca bles declaration made upon the bench on the first day of the trial, namely, "The corpus delicti (the body or sub stance of the offense) in this case lies
 in the interference with an officer
 That officer was the city attorney.
 Concerning this, the writer while on
 the witness stand made the following
 plain but very respectful declaration to
 the court: AS an officer of the Metho-
 dist Episcopal church, I am charged
 with responsibility for the public repu-
 tation of the eighty preachers of my district One of these preachers had |, l 1e lN tlxo
 torney, and that accusation had been
 made public. I have done my best, in
 loyalty to the church and in the fear ot God, to secure for him trial in the
 court where he was accused. He has
 been saved from destruction and his family from lifelong disgrace. And
 now if there is any law that requires
 me to be punished for what l have
 done I am here to take that punish ment. but shall never regret that did , my duty.''
 II That this position was impregnable
 and that the writer had committed n1 , legal error or offense in pressing the f city attorney to give the accused , preacher a trial, is attested by the fact , that, in rendering his carefully pre- f pared decision, the judge confined his : remarks to the alleged "intervieW" ill Meriden, and made no reference wha f.
 ever to interference with an officer. , But, as he had previously declared that , the corpus delicti" or body of th5
 case lay in the interference with ar , officer, emitting to refer to this in his
 decision would seem to indicate that ir
 his opinion there was little body" ir
 the case.
 The writer continues to hold that DO. sition, and without ostentation of tbra. very, desires the city attorney to un- , derstand that when, in a, matter af. f fecting the reputation of a Methodist preacher, he makes a plain agreement I with the presiding elder, he will be
 held to that agreement. And, if by his fault or error that agre eenent be broll. en and the preacher be publicly ac. } cused of crime, then he will be required either to give the accused a trial ir
 the court, or to declare that he finds t no cause for bringing such action. Tc l be more explicit: When the city attor-
 ney shall again deal with a Methodist - preacher as he dealt with the preacher referred to, then the presiding elder l will repeat in every particular ths course taken by him up to the very 7 day when the preachers trial began a And this for the very good reason i: