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


 day papers were received from person. al friend which explained the mysterl- ous summons. By the return mall a letter was sent to Judge Cable disclaim- ing responsibility for the publication of the alleged Merldcn "interview;" eN- plainiag the unobjectiOnabie nature of the conversation that did take place, which at the tins was supposed to be private, and expressing the deepest re- gret concerning the affair. Still another telegram was sent to the New Haven papers repudiating the Interview also a letter for publication at the earliest possible hour
 At 6;S0 o'clock Monday morning the writer lsft Cottage City for New Haven, teegraphing in advance that he would arrive at 2;35 D, m. Upon arriving he was met at the depot by an officer, ar rested, taken to police headquarters, s,atsd as a prisoner, age, measurement, etc, being taken, and was held until bail could be procured to the amount of $500.
 On Tuesday morning he was arralgn- ed before Judge Cable in the city court
 
 presented a criminal complaint which filled eleven pages of closely type-writ- ten legal cap paper. From this he read a few lines containing the coarse and | sensational part of the alleged Merlden Interview" The following coloquy then occurred:
 The court-Did you utter these words? l The presiding elder-Can I make statement?
 The court-No sir! You can either admit the whole, or deny the whole.
 The presiding elder-Then I dtuy that I have uttered anything derogatory to 1 this court.
 The court-That will do, sir!
 The trial was set down for Thursday, and when the hour arrived the twelve page criminal complaint was read aloud by the city attorney, nearly half an hour being required for its reading. As stated above. it covered not only the Meriden incident, but all of the acts of the presiding elder in the effort to se- cure a trial for the accused preacher
 Concerning the Meriden affair, counsel for the defense objected that the offense was alleged to have been committed outside of the Jurisdiction of the court, and asked that that count be dismissed. To this the judge responded: "He is within my Jurisdiction now, and we will hear this through"
 On the witness stand the reporter, the editor of the Meriden Journal, and the editor of the Connecticut Associated Press all testified that the defendant gave no authority or permission to pub fish anything and did not so much as know that anything was to be pub iished; also the reporter and s. w. Kent of Meriden, who heard the entire coG- versation, testified that the defendant showed no dsrespect for the judge in his manner, but on the contrary, ex- pressed his belief that the judge had given the accused preacher a fair and impartial trial;" and Mir. Kent testified that there was nothing in the con- versation that he could construe as dis respectful to the court. The writer also testified that he never uttered the. coarse expressions of the alleged inter- view and assured the court that no dis respect was intended in the reference to the fact that the city attorney was the recent appointee of the court, but that it occurred in the midst of the merest conversational conjecture on the outcome of the trial He also assur- ed the court of his profound regret at the entire, occurrence, especially as it had robbed him of ths opportunity which he had anticipated of expressing 1 or c,a;o .l. Ni and fairness with which the trial of the accused preacher had been presided over by the court.
 The trial closed, as the public knowA with a suspension of judgment. which after the lapse of three and a half months, was terminated on the 18th of November without notice to the defend ant or his counsel, by the unusual or der, Excused"
 In justice to Judge Cable, it must be stated that he has, since the trial, ex- pressed to one of the writer's counsel his deep regret that the criminal com plaint was brought and that the writer was submitted to the indignity of arrest when he was hurrying to court from a point far outside of its Jurisdiction; yet he will not think it strange if others should hold the opinion that the genu- ineness of his regret would have been better attested by a dismissal of the complaint, than by a suspended iudg. ment, still in force when the regret was expressed, and not terminated fol many weeks thereafter.
 Yet nothing connected with the whole affair has caused so much surprise and Wonderment as the statement, given i1' the published verbatim report, with which the court prefaced the reading of his decision, namely: There has been some criticism concerning the mode of procedure in this case. I wish to say first that the procedure was in compliance with the request of the ac- cused, and in my opinion he has had a fair and full trial" As neither the de fendant nor his counsel ever made any request whatever respecting the mode of procedure. except to object it, and as the thought cannot for a moment be entertained that a judge would uil- der such grave circumstances witting- ly make a statement which appears SC inharmonious with the facts. no reason able explanation of the statement has been found and it remains to this houl an unsolVed mystery.
 Another difficulty of less, but still of large magnitude, is the necessity of re- ronpi1ino the dec1ara finn of the deciSior