The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1895-10-18
PRESBYTERIAN POLEMICS
sssSseessssseeeSeeSSsesssSS&e
Reply to Judge rlcKin!ey's Letter

Reply TO Judge !tCNinity LetttT
Editor Herald:-In reply to the letter
of Judge Mckinley in The Herald of
Wednesday, to my letter the day before
on Mr.. Howard S case. we do not propose
to enter into a controversy, simply assert
ing what was said in that letter to be
true; but we do propose to examine some
OF the points and charges made by Judge
Mckinley.
Judge Mckinley contends that the rules
which prevented Mr.. Gordon acting as
the attorney for Mr.. Howard should have
prevented Mr.. Galbreath from acting as one
OF the prosecuting committee. We deny
this, and appeal to the law as laid down
, in the book of discipline. Section SO of
this disci pline is as follows: ''No pro-
fessional counsel shall be permitted to ap-
pear and plead in cases of process in any
of our eccleo astical judicatories. But if
any accused person feels unable to repre-
sent and plead his own case TO advantage,
he may request any minister or elder. bA
longing to the judicatory before whic h
he appears to prepare and exhibit his case
as he NAV judge proper"
Mr.. Gordon was not member of this
judicatory, by election or otherwise, and
as a matter of fact capable of proof he
had said to an attorney of this city, two
days before the trial began, that under
the book of discipline he would not be
permitted to act as attorney for Mr.. H ow-
ard. This proves til at neither Mr.. How
ard nor Mr.. Gordon were surprised when
MIR. 6 ordon was ruled out as his attorney.
Judge Mckinley saws that the ruling
out of Mr.. Gordon and the acceptance Of
Mr.. Galbreath were parallel CAGES.
Now. word to discrim mating minds.
Mr.. Gordon was never elected as a men,
Der of the presbytery, and had no APP
pointment from this session as principal
or alternate to that body; while on the
contrary, Mr.. Galbreath had been COM
missioned by his session to represent his
church in the presbytery, and by some
oversight had not been enrolled as
member at its first sitting. so that when
Mr.. Howard took exception to him as
member of the prosecuting committee his
exemption was promptly sustained by
the moderator, and a vacancy was de-
clared on the committee. At the next
session when the presbytery met. mo-
ton prevailed that Mr.. Galbreath be made
member OF the judicatory, having been
duly elected to serve by his session, after
which it was voted that he should fill the
vacancy on the prosecuting committee,
as he was then a member of the judica
tory and within the requirements Of the
book OF discipline. Mr.. Howard also OBJ
jected to Mr.. Galbreath acting on tibet
committee, on the ground that he was no.
present at the first session OF the court
Under the church law his absence pre-
vented him from voting on the case. and
as his after appointment rs one of the
com mittee also prevented him from hav-
Ing vote in the case, no possible harm
befell the defendants by his acting as one
OF the committee.
Whether or not Mr. Howaid's case has
been weakened by not having Mr.. Gordon
as his advocate on the floor is very
doubtful.
Jugce Mckinley in his letter tries to
make material point. that tho presby-
terry had prejudged Mr.. Howard s case
before they tried it. l will say that every
part of evidence introduced by Mr.. How
ard and ruled out, would have been ruled
out by any one of our civil courts. He
admitted and seemed to glory in the fact
that he had resisted the orders of the
presbytery, and proposed to give his rea-
sons for doing so. that presbytery had
transcribed Its jurisdiction, and that its
acts were against his conscientious con-
victions, ''and that he had had legal ad-
vice that he should not submit, "as other
interests besides his own were involved
in tho matter" These reasons for hav-
ing violated plain ecclesiastical de
cree, having the same force in ecclesi-
astical alters as decree of injunction
of civil court in court matters, did not
mitigate his offense. So far as the effect
npon the com munity was concerned it
would doubtless have been better if all of
Mr.. Howard,s reasons for defying pres
byterv had been heard, not that they
would have been any atonemenr for
breaking his VOWS. but their admission
would have prevented the idea getting
abroad that the presbytery was attem pit
ing to shut out relevant or material evil
don n Mr. In I'd &c haIf Enr 10
reason. and not that his excuses would
have had particle of influence on the
minds of those who had heard his ad-
mission CT having defied presbytery. il
would have been expedient for his owl
dence on all points to have been accepted.
Mr.. Towards suspension was foregone
conclusion before the presbytery con-