Omaha daily bee., 1897-02-28
BONACUM AND HIS PRIESTS
Status Of the Celebrated Case Before the
Apostolic Delegate.
LITlGANTS EXCHANGE WARM BRIEFS
Grounds of Appeal of the Bishop from
the Judgment of metropolitan
Court and Answer
of Priests.

The ups and downs, the twists and turns
Of ecclesiastical litigation are as bewilder-
ing, long-drawn out and as difficult to Keep
track of as the best efforts Of civil courts.
This is not at all strange, inasmuch as
canon law affords as many opportunities ior
delays and sharp practice as the civil law.
1t was generally supposed that when the
Roman Catholic metz 5politan court OF Du-
bu1ue rendered judgment last December In
the case of Bishop Bonacum against Fathers
Fitzgerald and Murphy that the beginning
of the end was in sight. The superstition
was misleading. The case seems as far from
settlement now as though the metropolitan
court ordered by the propaganda had not
rendered judgment in favor OF the priests
on all points. In fact the triumph CT the
priests was of short duration. They are now
in the extraordinary position of men obliged
to show cause why they should not be tried
a second time on charges OF which they
were acquitted by a properly constituted
court of the church..
1t will be remembered that the metro
politan court which met in Dubuque last NO
vember rendered a verdict, acquitting the
priests of the charges made by their bishops
and taxed the costs and damages against the
diocese of Lincoln. The costs and damages,
aggregating 1900, were ordered paid into
the chancellery of Dubuque within thirty days.
The period expired on January / OF TINS
year. but no attention was paid to the order.
Instead the bishop of Lincoln attacked both
the character of the court and the verdict,
and intimated that when he paid the 1udg-
ment people in search Of atmospheric curl
osities might look for icebergs in certain
underlined tropical regions.
APPEAL ENTERTAINED.
The bishop of Lincoln appealed the case
to the apostolic delegate, Mgr. Martinelli, at
Washington. Living authorities on canon
law contended that there could be no APP
peal from a sentence which freed Fathers
Fitzgerald and Murphy from charges OF IT
reverence and disobedience, but that there
might be an appeal entertained on the mat
ter of costs and damages. Mgr. Martinelli.
however, disagreed with the authorities and
entertained the bishops appeal against the
entire judgment of the court. At the pres
ent time the litigants are exchanging briefs
on the subject. The brief of the bishop has
been sent to the priests and they have filed
their answer, which in turn has been sent
to the bishop, who was ordered to make
answer by Saturday, the 9th. The decision
of the delegate apostolic will probably be
rendered during the coming month.
The bishops brief gives four reasons why
the action of the metropolitan court at Du-
buque should be set aside: l. The proceed
INKS were hull III NOlu NhS
9. it was an appellate court and should
not accept testimony; 3, the several prin-
eipal findings were based on false assump-
ton of fact; A, the law was interpreted
and applied falsely. The assertion is made
that Father Baart, the judge-delegate, was
prejudiced inasmuch as he had trouble with
his own bishop Foley of DetroiD, whom he
attacked in the public press; that he was
charged by a priest Of the Detroit diocese
with being deficient in moral integrity, con-
sequently he could not be fair with the
bishop of Lincoln, and was challenged.
REPLY OF. THE PRIESTS.
The priests admit that Father Baart had
trouble with his bishop, but Delegate Satolh
had decided that he was justified. 1t is con-
ended that the charge of a rival priest
oannot be taken for fact. If the bishop of Lin
coin knew all this beforehand, say the de-
PENDANTS, why did he not comply with the
law and challenge formally, giving reasons
for the challenge in writing at the inception
of the trial and not wait until the middle
of the second day, when he saw the case
was going against him. Even then he did not
give reasons for the challenge he submitted.
If circumstar ces had taken a turn in favor
Of the bishop, the defendants claim, the
world would never have known that Rev.
Peter A. Baart, whom Mgr. Satolli had
named, the propaganda had put forth and
the archbishop of Dubuque had accepted as
a most worthy ecclesiastic for the Office of
judge-delegate, was such a thoroughly bad
man.
A gentleman who has followed the cele-
brated case closely predicts that it will go
against the priests. Possibly" he said,
"the bishop will be reprimanded for not
having followed the law in all cases and for
his undigniaed attack on the judge-dele-
gate"
From Martinelli the case will go to Rome.
The civil suit against Father Fitzgerald
at Tecumseh last Saturday went against the
bishop.