Daily capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1896-1899, 1897-04-10
-L1EA. Froz -. 0a= So EH-

-Lzzh. Fro- - OK So ErI7-
E-sas-
II reply g. zr zrlicls- Ndica AZ
pszrad il TIE y5-ESAL r@ceoily
subscribed -Lfx1t FrD1 tn Other
side. Rev. Hsgis-s' ststeD-nts s1oEn
gp = little siz1=5 bT -'To@ Pain
tfss. and parportirz . y an answer
% the un5ersiE1ed. s11rsss-d % the
citizens q SzIsul. Or. and Published
ia The Jo-zSG- = the Z3r1 ut,
may writer b permitted u saF few
words ia deferse q his stateueut
made in his former leiter
The plaintiffs sccuse the under
signed Of 0ri1xlaz family matters BE-
fore the public This zcc8sstiOn j
simply ridicul1us- f0r tbe-s family
matters were before the public before
he ever Eas called upou % Investigate
them. and had that D0t been the Gaze,
he should never have published one
line 10 regard % them, a. be has
stated. 10 substance. iu his foregoing
letter. Or have the plaintiffs been
unable, perhaps. % understand plain
English
The plaintiffs fltbernCTe, deny
that they have EiIhdrzNn the charges
brought against their pastor and sf-
firm that they still uphold these
charges. This Affirmation may be
true, bat the denial Is not
The plaintiffs were unable TO prove
any one Of their charges and were
therefore Obliged TO withdraw each
and every complaint that writer was
called upon 20 examine. The minutes
of the meetings held during his pres
euce in Salem, the same minutes that
have been approved Of not only by the
friends Of the pastor, but also by the
plaintiffs themselves, will bear him
out Of this statement. OF course, the
undersigned has reference TO charges
only that were placed before him for
examination, There remained, he
believes, two or three charges that he
could not examine. for the simple rea-
son that, before lie could do so, the
Investigation was discontinued, since
the plaintiffs declared they would ap
pear no more for further examination
Of their complaints. He is perfectly
satisfied, however, that these remain
ing charges, il examined, would have
met with the same fate as their
predecessors, yea, with a worse fate,
for they were puerile, indeed, and
highly ridiculous. Now then il the
parties still uphold the
charges they have once withdrawn,
they may do so till the judgment day.
What 70 think OF such an action, on
the part Of the plaintiffs is here
with left to the public TO decide. |
When the plaintiffs claim that |
the undersigned was partial In the |
Investigation, they remind him
1f the old aud common saying, "a
poor excuse is better than none"
Why have they withdrawn their |
,harges before him, if he was partial? |
Why, II he was partial, have they,
Ifter they had withdrawn a number
Il charges already, twice entrusted |
lin, and him alone, with the hear
ng Of some testimonies by such men,
,ers OF the congregation as were not
70 be present in the meet
ngs? II the undersigned was partial,
'hy then do they not appeal to the
'resident OF our church on this coast,
S they ought to do, if they deem
'riter guilty Of partiality? Why, he
inally asks, do they decline all further
nyestigatiOu, even by the presidentg
{ is an oft repeated experience to
ear the person that has lost suit
~, "partiality!"
The plaintiffs seem 10 lay great
tress upon their being in the ma
1rity. The truth is, they are lust
alf OF the voting members, but they
re very much In the minority, when
Il that are really members OF the
aggregation are taken into cOnsidera-
lon. The majority, is, therefore,
nth the pastor, sincerely supporting
i'm in his ministerial work. Perhaps,
owever, the plaintiffs are not aware
{ what constitutes membership with
Lutheran church, and On this
round, their vain boast OF a majority
lay be excused.
Finally, may the plaintiffs atten-
ion be called TO the fact that, while
elling people in their article, "The
ThOle trouble arose through the
pposltiOn OF Rev. Hagist toward Sc
ret societies and lodges, which the