The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1900-07-02
PRIEST SUES
HIS BISHOP.
RI. Rev. EthoIbert Talbot Is
Accused Of Conspiracy.
DR.. IRVINE MAKES STATEMENT
Mrs. Emma Elliott Charged Rector with
Forgery, Causing Trouble.
WOMAN HAD BEEN ExCoMMuNlCArEp
Bishop Is Charged With Writing That Hs Would
''UuirOOk The Sdmy Fellow" \ Hs
Was Found GULLY.
WOMAN HAD BEEN txCoMMuNlcATEr

Huntingdon. Pa, July 2.-After watt
ing for three months, the Rev. i. N. w.
Irvine. former rectorof st. Johns Epls-
copal church here. has succeeded I'm
having a summons served upon the
Right Rev. Ethelbert Talbot, bishop Of
the Central Pennsylvania diocese, as
defendant in trespass suit. i'm which
conspiracy is charged. The other de-
PENDANTS named are Alexander Elliott
and his wife Emma ID. Elliott. of this
place.
The summons was served on the Bis
hop while he was riding on railroad
train between Tyrone and Vail.
This suit like others that have been
instituted between the parties named.
is the outcome OF the trouble which
originated IN st. Johns church year
and half ago.
Mrs. Elliott was excommunicated by
Dir. Irvine as a divorced woman on the
strength. he says, 81 this letter from
Bishop Talbot:
Diocese of Central Pennsylvania, Bis
hopsrue, South Bethlehem, Pa.
whom you refer is by the canon excom-
municated. / cannot believe she will
have the presumption 10 present her
self at the holy communion. III you
think there Is any danger of her doing
SO Il would be better for you in some
kind and gentle way TO intimate to her
her true condition. OF course, you have
no discretion in the matter. III she
should present heiself before you can
has xyfil iFll oh "a
In ignorance then you could speak to
her afterward. There Is no reason IN
this case to make any row II the thing
is managed quietly and firmly. Affec-
tionately Yours.
ETHELBERT TALBOT.
ACCUSED OF FORGERY.
Mrs. Elliott lodged information
against DIR. Irvine in March, 1899.
charging him with Forgery, the allega-
tfon being that he sigfed her name to
a letter addressed TO Bishop Talbot.
For nearly three months fseviously the
relations between DR. Irvine and Mrs.
Elliott, a parishioner had been very
much strained, and Bishop Talbot was
cognizant of the difficulty between
them.
At the preliminary hearing accorded
Dir. Irvine on March II, 1899, II de-
the criminal charge made against him
was the elimination of n conspiracy en-
tered into by the three defendants. and
he sought to substantiate this assertion
by quoting from letter written by
Bishop Talbot 10 the Elhotts. In which
the latter urged to have Irvine indicted
and convicted This letter read I'M part:
/ cannot find anything to try DIR.
Irvine on for violation Of morals or
canons, but If YOU prosecute him and
have HIN convicted in court of record
/ will ixffock the Shiny fellow for yoii
The grand jury found an Indictment
charging the clergyman with forgery.
but when the case was called for trial
the court sustained the defendants de-
murrer to the Indictment and nothing
more came or IL. The charge was sub.
sequently withdrawn the plaintiff pay
ing the costs.
DIR. Irvine contends that the presence
of Bishop Talbot at the counsel table
os the prosecution when the forgery
case was called for trial was evidence
of the bishops designs against his sub
ordinate
OF CONSPIRACY.
Other allegations are that the bishop
designedly conspired 10 ruin the pros
poets of the plaintiff i'm his conduct
since the disposition of the forgery case
1t is alleged that he called 'Dr. Irvine
TO appear before the standing commit
tee OF the diocese. i'm Wilkesbarre. IN
June Of last year. to Dissolve his pastoral
relations with St. Johns church With
out canonical authority, and because
of being restrained I'm this by the Luz
zerne County court he sent a commit
tee of three inquisitors to Huntingdon
TO inquire into the moral conduct of Dr..
Irvine. This committee made an ad-
verse report.
An ecclesiastical trial was ordered by
Bishop Talbot. DIR. Irvine was adjuds-
ed guilty. and on April %. 1900. his de-
position from the ministry was publc-
ly announced in st. Luke's church,
Scranton,by Bishop Talbot.
This makes the third suit instituted
by Dr.. Irvine against Mrs. Elliott none
of which has been tried. She is the
defendant In a criminal libel suit. a
civil suit for damages, and now the con-
-. ....l.