The Washington times. (Washington [D.C.]) 1901-1902, 1901-08-17
A SECULAR REVIEW ASKED.
The Rev. Mr.. Williams Takes His
Case to the Supreme Court.
Unable to Obtain Clerical Relief,
After Three Years. Efforts, He
Takes Legal Steps to Have His
Former Trial in 1SoS Set Aside

The trial three years ago by an ecclesi-
astical court of the Rev. Gilbert Fearing
| Williams. formerly rector of Christ
| Church. and his subsequently being de-
| posed from the priesthood of the Church,
| Is recalled by the fling of a petition by
| Mr.. Williams yesterday in the Supreme
| Court Of the District asking that writ
| OF certiorari issue against Henry Y. Sat
terlee, Bishop of the Diocese of Wash
ington, requiring him to certify to a copy
OF the actions. testimony. findings. and all
other papers IN connection with the case
| to the District courts for review and cor
| rection on their merits. The Rev. Mr..
Williams was tried by an ecclesiastical
court appointed by Bishop Satterlee dur
Ing the early part of the year 1893 on the
charge of immoral conduct with one of
his female parishioners. The proceedings
continued for several days and resulted
in his being deposed from the ministry.
The Rev. Mr.. Williams had for many
years been the rector of Christ Church
and was extremely popular, not only with
the laity but the priesthood of the do
cese. 1t was during the fall of the year
1897. while he was absent from the city
on account of his health, that the charge
upon which he was tried was made
against him. The charge was at first
made by innuendo. and. after becoming
matter of common talk in his parish, the
vestry of Christ Church deemed advisable
that he should return to the city and de-
fend himself against the reports which
were being circulated against him. Al
though very ill at the time and scarcely
able to travel, Mr.. Williams returned to
the city and declared himself ready to
meet his accusers. In accordance with
the canons of the Church. Bishop Sat-
terlee organized an ecclesiastical court,
which was convened in st. Marks Pro-
Cathedral. and there the trial took place.
In the petition filed yesterday the Rev.
Mr.. Williams states that the records of
the trial are asked for in order that they
may be reviewed and corrected on their
merits. and that The exercise of authority |
and errors may be corrected according to
law, and that the petitioner may have |
such other relief as the Supreme Court of |
the District may deem proper.
The petitioner also excerpts to the le- |
gaiity of the composition of the ecclesi- |
astical court which found him guilty of |
the charge against him, stating that it
was not convened in accordance with the |
canons of the Church. AS a result of his |
trial Rev. Mr.. Williams claims that he has
been wrongfully deprived of his Office of
priest.
According to the canons of the Church,
1t is contended by Mr.. Williams. no ac-
cused clergyman can be convicted except /
on the testimony under oath of two credi-
bic witnesses or upon the oath of one wit
ness whose testimony is corroborated by
noes pertinent to the case. 1t Is !
also pointed out in this connection that
the only witness who appeared before the
court at his trial was the one woman who
made the charge against him. There was, |
the petitioner further alleges. no corrobo-
rative testimony offered in support of the
statements of this witness On the con-
trary MIR. Williams contends that the fe-
male witness, by her own evidence, as
well as that of others, was shown to have
made contradictory statements in refer
ence to the guilt and innocence of the
petitioner. The latter also states that the
Rev. James 4. Poindexter, a member of
he ecclesiastical court, was not qualified
10 act because he was biased against the
accused.
In concluding his petition. the Rev. Mr..
states that as member and
priest of the Protestant Episcopal Church.
and as a good citizen having the cause OF
religion at heart. and in the interest of
IA rmony in the Church and the cause of
-eGgion in the community at large. he has
been reluctant TO bring the proceedings
md action of the ecclesiastical court and
IF the Bishop before the secular courts
With the inevitable result of producing
great scandal in the Church and com
rfce of his friends and fellow clergymen.
lie says. he has forborne until now from
LONG so. He further asserts that he
Used every other means within his power
o effect. within the circle of the Church,
rectification of the great wrong done
him. Failing in this. however. he states
re is now compelled to seek the aid of
he secular courts.
Some weeks after the conviction of the
Rev Mr. Williams thirteen clergymen and
wenty-four eminent laymen addressed
memorial to Bishop Satterlee asking him
o make a fresh or new investigation of
he charges against the accused On May
4 the Bishop. in answer to this memorial !
stated: Il do not see how | could con-
give reasons for annulling |
he findings Of a court whose members .
lot only carefully and prayerfully consid- .
red the testimony but actually heard the .
witnesses and noticed their demeanor." .
Henry +. Davis and William A. Meloy .
re named as counsel for the petitioner.
Organized Labor
5 advised that the name of Samuel C. Palmer.
oda and Mineral Water Manufacturer, was strick- .
n from the unfair list by Central Labor Union