The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1903-01-29
BISHOP TALBOT'S
VINDICATION.

A copy of the opinion of the
court of Huntingdon county, vindi-
eating Bishop Ethelbert Talbot, of
the Central Pennsylvania diocese
of the Episcopal church, of the
charges of conspiracy preferred by
the Rev. I. N. w. Irvine, has been
received. In view of the bishops
vindication, and the widespread
public interest shown in the trial of
the case, the COLUMBIAN herewith
reproduces Judge Bailey's charge
in part.
Gentlemen of the Jury: This
is an action to recover damages
which DR.. /. N. w. Irvine, the
plaintiff, claims he sustained by
reason of an alleged conspiracy be-
tween Emma d. Elliott, Rt. Rev.
Ethelbert Talbot, and Alexander
Elliott, the defendants, whereby he
was deposed from the ministry. st.
Johns Protestant Episcopal church
of Huntingdon, in 1898 was what
is known as a mission church. That
is, it was a church which received
aid from the diocese in support of
its rector. 1t is located within the
territory of the diocese of Central
Pennsylvania. Rt. Rev. Ethelbert
Talbot, one of the defendants, is
the bishop of the diocese, aud it
was his duty to supply the church
with a minister 50 long as it was a
mission church. On March 22nd
1898, he appointed DR.. Irvine, the
plaintiff, minister He testifes
that he knew that troubles had
arisen in other churches which had
been served by DR.. Irvine, which
he believed were attributed to his
conduct, but being willing to give
him another trial, he eXacted from
him, at the time OF his appointment,
promise that he would resign
from St. Johns when he (the
bishop would request him.
mot many months had elapsed
before the bishop learned oftrouble
between DR.. Irvine and the other
ministers of the borough of Hun
tingdon. and between him and the
management of the Pennsylvania
industrial Reformatory, located
across the river from the town, and
that serious trouble had arisen in
the church. Its members had be-
come divided and members of the
vestry had resigned. Ugly runners
as to the moral character and con-
duct Of DR.. Irvine came to his ears.
On Feb. II, 1899, he wrote DR..
Irvine a letter, reminding him of
his promise that he would quietly
leave the church if any trouble
arose and requesting him to leave
Huntingdon. This letter is couched
in very friendly terms. DR.. Irvine
formally resigned as rector of the
church, but majority of the church
vestry, on teb. 20, 1899, declared
the church Withdrawn from any
claim for aid from the missionary
fund and formally called DR.. Irvine
to be its rector. The bishop there
after had no power to compel him
to relinguish his rectorship unless
he had or would violate some canon
of the church.
" Mrs Emma d. Elliott, one OF
those defendants, had been a warm
personal friend OF DR.. Irvine and
was very generous contributor to
the church. A trouble arose be-
tween the rector and her about a
claim which a Mr.. Harmed, of AL
toona, had against the church for
services rendered as choirmaster.
Mrs. Elliott testi6es that she gave
to DR.. Irvine money to pay the
claim and that Irvine instead of
paying the claim kept the money.
This circumstance seems to have
estranged Mrs. Elliott and DR..
Irvine. To that time she was ad-
mitted to the communion by Mr..
Houghton, the immediate pre-
decessor of DR.. Irvine, as well as
by DR.. Irvine himself. Dr. Irvine
then barred Mrs. Elliott from the
communion becauce she was a di-
vorced woman for reason contrary
to the canon of the church. Cor
respondence was had between him
and the bishop and Mrs. Elliott on
the subject. We do not regard this
circumstance of materiality in the
determination of this case, although
Mrs. Elliott seemed then desirous
of having him deposed from the
rectorship of this church. Com
plants of DR.. Irvine's conduct were
made by her to the bishop. Sub
sequently letter was received by
the bishop, purporting to be signed
by Mrs. Elliott, Withdrawing Cor
practically withdrawing) all COM