New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-12-28

Fleeu. / have acted KINDLY ana =
possible. II the world knew why ne was avn M
posed and what he really is ne would get no ~
isishops whitaker whitehead. Seymour scarb t,I.
ough Potter. Doane Adams ana Is a en- hear
out ali ] have said as 70 his character an
with every assurance OF personal esteem 94-
my Dear DOCTOR fa"h'o ErH 4gRILlBBERT TALBOT.
SAYS IMPR EssIoN CONVEYED Is FALSE.
The impression intended to be conveyed eyed by TINS
Dr. Irvine was not deposed, as alleged by BlshoP
lasciyious eonduct with women" as an examination
OF the records Of the trial. which are public woulo
The Supreme Court of Pennsyyani nj ,, says 3o Mrs
Eilioff combined to prefer charges against Irvine
n the church court and acted in concert 10 sup
And it was upon these charges that he was tried
above stated and deposed him from the ministry
upon the charges which he and Mrs. Elliott com
The charge that Dr. irvine has been for tTeny
false. DR.. Irvine has never been under the ban
Of ecclesiastical discipline
He has never been suspended, nor inhibited, nor
made to leave any diocese or parish as chargT gm
Der OF bishops have charges against him. for it is
be believed that any bishop would have
n view Of the Wide publicity the deposition Of Dr.
Irvine by Bishop Talbot has had.
CHARGE QUOTED FROM A DEAD BISHOP.
The charge that the venerable Bishop of Quincy
Bishop Burgess) wrote Bishop Talbot a letter on
his death bed charging that Irvine outraged two
girls in his city is safe one for Bishop Tai
bot make since the Bishop of Quincy referred TO
is dead.
DR.. Irvine Indignantly denies that there was any
such charge made against him to his 5 % He
did anything to give the faintest shadow or sup
Bishop Burgess and Dr. Irvine but that controversy
"as B se a1I DR. i Infs ree said in commu
nication to DR.. Irvine: Il stated them Gumors al
had right Bishop to consult, in supposed con
adence and without any intention to injure the ne
niied and exaggerated in Quincy, I am Informed,
made by me to ASCERTAIN the truth Of the
became satisfied that there was no gue 5d s 9Hp
the Dean CDR. Irvine in respect to them 10 be held
The statement that letter was brought from
St. Clements by Mrs. Elliott (who is the divorced
ei1ee A the f them rector Of St Giemenfs is dead
there was such letter. and Dr. Irvines statement
is 20 be believed. because substantially all the
coi,Tee hsse6 Tarses y15icy would have been
utterly incompatible with her accommodation had
If Dr. Irvine had told Bishop Talbot that such
letter had been brought by Mrs. Elliott from st.
Clements 70 Huntington, why should ne nave
iDocess Of Central ti Penhsyysns Bishopsruhe
South Beth a.s6sr7, Pc Penn q 1900
MY Des7 Irvine: The woman 10 whom you refer
she will have the presumption present herself at
Holy Communion. II you think there is any danger
kind and gentle way to intimate to her her true
matter If she should present herself before you
can speak her. and you think she does it in ig-
There is no reason in this case to make any row. if
The thing IS managed quietly ana hTpiy with tfle
the matter of the missi9ns AfT5GtonateIy g9grs
Bishop Talbot says. 81 have acted Kindly and
righteously as was possible" AS against Bishop
Supreme Court Of Pennsylvania, stated above, is
The statement that the bishops named in the
letter and host Of Others will lear ar out all
serious thing in the letter It is an unauthorized
and I E n the GShs IN sae s BISHOPS
would sustain him.
CHARGES AGAINST THE BISHOP.
The pressntnnent is based upon the letter above
Bodine of Philadelphia. It charges Bishop Talbot
with
"A criminal libel"
immortality" to wit, "FaIse statements" "the
circulating of false, malicious and defamatory
report"
"FaIsifyins."
Breach of ordination and conservation vows"
and
Conduct unbeoonane bishop"
The Rev Dr. Upjohn is quoted Rs saying: $50 far
as have been able 10 learn, the original Lof the
eds Dr. S oree sf to rely on Copies
ppsTenIly his eTeatsst hone T 5n not see how
hey can hope to sustain the presentment This
Of on techncalty. presumably being afraid OF
Whether the case shall prevail or not. the pre-
senters have been actuated by the desire to right
wrong Bishop Talbot has for years pursued q
course seeking Dr. 1ryne's destruction The pre-
senters believe that such conduct the part Of
bishop OF the Church is unworthy. and that when
bishop is actuated by such motives that he writes
@ letter filed with false statements the good Of
the Church requires that he be put to his trial.
This presentment is not fled by Dr. Irvine. Had
he desired TO serve personal ends the civil courts
would have been open to him. The presenters are
OF what they believe TO be terrible wrong and also
to purging the Church of unworthy bishop.
While The Tribune learns that DR.. Dix has
resigned the craftsmanship on the plea of his
years, there was apparently nothing 10 indicate
yesterday that he would not remain a member
of the board.
On the contrary, Il have been made member
Of the board OF inquiry" DR.. Dix told the
porter in the afternoon, and I will not say
word. not syllable, on the case. Would you go
and ask judge as to his views on a case which
he is tryfng?" said DR.. Dix, adding: II have
nothing whatever to say; nothing whatever"
While ]. Pferpont Morgan could not be SEEN 1t
Is said that the fact that Francis Lynde Stetson,
who is a lay member of the board is also of
counsel for Mr. Morgan's firm. is a mere coin
cidence, and that Mr.. Morgan has no interest
In the case one way or the other
Mr.. StetsoH still declined TO discuss the case
and Henry Lewis Morris, another lay member
declared that in view Of the fact that he was
one Of the judges 1t would be highly improper
for him to talk.