The St. Louis Republic., 1904-12-27
Doctor Irvine Tells of Hi>appoint,
mcnts and New
Hopes.
DOES NOT ATTACK BISHOP.
fakes Public Letter to Prclatc in
Which He Claims to Have
Zone Right III Elliott
Case.


Rt.f'I. BIIt 81 EC1iI.
Philadelphia, Dec. c6.-Ihc Reverend
roctor lnsraham Y. W Irvine. whose
friends have lodged 4 new prrsentmsnt
against Bishop EthelbcTt Tslbo, y. the
central Pennsylvania Diocese. Who un-
fiocked the former rector. consented To-
dag 10 tel OF his old iissppCIn;mvnts and
aew hopes.
.! an only willing 10 speak IN + gen
rrai way OF the features ~ the case said
Doc;nr Irvine. IN the first place. I wish
IL could he mad. plain that this present
ment Is not an attack by me upon Bishop
Talbot. but that il is Prosecution brough =;
by tie church TO inquire into actions
which bring the church into discredit.
bishop Talbot and I wer. always good
friends until trouble arose over Mrs. El-
liott while was rector at Huniiu gdon.'
Did Bishop Talbot visit Mrs. Elliott fre-
quentiy?" Doctor Irvine was asked.
He did. and they Appeared to be close
friends was the reply. Why. you know.
purple is the Bishops color. and Mrs. FL
lott used 10 wear purp.e when the Bishop
came to town. / 70 rot Ike to dwell upon
that part OF the case although from the
circumstances il must be an important
part"
Iii is reported that 1t is based largely
upon a letter written 10 the Reverend Mr.,
Ipiohn. and that no word of the latter has
yet been made r.''blic.
Il believe that is correct. SeTsral Bi-h-
Ops were referred to in that letter. most
of whom have repudiated ;he us~ Of their
names as references against me-.
When the wording Of that letter be-
comes public the church viii tie surprised
In 1t am charged with all sorts Of things
and some of the references will cause Il
sensation. Things have so far been
smothered.
Bishop Talbot a one time asked. him
self fer an inQri;y after the first com
rnittee by close vote had Jailed TO pie
sent him. but he afterwards withdrew l,is'
request. About a year after hs, had been
deposed / wrote to Bishop Talbot asking.
.or reinstatement. Part OF the letter read:
You must certainly remember that l
did my duty IN reporting the Elliott Iii
vOrce natter to YOU. Ncu certainly OK
communicated her. as the receipts shoT-
VOW wanted me To compromise III" case
with her afterwards. / could not do so.
There was noti irS Tor No to DO but 10
stand my grounI Under fire from her
Both Mrs. Elliott and her husband had
been divorced. MIR. Elliotts case was a
very grievous one. Alas. how could either
YOU or ! have compromised Don't yon
remember our signatures were given ia
the memorial to the General Convention
against marrying divorced persons under
pDv circumstances Then. why should l
I've made scapegoat to anpease an enragel
divorced couples wrath? ] asked YOU to
remember that your present Christ was q
Bishop and as such do what Christ womb
do to me- His priest: aye. what he de-
rnends OF you. his Bishop
ITO this letter ! have never received a
reply. ! have never lost hope. however.
OF beirc restored To my rightful place in
the church | hope this may follow the
new presentment, hut ! still ask the pub
lie to remember the presentment Is not
ieinr brought by me out Of revenge. but
IS simply the work Of earnest churchmen.
who without question regarding me, be
lieve that harm has been done the ehurch
bv the Bishop.