The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-12-30
TalbOt'S Prosecutor Makes
 a Statement.
DEFAMATION IS ALLEGED
Bishop Accused of Secretly
 Attacking Him.
Rev. Mir. Irvine Declares Rt. Rev. Mir. Talbot in . Letter to pr. Upjohn Called Him (lrvine) . "PiausI.
 ble Romancer.'

Philadelphia. Dec. 29.-"Can a bishop or ought a bishop write defamatory letters in secret in order to inJure any member of the ministry?" This Is the question which will be decided at the meeting of the board of inquiry in the case of Irvine vs. Talbot" said the Rev. Ingram. N. w. Irvine. the plaintiff in the celebrated case today in discussing the charges which have been made against him.
 My reinstatement continued Dr. Irvine, lis of secondary consideration when contrasted with the above query. Of course wish to have this unjust deposition removed, but I also desire entirely without malice to be vindicated in the sight of God and my friends"
 In discussing the motive for the presentment Dr. Irvine said that it was because he had consistently refused to serve communion to Mrs. Emma D. Elliott of Huntington, Pa. who is di- vorced. against the wishes of Bishop Talbot.
 Signed the Declaration.
 Bishop Talbot and l along with abopt 1.6O0 other members of the mia istry." said Dr. Irvine signed the dec- laration which was sent to all the bishops and clergy in the United States
 
 ton of 1898 and which prayed for more stringent restrictions in the matter of divorce and marriage.
 The canons of the church. provide explicitly that a man or woman divorc- ed on any charge, except that of adultery which mus tbe proven beyond the bounds of reasonable doubt, can- not receive the holy sacrament. In the face of this Bishop Talbot, while he publicly supported the petition. covertly and by secret meetings with Mrs. Elliott, who Is a woman divorced on the grounds of desertion. sought to have her remain in the church.
 Now. who was the most consistent, Bishop Talbot or I? Did we not, both of us, sign the petition mentioned? Is it not curious that Bishop Talbot al- though he had written me saving that Mrs. Elliott was. by canon excommunt- cated. should by other methods seek to retain her as a eommunicant?,
 Referring to the letter which Bishop Talbot is said to have written Dr. Up- john in which the former termed Dr. Irvine plausible romancer" and charged that he was deposed for gross immortality and that for twenty out of the thirty years of his service in the ministry he was under ecclesiasti- cal discipline" Dr. Irvine said that Bishop Talbot has placed himself in a most awkward position.
 "Cruel and Unwarranted.
 That letter to pr. Upjohn was un- warranted and cruel" said Dr. Irvine since 1t was first of all a gross subter- fuge. It was used secretly as q weapon against me, to deprive me of all sym pathy. respect and even maintenance.
 Tn the first place 1t Is an utter i'm possibility for these allegations to be true. The church law requires that a minister shall not be eligible to an- other diocese when leaving one unless he bears the letter dimissory' This letter shows that the departing min- ister has a clear record, that his life is beyond reproach, free from error in religion or viciousness in life, and must be signed by the bishop. How could therefore, be guilty of the charges made against me?"
 Dr. Irving said In conclusion that he is not a member of the Catholic club, nor has he ever made any accusations at the club or had words with Dr. Up- john.