The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-12-28
CASE AGAINST TALBOT
CHARGES AGAINST BIsHoP BASED
 ON LETTER.
Specific AlleEatsens are Criminsi Li- bel, Immsralfty, Falsffying, Breach of Ordfnafion Vows
 and Conduct Unbecem- Ing q Hlah0R.

New York, Dec. z7.--In statement tonight Herbert Noble, lawyer of this city, representing the presenters in the charges recently made against bishop Talbot. of the Central Diocese of the Episcopal Church in Pennsyivania, briefly outlined what those who will appear against the Bishop will take up.
 The presenters MT. Noble will not name. except to say Dr. Irvine Is not one. and he also declined to give out the text of the presentment but Tn his statement he says that the presentment has its foundation in . letter said to have been written by Bishop Talbot to Rev. Samuel Upjohn, when the latter was President of the Philadelphia Club in 1909.
 "The presentment is based on this letter." says Mir. Noble. It Is In the hands of Rev. w. B. Bodine. D. D., of Philadelphia. It charged Bishop Tal- bot with criminal libel immoral ity, to wit, false statements': the cir culation of a false, malicious and de- famatory report; falsifying, preach of ordination and consecration VOWS, and conduct unbecoming a bishop. :"
 These charges, said MT. Noble to- night, are the headings" of the alle- gations made in the presentment. He added that he had communicated with MT. Bodine and would call on him Thursday or Friday in Philadelphia for a consultation as to the method of pro- cedure in the hearing of the charges against Bishop Talbot in Reading, Pa., January 10. These charges will come before committee of investigation appointed by Presiding Bishop Futile of St. Louis, this committee: consisting of twelve clerical. twelve lay members
 A aAt ntsH- ing Central Pennsylvania.
 This committee was apointed about ten days ago and the investigation is a direct outcome of incidents relating to a case which for some time has stir red the Episcopal church--that of Rev. Dr. Ingraham W. N. Irvine, now resident of Philadelphia, who was de- posed from the ministry by Bishop Talbot several years ago.
 It is made clear from the develop ment tonight that the names of several women were brought into the case. The statement made by Mir. Noble re- cites that Bishop Talbot has pursued Dr. Irvine reientlessly'' and then quotes from a decision of the supreme court of Pennsylvania in a suit brought by Dr. Irvine against Bishop Talbot and Mrs. Elliott, the later of Hunt ington, Pa, to the effect:
 Undoubtedly defendants combined to prefer charges against Irvine in the church court and acted to support the charges. They wanted him desposed from the ministry. That they also had him and by their course possible gratified less worthy motives than those which prompt true Christians to action Is of no moment except insofar as 1t might have affected this credibil- ity as witnesses before the court which tried him."
 Mir. Noble says this case went off for lack of Jurisdiction. He then says Mrs. Elliott has been pronounced excom- municated by Bishop Talbot because she married after having obtaining a divorce from her, husband on grounds other than adultery" Continuing MT. Noble says in his statement that hav- ing disposed Irvine from office, this bishop brought on January 25, the let ter complained of to, Rev. Samuel Up- john and two years after It's date sent copy of this letter to the Rev. John Fulton.
 Tt was after the sending of a copy
 of the letter to Dr. Fulton in July,
 1904" the statement goes on that the
 presenters first learned of the existence
 of such letter. It was felt by them
 that the church generally should know
 the circumstances of the case, particu-
 larly because of the fact that Bishop
 Talbot was to sit as final judge to pass
 on the evidence which was produced at
 the trial"
 Charged With Immortality. The letter referred to as the letter | of Dr. Upjohn is signed by Ethelbert Talbot. and charges Dr. Irvine with immortality and closed by referring to Bishops Whitaker. Whitehead, Seymour, Scarborough, Potter, Doane. Adams, Taylor and Rev. Dr Lefingwell, and | a host of others who will bear out all have said in regard to his charac- ter"
 The statement issued tonight denies
 that Dr. Irvine was deposed for immor- ality. denies that for twenty years he
 was under the ban of ecclesiastical dis cipline and denies that he was ever | suspended or inhibited as charged in this letter.
 Referring to a statement in the let
 ter that eight bishops had held charges against Dr. Irvine, MT. Noble says the presenters disagree with this, and adds that Dr. Irvine denies that Bishop Bur- gess ever made a charge of any kind against him as alleged according to a EaA lnl..