The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-04-27
CROPSEY CASE
BEING RUSHED
Prosecution Has Rested and
the Defense Now Putting in
Testimony for Accused.
MERE QUESTION OF CREED
COURT RULED AGAINST THE DE-
PENDANT.

Batavia, y. Y, April 26.-The prose-
cution rested Its case today In the
trial of Rev AIgernon S. Crapsey on
the charge or heresy and violation Of
his ordination vows Before doing so.
John Lord O'Brien. counsel for the
prosecution. filed with the court for
record a letter to Mr.. Alexander. DIR.
Crapsey's assistant, from DR.. Crapsey,
dated Jan. 5. 1906
Congressman Perkins, counsel for the
defense. admitted as evidence that DR..
Crapsey had taken all his ordination
vows.
The resting of its case by the prose-
cutiOn excludes from admission as evil
dence DR.. Crapsey's book, Religion
and Politics. with the exception of
such parts as are contained in the
presentments against the rector of
st. Andrews. The exclusion of the
useless for the prosecution to call GER
tain other witnesses to testify along
similar lines.
Witness for Defense.
The first witness for the defense was
Rev. a. j. LightOn, professor of phi
losophy i'm Hobart college Congress-
man Perkins put in evidence certain
books bearing upon the doctrine of the
Protestant Episcopal church, including
the work on the incarnation, by DR..
Briggs; Christ" by S. D. Mcconnell,
and also works by Canon Henson, Of
Westminster Abbey: Frederick Tenn
pie, former Archbishop of Canterbury;
the Rev DR.. Frederick Palmer Of An
dover. Mass, and others. Witness said
in reply to questions, he had read all
the books mentioned as we'll as the
presentment against DR.. Crapsey.
DO you think" Mr.. Perkins asked
n lin hnvn 5c hi hn
fications of the presentment contrary
to the doctrine of the church, as the
law has commanded. and which the
church has accepted"
Objected to Interpretation.
Mr. O'Brien objected. He argued
that the doctrines of the church were
clearly and explicitly set forth in the
book of common prayer and were not
in need Of interpretations that no man
could qualify as expert on a question
Of doctrine.
in Jesus Christ our Lord who was
conceived by the Holy Ghost born of
the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pom
thus PLATE, was cruciied. died and was
buried. He descended into hell; the
third day he arose again from the
dead
There is the doctrine, clearly and
Enthusiastically set forth" said Mr..
O'Bricn.
Much Argument
Much argument of counsel for both
sides followed Ex-Chief Justice
Shines OF Rhode Island closed an in
cisiVe argument for the prosecution
with the words:
federation of error does not estab-
lish it as truth" and Mr.. O'Brien
pleaded with the court to look at this
question with strong hearted wisdom
and remember that the church was not
a cowardly church and to perceive its
clear duty.
de was answered by Edward NJ
shepard of New York, who declared
that the prosecution begged the cues
ton, which was one of interpreta-
ton.
The question is" said Mr.. Shep-
ard, IN conclusion, whether A cler-
gyman of the Protestant EPISCOPAL
church who. having taken his vows
OF ordination, and studied the Scrip
lures Is persuaded as a result that
the Nlcene creed means certains things
should or should not preach these
things 1t then becomes his duty and
ms right to preach these things"
me court ruled that the testimony
or Dr. Lishton was not competent and
sustained the objection taken by Mr.