The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-04-29
Strong SPEECH
FOR DEFENDANT
Edward M. Shepard Delivers,
His Final Argument in the
CrapSey HereSy Case.
JUDGE STlNESS FOLLOWS.
LATTER DOUBTS GOOD FAITH OF
THE DEFENSE.

%%%A%%%$@-A&@%%
Batavia, n. Y, April 2S.-The -
y fate of Rev. DR.. AlgernOn S Crap "
y sey, as a clergyman Of the Prot -
estant Episcopal church rests with ~
y his judges. The trial of the rec -
y tor of st. Andrews, Rochester, on -
y charges of heresy and violation of y
y ordination vows ended today with y
y the nnal arguments of counsel for -
y the accused and for the prOsecu- y
y ton The ecclesiastical court of -
y five members took the evidence -
under consideration and viii rem =
y der a verdict to Bishop Walker, -
y of the diocese H.. of western New -
y York, on or before May Is. -
Batavia. n. Y. April 2S.-when the
Crapsey heresy trial was resumed to-
day Edward Nj. Shepard of New York.
opened the proceedings with an Address
to the court in behalf of the defendant.
He said Franklin D. Locke. who adj
dressed the court yesterday for the
prosecution. is not a member Of the
church and that the canons provides
that any counsel addressing the court
should be a communicate. adding
thereto that ne, Mr. Shepard, is a COM
municant.
It am not here to speak for any doc
( trine which don't believe in my heart.
my words come from my own con-
science and my conviction he said.
Locke Not COMMUNICATE.
Mr.. Shepard drew attention to Mr..
IOcke'S statement that DE-. CraDsey
had denied the apostles creed and said
that Mr. Locke had no right 10 appear
in the case He said the adrIinistra-
ton or justice in an ecCleSiaSticaI or
civil court is fundamentally 1he SANE:
that the court is independents and su-
preme.
He cited the McCreary case. in which
he said the bishop Of the diocese had
informed an ecclesiast of the decision.
rernarking that the verdict of this
court had been received without re
spect or consideration.
1T is incOnceivabIe." Mr.. Shepard
said, that any court should be VIII
ing to convict of an Offense upon the
incOrrobOrated testimony of Mr.. Alex
ander. In this holy Catholic church OF
ours, whatever the OrSanizat ton. there
is some division, some variation ard IN
this trial we see two such variations:
Two Schools of Thought.
First. those who see and are con-
Vlnced OF the usefulness Of Organiza-
ton and the discipline and second,
those who believe the church TO he a.
great growth and that it viii go on
growing in beauty and sacred extent
This division may be calIesi the lib
eral school II is represented Eere by
DR.. Worcester.
I'm England there is a court reDrn-
senting the whole church 10 pass on
matters of doctrine. We have no such
court in this country According TO the
canons it would appear 10 be the mind
of the American church that no court
should pass on matters of faith anG
doctrine until final court has been
established.
Even in the time of the auto de fe
in Spain there was one invariabIe rule.
heresy should be IabCred with. In this
presentment. which only SAYS that in
the past DR.. Crapsey has made Ger
tain errors, there is not a word to show
that he was labOred with in any way
before this case was brought TO trial.
The Universal Church.
Continuing, Mr.. Shepard expressed
his belief that the Catholic church. by-
which he said he meant the I'M yersaI
church for the continent OF America. is
the Protestant Episcopal church
1T is to be. I believe he said, the
center of life and good living in every
community in our land"
The speaker reiterated presidents in
which he said that several weII-knOvp
English clergymen have expressed
views which were more heretical than
those uttered by DR.. era Sey and either
nave never Deen brought to trial for
them or have been tried and acquitted
He made especial reference to the case
of Archbishop Temple, who finally
reached most exalted position in the
church of England.
Former Chief Justice Stiness OF
Rhode Island followed Mr.. Shepard-
He spoke for the prosecution.
Speech for Prosecution.
Judge Stiness. speaking for the pros
ecutiOn, said it seemed that the defense
was trying the case before the public
and not before the court
have failed to see any connection
between the speeches Of the defensos
and the cause before the court" he
said There has been one remark
able thing in this proceeding which has
led me seriously 20 doubt the good faith
of the defense. namely. that ii has not
called upon DR.. Crapsey to testify"
CLARK OF MONTANA