Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1906-12-07
CHARGES AGAINST CREIGHTON.
Newspaper Correspondent Gives Their
Substance.


The Record, the first Columbia pa
per to appear after the verdict in the
Creighton case, states that 1t was un-
able to print the charges and specifi-
cations for the reason that no copy
thereof was available. 1t stated that
a copy had been given out to a local
newspaper man; but that 1t had been
withdrawn before the newspaper man
had more than time to read It, The
following, however, from the Colum-
bia correspondence Of the Charlotte
Observer seems to throw satisfactory
light on the subject:
Following is a copy Of the verdict:
"The committee appointed to try the
case of C. w. Creighton, charged with
gross immortality, report that we have
carefully and prayfully considered the
same and find as follows:
Charge /. Specifications 3, 4, 5, z,
9, 10 and Is are sustained.
Charge 2. Specifications 4 and z
are sustained.
And that these specifications sus-
tain the charge, and he Is hereby de-
posed from the ministry and Is expell-
ed from the membership Of the Meth
odist Episcopal Church, South.
"(Signed) George William Walker,
D. NJ. Mcleod, A. N. Brunson, j. D.
Crout, c. C. Herbert w. M. Duncan,
R. l.. Holyrod, D. Tiller, John g. Beck
IL. f. Beatty, chairman; ]. M. Stead
man and S. B. Harper, secretaries"
1t should be explained that charges
/ and are not different except as to
time The offense under the first
charge occurred prior to the last con-
ference, and the other occurred since
the last conference.
The presiding elders Mr.. Creighton
attacked were: H. w. Bays, ]. s. Beas-
ley, John E. Carlisle, H. B. Brown, w.
P. Meadows, Marion Dargan, R. H.
Jones, E. P. Taylor and ]. w. Kilgo.
The specifications under these two
charges on which Creighton was found
guilty and the report Of the committee
was based are, in brief, as follows:
Specification No. 8, under charge No.
l: The assertion made by Mr.. Creigh-
ton that the presiding elders exercise
the power of a -perpetuating body,
in violation Of the laws Of the church,
this question being denominated in
the specification as false.
Specification No. 4: The assertion
that the presiding elders shelve men
who, for any reason, do not sympa-
thize with them and approve their
methods and promote those who stand
by them and support each other In
doing 1t, this assertion being declared
to be maliciously false.
Specification No. g.: The assertion
that the presiding elders agree upon o
method Of forcing up their salaries In
% h. L., 80 Ia oht
Specification No. z: An editorial In
the Christian Appeal of March 19, 1905,
in which 1t was charged that the pre-
siding elders were guilty Of heartless
conduct in grinding and exacting ex-
orbitant proportions of the preachers
salaries.
Specification No. 81 An editorial in
which the following occurs: when
we take into consideration the compe-
tency and efficiency of the presiding
elders and the amount Of service which
thev render to the church, we discover
a clear case Of graft" The presiding
elders mentioned in this connection are
Rev. A. j. Stokes (since deceased).
Revs. w. P. Meadows, ]. S. Beasley,
]. w. Kilgo, H. B. Brown and H. w.
Bays.
Specification No. 10 refers to an edi-
torial in the Christian Appeal attack
ing the Rev. E. o. Watson, who was
at that time acting editor Of the South
ern Christian Advocate, and who had
in that paper called on Mr.. Creighton
to specify what he meant by the use
Of the term graft" Mr.. Watson Is
referred to in this editorial in con-
temptuous terms.
Specification No. 13 relates to an at
tack on Rev. Marion Dargan, who had
assumed personal support Of a mis-
sionary at an expense Of $3.50. The ar
ticle calls this contribution by Rev.
Mr.. Dargan "a conscience fund"
Under charge No. 2, specification
relates to Creighton's charge that the
presiding elders of the South Carolina
conference brought charges against
him that they knew to be false.
Specification No. relates to an ar
ticle by Mr.. Creighton referring to "Mr.
(R. H.) Jones and conspirators,"
charging conspiracy on the part Of the
presiding elders.
The other specifications, which are
not referred to in the report Of the
trial committee, it is presumed, were
not sustained for lack of sufficient
evidence. They were Of the same gen.
eral character as those which were
sustained and which are outlined
above, being based upon other arti-
cles of the same nature in the Chris
tian Appeal.
The character Of Mr. Creighton was
first attacked in conference two years
ago and a committee Of investigation
was appointed. This committee con-
sisted of Rev. M. L. Carlisle, Rev. T.
c. O'Dell and Rev. r. w. Barber. The
committee reported in 1905 at Spartan
burg that they did not have sufficient
evidence on which to go to the trial OF
the charges and recommended that the
case be left in the hands Of the pre-
siding elder in whose district Mr..
Creighton was stationed. This pre-
siding elder was Rev. w. T. Duncan,
of the Cokesbury district Mr.. Creigh-
ton appointed the following committee
to investigate the charges: Rev, T. c.
O'Dell, w. A. Massabeau and Peter
Stokes. Their report was made at the
present session and upon that report the
committee of trial was appointed.
whose report was submitted today.