New-York tribune., 1909-11-10
ASK ACCOUNTING
Continued from first psg-.

on August 4 saying. Charges asahst
you are dismissed" and letter from the
same source of that same date con
firmed the telegram. and informed her
that the entire case was now in the
hands OF the branch church Of which she
was a member.
DIRECTORS TO STRICkLEE-
Mr. Strickler received from the direct
ors copy OF the Stetson letter with an
added reference as to his duty in case
charges were preferred against her in
the New York church. and he replied
that il any charges were preferred they
would receive due and proper attention
Mr. Taylor's view of the case was that
these letters closed it. and for the re-
opening of IT. short time later. in Au-
gust. hc bIames Mir. StriclSler alone.
StrickIer. he says, went voluntarily to
Boston with his diary, and thereby gave
the directors opportunity to start an
other investigation.
a point which the trustees especially
emphasized was that Mr.. Stricken, in
testifying before the committee of in
quiry Of the local board. declared that
ifNti idtA tHtic brth ei4hs N'tN. 80 VI
complaint fled with him against Mrs.
stetson or against any Of the practition-
ers of the New York church.
MRS. STETSON NOT INVITED.
Mr.. Taylor then takes up at length in
his statement the details of rather
stormy session between the local trus-
tees and the directors i'm Boston on Sep
tember -. lie says;
ON that date eight OF tine nine trustees
were summoned TO Boston TO meet the
directors Of the Mother Church on
that same day some of the practitioners
from our church were being heard as
witnesses by the directors. and We had
10 wait while the last one was being ex-
amined. On coming into the room we
found present i'm addition 70 the five
directors. Judge Clifford b. Smith. first
reader of the Mother church. Virgil q.
Stricklsr. first reader OF our own church.
and Miss Ella Young. our second reader
From this conference two OF our trus-
tees were unavoidably absent. and the
ninth member. Mrs. Augusta p. Stetson.
had not been invited
Mr. Taylor startled the directors by
starting to ask questions instead Of sub
mitting to an examination. He wanted
n know in what capacity the New
Workers were invited.
judge Smith replied that they We're in
vited as individuals, but because they
were trustees
Then MI Taylor wanted 10 know
whether the directors were sitting in
executive session, and the answer was:
mo. we are sitting Informally
In answer 10 further questions the di-
i -,
conducted under the section of the by
laws referring 10 "misteaching," and the
New Iorkers followed that up by de-
manding whether the directors had first
obeyed one of the bylaws requiring
Scientists. when a brother was COM
planned against to so and talk il over
with the brother. once, twice and a third
time. before starting an inquiry.
None Of the directors answered that
query. Mr.. TAYLOR says. and Mr.. Mac
Lellan turned TO ask Mr.. Strickler II he
had admonished Mrs. Stetson. but Mr..
Taylor stopped the answer by declaring
that he objected 20 any such statement
in the absence Of Mrs. Stetson.
Continuing his questions. and directing
them now at Mr.. Mcclellan, Mr.. Tay-
Tor was told that the charges preferred
against Mrs. Stetson by the five former
practitioners had been dismissed. and
that new investigation had been start
ed two weeks previously. But there
Mr. Mcclellan stopped him by saying
that the visitors hadn't been invited
there to cross-examine the directors. hut
20 be examined themselves.
4 TART PASSAGE.
However, we don't want TO force any
thing on you. and if any one objects. we
will make no objection if he retires,'
We're Mr.. MacLeIlan's words. Mr.. Taylor
says.
DR.. !. G. Crowell, another of the New
York trustees. declared then. Il am here
in answer 20 a peremptory demand. and
because l want TO ask a few questions
to ascertain why I am here I don't pro-
pose 10 be told to leave the room: at
which Judge Smith replied that no one
had been told TO leave the room. and
with the air thus cleared the discussion
of the two boards proceeded. Mr.. Tay-
lars statement continues;
At that conference Judge Smith ssil
that at that time no charges we're pend
ing against any one-that was Septem-
ber 24-end on September 26 Mrs. Stet-
son received the letter from the directors
suspending her as a teacher and practi-
toner.
At the subsequent meeting of the
trustees in New York. when the local in
quiry into Mrs. Stetson's conduct was
started. Mr.. Strickler voluntarily relin-
ouished his right TO be present as Il
member Of the board ex-oficio. Mr.
TAYLOR says. He adds.
We know that Mr.. StriclGler was show
ing his diary TO members of the con-
gregatiOn during the progress of our
inquiry. with the idea of biassiug them
against any report we might bring out.
Referring 10 the admitted variance in
Mrs Remers testimony as between the
Boston and New York inquiries. Mr.
Taylor said that that was best explained
by Mrs Remer herself when she said in
reply TO query of the directors on that
same point. If there is any difference il
is due 10 my having failed TO observe
that bylaw which commands us to pro-
.ect o,rsal--es from b,-ppot;Sr, arl ss.o-