Evening journal., 1917-01-24

beS can chailenee Tor cause, Dut IN
the Appellate Court the appellant
alone has the right OF challenge, and
that is peremptory. He is not re-
quired to have assigned the reasons for
such challenge, and even he cannot
reduce the number below nine. and
thus invalidate the court This IA
miliar fact must have escaped the at
tention of Brother Cooke.
The reasons for this right grant
! ed alone 20 tho appellant are obvious.
kA1 II the complainant, the injured
party. presumably. How monstrous
It would be for the church TO assail
its own court.
Il would appear 10 be wholly rea-
sonable and in keeping with ordin-
airy fairness and justice TO say that II
any purely pro forma, legal techni-
cality as 10 matter OF detail how
ever. important that provision might
} be, in itself considered, was over
! looked by counsel for the appellant,
/ two facts are manifest. viz. 1, the
conduct OF this court is subject TO re-
view. and 2, In view OF the fragrant
disregard OF the provisions laid down
by the General Conference through
its judiciary Committee. for the pro-
lection of an accused member or
minister. relative TO the exercise Of
judicial functions. revealed in the res
gesta OF these appeals, in other words
in view OF the fact that the pastor
acted as Judge, prosecutor and witt
ness. fact which he does not deny,
but seeks 70 justify that exercise, this
fact in the law and usage of our de-
nomination amounts TO n legal scan
dal. therefore no technical error
should be allowed TO stand in the
way Of a prompt appeal to the prop
erly constituted tribunal. Whether
such error has been committed Will
appeaa. in due time in the orderly
processes OF the law
1T should be said in all fairness
that those who represent the church
In all this melancholy business see
the utter impropriety OF discussing
administrative matters in the press.
The public will have ample oppor-
tunity to determine for Itself. when
the facts become known. whether
these appellants had any slightest op-
portunity for a fair trial. and the
Wilmington Conference in due time
will have like opportunity. I'm
~ then. the representatives of the
church are silent even In the face
OF n storm OF inuendo and abuse.
my attention has been called to an
Incorporate screed published In an
evening paper. over the signature Of
the pastor Of Wesley Methodist Epis-
copal Church, this city, purporting 10
. be an argument, 10 be made presum-
ably 20 this court, yet published full
IN the prcss hours before the conven-
ing OF this court. Il IL not within the
province Of this court TO pronounce
upon questions OF good tnsto, and
! a.
the doliverance referred to does con-
tain one assertion, deliberately made
! which ilnpeached the professional
standing OF an honorable member Of
I the New Castle County Bar, and
which, II true. would disbar him
from practicing his profession at the
Z said bar. II also contains a state
Z ment that impeaches the professional
! standing and good name Of one OF
/, the ablest and purest ministers in
+ the Wilmington Conference. and
l. which. IL true. would expel him from
{ the Conference aforesaid"
. The Rev. T.. II. Dashien, openinl
e the argument of the appellants, said
: we wish 10 call your attention t
e certain things which stand out n
a these proceedings; First. the rithies
u violation OF the rights OF the defend
ants. Practically every right was de
Ia MED. He was cited o Monday to ap
T. pear on Wednesday; one half hou
q less than two days IN which 20 pre-
y pare his case by which he was to tes
. his right to remain in the church.
Is Secondly, he was denied the righ
OF counsel and upon most films
" grounds. namely because the conduc
- OF Mr.. Burchenal and Mr.. Dashiel
e az a preceding trial was such tina
0 4
" as counsel In this case.
s Third, he was denied the right o
e a Judge The judge sits for the de
Ell fendant as we'll as for the accusers
Fourth. he was denied the rieh
o OF jury, because he should have beel
e permitted 20 go beyond the bound
is OF those who were opposed TO hin
q 70 obtain a jury.
e Fifth. he was denied the right o
n testifyins.
D." sixth. he was denied the right o
{. seconds. In this regard the mos
II sacred rights OF the defendant wer
violated.
N Seventh. he suffered wrongs unde
r the law. from the attitude OF tn
Id Judge who at the first trial Of Nj
h ceedtngs insisted upon presiding q
e the trial, and showed prejudice /
of his conduct OF the case.
,e His address TO the trial committe
showed bias Then there was tn
ie prejudice Of the jury who during IN
a. delivery OF the charge were delibel
n ateiy directed 90 find a verdict
is guilty.
The whole stage was set not 10 oh
ig tain justice, but to obtain conviction
he came from that room with a dis
tnct sense of depression and sham
v for the great Methodist Church whic
A. took me 20 her bosom and taught m
IS to love my fellow men"
n Mr.. Dashiell quoted decisions Of N
mt Judiciary Committee to the efe,
'ul that the presiding officer cannot testii
,se as a witness. and called attention
to Pastor Cookies Transforming hin
let self' into a witness and testifyin
sw although he had been acting as pr,
on siding officer. A quotation was rea
OF to the effect that such situation ws
to lat war with the tradition OF n
at- race"
Mr.. Dashiell said that although a.
~. cording to Merrill's Methodist La
at a pastor was in duty bound TO Or
ais side at a church trial except when
lat party to the proceedings. he insist,
sct the sitting OF Pastor Cooke at the tri