Evening journal., 1917-01-24

Appeals present, out that proceeding
now appeared unnecessary.
Or. Collins then took his place as
counsel for the church and asked the
consideration OF the court until he
could confer with Mr.. Cooke con-
cerning the matters TO be considered.
DR.. watt then asked that the charges
and specification be read and the pro-
ceedinss commenced.
Prayer Opens Proceedings.
The proceedings were opened by
prayer by DR.. Watt who asked that
all passions and prejudice might be
left out and kept out Of sight and the
laws Of Christian unity and brother
hood be uppermost in the hearts OF
those present.
From the beginning there appeared
to be trouble for the respondents on
account OF incomplete records The
case Of Mr.. Crew was considered first.
Alleged incomplete or wrong entries
or omissions were noted by counsel
for the appellants. II was found that
the records we're kept In long-hand
instead OF shorthand and In some
/ places did not agree with the short
hand record kept by the Rev. r. II.
Dashieil, who attended the trial Of
! Mr..
From tho start DR.. Watt. as presid-
ing officer ruled the charge against
Crew was defective as u did not
contain the reasons for allowing
Meesrs. Burchenai and Dashiell
TO act as counsel for Grow al
the trial OF the latter. He also
ruled that the omission OF the plea
OF mot guilty from the record
was vital. DR.. Collins said he was
willing that pencil record oiieged tc
be the real record" be substituted FOR
the pen written iong-hend record, and
Mr. Buchenal then withdrew some OF
his objections 10 the record 40 far a.
10 permit Il 10 be read
The reading o. the appeal included
the reading of the charge given e
the jury az the Crew trial. and which
was an arraignmcnt Of Crew, and re.
ferred 70 him as having a BLACK
heart" for some Of his actions In con.
nection with the affairs OF Wesley
Church
Preliminary TO reading the answer
cor the church. DR. Collins soid he had
hCcn asked by Mr. Cooke 20 read ar
answer drawn up by Mr.. Cooke. II
was pointed out the answer already
had been given out 20 the public press
prior 10 the trial.
When DR.. Collins began TO read the
answer 10 the appeal. Dr. Watt OBJ
iected h the FIRST statement on the
ground that he already had asked II
there was any objections to the m.
peals and had been told there was
none Then Dr. Collins began 10 read
the answer. the first statement OF
which objected 10 the appeal.
Dr. Collins read az follows:
Having acted in the capacity ot
counsel for the church In the trial o
Clayton L. Crew. which occurred n
Wesley Church on Wednesday evening
January 10. and upon request o
Frank y. Boyer and Mrs. Frank d
Boyer accusers OF MIR. Crew In tina
trial that act as their counsel in tn
appellate court, hereby reply 90 IN
grounds or reasons for an appeal n
stated In a document received by m
, Friday evening. January 10. 1877. an
signed by Caleb r. Buchenai couns,
for Mr. Crew.
The appellant has forfeited hi
right TO an appeal by. misconduc
Since his trial he has not attended tn
services OF the church. He has ah
, sented himself from the public preach
ing services. also from prayermeeting
and classmeetings.
THAT viii have to be stricken out.
exclaimed DR.. Watt. 'It Ia not admiss
able since Il has not been shown IN
appellant was given an opportunit
to do as is required by this statement.
Dr. Collins said he would strike thi
out and continued 10 read until h
,, came TO the following passage. tn
third objection:
"Obejction 3. The pastor refused I
recognize the counsel selected for IN
reason that previous experience ha
convinced him that they did not hav
proper regard for the law OF tn
church and would resort 10 imprope
means TO defeat the ends OF Justice.
THAT Is Hcandalous." said Dr. Wat
/ ''and cannot be permitted 20 pass.
! will have TO be stricken out"
This was done. and DR.. Collins the
! explained he had not had an oppoi
> tunity TO read the statement and al
not know what Il contained He al
(. not feel. he said. that he could cor
a tinue 20 read Il IN view of the stat,
@ ments already made and as much ,
the statement appeared not to
,f material to the case I'm hand.
.s Dr. Watt then handed down n
N following in connection with the stat
! ments read by DR.. Collins. and whiS
~ he stated would be construed as n
10 opinion in the matter:
A. Statement for the press regardiI
Al the Appellate Court which heard q
- appeals OF Messrs. Crew and Thorp.
& THE president OF the court recei
4 ed two letters from the Rev. G.
4 Cooke, affecting TO instruct said pre-
n ident as TO his duties. rights and lii
ia itations, under the law, as preside
OF the Appellate Court Respect
e and brotherly reply was made 20 the
N OF instruction, which took occasion
l. remind the sender that the condu
q OF said court was subject 10 revi'
q by the bishops and the Wilmingt
: Conference and that the president
3 said court stood ready 20 answer
j. those in authority over him in ms
a ters OF administration.
'In a statement made by the Re
II C. A. Cooke. 10 the effect IN
Il the names of the Triers OF Appel
should have been furnished him, th
he might have opportunity to obj'
4. 10 any OF all OF them, there is !
vealed. Brother Cookies ignorance
the usage that governs in cases
al appeal. In the Trial Court both pa