The Cardiff Times

THE NEATH. CHAPEL CASE. 1 THE REVISION OF THE ROLL. The adjourned sitting <»f the referee inhhtscase, the Ven. Arcbdewxm oi Liandafi and Rector of Neath, took place on Saturday afternoon. Con- siderable progress was made towards completion ot thp, matter now in process Itf settlement, and it is expected thru; at the next meeting the rentable referee will have had suthoientmaterial bef.crobim on which to ground bis award, which will be published in the usual manner. Duriug Satur- day's enquiry there was ft large number of Biemhers present 0:1 (,0,11 antes, who r-ppeare-i to take a warm interest in what transpired. The referee proceeded, as im the two former ait- ting-1, to call ever the roll as it at present stands, and either party had the fig! i to object toa, name which was called. This course WM adopted by the VeIl. Archdeacon, who cor ,dered ft would be less invidious than g'(),ng iniuply through fcue lists •f i>ersori objected to on either side. v vf Mr Brvuumr Jones, instructed by Kit Williams," appeared for Mr Burn and hu party, and Mr A. Curtis i~i>res« >tjd tb\ members who are dissatisfied wi th Mr Lnrn. The first objection was iraie by Mr B«>iamor Jones to the name of Mr William Mort, who had been nnmt.-rrupXtUv a communicant to the month of Deceuihev, 1333. The ground for objection was alleged breach of rule*, and Mr Jones desired the ease should stand by for the presc: 1\ t. Mr Curtis said he was aL once prepared to test the case. The member objscted to had been pro- vided with his mem'.Miablp en .eloper for 1884- in the eftvly part nÏ this year, and was 011 the hat made out by the .secretary to fcht, finance commit- tee a*, those to whom ^envelopes were to be sup- plied. „, Mr Brynruoi- Jone* This is a case of breach of rules. The Referee What w the alleged breach of Mr Jones The samo as Mr Edwin C. Curtis, Mr James Gandy, and others. Mr Curtis: Mr Snooks' evidence was that he had prepared the envelopes from the list p-epared by Mr Garnet.. That r/as after the December communion sei-'ice, aad no such service had since been held. Mr Brynmor Jones sail there W.1.3 a reason for that, as Mr Curtis had himself refused the elements, and thereby en-used a scandal which justified the c rile pursued. Mr Curtis said the statement was absolutely fake. The Referee to Air Jonos Even if it were, do you think it a sufficient reason, if 1, 2, 6, 8, or 12 members refused the communion, for doing away with the servicc and practically disbanding the church? Mr IJ. Jones: Yes, bacauso i". would be com- parable to mutiny. There was also a large number of persons who were lapsed meir'wro, ind bad not been there for a long period, b came on that occasion so as to be justified to act. The Archdeacon I must draw a. line some- where. Mr Curtis sub-rutted that the refere would not go into the conduct of any members since December, 1333, or a -1 > w the cl. < r c h officials to derogate trotu their own act in supplying members with their credentials. The Archdeacon said ho should only attach hn- portance to facts proved to h&s occurred in 1883. The question mooted by Mr Jones was one 01 discipline, and not of dealing w -th the foB. Mr Jo ies The breaches of rules arc quits did- tinct from the roll. Mr Curtis And open up the whole dispute in the church, winch is not refavnd to you. The reference is one as to the pemrju* eutik-J to be on the rod. I submit it is ishaaieto oppose the right to vole in this case, as tne envelopes were given out in 1884, and if there had beeu any offence it was duly condoned. The Kiferee Is thib admitted—that Mr David Harries made out a list, and did he include William Mort's uame, as showing ho had a right to resume his pla.ce? Air D. Jones Mr Karnes's list contained the natues of persons who had not violated the four months rule. The mo-e serious charges were not gone into at the time Mr II rms's list was pre- pared. The Referee We are going mto generalities. I sh >uld like this cruse dealt with. Mr Curtis: The church meeting is the only proper place to decide the point Mr Jones is claiming to discuss. The Referee As I understand it, there were a. finance committee, a secretary to the church, and also a secretary to ,he finance commi tee, who came into contact with the secretary of the church,when a con/ereuce msucsd as to what enve- lopes were to be issued for th: coming year, 1884. The secretary is provided w th a list of names, aad gets instructions or permission to Msuethe em elopes. It seems :o me that envelopes are presumptuous evidence- that the person to whom they were given was a proper member on the roll, and if offences had been committed they were eondo."ad by tnat act. Mr Dryum<>r J >nes The more serious cases are the breaches of rules, and they could not be dealt with by the finance committee. The Referee I do not feel it to 3 my duty to enter into questions of cnurch disc iline. I find a name on the roll for 1883, and established by the fact of envelopes for 1884. Do you think it right for me to tnnel ha,k! Mr Jones Certainly. My present application is that the case may be reserved until the similar cases against Mr Curtis and others are dealt with. Mr Curtis I ask you, sir, "0 rule that you will not deal with this case at all. 1 don't intend to offer any evidence with reference to Mr Mort, ex- cepting to put in the envelopes. Mr Jones contended that t-Jiw was taking an ad- vantage o. the technical objection. The Referee May I not now go on with the next case? I do t'.ot want to hear any more evi- dence now. I reserve the case. Mi Brynmor Jones inquired whether Mr Curtis imputed falsehood personally to himseir when he re erred to tii-j December Communion service. Mr Curtis: Not to you, Mr Jones. I know you are merely carrying out your instructions. I know where the falsehood comes from, and if it is repeated,I will, if necessary, deny it 50 times, .as it is not true. Mr burn 1.; is true. Mr Curtis (to Referee); Will you allow this man to go on in this way? The Referee I must ask you, Mr Burn, to de- sist, an l not allow any exhibition of f'oeWig in the enquiry. Mrs Taylor was next objected to by Mr Jones, on the ground that the register book shewed absencj since July, 1883. Mr Curtis supported the vote, and called MM Taylor, who proved being at the October communion service, but didn't put in any envelope. Her husband wa-t present with her. Was also present in December. By Mr Jones Didn't Mr Burn call to see you ? Witness Yes, but not t' en. He ca!'od several times, not a doz-n — two o;- time occas m. He asked nie why I didn't come. l to d him I ha i been obliged to put clothes in pawn. Mr Jones Mr l.u/n got th m out didn't he ? Witness Someone else did. Mr Jones Mr Curtis Answer Yes. Mr Curtis said it was par iding every private transaction III a most scandalous fashion. Mr eurll was then caHed, ..ud stated that he saw Mr-: Taylor at lea-st d'«zen tunes in 1883. On the first occusion the clothos were in Mr Nathan the pawn, ,rokE,r'¡>, Mr Curtis it it. r. ahamo to introduce matters of this kind into this reference. Mr Burn contiuudd I went to Mr Curtis, as treasurer, and said, Here i-t a woman who wants so much to redeem her clothes from Nathan's. Will you advance ?" i intended they should be kept and handed to Mrs Ske'iyto keep until each articles could be redeemed. Mr Curtis advanced the money himself, on a policy, as there was a prospect of gain to him. Tn ■ Referee You had better deal with what is relevant to the case. Mr Curtis: Another inattiice of the man's malice, Mr Referee. Mr Burn I wanted to show thai this woman is like many other members,in MrCurtis's pocket. Mr Curtis Here's manhood I 1\-h Burn (continuing): He advanced the money on security. I found the woman came once or twice after, I don't, believe she was there in October. ¡ Upon Mr Burn resuming hu seat before the cross examination commenced, Mr Curtis said Will you kindly stand up ? ) Mr Hum You stand. Mr Curtis You are a witness, and as such you mus: be good enough to behave yourself. Mr Hum I will stand up if you do. Mr Jones advised his client to stand, aud, with a similar intimation from the referee, Mr Burn reluctantly did so. By Mr Cnrtis Do you tell the refetee that, as church treasurer, I advanced the money ?— A. No. Was there any reference to interest ?—A. Wait till the document ia producer. fo tne best of your teeodection was any in- terest charged ?-A. 1 Uebevo there was. Did I get even the stamp ?•—A. That was for the Government. By Mr Curtis If th" docuincnt is in my hand- writing, it is copied from one of yonr ow.:a. It is more than a piedge for the payment of the itiouey. The whole transaction promise* ga.o, aud to the best ot my recoi lection interest is charged. I told Mrs Taylor aud her husband, "Idou't advise you to place yourself m the hands vl Mr Curtis." The document was th,;n sent toi, and, upon its production, Mr Curtis continued In that your handwrit- ing ?—A. Very likely it is. Mr Curtis is it ?—A. 1 have answemd you. Mr Curtis :—You said, "Vary tkeiy."—Yes, it Is my writing. Mr Cuttis Is there auy interest mentioned ? The witness read the dnciunwit uút., and there appeared to be no mention cr acj interest for the loan, and what the stjcre'try <luposite<i watt an ind us rial policy on Lhe lue 01 MisTaylor's lather for a small .urn—;U»ou' JE5. The Referee Was Mioro auy 1 kelo.o ,J of any dispute coming on then ?—Mr Bora said there was a dispute between Mr Curtis ami tho ch uch, and he had to arrange it at the tin, but this was denied by Mr Curt. The Refere • It I *vano«. £ 3 otl'J, 1 don't think :t is too much to ask fpI a Memorandum, and Mr Curtis very likely, IUI a r«»»u <>t t.os;neas, wouiu require it. Mr Bryamor Joue*: i here ie uo douot at all that that is so. The Referee Is there anything u, justify the • tatemeiiG of Mr Burn ? Suosequeutly, upon ,n cowing ii io i> uru, Mr James laylor was called and owoiirmed ins wue i evidence as to her presence at tb' )cti b r enn- munion. By Mr Jones: I have not turn my w,/e sines j dinner tiin3. I came tiere of my own accord as I promised. I did not meet my .i. ti.e iloor of thv* court. Mr W. Skeiiy was objected io by Mr Jones on the ground of absence. r Curtie supported, and the. wittess sltowed he WKS pi-»sent at the commUlHOD set VWe3 -iot d,-du..e!1 by the regwter book. His mother was marked Or being present in October, but .Ie denied being »<«, and there was very little donbt a ini»^«Ve 'dj^een m»de n marking off the ei» v»»;r. r^uxi ultiffzately the «bj«iition was with^rawo. j Ml's Ellen Williams was objected to by Mr Jones on the ground of absence. Mrs Williams admitted she was baptised in September, 1882. and attended ordinances ou that and following month, and then in December, 1883. No one ob- jected to her being present, and she was waited upon with the oleineuts by one of the deacons j as usual. She was on the roll, and claimed the « rights of membership. Mr Jones: This raises the question we have had t before. Cross-examined I never told Mr Barn I didn t intend to come to the chapel. I did tell him I never heard a minister speak from the pulpit to j people as he did. It was in consequence of his speaking too much against the Joshua Brothers of the mission I stayed away. Never gave him to understand I didn't intend again to attend. No one asked me to attend ordinance in Decem- 1 ber. Every one knew of the dispute in the 1 chapel. It was the common talk. I was there often before December in chapel, but not on or- dinance Sunday. No one suggested I should wait to communion when I got to the chapel in December. I know my name was on the roll. I never heard the rules of the church read. Mr Burn never gave them to me, nor did Mr Snow send me any. No one wrote to me about the affairs of the church. I By Mr Curtis I never thought I had lost my position in the church. By the Archdeacon They have nothing like a church at the mission, and do not celebrate the ordinance of the Lord's Supper. The Rev. Mr Burn, examined by Mr Jones I baptised the last witness. I saw her several times after Oct., 1382. I saw her on one occasion. She went into the house and locked the door to give the impression she was not at home. I spoke to her she said she had taken offence when I received candidates by making a distinction between her and other young candidates. That it was a shame she had remained j so many years in her sins. Mr Burn continued that it was nesessary for him to make a statement, and observed that he had never made any allusion of any kind to the Brothers Joshna from the pulpit in the whole course of his ministry, good or bad. The Referee My mind is not going to be tossed about by everything I hear. Mr Curtis Are wehere to have a speech from Mr Burn whenever he pleases ? The Referee: I think we had better keep to the point, and that Mr Burn should make his answers as brief as possible. Mr Burn I say in the most positive terms sh?- said she was not coming to ouv place. Win. Davies objected to, on ground of absence, but it appeared that Mr Davies left Neath in June or July last, for the Rhonr'da Valley, and returned on the 1st January, 1884, as his mother wished him to come home. He did not apply for his letter of dismission to another church, as he did not intend to stay away. After this member's evidence had been taken, the objection was withdrawn. Upon the uame of Geo. Copp being called, Mr Curtis enquired whether this was not the same ail G. T. E. Copp, fur whom an application was to be made to be inserted in the roll. It was admitted this was so. Mr Curtis He was there in December, but not there for months before. Mr Jones We have satisfied ourselves about, reasonable cause in the case. Mr Curtis He happens to be on Mr Burn's side — that's the reasonable cause. (To the Referee) I think it right to call your attention, sir, when these cases crop up, as they are similar to those in which we have had such hard words said. The Referee I wish you would do so. Another case was considered, in which Mr Jones supported a female member who had been absent since 1832. The Archdeacon observed that it appeared to be a questionable case, as the person had been restored after a long absence, and had only cOllimuned-ollce after restoration. Mr Curtis objected to the case without a medical certificate, and the matter stood over. A discussion ensued as to the adjournment and the course the Referee intended to pursue with regard to the cases in which the breaches of rules were brought up. Mr Curtis submitted that the fact that en- velopes were prepared and handed out in 1884 to the members by Mr David Harries, of the finance committee, and by Mr Snook, the church secre- tary, was quite sufficient evidence to entitle the members so supplied to all their church pri- vileges, and he asked the Referee to consider that point, and, if necessary, to take legal advice upon it before the next sitting. After some remarks from the Refcrea, Mr Jones said the Venerable Archdeacon would hear him upon the cases before he decided what to do. The Referee said he would, and the enquiry was then adjourned. ALLEGED FALSE STATEMENTS BY A NEWSPAPER. The adjourned inquiry into the dispute between the Rev. S. C. Burn, of the Baptist Chapel, Neath, and some of the members of that church, was resumed in the Council Chamber, Neath, on Tuesday, before' the Venerable Archdeacon Griffiths. The interest in the subject increases, and on Monday some sharp passages of arms occurred, making the proceedings quite as lively as on former occasions. Mr Brynmor Jones, in- structed by Mr T. Williams, appeared for Mr Burn, and those who take his views of the dis- pute, and Mr A. Curtis represented the members who are dissatisfied with Mr Burn. Ou the court assembling, Mr Curtis called attention to an article which he said had appeared in the Western Mail in re- ference to this matter, and which was headed The History of the Dispute." With the excep- tion of the last paragraph, with which ho fully agreed, the article was aboutjas disingenuous as anything could well be and he ventured to suggest that the publication of it was an act which, from any other court than that, would have brought down a severe animadver- sion as to contempt of couro. It abounded in false and misleading state- ments. He would merely call attention to one which related to something entirely outside of the venerable arbitrator's functions, and which was obviously made—ho could quite understand at whose instance—to prejudice him and his family in the eyes of the public. Mr Brynmor Jones said before his friend went further, he would like to know how far he would make the misconduct of the Western Mail evidence in the case. If he was simply calling attention to the fact that the Mail had done what news- papers generally abstained from doing, viz., commented upon the case before its termination, he (Mr Jones) had no .objection, but if he was stating in general terms that the Western Mail had written something for which he (Mr Jones) or those instructing him were respJusible- Mr Curtis I do. Mr Jones: Then I disclaim any sort of conni- vance, either directly or indirectly. Mr Curtis: There is something about the article which shows it must have been written at the instigation of Mr Burn. The Rev. S. C. Burn: It is a lie. You are a liar if you say that. The Arbitrator: Now, gentlemen, please- Mr Curtis went on that he was not complaining of the reports published, but of the false state- ments made for the express purpose of prejudicing himself and his friends. The Archdeacon expressed the regret that he saw comments upon this case and expressions of opinion with regard to it. Ho added, however, that these comments would not affect his mind in any way, and he now asked that the matter be allowed to drop. Mr Curtis said he referred to the article because ha could not answer it in the papers while these proceedings were going on, but he would have something to say about it at the right time. The evidence with respect to the membership of persons now or formerly attending the church was then continued. Annie Collins, on being called, was objected to by Mr Brynmor Jones.. on the ground that she had been absent from communion at the chapel since 1883. Mr Curtis explained that Annie Collins had been away in service at Aberavon, and that she had also suffered from illness. It was decided to call her later on. Next an altercation ensued upon the name of a youth, named John J. Gale. Mr Curtis Is he a shop assistant, Mr Burn ? Mr Burn You know him well enough. You tried to get his signature. Mr Curtis No, I did not. Yon are making assertions which you know to be incorrect. David Lewis was called, and said that he had been ill with slow fever. In the course of some other words, The Archdeacon, who called the parties to order, asked whether or not he was to rule the court. Mr Brynmor Jones replied that be himself was most obedient, and he wished the archdeacon to rule over them. He added that, if necessary, he would get a medical certificate with respect to Gale. Annie Collins, called and sworn, said, in reply to Mr Curtis, that she was a member of the Baptist Church at Neath. She went away to service at Aberavon, and returned to Neath in August owing to an attack of rheumatism. She did not attend the chapel then because things there were so disturbed her father objected to her attending on that account. In reply to Mr Jones, witness said that she had not attended the chapel in August-place since last May. Mr Jones thought that the name of Annie Collins must be struck off. George Collins, ancle of the last witness, waa thereupon called by Mr Curtis, and spoke to his mece's illness. In reply to Mr Jones, he denied that he threatened to chastise his niece if she declined to attend the Baptist Church and vote for Mr Curtis. In reply to the Archdeacon, who asked whether admission ever preceded baptism, it was stated that admission did not take place excepting a person were baptised first in the church to which he was admitted, or unless he were dismissed from another church. The Archdeacon reserved his decision in the cases referred to. The next name upon which a discussion arose was that of one Chloe James. Mr Curtis objected to Chloe James being on the register on the ground that she had been absent from cbapel since May. Mr Brynmor Jones replied that ehe had been ill for mouths. She had attended the chapel when welL The Archdeacon could not see that any peraou was entitled to be on the roll without giving proof of attendance. He could not see that dismissal from any chnrch was sufficient-they were not discussing whether Chloe James was a member of the Baptist body scattered throughout the country, but whether site was a member of this church. Mr Brynmor Jones: If she was accepted by the church, the mere fact of her not taking the Eommunion does not show that she is not a mem- ber—that is if she can show reasonable ground for not attending the Lord's Supper. Mr Curtis; Yes, I should take that view. The Archdeacon: I will reserve the case. Mr Brynmor Jones read an extract from the chapel minute book showing that Chloe James waa admitted into the chapel in March, 1883. The production of the books waa imtrmf for by til Brynmor Jones, but Mr Ourtia declined to comply with the request, whereupon the Arch- deacon was appealed to. The Arohdeacon said it would be a very serious thing if hereafter his decision were impugned be- cause he preveated certain books of unportance from being produced. Mr Brynmor Jones said he could understand why his friend was so reluctant to have the books produced. Mr Curtis said ha would produce any book which the archdeacon might think necessary for the purposos of a particular case before him. In reply to the archdeacon, Mr Brynmor Jones expressed the belief that the book he re- quired would aid the work of arbitration. Mr Curtis said that the books were simply asked for to gratify the prurient curiosity of Mr Burn. The Rev S. C. Burn I beg to say that it is false. It is a second falsehood. The Archdeacon Are these books the property of the Church ? Several Voices They are. The Archdeacon Gentlemen, one at a time, please. Mr Curtis said the question for the archdeacon was whether the books had anything to do with the case before him. If, however, the arch- deacon told him that he would not allow the books to be abused, he would produce them. Mr Brynmor Jones What right has my friend to dictate to you, sir, the terms upon which you shall order the books to be produced ? The Archdeacon said he should order the books to be produced, and if anything irrelevant cropped up in the use of them, it would be his duty to step in. Books were then handed by Mr Curtis to Mr Jonea. As before-mentioned, the case of Chloe James was reserved. The next name which was questioned was that of Sarah Ann Cox. Mr Jones objected to her name being on the register because she had not been baptised. Mr Curtis: But she has been. The Iiev. S. C. Burn Not unless Mr Curtis baptised her himself, which I kuow he did not. (Laughter.) the Archdeacon: But she is entered upon the roll of members as having been baptised by Mr Burn. We shall have to call evidence in this case. The Rev. S. C. Burn I tried hard to get her baptised, but there were objections. It appeared that the person had loft the town, and it was decided to remove her name from the list. Catherine Poley's name was also amongst those objected to, it being stated that she had not been in communion since 1883. She was called,and said that she was at communion in December last, as well as in the previous month, and contributed a donation. Her statement was borne out by her mother, and a Miss Mort, one of her friends. Mr Jones contended that Miss Poley was not present in any month excepting December, and he urged that therefore slie was not entitled to be considered a member. In another case it appeared that the name of a Miss Snelling, who attended the chapel, was not upon the attendance book at all. The Archdeacon said that was most unsatis- factory. Mr B. Jones remarked that the affairs of the church had been in great confusion owing to the conduct of Mr Curtis; and therefore the books had not been kept in the way they should have been. Mr Curtis It is a pity you cannot efface me from the earth, Mr Jones. You interject these observations continually and persistently with the obvious purpose of doing me personally all the mischief you can. The Archdeacon remarked that too much re- liance could not be put upon the attendance book. It was decided that the name of Miss Snelling should remaid on the roll that of Miss Poley was reserved for further consideration. Mr Gandy, clerk to Mr Curtis, said he was present at a church meeting of Mr Burns' chapel on October 25th, when the names of Mr and Mrs James were introduced by Mr Burn. An objec- tion was raised that they had no letters of dis- mission from Herbert-road Baptist Church, which they had formerly attended, but Mr Burn said he would not trouble about letters in their case. He also said Mr Maxwell, of the Herbert-road Chapel, had received members from Orchard- place Chapel (Mr Burn's) without letters, and therefore he (Mr Burn) should not require letters. A resolution was put and carried, that Mr and Mrs James be received. The Rev. S. C. Burn, on being called upon by his counsel, said that Mr James informed him that he wished to be received into his (Mr Burn's) church "as from the world." He added that the preacher at Herbert-road Chapel had treated him rather unhandsomely, and he should not wish to ask for a letter. Hence Mr and Mrs James were received without letters. Walter Willis objected to by Mr Curtis on the ground of absence. Mr Willis said I absented from communion ten months—since March last. I was absent through ill health. It lasted two or three months, No one made enquiry about me except Mr Jonah Rees. I didn't iiitend leaving. I liked to be looked after in the church, If I were in a position to join the church I should do so, but I anticipate leaving Neath soon. By the Referee: My illness began in March and continued until June. Then the dispute commenced in the chapel, and I naturally didn't care to retain my membership in a chapel where there was such a dispute. I went to the Calvinis- tic Church. The Referee Where ? Mr Burn: The tin chapel. The Referee I took Communion there for two months. I began to attend there about 9 months ago. On one or two occasions after I recovered I went to the Baptist Chapel. I asked for no letter of dismission from the other chapel where I went to. I was received merely by the vote. The list of new members whose names were not on the roll was next gone through, and then cases which had been reserved for the attendance of the members objected to were called over. That of Mrs Betsy Lloyd was dealt with. Mr Curtis objected on the cround of absence. Mrs Betsy Lloyd stated I have been a member for about 7 years. Went away to Hampshire about September, 1882. There was no Baptist Chapel nearer than three miles and a half. I came back in November, 1883. I went to Hamp- shire because my mother was ill. It was at December, 1883, communion that was the first communion after my return. I have had my envelopes for this year. By Mr Curtis I sat down at December ordi- nance. Wm. Lloyd wasn't at home till the 19th of December. Mr Lloyd and his wife, brother, and mother were not there. My mother-in-law was not present at the service on the 16th of December. My sister and I took sacrament to- gether in December. By the Referee I came back to Neath in November. By Mr Curtis I put 6d in the envelope, I am positive, Mrs Lloyd, my sister-in-law, always put in something. Sho had her envelopes. I can't say what she put in the envelopes. I don't know that only 3d is entered in the contri- bution book as loose money collected at the December communion. My sister-in-law always put in en velopes. I don't know whether she used the envelopes or not. There has been no commu- nion service since William came home. By Mr Jones I am not sure which basket I put it into. In reply to this witness, Mrs Mary Gwynn stated I am a member of Orchard-place Baptist Chapel. I was present at the December ordi- nance. After the first meeting I spoke to William Lloyd and said, Welcome home." Mr and Mrs Lloyd (both families) and an elder friend of theirs went out. I remarked at the time that they might have stopped. I knew that Lloyd had been in America. By Mr Jones: We talked of it as we came ont —about their not sitting to communion. They sat right in the seat in front of me. I was present at that communion and stayed. I put a mark to a circular in November, 1883. I was asked by Mr Curtis. He never asked me to come to give evidence. I couldn't bear to hear such untruths spoken. I haven't been here before to-day. Mrs Betsy Lloyd shook hands with me the night she was baptised. My husband sat by my side that night. No one came over to me just now to give evidence. I didn't see Mr Gandy. I told Mr Alford that Mrs Lloyd was speaking a falsehood. William Lloyd was called by Mr Jones, and said I sat down just in front of Mrs Gwynn. She shook hands with me on the Sunday evening. I was present in chapel and I thanked her. I positively say I never saw a communion service at the church that night. The communion ser- vice is visible throughout all the prior service. By Mr Curtis I can't swear my mother was not there. My brother might have been there, but I don't recollect. I believe he was. I now believe he was there and his wife. I went in to see Mrs Stacey on the day after the Sunday ser- vice. I can't remember what I said to them about anything unusual connected with the ser- vice. I remember that Mr Burn cried during prayer. I wouldn't be surprised if that was on the 16th of December. I won't undertake to swear I was not at the chapel on the 16th of De- cember. I went out immediately after the first service. My wife went out with me. By Mr Jones Mr Burn seetned affected greatly. It was nothing unusual for him to exhibit grief. That was the only time I saw Mr Burn cry. He didn't shed tear3 on that occasion. He didn't actually break down, bnt there was quite a sensa- tion. I have perceived the same symptoms several times. In connection with this case the Rev. S. C. Burn waa examined, and went on to state that Mr Curtis and his son had been the centre of a group of young men who had caused ill-feeling in the church. Mr Curtis This is another exhibition of your malicious feeling. Mr Burn 1 throw it back in your teeth, Curtis. The rev. Archdeacon Gentleman, let us avoid these scenes. Mr Burn went on to say that if Mr Curtis took advantage of his position to insult him, he should not submit to it. Mr Curtis Did you make a scene in the chapel on the 16th December ? Mr Burn What do you mean by a scene ? Mr Curtis: Did you cry in the chapel on the 16th December, or attempt to cry ? Mr Burn What do you mean? Mr Curtis I say" cry, or affect to cry." Mr Burn Put the question properly. Mr BryumorJones It is an offensive question, as Mr Cnrtis suggests, by way of innuendo, that Mr Burn's feelings ware not real. There is a sugges- tion that Mr Burns was guilty of hypocrisy. bo The Archdeacon I think, Mr Curtis, you might put the question in another form. Mr Curtis (to Mr Burn): Did you cry on this occasion—the 16th December ? Mr Burn I don't think I did cry, but my voice was broken with emotion. If Mr Curtis can swear that he saw tears— A Voice You cried, and wiped away the tears. Mr Bum: What is your next question, Mr Curtis ? Mr Curtis Oh, you have found the Mr," have yon ? (Laughter.) Mr Burn: Yes, if you like you shall be esquire" or town clerk." (Renewed laughter.) Mr Curtia Did you demean yourself in the put pit ? I Mr Bum I never did demean myself in the pulpit. There is a double meaning to that word. The Archdeacon t Ob. take it iu ilil ordinary !v; I8D88o 1 Mr Curtis Did you so act as to give the con- gregation the idea that you were crying ? Mr Burn Do you mean act as a play-actor does ? Mr Curtis (emphatically) I will have an an- swer to my question. Mr Burn That depends apon whether you put it in a proper shape. Ycu can raise your voice and snarl, and growl as much as you like. The Archdeacon said it was a pity they should go on in that way at the close, after getting on so quietly. Mr Jones said he had advised Mr Burn to an- swer the question. Mr Curtis complained that Mr Burn fenced with the questions. The Archdeacon (to Mr Burn) < Was there- anything in your voice or appearance to lead the people to think that you were giving way to tears? Mr Burn I was quite unmanned, and had to sit down. The Arbitrator Then you will accept the word demean as I put it—that there was in your demeanour that which might be construed into a shedding of tears, or an expression of deep emotion. Mr Burn: Oh, yes; but what I resent is that I was shedding tears to produce an effect like an actor. (Laughter.) Mr Curtis Did you on any other occasion during the mouth of December give the congre- gation a similar impression—that you were un- manned, and had to sit down ? Mr Burn I have no doubt every Sunday even- ing in Deccn.ber after your misbehaviour I did. I was in groat trouble, and suffering from excite- ment. Mr Curtis Will you undertake to swear that on any other Sunday evening you became, as you term it, unmanned, and were obliged to sit down? Mr Burn I don't think I sat down, except ones. Mr Curtis Or were you, to use you own ex- pression, unmanned on any other Sunday even- ing? Did anything approaching a scnsational oc- currence take place any other Sunday evening ? Mr Burn Yes, your son was the hero of many disturbances. You know that very well. Mr Curtis (violently) No, sir, I do not. Don't appeal to me. I say all through this case you have been hurling misstatements at myself. Mr Burn They are true. Mr Curtis They are scandalous and false. The Archdeacon Come to the question, gentle- men. Mr Curtis This man insults me when I put a question. The Archdeacon: Give him another trial? Mr Burn He will drop me like a hot potato. (Laughter.) Mr Curtis Oh, no, I won't; don't you be afraid. If you go on like this, I will askthe arbi- trator to commit you for contempt of court. Mr Burn I will appeal to him to commit you. Mr Curtis You behave yourself. Mr Burn Behave yourself. Mr Curtis, turning to the archdeacon, said he would not insult himself or the court by con- tinuing the examination of such a witness. In reply to Mr Jones, Mr Burn said that Mr Curtis had stated that he (Mr Burn) whined in the pulpitj in order to curry favour, and pose as a martyr. After some further examination, the inquiry was adjourned. EXTRAORDlNAEf DETAILS. SCENES IN COURT. At the Town-hall, Neath, on Wednesday, the Ven. Archdeacon of Llandaff resumed an inquiry into the dispute which has arisen at the Baptist Chapel, Neath, between the pastor (the Rev. S. O. Burn) and a large number of the members of the church. The object of the investigation is to revise the membership roll, in order to ascertain who are and who are not entitled to a voice in the settlement of the affairs of the chapel. Mr Bryn- mor Jones, barrister, appeared for Mr Burn, whilst Mr Curtis represented those differing from Mr Burn. Upon the Archdeacon taking his seat, Mr Curtis said that ha had once more to call attention to the Western Mail. This time his complaint referred to a letter which appeared in that paper over the signature of Mr Burn, and he would simply ask the archdeacon whether be had read it, making no observation upon it in view of what the archdeacon had said on several former occasions. Mr Brynmor Jones said that the letter appeared to him not to relate to anything which had taken place before him, or to make any comment upon the proceedings. The report, the letter complains, was not that of an ordinary reporter of the paper, but was communicated by a clerk to Mr Curtis. Mr Burn And one of his perjured witnesses. Mr Curtis: You hear that, sir; "one of his perjured witnesses." The Archdeacon (to Mr Bum): I hope you will refrain from these comments. The evidence was then proceeded with. The names of perjons attending the chapel were called out, and upon their membership being questioned, witnesses were produced to speak to the nature of their connection with the church. The membership of Mr aud Mrs Lloyd was disputed by Mr Curtis, and Mrs Stacey was called. She said that she lived nearly opposite the Lloyds. She saw Mr Lloyd on the 16th of December in chapel for the first time. He, his wife, his sister-in-law, and his brother had returned on the 15th of December. That was the ordinance Sunday. They were pre- sent at the first service. Witness saw them all go home together. They were shaking bands with some friends, and she also saw Mrs Gwyn. Examined by Mr Jones I am the wnfe of Mr Stacey, the printer. Mr Jones Does yourhusband do thecorporation printing? Mrs Stacey You must ask him that. Mr Jones I ask you that. Mrs Stacey Well, a very little. Mrs Ellen Williams, examined by Mr Curtis, said that she was in chapel on this occasion—the December ordinance. She knew the Lloyd family well, and saw them at the general service in the evening. She saw Mr Lloyd a.nd his wife, and Thomas Lloyd and his wife. They went out at the close of the first service. All those she had men- tioned went out then. Witness did not stay to communion. Mr Jones was speaking on behalf of the Lloyds' memb2rship, when Mr Curtis said that if Mr Jones was going to deny the witnesses he (Mr Curtis) had just called, their evidence going to show that the Lloyds were not members, he would call another witness. Mr Jones replied that Mr Curtis had closed his case, and that in offering to call further wit- nesses he was treating him (Mr Jonas) with great discourtesy—personal discourtesy. He (Mr Jones) was getting up to say that his witnesses might have been mistaken, and that Mr Curtis's wit- nesses might have bean guilty of a like fault. Mr Curtis: I say thera has been an attempt to mislead the court. Mr Jones replied that that was tantamount to a charge of perjury, and he thought an advocate should pause before he made such a suggestion. He (Mr Jones) had carefully abstained from say- ing that any member of tho church had been guilty of perjury it had been reserved for his friend to make that grave accusation against a member of his own church. Mrs Lloyd was good enough to sign a paper which Mr Curtis inde- cently got her to sign. Mr Curtis What has that got to do with it ? Mr Burn: Ah Mr Jones: My friend makes a grave accusation against Mrs Lloyd of committing perjury. Mr Curtis: You are the gentleman who used the word perjury—learnt, I suppose, from Mr Burn. Mr Burn That is a lie The Archdeacon; Hush. Mr Barn: I must say so. Mr Curtis said if the archdeacon read the notes of the evidence he would see that Mrs Lloyd was attempting to mislead the court. Mr Burn: This is misleading the court. The Archdeacon (to Mr Burn): I do hope you will be quiet. The next name questioned was /that of James Daniel, eubmitted as a member by Mr Brynmor Jones, who put in Mr Daniel's statutory declara- tion in his absence. Mr Curtis at first objected to the declaration being put in, because, he said, the man himself was in the town, and could attend. Mr Jones then offered to call evidence upon the declaration, when Mr Curtis said he would rather admit it as it stood, than have a complexion put upon it by someone else. Mr Jones My friend now suggests that the gentleman who instructs me has been guilty of perjury. Mr Curtis For shame Mr Jones I do not know Mr Daniel's signa- ture, but I will take the declaration for what it is worth. The gentleman is not here for cross- examination, and therefore this document should be accepted cum grnno salis. He afterwards called Mr Robert Scale, who said that he was em- ployed by the Great Western Railway Company. as also was James Daniel. Knew Daniel well. He never worked on Sundays. During the latter part of last year he was in regular health, and attended his duties, and might have attended the services. He had asked Daniel why ho did not attend, but be wouldn't give any reasons. He never said that sickness was the cause of his staying at home. Mr Jones proceeded to address some observ- ations to the court, mentioning the name of Mr Curtis several times, when Mr Curtis said that it was a pity Mr Jones could not remove him from the faca of the earth. Mr Burn here laughed loudly. Mr Curtis When you have done laughing I will resume my duties. Mr Burn continued to laugh. Mr Curtis When you have quite done I will go on. The Archdeacon Really, Mr Barn (To Mr Erynmor Jones) I must look to you for protection. I don't properly understand your status if Mr Burn interrupts in this way. Are you not here as the advocate ? Mr Jones I hold a brief. The Archdeacon: Is it not the rule in all courts that the advocate, and not others, should conduct the case ? Mr Jones My proceedings as an advocate are not hampered by anything which Mr Burn may do. I feel that great allowance ought to be made for Mr Burn in this case. Mr Curtis And not for me ? Mr Burn No. The Archdeacon objected to both sides to ex- press any manifestation of feeling. Mr Jones said that the disturbances did not come from his side only. Mr Curtis said that if Mr Burn continued to go on in the way that he had done, he should ask the archdeacon to order him out of court. Mr Jones did not know why his friend made such a statement as that now-let him make the appeal when Mr Burn transgressed, and be (Mr Jones) would deal with it then. Mr Curtis 1 will make it the next time that he misbehaves himself. Mr Burn And I will make a similar one. Mr Jones Then you see we are in this posi- tion I cannot ask Mr Curtis to be turned out, because he is an advocate. The Archdeacon wished it plainly to be under- stood that interruptions on either side did not at all assist the side from which they came. In fact, theot interruptions will rather weigh on the lido opposite to that from which they come, because I when passion is allowed to rule, reason must be giving way. Reason and passion cannot work together. Mr Burn was then called, and said that he had made enquiries from Mr Daniel, who had given him satisfactory reasons (which were ef domea- ticjnature) for his not attending the communion. In the course of the proceedings, Mr Curtis said be wished to call the attention of the arbi- trator to the presence in court of one Walter Rees. He was allowed to be here aft day yesoordayon the pretext that he was to be called. He was there again that day, and he was not only here, but be had had the impudence to threaten to give bis (Mr Curtis's) junior clerk, who was & member of the church, "a slap in the mouth." (Laughter.) Mr Rees I did not say anything of the sort. Mr Jones: I think this is an improper matter for Mr Ourtis to introduce now. Supposing these clerks disagree-- The Archdeacon I am not thinking about the slap in the mouth, but whether Mr Reas is justified in being here after the rule I have laid down. Mr Jones: I am told that he is helping Mr Williams, solicitor, as his clerk. The Arohdeacon: I don't think that will bold. Mr Curtis Is not the pretext a shadowy, flimsy one ? (Laughter.) After some other remarks, the young man Rees retired from the court. Mr Brynmor Jones said he now came to those cases in which he claimed to strike the names of certain persons from the roll of members of the church, on the grouud that they bad committed breaches of the rules of so serious a character, that the arbitrator in the exercise of his discretion ought not to permit them to remain members of the church. The names were those of Alfred Cnrtis, Edwin Curtis, John Dowdell, John Davies, James Gandy, William Rosser, William Slow, B. II. Thomas, Henry Thomas, and William Mort. He proposed to take the cases en bloc, as they were of the same character, though the evidence with regard to some of them was much stronger than with respect to others. It was particularly strong with respect to Mr Alfred Curtis, Mr Edwin Curtis, Mr Gandy, and perhaps,he might add,Mr B. H. Thomas. Siine serious differences arose in this church, Mr Jones went on, between the different members; and as was the caF?e with nearly every dispute, whether it took place in Parliament or a church, there were leaders, and persons more conspicuous than others, and Mr Curtis was considered to be the leader of the faction which was perpetually harassing Mr Burn, with the intention of discrediting his ministry, depriving him of his office as pastor of the church, ruining his professional prospects, and driving him away from the town aitogether. Mr Curtis objected to Mr Jones going into all this. What the arbitrator had to enquire into, he said, was not the unfortunate dispute which had arisen in the church, but simply into the question of who were or who were not entitled to be on the roll. The Archdeacon said that only such matters in the opening speech as were borne out in the evi- dence would have weight with him. Mr Curtis replied that the speech of Mr Jones would find its way into the newspapers, whether it was afterwards substantiated or not. After some other discussion, the archdeacon allowed Mr Jones to proceed. He expressed the regret of himself and those who instructed him that the necessity for this arbitration should have arisen and went on to say that it would decide whether or not Mr Burn was to continue pastor of the church. Therefore the interest of Mr Burn in this matter was different in character and different in degree to the interest which Mr Curtis and those acting with him had in the matter. An attempt had been made by Mr Burn and those acting with him to heal the dispute amicably—(No, no, and yes, yes)—but he felt that it was no longer possible to heal it. Owing to the insinuations made against him, Mr Burn was anxious that bis whole life should be investi- gated, said the learned counsel, and he went on to give particnlars. of the rev. gentleman's career, dating from his college career, and showing that his ministerial labours had been very success- ful in various towns, where testimonials had been presented to him. Nothing could be more pro- mising than the state of affairs when Mr Burn first entered upon his duty as pastor of the Baptist Chapel, at Neatb,and in a very short time he bap- tised the extraordinary number of 88. Mr Curtis occupied in that chapel a place of very consider- able importance. He had been connected with the church for a great many years, and the ministers previous to Mr Burn appeared to have submitted to the dictation of Mr Curtis. Mr Curtis (rising excitedly) Will you call any of them, sir ? Will you call Mr Hawker or Mr Mills? Mr Junes: I dare say they would support Mr Curtis. It is the suggestion that they were the tools of Mr Curtis. Mr Curtis: Tools tools, sir Mr Jones went on that Mr Curtis had become virtually the bishop of the church. At the busi- ness meetings he would sit by the side of the pastor, and continually interfere, so as to suit all the arrangements to himself. On Sunday he was in the habit of making such arrangements ashe thought fit, and commenting or exhorting in connection with the announcements in an unwelcome manner. Mr Curtis, interrupting, said that the learned counsel was reading from a pamphlet which it had been intended to issue, and about which they had read in the newspapers. Mr Jones I don't know why my friend should look at my brief. Mr Curtis You tr-c Jgadiug the pamphlet. Mr J ones I am nki-rating facts. Mr Curtis No, you are not. Mr Jones went on that it was admitted that Mr Curtis had done useful service to the church in the past, but he came to attempt pastoral func- tions, and his ambition resulted in a fall. Mr Burn was a man pleasing to the congregation, his minis- trations were immediately successful, and whether or not that excited jealousy on the part of Mr Curtis, certainly it was that within a few weeks of Mr Burn becoming pastor, Mr Curtis assumed a significant attitude at the recognition meeting of Mr Burn. The speech made by Mr Curtis was in marked contrast to those which fell from the lips of other speakers. In November, 1882. Mr Burn found that there was very considerable hostility towards the influence which Mr Curtis exercised in the church. The first dispute WilS with respect to ths lowering of the pulpit. Mr Curtis Don't you think you are lowering the pulpit ? Mr Jones I am not in it. Mr Curtis Some of the remarks you make are so small they really lowertbo pulpit considerably. Mr Jones I don't quite follow you. The Archdeacon Mr Curtis is indulging in figurative irony. Me Jones went on that this pulpit was absurdly high. Mr Curtis It was designed by an eminent Lonc.cn architect. Mr Jones said Mr Curtis was the only one who objected to the lowering of the pulpit. He showed himself to be highly displeased with the other deacons who unanimously agreed with Mr Burn in the lowering of the pulpit, Mr Curtis I did not. Mr Jones said that because Mr Curtis was opposed with respect to the pulpit he showed great lukewarmness in the matter of pro- viding an organ—he refused to proceed with a plan ne had hitherto favoured with regard to the organ. The idea was entertained that Mr Curtis wished to get his son appointed a deacon. Mr Curtis That is false. It is an invention of that wicked man (Mr Burn). Mr Jones: I don't know why my friend in- terrupts. Mr Curtis (excitedly): It is a pure invention, or an impure invention of that wicked man. The Archdeacon But you have seen it before. Mr Curtis Yes, I have seen it in print. It is a shameful and scandalous invention. Mr Jones dared say that young Mr Curtis would have made an excellent deacon—at least at that time—and therefore he did not know why it would be such a monstrous thing for his father to propose him. He (Mr J ones) abstained from using adjectives he had simply stated facts. Mr Curtis No, you are not. You are stating certain suggestions of a wicked man's mind. After some other remarks had been made, Mr Jones continued his address, mentioning a num- ber of instances of conduct on the part of the Messrs Curtis and the others named, which, as he (Mr Jones) alleged, constituted such a breach of rules as to deprive them of membership. At a church meeting on tho 12th April, Mr Curtis said that if Mr Miilett was elected a deacon he would not work with him, but would resign his office. Mr Miilett was elected, and Mr Curtis after- wards publicly animadverted upon the prayer which he offered up. On another occasion, Mr Curtis, in dissenting from the minister's ruling, was guilty of rudeness, in so far that be accused Mr Burn of partiality. Upon a missionary visiting the Sunday schools, Mr Edwin Curtis ascended the platform, saying he had to offer a personal explanation, but the per- sonal explanation tnrned out to be an attack upon thi pastor of the church. The pastor on that occasion requested Mr Edwin Curtis to sit down, whereupon hebecame abusive. OneSunday morning Mr Burn preached from the folio wing text 11th chapter of Mark, commencing at the 38th verse, "And He said unto them in His doctrine, Beware of the Scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the market places, (39) And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts; (40) Which devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayers; these shall receive greater dam- nation." Upon the minister coming to the word II damnation," there was a perturbation on the part of Mr Curtis and his sons, who sat just beneath the pulpit. In the course of his sermon Mr Burn quoted the following passage :— When Eve tempted Adam, it was the first but not the last instance in which Satan employed one human being who had succumbed to his influ- ence to decoy another into the same evil case. One day I found two men in conversation, who were members of the same church, and one of them afterwards told me that the other had been tempting him to distrust his minister and his brethren." Upon the preacher getting to the word other," Mr Curtis did what he (Mr Jones) had never seen in any place of worship. The Archdeacon Well, there was no disturb- ance ? Mr Jones No excepting that Mr Bum ob- served that Mr Curtis appeared to be much perturbed. The Archdeacon How could Mr Bum or any- one else know the real cause of it ? Mr Junes went on to say that at another time Mr Curtis stood up in his pew and stared at the minister in a fierce manner. He also charged Mr Curtis with having ob- tained a number of signatures to a document which was a libel upon Mr Bum. He contended that Mr Burn had been harassed by the conduct of Mr E. O. Curtis and others acting in concert with him. The next scene oc- curred on the 25th November. Mr Curtis: Why don't you refer to the 8th November? Was it rifrbt for Mr Burn to say that persons were threatening to burn himself and me in effigy, and then refuse to give up the name of the author when tusked! On the 2nd December a meeting of church mem- bers was convened by Mr Curtis and his friends, and Mr Barn determined to preside at it» It had been mentioned to him casually that an objection would be raised to hu doing 80. Th Archdeacon: Did he have any notice of that ? Mr Joaes No notice, sir; the other aide played their cards too well for that. Mr CurtM He had a notice of the meeting sent him. Mr Joaes proceeded to quote the words of tho circular, and contended they were such as to I bring about unpleasantness in the diurch, and practically to do Mr Burn out of hie pastorate. Mr Curtis inquired whether 123 members had not the right to invite the rest of the members I to a couferenca when they had a grievance. Mr Jones It is a schism. The Archdeacon: In that case the discipline of the Baptist body is very arbitrary. Mr Jones then proceeded to give Mr Burn's version of what transpired at the meeting on the I 2nd December, and which has already been be- fore the public. He urged that Mr Burn, under the rules, had the right to preside at the meeting. In the evening a notice convening the meeting of the church was put up in the lobby by Mr G. C. Curtis, convened to consider the cenduct of the pastor and those who had acted with him in thwarting the meeting, attempted to be held during the afternoon. That was torn down by Mr Burn. Subsequently Mr E. Curtis got another notice, and put that up, but it tvas also pulled down by some one. Mr Miilett: I did it. Mr Jones: Later on, during the servioe, John Davies attempted to give out a notice. The Archdeacon: Now here is a body of people meeting together—not a church meeting—to con- sider grievances, at a school-room where concerts, &c., are held. They came there to talk over their grievances. Do you think the pastor has the right of presiding in such a case? Mr Jones He is to preside in the assemblies of the church, according to the rules. Mr Curtis This was a meeting of members simply called to talk over the grievances, and Mr Burn's conduct was in question. I consider that in this instance the conveners bad the right to propose their own chairman. Mr Jones: The rules put it that the members recognise the directions as given in the Gospel according to St. Matthew. The Archdeacon Those are in regular church assemblies. This was not a church meeting. Mr Jones continued On the 16th Decem- ber the communion service was held, svhen, as he was instructed, persons were whipped up for the occasion. The cup containing the wine was refused by Mr Curtis from one deacon, and he beckoned to another, who was a partizan, to bring him the cup. Mr Curtis: Do you intend to prove that ? Mr Jones Yes, I do. Mr Curtis: You can't do so, Mr Jones: Treat it argumentatively if yon like; but don't speak of that as a fact, because it is not. Mr Jones: It is my instructions that Mr Curtis did so, and they were, of course, very painful to Mr Burn. He mentioned several other acts alleged against the members who differed from Mr Burn, especially that Mr Curtis had brought an action against Mr Burn for libel, and that he, with others, had instituted proceedings in Chancery, which were acts contrary to the rules of the church. The Archdeacon, after Mr Jones had narrated further alleged grievances, wanted to know why no church meetings had been called to deal with Mr Curtis and his son, and why the offences had been allowed to pass. Why was no discipline exercised ? Why were there no private ad- monitions given, as directed in the gospel of St. Matthew ? Mr Jones said he understood that bad been done. Mr Curtis said there had been nothing of the kind. The Archdeacon I have been waiting to hear of these meetings. Mr Jones: The power these gentlemen held prevented then. The Archdeacon (To Messrs A. and E. C. Curti ) Were you ever visited and admonished in respect of these matters brought against you ? Messrs Curtis Certainly not never. Further statements having been made, Mr J ones contended that the acts narrated, if proved, justified the names of all the members he had mentioned being taken off the roll. Mr Curtis proposed, for the purposes of this case, and for argument's sake only, and not as a matter of fact, that the statements made by Mr Jones should be admitted as if they had been proved by witnesses, and so save any further time being occupied with evidence. The Archdeacon That is a very generous way of dealing with the case. Mr Jones You will admit, for the purposes of the case, the statements I have made ? Mr Curtis: Yes, for that purpose only, but ne t as being true. The Archdeacon I will make a note of that. Mr Curtis said he would now shortly deal with the case, and he would call the archdeacon's at- tention to the fact that Mr Snook (the secretary) and Mr D. Harries had prepared a list, for which envelopes were prepared, and they had been handed to the members now objected to. This clearly showed a mere afterthought on the part of Mr Burn and those who were acting with him that at that time he (Mr Curtis) and the other members were not duly qualified. These 10 members, whose right to membership was now questioned, had, as a fact. received the envelopes at the beginning of 1884, and that fact showed they were then considered by the persons who now objected to them as being entitled to all their privileges as such. He oalled attention to the fact that Mr Thomas was the superintendent of the chief Sunday-school, and Mr Snow the super- intendent of the branch Sunday-school. Were they persons who were likely to commit a breach of the lules ? It was time Mr Burn had taken up the rules, and stated in church meetings that he could tear them to pieces. Mr Jones That has not been proved. Mr Curtis It is true, though. With regard to the 10 persons objected to, it was proved that they were deacons, and had acted as such up to the 10th of January, 1884. There were then only three other members who had been inculpated in the somewhat long address of Mr Jones, viz., himself, his son, and Mr John Daviea. All that was alleged against John Davies was that ha endeavoured, at the usual time and place, to give out the notice of a church meeting, and Mr Curtis submitted, the archdeacon would tako it, horn what happened about the time, that he gave out such notice at the instance of a large number of members. As to Mr E. C. Curtis, the allegation against him was that he has acted offen- sively towards the pastor with regard to the concert; he has been charged with starting it for the express purpose of thwarting the mis- sionary meeting. But those who knew him and his son, and the interest which they had always taken in missions, know also they were not likely to do such an act as that complained of. For himself, he had almost been contemporary with the venerable archdeacon with regard to this particular church. He came there in 1855, and the rules were, as he would have noticed, framed in the same year. Ever since he (Mr Curtis) had identified himself with the church, and it might be, in doing what he considered to be his duty towards it, he had been obliged to take up an antagonistic position with regard to Mr Burn—a gentleman with whom he should only have been too delighted to have been able to work in harmony with, and whatever he had done had only been done under a stern sense of duty. As to the alleged breaches of rules, he should like to know why they had not been the subject of inquiry at church meetings. It had been suggested to the archdeacon that of all people he (Mr Cartis) was the most powerful. Yet he did not attend any of the church meetings from June to December. Was there not, then, an opportunity for the pastor and the church to deal with the allegations now brought against him, and those who thought with him ? It had been urged that in April, 1883, the church was sufficiently strong to outvote him by 33 to 7 why did not the church deal with him then, when they had such full power, as contended by Mr Jones ? Never during the time he was in office in the church as treasurer and deacon had such arbitrary proceedings been witnessed as had occurred during the past few months. Mr Curtis called attention to the fact that Mr D. Harries, as finance secretary, chose to mark certain parties as not entitled to be supplied with envelopes because of a violation of rule 2 of the church. Why (asked Mr Curtis) should he make a distinction with regard to other members ? why did he not deal with them if they had, as was alleged now against them, committed breaches of other rules ? or why did not the finance committee report the matters to the church ? With these observations he left them in the hands of the archdeacon to deal with. It was subsequently arranged that six cases should be enquired into by the archdeacon at a private sitting, and the award thereafter pub- lished by him in the usual manner. The award will be ready on Monday, the 28th inst and the I church meeting stands further adjourned by j agreement to the 1st of May. j With reference to a letter addressed by the Rev i S. C. Barn to our local contemporary, and pub- lished in yesterday's issue, we are compelled, in justice to ourselves, to make one or two remarks. In that communication Mr Burn evidently wishes to convey the impression that our reports of the above case are biassed against him, because our Neath reporter is in Mr Curtis's employment, and also one of Mr Burn's opponents. What object Mr Burn had in view in writing such a letter is not very clear, except on the supposition that he wishes our readers to think better of him and bis case than they would otherwise do. In reply, we have to assure our readers that on one day only of the hearing was the case reported by our Neath reporter, and he indignantly denies the eharges of suppressio veri and suggestio falsi. On all other days the case has been reported by one of our Cardiff staff, who has no personal in- terest whatever in the matter. Mr Burn should be the last man in the world to bring anyjcharge of unfairness against us. From the first our columns were, as he knows, open to him to state his case as freely and fully as he wished, nor did we, on a single occasion, decline to pub- lish any letter which he forwarded for insertion, except when we refused to be the medium of pub- lishing libels against a brother minister and other persons whose names he dragged into the dispute. We have certainly no occasion to take offence at the too great abundance of his gratitude.