Evening Republican, Volume 19, Number 219, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 15 September 1915 — OUSTED MEMBER OF CHURCH WANTS $15,000 [ARTICLE]

OUSTED MEMBER OF CHURCH WANTS $15,000

Walter Johnston, Who Was Put Out of Remington Christian Church, Files Suit. Called Him “Mischief Maker’’ Remington’s Lumber Merchant and Prominent Sunday School Worker Who Was Put -Out of Church By Board of “Elders” Last April, Starts Action for Damages, Making William C. Smalley, Samuel Bowman, Ezra Bowman, J. W. Hamilton and Rev. I. Konkle Defendants—Jasper Guy & Co. Are the'‘Attorneys.

Walter E. Johnston, lumber dealer in Remington, through his attorneys, Jasper Guy & Co., has filed a $25,000 damage suit against the board of elders of the Christian church of Remington and including the pastor of the church, Rev. I. Konkle, as one of the defendants.

Johnston’s action i.i based upon the fact that the board of elders on the 11th day of last April removed his name from the rolls of the church, alleging that he was a “mischief maker” and a “reviler of men.” Johnston had been very active in church and Sunday school work in Remington and all over Jasper county and the action of the elders at the time was a great surprise except in Remington where discontent had existed for some time.

Johnston objects to the action removing him and charges that he has suffered a business injury because of the action of the board and that the board was without authority to remove him from membership as that was something that the congregation as a whole would have to vote on.

While the case is a very sensational one, the allegations in the complaint are not particularly SQr-as the facts stated above constitutes practically all that is embodied in the complaint. The complaint alleges that on April 11,1915, the persons named as defendants, William C. Smalley, Samuel Bowman, Ezra Bowman and James W. Hamilton composed the board of elders of the church and that Rev. I. Konkle was the pastor. That “the defendants without any warrant of law either civil or ecclesiastical, wickedly and maliciously conspired together for the purpose of injuring plaintiff in his good name, fame, credit and business, and to bring him into public scandal and disgrace, in a certain discourse which the defendants had at a public me sting held in th? Christian church in Re; li.igtoi on said April 11,1915, and in the presence and hearing of a large congregation which consisted of a large portion of the members of said church and/>f divers other persons when and there present wickedly, falsely and maliciously spoke and published of and concerning this plaintiff the following wicked, false and malicious words, to-wit: “First: That plaintiff was a “mischief maker,” meaning thereby to con-, vey the idea that plaintiff was guilty of inciting quarrels, disturbances and law suits among the inhabitants of the town of Remington and the vicinity thereof. “Second: That plaintiff was a “reviler of men,” meaning thereby to convey the idea that plaintiff was guilty of slander, libel and the making of false insinuations against the inhabitants of said town and the vicinity thereof. “Third: That plaintiff was guilty of

withholding his rightful support of the Christian church of Remington, meaning thereby to convey the idea that plaintiff had failed and refused to pay his subscription and financial obligations to the Christian church of Remington. “By means Whereof plaintiff has been injured in his good name, fame, credit, business and reputation to the value of $25,000, for which he de‘mands judgment of the defendant?.” "A second paragraph sets out that the plaintiff has lived in Remington seven years, during which time he had been an active worker in the Christian church and (Sunday School and engaged in the lumber business in the town of Remington. He states that during all of the time he enjoyed the rights and privileges of the church and .Sunday School of which he was the superintendent of the Sunday School. He alleges that'he was a large contributor to the financial support of the church and that the implication that he was not is untrue. He further alleges that during all of the seven years he has been in Remington and a member of the ’church and superintendent of the Sunday School he has conducted himself in" a manner fitting his position as such . superintendent and church member. That I. Konkle, the pastor, had been pastor of the church for about one year prior to the date of the action of the board of elders.

The complaint alleges that the ouster proceedings against the. plaintiff were not brought before the church congregation but that the defendants constituted the board that threw him out and that they were without proper authority as such matters are required to be voted upon by the entire congregation. That the defendants in their action against the plaintiff were without any “right, privilege, authority or power granted to them by either the Christian church of Remington or the Christian church at large, but that the elders conspired together and organized themselves into a mock court for the purpose of injuring the good name, fame, credit, reputation and business of the plaintiff. That after they were organized they went to the church where a public meeting was being held and published to the crowd there assembled that the plaintiff had been voted from membership because he was a “mischief maker,” a “reviler of men,” and had not contributed to the church in the amount he was able to do. The unfortunate affair has seriously injured the work of the Christian church of Remington and it is understood there are some who are taking the part of Mr. Johnston. Those, however, who know the defendants personally know them to be men of excellent citizenship and Christian meh who have long been bulwarks in the Christian church of Remington and will not believe that their action toward Johnston was based upon any desire to do him an injury, but with the belief that discord in the church could best be overcome by having him no longer a member of the church. Recently Mr. Johnston published a lengthy article in The Remington Press that was calculated to cause much dissension in the church and it evidently opened up the wound that was caused by his dismissal from membership. Whether the case will be tried in this city or sent out of the county on change of venue is not known at this time.