in the following summer was elected Bishop of Minne-
sota. He delivered his farewell sermon to this Church
on October 2, and on the 8th of November, with the
consent of Bishop Whitehouse, Bishop Whipple held in
this church his first confirmation. After the resignation
of Rev. Mr. Whipple, the Church extended a call to
Rev. J. S. B. Hodges, of Nashotah Seminary, who
entered upon his duties Sunday, December 11, 1859,
and remained until November i860.
After his retirement, the pulpit was supplied by
Bishop Whitehouse, Dr. Chase, Rev. H. B. Walbridge,
of Toledo, and Rev. G. T. Dougherty, D.D.; and at
length Rev. J. O. Barton, formerly of the Church of the
Ascension, accepted the call of the Church, and entered
upon his duties Sunday, April 8, 1861. About the first
of January, 1863, a call was extended to Rev. Thomas
Smith, formerly of Booneville, Mo. He did not long
remain rector; and in the following August, Rev. Mr.
Hager took charge of the parish, continuing as rector
until Sunday, May 28, 1865. He was succeeded by
Rev. John Gierlow, who preached his initial sermon on
August 6. His pastorate was of only a few months'
duration; and he was succeeded, in the early part of
June, 1866, by Rev. William Greene, whose stay was
likewise very short, and the Church was then without a
pastor until in April, 1S71.
In November, 1868, it was evident that a removal of
the church from its location on Wabash Avenue and
Randolph Street was imperatively necessary, and con-
sequently lots were purchased on Burnside Street, be-
tween Twenty-ninth and Thirtieth streets, the new
location being more than three miles from the old one.
Over this entire distance the church-building was re-
moved, at a cost of $2,000. Needed repairs were also
made and a basement erected under the old building.
Services were resumed in the new location on November
27, 1870. Rev. John Wilkinson, of Milwaukee, Wis.,
was called to the rectorship about this time, and there
was a formal opening of the church on Sunday. April
9, 187 1, services from November 27 having been con-
ducted in the basement.
Church of the Ascension. — At the time of the
close of the first volume, the Church of the Ascension
was worshiping in Westminster Chapel, on the corner of
Dearborn and Ontario streets. Rev. J. W. Cracraft was
the pastor. He remained not quite a year, being suc-
ceeded by Rev. Henry H. Morrell, who preached his
first sermon March 21, 1S58. A new church-edifice was
then in process of erection on Oak Street, between
Wells and LaSalle streets. This building was a frame
one, cost $2,400, and was capable of seating three
hundred persons. It was dedicated April 22, 1858,
and by the fall of that year the Church was reported as
self-sustaining. Rev. Mr. Morrell resigned on June 26,
1859, and was succeeded on October 16 by Rev. William
412
HISTORY OF CHICAGO.
Fulton, from Fremont, Ohio. Rev. Mr. Fulton, how-
ever, did not remain long with this Church, being trans-
ferred to the ecclesiastical authority of Iowa; and after
the services had been suspended for some months, Rev.
William H. Cooper, of Waukegan, became rector in
March, 1S61, and held that position until July i, 1863.
A call was then extended to Rev. S. Russell Jones, of
Greenfield, Mass., who commenced his labors in Sep-
tember, 1863.
At that time, the income of the Church from pew
rents was only about $550, but by September, 1864, the
revenue from this source had increased to $1,300. A
chancel, belfry, bell and a new organ had been procured
during the year, and arrangements made for the re-
moval of the church-building to the corner of LaSalle
and Maple streets. After the removal, services were
resumed November 20, 1864. In a short time Rev. Mr.
Jones resigned his rectorship, and Rev. H. W. Beers
entered upon his duties as rector April 2, 1865. In the
meantime, the church-edifice had been lengthened about
thirty feet, the number of sittings having been increased
by two hundred. In the early part of 1867, the church-
edifice was removed to the corner of LaSalle and Elm
streets, where it was re-opened on Whitsunday, June 9,
1867. Soon afterward Rev. Mr. Beers resigned his
rectorship, and the pulpit was filled temporarily by
Rev. H. H. Cole, of St. Luke's Church, and others of
the city clergy, until January 8, 1868, when Rev.
Thomas G. Carver, D.D., assumed charge of the parish,
retaining it until July 1, 1869. Various clergymen then
supplied the pulpit until October 3, when Rev. C. P.
Dorset entered upon his duties as rector. On the 1st
of January, 1870, the seats in the church were made
free, and the immediate result was very gratifying to all
concerned.
Christ Church. — This Church was organized in
1856, with fifteen members, Rev. Charles V. Kelly be-
ing the first rector. Rev. J. W. Osborne preached at
the Protestant Orphan Asylum, May 17, 1857, and on
the 20th of that month Rev. Noah H. Schenck took
charge of the parish. At the end of the diocesan year
in October the number of communicants was eleven.
One year afterward the society was in a flourishing con-
dition, and had a new chapel on Monterey Street, be-
tween Michigan and Indiana avenues, which was opened
May 25, 1859. In January, 1859, Rev. Henry Adams
had accepted the pastorate, and officiated at the opening
sen-ices. In November, Rev. E. B. Tuttle had charge of
the Church, and about that time Rev. Charles E. Cheney
was called, and shortly afterward became the pastor. In
February, i860, Rev. Mr. Fulton occupied the pulpit,
and on March 11. Rev. Mr. Cheney preached his first
sermon in this church.
By June, 1861, the church-building was enlarged
and improved. Toward the latter part of the year a
site for a permanent edifice was purchased, and a fair
and festival was held in Bryan Hall December 17, 1862,
to raise money to erect a new church-building.
In April, 1863, the following officers were elected :
Wardens, A. (,'. Calkins and G. A. Sackett ; Vestrymen,
Charles Follansbee, R. A. B. Mills, I). W. Keith, J. G.
Deven. J. li. Parsons, W. N. Woodruff, R. Benedict and
W. 1). ' '.. Grannis. On February 28, 1864, the new
building on Twenty-fourth Street was destroyed by fire,
and the Church took prompt measures for the erection
of another edifice. A meeting was held at the Orphan
Asylum March 2, at which §3,400 was subscribed to this
end. In the- meantime Rev. Mr. Cheney conducted ser-
vices in the Calvary Presbyterian Church on Sunday
afternoons.
The new church was erected on Michigan Avenue.
On August 25, 1864, the corner-stone of the new edifice
was laid by Bishop Whitehouse. The church was dedi-
cated in December, 1865, and in that month, twenty-two
of the pews were sold for $11,965, and fifty-eight were
rented at prices varying from $20 to $120. On June 8,
1866, the cupola of the church was struck by lightning and
damaged to the amount of several hundred dollars. In
February, 1868, the church was filled to overflowing to
hear the Rev. S. H. Tyng, Jr., of New York, upon which
occasion the new organ was played for the first time.
In the spring of 1869 commenced the controversy
between Rev. Mr. Cheney and Rt. Rev. Henry J. White-
house, D.D., Bishop of- the Diocese of Chicago. Mr.
Cheney was accustomed to omit certain words from the
baptismal service. This omission continued some time
without coming to the knowledge of the bishop, and then
he learned of it only by accident, and resolved to pre-
vent, if possible, a deviation from the ritual. After col-
lecting proof of the truth of what had been casually re-
ported to him, the bishop notified Mr. Cheney that in
thirty days he would be required to answer to the
charges preferred against him, and that adhering to his
"clear convictions of duty" must end in his deposition
What was called the " Chicago Protest," was dated
February 18, 1869. It was sent to various parties
throughout the country, with a request that those who
approved of it should append their names, and signify
whether they were in favor of a meeting to be held in
Chicago in June, for the discussion of questions in-
volved in the protest. So many favorable replies were
received that the Evangelical Conference was set for
June 16. In the meantime, there was much discussion
in all parts of the country on the questions of a revis-
ion of the prayer-book, and of a separate and Reformed
Church. A committee of fifteen clergymen was se-
lected in April, by the Clerical Association of the Prot-
estant Episcopal Church, to inquire into the subject,
with the view of harmonizing the action of that part of
the Church for which they would act. It was thought
that a report from such a committee would exert a vast
influence on the counsels of the association and aid them
in reaching satisfactory results. The following are the
names of the committee: Rev. A. H. Vinton, D.D.;
Rev. S. H. Tvng, D.D.; Rev. W. A. Muhlenberg, D.D.;
Rev. J. S. Stone, D.D.; Rev. E. H. Canfield, D.D.;
Rev. H. N. Powers, D.D.; Rev. John Cotton Smith,
D.D.; Rev. Richard Newton, D.D.; Rev. D. R. Good-
win, D.D ; Rev. W. R. Nicholson, D.D.; Rev. L. W.
Bancroft, D.D.; Rev. William Sparrow, D.D.; Rev.
William Newton, Rev. Otis Kellogg, and Rev. Charles
E. Cheney.
The Evangelical Conference, which was convened
to hear the report of this committee, and to discuss the
" Chicago Protest," met in the prayer-room of the
Young Men's Christian Association Building, June 16,
1869. The Conference was called to order by Alexan-
der G. Tyng, of Peoria, and, after devotional exercises
by Rev. Mason Gallagher, of Paterson, N. J., Gurdon
S. Hubbard was made temporary chairman. The pro-
test was read by Rev. N. N. Cowgill, of State Line,
Fulton Co., Ky. In the afternoon, there was an earnest
discussion on the question : " What shall we do ?" par-
ticipated in by Rev. F. B. Nash, of Tiskilwa, 111.; Rev.
William H. Cooper, of Lockport, 111.; John H. Kedzie,
of Chicago; Rev. Dr. Newton, of Philadelphia; and
Rev. Mr. Bourne. All expressed themselves as having
no desire to leave the Church, but all maintained the
"undeniable right of private judgment upon, which the
Church and the Reformation were founded." Mr.
RELIGIOUS HISTORY.
4i3
Cheney closed the discussion by a few remarks on the
great importance of the subject. It was the great un-
derlying one. Were they to go on using a prayer-book
which many thought false doctrine, or which, in its
ipsissima verba, conveyed to unlettered people an untrue
meaning? He hoped the time would come when they
could have a pure liturgy, reflecting the teachings of
Christ the Master. In the evening, the revision of the
prayer-book was discussed at length. On the 17th, the
discussion of the revision of the prayer-book was con-
'tinued. Rev. Mr. Cheney referred to the letter of
Bishop Mcllvaine, in which the latter said the Reform-
ers had no intention of teaching spiritual regeneration,
and that if they had no such intention they had made a
great blunder in language. Mr. Cheney urged imme-
diate action on the question of revision. If they were
to conquer they must not delay. As for himself, he
was not going out of the Episcopal Church. No man
could put him out. He would fight the battle in the
Church; and if they all left him, he would climb to the
mountain-top of communion with his God, and claim
that he was the Protestant Episcopal Church.
The number of delegates from abroad in attendance
at the conference was fifty-seven. The discussions in
the conference had no influence on Bishop Whitehouse,
so far as abandoning the trial was concerned. Mr.
Cheney was arraigned for trial on July 21, 1869, in the
chapel of the Cathedral of Sts. Peter and Paul. The
charges against him were three in number. The first
was that he had violated Article VIII. of the constitu-
tion of the Protestant Episcopal Church, which provides
that in those dioceses which have adopted said consti-
tution, the Book of Common Prayer, administration of
the sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the
Church, when established by the General Convention,
shall be used in the Protestant Episcopal Church. The
second charge was that he had violated his engagement
to conform to the doctrines and worship of the Protest-
ant Episcopal Church. The third charge was that he
had violated the solemn promise made by him at his
ordination, which was " always so to minister the doc-
trines and sacraments, and the discipline of Christ, as
the Lord had commanded and as this Church hath
received the same, according to the commandments of
God."
The ecclesiastical jury was composed of Rev. Dr.
Samuel Chase, of Jubilee College ; Rev. Dr. Henry N.
Pierce, of Springfield ; Rev. Thomas W. Benedict, of
St. Luke's Parish, Wyoming; Rev. J. Benson, of
Peoria ; and Rev. A. W. Snyder, of Chicago. The
presentors were Dr. George F. Cushman, of Sycamore,
III; Rev. R. F. Sweet and Hon. L. B. Otis, of Chicago.
Hon. L. B. Otis was the counsel for the prosecution,
and Hon. Melville W. Fuller for the defense. The
proctors for the defense were George W. Thompson and
M. Byron Rich.
Upon the proper constitution of the commission for
the trial, Bishop Whitehouse made a statement of the
reasons why the trial was brought ; that he had done
all in his power, by explanation, argument and appeal,
to induce Rev. Mr. Cheney to conform to the worship
of the Church and the administration of the sacraments,
to which he, on ordination and as a priest in the Church,
had solemnly promised conformity ; and that at the
termination of the interview, Mr. Cheney had proposed
to consider the matter for one week, at the end of which
time decision should be made. At the expiration of the
time agreed upon, Rev. Mr. Cheney had sent the fol-
lowing note :
" Christ Church Rectory,
" Chicago, Jinn s, i86g.
"Rt. Rev. and Dear Sir, — I regret the circumstances which
compelled me to delay for a few hours the answer which I promised
to send you in one week from our conversation on Monday, 31st
ult. After the most serious and prayerful deliberation, I can only
say that I have been able to arrive at no other conclusion than
that already expressed to you.
"Very truly yours,
" Chas. Edward Cheney.
" Rt. Rev. H. J. Whitehouse, D.D."
Bishop Whitehouse hence concluded, " that the said
Rev. Charles E. Cheney, rector of Christ Church, Chi-
cago, is under imputation of being guilty of offenses
and misconduct for which he is liable to be tried, and
that the interests of the Church require an investiga-
tion."
The 21st was spent in an attempt to prove that the
court, as constituted, had no jurisdiction in the case,
but the objections were overruled. On the next day, an
injunction was granted against further proceeding of
the assessors, by Judge John A. Jameson. The Court
thereupon requested that the trial be postponed until
Thursday, July 29, and the bishop, while denying the
right of the civil tribunals to interfere in the adminis-
tering of the ecclesiastical discipline of the Church in
the trial of its ministers, postponed the Court until that
day. On the 3d of August, a motion to dissolve the
injunction was overruled by Judge Jameson, and it
was then decided that the case be carried before the
Supreme Court at the September term.
On the 5th of August, a supplemental bill was filed
by Rev. Mr. Cheney, in which he called attention to the
fact that there were two types of belief in the Protest-
ant Episcopal Church, viz., the Evangelical and the
Sacramentarian ; and also stated that the bishop had,
before the commencement of the proceedings against
him, openly declared that he intended "weeding the low-
church clergymen out of the diocese." The Ecclesias-
tical Court met on the same day, and made public the
grounds of their complaint against the interference by
the civil tribunal, and then Rev. Samuel Chase, as pre-
siding officer, adjourned the Court until September 15;
and upon its assembling on that day, it was again
adjourned until November 16, the case having been
taken before the Supreme Court on the 13th inst. The
Supreme Court, on January 24, 1871, dismissed the-bill
and dissolved the injunction, the judgment of the Court
being delivered by Judge Thornton, who held that pre-
sentment being made, with due service, the Ecclesias-
tical Court had power to take cognizance of and to
decide the case.
The Supreme Court defended the right of the
Church to establish and enforce its own laws, upon the
ground that such a right is essential to religious liberty.
It said :
" We have no right, and, therefore, will not exercise the power,
to dictate ecclesiastical law. We do not aspire to become ,ie facto
heads of the Church, and, by construction or otherwise, abrogate
its laws and canons. We shall not inquire whether the alleged
omission is any offense. This is a question of ecclesiastial cog-
nizance. This is no forum for such adjudication. The Church
should guard its own fold; enact and construe its own laws ; en-
force its own discipline ; and thus will be maintained the boundary
line between the temporal and spiritual power."
The Ecclesiastical Court re-assembled February 1,
187 1. In the afternoon, Rev. Mr. Cheney read a state-
ment, unreservedly admitting that he had made certain
omissions from the prescribed office for the ministration
of infant baptism, but he denied the truth of the three
charges made against him. He denied Charge I., on
the violation of Article VIIL, inasmuch as said Article
414
HISTORY OF CHICAGO.
has no relation to any omissions made by an individual
minister, etc. He denied Charge II., inasmuch as the
promise to conform to the doctrine and worship of the
Protestant Episcopal Church had never been regarded
as involving the obligation to use the very words of
every service under all exigencies that might arise in
the work of the ministry. He denied Charge III., inas-
much as at his ordination he solemnly vowed that he
would instruct the people committed to his charge, and
teach nothing as necessary to eternal salvation but that
which he should be persuaded by the Scripture, and he
was not persuaded that the doctrine which connects
regeneration inseparably with baptism might be con-
cluded and proved from Scripture.
The Ecclesiastical Court having pronounced the
guilt of Rev. Mr Cheney, he gave notice of an appeal
The appeal was, however, given upon February 6, 187 1,
and on the iSth of that month, the bishop read the
verdict of the Court, and then sentenced Mr. Cheney
to be suspended from the exercises of all the offices
and functions of the priesthood and ministry of the
Church of God, until such time as assurances should be
given of contrition for the past, and of conformity in
the matter wherein he had offended for the future.
Mr. Cheney presented the following solemn protest
to the action of the Court :
"I, Charles Edward Cheney, a Presbyter of the Protestant
Episcopal Church and rector of Christ Church, Chicago, do enter
my solemn protest against the constitution, the mode of procedure,
the rulings, and the verdict of the Ecclesiastical Court by which
my so-called trial has been conducted. From its decision and ver-
dict, and from the sentence this day pronounced, I appeal to the
judgment of the Protestant Christianity and to that Supreme
Tribunal before which all must appear.
"Charles Edward Cheney.
"Chicago, February 18, 1871."
On the same day, a meeting of the wardens and
vestrymen of Christ Church was held, at which it was
unanimously resolved that Rev. Charles E. Cheney be
requested to continue his services as rector. In response
to this resolution, Rev. Mr. Cheney preached on Feb-
ruary 19, 187 1, in Christ Church. He read to the con-
gregation the above resolution, and a letter to himself,
signed by Wardens F. B. Phillips and Albert Crane,
explanatory of the reasons which led to the adoption of
the resolution. This letter was to the effect that Rev.
Mr Cheney had been singled out for trial and deposi-
tion, while others in the Protestant Episcopal Church
were equally guilty with reference to omissions of por-
tions of the offices ; that nine bishops of that Church
had signed a solemn declaration that the right should
be granted to drop the troublesome word "regenera-
tion " ; that the Court which tried him, besides being
prejudiced against him, had not been legally consti-
tuted, and hence its decisions were of no binding force
upon him ; and that a forcible separation of pastor and
people would have a fatal effect upon the great work in
which Christ Church was engaged.
Thus the congregation of Christ Church assumed
as contumacious an attitude as its pastor, who for his
defiant e of the authority of the Ecclesiastical Court,
was, on March 28, 1871, notified by Bishop Whitehouse
of a new trial to take place May 3, 187 1.
In the presentment to the Bishop of Illinois by the
presentors, — Rev. William Y. B. Jackson, rector of the
Church of Our Savior, Chicago; Rev. George F. Cush-
man, D.D., rector of the Church of the Redeemer,
Princeton, 111.; and Lucius B. Otis, — there were four
charges, the principal one being " Contumacious viola-
tion of the law-, of the Church of Cod, in respect of
the exercise of the offices and functions of the priest-
hood and ministry of the same, and in respect to eccle-
siastical sentences and penalties " — the others, except the
first, having reference to his violation of the ordination
vow. The new trial commenced on the 3d of May,
in the Cathedral, on the corner of Washington and
Peoria streets, before the following Court : Rev. Clinton
Locke, D.D., rector of Grace Church, Chicago ; Rev.
J. L. Townsend, rector of Trinity Church, Jackson-
ville, 111. ; Rev. F. M Gregg, rector of St. Paul's
Church, Springfield, 111. ; Rev. W. H. Williams,
rector of St. Luke's Church, Dixon, 111.; Rev. W. W.
Estabrook, rector of Christ Church, Ottawa, 111. M. W.
Fuller, M. B. Rich and G. W. Thompson appeared for
Mr. Cheney, and on his behalf objected to the juris-
diction of the Court.
As an incident in the history of this trial, it may be
mentioned that, on Sunday, June 4, 187 1 , Rev. Stephen
H. Tyng, Jr., of New York, preached both morning
and evening in Christ Church, notwithstanding he had
been the recipient of a note from Bishop Whitehouse,
reminding him of the canon forbidding his participation
in the services with a deposed clergyman. Among the
evidences of the interest in the controversy and sym-
pathy with the deposed clergyman, was a letter ad-
dressed to Mr. Cheney, signed by sixty-five influential
members of Dr. Tyng's Church, among whom were the
Tyngs, Rev. Cotton Smith, Jay Cooke, and Columbus
Delano, urging him to go on with his preaching, dis-
cipline or no discipline.
Thus matters continued for some time, until, on
July 8, the bishop notified the wardens of Christ Church
that on the 13th of August he would make a visitation
of that Church, for the purpose of examining the state
of the Church, administering the rite of confirmation,
ministering the word, and administering the sacrament
of the Lord's Supper, and requested them to secure the
services of a minister in good standing to assist him
(the bishop) in the ceremonies, â– ' insomuch as the parish
of Christ Church is now without a rector." To this
communication the wardens responded at considerable
length, saying, in substance, that their Church had a
rector in good standing; that all epistolary correspond-
ence, to insure attention, should be addressed to Rev.
Charles E. Cheney, rector, whose contract with the
Church still remained in full force; that the day selected
by the bishop would not be a convenient one for them
to see him, but that upon any other day they would be
glad to receive him, and to assist him and their rector
in the ceremonies referred to, and suggested the selec-
tion of the tenth Sunday after Trinity.
The attitude of Right Revs. H. B. Whipple, Bishop of
Minnesota, and Henry W. Lee, Bishop of Iowa, is
shown by their visit to Bishop Whitehouse, with
the view of obtaining, if practicable, a mitigation
of the sentence, or at least a postponement of its inflic-
tion until after the General Convention should assemble.
Bishop Whitehouse, in deference to the views of these
two bishops, deferred final action for a few days, con-
ferring meanwhile with friends and advisers, and then
earned out the decision of the Court, degrading Mr.
Cheney from the ministry of the Church of God.
The bishop, in reply to the note of the wardens,
authorized them to name a later day for his visitation.
Subsequently a letter was sent to the bishop by the