“BOGUS CURATE ” CHARGE

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 3614, 18 November 1924, Page 7

“BOGUS CURATE ” CHARGE

A REMARKABLE CASE. A remarkable case was heard recently by the Pudsey magistrates, when .William Alfred Barber, who surrendered to tile police at Bow street to answer a charge ot obtaining money by false pretences a Pudsey, near Leeds, where he had oflic - Med as curate in the parish church, though not in Holy Orders, was bound over, under the Probation Act, no conviction being recorded against him. Mr F. A. T. Mossman prosecuted, and Mr A. E. Masser, of Leeds, appeared tor the accused, who had surrendered to the warrant out against him at Bow street, London. . •, ... Mr Mossman, opening the case, said lie appeared for the Rev. Charles Owen French, vicar of Pudsey, who had instituted the proceedings upon the instructions of the Bishop of Bradford. Mr Fiench advertised in June tor clerical help. The defendant applied, and owing to the representations which ho then made, one of which was that he was a priest of the Church of England, Mi French engaged him to officiate at Ind sey. He did, in fact, officiate for five Sundays, commencing on June 22, and tor those services he was paid nine guineas. He assisted in the< administration ot the Holy Communion and other sacraments o. the church, preached, and performed the duties of a priest ot the Church of Eng land. It was only fair to say that he peiformed these duties in a reverent and satisfactory manner, so much so that tnc vicar offered him permanent employment as curate. The defendant said he had been, ordained by the Bishop of Woicoster, hut that proved to he untrue. While at Pudsey, Mr Mossman added, the defendant wore the stole, the clothing of a priest of the Church of England, and the hood of a graduate of the London University, to none of which things he was entitled. The vicar of Pudsey hi ought these proceedings on the order of his superior with no vindictive feelings, hut simply for the protection of the public. The Rev. Charles Owen hre'icu, vicar of Pudsey, gave evidence, and, in crossexamination by Mr Masser, said that Barker pronounced the Absolution, winch could he done only by a. priest, and assisted in the administration of Holy Communion. A priest only could do that. For the cicrencs, Mr Masser submitted that the prosecution had failed, to call evidence to prove that the defendant was not in Holy Orders, and, that being so, the case fell to the ground. Mr Mossmau said that if that position was seriously maintained, ho would have to ask the court to adjourn, in order to call the Bishop of Worcester,

The magistrates, after retiring, came to the unanimous conclusion that there was a prima facie case. Mr Ma=ser submitted a further point. While there might be an offence against the law of God, lie said, was there one against the law of man '■ There was no evidence that the money was paid to the defendant because he represented himself to be something which he was not. In consequence of a representation which might be an oifence against the law of God, the defendant was given a certain position. He was asked to perform certain services, which lie did to the satisfaction of everyone concerned, and was paid nine guineas, not because of false representations, bun because of services he had rendered. It was suggested that the defendant had hurt the feelings of some of the parishioners, and naturally the vicar’s dignity might have been injured. But what harm had he done to anyone? The magistrates ruled against Mr Masscr’s submission.

In dismissing the charge, the Chairman of the Bench said the magistrates believed the defendant had acted in good faith, and from a desire to do something for the good of the people. j