The other day we published a brief article announcing that a decision had been given in the Piechowski trial, in which a certain Kowaczyk (previously given as Kowarzyk), an undertaker from the Independent Parish of the excommunicated priest Anthony Kozlowski, accused Reverend John Piechowski, the respected and honorable pastor of Saint Hedwig Parish, of libeling him in print.

The cause of the complaint was the [Polish] word drab (Strongman) used in one of the articles in the Friend of the Young People, a newspaper published by Reverend Piechowski. The complainant, claiming the word referred to him, gave two translations of it: first, in the affidavit of complaint, as "Highwayman," then, in court, as "all round criminal". Anyone possessing the least knowledge of the Polish language will understand how false and misinterpreted is this translation.

And that is why we had foretold that nothing would come of this case, which 2is just what has happened. As we already know, Reverend John Piechowski has been honorably cleared of all guilt by Judge Eldred.

We are returning to this case again because the trial was very interesting and explanatory in many ways, and the decision of Judge Eldred throws still more light on the subject.

First of all, it is worth mentioning that this was not a personal question between Kowaczyk and Reverend Piechowski, but an attack by the entire so-called Independent Parish against a respected and honorable priest. The first and main witness for the complainant was the excommunicated priest Anthony Kozlowski, and then his teachers (?), and in fact the whole band from his parish. All of these people, with an astounding degree of self-confidence and in spite of the Chodzko and Linde dictionaries on the table, endeavored to convince the judge that the word drab meant an all round robber or criminal.

But that isn't all! The attorney for the complainant tried to convince the 3judge that the excommunicated Kozlowski was as good a Catholic priest as, for example, Reverend John Piechowski; that the cause for the action evolved from a competitive battle between two Catholic parishes, etc., etc., and Kozlowski himself (to prove this assertion) on examination, testified that he was a Catholic priest in good standing.

This manner of confusing the issue was properly rebuked by the judge.

The Independents would have never dared to institute such a charge before a judge familiar with the Polish language and our local situation....By bringing it before an American judge, they figured, they would be able to confuse him with explanations and the testimony of the so-called independent teachers, who twisted the Polish language in every imaginable manner; they thought they would be able to convince the judge that the excommunicated Kozlowski was a regular priest and the victim of persecution.

They were rudely disappointed.

4

The American judge, a disinterested and intelligent person, easily saw through their queer doings, thanks to the excellent explanation of the case by attorneys for the defense John C. King and Clemens J. Bielinski. In his verdict, the judge not only found Reverend Piechowski not guilty, but in addition gave the Independents a severe lecture.

They asked for it by insisting on discussing the affairs of the Independent Parish in connection with this case.

This case was heard by Judge Eldred through three court sessions. During the first two sessions, the testimony of witnesses for both sides was heard. At the third session the case was actually argued. We wish to publish here a few pertinent facts brought out at this session.

The attorney for the complainant spoke first (and we will omit his neck breaking arguments, full of nonsense and insolence) and then attorney Clemens J. Bielinski took the floor.

5

He argued convincingly that the word drab could not mean anything else than a person that is strong and tough, and at most, coarse, and submitted the Chodzko and Linde dictionaries to prove his assertions. As to the testimony of the so-called teachers of the Independent Parish, who unexpectedly found a criminal meaning in this innocent word, he characterized it as proceeding from hay dealers, gardeners, grocers, bankrupt counts, etc., who expressly, for this case, became experts in the Polish language.

Naturally, he demanded a dismissal of the charge, as being without any foundation in fact.

The second attorney for the defendant argued the case from a different angle.

First he read the law about criminal libel in print, and proved decisively that the case being heard had no connection with it. He brought out the scandalous manner in which the arrest warrant was issued for one of the most respected priests in our diocese, of the night travel to give a bond, etc, etc. Finally 6he touched upon the status of the Independent Church of the excommunicated priest Kozlowski in relation to the true Roman Catholic Church. To prove his point, he submitted to the judge two documents from the Archbishop's Chancery Office, a copy of a public letter to Kozlowski, and a copy of the excommunicating decree, and asked that they be taken into consideration during the trial of this case. This brought a storm of protest from the complainant's attorney. He did not wish the truth to be known. But his objections were of no avail--he was forced to accept at least one of these documents as an exhibit in the case. He brought up the question of the Independent Church himself; so it was necessary to give a complete explanation.

Now Mr. King began speaking again.

Quiet reigned when he picked up the document expelling A. Kozlowski from the Roman Catholic Church. His voice was gentle but solemn. It was evident that he spoke as he felt, convincingly and sincerely.

7

Here we quote parts of his speech: "...Here we have before us the excommunicated priest Anthony Kozlowski, who, according to this document bearing the personal signature of the Most Reverend Archbishop Feehan and confirmed with his seal, does not belong to the Catholic Archdiocese of the city of Chicago, and never will belong to it. This document further avers that the said Anthony Kozlowski has been excommunicated and expelled from the true church, yet a few days ago he falsely insisted that he was a Roman Catholic priest, Where is the logic, where are the brains of such a person? How can anyone believe any of his assertions, and how can the charges instituted in his behalf be taken seriously?

"....This document states that no Catholic church can be built without the consent of the Bishop, that such a building cannot be called a Roman Catholic church, and yet, this fallen priest called his the "Church of All Saints".

"Every organization, whether religious or otherwise, must have certain prescribed statutes and its own government.

8

"....Let us take, for example, one of the newest sects, the Salvation Army. Aren't they all ready to obey their leaders? Or take a civil organization, like the Catholic Order of Foresters. If the High Court cancels a person's membership because of some violation, can this person still call himself a Forester? No. The same is true here, if Kozlowski was legally expelled, excommunicated, and thrown out of the Roman Catholic Church by the highest authority of said Church in the Chicago diocese, which is accepted even in the civil courts, how can he still claim to be a Roman Catholic priest, how can such a condemned priest say the Holy Mass and give the Sacraments?

"Can such a person be believed?

"....Let us look back a couple of hundred years ago. Luther Martin, when he was expelled and excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church, did not call himself, as Anthony Kozlowski does, a Roman Catholic priest, because he had more brains and was smarter than Kozlowski."

9

Finally, Attorney King spoke to the complainant Kowaczyk as follows: "...The word drab, my dear sir, will not injure your finances or your good name, because it means a strong, tough, tall person, just as you are; but if you continue to associate with this excommunicated priest, then you will lose everything, your honor, your good name, your fortune, and finally, in the end your soul."

This peroration by Mr. King created a tremendous impression, and the additional tricky explanations of the attorney for the complainant had no effect.

Judge Eldred gave his verdict in the following words:

"....After considering all the evidence submitted in this case, I cannot say that the accused, Reverend John Piechowski, is guilty of libel.

"The words which presumably are libelous, I cannot accept as such. They were used in an article without evil intention. The word drab on which the attorney 10for the complainant places the greatest stress, has no such meaning given to it by this attorney. The word was used in the usual everyday meaning, and as such does not imply anything criminal. As it is used in this article, which is the basis of the complaint, it means nothing more than a strong, tough person. I cannot do anything else, therefore, than to honorably discharge the accused from the charge of criminal libel.

"....In deciding this case, I am of the opinion that a spiritual overseer has always the right to express himself vehemently, if his purpose is to correct his parishioners. When he attempts to enlighten them and improve their morals, he must speak openly, clearly, and so as to be understood, because he wants to benefit them; naturally, his words then must have this purpose in view and must be spoken in a truly inspired brotherly feeling.

"....I would like to advise all those present here to go home, forget your past differences and live in peace and good will. All of you here are of the same nationality, and evidently religiously inclined. I cannot understand the 11cause of these quarrels. As I understand it, a priest of the Catholic Church owes allegiance to his bishop and is dependent on his orders and commands; furthermore, no new Catholic Church can be established without the sanction of the bishop. The bishop is the legal head of the Church and his decisions are final in church matters. No priest or group of people has the right to organize as they please and then claim they are the Catholic Church, because only the permission and word of the bishop authorizes them to do so."

These words were directed squarely and openly at the excommunicated priest Kozlowski.

The result of this case is therefore worthy of note from all angles. The dirty intrigues of the Independents not only have failed to dim the honors due Reverend Piechowski but have brought on the Independents the condemnation in public of a respectable attorney and a wise judge. Let them know now that even people of other nationalities are condemning and scorning them; that 12truth and justice will always triumph over intrigues, lies, and charlatanism.