The Sun.
London, England, 1868-07-29 00:00:00

THE ATHERSTONE CRUTCH CASE.

This case, which has caused a good deal of a-
citement in the Anglican Church, came by letters
of request from the Bishop of Worcester, at the
instance of the Rev. Frederic Ilartshill Richingst
M.A.,incumbent of the church and parish of 63'
Mary, Atherstone, Warwickshire, who charged
Mr. Edward Cordingley with forcibly entering the
church, accompanied by a concourse of noisy and
disorderly persons, and illegally removing frog'
the communion table a ledge placed thereon, and
i
with having irreverently broken the same and
caused it to be thrown away and left in the church-
yard ; he was also charged with having on the
same occasion removed from the communion table
the cloth placed thereon, and with removing the
same, as also two iron sockets, placed as fixtures,
on each side of the church arch, for holding ban"
ners. It appeared from the evidence that on the
23rd of August last Mr. Cordingley entered the
church by employing a man named Scanlan t 0
pick the lock, and was accompanied by a number
of persons. The ledge which was used as the
super-altar was forcibly removed, and throve
down and broken, and then thrown into a Place
where coals were kept. The altar cloth was alse
removed. It was shown that, although Mr. Rich-
ings had refused to give up the keys of the 610°11
to Mr. Cordingley, he had offered him free access
to the church, and had even waited for him. gr.
Cordingley, too, it was urged, had acted in oppesi"
tion to the wishes of his co-churchwarden. 00
the other hand, it was contended that Mr. Rich'
inns, the promoter of the suit, had acted illegaly
in introducing the super-altar and the other decors"
tions into the church without obtaining the Per-
mission of the bishop of the diocese. It was 813s0
urged that no violence was used ; that Mr. Cord-
ingley simply went to the church and removed the
articles in conformity with a wish expressed at e,
public meeting of parishioners, whose servant he
was ; and that he was not accompanied by a noisy
or irreverent party, only one person (a Mr. gat
-
ton) had kept his hat on during the proceed,

ings.
Sir R. Phillimore, in delivering judgment °II
Tuesday, said it had been alleged that the art
meats complained of by the defendant were is the
church when the bishop held a confirmation there.
That was scarcely sufficient, and whether the
ornaments were legal or not, they ought to lA°
been submitted for the approval of the ordin°li
A public meeting had been held in consequence °a
the introduction of these ornaments, a meetill
which was scarcely calculated to promote clilles
discussion. At this meeting authority was gil-
to the churchwardens to remove the ornaraeuto.
The vestry did not, it might be supposed, wish, „tc;
make the request to one churchwarden indepenae'o
of the other, and it had no legal power to gllrf
such authority to both. Even in the case fle
church rates the vestry could not authorize on
e,
churchwarden to take any legal proceedings 11:1ci 1,
pendent of or without the sanction of his e°o
league. In the present case one churchwarueil
had acted independently of the other, and if °li.eg
scenes were. allowed—one churchwarden takijlA
one view and the other an opposite view—the ril°o
disgraceful riots would ensue. He was hag,' r.
say that the law was very clear upon the Inatt,eo
it was a matter of surprise that a churchwarutit
should have acted so illegally as in this case
„„bAis
Mr. Cordingley had honestly admitted that he
not a member of any Church, that he was 31(4
communion with any Church, and that he a11i454
;b,
had a great repugnance to the office of eh° a
warden. Under such circumstances, the peopiew.
Atherstone had made a most unfortunate ell°l et
The promoter of the suit had withdrawn his Prs'tlho
that the court would order the restitution of be
church, and prayed that Mr. Cordingley 811°11!a
admonished anti condemned in the whole °' At
costs. Considering that he (the learned judge,;ich
the outset suggested an arrangement, tow,cir
Mr. Cordingley assented, but to which Mr.
e°
ings would not consent, he should not Ohd
faor
Mr. Cordingley in the whole of the costs, but ',
him to pay the sum of £lOO nornine expert 11legal
and admonish him to abstain from such 11
practices in future. 11110
It is understood that the English Church "
pays such expenses as fall on Mr. Richiugs,
Cor j..
the parishioners of Atherstone those of gr.
in gley.

An extraordinary scene took place on Stin(lsjlso.
Queenstown Chapel during the celetration tat
Just at the elevation a labouring man named `1- fer
rushed from the body of the chapel, sprang
the railings, and seized the rev. gentleman for
the body. The greatest consternation prevni'eladie:l
a few minutes. An alarm of fire was giv'en'LL-tioo
fainted, the greater portion of the cougreacient
rushed to the doors, while some person 3 air
ou the altar and seized Cotter. In , tllO air
sence of any explanation from Cotter incllP t
by is
ran high against him, and, only for his arres 1,00
policeman who was present, he would 1151 e
t 13116
roughly handled. It subsequently transpire
the man had acted under the influence of a erring to
that some awful calamity was about haPPelli riot
,3
him, and that if he succeeded in touching the orFotti
at this particular part of the mass all danger rept
be averted. The clergyman not wishing edPfto®
any charge against Cotter, be WAS release'
custody.