The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-02-25

one that is 30 utterly irrecOncileabe with the in
stitutioDs under which we live that it is subject
of wonder how such an abuse could have been
peIPetuated amongst US. Whilst all the other
chartered nuisances which were bequeathed to us
as lsgacies by the old colonial governments have
been swept away and extiDguished by republican
legislation this has continued to fatten and
thrive, until it has assumed such gigantic proper
tons that it threatens to dominate every other
vested interest in our city. The law Of 1914,
which was intended to break down this danger
Gus monopoly, has had directly the contrary ef-
feet, and the corporation, confirmed by it in it's
possessions, bids defiance at once to public OPT
Mon and to the voice Of the more enlightened
portion Of the religious denomination for whose
especial benefit it claims to exercise it's trust
That these assertions are not vague general-
ties We are prepared to show from the evidence
laid before the select committee Of the Senate,
to whom was referred the report of the
vestry of Trinity Church, called for by
the resolutions passed April Is, 1855
In that report the corporation resorted to every
shift and subterfuge to conceal the exact amount
of trust property in their hands, and made out q
statement such as We only expect to meet in q
had bankrupt case. According TO this document
the whole net value of the property of the trust
including real estate, bonds and mortgages, and
cash in bank at the end of the last financial year
was, after deducting the debt, S1,0l6,327 S.
According to the evidence taken before the COM
mittee, the net total value Of the whole was
1921 ,293 47-mOre than five times the net total
stated in the report We pass without further
comment the startling amount Of this discrepan-
cy, and we ask what has been done by the cor
poratiOn with their large revenulA In the speci-
fcations Of expenditure made in their report
they have not hesitated to use the same unscru-
pulous means of battling inquiry as those we have
just indicated. We have not space to enter into
detailed exposure of these items, but we may
instance as one, that relating to the alleged pay
ment, at different periods, of S63,S50 70,
Tor the church of the Holy Evangelist,
(now occupying the old st. Georges, Beck
man street.) Of this sum $4,000 turns out
not to have been a payment Of any kind,
but merely a vote Of the vestry empowering ST.
Georges, Stuyvesant square, to sell the lots for
mer)y given by Trinity corporation, which vote
of the vestry is estimated by Trinity to be worth
$4,000 to st. Georges, Stuyvesant square, and
is therefore set down as so much paid for St
Georges, Beekman street. OF churches in the
city of New York endowed by this corporation
within the preceding five years, it does not ap-
stance of appropriation during the previous
three years, to institutions of charity, benevo-
lence or learning in the city of New York. We
do not find one, with the exception Of the grant
OF five plots in Trinity Cemetery to some Of the
public hospitals and asylums. Furthermore, it
appears that Trinity Church has never at any
time established or endowed any institution of
charity or benevolence, even for her own poor.
With regard to the manner in which
the corporation have doled out aid to
the churches of their own denomination,
we have the testimony of Mr.. Skidmore, one of
the vestrymen and member of the Standing
Committee. He says that not only have they not
multiplied churches throughout the city to any
extent in proportion to their MEANS but that the
aid which they have extended to public churches
has been done reluctantly and extensively, either
by taking mortgages on the churches to which
they have advanced money, or by annual pay
ments in support of the minister-in either way
pushing their power over the corporations and
ministers Of the church to an extent which is
fatal to ali independence Of thought or action ON
their part.
II, then, as we have shown, the Trinity Church
corporation have laInentably failed in carrying
out the specific religious objects for which they
have been appointed trustees, we ask what plau-
sble grounds can be alleged for the further per-
petuation Of so useless monopoly? Here
are vast resources which can be benefcIally
ton, suffered to accumulate idly or TO be convert
ed to individual uses. But we 20 further, and
say that even admitting that the trust funds have
been honestly administered according to the views
Of the Episcopalian denomination, such an allo
cation Of them is still an abuse which ought to
be put an end to by the State.
1t will hardly be denied, we think, that the
principles under which these grants were origi-
nally made, and subsequently confirmed by Queen
Anne, are no longer applicable 10 the present
state Of society here. Under monarchical sys-
tenn, which based its strength on the union of
Church and State, grants of public lands for the
support Of the State religion were perfectly legit-
mate and consistent In republican form of 80
ciety where all religious denominations enjoy
equal rights such appropriations Of the public
domain are OF course unconstitutional. And yet
our State Legislature have practically recognised
the principle of State church, and per-
petuaied some of its worst abuses by con-
arming the old colonial grants TO the
Trinity Church corporation. The existence
of such an anomaly is stigma upon our institu-
tons, and the sooner we get rid Of IL the more
creditable II will be for our consistency and the
more beneficial for the cause Of religion and mo-
rslty. Let the Legislature, therefore, at once