The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1872-08-10

determine from the suppression OF my
letter and the publication Of Mrs. Hamil.
toms, both addressed TO the same person,
and both, presume read by the w. ~,
Nhethpg the desire q to met Tie great
Question involved, o. to Join issue with
letter.
WHEELING, W. Va, Aug. 9, 1872.
Hugh Sterling, ESQ., Wheeling, ". Va.
MY DEAR MISUNDERSTANDING 10 our
conversation Oof last Governing, during
which you read to me certificate from
Mrs. William Hamilton to the effect that
she had requested me TO oftiCIate at the
house on the occasion Of her husbands
funeral, and that she desired the Masonic
ledge 70 have charge, Of the services at
Tie 'gta9e, Il wish % say to you, n tcfitihp,
That did not 30 understand the case.
l cheerIully acknowledge the right OF
any one to elect the mode Of burial, or the
form OF funeral service which to him may
seem best. Such right Is sacred. And
had l understood that Mr.. Hamilton or
any OF his family preferred the Masonic
rites at his grave TO the "order for the
burial Of the dead" Of the church In whose
communion he died, I would not have
gone beyond my services at his house.
Not understanding the wish Of the parties
concerned, 4 supposed that the whole Of
my church form was to be observed, and
~ looked upon the affair OF Sunday as an
gaterierence With the exercise OF my
functions as a Minister oil the Gospel.
Pmy happy TO have the assurance from
yon that no such interference was intend.
cd, and 1accept It. lean say NO less than
this, In Justice as well to myself as to all
the parties concerned In this particular
case. OF course this note refers to the ai.
fair In hand only, and 10 similar ones, as
tQr instance where; the Masdpic, burial ssr.
Wee IS Psefeited, I'd the service provided
BY the ritual OF my church 10 be used at
the grave. But where no preference Is
expressed, or where the tohOle OF our burial
service Is desired, as well as the burial
service Of the Masonic or Of any other or.
deEot human Origin Ielaim thAtlit lthe
church seSYice) takes precedence. This
ese etRays been my practice, and that of
other Ministers whom have consulted.
Truly Yours,
HENRY G. WEsrwooD.
NoTE-l cheerlully write you this and
can do so without sIrrendering any prin.
clple. You can make any use Of this
that you may choose. w.
Accommodation that the public may
Judge between The two parties Ia this
issue, and that all fair minded Masons
may see II intended to Insult the order.
l repeat that did not understand Mrs.
Hamilton to request me to perform the
services at the house only. ! did under.
stands her to.say that the Masons would
bury him. BY this | thought that she
meant that the order would defray the
expenses Of the funeral, would make the
necessary arrangements, would attend as
8 body, and would read their burial ser.
Woe al. the grave. Had II known or
thought that therequest OF Mr.. Hamilton,
before his death, or that the remarks OF
his widow on Saturday last compre.
hended the exclusion Of the Order of the
Church of which he was so long mem.
beS a would have demonstrated with
her, and then, II she had insisted upon
It, would have OBLIGATED only
at the house. This l say, as
Mason, TO Masons, as a man to men.
That l did not SO understand, it is shown
In the fAct that ] invited the Rev. Mr..
Mcclure 70 accompany me TO the grave.
l would not have done so had not
thought that the services begun at the
house were to be concluded at the grave.
| have buried Masons before, and have
used my burial service first. One OF the
best ministers in this city has informed
me thatlhe has always done the same, and
that only once was his right disputed, and
that on Me Scdy 10 the grave. The case
WIS taiefred for settlement to the family.
lpeeislcl was made in hisiaYor, aud the
Masons quietly and properly went on
Iwiththeir ceremony when his service was
ended. Other ministers-andi these OF
the N E. CAurch- have assured me that
/ did right, and that they have never un.
derstood that request for Masonic burial
excluded Christian burial.
I'D; give up the case Of Mr. Hamilton, in
the face Of the letter from Mrs. H. to my
friend and brother, Sterling. Itexpressly
says that she informed me that the Ma.
sons were ito take charge of the body at
the grave Mrs,, H. Is member Of my
church q very worthy and pious Chris.
tign; 1si LADY, and many years my senior.
l cannot and would not contradict her.
SonlY say that ! did not understand her
by n Masonic, BURIAL that the
-Masons were to have charge at the grave
90 as to exclude her husbands pastor and
her Church service, which he IS required
itouse. Iregret that l did not understand
her and her husbands wish. That wish,
to me, would have been sacred, for I too
have buried my dead. q
0. But while give up that case-and
that, only in the face OF the certificate of
Mrs. HI stand BY my principle. And
the point for which have commended Is
yielded by the WIN. l have been trying
10 obtain concession of that from my
unknown opponent. The W. N. volunta.
rily makes It In his own report OF his con-
versation with the Rev. T. B. Hughes-"I
told him he q could not do SO Tread my
burial Hlvice) as 1t was not ID conformity
with one Of the ancient landmarks OF Ma.
sonry." He makes 1t in his report Of his
words to me-"Doctor, you cannot read
your service" My understanding was as
lgaVe 1t in my letter in Tuesdays paper.
The public can determine If his own re.
port Is not as strong as mine. raise no
questiono Of veracity, ss the circumstances
surrounding Ggmight afsct his remem-
brGnee 81 whit was said as well as mine,
or mine as well as his. Let the impartial
public take his remark to the chaplain In
connection with that TO me, and decide as
to the force thereof. He makes the con-
cession further when he says eve
do not claim that the Masonic
service has precedence over the
christian service, but do claim that when
parties make the requestfor Masonic
funeral, by virtue Of that request OF our
attendance and Of our ritual, the prece.
dence Is ours, right we propose to ex-
ercise." That is the very point. Of