National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-04-24
by which they are more than ready to stand

ures Of the statement are taken from OIL
cial sources, and are TO the last degree ac-
curate and authentic. They are neither
imaginary, nor the estimates OF the figures
taken from a report mot accepted; aud,
by the way, speaking:of finances, the exhlb.
Il OF the reply, on pages 8 aud 9, cannot be
otherwise characterized than as astounding.
The architect Of this exhibit divides the
financial history of the parish into two per-
iods, one embracing the thirteen years
prior TO 1873, and the other the thirteen
years from that date to the present. timo.
Not only does this make, with becoming
modeety, a direct contrast between the adj
ministratlon OF the present rector and that
OF Bishop Plnkney while rector before the
advent OF the present incumbent, but also
II would seem TO have been expected that
the congregation could forget Its history
and fortunes in the earlier period. During
n great part Of those thirteen years the
congregation was driven from its church
by the exigencies OF civil war, the building
being taken and occupied by the United
States government for army hospital pur-
poses; the services Of the congregation bO-
Ing held in n private edifice, generously
appropriated TO the purpose by our steady
benefactor; all the financial re-
sources Of the congregation and parish
being drawn upon 70 the very utmost
by burdensome taxation in the very face OF
the threatened capture OF the city; and the
energies Of the parish being paralyzed by
the scattering Of its members and absorp-
ton In the ever present necessity OF 1nan.
cial self-preservation. Tho second period
thus delimited embraces two separate and
distinct sources Of income, which would be
apparent at q glance 10 any one reading
the statement; one being for a specific OBJ
iect, to wit: The erection OF new building,
and not contributions TO the revenues OF
-. L.. 81 q h.
term. The determination to erect this
building had already been taken before the
advent Of the present incumbent, and from
that time until the present the whole en-
ergies Of the parish had been directed to
that object. The sum total Of contribu-
tions, socalled, for this second period Is
stated in the reply at S2i7, 1896. or this
sum, as is stated on page IL Of the reply,
about $l7l 900 were for prime cost OF the
new church, lot, and furniture, specially
contributed to the purpose. Taking this
sum from the total reported in the reply,
the hollowness OF the comparison between
the two periods designated Is apparent.
This subtraction leaves the sum OF little
over S103, 900 as the revenues OF the
church for the last thirteen years,
the average being in round numbers
$1,000, as against 81, 900 in each Of the pre-
ceding thirteen years, II is further to be
observed that not only was the early period,
as above suggested, one OF great financial
depression and stress, but also no allowance
is made for the growth and increaee In the
population of the city during the latter
period. The impulse under which the in-
crease in the latter period was brought
about was pointed out In the statement,
and surely needo no restatement. To claim
that the specific donations made for the
particular object mentioned are In any
sense TO be regarded as contributions to-
ward the general revenues OF the church is
manifestly unfair and purposely misead-
ing. Moreover, of the large amount
claimed to have been realized during the
last period, over 100000 were the dona-
tion of one member Of the vestry, and the
greater part OF the rest the donations Of the
remaining members Of the vestry, and the
sum realized by the sale OF the old prop
erty. AS to the continuation Of the present
administration Of the parish, the vestry is
entirely willing TO abide by the judgment
Of thoseIwho have thus contributed much
the greater part Of the boasted revenues
during the past thirteen years, OF whose
support and sympathy In their action the
majority of the vestry have direct assur-
ance.n~
"But is not the increase OF receipts In the
past quarter evidence of the financial
growth Of the parish since the extinguish-
ment OF the debt, as is claimed In the re-
IThese increased receipts are probably
taken from the already mentioned report OF
the finance committee mot accepted In
fact, much Of this claimed increase is due
to the open colonization OF the parish in
the interest OF the rector In the coming
election, and the payment Of arrears stimu.
lated by the resolution of the vestry de
| claring all pews vacant, the holders oi
| which should be In arrears on the 3lst oi
March. Besides which, as pointed out In
the statement of the majority, the revenues
Of the first quarter are in no wise to be con-
sidered as Indicative of the prospects for
the year, for not only is the attendance
larger and the contributions greater during
that time than at any other period of the
| year, but also many pews and seats held at
that time are given up later In the year and
| not again resumed, II at all, until Its close
AS to any indication that the alleged
increase was due to the payment
| Of the debt, the existence oi
which, as is repeated on page 13 ol
thereby, warned away new pewholders and
| impeded the growth of income.' The com
| plete exposure of this pretense has already
been made on pages IA and Is Of the state
ment Of the majority. The value OF the
reply, as to the truth Of It's figures, may be
| estimated when attention is called TO the
fact that the contributions for the year 1885,
are stated at $50, ,033.35. This is an exact
| repetition OF the statement made In the
Parish Record some months since. Upon
the appearance OF the statement, the atten.
| tion Of the vestry and rector was called 10
the fact that the statement In itself was
misleading and incorrect, in that over s., ,00C
| of the amount was not O contribution, bui
| was money received from the sale OF the
parsonage and site, long the property Of the
| parish, which sale had been forced from the
reluctant rector. Notwithstanding the ex.
posure at the time OF this inaccuracy, we
lind Il repeated In the reply.
"The reply seems TO show, on page 16, Q
steady addition to the number OF pewhold
ers from Sept. /, 1876. With this addition
constantly going on, how does It happer
that, as set forth In the statement Of the
majority, the number has been increased In
the aggregate only to the extent OF three
over the number OF the pewholders at The
time Of quitting the old church
"The statement in the reply is far mor'
ingenious than ingenious. 1t will be no
ticed that all the additions to the numbe
of pewholders are stated as between tn,
dates, Sept. l and Jan. 26following. Every
one knows that this is the period OF tn
year In which those who have given III
their pews or sittings for the summer re
sumo them, and these figures In reality onl
represent in great part the number OF thos
thus resuming their pews and sittingc
Furthermore, this statement wholly eS
cludes all account Of those giving up thei
pews and sittings within the same perio
for the several years mentioned. The totS
Of apparent gain, as intimated In the reply
when contrasted with the total Of actua
losses, ingeniously omitted from Oh
reply, will put very different face on th
figures. AS already stated, this is the mos
flourishing period of the year, aud is n
criterion by which to Judge actual & .ins an
losses, Notwithstanding which the valuatio
OF the apparent gain Is disingeniously. 81
forth, as though the pews and sitting
represented thereby were taken or resume
TO be held throughout the year, contrary
the uniform experience OF the parish"
"How is this affected by the statement
the reply that there seems to be some col