The Portland daily press., 1886-08-04

There is a revival of interest in the finan-
cial operations of the late Archbishop Pur-
cell consequent upon a petition to the Pope
to remove his successor, Archbishop Elder,
ito some remote pastoTate, where there are
no newspapers to expose his weakness nor
committees to draw out contradictions from
his lips" 1t will be recollected that large
number of the poor members of Archbishop
PurcelPs congregation deposited their saw
ings with him, he agreeing to pay them in
terest. Matters ran along well for a time,
but eventually the Archbishop became bank
rupt and unable to return the money entrust-
ed to him 1t turned out that most of the
money had been spent in building churches,
An assignee of the insolvent estate was ap-
pointed, and some of the churches were sold
for the benefit of the creditors and the money
turned over to the assignee. He also re-
ceiyed a considerable sum collected from
Catholics throughout the country The most
Of this money he squandered in speculation,
engaged in, he said, with the hope of increas-
ing the amount for the benefit of the credit
ors. After Archbishop Purcell's death
Archbishop Elder was appointed to the do
cese. The new Archbishop took the ground
that the debts were purely personal against
Nbishop Purcell and that the church
could not be held for them. He is
Of usipg~Same Of the money
= - BENEFIT of creditors in buy
ing back churches and other ecclesiastical
property sold for the benefit of the creditors.
-Four hundred of these creditors held meet
ing in Cincinnati last Sunday and adopted
an address to the Pope, in which Archbishop
Elder is handled without gloves. He is ac-
cused of plotting against Archbishop Pur-
cell, with Selling and holding funds collect
ed in 1879 for the Archbishop's creditors and
OF deceit in dealing with these creditors.
The address concludes in this way:
The money deposited by the poor people
was put into churches, which the canonists
say cannot be sold to pay it back This dis
position Of deposltors' money without their
CONSENT the canonists say, belongs to God,
and God is not bound to pay debts, The
-ean0nfSts say we can address your holiness
with assurance of speedy hearing and lust
decision. Yet we are not ob1ivious that
within seven years no answer has been re-
ceiyed to our three complaints. The lying
unholy trick and open efforts aC Swindling of
your representative here have created very
bad impression among our citizens and have
driven thousands of souls from the
CuuICu. ItOplc uOG Idmllldr With the
casuistry of moral theology or canon law
concluded that man who steals another
mans purse or good name is not fit to ad-
minister the sacrament. We know nothing
of Archbishop Elders antecedents, but from
what we know Of his present actions we feel
we are justified in demanding his recall We
were not consulted as to his coming, and
feel under no obligations to let him stay
You, holy father, are saddled with the blame
Of sending him here unasked for, and we be-
seech you to wipe the stain off your brow by
ordering him to some remote pastorate, where
there are no newspapers to expose his weak
nesses nor committees to draw out contra
dictions from the lips of your subordinate,
and we, as in duty bound, shall ever pray
for the long life and happiness of our holy
father, the supreme pontiff, the vicegerent of
the Lord"
What the legal rights of these creditors in
the premises are is for the courts to decide.
But that they have moral right to the prop
erty that was bought with their money there
can be no question. Their anger at the way
they have been treated by the Archbishop
Elder, assuming their statement to be true.
is righteous.