The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1892-02-18


one who spoke against Archbishop Ireland's
meeting, and all be said was that he did not
think it was treating the lay committee prop
erly.
At 10p. m. all assembled again, and this time
Archbishop ireland carried his point Arch
bishop Williams, being absent, he (Archbishop
lreland) nominated Archbishop Feehan, who
took the chair. Our committee, that is MeSsrs.
Kelley, Farrely, Hanson, Fanster and Spaun-
horst u am not sure as to the latter caucused
and came TO the conclusion that they would
not hgnt the archbishop; that if they wanted
TO take the congress and run it, they might do
so. they would have all the responsibility, and
our committee would be free from all
further duty. Besides our committee had al
ready given itself up TO them ANYHOW. by
granting them full veto power, aud therefore,
even if we renamed, we could do nothing
against their wishes; so if they wished to take
control let them do so. Therefore they offered
no further opposition. Archbishop Feehan
took the chair and they asked Maj
Kelley to ect as their secretary, and he
did so. They then voted that the laymen
present be invited to act with the meeting
Tney did So Then this new meeting con-
trolled by Archbishop Ireland. appointed an
executive committee to take charge or every
thing with Archbishop Feehan as chairman
and Mr.. Onahan as secretary. They voted Mr.
Onahan salary OF e3 900 a year as secretary
and an allowance of 81 900 a year for clerical
help. Our COMMITTEES did not disband but met
again and formally adjourned to meet again if
called by the chairman, and that will be meet
ing 70 approve Of the minutes.
COMMENTS.
Al do not give all of the above as absolute
exact history; there was q lot more. give it
as remember it from Mai Kelley's oral re-
port TO me here But a more accurate report
has been made. At the final meeting of our
COMMITTEES In st. Louis it was agreed that this
might some day in some way become OF i'm
portant service, and it was agreed that Mai
Kelley and Mr.. Farrely should each one, as soon
as possible write out his full remembrance of
the matter and then confer with each other and
EllG OhNlln a or ha arafa 70
draw from in making up his minutes.
B,-MaJ. Kelley and Farrely, Judge Morgan,
Mr. o Brien and myself, all being of our COM
mittee, had an informal meeting at Judge
O'Brien's chambers in the city hall here about
Dec. 10, to deliberate as to what we should do,
whether to make public report of this matter
and and protest against this usurpation by Arch
bishop Ireland, etc. or to say nothing
and let the archbishops run this thing
now themselves. Judge O'Brien was strong
In urging that we say nothing, and so we
ord in the matter. Now all this is to explain to
you why we did not contradict that dispatch
publishedin the Sltn as from st. Louis to the ef-
feet that ''the archbishops adopted all sug-
gestions of the com mittee, and the programme
was as follows (the seven social subiects),
emitting all reference to temporal
power aud education" That report
shows the archbishops as agreeing to
programme leaving out temporal power and
education; If they are willing to stand on that,
let them do SO.
". Cnere IS one OCner point, ana an important
one, as revealing the animus Of Archbishop
Irelsnd's action. After carrying al his points.
burying our committee, getting
new committee, etc, and with
then wanted cert hcate of his victory, and
moved that the name be changed from the
Catholic congress to the social congress" This
was point fought for by them in Boston, but
that motion did not prevail. it is still to be
styled the Catholic congress" although all the
Catholic part has been cut out. There is nothing
private about this information, except that
1t must not be given for newspaper publica-
ton: First, because it would not be just to our
committee, because I do not pretend that it is
full and exact. and they attach great impor-
tance to having the published report unim-
peachably exact; second, they are not ready to
publish any report yet
But wanted you TO have at least general
idea of the inside history of the meeting in
st. Louis. Ever yours, e. F. DUNNE.
DUNNE'S STATEMENT DENIED.
DETROIT, MICH, Feb. I'm. H. O'Brien
of this city, one of the committee of ar
ranRements of the Catholic congress, saws in
regard to Mr.. Dunne's letter that Judge E.
F.'Dunne OF Ohio was not present at the as
semblage OF archbishops in st. Louis, Dec.
l; that at that meeting the question of the
omission of the isubjeots of Catholic
education and temporal power was never
contemplated either by archblshops or the
laymen and that the questions have not
been omitted from the programme, which
is not yet completed. The archbishops
usurped none of the authority of the lay
men. The personnel of the committee as
originally constituted, however. was not
universally popular, and at the St. Louis
convention the committee was reorganized
with Cardinal Gibbons as honor
ary president and Archbishop Feehan
as president. The vice presidents
comprised a number of archbishops. Mr..
Onahan of Chicago was chosen secretary
and Mr.. O'Brien treasurer. Mr.. O'Brien
denouuces as false the statement that Mr..
Onahan and he had abandoned their fellow
laymen and played into the hands of the
preates The convention worked in har-
mony and there was no intention of change
In the programme as originally agreed upon.