Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-06-17
NOT TRUE. SAYS DR.. BURTSELL.
4 Londo" Tablet Report About Himself,
Mgr. >atolii. and Dir. McGlynn Denied.
(Ncw York Times)

The London Tablet, a Well-knOwn
Catholic paper Of England. on April 2Sih
last published "A story I'm which IL was
said tina; Mgr Satoll, the Apostolic Dele
safe. aud the Rev. Or. McGlynn had
fallen out. and that Dr. Burtsell had been
summoned to Rome by tho Pope TO eX-
plain his relation to the MCGlynn case.
In a letter from Rome, dated May 22i,
Dr Burtsell replies TO the Tablets article
This letter IS published in the issue Of
the Tablet. which arrived in this city
Monday. pr. Burtscl says
In your issue OF April -. 1884, YOU state
that "a Wrll-knOWn correspondent has
sent you few notes upon certain diff
culties which have arisen in the Diocese
OF New York" This account has just
reached me from the United States. with
the comment of a priest who lives out
side Of New York ely. that There ia
the most audacioua Justification Of dates
In this Tablet article. not 10 speak Of
other falsrtcations that have seen in the
whole controversy
Very probably when the serious mis-
statements therein made Of the action
and position Of the Papal Delegate have
met the attention OF the propo. ecclcsias-
teal authorize. You viii be glad to
make more rcparation than any eXplana-
ton Of mine would convey. The account
OF Dr. McGylnn's relations with Henry
George. with the Archbishop of New
York, with the Papal Dclcsate. and with
the Pope IS SO confused and mis-
stated that to correct the mistakes
would require a history Of the events
which took place in eight, perhaps |
should cay in twelve. years, while your
"well-mformed correspondent" writes as
Il they had happened within the space
ha nng lnf IL ant
the cart before the horse.
Permit me. however. 20 say few
words about myself, whom your we'll
informed correspondent calls DR. Bur
chell The correspondent apparently
knows little or nothing Of the public facts.
| am not surprised at his msstatements
of what did not appear in public should
say, of what did not occur at all. | fiat
" contradict several of his more serious
statements. At no time did Archbishop
Corrigan tell me that he heard that I
gave dissolution to those who attended
Father McGlynn's meetings whether IL
was reserved case or otherwise; he
never asked me TO give any explanation
on any such question, nor did he ever
insinuate that | did not recognize his
authority. or that | was acting contrary
TO his orders. II Is not true that | was
ordered to retract my errors. which were
declared 10 he contra fldem. nor is II true
that when came TO Rome my case came
up for trial but the decision Of the Holy
See was a standing decision, or that the
matter is at present In the hands OF the
Holy Father
"Since my arrival In Rome / have not
been on any kind Of trial nor has any
ecclesiastical authority here asked me
single question about my connection
with Dr. McGlynns case or with hia
teachings. 1t was my pleasure and honor
that. through my mediation Mgr. Satolli
removed the accommodation from DR.
McGlynn, whose reconciliation was sealed
by his subsequent reception BY the Pope"
This is the Tablets only comment on
the letter: 1T is. perhaps. enough TO say
that the Archbishop OF New Yorks secre-
tary. Father Connolly. has stated TO a
representative OF the New York Free
mans Journh that the Tablet article
is in substance correct"