The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1907-11-22
CRAWFORD


Especial Journal Courier News service)
Branford, Nov. 21-An article in this
mornings Journal and Courier, from |
the pen Of Hon. Michael J. Tanning
has been read with interest by many |
Branford people and while we have no |
disposition to seek a controversy with |
the gifted author who is the author of |
that article there are some points in |
his communication which in our hum
Die opinion have left the situation par
TALLY obscure. and justice, both to the
correspondent and the readers of this
paper requires that the matter be
further elucidated. In the first place,
your Branford correspondent had no
intention of commenting on the situa-
ton in Branford, attendant on the
very interesting lecture delivered by
Mr.. Tanning on the evening of We'd
nesday, November 10. Only the unvar-
nished facts were given in the article
which Mr.. Tanning criticises and with
one exception, every statement con-
tanned therein was admitted by Mr..
Tanning in his communication in this
mornings issue. AS a matter of fact,
the correspondent could have said,
much more and still confined the para
graph to facts. The statement, how
evr that the method pursued in taking
the offering in the Branford church
was not highly Objectionable" cam
not be permitted to go unchallenged;
not only did the reverend pastor of the
church so view it, but at least one gem
tleman, who was a liberal contributors
SO regarded it and we doubt not that
Others felt likewise. The amount given
at that meeting consequently did not
show that the people believed In rails
ing the offering. The assertion of Mr..
flaming, consequently, that mo person
who contributed to this fund has been
known to find fault" needs further
revision. Again, While we are not au-
thorized to speak for Rev. T. S. Dewitt,
the pastor OF the church, that gentle
man being fully equal to define his own
position, we venture the assertion that
it will be very long before be win pub
licly modify or retract his position on
the matter of the offering taken in his
church. In the matter Of the offer
ings taken at the five New Haven
churches, Mr.. Tanning quotes correct
ly, and just as we intended the same
should read. Either your correspond
emit Internationally omitted the word
mot" in his article, or ii Is typo
graphical error; in either case
we regret it, but the reader who saw
both articles will understand that 1t
would be the climax Of folly for us to
wilfully mtsquote another New Haven
paper. Just a few words respecting
the Guilford episode. Anyone who
knows Rev. F. q. Snow will
enjoy the unconscious humor Of the
assertion" Ito paraphrase the language
of Mr., Fanning) that Mr.. Snow was
In seni-hysterical condition, occas-
toned by the unjust and untrue state
! ments about my (Mr. Fannings) work
In Bradford" 1t is the privilege of
the writer to havo been personally ae-
Quainted with Mr.. Snow during per-
Tod closely approximating twenty years.
and during that period we have never
known him to be In mi-hysterical
condition" We are certain that hun
dreds Of acqualntances Of Mr.. Snow,
some of whom know him better than
your correspondent, even though we
have lived within nearly a stones
throw of each other for more than thir-
teen years, will endorse our statement.
just why Mr. Tanning should state
that he was not promptly squelched
by Mr.. Snow" and few lines later,
admit that Mr. Snow undertook to
say how we should take the Offering
does not seem at all clear to your COR
respondent From what transpired In
Branford, we assume that Mr.. flaming
requested Mr.. Snow to act as secretary
and receive the names Of those who
pledged funds for the cause he repre-
scented, but that the reverend gentle
man declined to do SO and told the
speaker he might take up q collection
in the usual manner. The mere fact
that Mr.. Tanning states in his article
that he refused to permit the latter,
would 60 to show which was near a
condition of semi-hysterics.