Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1909-07-15

Fetitu 70 crlHcIs9 my caro- OF the
oath uIt0. and 20 impuRn my motive.
| is indeed wonderful production.
although do not set myself up as &
critic 70 find fault with writer's
whose combined genius must, / am
sure be admired, vet whose princi-
pie stock la trade seems 10 be to
Willy me. and 70 misrepresent facts.
would advise them before seeking
q task elsewhere TO criticise each
other at their next mfeting, for try
ing 10 fool the public by making
two unauthenticated statements
which they claim led TO the n0t0ri-
Gus resolutions passed by them.
H. the fret place they state that
they saw from the Baltimore pa
pers that the Association intended
70 HAYES religious and civic cere-
monies at St. Mary's City" (can
they produce q copy OF the paper2)
N0One with whom | have'talked has
ever seen such statement Ii any
paper. Again th6v state that they
we're informed that there was 70 be
Military Mass on the site OF the
first landing ct ST. Mary's City,
upon which site our parish church
Is UNDERSTANDING. and we deemed 1t
wise to precautionary measures
so that there should be No misun-
Outstanding nor unpleasautn0ss
when the Pilgrims arrived on the
spot" Did any ono ever hear OF such
o lame. coutemptible and nonsensicaI
excuse for doing mean act2 Who
ever heard Of q favor being refused
which no one ever asked and never
thought OF asking2 Who ever heard
OF q Catholic Priest taking possess
sion Of q Protestant Church or OF
sny other building 20 say Mass
without having full authority 70 do
so2 The idea Is preposterous. +
deny most emphatically that there
was ever any intention Of having
other than civic celebration ~ So.
Mary's City, for which purpose the
Hall on State property was secured.
from the Trustees Of st. Mary's
Seminary. Any one who says 10 the
CONTRARY states that which Is abso-
lutely false and can be proven BY
afidavits II necessary. The officers
Of the Association are gentlemen,
and their followers al least law
abiding citizens and had no inten-
ti0n Of taking possession Of property
for which they had not asked the
nse. Ia regard 10 my statement
that the visit Of the Association was
delayed q week on account OF the
resolutions. the error was mine. The
day Of the celebration. ] was inform.
cd by one OF the officials that "the
resolutions caused them great tr0u-
BILE. /" as they stated that Fall land
surrounding the site of the Null
berry Tree and tho site upon which
stood the Colonial State House be-
longed 70 the church" this state
ment Ia literally true. but very mis-
leading, as II was intended 70 be.
These strangers not being familiar
with the property thought the Hall
WAS included. inferred from the
gentleman's remarks that the trou-
BILE mentioned caused the delay; the
mistake on nv part was unintention-
al for which ] am sorry, hut for the
balance Of my remarks I have no
regrets and no apologies W make.
! meant every word and am endOr
sed by people OF ell denOmina
tlons. including gentlemen Of lheir
own faith, four Of whom have
expressed themselves fn denuncia-
tion Of their act.
As 70 the statement that one of
the Vestry had explained the resolu-
lions In detail 70 mo, deny ID EN-
phatIcally, and do not believe she
gentleman said so. Our conversation
only lasted few seconds. He said
I'VE saw Ia the Baltimore papers
that there was 70 be q religious
ceremony which caused the rOsolu-
tions. He did not mention one word
~ 70 detail, bus simply promised 10
send me copy. which he never did.
l am sure she gentleman will zorro
b0rate this statements. / never saw
copy OF the resolutions until nine
days after my card was printed
(Which / got from Baltlm9re) This /
hope explains 10 the erudIte gentle
men my non comprehension OF same,
when my card was written, AS
the Association has asked no favors
OF the Rector. the Church Warden,
and the Vestry, and had no inten-
ti0n Of doing so, the insult convey
cd through the resolutions was en-
tirely gratuitous, and la order 10
avoid o repetition OF the same, rs az
some future time members OF other
denominations may wish 10 visit the
Calvert Monuments. which Is on
church property. petitIonllshould
DO sent 10 the Legislature for the
removal Of said monument 10 the ad-
joining State property. rs II would
seem, judging from their resolutions.
that ID would be q dissertation for
others thanmemberaof their church
70 sread upon their consecrated
ground.
have DO desire for controversy
Is stated by the gentlemen, and will
answer no further communications
from We, Us q Go.
Respectfully,