The Canon City record with which is consolidated the Canon City cannon., 1915-02-18
fQRNE PASTOR LOSES
nlS SUIT AGAINST BlSMoP


The suit Of the Rev. Michael cul-
kin. former pastor Of the Catholic
: church at Canon city. to recover s17.-
600 from Bishop n C, Matz. which has
been pending s=s>re the Fremont and
Denver county district courts. the &c
Ecclesiastical courts at Rome and the
Sstate Court Of Appeals Tor more than
nineteen years. but finally disposed
OF this morning. The Court Of Appeals
decided that the suit of the priest,
who sought to recover money he claim
81 TO have expended on the church
property before he wes suspended and
his faculties withdrawn in 1888.
should be dismissed.
Charges Against Priest.
Father Culkin's friction with the
head of the Denver diocese OF the
Catholic church originated while that
Rost was occupied by Bishop Mache-
beuf. The charges against him were
that he had received money for the
construction of new church building
OF which the bishop had not obtained
an accounting. and that he had "an
unfortunate mental attitude that
brought about trouble and scandal In
the two missions intrusted to him"
" After he had been. deposed he re-
fused to reIinquish the church prop
erty. Thereafter. however. the bishop.
through Father T. H. Malone, erect
ed settlement with the priest by
which It was tsipnlated that the action
brought by the bishop in the Ere
mont County District court TO recover
possession Of The church through legal
means. should be dismissed. Bishop
Matz had then succeeded Bishop Mach
ebeuf and the stipulation was signed
In his name. II was supplemented.
|, moreover. by a separate contract be
tween Father Malone and the priest
whereby 1t was agreed that Father
culkfn should have parish II ster-
ling and that he shonid receive back
. Aaiary and $3.50 counsel fees.
Rssssss 70 Reeesnizs Past
This agreement Bishop Matx later
fefused 10 recognise. and In 1880 the
suit was brought to trial in Fremont
county and Father culkia was de-
feated. He made only nominal re-
slstance. but carried the case imme.
diateiy to Rome. where be spent four
years in attempting 70 have the church
authorities adiudicato the controvcr-
sy. Finally In May. 1895. decision
vas rendered which held that the
legality Of The cuutsaot between Faith
~ Malone and Father Culktn had not
DlDeen sustained: that the latter haA no
grounds a uhleh - 1ananA danaGes.
and that he uas NOT eatitied 10 rein
statement.
Tho eccieaiastic court recommended
, however. that he be paid an annuity
Of $500. conditional upon his apology
TO the bishop and his withdrawal
from Denver.
culkin then returned to Denver and
wrote the bishop as foilovs:
III during this controversy nave
offended you 1 am sorry"
paid Annuity Seven vears.
The bishop received this as compii-
ance with the orders Of the court In
Rome and paid the annuity seven
years. At the esd OF this period Fa-
ther cuIkin returned TO Denver and
entered suit for $4,000. which he
claimed had been the total Of all
moneys due him. including sums spent
upon the building Al Canon City from
his personal funds. back salary and
interest.
The Denver District court refused
to allow the claim on the ground
that the statute OF limitations had
run. The Court OF Appeals sustained
sfhis view.