The Barrow Herald and Furness Advertiser. — 1888-10-13 (Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria, England)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.  ST: GEORGE'S CHURCH.  Sir,—l was highly amused on Sunday night, at Archdeacon Crosse, by the way he raved at the people of his parish for not coming to his church in such numbers as here'ofore. Surely, of all people on earth the Archdeacon ought to be the last to get up and denounce the people for not attending church. I say to Archdeacon Crosse : Commence at home, and pnt your own house in order, and then go to the people and say what you have to say; but until then I say you have no right to denounce those who conscientiously have left your church, and others who do not go. Go with Na back to 1885 during the Schneider and Duncan election. Did not Archdeacon Crosse get up, after he had heard Mr Duncan's views upon the Disestablishment question (which to a Churchman were not worth a fraction), and say he was perfectly satisfied with what Mr Duncan had said ; but no sooner was a Disestablishment motion brought forward iu the House of Commons than Mr Duncan went and voted straight for it. It was a scandalous affair for the head of the Church in Furness to be mixed up with. For my own part, I would willingly have let that pass by, if Mr Schneider had been anything but what he was to the parish of St. George's. Was he not its real friend ? But alas ! what thanks did he receive? Truly, a prophet bath no honour in his own country ! Secondly, can anyone conscientiously go aud hear God's Gospel preached by a man who at the same time is backing up the rebel movement in Ireland, which knows no limit to horrible crimes and cruel outrages, both on man and beast? Carry your minds back to the Norah Fitzmaurice case. Here was a poor girl cruelly boycotted, even in God's house of prayer, because she dared to give evidence in a court of justice that would convict the murderers of her father. Yet the Archdeacon of Furness resents the interference of the Government in its just endeavours to put down such cowardly, abominable work. Examine a case I came across yesterday, at a meeting of the National League, held at a place called Sixmilebridge, on the 30th ult., the parish priest in the chair. AMr Finucane, M.P., addressing the meeting, denounced a poor village blacksmith who had fallen foul of the League through having shod a horse belonging to a poor unfortunate landlord. This "Imperial legislator " called the pcor fellow all the names under the sun, and finished up by this most "humane advice," viz.' that he ought to have driven the nails into the quick of the horse's hoof. The High Sheriff of Limerick endorsed this callous individual's advice. Could anything, I ask, be more devilish than this? No, sir; knowing what we do of Archdeacon Crosse and this question, I think it ill becomes him to throw stones at the people for not going to his church. Splendid example set them, haven't they? I know many who cannot gc on account of the Archdeacon's action, and I say far better stay away than go and hear the Word preached on the one hand, but on the other, aiding on the most scandalous agitation that ever disgraced a civilised people. The fault lies not with the people but with the Archdeacon himself. Therefore, commence at home and reform, then spread your net broadcast again, and I doubt not the people will flock back to the sacred edifice of St. George's, and be willing to erase from memory the things of the past.—Yours truly,