and closes the church doors in their faces and
efuses them burial? Is there any earnest given
ait the corporation which may be organized
sill come in under better auspices than the one
tow in existence? Will we have men in it who
re better than those who preserved the church
roperty from a tax sale? Is not the present
tposition a senseless one? Is it not adumitted
,n all hants that a corporation is necessary to
ake the control of the church property? Is it
itt recognized that those who formed the new
orporation did a commendable act when they
aid the taxes and saved the property from
icing sold? Are not the members of that cor
oration in good standing in this community,
ud worthy of confidence? Is it not notorious
hit eighty odd good citizens, all Catholits,
iged the act of incorporation and that over
hree hundred others approved and ratified
heir act? Was not the notarial act of incorpo
ation clothed in due legal form? What then
an be the objection to this corporation? It
aits not exactly executed in the manner that
tm, Dick and 'Harry desired it should have
en. and ten to one, these gentlemen never
nuld agree on an organic structure. But the
est of it is, that it is the "Diocese" which
mplains and uses the signers' fingers to draw
is chestnuts. The "Diocese" could not say,
Iprotest," because it 'has no right even to
rotest, as the property does not belong to it
id it has not its control. So that the signers
otest for the benefit of the "Diocese," while
the same tune they assert that the " Diocese "
s no claims. We should be satisfied that cer
in good citizens have undertaken gratuitously
a labor of administerin> our church property.
