|
SIR—I doubt that I was less astonished, or perhaps grieved, by the reply to a letter I addressed to you a day or two since, on the above subject. The editorial comment (coupled with my statement of facts), as to matters detailed, should in my opinion have elicited something better than a reply from a Sexton, who writes his name "Benjamin Hall Browne." In bringing under your notice, and that of the public, the circumstances pertaining to the funerals, to which my former letter alluded. I was by no means ambitious to enter into a controversy with Mr. Browne. I simply adduced the facts within my own knowledge, but, I am yet sorry to say, I could, and will do more. I state distinctly, the body of the first child was taken from the cab, returned to it, and without the Holy offices of religion, being performed at all, and it was this—and this alone, which generated my disgust. I will not enter into a discussion with the Sexton, for obvious reasons—nor will I the more, or the less rejoice upon receiving information of the "lapses" in this respect. The question before the public is simply this, "can funerals conducted (or supposed to be) at St. David's, by the Minister (pro tempore), at that Cathedral Church, (assisted in a mea- (sic) by Mr. Browne) for any reason, at the whim and pleasure of the one, and the indecency of the latter, set aside those usual observances of decent interment, to which my former letter referred. I don't care as to a date—whether it were the 24th, or 25th the fact remains ! and I quite agree with your Editorial remarks of this morning, that the facts detailed, warranted a reply from a higher source than that of a "Sexton." "LEX SCRIPTA MANET." |