ST. JOSEPH'S ORPHANAGE

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 49, 22 November 1920, Page 5

ST. JOSEPH'S ORPHANAGE

Sir,—ln answer to the communication of the Kcv. Father Smyth, which appears in your columns of to-day, permit me to say that I consider he is only evading the real issue. It is surely surprising to know that without any evident inquiry to substantiate the statements he repro> duces nn article appearing in an obscure country paper, and that paper only. Knowing that paper as doubtless he does, and coupling with, it the fact that no reference to any sneh. statements was made in any of the city newspapers, surely he should have inquired at any rate of myself as to their accuracy, 'before using them for the evident purpose of assisting a, particular financial object. That, to sav the least of it, would have been common courtesy.. / As to your correspondent's questions, 1 can only say— v (1) The article, whichi appeared in the first instance in the "JTufct Valley Independent," does not purport to be the report of any particular Charitable Aid Committee meeting, 3>ut n reiteration of statements made by myself and others, somewhere at some time, though the writer is careful not to say when or where. As they are purely the imagination of his own brain, tlmt is.not to be wondered at. (2) I have always supported the recognised principle of the board, namely, that children of Catholic parentage should bo sent to Catholic orphanages, whilst Protestant orphans should be provided for in Protestant institutions. (2) I thought my former communications made it quite clear that I repudiated the aliened statements emphatically and definitely at the committee meeting immediately following the publication of them in the "Hutt Independent," and as the editor of that paper is a member of that committee and Was present on that occasion, I anticipated that as a fellow-mem-tor and a gentleman he would at once withdraw tho statements and do the honourable thing. (4) Tour reverend correspondent must be well aware that public men cannot w'tftTT D>ir time by taking notice of the vapourings of every unimportant paper, and others know that to expect cither fair piny or courtesy from the "Hutt Independent" is to seek the impossible. I am exceedingly surprised 1 to note that despito tho fact that the Rev. Father Smyth's attention has been oalled to the absolutely' fictitious nature of the alleged statement*, he still persists in justifying their inclusion on an official programme connected with an institution of hie Church, I have neither praiwd nor condemned' their orphanages, nor is it my intention to act either in my official or private capacity iu other than an absolutely impartial manner, but I unhesitatingly say that the use of such foundation, less statements is misleading the public. I would remind the rev. gentleman that tho law of the land plaoes the responsibility not merely on the origin*! fabri.