MR. HOWAN IN REPLY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue 84, 21 June 1881, Page 2

MR. HOWAN IN REPLY.

TO THE EDITOP OP TIIE MANAWATU HERALD. Sir, — Seeing in your issue of the 17th insfc a letter bearing the signature of Mr F. Loudon, which criticises my action iv taking round a subscription list for the purpose of obtaining funds for the erection of a Chapel for " Brethren " in Foxton, I would wifch your permission trespass upon your valuable space, iv order to vindicate myself. Mr Loudou gives a version to the public of what he says are the facts of the case. I will now state to the public the facts of the case. I would refer, sir, the public to a period about 11 years ago ; at that time an Evangelist named Mr Feist came to Foxton, and the Lord blessed his labours iv so much that so many were converted uuder his misistry, that it became necessary to obtain a place to worship in. Mr Feist proposed to buy a section of land from Mr Walter Staff, on the riverbank, but Mrs Loudon offered the site to which Mr Loudon refers. Mr Feist accepfced ifc wifch thanks, with the understanding that a deed of gift to the Brethren was to be drawn up at once. But before this was done, Mrs Loudon died. Then, as Mr Loudon says, the property fell into his hands. From that time we looked to Mr Loudon for fche conveyance of land to fche Brethren. Some misunderstandingoccurred between Mr Feist and Mr Loudon which led the latter to hold the building in defiance of Mr Feisfc. We think a dutiful aon who desired to carry out the wish of a dead mother would as soon as possible fulfil her wish ; but as the pnblic are aware, Mr Loudon did no such thing, but, on the contrary, held the site as his own property. Truly an amazing display of brotherly charity ! After this Mr Loudon still allowed the Brethren to use the building until such time as he wanted to assert his authority. The next thing Mr Loudon does, isto a^k the Brethren to give up the building to the Primitive Methodists. This they thought was a wrong step on Mr Loudon's parfc. They declined to do so. Mr Loudon, in the exercise of his authority, broke open the door, and admitted the Primitive Methodists. A little while after this, he converted the building into a store, thereby showing that he was the sole owner of it. How can Mr Loudon say in the face of these facts that the Brethren had a chapel ? if they had it was ouly so long Mr Loudou 's pleasure lasted. After all these incidents, I spoke to Mr Loudon in reference to the transferring of the properfcy to the Brethren fco which he replied, that he would get the transfer made oufc afc his own expense, and hand it over to them. Six months after this, I asked Mr Loudon if he had made out the deeds of conveyance; he said he had md thafc they were in the registry office in Wellington. We at once took steps to ascertain whether such conveyance had been lodged ih that office, and found that no such document had been deposited there on behalf of the Brethren. The next thing wo saw, was an advertisement in the Manawatu Herald, announcing that the whole of the property was for sale. I again saw Mr Loudon for the purpose of seeing if something oould net be douQ to retaiu the building and site"; he' at once showed me the door. I then on behalf of the Brethren wrote to Mr J. B. Harcourt, asking if he would sell ifc, aa we were very anxious to purchase it for the Brethren. His reply was, that he would let rae know in a few days. Iv the meantime, I saw Mr London. He informed me in the presence of Mr Liddell that he was making arrangements with Mr Harcourt in regard to the property. Mr Loudon says tbat he has no objections to me raising subscriptions to build ohapels, if I only lay the facts before the publis. This I have endeavored to as briefly as possible. Mr Loudon says that he pointed out to me that it was never intended that the property should be owned by any one individual. This we all understood from the ffrst. Mr Loudon, knowing this fact, perhaps will be kind enough to inform the public how Mr Harcourt became the sole owner of the said property ! Mr Loudon, and he alone, is able to answer this question. Mr Loudon goes on to say that I have no authority to acfc on behalf of the Brethren in getting up a subscription to build a chapel. In this Mr Loudon is correct, if he means from himself or those who are misguided by him ; but I am happy to inform the public that I am acting on behalf of the majority of the Brethren, who are anxions to extricate themselves from bondage, and to have a place to meet in, where such people as Mr Loudon have not the power to close or open the doors, as their whimsical fancies may dictate. If I might venture to offer a suggestion to Mr Loudon, I would say, if he has fche power, to make over to the Brethren at once the property which he states is theirs, he will act wisely : le3t peradventure a relapse occurs. In conclusion, I wish to inform those who have kindly assisted us, and those who may purpose to do so, that should there not be sufficient funds raised fco enable us to erect a building, their subscriptions will be returned ia full. Apologising to you, sir, for trespassing on co much of your valuable space, I remain, Ac Samuel Howan. Foxton, June 20th,' 1881. [Any further correspondence on this subject must be* paid for as an advertisement, the matter in dispute being a private oae. —Ed. M Hxbald. j I