AN EPITAPH.

Oamaru Mail, Volume I, Issue 8, 1 May 1876, Page 4

AN EPITAPH.

The Guardians have spent atone time m diacttsaing an epitaph which tad been on & bmktone in the Roman Catholic Cemetery of Mayne, aittl which as fellows:— " fhrxmtb 6h& stone h«ir ti«th oneThat tQI hfe fcfsrwfo tiid ptwwtr. To totuii t hopv (Wi* »(W«iy gone To «t«rna{ kiwis. Ufc «ftunfc. ti« sanif. whitss here on earth, Livwl happy o» m l»nl. Ami now hj« btttf> m&rnstl hli* breath. Owl rati hitu lurfity Wot A,'" The inscription was gradually becoming effaced by tune, when it was retouched and mtond k the direction of Mr. Owen Markey. The attention of the Rev. James Powderly, P.P. of the pariah in which the churcbyardis situate, was then directed to .the rabied, and he, Relieving the epitaph to he of an unseemly and immoral character, cat Mcd it to bv? effaced, with the exception of the last line. A letter was read from the Meat Rev. Dr. Gettigan, Roman Catholic Primate, in which the epitaph was denounced as "profane, immoral, and scandalous." On the other hand, a letter was signed by three parish priests who had been curates in thepamh, expressing the opinion that the epitaph hod never had a demoralising effect on the parishioners. After a long discussion, Mr. W.Whitworth, M.P., moved thai the board should order JTather PowderK* to efface the objectionable epitaph. Mr. Chad wick seconded the the motion. Mr. Mongan moved, and Mr. M'Geown seconded an amendment, "That the epitaph should not be effaced. A division was then taken, when there appeared thirteen for the amendment, and only five for the motion, but it is not likely that the matter will end thus, as the Rev. Mr. Powderly, it seems, chums the legal right to to dhee the epitaph, or remove the tombstone altogether if he so pleases.