REPRESENTING THE LARGEST COLLECTION OF 2X2 HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET
Perry, Oklahoma Conv, 1942
Newspaper Articles for September 2, 1909 thru Year End
About
The Church Without a Name, The Truth, Two By Twos, 2x2s
Death of Alfred Carson - Edward Cooney's Brother - Ruled a Suicide
September 2, 1909 - Impartial Reporter 
September 2, 1909 - Fermanagh Times (2 articles)
September 2, 1909 - Fermanagh Times
September 4, 1909 - Fermanagh Herald - Tragic death of Mr. A. C. Cooney, solicitor
September 4, 1909, p.1 - Anglo-Celt - Tragic Death of Alfred Cooney. Edward Cooney's brother
NOTE: On August 14, 1909, Edward Cooney departed from Liverpool, England for Halifax, Canada.
* * * * * * *
September 2, 1909, p. 8September 9, 1909, p. 8
September 16,
1909
September 23,
1909, p. 8
A Sad Fate
Young Solicitor's Tragic End - Found With His Throat Cut
He Had a Strange Delusion - No Reasons for Rash Act
The inhabitants of Enniskillen received a very painful shock on Sunday evening last when the sensational news was received of the sudden and tragic death of Mr. Alfred Carson Cooney, Lakeview, who was discovered by his mother, lying on his bedroom floor, with his throat cut from ear to ear.
At first the sad and awful intelligence was received with scepticism and reserve, but as the particulars leaked out, it was found to be only too true.
The deceased gentleman, who was 38 years of age, was by profession a solicitor, and had by close and consistent application to business built up a large clientele. He was secretary of the local Sessional Bar, secretary of the Fermanagh Hunt Club, and also represented the South Ward of Enniskillen, on the Urban District Council.
He had been away for the past few weeks at Scarborough for holidays, and returned home to Lakeview on Thursday last. On Friday he was engaged professionally at Derrygonnelly Petty Sessions, and conducted his cases with his usual ability. On Saturday he was in Enniskillen and meeting many friends chatted affably and appeared to be in the best spirits. Consequently the shocking intelligence of his sudden demise was the more acute and painful.
Intense and sincere sympathy was widespread with his bereaved parents who were prostrated with grief at their son’s rash act.
THE INQUEST
On Monday afternoon an inquest was held on the body in Lakeview House, Enniskillen, by Mr. Geo. A. Atkinson, solicitor, Coroner for North Fermanagh. Mr. Thompson Taylor was foreman of the jury, and Head-Constable Mallon conducted the proceedings on behalf of the Crown.
The inquest was an ordeal of more than usually acute degree. The coroner and all the jurors were personal acquaintances of the deceased and all were visibly moved with grief at the loss of their friend.
Mr. Wm. R. Cooney, J.P., was the first witness examined. He said that he was the father of the deceased, who was a solicitor by profession, and aged 38. He was unmarried. He dined with witness and his mother about 1:45 on Sunday. Dinner was over about 3:30. Immediately after that deceased took some coffee in his own room. That was the last time witness saw him alive. He observed nothing unusual in his manner during dinner hours. After dinner he supposed he went to his own room about 3.
Witness went to his own bedroom and was called by his wife about 5:30, and in consequence of what she said he went into the bedroom of deceased. ‘I saw him,’ said witness, ‘lying on the floor, face downwards. There was a great pool of blood. I felt him, and his mother said he was certainly dead. There was an open razor lying just beside his hand on the floor.’
There were no servants at all on the premises at the time, so witness and his wife walked into town together and met Dr. Betty on the street and informed the constabulary and they all went out together to Lakeview. Dr. Betty pronounced life to be extinct for some time.
Deceased left no written document of any description, and as far as witness knew he had no reason for the act, and had no trouble of any kind. ‘Our family relations,’ said witness, ‘at the time were the warmest, most enjoyable, and most friendly.’ Deceased had enjoyed good health and was just home from a holiday at Scarborough. There was never anything peculiar in his manner.
Head Constable Mallon–Did deceased suffer at any time from fits of moodiness or depression?
Witness--Some times ago he had a delusion that there was a conspiracy amongst the people of Enniskillen against him, and whether it remained with him or not I do not know.
Coroner- How long is it since he thought there was a conspiracy?
Witness--Three or four years ago. Witness added that the deceased had never been in any institution or under the care of any specialist.
Head Constable Mallon– You can assign no cause for his act?
Witness--No cause whatever.
Sergeant Patrick Murphy swore that in consequence of a report made to him about 6:20 p.m. on Sunday evening he went out to Lakeview House and arrived there the same time as Dr. Betty. Witness and Dr. Betty went up to the bedroom of the deceased. The deceased was there lying on his face, resting on his left cheek, his feet were towards the foot of his bed, his left hand was bent under his breast, and the right hand was almost clenched, and was bent under his chin. He was fully dressed save his head which was bare, and he had slippers on. There was a large pool of blood under his face and breast. There was an open razor (produced) about one foot from his left shoulder covered with blood stains. Dr. Betty was examining deceased when he saw the injury. He was cut almost from ear to ear. He was then quite dead then, and nearly cold. Witness examined his pockets and the room for documents but found nothing that would throw any light on the occurrence. Witness believed the wound was self-induced.
Dr. Moore Betty stated that he made a deep examination of the body of deceased. He found the tissues of the neck completely divided from left to right down to the bony parts, with severance of all important parts of the neck. The cause of death was shock and hemorrhage. Witness was acquainted with the deceased very well, but never attended him professionally. He was always in the best of health so far as witness knew. There was no doubt that the wound was self-inflicted.
This was all the evidence produced, and the coroner, in referring to the sad occurrence, was deeply moved. He said that since he had been appointed Coroner he had never investigated a case that shocked him or grieved him so much. The deceased was a brother solicitor of his. They had always been on the very best of terms and if he ever had wanted any assistance the deceased always gave it to him. He (the Coroner) looked upon him as a shrewd, clever young man. It was a desperate thing for his poor father and mother and he was sure they all offered them their deep sympathy, in the great ordeal they had to go through.
The jury returned a verdict of suicide during temporary insanity, and also passed a vote of condolence with the relatives of the deceased.
THE FUNERAL
The funeral which was very representative, took place yesterday afternoon, to Rossorry. At three p.m., the mournful procession left Lakeview House, headed by Town-Sergeant Slavin bearing the mace draped in crepe, followed by the members of the Enniskillen Urban Council and the members of the local sessional bar. The chief mourners were W. R. Cooney, J.P. (father); Harry and Fred (brothers): Rev. S Boyton Smith, and James M’Connell (brothers-in-law).
On reaching the church a brief service was conducted by Dean Ovenden. In the course of a touching address, the Dean remarked that they were gathered as an expression of their deepest sympathy with the bereaved parents. He knew that there had gone out a wave of sympathy that was unparalleled in the town and neighbourhood for Mr. and Mrs. Cooney; yet at the same time when they reflected calmly they knew that they were not considering anything except a case of disease. They knew that they were fearfully and wonderfully made and it was only now that medical science was beginning to understand the deep intricacies of the human mind and the organisation of the being. In no form of brain disease was there responsibility. It was a case of affliction, and they understood fully the mind of God on that matter. He was perfectly certain that the verdict of the 12 honest, disinterested men, who were unmoved by prejudice or any thought of gain came nearest to what they might know was THE VERDICT OF ALMIGHTY GOD.
Of the deceased he spoke with very great emotion, because he had known him as a personal, intimate friend since he was 15 years old. There never had been a shadow between them, but they had been close associates for all those years. He had known the deceased’s deep interest in spiritual subjects. There was no impure or unclean thoughts ever passed through his mind. Again they expressed their intense sympathy with those who were so sorely bereaved to-day.
The following sent wreaths— Mr. and Mrs. Davidson, Mr. and Mrs. George Harvey, Mr. and Mrs. James Harvey, Mrs. Frank Carson, Mrs. Melanophy, Dr. and Mrs. Moore Betty, Miss Eva Betty, the Office Staff, Mr. T. Maguire, The Fermanagh Bar, Mr. and Mrs. John Frith, Mr. and Mrs. B. Clarke, Mr. & Mrs. M’Connell, Mrs. Wm Black, Mrs. R. H. Ritchie.
September 2, 1909
Fermanagh Times
Tragic Death of Enniskillen Solicitor
Why he felt tempted or impelled to sacrifice so ruthlessly all this home affection, a professional prosperity so comfortable and coveted, and life itself with such splendid prospects must we fear remain for ever an inscrutable mystery.
The deed was in every human sense deplorable and to the bereaved parents in an especial manner and to his brother and sisters has been extended far and wide the deepest and most genuine sympathy. We have no intention of piling up and prolonging the sad unfortunate story. The main facts are described in the evidence reported at the inquest. We will only add that for some considerable time past his more intimate friends noticed in him off and on some little vageries of temperament and disposition that surprised and puzzled them. Latterly he had appeared more than usually cheerful and as he had just returned from a holiday at Scarborough and was engaged at Derrygonnelly Petty Sessions on Friday and at office work on Saturday, the terrible act was more than probably due to some passing but momentarily irresistible feeling of despondency. Educated at Portora, he served his apprenticeship with Mr. C. F. Galls.
Poor fellow! It is a heart breaking ending to a most promising career. May the earth lie lightly o’er his ashes!
September 2, 1909
Fermanagh Times
The Funeral of Mr. A. C. Cooney
The funeral of the late Mr. A. Carson Cooney reference to whose death will be found in another column, was attended yesterday by the members of the Urban Council, who preceded the hearse, the members of the Fermanagh Bar following. There was a very large, representative, and most sympathetic gathering of the general public. The Dean of Glogher delivered a very touching address. The chief mourners were: Mr. W. R. Cooney (father); Mr. H. Cooney and Mr. F. Cooney (brothers); Rev S. Boyton-Smythe and Mr. J. M’Connell (brothers-in-law).
Wreaths were sent by: Mr. and Mrs. Davidson, Mr. and Mrs. George Harvey, Mr. and Mrs. James Harvey, Mrs. Frank Carson, Mrs. Melanophy, Dr. and Mrs. Moore Betty, Miss Eva Betty, the Office Staff, Mr. T. Maguire, The Fermanagh Bar, Mr. and Mrs. John Frith, Mr. and Mrs. M’Connell, Mrs. Wm Black, Mr. and Mrs. R. H. Ritchie, Mr. and Mrs. S. G. Clarke.
September 4, 1909
The Fermanagh Herald
Enniskillen Sensation.
Tragic death of Mr. A. C. Cooney, solicitor.
Found with throat cut.
Blood-stained razor beside him.
Inquest and verdict.
The people of Enniskillen were horror-stricken on Sunday evening when the news spread through the town that Mr. Alfred Cooney, solicitor, had been found dead in his room at Lakeview House, the residence of his parents. Mrs. Cooney on entering the room at about half past five o’clock found her son lying in a large pool of blood with a deep gash in his throat and a blood-stained razor close to him. She immediately called her husband who had gone to his bedroom after dinner, and both of them went into the room where their son was lying. The unfortunate gentleman was fully dressed and HIS THROAT WAS CUT almost from ear to ear.
They saw at once that life was extinct. The servants in Lakeview House had gone out for the evening, and having no messenger to send to Enniskillen for a doctor the grief-stricken parents had to walk into the town themselves, a distance of about half a mile. They met Doctor Moore Betty on the street and informed him of the tragic occurrence, and they notified the police. Dr. Betty at once motored to Lakeview House but the young gentleman was beyond human aid, the tissues of the neck having been completely divided from left to right. Head-Constable Mallon and Sergeant Murphy accompanied by one or two constables arrived on the scene and made A CLOSE SEARCH OF THE ROOM for any letters or documents that would tend to throw any light on the motive of the deceased for committing the rash act, but their efforts were fruitless.
DECEASED’s CAREER
The deceased young gentleman was a son of Mr. Wm. Rutherford Cooney, J. P., and was 38 years of age. He had been practicing as a solicitor for about fourteen years and had built up a large clientele.
On Saturday he had been attending to his business as usual and such startling intelligence as his tragic death naturally enough caused great consternation in the community. For some weeks previous he had been at Scarborough on holidays and only returned to Enniskillen on Thursday. The subsequent day he was present at Derrygonnelly Petty Sessions, at which he was professionally engaged. He appeared in the best of health and spirits, and no cause whatever can be assigned for the dreadful occurrence. The deceased was a brother of Mr. Frederick Cooney, electrical engineer, Dublin, formerly of Messrs Cooney and Robinson, electrical engineers, Belfast. A second brother of the deceased is Mr. Edward Cooney, whose name has become familiar with the public on account of the prominent part he took in the formation of the sect known as ‘The Pilgrims.’
On the completion of the first stage of his education at Portora Royal School, Mr. Cooney was apprenticed to Mr. C. F. Falls, solicitor, Enniskillen. He passed all his examinations with much distinction, and from the beginning his career in the profession was eminently successful. By close personal attention to business he succeeded in attaining to the position of being able to claim one of the largest practices in Co. Fermanagh. He was therefore A FAMILIAR AND POPULAR FIGURE in the courts, and the news of his very sad end will be received with sincere regret not only in Enniskillen but throughout the entire county.
In social as in professional life Mr. Cooney was well-known. He took a very keen interest in hunting, and held the secretaryship of the Fermanagh Hunt Club. He was also secretary of the Sessional Bar, a very active member of the Enniskillen Urban Council and a member of the Fermanagh Technical Instruction Committee. Not only was he popular with his colleagues at the Bar, but he had very many personal friends among the general public.
In the course of his career Mr. Cooney appeared in a number of important cases both in the county court and in the Dublin Courts. He was in affluent circumstances.
THE INQUEST
On Monday afternoon an inquest was held on the body in Lakeview House, Enniskillen, by Mr. George Atkinson, solicitor, coroner for the district, and the following jury – Messrs. Thompson Taylor, U.D.C. (chairman), Frederick Gordon, George Whaley, R. W. Wilson, F.A.I.; M. Colquhoun, James Wilson, John Stewart, U.D.C., Bernard Coyle, Josiah Maguire, U.D.C., Richard Clingan, Thomas Elliott, C.E., Michael Griffith, Alfred Weaver, and Wm. Irvine.
Head Constable Mallon watched the proceedings on behalf of the Crown.
FATHER’S EVIDENCE
The first witness called was Mr. Wm. R. Cooney, J.P., father of the deceased. He said his son, who was 38 years of age and unmarried, was a solicitor by profession.
The Head Constable – Did he reside with you in Lakeview House?
Yes.
Did he dine with yourself and his mother yesterday?
Yes.
At about what time?
The dinner commenced at ten minutes to two and was over about half-past two.
He was supplied with some coffee later in the evening?
Just immediately after dinner in his own room.
Was that the last time you saw him alive?
Yes.
Did you observe anything unusual in his manner during the dinner?
Nothing whatever. We supposed he went to his own room about three o’clock or a few minutes after three.
You went to your room?
I went to my bedroom, and he is supposed to have gone up to his bedroom after dinner.
Were you called by your wife later in the afternoon?
Yes, at about half past five o’clock.
And in consequence did you go to the deceased’s bedroom?
Yes.
Would you just tell us what you saw?
I saw him lying as I believed dead on the floor, with his face downwards in A GREAT POOL OF BLOOD.
The Coroner – You believed he was dead?
I felt him and his mother said he certainly was dead.
The Head Constable – You saw a razor there?
There was an open razor lying just beside his hand on the floor.
‘Did you,’ asked the Head Constable, ‘come into Enniskillen and report the matter to Dr. Betty?’
‘We had no person at all on the premises,’ replied witness. ‘The gate lodge keeper went on Friday to the town, and the second man was away at his own house. One of the servant girls was away on holiday, and the second one had gone out for the evening to see some of her friends. We therefore had no messenger. I saw he was quite dead, and I was afraid to leave Mrs. Cooney here, so we just WALKED INTO THE TOWN, and met Dr. Betty on the street and informed the constabulary in the barrack. We all came out together. I came out on Dr. Betty’s car, and he pronounced life extinct for some time.
The Head Constable: Did he leave any written document, as far as you know, assigning any cause for this?
Not a scrape of a pen of any description.
As far as you know he had no troubles of any kind?
Not that I know. The family relations at the time were of the warmest kind – most enjoyable and most friendly. They could not have been more so.
The Coroner – He never complained of being ill?
He enjoyed good health as a rule. He had just come back from a holiday in Scarborough.
Head Constable – Did you observe anything peculiar in his manner which caused or led you to believe his mind was touched?
Oh, no, he went away on his holidays in good humour and came back in good humour.
Did he suffer at any time from fits of depression or moodiness?
Some years ago he had a delusion that THERE WAS A CONSPIRACY AGAINST HIM amongst the people of Enniskillen. That is some years ago. That passed off – whether it remained with him or not I do not know.
In recent times did you not notice him dispirited or depressed?
If he laboured under anything it was excitement and nervousness, not depression, as he had nothing to depress him.
The Coroner – How long is it since he thought there was that conspiracy against him?
I think it would be three or four years ago, but he never was in any institution, or under the care of any specialist, or anything of that sort. At that time I was with him myself. He spent a week in the Hotel in Lucan. He was quite well and bright and cheerful.
The Head Constable – You could not assign any cause for this act?
I could assign no cause whatever.
SERGEANT PATRICK MURPHY, Enniskillen, was then examined. He said that in consequence of a report made to him about 6.20 p.m. on Sunday he went out to Lakeview House and arrived there the same time as Dr. Betty.
The Head Constable - Did you and Dr. Betty go up to the bedroom of the deceased?
We did.
Will you just tell the jury the position you found the deceased in?
The deceased was lying on his face, resting on his left cheek. His feet were towards the foot of his bed. His left hand was bent under his breast, and the right hand, which was almost clenched, was bent under his chin. HE WAS FULLY DRESSED, save his head which was bare, and he was wearing slippers. There was a large pool of blood under his face and breast. There was an open razor (produced) covered with blood stains about one foot from his left shoulder. His throat was cut almost from ear to ear. He was then quite dead. The body was nearly cold. I examined his pockets and the room for documents. I found nothing except a white handkerchief stained with blood in the outside pocket of his coat. I found nothing that would go to throw any light on his reason for committing this rash act.
The Head Constable – I suppose you are of the opinion it was self-inflicted?
Yes.
DR. MOORE BETTY
Said he made a deep examination of the body of the deceased on Sunday. He found the tissues of the neck completely divided from left to right down to the bony parts, with severance of all important parts of the neck. The cause of death was shock and hemorrhage.
The Coroner – You were acquainted with the deceased?
Yes, very well.
The Coroner – Had you been attending him?
No.
The Coroner – Not for years?
Never professionally except to give him a cough bottle. He was always in perfect health as far as I know.
The Head Constable – I suppose you are of the opinion that the wound was self-inflicted?
Oh yes, there is no doubt at all about that.
The Coroner – You know nothing about his mind?
I am not in a position to know anything about that.
TOUCHING ADDESS
The Coroner said he supposed it was hardly necessary for him to say anything to them. During his career as a coroner for fifteen years he never held an inquest that shocked him or grieved him as much as the present one. ‘Poor Alfred Cooney’ said the Coroner, proceeding. ‘He was a brother in my own profession. He and I were on the very best and most intimate terms. If I wanted any assistance from him he always gave it to me. I looked upon him as a very shrewd, clever young man, and I always found him very courteous and very agreeable. His death is a desperate shock to me, and it is a desperate shock for his poor father and mother. We offer them our sympathy, and I am sure everyone in the town sympathises with them.
VERDICT
The jury found that deceased committed suicide while temporarily insane, and they expressed their sympathy with his father, mother and other relatives.
THE FUNERAL
The funeral took place on Wednesday and was attended by an immense concourse of people, including representatives of the legal profession and the members of the Enniskillen Urban Council and Town-Sergeant Slavin carrying the mace. The interment took place in Rossorry graveyard.
THE ANGLO-CELT
September 4, 1909
ENNISKILLEN TRAGEDY
WELL-KNOWN SOLICITOR'S DEATH
On Sunday afternoon, Mr. Alfred Carson Cooney, a well known Enniskillen solicitor, was found dead in his room in Lakeview, the residence of his parents, under tragic circumstances . A member of the family on entering his room found the unfortunate gentleman lying in a large pool of blood,
The deceased was aged about 38, had been in practice about 14 years and had built up a large clientele. He was secretary of the local Sessional Bar, secretary of the Fermanagh Hunt Club, a member of the Enniskillen Urban Council, and was in affluent circumstances. He returned from holidays in Scarborough on Thursday, and was engaged professionally in Derrygonnelly Petty Sessions on Friday.
No reason can be assigned for the tragic occurrence. The coroner has been communicated with.
The deceased gentleman, who was a brother of Mr. Cooney, one of the leaders of the religious sect known as the Tramp Pilgrims, was well known throughout the county, and his demise under such tragic circumstances is deeply deplored.
Notification of the terrible tragedy was given to the police by Mr. and Mrs. Cooney, the unfortunate young man's parents, who at once drove to the town when the distressing discovery was made. Several members of the force returned to Lakeview with Mr. and Mrs. Cooney, and Dr. Beatty being apprised of the tragic occurrence, he motored immediately to the residence. When the room in which the young Mr. Cooney lay was reached, the doctor, after examination, could only announce that death had taken place some little time previous. There was a razor blade beside the body, and blood flowed freely from the wound in the throat.
The body was taken charge of by the police, who communicated with the coroner for the district with regard to an inquest.
When first the rumour of the tragedy passed round the residents were inclined to be skeptical regarding its accuracy, but as the evening advanced confirmatory information was received from various sources.
Mr. Cooney had been attending to his business as usual during Saturday, and such startling intelligence as his tragic death naturally enough caused general consternation in the community. For some weeks pre vious Mr. Cooney had been at Scarborough on holidays, and only returned to Enniskillen on Thursday. The subsequent day he was present at Derry gonnelly Petty Sessions, at which he was professionally engaged. He appeared in the best of health and spirits, and at pre sent no cause whatsoever can be assigned for the dreadful occurrence. The police are reticent about the affair, and only meagre information can yet be gleaned with reference thereto.
The tragedy could not have been actuat ed by an financial embarrassment, for some years ago, on the death of his grandfather, Mr. Cooney succeeded to a fairly large for tune, from which, together with his very lucrative professional work, he undoubtedly had a very satisfactory return. The deceased was a brother of Mr. Frederick Cooney, electrical engineer, Dublin, formerly of Messrs. Cooney and Robinson, electrical engineers, Belfast. A second brother of the deceased is Mr. Edward Cooney, whose name has become familiar with the public on account of the prominent part he took in the formation of the sect known as "The Pilgrims."
DECEASED'S CAREER.
On the completion of the first stages of his education at Portora Royal School the late Mr. Cooney was apprenticed to Mr. C. F. Fall, solicitor, Enniskillen. He passed all his examinations with much distinction, and from the beginning his career in the profession was eminently successful. By close personal attention to business, he succeeded in attaining to the position of being able to claim one of the largest practices in County Fermanagh. He was therefore, a familiar and popular figure in the courts and the news of his very sad end will be received with sincere regret not only in Enniskillen, but throughout the entire county.
In social as in professional life the late Mr. Cooney was well known. He took a very keen interest in hunting, and held the secretaryship of the county club. He was also secretary of the Sessioned Bar, a very active member of the Enniskillen Urban Council, and a member of the Fermanagh Technical Instruction Committee. Not only was he popular with his colleagues at the Bar, but he had very many personal friends amongst the general public.
In the course of his career, Mr. Cooney has been connected with a number of very important cases both in the county courts and the higher courts in Dublin.
THE INQUISITION
Mr. George A. Atkinson, coroner for North Fermanagh, held an inquest : on the body in Lakeview House, the late residence of the deceased. Head Constable Mailon and Sergeant Murphy were present on behalf of the Crown.
The jury, of which Mr. Thompson Taylor was foreman, having review the body, evi dence was given by Mr. W. R. Cooney, father of the deceased, who said his son was 38, and unmarried. Deceased dined about two o'clock with witness and his mother on Sunday. This was the last time he saw him alive. He observed nothing unusual in his (deceased's) manner during dinner. About half past five he was called by his wife, and went into the deceased's bedroom. He saw his son lying dead on the floor in a great pool of blood with an open razor beside his hand. Witness reported the matter immediately to the police. The deceased left no written statement, and he knew no reason which could be assigned for the tragedy. Some years ago deceased had the delusion that there was a conspiracy against him amongst the people.
September 2, 1909, p. 8
Newspaper for Enniskillen, Northern Ireland
_____________
A METHODIST MINISTER REPLIES
TO QUESTIONS ASKED BY ‘TRAMPS’
BIBLE PROOF GIVEN
UNEXPECTED INTERRUPTION
Bundoran Methodist Church was well filled on Thursday evening last, when
a special address was delivered by the Rev. Wm. Clarke, answering certain
questions asked by the Tramp Preachers of today.
In his introductory remarks the Rev. Gentleman explained that he was
taking up a number of questions given to him by a member of the sect called ‘Pilgrim Tramps.’ ‘I do not wish to speak of them,’ he said, ‘in
any disrespectful, or unkind, or uncharitable way. I do not want
to abuse them as they have abused the churches. I do not want to
pronounce judgment upon them further than to say that some of them—many
of them—have been sincere, but I believe misguided, having zeal without
knowledge. What a pity that their zeal was not directed wisely, for
they put forth great energy in connection with their cause.’
OBJECT OF THE ADDRESS.
‘My object,’ Mr. Clarke said, ‘first is to instruct those who may be wavering. They hear these questions asked by those people again and again, and they are not prepared to answer them, and they get puzzled. People have spoken to me about their perplexity and wish to get instruction. They have not time to study God’s Word as that Word bears upon these questions. Some persons have objected—that we ought not to say anything about these ‘Tramp Pilgrims,’—even on the defensive. Well, our Lord Jesus Christ has set an example, and you have noticed in reading the gospels, that he tried to correct the errors of religious leaders of His day. Paul tried to correct the errors of religions misguided enthusiasts. Mr. Wesley, for whom most of us, and all the churches, have respect, also contradicted those who introduced teaching not in accordance with the word of God. So, I think we have the right to take up these questions in self-defence, and answer them.’
‘IMPARTIAL REPORTER’ COMPLIMENTED
Before proceeding with his subject, Mr. Clarke paid a tribute to the Editor of the IMPARTIAL REPORTER. He stated that Mr. Trimble had done an excellent service in reporting the addresses of these people and letting the country at large know what they said and what they thought. The speaker then read the questions which he held in his hand. They were in the handwriting of one of the Pilgrims, and he intended to answer them one by one by the Scriptures.
THE TITLE REVEREND
1—‘Where does a clergyman get the right to take the title of "Reverend?"
God has said: ‘Holy and reverend is His name.’ Jesus also said:
‘Call no man Rabbi.’
This was the first question. Now in the first place it could
not be a sin to take the title ‘Reverend.’ They did not take the
title, they got it, and it could not be a sin because the Bible said that
sin was the transgression of the law to take it. There was no mention
in the Bible, from Genesis to Revelations, where they were commanded not
to take this title. Further, what was the meaning of the word 'Reverend?'
It means to venerate, to respect. And surely a man who occupied the
pulpit who was not worthy of veneration or respect, was not qualified to
take that place. The Scriptures taught that it would be proper for
wives to call their husbands reverend. ‘And the wife see that she
reverence her husband.’ (Ephesians v.33) And so it would not
be wrong for a wife to venerate and respect a good husband either by word
or act. It would be consistent with the teaching of the Bible.
If good husbands were worthy of respect and reverence, why not clergymen?
In Hebrews XII, 9, it said: ‘Furthermore, we have had fathers after
our flesh which corrected us and we gave them reverence.’ Now he
held that the young man or woman who did not give reverence to their father
and mother was guilty of a sin, because they were violating the command
‘Honour thy father and mother.’ And he knew some who insulted their
parents who professed to be very religious.
OTHER ASPECTS
Many of these people talk about these things, and did not know much about their Bible. ‘Ye shall keep my Sabbaths and reverence my sanctuary’ (Leviticus XXVI. 20). These people said that these places of worship belonged to the Devil. That was not reverencing God’s sanctuary. Yet they say that they are living the Jesus life. They would not put their foot in a house like this. They say: ‘This question implies that we should only do what is commanded in the Bible.’ But, there was nothing in the Bible about having a Convention at Crocknacrieve, and they had one. There was nothing about riding bicycles in the Bible, but they did it.
MEANINGS OF THE WORDS
Now both rabbi and reverend had two different meanings. The word master had not the same meaning in one part of the Bible as it had in another. In Matthew XXIII. 8, master meant an ‘infallible guide.’ There was only one infallible guide—Christ. The Bible spoke of master in another sense—‘Servants be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh with fear and trembling’ (Ephesians VI. 5). Again rules were given for masters in relations to their duty to the employed—‘Masters give unto your servants that which is just and equal.’ (Colossians IV. 1). Here masters were recognised as employers, not as infallible guides. So if they took the intrepretation of the Scriptures, by these people they would be misled, not knowing the meaning of the terms.
2—Where does he get the right to dress in special clothes or why?
In all ages men holding sacred offices were dressed in special clothes. ‘And Moses brought Aaron’s sons and put coats on them, and girded them with girdles, and put bonnets upon them as the Lord commanded Moses.’ (Leviticus VIII. 13). He could quote a great deal more from the old testament about garments to be worn by those officiating in sacred offices. John the Baptist wore a coat of camel’s hair and a leather girdle. That was a special dress. Jesus wore a coat without any seam in it. The Pilgrims had not got that kind of coat yet. He thought, himself, that clergymen should be at liberty to dress as they liked.
3—Where in the Scriptures do they get the right to have a salary or
a home as preachers, when Jesus sent forth all His preachers without salary
or provision and made them homeless like Himself.
There were some people wonderfully taken in by this question of the
brethren. First, get them refer to the Old Testament in Numbers XXXV.
1-5, they found:
1 And the Lord spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan
near Jericho, saying,
2 Command the children of Israel, that they give unto the Levites
of the inheritance of their possession cities to dwell in; and ye shall
give also unto the Levites suburbs for the cities round about them.
3 And the cities shall they have to dwell in; and the suburbs
of them shall be for their cattle, and for their goods, and for all their
beasts.
4 And the suburb of the cities, which ye shall give unto the
Levites, shall reach from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits
round about.
5 And ye shall measure from without the city on the east side
two thousand cubits, and on the south side two thousand cubits, and on
the west side two thousand cubits, and on the north side two thousand cubits;
and the city shall be in the midst: this shall be to them the suburbs
of the cities.
The Levites were the ministers of the tabernacle and these were their
parsonages or manses. That was in the Old Testament times.
To this was to be added the one-tenth of the Israelites’ possessions. Numbers XVIII. 21-24 said—
21 And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth
in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even
the service of the tabernacle of the congregation.
22 Neither must the children of Israel henceforth come nigh the
tabernacle of the congregation, lest they bear sin, and die.
23 But the Levites shall do the service of the tabernacle of
the congregation, and they shall bear their iniquity: It shall be
a statute for ever throughout your generations, that among the children
of Israel they have no inheritance.
24 But the tithes of the children of Israel which they offer
as an heave offering unto the Lord, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall
have no inheritance.
It was not left to the people to give what they liked. These
Levites whose lives had been set apart to the service of God had been deprived
of the opportunities of going into business to make provision for their
families, and so God made provision for their wants, giving them homes,
and fixing their income at the one-tenth of the income of Israel—not leaving
their income to whatever the people liked
to give. It might be said that these were Old Testament times, so
let them now turn to the
NEW TESTAMENT FOR CONFIRMATION.
Well Paul in the first Epistles to the Corinthians, IX. 11-14, said—
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great
thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
12 If others be partakers of this power over us are not
we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all
things, lest we would hinder the gospel of Christ.
13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things
live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are
partakers with the altar?
14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they that preach
the gospel should live of the gospel.
Here Paul referred to the law of the Levite, and said that the
Lord had ordained that provision should be made for those who preached
the gospel. Could anything be plainer? It has been objected,
by some who identify themselves with the Pilgrims, that Paul had not made
himself chargeable to the church at Corinth. Yes, but he found out
his mistake and in second Corinthians, XII. 13, he said: ‘For what
is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself
was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong.’ Paul had
not been educating them in the Scriptural method. He had been encouraging
their nigardliness instead of the spirit of benevolence, Paul asked for
forgiveness for this wrong, as he had gone contrary to the teaching of
God.
JESUS’ AUTHORITY
THE PILGRIM’S WAY
These Pilgrims said this was not the way. They said ‘If you have a farm, sell it and hand it over to us. If you have a business, sell it and give to us. If you have money or shares in the bank give it to us.’ That, the speaker said was contrary to the Bible. It was not the Jesus way. The Bible’s way was the one-tenth. The other was the contrary.
In conclusion he hoped that he had said nothing that was unkind. He did not want to hurt any one’s feelings. Some of these people were sincere. They said that the Methodists were going to hell. He believed that some of these people would go to heaven and he prayed for them. ‘As far as it is in our power’ he added, ‘we should treat them lovingly, kindly, gently, and courteously. We say we are the followers of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us possess His spirit.
QUESTIONS ASKED BY A ‘PILGRIM’
When the Rev. Mr. Clarke had finished his address there was a moment’s
pause, and before he had time to announce the closing hymn a delicate looking
girl, of stout built, wearing a shawl, and trimmed straw hat, rose, and
speaking with a broad southern brogue asked might she say a word.
She stated that for years and years she had sat under the preaching of
Methodists but that she never found real satisfaction until she met with
the so-called Tramp Preachers. Although she was not a Tramp Preacher,
if permitted she would be one today. Jesus said, ‘I am the way, the
truth, and the light,’ and as far as she could see, she could not find
where Jesus ever sent anyone out to preach the Gospel the way the preacher
said that night. She was able to state that she got satisfaction
from hearing those Tramp Preachers. She was glad that the ‘Jesus
Way’ was preached, and it was her purpose that night to follow it.
In reply to a question by this girl, Rev. Mr. Clarke said that the
Tramp Preacher was unable to prove his position from the New Testament.
The Pilgrim—Jesus is the best preacher ever lived on earth. Who
was the next best? John the Baptist. Where did John the Baptist
get his education? If I understand the Bible aright, and I am not
very learned, it was in the wilderness. It is three years since I
got separated from the Methodist Church, and I praise God that in the wilderness
I got the satisfaction that I never got before. It is the purpose
of my life to go on and follow the lowly Tramp Preacher.
Rev. Mr. Clarke—I must ask you to sit down.
The Pilgrim—You have not answered my question. Where did John
the Baptist get his education?
Rev. Mr. Clarke—A man once told John Wesley, that the Lord had no need
of his education, and John Wesley replied ‘The Lord hath far less need
of your ignorance.’
The Pilgrim—Tell me where was the title ‘reverend’ ever used to Jesus
or his followers?
Rev. Mr. Clarke—I have answered the question about ‘reverend.’
I must ask you to sit down; we are going to sing a hymn.
A hymn was then sung and prayer followed, but the lady Pilgrim sat
unmoved through this portion of the service and took no part in it.
Leaving the church she refused to give her name at present, and added
that the IMPARTIAL REPORTER always misrepresented the Tramp Preachers.
The lady, it has transpired is a Miss Robinson, from Queen’s County.
THE TRAMP PREACHERS
A CORRECTION
TO THE EDITOR OF THE IMPARTIAL REPORTER
DEAR SIR:—I have read your reports and comments from week to week on the
Convention at Crocknacrieve, and having attended the meetings every Sunday
afternoon, I am bound to say, to put it mildly, that your reports did not
convey to the public an accurate idea of the utterances of the different
speakers (the first Sunday excepted), and I have heard different others
not in sympathy with the Preachers say the same thing. It would be
impossible to now go into details, I ask you however, in fairness to those
people upon whom you have so often let loose your righteous indignation,
to correct two statements made by you last week. 1st, you say that
‘owing to a difference of opinion between the leaders, Messrs. Irvine,
and Cooney, the latter has gone to America and will remain there for
some years.’ This statement is quite untrue. Mr. Cooney
has had before him for over four years, to the writers knowledge, the idea
of going to America, and it is now with the full approval of Mr. Irvine that he has done so. Besides it is in accordance with Scriptural
teaching that a true prophet should desire to go the uttermost parts of
the world, which Mr. Cooney purposes doing before the finish of
his work on earth. He also purposes coming back to Crocknacrieve
for next Convention, and those who love him for the truth’s sake will pray—That
he may come back with renewed vigour to preach the true gospel, bearing
the reproach of Christ for his name and sake, uninfluenced by what worldlings
say about him or even the secular press; always remembering that the natural
man cannot understand the things of God, because they are foolishness unto
him. Next, you lay to the Tramp Preachers’ charge the circulation
of a rhyme called the ‘Parson’s Idol’—and so headed (not the ‘Jesus way’
as you say). This is also untrue, it is not their composition nor
was it circulated by them. A certain South of Ireland gentleman who
happens to be in sympathy with the preachers got this rhyme printed and
circulated, and I am in a position to say that the Tramp Preachers discouraged
what he did, simply because it was a waste of time and money. The
question whether it is untrue or otherwise is a matter of opinion. I have heard many people who still are under the darkness of clericalism
say that it was all too true, and last week a Roman Catholic lady said
to me that it was the truest thing Trimble had in his newspaper for the
past month and was worth the whole penny itself.
Before concluding I cannot help noticing how mildly you referred last
week to the astounding fact that the King of this free Protestant Empire
attended the idolatrous Popish mass on three occasions lately, and how
cruel and vindictive all your references have been to the brave and true
men and women who have gone forth in accordance with the Divine plan to
follow Jesus and walk His way on the earth.
—Yours truly, Within.
September 9, 1909, p. 8
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Beach View Cottage, Bundoran
7th September, 1909
DEAR MR. EDITOR: —We appreciate the fair opportunity your paper gives us of reaching your reading public, some of whom may be interested in a slight enquiry into Mr. Clarke’s defence of his position, as given in the IMPARTIAL REPORTER, September 2nd.
Mr. Clarke wants a direct commandment before he can consider God alone worthy of the title 'Reverend.' ‘Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain’ and to take a word descriptive of God’s character and using it as a title to apply to men, is taking His name in vain. It is beyond controversy that clergymen labour to obtain the title of ‘Rev.’ and by their defence of their unrighteous claim upon it, show that they do not want to loose it, and if I mistake not, a special Act of Parliament had to be passed for Methodist preachers to be allowed to take the title. We get the name of ‘Cooneyites,’ but we don’t take it. It’s a libel. Edward Cooney doing the work of a servant of God, taught me how to live as a disciple of Jesus. If clergymen don’t take the title, let them explain that such a title would only libel them as graspers at honour due to God only, and let them when worthy of it, take their share of the homely natural reverence, worthy men get from those who have personal dealings with them and which it is dishonest to confound with the title ‘Reverend.’ An enquirer after God’s truth will never learn from John Wesley’s journals or sermons, or notes on the New Testament, how to live as a disciple of Jesus. Read Green’s shorter history, and see that the Church of England of his day was a lie, and he loved it. Methodism is a lie, and he made it, Rev. XXI and 27 verse, and the fruit of his life is seen in giving the world today, with its teaming populations of untaught men and women, preachers not like Peter and John, but like all clergymen and Mr. Clarke.
Those who profess to be Christian teachers and abuse the Levitical priesthood, which God has set aside (Hebrews 12 to 28) by making it an excuse for the carnal priestism of today in its dress and manner of life, confess their unbelief in Jesus, who for ever wiped out official priesthood from the consideration of children of God. the epistle to the Hebrews was written to help Jewish converts, who had a natural tendency to the practices of their fathers, to see this. But that a man who had never been a Jew, should pose as a teacher of Christian doctrine, and an expounder of Christian principles, and excuse his clerical uniform, &c., by references to Aaron and the Levites, is a species of dodgery that can be developed only in a complex age.
Jesus was very definite when speaking of people he noticed as claiming a right to a special dress for the sake of religious distinction, and it is safer for those who wish to avoid them; that such people should continue to bear the outward marks of their inward hypocrisy and pride. Jesus in Mark XII. 38-40, gives a word photograph of the clerical species, then and now. ‘Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the market places, &c.’ John the Baptist like Elijah and other true prophets, wore the dress common to the peasant class of his country and time. His dress and food were specially common if specially anything. The ‘coat’ or ‘vesture’ Jesus wore was not his outer robe, but a woven garment like what we describe as a semmit, and common to the labouring class of most countries and times.
In 1st Cor. IX, Paul is writing to those of whom he can say ‘The seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord’ (1st Cor. IX. 2). He encourages them to practical fellowship with the work of God, while he states that he himself wants nothing from them. He uses the figure of the ox treading the corn unmuzzled, so that it may take a bite as it works, to show what is meant by those who preach the gospel living of the gospel. (He does not quote Aaron and the Levitical ‘parsonages.’) Methods of extracting preachers’ salaries from people who fear God less than they do Mrs. Grundy, has nothing to do with living of the gospel.
Comparing 1st Cor. IX, with 2nd Cor. XII., and Matt. X, we can assure Mr. Clarke that Paul had been ‘educating’ his children in the gospel quite scripturally. There was nothing wrong with the spiritual teaching the Holy Ghost inspired Paul with in 1st Cor. IX. A man of normal calibre can appreciate the delicacy of touch with which Paul in 2nd Cor. XII. 13 recalling the fact that he had not sought for himself personally, the attachment and ministry of the Corinthians, even to that extent that was lawful to him, says ‘forgive me this wrong.’ He shows no sign of altering his conduct even when forgiven, for the words immediately follow: ‘Behold the third time I am ready to come to you, and I will not be burdensome to you for I seek not yours but you.’
How the words in Luke XI. 42, ‘Woe unto you Pharisees, for ye tithe mint and rue,’ etc., can be considered as enlarging on Luke X. 7, is a brain wrecker. Jesus did not discourage conscientious men from keeping the ‘law of commandments contained in ordinances,’ till he took it out of the way nailing it to His cross’ (Col. II. 14); but he never taught His disciples to take tithes from Pharisees, and he never taught that giving tithes was connected with discipleship.
. .
If in place of hoping he has ‘said nothing unkind,’ Mr. Clarke would instance one person in Fermanagh or elsewhere whom a God-sent preacher has asked for their farm, their business, their gold, or their goods; his words might have some weight.
Jesus teaches a preacher to forsake all that he has. Jesus teaches a saint to let go claim to all that he has. Nothing else made discipleship possible when he walked by Galilee. Nothing else makes discipleship possible by Loch Erne, or elsewhere today. Here as there, now as then, He works in the bodies of those who do His will, the only sanctuary He recognizes since ‘the vail of the temple was rent.’
—Yours, etc., CHA. RYAN
DEAR SIR: —Will you be so kind as to permit a few observations
upon the address of the Methodist parson at Bundoran, and your own letter
of last week. I must first confess surprise at the weakness of the
arguments used at Bundoran, and astonished at how carefully he has ignored
the whole teaching and life of Jesus, his apostles, and prophets, in his
attempt to defend the particular brand of clericalism to which he belongs,
and so utterly bereft of argument that he has to fall back upon the old
Jewish dispensation of the law which the Bible tells us was unto John the
Baptist, and after that the Gospel of the Kingdom.
Paul in writing to the converted Jews who might nationally be inclined
to adhere to the old law, tells them in Hebrews VII, VIII, and IX, chap.,
that the ‘old covenant, the priesthood, the temple worship, and the Mosaic
law were forever set aside, and that Christ had himself become Our High
Priest forever and the surity of a better covenant—an everlasting one,
whereby He is able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him,
seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.’ And Jesus when
teaching His disciples how to preach and live the Gospel of the Kingdom,
totally ignored the old levitical priesthood, and took many opportunities
to testify against their vanity, selfishness, and hypocrisy, to such an
extent that the Chief Priests and Scribes, and Pharisees put Him on the
cross, and just before sending the twelve on their first mission, Jesus
warned them to not be making provision for food or raiment, (Matt. VI.
25-30,) because their Heavenly Father knew that they had need of all these
things, and He lived out in his own body the perfect life that pleased
his Heavenly father, and we never read of Him having a collection, or preaching
a charity sermon or taking any trouble whatever to provide for the temporal
wants of Himself or his Disciples. He warns them against this selfishness,
and tells them to ‘seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness
and all these things will be added unto them’ (Matt. VI. 23). How
it must grieve His heart today to see the develish dodgery that is resorted
to raise funds to preach in His Blessed name—bazaars, concerts, pop-guns,
raffles, charity sermons, lectures on worldly wars, &c.; how dreadful
in the light of the teaching of Him that spoke as never man spake.
Every preacher sent by the God of heaven becomes utterly dependent
upon Him for the necessaries of life from day to day—Sell all and give
alms and go forth is God’s best for a preacher in every age, and any preacher
not willing for these conditions has no right to take His name and call
himself a preacher of the gospel.
The excuses of Mr. Clarke for taking the title ‘Reverend’ are amusing
if the subject was not such a serious and painful one—did ever Mr. Clarke
refuse to be so addressed? Why does he allow people to call it to
him if he does not want it. There is no scriptural authority for
such, and the whole teaching of Jesus is against it. ‘They love the
salutations in the Market-place and to be called Rabbi’ is true today,
and proves that all clericalism is after the same pattern.
This mark of iniquity had its origin in Rome, and comes from the scarlet
coloured beast full of names of blasphemy, (Rev. XVII. 3.) Did Rt.
Rev., Most Rev., Lord Bishop, His Grace, His Holiness, Archbishop, and
all the other blasphemies that unregenerate, man clothes himself within
the weakness of his unregenerate nature, and proves that he has been deceived
by the Harlot church (Rev. XVIII. 3), such titles have no place in the
true church of God. Soon after the days of the apostles we find the
mystery of iniquity beginning to work in the world—spoken of by Paul, and
when the early christians began to forsake the Jesus way, they began to
imitate the old Jewish priesthood.. The church of Rome and her daughters
today are the result of this departure from the Truth. Paul warned
the early churches again and again to beware of evil workers, and false
prophets, telling them that as the devil had deceived the bride of the
first Adam, so now he would try to deceive the bride of the second Adam
Christ, that they would preach another Jesus whom he had not preached (2
Cor. XI. 3), and that the time would come when they would not endure sound
doctrine but would turn to fables (2 Tim. IV. 3, 4), and he tells the Galatians
that though he or an angel from Heaven came and preached any other gospel
let him be accursed (Gal. I. 7,8). Thus the early church was solemnly
warned against the traditions of men, and man made ways of worship.
The Apostle John also feared their taking other ways, and he tells them,
‘He that saith he abideth in Him should himself walk even as He walked
(1 John, X. 6), and again he tells those who refuse to obey the teaching
of Jesus, ‘He that saith he abideth in Him and keepeth not His commandments
is a liar, and the truth is not in him,’ and ‘If any man cometh unto you
and bringeth not this doctrine, receive him not into your homes, neither
bid him Godspeed,’ 2 John 10.—(That is why we don’t go to the clergy house,
Mr. Clarke).
We praise God today for the noble band of God-fearing men and women
who have dared to shake oft the traditional teaching of their fathers and
believe the simple gospel of Jesus Christ which is the power of God unto
salvation to everyone that believeth. God wants today more men who
are willing to suffer affliction with God’s people, and who will declare
to the world that the salvation of God can only be obtained by fulfilling
God’s conditions which are the same in every age,—that the Holy Spirit
operating upon man’s heart today will lead him to follow the same Jesus
in the same way that Peter, and Paul, and John, and Timothy, and all the
early apostles were led to go forth and ‘walk even as He walked’ on the
earth, without home, without salary, without title, without sustentation
funds, twentieth century fund, auxiliary fund, superannuation fund, bazaar
or lottery, depending upon Him to supply their every need, esteeming His
reproach greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, and will never lead
a man to make money out of the Gospel.
Because we speak this truth today, we are called uncharitable, and accused
of judging, &c. I ask you what did Jesus mean when he said by
their fruits ye shall know them and told his apostles not to cast their
pearls before swine. How were they to know the swine if they were
to close their eyes and ears? Is it charity and kindness to allow
men and women to be deceived on this all important question? Is a
lie, the truth because it is 100 or 1,600 years old? Does the Gospel
change to suit the times? We do not judge in the scriptural sense
but we speak the truth and when darkness is revealed, thereby men tell
us we are judging. We declare to our fellow men that Jesus Christ
is the same yesterday, today, and forever. That salvation can only
be had by fulfilling God’s conditions the same in every age. We refuse
to have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness under any circumstances
because it would dishonour Him, whom we have made Lord and Master.
—Yours obediently, Within.
The Fermanagh Herald
Enniskillen Sensation.
Tragic death of Mr. A. C. Cooney, solicitor.
Found with throat cut.
Blood-stained razor beside him.
Inquest and verdict.
The people of Enniskillen were horror-stricken on Sunday evening when the news spread through the town that Mr. Alfred Cooney, solicitor, had been found dead in his room at Lakeview House, the residence of his parents. Mrs. Cooney on entering the room at about half past five o’clock found her son lying in a large pool of blood with a deep gash in his throat and a blood-stained razor close to him. She immediately called her husband who had gone to his bedroom after dinner, and both of them went into the room where their son was lying. The unfortunate gentleman was fully dressed and HIS THROAT WAS CUT almost from ear to ear.
They saw at once that life was extinct. The servants in Lakeview House had gone out for the evening, and having no messenger to send to Enniskillen for a doctor the grief-stricken parents had to walk into the town themselves, a distance of about half a mile. They met Doctor Moore Betty on the street and informed him of the tragic occurrence, and they notified the police. Dr. Betty at once motored to Lakeview House but the young gentleman was beyond human aid, the tissues of the neck having been completely divided from left to right. Head-Constable Mallon and Sergeant Murphy accompanied by one or two constables arrived on the scene and made A CLOSE SEARCH OF THE ROOM for any letters or documents that would tend to throw any light on the motive of the deceased for committing the rash act, but their efforts were fruitless.
DECEASED’s CAREER
The deceased young gentleman was a son of Mr. Wm. Rutherford Cooney, J. P., and was 38 years of age. He had been practicing as a solicitor for about fourteen years and had built up a large clientele.
On Saturday he had been attending to his business as usual and such startling intelligence as his tragic death naturally enough caused great consternation in the community. For some weeks previous he had been at Scarborough on holidays and only returned to Enniskillen on Thursday. The subsequent day he was present at Derrygonnelly Petty Sessions, at which he was professionally engaged. He appeared in the best of health and spirits, and no cause whatever can be assigned for the dreadful occurrence. The deceased was a brother of Mr. Frederick Cooney, electrical engineer, Dublin, formerly of Messrs Cooney and Robinson, electrical engineers, Belfast. A second brother of the deceased is Mr. Edward Cooney, whose name has become familiar with the public on account of the prominent part he took in the formation of the sect known as ‘The Pilgrims.’
On the completion of the first stage of his education at Portora Royal School, Mr. Cooney was apprenticed to Mr. C. F. Falls, solicitor, Enniskillen. He passed all his examinations with much distinction, and from the beginning his career in the profession was eminently successful. By close personal attention to business he succeeded in attaining to the position of being able to claim one of the largest practices in Co. Fermanagh. He was therefore A FAMILIAR AND POPULAR FIGURE in the courts, and the news of his very sad end will be received with sincere regret not only in Enniskillen but throughout the entire county.
In social as in professional life Mr. Cooney was well-known. He took a very keen interest in hunting, and held the secretaryship of the Fermanagh Hunt Club. He was also secretary of the Sessional Bar, a very active member of the Enniskillen Urban Council and a member of the Fermanagh Technical Instruction Committee. Not only was he popular with his colleagues at the Bar, but he had very many personal friends among the general public.
In the course of his career Mr. Cooney appeared in a number of important cases both in the county court and in the Dublin Courts. He was in affluent circumstances.
THE INQUEST
On Monday afternoon an inquest was held on the body in Lakeview House, Enniskillen, by Mr. George Atkinson, solicitor, coroner for the district, and the following jury – Messrs. Thompson Taylor, U.D.C. (chairman), Frederick Gordon, George Whaley, R. W. Wilson, F.A.I.; M. Colquhoun, James Wilson, John Stewart, U.D.C., Bernard Coyle, Josiah Maguire, U.D.C., Richard Clingan, Thomas Elliott, C.E., Michael Griffith, Alfred Weaver, and Wm. Irvine.
Head Constable Mallon watched the proceedings on behalf of the Crown.
FATHER’S EVIDENCE
The first witness called was Mr. Wm. R. Cooney, J.P., father of the deceased. He said his son, who was 38 years of age and unmarried, was a solicitor by profession.
The Head Constable – Did he reside with you in Lakeview House?
Yes.
Did he dine with yourself and his mother yesterday?
Yes.
At about what time?
The dinner commenced at ten minutes to two and was over about half-past two.
He was supplied with some coffee later in the evening?
Just immediately after dinner in his own room.
Was that the last time you saw him alive?
Yes.
Did you observe anything unusual in his manner during the dinner?
Nothing whatever. We supposed he went to his own room about three o’clock or a few minutes after three.
You went to your room?
I went to my bedroom, and he is supposed to have gone up to his bedroom after dinner.
Were you called by your wife later in the afternoon?
Yes, at about half past five o’clock.
And in consequence did you go to the deceased’s bedroom?
Yes.
Would you just tell us what you saw?
I saw him lying as I believed dead on the floor, with his face downwards in A GREAT POOL OF BLOOD.
The Coroner – You believed he was dead?
I felt him and his mother said he certainly was dead.
The Head Constable – You saw a razor there?
There was an open razor lying just beside his hand on the floor.
‘Did you,’ asked the Head Constable, ‘come into Enniskillen and report the matter to Dr. Betty?’
‘We had no person at all on the premises,’ replied witness. ‘The gate lodge keeper went on Friday to the town, and the second man was away at his own house. One of the servant girls was away on holiday, and the second one had gone out for the evening to see some of her friends. We therefore had no messenger. I saw he was quite dead, and I was afraid to leave Mrs. Cooney here, so we just WALKED INTO THE TOWN, and met Dr. Betty on the street and informed the constabulary in the barrack. We all came out together. I came out on Dr. Betty’s car, and he pronounced life extinct for some time.
The Head Constable: Did he leave any written document, as far as you know, assigning any cause for this?
Not a scrape of a pen of any description.
As far as you know he had no troubles of any kind?
Not that I know. The family relations at the time were of the warmest kind – most enjoyable and most friendly. They could not have been more so.
The Coroner – He never complained of being ill?
He enjoyed good health as a rule. He had just come back from a holiday in Scarborough.
Head Constable – Did you observe anything peculiar in his manner which caused or led you to believe his mind was touched?
Oh, no, he went away on his holidays in good humour and came back in good humour.
Did he suffer at any time from fits of depression or moodiness?
Some years ago he had a delusion that THERE WAS A CONSPIRACY AGAINST HIM amongst the people of Enniskillen. That is some years ago. That passed off – whether it remained with him or not I do not know.
In recent times did you not notice him dispirited or depressed?
If he laboured under anything it was excitement and nervousness, not depression, as he had nothing to depress him.
The Coroner – How long is it since he thought there was that conspiracy against him?
I think it would be three or four years ago, but he never was in any institution, or under the care of any specialist, or anything of that sort. At that time I was with him myself. He spent a week in the Hotel in Lucan. He was quite well and bright and cheerful.
The Head Constable – You could not assign any cause for this act?
I could assign no cause whatever.
SERGEANT PATRICK MURPHY, Enniskillen, was then examined. He said that in consequence of a report made to him about 6:20 p.m. on Sunday he went out to Lakeview House and arrived there the same time as Dr. Betty.
The Head Constable - Did you and Dr. Betty go up to the bedroom of the deceased?
We did.
Will you just tell the jury the position you found the deceased in?
The deceased was lying on his face, resting on his left cheek. His feet were towards the foot of his bed. His left hand was bent under his breast, and the right hand, which was almost clenched, was bent under his chin. HE WAS FULLY DRESSED, save his head which was bare, and he was wearing slippers. There was a large pool of blood under his face and breast. There was an open razor (produced) covered with blood stains about one foot from his left shoulder. His throat was cut almost from ear to ear. He was then quite dead. The body was nearly cold. I examined his pockets and the room for documents. I found nothing except a white handkerchief stained with blood in the outside pocket of his coat. I found nothing that would go to throw any light on his reason for committing this rash act.
The Head Constable – I suppose you are of the opinion it was self-inflicted?
Yes.
DR. MOORE BETTY
Said he made a deep examination of the body of the deceased on Sunday. He found the tissues of the neck completely divided from left to right down to the bony parts, with severance of all important parts of the neck. The cause of death was shock and hemorrhage.
The Coroner – You were acquainted with the deceased?
Yes, very well.
The Coroner – Had you been attending him?
No.
The Coroner – Not for years?
Never professionally except to give him a cough bottle. He was always in perfect health as far as I know.
The Head Constable – I suppose you are of the opinion that the wound was self-inflicted?
Oh yes, there is no doubt at all about that.
The Coroner – You know nothing about his mind?
I am not in a position to know anything about that.
TOUCHING ADDESS
The Coroner said he supposed it was hardly necessary for him to say anything to them. During his career as a coroner for fifteen years he never held an inquest that shocked him or grieved him as much as the present one. ‘Poor Alfred Cooney’ said the Coroner, proceeding. ‘He was a brother in my own profession. He and I were on the very best and most intimate terms. If I wanted any assistance from him he always gave it to me. I looked upon him as a very shrewd, clever young man, and I always found him very courteous and very agreeable. His death is a desperate shock to me, and it is a desperate shock for his poor father and mother. We offer them our sympathy, and I am sure everyone in the town sympathises with them.
VERDICT
The jury found that deceased committed suicide while temporarily insane, and they expressed their sympathy with his father, mother and other relatives.
THE FUNERAL
The funeral took place on Wednesday and was attended by an immense concourse of people, including representatives of the legal profession and the members of the Enniskillen Urban Council and Town-Sergeant Slavin carrying the mace. The interment took place in Rossorry graveyard.
See also: The Anglo-Celt (Cavan)
1909 September 4, p. 1- Enniskillen Tragedy – Well Known Solicitor’s Death (Alfred Cooney)
THE ANGLO-CELT
September 4, 1909
ENNISKILLEN TRAGEDY
WELL-KNOWN SOLICITOR'S DEATH
On Sunday afternoon, Mr. Alfred Carson Cooney, a well known Enniskillen solicitor, was found dead in his room in Lakeview, the residence of his parents, under tragic circumstances . A member of the family on entering his room found the unfortunate gentleman lying in a large pool of blood,
The deceased was aged about 38, had been in practice about 14 years and had built up a large clientele. He was secretary of the local Sessional Bar, secretary of the Fermanagh Hunt Club, a member of the Enniskillen Urban Council, and was in affluent circumstances. He returned from holidays in Scarborough on Thursday, and was engaged professionally in Derrygonnelly Petty Sessions on Friday.
No reason can be assigned for the tragic occurrence. The coroner has been communicated with.
The deceased gentleman, who was a brother of Mr. Cooney, one of the leaders of the religious sect known as the Tramp Pilgrims, was well known throughout the county, and his demise under such tragic circumstances is deeply deplored.
Notification of the terrible tragedy was given to the police by Mr. and Mrs. Cooney, the unfortunate young man's parents, who at once drove to the town when the distressing discovery was made. Several members of the force returned to Lakeview with Mr. and Mrs. Cooney, and Dr. Beatty being apprised of the tragic occurrence, he motored immediately to the residence. When the room in which the young Mr. Cooney lay was reached, the doctor, after examination, could only announce that death had taken place some little time previous. There was a razor blade beside the body, and blood flowed freely from the wound in the throat.
The body was taken charge of by the police, who communicated with the coroner for the district with regard to an inquest.
When first the rumour of the tragedy passed round the residents were inclined to be skeptical regarding its accuracy, but as the evening advanced confirmatory information was received from various sources.
Mr. Cooney had been attending to his business as usual during Saturday, and such startling intelligence as his tragic death naturally enough caused general consternation in the community. For some weeks pre vious Mr. Cooney had been at Scarborough on holidays, and only returned to Enniskillen on Thursday. The subsequent day he was present at Derry gonnelly Petty Sessions, at which he was professionally engaged. He appeared in the best of health and spirits, and at pre sent no cause whatsoever can be assigned for the dreadful occurrence. The police are reticent about the affair, and only meagre information can yet be gleaned with reference thereto.
The tragedy could not have been actuat ed by an financial embarrassment, for some years ago, on the death of his grandfather, Mr. Cooney succeeded to a fairly large for tune, from which, together with his very lucrative professional work, he undoubtedly had a very satisfactory return. The deceased was a brother of Mr. Frederick Cooney, electrical engineer, Dublin, formerly of Messrs. Cooney and Robinson, electrical engineers, Belfast. A second brother of the deceased is Mr. Edward Cooney, whose name has become familiar with the public on account of the prominent part he took in the formation of the sect known as "The Pilgrims."
DECEASED'S CAREER.
On the completion of the first stages of his education at Portora Royal School the late Mr. Cooney was apprenticed to Mr. C. F. Fall, solicitor, Enniskillen. He passed all his examinations with much distinction, and from the beginning his career in the profession was eminently successful. By close personal attention to business, he succeeded in attaining to the position of being able to claim one of the largest practices in County Fermanagh. He was therefore, a familiar and popular figure in the courts and the news of his very sad end will be received with sincere regret not only in Enniskillen, but throughout the entire county.
In social as in professional life the late Mr. Cooney was well known. He took a very keen interest in hunting, and held the secretaryship of the county club. He was also secretary of the Sessioned Bar, a very active member of the Enniskillen Urban Council, and a member of the Fermanagh Technical Instruction Committee. Not only was he popular with his colleagues at the Bar, but he had very many personal friends amongst the general public.
In the course of his career, Mr. Cooney has been connected with a number of very important cases both in the county courts and the higher courts in Dublin.
THE INQUISITION
Mr. George A. Atkinson, coroner for North Fermanagh, held an inquest : on the body in Lakeview House, the late residence of the deceased. Head Constable Mailon and Sergeant Murphy were present on behalf of the Crown.
The jury, of which Mr. Thompson Taylor was foreman, having review the body, evi dence was given by Mr. W. R. Cooney, father of the deceased, who said his son was 38, and unmarried. Deceased dined about two o'clock with witness and his mother on Sunday. This was the last time he saw him alive. He observed nothing unusual in his (deceased's) manner during dinner. About half past five he was called by his wife, and went into the deceased's bedroom. He saw his son lying dead on the floor in a great pool of blood with an open razor beside his hand. Witness reported the matter immediately to the police. The deceased left no written statement, and he knew no reason which could be assigned for the tragedy. Some years ago deceased had the delusion that there was a conspiracy against him amongst the people.
On Thursday evening last, Rev. W. Clarke, in the Methodist Church, Bundoran, gave a second discourse in answer to the following questions and began by taking up:
Question 4—The bishops or pastors, the apostles ordained, were men whom they set to look after the converts, after having first been proved to be faithful. When the apostles came around generally some time after they had worked the mission, and got a little band separated from every other sect or party to serve and obey Jesus and keep His Commandments; not what men call pastors or bishops today, who are paid large salaries for looking after, principally, so saved people in the different sects. Is not this so?
If those who had been elders or bishops in the early church were, he said, selected from amongst the common people to have pastoral oversights, it was so still. Cary the famous missionary had been a shoe-maker. John Hunt, of Fiji Notoriety, had been a farm labourer before his conversion, and they had thousands in the ministry of Christian churches today, who, in this respect were in the line of apostolic succession. But those early pastors and teachers had not been like The Pilgrim Tramps; a self-appointed unqualified ministry. They had to ‘study to show themselves approved unto God. Workmen that needed not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth’ (2 Tim. 2. 15). It was never designed by the Lord that ignorance, presumption, and uncharitableness should be a qualification for the ministry. No college course could equal, as an educational preparation, the instructions received by the apostles from their Lord during their three years under His teaching, and to crown all this at the day of Pentecost they had been endowed with such a gift of languages, that it would take years of study to acquire. The Lord might have called unlearned men to be His apostles, but he did not send them to preach until they had been suitably educated.
In like manner the apostles had insisted on men being qualified for the ministry. Paul urged Timothy—(1 Tim. IV. 13, 14), ‘Till I come give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. Neglect not the gift that is in thee by prophesy with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.’ The apostles had protested against unqualified men being appointed to preach—(1 Tim. III. 6.) ‘Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.’ And in the Old Testament times there had been the school of the prophets where they had been educated for their work. It was not true that apostles tried to separate numbers from churches to build up a self righteous bigoted sect. The apostles deplored divisions, as he should notice more fully later on.
This question also went forth that it was principally unsaved people who were members of the churches. It was great presumption for anyone to take upon himself to say this. Christ came into the world not to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. These people wanted to do the judging before His judgment day came, and send to hell the members of the churches with Luther, John Knox, Spurgeon, Moody, and Wesley. Such spiritual pride and unchristian christianity could be only paralleled by those Paul speaks of in 2nd Tim. 3. 1—‘This know also that in the last days, perilous times shall come, for men shall be lovers of their own selves. Coveteous boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents without natural affection, truce breakers, false accusers, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God, having a form of Godliness—For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women—Even learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth—Now even as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these resist the truth.’
Question 5—The Church was in the Apostles’ time one body, controlled by one spirit, believing one doctrine, having one Lord, one faith, one baptism. When did it change?
This question revealed a deplorable ignorance of the state of things in the Apostles’ day, even in the Christian churches. This state of things did not exist in the church at Rome. They found Paul saying in Rom. 16: ‘Now, I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them. For they that are such serve not the Lord Jesus Christ but their own belly, and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.’ They had not been of one spirit at Rome. There had been those who caused division like the Tramp Preachers.
A similar condition of things existed in the Christian Church at Corinth. In 1st Cor. I. 10, 11, they read: ‘Now, I beseech you brethren by the name of the Lord Jesus, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you my brethren, by them which are of the household of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.’ They had not all been of one spirit in the church at Corinth. There were divisions and contentions among them, and Paul says, chap. III. 3—‘Whereas there is among you envying and strife divisions, are ye not carnal and walk as men?’
If they turned to the churches at Galatia they would find Paul trying to correct the false doctrine that some ignorant people were trying to teach. In Gal. III. 1, Paul says: ‘O foolish Galatians, who hast bewitched you that ye should not obey the truth?’ The Galatians had been the victims of false teachers who had sprung up amongst them, and in place of being of ‘one spirit’ some of them were abusing the others, and Paul says ‘If ye bite and devour one another take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.’ Paul gave instructions 1st Tim. I. 5, 6, 7—‘Now the end of the Commandment was charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned, from which some having swerved, had turned aside unto vain jangling, desiring to be teachers of the law understanding neither what they said nor whereof they affirmed.’ He was asked when did the church change? There always were false teachers, disturbers and causers of division, and simple misguided people who followed them as was the case today, and such causes of divisions, uncharitable judgers, and those who bite and devoured were not in the Jesus way so far as they did these things, nor were they Bible Christians. After looking at these answers they saw what lack of knowledge of the Scriptures was revealed in the question not answered. ‘Understanding neither what they say nor whereof they affirm.’
Question 6—Why are infants sprinkled with water and that called baptism when the scriptures never speak of any but believers being baptised.
In the first place their question implied that baptism by sprinkling was not scriptural. There was no law or rule given in the Bible as to whether it should be by sprinkling or immersion. Then it can't matter very much how it was done.
The word rendered ‘baptism’ meant either immersion, sprinkling, or pouring, and was repeatedly made use of in the New Testament where there was no immersion in the case. In Acts they read of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. There had been no immersion in the spirit. He came down on them from above. Baptism was a type of the work of the Holy Spirit, and was therefore more symbolic by pouring or sprinkling than by immersion.
Again in 1st Cor. I. 2, they read: ‘All our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea. And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.’ This baptism had not been by immersion in the cloud or in the sea. The cloud came down from above, and the sea never touched them.
In 1st Peter III. 21, Peter referring to Noah in the Ark said—‘The like figure whereunto baptism doth also now save us.’ Noah had not been immersed in the flood, then the figure was not immersion to typify salvation. Those who were immersed in the days of Noah were not saved. The Egyptians who were drowned in the Red Sea were immersed and this would not make a good type of salvation. They saw wisdom of their Lord in not prescribing any form of baptism, and only prescribed the formula, i.e. ‘In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,’ and so the use of water could be adopted to the climate and the condition of the subject.
But this question implied again that infants should not be baptised. Why not? In Coll. II. 11, 12, Paul puts it in the place of circumcision,—‘In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands—buried with them in baptism.’ Here Paul calls baptism ‘The circumcision not made with hands.’ They knew that infants were to be circumcised on the eighth day after birth, and here Paul recognised baptism as taking the place of circumcision, and to correspond with the type baptism ought to be administered in infancy.
No objection had been raised against the baptism of infants until after the second century. The first great council of the Christian church had been held in Alexandria in the second century. Bishop Cyprian presided, and one of the questions asked at that Council was ‘When shall our children be baptized?’ and the answer was ‘As soon as possible,’ showing that up to that time there had been no controversy about the baptism of infants. Then why not baptise them? Paul put it in the place of circumcision. The early church had practised it. But furthermore what constituted fitness for baptism? He answered to be in a state of salvation. This was the ground on which Peter pleaded for the baptism of the converted Gentiles. Peter said in Acts X. 47, ‘Can any man forbid water that these should be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? Were infants in a state of salvation? Let their Lord answer—‘Of such is the Kingdom of heaven.’ Then who should presume to forbid water that they should not be baptised.
Question 7— Where in scripture is stone and mortar called a church or where do the scriptures say that saints met.
The scriptures nowhere called stone and mortar a church. The saints met in a house and they did so still, and in other places as well. It was not a place or building constituted a church, and wherever true Christians met they were as much a church whether they met in a dwelling house or a house built for the purpose.
In association the rev. gentleman said—‘I have allowed the word of God the foremost place in my answers to these questions. To any unprejudiced mind it will be plain that the Tramp Preachers are not following the ‘Jesus way’ nor the Bible way.
‘The gospel of Christ was ‘Peace on earth and good will to men!’ Their way is strife on earth and ill will to the extent of sending to hell those from whom they disagree.
‘Our Lord’s way was that ‘all might be one as Thou Father art in Me, and I in Thee’ but their way is division and discord. The Jesus and Bible way of giving is the tenth, their way is to give all. Their way is to send out ignorant men to preach; ‘the Jesus way’ is to educate them as well convert them that they may be properly qualified for their work.
‘I commend to all the Christianity set forth in the 1 Cor. XIII: ‘Love suffereth long and is kind; love envieth not, love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up; doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, rejoiceth not in iniquity but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.’
A ROMAN CATHOLIC’S VIEWS
DEAR SIR—I have read the ‘Pilgrim’ controversy in the REPORTER with great interest. It is surprising to find the many texts of scripture which the correspondents in each side can adduce to prove their friends on the other side wrong. It sets an outsider like myself thinking seriously that perhaps there was a very real need for the Roman Catholic Church refusing to permit of private judgment in such matters, for it seems to lead but to confusion and doubt.
As I said, I am an outsider, and therefore can all the more admire the cleverness of the Reverend gentleman from Bundoran who tried in his sermon to prove from scripture that the preachers are entitled to a wage: ‘The labourer is worthy of his hire.’ I turn to the New Testament and in Matthew X. 9,10, I read these words of the Master to those He was sending forth to preach His word—‘Provide neither gold, or silver, nor brass in your purses, neither two coats, neither shoes, for the workman is worthy of his meat.’ If the Reverend Gentleman to my mind can explain away these words, he proves his case, not otherwise.
Again in Luke IX. 58: ‘Foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but, the Son of Man hath not where to lay His head.’
Christ was a homeless man, so were his disciples. The whole system of theology today seems to resolve itself into an effort to prove that Christ is not to be taken literally wherever he preaches poverty for his ministers and Church. The sacred calling of a preacher is a profession now-a-days, and a well-paid one, and the whole aim of theologians seems to be to reconcile it with the plain word—I have quoted above.
—Yours truly. READER.
THE ‘TRAMPS’ IN NORTH LEITRIM
Glencar, 4th Sept. 1909
SIR—The persistent manner in which the ‘Tramps’ suggest being misrepresented
in the IMPARTIAL REPORTER prompts me to say that we here in North Leitrim
(and particularly in Glencar), are not ignorant of their devices, and consequently
we cordially appreciate the spirited and timely action of the Editor of
the IMPARTIAL REPORTER, in exposing the actions, and enlightening the public
in regard to the ‘Tramp’ sect, who have been appropriately described as
‘religious anihilists amongst the christian churches.’ I venture
to assert that the worthy advice published from time to time in the IMPARTIAL
REPORTER was to a large extent the cause of the Tramp Preachers being unable
to gain any foothold in North Leitrim, or adjoining district, with the
solitary exception at Glencar, and in that place the ‘Mission’ proved such
a dismal and humiliating failure that several of the Tramp Sect are thoroughly
disgusted with the final results.
Now just a word in regard to ‘The Parson’s Idol,’ which your correspondent
‘Within,’ says was composed by an obliging South of Ireland gentleman.
If the Tramps disclaim composition they evidently retain it, distribute
it, and roll it as a sweet morsel under the tongue, judging from the fact
that some 12 months ago a type written copy or copies of the lovely (!)
doggerel went the rounds of the ‘chosen few’ in this district, and finally
I was presented with a copy of the precious document.
—Yours truly, J. ALLINGHAM
Mr. Wm. Caldwell, Mar Lodge, Dremore Avenue, South Circular Road, Dublin, writes, in the course of a rather discursive letter:—Mr. Clarke has not done credit to his side. I would ask him to read Ephesians 4. 4,5 & 6 shows the oneness, and the 11th verse gives God’s gift to the churches. The first and highest are apostles, and I don’t find ‘Rev.’ Even Jesus did not take it, nor did one of his Apostles. Then what right has Mr. Clarke to it? Paul boasts in 2 Cor. 2, ‘We are not as many who make merchandise of or trade out of the word of God.’ Mr. Clarke’s is a good way according to the world’s ideas. The only thing wrong about it is, ‘It’s not God’s way;’ nor can he find it in the New Testament. If his last statement is true, then the Tramps are wrong. The Pilgrims say, ‘If you have a farm sell it or hand it over to us. If you have money or shares in the bank give it to us.’ Now if he can prove this, Fermanagh will erect a stained glass window to him, and give him a purse of sovereigns, and he will have an invitation to the leading Methodist Church in Dublin; but if he cannot do so he must be branded as John says in 1st Epistle, 2nd chap. and 4th verse, ‘A liar and the truth is not in him,’ and I am sure, sir, as I have read your paper, you cannot agree with him.
A CORRECTION.
CASTE IN THE CHURCH.
An error occurred at the close of W.C.T.’s article last week respecting
the Tramps. The last passages should have read:—There are and there
will be little social distinctions—the fewer the better. And that
minister is most like his Master who regards all his people as brethren,
and who sets his face vigorously against caste and class. I do admit
that there is too much of this weakness in the Christian church, and that,
too, notwithstanding the strong admonition in the 2nd chapter of James. As this James was a brother of Jesus Christ, it is well to quote the passage
from such an authority:—
My Brothers, are you really trying to combine faith in Jesus Christ
our glorified Lord, with the worship of rank? Suppose a man should
enter your Synagogue, with gold rings and in grand clothes, and suppose
a poor man should come in also, in shabby clothes, and you are deferential
to the man who is wearing grand clothes, and say—‘There is a good seat
for you here,’ but to the poor man—‘You must stand; or sit down there by
my footstool,’ is not that to make distinctions among yourselves, and to
show yourselves prejudiced judges? Listen, my dear Brothers.
Has not God chosen those who are poor in the things of this world to be
rich through their faith, and to possess the Kingdom which he has promised
to those who love him? But you—you insult the poor man! Is
not it the rich who oppress you? Is not it they who drag you into
law-courts? Is not it they who malign that honourable Name which
has been bestowed upon you? Yet, if you will keep the royal laws
which run—‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thou dost thyself,’ you are
doing right; but, if you worship rank, you commit a sin, and stand convicted
by that same law of being offenders against it. (Twentieth century
version.)
If I were a bishop or moderator I would advise that the first half
of this chapter be read once a month in every congregation, as well as
the well-known last verse of the first chapter:—
Pure religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit
the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted
from the world. W.C.T.
September 23, 1909, p. 8
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
DEAR SIR:—Will you kindly permit a few references to the above in reply to Rev. Clarke’s answers to certain questions appearing in your last issue. Mr. Clarke did not attempt to deny the fact that unpaid overseers or bishops were appointed or ordained in the christian churches of the first few centuries, because all history sacred and secular would be against him, but just as was expected, he tries to explain this stubborn fact away by quoting certain texts of scripture that has nothing to do with the subject more than the man of the moon, and goes on to tell us that ‘if these early christian overseers were uneducated they were qualified,’ not like the self-appointed Pilgrim Tramps, as he is pleased to call us.
Perhaps Mr. Clarke would tell us who appointed him to go and preach as a clergyman, with a stated salary, title, manse and promised pension. It could not have been the same God that sent John the Baptist, Peter, John and Paul, because they were sent without either purse, scrip, or certain dwelling place, and instead of a pension were promised the hatred of all men, for His namesake, and God never changes. Heb. XIII 8. Mr. Clarke seems completely at sea on the question of what goes to form a christian church, because he tells us we are not to enquire who are christians and who are not. I must confess astonishment at this coming from a Methodist clergyman, because I always was under the impression that Methodists tried to get people to profess, at least. However, God does not leave us in the dark on this vital point.
In I Cor. 1 Chapter, we have the scriptural definition of a true christian church. Paul, in writing to those whom he got delivered at Corinth from sin and ungodly forms of worship, to follow Jesus, addresses them as ‘The Church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus called to the Saints in whom the testimony of Jesus is confirmed who are enriched in all utterance and all knowledge, and who are waiting for the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ.’ The foregoing is the definition of a true christian church recorded for us by the Holy Spirit for this and every age.
This kind of church met in the home of a saint and was looked after by the kind of overseer described in 1 Tim. III. 2,3, ‘A man without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality apt to teach, no love of money &c. Not greedy for filthy lucre, but for a ready mind,’ 1 Peter V. 2. Everywhere the servants of God has preached the Gospel of the kingdom and got men to believe on Jesus and become his disciples, they have formed churches and appointed overseers, just as Paul told Timothy to do. We fail to find any other kind of a church in God’s Word, therefore we dare not believe in the world’s organizations formed after another pattern.
No matter how old or how holy they say they are, the same Holy Spirit working in the hearts of his disciples will produce the same conditions of service and worship in every age. Let us contrast the foregoing with the world’s popular so-called churches today, formed by the various sects--we have the consecrated stone and mortar, the stained glass window, the one man ministry, the well-paid titled gentleman preacher, the congregation graded and seated, as a rule according to the depths of their purse. It is here you will find the latest fashions, the newest in bonnets and blouse. ‘Are you born again?’ is never asked. Hell is never mentioned, and so poor sinners’ paths are smoothed to the pit.
Those who warn sinners to flee from the wrath to come are regarded as fanatics—for the harlot’s daughters have actually taught that hell is an exploded theory, and that she is converting the world. By her sorceries were all the nations deceived, Rev. XVIII. 23. What a contrast to the true church, builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit (Eph. 11. 22).
Question 5. The church was in the apostles’ time one body, controlled by one spirit, believing one doctrine, having one Lord. When did it change?
Now Mr. Clarke does not attempt to answer this question at all, but darkens counsel with words as usual. Paul, the Tramp preacher, in writing to his converts warns them to avoid divisions among themselves, and to be of the same mind and to speak the same thing that they may be perfectly joined together in the same judgment. This very desirable state of things can only be found among those today who have the testimony of Jesus, having made Him Lord and have become partakers of His nature; Paul’s warnings could have no application to those who claim the right to change the Divine plan to suit themselves.
Now we come to Infant Baptism and we find Mr. Clarke quoting Col. 2. 11, 12, as showing circumcision to take the place of Baptism and like the tempter in the wilderness he only quotes the part that suits him. I find however that this scripture says nothing of the kind. The whole passage is one of the many proofs against Infant Baptism, because it refers and was written to believers at Colossae—children or infants were never thought of. There is not one word in the New Testament from cover to cover to tell us that Baptism takes the place of circumcision; on the contrary Timothy was circumcised long after Baptism was preached and practised (Acts XVI. 3).
So strong were some of the early Christians in favour of circumcision that we find the Apostles, elders, and brethren had to come together at Jerusalem to consider the question of forcing this rite on converted gentiles as necessary to salvation. Paul was there and that would have been his opportunity for saying so, but not a word was said about baptism during the whole controversy. Every bible student knows that circumcision was God’s earthly covenant with Abraham that he would make the Jews a great nation. Hence it was males only that were circumcised.
The new Spiritual Covenant at Hebrews 8, 10, is for both male and female, and is foreshadowed at Jeremiah XXXI. 31, 34. Nobody was ever baptised in New Testament times but believers. Infant Baptism came from Rome, and was introduced at a time when the very foundations of the Gospel were being frittered away. Infant Baptism is the parent of the absurd and senseless theory of baptismal regeneration which was made to support the fundamental and vital doctrine of the new birth. All true christians must regard infant sprinkling and baptismal regeneration as the greatest devil’s deception of the ages.
The baptism of believers is a typical ordinance, not a meaningless ceremony. In being buried under the waters of baptism, the believer declares His death and burial with Christ, (Rom. VI. 4), his separation from the world (Col. XI. 12,20), and his end as a sinner in the flesh, (Gal. II, 20). In being raised from this grave he confesses his resurrection with Christ to rise and walk in newness of life (Rom. VI. 5,9) and his determination as a risen saint to seek heavenly things during the remainder of his earthly pilgrimage.
Besides all this it was a direct command of our Blessed Lord himself to his apostles and prophets. He himself submitted to the ordinance at the hands of John the Baptist (Matt. III. 13). In conclusion I would ask all sensible wise people to search the scriptures and see if these things are so. ‘God is not mocked; whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap.’ Don’t spend valuable time criticising and finding fault with those who believe in the lowly Jesus, and seek to walk His way and speak his truth—we know our many imperfections—and how unworthy we are to take His name.
We did not invent the Jesus way; it was made for us—for you, and for every child of Adam. I am gladder every day that ever I heard God’s truth from His messenger, who dared to believe that Jesus was the way, the truth, and the life, the pattern preacher, God’s perfect manifestation for every age. The answers of the questions at Bundoran has convinced me and others more than ever that the light that is in Methodism is darkness. I esteem, O Lord, all thy precepts concerning all things to be right, and I hate every false way (Psalm CXIX. 128).
—Yours truly, Within
FROM A TRAMP
Beachview College, Bundoran
17th September, 1909
DEAR MR. EDITOR:—It may be that you will give space to the consideration
of some of the matters referred to by your leader writer W.C.T., in recent
issues of the IMPARTIAL REPORTER.
To one who like Ernest Renan, turn to the thought of Jesus as a man,
and turn from the fact of Jesus the Son of God, many, like W.C.T. turn
to a self-excusing conception of Jesus as Son of God, and turn from the
self-condemning fact of the man Christ Jesus, whose life has been the same
in kind, tho’ not in degree, in every human body given to God, from Abel
till now.
Jesus read the scriptures in the common language of His day, as they
were preserved by scribes who counted their chapters, and words, and letters,
and bound them in the best bindiry they knew about; but proved by their
treatment of Jesus that they did not know the God of Moses, and Abraham,
and the prophets. Those who read the English version of the scriptures
today can follow Him in doing so. Jesus hearkened to and loved and
obeyed the voice of the God of the Hebrew scriptures, and the scribes hated
Him for doing so, that all men in every time following who did as He did,
might expect the same result. Jesus did not make Himself peculiar
in dress from the common people He lived among, that His disciples in every
place might understand to dress as common-sense and health dictated to
the common people of their country. If Jesus had abused His prophetic
foresight and dressed as an Irish farmer, He would probably have given
the diseased imaginations of His time, a subject for comment and reflection.
If we attired ourselves in sandals and girded robes, the diseased imaginations
of today might find one common ground of sympathy and say ‘Now this just
suits us. They are right, they are consistent.’
The words of Jesus on the mount were recorded first by those who loved
Him; afterwards by those who loved to make gain of Him. To translate
scripture: to interpret Scripture in the God-of-this-world’s way
has been always the work of Scribes and Pharisees. To demonstrate
scripture,—to show the power of the God of Heaven in life and words, is
the work that always separates light from darkness—the children of God
from the descendants of those to whom Jesus said ‘Ye are of your father,
the devil.’
The sermon on the mount is full of implied contrasts that show up the
darkness of Scribe and Phariseeism, and as those who believe in Jesus,
trust His teaching, and recognize its application to our own case, we say
plainly that we do not compare ourselves with the sects; we contrast with
them, and where we come short, let men who love their souls set themselves
to do better.
Jesus on the mount gave teaching to His disciples that was calculated
to help them to become like Him in the world and unlike those whose example
He warned them against. The poor in spirit, the meek, the hungry
after righteousness—who are they? The salt of the earth, the light
of the world, were not and are not Scribes and Pharisees. Jesus gave
them to understand they were the corrupters of the earth, the darkness
of the world. Why? Because ‘They say and do not.’
No where do we see a more perfect development of hypocrisy than when
those who make no attempt to do His will lay claim to the words He spoke,
to those who were to the limit of their manhood’s possibility, following
His footsteps. ‘Judge not’ does not mean ‘Do not recognize a false
prophet to be a false prophet.’ ‘Judge not’ does not mean ‘Believe
that the Sanhedrian is just as right as yourselves.’ John hearing
the words ‘judge not’ could understand that it would be hypocrisy in him
to expect his brother Peter to be more like the pattern Jesus than he was
himself. It is one thing to discern those who do not follow Jesus,
and another thing to criticise those who imperfectly follow the Perfect
One.
‘Ask and ye shall receive. Seek and ye shall find, knock and
it shall be opened unto you.’ Phariseeism today pretends to have
a right to interpret these words, while they ask the world for its patronage,
money, sympathy, protection, and get these; while they seek from men not
God; while they knock, not where God hears and answers, but where the world
hears and answers.
‘Beware of false prophets.’ How were they to know them?
‘By their fruits.’ What preacher of any recognized sect in Christendom
today produce in others a love to do as Jesus taught the twelve to do?
Preachers of every sect are powerful in the Devil’s hands in producing
in men a love to talk about the words of Jesus, to talk about the doings
of the twelve accompanied by a blind, selfish pride that will not obey
the words of Jesus, will not live as the twelve lived, as the hundred and
twenty lived; as the disciples at Pentecost lived—too proud to be common
like Jesus of Nazareth; too proud to live on the level of the carpenter,
to preach on the level of the pauper, to die on the social level of the
criminal and slave—too blind to see God’s glory in the face of a man they
cannot give a salary to for preaching—too selfish to renounce all that
they have, and love Him better than father or mother, or wife or child—and
yet they explain His words.
Why will men become eager candidates for ‘the greater damnation?’
If God has in our day done again a work He has often done before in
the world, should we wonder? If He has made one man so like His Son
Jesus, that that man’s life has been light to many, should we wonder?
If every man today who starts to follow Jesus in deed and in truth, would
find that William Irvine is ahead of them on the road, and able
to teach and help and encourage them, need that be a cause of stumbling?
If any man is more in the place to do it why for a lost world’s sake does
he not let God make him known? No credit to any man to whom God has
spoken by His Son, to be and do what William Irvine, servant of
Jesus Christ, does and is; but shame and everlasting contempt; to every
man who has ever given his heart and ear and eye to the God of this world
to make him after any other pattern.
— CHA. RYAN.
Our correspondent need not indulge in any idea that Mr. Wm. Irvine
will be deemed to be ‘ahead’ of others in the interpretation of scripture. He does not possess any advantage such as a knowledge of Hebrew or Greek
to facilitate him in a better translation of the original tongues, nor
any qualification that we know of for a better comprehension of plain English;
nor any gift of any description, except that of consigning his fellows to
perdition.
The hall-mark of Christianity is a godliness, a meekness, a charity,
a loveableness, such as the Saviour possessed. We have heard Mr.
Irvine speak. His address was two-thirds denunciation.
He alleged that those who were going to church in Enniskillen on Sundays
with their Bibles and prayer books were going to hell. A young girl
of 17 rose before ten o’clock, p.m., to follow the lady with whom she lodged,
that she might be in doors in proper time, and Mr. Irvine openly
said that he saw the devil in the girl’s eyes, and that the devil was driving
her out of the room!! Some of his own people took him to task afterwards
for this very cruel and offensive observation; and his answer was that
it would do her good. There was no charity there! There may
be the sounding brass and tinkling cymbal in Mr. Irvine but no charity!
no justice! no kindliness! no love. No, no, our correspondent need
have no hallucination on the subject. The public are not quite so
deranged as to think that Mr. Irvine is ‘ahead’ of any one in his
interpretation of scripture, rather the contrary, that he wants to live
in the first century while he is in the 20th.
We have had a lot of these ‘ahead’ men from time to time, who have all
obtained a following of some sort, but of all the uncharitable men we have
ever heard of, there has been none to equal Mr. Irvine. The
hall-mark of Christ-likeness is not there. He is no doubt, sincere,
earnest, and full of enthusiasm in the cause which he has started, but
as the tree is known by its fruit, as our correspondent says, so the uncharitableness
and far fetched ideas of Irvineism are to be avoided as being un-Christ-like
and not being authorised by Holy writ.
EDITOR - I.R.
A ROMAN CATHOLIC’S VIEWS.
SIR:—The Roman Catholic’s views as expressed in the IMPARTIAL REPORTER of September 16th last, seem to be as confused and absurd as the crude vapourings of the Cooneyites themselves. He says, I turn to the New Testament and in Matthew X. 9, 10, I read these words of the Master to those He was sending forth to preach His word—‘Provide neither gold or silver nor brass in your purses, neither have two coats, neither shoes, for the workman is worthy of his meat.’ He adds, ‘If the Reverend Gentleman to my mind can explain away these words, he proves his case, not otherwise.’
If our Roman Catholic writer understood the Scriptures he would not need to have the Rev. Gentleman ‘explain away these words to prove his case.’ He would understand that the Master’s words, which he quotes, do not apply to the support or nonsupport of ministers of the gospel in our time. The words applied to the twelve apostles only, and to them, only for one special mission, and that a mission to the Jews only, for they were commanded to not go into the way of the Gentiles or Samaritans (Mat. X. 5). And some time after Jesus said to his disciples
"When I sent you without purse and scrip and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said Nothing. Then said He unto them, But now, he that has a purse let him take it, and likewise his scrip," (Luke XXII. 35, 36.)In this passage Christ evidently countermanded the order which he had previously given to the twelve apostles in Matthew X. 9, 10, and authorised and commanded them to take with them in future provisions, for their expenses. And every person who has common sense must know, that their members of a church need to eat food wear clothes and to have houses to live in for themselves and their families, it is their duty to provide the same to their ministers who give their whole time and talent to the service. This would be clear if there were no teachings in the Scriptures on the subject, but it is also clearly enjoined in the Word of God.
For we find that Paul says, ‘Do ye not know that they which minister in holy things live of the temple and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so has the Lord ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel.’ 1 Cor. IX. 5, 13, 14.
We see also that the disciples of Christ were not ‘homeless’ when Christ was with them; for when Jesus came into Peter’s home, ‘He saw his wife’s mother laid and she was sick of a fever and he touched her hand and the fever left her,’ Matthew VIII. 13, 15. Peter had a house and a wife. And Paul says, ‘Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles and as the brothers of the Lord and Peter?’ So it is evident that other apostles as well as Peter had wives and houses and that Paul claimed the same right.
Jesus commanded the twelve apostles to ‘Go, preach the word, heal the sick, cleanse the lepers and raise the dead,’ and it is said they did so. When the Cooneyites do that ‘Jesus way,’ I will believe them if they say anything according to the Scriptures; but their way seems to be to wrest portions of Scripture from their connection with other portions, that complete their correct meaning, and thus mislead their ignorant hearers. The proper antidote for their false teaching and wrong interpretations of the Scriptures would be for every one to read and study the Word of God, with prayer to God for the light and guidance of the Holy Spirit.
It is said that an ambitious young man went to the emperor Napoleon and told him that he wanted to get up a new religion and desired the emperor’s advice as to the best way to do it, and, as the story goes, the emperor told him to get himself crucified and rise from the dead the third day and that he would be sure to get a following. There are many things which Jesus did that his followers do not need to do, because Jesus did those things to provide salvation for us. And ‘it is not by works of righteousness that we have done, but according to God’s mercy he saves us by the cleansing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he poured out on the day of Pentecost on His disciples and other believers abundantly,’ and also upon all of us now who sincerely repent of our sins and believe with the heart on the Lord Jesus Christ, Titus III. 5, 6.
If the Cooneyites insist on being saved by doing ‘the Jesus way,’ let their leading men and women too, get themselves crucified and rise again the third day and I will then believe that they mean what they say.
September 18, 1909 - A PROTESTANT READER
DEAR SIR: —The articles of W.C.T. are attracting such widespread
interest, and are found to be so helpful and instructive, that I want to
express the hope that they may be published in a pamphlet. We have
the difficulties raised by the Tramp Preachers from day to day, and it
would be of great assistance if we had such a statement by a layman to
put into the hands of a questioner. I must say that I have never
seen the case so ably argued or so plainly put, and I think we should have
these articles preserved for use. I would be only to glad to subscribe
for one hundred
—Truly yours, A LOCAL PREACHER
The Editor has received two other communications, ordering back numbers
of the IMPARTIAL REPORTER, containing the same suggestion. If our
readers thought these articles would be worth republishing, they might
be produced to cost 2d each or not more than 3d each; and quantities at
a cheaper rate.—Editor, I.R.
