News Articles

Trinity Chapel May Secede

This article, from December 18, 1909, begins a series of articles describing the secession of Holy Trinity Memorial Church from its parent church, Holy Trinity Church. At this point, the offending act has been committed, but the congregation of Holy Trinity Memorial Church is only thinking of taking legal action. The instigation of this hostile air was the dispelling of the vicar of the church, Rev. Dr. R. Marshall Harrison, by the rector of Holy Trinity Church, Rev. Dr. Floyd W. Tomkins, who is described here as having mistreated several other vicars before Dr. Harrison. The congregation was extremely fond of Dr. Harrison, which is why they were so angry at his bring forced to resign, many offering their own houses for the Reverend to live while he was without home.

Trinity Chapel to go to Law

By January 8, 1910, Trinity Memorial Church had decided to go to the courts in order to make itself wholly independent of Holy Trinity Church. Because of an endowment given to the church, Holy Trinity Church controlled Trinity Memorial Church as a trust. When the vestry of Holy Trinity Church refused to allow Dr. Harrison to return as vicar, as the congregation wanted, Trinity Memorial Church asked for independence, and was refused this as well. Upon those decisions, they were left with no other option than to take the matter to law.

Deadly Vicar with “Deadly Parallel”

In April of 1910, a committee of the members of Trinity Memorial Church released a pamphlet explaining the misdemeanor and arguing for the independence of their chapel. One of the main arguments of the pamphlet is Rev. Dr. R. W. Tomkins’ conflicting reviews of Dr. Harrison’s work. Dr. Tomkins at one point praised Dr. Harrison’s ability as a preacher and his success at the parish. He was later quoted saying that he and the rest of the vestry of Holy Trinity Church were unsatisfied with Dr. Harrison’s work. The fifteen-page pamphlet also makes use of the vestry’s inconsistency in granting independence, as well as the skewed and blatantly incorrect data used by the vestry to show Dr. Harrison’s failure as a vicar.

Holy Trinity Chapel Meets another Rebuff

This article, from May 14, 1910, follows the dissolving of the Guild House Committee by Rev. H. C. Stone, the appointee by Dr. Tomkins to fill Dr. Harrison’s role. The Guild House Committee was a group of congregates which dealt with the parish, and Dr. and Mrs. Harrison had joined the organization immediately upon Dr. Harrison’s deposition, presumably to remain connected to the parish. Other members of the committee were some of the main drivers of the fight for Dr. Harrison’s reinstatement. One might assume, from the details of the situation, that Dr. Tomkins was aiming to rid the parish of Dr. Harrison and all of his supporters completely.

Denies Agreeing to Free Chapel

This article, from January 6, 1911, documents the defending arguments of Holy Trinity Church against Trinity Memorial Church’s plea for independence. They first responded to Trinity Memorial Church’s claim that it was the wish of Anna H. Wilstach, the primary benefactor of the parish, that in time the Holy Trinity Memorial Chapel should become its own church, independent of Holy Trinity Church. They said that Ms. Wilstach never expressed such a desire. Another argument of the church was that, when Trinity Memorial Chapel was built, there were not enough funds from Ms. Wilstach alone, and that much of the duty of paying for the erection of the church fell on Holy Trinity Church.

Holy Trinity Case is Argued in Court

In this article, from June 5, 1911, the proceedings of the court case are explained. The judge, a Mr. Audenried, seemed to make light of the case, often citing points of the plaintiffs, Trinity Memorial Church, as irrelevant. He said that their argument boiled down to two points – that Mrs. Anna H. Wilstach intended for the chapel to become a separate parish, and that the vestry of the Holy Trinity Church understood this in accepting her donation – and that they did not have substantial evidence for either. While he allowed the attorney’s of both sides a week to file briefs on the case, the prospects for Trinity Memorial Church winning their case were dim.

Victory for Holy Trinity Church

This article, from July 20, 1911, confirms that the case of Trinity Memorial Church was lost. Judge Audendried cited the plaintiffs’ lack of evidence and failure to prove the basis of their case as reasons for the dismissal. While Mrs. Wilstach may have suspected Trinity Memorial Church might want to become independent someday, she did not explicitly express any particular wish that it do so, and she certainly included no such requirement in her agreement with Holy Trinity Church when giving her gift to build the parish. Another reason for the loss was that Judge Audendried could not interfere with the policy which permits one congregation to control and govern another as a dependency.

Center City Rustics Do a Fast Do-Si-Do

This article, from March 6, 1957, tells of an event at Trinity Memorial Church: an annual barn dance. Some several hundred people flooded the Church at 22nd and Spruce Street for the hoedown, including Edmund N. Bacon, with his wife and kids, who apparently hardly missed a dance! Five years before, at the first barn dance the church held, only some 40-odd people attended. This time around, the barn dance became an all-out community event, with many residents hosting pre-dance dinner parties, and many who attended the dance had no affiliation with the church.

Fitler Square Fair To Salute Ireland

This article, from May 4, 1967, is an announcement about the Fitler Square Association's "Salute to Ireland Festival and Fair." It states that the mayor, who was Mayor Tate at the time, will be attending and that the Irish Consul General, F. A. Coffey, and City Council President, Paul D'Ortona, would be present at the event.

Holiday Bazaar

This tiny article, from November 30, 1978, advertises the ninth annual holiday bazaar, hosted by the Home and School Association of the Albert M. Greenfield School. They would sell home-made crafts, used books and movies, and food from an “international smorgasbord”. This displays the community aspect of the elementary school. Many children from the surrounding neighborhood attend the public elementary school, and a bazaar would attract many parents in the neighborhood, who know that they money they spend at the event will go into the school that their children attend or will attend.

1, 2, 3                                                                                                     Next→