RUSSELL CHURCH

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22346, 18 February 1936, Page 15

RUSSELL CHURCH

Sir, —In his letter of February 13 Archdeacon Simkin states only half the position regarding the Anglican Church at Russell, and omits the point at issue, namely, that the proposed stone addition is to be "the first portion of the new church to replace the old building." One may well imagine the incongruity of the altered building, with a modern stone chancel-sanctu-arj T costing upwards of £SOO joined to a wooden structure 100 years old — truly an "Ancient and Modern" version of church architecture. Most countries would be exceedingly ptoud to possess such an historical building as the Anglican Church at Russell. To commence to build a new church "to replace the old," is the last thing they would think of doing. On one side of Russell Harbour we have the Treaty House so thoughtfully and generously presented to the nation by Viscount' Bledisloe, that it may be preserved for all time. On the other side of the harbour we have a building of equal, if not greater, historical value —the Anglican Church at Russell, so little appreciated that funds are actually being collected to commence a new church on the same Bite which will eventually replace it. Surely this church is worthy of something better than being demolished. It should be kept 5n good repair and does not need any extraneous stone addition to detract from its appearance. When the distant day arrives when it will be no longer used for Divine worship, then let it be set aside intact, to be as much honoured and cared for as the Treaty House at Waitangi. Veritas.