The fire was first noticed by the janitor, who was sleeping in the Parochial House. He was awakened by the persistent barking of his dog who sensed something was wrong. The neighbors quickly gathered, when the alarm was sounded but little could be done as the Church was ablaze. The cause of the fire was a defective flue. It had been built about 20 years before and was a splendid structure 100’ x 40’ and could seat 600 people. It was finished inside in natural wood. A new altar had been built about a year before and the church was valued at 15 to 20,000 dollars and was only about one-third covered by insurance. It was fortunate that the wind was blowing the fire away from the other buildings or all would have been destroyed.

It was truly a sad Christmas day, 1914, when the people gathered to stare in utter disbelief at all that remained of their church. And as they stood around in small groups talking of the tragedy, they must have asked the question “What do we do now?”. The prospect of having to build again discouraged some, made others a little bitter, but their lead- ers encouraged them by recalling the sacrifices of their early ancestors, appealed to their faith and confidence in God and called a meeting to plan for the future. In the meantime the first church, built in 1848, and used now as a hall, was once more used as a church.

If the people were discouraged at the prospect of rebuilding, they also were of different opinions as to the material of which to build the church. Some were in favor of building it of brick, while others, and they were in the majority, wanted it of wood. On January 4th., 1915, His Lordship Bishop Henry O’Leary attended the meeting to try and arrive at a proper solution. After he had heard the arguments for and against each proposition, and having seen the generous response of all people to the call for subscriptions, judged that their generosity, prompted, no doubt by the strength of their faith, in spite of all their past losses and sacrifices, pointed in the direction of a brick church. He emphasized his great wish that they should build in brick, and gave several reasons for the superiority of a brick structure over one of wood. No doubt the people of Kelly’s Cross, when the two estimates are received, and a comparison made, in all the various details, as to cost, durability, cost of keeping in repair, etc., if at all feasible, will pursue the better course. Several hundred dollars have already been thankfully received from gen- erous donors from all over the Province to help rebuild.” (Taken from The Guardian).

A decision was taken to build in brick. It was a failure from the beginning. The building was never completed inside because of the ap- parent poor construction. The materials used were not of the best quality — the bricks cracked, the mortar crumbled and snow and rain soon played their part in making a bad job worse.

It was difficult to establish where the true fault lay. The Parish refused to pay the unpaid balance of the contract, and so the contractor, Bernard Craemer, sued the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation. The matter ended in court, and a verdict favorable to the parish was rendered

_15_