Awful Disclosures of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery of Montreal - novelonlinefull.com
You’re read light novel Awful Disclosures of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery of Montreal Part 19 online at NovelOnlineFull.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit NovelOnlineFull.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy
Now it is certain, that she was not deranged; and she was not forced.
She went deliberately, and of her own accord, to meet the Popish Priests upon the spot where their crimes are perpetrated, and the stronghold of their power. Whether that measure was the most prudent and politic for herself, and the most wise and efficient for the acquisition of the avowed object, may be disputed; but the exemplary openness and the magnanimous daring of that act cannot be controverted.
The narrative, pages 116 to l27, respecting the cholera and the election riots at Montreal, both which scenes happened at the period when Dr.
Robertson says Maria Monk was at William Henry, or St. Denis, or St.
Ours; could not have been described, at least that part of it respecting the wax candles, and the preparation for defence, except by a resident of the Nunnery.
It is a public, notorious fact, that "blessed candles" were made, and sold by the Nuns, and used at Montreal under the pretext to preserve the houses from the Cholera, and to drive it away; that those candles were directed so to be kept burning by the pretended injunction of the Pope; and that large quant.i.ties of the Nunnery candles were dispersed about Montreal and its vicinity, which were fixed at a high price; and whoever suffered by the Cholera, the Nuns and their Masters, the Priests, could truly say--"By this craft we have our wealth." Acts 19:25. It is obvious, that a young Papist woman at service at William Henry, could know no more of those matters, than if she had been at Labrador; for the incidental remark with which that part of the narrative commences, is one of those apparently superfluous intimations, which it is evident a person who was writing a fiction would not introduce; and yet it is so profoundly characteristic of a Canadian Convent, that its very simple artlessness at once obliterates Dr. Robertson's affidavit. "There were a few instances, and only a few, in which we knew any thing that was happening in the world; and even then our knowledge did not extend out of the city." We cannot be infallibly certain of Maria Monk's description of the interior of the Nunnery; but that unpremeditated remark, so minutely descriptive of the predominating ignorance among the Nuns of all terrestrial concerns exterior of the Convent, is satisfactory proof that the narrator was not sketching from fancy, but depicting from actual life.
From those testimonies, direct and unintentional, it is fully evident, that Maria Monk was a long resident, and is profoundly acquainted with the doings in the Hotel Dieu Convent at Montreal.
II. What collateral evidence can be adduced of the truth of the "Awful Disclosures" by Maria Monk?
1. One corroborative testimony is derived from the _silence of the Roman Priests and their avowed partisans_. Months have pa.s.sed away since the first statements of those matters were made, and also the defence of the Priests, with the affidavits and other connected circ.u.mstances, were presented to the public in the Protestant Vindicator. One of the persons in Montreal, who was in favour of the Jesuits, Mr. Doucet, stated that "the Priests never take up such things; they allow their character to defend itself." There was a time when that contemptuous course would have sufficed, or rather, when to have spoken the truth of the Roman Priests would have cost a man his life, and overwhelmed his family in penury, disgrace, and anguish. The Canadian Jesuits may be a.s.sured that time has pa.s.sed away, never more to return.
They must take up this thing; for their characters cannot defend themselves; and every enlightened man in Canada knows, that in a moral aspect, they cannot be defended.
Argument, denial, affidavits, if they could reach from Montreal to New York, and the oaths of every Papist and Infidel in Canada,--from Joseph Signay, the Popish Prelate of Quebec and Jean Jacques Lartigue, the Suffragan of Montreal, down to the most profligate of the half-pay military officers, among whom are to be found some of the dregs of the British army, all of them will avail nothing. They are not worth a puff of wind against the internal evidence of Maria Monk's book, in connexion with the rejection of the proposal of the New York Protestant a.s.sociation, that the Nunnery shall undergo a strict and impartial examination. It is one of the remarkable evidences of the extraordinary delusion which blinds, or the infatuation which enchains the public mind, that men will not credit the corruptions and barbarities of Romanism. To account for this stupefaction among persons who are wide awake to every other system of deadly evil, is almost impossible. Popery necessarily extirpates the rights of man. It ever has destroyed the well-being of society. By it, all munic.i.p.al law and domestic obligations are abrogated: It always subverts national prosperity and stability; and it is the invincible extinguisher of all true morality and genuine religion. Notwithstanding, men will give credence neither to its own avowed principles, character, and spirit; nor to the unavoidable effects which constantly have flowed from its operations and predominance.
In any other case but one exposing the abominations of Popery, such a volume as Maria Monk's "Awful Disclosures" would have been received without cavil; and immediate judicial measures would have been adopted, to ascertain the certainty of the alleged facts, and the extent and aggravation of their criminality. But now persons are calling for more evidence, when, if they reflected but for a moment, they would perceive, that the only additional evidence possible, is under the entire control of the very persons who are criminated; and to whom the admission of further testimony would be the acc.u.mulation of indelible ignominy.
The pretence, that it is contrary to their rules to allow strangers to explore the interior of a nunnery, only adds insult to crime. Why should a Convent be exempt from search, more than any other edifice? Why should Roman Priests be at liberty to perpetrate every deed of darkness in impenetrable recesses called nunneries? Why should one body of females, shut up in a certain species of mansion, to whom only one cla.s.s of men have unrestricted access, be excluded from all public and legal supervision, more than any other habitation of lewd women, into which all men may enter? As citizens of the United States, we do not pretend to have any authoritative claim to explore a convent within the dominion of a foreign potentate. The Roman Priests of Canada, exercise a vast influence, and are completely intertwined with the Jesuits, in this republic. Therefore, when they remember the extinction of the nunneries at Monroe, Michigan, Charlestown, and Pittsburg; and when they recollect, that the delineations of Maria Monk, if they produce no effect in Canada, will a.s.suredly render female convents in the United States very suspicious and insecure; if they have any solicitude for their confederates, they will intrepidly defy research, and dauntlessly accept the offer of the New York Protestant a.s.sociation: that a joint committee of disinterested, enlightened and honorable judges, should fully investigate, and equitably decide upon the truth or falsehood of Maria Monk's averments. Their ominous silence, their affected contempt, and their audacious refusal, are calculated only to convince every impartial person, of even the smallest discernment, of the real state of things in that edifice; that the chambers of pollution are above, and that the dungeon of torture and death are below; and that they dread the exposure of the theatre on which their horrible tragedies are performed.
It is also a fact publicly avowed by certain Montreal Papists themselves, and extensively told in taunt and triumph, that they have been employed as masons and carpenters by the Roman Priests, since Maria Monk's visit to Montreal in August, 1835, expressly to alter various parts of the Hotel Dieu Convent, and to close up some of the subterraneous pa.s.sages and cells in that nunnery. This circ.u.mstance is not pretended even to be disputed or doubted; for when the dungeons under ground are spoken of before the Papists, their remark is this: "Eh bien! mais vous ne les trouverez pas, a present; on les a cache hors de vue. Very well, you will not find them there now; they are closed up, and out of sight." Why was the manoeuvre completed? Manifestly, that in urgent extremity, a casual explorer might be deceived, by the apparent proof that the avenues, and places of imprisonment and torture which Maria Monk describes are not discoverable. Now that circ.u.mstance might not even been suspected, if the Papist workmen themselves had not openly boasted of the chicanery by which the Priests, who employed them, expected to blind and deceive the Protestants. For in reference to the Romanists, a Popish Priest well knows that nothing more is necessary than for him to a.s.sert any absurdity, however gross or impossible, and attest it by the five crosses on his vestments, and his own superst.i.tious va.s.sal believes it with more a.s.surance than his own personal ident.i.ty. But the filling up and the concealment of the old apertures in the nunnery, by the order of the Roman Priests are scarcely less powerful corroborative proof of Maria Monk's delineations, than ocular and palpable demonstration.
2. Some of the circ.u.mstances attending Maria Monk's visit to Montreal, in August, 1835, add great weight in favour of the truth, which no cavils, skepticism, scorn, nor menaces, can counterbalance.
We will however state one very recent occurrence, because it seems to us, that it alone is almost decisive of the controversy. A counsellor of Quebec--his name is omitted merely from delicacy and prudential considerations--has been in New York since the publication of the "Awful Disclosures" His mind was so much influenced by the perusal of that volume, that he sought out the Auth.o.r.ess, and most closely searched into the credibility of her statements. Before the termination of the interview, that gentleman became so convinced of the truth of the picture which Maria Monk drew of the interior of the Canadian Nunneries, that he expressed himself to the following effect:--"My daughter, about 15 years of age, is in the Ursuline Convent at Quebec. I will return home immediately; and if I cannot remove her any other way, I will drag her out by the hair of her head, and raise a noise about their ears that shall not soon be quieted."
That gentleman did so return to Quebec, since which he has again visited New York; and he stated, that upon his arrival in Quebec, he went to the Convent, and instantly removed his daughter from the Ursuline Nunnery; from whom he ascertained, as far as she had been initiated into the mysteries, that Maria Monk's descriptions of Canadian Nunneries, are most minutely and undeniably accurate.
We have already remarked, that Mrs. ----, Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Hogan, and Mr.
Smith, who was a Papist Priest, with scores of other persons who formerly resided in Montreal, all express their unqualified belief of the statements made by Maria Monk. Mr. Ogden's acquaintance with the facts, as Attorney General, and that of other officers of the Provincial Government, have also been noticed. The ensuing additional circ.u.mstances are of primary importance to a correct estimate of the value which should be attached to the crafty silence of the Roman Priests and the impudent denials of infidel profligates.
Mr. Bouthillier, one of the Montreal Magistrates, called at Mr.
Johnson's house where Maria Monk stayed, in the month of August, 1835, when visiting Montreal.
He addressed her and said:--"There is some mystery about Novices--What is it? and asked how long a woman must be a novice before she can take the veil?" Having been answered, Mr. Bouthillier then desired Maria Monk to describe the Superior of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery. As soon as it was done, he became enraged, and said--"Vous dites un mensonge, vous en savez. You lie, you know you do?"--Mr. Bouthillier next inquired--"Was Mr. Tabeau in the Holy Retreat when you left the Convent?" She answered "Yes." To which he replied in French--"Anybody might have answered that question." Something having been said about the Hotel Dieu Nuns being confined to their convent, Mr. Bouthillier declared, that they were allowed to go about the streets. He was told that could not be the case, for it was a direct violation of the rules for Nuns to depart from the Hotel Dieu Nunnery. He replied--"Ce n'est pas vrai. That is not true,"
Mr. Bonthillier then became very angry, and applied to Maria Monk some very abusive epithets, for which a gentleman in the room reproved him.
It was evident, that he lost his temper because he had lost his argument, and his hopes of controverting her statements.
On the Lord's day after Maria Monk's arrival in Montreal, and when the matter had become well known and much talked about, Phelan, the Priest, at the end of ma.s.s, addressed the Papists, who were a.s.sembled to hear ma.s.s, to this effect: "There is a certain nun in this city who has left our faith, and joined the Protestants. She has a child of which she is ready to swear I am the father. She wishes in this way to take my gown from me. If I knew where to find her, I would put her in prison. I mention this to guard you against being deceived by what she may say.
The Devil now has such hold upon people that there is danger lest some might believe her story." He then pretended to weep, and appeared to be overcome with feeling. A number of the people gathered around him, and he said: "That nun is Antichrist. She is not a human being, but an evil spirit, who got among the Catholics, and _was admitted into the nunnery_, where she learned the rules." He also stated, that "in that nun, the prophecy respecting the coming of Antichrist is fulfilled, to break down the Catholic religion." Such was Phelan's address to the people. He declared that Maria Monk had been a nun. Now he knew her, for he saw her in Montreal, where she could not know him. It would have saved all further inquiry and research, if, instead of denouncing her after ma.s.s, he had merely a.s.sented to Maria Monk's proposition, to be confronted with those Roman Priests and nuns before impartial witnesses in the Hotel Dieu Convent.
One of the most impressively characteristic circ.u.mstances which occurred during Maria Monk's visit to Montreal in Aug. 1835, was an interview at Mr. Johnson's house with a carpenter who had heard Phelan's denunciation of Maria Monk after ma.s.s.
The heinous destruction of all domestic confidence and of all female purity, is known to be the constant and general practice, not only in Canada, but in all other Popish countries, and among Papists in every part of the world. For in truth it is only fulfilling the authentic dogmas of their own system. The following authoritative principles are divulged in the Corpus Juris Canonici, which contains the Decretals, Canons, &c. of the Popes and Councils; and other partic.i.p.ants of the pretended Papal infallibility. "If the Pope fall into homicide or adultery, he cannot be accused, but is excused by the murders of Samson, and the adultery of David." Hugo, Glossa, distinc. 40 Chapter, Non vos.
--"Likewise if any Priest is found embracing a woman, it must be presupposed and expounded that he doth it to bless her!"--Glossa, Caus.
12. Quest. 3. Chapter Absis. According to the Pope's bull he who does not believe those doctrines is accursed.
As that carpenter was completely overcome by the recollection of the Priest's information and caution about his marriage, he desisted from any further questions; but upon Maria Monk's declaration, that she was desirous to go into the convent, and prove all her accusations against the Priests and Nuns, he withdrew. Soon after he returned, and stated, that he had been to the Convent, to inquire respecting her; and that he had been informed, that she had once belonged to the Nunnery; but that they would not any longer own or recognise her. Afterwards he exhibited the most contradictory emotions, and first cursed Maria Monk; then reviled the Priests, applying to them all the loathsome epithets in the Canadian vocabulary. Subsequently, he went to make inquiries at the Seminary; and after his return to Mr. Johnson's house he declared, that the persons there had informed him, that Maria Monk had lived in the Nunnery, but not as a Nun; then he offered to a.s.sist her in her endeavours to expose the Priests; and finally disappeared, swearing aloud as he was retiring from the house; and apparently thinking over the conduct of the Priest to his wife before their marriage. "Oh, sacre!"--he repeated to himself--"c'est trop mechant!"
Similar facts to the above occurred frequently during the time of Maria Monk's visit to Montreal--in which strangers who called upon her, cursed and reviled her; then believed her statements and a.s.sented to them--and displayed all the natural excitement which was necessarily comprised in the working of their own belief and convictions of the iniquity of the Priests, and the dread resulting from their own superst.i.tious va.s.salage, and the certainty of a heavy penance.
But in connexion with the preceding collateral evidence is another remarkable circ.u.mstance, which is this: the extensive knowledge which Maria Monk has obtained of the Canadian Jesuits. Those with whom she has been acquainted, she affirms that she could instantly identify. For that object, she has given a catalogue of those Priests whose names and persons are in some degree familiarly known to her. As the Priests are often changing their abodes, and many of them residents in Montreal until a vacancy occurs for them in the country parishes, in those particulars there may be a trifling mistake; but Maria Monk solemnly avers, that the Priests, whether dead or living, who are enumerated in the subsequent catalogue, either have dwelt or do yet reside in the places specified. When unexpectedly and closely examined in reference to the Priests of the same name, she particularly distinguished them, and pointed out the difference between them in their persons, gait, &c.; thus precluding all objection from the fact of there being more than one Priest with a similar appellative. This circ.u.mstance particularly is ill.u.s.trated by the Priests named Marcoux, of whom she says there are three brothers or first cousins--two called Dufresne, &c.: each of whom she graphically depicts. It is also certain, because she has done it in a great variety of instances, and in the presence of many different persons, all of whom are well acquainted with them, that she describes Lartigue; Dufresne; Richard; Phelan; Bonin; Comte; Bourget; McMahon; Kelly; Demers; Roux; Roque; Sauvage; Tabeau; Marcoux; Morin; Durocher; and all the Roman Priests around Montreal, with the utmost minuteness of accuracy; while the Chaplain of the Ursuline Nunnery at Quebec, Father Daule, is as exactly depicted by her, as if her whole life had been pa.s.sed under his _surveillance_. Some of the appellatives in the ensuing catalogue may not be correctly spelt. Scarcely any thing is more difficult than to acquire proper names in a foreign language; and especially where the p.r.o.nunciation itself is provincial, as is the case with Canadian French; and when also those t.i.tles have to be transcribed from the mouth of a person who knows no more of orthoepy and orthography than a Canadian Nun. However, Maria Monk attests, that the Priests to whom she refers did reside at those places which she has designated, and that she has seen them all in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery--some of them very often, and others on a variety of occasions.
Nothing is more improbable, if not impossible, than that any Papist girl should have such an extensive acquaintance among Roman Priests. In Canada especially, where the large majority of females have little more correct knowledge of that which occurs out of their own district than of Herschel's astronomical discoveries, young women cannot be personally familiar with any Priests, in ordinary cases, except those who may have been "Cures" of the parish in which they reside, or of the immediate vicinity, or an occasional visitor during the absence, or sickness, or death of the resident Curate or Missionary. Notwithstanding, Maria Monk delineates to the life, the prominent features, the exact figure, and the obvious characteristic exterior habits and personal appearance of more than one hundred and fifty of those Priests, scattered about in all parts of Canada; Among others she particularly specifies the following men: but some of whom she notes as dead. Others she has named, but as her recollections of them are less distinct, they are not enumerated.
Jean Jacques Lartigue, Bishop of Telmese, Montreal. The Irish Priest McMahon, who has resided both in Montreal and Quebec. M. Dufrense, St.
Nicholas. L. Cadieux, Vicar General, Three Rivers. F. F. Marcoux, Maskinonge. S. N. Dumoulin, Yamachiche. A. Leclerc, Yomaska. V.
Fournier, Baie du Febre. J. Demers, St. Gregoire. C. B. Courtain, Gentilly. T. Pepin, St. Jean. Ignace Bourget, Montreal. The Priest Moor, Missionary. J. C. Prince, Montreal. J. M. Sauvage, Montreal. J. Comte, Montreal. J. H. A. Roux, Vicar General, Montreal. J. Roque, Montreal. A.
Malard, Montreal. A. L. Hubart, Montreal. A. Satin, Montreal. J. B.
Roupe, Montreal. Nic. Dufresne, Montreal. J. Richard, Montreal. C. Fay, Montreal. J. B. St. Pierre, Montreal. F. Bonin, P. Phelan, Montreal. T.
B. M'Mahon, Perce. J. Marcoux, Caghuawaga. C. De Bellefeuille, Lake of two Mountains. Claude Leonard, Montreal. F. Durocher, Lake of two Mountains. G. Belmont, St. Francis. F. Demers, Vicar General, St. Denis.
J. O. Giroux, St. Benoit. J. B. St. Germain, St. Laurent. J. D. Delisle, St. Cesaire. J. M. Lefebvre, St. Genevieve. F. Pigeon, St. Philippe. A.
Duransau, Lachine. O. Chevrefils, St. Constant. Joseph Quiblier, Montreal. Francis Humbert, Montreal. J. Arraud, Montreal. O.
Archambault, Montreal. J. Larkin, Montreal. F. Sery, Montreal. R. Larre, Montreal. A. Macdonald, Montreal. F. Larkin, Montreal. J. Beauregard, Montreal. R. Robert, Montreal. J. Fitz Patrick, Montreal. J. Toupin, Montreal. W. Baun, Montreal. T. Filiatreault. Montreal. J. Brady, Montreal. P. Trudel, St. Hyacinth. John Grant, St. Hyacinth. J. Delaire, Chambly. J. Desautels, Chambly. P. D. Ricard, St. Joachim. Jan.
Leclaire, Isle Jesus. F. M. Turcot, St. Rose. C. Larocque, Berthier, T.
Bra.s.sard, St. Elizabeth. J. B. Keller, St. Elizabeth. J. Ravienne, Lanorate. J. T. Gagno, Valtrie. Gasford Guingner, St. Melanie. L.
Nicholas Jacques, St. Sulpice. J. Renucalde, St. Jaques. T. Can, St.
Esprit. C. J. Ducharme, St. Therese. J. Valliee, St. Scholastique. J. J.
Vinet, Arganteuil. M. Power, Beauharnois. J. B. Labelle, Chateauguay. E.
Bietz, St. Constant. P. Bedard, St. Remi. C. Aubry, St. Athanase. L.
Vinet, Noyon. J. Roque, Noyon. J. Zeph, Carren. F. Berauld, St.
Valentia. A. Maresseau, Longueuil. P. Brunet, ----. J. Odelin, Rounilli. J. B. Dupuis, ----. L. Nau, Rouville. A. O. Giroux, St. Marc.
G. Marchesseau, ----. J. B. Belanger, St. Ours. H. Marcotte, Isle du Pads. E. Crevier, Yamaska. G. Arsonault, ----. Eusebe Durocher, ----.
D. Denis, St. Rosalie. F. X. Brunet, St. Damase. J.A. Boisond, St. Pie.
M. Quintal, St. Damase. L. Aubry, Points Calire. P. Tetro, Beauharnois.
B. Ricard, St. Constant. M. Morin, Maskonche. J. Crevier, Blairfindie.
P. Grenier, Charteaguay. A. Darocher, Pointe aux Trembles. P. Murcure, La Presentation. R. Gaulin, Dorchester. H. L. Girouard, St. Hyacinthe.
J. Paquin, Blairfinde. E. Bra.s.sard, St. Polycarpe. J. Boissonnault, Riviere des Prairies. F. N. Blanchet, Soulanges. E. Lavoie, Blairfindie.
J. B. Kelly, Sorel. E. Morriset, St. Cyprian. H. Hudon, Argenteuil. M.
Brudet, St. Martin. P. P. Archambault, Vaudreuil. J. B. Boucher, La Prairie. J. Quevillion, St. Ours. A. Chaboillez, Longueuil. P. J.
Delamothe, St. Scholastique. T. Lagard, St. Vincent. J. Durocher, St.
Benoit. Antoine Tabeau, Vicar General, Montreal. J. F. Hebard, St. Ours.
F. A. Trudeau, Montreal. M. J. Felix, St. Benoit. L. Lamothe, Bethier.
J. Moirier, St. Anne. F. J. Deguise, Vicar General, Varennes. J. B.
Bedard, St. Denis. R. O. Brunsau, Vercheres. F. Portier, Terrebonne. P.
D. Ricard, Berthier. L. Gague, Lachenaie. Joseph Belanger, Chambly. M.
Blanchet, St. Charles. P. M. Mignault, Chambly. F. Labelle, L'a.s.sumption. F. Marcoux, St. Barthelemi. N. L. Amiot, Repentigny. J. B.
Boucher, Chambly. P. Lafranc, St. Jean Baptiste. P. Robitaille, Monnie.
F. De Bellefeullie, St. Vincent. M. Bra.s.sard, St. Elizabeth. P.
Cousigny, St. Mathias. J. D. Daule, Quebec.
It is readily admitted, that any person could take one of the Ecclesiastical Registers of Lower Canada, and at his option mark any number of the Roman Priests in the catalogue, and impute to them any crime which he pleased. But if the accuser were closely examined, and among such a mult.i.tude of Priests, who in all their clothing are dressed alike, were called upon minutely to delineate them, it is morally impossible, that he could depict more than a hundred Priests dispersed from the borders of Upper Canada to Quebec, in as many different parishes, with the most perfect accuracy, unless he was personally and well acquainted with them.
Maria Monk, however, does most accurately describe all the Priests in the preceding catalogue, and repeats them at the expiration of weeks and months; and the question is this: how is it possible that she could have become acquainted with so many of that body, and by what means can she so precisely depict their external appearance?--The startling, but the only plausible answer which can be given to that question is this:-- that she has seen them in the Nunnery, whither, as she maintains, most of them constantly resorted for licentious intercourse with the Nuns.
One other connected fact may here be introduced. Maria Monk well knows the Lady Superior of the Charlestown Nunnery. That acquaintance could not have been made in the United States, because Saint Mary St. George as she called herself, or Sarah Burroughs, daughter of the notorious Stephen Burroughs, as is her real name, removed to Canada at the latter end of May, 1835; nor could it have been prior to the establishment of the Charlestown Nunnery, for at that period Maria Monk was a child, and was not in any Convent except merely as a scholar; and Mary St. George was at Quebec. How then did she become so familiar with that far-famed lady as to be able to describe her so exactly? The only answer is, that she derived her knowledge of the Charlestown Convent and of its Superior, from the intimations given, and from intercourse with that Nun in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery.
Young females often have been sent to the Nunneries in Canada under the fallacious hope of obtaining for them, a superior education; and very frequently, they are suddenly removed after being there but a short period; because the persons to whose partial guardianship they are committed perceive that they are in danger of being ensnared by the Chaplain and his female Syrens.