IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I ul m ^ 2.0 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 < 6" — ► V}. STER,N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-' 503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D n D T 7 n D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pelliculde Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) n Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leavv^s added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6es. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exempiai.e qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqu^es [ ] Pages detached/ i i Pages ddtachdes BShowthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Qualit^ in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire D D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t^ fiimdes d nouveau de fa^on h obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous lOX 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X 1 V 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grftce d la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impias- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplairws originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par Is second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commen^ant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^' (meaning "CON- TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END "), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole —^- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, pistes, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s A des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 T^ I I i The CIntrch in Canada. 95 67 'Z(r 77' THE OLD PROVINCE OF QUEBEC. Reprinted by permission fioni the American Catholic Quarterly Rnieiv. 50 ESSAYS ON THE CIIUKCH JN CANADA. 1^/ '40 The Church Catholii" — Natioujil Clnirchos -Anglican and (iallican —The Church in Canatla undci- I'ronch Rule — The Capitula- tions at Montreal ami (^ucIkh- (ijsv-^x)) -The Treaty of Paris, 1763 The Quehec Act, 1 77 j^, and the Speeches on it in the Enj^lish Parliament — The Church under British Rule Teriitory within the Act and the Treaty Cieoijiaphical and Political chantji s resulting" in the present Do- minion — The Clun'ch in Ontario. 30 57 \\\ D. A. O'SL'LTJVAN, Esq., Q.C, LL.D., ()/•■ (>.S7;r '('/'/•; HALL. rOROXTO. Author of " (ioxKRN.MEN r IN Canada," Etc.. Etc. WITH AN iNTinimxTioN nv HIS GRACE THE ARCH BISHOP OF TORONTO. ^0 TORONTO; 1890. The Catholic Trlth Society. ALt, RKIirrS RKSKUVKll. 'f Bi 01 ALL Khi/rrs KESERrEI) Patrick Boyi.k, Piuxtek, IXTRODICTOR^' NOTICE BY I^is (Srane the '^rclu^hop ot* Soroijto. The following Essays ie7c>, and the writer has reason to believe that they have been found useful and acceptable to Anierican and Canadian Catholics and to historical writers generally. They were written in hours snatched from professional work, and perhaps do not present all the evidences of research which they really entailed. When it is considered that they were written for a periodical it must be conceded that a certain brevity had to te kept constantly in view ; this did not, however, prevent the writer from consulting the original documents and other sources of information concerning Canadian history, even when many of them contained little or nothing to the purpose. Acknowledgments are due and cheerfully given to Cheva- lier MacDonell for the use of his library, and also to Mr. '^\ 1 VIU. To the Reader. Bain cf the Toronto Public Library, and to Mr. Houston of the Lpgialative Assembly Library, for their courtesy in lending the writer books and pamphlets bearing on the subject. The writer must also not omit to mention the permission given by Messrs. Hardy and Mahony, of the American Catho- lic Quarterly Reineu\ Philadelphia, to reprint these essays, which are copyrighted by them in the United States. If the Canadian Catholic public are to receive any advantage from these articles appearing in a cheap and handy form, their acknowledgments are mainly due to these enterprising publishers. A full table of contents has been added in the hope that it may be useful for students and others desirous of mastering discussed. )jects D. A. O'S. TonoNTo, Christmas Vacation, 1889. A yf. -^y^;^^ V-.; ouston of iirtesy in 5 on the TABLE OF CONTENTS. lermission an Catho- le essays, . If the tag(; from rm, their erprisiug pe that it CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. "'^ Ancient Diocese of Quebec 9 Royalty and the Church 10 I )iver8e Views on the Church in Quebec 11 Church in Nova Scotia - 12 In Ontario 12 Scope of these Essays 13 The Church not in need of History 14 Dr. Brownson's Views on 14 CHAPTER II. THE CHURCH, CATHOLIC AND ROMAN. Necessary to understand " Establishments" 15 Privy Council Decisions . » 15 What Non-Catholics understand by Establishments IH False Views as to the Galilean Church 16 Encyclical Immortale Dsi 17 Catholic Church not a Church Established by law 19 Cardinal Manning on this Question 19 The Catholic Church not a National or State Organization 20 Papal Supremacy Opposed to That 20 Meaning of Ultramontanism 20 Every Catholic is Necessarily an Ultramontane.. 20 CHAPTER III. THE ENGLISH NATIONAL CHURCH. Only National Churches can be Established by law 21 Concordats between the Pope and the Nations 21 A Catholic Church cannot be National 21 I . / 2 Table of Contents. National or State Clmrches at the Mercy of the People. 2:1 Church of I'^nfjland, before Klizibeth, under I'apal Supremacy ... . 2*2 English Chur,:> prior to Henry V III 24 Kngliah Church after his tirae 2;") Power of I'rivy Council over the Church of Kogland 2G CHAPTER IV. TIIK SOCALLKl) FUENCE1?KC. The Seven Yeirs' War -I 50 French and English Possessions SO-.")! f Tdhlr of Contents. 8 02 lacy..,. 2'J 24 2-) 2G f Fall of Quebec ^^ J: Jyvpae of Three Years before JVeaty oi ■^ "I I Capitulations • • •" % Aiticles in both Citits show a Csaion, not a Coiuiuest 52-53 r Relio:iou3 Freedom in these Cupitul itions . ... 52-54 ~^ Capitulation? Regard the Ultimate Possession of Canada as Doubtful '"''^ 27 27 28 28 28-9 .30 'M 82 3;; . ;u ..S5-II . 3() .37!) 39-4 1 42-4;; 44-4(i . 44 47 49 . 4S 48-4!l . 60 50-51 CHAPTER \MI. THK TIJilA'l'V <»F I'AKIS, 1703. 55 Negotiations begun in 1701 • • • ( Jarneau on i'^* 4 Protocols and Alterations ., ^'>6 ^ Vote in the House of Commons i*! 1 4th Section ^^ \ " So far as the Laws of (Jreat Britaiu Permit." 58 No British Penal Laws extend to the Coloniiis 58 I The Act of Supremacy 1 P]liz., cap. I, bold to apply 59 Opinion of Mazares and others 00-01 Construction by Parliamr^nt 01 The (Jereral Laws as to Treaties 62 03 London Conference, 1S71 63 CHAPTER VIIJ. TIIK QrKl'.KC ACT, 1774. m t Proclamation of 17t»."{ ^ 04 ^ State of Canada at that I) ite 64 I Religious Questions 65 The Atty.-dan'l. M-izares and (iovernor Carloton 66 Mazere's Plans 07 Materials before Parliament 68 The (,)u. bee Bill 08-09 ."Speeches in Parliament (Appendix li) 129 Boundaries (see map) 70 Clause as to Religion 71 Oath as to Supremacy Modified 72 Judicial Opinion on , , 74 M \ t h: 4 Table of Contents. CHAPTER IX. THK ACT OK SUPREMACY. Origin of Supremacy of the Crown in Matters of Religion 75-7<) How far introduced into Canida 76 The English Clergy and ihe Crown 77 Extent of the Act 78-71) Opinions of Coke and Hale 79 Magna Charta 79 Position of the Crown and the Cluirch 80 Heads of the Church 81 Two Heads for Canada 8*2 Royal Head disposed of in the time of Bishop I'lcssis 82 CtlAPTER X. . ^^. ') ■ TEKRITOHY WITHIN THK ACT AND THK THKATY Ancient Diocese of Quebec S.S Portion now in the U. S S.S The Diocese and the Cuarantees 84-8') Old Treaties, Islands, Capa Breton, St. John, & ; 85-87 Territory within the Treaty . . 87 Territory within the Act, 1774 8S Difference j between] the Act and the Treaty as to Religious Freedom S!) Offence given by Quebec Act 89-HO 4 CHAPTER Xr. 1' I THE CHURCH UNDER EARLY BRITISH RILE. The First Fifty Years Contradictory Provisions 1759 to 1763 93 Attitude of Authorities Reference to State of Freedom by the Vicars General 95 Selection of Bishop State of the Law on Bishop Briand's Succession Royal Instructions as to Pritsts Affairs to 1791 ill Q'l -94 94 -91) 91 98 !•!! 100 D 75-7t) 7<; // 78-71) 79 7n 80 81 82 82 ■I Y s.s S:\ 84-85 85-87 . . 8/ 8S Religious S!) 89-!)0 ill 9'2 93-94 94 95-!ll3 97 9S 'to 100 Tabic of Contents. CHAPTER XII. THK CUtTRCJI UN1»FK KARLY URITlSll RULK. Act of 1791 1^2 Protestant (-hurch Provided For 102 Secretary Ryland 102 Bishop Plessis ■ • • 103 State of Clergy in 1801 103 Scandals of the Time 104 Projects for Religioc • • 105 The Bishop Recognized by Executive Council. . 106 Negotiations in England 106-7 War of 1812— Offer to the Bishop 108 The Bishop and (Jovernor Craig 109-110 Sir George Prevost 1 1 ' Bishop's Position, End of the Question of Supremacy 114 Instances where the Crown recognized Papal Supremacy 115 CHAPTER XIII. THE CANADAS AM) TllK bOMTNIOX. Changes Political 116 Newfoundland 117 New Dominion— 1791, 1840, 1867 117*' Division of Quebec Diocese 118 Ecclesiastical Divisions 119 Hierarchy in Canada 120 ;1 't> 6 APPEN DIX. i '■ ! I m ■ fl f|!! *-' I ^ A. — The Parliament of Pai:is. Di, Maisthk 12] B.— Speeches on the Qufi5E(; Bill im the Knclish Pakll\ment, 1774 12;^ C— The Chukch in Ontaiuo 12!' Chevalier MacDonell ; /'eminisanrrs oi Mishop yidc})one\\. 12!) The Clergy Reserves 12!' The Anglican Church not Kstahlished by Law in Ontario. 130 Tithes in Upper Canada 1 .'K) Early Missions 130 Priests up to 181S 131 " U. C. a Vicariate Apostolic in 1 SI 9 131 Bishop MacDonell in 1S20 131 Diocese of Kingston in 1 826 131 Priests in 1830 35 132 Diocese of Toronto, 1841 133 Ottawa, 1848 13.! Hamilton, 1856 133 Sandwich (London), 1856 133 Toronto, Archdiocese ; 1870 133 Vicariate of Northern Canada, 1874 , . 133 Diocese of Peterborough, 1882 13.3 Vicariate of Pontiac, 1882... 133 Archdiocese of Ottawa, 1886 13.! Archdiocese of Kingston, ISSO 13,'! Diocese of Alexandria, 18J»0 133-4 List of Deceased Prelates 1 33 4 Names of Present Prelates 1 34 List of Ontario Clergymen and Laymen honored in Rome. 134 tW N O 1^ A N D A The map on the tirat page is drawn fn in the boundaries given in tile Quebec Act. The northern and north-eastern limits are yet Ondefermined. When on page 71 it ia stated that the ohl Province of Quebec Included part of Manitoba, that was written at a time when the boundaries of Manitoba extended eastward bej ond their present limits. The word "recogni/.cd" in the last line of page 10 should be ** preconized" as it stands in the Qxinrto-hj. The note to page 120 has "Cornwall" as one of the sees of Eastern Ontario. This has since been announced as Alexandria. Some recent writers who ought to know better, talk of the " con- quest" of Canada — meaning thert by that Lanada was conquered by England and not cdcd to that power, in 17()3. The correct statement fil this : That there was a con(|uest of Quebec and Montreal in which Ihese towns capitulated ; but under the capitulations it was unknown ind undetermined to ^\hich power Canada should belong ultimately. (Seepage "),'?. ) After three years barter and delay, the English and French agreed on the division they were to make in America, and Canada fell to the English the French making it over by a treaty of Oession. That treaty is like a deed of grant whereby one landowner conveys property to another ; a treaty is no more necessary to a con- quest, or usual with it, than is a written transfer wi h goods taken by a lighwayman. There was a coc(juest of Canada Init it was terminated by a treaty of cession. (See articles on Treaties by the present il^riter in the American Cathol'tc (^itartcr/}/ Iii;ri<'W, July, 1887.) I IT r."3awr 'f? ■T.~fi-:.,-~- - T,"; .y ".. e: 'Ik! 11 4 i . » ^'j;. " One great fact stands out conspicuously in Canadian history — the Church of Rome. More even than the royal power she shaped the character and the destinies of the colony. She was its nurse and almost its mother ; and way- ward and headstrong as it was, it never hroke the ties of faith that held it to her. These ties formed, under the old regime, the only vital co-herence in the population. The royal gov- ernment was transient. The English conquest shattered the whole apparatus of civil admin- istration at a blow, but it left her i itouched. Governors, intcndants, councils and command- ants, all were gone, the principal seignors tied the colony, and a people who had never learned to control themselves or help themselves, were suddenly left to their own devices. Confusion, if not anarchy, would have followed but for the parish priests, ,vho, in a character of double paternity, half spiritual and half temporal, became more than ever the guardians of order throughout Canada."— Far kman. tli .A^ ESSAYS ox IHE CHURCH IN CANADA. ;* '$ $ CHAPTER I. I N T R O D U C T U Y Xiitention and scope uf these Essays^ as written in 1SS3-8, for the Amirican Catholic Quarterly Review. T the cUstinguished company assembled at Toronto last autumn in honor of Archbishop Lynch, many of the ,^\^ readers cf this Rkvikw who were present and heard the Ipeeches will have remembered with what pardonable pride e venerable prelate from C^uebec, Archbishop Taschereau, ferred to the ancient boundaries of his diocese ; to the time #hen his predecessors had jurisdiction not only over the pro- y^nce of his host, but westward to the valleys of the Ohio and |e Mississippi." No one better than the illustrious speaker W .Th "This was written in 18S6. Since that time Archbishop Lynch has passed away the See of Toronto is now filled by the Most Reverend John VValsb, D.D , lerly Bishop of London, Canada, and a distinfcrviished cuntributor cf the Qmtr- y Revieiv. The Archbieliop of c^uebec is now Cardinal Taachereau. 'I r i I ! 'I in M 1 1 1 10 Essays on the could have depicted the time when, in Canada, a long line of bishops traced the outlines of a great cross on this Continent, at once the symbol and limits of their jurisdiction, connecting the Atlantic with the Rocky .^Fountains, intersected by a belt of territory extending from Hudson's Bay to the waters of thr Gul? of Mexico. This was the diocese of Quebec not only under the old B>ench regime, but for many years after the cession of Canada to England in 1763 — up, in fact, to the formation of the United States some years later. The early American Church, not owing allegiance to the French or Canadian bishops, comprised what was comparatively a small atrip of Atlantic seaboard, with France to the north and west and Spain to the south. Probably the moderation of the speaker had been somewhat suggested by the cosoaopolitan character of the as3emV>ly, fearing lest some representative of the Mexican (Jhurch ra'ght have arisen and asserted his claim, if not to the larger portioa of tho Contiuent, at least fore stalling Quebec in priority by a good century and a quarter. Cone id'ing this, there yet remained a respectable antiquity to Bishop Laval and his successors, and a jurisdiction of territory that now covers nearly a dozen ecclesiastical provinces. But beyond this there are some unique things about thr Church in Canada. We had something resembling Church establishmant prior to the cession, and we have had since the cession an attempted establishment, so to speak, under British law. Our bishops in French times were the choice of the king, and the diocese, convents and colleges were established by royal patent. In early English rule, since the cession, tht King of England has been consulted in the choice of bishops and the Downing Street authorities have time and agaii signified their disapproval or acceptance of nominees to tht episcopal see of Quebec before they were recognized at Rome. ii * i Church in C(Uiaila. u long line of ,g Continent, 1, connecting ;ed by a belt waters of the bee not only ars after the fact, to the '. The early le French or lively a small )rth and west ration of the cosoaopolitan resentative of ted his claim, at least fore id a (jiuarter. 3 antiquity to on of territory vinces. in2S about th» ibling Church had since the under British choice of th( re established le cession, tht ice of bishops ue and agaii )minees to the lized at Rome, In truth, we have had the representative of the Grown trying, Iby every means, to force the Church under the law, so that not 5Dnly the bishop but every aire should seem to be appointed by -?the king's most excellent majesty. In former days, in Eng- >|and, a Catholic was thought to be good enough to be head of the Protestant Church; and as it was apoDr rule that worked t>nly one way, the flexibility of the constitution was thought to be surticlent to enable a Protestant king in return to become the head of the Catholic Church, at least good enougli for the Church in a colony. We have had Protestant legal luminaries amongst us, at one titne arguing that Roman Catholics in Quebec or Lower Canada had no rights whatever, as compared with the Church of England, and at another arguing that the Catholic Church is the only Church there established by law. We have seen the one see of Quebec occupied by two titular Bishops — a Catholic and an Anglican — and the latter forced to give way. Learned judges and attorney generals have Wasted their time drafting conunissions for Catholic bishops to be licensed as Chief Ecclesiastical Superintendents of the Church of Rome, with irremovable cun's and state-erected jparishes ; and afterwards we have seen these otUcials sit 1*' cheek by jowl," will the s'ilf-sarae superintendents in the legislative councils of the province, not as superintendents t)ut as recognized bishops of this favoied Church. And to this day, in the Province of Quebec, the parish, so erected by |he Bishop, is equally as well known as is the township or county or ward under its municipal law, and the curi' and i|hurch wardens are recognized in the public law of the land, ^he law apportions the tithes and its officers collect them. |pn the other hand, there is also on record within this country pie refusal by Protestant rulers to grant Wesleyan Methodists pny sort of legal recognition for their ministers, unless under m security of two hundred pounds sterling and the appearance 12 Essays on the •V of seven respectable members testifying before justices of the quarter sessions as to the genuineness of the minister in ques- tion, and the additional indignity of a violent protest against even this concession by a Protestant chief justice.* We have had the Church of England established by law in one province, Nova Scotia, and generally the attempted disre- gard everywhere of all who did not belong to that church. We have examples of a Catholic being in the position of O'Connell as to taking his seat in the Commons. We have the sad story of the Acadians and the persecutions of religious, and by one of those curious retributions by which Providence makes a fool of people, we have a small province, into which no Catholic was allowed to emigrate, now numbering more Catholics than Protestants. 4 I In our chief Protestant Province of Ontario we have had a committee of the legislature report that the Church of Eng- land is not the church by law established in Canada, and that no prayers from its chaplain would be tolerated. We havf' had govornments make a choice of religions, and find them approving of four — the Catholic, the Anglican, the I'resby terian, and the Methodist — and following the example in Ireland of giving the most assistance where it was least needed. We have had, however, within the last sixty years, a Catholic bishop and his clergy supported largely out of th( public chest. In this same province we can turn up the estimates in blue books and find pounds upon pounds paid t ( * III order to show what a beautiful example thisjudix ial dijfnitarv hcqueatht 1 to his posterity, it is related that when the accounts of the Jesuits' estates wtn examined by the House of Assembly in Lower Canada it was found that one of tin Church of Eiif,'land parsons, residing in Quebec, was in the habit of annually drawing; a large income from the s hool funds on pretence of being " Chaplain to the Jesuits. ' *' The Jesuits," says Wm Lyon Mackenzie, who is authority for this story, " had bet n all dead many years before, and, besides, they were Roman Catholics. The parson ■ name was Sewell, a son of Jonathan, the Chief Justice." f I Church in Canada. 13 ices of the ter in quea- test against r d by law in opted disre- bat church, position of We have of religioug, Providence , into which bering more ve have had irch of Eog- da, and that We have I find them the Tresby example in it was least sixty years, y out of th( urn up the pounds paid itary hc<|ueatln i itits' estates wci' 1 that ono of tin annually drawiri;: n to the Jesuits. ' story, " had bet ii (3. The parson ! •out of the public taxes for the building and repairing of Catholic churches. We have separate schools, and we have had large sums paid annually in this same Protestant province for the support of Catholic colleges. We have had tithes, as they still have them in Quebec. Here, too, may be found the name of a legislative councillor who was an Honorable and Right Reverend gentleman — the first Roman Catholic Bishop of Upper Canada — in receipt of a considerable pension from the state and of complimentary notices for his loyalty from .'the Prince Regent. We have had riots and mobs attacking processions, and we have in return a Protestant city turn out to honor its Archbishop, and the vice-regal, provincial, and civic dignitaries vieing with one another to honor this same rather outspoken churchman. There is, in fine, in Canada, an immense territory, with every assistance of natuie, for a great nation, with the only serious drawback of a lack of anything like a proportionate population. There is need of fifty millions of people, but, in the meantime, things go on very well with a tenth of that number, one-half of whom are Catholics, holding their own fairly well. The Catholics believe that the form of civil government in Canada is one of the best in the world, and that the Church is as free and prosperous as the Church militant can expect to be. Whoever undertakes to write the history of the Catholic Church for our Ilnglish-speaking Catholics will find plenty of material at hand, but the reader must not expert to find in these hurried essays any attempt in that direction. What is noted down here the historian may use as far as it goes, and ^n the absence of history the general reader may find himself interested, and it is to be hoped instructed also, by it. The l&biect here in view is to take into consideration certain ques- ibions aflfecting the Catholic Church in Canada and discuss them Ill 1 1 It li . !f . f r I .\ im y 11 J^ssdijs on the in the light of authentic hifitory. We hoar a groat deal now a-days about Ultrarnou'anca and ffallicans, about the Treaty of Paris and the Quebec Act, the Supremacy of the Crown of England, about Establibhrd Churches and the theories of n State Church, Whatever amount of information there may be needed or cared about by (>atliolic8 or by the Catholic Church on these questions need not be hero discussed ; one thing is certain that nonCatholic writers and the secular press pretty generally are misinformed about tliem. The Catholi( Church is its own witness and does not stand in need of secular history, but there are times when it is convenient and usefnl for Catholic subjects and citizens to be rightly ae(]uainted with those troublous periods of history wherein the Church or its local representatives are important factors. The history of the (^buvch in Canada illustrates what Doctor Brownson has well said of modern history in general, that when full histofica! truth comes to be told it will bo altogether more favorable to the defenders of the Catholic cause than they have dared to believe. It is to such periods in the history of this country that the reader's attention is here directed ; but :n order to understand them intelligently something must first of all bi said in reference to the relation which the Catholic Church holds in every country towards the civil ttate, and also the condition of established or national or local churches under the civil authority around and above them. ^ it doal now- the Treaty ne Crown of heoriea of n 1 there may the Catholir scussed ; one secular press rho Catholi. ed of secular t and uaefnl ^ accjuaintec't [ the Church The liistory t5rownson has- full historical favorable to ave dared to this country : :n order to irst of all ho holic Churcli and also the urches under CHAPTER II. Tilt Cliurch Cnthulic and Rinnan. The Eitojdkal immorialc Dei. Christendom. The CaOtoIic Church in not and cannot be *^e.stahlished /»!/ laiv' in any pxrticular cunntry. I* I T may seem unexpected that the subject of Establishments should have any special connection with a consideration of the ''iirch in Canada. Such, however, will be found to ba the fact — indeed, to a thorough understanding of our Subject, reference must be had to what was in reality a State Establishment in Kngland, as well as to what was believed to be a State or National Church of France. At the risk of being tedious, it may, perhaps, be desirable to examine briefly bow far the term " establishment" is applicable and appro- priate to churches generally. A misconception in regard to this and some cognate matters has not only engendered a considerable iiuiount of bad feeling in this country, but has given rise to prejudices and opinions which are positively unjust and unfounded, so far as Catholics are concerned. Blere individual opinion might go, as it has largely gone, for jacthing. But it is otherwise with judicial determination. 3?he judges of the judicial committee of the Privy ('ouncil In England, having before them every day questions bearing ^n their own State Church, may very naturally import cor- fesponding impressions into the consideration of a case wherein the Catholic Church may be represented to be a State Church, ihey have assumed for example, that during the French" rule ii 16 Essays on the nn\ ;l M ' I ■Mi 1=- in Canada the Catholic Ohurch was established by law; and that since 1763, when the country passed into the hands of the English, though it may not have been an establishment •'in the full sense of the term, it nevertheless continued to be a Church recognized by the State." It was one, therefore) over which the State could exercise some control. An estab- lishment for non-Oatholics generally is an institution over which the State presides, over which there might be a minister of public worship; and it presupposes a condition of things wherein the law could put an end to the establishment or to the parliamentary religion, just as the law created it. "The Anglican theologians," says De Maistre, "often call their Ohurch the Establishment, without perceiving that t'iis single word annuls their religion." The word in its usual accepta- tion is not used by Catholic writers regarding the Catholic Church. The popular view of a State establishment becomes the more important to correct, inasmuch as one hears a good deal of a French National Church- '^e "liberties" of the Gallican Church — the right to appeal from an ecclesiastical to a lay tribunal, commonly called the aj>pd comme (Tabus, and other matters now of some antiquity. Several industrious locai writers, setting out with conclusions and adducing only such evidence as went in support of them, have discovered a Na- tional Catholic Church in Canada — an Established Church — a Churcli with the Gallican liberties (so they are called) of the Church of France, a Royal as opposed to a Papal^ supremacy: and with much bewailing these writers have adverted to the Ultramontane Church of the Vatican Council, under which for the first time Canada was brought under Rome, and the beloved national element put an end to. It is not likely that these gentlemen will change their opinions, even when these mil kn the be "ef the al^ Oai XI Va cen moi no fOQ] soil tnor Con refe Ifttii exte in a acco shov time to b Chui divic viz, divir in it restr by law; and the hands of istabliahment continued to ae, therefore, An estab- bitution over be a minister ion of things shment or to ed it. "The 3n call their at t'iis single usual accepta- the Catholic becomes the J a good deal the Gallican ical to a lay us, and other ustrious local ing only such ;overed a Na- ed Church — a ailed) of the ,1 supremacy; verted to the under which ome, and the .ot likely that n when these Church In Canada. 17 H^conceptions are corrected; but it is due to those desiring to ||iow the real state of affairs to have the truth put before ^em. The Catholic Church is not, and was not, and cannot bi a national church in Canada or elsewhere; it cannot be "Established" as is the church familiar to their lordships of ^ Pi^y Council; the supremacy of the Church is and has ilN^^ays been that of the Pope of Rome; and, finally, the ,nadian Church was as ultramontane in the time of Xouis ilV., and of the Popes who opposed him, as it was after the Vlitican Council. It must needs be repeated very often in Olfrtain quarters that every Catholic is, so to speak, an ultra- nptontane Catholic, and that whoever is not ultramontane is no Catholic. , , The teaching of the Catholic Church on what lies at the ftittndation o* this question of establishments may be found lei out with great clearness in the famous Encyclical Letter, Im- mifrtale Dei,oi His Holiness Pope Leo XIII., on "The Christian OcBQstitution of States," dated the Ist November, 1S*B5. After referring to the office of the Church in "watching and legis- ^iling for all that concerns religion, of teaching all nations, of extending as far as may be the borders of Christianity, and, in a word, of administering its affairs without let or hindrance, according to its own judgment," the Holy Father proceeds to show that the Church always claimed this authority from the titne the Apostles maintained that God rather than man was to be obeyed. The Catholic belief on the relations of the Church and the State is thus expressed: "God, then, has di^ded the charge of the human race between two powers, viz, the ecclesiastical and the civil, the one being set over divine and the other over human things. Each is the greatest in its own kind; each has certain limits within which it is rortricted, and there is, we may say, a world marked off as a 18 Essays on the I .,r H ! ! 4iii' field for the proper action of each. . . . 80, then, then wfai must netds be a certain orderly connection between these twc ette powers, which may not unfairly be compared to the iinior with which suul and body are united in man. What tin nature of thai union is, Wnd what its extent, cannot otli( r wise be determined than, as we have said, by having regan to the nature of each power, and by taking account of tli relative excellence and nobility of their ends; for one of thi 11 has for its proximate and chief aim the care of the goods 0: the world, tbe other the attainment of the goods of heavn that are eternal. Whatsoever, therefore, in human affairs i in a manner sacred ; whatsoever pertains to the salvation c: souls, or the worship of (iod, whether it be so in its ow: nature, or, on the other hand, is held to be so for the sake c the end to which it is referred, all this is in the power, ar.^ subject to the free disposition, of the Church; but all otli ;g| things which are embraced in the civil and political order a'-^Mi rightly subject to the civil authority, since Jesus Christ lu*^ commanded that what is Cirmr's is to be paid to Cn'sar, ai:| what is God's to God." iabe a 01 tbe atid liu llibai If this ecclesiastical power is entrusted to the Cathi Ohui timat Church, and if she has charge of divine things as fully as t** P° civil power has charge of human things, it follows that t Church has as good a claim — indeed the same claim — to tn{|^» possession of her power as the State can show for its 0*2^^1^ Whatever the extent of that power may be, it cannot, on '^nf^ one hand, be lawfully abridged by a hostile civil power, or, bered the other hand, be confirmed or more fully " established \% {\^^ the action of a friendly civil power. The Church is entitj^ggci to this power, not by virtue of a mere human law, but neat dependently of any human law, and if needs be, in spite ofjve^ l The Catholic Church, therefore, in a higher sense than that|iy||^( Chiircli In Camidd. 19 ;o then, then lij|ich the word is generally used, is "estalhished," but not 'een these twc established by any civil or human authority. to the unior ^^^ Catholic Church never was and never can be "estab- ia'hed by law," in the accepted meaning of the phrase, because* What th( . cannot otlur a Church so established comes to m?un one that depends on :or one of tin f the goods oods of heav uman alVairs he salvation having reg.vr ^ j^^^ ^^ some particular State or countrv for its existence account o ^ : ^^^ support. It, therefore, at the best, can be no more than a State or National Church. It cannot be catholic — it cannot b6 universal. As it may be established in a dozen different cauntries, it will necessarily be rcijuired to conform to the civil or municipal law of the land in every one of these; and, therefore, it is vain to expect that there should be unity, so in Its jjigause there never was, and never will be, two countries in ( for the sa '« '^^ world governed by the same local laws. If the civil or the power, '^ ^gi^pQ^al atFairs of the whole world were entrusted to some ^j out a o ^^^ C;e?ar Augustus, and if the subjects of his authority itical order •' „„d^rtook, in union with him, to "establish" the Catholic esus Onris ^Jju^ch by means of an imperial edict, or act of parliament, i to L ie^ar, -^^^ vi'ould mean, and mean only, the recognition of the Church to have charL,^e over spiritual atlairs in its own legi- ,, n i.i>. tifljate sphere. This would still fall short of an establishment to the LatlK f^ - ,, ,airopularlv understocd. s as fully as i.--^ ^ "^ follows that t^H^The theory of eatablished churches," says Cardinal Man- e claim — to ^ot%, "demands an ecclesiastical supremacy in the civil power. 10 w for its <^^Th(B two come and go together; and when the ecclesiastical .t cannot, on tjti|Mremacy is declining, the days of establishments are num- A'il power, or, bewd A church that consents to be established ' established it 4he cost of violating its divine constitution and its own hurch is entitij^ip^cience, is not a church, but an apostasy. No establish- nan law, but ai^lt by State laws and State support has ever been or can be, in spite oijvif be accepted by the Catholic Cliurch at the cost of its own ense than thatjiy^e constitution. The Catholic Church can stand, and has / fll'l . 5; 20 Essays on the Church in Canada. stood, for centuries in relations of amity with the civil powers of the world; but in the sense of estiblishments here under- stood, the Catholic ('hurch has never been established in any kingdom upon earth." With these extracts it will not be further necessary to enter into the very diilicult and debatable ground of the relations between the Catholic Church and the Civil State. It will be admitted by all that the Catholic Church has to deal with all nations, and further that if she were obliged to submit in ecclesiastical matters to each one of them she would cease to be catholic or universal. She would become a national or state organization. The Church stands towards the civil powers in Canada just as she does in other countries. The same supremacy of Rome is acknowledged by the Church here as is acknowledged in France, or Austria, or England, or the Americas, or Australia. This is Ultramontanism''' — ^a term which arose in France and used by those who wished the Church to be governed by the State. F'or Catholics to be considered Ultramontane is no more than saying that they acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope of Rome. Not to be Ultramontane is to give up the Papal and take to tha State supremacy. This is the position of every national church, whether Anglican or Gallican. It would seem superfluous to say that the Church Roman and Catholic could be anything else but Ultramontane. *" Ultramontane" literally means "beyond the mountains"— that i? as the term arose, beyond the Alps— the supremacy of the Fren h Church yiviui^ rise to the expression. Ultramarine would have been more corrt'ct and <|uite as appropriate and ne( essary as to the continents other than Europe. When the ixprcssion is understood it will be seen how supcrttuons it is to apply it to Catholics in Canada, or in any other conntry. )wers nder- i any ry to )f the State. deal lubmit 1 cease nal or civil The ]!hurch agland, ixn"^' — ^a wished ;s Xi to be they L to be ,3 State church, lous to ly thing the term so to the propriatc resHion if^ Canada, or f CHAPTER III. The English National Church. ^/'INCE the breaking up of Christendom in the sixtpenth century, it is manifest that the phrase, "established by law," as applied to churches, must be restricted to national churches, or to such as are fostered or controlled by the will of any one sovereign people. But there is no longer Christendom. When there was such, the Roman Pontiff was its head and the Catholic Church was its recognized Church. The temporal authority in each country naturally wanted, and sometimes imperatively required, particular regulations; aud in this regard the Chief of Christendom, for the sake of, peace, or for other good and sufficient reasons, made special arrangements with that country — made concordats. In the Encyclical on Civil Government already referred to, it is said that "sometimes, however, circumstances arise when another method of concord is available for peace and liberty; we mean when princes and the Roman Pontiff come to an understanding concerning any particular matter. In such circumstances the rimrch gives singular proof of her maternal good-will, and is accustomed to exhibit the highest possible degree of generosity and indulgence." Protestant writers, to whom the idea of a universal authority in spirituals, or a Catholic C'hurch, is objectionable as affording a twofold argument against themselves and in favor of Catholicity (so to call the Church), have readily taken up the idea of national churches, either as the mere creation of the State, as Hubbes in his " Leviathan" has it, 22 Essavs on the m or as an organization fur spiritual affairs co-existent with the civil government of the people, as is the more recent and less humiliating view. The theory, however, puts a church on a very temporal and precarious foothold and entirely at the mercy of the populace, who, as once before, might cry out for Barabbas ; because the people, the king and Parliament in England, for example, could repeal the Act of Supremacy, could declare the religion of the State to be anything or nothing, and wipe out the Church it had established ; and do all that in a regular and constitutional way. Indeed, the days of tho Church of England as a legal establishment are likely to be numbered, and may from constitutional, revolutionary, or external causes be completely annihilated. From a regular and compact Cnristendom we find there have been experiments with national churches; and now there is but one remaining step, from a few straggling and debilitated establishments to no church at all. In the sixteenth century the English people achieved a sep- aration from Christendom and established a nationl church. It was the ingenious theorv of some of her historians that this national chur-'h is the original and genuine Ecclcsia Angiuana., the Church whose rights were maintained inviolate in Magna Charta, and concerning which the repeated statutes of the Plant agenets form no inconsiderable portion of the legislation of the kingdom. ■' Uut it is undisputed that the This theory sits uneasily on ttie " Declaration of the Homily a^'ainst Peril of Idolatry," put forth liy authority of C^iiPeii Klizal)utli in ir^i'i, and approvod of hy the iifith Article of tiio Chnrcli o( Knuland. This destrilies the Church ai fallen ir)fo the "pit of damnahle idolatry, in wliich all the world, a< it were drowned, rrave coiistitutional writer, says: "Our ance^' . > • Lertainly Roman Catholics," and tluiu he <;oes on to resist the imputa- tiv'i. 'j' V;' "Papists." If they were not " Papists, ' it is ditti ult to under- i> f respectinfr appeals to Rome, or Henry Vlll.'s (jnurrel with the Pope. r."", it . it' '.he British (Quarterly li'evictv for .January last, a writer on this 8vti;-\- . • " ' V" ..le^er else the Uefonnation did, it tfave to the sovereijfn that tu- Church in Canada. 23 Roman Pontiff had great control over the Church, that up to the time of Henry VIII. an appeal lay to him; that he had the right of nominations to vacant sees and to the heads of monastic institutions; that he confirmed all appointments of archbishops and bishops; and that a rupture between him and the king was the cause of the establishment of a national church of England and a separation from the Universal Church of Rome. What took place in England is not pertinent to our subject, except in so far as reference is made to English church estab- lishments. The abolition of appeals which Henry VIII. wanted, and the separation which finally resulted from his quarrel with the I 'ope, turned out to be two very different and, perhaps, unexpected things. But it is quite certain that other monarchs in Europe before and after his time were equally desirous, if not to nationaHze the Church, at least to control it as much as possible. The history of Western Europe at the period we refer to is largely taken up with kingly encroachments on the power, spiritual and temporal, of the Papacy. Germany, Spain, France, might be considered as well as England. In the case of France, for example, we find concordats and pragmatic sanctions between the Roman Pontiffs and the kings, in order to come to an understanding on the particular matters of their nation. To say that because of these arrangements France or Spain had set up a national church, as happened in England, and had become independent of the Holy See, is what cannot be justified. Yet that lies at the foundation of an error within the consideration of so modern a subject as the status of the Church in Canada. The learned read'^r will withhold his decision as to the relevancy V-.'NJ l>reiniicy over the Church which was formerly held hy the Bishop of Rome. The bare fact from which we must s'art is, thit the IJishop ot Home liefore the He- formation was supreme head of the Church in England." 24 Essays on the 1 of some things here set out, which arc well known, in order that the subject may be fully grasped. We hear of the Gallican Church, the liberties of the Gallican Church, and sometimes of the Gallican school of theology, until it is prr-vUeled with the Anglican Church ; and, finally, a grave bench of judges think that there is something in it, and what is more important, a grave question came near being decided in reference to all this. Writers in Canada have espoused this national church, and have given day and document for the transition from the Gallican Church of the past to the Ultramontane Church of our own day. It is difficult to conceive nowadays the position the Catholic Church occupied in England in very early times, or even in times immediately prior to Henry VI 1 1. The bishop's see at first was commensurate with a kingdom, the parish with a township. The bishop had then his own courts, and every- thing relating to the care of souls was to be adjudged therein. The law of thfse courts was the canon and episcopal law; and when the bishop excommunicated, the royal authority gave its full support towards carrying out the sentence.''' The ecclesi- astical courts decided all questions of wills, of legitimacy, and of marriage, and came very near absorbing all the litigation concerning contracts. Any man who could read might claim to have his case handed over to the ordinary — the Bishop — and so claim his *' benefit of clergy." The wonder was that the king's court had anything to do. The king's council, or ultimate court, had no jurisdiction by a final appeal over these ecclesiastical courts ; but an appeal, however, lay to Rome. Not only were the clergy possessed of their separate judica- tures, in which they administered their own law, but they * As long as the Convocation of the Established Church in the time of Henry VIII. h d any power, thin^'i were not done so decently. Tlie bishops cmild ini;»rison on the mere cliart^e of hi'resy, and when the cause came to trial the proceedings were in accordance with neither law nor justice. •V. Church in Canada. is formed a separate order in the State. The Lords Spiritual were selected from the ecclesiastical chiefs ; they had their convocations in York and Canterbury, sittin<^ regularly at the same time as the Commons, and being summoned with them. They, it is said, disputed the supreme legislative authority with the civil power in the State. They were in a majority among the peers, they had immense wealth, they were exempt from taxation. So far, then, from being a church "established by law," the Citholic Church in England was a separate, in- dependent power in the State ; and this position was accorded it by the oaths of kings, and by repeated acts of Parliament. In upwards of twenty statutes, during the Norman and English periods, the "liberties" of the Church always appear. It claimed the sole right to define doctrines of faith and morals and to allix the limits of its own jurisdiction in that sphere. It taught that the civil power was to be obeyed in its own sphere; it v/as in union with, and subject to, the Popes of Rome. This was the Church of England in Catholic times, is the Church of the Vatican Council, and is the teach- ing of the l^ncyclical of Pope Leo XIII. on the relation of the State to the Church at this very hour. This is uUramontan- ism, and it is, and has been always, opposed to national churcht^s or mere State establishments. " The Church in England, in Catholic times, was not established," says Cardinal Manning, " and when an establishment appeared it ceased being Catholic." But Henry VIII. and his successors changed all this. The ecclesiastic J.1 courts are no more ; their particular law is good only so far as it is not repugnant to the law of the land. Wills and matters testamentary are now looked after in the Probate Division of the High Court of .1 ustice. Con- vocation is only a meeting for an adjournment. ISome spiritual peers there are, l:)ut they sit as barons, the lowest of the five orders of nobility in the United Kingdom. The national 3 r ■' % Essfffjs on the & m r' 1 church is not relatively to the State what the Church was in former times. Questions for the care of souls are now disposed of by lay, and not by ecclesiastical tribunals. The Church of itself has no authority. The judicial committee of the Frivy Council now decides what is, or what is not, heresy as opposed to the Thirty-nine Artices ; and they are tht; judges of the legal tests of doctrine in the Church of England. These articles are rendered law and good religion by the statute 13 ElizaVjeth. And so the same judicial committee has decided on the canonicity of the books of the Old and the New Testament, the " real, active, objective presence" in the communion, as also the state of depravity sullicient to disentitle a communicant from ret eiving the communion. The manner of baptism has been defined by law, as well as all that is legal and salutary to believe so far as regards the same sacrament. The communion table, the altar, the crosses, the candlesticks, the lighted candles, the vestments, the bread for the service, and many other kindred matters, are judicially laid down in English law as minutely as is the law of landlord and tenant. The legal posture of the clergyman has l)een carefully regulated. For instance, it has been held illegal for him in the celebration of the communion to elevate the elements above his head, or to mix water with the wine, or to use incense, or to kneel or prostrate himself before the elements. To bow one knee has been held a breach of the discipline of the Church ; as also a practice of the minister to stand with his back to the people.* Decisions of this kind are not confined to the ones so well known as the JMaconochie case, but numbers like it can be turned up in the law reports. This will give a fair idea of what is meant by a Protestant church as established by law in England. *SeeMoort''s Privij Council Cases, New Series, vol. vii , page 167; vol. ii., page 37 ; vol. XV., page 1 ; Weekly Reporttr, vol. xx., page 804 ; and JmLst, page 443. I I ciiapt[:r IV The so ndled French N(ttion(d ChurrJi —Thu (rallican Church, 1^ IV ) OW does this account of the Church of England as given ^ I in the last chapter compare with the Church of France — ^j the Gallican Church 1 Louis XIV., it ia true, had his t dillerences with the Popes, Init there was no such fatal quarrel with Rome as appears in English history. Halations, such as they were, often unsatisfactory to both parties, were main- tained between the head of the ( 'hurch and the head of the nation; but at no time did the parliaments or other civil tribunals profess to decide on the doctrine, the liturgy, or the discipline of the Church. The Catholic Church was no more an estal)lished church in France in the time of Louis XIV., than was the Catholic Church in England in the time of Edward IIL Let us see how far it can be called a national church. From the time that Valentinian commanded the Gallican Church to submit to the Pope, down to the famous Articles of 1G82, there is, on the face of French history, abundant evidence of the ultramontane or Papal, as opposed to the national or Gallican, character of the French Church. After she received the pallium from Piome, we have repeated pragmatic sanctions and concordats between the French kings and the Popes; for instance, the pragmatic sanction (now by many regarded as spurious) of Saint Louis in 12(38, that agreed on at Bourges in 1138 with Charles VII., the con- cordat of 1515 between Francis I. and Leo X,, abolishing this objectionable treaty with Charles VII. iSm u m-^ 28 Kssiijjs on the ;li; The (lallican ('hurch was, therefore, controlled to some extent by a power outsit!*' the French nation, and so was not national; it was ultramontane. I hese negotiations between France and the Holy See necessarily prosiune two things : lat — to ma lanj^uage not (|uite exact, but popular enou<^h to be undiifstood — tin; dependency of the French Church on the Roman; 2d, privilege's or concessions, liberties or slaveries, of the Fr(!nch Church, eilher towards the Roman Pontiff or towards th(( kin^. Fur the king, especially Louis XIV., used the in(lii(;nc(i of the I'ope a<^ainst the clergy, and availed himself of th<; clergy to make terms with the Pope. The French clergy were, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, in a peculiar position an regards the king and the royal treasury. They were possessed of considerable means, and aided the king very materially in liquidating the burthens of his kingdom. They were in a position to ask favors, and the king, having conceded some, was similarly in a position to comi'iand their suVtjection. *' It has always been a maxim of the French court," says Ranke, "that the papal power is to be restricted by ra<;ans of the French clergy, and that the clergy, on the other band, are to be kept in due limits l)y means of the papal power. But never did a prince hold his clergy in more absolute command than did Louis XIV. A spirit of submission without parallel is evinced in the addresses pre- sented to him by that body on solemn occasions. . . . And certainly the clergy of France did support thou king without scruple against the Pope. The declarations they published were from year to year increasingly decisive in favor of the royal authority. At length there assembled the Convocation of I()8l\ 'It was summoned and dissolved,' remarks the V^enetian ambassador, 'at the convenience of the king's min- isters, and was guided by their suggestions.' The four articles drawn up by this assembly have from that time been regarded S ■fc- Chnrch in Cannda. 29 1 as the manifcHto of tho (iallican iiiiinuniticg. It was th^ opinion of conteii'poraries that, ol(ljou;:;h Kruiue ini^^ht remain within the pale of the (Catholic Church, it jet stood on the threshold, in rt^adiness for stepping beyond it. The king exalted the propositions above named into u kind of 'Articles of Faith, 'a symbolical book. AH -chools w( re to be regulated in conformity with these precepts ; and no man could iittain to a degree, either in the judicial or theological faculties, who did not swear to maintain them. "But the Pope also was still possessed of a weapon. Tlie authors of this declaration — the memliers of this assembly — were promoted and preferred by tin; king before all other candidates for episcopal ( tHces ; but innocent refused to grant Ihera spiritual institution. "They might enjoy the revenues of those sees, but ordina- tion they did not receive; nor could they venture to exercise one spiritual act of the episcopate." The measures which Louis Xi\'. en)ployed to coerce the Pope are matters of general history, and are detailed by Hanke, Oerin, llohrbacher, and other liistorians, 'i'he king found it impolitic to have the Pope as his enemy, and jjlace the Church to which he himself and the Fnndi people were attached on tlie eve of what threatened to be a schism. Pope Innocent XI. remaii.ed finn, and so the king made a virtue out of liis necessities, and went to the other extreme by his hostility towprds the Huguenots. He withdrew from the position he had taken towards the i*ope. Ranke, after descriVnng the change in the king, and the political complications of Western Europe that seemed to have driven him to it, proceeds thus: .>f'*v !'■> 30 Essays on the '•It is true that when this result ensued, Innocent XI. was no longer in existence; but the first French embassador who appeared in Rome after his death, 10th of August, 1689> renounced the right of asylum ; the deportment of the king was altered ; he restored Avignon, and entered into ne- gotiations. " And that was all the more needful, since the new Pope, Alexander VIIL, however widely he may have departed from the austere example of his predecessor in other respects, ad- hered firmly to his principles as regarded the spiritual claims of the Church. Alexander proclaimed anew that the decrees of 1682 were vain and invalid, null and void, having no power to bind even when enforced by an oath. ' Day and night' he declares that he thought of them • with bitterness of heart, lifting his eyes to Heaven with tears and sighs.' "After the early death of Alexander VIII, the trench made all possible etlbrts to secure the choice of a Pontifl' disposed to measures of peace and conciliation ; a purpose that was indeed effected on the elevation of Antonio Pignatelli, who assumed the tiara with the name of Innocent Xtl., on the 12th of .July, IGiU. " But the Pope was not by any means more inclined to compromise the dignity of the Papal See than his predecessors ha<^ been ; neither did there exist any pressing motive for his so doing, since 1. uis XIV., was supplied with the most serious and perilous occupation by the arms of the allies. "The negotiations continued for two years. Innocent more than once rejected the formulas proposed to him by the clergy of France, and they were, in fact, compelled at length to declare that all measures discussed and resolved on, in the Church i}i Canada. 31 'i' assembly of 168'?, should be considered as not having]; been discussed or resolved on: 'Casting o irselves at the feet of your Holiness, we profess our unspeakable grief for what has been done.' It was not until they had made this unreserved recantation that Innocent acccrded them canonical institution. " Under these conditions only was peace restored. Louis XIV. wrote to the Pope that he retracted his edict relating to the four articles. Thus we perceive that the Roman See once more maintained her prerogatives, even though opposed by the most powerful of monarchs." Ranke does not in any way question the authenticity or effect of the retraction. He then proceeds : "The words of the king, in his letter to Innocent XII., dated Ver?aille?, September 14th, 1G03, are as follows : "'1 have given the orders needful to the etlect that those things should not have force which were contained in my edict of the 2'2d of March, 1()82, relating to the declaration of the clergy of France, and to which I was compelled by past events, but that it should ceaso to be observed.' In a letter of the 7th of July, 1713, that we lind in Artaud's "Histoin"' du Pope Pie VI].," 183(), tom. ii., p. 16, are the following words: 'It was falsely pretended to him [Clement XI. | that 1 have dis- sented from the engagement taken by the letter which I wrote to his predecessor; for I have not compelled anv man to maintain the propositions of the clergy of France against his wish; but I could not jtistly prevent any of my subjects from uttering and maintaining their opinions on a subject regarding which they are at liberty to adopt either one side or the other.'" This was the condition of Gallicanisir. in France when Canada was a French colony. The reader need not be de- '^n II 32 Essays on the tained with any account of the '* liberties" (or "slaveries," as Catholic writers call them) of the French Church. They seem, at this distance of time, to resolve themselves chiefly into an annihilation of the Papal authority and an exaltation of the claims of the national clergy. The articles of 1682, some think, were the mildest expression of these liberties ;■*■ others consider them as the extreme limit of the kingly encroach- ments. The tirst, second, and fourth relate to the Pope and the Councils, and do not concern the subject here in hand. The third article assumes that the Papacy is inferior to the Episcopacy, and in France is subject to the rules, manners, customs, and institutions of the country. This subjection would, therefore, entail such courtly rights and exactions as the right of presentation, the right of the r^'gale^ the appel comme d'abus, and such other infringements of ecclesiastical power as the Court or the parliaments delighted to exercise. In the wilderness along the St. Lawrenc(!, as Garneau in his history intimates, it would scarcely be expected that the courtly customs of the Galilean Church could have much application. The reader will appreciate, however, that in any discussion concerning the status of the Church in Canada, a reference to the Church of France may be most material. At the same time it is to be remembered that so far as " estab- lishments" ire concerned, the law of England is, that in any of her colonies the English Church is in the same situation as any other religious body. After a colony has received legislative institutions, the crown has no prerogative to effect the least control over the colonial church; the mother church forms no part of the colonial constitution; and the establishment is not in any way transplanted. The position of the Anglican church, in a British colony, is that of a ' This Hccins to have been the opinion of Dr. Brownson. Church in Canada. 33 voluntary association.* If this analogy were insisted upon in a case where the French Church was transferred into a colony of France, one would hear less of " establishments" and ••liberties" of the Catholic (."hurch in Canada. There are, therefore, fstablishraents and establishments. A purely civil law that controls the doctrine and the discipline of a church, and manages its affdirs just as it does the postal affairs or the customs of the kingdom, no doubt may establish a church or religion in a way that must be conceded to bo legal and, probably, constitutional ; but it is manifestly a ditFerent establishment from that of a church which has its own laws, its own courts, its own undisputed position as an integral part of the constitution ; and whose authority and jurisdiction, if not superior to the civil law, are coordinate with it, and admittedly supreme within its own sphere. There is also that milder and uncomplimentary form of establishment of which the civil authority says in effect : We will recognize such or such a church as the established church of this country; just as it might say, we will do business in financial matters with the First National Bank. One cannot help remarking that those who aided in breaking up Christendom have taken low ground for their religions; avoiding a universal head, recourse was at first had to a national or royal supremacy, and after that has been found a failure, every man is and has the right to be the head of his own church. If the right of private judgnu nt is good against the Pope, it ought to be good against the Privy Council. The historical fact is, that tin world within a very short period has seen a Christendom with one i-iternauonal head; then national churches with a royal supremacy; and now disesta'-lishmeut — *See Long v. Gray [Cape Town Hishopl, 1 Moore'8 Coses, N. H., 411 ; Colenso v. filadstone, 3 L. U, Eq., I; In re Bishop Natal, 2 Moore's Cases, N. S,, 116, decidinjf these points. 34 Essayii on the no church. " The royal supremacy," says Cardinal Manning in one of his most happy remarks on this subject, "has perished by the law of mortality, which consumes all earthly things." It failed in Ireland — penal laws could not enforce it ; in Scotland the whole people rose'against it. In Canada* after being shorn of many of its objectionable provisions, it was introduced by the Quebec Act of 1774. After several ineffectual attempts to enforce it, the provision passed through all possible stages of degradation ; it was overlooked and waived and ignored, and then finally relegated to the limbo of obsolete law. During British rule in Canada one thing is certain, that the Church of England never was, and is not now, an establishment by law. The Church of Rome, with its Papal supremacy, could not be expected to con6ne itself under a Royal supremacy ; it could not have acknowledged two in- consistent and irreconcilable authorities, and, therefore, it has not been an established church in Canada. It may well be the case that it is better known to the law of the land than any other church ; that its freedom is guaranteed bj* treaty and by statute ; and that the law of nations must be set at defiance before any abridgment of this freedom can be effected — a strong and indestructible bulwark against bigotry eman- ating from any quarter — but all this falls short of establishment even of the mild character alluded to. It is vastly better t^an an Establishment. i. I CHAPTER V. The Church in Canada under the French Bojime. HE Church under French rule must first of all be considered both with regard to the sequence of events and as throwing light on the state of affairs when this country passed into the hands of flKe English. It will be contended that it was no national or state church that formerly obtained in this country ; that there was no trans- planting of '* liberties" of the French Church ; and that from the historical evidences and legal state papers and other documents pertinent to the solution of these questions, it is impossible to arrive at any other conclusions. From the discovery of ('anada, or rather from the founda- tion of Quebec, the spiritual care of the French settlers and of the aborigines was entrusted to the Archbishop of Rouen. Quebec dates back to 1608, and is associated with the name of Champlain. Many other discoverers had touched at several points in the Gulf of St. L'lwrence from the time of Jacques Cartier over seventy years before. To Poutrincourt is ascribed the honor of bringing the first missionary, in 1610, to this shore. As appears by the ecclesiastical records in Quebec, on the 12th of June, 1611, two Jesuit Fathers arrived from France to begin the work of implanting the faith in the New World. One of these remained about two years, and then returned to France. His confrere, after thirty-five years of missionary life, ended his days peacefully with the people he had come to serve. Not alone, however, during all this time; wm m% V If' Hji' 36 Essays on the for in 1615, four Recollects reached Quebec, and every second or third year afterwards new missionaries of these orders reinforced thrir brethren, as death or other causes thinned their ranks. it' %. It- :,■ The tenth name on the list is .Jean de Brebo'uf, a martyr in 1640, While not a few are set down as "drov/ned" or "frozen," there are over twenty on the same glorious roll with this illustrious Jesuit. Liter, many are reported as lost — unheard of. In 1620 the Recollect convent was founded on the St. Croix River; the name was afterwards changed to St. Charles, and five y^ars later the Jesuit estaV^lishment of Notre Dame des Anges w^s iV -^ded. The year previous St. Joseph had been chosen patron .saint of the country. In 1639 the Ursulines and Hosp'.allers commenced their labors at Sillery. Within this period la tc be found the names of Lalemant and Breb(vuf, Maise, Jogues, and other missionaries. Shortly after, Ville Marie (Montreal) was founded, and churches were built there as in Quebec. The Sulpicians arrived, and with them M. de Queylus in his quality as Grand Vicar of the Archbishop of Rouen. In 165S, however, Mgr. de Laval was named Bishop of Petrjva /// ^ar/. injid.y and Vicar Apostolic of New France, and the Grand A'icar retired from the country.'' It was not until 1674 that he was named Bishop of Quebec and immediate suffragan of the The phrase )»i jhirtilm hift(leliu)» , as applied to a l)ishop, moans that, the bishop is coiiHecrated to a ^^•e wliidi foroierly existed, l)iit whicli has been, ciiiefly throuffh the devastations cf tlie followers of Malioniet, lost to (,'hristendoin. In Spain, Asia Minor, Ssria and Africa, nuniherles's churches had bet n devastated, and the bishops therein minpelled to wander from place lo place, ho|)in}^ one daj- to return to their widowed sees. This was tho cri^ n of the i)hrase ; hut in snore recent tiniea, before the creat'on of a see, or U>r other reas^ons, bishops were nanud t»i jMrtihus. From the year Ki'Jli tolSr>0(.'atholic affairs in (Jreat Britain w» recommittid to bishops so named. It was and is the case in various pans of the I'niteil States and Canada yet. My a decree of the Propaganda in 188-! the fotmula in }Hiriihus in- fidelinm vsaa abolished, and non-resident bishops are to be known as "titular" biehops of their sees. Sec Catholic Di-.tionary, Art. Birhop. church in Canada. 37 Holy See. This was by bull of Clement X., dated Ist of October of that year. During these fifty years it may be fairly argued that whatever principles of the French national church or of Gallicanism could be imported into New France might have been so imported ; that Quebec was ecclesiastically an outlying portion of the Archdiocese of Rouen, and that whatever that was, Quebec was. But now a bishop was to be appointed, and that was regarded then, as it may be now, the test ques- tion, or deciding whether Gallican or Ultramontane principles (go to call them) were to be transplanted into the French colony. On this important matter few writers will be more readily accepted, at all events by Protestants, than the historian Parkman. In his " French Regime," he thus narrates this crisis of ecclesiastical affairs : fc;J«'^ H.. v>nncli\ A. t See oritiinal in the <,)u(i)terly lievicir, .Inly, I.s8n, or in l>ontre and l.areau's History of the Law in <^neljec. I' i . ■ ''. .... ■ :kil 42 Essays on the C'xistonce and toleration, th(5 actual establishnicmt indfod, of the "lihortiofi" of tho (Jallican Church in Canada. IJut the govornor, M. do Boauharnois, took tlie most decidcid stand against the action of the intc^ndant, Dupiiy; he; annulled the obnoxi- as ordinance and had bis own decrees for their reversal executed with the aid of the military. Cardinal Fleury, at home, had procured the dismissal of Dupuy; and although the Governor tnay have acted in a high handed way, as Mr. Garnoau .says, tlie ordinance of the ITtli of September, an- nulling the proceedii)g8 of Dupuy, was contirmed by Maurepas, the H'rench Secretary of State. j\Ir. Garneau thinks that the governor tooks sides more strongly in favor of the clergy than ever his predecessor took against them. But nn(|ue"tionably it was a critical time in the history of the ( -hurch. Garneau's account is, to say the least, meagre, and not at all marked by the calmne.sH that should pervade the treatment of such deli- cate subjects amongst his countrymen. Mr. Doutre is forced to say; "The council accordingly found itself in opposition to the governor and to tlfe majority of the clergy. The immoral Louis XIV , for the sake of appearar ^es, made use of the Cardinals and gave to the clergy an immense intluence in the kingdom. The intendant Dupuy, seeing the council over- thrown, sent in his resignation in anticipation of his dismissal." This great and indi8{)utable fact remains. In 1728, in La Nouvello France, the declaration of IGS'J was expiessly referred to and relied upon in an ollicial State document; and subsequently, wirhin the same year, and as part of the same public affair, this document was olHcially, publicly, and with unusual notoriety, annulled and rendered void, The French authorities ap])roved of this course. The history of the declaration is in perfect accord with this view. It was never registered or put in force in Canada. ■ Church 'i}i 0(1)1(1(1(1. 43 This cannot be ditiputf'cl In tlie two larjj;e volumes compiled under the direction of the Parlininent of Canada, in IfSUl, no such registration can bo found ; nay more, no olVicial or oil er state paper from Krance has th»5 most remote reference to it. It can be pretty confidently asserted that no ollicial or other state pnper in Canada, except the one already referred to as *Mg been cancelled, is to be found. If not registered, then, according to the Kr(;nch law, it would be void. "It did not re(juire registering," says Mr. Doutre, 'because i^ did not emanate from the king." ft is true that the declaration did not emanate from the ly the Iciiriietl to •■xli hit pretty aecuniteiy the (iisc'ii>liiie of tin; first tliree ci.'iitiiries nf the (.'liiircii — proniiiiiioed sen- teiiueH of dispcsition against Itisliops wlio received tlieir Sei's IVoni princ<.'.s. The I fr: V ■■, !• II I (l*i 44 Essays on the m. m. pi m Bishop Laval was no Gallican, and was opposed to Gallican principles ; IJisliop iSaint Valier was necessarily something of a royalist, but was unable to nationalize the Church ; he could not even establish an irremovable cure. We have seen the defeat of Gallicanisin after his death — a defeat where success, if possible, was the most likely. During the episcopates of Mornay, Dosquet, and L'Aube-Riviere, there is no sign of any royal, or national, or Gallican tendency ; but we are told that the installation of the last bishop under the French re- gime established the most " incontestable proof of the recogni- tion of the four articles of IGSi'." The first bishop was con- fessedly not within these articles, as his installation was many years before they were drawn up — the last one, it seems, is the only one possible to be accounted as Gallican. Bishops in French times, and later under English sway, were royal counsellors as well as spiritual heads. They there- fore took an oath such as privy couusellors at this day take. If Bishop Pontbriaud, or any other bishop before or since his time, took an oath with any reference to Gallican liberties, or adverted even to the existance of such things, there would be an argument worth considering. Now, what are the facts about Bishop Pontbriand ■? After the king had seen the " bulls and apostolic provisions for the bishopric of Quebec," as the iustallation document says, " and not being able to dis- cover anything in them, either derogating from our laws. fourth ciuion of llii' ^roat Cniincil of Nicr, held in .'' rci^'ulates tlit- manner of ap- pohitinir l)if.lMi))s hy tlic pii'latcs nf tlic; i)ro\ iticc, oi ' ^, loast tlino of thcni, withmit evtri alliiiliM'4 fo aii.\' riulif nf tlie i>cii)iliM)r of jn'i • ■, in the iiiittoi'. Thi' twcnty- socond canon 'if tlic IjuhMi (U'licral ('niiiicil, lulil CoiistaTif.itioph' in M70, lcoi's still fiu'thcr and I'l-iinuun' fs an anathema iii^ainst any lay princf w lio would interli'ie in tlu! "ili'ctiiiM (ir pimnotiun ol' any patriarrli, nu'tropolitan or lii'^hiip so as to prevent its canonical fri'i'doni." Many othcf auMiorities could i)L' produced to ju'on c that the (daini set up l(y the princes of the Uili ceuluiy nul only liad mm sanction from the Church, Imt was in the lace f)t all its riu'hts and laws. Hy lieini; jiheral to thcClmrcli, tomi>ural princes uc(piired no riultt to cnsla\e it, and to introduce into its bosom the feudal on tlie ruiiia of the canon law. Church in Canadd. 45 indult, concession, and concordat between the Holy See and our kingdom, or from the privileges, franchises, and liberties of the French C'hurch, we have admitted the said bishop to take an oath of fidelity that he owes us by reason of the said bishopric, as it appears by a certiticate," etc. '■ Now all this is manifestly in favor of the view we are pre- senting. As to the bishopric of Quebec, the bulls and apos- tolic provision for its erection were issued on the ist of October, IGTI, and the negotiations for obtaining a bishopric for Canada begau in 1()57. The king wrote to the Pope fre- (jaently about it, and lie was waiting, as the ollicial documents show, until '* it would be pleasing to our Holy Father the L'ope to establish one there." Mgr. Laval was consecrated Bishop of Petriia in lO.')'.*, and the delay was really due to the fact, as Parkman tells, whether Laval should be attached to the Galilean archbishop of llouen, or should be directly under the authority of the Tope, l^etween 1059 and 1674 Mgr. Laval was named V^car Apostolic, which, as every one knows, is an otlice immediately depending on the Holy See. W hen the bulls were published in 1G71, tills fact was recited in them. Now, in 1711, when iJishop Pontbriand received the mitre, he received it both with reference to the king and the Pope, exactly as did Bishop Laval in 1(571 ; and this is not only the meaning, but the precise wording of the installation. Further, if the articles of 1»!S2 were in force, either in France ' The oath of I5isho]) Poiithriund is as follows ; " Siii', I Hem i. Marie Du Ureil de ronthriand, Bishop of tj»iiehct: swt^ar and promise your .Nlajishv that ! knuwledjfe I will n\ike it known to your Majesty. |Sigiied| II. M. I>i J!iu;ii. hr I'usriiui vnd, IJishop of t^uehcc. ^r""ii i vU • i .!i, . jA 46 Essaj/s on the lit- Ml or in Canada, if no referelice were made to them, it would be strangle, but it might pass. When, however, the king says that *' the bulls and apostolic provifeions of the diocese of Quebec are in accord with tlie laws, indult, concession, and concordat" between France and the Holy See, it is inconsist- ent with these words to suppose the existence of the articles of 1G8l', which had been, as long as they were in force, directly opposed to the concordat of 151."), and to all the re- lations with the Holy See. This document is, therefore, evidence against those who contend for the Galilean character of the Church in Canada; but even if it were the contrary, it has been referred to here for this reason : it is the only document in force referred to in the edicts, ordinances, arrrts^ etc., in France or in C-anada, in ecclesiastical or "Gallican" state papers, in which the phrase, •'Liberties of the Callican Church" appears. This state pa})er drawn up by Diipuy in 17-8, and already referred to, relies on the articles of IGHi', but was annulled. In no one of the commissions to governors or intendants is there any reference to the Gallican Cburch. In the ordinances or patents re. specting the bishops, the seminary, the Jesuits, or other religious bodies, there is not a word pointing to any Gallican Church or any special customs, liberties, or privilegr s."' The state papf^rs drawn up in refcsrence to the cession are further evidence of the ])ositiou for which we are contending. The V'lth article of the capitulation of Quebec provided that "the Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman religion should be main- * III a series of (|iii.'s1 ions put, for tlic (icrisioii of tlie l-.iii-^ in lti!>2, on scnio dis- (uplinary nuittors as to iiriciilencf in the Cinin-h, an answer is iriven to one to the ettett that the case he yoNeriied " par lea u.-aucscU I'lvuHsede F'rance." It is n etlh;s8 to siiyshat it wonlii he iinfiiir to draw a i;eneral deciiutio'i from piir.iscs liko "I'Kulise do [•'ranee," or " rKi;lis(, (laiiicane," w hen v^^e(l in a sense of cerfiiin eiistomsohtaininf; in Krance and ne(essarii\ introthiced tfiere. In nti\ event tliis was hefure the an- nulling of the tour iiroiiosilions h> Pope Alexander iil. Church in Cunada. 47 tained ;" the XXVIIth article of the Capitulation at Montreal makes provision that ''the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman religion shall subsist in its entirety," and then th(; Treaty of Paris in its IVth clause secures " the (\vtliolic religion, . . . according to the rites of the (Jhurch of Home." Attorney- General Marriot, who went very minutely into the whole question, gave it as his strong opinion that the Church in Canada was the C'hurch of Home without any restrictions of the Gallican Church. He wrote at the time, and at the express re(iuest of the Government of England. He was employed to draft a constitution for the "new" subjects of His Majesty George III., and he was regarded as one of the most learned doctors of the law in the kingdom. The Church, then, in Canada began under the protection of the Archbishop of Rouen, and for nearly fifty years was under his charge. A vicar apostolic was then put over the country; the archbishop lost all control of the ecclesiastical affairs, and Quebec became immediately dependent on the Holy See. i*rior to this time Cardinal Richelieu, an adherent of the Roman as opposed to the Gallican tenet?, took charge of the colony, t In the third quarter of the century the diocese was erected and placed under Roman as opposed to (Jallican control. From 16S2, the date of the Gallican articles, until 1003, when they were annulled, no edict is to be found transplanting them into Canada, and no Fn nch or Canadian edict ever referred to them as being in force in this country. The Pope, it is said, claimed that it did not apply to a country like Canada. The Superior Council at Quebec has no reference to it. In 172!;J an Attorney General attemj»ted to make it appear that t KaiiVe srivs : " Hiihclleu fomul it adv is:, lile, on tho whole, to att.K Ii himself as f'loselv as |>ossil)le to the l'a]>:icy : in tlie di-putes iietwren tin? ({oniaii afid (iallican doctrines, he now adhcreli'.>. Moidrtdl^ l^OO. |N the 10th of February, 170;^, there was signed at Paris the detinitive Treaty of Peace between i'Vance, Spain, and Enjijland. This treaty besides terminating the Seven Years' War, contaiiiH an adjustment of the North American possessions of these three nations, Prior to this, the English ruled over the Atlantic seaboard provinces — Acadia, afterwards divided so as to comprise New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and the territory lying to the south of it, running westward from the Atlantic Ocean, north of Florida, to Louisiana and the Mississippi River. The French posses- sions were Canada, along the banks of the River St. Lawrence (except the Gulf iHlands) and the country north of the Great Lakes and westward, including part of the present State of Michigan, to the wilderness beyond. Northward they held sway to the limits of the Hudson P>ay Territory. Besides these northern possessions, named New France, the French held a chain of forts running south from Canada to New Orleans; and wliether or not these corresponded to the Mississippi, they claimed to own all westward — all to the rear — of the English colonies. They owned tlie substantial province of Louisiana, extending east to Georgia and Florida, and northward about a third or more of the distance between the Gulf of Mexico and the Great Likes of Canada. Florida under this treaty was given up to England by the Spaniards, and Canada by the French, leaving the western Essays on tJie CJiurch hi Canada. 51 territory and its forts undetermined ; siibeequently the French reasserted their claim to these; but, by the Peace of Versailleg, 178.3, the French and English, as is well known, lost the entire territory south of (Canada. The fall of Quebec, the stronghold of the French, was in the year 1759, and in the following year the capitulation at Montreal surrendered the whole of Canada to the English. It is true that the effort of Pontiac was made subsequently (but before the Treaty), yet the cession was complete in 17()^> as a military, though not as a diplomatic, fact. A rupture having occurred between England and ^pain, a period f over three years passed before all parties agreed to settle theii then impending dilHculties. Canada, in the meantime, livt'd under a military rule — the "reign of the soldiery ;" and the law, if any, in all matters, was to be found in the terms of capitulation between General Amherst and Vaudreuil made at Montreal, in 17 GO. The terms of capitulation at Quebec and at Montreal are not of any real value, except in so far as they throw light upon a similar question in the Treaty of Paris. It is much to the credit of the French in Canada, and correspondingly un- complimentary to their enemy, the English, that in every treaty between these two powers in this country, the French stipulated for the free exercise of their own — the Roman Catholic religion. About 130 years before the date we are now considering, the French surrendered Canada to Sir David Kirk, the English commander, and stipulated for these terms. The fame was done, in Quebec, between De Ramezay and the English commanders, and in ^Fontreal the matter was gone in4, " All the communities, and all the priests, shall pre- serve their movables, the property and revenues of the seignories, and other estates which they possess in the colony, of what nature soever they may be. And the same estates shall be preserved in their pri- vileges, rights, honors, and exemptions. Ansiver. ••Granted." The capitulations at Quebec are contained in eleven short articles, of which the sixth only is material for our purpose. It is aa follows: "That the exercise of the Catholic Apostolic and Roman religion shall be preserved ; that safeguards will be given to religious houses of ecclesiastics, male and female, particularly to big lordship the Bishop of Quebec, who, filled with zeal for religion and charity for the people of his diocese, desires to remain there permanently, to exercise freely and with the decency that his state and the sacred mysteries of the Catholic Apostolic and Roman religion demand, hia episcopal authority in the city of Quebec as long as he will judge it suitable, until the possession of Canada may have been decided by a treaty between His Most Christian Majesty and His Britannic Majesty." The answer to this is not, as are the other articles, simply "Granted," but is as follows: "The free exercise of the Roman religion, safeguards granted to all religious persons, as well as to M. the bishop, wlio can freely and 'fM 54 Essays on the Church in Canada. with decency exercise the functions of his state as long as he will jud^e it suitable, until the posseasiou of Canada may have been decided be- tween Ills Britannic Majesty and His M at Christian Majesty." After the capitulation at Montreal, the English ruled New France for the next three years under a martial sy&totn. In Quebec, at all events, the decerci»s were observed towards Bishop Pontbriant and the clergy. No one expected the then state of things to continue, and perhaps, under all the cir- cumstances, the rule might have been less objectionable. The people looked forward to the treaty, and faith was expected to be kept under the piovisiona of the capitulation. ^'^2@'x^^ ^i^r. CHAPTER \ [I The Treaty of Paris, 170S. HE negotiations for tlio treaty ^egun in I7GI were mainly intruatod to two representatives from France and Eng- land who exchanged protocols, etc., as is the custom in such formal proceedings. Mr. Pitt rej)resented the English nation — the French side was intrusted to the Duke de C-hoiseul. Mr. Garneau, in his History of Canada, states that the Clergy of Quebec drew up two memorials on ecclesiastical atlairs in Canada, one for the Duke de Nivernois, the other to the Duke of Bedford — these nobles being the two chief diplomatists employed in settling terms of pacitication between France and Great Britain. He refers also to one of the Canadian agents, Etienne Charrest, who was charged to negotiate in the article of religion as expressed in the treaty of I'aris, and who wrote several times on that subject to Lord Halifax, Secretary of State. It cannot be supposed, therefore, that each party did not minutely understand the imsiness in hand, or what was meant by the free exercise of religion; nor was any one ignorant of the fact that the laws of ( Jreat Britain — the penal laws — were aimed directly at the Roman Catholic religion, and in fact that there was no toleration of it in England at the time. The first memorial from the English contained no reference to f t^'-A 'Am w 56 Essdys on the mi this qnostioii of n^Hgion. Subs(M|URntly a French memorial of Tropositions was submitted of which the socond clause is as follows: "The Kin^', in making over his full right of sovereignty over Canada to the King of I'logland, annexes four conditions to tho cession. •* 1st. That tho free exercise of tlie Roman Catholic religion shall bf maintained there, and that the King of I'lni^dand Hill give the most precise and effectual orders that his new Roman Catholic Bidijects may as heretofore make public profession of their religion according to the rites of the Roman Churritain, France and Spain, and in the 2d article "his Britannic Majesty on his side agrees to grant to the inhabitants of Canada the liberty of the Catholic religion. Jle will in consequence give the most exact and effectual orders that his new Roman Catholic sub- r * The oUier conditions have no reference to the suhject here discussed* .^uu]ksi^A.L Church in Canada. 51 jects may profess tho worship of their religion according to tho rites of tho lloman ('ijurch as far as the; hivvs of (Jroat Britain permit." The same words in Article X(\. are used for tiie cession of the Sj)ani.sli possessions. Mr. Fox rose in the House and moved the adoption of an address recommending tiie tr( aty. Mr. Pitt violently opposed almost every part, hut made no reference to the change of tho words added after he himself had cfiased negotiationa re.«!pocting it some months before. That would not have been a popular argument. The House accepted the addres.s, .U!) being for and (i") against it. The words of the treaty, as finally agreed upon, do not dider from the foregoing, except tliat the word "precise" is used iov "exact" in the otlicial report.'*. The following is the celebrated Uh article : "1\'. His Diost ("hristiaji Majesty rrnnnnccs all preten.sioDs which he has heretofore formed or niiglit form to Nova Scotia or Acadia in all its parts and guarantees the whole of it, and with all its dependencies to the King of (treat Britain. Moreover his most Chrl-stian Majesty codes and guarantees to his yaid JJritannic Majesty in full right, Canada, with all its dependencies as well as the Islands of Cape Breton, and all the other inlands and coa.sts in the (^ulf and the River St. Jjiwrenoe, and in general everything that depends on the said countries, lands, islands any treaty or otherwise with the most Christian King, and the Crown of Krance have had till now, over the said untries, islands, places, coasts, and their inhabitants, so that the most Christian King cedes and makes over the whole to the said King and to tlie crown r f (Jreat liritain, and that in the most ample manner, and for and without restrictirm and without ary liberty to depart from the -aid cesaion and guaranty under any pretence, or to 5 ^U m*. -/I ft. t 1" ':\ ^i 58 KsSiU/s on the disturb (Jreat liiitain in the poaaession above mfntioned. His Britan- "^ic Majesty on bis side agrees to grant tbe liberty of the Catholic religion to the inhabitants ot Canada; he will conactiuently give the most precise and elloetual orders that his new Roman Catholie subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rights of the Romish Church, so far as the laws of (Jreat Britain permit." Tho last articio, XXVI., roads: "Their Sacred Britannic, Most Christian and Catholic, and Moat Faithful MajcHtioa promise to observe sincerely and hona fide all the articles contained and settled in the present treaty ; and they will not sull'ev the same to be infringed directly or indirectly by their respective subjects ; and the .same High Contracting parties generally and re- ciprocally guarantee to each other all the atipulationg of che^jreseut treaty."* Now, what is the meaning of the words : *' the liberty of the (.'atholic religion," "to profess the worship of their reli- gion," and how are they atlected by the words, ''so far as the laws of Great liritain permit 1" The reader will say, Why, in 17(»o, the English penal laws were in full force against Catholics. There was no Emancipation Act for half a century or more after that. The laws of Great Britain did not permit any exercise of the Roman Catholic religion in 1763. There is no other section in the Treaty respecting Catholics in this part of America. This section, however, has sub- stantial, potential guarantees within its four corners. Taking up the last words of the section tirst, it will be perceived that the freedom of the C'atholic religion is secured to Catholics in Canada, unless it happens that by the law of Great Britain, the penal laws against Catholics had been previously extended to Canada. The laws of Great Britain do not extend alike to all the Jiritish possessions, unless expressly extended to these *Chahners Treaties ct ].>tiKsi»}. The retiuiimicr of tlie 4tli scctioti refers to per mission to Can.-jiiuns to return to Fraiu e, and was in force only eijjhteen months. Church in Caiuahi. 59 possessions. It is important to rpmernber that. The penal laws extended to Insland, hut they did not, in 170,*i, or before or since, extend to the colonies. Canada fell into tin; list of l>ritish colonies in 1 7G3,and the ponal laws against Catholics did not reach them. Creat was the dismay and confusion of the ()00 English emigrants in Quebec, when the highest legal lumi- naries in the land and out of the land, gave it as their opinion that the "new subjects," the French Catholics, were not afl'ected by those Penal hiws tliat are aimed at Catholics in the old country. Then the musty old statutes were dislodged from thiiir shelves, the black letter Jurists of the Stuart and Tudor periods were ransacked, and not until they came to the first statute of Elizibethwas there any comfort found. The statute of 1st Elizabeth, Cap. 1 , was the only statute omnipotent enough to reach the Colonies ; it providers that the supremacy which formerly vesttnl in the Pope of liome in spiritual matters should, tlureafler, be vested in th(i Queen of P^ngland, and this Act was expressly extended to the Colonies. The con struction was a narrow, strained and illogical one and utterly at variance with the spirit of the Treaty of Paris. The parties who drew up and settled the terms of the Treaty had no idea that the si?iute of Elizibeth applied. That they were aware of the Penal laws against Catholics in Great Britain and in Ireland there is no doubt. Canada, some 130 years before this Treaty, had passed out of the French control into P>iglish hands, for about three years, a; id there was a provision then to the same efl'ect as the present — that the freedom of their worship should be allowed to tVe Catholics. The language of the Treaty, so far as religious guarantees are concerned, was intended to |>revent future legislation alFectifig the freedom and exercise of the Ptoman Catholic religion by the ( atholics of Canada. j!^ i- #ip'! GO Essays on the Attorney General Maseres, writing about ten years after the treaty, says: "Two senses may l)o put upon these words, 'as far as the laws of Great Britain permit.' They may either be supposed to mean that the Canadians shall be at liberty to profess the worship of the Roman Catholic religion as far as the lav/a of (ireat Britain permit that wor- ship to be professed in England itself, or they shall be at liberty to profess that worship as far as the laws of England permit it to be professed in the Dominions of the Crown of (ireat Britain that are not parcel of the realm, such as Minorca, Senegal, the West India Islands, and the colonies of North America. The former ef tiiese senses I acknowledge to be too narrow to be put upon these words, liecause it >vould in a great measure destroy the grant of the liberty of professing the worship of the Romish religion which these words were only in- tended to »|ualify and restrain ; because in England itself the laws do not permit the worship of the Romish religion to be professed in any degree. " We must therefore have recourse to the latter sense above mentioned and suppose these words to maeen Elizabeth, cap. i., which is entitled '^\ii Art to re- store to tlic Cro}C}' the ancient Jiiri'',//ctlo7i over the ijn, j^overs rcpni/nant to tlir samc,^ which is commonly called the Act of Supremacy, does expressly relate to all the (^)ueon's dominions as well as to the realm of l']ngland, and is even extended by positivti words to such countries and places as should at any future time become subject to the crown of i'lngland." He then sets out the elTect of this statute of Elizabeth, and adds in conclusion that "the British Nation is bound by that articlo to grant to the Canadians the liberty of professing mm Church ui Canada. (31 the worship of the Roman Catholic religion only so far as is consistent with that statute." Besides the construction put upon the words of the treaty by the English Parliament, which is substantially tliat of Mr. Maseres, eminent lawyers have given opinions thereon. In reference to it Attorney-General Wedderburne, after- wards a Lord Chancellor of England, says: "True policy, dictates, then, that the inhabitants of ( 'anada should be permitted freely to profess the worship of their religion; and it follows of course that the ministers of that worship should be protected, and a maintenance secured for them." And Attorney-General, afterwards Lord, Tliurlow, says: "The free exercise of their religion by the laity and of their function by their clergy was also reserved." As a matter of fact it would be of little account, after the Quebec Act was passed, what any legal opinion niight have been as to the meaning of these words -the Act thenceforth was the guide. The Act, it is true, could not abridge the effect of the treaty so far as the new British subjects were concerned — the subjects who were the subject of the treaty ; but the act could, and probably did, enlarge the meaning of the words for the benefit of thesr objects. For instance, it might have been a condition that each of the tliree religious orders then in Canada should receiv(» one thousand acres of land. No act could be passed, without setting at naught the law of nations, giving them only five hundred acres, but an act giving them two thousand would be valid. The Quebec Act took the sting out of the objectionable words in the treaty. It gives probably the most favorable construction that would be put on the treaty, and indeed a much loss equitable inter- ^ip 62 Essays on the pretation would have suited the English party in Canada and in some of the other American provinces. The statute, however, imposes no insuperable difficulty; it requires all priests and other ecclesiastical persons to take the oath of Supremacy, but, in the event of their refusing, it annexes no penalty beyond the deprivation of their benefices or other spiritual promotions. The question therefore would not arise until the state held the property of the Church, and in Lower Canada, at all events, the question did not arise. The Quebec Act, as will be seen presently, provided an oath in lieu of the one in the Act of Elizibeth,* and though many difficulties arose under the Quebec Act, they termiaated in favor of the Ohui h." In Canada the power of the Treaty of Paris is to-day not so much a thing to be invoked against penal legislation on the statute book, of which there is none, as it is a shield against any threatened penal legislation — which some think tiiere possibly might be without it. It is in force now as it was in 1763. It is a treaty of Cession and these provide for a per- manent state of things. The obligations under treaties are not extinguished until their objects are satisfied, or until a state of things arises through which they became void, though they temporarily or definitively cease to be obligatory when a state of things arises through which they are r.uperseded or become voidable. For instance, treaties are void when they become impossible of execution, when they are disposed of by consent of the parties when they have satisfied the object of the compact, or when they are incompatible with undisputed law and morals. But recent high authority is in favor of ex- '^ By an act passed in the first year of the reiKii of William and Mary, the Bill qf Rights, the oath of suprcniary as provided in the Art of Klizatn'th was taken away and another of a n\ildor chariu-tcr sul) tituted. It is, lioAeM-r, much more ohjection- .able than the one in the Quebec Act, which is indeed no more thin an uath of allegiance. Church in Canada. 63 «| eluding, as testa of voidability, the fact that a treaty may con- flict with the rights and the welfare of the people, or that it may contain a gratuitous cession or abandonment of an essential national right, or be incompatible with its develop- ment.* if it is observed by both parties, is consistent with their rights of self-preservation, and retains for them freedom with respect to its subject-matter, it is a binding agreement, and is as much a law for them as municipal law is for the in- dividual. This agreement, says Howyer in his "Public Law," must be inviolably kept by virtue of that maxim of natural law which requires us to perform our promises. A treaty under the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and binds the judges in every State, notwith- standing anything in the laws or Constitution of the State to the contrary. It supersedes all contradictory local statutes. It can be repealed only so far as it is municipal, and not then unless its subject-matter is within the legislative power of Congress;! and it is an essential principle of the law of nations that no power can be released from the engagements of treaties or modify their stipulations, except with the consent of the contracting parties amicably obtained. [ * Hall's International Law. t Taylor v. Morton, 2 Curtin, i:>i. t At the conference in Londun in 1871, this prineijile was rcco;fni/e(l hy Hiissia, Austria, (ierniany, (Ireat Britain, Italv and Tnrlvcy. Sec article hy thr present writer on tiio Pnhlic Law of the United States in tiie American Catholic Quarterly Jicvieiv for Julv li>87. >-rv '-*-::^ ?/^' l^—'my~w\j e ■I I CllAPTlCK \11L Tht Qiieltea Act, 177 J^. fITUS stands the treaty, and in the fall of the same year, 17<);3, a proclaiiiatioii was issued l>y Georj^e 111, re- ferring to the valuable possessions secured by this treaty, and under it were erected four governments under the names of Quebec, East and West b'lorida, and Grenada. The governments of Newfoundland and Nova Hcotia were also referred to, and a general promise given that the colonists could confide in the royal protection for the enjoyaient and benetit of the laws of England, until assemblies of the people could be aumuioned. There were at this period ab?ut seventy thousand in- habitants in Canaila, and less than live hundred of these were English and Protestant. The remainder were French and Roman Catholic. The Catholic religion had been the law of the land, and in Quebec at least the British soldiers were ordered to be respectful to the clergy and to the religious processioHK in the streets. It will be remembered that after ('ardinal Richelieu founded the royal government in New France, the governor, the bishop, and the royal intendant practically ruled the province. It is, therefore, to be expected that the Church and its ministers in their time would be respected. Under the comparatively mild rule of Sir Guy Carleton the Catholics had little to complain of on this score. The people complained somewhat that the terms of the capitulation were not observed, the French as to innovations, KssaijH on the Cltiirch ui Canada. tft (1 J the English that everything was not expressly made to suit their wants. However, the minibters in England urged that their case would he considered as soon as the war — the Seven Years' War — would be at an end, and it came to an end bv the treaty which we are now discussing. Before the treaty, the military rule depended much on the temper of the governor, who, all things considered, was better vastly than those of his countrymen who formed his staff'. The ({uestion of the status of the Roman Catholic Church in Canada arose at once as to a successor to Bishop Pontbriaut. In 17G3 the governor sent M. Cramahe to Loudon to sustain an application in this matter. In 17*55 the attorney and solicitor general, Norton and Cruy, expressed their opinion regarding the Church of Canada, rhat the Catholics of that (now British) colony were not liable to the operation of the disabilities imposed by statutory law on their co-religionists in Great Britain. In 17(38 the king issued three mandates to the governor for the appointment of a rector for each of the towns of Quebec, Three Rivers and Montreal. Governor Carleton directed Mr. MasereS; tho attorney-general, to prepare a draft commission, which that zealous otiicial did with all promptitude. On consideration of "the peculiar and delicate situation of the province with rtjspect to the article of religion," as Mr. Maseres put it, "his excellency did not think it expedient to grant these gentlemen commissions of this form under the seal of the province, but in lieu thereof gave hem licenses to preach and perform divine service according to tie certmonies of the Church of England in the re.spective parishes of Quebec, Three Rivers and Montreal, under his hand and private seal." The draft was never availed of, and Mr. Maseres in about a year afterwards calls attention to this in certain other papers preserved at the time. s<»..y!M tm 66 E-'isaija on the The Proclamation of 1 70.3 promised tlie people that as soon as it was convenient an assembly would be given the Canadians — the new subjects — and that in the meantime they could rely on the regard of the sovereif:;n for the solution of any dilHcultiea that might arise. This ))ica)iti)}ic lasted for ten years, greatly to the annoyance of the old subjects, many of whom regarded the colony as a place to make money in and regain their shattered fortunes while their past history in England might be forgotten. There is little room for doubt as to the character generally of these noble five hundred; but it is not with them we are concerned, though they made themselves heard more clamorously than the whole French population. In this interval a chief justice, an attorney-general and some other ollicials were sent out from England. The attorney -general, Prancis Maseres, lived in Quebec for about three years, up to 17G9, and retired apparently in disgust to England, where he was appointed to an inferior judgeship. He is the author of certain jjapers — and violent papers they are — regarding the colony and its laws. These are called the " Maseres papers," and from them a good deal of inspiration can always be drawn against the French people and their re- ligion. He and Sir Guy were not of one mind as to the manner of ruling the new possession, V>ut the governor had not only the more sensible plan, but also the one that recommended itself to the home government. Maseres became the spokesman for the English in Canada — he represented their grievances and formulated reports, lie even drafted a bill for the better government of Quebec. Under this model document the five hundred colonists referred to were to have full control of Canada, to the exclusion of every Frenchman and Oatholic, ' m Church in Canada, 67 In the " draught of an act . . . . " for the good govern- ment of Quebec, prepared by Mr. Maseres, the members of the assembly would be recpiired to take an obnoxious oath passed in the reign of George II: " And likewise to make and subscribe the declaration against the Romifeh doctrineof transubstantiation mentioned in an actof Parliament made in the twenty fifth year of the reign of King Charles II. entitled * An Act for prevenfhig dangers which may happen from Popish recusants,^ before they are permitted to sit in said assemblies." Another recital, in the spirit of this one, stated : " That hitherto it was not practicable, by rea^.on of the general pre- valence of the Romish superstition among his Majesty's ' new ' Cana- dian subjects, to summon and call a general assembly." 'I he draught goes on to enact that in view of these and other things an assembly be called, each member of which should take the oath referred to, and so exclude any Roman Catholics. " If it should be approved and carried into execution," wrote Mr. Maserea, " I confess I should ihink the inhabitants of the province would be likely to be governed more happily under it for seven or eight years to come, than under the influence of an assembly of Prot- estants only, I see no objection to the establishment of one, but the danger of disobliging the Catholics of the province, who are so much superior in number." Mr. Maseres's plan of a legislative council was so good as to mFrit the approval of "Mr. Thomas Walker, of Montreal, and Mr. John Paterson, of Quebec, English merchants of eminence settled in those towns," but it did not commend itself to the governor nor to the British ministers. Ilia proposed council was to consist of thirty one members, all Protestants and thirty years old : •' Because if Roman Catholics are admitted into the council, there is no good pretence for not having an assembly agreeably «* *^^^ii! ill 68 Essay s on th( to tho King's proclamation and commissions to GenerAl Murray and (M;n(Tal Carleton." The council afterwards estaldiahod, it may be remarked, was comprised of seventeen members, seven of whom were Catholics. "To consist cither of seventeen members or of twenty- three members, or of any intermediate number of mem))ers at the King's pleasure. And they may be all papists or even popish priests if the iving shall so please, and of any age the King shall please above twenty-one years." Mr. Maseres might be pardoned for writing, as he did, a '•remark" of ten pages upon this. The petitions of the London Board of Trade and of the Elnglish at Quebec were entrusted to him, and in 1773, after a ponderous mass of materials from French and Knglish petitions were in the hands of the home ministry, the govern- ment set to work to frame an act for their new and old subjects of Canada.'' The Earl of Dartmouth introduced the bill into the Lords, and Lord North assumed the task of defending it in the Commons, it may save some speculation here if we antici- pate and say that in almost every particular, and certainly in every important one, the British Ministry disregarded the clamor of the now Baron Maseres and his requisitionists, and passed aa act much more in the spirit of justice to the French than might have been expected. There were reasons for this *ln the laiii^uage of tlie time, the French Canadians were called the "new sub- jects" of the kint,'. CJnirch in Canada. 09 le bb- outaide of pleasing tho French, as tho coming events of 1775 were shadowing the whole continent. Indeed, the cause of the difluulties at Jjoston, in 177.'?, was an error admitted in English councils. Whatever may have been the motive, the I'jnglish /^'overnmcnt certainly deaired to deal fairly with the French. The English emigrants, once in America, were intolerant and revolutionary to a great degree, and in Canada they were, at the time about which we arc writing, and later, in 1791, the most troublesome and unreasonable of subjects. The Quebec Act of 1771 was an important measure, and so much so that although anything approaching a Hansard or parliamentary reporter was then in its infancy, we have, thanks to the industry of the then member from Lostwithiel, a very full report of the whole measure — the debates, the evidence taken, and the reports before the committee. These form a volume of .'^00 pages and are called Sir Henry Caven- dish's reports. The fact that such a thing was done is good reason for believing how great an interest was taken in the act itself. Sir Guy Carleton was examined, Chief Justice Hey, a touchy and bigoted Doctor of Laws named Mariott, and many others of loss note. Edmund Burke made several good speeches, and we can read the names of Attorney (Jeneral Thurlow, Colonel Rarrr, Mr. Wedderburne, Charles Fox, and others." The bill defined the boundaries of the new British pro- vince which was thereafter to be known as " Quebec," con- taining : Sec appendix R for flic speeohtw referred to. il*« m -19 §ii #!! 70 Essaifs on the '* All the territories, islands, and countries in North America, be- louginfi; to the crown of (ireat Britain, hounded on the south l)y a line from the hay of Chaleurs, along the hi^h lands which divide the rivers that empty thomsflves into the river St. Lawrence fiom those which fall into the sea, to a point in forty-five degrees of northern latitude, on the eastern hank of the river Connecticut, keeping the same latitude directly west, through the lake Champlaii, until, in the same latitude, it mcetH the river 8t. Lawrence ; from thence up the eastern bank of the Slid river to the lake Ontario ; thence through the lake Ontario, and the river commonly called Niagara ; and theuee along hy the eastern and southeastern bank of lake Erie, following the said bank, until the same shall be intersected by the northern boundary, granted by the charter of the province of Pennsylvanii, in case the same shall be so intersected ; and from thence along the said northern and Wi stern boundaries of the said province, until the said western bouudary strike the Ohio ; but in case the said bank of the said lake sliall not be found to be 80 intersected, then following the said bank until it shall arrive at that point of the said bank which shall be nearest to the northwestern angle of the said province of Pennsylvania, and thence, by a right line, to the eaid nortliwestern angle of the said province ; and thence along the western boundary of the said province, until it strike the river Ohio ; and along the bank of the said river westward, to the banks of the Mississippi, and northward to the southern boundary of the terri- tory granted to the merchants-adventurers of England, trading to Hudson's Bay ; and also all such territories, islands, and countries, which have, since the 10th of February, 1763, been made part of the j?overnment of Newfoundland, be, and they are hereby, during his majesty's pleasure, annexed to, and made part and parcel of the pro- vince of Quebec, as created and establiahed by the said royal proclama- tion of the 7th of October, 1763." Thin boundary has been given in full because it will be seon to what extent the Quebec Act stretched across the continent the protection of the law in regard to the Roman Catholics. Part of this old province is now in the United States, part in several provinces of the Dominion of Canada other than the present province of Quebec, which, after an interval of 93 years, resumed its old name. It would, therefore, include Church in Cunaiht, 71 in Onttrio, Manitoba in part at least, and part of the Northra«t and Northwest T.irritorio?. lUit it might not include Nova Scotia and New IJnmawick, as theao bocanio British provinces by the treaty of Utrecht, 171. '5, and were tin'u undividiHl and known by the name of Acadia, 'i'he English owned Prince Edward Island since 17r)8. Although the treaty conlirmed these provinces toCreat iJritain, it could scarccily be said that the inhabitants were " new" subjects. However, any one with a ma]) V)ofore him can see the extent of the old Province of Quebec ; and this much i-} certain, that for so much of that as had been wrested from the I'Vench by the capitulation of 1700, its inhabitants came within the relief given by the Quebec Act. Attention will now be called to the clause as to religion, which is as follows: "And for the more perfect security aud ease of the inioda of the inhabitants of the said province, it is lieroby declared that his majesty's subjects, professing the religion of the Clnirch of Rome of and in the said province of Quebec, may have, hold, and enjoy the free exercise of the religion of the Church of Rome, subject to the King's supremacy, declared and established by an act, made in the first year of the reign of <,|ueen Elizabeth, over all the dominiona and countries which then did, or thereafter should belong to the imperial crown of this realm ; and that the clergy of the said church may hold, rtccdve, and enjoy their accustomed dues and rights, with respect to such persons only as shall profess the said religion. •'Provided, neverthelv rfs, that it shall be lawful for his majesty, his heirs or successors, to make such provision out of the rest of the said accustomed dues and rights, for the encouragement of the Pro- testant religion, and for the maintenance and support of a Protestant clergy within the said province, as he or they shall, from time to time, think necessary and expedient. "Provided always, and be it enacted, that no person, professing the religion of the Church of Rome, and residing in the said province, m % III 72 Kssaj/s on the ^ shall be obliged to take the oath required by the said statute passed in the first ytar of the reign of Queen Kli/.xbeth, or any other oaths sub- stituted by any other act in the place thereof ; but that every such person, who, l)y the said statute is recjuired to take the oath therein mentioned, shall be ol)liged, and is hereby rc((uired, to take and subscribe the foUovviny oath before the governor or such obher person in such court of record as his majesty shall appoint, vi^ho are hereby authorized to administer the same; vidc'icct : "I, A. B., do sincerely promise and swear, that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance to his majesty King (Icorgc, a;>d him will defend to the utmost of my power, against all traitorous conspiracies and attempts whatsoever, which shall be made against lis person, crown, and dignity ; and I will do my utmost endeavor to disclose and make known to his majesty, his heirs and successors, all treasons and traitorous conspiracies and attempts, which I shall know to be against him, or any of them, and all this I do swear without any efpiivocation, mental evasion, or secret reservation, and renouncing all pardons and dispensations froin any power or person whomsoever to the contrary/ Tho clause was carried by a very large majority, and in a few days afterwards the bill passed into the act of Parliament. Whatever success the French regarded as falling to their side, the English — the old subjects — were sorely disappointed. They were defeated and they knew it. The act, besides what we have referred to, established the French municipal law in C-ariada as it was formerly — at least for all civil cises. The criminal law of England was in use since the capitulation and ■ WluMi this rl.nisc was o^kmi for dcbato Mr. William niirkc, a kiiismaii of Etliii'iii'l r.nrKc, said, " I do net ri'inemher that I o\or saw the House of Commons in so sick a situation ;is it is at vicsent (< rv of order! o parliamt'iit of (in'at liiifniii is in an unfortunate situation. This is the worst hill tliat e\er (MiLtaiicd file attention c.r the I'ritish Conned. It is a hill to estahlish the rojiih reli^fion — til e-tidili^h despotism. There hae heen instances in liun\an atTairs in wliich for jmrposes of couunerc - we have t'stahlishecl fnodum as far as we could in ;i certiiin localit\ , h'.it to I'stahlish Tojierv — to C'ltablish despotism in a con(iuere(l provinci' is what we have'ruNcr done 111 fore. . . . The ifenMeniiti wlio opposed the hill, kiiowinu' it \\ as impossible to defe.d. it, have almost worked themselvis to death to make it, as f.ar as they could, consonant to iMiulish libert.\ and the prin- ci)>los of the Kn'.;lish Constitution." After much more in tlie same str.iin the clausi- was carried, no other mendier spcakini^ on it. Church in Canada. 73 was only formally introduced. The bill produced something like a panic at Quebec among the English colonists. All bis Majesty's ancient subjects settled in the province of Quebec petitioned against it, and in tlio following year Lord Camden endeavored to get the act repealed, but the motion was defeased. Mr. Masercis finally gave expression to his feelings by declaring that in his opinion " it had not only offended the inhabitants of the province itself in a degree that could hardly be conceived, but had alarmed all the English provinces in America and contributed more, perhaps, than any other means whatsoever to drive them into rebellion against their Sov- ereign." For the next fifteen years, of course, the influx of English speaking citizens was very great, not only by the natural emi- gration from the I>ritish soil, but also by the hegira of those superior souls, the United Empire Loyalists. These came chiefly to the western part of the province of Quebec — what was later called Upper or Western Canada and now the Pro- vince of Ontario. In 1790 a dead set was made by all these on the Quebec Act, and a worthy man from Montreal went to England on a like mission as was previously entrusted to Baron Maseres. m^ I This was Mr. Lymburger, who made a long speech in the Commons against the proposed constitutional act brought in by Mr. Pitt. Mr. Fox thundered against the new bill and its provisions, but all chiefly because it did not repfal the old act — the Quebec Act. Mr. Lymburger and his friends met with no better reception than the agents of the British coloniftts did in 1774. They wanted the province to remain as one province — the English laws to be the law in all c-ises, and the obnoxious act repealed. 6 '^ !!•; 74 Essays on the Church in Canada. 'hi' The Pitt ministry divided Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada — they did not touch the Quebec Act except in so far as the new act expressly altered it, and the only concession was a clause for the Protestant clergy. This gave rise to what was called the Clergy Reserve, which, after disturbing the country for over fifty ^years, was finally wiped out of the statute book. The Quebec Act has, since the constitutional act of 1791, been recognized in a score of^ statutes by the provincial and imperial authorities. As late as the year 1880 a leading judge in Quebec, in giving judgment in a case involving what elsewhere would be a conflict of municipal and ecclesiastical law, says: "It is unnecessary to establish in this case that the Roman Catholic religion and its full entire and free exercise have been acknowledged in this country and guaranteed by the faith of treaties confirmed by the Imperial Act of 1774, so often cited before our tribunals under the name of the Quebec Act. The most important part of our civil legislation is connected with this fact, and is the necessary consequence of it." :A'^.r^,V^^ .•I ■ .; CHAPTER IX. *l Freedom of Relitiion to Catl^olics in Canada. The Supremacy of the Crown. One head for two bodies. HE Treaty of Paris, it will be remembered, has one apparently inconsistent feature in it — the frfe exercise of the Roman Catholic religion is guaranteed to the new subjects, "so far as the laws of Great Britain pern it."* The Act of 1774 puts an interpretation upon these words, but the Act itself is not easy to construe. The ablest jurists in England and Canada gave it as their opinion at the time thf.t thH.'.e words, "so far as the laws of Great Britain permit," mean S'> far as the laws of Great Britain permit the exercise of the Roman Catholic religion in the colonies and outlying divisions of the Crown. Parliament adopted this construction. The statute books were then ransacked to discover what, if any, laws in force against the Catholics extended to the colonies. After a search, the most careful as may be imagined, only one statute could be found. This was the Act of Su- premacy of Queen Elizabeth — the first Act in the first year of her reign. The Act of Supremacy arose out of legislation passed in the reign of Henry VII F. to secure that monarch's second *L'Abbe FcrUind nunatus that, \vh(!n Monsei^'rieiir Plfssis, Bishop of Ci>iiebcc, wag on a visit to Home in 18i9, an interview with Louis XV'lll. was uiniiijitHl for him at Paris. "The audience w,i£) private: the Kiux spolco to Mons i/ncur Ple^sis witli kindness, and put many questions relatin^r to the state of rehj^ion in Cm dn, re- quested to be renieiuhercd in liis juayers, and (harmed hun to say to his diocesans that their former so'.ereijin had (t forgotten iheni. and th it, if the conditions stipulated foi in their fa\nr by vhe Treaty of Peace were not observed by England, France would not neglect to claim them." >■*, 1 ■> r»" J85' it > 1 76 Essays on the ^at^;* marriage from being annulled by the Pope. In 1531 all appeals to Rome from English ecclesiastical courts were done away with; and in the next session, in order to cut off aU connection with Rome, an Act was passed rendering the papal bulls unnecessary for bishops or archbishops. In this Act the king is recited to be the supreme head of the Church in Eng- land. This Act, which in the mind of the king — //ie defender of the Faith — had no appearanje of separating the English from the Catholic Church, was the beginning of the great schism; but when the Act was revived in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, some years later, the English Church was no longer Catholic. A church with new doctrines stood in its place, and, as history informs us, every species of persecution that the State could enforce was applied to bring the English people into line with the English Court in religious matters. A church was established by law and the sovereign was its head ; those who claimed the Pope as sovereign head of the Church were subject to pains and penalties without number. In process of time the State wearied or became ashamed of persecution — then it tolerated, then it recognized the Pope of Rome as the spiritual head of some English subjects. So long as the rigor of the Act was enforced there was no legal existence for a Catholic When it was transferred to Canada in 1774 there was just enough of persecution left in it to work mischief. In the Quebec Act, as has been seen, they, accordingly, in- troduced the supremacy of the king, but greatly modified the oath, so that there was 'jothing very objectionable about it. Where the statute applies territorially, then this construction must obtain ; and without going into argument on the question, it may be assumed that, where the treaty extends beyond the boundaries of the old Quebec province, the same construction Church in Canada. 77 would be put upon it as upon the statute. To invoke the treaty would be to invoke the construction put upon it in the highest court of the realm. It was quite competent to the British Parliament to have made the Quebec limits cotermin- ous with the ceded territory, and if they fell short of part of it this would not affect the raiio dtx'ukndi the purview and scope of the treaty generally. We will consider this question of territory in the next chapter. If this be so, then the one construction sutiices for treaty and statute, and reduces the question to this simply : How does the supremacy of the king of a Protestant country affect the free exercise of religion to his Roman Catholic subjects ^ The Act of Supremacy was but a re enactment by Elizabeth of a statute passed in the twenty tifth year of Henry VIII., en- titled : " An Act for the submission of the dergie to the King's Majestic." The preamble of this act is painfully significant of the times: "Whereas, the King's humble and obedient ser- vants, the clergy of this rea^m of England, etc.," and then it goes on to recite the desire of the King in matters ecclesiasti- cal. The submission of the clergy is accounted for at this particular junction by a Protestant writer. Short, in his '* History of the Church of England." The clergy were then under a prceniunire in regard to Wolsey.'^ ''In order to buy this off, the Convocation consented to a considerable subsidy, and in the bill which granted it the king's supremacy was asserted. It was, however, with much dithculty that this clause was passed, and so little with the gooJ-will of the lower house that, after the acknowledgment, a proviso was inserted quantum per Christum licet.'' This act made the King Primate llu,! * Prccnmnire was a writ issued out of the civil courts under authority of a statute of Ricliard II., by which severe penalties were enforced :iirainsf those who relied on Papal appointments to benetices that were claimed by the hini;. 78 Essays on the Mr^ of the Church of England, and by it the sovereign is regarded as being over all persons and over all causes, ecclesiastical as well as civil, supreme in the Church. The author referred to, very candidly admits the reason of the assumption of this supreme ecclesiastical power ; it was to procure a divorce for the King from Queen Catharine. "The existence of the Church of England," he adds, " as a distinct body and her final separation from Rome may be dated from the period of the divorce." To obtain this and yet remain £L Catholic — a Defender of th3 Faith — it is by various authors contended, was the sole aim of the King, and it is certainly clear that whatever his motives may have been, the doctrine of the royal supremacy was not pushed to as great a degree as in the reign of Elizabeth. In the interval between the reigns of these two sovereigns the first statute of Philip and Mary repealed this act and established the Church in its former relations to Rome. Elizabeth, on her accession, passed an act reviving the supremacy of the Crown, and re- enacting nearly everything that her sister had repealed. Two short sections of the first act in the year 1558 will give all that is necessary. Section XVI. is as follows: "And to the intent that all uaurpod and foreign power and authority, spiritual and temporal, may, forever, be clearly extinguifhed, and never be used or obeyed within these realms or any other of Your Majesty's dominions or countries. May it please Your Highness that it may be further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, spiritual or temporal, shall use, enjoy, or exercise any manner of power, jurisdiction, superiority, authority, pre-eminence, or privilege, spiritual or ecclesiastical, within this realm or any other of Her Majesty's dominions or countries, but the same shall be abolished thereout forever, any statute, ordinance* custom, constitution, or any other matter or cause whatever, to the contrary notwithstanding." 3Jt Church 171 Canada. 79 i% Section XVIf. : "And that it may alao please Your Highness that it may be established and enacted by the authority aforesaid, That such jurisdiction, privileges, superiority, and pre-emiuence, spiritual and ecclesiastical, or by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority, hath heretofore been, or may lawfully be, exercised or used for the visitation of the ecclesiastical state and persons, and for reformation, order, and correction of the same ; and of all manner of errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities shall, forever, by authority of this present Parliament, be united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this realm." Ooke and Hale put constructions on this statute which, at all events, suited the royal pretensions, Ooke says that, "By the ancient laws of this realm the kin<^dom of England is an absolute empire and monarchy, consisting of one head, which is the King, and of a body consisting of several members, which the law divideth into two parts. The clergy and the laity, both of them next and immediately under Ood, subject and obedient to the head, , . . such an authority as the Pope heretofore exercised, is now annexed to the Crown by the above-mentioned statute." And else- where it is laid down judicially that "all that power which the Pope ever exercised within this realm on spirituals is now vested in the King." These opinions were certainly opposed to Magna Charta, the first chapter of which stipulates that the Church shall be free and have her whole rights and liberties inviolable. As to the statute being declaratory of the common law, that went for nothing, as the whole doctrine was novel, and without custom or precedent justifying it. The title of " Supreme Head of the Church and Clergy of En land" appears for the first time in the I'etition of Convocation to Henry VIII. to relieve them from the penalties to which they were exposed. If it were necessary to pursue this subject, there would be little dilticulty in estimating how the members of the Church f k 80 Essaijs on the of England regarded the change from the Papal to the Royal supremacy. It was well enough to inveigh against the supre- macy of the Pope, but when the royal supremacy was found to be more intolerable, then it was time for a noted public man and writer to say that " pretensions of this sort, from whatever side they have come, have never found any perman- ent favor with the English people." 'i'his is very briefly the history of the ])asfcing of the Act of Supremacy — an act by which, in England, the King is supreme ordinary and who might, without any Act of Parliament, make ordinances for the government of the clergy, and if there be a controversy between spiritual persons concerning Jurisdiction, he is arbitra- tor, and it is a right of his Grown to declare their bounds. The King in England, therefore, became head of the church, no matter what the church was, and no vuatter what religion the King professed. He was King and Pope ; the church became a department of the state, quite subordinate to the Crown and to its judicial and executive oliicera. It exists with the Crown, and ceasfs when the Crown ceases. The Crown was the head of Episcopacy in England, and might have been head of Presbyterianism in Scotland that tolerates no Episcopacy. A Catholic Stuart was the head of this Protestant Church. With such precedents, what obstacle 7as there to the omnipotence of the Parliament of Great I'ritain to assume headship over the Church of Rome in Canada? IJndar such a multiplication of recognized churches the Crown was likely to become an ecclesiastical hydra. If there was no great reason why that should be propagated in Canada which was regarded as damnable and idola- trous at home, then it was but a step further to have the viceroy in India proclaimed the head of the native church, as Lord Dalhousie thought he could be in Canada. Had the Church in Canada, 81 Act of Supremacy been held to be in full force in Canada, there is little doubt but that no Catholic could have assuuied any ollice, or any clergyman become recognized before the law ; but the statute itself was virtually repealed, especially as to the oath, and a new and simple one introduced. The words of the Quebec Act are, " may have, hold, and enjoy the free exercise of the religion of the Church of Rome, subject to the King's supremacy declared in the act, etc." Now, as to the meaning put upon the statute by Lord Coke and referred to above, it is to this effect, that to the King of England there is now annexed such an authority as the Pope heretofore exercised. Suppose such power were annexed, it ould vest only by some supposed transfer of it from the Pope himself ; or that the King inherently was possessed of it. The latter was the only view possible. The statute athrming this inherent authority could not make it a fact or make it believed by Catholics, and the only course open to the Crown was by active coercive measures in the more modern form of persecution. The Crown then, in Canada, said in eti'ect, we will assume control over the Church and be its head whether it wants another head or not. The Church in Scotland would have been satisfied with the Crown, and why should Rcme be more particular? One head, more or less, ought not to be a matter that a Catholic need worry about, as good (Jhurchmen in England were liberal in this regard. A Queen was the first head ; there may have been no head, or an interregnum or hiatus or something of that sort from the time of Henry VIII. to Elizabeth, because Mary repealed her father's spiritual enactments. By plain statute, however, E izabeth was head. Then we have Edward VI., a child of six years. There was no head, unless it be Cromwell, in the pre-restoration period. The oddest thing of all is, thai James IX., a Catholic, was bead of the Protestant Church. m ■¥ifiii m" ^ f" ,'(' ' 82 Essays on the Clmrch in Canada. If 80, waH tlifre not a litiiess — a compliment nicely turned — that a Protfstant should ho the head of the ^'atholic Church? The ludicrous side of the matter in (Unada was that the same K\u^ Hhonld he head of the Anglican and Roman Churches. Colonists should not be particular when the people at home wer(! so easily satistied. The head was ready made ^iid at hand, and there was nothing to he done but tit the body to it. It was an adaptation somewhat of th" methods of Procrustes, the Inhospitable, who had ft simple remedy of adjubting all travellers to his bed. If too long, he cut a piece otF; if too short, he had theui stretched out the desired length. For a time it seeuied as if the Catholic CMmrch in Canada were to carry around this extra head on its shoulders and Vjecome a hydra among Churches, but the thing was too absurd. Some of the Uovernors who were sent out shortly after the Cession, held to the view that the King was really head of the Catholic Church, and they wanted the appointment of the parish priests, as a matt<;r of i)atronage, just as one reads of appointments in the ollice of the Home Secretary in England, They wanted, in fact, to get the Church under the law, as cvfry Church establishment is — " the creature and slave of the State." As a matter of policy and prudence, all the Catholic Bishops, down to a very recent date, were approved of in England before going to Rome. It is safe to say they called in at Downing street on their way to the head of their own Church. J^iit, on the other hand, it is only fair to the civil authorities to say that //wir desire was generally, if not always, to get an unobjectionable and workable man for so important an ottice. The contest, in this respect, was fought out in Bishop Plessis's time, and the Crown gave up any pre- tensions to the double headship. The statute of Elizabeth was relegated to the region of obsolete law, but, as will be seen presently, not without a severe struggle. :ht be CHAPTER X. Territory within the Treaty lotd the Quebec Act. Th> (Jnrhtc iJiocene. Ca TTENTION has been drawn to the extent of the Diocese 11 of QueV)ec. That portion of it whicli now lies within CT* the United States need not detain us. For twenty years after the Cession the English owned north and south of the Great Lakes, and Quebec claimed Jurisdiction in the valley of the Mississippi, as far t'^uth as New Orleans. After the Treaty of Versailles, in 178'), only six years elapsed until the Catholics of the United States had a bishop of their own, and since that time the history of the (^hurch in the United States would include that of the portion of Canada extendini,' along the Mississippi. None of the territory south of Lakes Erie or Ontario, or west of Lake Huron, though included in the boundaries of Quebec under the Quebec Act of 1771, need be taken into consideration, though for many years after it passed into the hands of the United States authorities the ecclesiastical limits were not the same as the political boundaries. To day this territory includes the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and that portion of Minnesota north of the Mississippi river and east of the meridian line passing through the source of that river — probably the 9")th degree of longitude, counting west from Greenwich. By an Ordinance of Congress, dated July l.'Uh, 1787, for the government of the territory of the United States northwest of the Ohio river, it was declared to be an article of compact between the original States and the people and States in said territory— a funda- mental principle of law to remain forever unalterable — that 1 IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) WJ. < 'C. ^ %> .'< "^ ^# W fe CA w m i 1.0 I.I IIIIIM 1125 13 2 ^ li M 1.8 1.25 1.4 i.6 1 ^m -^ 6" Va & 'f '^A W ^ c-l ■ ^7//// ' * m' . ^>. •r 1 VI "^ Photo[,:aphic Sciences Corporation ^^ C\ ■^^ \ 4^" ^^ \ ^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBST-K.N.Y 14580 (716) 872-450' te €?. w- t 84 Essays on the "no person demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, should ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments/'* So far as the Church in Canada is concerned, the extent of the Diocese of Quebec at the time of the Treaty of Paris, or in 1774, may not be a safe guide in estimating how far the guarantees of the treaty extend. It will be borne in mind that, while the French ceded Canada to the British, they stipulated for the free exercise of religion, but only as regards their own 8ubj<;ots. There was no compact entered into that all other Catholics under British rule in America should be secured in the same rights. The "new" Roman Catholic subjects were the subjects to be protected. Now, it is true that Acadia and Newfoundland and some of the Gulf islands changed masters very frequently, and that, in general, they were under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Bishop of Quebec; but they were, excepting perhaps the Island of St. John (now Prince E^lward Island), and Cape Breton, under the Crown of England before the date of the Treaty of Paris. These inhabitants were, therefore, not new subjects, nor can it be urged with the same force that the guarantees of the free exercise of religion extend outside of the territory actually known as Canada or New France in 1763. The terms of capitulation at Montreal, ind^ud, refer to the "Diocese" and to the "priests and people" in the "towns" and "country places" and "distant posts" and to the "missionaries," but under the usual construction put upon like documents the terms of capitulation would be binding only and until the definitive treaty was executed. They were binding, certainly, for three years, but then came the treaty in which "His *Fermoli v. The First Municipality of New Orleans, 3 Howard, 589, and another caee in the same State, reported in 8 Kob. La. 52. \r Church in Canada. 85 of St. ider [aris. can free ally s of and try but the the nly, His lothcr Britannic Majesty on bis side agrees to grant to the inhabit- ants of Canada the liberty of the Catholic religion. He will, in consequence, give the most exact and effectual orders that his new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rites of the Roman Church as far as the laws of Great Britain permit." The writer, while stating his opinion that the treaty is now to be looked at rather than the terms of capitulation at Quebec and Montreal, is not unaware of the fact that almost every writer who has dealt with this matter has read treaty and capitulations as forming one international bargain. It is difficult to reconcile this with the history of the treaty, and with the general principles applicable to the construction of agreements culminating in one considered and definite docu- ment. Of course, the capitulations are good enough evidence of the desire of the parties, and where they do not offend against the meaning of the treaty, but help to explain it, they ought to be admitted. But it is manifest that entirely new stipulations may have been finally settled by the treaty which were never entertained by the generals who drew up the capitulations. Indeed, these capitulations anticipate other terms. It is a matter of fair argument to say that Catholics within that portion of the Diocese of Quebec which is yet British territory should be included within the guarantees of the Treaty. The construction of such a document should be •liberal and where possible should be read in the light of the capitulations. Nearly every treaty between France and England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries adjusting European matters affected colonists in America, the Anglo-Americans and the Canadians, as the French inhabitants were called. In 1697 the Treaty of Ryswick was signed, and by it the Mil w Hi '*« ill i. 'i| ■I il 80 Kssfiys on the French asserted the Kennebec to be the boundary between them and Massachusetts.^ The entire eastern coast, Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, St. John (now Prince Edward Island), Newfoundland, Labrador, and Hudson's Bay remained to the French. By the treaty of Utrecht, 1713, Nova Scotia, then called Acadia, according to its ancient limits, with the whole of Newfoundland, was given up to England. The French re- tained some reservation as to the fisheries in Newfoundland, and the English secured the fur trade of Hudson Bay. By the Treaty of Aix la Ohapelle, in 1749, Cape Breton, with the islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, was restored to France. Throe years prior to this. Cape Breton had been taken by the English colonists. By a consideration of these treaties it will be seen at once who were and were not already British subjects in what is yet British territory before the Seven Years' War ending with the Treaty of Paris. The inhabitants of Acadia, afterwards two provinces of Canada, were, in 17G3, not inhabitants of Canada, and cocsequently were not "new" subjects, as Acadia passed over to England in 1713 by the Treaty of Utrecht. In a court of law it might not be arguable on the documents and facts to say that the guarantees of the stipulation were coterminous with the boundaries of the diocese, or that New Brunswick or Nova Scotia come within the scope of its benefits. On the other hand, the people of St. John and Cape Breton may fairly be 'Mr. Uarnrau says that soon after 1763 a slice of territorj' \va« detached from Canada anil took the name of New Brunswick with an ailiniiiistration apart. Now No.a Scoiia liad a loj;islature of its own since 1758. and it thf n, arid since 1781, included New Brunswick, but its western boundary was not easily difiried. .\cadia or New Brunswick, when it jiassed into the hands of the English in 1713, had for its western bouridary the Kennebt o Hiver. Great Britain, since that time, lost the ter- ritory between the Kennebec and the present boundary, the St Croix Ki\ er Q it iC le [a r e Church hi Cannda. 87 regarded as citizens of a part of New France, as -'new" sub- jects of the Crown of Great Britain aftt^r the cession, though St. John was under British rule before the treaty and in 1758. However, it was part of the Seven Years' War; Quebec was in the same position, was under British rule since 1759, and Montreal since 17G0. . There is no doubt at all but that the other provinces and territories in Canada, except probably British Columbia and some of the Hudson Bay territory, come within the treaty of 1763 or the act of 1774. A reference to the words of the trei ty will explain this. The territory, ceded to England after the fall of Quebec and the capitulation, is referred to in the treaty, and in the act has already been referred to. Under this treaty there is, therefore, included the province of Ontario and a part of the Northeast territory, along with the present Province of Quebec. These come within the operation of the Quebec Act as well. What the western boundaries of New France may have been in 1763 is not now easy to determine. It was lately the subject of an appeal to the Privy Council between the Pro- vince of Ontario and the Dominion of Canada as to the western limits of this province. These were found to be more extensive than many supposed. But their extreme western limit does not reach into the province of Manitoba, and it would require a consideration of the Red River settle- ment and the wars of the tiader.s to be able to otler any speculation as to whether treaty or act reached westward on the Saskatchewan. The country was explored by Verendrye, under French rule, in the early part of the eighteenth century, and large settlements made. The Hudson Bay charter goes back to the time of Charles II., but the French and English ill .,.^^"H 3 Jf!^ m i*i ;:,ii .d! €. 88 Essays on the were alternately masters of the fur trade, and the settlements were largely made up of the traders and the half-breeds. As regards the Hudson Bay settlement, there were very few Catholicg, the inhabitants being nearly all from the Orkneys of Scotland or from Switzerland. In the Red River settlement and at Sault Ste. Marie there were flourishing French posts with missionaries and a prosperous body of settlers, all Catholic?. The Quebec Act defined thj boundaries of Canada and gave the benefit of a more or less liberal interpretation of the re- ligious guarantees extended to all Catholics within the large area of the new province of Quebec. Beyond this area the act does not go, but the treaty does, and to a considerable extent of territory. Under the Quebec Act there was Labra- dor, from St. John River tD Hudson Biy, Anticosti, and the Magdalen Islands ; under the treaty, the isles of St. John (now Prince Edward Island) and Cape Breton. The OanadaB and parts of the territories are both in the treaty and in the act. It will thus be seen that for a portion of British America the Treaty of Paris applied ; for another portion the Quebec Act applied, aiid for the remainder there seems to have been no guarantee as far as the Church is concernrd. Indeed, in Nova Scotia one of the early Acta of the Legislative Cjuncil was to establish there by law the Church of England. After discussing the question of the extent of the treaty as compared with the Quebec Act, or the benefits accorded by either, assuming that the former extends to the French territory now owned by Great Britain, by virtus of the law of nations, and that the latter (the act) is binding within whatever ter- Church in Canada. 89 icil by er- ritory the Crown of England choao to extend 't, it may be asked what difference would it make to claim under the treaty or under the AcfJ There can be no great difference; the act is fuller than the bare words in the treaty, and is not limited to the old French territory; it may be within larger or smaller bounds, and may, like any other imperial statute, extend its provisions anywhere within the Empire. It may, however, be repealed. Th ! treaty is limited to the old French territory, and cannot be extended beyond the ancient French possessions, nor does it include them all; on the other hand, it cannot be abridged as to that territory. There is no doubt also but that as long as the British Bmpire continues to exist and keep up its standing as a nation, it will be bound to keep faith with France as to the terms of the T|-eaty. The guarantees for * these terms would extend to all Roman Catholics who, at anv time subsequently, were British subjects in the ceded territory. A treaty does not become effete, though it is otherwise with an Act of Parliament: but until the Quebec Act is repealed a mere non-user would not render it lifeless. This act has been expressly recognized for over a hundred years in Canada, and in every great political change has been rtferred to as the basis of all our constitutions. It gives offence at the present day to those who are intolerant of religious freedom to Roman Catholics just as it gave in the years 1774 and 1791. In the famous Declaration of Independence of the United States of America, 1776, there is recited among other grievances of King George III., that he gave assent "for abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, estab- lishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries, so as to render it at once an example and tit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these 7 0\ tub. • ^2 ■1 m I . KJ 90 Ksudijs on the CJiurch in Cunaihi. colonies." This neighboring province was, of course, Quebec^ where, by this Quebec Act, the French laws were not so much introduced as that thej were reinstated, being best suited to the Canadians. A government not much more arbitrary than the other English colonies possessed, was indeed introduced ; but it gave free exercise of their religion to the Roman Catho- lics, the ''new subjects" of the king. It is well known that this concession was not palatable to representatives among whom were those who wished for freedom of religion to all denominatioEs "excepting to the professors of the Church of Rome," — "to all Christians except Papists," — and whose bitter and un-Christian "Address to the People of Great Britain" is one of their lasting disgraces. ■^j^jr" CHAPTER XI. The Church Under Early British Rule— 1759 1791. H'J' fHE second volume of the Mandcments and the Pastoral and Circidar Letters of the Bishops of Quebec^ issued . within the past few weeks, is an elaborate work entrusted to the competent hands of Mgr. Teiu and L'abbe C. G. (iagaon, of Quebec, and will be of interest to all historical students. "*'■ This volume covers a period of over sixty years, from 1741 to 1800, and embraces the last of the old French regime and the first half century of English rule. It closes with Bishop Denaut, and th^ next volume will be of even greater interest, as certain to contain much of the writings of Bishop Pleseia not generally kno»vn to the English speaking public. It was during the episcopate of this distinguished prelate that the vast Diocese of Quebec was divided ; and so every part of the Dominion of Canada, as well English as French, is referred back to those times in tracing the origin of its own diocese. The period embraced in the volumes already published is of interest to the whole of North America. In considering in advance some circurastanceg in the early history of Canada under British rule, the reader will the better appreciate the position of Bishop Plessis and his predecessors ; he will be ab!e also to see more fully the whole situation whci the next vol- ume of the Mandements is put before him. The writer of these pages has necessarily drawn from other authorities, and will This was written in 1888. Another volume has appeared since that year. 'mH I 91 imii Ii ■ l 92 Ehscogni/ed, and was permitted, froely and with decency, to exercise the functions of his state. This is i\\v. substance of the capitulations at Quebec. At Montreal the free exercise of religion was to subsist in its entirety. As will have been noted, the Bishop died on the Stli of June, 1700, so that when the capitulation of Montreal was signed on the 8th of September following, there was no Bishop. This accounts for the extraordinary- looking requKst of th»i Mar(|uis de Vaudreuil, that the French King should continue to name the Bishoj) of the colony. The nomination of a Bishop was the tirst diltioulty, but it did not arise until after the treaty had been signed, and was not adjusted for several years after that date. The Treaij r' Paris (10th of February, lld'S) ^' arantees freedoQi of religion to the Catholics, " so far as the Uws of Great Britain permit." The short fourth clause of the treaty containing this guarantee and this dangerous looking restric- tion of it must not have appeared to the C'anadians so satis- factory as the ditfuse wording of the capitulations. The fnandements that follow the proclamation of the treaty of paace do not contain much on the subject. M. Perreault says : And even though the perfection of religion which you have the honor to profess, and whose free exercise is guaran- tee i by the treaty of peace, had not enjoined on you a scrupul- ous fidelity towards your new and lawful king, gratitude alone would oblige you to it." jM. Bricind refers to the illustrious and charitable General Murray, to whom he had communicated the date a»^d parti- culars of chanting the solemn Te Deum. M. Montgolfier wrote apparently with a bitterness that cost him the dislike of the English, and for which they revenged themselves later. .!>. 'I 96 Essays on the Speaking of the Cession and the king he writes : "You taste already during several years the sweetness ot his reign. Even when he had conquend you by force of his arms, he appeared to prefer the condition that you were no longer enemies to the glory of having vanquished you. He could hurl on you his thunderbolts, but it is apparent only by the voice of his bene- factions. Since you have become his conquest what graces, what favors have you not received at his hands ! Let us not undertake to go into details, they would be infinite ; the most sensible proof of it is your alFection and your respectful attachment to the wise governor who represents so worthily so gracious a sovereign. , . ." The Canons and Chapter of Quebec in the following month (13th September) petitioned tha king that the vacant See bo filled. After stating their position and the necessity of continuing the episcopate, they clearly put down what they required. '• We propose a chapter whose members shall be priests of the seminary, who will have the name and dignity of ("anons without having their obligations because they would have none of their emoluments; that is to say that the Canons des- tined by their state to the celebration of the divine office would only be charged with the service of the people of the city, the care of the seminaries and the instruction of young persons, particularly those intended for the ecclesiastical state. ''In this way with the same foundations and revenues, without multiplying the priests, the Church of Canada would preserve the same state; it would have its bishop, its chapter, and the directors of the seminary; the piety and desires of the clergy would be fully satisfied, and the people also who in point of fact have shown so much sensitiveness in this present Church in Canada. 97 revolution on the question of religion, and who would apprehend its extinction hereafter if your Majesty refused a bishop. The illustrious and wise governor, M. Murray, viewing the good character of the Canadian people and their attachment to the faith of their fathers, has not failed to inform your Majesty that what we say is the exact truth," Two days after this the Chapter met to consider the choice of a Bishop. M. Montgolfer was unanimously elected. Ho set out for England to have his nomination confirmed, but General Murray opposed it and the government would not recognize him. He resigned and named M. Briand, who, in the following September, was elected by the Chapter. The Governor gave 31. Briand a letter of recommendation to the Colonial Secretary, and after all difficulties were overcome, on the 2l8t January, 1766, the Bulls were sent him from Rome. The meeting of the Canons in September, 1763, when M. Montgolfier was elected, is worthy of mention on another account. It was arranged then, as appears, by a joint ma7ideme:it of all the Vicars in authority, that the expenses of a deputation to London should be born — a deputation com- missioned to demand the execution of the fourth Article of the Treaty, as to freedom of religion. An application had been previoufritish Parliament changed the objectionable oath in it to a milder one. The suprea)acy of the King in matters ecclesiastical, however, remained ; and the one aim of all the governors, pnsentfd with greater or less degree of earnestness, was to bring the bishops and the cures under the control of the crown. The very lirst Royal instructions provided that "no person should receive Holy Orders, nor have charge of souls, without a license duly obtained from the Governor. The Governor was strictly to safeguard the supremacy of the King to the exclusion of every power of the Church of Rome, exercised by any of its ministers ir the Pi evince, not absolutely re- quibite for the exercise of a tolerated worship." The Catholic clergy refused to tubmit to this, and some of them left the country and some others were deprived of preferment. The instructions were not interpreted very strictly, for, in the very year in which they were received Bishop Briand was paid a '• , I'll I! ■, , I. I J- i I l!K if- >!)> lift 'H V: r N III 100 Essays on the pension by the Governor. His coadjutor, Monseigneur d' Esglis, had been previously chosen, and recognized by the State, cum fiitura successione, taking the oath of allegiance in full Executive Council. Each Rubsfquent bishop had his co- adjutor in the same way. While over zealous officials were bringing the subject into prominence whenever it could be done, it so happened that there was always more urgent public business for the Governor to attend to. The war of the American Colonies occupied all parties from the Quebec Act until the peace of Paris in 1 783 ; and the Province of Quebec took the intervening time between that date and its own division, in 1791, to consider more important internal matters.* The first Protestant bishop did not appear until 1793, after Upper and Lower Canada were called into exist- ence. The statute law stood in this way until 1791, the Governor and Council jf Quebec having no power to make an ordinance touching religion unless such ordinance bad received the King's approbation. As a matter of fact, no ordinance was passed during these 16 years touching religion, unless we except one of the year 1791. On the 30th of April, 1791, an ordinance, one of the last, was passed in Quebec concerning the construction and repair of churches, presbyteries, and cemeteries. It was ordained by this that whenever it was necessary to form parishes, or to construct or repair churches, presbyteries, or cemeteries, the practice of the old French Canadian law was to be follow- ed. The Bishop could exercise the ancient rights of bishops * \t was a favorite recommendation during this time that no prietit, connected with the BourbotiH, shovild be allowoil into Canada. Priests from Savoy, Lord North wanted. See letters in the Haldimand collection, Canadian Archives. tfi? Church in Canada. 101 under the French regime— the governor those of the Intendant. Protestants were exempt from contributing to the support of the Catholic Church, though this was always the law since 1774, that the accustomed dues and rights of the Roman Catholic clergy were to be paid only by Roman Catholics. The residue of these dues was, by the Quebec Act of that year, appointed for the support of the Protestant clergy, as has p.lready been pointed out. I H M jiilf- V ' i %. IKi . 1^' 'XWi II' 'I If: - II, r li'i >'r ■■>! I ill III ill) III CHAPTER XII. The Church Under Eurhj British Rule— IVJ 1-1 S2iK r tHK (Jonatiiutional Act, 1791, continued all laws in forces as they then exist<3cl, until repealed or varied under its authority. By the 3;'>th section the provisions respect •J ing Roman Catholic clergy were continued in each of the two provinces of Upper and Lower C-anada, subject to be varied or repealed by the Parliament of Great Britain. The next seven sections are taken up with the reservation for the sup- port and maintenanceof a Protestant clergy. This reservation, known as the " Clergy Reserves," was one seventh part of the lands granted by the Crown. This grant was to be applied solely for the purpose mentioned, and for no other ; provision was made for the erection and endowment of parsonages, and the presentation of incumbents as in England under the Juris diction of the Bishop of Nova Scotia. The Act of 171)1 left the Church of England with this pro- vision for its support, and left the Church of Rome to con- tinue in both provinces under the existing law, as set out in the Act of 1774, When Lower Canada had settled down under its new constitution, it was evident from the writing of the time, that the (juestion was likely to be pressed to a definite solution. A man, named Ryland, had been secretary for a number of governors, and, as he grew older, he increased in bitterness against everything Catholic. There lived contemporaneously I Kssni/s on the Clninh 'ni C: if!' 1 •ill 108 EsHdya OH thi crown ?'' Tho answers were unfavorable to the Church and to the yeminarians. Tho lawyers in tho course of a long re- port admit the posHosHory right of tho Sulpicians and the im- propriety of disturbing them ; and as to tho other (lueation they say : "We think therefore that so much of the; patronage of the Jloman Catholic benefices as was exercised by the Bishop under the FnMich (iovernment is now vested in His Majesty" — His Majesty George III. No answer was given to the chief ditKiculty, which, however, was settled in Canada by the force of circumstances. Fn 1775, as the kh\)v Ferland says, •* Sir Guy Carleton declared publicly that if the Province of Quebec had been preserved to Great Britain, it was owing to the Catholic clergy, lie testified his gratitude by allowing the Bishop to exorcise his functions peaceably, and to dispose of the cures at his will without having recourse to the Royal instructions, which seemed to him to have been prepared only for the de- struction of the Catholic religion." The obligations to the clergy seem to have been forgotten as soon as the services of the clergy were no longer necessary ; but when the war of 1812 began, the clergy became important once more. In the interval the governors had tried the methods of persuasion, of bribes and of threats, and in all they were unsuccessful. "They oiler the liishop an estate and revenues," says Mgr. Plessis in 1806; '■'■ haec omnia tibi dabo si cadens adoraveris me. "* \-?i the proceeding year, Attorney General Seweil had discussed the situation with the Bishop, in the course of which the former said: **The government, acknowledging your religion, and avowing its otHcers to be officers of the crown, should provide * "All these thiiis,^s I will give thee if falling down, thou wilt adore me.'' 11 Chiu'ch in Cdnada. 109 for thorn as for all others. The Bishop uhould liave onoii^h to enable him to live in a Hpleiidor buitui)le to his rank; and a coadjutor al »o in proportion." To wliioh the Bishop replied: "I do not wish to see the Jiishop in splendor, but I wish to see him above want. I do" not wish to see him in the I^egislative or Exrcutive Councils, but as an ecclesiastic, solely cntithMl to the rank which is due to him in society." The threats came later and deserve a more extended notice. A year or ho prior to tjie war of 1812, Bishop Plessis had issued a Mandi'inent on the occasion of the imprisonment <>' Pope Pius V'lF., in which he invited the faithful to pray for the Holy Father, lie styled himself Bishop of Quebec, as had been the custom at all limes in Canada This otl'ended tiie Anglican Bishop, Dr. Mountain, and ofbuided the civil authorities as well. " We have ))cen praying for the deliverance of the Bope here," writes the (Governor, Sir James (*raig, to his secretary, Kyland, who was then in England ; and the governor enclosed a copy of the offending pastoral — " as an instance of the complete independ- ence which is assumed." The worthy Ilyland submitted a case to the crown ollicers and asked if the Rev. Mr. Plessis did not render himself liable to a criminal prosecution thereon. The otHcers of the crown, however, paid no attention to the matter, and it wafi completely overlooked by the ministry. A reference to one other circumstance immediately after this will be sufficient to show the perilous position of the Church at this time. The Governor and the Bishop in the course of a lengthy conversation on the whole case, laid open the aims and claims of the conflicting Church and State. This conversation has been preserved in two versions and is Mil •I! m - 'h •f' . *- '. 110 Essaijs on the of considerable importance. It was the last scene before the curtain fell. The Bishop, writing to his Vicar genijral (lioux), says: *' I had yesterday a conversation with Ilia Excellency the Governor, which lasted one hour and three (luarters, in which he exhausted himself, and me also, in speaking, withuut our being al>le to fall into accord upon the only point that was agitated, to wit : the noiiiination of curt's. He viewed it obstinately as a civil affair, and as a prerogative of the Crown which it would never abandon, and which he maintained had been exercised from all time by the Kings of France and England, even before the Reformation of the Church in the latter kingdom. 1 tried to make him understand the essential diii'erence between the patronage exercised over certain bene- fices, whether by the king or by private persons, and the canonical institution, which could only proceed from the Church, and without which all the commissions or no.-:. nations of sovereigns and other patrons, would be of no etffsct." The Bishop in conclusion says: ''That Uaving done as much as my predecessors for the service of Government, 1 ex- pressed a hope that the Governor did not desire to treat me worse than my predecessors ; and further, that I would try more and more to deserve his protection, not so much for myself as for the faithful, in whose salvation I interested my- self ; that divine Providence would bring, without doubti more favorable circumstances, etc. We disputed much, but the Governor was not angry, and we parted at last, little satisfied with each other." The Governor's account of the interview ia in this way * •'I have lately had some conversation with Plessis, r< lative to his situation and that of his clergy. I had once or twice Chnrch in Cdtiadii. Ill loosely talked with him on the suhject, but without entering very particularly into it, as I wished ti-st to be more master of opinions at home upon it. I was therefore a little sur- prised when about a month a^^o he came to me and renewing the subject he expressed a wish that it was finished, and certainly at the moment implying upon the tooting upon which it had stood with his predecessor, Denaut. 1 assured him that I thought there would be no dilliculty. He then told me that he was to go to Three Rivers a day or two after, and re(juested to dnfer entering more p.irticularly into it till his return. Whether he c )nsulted Noiseux or (Jalonue, or both, I know not; but when he returned, I found him entirely changed, for his conscience would by no means permit him to consent to the (Jrown nominating to the livings. I im- mediately told him that it was unnecessary to continue any further conversation, as that was a matter which did not rest upon his assent or denial; the right actually existed in the Crown and would most assuredly sooner or later be resumed Our conversation did, however, continue two hours and a half, but we parted without either inducing the other to change." A short time afcer this conversation Craig was replaced by yir George Prevost, who fortunately for the Bishop and the Church was of a ditferent disposition from that of his predecessor. Tne Bishop prepared a memorial showing what was the position of bishops before the (.ession, and since that time; and also the position it would be proper for them to occupy for the future. Afcer tracing the history down to the year 1807, when his own coadjutor, Mgr. Panet was conse- crated, he sums up the change in Craig's administration in this way: "It is very well known that the bishops of Quebec do not pretend to exercise any other than spiritual authority over I 111 f 1 J\ 1 112 Essays on the the Catholic subjects of their diocese ; and neither their jurisdiction nor their titles were ever contested till these latter years; when some insinuations artfully spread, and some assertions advanced in the courts of justice of this Province, began to throw over the exercise and even over the existence of the (Utholic Episcopate of Canada, certain clouds, calculated to deprive these prelates of the influence which is necessary to them, whiither for the conduct of their flock, whether for the success of services which the govern- ment of His Majesty mij^ht expect from them for the maintenance of good order, or for the security of the Province in moments of invasion. . . For the future, the spiritual powers to be exercised by the Bishop of Quebec should come from the Church by way of the Sovereign Pontiff. He is not permitted to despoil himself of them either in whole or in part, nor to draw thom from any other source. . . . He desires then that he and his duccessors be civilly recognized as Roman Catholic Bishops of Quebec; having under their episcopal jurisdiction all the Catholic subjects of his Majesty; . . . and that the said bishops may enjoy in an acknow- ledged manner the rights and prerogatives up to the present exercised without interruption by those who preceded them in the Government of the Church of (-anada; and further, that the property of the Episcopal Palace be confirmed to the Roman Catholic l>ishops of Quebec, and that they may transmit to the bishops, their successors, the acquisitions which they may have made in that quality." This unmistakable language was preceded by a memo- randum which is worth reproducing, as it puts the conduct of the Bishop in its true light. It will be remembfred tha*-- the Bishops of Quebec had from the time of the Cession been in receipt of a small pension from the Governraeut — a pittance t I Church in Canada. 118 I of two hundred pounds a year; Mr. Sewell had proposed that they live in splendor, as othcers of the Crown should live; Sir George, that they should be put on a respectable footing, as he ternitd it. "I am obliged to declare beforehand," writes the Bishop, when the shilling was again offered, "that no temporal ofl'er can induce me to renounce any part of my spiritual jurisdic" tion. That jurisdiction is not mine. I merely iiold it as a deposit for the Church, which I am in no wise permitted to dissipate, and of which I must render a good account." Whilst the relations between the Church and the State continued in this way, the war of 1812 began. The Bishop, unmindful of past ^injuries, and acting only as his duty impelled him, threw himself with great energy into the defence of his coimtry. lie provided chaplains for the militia, counselled the cur«>s, and issued a stirring address to the warriors who were exposing themselves for the defence of their country and their firesides. The Catholic subjects of the King gave good evidence of their loyalty to the Crown in this serious crisis, and gave it at a time when the loyalty of every man counted. Their services were praised and publicly re- cognized: as to the Bishop himself, long before the treaty of Ghent was signed, the Colonial Secretary wrote to Sir George Prevost as follows: "I have to inform you," Lord Dathurst says, "that His Royal Highness, the Prince Regent, in the name of His Majesty, desires that hereafter the allowance of the Catholic Bishop of (.^hiebec be one thousand pounds per annum, as a testimony rendered to the loyalty and good conduct of the gentleman who now occupies the place, as well as of the other members of the Catholic Clergy of the Province." -1^: i! If i m jtmil 114 Kssdi/s oil the i'. The Anglican Bishop and Mr. Ryland oV>jected to the recognition of the (Jatholic liishop in this way, but they were repulsed by the Secretary of State, who curtly informed Dr. Mountain that it was not an auspicious time to bring up such questions. In tht; course of a year or so, Mgr. Piessis was officially recognized as the Roman Catholic Bishop of Quebec. A Maiidamiis issued on the ."iOch of April, 1817, by which a seat in the Lf^gislative Council of Lower Canada was accorded to him in virtue of his ecclesiastical position. Subsequently, \*y a circular despatch of Lord .John Russell, it was directed that the word "Lord" should be put before the name of the Bishop. So ended the questions of Royal Supremacy, Ec- clesiastical Superintendents, Rights of Benetices, and such kindred matters in the Church in Canada.* No one can iay that the Crown in Canadi ha^ not recog nized the Pope of Rome as the head of the Catholic Church. England has done the same thing, and so for that matter has every power in the world. The Royal Supremacy, except for members of the Church of EngUnd, is no more in force against Catholics, or Methodists, or Baptists, or any of the so called Dissenters, than are the penal statutes of the Tudors. What- ' Tho curious n-Mder will tind iii tliu sixth \m1uiho of (Jhristio's "Canada" the Draft of Letters l\iteiit loi tlie appointiiiciit of a SuiiuriiiteiKlriit for tho Cliurch of ItoMio ill (J.tnada, an elaborate coiapoiitiou i» foai i>a,i,'es of tine typo. A pa^aj^rajih will suHice : (IKolUiK 11. l)Y TilK GKACK OF (loD, KTC, ETC. To atl to whom these presents shall conic. — GEtJETIXG. Whereas, Kn., Ktc. Thorefuro, to this eiiti, we, lia\iii>; u'reat coiitiilencc in the learuin;;, iiMrals, prohity, ami iirudence of our helmeil ,\ I*. , of, etc., haviui; constituted, named ati'.? appointed, and liy these presents do constitute, name and appoint him, the said A K., to Ik' Our Superintendent Kcclesia~ti(al for the afYairs of the Church of Rome in Our rroviiue of Lower Canada, to have, hold, exercise, and enjoy the said otlice of Superintendent Ecclesiastical for the affairs ot (»ur Chureh of Home in Our Province of l,ower Canada for and durinj,' Our Uoyal Pleasure, with a salary of pounds Sterling jier ainium. 1 Church in Canada. 115 ever may have been the position ot other churches, the Catholic Church fairly met the difficulty and overcame it. Amon«;st many other instances the Crown recognized the Supremacy of Rome in 176G in the time of Bishop Hriand of Qi:hWc ; and the Tjpgislature of Upper Canada recognized it in IS'iG in the Diocese of Kingston. The Parliament of the United Canadas in a statute passed in 1815, inc> rporated the Dioceses of Kingston and Toronto "in communion with the Church of Rome." Since Confederation in a half dozen statutes passed in Ontario and in the Dominion of Canada, the same supre- macy has been recognized; and to day it would be as idle to attempt the reviving of the obsolete legislation of Queen Elizabeth as it would be to attempt the reviving and importing of the Ciallican articles of 1G82.* 'Since these essays were written the (i>\ii;lie(; Statute rospo(tir)u the .Jesuits PLstatc has l)oun discussed throui,'hout (Januda ami America, and thi- \ iowa and opinions yiven in the fore^'oiti}; ciiapters aiui othe; ar^'unionts presented v\ith ^'reat clearness and force, especially in the debates in the Doniiniou Parliament. The Premier of Canada, Sir .John Macrdonald expressed the opinion that these ancient statutes were lonir aj,'0 disus(Hl in En'.^laud annt they formed no part of Canada as ceded by Fr . ' , Xk'- ^mg to the English for many years before Qu . "^ ' ' »n the other hand, I'rince Edward Island, calleu l»y oiiv. i lench St. John, and Cape Breton, were part of New Eraace, and came to England under the Treaty of \ Ensni/H on the Church in ConadiL 117 17G3. Newfoundland has never fraternized, politically or ecclesiastically, with British Canada, and is no part of the Dominion. Tftc other two provinces of Canada are Firitish Columbia, on the Pacitic coast, formerly owned by the Hudson Bay Company, and Manitoba, a new creation of the Dominion Government, carved out of the great Northwest, lying between Ontario and the Saskatchewan Valley, which runs westward to the Rocky ^fountains. This latter valley and the great Lone Land to the north of it and Manitoba, extending east to Hudson Bay, is the Northwest Territory, and was formerly the seat of the posts and forts of the Hudson Bay Company and other great fur companies. The remainder of the map eastward to the Atlantic forms the Northeast Territory. These provinces and territories have, of course, their own separate histories. They have their own local laws and, in general, the care of their own domestic concerns. Formerly they were separate colonies of Great Britain, now there is only one colony — rather one dependency — as no one now, except some newly-arrived Englishman, would talk of Canadians being colonists. The new Dominion of Canada dates back only a few years, beginning in 1867 with four provinces and adding others since that date until the present dimensions have been attained. It is plain, therefore, that considerable limitation must be made in speaking of historical matters in Canada, as there are fully half a dozen or more places to be considered, each with a separate history of its own. However, the two Canadas, once the old Province of Quebec, and forming the bulk of what was New France, are very prominently before the mind of the reader of political and ecclesiastical history. They were divorced by the Act of 1791, to be united again in ly40, and ■'I mi 5 118 Esmys on the seemed to be marked out aa political partners, strange enough though the partnership be. The present constitution is the fif.!i or sixth change under British rule within its first century. constitutions the Church hj During all these mutations a history that, though naturally branching out in more recent times with the increase of its children and by force of political changes, nevertheless preserved for a long time one head- quarters in one ecclesiastical province, having to deal entirely with the Crown of England as represented by the governors of Canada. As has been said, all the other fragmentary pos- sessions of Great Britain in America were separate colonies. But the Governor-General of Canada was, in an undefined way, their superior, was Captain General of all the forces, and took precedence of other British governors. Living in Quebec with the Bishop, he seemed to represent the Crown, as did the latter the Church, for all ihe British provinces. The battle of the Church was fought between these two under British rule as it was fought there under the French rule. It was not until the last years of the reign of George the Third that the Bishop of Quebec got his immense diocese subdivided, but the rights of his Church were contested and decided long before this, though by the same heroic bishop. In 1819 Bishop Plessis, having obtained sanction in Eugland and in Rome, estaVjlished vicar-generals in Upper Canada, in New Bruns- wick, and in the Northwest. From that time a particular history in these places is necessary. It is to this period, within which Bishop Plessis (he was Archbishop, but prudently declined to style himself such) and his predecessors, as bishops of Quebec, held the Church in their own hands, that attention has been mainly directed in the foregoing chapters. He and Binhop Lavfctl stand at the end and beginning of the history of that Diocese. Church in C ana (hi. 110 ion Ind of Upper Canada, now Ontario, was the resort of United Empire loyalists, and many others, to whom the rule in Lower Canada or Quebec was displeasing, and it is now, a'? it always has been a part of Canada.* In 170(> Newfoundland had been erected by th(! Holy Father into a Vicariate Apostolic, and the same condition of things began in Nova Scotia in the year 1S17. The other portions of Canada were under the supervision of the Bishop of Quebec. Louisiana had passf d out of French control to Spain soon after the midtlle of the last century, and, in 1793, had its bishop, who was sutlVagan of San Domingo; so that nothing remained to England south or west of the Great Lakes, though the mission in Detroit was still prac- tically under the care of J^ishop McDonell, auxiliary of the Bishop of Quebec and later the first Uishop of Kingston, t As will be seen later, there was a certain analogy between the political and ecclesiastical divisions in Canada. What we call the Maritime Provinces, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, now form one ecclesiastical province, and besides the popular name, the < 'onstitution of (anada considers these as one division for purposes of representation in the Senate. Queb' c and Ontario were also ecclesiastical provinces at the time of Confederation; and are separate political provinces, and the remainder of Canada went to make up the fourth ecclesiastical province. It has a Senate representation with reference to its population, so that four divisions obtain in each, though as to the Northwest the analogy is not so complete as in the other three. I'here are still vicariates apostolic in Canada. Newfoundland stands 1 ' M S-' i * See appendix C as to the Chinch in Ontario. t See Reminiscences of this Bishop by Chevalier McDonell, K.H.S. 120 Essaijs on the Church in Canmhi. aloof from the political combination of 1867, and is yet a colony of the empire. She also forma no part of any ecclesi- astical province of Canada, being directly suV)jpct to the Holy See. The western portion of the island was made an Apostolic Preft^cture in 1871, and is called St. George. The Fr^mch islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence form another Apostolic Prefecture. There are in Canada about two millions of Catholics, over two thousand churches and about twenty-two hundred priests. Besides the system of Separate Schools for elementary education in three of its provinces, there are forty eight colleges, pixteen theological seminaries and about two hundred academies. The hierarchy is composed of one Cardinal (Archbishop), six Archbishops, sixteen bishops, five Vicars- Apostolic, and one Prefect- Apostolic* ♦The ancient Sec of Quebec is presided over by a Cardinal ; Montreal, Toronto, Kinjfston, Halifax, Ottawa and St. Honiface by Anilibishops. In the Province of Ontario tliere are Sees at f>ondoi), Hamilton, Peterborouf^h and Cornwall. In Que- bec, at Chicoutinii, Nicolet, Uiniouski, St. Hyacinth, Sherbrooke, and Three Kivers ; in New Hrunswick, Cii itham and St John ; in Nova Scotia, Anti^roninh ; in Prince Edward Island, Charlottctown ; \n the Northwest, St. Albert ; and in British Columbia, Vancouver Inland. There are V'icariates-Apostolic in Arthabagca-Mackenzie, and British Co'umbia, with two bishovw in each, and the Vicariate of Pontiac with one bishop. The Pre- fecture Apostolic includes Anticosti and other British islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.— Sa (filer's Catholic Almanac, 1890. I I APPENDIX A. Note to Page 41. 11 As to the nature of the Parliament of Paris, hear what Count de Maistre says of it: "Protestant dans le seizieine siecle, frondeur et Jans^niste dans le dix-septiome, philo?ophe enfin et r/'publicain dans les denic'res annexes de sa vie, trop souvent le Parlement s'est montr^ en contradiction avec lea vt'ritables maximes fondamentales de I'Etat. Le germe Calviniste nourri dans ce grand corps devint bien plus dangereux lorsque son essence chaogea de nom et s'appela Jans^nisme. Alors lea consciences 6taieut mises a I'aise par une ht'^rt^sie qui disait : je n'existe pas ; le venin atteignit mome ces grands noms de le magistrature que les nations etrangtres pouvaient envier ii la France. Alors, toutes lea erreurs, miitne les erreurs ennemies entreelles, t''tuent tiujours d'accord contre la v(^ritt^, la nouvellc philosophic dans les parlements s'allia au Jans^nisme contre Rome. Alors le Parlement devint en totality un corps v^'ritablement anti-Catholique, et tel que sans Tinstinct royal de la maison de Bourbon et sans I'inHuence atistocratique du clerg6 (il n'en avait plus d'autre) la France eut i't6 conduite infailliblement b. un achisme absolu. " Encourages par la faiblesse d'une souverainet^ agoniaante, les magistrate ne gard^rent plus de mesure ; ils regent^rent les (^'veques, ila saisirent leur temporel ; ils appeRrent comme d'abus d'un institut reli- gieux devenu fran9iia depuis deux si^oles, et le deolar^rent, de leur chef, anti-franyais, antisocial, et meme impie, aana a'arreter un inatant 9 too .1 W 4^ , [jijH'iuilr. (levant iin uoncilo ii'cuiiu'iii(|iie (|iii I'avait (li-clciK-, pieux devant lo aouverain I'ontifo urpose. Am I to understand the tithe to be absolute so that you are not to alter it, and that it is contemplated to give to his M ijcsty the power of applying that tithe to the support of which clergy he p!easj8 ''. **TiiK .Solicitor Gkni;ral. — ''Though I wish to tolerate the Popish religion, I do no!: wisli to encauragi; it. \^"hen we tell the Roman Catholics of ('anada that -ve will Lot oppress them, we, at the same time, tell the followers of the Cliurcli of Kugland tliat whenever their faith shall prevail, it will have a right to its establishment. As soon as the majority of a parish -shall be Protestant inhabitant. . then I think the ministers of the Crown arc bound to make the minister of that parish a Protestant clergymen ; then, I think, it could not be felt by any man an act of injustice to say that the whole revenue of that parish shall be paid to the Protestant clergymen." '• IjORD North. — 'Sir, as you have pointed to mo, I presume to offer my sentiments, to explain the views I had when I made this amendment. I was in hopes of meeting the objections which had been made against the l)ill as it stood before. Those objections are two : one, that no care was taUen of the Protestant clergy ; that no establish- ment had been thought of for them ; that, in the course of this bill, we had not only tol -. \tc(l, but established the Roman Catliolic religion, and that nothing had been thought of for the Protestant clergy. I am persuaded, in the present state of thut country, the Protestant religion does not call much for support ; but the ho^io of greater encouragement should be held out to it. A small establishment, however, will be suf- ficient at present. The f peace, anxious to pro- mote good will and good followship among men. To establibh, in the m 1*1 ^r !-.., 126 A2yj)endix. 'i '!i judgment of the learned gentlemen, is not to encourage ; in my judg- ment it is to encourage ; and especially if this is to be the predominant religion. I do not like domineering in religion. 1 do not think the religion of the many ought to be the religion of the few. According to my apprehension those few have as good a right to judge for them- selves as those many. Kvery man has a right to pursue his own opinion ; no man ought to be permitted to control that of another.' "Mk. Stanley — 'There is no inconvenience in supposing two religions established in the same country. For example, the establish- ment of the Roman Catholic religion has by no means excluded the Protestant.' "Mr. Thomas Townsend, Jr. — *I want to see some specific provision immediately made in Canada for the Protestant religion. I was concerned to hear that nine or ten years ago there was not a single place of worship for the Protestant, which I consider to have been a great disgrace to the English governor. I was surprised at an expres- sion dropped by the noble lord, ' that the Protestant religion in Canada at present was hardly an object worthy of consideration.' During the whole of these discussions, paius have been taken by the Prime Minister of this country, and Chancellor of the University of Oxford, to rank the Protestants in Cinada as low as possible in number, consequence and character.' "Lord North.— ' The honorable gentleman is word-catching. I certainly did say that the Protestant inhabitants were so few that they were hardly worthy of attention ; but I explained it at the time. What I meant was that tliey were not sulUciently numerous at present to make it necessary for the legislature to provide establishments and a revenue for them. With regard to the bishop, it is my opinion — an opinion founded in law — that if a Roman Catholic bishop is professedly subject to the king's supremacy, under the act of Queen Klizabeth, none of those powers can be exercised from which dangers are to be apprehended.' "Mr. Edmixi) BruKK. — • The noble lord says he makes the pro- position contained in the amendment in order to make the clause palatable : but i*" not liked, he has no objection to withdraw that amendment. Are they then mere nugatory words, since thoy are ■I i Appendix . I'll )ro- Ikuse hat are drawn with such extreme levity ? Then I promise mine as a better candidate for the consideration of the committee. But before I pro' ceed, allow me to state, in a few worda, my opinion with re^'ard to the principle of toleration. There ia but one hauling Catholic principle of toleration which ought to hud favor in tin's House. It is wantetl, not only in our colonies, but here. The tliirsty earth of our own country is gasping and gaping, and crying out for tli:it healing shower from heaven. The noble lord has tohl you oi the right of those ptMjplc l»y the treaty ; but I consider the right of con(juest so little, and the right of human nature so much, that the former lias very little consideration with me. I look upon the people of Canada as coming, by the dis- pensation of (jlod, under the Biitish government. I wouM have ua govern it in the sauiC manner as the all-wise disposition of Providence would govern it. We know He suH'crs the sun to sh'ue upon the righteous and unrighteous ; and \vc ought to autl'jr all classes, without distinction, to enjoy the right of worshipping God according to the light he has been pleasf'd to give them. The word " estal)lishod " has been made use of ; it is not only a crime, but sonietlung unnatural to establish a religion, the tenets of which you do not believe. Applying it to the ancient inhabitants of Canada, how does the (|uestion stand ? It stands thus : Vou have got a people professing the Roman Catholic religion, and in possession of a 'naintenance, legally appropriated to its clergy. Will you deprive them of that? T^ow that is not a ([uestion of "establishment ;" the establisliment was not made by you ; it exist- ed before the treaty ; it took nothing from the treaty ; no legislature has a right to take it away ; no governor has a right to suspend it. This principle ia confirmed by the usage of every civili/.ed nation of Europe. In all our con(juered colonies, the established religion was confirmed them ; by which I understantl that religion should receive the protection of the state in those colonies ; and I should not consider that it had received such protection, if their clergy were not protected. I do say that a Protestant clergyman going into that country does not receive the protection of the laws, if lie is not allowed to worship (Jod according to his own creed. Is this removing the sacred landmark ? What I desire is that every one should contribute towards the rcdigion which he professes ; and if this is proper to be done, why not do it immediately ? "TiiK Attouxky-Gkskral. — 'The present question turns upon the merits of two propositions. The one moved by the noble lord II m f . S 128 Appendix. I 'I III stands in a very small compass — " let those inhabitants who profess the Popish religion continue under the obligation of payins; tithes for the maintenance of the Popish clergy." But as there are a certain number of persons in the province who do not profess the Popish religion, some regulation ought to be entered into with regard to their tithe. The noble lord proposes a clause referring it to the king, to ap- point the payment of their tithe, in such course and order as his Majesty's wisdom shall suggest, for the support of the Protestant clergy. Another plan which has been proposed is that instead of the tithes of the Protestants being paid as circumstances may require, they shall be paid to the receiver- general. They are not even then to be disposed of, even by his Majesty, as the exigency requires, but to be paid to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts i 80 that instead of the disposal of the tithe being committed to the king, we are called upon to declare by our vote, that it is a titter thing to place greater confidence in the wisdom and discretion of a religious corporation. I should never have thought of referring this to the opinion of the House. I have no difficulty in saying that the first pro- position is infinitely the better of the two.' " This is substantially all there is preserved of the debates on the clause as to religion, though there was considerable discussion on the second reading of the bill, when its principle was discussed. I :;fi III I) r — n 1 i ^^^J^jP Pfi IP y^yafe^jg^ 1 'ess W^&^k bjj^'^r^M ^M ^^^^^^^ i for .ain )ish leir u j ap- 1; APPENDIX C. Note to Page 119. The following is the substance of part of a lecture delivered by the writer in the year 1886, and may contain some information useful for the young student. It refers to the Church in Upper Canada, now Ontario, and can be read in connection with Chevalier MacDonell's Reminiscences of Bishop MacDonell, published since that year. Some additions have been made to the lecture in order to bring the informa- tion down to date. The old Province of Upper Canada being part of the ancient Province of Qaebec until the year 1791, was subject to the laws and ordinances made under the Quebec Act of 1774, until these were repealed by virtue of the Act of 1791. This latter Act made provision for the Church of Eagland, just aa the former had made provision for the Church of Rome. The Crown of England, in order to maintain its own Church, set apart one-seventh of all the public lands in Canada for that purpose. This appropriation gave rise to what is known as the Clergy Reserves, and for fifty years they furnished material for religious strife. Prior to 1833 this favored Church received over 22,000 acres of land, and there was every possible attempt made to establish it in thii country by law, just as it was established in England. The Church of Scotland made an effort to secure some of the lands and succeeded in its legal claim to the extent of obtaining 1160 acres before the year re ferred to. The Catholic Church was less fortunate, but, however, Becured 400 acres. The Anglicsan and Catholic lishops and clergy were il $■ Wit I mmm III n V .11 130 Appi'ud'ix. paid considerable sums ot money during the first half century, and the Presbyterians and Methodists came in for a share also ; but the law very slowly recognized any other churohes than the first two named. An Act was indeed passed in 170S, authorizing cert;iin ministers of " the (jluirch of Scotland, or I^utheraiis or Calviyists" to celebrate the ceremony of matrimony, but it was a very disa^'reeable piece of legisla- tion, as wa.s a subsecjuent Act regarding Methodists, Tithes for Protestant clergy were abolished about the year ls;iO/ The legislature in Upper (Jinada did not interfere with the Catholics or their Church, and left both to continue umler the Quebec Act. I'liat was in force, at all events until the year ISOT, if it be entirely repealed by the Imperial Act of that year. In 18.S2 a Hill originated in the Legislative C •> ini •> 4 Upper Canada " For the relief of Roman Catholic congregations in this Province," but was rejected by the House of Assambly. Tvv. ;yej'K lat'^** an Act was passed for the management of certain lands in the x'owiship of Sandwich belonging to the R. C. congregation, but it was reserved by the Governor. The first Act recognizing the Catholic Church, and that with a fortign supremacy, was the Act ini,or})orating the Dicceses of Kingston and Toronto in 1S45. The Catiiolic Bishop, after the year 18'27, was paid a stated sum of money, and there were also various sum-i apportioned out by the (lovernment to the ditl'erent parishes. Tithes were introduced for the Catholic clergy as far back as the year 1063 ; but the tithes were not the tenth part of everything as the word properly signifies. Tithes in the Canadas were the one twenty sixth bushel of grain, and did not apply to anytiiing except grain, or produce of the ♦leld. That is the meaning the word luis in (,|uebec now, and what it meant formerly ia Upper Canada, when, as was said, tithes were collected in Sandwich and in (ilengarry. The early missions ir. that pirt of Canada, or New France, now within Ontario, refer to Penetmguishene, Sault Ste Marie, Sandwich, Keut('' Mission and many others founded over two hundred years ago. ■ III 1S31 tlujri' was a UcMorfc to tlie Iif,nslati\ c Assoiiibly of rp])cr Taiiada, in these words: "Your ciumiiittee do not aitiiiit tliat the Chiircli of Kiiiilaiid is the cstahlishtid (Miurch df th'.s l'ro\ iiice, ami are therefore of opinion that the l",xecnti\e, if jtossesseii of the rinht, niinht a)>point a nietiib r of any sect of Christians to oHiciate as chaplain of this House, coiistituteil as the Mouse of Assembly now is, and nuist always continue to lie, of iiersons of \arious reliuioiis denominations. The appointment ot any chajilain will in all probability lie unsatisfactory to a majority of the House." Ajipnid (.i. 131 IM Itlll! ]^»'. to uid Che of These were conducted by .lesuitp, or Keoollects, from Old l-'ratice. The names of Brelxiuf, Lulemant and .Jogucs art familiar to most readers of American or Canadian history. In lliOT, Kenelon, a relative of tlie great Archbisliop of Camliray, ami Trouvc, undertook tlie Kentt- Mission in Luke Ontario, at the expense of tlie seminiry of I'aris ; and Dollier, (ialiuee and others labored alun*^ Lake Erie and the neigh- boring country. The hi.story of these misi-ions can bd found elsewhere, and the reader's attention will here be britlly directed to events within the present century. Bishop Plessis, as has ])een stated heretofore, was Catholic Bishop at Quebec shortly after Upper Canada was called into existence in 17'Jl. About the year IS' '4 he confided the .spiritual care of the Province to the Reverend Alexander MacDonell, who had one assistant, and these two did all the missionary work between (Uengarry and Sandwich, After the lapse of a dozen years or so a priest was stationed at Perth and another at Kingston, and the total numl)er of priests iacreased to six : two at St. Jluphael's, the llev. A\r\. MacDunell and .John Mcl)(juell, the former subs* (piently Disliop, and the latter his Vicar-(ieneral ; J''athers Delamothc of Tertli, IVrinault of Kingston, Marchand of Sandwich, and Crevier (named also a vicaire)of Sandwich. The only other clergymen at this date in this Province were the clergy- men of the Church of England — about ten in all. In 1S19 the diocese of Quebec was erected into an archdioc se (though Bishop Plcssis did not assume the title) with two sutl'ragan or auxiliary bishops, one for No^'a Scotia and one foi' New lirunswick. la the same year, some months previously, Upper Canada was created a Vicariate-Apostolic and Father MacDonell was consecrated its Vicar- Apostolic and Bishop of Hisina in pa; /Hms on the last day of the year 1820. Some difliculty havirg arisen as to the recognition of his iliocese, he went to England and arranged the matter satisfact(jrily. Kingston was named as the Episcopal See and in the year iS'Jti it was erected into a diocese. It is stated to be the first diocese established in a British colony since the so-called Reformation. Bishop Macdoaell did niissionary work in Canada for thirty-six years, and died in the year iS-tO. lie is a martial figure in the history of the Church in this country, and had many diMi oulties to encounter. He had been chaplain in Ireland durirg the troubles of '98; he lived ''k i K^ if 132 Appendix. 1^ through those riots agaiiiHt Catholics in Scotland that followed the Gordon riots in England ; lie was inisbionary in Canada during the war of 1812 and Bishop of KinKstou during the Rebellion of 1837. He was a man that might have gone to the Crusades and would have prayed and fought as seemed best to him at the time. He wast named a Legisla- tive Councillor shortly after tlie creation of his See, and was in receipt of a considerable pension from tlie government of the day. lu 1830 there were (ifteen priests in Upper Canada, many of whom were not unknown to persons now living. The Bishop lived at Glen- garry and had two chaplains, Rev. John McDonell and Rev. James Campion, with the Rev. M. Dempsey as secretary. The Very Rev. W. P. McDonald and \V. J. O'Grady are given as Vicars General. Father L^lor was the assistant priest of Vicar McDonald at Kingston. Father Edward Gordon attended to the mission of York and Adjala ; Father CuUen to Niagara, Guelph and Dundas ; Father Fluett to Amherstburg ; Father Crevier to Sandwich and Rochester ; leaving to the east Father James Crowley, of Peterbt^rough ; Father Michael Brennan for Hallowell and Marmora; Father Angus McDonell for Bytown ; Father O'Meara, Prescott and Brockviiie ; and Father William Frazer for St. Andrews and Cornwall. Bishop Gaulin is set down as in charge of Cornwall for the year 1832. Of others long since passed away there were, about the years 1830-5, Father O'Connor, of Guelph ; Father Lynn, of Niagara ; Father Michael Russel, of the Gore ; Father Downey, of London ; Father Cassidy, of Guelph ; Father McDonough of Port Hope, and Fathers Bennett, Cameron, Butler, Keenan, Hay, Lostrie, Morin, Polin and Moore in other places. In this year the Bishop and clergy were paid eleven hundred pounds sterling, and for churches seven hundred and forty-one pounds. During 11 years prior to 1835 Bishop MacDonell received £3,552; Dr. Strachan for nine years, £12,827.2.10. In 1834 the number of missions increased to ,34 and the total number of Catholics 15,785.' There were also churches in course of erection at Hamilton, Paris, Waterloo Township, and in the Newcastle and Home Districts in 1832 Dr. Rolph says, and he aiids that " Bishop MacDonell has long since desired to erect a college for the education of youth for ♦ The Government papers and almanacs of the time do not appear to include the French missions. AppflHl'lX. 133 sars ;her ;her ers and aid laud nell 834 of at me ell for the the priesthood in a beautiful aud commanding piece of groutd, skirted by a fine grove of lofty and majestic pines overlooking the town and suburbs of Kingston, together with the 8t. Law rence and Lake Ontario and their lovely islands." A gift of £1,000 by Cardinal Weld for the purpoee of building a college at Guelph is mentioned in early days ; and the same writer. Dr. Rolph, says that there was :n Prescott a very elegant stone building, erected by the Catholics, denominated the Grenville College, over which the Rev. J. W. Campion presided. After the death of Bishop MacDonell, in 1840, he was succeeded by his coadjutor. Bishop Claulin, who died iu 1857. In 1841 the large Diocese of Kingston was divided, leaving the western part of Upper Canada to form the See of Toronto ; forty-one years later the ancient See was again shorn of part of its western territory, out of which the Diocese of Peterborough was created ; aud in this present year (1890) a portion of its eastern territory has been formed into the Diocese of of Alexandria. In 1848 the Diocese of Ottawa (Bytown), was erected, and in 1856 the Dioceses of London and Hamilton formed out of the Diocese of Toronto. Toronto was elevated to a Metropolitan See in 1870, Ottawa in 1880, and Kingston in 1889. In 1859 the See of Lon- don was changed to Sandwich and remained there for ten years, after which time London became the Episcopal See as it was originally in 1856, and has so continued to the present time. In 1874 the Right Rev. J. F. Jamot was raised to the episcopal dignity and made Vicar- Apostolic of Northern Canada ; and iu 1882 the Right Reverend Z. N. Lorrain was similarly elevated and made Vicar-Apostolic of Pontiac. The total Catholic population of Ontario in 1889 is about 350,000, with about 350 priests, The following gives the names and dates of the deaths of the deceased Bishops, and of the one deceased Archbishop of this Province : Toronto— Archbishop Lynch, 1888. Kingston— Bishop MacDonell, 1840. Bishop Gaulin, 1857. Bishop Phelan, 1857. Bishop Horan, 1875. Bishop O'Brien, 1879. Present Archbishop, the Most Reverend James Vincent Cleary, Bishop in 1880; Archbishop in 1889. I m lai AppcuiVix. J Toronto— Bishop Power, 1847. Bishop Charbonnoll, (resigned in 1860). Present Archbishop, the Most Reverend .John Walsh, 1889, Auxiliary liishop, the Right Rev. Dr. O'Mahony. OrrAWA— Bishop (iuigues, 1874. Present Archbishop, the Most Reverend Dr. Duhamel, Bishop 1884 ; Archbishop 1886. Hamiltov -Bishop Farrell, 1856. "■' Bishop Crinnon, 1874. Bishop Carberry, 1883. Present Bishop, the Right Reverend T. J. Dowling, 1839 ; tranS' lated from Peterborough. London — Bishop Pinsonneault (resigned 1866), 188.3. This prelate was succeeded by the Right Reverend (now the Most Reverend) John Walsh, in 1867, is Bishop of Sandwich, and in 1869 the latter was translated to London. In 1889 Dr. Walsh was promoted to the Archiepiscopal 8ee of Toronto. The See of London is at present vacant. PKTERBOUoudii — Bishop Jamot, 188(5. In 1887 the Right Rev. Dr. Dowling was consecrated Bishop of Peterborough and translated to Hamilton in 1S8!>. Present Bishop, the Right Reverend R. A. O'Connor, 1889. Alexandkia. — VicARiATK OK Al(U)Ma— This N'icariate in the year 1882 was merged in the Diocese of Peterborough. Vicariate ok Pontiac— Present Bishop, the Right Rev. Dr. Lorrain. Members of the Papal Household : Monseigneur Proulx, Toronto (deceased). Monseigneur Farrelly, Belleville. Monseigneur Bruyere, London, (deceased). Ontario clergymen and laymen honored in Rome : Rev. Dr. Kilroy, Stratford. Rev. Dr. Tabaret (deceased), President Ottawa University. Rev. Dr. O'Connor, President Sandwich College. ^ " Chevalier Casgrain, Knight Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem. . . ^. Chevalier MacDonell, Knight Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem. i ^ THE END. ^.