i' IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) A ^ "V 7y 1.0 I.I -1^ |2.5 u liiS 1^ Kfi IIIIIM 1.8 1.25 1.4 iiji/s «M 6" ► ^ # >• ^.4 f '/ Hiotographic Sciences Corporation «v ,v fv ^ ». 23 WIST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^ HI CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CSHM/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 Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ □ Couverture endommag6e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurte et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) r~| Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ n a n Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ReilA avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La raliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutAes tors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont pas M fiimies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplAmentaires: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il iui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les di^taiis de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. D D D D V D D D D Coloured pages/ Pages de couhur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurAes et/ou peiiicuiies Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colortes, tachet^es ou piqu6es Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es Showthrough/ Transparence Qualitv of print varies/ Quality in6gale de I'impresoion Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplAmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Mition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by erratn slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possiblo image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmies A nouv^au de fa^on A obtenir la meilleure image possible. Th to Tl P< o1 fil Oi b( th sii ol fil SJi Ol Tl si Tl w IVI di er b( "1 re m This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de rMuction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X J 26X »X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X 9ils du difier jne lage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: National Library of 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. 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 b^ck cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Bibliothdque nationale du Canada Las images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film^^ et en conformity avec ies conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont film^s en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la durnidre page qui comporte une e? preinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film^s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreintn d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The iaCt 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 symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols y signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too la'ge 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 filmds d des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de {'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. ratn 9 lelure, I A 3 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 I 5 6 AWFUL EXPOSURE or THE ATROCIOUS PLOT FORMED BY CERTAIN INDIVIDUATES AfiArX.ST TIIR CLERGY AND NUNS OF LOWER CANADA, THROUGH TIIK INTERVENTION OP MARIA MONK. WITH AN AUTIIBNTIC NARRATIVE OK HER MFK, FRO:.t HER BIRTH TO THE PRESENT XOMENT AND AN ACCOUNT OF HER IMPO3ITI0N8, ETC. Aurl parra fames quid iion mortalitp pectora cogis I ! i\E]V.YORK: PRlNTF.n FUP JONES & CO. OF MONTREAL. I 1 5 1 4 1 Entered, according to the act of Congress, In the year 1836, by S. Adams, in the Clerk's ollice oi'tlic District Court of the Southern District of New- York. t INTRODUCTION. The Pamphlet of the " Awlul I>l5«//|f 't/i ^ object of it is no less than to iniiict niCb'KV'%Hc injury on the reputation and etiicietic\ pf lit^ ministers of the Roman Catholic iaitli i;. L^v/ifi Canada, and on the hitlierto unblei.iis/li^'L fame of the Conventual institutions oi' thcti ; ig> vince. Let it be admitted that sucli a w t-j .. might be undertaken with a conscientious per- suasion of its justice -and necessity, the public would still look for and expect to find strong and unquestionable evidence in justification of the act of the accusers. If that evidence were really produced, it would indeed be difficult to over-estimate the importance - f the question be- tween Maria Monk and her supporters on the one hand, and the Catholic clergy and religi- ous establishments of Lower Canada on the other. If inquiry should substantiate and prove the charges against these latter, it would then become a question whether piety, charity, humility, or Christian virtue, had any real abiding place upon earth. For it would follow, that men visibly engaged through a long course INTRUDIC TIOX, of years in tlir active (liscfiar""^ oftlio wo^X sa- cred fuiictions, may nevertheless he stained by the Ijahitiial ijiduls-.-nce of the blackest crimes ; and that wovnen, whose vows consecrate them to the j-ervice^of (jJod, and who fulfil those vows in works of mercy to (jJod's creatures, may at the same time be plmig-ed deep in revolting sensuality. Individu.il liypocrisy may be allow- ed and credited without seriously affecting our belief in human virtue ; but hypociisy so ex- terisiv'^' as that charsred in the work we are corlsi'dering, if proved and luiveiled, would shake to the very foundation our faith in the existence of relig-ion and morality. Tlie very nature of tliat hypocrisy is in itself monstrous and appalling. You who have recid the " Aw- ful Disclosures," look at the picture Avhich is presented to your understandings ! Contem- plate the demand which is made on your cre- dulity ! Mark that aged woman watching over the bed of the pestilential and the dying, mark her fearless intrepidity, her self-abnegation, and her merciful ministrations ! See ! her hand smooths the pillow of that tossed and troubled man, she carries to his lips the reposing draught, he sleeps ! Now see if you can — if your vision will admit the picture, if your understanding will admit the belief, that same woman, in the broad glare of the next day's sun, doing a deed of Murder! Mark that man in the habili ments of a servant of God ! Where is he ? What does he I He stands at the side of the plague-strickeuj he administers the last rites of 1 % IxN'TRODUCTION. Religion — he prays, and his words carry hope and consolation to the dying. Again, look and behold that identical being treading with stealthy pace his way to the commission of hideous de- bauchery within the precincts of an Hospital. There is no exaa^iJ:eration in these contrasts. The duties of the nuns and priests have been and are such as we have ascribed to them. — Now we ask the ten thousand readers of the book, if the deeds therein alleged are not incom- patible with human nature, — if any thing that is known of man's capacity for crime can ren- der them credible ? Scrutinize the annals of vice, and where will be found any thing ap- proaching the horrors imputed in the " Disclo- sures," to the Roman Catholic clergy and orders of Lower Canada ? Protestant historians, in dwelling on the enormities oi the Catholics in the worst of times, have never charged them with the turpitudes related in this book. Luther, the violent and ruthless Luther, in justification of his attacks on the Roman Catholic church, never urged the existence of corruption so horrible. Tiiis remark applies with still greater force to his fellow-laborers and successors. At the close of the last century, and in enervated Italy, the Grand Duke ot Tuscany ordered an inquiry into the state of the religious establishments within his dominions ; and the result of the in- quiry was, that reform was judged necessary. Ricci, bishop of Pistoia, was appointed by his sovereign to conduct and bring to a termination that reform. The life of Ricci has been writ- a2 O INTRO DUCT I OK. ten by an acute liistorian, and in no friendly spirit to the church of Rome. It was consider- ed that in that work the worst was said, and the worst was proved, that could be advanced against the Conventual sy stern. The debased civiliza- tion of the country where the reform was under- taken, opposed but a feeble barrier to the prac- tice of vice in every condition and class of socie- ty, and it was not surprising that some corrup- tion should have penetrated into the holiest sanctuaries. The existence of the corruption was however known to the Tuscans previously to the legal inquiry. They cared not for it, nor murmured against it. How different is the case with Canada ! Its population, seated in a region of snow and ice, is primitive, moral, and strictly religious. The people neither know of nor sus- pect the existence of corruption among their priests. The few convents in the country are in the nature of seminaries for the instruction of youth, and asylums for the poor and wretch- ed. There are noriC others. In Tuscany, the convents which were found to require reform, were close convents ; that is to say, their inmates never came in contact with the people, either as nurses to the sick, teachers of youth, or minis- trators of the helpless. But, notwithstanding these differences more favorable to the existence of corruption in one case than in the other, the deeds alleged in the life of Ricci must appear comparatively innocent to the believer in the enormities detailed by the writer of " Passages in the Life of Maria Monk." Is there such a 1N'»^R0DUCT10N. man ? We know not ; but if there is, he must be possessed of a mind capable of dweUing on the possible blood-thirstiness of a William Penn, or the possible misanthrophy of a Howard. Turn we now to the supporters of this work, and let us ask, where is the evidence in justi- fication of the unheard of charges they have brought? Let them point to it. Will they have the hardihood to pretend that the testimo- ny of an unhappy female, recently imprisoned for theft, and still more recently the inmate of an Asylum for repentant sinners, will serve such purpose ? Does the corroboration of a man re- pudiated by his class for dishonesty and pecula- tion- -the paramour of their wretched protege — does it give assurance of their conscientious persuasion? Is it even true that they have produced the evidence of the thief and prosti- tute ? Is the book which bears her name, really written by Maria Monk l Impossible, for she is in fa^i. and by her own confession, an igno- rant ana uneducated girl. It cannot be receiv- ed as her own evidence, although produced in her name. It may be alleged that all the mate- rials were obtained from her own lips, and that the editor or editors have merely arranged for the public eye the matter she supplied. In thsit case they have been guilty of tampering with the evidence, a misdemeanor for which there is no excuse nor palliation. We again refer to the life of Ricci as an unexceptionable model in this respect. There the minutes of all the examinations which occurred in the 8 INTRODUCTION. course oi Ricci's inquiry, with day and date, and names of witnesses and of parties, are minutely set down. In the " Awful Disclosures," there is not a single date from the commencement to the end ! The work announces a disgusting alUance between false Christianity and female profligacy of the worst description. In Canada, this attempt to unite the ravings, puerilities, and loathsome fabrications of a disturbed intellect Avitii the ends of piety and religion, was received with nothing but contempt ; but in the United States the work has, as we are told, gone through two editions of ten thousand copies each, and has been circulated by the zeal of fanatical and interested propagandists throughout the entire land. It has even been publicly recommended from the pulpit as an antidote to the " errors of Popery;" and the heroine has been honored by reports of hair-breadth escapes and of defeated conspiracies for her abduction. We would fain have believed that religious fanaticism, in its more odious form of gross ca- lumny and pernicious hatred, had nearly depart- ed from the civilized world ; but the reception given to the " Awful Disclosures " of Maria Monk shows that it still has an extended habi- tation in a country claiming to be pre-eminently enlightened, and that in that country it may one day become the stirrer of intestine trouble, ra- pine, and bloodshed. There, the very men who abjure the interference of the civil power to procure conformity to their sectarian faith, do not hesitate to resort to private persecution, se- INTRODUCTION 9 cret intrigue, and the rash and culpable adoption of idle and flimsily constructed stories, to attain their ends. The principle is in both cases the same, although differently manifested. It will be in vain for the supporters of Monk to protest the sincerity of their belief in her pretended narrative. — The question, why believe? still remains unsatisfied. Have they anticipated the question I They have not. Are they looking about for evidence to sustain their pre-judgment ? They notoriously are. and in this consists the infamy of their conduct. We are right in des- cribing as infamous the conduct of men, whe- ther lay or clerical, who have come before the world and preferred the most atrocious charges, in the hope or expectation that subsequent events might demonstrate them to be true, or that they might with their sanction pass with the mass without further examination. To be- lieve things that are not, and cannot be, is a chapter in the history of man : whether his credulity has been rightly calculated upon in the case before us, we have no opportunity of determining ; but much has been done to influ- ence him, and men of a sacred calling have sa- crilegiously abused their opportunities, and pre- sented from the altar of God the poison to his lips, gilded with a blasphemous application of the language of the Holy Writ. We should have supposed a priori that the marked inconsistencies of this scandalous work would have sufficed to render its effects on most readers comparatively innocuous ; we hoped at I 10 INTRODUCTION. least that it would speedily have sunk into ob- livion, and have been allowed to rot, forgotten amidst the mass of falsehood and impurity which disgraces a portion ol the New-York press; hut it would seem, from the notices which appear from time to time in the periodicals, that it is determined to persist in the system of false- hood so shamefully commenced. A reply has been deemed necessary. It is here offered with a feeling of deep regret on the part of the author, that the tissue of hor- rors which calls ii; forth should have ever been thought or printed. It will be necessary to place before the public gaze persons whose ha- bits and inclinations especially fit them for retire- ment, and who might reasoucibly have expected to have walked though life in the peaceful and undisturbed discharge of their pious avocations. The necessity of invading the privacy of the good, the charitable, and the humble, weighed strongly with the author as an objection to ma- king any reply whatever to the ^^ Awful Disclo- sures of Maria Monk; " but the opmion of wise and reflecting men, that they should no longer be suffered to remain uncontradicted before the world, has prevailed. It only remains to add, that the reply here presented is complete, that it is sustained by authenticated documents and in- disputable evidence ; and that nothing will be advanced in the text, the truth of which has not been ascertained by careful investigation and personal observation. Is it too much to hope that this refutation of the "Awful Disclp- INTRODUCTION. 11 sures" will be favorably received by a generous and iiscernino- public,— generous, we trust, in behalf ot'calumiiiated innocence, and discerning between truth and falsehood. :ii .^k . CHAPTER i A hief accou?it of the Cmivmtual Eslahlishments of the City of Mem' treal. Congregation de Notre-Dame. This institution was founded in the seventeenth cpntury, by Margaret Bourgeois, born at Troyes in Champaign. In her thirty-third year she aban- doned her native country, and arrived at Montreal in the year 1653. Her Ufe appears to have been marked by those acts which immortalize the friends of humanity. Her historian thus describes the scene of her labours. " Fifty houses, dispersed here and there, v;ithin the limits of a fort defended by stakes, composed the settlement. Their inha- bitants, together with a few families, French and In- dian, scattered over the neighbouring country, com- posed the entire population. It was the daily prac- tice of Sister Bourgeois to visit almost every house within and without the fort. Her ordinary occupa- tions consisted in attending the sick, consoling the afflicted, instructing the ignorant, in washing and mending for the helpless, and in burying the dead." At the expiration of five years thus spent, the sister returned to France in search of companions to a toil which became too great to be properly dis- charged by a single person. She arrived a second time at Montreal, in September, 1659, and, with her companions, was accommodated with a stable, the only dwelling in which the missionaries could obtain rest from the fatigues of their journey. In that stable, and on the 25th of November, 1659, was opened the first school established in the city of Montreal. The day is still annually cominemo- rated. Many years elapsed before the congrega- tion became possessed of the soil on which the convent is now erected ; but in 1698 we find the sisters, alrc'idy numerous, established within tlK)ir present hniils. In the same year they received from the hands of the Bishop the rules of their foundation, which have not since been altered ; and also made in his presence the simple vows of poverty, chastity, obedience, and of instruction of persons of their own sex, together with the vow of sta')ility in their profession. Hotel Dieu, — This in'='< itution was founded in 1644, by the Duchess of Bouillon. Her immedi- ate representative in Canada was Jane Manse, who administered during her lifetime the " property of the poor'* in the hospital of the Hotel Dieu of Montreal. The following extract from the Memo- randa of an American traveller, who visited the Hotel Dieu in 18'25, describes, in eloquent language, the occupations of the nuns. " We were shown the Hospital, which contains a Laboratory, Dis- pensary, and two large halls for the sick. In the first room the nuns were preparing medicines, making extracts, decoctions, essences, and all that the apothecary could find a name for ; which were afterwards placed in the Dispensary in the neatest manner ; and this room niade a fine appearance, al- though there were no blue or yellow waters, which make so great a show in our apothecary shops when seen through glass vessels of exquisite cJear- nc^ss. The hall for male patients was on the ground floor ; and, notwithstanding it was excessively warm in the streets that day (July 16th, 1825), yet, be- sat 8 tween these massy walls of stone and lime thei*e was a refreshing cooine«s ; the change of tempera- ture was felt the instant we entered the room. Here these delicate women were seen exercising the skill of a physician, and the tenderness and patience of a mother or wife at a sick bed ; and these charities and this tenderness were bestowed, not upon kindred and friends, but upon humble beings, unknown to these Sisters of Cliarity before mistoriunes and dis- ease had come upon them. Some of these wretch- ed beings would have perished without such suc- cour. Humble as they were, there were no hirelings about their pillows— no anodynes were administer- ed to them, that their nurses might enjoy unbroken slumbers ; but every attention which wealth and affection could command in a populous city, was found here. The feni.ile apartment for the sick was, if possible, still more convenient. There was an ail of taste and comfort about every thing in this room, v/hich seemed to half cure disease at the first look of the means to do it. It often happens, such are the accommodations for the sick here, that others than the poor and destitute come here to be healed, and leave the place, if not under pecuniary obligations, at least with a deep sense of gratitude for kind offices. I noticed one young woman lying on her bed, whom the nuns approach- ed with great affection and kindness, bringing every little delicacy to tempt a sickly appetite ; now and then a small cup of cooling beverage, to moisten her parched lips ; and the nuns, as they sat by her side or passed along on duty, often, in gentle tones, let fall sweet words of consolation to the sufferer. Even the soft western breeze, so re- viving in that excessive heat, was not allowed to visit her directly, but its current was breken by a screen, round which the air was wafted ott the balmy wings of love and healing, i learnt that this fair invalid had been there twice before, and had, in a good measure, recovered ; but it was all over with her now. The death tones of her voice — the preternatural illuminations of her eyes — the steadfast gaze— the sudden change to a quick twinkling of those orbs from that fixed look — and, added to all, that saintly smile which was frequent- ly seen on her lip at every kindness, were to my mind irresistible proofs that her dissolution was near; and it required but little imagination at that moment to think that some angel was then whis- pering " Sister spirit, como away." Every thing in this institution was active, yet composed ; all were busy ; but there was no bustling. Religion and Chanty, hand in hand, were walking their rounds of duty. There were no repining beauties here, under thick veils, breathing half- smothered curses at parental cruelty. Nothing but the sanctity of the place to remind one of the Paraclete, nor of — ' Those deep solitudes, and awful cells, . ^ Wliere pleasing, heavenly conleraplation dwells, And ever-musing melancholy reigns.' The costume of these nuns is one of ease, and not destitute of grace. The large sleeves in any fe- male dress is generally becoming, and almost every dress is graceful in which perfect neatness is a striking feature." It is pleasing to be able to turn from the atra T hilarious inventions of madmen and fanatics to the dignified and merited eulogium of a liberal and well informed mind. General Hospital. — This institution was founded in 1753 by Madame de Youville, as a refuge for the infirm, poor, and invalids. It has also a depart- ment for patients labouring undc-r mental derange- ment, and another for foundlings. The revenues of the three foundations are ex- pended for their appropriate objects. The vene- ration with which they are regarded by the people, Protestant and vJatholic, proceeds from the charities they exercise, and which can neither be disguised nor simulated. CHAPTER II. Misreprcsentalions ccn'ainsd in the " Awful Disclosures,''^ concern' ing the discipline and internal management of tlie Convents, The very points on which information may most easily be obtained by I's, stranger or by the inquiring traveller, are in part ignorantly, and in pitrt wilful- ly misrepresented in this " artless" production. The names, occupations, and holdiug in the public esti- mation of the sisterhood of the three Convents, are in most instances either malignantly distorted or stupidly confounded. Intelligent readers are afflict- ed with a stubborn and iKconvenient habit of in- quiring into statements of every description, whether of great or apparently small importance. It will appear in the course of this refutation why it was impossible for the pseudo-writer of the " Awful Dis- c^iosures" to have furnished correct information 1* 6 concerninpj the discipline of the con vents. In the meantime we shall point out a few of the errors of detail, with which the pamphlet abounds. Speaking of the nuns of the Congregational Nunnery, it is stated that they are sometimes called " Sisters of Charity." This is not true. The order of the " Sisters of Charity " has no existence in Canada, and the only name, either in French or English, by which the nuns of the Congregational Nunnery are collectively distinguished, is, " Sisters of the Congregation!" It is stated that some of the nuns belonging to the Congregational Nunnery " arc established as instructresses in difierent parts of the United States.'* This is not true. There are not, and never have been, instructresses from that convent sent to any part of the United States. The rules of the foun- dation expres "ly limit the labours of the sisterhood to Canada. The account given of the instruction afforded to pupils in the Congregational Nunnery is false ; it is not even sustained by plausible allegations. It is true that the education bestowed in that esta- blishment is not brilliant, and that the accomplish- ments which a state of society differing from that of Canada requires, are not there cultivated ; but on the other hand, it is undeniable that the branches which help to make the notable woman, that best ornament of domestic life, arc carefully attended to. The moral and religious instruction of the pu-pils is a chief object, and their parents are grateful and satisfied. We must not be misunderstood when we say the education is iiot brilliant ; it is elegant and refined, and will not suffer, in this respect, by comparison with any modern boarding-school ; but I chemistry is, \vc arc afraid, sadly neglected, and conchology held in light esteem. It is stated, that the nuns had no very regular parts assigned them in the management of the " Schools." Assuming that this refers to the Congregational School, it is false. Regularity, in all thingwS, is the soul of Con- ventual establishments, and could not be neglected in the instance mentioned, without great pubUc scandal. It is alleged that " the nuns were rather rough and unpolished in their manners." Rough- ness is not characteris 'c of Fren-ch Canadians in any situation of life ; moreover, as inmates of con- vents, the natural disposition of Canadian females is assisted by the sanction of religion and of religi- ous rule. Of the polish of the sisterhood it does not appear that the author of the " Disclosures" was capable of forming an opinion. It is alleged that they (the nuns) would often exclaim, " c'est un menti," (that's a lie,) and " mon Dieu" (my God,) on the most trivial occasions. Respecting the lirst expression, it must have escaped the learned correctors for the press, that " c'est un menti," is not the PVench for "that's a lie," or for any thing dse : — " mon dieu" is an habitual expression with the French women, who do not attach to it the so- lemii meaning ©f the English vertsioH. This im- pertinent and foolish opinion on the labours of th€ sisterhood of the Congregational Nunnery in the instruction ©f youth, is not creditable to the skill of the authors of the "Disclosures." Their " Dis- closures" are often more than hazardous. They must have calculated largely on the pliability of their readers when they allowed such stuff' as the following to go to press : " their (the nuns) writ- ing was quite poor, and it was not uncommon for 6 them to put a capital in the middle of a word." " The only book on Geography which we (the pupils) studied, was a Catechism of Geography, from which ^ve learnt by heart a few questions and an- swers." "We were sometimes referred to a map, but it was only to point out Montreal or Quebec, or some other prominent name ; while we had no instruction beyond.'' And again, — "it would require only a proper cxaminati.on to prove, that with the exception of needle-work, hardly any thing is taught, excepting prayers and the catechism ; the methods ' of teaching' were very imperfect." When we come to examine the worth and capa- bility of the witness, the reader will see how little fitted that witness was to give any testimony on the above matters. It is stated, that "some of the priests of the seminary often visited the Congregational Nunner}^ and bo-th catecliised and talked with us (the pupils) on religion." The errors here are circumstantial, and such as a person speaking confidently on hasty inquiry would be apt to rviake. To have made the statement correct, it sliould have been written, " The chaplain of the Congregational Nunnery often said mass in our chapel, and occasionally exhorted us on religion." We will not say that the repre- sentation made in the "Disclosures" is in any re- spect ofiensive ; no, it 'us simply in-jcrrect, and made by an ignorant person. It is stated tiiat " the superior of the " Black Nunnery" adj'oining, also occasionally came into the school, ;.^nd enlarged on the advantages we (the pupils) enjoyed in having such teachers ; and dropped something now and then relating to her own convent, calculated to make us entertain the i g IS the on highest ideas of it, aud to make us sometimes think of the possibility of getting into it." Such some may regard as the language of artless simplicity, but we know it to be the fabrication of clumsy knavery. Even Protestants may know that it would be directly contrary to the rules and customs of such establishments for the superior of one con- vent to visit the interior of another entirely inde- pendent of hor control- and there indulge in such interference as is mentioned. Were she so inclin- ed, she would not be suftbred to do it by the superior of the convent so visited, and who is bound to guard against any infringement of the privileges of the institution over which she presides. More, over, it is known to the pupils of the Congregation, that the superior and nuns of the Hotel Dieu are bound by their vows never to leave the precincts of their convent. What she " dropped now and then relating to her own convent, calculated to make us entertain the highest ideas of it" is not mentioned. Did she " now and then" give the assembled children an insight into the practices which are elsewhere described in the " Awful Dis- closures ?" Miserable and disgusting falsehood ! It is stated that the instructions given to the pupils were particularly directed against the Pro- testant Bible, and the charge is made in suitable language. They often " enlarged upon the evil ten- dency of that book, and told us, that but for it many a soul now condemned to hell, and suffering eter- nal punishment, might have been in happiness. They could not say ay thing in its favour, for that would be speaking agains^ religion and against God. They warned us against its woe, and re- presented it as a thing very dangerous to our souls." 10 Have we not here a specimen of the fanatical ex- a«T|Teration which may be heard in any New-York conventicle where the practice and doctrine of CatlioHcs, in relation to the Scriptures, are intro- duced I It is utterly incredible, nay, impossible in the ordinary course of things, that the language ascribed to the priests should have been used by them ; but it is well kn'^wn that it is daily invented for them by their detractors, and by the real enemies of the Word of God. It is stated that the religious instruction of the pupils at the Congregational Nunnery was conduct- ed by the priests, and that unwritten questions and answers were proposed during the hours of instruc- tion, which the pretended writer of the " Dis- closures" has managed to retain ^^with tolerable accuracy. ^^ We belivve that the following intelligi- ble, probable, and consistent dialogue is copied with " tolerable accuracy" from the " Disclosures." Qu-es. Pourquoi le hon Dieu n^a pas fait tons les commandemens ? Rcponse, Parceque lliomme 71* est pas si fort quHl pent garder tons Ics commandemens, Ques, Why did not God make all the command- men-ts ? Ans. Because man is not strong enough to keep them. Ques, Pourquoi Vliomme ne lit pas VEvangile ? Repouse, Parceque Vesprit de Vhomme est trop home et trop faible pour comprendre qu'est ce que Dieu a ccrit ? Ques, W^hy are not men to read the New Tes- tament ? Ans, Because the mind of man is too limited and weak to understand what God ha§ written ! I I Tff I 11 f 4 We have already intimated that the only priest who visits the Congregational Nunnery, is the oth- c'.al chaplain for the time heing ; and it is positively false that he interferes in the religious instruction of the pupils, except inc'dentally ami in tiie discharge of his duties as chaplain. The alleged interference would he contrary to the rules of the foundation. The catechism is taught, and the principles o^ re- ligion are explained by the nuns, who are fully competent to discharge tliat duty. It is therefore impossible that the writer of the "Disclosures" should be able to recall, " even with tolerable accu- racy," language which, from the very nature of the institution, could never have been uttered within its walls. Moreover, we may remark, that the first question and answer do not present an intelligible meaning — a circumstance which we arc bound to suppose assisted the mind of the witness in " recall- ing with tolerable accuracy ;" and that the second is at variance with the known doctrine and practice of the Catholic church and its members, lay and clerical. There are other circumstances connected with this statement, which heighten its absurdity. The French given in the " Disclosures" is really not French, and of course the English, which purports to be a translation, is in all probability the inven- tion of some defamatory conventicle. The method, unwritten questions and answers, could never have been resorted to by reasoning beings for any pur- pose, good or bad. It does not even appear that pains were taken to impress them on the memory, as it is simply stated that the pupils did not " read them," and that they " were taught them only by word of mouth!" The written catechism referred to in the ** Disclosures," contains all the command- 12 ments which Catiiolics are bound to observe. The priests, in their alleged unwritten catechism, could not present others without subjecting themselves to the obvious criticism, ewcn af children. It is stated that " the nuns had a in-ivate confea- sion-room in the building," and that " the boarders were taken in parties througli the streets on different days, by some of the nuns, to confess in the church (of the parish) ;" it is added, that this was not ne- cessary at the " Black Nunnery," as there were there " a chap^il, and priests attending in the Confession- als." This statement contains an untruth direct, and an untruth by implication. It is untrue that "the nuns had a private confespion-room in the building ;" confessions are never heard within the building, except in cases of sickness. It is implied that the Congregational Nunnery has no chapel at- tached to '^ ; this is an untruth, and an untruth clumsily constructed, for, speaking of a first visit to the Congregational School, the writer is made to say, " we walked some distance along the side of a building towards the chapel." We have examined all the represe cations concerning the Congrega- tional Nunnery, and we have shown them to be false in every instance. We found the allegations to be such, that it was possible to refute them with- out reference to the personal character or trust- worthiness of the witness ; but when we come to that branch of oiu* subject, the effrontery and culpabilit\ of the editors of the " Disclosures" will be rendered even more conspicuous than they must now appear. The statements and charges concerning the Hotel Dieu hospital are of a mingl«d description. Some of them must rest on the evidence ot the wo- man whose name appears on tho title-page of the f ai 18 be " Disclosures," and of individuals mentioned in the narrative ; others regard matters of public no- toriety, and to public notoriety and the experience of every citizen of Montreal we shall appeal in re- futation of them. More the reader will not deem necessary in reply to a public prostitute, and the canting hypocrites who have undertaken to stand l)etween her and the public as pledges for her " holiness and veracity." It is stated that " there are a number of veiled nuns of thy.t convent (the Hotel Dieu), who spend most of their time there (in the liospital)." It is true that the nuns spend most of tiieir time " in the hospital," such is their charitable profession ; but it is untrue that anv of them are " veiled," if bv this word the concealment of the countenance iji implied. Speaking of the employment of the nuns and no- vices, it is stated " that a rich carpet, made and finished in the convent, was sent to the king of England as an expression of gratitude for the money annually received fram the government." This is positively untrue ; such carpet never was " made and finished in the convent." The Hospital of the Hotel Dieu owes no gratitude to the king of Eng- land personally for favours received ; their feelings towards his majesty are such as they share in com- mon with their fellow-subjr?cts, — respect and loyalty to the chief magistrate of an empire, by whose powei* and justice they are protected in their pri- vileges as public benefactors. The Word of God is the Christian's text, Pro- testants and Catholics equally revere it ; but it has been the constant aim of impostors to impugn that reverence and dispute its existence. Wo arc not sur* 14 I :■! prised to find in the " Disclosures" the following artless statements. " The priests would also take a verse or two, and preach from it (the New Tes- tament). As for St. Paul, I remember as I was taught to understand it, that he was once a great persecutor of Roman Catholics until he Isecame convicted, and confessed to one of i\iQ father con» fessors, I don't know which." It is not mentioned what priests would " preach," nor where they preached in the manner stated ; but it is well known that Roman Catholic clergymen are probably more ^iven to scriptural quotation than the ministers of any other denomination ; good taste is frequently offended by their excess in this particular. The contrary, which is an untruth, is implied by the artless insertion of the words " a verse or two." Moreover, we find here, as elsewhere, the att'^mpt to create the impression that the whole body of priests are to be found interfering in the religious instruc- tion and internal concerns of the convents. As in the case of the Congregational Nunnery, it is un- true that any priest beside the official chaplain visits the Hotel Dieu ; and he does so for the especial purposes of saying mass in the chapel, and praying with and for the confined sick. In regard to the falsification of the scriptural account of St. Paul's conversion, we would cisk, why even imestly iniquity should be supposed capablo of committing it? It is stated, that in the three convents — the Congregational Nvmnery, the Grey Nunnery, and tlie Hotel Dieu — there are " certain apartments into which strangers can gain admittance, but others froiii which they are always excluded." As the same remark might be made of every building in exist' 15 ence, public or private, why is it here specially applied ? With, it is obvi(?us, the intent of prejudic- ing the mind of the ign*)rant roader against a specif s of seclusion which a moment's reflection woull show is practised with even greater rigour in his own domicil. It cannot be said ** there are certain apartments" in any private gentleman's house, " into which strangers can obtain admit- tance," even on applying to the owMer for his leave. The apartments to wh". h strangers visiting the convents are admitted, are those devoted to our- poses in which the public are considered to have an interest ; the apartments from which they are very properly excluded, are the bed-rooms and chambers of the sisterhood. Vulgar and insolent men have, in more instances than one, received from decorum and propriety the rebuff which their impertinent curiosity merited. The vengeance of such men finds its place in these " Awful Disclo- sures." It is stated, that " From all that appears to the public eye, the nuns of these convents are devoted to tlie charitable objects appropriate to each — the labour of making different articles known to bo manufactured by them, and the religious obser- vances which occupy a large portion of their time. They arc regarded with much respect by the people at large ; and noiv and then, when a novice takes the veil, she is supposed to retire from the temp- tations and troubles of this world into a state of holy seclusion ; v.here, by prayer, self-mortification, and good deeds, she prepares herself for Heaven." Such, we admit, is very nearly a true picture of the estimation in which the convents and their in- mates are held by the people at large ; what fol- 16 lows is less exact. " Sometimes the superior of a convent obtains thr? character of working miracles ; and when such a one dies, it is published through the country, and crowds throng the convents, who think indulgences are to be derived from bits of her clothes or other things she has possessed ; and many have sent articles, to be touched, to her bed or chair, in which a degree of virtue is thought to remain." Here we have manifestly another fabri- cation of the " conventicle." The passage is what an impudent impostor would be ready to apply to any convent in the world — in Sp?»in, Portugal, or Italy. It is sufficient to say, that the statement, as fur as regards the Montreal convents, is false, word for word. Our enumeration of the notorious misrepresenta- tions contained in the "Disclosures" might be much further extended. Same of them, not here mentioned, will be pointed out elsewhere. Those we have selected are sufficient to raise at least doubts on the credibility of a " witness," who, by her own pretensions, was placed beyond the possibility of error. She was a nun ! CHAPTER m. Manifest absurdities, toniradidions, and falsehoods nf the preltnded " DISCLOSURES." We have contended that no nrnn of integrity, honesty, or ordinary intelligence, would hesitate to pronounce apriori the narrative which bears Monk's name to be a tissue of ill-coHstructed lies from be- 17 a 'S; lO of nd )ed to )ri- lat to or as ord i I ginning to end. Wc say, that the very narrative bears on the face of it the evidence of imposture ; and for this reason, among others, we have ventured to impugn the motives as well as the acts of the " teachers of the people," who had undertaken to uphold it. That we have not erred in expressly stigmatizing those persons as debased and disgraced by the touch of manifest falsehood, it is now our business to prove. It will appear that our materi- als are ample. A straight-forward, well-told con- sistent story may be plausible though fictitious ; but the story given on the authority of the woman Monk, has nat even the most ordinary essentials of verisimilitude ; 'till less has it that cunning adap- tation of means to ends which forms the great at- traction of Nursery tales. If the " Awful Disclo- sures" have obtained credence, we do not see why even at this day the truth of Daniel De Foe's ce- lebrated Stories of Dreanis should be disputed. Both have been attended with the same success. The one procured the sale of " Drelincourt on Death," the other has dispersed, among tens of thousands of eager readers, " Monk on Murde-r." At the very outset of the " Disclosures," some startling demands are made on our- sympathy and credulity. Thus we are informed, that " according to her earliest recollections, her father was very attentive to his family ;" that " she may very yrO' hably have been taught by him a particular passage from the Bible," which often occurred to her " in after-life ;" that, ** after his death" she " received no religious instruction at home ;" " that her mo- ther neglected her children in this respect." She was therefore capable of judging her father's con- duct at the age of six or sevea, and of recollecting a* 18 the serious judgment then formed at a much subse- quent period ! The probabiUty of " a particular passage from the Bible" having been taught her by her father while yet an infant, must have ap- peared to her present advisers most affecting ; and the sacrifice of filial piety exhibited in her reflec- tions on the mismanagement of her surviving pa- rent, must have filled them with admiration ! She proceeds to say, " To my want of religious instruc- tion at home, and the ignorance of my Creator and my duty, which was its natural consequence, I think I can trace my introduction to convents !" She is made to " thinW^ what it is morally impos- sible that any intelligent being could think. What connection did her prompters discover between her '** want of religious instruction at home," and her entrance into a convent ? We request attention to the following passage. " When about six or seven years of age, I went to school to a Mr. Workman, a protestant, who taught in Sacrament Street, and remained there several months. There I learned to read and write, and arithmetic as far as division. AH the progress I ever made in those branches was gained in that school, as I have never made any progress in them since." The progress made by a child " six or seven years of age," in " reading; writing, and arithmetic as far as division," is remarkable enough ; but n®.t quite so much so as the ability of the grown up woman to apply the acquirements of that age, never improoed upon, to the composition of the " Awful Disclosures !" The foolish absurdities of these pretended " Dis- closures" crowd upon us as we proceed. She in- forms hor readers, that ^^ th« schools taught by the 19 |se- llar \er |ap- md lec- •uc- Ltor ice. ^H Congregational nuns are more numerous than some may imagine." Why her readers should im- agine any thing on the subject, is not apparent ; but, by way of supplying the imaginations of her readers, siie proceeds, in the very next sentence, to coin an absolute untruth, which we have already noticed, respecting those same nuns. When "about ten years old," the girl, whose judgment at the age of six or seven was so precocious, began to think sei*i- ously (!) about going to the Congregational school ! The time that elapsed between that moment of " serious thought" and her entrance into the school, is not nientioned. We repeat here, that the utter absence of dates from the pretended " Disclosures," ought in itself to have been sufhcient to cause their rejection by a man of common sense and common honesty. The want of both may safely be imputed to the men ^vho have presumed to say, — " Here is a narrative wl'iich bears on it the stamp of truth." It is not stated at what age she entered the school, or in what year, or under what circumstances; or whether on her mother's application or otherwise ; or whether as a poor scholar or as a paying scholar ; or whether as a day scholar or as a boarder. All those things, essential tg the verisimilitude of the narrative, and, one would suppose, so neces- sarv to satisfy the minds of honest vouchers for its truth, are wholly past over without notice. Her introduction into the convent is briefly told. " I was conducted by some of my young friends." These "young friends" she speaks of just before as " girls of her acquaintance," who attended the school. *' On my entrance," she proceeds to say, " the su- perior met me, and told me first of all that I must always dip my fingers into the Holy water at her .j5. 20 door, cross myself, and say a short prayer ; and this she told me was always required of Protestants as w-ell as Catholics. It must he remarked, that this interesting piece of information is vouchsafed to the new-comer in the school-room, and of course in the presence of her " young friends" and others there present. Thus, in the first place we are re- quired to believe that the superior, a woman, it must be supposed, of some sense, advised the new- comer of a trifling obsc-rvance before the occasion for that observance arrived, and even before a girl in Monk's situation could be expected to under- stand it ; for she had Mot as yet seen the superior, or the " door," or the threshold, or the " Holy wa- ter" into which she was to " dip her fingers." In the second place, we are required to believe that the superior did actually risk the h^ss of that esteem, in which, it is admitted, the convent was held, by re- quiring of a girl, with whose character she was un- acquainted, practices forbidden by the religion in which that girl was brought up. These considera- tions do not appear to have weighed with her fanati- cal editors. Neither does it appear to have struck their apprehensions that it was ridiculously absurd to allow, that the opinions of a jrirl, whose sole know- ledge, acquired " when about six or seven years of age," and in the space of some months, was limited to " reading, writing, and arithmetic as far as divi. sion," on the education received in the school, were worthy of belief and attention. That those opi- nions are defamatory, only renders their easy recep- tion the more culpable. We have, in a previous chapter, pointed out the little foundation there was for them. She remained, as is stated, " about two years'* at 21 the Congregational school ; at \\ liat age or in what year she left it, is not mentioned ; but she does not hesitate to make a second sacrifice of her filial piety, in describing her condition while at home. "I soon became dissatisfied, having many and severe trials to endure at home, which my feelings will not permit me to describe," Why she conquered her feelings so far as to say so much as is conveyed in the above passage, or why the allusion to ker mo- I ther, who is still living, was necessary to complete the " Awful Disclosures" of " Popish Iniquity," i does not appear on the face of the narrative. While still at the school, i^he is told " one day" by " a girl thirteen years old," of the conduct of a priest at "confession," which "astonished her." The story has some of the requisites of rational evi- dence ; the time at which it was told is mentioned, " one day ;" also the place where it was told, the school-room, and the age of the narrator, are care- fully described. Who could doubt its trutli, par- ticularly as it is stated that the girl thirteen years old informed her mother of it, " who expressed no anger nor disapprobation !" Another story is told her, by " a girl of the school," of a murder commit- ted by a priest on the person of " a young Squaw." Why the priest murdered, and why he then ran away, are most ingeniously accounted for ; it is intimated as a reason for the latter, that timely no- tice was conveyed to him in a note by an Indian f 8uch are th© "Disclosures" which the Montreal priests are summoned to refute. " At length I determined to become a Black nun," are the opening words of the third chapter of the "Disclosures." The "at length" is admirable. One would b« apt to suppose that she has just b«en 22 desoribing her self-communings, her struggles against her vocation for a religious life, and the difficulties she encountered in obeying the call. There is nothing of the kind, and the force of the " at length'' must remain a mystery until expound- ed by her present confessors. The probable truth of her having formed " the determination of becom- ing a Black nun," may be estimated by the context of the narrative. Among the inducing motives, the reader will rank " her ignorance of her Crea- tor," her intercourse with the nuns of the Congre- gational Nunnery, described as dissatisfactory to her precocious intellect ; the influence produced on her mind by the occasional lectures (which could never have been given) of the superior of the Black Nunnery ; the stories told her of the priests while at the Congregational school, forming a portion of the information received from " her Catholic ac- quaintances in favour of their faith ;" and finally, her positive knowledge that, as an inmate of the Hotel Dieu, her occupation through life would be that of a sick nurse ; a pleasing prospect to a young girl, who could not, by her own confession, have been urged to it by religious feelings ! " While out of the nunnery," she says in the preceding chap- ter, " I saw nothing of religion ;" and while in the nunnery, the saw nothing but what was frivolous and repugnant to her feelings ; her ears were sa- luted with tales of blood and debauchery ! The ab- surdity of this part of the narrative might perhaps have been avoided, or at least concealed, by the editors p. oposing one simple question^ — ^** why did you at length determine ?" They might have ex- hibited her acting without deliberation ; hut imbe* cility and knavery are closely allied. w h( G 23 rgles the J call. fthe mnd- truth Icom- itext ;ives, 'rea- We are not able to discover from the narrative that the slightest control was exercised over the actions of Monk from her earliest infancy. This is unaccounted for. She mentions, that on her first application to be received as a novice into the " Blaek Nunnery," the superior told her " that she must make some inquiries before she could give a decided answer." To whom the inquiries were put is not stated. " At length," at the expiration of a fortnight, she calls at the " Black Nunnery," and is forthwith admitted as a " novice !" How very artless ! The year in which she thus entered and her age aro omitted ; but, to supply this deficiency, we are told that the day was " Thursday," and the hour, " about ten o'clock in the morning !" As to when she became a convert to the Catholic faith we are left in the dark ; that she apparently was a convert at the time of her alleged entrance into the Hotel Dieu, may be inferred ; that she really was, her preceding narrative renders incredible. The " Awful Disclosures" make a pamphlet of 231 pages, twenty of which would be sufficient to contain all that relates to their ostensible purpose, the exposure of " Popish Iniquity." This object has been combined in the publication of the pam- phlet with another of no less importance. Pages are filled up with the most frivolous and disgusting trash, and a book is produced, the sale of which yields some seven or eight thousand dollars to the parties concerned. We see that a certain P. Gor- don has ventured to put his name as proprietor of the copyright. We trust that all honest men, all who detest calumny and despise impostors, will hereafter be on their guard in the company of " P. Gordon ;" and that, shoula they at any time iden- 24 tify the creature of the prostitute Mmk and her infamous advisers, they will treat the wretch to a " pointed figure." With an appearance of veracious detail she de- scribes her first day at the convent ; but even here it is easy to discern the fabrications of the " penny- a-liner." She enters the institution with "much sa- tisfaction ;" passes the morning with the novices, " expecting, with painful anxiety, the dinner hour f We take this to be an obscure hint, that in the course of the morning her " satisfaction" became affected by serious apprehensions of her destination at the approaching meal ;*doubtful whether she was to be a guest or a dish. The poor girl, however, is not spitted ; she is suffered to live, to eat her dinner in silence ; to learn rules and ceremonies, to sit by windows, to mark the waywardness of a cer- tain Jane Ray, of whom more hereafter ; t& listen to stories which make " a deep impression on her mind ;" to comb the superior's head, and pick up " all the stray hairs ;" to confess her sins, and be strangely questioned by the priests ; to form shrewd guesses " of the confession-rooms" of the veiled nuns ; to see gags, and see them used ; to study French and Latin prayers, not for present use, but to prepare for the " easy repetition of them after she should be admitted as a nun ;" and to regret that she had no opportunity of storing her mind, of po- lishing her manners, or of studying the higher branches of " Education !" Such are the plausible details of some ten or eleven pages of these " Awful Disclosures." The first sentence of the next chapter exposed the foiled cunning of the association of impostors. She quits the convent « without ob»tacle," and given f 1 i?*x. I ! 25 her reason in the following words. ** After I had been a novice four or five years, that is, from the time that I commenced school at the convent, one day I was treated bv one of the nuns in a manner which displeased me, and because I expressed some resentment, was required to beg her pardon. Not being satisfied with this, although I complied with the command, nor with the coolness with which the superior treated me, I determined to quit the con- vent at once, which 1 did without asking leave." There are two manifest falsehoods in this statement, which it is easy to discover by comparing it with what precedes. Is not the explanation of the time of her noviciate a deliberate lie ? Let us see. — She commenced school at the Congregation, and re- mained there " about two years." These two years spent at school in one convent, she includes in the time of noviciate spent in another. Again, " after she left the Congregational Nunnery," she did not immediately become an inmate of the Hotel Dieu, but " attended several different schools," and lived at home. The interval of time, as has already been remarked, between her leaving one convent and joining another, is not mentioned ; but what- ever it was, whether great or small, it is included in the " four or five ^""ears" of noviciate at the Hotel Dieu. The reason assigned for leaving the latter institution is equally contradictory. It is incredi- ble that a girl, whom the spectacle of horrible cruelty practised on the novices, the (to her) un- satisfactory routine of the cloisters, the " strange questions" of priests, could not induce to fly, should do so because required to beg pardon for an of- fence. Her " dissatisfaction" toward the superior, whom eh© yrQ.% taught to regard, and whom sho 28 •tates she actually did regard, as a " sain^," is an obvious coinage of the penny-a-liner. " Soon after,*' we find her at St. Denis, engaged as an assistant teacher in a government school ; a situation for which, it will be recollected, the instruction receiv- ed by her at the age of six or seven years was her only qualification. While in this situation she dis- covers that " ciphering" i« an improper expression, and that the bag of the superior'f. " suay hairs" cures the tooth-ache ! She marries, separates from her husband, and finally resolves, without any ima- ginable inducement, to return to the convent of the Hotel Dieu. To effect her purpose, she persuades the " lady" with whom she had been associated as a teacher, to conceal her marriage, and disin- terestedly lie for her t® the superior of the convent and priests of the seminary. She robs her mother of thirty dollars, and by other robberies effected on several of her friends, she raises a number of pounds, part of which she deposits in the convent treasury. The superior, whom she regards as a " saint," and whose " stray hairs" she carries in a bag-, receives •* the money with evident satisfaction," knowing, of course, that it must have been dishonestly ob- tained ! As usual, this narrative, which it is pretended bears on it the stamp of truth, does not state what time elapsed between her leaving the Hotel Dieu and her return to it, or the date of the latter event ! Have these omitted fabrications rendered the copy- right more valuable to " P. Gordon" and his asso- ciates? Under the head of Specimen of "instruc- tions received on the subject of confirmation," she relates stories of fire and brimstone, which " she wa« told j" and concludes her fifth chapter by the 27 an ant for eiv- her dis- following statement. " I was required to devote myself for about a year to the study of the prayers, and the practice of the ceremonies necessary on the reception of a nun." How does this agree witli the previous statement, that such was the principal occupation of the novices from the com- mencement of their noviciate to the expiration of it ? The statements are contradictory, and are each of them obviously false. When her noviciate ceased, or how long it last- ed, cannot in any manner be inferred from th« nar- rative. Respecting the date of her becoming a pjrofessed nun, the narrative is equally silent. It is simply stated, that one day the " Bishop came,** and made her one. On the same day she is gra- ciously informed by the " saintly superior" of the exictence of dungeons, and of victims therein con- fined ; of the pr- ctices of priests, " which come on her like a flash of lightning," notwithstanding her previous experience acquired at confession, and derived from the stories of her " young compa- nions ;" and finally, of the pious practice of stran- gling infants for the purpose of securing their eternal happiness ! A number of nuns are admitted to join in the conversation, whose representations affect, even to •< indecision," the mind of the young nun on the obscure subject of the criminality of impu- dicity and blood-shedding. Forgetting, that from the very commencement of her intercourse with Catholics, her ears were saluted with debauchery and murder, she proceeds to say that there was " 60 much that disgusted lier in the discovery sho then made," that she would gladly have escaped, had it been in her power ; but the obstacles in the way of flight, so easy to the novice, were suddenly tiB rendered almost invincible to the *' nun," in what manner the reader is left to imagine. The " Dis- closures" of the dinner ceremonial of the reception day are not very horrible, but they help to till a space. " Late in the afternoon" is stated to have been perpetrated the first crime of surpassing atro- city resting on the alleged personal cognizance of the witness Maria Monk. The " disclosure is re- luctantly made, to expose the conduct of priests in our convent," and to gratify the imaginations of the people of the United States. Admitting these motives to be good, which they certainly are not, at least in a Christian sense, the most fanatical sectarian, or the most imaginative ©f dreamers, if possessed of a grain of honest sincerity, will not hesitate to acknowledge that the pretended expo- sure is a dastardly, but most fortunately a raost stupid and easily detected calumny. The seventh chapter, on " daily ceremonies,'' com- mences with singular pretension to accuracy. " On Thursday morning the bell rung at half-past six, to waken us." This " Thursday" stands alone. Was it a Thursday in 1820 or 1830 ? Who may tell from the narrative ? The treatment she received ** very late in the afternoon," and which is described at the close of the preceding chapter, appears to have cleared her mind of all " indecision," and brought it a state of calmness and impartiality befitting the keen observer and accurate memorialist. Accord- ingly we are favoured from page 64 with fifty-six pages of "Popish" legends — of conventual obscr- vances and conventual principles of morality. Chapter the eleventh describes a murder, which is agreeably refreshing. " The time was about five months after I took the veil ; the weather was cool, T 29 Dis' tion ilia lavc itro- c of 3 re- ts ill ns of hese not, tical rs, if I not perhaps in September or October !'* The recitals of mingled bloodshed, debauchery, and frivolity extend- ed throughout the rest of the pamphlet, absurd as they manifestly are, will all be found answered in a subsequent chapter of this refutation. We were at a loss to account foi' the expression, " an old woman for a nun, that is to say, about forty," applied to a nun at page 30, until we met with the following explanation at page 82. "It was a common remark always at the initiation of a new nun into the Black nun department, that is, to receive the black veil, that the introduction of ano- ther novice into the convent as a veiled nun always caused the introduction of a veiled nun into heaven as a saint, which was on account of the singular disappearance of some of the older nuns always at the entrance of new onec." The explanation, how- ever, is not complete ; for there is constant mention throughout the narrative of " old nuns," and the rea- der is induced to suppose that there is " always" a reasonable number of them ; so that, even in the de- velopment of one of the main objects of the Disclo- sures, allowed murder and hints of murder, the au- thors of this libel are not consistent. We pause here to make a few obvious reflections suggested by the paragraph just quoted. It is to be inferred from the narnitivo, that tlic so called " Black nuns" live in a state of independence, and that theiir obe- dience to the priests is voluntary. They have tlieir own buildinji^s and their own grounds. The deeds done in the convent are *'no secret," they are known to all, old and young, for all participate in them. Now, we are required to believe, that in a community thus constituted, the members have consented to surrender themselves to "singular dfi in different parts of the United State.?," evide-iily ori^rinated in the de- sire to prejudice readers against (^atholic teachers generally, by eAcitlng ainong the ignorant the sus- picion that they Jiiav he from Canada. Now, v/hether tlie nims ofAioiUrcal are redeemed or not from obloquy by tiiis reluititloii, we repeat, that none belonging U) the loundation of the " Congre- gation," as mentioned in I'lo '• Disclosures," or to any other, are to be met v/it!i in tiie United States. Missions are sent from the convent of tbe Congre- gation to various parts of Canada ; a convenient 82 stroke of the pen extends them in the " Disclosures" to the United States. Careless readers may in some instances havo I^een iinposed upon by the appearance of detail which the " Disclosures" exhibit in describing the practices and discipline of Conventual life. A sufficient foundation for the construction of similar details exists in thousands of narratives and ro- mances to be found in every language. The ad- visers of " Monk" would hav^e been wise had they confined themselves to mere invention, and s-o much of compila.tion as coirid have been safely interwo- ven in the story. It was foolish in them to have used " Monk" for any other purpose than as the ostensible vehicle by which their slanders might be conveyed to the world. In what she has supplied, the manifest falsehood is so close to the pro- bable trwth, that the perception of the one instantly leads to the rejection of the other. Maria Monk has had some experience of a species of Conventu- al l>fe gained bv a residence of several months in an institution of the city of Montreal, commonly known as the 3Iagdalen Asylum. The Asylum is under the control and direction of a charitable lady, who has for many years appropriated her revenues and devoted her whole time to the wretched and sinful of her sex. This lady, Mrs. McDonell, re- ceived " Maria Moj:ik" into her establishmen.t, and endeavoured, by every means in her power, to restore her to habits of virtue : but M(/nk proved a harden- ed sinner, and the efforts of her benevolent instruc- tress were lUtimatcIy unsuccessful. Monk left the Asylum, and for several months wrmdered about from place to place as the prett.'nded wife of a disgraxied and cast-olf ck^rorvman. To this man, who know 44 th M i 33 .»> ave itail the A h^r real character, and liow abaHcloned it was, she ';ommunicated the history oC her residence at Mrs. McDonell's, and his love of lucre immediately sug- gested the use which might be made of it. Such is the real origin of the " Awful Disclosures." Mrs. McDoneli i« a devout v/oman, and she has adopted in the As^^iiun, for the purposes of order and religion, many of the practices of Conventual life. She has remarked to tlie writer, that the por- tion of the " Disclosures" relating to Conventual discipline is entirely borrowed from the habits to v/hich " Monk" was suhjectod while an inmate of the Asylum, it is not tliat the truth is told, but there is not a line which may not be accounted for. Thus, at pa^e 21, where mention is made of fifty girls at the Congregational school, the fabri- cation will be accounted for by stating^ that there were fifty girls at the Asyiiim at the time "Monk" entered it. At the Asylum aUo, Holy water is placed at the doors of the apartments, and the girls are expected to use it. The entrance or way to the school-room of the boarders at the Congregation it was out of Monk's power to have described, for she never was a boarder at the convent, and never was admitted within the building. Monk, at the age of nine years, and about tlic year 1826, attended the poor-school of the Congregation for a few months : but the poor-school-room is entirely separate from the convent proper, and the entrance to it is imme- diately from the yard. Tliere is no " long covered passage" — no " turn to the left ;" but there are " covered passages and turns" in the building of the Magdalen Asylum. At page 22, the Conventual establishments of Montreal are named, as, 34 First — The " Congregational Nunnery." Second — The " Blat:k Nunnery " or Convent of S-ister " Bourgcoise." Third— The ** Gr«y Nunnery." The proper nppcllations of the convents are not here " disclosed," nor are they used in any part •f the pamphlet. The ability of the pretended ex-nnm to name or describe things as they really are, does not show itself commensurate with the necessity of doing so in order to give an appearance of truth to hfc^r "disclosures." The correct names of the con- vents are — First — " Congregation de Notre Dame." Second— " Hotel Dieu." Third — " Hospital General." It will be perceived that tho " Hotel Dieu" cor- responds with the " Black Nunnery, or Convent of Sister Bourgeoise." The foundation for this descrip- tion is, that one of the three nunneries is sometimes called by the English population the " Black Nun- nery," and that there lived, in the seventeenth cen- tury, a pious lady, who went by the name of Sis- ter Borgeois. Th3 errors are three in number; the nunnery sometimes called the " Black Nunnery," is not the " Hotel Dieu," but the " Congregational Nunnery ;" " Sister Bourgeoise" is improperiy writ- ten for " Sister Bourgeois ;" and lastly, the name of th© pious sister is associated with an institution in the foundation of which she was nowise concern- ed, and which, indeed, originated before her arrival in Canada. These errors are, we grant, not im- portant in themselves, but unpardonable in the al- leged production of an ex-nun of the " Hotel Dieu," and point out clearly the manner in which the '• Disclosures" have been got up. 85 It is stated that the charities of thn " Hotel Diou" nt of ^^® ^^^ insignificant when compared " with the size I of the buildings.'* The origin of this error must I be looked for solely in the ijjiiorance and malijjnitv of the prompters of the pretended witness. The falsehood is easily answered. The Hotel Dieii con- sists of five parts, nearly eqwal in size ; of the?»e, three are exclusively devoted to public charity, and the remaining two consist partly of cloisters, and partly of apartments where articles for the poor and destitute are prepared. It is stated that the nuns of the Hotel Dieu and General Hospital have their " common names (black i and grey) from the colours of the dresses woi*n by 1 their inmates." The reason assigned is not suffi- cient to account for the aforesaid " common names," inasmuch as the nuns of the Conjjrcfrjation also wear the black habit. The truth is, that the nuns of the Congregation and the nuns of the General Hospital have establishments out of tlie city, which is not the case with the nuns of the Hotel Dieu ; and in the neighbourhood of those establishmenti? they are sometimes distinguished as " black and grey nuns." It may still further be observed, that the nuns of the Hotel Dieu nev^er leave the precincta of their convent ; whereas, both the nuns of the Congregation and of the General Hospital may fre- quently be seen in the streets, and the citizens aro thus led to distinguish them by 39 at the Congregation ; two of the three have not at any time been inmates of the Hotel Dieu, either aa novices or otherwise, nor have they any knowledge or information of Monk's stay there, except from her published narrative. The acquaintance of Monk with Miss Fourneer (not " Fougnee") and her sister commenced and ended at the Magdalen Asy- lum, where those two young persons were engaged as assistants to Mrs. McDoncll.* " Miss Howard from Vermont" knew nothing of Monk previously to the entrance of the latter into the Asylum. She never has been within the wails of a convent, and during several months of hourly intercourse with Monk, never heard the latter pretend that she had been at any period of her life an inmate of a con- vent. We have deemed it right to procure docu- mentary evidence on these points, which shall be produced in its proper place. We had forgotten to state that her alleged application to Father Rocque, mentioned at the commencement of the third chapter, is a positive invention. We know from Father Rocque that he has never seen or con- versed with Maria Monk. The miserable beings who vouch for this woman's veracity, may indeed reject the testimony of a venerable old man be- cause he happens to be a " popish priest," but in- dependently of it, her account contains some notori- ous untruths. It is stated that " Father Rocque" succeeded *' Father Roue" as superior of the seminary, and was superior at the time of her ap- plication. These statements are untrue. Mr. Quiblier succeeded " Father Roux," not Roue, as su- *The elder Miss Foumier had been a novice at the Hotel Dieu, but never took the vows. Monk's acquaintance with this fact enabled her to add to her vocabulary the word "novice." 40 perior of the seminary. The time of iVIonk*s pre- tended appHcation to Mr. Rocque is, as usual, not mentioned, but we can say that that clergyman never has been at any time superior of the semi- nary. The information of Monk on the seminary itself is such as might be expected from a woman of her class. " It is the general rendezvous and centre of all the priests in the district of Montreal, and, I have been told, supplies all the country wiih priests as far down as Three Rivers, which place is, I be- lieve, under the charge of the seminary of Quebec. About one hundred and fifty priests are connected with that of Montreal, rs every small place has one priest, and a number of larger ones have two." The untruths are nearly as numerous as the words. The seminary is not a " general rendezvous ;" it does not supply the district with priests. The seminary is a corporation, enjoying the ministration of the parish of Mo itreal, and has only one mission, to the lake of Two Mountains. The number of priests connected with the seminary is not one hundred and fifty, either for the reason assigned in the " Disclosures ?" or for any other. The number of priests connected with the seminary seldom exceeds thirty. We need not say, that on all these points nuns are well informed. At page 34, we find in the mention of " Saint Clotilde," a falsehood, which is repeated time over time throughout the pamphlet. Let it be remembered that it is an ex-nun of the Hotel Dieu who speaks, and let it be remarked that she every where speaks of her companions in that hospital and convent as being distinguished by the names of saints taken from the Catholic calendar. Each instance is a falsehood, and we here place be- as yoi Mi an^ foi w< 41 m pre- not man lemi- fore the reader the origin of it. The nuns of the Congregation generally assume the names of saints, and also at the Hotel Dieu tho names of saints are placed distinct to the eye over the beds of the pa- tients. On this foundation some gentleman in black, with elongated visage and sanctimonious air, visiting the latter institution in search of sin under the coverlids of disease, has raised the fancied su- perstructure which it is now our business to de- stroy. With two exceptions, there are no " Saints" at the Hotel Dieu, and the nuns are collectively named as " Soeurs St. Joseph," or sisters of St. Joseph, and individually after their baptismal and family appellations. It is customary for two of the sisters to assume the names of St. Joseph and St. Augustin, the patron saints of the convent. Tlie sister wuo bore the name of Saint Joseph, died about three years since ; and at the present time there is only one sister who is distinguished by a saint's name. Had Maria Monk been at anytime a nun at the Hotel Dieu, she would have been known as " Sister Maria Monk," or, more briefly, as " Sister Monk." " Clotilde" is the name of the younger Miss Fournier, and it was usual at the Magdalen Asylum to style her " St. Clotilde." At pages 36 and 37, a girl named Jane McCoy, and an " old nun" named Jane Ray, are mentioned for the first time. Perfect madness ! These two women are reformed prostitutes, and were inmates of the Magdalen Asylum contemporaneously with Maria Monk. Our remarks on the unparalleled impudence and imbecility of the advisers of Monk in bringing forward the names of real persons to substantiate the ** Disclosures," apply here with peculiar force* We have taken the trouble to count 42 the pages of the " Disclosures" occupied with the sayings and doings of this " Jane Ray," and we find them to amount in number to forty-six. Forty - six pages of falsehood so easily refuted ! Forty-six pages of falsehood met by the incontestable facts that Jane Ray never was an inmate of the Hotel Dieu ; that Jane Ray is a reformed prostitute, that she has been for years living at the Magdalen Asy- lum, and that her sole acquaintance with Monk was formed during the stay of the latter at the Asylum ! We freely confess that it is more easy to admit scandal than to extirpate it after it has been received ; but we put it to the consciences of the most simple-minded, if, Jifter this exposure of the origin of the " Disclosures," they can retain for them a particle of credulity. The falsehoods concerning Monk's re-admission to the noviciate, mentioned at page 47, are so inter- woven in the narrative, that it is difficult to separate them. In fact, everv word is a lie. We shall en- deavour to enumerate the more flagrant of them. It will be seen by referring to the narrative, that she states that " money is usually required for th© admission of novices ;" that she paid money for her re-admission ; aiwl that she robbed her mother of thirty dollars, by applying for her pension to the brigade Major. The only foundation for these lies is, that nuns, before taking the veil, are required, by a law that cannot be suspended or put aside, to pay into the treasury of the convent, for charitable pur- poses, the sum of three thousand francs, or about five hundred and sixty dollars. The reader will look in vain for any evidence, for any pretence, that such sum was paid by Monk. As we have before observed, the mother of Monk is in the receipt of 43 the wages, not of a " pension" properly so called ; and we now add that such pens?" j, if onjoyed, could not have been received by the dac^hter nor paid by a brigade major. The law regulates such matters differently ; moreover there is no such officer as brigade major stationed at Montreal. The origin of this lie is easily traced. Until recently, the town major of Montreal had the use and occupation of the govern- ment house where Monk's mother was employod as a domestic. This was tiie case when Monk and her paramour, the repudiated clergyman, were in Montreal, We cannot hope to disturb any honest man's belief that such vile creatures as Maria Monk and her crew may have robbed and stolen ; but we think that reformed sinners, whether hatched in the purlieus of vice and sensuality, or in the conventi- cles of bastard sectarianism, should give to their self- condemnations at least the appearance of truth. At page 48 it is stated, that " one of her cousins from Lachine, named Reed, spent about a fortnight with her," and that the " bold young novice" was dismissed for indecorous language. The only foun- dation for these falsehoods is, that there is a girl named " Reed" with whom Monk was acquainted ; but Reed never was an inmate of the Hotel Dieu. Reed was an inmate of the Magdalen Asylum con- temporaneously with Maria Monk. Independently of this, the lie is awkwardly composed. It is first stated that she is a visitor, and a few lines lower down shtf is transformed into a novice. The parts of the lie are badly odjusted. The inventors of these noviciates knew not of the class of posttilanteSf from which all novices must be taken, lieed is unceremoniously made a novice, in a manner which itself betrays the falsehood of the narrative. 44 It is contrary to the rules and practice of the Hotel Dieu Hospital and Convent to give admis- sion into anv of the three classes into which its in- mates are divided, unless the applicant have pre- viously received the sacrament of confirmation. If Ihis is true respecting the lowest class, that of pos- tidantes, it is so a fortiori of the class of novices, of which Monk states she was a member at the time she was confirmed. The only foundation that ap- pears to exist for Monk's descriptions of her partici- pation in Catholic ceremonies and Catholic obser- vances, is, that at some periods of her hypocritical life she put on the guise of a member of the Roman Catholic church, and in that guise '^ecame acquaint- ed with some of its rites. We presume that it will not be disputed, that, even if all other points be ne- glected or passed over, the Catholicism at least of girls received into an establishment such as the Ho- tel Dieu, must be undoubted. There is not the slightest reason to believe, either from the narrative or from any other source, that Monk could have proved, or that she undertook to prove, her conver- sion to the Roman Catholic faitii. By the canons of the church, which are strictly observed in Canada, a convert to Catholicism is required to submit to two acts, namely, of conditional baptism and of ab- juration, and those acts are regularly registered at the places where they arc ma^le. In the case of Monk, it is not " disclosed'* in what year or by whom she was instructed in the Roman Catholic faith — at what place or into whose hands she made her abjuration — or who were the witnesses of it ; by whom, on what day, or at what placp. she received baptism, under condition, agreeably to the rites of the Roman Catholic church. On all those points the tl fa c^ P] 45 IS- in- re- If narrative is silent. The deficiency cannot be sup- plied without further fabrication, which we should think this ex]>o6ure will deter the boldest of Monk'n advisers from resorting to. Before dismissing the subject of Monk's pretend- ed confirmation, we shall make two quotations con- cerning it /rom the "Disclosures." She states, that " on the day she went to the church to be confirmed, her conscience troubled her !" She then describes the ceremony after her fashion, and con- cludes by saying, that " she went home with qualms of conscience." Maria Monk's conscience! We infer from the language of the narrative, that she went from the Hotel Dieu to a church to be con- rtrmed ; or, in other words, that the ceremony was not performed at the chapel of the convent; and also, that after the ceremony she returned to her mother's house (see page 31 ), where the word " home" is expressly used in this sense, which, indeed, is the most obvious and proper. Now, it will be recol- lected that the nuns, novices, and po^tulantes of the Hotel Dieu, never leave the precincts of the Hos. pital and Convent for any purpose whatsoever. Thus the story of Monk's pretended confirmation is falsehood running into falsehood, and so clumsily constructed, that in whatever light it be viewed, it presents still the same ugly aspect of forgery. We are informed by Mrs. McDonell, that Monk ** disclosed" to her a story of confirmation in lan- guage resembling that used in the narrative, but of course never dared to pretend that she was a no- vice, either at the time of such confirmation or at any other. She declared to Mrs. McDonell that she was confirmed at St. Denis, in the church there {administered by Mr. Bedard. She also mentioned 46 that she had concealed some sin from Mr. Bedard at confession, which excited in her the " qualms of conscience." Tlie ceremony of taking the veil is " disclosed" with much circumstance and detail. It is in our power to say, that not Monk nor any one else has ever acted a part in such a scene as is described by her in the sixth chapter of the " Disclosures." The origin of the falsehoods must be looked for in the information of the parties to them. That there is 5, ceremony performed at the taking of the veil, this alone is true; all else is positively and no- toriously false. We shall quote from the " Dis- closures" only two passages concerning this pre- tended ceremony. At page 53 it is stated, " tak- ing the veil is an affair which occurs so frequently in Montreal, that it has long ceased to be regarded as a novelty ; and although notice had been given in the French parish church as usual, only a small audience have assembled, as I have mentioned." Were Monk's assertion made at page 34, that she was introduced among forty novices, founded in truth, it might readily be inferred, that " taking the veil is an aff^air which occurs frequently at Montreal." The concordance between the two statements pre- sents one of the very few instances of consistency to be met with in the course of the narrative. Tho truth however is, as we have before remarked, that the nuns of the Hotel Dieu Hospital and convent are few in number, and that the novices seldom exceed three or four. We now add, that the nuns of the Hotel Dieu and the nuns of the Congre- gation in Montreal are the only nuns who go through the ceremony of taking the veil in pub- lic ; and that the ceremony is regarded by the citi* M ai ol 01 ^\l U 47 zens as a great novelty, and is always numerously attended. The second member of the sentence states that notice of the ceremony is usually given in the " French parish church." Not only is it false that such notice is " usually given," but in fact it is never given, and most certainly was not given on the occasion of Monk's pretended reception. Of the thousands who frequent the parish church, not one will be found to say that the name of " Maria Monk" has ever been sounded from the pulpit of that building. At pag/? 54 we find the following " disclosure ;" " After taking the vows, I proceeded to a small apartment behind the altar, accompanied by four nuns, where was a coffin prepared with my nun name engraven upon it," "Saint Eustace." " My companions lifted it by four handles attach- ed to it, while I threw otf my dress and put on that of a nun of Sctur (sister) Bourgeoise" (again incor- rectly written for " Bourgeois.") Is it necessary to say that there is no such coffin ? Will the reader please to observe that * the disclosure" just quoted conveys two asser- tions resting on the personal evidence of the woman Monk ; namely, that the " nun name" of *' Saint Eustace" was bestowed on her at her reception, and that on the same occasion she put on the habit of" Sister Bourgeoise ;" and will he then turn to our previous remarks on these two points ? Ho will instantly see that it was impossible for the pre- tended ex-nun to have assumed or received the " nun name" of " Saint Eustace," for such names never have been assumed by the nuns of the Hotel Dieu Hospital and convent, with the exceptions al- 49 ready mentioned ; and he will also see, that the ** putting on the dress of Sister Bourgeoise" was equally impossible to the pretended ex-nun, inas- much as Sister Bourgeois, (not Bourgeoise,) of pious memory, belonged to another and entirely distinct institution, of which she was the founder ; that she was in no manner connected with the Hotel Diou ; and that the nuns of the latter foundation are sis- ters of St. Josepli. The reader may then ponder at will on the authenticity and verisimilitude of the artless " Disclosure's" of the pretended ex-nun. We must state here, that the laws of the province of Canada regulate the acceptation of the religious habit and interfere therein. By those laws it is requir- ed that an instrument shall be drawn up and exe- cuterl. wherein the voluntary co-operation of the new nun shall be set forth, together with other cere- monies appertaining to lier reception. The deed must be signed by a notary and competent witnesses. Need we say that no vsuch deed concerning Monk is in existence ? At page 61, the falsehood concerning her " new name" is repeated. She found it inscribed on a certain " band" at the dinner table. The pretend- ed details of conventual life given at this part of the narrative, are all borrowed from Monk's experience gained at the Magdalen Asylum. There the dinner hour, for instance, is eleven ; and a band or ticket, with the " owner's name" marked on it, " is fasten- ed to the napkin." The napkin of the pretended ex-nun bore the inscription of " M?ria Monk." Father Dufresne, mentioned at page 62 in a way that marks the atrocious intentions of the advisers of " Monk," is a clergyman, justly venerated for his benevolence and indefatigable exertions in the m cl ti 49 #^ duties of his calling. He has been for years the ♦Viend of Mrs. McDonell, and has advised and as- sisted that lady in the conduct of the Magdalen Asylum from its commencement. At the Asylum he once spoke with Maria Monk, an occurrence which minds prolific of calunmy have expanded in- to a disgusting outrage. The " daily ceremonies" described in the seventh chapter of the " Disclosures," are taken from Monk's remembrance of what she saw practised at the Asylum. Her remiiiioCcjnces are, however, more frequently inaccurate than otherwise. The words in French are used at the Asylum ; the prayers spoken of are said there. There is also a com- munity room in which the nuns are daily assem- bled ; but reformed " popish priests" may be able to certify, that in convents there is only one apartment «tyled a " Community room." It takes its name from the use made of it, and is called in French " chambre de la communaute," or " room of the community." Monk's narrative creates for the Hotel Dieu dozens of such apartments. The error of the pretended ex-nun is foolish and unnecessary for the purposes of the " Disclosures." " Benissante," prominently printed at page 68, is an amusing transformation of the two first words of a well-known catholic hymn, " Veni Sancte ;" this hymn is daily sung at the Asylum. What follows is extracted from page 81 of the " Disclosures," and affords a pretty specimen of the consistency of the penny-a-liners. " The Congrega- tional Nunnery was founded by a nun called sister Bourgeoise. She taught a school in Montreal, and left property for the foundation of a convent. Her body is buried, and her heart is kept under the 5 50 nunnery in an iron chest, which has been shown to me, with tlie assurance that it continues in perfect preservation, although she has been dead more than one hundred and fifty years. In the chapel is the foHowing inscription : * Soeur Bourgeoise, Fonda- trice du Couvent,' — ' Sister Bourgeoise, Founder of the Convent.' " Tlie only truth in this piece of tattle is, that tiie Congregational nunnery was founded hy a sister Bourgeois (not Bourgeoise.) The pas- sage makes a strange appearance in the " Awful Disclosures," for it has no connection with what immediately precedes or succeeds. It would seem to have been inserted by some malicious spirit, for the purpose of bringing tiic authors to utter confu- sion. As it is, compare the admission there made, that, the Congregational nunnery was founded by sister Bourgeois<\ (Bourgeois,) with two statements which we have already noticed. At page 22 the Hotel Dieu is designated as the convent of sister " Bourgeoise," (Bourgeois,) and at page 54 the nuns of the Hotel Dieu are designated as the nuns of " Sister Bourgeois !" Further comment on this point is unnecessary. The pretended ex-nun has the " assurance" to say, that she was shown " an iron chest under the nunnery, in which the body of the sister is buried and her heart is kept." Monk was never shown such "chest," for none such exists. Even the mere and simple laity of Montreal know better than this pretended ex-nun how the remains of sister Bourgeois were disposed of. The following is a translation of the only inscription which exists concerning the sister Bourgeois. The inscription itself may be read in the conventual chapel, which is not " under the nunnerv," but beside it. " Here, in this small leaden chest, is inclosed a p¥ 51 m (led ti'5 silver box in the form of a heart, which contains the remains of that of the venerable sister, Mar- garet Bourgeois, instructress of the community of the Congregation of our Lady in Canada, deceased the 12th January, 1700. Her body had at first been interred in the chapel belonging to the sisters in the parish of Montreal, from which place her bones have been transferred into this church in 1766. They repose in the sanctuary, interred against the wall on the left side of the altar. Her heart, a year after her death, had been solemnly de- posited in this chapel, and subsequently, having been in part spared by t-lie flames of the fire of 1768, was there replaced the 30th June, 1782." Monk was at the poor school of the congregation in her ninth year ; and her " disclosure" regarding the sister Bourgeois is an imperfect reminiscence of that early age. At page 89 and elsewhere, nuns are mentioned as employed in saying their " catechism." The untruth is obvious, for it may readily be inferred that nuns who undergo years of religious training as novices and posiulantes, have no occasion to re- peat the " catechism" after their reception. At the Asylum the girls are taught the catechism, and the practice there followed has suppHed Monk with a reminiscence for the coinage of her untruth The falsehood concerning " nun names" is elab- orately repeated at page 91. "I found that I had several namesakes among the nuns, for there were two others who had already bore away my new name, saint Euatace. This was not a solitary case, for there were five saint Marys and three saint Monros, besides two novices of that name." We are here informed, for the first time, that even 52 novices assume the names of " saints," and though not yet " nuns," nevertheless bear these pretended "nun names." These idle fabrications destroy each other. It is previously stated that these " nun names" are conferred on the day the ceremony of taking the veil is performed. It is stated that the " new name" of the new nun " is found inscribed on her coffin !" We can account for the fabrication of the pre- tended " squaw nuns," mentioned in the ninth chap- ter of the "Disclosures." At the Asylum there was, contemporaneously with Monk, an Indian girl, the grand-daughter of Thomas Raco Suinte, a chief of the " Sault St. Louis." But Indians have not large sums of money to pay for the " admission of their daughters into convents.'^ The money paid on the admission of a nun is not measured by weight. The Indians in Lower Canada live in communities, and are not allowed by law to " sell their property." The idea of the pretended squaw nun, " St. Hypo- lite," originated in the circumstance of the elder Miss Fournier owning that name. The story of the " secret bell," mentioned at page 97, is another reminiscence of the Magdalen Asy- lum. The buildings at the Asylum arc situate in a yard, which separates them from the lane leading to the gate. The gate itself is provided with a move- able board, by means of which, a person inside can ascertain before opening who the applicant for ad- mission is. Outside the gate is a " bell handle," which is not "entirely concealed." So much for the origin of the fable of the "secret bell." Monk was at St. Denis in the year 1833 and 1834, and there may have seen or heard of the Rev. Mr.Bird, vicar to the Rev, J. Baptiste Bedard, curate i 53 lough jnded stroy "nun iny of it the ;ribed e prc- chap- there -n girl, I chief ve not lion of ^ paid i^eight. mities, ^erty." Hypo- elder at page Asy. ite in a ding to move- de can for ad- andle," for the 33 and he Rev. curate of the parish. She introilu<:e.s him at page 98, with liis name transformed into " Bicrze." The names of tlie books mentioned at page 98, are another reminiscence of the Asvluni, where tliose books are actually used. Some two or three, however, of those mentioned have no existence. Tlie " Examcn de Conscience" is the title of a chapter in most C;itholic prayer-books, and to which the attention of Monk was frequently directed by Mrs. McDonell, but there is no hook of the name. At the commencement of the tenth chapter it is stated, that the manufacture of wax was an im- portant branch of business in the nunnery, and that " it was carried on in a small room, on the first floor, thence called the ciergerie, or wax-room, cicrgc being the French word for tc«a;." Monk would have us believe that she " was sometimes sent to read to the nuns employed there." At the Asylum the manufacture of wax tapers is a " branch of business," and the room in which the manufac- ture is carried on is certainly called the ciergerie^ though not for the reason mentioned in the " Dis- closures," as cierge is not " the French word for wax." Monk was occasionally sent to read " there" to the girls, while at work. At page 109, Monk has appropriated to herself the interesting title of the " devout English reader," of Jane Ray's inven- tion ; but " Jane Ray," with whom we have convers- ed, denies that she had any knowledge of it. The needle of Monk was sometimes employed at the Asylum in making scapularies. She describes them in the " Disclosures" as having on one side a kind of double cross, and on the other I. H. S., the meaning of which she " does not exactly know." 5* 54 This is not surprising in a jirustitute. but nuns are , better informed. The "Disclosures" make Messrs. Bonin, Rich- ards, and Sauvage, together with the Bishop, au- thors of, and witness to the death of " St. Francis." Mr. Bonin succeeded Mr. Dufresne as religious ad- viser to Mrs. McDonell, and in that capacity was personally known to Monk. Neither Mr. Bonin nor Messrs. Richards and Sauvage, have at any time been chaplains to the Hotel Dieu. The Bishop and Mr. Sauvage have the years of the Roman Cenci, but are not reputed to resemble him in other particulars. Mr. Quiblier, superior of the Montreal seminary, mentioned at page 150 and elsewhere, is a gentleman of the highest character ; and yet we are induced to believe, that in some places, ar.d with some peo- ple, the word of such a man may be of less weight than that of the thief and prostitute. To believe in Mr. Quiblier's visits to the Hotel Dicu, it is ne- cessary to introuuce the machinery of the " subter- ranean passage." As Mr. Quiblier never has been chaplain to the Hotel Dieu, they could not have hccn otherwise paid. The belief in the " suhler- ranean passage" is comfortable, for it solves many difficulties. We shall doubtless distress many a fool by depriving him of it. At page 153 it is stated, that the youngest novice who ever took the veil *• was only I'ourtecn years of age." This is an implied falsehood. By the laws of Canada, no nun car. " take the veil" before she has attained the age of sixteen. Will Monk's story, related at page 154, induce any one to believe, that a Catholic bishop and vicar general of the dioccirc of Quebec niav be found on i 55 " public squares" on the diiys of executions ! We regard it as a singular instance of timidity, that the authors of the " Disclosures" have not invented for the region of Canada an ^^Autodafe" under the superintendence of the bishop and his clergy. Visits of tlie bishop to the Hotel Dieu, and his participation in the crimes alleged to be committed there, are repeatedly charged in tlie " Disclosures." Now, when the bishop visits the convent proper, he is always dressed in his canonical robes, and is at- tended by at least two of his clergy. Such visits are in their nature public, and could not be other- wise paid without exciting public remark. The name of the bishop is not well known to the ex- nun, for it is written in three or four different ways throughout the narrative. The story of the " Saint Bon Pasteur," introduced at page 160, is not only evidently absurd, but is also a singular instance of the mode in which the fabri- cations of the " Disclosures" have originated. ** Bon Pasteur," or the " Good Shepherd," is an expression habitually used by devout Christians in speaking of our Saviour. This expression was frequently in- troduced in the prayers daily recited at the Asylum, ind such is the i)urc and siiuple origin of the fable of the ''Bon Pasteur." In conversing with Mrs. McDonell, she satisfied us fully on this point. In fact, there is not perliiips a single lie told in the "Disclosures," for whicU a similar origin might not b(^ found. Thus the " songs" which are interspersed ll»roughout the " Disclosures," are catches which were familiar to the girls of the Asylum. A most atrocious charge is brought, at page 169, against the whole body c^f priests. The mind Kickens in the contemplation of such horrible 56 calumny. Our iiidigntition against the abettors of Monk in Iitr sclicme of infamy, and the villany we impute to them, are more thtin jiistiiied. It will be better to lay aside hU false delicacy, and give the charge at once in the proper words of the narrative. "The priests are liable, by their dissolute habits, to occasional attacks of di.iensc, which render it ne- ccssar}', or at lea;;t prudent, to subujit to medical treatment." We puc it to the common sense of the reader, if these " occasional attacks of disease" do not su[)pose habits of promiscuous debauchery in conunon rece})tacles of sensuality ; but, with such habits, could the priests by any possible pnjcaution escape the stigma of public opinion ? Certainly not. Now the priests of Montreal and of Canada do enjoy at least public esteem for moralit}^, and, if ne- cessary, the testimony of every adult in the province would be gladly yielded to their excellent character. Opposed to this character, and its absolute incom- patibility with the charge, we have the evidence of Monk delivered in the following terms. " I am able to speak from personal knowledge, for I hjlve been a nun of Soiur IJourgeoise." A nun of Soeur I3ourgeoise (Bourgeois) means, if any thing, a nun of the Congregation ; a nun of the Hotel Dieu is a ** Socur de St. Joseph;" but this signal contradic- tion, which we have pointed out more than once be- fore, was not necessary to cover the calumniators with confusion. We have it in our power to show that it was in common brothels that the wretched woman Monk made herself familiar with "occa- sional attacks of disease ;" and that it was among women of her class, at a time she alleges she was an inmate of the Hotel Dieu, she learned the dis- 1 r JST ors of ly we i^ill be e the ativc. ity, to it ne- edical of the ie" do ery in 1 such iiution ly not. ida do , if ne- ovincc racter. incoiu- ence of "I am I have f Soeur , a nun ieu is a itradic- >nce be- niators :o show retched " occa- among he was he dis- tinction between prudence and necessity in submit- ting to medical treatment. Monk became acquainted with the name of ** Father Tombcau" from the circumstance of a re- vered clergyman, bearing a name somewhat similar, having died about the time Monk left the Magdalen Asvlum. The funeral ceremony excited much at- tcntion at the time, as the deceased was widely known and respected. Notwithstanding the charge made in the " Disclosures" of Maria Monk, the charitable and Christian reader may believe that the soul of the good clergyman and faithful pastor "rests in peace." " Father Larkin," mentioned at page 174, has I been for years past a professor at the Montreal college. Hi^ brother, a sub-deacon, is also em- ployed there. Will it be credited, that a gentleman so employed could l)y any possibility be " on duty" of any description at the Hotel Dieu Hospital and Convent ? There is as little truth in the description given at page 177 of the obsequies of a nun, as in that of the ceremony of taking the veil. It is stated that " when a Black nun is dead, the corpse is dressed as if living, and placed in the chapel in a sitting posture within the railing round the altar, with a book in the hand as if reading. " A " Black nun," or nun of the foimdation of sister Bourgeois, is not a nun of the Hotel Dieu Hospital and Convent ; and when a nun of the latter institution dies, she is not exhibited " with a book in the hand." The exhi- bition is public, and the information obtained by the repudiated minister who accompanied Monk from Nevv-York to Montreal, has been awkwardly and incorrectly transferred to the pages of the " Awful / 58 Disclosures.*' The vows of a nun of the Hotel Dicu, taken with the veil, arc always written out ; retained ahout her person as long as she lives ; and placed in her hand when laid out in the chapel of the convent. Arc tlie authors of the " Disclosures" prepared to say what those vows are, or what have hecome of the recorded vows taken hy their wit- ness ? A ring is placed on the linger of a nun of the Hotel Dieu at the time of her reception. That ring is never removed, and is huried with her. Arc the authors of the " Disclosures" prepared to de- scribe that ring with the inscription thereon? Can they account for the silence observed on these points by their witness? Can they inform their dupes wliat has become of the ring which their witness must have received and worn, if their al- legations concerning her nunship are founded in truth ? By referring to the " Disclosures," page 178, it will be seen that it is stated that the superior of the Hotel Dieu was in the habit of absenting her- self fiom the convent, and that it is intimated that on such occasion she would visit the priest's farm, situate at some distance from the city. The mani- fest fulsehood of this " disclosure" will be at once perceived, when it is recollected that the vows of the nuns of the Hotel Dieu bind them to perpetual seclusion within the precincts of the hospital and convent ; and that the existence of those vows is known to the citizens. No nun is ever seen out of the convent ; no nun would dare brave the ex- posure. It is not even pretended that either the visits to the farm, or the visits to the Conffregation- al Nunnery, mentioned at page 125, were secret ! Although Monk styles tlic disappearance of tho [ 59 ,j> " old superior" one of the " most remarkable and unaccountable things that happened in the con- vent," it is nevertheless accoimted for at the very page that follows, by insinuating that she was mur- dered ; an occurrence that need not have appeared at all remarkable to Maria Monk. This has been elsewhere noticed : we shall now state how supe- riors of the Hotel Dieu do sometimes disappear. At the expiration of every three years a con- ventual chapel is h Id for the piirpose of electing a new suj)erior. By the rules of the ioundation, the same person cannot be elected more tiian twice in succession, and consequently, at least every six years the " old superior disapptsirs," and a new superior takes her place. The disappearance is, however, not total ; for the " old superior" merges into the community, of which siie remains a member for life, unless re-elected at a subsequciit period. The election is always certified by a formal instru- ment, as required by law. The iiistalliTijr of a new superior is souiewhat dilltjrently described in the " disclosures." There it is staled, that ** one morn- ing" the nuns, on their arrival in the community room, found tlie Bishop, but " no superior ;" strange to say, the Bishop addresses the nuns " instead of the superior, v.'ho was nowhere to be seen." He then introduces to tliem one of the oldest nuns. Saint l)u, " as their superior." This cloud of nonsense, falsehood, and foolish mysteriousness, {Saint Du !) may be dispersed in a very few words. There have been two superiors since 1821, and both are still hving at the Hotel Dieu. The present supe- rior was in office from 1821 to 1827, and was re- elected in 1831), and again in 1836. We quote the following passage from page 190. —ii^ia* 60 :.^>m " One of the most shocking stories I heard of the events that had occurred in the nunnery hefore my acquaintance with it, was the following, which was told me by Jane. What is uncommon, I can fix the date when I heard it ; it was on New Year's day, 1834." Uncommon, indeed ! for it is the only date mentioned throughout the "Disclosures." Bo it remarked, however, that the date does not re- gard an exent concerning Monk ; no, it merely re- gards the time a story was told her by "Jane!" " Jane," who knew of events " that had occurred" at the Asyium before Monk's acquaintance with it, denies, nevertheless, that she is the author of the delectable story attributed to her. The whole account given in the eighteenth chap- ter, of the manufacture and use of wax tapers at the Hotel Dieu, is notoriously false. We oppose, as witnesses on this point, the entire population of tlio city. It is stated, that the " Pope had given early notice that the burning of wax candles would af- ford protection from the disease, (the cholera,) and that his message was promulgated in the Cray Nunnery, the Congregational Nunnery, and to Ca- tholics at large, through the pulpits." As an in- stance of the loose manner in which these fabri- cations are constructed, the reader will remark that no mention is made of the promulgation of the " Pope's message" at the Hotel Dieu, although it was in the latter institution, it is alleged, the " manufacturing business" was principally carried on. The origin of these lies must be looked for in the manufacturing experience gained by the pre- tended ex-nun at the Magdalen Asylum, and in the well-known use of wax tapers in the Roman Ca- tholic worship. . No ♦< Pope's message'* was pro- 61 !" as mulgated in Canada concerning the cholera, and the only document on the subject proceeding from the superior clergy of the church, was the following pastoral letter of the Right Rev. the Bishop of Quebec. The fanatics may make the most of it for farther exposures of " Popish superstitions :" " You are aware, our very dear brethren, that an epidemical disease, known under the name of the Cholera morhus, having escaped from Asia, has ex- erted, for more than a year past, its terrible ra- vages in different European states, casting every where fright and consternation, and reaping on its passage a great number of victims. Until the present moment, contemplating it at a distance, we have lived in security, and have had only to lament tlie evils it has caused in the old world. But we are now disturbed from our repose by the pro- gress of the disease, which, according*; to the last accounts, has already penetrated into various parts of England and Scotland, and has even made trem- ble the immense population of the metropolis. " This plague seems to threaten us ; well-founded apprehensions have gained every mind. Our inti- mate relations with the mother-country give us rea- son to fear that the spring arrivals may carry to us the seed of this contagion. " It is true, that our Provincial legislature, in ii^ wisdom, has spared nothing to preserve us from so great a misfortune. By a special law, passed at its last session, a board of health has been formed, and instructions calculated to anticipate and arrest the effects of the disease are about to be distributed in our cities and throughout the country. But what may serve all these means of human prudence, if the God of mercy does not extend to us his pro- U 6^ tecting arm? Nisi Dominus cuModierit civitatem^ frustra vigilat qui custodiit earn, (Ps. 126, v. 2.) Moreover, (). V. D. B., if we are compelled to acknowledge in this calamity the efibcts of* divine vengeance on the culpable nations of the earth, have we not just reason to fear that our multiplied iniquities may draw down on our heads the chas- tisement of an insulted and contemned Providence. ** Yes, O. V. D. B., we cannot disf.imulate to our- selves : a dark cloud hangs over us ; a contagion, a thousand times more disastrous than epidemical dis- ease, commences to spread itself over our ancient soil, and to invade our ancient virtues : a torrent of disorders, inevitable consequences of the weaken, ing of our faith, has already made strange ravage« in our land, formerly so moral and so religious. It would not be surprising, if heaven, in its anger, should envelope us in a calamity, the destructive consequences of which have already been felt by so many nations. " Under these circumstances, O. V. D. B., with a heart penetrated by the liveliest grief, we invite you to prepare for the day of mourning and afflic- tion by a sincere return to righteousness. Let um implore togethc r, and with tears, the goodness of our God, so much outraged by the perversity of the age. Indulgentiam ejvs fusts lacrymis postuhmus, (Judith, ch. 8. V. 14.) Let us bow down even to the dust in his presence, humiliemus illi animas nostras^ (Ibid . . . v. 16.) ; and, following the example of the inhabitants of Nineveh, let each one be convert- ed ; let him abandon his evil ways and the iniquity of his hands. Converiaiur vir a ivd sud et ah mi- quitate quae est in manibus eorum, (Jonas, ch. 3. v, 8.) Who knows but that God, touched by our re- 63 pentance and our wailings, may turn to us and par- don us ; but that his anger may be appeased, and the warrant against us withdrawn ! Quis scit si convertaiur et ignoscat Deus ct revertatur a furore irm SM(B et non ferihimus? (Ibid. v. 9). *» FOR THESE REASONS, and in the holy name of God, we have determined and ordered, and determine and order, what follows : " 1. On Friday, the fourth d;iy of the month of May next, there shall be celebrated in all the parish churfhes which have resident curates, a solemn mass, jiro qiiocuvxque necessitate; at the close of which shall be sung, on bended knees, the Domine^ non secundum^ &:c. with the verse ostende nobis Do* mine^ &c. and the orison Deusj qiii non mortem^ &c. us in the missal, in the mass, jyro miandd morialitate. We expect of the piety of our faithful diocesans, that they will sanctify the day in a special manner, by prayer, fasting, and repose. " 2. In all the churches and chapels of our diocese, where mass is celebrated in public, each Sunday or day of obligation, immediately after the parish mass, conventual or principal, the celebrating priest shall recite on his knees, and in a loud voice, to the responses of the people, five Pater and five Ave Maria ; after which he shall recite the verse ostende nobis f &c. and the before-mentioned orison, DeuSf qui non mortem, ^c. We hope that such as can- not assist at the divine service, will recite the five Pater and Ave Maria in their families. " 3. Each priest shall add to the mass of the day, the orison, ne despiciaSy &;c. as in the missal, (inter orationes ad diversa,) whenever the mass of the day shall not be of the 1st classt or solenm of •4 the 2nd class ; and this same orison shall replace that marked ad libitum in the other masses. ** 4. At all elevations shall be sung the anthem of St. Joseph, first patron of the diocese, Esse Jidelis servusy dec. and the verse Gloria et dimticB, Ate. and the orison sanctissimcB genetricisj dec. " 5. The prayers prescribed in the three preced- ing articles shall commence the first Sunday after the 4th of May, and shall be continued until further notice. " The present letter shall be read and published in every parish, and read in chapter in all religioufs communities the first Sunday after its reception, or the Sunday of Quasimodo, Those living in distant places, and who shall not receive it in time, shall pub- lish it the first Sunday after its reception, and shall consecrate to the works hereinbefore determined the following Sunday. " Given at Quebec, under our sign, the seal of our arms, and the countersign of our secretary, the ninth of April, eig^^teen hundred and thirty-two. Bern. Cl. Bishop of Quebec." By My Lord, L.+S. C. F. Cazeau, Pst, Secretary, It will be seen, that the letter contains several quotations from the ** Bible," and also that it is or- dered to be read in all religious communities. It is not surprising that a prostitute should be igno- rant of the use made of the Scriptures by the Ca- tholic clergy ; that she should confound a pasto- ral letter of the bishop with the " Pope's message," and that she should not know that the letter was read (■ IS fe 4t 05 » ?» in Ihe Hotel Dieii. It will rot, however, be doubted, ^ that on all tlici-e points nuns are well informed. It is I stated, ibr the .sutisiiiction ot* the tanatics, that in the niattera of praying and fasting, " Church of England superntition" had the advance of " Ro- man Catholic f^uperstition." The proclamation of the Governor, on tlie same subject, is dated the fourth of April, eighteen hundred and thirty-two. At page 195 it is stated, as a " remarkable fact," that " not one case of that disease (the cholera) existed in the nunnery during either of the sea- 8ons in wiiich it proved so fatal in the city." We cannot give credit to the advisers of Monk for her complete conversion from the " Errors of Popery" to "pure Evangelism." She pretty clearly at- tributes the " remarkable fact" to the influence of the " wax tapers." After all, her story may be a Kort of permitted Evangelical lie ; for, in point of fact, in the ordinary sense, (not Monk's,) two nuns of the Hotel Dieu died of the Asiatic Cholera. The entire number of deaths among the sisterhood, from the year 1829 to thenwnth of July, 1836, exclusive of murders or ** strange disappearances," amount to six. Their graves may be visited by all whom Jfl it concerns. " When the election riots prevailed in Montreal," i is an approach to a date, and offers one of the two opportunities the reader of the " Disclosures" has of comparing the progress of external events with the internal history of the Hotel Dieu. That Monk was an inmate of the Hotel Dieu, is to be in- ferred by reflecting persors from the interesting "disclosure" that the riots "gave her serious I thoughts," and that it was to her " own satisfaction" she ascertained there was " a quantity of gun-pow- 6* 66 dcr in a state of preparation" under the direction of the superior of the convent ! Monk's " serious thoughts'* are, in truth, a remi- niscence of the Montreal house of correction. She was immured there during the election riets, and as the house is guarded by sentinels, she had an opportunity of smelling gunpowder. The " supe- rior" of the house of correction at that time was Captain Holland. The "punishment of the Cap," mentioned at page 201 and elsewhere, is a reminiscence of the early life of the pretended ex-nun. She has been afflicted from her youth with a malady in the ear, which compels her to wear a cap. It was the malady, not the cap, that " took away her reason." When the pain waa excessive, various applications were made to her head to remove it. We have in- formation on this point from Mrs. McDonell, Mrs. Monk, and several other persons. It seems, that if Monk had had an opportunity of examining her head, the " disclosures" might have been extended seve- ral chapters. The acquaintance of Monk with Dr. Neilson was not formed at the hospital, but at her mother's house. Her pretended attendance on Dr. Neilson at the Hotel Dieu Hospital was, as will be seen, a verv hazardous fabrication. "Popish priests," converted to " pure evangel- ism," may know that the " Agnus Dei" mention- ed at page 213, is not so very rare an article as is implied in the " Disclosures." Nuns are more fa- miliar with the " Agnus Dei" than women of the class of Maria Monk. The twentieth and last chapter of the " Disclosures" relates the " despe- rate" escape of Monk from the cloisters of the Hotel Dieu convent. The narrative need only be read \ «T >» to be rejected. Tlie fiction may be at once per- ceived without even comparing it with other parts of the " Disclosures." If wc proceed to make the comparison, we shall discover that it is utterly at variance with previous statements. We cite the following additional instance of the contradictions in the "Disclosures," and we ask the candid reader if there can be found language too strong to express the just abhorrence which the conduct of the ad- visers of " Monk" must inspire. It is stated at page 222, that " it was well known to some of the nuns that she had twice left the convent from choice." Now we defy the most subtle inquirer to discover from the pitvious narrative that she had " twice left the convent," either " from choice" or otherwise. The only distinct and deliberate men- tion of her having left the convent occurs at page 43. We point out these signal and startling con- tradictions, not more for the purpose of convict- ing Monk, than with a view it) hold up the infamous intentions and acts of mon, who, in the presence of such manifest demonstration of tlie falsehood of the •♦ Awful Disclosures," have nevertheless undertaken to uphold their truth and verisimilitude. It will be remembered, that without the countenance and support of those men, tho " Awful Disclosures" would never have been })ublished — never have been circulated — and most certainly would never have been believed. t> (iB CHAi'TER V. ^■^ lam willinp: to rbk my credit for truth and niiicfritu on thf fire- neral corrrspondence btturcn viif discription and thimrg as they are: •* Aviful DisrhsureSy^ page 73. The strange audacity of the advisers and sup- porters of Monk in advancing her acquai ntanco with the interior of tlic Hotel Dicu Hospitfil and Convent, as a test of the truth of her narrative, is a piece of quackery of fatal contrivance. Tiiey appear not to have reflected that it was possible to meet them on this their own chosen ground, and convict them of the most deliberate forgery. Previously to placing before the public the direct and conclusive refutatory evidence we arc possess- ed of, we shall proceed to examine the description of the interior of the Hotel Dieu, with reference to its apparent credibility and compatibility with what is publicly known of that Hospital and Convent. Even the introduction to the pretended descrip- tion is deficient in truth and verisimilitude. It is stated at page 14, that " Monk is sensible that new walls may be constructed, or old ones removed ;" and that " she has been credibly informed that masons have been employed in the nunnery since she left it." Monk's " architectural sensibility" must have been acquired during her recent resi- dence in New-York, for it seems from the narra- tive, that during her pretended noviciate and nun- ship, her education in the more masculine arts was entirely neglected. The truth is, as evory one who has been in Canada must well know, that the par- tition walls of stone buildings are there constructed of stone, and of great thicknessi There is a possi. 69 bility of removing them, but only by removing the entire structure. The Hotel Dieu is a stone build- ing, and its partition walls are of stone. The credi' ble information of Monk is a sheer fabrication. M&sons have not been employed in the " nunnery" for the purpose she mentions, or for any othei'. The contrary is of public notoriety. The description of " the first story"' commenceif with a signal blunder. It is stated, <^ that begin^ ning at the extremity of the western wing of the con- vent, towards Notre Dame street, on the first story, there is — ** Now, although the description is ob- viously intended for the " secluded apartments," it so happens that the " western wing" includes public iiospital apartments only. Moreover, the igno- ranee of th(? authors of the Disclosures, of even the general appearance of the Hotel Dieu, may bo in- ferred, when it is stated that the three wings of the Hotel Dieu extend equally towards " Notre Dame street ;" or, in other words, thice or reformed profligacy, Maria's previous ha- bits rendered her admittance, even as a postulantey utterly impossible. Besides, Maria was not a Ro- man Catholic ; and her readiness to become one, to effect a special purpose, would not have been con- sidered a suflicient guarantee against a possible re- lapse. Discouraged in her endeavours, Mrs. Monk again resorted to her personal authority, but with little success. Her daughter became a confirmed vagrant. In the years 1831, 1832, we find her at Sorel or William Henry, a town situate on^he river Richelieu, about forty-five miles below Montreal. She there first resided with Charles Gouin, hotel keeper, and subsequently at Mrs. Monk's of the same place. From Mrs. Monk's she ran away, af- ter having robbed the house of a quantity of wear- ing apparel, and proceeded to St. Ours, where she managed to procure employment at Mr. Pringle's> a farmer of that vicinity. Discovered and dismiss- ed by Mr. Pringle, she proceeded to St. Denis, and in various occupations employed her time until the spring of 1834. About the 12th of July in the same year, 1834, and shortly after her withdrawal from St. Denis, she was engaged as a domestic in the tamily of C. Lovis, watchmaker and jeweller, residing in Notre Dame street, opposite the Montreal seminary. Her conduct, in this situation, was not satisfactory 76 to her master ; and her bad character, which waft quickly ascertained, occasioned her dismissal about the 9th of August following. During her resi- dence at the house of Mr. Lovis, Maria contriv- ed to give evidence of a disturbed and ill.regulat- ed intellect. She exhibited strange eccentricities, and laid claims to an interest and sympathy for her person which neither her conduct nor character entitled her to expect. She signified to Mr. Lovis her desire to embrace the Roman Catholic faith, and requested permission to prepare in his house for the rc-baptism which she imagined the canons of the Roman Catholic church would require. Mr. Lovis treated her application as a pretence, and regarding her as an unworthy person, dismissed her from his service. After her departure from the house of Mr. Lovis, it seems fehe took up her habitation in various bro- thels at Griffin Town, a sul)urb of Montreal, and elsewhere. At a subsequent period, in perambulating with Louis Malo, a constable of the Montreal courts, «he pointed out various resorts of vice in which she had resided. In the month of October, 1H34, we find her at Varennes, a town fifteen miles from Montreal, on the opposite side of the river. Hhe there committed a theft in the house of Girard, hotel-keeper, and returned to Montreal with various articles in her possession, among which were a lady's veil and a silver watch. The veil she disposed of in Griffin Town, and the watch she sold to Mr. George Sa- vage, watchmaker, residing in St. Paul street in the city of Montreal. Girard, so soon as be dis- covered his loss, left Varennes in pursuit of the thief, and lodged information against her in the n Montreal police office. On his affidavit a war- rant was immediately issued against the fugitive, and put for execution into the hands of the consta- hie, Louis Malo. Malo, having information that Maria was concealed at Lachine, instantly proceed- ed there, and succeeded in securing her person. On her apprehension she confessed her guilt, and was carried in custody to the city, , The veil could not he recovered, but the watch was immediately restored by Mr. Savage. Still in custody, she was then taken to Varennes to be identified ; and, in con- sideration of her youth, and moved by her tears and entreaties, the injured parties consented to her release. It would seem that Maria is not deficient in personal charms, for she made an impression on the heart of the susceptible constable, who, taking her under his protection, returned with her to Mon- treal. Arrived in the city, she was placed, by the care of Constable Malo, in a tavern, which then existed at the corner of St. Joseph and Commission streets, and which was occupied by a person of the name of Richard Ouston. About this time her cohabitation with her protector, the constable, oc- curred. On the 9th of November, in the same year, 1834, the spirit of adventure, which no circumstances had been able to control, again broke forth. On that day Maria's wanderings led her to the neigh- bourhood of the Lachine canal, into which she ma- nifested a strong disposition to throw herself. Her movements having by chance been observed by some persons noar her, they interfered with her self- Haci fice, and conveyed her to a house in the vi- cinity. Al\er some hours spent in hysterics, moans, und lamentations, Maria's intellect and memory lault 9P i? cleared up, and she; declared herself to be the daughter ul' Doctor W. Robertson, one of the city magistrates ; but, on being confronted with that func- tionary, she gave her real name and parentage. 8he represented, however, that she had no home, and gave a confused and disjointed account of her- self. Under these circumstances, she was commit- ted to the house of correction as a vagrant, and remained there until the 19th of November. Her mother having learned her situation, procured her liberation, and took her to the government house, of which she was the keeper. Whilst in jail, slie was seen and spoken to by Mrs. Beaudry, a lady whose charitable intentions frequently conducted her to scenes of misery and dis- tress. Affected by the forlorn condition in which she vsaw Maria, she represented her case to Mrs. McDonell, and prevailed on that lady to receive her as an inmate of the Magdalen Asylum. She was accordingly conducted there, and entcrc?d to- wards the close of the month of November. In the Magdalen Asylum she was still Maria Monk, wavering and fanciful. All efforts to re- store her to a rrgulat<3(l mode of thought and action proved unavailing. It was even discovered that the seclusion of tlie Asylum did not prevent her from renewing her intercourse with the constable. She received his visits, and held converse with him through the yard enclosure. At the Asylum, Maria was visited by her mother, who did not fail to dis- cover that she was in a slate of pregnancy. The same was alvo renunkcd by Mrs. McDonell, and other persons about \vn\ Her conduct, finally, be- came so insupportable, that Mrs. McDonell was compelled to dismiss her, and she returned to her 79 mother's charge at the beginning of the month of March, 1835. Maria speedily tired of her home, and left it early in summer. It was not known where she had gone. It was supposed that she had returned to her ancient haunts within the limits of the province, but it soon appeared, that with increased experi- ence she was induced to extend the field of her operations. She had gone to New-York, and on the nineteenth of August, in the summer of 1835, she arrived at the Exchange Coffee House, Montreal, in company with a person named Hoyte, who pass- ed for a preacher, and of a person named Turner, who passed for a judge. Tlie judge, the preacher, and the prostitute having clubbed their wisdom and inventive powers, passed some timo in laying the foundation of charges which were afterwards to be preferred against the priests and nuns of Lower Canada. The parties, however, could not long agree. The judge, a man waxed in years, and probably not possessed of more wickedness of heart than might be expected from a determined Calvin- isi, bociimc disgusted with his companions, and re- turned to the green hills of Vermont, with the con- solation of having wandered from them on a wit- less and wortliless errand. The prostitute also be- came rcative. She left tlie preacher, and the child she called his, at the hotel, and made her way to a notorious house of ill-fame in one of the city suburbs. She was there visited by Constable Malo, to whom she expressed herself in bitter terms of the preacher, and declared her determination never to have any thing more to say to him. She yield- ed, however, to the persuasion of the preacher, and was induced to leave the brothel in his compa- ^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 11.25 I. I. U il.6 m V] ^ ^;j <3^ *. ■'• ^ o^ ^^ 7 ^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80 (716) 872-4503 N^ 80 nv. Some two or three scenes occurred between Maria, her mother, and Hoyte, in which the con- duct of the latter was not entirely agreeable to our notions of clerical, or even semi-clerical, pudi- city. Maria, again in the power of Hoyte, was quickly removed by him to New -York, beyond the reach of farther interference. In that city, and toward the close of the jear eighteen hundred and thirty-five, were published the " Awful Disclosures," which have given so much celebrity to the name of Monk, and even to that of Jane Ray, one of her compa- nions at the Magdalen Asylum. In New-York she still lives, regarded and honored as a martyr to the cause of pure evangelism. The author of this article understands that the preacher Hoyte, having been crowded out by more ambitious aspirants, the company of anti- papists at present consists of W. C. Brownlec, Maria Monk, John S. Slocum, William Miller, re- cently of Montreal, Andrew Bruce, a " lady," also recently of Montreal, D. Fanshaw, and others. CHAPTER VII. H'i Documentary evidence, provin/:f thnl from her early youth yfaria Monk has led the life of a vap;rai\t, and that on the first ofJantiary^ Monk uxttt on. inmate of the Hotel J)ieu, she was i7i reality resid- ing at various other })laccs in and about Montreal. It would be possible to produce here evidence bearing on the life and adventures of Maria Monk, ' 81 from her infancy to. the present moment. She is still young — very young ; her personal acquaintances are to be met with in numerous directions on the banks of the St. Lawrence and Richelieu rivers, and very little trouble would have enabled us to ex- hibit her entire career from the " Primer" to the " Disclosures ;" but it would not be interesting to the public to know more of the history of Maria Monk than is necessary, in all reason, for the re- futation of her pretensions, and the exposure of the imposition which has been attempted in her name on popular credulity. The task of unfolding the immorality of this wretched woman is any thing but pleasing, it is not undertaken to gratify idle curiosity, but to vindicate from atrocious asper- sions the characters of men whom we deCi^^'y \ cntj- rate — to redeem iVom calumny the noble lives of good, peaceful, and charitable women. When this refutation and these proofs shall meet the eye of the scurrilous and unhesitating defamer, will he not seek to escape the light of day and the regards of his fellow-men? The turbid current of his deliberate and blasphemous fanati- cism will be heated by hot shame and unavailing regret. The stupid and lying wretch, the base knave, the imbecile criminal, will writhe in his an- guish, scorned and loathed by an insulted and indig- nant community. We have carried back our in- quiries into the adventures of Monk as far as the year 1831 ; she was then in her fifteenth year. It cannot be said positively that it is not pretended that she was a professed nun years previously to that age ; but we have reason to believe, from the lan- guage held by her supporters in the public prints, ths^t her conventual trials principally occurred in npp 82 the years 1831, 1832., 1833, and 1834. We now pro. ceed to exhibit our first document. No. 1. Evideace of Charles Gouin, The undersigned having !->een requested to state what he knows concerning Maria Monk, daughter of Mrs. Monk, house- Iteeper of the house known as the Government House in Mon- treal, declares, — That the said Maria Monk entered into his ser- vice at Sorel,or William Henry, as a menial, about the month of November, one thousand eight liundred and thirty-one ; and that f-he remained in it until the month of September nearly of the following year. The undersigned declares tliat the said Maria remained in his service during all the time of the Cholera of one thousand eight hundred and tliirty-two ; the undersigned has un- derstood that when the said Maria left his service, she made a voyage to Quebec — that on her return therefrom, she took ser- vice at Mrs. Monk's of Sorel, or William Henri/ \ that she there commilied a thefi ; and that the stolen articles were found in her possession. The undersigned declares that the said Maria Monk told him that the said Mrs. Monk of Montreal was not her mother proper, but her step-mother ; which allegation the undersigned subsequently found to be false. The undersigned declares that the said j>Iaria, at the time he knew her, appeared to be about fourteen or fifteen years old. The undersigned declares that he has never undersrood, except from public reports recently spread, that the said 3Iaria hath made any residence whatever in any Convent. (Signed) CHAS. GOUIN. Mr. Gouin is a man of years, and keeper of the principal hotel of Sorel. His evidence proves — 1. That in the year 1831 and 1832, Monk was in his service for the s'>» i^ of about ten months. 2. That she was in his service, during the cholera season of 1832. 3. That while in his service, she denied her own mother. The conduct of Monk, towards her mother has always been ungrateful ; and her habit of in- dulging in calumnious remarks on her parent could be testified to by hundreds of witnesses* 63 No. 2. Evidence of Mrs. Monk of Sorel, Sorel, Wh July, 1836. The undersigned, being requested to state lier informntion and knowledge concerning Maria Moni<, daughter to Mrs. Monk, »ouse-kenpcr of the Ciovernment House in the city of Montreal, jiereby declares tliat Maria Monk entered her service as domestic in t le Autumn of 1832 ; that the undersigned understood that Ma- ria nad just returned from Quebec ; and that a sliort time previous- ly she had been employed as a domestic in the hotel kept by C. Gouin at Sorel ; that having remained about one week in the ser- vice of the undersigned, Maria Monk secretly withdrew from it, carrying with her a quantity of wearing ajjparcl belonging to the undersigned ; that Maria was innuediately pursued to 8t. Ours, a village about twelve miles from the borough of Sorel, and there discovered with the stolen articles ir her possession ; but that in consequence of her extreme youth she was released from custo- dy, and suffered to go at liberty. The undersigned has never un- derstood, except from recent public report, that Maria had been at any time an inmate of a convent. (Signed) MARY ANGELICA MONK. To guard against error from the similarity of names, it is proper to state that ]Mrs. Monk is no wise connected with Monk the thief. Mrs. Monk's evidence proves the commission of the crime of theft, and corroborates the evidence of Mr. Gouin. On the liberation of Monk from custody, she at- tempted to pass herself on Mr. Pringle, a farmer of St. Ours, as an honest girl ; and indeed was in his service for a few days ; but Mr. Pringle quickly ascertained her character, and dismissed her with ignominy. The inhabitants of the Canadian villages are simple and primitive in their manners, slow to sus- pect the existence of vice, slow to detect it. Monk is represented by all who knew her, as having been at one time a girl of extremely interesting appear- a!ice. Immediately after her dismissal from the house of Mr. Pringle, she fled from St. Ours, and made her way to St. Denis, a village about twelve ^ppip @4 miles distant. The communications between the French, and scattered English inhabitants of the parishes, are as slight as it is possible to imagine. Monk met, therefore, with no difficulty in procuring employment, in a Canadian family ; and she accord- ingly took service in the house of Mr. St. Germain, a respectable tradesman and mechanic of St. Denis. Mr. St. Germain, is since deceased ; but his widow has furnished us with the following notarial depo- sition. No. 3. Evidence of Mrs, St Germain* Sorel 22d .My. 1836. In the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, and on the twenty-third day of July, before the Notary undersigned, re- siding in the borough of St. Denis, appeared Angehca Hodgins, widow of the hite Anthony Gazaille dit St. Germain, in Jus Ufe- time hatter, of the said borough of St. Denis, who said and declar- ed that she knew well the so-called 3Iaria Monk, and that the said Maria was employed in the service of deponent from about th*» first day of October, one thousand eight hundred and thirty- tv o to the month of March, one thousand eight hundred and thir ty -three ; and further deponent declared not. (Signed) ANG. HODGINS. (Signed) E. MINAULT, N. P. This deposition carries us forward six months, to the spring of 1833. On leaving Mrs. St. Ger- main's, Monk became depf dent on the charity of various individuals, and remamed, for about two months, without any fixed employment. She was regarded by the inhabitants of the village as a girl of at least doubtful virtue. This circumstance compelled her to quit it. She wandered into the country, and prevailed on the untutored pe9Ji>ant9 to employ her as a teacher of English. 85 No, 4. Evidence of Michael Guertin* In the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, and the twenty-third day of July, before the Notary of the Province of Jjower Canada, undersigned — appeared, Michael (jluertin, furmer, of tiie parish of St. Denis, who said and dechvred. that he knew well the so-called Maria Monk ; that she kept a school in his house from about the fifteenth of the month of May, in the year one thousand eight hundred and thir- ty-three, to the end of the month of June of the same year. And further deponent declared, that he did not know how to sign — wherefore he made his mark . . Signed) MICHAEL + GUERTIN mark. E. MINAULT, N. P. The deponent Guertin granted her the use of a room, and the neighbours were invited to send their children to the English mistress. At Guertin's and other places in the immediate neighbourhood she pursued her adopted profession during the spring, summer and autumn of 1833, and on the 2d of De- cember in the same year entered the employment of Miss Louise Bousquet, government school mis- tress, as her English assistant. No. 5, Evidence of Louise BotisqtteU In the year one thousar i eight hundred and thirty-six, and ou the twenty-fourth day c. July, before the undersigned Nota- ry Public, residing in the borough of St. Denis, appeared Louisa Bousquet, wife ofJean Buptiste Archambeau, and declared, — That in the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty-threei deponent was mistress of the Government School at St. Denis, District of Montreal ; that in the same year she knew in the vil- lage of St. Denis a \ oung girl named Maria Monk ; that on the second of December, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-three, the same and said Maria Monk came and resided with the said deponent as her assistant in the instruction in English of the chil- dren committed to her care ; that the said Maria remained la the employment of deponent about seven months or thereabouts, and that she left it about the month of July, one thousand eight hun- dred and thirty-four; that during: her stay with deponent, her conduct was not satisfactory ; that deponent was intbrmed that 8 -^JP.»I 86 the said Maria, on leavinp; the liouse of deponent, withdrew from 8t. Denis; that deponent hiul been informed and beUeved that the entire stay of the said Maria at St. IJenis embraced a period of eighteen monflis ; that deponent having been informed, that in a booii publislied at jNew-York, reiital is made of certain rela- tions alleged to have existed heretofore between deponent and the said Maria, deponent declared such recital to be absolutely false, with the single exception hereinbefore mendoned ; that de- Sonent having been informed that it is therein said that the said laria, during her residence with deponent, wore on her person a bag containing hair of the superior of the Hotel Dieu Convent of Montreal, deponent declared that she had no knowledge of it; that having been informed that it is said in the same book that the said Maria was married during her residence with deponent, and that she consulted dop(»nent on the subject of her marriage, deponent said and declared that slie wt!s a total stranger to such alleged marriage ; and moreover positively denied the part impu- ted to her therein, or any other part whatever ; that having been informed that it is said in the same book that deponent had con- sented to make certain representations concerning the said Ma- ria to the Superior of the Hotel Dieu, deponent positively deni- ed having given such constant, denied having been spoken to on the subject, or having any knowledge or information of the trans- action mentioned in the said book, being, in all respects and un- reservedly, a total stranger to it; that having been informed that it is said in the same ])ook that deponent we . t to the said Hotel Dieu to inquire for a certain "St. Francis," deponent positive- ly denied it ; and moreover declared that she never hud an ac- quaintance hving in the Uotei Dieu of the said name of St. Fran- cis ; and deponent further declared, that in the summer of eigh- teen hundred and thirty-four, Mr. Lord the bishop made an epis- copal visit to St. Denis; that on the day the confirMations were made in the parisli church, the said Maria pretended to deponent that she had been confirmed on the same occasion, but with what truth deponent cannot say ; and further deponent declared, that during the stay of the said Maria at St. Denis, Mr. Bedard was Curate of the parish, and i\Ir. Birs his Vicar. And dei)onent fur- ther declared, that she had never understood, except from recent public report, that the said Maria had been at any time a Novice, or Sister, or inmate in any Convent whatever. And deponent further declared, that in the month of August, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-five, deponent received from Montreal two letters, o.ic in the English language and the other in the French language ; that the French letter was signed " Ambroiso Vigeaiu," and that it invited deponent to proceed to Montreal to reaeiNc two hundred pounds currency which a lady there at Montreal was commissioned to give her ; that the Eng- lish letter was signed " Hoyte," but that deponent, from her ig- noronce of the language, remained ignorant of its contents. 87 ew from ^ed that a period i, that in ain rela- lent and )sohitely that de- the said • person Convent ige of it ; ook that sponent, lurriage, • to such irt impii- ingbeen lad con- idid Ma- ly deni- en to on lie trans- and un- tied that id Hotel positivo- I an ac- >t. Fran- of eigh- an epis- ns were eponent ith what red, that ard \.as lent fur- n recent Novice, August, received and the is signed oceed to h a lady he Eng- II her ig- .3. And deponent further declared, that deponent did accoraiiigly proceed to Montreal, and having communicated with the said " Ambroise Vigeaut," the said Anibroi^e Vigeuiit informed de- ponent that the said ^Lnna, in company with a man dressed in black, had requested of him very earnestly to write to the depo- nent, with which request he was induced to comply; that depo- nent did then proceed to call upon the mother of the said 3Iaria at the Government House, and that the said mother said to depo- nent that her daughter, the said Maria, was a victim and an un- fortunate ; that deponent handed the said letters to the said mo- ther, who, in an angry manner, burned thorn on the spot ; and that deponent paid no .urtlicr altemion to the said hivitation,orto the matter it relates to ; and further deponent declared not (Signed, after perusal) LOUIISE BOUSQUET, Femme Archambeau. (Signed) E. 3HNAULT, N. F. The part attributed to Miss Bousquet, in the ** Awful Disclosures," is more than she will confess to. She is now married, and the curious traveller visiting the so called Sixth Concession, nine miles east of the village of St. Donis, will find her the happy and contented wife of John Baptiste Arch- ambeau, enjoying some reminiscences of Maria Monk, but wholly dead to the memory of the mur- dered St. Francis. The evidence of Madame Archambeau proves that the residence of Monk in and about the parish of St. Denis was extended to the month of July, 1834. It moreover corroborates the evidence of Mrs, St. Germain and of Miche.el Guertin on the entire period of the residence of Maria Monk at St. Denis. It will be observed that she entered the service of Mrs. St. Germain in the autumn of 1832, and that she lost her situation with Miss Bousquet in the summer of 1834. As is stated in the d'^position of Miss Bousquet, Monk then withdrew from St. Denis. It cannot be said Monk's vicious propensities slumbered while she was in the country ; for it is certain that the deponents of St, Denis, who are silent on her moral r^ d8 conduct might have stated much against it. That she was a girl practised in evil, may be inferred from the evidence of Cournoier, commonly called Mart el Paul. No. 6. Evidence of Martel Paul Hus Cournoier, District of Montreal : Personally came ana appeared before me, Edward W. Car- ter, one of his Majesty's Justices for the District of Montreal, Mar- tel Paul Hns Cournoier, who being duly sworn on the Holy Evan- gelists — declared, — That deponent was personally acquainted witli Maria Monk, daughter to Mrs. Monk, house-keeper of the Government House in the city of Montreal ; that he know her from her infancy, and was personally acquained, with her late father, W. Monk, Barrack ■ master at St. .lohn's, Lower Canada ; and that he was personally acquainted with her mother ; that deponent alw ays beheved, and did still believe, that the said Maria was the proper daughter of the said Mrs. IVFonk ; that deponent, until within the last two or three years had always been in the habit of seeing the said Ma- ria from time to time; that deponent had know not her residence at various places, and particularly of her residence at Charles (jouin's, and Mrs. Monk's of the borough of Sorel; and also of her residence at Montreal ; at St. Ours, and at St. Denis ; and of simdry voyages performed by her to Quebec; that deponent knew of the theft committed by her at the said Mrs. Monk's of Sorel, and was present at the time of her arrest at the house of a person named Leclaire, at St. Ours. And deponent further declared, that from the age of fourteen or fifteen the said Maria had been, acconling to the belief and information of deponent, a person of debauched habits, and that her illicit intercourse with various persons known to deponent was of public notoriety. And deponent further declared, that it was not the belief of de- ponent that the said Maria had been at any time an inmate of any convent whatever, and that deponent had many strong and conclusive reasons for beUeving that the said Maria was a total stranger to the convents of Lower Canada. And further depo- nent declared not. . . (Signed) MARTEL + PAUL. mark. Taken and sworn to befere me, this 24th day of July, 1836. (Signed) W. CARTER, J. P. tpi J. p. 89 This affidavit corroborates moreover the evidence of Mr. Charles Goiiin and Mrs. Monk of Sorel, and of Mrs. St. Germain, Michael Guertin, and Louise Bousquct of St. Denis. It appears that Monk proceeded directly from St. Denis to Montreal, for on the 12th of July, and shortly after her separation from Miss Bous- quet, we find her entered as domestic in the family of Mr. Lovis of that city. of de- late of fng and I total depo- lUL. No. 7. Evidence of Charles D, S. Lovis, Province of Loiver Canada, Vistrict nf Montreal : Before me, Pcfcr Lukin, one of his Majesty's Justices of the Reace for tlie District of IMontreal, appeared Charles D. S. Lovis, Watchmaker and Jeweller, who, on making oath on the Holy Evangelists, declared : That Maria Monk came to live in his family as a servant girl, on or abontthe I'ithofJuly, 1834, and remained in his service until the 7th or 8th of August of the samn year ; wlien it being per- ceived that she was often deranged in hern^ind, and it being dis- covered that her conduct and charncter were notoriously bad, she was discharged ; that the said Maria Monk stated to depo- nent, that she wished to become a Romaki Catholic, and that she was preparing to be baptized, and that she asked deponent's per- mission to prepare herself in his house for that purpose. (Signed) CHARLES D. S. LOVIS. Sworn before me, at Montreal, the 8th of July, 1836. (Signed) P. LUKLN, J. P. The cholera of 1834 broke out in Montreal on precisely the very day that Maria Monk took ser- vice in the family of Mr. Lovis. She was dismiss- ed from the employment of Mr. Lovis early in the month of x\ugtist, and shortly after performed an expedition to Sorel ; for what object we have not troubled ourselves to discover. 8* 90 i ' > No. 8. Evidence of Lawrence Kidd, Esq* In the mimmer of 1834 I wan coming one Sunday morning from my cottage in the Quebec suburbs, when I met Capt. Ryan, master of the "Canadian Patriot," steamer, (^apt. Ryan inform- ed me that he had arrived from Quebec that morning ; that ho was then in search of Maria Monk, who had come up with him from Sorel, and whom he suspected of having sfxjlen his watch from on board the boat. Capt. Ryan further told me, tliat Monk had journeyed in his boat from Sorel to Montreal ; thatou coming on board of the boat previously to its departure from Sorel, she addressed him on deck, and asked him if ne did not re- cognize her; that at first he did not, but afterwards did recog- nize her ; and being acquainted with her mother as well as with her late father, and having taken compassion on her destitute condition, he sent her down to the cabin. And further, Capt. Ryan informed me, that on the arrival of the steamer at Montreal, Maria Monk disappeared without communicating with him, and that he had reason to believe that she had stolen his watch. I have no positive knowledge of the steps taken by Capt. Ryan, subsequently to my conversation with him ; but am un- der the impression that Monk successfully evaded his search. I saw Capt. Ryan lately, who is still impressed with the same idea, that she was the person who stole his watch. (Signed) LAWRENCE KIDD. Mr. Kidd is one of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the District of Montreal. It does not appear from the evidence of Mr. Kidd, in what month of the summer of 1834 Monk made the jour- ney there mentioned ; but by recurring to the evi- dence of Miss Bousquet, as to the time of her with- drawal froni her service (July), and to the evidence of Mr. Levis as to the time of her entrance into his service (12th July), it will be perceived that the journey must have been made subsequently to the 8th of August. It is doing Monk no injury to be- lieve that she stole Capt. Ryan's watch. The unfortunate woman has committed crimes which obscure stealing. It is no libel to write Maria Monk a thief. orniiig Ryan, inform- Uiat ho ith him s watch no, that that uu e from not re- 1 re cog- as with destitute further, earner at inff with tolen liis by Capt. am un- »arch. the same KIDD. of the 9es not 1 Avliat le jour- he evi- T with- k^idencG ce into ;hat the to the to be- . The which 91 No. 9. Evidence of Louis MaJo, Province of Lower Canada, Dislrui, of Montreal: Personally came and appeared before me, I^awrenre Kidd, Esq., one of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the said dis- trict, this twenty-fourth day of March, 1836, lAmin Malo, of the city of Montreal, in the said district, Constable, who after being duly swoni on the Holy Evangelists, deposeth and saith, that on the eleventh day of October of the year of our Lord one thou- sand eig'. t hundred and thirty-four, a warrant, of which follows a true copy, was plr.ced in his hands for execution — to wit : •'PEACE OFFICE. " Province of Loujer Canada, District of Montreal : " Joseph Antoine Gngnon, Esquire, one of the Justices of •' our Lord the King, assigned to keep the peace within the said *' district. "To the High Constable, all other constables, peace officers, "and others, the mini.sters of our said Lord the King within the " said hstrict, and to every of them — Greeting : — " Wherea.s, a woman whose name is unknown, to be pointed "out by Jean Baptiste Girard, of the parish of Varennes, in the "county of Verclieres and district aforesaid, Inn-keeper, stands " charged upon oath with having, on the eighth day of October "instant, feloniously taken, stolen, and carried away from the " dwelling-house of the said .Fean Baptiste Girard, a silver watch, "of the value of two pounds currency, and a variety of wther " goods and effects, the property of the said Jean Baptiste Girard. "These are, therefore, to autliorize and command you, or aiiy "of you, in his 3fajesty's name, forth with to apprehend and bring "before me, or some other of his 3Iajesty's Justices of the peace "for die said district, the body of the said woman; further, that "you make a diligent search among the effects of the said wo- " man, for the said stolen goods : to answer the said charge, and "to be further dealt with according to law. Herein fail not. Given " under my hand and seal, at Montreal, the eleventh day of Oc- "tober, inthe fifth ypurof his Majesty's reign." (Signed) J. A. GAGNON, J. P. That the deponent being then charged with the execution of the said warrant, 4id, onthe same eleventh day of October, go in pursuit of the woman therein mentioned, accompanied by the said Jean Baptiste Girard, and overtook her at the parish of I^- chine,in the District of 31ontreal, at a distance of nine milesfrom the city of Montreal, !=he being then on board of the steam-boat Chateauffuay . That the sai the deponent hav- ing gone there was directed to a room in which he foimdthe said ■ 93 Maria Monk ; who, among other things, told the deponent that she intended leaving for Quebec. Tnat they then parted, and the deponent never heard of her afterwards, until about the early part of the month of September last, when, on arriving home in the afternoon, he was uifonned that the servant of one Josephine Raymond, widow of the late John George Dagan, had come there to requect the deponent to go to the said Josephine Raymond's residence; that there was a younar woman there from New- York desirous of seeing deponent. That the deponent having gone there, found that the young v»^oman in question was the said Ma- ria Mou'; before mentioned. That she then told the deponent that she had just arrived from New- York, with her friend, the Rev. Mr. Iloyt ; that they had taken lodguigs at Goodenough's hotel ; but that she had run away from him and left him his child ; she also stated that she did not know how to get her clothes from Goodenough's hotel; that she would no longer live with the said Hoyt, as she did not like him ; and that she womd do any thing soon- er tnan return v.ith him, the said Hoy t. The deponent then advised her to return toher mother, which she declined doing. That on the day following, the deponent saw the said Maria Monk before the house of the said widow Dagan in a calash, with a person of gen- teel appearance, whom she called her friend, and which the depo- nent took to be the said Rev. Mr. Hoyt. That the said Joseplune BnyiKond, wi(lo\«^ of the late John George Dagan. keops a house of ill fame in St. Elizabeth-street, of the city of Montreal. That the deponent has never since seen the said Maria Monk. (Signed) LOUIS MALO. Sworn before me, at Montreal, the day and year above mentioned. (Signed) LAWRENCE KIDD, J. P. From the affidavit of Malo, it appears that he knew of her whereabouts for several days subsequent- ly to the 11th of October, 1834. The elections for the city of Montreal commenced on the 28th of the same month, and the riots in the first week of the following month. The latter were continued tliroughout nearly the whole of November. On the 9th of November, Monk was committed to i\w house of correction. No. 10. Evidence of Doctor Robertson, William Robertson, of Montreal, Doctor in Medicine, being du- ly fcworh on the Holy EvangeUsts, deposeth and saith tn foll#wi : 'nmm 94 On the 9th of November, 1834, three men came up to my house, having a young female in company with them, who, they said, was observed thM forenoon, on the bank of the Canal, near the extremity of the Su Joseph suburbs, acting in a manner which in- duced some people who saw her to think that she intended to drown herself. They took her into a house in the neighborhood, where, after being there some hours, and interrogated as to who she was, &c., she said she was the daughter of Dr. Robertson. On receiving this information, they brought her to my houic. Bein;^ from home when th^y can., to the door, and learning from Mrs. llobertson that she had deceived them, they conveyed her to the watch-house. On returning home and hearing this story, I went in company vnlh G. Auldjo, t'sq., of this city, to the vvutch- liouse to inquire into the afliiir. There we found the young fe- male, whom I have since ascertained to be Maria 3Ionk, daugliter of Mrs. Monk of this city, in custody. She said, that although she was not my daughter, she was the child of respectable pa- rents in or very near Montreal, who, from some light conduct of hers, (arising from temporary insanity, to which she was at times subject from her infancy,) had kept her confined and chained in a cellar for tbe last four years. Upon examination, no mark or appearance indicating the wearing of manacles, or any other mode of restraint, could be discerned. She said, on my observing this, that her mother always took care to cover the irons with soft cloths to prevent them injuring the skin. From the appear- unco of her hands, she evidently had not been used to work. To remove her from the watch-house, where she was confined with some of the most profligate women of the town, taken up for ine- briety and disorderly conduct in the streets, as she could not give a satisfactory account of herself, I, as a Justice of the Peace, sent her to jail as a vagrant. The following morning I went to the jail for the purpose of ascertainig, if possible, who she vva.s. After considerable persuasion, she promised to divulge her secret to the Rev. H. Esson, one of the clergymen of the Church of Scotland, to whose congregation she said her parents belonged. That gen- tleman did caU at the jail, and ascertain who she was. In the course of a few days shf; was released, and I did not see her again until the month of August last, when Mr. Johnston, joiner, and Mr. Cooley, of the St. Ann Subiubs, merchant, called upon me about ten o'clock at night, and, after some prefatory remarks, mentioned that the object of their visit was, to ask me, as a ma- gistrate, to institute an intjuiry into some very serious charges which had been made agamstsome of the Roman Catholic priefit.s of the place and the nuns of the General Hospital, by a female, who had been a mm in that institution for four years, and who had divulged the horrible secrets of that establishment, such as the illicit and criminal intercourse between the nuns and the priests, stating particulars of such depravity of conduct on the port of these people, and their murdering the o^spriug of these ny house, they said, near the which in- tended to iborhood, as to who lobertson. ny house, iting from ^eyed her this story, he vvutch- young fe- , daughter although ctable pa- jonduct of IS at times chained in a mark or any other observing rons with he appcar- work. To fined with ID for inc- d not give eace, sent ent to the vas. After [^retto the Scotland, That gen- . In the her again oiner, and upon me ' remarks, as a nia- 1 charges >hc pricKt.s a female, and who t, such as and the ct on the g of these 95 criminal connections as soon as they were bom, to the number of from thirty to forty every year. I instantly said that I did not believe a word of what they told me, and that they must have been imposed unon by some evil disposed and designing person. Upon inqriry w-ho this nun, their informant, was, 1 discovered that she answered exactly the description of Maria Monk, who I had so much trouble about last year ; and mentioned to these in- dividuals my suspicion, and what I knew of that unfortunate girl. Mr. Cooley said to Mr. Johnston, let us go homo, we are hoaxed. They told me that she was then at Mr. jc)hnston's house, and re- quested me to call there, and hear her own story. The next day, or the day following, I did call, and saw Maria Monk, at Mr. John- ston's house. She repeated in my presence the suhstrtuce of what was mentioned to me before, relating to her having been in the nunnery for four yea/s ; having taken the black veil ; the rrimes committed there ; and a variety of oiher cirounistances concernino^ the conduct of the priests and nuns. A Mr. Hoyte was introduced to me, and was present during the whole of the time that I was in the hou.se. lie wan represented as one of the persons who had come in from NriVV-VorK with this young wo- man, for the purpose of investigating into this mysterious affair. I was asked to take her deposition, on oath, as to the truth of what she had stated. I tleclined doing so, giving as a rea- son, that, from my knowledge of iier character, I considered her deposition upon oath not entitled to more credit tha.*. her htu-e as- sertion, and that I did not believe either ; intimating, at the same time, my willingness to take the necessary step;? for a full inves- tigation, if I'ley could get any other pei-son to corroborate any part of her testimony, or if a direct cliarge were made against any particular individual of a criminal nature. During the firait interview with ^Messrs. Johnston and Cooley, tiiey mentioned that Maria Monk had been found in New-Vork in a very destitute .situ- ation by some charitable individuals, who administered to her ne- ressities ; that being very sick, she expressed a wish to see a cler- gyman, as she had a dreadfid secret which she wished to divulge before she died. A clergyman visiting her, .she related to him the alleged crimes of the pnesi.s and nuns of the (icnoral Hospital at M(mtreal. 'I'hat al'ter her recovery she w as visited and examined by the mayor and some lawyers at New-Vork, afterwards at Troy in the State of New-Vorii, on the subject ; and I understood them to say, that Hoyte and two other gentlemen, (me of tiiem a law- yer, were sent to Montreal with her for the purpose of examining into the truth of the accusations thus made. Although incredu- lous as to the truth of Muria Monk's story, 1 thought it incumbent upon me to make some inquiry concerning it, and have ascertain- ed where she had been residing, a great part of the time slie states having been an inmate of the nunnery. During the summer of 1832 she was at service in William Henry ; the winters of 1832-3 the passed in tliis neighborhood, at St. Ours atid St. Deni.s. Tito 96 account* given of her conduct that season corroborate the opi- nions I had before entertained of her character. W. ROBERTSON. fclwom before me, at Montreal, this 14th day of November, 1835. BENJ. HOLMES, J. P. The date of her liberation is not mentioned in Doctor Robertson's affidavit ; but on referring to tlie jail record, the order for her discharge was found entered on the 19th of November. There are four periods mentioned in the " Dis- closures," at which it is pretended that Monk was an inmate of the Hotel Dieu. We shall notice them in the order we find them, and in the identi- cal language of the narrative. Period first, refers to a story related to Monk by Jane Ray, "on new year's day, 1834." (page 192.) The evidence of Miss Bousquet (No, 5) conclusively proves that Monk was in her employment previ- ously to that date, at that date, and for months sub- sequently. Period second, refers to the election riots, and is mentioned at page 192 as one of the few occasions " in which the nuns knew any thing that was happen- ing in the world." Within the recollection of Ma- ria Monk there have been two " election riots" in the city of Montreal, one in May, 1832, and the other in November, 1834. The evidence of Mr. Gouin(No. 1) conclusively proves, that inMay, 1832, she was in his service, as a menial. The evidence of Dr. Robertson (No. 10), and concurrent evidence, prove conclusively, that in November, 1834, her life v/as varied by street vagrancy and imprison, ment. Period third," or cholera season of 1832, is men- tioned inclusively with period fourth at page 192, 97 the opU SON. , J.P. aed in ing to yQi was « Dis- ik was notice identi- 3nk by 3 192.) usively previ- iis sub- and is lasions appen- ofMa- ots" in nd the of Mr. 1832, ddence idence, 34, her prison. s men. i 192. ^ The appearance of the cholera in both cases of its ravages, gave us abundance of occupation." The evidence of Mr. Gouin (No. 1) conclusively proves, that in the cholera season of 1832, Maria Monk was residing at Sorel, and in his house. Period fourth, or cholera season of 1834 — ^The evidence of Mr. Lovis (No. 6) and concurrent evi- dence prove that Maria Monk spent one part of the cholera season at service, and the remainder as a vagrant thief. What remains ? CHAPTER VIII. Documentary evidence provinsr thai :'(' the maferlal aUegations of Hie ** Awful Visclosures^^^ concerning persoiis and things, are utter and absolute falsehoods. Shortly after her liberation from jail, Maria Monk became an inmate of the Asylum for repent- ant females, managed and conducted by the exem- plary and charitable Mrs. McDonell. Mrs. Mc DonellVj affidavit exposes the source of the fool- ish and childish fabrications regarding conventual discipline, which occupy more than one half of the "Disclosures." ^ , No. 11. Evidence of Mrs, McDonell Province of Lower Canada, District of Montreal: . Before me, Adam L. Macnider, one of the Justices of the Peace for the District of Montreal, appealed Agathe Henrietta Huguet Latour, widow of the late Duncan Cameron McDonell, who, after making oath on the Holy Evangelists — declared : That for six years past, she had conducted and managed an in- stitution in the city of Montreal, commonly known and distin- 9 « •^mm rrm iCM 99 guished as the Magdalen Asylum ; that about the close of the month of November, one thousand eight hundred and thirty -four, Maria Monk, daughter of Mrs. W. Monk, house-keeper of the Government House, in the city of Montreal, entered the said asylum, and became an inmate thereof; that she understood that the said Maria had, for many years, led the lil'o of a stroller and {)rostitnte ; and that she received her into the asylum with the lope of effecting her reformation ; that in the progress of her ac- quaintance with the character of the said Maria, she found it to bo A very uncertain, and grossly deceitful ; but thai she did, npverth(>- less, persevere in her efforts to reclaim her to the path« of virtue and morality. And deponent further declared, that having been informed that the said ^^aria had held conversation with a man who h:id reach- ed the yard of the asylum, by scaling I he enclosures, she sent for the said Maria, and severely reprimamled lier ; pointing out, that her holding such communication was in direct violation of the rules of the institution, and did moreover indicate a dispofii- tion to relapse into her vicious courses; that the said 3faria was not toucheu by the remonstrances addressed to her, but hecame more indecorous in her conduct every day ; and that finally, de- ponent was compelled to plismiss her from the asylum. That the said Maria, be<«)re her dismissal, did appear discontented with her residence ther» ; but that deponent would not consen* to her withdrawal without the consent of the said Mrs. Monk, who was accordingly informed of her daughter's conduct, and of her desire to withdraw from the asylum. And deponent further declared, that she had reason to believe, that the man with whom the said Maria communicated, during her stay at the asylum, was Louis Malo, Constable of the courts of the city of Montreal ; having been so informed by the said Ma- ria herself. And deponent further declared, that she liad reason to believe that the said Maria was in a stale of pregnancy at the time she entered the asylum. And deponent farther jleclaied, that the said Maria was dismissed from the said asylum aboutlhe beginning of the month of March, eighteen hundred and thirty- five; and withdrew, as this deponent had been informed, to her mother's house. And deponent further declared, that she had read the pamphlet entitled "Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk:" and that deponent was thereby informed, for the first time, that the said Maria had been at any time an inmate of a convent ; that the said Maria, at the time she was in the Magdalen Asylum, did never preteml to deponent, or' any one else, according to the information and belief . of deponent, that she had been an inmate of the Hotel Dieu Con- vent, or of any other convent whatever; but that deponent al- ways understood and believed that she had, for many years, led the life of a vagrant and disorderly person. And deponent further declared, that phe had reason to believe 99 that the name "Fougnee," mentioned in the said "Disclosures," is mis-spe!f for Fournier ; and that at the time the said Maria was at the asyhim, Miss Hypolyte Fournier and Miss Clotilde Four- nier, two sisteis, wore assistants? to deponent in the management ofihn a.sylinn, and tliat deponent believed them to be identical with the persons named in the said "Disr'osures" as the "two Miss Fougnces." And deponent further declared, that she had reason to believe the person named "Miss Howard," in the said "Disclosures," to bo identical with a person bearing that name who lived at the ^syinm contemporaneously with the said Mario. And deponent further declared, that she had reason to believe, and therefore did believe, the person named "Jane McCoy," in the f'.aid "Disclosures," to be identical with a person bearing that name, who lived at the asylum contemporaneously with the said Maria. And <.eponent further declared, that she had reason to believe, and did believe, the person named " Jane Ray" in the said "Dis- closures," to be identical with a person bearing that name, who lived at the asy! im contemporaneously with the said Maria. And deponent further declared, that she had reason to believe, and did believe, the person desighated in the said " Disclosures" as "one of my cousins, who lived at Lachine, named Reed," to be identical with a person named Reed who lived at the asylum contemporaneously with the said Maria. And deponent further declared, that many of the rules and habits of conventual life were in use and practice at the asylum at the time the said Maria was an inmate thereof; and that she had reason to believe, and did believe, that so much of the said "Disclosures" as related to conventual discipline, is an incorrect representation of what the said Maria saw and learned at the said asyhim. And deponent further declared, that she had reason to believe, and did believe, that the description ^iven in the said " Disclo- sures," of the interior of the Hotel Dieu, is an incorrect descrip- tion of the apartments of the said asylum, of which the said Ma- ria was for some time an inmate, as is hereinbefore mentioned; and further deponent declared not. (Signed) AGATIIE HENRIETTE HUGUET LATOUR. Ve. D. C. McDONELL. Sworn before me, this 27th day of July, 1836. (Signed) ADAM L. MACNIDER, J. P. This lady's name does not appear in the ** Dis- closures," and we regret to be compelled to Intro- 100 ;f i duce it in connection with the nauseous criminality of Monk and her supporters. The mention of the " two Misses Fougnees" oc- curs at page 34 of ^he " Disclosures." No. 12. Evidence of Miss Hypolyte Fournier, District of Mfintrealy Province of Lower Canada: Hypolyte Fournier, spinster, being duly sworn, deposeth and saith, that she is acquainted with tlie contents of the pam- phlet, entitled "Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk;" that she hath reason to beheve, and doth believe, the said Maria to be identi- cal with a person bearing that name, who was an inmate of the institution commonly known as the Magdalen Asylum, of the city of Montreal, from the month of November eighteen hundred and thirty-four, to the month of March eighteen hundred and thirty- five : and that deponent hath reason to believe, and doth be- lieve, the persons designated in the said " Disclosures" as " The two Miss Fougnees," to be identical with deponent and her sister Clotilde Fournier. And deponent further saith, that slie was an inmate of the said Asylum, as assistant to Mrs. McDonell, during the whole period of ihe stay of the said Maria therein, and that the acquaintance of deponent with the said Maria commenced and ended at the said Asylum. And deponent further said, that she hath never understood, ex- cept from recent public repoi;t, that the said Maria had been at any time an ramate of any convent whatever, but that depo- nent hath ahv^ays understood, that previously to her entrance in- to the said Asylum, the said Maria had led the life of a common stroller. And further deponent saith not. HYPOLYTE FOURNIER. Sworn before me, at Lachine, this 30th day of July, 1835. DOND. DUFT, J. P. The younger sister of this lady is the " St, Clo. tilde" of the " Disclosures." No. 13. Evidence of Miss Clotilde Fournier. District of Montreal, Province of Lower Canada : Clotilde Fournier, spinster, being duly sworn, deposeth and saith, that she is acquainted with the contents of the pamphlet •ntitled " Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk," that she hath rea- son to beUeve, and doth believe, the said Maria to bo identical with a person bearing that name, who was an inmate of the in- 101 linality ses" oc- rnier. deposetli the pam- i she hath t>e identi- ite of the 3f the city idred and nd thirty- doth be- ' as " The her sister f the said ale period uaintance ed at the stood, ex- i been at hat depo- trance in- i common INIER. T, J. P. fet. Clo. mier. Mjseth and pamphlet hftth rea- ) identical of the in- stitution rommonly known as the 3Iagdalen Asylum of the city f)f Montreal, from the month of iNovrmber eighteen hundred iMid thirty-four, to the motilh of JMarcli eighteen hundred and thtrty-live, and that doponont hath r'jason to believe, and doth bolievo, tiu' persons designated in the paid " Disclosures" as the " two iMis;< Font^nees," to be identical with deponent and her sis- ter ITypolyte Fournier. And deponent further saith that she was an inmate of the said Asylum, as as!sistnnt to Mrs. MeDouell, during the whole periofl of the htay of the said Maria therein, and that the acquaintance of deponent with the said Maria commenced and ended at the said Afiyhmi. And deponent furtlier saith, that she Jiath never understood, ex- cept from recent public, report, tiiat the said Maria had been at any lime an inma of any convent whatever, but that depo- nent huth always understood that previously t(» her entrance into the said Af^ylnm, the said Maria had led the life of a com- mon stroller. And further, deponent saith not. CLOTILDE FOURNIER. Sworn before me, at Lachine, this 30th day of July, 1835. DOND. DUFT J. P. The evidence of both of these ladies is corrobo- ratcnl bv the aflidavit of Mrs, McDoneil. The deponent in the following affidavit, is the " Miss Howard" mentioned, in conjunction with the " two Miss Fotignees," as the " fellow-pupil" of Monk in the Congregational Nunnery, and her subse- tjucnt fellow-novice at the Hotel Dieu. No. 14. Evidence of Mary Ann Howard, Province of Loiner Cnnoda, District of Mont real: Before me, Adam L. Macnider, one of his Majesty's .Tus- tiees of the Peace for the District of Montreal, appeared Mary Ann Howard, who, after making oath on the Holy EvangcUsts, declared : That the eonten^s of the pamphlet entitled, " Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk," had been communicated to her : that she had reason to believe, and did believe, the said " Maria Monk," to bo identical with a person, bearing that name, who was an inmate of the iiif^tiiution commonly known as the Magdalen Asylum of the city of ^lontreal, from the month of November eighteen hun- dred and thirty-four, to the month of March eighteen hundred and thirty-five ; that deponent had reason to believe, and did be- ■Tpi 102 liev©, the person designated as " Miss Howanl from Vormont," in the said " Disclosures," to be identical with deponent. And deponent further declared, that she was an inmate of ihe »!aid Asylum during the entire period of the said Maria Monk's stay therein; and that her acquaintance with the said Maria commenced and ended at the said asylum. And deponent further declared, that she had never been at any time an inmate of any convent whatever. And deponent further declared, that the said Maria was in the habit of holdinisf frequent conversations with deponent on the events of her life ; that among other things she mformed depo- iient of her residence at St. Denis and at Sorol, and also of sun- dry voyages to Quebec, performed by her ; that she informed de- ponent of her state of pregnancy, and that she attributed her con- dition to Louis Malo, one of the Constables of the courts of Mon- treal ; that she informed deponent that she had cohabited with the said Louis a ghort time previously to her entrance into tho Asylum ; and that she mentioned particularly that the said Louis had placed her in a tavern kept by Richard Ouston, at the cor- ner of St. Joseph and Commissioner streets, where the said Louis frequently visited her ; that she mentioned particularly that the jsaid Louis visited her at the said tavern for illicit purposes, on the seventeenth day of October, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-five ; such day being commonly known as the dark day. And deponent further declared, that the said Maria communi- cated to deponent the conversation held by her with the said Louis, as described in Mrs. McDoncU's affidavit ; the contents of which deponent declared herself to be accjuainted with; that the said Maria further informed deponent that the said Louis, at the time of the said cor versation, gave to her a gold ring, and of- fered her many inducrments to quit the asylum. \ And deponent further declared, that the said Maria pretended to deponent that she had been confimed in the summer of eighteen hundred and thirty-four, at the Bishop's Church in the city of Montreal ; that she further pretended to deponent, that she w as guilty of a sacrilege at the time of such confinnation, in having concealed at confession, a certain sin committed by her at a ball, which she, the said Maria, had attended. And deponent further declared, that the said 3Iaria, during her residence at the said Asylum, did never pretend to deponent, or to any other person, according to the information and belief of depo- nent, that she had been any time an inmate of a convent ; but that deponent always understood, as well from the confessions of the saia Maria as from other fc urces, that she had, previously to her entrance into the asylum, led the Ufe of a stroller ; and fur- ther deponent declared not. . (Signed) MARY ANN -f HOWARD. mark. Sworn before me, this 27th day of July, 1837. ADAM L. MACNIDER. J. P. 108 srmont," te of ihfi I Monk's d Maria in ot any 18 in the on the 3d depo- ) of sun- rmed He- he r con- of Mon- tcd with into tho lid Louis the cor- lid Louis that the (s, on the red and k day. jmmuni- the said ntents of ith; that Louis, at ;, and of- 'etended eighteen e city of she was I havin(T at a ball, iring her 3nt, or to of depo- 3nt; but ssions of iously to and fur- ARD. The deponent in the following affidavit is Jane McCoy, who, it is stated at page 36, sat " one time by a window" with Monk in the Hotel Dieu con- vent. No. 15. Evidence of June McCoy. District of Montreal,, Promnce of Lower Canada: Before me, Adam L. Macnidor, one of his Majesty's Jus- tices of the Peace for thr district of Montreal, appeared Jane Mc Coy, who, after majiing oath on the Holy >:0vangelist8, declared, "That tho contents of tl>.e j)aniphlet, entitled " Awful Disclo- sures of Maria Monk," had betMi communicated to her; that she had reason to believe, and did believe, the said " Maria Monk" to be identical with a jierson boarins? that name, who was an inmate of the institution commonly known as tlie MagdrJen Asylum of the city of Montreal, from the month of ISovember eighteen hun- dred and thirty-four, to the montlx of March eighteen hundred and thirty-five ; that deponent had reas-on to believe, and did believe, the person designated as " Jane 3icCoy" in the said " Disclo- sures," to be identical with deponent. And deponent further declared, that she was an inmate of the said Asyhim during the entire period of the said Maria Monk's stay therein ; and that her acquaintance with the said Maria commenced and ended at the said Asylum. And deponent furtlier declared, tliat she had never been at any lime an inmate of any convent whatever. And deponent furtjier declared, that the said Maria was in the habit of holding frequent conversations with deponent on the events of her life — that among other things she informed deponent of her residence at St. Denis and at Sorel, and elso of sundry voyages to Quebec, performed by her; that she informed depo- nent of her state of pregnancy, and that she attributed her condi- tion to Louis Malo, one of the constables of the court, of Montreal ; that she informed deponent that slie had cohabited with the said Louis a short time previously to her entrance into the Asylum, and that she mentioned particularly that the said Louis had placed her in a tavern Itept by Richard (Juston, at the corner of St. Joseph and Commissioner streets, where the said Louis frequently visited her ; that she mentioned particularly that the said Louis visited her at the said tavern for illicit purposes on the seven- teenth day of October one thousand eight hundred and thirty-five, such day being » .mmon'y known as the dark day. And deponent further declared, that the said 3Iaria communi- cated to deponent the conversation held by her with the said Louis, as described in Mrs. McDonell's affidavit, the contents of • «!• X • ■pwi 104 which tlepoiient ricchired hcrfiolf to he avaH guilty of a sacrilege at the time of such confirmation, in having concealed at confession a certain sin commillcd by her. And deponent further declared, that the said Maria, during her residence at the eaid Asylum, did never pretend to deponent, or to any other person, according to the information and belief of de- ponent, that she had been at any time an inmate of a convent ; but that deponent always understood as well from the confession of the said Maria as from other sources, that she had previously to her entrance into the Asylum led the Ul'c of a stroller ; and fur- ther deponent declared not. JEAN iMcKAY. Sworn before me, this 27th day of July, 1835. . ADAM L. MACMDER, J. P. The deponent in the following aflidavit is Jane Ray, who occupies so conspicuous a place in the "Disclosures" as the freakish "old nun." No. 16. Evidence of Jane Ray, #■ Province of Lower Canada, Diffrict of Monfrtal : Before me, Adam L. Macnider, one of his Majesty's Justi- ces of the Peace for the District of 31ont real, appeared Jane Ray, who, after making oath on the Holy Evangelists, declared : That the contents of the pamphlet, entitled the "vVwful Disclot sures of Maria Monk," had been communicated to her ; that she had reason to believe, and did believe, the said Maria Monk to be identical with a person bearing that name, who was an inmate of the institution commonly known as the Magdalen Asylum of the city of Montreal, from the jnonth of Novernber eighteen hundred and thirty-four, to the month of March eigiueen htmdrcd and thirty -five ; and that deponent had reason to believe, and did be- lieve, that the person named *'Jane Ray" in the said "Disclo- sures," to be identical with the deponent. And deponent further declared, that she was an inmate of the said Asylum during the entire period of the said Maria Monk's stay therein ; and that her acquaintance with the said Maria com- mei^ced and ended at th^ said Asylum. 105 And deponent further declared, that she had never been, at any time heretofore, an inmate of any convent whatever. And deponent further declared, that the conduct of the said Maria in the said Asylum, was extremely indecorous, and that her example was hurtful to the discipline of the institution ; and further, that deponent always understood and believed, that the said Maria had le'. previously to her entrance into the said Asy- lum, the life of a st. oiler and prostitute. And deponent further declared, that during the stay of the said i\Iaria at the Asylum, the said 3Iaria did never pretend to depo< ncnt, or to any other person, according to the information and be- lief of deponent, that she had been at any time an inmate of aeon- vent ; and further deponent declared not. JANE RAY. Sworn before me, this 27th day of July, 1836. ADAM L. MACNIDER, J. P. Poor, repentant, and, from Mrs. McDonell's ac- count, sincerely reformed Jane Ray, has never been a nun, and has never seen one except in the streets. The tricks and practices attributed to her in the " Disclosures," are foreign to her present state, and are certainly not indulged in by her in the "dor- mitories," " passages," or " cellars" of the only re- treat from the world she has ever known — the " Magdalen Asylum." The deponent in the following affidavit is " one of my cousins" mentioned at page 48 of the ♦* Disclosures." No. 17. Evidence of M, Reed. District of Montreal, Province of Lower Canada: Margaret Reed, of the parish of the Saut au Recollect, in the said district, being duly sworn on the Holy Evangelists, de- poseth and saith, that the contents of the pamphlet entitled "Aw- ful Disclosures of Maria Monk," have been communicated to her; that she hal'i reason to believe, and doth believe, the said Maria Monk to be identical with a person bearing that name, who was an inmate of the institution commonly known as the Magdalen Asylum of the city of Montreal, from the month of November eighteen hundred and thirty-four, to the month of March cigh- ^sm 106 1 teen hundred and thirty-five ; and that she hath reason to be- Heve, and doth believe, the person designated in the said "Dis- closures" as "one of my cousins who lived at Lachine, nam- ed Reed," to be identical with deponent. And deponent further saith, that she was an inmate of the said Asylum during the entire period of the residence of the said Ma- ria tlieroat. And deponent further saith, that proviously to meeting the said Maria at the said Asylum, she had formed a personal acquaint- ance with her at St. Denis ; that deponent particularly knew of the residence of the said 3Iaria in the family of Charles St. Get- main, batter, of the said St. j)enis; and that it is the information and behcf of the deponent, that she was expelled from the said family on account other dissolute practices. And deponent further saith, that deponent hath never been at any time heretofore an inmate in any convent whatever. And deponent further saith, that the said Maria hath never pre- tended to deponent, at any time, or to any other person or persons, according to the information and belief of deponent, that she had been at any time an inmate of a convent; but tliat deponent al- Avays understood, as well from the confessions of the said Maria as from other sources, that the said Maria had for several years led the life of a common stroller and prostitute \ and further deponent mtii not. Sworn before mc, at 3Iontrcal, this 30th of July, 1836. her MARGARET H-REED. mark. P. LUKIN, J. P. Miss jouise Bousquet, Miss Hypolitc Fournier and her sister, Mary Ann Howard, Jane McCoy, Jane Ray, and M. Reed, all separately and con- clusively deny all knowledge of the pretended no- viciate and nunship of Monk. They all deny the allegations concerning them, with the exception that they were acquainted with Maria Monk. Independently of " nuns, and priests," there are altogether eight persons named in the " Disclosures" as witnesses to Monk's residence in the Hotel Dieu hospital md convent. Doctor Nelson is the eighth. 107 )n to be- iid"Dis. ne, nam- f the fnid said Ma- ; the snid ncquftint- knew of I St. Ger- 'orraation the said : been at ever pro- • persons, t she had onent al- Maria as years led deponent [lEED. >(, J. P. Durnier IcCoy, con- ied no- ny the r.eption 3re are >sures" Hotel 1 is the No. 18. Evidence of Doctor Nelson, Montreal, 19t?i Mardi, 1836. Sir — In reply to your request, desiring me to read the " Dis- closures" of Aliss M. jMonk, and to say whether I can corrobo- rate any of llie allegations therein contained, jiarticularly that one which relates to " Dr. Nelson," permit me to say, that when I was ihe medical attendant of ihe Hotel Oieu hospital, and occa- sionally of the convent, which is the doistorcil part of the esta- blishment, 1 never once taw Mi.w Monk there; but, more than unco, at lur mother's request, 1 saw her at the (Government House-keeuer's apartments, v\hi<^h are tlio.se occupied by her mother. I'he description she gives in the '* Disclosures" of hav- ini^ accompanied me, during my attendance on tlie sick, is there- fore incorrect, and it is otherwise faulty as regards tlie recortl. On the^e occasions the physician is accompanied by one of the Apothccaresses, a nun, for the purpose of rendering to him an ac- count of the administration of the medit^ines jireviously ordered, to give such information as nmy be asked regiuding the patients dtuing his absence, and to receive his future dire<;tions ; these lust, and his prescriptions, he himself writes in the prescription- book at the bed-^ide : they are in the I'Vench Language, and all in lay own hand- writing ; therefore the assertion, " 1 Irequently followed Doctor Nelson with pen, ink, and paper, and v\ rote down the prescriptions," is also altogether incorrect. I am, Sir, Your most obedient servant, (Signed) "ROUT. NELSON." Doctor Nelson knows Monk well, for he has often advised her on her maladv ; btit he has never known her as a nun of the Hotel Dieu. We have elsewhere repeatedly pointed out the gross errors of the " Disclosures," in regard to what is publicly known of the Montreal convent. We have said that Sister Bourgeois was no wise con- nected in the foundation of the liotel Dieu, and that the habit of Sister Bourgeois is not the habit of the Hotel Dieu nuns. This is no secret in Ca- nada, as will appear by the following extract from the Quebec Almanack for 1831 : mm 108 i.:: No. 19. Evidence on the Foundation of the Hotel Dieu, HOTEL DIEU OF MONTREAL, Founded in the year 1644, /or the Poor Sick. Sister Meniere, Superior since 1827. Professsed Nuns, 36 Novices, -- 2 Postulantes, 3 - 41 Quebec Almanack, 1831. Sister Bourgeois founded the Congregational Nunnery, and it is there, and not at the Hotel Dieu, that her memory is held in peculiar veneration. We again extract from the Quebec Almanack. No. 20, Evidence on the Foundation of the Congre- gation de Notre Dame, CONGREGATION DE NOTRE DAME A MONTREAL. Sister St. Magdalen (Miss Huot) Superior since 1827. Professed Nuns, - - - - - - - -81 Novices, - 2 Postulantes, - .'> • S Quebec Almanack^ 1836. These are small matters in themselves, but mate- rial when considered with reference to the identity of the informant of the authors of the " Disclosures" with an ex-nun of the Hotel Dieu. At page 34 of the ** Disclosures" it is stated that there were ** forty novices" at the Hotel Dieu. Look at document marked No. 19 ! How many novices are there set down ? Two. The truth is, that there is no secrecy observed in regard to the number of novices or of nuns. No secrecy could 109 ; Hotel - 36 2 3 41 :, 1831. ational ;1 Dieu, ;ration. ck. Jongre- REAL. - 81 2 88 . 1836. mate- dentity >sures »> ed that Dieu. many *uth iS) to the couUl I ^ be obsej'ved consistently with the laws of the pro- vince ; and thus it happens that the Protestant edi- tors of the official Almanack are perfectly well ac- quainted with the constituency of every convent in Lower Canada. Forty novices ! We again quote from the Quebec Almanack, but for 1836. No. 21. Evidence 07i the number of iiomces at the Hotel Dieu, HOTEL DIEU OF MONTREAL. Founded by Madame de Bouillon in 1664, /or the poor Sick. Sister Lapailleur Devoisy, Superior ..ince 1831 Professed Nuns, 94 Novices, --.-1 Postulantes 2 y i In 1831 there were two novices, and in 1836 we find one ; and we can assert with great certainty, that at no time since the foundation of the hospi- tal there have been forty, or any number approach- ing it. The extracts from the Quebec Almanack also corroborate what we have already advanced, that the sisters of the Congregational Nunnery take the name of saints, but that the sisters of the Hotel Dieu never do. In the " Disclosures," with the ex- ception of" Jane Ray," the nuns of the latter are always designa^^ed as " saints." At page 179 et aliunde, it is insinuated, that "su- periors," when they grow old, arc regularly mur- dered, and the bloody exit of one in particular is plainly intimated. In the extracts from the alma- nack are the names of two superiors. The sister Meziere, mentioned in No. 19, was superior from 10 mm 1-^ 111 ■ ■! h 'I no 1827 to 1833. The sister Lapailleur Devolsy, mentioned in No. 21, was superior from 1821 to 1827, and was re-elected first in 1833, and ag^in recently in June, 1836. At page 33 it is asserted, that " about one hun- dred priests are connected with the seminary of Montreal." We again extract from the official Almanack. , No. 22. Evidence on Montreal Seminary, SEMINARY OF 3I0NTREAL. Mr. Henry Roux, Superior. Mr. Joseph Quiblier, Vice Superior. Mr. James Roeque. Mr. Charles de Bellefeuille, ) Missionaries to the Lako of Two Mr. Flavira Durocher, > Mountains. Mr. Anthelme MalanJ. Mr. Frs. Humbert. Mr. Jos. L. Melchior Sai.vage. Mr. Lasni Hubert. Mr. Ant. Satin. Mr. John Bt. Roupe. JVrr. John Richard. Mr. Nicholas Dufresne. Mr. Joseph Comte, Procureur. Mr. John Bt. St. Pierre. Mr. Francis Bonin. Mr. Patrick Phelan. Mr. Claudius Fay, faisant les fonctions curiales. Mr. John Claudius Leonard. Mr. James Arraud. LESSER SEMINARY. Mr. John Bt. Bayle, Director. Mr. John Larkin, i Mr. Germ Sery, > Professors. Mr. Romain Larre, ) > Mr. O'Reilly, Mr. Angus McDonell, Mr. Frs. X. Deseve, Mr. D. Denis, Mr. John Bt. Dupuis, Mr. Plinquette, Mr. Eu8. Durocher, Regents of the Humanities. Qutiftec Almanack^ 1831. i Ill Twenty priests attached to the seminary proper, and nine professors and r No. 23. Evidence on the age requisite for the Mo- nastical Profession* " The tenth article of the Ordinance of Orleans had fixed the age at twenty-five years for males, and at twenty for females ; but the Council of Trent having fixed the age for both sexes at sixteen years, the twenty-eighth article of the ordinance of Blois adopted the same rule, and it was followed throughout the king- dom until the month of March, 1768. (Article on the Monastic pro- fession. Repertoire de Jurisprudence.) The requisite age is sixteen, but it rarely hap- pens that the veil is taken before twenty. In the " Disclosures," mention is made of professed nuns fourteen years old. It is not stated at what age Monk took the veil. ' No distinction is made in the " Disclosures" be- teen novices and postulantes ; it is even asserted, page 34, that novices " are called in French postu- lantes." Both are errors, one of the omission and one of the commission. See the extracts from the official Almanack marked Nos. 19, 20, and 21. The laws of Canada interfere in the ceremony of vesting the religious habit. No. 24. Evidence on the Vesting of the Religious habit, " In all religious houses there shall be two registers, in order to inscribe therein the deeds of vesting, noviciate, and profession ; 112 which regiistry shall be paged, and each page noted by the su- Eerior of the convent, to do which superiors shall be authorized y a capitulary act, to be inserted at the commencement uf the said registers." " All the deeds of vesting, noviciate and profession, shall be in- scribed in the said regifeters in continuation, and without blanks, and the said deeds shall be signed in the said registers by the re- quisite persons, and at the time they are made, and in no case shall the said deeds be inscribed on loose leaves." "In eacl.of the said deeds shall be mentioned the name and simame, and the aee of him or her who shall assume the religious habit, or who shall make profession ; the names, qualitie«, and domicils of his or her father and mother ; his or her birth-place, and the date of the deed, which shall be signed on the registers, as well by the superior as by him or her who shall assume the habit, or make profession, and also by the bishop or ecclesiastic who shall have performed the ceremony, and by two of the near- est relations or guardians who shall have assisted at it. The said registers shall serve during five consecutive years, and shall be lodged at the Greffe.'' . (Super.) ' In the " Disclosures," the public ceremony of vesting the individiial, Monk, is described, but no mention is made of compliance with the requisi^ tions of the law. What remains ? t . CHAPTER IX Documentary evidence, proving that the plan ^ven in the " Awful Disclosures ,^^ of the interior of the Hotel Dieu, is in aU respects different from the reality. We will not do the American public the injury of supposing that their eyes cannot be opened to truth. We are well aware that the mere circu- lation of such a book as the " Disclosures," must have created a description of public opinion preju- dicial to the good nftme of the individuals and in- stitutions who stand charged therein. We under- 1 by the su- Eiuthorized ent uf the hall be in- ut blanks, by the re- in no case name and e religious ilitie«, and irth-place, ! registers, ssume the cclesiastic f the near- ive years, lony of , but no requisi^i e" Awful U respects injury opened circu- " must preju- md in- under- 113 stand that recently, persons from the United States have visited Montreal, on missions of inquiry into the truth of these charges. It is probable that per- sons who have taken so much trouble to verify absurd conclusions will for ever retain them. Circum- stances do not help to correct or alter the organi- zation of a fool's mind. This refutation is not ad- dressed to such men ; still less is it addressed to men who, with sufficient ability to distinguish between truth and falsehood, have voluntarily, and for sinis- ter purposes, embraced the cause of the latter. It is addressed to that great majority who know only of the contents of the pamphlet through the medi- um of conversation ; and who, unacquainted with the enormous inconsistencies of the narrative, have suffered themselves to be affected by general asser- tions of the nature of its contents. Now we desire it to be generally known, that all the allegations of Monk and her supporters are dis- tinctly met and refuted in this reply. We have accepted the challenge of the " anti- papists" in the matter of the plan and composi- tion of the cloisters of the Hotel Dieu ; not certainly as an absolute test of the truth or falsehood of the narrative ; for it is the prerogative, not of Calvinis- tic divines, but of Reason, to fix and determine such a test. We have, however, accepted the challenge as one test, and we proceed to lay before the pub- lic the result of the encounter. The narrative of Monk, it will be recollected, contains a detailed description of what is termed the " interior of the Black Nunnery," and it is stat- ed at page 74, that whenever that interior "shall be examined, and found to be materially different" 10* 114 from the description, that then she, Maria Monk, ***can claim no confidence of her readers." On the 15th of July, 1836, the Hotel Dieu Nun- nery was visited by five gentlemen, of whom three are clergymen, and two are laymen — two are Ame- ricans, two Canadians, and one a ►Scotchman ; four are Protestants, and one is a Catholic. It would be impossible to imagine any thing more conclusive than their evidence. No. 25. Evidence of the Rev, W, Curry, Rev, G, W, Perkins, Rev, H, Esson, Benjamin Holmes, Esq. Justice of the Peace, and Mr, I, Jones, Tliis may certify, that, being desirous of ascertaining the truth in regard to Maria Monk's printed plan and description of the Ho- tel Dieu, or Black Nunnery of this city, 1 did, a few weeks since, in company with N. B. Doucet and 1. P. Lacroix, Esquires, and tvithout sending any previous notice, visit said Nunnery, and with said map and description in hand, examine most muiutely from the cellar to the roof, all that part of ^aid building between the wall or St. Joseph street, and the wall running from the north side of the public chapel, (the top of tJie map being called north,) that fronts on St. Paul street to the extreme corner, from whence the passage to the Congregational Nunnery is laid down in said map ; and I do most freely declare, that after a patient and pro- tracted scrutiny of the walls, windows, closets, doors, cellars, rooms, and furniture of the same; after having examined Avith equal scrutiny all the hospitals, out-honses, gardens, vaults, &c. &c., with special reference not only to their appearance, but their relative j.osition to each other, so as to be sure that nothing was overlooked; I was unable to discern ahy resemblance whatever between isaid building, in whole or part, and that portion of said map furnished by Maria Monk. The only resemblance being that between the outside walls, and the grounrl plan in said map, whicli, she says, was furnished by another hand. All the interior is un- like her plan hi every respect; and in as much as most, if not all, of the partition walls are commenced in the cellar, and built of heavy stone, it is impossible, in the nature of the case, that the building should have been so altered as to make this discrepancy • for, to say nothing of the labor and expense and publicity of sach a work, the walls and wood-work bear that appearance of age which cannot be counterfeited. When the nuns and the lady superior, to whom I was introduced, learnt the object of my visit, 115 Monk, lu Nun. m three re Ame- jhman ; lie. It 5 more lev. G, ^otmes, 5. the fruth f the Ho- ;ks since, ires, and lery, and mhiuteiy between he north J north,) whence n in (iRk\ find pro- eellars, ed with ihf, &c. )ut their ing was hatever of said ing that , w liicli, or is un- not all, built of that the ipancy • of such of age he lady ly visit, they cheerfully opened every enclosure of every description ; answered all inmiiries promptly ; and one of them assured me, that if they had had timely notice of my visit, a permit from the Bishop would have been obtained to give me immediate access to tlie whole of the cloistered department ; and I was assured that as soon as he should return to tiie city, such permit should bo had. I furthermore certify, that having been informed that a permit having been obtained for a party to visit and examine said Hotel Dieu nunnery, and that I was requested to make one of the num- ber ; I did, on the 15th July, 1836, after the Rev. G. W. Perkins had been added to the number, go in company with said party, consisting of Rev. G. W. Perkins of the American Pres. church, Rev. H. Esson of tlie Scotch pres. church, Benj. Holmes, Esqr. cashier of the Montreal Bank, Protestants, and J. Jones, publisher of L'Amidu Peuple, Roman Catholic, and commencing at the gen- eral hospital and chapel, 1 examined, in company with these gen- tlemen, all the remainder of the buildings and grounds of said Hotel Dieu and Nunnery, until we had repeatedly traversed ev- ery section of the same. We examined closely the walls, win- dows, doors, rooms, vaults, &;c. Iontreal, I shall not be slow to be- lieve that the nunsi of Canada yet retain the power of working miracles witl; stone and mortar; and that Maria Mank possessed this accomphshrnent up to the moment of her arrival in St. Jean Baptiste street, at the time of her escape. For, when she " step- pea across the yard, unbarred the great gate, and was at liberty," she must have passed directly over, luider, or through, at least 116 three high stone walls that would have discouraged a less adven- turous lady. (Signed) W. F. CURRY, Cor. Sec. of the Canada Education und Home Miss. Society. Montreal, July 18, 1836. Having vif^^itod the nunnery in company with the Rev. Mr. Curry and other Proloi^taiit gentlemen, as stated in the preced- ing declaration, I do most fully agree to the statements therein contained. In every step of rnv progress through the building, 1 had the Inst edition of Mariti clonk's work in my hand, and did not fail most carefully to compare it with the interior of the edi- fice. 1 hesitate not to say, that it was utterly impossible that a person at all acciuainted with the internal plan of the nunnery could have drawn up the sketch or map given in her book ; so thorough was our scrutiny, that no changes, if materially varying the interior, could have escaped our notice. .Montreal, July, 22, 1336. (Signed) G. W. PERKINS, - Pastor of the Am. Pres. Ch. I hereby certify, that, as stated in the above declarations, I ac- companied the Rev. Messrs. t'urry and Perkins, Benjamin Holmes, Esquire, cashier of the Montreal bonk, and J. Jones, publisher of the L'Ami du Pcuple newspaper of this city, on Fri- day, the ir»th instant, throughout the course of a very minute and rigorous scrutiny of the whole extensive range of buildings form- ing the Hotel Dieu or Blaoic IVuimery of this city, having been conducted through all the numerous divisions of the establish- ment, and having deliberately and carefully surveyed them in succession, comparing, at every stage of our progress, what we saw with the preteucled plan of the said nunnery as exhibited hi the lairt edition of 3Iaria Monk's work ; and I perfectly concur with the two reverend gentlemen above mentioned, in declaring my decided conviction that tlie said plan ascribed to Maria Monk is a palpable and complete fabrication, derionstrative of nothing but its author's total ignorance of said building. (Signed) H. ESSON, member of the Scotch Presbyterian Church, St. Gabriel street, Montreal. Montreal, July 23d, 1836. I hereby certify, that on the 16th day of Jidy instant, I accom- panied to the Hotel Dieu, or Black Nuiviery, the Rev. Mr. Curry, the Rev. Mr. Perkins, the Rev. Mr. Essun, and Mr. Jenes, and was ♦hen and there present at the examination made and entered upon by those gentlemen, as stated in the foregoing certificates, the full tenor ol which, their close investigation of the premises, and their comparing the same with Maria Monk's plan of the said buildings, 1 was witness to ; and I have much pleasure in 688 adven- Canada Society. Rev. Mr. le preced- tB therein 3 building:, d, Jind did )f the edi- ble that a nunnery- book ; so ly varying IKINS, Pros. Ch. ions, I ac- Benjamin J. Jones, ;y, on Fri- linute and ngs form- ing been efitablish- 1 them in what we hibitcd in y concur declaring ria Monk nothing SSON, Church, real. I accom- r. Curry, mes, and 1 entered tificates, )remises, n of the iBasure in 117 bearing testimony to the cheerful and ready disposition of tho lady superior, and the other ladies, in forwarding the inspection, arid affording every information acquired by the two first-named Rev. gentlemen. (Signed) BENJ. HOLMES, J. P. Montreal, 23d July, 1836, I hereby certify, that I visited the Hotel Dieu convent in com- pany with the gentlemen whof^e names arc hereinbefore affixed to their separate certificates. I declare that I entirely concur in the statements and conclusions they mak? ; and I further declare, that the " veiled nuns' department," which, to all appearance, by the plan is located in the centre building of the convent, is in fact situate elsewhere. J. JONES. Montreal, July 23d, 183G. At the time of their visit, the preceding gentle- men used Hoisington and Trow's edition of the " Disclosures," which is provided with jin engraved plan of the Hotel Dieu, of the nunnery grounds, and of "tlie veiled nuns' department." Nothing was omitted to give to the proceedings of the visi- tors the character and reality of sincere and con- scientious investigation ; and what has been the re- sult ? Read the certificates. It would seem impossible for the advisers of Monk to construct a lie of ordinary verisimilitude. The engraved plan prefixed to their improved edi- tion of the " Disclosures," is a manifest and impu- dent fabrication. No. 26. Evidence of J, Ostell, Esq. Architect, This is to certify, that the plan of the Hotel Dieu nunnery of Montreal, pubhshed in a book, entitled " Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk," having been submitted to me for my professional inspection, I have considered the said plan, and declare it to be my opinion, that, architecturally speaking, and with reference to the practice prevailing in Canada in the construction of build- ings, it is impossible that the said plan should have any real ex- istence, for the following reasons. The detailed plan presents 118 partiiion wulls on the first and second stories, which have no corre- Kpondence with each other, commencing and ending on each se- parate story ; whereas it is necessary that such walls should not only corref^pond with each other, but that they should commence in the cellar ; also the second story plan shows a portion of building at one extremity, without any similar substructure in the lower stories; the lorm of the main buildinsr on the block plan exhibits considerable incongruity with that ot'the detailed plan, inasmuch as the two small wings forming the cross of the building bear a proportion on tho one that is entirely lost sight of in the other. Further I hereby declare, after having made during the last month a careful inspection of a greater portion of the buildings of the Ho- tel Dieu nunnery, more particnlarlv of the centre or main building, wl\ich is represented in the " Disclosures" as containing the veil- ed mms' apartments, that the plans and descriptions there given are essentially false, and could not, in my opinion, havo ever had any actual existenoe in connection with the above-named build- ing ; and further, that the nuns' apartments or cloisters (to which I was no' permitted to enter) are not situate in the centre build- ing, but in that part of the structure extending towards St. Jean Baptiste street in the east wing on the said street. (Signed) JOHN OSTELL, Montreal, July 30th, 1836. Architect and Surveyor. CHAPTER X. Documents produced by the advisers of Monk in support of the truth of her Narrative. In the month of March of the present year, the *< Protestant Vindicator," a paper printed in the city of New -York, published one affidavit, one state- ment of an anonymous " female," and one certifi- cate, favorable to the veracity of Maria Monk. That the " Awful Disclosures" may not be depriv- ed of the benefit of them, the compositors have kind- ly consented to " set them up" and the pressmen to " wprk them off," lid e no corre- )n each se- should not commence of building the lower an exhibits , inasmuch ling bear a I the other, last month i of the Ho- in building, ig the veu- tiere given ever had med build- j (to which sntre build- Is Hi. Jean STELL, Surveyor. >f the truth ear, the in the e state- certifi- Monk. dcpriv- '^e kind- essmen No. 27. Affidavit of William Miller. '• City and County of Neu)- York, ss. " William Miller bring duly sworn, doth say, — T knew Maria Monk when she was a child, and was acquainted with all her father's family. My lather, Mr. Adam Miller, kept the go- vernment school at St. John's, Djwer Canada, for some years, (^aptain Wm. Monk, Maria's falhrr, lived in thn garrison, a short distance from the village, and she attended the school with mo for some months, probably as much as a year, kler four bro- thers also attended with us. Our families woio on terms of inti- macy, as my father had a ]\u!}\ regard for Captain JMonk ; but the temper of his wife wa.s sm-h, even at that time, iis to cause much trouble. Capt. 3Ionk died verv suddenly, as was reported, in consequence of lieing poisoned. Mrs. Monk was then Keeper of the Government House in Montreal, and received a pensiou, which privilege she has since enjoyed. In the summer of 1832 I left Canada, and came to this city. In about a year afterward I visited Montreal, and on the day when the Governor reviewed the troops, I believe about the end of August, I called at the Go- vernment House, where I saw Mrs. Monk and several of tlie fa- mily. I inquired where Maria was, and she told me that she was in the nunnery. This fact I well remember, because the in- formation gave me great pain, as I had unfavorable opinions of the numieries. On reading the " Awful Disclosurcn," I at once knew she was the eloped nun, but was unable to find her until a few days since, w hen we recognLsed each other immediately I give with pleasure my testimony in her favor, as she is among strangers, and exertions have been made against her. I declare my personal knowledge of many facts stated in her book, and ray full belief in the truth of her story, wiiich, shocking as it is, cannot appear incredible to those persons acquainted with Ca- nada. " " Sworn before me, this 3d day of March, 183G. " WH.LIAM MH.LER. "BENJAMIN D. K. CRAIG, " Commissioner of Deeds, Committee." HENRY LYMAN, ) This is the man who accompanied Monk to Ca- nada in August, 1835, and who had the impudence to offer himself to the notice of several honorable men, as an investigator of the truth of certain ru- mors concerning the priests and nuns, of which he himself was the Author ! Tlie wretch was scorned as he deserved. " Judge Turner" of Vermont, who foolishly countenanced him for a brief period, doubt- lessly in consequence of having discovered his co- habitation with the pretended ex-nun, withdrew froto his society. 125 in the va- iiblicly ex- been done ;d States,) I last, and quest that nont Chro- illy youra, RITAS. haracter ot but ex- plied vvitli the buokij itations to is conduct sli further le gentle- ay acting nittee. ' to Ca- )udence norable ain ru- lich he corned it, who doubt- his CO- thdrew No. 32. Evidence of Catharine Couriers and Mary McCaffrey, District of Montrcnl, Province of Lower Canada : Before me, W. Robertson, one of his 3Iajesty'8 Justices of the Peace for the District of Montreal, apppared Catharine Con- nors of Montreal ; she having made oath on the Holy Evange- lists, to say the truth and nothing but the truth, declared and Miid what follows : 'J'owards the 19th of August last, two men and a woman came to the Exc/iun^e Coffee-House ; their names were written in the book, one by the name of Judge Turner, and the other as Mr Hoyte ; the name of the woman was not written in the book in which the names of travellers are written, because I was inform- ed that they were taking a single room with two beds. Some lime after another room was given to them for their accommo- dation; the woman passed for ilie wife of 3Ir. Hoyte. Tiie day following, when I was malung the bed, I found the woman in tears. Having made the remark to her that her child was a very young traveller, she replied, that she had not the power to dispense with the journey, for they travelled on busi- ness of importance ; she also said that she had never had a day of happiness since she left Montreal, which was four years, with 3lr. Hoyte ; she expressed a wish to go and see her father. She entreated me to try and procure secretly clothes for her, for 3Ir. Hoyte wislied to dine wiih her in his own room, in which he was then taking care of the child. I gave her my shawl and bonnet, and conchicted her secretly out by the street St. Pierre ; she never rolurned, and left the child in the hands of 3Ir. Hoyte. She sfiid that her hnsljand was a Methodist preacher, and apent of the Sunday schools for Montreal, in which the had resided four months last winter; but she had not then been with him. When I returned to the room, Mr. Hoyte was still taking care of the child ; he asked me if 1 had seen hbf hdy ; 1 said no. Upon this question he told mo tliat the father oiliis ladj/ was dead, that her mother yet hved in the suburbs of Quebec, and he asked mo for all the clothes which I had given to wash for him, Am /ody and child ; clothes the ladi/ had taken from the only portmanteau which tliey had. Beyond that, I perceived nothing remarkable, except that Mr. Hoyte wished.to ccmceal this woman, and to pre- vent her from going out. J heard the judge say to him, " now she is yours." Sworn before me, the 2d day of November, 1835. (Signed) W. ROBERTSON Marj'^ ^IcCaflfrey, also a chambermaid in the hotel of Mr. Good- enough, corroborates the preceding deposition. (Signed) W. ROBERTSON 11* 126 H. K. Hoytc, cjiiinol sulTer by the exposure of his cohabitation with Monk. He cannot suffer from the exposure of his famiharities with Monk, practised even in the presence of her mother. No. 33. Evidence of Mrs, Monk, On this (lay, the twenty-fourth day of October, one thousand eight hundred and tliirty -five, before me, WilUam Robertson, one of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the district of Montreal, came and appeared Isabella Mills, of the city of Montreal, widow of the late VviUiam Monk, who declared that, wishing to guard the public against the deception wliich has lately been practised in Montreal by designing mt n, who have taken advantage of the occasional derangement of her daughter, to make scandalous ac- cusations against the Priests and Nuns in Montreal, and after- wards to make her pass herself for a nun who had left the con- vent. And after having made oath on the Holy Evangelists, (to say the truth,) the said Isabella Mills declares and says, a man de- cently dressed (whom afterwards I knew to be W. K. Hoyte, stating himself to be a minister of New-York,) came to my house on or about tke middle of August last, and inquired for one Mr. Mills ; that Mr. Esson, a minister here, had told him I could give some information about that man ; Irephed that I knew no one of that name in Montreal, but that I had a brother of that name five miles out of town. lie then told me that he had lately come to 3Iontreal, with a young woman and child of five weeks old ; that the woman had absconded from him at (j'oodenou^h's tavern, W'here they were lodging, and left him with the child; he gave me a description of the woman : I unfortunately discovered that the description answered my daughter, and the reflection that this stranger had called upon Mr. Esson, our pastor, and inquir- ing for my brother, I suspected that this was planned ; I asked for the child, and said that I would place it in a nunnery ; to that Mr. Hoyte started every objection, in abusive language, against the nuns. At last he consented to give me the child, provided I would give my writing that it should be presented when de- manded. We left the house together, Mr. Hoyte requesting me to walk at a distance from him, as he was a gentleman. I foflow- od him to 3Ir. dloodenough's hotel, and he directed me to room No. 17, and to demand the child ; a servant maid gave it to me ; Mr. Hoyte came up, and gave me tjie clothing. I came home with the child, and sent Mrs. Tarbert, an old acquaintance, in search of my daughter; her deposition will be seen. The next day Mr. Hoyte came in with an elderly man, Dr. .Judge Turner, decently dressed, whom he introduced to me as a Mr. Turner of 127 3o^ure of lot suffer h Monk, ler. e thousand ertson, one f Montreal, Bal, widow r> guard the •ractised in ige of the idalous ac- and after- ft the con- igelists, (to a man de- K. Hoyte, my house r one Mr. pould give w no one that name tely come eeks old ; 's tavern, he gave ered that 'tion that id inquir- I asked ■ ; to that, B, against provided vhen de- (sting me I follow- to room t to me ; le home ance, in ^he next Turner, urner of St. Alban's. They demanded to see the cliild, which Iproduced. Mr. Hoyte demanded if I had discovered the mother ; I said not. She must be found, said he ; she has taken away a shawl and a bonnet belonging to a servant girl at Goodenough's ; he would not pay for them; she had cost him too much already ; that his things were kept at the hotel »n that account ; being afraid that this might more deeply involve mv daughter, I offered my own shawl to replace the one taken ; 5lr. Hoyte first took it, but af- terwards returned it to me on my promise that I would pay for the shawl and bonnet. In the course of the day, Mrs. Tarbert found my daughter, but she would not come to my house ; she sent the bonnet and shawl, which were returned to their owner, who had lent them to my daughter to a-ssiist her in procuring her escape from Mr, Hoyte at the hotel. Karly on the afternoon of the same day, Mr. JToyte came to my house with the same old man, wishing me to make all my ollorts to find the girl, in the meantime speaking very bitterly against the CathoHcs, the Priests, and the Nuns ; mentioning that my daughter had been in the nimnefy, where she had lj«>on ill troated. I denied that my daugh- ter had ever been i'; a nunnery ; that wlien she was about eight years of age, she wont to a day-.school ; at that time came in two other persons, whom .Mr. Hoyte introduced ; one was the Rev. Mr Brewster. I do not recollect the other reverence's name. They all requested me, in the most prei-sing terms, to try to make it out my daughter had been in the rnmnory ; and that she had some connexion with the priests of the seminary, of which nunneries and priests she spoke in the most outrageous terms ; said that should I make that out, myself, my daughter, and child would be protected for life. I expected to get rid of their importunities, in relating the melancholy circumstances by which my daughter was frequently deranged in her head, and told them, that when at the age of about seven years, she broke a slate pencil in her head ; that sinae that time her mental faculties were deranged, and by times much more than at other times, but that she was far from being an idiot ; that she could make the most ridiculotis, but most plausible stories ; and that as to the history that she had been in a nunnery, it was a fabrication, for she never was hi a nunnery ; that at any one time I wished to obtain a place in a nunnery for her, that J had employed the influence of Mrs. De Montenach, of Dr. Nelson, and of our pastor, the Rev. Mr. Esson, but without success. I told them notwithstanding I was a Pro- testant, and did not like the Roman Catholic religion — like all other respeetable protestants, 1 held the priests of the seminary and the nuns of 3[ontreal in veneration, as the most pious and charitable per.«ons I ever knew. After many more solicitations to the same effect, three of them retired, but Mr. Hoyte remain- ed, adding to the other solicitations ; he was stopped, c person having rapped at the door : it was then candlolignt. I opened tlie door, and I fountl Dr. M'Donald, who told me that my daugh- 128 ter Maria was at his house, in the most distresKing situation ; that she wished him to come and make her peace with me ; I went with the doctor to his house in M'Gill street ; she came with me to near my house, but would not come in, notwithstanding? I as- sured her that she would be kindly treated, and that I would give her her chilil ; she crossed the parade-ground, and I went into the house, and returned for her. Mr. Hoyte followed mo. She was leaning on the west railing of the parade ; wc went to her: Mr. Hoyte told her, my dear Mary, I am sorry yoiihave treated yoiir- polf and me in this manner; I hope you have not exposed wliat has passed between us ; nevertheless I will treat you the same as ever, and spoke to her in the most aflectionate terms ; took her in his arms ; she at first spoke to him very cross, and refused to go with him, but at last consented and went with him, abso- lutely refusing to come to my house. Soon after, Mr. Hoyte came and demanded the child ; 1 gave it to him. Next morning Mr. Hoyte returned, and was more pressing than in his former soli- citation, and requested me to say that my daugliter had been in the nunnery : that should I say so, it would be bettor than one hundred pounds to me ; that I would be protected for life, and that I should leave Montreal, and that I weuld be better provided for elsewhere ; I answered that thousands of pounds would not induce me to perjure myself: then he got saucy and abusive to the utmost; he .«aid he came to Montreal to detect the infamy of the Priests and the Nuns ; that he could not leave my datightcr destitute in the wide world as I had done ; afterwards said. No, she is not your daughter, she is too sensible for that, and went away. He was gone but a few minutes, when Mr. Doucet, an ancient magistrate in 3IontreaI, came in. That gentleman told mo thatMr. Cioodenough had just now called upon him, and requested him to let me know that I had a daughter in Montreal ; that she had come in with a 31 r. Hoyte and a child, and that she had left Mr. Hoyte and the child, but that she was still in Montreal, so as to enable me to look for lier, and that I might prevent some mis- chief that was going on. Then I related to him partly what I have above said. When he was going, two other gentlemen came. I refused to give them any information at first, excepting that they were of the party that had so much agitated me for a few days ; but being informed by Mr. Doucet that he knew one of them, particularly Mr. Perkins, for a respectable citizen for a long time in Montreal, and the other, Mr. C'urry, two ministers from the United States, that if they came to obtain some information about the distressing events she related to have occurred in her family, he thought it would do no harm, and I related it to them : they appeared to be afflicted with such a circumstance ; I have not seen them any more. I asked Mr. Doucet if the man Hoyte could not be put in jail ; he replied that he thought not, for what he knew of the business. Then I asked if the Priests were inform- ed of what was going on; he replied, yes, but they never take 1'J9 ion; that 5 ; I went witli me iing I 08- ould give It into ilic She was her: Mr. ited yoiir- sed wliat llie sniuo nis; took tl refuffed m, abso- yte came ning Mr. mer .soli- been in than one life, and provided ould not )usive to ifamy of laughter aid, No, id went iioet, an I told mo quested hat she had left d, so as Tie mis- what I 1 came, lat they f days ; ' them, ig time )m the about family, they ve not could hat he nform- take up these things ; they allow their character to defond itself. A few days after, I heard that my daughter was at on« Mr. John- son's, a joiner, at Griffin Town, with 3Ir. Hoyte ; that he passed her for a nun that had escaped from the Hotel Dieu Nunnery. I vent theietwo days successively with Mrs. Tarbert; the first day Mrs. Johnson denied her, and said, that she was gone to New- York with Mr. IToyte. As I was returning I met Mr. Hoyte on the wharf, and I reproached him for his conduct. I told him tha« my daughter had been denied to me at Johnson's, but that I would, have a search warrant to have her when I returned ; he had really gone with my unfortunate daughter ; and I received from Mr. Johnson, his wife, and a number of persons in their house, the grossest abuse, mixed with texts of the Gospel, Mr. Johnson bringing a Bible for me to swear on. I retired more deeply af- flicted than ever, and further sayeth not. Sworn before me, this '2 Jth of October, 1835. W. ROBERTSON, J. P. We are informed that Mrs, Monk's evidence on the Juaterial question of her daughter's residence in the Hotel Dieu Convent has been disputed on some unimaginable ground of interest and secret influ- ence. It is unnecessary to draw comparisons be- tween Mrs. Monk and her unhappy dauf^hter ; but wc are bound to state, that in her situation in life Mrs. Monk is regarded and esteemed. Her good conduct and management at the government house has secured to her, for many years, a situation of trust, and will continue to secure to her a decent subsistence to the end of her days. The attempt made to bribe Mrs. Monk was repeated in regard to other persons. M'ss Louise Bousquot of St. Denis, was induced to visit Montreal on a false in- ducement, which the parties were frightened from following up by an explanation of their real inten- tions. The evidence of Miss Bousquet (No. 5), refers to Ambrose Vigeaut. 130 No. 34. Evidence of Amhroise Vigeaut, Province of Lower Canada : This twenty-sixth day of July, eichtcen hundred and thirty- six, appeared bewre me, Hoiijamiii Holmep, one of his Majesty's Justices of the Pence for the District of 3Iontreal, Ambroise Vi- gaut, who, having been sworn on the IJoIyEvangehsts, declared : That deponent had attended a school kept by tlie so-called Ma- ria Monk at St. Denis, for the space of about two months, in the year eighteen hundred and thirty-three ; that vv hilst deponent at- tended her school, she kept it at two diflerent places ; first in the house of Michael Guertin, farmer, and subsequently in the house of Jean Baptiste Laflammc ditTimineur; that previously to his attendance at said school, deponent had understood that the said Maria had resided at St. Denis and in llie neighborhood for se- veral months ; that subsequently to his departure from the said school, he had understood that the said IMaria remained residing in and about St. Denis for several months : and deponent further particularly declared that he saw the said Maria at St. Denis on the twenty-ninth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-four, bein^ the day on which my lord the bishop of Tel- messe there administered confirmation; and deponent further de- clared, that in the summer of eighteen hundred and thirty-five, the said Maria, accompanied by a man whose name is unknown to deponent, came to the bar of PhiUp Lavoiel, tavern keeper, re- siding in the main street of the St. Lawrence suburbs, city of Mon- treal, where deponent w-as employed ; that the said Maria and the said man having conversed for a long time together, the said Ma- ria requested deponent to write to 5liss Louise Bousquet of St. Denis, and say to her on behalf of the said 3Iaria, that the »aid Ma- ria had two hundred pounds eurrency to give her, and that she in- vited her to come to town to receive them ; that at the second visit to deponent of the said Maria, accompanied as aforesaid, the said letter was written ; that the man who accompanied the said Maria was dressed in black cloth ; that some time thereafter the said Louise Bousquet called on deponent, and that deponent was only nble to inform her that the said letter w as written at the request of the said Maria ; and deponent further declared, that he had never understood that the said Maria had been an inmate of any convent or reHgious establishment in Canada ; and deponent further de- clared not. AMBROISE VIGEAUT. Sworn before me, at Montreal, this 26th day of July, 1836. BENJ. HOLMES, J. P. The associates, defeatod in their attempts to su- born witnesses, defeated in their expectation of 131 Protestant illiberality in Canada, departed from it. The admirable, noble, and generous conduct of the Protestants of Lower Canada, in relation to these « Awful Disclosures," is an example to all nations and all communities. Each man pressed forward with his unsolicited testimony in the causo of insulted virtue ; the press echoed the public voice, and m accents of deep and eloquent indignation, reprobated the unapproachable infamy ol, « We, the Subscribers." The act of accusation, brought by " We, the Sub- scribers," against the priests and nuns of Lower Canada, recalls the proceedings of the Gallican revolutionary assassins on tiie trial of Marie Antoi- nette. When that persecuted princess was charg- ed before a flmatical tribunal with an impossible crime, she turned from the tigers to her fellow- creatures, and exclaimed, " I appeal to the hearts of mothers." THE END.