IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) £. ^ ^/ 1.0 1.1 1*0 12.0 IL25 flll 1.4 1 I 1.6 V /^ -^<*'*- Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80 (716) 872-4503 5 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de m Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreiiroductions historiquas Tschnical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notat tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibliographically uniqMa, which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha raproduction, or which may aignificantly changa tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. D D D D D D Colourad covara/ Couvartura da coulaur I I Covara damagad/ Couvartura andommagAa Covars rastorad and/or iaminatad/ Couvartura raataurte at/ou palliculAa I I Covar titia miaaing/ Le titra da couvartura manque □ Colourad mapa/ Cartaa giographiquas an coulaur Colourad Ink (i.a. other than blue or black)/ Encra da couleur (I.e. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ReliA avac d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure 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 certainas pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration cpparaiaaant dans la taxte. mala, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmAes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires: L'Institut a microfilm* la mallleur exemplaire qu'll lui a At* poaaibla da aa procurer. Les details da cat axampiaira qui sont paut-Atre uniques du point de vue Mbllographiqua. qui peuvent modifier une image raproduita. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dana la mAthode normaia de filmaga aont IndiquAs ci-dassous. r~~| Colourad pages/ Pagaa da couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagAas □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur*es et/ou pelliculAes Pages discoloured, stained or foxod/ Pages d*color6es, tachetAes ou piquies □ Pages detached/ Pages d*tach*es HShowthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Qualit* inigale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplAmentaire D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totaiement ou partieiiement obscurcies par un feuiiiet d'errata. une pelure, etc., ont 6t* film^es d nouveau de fa^on A obtenir la meiiieure image possible. Tl to Tl P< o1 fll O bt t» si oi fll si OI T si T ¥1 N d ei b ri n This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* cl-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X J 12X 16X 24X 28X TiM copy fllm«d hf hM b—n raproducad tttanks to th« o«n«r<Mity of: ■JnivtrsHy of Saskatchewan Saskatoon L'oxomplairo film4 f ut roproduit grico k la g4n4ro«itA do: Univtrsity of Saskatchawan Saskatoon Tho imago* appoaring haro ara ttia boat quality poaaibia conaidaring tha condition and lagibiiity of tho original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract apacificatlona. Laa imagaa auivantaa ont At* roproduitot avac la plua grand aoln, compto tonu da la condition at da la nattat* da I'axamplalra fiimA, at wx conformiti avac laa condltiona du contrat da filmaga. Original copioa in printad papar eovora ara filmad baglnning with tha front covor and anding on tho laat paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- aion, or tho back covor whon appropriata. All othor original copioa ara filmad baglnning on tho f irat paga with a printad or illuatratad Impraa- aion, and anding on tho laat paga with a printad or Illuatratad impraaaion. Laa axamplairaa origlnaux dont la couvorturo an paplar aat Imprim4a aont fllmte an commonfant par la pramiar plat at an tarminant aolt par la darnlAra paga qui comporto una ampralnta d'Impraaalon ou d'llluatratlon, soit par la aacond plat, aalon la caa. Toua laa autraa axamplairaa origlnaux aont filmte wn commandant par la pramiAra iiaga qui comporto uno ampralnta d'Impraaalon ou d'llluatration at an tarminant par la darnlAra paga qui comporto uno tolla ampralnta. Tha laat racordad frama on oach microflcho ahall contain tha symbol -^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or tho symbol ▼ (moaning "END"), whichavar appllas. Un daa symbolos sulvanta apparattra sur la darnlAra imaga da chaqua microficho, salon la caa: la symbols »»• signlfia "A SUIVRE", la aymbolo ▼ signifio "FIN". Mapa. plataa. charts, ate. may ba filmad at diffarant raduction ratios. Thosa too larga to bo antlraly includad in ono axpoaura ara filmad baglnning in tha uppar laft hand cornor. loft to right and top to bottom, aa many framaa aa raqulrad. Tha following diagrams illuatrata tha mathod: Laa cartaa. planchas. tablaaux. ate, pauvant Atra fllmte k daa taux da reduction diff Arants. Loraqua la documant aat trap grand pour Atra raproduit on un soul cllchA. II ast fllmA A partir da I'angla aupAriaur gaucha. da gaucha A drolta, at da haut an bas, an pranant la nombra d'Imagaa nAcassaira. Las diagrammaa suivants lllustrant la mAthodo. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENGLAND OR ROME? A REVIEW OF THE \, . ♦ Froii) the " Altar and the Throne. >♦ % PRICE 10 Cents. • » 97912" MONTREAL 'itixTKD BY A; A. St«vi5N80M for thk Propbibtq THH 1 HRdHK." 1871. 'X <4it^ ^^'X t-^L, ■which:? 3g]IfiJU JlHO OB BOHS ? A REVIEW OP THE GUIBORD BURIAL CASE, From the <* Altar and the Throne,** Montreal. ■*? In fulfilment of the promise made in our first number, we now submit a short account of this cause cilehre, and in order that our readers may thorouirhly understand the question, we have to go back to the year 1844, when the Roman Catholics ot Montreal, whether Irish or French Canadian, had not a single library or reading room or place of meeting, for any purpose whatever, apart from their churches. The feeling that this want should be sup- plied induced a few French Canadian students to meet in that year and lay the foundation of Vlnatitut Canadien, a literary society having for its object the mutual improvement and educa- tion of its members, through books, newspapers, and discussions or debates. For several years prosperity attended the under- taking, and the society obtained a special act of incorporation in 18^3, (see Statutes of Canada, 16 vie, c. 261.) By this act of incorporation minors of 17 years of age were accorded all the rights pertaining to the exercise of membership. Such was the rapid progress of this Institution that every city, town and village wanted to have its Jnstitut Canadien ; that being a synonimous term for the library, reading room and debating society. The result of this was that the various faculties of the mind were aroused and light began to dawn on dark places. Protes- tants who enjoy from their very birth the exercise of the brain's functions can scarcely realize the astonishing effect thus produced on a class of men who had been trained to think that it was not within their province to see anything that was not exhibited to » • them by a " patented" divine in robes. The ** why*' and the " wherefore" began to be heard, and they threatened Roman Gatholii'ism as the Guy Pawkes powder plot did the Parliament of England. About 1857 the Roman Catbolio authorities re- alizing their position, decided upon the destruction of this danger- ous focus, and began the attack under cover, and by raising side issues. The first gun fired nt it was in the shape of a motion to exclude all religious p:ipcrs, whether Roman Catholic or Pro- testant. The object of this motion was to exclude the Witness and Le Semeur Canadien for there was not then any Roman Catholic religious paper properly speaking, if we except the True Witness, which was at that date of no more account than it is at the present. A fierce struggle ensued, discussion run high, an amendment was made, und^out of a meeting of 300 was thrown out early in th<) morning by a small majority. A second meeting was held, and an amendment was again put, and and out of 300 votes there was a tie, when the casting vote was given in favor of the amend'uent. The enemies of free thought acknowledged their defeat ; the biiUot was then adopted when the advocates of education carried everything before them, and the Institut was triumphant. Jesuitical merchants were unable to induce their clerks to vote with them ; and open warfare for the nonce was at an end. Up to this time the instigator of the oppressive oppo- sition was unknown, but two days after the decisive vote referred to, bishop Hi urget published a long and elaborate pastoral letter commanding every one to withdraw from the Institut, under yai ' said to have beon decreed by the Council of Trent — Upwards of IfjO members in tonlormity with this order, executed a solemn act of secession in writing. — fhis was in 1858. Then indeed did the promoters of the scheme of infallibility, spread fanaticism amongst Roman Catholics, and the Institut Canadien was t^oou visited by this foul pestilence, for whenever a member found himself deprived of protection or of that strength of mind which animated the arch-angel, he would encounter the sweet face of a pi iust with the gratifying assurance that he could neither partake of the communion, nor be married by his chuich until he had withdrawn from V Institut Canadien. y As long as u member was known to act uncompromisingly >-• Jr A 'K — 5 — A« • A either by himself or by his immediate rehitivca or friends, every thin; connected with his church affairs'was smooth and [comfort' able ! and this brings us to the case of Quibord. Guibord was a printer, a fellow apprentice with ex-mayor Work- man and John Lovell, and although he did not ascend the ladder of wealth with them, he nevertheless possessed that strong will neces- sary to I he acquisition of wealth, had ambition been associated with his unconquerable faculties of mind. Guibord was a printer! he lived a printer, — he died a printer, not a wealthy one indeed, for had wealth been his, the Roman Catholic Church never would have selected him as the victim of its unrelenting persecution. Guibord died in November 1869, at a time when the bl-jsphemous thermometer of papal infallibility was indicating a temperature of clerical fever heat, — at a time in fact when every priest of Rome imagined that he was not without bin share ol' in/aUibility. In selecting Guibord as its victim, the Church of Rome singled out one whom it knew to be poor, one who it knew, had no children, no brother not even a sister. It singled out as its victim a poor journeyman printer, believing that as he was poor his friends were also poor. Dut still io all his poverty Heaven had blessed him with a wife, one who had not forgotten her marriage vows — but loved her husband though he was only a poor journeyman printer. She, alas, had no brother, no friends but those of her poor husband, and it required very little power of ratio-cination on the part of the Honiish priests to consider his case as one most admirably adapted for disphtying their authority. The Roman Catholic Cemetery of Montreal is on the slope of Mount Royal, is approached from the road leading to the pic, turesque village of C6te des Neiges, and consists of two parts- the one known as consecrated ground — the other as " the potter's field" — the latter mentioned being the final depository of drunk- ards whose corpses have been dragged from the gutter, and tha spot where murderers waA friendless suicides are throwu with dis- gust, in eternal oblivion — here the pious church of Rome was willing to bury Guibord the poor printer — here and here alone, and this, not, because he was a murderer, not because he was a drunkard, not because he was a criminal, not because he was a »iS%:m0 l k.i'iimi« a '«iwj mm0'i>''''''''^*^ mm f •aicide, but hkoaubk Ouiborp, tiir poor, FRirNDi.KHS, jora- NErMAN PRINTER, WAS A MEMBER OF l'InsTITUT CaNADIEN. Yes ! ohristian burial w is ret'uHod him by liin cburch and liin poor bones the remnants of his mortality were obliged to be taken where ? to a protestant cemetery whose doors were as wide opon for their reception, as those of the Roman Catholic were closely barred. In that protestant cemetery those poor bones still remain ft livini^, terrible protest against Rome's intoleranno. How striking the contrast between the poor friendless Printer, Guibord, and the rich suicide, Joseph .lodoio. The one was a criminal in the eyes of his church, — the potter's field was nil thnt was open to him, — his crime was p »Terty ! The othwr, who took that which none but God has a rijjht to take, — his life, — wiis buried with all the pomp and show which wealth can procure in the romish church, — the wealthy suicide was buried midst the tolling of bells, the burning of tapers and incense. — was buried in consecrated ground, — while Guibord, who died a natural drath, was oonsiderrd a fit subject for the potter's field ; but Quibord was a Printer, a poor but honest journeyman Printer, while Jodoin was a wealthy self murderer, whose blood-stained " gold« en fleece" was of more value to the Roman wolves than the honest unstained "home-spun" of the poor, friendless, but now, enver to be forgotten Printer, Guibord. It was in consequence of this refusal to bury her husband that the widow Guibord was forced to apply to our Courts of law in order to compel the cur^ and church wardens of the parish church of Notre Dume of Montreal to give her husband's remains burial in the Roman Catholic Cemetery. The proceedings for this purpose adopted, were an application for a writ of mandamus ordering the burial of Guibord's remains. A prolonged argument of seventeen days took place before the Honorable Mr. Justice Mondelet, senior Judge of the Superior Court for Lower Canada, sitting in Montreal, resulting in the granting of the widow's prayer, by ordering a peremptory writ of mandamus to issue, commanding the cur4 and church wardens to bury the deceased within six days, and to report the execution of the writ. The arguments of counsel and the remarks of the learned and f ' ■» JOtfB« [ill poor taken le open closely I remain 'rintor, )e was a all thot ■ho took V,— wn8 ocure in idnt tho 8 buried al death, Ouibord 3r, while d ♦' gold- than the but now, band that ;s of law he parish 9 remaina pplicntion ) remains, before the Superior ng in the ptory writ i church •eport the nmed and f ' -7- independent jud^e, and the judji^'ocnt itiielf deserve speciid notice but unfortunately they are so voluminous, that were we to repeat them our rendurs might think that wo were testing the extent of their pativnoc. The Church of Rome was not di<<posed to m knowledge civil law, particularly when its utteruiiocs wore adverao to its extra- vagant pretensions that the civil Courts had no jurisdiction over matters strictly ecolosiiistical, and accordingly an appeal from the decision of Mr. Justice Mondelet was taken to the Court of Review, oonoisting of tho ITonoraMe Justices Briitiiei.ot, M'Kay and Turrancb ; who after having heard counsel and maturely deliberate', reversed the judgment of tho Honorable Mr. Jubtice Mondelet, and di-snns^ed the action or application: I St. Becnute the action nhoald hive been brought ugainnt the curi peraoniilli/ — and 2ndly. Became the writ wat informal. II is well known in every country that judges are to be found who are afraid of making theniholves disagreuble to the rdlinq PiiWERS whether they be king, clergy, or mob, and these experience DO great difficulty in discovering Home loophole or question of form by which they wash their hands of an embarassing case. Such was Pilate's example, when he tonsked hi$ handu of innocent bloody and gave up the Son of God to a baud of relentless priests, to shed his blood. Tho discussion of the technicalities on which the Court of Review based their judgment would present very little interest to the non-professional reader and therefore we will not enter into then I here. Up to this stage the widow of the poor journeyman printer GuiBORD had been able to avail herself of a charitable provision of law, by which an indigent suitor is allowed to sue in forma pauperis but having lobt her action, an appeal from what was con- isidored an unjust judgment could not be taken unless security for the costs oi huch appeal, in case of failure, were first put in, and this it was supposed would present an insurmountable barrier to her further proceedings, even though she had lawyers so devoted to her cause as to act gratuitously. IJut sympathy had been aroused and the tyrants of Rome and their sycophants were not yet allow- ed to proclaim a final victory over the poor printer Guibobd, for tj lilkv m — 8 — <lje required Rccuritj was given and tljc dcwrcd npppnl — nn npponl to the Court of Queen's Bencli — wax r|uiekly tnkcn, nnd lierc it was that this now cclchrated cuu.so assumed a new shnpe and a greater importuiicc. The decision of tho Court of Review had produced an iiU' pre^sion on the winds of the friends of the poor widow, and upon the luinds of u large class of tho community, that tho Uoni;m Catholic clerical influence hud so much wci«;ht over the judges in Review that they had, instead of pronouncing on tho merits of the case, resorted to technicalities ruised contrary to the most positive enactments of the Code of Civil Procedure, objecrtions which should have been dismissed at once, even though under, other circumstances they might have been well founded in law objections which the Honorable Mr. Justice Mondelet had tho manliness and intrepidity to dispose of summarily. To make this mutter understood by our non professional rotid- era, we would illustrate the matter thus: — It is very clear that the endorser on a prommissory note is liable to its payment, pro' vided the note wag protested on the third dny of its maturity. If, however such note was only protested ten days after maturity DO Court could muintain an action against the endorser. So in matters of form tho Code of Civil Procedure provides thut all these shall be t;'kcn advantago of within four days of the return of the action, whereas in the Quibord matter the Defendants pleaded ten days after the return, that the form uf the Writ toa» defective, that the Writ itself should have contained the command to bury Guibord. His H(»nor Mr. Justice Torrunce admitted that^ since 1849, when n Statute was passed to amend the law relating to Writs of Prerogative, the uniform practice had been to insert the order in a petition annexed to the Writ, and not in the Writ itself, but, nevertheless, he concurred in u judgment which dismissed the action, became it was sh'iped'in accordance with that nn if onn practice, and this, on an objection raised ten days after the return of the action. The action of the widow Guibord was knoWn in France, in Spain, in Austria, and generally in Reman Catholic countries, under the name of Appel Comme d' Abus, appeal against the abuses of the Church. In 1864 the syllabus decreed a number f> i>' 1 ♦ ?» 4 k — 9 — •re it inii a In im- ujwm Ionian jnd<i;n» nits of most lections under, in law kad the » ■I * * 4 * of new doctrinoK which made it a mnttcr of conscience nnd of cternfil con.sp(|ucncoN forjudges who acknowledged the authority of the Mi/lltihna to didmifui the action of tlie widow Guibord. In submitting their c<if;e, the Dcfendantn' counsel formnlly and openly took the •;round that the Church, that 18 the Dcfendunta, were not nmonable to the Civil Courts. The Roman Cutholio judge in tho Court of lieview, the Honorable Mr. Justice Berthelot, went fuithor than his Protestant colleagues in disuiisaing the action. He accepted in its full extent tho doctrine of tho iude* p ndcnce of tho Church in the question submitted, and*the Ap* pcllunt anticipated, in consequence, similar views with tho four Romnn Catholic judges in the Court of Quood's Beooh sitting in appeal. There is at Brst 8i<rht something; plausible in that opinion which may deceive a ri<j:ht minded man if he be nut on his guard. Mr. Justice MacKay seems to have fallen a victim to thist specious as- pect uf the case, although his jud,t'r;iunt is not founded on the opinion virtually expressed by him. He doubted, rightly tooi whether a Methodist could force the Church of England tu bury his relative, also a Methodist, in their burying ground. It is not because the church is independent of the Civil Authorities that tho Church of England could resist suoh a de- mand, but because the deceased Methodist was not a member of the Church of England, and had no right to demand burial in her cemetery. The question, ns it presented itself, was, whether a church which had acknowledged a man as one of its members during his whole life time, — a church whicti would have forced that man by com- pulsory process of the Civil Courts to pay tithes, to contribute to the building or repairs of tho church, and even to paying for the cemetery ground, is so independent of sill authority that it Can refuse u decent burial to the remains of that man, and that his family can have no recourse against that church ? The affirmative being the doctrine of Judge Berthelot und of the dogma promulgated by the xylliihui^ the Appellant considered it a matter of paramount importance to know in limine whether the Roman Catholic judges m Appeal considered themselves bound by the si/Uabus, for if they di'l, anJ if thv decision of the fc*^ % — 10 — Roman Catholic Bishop was final and not 6UJ>ceptibIe of Appeal, the Appellant conftidereJ it would be a waste of time and of legid research, to show that the rcfusiil to burirUihiibord was unfound- ed. Should f>uch a doctrine prevail it would follow that the Roman Catholics of this part of Canada are eminently privil- edged inasmuch as they would not recognize any authority as higher than the Church. The Anglican Bishop in Q ebuc was impleaded for refusing to bury a child, and though the case was dismissed it was on the ground that the Anglican Church had not acknowledged as its cemetery the piece of land, wherein the father wished to compel the Bishop to bury the child. No one ever dreamt of denying the jurisdiction of the Court. In the Guibord matter, however, it is different. The preten- sions of the Romish Church are (exposed ai* follows, by the De- fendants pleadings: — By the treaty of Cession of Canada of ]7t)3, it is declared that the Roman Catholics shall have the free exercise uf their religion ainsording to the rites of the Church of Rome. Fro.ii this it follows that the Roman Catholic bishop is amenable to no authority in the country when he decides that a man has no right to Se buried in a Catholic cemetery. Fur- thermore, the Church of Rome has deemed that it exerciser its authority independently of all civil governments, and other doc- trines which will be mentioned presently. Can Protestants look with indifference to the settlement of such pretensions, set up as they are against the Guibnrd action ? If it be truel were such a pret<intion to be allowed, the Roman Catholic Church which already enjoys, the exclusive right of forcing its members by compulsory process of the couris, to support it, would possess an immense power of cohesior and coercion, not only over its own mnmbers, but indirectly over the members of other churches, for on pain of bein^ buried like a dog, a Roi.iau Cat.holio might be induced to join organizations uf hostility or propogandism against the members of other churches. To look upon this as a mere supposition is a grave error, for it was fully proved to be a matter of fact in the very Guibord case itself. Guibord was a member of a benevelent society, — in wliich none but Roman Catholics were allowed to participate* Several of its members gained their living and sonscquently their n e d I e < ,iU «•« —11 — )pcal, legiil found' It the )rivil- Ity as to was te W)is jhhud In the \o one »,u means of supporting the society, — exclusively from Protestant employers. Without enquirini; how such societies are propa<;an- dist organizations, it cannot be denied but that their influence lends iclfit and show to the Romish Churoh. Tii public demon- strations, such as the procession of Corpm Chrinti, or when the St. Patrick's Society or the St. Jean Baptiste Society celebrates its anniversary ; we see a great concourse of people filling and blocking up the streets. Now, whc compose those crowds ? These very Roman Catholic benevolent societies formed under the sanction of parliamentary incorporation, for the glorifica- tion and strengthening of the cords of the Romish Church ! Each trade is formed into one of these societies, and of these societies it is said fully twenty-five are in existence, with an average membership of 500. Leaving our readers to connect these statements with the pro* ceedings in the Court of Appeals, we proceed with our narrative. At the opening of the December term (1870) of the Court of Appeals, Joseph Ooutre, Q.C., one of the counsel for the Ap- pellant, (Mrs. (luibord,) challenged the four Roman Catholic judges as being disqualified on the ground that they belonged to the Church of Rome, which had by the syllabus oi' 1864 promul- gated the following dogmas : — 1st. That the ecclesiastic authority was exercised independ- ently of any permit or consent of the civil government. 2nd. That the State and the Queen were not the souroe of all rights ; and that its or their powers were limited. 3rd. That the State, even when it was governed by a Pro- testant Sovereign, possesses no authority, not even indirectly, over matters of religion ; that in consequence it has neither the right of exequatur, nor that of Appel comme dAlusy (Appeal against ecclesiastical abuses). 4th. That in matters of conflict between the two powers, (the State and the ecclesiastical authority), the latter prevails in pref- ference to the State. 5th. That the civil power has no right to interfere in matters of religion, morals or spiritual things ; that the instructions con- tained in pastoral letters (even, we suppose, if they coutained ■WMH — 12 — libels or instigations of high treason) cannot be submitted to its decisions. 6th. That Kings are amenable to the jurisdiction of the Church, and that they have no jurisdiction above the Church when questions of jurisdiction are to be decided. 7th. Tbat the Roman Catholic religion should be the only religion recognized by the State, and that, to the exclusion of uU other religions. 8th. That the Romish Church has the right of physical coer- cion, and possesses a direct and indirect temporal power. 9th. That the immunity of the Romish Church and of eccles- iastical persons has no origin in the civil law. The recusation or challenge, after enumerating these dogmas* 8t ited that by a recent proclamation of the same church, its head* the Pope, has been declared infallible, and that he must be obeyed as if he were God himself, being superior to all Kin<jrs and Sovereigns It then required the judges challenged to declare whether they considered themselves bound in conscience by such commands of their church This recusation is framed with considerable precision. Ac- cording to our Code of Civil Procedure, the judges challenged Ciiimot decide on the merits of the recusation, they cannot even be present in Court when the decision is given. In presenting the petition of recusation, Mr. Doutre said he hoped the measure he was adopting would not be looked upon as implying want of either respect or conOdence. Quite a number of persons were in doubt as to whether our judges were the rep- repentatires of the Queen, carrying out the spirit of the laws cn.icted under Her sanction and those of her predecessors, or whether they were not, in certain matters, governed by the « hurch authority whose seat is at Rome ! Chief Justice Diival remarked that it was giving too much importance to the imbeciles who thought that judges recognized any authority but that of the Queen, and the laws enacted under Her authority. Mr. Doutre replied that unfortunately these imbeciles were so numerous and occupied so mmy positions in life that until the judges would themselves define their stand point, their decisions I St ■^ ^•. » — IS — to its lof the l^hurch «• |e only of all il coer- eccles- Ac- I n ' 4i ^ .1. wonld remain in miny cases without mor.il woij»ht, and therefore, after due consideration, he thous^ht it essonti.il bRpore arguing his case, to koow whether the judges felt themselves competent to hear him and render justice to his client. The condition of the Roman Catholics since the cession of the country had been altered by decrees of new dogmas, some of which if they were adhered to by the judges, would prevent those of the Roman Catholic faith from applying the law of the country. By Chap. 83, §14., George III, which confirmed the treaty of cesssion, Roman Catholics were granted the free exercise of their religion, but subject to the supremacy of the Sovereign. Several articles of the si/Uabut declared it to be a heresy to believe that any Sovereign had authority over the laws decreed in Rome, and that in a conflict of jurisdiction in civil matters, it was another heresy to recognize in the civil law the power of pronouncing upon such jurisdiction. The action of the Appellant was, Mr. Doutre said, specially mentioned in the syllabus, to be proscribed, and it was worthy of anathema to make use of that recourse. The judge that would receive such an action, and pronounce favorably upon it, would be liable to anathema and excommunication. He knew very welli he continued, that none of the judges considered themselves bound by anything but the laws of the country; but in the present state of religious exaggeration, his own conviction in that respect was not a sufficient guarantee for his client, or for the public. He had, he said, no doubt that the answers the judges would give to the facts mentioned in the petition would be such as would put the Appellant in a position to withdraw the exception, which she would be happy to be able to do. The opportunity he con- sidered a precious one, wliich should not bo lost to clearly define the position of our Roman Catholic judges in mixed questions, and also to put an end for ever to the injurious doubts wliich are thrown out against their indcpentlence and their true position to the Sovereign who appoints,a!id to the other who claims authority over their consciences with the rights to define their jurisdiction and hurl defiance against the authority of our Queen, our par- liaments, and our laws. The Chief Justice ordered the Clerk of the Court to take the mmmumiKm — 14 — pet tion, but not to fyle it in the records of the Court, until fur- ther orders. This recusation took place at the beginning of the term and consisted of four separate petitions, that is, one for each judge. After four or five days consultation, Mr. Justice Badgley, the only judge unchallenged, suggested to Mr. Doutre that he should withdraw the petitions and present them de novo on account of the absence from the bench of one of the judges, at the time they were first presented, but to this Mr. Doutre did not accede. However, the last day of the term arrived, and then the five judges concurred in a judgment, declaring the petitions inadrais- sable inasmuch as the charges contained in them amounted to accusations against the judges of treason and perjury. Mr. Doutre thereupon moved for an Appeal to Her Majesty's Privy Council. No decision was given on this motion, but the Court suggested that a rule be taken returnable on the first day of March, a course which evidently did not meet with the learned counsel's approbation, as he has not adopted it, preferring, as we understand, to allow the motion to remain as a protest against the judgment and to proceed to the argument, so as to bring the whole matter in Appeal before Her Majesty's Privy Council, should the pretentions of the widow Guibord be unsustained. The case is, while we write, being argued before the count on its merits, and the judgment will probably be rendered in the month of June next — a judgment to which our readers will look with no little interest. '* 97912 tH\S BOOK ql1l^- '■.'--■:/'' * . ir V ^ X / The Altar and the Throne. ■ ■♦-♦- THIS Weekly Journul published ii^ the interests of the Loyal Orange Association of British America, is issued EVERY WEDNESDAY, and circulated largely throughout the Dominion of Canada. It is not published with a view of perpetuating national ' an- imoBities, but on the contrary has for its objects. the advocacy of \ free speech, to be shown in all matters of religion, and the treat- ment of all loyal British subjects on an equal footing, irrespective of creed. % It will seek to secure Protestant unity throughout the land, and thereby clicek the attempts.tbat arc been made to restrict our civil and religions liberty. The maintenance of the connection with the mother country will bo constantly upheld, and all attempts to dismember the British Empire will be strenuously opposed. As its name in- dicjites it will be devoted to our religion and our Qjieen. E«ch number will contain all the Orange News, the Orange Constitution, and a tale founded on the connection of the As- sociation. There will also be" a hous-ehold corner for the family. The general news will also be supplied. T< rms^ ?2.00 per- annum; payable yearly, or half yearly in adviince. ^^^Ijattf^e^ BROWNE, uwKhn MoxTBEAt, March, IKl cct. .1F**>"'V1*'