Awful Disclosures

M >> Maria Monk >> Awful Disclosures

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23

"Sworn before me, this 24th of October, 1835."

* * * * *

(AFFIDAVIT OF NANCY M'GAN.)

"_Province of Lower Canada, District of Montreal._

"Before me, William Robertson, one of His Majesty's Justices of the
Peace, for the District of Montreal, came and appeared Nancy M'Gan, of
Montreal, wife of James Tarbert, who has requested me to receive this
affidavit, and declared that she had been intimately acquainted with
Mrs. (widow) Monk, of Montreal, a Protestant woman. I know the said
Maria Monk; last spring she told me that the father of the child she
then was carrying, was burned in Mr. Owsten's house. She often went away
in the country, and at the request of her mother I accompanied her
across the river. Last summer she came back to my lodgings, and told me
that she had made out the father of the child; and that very night left
me and went away. The next morning I found that she was in a house of
bad fame, where I went for her, and told the woman keeping that house,
that she ought not to allow that girl to remain there, for she was a
girl of good and honest family. Maria Monk then told me that she would
not go to him (alluding, as I understood, to the father of the child),
for that he wanted her to swear an oath that would lose her soul for
ever, but jestingly said, should make her a lady for ever. I then told
her (Maria), do not lose your soul for money. She told me she had
swapped her silk gown in the house where I had found her, for a calico
one, and got some money to boot; having previously told me if she had
some money she would go away, and would not go near him any more. Soon
after, Mr. Hoyte and another gentleman came. Mr. Hoyte asked me where
she had slept the night previous, and that he would go for the silk
gown; the woman showed the gown, and told him that if he would pay three
dollars he should have the gown; he went away, and came back with Maria
Monk, paid the three dollars and got the gown; I was then present.

"Being at Mrs. Monk's, I saw a child which she mentioned to be her
daughter Maria's child. Some time after, Mrs. Monk requested me to
accompany her to Griffintown, to look for her daughter. We went, to Mr.
Johnson's house, a joiner in that suburb: we met Mr. Hoyte and he spoke
to Mrs. Monk; when at Mr. Johnson's, Mrs. Manly asked for her daughter;
Mrs. Johnson said she was not there. I saw Mr. Hoyte at Mrs. Monk's; he
was in company with three other persons, apparently Americans, earnestly
engaged in conversation, but so much confused I could not make out what
was said; and farther sayeth not."

"Her

"NANCY + M'GAN.

"mark.

"Sworn before me, on this 24th October, 1835.

"W. ROBERTSON, J. P."

* * * * *

(AFFIDAVIT OF ASA GOODENOUGH.)

_"Province of Lower Canada, District of Montreal._

"Before me, William Robertson, one of his Majesty's Justices of the
Peace, for the District of Montreal, appeared Asa Goodenough, of
Montreal, holder of the Exchange Coffee House, who, after having made
oath upon the Holy Evangelists, declareth and sayeth, that on or about
the nineteenth of August last, two gentlemen and a young female with a
child, put up at the Exchange Coffee House, of which I am the owner;
they were entered in the book, one under the name of Judge Turner, the
other as Mr. Hoyte, a Methodist preacher, and agent or superintendent
for the establishment of Sunday-schools, &c.

"Being informed by Catherine Conners, a confidential servant, that
something mysterious was passing amongst the above-named, which led me
to call on them for an explanation, they answered in a very
unsatisfactory manner. I afterward learned that the name of the young
woman was Maria Monk, that her mother lived in town, that she was not
married to Mr. Hoyte, and they came to Montreal with the view, as Mr.
Hoyte said, to disclose the infamy of the Priests, whilst she was at the
Nunnery. I thought it prudent to give information of this to a
magistrate. Seeing Mr. Doucet's name on the list, I went to him, and
requested him to give information to the mother of the young woman, of
the circumstances in which her daughter was. He did so, and the
disclosure of the design of Mr. Hoyte was the consequence.

"Montreal.

"ASA GOODENOUGH."

* * * * *

"The following affidavits have been translated from the _L'Ami du
Peuple,_ Montreal, Nov. 7, 1835."

(AFFIDAVIT OF CATHARINE CONNERS.)

_"Province of Lower Canada, District of Montreal._

"Before me, W. Robertson, one of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace for
the District of Montreal, appeared Catherine Conners of Montreal, a
servant in the hotel of Mr. Goodenough, in the city of Montreal; she
having made oath on the Holy Evangelists, to say the truth and nothing
but the truth, declared and said what follows:

"Towards the 19th of August last, two men and a woman came to the
_Exchange 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 informed that they were taking a single room with
two beds. Some time after another room was given to them for their
accommodation; the woman passed for the wife of Mr. Hoyte.

"The day following, when I was making 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 business of importance; she also said
that she had never had a day of happiness since she had left Montreal,
which was four years, with Mr. Hoyte; she expressed a wish to go and see
her father. She entreated me to try and procure secretly clothes for
her, for Mr. Hoyte wished to dine with her in his own room, in which he
was then taking care of the child. I gave her my shawl and bonnet, and
conducted her secretly out by the street St Pierre; she never returned,
and left the child in the hands of Mr. Hoyte. She said that her
_husband_ was a Methodist preacher, and agent of the Sunday School
for Montreal, in which he 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; be asked me if I had seen _his
lady_; I said no. Upon this question he told me that the father of
_his lady_ was dead, that her mother yet lived in the suburbs of
Quebec, and he asked me for all the clothes which I had given to wash
for him, _his lady_ and child; clothes the _lady_ had taken
from the only portmanteau which they had. Beyond that, I perceived
nothing remarkable, except that Mr. Hoyte wished to conceal this woman,
and to prevent her from going out. I heard the judge say to him, 'now
she is yours.' Sworn before me the 2d November, 1835.

(Signed) "W. ROBERTSON."

Mary McCaffrey, also a chambermaid in the hotel of Mr. Goodenough,
corroborates the preceding deposition.

(Signed) "W. ROBERTSON."

* * * * *

(AFFIDAVIT OF HENRY M'DONALD.)

_"Province of Lower Canada, District of Montreal._

"Before me, W. Robertson, one of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace,
for the District of Montreal, appeared Henry M'Donald, physician, who,
after taking an oath on the Holy Evangelists to say the truth, declared,
that in the month of August last, at seven o'clock in the evening, a
young woman called at his house with all the symptoms of an
extraordinary agitation, and in great distress. She asked his
professional advice, complaining of great pains in the breast. On
questioning her, he learned that she had a young child, which she said
was at Mr. Goodenough's, and that this child was taken away from her.
She said that the father of the child was a Methodist Minister, and
general agent of the Sunday-Schools. She told me his name, but I cannot
recollect it. She told me that now and then her intellectual faculties
were weakened in such a manner that she could not support herself. She
told me that she would be under great obligation to me, if I would go to
her mother's house, and get her child, and procure lodgings for her;
that she was without means, and did not know where to go. She could not
remain with her mother, because she felt that her conduct had disgraced
her family. I went in quest of Mrs. Monk, her mother; she had just come
in quest of her daughter, and they went away together from my house.

(Signed) "HENRY M'DONALD."

"Sworn before me the 2d November, 1835.

(Signed) "W. ROBERTSON."

* * * * *

(AFFIDAVIT OF MATTHEW RICHEY.)

_To the Editor of the Montreal Morning Courier._

Sir,--Among the affidavits published in your paper of to-day, relating
to Mr. Hoyte and Maria Monk, I observe a deposition by Mr. Goodenough,
that when Mr. Hoyte, in the month of August last, put up at the Exchange
Coffee-house, he was entered on the book as a _Methodist Preacher, and
Agent or Superintendant of Sunday Schools_, &c. It has, however, been
ascertained, from an examination of the book referred too, that no
official designation is appended in it to Mr. Hoyte's name. This
discrepancy, Mr. Goodenough states, took place entirely through mistake,
and he did not know that Mr. Hoyte was thus characterized in his
affidavit till he saw it in print. But as a similar mistake has found
its way into several of the depositions which have been elicited by this
unhappy affair, I deem it incumbent upon me, as a regularly appointed
Methodist Minister of this city, to declare that Mr. Hoyte has never had
any connexion with the Methodist Society, either as a preacher or as an
agent for Sunday Schools; and I would, at the same time, express my
surprise and regret, that the _New York Protestant Vindicator_
should have taken up, and industriously circulated, charges of so grave
a nature against the Priests and Nuns of this city, derived from so
polluted a source. From such a species of _vindication_, no cause
can receive either honour or credit. By giving this publicity, you will
confer a favour on yours, respectfully,

"MATTHEW RICHEY, _Wesleyan Minister_."

"Montreal, Nov. 16, 1835.

* * * * *

"Although we could produce several other affidavits, of an equally
unimpeachable character as the above, yet we deem the evidence advanced
more than enough to show the entire, falsehood and extravagance of the
fabrications in the _Protestant Vindicator_."

* * * * *

Here closes all the testimony that has been published or brought against
me. It requires the suppression of my feelings to repeat to the world
charges against myself and my companions, so unfounded, and painful to
every virtuous reader. But I [illegible] to the truth to substantiate my
narrative, and prefer that everything should be fairly laid before the
world. That my opponents had nothing further to produce against me at
that time, is proved by the following remark by the Editor of the New
York Catholic Diary, to be found in very paper in which he published the
preceding affidavits:--

_"Here, then, is the whole!"_

In a N. Y. Catholic Diary of March last, is a letter from Father
McMahon, a Missionary, dated at Sherbrooke, in Canada, in which, as will
be seen by the extracts given beyond, he does not even allude to any
other testimony than this. Of course my readers will allow that I have
reason to say--"Here, then, is the whole!"

The following extracts are given for several reasons. 1st. To prove, by
the admission of my adversaries themselves, that no new testimony has
been produced since the publication of the Montreal affidavits. 2d. That
no disposition is shown to bring the truth to the only fair test--the
opening of the Nunnery. 3d. That they are inconsistent in several
respects, as, while they pretend to leave the characters of the priests
and nuns to defend themselves, they labour with great zeal and acrimony
to quiet public suspicion, and to discredit my testimony. 4th. Another
object in giving these extracts is, to show a specimen of the style of
most of the Roman Catholic writers against me. In respect to argument,
temper, and scarcity of facts, Father McMahon is on a level with the
editors of the Diary and Green Banner, judging from such of their papers
as I have seen.

* * * * *

_From Father McMahon's Letter to the editor of the N. Y. Catholic
Diary of March, 1836._

"The silence by which you indulge the latent springs of a mal-propense,
so far from being an argument for culpability, is based upon the
charitableness of a conscious innocence, and is, therefore, highly
commendable. I say it is highly commendable, inasmuch as these worthy
and respectable characters do not deign to answer falsehood, or turn
their attention from their sacred avocations by effectually repelling
allegations which all men, women, and children, able to articulate a
syllable, in the city of Montreal, have repeatedly pronounced to be
utterly false, detestably false, and abominably scandalous.

* * * * *

"May I now call upon you, honest Americans, who, though you may differ
from me in doctrinal points of religion, have, I trust, the due regard
for truth and charity towards all mankind; and into whose hand that
instrument of Satan's emissaries may fall, before you believe one
syllable [illegible] attentively to peruse the following
_facts_, which are [illegible] men of learning, of every
persuasion, and in every country, and which you will find, by mature
investigation, to serve as a sufficient key to discover the wicked
falsehoods, circulated by the enemies of truth, in the work called, 'The
Disclosures of Maria Monk,' but which, in consequence of the total
absence of truth from the things therein contained, I have termed (and I
think justly on that account), the devil's prayer-book. I beseech you to
give my statements a fair, but impartial trial, weigh correctly the
arguments opposed to them, according to your judgment--do not allow
yourselves to be gulled by the empty or unmeaning phraseology of some of
your bloated, though temperate, preachers. All I ask for the test of the
following statement, is simply and solely the exercise of your common
sense, without equivocation. 1st. I distinctly and unequivocally state,
that the impugners of the Catholic religion and its doctrines, never
dared to meet us in the fair field of argument. Never yet have they
entered the lists in an eristical encounter, but to their cost. Why so?
because we have reason, religion, and the impenetrable shield of true
syllogistic argumentation in our favour. Witness, in support of the
assertion, the stupid and besotted crew (pardon me for this expression,
and find a proper term yourselves, for the politico-Theological
Charlatans of England), who, not daring to encounter the Catholic
Hierarchy of Ireland, in an honorable religious disputation, are forced
to drag to their assistance those very apostates from Catholicity who
were considered by their superiors unworthy of the situation they
attempted to hold in that Church; for the purpose of propping up the
staggering and debauched harlot, whose grave they are now preparing.
Only remark how they are obliged to have recourse to the exploded
scholastic opinion of Peter Dens, by way of showing the intolerance of
the Catholics, who repudiate the doctrine of religious intolerance.
Maryland, Bavaria, and the Cantons of Switzerland, prove the contrary by
their universal religious toleration. Now I could mention, if I thought
I had space enough on this sheet, numbers of Protestant divines, who, in
their writings, have strongly inculcated the absurd doctrines of ruling
our consciences by the authority of the Civil Magistrates. See then, how
strange it is that they seek to condemn us for doctrines which we abhor,
and which they practice, even to this day. Mark that for an argument
against our doctrines.

"2dly. I assert, that notwithstanding all the persecutions, all the
falsehood and defamation daily exercised against the Catholics and their
religion, they are at this moment the only people on the face of the
earth, who maintain amongst them the unity of the true faith, and the
regular succession in the Ministry, from Christ and his Apostles.

"3dly. I assert, that the late scandalous production against the Catholic
Clergy of Montreal and the Catholic institutions there, is a tissue of
false, foul, designing, and scandalous misrepresentation. 1st. Because
upon strict examination into all its bearings, it has been so proved
upon the solemn oaths of a magistrate and others concerned. 2dly.
Because it is no way consonant to reason or common sense to say that
those living at a considerable distance, and avowedly hostile to the
Catholics and their religion, should feel so interested in the matter?
as the Catholics themselves, who are vitally concerned, and who had
every facility of discovering any impropriety; who are zealous of the
purity of their religion and its Ministers. 3dly. Because the loud cry
of all the inhabitants of every denomination, from the well-known
integrity, the extraordinary piety, the singular charity and devotedness
of the Catholic Clergy, came in peals of just wrath and well-merited
indignation on the heads of the degenerate monsters who basely, but
ineffectually, attempted to murder the unsullied fame of those whom they
deservedly held, and will hold, in the highest estimation.

"T. B. McMahon, _Missionary_."

Now this letter alludes to testimony legally given, as substantiating
the charges against me. What testimony is intended? Any new testimony?
If so, where, and what is it? I never heard of any, of any description,
except what I have inserted on the preceding pages, unless I except the
violent, unsupported, and inconsistent assertion in newspapers, before
alluded to. Has any testimony, legally given, been produced, which
neither the Catholic Diary, nor any other Catholic paper, has either
inserted or alluded to? No. The Missionary, McMahon, must refer to the
Montreal affidavits; and since he has expressed his opinion in relation
to their credibility and weight, I request my readers to form their own
opinions, as I have put the means in their power.

It may, perhaps, appear to some, an act displaying uncommon
"_concern_" in my affairs, or those of the Convent, for Father
McMahon to take the pains to write on the subject from Canada. I know
more of him and his concerns than the public do; and I am glad that my
book has reached him. Happy would it have been for him, if he could
prove that he did not leave Sherbrooke from the day when I took the
Black veil, until the day when I cast it off. There are many able to
bear witness against him in that institution (if they have not been
removed), and one out of it, who could easily silence him, by
disclosures that he has too much reason to apprehend.

But to return--I assure my readers, then, that this book contains all
the testimony that has been brought against me, so far as I can
ascertain.

The extensive publication of the Montreal affidavits (for they appeared
in the Roman Catholic papers, and were circulated, it is believed, very
generally through New York), for a time, almost entirely closed the
newspapers against me. My publishers addressed the following letter to
the, editor of the N. Y. Catholic Diary, and waited on him with a third
person, to request its publication in his next paper, but he declined.
He expressed doubts of my being in the city, and intimated a wish to see
me; but when they acceded, he refused to meet me anywhere but _at his
own residence!_

The same letter was then offered to other editors in New York, and even
sent to Philadelphia for publication, but refused. It appeared on the
29th of February, in the Brooklyn Star, thus introduced:--

_Extracts from the Long Island Star of Feb. 29th._

"Since the publication of our last paper, we have received a
communication from Messrs. Howe and Bates, of New York, the publishers
of Miss Monk's 'Awful Disclosures.' It appears that some influences have
been at work in that city, adverse to the free examination of the case
between her and the priests of Canada; for thus far the news papers have
been almost entirely closed against every thing in her defence, while
most of them have published false charges against the book, some of a
preposterous nature, the contradiction of which is plain and palpable.

"Returning to New York, she then first resolved to publish her story,
which she has recently done, after several intelligent and disinterested
persons had satisfied themselves by much examination that it was
_true_.

"When it became known in Canada that this was her intention, six
affidavits were published in some of the newspapers, intended to destroy
confidence in her character; but these were found very contradictory in
several important points, and others to afford undersigned confirmation
of statements before made by her.

"On the publication of her book, the New York Catholic Diary, the Truth
Teller, the Green Banner, and other papers, made virulent attacks upon
it, and one of them proposed that the publishers should be 'Lynched.' An
anonymous handbill was also circulated in New York, declaring the work a
malignant libel, got up by Protestant clergymen, and promising an ample
refutation of it in a few days. This was re-published in the Catholic
Diary, &c. with the old Montreal affidavits which latter were also
distributed through New York and Brooklyn; and on the authority of
these, several Protestant newspapers denounced the work as false and
malicious.

"Another charge, quite inconsistent with the rest, was also made, not
only by the leading Roman Catholic papers, but by several others at
second hand--viz. that it was a mere copy of an old European work. This
has been promptly denied by the publishers, with the offer of $100
reward for any book at all resembling it.

"Yet, such is the resolution of some and the unbelief of others, that it
is impossible for the publishers to obtain insertion for their replies
in the New York papers generally, and they have been unsuccessful in an
attempt in Philadelphia.

"This is the ground on which the following article has been offered to
us for publication in the Star. It was offered to Mr. Schneller, a Roman
priest, and editor of the Catholic Diary, for insertion in his paper of
Saturday before last, but refused, although written expressly as an
answer to the affidavits and charges his previous number had contained.
This article has also been refused insertion in a Philadelphia daily
paper, after it had been satisfactorily ascertained that there was no
hope of gaining admission for it into any of the New York papers.

"It should be stated, in addition, that the authoress of the book, Maria
Monk, is in New York, and stands ready to answer any questions, and
submit to any inquiries, put in a proper manner, and desires nothing so
strongly as an opportunity to prove before a court the truth of her
story. She has already found several persons of respectability who have
confirmed some of the facts, important and likely to be attested by
concurrent evidence; and much testimony in her favour may be soon
expected by the public.

"With these facts before them, intelligent readers will judge for
themselves. She asks for investigation, while her opponents deny her
every opportunity to meet the charges made against her. Mr. Schneller,
after expressing a wish to see her, to the publishers, refused to
meet her anywhere, _unless in his own house;_ while Mr. Quarter,
another Roman Catholic priest, called to see her, at ten o'clock, one
night, accompanied by another man, without giving their names, and under
the false pretence of being bearers of a letter from her brother in
Montreal."

* * * * *

_Reply to the Montreal Affidavits, refused publication by the Catholic
Diary &c._

"To the Editor of the Catholic Diary.

"SIR--In your paper of last Saturday, you published six affidavits from
Montreal, which are calculated, so far as they are believed, to
discredit the truth of the 'Awful Disclosures' of Maria Monk, a book of
which we are the publishers. We address the following remarks to you,
with a request that you will publish them in the Catholic Diary, that
your readers may have the means of judging for themselves. If the case
be so plain a one as you seem to suppose, they will doubtless perceive
more plainly the bearing and force of the evidence you present, when
they see it brought into collision with that which it is designed to
overthrow.

"First, We have to remark, that the affidavits which you publish might
have been furnished you in this city, without the trouble or delay of
sending to Montreal. They have been here two or three months, and were
carefully examined about that period by persons who are acquainted with
Maria Monk's story, and were desirous of ascertaining the truth. After
obtaining further evidence from Canada these affidavits were decided to
contain strong confirmation of various points in her story, then already
written down, only part of which has yet been published.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23