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

"Second. It is remarkable that of these six affidavits, the first is
that of Dr. Robinson, and all the rest are signed by him as Justice of
the Peace; and a Justice, too, who had previously refused to take the
affidavit of Maria Monk. Yet, unknown to himself, this same Dr. R., by
incidents of his own stating, corroborates some very important parts of
Miss Monk's statements. He says, indeed, that he has ascertained where
she was part of the time when she professed to have been in the Nunnery.
But his _evidence_ on this point is merely hearsay, and he does not
even favour us with that.

"Third, One of the affidavits is that of Miss Monk's mother, who claims
to be a Protestant, and yet declares, that she proposed to send her
infant grandchild to a Nunnery! She says her daughter has long been
subject to fits of insanity, (of which, however, we can say no traces
are discoverable in New York,) and has never been in a Nunnery since she
was at school in one, while quite a child. She however does not mention
where her daughter has spent any part of the most important years of her
life. A large part of her affidavit, as well as several others, is taken
up with matter relating to one of the persons who accompanied Miss M. to
Montreal last summer, and has no claim to be regarded as direct evidence
for or against the authenticity of her book.

"Fourth, The affidavit of Nancy McGan is signed with a cross, as by one
ignorant of writing; and she states that she visited a house of ill
fame, (to all appearance alone,) although, as she asserts, to bring away
Miss M. Her testimony, therefore, does not present the strongest claims
to our confidence. Besides, it is known that she has shown great
hostility, to Miss Monk, in the streets of Montreal: and she would not,
it is believed, have had much influence on an intelligent court or jury,
against Miss M., in that city, if the latter had been fortunate enough
to obtain the legal investigation into her charges, which as Dr. R.
mentions, she declared to be the express object of her visit to that
city, in the last summer, and in which she failed, after nearly a
month's exertion.

"Fifth, The affidavit of Mr. Goodenough is contradicted in one point by
the letter of Mr. Richey, a Wesleyan minister, which you insert, and
contains little else of any importance to this or any other case. * * * *

"Sixth, You copied in a conspicuous manner, from a Catholic paper in
Boston, a charge against the book, the groundlessness of which has been
exposed in some of the New York papers, viz. that large parts of it
were, 'word for word and letter for letter.' (names only altered,)
copied from a book published some years ago in Europe, under the title
of 'The Gates of Hell opened.' We have not seen in your paper any
correction of this aspersion, although the assertion of it has placed
you in a dilemma; for, if such were the fact, as you asserted, the
Montreal affidavits would have little application to the case. Besides,
that book, having proceeded from Catholics, and relating, as was
intimated, to scenes in European Convents, divulged by witnesses not
chargeable with prejudices against them, is to be taken for true with
other names; and therefore the charge of extravagance or improbability,
which is so much urged against our book, is entirely nullified, without
appealing to other sources of information which cannot be objected to.

"But before closing, allow us to remark, that you, who claim so strongly
the confidence of your readers in the testimony of witnesses in
Montreal, who speak only of things collateral to the main subject in
question, must be prepared to lay extraordinary weight on evidence of a
higher nature, and must realize something of the anxiety with which we,
and the American public generally, we believe, stand ready to receive
the evidence to be displayed to the eye and to the touch, either for or
against the solemn declaration of Miss Monk, whenever the great test
shall be applied to which she appeals, viz. the opening of the Hotel
Dieu Nunnery at Montreal. Then, sir, and not till then, will the great
question be settled,--Is our book true or false? Affidavits may possibly
be multiplied, although you say, 'Here, then, is the whole!' Dr.
Robertson may be called again to testify, or receive testimony as
Justice of the Peace,--but the question is _not_, what do people
believe or think _outside_ of the _Convent?_ but, _'what has
been done in it?'_

"By the issue of this investigation, Miss Monk declares she is ready to
stand or fall.

"You speak, sir, of the 'backwardness' of persons to appear in defence
of Miss Monk's book. We promise to appear as often on the subject as you
are willing to publish our communications. In one of the paragraphs you
publish, our book is spoken of as one of the evils arising from a
'_free_ press.' We think, sir, that 'a free press' is exposed to
less condemnation through the 'Awful Disclosures,' than the 'close
Nunneries' which it is designed to expose.

"Respectfully, &c

"New York, Feb. 22d, 1836."

* * * * *

The above was afterward copied in other papers. The following
certificate appeared in the Protestant Vindicator, and other papers, in
March, 1836, introducing the two first witnesses.

"_The truth of Maria Monk's 'Awful Disclosures' amply certified._

"We the subscribers, having an acquaintance with Miss Maria Monk, and
having considered the evidence of different kinds which has been
collected in relation to her case, have no hesitation in declaring our
belief in the truth of the statements she makes in her book recently
published in New York, entitled 'Awful Disclosures,' &c. We at that
same time declare that the assertion, originally made in the Roman
Catholic newspapers of Boston, that the book was copied from a work
entitled 'The Gates of Hell opened,' is wholly destitute of foundation;
it being entirely new, and not copied from any thing whatsoever.

"And we further declare, that _no evidence has yet been produced which
discredits the statements of Miss Monk; while, on the contrary, her
story has received, and continues to receive, confirmation from various
sources._

"During the last week, two important witnesses spontaneously appeared,
and offered to give public testimony in her favour. From them the
following declarations have been received. The first is an affidavit
given by Mr. William Miller, now a resident of this city. The second is
a statement received from a young married woman, who, with her husband,
also resides here. In the clear and repeated statements made by these
two witnesses, we place entire reliance; who are ready to furnish
satisfaction to any persons making reasonable inquiries on the subject.

"W. C. BROWNLEE.

"JOHN J. SLOCUM.

"ANDREW BRUCE.

"D. FANSHAW.

"AMOS BELDEN.

"DAVID WESSON.

"THOMAS HOGAN."

* * * * *

(AFFIDAVIT OF WILLIAM MILLER.)

"_City and County of New York, ss._

"William Miller being duly sworn, doth say--I knew Maria Monk when she
was quite a child, and was acquainted with all her father's family. My
father, Mr. Adam Miller, kept the government school at St. John's, Lower
Canada, for some years. Captain Wm. Monk, Maria's father, lived in the
garrison, a short distance from the village, and she attended the school
with me for some months, probably as much as a year. Her four brothers
also attended with us. Our families were on terms of intimacy, as my
father had a high regard for Captain Monk; but the temper of his wife
was such, even at that time, as to cause much trouble. Captain Monk died
very suddenly, as was reported, in consequence of being poisoned. Mrs.
Monk was then keeper of the Government House in Montreal, and received a
pension, 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 Government House, where
I saw Mrs. Monk and several of the family. I inquired where Maria was,
and she told me that she was in the nunnery. This fact I well remember,
because the information gave me great pain, as I had unfavorable
opinions of the nunneries. On reading the 'Awful Disclosures,' I at once
knew she was the eloped nun, but was unable to find her until a few days
since, when we recognized each other immediately. I give with pleasure
my testimony in her favour, 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 my full belief in the truth of her story,
which, shocking as it is, cannot appear incredible to those persons
acquainted with Canada.

"WILLIAM MILLER.

"Sworn before me, this 3d day of March, 1836.

"BENJAMIN D. K. CRAIG,

"Commissioner of Deeds, &c."

* * * * *

_From the Protestant Vindicator of March 9._

"The following statement has been furnished by the female witness above-
mentioned; the name being reserved only from delicacy to a lady's
feelings."

(TESTIMONY OF ANOTHER OLD SCHOOLMATE.)

"I was born at Montreal, and resided there until within a few months,
and where my friends still remain. I was educated among the Catholics,
and have never separated myself from them.

"I knew Maria Monk when quite a child. We went to school together for
about a year, as near as I can remember, to Mr. Workman, Sacrament-
street, in Montreal. She is about one month younger than myself. We left
that school at the same time, and entered the Congregational Nunnery
nearly together. I could mention many things which I witnessed there,
calculated to confirm some of her accounts.

"I knew of the elopement of a priest named Leclerc, who was a confessor,
with a nun sent from the Congregational Nunnery to teach in a village.
They were brought back, after which she gave birth to an infant, and was
again employed as a teacher.

"Children were often punished in the Congregational Nunnery, by being
made to stand with arms extended, to imitate Christ's posture on the
cross; and when we found vermin in our soup, as was often the case, we
were exhorted to overcome our repugnance to it, because Christ died for
us. I have seen such belts as are mentioned in the 'Awful Disclosures,'
as well as gags; but never saw them applied.

"Maria Monk left the Congregational Nunnery before I did, and became a
Novice in the Hotel Dieu. I remember her entrance into the latter very
well, for we had a 'jour de conge,' holiday, on that occasion.

"Some short time subsequently, after school hours one afternoon, while
in the school-room in the second story of the Congregational Nunnery,
several of the girls standing near a window exclaimed, 'There is Maria
Monk.' I sprang to the window to look, and saw her with several other
novices, in the yard of the Hotel Dieu, among the plants which grew
there. She did not appear to notice us, but I perfectly recognised her.

"I have frequently visited the public hospital of the Hotel Dieu. It is
the custom there for some of the nuns and novices to enter at three
o'clock, P.M., in procession with food and delicacies for the sick. I
recollect some of my visits there by circumstances attending them. For
instance, I was much struck, on several occasions, by the beauty of a
young novice, whose slender, graceful form, and interesting appearance,
distinguished her from the rest. On inquiry, I learnt that her name was
Dubois, or something like it, and the daughter of an old man who had
removed from the country, and lived near the Place d'Armes. She was so
generally admired for her beauty, that she was called 'la belle St.
Francois'--St. Francis being the saint's name she had assumed in the
Convent.

"I frequently went to the hospital to see two of my particular friends
who were novices: and subsequently to visit one who had a sore throat,
and was sick for some weeks. I saw Maria Monk there many times, in the
dress of a novice, employed in different ways but we were never allowed
to speak to each other.

"Towards the close of the winter of 1833-4, I visited the hospital of
the Hotel Dieu very frequently, to see Miss Bourke, a friend of mine,
although I was not permitted to speak with her. While there one day, at
the hour of _'conge'_ or _'collation'_ which, as I before
stated, was at three P.M., a procession of nuns and novices entered, and
among the former I saw Maria Monk, with a black veil, &c. She perceived
and recognized me; but put her finger on her lips in token of silence;
and knowing how rigidly the rules were enforced, I did not speak.

"A short time afterward, I saw her again in the same place, and under
similar circumstances.

"I can fix the year when this occurred, because I recollect that the
nuns in the hospital stared at a red dress I wore that season; and I am
certain about that time of year, because I left my galoshes at the
door before I went in.

"The improper conduct of a priest was the cause of my leaving the
Congregational Nunnery: for my brother saw him kissing a [illegible]
one day while he was on a visit to me, and exclaimed--'O mon Dieu!
what a place you are in!--If father does not take you out of it I
will, if I have to tear you away.'

"After the last sight I had of Maria Monk in the hospital, I never saw
nor heard of her, until after I had been for some time an inhabitant of
New York. I then saw an extract from 'Awful Disclosures,' published in a
newspaper, when I was perfectly satisfied that she was the authoress,
and again at liberty. I was unable for several weeks to find her
residence, but at length visited the house when she was absent. Seeing
an infant among a number of persons who were strangers to me, as those
present will testify, I declared that it must be the child mentioned in
her book, from the striking resemblance it bears to Father Phelan, whom
I well know. This declaration has also been made by others.

"When Maria Monk entered, she passed across the room, without turning
towards me; but I recognised her by her gait, and when she saw me she
knew me at once. I have since spent many hours with her, and am entirely
convinced of the truth of her story, especially as I knew many things
before which tend to confirm the statements which she makes."

["It is superfluous to add any thing to the above testimony. Let the
Roman priests of Montreal open the Hotel Dieu Nunnery for our
inspection, and thus confute Maria Monk: or, Mr. Conroy is again
challenged to institute a criminal process against her, or a civil suit
against the publishers of her volume--They dare not place the eloped nun
or her booksellers in that 'Inquisition;' because they know that it
would only be 'putting themselves to the torture!'"--_Ed. Prot.
Vind._]

* * * * *

_From The Protestant Vindicator of March 16th._

"We recommend the following communications to all persons who doubt the
wickedness of Nunneries. The young gentleman who sent us the letter is
now in this city, and we have heard the same statements from other
witnesses. That subterraneous passages from the Seminary to the
Nunneries, we ourselves have seen, and close by the spot designated by
our correspondent:--

(STATEMENT OF J. M.)

_"Underground passage from the Jesuit Seminary to the Hotel Dieu
Nunnery, Montreal._

"I have been informed that you are endeavoring to obtain facts and other
incidental circumstances relative to the Black Nunnery, in Montreal, and
the disclosures concerning it, made by Maria Monk, in which are many
hard things, but hard as they are, they are not indigestible by us
Canadians; we believe that she has told but a small part of what she
must know, if she was but half the time there which she says she was.
Maria Monk has mentioned in her book something about the underground
passage which leads from the Black Nunnery to other places in Montreal.
That fact I know by ocular demonstration, and which nine tenths of the
Canadians also will not deny, for it has been opened several times by
the labourers, who have been digging for the purpose of laying pipes to
conduct gas and water. While preparing a place for the latter I saw one
of those passages; the earth being removed by the labourers, they struck
upon the top of the passage, and curiosity led them to see what was
beneath, for it sounded as though there was a hollow. They accordingly
removed the large flat stones which formed the top of the passage. Many
persons were looking on at the time, and several of them went down into
it; when they returned after a few minutes, they stated that they went
but a short distance, before they came to an intersection of passages,
and were afraid to proceed further. Shortly after, several priests were
on the spot, and prevented the people from further examining it; and had
the place shut up immediately, while they stood by and guarded it until
it was all done. The appearance of that part of the passage was the same
as I saw while they were laying the water pipes. The floor of it in both
[illegible] where I saw it was clean to appearance, with the exception of
a little dirt that fell in on opening them, and of stone flagging. I
have heard much about these underground passages in Montreal, in which
place I have spent the most of my days. I give you my name and
residence: and if you should be called upon from any quarter for the
truth of this statement. I am ready to attest it upon oath; and there
are others in this city who have witnessed the same things. The places
where those openings were made in the underground passages were in St.
Joseph street for the water pipes; and for the gas pipes in Notre-Dame
street, near Sacrament street, at a short distance from the Seminary.

"W. M."

* * * * *

About the close of February last, a note was sent me from a person
signing himself the man who took me to the Almshouse. Soon after I had
an interview with Mr. Hilliker, whom I recognised as my first protector
in New York, and to whom I owe much--indeed, as I think, my life. He
kindly offered to give me his testimony, which follows:--

_From the New York Journal of Commerce_.

(AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN HILLIKER,)

_"City and County of New York, ss._

"John Hilliker, being duly sworn, doth depose and say--that one day
early in the month of May, 1835, while shooting near the Third Avenue,
opposite the three milestone, in company with three friends, I saw a
woman sitting in a field at a short distance, who attracted our
attention. On reaching her, we found her sitting with her head down, and
could not make her return any answer to our questions. On raising her
hat, we saw that she was weeping. She was dressed in an old calico
frock, (I think of a greenish colour,) with a checked apron, and an old
black bonnet. After much delay and weeping, she began to answer my
questions, but not until I had got my companions to leave us, and
assured her that I was a married man, and disposed to befriend her.

"She then told me that her name was Maria, that she had been a nun in a
nunnery in Montreal, from which she had made her escape, on account of
the treatment she had received from priests in that institution, whose
licentious conduct she strongly intimated to me. She mentioned some
particulars concerning the Convent and her escape. She spoke
particularly of a small room where she used to attend, until the
physician entered to see the sick, when she accompanied him to write
down his prescriptions; and said that she escaped through a door which
he sometimes entered. She added, that she exchanged her dress after
leaving the nunnery, and that she came to New York in company with a
man, who left her as soon as the steamboat arrived. She farther stated,
that she expected soon to give birth to a child, having become pregnant
in the Convent; that she had no friend, and knew not where to find one;
that she thought of destroying her life; and wished me to leave her--
saying, that if I should hear of a woman being found drowned in the East
River, she earnestly desired me never to speak of her.

"I asked her if she had had any food that day, to which she answered,
no; and I gave her money to get some at the grocery of Mr. Cox, in the
neighbourhood. She left me, but I afterwards saw her in the fields,
going towards the river; and after much urgency, prevailed upon her to
go to a house where I thought she might be accommodated, offering to pay
her expenses. Failing in this attempt, I persuaded her, with much
difficulty, to go the Almshouse; and there we got her received, after I
had promised to call and see her, as she said she had something of great
consequence which she wished to communicate to me, and wished me to
write a letter to Montreal.

"She had every appearance of telling the truth; so much so, that I have
never for a moment doubted the truth of her story, but told it to many
persons of my acquaintance, with entire confidence in its truth. She
seemed overwhelmed with grief, and in a very desperate state of mind. I
saw her weep for two hours or more without ceasing; and appeared very
feeble when attempting to walk, so that two of us supported her by the
arms. We observed also, that she always folded her hands under her apron
when she walked, as she has described the nuns as doing in her 'Awful
Disclosures.'

"I called at the Almshouse gate several times and inquired for her; but
having forgotten half her name, I could not make it understood whom I
wished to see, and did not see her until the last week. When I saw some
of the first extracts from her book in a newspaper, I was confident that
they were parts of her story, and when I read the conclusion of the
work, I had not a doubt of it. Indeed, many things in the course of the
book I was prepared for from what she had told me.

"When I saw her, I recognised her immediately, although she did not know
me at first, being in a very different dress. As soon as she was
informed where she had seen me, she recognised me. I have not found in
the book any thing inconsistent with what she had stated to me when I
first saw her.

"When I first found her in May, 1835, she had evidently sought
concealment. She had a letter in her hand, which she refused to let me
see; and when she found I was determined to remove her, she tore it in
small pieces, and threw them down. Several days after I visited the spot
again and picked them up, to learn something of the contents but could
find nothing intelligible, except the first part of the Signature,
'Maria.'

"Of the truth of her story I have not the slightest doubt, and I think I
never can until the Nunnery is opened and examined.

"JOHN HILLIKER.

"Sworn before me, this 14th of March, 1835.

"PETER JENKINS,

"Commissioner of Deeds."

The following challenge was published in the N. Y. Protestant Vindicator
for six or seven weeks, in March and April, without a reply.

"CHALLENGE--The Roman Prelate and Priests of Montreal--Messrs. Conroy,
Quarter, and Schneller, of New York--Messrs. Fenwick and Byrne of
Boston--Mr. Hughes of Philadelphia--the Arch-Prelate of Baltimore, and
his subordinate Priests--and Cardinal England of Charleston, with all
other Roman Priests, and every Nun from Baffin's bay to the Gulf of
Mexico, are hereby challenged to meet an investigation of the truth of
Maria Monk's 'Awful Disclosures,' before an impartial assembly, over
which shall preside _seven_ gentlemen; three to be selected by the
Roman Priests, three by the Executive Committee of the New York
Protestant Association, and the Seventh as Chairman, to be chosen by the
six.

"An eligible place in New York shall be appointed and the regulations
for the decorum and order of the meetings, with all the other
arrangements, shall be made by the above gentlemen.

"All communications upon this subject from any of the Roman Priests or
Nuns, either individually, or as delegates for their superiors,
addressed to the _Corresponding Secretary of the New York Protestant
Association_, No. 142 Nassau-street, New York, will be promptly
answered."

* * * * *

_From the N. Y. Protestant Vindicator of April 6, 1836._

"THE CHALLENGE.--We have been waiting with no small degree of impatience
to hear from some of the Roman priests. But neither they, nor their
sisters, the nuns, nor one of their nephews or _nieces_, have yet
ventured to come out. Our longings meet only with disappointment. Did
ever any person hear of similar conduct on the part of men accused of
the highest crimes, in their deepest dye? Here is a number of Roman
priests, as actors, or accessories, openly denounced before the world as
guilty, of the most outrageous sins against the sixth and seventh
commandments. They are charged before the world with adultery,
fornication, and murder! The allegations are distinctly made, the place
is mentioned, the parties are named, and the time is designated; for it
is lasting as the annual revolutions of the seasons. And what is most
extraordinary,--_the highest official authorities in Canada know that
all those statements are true, and they sanction and connive at the
iniquity!_--The priests and nuns have been offered, for several
months past, the most easy and certain mode to disprove the felonies
imputed to them, and they are still as the dungeons of the Inquisition,
silent as the death-like quietude of the convent cell; and as retired as
if they were in the subterraneous passages between the Nunnery and
Lartigue's habitation. Now, we contend, that scarcely a similar instance
of disregard for the opinions of mankind, can be found since the
Reformation, at least, in a Protestant country. Whatever disregard for
the judgment of others, the Romish priests may have felt, where the
Inquisition at their command, and the civil power was their Jackal and
their Hyena: they have been obliged to pay some little regard to the
opinion of protestants, and to the dread of exposure. We therefore
repeat the solemn indubitable truth--that the facts which are stated by
Maria Monk, respecting the Hotel Dieu Nunnery at Montreal, are true as
the existence of the priests and nuns,--that the character, principles,
and practices of the Jesuits and Nuns in Canada are most accurately
delineated--that popish priests, and sisters of charity in the United
States, are their faithful and exact counterparts--that many female
schools in the United States, kept by the papist teachers, are nothing
more than places of decoy through which young women, at the most
delicate age, are ensnared into the power of the Roman priests--and that
the toleration of the monastic system in the United States and Britain,
the only two countries in the world, in which that unnatural abomination
is now extending its withering influence, is high treason against God
and mankind. If American citizens and British Christians, after the
appalling developments which have been made, permit the continuance of
that prodigious wickedness which is inseparable from nunneries and the
celibacy of popish priests, they will ere long experience that divine
castigation which is justly due to transgressors, who wilfully trample
upon all the appointments of God, and who subvert the foundation of
national concord, and extinguish the comforts of domestic society.
Listen to the challenge again! _All the papers with which the
Protestant Vindicator exchanges, are requested to give the challenge one
or two insertions_." (Here it was repeated.)

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