THE JESUITS' ESTATES

The question of the Jesuits' Estates is, we venture to tliink, much simpler than it has been made to appear. We do not now propose to question Mr. Mercier's power to give to the present order of Jesuits a half million of dollars ; nor do we wish to impugn the merit of that society : we merely desire that the facts concerning the estates of the Jesuits of 1760 may be understood. They are not many in number.

It is not worth while to discuss the position under French law of the Jesuits in Canada at the conquest. They held j^roperty here in some way as a matter of fact, and were recognized by the King of. France. Their position under the English regime necessarily depended upon the terms — ist of the capitulation to Amherst in 1760 ; 2nd upon those of the cession to the English Crown in 1763 under the treaty. Article 32 of the capitulation reads : " The communities of nuns shall " be i)reserved in their constitutions and privileges. They shall con- ** tinue to observe their rules. They shall be exempted from lodging ** any military, and it shall be forbid to trouble them in their religious *' exercises." The reply of Amherst was : "Granted." Article ^iTt reads : *' The i^receding article shall likewise be executed with regard to the ** communities of Jesuits and Recollets and of the house of St.Sulpice '' at Montreal. This last and the Jesuits shall preserve their right to *' nominate to certain curacies and missions as heretofore, " The *• answer of Amherst was : '• Refused ; till the king's pleasure be *' known. " 'I'he next Article provided that the Jesuits, Recollets and Suli)icians " shall be masters to dispose of their estates and to send " the produce thereof, as well as their persons and all that belongs to " them, to France. " Thus in the surrender of the country by the governor of New France to the gencral-in-chief of the English army the case of the Jesuits was specially considered, ll was to depend *' upon the ])leasure of the king" of England.

From 1760 to the close of the war everybody in Canada waited in uncertainty as to the final result. The definitive treaty of peace was

signed at Paris, on February lo, 1763. The only stipulations bearing upon the question are the following : " His Britannic Majesty agrees *' to grant the liberty of the Catholic religion to the inhabitants of *' Canada ; he will consequently give the most effectual orders that his " new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their reli- *' gion according to the rites of the Roman Church as far as the laws ''^ of Great Britain permit. His Britannic Majesty also agrees that " the French inhabitants, or others who had been the subjects of the " most Christian King in Canada, may retire with all safety and " freedom whenever they shall think proper, and may sell their estates, '''provided it be to subjects of His Britannic Majesty, and bring away " their effects, as well as their persoi'.s, without being restrained in '* their emigration under any pretence whatever, except that of debts *' or criminal prosecutions ; the term limited for this emigration shall " be fixed for the space of eighteen months to be computed from the day ." of the exchange of the ratifications of the present treaty. "

Thus it is manifest that what was secured to the French Canadians by treaty was the Hberty to w^orship according to the rites of the Roman Church to the limit of the English law as it theft stood ; while the Sulpicians, Recollets and Jesuits were left under the terms of the capitulation, viz : to " the pleasure of the King" as regards their property; but they^ like all other Canadian s^mj^ht sell their-estatesto^iuigJish subjects within eighteen months and retire to France. The Sulpicians complied. The heads of the order in France sold all their Canadian property within the specified time to the house in Canada. The Sulpicians in Canada became British subjects and followed the fortunes of the French Roman Catholic Canadians who remained in the country. This the Jesuits did not do. The rules of their order would not permit it. Consequently they, by the terms of the capitulation, remained still '' at the pleasure of the King." There is a profound distinction between the Seminary of St. Sulpice and the order of Jesuits. The first was originated by French subjects in France under French law : the second originated in Spain ; it is of no nationality, and its law is the will of its general.

While the emigration was going on and the Sulpicians were arranging for the transfer of their property, before the eighteen months had expired, the Government of France, in 1704, suppressed the order of Jesuits, dissolved its houses, and banished from the soil of France all its members. So far as French law had effect, the Jesuit order ceased to be. The blow had been long impending. The bishops of France had represented to the Due de Choiseul that the unlimited authority of the general residing at Rome was incompatible with the laws of

France. The " pleasure of the King of England " was not likely to be more propitious than that of the bishops and King of France. This was manifest in the King's instructions to Governor Murray, December 7, 1763, clause 32 — "You are not to cdmit of any ecclesiastical juris- ** diction of the See of Rome or any oihtv foreign ecclesiastical juris- " diction whatever in the province under your government. " This jealousy of the See of Rome was relaxed in after years, and religious liberty was secured to the French-Canadians by the Quebec Act of 1774. The laws of Great Britain were, by that act, so extended as to secure the fullest liberty to the Roman Catholic religion — liberty to a far greater extent than, at that time, was enjoyed by the Protestant dissenters from the Anglican Church in England. In the meantime, before the Quebec Act was passed, and while the British Government was deciding upon its ultimate policy, there was no hesitation as to the ffesuit order. The commission to the King's Receiver-General in 1765 shows that. His instructions read as follows : '' And whereas the lands " of several religious societies in the said province, particularly those *' of the society of the Jesuits, are, or will become, part of His Majesty's *' revenue, you are therefore to endeavor, by agreements to be made *' with the persons interested for the present in any of the said estates, *' to take the said estates into your charge, giving unto them respec- " tively such competent allowance thereon for their lives, as you may *' judge proper, taking care that these lands may not be sequestered *' or alienated from His Majesty. " Again in a letter from Lord Shelburne to Governor Carleton November 14, 17O7, we read: '* It has "been represented to His Majesty that the Jesuits of Canada make *' large remittances to Italy and that they imperceptibly diminish their ** effects for that purpose * * * Too much care cannot be taken " that they do not embezzle an estate of which they enjoy only the *■' life-rent and which must become on their demise a very considerable " resource to the provinre, in case His Majesty should be pleased to " cede it for that purpose. "

It is the habit of many who live by whipi)ing up religious and race jealousies to base the liberty enjoyed by the French Catholics in Canada upon the capitulation and the treaty. They suppress entirely the clause : " so far as the laws of Great Britain permit'' These documents arc to be found in any history. The fact is well known ; and yet vague tirades about " treaty rights " still serve to mislead simple people and prejudice them against tr.e English Government. Once again, let us say it : the people of Canada were abandoned by the French of Old France. The English laws at that tune jiermitted ver>- little toleration to Roman Catholics ; but the English Parliament modified its laws.

eleven years after the trcaly, in deference to the rehgious sentiments of the French who remained in Canada. We cannot lay too much stress upon this fact. It is explained away, it is minimized, it is contradicted, but nevertheless it is true; it is plainly written in easily accessible documents and to stand up before ignorant audiences and deny it is dishonest. Let us never be forgotten that the charter of French Catholic liberty is in an act of Parliament and not in a treaty. The act of 1 774 made a new departure in Canadian history, and necessarily new instructions were sent to the Governor. These were dated Jan-uaty -3, 17^.5 ; the passages of present interest are the following : *' That the society of Romish priests, called the Seminaries of Quebec *' and Montreal, shall continue to possess and occupy their houses of *' residence and all other houses and lands to which they were lawfully *' entitled on the 3TSt September, 1759, and it shall be hwful for thos^ *' societies to fill up vacancies and admit new members according to *' the rules of their foundation. * >k * That the Society of the *' Jesuits be suppressed and dissolved and no longer continued as a *' body corporate and politic, and all their rights, possessions and " property shall be vested in us, for such purposes as we may hereafter *' think fit to direct or appoint ; but we think fit to declare our royal *' intention to be that the present members of the said society, as estab- *' lished at Quebec, shall be allowed sufficient stipends and provisions " during their natural lives. " Thus was the pleasure of the King made known, and so it was carried out, until, in 1800, the last Jesuit, Father Cazot, died, and the last stipend out of the Jesuits' estates ceased.

But, in the meantime, while the last Jesuits in Canada were ending their lives in peace and plenty, under a Protestant King, the order was totally suppressed throughout the whole Catholic world . The storm which had been long gathering, broke in 1759, in Portugal. In 1764 in burst in France ; in 1767 in Spain. The order was totally suppressed in the European and colonial possessions of these and ail other Catholic countries, its estates confiscated, its members banished. The Catholic countries did not allow stipends for life, but drove the unfortunate Jesuits into exile and want. This was not the worst, for on July 21, 1773, Pope Clement XIV issued the celebrated Brief Dojuiniis ac Redemptor noster, in which he suppressed the order throughout the world, and it remained suppressed and utterly dissolved until fourteen years after P'ather Cazot's death at Quebec. Truly, if ever a man died without heirs it was Father Cazot ; and if ever there was an escheat, the Jesuits' estates would have been escheated, even if they had not been confiscated at the conquest. The Pope's brief is very long. He cites many previous instances of the sui)pression of religious orders by

the Holy See ; he recites the many favors and privileges conceded to the Jesuits and he states that almost from their institution '* there arose " in the bosom of the society divers seeds of discord and dissention, *' not only among the compani(Mis but with other regular orders, the " secular clergy, the academies, the universities, the public schools " and lastly even with the Princes of the states in which the society " was received. " The Pope then recites at some length these quarrels; the dissentions, he says, grew day by day — the accusations "multiplied " without number, especially with regard to that insatiable avidity of " temjjoral possessions with which it was reproached. " Then follows an account of some abortive attemjUs to reform the society — " in vain," he adds, did these Pontiffs "endeavor by salutary constitutions to " restore peace to the Church, as well as with respect to secular affairs " with which the company ought not to have interfered." After reciting some further efforts he proceeds " After so many storms, tempests, and " divisions, every good man looked forward with impatience to the ** happy day which was to restore peace and tranquillity ; but, under " the reign of Clement XIII, complaints and quarrels were multiplied " on every side, in some places dangerous seditions arose, tumults, " discords, dissensions, scandals, which, weakening or entirely breaking " the bonds of Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of *' party hatreds and enmities. " These and such like grievances are recited at great length. At last the conclusion comes. '* After a mature *' deliberation, we do, of our certain knowledge and the fulness of our " apostolical power, suppress and abolish the said c^mj)any. " The Pope " abrogates their statutes," extinguishes the authority of all their officials, releases all their novices, forbids any accessions to the order, submits Till who have. taken the last vows to the authority of the Bisho])s, converts their i)roi)erty to pious uses according to the intention of the founders and the holy canons and extends the operation of the Brief even to the distant missions. " Our will and meai^ng is that the sup])ression aid destruction of the said society ami of all its parts shall have an immediate and instantaneous effect " under pain t f the greater excommunication reserved solely to the Pope.

Now then — seeing that all this had in 1773 been done and said l^y the Sui)reme JMntiff and that the Jesuits had been expelled out of all Catholic lands into orthodox Russia and Protestant Prussia, where they lived as individuals, was it strange thil ih'^ King of Kngland should, after providing so carefully for good Father Cazol. apjily the Jesuits' estates to educational purj)oses? for the Jesuits were a leaching order. When Father Cazot died there was no Jesuit ci>rporate Ixxly any where throughout the world. Pius Vll, in 181 1, when he reinsti-

tuted the order in Russia, calls them " secular priests, once members " of the company of Jesus, suppressed by Clement XIV, of happy " memory, " and his bull of restoration, August 7, 1814, did not attempt to reinstate them in their possessions. Those possessions by the Roman canon law as well as by the express terms of the Brief would fall into the general administration of the Church ; they cannot by the law of the Church be inherited by the present Jesuits. The corporate identity of the order is broken. In Canada it ceased to exist as a corporation, in 1760, by English law. By canon law it ceased to exist in 1773. In the Roman Church the order was re-incorporated in 1814. In Canada it was incorporated last year, but the corporate life has been hopelessly interrupted. The present corporation is a new person. By canon law no prescription can run against the Church, but the order of Jesus is not the Church of Rome. The Church of Rome existed before the Jesuits, it existed during their suppression ; not in Russia, where alone for thirty years there were avowed Jesuits, but in its old seat among the Catholic nations. The " worship according to the rites of the Roman Church" referred to in the treaty is a definite thing ; the establishment of the order of Jesus is another thing. It is an utter confusion of ideas to attempt to drag the latter into the treaty. If it be thought desirable to present a half million of dollars to the Jesuit Fathers who are working in our midst, the Legislature has the power to do it; but let not justification be sought by confusing the facts of history.