The Sun.
London, England, 1869-02-13 00:00:00

THE CONVEAT CASE

Ine pitiless rain notwithstanding, the crowd attract&
to Westminster yesterday to see or hear something of th
ninth day's proceedings in the Hull convent case wa
nearly as great as on any previous day. As to the Cour
of Queen's Bench, it was, if possible, more densely puke(
than it has been since the commencement of the trial, any
there were certainly more ladies present. Mrs. Starr'l
examination was continued. Referring to Miss Saurin',
alleged imprisonment, the witness said the plaintiff wa
not guarded and prevented from leaving her room for ant
purpose. The direction I gave was that her movement
were not to be controlled in the least, but that she shouli
be allowed to do just as she liked. I gave directions, how
ever, that she should not be left alone. On the 30th April
about noon, I ordered that a particular door should be kep
locked, because Miss Saurin was in the habit of going tc
the room and remaining so long that she inconvenienceC

tue community. There were four other rooms of the min(
description to which she had unlimited access.
By the Lord Chief Justice : A rope was attached tc
her door and the sister's bed in the corridor, but it ilk'
not fasten the door.
Defendant : She was afterwards moved to a room higher
up—one of a range of cells—because she was not a member
of the community. It was a larger room than she hac
previously occupied, and it was lighted by a window,
The same room has been and is now occupied by a sister,
Miss Saurin was in the habit at night or early in the
morning of getting up and going over the house alone;
and it was understood she had been seen in the
corridor at five o'clock in the morning, in her tunic and
without stockings. I have learnt that since, but in my
own mind I believed she would. I gave directions that a
sister should sleep in the corridor, and that a string should
be attached to her bed and Miss Saurin's door, that if Miss
Saurin should come out it should awaken the sister, and
she should accompany her about the house. The
sisters are forbidden to rise before the call. The rope did
not fasten the door. There was nothing to prevent Miss
baurin's going out. The ordinary furniture of a sister's
cell contain one chair or one stool for each occupant ; and
svnen I wens so ner 1 Jo,uuu li.. soaiog
although there was a stool in the cell. I then ordered
two chairs to be taken to the room, but I don't know if
she used them. I did not desire Miss Saurin not to use a
particular chair, but not to go and sit near the sister who
was attending her. She might have put the chair in any
part of the room. In 1864 or 1865 there was a
general cleaning of the house at Hull, and Miss Saurin
asked to be allowed to take part, but I declined
to let her. I did not give directions for extra menial
work to be imposed on the plaintiff at Clifford. I never
gave directions for her to stand in school hours at Clifford.
It is usual for them to stand in school when teaching, but
I always told them to sit when possible. The
faults in her monthly reports would be trifling
except in the manner in which she mentions them,
and taking the paper. An alteration was made in the
rules by Mrs. Kennedy in Hull, with reference to sewing
and other materials, &c. My impression is the altera-
tion extended the " leaves" instead of restricting them. A
chapter was held at Hull in May 1864, for tho
re-election of a superior, my first term of office
(six years) having expired. After the first the
election is only for three years. The first is an appoint-
ment for six years from the bishop or by election. At the
end of that time she can be re-elected for three years,
and again for three years. After that period she becomes
a sister, and is subject to the superior appointed or elected
to that office.
In her further examination the witness stated in
reference to the dress supplied to the plaintiff, that Miss
Saurin complained of cold, and asked me for a petticoat,
and I gave her the warmest of the two that had originally
been hers. I had previously directed that those who had
not woollen jackets should apply for them. Miss
Saurin did, and I gave her one the next
day. She complained of her stockings in 1864
or 1865, but they were as good as the other sisters', and I
paid no attention to it. I think I had kept them in repair
for her. She also complained unnecessarily of her tunic,
but a week after I got her a nearly new one. The condi-
tion of her boots, that of being in holes, must have happened
in 1865, when I was at Clifford, if it ever occurred ;
but it is not within my knowledge. Mrs. Kennedy
was the assistant superior at Hull, and in consequence of
what she said I left a pair of boots for Miss Saurin. When
Miss Saurin came from Clifford to Hull, in June 1864, she
had two pairs of boots ; they were allowed to the sisters
at Clifford because they went out every day ; the sisters
at Hull usually only had one pair.
The Lord Chief Justice : What if they got wet ?
Defendant : Then they had shoes to change. Each
sister has light shoes, strong shoes, and boots.
Mr. Russell: The plaintiff in her evidence said Mrs.
Starr gave her a. pair of house-shoes. but they were eu old
that she had to tie them on with string across her feet
and put paper over all because the soles were worn out.
Defendant : I gave her a pair of boots, and noil
shoes—the pair I had taken from her a year before. She
was then on an equality with the rest of the sisters at
Hull. I found Miss Saurin had allowed the furniture to
be thick with dust. She said she had not sufficient time
allowed her for properly dusting it. I knew she had, and
I waited before speaking to her again, to see if
she would make use of the few minutes she
would have at tea-time to dust it. She did
not do so, and I said to her that if I found the com-
munity-room in the same state I saw it in that morning,
I should require her to wear the duster on her head as a

penance. I went upstairs and took the dust off with my
finger. She said she had dusted the room twice that
morning. I then got the duster for the purpose of putting
it on her head. She objected to wear it, because, she said,
it was wet or damp. I gave it to one of the sisters to take
to the fire and dry it. She did so. Miss Saurin then
objected to near it because it was dirty. It had been used,
but it was not dirty.
The Solicitor-General : In an intermediate state.
The Lord Chief Justice : According to your view it hat
not been used enough.

Defendant: I said it was not dirty. She stooped
down as if she wished to wear it, and I put
it over her veil. This was about one o'clock. It was her
duty then to remain in the community room, but at 3.35
I went upstairs and saw her walking in the corridor with
the duster still on. When she came near me I said
"Sister, you may take the duster off now." She bowed
to me, but said nothing. I have no doubt she heard me.
She, however, still continued walking up and down,
wearing the duster.

Mrs. Starr then went on to explain the keeping back of
the letter, said there was nothing extraordinary in Miss
Saurin's case, declared that at most seven letters were
kept back, brought forward instances in which the same
thing had been done to other sisters, and laid some stress
on the fact that all who entered the convent were expected
to render implicit obedience.

Her cross-examination then commenced. It was con-
ducted by the Solicitor-General. The interest in court
rose when he rose and the examination-in-chief was con-
cluded. He commenced at the beginning, and elicited
from the defendant that she was born in Dublin, and
baptised as a Catholic. I joined the order (she went on to
say) as a postulant in Glasgow, in October 1849. I joined
the Bagot-street order after a dangerous illness in
Scotland. I left Glasgow 11th July, 1850, and went direct
to the Dublin convent. Miss Saurin came in 1851. I
left Bagot-street in August 1855, for Yorkshire. Miss
Saurin, Mrs. Delany, Mrs. Kennedy, Mrs. WO wne,
and a lay sister came over from Dublin. Miss
Saurin came nine months after the others. I did
not know there were any difficulties about her
coming until Miss Saurin informed me in Yorkshire.
It was before any differences arose between us. One of
the most binding vows of the order is not absolute obe-
dience to the will of the superior, but only in cases of sin
and as far as her authority extends. We will suppose I
said to a sister "For such a fault it is possible you will be
put last of your order and deprived of being a member
of the chapter," I could not carry it out without
the sanction of the bishop. I might hold it over her.
It is part of the excellence of a nun to submit her will and
thought to those above her, and the opinion of a superior
-would rather influence the judgment of a nun. She would
feel it right to do so. The duty of a novice in
obedience would be more so in the case of a
.nun.
The vow is influential upon the nun's conscience. The
duty of a superior is to lovingly correct and sweetly
admonish the sisters. Mrs. Kennedy held different
positions in the convent at various periods. I consulted
her and Mrs. M`Owne for a time about Miss Saurin.
There is not a printed or written rule about withholding
letters. The " customs" state what is to be done with
letters. Instructions with reference to them might come
under correspondence with seculars. The power to with-
hold letters is traditional ; the usage is, that the superior
has power to withhold letters if she pleases. I believe
it was a rule to do so in Bagot-street. I don't re-
member whose letters were retained. A rule of that kind
has been printed since this action was commenced. The
superior can withhold any letters she thinks it right to
retain.

The Solicitor• General : Why does it become better for a
letter to be given a few weeks after it is received than or
the same day?

Defendant : Because in this case I had spoken to Miss
baurin of their contents, and she condemned her brother's
reflections on the community, and I gave them up.
The Solicitor-General : You condemned her, and, like a
good nun, she agreed with you? (Laughter.)
Defendant : I told her my opinion. It was not an
obligation on her part to submit. It was only a matter of
opinion, and not settled judgment.
The Solicitor-General: Where is the line drawn? I am
sure it is my fault. I am not a nun. (Laughter.)
=D11(41444 ilamt tclirsak_lll4 the duts_d_pdauu

to submit ner judgment to the opinion of a superior as
far as she can without sin. I have not a distinct remem-
brance that she followed my opinion. I told her it was 3
pity a religieux bad so expressed himself, and she expressed
disapprobation of her brother's conduct. I then consi-
dered the letters would not do her harm.

Mr. Mellish complained of the mode of cross-examina.
tion. The Solicitor-General ought to put questions of
fact, and not hypothetical cases.
The Lord Chief Justice : I thought so.
Defendant: I don't know if the letter containing the
announcement of the brother's death was withheld. She
was informed of the death, or she had the letter. After-
wards she sent me a letter to be forwarded to
her uncle, which referred to her brother's death. BY
1862 I had a very clear opinion Miss Suarin's vocation
was not for this line of life. I first communicated unfavour-
ably of her to Bagot-street in 1862. It was volunteered in
so far that it required to be told in explanation. When
I asked them to receive Miss Saurin back, I thought it
very unlikely, almost impossible, that they would, in con-
sequence, receive her back. I had not communicated with
Begot-street before I wrote her uncle that she would not
be received back. I can explain it. The superior in 1856
was averse to Miss Saurin's coming to England, because
she would not be an advantage to our community,
She had a bad. opinion of her ; she was so double
and underhand. That is what I meant by the passage,
" Superior there knows her too well to receive her." LP
to April 3, 1862, the date of my letter, I cannot tell if
anything had occurred that required my communicating it
to Bagot-street. So far as I can remember I had not
mentioned anything in April. In 1861 Mrs. Saurin wrote
to me about her daughter visiting her, and I heard from
the superior in Bagot-street in 1861 or 1862 that Father
Matthews, or some other member of the family, had
called there and made some remarks about my not allow-
ing Miss Saurin to visit her friends. The superior wrote
to me on the subject, and I answered. I may have
explained to her my reasons for not sending her.
The Solicitor-General : Have you any earthly doubt
about it?
Defendant : I don't remember.
The Solicitor-General: What else could you have written
.o her about?

Defendant: Her letter might have referred to other
matters.

The Solicitor-General : Yes. It might have referred to
the moon.

The cross-examination was not concluded when t
court rose.

The Council of University College, London, have
resolved to institute a Professorship of Hygiene and Public
Health.

The Right Hon. B. Disraeli and Viscountes4
Beaconsfield have arrived at Grosvenor-gate for 010
season. The right hon. gentleman has issued cards for
Parliamentary dinner on the 15th inst.
The sporting correspondent of the Leicester Journal,
writing from Melton in that paper of to-day, says :—".'l'll
interested in the case of Frewen v. TallbY will be glad to
learn that matters have been satisfactorily arranged, 313
Mrs. Frewen has kindly consented to allow hunting to be
.
carried on in the Cold Overton district as usual.
A CITY OF DARKNESS.—The Kingston Morning
Journal complains that the chief town in Jamaica is not
yet lighted with gas, though it is to be found even .n
villages in other countries. There is a prejudice, it says'
in the community against gas, from fear of the danger
when the pipes explode.
CABINET COUNCIL.--At the Cabinet Council 1181 a,
on Friday at Downing-street, the Ministers preset
were the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, the Lew
Chancellor, Earl De Grey and Ripon, the Earl of Klaiber'
ley, the Right Hon. H. A. Bruce, the Earl of Clarendl
Earl Granville, the Right Hon. E. Cardwell, the Duke °
Argyll, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Right lieri'
Hugh Childers, the Right Hon. J. Bright, the Might
Iron G. J. Goschen, and the Right Hon. C. Fortescue. 0
THE DEATH OF A POLICEMAN AT OXFORD.
adjourned inquest on the body of police-constable Gelk, 111
member of the new police force at Oxford, , who
drowned in the Isis on Thursday week, has taken place°
the Council Chamber of that city. After a patient inveg:i
Ligation, occupying nearly three hours, the jury returned
the following verdict :—" That the deceased was drowned
while endeavouring to escape from Cox, his wife, tt,
James Blay, who had violently assaulted him." The kl"
at the same time requested the coroner to call the atteatiet;
of the local board to the unprotected state of the bank°
the river.
_—A
ATTEMPT TO MURDER A SISTER OF MERui.
determined attempt at murder was made a few days 1)3.4
in the civil hospital of Wissembourg. A Sister of Clitaw
was occupied in the kitchen, when one of the attendants'
a ynnng man aged 21, approached with a pair of double'
barrelled pistols, and discharged two shots at her head'
then, finding that he had only wounded her slightly' P-t
fired a third time, point blank in her face, wounding he
severely. The sister is lying in a critical state, and the
assassin has been arrested. He declares that be bad 10°
meditated this crime.
THE ROMAN HIERARCHY IN SCOTLAND.--/rte
Roman correspondent of the Pall Mall Gazette repeats t'o
very silly story that two archbishops and ten bisb°P,,
are about to be appointed to Scotland by his Holivoeso
Now, as there are in Scotland but 202 priests
told," it follows that if this absurd tale is ttr o
un
each prelate would have something less than 7,4
priests to superintend. The fact is, that no hierarchy
whatever is to be appointed to Scotland for °To
time. Monsignor Eyre, the new vicar-apostolic of t`c;
Western District, has merely been created an archhisb,°:s
instead of a bishop. All the other ecclesiastical tit
remain exactly as before, and neither the arclibishl
nor the two other bishops in Scotland will for the Prese-11
take the title of any Scottish see.— Weekly Register. 0.
THE BISHOP OF NATAL.—The Athentclon
nounces that the Bishop of Natal has met with two seveos
accidents. The first was a fall from his horse ; /1
stunned for the moment, but was afterwards able to ti
cia
home, a distance of some five miles. The second baPPelleo,
in November, as he was coming home from his visitati%o
Being delayed in consequence of the slippery state 01 the
roads, he had to ford the river after dark. His horse 90
into a hole some feet deep, and the bishop was washeel°
is back. Mr. Kirkman, who was fortunately with Ilth le
being a good swimmer, got the bishop out, but ell to
wrong side of the ford. He managed with assistance 4
cross the river again after a short rest, and had on his /s
home to be supported by natives on each side.
wiser°
DISTINCTIONS OF CREED. —The daily r- ;do
inform us that the Baron de Rothschild has presentecyoo
Rev. C. S. Grubbe, M.A., of Jesus College, Oxford'
to
archdeacon of Maritzburg, to the vicarage of Melit':,°t to
Bucks. From this it appears that a Jew can prose The
Anglican livings, although a Catholic cannot. o,
Duke of Norfolk is patron of thirteen lir° of
the Marquis of Bute of ten, Lord Dunraveu
.„11
seven, Lord Orford of seven, Lord Gainsboroutoo
of seven, Lord Beaumont of one, Lord 5001... of
of one, Lord Petre of five, Lord Arundell of Warclou.
two, and Lord Clifford of three—in all, fifty-six
ne
besides many others of which Catholic commoners 06,
patrons ; but not one of them can present to these liTl'o7o
although a Jew who is a patron can do so. How Pr t 1.5
the Anglican clergy ought to be of this distinction ! p
to be feared that the obj sets of A. P. U. C. are St

long way from being attained.— Weekly Register.
be
The will of James Disraeli, Esq one ofji
Commissioners of the Board of Inland Revenue, foricee;
of Eaton-terrace, Pimlico, but late of Cromwell-1313ti1;
Middlesex, was proved in the principal registry n,-jo
2nd inst., by his brother, the Right Hon. Benz
Disraeli, P.C., M.P., one of the executors, power .„1."
e;
reserved to John Luc ena Ross Kettle, Esq., of ity
square, Lincoln's Inn, the other executor. The persof.l'ted
was sworn under £14,000. The testator was aPP.-.1108
to the Board of Inland Revenue in 1858, Pflol
previously been the treasurer for some Yenlio
the county courts of Lincolnshire and Derhyshirt,ving
death was very sudden on December 23 last, pre'
transacted business at Somerset House on the'6WA,l
ceding. The will is brief, dated March 3, 1888- bet
leaving to his housekeeper a legacy of £4,000, and tee
sister, then in his service, a legacy of £4OO, both
eo.4,;te,
duty, he bequeaths the residue of his personal
together with his real estate, to his brother, .the .00
Hon. B. Disraeli, with a request that Mr. Kettle
rood
select for himself two of the testator's pictures.—Oust .

1 London News. The
A CRYPT THAT HAD TO BE PAID F'-'II.A os'
New York Times gives the following as a very, g°,°- '
tration of the extreme vigilance which prevails in 1i°137.1',e;:
overaic public expenditure :—" Among the apkropri'l4-114
heed for, the committee found one providing. Pr are
Lthat` Superintendent of the Crypt.' As nobodylO* itb
4-•ted
there was such a thing as a ' crypt ' cone uper
the Government, still less that it had or needecT B.f
intendent, inquiry was made, and it vo-9 -°ttbe
rasdelfortot
that the appropriation had been regularly
last fifty years. Further investigation shoved vide`)
soon after General Washington died Congress 1.4
for the construction of a vault under the CaPit° o
called the crypt, in which his remains I,ere
and
deposited. A light was to be kept burning near "4100
a superintendent was appointed to watch it, m IJ‘e ir %
t biog
doing daily for the last fifty years ! Afeantirne,3'
ton's body was not deposited there, and`t'ever'i°eP
Congress included, forgot that any such thin' Vvgniltlvg
istence. The only memorial that exists to l‘eer ptV
memory of the affair alive has been the annual app gnu
ation for the superintendent." The New Yorgresos4.l
that the Circuttiocution Office and Tite
aniumtutzare p0t..,e0nfig9.44.....„.t0Dicke„%c0,a, 170 u 9 Pg