Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1837-02-08
VOL. TX. NO. 20.

animation; still refusing 10 permit an ex-
animation by persons, not of their own Sc
Letting; or by persons in company with
Maria Monk. OF this fact l Obtained the
most unquestionable evidence, while in
Montreal. Mr.. Clary, the pastor Of the
Congregational society in that city, in
whose veracity, candor, and piety. I place
full confidence, assured me, that on the
same day. in July last of the examination
of the Hotel Dieu, by Messrs Perkins,
Curry, and others, under the guidance Of
Mr.. Jones, the Catholic Editor of Mon
treal he called on Mr.. Jones and request.
ed that permission might be obtained for
several gentlemen, from New York, with
others from Montreal to examine the Con.
vent; that Mr.. Jones at first said, he did
not think the bishop would give such per-
mission; but afterwards said that on Ger.
tain conditions, he would engage to OBJ
tain permission for these gentlemen, with
Maria Monk, to go in. One of the condi-
tons was, that if the examination failed to
prove the truth Of Maria Monks Disclos-
ures, she should be delivered up to the
authorities that she might be dealt with as
she deserved. With this condition Mr..
C. became responsible for compliance;
and Mr.. J. engaged to see the bishop and
let him know the next morning. Mr.. J.
not, however, complying with this engage
ment Mr. c., after waiting two or three
days, and hearing nothing from Mr.. J.
called on him again, when Mr. J. gave, as
the cause of his noncompliance, that he
had not seen the bishop, but promised to
do so Immediately, and to call on Mr.. G.
next morning bet4"een nine and ten o'clock,
and seemed then quite confident permiS-
sion would be granted. This interview
was on Monday, and Mr.. G. heard moth
ing further on the subject, until Saturday,
when accidentally meeting Mr.. J. in the
Post Office where he avowed to him
that he could not obtain the bishops per-
mission, and assigned that as the reason
why he had not fulfilled his promise The
amount Of the statemept was published,
under the authority Of Mr.. Clary's own
name, in the Protestant indicator. Thus
we have proof positive, that those interest
ed in sustaining the character of the Con-
vent, have refused to permit such examin-
alton, as would, incontestably, settle the
question, respecting the truth or falsehood
of Maria Monks charges. If innocent.
why should they have refused the only
possible means of making their innocence
unequivocally appear? Innocency does
not usually shun investigation.
which appears to be an instance of the
strongest possible kind of substantial evil
dence. Priest Conroy called several times
at the Aims House, in New York, in
which Maria Monk was first entertained,
and endeavored to obta in an interview with
her alone and stated to other persons,
connected with the institution, that he
knew she had escaped from the nunnery
that he had orders from the bishop to
dpprehend her, and take her back, &C..
and all this before she had made any of
her disclosures.
These circumstances had strongly i'm
pressed my mind that the Awful Disclos-
,ures were materially true. Besides, l had
read the book with care aud attention, and
believed it gave strong internal evidence
of being a genuine production, and the au-
thoress had been what she described.-
With these views ofthe matter in contro-
versy, went to Montreal, wishing to OBJ
tain certain knowledge of the truth
There first learned that Col. Stone had
published report of his examination of
the Hotel Dieu, and W hen heard of his
conclusion, was not little surprised.-a
| had read Messrs Perkins and Curry's
report, which appeared to make but little
impression against the credit of Maria
Monks book. But suppose that Col.
Stone had discovered some new evidence,
clearly demonstrating the falsehood of the
Awful Disclosures. Before had an op-
portunity of reading COL Stones account,
| had a conversation with Messrs. Per-
kins and Curry, American protestant min
listers in Montreal, knowing that they ad-
vocated the innocency of the priests, and
the purity Of the nunnery. proposed to
them several considerations, which, in nv
opinion, gave credibility to the ex-nun's
book. heard and reflected on the an
swers which they very obligingly and po-
litely gave, and although they were not
such as | thought those gentlemen ought
themselves to rest satisfied with; yet they
had the effect of making me suspend any
further opinion on the subject, until 1
should examine such evidence as they re-
terred me to, in confirmation oftheir opin-
ion-particu!arly Col. Stones report, and
Mr.. Jones book. They also expressed
their belief as COL Stone and Mr.. Jones
had done, that it was Mrs. McDonneIEs
MagdaIen Asylum, that Maria Monk had
in her minds eye, when she wrote her
description of the nunnery, in which she
was enclosed, and not the Hotel Dieu.-
This induced me to desire to see Mrs.
McDonnelrs establishment, and compare
its appearance with Miss Monks descrip-
ton and nlan of the Hotel Diem az renra.-