National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-11-23

The Baltimore AmcricGH Of Saturday prints the
following letter from Archbishop Bayley in refer
ence &c the abandonment Of the Church by the
Rev. Father Jacquemet, allusion to which was
made in our columns on Saturday last:
ARCHGISHoP's House,
BALTIaORE, Nov. ~ IS7L
As was certain that in a short time that they
who had taken the Rev. Mr.. Jacquemet in hand
would md out by sad experience what sort Of
person he was, I had made up my mind not to
take any public notice Of the matter.
If he had quietly left the Catholic Church and
joined himself to the PTesbyterians or any other
denomination, l would hare said nothing about
it, but as the statements he has induced you to
make in your paper this morning that he was
priest in good standing, and had received a GER
ufcate from the Archbishop declaring that there
was no mputatiOR on his character, are calculated
TO convey false impression. 1 have been urged 70
make brief statement Of his case.
Mr.. Jacquemet was never formally received
had in it to my commisseratiOn for poor priest,
with 4 somewhat injured reputation. He had
formed the habit of using preparations OF
ing TO correct the bad effects Of the Mississippi
water, when obliged to be good deal on the
river in the performance OF his missionary duties
Soon after received him into my house, l found
out that he sometimes INDUCED in more active
stimulants, and then told him that it would be
impossible for me 10 give him permanent situa-
tion in the diocese. He begged so hard of me to
give him another trial that l persuaded good
Father Michigan, Of st. Peters church, to take
him into his house. at least for awhile, so as TO
give him another opportunity of testing the sin
certify Of his promises. His conduct at St. Peters
was so unworthy Of priest, and began to give so
much scandal, that was obliged to withdraw his
faculties and TO declare to him in the most posi-
tive manner that could do no more for him. But
although wished to get rid Of him. he did not
seem inclined to regard my wishes, and so won
again on my pity by his destitute and miserable
condition thar l prevailed on the abbot Of the
Trappist NonasteTyIO: GethSemane, in Kentucky,
10 receive him into his house in the hone thsf
under the quiet and solemn influences Of the
place, he might enter into himself and reform. 1t
may not be improper tor me to mention that all
his expenses we're paid by me.
AfLerremaininR for some months at Gethsemane
he left the Monastery and returned to Baltimore.
in the face of my declaration that neither wsuld
nor could give him anything to do, although l
informed him that would provide for him so
long as he should stay at La Trappe. When he
arrived here refused to see him. but sent him
some assistance. He forced himself into my pres
ence, and when refused to restore his faculties
he became very much excited, and intimated TO
me as he left the house, that he would commit
suicide. Some time afterWaTd he wrote to me
that he was entirely destitute, and again begged
me TO have mercy on him. He said that he knew
none Of the priests Of the Mission Ito which con-
gregatiUn he formerly belOnged) in CIba, and
that if would give him certificate that he was
not under 'censure" they would no doubt re
him something TO do as teacher, and l was thus
induced 10 give him a few lines in I.atin, merely
stating that he caIue here from Charleston; thai
lie had exercised for short time the fasdltie3
gwen in this diocese, and that he was not so IA:
as l knew, under ecclesiastical censure.7
The withdrawal Of ordinary faculties, although
it taxes away the power to celebrate the Holy
Sacrifice Of the Mass, and to administer any OF
tine sacramen.s Of the Church, is not .'eensure''
in the ecclesiastical sense Of the word. Such
letter as l gave to him, answering to what are
called ''cantng arms in heTaldry. which are so
called because they do not carry their meaning
their face, but suggest inquiry. No bishop
would receive q priest into his diocese on such
letter without first writing and obtaining further
information. So far from declaring that every
thing is right such brief letters show that there
is something wrong for good priest removing
to another diocese would not bear with him such
a mere negative declaration that he was under
no ecclesiastical censure. but positive and full
statement Of his WOrthiness and zeal.
The above is a simple and true statement Of my
connection with Mr.. Jacquemet 1t now turns
out from his own account OF himself that az the
very time that / was supporting him out Of my
pocket and doing all that could to keep him out
Of the gutter he was 10 treaty with some Of the
Protestant clergymen OF the city for leaving the
Catholic Church. His story about going 70 Cuba
was. Of course, mere trick to obtain some sort Of
testimonial by which he might prove character.
although he knew full we'll that the paper gave
him proved nothing, except that be was priest
badly damaged, though not entirely shipWrecEed.
To explain this certificate, which wOuId be mis-
understood by those not acquainted with ecclesl-
astical usages, and the circumstances under which
it was given, and which was evidently thus mis-
understood by the person who wrote the article
in your paper, is in fact the chief reason for my
writing this letter.
Isineerely regret that have to write It for any
reason. It gives me no pleasure TO expose or
dwell upon the delinquencies OF those who have
protessed 70 give themselves up to the service OF
God. whether they belong TO- the Catholic Church
or not. To use Dean SWiits we'll known smile,
ing HE garden and throwing the weeds over the
wall. and have charity enough in me 20 advise
those who snatch at these weeds as eagerly as
they were vegetables, that they are not whole
some nor good to eat.
Iremain, &e., ]. ROOSEVELT BAYLEY.
Archbishop Of Baltimore.