The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-04-07
Trial, Conviction and Sentence Of The
Bishop Of 0linda.
FOUR YEARS WITH HARD LABOR
Scenes in COurt-The Citizen
Feeling Outside.
The Conflict Between Church and State in
Bitter Progress.

Rio JANEiRo, Feb. %. 1874.
The trial ana Condemnation OF a Roman Catholic
bishop in Roman Catholic country for offences
committed IN his spiritual character ~ pastor Of
the Church against the constitution and laws OF
his country is phenomenon due TO the necessity
felt by ali Catholic and most Protestant states to
erect o barrier against the encroachments Of the
ecclesiastical power welded by Rome and it is the
first time that Brazilian bishop has been brought
TO the bar OF a civil court to answer for his
conduct.
CAUSES OF Tue CRISIS,
The issue, AZ you are aware, arose out the in
tcrdicting by the Bishop OF Ulinda OF various semi
religious brotherhoods secular societies. which
were formed to promote the spiendor OF religious
worship and to perform acts OF charity and mutual
aid. The Bishop gave o reason for the inter-
diets that they had not expelled all the Free
masons among them. Legally the brotherhoods
were utterly without power to cxpel Freemasons
and, on appeal to the Crown, the Emperor,
by advice OF the whole Council Of State, held tnat
the brotherhoods were without power to obey the
Bishops command; that this was therefore exor-
Ditanr ana the interdIcts unjust, and that the
Bishop be required TO undo his work and remove
the interdicts. The Bishop percmptorily refused
to obey the Emperor's order, though made In
proper legal form after consultation OF the Council
OF State, and denied the jurisdiction OF the temporal
to it, alleging that appealay solely 80 the Pope; and
to emDhaslze his position, proceeded to nterdict
some twelve more brotherhoods Tor the same
motive. He also published, contrary to law, n
brief from the Pope, without first obtaining the
government PERMISSION to do so. The legislative
Chambers were in session at the time and offered
to give the Ministry any special powers required
by it to deal with the dangerous issue raised by the
Bishop OF Olinda, and supported actively ver-
bally by the other bishops. The government,
however. neld that the new powers were not nee
essary, ana determined to promote prosecution
before the Supreme Tribunal OF Justice
ARREST.
Accordingly the Bishop OF Olinda was arrested
by an officer OF the Court, brought TO Bio ana
lodged in apartments prepared for him In tue
Arsenal Of Marine. The majority OF the section.
Tribunal, having found good cause ana committed
him upon the charge OF attempting to destroy an
article OF the constitution,
TIE BISHOPS TRIAL
commenced upon the 18TH Of February. To the in
document the Bishop refused to plead. On that
canonicals and attended by the Bishop OF kio ia
neir0 Two Senators and various other gentlemen
kissed his hand and received his blessing. The
Crown Prosecutor or Attorney General, entered
also, and the Court took mp the case. fhe presl-
dent, Conselneiro Marcellino de Melo, commn-
nicated petition OF Senators and Co,nseors
Zacarias de Goes Vasconcell0s and Candida
Mendes Aea permission
Bishop OF oIinda me Court held that
that, as the members who had voted for the COM
initial OF the Bishop thereby disqualified. the
Pinto, Figueira de Melo, Baron de Montserratc,
Baron de Pirapama Smoes. Viares, valdetaro
and Albuquerque. The crown Prosecutor sug-
gested that COnselhero Figuera de Mello should
declare himself suspected, he having expressed in
Bishop to the proceedings Which mad brought HIM
to the bar or the Court, and having even published
pamphlet on the Issue sue senior Figueira de
right to make. such request; that he could
merely challenge him as Judge. After some
slightly warm conversation the Crown Prosecutor
formally challenged senior Figueira dc Mello, VINO
accordingly retired.
senator Candida Mendes de AlmeiGa asked leave
to challenge Conselhetro Valdetaro.
The President asked whether the accused had
senator Candida Mendes replied that the accused
had authorized nothing, but that, as his defender.
he thought he had the right.
COnseiheirO NaidetarO remarked that in all his
mutitudinous slttings III that Court he had never
before been challenged. and he denied the right OF
authorized by the accused.
Senator Zacharins argued that once admitted as
spontaneous defenders, they had the right al
though the accused mad not authorized them to
defend him.
Of the law 20 show that only the accused and his
procurator had the right OF challenge. II the ac
cused challenged hum he would gladly retire.
The Bishop remained silent.
The Court, Baron de Pirapama alone excepted
held that the challenge was not legal.
After reading the documents the Court adjourned
un til the 21st OF February.
COURT SESSION AND A SOLEMN SCENE.
On the 2lst the attendance Of spectators was
large, and the galleries were crowded. At ten the
Bishop entered. attended by the Bishop OF Kansas
and Senators zacarias and Mendes de Almeda.
After the report OF the relator was read the
President asked the Bishop OF Onda what he had
to allege upon It,
The Crown Prosecutor remarked upon the allow
ing Of two spontaneous and unauthorized defend
ers TO the accused, who had not employed them
and who would not plead, he denying the jurlsdic-
ton OF any civil court
The President said nothing more could be alleged
on that matter. the Court having permitted those
defenders
Judge valdetaro thought that the Crown Prose.
cutOr was IN his legal right in protesting, and that
he thought The spontaneous defenders had no
locus 20 speak, as the accused had not employed
them or acknowledged them in any way.
The President thought that, having admitted
those defenders, the Court must permit them TO
address II Tor the defence.
The Crown Prosecutor alleged that any such de-
fence Dy two Intru0crs must be held as though not
heard, ana, with the permission o. the Court, he
would retire, in order not to sanction the prece
dent by his presence. (Voices OF approval among
the audienceD
the accused could have defender without APP
pointing aim BY procuratlon, and he thought the ,
spontaneous defenders could not be denied inll
right to speak in defence.
Judge Valdetaro saIo that the old rule was extn
gnished by the law OF iS2s. which required power
OF attorney TO authorize an advocate, and that the
ofIicious defenders had no right to speak
The President held that their admission was not
contrary to law, and that they might speak.
DEFENCE.
Senator Zacaras then addressed the Court Tor
the dclence denying the legality OF the prosecu-
ton ana the validity and legality OF the charges.
and argued that against the Bishops acts, The
only appeal lay to Rome, TO which the government
should nave resorted II aggrievcd by the Bishops
course.
Senator Candido Mendez de Almeida asked leave
to speak.
The President said there could be but one speech
for the defence.
Senator Almeda said his colleagues speech was
detective, ana he wished to touch on the points
lett out.
The President then permitted Senator Aimeida
to address the Court.
Senator Alneida then argued against the capa-
city OF the Court to Judge the Bishop Tor acts done
IN accord with his conscience and his spiritual
duty, and quoted the canons III support lie also
snld the RlshOp could not be cOnstiffinnallv friad