The New York herald., 1875-09-11
The GuIbord Case in Canada.

The GuibOrd Case in Canada.
The excitement in Montreal over the case
of Guibord shows how a small matter may
become of worldwide interest. The whole
story is in a nutshell Guibord was a proper
and worthy citizen, a member of the Catholic
Church While in the enjoyment of this
membership he became also a member Of a
literary association, which fell under the dis
pleasure of the Bishop of Montreal because
its officers would not, in obedience to his
command, remove from the library certain
books that were interdicted by the Holy See
Because Of the action of these officers the
Bishop placed them under excommunica-
tion. Guibord objected to the action of the
Bishop and appealed the question to Rome.
In the meantime he died, and although he
made confession according to the rules of
the Church, he was denied the last rites be-
cause he declined to withdraw from
his membership. The Bishop for
bade him the rights of sepulture
in the Catholic cemetery because, having
died outside of the Church, he could not
claim to be inferred in consecrated ground.
The case was taken to court, the friends of
Guibord contending that he had in no re-
spect forfeited his position as Catholic, and
that the Bishop transcended his power in for
bidding him interment in a cemetery in
which he owned lot. The matter was car
ried from court to court in Canada, until it
reached the highest tribunal in England, that
of the Privy Council The result was that
ri 1,,,t t1,o D,.;x o,1
commanding that sepulture be given to
Guibord in the consecrated ground. This
mandate had not been obeyed because of the
action of the people of Montreal, who sym
pathize with their bishop, and who as
sembled at the cemetery and violently pre-
vented interment when the remains of the
deceased were brought to its gates.
The question has taken so angry a shape
that an outbreak is expected at any moment
1t is difficult to see how such question can
be decided without trouble, because on one
side we have the authority of the Queen, who
is the Sovereign of the Kingdom, and on the
other side the authority of the Bishop, who
represents the Holy See. Our own belief is
that the question should never have arisen.
We think that if the rulers of the Catholic
diocese of Montreal had been wise they
would have avoided q controversy with the
Queen. 1t is certain that if the Privy Coun-
Gil of the realm, the highest tribunal known
to the law, decided case against the
Catholic Church, that its decision will be en-
forced if it requires all the military and
naval power of England. Reasonable men
will also say that decision from so high and
impartial and respected a tribunal must be
equitable and just. The Privy Council
is sure to decide question of this
kind upon its merits as matter of law
and not from religious feeling Therefore
we repeat that it is unfortunate for Cath
olic bishop to assume the position of an
tagonizing the Crown. 1t only gives rise to
the assertion so frequently made that the
aim of the Catholic Church, and especially
since the proclamation of the dogma of in
fallibility, has been to elevate the Pope over
the State 1t certainly looks like this when,
at the O'Connell dinner in Dublin, the Lord
Mayor gave the place of honor in the toasts
to the Pope, proposing his health before that
of the Queen. Now, when we find the
Bishop of Montreal declining to obey man
date from the Queen, the decree of the su-
preme tribunal of England, it is hard to
reconcile its attitude with that due loyalty to
authority without which society would
cease to exist.