The San Francisco call., 1895-12-20
FORGERY Is CHARGED.
Af6davits From Prominent Cath
olic Clergymen Are
Submitted.
DIR. BOvARD AND THE BAPTISTs.
The Monitor Replies to Major Sherman.
DR.. French and Father
Ferguson.

The Rev. Father Yorke makes the fol-
lowing reply to the letter OF 6. A. Hub
bard of the American Protective Associa-
tion published in THE CALL yesterday:
December, 10, 1895.
To the Editor Of the CGIJ-DEAR SIR: In your
issue of this morning G. A. Hubbard publishes
certain oaths which he claims are taken by
priests and Jesuits. The object OF this publica-
tion is evidently to Offset the exposure OF the
oath of the A. P. A., the authenticity OF which
oath G. a. Hubbard admits when he says,
eve are not averse TO the publication OF the
A. P. A. oaths, in fact we prefer that they
should be given TO the public.
The two oaths which Mr.. Hubbard selected
for publication are good specimens OF current
a. P. A. literature. They have been kept
standing for months IN the A Z. A. papers, ana
they have been circulated as handblIls TO
brighten the credulOus. No words OF mine
could describe more vividly than does the pro-
duction of these documents the mental and
moral bankruptcy of the A. p. A. When de-
scribed that society as engaged in campaign
of slander and forgery. many thought that my
language was too strong. Here now is my
justification and out OF the mouths OF the
chiefs OF the A. 2. A.
To engage in q serious retutatlon OF these
oaths may seem to you, Mr. Editor, waste OF
time. You yourself if l mistake not, have not
considered yourself dlshonored by the friend
ship of priests-aye, even OF Jesuit priests.
When call to your recollection the venerable
and kindly men who in san Francisco, in Santa
Clara, in San Jose, have for nigh fifty years
trained generation after generation OF our
youth TO manliness and virtue. need not ask
you what you think of the ''JesuitS' OATH"
When l point out TO you as he goes along the
street on his errand OF mercy yonder bent and
white-haired figure, whom strong men,
Protestant as well as Catholic, salute to-day as
respectfully and greet as lovingly as they did
thirty years ago. when they were boys, can
do such outrage to human nature as to suggest
that he has sworn q diabolical oath TO chang,
burn, waste, boil, fay, strangle and bury
alive" those who differ from him in religious
belief?
When few winters ago want and misery lay
heavy upon this City and early in the morning
q long procession OF the unemployed streamed
by the doors OF St. Ignatius, and received each
man his daily bread without thought or ques-
ton of nativity or creed, did any one think OF
1.-The poisonous cup, the strangulatlng cord,
the steel OF the poinard, the leaden buIlet?' 1t
is humiliating, Mr.. Editor, to you, TO me and
10 every decent man 10 suggest such questions
in an American city and on the eve OF the
twentieth century.
some who believe in the authentenuc1ty OF
these oaths, otherwise the A. P. A. would not
have Circulated them so widely nor paraded
them SO confidently. Indeed, II mistake not
that organization looks upon them as its
strongest weapon. Here, it cries, are the veri-
table sentiments OF the priests and of the
Jesuits, and here is the sole and sufficient
reason why the A. 7. A. exists.
l viii not do the great American people the
Injustice OF supposing that they credit such
infamous fRbrlcatlonS. The American people
is just people, and does not wish 10 con-
demn any one unheard The American people
Is q cOmmon-sense people, and Is not willing
10 credit 10 priests or Jesults ideas which
are not only contrary TO the dictates OF re-
yealed religion, but at variance with the very
rudmentary principles OF morality which
survive among the most barbarous tribes.
do not think that IN this age of universal en-
hghJenment any sane person can believe that
great Christian church could have pro-
tessed 10 give license to sin. Catholic the
ology should be too well known for any one to
assert that We allow acts against the divine
or civil law. The teaching OF our very cate
chism is too clear 10 permit such a delusion
to exist. For no spiritual or temporal good
can we connive at evil. If tomorrow the most
trivial lie would assure the salvation OF every
soul in san Francisco, Catholic theology de-
clares that such lie would not be lawful.
Yet here we are held up In great San Fran
cisco daily as conn1ving not only at rank trea-
son, but al every atrocity which the devil
could suggest to his dupes.
Yet these oaths would not be published with
such shouts OF triumph If there were not some
to believe them true. For the sake of those,
whom hope are few, have tried during this
short day to muster such evidence as l could
to show the real nature of the documents and
to demonstrate to the public of San Francisco
the fraud and forgery of the organization
which is responsible for their concocuon and
divulgation.
In the beginning let me say, Mr.. Editor, that
the man who attempts TO prove a negative un-
dertakes ditticult task. Any one may come
before the public and accuse me of all the
crimes in the calendar and though perfectly
innocent may not be able to disprove his
charges. Happily, however, in such case the
common-sense OF the civil law provides rem
edy. 1t stiDulates that my assailant must prove
his assertions or else it Furnishes him. When
charge, however, is brought against a body OF
men 1t appears there is redress, and if the
priests or the Jesuits undertake to disprove the
authenticity OF such oaths as those the A. P A.
prints they are compelled to do SO outside the
courts and without the protection OF the civil
law.
Yet, with all these disadvantages, hope to
be able to make plain to the people of San
Francisco the defamatory and calumnious char
acter of these oaths ascribed to the priests and
to the Jesuits. l call as witnesses two men
whose lives have beeI4 spent in this City, and
against whose character not even the de-
gladed hirelings of Intolerance can raise their
rancorous notes. The Very Rev. John j. Prem
dergast is the Vicar-General of this archdiocese,
and therefore the chief priest in San Francisco.
The Very Rev. Henry Imoda,S IS. j., is the superior
of the Jesuit order on this coast, and therefore
competent to bear witness as to what the
Jesuits believe and do. These are the witnesses
bring before the American public, and their
testimony, given not as hearsay or matter of
belief but sworn to under oath and concern
ing matters OF TACT, lay before the people of
this City and of the State of California. This
morning l addressed the following letter to
Father Prendergast:
SAN FRANCISCO, December 49, 1895.
Very Rev. and Dear Father Prendergdst: In the
San Francisco CALL of this date there appears
letter signed by one 6. A Hubbard. In that letter
he publishes a copy of what he calls the "Prlests'
Oath" and states that this GA b is taken by priests
wish you would read the oath carefully through.
You know better than do that this screed calls for
serious refutation; still it has been published
in daily paper of large circulation and as it has
been read by many, it may be well for you as the
chief priest in this diocese TO make affidavit as to
the truth or falsty of the said OATH Yours truly,
PETER c. YoRKE.
In reply TO this letter l received from Father
Prendergast the following sworn statement:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, S.
]. J. Prendergast, being first duly sworn deposes
and says
date alleged oath entitled priests Oath" plIr-
porting to be taken by the priests of the Roman
Catholic church.
/ further depose and say that 1 was ordained in
the month of June, 1859, and that have been at
Bached secular priest to the archdiocese of San
Francisco from that date until the present; that
occupy the position of Vicar General in the arch