The San Francisco call., 1895-12-28
Proofs Requested of Father
Yorke for Seventeen
Citations.
ANSWERS DEMANDED.
The Minister Declares Spain TO
Be Low in the Scale of
Nations.
WESLEY LOYAL TO HIS FLAG.
Father Yorke Replies to DR.. Bovard
on Questions of Catholic
Doctrine.
WESLEY LOYAL TO HIS FLAG

The Rev. DR.. w. w. Case submits the
following reply to the letter of the Rev.
Peter C. Yorke as published in THE CALL
yesterday:
To the Editor of the San Francisco Cdtl-DEAR
SIR. NV distinguished critic returns to his lost
csuse with superheated blood and surplus of
bile Il is TO be regretted that he has quite lost
his temper and that in his agftated condition he
forgot to return the compliments OF the season
10 ms and TO other heretics But his excited
condition may be pardoned, since he is hard
pressed in the galley. He has the laborlng oar.
Hard pulling against the stream puts MN out
of breath at times, but with the recovery OF MS
wind he blows hard as ever. 1really pity
him from the bottom OF my heart. 1t is natural
10 me to always sympathlze with the under
dog | am sorry Chris tmas did not have more
soothing effect upon his spirits and bring TO
him more peaceful rest. AS for myself. am as
happy as California oriole in sprlngtlme. II
would give me real pleasure to see my critic IN
ihd iights enjoyment u '--' '"-i' anu
He returns desperately to his ten PROPOSE
tions 1t is clearly manifest he dotes on them.
Since one good turn deserves another L also
viii state few propositions;
l. Ny critic has not proven that his SANDER
Gus charges against Rev. J. H. Nelson have q
scintilla of truth in them, ana he never can
prove ii.
2 He has not proven that religious liberty in
Spain makes 1t comfortable for Protestant
teachers there, or that Spain Is not low IN the
scale of nations, nor can he ever prove 1t.
8. He has not proven that Archbishop
Hughes was friendly TO our common schooI
system, nor can he ever furnish the proof OF it.
4 He has not proven that John Wesley was
disloyaI to the flag of his country, the British
flag, nor can he ever prove It,
D. He has not furnished any credltaDle YES
timony 10 disprove my quotation from "The
Shepherd of the Valley" nor can he ever bring
such testimony.
nv quotation from Bronsons Quarterly Review
for October, 1852, nor can he ever bring such
evidence.
2. He has brought no evidence to disprove
my quotation from the New York Tablet, nor
can he ever produce any creditable testimony
against it.
s. He has not proven his charge that 1
garbled or misrepresented Hecker in my cita-
lions from his The Church and the Age, nor
can he ever prove 1t.
9. He has never proven that he told the
truth when he said my quotation from Hecker
from the preface OF the book, nor can he
ever prove it.
10 He has not proven that the section of
"Gury's Compendium" when quoted teaches
decent morals nor can he ever prove 1t.
II. He has not proved 10 US, nor can he ever
prove, that the moral teaching OF 'Gury's Com
pendulum is any the less vile because "these"
propositions ''are explained farther down TO be
'extraconstitutional,' as we would call it in
American law"
II. He has not proven that Peter, who is
claimed as his first Pope, was never married,
nor can he ever prove it.
13. He has not proven that Peters wifes
declares, nor can he ever prove 1t.
Ia He has not proven that the Apostle Peter
was ever in Rome nor can he ever prove it.
15 He has not proven, nor can he ever
prove, that my quotations from Father Nc
Glynn (Which he styles "apocryphaF1 are
either apocryphal or 'extraconsttutional."
TO- He has not proven that Protestants are
the enemies OF the public school system of this
country. as he charges, nor can he ever
prove ii.
no hat 10
out OF politics, and he never can prove 1t.
have given, in my previous pa per. tes I OF
the unreliability OF my. critic. furnished a
perfect transcript of the section of Hecker
from which l quoted. THE CALL printed it
word for word as l copied it. But for lack of
time and space l should certainly have used
the whole section, comprising four pages, in
my Temple address as bearing directly on the
point was illustrating. As your readers have
seen in the full quotation in my last communi-
cation did not in any respect garble the text
or pervert the meaning of the author quoted.
My critic was clearly convicted of gross mis-
representation, either willful or ignorant. he
can take either horn of the dilemma as he may
choose. So complete was the exposure of his
undignified and unprincipied methods of con-
troversy that it wrought him up to a tempestu-
Gus fury, in which condition probably he wrote
his last paper. No doubt he is heartily ashamed
OF his ebullition of temper ere this and we
must overlook it.
1t would be folly to stack up reference-books
in your office to verify every quotation made
when intelligent public, with access to
great public Libraries, have the opportunity
of verifying for themselves. It would be some
thing of burden to pack my library, which
consists of 5000 to 5000 volumes and weighs
several tons, over to the newspaper office in
order that my quotations should be verified
Every quotation l have given thus far has
been true transcript or translation of the
book quoted.
feel like making an apology for having
consumed so much OF your valuable space dur
ing the last few weeks. l am done for the
present. When discussion of great questions
degenerates into wrangling, stop. Jangling
words, like jangling voices, are very discord-
ant. Enough has been said in your columns
to awaken public attention anew to the errors
OF Remanism, and the people are thinking for
world needs is more light to dispel the dark
ness. Ny critic in his last communication
says "the readers OF this controversy are the
members of my own church." meaning, l
suppose, Protestant people What does he
mean by this statement? Surely there are
many Catholics who readl Have they
been commanded not to read the last page of
THE CALL? What can this mean? Is THE
CALL on the "Index Expurgatorius''? Liberty
forbid itl WEsTwooD WRIGHT CASE.
G. A. Hubbell, business manager of the
Patriot, adds the following communication
to the frightening record of the contro-
versy.
OFFICE AMERICAN PATRIOT }
819 Market ST., Dec o. 1895
Editor San Francisco CGll-DEAR SIR: 1t ap-
diocese San Francisco, is uncontrolably angry
because your readers have been informed of the
fact that Jesuits are so bad in every conceiva-
bic manner under the sun, as soon as they get
the power and the opportunity that even the
Pope OF Rome had to destroy them. He is ex-
ceedingly angry because your readers have
been informed that most, If not all, the civil
ized countries of the world, for seli-preserva-
ton, had TO run these Jesuit priests out.
Peter c. 1orke says that the long list of gov
ernments expelling the Jesuits mentioned in
my last communication is incorrect Weadmit
thst this list little incorrect; we laid this
trap to catch Peter c. Yorke. The incorrect
ness of the long list consisted in it not being
longer. We know however that one-quarteT
Of the list is sufficient to convince any one who
has not sworn his first allegiance 10 the Pope
of Rome, that the Jesuit is knave.
'Jesuit?" Why, even the sehoolchildren
know that the Roman Jesuit Is a crafty de-
ceitfui, perluring fraud. And why shouldn't
every true American place Jesuit beneath his
contempt and put no reliance whatever upon
Jesuit oath In the face of such damnable Jug
glery as this.
Under the heading Mental Reservations" :"
Sanchez, Jesuit writer and authority, says !:
"a man may swear that he never did such a
thing (though he actually did III, meaning
within himself that he did not do so on GER
tain day, or before he was born, or understand
ing any other circumstance, while the words
which he employs have no such meaning.
mi is in