The Irish standard., 1914-08-29
CONTINUED from page -

continued from page ~
the desire OF his government. This
declaration could only be made at the
last moment, for the reason that, by
| traditional usage, a government
might invoke this alleged right only
once at the same conclave, and conse-
quently would not wish to employ it
unnecessarily. a veto made after the
election was not recognized. Opin-
ions differ widely as to the antiquity
of this right. 1t cannot be proved
that it is in any way related to the
rights in the papal election, exercised
by German kings and emperors in the
early Middle Ages. Indeed, it was
not until the sixteenth century, that
the more important European coun-
tries obtained larger influence over
papal elections, owing to the conten-
tions of France, Spain, and the Ger
man emperor, for the control of
Italy. These governments were or
iginally satisfied with the so-called
ballot of exclusion" i.e., they
sought to unite more than one-third
of the voters against an undesirable
candidate and thus make his cleo
ton impossible, through lack of the
necessary two-thirds majority. About
the beginning of the seventeenth
century, however, in the conclaves
that elected Leo XII and Paul V
(1605), Spain raised the claim, that
it could exclude a candidate by a
general declaration addressed to the
College of Cardinals. Soon after, in
the conclaves of 1914 and 1855,
which elected, respectively, limo
cent x and Alexander VII, and in
both of which Cardinal Sacchetti was
excluded as candidate, the term
used for this action was JUS Ex-
clusiva bright of exclusion). This
right was, therefore, claimed about
the middle of the seventeenth CEN
fury; later dates suggested, e.g.,
1891, or 1921, must be abandoned.
1t was also about the middle of the
seventeenth century that treatises
and polemic writings began to ap-
pear, in which the alleged right of
exclusion was discussed; among such
controversialists were the Cardinals
Albizzi and Lugo.
In the following period repeated
use was made of this so-called right
In 1921 the Germany emperor for
mally excluded Cardinal Paolucci;
in 1880 the King of Spain excluded
Cardinal Imperiali; in 1858 France
exercised this right to exclude Car
dinal Cavalchini. In the nineteenth
century Austria maintained the right
of exclusion, in 1880, against Car
dinal Severoli, and Spain, in 1880,
against Cardinal Giustiniani; in 1908
Austria again exercised this right,
this time against Cardinal Rampolla.
AS matter of fact, no government
has right to exercise any veto in a
papal election. On the contrary the
popes have expressly repudiated the
exercise of such right. Plus Nv in
Bull of October 9, 1852, ordered
the cardinals to elect a pope without
any regard to the interference of
secular rulers, or to other human
considerations. That he meant
thereby what is now known as the
right of exclusion cannot, indeed, be
proven; according to the foregoing
account of its origin such claim did
not then exist. Gregory XIV in a
Bull November IS, 1921 declared
authoritatively that the cardinals
must abstain from all agreements
and from acts of any kind, which
might be construed as binding them
to include or exclude any one candi-
date, or several, or candidates of a
certain class. 1t may be that the
pope does not even here refer to ex-
clusion by a state, but only to the
so-called ballot of exclusion; it
has already been stated, however,
that the governments at this time
laid claim to a formal right of ex-
clusion. In the Bull of October II,
1892, Clement XII ordered the car
dinals in the words of Plus Nv to
elect without regard to the interior
ence of secular rulers or to other hu-
man considerations.
BY this time, however, govern
mental exclusion had long been the
accepted form of the interference of
secular rulers in papal elections. 1t
is, therefore, precisely this exclusion
which the pope forbids. This COM
mand has all the more weight since
we know that this pope was urged to
recognize, within certain limits. the
right of exclusion put forth by the
Catholic states; in the minutes of
the deliberations of the comission
of cardinals appointed to draw up
this Bull the right of exclusion is ex-
nlicit1v characterized as an abuse