by Rev. Aeneas McDonnell Dawson

BISHOP GEDDES PREPARES A CHINESE GRAMMAR—MANUFACTURERS OF GLASGOW PROPOSE SUBSCRIBING FOR THE ERECTION OF A CATHOLIC CHURCH—THE PENAL LAWS A HINDRANCE—THEIR ODIOUSNESS, EXPOSED— CASE OF MUNSHES—THE MAGISTRATES OF DUNDEE FAVOUR A RELIEF BILL— PROPOSAL THAT THE FOUR CHIEF TOWNS SUPPORT THE SAME—BISHOP HAY WISHES TO ENLIST IN THE CAUSE BISHOP GEDDES’ POWERFUL FRIENDS— MOTION LAID BEFORE PARLIAMENT—RELIEF BILL PASSED BOTH HOUSES— RECEIVED THE ROYAL SANCTION ON 3RD JUNE, 1792—NO DIRECT OPPOSITION TO THE BILL IN PARLIAMENT—A COL. M’LEOD AND LORD GEO. GORDON HOSTILE—OPPOSITION DISCOURAGED BY THE PRESS AND BY THE KIRK ASSEMBLY—THE MODERATOR THOUGHT IT NOT SUFFICIENTLY FAVOURABLE TO CATHOLICS—STATESMEN HIGHLY PLEASED—THE SUCCESSION—ANNUAL MEETING OF 1792—THANKS TO THE BISHOP OF RHODEZ—THE BISHOPS EXPRESS THEIR SYMPATHY WITH HIM IN VIEW OF THE SAD STATE OF HIS COUNTRY—REGRET FOR THE DEATH OF BISHOP M’DONALD—MRS. GOLDIE AND HER CHILDREN’S TUTORS—INTERESTING THE NUNCIO AT LIEGE IN FAVOUR OF THE MISSION—MUCH GOOD EXPECTED FROM BISHOP GEDDES’ MISSION TO PARIS—GLASGOW MANUFACTURERS PAY THE RENT OF A LARGE HALL FOR CATHOLIC WORSHIP—IMPORTANT OPENING OF THE SAME—MR. ALEX. M’DONELL, AFTERWARDS BISHOP OF KINGSTON, OFFICIATING—BISHOP HAY’S OPINION OF HIM—MAGISTRATES AND CHIEF MERCHANTS FAVOUR­ABLE.

When Bishop Geddes reached London, on his way home, he must remain there some time in order to see friends and prepare a Chinese grammar for presentation to Mr. Dundas. In a few days it was complete; and the Bishop had a preface ready. Before it was presented, Sir George Staunton, Secretary to the Embassy intended for Pekin, called in company with two mission­aries from the Chinese College at Naples. In course of conversation he expressed his regret that there was no grammar of the Chinese language. The Bishop showed him the one he had prepared. He took it with him and promised to present it to Mr. Dundas.

Bishop Hay was desirous that the coadjutor before leaving London should see Mr. Dundas regarding the mission affairs of Glasgow. Some of the principal manufacturers were willing to raise a subscription towards building a church for the Catholic people. The penal laws, however, although dormant, were still on the Statute book; and ill disposed persons might take advantage of them to accuse those worthy gentlemen of infringing the law. Several Protestants were inclined, but for those laws, to aid in the erection of the proposed church. There occurred, mean­while, a circumstance which proved more powerful than all the diplomacy and eloquence of Bishop Geddes. It exposed before a more enlightened public the odiousness of the penal laws. The next Protestant heir to Mr. Maxwell of Munshes, had taken measures for possessing himself of Mr. Maxwell’s Annandale estate, and would, no doubt, have made good his claim but for the agitation which his proceeding occasioned among the Catholics and their friends. Bishop Hay remarked on this outrage: “It will make a curious appearance in the eyes of the world if, whilst Catholics are getting every indulgence they can reasonably desire throughout, the whole British Dominions, Munshes should be deprived of such an estate merely because he is a Catholic. However, God Almighty has His own ends in view; we must refer all to His Divine Providence, who knows how to bring good out of evil. I hope Munshes’ affair in the hands of Providence will produce some good. Fiat! Fiat!” The magistrates of Dundee had lately made an offer to Mr. Pepper, the priest in charge there, to petition Government for the extension of the English Relief Bill to Scotland. This proposal, viewed in connection with the friendly action of the citizens of Glasgow, suggested to the Bishop a plan for obtaining the much desired relief. It was that the four leading towns in Scotland, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Dundee should make a united effort in support of the good purpose. “Who knows,” added the Bishop, “but Providence intends that those very places, which were lately very much against us, should he the means of befriending us? A bold stroke may be made, and sometimes succeeds best.” The agent for the Crown in Edinburgh suggested to Bishop Geddes that when the Irish Relief Bill should pass, the Catholics of Scotland would do very well to bring their claims under the notice of Parlia­ment. There was some difference of opinion as to the extent of what should be asked for. Bishop Hay inclined for a general repeal of disabilities rather than of those only which affected the power of Catholics to hold property. His views were expressed at some length in a letter to the coadjutor. He considered the time exceedingly favourable, and continuing said: “If Mr. Constable gets any motion made for securing our property would it not be proper for you to write to Lord Gower before it come in, to see if he could get any of his friends to move for the extension of the English Bill to Scotland? Could you not suggest it, also, to Mr. Secretary Dundas? * * * The general run of the country is in our favour, and I do not think that your using your influence with your great friends could do any harm. If matters were carried through at once there could not be the least danger; but if property alone were sought and obtained they might raise a splutter (if they were inclined to make one) to prevent our getting more, of which property would be considered as a prelude. This was the rock our friend split upon when the first application was made. Had Scotland been included in the first Bill there would have probably been no disturbance. And, from the experience of what happened then, I am fully persuaded that it would be much easier to get the whole at once, just now, than to get a part now and the rest hereafter. Might you not, at least suggest these reflections to Mr. Constable, as well as to your other friends? * * * In a second letter on the subject, the Bishop earnestly urged on his coadjutor the propriety of communicating with his powerful friends, and expressed anew his conviction that the most complete relief should be asked for. He addressed, moreover, a circular letter to the Catholic proprietors, inviting their cooperation with Munshes, and proposing, as the most expeditious and economical plan, the simple extension of the English Bills of Relief to Scotland. “We cannot expect, nor would I desire more; and if we got it, it would make us very easy.” Mr. Menzies, of Pitfodels, was associated with Munshes and Mr. Constable in bringing the matter before Parliament. The Lord Advocate, on April 22nd, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to relieve the Scotch Roman Catholics from certain penalties and disabilities imposed on them by former Acts of the Scotch Parliament, and especially in the eighth and ninth sessions of the first Parliament of King William. The preamble of the Bill asserted that former acts of repression had been deemed expedient as chiefly directed against persons who acknowledged, or were supposed to acknowledge, the temporal superiority or power of the Pope over Scotland; an opinion contrary to the allegiance of the subjects of that kingdom. The preamble to the new Bill further declared that the formula hitherto imposed on the Roman Catholics of Scotland amounted only to a renunciation of speculative and dogmatic opinions. It was, therefore, enacted that, from this date, the Scotch Roman Catholics who should take and subscribe the oath of abjuration and the declaration annexed to the Bill should be exempted from all the pains, penalties and disabilities imposed, enacted, revived, ratified and confirmed by the said Act of the eighth and ninth sessions of the first Parliament of King William III, as fully and effectually as if such persons had actually made the renunciation of Popery thereby ordained, according to the formula there unto subjoined. A certain amount of legal shuffling and quibbling was but a small price to pay for so important a measure of justice to the Catholics of Scotland. The formula was declared to have been aimed at persons who held political doctrines inconsistent with the duties of good British subjects. Yet the formula was also declared to comprehend only religious opinions, and to be, therefore, imperative as regarded political opinions. For which reason the new Act of Relief proposed to substitute a more efficient check to political heresy, under cover of which the offensive formula was set aside as inefficient; and thus a measure of religious liberty was secured for the Roman Catholics in Scotland. The Bill was read a first time, April 25th, and its provisions were even more favourable than the Catholics themselves had hoped for. The Oath subjoined was the same as that prescribed by the last English Relief Act, and was one against which no scruple could exist. By taking it a Catholic was fully enabled to acquire, possess and dispose of his real and personal estate in Scotland, as any other subject could. An exception, however, was retained which forbade any Catholic, even after taking the Oath, from discharging the office of a governor, pedagogue, teacher, tutor or curator, chamber­lain or factor, to any child or children of Protestant parents; neither could he be employed in their education or in the trust and management of their affairs. The Bill prohibited a Catholic from being a schoolmaster, professor or public teacher of any science in Scotland. Notwith­standing these drawbacks the Bill was thankfully received by the Catholic body; Bishop Hay’s only disparaging remark being that the exception about teaching was rather inconvenient. The Bill passed the Upper House on May 24th, and received the Royal Assent on June 3rd. Bishop Geddes, in communicating this good news to Bishop Hay, sincerely congratulated him upon it, and expressed his hope that the Bishop might live many years to see the good effects resulting from this favour of Providence. He writes also some very interesting particulars illustrative of the history of the Bill: “The first sketch of the Bill which was concerted in Scotland would have excluded converts from all benefit of the Act, and had a clause declaring illegal all donations to religious societies. But these odious parts were, cut out by the present and late chancellors. There was not the least direct opposition made to us in either House of Parliament; but, it is suspected that Colonel McLeod and the Duke of Norfolk, by proposing to give up more privi­leges, intended to create delays, and even, perhaps, to raise discontent in Scotland. It seems Lord George Gordon also bestirred himself; but there has scarcely been a murmur that I have heard, which, I believe, owing greatly to the quiet manner in which the affair has been gone about and the very obliging disposition of the publishers of our newspapers who unanimously agreed to reject every inflammatory composition that was offered them for publication. There was no mention made of us in the general Assembly. Its Moderator, Dr. Hardie, had seen the Bill at London and had said that it was not favourable enough to us. The Lord Advocate has behaved extremely well; and, last week when I thanked him, he seemed happy at what he had done, and assured me the exceptions had been left merely for peace’s sake but that they will never be minded. We meet with many congratulations; but none seems to be more glad at this event than your friends, Mr. Arbuthnot and Andrew Stewart (Protestants.) Mr. Maxwell, of Munshes, is returned home in very good spirits, and has brought another emigrant priest along with him. He and Mr. Constable have paid the expenses in the first instance and will not, I believe, be very rigourous in exacting repayment; but Mr. Menzies, of Pitfodels, from whom I heard yesterday from Tunbridge Wells, is strongly of opinion that all proprietors should contribute proportion­ally, and has written to that purpose to Kirkconnell.

You will, I am persuaded, think his proposal reasonable; and the sum is, I believe, very moderate. Lord Kelly was the mover in the House of Lords, and expressed great satisfaction in having been so, when he lately dined with Mr. Arbuthnot, where Mr. McPherson also was. With regard to the Act itself it almost puts an end to the penal laws against us, as the exceptions are so few and trifling, and purposely there is no penalty annexed to them. Besides the English Catholics have it in contemplation to apply soon for being put entirely on the same footing with other subjects; and when that happens we may now reasonably hope to be included with them.”

The clause in the Oath regarding the Protestant succession appeared at one time to Bishop Geddes to be objectionable. On further consideration, however, his view changed. That succes­sion was confirmed by law, ingrafted in the Constitution. More, it was necessary, he considered, for the national tranquility. He submitted to it, therefore, and could safely promise to maintain it as long as it should continue to be the law of the land and part and parcel of the Constitution. “Every prudent person amongst us,” he writes, “will see how proper it is for us not to appear elevated on this occasion, so as to give any offence to Protestants, and this behaviour, you (Bishop Hay) will, no doubt, recommend.”

The Bishops held their annual meeting in July this year, 1792, at Scalan. Their usual letters to Rome were then prepared; and in addition they despatched a joint letter to the Prior of the Carthusians and the arbiters in the recent conference at Paris, cordially thanking them for their services. To the excellent Bishop of Rhodez, also, they expressed their gratitude for the interest which he had kindly taken in the Scotch College, and the laborious services which he had rendered to it, particularly by his communication to the Principal. They requested that he would still obligingly continue to watch over the affairs of the College. They concluded by expressing very feelingly their sympathy with him in the distressed condition of his country, confidently hoping that in the ways of Providence a vineyard once so flourishing would be restored to its former splendour, and their highly valued friend, the Bishop, to the undisturbed charge of his beloved flock.

In their letter to Cardinal Antonelli and Propaganda the Bishops intimated the recent death of their colleague of the Highland district, Bishop Alexander Macdonald, describing him as “a pious and devoted prelate,” and a descendant of the ancient family of Clan Ranald. They also mentioned, and with honour, Mrs. Goldie, a convert, who, rather than allow her children to be brought up as Protestants, put to sea in most unfavourable weather, together with her son of seven and her daughter of eleven years of age; and without previously giving notice to her friends, sought a home in the convent of English Nuns at Rouen, confining herself to the care of God’s Providence. It is so far to the credit of the children’s tutors that they did not proceed to extreme measures, but supplied the family with money.

In compliance with the request of the Nuncio at Liege, Bishop Hay wrote to him some details of the state of the mission, not forgetting to suggest that it would be acceptable and meritorious on the part of His Excellency to interest himself in its favour. The Bishops before separating, expressed their satisfaction with the results of Bishop Geddes’ mission to Paris. They hoped to derive from it much permanent good whatever might be the state of public affairs in France.

Meanwhile, it gave them pleasure to hear of Mr. Alex. McDonell’s success at Glasgow, A very large hall was hired there from the Duke of Hamilton and the Lord Provost, for the purpose, as was well known, of a Catholic chapel. The principal manufacturers placed seats in it for 300 persons, and became security for the rent, £40. The town clerk showed his friendship, as did also the Board of Trade and a society for preventing emigration. Acting thus liberally, they could have had no surer means of securing sober and industrious men for their employment. The opening of the chapel on 21st October, made an epoch in the history of the Glasgow mission. The congregation that assembled on the occasion amounted to over two hundred. Mr. McDonell officiated in the new chapel for the first time. This was welcome news to Bishop Hay; and yet his remembrance of former things caused him to have some misgiving. Mr. McDonell’s hopes were raised so high and his ambition so much excited that the cautious Bishop could not help being “much afraid that he had a little touch of the common turn (perfervidum ingenium scotorum, propably) too prevalent amongst us.” This, however, was but the passing thought of the moment; for, a few days later, he bore high testimony to the fine qualities of the Glasgow missionary. “Mr. McDonell,” he writes to Bishop Geddes, Dec. 17th, “is of a forward and intrepid disposition; but I have often seen that when Providence has a mind to bring about any event He qualifies the instrument He makes use of for that purpose; and very often a certain degree of boldness produces much better effects than too much timidity. I trust in God that will be the case with our friend there.” So far the Glasgow mission was prosperous and promising. The magistrates and principal merchants were highly favourable; and, moreover, the associa­tions that were arising and causing alarm to the Government, held “liberty to the Papists,” as part and parcel of their reform.

    


All Rights Reserved
The Grian Press