Mrs. M'Owne tried to excuse her conduct, saying she had been obliged by Mrs. Star to refuse her permission to see me. My mother and brother stayed an hour or two with me. My mother told me Mrs. Star complained of the impertinent note which I had written to her. She said she thought if such were the case that I ought to apologize. Accordingly, I wrote a long letter of apology to Mrs. Star. Before sending it I showed it to Mrs. M'Owne, who approved it. After this there was a very great change in Mrs. M'Owne's deportment towards me. She took all writing materials away from me, and she appeared to be a great deal more reserved at recreation. On one occasion she said she would rather speak before a lay postulant than before me on any matter she was particular about. The other sister, Mrs. King, appeared to be with me wherever I went. Mrs. M'Owne suddenly came into my cell at nights. I was asked as to whether I had written letters to my relatives when at the Hull "Retreat," and I acknowledged it. The Lord Chief Justice.-Is it contrary to the rules to send letters without the Superior seeing them?

Plaintiff.—It was contrary to the custom.

It was explained by counsel that there were two books-the book of rules or constitutions, and the book of customs.

The plaintiff's examination was continued. Mrs. Star, she said, wanted her to give a written acknowledgment of her fault, and also resolutions for the future. She gave the written acknowledgment accordingly:-"I acknowledge to have written two notes to my uncle, the Rev. Thomas Mathews, of Drogheda, and sent them without the knowledge of my Superior." Mrs. Star, however, desired her to sign another acknowledgment drawn up by herself:-" I acknowledge to have written two letters to my uncle to obtain his assistance in obtaining admission into another community, and I sent them without the knowledge of my Superior." Witness said she did not write "letters," but only "notes." Mrs. Star said it made no difference. She asked Mrs. Star if she should acknowledge her fault openly before the "chapter." Mrs. Star said no- -that it might disedify the community. (The resolutions were here called for, but not produced, and were stated to have been destroyed.) She had never been charged with any other misconduct than writing the letters; she had never been charged with habitual disregard of rules, with unauthorized intercourse with "externs” (i. e. strangers), with disregard of the rule as to silence, or with want of truth. She was not aware that at this time a council or chapter was being held as to her conduct. Neither had she any idea that at this time Mrs. Star was proposing to the Bishop that she should be released from her vows. Mrs. Star told her that her father had written to her and wanted her to leave, but that she had no notion of letting her go. Mrs. Star did not tell her that her father was dangerously ill. She was not allowed to go to see her family, although it was usual for the sisters to be allowed to go and see their friends upon request. Mrs. Star said once a year was enough. Mrs. Star said she had letters from her family, but did not give them to her. Going to a drawer one day she saw letters from her brother in it-her brother the Jesuit. After all this she went back to Clifford, where Mrs. M'Owne was Superioress. This was after August, 1862. She was then subject to restrictions. Upon her return to Clifford Mrs. Star gave her a "distribution of time," which she never had before, and was not usual among the "community sisters." It prescribed the employment of every hour through the day. Mrs. Star told her she was to consider herself the lowest member of the community, and to obey the orders of a novice. She was treated as a junior lay

sister-though she was the senior sister next to Mrs. Star. The lay-sisters were generally like servants in the house, and had to do the household work, and she had to do such work. Added to this, restrictions were placed upon her speaking to any one at the schools, the result of which was that she was placed in a very awkward position, and when people spoke to her she could not answer them and had to make signs. In November she went to a visitation at Hull, and saw the Bishop there. She received advice from him, and spoke to him on the subject. But on her return to Clifford there was no improvement in her treatment. Mrs. Star spoke to her, and said she would never be able to bear the punishment which might be inflicted upon her. Further restrictions were placed upon her, as to speaking to any one, even to the novices. The domestic duties were put upon her, and she had to do household work-black stoves, brush floors, &c., and other work which had been done by the lay-sisters. She had to go to the schools every evening for two hours, from six to eight. Every day she had to acknowledge her faults on her knees. That was a custom which had been introduced by Mrs. Star. Her food, also, was different from what it had been, and different from that of the others. She was known to have a constitutional aversion to mutton, yet nothing but mutton was given to her. This was in 1863-4. She had nothing but mutton to eat.

The plaintiff went on to state that she became unwell, and asked for medicine, but it was refused. It was refused by Mrs. Star, who said it was by order of Mrs. M'Owne. She had to stand also when at the schools, which wearied and exhausted her. On the 18th of February, 1863, her brother Thomas died, and she did not hear of it until two or three weeks afterwards-Mrs. M'Owne told her of it. She had no sympathy from any one. In September, 1863, she had a visit from her mother and aunt and two uncles, and she was alone with her mother on that occasion. In October the Bishop came to visit Clifford, and she saw the Bishop. Mrs. Star came and saw her, and spoke to her about certain monthly letters she was to have written to her, and said she had not written sufficiently of her faults or thoughts; that there was nothing in them which a saint might not have written. She was told she ought to try and recollect and write more, as the other sisters did. Her treatment continued as it had been, and a watch her father had given her was taken from her as contrary to rule, though it was returned to her before she left the convent. After this Mrs. Star, who was re-elected Superioress, had a conversation with her, and said she was an unfortunate creature, and that her life was a martyrdom, and would continue to be so if she remained there, and that it would be better for her to go as a "postulant" to any house rather than remain there; and why did she not go to another convent? After this she had her bedding taken from her, except a blanket, counterpane, and sheets, upon an iron bedstead. Mrs. Star gave her additional duties of a menial character-sweeping out the passage, &c.

After this, continued the plaintiff, I was shown by Mrs. Star a letter from my brother to the effect that he did not know where I was, and wanted to know, but Mrs. Star took it out of my hand and tore it up before I could read it through. She gave me a scrap of paper, and told me to kneel down and write upon it "Sister Scholastica" (my name in the house) "is at Hull." I did not know what she wanted it for. I wrote it and she took it. She said the Superioress of Baggot-street was changed, and I might get back there. She said if she had gone through half what I had gone through she would have been in her grave long since. I said I had striven to give her satisfaction. every

She

said I had complained to the Bishop. The plaintiff went on to describe what she had to do at the convent at Hull. She had, she said, to sweep the corridors, some closets, the water-closet, sink, dust-box, &c.-duties never done by any other community sister but herself. She went on to describe other grievances she alleged she had sustained in the convent. Her food, she said, was not the same either in quantity or quality as the others got.

The plaintiff then deposed to various instances of petty persecution to which she had been subjected, such as not having enough clothes on her bed, not being allowed to change her dress, having to put a thimble on a cut finger, &c. She was not allowed to receive letters from her relatives or friends, except through the hands of the Superioress, and then was only allowed to look at them for a few minutes, and they were then taken away and torn up or kept by Mrs. Star. Moreover, parts of the letters she had were often obliterated or scratched out. This was done, she said, with a letter from her father.

The examination was then taken to August, 1864, when the plaintiff was in the Hull convent. She stated that one afternoon, after she came in from school, Mrs. Star sent for her into her room, where Mrs. Kennedy also was, and commanded her, on the obedience she owed to her as Superioress, to undress herself. She was obliged to do so, even to her stays; and as each article was taken off Mrs. Star examined it. She then, continued the plaintiff, made me take off my stays and my last skirt, and then examined my person. I was crying and asked for my pocket-handkerchief, and she would not give it to me. She searched in my pockets and took out every thing. She then told me to dress myself again, and sent me away. Among the things taken away was a small memorandum-book, &c. (These articles were called for and produced.) Something of the same sort occurred in December, 1865. I was sitting working, and Mrs. Star came in and took me into a small room and called Mrs. Dawson (another of the sisters) to her, and then she said she wanted to see my stays, and desired me to take off my dress, standing opposite the open door, and the sisters constantly passing, and also coming into the room. She made me take off my clothes until I had nothing on but a thin tunic, and I thus remained undressed from shortly after ten until near twelve.

The Lord Chief Justice. What were they doing all that while?

Plaintiff. They said they were mending my stay laces (as was understood). I remember Mrs. Star saying to the sister that she wondered I should stay there, as they wanted me to go. She also said to Mrs. Kerr, another sister, that the Bishop had as long ago as July given me a dispensation from my vows, and that I was to be ready for a quick despatch, and that a secular dress was to be got ready for me. I had asked leave to write to my friends, but was refused. She came to me afterwards, just before chapel-time, and gave me a small piece of paper and said I could write, but that I must not ask them to come to see me. I then had neither pen nor ink, which were brought afterwards. I had only about ten minutes, and wrote a few lines to my mother, which I gave to Mrs. Star, and I don't know what became of it. On the Sunday I asked leave to write to the Bishop, as I was surprised to hear that I had been dispensed from my vows, and had never desired such a thing. Paper was given me, but Mrs. Kennedy sat opposite to me while I wrote. I asked for an envelope, and she said she knew her duty and would send it herself. The plaintiff said she never saw the Bishop until the occasion of the commission. In September, she went on to state, she was told to kneel, and had to worship in a sitting posture; but Mrs. Star made her have a

higher seat, and, as she sat before Mrs. Star, she was often poked by her during

mass.

The plaintiff was then examined as to the ring the Bishop had given her on her profession, as a symbol of her mystical marriage with religious life. On one occasion, she said, Mrs. Star asked me for it, and pulled it off and took it away from me, and I never had it again. Some time afterwards my Jesuit brother came to see me; I had not seen him for eight or more years; I was not told that he had called until next morning, when Mrs. Star let me see my brother, but put a quarter-of-an-hour glass into my hand as the limit of my time. I never knew before such a rule enforced in the case of such unfrequent visits from such near relations. I was with my brother half an hour, and I was afterwards subjected to censure for having exceeded the time. Mrs. Star asked me on the following morning why I had not acknowledged it as a fault. I believe I said I thought I had permission; but I had to acknowledge it as a fault. Afterwards Mrs. Star told me she and Mrs. Kennedy had an interview of an hour with my brother. I never saw him again. I had no interview with the Bishop until the occasion of the commission. In November, 1865, my uncle, the Rev. Mr. Mathews, called at the convent. In January, 1866, I observed the sisters a good deal engaged in writing, principally with Mrs. Star and Mrs. Kennedy. In that month Mrs. Kennedy handed me a note from the Bishop, which first informed me of the commission. I wrote something on the back of it, and I destroyed it. It was merely to say that he had decided on having a commission. I wrote an answer

to inquire the day and also to ask what the charges were.

Dr. Cornthwaite, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Beverley, was then called upon to produce the letter. He produced two letters. The first was dated in December, 1865, and implored the Bishop to visit the plaintiff. It did not appear that this letter was answered. Then there was another letter, dated in

January, 1866, begging the Bishop to be present at the commission.

my cell without a sister following me.

The examination of the plaintiff was then continued. She said, I received no statement of charges. I asked to be allowed to be alone for a short time to write in preparation for the commission, and it was refused. I could not go to The others might go for a few minutes, if they pleased, though there was a rule not to be absent more than five minutes without special permission. The day before the commission I was allowed a short time for preparation. It was very difficult to write in the community room among all the other sisters. Mrs. Star told me she went to Liverpool, and saw Mr. Porter (who was one of the commissioners). She said to me also, on another occasion, that I did not think that what I had said to my brother would be known, but that she had been told all. She asked me if I had told him that she had stripped me. I said, "Yes." She said if she were to take me by the hair of the head and drag me down-stairs, from the top of the house to the bottom, I ought not to mention it. I asked to renew my vows (according to the rules) on New Year's Day, but she said she believed I had been absolved from my vows. The day before the commission my uncle came to see me for a quarter of an hour. Some papers I had prepared for my trial were taken away from me. (It was stated that they had been destroyed.) The plaintiff then went on to state the formation of the commission, composed of Canon Walker and Canon Chadwick, Dr. O'Hanlon, and two others. She said, I had no statement of charges before I went before the commission. There was a great pile of written papers containing the charges-that is, the statements of the sisters against me.

Portions were read to me, but not all. No witness appeared against me, and there was no evidence heard. There were only those statements of the sisters, the contents of which I did not know except when any portion was read to me, and I was asked to answer it. No one was examined in support of the statements made against me, not even Mrs. Star.

The plaintiff then described what passed before the commissioners. It appeared that under each head of charges in the summary there was a body of written statements made by some of the sisters, each sister contributing her quota of accusation, and this was alluded to in the summary as the "evidence." There was at all events no other evidence produced. As each head of charges was read from the summary, said the plaintiff, I was asked whether or not it was true. I said it was untrue. Portions of the statements of the sisters were then read, sometimes, but not always.

The Lord Chief Justice.-Were not the statements of the sisters read to you?

Plaintiff.-No, my Lord.

The Lord Chief Justice.-Were you called upon to explain, and had you an opportunity of doing so?

Plaintiff. I explained as well as I could. My uncle was there and asked some questions of me.

The Lord Chief Justice. He could not ask questions of the witnesses, for there

were none.

Plaintiff. He asked me questions for the purpose of explanation. I offered to make a statement as to my treatment in the convent, but I was not allowed to do so. The plaintiff stated that Dr. O'Hanlon took part in the case, and asked a few questions. Mr. Porter was particularly hostile to her. The commissioners sat two days, and when it was over she returned to the convent. She had not heard of the result until some time afterwards. She had written to the Bishop on the 18th of January, to which the Bishop replied as follows:

"Dear Sister Scholastica,-Your letter, just received, has hastened a communication which would otherwise have been delayed until I heard from your uncle, with whom I have communicated. I hereby require you to remove from the convent, and offer to absolve you from your vows, on a condition" (stated afterwards to be the hearing of ten masses). "Under all the circumstances, as no advantage can arise from seeing you, I must decline seeing you."

After this Mrs. Star read to her a letter, to the effect that the Bishop dispensed her from her vows, and this formal communication was enclosed, dated 9th February, 1866.

"These presents are to inform you that for good and sufficient reasons, and in virtue of faculties from the Holy See, I dispense you from your religious vows as a Sister of Mercy; and I hereby commute them for the hearing of ten masses— which condition shall be satisfied by the first ten masses you hear after receiving this notice. And I permit you to leave the community and return to your friends. The formal document is in my possession, but a copy may be had if circumstances should hereafter arise to require it."

This formal dismissal was enclosed in a letter from the Bishop to Mrs. Star. The plaintiff continued her evidence.-At five o'clock Mrs. Star came in; Mrs. Kennedy was with her. She read to me, as if from a letter, that the Bishop had dispensed with my vows. She asked would I go? I said I would not; I said I would die rather than go. She said, "I can put you out." I said I would die