Reading Time: 290 minutes

Letter to President Taft

CABLE ADDRESS

CROWLEY.CINCINNATI, JEREMIAH J. CROWLEY
Author, Lecturer, and Publicist
619 JOHNSTON BUILDING
CINCINNATI, OHIO, U. S. A.

February 22, 1913.
The Honorable William H. Taft,
President of the United States,
Washington, D. C.

Your Excellency:

I have the honor to call attention to two letters, under dates January 24th and January 29th respectively, of this current year, addressed to me by Postmaster Monfort, of Cincinnati.

These letters, copies of which I enclose, have reference to my complaint against one Myron L. Hurney, a clerk, till recently, in the mailing section of the Cincinnati Postoffice, whom I charge, under oath, with gross and scandalous misconduct towards me, on August 15, 1912; conduct which, if unwhipt of justice, were an intolerable menace and a most flagrant outrage upon the American public, especially American women and children, obliged to receive at the hands of such a foul-mouthed postoffice official the attention called for by the Constitution and Laws of the United States.

Mr. Monfort informs me, in his letter of January 24, 1913, that the matter of my complaint against Hurney had passed entirely out of his hands and was now under charge exclusively of the Postoffice Department at Washington.

Here, sir, are Postmaster Monfort’s own words from his letter aforesaid of January 24, 1913:

I, therefore, on October 29th sent the case with all the papers on both sides and an abstract to the Department at Washington, and from that time it has been entirely out of my hands.

Yet, Mr. Postmaster Monfort, in his letter of January 24, 1913—this case being then, for nearly three months, “entirely out of my [Monfort’s] hands’ ‘—adds: “I will be glad to have you call at my office and I will show you the evidence.” Why, sir, should I call at the local postoffice to look over evidence in a case now “entirely” out of Postmaster Monfort’s jurisdiction?

Let me state, right here, that I rejoice that this matter has been transferred for final determination to Washington. There is involved in it a National issue of greatest concern to all our people and to their most cherished rights.

In Chapter VIII of my work, “Romanism — A Menace to the Nation,” I say, under the heading “Papal Despotism:”

Nothing more startling has ever been put before the public than Rome’s recent resolutions of boycott of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Watson’s Magazine, The Protestant Magazine, The Menace, etc., and her attitude as Censor of the United States Mails. At the annual convention of the American Federation of Catholic Societies, held at New Orleans, November 13-16, 1910, resolutions were passed calling for the passage of Federal laws to prevent the transmission, by the United States mails, of matter offensive to the Roman Catholic Church. In these resolutions postoffice employees were boldly called upon to destroy, without any warrant of law, any such mail in transit. The leading ecclesiastic at this convention was Archbishop Falconio, Papal Delegate to the Roman Catholic Church in America.

Is the Roman Church mistress of the Postoffice Department of the United States? If so, under what article of the original, or of the amended, Constitution of the United States is control of the Postoffice Department of this free Republic vested in the Pope and his agents? How anxious Rome is to have Protestant Federal officials ready and desirous to promote her interests, an extract from The Commercial Tribune, Cincinnati, February 6, 1913, will explain:

Postmaster E. R. Monfort delivered an interesting^ address on “The Postal Savings Bank” last night, before the department of commerce, accounts, and finance of St. Xavier’s College.

“The postal savings bank” [he said] “is a new department of the greatest business on earth—the banking business. Few people realize the magnitude of the Postal Department. In Cincinnati alone last year over $17,000,000 changed hands in handling the mails. There are 2,650 mailcarriers in the city, and the salaries of the deliverers and the railway mail clerks with headquarters in Cincinnati amounted to over $1,000,000.

“The postal savings bank’, although a new department of the Mail Service, has grown so rapidly that it is at present one of the largest. The people put more trust in the postal bank than they do in the ordinary banks. It is designed merely to protect and take care of the earnings of the working class. Under this system the money that is placed in the care of the Government can be withdrawn at any time. At times, it is said, more than half the money of the world is out of circulation and in the pockets of the people. At such time the circulating money is not sufficient to carry on the business of the world, and a panic follows. The great financiers of the world have been unable to account for these conditions, but many think that this system, by placing cash at the disposal of the poorer people, will greatly lessen the hardships of such panics.”

In speaking of the rapid growth of the postal savings bank and its favor with the people, he let the figures speak for themselves. On January 1, 1912, there was in the bank $11,000,000; now there is $30,000,000. On this money the depositors receive 2 per cent interest. The Government, however, invests this money so that the department is self-supporting and so far has paid all its own expenses.

Not only in the domain of the United States Postoffice are papal agents busy, but also in other departments of Governmental control. Statements of sinister import come, for example, from Oklahoma of the activities of that adroit representative of the Papacy, Father Ketcham, in securing the selection of a Federal building site in Oklahoma City on land adjoining, or in close proximity to, the Roman Catholic cathedral, nunnery, etc., etc. Father Ketcham is Rome’s trusted agent in the manipulation of Indian affairs at Washington. Residing at the National Capital, he (Ketcham) is in such close contact with the Papal Delegation there, and with Cardinal Gibbons— the very crafty, though unlearned prelate of Baltimore—that he may be relied on to discharge the duties of the high functions you, sir, have seen fit to honor him with ; first, to the full satisfaction and benefit of the Vatican ; secondly, to the profit of papal priests, monks, and nuns operating among whites and Indians in Oklahoma, as well as elsewhere ; thirdly, with no consideration whatever for the real permanent moral upliftment of the Indian. In promoting Ketcham to a position of (administrative importance in the management of Indian affairs, had you, sir, in view the value of cunning, unscrupulous devotedness to a foreign priest and pontiff, rather than earnest patriotic purpose to do duty to the humanity of this great Nation by the upliftment, on Christian bases, of a fallen and vanishing race?

You can not, sir, be ignorant of the teaching of American History as to Roman Catholicism’s degrading and decimating influences on the Red Man everywhere, from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego. Yet you give Roman Catholicism a voice of control in the person of Rev. Ketcham, trusted ally of Papal Delegate Bonzano and Cardinal Gibbons, over all Governmental dealings with the surviving Indian races under the jurisdiction of the American Flag. Nay more, Ketcham has potent say and sway in matters pertaining to the Postoffice Department. The great Congregational Church of ‘the United States had in Oklahoma City a site for the Federal Building, much better adapted to public needs than the Ketcham-papal site selected finally by the Department. The Congregational Church in Oklahoma City had, at the time the Ketcham Vaticanistic land deal was put through, a distinguished representative in the Rev. Thomas H. Harper, pastor of Pilgrim Church, a Republican of worth and a citizen of eminence, as well as a clergyman of unassailable purity of life. No man in all Oklahoma had, for clean government and for the Republican cause, which he considers inseparable, made more sacrifices than the Rev. “Tom” Harper. But Harper stood away from and far above any alliance or collusion with the infamous liquor ring of Oklahoma City, which is one of Rome’s most powerful instrumentalities in that prohibition State. Neither Rome nor Rum would have Harper for mayor of Oklahoma City. The people voted him in—the Roman bosses counted him out. The Government at Washington, coinciding with Rome and Rum’s estimate of this worthy man, has denied him and the masses of the clean-living people of Oklahoma’s principal city all say or suggestion in the selection of a Postoffice site for a city where Protestants may do the voting, while Romanists do the counting.

To return to my chapter on “Papal Despotism:”

Archbishop Falconio had good reasons [so the work on “Romanism—A Menace to the Nation” continues] for tendering his sincerest congratulations to the American Federation of Catholic Societies at its convention held at Columbus, Ohio, August 20-24, 1911, for its ” rapid progress” and “the effective good work accomplished’ ‘ by it. He was fully aware, I presume, of the destruction of much printed “matter offensive to the Church” in the postoffices of the United States of America since their last reunion at New Orleans.

With good reason there immediately follows in my book:

I know that several large parcels of printed matter mailed at the General Postoffice in Chicago during the months of December, 1910, and January and February, 1911, never reached their destination. This destruction commenced immediately after their New Orleans convention. On receipt of numerous complaints from subscribers the sender called on the Postoffice authorities for an explanation, but received no satisfaction whatever. This party’s mail continued to be held up, and, surmising the cause, the sender threatened public exposure of such unlawful action on the part of the Postoffice Department.

Are you, Mr. President, aware of the fact that Catholic employees in Post Offices are taught by their “father confessors’ ‘ that they are bound in duty to “Holy Mother Church” to prevent, by all available means, the circulation of any mail matter, be it letter, book, or paper of any kind, exposing the operations of the crafty, covetous, and lecherous priesthood and Hierarchy of Rome? So teaches “Father” Gury, the wellknown Jesuit theologian, whose “Moral (?) Theology” is the text-book of so many Roman Catholic training schools for priests.

I defy production of any Roman Catholic “theologian” who takes a stand on this point contrary to that assumed by Gury. The first duty of a devout Romanist is, according to all Jesuitical authority, (all modern Roman Catholic “moral” theological teaching is Jesuitical), to an infallible pope. A Catholic is a Romanist first, an American, an Englishman, or a German, a long way after. This is the doctrine taught at the Roman Catholic University at Washington, and at the Georgetown Jesuitical College, both at your very door; and by every Catholic educational institution in America and the world over.

The pope being, according to Jesuit theology, “king of all earthly kings,” “ruler of all earthly rulers,’ ‘ having power from on high to invalidate and suppress all legislation framed by Congress, Parliament, or any other law-making instrumentality on earth, is the sovereign to whom devoted confession-going Romanists owe first allegiance. Him, first, must they serve, even to the extent of violating oaths of office, injuring neighbor and fellow-citizen, betraying the country affording them life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

You have, sir, made appointments to several offices at the instance of and in accordance with the desire and request of Romanist bishop and priest. The professing Catholic so appointed must, to retain the good-will of the influences back of his appointment, be loyal to pope and papal requirements, regardless of all other interests involved in his discharge of official duty. To destroy, for instance, mail matter, by him, as a loyal Romanist, considered inimical to papal machine interests, is one of the essential obligations of the Romanist postmaster or Romanist post office employee.

The Romanist priesthood very often prefers for postmasterships—to say nothing, for the moment, of other offices—a professing, nay even ” pious’ ‘ Protestant, ready to prove his liberality in things denominational, by giving, when appointed, more attention to local “holy fathers’ ‘ than a Catholic postmaster might care to exhibit. The assistants of this weak-kneed, time-serving American official are certain to be either devout Romanists, or complacent non-Romanists, as ready as their chief to carry out the behests of the Vatican.

Vaticanism has, in America, its professing Protestant representatives. They are conspicuous in prayer-meeting, in Sunday school, and in pulpit. They sometimes reach leadership at synods, conventions, and even in ministerial associations.

The amazing power attained by Romanism in this Republic is, safe to say, due as much to socalled Protestant agencies as to direct Roman Catholic effort. The Protestant United States Senator, relying for re-election, on the support of a John Ireland of St. Paul, a Glennon of St. Louis, a Quigley of Chicago, a Blenck of New Orleans, a Moeller of Cincinnati, or any other papal archbishop or bishop, is more condescending to Romanist importunity for pelf and patronage than any professing Romanist could afford to be.

The professing Protestant Congressman, mindful of the big vote that “Father Tom” or “Father Mike” or some other priestly boss in his district, is believed to have under control; mindful of the close alliance in so many citieis between the priesthood on the one side and the saloon and the red light districts on the other, will recommend for appointment or reappointment no man distasteful to priestly demands and exigencies.

No New York man need be told of the alliance between Tammany Hall and the priesthood. Talk of the fat Church establishment of Protestant England! It yields positis ponendis, small revenue to Anglican bishop or priest compared with the vast annual flood of tainted gold turned into papal coffers of New York, through the activities and organized endeavors of Tammany Hall. No marvel why the pope looks away in disgust from the European countries, which place so many needed restraints on priestly greed and monkish rapacity! No marvel why his crafty eye lights up with cheer and hope as he gazes fondly on American Tammany Halls pouring into priestly, monkish, and nunnery treasure box volume after volume of glittering currency!

Every American city under Romanist control, and many are such cities, from Atlantic to Pacific, from Mexican Gulf to Superior’s shores, has its Tammany machine in some form. The boss may bear one name in New York, another in Louisville, another in Chicago, another in Cincinnati; his name may be anything that befits a Knight of Columbus, or a lay agent of Jesuitism. “Whatever his name, he sees to it, first of all, that tithe and toll are paid to pope, prelate, and priest from every wage of sin, death, and deviltry in his bailiwick.

Romanism, tried for centuries in France, Italy, and Portugal, as well as other Catholic lands of Europe, and everywhere found wanting, is fastening itself on the American Republic, on Great Britain, and on the British possessions of this and other continents.

Cast eye for a moment on French Catholic Quebec, a Province of the Canadian Dominion. The Vatican, having yoked that vast and rich domain to its chariot wheel, is now directing the overflow of Quebec’s ever-expanding population to the New England States. A French Canadian Catholic is already Governor of Rhode Island. French Canadian Catholic mayors are found in ever-growing numbers in the cities of New England. French Canadian churches, of cathedral size, proportion, and adornment, dot the towns of that one-time stronghold of Puritanism from Memphremagog to Narragansett pier.

Not a word disrespectful toward the French Canadian people, in so many regards admirable, do I speak when I refer with regret to their traditional subserviency to Rome. The French Canadian is himself welcome to the United States. Let him bring his beautiful language, let him bring his racial gallantry, let him bring his numerous progeny; but he must not, with American approval, be made the agent for the erection on this soil, sacred to liberty, of a Vaticanized Quebec, with its dearth of efficient public schools; rich in monkish minsters and in nunnery halls, but poor in agricultural school, in free library, in elementary education, and even in independent press.

There is, sir, at Ottawa a Papal Delegate, with powers similar to those of Delegate Bonzano at Washington. The delegate at Ottawa is striving to Quebecize, that is Vaticanize and enslave the great chain of provinces, extending from the St. Lawrence’s mouth to Vancouver Island. The Papal Delegate at Washington is preparing, through archbishop, bishop, priest, and nuns, the American States for an ultimate alliance with the Quebecized or Vaticanized Canadian Provinces, and for one grand Papal Dominion or Satrapy, extending from Florida to the sources of the Yukon.

Cable after cable tells of the pope’s blessing America. Every toll of American or Canadian gold laid at his feet—many and frequent are such tolls—calls for such blessings.

Rejoiced, especially, is “Holy Father” in the Vatican, when subservient Protestant allies of his American representatives make telling display of ” liberality” to the Papal System, As well for child to be playful with wolf, or maiden trustful of tiger as for free American to confide in papal rapacity.

The pope was for three centuries supreme in the Philippine Islands. You, sir, know the result— a beautiful archipelago and a region incomparably favored by nature, cursed till the other day by monkish superstition, priestly depravity, and hierarchical greed. With iEneas of old, the Filipino might, before the American occupation of his country, exclaim, “Quae regio in terris nostri non plena laboris?”

Vaticanism has now put on American gloves and assumed American voice to levy toll off the Philippines, but while the hand of greed may be that of Jacob, the voice of the despoiler and ravisher is, assuredly, that of Esau! Clerical immorality is in the Philippines so deeply and so firmly rooted that the infusion or intrusion of American priests there, several of these as immoral as Spanish priest or native cleric in the archipelago, at the time of the American conquest, could not improve conditions.

Testifying to the Philippine Commission, of which you, sir, were leading member, Senor Don Felipe Calderon, a native of the Islands, educated by the Jesuits at Manila, declared October 17, 1900:

With respect to their [the Friars’] morality in general, it was such a common thing to see children of Friars that no one ever paid any attention to it or thought of it, and so depraved had the people become in this regard that the women who were the mistresses of the friars really felt great pride in it and had no compunction in speaking of it. So general had this thing become that it may be said that even now the rule is for a friar to have a mistress and children, and he who has not is the rare exception, and if it is desired that I give names, I could cite right now one hundred children of friars.

Asked if these children of friars were in Manila or the provinces, Senor Calderon added: In Manila and in the provinces. Everywhere. Many of my sweethearts have been daughters of friars.

Asked, again, if the friars who have had these children were still living in the Islands, Senor Calderon declared:

Yes ; and I can give their names if necessary, and I can give the names of the children, too. Beginning with myself, my mother is the daughter of a Franciscan Friar. I do not dishonor myself by saying this, for my family begins with myself. Requested to produce a list, Senor Calderon proceeded:

I can give it to you right now: In Pandacan, Isidro Mendoza, son of the Bishop Pedro Payo, when he was the parish curate of the Pueblo of Samar; in Imus, the wife of Cayetano Topazio, daughter of a Recolecto friar of Mindoro; in Zambales, Louise Lasaca, now in Zambales, and several sisters and brothers were children of Friar Benito Tutor, a Recolecta friar in Bulacan; in Quingua, I can not remember the last name, but the first name is Manuela, a godchild of my mother, is a daughter of an Augustinian friar named Alvaro; in Cavite, a certain Patrocinio Berjes is a daughter of Friar Rivas, a Dominican friar; Colonel Aguillar, who is on the Spanish Board of Liquidation, is the son of Father Ferrer, an Augustinian monk.

Dealing with the question of general licentiousness on the part of the friars, Senor Calderon states:

It was a general licentiousness, because, as I have said, the exception as to the rule among friars was not to have a mistress and be the father of children by her. The friar who was not mixed up with a woman in some way or other was like a snowbird in summer.

Continuing, Senor Calderon affirms that:

The moral sense of the whole people here had been absolutely perverted. So frequent were the infractions of the moral laws on the part of the friars that really no one ever cared or took any notice of them; and this acquiescence on the part of the people was imposed upon them, for woe be unto him who should ever murmur anything against the friars, and even the young Filipino women had their senses perverted, because when attending school they had often and often seen the friars come in to speak to their openly avowed daughters, who often were their own playmates.

Coming to the unpopularity of the friars in the Philippines, Senor Calderon defines this very clearly:

They [the Friars] were the expression of the most exaggerated despotism, not of the Government of Spain, but of their own despotism, which they exercised, using the name of the kingdom of Spain, because their system was to deceive both Spain and the people. That was the line they had laid down, and, unfortunately, they are still following it, as they used it during the time of the Spanish regime. They would say to the people, ”If it were not for me the Government would annihilate you,” and then they would say to the Government, “If it were not for me the people would overthrow you. ‘ ‘ And even at the present time there is not the slightest doubt that they have said to the American authorities that all of the Filipino people were a lot of anarchists and insurgents who were conspiring to overthrow constituted authority, while to the people of the Philippines they say the American Government will place a chain around the waist of each of them; I do not make this assertion as an emanation from myself. I have seen it in writing. In the confessional they say to them, “How can you be in favor of the Americans when they are absolutely the enemies of our religionV And they say that constantly to the secular clergy, adding that woe betides the poor Filipinos who deliver themselves over unconditionally to the American Government, and I have heard this from the very lips of Monsieur Chapelle (Archbishop of New Orleans and Papal Delegate to the Philippine Islands). — Senate Document No. 190, 56th Congress, 2d Session, pp. 139, 140, 141.

Joseph Roderigues Infante’s testimony in the siame State Document recites that in point of morality native priests and friars were about on the same footing:

All these priests have [he states] the same vices, and when you take into account that they were purposely kept from following their natural bent to obtain an education by the friars, in order to show the Pope that there was a natural want of capacity in the Filipino, it can be seen why they became easy tools of the Spanish priests and great mimics of them in their loose life. —Senate Document No. 190, 56th Congress, 2d Session, p. 148.

Senor Nozario Constantino, of Bigan, Province of Bulacan, a life-long resident of the Philippines, testifying at the age of fifty-eight, declared solemnly of the friars:

There was no morality whatever. . . . About the year 1840 and the year ’50 every friar in the Province of Bulacan had his concubine. Dr. Joaquin Gonzales was the son of a curate of Baliuag, and he has three sisters here and another brother, all children of the same friar.

. . . The multitude of friars who came here from 1876 to 1896 and 1898 were all of the same kind, and to name the number of children that they have would take up an immense lot of space.

. . . I will cite a case that actually happened to us. It was the case of a first cousin of mine, Don Soponee, who married a girl from Baliuag and went to live in Agonoy, and there the local friar curate, who was pursuing his wife, got him the position as registrar of the Church in order to have him occupied in order that he, the friar, might continue his advances with the wife. He was fortunate in this undertaking and succeeded in getting the wife away from the husband, and afterwards had the husband deported to Puerto Princesa, near Jolo, where he was shot as an insurgent, and the friar continued to live with the widow and she bore him children. The friar’s name is Jose Martin, an Augustinian friar. — Senate Document No. 190, 56th Congress, 2d Session, pp. 150, 151.

Maximo Viola of San Miguel De Mayumo, a native of the Philippines and a physician, declared as to the morality of the priests:

There was no morality. . . . I do not know of a single one of all those priests I have known in the province of Bulacan who has not violated his vow of celibacy. . . . From my own personal experience I think all the priests and friars are on the same level. I have never seen one that was pure. I do n’t deny there may be exceptions, but I have not seen them. The large majority have violated their vows of celibacy and chastity. For this reason I believe that Protestantism will have a very good field here, for one reason alone, and that is that the Protestant ministers marry, and that will eradicate all fear of attacks upon the Filipino families on their part. — Senate Document No. 190, 56th Congress, 2d Session, pp. 156, 157.

Of the native priests, Brig. Gen. R. P. Hughes, U. S. V., Commanding Headquarters at Iloilo, Island of Panay, said, sir, to you:

To be plain, Judge, there is no morality among them, not a particle. They gamble in their convents; they send for members of their congregation to gamble with them. There is no morality. — Senate Document No. 190, 56th Congress, 2d Session, p. 177.

That moral and social conditions can be improved in the Philippines, by the employment there of American bishops and priests, there is very small ground for hope, as my work, “Romanism— A Menace to the Nation/ ‘ very clearly proves. No stream rises to higher level than its source.

Drunkenness, graft, and immorality are very prevalent in American priestly ranks, from cardinals down to curates. Respect for public opinion compels, in many cases, concealment of priestly vices in the United States. But there is not a State in the Union without flagrant examples, not a few, of priestly profligacy.

Mr. Monfort ascribes to my pen the article in The Menace, published at Aurora, Mo., Saturday, January 25, 1913. This honor is not mine. The author of the said article is Mr. H. George Buss, at the time Staff Correspondent of The Menace, who, over his own name, assumed publicly full responsibility therefor.

Mr. Monfort, instead of writing direct to Mr. Buss at Washington, D. C, or to the editorial management of The Menace, at Aurora, Mo., addresses me January 29, 1913, stating of this case, then “entirely” out of his hands, “I have not received reply to my letter of January 24th, nor have you called at my office for an interview.” Then the Cincinnati postmaster menacingly adds:

Unless I hear favorably from you I shall write to The Menace and demand that my letter to you should be published as my defense, as I can not reach half a million people in any other way.

Why should I, sir, let me repeat, call on Mr. Monfort in reference to a case now admittedly, according to his own words, “entirely” out of his hands?

But if this case be “entirely” out of Mr. Monfort’s hands, it is attracting papal attention. So pleased are the Jesuits of Cincinnati with Mr. Monfort ‘s indorsement of Hurney that they have bestowed on Cincinnati’s postmaster what is, in eyes Jesuitical, a signal honor, by inviting him to lecture lat their college in this city, one of the most aggressively papal institutions of learning in the Middle West.

Jesuits confer no honors on Catholic or non- Catholic, unless the conferee have rendered notable service to papal interests. Close watch do Jesuits and other Roman representatives keep on the judicial bench of the United States, and of every State, that judges subservient to the interests of the papacy be appointed ; or that judges already on the bench may be induced to interpret law according to Roman interests. Are you aware, sir, that political parties in many cities and in many States place tentative lists of candidates for judicial as well as other offices before Roman Catholic bishops and other Church dignitaries? Any name objected to by the priesthood is sure to be obliterated.

Known, all over the land, is the constant interference, now open, again underhanded, of the priesthood in civil, military, and naval promotions. The participation of the priesthood in every stage of political activity, from the ward contest to City, State, and Nation-wide struggle for party domination, is everywhere in evidence.

Papial “statesmen by chemistry,” adepts in the art of removing rivals by poison, there are to-day, as well as in the days of the infamous Borgia, who on assuming the papal crown took the name of Alexander VI. The lecherous Cardinal Antonelli, Prime Minister of Pope Pius IX, found singular satisfaction in removing “by chemistry’ ‘ cardinals who refused to indorse his infamies. In passing, I might state that “His Eminence’ ‘ Cardinal Antonelli, to the knowledge of the Hierarchy, had a natural daughter (Countess Lambertini), who, on her father’s death, claimed through the Italian civil courts a share of her father’s estate, amounting to 100,000,000 lire.

The Right Rev. George Conroy, Bishop of Ardagh, Ireland, Papal Delegate to Canada and Newfoundland in 1877-78, was, in August, 1878, poisoned at St. John’s, Newfoundland, by the infamous Bishop Carfagnini, a greedy Italian, who had been forced into the see of Harbor Grace, Newfoundland, where he gave so much dissatisfaction and excited such opposition that Delegate Apostolic Conroy was about to recommend his removal.

What was done to Carfagnini? He was brought back to Italy and promoted to a better and richer see—that of Gallipoli!

In my book, “Romanism—A Menace to the Nation” (pp. 51, 52, 53), mention is made of several cases of murder by expert clerical chemists and other papal assassins. Some of those murdered were Police Officer Hyland, Vicar General Dowling, of the archdiocese of Chicago ; a woman of Rev. Cashman’s parish, concerning whose death certain high ecclesiastics, such as Bishop Muldoon, could give full particulars. Pertaining to the same case Rev. Cashm’an states that he knows the person by whom “her mysterious death could be explained.”

The suppression of such a book as mine, through the offices of postal employees, is a work very close to the heart of Jesuit and every other class of papal agents.

Is it through the influence of these Cincinnati Jesuits that Postoffice Clerk Hurney, whose case is still sub judice, has been transferred from the city postoffice building to Station I, Avondale, Cincinnati! This transfer of Hurney is either a promotion or a demotion. If a promotion, it is an official vindication of him from the grave charges by me preferred; if a demotion, a censure altogether inadequate of the accused man Hurney.

It is, sir, in either event, an attempted disposal of the case, now “entirely” out of Postmaster Monfort’s hands. Actuated by no personal animus whatever against Postmaster Monfort, or any other officer of the Postoffice Department, I desire that this matter of my complaint against Hurney be so finally decided and equitably determined that public interests and private rights may be conserved conspicuously and permanently.

Time, indeed, that this complaint should be, both in the public interests and in my own, passed upon decisively. Hurney, it is very evident to me, his own statements to the contrary notwithstanding, not only knew me well by sight, but knew also the nature and contents of my book. Several of his fellow postal officials had purchased copies of my volume, which had thus become a subject of frequent conversation in postoffice circles. Acting clearly (to my mind) under Jesuitical inspiration and prejudice, Hurney grasped the first opportunity, to him looking favorable, for expression of profoundest animosity for myself and my printed production.

To me, it is easy, after Hurney’s blasphemous and obscene outbreak on August 15, 1912, to understand why several copies of my book, mailed by me personally at Window No. 9, Cincinnati postomee, between July 16, 1912, the very day of its publication, till August 15, 1912, the day of Hurney’s vulgar verbal assault on me, failed to reach their destination.

An American citizen, proud of this designation and this distinction, glad of the responsibilities, rejoicing in the discharge of every duty which American citizenship imposes, I raise humble but emphatic voice against special privileges for any class, creed, race, or individual in this Nation of freedom. Special privileges are, sir, to Americans, abhorrent. The heroes of the Revolution died that special privilege might perish from this land and ultimately from the world. A paper published in the Canadian Northwest utters a very significant truth—I quote from the Edmonton Bulletin:

In a new country of mixed peoples nothing more surely or quickly brings one class into general dislike and general disrepute than a suspicion that they have aims other than are common or claim rights or privileges other than are generally accorded. “Special privileges for none” was the watchcry of this Nation’s fathers and founders. The maxim it was, sir, of the first President of the Republic, the guiding star of the virile statesmen who led the American Ship of State through two great wars with Britain, through the struggle with Mexico ending in the extension of freedom’s boundaries to the Pacific; through the terrific conflict between the States, terminating in the triumph of the most cherished and most salutary of Washington’s purposes—the unity, the indivisibility, ‘and the sovereignty of the American Nation. Worship the name and memory; revere, do all Americans, the achievements and triumphs of Washington, because

This was the man God gave us when the hour
Proclaimed the dawn of liberty begun;
Who dared a deed and died when it was done.
Patient in triumph, temperate in power—
Not striving, like the Corsican, to tower
To heaven, nor, like Philip’s greater son,
To win the world and weep for worlds unwon
, Or lose the star to revel in the flower.
The lives that serve the eternal verities
Alone do mold mankind. Pleasure and pride
Sparkle awhile and perish, as the spray
Smoking across the crests of cavernous seas
Is impotent to hasten or delay
The everlasting surges of the tide.

I am, sir, at your command for any further information at my disposal. My affidavit in the case, dated August 17, 1912, has never yet been met, either wholly or in part, by any adequate or satisfactory contradiction.
I have the honor, sir, to be,
Very respectfully yours,
Jeremiah J. Crowley.

CABLE ADDRESS
CROWLEY. CINCINNATI. JEREMIAH J. CROWLEY
Author, Lecturer, and Publicist
619 JOHNSTON BUILDING
CINCINNATI. OHIO. U. S. A.

Me. President: February 26, 1913.
I am enclosing, under separate cover, an “open” letter concerning postal and other matters. This “open” letter bears date February 22, 1913.

I am likewise sending, under still another cover, not only the various exhibits referred to in my “open” letter, but also a six-page circular illustrating my work.

I have the honor, sir, to be,
Very respectfully yours,
Jeremiah J. Crowley.

To the Honorable William H. Taft,
President of the United States,
Washington, D. C.

Part of the circular referred to above is here given:

A searchlight on the Papal System—startling charges against individuals in the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, made and filed by the author and a score of prominent priests, with letters, affidavits, cancelled checks, photographic proofs, etc., exposing Rome’s traffic in religion, (!) sin, and shame; stupendous exposures of the political influence of the Roman Catholic Church in Municipal, State, and Federal Governments.

This volume recites the authentic experiences of a man who occupies the unique position of having voluntarily withdrawn from the Priesthood and membership of the Church of Rome without being canonically excommunicated. Concerning Crowley and his unanswerable book Rome is as silent as the grave. Why? Because she dare not reply. However, she is secretly striving to prevent its circulation with such aid as she can command from certain employees in the Postal Service, and time-serving politicians of divers Church affiliations.

The charges in this book are either true or false; if true, the crafty, guilty priesthood and prelacy of Rome are a living menace to decency, truth, and liberty; a portentous danger to clean living and pure home life. They should be, as such, prosecuted and punished by their respective governments.

The governments of several Catholic countries have already dealt vigorously with this dread, ever-present menace to National, social, and individual life. Italy, France, Mexico, Latin America generally, and Portugal have banished religious orders—monks and nuns—either wholly or partially. Other Catholic governments are making ready to follow in their footsteps.

What the governments of Roman Catholic countries have done, or are preparing to do, America, Great Britain, and Germany must soon do. Why? Read this book.

If my specific charges were false, Rome surely would not hesitate to prosecute me! Why should any of the civil authorities, real or seeming allies of the Papacy, fail to take fitting action against me as a libeller?

Legal prosecution has not been, and shall not be, invoked against me ; for Rome and its governmental allies know full well that my distinct, repeated, and specific charges would be, before any tribunal of a free country, not only substantiated, but reaffirmed and emphasized with an hundredfold force.

Since I first turned the searchlight on priests, prelates, and “princes of the Church,” some of those by me specifically charged with crime have died by their own hand; some from drunkenness; others from unprintable diseases. But the majority of the surviving phalanx of accused, wicked Roman hierarchs have been promoted, or otherwise rewarded, for brazen criminality, accepted as “signal service” to Church and Pope! Nay more, some of my one-time ecclesiastical cooperators and financial backers—for example, Revs. Cashman, Smyth, McNamee, Croke, Foley, et. al. (see page 54 of book—have bartered conviction for advancement and profit at the hands of ecclesiastical authorities whom they once bitterly assailed. Easy, therefore, to see why they also prefer to keep ” operating’ ‘ lucratively among deluded Catholics and self-seeking non- Catholics. All done, of course, for ” God’s greater honor and glory,” with the authority, approbation, and blessing (!) of “Holy Father,” Pope Pius X, “Vicar of Christ,” “Our Lord God the Pope,” “King of Heaven, Earth, and Hell.”

The Vatican’s policy—that of cunning, calculating guilt’s systematic silence—should not be permitted to cover, even for one moment, from gaze of a confiding people the awful criminality and frightful perils confronting the nations.

Every citizen—be he Protestant, Catholic, Jew, or non-church-goer—all governmental agencies should combine to rid mankind of this vile incubus of treason, corruption, and organized diabolism— the Papal System.

Every man interested in the race’s welfare, every lover of truth, enlightenment, and liberty the world over should insist upon a stern and thorough investigation of the stupendous charges formulated and promulgated by myself and my associates, lay and clerical.

This volume will enlighten you; it will guard you, and, through you, your country, against the abominable conspiracies of ROMANISM. Many judicious readers declare this book a storehouse of incontrovertible facts. Estimating it in the same way, the Roman hierarchs fear that its dissemination will bring about a revolution in the Church of Rome, dethroning spiritual despots, great and small ; uprooting ecclesiastical rapacity and diabolism forever.