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 every satisfaction. 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 staylaces (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. to inquire the day and also to ask what the charges were.

I wrote an answer

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.

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

my cell without a sister following me. 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.

It ap

The plaintiff then described what passed before the commissioners. peared 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

where I was. This occurred in my cell. Mrs. Kennedy threatened all sorts of vengeance from God and the Bishop. Mrs. Star checked her. They left the cell after a little time. Shortly after Mrs. Star brought the secular clothes. They were taken away after some time. Later Mrs. Star came with a lay-sister. Mrs. Star said I must go to the bath-room, on the same floor as my cell. I went, and Mrs. Star with me. The fire was never relit while I was in the room, which was till April. I was not allowed any book during this time. A sister was always with me, night and day. They took it by turns to be with me. I complained of the cold. The sisters were warmly clothed, and had bottles of hot water for their feet. I had none of these. Two pieces of carpet I placed for my feet, but Mrs. Star took them away. I was removed to an attic. Mrs. Kennedy came one evening and said I was wanted. I went and saw Mrs. Star. The attic had been used for lumber. The sheets had been used by me since December, and this was in April. The door was fastened by a cord from the handle to a bed of a laysister in the corridor. This was at night only. I remained in the attic all day. A sister sat at the door, and I was not allowed to leave the room at all for any thing. I had sheets, a soiled blanket, and rug, as bedclothing. The blanket was affected with vermin. I complained, but no change was made. I asked to have the blind removed, as it made the room very dark; but that was refused I was never allowed to go down-stairs to meals after my clothes were taken. There was one chair in the room, but I was forbidden to go to that, and sat on the floor. Sisters, when the weather got very warm, were changed as often as 18 times a day. I was not allowed to leave the room for any purpose whatever. My brother came to Hull in March. He saw me. He sent Sir H. Cooper, the physician, to see me. The food had at this time been worse than formerly. Two sisters sat close to me when Sir H. Cooper saw me; near enough to hear what I said. My brother asked them to leave me alone. He went out himself. They did not leave. Next day my brother took me from the convent, and I put my case in the hands of my friends and solicitor.

The plaintiff was then cross-examined.—I was 21 when I entered the convent. I had a wish from a very early age to enter a convent. I knew no one in Baggot-street Convent. I knew a little of two ladies there. I had visited many convents of different orders. I had an interview with the Superioress before I entered, and she explained to me what I should have to do. I was a postulant six months for the purpose of informing myself of my duties and the austerities I should have to undergo. No postulants undergo austerities. Then I was a novice for two full years. During that time I was free from any vow, but mixed with and was instructed in the duties of the sisterhood. Sweeping and dusting were among the duties of the novices. I don't remember any novice or sister scrubbing the floors. As a novice I had no copy of the rules. They were read to me once a week, or more. Before I professed I had tried to make myself thoroughly acquainted with the rules, and I believed I had made myself so. We are not required to be thoroughly acquainted with the rules until we make our profession. My act of profession was after two and a half years' experience of what the duties of a professed nun were. The rules of the sisterhood as to poverty were here read, and the witness said it was something to that effect she had been taught, as what a nun should aim at, but it was a perfection they could not obtain. (The rule as to the vow of obedience was then read.) There was a book, said the Plaintiff, in which certain written instructions were contained while I was a novice. My friends were treated as externs; but there was a dif