V. REV. JOHN OLIVIER, V.G.

595

Louisiana, Bishop Carroll created him Vicar-General. The Rev. Mr. Olivier at once produced these documents before the Governor of Louisiana and left copies with him. He also wrote to Father Sedella informing him of the action of the Propaganda, and of his appointment by the Administrator-Apostolic. Sedella called upon him the next day with one of his pretended vicars, but evaded recognizing his authority, and finally on the 25th of February, 1807, in a letter openly refused to do so, incited by Cantillon and other mal

contents.

Jean olivier vicaire general

SIGNATURE OF JEAN OLIVIER, V.G.

The Vicar-General then published the decree and the Bishop's letter at the convent chapel, the Rev. Mr. L'Espinasse preaching on the occasion to explain to the people the duty of obeying the authorities in the Church appointed by its supreme Head.'

While the unfortunate diocese had been almost without any recognized head, the distant parishes suffered, or became the prey of adventurers, who took possession without any appointment or faculties. Thus the Rev. Thomas Flynn wrote from St. Louis, November 8, 1806, that the trustees were about to install him. He describes the church. It "has a tolerably good bell, a high altar, and commodious pews. The house for the priest is convenient, but rather out of repair. There is annexed to it a large garden well stocked with fruit trees, barn, stable, and other out offices.""

1 Rev. John Olivier to Bishop Carroll, New Orleans, February 28, 1807. Letter to Bishop Carroll. He wrote to Rev. S. T. Badin from St. Genevieve, May 25, 1807.

The veteran priest of the West, Rev. Peter Gibault, had retired to New Madrid about 1790, and died there in 1804.' Rev. James Maxwell continued at St. Genevieve, where he had succeeded Father Paul de eight years' pastorship in 1797. Rev. Mr. Maxwell there was Louisiana.'

St. Pierre, who closed his With the exception of the scarcely a priest in Upper

As the original Rescript issued by the Holy See to Bishop Carroll had not been so distinct and clear as to obviate captious objections by the unprincipled Sedella and his adherents, a more ample and distinct authority was sent.

“TO OUR VENERABLE BROTHER, THE ARCHBISHOP of BaltiMORE POPE PIUS VII.

"Venerable Brother, Health and Apostolical Benediction. The solicitude of the Roman Pontiff, embracing the universal church, no where permits laborers to be wanting in the vineyard planted by the Eternal Son of the Father, that by their efforts and assiduous zeal, the true faith which is one as God is one, may not only be firmly retained, but more widely propagated, and the spiritual fruit of souls, grow to the hundredfold and even exceed it. We cannot otherwise provide for the church at New Orleans or province of Louisiana in North America, deprived of its pastor and bishop than by confiding it to the ordinary jurisdiction of your Fraternity, until an occasion offers to Us and this Holy See of making other dispositions, which may seem to meet the general wish more fully. As this occasion is not yet proximate, and you are already sufficiently burthened with other cares, therefore by the advice of our venerable Brethren, the Cardinals of Holy Roman

1 Very Rev. John Olivier to Bishop Carroll.

Rozier, "An Address," etc., St. Louis, 1885, p. 15.

BRIEF OF POPE PIUS VII.

597

Church, placed in charge of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide, We, lest anything should be wanting which either the spiritual necessity or utility of the Faithful in those parts may require, by these presents commit to your Fraternity and command, that if you deem it expedient in the Lord, you delegate and send to the aforesaid province of Louisiana, either our beloved son Charles Nerinckx, on whose zeal and virtue we rely greatly in our Lord, or if perchance he feel himself unequal thereto, some other secular or regular priest whom you know to be fitted, with the rank of Administrator Apostolic and the rights of an Ordinary, to continue however, only during a time at our good-will and that of this Holy See, and according to the instruction to be forwarded to you by the said Congregation, notwithstanding anything to the contrary. "Given at Rome at St. Mary Major's under the Ring of the Fisherman, on the fifth day of April, 1808.

CHAPTER IV.

DIOCESE OF BALTIMORE, 1806-1808.-DIVISION OF THE DIO

CESE.-BALTIMORE A METROPOLITAN SEE.

IN 1806 Bishop Carroll had the consolation of seeing positive evidence of the growth of Catholicity in Baltimore in the initiation of new temples to the Most High.

On the 7th of July he laid the corner-stone of his Cathedral. The erection of a noble edifice had, as we have seen, engaged his mind from an early period. The plans of the Cathedral were the work of an eminent architect, B. Henry Latrobe, who at first submitted plans for a Gothic Cathedral, but as Roman or Greek architecture was preferred, he prepared the plan of the present Cathedral. "The principal motive," wrote this gentleman to Bishop Carroll, "which induced me to undertake the labor of the design at a time when neither my existing engagements nor the circumstances of my family permitted me to undertake it with convenience, were not entirely selfish. They were motives of gratitude. To the disinterested benevolence and the pious sensibility of a clergyman of your church I owe my existence, at all events an existence of which I have no reason to be ashamed, and I hope I have never since omitted an opportunity of honoring and serving the Church of which he was a splendid ornament." 1

The selection of a suitable site for the Cathedral had not

1 B. H. Latrobe to Bishop Carroll, August 5, 1806.

THE BALTIMORE CATHEDRAL.

599

been free from difficulty. A beautiful position on the Hill had been proposed as the most desirable spot, but the cost of the lots, for which nearly twenty-five thousand dollars was asked, deterred the Building Committee, and it was resolved to erect the Cathedral on the burial ground adjoining St. Peter's Church.

When the space had been partly cleared and some of the bodies were already removed, there arose a strong feeling of

disapprobation, and a memorial was presented to the Bishop, remonstrating against the use of that spot, and especially against the disturbing of the dead. Bishop Carroll did not yield at once; he replied with some feeling, urging the plea of the necessity of economy, in view of the heavy cost of the lots, which all desired. When, however, the clergy of the Seminary, who were regarded as the priests of the Cathedral, supported the views of the memorial in a document signed