P. Vicente Xaus,Franciscan.
Gerona, June 2d, 1807.
P. S. Both the above occurrences happened about two years ago. Nevertheless a few days after the confession, I remember that the said Eulalia told me they continued to confess to the same Father.
In the city of Gerona, on the twentieth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and seven, beforeDr Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Inquisitor Honorary, and Commissary, appointed for this investigation, and me Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, both sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy in everything which she knew, and about which she might be interrogated, a person calling herself Eulalia Forcat, of the city of Barcelona, aged about thirty years, a nun and attendant upon the foundlings in the Royal Hospicio of this city.
Questioned, if she knew or conjectured the cause of her being summoned to appear by the Holy Office.
Answered, that she did not know.
Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any person had said or done anything which was, or appeared to be, contrary to Our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, or against the just proceedings of the Holy Office.
Answered, that about two years since, being in this city, and serving as a domestic in the house of Señor Francisco Galup, merchant, in the Calle de la Merced, she heard on many occasions, Joseph Jalbert, merchant, a young man, a native of Puigcerda, and who transacted business in this house for a year, and then removed with his parents to the Calle de San Antonio, utter various insulting and abusive words against the Priests, both secular and regular, disputing often at table with the said Señor Francisco Galup, respecting matters of religion, declaring that the Priests were aparcel of useless vagabonds, and that they ought to be set to work, with other assertions of the same kind, which were uttered repeatedly in the presence of the deponent and Augustina Buxeras, both domestics in the house, Señora Maria Galup, Cayetano Galup, and Señor Francisco Galup. He persisted in this language, notwithstanding they all checked and rebuked him, in particular the abovementioned Señor Francisco Galup.
On another occasion the deponent being in company with the aforesaid Augustina Buxeras, in the kitchen of the house, the abovementioned Joseph Jalbert took a paper, on which was the figure of a Saint, and with approbrium to religion passed it behind him over his clothes. And when they rebuked him in a christian manner, he laughed and left them. At the same time she saw in the room in which he dwelt, three books, bound in the French manner, of a small size, and containing very indecent pictures of men and women. Neither the author of the books nor the subject were known to her, as they were in French. He kept them in his possession while he remained in the house, and on his departure took them with him.
Questioned, what was the age, personal appearance, residence, &c. of the abovementioned person.
Answered, that he was then about twentyone or twentytwo years old, of a moderate stature, fleshy, with a face somewhat long, and flaxen hair. He was unmarried, and engaged in mercantiletrade. She believed that he lived at present in Barcelona.
Questioned, if she knew that any other person had said or done anything which was or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Faith or against the just proceedings of the Holy Office.
Answered, No.
The above being read to her she declared that it was faithfully recorded conformably to her own declaration, and that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth. She further stated that she had not done it out of malice, or ill will against the said Joseph Jalbert, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised; and the deponent, not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.
Narciso Coll,Presbyter, and forthe said Deponent.
Before me—
Joseph Gasull,Presbyter Notary.
In the city of Gerona, on the twentyfifth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and seven, before Dr Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Commissary commissioned for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Eulalia Forcat, and being present in the quality of honest and religious persons, the Rev. Gines Torrent and the Rev. Thomas Parella, bothPresbyter Beneficadores of the Holy Church, sworn to preserve secrecy. She was
Questioned, if she remembered having made a declaration before the Ministers of the Holy Office against any person for crimes within her knowledge.
Answered, by repeating, substantially, the foregoing declaration of the twentieth of June current, made before the Commissary and Notary whose names are signed below. She requested that it might be produced and read.
The deponent was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office presented her as a witnessad perpetuam rei memoriamin a cause under his direction against the persons referred to in the said declaration. She was directed to give attention while it was read, and if she found anything to add or alter respecting the contents of it, to do it in such a manner as to declare the truth, as what she now uttered might operate to the prejudice of the aforesaid persons. The declaration made before the abovementioned Commissary and Notary, on the twentieth of June current was then readde verbo ad verbum, the deponent hearing and understanding the same.
She declared it was her declaration, and correctly recorded; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth, and she attested it for the same, and if necessary was ready to repeat the whole anew against the said Joseph Jalbert, not out of malice or ill will, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoinedupon her which she promised to observe, and the deponent not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name, along with the honest persons.
Narciso Coll,Commissary,and for the said Witness.Gines Torrent,Presbyter,in the same name.Thomas Parella,Presbyter.
Before me—
Joseph Gasull,Presbyter Notary.
In the city of Gerona, on the twentysecond day of June, one thousand eight hundred and seven, before Dr Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Inquisitor Honorary, and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy in everything which she knew, and about which she might be interrogated, a person calling herself Eulalia Forcat, of the city of Barcelona, aged about thirty years, a nun, and attendant upon the foundlings in the Royal Hospicio of this city.
Questioned, if she knew or suspected the cause of her being summoned to appear by the Holy Office.
Answered, that she did not know.
Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any person had said or done anything which was or appeared to be contrary to our Holy CatholicFaith and Evangelical Law, or against the just proceedings of the Holy Office. Answered, that at present she could remember nothing.
Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any Ecclesiastic had practised irregularities towards any person of the other sex in hearing them often at confession.
Answered, that all she knew was this; about two years ago she served as a domestic in this city, along with Agustina Buxeras, who afterwards lived in the family of Puigcech, a button maker, in the Plazuela de Basea in Barcelona, and being at that time in the house of Señores Francisco Galup and Cayetano, merchants, in the Calle de la Merced in Barcelona, she heard, on several occasions, the said Agustina declare that on confessing herself to the Reverend Father Fr. Antonio Puig, of Barcelona, of the order of San Francisco de Asis, he had ordered her many times at evening to go into a room at the entrance of the church of the Convent of San Francisco, on the right hand, where he disciplined her and caused her to do the same to herself, and that, he had done this also at the house of the abovementioned Señores Galup. This the deponent learned from the mouth of the said Agustina, and furthermore by examining her person on the second occasion, when she found her posteriors were black and blue, and that she had evidently been severely handled.
The said Augustina also informed her that in one or more of these instances while she was inthe room with the abovementioned Confessor, at the entrance of the Convent, he had taken off her petticoat and stays to give her the discipline; at the same time he uncovered his back, which she supposed was done for the purpose of exhibiting the effect of his flagellation. These confessions and disciplines continued, as the deponent learned, for some time, when finding that he did nothing to effect her admission as a nun into some Convent, of which she was desirous, she left him and sought another Confessor. What other things were done was not known.
The deponent was then informed that information had been received in this Holy Office that on the time above specified, while she was confined to her bed by some indisposition, her Confessor had paid her a visit, and in conversation upon penal mortifications he had uncovered a part of her body, examined it, and touched with his hands the places where she exercised her discipline, demanding if she felt any pain while he was touching them. Therefore, by virtue of the oath she had sworn, she was exhorted to bethink herself, reflect attentively upon the matter, and declare the truth.
Answered, that this was all true; that it occurred in the abovementioned house of the Señores Galup, with the aforesaid Father Fr. Antonio Puig, her Confessor, and that on this occasion she did not confess herself to him. She did not remember how long she had then gone without confessing, nor how long she deferred afterwards confessing to the same person. She however continued in company with him but without ever speakingof the matter. She knew not whether the abovementioned Father had ever solicited any person during confession or at any other time, nor had ever heard that any person has declared that there was no obligation to denounce such things to the Holy Office, but has heard the contrary from her present Confessor, Father Fr. Vicente Xaus, a monk of the same order, and now a conventual in this city of Gerona.
Questioned, what was the age and personal appearance of the said Father Fr. Antonio Puig, also his condition, residence, &c.
Answered, that she believed him to be under forty years of age, that he was of a middling height, rather thin, with a handsome face, large black eyes and eyebrows, hair and beard a little whitened, and that she believes he resides in Barcelona as one of the four ordinary Confessors of the aforesaid Convent.
The above having been read in her presence, she affirmed that it was correctly recorded conformably to her declaration; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth; and that it was not uttered by her out of malice or ill will against the abovementioned ecclesiastic, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised, and being unable to write, I, the said commissary sign in her name.
Narciso Coll,Commissary,and Presbyter for the Deponent.
Before me—
Joseph Gasull,Presbyter Notary.
* * * *
INthe Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyninth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and eightyone, the Inquisitor Licentiate, Dr Manuel de Merra y Paniagua, ordered to appear before him according to summons, a foreigner, established in this city, who, being present, was formally sworn to declare the truth and preserve secrecy with respect to everything which he knew, and concerning which he might be interrogated, and in relation to everything which he might see or understand, and everything which might befall him.
Questioned, his name, birthplace, residence, condition, age, and occupation.
Answered, that his name was Pedro Remson; that he was born in the town of St Jean in the district of Laval, in France; that he had resided in this city four years, doing business as a linen draper; that he had no wife, and was about thirtyfive years of age.
Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear by this Tribunal.
Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.
Questioned, if he had said or done anything which was or appeared to be a matter within the cognizance of the Holy Office, or against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law.
Answered, that he had never said or done anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, nor anything pertaining to the cognizance of the Holy Office.
He was then told that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that he, the deponent, had uttered certain speeches containing matter which came under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office; that he was summoned to be examined respecting it, and that he would do well to confess the whole before he was compelled to it.
Answered, that he was confident he had never said or done anything of the kind unless the following could be denominated such. About a year since, conversing with Carlos Coquet with whom he resided in this city, speaking of our Lady, of Mary and her image, the deponent affirmed that the Holy Virgin Mother of God was the only one, and that there was no difference between the image of Our Lady, of Mary, and any other. On another occasion, about the same time, he told the abovementioned Coquet that in France they were not obliged to present certificates of compliance with the annual precepts of sacramental confession and communion; that he considered it a burdensome practice and exposed to great abuses, and that he had understood these certificates were often sold about to persons who did not choose to comply with the precept, which thing he had heard publicly declared in coffee houses and clubrooms, but did not recollect by what persons.
At another time, finding that at his meal the oil did not suit his taste nor agree with him, he observed to the said Coquet that he thought he should not offend by eating the fat of beef on fast days, in place of oil.
On another occasion, about the same time, being out of the city, Josefa Coquet, wife of the abovementioned Carlos Coquet, was looking over his books, among which she found one entitled La Henriade, by Mons. Voltaire, which book belonged to Bernardo Carles, a Frenchman, who passed through this city for Andalusia, and gave the book in keeping to the deponent. He received it knowing that it was a prohibited book. When the deponent returned to the city, the said Josefa Coquet told him, with a mysterious look, that she had seen this book, and that her Confessor had ordered her to give information of it to the Holy Office. He replied that she had done wrong, and should have given up the book on mentioning it. He offered her the key of his writing desk that she might see whether he had any other bad or prohibited book.
Another day, talking with the aforesaid Coquet about the infallibility of the Pope, the deponent declared that inasmuch as he had never read in any book that the Pope was infallible, although he believed and held him to be the head of the church, yet he was persuaded that God alone was infallible; that the catechism which was taught him in France did not declare that the Pope was infallible, and therefore he did not believe it; but if his confessor or any other learned person were to say that he was, he should believe it; upon which Coquet was offended and went off to his own apartment. Further than this he did not remember to have said or done anything relating to mattersof religion, and if he were apprised of anything, which had been denounced to the Holy Office, he would disclose all he knew with the same sincerity.
He was then told that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that he, the deponent, had said he was a freemason, and had a book containing the constitutions of that society, that he produced the book, read a portion of it, and declared that there was nothing in it contrary to the Catholic Religion; furthermore, that the person to whom he made these assertions and read the book, making some objections, and telling him to conceal the book and take care that it came not to the knowledge of the Inquisition, for they would punish him, he laughed at him.
Answered, that it was false that he had ever told any one that he was a freemason, as he was not, nor ever had been one of that order, although he had held communication with some of them in France, had dined with them, and seen them converse together by signs; also, that he never possessed, nor said that he possessed a book containing their constitutions, and although he once had a book which spake in praise of freemasons, and commended their charities and other good works, yet it was false that he ever read any part of the same to any person; that he burnt this book with some other papers in presence of the abovementioned Josefa Coquet, and that he did not remember to have made the assertions imputed to him.
He was then told that information had been also received and sworn to, that he, the deponent, on a certain occasion, gave to another person a book whose author was Mons. Voltaire, informing him that he had possessed it for fifteen years; and that a certain ecclesiastic reprehending him for it, he replied that the book was not his, and that on the same day, in presence of the person aforesaid, he burnt some papers, saying, that he did it for fear of the Inquisition.
Answered, that the first part of this assertion was false; namely, that relating to the work of Mons. Voltaire, and that no part of it was true, except what he had already related as having passed between him and Josefa Coquet; that it was true he had burnt, in her presence, the book in praise of the freemasons, the history of the Incas of Peru, and some papers relating to the entertainments given to the Prince of Chartres, who was considered as the head of the freemasons, and also that he declared he had done the same for fear of the Inquisition.
It being late, the audience closed, and the deponent was ordered to appear again the next morning. The whole was read to him and he declared it to be true, which I certify.
Pedro Remusson.Juan Antonio Almonacid,Sec’y.
* * * *
To the Members of the Tribunal of the Inquisition of Catalonia, at their Royal Palace, Barcelona.
Barcelona, March 20th, 1802.
MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,
I have some information to give your Excellency respecting a certain person who has uttered in my presence some words which it appears to me come within the cognizance of your Excellency. Various causes have hindered me from appearing before the respectable tribunal of your Excellency and denouncing the whole matter. I trust your Excellency will favor me so far as to take my deposition at the hands of some clerical person. I live in the Calle Ancha, in the second room of a house which forms the corner of the Callejon de la Plata, No. 1, and for more particular direction, my house is so near that of Señor Don Juan Larra, that nothing separates them but the abovementioned Callejon.
Your Excellency’s most humble servant,Maria Bernarda Hallegg,wife ofDon Pedro Hallegg, Captain in theRegiment of Rutiman.
In the city of Barcelona, on the third day of June, one thousand eight hundred and two, before Dr Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, the Reverend Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter, Commissary, and Notary on this occasion, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfullyour duties, appeared, voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy with respect to everything which she knew and about which she might be interrogated, a person calling herself Dona Maria Bernardo Halegg, wife of Don Pedro Hallegg, Captain in the Regiment of Rutiman, a native of the town of Estipona, in the province of Andalusia, of age, as she stated, twentyfour years, and residing in the Calle de la Plata.
Questioned, if she knew or conjectured the cause of her being summoned to appear by the Tribunal of the Holy Office.
Answered, that she supposed it to be on account of a letter which her Confessor had written in her name to the Holy Office, in which letter she had declared that she had some information to communicate. The matter in question was as follows. About six months ago, Juan Picar, a native of Lyons, in France, who visited at her house, uttered the following heretical speeches; namely, that he did not believe in the purity of the Most Holy Mary; that he did not believe Jesus Christ descended to the Host after the words of consecration were uttered by the Priest; that he did not believe in the Pope, inasmuch as he was a man like ourselves; that those who died did not go to Hell, but to Paradise; that he said ‘Holy Mary’ instead of ‘Most Holy Mary;’ that he spoke ill of the Priests, declaring that he could not endure the sight of them, and that they had ruined Spain; that the French had done well in driving them all out of their country. The deponent stated further, that shebelieved he did not attend mass on the days appointed, although he professed to be a Christian.
She was then shown a letter beginning with ‘Barcelona, March 20th, 1802,’ and ending with ‘Don Pedro Halegg, Captain in the Regiment of Rutiman,’ that she might examine and identify it, and declare it to have been written by her, or by her direction in her name, and containing the truth.
Answered, that it was the identical one which she had caused to be written by her Father Confessor, and that she attested it for the truth; that she had nothing to add or alter in relation to it, and that she had not made her declarations out of malice or enmity against the abovementioned person, nor from any counsel or instigation on the part of any other person.
Questioned, why she had delayed to denounce these offences to the Holy Office, thereby failing in her obligation to give notice of all such matters immediately upon having knowledge of the same.
Answered, that she wished previously to consult her Father Confessor, and that she obeyed upon receiving his orders.
Questioned, at what time and in what place he made the abovementioned assertions; what persons were present; if he said them more than once, and how many times; whether he spoke in his own language, or quoted others who made the assertions referred to; whether he spoke in jest, in dispute, or in a passion; whether he was accustomed to utter such words; whether he was rebuked by any persons present, and by whom; whether,after being rebuked, he persisted in his assertions, and whether at the time of speaking he was in his right mind, or was insane or drunk.
Answered, that she had already specified the time, and that it happened at her house; that there were present occasionally her husband abovementioned; her brother-in-law, Don Martin Halegg, who resided there, a servant named Francisca Garriga, living in the Callejon de Santa Anna, and who went to be married at Tarragona, but her present place of residence the deponent does not know, and another servant named Antonia, who lives in a lane near La Trinidad Calzada, and is the daughter of a schoolmaster in that lane; that he repeated the above assertions many times, so often that she could not recollect the number; that he spoke affirmatively, and seriously; that she did not think he was accustomed to such talk, as he had not repeated it for more than two months; that he was rebuked several times by the abovementioned persons and the deponent, but took no heed; and that on most of these occasions he was in his right mind, although a few times he was intoxicated.
Questioned, if she knew that any other person had said or done anything which came within the cognizance of the Holy Office.
Answered, No.
Questioned, what was or appeared to be the age of the abovementioned Juan Picar, also his personal appearance and condition.
Answered, that he was about fortyfour years of age, tall, thin, with a light complexion, blue eyes,and red hair; and that he was a soldier in the aforesaid regiment.
The above being read to her, she affirmed it to be recorded conformably to her declaration; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth; and that she did not utter it out of malice or ill will against the said Juan Picar, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised to observe, and added her signature, which I certify.
After the declaration had been read, and before it was signed, the deponent recollected that the abovementioned Juan Picar observed to her husband, that a person, on dying, passed to the other world without suffering any punishment. Also she had been informed by her sister-in-law, Dona Rafaela Reymer, wife of a captain out of service, named Don Joseph Reymer, who lives in the Calle de San Pablo, No. 14, third story, that two officers of the said regiment, the one named Martin Estinause, and the other unknown, uttered blasphemies respecting a figure of Christ.
All which she denounces to the Holy Office in discharge of her conscience, and under the oath of secrecy sworn by her. She added her signature, which I certify.
Maria Bernarda Hallegg.Dr Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,Presbyter and Commissary,Cayetano Tuco,Presbyter, Commissary,and Notary.
* * * *
MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,
Francisco Prat, Subdeacon, native of Esponella, and a resident in the Seminario del Señor, in the bishopric of Gerona, by counsel and order of the Reverend Juan Salgueda his Confessor, gives information with due respect to your Excellency, of the following matter.
About six months since, in this city, he heard Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, the wife of a Frenchman, and reputed a woman of truth, and a native of Gerona, dwelling in the Mercadal Parish of that city—declare that a Frenchman who was a stocking weaver in the Hospicio of the same city, whose name was Blaqueire, and whose age was about thirty years, had been baptized since he was in Spain, but had prevaricated and embraced some heresy.
Also that a certain Frenchman, named Avi Brich, aged about sixty years, residing in the said city of Gerona, and likewise a stocking weaver in the Hospicio, was a Jew, and the writer of this letter observing that they ought to commune annually, otherwise they would be severely punished, she replied that in order to deceive the spies, he took the sacrament not merely once, but two or three times every year.
Which information I transmit to your Excellency for the necessary end.
Gerona, April 28th, 1791.
Francisco Prat,Subdeacon.
We herewith transmit to the Reverend Juan Salgueda, Presbyter Vicar of the church of the Mercadal of Gerona, the extrajudicial denunciation of Francisco Prat, Subdeacon, a resident in the Episcopal Seminario of that city, and we grant a commission for examining him before another Ecclesiastic as Notary, according to the formula adjoined, No. 1, in order that the denunciation may be attested, and he may affirm, under oath, that it is his, written and signed by him, and its contents true, as also whether he has anything to add or alter respecting it, and from what motive the said Narcisa Catala y Pinsach made the charges in question against the two Frenchmen.
Having taken the deposition of Francisco Prat, you will take the occasion and methods the most cautious and opportune to examine before the same Notary, and according to the formula No. 2, the said Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, respecting the matters referred to by Francisco Prat, taking care not to mention to her the name of this person, nor the names of the Frenchmen accused, inasmuch as she will state them herself should her testimony corroborate the charge, in which case she will specify the name, occupation, country, residence, age, and personal appearance of each individual. Also if she knows whether one of them has been baptized in Spain, when, in what Parish, and what heresy he embraced afterwards. Also what reason she has for saying that one of them is a Jew, and in order to deceive the spies, takes the communion not merely once, but two or three timesa year. You will also question her whether she has heard or understood anything from these two Frenchmen or others, which is, or appears to be, contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, or within the cognisance of the Holy Office, in which case she must declare whatever she knows, with the utmost clearness and perspicuity.
These investigations being completed, you will forward the proceedings to us, returning also all the papers. Our Lord preserve you.
Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 11th, 1791.
The Licentiate,Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.Dr Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.Juan Antonio Almonacid,Secretary.
In the city of Gerona, Principality of Catalonia on the thirtieth day of June, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone, before us, Juan Salgueda, Presbyter Vicar of the Mercadal and Commissary of the Holy Office for this investigation, and Dr Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, a person calling himself Francisco Prat, Subdeacon of the village of Esponella in the bishopric of Gerona, aged twentyeight years.
Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.
Answered, that he supposed it to be on account of a denunciation he had made, respecting something he had heard from Narcisa Catala y Pinsach.
He was then informed that a letter had been received in this Holy Office, which appeared to be from him, which letter began with ‘Francisco Prat, Subdeacon,’ and ended with ‘for the necessary ends.’ This letter was then produced, when he recognised it, and declared it to be the one which he wrote to the Tribunal, and that its contents were true.
Questioned, if he had anything to add thereto.
Answered, that in the conversation referred to, the abovementioned Narcisa Catala y Pinsach stated that some other Frenchmen abused the said Francisco Blaqueire on account of his prevarication respecting our religion, and that this happened in her house. Also, (but of this he is not certain) he believed she declared that the father and brother of the said Blaqueire who reside in Montagut or Tortella, in the bishopric of Gerona, refused to live with him by reason of his baptism, and that they had not been baptized; at any rate she said something respecting this.
Furthermore he had been told by Maria, the sister of the aforesaid Narcisa Pinsach, that Francisco Brich was a Jew. This she told the deponent in his own house; the like assertion he had heard from some of the common people, but did not recollect whom.
Questioned, what gave rise to the aforesaid conversation; why the charges were made; and seeing that it was his duty to oppose and denounce such matters, why he waited six months before he gave information.
Answered, that he chanced to remark, while waiting for the husband of the said Narcisa Pinsach, that the abovenamed Brich appeared to be an honest man, to which she replied that he was not, when the rest of the assertions followed; that the charges were made in compliance with the dictates of his conscience; and that he had spoken of the matter before, but had been told that it was women’s tattle.
Questioned, what was the appearance of the persons in question.
Answered, that he had no knowledge of Francisco Blaqueire; and that the said Brich is a man of middling stature, corpulent, somewhat florid, and of a pacific temper; and that he knew nothing of his birthplace, except that he was a Frenchman.
The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, who has not made this declaration out of malice or ill will, but solely in discharge of his conscience; he declared that it was correctly recorded, and signed it in the city of Gerona, on the first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone.
Francisco Prat,Subdeacon.
Before me—
Dr Marcial Llistorella,Presbyter Notary.
In the city of Gerona, on the second day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone, before us, Juan Salgueda, Presbyter, Vicar of the Mercadal of Gerona, and Commissary of the Holy Office, and Dr Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, wife of Joseph Fabrega, commonly called Catala, stocking weaver, a native and inhabitant of Gerona, of age, as she stated, twentyeight years.
Questioned, if she knew the cause of her being summoned to appear.
Answered, No.
Questioned, if she knew that any person had said or done anything which was, or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, and Evangelical Law.
Answered, that she had been told that Francisco Brich,aliasLo Avi Brich, and Francisco Blaqueire, stocking weavers, in the Hospicio of this city, were Protestants; and that the said Blaqueire had been baptized since his residence in Spain, but she knew not in what Parish. Also, that he could not live with his parents because they were Protestants. His parents live in France.
Questioned, if she knew whether the said Blaqueire had embraced any heresy.
Answered, that she only knew he was a Protestant, according as she was informed by her mother, now dead, who asserted that she was unwillingto let her other daughter marry the said Blaqueire because he was a Protestant. The same assertion she has heard from many other persons; she could not remember whom, but believed they were people of the vulgar sort.
Questioned, if she had told this to any other person.
Answered, that what had been told her, she had told to others, but to whom she could not say.
Here closed the deposition of the second of July, and on the fourth of the same month, the said Narcisa Fabra Catala y Pinsach appeared again.
Questioned, if she had anything to add to the declaration which she had made against Francisco Blaqueire.
Answered, No.
Questioned, what was the personal appearance of this man.
Answered, that he was about thirty years of age, of a moderate stature, and corpulent; that she did not know his birthplace, only that he was a Frenchman; that he was desirous of marrying, and that he was a stocking weaver, but in what factory he worked she did not know.
Questioned, why she supposed the abovenamed Brich to be a Protestant.
Answered, that she did not know it for certain, but had heard of it in the same manner in which she learned the history of Francisco Blaqueire, and that perhaps she had told it to others.
She was then informed that information had been received and sworn to in the Holy Office,that in a certain conversation a certain person observed that Avi Brich appeared to be an honest man, to which she replied, ‘He is not an honest man, but a Jew.’ And it being remarked that in Spain they must confess and partake of the communion once in each year, she replied, that in order to deceive the spies, they did this not merely once, but two or three times a year.
Therefore, in the name of God Our Lord and his Glorious and Blessed Mother Our Lady the Virgin, she was exhorted to bethink herself and declare the whole truth.
Answered, that she did not remember to have said so, but had heard say that if he had died in the Hospital, where he lay very sick about two years, he would not have been buried in consecrated grounds. At present she could not recollect who made this assertion, but she believed they were Frenchmen.
Questioned, what was his age and personal appearance.
Answered, she had known him about six years; that he was of a middling stature, corpulent, of a pacific temper, and above fifty years old; that she knew not his birthplace, but only that he was a Frenchman, and resided in the parish of the Mercadal of Gerona.
Questioned, if she knew anything of any other person which was contrary to our Faith.
Answered, that she had been told by Dona Manuela de Rodil, that Monsieur Daniel, a Frenchman, living in the parish of the Mercadal, possesseda mirror, which, on looking into it, exhibited the figures of devils. Also, she had heard, from the vulgar, that he and his wife were not Christians. Furthermore, she had been told by a certain Mallensa, a French woman, that a certain Luis in her house was a Protestant, but she believed this was said from hatred, and in order to get him out of the house. Finally, she remembered to have heard that one of the sons, Francisco Brich, now in France, was a Protestant. Who made this assertion she could not tell.
The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, who has not uttered it out of malice or ill will, but solely to discharge her conscience; and having been read, she declared that it was correctly recorded.
Done at Gerona on the fourth day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetytwo.
The said Narcisa Catala Fabre y Pinsach not being able to write, I sign the above.
Juan Salgueda,Presbyter, &c.
Before me—
Dr Marcial Llistorella,Presbyter,Notary in this Investigation.
* * * *
MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,
Being in company with Juan Bautista Viada, mason, on the twelfth day of the present month, and discoursing of sermons upon the state of the soul, I am very confident that he made this remark; that he had heard sundry persons declare they believed nothing about hell or purgatory,but as for himself, he believed. Which information I give your Excellency in obedience to the dictates of my conscience.
Mataro, November 17th, 1819.
Your most humble servant,Franch. Plana, Carpenter.
On the road beyond the gate of Batlleix.[21]
Let a commission be expedited for the examination of the above letter.
To the Reverend Father Pedro Martir de S. Vicente, Capuchin and Ex Lecturer of his order.
We hereby grant you a commission to summon before you, and another ecclesiastic to act as Notary, first swearing secrecy, Francisco de Asis Plana, carpenter, residing opposite the gate of Batlleix of this city. You will subject him to a regular examination respecting a letter of his which is herewith enclosed, and exact an oath from him that the letter is his, written by himself and its contents true. You will ascertain whetherhe has anything to add or alter respecting it, and after four days you will ratify the samead perpetuam, in the presence of two other ecclesiastics sworn to secrecy. In the same manner you will proceed to take separately the depositions of Juan Bautista Viada, mason, and of the other persons whom he states were present when the speeches in question were uttered; these depositions to be also ratified. You will not omit to question him who these persons were, according to the regular form. You will note in the margin of the paper which shall contain the depositions, the degree of credit which they deserve; and you will also transmit, separately, an account of the lives, character, and behaviour of the persons denounced. With these you will return this commission and the other papers. God preserve you many years.
Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, December 18th, 1819.
Dr Don Jose Llozer.
The Licentiate,
Don Santo de Basarrate.D. D. Juan de Calva y Marti,Sec’y.
In the city of Mataro, bishopric of Barcelona, on the twentyeighth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and nineteen, before Father Pedro Martir de San Vicente, Presbyter and Commissary, specially appointed in virtue of a commission to this effect, and before me, P. Bernardino de Barcelona, Presbyter Notary, havingsworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared voluntarily and made oath in the name of God our Lord, with the sign of the cross, to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, with respect to everything demanded of him which he knew, a person calling himself Francisco de Asis Plana, carpenter, aged fiftyseven years.
Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear by the Holy Office.
Answered, Yes.
Questioned, if he had written, or caused to be written at any time, a letter to the Tribunal of the Inquisition, giving an account of some crime within his knowledge, and who was the person to whom he referred.
Answered, that he had written a letter against Juan Bautista Viada, mason. The letter was then exhibited and the first clause of it read, when the deponent declared it to be his, and that its contents were true.
Questioned, if he had anything to add or alter in the said letter.
Answered, that if it were not for the apprehension of falling into an error, he should alter, ‘I am confident,’ to ‘I am certain.’
Questioned, if there were other persons present when Juan Bautista Viada made the assertions in question.
Answered, No.
Questioned, if he knew that any other person had said or done anything which came under the cognizance of the Holy Office.
Answered, No.
Questioned, what was the age, appearance, and habitation of the person denounced.
Answered, that he was about fiftysix years old, and lived in the Calle de Argentona, in Mataro.
The above having been read to the deponent was declared by him to be correctly recorded. He stated further that he had nothing to add or alter respecting it; and that he did not make the declarations therein contained, out of malice, but solely from conscientious motives. Secrecy was enjoined upon him, which he promised, and added his signature.
Francisco de Asis Plana.Fr. Pedro Martir de San Vicente,Presbyter Capuchin.
Before me—
P. Bernardino de Barcelona,Presbyter,Notary, and Commissary, appointed forthis Purpose.
In the city of Mataro, bishopric of Barcelona, on the sixteenth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and twenty, before Father Pedro Martir de San Vicente, Presbyter Capuchin, and Commissary, by a special commission for this purpose, and me, Father Bernardino de Barcelona, Notary, having sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our offices, appeared and made oath in the name of God our Lord, with the sign of the cross, to declare the truth, and observe secrecy, a person calling himself Juan Bautista Viada,a native of Mataro, in the bishopric of Barcelona, by occupation a mason, aged fiftyfour years.
Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.
Answered, No.
Questioned, if he knew that any person or persons had said there was no Hell nor Purgatory, or made any other assertion which came under the cognisance of the Holy Office.
Answered, that he had heard the above assertion uttered by Magin Casanovas, or Barcelo, a person who died two years since.
Questioned, what persons were present when these words were spoken; and if the said Magin Casanovas was in his right mind; also, whether the assertion was made in a positive manner, or by referring to some other person, and whether it was made in jest, or dispute, or passion.
Answered, that he did not recollect whether it was said in the presence of others or not, but that it appeared to be said in a positive manner, and not in the heat of passion; that the abovementioned Magin Casanovas was a Marine Alguacil of this city, of which he was also a native, and that his age was about seventy years.
Questioned, if he remembered how many times the assertion had been made, and if he received any rebuke for it.
Answered, that he did not remember.
Questioned, why he had not denounced the speaker to the Holy Tribunal.
Answered, that the thought of this never occurred to him.
Questioned, if he knew that any other person had said or done anything which belonged to the cognizance of the Holy Tribunal.
Answered, No.
The above having been read to the deponent, was declared by him to be correctly recorded; and he further stated that he had nothing to add or alter respecting it, and that he did not make the declaration through malice, but solely in obedience to his conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon him, which he promised, and added his signature.
Juan Bautista Viada.Fray Pedro Martir de San Vicente,Presbyter Capuchin Commissary.
Before me—
F. Bernardo de Barcelona,Notary.
[The following is written in the margin of the above deposition.]
I know the deponent Juan Bautista Viada to be a person worthy of credit. He supports his family by his labor; follows the precepts of the church, confesses, and partakes of the sacrament; nor have I ever heard of anything which can impeach his testimony. This is my opinion, salvo meliori.
Mataro, January 28th, 1820.
Fr. Pedro Martir de San Vicente,Presbyter Capuchin Commissary.
THE END.