Fr. Bapst changed his residence
from Ellsworth to Bangor on June 7, 1854. This change was ordered by the bishop
of Boston, who still retained Maine within his spiritual jurisdiction. The
bishop was forced to place Fr. Bapst in permanent charge of Bangor by a chain
of circumstances which left him no choice in the matter, but in view of after
events it is only just to say that the bishop would never have allowed Bangor,
the most important mission of Maine, to pass out of the control of his secular
clergy, had not a terrible crisis in Catholic affairs at Ellsworth precluded
the adoption of any other course. When he first committed Bangor to the charge
of the Jesuits, he had intended to burden them with its care only for a short
time, until he could choose a competent secular priest as successor to Fr.
O’Sullivan. The events that led to Fr. Bapst’s hasty removal to Bangor are of
an exciting nature, and are best learned from his own narration, made to the
compiler of this sketch many years ago, from the reminiscences of his faithful
housekeeper, and from letters written to the provincial at about this period.
Fr. Bapst’s Narrative
When I first came to Ellsworth I
began a course of Sunday afternoon lectures on the doctrines of the Church.
These instructions drew to the afternoon service on Sundays a large concourse
of Protestants, curious to know what could be said in defence of a religious
system which in their opinion had long before been thoroughly exploded. The
results of my labors were most gratifying. Before many months had elapsed I had
gathered into the fold a goodly number of Protestants, and among them twelve young
ladies, all members of prominent families of the town.[1]
Religious feeling ran high in consequence. I was denounced, from the pulpit and
in the press, as a perverter of the young. I was warned to stop my work of proselyting,
and of reducing free-born Americans to Rome’s galling yoke. All manner of
threats were uttered against me.
To add fuel to the already
fiercely burning here of religious hatred, Catholics whose children attended
the public schools of the town protested against the law recently passed by the
school committee of Ellsworth, whereby their sons and daughters were forced
under pain of expulsion to read in the school the Protestant version of the
Bible and to join in the Protestant prayers. They petitioned the -committee to
permit the Catholic children to read the Catholic version, or else to excuse
them from reading any. In their petition they expressly declared that they had
no desire to interfere with the right of Protestant children to read any
version deemed proper by their parents, but simply wished to protect the
religious faith of their own children. I knew that the board as a whole had an
intense hatred of all that was Catholic and foreign, but I found some of the
committee, as well as the teachers, willing to accede to my request that the
children be not forced to act against the dictates of their consciences by
reading a Protestant version of the Bible and by uniting in prayers not
approved by the Church. I was the more anxious to ward off these dangers, as I
knew on good authority that one of the members of the school board had said
openly: “We are determined to protestantize the Catholic children; they shall
read the Protestant Bible or be dismissed from the schools; and should we find
them loafing around the wharves we will clap them into jail.”
I could not, therefore, in
conscience permit my Catholic children to join in the Protestant religious
exercises, as such a course would be a virtual profession of Protestantism,
seeing that the regulation was insisted upon in hatred of the true faith. I did
not wish to excite our enemies unnecessarily, and did all I could to lower the
high pitch to which the public mind had been excited. I held in check the
overwrought feelings of my flock, and abstained from all bitterness in pushing
the righteous claims of my people. But in vain! The protest, signed by over a
hundred Catholics, which was presented to the consideration of the school board
one morning in November, 1853, by Mr. White and myself, was rejected with
insult and abuse. Next day Messrs. Tisdale and Richards, two members of the
board, went to the school where most of the Catholic children attended, and
forthwith expelled all who refused to read the Protestant Bible. I was
therefore obliged to provide means of instruction for these dear little
confessors of Christ. I opened a Catholic school in our old chapel, but in thus
baffling the plan of our adversaries, who were intent upon obtaining an
unconditional surrender on the part of the Catholics, I was much pained to find
that I only increased their blind fury against us. The chapel was blown up one
night, and we were obliged to transfer the school to the galleries of the new
church. To try whether the law would provide a remedy by declaring the cause of
the school board unconstitutional, a test case was made in behalf of the son of
Lawrence Donahoe, and a suit commenced against the committee, but to no
purpose. Bigotry won the day. An incident that happened shortly before the
dismissal of the children from the school added fuel to the flames. I was
drawn, much against my will, into a controversy with one of the Protestant
ministers of the town, and defeated him so completely as to put the Protestants
present to the blush for their poor champion. It came about as follows.
One morning business called me
to the office of one of the town lawyers, and while I was engaged with him, who
should come in but the other powers of the town, the leading minister and the
most popular doctor of the place. After I had politely saluted them both, I
overheard the lawyer whisper to the minister: “Now you have got the papist
priest at your mercy ; give it to him !” I saw from the confident smile of the
lawyer and doctor that they anticipated an easy victory for their clerical
champion. He, no wise unwilling, entered the fray without gloves, and abruptly
put forth this astonishing statement:
“You Catholics despise the
Bible. You have no faith in the written Word of God. How can you call
yourselves Christians?”
To this exceedingly ill-timed
remark I would have gladly avoided giving an answer, but as I considered that
silence would be taken for assent, I quietly and gently proceeded to pursue a
line of argument whereby the minister would be put to rout by his own
admission.
“Well,” said I, “supposing,
Reverend Sir, that your statement be correct, that we set no value on the
Bible, granting this to be true for the sake of argument, may I ask you, with
all due respect, do you set any value on oral tradition?”
“No, of course not.” replied the
minister with a deep frown, “that is a popish doctrine.”
“Well then,” I said, “may I ask
you why you value the Bible so highly? How do you know it is the Word of God?”
“Why,” he replied, “it bears the
divine imprint on its every page.” “Those who have read the Koran and the works
of Confucius,” I said, “have found them very like in style to the Bible, yet
these are certainly not the Word of God.”
“Well,” replied the now greatly
excited minister, “our forefathers have always revered the Bible as the Word of
God, and have so taught their descendants.”
“But how were your forefathers
able with certainty to hold the Bible as from God?”
“Why, my dear sir, how simple
you are! They had the testimony of their ancestors to that effect, and these
ancestors had the testimony of theirs, and so on up to the time of Christ.”
“Well, Reverend Sir, excuse me
if I ask one more question. What do you call that oral testimony I am sure you
are too honest, to deny that this is oral tradition under another name, and
therefore your Bible has no intrinsic value without the aid of tradition."
The expression of the minister’s
face was terrible to behold. It was one of baffled hatred and shame. He did not
venture a reply, but turned from me abruptly, and sought the fellowship of the
two spectators who had been in full sympathy with him from the opening of the
tilt. When I was leaving the office I overheard the lawyer mutter the following
words expressive of his deep chagrin : “Well, I could have stood our parson’s
being overcome by an enlightened American, but to have had him completely
routed by one of these Romish foreigners—a man who can’t speak two words of
English correctly—it’s a crying shame!”
The fanatical fury of the
Know-nothing party increased with time, and at length reached such a pitch
that, after destroying the old church, they broke the windows of my dwelling.
This happened on the evening of June 3, 1854. From the early part of the
preceding November the agitation was kept alive by the Ellsworth Herald in its
daily attacks on the Catholics, and on Sundays by the tirades of the minister.
On June 6, the mob broke the
windows of our church, and then went to the nearest tavern to muster up courage
for further outrages, threatening all the while to inflict all manner of injury
upon the Catholics. At this stage of the excitement I was directed by Bishop
Fitzpatrick of Boston to take up my permanent abode at Bangor, which I had
previously cared for as its temporary pastor, pending the appointment of a
secular priest as successor to Fr. O’Sullivan. I was ordered by the bishop not
to return to Ellsworth even for the Sunday services, but to send another father
who was not connected with the school trouble. Thus good came out of evil. By
this disposition of affairs I secured for the missions the long-desired centre
in Bangor, which would never have been my good fortune had it not been for the
trouble at Ellsworth.
On the morning of July 16, word
came to Bangor that the untiring mob of Ellsworth had attempted to burn down
the chapel at one o’clock that morning. The fire was luckily discovered in time
by Amory Otis, one of the rightminded citizens of Ellsworth, and put out before
any damage was done except to the cellar.
Housekeeper’s Account
Before entering Fr. Bapst’s
service I had been housekeeper for Fr. O’Sullivan, parish priest of Bangor. Fr.
Bapst used to stop over with us from time to time on his way to his various
missions. I first met him shortly after his arrival from Europe, when he could
as yet speak but a very few words of English. Sometimes, while at Fr.
O’Sullivan’s, he would be called upon to administer the pledge, and I would
make him understand what was wanted by raising an imaginary glass to my lips
and then pointing at the poor drunkard.
One day an amusing incident
occurred. Fr. Bapst, as yet ignorant of English, was sitting in the library
conversing with Fr. O’Sullivan in French, when the niece of the parish priest
entered, and exhibited a costly bottle of cologne which she had just received
as a present. She held it out to Fr. Bapst that he might admire it, but he
mistaking her intention and thinking she wished to make him a present for the
Indians, took the bottle and slipped it into his coat pocket, exclaiming again
and again with a most winning smile : “Merci, mademoiselle, merci.” The poor
girl was deeply grieved at her loss, but gave up all attempts to recover her
treasure, knowing, full well that any hint, whereby she might seek to enlighten
Fr. Bapst on the true situation of affairs, would be entirely lost upon him,
owing to his ignorance of English.
When Fr. Bapst went to live
permanently at Ellsworth in January, 1853, he was very desirous of securing my
services as housekeeper. He was so kind as to think me prudent enough and of
sufficiently mature age to make him a good housekeeper. On my part, I had
learned to admire his sanctity, gentleness, and burning zeal so much that I
would have gone through fire and water for him. An agreement, therefore, was
easily reached, whereby I left Bangor to take charge of the house in Ellsworth,
procured for Fr. Bapst by the Catholics of that town shortly before my arrival.
Fr. Bapst was generally at home in Ellsworth from Saturday till Monday of each
week, but during the other days of the week he was frequently absent attending
to the other missions lying around Ellsworth.
From November, 1853, till the
October of the following year, great feelings of hatred towards the Catholics
and their priest were aroused among the Protestants ; and the rowdy element of
the town with many who styled themselves respectable began hostile proceedings
against Fr. Bapst. The excitement had its origin in the father’s success as a
missioner and in his position with respect to the school question. The
agitation reached such an alarming pitch by June, 1854, that I feared for Fr,
Bapst’s life.
On Saturday June 3, I had been
able to unearth a secret plot whereby the Know Nothings hoped to seize Fr.
Bapst, and wreak their vengeance upon him. The dear father had just returned
from his missions, and a sick-call from a distant station awaited him. He was
inclined to defer attendance on this case until after Sunday, being averse to
leaving the Catholics of Ellsworth without Mass on that day. With a boldness
that afterwards surprised me, and moved by a presentiment of evil that seemed
inspired from above (for I did not then know that an immediate attack was
meditated by his enemies), I bade the dear father not delay bringing the consolations
of religion to the poor sick man. “Go, Father, in the name of God!’’ I pleaded.
My entreaties prevailed, and he started on the sick-call that very day.
That night, Saturday June 3,
1853, a mob surrounded the priest’s house. They were dressed entirely in white
with a dark belt encircling their waists. Their faces were securely masked.
They thundered at the door, and demanded instant admission. I was alone in the
house, and though greatly alarmed I retained my presence of mind. Some good
Catholics had brought me news of their approach and I bethought myself of the
necessity of saving such goods as would be most likely to suffer at the hands
of the invaders. Among these Fr. Bapst’s books were the chief objects of my
care. I knew the villains would destroy those first. I therefore conveyed the
contents of his library to the top story of the house.
Hardly had I finished my labors
when 1 heard the mob at the front door demanding admission. I answered the call
with fear and trembling and a silent prayer to God for help. “What do you want,
gentlemen ?’’ I said to the crowd that was crammed into the space around the
door, intent on rushing into the house. “Where’s that Bapst ?’’ they shouted in
chorus. Their sacrilegious way of naming the man of God aroused all my spirit,
and though never given to profanity I forgot myself in my just indignation, and
answered, “It’s none of your business.” This bold reply startled them at first
and made them cower. Then, in more guarded language, they expressed their
determination of searching the house for the priest. Not wishing to give them
unnecessary offence, I assumed a tone of great mildness, though my heart was
bursting with indignation at the insolence of the crowd, and I tried to
dissuade them from entering, saying : “Gentlemen, Fr. Bapst left here this
morning to go on a sick-call, and it is doubtful when he will return. I, a lone
unprotected woman, am the only occupant of the house. Will you be so cowardly
as to enter this house when you have no one to resist you but a poor, weak
woman?” My words seemed to stir up their better natures; they gave over making
any further efforts to effect an entrance, but they vented their hatred against
the priest by riddling with stones nearly every window in the house.
The next day being their Sabbath
, they remained quiet, not wishing to desecrate the day. On Tuesday, June 6,
Fr. Bapst returned after dark to Ellsworth, and so quietly that his coming was
not known to his foes, for he had received news on the road of the attack on
his house. That night the mob reassembled in the town, and, with the fury of
demons, rushed towards our church and made a fierce assault upon its doors.
Col. Charles Jarvis, one of nature’s noblemen, who though a Protestant was a
great admirer of Fr. Bapst, hastened on horseback to the rescue of the church.
He dashed into the midst of the crowd, shouting to the foremost aggressors to
desist from their work of destruction. Then quickly leaping from his horse he
mounted the church steps, and thus addressed the rioters ; “Till to-day I was
ever proud of being called a freeborn American. I gloried in the liberty
accorded to all by our country ; but to-day, for the first time, the thought of
having to claim a common country with fellows that can be guilty of such a
gross invasion of the most sacred rights of others brings a blush to my cheek.
Think of it, men, the poor Irish, who get but a dollar a day in wages, live
from day to day on potatoes alone, and this that they may have money to spare
wherewith to erect a temple in which they may worship God according to the
dilates of their consciences. And you, who call yourselves free Americans,
would destroy the fruits of their hard labors in a night! Shame upon you!’’
His forcible remonstrance had
some temporary effect, the attack on the church was not immediately renewed,
but the rioters continued to hang around the church until the colonel had
departed, when they gave full fling to their hatred against us by breaking all
the windows. The colonel, who had reached one of the bridges that span the
Union River, on hearing that the work of destruction had recommenced, came
riding back at a furious pace, but too late to save the windows. When he
reached the spot the crowd was dispersing. Fr. Bapst was persuaded by me to
vacate his ordinary bed-room, and seek a safer one in the upper part of the
house. No attempt, however, was made that night to attack the house, as the
Know-nothings did not dream that he had returned.
The next morning Fr. Bapst
received a telegram from Woodstock, Maine, about 180 miles west of Ellsworth,
near the New Hampshire border, asking his spiritual assistance for a person
sick at that place. He started for Woodstock early on Wednesday morning, and on
his return, instead of going to Ellsworth, went direct to Bangor. This he did
by order of the bishop, who wished him to take up his permanent quarters at
that town for the future, and never to return to Ellsworth. I soon followed him
to Bangor, and there continued in my office of housekeeper until 1859.
In October, 1854, Fr. Bapst was
obliged to visit Cherryfield, 24 miles beyond Ellsworth, to attend a sick-call.
To do this he had to pass through Ellsworth. He therefore determined to stop
over Sunday in that town, in order to hear the confessions of the Catholics
there and say Mass for them. He arrived in Ellsworth on Saturday night, full of
hopes that no attempt would be made to molest him, as he thought that the old
agitation had died out. That night he was taken out by a mob, and tarred and
feathered. He said Mass, however, on Sunday morning in Ellsworth, remained with
Col. Jarvis Sunday night, and returned to Bangor on Monday morning.
I was nearly dead with anxiety,
for news of the outrage had reached Bangor Sunday morning. I was for setting
out myself to seek the dear father, and bring him home in safety, when his arrival
in Bangor made such a course unnecessary. I had everything ready to render him
comfortable after his sad experience. A hot bath was placed in his room with
plenty of new rum to apply after the bath. Fr. Bapst immediately availed
himself of these remedies against a reaction, and after some time emerged from
his bed-room as fresh as before the assault, and as eager as ever for work in
the Lord’s vineyard. Portions of Fr. Bapst’s clothing that he had worn on that
terrible night, and that were covered with tar and feathers, were brought to me
from Ellsworth together with the broken crystal of his watch. These I have
treasured as most precious relics through all these long years.[2]
On Dec. 8, 1854, Bishop
Fitzpatrick, assisted by the recently appointed bishop of the new diocese of
Portland, Rt. Rev, David Bacon, laid the corner-stone of Fr. Bapst’s new church
in Bangor. By direction of Bishop Fitzpatrick, I deposited in a bottle a small
portion of the clothing worn by Fr. Bapst at the time of the outrage. It was
spattered with tar to which some of the feathers were still clinging. The
bishop wrote the following inscription which was also placed in the bottle
before it was sealed : “This is a piece of the clothing worn by the builder of
this church, Rev. John Bapst, S. J., on the night of October 13, 1854, when he
was tarred and feathered, in hatred of the faith, by the Know Nothings of
Ellsworth.” The bottle was placed beneath the corner-stone by the bishop
himself.
In the autumn of 1859, the
Jesuits were withdrawn from Maine by their superior; and when, in 1860, Fr.
Bapst was appointed superior of the scholasticate at Boston, he urged me to
come to that city and take charge of the college laundry. I gladly availed
myself of an opportunity that allowed me to see the saintly father from time to
time. I retained this position until 1869, when, through Fr. Bapst’s influence,
I gained the accomplishment of my life’s desire —admission into the Order of
the Good Shepherd in New York. It was my great happiness to have Fr. Bapst
preside at my religious profession.
In the fall of 1883, Fr. Bapst,
whose mind was then greatly weakened, passed through New York on his way from
West Park to Frederick. Rev. Fr. Brady, then Provincial, knowing how happy I
would be to see Fr. Bapst, caused the dear father to be conducted from St.
Francis Xavier’s College to the residence of St. Lawrence’s Church, and sent me
word at the same time to the latter house if I wished to see my old pastor. The
Brother Porter told me it would be useless to call Fr. Bapst to the parlor, for
he would not recognize me, as he did not remember his own name, nor those of
his own brethren. But I assured the brother that he would certainly remember
his old housekeeper. One of the fathers soon brought him to the corridor in
which I was waiting, and when the saintly old man saw me his face was lit up
with a smile, and to the astonishment of all around he cried out: “Ah! there’s
my Mary.’’ That was the last time I saw Fr. Bapst. If any one deserved heaven,
he certainly did, for his life at home and abroad was that of a true man of
God. Extracts from Letters of Fr. Bapst to the Provincial of the Maryland
Province, touching the origin of the excitement in Ellsworth.
Ellsworth, October, 1853. .... I
have to inform Your Reverence of another difficulty. A town school-teacher, out
of bigotry, being the son of a parson, has established in his school, that all
the scholars should read the Protestant version of the Bible or leave the
school; he prevailed, to a certain extent, on the school committee to have such
a rule approved, and immediately dismissed the two Catholic children he had in
his school because they would not read this version. The case has already
created some excitement among Catholics and Protestants. Next Sunday a petition
will be presented to the committee requesting that the Catholic children should
be free to read their own Bible, or no Bible at all, in the schools. I cannot
foresee the result; all the Catholics seem to be determined not to have their
rights trampled upon, and will sign the petition. I have visited the committee,
and succeeded in convincing them of our right, but they are afraid of becoming
too unpopular by doing their duty. Poor committee! I shall inform you of the
result, and in the meantime recommend myself to the prayers and holy sacrifices
of Your Reverence.
Ellsworth, November 16, 1853.
.... With reference to the school and Bible question, which has created so much
excitement, I have to state that the position of the Catholics is every day
getting better and brighter. Our rights begin to be acknowledged. The
committee-men are already somewhat ashamed of themselves; public opinion and
the press are turning against them; the best men here say that they have
exceeded their powers, and violated the Constitution by compelling our children
to read the Protestant Bible, or by turning them out of school in case of
non-compliance. But the Catholics seem determined to go ahead, and although it
is very probable that our children will be readmitted into the school for the
next term without being obliged to read any Bible, still the Catholics seem to
prefer to establish their own school, which will be a great blessing for
themselves and a bitter mortification and a great disappointment for the
bigots, who thought already that our children were going to turn Protestants en
mass sooner than leave the town school. Yours in Xt. very respectfully, John
Bapst, S. J.
After events show that the view
of the situation in Ellsworth as expressed by Fr. Bapst in these extracts was
too sanguine by far. He did not then know what the coming year had in store for
him.
FR. JOHN BAPST.
A SKETCH.
( Continued.)
After the blowing up of the
school-house, in the spring of 1854, the Protestants feared reprisals would be
taken by the Catholics. The better disposed Protestants, hoping to avert a
general uprising of the persecuted Catholics, determined to call a public
meeting to denounce the outrage. The issue of this well-meant but unsuccessful project
is thus related by a Protestant citizen of Ellsworth, a great admirer of Fr.
Bapst: — “It was thought well to call a meeting for the purpose of denouncing
the outrage, and assuring our Catholic fellow townspeople that the burning of
their school was the act of ignorant bigots, and that all respectable
Protestants held such conduct in abhorrence. Half a dozen of us went to see Mr.
Whittaker, who was then chairman of the Town Selectmen, to have the meeting
called. Mr. Whittaker, being a Democrat, was with us. The meeting was called
for the 8th of July, 1854. When we went to the place, we found that the
Know-nothing element had gathered in large force and taken possession. It was
our intention to have Mr. Whittaker preside, but we saw we were outnumbered
four to one, and, knowing we could effect nothing, we left. Besides, if we had
remained, it might be claimed that we, by our presence, countenanced whatever action
might be taken. The meeting was organized by the election of George W. Brown as
chairman. Speeches, prompted and dictated by a spirit of persecution, were made
and cheered to the echo. The meeting then passed resolutions of which I have
just received a certified copy, taken from the town records by Mr. Edward E.
Brady, the present town clerk.
“Extract front the Ellsworth Town-Records Touching the Case
of John Bapst , S. J. July 8th, 1854.
“Moved by George W. Madox :
—That if John Bapst, S. J. be found again on Ellsworth soil we will provide for
him, and try on an entire suit of new clothes such as cannot be found at the
shops of any taylor (sic), and that when thus appareled he be presented with a
free ticket to leave Ellsworth upon the first railroad operation that may go
into effect.
“Voted, that the resolutions
adopted at this meeting be published in the Ellsworth Herald and Eastern
Freeman. “Voted, that we now adjourn sine die. W. A. Chany, Town Clerk.
“The reading of the resolutions
was received with shouts of applause, and they were adopted without a
dissenting voice or vote, as the Democrats and Liberal Republicans had all left
when they saw how things were likely to go.”
The outcome of these hostile
proceedings is thus described by the same writer : “Fr. Bapst, not believing
that they would put their threat into execution, went to Ellsworth on Saturday
evening, October 14, 1854, to be on hand to attend to his religious duties next
morning. He stopped at the house of an Irish Catholic named Kent. When darkness
had set in, the house was surrounded by a mob, who demanded the production of
the objectionable priest. A trap-door in Mr. Kent’s house led down to the
cellar, and Mr. Kent, after much urging, induced Fr. Bapst to descend, and hide
in the cellar, expecting the mob would go away when they could not find him.
Mr. Kent opened the door, and told them that Father Bapst was not there. ‘We
know he is, and we must have him,’ yelled the mob. Mr. Kent invited them to
look all over the house, but they persisted in the statement that he was
secreted in the house, as some of them had seen him enter. Mr. Kent tried to
persuade them to go away. If you don’t produce him we will burn down your
house, and roast him alive,’ the mob howled.
“They were proceeding to carry
out the threat to burn down the house, when Father Bapst, not wishing to see
his protector suffer, pushed up the trap-door, and ascended from the cellar. He
still hoped that the instincts of humanity would prevail in them over the
spirit of bigotry; that they would be open to reason and justice, and would
disperse to their homes. But he misjudged the spirit that controlled the mob.
With a yell they rushed upon him, dragged him out of the house and up the road.
They placed him upon a sharp rail, and thus carried him along, yelling,
hooting, and cursing him. The men carrying the rail jogged him up and down, so
as to inflict more pain and injury.
‘‘Coming to a lonely place
outside of the town they took his watch and money and his clothes, stripping
him naked. They then dragged him into a wood, as I afterwards learned, and tied
him to a tree. They piled brush around him, and some of the ruffians tried to
set it on fire. They would most likely have burned him to death had not their
supply of matches given out before they could set fire to the brush.
“I was sitting in my house
during all this time, unaware of all that was going on. A rap came to the door
; I opened it, and a neighbor told me that a mob had seized Father Bapst, and
carried him off into the woods. I could not believe it, but I started out, and
on the hill outside the town met my brother and the sheriff coming in. They had
gone out to look for the mob, and try to save the priest. They encountered the
mob, who flung stones intending to break the lantern which the sheriff carried.
The sheriff was a man of courage, and told the roughs that if they did not
desist, he would empty the contents of his pistol among them. This had the
desired effect; the crowd passed on, but the search-party were unable to find
Father Bapst among them. This, I suppose, was only part of the mob, the other
part having the unfortunate man in the woods at the time. We ascended the hill,
and searched for his body, believing they had killed him.
“It appears that after they
released him from the tree, where, covered with tar and feathers, they had
attempted to roast him alive, they dragged him back to the town, and told him
to get out that night, threatening to kill him if he attempted to say Mass next
day. When we got back I learned that Fr. Bapst was at Mr. Kent’s residence. I
went there and asked to see him; I was at first denied admittance, but was
afterwards permitted to enter the room in which he was. There stood Father
Bapst covered with tar and feathers, and exhausted by his inhuman treatment. He
was surrounded by a few male friends, who were endeavoring to cleanse him with
soap and warm water. He extended his hand to me. It was a trying moment. The
priest said that fortunately he had escaped a more terrible fate, which his
abductors had in store for him, through the pleadings of two or three of the
marauders. As I stood there, and saw the poor priest’s hair and eyebrows shaved
off, for it was impossible to get the tar out otherwise, I vowed that I should
fight fanaticism until I died.
“Father Bapst preached next day
in his church, for although of a very mild disposition, he had the heart of a
lion in the cause of duty. That Sunday we feared the mob would gather again.
The Hon. Charles Jarvis, one of the leading Protestants of the town, took the
father to his home, protected him all night, and drove him to Bangor in his
carriage next day. I saw him get into the carriage, and shook hands with him
when he was driven away.
“The respectable people of
Bangor were as much incensed at the outrage as we were at Ellsworth. We
resolved to punish the ruffians, and got Hon. George Evans, then Attorney
General of the State, previously U. S. Senator, to come to Ellsworth to present
the case to the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury, however, were all Know Nothings,
and refused to find indictments, although the evidence was most conclusive. Mr.
Evans was so indignant and disgusted with the Grand Jury that he said that he
would not sleep a night in the town if he got a present of all the State. Late
as it was he insisted on shaking the dust of Ellsworth from his feet.
“These facts I know to be
accurately stated, as I was a resident of Ellsworth at the time of the outrage,
and had been for thirty-six years. It was my birth-place, and I knew all the facts,
and who were the perpetrators of that atrocious act. And it is with shame lam
forced to say that, instead of ‘Orangemen from New Brunswick,’ as a recent
writer has asserted, they were our own citizens; and l am sorry to say that
many who claimed to be our best citizens were the ringleaders. I knew every man
in town, and less than a dozen were Irish Protestants; and of these not one had
anything to do with it. At that time, as it is now, Ellsworth was one of the
most flourishing towns in eastern Maine, with a population of over 4000. The
people were educated and refined, with two score of professional men
—ministers, lawyers, and doctors. We were largely engaged in ship building, and
not a single man in our employ was from the British provinces. I knew Father
Bapst well; he was an educated and cultured Christian gentleman.”
Thus writes this Protestant
friend of Fr. Bapst, who under the nom de plume of “Lumberman” furnished these
reminiscences, in September 1884. to the Portland Argus. It has been thought by
some, that Fr. Bapst might have averted the painful incidents enacted at
Ellsworth, had he but exercised more foresight, and abled with more prudence,
not preaching so boldly, and not venturing to visit Ellsworth after the issue
of the town case against him. To such as these, the following testimony of the
same Protestant gentleman will be sufficient answer: — “He was the most perfect
gentleman I have ever met. He had a very fine, imposing presence, was
thoroughly educated and refined, and a true Christian in every sense. He was in
his views liberal, in his tolerations large. He was the last man you could
think of who would provoke the outrage inflicted upon him. Were he
narrow-minded, bigoted, ill-bred, and of a quarrelsome disposition, the excuse
might be presented that he drew it upon himself. But he was directly the
opposite, and possessed the esteem and respect of all the liberal-minded and
respectable Protestants of the whole district in which he served.” Fr. Bapst’s
subsequent career in Boston, where he was the friend of the poor no less than
of the rich, no less beloved by Protestants than by Catholics, is of itself a
sufficient eulogy of his admirable tad, born not of worldly policy, but of
Christian prudence, vivified by charity divine.
After the perpetration of this
outrage, Fr. Bapst never again ministered to the wants of the Ellsworth
Catholics, his place being filled by other fathers dwelling with him at Bangor.
Among those who visited Ellsworth every two weeks to say Mass, etc., was Fr.
Eugene Vetromile who afterwards left the Society. On Fr. Bapst’s return to
Bangor he was received by the people of that city, both Protestants and
Catholics, with the greatest sympathy. Loud were the denunciations of the
Ellsworth rowdies. Good came out of evil. Fr. Bapst’s influence with all
classes in Bangor was from that time most powerful. Sympathy had begot
admiration; admiration, love; and the sway of love brought to the faith many
who had before been indifferent, or hostile to the Church. The Protestants of
Bangor called a public meeting at which Fr. Bapst was invited to be present.
The place of honor on the platform was assigned him. The meeting was attended
by the most prominent Protestants of Bangor, who came in large numbers, and who
greeted Fr. Bapst’s appearance on the stage with hearty and prolonged applause.
Resolutions were read, denouncing the outrage, lauding Fr. Bapst’s admirable
patience during the trial, his Christian forbearance after it, his courageous
zeal in performing his sacred duties despite the dire warnings to leave the
town, expressing the sympathy of the whole Protestant community, and declaring
that his high integrity and untiring zeal were a source of blessings to the
city of which he was so honored a resident.
In closing this expression of
their sentiments, the framers of the resolutions begged leave to present a
fitting testimonial of his acknowledged worth, and also, thereby, to make
reparation for their State of Maine for the cowardly pilfering that had
intensified the baseness of the unprovoked attack upon him. The chairman, amid
deafening applause, then presented Fr. Bapst with a well filled purse and a
very handsome gold watch, to replace the silver timepiece stolen from him by
some of the Ellsworth mob. On the cover of the watch was engraved the following
inscription : TO REV. JOHN BAPST, S. J. FROM THE CITIZENS OF BANGOR, MAINE, AS
A TOKEN OF THEIR HIGH ESTEEM.
Fr. Bapst, greatly moved by this
unexpected testimony of goodwill, found difficulty in making a suitable
response. In feeling tones that greatly touched his hearers, moving some even
to tears, the heroic father thanked them for their sympathy, and expressed his
pleasure at having been made the recipient of such a beautiful testimony of
their esteem. He said that he would ever prize it, not as a gift of which he
had shown himself worthy —for he had only done what every true Christian should
do in discharging his duty to his Divine Master —but as a token of the goodwill
of those who fully appreciated the fact that he was in their midst to better
the moral condition of that section of the great republic, not to turn with
serpent-like treachery against the generous and warm-hearted nation that had
sheltered a poor exile who had been refused a home in his native clime.
Very Rev. Father General Beckx,
when informed of the gift bestowed upon Fr. Bapst, and of the circumstances
that led to its bestowal, deemed it wise to waive the usual custom of the
Society that forbids its members to bear about their persons costly gold
watches, and ordered Fr. Bapst to retain the gift for his daily use. Fr. Bapst,
who had been at first averse to such a disposition of the gift, submitted with
true obedience to the will of his superior. He used the watch till about two
years before his death, when it was consigned to the care of his superiors.
An amusing incident touching
this noted timepiece is thus related by a devoted friend of Fr. Bapst.[3]:
“In 1881 Fr. Bapst’s mental faculties began to fail. I expressed to his
superiors my great desire to procure for the dear father a change of scene and
air, hoping thus to avert the impending calamity. His superiors kindly
consenting to my plan, I started with Fr. Bapst on a trip to Bangor, as he had
expressed a longing to revisit the scene of his former labors. While there Fr.
Bapst’s watch got out of order, and he gave it to me to take to a watch-maker’s.
Going out into the city to fulfil my mission, I stopped at the first jewelry
store I met, and handed the watch for inspection to the gentleman in
attendance. He opened the cover, and then gave a start, glancing at me with
eyes betokening suspicion of my honesty. Then he abruptly asked me, ‘Where did
you get this watch, sir ?’ My first impulse was to take to flight. I felt
thoroughly guilty. The jeweller had evidently read the inscription on the case,
and had come to suspect my possession of the watch. I tried to explain, and the
jeweller, apparently only half satisfied, related to me the cause of his
interest in the timepiece. He had himself made the watch for the committee of
the people of Bangor who had been appointed to make the presentation to Fr.
Bapst. The repairs were soon effected, and I hastened back to the dear father
to tell him of my adventure. He laughed heartily at the plight to which my
service in his behalf had reduced me.”[4]
It is said by those who have a
right to be believed that all those who had anything to do with the outrage
upon Father Bapst either came to an untimely end or met with some temporal
calamity. Certain it is that the town of Ellsworth suffered a long disgrace.
“Two years after the outrage” writes a devoted friend of Fr. Bapst, “Henry Ward
Beecher refused to lecture there, because he would not visit a place where such
an outrage had been committed. Wendell Phillips also refused, though he was
going to Bangor. But I persuaded Mr. Phillips to consent. I have no doubt it
would now be more difficult to stir up a riot in Ellsworth than in almost any
other city of Maine.”
[1] Of
these twelve young ladies one was the authoress, Miss Mary Agnes Thicker, who
was ever after a most devoted friend of Fr. Bapst. She has faithfully portrayed
the Ellsworth excitement in a beautiful tale entitled “The House of Yorke”
[2] Mary
Hennessy, now Sister Mary Borgia, extern sister of the House of the Good
Shepherd, N. Y. One of those rare souls, full of faith and possessed of
unflinching devotion to the Church. She was a great help to Fr. Bapst in those
days of affliction. A portion of the shirt torn from Fr. Bapst’s body during
the outrage, and the broken crystal, have been recently presented to the museum
of Woodstock College by this good housekeeper.
No comments:
Post a Comment