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 Catholic Faith 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 s.e.x 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 b.u.t.ton maker, in the Plazuela de Basea in Barcelona, and being at that time in the house of Senores 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 Senores 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 in the 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 Senores 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 speaking of 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_.
In the 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 G.o.d 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 ent.i.tled La Henriade, by Mons.
Voltaire, which book belonged to Bernardo Carles, a Frenchman, who pa.s.sed 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 G.o.d 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 matters of 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 const.i.tutions 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 a.s.sertions 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 const.i.tutions, 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 a.s.sertions 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 a.s.sertion 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 pa.s.sed 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 ILl.u.s.tRIOUS 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 Senor Don Juan Larra, that nothing separates them but the abovementioned Callejon.
Your Excellency"s most humble servant, MARIA BERNARDA HALLEGG, _wife of Don Pedro Hallegg, Captain in the Regiment 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 faithfully our 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.