pecting the rescript, and laid
rescript and contradiction before the public. "I was surprised and
sorry," he writes, "to find that you had ventured to assert that a
letter sent to me some time past from the Propaganda was not a canonical
document." He adds that he laid the document before the assembled
prelates, and appends the resolution in which they acknowledged its
authenticity and approval of its counsel.[6]

Mr. O'Connell at once expressed his entire acquiescence and deep
contrition. He bowed reverentially to the resolution of the prelates,
retracted the hasty opinion, and apologised for his error, which, he
said, resulted from his great anxiety of mind, caused by the avowal of
the _Morning Chronicle_ that the Whigs had a secret agent in Rome.

But the prelates were far from unanimous in their construction of the
rescript which they promised unanimously to obey. With the resolution
among his papers, the Archbishop of Tuam proceeded directly from the
Episcopal meeting to the Repeal banquet at Limerick, where he delivered
a speech stronger in language and more violent in character than any he
had ever uttered. Some passages in that speech, wherein he eulogised the
heroism of the women of Limerick who cut their long hair to supply the
defenders of the city with strings for their bows, excited the wildest
enthusiasm and most rapturous applause. Doctor Cantwell, in the letter
already referred to, gives his construction, which he says was that of
the majority.

"The Cardinal only evidently censures violent and intemperate
language, in either priest or bishop, whether they address their
flocks in their temples, or mix with their fellow-countrymen in
banquets or public meetings. We inferred, and I think we were
justified in the inference, that conduct and language at all
times unbecoming our sacred character, and not our presence on
such legitimate occasions, were the object of this salutary
caution."

His construction was sustained more clearly and forcibly by Thomas
Davis. "It [the rescript] announces the undoubted truth that the main
duty of a Christian priest is to care for the souls of his flock, and
both by precept and example to teach mildness, piety and peace. It does
not denounce a Catholic clergyman for aiding the Repeal movement in all
ways becoming a minister of peace. Nowhere in the rescript is the
agitation as a system, or repeal as a demand, censured; but some
reported v