a manifest tyrant, because of the peril of the consequences which ensue to states from such an act. Hence Catholics reckon the murder of a sovereign as a worse crime than an ordinary murder. If, therefore, the European governments were Catholic, all could be satisfactorily provided for, and nothing would be easier than to apprehend the regicide wherever he had taken refuge. Princes may accordingly thank themselves if their death is so often compassed, for it is they who have headed the wicked war against the Church, the only instructress of true principles and the fountain of just laws. But the logic of Liberalism, which they have favoured, leads inexorably to the present . appalling state of things. This the writer proceeds ably to demonstrate, but space forbids our following his argument in detail. As an instance of the extreme but logical result of the doctrine of the people's sovereignty, and their indefeasible right, as expressed by a majority-a principle accepted with more or less prominence in all European States except Russia and Turkey-he reminds us of the late amnesty accorded in France to the deported Communists, who had been guilty of the most flagrant and sanguinary deeds, from which measure we are led to deduce that murder, arson, and robbery are no longer judged to be crimes by the French nation if committed during a sedition. But what is to hinder the sovereign people, by the mouth of its representatives, from deciding to-morrow that even that condition is not needed? Regicides are as yet in the minority, but they call themselves the leaders of progress, and confidently assert that the future is theirs. You hang us to-day, they say, but to-morrow we shall have statues erected to us. All Liberal Europe is treading the same path in which France has made such advanced progress, and, had it been possible that the Nihilists should have succeeded and attained to power in Russia, there can be little doubt but that the other governments would have made up their minds to enter into amicable relation with the new administration.

But even as matters stand, and supposing that all were agreed in reckoning regicide to be a crime, our statesmen would have to renounce many other principles beside the indefeasible right of majorities to rule all points, principles which, thanks to them, widely prevail in modern society, before they could succeed in limiting the right of asylum. For instance, the doctrine which they have so largely acted upon, of the end justifying the means, that of accepting accomplished facts; the imposture called non-intervention, devised by Napoleon III., who never acted upon it when it suited his policy to disregard it; but, above all, the intense selfishness and egotism erected into a system under the name of utilitarianism, which makes states regard only their own immediate and narrow interests, would have to be given up. The useful and the expedient have supplanted God and His law. The treaty of Westphalia, which dethroned religion, sanctioned utilitarianism in politics. Crimes had been committed in all ages, but henceforth they were committed on system.

After noticing several other influences at work which would defeat the proposed object, the writer finally alludes to the physical impotence,

as he styles it, which would render its success utterly nugatory, so long as it shall continue to exist. What avails to prosecute the regicide while you train up regicides in your bosom? Take away the causes which form them, or you will be physically impotent against this crime. In one word, it is indispensable to return to God, to Christianity—that is, to true Christianity, which is Catholicism. Society has need of a complete system, and that is to be found only in Catholicism. But if you do not will the means, you never can attain the end; therefore is modern society, in spite of its pride and its boasting, impotent against the crime which dismays it-such is the sentence which it has merited by its many iniquities.

POP

FRENCH PERIODICALS.

Revue des Questions Historiques. Avril, 1881. Paris.

OPE ALEXANDER VI. is the subject of a long and careful article from the pen of M. Henri de l'Epinois. The subject is a sadly familiar one in controversial and anti-Catholic literature, but the Article is noteworthy in one or two ways. It is a compendious résumé of the most recent works, whether expressly on the career of this Pope, or in which it has received any special treatment. Also, it is marked in its tone by great discrimination and freedom from prejudice. Though the writer would rejoice to be called Ultramontane, his Article deliberately lends confirmation to the popular bad opinion of Alexander VI., quite as frequently as it seeks to soften that opinion towards the more favourable, truth. Impartiality, not bias, and zeal entirely guided by respect for historical truth-these qualities marking a truly Catholic study of the life of such a Pontiff, recommend it very powerfully, as likely to promote the cause of our holy religion with earnest enquirers. The saying of Count Joseph de Maistre: "Les Papes n'ont besoin que de la vérité," is gladly accepted by M. de l'Epinois as a motto-it is, indeed, he says, a first principle of their history.

66

The first thing that may strike a reader who has been accustomed to hear modern Catholic historical writing condemned as one-sided, is, that for unflinching condemnation of this unworthy Pope, and for judgment characterized by what he may have fancied was "Protestant honesty," there is no need to travel beyond the pages of some of our standard Ultramontane authors. The present Cardinal Hergenröther calls him an "immoral and wicked Cardinal," and an unworthy Pope," whose death "freed Christianity of a great scandal." Only, of course, neither Cardinal Hergenröther nor any other Catholic author argues for the need of impeccability because of infallibility, or confounds the morals of a Pope with his office, or fancies that the Pontiffs of Christ's Church need show otherwise than His apostles did, among whom the crime of Judas in no wise dimmed the glory of the faithful eleven. "The faults" of Alexander VI., writes M. de l'Epinois, VOL. VI.-NO. I. [Third Series.]

S

"will not trouble the faith of a Christian.. .... The Church lives in the world, and is served by men subject to all the weaknesses of their time, but the Divine element in her continues unassailable, indefectible; the worst Popes have never opposed to the Faith any decree that could change it. It would seem that the character of infallible vicars of Jesus Christ is resplendent in them with new brilliance. It would appear natural that a Pius V. or a Pius IX. should never decree anything contrary to faith or morals, because they would have simply to transfer into words the working of their own pure lives and chaste thoughts; but if a Pope who is the victim of human passions has never altered the truth, in that we have a fact not natural, but clearly bespeaking a divine guidance." Thus, whilst the human personality of the Popes may fall a victim, the Divine character stands out the more clearly from the darkness. But, alas, the evil lives of her priests and children is often chastised in their successors. Alexander VI. explains Luther. "History properly studied—the history of Alexander VI. more than any other is the justification of Divine Providence."

One point to be carefully observed, however, and it is distinctly shown from the best authorities in M. de L'Epinois's article-is that the life of Alexander VI. was by no means so black as it has been painted. "It would appear," says Mr. Rawdon Brown, quoted by the writer, "that history took the Borgia family as a canvas on which to bring together en tableau the debaucheries of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries." And Alexander VI., culpable doubtless, was made a scapegoat; the passions and spite of his numerous enemies have exaggerated, insinuated, invented against him. Much of the documentary evidence, the writer warns us, contains trustworthy details mixed up with anecdotes exaggerated, or altered, or gratuitously invented. It must not be forgotten how much political rancour mixed itself at that time with religious feeling and judgments, and how unworthy were the lives of the men who grew indignant about a Pope whose fault was to be too much of their own description. So far may this characteristic of society at that time impair the weight of its testimony, so uncertain and difficult of explanation is much of that testimony, that it is by no means impossible to undertake a defence of even Alexander VI. This task, two recent authors, Fathers Ollivier and Leonetti, have confidently attempted. In the dedication of his book to St. Peter, Father Leonetti calls Alexander the "piu oltraggiato " of the Apostle's successors. In summing up the result of his long arti le, M. de l'Epinois says that he cannot accept the conclusions of those-as M. Cerri, Dandolo, Father Olivier-who have tried to prove that Rodriguez Borgia was legitimately married before he received Orders, or of Father Leonetti, who has transformed the sons of that Cardinal into his nephews; on these points he is of the opinion, which he quotes, of the learned Jesuit editors of the Civiltd, that Alexander cannot be justified; "he had several children, four or five after he was bishop and cardinal, one whilst he was Pope." The second and third section of the article where these points are discussed are manifestly the result of wide and

careful reading. But the public life of Cardinal Borgia was marked by prudence, zeal, tact, success in the missions confided to him: "Sa vie publique n'a guère mérité que des éloges." The question whether or not his election was simoniacal is fully discussed in Section V. of this Article.

That Cardinal Borgia expended large sums of money, and promised benefices to the Cardinal electors, and that he promised reforms which he never attempted, appears too true; "but he has been accused, without proof, of nameless debaucheries, and of having turned the Vatican into a theatre of horrible orgies." He vigorously pursued the turbulent feudatories of the States of the Church, assuring to the States their modern constitution, a work which Julius II. only completed; but he has been accused without proof of premeditated treasons, and of being the accomplice of assassins. The summary justice of Cæsar Borgia was unfortunately the custom of the time. That which

is not doubtful, which was public in the conduct of Alexander VI., truly his grande passion, was his desire to aggrandize his children, his nepotism. The accusation that Alexander VI. poisoned the Sultan Djemm, is far from being proved-" n'est nullement prouvée ;" neither did he poison Cardinal Orsini, as may be learned from the express testimony of witnesses friendly to the Orsini family. He did much for the spiritual interests of the Church, detailed in section X. M. de l'Epinois promises in a future study to consider the question why, if Alexander was zealous for the reform of the Church, he did not second the efforts of Savonarola. Lastly, was the death of this unfortunate Pope due to poison intended for others? Muratori rejected this as a fable, and new documents have confirmed the justice of his rejection. Alexander died of fever. The suspicions of poison, from the rapid decomposition of his body, point only to effects natural enough in the month of August. These are only assertions-the reader will find in the able article itself seventy pages of proofs and authorities.

Notices of Books.

The Cat; an Introduction to the Study of Backboned Animals, especially Mammals. By ST. GEORGE MIVART, Ph.D., F.R.S. London: John Murray. 1881.

THE

HE cat may be studied from various points of view; but Professor Mivart's large and admirably brought out volume of some 600 pages, is calculated to invest that animal with a respectability which it was hardly suspected to possess. The writer's object, in this monograph, seems to be, to enable those who are not going to be doctors to attain to a thorough acquaintance with anatomy and physiology. That there are many such persons anxious to learn cannot be doubted for a moment. There are numbers of priests, for example, who are well

aware that the more completely they know these two sciences, the more easily and safely do they walk in their professional duties; and no student of metaphysics, whether priest or layman, can afford to overlook the questions raised by materialistic writers in reference to brain, nerve and tissue, or to despise the assistance which modern investigations offer in determining the relations between spirit and body. Non-professional students of man's anatomy-that is to say, all but those who are studying for the medical profession-have hitherto been too effectually deterred by the supposed necessity of attending dissections of the human subject in a public dissecting room. Priests, especially, have naturally found it to be out of the question to mix with medical students and attend demonstrations in a public hall. This is the reason why Professor Mivart has chosen the Cat.

A fresh description of human anatomy is not required, and would be comparatively useless for those for whom the work is especially intended. For a satisfactory study of animals (or of plants) can only be carried on by their direct examination-the knowledge to be obtained from reading being supplemented by dissection. This, however, as regards man, can only be practised in medical schools. Moreover, the human body is so large that its dissection is very laborious, and it is a task, generally at first unpleasing, to those who have no special reason for undertaking it. But this work is intended for persons who are interested in zoology, and especially in the zoology of beasts, birds, reptiles and fishes, and not merely for those concerned in studies proper to the medical profession (Pref. viii.).

Cats are easily to be had; they are not too large; and they are so sufficiently like man, as to limbs and other larger portions of the frame, that almost all the advantages to be gained from human dissection may be obtained by the dissection of the cat. This volume, indeed, is intended as an introduction to the natural history of the whole group of backboned animals; we have definitions of all needful terms, and all those explanations which an introductory handbook is expected to afford, combined with that vividness of illustration which results from studying these things in a concrete example.

With the technical part of this most opportune book we shall not be expected to concern ourselves deeply. We have chapters on form, skin, skeleton, muscles, on the alimentary and nervous systems, the organs of respiration and circulation, and all the other subjects connected with physiology proper as exemplified in the cat. It may be observed, however, that Professor Mivart has dealt with the technicalities of his subject in so clear and intelligible a fashion that the non-professional reader will not find it difficult to follow him. If we turn, for instance, to chapter vii., on the cat's organs of circulation, we find a readable and useful account of the blood, the arteries, the veins, the heart, &c. In the chapter on respiration we find it easy to understand all about the voice and its production. Under the nervous system we learn the structure of the eye, and so on. But this book, besides being an excellent hand-book for a student of physiology, is also the production of a philosophic writer who has thought much on