Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2010 with funding from

Lyrasis IVIembers and Sloan Foundation

http://www.archive.org/details/repofconventsnun1856mary

Document Q.

By the House of Delegates, March 4, 1866. Read and 1000 extra copies ordered to be printed. Bj order.

Thomas H. Kent, of Jos., Clerk.

REPORT

SEX-.EC'r O 03^^3iv^Xi:TEE

CONVENTS AND NUNNERIES.

REPORT.

The Select Committee to whom were referred the various peti- tions, asking further legislation for the protection of persons un- lawfully confined in Convents and Nunneries, beg leave respect- fully to report :

That they have given the subject that calm and deliberate con- sideration whicli its importance demands, and while they have been led unanimously to the conclusions they present, they will not be able to do more than state those conclusions, without furnishing all the reasons in detail, which have induced their adoption.

The Constitution and Declaration of Rights of our State, guar- antee to every individual the right to worship God in such manner as he may think most acceptable to Him ; and they also declare that no person ought, by any law, to be molested in his person or estate on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless under color of religion any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State. And, how- ever persons may differ as to the propriety or necessity of estab- lishing Religious Houses, Monasteries, or Convents, in which pro- fessors of religion may seclude themselves from the world, the right of any individual, under our laws, to enter such places, and there remain of their own free will, cannot admit of a doubt.

As to the propriety of persons entering such Institutions, your Committee are not called upon to inquire, nor is it made their duty to determine whether such Institutions are consistent with the spirit of the Age, with the " well established" and dearly cherished prin- ciples of our Government, or with the expressed sentiments of the American People.

The question to be determined is, whether, in reality, there are within the limits of this State Religious Houses in which persons are unlawfully deprived of their natural, civil or religious rights, and whether any case has been presented to this House properly supported, vyhich justifies an examination or inspection of such places, or demands additional Legislative protection.

Mere complaints that there are religious institutions where such persons are said to be detained against' their will, are not sufficient to justify legislative interference, for it is possible that unlawful re- straints have been exercised in private houses, and many individuals deprived of their liberty and right, in the place redognized by the law to be their castle. Yet no one has thought because of such

abuses, that the Legislature ought to authorize Grand Juries or Committees to forcibly enter and inspect private houses on suspi- cion that these abuses did exist. Such a proceeding would not be tolerated in any free government.

Nor was it intended that Grand Juries or Orphans' Courts should act the part of Grand Inquisitors. That function has been estab- lished in other Countries by ecclesiastical and civil laws, and the result has been such as to prevent your Committee from rcommend- ing any such course in this State.

Nor is it submitted to'lhis Committee to inquire whether any further legislation should be had as to the property of persons who may choose to enter those Institutions. The single matter re- ferred to them is the personal protection of those entering Convents, and whether there be, under the existing laws sufficient remedy for illegal restraint upon such persons.

Your Committee would, therefore, respectfully suggest, in the first place, that no allegation has been substantiated, nor has proof been exhibited that any person is now unlawfully confined in any religious house or Convent within the limits of the State.

There is a general charge that such a state of things does exist, and the statement is also made' that unsuspecting females are de- coyed into such places and there detained against their will ; but it is necessary to justify the interference of this Body that the petitioners should state some particular case, and the facts in the case wherein a wrong is committed, or a right violated, so that the House could, as the Grand Inquest of the State, act, as all other Grand Inquests do upon oath or statement in regard to the particular facts.

But even admitting, for the sake of argument, that the charge be> true, and that certain persons are confined against their will, still-' your Committee are of the opinion that the laws of the land, and those now in force in this State, furnish an effectual and complete remedy for all such cases as have been reported for their consider- ation.

It would indeed be an outrage were it not so, and if, in fact, it were permitted to any religious sect or persuasion to erect private houses or Convents, with intent to confine persons unlawfully with- in their walls, and if, in a single instance properly authenticatedg such an intention were carried out with impunity, it would not only be a flagrant violation of all law, but an outrage upon the feelings of any civilized community.

But your Committee need only remind the House that that great safeguard of personal liberty, the writ of Habeas Corpus, throws ample protection around even the humblest citizens of our Com- monwealth ; and that if any person, whatever, has reason to believe that any individual is detained unlawfully, or against his will, in any

Convent or Religious House upon oatli of such person, so believ- iuo- before any Court of this State, this writ issues, as of right, commanding the Owner, Director, or Superior of any such house or convent, to bring before such Court the individual so detained ; and neither bolts nor bars, nor any religious vows can preve«l the service of, or compliance Avith such writ ; but it is a speedy, sum- mary and sure writ of deliverance, to any one deprived of his lib- erty, by any unlawful means, or under pretext of any religious vow or consecration.

Your Gommittee have, therefore, arriv&d at the unanimous con- clusion, that, if, as alleged by the petitioners, persons are detained against iheir will, in any Religious House or Convent, it is not be- cause the law does not aflbrd ample protection, but because of the neglect to execute its demands ; audit is the fault of those interest- ed in the execution of the law, not the defect of proper legislation. Believing, therefore, that no further legislation is necessary lor ihe security of the citizen, or for the peace, good order and safety of the State, they beg leave, respectfully, to submit these rea- sons, which have led them to this conclusion — to the further con- sideration of the House, and to the enlightened judgment of the people of Maryland.

LEWIS P. FIERY, ANTHONY KENNEDY, JAMES R. PARTRIDGE, WM. D. BOWIE, WM. B. CLARKE.