PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. 



70; 



73. A mcrch civil contract mar, among Christians, 



constitute a true marriage; and it is false, either that 

 the marriage contract between Christians is always a 

 sacrament, or that the contract is null if the sacra- 

 ment be excluded. (Id. Ibid., Letter to King of Sar- 

 dinia, 9th September, 1852. Allocution Acerbissi- 

 muia, 27th September, 1502; Mu.tis gravibusque, 

 17th December, 1860.) 



74. Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by 

 their very nature to civil jurisdiction. (Let. Apost. 

 Ad Apostolicae, 22d August, 1851. Allocution Acer- 

 bissimum, 27th September, 1862.) 



N. B. Two other errors may tend in this direction, 

 those upon the abolition of the celibacy of Priests, 

 and the preference due to the state of marriage over 

 that of virginity. These have been proscribed ; the 

 first in the Encyclical " Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846 ; 

 the second in the Letters Apostolical " Ifultiplices 

 inter," June 10, 1851. 



IX. Errors regarding the Civil Power of t7ie Sovereign 

 Pontiff. 



75. The children of the Christian and Catholic 

 Church are not agreed upon the compatibility of the 

 temporal with the spiritual power. (Let. Ap'ost. Ad 

 Apostolicae, 22d August, 1851.) 



76. The abolition of the temporal power, of which 

 the Apostolic See is possessed, would contribute in 

 the greatest degree to the liberty and prosperity of the 

 Church. (Al. Quibus quantisque, 20th April, 1849.) 



N. B. Besides these errors, explicitly noted, many 

 others are impliedly rebuked by the'proposed and 

 asserted doctrine, which all Catholics are bound 

 most firmly to hold, touching the temporal Sov- 

 ereignty of" the Roman Pontiff. These doctrines are 

 clearly 'stated in the Allocutions "Quibus quantis- 

 que," April 20, 1649; and "Si semper antea," May 

 20, 1850; Letters Apost. " Quum Catholica Eccleia, 

 March 26, 1860 ; Allocutions "M>vos," Sept. 28, 1860 : 

 " Ja mJud urn," March 18,1861, and "Maxima qui- 

 dem," June 9, 1862. 



X. Errors 7tv ing Reference to Modern Liberalism. 



77. In the present day, it is no longer expedient 

 that the Catholic Religion shall be held as the only 

 Religion of the State, to the exclusion of all othe'r 

 modes of Worship. (Allocution Nemo vestrum, 26th 

 July, 1855.) 



JS, Whence it has been wisely provided by law, in 

 some countries called Catholic, 'that persons coming 

 to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of 

 their own worship. (Allocution Acerbissimum, -27th 

 September, 1852.) 



79. Moreover it is false, that the civil liberty of 

 every mode of worship, and the full power given to all 

 of overtly and publicly manifesting their opinions and 

 their ideas, of all kinds whatsoever, conduce more 

 easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, 

 and to the propagation of the pest of indifferentism. 

 (Allocution Xunquam fore, 15th December, 1856.) 



80. The Roman Pontiff can and ought to reconcile 

 himself to, and agree with progress, liberalism, and 

 civilization as lately introduced. (Allocution Jamdu- 

 dum cernimus, 18th March, 1861.) Pastoral Letter of 

 Archbishop Spaulding, d~c., d-c. 



Instructions to Confederate Cruisers. 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE. RICHMOND, Sept. 8, 1S64. 

 Hon. S. R. Jfallory, Secretary of the 2?acy. 



SIR : I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of 

 the following papers communicated by you to this 

 Department on the 22d ult., under instructions of the 

 President. 

 Confidential Communication to be made to the Officers 



in command 'of the "Florida" a vessel of war of 



the so-styled Confederate States. 



First : My attention having been drawn to the cir- 

 cumstances of the Martaban, a vessel with a British 

 register and papers, having been burned at sea by the 

 Alabama, I have issued the following instructions to 

 the officers under my command. 



To capture and send to England for adjudication 

 in the Admiralty Court every vessel by which a 

 British vessel (i. e. with legal British papers) is burn- 

 ed at sea. 



You are further to acquaint him that, the right or 

 otherwise of the Alabama to burn the Martaban oeing 

 not altogether free from doubt, I referred the ques- 

 tion on the 2d of May last for instructions, which led 

 me to expect a reply by the next mail. Should a 

 view different from that which I have found it my 

 duty to take of the question be arrived ut by my 

 superiors, I shall not fail to communicate it to him 

 with the least possible delay, should the Florida still 

 be on the station under my" command. 



Second : That, under these circumstances, it will 

 be very satisfactory to me, if he can find it consist- 

 ent with his duty, to give you a written assurance of 

 his intention to forbear from any act of the like de- 

 scription until he has received special instructions in 

 regard to this question from his Government, and 

 that I shall be obliged by his communicating the 

 tenor of such instructions to me by the earliest op- 

 portunity which he finds convenient. 



Third :" That the view I take of the question, and 

 which I submit for his serious consideration, is as 

 follows : 



1st. That a belligerent has the right to burn the 

 vessel of an enemy at sea. 



2d. That a belligerent has the right to capture and 

 to send a neutral for adjudication in an Admiralty 

 Court, but in no case to burn her at sea prior to con- 

 demnation ; and that if circumstances do not admit 

 of his sending her in for adjudication in an Admiralty 

 Court, then she should be dismissed. 



Fourth : That the care with which officers in com- 

 mand of Confederate vessels of war have hitherto 

 avoided giving just cause of offence to neutrals, in- 

 duces me to indulge in the belief that he will avoid 

 any act which may produce consequences which 

 would be matter of much regret alike to me and to 

 my superior ; and that I beg to call his attention to 

 the annexed opinion of Lord Stowell on this ques- 

 tion, which I incline to think will find acceptance 

 with the British Government. 



J. HOPE, Vice-Admiral. 



The paper annexed to the foregoing communica- 

 tion is in the following words : 

 Opinion of Lord Stowell on Capture and its Inf-ident*. 



Upon the surrender of a vessel under an enemy's 

 flag on the high seas, a belligerent may destroy her 

 under the general law of nations ; and if a captor is 

 unable to bring her into port, he will be justified tow- 

 ard his own Government in destroying her. 



The instructions of his own Government may, in- 

 deed, require him to bring into port every capture 

 which he may make, but he may be actually engag- 

 ed on a service which will not allow him to put a 

 prize crew on board the vessel which he has captur- 

 ed, in order that she may be taken into port. L nder 

 such a collision of duties. Lord Stowell has held that 

 nothing is left to the belligerent vessel but to destroy 

 the enemy's vessel which~he has taken, for she can- 

 not, consistently with her general duty to her own 

 country, or, indeed, under its express injunctions, 

 permit enemy's property to sail away unmolested. 

 If it should be impossible to bring her in, her next 

 duty is to destroy the enemy's property. When it is 

 doubtful whether it is enemy's property, and it is im- 

 possible to bring it in, no such obligation arises, and 

 the safe and proper course is to dismiss. When it is 

 neutral, the act of destruction cannot be justified to 

 the neutral owner bv the gravest importance of such 

 an act to the captor's own State. To the neutral it 

 can only be justified, under any circumstances, bj a 

 full restitution in value. [Law of Nations, Dr. T wi'ss, 

 1863.] 



L'emark. It is to be observed that, should the Cot- 

 federate States fail in establishing their independ- 

 ence, then the above-named restitution in valut 

 would be impossible. 



