To James Madison from John Carroll, 17 November 1806
From John Carroll
Balte. Nov. 17 1806.
Mr. Brent,1 has laid before you my letter to him of the 11th,2 in which I proposed to have the honr. of addressing you soon after and more fully on the same subject. You may perhaps recollect, that a considerable time ago I had some conference with you on the affairs of the R. Cath: church in Louisiana, having even then been authorised to take order for its regular administration and to recommend two or three clergymen suitably qualities3 to take charge thereof of it one of whom would be constituted its Bishop; under the express provision, that this might be done without giving offence or displeasure to the government of the U. States.4 At that time, I had Some expectation of recommending a clergyman to be instituted as Bishop of New Orleans, whose attachment to the U. States was unequivocal, & who at the same time would be acceptable to the original inhabitants of Louisiana, & keep them well affected to our government, and their other fellow citizens. I was not so satisfied with the accts of Louisiana of the Clergymen living there, as would justify a recommendation of any of them*; I therefore directed my views to two others, who, tho’ Frenchmen, have been long resident in this Country, and steady in their attachment to it. But the removal of either of them to Louisiana was rendered impracticable, and circumstances have since occurred, which perhaps make it unadvisable, in the opinion of this government, to nominate for the Bc. of that country any native of France or Spain.5 I therefore declined hitherto taking any concern in this business, tho the situation of the church there has long required & requires now more particularly a prompt interference, not only for the interests of religion, but likewise for quieting & composing the minds of the Inhabitants.6
You will observe, that my first commission to take a provisional charge of the diocese of N. O. was received long before the intermedling of the Emperor Napoleon.7 This has been procured, as I am credibly informed from N. Orleans, by a mission to Paris from a Mr. Castillon, who is at the head of the municipality, and an artful Spanish Friar, Antonio de Sedilla, the intimate friend of the Marquis of Casa Calvo. This mission was intrusted to a certain Castanedo, who was furnished with $4000, to obtain a recommendation from the Emperor Napoleon for the immediate nomination of de Sedilla to the Bishopric: but the attempt has compleately miscarried, as you will See by the duplicate copy of the commission sent to me, which I take the liberty of inclosing, & request the favour of its being restored to me, at your convenience. To this commission allow me to subjoin an extract from a letter of Cardl. Pietro, Prefect of the Congregation de propagandâ fide at Rome, which I received at the same time.8 Speaking of the information, I had sent concerning the state of religion in New Orleans, & referring to his former letter to me, he says; “respondimus &c.”9 From which it appears that the acquiescence of our government is necessary with respect to the measures to be adopted for settling the ecclesiastical state of Louisiana.
Something, as has been mentioned, is immediately necessary, before I proceed to determine on the choice of a subject, fit to be recommended for the future Bishop. If a native of this Country, or one, who is not a Frenchman, tho well acquainted with the language, cannot be procured, would it be satisfactory to the Executive of the U.S. to recommend a native of France, who has long resided amongst us, and is desirous of continuing under this government? In the mean time, as the only clergyman in Louisiana, in any degree qualified to act with vigour & intelligence in restoring order in the Cat. Ch. is a French Emigrant priest & far from any attachment to the present system of his country, may he be appointed to act as my Vicar without the disapprobation of our Executive? I have many reasons to believe that this person rejoices sincerely in the cession of that Country to the U. S.10
Draft (Archives of the Archdiocese of Baltimore: Carroll Letterbook). Enclosure not found, but see n. 8.
1. Carroll referenced his nephew, Daniel Brent, who worked as a State Department clerk (Melville, “John Carroll and Louisiana,” Catholic Historical Review 64 [1978]: 413).
2. Letter not found.
3. Carroll originally wrote “having suitable qualities,” but he canceled “having” and changed “suitable” to “suitably,” neglecting to change “qualities” to “qualified.”
4. The Propaganda Fide had given Carroll temporary custody of the Louisiana diocese on 20 September 1805. JM’s “conference” with Carroll may have occurred sometime after he received that appointment, in late 1805 or early 1806, but could have taken place earlier. On 21 April 1804 the Propaganda Fide had requested that Carroll send recommendations for the bishopric. It is not clear that Carroll received the letter; on 13 July 1805 the Propaganda Fide asked “for the fifth time” for his recommendations. He had not fulfilled the directive when he took charge of the diocese (O’Neill, “A Quarter Marked by Sundry Peculiarities,” Catholic Historical Review 76 [1990]: 246–47).
5. For Carroll’s attempts to find a suitable candidate, see Melville, “John Carroll and Louisiana,” Catholic Historical Review 64 (1978): 398–440.
6. For affairs of the Catholic Church in Louisiana, see JM to John Armstrong, 10 Nov. 1806.
7. For the French government’s actions in the affair, see ibid.
8. This commission and the referenced letter were sent to Carroll by Michele di Pietro, prefect of Propaganda Fide, via the secretary of Propaganda Fide, 23 and 25 Apr. 1806 (Finbar Kenneally, O.F.M., ed., United States Documents in the Propaganda Fide Archives: A Calendar [13 vols. to date; Washington, D.C., 1966–], 1:30, documents 171–73).
9. We answered.
10. On 29 December 1806 Carroll bestowed the position on Jean-Baptiste Olivier (Melville, “John Carroll and Louisiana,” Catholic Historical Review 64 [1978]: 413).