An Answer to Six Months in a Convent - Exposing Its Falsehoods and Manifold Absurdities #233492

Spacious establishment, than the common parlor; and that even the physician, as they understand, (from Miss R. No doubt,) never saw any religeu'se, to prescribe for them in their pr1vate apartments. It was reasonable to expect an attack upon the Ursulines as a-secret society, when we have been told that the editor of the Advocate is one ofthe Publishing Committee. The rules of the Convent the testimony of many individuals, and particularly of Dr. Thompson, physician to the Community, were a perfect justification ofthe Bos son Report, and establish, beyond doubt, its correctness in this par sicular. Because Messrs. Fay and Thaxter had testified that they had never gone beyond the parlor, but in one instance, and had nev er sought to do so, they state as a necessary conclusion, that they were never permitted. They not only mistate the facts but make inferences not warranted even by the facts as assumed by themselves. Such is their accuracy in matters of fact and logic. The rules ofthe Community, and the statements of Dr. Thompson and others, prove, that there was no greater restraint upon visitors, than was consistent with the duties and occupations of the inmates and the decencies of a well regulated family.