He arrived in France last Monday after travelling through England, Scotland and Ireland. He has not seen Father A.M. Pelamourgues yet, but shall meet him tomorrow, when they will both proceed to Rome. Pelamourgues wanted to return to Dubuque, but his services were not needed and the Bishop did not answer his letter. He does not realize how times have changed since he left Iowa. He has a question which he would like to put in the Journal if McMaster think it should be inserted. It is in regard to the cathedraticum, or contribution of each priest or parish to the Bishop that has been demanded for the past 10 years. He would like to know whether it is a tax or merely an alms. If a tax, it should be apportioned according to population or some other representation. If it is for the support of the Bishop, the Bishop should be in need of support, but since each Bishop holds title to the Church property of the diocese, it is difficult to allege that they are in need of support. It is common knowledge that one of the western Bishops was the owner of a banking house besides owning all the Church property. Why should support be demanded then? Is not the Church in the U. S. a missionary Church, relying on contributions and donations of the faithful for its support. Then the idea of taxing them for the support of the Bishops seems repugnant to the religious hearts. Is not the cathedraticum an alms, a voluntary donation from the rich to the poor? And if it is an alms, is it obligatory and when and how is it so? He would be grateful if some one more able and more impartial would throw some light on the question. How do McMaster's clerical readers feel about it? :: I-1-o A.L.S. 3pp. 12mo.