such an appearance would be in fact to accept the Italian
domination in Rome, a course which, as has already been noticed, would
be contrary to the accepted Catholic idea of the social basis necessary
for the papacy. It would not necessarily be an uncatholic act, however,
but it would certainly be an unpapal one. No one would expect the
ex-Empress of the French, for instance, to live openly in Paris, as
though the Parisians had never been her subjects, and as though she
accepted the Republic in a friendly and forgiving spirit. And the case
is to all intents and purposes exactly identical.

[Illustration: LOGGIE OF RAPHAEL IN THE VATICAN]

But this is not all. It is unfortunately true that there is another and
much better reason why Leo the Thirteenth cannot show himself in the
streets of Rome. It is quite certain that his life would not be safe.
The enthusiastic friends of Italy who read glowing accounts of the
development of the new kingdom and write eloquent articles in the same
strain will be utterly horrified at this statement, and will, moreover,
laugh to scorn the idea that the modern civilized Italian could conspire
to take the life of a harmless and unoffending old man. They will be
quite right. The modern civilized Italians would treat the Pope with the
greatest respect and consideration if he appeared amongst them. Most of
them would take off their hats and stand aside while he drove by, and a
great many of them would probably go down upon their knees in the
streets to receive his blessing. The King, who is a gentleman, and
tolerant of religious practices, would treat the head of the Church with
respect. The Queen, who is not only religious, but devout, would hail
the reappearance of the pontiff with enthusiasm. But unfortunately for
the realization of any such thing, Rome is not peopled only by modern
civilized Italians, nor Italy either. There is in the city a very large
body of social democrats, anarchists and the like, not to mention the
small nondescript rabble which everywhere does its best to bring
discredit upon socialistic principles--a mere handful, perhaps, but
largely composed of fanatics and madmen, people half hysterical from
failure, poverty, vice and an indigestion of so-called 'free thought.'
There have not been many sovereigns nowadays whose lives have not been
attempted by such men at one time or another. Within our own memory an
Emperor of Russia, a President of the French Republic and two