of all the saints, which is full of such visions.  They might deny them if they pleased, but it required all the wilful blindness of passion to affirm, once such things were articles of belief, that they came from Satanic influence.’  As regards Joan of Arc’s costume, she had on several occasions answered with sufficient clearness, and every person might have made a like answer, that there is no hard and fast law laid down by the Church relating to the costume that may be worn by members of the Church.  Nay more, it was notorious that one of the female saints of the Church (Sainte Marine) had always worn a man’s dress.  The question as to her dress had been gone into thoroughly during Joan of Arc’s examination by the Churchmen and laymen at Poitiers; that which the Church had not blamed at Poitiers could not therefore be a sin in Rouen.  By the same token, how was it possible for Joan to believe that what had not been disapproved of by the Archbishop at Rheims should be considered a criminal offence by the Bishop of Beauvais?  As regards the question of her submission to the Church, Joan of Arc replied, when asked if she would submit to its will, in these words:  ’You speak to me of the “Church Militant” and of the “Church Triumphant.”  I do not understand the signification of those terms; but I wish to submit myself to the Church as all good Christians should do.’  What more could be required of her than this entire submission to the Church?  She had made that answer to the doctors and clergy at Poitiers, and it had entirely satisfied those men.  What Joan of Arc had a clear right not to do was to submit herself to her arch-enemy the Bishop of Beauvais.  When she asked what Cauchon and his judges called the ‘Church Militant,’ she was told it consisted of the Pope and the prelates below him.  She thereupon exclaimed she would willingly appear before him, but that she would not submit to the judgment of her enemies, and particularly not to Cauchon.  ‘In saying this,’ adds M. Wallon, ’she displayed her usual courageous spirit.  How eagerly had she,’ he remarks (when told that if she would submit herself to the Council then sitting at Bale, where she would find some judges of her party among the English), ’appealed to be allowed to bring her case before that Council; and it will be remembered how Cauchon cursed the lawyer who had brought forward the suggestion during the trial.’  On that occasion escaped from the prisoner’s lips the cry which showed how well she knew the unscrupulousness of her judges.  On learning that her wish to appeal to the Council of Bale by Cauchon’s order was not to appear in that day’s report of the trial, she said, ’You write down what is against me, but you will not write what is favourable to me.’  Along with the twelve articles, Cauchon enclosed a letter to the lawyers in Paris asking for their opinion on what he calls the facts submitted to them, ’whether they do not appear to be contrary to the orthodox faith, to the Scriptures, and to the Church of Rome, and whether the learned members of the Church and doctors do not consider such things as stated in these articles as scandalous, dangerous to civil order, injurious and adverse to public morals.’  In every way Cauchon’s letter was worthy of its author.