This very important letter ends as follows:  “I endeavor to keep close to God, to keep up my confidence in His protection, and in the aid of Our Blessed Lady.  I pray for you all; you cannot forget me in your prayers.”

Then follow suggestions about obtaining testimonials from the American hierarchy for the information of the Holy See in a final settlement of the entire case.  The prelates who wrote, all very favorably, were:  Archbishops Hughes of New York, Kenrick of Baltimore, Purcell of Cincinnati, Bishops Bayley of Newark, Spalding of Louisville (both afterwards Archbishops of Baltimore), Lynch of Charleston, Barry of Savannah, and De Goesbriand of Burlington, Vermont.

On October 26, while wondering what would next happen, he writes:  “As for my part, I do not see one step ahead, but at the same time I never felt so closely embraced in the arms of Divine Providence.”  But on the next day:  “It seems to me a great and entire change awaits us. . . .  We are all of us young, and if we keep close and true to God—­and there is nothing but ourselves to prevent this—­a great and hopeful future is at our waiting.  I know you pray for me; continue to do so, and believe me always your wholly devoted friend and brother in Jesus and Mary.”

On November 12:  “My present impression is that neither union with the Cisalpine Fathers nor separation as a band of [independent Redemptorist] missionaries in the United States will be approved of here. . . .  What appears to me more and more probable is that we shall have to start entirely upon our own basis.  This is perhaps the best of all, all things considered. . . .  Such a movement has from the beginning seemed to me the one to which Divine Providence calls us, but I always felt timid as long as any door was left open for us to act in the Congregation. . . .  I feel prepared to take this step with you without hesitation and with great confidence, . . .  I should have been glad, as soon as my dismission was given, to have started on in such a movement.  But then it was my first duty to see whether this work could not be accomplished by the Congregation (of the Most Holy Redeemer); and, besides, I was not sure, as I now am, of your views being the same as mine . . . all indicates the will of Divine Providence in our regard and gives me confidence. . . .

“Father Hewit’s letter, confirming your readiness to share your fortunes with me, was most consoling and strengthening.  God knows we seek only His interest and glory and are ready to suffer anything rather than offend Him. . . .

“We should take our present missions as the basis of our unity and activity; at the same time not be exclusively restricted to them, but leave ourselves at liberty to adapt ourselves to the [religious] wants which may present themselves in our country.  Were the question presented to me to restrict myself exclusively to missions, in that case I should feel in conscience bound to obtain from holy men a decision on the question whether God had not pointed out another field for me. . . .  Taking our missions and our present mode of life as the groundwork, the rest will have to be left to Divine Providence, the character of the country, and our own spirit of faith and good common sense.”