It was in a saddened tone, and with a downcast eye, that the Legate replied:
"Ah, that is, indeed, a fearful question. A question that may well make one shudder. One of two things must happen. From the rocks and sands of the golden land, the oppressors of the world will derive new means of oppression, or from those rocks and sands, will come the instrument, which is to lift up the masses and shake the oppressors to the dust. What shall be the result? Shall new and more damning chains, for human hearts, be forged upon the gold of these sands and rocks? Or, tottering among these rocks and sands, shall poor humanity at last discover the instrument of her redemption? God alone can tell."
The Prelate was silent. Folding his hands he surveyed the pallid visage of the Legate, with a look hard to define.
"The first wind that blows intelligence from this land of gold, will convulse the world. A few years hence, and these sands, now sparkling with ore, will be white with human skeletons. Thousands and hundreds of thousands will rush to seek the glittering ore, and find a grave, in the mud by the rivers' banks; hundreds of thousands will lie unburied in the depths of trackless deserts, or in the darkness of trackless ravines; the dog and the wolf will feed well upon human hearts."
Suppressing the emotion aroused, by a portion of the Legate's remarks, the Prelate asked:
"And the thousand barren acres contain incredible stores of gold?"
"Gold sufficient to affect the destiny of one-half the globe," replied the Legate: "gold, that employed in a good cause, would bless and elevate millions of the oppressed, or devoted to purposes of evil, might curse the dearest rights of half the human race."
"And it is in your power to establish the right of our Church to these lands?"
"It is. A word from me, and the thing is done."
"Pardon me," said the Prelate, slowly, and measuring every word,—"some portions of your remarks excite my curiosity. You speak of the oppressed, and of the oppressors. Now,—now,—from any lips but yours, these words, and the manner in which you use them, would sound like the doctrines of the French Socialists. What do you precisely mean by 'oppressed,'—and who, in your estimation, are the 'oppressors?'"