LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 255, 22 July 1920, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

THE P. P.A. IN REPLY ARCHBISHOP O'SHEA ANSWERED. Sir,—ln Mb attack on the P.P.A., as reported in your issue of July 16, Arcnbisliop O'Shea, displays either an absolute lack of knowledge ol that association or such a disregard for facts as to make some reply to his diatribe by the association necessary. At the very commencement lie states: "I tell you that the P.P.A. is nothing more or less than that lrisn secret society,' etc. When he says this, the Archbishop states what is obviously contrary to lad. Does a secret society hold public meetings at which its purposes are fully, explained? Does it chronicle all its doings in the Press as does the P.P.A.? Does it publish its constitution and its political platform? Surely tho charge that tho P.l I .A. is a secret society is childishly absurd. Immediately after hurling charges of a most seriouß nature at the leaders of the nation, and prophesying tho nation's dissolution, iresh from charging the Peace Conference with betraying the ideals for which the war was fought, and of unnecessarily delaying peace, tnc Arciioislwp must surely have smiled to himself when ho imputed "disloyalty" to the P.P.A. It there is one thing for which the P.P.A. stands more than any other, it is for King and Empire. During tho whole of its existence, while Home's journal luu heaped opprobrium and calumny upon the British Government, British soldiers and most things British, the P.P.A. has lost no opportunity ot supporting the Government's "win the war" policy and tho Empire, I challenge Archbishop O'tihea to prove one fact of disloyalty on the part ol the association he now maligns, or that we have ever made our loyalty to King and ( Empire contingent oil the Government's "hostility to Catholics." Such a charge is utterly false. On the other hand, t*Uo 'lie writings of "The Tablet." Kb issue of June 17, for instance, contains a paragraph on the "women and children \vc starved by the most inhuman blockade in hißtory." A week later this journal states: "The British Government to-day is exposed before the world as a tyrant and a perfidious liar"; and agiiin, "What a shameful thing British despotism is, and how right it is to support Ireland's demands to bo Tor ever freed from the lying, murdering, thieving gang," This has been tho tone of this Homish journal for, years past. I will go further and challenge the Archbishop to provo that the charge lie so glibly lays at tho door of the P.P.A. is not in point of fact the policy of the ltoinau Catholic hierarchy—to make their support of any Government contingent on tho promise ot concessions to llome. The doings of the various P.P.A. deputations that have waited on Ministers have been duly reported in the Press, and there is no need to traverso them again, but surely there is more than a touch of sublime egotißin in the Archbishop's suggestion that wo arranged theso "during his absence." The P.P.A. stands absolutely for the Btate By6tem of education, and we oppose strenuously anything that is calculated to impair that system—this is one of the main planks of our platform. Vr e oppose State aid to any school outside of the State system, and to suggest that our eft'ortß on behalf of education are purely anti-Catholio is puerile in the extreme. The concession to "Itome" that we aro alleged to have "stampeded" the Minister ot Education into withdrawing, no doubt, is the issue of free railway to Roman Catholic school teachers, lhe position was that Boman Catholic teachers travelling daily from one town to another on the West Coast to teach school travelled free State school teachers travelling daily between tho samo towns, for tho same purpose, and by the Bame trains, were compelled to pay. Archbishop 0 Shea evidently considered this just and right, hut any unbiased mind \.m. agree \uui me that it was not; the position now ib that as a result of the P.i.A. s representations, both parties pay. _ • The Archbishop Eays: It is useless to appeal to reason or logic when yiu aro dealing with people who are blinded by religious hatred and rancour. Unless Homo's blind hatred of everything that does not conform to her policy can to termed "rcligioiiß hatred and rancour, I do not know what tho expression means; if it can, then I agree most heartily with his statement, for,; while: reason and logic are absolutely against Home s attitude to the world's politics to-day, it were useless to arguo with her, for "Semper ladera is still her watchword. Tho Archbishop bewails the fact that "Catholics' aro but a seventh of the community," and alleges 'that they .do not attack Protestants or seek to infringe Iheir lights." ltoman Cftthoho leaders have attacked Protestantism, mid d? attack it the world' over. In this Dominion tho Catholic Press carries 011 a campaign against Protestantism. The assault 0:1 Protestant ministers at Feuding, the breaking of windowß in a Protestant home in that town, the destruction of a Protestant hall, and the injury of many Protestants attending a meeting at Weymouth, and many other such incidents must be admitted by the Archbishop, unless his judgment is lwpclcssly warped, to infringe Protestant rights. ; At the mild threat to ."hit back wo can afford to smile, liome has been mtt'nß her hardest, as alio never failß to 00, and we welcome every such attempt, for the harder she "hits back" the more surely she proves herself to bo B'lMy ° f tjl verv thln&B of which the Archbishop in IS Trild attack 011 the P.P.A. has so ineffectually Bought to prove that association guilty 1 Dominion Secretary, P.P.A., ■ Wellington. ] July 17. 1920. ]