The Wanganui Chronicle. "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1920. SINN FEIN IN AUSTRALIA.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXVI, Issue 17894, 14 June 1920, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1920. SINN FEIN IN AUSTRALIA.

Recently addressing an assemblage of Irish pilgrims in Rome, His Holiness the Pope said that the beatification of Archbishop Plunket occurred when Ireland more than ever needed the help of Heaven to attain what legitimately belonged to her. This obviously indefinite pronouncement has prompted the Brisbane “Telegraph”—a paper that is keenly alive to the mischievous work of Sinn Feiners in Australia —to discuss the question, “What is it that legitimately belongs to Ireland?” In answer, it points out that there are two proposals inviting the attention of the world: One is now being considered and amended in the Imperial Parliament, a measure of selfgovernment which shall be as liberal as in the circumstances is practicable and consistent with the integrity of the Empire. The other is political independence, an Irish republic, separation from the Empire. Which did the Holy Father refer to? Which, in his opinion, legitimately belongs to Ireland? We are left to guess or choose. Ireland could now be enjoying self-government within the Empire if that would have contented her, if she had possessed one mind on the matter, if she had heartily co-operated in securing it. The difficulty is that there is no such thing as Irish unity in existence and hitherto co-operation has been unobtainable. Of course, on a political subject like the future of Ireland the Pope speaks with no more actual authority than his knowledge of the subject confers upon him. He is not an infallible guide and does not pretend to be. On the other hand, his office entitles him to the profoundest respect of Roman catholics throughout the world, and. while there is no acknowledged political leadership, there is a sympathetic leadership. Such a leadership is natural in the circumstances. A large proportion of Roman Catholics within and outside the British Empire feel that, though there is no compulsion, yet a self-imposed loy-l alty to the Pope in non-spirltual affairs is right atid proper. But, then.

iwhat does the Pope mean? Which | side is he on? Which objective ■ does he think has commended itself Ito Heaven? There is an apparent I ambiguity in his comforting message to the Irish people. But the “Telegraph” does not doubt that the Irish republicans everywhere—in Queensland, for example—having liberty to interpret the Pope’s words as they please. The question whether ;ii dependence. In confirmation of this opinion it is significant that at a luncheon tendered to Dr. Mannix (Roman Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne) at the Sydney Town Hall towards the end of last month, the toast of "The King” was omitted, and the Archbishop, in the course of his speech, deliberately voiced his pledge to the Irish Republic! “On my way through America,” he is reported to have said, “I expect to meet the President of the Irish Republic. I shall feel it my duty to pledge him and his party any support I can give them.” Commenting on this declaration of disloyalty, the “Telegraph” says: We seem to have got to the point now at which the disaffected Irish in Australia can be as openly disloyal to the Empire’s integrity as they . please. The question is whether I tolerance of this disloyalty is not being cariied too far is knocking at the door of the public mind. Men holding high positions in Australia can flaunt this kind of disloyalty. They can boast of their acquaintance with Mr. De Valera. They can advocate political independence for Ireland, knowing all that this may mean to Great Britain in the future. Any man, philosopher or fool, who has lived in this country knows what the English character is. A race cannot change its character by changing its skies. The Irish are as Irish here as in Ireland, and the English and Scotch as English or Scotch as in England or Scotland. But the Irish are only about a fourth of thg population. The other three-fourths come by blood from Great Britain. If the English, Scotch and Welsh are incurable, unrepentant tyrants in the United Kingdom, they must be incurable, unrepentant tyrants in Australia. They have the Irish at their mercy here. Are they abusing their power? Are they persecuting the Irish? What are the Irish disabilities in Australia? There is as strong an Irish element in Queensland as in any other part of Aus- j tralia, but it is numerically over- |, whelmed by the other British. Yet who could discover the downtrodden, . wronged, exasperated, driven-to-re- ' bellion Irish in Queensland? They share fully, to put the fact mildly, , in political distinctions. Archbishop Mannix found p, British country in which the English, Scotch, and I Welsh majority is tolerant even of ■ his disloyalty. For comparable con- : duct in the United States, he prob- < ably would have been deported to I the island from which he is an exile. < Assuming that perhaps the Pope will < not contradict those who choose the j rebellious interpretation of his am- , biguous message, what then? To , which the “Telegraph” replies: 1 “Why, nothing. The Pope does not 1 govern the British Empire. His intervention will not carry more 1 weight than that of the American j Congress. The British Empire is , self-governed. It is respectful to all ’ great religious organisations. It is ! tolerant of all religious beliefs that j do not intrude into the province of , politics. But emphatically it is self- I governed. There is. however, one ‘ remark that the Pope might have , made without venturing beyond his i own province. He might have in- 1 sisted that any cause which pro- ’ claims that it represents a struggle ] for a legitimate objective, for what 1 belongs to the strugglers and there- 1 fore may hope for the help of Hea- £ ven, pays Heaven a poor compliment when it supplements Heavenly help 1 with assassination and incendiar- I ism.” j