The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 1878.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume V, Issue 245, 11 January 1878, Page 11

The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 1878.

¥ THE POLICY OF CATHOLICS AND THE f ' HON. MR. REYNOLDS.

tN Tuesday evening last the Hon. Mr. Reynolds addressed Ins constituents at Port Chalmers It is not our intention to discuss those passages of his speech in which he gave an account of his parliamentary exertions in the promotion of thenlocal interests, and of general measures. Such as leel an interest in these, 'would not be likely to «f tTimn o + ,CC, CC . nv + c . any or profit from a discussion of them at this time. We could not hope to add to their knowledge or heighten their appreciation of them. Besides the time has not yet come, nor is it likely to come soon, when Oui duty calls us to tlio consideration of infinitely more important questions. J It does not concern us in the least, whether twenty-five years service m the House of Representatives entitles the Hon. Mr. Reynolds to step up into the Legislative Council, oi whether lie acted wisely or unwisely in abandoning Major Atkinson and supporting Sir G. Grey. Not does it concern us whether he has discharged his ,luty to the local requirements of Port Chalmers. The consideration of such questions is outside our sphere of duty. Oar only business at present, is to let our readers know what the Hon Mr I Reynolds thinks of our policy in reference to those who, by ! SSoSfShSh! done us an injustice in refosin »" ** * \ We are bound to believe that the Hon. Mr. Eeynolds ' has a conscience, for he says so, and we know that this conscience compels him to support a measure to force money irom Catholics to enable one class of the community— the secularists, to maintain a system of education whose primary object is to destroy Catholic schools, to invade Catholic homes and coerce Catholic consciences. It is a queer conscience this of Mr. Eeynolds, but it exists, it appears. And being about It 1S ' 1S J WOrth While t0 Say UUlch mole Leaving then, the question of conscience, we pass on to his denunciation of the policy of Good Templars and Catholics .Both are prepared, on all suitable occasions, to give a block vote against their opponents, and this it is which excites the indignation of Mr. Reynolds. We are not going to write on behalf of the Good Templars, they are well able to defend themselves ; but we have a few words to say on our own account The Hon. Mr. Reynolds has, it appears to us strange ideas on the subject of representation. He is evidently under the impression that unless Catholics! for example, vote for the men who have steadily, through a series oi years insulted and injured them, there can be no representation of the masses, and that no Catholic can ever hope to be returned to Parliament. Lest this should be said to be an unfair representation of tne Hon Mr. Reynolds' views, we here subjoin his own words :— At the same time I must here take the opportunity oi saying that I consider such threats as I have referred to if earned out to the fullest extent, would make the representation oi the masses and good government impossible, and the action threatened to be taken by Good Templars and Catholics would tend to defeat the object they have in view, because by the combination of all others who are opposed to their views, the possibility exists that neither a Good Templar, nor a Catholic would ever be returned to Parliament." These are extraordinary word*. The representation of the masses, then, according to the Hon. Mr. Reynolds, can only be secured by electors voting for representatives who have uniformly opposed their views and supported legislation repugnant to their most deeply seated and highly cherished principles. We were always under the contrary impression, and still think that the representation of the electors can only be secured by returning to 1 arliament men who will endeavbur to do justice to all. A different theory however, appears to prevail in these enlightened times, and it is this— that real representation consists in

helping to return to Parliament men who will spurn their constituents, rob them, invade the sanctity of their homes, interfere between them and their children, and coerce them to violate their conscience, disobey God, and expose their children to the worst of evils — the loss of their faith and innocence. Then the Hon. Mr. Reynolds has recourse to the old and ridiculpus clap-trap, saying that in consequence of their pursuing the only manly, straightforward, and rational course within their reach, Catholics will find themselves excluded from Parliament. How many Catholics are now in Parliament, how many would have even the remotest chance of being returned by any constituency— say, in Otago or Canterbury ? What folly is such a threat as this. In all England and Scotland there is not one Catholic Member of Parliament; The highest, best, most educated Catholic gentlemen of these' countries have been rejected simply because they were Catholics. And so it is here. The fact of any man, no matter who, being a Catholic, is an insuperable disqualification for Parliament in the estimation of the vast majority of New Zealand colonists. A savage Maori would have a better chance of being returned to Parliament than the best most highly educated colonist, if a Catholic. Politicians are manifestly afraid of the block-vote : they clearly foresee it's consequences, and, therefore, they deprecate it, and lose no opportunity of endeavouring to raise a false issue, with the view of deluding, if possible, the Catholic body But m Tain. We are not seeking to have Catholics returned to Parliament, for the simple reason that it would be insanity to do so. But we are determined to punish our enemies, and by throwing political parties into confusion, to compel them to consider our claims, treat our demands with respect, and do us justice.