Current Topics AT HOME AND ABROAD.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume X, Issue 483, 14 July 1882, Page 1

Current Topics AT HOME AND ABROAD.

A notice of Dr. Darwin's book on earthworms given by the Dublin Jteview for April, furnishes us with another instance of the uncertainty of proofs advanced against religion from calculations based on geology. " Now," says the writer, "no one has for-

TESTIMONY OF THE EARTHWORM.

gotten the celebrated researches in the Nile mud, carried out in 1854 by Mr. Homer, by which the high antiquity of man was propounded. An elaborate series of shafts and borings were started in the great valley of the Nile, with the result that pieces of pottery were found at a depth of from 60 to 70 feet below the surface. At the same time caref al measurements were undertaken that determined the average increase of Nile mud to be at the rate of 6 inches a century. Allowing that the burnt brick had been gradually buried by successive deposits of Nile mud, this work of the potter must have been executed no less than 12,000 years ago, and consequently, man's existence on this planet must be dated still further back than this. By the light however, of Dr. Darwin's researches we must convict these venerable bricks of an outrageous assumption of antiquity. The Nile mud is exceedingly favourable for the development and work of the earth, worm. Assuming, then, a very moderate rate of accumulation of mould— say 1.5 inch in every ten years— we find that the earthworm alone, without any assistance from the Nile deposit, could bury these bricks in about 5,000 years. Without contending that the earthworm pursues its labours, at the same unifoim rate, to so great a depth as 60 feet, it is enough for our purpose to point out that these little animals are very busy in burying objects nearer the surface, in order to vitiate the whole argument for the high antiquity of man, founded on elaborate measurement of the rate of Nile deposits. 'This is' one only of the many lessons so constantly impressed on scientists of the unreliable nature of the negative argument from geology."

The secret of that (Irish) crime is greeSd— the prevalent vice of peasant communities everywhere, and especially of those of Celtic race. To part with his money is the greatest possible misery to the Irish peasant, and he will commit any crime rather than do so. 1 ' " The fact is that in large districts of Ireland there are no innocent people of the lower classes ; the crime of at least guilty knowledge and silence being common to all." In the issue of May 13, again, we find the following :— " The No Rent proclamation in which the Kilmainham suspects directly recommended robbery, with full knowledge that it would be associated with outrage and murder, has not yet been recalled. The public protests the last assassination have not induced a tingle witness to give information which might lead to the discovery of the murderers. Only one penitent priest has expressed regret for foul-mouthed abuse of Mr. Burke uttered almost on the eve of the late catastrophe. It is perhaps not unnatural that a community which has regarded outrage and slaughter with complacency should feel a certain awkwardness in denouncing one murder among many." Here is a manifestation of that English spirit which we have in view when we speak bitterly, and how can we speak otherwise ? We will ask our readers then who think that we are too bitter to consider what it is that we deal with. — A Government piling Coercion Act on Coercion Act ; that has given over an unarmed people into the hands of a heavily armed force, demoralised and assured of impunity in all their excesses ; that forbids the people, stripped of the roofs their own hands had erected, and which they had paid for over and over again, to find a shelter from the winds and rain ; that by its barbarity is bringing barbarism in amongst its victims ; that is upholding the rights of landlords, a class of cruel unrelenting usurers, to continue their robbery, and their indirect murder, and banishment of the people ; that has mocked the people's hopes of justice by laws for their benefit that will not work. — A Press that teems with every loathsome insult and calumny against Ireland and the Irish people, and that section of the English people that supports this Government and this Press. — Such is the England we hold in view when we write bitterly, and, holding it in view, too bitterly we cannot write.

THB ENGLAND WE COKDEMN.

England. But does this reader of ours consider the England of which we in truth speak, or another England which it does not enter into our task to deal with ? We deal with th« England of coercion ; the English Government in Ireland where it is a tyrannous and cruel Government, the English Press that has nothing for Ireland but hard words and vile abuse. When we speak bitterly, it is all this we have in view ; we have in view men murdered by the Government when they Beck to defend their wives and children from being cast out homeless on the roadside, as on the bleak hills above Lough Conn, where the peasants bad themselves reclaimed the mountain side from which they were murderously evicted ; we have in view innocent women barbarously killed, as at Belmullet, or children shot down, in. return for a few stones thrown, as children can throw them, as at Ballina. We have in view such utterances as at the one extremity of the British Press— the upper one — we find in the columns of many English newspapers, at the other extremity — the lower one— in the columns of the colonial Press. Let our reader consider the following passages, which we give him in illustration, and judge if they can be too bitterly alluded to. The Saturday Review, then, of April 22 says : " The priest in Ireland is still powerful for evil ; he seems to be almost powerless for good. He may lead provided that he follows ; he may advise, provided that his advice coincides with the cupidity and the evil passions of his flock. ... As a conespondent of the Times, who evidently knows his countrymen, has said, deprive an Irishman of his money and you deprive him of his heart's blood. The striking story quoted by the same writer of the expressed intention of certain scoundrels to kill an enemy of theirs, but that they would have to pay for him under the late Peace Preservation Act, and of the actual murder following on the expiry of that Act, is an apt illustration, though, if it were proved to be incorrect, it would not affect the case, , ,

MR. FOBSTEB'S EXACTNESS.

made by Mr. Forster, and who pretended to give the details of a conversation that he had had with Mr. O'Shea on the subject. Mr. Forster said that he had made a memorandum of the conversation shortly after it was held, and of the exactness of his memory and the clearness of bis understanding the opponents of the Land League have never entertained a moment's doubt. The utmost that could be made of such a statement, even were it testified to by testimony that could not be overthrown, has been made of it, of which the following illustration taken from a speech recently made by Lord Cairns, will suffice. — " Overtures, communications, infor* mation, negotiations — disguise them, veil them, gloss them over as you may — have taken place which, fear and feel history will record as resulting in a compact or bargain — a bargain which Ido not believe any commercial man in the city of London would fail for a moment to understand — a bargin by which, in consideration of stipulations insisted on by those who were incarcerated on suspicion of treason, who were described but shortly before as steeped in treason, and as the exponents of the doctrine of assassination — in consideration of stipulations insisted on by these men, the Government of the Queen was to receive under the active direction of the same persons assist* ance for the purpose of suppressing outrage by that very organization, or conspiracy — I care not which word you use — by which outrage had been promoted, and had been excited, and was offered besides, if it did not invite the offer, the Parliamentary assistance of the same persons. Those who have been engaged in these transactions may persuade themselves, and I understand they do persuade themselves, that this was not their real character, but the facts remain, and about the facts there is little or no dispute, and the verdict of every plain straightforward Englishman upon those facts I for one can entertain no doubt of." The facts, however, are very doubtful, and such aa every plain and straightforward Englishman, who desired to maintain his character for plainness and straightforwardness would'do well to ex*

An esteemed reader of the N. Z. Tablet, who is also an English Catholic, finds that in dealing with the Irish question we are over bitter in speaking of

The grounds for the assertion that Mr. Parnell had undertaken to put down the commission of outrages if he were released from prison were a statement

amine before he accepted them. Mr Forster. on the contrary, seems to have misunderstood Mr. O'Shea thoroughly, and to have jumped to the conclusion that when Mr. O'Shea said, in the event of certain concessions being made, such as the settlement of arrears and the release of the suspects, the Land League would probably be able to influence the state of things so as to prevent the commission of outrages — the causes of popular anger being so much weakened, he was proposing to turn to this use an organisation for tha commission of outrages— that did not exist, so far as he or the Land League was concerned. That Mr. Forster formed his own conclusions, and did not ask Mr. O'Shea for an explanation of what struck him as remarkable we learn from bis admission. " I did not feel myself sufficiently master of the situation," he said, "to let him see what I thought of this confidence." Had he let his thoughts appear to Mr. O'Shea, it is certain the explanation that would have followed must have taken from him all pretence of justifi cation in making the extraordinary, startling, and false, statement, he made, as we have seen, with such effect. Mr. O'Shea, in his letter to the Standard ploces matters in a perfectly clear light and very plainly shows the frame of mind in which Mr. Forster must have been when he made his memorandum. The letter runs as follows :—": — " My assertion that I had been in frequent communication with him, Mr. Forster has had the coolness to describe as incorrect. I retort that, besides previous communications I talked the whole situation over while walking with him from the House of Commons to the Irish Office, and while standing outside the latter buildiDg on Wednesday, the 21st of April. On Friday, the 28th, I walked with him from the Irish Office, through the Park to Downing street, stopping several times on the way, as men often do when in earnest conversation. Amongst the matter of our discussion was a foolish answer wh ich he had drafted to Mr Oawen's question respecting the imprisoned members, and which he was, fortunately, not allowed to give in the House of Commons. I had another conversation, a short one, with him later in the day, at the Irish Office, and a third interview of some length in his room in the Housa of Commons, to which I was invited by him, through the Irish Solicitor General. During the last one he suggested the best plan for civilising Kilmainham unostentatiously. But I confess he appeared nervous and demoralised, and I was obliged to point out and make him correct an extraordinary error in the letter which he handed me, addressed to captain Barlow, deputy chairman of the Irish Piisons Board. That error was nothing less than the substitution, of another name for mine in the order for special facilities which he had just written. That order must be in Captain Barlow's possession ; let it be produced, for Mr. Foreter's worst enemy cannot suggest its being concocted. Now as to the memorandum alleged by Mr. Forster to represent my conversation with him on the 30th April. In it he informed the Cabinet that I had ussd the following words : — 1 The conspiracy which has been used to get up boycotting and outrages will now be used to put them down.' The following are the £acfc3, I myself know nothing about the organisation of the Land League. But I told Mr. Forster that I had been informed by Mr. Parnell the day before that, if the arrears question were fettled, that organisation would explain the boon to the people, and tell them that they ought to assist the operation of the remedial measure in the tranqullisation of the country. I added that Mr. Paruell had expressed his belief that Messrs. Davitt, Egan, Sheridan, and Boyton would use all their exertions, if placed in a position to do so, to advance the pacification ; and that Mr. Sheridan's influence was of special importance in the West, owing to the fact that he had been the chief organiser of the Land League in Connaught before his arrest, while Mr. Boyton had held a similar appointment in the province of Leinster, On these points I heard no more, I knew no .more, and I said no more.' "—So much, then for this proposal which the enemies of the Land League have invented and seized upon as identifying it with outrage as well as for the facts spoken of by Lord Cairns.

THE ROMAN QUESTION.

He writes as follows :—": — " Whilst we consider it to be our duty not to go before the Pope in making proposals for the •olution of the ' Roman Question,' we are quite prepared to see it very quickly solved. There seem to be three possible solutions. The first i 6, that the Pope should quit Rome and take refuge in some friendly or neutral country. The second is that foreign diplomacy, treating the question of the Papacy as an international concern, might bring sufficient pressure on the Kalian Government to induce them to restore Rome, and perhaps the surrounding territory, to the Pope. And the third is, that the Italian Catholics, aroused to a sense o! their duty, and taking advantage of the new law of universal suffrage, should settle the matter for themselves, and give back to the Holy See whatever the Holy See asks. We confess that it appears to us extremely unlikely that the Pope will quit the city of Rome. Numerous rumours have gained more or less credence from time to

time that departure had been decided upon. Our readers will remember the scare that took place in Rome itself last December. Two of the Pope's State carriages, a present from Napoleon 111. to Pius IX., had teen brought out of their coach-house to be freshly painted. At once the cry went round that the Pope was leaving. The police were strengthened, and the soldiers were reinforced ; and King Humbert, with his Ministers, prepared themselves for the woist. The Pope did not stir ; and it hardly appears probable that he will, unless things grow very much worse. There is, first of all, the extreme inconvenience of such a course. Few persons have any clear idea of what is involved in the Government of the Universal Church. There are some who would seem to think that everything is done by the Pope in his own cabinet, and that even he himself does nothing but issue Briefs and Encyclicals. The simple truth is, that he is surrounded by a gigantic and complex system of arrangements for business, such as is only to be paralleled in European political capitals of the first class. The ' congregations' among which, as among so many Boards and Committees, is distributed the legislative, the administrative, and the judicial work of the ' Curia Romania," are at least twelve in number. They consist of Cardinals, who, with a staff of Consultors, secretaries and clerks, entertain, examine, and decide the important matters which come before them from every quarter of the world. At least one-third of the existing Cardinals are perpetually occupied in the work of Congregations. For the despatch of business these congregations require rooms and offices. Some have palaces of their own, like the propaganda. Others are boused in the vast courts •! the Vatican Palace. Besides the Congregations, there are tribunals like the Cancellaria, the Dataria, the Penitentiaria, the Secretariate of Briefs, and the Rota. In addition to these, there iB the vast department of the Cardinal Secretary of State. This body of Ministers, Judges, Consultors, clerks and advocates is simply essential to the government of the Church. But let us try to conceive the difficulty of moving it to Malta, to Fulda, or to Salzburg, and of housing it in new habitations I The Cardinals are nearly all old men, whom the very journey would decimate, and for whom new quartera or habits would be too often not only disagreeable, but fatal. The official staff are Italians, and like all Italians, and especially Romans, intensely averse from emigration. The usurping Government would probably interfere to prevent the removal of libraries and archives ; and, if they did not, the task of moving them would be useless to attempt. The Pope would not move without taking the Curia With him. To leave them behind would be to paralyze the Church's action. These inconveniences are not everything. The Holy See would sacrifice much that is valuable by leaving Borne. Miserable as the present state of things is, Rome is always Rome. The Pope in Rome is the Pope in his own place. He is a prisoner there — for a time ; but his presence is felt. The pilgrim seeks out Home because the Pope is there. The worshipper at shrines and altars prays the more fervently because the Holy Father ia in the Vatican. The deep and warm Catholic life of the Eternal City is the more vigorous for its consciousness of the nearness of the Pope. The Catholic world would perhaps flock to any city where the Pope was ; but no city could be like Rome. Rome is a great Catholic hospice where the Pope's visitors have a thousand welcomes and a thousand ties ; where even those who cannot hope for private audiences, much les3 for familiar intercourse with the Sovereign Pontiff, and who will probably have to content themselves with a glimpse of his countenance in some crowded function, or some hurried passeggiata, can find intellectual recreation and devout occupation for weeks and months whilst they waif, er whilst they watch their business. A passing look at the Pope, or a kind word and smile, is valued by the faithful as it ought to be ; but the most devout would naturally think twice if the price of it were an uncertain sojourn in a town which would be certainly most dreary and dull in comparison with Rome. The Pope is at this moment a prisoner, and his situation, as he has said himself, is 'intolerable.' But, after all, he is in the Vatican ; he is in his own house ; he has his own servants around him ; no myrmidon of the State dares to pass his threshold. Whether or no he would be freer elsewhere, it is obviously not for us to inquire. He would certainly not quit the Holy City unless he was sure that he would be. But what European palace would befit him after the Vatican ? That the European Powers might interfere in the Roman question is certainly a very possible contingency. Mostjof the Powers of Europe, at the present moment, do not ostentatiously respect the wishes or the interests of their Catholic subjects. But that might soon be altered. If Home politics took such a turn as to make it woith while for Germany, France, and Austria, or even for England and Russia, to court the favour of the Catholic party, none of these States would hesitate much for the fear of offending the Quirinal. Italy has 1 , practised a deception on Europe. In 1870 and 1871, when the leaders of the Piedmontese irruption were anxious to secure the countenance of the Powers, they declared in the most emphatic and absolute words that the cause of the Papacy was an international one, and that no European State should have any cause to complain of the treatment of the Holy See

A 'WBITEB in the Dublin Review for April in speaking of the Roman question, deals with three solutions of it, any one of which he thinks possible

by the Italian nation. But the recognition by Europe of the status of the Italian Government in Rome has not been by any means so cordial as was desired. On the contrary, it has happened once or twice that one or other of the Powers has shown itself dissatisfied with the position of th* Pope. Twelve years have gone by, the rulers of Italy are no lengar of the sfamp of Lanza and Visconti Venosta, and there is nothing to bo gained by hypocrisy ; so it is now cynically declared ii official quarters that Italy brooks no inteiference about the Pope. It is stated, and it has never been denied, that, in December and January last, when Prince Bismarck was supposed to be manifesting a disposition to ask questions, Mancini, on behalf of the Italian Government, instructed De Launay, the ambassador at Berlin, to say to the Chancellor that 'no Italian Government, of whatever party, could permit the least external interference in a question which Italy was determined to treat as a matter of strictly home concern, aud as pertaining to her sovereign rights as a nation. 1 It is not known whether the German Minister has digested this defiance or not. Bat it is certain that the question is by no means at rest. The Holy See is patently and undoubtedly «international,' or else there ia no such thing as the Catholic Church. At the same time Earopean armed interference is out of the question, and European diplomacy is a treacherous swamp, in which good and bad are swallowed up indifferently. . . . But we are disposed to think that the solution of the Italian question will come from the Italians themselves. There can be little doubt that this is what would best please Leo XIII. The Pepe is an ardent Italian patriot, in the best sense. He considers that the greatness of Italy is, above everything else, in her providential appointment as the Beat and the guardian of the Papacy. The Italian Government, there can be no doubt, feels the strain caused by the too near neighbourhood of the awful shadow of St. Peter. Had it ODly the Pope to deal with the pressure would not be so great. But there is first the Revolution, and, next, the Catholics of Europe. The Catholics of Europe insist upon coming'to Rome as pilgrims, and have no intention of giving up talking about the Pope, even if, for the moment, they can do little else except talk. But the showing up of mistakes, the utterance of faith and hope, the protesting in favour of law and justice— all this may be set down as tali, bnt it is not ineffective for all that. • They are trying. 1 said Pope Leo XIII. to the Cardinals at the beginning of March, • to silence the voices that are raised in favour of Our cause, aDd to calm the apprehensions of Catholics. . . . But the matter concerns the whole Catholic world. . . . It is folly to suppose that the Catholics of the world will resign themselves to suffer peacefully their chief and their master to remain long in a condition so incompatible with hig dignity and so trying to their own filial love.' On the other side, the extreme ' Liberals,' in and out oE Parliament, will not rest until the law of the guarantees is abrogated, and the Italian police may walk up and down the staircases of the Vatican. Things cannot remain long as they are. Either the Italian Government will withdraw and, with the aid of the Catholics, defy the advanced Liberals, or else it will remain at Rome and its left wing will destroy it. It may or may not be true that influential men of the present dominant party are regretting they ever came to Rome. But there are many signs that the present situation is looked upon as very provisional and uncertain. Foreign sovereigns keep carefully away from the ;Holy City. Far the greater number of the deputies live not in houses of their own but in some hotel. Rome is found to be the wrong place for a capital— hard to fortify, unhealthy for the men of Northern Italy, and, -what is worse, already preoccupied by a Sovereign who is not yet got rid of. The uncertainty of the situation must continue until it pleases the Pope to permit the Catholics to take part ia the political elections. There are some signs that the permission, and the order, will be given before very long. Already a strong recommendation has been given to 'register. 1 This may not mean immediate action, but it certainly means action. When the Catholic body is a little better disciplined— when it has come to understand thoroughly what it is fighting for, and how to use modern weapons— then probably the word will be given. Till that happens, the Italian Government is in the position of men who are waiting for a high tide on a tropical island. The giant wave is Bure to come, and it is sure to swamp every thing—and no one knows how the place will look after it has gone down. The Sovereign Pontiff is drilling his army. When he has made his Italians, and his children in every European country, as good Catholics, as loyal Catholics, as intelligent Catholics, and as self-sacrificing Catholics as he thinks they should be, there can be little doubt as to what -will happen then."

AN INVIDIOUS PBOPOSAL.

not afford to pay for the education of their children, bnt for that of well-to-do people who could afford to do so and who ought to be ashamed not to do so, and we have always predicted that eventually it would be found desirable to establish separate classes of primary schools— the one class for the well dressed chil-

dren of the said well-to-do people, and the other class for the badly dressed children of the poor. We now, find our opinions .fully borne out, and that the fulfilment of our prediction has set in. The Rev. Mr. Fraser, in fact, a member of the North Canterbury Board of Education has given notice of a motion to bring about the very state of things to which we refer. Mr. Fraser, moreover, writes a letter to one of the Christchurch dailies in which he explains his meaning, and which we find clearly to bear out everything that we had foreseen. The rev. correspondent, then, begins by acknowledging the failure of the system as at present carried out, which he asserts has not succeeded in securing the attendance of all the children at school — notably " the children of careless, vicious, or criminal parents." But if these children be not looked after he foretells the worst consequences. "No one," he says, " -will complain of efforts being made in this direction, or that they are beyond the sphere of the Board of Education. Assuming, then, that such a work is to be undertaken, the question arises— What effect will it have on the children now attending the district schools ? The attendance at these '.schools is at present most satisfactory, and includes a much wider range of the various classes of society than is usually to be found in England. Few things could be more regretted than the disturbance of this promising state of matters. But the gathering of the waifs of the street into these schools would certainly cause the withdrawal of a greatmany children whose parents would object to the natural risk of their contamination. The establishment of separate schools for the little outcasts seems to be the only practical measure for gaining the desired object without such an injurious effect." The very children, then, for whom it was pretended that the free, secular, and compulsory system was introduced, are excluded from its schools, and the establishment of separate schools is called for in order that the superior classes may not be contaminated by contact with them. But let it not be supposed that carelessness and vice in their parents are to be the only causes for which children are to be condemned to gntUr-schools ; the children of poor parents must also find their place there, and it would again, be possible to have them removed from the higher sphere to that of the gutter-snipe, if the delicacy of teachers or schoolmates found itself offended by their uncleanly or untidy appearance. One of our Christcnurch contemporaries indeed in commenting on this matter confesses that good-feeding and genteel attire are the necessary qualifications for educational privileges. — *• TheTe is considerable force he says, in the plea that the means employed to benefit the neglected children may indirectly benefit the neglectful parents themselves. There is practical wisdom in continuing the kindly influences of home, and in compelling the parents suitably to feed and clothe the young ■cholaTs." It does not seem to enter into our contemporary's philosophy to consider that there may be careful, anxious parents of large families quite unable, through their poverty, to feed and clothe their children up to the mark.— And mast the children, besides the fineness of their raiment, betray by their appearance familiarity with roast beef and plum pudding ? will no meaner a bill of fare suffice to qualify them, and must the lean ones be cast out among the gutter children ? Are nature's noblemen all fat ?— But to return to the Rev. Mr. Fraser : "After a time such children as were found cleanly and well conducted might be promoted to their respective district schools. On the other hand, rude, foal-tongued, or untidy children in the district schools might, on the decision of the head master (subject, however, to appeal to the Committee), be removed to these compulsory schools. The whole tone of the district schools would by this means be raised, and both the efficiency and the gentleness of their discipline would be largely increased." The rev. gentleman perceives, however, that his proposal aims at the establishment of class distinctions ; nor is the answer he tries to give to this by any means apt. "It may indeed," he says, °be objected that the system of compulsory schools introduces a distinction of class. This is true. The only answer is that such a class exists, and that its extinction ought to be aimed at ; not, indeed, by the punishment of individuals as the rinderpest is stamped out, but by the prevention and cure of profligacy and vice as is the extinction of smallpox and fever by the noble efforts of the medical profession." There is such a thing, nevertheless, as honest poverty, and we altogether deny that it can be cured by treating the children of those who suffer from it, as if they were the children of the vicious or criminal ; and if Mr. Fraser's proposal be followed up, such will certainly be the result. The contemporary, from vhom we have already quoted, further alludes to this proposal as follows :—": — " It is likely to be opposed only by those who are hostile to the present education scheme, and who would regret to see it exercising a wholesome and elevating moral influence." This is an insult and a falsehood, both together. The present education scheme is opposed by those who oppose it because they are fully persuaded it cannot exercise any wholesome aad elevating influence, but must have a directly contrary effect. Nor will ita influence be raised by such an alteration as will include the poor among the criminals and people of depraved habits, and force their children into companionship with those of the classes in question. Meantime the fact remains acknowledged that the well-dressed, well-fed masters and misses of the well-to-do settlers are to be accommodated at an

We have always said that the secular system as established by law in New Zealand was intended' not for the benefit of the poorer classes who could

enormous experse to the public with achoola to suit their feeding and attire, while the ill-clad back and badly-filled stomach are to be cast out as unfit to mix with them. The class-distinctions of the old world, which are regulated by rank, are infinitely preferable to this separation of the sheep and goats, and by no means calculated to form so gross a frame of mind, and contempt of one man towards another.— Fine clothes and fine breeding require do such recommendation to the favour of our young colonists. Norjneed those who want them be so recommended to their contempt. The tendency o* the colonial mind leans rather in an opposite direction.