Current Copies

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XVII, Issue 1, 26 April 1889, Page 1

Current Copies

AT BOMB AND ABROAD.

THE " DETBBBFNT EFFECT."

of government. So long as any severe measure i carried oat in accordance with the laws of any particnlar realm, and with the end of serving the interests of a government or a dynasty, it is deserving of approval. This is the lesson we learn once more, this time from the opinions pronounced in authoritative quarters on the late doings of the Ameer of Cabul in Afghan Turkestan . The Ameer had been accused by the Russian Press of having travelled into that particnlar province of his kingdom, which was more or less disaffected towards him, and where a little before a perfidious lieutenant governo. named Isbak Eban had rebelled against him, for the purpose of initiating a movement against the Russians on his Southern frontier, and in alliance with the Emir of Bokhara proclaiming against them a " jibad," or holy war. This, however, is denied by some correspondents of the London Times, who are looked upon as authorities on the subject, and who explain that the object of the Ameer had been to ■nbjngate and punish disaffected subjects over whom he rules by methods that cannot be described as those of " rose-water." "In establishing his authority," comments the Times, " whether at Cabal, Candahax, or Herat, be has never been restrained by European motives of humanity. He wonld regard all such notions as mere weaknesa, certain to end in his downfall ; and very probably he is right, Afghanistan being what it is. . . . No one can blame him if he does all in his power to stamp out the influence of Ishak in Afghan Turkestan, and to overawe those who might be tempted to become his partisans." The doctrine of the " deterrent effect," then holds good whether it be applied to Afghanistan or to Ireland. In ftct this doctrine explains and excuses a good deal that has been laid to the charge of various countries and various times, and otherwise explicable only on evil principles and quite inexcusable. The " deterrent effect," however, also has its other side. When an Ameer of Cabul, for example, digs a row of graves and ranges in them all alive a row of culprits— cbaiitably cutting their throats before he covers them in — he produces the " deterrent effect " in a way for whichi seeing hiß necessities, no one can blame him— according to the Time*. But when an Irish community boycotts some self-seeking interloper who backs up an evicting landlord by taking the land off which the unfortunate tenants have been mercilessly driven, the "deterrent effect" is produced in quite another manner, and is inexcusable at d justly penal. The " deterrent effect," nevertheless, as applied to tl c ends of government, whether they be jast or unjust, and whether wi o Afghanish barbarity or English oppression, enters into the m^t useful and most approved methods of the day.

It seems that the " deterrent effect " is received as sound not only in the policy of Lord Salisbury, bu generally in all matters relating to the necessitie

A SIGNIFICAHT VISIT.

British ambassador, Sir Robert Morier, was taken as having a double meaning. It was first taken to signify the desire of the Czar to show that, in face of the reports -as to the aggressive intentions of the Ameer, prevalent at the time, he was unwilling that anything should occur to cause a" misunderstanding between Russia and England, The second meaning referred to an accusation brought against Sir Robert Morier by Count Herbert Bißmarck, to the effect that, at the time of the Franco-German war, be bad taken advantage of his diplomatic position at Berlin to give information to the French. Sir Robert Morier had denied this, and a correspondence Lad taken place in which he was understood to have thrown some discredit on Prince Bismarck and his son. It was, therefore, said that the Czar by per. sonally visiting Sir Robert Morier intended to show his satisfaction at the discomfiture of the Bismarcks. But, when we consider that the exhibition at Paris is intended to commemorate the revolution,

The rumour that the Czar will visit the exhibition at Paris if it be true is of some import. The late attendance cf his Majesty, with the Czarina and their court, at a ball given in St. Petersburg by the

a movement of all others most abhorred of monarch!, and above all of absolute monarebs like his Majesty of Russia— who, besides, DM during all bis reign been the victim of revolutionary attempt!, it is evident that some extraordinary reason only can explain hit Majesty's intention to visit the exhibition, The explanation, however, does not seem far to seek. Recent reports, for example, have made us acquainted with the fact that a reconciliation has taken place between Germany and England, and that it has been brought about through the personal diplomacy of Count Herbert Bismarck. It is evidently this which h*s proved strong enough to move the Czar to so seem* ingly inconsistent an intention, and we may therefore perceive in the matter a pledge of the Buseo-Frenoh alliance which baa been aa long talked of, and which has now apparently been finally determined on. Indeed, at the time his Majesty paid his visit to Sir Robert Morier, it was also said that he meant to mark his friendship towards France by honouring the statesman who bad tried to aid her in her need, and possibly this, as well as hostility to Prince Bismarck and his son, influenced him. At any rate it seems probable that Lord Salisbury's recent policy, and the reconciliation with Germany arranged by him and Count Herbert Bismarck, have made the alliance between France and Russia a settled fact. As to what the results are to be we have yet to learn.

PAST PBAYING FOE.

is a Bishop at Gibraltar whose diocese, we are told extends all the way from Bilbao to Constantinople, and is, therefore, more remarkable for the presence of a flock refusing to have anything to do with the Bishop, so far as they know of his existence — and that is certainly not very far— even than it is for the absence of a flock paying spiritual allegiance to his Lordship. We are not sure if it is within the confines of this diocese or that of a Bishop residing at Malta that Rome is situated, and the Pope himself is reckoned a disobedient spiritual subject of Anglican authority. The Bishop of Gibraltar, whose diocese includes the Principality of Monaco, has determined against the erection of a church or the appointment of a parson to look after the spiiitnal interests of the residents or visitors at Moate Carlo, and has given them over wholly to the reprobate's doom. His Lordship's argument is that, either the clergyman ministering in his church must daily protest against the gambling carried on, which, for some unexplained reason, be could not be expected to do, or that he must hold his tongue, and, by doing so, sanction it. The Bit-hop, therefore, as a " standing protest," refutes to permit of the establishment of an English church within the condemned boundaries. What, therefore, are those gamblers who desire to join the delights of the gaming table to the calmness of a conscience set at eaße by attendance on the Anglican ministrations of the gospel to do ? Such a class only, it seems, are likely to be affected by the Bishop'b determination, and some doubt may perhaps arise as to their number and importance. The figure, however, of an English gentleman in lawn sleeves, erect upon the Rock of Gibraltar in a state of protest against the gambling at Monte Carlo, should be a noble one, and if its protesting shadow fails to fall on all that lies between Bilbao and Constantinople, that we may take as arising from the ignorance of the inhabitants, who have for the most part heard no more of the Anglican Bishop under whose jurisdiction they are placed, than they have, perhaps, beard of the famous apes of the Rock— which lay no claim to juris iiction — or probably even less. But are the gamblers of Monte Carlo to be completely given over to perdition 1 General Booth, for example, might be consulted as to whether there also a squad of the Salvation Army might not be introduced, as elsewhere, to perform the work which the Church of England has been unable or unwilling to undertake. "Wouldn't I have fetched him ?" were the striking words once called out by an energetic lady among the audience, when a celebrated vocalist of his day was sioging a pathetic song called " The Gambler's Wife." There seems to be no fetching power, however, about the Church o England, as explained by the Bishop of Gibraltar, and the gambler must take bis chance uninterfered with. -"'•

Mbmbbbs of the Church of England who frequent the gambling tables at Monte Carlo are, it seems, to all intents and purposes excommunicated. There

His Eminence Cardinal Moran, in an address deraßWieriYi Hvered by him the other day in Sydney, said, in BIBALDBY. effect, that Protestantism as a weapon of assault

againit the Cathclic Church had inn its course. His Eminence went on to refer to secularism, whirh had taken its place, but with that portion of his argument we are not now concerned. What His Kminence affirmed with regard to Protestantism is an evident truth. The system referred to assailed the Church in two ways by doctrinal arguments and by physical force. God, for some wise purpose of his own, perhaps for all we know to punish the unfaithfulness and sin of Catholics, permitted the assault in some instances to be successful. False doctrine and penal legislation in some countries gained the ascendant, and the Cbnrch was persecuted or exiled. The times, however, for this have gone by— so far as Protestantism is concerned. Direct penal legislation, such as was employed under that system is hardly possible, and doctrinal argument is still less sr>. It is safe to cay that there is no edu -ated man at present, uninfluenced by prejudice or so situated as to be at liberty to give his intellect free play, who is capable of being deceived by arguments in favour of Trot e-tant ism as opposed to the claims of the Cataolic Church.

" For nature brings not back the Mastodon." The monsters of a less informed age have departed and cannot be recalled. While, nevertheless, this holds true in relation to Protestantism in its higher and more important forms, in its lower Btrata the assault upon the Catholic Church is still continued. The means so employed, however, and the arguments made use of are sufficient in themselves to afford a proof of the assertion made. In some literary mnck-hole here and there, for example, presided over by men having no pretension whatever to literary talent, and whose efforts to affect the literary calling are tro sickly even to be amusing, some publication is issued which pretends to be a bulwark of the Protestant creed. Its strongest efforts are low abuse ; its most val ; d arguments are false and foolish assertions, and the flower of its contributors, either direct or by quotation, are frequently wretched apostates who have been sharp enough to catch up the pious claptrap of controversial Pro- j testantism— which they turn to their own profit by mingling it with ribald, lewd, and grossly false inventions. One or two instances of this have recently been brought under our notice in which we happen to have had some personal knowledge either of the authors of the stuff to which we allude, or of the men or matters referred to in it, and of our own personal knowledge we are able to say that anything more at variance with the beliefs of tbe author a in question than the clap-trap made use of by them, or anything more shamelessly or scandalously lying than their statements, we have never heard. For a Ca'holic. indeed, to read such deceitful and lying inventions is not without a certain power of edification, for it brings before him in a v«ry forcible manner tbe nature of the people who, as a rule, apostatise from the Church. Their degradation is beyond the imagination of any decent mind, and requires to be witnessed if it is to be believed. But that Protestantism avails itself of such publications to bolster up its pretensions and to attack the Church, proves tbe troth of tbe assertion mare by Cardinal Moran, that Protestantism has run its course asa weapon to assail the Catholic Churcb. We hardly care to stigmatise any form of the Christian religion by identifying it with the filth to which wa have alluded, and whose assault on the Cbnrch can be harmful only to those who take part in it. Indeed, it is only possible to notice it indirectly and in illustration of some point of more or less interest or importanca. You do not, for example, repeat or reply to the ribaldry of a drunken larrikin who insults you in the street, though you may meution his existence as an illustration of the state of society in which his existence is possible. The Protestantism that conducts itself in a similar manner is not that which can be referrel tD in detail, Its uselessness as an effective weaptn is evident.