Current Copies

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XVII, Issue 3, 10 May 1889, Page 1

Current Copies

AT HOME AND ABROAD.

The following, which the London Globe publishes as an extract from the Times of February 22, 1890,

BRAZENING

IT OUT.

is not without merit as a specimen of Tory wit. It

is, however, a specimen of wit under difficulties, and forced to have recourse to what is very far-fetched. We give it to oar readers for what it is worth, and so that they may have a glimpse of another side of the question. " Yesterday, at Killabobby, the charge against Mr. O'Breeches, M.P., of inciting a crowd to a riot, which ended in the murder of six policemen was heard. The elegant velvet-cushioned throne, which had been erected on the bench for the accommodation of the prisoner, was much admired, though the magistT&\<u were understood to complain bitterly of being obliged to stand in the Well of the court among the onlookers. The covrt was densely crowded. Ten o'clock was the hour appointed for the hearing of the charge, but the special saloon train which conveyed the prisoner from Dublin was a little late, owing to his making rather a long speech to his friends on the Dublin platform. The prisoner was driven from the railway station to the court in the Lord Mayor of Dublin's statecoach, lent for the occasion. Precisely at eleven o'clock, Mr. O'Breeches, who wore a light check suit of the broadest pattern* entered the court, and was conducted to the throne, where he took his seat amid cheers, and proceeded to light a cigar. The particulars of the affair have already been given in our oolumns, and after formal evidence of the speech and the subsequent riot, the presiding magistrate, who on beginning to speak was severely jostled, said :—' We find the prisoner guilty, and we sentence him to one month's imprisonment in the New Palace and the 10,000 acres of ground attached thereto, which the Government have, at the cost of one million pounds. opened at the Lakes of Killarney for the reception of political prisoners/ The Prisoner (excitedly) : I object enirely to go to any palace in Ireland. I bave never been in such a palace in my life. The magistrate was understood to say that he was very sorry, but that was the best he could do for him. The Prisoner : I protest against the brutality of your sentence. The Magistrate : My dear sir, lam very sorry for you, but what better place could you choose ? The Prisoner : My health is weak, and the brutal and infamous Government is trying to murder me. I claim my rights as an Irish citizen to spend the month in a trip to America (loud applause). The Magistrate (after consulting with his brother) : We have come to the conclusion that under all the circumstances we will accede to your request. The Prisoner : I eba'l go in the Royal yacht. The Magistrate : Her Majesty will doubtless place her yacht and her servants at your disposal. The Prisoner : I protest against the sentence beginning to run until next Thursday, as I must see my tailor in London to get some yachting clothes. The Magistrate : Very well, a month from next Thursday. The prisoner then descended from the throne, and, amid deafening cheers, was carried out of court by the crowd, and subsequently returned to Dublin by special saloon train. In the evening a mass meeting was held at Killabobby to protest against the fiendish, inhuman, and infamous brutality of the Government in unlawfully banishing Mr. O'Breeches beyond the seas, and the magistrates and the Chief Secretary were burnt in effigy." According to a well known proverb, ridicule kills. Ridicule, however, that is driven to Buch extiemes as those implied in our quotation kills the cause on whose side it is employed. The fnn of this interesting " skit " partakes rather of the nature of the sardonic grin. But such as it is, we may as well get as much amusement as we can out of it. Why should not our adversaries grin for our.amusement if it so pleases them ?

General Boulanger, who is always a Republican but a Republican of a very different disposition,

Reassuring.

according to bis own showing, from those who now hold the reins of power in France, has lately, among the rest, promised himself in favour of strict moderation, and more especially 4r?th regard to religion. The Republic, he says, should provide the

country with religions peace by an absolute respect for all creeds and all opiniom. This is an utterance that whatever may hare been the true mind of the speaker, is deserving of serious attention, and may be looked upon as reassuring in a considerable degree. Whether General Boulanger was sincere or not is not a matter of material consequence—although undoubtedly, if he were so, it should entitle his claims to a consideration of which otherwise they hardly appear worthy. But it requires a certain stretch of credulity to believe it possible that a pretender, among whoie chief supporters are to be found some of the most virulent enemies that religion possesses in all the world, can be sincere in mch a profession. Tvmeo Danaet appears, under the circumstancee, a very apt and prudent motto. Boulanger, however, perceives the need that aay one who aspires to favour in France has of the support of the religious element in the country. He evidently recognises the blunder made by the existing republic in ranking itself as an open opponent of religion, and notes that in the long run such a policy must prove destructive. He sees thikt, whatever may be her faults or her failings, France still remains Catholic.and that the Catholic feeling there is certainly destined sooner or later to reassert itself. Perhaps he has reason to believe that the apathy shown in poli'ical matters by the Catholics of the country, for which it is difficult to acquit them of a very grave fault, is about to be surmounted, and therefore desires to avail himself (or his own ends of the change. His associations, however, are such that it is impossible not to suspect his sincerity, or that were he to attain to power he would do anything more than adopt a change of tactics, and replace a more open system of attack by one of greater Bubtlety . The old text still holds good, Dis moi gui tn hantes et je te dirai gui tv et and the General's alliance, for example, with M. Rochefort, must speak for itself. It is too much to hope that the party whom M; Rochefort represents have themselves admitted the folly of their war against the Church, and are ready, should the occasion offer, to make at least a truce with her. And yet, if possible, we would give even M. Rochefort the benefit of the doubt. The fact, however, iemains manifest that General Boulaoger perceives the inherent power of Catholicism in France, and knows that it has only to put forth its force to make itself effectually felt. Even in this there is reassnrance for those who take an interest in the welfare of religion as well as in that of France herself.

The Lord, it appears, possesses a very handsome property near London. The property in question is the Beulah-hill estate owned by the famous Baptist

A FORTUNATE locum tenens.

minister, Mr. Spurgeon. The property as described by a certain Dr. Hatcher, a minister of the sect from America, who has lately paid it a visit, is evidently a very delightful one,— extensive grounds highly cultivated ; a park abounding in trees and flowers aod adorned with statuary ; lawns the perfection of neatness and beauty > lakes and streams covered with waterfowl ; a home, crowning one of the loftiest hills of London, capacious, and furnished with almost everything that can pleaee the eye or administer to the comfoit of its inmates ; it fine conservatory and spacious gardens, " The house of his chief steward, situated at the rear of his garde o, was a cosy cottage, in excellent order, and very neat and pretty. There were also rich and verdant meadows, in wbicb could be seen several fat milch cows, evidently of superior stock. Bis stables — well, my party had just a few days before gone through the Rcyal stables at Windsor Castle, and we agreed that, in point of neatness and beauty of arrangement, they were not one wbit ahead of the stables at Beulah-hill. Mr. Spurgeon has not so many horses and carriages as her Majesty has, for he has no need of so many, but he has enough for his purpose, and that, too, of the best sort. His private carriage is very superior, his horses are finely kept, light-footed, and beautiful, and his driver, dreßsed in livery, looks like a gentleman of rank. Mr. Spurgeon has aIBO a fondness for fowl-raising, and there must have been several hundred chickens in his poultry yard the day I peeped into it. Indeed , I fancied that he has a little of everything in bis richly -endowed home at Beulah-hill." — So far bo good, say we— the very fine abode of a wealthy man, splendidly maintained. This, at least, is what the worldly-minded perceive in all this, and being worldly-minded they

cannot be expectei to perceive aav thing else. — What the elect, however, perceive is a property held in trust for tho Lord, and wholly to be surrendered to Him wben it reaches what Mr. Spurgeon himself calls the *• high-water maik of value." But let us hope the ascent of this property may still continue for many years, as the change, for example, from carriages fit for her Majest/ the Queen to commoner modes of conveyance would be severely felt by the highly favoured loowni tcnens. If meantime, Mr, Spurgeon has honestly earned hi* fortune why should he not baldly enjoy it without such pretences as that alluded to, which, at least to the worldly-minded, savour strongly of hypocrisy ?

According to the evidence of the constables given

FATHER MCFADDEN'B CASE.

in Father McFadden's case beiore the Magistrate 'i court at Letterkenay, the unfortunate Inspector Martin, appears to have been very much a victim

of his own rashness— and there, moreover, appears very little to excuse the violent and public condemnations which, notwithstanding that the case was sub judice, have bean made of the priest. In the first instance, Martin began by threatening the people. If they did not go home he told them, soms of them would get sore heads, —and this was befors a stoae had been thrown or a manacing gesture made, and merely in reference to a voice in the crowd that called out in Irish " Let not one man of you stir."— But it is evident tbat the spirit in which the Inspector was about to perform his task was no friendly one, and that it was very excusable for the people to distrust his attitude towards their priest. There was, bc3iies, a good deal of needless violence shown by the Inspector in the manner in which he made the arrest. Tnere was nothiDg to hinder him from walking quietly with Father McFadden the short distance that led to the house, and arresting him there when sheltered from the people. Inßteid of this he seized hold of the priest, an action that was a little afterwards repeated by one of the sergeants in his company. Some of the men present then pushed themselves in between Father McFadden and the Inspector, and the latter drew his sword. A woman immediately cried out that he had struck tbe priest, and this caused intense excitement, particularly among those at the back who could not see what was going on. Stone- throwing began and the terrible event of tbe Inspector's death was the consequence. Father McFadden, bowever, was seen at his window begging the people to go away and calling out " This is a hornbie thing." Rashness, if uot malevolence and a Beitied determination to Btir up a riot, has certiioly been proved agaiost the Inspector by hi* own men, an I, although there is nc excuse to be offered for muivler, those who un lersUu 1 hucnaa nature must lake into coa«ider.itun thj mianec n which passion and wild excitemeut drive in n b '.side tv 'mse! ves md render them less accou V • able for their d'-eds. Tae pj-i 10a ia which the people were placed egaiu, was not voluutaiy, but was forced upou them wantonly as it se^ms, and at least with every appearance of perverse intention. The denunciation, therefore, that uave been made with such recklessness and violence be-ir all the marks ol wilful misrepresentation and of an attempt to comoine vengeance in tbis particular instance with a party triumph.

evidence and trumped-up charges, and, finally, the fermenting of hatred between the people of England and the people of Ireland. These were the high crimes and misdemeanours which twice cost Stuart kings their throne. These are precisely the crimes which are now being brought home day by day against Lord Salisbury's Government. And this last week has shown that London believes these charges to be true." The differences that exist, adds Mr. Harrison, are on the surface only. They consist in the fact that the unconstitutional acts of Lord Salisbury are done in Ireland and against Irishmen, and that they are done under cover of Act of Parliament. But the time is past when Englishmen will permit gross oppression in Ireland, and evan to sive the Empire they will not endure the prostitution of justice. " Nor is the plea aay batter that they are done by Act of J Parliament and in legal form. Oppression, it is true, has been organised into a science ; and a temporary majority has been clever enough to disguise proscription in a statutory garb. So have other Governments, despotic or revolutionary, and have gained little by it but increased indignation and contempt, Henry VIII.'s enormities, as well as his judicial murders, were usually perpetrated by Act of Parliament. The decrees of the Convention of 1793 were perfectly Itgal— in form. But the statutes of an oppressive Government aad the decrees of a revolutionary Convention are reversed as easily a 9 they are passed. The real question for us is whether these statutes and proceedings are jus^, sound, and constitutional in essence, as well as regular in form. And if they are not, they will be swept away along with their guilty contrivers. The people do not forget tbat the Tory party is a party in a minority, that they got a momentary power by the desertion of a renegade factian, that they won their seats by repudiating all idea of coercion, that they lived only to secure coercion, that they passed coercion by the closure, by defrauding the public, by lying accusations, and bf forged letters, that they have carried out coercion in the face of indignant signs of national irritation, and in a way that belies their solemn pledges in Parliament. The people will not forget this, and they will not be satisfied that violations of all our constitutional traditions can be covered by the trick of Parliamentary manoeuvres and the dexterous manipulation of legal procedure. Nor are they likely to forget that it was a Tory Government and a Unionist policy which set at defiance the usages of centuries and the spirit of English liberty, and for the first time for two hundred years resorted to those revolutionary methods and persecuting devices that have always marked desperate cases within measurable distance of insurrection and civil strife." We may add that this powerful letter of Mr. Harrison's quite explains to us the frequent repetitions and renewed insistances reported lately of the Ooercionist lenders. In their fatuousness they h.ive nailed their colours to the niast and are determined to go to the bottom in their unseaworthy ship. Mr. Harrison well compares them to the Stuarts, who aiso were fatuous aad pig-headed, receiving the reward they merited, and involving in their ruia those who foolishly, though faithfully, adhered to them.

Mb. Fbkderick Harbison has recently published in the London Daily Nc?vs, a powerful indictment ot the folly of the Tories. The effect ot their action,

A POWERFUL INDICTMENT.

he says, will be to briug Conservatism, property, and the whole machinery of Government, into collision with the English people. Mr. llarr.son points to the National Protest as a most pregnant sign of the times. The movement, he says, was unprecedented. The money subscribe! in a few days, and the I numbers of adherents were extraordinary. The indictment presented by the groat meeting in Lmdon, representing the backbone of Radicalism, was such as baa seldom bien heard for ceuturies i i England. The Luroea of the day, moreover, were two lnsn Nationalists, whom the Government had been employed in crushing by criminal charges ami vindictive puaishmeats -and in two days one oi' the strongholds of London Conservatism latified the enthusiasm by a transfer of more than one thousand votes, " Can the dullest fail to see that the game ia up ? " a^k3 the writer. Mr. Harrison goes on lo paint out that a Government has never succeeded in crushing by judicial sentences and sava?e treatment any m;u whom large bodies of Englishmen regarded as mar.yrs, Tl-a indictment, he says again, brought by thi great meetings of the National Protest is substantially the same as that 03 whica tho English people have twice driven kings from the throne. " The Stuart Goveruments now and then threw into prison a member of Parliament ; Lord Salisbury has systematically thrown nto -prison twenty -four members wituin as many months. The charges made against Stuart Governments were — vindictive prosecutions of political opponents, straining o£ the law by judicial mtruments, tampering with the freedom of trial by jury, oppression by the arbitrary acts of unscrupulous instruments, making ex-jwxt facto 1 k ws or interpret a ions of law as a mere party weapon, making •ciirnes' out of ep ken words without any pro«.l of criminal intent pr ciiminal illxt, attempting to crus-h op portion by perjured