Current Topics AT HOME AND ABROAD.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XVII, Issue 24, 4 October 1889, Page 1

Current Topics AT HOM E AND ABROAD.

The honour paid to Mr. Parnell by tbe city of Eainpanic- burgh has evidently been witnessed with dismay by stricken the enemies of the Irish people and their cause.

We may take as an example of this a couple of leaders which a| -aarel a week or two ago in the Ohristcburch Press on tbe matter. * one of these leaders we find the sagacious explanation that Mr. Parnell was urged by political exigencies only to accept the proffered honour. The majority of the Municipal Council, we are told— strengthened as it certainly was by the failure of the effort made to take an adverse plebiscite of the town— had no representative effect and merely stool for an expression of the particular ooiniona of Biilie Walcot and bis supporters. The meetings, in short, held on the occasion, numerous as they were, we are given to understand, wcrj merely boeus meetings, brought together by Mr. Gladstone's iaflaence, which must be always sufficient for the purpose in Edinburgh. But, perhaps it might be suggested that, such being the cae, Mr. Gladstone's inftuenci might go a step further and be sufficient to account for the genuine disposition of Edinburgh generally. The demonstration, however, we are told, was merely a bogus affair, got up in some kind of a manner not fully explained, by Bailie Waloot and hts colleagues, and accepted by Mr. Parnell for necessary cads. The oaipliaaent, nevertheless, paid to the Eoglish people, by asserting that they are capable of being deceived by a bogus affiir of tbe kind, is somewhat doubtful. It may further be remarked that, although the crowds who were present in the halls where Mr. Parnell spoke might, perhaps be looked upon as represen in» only a party among the citizens, the gre.it demonstration made by the workingmen aad the cheering thousands generally in tho strec'.s completely refute such an argument. In any case, when Mr. Parncll alluded to the signific ince of the honour puid him as affording to thj people of G.eat Britain an earnest of the soundness of hu came, and an encouragement to support it, he could not have insulted their intelligence by supposing them capable of being misled by a false show, a f Use show, moreover, maie the mist of by those opposed to him, and exposed by them m eveiy possible manner. But Mr. Parnell, i- hin spiech at the Council Chamber, dwelt at length ou the opposition given by the minority, and showed clearly his right to disregard it. We fancy that unprejudiced people generally will admit the weight of Mr. Parnell's argument. '• Difference of opinion," he said, "is the salt of our public life, aud I for one do not, aud ought not to comp'ain of the diffe.ence of opinion that was manifested in this chamber, because it has enabled the representatives of thj majority of the citizens to testify iv the most remarkable and significent ma m r nn three repeated occauious, to the faith thit is in them." As to the argument of the Prexs that Mr. Gladstone is disqualified from coademning, as he does in his letter referring to the demonstration in Edinburgh, the procejdings of the Tory Government in lielaml as " ill-judged, ineffective, and tyrannical," because he himself had b< en at the head of a Government making use of similar methods, it simply involves the assertion that the lessons of experience must be disregarded. But is v. not universally admitted on the contrary that experience is the best teacher I The progress of the world is largely due to failure. Nay, there are teachers of admitted authority who teach that failure is the necessary source of all high aspirations and greatest efforts, and that wanting it the world must stagnate at a lower level. Mr. Glalstone has confessed his failure, has acknowledge 1 himself taught by experience, and, therefore, is legitimately in a position to coudemu those who persist in the methods that he himself has abandoned. Mr. Paruell, again speaking at Edinburgh, was not, as tbe Press asserts, speaking in a strain especially assumed

for the occasion, and completely out of keeping with the spirit of tpeeches made, as our contemporary says, in tbe County Care. He was speaking aa he has always spoken, in a manner regardful of the constitution, in advocacy and support of constitutional methods, and expressive of friendship towards England. Our contemporary, if be is

himself informed, depends on the ignorance and prejudice of hit readers when he implies that Mr. Parnell has ever spoken otherwise, or asserts that the speeches of Mr. Dillon or Mr. O'Brien radically differ from that of Mr. Parnell. Our contemporary, if he knows anything of the speeches of Mr. Dillon or Mr. O'Brien, and the probabilities are that he does not — evidently relies on the ignorance of his readers with respect to them. His view, moreover, of the transactions that take place in Clare is one that betrays either complete ignorance, or wilful misrepresentation. There is no desire on the part of the Irish people to violate the binding nature of legitimate contracts, or to dispute the lawfulness of eviction for the nonpayment of fair rents judicially fixed. A chief end of the Irish struggle has been that of obtaining legitimate contracts — instead of enforced consent to impossible conditions — and a scale of rents so fixed as to be possible of payment. Evictions in Clare, as elsewhere, as our contemporary must know if he knows anything about the matter, and does not merely back up his prejudices by his imagination for the confirmation of readers in the same condition as himself — have not been thosa of tenants refusing to pay judicially fixed rents, but those of tenants absolutely unable to pay arrears tf rack-rents — which rack-rents they were about as free in undertaking to pay as was the traveller of old in undertaking to make a present of his parse to a highway man holding n pistol to his head. We may, neverthelesp, admit the justice of our contemporary's conclusion, that Home Rule would have little value in the eyes of the Irish peasants if, to quote our contemporary's words, they were to go on paying rents and keeping contracts with English landlords as before." — "As before 1" There would ba little use in Home Bule, indeed, if matters were to ontinue as before. Impossible rent*, enforced contracts, eviction, confiscation, starvation, deith— these are the things that for the Irish peasant are signified by that expression, "as before." It is charitable, however, to suppose that men who speak or wiite in this fashion speak or write in ignorance of the Bubject they treat of. »Vc, nevertheless, are unable to plead ignorance on our contemporary's behalf concerning that other point hi deals with — that is the refusal of the Judges to demand the production before the Commission of the books of ths I.L.P.U. But does the end really justify the means in the eyes of honourab'e Englishmen? Our contemporary tells us in effect that so lon^ as Mr. Parnell and his colleagues are convicted the manner ef their conviction deserves no consideration. It makes no difference as to whether they are conv.cted as the victims oi a foul plot or otherwise. Sucb is the opinion placed on record by the Christchurch Press, But Mr. Parnell, in his Edinburgh speech, explained what depended on the production of theso books. "It would not have been denied," he said, "to th« meanest criminal on his trial to show that the charges made against him had been made by men of perjured and disreputable and bad character. But that opportunity has been denied to us. ' Thus far shall you go and no further,' says the Government, under the terms cf their reference, and we are stopped short at the point of the investigation which it was vitally necessary to proceed beyond in order that we might show to the people of England the fall iniquity of their procee iin^, and the men and objects by which they were influenced, who concocted and fabricated them."— The Christchurch Press, however, believes that the decision of the Judges who prevented this investigation demanded by Mr. Parnell will be sufficient. Not having heard the full evidence for Va-i defence, but, on the contrary, having peremptorily refused to permit of its being produced, they will still be in a positioa to pronounce a true, impartial, and justly decisive verdict. For the credit of the British public, we do not belief c that this will be possible. Our contemporary, indeed, admits that, so far as Ireland is concerned, the verdict of tli3 Judges will have no effect. Our contemporary evidently anticipatts that it will be hostile to the Irish cause, and if he had no such anticipation, would certainly not ba so earnest in defendiug it in advance. But we may think better of tbe people of Great Britain than to suppose them capable of being bo prejudiced or so deceived. The verdict of the Judges if it be adverse, as there are grounds to believe it was from the first determine^ it should be, will be received with acclamation by the party iv whose interests the plot was formed and the forgeries published. To all impartial and soundly-judging people it will baar

the authority of a decision given by those who formulate ihe accusatioD, repress or concoct and suborn the evidence, and themselves sit in judgment on the case. The proof, meantime, of the tendency of public feeling in Great Britain, such, especially, as that given at Edinburgh, is most alarming to the enemies of the Irish people, and their cause. It is to this feeling of alarm, for example, we may attribute such arguments as those of which our contemporary the Chrietchurch Press h*s given us a specimen, and which are excusable, so far as they are excusable at all, on the plea of panic.

A paper lately read by Mr. Beavan before the Intercolonial Industrial Association of Canterbury, is being Rkciphocity. circulated in advocacy of the establishment of

intercolonial reciprocity. The particular plan proposed by the writer of the paper is that of free trade between the colonies with a Customs union between them, based on a uniform tariff against the rest of the world, and the question is very well argued. Colonial federation, of which the writer asserts his plan would be a certain forerunner, is an end that moet of us probably regard as of the utmast consequence. Whether Imperial federation be a dream or not, that we must regard as sooner or later to prove of Tital necessity. Should the proposal for Imperial federation, indeed, be finally abandoned the necessity for that between Ihe colonies would be all the more apparent. In that case we must look for separation to ensue, and what would the colonies under the circumstances become unless they were united by federation 1 But it may possibly need some extreme event to show tbu colonies the desirableness of a closer union. One of the strongest, an-1, at the same time, the strangest characteristics of colonial life is the jealousy that prevails not only between different colonies, but eve i between different localities of the same colony. We have, for example, lately seen a very ugly illustration of this in the impediments opposed to the construction of the Central Otago railway. It will be necessary, therefore, whether with relation to reciprocity, or federation to show very plainly to each colony the advantages to accrue to it individally from the measure proposed. A difficulty, however, in doing this may be lest alarm should be given elsewhere by tbe line of argument taken. Mr. Beavan, for instance, describes the benefits to be gained, under reciprocity by New Zealand and the superior advantages possessed by her. He promises us an immense influx of popnlation and capital, attracted by our greater facilities for manufactures, our healthier climate for manufactures requiring confinement in buildings, our magnificent wat«r supply. Bat whence are the population and capital to come, or what would be the inducement offered to the other colonies to admit into competition with their manufactures tbosejproduced by us under more favourable circumstances ? Would again, the farmer of the dry landa of Australia, as Mr. Beavan describes him, gladly welcome to his market his brother farmer working the fertile soil of New Zealand ? It is to be feared a much more widely extended and a mucb more wholesome public spirit must obtain before the benefits of reciprocity are duly appreciated in the colonies. The cad, however, to be attained to is one deserving of every effort that can be made to bring it about. Tbe future of this hemisphere depends upon its becoming the abode of a uoited Australasian nation, if still in union with tbe British empire all the better, but, at any rate, firmly knit to-gether, so that t« be an Australasian citizen will hive no more reference to the particular colony to whicb the individual belongs that has American citizenship to any particu'ar State. If intercolonial reciprocity would promote this, as Mr. Beavan in effect argues, and a?, if clearly and fully successful, it moßt probably would its establishment cannot be too earnestly advocated.

An adventurous minister at Auckland has been BEVELA.TIONB. engaged of late in personally investigating the

condition of his city's vice, and his conclusions are anything rather than crclitable to the community in question. He discloses, ia fact, a state of things that is excessively disgraceful, and of whose remedy, moreover, the rev. minister does not seem over-hopeful. '• I also learned," be siys, " that the Christian Church, in all her branches, is only woikiDg- on the surface, and that there is a mass of corruption beneath our present religious and benevolent machinery." It happens, meantime, that our attention hae recently been callad iv another manner to tbe religions condition of the city of Auckland. In the debate on the Private Schools Bill an hon Member brought what be considered some very formidable arguments against the proposed aid to Catholic schools from the disposition of Catholics in that city towards Catholic education. This hon. Member, moreover, we must admit, seemed to make good his point, that among so-called Catholics in the place a good deal of indifference prevailed. A sufficient answer, however, was given to him by another hon. Member, who replied as follows :—": — " I must say, however, — and I daresay the honorable Member for Auckland West will agree with me — that Roman Catholicism hai sunk so low in Auckland that there is perhaps do place in the world where it has Bank by its indifference into bo low a condition, and that, perhaps,

ia what has led him to make the remarks he did." — But Burely a city that festers with. vice, and where Catholicism is in a notably low condition, is not one that can be fairly pointed out as offering an example for the imitation of the Catholic world, or as illustrating the general tenor of the Catholic mind. " There ia a mass of corruption," says the minister to whom we have referred, " beneath our present religious and benevolent machinery." So far, however, as the religious machinery of the Catholic Church is concerned, it may well fail to work with full effect ia places where it is so hampered — hampered by Catholics who, as publicly stated in Parliament, are unfaithful to their Church's teaching, and by the Government that encourages their faithless conduct. The Member to whom we have referred added the following words to the passage quoted by us :—: — " Still that is no reason why it (.Catholicism) should not rise there again, and we know that there are good and earnest mcD working in that district who are now using their best endeavours to raise it out of tbe condition into which it has got." But wnat is to be said of a Government that, so far as it is able, binds the hands of these good and earnest men, and places them at a disadvantage in their labour of recovering what has been lost, preventing the fall of what still remains pure, and guiding all into better ways ? The impediments placed by the Government of New Zealand in the way of religious education may be reckoned , at the very least, as tending to increase and perpetuate the disgraceful state of things revealed to us by the rev. minister as characterising the city of Auckland.

Matrimony, it appears, has become a more serious A new FBBAK. undertaking than ever. If we are to believe the

London correspondent of the Melbourne Argus, indeed, no undertaking can well prove more dangerous. Here is a case in which the rights of women have probably trangieesed the widest barrier claimed even by their extreme advocates. The correspondent in question, in alluding to a wretched woman recently found guilty at Liverpool of poisoning her hnsband, and for whom, nevertheless, a great deal of sympathy was shown, tells as that the sentence of death passed upon her was due to the growing terror of the crima. " I was speaking," he adds, •■ about the dread of poisoning a short time ago, and saying that I beard the practice* was on the increase. ' Yes,' he observed, ' and owing to the terrible competition for patients among us so many of us feel that we dare not give expression to our suspicions when a case of the kind occurs, for we don't know what other houses might then be shut against us.' In the view of this nervous and ingenuouß youth, the poisoners are numerous enough to organise a boycott I " But surely we are to take this paragraph as due to the desire to cause a sensation. If it were true, how terrible a comment should we not have on the enlightenment of the age, and, above all, on the superior nature of British civilisation, of which we are wont to hear so much. Those fabulous times known as the dark ages, and so frequently and unsparingly condemned, would, in this case, shine by comparison and become brighter in their obscurest night. Every wife a poisoner, and every doctor aa accomplice through self-interest ! What a picture of Christian society have we here. Must every youth, then, and still more every man of advanced years, who forms matrimonial designs, study chemistry so far a? to become versed in the detection of adulterated lr>od 1 Or must a medicine-chest of antidotjß be included in every bridegroom's outfit. Here, indeed, we have a newlydeveloped trait in the character of lovely woman that hardly adds attraction to her charms. We doubt, even, as we have said, that the practice may be claimed as belonging to her rights. But, then, wheu woman, individually or collectively, occe begins Heaven only knows when she can be induced to leave off, and, having begun to claim her righta many years ago, it would be difficult to Bay at what stage 6he is now arrived. We doubt, in fact, if she could herself throw much light upon the subject. But, at least, let the Benedicts among us delay their suspicions until they feel the incipient qualms*

Tiieke is, it would appear, an interesting contest AN important going on at present in Australia between secularism admission. and non -sectarianism. Non-sectarianism :s repre-

sented by New South Wales, where the education syptem ia described as non-sectarian by those who define the epithet as fitly applied to a system by which every child is authorised and aided to choose, as it seems good to him, his own particular form of private interpretation — a privilege distinctively sectarian and constituting a note of the Protestant sects. In Victoria the system is lees pretentious and more sincere. It is purely secular without any pretence of an accommodation, to religiouß requirements. A conference therefore, is proposed to be held in Melbourne, for the purpose of coming to an agreement. A debate en the subject took place the other night in the Legislative Assembly at Sydney from which, among olher things, we leain the extreme nature of the system in Victoria — the Minister of Education quotiDg authorities to prove that the names of God and of Jesus Christ had been expunged from the Victorian school-books, Borne of the remarks quoted from Dr. Pearson, the Victorian Minister of Education, are Buggestive. Dr. Pearson, to give him as much credit as he deserves, and hie deserts

in the respect referral to are not particularly brilliant, disapproves I of the obliteration made of the sacred names. He seems to have special objections to this from a literary point of view, as he epeaks particularly of the folly of striking cut certain stanzas from a selection of poems, because of their containing the name of God, " Him.*' he says, " whom 999 out of every 1000 among us reverence as God." Dr. Pearson, however, made, besides, an important admission •' But" he said " I have always held that religion, being as it is inteiwoven with our political, social, and family life, is a thing which cannot be left oat of account ; that to profess to ignore it is absurd." The Minister, therefore, condemns pure secularism, and would willingly introduce the religious element. Dr. Pearson , meantime, is a resolute and not by any means an over-scrupulous opponent of the Catholic claims, and the religious teaching, or the acknowledgement of religion, he would introduce into the schools', would have no reference to them. The Catholic argument, however, has always been that now advanced by Dr. PearsoD. We have always maintained that religion could not be left out of. the schools, and that to ignore it there was absurd. In fact, it never has been ignored there, for the expungements and obliterations made were themselves a striking testimony to the war undertaken against it, and what we fight against we certainly do not ignore. But if religion cannot be ignored, is it not much wiser to recognise it fairly and in accordance with liberty of conscience. Instead, therefore, of this conference to be held as to the respective merits of secularism and non-sectarianism, involving in either case an unjust and unsatisfactory decision, the step that might much more reasonably be taken is that of providing honestly for religious instruction free from subterfuges and compromising accommodation. Even chief upholders of the secular system themselves, aa we see, recognise its failings aod are unable to defend them.