Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXI, Issue 3, 15 December 1893, Page 1

Current Topics

AT HOME AND ABROAD. The letter from Mr Mark Cohen, which we publish MR Cohen's] in another column, and which was apparently LETTKB. intended for our last issue, only reached this office on Wednesday evening, when the publication of our paper had already made some progress. That accounts for our holding over the letter. Mr Cohen's allusioo to onr issues of December 1891 refers, no doubt, to the opposition we offered to his election a a Mayor of Danedin. But a better time is coming. Surely when the municipal franchise has been conferred upon every citizen, and all are entitled to vote for the disposal of the rate-payers' money, Mr Cohen's hour of triumph will come. Who so fit as one who will combine in his own person the offices of Mayor and " Educationalist " to carry out the great plan of the public library? Our lady voters, we may be persuaded, will no longer prove ungrateful or prefer another to their doughty champion. No amount of attention we could bestow upon a coming man of so great promise could be excessive,— His friends must regret for Mr Cohen's own sake that be is so sensitive to personal criticism. Men of eminence in any public career must nece* sarily undergo such an ordeal. Not only their habits, their talents, their qualities, their attainments, but even their outward appearances! and their very clothes, become, as it were, public property. Woo, for example, c»u picture Mr Gladstone to his mind'a eye without picturing also a big nose and a high collar. The foppery of Disraeli is historic. Nay, have not special correspondents at Wellington been wont to describe to us the flower that our old friend, the Hon Vincent Pyke, wore in his button hole, and the salad that Sir Julius Vogel ate for luncheon. We do not presume to o£Lt Mr Cohen a lesson in the journalism of the period— but even so able a journalist as be may take a hint from a member of the craft whose fame ie more than European. Mrs Crawford, in an article of inntruc. tion to ladies desirous of entering tbe jnuraaliat'e profession, lately contributed by her to one of the London reviews, reckons the omission of personalities as a fault. Thp reporters of tbe opening of the Exhibition of 1851 who overlooked the tears lhat on the occasion filled the eyes of her M jesty the Queen, she condemns as stupid. Mrs Crawford also furnishes us with a defence against Mr Cohen's rebuke to us for having given so " precious little " of what he said. Mrs CrawforJ tells the aspirant that Bbc need not learn shorthand, the toleration of the public for repjrts of long, dry, speeches having passed away. A comprehensive sketch , she says, is all that the taste of the day will endure— and that we claim to have given. But Mr Cohen really mußt get over his sensi. tiveness. On whom is tbe historian of the future to depend, if not on tbe reporter of the present 1 We should sin against posterity in not striving with all our might to place the complete man before them. We are conscious of failure on the occasion in question. We had to struggle with a certain shortness of eight, not to speak of two flaring gas-burners, without even the shadow of a shade to temper their blaz*. We shall hope for better results next time— with the aid of an opera glase. and a more carefully-lighted hall. If there be a dimness of the lecturer's eyes— and the tone of Mr Cohen's letter seems to suggest that such there may be, we trust that we, for our part, shall not merit Mrs Crawford's disdain Mr Cohen is plaintive because, in dealing with what he calls the "secret, if not avowed, enemies" of tbe secular system, he is not permitted to have it all his own way. It seems to him the simplest thing in the world, and the most polite and charitable, that he should give Bishop Moran the lie direct. Indeed, be gives it to us all in stigmatising us as the " secret enemies "of the secular system. It is outrageous" he thinks that we should refuse to accept such compliments with a bow and a scrape. It may, perhaps, be our misfortune that we have not been trained in the school of manner?, of which Mr Cohen is a professor. We may be permitted to doubt, meantime, as to whether Mr Cohen himself is as perfect in its passive aa he appears to be in its active methods. Mr Cohen, however, makes a dt finite charge against us, for which there is not the slightest foundation. From beginning to

end of all we wrote there was not one allusion to any private letter, or to any letter, except those that had been published in the Star. The writer of the report, as the writer of one of those letters, knew that a paßMge bad been cut oat in the Star office and thenoe, ai he was perfectly justified in doingr, he drew a conclusion that supervision was exercised over the correspondence published by the Star. Mr Cohen's accusation of ns, then, is groundless and altogether void of meaning. — Mr Cohen repudiates our suggestion that his lecture was delivered so aa to leave to time for a reply. A gentleman, nevertheless, who accuses his neighbours of secret designs must tie open to the suspicion of judging of others by himself, and, therefore, we still claim the right to accept his assertions with the traditional grain of salt. Most of us cou'd have done a great many thing! that we did not do, because we did not foresee what would happen to hinder the completion of our plans. But, by all means, let Mr Cohen provide the electors with all the food for thonght in his possession. The man who makes such provision wholesomely is a benefactor of the race. What else, in fac^, have great men done as such, or how else have they " achieved greatness ?" How else have they deserved the commemoration of tbeir noses and collars, their velvet coats and glow? ringlets ? Bvery morsel of food for thought with which Mr Cohen favours the electors should earn for him the photographing of tome particular feature. And even if Mr Cohen did contult the Tablet, we should give our consent with effusion. Par be it from us to make any attempt at starving the thought of our neighbour!, or to cut ourselves off from the rich enjoyment of a feast of reason. Why, we confess to itching earn. Did we not travel to the other end of the town and enter upon unknown and gruesome precincts to bear Mr Cohen on the recent occasion ? At fair and festival we have ever hung with rapture on the eloquence of the cheap-jack. If Mr Coh«n consults the Tablet he will hold forth without etint. — It ie, too, the gentleman at Ban Francisco, not tbe gentleman at Ktokak, who is the " ex-DiiDedinite"— but they are as like a! two peai— and confusion as to their identity is only natural. Koownotbingism it % great leveller. If Mr Cohen regards blisters on the tongue as tbe signs of a " healthy subject," it is not for us to dispute his judgment t The gentleman at Kaokuk remains a convicted liar, and a dishonest fellow. Finally, Mr Cohen promisee us the honour of a public criticism—one all to ourselves. It should be highly improving for us »o learn how we appear in the ejts of an authority so txalted. Bat how shall we support tha agitation of the moment? Camphor julep, ac we learn from a correspondence in the Daily Times, it poisonous— but, fortunately, there are still smelling salts, and, for extremes, sal volatile Burnt feathers might possibly prove disagree* able to the rest of the audience. And let us hope that there will be an audience, as select.but not quite as thin, as on the recent occasion. Let ng hope, too, that the surroundings will be a little less sepulchral. When, oh when, is, therefore, tbe suspended sword to fall? Until it does fall, we shall feel like Uriah Heep exptoticg pulverisation at the bands of Mr Micawber. Surely Mr Cohan will be merciful and will not unnecessarily prolong the time of our agony and of his own raj»«a j»« bling around in the form of a nightmare to disturb our sleep. Well we have brought it upon ourselves. "Tv Va* wulu, George Dandi»,'\ We gave Mr Cohen a Roland for an Oliver, and he did not like it. To cite our friend Malvolio again— he suffers from the consequent! of his greatness, and blames us for it. Necessarily we bestow our attention on him. Mr Cohen's feeling flattered at thia could proceed only from the pride that apes humility. Thkbk is nothing whatever inconsistent or astoundanother ing in the fact that correspondents are now found " hkalthy SUB- in America to send to our daily paper! missive* ject." teeming with a revival of the Know-notbinginn which at one time was productive of such enormities in the country. The fact is that a society to reproduce tha spirit and action of the Know-nothings has recently been formed, under the title of the American Protective Association, and has been productive of much evil. The organiser of this gang is a man named Cluff, an Orangeman bailing from Montreal, who hai immigrated into tbe States for the express purpose of stirring up an anti-Catholic agita* tion, and, if he cannot drive them out of the country, of bounding Catholics down into the mire. In such a " healthy subject "as oar

friend « Ulysses," of Keokuk, (or example, Oluff would find a ready ally, and we are quite prepared to learn lhat our friend holds high offloe in the A. P. A. But of Olaff* spirit let u9u 9 take a specimen ou of his own mouth. Having set matters going in the Western Siatea be has now turned hi 3 attention to those of tha East, and tbe Bjaton Pilot of Saptember 30 qiotea the foil wing from a report published ot an interview with him :— " We are going to run this city (BuflMo)," nesaye, "asthe A.P.A. rtuaKiasMcity, Detroit, Siginaw, and other cUieiin the West. We are saying nothing until we have 8,000 members. Then we are going to show our hands. We pr >paje to fight Pap icy with ballots, and if need be with ballets. Look at Buffalo's public •ohoola. Over eighty per cent, of the teachers are Roman Catholics. Inside of two years there will not be one Catholic teacher left. Almost every official and employee of Detroit a few years ago waa a Catholic ; now there are only two left in the municipa'ity. Look at the aimy of Catholics round Buffalo City Hall. Within two years erery department down there will be Protestantized. In New York State there will be a great turn over, and we are going to leave every Catholic at home."— Here, then, is a sketch of the programme that Ojaff proposes for himself and his associates, and in the echoes of Oloff, which, no doubt, we shall find still more abundantly in the American correspondence published by our Duaelin daily contemporaries, we shall be kept duly informed of their progress in carrying it out, with suggestions and exhortations to their admirers in New Zealand to imitate it, or even, if possible, to improve upon it. A 11 healthy subject" like our friend "Ulyßsea " is not likely to let his opportunity slip. An "ex-Dunedinite," too, in contact with tbe A.P.A.,sboald be like a fish restored to water. Fortunately, however, Oloff is not goiog to have it all bis own way in the United States. There are men in the country he seeka to incite— even non.Catholic men, who see his proposed methods in their trno light, and have the honesty to expose them. Here, for instance, is the manner in which ft certain Protestant miniater— namely, the Rev Alexander Milne, rector of Plymouth Congregational Church, Columbia, Ohio-speaks Of the oatb taken by toe members of ;he A.P.A. The extract, as quoted by the New York Tablet, is taken from an address recently delivered by the rev gentleman to his congregation :-" It is but stating the naked fact in the case when we say that the meaning [of tbe oatb] is : "I will do all in my power to hurt Roman Catholics except when it will involve hurting myself.' That is, selfishness is added to sectarian prejudice and hatred, and men imagine that the iujection of this selfish unconsideration makes it harmless and objectionable. Understood, then, in tbt logical outcome of its principles, are we not justified io denouncing it as un-Chriatian ? Sometimes humm language is inadequate to express our thoughts. And I find a difficulty io properly characterising this oath. It is not only un-'Jbristian, it is absolutely selfish, inhuman, and despicable. It seems harmless at first, but it is like a nest of devil* hidden among fair and innocentlooking flowers. It is an engagement prepared by the spirit of evil to ensnare and to lead astray human souls. It smells of the brimstone of tbe pit. Tbis oath calls for a violation of the great principle of freedom ot conscience. . . . This movement, although started in the name of our Protestant Christianity, is a reproach to it. Our American Protestantism has been disgraced by it. The literature it has sent forth is a reproach to our public school system, an insult to our intelligence, and a damage to our churches. ... I warn you solemnly, as I never warned you before, that if you have taken tbat oath you hava not only taken a stand against hbsrty, but you havt joined yourself with tbe forces of tha devil. And I exhort you in the name of our country, and for tin honour of tba Protestant churcbtfs and for the glory cf Christ t) com: out of the mi Ist of it and cleanse yourself from its defilements. . . . For liberty we plead, liberty f> r Roman Catholic as well as Protestant. He who atrikes at hbarty when she app2ars by the siJe of a Roman Oitholic, is seeking to drive a dagger intothe heart of his own boat friend. Whether a Boman Catholic shall be elected for this or that office, or whether he (ball be employed to do this or that piece of work, may be in itself a small matter, but that any man, Catholic or Protestant, Buddhist oi Freethinker, shall have the right to live and enjoy the pr.vileges of citizeoßbip in this country ; that is a principle worth fighting for, and, if need b-, worlh djing for. "-Such, then, is Clnfflsm, as expressed by Cluff himself, aDd as exposed by an honest Protestant, who, aB •ocb.cr.nnot pessibly consent to it. Its identity with the Knewnothingism of the bad old days is evident. Our readers, meantime, being warned of the eonrces-tbc "wells of Eaglish undi filed "— whence the Start " healthy subj-ct," " U yes -p, ' and tbe " ex-Dure-dinite" of the Daily Turn* draw the draughts of wisdom, grace and charity they forward to New Z -aland, will know how to account for what comes an 1 for wnat mm? any hi exp-cted. Whether the newspspi rs in question are to be congratula'c d on thuir appointment of eucb correspondents is another matter. But at leist we may discount tbe pruft.B,iorß of m iteration and friendship towards Catholics made by men who arc account, We for the publ ca ion of Such correspondence:. W> should, no doub', be held exou»el for refusing, as Catholic, to txtend the right-hand of fellowship to a " heaitby subject " like Cluff.

The death of Lord Clonbrock, which is announced odor and by cable, is remarkable as lhat of a man who filled ends. the difficult position of an Irish landlord justly and well. On the occasion of the coming of age of his grandson, some two or three years ago, a demonstration was made in which his Lordahip'a tenantry, headed by their parish priest, bore striking testimony to his merits and the affection they entertained towards him. An iuteresting circumstance in connection with the career of the deceased, waa that he had broken an evil record connected with bis family, and proved, in his own person, the falsehood of a prediction. This was that no head of the house should see bis eldeßt son attain his twenty-firat year. Serious uneasiness was said to prevail among Lord Clonbrock'a friends when the heir who now succeeds him was about — over thirty years ago — to attain the fatal age. A minatory cloud seemed to bang over the preparations being mida for tha celebration of the majority. The threatened nobleman, on the contrary, as we have seen, waa destined to fulfil a patriarchal term, Professor Tyndall is dead— and, as we gather, from a dose of chloral administered to him in mistake by his wife. Professor Tyndall was a self-made man, who, by means of ability and industry, had risen from a humble position to eminence. He waa the son of an Irish policeman— and became a noted man of science. Hia wife waa a lady of rank— if we recollect aright, the daughter of Lord Claude Hamilton — but, at any rate, of some personage of high distinction. As a traditional Irish Protestant, the Professor, in his youth, bad been a strong anti-Catholic controversalisr, and though, as years went by, his religious Protestantism died out, and he became a Freethinker of advanced views— an atheist, indeed, if we may judge by his notorious address, delivered in Belfast— his anti-Oatholic spirit remained. He was the foe of the Catholic Church and no friend to the land of his birth. He was the furious, deadly enemy of Home Rule. Was it to be accounted as a note of moral weakness in Professor Tyndall— or was it without his knowledge, that, at or abont the time of his marriage, in a sketch of his life published in one of the periodicals—as well as we recollect, the Dublin University Maganine, an attempt was made to create for him a pedigree ? It was asserted that, in some way or another, he was an inheritor of blae, or blueisb, blood, and a descendant of Tyndall of Biblical renown. But pedigrees are easy to obtain. We all remember that of tha most respectable family of the Newcomea. In real life too there are, for example, among many others, my Lord Ardillan and my Lord Iveagh, whose ancestor, almost within the memory of living men, wore domestic livery and was a simple builer— boneat, and, we doubt not, sober— although he had, fortunately for his descendants, a geniua for the concoction of drinkables— but still a simple butler. Sir Bernard Burke, neverthelesp, manufactured for tha house a lineage ooma straight dowo, rather straighter thaa usual in fact, from Irish princes. And if we take up our Bibles, can we not without the aid of any Kiog-at-Arms or other heraldic Jack-in-offiae, trace a princely descent for even the floundsditch Jew— who undoubtedly owns for his ancestor Abraham, a prince of the primitive ages? A gallery of family pictures is always within the command of money — and a pedigree is within the reach of most people's invention. Norman blood » however, even where it really exists may be a wishy-washy sort of stuff. Where there is the bare conceit of it, as is often tbe case it can hardly be worse than that, But we have wandered far from Professor Tyndall and his origin. It was hard to try and rob the Irish constabulary of the glory to be reflected on them by his birth, Verily their honours are not superabundant. And Professor Tyndah's mortal remains are to be cremated. But, for Christian*, tbe last word on cremation would seem to be that contained in an articlp, some two or three months ago contributed by Mr Grant Allan to one of the reviews or magazines. It is almost brutal in its declaration of atheism, and it identifies cremation with the profession it makes. Modern buri»l it condemns as the outcome of a lower civilisation, that, for example, of the Jews as contrasted with the higher culture of heathenism. Burial, it says, originated in a 6uperßtitioDß struggle to keep the corpse from troubling the living, and with it was associated the idea of the resnrrec'ion of the body. Tbe idea associated with the burning of the body was, we are told, more spiritual, worthy of a higher civilisation, and connected with ihe refined philosophy and symbolism of a cultured heathendom. That men of Mr Qrant Allan's turn of mind may eventually play tbe part of a second Julian, and restore the altars of the gods, should not surprise us. Phioaopby acd symbjlism may account for anything. Mr Grant AllaD, moreover, betrays his spirit by the reproach he casts upon Christianity for the repression of the passions introduced by it, and the congratulations he utters because the force of that repression haa become weaker, and bids fair to pass wholly away. But he upholds cremation as destroying the notion of the resurrection and belief in. the soul or a future life. He associates it with atheism, and exposes it to the reprobation of the Christian. { From the fact that it ia to be made use of in disposing of Professor Tyndall's remains we gather tbat the death of the deceased was conBisteot with his life.