Current Copies

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXVII, Issue 37, 14 September 1899, Page 1

Current Topics

AT HOME AND ABROAD,

A short time ago a speculating medico the dredging made the following remark on the goldboom. dredging boom in Otago : ' Twelve months ago you couldn't float a cork in Dunedin ; now you could float a bar of iron.' The phenomenal success of the Hartley and Riley claim and the widening knowledge of the extent of gold-bearing rivers in Otago have set the pulse of speculators beating at the double with the dredging fever. The boom goes gaily on. Every week new ventures are being placed upon the market, and the shares are gobbled up without examination or inquiry, just as your greedy adjutant bird gulps down with perfect impartiality a healthy frog, a chunk of quartz, or a twelve-penny nail. Thus far flotations have been, as far as we know, of the kind called ' straight.' But a would-be purchaser of a ' claim ' published a warning note in Saturday's Dunedin dailies, which should make intending investors deal with new ventures on their merits, even though they may not follow the extreme counsel of Mark Twain, who declared that ' there are two times in a man's life when he should not speculate — when he can afford it and when he can't.*

A controversy on the religion of the Early A pen-duel British Church has been wagging its tongue in for some time past in Auckland. A writer Auckland. who conceals his identity under the pen-name

'Justitia ' holds the right end of the discussion in so far as he maintains the thesis that the Early British Church was Roman in doctrine and liturgy, that it believed in bishops, priests, deacons, sub-deacons, etc., in the primacy of the Pope, the Sacrifice of the Mass, prayers for the dead, intercession of saints, anointing with holy oil, confession, forgivenness of sins through the Sacrament of Penance, reservation of the Blessed Sacrament, the Real Presence, pilgrimages, the monastic system, the canon of Scriptures as used in Rome, fasting, Latin liturgy, and other doctrines and practices peculiarly characteristic of the Catholic Church. So much may Be learned from the Book of Llandaff and the works of the monk Gildas the Wise, who flourished in the sixth century and was a personal witness of the faith of the Earl) British Church in his day. The editorial scissors snipped the vitals out of * Justitia's ' latest contribution to the controversy, so that we do not know precisely how he bore himself in the latest phase of the encounter. But we fancy he might easily have made in this connection, and indeed on most of the ground covered by the controversy, a deadlier use of the works of such foremost Protestaut writers as Ussher, Spelman, Collier, Dugdale, Cressy, Goodwin, Lhuyd, Pughe, Wharton, Rees, Woodward, Bishop Short, Schaff, Skene, Haddon and Stubbs, Pryce, Green, Bright, and a room-full of others. He might, indeed, have fought out the controversy on their testimony alone, without having to appeal to the convincing evidence of Lingard and the Fathers. We recommend him and all interested in the subject to procure, through any bookseller, copies of Archbishop Carr's admirable lectures on The Origin of the Church oj England (Melbourne : Verga, 154 Little Collins street, 6d). This is the last word on the subject, and the best. ' Justitia ' might present a copy of it to his late opponent. If, after a careful perusal of its contents, they again set about tossing each other in the same controversial blanket, 'Justitia ' would, from the first bout, put * G.A. through a whirlwind of somersaults that would leave him ("metaphorically, of course) black and blue for a month of Sundays.

A correspondent asks us to publish ' the the worst best argument against a toper.' Well — vm — a argument. good deal depends. Topers, you know — like certain other people— are kittle cattle. They have as many moods as a September day, and, if you want

them to ' swear off,' you must take them in their proper mood — and tense. What moves Jack may not move budge Jill, and the argument that is good on Friday has often been found inoperative on Saturday night. It is as easy to get some men to ' sign ' as to lead a horse to water. Others take a good deal of convincing. Others still are — short of physical foree — open to no kind of conviction yet devised. But it is generally bad policy to use reasoning that is in the face of it inconclusive — and least of all the stock arguments based upon the gene. rally temperate habits of the brute creation. These are, with. nut exception, the worst arguments to fling at the head of the toper. There is, in the first place, an implied ' odorous ccmparison ' in favour of the cow and the horse which seldom conciliates good-will j and, in the second place, even a toper can usually see in his muddled sort of a way that the argument is somehow limping and lopsided and out of plumb. ' Just look at that poor cow there at the stream,' said an Irish priest to a parishioner who had a habit of looking at his country's wine when it sparkled in the glass. ' Just look at her. You may be sure she won't drink too much.' ' Who'd thank her,' said the toper, * when it's only wather ? ' Father Matthew, the greatest apostle of temperance of modern times, fell into a similar pitfall in addressing an audience of Dublin car-drivers away back in the forties. He determined to teach his audience a lesson in temperance from a class of quadrupeds other than the harmless, necessary cow. ' If,' said he, ' I were to set before one of your horses a bucket of water and a bucket of whisky, you know which the wise beast would take.' Now the wit of the Dublin car-men is not of the leaden-heeled variety, and one of the Father's audience promptly replied : 'Well, Father, if I wor to place before me horse a truss of hay an' a beefsteak, you know which the wise baste would choose. But, Father, does it follow that the hay is the best for me ? '

Archbishop Ireland once reached the * sweet citadel of a toper's heart by an unexpected Kilkenny ! ' and unsuspected route — just as Wolfe captured Quebec by a steep and unknown track in 1759. The great American temperance orator told the story himselt a few weeks ago in the Cork theatre. We give it in his own words :—: —

' Some thirty years ago I began the work in St. Paul, and I was succeeding very well, owing to the generous hearts and strong faith of the people to whom I was appealing. However, down in a street called Minnesota street there were some ten or twelve Irishmen who boasted that Father Ireland, whatever he might do, could not touch Minnesota street, and one man particularly. I can use now his name, because it is an honour to him, and he is in heaven — John Shortall was the leader, and he said : " No ; nothing can be done here ; we shall have our liberty " — liberty to drink themselves to death. One day I met John Shortall. He was half-drunk, but yet full of good sense — for it takes a deal of drunkenness to drive out all the good sense from an Irishman — and he said : • You cannot do anything in Minnesota street.' A bright thought struck me. I said : "John, I have been reading lately some interesting news from Kilkenny " (John was from Kilkenny). He said : " Sweet Kilkenny ! " I saw my opportunity. I said : " Will you do me a favour for the sake of sweet Kilkenny ? " " Yes— anything," he said. " Very well, take the pledge for the sake of sweet Kilkenny." His quick answer was : ' You have made me." From that day there was in St. Paul no more pious Catholic, there was no more loving father, there was no happier man, than John Shortall. Eight months ago he was near his end, and I went to see him. He said : ' Archbishop, I am blind. I cannot see you. I pray that the light of heaven may be upon your soul. I pray for you every day." And he went to heaven. He was a saint, because for the sake of " sweet Kilkenny " he took the pledge.'

Some fine day in the sweet by-and-by of the scientific gardening we may gather grapes cable fiend, from thorns and figs from thistles, and ex-

tract sunbeams from cucumbers. And some other fine day — when the cow jumps over the moon — we may

expect the plain and unadorned truth from the cable- fiend when he sets forth to furnish items of Catholic news to the Antipodes. Here is the latest piece of simian folly which the plaguy wight has perpetrated. It came to our New Zealand dailies in the shape of a message dated ' Madrid, September S ' :—

A Congress of Bishops is sitting at Burgos, despite an in j unction from the Pope, and they passed a resolution of sympathy with the Oarlists. The representative of the Pope, who presided, at once left the Congress, which was then brought to an abrupt conclusion.

Now (i), in the first place, this message, as worded here, did not come from Madrid. It is simply a summary supplied by some hack who does work of this kind for the Press Association, and who probably knows almost as little of the Catholic Church as the typical Protestant controversialist. This, of course, does not exclude the possibility, or even probability, of the original telegram from Madrid being as chock full of absurdity as the Press Association's summary of it. (2) Again : nobody acquainted with Catholic terminology would apply the word ' congress ' to what was manifestly a council or synod of Spanish bishops. (3) Yet again : the blundering descendant of Ananias who manipulates European Catholic news was guilty of a particularly clumsy falsehood when he ♦ represented a ' congress ' of Cstholic bishops as being held ♦ despite an injunction of the Pope,' and yet with c the representative of the Pope ' presiding over it so effectively that his departure brought the proceedings 'to an abrupt conclusion.' If the Press Association -will persist in dumping false reports of Catholic happenings into New Zealand newspaper offices, it ought to employ somebody that can at least lie plausibly. (4) Councils or synods such as are evidently referred to in this sadly bungled cable message confine themselves to passing decrees on matters of doctrine, morals, ritual and discipline. Apart from this we may merely refer to the signal improbability of a papal representative so far forgetting his duties and responsibilities as to permit discussion on the Carlist question, much less to formally put a resolution on the subject from the chair.

From time to time we have commented on cable-messages of this kind that, for their amazing fatuity, might have been concocted or edited in a padded cell at the Seacliff Lunatic Asylum. We smile at the vagaries of the well-meaning idiots who described a priest at a Requiem service as ' performing the ablutions by sprinkling holy water on the bier,' or who represented the acoljtes as entering the sacristy ' bearing crucifixes and thurifers,' or who told all the world and his wife how Cardinal Vaughan wore 'an asperges on his head,' and how his master of ceremonies ' entered the sanctuary swinging a thurifer in his right hand.' Such miraculous stupidities are on a par with the paragrph in a London morning paper which a few months ago assured a confiding public that Mr. T. P. O'Connor ' invariably wears a sprig of shillelah in his buttonhole.' These blunders are evidently unstudied and ingenuous. They contain no sting and are written in perfect good faith and deep earnestness by honest and upright imbeciles who fancy they know something about the solemn functions of the Catholic Church and are anxious to impart that knowledge to others. They fail in the attempt. And such failures add a piquancy to the sauce of life. * » •

Other cable-blunders would be laughable too, but tor the fact that there is too often a certain malignancy — subjective or objective — in their folly. A metaphorical stab with a jackknife forms past of the cable-twister's antics. In other word?, his tortured messages convey whole falsehoods or half-truths that are calculated or intended to throw discredit on the Catholic Church or some portion of it. Such were several of the cable messages that we have dealt with us from time to time for many years past. Such, in effect, was the manufactured story about the • congress 'at Burgos. To the same category belong the many evil tales sent round the world charging Catholic ecclesiastical persons or religious with serious crimes. Over and over again the accused persons have been acquitted of these charges. The cable-fiend cables the accusation. We have not yet met with one instance in which he has cabled the acquittal. Here are two quite recent cases in point that were blazoned forth under what some irreverent people term ' snorting ' headlines in almost every daily, weekly, biweekly and tn-weekly secular paper from Auckland to Invercargill. One was a charge of cruelty against a Catholic Sister, who had ordered the caning of an obstreperous boy of ten who had been committed to St. Joseph's Orphan Asylum at Potadam, and had twice run away, and endeavoured to induce other lads to go with him. The cable -rigger furnished the New Zealand public with a bold charge of gross cruelty. It was stated as an absolute fact. No hint was given that it was a question of an untried (and denied) accusation. There was no suggestion of mitigating circumstances, no hint as to the real form of punishment. And, of course, the Press Association took particularly good care that the following additional particulars should never reach the secular papers of New Zealand : A prosecution was instituted. The charge of undue severity was promptly dismissed as quite contrary to evidence. An appeal

was lodged. The case was heard in a higher court. The rehearing resulted in the acquittal of the Sisters, and the expression of a judicial opinion that St. Joseph's Orphan Asylum is a model house of its kind. This judgment was delivered early in July. But not a hint has thus far been given to the people of this Colony by the Association, which went to the expense of spreading the calumny against a woman to every wind that blows over Australasia.

Here is the other case referred Jo. The Press Association some months ago stated positively that one Abbe Flamidien, of Lille (France), had brutally murdered a boy. As usual, there was no indication that he was merely accused, of the crime. The lie got a long start and was away around the world on seven-league boots while the truth was rubbing the sleep out of its eyes and preparing to draw on its house -slippers. But it has come lumbering along at last — in our European exchanges. Now it turns out that the accused was not an abbe (priest), but a brother of the Christian Schools — Brother Flamidien. The murdered boy, Foveaux by name, had attended the Brothers' extern school at Lille. Brother Flamidien had taught the lad's class on the evening when he was missed. On this ground alone he was arrested and charged with the crime. Strenuous and — to those accustomed to English trial by jury — shockingly unfair efforts were made by the ' juge destruction ' to sustain the charge against Brother Flamidien. But it was all in vain. He gave conclusive proofs as to how he spent every moment of his time, and on July n was acquitted and set free, without a stain upon his character, by a full bench consisting of members of the Preparatory Chamber and the Chamber of Correctional j Appeals. As the London Weekly Register says : ' The Court of First Instance has now dismissed the case against him, which utterly broke down on investigation. He leaves the court absolutely reinstated and justified.' But the Register adds that in England ' not nearly so much prominence has been given in the Press to the news of his acquittal as was given to the previous proceedings.' Just so. The American telegraphic agencies had sufficient sense of honour and manliness to give as wide publicity to the acquittal of the accused as they nad previously given to the news of his accusation. The Press Association that serves these colonies has chosen, as usual, to adopt the cowardly expedient of suppressing the fact of the acquittal of the accused man.

As to the cable-riggers, our single protest is not likely to affect their tactics. But we venture to respectfully submit that their modes of dealing with Catholic news forms a fair subject for a joint and vigorous remonstrance by the Catholic hierarchy of New Zealand and Australia. We should need the income of a Hartley and Riley gold-dredging claim in full working if we were to promptly nail the silly or malicious tales that come over the cables reflecting on the Catholic Church, Catholic ecclesiastical persons, and Catholic institutions. Such a course is therefore barred to us. A few years ago, at the instance of the late Cardinal Sanfelice, we pilloried a Melbourne newspaper proprietor for the publication of a gross libel on the Convent of SS. Joseph and Teresa, in Naples (Italy). Should ;uch cases of gross and unretracted calumny appear in future in the Press of this Colony, we shall consider the desirability of placing it in the power of the ecclesiastics, religious, or institutions concerned to see that their good name may not be blackened with impunity even in this far-off verge of the world.

The last San Francisco mail brought details exit of the death of the notorious American infidel ingersoll. lecturer, Robert Green Ingersoll. He will, perhaps, be best remembered through the withering exposure which Father Lambert made of his ignorance, his shallow fallacies, his mellifluous sophisms— just as Dr. Hyde (the slanderer of Father Damien) will be known to posterity through the magnificent literary horse-whipping administered to him by the late Robert Louis Stevenson. Ingersoll's death was one of awful suddenness. In his later years he had expressed a wish that the end might come slowly, so that he might be able to watch its approach and to calmly contemplate its possibilities. But it came in the flush of health, and with the suddenness of a lightning flash. Though a successful lawyer, Ingersoll was no scholar. He did not profess to be a scientist, and even the rudiments of philosophy were ' a Hebrew speech 'to him. He was not even a wit. He was merely a ' jokist ' — a master of a certain kind of direct and rough (sometimes coarse) sarcasm, a buffoon skilled in all the quips and pranks and grimaces and by-play of the low comedian. With these he tricked out such of the exploded fallacies of Paine, Voltaire, and Co., as his untrained mind could get a partial grip upon.

His appeal was made to the ignorant and half -educated element of the community— to the shallow minds that are easily tickled and enjoy a horse-laugh, especially at the ten commandments, or at some coarse, if cheap, reference to Moses or the Deity. Among such people Ingersoll wrought unspeakable

moral harm. His lectures were sent broadcast over the world — a packet of them caught our eye the same day that the American mail brought news that he was cut down without a moment's warning while waiting for a game of billiards. His ignorance of philosophy, theology, biblical lore, history, etc., was shown up by Father Lambert (now editor-in-chief, N.Y. Freeman's Journal), Rev. Dr. Nothgreaves, the late Judge Black, and Rev. H. Ward Beecher. Father Lambert's /Votes on Ingersoll and Tactics of Infidels fairly flayed the shallow comedian alive, cut him into mincemeat, and threw the fragments to the dogs. He out-matched the actor-lawyer in wit and satire, and dissected his clumsy fallacies and misuse of terms with a keenness of hard philosophy that cut the very vitals out of Ingersoll's system — or rather of that destructive criticism which with him seems to have stood for a system. Of late years Ingersoll had been getting more and more out of the public eye and ear. In a short time his lectures and his vagaries will be remembered only through the reply which they called forth from Father Lambert — pretty much the same as the anti-Catholic D'Esterre's name is perpetuated by the fact that O'Connell iought with him and settled his hash.