Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXIX, Issue 38, 19 September 1901, Page 1

Current Topics

The Murdered President.

Mazzini's well-preached doctrine of political assassination has secured another victim ; and the blood of the murdered President of the United States (to whose melancholy death extended reference is made elsewhere in our columns) has mounted upwards and cried to heaven. It appears that the sword has been hanging over the late Mr. McKinley for some time ; or, rather, the pistol has been pointed at his heart and the Thugs of the West were only waiting for the finger that was to pull the trigger. He had been warned to be cautious, but with the rash and generous courage that empties itself of discretion, he disregarded the friendly counsel and faced the coward attack that has left a nation mourning.

Rulers have had so many trials and blisters in every age that one wonders how the trite expression ever arose : 'As happy as a king.' In olden days dangers to the life of a ruler came chiefly from the hand of some aspirant or rival to the royal or ducal throne or (as in the case of Genoa and Venice) to the presidential chair. The eighteenth century crystallised the movement which objected to the ruler who happened to wear a crown upon his head ; and the nineteenth century created what Carlyle calls ' the choking, sweltering, deadly, and killing rule of no rule ' — anarchism. Alfred the Great was, perhaps, about the only ruler of ancient or modern times who felt thankful for the dangers which circled him round about, and which he regarded as blessings masquerading in fierce-looking masks and playing practical jokes upon him. ' Oh, what a happy man, he once exclaimed, 'that man [Damocles] that had a naked sword hanging over his head from a single thread, as to me it always did ' ' Another of his sayings has a melancholy applicability to the murdered President, whose worst enemy was a child of his own nation. ' Desirest thou power ? ' he said. ' But thou shalt never obtain it without sorrows — sorrows from strange folk, and yet keener sorrows from thine own kindred.' ' Hardship and sorrow ! ' he exclaimed another time ; ' not a king but would wish to be without these if he could. But I know that he cannot.' And the history of the past 50 years shows that the assassin's dagger is as keenly athirst for the heart-blood of a ruler who is called a President as for that of a ruler who is called a King.

On Dunedin.

' It is not surprising,' says M.A.P. of August 10, ' that the Royal travellers (the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York) had an extraordinarily warm reception at Dunedin, the capital of the great Scottish settlement in New Zealand. They are an enterprising and progressive people in Dunedin, and do things well at all times. It was in Dunediu that an ingenious Ah Sin — there are many Chinese about the Otago diggings — once made a famous attempt to break through the Scottish •♦ring." A road-contract was advertised by the town council, and when all the tenders came in, the lowest — from one Alexander Macfarlane — was selected, and the would-be contractor written to and invited to call and sign the necessary

papers. At the appointed time a bland Chinaman appeared and answered to the name. " But look ye here, mon," said the surprised head oi the Council, " yer name's no Alexander Macfarlane, surely ? "

" Allitee," said the Celestial, " me savee this pidgin— supposee no gottee name belong • Mac ' no gettee contlact ! " '

'They delight,' says M.A.P.,' in telling stories against themselves in Dunedin, which they can afford to do, as they are a generous-spirited and jovial folk. One of the southern legislators greatly amused a late Scottish Governor of the Colony by the relation of an incident which he solemnly declared to be true. A man from Dunedin visited Wellington. An Irish friend in the capital insisted upon the visitor staying at his house instead of at an hotel, and kept him there for a month, playing the host in detail, even to treating him to the theatres and other amusements, paying all the cab fares and the rest. When the visitor was returning to Dunedin the Irishman saw him down to the steamer, and they went into the saloon to have a parting drink. " What'll you have? " asked the host, continuing his hospitality to the very last. " Now. look here," said the man from Dunedin, " I'll hae nae mair o' this. Here ye've been keepin' me at yer hoose for a month, an' payin' for all the theatres an' cabs an' drinks — I tell ye I'll stan' nae mair o' it. We'll juist hae a toss for this yin ! "

The story of the Chinaman has the merit of being strictly true. The other is a reasonably good one, as such stories go. There is only one thing the matter with it — it recalls rather forcibly Lord Rosebery's famous definition of memory as * the feeling that steals over us when we listen to our friends' original stories.' The tale told about the canny Dunedin Scot has all the air of being a variant of the well-known incident which happened in Dublin at the close of a long tour in Palestine taken by the celebrated Irish wit, Father Healy of Little Bray, and Mr. Matthew Darcy. The latter bore all the expenses of the trip, and did his part in lordly style. When they reached home again in ' dear, dirty Dublin,' Father Healy insisted that it was his turn now, and paid the penny tram-fare for both with a waggish ostentation that was irresistibly droll.

A Precious Rascal,

Some time ago we wrote — but not in strains of high-flown panegyric — regarding two ex-convicts and unmitigated blackguards who are the bright particular ornaments of the profession of sham ' ex-priest.' The one ot these is Riordan (alias Ruthven), the other is Nobbs (alias Widdows). This pair of precious rogues remind us of what an aged Liverpool dame said after wading through two columns of police-court news : * Well, well ! There's one thing I'd never do. If I had fifty children I'd never name one of them Alias. Seems as if they're sure to go wrong.' Well, ' Ruthven ' is picking oakum in England and lodging at the King's expense, and Nobbs (a sham ex-monk) is getting such a triangular squeeze from the action of the police and the contempt of the public and the dislike of hall-owners throughout Great Britain that he is likely to flit in search of less unfriendly shores. Some fine day he may step ashore — professionally — at Auckland, Wellington, or Dunedin ; in which case we shall take down the rather

bulky thing which we call our ' Rogues' Gallery * and shall write sundry chapters of his biography — and, faith, we'll prent 'cm.

Some weeks ago Nobbs (under his alias), bent on swindling in the name of the Lord, did some no-Popery whooping to his friends the Orangemen of Belfast. The brethren — whether there or in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, or elsewhere — are not at all particular as to the moral character or antecedents of a roving adventurer so long as he (or she) throws road metal at the M in of Sin in a satisfactory way. They took Ncbbs to their heart, for Nobbs has a tongue as coarse as a wood-rasp. But his visit to the head* centre of Orangeism led to an official declaration as to his character which ought to do good in some quarters. The Dublin Freeman's Journal of August 3 contains the following report of a question asked by Mr. Dillon in the House of Commons, and of the answer given by Mr. Wyndham, the Chief Secretary for Ireland :—: —

Mr. Dillon asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the man Widdowß, who delivered a speech against Roman Catholics at the Belfast Custom House on Sunday, is the same Widdows who haß been twice convicted for unnatural crimes ; whether any prosecution has since been instituted against him for obtaining money under false pretences ; whether any shorthand writers were present on behalf of the Government at Sunday's meeting ; whether collections were taken np on the occasion ; and whether it ia intended to allow such proceedings to continue. Mr. Wyndham. — It is true Widdows was oonvioted in London in 1888 of the off f nee referred to, and sentenced to 10 years' penal servitude. In July, 1875, he was con Tic ted in Toronto of an attempt to commit a similar offence, and sentenced to five month's imprisonment. He has represented himself to be an ex-monk. He never was a monk or friar, and it is believed never was an ordained clergyman. No prosecution has as yet been instituted agaiuet him. The question whether any criminal proceedings can be taken is under consideration. No shorthand writer was present on the occasion mentioned, but notes in longhand of bis remarks were taken.

Such be thy gods, O Israel !

That 'Jesuit Oath.'

It is a melancholy reflection on the secular journalism of Auckland that, at this hour of the day, editors should be found so credulous and so unacquainted with the course of current events as to give publication to the di-t>raceful forgery which has during the past few months won such malodorous notoriety under the title of the Jesuit oath. Some six months ago or thereabouts the Auckl tnd Herald dished up this frowsy old calumny. We at once switched the electric light on to it, and tracked it to its real r.uthor, Robert Ware, who held fast by Luther's motto, ' Against the Papacy we account all things lawful to us, 5 and who looked upon forgery as a fair and proper weapon with which to fight the battles of the Lord of Truth. Since the date of the publication of our refutation of this gross Jesuit myth, both secular and religious newspapers and periodicals in Great Britain have let the light of day upon Ware's forgery to such good purpose that none but malicious or sleepyheaded newspapers would give the outl lwed Thing the hospitality of their columns. In all the circumstances, the publication of the ' Oath,' as a solid fact, in the Auckland Star, is an unpardonable offence against joui nalistic decency. Trie Star evident!) entertains the conviction that it can abuse and spit upon its Catholic readers and advertisers with impunity ; for the subsequent exposure of the forgery elicited from it no expression ot apology or regret. We commend the manly protest of thelocil Catholic Literary Society. We think there is some thing stiffer than lemon-jtlly or india-rubber in the spines of our Auckland friends, and we venture the hope that they will, so far as they are concerned, see that coarse attacks of this kind shall not be, commercially, a good speculation. There was long current a notion that the most sensitive portion of the human anatomy wis the region ol the epig istnum. The most sensitive spot m a newspaper proprietaiy is — its fob.

An Apology.

In England this sham 'Jesuit Oath' has reached a new and interesting phase. One ot the controversial fakirs of the press was allowed by the Rochester and Chatham News to accuse Eather Bernard Vaughan with having taken the now notorious ' Oath.' The result is told in the following editorial apology which appealed in its issue of August 3, and illustrates in a curious way the absolute lack of evidence on which press and platform enthusiasts, in England as in New Zealand, are prepared to lay abominable charges at the doors of their Catholic neighbors :--

• In our issue of July 6 we published a letter under the heading ot " Tnc Att uk on the King," in whi< h the writer, who signed himself " Loyal PiotesUnt," ,-isscrted that F.ther Vaughan, brother of Carou al V.iughan, h.id taken the " Jesuit Oath," which was quoted at length. One of the sen-

tences ran : " I do renounce and disown my allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince, or State-named Protestant, or obedience to any of their inferior magistrates or officers, etc." A few days after the publication of this letter, Messrs. Witham, Roskell, Munster, and Weld, of 1, Gray's Inn square, W.C., solicitors to the Rev. Bernard Vaughan, commenced an action for libel against us. We applied to the " Loyal Protestant " to furnish us with the evidence upon which he had made such a definite and emphatic statement, and our correspondent was then obliged to admit that he could procure none. He had seen the so-called "Jesuit Oath " in print somewhere, and assumed and took it for granted that, as the Rev. Father Bernard Vaughan is a member of the Society of Jesus, " he mast have taken that oath." We then went carefully into the matter of the " Jesuit Oath " ourselves, and having come to the conclusion that the statement of " Loyal Protestant " is absolutely unfounded, and that the Jesuits take no such oath as that alleged, we felt in honor bound to express our regret that we had inadvertently allowed any such fraudulent imputation upon the loyalty and good faith of the Rev. Bernard Vaughan to appear in the columns of the News. Messrs. Witham. Roskell, Munster, and Weld, on behalf of the Rev. Bernard Vaughan, have accepted this explanation, and have acceded to our request to withdraw the action. This is fortunate for " Loyal Protestant "as well as for ourselves. In putting for* ward ridiculous inferences as positive facts, our correspondent abused the hospitality of our columns, and forfeited all claim to be sheltered from the consequences of his own act.'

A Pending Action.

Some time in the merry month of July— auspicious period ! — the editor of the Methodist Weekly also adorned his religious columns with the forgery of Ware — or, rather, with an ' improved ' and more gory and thunderous version ' made in Germany ' upon Ware's original. Father John Gerard, S.J., wrote denying the alleged ' Oath,' Whereupon the genial editor inserted a statement charging Father Gerard with mendacity. The learned Jesuit then put the matter into the hands of a lawyer, and the Tablet announces that 'the Methodist Weekly is going to fight. We are glad to hear it/ says our London contemporary, ' and so, we are sure, must be Father John Gerard himself, who will at last have the opportunity of repudiating this odious calumny against himself and his religious brethren in the witness-box.'

A Genuine Oath.

The forger Ware and his German copyists all seem to have shared alike the principle of ethics laid down in L'Estrange's fable of the Gentleman and his Lawyer. The fable runs as follows : ' A gentleman that had a suit in Chancery was called upon by his counsel to put in an answer, for fear of incurring a contempt. "Well," says the Cavalier, " and why is not my answer put in, then ? " " How could I draw your answer," said the lawyer, "without knowing what you can swear?" " Pox on your scruples" said the client again, " pray, do you the part of a lawyer, and draw me a sufficient answer ; and let me alone to do the part of a gentleman and swear it." ' Robert Ware — who is notorious for his forgeries — concocted what he considered ' a sufficient answer ' to the Jesuits. His German clients not alone swore it ' like gentlemen,' but ' improved ' upon it in details here and there. And all were tarred with the same old brush of the father of lies.

Even during the frenzy of the ' Popish Plot,' there was found a colleague of the infamous Titus Oats who was honest enough to give what Father Gerard terms a perfectly fair, though ' somewhat awkward, and not always grammatical,' translation of the oath taken by the professed Jesuits. It runs as follows: 'I, N., make my profession, and promise to the Omnipotent God, before His Virgin Mother and all the whole Court of Heaven, and all that here stand by, and to you our reverend Father General of the Society of Jesus, God's lieutenant, and to your successors (or : to you Rev. Fr. , in place of the General of the Society, God's lieutenant, and to his suca s-ors), perpetual poverty, chastity and obedience, and, accordingly, peculiar care in the education of youth, consentaneous to the form of living contained in the Apostolic letters of the Society of Jesus and in the Constitutions thereof. Moreover, I promise special obedience to the Pope concerning missions, as contained in the same Apostolic letters and Constitutions.'

Our Sectarian 4 System.'

Some time ago we ruffled the feathers of one of our leading New Zealand dailies by pointing out — and proving, too — that ' our great National System,' so far from being undenominational, is strictly seciari in, and that, instead of being secular, it is rankly Secularist. Our contemporary has had abundant time to get unruffled and can probably stand another dose of the same prescription that raised its top-knot then. From our

old friend the Aye Maria we learn that Mr. John C. Spencer, Superintendent of Schools in the State of New York has abundantly justified our views. Writing recently to Governor Seward, he said : • It is an er.or to suppose that the absence Of religious instruction, if it were not practicable, is a mode of avoiding sectarianism. On the contrary, it would be in itself sectarian, because it would be consonant to the views of a particular class and opposed to the opinions of other classes. Those who reject all creeds and resist all efforts to infuse them into the minas of the young would be gratified by a system which so fully accomplishes their purpose.' Good old Daniel Webster saw all this long before. 'It is.' said he, ' a mockery and an insult to common. sense to maintain that a school for the instruction of youth from which Christian instruction by Christian teachers is sedulously and vigorously shut out is not deistic and infidel both in its purpose and tendency.'

The contentions voiced by us from time to time are admirably expressed in the following extract from a speech which (says the Monitor) was delivered to a mainly non-Catholic audience recently at the graduation exercises at the State Normal School at Los Angeles. c Many of the best friends.' said the learned prelate, 'of everything American honestly believe that the system of instruction now in vogue is neither non-sectarian nor fair and just to all. In its practical results it is, and always has been, sectarian ; not in the sense r that it teaches the tenets of any religious denomination, but by the positive exclusion of such teaching it inculcates the religious views of those who are indifferent or opposed to religious dogmas. The unbeliever, as a rule, has as clearly denned views on religious matters as has a Jew or Christian. His are negative, theirs are positive ; but they are his religion. In this sense unbelievers constitute a sect as really as do the members of any religious denomination. The system as it stands, unmodified, does for him precisely what he would do if he had the absolute control of it. The consequence is that the unbeliever, as a class, is the only one that is perfectly satisfied with it. And hence the system in its application is sectarian and unfair to many of the citizens of the country — the very two thing-5 which it was intended should not be. As evidence that the system unmodified is not satisfactory to the great bulk of Christian denominations, it is sufficient to call attention to the fact, first, that in almost every general convention or synod of most of the great religious denominations in the country it is declared that there should be more religion taught in the schools ; that the absolute separation of religious from secular training is not the best; second, the great Lutheran body as such, as well as Catholics, has felt bound in conscience to establish and maintain at a great sacrifice private schools where that dual training may be imparted.'