THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1901. A WORD AMONG OURSELVES.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXIX, Issue 51, 19 December 1901, Page 17

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1901. A WORD AMONG OURSELVES.

OLITICS are an evil game. And, all things considered, we can understand the feeling that led Artemus Ward to vote for a dead statesman (Henry Clay) because there was nobody living worth voting for. ' Inasmuch,' said he, ' as we don't seem to have a live statesman, let us by all means have a first-class corpse.' Ihe contest that, as we write, is still raging for a year's brief lease of the Caversham seat presents, in some respects, features as unsatisfactory as those which raised the sarcastic gorge of ' the genial showman.' Five of six contestants scrambling for one electorate in the Government interest must prove an embarrassment of wealth to the Ministry. Two of the contestants are endeavoring to trap fanatical votes by raising the most vindictive and lying and cowardly no-Popery shriek that has for many years disgraced a electioneering campaign in New Zealand. The one Catholic candidate would be, of all others, fitted by his talent and other personal qualifications to adorn the councils of a nation. A paragraph published in the secular papers before our last issue went to press, and purporting to expound his views on the education difficulty was — we were officially informed — interpolated and unauthorised. But in his formal pronouncement upon the subject towards the close of the week, he elected to take a position that has been viewed with surprise and regret by his Catholic friends. * Other, and even successful, Catholic candidates throughout the Colony have adopted a similar attitude in reference to our educational grievances. And the sense of surprise with which their pronouncements, when first made, are usually received by the Catholic body argues the existence of a healthy sentiment upon the subject amongst our people. But the sentiment soon dies, and — as Pope said in another connection — ' we first endure, then pity, then embrace.' Catholic feeling upon the subject is running to wild and woful waste for want of constant and intelligent direction— in other words, for lack of organisation. Heaven preserve the lungs and larynges of those that protest ! But talk is cheap, and wind-power not over costly, and indignation seldom dear. And when we, Catholics, have exhausted our spasmodic vocabulary of condemnation and finished slaying all opponents with our mouths, we would do well to sit down and cool off and calmly examine our consciences to find out if we also, as well as the candidates, are not to blame — if we have not, as a body, contributed by our apathy, our neglect, our grovelling pursuit of passing temporal advantages, to the unsatisfactory position which the vexed question of our educational grievances occupies at present in the public eye. We have allowed it to be almost frozen out of politics ; we do not particularly trouble the general ruck of candidates with the matter ; and we seem disposed to keep our views to ourselves for our private enjoyment. But once in a time we wake up and rub our eyes — like the British public in one of its accesses of virtue over King Bomba or the unspeakable Turk — and, with a sudden spasm of enthusiasm for our 'principles,' we berate or bemaul some luckless candidate for deserting them. All

this is mere childish caprice. When we rise in our passing anger and flay opponents, we should, on our own part, remember to put on sackcloth and ashes and mend our political ways. * What have we, the great Catholic body of New Zeaknd, been doing to advance our educational claims ? The question is a remorseful one. Bits of gallant outpost work here and there over the matter of school inspection ; a rare question put timidly — almost apologetically — at election times ; some lone vo:c« in the pulpit once in a while ; arid the N.Z. Tablet speaking in season and out of season, but, to some extent, we fear, to the wilderness. Mostly words, words, words. And yet there is no loss of faith in the inherent justice of our claims, nor, we believe, of hope in the ultimate triumph of our cause. Our faith is right. But where are oar works ? Religious bigotry is the great barrier that stands in the way. What have we done to enlighten it ? Little or nothing. And it requires teaching year in, year out, in season and out of season ; and the best propaganda against it is conducted, not amidst the discordant din and evil clang of an electioneering campaign, but in ' the stilly hours when storms are gone.' The principle, non in tempestate Dpvs, has, in altered terms, its application here.

And at election times, what have Catholics been doing ? Giving their votes, from one end of the Colony to the other, alike to non-Catholic and to Catholic candidates who are opposed to our views and rights and interests in connection with the education problem. Such candidates are supported merely or chiefly for their political or party leanings, or for their proved or anticipated power to ' benefit the district.' It is a question of prospective railway sidings, workshops, •billets,' engine-cleaning sheds, roads, turn-tables — mere henroost politics. There is an accursed venality or spirit of implied barter over it all, that, to a sensitive man, must be like contact with Asiatic leprosy. And Catholic voters have learned to overlook the hostility of candidates and members to our Just educational rights. They coddle and stroke the hand that strikes them, just because it can dispense Government crumbs. They hunt — with less avidity, it is true, than others— for backsheesh — and get very little of it, as we have shown ; and many of the short-sighted wights are content to receive as the reward of their support the ghastly political ' favor ' which drops a son into the position of an underpaid hack clerkship or condemns him for life to the pick and shovel of the navvy or the surfaceman — like a galley-slave chained to the oar. That is what we have been doing. We have fine principles on our lips and fine, if distant, hopes in our souls, and we make, with light and happy hearts, a thousand splendid sacrifices to teach our children that there is more in life and beyond it than the multiplication table and dollar-worship. But we have taught members and candidates that they can count on our support almost irrespective of their views on the one question of questions for us. We greet a string of twelve opponents — Catholics and non-Catholics — with a smile, and aid them with our votes. But when the thirteenth steps forward and follows in the footsteps of all the others, we suddenly recall our ' principles ' and smite him with a dire anathema maranatha and make him a scapegoat to bear the sins of all. Would that we were either consistently hot or consistently cold, so that friend and foe alike should know where to find us on election day ! But this shilly-shallying is a trap for candidates, and it is unfair to ourselves. In the Caversham electorate, however, the great body of the Catholic voters arc staunch upon this subject. We are convinced that, in ordinary circumstances, they would not support one whose views thereupon do not meet with their approval. Numbers of them, however, have been stung and lashed out of apathy or opposition to a candidate of their own creed by an utterly reckless and disgraceful no-Popery campaign carried on with indecent clamor in the interests of a nominee of the Orange lodge. And if, under all the circumstances, they select what seems to them to be the least evil and support an otherwise blameworthy candidate, we believe that — however we may ourselves regard the matter — the Catholic body at least, considering its own past action, is not entitled to upbraid them.

We, Catholics, are, in connection with this general subject of our educational claims, acting fehe part of the rustic who sat down upon the river-bank and waited for the waters to flow by so that he could cross over. Or, like helpless Micawbers, we are waiting for something to • turn up — hoping that, by some miracle or other, oar opponents may one day be suddenly converted, as Saul of Tarsus was, to accept a point of view and espouse a cause that to-day they hate and persecute. No. Such success as we achieve in this matter of the recognition of our educational rights, will be measured by our own effort. In Victoria, thirteen years ago, few men outside the Catholic constituencies, woukl dare to stand upon a public platform and advocate the Catholic educational claims. To-day a number of ita representatives are committed to their support, and within the past two weeks Protestant newspapers and Anglican and Presbyterian clergymen have warmly espoused our cause. But in Victoria Catholics have had the grace to keep pegging away ' upon the subject. And, in Disraeli's words, « the secret of success is constancy of purpose.' Kight here is our highest lesson and our brightest hope. But it means organised and united effort ; it means a known policy towards individual politicians and cabinets, towards friends and foes. At present we have none. We have dealt with all this before, and there is no need that we should thresh the same old straw over again. Let us be frank and state that if our claims are slighted at election times, if candidates fear to voice them, if electors are impatient at hearing of them, Catholics have, in a great measure, themselves to blame. Let us but once get our forces together and in hand, from North Cape to the Bluff, and the aspect of things will in due course change. The grievance that marches into an electioneering campaign with a phalanx of 50,000 voters at its back will be listened to with respect.