Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXIII, Issue 50, 14 December 1905, Page 1

Current Topics

• An Unholy Alliance ' The Rev. R. S. dray, of Chrietchurch, is one of the local standard-bearers of the Prohibition movement. His views on no-license arc his own affair. Some of his recent remarks on the local option poll are our aftair. In an interview with the representative of a Christchurch daily paper on last Thursday, the good man spoke, at leas* in part, under the stress of feelings that had been beaten black-and-blue. ' Mr. Gray,' ,says the interviewer, ' also dwelt upon what he called an unholy alliance between the Liquor Party and the Roman Catholics in the North Ward and elsewhere, a combination of which the righteous sentiment of this Colony would, .he believed, without doubt express its strong disapproval.' • In discussion, as well as in cookery, you must first catch your hare. ]\lr (I ray ought to have been sure that he had his facts m hand before he placed the alleged ' unholy alliance ' upon the griddle. And he is not to be excused for this grave omission by any plea that Ins leathers weie milled a* a result of the Local Option poll in Christchuieh As mattcis stand, he has cruelly maltreated simple truth. The story of the new dual alliance is a piece of fiction—' all carved from the carver's biain ' The manner oi its telling, too, indicates sufficiently a slipshod method of thinking, an intemperateness of utterance, and an eagerness m attack upon Catholics for which many of the lay and clerical leaders of the Prohibition party have won an evil notoriety. In the piesent connection, for instance, an 'alliance' necessarily implies a positive bond, compact, agreement, treaty, or league entered into by ' the Roman Catholics in the North Ward and clsewheie ' on the one side and ' the Liquor Party ' on the other side. The public are entitled to demand of the Rev. Mr. Gray the essential details of such bond, compact, or agreement—when, where, and by whom was it drawn up ? But these are precisely the particulars that the reverend enthusiast cannot iurnish, for the simple reason that his whole story has just tho same amoant of objective truth as the tale of Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves. Yet he assumes, without so much as a scrap of evidence, .'the existence of this mythical compact But he carries ■the mouldy old fallacy of undue assumption even further than this ; for he applies to this imagina-ry alliance the question-begging epithet, ' unholy '—which, as the

context cleariy enough shows, is intended to convey the impression that it was an impious and sinful vtolation of the moral law. But wherein does this appear ? The Rev. Mr. Gray must first catch his haie— that is, he must establish the fact of the alliance before he proceeds to give it, like a dog, a bad time. Let him begin by setting the alliance on its legs and establish beyond reasonable doubt its standing and character as an actuality. A non-existent contract cannot be a crime against the laws of either God or man. When he has fully proven the alleged compact to be a fact and not— as it is— a fiction of his own imagination, and furnished us with the details of its provisions, then, and not till then, will a discussion as to its morality be in order. And, on his own principles as a Protestant, our verdict upon this matter at its worst, will be at least as good as his at its best. And on the whole question, both of fact and of inference— and, generally, on all matters afiecting Catholics— lns judgment is subject to serious discounts? by reason of the prominent part which, we understand, he took in the Stoke aft air. A man does not cast his religious or political skin in four-and-twenty hours. i* The fact of the matter is this : The sundry disappointments at the Local Option polls that have made the Rev. Mr. (>ray get afire all over have been due to a variety of causes that are sufficiently obvious to thoughtful observers. Some of these were contributed by the Legislature , some by ' the trade '—to wit, its better general conduct of business during the past three years , some by the impression which this improvement created in the minds of the large class of voters that are labelled, in refeience to the licensing question, Moderates , ami some, again, were furnished by the electioneering mclhods pursued by the Prohibitionists themselves, and particularly by the manner in which many of the clergy in the movement used their pulpits as political ' stumps.' He is a mole-eyed observer and a bankrupt philosopher who must needs fall back upon the phantom of a Catholic-cum-publican ' alliance ' to explain the recent Local Option vote. There was no ' alliance ' either with ' the trade ' or with any political party during the recent electioneering campaign. Catholics voted on the licensing issue, as they voted on the political issue, without dictation from any source, and as their fancy, or personal preference suggested. They were not influenced in their choice, as so many of the Rev. Mr G ray's co-religionists were, by whoops and entreaties and emotional appeals from political pulpit-

eers. In our issue of November 23— a fortnight before the general elections— we took pains to emphasise in our Jeading columns the spirit of freedom with which Catholics, at least, should approach the electoral urns. And we quoted the following words of Dr. Barry, spoken in England, as being a true statement of principle and policy for the guidance of his co-religionists in New Zealand : ' What are Catholics to do,' he asks, 'at the general election ? " All vote one way and keep in the Tories," says a 'Conservative. " All vote the other way and turn them out," replies the Liberal. But we know before a vote is cast that neither Whig nor Tory will get his desire. Catholics are agreed in religion, but in nothing else. There is no power on earth to which they would hearken that can counsel them to be of one mind in politics. We must each of us decide for ourselves.' These are words that the Rev. Mr Gray would do well to mark, learn, and inwardly digest when next he goes electioneering.

The French Tyranny

A brief cable message in last week's daily papers announced that the French Senate had adopted the Bill for the separation of Church and State, as passed by the Chamber of Deputies. This fresh legislation comes into force with the dawn of the New Year. Nominally, a separation takes place between Church and State in Franco, and the Church is supposed to go on her separate way rejoicing. Rut this is a mere legal fiction. As a matter of fact, the Chuich sets out upon her new career plundered ol her property, stripped to the bone, hampeied in her organisation, loaded with fresh manacles, subject moie than e\er to the capiicc and tyranny of the secular power, and shorn of the services of thousands of religious "who have been driven out at the point of the bayonet and compelled to seek homes or graves in foreign lands. Marina, the desolate wife in Byron's ' Two Foscari,' says "—" — ' The country is the traitress, which thrusts forth Her best and bia\est fiom her Tyianny Is far the woist ot treasons. Dost thou deem None rebels except subiects '' The pi nice -who Neglects oi unlatcs Ins tiust is more A bugand than the robbei-chicf ' Rut there are tyrants a-many besides those — rare nowadays among Caucasian peoples — that weai the legal or imperial diadem And the so-called Separation Bill represents, m all its c ncumstanoes, one of the worst forms of ichgioiis tviannv and treason to a sacied trust that have been, perpetrated in our generation. IVlany of its Freemason and Radical supporters frankly acknowledged that if was meiely a means towards an end And the end they had, and ha\ c, in view is the destruction, not alone of Catholicism, but of lehgion and leligious ideals m lodire-iulden France. So much is acknowledged by a well-informed Protestant writer in a recent issue of the London ' Church Times ' (Anglican) The Jacobin Stale in France (says he) 'has shown that it legards not "le clericalisme," but "la chretientc '' as " l'ennemi " The most politically humble and self-effacing Christian Church, if it maintained unearthly and supernatural claims upon the human conscience, would be intolerable to the Combesist, who cries " ecrase/. l'lnfame," When Victor Hugo was buried in the ancient church of St Gcnevieve, every \estige of Christianity was removed from the building, without and within That is the spirit which has torn the crucifix fiom the walls of the law courts, and forbidden the half-masting of ships' flags on Good Friday, which prohibits the President of the Republic from attending public worship, or any official of the State from w r eanng uniform in church. Indeed, there are few departments in which e\en small officials can attend Mass without a black mark being affixed to their names.'

Threatening Rebellion

John Mitchel once said that it is easier to come to a meeting with rotten eggs than with sound arguments. That is just the impression left upon our mind after a perusal of the report of the recent Orange ' national ' demonstration held in Melbourne to protest against the petitions of the Commonwealth Parliament to King Edward VII. on behalf of Home Rule for Ireland. What we may call the addled egg fallacy was oppressively obtrusive during the whole proceedings. But the demonstrators were, by long previous custom, inured to the atmosphere. The demonstration (says the ' Tribune ') was shorn of its best intended glory 'by the of G. H. Reid to heave his corpulent waistcoat in view of the audience. The heavy politician,' adds our Melbourne contemporary, ' was busy earning fees in Sydney Supreme Court, and he let the Empire rip for the time being. . . There wasn't a representative Australian on the platform, which fact is as significant as Wilks' admission that the audience was Orange, or of Orange sympathies.' ' Quel che nasce di gallina,' says an old Italian proverb, ' conviene che razzoli ' — he that comes of a hen will naturally scrape. And long experience has taught us what sort of oratorical Catherine-wheels and gutterbullies we may expect to come as a matter of course of an Orange platform. Nobody was therefore surprised at the exhibition ot verbal pyrotechny and glowing religious hate that marked the recent demonstration in Melbourne. It came, too, as a matter of course that those vociferous ' loyalists,' who are ever slaying ' rebels ' with their mouths, should receive* 'with marked favor a proposal to resist ' aX the point of the bayonet ' a broad-minded scheme of legislation that was carried m the House of Commons on the first of September, 1893, by the substantial majority of thirtyfour votes. Similar threats were issued in 1886 and 1893 to ' line the ditches ' north of the Boyne with bayonets, if the King, Lords, and Commons of the United Kingdom dared to exercise their right and prerogative of granting to the Cinderella nation of the West an instalment of the self-government which is enjoyed by e\ery Slate of the Australasian group. * Colonel Saunderson (an Ulster Orange Member of Parliament) was one of tha militant brethren who thieatened to ' put fifty thousand men under arms ' the moment Home Rule became really imminent. The menace was, of course, a brutum fulmen— a thunderbolt of goose-down. T. D. Sullivan rallied in the following merry measure the voluble and demonstrative Colonel, his echo and familiar spirit, Colonel Waring, and Mr. Wiilliam Johnston, of Ballykilbeg, the three parliamentary arc-lights of the lodge in 1893 :— ' " When Gladstone gets his Home Rule Bill," Says Saunderson to Waring, " Then you, and 1, and Ballykill, Will show our martial daring. ' Without delay, the very day That down such gage he pitches, We'll (ill our flasks from jars and casks, And march to ' line the ditches.' With skill and might and valor bright We'll set the world a-staring "— " We surely will," says Ballykill ; " Of course we will," says Waring. 4 " If in the fields the rebel rout Will not confront our Lodges, In street and lane we'll find them out, Despite their craven dodges ; We'll pot the rascals at their doors, We'll club their babes and spouses, We'll sack their shops and wreck their stores, And loot their public houses. And then 'twill be a joy to see Our boys the plunder sharing ; The victors' toil deserves the spoil "— " Of course it does," says Waring.

• " If met by forces of the Crown 'Neath flags and banners royal ; We'll simply shoot the traitors down For conduct so disloyal. We'll feel a pang at every bang, We'll weep with every volley — But theirs the blame, the sin, the shame, The treason and the folly. In smiting wrong we must be strong, Unpitying, and unsparing "—" — " 'Tis heaven's will," says Ballykill, " The will of heaven," says Waring.' * But there was really nothing more dangerous than stage thunder at the back of all this prancing and cavorting of the old war-horses of the lodge. I ' Ballykill ' was in private life an estimable man, and personally popular with the Irish Nationalist Members of Parliament. Colonel Waring is hardly the stuff that dangerous rebels are made of. Colonel Saunderson — although he has a blustering air and a tongue as rough as a wood-rasp — was far from being the most violent and obstreperous of his Ulster confreres in 1&86 and 1893. His speeches were even at times adorned with flashes of wit — like rubies glinting on a rough-sawn deal board. 'If we reside on our properties,' said he once of the Irish landlords, ' we are liable to be shot, and if we go out of range we are called absentees.' On another occasion (recorded in T. D. Sullivan's ' Recollections ') he said : ' England is very fond of drying the tears of Ireland, but she always makes Ireland pay for the pockethandkerchief.' Whether it is in the mixture ol blood or not, we cannot say ; but, as a class, Punch-and-Judy rebels of the ' yellow ' sort seem to sharv only to a very small extent the typical Irishman's headlong love of ' a rale purty bit of a fight ' where the blades fall and the bullets fly. The records of their history tend to show that they prefer to do their kill ing at long range, or with long odds in their favor— and best of all with the tongue or with the weapon thai Samson used with such effect upon the brain-cases of the Philistines. In 1854, and again in 1857 and 1882, the Irish Nationalist newspapers taunted them with their frequent threats of armed rebellion, and invited them to prove their mettle and their ' loyalty ' by send ing, not their traditional hundred thousand ' ditchliners,' but) a mere regiment, or even a paltry battalion to fight for the Crown in the Crimea, or m India, /or u\ Egypt. But the ' Fighting Bobs ' of the lodge never sent so much as an awkward squad, or even a corporal's secretary. Stage thunder impresses the unaccustomed yokel. In the same way this lecuirent vociferation about bayonet-points and ' ditch-lining ' may fluster those who know nothing about the Irish phase of the agitations for Emancipation, Reform, Repeal, and Disestablishment. And well they know that all these ' hakas ' or war-dances are ' mere sound and fury, signifying nothing.' There is a good deal of the spirit of the Vicar of Bray about the brethren's agitation against Home Rule. They and their co-religionists of the ascendancy party hold a practical monopoly of State pickings — of the political manna and quails. And they mean to stick to it as long as they can.