Notes

New Zealand Tablet, 6 August 1914, Page 34

Notes

The ‘Entente Cordiale’ In view of the wide-spread discussion which has taken place as to whether or not. .Britain is bound by the h it tent e Cordiale, or friendly understanding with Trance, to become the open and active ally of that country in the present struggle, it is interesting to note the opinion expressed before the outbreak of war—of one who was instrumental rti bringing about that rapprochement between the two countries. Baron d’Estournelles de Constant, Senator of France, and member of the ilague Tribunal, is one of the most indefatigable workers for the peace of the world; and when he was French Charge d’Affaires in London he helped largely to bring about the 'Entente Cordiale. In an article contributed a few weeks ago to the London Da Hi/ Chronicle, advocating a Franco-German rapprochement, Baron d’Estournelles argues that the Anglo-French rapprochement that is, the Entente Cordiale — an entente for peace, not an entente for war like that of the rapprochement between France and Great Britain at the time of the Crimean War. ‘ For this reason the Anglo-Russian rapprochement followed the Anglo-French Entente Cordiale as a matter of course. In that fact lay the great innovation, one of the applications of the new policy we arc pursuing. This policy would have been at once vitiated and warped were the Entente Cord to have become a weapon in the hands of the Anglo-French diplomacy, and, after that, of the Triple Entente, against Germany.’ Is the Religious Referendum Democratic ? In his speech at the Wellington Town Hall demonstration the other day Mr. P. J. O’Regan to some extent broke new ground on the referendum question - —not, indeed, on the fundamental principles relating to the proposal, but rather in his illustration and application of them. Mr. O’Regan has been a politician, and may be a politician again; and he met the political advocates of this peculiar plebiscite on their own ground. ‘He would not,’ he said, attempt a definition of the limits of legislation, but it could be laid down as a safe rule that any subject beyond the functions of government was not a fit subject for a plebiscite or referendum. In conceding that any given question might be referred to a popular vote, we implicitly conceded that it was competent for Parliament to legislate on that question, and hence to demand a plebiscite on a religious issue amounted to a demand for the inculcation of religious teaching by the State. It was the current opinion and practice of the age that all religions, so long as they did not violate the plain precepts of justice and morality, should be treated with perfect equality by the State. Then we were told that the proposal of the Bible-in-Schools Party was democratic, but surely that which was unjust could pever be democratic 1 And it was certainly unjust to compel dissenting taxpayers to support religious principles to which they were opposed in conscience. Personally he did not limit the rights of minorities to matters of religion. What was the significance of the Osborne judgment The Osborne judgment affirmed the principle that a majority could not coerce the minority to pay for the promulgation of political principles with which they disagreed. If, however, the political rights of minorities were to be protected by the strong arm of the law, how much more their religious rights. He recollected that one of their opponents had quoted the maxim, ‘ The greatest good for the greatest number.” Unless they took that maxim of Bentham’s with proper limitations it was a fallacy. The limitation to it was that the greatest good of the

greatest number should never be sought and could not be attained at the expense of justice. In the present contest Catholics were fighting for religious equality, the maintenance of really democratic principles, as well as for observance of the agreements into which the State had entered with the teachers in the public schools : and they would, by co-operation with their fellow-citizens of other creeds, assert their, rights as the citizens of a free country.’ British and German Naval Strength For .-ionic time past, owing to the growing strength of Germany in the North Sea, the naval position of Great-Britain in those waters lias been deemed seriously unsatisfactory by experts ; and early last year Mr. Churchill laid down a programme, covering a period of six years, intended to remedy matters. Under this programme and that sanctioned about the same time by the German Reichstag, the British and German strength in Dreadnoughts in the North Sea- stands as follows for the vear 1914-—Britain 27; Germany, 21. It is calculated by German strategists that with a British strength of three ships to every two German ships, the British Navy will be unable to cover the movement of British troops to Belgium or the north of France, which would be indispensable if Britain were to become; the active ally of France. Yet at the present time the British Navv has only five ships to every German four. In old ships, it is true, the British Navy will lave a marked superiority, but with each year the value of these vessels is rapidly diminishing. According to the experts, we have reached a time when ‘ only Dreadnoughts count.’ * In gun armament the British Dreadnoughts are distinctly superior, unless the reports are correct that five German battleships recently completed carry the 14-inch gun and three the 15-inch gun. In torpedo armament the German ships have the advantage. There is nothing to choose between the gunnery of the two fleets, and there is even some reason to fear that the German gunnery may be superior. On the other hand, her long-service personnel should give Britain a marked superiority in the quality of her crews.- * The British torpedo flotillas, as shown in the latest naval return, numbered 176 destroyers complete, of which 19 were in the Mediterranean or Far East, with 347 torpedo tubes. The German numbered 109, of which two were on distant stations, with 339 torpedo tubes. Moreover, figures given in the House of Commons proved that , the German destroyers are on the average of more recent date than the British. Our' the last seven years 103 British and 84 German destroyers were laid down, and 61 British and 60 German were passed into service. While Germany scrapped no old destroyers between 1906-12, Britain scrapped or lost 28 In small cruisers the British position will be improved by the eight light armoured ships voted in 1912. The number built or building in 1912 was 34 of modern type to the German 25 : but the protection of British commerce will make severe demands upon British resources in this class of vessel.

DIOCESE OF DUNEDIN

at St. Joseph's Cathedral on Sunday last from the last Mass until after Vespers. In the evening there was the usual procession, followed by Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.

A euchre party will be held in the Victoria Hall on Friday evening next, August 7, the proceeds of which will go towards furnishing the Hibernian Stall at the forthcoming bazaar in aid of St. s Patrick’s School Building Fund, South Dunedin.

At the nine o’clock Mass at St. Joseph’s Cathedral on Sunday last his Lordship the Bishop referred to the gravity of the European situation, and to the awful calamity in the event of war, and the possibility of many nations being engaged. His Lordship exhorted the congregation to pray for peace, and expressed the hope that the threatened disaster would bo averted.

Working parties from the Cathedral and South Dunedin parishes have, on the last few Saturdays, been carrying out some necessary and extensive road formation at the Home for the Aged Poor at Anderson’s Bay. This will be continued next Saturday and until completed. The work is of an urgent nature, and any of the men of either parish, who can spare an afternoon, will, while assisting the Little Sisters considerably, find that their practical interest in the Home and its work will be highly appreciated.