DISTRESS IN DUBLIN

New Zealand Tablet, 2 November 1916, Page 30

DISTRESS IN DUBLIN

ATTACK BY THE Plf ESS. BISHOP BRODIE AND DEAN REGNAULT IN REPLY. We have to (hank Hie /Vo* (Christchurch) for haying, unintentionally of course, assisted the appeal which is now being made through our columns on behalf of the Dublin poor. This it has done by its attack on the efforts made at the public meeting held in Christchurch on Tuesday, October 24, to raise funds for the worthy object. Its attack has drawn the following replies from the Bishop of Christchurch and from Dean Regnault, and has been the cause of the public meeting which was held on Tuesday night, at which the tactics of the 'Pres* received due consideration. The result of the storm must tell in favor of our appeal, so we thank the I re** for its uninvited assistance. The attack by the Press was contained in a leader in its issue of last Friday and formed the subject of addresses by his Lordship Bishop Brodie at the Catholic Cathedral on Sunday morning, and by the Very Rev. Dean Regnault at St. Mary’s in the evening. BISHOP BRODIE. . . H ls Lordship Bishop Brodie said that regard! the Dublin relief movement, me results financially had been very gratifying, the amount of .£l2O being handed in at the opening meeting. But in connection therewith two articles had been written in the daily papers, the 1 i <;>■* and another, conveying most painful impressions: a casual reader of the article in the Press would form the following impressions; (1) That as there was no necessity for the collection, the money was being raised under false pretences ; (y) That the occasion of the distress being the Dublin rebellion, the meeting could be construed as being in approval with the rebellion and .as such treasonable ; (3) Statements were referred to alleging that the

money raised in Australia for relief in Dublin had been devoted to political purposes. Certainly such an article conveying these impressions was most dangerous, and the fact that mention was made of the Catholic Bishop of Christchurch presiding constituted him as primarily responsible for the movement, dishonest and treasonable. There was a danger that this article in the Press might have a deterrent effect on the contributions of the people, but his Lordship impressed upon his hearers the fact that there was distress. Archbishop Walsh, of Dublin, had appealed for help for those in distress, relief movements had been started by the Lord Mayor of Dublin, and the National Aid Association, and generous contributions had poured in from England, Australia, and New Zealand. The result of this painful criticism would be to stir our people to greater generosity in this work of charity. Further than this, his Lordship said he could not legald the article in any other sense than a cruel insult to him as the head of the Catholic body, and herein a grave duty was imposed upon him inasmuch as his honor was so closely associated with the whole body of Catholics of the diocese. It would be for him to take such steps as would vindicate such an insult, and for that purpose he would call a meeting of Catholics for Tuesday evening in (he Hibernian Hall, when ho would confidently expect a large and representative, gathering. It was sad to think a reputable paper of such standing had necessitated such a course of action, Perhaps the most painful feature of all was that the writer did not pause to consider the facts that at the meeting were fathers who had given their sons for the Empire, and only last- Tuesday did the Press itself record the death in action of the brother of one of the speakers, and yet such men with strong claims on the Empires gratitude were included in the insinuated want of loyalty. His Lordship concluded that he felt that he could safely rely on the loyalty of his people to co-operate ith him in vindicating his name —he did not wish to use the pulpit to adduce arguments to rebut the statements and insinuations of the /'re**.- this could be done if necessary at the proper time and place. DEAN REGNAULT. before commencing his sermon at St. Mary’s Manchester street, on Sunday evening, (he Very Rev. Dean Regnault announced that in (he Hibernian Hall on Tuesday evening a meeting would be held to protest against the insinuations made in a leader in the Christchurch / / css on Friday morning last concerning a meeting which had been held the previous evening to institute a fund for the relief of the distress in Dublin. he meeting, which-gave rise to the article in Friday morning s Pres*, was, in his opinion (said the Dean), prompted purely and simply by Christian charity, and therefore it was very surprising to find such a leader in the Press, which had always been so ready to help any charitable cause. Dean Regnault proceeded to read extracts from the article, which in one place stated that not only was no evidence produced at the meeting of the actual existence of distress justifying the appeal, but no information was given as to the ‘ authorities ’ to whom the money raised was to be sent. With reference to that statement, he said, he hoped to be able to place some very conclusive evidence before those present. In another place the article stated that a statement was recently made by the new Chief Secretary for Ireland to the effect that the British Government had voted three and a-half millions sterling to repair the damage done by the rebels in Dublin, and to remove the slums of the city. Everyone knew, commented the Dean, how long it took from the time such sums were granted until they were actually used in the cause for which they were voted. In the meantime were the women and children of the Dublin poor to be allowed to starve ? r Incidentally Dean Regnault remarked on the fact that little news of Roman Catholic doings in the Dominion were known outside the Catholics of the town in which the happenings took place. That was the

fault of the Press Association, controlled by those who were not friendly to the Catholic cause. Recently he had delivered an address on the work which the Pope was doing in connection with the war, but in no New Zealand papers had he yet seen any reference to the work of the Pope, simply because the Press Association did not forward the news. ‘ But what I find fault with more than anything,’ continued the Dean, referring again to the leader in last Friday’s Press, ‘ is this. After remarking that at last Thursday’s meeting no information was given as to the authorities to whom the money raised was to be sent, the article went on to say “that information would not be necessary, perhaps, in ordinary circumstances, but it. seems desirable now in view of the statements made that moneys raised in America and Australia, ostensibly for the relief of distress in Ireland, are really used for the furtherance of political agitation.” That is a suspicion on the part of the editor which is not worthy of a man in his position. When it is known that the movement has been conducted by men like our own Bishop, and Archbishops of Sydney and Melbourne, who say that the funds have been asked for • by the Bishop of Dublin, to relieve the distress in Dublin, such a suspicion is nothing less than an insult to the whole Catholic hierarchy of Australia and New Zealand.’ Had his health permitted, Dean Regnault went on to say, he would have been nresent at. Thursday night’s meeting at the Hibernian Hall. He would have been on the platform first of all as a Frenchman, to pay a tribute to what Irishmen at the front had done for his country. Then as a Christian he would have appealed to all generous hearts for assistance for the poor of Ireland. He was not going to pass an opinion on the recent uprising, but whatever the faults of its leadershad been, they had fought a good fight, and had die;! a Christian death, and had left behind women and children and relatives who were innocent victims of their efforts. Because they happened to be relatives of those who had died in what they believed to be a just cause, was it to be said that they were not worthy of sympathy and help? Surely not ! They had been told that there was no evidence of distress in Dublin. The New Zealand Tablet of September 7 last had stated that there was dire distress and great need of assistance, and the facts that it had set forth were as conclusive as could be. The funds collected in New Zealand were going to the Archbishop of Dublin (the Most Rev. Dr. Walsh), who had also cabled to Australia and the United States for funds for the suffering poor of Dublin. Another fund had been started by the Mansion House, and the Irish Times had found it necessary to establish a similar fund Yet they were told that there was no evidence of distress. Surely those were sufficient authorities that distress existed. The Brisbane Catholic Advocate recently published statements of newcomers from the Old Land who told tales of arvvful destitution. There was (Dean Regnault continued), very great distress in Dublin long before the war commenced ; in fact, to a greater extent than in any other part of the world. Statistics showed that before the war there were 24,000 families whose weekly income was less than £l. What would our unions, our Parliament, even our National Government say if such conditions existed in New Zealand? Mr. Charles Douglas, the wellknown English journalist, had written very strongly about the misery and poverty in the slums of Dublin, and had pointed out that whereas families who had suffered in other parts of the United Kingdom were receiving their share of the munitions work, high wages, and other war profits, Dublin was getting absolutely nothing. The labor returns showed that in other parts of the United Kingdom unemployment was now at its lowest. In Dublin it was shown to be at its highest. The slums were appalling before the war, the Dean went on. How much more so were they now, especially after the uprising? The slums were there, indeed, but we must not attach to them the stigma which attached sometimes to those of other parts of the

Empire. From them thousands of men had arisen when the bugle sounded, when war broke out, and when the Empire was in danger, and went to fight for the Empire which did so little for the poor of Dublin. And they had fought-in such a way on Gallipoli and in France that they had covered themselves with glory. Some regiments from the Dublin slums had been completely annihilated during the retreat from Mons, and had been replaced by men from those same slums. Were we going to despise them to-day? Those same slums had produced some of the leading men in building up the Empire, and now the mothers were looking’ at the blackened walls of their homes, and starving. The Prince of Wales, Dean Regnault concluded, had provided a fine example. He knew the services of the Irish at the front; he had been in the slums of Dublin, and he knew how dire was the distress and the result was that he had forwarded <£2ooo to relieve the misery. Could we do better than follow in the footsteps of him who was to be our King ? (By telegraph, from our own correspondent.) October 31. A crowded meeting, many being turned away, was held in the Hibernian Hall on Tuesday evening. His Lordship Bishop Brodie presided. He was supported on the platform by the Very Rev. Dean Regnault, Rev. Fathers Graham (St. Bede’s College), Long, O’Hare, and Murphy (Cathedral), Drs. Morkane and O’Brien, and Mr. F. Holley. After a few preliminary remarks, Dean Regnault moved—‘ That, notwithstanding the criticism levelled against the Dublin distress relief fund movement, this meeting of Catholics upholds the merit of the work and pledges itself to do its utmost to make the appeal a success.’ The Dean spoke eloquently and at length on the subject of the motion. Mr. IT. H. Loughnan seconded the resolution, and expressed the general conviction of the dire distress existing in Dublin, and surprise at the criticism, by what is considered a reputable journal, of the action of the promoters in organising a local relief fund. Mr. F. J. Doolan moved, and Mr. M. J. Corrigan seconded— 1 That this meeting expresses its sympathy with those relatives of fallen and wounded soldiers and with those who were present at the Dublin relief meeting of last Thursday, but who, notwithstanding their sacrifices for the Empire, had to bear their share of the criticism of the Press of last Friday.’ Mr. F. Holley moved, and Dr. A. B. Q’Brien seconded— ‘ That this meeting of Catholics offers its sympathy to Bishop Brodie for the pain caused him by the severe criticism of the Press in reference to the meeting held for the relief of distress in Dublin. In his reply the Bishop spoke at considerable length, and in the most stirring manner ever heard in this city. He had, he said, received many messages from different parts of the Dominion touching upon the subject, and sympathising with himself. All the resolutions were carried unanimously amid cheers, and at the conclusion, ‘ Faith of our fathers ’ was sung by the many hundreds present.