The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920. THE A.S. CAMPAIGN

New Zealand Tablet, 11 March 1920, Page 25

The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920. THE A.S. CAMPAIGN

fECENTLY Dublin was the scene of a M spirited protest against the introduction SJ of West-British filth among the Irish P> people. What the stalwart editor of the Leader calls an "Anti-Smut Campaign" was, mainly as a result of Mr. Moran's own caustic writing, organised enthusiastically. The Leader has consistently denounced the introduction of English Sunday papers, reeking with the filthy details of English Divorce Courts, and of English theatrical companies posturing lewdly and staging suggestive and indecent dramas and singing bawdy songs on Irish stages. Very little assistance did Mr. Moran ever get from the ad-vertisement-hunting dailies of Dublin, but he kept on his lonely way unabashed and unashamed, until he succeeded in arousing the attention of decent-minded people, who have now proclaimed in a public meeting

that Ireland wants no more English filth, just as she wants no more English misrule. We may never hope to secure much support'from the press of this country; still less from a Government that has banished from the schools the one thing that can teach "boys and girls the high value of purity in time and in eternity. But, we have a Catholic Federation which has already done great work in this direction, and we can do our best, each in his own way, to co-operate with the Federation in this matter.

Have we no need of an Anti-Smut Campaign in this country ? , Personally we cannot speak authoritatively on the Picture-Shows, as we never go near them but we have evidence enough to convince us that they are not the best places to send young people, who ought to be kept away from temptation and suggestion at an age when awakening passions only need fuel to feed their destroying fire. We have as part of our daily duty the penance of reading the daily and weekly press, and we know that there are papers in circulation that ought to be allowed into no Christian home. If we were to name one we should select a certain Australian periodical that, pretends to aim at elevating and improving the aesthetic taste of the people by publishing mawkish pictures and not infrequently suggestive verses. Other papers publish details of shocking divorce cases and of criminal assaults so fully that their aim can be no other than to pander to prurient minds. In the trains and in the public streets, one cannot help hearing from time to time the foul language of some of our young hopefuls, who in a civilised community would be treated to a reformative acquaintance with the cat-and-nine-tails. And, last but by no means least, owing to the zealous efforts of certain parsons to purvey for impure minds the sort of gutter-literature they demand, books that used to be sold furtively by obscure and shady dealers in contraceptives and similar immoral devices are now paraded in the open as “Protestant literature.” Those so-called ministers of the Gospel have made it possible for depraved dupes to read the ravings of the prostitute Maria Monk, or the calumnies of Chiniquy, or the anti-Christian fictions of Robertson, than which no more poisonous and malodorous fuel for lewd minds could well be invented. What the results of all this are we can see only too plainly. We need not go beyond the opinions of the magistrates if we want to be convinced that there is work enough to do for those who feel keenly for the good name of the Dominion.

Of all the virtues, chastity is the one that de-mands-most care and precaution, the most scrupulous attention, the most active surveillance. A word, a look, a thought is enough to tarnish the whiteness of a young soul and to corrupt an innocent heart ; and one word or look or thought may readily mean the ruin of both body and soul for eternity. The Bible teems with warnings: a look was the cause of the fall of David, who had lived a long life in the fear and love of God; a desire of concupiscence delivered Solomon, the wisest of men, as a prey to his passions; and if such men fell, what are we to think of those who are so far beneath them in wisdom and strength ? What hope is there for young people to whom the name of God means so little, for whom the restraints of religion mean nothing, whose minds are exposed continually to the haunting suggestions of an imagination roused by evil words, by pictures that depict men and women enslaved by their desires, of “literature” —blessed by parsons—that reeks with obscenity What hope is there for them in a community that is taught to regard religion as unnecessary and that holds the marriage bond so lightly? Surely, if an “Anti-Smut Campaign” is needed in Ireland, it is a thousand times more imperative here. Things have gone so far without sign of improvement that no man can close his eyes to the seriousness of the plague. If we -had a Government worthy of the name, something might be

done in the way of public reform, but the Government that is seems intent on helping the flood of demoralisa-

tion by keeping God and religion as far from the souls of the children as possible.