“FEARING TO DO RIGHT”

New Zealand Tablet, 1 July 1920, Page 33

“FEARING TO DO RIGHT”

111 his speech on the second reading of the Irish Bill, Mr Lloyd George uttered one passage which richly merits analysis in all its bearings (writes Mr J. W. Poynton in the London catholic Times). ■ Not that the words' were, taken in themselves, either very clever or very original. They were neither ; but they expressed in a few brief lines a defect which has inhered in English political life for many generations, and ; been responsible for half our woes. “Self-determination,” said Mr George, “is a principle that must be qualified ' by tradition, usage, and commonsense.” He was speaking of the demand (now made by the great majority of the Irish people) that they must have a completely independent national existence of their own. He did not. attempt to deny that that demand is just. He did not venture to deny that it is precisely the same claim as that to which England herself has compelled the Central Powers to accede in the cases of the new European Republics just set up. No; he simply said that it must be “qualified by tradition, usage, and commonsense,” no matter how just it, as a demand, may be nor how logically its fulfilment is demanded by England’s own professed war-aims.

An English Characteristic.

It is well to look into the state of mind exhibited by this Lloyd Georgian dictum It will be found to be only one more instance of our fatal English defect of preferring plausibility, expediency, temporary “patches-up” or compromises, before thorough going justice. The English nation 'has many very great and noble qualities; but for centuries this defect has 'been spoiling their full fruition. . Of course, it is perfectly true that, in all things, one must be “prudent.” No Catholic, at any rate, will deny this, seeing that prudence is one of the four cardinal virtues. He would, however, remember that justice, also, is a cardinal virtue,' and that compromise, which is made at the expense of justice, is not prudence at all, but cowardice. Let us look, for a- moment, away -from our own times, back to the reign of Henry VIII.

An Example from the Past.

The tyrant, thirsty with his lusts and his greed, had claimed for himself the Headship of the Churchr* The bees were occupied by Catholic bishops the religion of the land was Catholic; but the spirit of the time (at least, in England] was one of opportunism and compromise. As a result of this (and also of the inborn English tendency to “ease things down”), those who should have offered strenuous opposition to the tyrant did not do so. “Religious duty,” we can almost hear them* saying, “must be qualified by tradition, usage, and commonsense.’’ It is a “tradition” in England (we can always hear them adding) that the King bust be honored and his laws obeyed; no doubt he is going a bit too far in what he is doing, but “commonsense” tells us it won’t last, so let us put up with it and hope for better times.

What was the result of it- all? Not good, but bad to an extreme! As the force of resistance to injustice was' weakened by compromise, the tyranny of the despot waxed greater, the foundations of the whole life of the nation were upset; death and misery stalked the land; problems of incalculable complexity accumulated on all sides and have been handed : down even ■ to our own time. - ’ ' ■

Come again now to our own days. No doubt, to Air George when the Peace Treaty was being framed in Paris, it seemed “easier”— “commonsensible” —-to balance one vested interest against another, one unjust secret treaty against others, than to make them all subject to plain, clean justice. The result, however, has been to plunge Europe still more deeply into confusion. Doubtless, also, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in his recent abject surrender in the House of Lords on the Divorce Bill, thought he was prudently “avoiding worse things.” Will it not probably turn out, however, that he has really made things worse?worse for the nation,, because immorality will increase; worse for himself, because people will say : “What use are you in Parliament at all, seeing that you cannot even stand up 'for your own convictions?”

Friendship with Ireland.

Many people— especially politicians —have in all ages seemed to forget what is the real main function of the virtue of prudence. They forget that it may be said to be mainly that of perceiving the best and wisest ways of doing what is just; and they seem to think it is, rather, that- of finding plausible excuses for not doing our just duty. In the case of Ireland, for example, if we English boldly recognised justice and logic, and acknowledged Erin’s independent nationality, then in a 'few . years (perhaps months) all would be amity. We prefer, however, futile compromises leading to more . bloodshed and hatred and misery. It is our great ’ national defectloving compromise before, bold equity. These “make-shifts,” however, merely breed greater evils than those they avoid. Much wiser would it be for ns to cease “fearing to do right.’’ •

There are some who confuse and rush, and attempt to do several things at once, and accomplish little, while others proceed quietly from one duty to another, and easily accomplish a vast amount of work. The difference is not in the capacity of»the two classes, but in the regular method of the one as compared with the irregular and confused habits of the other. ... r