Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 23 September 1920, Page 14

Current Topics

A Point for the Councillors v We would respectfully call the : attention of the Council of Churches to the following remarks of Arthur Griffith:— --•—' ; -'' - ; - : hli'-lx™ ■.,;■*■:<■■ >.-:; * * " ; "The rioting in Derry had no accidental origin. It has been planned and directed by,Unionist leaders, in collusion with persons of eminence in England, and with the servants of the English Government in Ireland." • .■:'-■■ --..*■ Commenting on this the New Witness says :—■ • "As the fog lifts, one learns that for two days the Nationalists of Derry, practically unarmed, were left at the mercy of Unionists armed with rifles firmly guarded by the R.I.C. When they procured some arms and proceeded to defend themselves, the military and the Unionist shooters fraternised, and later the military fired on, the Nationalists." Dear Mr. J. J. North, is it seditious to call attention to this damnable foul play and this campaign of murder carried on by your Orange friends in a small nation ? r p i For Small Nations, Moryah! The following table gives us the total loss of population which the war caused in Europe, not through deaths alone, but through decline in birth-rate, rise in death-rate, and casualties:

Remember that much of this happened because Lloyd George told the soldiers they were fighting to secure for peoples the right of choosing their own form of government, and to save weak nations from organised bullies holding them down. Oh, they were great and glorious those war aims, for which Mr. George asked men to die! To-day in a small nation, Commissioner Smyth tells the police that he will like them better the more they shoot, and that he will protect them even if they kill innocent persons, and that they may enter any house they please and throw out the inmates to die in the gutter, and that the more die the merrier. It is certainly high time that all who care for the safety of the British Empire united in protesting against the Orange devilry.and the Tory slaughtering among the Irish people. It is well to remember that all who fought for Belgium and Poland were not hypocrites. i j The Marriage Laws We are pleased to see that practically every daily of importance in the Dominion has condemned the proposed -legislation on Marriage Laws. That this is the case, and that the unanimity is so remarkable is one more proof that the Government does not represent the people of the Dominion. .........While we have such support from the press, let us not make the mistake of taking things too easy. Our adversaries are unscrupulous and unprincipled. . We believe they are animated by a spirit of hostility to Catholics, and the obvious manner . in which the leader' of the Massey Party in the Council has played into the hands of the P.P. Ass., both before the inquiry and pending it, ought to convince us that he at least will leave no stone unturned in order to get home his blow at our religion.

The proposed legislation certainly is a direct attack on. our doctrine, and for that reason we are bound in honor and in conscience to resist it to the bitter end. We ought to lose no opportunity of making it plain that we will not submit to religious persecution, inspired by a party of bigots'whose sole conception of religion is hatred. Our bishops have given us a splendid lead in this matter, and it is to be hoped that all our clergy and people will take the agitation up in the same spirit as the Hierarchy have done. We note with satisfaction that two Anglican bishops in Dunedin have emphasised the importance of safeguarding the spiritual nature of the Marriage Contract between Christians, and also the supreme need of a fundamental religious, education for the-youth of this country. The growth of immorality, and the scandalous increase of divorces make it quite clear that a system of education which, banished God and teaches indifference towards His Law is corrupting New Zealand. We have fought for religion in the schools and have been penalised by our atheist State for our principles, and we regret to say that we have fought alone. It is a good sign to see that others are awake to the crying need of schools like ours for the children of all creeds, just as it is consoling to read, that a public declaration concerning the importance of maintaining jealously the sacred character of Christian wedlock has come from the Anglican authorities. On the schools and on conjugal unions sanctified by God all true reform must hinge. Legislation will never make people moral : nothing can do that but sound principles and habits , of virtue, acquired in good homes and fostered in good schools. May we venture to express a hope that Anglican sympathy will not stop at mere words. Anglicans in the past gave us precious little support in battles that we fought for them as well as for ourselves; and, considering their numbers in the Dominion, we can hardly help thinking that much of the evils with which Christians have to contend now are due to the lack of earnest action and the want of organisation of the leaders of the Church of England. However, we have learned not to hope for much from any outside sources. The practical lesson of our history in this country is similar to. that so well learned by our friends in Ireland. We must depend on ourselves; we must organise and be ready to fight for our rights as Catholics and as citizens. And we might with profit recall the truth inculcated by Padraic Pearse in another connection: Oiganised, and ready to make sacrifices, we can never be beaten. While we invite the co-operation of all sincere Christians for the safeguarding of our common ideals, we will at the same time remember always that Sinn Fein is our best motto. Self-reliance, self-sacrifice if need be, and organisation, will enable us to defy even greater bigots and more unprincipled enemies than Orangemen, P.P. Ass. agitators, and their tools in the Government which the bigots boast they have made their very own. ■ ■

Hunger-Strikes .*... More than one of our readers has asked us what of the morality of hunger-striking. Is it suicide or not if the strike is persevered in till the striker dies May a priest absolve a hunger-striker who purposes to keep on till death? The problem is no easy one, and there are differences of opinion concerning many of its • aspects. Some eighteen months ago the matter was discussed at great length in the Irish Ecclesiastical cord by two writers well versed in theology : and philosophy who in the end agreed to differ. In the present article we would have been aided by reference to this discussion, but we find that some kind person abstracted, hid, or so confused our volumes of the Record that we are unable to find' what we want just now. If we might be pardoned for the brief digression we would here remark that it is only one who is liable to need his documents at short notice at any time who fully realises the plague that are all those who are much more ready to borrow one's papers or books than to return them. However, revenant a nos moutons,

it is right; to make it clear that there are different views on- the subject. It is also right to say that we are free to hold our own opinion, as nothing has been officially decided for or against. And from this it follows that, since there is a reasonable doubt, a priest would do wrong in refusing to administer the , Sacraments to a dying hunger-striker. That much seems to be quite certain, at any rate. People who hold that hunger-striking is equivalent to suicide will of course maintain that it is unlawful. But most people are slow to conclude that it is direct killing of oneself at all. It is of course refusing to take food in the first place ; but it is not refusing to take food with the intention of killing oneself. Thus death is certainly not intended directly : if death follows, it follows rather indirectly and the question then is whether or not there is a proportionately grave cause to overcome the evil indirect result. Strong arguments for or against might be multiplied at length; and their weight will probably depend a great deal on the bias of the individual. So far as we are concerned personally, we hold that hunger-striking is not suicide, and that the Irish strikers have sufficient cause to excuse them. In the absence of theory we venture to suggest one fact that tends to justify them. When St. Eusebius was thrown into. prison he refused to take food from his gaolers and nearly died of starvation. If that did not prevent the canonisation of the Saint it can hardly be identified with suicide. And if the guilt of his death could in the case of Eusebius be thrown on the gaolers it is hard to see what case can be made against Irish strikers fighting for a principle. There seems no evidence for suggesting that St. Eusebius refused to eat because to accept food in his case might involve sinful communication with heretics. Certainly, other confessors of the faith did not think they disobeyed any law of God when they accepted food in prison under like circumstances. As . Father Gannon, S.J., says of this instance: “The story, as Flenry tells it, will give us pause before pronouncing dogmatically upon the ethics of this manner of protest.” The conclusion seems to be: that to accuse the Irish hungerstrikers of acting unlawfully is rash; that much may be said for the contrary view ; and that sound theological principles would not leave any priest free to refuse the Sacraments to a striker in Mr. Mac Sweeney’s circumstances. Whether the cable telling us of Father Vaughan’s view be true or false we cannot say. Probably, „ like most cables, it was false. But even if it were true, Father Vaughan has not been so orthodox during the war that we should select him as a safe guide in questions of theology. Popular preachers are more often than not poor theologians.

Another Colthurst Mr. Darrel Figgis and Colonel Moore were appointed as a deputation to attend a meeting held at the Courthouse, Carrick-on-Shannon, to deal with the question of the Arigna coal deposits. While the meeting was m progress a British captain and a guard of soldiers entered. The captain ordered the arrest of the chairman, Mr. Kealy. Upon Mr. Kealy's asking tor his authority the brave officer produced a revolver and said: "This is my authority the authority of orce. The captain removed Mr. Kealy and returned later and demanded the names and addresses of all the other members. When he came to ColonelJMoore, the Colonel told him. his name and added that he was ashamed to see an officer disgracing the uniform he wore. I suppose/' he said, "these are the manners of the new army." Mr. Figgis then gave his name, whereupon the officer cried out roughly", brandishing a revolver in Mr. Figgis's face: • ? now X y ° U ' re Darrel Fi^is = I want you, and Mr lr- got you I m not s° in s to let you go." Mr. Figgis was marched to the guardroom In conversation with the soldiers they said to himoff his head atam mUSt aWaSh With liqU ° r or ' else

On the spot the mad or drunken officer tried Mr. Figgis by a sort of drum-head court-martial and sentenced him to death.. A sergeant was i sent away to buy 20 feet of rope for the hanging. Mr. Figgis warned the Brithun that if he were hanged there would be trouble over it. The gallant champion of small nations repliedagain : brandishing . his i revolver: “I have no need to worry about trouble. I know very well that they will be thankful to me for hanging you- and it will mean a good thing for me. I have been specially wired down here by G.H.0., Ireland, and I am sure they did not wire me here for nothing. You remember what happened in Tuam. It is clear that they want me to make a similar example here in Car rick.” ■ Apparently, however, the Captain did fear something, as he now said he would .bring Mr. Figgis to the District Inspector. They marched the prisoner to the police barracks, where they saw the D. 1., who did not know what to make of the situation at first. He said to Mr. Figgis: “Things look serious, and I don’t like the way the man spoke and handled his revolver. It is men like that who make all the trouble in this country.” 'He also expressed his opinion that the captain was probably in drink. The captain, who gave his name as Cyril Crowther, produced some papers which he took from Mr. Figgis, and submitted them to the D.I. and also to the County Inspector, who arrived later. These gentlemen said they saw nothing in the papers to justify arrest, and decided that Mr. Figgis ought to be set at liberty. Mr. Figgis returned to ,Dubhn with Colonel Moore and told his story to the press. The facts as here related are found at length m the Irish Independent, July 23, and they are certainly well worth consideration for those ChurchCouncillors in New Zealand who hold that the British Government in Ireland is maligned by the New Zealand Tablet. Since the day in 1916 when Colthurst shot down in cold blood innocent men, we have heard of nothing to rival this sample of British militarism in a small nation. The authorities refused to interfere with the assassin, Colthurst, and Major Vane was driven out of the army for bringing his crimes under Kitchener s notice. When Kitchener forced the Castle to take action, Colthurst was whitewashed as a lunatic. What will the Government do now with the drunken or mad Crowther ? Lunatics, drunkards, fools, armed with revolvers, are apparently suitable persons to send to Ireland as Lloyd George’s ministers of peace.

Decline in Per Riie in Per War casPar Total Per Birth* Per Ct. Rise in Deaths Per Ct War casualties Per Ct. Total Losses Per Ct. Thous, Thous. Thou*. Thou*. A,-Hungary ■. Thous. 3,800 7.1 Thous. 2.000 4.0 Thou*. 1,500 2.9 Thou*. 5,800 1 1,0 France 1.500 3.8 1,840 •4.6 1,400 3.5 3.340 8.4 Germany 3,600 5.3 2,700 4.0 2 000 3.0 6,300 9.3 Great Britain 850 •1.9 1.000 2.1 800 1.7 1.850 4.0 Italy 1,400 4.0 880 2.5 600 1.7 2.280 6.4 Eur, Russia • • 8.300 6.1 4,700 3.5 2.500 1.8 13,000 9.6 Belgium 175 2.3 200 2.6 115 1.5 375 4.9 Bulgaria 115 3.2 120 2.5 65 1.4 275 5.7 Rouraania 150 2.0 360 4.7 159 2.1 510 6.7 Serbia 320 6.8 1,330 28.4 690 14.8 1.650 35.0 Total* 20.210 5.0 15.130 3.8 9,829 2.5 35,380 8.8