THE OTHER SIDE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 18, 16 October 1918, Page 7

THE OTHER SIDE

REV. J. K. ARCHER'S ADDRESS CRITICISED MORE ABOUT DEAN SWIFT DEFENCE OF THE EARLY SETTLERS. (To tho Editor.) Sir,—l have been waiting to tee if our Baptist, people had any comment to make on the extraordinary address 1 delivered by the president of their unimi on Wednesday.night last week. 1 havo seen no comment either from the union or from those who are not members of that representative body. In your paper you headed the address ihus:

"A. Popular Sin"; "The Race for Gain"; "Minister on Covetousnese" ; "Scathing Condemnation of Present Conditions." And you divided the address in two parts, for iu another column you had "Ireland and the War"; "Why She Stands Out"; "A Baptist Minister's Views.' , The address is naturally so divided. One part-is an apology for, Sinn Feinism in ' Ireland and the other is the advocacy of what is popularly known as Red Fcdism. The address has apparently fallen, flat. No Baptist has even referred to the president'*. utterance. Taking the apology for Sinn Feinism in Ireland, this Baptist, minister assumes that it exists because in the past, the Irish were badly -treated by English people, and especially by Anglican chuiclinien; and hs drags in poor l)ean Swift as if his action had led to this anti-English feeling so manifest to-day in some classes in Ireland. 1 do not know if it is. more manifest among the Sinn Feiners in Ireland than it is among some of the Red Feds in New Zealand. I do not know, if they know anything of Dean Swift. Dean Swift is described as a humbug and a pampered Anglican. It is nearly 173 years since he died, and I think his bones might have been allowed to rest in peace. He was a kindly man, and he had his faults, and fewer faults, perhaps, than some of his critics. Ho spent one-third of his income on charity; another third he saved for the hospital he endowed. He left about £11,000 for a free mental hospital, and he left personalty to carry out his charitable objects. In his cupboard there was, it is said; a skeleton.' I have heard of such even in a Baptist minister's cupboard, though Mr. Archer was not then in New Zealand. What Dublin people thought of the Dean may be gathered from this extract :from the best-life cf Swift (Sir Henry Craik's): "When it became known that tho Dean had breathed his last the nation's love and veneration, hushed , to silenco during these years of living death, broke out once 'more. The people, crowded to tho deanery to take a last look of him who had been their idol for' five-and-tweuty years, 'to bog a lmir of him for memory,' and to pay to him in death tbat tribute of enthusiastic worship which, living, he had accepted with half-pitying disdain." I wonder to what Baptist -minister m Dublin was there ever such a tribute offered?. Thackeray said, referring to ■Swift's nervous breakdown—"To think of him is like thinking of tho ruin of. a great empire." Swil'fc had as his friends to the end Arbiithnot. Addison, and others, and it was Swift, this Dean of the "pampered" Anglican Church, who exposed the Wood Copper job. To speak about the Wood job as having led to Sein Feinism is pure piffle. Why was Dean Swift's'life brought before the Baptist Union?. Was it'for tho purpose of having a ding at the Irish Episcopal Church? It is to-day a vital Church. It has about ouoeufhth of thtvpopulation'its people, and no Church is more generous or belter organised. In Ireland there was in tho past persecution of Catholics, but there was also cruel persecution of Protestants. There were persecutions of Presbyterians and Covenantors by .episcopalians in Soot-la mil on tho hill's of Ayr, of Renfrew and Lanark, and who has not heard of the Wigton martyrs? Have the Scotch, because of past persecution, refused to, fight for ;he Empire? There are, too, loyal Catholics in Ireland. Many of th'n'nu like Major Redmond and' Professor Kettle and thousands of others, have made the supremo sacrifice for our Emj pire. The disloyalty of the Sein Feiners is not explainable by past religious persecution. . It has another root," just as the disloyalty of tho Rod Feds, in New Zealand, who decline to join in tho National Anthem, has another cause. In not a sentence of the presidential address can I see ono phraso criticising the action of the disloyalists amongst ourselves. The president can afford to sneer at our Coalition Government thus: "Covetousness is frightfully commonplace, as much so as tho weather, or the Kaiser, or tho Coalition Government. Like each of these, however, it vitally affects our existence." And the gracefulness of his oratory can be gauged by his sneer at thesacredness of law. Listen to this lied Fcdism: "For centuries tho British Parliament was dominated by landlords, who made laud laws to suit themselves. Landless people were then preached and prated at about the s»eredness of law. The sacreclness of law my grandmother."

Before I refer to tho trinity of evil that is cursing our Empire, lot me note the slanders cast on our early settlers. I quote: "The origins of land' monopoly in New Zealand are .scarcely loss discreditable. The Maoris appear to have taken by force from their predecessors some 66,(100,000 acr.es. By for;:o and gmlo we have taken 63,000,000 acres of that from the Maoris." This is a gross misstatement. No land was ever taken by force save the small areas taken from those who fought against us and lost. And as for land taken by guile, this is <i gross slander. Anyone can judge of the president's economics by this sentence: "On the West Coast 7.000,000 acres were bought for £300, which is something like 24 acres' a fnrthin K , Out of that little patch over £20,000,000 worth of gold has been taken, so have other valuable minerals." The West Coast lands were _ not .in occupation of the Maoris, and were not their lands, save by tho will and kindness of the early settlers. It was unoccupied territory. .Further, the cost of mining this £20,000,000 worth of siold would about equal the gold won. Them has to be put on the other side of thu account the cost of roads, harbours, railway, bridges, etc., and of labour. In soma goldtields the cost of getting each ounce of gold has, on so mo occasions, exceeded its value. Who, we would like.to know, are "the rapacious" land sharks? How comes it that the Baptist Union quietly submitted to the wanton abuso of the Anglican Church nnd of the early settlers? Prices of land have gone up, but how fen' early settlers are really rich from land purchase! But if the increase of tho value of the land does not belong to the holder, pray let tiio Baptist Church set an example. The present church in Vivian Street could letch double or treble the price it cost to the church folk when it was erected. Are !!"> church members rapacious land sharks who keep this valuable property?

Now let- us see what is the cause of puvcrly. Is it not caused by the iviisto of our means in alcohol? Kn.mlnnd li:is lieon spending during; tlio win , about £-200,000,000 ii voiir, Imt tint is not one of Hie causes of povurty! I wondi!) , wlinfc the 'Rev. 11. S. Gray has to say lc this statement. We ar« told. "Poverty is tlm rostill. of economic influences over which the individual has uo con-

trol." I(/ is a comforting doctrine! The trinity of evil is: ".Mechanism, Imperialism, and Mauimonism," and the ronicd.v is Socialism 1 Vjiat is needed, lie says, is not efficiency of production, but efficiency of distribution. Will ho bo precise? What does he propose? "Competitive 'commercialism" is to jjo. What is to take its place? Aro all trades and manufactures to be in the State's hands? And 1 suppose 'religion too! Where will tho Baptists come in? And who is to manage?Let the Bolsheviks answer!

All tho progress in the world in thn past has come from individual exertion mid freedom. Just as Socialism has ceased so has progress advanced. .'.Die Maoris were. Socialistic. Did they succeed? We havo had Socialism tried in Paraguay, first by the Jesuits and then by the Australian Lano. Settlement. Did it succeed? And we know what tho Bolsheviks have done! Murders rampant, property destroyed, poverty never worse. But let Mr. Archer and his friends, Messrs. Holland, Semple, Fraser, etc., start) a new Socialistic venture. Let. them have every chance of showing what they can do. We shall see what we shall see.

There is one thing Mr. Archer has not done. He has'not ventured to talk about religion. It apparently has no part in tho future reformation of humanity. • At one time it would have been impossible to have a presidential address to any church gathering that did not rely on the Gospel of Christ as tlio reforming factor for humanity. There is no mention of this in Mr. Archer's address. What is needed is the distribution of production. This is certainly a new , gosijel. The old gospel was: "He <liat"believeth and is baptised shall be saved." Xow it is: "He Ihat brings about the cud of competitive commercialism, shall be saved." And Baptism and belief have taken a back seat, fio bo it.

May. I just add that, though the profiteering farmers and capitalists aro referred to as condemned, there is no criticism of tho attitude of the wageearners who demanded an • increase of wapes. The coal miners were earning in *i)l7 17s. to 2-ss. a day. They demanded more. They were offered 5 per cent, more, but that did not satisfy them. Where was thnir.patriotism?' I suppose, liko the Red Feds, the Baptist president-endorses the. "Mapriland Worker's" programme, which states: "Capitalism ciin bo abolished only by the workers meeting in one class-con-scious organisation to take and to hold the means of production'by-revolution-ary, industrial, and political action." Tliis is what the New Zealand Socialists desire) and it means industrial war.—l am, etc., - . . FREE ELECTOR.