The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1875.

Evening Star, Issue 3883, 4 August 1875, Page 2

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1875.

Two letters from our Melbourne correspondent contain details of the manner in which two children have been taken from the care of a woman who hud undertaken charge of them, by a priest of the Roman Catholic faith. We are far from approving of the style in which our correspondent related the fads, but we purposely did not soften its asperities, for it tends to show the bitterness of feeling that has been aroused by a high-handed contempt of law and an outrage upon the religious feelings of the majority of the people. Very likely, so far as the two children themselves are concerned, it may be a very fortunate occurrence. If they are permitted to be retained in the Orphanage, they will enjoy comfort and training far superior to what could have been their lot had they been left to the care of the good Samaritan who so generously accepted the charge of them ; and if by a legal process they are removed from Roman Catholic care, they are not likely to be allowed to be placed in worse circumstances among Protestants. It is not that we fear they would suffer in either case, for there is enough in common in the religion of Roman Catholic and Protestant to lead to a tender care for both the temporal and spiritual welfare of young human beings. In zeal, perhaps, the old Church excels. Difference of religion is not the grievance. Our correspondent’s letters give the facts of the case, and his account is confirmed by particulars published in the Melbourne ‘Argus’ and ‘Age.’ The latter journal, in fact, took the precaution of obtaining a statutory declaration of the truth of the details of the affair. The real grievance is the determination shown by the Romish priesthood to override all social law, and to assert the privilege of the ecclesiastical order to commit outrages upon liberty in the name of religion. It is this that has weaned and is wean-

ing the nations of Europe from the ancient Church • it is this that renders it so difficult to live harmoniously with others in new communities. We do not believe that the laity, as a body, coincide with or approve of the action of the priesthood. They are as much interested in the observance of those laws which are intended to guard civil liberties as those of other persuasions,and we can quite understand bow bitterly they would resent so gross an outrage upon their faith as taking children in contempt of law, and in defiance of social lights to train them up as Protestants. Could a wellfounded claim have been established of the right of the Romish priesthood to have the care of those Melbourne children, not a reasonable objection could have been raised, and every Protestant, not blinded by bigotry, would have acquiesced in the arrangement. In fact, it would scarcely have been heard of beyond the court where the right

was established. Instead of this, through a high-handed defiance of law’ a fireorand lias been thrown into society tending to disunion and bitter hatred of two large sections of the colonists. Ihe ‘ I ablet,’ which claims to be the mouthpiece of the Roman Catholics New Zealand, instead of being a guardian of their liberties and condemning this sad affair endeavor s to excuse it; and has thus proved itself to bo the organ of the priesthood—not the champion of the people. The Roman clei'gy may per-

suade themselves their interests are identical with their flocks’, but every move of this sort tends to separation. The interest of the people is peaceful enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, while the priesthood appear to think that they prosper only when they are outraging both, by insulting and defying professors of other religions, and thus sowing the seeds of disunion and anarchy.

The ‘ Australasian ’ puts the case very forcibly, as follows Possibly, if the Catholic clergy were for a i-I? to rel ix their efforts of proselytising which bear so marked a liken-ss to k dnappiug practices, the problem of supporting the schools wou.d hardly require considering, or, at any rate, urcula ibriak to very small dimendonsi

To an impartial observer, it would appear that at present the clergy ha*e quite enough to dn to secure the attendance of die children of their own people at their schoo's, without out raging human feeling and infringing the laws, b _ getting hold »f other children by violence or tuckery. But, however this may be, it is quite certain that a system that can only support itselt in this way cannot in any law-respecting community support itself very long.