BISHOP LISTON’S SPEECH.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2409, 25 March 1922, Page 3

BISHOP LISTON’S SPEECH.

ACTION BY AUCKLAND CITY - COUNCIL.

Auckland, March 24. "The City Council to-day passed • the- following resolution: —“That this Council, solemnly and sincerely affiriiiing its loyalty and allegiance to King George, and to the British Empire, deplores the disloyal, seditious speech delivered by the Right ■Rev. Dr. Liston, Roman Catholic Coadjutor Bishop of Auckland, in 'the Town Hall, and resolves: (1) , Thakthe Council hereby records its ■ condemnation of the said lecture, and declares the opinion that no person making the reported to have been made by Bishop /■’ Liston is worthy of British'jcitizenship; (2) That the speech be brought under' the' notice of the New Zealand, GoveTriment, with a view to its taking appropriate action; (3) That those concerned in the hire of the Town Hall and the Auckland Domain in connection with St‘. Patrick's Day . celebrations be notified that until tl/e sentiment expressed in the speech/ and evident in’the proceedings, are disavowed, and an assurance given against'any repetition of such statements, neither of these facilities will be available for an organisation under these auspices, and on whose behalf the Bishop claimed that he spoke; that the city solicitor be instructed to re-draft the terms for the hire of the Town Hall/and the by-laws governing the ' : use of the Domain, and re-draft the • 'by-laws relating to parks and open 1 spaces, and consider the Council’s powers in regard (to licensing public halls, so as to require that all pro- ' ceedings be conducted in a lawful . and constitutional manner, pvithoui disloyalty, sedition or other con- , duct invidious to the realm, or conducting an affront to the citizens.” The City Council’s resolution regarding Bishop Liston’s speech was opposed by Cr. Bloodworth, who moved four amendments, all failing to find a seconder. Cr. Bloodworth said the Mayor was right in. writing to Bishop Liston, but that he should /have awaited a reply before publishing his statement/ The motion' • . ' went further than the Council'should go. The speaker claimed that stronger speeches would have gone unnoticed in Britain, and pleaded . for freedom of speech here. The St. Benedicts’ branch of the Hibernian Australasian Catholic

Benefit Society passed a resolution , unanimously deprecating the at- , V tacks on Bishop Lisbon, condemning the unwarranted attitude adopted . towards His Lordship by so-called Catholics, and recording its un-

swerving fidelity to, and app’reeiation of, Bishop Liston., . ■ f. Wellington, March 24. ’’ < Cabinet has considered the mat- - t’er of Bishop Liston’s speech’, and will announce its decision shortly. Auckland, March 24. At a meeting of priests in tbe'city and suburbs, a resolution was chr- ,. ried expressing loyalty and devotion to Bishop Liston, and sympathy with him in the bitter attack made upon him and the misrepresentation to which he has been subjected, and assuring him of their cordial support. The resolution was signed by Monsignor Hackett (president), and 17 others. '

ROMAN CATHOLIC’S PROTEST

PLEA FOR PEACE AND / CHARITY.

, Mr Patrick Darby writes in the Herald:—l, with hundreds of other Catholics in Auckland, and probably thousands ofv them throughout New Zealand, was pained and surprised at the uncalled-for remarks of Bishop Liston last Friday even- *: ing in the Town Hall. o*ne can readily understand.the indignation of our non-Catholie fellow citizens, and rightly so. Bishop, Liston has no right to publicly insult the citizens of Auckland, Catholic and non- , Catholic, as he did. He is entitled . to his own opinions, but to say that his position in the Church gave him the privilege to speak as he did'as the mouthpiece of the Catholics is . absolutely wrong. He has no more right than any ordinary layman, Catholic or non-Catholie, to dictate to him his political views. His duty in conjunction with all other bishops and priests is to attend to the spiritual wants of his people, and not to try and stir up srife and dissension among Where is the great spirit Of'charity that they are always harping, about, and why do they (the clergy) not exercise it and practice .it in .. place of preaching > same? One would think that with all the concessions granted to Ireland by the recent treaty (more tbap we have in New Zealnnd) Bishop Liston would ; do3his very utmost to engender kindly and charitable feelings to those outside.of his . Church. A resolution was passed'hy the (Auckland branch of Hibernians sympathising with Bishop Liston, and protesting against the action of the press. In justice to the Catholics of Auckland,, it ought to be clearly understood by ; all non-Catho-lics in Auckland that the Hibernians represent only a fractional part of the Catholics in Auckland, and are on a par with the three .tailors of Tooley Street. The time has evidently arrived-when not only the school teachers, private and public, should be called upon to take the oath of allegiance,' but every adult in the Dominion; and those, who refuse to take the oath. be given the option of leaving, the Dominion to r settle in lands more in keeping with ' their sentiments. In conclusion, our

late Holy Father Bepedict XV., in an 'encyclical letter' issued a few years •ago, entreated-the clergy to refrain from any word or .writing that would

tend to impede the peace he was so anxious to see re-established.

' A PLEA FOR THE BISHOP. THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT. Mr J. McD. Coleman writes: Many attacks have been made by the press and public men, no doubt all in good faith, on Dr. Liston because of his speech at the Town Hall on St. Patrick’s night. Permit, me a word. I can lay claim to “loyalty” through? free and voluntary service at the front, and I claim also ,to understand a little of the-Irish spirit. Dr. Liston spoke as a man of Irish' descent to an Irish audience, and on their national day. One does not expect at such a time or occasion a recital of the virtues of England and English rule. Many of the Irish present had lost relatives in the recent years of the Irish trouble, and no doubt, the wounds were still open and sore. The Irish blamed the English Government, for its misrule, whether or not there was blame oil both sides. Was it not natural under the conditions of the evening’, amidst Irish national song, music and dancing, things might be said that in the light of cold reading on the following day may seem harsh and uncalled for, and even say uncharitable. Frym the speech as I heard it I do not believe sedition was meant, or intended. Time is a great ltealer for all wounds, and when the Irish Free Stqte is solidly and securely established under {he leadership of Mr Griffith and Mr Collins, a more contented" and happy spirit must grow. Meanwhile, press Comment and sectional bitterness with the demand for punishment on occasional outbursts as the present will add nothing to tjie stability of Jhe Empire, or help the Irish themselves lo forget.