Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIX, Issue 16, 16 January 1891, Page 1

Current Topics

AT HOME AND ABROAD.

Mb. Pa.rnell'B resolution to refrain from defending himself in the O'Shea divorce cue was taken as an acknowledgment on bis part of guilt. His particular followers, the National party, and the Irish people generally, nevertheless, did not at once renounce their allegiance to him. A meeting of the Home Bale party, on the contrary, was held in Dublin, at which, for example, Mr. Justin McCarchy, whe had come there, he said, at great personal inoonveoieoce, spoke strongly in favour of a renewal of confidence, at which Mr. Healy, sinoe very differently reported of, was outspoken and even eloquent in his declaration of an unaltered and unalterable fidelity sad where there was a strong aad unanimous expression of opinion in support of Mr. Parnell's continued leadersbip-thoughnoone attempted to nuke an excuse for or palliate his offence against morals. The tone of the National Press, with the important exception of Mr. Michael Davitt's paper, the Labour World, was to the same effect, and, all through Ireland, meetings were held and other means adopted of expressing an unaffected allegiance. A vote of confidence, nevertheless, proposed by Messrs. Healy and Lane, M.P.'s, at a meeting in Cork, was rejected, and the Members, in consequence, left the hall. In England opinion was divided. The Non -conformists, for example,' were very determined in demanding Mr. Parnell's resignation, and one or two of the Liberal members expressed themae yes bluntly on the subject. "The Liberal party represents the working people, and the so-called middle classes, among whom the purity of home life is keld ia high esteem," said, for instance, Mr. Bicard, M.P. "We have neither the time nor the inclination for debauchery, and we want our leaders to be men whom we cm tike by the hand." la America, two or three of the more prominent newspapers were pronounced in support of Mr. Parnell's leadership, and the Irish delegates, then in the States, enewed the expression of their confi ienca in him, but the - reatbody of the Press were agreed that he must resign. This waa the position in short, when Mr. Gladstoue, ia a letter to Mr. John Morley, declared that, as a result of hia observation and reflection he had arrived at the conclusion that, under the circumstances, Mr! Parnell's continuance as leader would be disastrous to the cause of Ireland, and would render his own retention of tha leadership of the Liberal party almost a nulii y. It response to tnis Mr. Parnell published a manifesto, with tha object of showing that the loss of Mr. Gladstone's clumpionship and Mr. Morley's alliance would be no great detriment to the Irish cause. He virtually branded both of these eminent men as traitors to the cause they pretended to support In an interview held at Hawarden, he said, Mr. Gladstone had told him it was his intention to redone the number of Irish Members in the Imperial Pailiament from 103 to 32, to withhold from the Irish Legislature the power of solving the agrarian difficulty, to retain the control of the Iriih constabulary for Imperial authority, while its cost would be compulsorily provided out of Iri«h revenues, and to deal in a similar manner for tomj 10 or 12 years with the appointment of Irish judges and Besident Magistrates. Mr. Morley, added Mr. Parnell, had proposed to him, in view of a victory of the Liberals to assume the office of Chief Secretary for Ireland, and to fill one of tha law offices of the Crown by a legal member of his party— thus compromibingtbe independence of the Nationalists. He bad also declared that he saw no chance of doing anything for ths Plan of C - - paign tenants. "I allude to the matter, faid Mr. Parnell "only because within the last few days a strong r.rgument in many mm is for my expulsion has been that unless the Liberals come into power at the Dext general eleoion the Plan of Campai E n tenants will suffer '' —To this m .nifesto Mr. Gladstone returned a flat det.ial. " I deny)" be safe', tbat I maae the statements which his (.Mr. Parnell's) memory ascribes to me, cr anj thing substantially resembling them." The consfquence was a change of attitudeon the part of all those, with no excep.ion worth speaking of, who had so far been of the opinion that, notwithstanding the admitted heinousness of his offence against morals, Mr. Parnell should retain his poiition of leader. The Parlia-

thk cum or MB. PABNELL.

inentary party, including five of the delegate to Ameiica— thai is, Messrs. John Dillon, William O'Brien, Thomas P. O'Connor, T. D. Bulliran, and Thomas P. Gill, the Iri-h National Press, and the country generally, declared that Jir. Gladstone's pronouncement muet be accepted at decisive, and that no s paration from the Liberals of Great Britain must take place.— This is, briefly, the situation as explained to us in the newspapers come to hand bjth from Ireland and America by the last mail— but in another place our readers will fiad extracts, in nhioh we lay before them an expression of opinion on the matter made by authoritative speakers, or by representative organs of the Press.

HIABT-BICKEN-ING TBUTH.

Now that the facts of the case are before us, that we hate rewired reliable newi, and that there it no longer any room for doubt, our readers may, perhaps desire that we ourselves should place on record our thoughts and feelings respecting this most lamentable, this truly heart.«ckening, affair. We have, however, in a manner, already said what we thought. la saying what, as it appeared to us, must happen should the cable prove to have told the truth, we made our mind sufficiently known, and we have nothing to retract. If the effect in Ireland was to a considerable extent different from what we assumed it must be, perhaps we did not make sufficient allowance for th 9 state of mind begotten by a long struggle «nd the devotion engendered towards the leader to whom so much was due and on whom still so much seemed to depend. We were mistaken, it seems, and we need not greatly care to explain our mistake. But let us recognise the additional debt that Ireland owes to the illustrious man who recalled her to a sense of her duty, and showed her the precipice on whoso brink she stood. We have, meantime, been reminded of many memories stained by defilement of a like kind, Jiarlborougb, Fox, Nelson, Wellington, Lord Melbourne, Lord Palmerston, and we are told that such defilement ia common among those men of the world who still attain to eminence. Ia Gladstone so stained ? was Wilberforoe ? was O'Oonnell ? With ordinary affairs of gallantry, as they are called, we have nothing to do. We must take the world as we find it, and we wi liogly übey the precept of the Gospel that he who is without sin among us, and he only, should cast the first s'one. But is the man who occupies an exceptional piao-», the man whose name should form a housjhold word, the man to be pointed out as their champion and hero to young girls and boys, to be exoased when he comes before the world as a seducer in his worst form ? In what respect, was the place occupied by Mailborough or Fox or Nelson or Wellington, or those others, equal to that occupied by the leader of tne Insb people in their strugg.e for na ional life, for freedom of religion, aud all that most concerns the moral as well as the material interests of the country 1 Tboße men live in history and we admire their great qualities, but they are apart from us and their memory exercises no intimate influence over us. Nelson threw himself at tke feet of Lady Hamilton, and was aa object of shame and contempt to those even who personally witnessad and rejoiced in his great deeds as a naval captain. Wellington was unfaithful to the woman who, in spite of his frank avowal of an altered mind, kept him to his promise of marriage. But he beat Buonaparte and who now thinks of anything else about him ? The character of his renown keeps it separate from the details of his private life. He was in one respect alone, and that the doubtful one of military glory, the hero of his people. But here is a man— whose example now ,and whose memory hreafter, must pervade the very lives of -..e »r!Su people, who possessed their implicit couSJcnoe, who L»u, it ia true, rendered them eminent services, but who was rewarded by their complete devotion— even to the death if he had demanded it of them Ii is vain to compare the position occupied by Mr. Parnell wiih that occupied by mm even of extraordinary eminence, buc less iatima'e y associated with the hv<_s ami higher interests of others. "On tny retura from London," wrote Captun O'Shea's young son to bis father, " I heard the voice of that awful Bcoundrel Parnoll. . . Perhaps I ought to have gone in and kicked him, but I am anxious to avoid unpleasant scenes with my mother, and I also tnink it is batter for you to know about it before giving him a thrashing, as you, of course, understand more about these things than I do." Anj

attempt to palliate the guilt of a man concerning whom such words were justly penned, and penned by such a writer, would but diserace thote making ir. They are words to make sick the heart of any Irishman who is true to his country, and knows what his country owes to the man of whom they were justly written. To explain their piteous significance would form a task too harrowing for us to undertake. But are we to look upon this man, who dishonours a mother before the indignant, outraged, eyes of her children, as a man representing the statesmen an! men of eminence to whom great social &ni moral reforms are due? Whatever it m*y be elsewhere— and we refus* without full evidence to believe that it is bo, as a rule, anywhere-it must not be so io Ireland. It ihall not be so among the Irish people. Nay, in proportion to the services rendered to them by Mr. Parnell, and to their gratitude to him, muet be their reprobation of his guilt, if they would be true to themselves and to the children to whom their dearest hope should be to leave as the brightest and most precious treasure of an enfranchised country an inheritance of honour and purity, and a repod'ationand avoidence of all that is base and filthy.

A BGANDALOWS UNDKfctTAIINf.

So we had conjectured. We find high authority to bear out our assertion that the outbreak of the Indians ia the North-west was the work rather of white men than of the unfortunate people themselves. We drew on the memory of what had before happened in America and elsewhere, but we are confirmed by a missionary who has recently visited New York— that is Father Kraft, some time ago appointed by the Biou* Indiana as one of their chiefs, and given by them the name of " HoTering Eagle." Father Kraft makes very light of the alleged apparition of the Messiah, uf which so much has been ■aid. He describes it as a hallucination, not only harmless, but even quieting and consoling to a people suffering from distress and want, •f at any rate no more formidable in itself than that of the sect of the Second Adventiats. It caused no excitement among the Indians, lie says. Of the " ghost dance " also, described as a preparation for and manace of war, be thought very little. No such danes, he said, Mad been known among tha tribes, tbough possibly at their meetings' some dance had lately been inveat j d in honour of their Messiah. All the trouble, according to Father Kraft, in short, has originated with the whites. There, for example, is tie Indian Department, wh >sa very existence depends on the people still remaining barbarous. There are its agents interested ia proving that there is still work for them to do. " Indian agents wanted to saow that Indians were as wild as •rer. and wanted also to show their ability to control them, that their importance might be proved, and the contiamnce of thdir positions and salaries assured. Many of tha Indians were getting so near civiliaation by their own efforts as to make agents fear that the transition •tate might end, and with it would end their positions and salaries. Something had to be done." — There also was the neighbouring population anxious for the arrival of troops among them, oat of which they might make their profit. Father Kraft, in shor, in an interview with a representative of the New York Freeman's Journal, has made the matter lamentably plain. It is the old story, as we have said. Advantage has been taken of the situation of a necessitous and <lepemdent people to provoke them for particular ends. According to the reports received, however, the Indian Department and the other instruments engaged in bringing the matter about, would seem to have succeeded somewhat in excess of their desire?. The Indian Department at least could not wish for the extermination of the tribes, whose management is the only reason for its existence. In any caß3 the matter is a disgrace to the American Government— and co credit to the American nation.

THE " CATHOLIC " JACC-ASB.

THE line, " Life is real, life is earnest," then, is a " weary old platitude." Is the rest of the verse of a like nature ' " And the grave is not the goal. Dust thou art, to dust returnest, Was not written of the soul." Considering the " Catholic " quarter whenc* the judgment we have quoted proceeds, we concluie it is bo esteemed— Qarpe diem. The pagan maxim is good enough for us. Let us eat aad drink and be merry, therefore, for to-morrow we die — and there is an end of us. Bat shall we not apply to the ecclesiastical herald, or whomsoever it ■ay be that represents him, to appoint us, for example, the laughing jack-ass as the symbol of our profession. The jolly bird, more noisy th»n witty perhaps, should typify our calling perfectly. The symbol, indeed, might seem to some, at least to the more elephantine among us, a little out of keeping with the patronage of a Saint, under which Pope Pius IX. placed the Catholic PreEs. Bat has not St. John his e»gle, Bt. Antbony his fishes / Why sh)uld not St. Francis de Bales hare his jack-ass ? It is a thought of charming originality, gaining distinction for all New Zealand, and positive glory for the particular diocese, to nretent him with it. Let our symbol, therefore, be the laughing- jack-ase, and our maxim, Life is but a dream— Why should we make it a night-mare with our platitudes aboutjreality or earnest-

■eas, or stuff of that kind. Nay, let us still cackle a jovial at/taw to speed the world suitably on its way. Does it not travel aqPftw ridieuloua road— de Poliehinelle au neant? Bat •• needs must go when the devil drives," and the more merrily the better. In wit and humour, or their forced counterfeit perhaps, it all our relief.

OIVE THE DEVIL HIS DUE.

But may we really claim for New Zealand this charming inspiration of a nnion between facetioutness and piety ? Are we to see it made for the rlrit time among ourselves, and in the delightful form of a Catholic Alley Slop&r or nondesciipt Bulletin! We are afraid ■ome doubt exists as to our claims to originality in the matter. Wo have it, at least, on high authority that many centuries ago a combination of a Bimilar kind, though not exactly in the same form, had beoome somewhat famous. Dante, for example, giveß us to understand that in the Italy of his century, the preachers, as a rule, were rery much imbued with a love for fun. So highly did they appreciate it, in fact, that, as the poet complains, "no man among them wm satisfied with hia sermon unless it made his congregation burst their •ides with laughter. They vied with eaoh other, consequently, in telling ridiculous stories. Nor is this the only manner in which fun and frolic have found their way into the sanctuary. There was a time alto when church music was made the vehicle of a similar expression. The solemn magnificence cf the Church's hymns was wedded to the rallicking airs of tbe day. The Mass took its name from the lilt to which it was set, and, for instance, the " Mass of tbe Red Noses," was a reigning favourite. We saw a proposal a little time ago made in an American paper, not, however, one assuming the epithet " Catholic"— that the popular tune known as the " Mulligan Guards," should be made use of in a lik« manner. But why should not the •ecular paper also have its Uttle joke ? Perhaps the Punchinelloising of the Catholic Press may bring religious matters generally back into pleasant ways that were, mayhap, abandoned with a mistaken »»■ for the promotion of the ponderous and doleful, and an affected and silly pursuance of the genteel. We fear, then, that in mingling piety and jocularity New Zealand, or its more Northern por ion, to give honour where it is due, cannot claim to ba completely original. Nevertheless, some degree of originality must be justly accorded to it. It is, for example, strikingly original to have the slight offered by a chief of the freethought platform to • lesser light of the same school, avenged week after week in the columns of a Catholic newspaper. Sir Robert Stout, indeed, W3 hava ourselves frequently oppjsed and sometimes ridiculed. It was in hid opacity, however, as an agres ive champion of freethought and ■ declared foe to Catholicism aud to Catuolic institutions that we did so. In other respects we share the esteem in wbich Sir Robert is universally held throughout the colonies, and we fully appreciate the talents and other admirable qualities that have deserved for him the place he holds in popular regard and affection. It is a somewh&t bitter fun to fiad him pilloried we-k after week in a print pretending to be Catholic beciuse he did not connive at tbe degradation of the plaform on which he himself presided, or pander to its being vulgarised and made tbe means of gross demoralisation. We are, however, perhaps a little old-f tshioned, too elephantine, ponderous, and doleful, it may be, to understand a joke. We confess we have no desire to return to the days of tbe comic preachers, and tho " Mais of the Red Noses " or the " Mulligin Guards " would be to us an abomination. Some respect also we have for the Catholic Prest. It is under the patronage of a Saint, and Popes uphold and advocate it. How, therefore, without glaring inconsistency and some slight approach to impiety, and even to a betrayal of the Catholic causa, it can be made a facetious organ vying with the '• Alley Slopers " and " Bulletins " of the period we are unable to understand. But, at laast, let our clever friends at Wellington have credit for all they deserve — that is, the degree of originality we have pointed out,