Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 1 December 1921, Page 14

Current Topics

A Farce According to the Otac/o Daily Times, November 25, Mr. Witty asked the Prime Minister when New Zealanders returning from business or holidays in a distant land were/to be saved from the annoyance and futility of having £o7sign a.long form, answer ridiculous questions, and take «n unnecessary oath of allegiance. He very properly described the entire procedure as farcical, to which of course many of the Members who have made the New Zealand Parliament a laughing stock objected. Considering that Mr. Massey and his friends have by their support of godless schools done their best to destroy all reverence for God's name in this Dominion their belief in the efficacy of an oath is childish. Such an oath would be treated lightly by people who have been taught by New Zealand schools that religion is a matter of indifference. Even Mr. Massey, who admits that he was Grand Master of a society once rightly condemned by the British Government, seems to have taken the oath without scruple. Mr. "Witty was quite right. It is a farce, and a costly one too. A traveller recently returning to Auckland tells us that when the boat came to an anchor he saw a strange-looking craft laden with uniformed men, making for the steamer. He asked a bystander if New Zealand had been taken by the Japanese—during his absence. "No," was the reply. "These are y only Massey navy, and you are going to have a demonstration of how a fool-Government wastes public money." Another said it was nearly as hard to get into New Zealand now as into heaven. A third said he could not understand how anybody who had not urgent business came near the country. Somebody else asked whether tourists were not catered for. "Tourists!" said the first speaker, "'why "everything is done to drive them away. We have dirty trains, with first-class carriages worse than the third at home: we have a rotten steamer service, and very little of that left in action at all nowadays, and a tourist office is the last place a sensible person would go to for information." « A Note from Ireland The last mail brought us a note from a prominent Sinn Feiner, and some of it is worth quoting for the sake of the (authoritative) view it gives of events at the date at which it was written. Speaking of a training camp, the writer says: "The maintenance and training of the I.R.A. is of vital importance whether the future brings us peace or war. Too often did Ireland throw aside her arms and put her trust in John Bull's sense of justice and honor. To-da'y we intend to keep a grip on our rifles until the bargain is clinched and till long after the ink has dried. The conference is sitting as I write. Of its final issue none can speak with certainty. Personally I am not without hope, but mindful of de Valera's warning in a proclamation to the nation published this morning, in which he said: The prospect of further sacrifices, does not cause me to quail or falter for a moment. The threats that could force surrender in one particular would be relied on to force surrender in another and another till all were gone. Of necessity Ireland must stand where she is, unyielding and fearless on the rock of right, or be outmanoeuvred and defeated in detail. .The peace that will end this conflict will be secured, not by the skill or statesmanship of leaders, but bv the stern determination of a close-knit nation steeled to the accentance of death rather than the abandonment of rightful libertya peace guaranteeing a freedom worthy of the sufferings endured to secure it.' That address is pitched in the right key. Don't think it too high. Young Ireland is well able for it. Onlv cowards and croakers find fault with it." Of such mettle are the men in whose hands are the destinies of Ireland to-day. Not without good cause did

the American Hierarchy congratulate the Irish bishops on the leaders who are winning victory for the old land at last. And it is victory. We too have had our cowards and croakers, but to-day our stand is justified. What about Ulster? There is no denying the fact that the British Government has made no serious attempt to prevent the murder of Catholics by the Orangemen. While , whole streets of houses have been burned down and j while Catholics have been persecuted for their religion the Lloyd George Government that professes such pity / for minorities has given no proof that it cares one whit for the lives or property of a minority that happens to be Catholic. This is at the present time a very significant fact. Another is the charge by Eoin MaeNeill that the Government is secretly"' organising in Orange Ulster a sectarian army. "Professor Mac Neill is an Ulster man and he is not in the habit of making rash assertions. Taking his statement with the undeniable fact that the Government has tacitly approved of the slaughter of the Catholics there is some reason for doubting how far Lloyd George is sincere in his alleged desire to make peace with Ireland. An American writer thinks the present Conference is but another scheme on the same lines as the Convention, /"' the findings of which Lloyd George disregarded once he succeeded in getting America into the war. It is not indeed impossible that the wily Welshman is once . more scheming and marking time in view of the Washington Conference. But we may be sure that the fate of Ireland is in 'good hands and that the Sinn Fein representatives will not be fooled. We do not go so far' as to say that the British Prime Minister is again attempting one of his old tricks. But the existing facts and his own bad record in the past are enough to make Irishmen watch every move of his with suspicion. Therefore, the I.R.A. is drilling and organising still just as if the worst had to be faced; and the leaders are determined that they will not trust this time to British pledges or scraps of paper. If there is, treachery on this occasion they will at least have their rifles and their army. Ireland is wide awake and calmly facing the facts while anxious for a real peace. As for Ulster, it is not all plain sailing in Sir James Craig's realms. Day by day there are deputations from Tyrone, Fermanagh, Derry City, Derry County, County Down, and even from Belfast, demanding that Ulster should come in with the rest of Ireland. And in the little Parliament the members are not a very happy family. The egregious Coote has turned on Craig, accusing him of giving jobs to many people in order to secure their votes. Craig retorts that Coote's statements are disgraceful and that they constitute a charge of bribery and corruption.. Poor Mr. Pollock, the Ulster Minister of Finance, complains that the whole Act is a fraud, and that the British Parliament has left him to carry on with an overdraft. Altogether, in the midst of the slaughter and arson in Belfast, the little Ulster conclave provides a laughable farce for the rest of Ireland and even Ulster Protestants are beginning to get .disgusted with it. The Dublin Leader says of the situation: "It is impossible to take Craig's Parliament ser-„, iously. It has its serious and tragic side like the pogroms, for the pograms are all parts of the English game ; of 'Ulster.' But for the most part we think Craig and his team will provide good light comedy. We are not sufficiently interested in this English farce in Bel- l fast to read about it in close detail, but from what we have read we gather that it is at present living on an overdraft from mother England, and ; that quarrels have already broken out there as to the spending of the money." , Poor old England which never in her prosperous days paid back to Ireland the three hundred odd millions which she stole through over-taxation, is in such sore straits nowadays that she has no money to spare even for her pet game of "Ulster." And poor Craig is sorely afraid that he will be the next victim betrayed by Llovd George. With reference to the Conference, he says: "I have a feeling that we/will be let down if there is nobody there to speak for Ulster."

The "Stop. My Copy" Man Apropos of an Indian gentleman who issued to the editor of the Bombay Examiner, a "Stop my Copy" order because a contribution of no general interest or merit was not published, the Examiner for June 11, has something to say that deserves consideration in other places besides India. The "Stop my Qopy" man takes one of the following lines, according to Father Hull: (1) The editor must insert in his paper anything which > I take a fancy to send him, or else I shall order him to stop my copy. , —- (2) If the editor does insert anything I send, he must insert it wholly, verbatim and at once, otherwise I shall stop my copy. ' (3) The editor must never express any view contrary to mine on any point in which I feel keenly interested; otherwise I stop my copy. (4) He must not even reproduce from other papers any news-item or expression of opinion contrary to mine on such subjects—otherwise/I stop my copy. (5) The manager must never remind me that my subscription has fallen.into arrears, no matter how far. If he does I must stop my copy. (6) If I make any complaint against the despatching 'staff, that my copy did not arrive, or my postcard was not attended to, the office must at once acknowledge the mistake and apologise profusely for it. If on the contrary the manager clears his office from blame and makes no apology, then there is only one • course I must stop my copy. About twice a year we find ourselves confronted with persons of this type, with the same result each time. Our average we believe, is a lower one than falls to the lot of many other editors. About half of them we get up against are persons who have for years been writing most eulogistically to the editor saying how much they value the Examiner, how much good it does them, how they look forward to it week by week, and feel quite disappointed if a copy misses; and in short they would not be without it for the world. And yet as soon as there occurs any one of the five or six pettifogging incidents just enumerated above, back like a flash of lightning comes the watchword of the situation Stop my copy ! One's only further interest in such a quondam subscriber is to try and analyse his mentality. Does he really - imagine that anyone, merely by paying his subscription, thereby acquires a sort of proprietory right over the paper, with power to put into it whatever he likes? Does he really imagine that his subscription is a sort of favor which the editor is down on his knees for, ready to grovel and offer bribes of free publication of whatever is sent in, in eternal gratitude K for the honor of having such a person on his register? Does he really imagine" that the high importance which he attaches to his own private affairs, private opinions and feelings is the objective measure of their importance in the eyes of the universe, to be recognised and conformed to 'as a* law by all and sundry whom it may concern? Does he really imagine that he is promoting ■ the cause of civilisation, culture, libertv. progress, or any of those other things which we prize so highly nowadays, by assuming the swollen proportions of a despot; and dictating to the journalistic world what it shall do or shall not do, under the appalling and calamitous penaltv of having his name removed from the subscription list ? Has he. ever asked himself what would happen if places were changed ; if he himself were editing a newspaper of a certain tvpe and. kind, with a certain outlook, and found himself besieged by contributors asking him to publish "in hi& next issue" items which; in view of common sense and the sense of proportion, he would never dream of inserting freely Catholics and Socialism At the session of the Catholic Confederation of England and Wales, held in Sheffield about the first of October, a resolution was passed which brought about a cleavage between Catholic Trade Unions and the British Labor Party. Objecting to the socialisation of the Labor Party, which was brought about at its

convention of 1918, the Sheffield Convention called on Catholic Trade Unionists to withhold their levy to , the Parliamentary Funds, and to oppose anything in the shape of affiliation with the Socialist International.. The sense of this resolution was not to call on Catholic workers, to leave their unions but to oppose the jockeying of the Trade Unions into the Socialist Party under the mantle of the Labor Party. In connection with the foregoing report issued by the Catholic News Service, a. correspondent invites an exposition of the aims of the Confederation. If the report is correct it indicates the purpose of the Confederation's resolution clearly, when it says that "the sense of the resolution was not to call on Catholic workers to leave their unions, but to oppose the jockeying of the Trade Union into the Socialist Party under the mantle of the Labor Party." That defines the aims of the Catholic Federation in so far as this particular resolution is concerned; as to its aims in general it may be said that they are similar to those of our own Catholic Federation in New Zealand. The resolution would have no' greater authority than a resolution passed by our own organisation. It has a certain weight, but from a doctrinal point of view it is no more than a forcible expression from a large body of Catholic laymen. In order to make the action of the Confederation more clear it is well to quote in full the main resolution proposed by Mr. Thomas Burns of Salford: "This conference draws attention to the following facts: (1) That a Catholic cannot be a Socialist; (2) it That the Labor Party became a Socialist Party in 1918 ; (3) That Catholic Trade Unionists are voluntarily joining, paying an individual levy to the Labor Party ; (4) That Catholic Trade Unionists and non-Trade Unionists are voluntarily joining the Labor Party; (5) That the Trade Unions are affiliated to the Labor Party and to the Socialist International; (6) That Catholics since 1918 have in effect accepted the Socialist position, and suggests the advisibility of Catholic Trade Unions withholding their payment of the Parliamentary levy." Commentng on this resolution, the New Witness says: "Of course there will still be Catholic Socialists, for there are stalwarts like Mr. Joseph Clayton who do not hold that Socialism is the absolute negation of private property, and that therefore Catholics. are bound by their faith to say that 'a Catholic cannot be a Socialist. We ourselves are ready to concede, for example, that Socialism does not imply the nationalisation of a man's pine and carpet slippers. Nevertheless the passing of the resolution does mean that Catholic Trade Unionism declares itself ireconcilably opposed to the politico-economic creed to which the Labor Party stands-committed." The following editorial from the Catholic Times shows that the chairman and others were not in favor of having such a resolution passed : '..',• A VEXED QUESTION. "In his Encyclical on the condition \of Labor Pope Leo XIII says that the discussion of the question of Socialism is 'not easy, nor is it free from danger.' The Sheffield Confederation's proceedings afforded an illustration of the truth of the Holy Father's words. Mr. Edward Eyre, who presided, seemed to be alarmed at the inopportuneness of the resolution of the National Executive Council, moved by Mr. Burns, advising , Catholics to keep aloof from the Labor Party as a body who had become Socialists, and urging that Trade Unionists should withhold payment of the levy and oppose the affiliation of their Trade Unions to the Labor Party and the Socialist International. Evidently ' Mr. /Eyre was troubled bv the thoug-ht of the difficulties in -which compliance with the motion would involve the Catholic working man, who believed that the Labor * Party had looked after his political and economic interests. If the Catholic Trade Unionist refused to pay the levy, the Labor Partv would regard it as a sciirvv requital for services rendered, and he would be held to be acting against . his own interests. These and similar arguments evidently occurred to Mr. Eyre, and they were strongly emphasised by Mr. Fitzgerald. Moreover, the chairman objected to an attempt 'on the part of laymen to usurp the authoritv of the bis- .|

hops and to restrict the liberty of their fellow-Cath-olics, which was not interfered with by the prelates. The chairman's amendment that the matter be referred back for further consideration was lost, but it would seem that the last has not been heard of the ar-umenta by which he supported it."