Rome--"for prudential reasons
Propaganda has heretofore postponed action in the case of Dr. M'Glynn.
The Sovereign Pontiff has now taken the matter into his own hands."
In the hands of his Holiness the matter was safe; and in the Papal
Decree of April 20, 1888, we have at once the most conclusive
vindication of the wisdom and courage shown by the Archbishop of New
York in 1886, and the most emphatic condemnation of the attitude assumed
in 1886 by the Archbishop of Dublin.
VIII.
It must not be assumed that Mr. George has been finally defeated in
America. On the contrary, he was never more active. A legacy left to
him by an Irish-American for the propagation of his doctrines has just
been declared by the Vice-Chancellor of New Jersey, to be invalid on the
ground that George's doctrines are "in opposition to the laws"; and this
decision has bred an uproar in the press which is reviving popular
attention all over the country to the doctrines and to their author. He
is astute, persevering, as much in earnest as Mr. Davitt, and as
familiar with the weak points in the political machinery of the United
States as is Mr. Davitt with the weak points in the political machinery
of Great Britain. This is a Presidential year. The election of 1888 will
be decided, as was the election of 1884, in New York. The Democratic
party go into the contest with a New York candidate, President
Cleveland, who was presented to the Convention at St. Louis for
nomination, not by an Irishman from New York, but by an Irishman from
the hopelessly Republican State of Pennsylvania, and whose renomination,
distasteful to the Democratic Governor of the State, was also openly
opposed by the Democratic Mayor of the city of New York, Mr. Hewitt, Mr.
George's successful competitor in the Municipal election of 1886.
Leaving Dr. M'Glynn to uphold the Confiscation of Land against the Pope
in New York, as Mr. Davitt, Mr. Dillon, and a certain number of Irish
priests uphold the Plan of Campaign and Boycotting against the Pope in
Ireland, Mr. George supports President Cleveland, and in so doing
cleverly makes a flank movement towards his "exclusive taxation of
land," by promoting, under the cover of "Revenue Reform," an attack on
the indirect taxation from which the Federal Revenues are now mainly
derived. Meanwhile the Cardinal Archbishop of Baltimore, who is also a
political supporter of President Cleveland, has not yet been confronted
by the supreme authori
|