The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1848-09-05

grown up during the present canvass.
Bishop HUGHES AND THE IRISH REBELLION
The generous conduct of Bisnop Hughes, in sub
scnblpg the sum of five hundred dollars for the
purchase of shield, In order to help the Irish
people to establish republic, or separate indie
pendence, In opposition to British misrule, has
been the topic of comment IN several journals,
and been made the theme of some ugly questions,
that may puzzle him good deal IN the course of
his ministrauon IN this diocese. In the Com
,nc,c,ai advertiser, the other evening" we find the
following curious inquiries
We respectfully ask for certain information at the
hands Of Bishop Hughes, made desirable, to at
least, by the appearance Of document, published in
the Irish and English papers, and thence transferred
to columns yesterday. We allude to the memorial
intended to be laid before the Queen England by
the Roman Catholic clergy Of the diocese of Tuam in
Ireland.
1t lis matter of public notoriety that Bishop
Hughes, of New York, has distinctly given the
ton Of his and presty character to the recent
insurrectionary movement in Ireland 1t is known,
also that the duty of loyalty to the throne and
pudated by the orignators and leaders that move
ment; and all the expected and presumabls conse-
royal authority, the slaughter Of royal troops and
loyal subjects in short every thing practically falling
within the purview Of organized rebellion, have been
again and again exalted heroic virtues, not only
by the speakers at public meetings in this city
and elsew here but also in the official addresses,
proclamations &C., of the "Directory' under whose
guidance all the proceedings for the aid of Ire
landn have been originated and carried on. Bishop
Hughes, by publicly speaking at one of the meet
ings by counseiling his countrymen to take an ac
tive part in the cause by giving five hundred dollars
for Its prosecution, and by his whole of action
on the subject, has given his entire sanction to the
attempt purposes, and proceedings of the actors and
speakers in Ireland and empowered them to say that
he in his capacity Of spiritual leader upholds all that
they have said done and attempted to be morally aud
reheiousy free from all objection, worthy Of oil ap
But the opinion of the Remain Catholic clergy in the
diocese Of Tuam to be widely different from that
Of Bishop Hughes They make the strongest profess
tioDs Of eternal loyalty to the throne''-they have
observed with PAIN the proceedings of the insur-
gents and their instgators- disagree with them
on princple"-they " denounce them as the enemies
of order religion and the country'-and they implore
the royal ncy for the delvded misguided" per-
sons who have taken part in the proceedings thus de-
Now we do not profess to understand-we have never
been able to obtain a distinct aud satisfactory ex-
PLANTATION of-the extent to which ssinfalibEty, is
claimed by the church Of which Bishop Hughes is
distinguished ornament; but it seems not unreasona
bic to suppose that the sphere of its nfsbty at least
ought to extend far to include the rule Of action
governing great questions of morality private pub
c and such question assuredly is that of the duty
Of people to their government, and to their fellow
citizens subjects. IT, then, the church lays down
nfaibe rules for the determination Of such questions,
the teaching of its ministers ought to be uniform in
regard 10 them. The Bishop of Tuam and the Bishop
Of New York ought to hold language, inculcats
doctrine, set one example. Yet, we have seen,
Catholic and Protest not more widely at issue
than in this matter the clergy Of Tuam and the
Ri hop Of New York.
weshoud be eratifed by an exposition from Bishop
Hughes Of his views upon this important subject.
We mnst acknowledge there is something per-
tnent in those remarks, as well as in the ques-
lions put to the Bishop. 1t is generally understood
that the first movement favorable to the Irish
bellion in this city, was discountenanced by
Bishop Hughes, until, under some new dispense
ton OF particular revelation, his emnence became
a sudden convert, and took up the case on Its own
merits. The next movement connected with the
Bishop, was his appearance at public meeting,
his subscribing five hundred dollars, and above all,
an eloquent speech in favor of the Irish cause, and
against the British government and its policy to-
wards Ireland. Yet we do not see in this conduct
any thing disparaging TO Bishop Hughes as preate
OF the Catholic church. Cathohciy is neither
monarchIcal, nor aristocratic, nor republican. II
belongs 10 all those forms of government and
ocety, and there can be no more inconsistency
IN the bishops and priests Of Ireland adhering TO
Inc British government, than IN Bishop Hughes
and his clergy adhering to the American govern
nent in opposition to any other. The Catholic
ystem Is not particular in the extreme In such
matters. 1t is elastic and has in It's composition
aree quantity ofihe invisible and immaerial guita
'eicha. 1t seeks not to establish monarchy, or
ristocfscy, or repubhcanism. 1t endeavors TO
repare souls for Heaven, under every system of
government and every system OF laws.
II will, therefore, be very easy tor Bishop
Hughes to reply TO the protestant editor and gain
is complete victory over him, as he did over
lie Rev, DIR. Murray, of Elizabethtown, In the re-
tent controversy between those two divines. But
the principal point In this matter is the Money the
sum OF ihiry-fve thousand dollars, which was col
ected by the lish Directory, and the right which
Bishop Hughes has to clam his five huldred dol
arr, and take back the whole of the speech which
he pronounced on the night on which he made his
That money, and the speech, in
GLIDING all the sentiments and professions, should
be returned to the Bishop by the Directory. They
have precedent TO take such a course In this CITY
When the revolution broke out in Lombardy. a
large sum of money was collected by the Italians
here, fer the purpose of aiding and assisting their
at home IN recovering their indepen-
dence. However, it appeared that the Italians like
the Irisb, were not fully prepared to accomplish
their independence What did the Italian Dlrec-
tory do, under the circumstances They returned
the money to the subscribers; and we know Of one
occasion, If not more, where a subscriber, to the
amount of one hundred dollars, received back
again lie Identical money. Let the Irish Direc-
.,il LIZ ,Lt agne course.