The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1883-05-16
rock Isra NpER's GRITICIsM CRIT.
ICISED.
Rev. Louis Cook, of st. Louis, Answers
the Criticism on His Lecture
nj Rock Island, Ill.

H.
JB Danforth so unjustly criticised:
Mr. ]. B. Danforth, Editor of weekl
paper of Rock Island Illinois called tin
Rock Islander, undertook to criticise ny
lecture on the " Catholic Church an,
Human liberty Rev. T. Mackin, o
Rock Island made caustic reply to thi
criticism, in one of the daily papers o
the city. Thereupon Mr.. Danforth sal
lies forth in biting article in which ht
attacks his pastor Rey.T. MackIn, Fathel
Cook the lecturer. the lecture itself, and
winds ND by expressing his regrets fOl
the Catholic Church itself, Although
am not in the habit of noticing sucI
advertising schemes of editors who wish
thereby to gain notority, and few ad
ditional subscribers, | still thought il
worth my while to show Mr.J, B. Dan
forth, that there yet remain few little
matters on which he may be enlightened
Mr.. Danforth says:
Father Cook is an excellent-a very
attractive speaker. But the lecture was
ESPECIALLY weak in spots He was par
ticulary severe and unfair toward the eff
forts of people who are trgine to secure
for the masses a better condition in the
world, and wholly misstated their posi-
ton. He said they claimed that all men
are equal, and then he battled with this
man OF straw which he himself had sci
up No one makes any such claim as
Father Cook stated. He evidently gets
his information from prejudiced source.
" Father Cook did say that certain dis
satisfied people claim that all men are e.
quail Who he had reference to was plain
enough. TWAS men engaged in labor
reform organizations He named"com-
munists, socialists, nlhilists and others
I'm France said he, '1hey are called
communists, in Germany they are called
socialists, in Russia they are called Hihi-
lists, in some places one thing, and in
some places others. He then proceeded
to beFate these dissatisfied people, "as
he termed them, in severe terms, and said
''they claimed that all men are equal,
and that property ought to be divided"
This is what he said and plenty of his
audience know it. And having set up
this man of straw he proceeded to val
liant and vigorous attack upon this myth
the creation of his own distempered imagi
nation, His illustrations were amusing,
and would have been apt had his premises
been true.
My answer TO this criticism is the
following: / thank the Editor for the
soothing syrup he administers in his first
sentence. But let us now take up the
spots he detected, and see whether they
are spots at all. Here are the supposed
spots;
Spot 1st He was particularly severe
and unfair towards the efforts of people
who are trying to secure for the masses a
better condition in the world" etc, etc,
The terms working people laboring
organizations, for which Mr. Danforth's
heart is bleeding did not occur single
time in the entire lecture, and, what is
more, they were not even in my mind at all.
1t u.s. therefore, with justice that Rev. Il.
Mackin charges him with misrepresenting
the lecturers words and thoughts. | did
speak of class of dissatisfied people who
were to be found everywhere, and stated,
that they were called Communists in
France, Socialists in Germany, Nihilists
in Russia, in some places one thing and
in others, another But what tempted you,
Mr. Danforth to single out the labor or
anizatiOns, and claim that | meant them in
particular, and that my lecture seemed a
COU6rt driUe at Iab0r 0FgdEi2dt50ns en- this
couIlt1y2 You had not the remotest reason
for such an assumption, of course must
accept the implied apology you make in
stating that your perception is very diff
cult Your criticism led me to believe rs
much before you offered it as an apology.
One would furthermore suppose from your
assumptions that there were no or9auiza- |
tions in the United States, save those of
Iaborers or working men Did Won ever
hear of the Socialist gatherings of Chica-
go. New York, Philadelphia and St Louis |
was present in St. Louis when these !
rebels had to be crushed by the military
organizations os the state More recently |
Herr Most made himself notorious and |
infamous as well, by advocating in |
public assembly in Chicago the equality |
of all men as to the ownership of prop |
erty. He distinctly emphasized the doc |
trine, that there should be no holders of |
private property and that his followers
should rob the banks and divide the |
spoils. There are at present in the United |
States no less than eight cemmunistic |
societies, divided into seventy-two sepa-
rate communitus with about 5 900 mem I
bers. (See American Cyclopaedia, Article |
Socialism, L think the application of
little bit OF logic on the part of no critic |
would have satisfied the ponderous brain |
of Mr., DanfOrth as to whom | meant by |
the societies / berated. Does he not |
know that the far greater majority of |
N
they certainly understand liberty to mean |
what the Catholic church teaches about
1t. had consequently no quarrel to pick |
with these Catholic workingmens organ
iZations, because they agreed with me to |
the fullest extent. If they do not agree |
with the Catholic church in her definition |
of liberty. then they fall in rank with and |
accept the principles of the Protestants |
or of the Rationalists or of the Socialists |
For my lecture l ventilated these very
principles and proved them to be false. |
/, therefore, must come to the same con |
clnsions arrived at by Rev T. MacEin |
That either through defect of hearing
or through wilful misstatemenf MIR. Dan |
forth madethe above charges"
Spot End. He wholly misstates their
position. This Is mere assertion, MIR.
Danforth. And rs you are not yet in.
lalllble we have right to demand proof
But you give none
spot Bird. Father Cook said: They
claimed all men are equal and that prop
erty ought to be equally divided
And then he battled with this man of
straw which he himself had set up"
| will show Dir. Danforth presently that
there was no such straw as he imagines at
the lecture unless it was in his head. And
that, Of course, would not be the lectures
fault.
You distinctly state. in your reply to
Rev. T. Mackin, ''No considerable mum
Der of men, no organization of men. no
organization of Communists, or Socialists
or Nihilists hold that men are equal"
/ denV your assertion in toto and most