The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1891-10-31
INCONSISTENT.

i
pathy with the attacks made upon Hon.
VIM F. Sheehan, the Democratic can
didate for lieutenant governor of New
York state. Mr.. Sheehan is a brilliant
young Irish Catholic who owes his rise
to the high standard he has attained to
his own personal worth and ability aud
it i'll behooves Catholic journal to act
knownothing part toward him. Ithas
been conclusiyely shown that the charges
brought against Mr.. Sheehan are un-
rue and we cannot help but believe
that those of our Catholic contempor-
aries who advocate his defeat. have been
led astray by the Republican opponents
of MIR. Sheehan in New York and that
knownothing element who have always
resorted to desperate efforts to defeat
and malign Catholic.
The charge against Mr.. Sheehan is,
that while speaker in the last New York
Legislature, he refused the reading of a
ramonstrance presented in behalf Of a
number of Catholic clergYmen, against
what is called the Stadler Excise meas
ure. The facts of the case are as fol-
lows; -s-
Several excise measures were pending
in the Legislature, among them the
Stadler bill. The legislature was petit
toned for an excise enactment, and re-
monstrance were presented against it.
The speaker himself had handed down
some of these remonstrarces, and others
had been presented by Democratic men,
bers from New York and Kings counties,
and all had been referred. without
question, as the rules of the Legislature
required, to the committee on excise.
Then came the Fish episode, out Of
which grows this dastardy attempt to
mi are a young man who, as the Repub-
lican members themselves afterwards
said. was one Of the fairest and ablest
speakers the assembly OF the state OF
New York ever had. Mr.. Fish, who
had always been bitter and aggressive
antagonist of many measures involving
freedom of worship. offered remon-
STRANGE against the Stadler bill. and
asked to have il considered. Objection
was made from the floor of the assembly
aud the speaker held that under the
rules of the assembly, prepared and
adopted by Republican majority, the
remonstrance must be referred to the
committee on excise; and it was so or
dered. The sole desire of Mr., Fish
was to make political capital, by methods
so unscrupulous and devoid Of fairness
that even among the most bitter par
tlsans of his political associates he
could find no one to uphold his course.
Mr.. Fish we'll knew that the rule in re-
lation to petitions was clear and en-
phat,c. because he was one OF the COM
mittee that presented 1t to the Assembly
for adoption in 1890; and he knew that
no other course was open to the speaker
than the one adopted By HIM.
It will thus be seen that Mr.. Sheehan
simply obeyed the rules Of the body
over which he presided Had he acted
otherwise he would have betrayed the
duty he swore to fulfill. In view OF
these facts hastiness has characterized
the action Of the several papers u their
unjust criticism. and some apology is
certainly due. Mr.. Sheehan as az IRISH
man and Catholic, has his hands full
fighting that anti. Catholic clique who
look upon Catholics holding high offices
as something barbarons. Our Catholic
contemporaries alluded to are we'll aware
81 this, and should give Mr.. Sheehan all
the support il their power especially