The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1906-12-22

ID lQOo.
in bshal1 Of the Archbishop. while thu
President says he did not. The only
thing that appears perfectly clear from
doubt is that the President did dismiss
Mr.. storsr without assigning any cause
for the dismissal. The whole affair
10 20 unlike the President that It seems
hard to explain.
In its last issue. the Western
Waterman" gives an explanation which
seems very likely to DO true. The
''Watchman' blames the dismissal of
the Ambassador to a fight between
the women of his household and tho
wife Of Mr.. Storer. 1t says:
Miss Roosevelt is married to Mrs.
Storer's nephew. The latter is the
leader of the Longwortn olan. After
her engagement, Miss Alice visited
Cincinnati to get acquainted with her
new relations. She was not we'll re-
ceived. She found her kins-folk all
fed and their houses closed. When
women's hands and feet are so active.
their tongues are generally not idle.
Now, we are on the side Of Alice and
her father in this matter. The young
girl may have been too lively ana even
reckless at times In the eyes of the
stern old Puritans of Cincinnati, but
she was better than most girls would
be under the circumstances, and her
lapses from traditional decorum were
venial and should be overlooked by
the people among whom she was COM
Ing to live. They should have been
overlooked by Mrs. LonGworth, the
future mother-in -law, and Mrs. Storer,
the future aunt. They were not. Alice
was snubbed and Alicss father took
up the big stick to defend her. The
husband of the woman who cut Alice
did not remain long Ambassador sx-
traordinary to Vienna
This explanation seems reasonable,
because the whole controversy is so
unlike the actions Of men as to be al
most inexplicable. Mrs. Storer and
her husband are ardent Catholics.
They are good people and until re-
Gently were very close friends of the
Roosevelts, not only politically. but
socially. They are also relatives and
neighbors of the Longworths. Presi-
dent Roosevelt should not be blamed
for defending his daughter. Any man
would do the Same thing, but it was
unnecessary and unfair to drag the
name Of dignified ecclesiastics into this
squabble between women. Why should
Archbishop Ireland, the Roman Curia
and the Pope himself be necessary
parties to settle quarrel in the
kitchen cabinet? President Roosevelt
does not usually fight that way. He
is not in the habit of Sinking respon-
sibilty. 1t seems strange that he
should have taken this method Of ex-
planning the dismissal Of the Ambas-
sador to Vienna. OF course it would
have been a little hard for the Presi-
dent to give out publically statement
that he dismissed an American AM
bassador Of the first class for the rea-
son that the Ambassadors wife did
not show proper Difference to the
Presidents daughter. But even that
would have been better than dragging
In Archbishops and Cardinals.
The person who, no doubt, dspre-
Gates this whole controversy more
than anyone else is the Archbishop Of
st. Paul. 1t is an extremely delicate
matter and one upon which he can
say nothing. Sometime perhaps Amer
lean newspapers and newspaper read
ers will know how little consideration
is given in the Vatican to the matters
which they discuss.