In the departments of government there is not less moral disorder. The
finances are mismanaged and dilapidated. Notwithstanding the enormous and
oppressive increase of taxation, together with the forcible appropriation
of ecclesiastical property, deficits are the order of the day, and the
nation has been, more than once, and probably is still, on the verge of
bankruptcy. Truly, may the Italians, who are twenty-three to one, exclaim,
in their distress: _Quo usque tandem abuteris patientia nostra?_ “How
long, O disastrous revolution! wilt thou abuse our patience?”
Nor are the better thinking Italians without blame. Why did they not take
part—why do they not still take part in the elections, and return, as they
well may, a majority to the would-be constitutional parliament? Their
numbers would, undoubtedly, be imposing and influential. So much so,
indeed, that they must finally obtain admission, without burdening their
conscience with an obnoxious oath. What did not Daniel O’Connell,
Ireland’s liberator, accomplish, by causing himself alone to be elected
for an Irish constituency, and by proceeding to demand the seat to which
he was elected in the British parliament, without uttering an oath which
shocked his conscience?
RUSSIA AND THE EAST.
The cruel and sanguinary persecution of Catholics in the Russian Empire
was a cause of intense sorrow to Pius IX. He could do nothing towards
alleviating the sufferings of those unfortunate people. The Tsar,
Alexander II., shows in his treatment of his Ruthenian subjects of the
united Greek Church, that he is wholly unworthy of the reputation for
enlightenment and benevolence with which he has been credited. The
Empress, indeed, is blamed, together with her fanatical favorite, Melle.
Bludow, the Minister of Public Instruction, Tolstoy, and Gromeka, Governor
of Siedlce, for having urged him to use the power of the empire in forcing
conversions to Russo-Greek _orthodoxy_. That the heads of a semi-barbarous
nation should so advise is not surprising. The Tsar, who is an absolute
monarch, cannot be excused. There is every reason, besides, for holding
him personally responsible. When he was at Warsaw, a peasant woman,
bearing a petition, succeeded in obtaining admission to his presence. As
soon as he learned that the petition begged toleration for the united
Greek Church, he replied by inserting in all the newspapers a confirmation
of the orders formerly given for the extinction of that church. Count
Alexandrowicz de Constantinovo was repeatedly warned by the Russian
authorities that he had no right to attend the Latin churches, which,
being less persecuted, were a refuge for the united Greeks, when, indeed,
as was rarely the case, they were allowed to enjoy it. The Count, hoping
to be more liberally dealt with by the enlightened Tsar, who was said to
surpass in all that was great and noble, his tolerant predecessor,
Alexander I., proceeded to St. Petersburgh. The Tsar made a reply to his
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account