48
AN GAODHAL.
CRUIT NA h-ÉIREANN.
Seinn d'abhrán, a chruit is binne,
Seinn é mar do sheinn
Báird a chlaoidh le ceol an chuuinne,
'Nuair do bhídhis, a thír is fine,
Lán de shuairceas bhinn.
Lán de shuairceas bhídhis, óir bhí tú
Saor, a's bhídhis 's an g-cath
Treun a m-bualadh, a's do chlaoidh tú
Náimhde móra, a's do chríth tú
Iad-san uait go bráth.
Ní'l tú saor; acht tig do shaoirse
Chugat, maidin bhreágh
T'réis dubhoídhche. A! mo thír-se
Éirighe, caith uait 'nois do dhaoirse
Ná bí eaglach, tlá.
Crith do shuan throm uait go síorruidhe,
Seas go díreach, treun,
Gabh do shaoirse 'nois, ná iar í
Óir is í do cheart is fíre
Gabh í chugat féin.
Béidh do chruit annsin níos binne
'Ná 's an am a sheinn
Báird a chlaoidh fad ó an chruinne
Le n-a g-ceol; a chruit ar g cinidh
Seinn d'abhrán suairc, binn.
"Gabhar Donn."
[ls caoin, tláth, tíreamhuil, guth an
"Ghabhair Dhoinn," agus, mar dubhramar
cheana, beireann sé bárr air Thomás O'
Mórdha, ní shé amháin go bh-fuil a fhocla
chó tuilmheach le tír-ghrádh ach tá siad
go mór níos milse óir téigheann siad go
fréimh an chroidhe thre teangain an chinidh,
nidh nach d-tig linn i rádh le abhráin an
Mhórdhaigh. — F. Eagair.]
The TUAM News has copied from the Times of
this city the proceedings of a German-American
association which has adopted a resolution pledg¬
ing the members to vote for no candidate at elect¬
ions who will not support the movement to have
the German language taught in the public schools
Will the Irish follow the example of their Teu¬
tonic neighbors ? O, no, they are too "stylish,"
the leavings of the Gotho-Saxon is more tony!
We have received a large number of photos for
our Gaelic Historical Album. Mr. Downey, Mon¬
tague, Mich., sends his with "The Gael” held a¬
loft triumphantly. We hope all the subscribers
will be represented. The work will be interesting
to future generations of Gaels as a record of those
who preserved their identity.
CAPTAIN NORRIS and CHICAGO CITIZEN.
New York, Nov. 14, 1890.
Editor of the Gael.
Dear Sir — The subject of the following epistle
appeared in the Chicago Citisen of the 30th of Au¬
gust, with a promise of more of its kind, I imme¬
diately wrote this reply, or rather complaint, for
its appearance in a paper like the Citizen, claim¬
ing to be so Catholic and so Irish. I directed my
communication to Mr. Finerty, personally, as chief
Editor. I waited for three issues and had no rep¬
ly. I then dropped Mr. Finerty a note asking for
a return of the manuscript, if he could not use it.
There have been several other issues and I have
not seen or received any reply. I hereby re-write it
and request THE GAEL to give it a place, that our
people may see that our bishops and priests, and
Church cannot be misrepresented and our dear
language and its own distinctive type cannot be
abused publicly and shamefully without a protest
from some Irishman. By the way, we have not
seen the Citizen's “more to say on the subject"
yet. Yours truly,
— Thomas D. Norris.
Here is the letter, —
No. 15 Stone St. N Y, Sept. 4th. '90.
To the Chief Editor of the Chicago Citizen.
Dear Sir: Please grant me space to (reluctant¬
ly) make a few remarks on a subject which app¬
eared in the shape of an editorial in your worthy
paper of August 30th. I must say that I do not
really believe that you ever wrote or dictated that
article. Neither do I believe that the writer of it
believes in or knows much about the Church, nor
do I believe that any Catholic or real lover of the
Irish language would be guilty of spreading such
trash before our people. The article says, “Last
week's mail from Ireland says that 'on Sunday Ju¬
ly 27th. priests speaking in some of the Catholic
churches, on the opening of the schools in the city
(Dublin) referred to the Irish language as being a
study worthy of special attention.' This is one of
the strangest and most suggestive item of news e¬
ver brought across the Atlantic from Ireland."
Why, there is nothing strange or wonderful ab¬
out it. It may be suggestive and hopeful news,
and surely it is, and we thank God and the good
priests for it. The writer tells us that,
"Unless the priests, who spoke about the duty
of the Irish people towards their national language
HAD BEEN ORDERED so to speak by some author¬
ity before which THEY HAD TO ROW, it is an absol¬
ute certainty that not one of them would have said
a word in favor of the Irish language."
Oh, what a gall! What a treacherous misrep¬
resentation of our good priests ! There is not an
authority on earth to make them bow to such an or¬
der nor a power that would try to compel them to.
The only authority on earth before which God's
priests have to bow is the legitimate authority of
their church, dictated by Jesus Christ, its founder,
its protector and its life, and that Church will ne¬
ver issue an order to compel anyone to speak or
to teach any particular language or form of speech.
We have before now seen similar charges made
against our good priests and against our church, in
writings similar to the present, and by persons
who did not know the difference between a dozen
priests and the body of the Church of God. The
writer says, —
"It is reasonable to conclude, then, that the or¬
