ANTE-PREFACE.
[figure description] Ante-Preface, with a head-piece depicting two men and two women, in medieval dress, holding hands and walking through a corn field. [end figure description]
D'israeli, the elder, in his Chapter on Prefaces,
says that “the way to entertain the reader and
“soothe him into good humor, will be best obtained
“by making the preface (like a symphony to an
“opera) to contain something analogous to the work
“itself, to attune the mind into a harmony of tone.”
The writer of the preface to a former edition of this
work had endeavored to follow the advice of this
elegant writer, but, alas! Old Dizzy has no advice
-- vi --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page vi.[end figure description]
to give as to ante-prefaces; so, not having the fear
of precedents before his eyes, the editor can be as
dull as he pleases. If the reader is offended, all
that he has to do is to turn over a few pages, and
get into the very marrow of the book itself, and
when he has exhausted that, turn back to preface
and ante-preface if he chooses, in hopes to extract
some benefit from them, just as children, when they
have extracted the juice out of a ripe orange, fall to
and chew the skin with unsatisfied desire. For my
part I do not see what right a preface has in the
beginning of a book at all. I am not averse to innovation
myself, but I do not like to be the pioneer
in this kind of business; and if I could change
matters, I would soon alter the title of all “prefaces”
to “appenda,” and hang them on the tail of each
work, like bobs on a kite.
In furnishing the preface to “Father Tom and the
Pope,” the writer had adopted the common belief
among literary men here, that William Maginn was
the author. It is very true that in Dr. Mackenzie's
excellent edition of this author's collected works,
“Father Tom” does not appear. But that goes for
-- vii --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page vii.[end figure description]
very little. I have also the collected works of
Jonathan Swift, D.D., published by Charles Bathurst,
London, 1742, in twelve volumes, 12mo., in
which Gulliver's Travels do not appear! And in
the collected works of the true author of “Father
Tom and the Pope,” this admirable sketch is carefully
omitted. In a letter to me he says: “My friend
“Dr. Smith has informed you correctly as to the
“authorship of `Father Tom and the Pope.' It was
“written by me in the summer of 1838, just about
“the time of my call to the Irish Bar. No one
“else had any hand in it, and like the `Forging of
“ `the Anchor,' it underwent a rejection before its
“appearance in Blackwood. I am flattered by its
“having been ascribed to Maginn, for whose genius
“I entertain a high admiration. I have never
“made any secret of the authorship, but as I have
“constantly endeavored in any literary work I have
“been able to do for many years back to elevate the
“Irish subject out of the burlesque, I have an indis
“position to place my name on the title-page of so
“very rollicking a piece as Father Tom.” In another
part of the letter he says, “Anything that I
-- viii --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page viii.[end figure description]
“have done in the higher walk of my literary vo
“cation has become very slowly known, owing
“probably to a not unnatural repugnance toward
“the Irish subject, when presented in any other
“than a droll aspect.” It is scarcely courteous for
me to take such a liberty as to place the name of
the author upon the title-page of this book, but
I have no reason to withhold the information which
I derived from other sources as to its paternity.
A dear friend, whose memory is familiar to every
lover of literature in this country,* soon after the
first edition of this book appeared, told me that I
was all wrong in my surmises; that Thackeray,
when he was here, had said that “Father Tom and
the Pope” was written by a gentleman from Wexford,
Ireland, (the author is really a native of Belfast,)
who, like Single-Speech Hamilton, had never
distinguished himself in any other way; and who,
although a writer of very great genius, seemed content
to rest his fame upon this first-born child of
his brain. Soon after I received a letter from one
-- ix --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page ix.[end figure description]
of the most learned fathers of the Roman Catholic
Church, who corrects me in some particulars in the
preface. He says, “You say Maginn was a good
“Catholic. He never was a Catholic. He was a
“Protestant of the Church of England, `so-called,'
“and so was his father before him. Maginn was a
“man of extraordinary genius. But like many
“others of that ilk, he was unfortunate. His bro
“ther, Rev. Charles Maginn, is I believe living still,
“and a clergyman of the Church of England, `so-
“called.' With regard to the discussion between
“Father Tom and Rev. Mr. Pope, you seem very
“injudiciously to have prejudged the case. In so
“ber truth, Father Tom overcame Pope. This was
“confessed by many Protestant clergymen of the
“Church of England, `so-called;' among the many,
“two well known to myself, Rev. Stephen Ratcliff,
“of Lisnadell, and Rev. Mr. Olpherts, of Armagh.
“You say that Father Tom by some legerdemain
“drove Pope to the Fathers, and that Pope having
“thus been driven from the dear Bible and unac
“quainted with the Fathers, was used up by Fa
“ther Tom, etc. Now this is not so; neither is it
-- x --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page x.[end figure description]
“at all true that Pope, having commenced to study
“the Fathers, found Father Tom's quotations false,
“etc. Now, my dear friend, please call on Donegan
“& Brother's publishing house, N. Y., where you
“can get the controversy of `Pope and Maguire,' and
“you will find that the Provost of Trinity College,
“Dublin, refused to translate the extract from a
“Greek Father, and it remains untranslated in the
“published controversy. Maguire was willing to
“leave the translation to the Provost when his own
“had been disputed. But the Provost would not,
“so that there is no use talking about the Fathers
“in that way.
“I will give you an opinion from St. Augustine,
“one of the most philosophical and logical men that
“ever existed. `I would not believe the Scriptures
“were it not for the testimony of the Church.' Now
“what do you say to that? St. Augustine is right.
“How would we know it to be Scripture were it not
“for the testimony of the Church? My dear sir, I
“need not pursue the argument any further, for to
“one of your natural and acquired ability it must be
“self-evident. Father Maguire boldly asserted in
-- xi --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page xi.[end figure description]
“a speech in public in the city of Dublin, that he
“had been offered a `nate' church, with a living
“worth £800 per annum. The Protestants called on
“him for the proof. Father Tom offered to give the
“proof in presence of men he named at any day and
“date they pleased. It is needless to say that the
“men he named were Protestants, but high-minded
“gents, and he was never troubled more about it.
“With respect to Heffernan, whom you call a hedge
“priest, he is represented as a hedge-schoolmaster;
“as you will see through all the narrative of `Fa
“`ther Tom and the Pope.'
“Again, I do not believe that Maginn was the
“author. I think, if I rightly recollect, it appeared
“in the `Dublin University Magazine,' author un
“known.”
Nearly at the same time that this letter from my
amiable Roman Catholic friend was received, another
one had reached me, written by a personal
friend of the author of “Father Tom and the Pope.”
As liberty has been given me to make use of it, I
quote a brief extract. “I regretted to see,” says
“the writer, (David S. H. Smith, M. D., Mabbetts
-- xii --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page xii.[end figure description]
“ville, N. Y.,) “that the author's name was not upon
“the title-page, and that you were unable to decide
“upon it in your preface. The brochure was not
“written by Lord Brougham, nor by the Duke of
“Wellington, nor by Maginn, but by Samuel Fer
“guson, Esq., of Dublin, barrister-at-law, author of
“the `Forging of the Anchor,' and other poems. I
“have my information from Dr. Ferguson himself
“(he was created an LL.D. by the University of
“Dublin in 1865), whose acquaintance I formed
“during my sojourn in the medical school of the
“Irish metropolis.” In a capital review of “Father
Tom and the Pope,” in the Round Table for Nov.
30, 1867 (written I believe by Mr. Eugene Casserly)—
a review that has blood and marrow in it, for
it does not hesitate to speak right out in a straight-forward
manly way, and say “That is wrong,”
when it has reason to say sc—the authorship is attributed
to Dr. Samuel Ferguson, author of the
“Forging of the Anchor.”
With all these links of circumstantial evidence
before me, I wrote to Dr. Ferguson himself, for
“more light” upon the subject. A portion of his
-- xiii --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page xiii.[end figure description]
answer has been already quoted. And, although
debarred by his injunction,—“I have an indisposi
“tion to place my name on the title-page of so very
“rollicking a piece as Father Tom,” which I have
obeyed, yet nobody can possibly find fault with
the pains that I have taken to get his name in the
preface, except one, and that is himself.
But I hope he will forgive me, for I do not believe,
as multitudes of thoughtless people do, who read
the sophistries of Copyright Carey, that the public
has any right to the mental productions of an
author without his consent, no more than they have
an agrarian right to the coat and waistcoat which he
has earned by those literary labors. If authors
benefit mankind, why should not mankind protect
their benefactors? If an author can “smooth a
wrinkle on the brow of care,” why should not
mankind lend a helping hand to smooth a wrinkle
on his own?
But this has nothing to do with “Father Tom
and the Pope.” Behold! it is a free gift! Not even
Fame,
“The last infirmity of noble minds,”
-- xiv --
[figure description] Ante-Preface. Page xiv. Tail-piece depicting a knight of the church holding a scepter. The knight is surrounded with an ivy border.[end figure description]
has touched the author. He would rather try to
restore the ancient glories of Ireland. It will be
a thankless task to be sure, but it is beautiful to
see the developments of the task itself. The ancient
Irish kings and heroes may rejoice over it, if
they are in spiritual communication with the poets
of this world. But for a few centuries at least,
until the Romish Church is extinct, our children's
children will enjoy A Night in the Vatican.
F. S. C.
eaf526n1* Hon. Gulian C. Verplanck.
-- --
PREFACE.
[figure description] Preface. Head-piece consisting of a diptych; the left side shows monks and knights gathered around the bed of an ill man who holds a large crucifix. The right side shows a church scholar reading a book that is on a book-stand. He is also holding a rolled-up parchment.[end figure description]
THERE are several questions which at this present
time remainn unsettled. One of them is, “who
invented gunpowder?” Another is, “which of them
was it, Faust or Guttemberg, that invented print
ing?” Another is, “whether the Deity created
nature, or nature created itself?” That is a poser.
Another is, “whether the original egg was the parent
of the chicken, or the egg was the original ancestor of
that celebrated feathered fowl?” “De novum ovum,”
-- 006 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 006.[end figure description]
says Xinctillios, “inseperatum primero, cum
possibilitas, et credentia, in meo judicio, quam supra
calcis phosphas, qui est, in the bones of the chicken.”
In other words, and to make it plain to the reader,
he, Xinctillios, cannot understand how it is possible
for human comprehension to see a new laid egg,
without permitting in his judgment the idea of
phosphate of lime existing in the osseous structure
of the bones of the original hen. St. Bardolphus
entertains a contrary opinion, “Anam, aname,
mona mike,” says he, “Barcelona bona strike,” says
he, “harum scarum, wy frone whack!” (I give
you the original Coptic) “harrico barrico, we won
frac!”
Between these two contending opinions I have
nothing to say. The dogmas of the Roman Catholic
Church, and the folatreries of the philosophers
of the high school of nature, differ so widely, that
it is impossible for common sense to adopt either
the one or the other—and the Greek Church on
these points has given no decided opinion!
Such a dilemma presents itself when we come to
consider the contents of this volume. Who wrote
-- 007 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 007.[end figure description]
it? Some say, Lord Brougham; and some attribute
it to the Duke of Wellington, who understood
the Irish vernacular to a dot. I have a shrewd
suspicion that Maginn, a high tory, although a good
Roman Catholic, and one of the prominent contributors
to Blackwood, lent his helping hand to it,
if he were not the real author of it all. “Howandiver,”
to use a phrase of the author, let us look
into the history of it.
Father Tom Maguire, a prominent Roman Catholic
priest in Killeshandra, Ireland, of the parish of
Innismagrath, was one of the most celebrated men
of his time. He was a splendid orator, trained at
Maynooth; he was a high liver—everything consisting
of meat and drink on his table was of the
best; his wines were excellent; and he kept the
best stable and the finest greyhounds in Ireland.
He was a bold fox-hunter; rode over ditch, hedge
and five-barred gate; and when his good Bishop
interdicted these sports of the Irish clergy, says
he, “I will give up my hunting,” says he; “but if
I must give up my greyhounds, there is a little
Protestant parish church hard by waiting for me.”
-- 008 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 008.[end figure description]
Whether this threat had the desired effect is not
known. It is said that he adjured his church and
died a heretic. How much of this we can believe
depends altogether upon the amount of our credulity.
It may be true, and, alas! it may not!
Father Tom, as the great Roman Catholic controversalist,
was challenged to decide by argument
the superiority of the Romish Church over that of
the Established Church of England, by the Rev.
Richard T. P. Pope, a clergyman of the latter persuasion.
The controversy took place in the Rotunda,
at Dublin, about forty years ago.* Crowds
of spectators assembled to witness the religious
contest. Of course the ladies, who always take a
great interest in religious disputations, were present
in great numbers. The beauty and the fashion,
the graceful, the wise and the witty of Dublin
assembled to hear these knotty points discussed.
The Rev. Mr. Pope, who was a very learned scholar,
but unfortunately a timid man, based his great
argument upon the Bible itself. So long as he
stood upon this ground his arguments were
-- 009 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 009.[end figure description]
unassailable. But Father Tom, by one of those dexterous
twists so well known in polemics, managed
to get Pope to shift his ground from the Bible to
the Fathers. The dispute, which had occupied
several days, up to this time had been in favor of
Pope, but when Father Maguire got him entangled
in the Fathers, and hurled at him quotation after
quotation from St. Austin, St. Chrysostom, and
others—poor Pope, who knew very little of the
Fathers, became so dumb-foundered that he was
incapable of making a reply, and the victory rested
with Father Tom. But after the controversy was
over the Rev. Mr. Pope took up the Fathers, and to
his surprise could not find any of the quotations that
Father Tom had cited! Like a true scholar, he
published a book, exposing the fallacies of his antagonist.
But the time had gone by. Few people
cared to read it, fewer still had patience to wade
through laborious denials of the smart sayings of
Father Tom in the Rotunda; the sparkle was off—
the champagne had ceased to effervesce—and Mr.
Pope never recovered the ground he had lost.
Some years elapsed, and the Rev. Tresham D.
-- 010 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 010.[end figure description]
Gregg, of the Established Church, took up the
polemical cudgels to demolish the redoubtable
champion of the Romish Church. He was just
such a man as his antagonist, vehement, loud-voiced—
of the ad captandum, knock-down-and-drag-out
school. Although not acknowledged by the Church
of England as the Goliath of its faith, yet there is
no doubt of the secret exultation of its clergy at
his success. The challenge was accepted, and for a
fortnight the Rotunda of Dublin rang with the
verbal blows of these doughty combatants. Victory
poised her scales; the contest hung in the
balance. At last, one afternoon, after the battle of
the day was over, Gregg raised his mighty arm
high in the air, and said “that on the next day, the
secrets of the confessional would be the subject of
the discourse,” and warned the ladies, “that no
modest woman would appear, or could appear,
while he revealed the secrets of that powerful instrument
of the Romish Church.”
The consequences may be imagined. The hall
was packed to overflowing by the gentler sex.
Ladies of the Catholic persuasion, conscious of the
-- 011 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 011.[end figure description]
inability of the orator to make his words good,
flocked to hear his discomfiture. Those of the
other persuasion were induced to come from a laudable
curiosity. The argument, if argument it
might be called, consisted on Gregg's part of that
style which Poe has properly denominated “the
awkward left arm of satire—invective.” He had
caught Father Tom at single-stick and paid him off
in his own way. There was of course no little allusion
to indelicate matters. After the argument
the Rev. Mr. Gregg had to be escorted to his
lodgings by a troop of dragoons. At the close of
the debate he announced, that on the morrow the
subject would be continued; but on the following
day Father Tom did not appear. The victorious
Gregg was cock of the walk; the judgment went
by default.
Whether any one among the speakers or listeners
became better Christians after the controversy, is a
question. It is doubtful whether Gregg or Father
Tom made or lost a single convert to either faith.
“Father Tom and the Pope” first saw the light
in Blackwood, ten years after these controversies.
-- 012 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 012.[end figure description]
It may have been written by Maginn, who was a
good Catholic, but it may truly be said of him, that
although he “loved the Church much, he loved fun
more.” As a work of mere wit it must take its
place with some of the brightest efforts of Rabelais,
of Montaigue, or of Pascal.
The ingenuity with which the conversation between
the Pope and Father Tom is developed to
the reader, forms no little part of its felicitousness.
A hedge priest, one Michael Heffernan, of the National
School of Ballymacktaggart, is the interlocutor.
This keeper of a ragged school, under the
shadow of an Irish hedge, is the exponent of theological
controversies that have shaken the world!
Happy satire! which like summer lightning, clears
up the atmosphere, and makes even the skies bright,
blue, beautiful and buoyant. To us! poor mortals!
to whom a touch of nature shakes the laughter
out of us, or brings the tears into our eyes, such
books are the treasures of our language.
If out of the sorrow and misery of this world,
wit has managed to alleviate one shade of human
suffering; if it has lifted up its hand against
-- 013 --
[figure description] Preface. Page 013. With a tail-piece depicting a knight of the church holding a scepter. The knight is surrounded with an ivy border.[end figure description]
tyranny; if it has sometimes by the pen of Cervantes
lessened the ridiculous power of a so-called
chivalry, or in the satires of Swift destroyed the
prestige of hereditary birth; if it has done any
good in this world, let so much good be accounted
to it.
eaf526n2* In 1827.
-- --
[figure description] Blank Page.[end figure description]
Ferguson, Samuel, Sir, 1810-1886 [1868], Father Tom and the Pope, or, A night in the Vatican. (Moorhead, Simpson & Bond, New York) [word count] [eaf526T].
