w_
CI-
UJ
g
c::I
U - M
..D
;
- -=
M
==:;::; c::I
(, ==
t
!
>
- rr1 I
I
. .
.
.
.
'I 111 '111' "
-------.,
.
.
J
.
.
I
.
.
I
.
.
I
....
' 1
([@jJ
t(
J
I .
!
I
,
I -
ßYj)
.
'[
1
i@)
-=-".
.
r J j)'Þ\'l
,,
. 04>.
'"
_.___
. 1
.
Âj
.
>> r
J5
rj
J '
1
i
._
__Þ I
I '
,'/("
1\
ìi1ii'
(
]
4-
""
':-' P
__ "". '!J
Ill, " '.1,""',1 1 ,1,
..
L.-
..
.
.
__ - - _____..1
(
History of Ireland
HALF-VOLUME VI
J.
..,
".
'"
'"
"
...
:
':'
....
.:
..
"
"':'
:,'"::-p ...::..
.
"...
-..
-.
.
... -" '=..
J..
QJld
!
GLADSTO
E I
TRODUCI
G TIlE IIO
IE H.ULE mLL OF 1886
HISTORY OF IRELAND
FROM TIlE EARLIEST TIl\tlES
TO THE PRESENT DAY
BY
THE REV. E. A. D'ALTON
LL.D. M. RJ.A.
HALF-VOLUME VI
1879 TO 1908
LONDON MCMX
THE GRESHAM PUBLISHING COMPANY
THIRTY.FOUR SOUTHAMPTON STREET STRAND
CONTENTS
CHAPTER XII
THE LAND LEAGUE
PAGE
The Irish Farmer after 1870
The Distress of 1 879
Mr. Michael Davitt
The New Departure
Meeting at Irishtown
Parnell joins Davitt
The Land League established
Parnell and Dillon in America
The Question of Irish Distress
The General Election of 1880
The New I rish Party
The Liberal Government
Parnell in Ireland.
Boycotting
Agrarian Outrages
The Chief Secretary, Mr. Forster
Forster's Coercion Bill
Gladstone's Land Bill
Parnellites and Liberals
Death of John MacHale
Coercion in Ireland
The Kilmainham Treaty
273
273
275
276
277
278
280
281
282
28 3
284
28 5
286
287
28 9
28 9
290
293
295
29 6
297
299
v
vi
HlSTOR Y OF IRELAND
CHAPTER XIII
THE COERCIONIST RÉGIl\IE
Secret Societies in Dublin .
The Phænix Park Murders
The Crimes Bill
Arrears Bill
The National League
Outrages in Ireland
Parnell and Forster
The Parnell Testimonial
Parnell's Difficulties
Parnellites and Tories
Lord Randolph Churchill
Parnell's Party
General Gordon
Tories and Parnellites coalesce
Liberals defeated .
PAGE
3 00
3 00
3 0 3
3 0 3
3 0 4-
3 0 4
3 06
3 0 7
3 0 7
3 0 9
3 0 9
3[[
3 1 3
3 1 3
3 1 4
CHAPTER XIV
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
The New Tory Government and Ireland
Parnell and Lord Carnarvon
Parnell and the Liberals
Gladstone's Position
Parnell's Manifesto
The General Election
The Archbishopric of Dublin
The Tories and Coercion .
Gladstone in Office
Death of Mr. Forster
Gladstone's Home Rule Bill
The Land Purchase Bill
The Opposition to Home Rule
Mr. Chamberlain .
Friends and Foes.
3 16
3 1 7
3 1 9
3 21
3 2 3
3 2 3
3 2 5
3 2 6
3 26
3 2 9
330
33 2
333
335
33 6
CONTENTS
vii
J'Ar.E
Mr. Bright
The Second Reading Debate
Government Defeat
337
33 8
34 0
CHAPTER XV
THE UNIONIST GOVERNMENT
The General Election of 1886
The Tories and Ireland
The Plan of Campaign
Resignation of Lord Randolph Churchill
The Round Table Conference
Balfour's Coercion Bill
Balfour's Land Bill
The Queen's Jubilee
The Coercion Struggle in Ireland .
Papal Rescript condemning the Plan of Campaign .
Continued Coercion
The Irish Loyal and Patriotic Union
Houston and Pigott
., Pamellism and Crime" .
The Times Commission
Pigott's Forgeries.
Findings of the Commission
Mr. Parnell's Triumph
34 1
34 6
349
35 1
35 2
35 2
355
355
35 6
359
3 61
363
3 6 4
3 6 5
366
3 6 7
3 68
3 6 9
CHAPTER X'ï
THE FALL OF PARXELL
Parnell's Character
Parnell and the O'Sheas
The O'Shea Divorce
Parnell's Position .
Parnell denounced in England
Parnell's Attitude .
Cladstone's Letter.
The Irish Leadership
37 0
37 1
373
374
375
376
377
379
viii
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Parnell's Friends and Enemies
Committee Room Number 1 5
The Kilkenny Election
The Boulogne Negotiations
Ireland in Parliament
Mr. Parnell's Campaign
Death of Parnell .
PAGE
3 82
3 8 3
3 8 4
3 86
3 88
3 8 9
39 1
CHAPTER XVII
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
Irish Parties after Parnell s Death .
Mr. Dillon and Mr. Healy
Balfour's Irish County Government Bill
General Election of 18 9 2 .
The Second Home Rule Bill
The Second Reading Debate
The Bill in Committee
Rejected in the Lords
Mr. Gladstone retires from Public Life
Dissension in Ireland
Lord Rosebery, Prime Minister
Rosebery's Attitude on Home Rule
I rish Party Quarrels
End of the Liberal Government
394
397
4 01
4 02
4 0 5
4 03
4 12
4 1 3
4 1 4
4 1 5
4 16
4 1 7
4 1 9
4 20
CHAPTER XVIII
YEARS OF STRIFE
The Unionists in Office
The Parnellites
Conflicting Views of Mr. Dillon and Mr. Healy
The General Election
The Chairmanship of the Irish Party
Mr. Dillon elected Chaimlan
National Convention in Dublin
Mr. Dillon carries out its Mandate
4 21
4 22
4 2 2
4 2 4
4 2 7
4 2 9
43 0
43 2
CONTENTS
ix
PAGB
Mr. Balfour's Land Purchase Bill .
The Overtaxation of Ireland
I rish Local Government Act
Mr. Horace Plunkett
I rish Department of Agriculture
The Liberal Leadership
Death of Gladstone
Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites coalesce
434
43 6
43 8
44 0
441
442
44 2
443
CHAPTER XIX
THE NEW CENTURY
The Boers
The Irish favour the Boers
The General Election of 1900
Mr. Healy expelled from the Irish Party
Death of the Queen
Ireland in Parliament
The Position in Ireland
The Land Conference of 1902
Mr. \Vyndham
The Land Purchase Act of 1903
The Irish Leaders differ on Land Purchase
The Reform Association
Sir A. :MacDonnell, Irish Under-Secretary.
General Election of 1906
The New Government
Mr. T. W. Russell
Mr. Birrell, Chief Secretary
Mr. Birrell's Difficulties
Mr. \V. F. Bailey .
Irish Nationalists disagree.
Devolution-The Irish Councils Bill
Death of Mr. Davitt
I reland in 1 907
The Irish Universities Act
445
44 6
447
447
447
44 8
45 0
45 1
45 2
453
457
45 8
459
461
4 6 3
4 6 3
4 6 5
4 6 5
466
467
469
47 1
471
473
x
HISTORY OF IRELAND
CHAPTER XX
LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL :MOVEMENTS
I'AGE
I reland in the Eighteenth Century .
Ireland under Grattan's Parliament
After the Union
Literary Revival
Carleton .
Carleton's Contemporaries.
I\-1oore
The Young Irelanders
O'Connell and the Literary Revival
After O'Connell and Davis
I rish History and Antiquities
The Catholic University
Tercentenary of Trinity College
Centenary of Maynooth College
The Gaelic Revival
Anglo-Irish Literary Movement
Industrial Conditions
Sir H. Plunkett and Dr. O'Riordan
The Dublin "Leader"
477
479
4 80
4 81
4 82
4 8 3
4 8 4
4 8 S
4 8 7
4 88
4 8 9
49 2
49+
49S
49 6
SOl
5 02
S03
S04
CHAPTER XXI
THE IRISH ABROAD
Irish in America in the Eighteenth Century
Subsequent Emigration
Emigration to Canada
Emigration during the Famine
Condition of the American Irish
Anti-Catholic Feeling
Irish during the Civil "Var
Irish among the Confederates
Battle of Fredericksburg
s06
5 0 7
5 08
5 0 9
SII
5 12
5 1 4
5 1 5
S I 7
CONTENTS
xi
Disappearance of Bigotry .
America after the \Var
Irish Emigration since 1860
Distinguished Irish-Americans
Emigration to Australia
Treatment of the Irish Immigrants.
Progress of the Australian Irish
Irish in Great Britain
Effects of Emigration
PAGB
5 1 9
52 0
5 21
5 22
5 2 3
524
525
5 28
5 28
LIST OF PLATES
HALF-VOLUME VI
FACING PAGE
Gladstone introducing the Home Rule Bill of 1886 Frontisþiece
Michael Davitt. Justin MacCarthy. T. P. O'Connor. Thomas
Sexton. T. M. Healy. \Villiam O'Brien 3 I 2
Dr. :\IacHale, Archbishop of Tuam. Dr. \Valsh, Archbishop of
Dublin. Dr. Healy, Archbishop of Tuam. Dr. Croke, Arch-
bishop of Cashel 3 2 5
\V. E. Forster. Joseph Chamberlain. Lord Spencer. Lord Morley.
Lord Randolph Churchill. Sir \Yilliam V. Harcourt 339
John Dillon. John E. Redmond 443
Arthur James Balfour. George \Vyndham. T. \V. Russell.
Augustine Birrell 4 6 5
Lord Dunraven. Lord MacDonnell. Sir Horace Plunkett.
Capt. Shawe Taylor . 47 I
\Villiam Carleton. Thomas Moore. James Clarence Mangan.
Father Eugene O'Growney. \V. B. Yeats. Dr. Douglas Hyde 5 02
Cardinal :i\loran. Cardinal Gibbons. Monsignor Shahan. Dr. Yorke 5 2 7
CHAPTER XII
The Laml League
THE years which followed the Land Act of 1870 were
prosperous years in I reland. The seasons were good, the
crops abundant, the price of farm stock abnormally high. The
Land Act in no way curtailed the landlord's right to raise
rents, and he took full advantage of his powers. Yet the
tenants willingly paid the increased rents. \Vhene\'er land was
to be let there were many competitors for its possession, and
when a tenant was evicted the landlord had no difficulty in
finding a new tenant for the vacant holding. There was then
no powerful organization to protect the evicted, and no one to
raise the cry of grabber, and in their greed for land the farmers
forgot the interests of their own class to satisfy the rapacity of
the landlords. 1 In 1877 there came a change. In that year
the potato crop was barely half that of the preceding year; in
18 7 8 the crop was equally a failure; and in 1879 there was
but a third of the average yield. Bankrupt and starving men
could not pay rent, but the landlords, caring nothing for the
people, insisted to the full on their legal rights; and as rents
were not and could not be paid they commenced to evict. In
18 77 the number or such evictions was 1323 ; in 1878, 1749;
and in 1879 the number had risen to 2667. \Yith famine
and eviction the outlook was certainly dark, and it seemed as if
the horrors of 1847 were to be renewed. 2
Nor would the Government do anything to stay evictions or
relieve distress. With distress in Great Britain and trouble
abroad Ireland was forgotten, and when Parliament met in
February 1879 its chief concern was about the affairs of
1 New Ireland, pp. 429-30. 2 ParnellltIove1J1ent, pp. 16 5-7.
VOL. III 273 88
I^
274
THE LAND LEAGUE
Afghanistan and Zululand. Nothing was promised to Ireland
except an amendment of its Grand Jury laws. l At a later
period of the session Lord Clare's Convention Act of 1793 was
repealed; 2 and for the first time for nearly a hundred years
Irishmen selected and delegated by their countrymen were free
to meet and discuss public questions. There was also a
University Bill passed, which abolished th{' Queen's University
and set up the Royal University in its place. The Queen's
colleges, however, were left undisturbed, still shunned by
Catholics as godless colleges, and as such barred by Catholic
bishops. N or was any concession made except to allow
Catholics in common with others to be examined for degrees,
for the Royal University did not require residence, and was
nothing more than an examining board. s
Nothing further would be done for Ireland. As if in
contempt of the country, Lord Beaconsfield had appointed Mr.
James Lowther Irish Chief Secretary. He was but an ignorant,
horse-racing country squire, more at home in the racing
paddock than in Parliament, less familiar with the language of
statesmen, or even of intelligent politicians, than with the
language of the stable and the horse jockey. In the end of
May, :Mr. O'Donnell, 1\I.P. for Galway, called attention to the
state of Ireland, and 1ir. Parncll and others supported and
emphasized the statements of Mr. O'DonnelL But 1\1r.
Lowther, who knew nothing and cared nothing abou[ Ireland,
undertook to say that these statements were exaggerated, and
that the depression in Ireland was" neither so prevalent nor so
acute as the depression existing in other parts of the United
Kingdom." 4 A month later Mr. O'Connor Power, M.P. for
1\'Iayo, one of the ablest of the Irish members, and one of the
greatest orators in Parliament, moved the adjournment of the
House to call attention to the subject of Irish distress. But
neither the strong case he made nor the eloquence with which
he spoke made any impression on the Government benches.
The members talked and laughed while he spoke, so that he
1 Annual Register, pp. 1-2, 33. 2 Ibid. 73.
S Fifty Years of Concessions to Ireland, ii. i New Ireland, pp. 43 6 - 8 .
MR. MICHAEL DAVITT
275
was heard with difficulty.! They were willing to help the
Government to pass new rules for putting down obstruction,
which meant putting down Parnell,2 but they were not willing
to listen to the cry of I rish distress, and closed their eyes as
we
l as their ears even while famine was advancing with rapid
strides.
There was then a more militant spirit in Ireland than that
which existed in 1847. The Irishmen of 1879 were not
willing to starve or be evicted, and if the Government would
not help them they were determined to help themselves. The
most prominent exponent of the new gospel of defiance and
self-help was l\1:ichael Davitt. The son of a Mayo peasant,
he was born in 1846 at the little village of Straide. His
parents, who had passed safely through the famine, were
evicted in 1853, and the whole family, father, mother, son
and two daughters, crossed to England and settled at
Haslingden in Lancashire. To supplement the scanty
earnings of his father, the little boy was sent at an early
age to work in a mill, and one day his arm got caught by
the mill machinery and was so seriously injured that it had
to be amputated. He had already acquired some education
and was clever and quick to learn, and perhaps the terrible
misfortune which involved the loss of his right arm caused
him to turn to books with fresh eagerness. At all events,
he read and acquired knowledge, and was soon able to con-
tribute to O'Leary's Fenian organ, The Irisk People. He
joined the Fenian organization and passed unharmed through
the exciting times of 1867; but in 1870 he was arrested in
London as a Fenian arms-agent and on the evidence of an
informer was convicted. Sentenced to fifteen years' penal
servitude, he was in 1878 liberated on ticket-of-leave. He
was then a fairly well-educated man, for in prison he had
availed himself of every opportunity given him to read. In the
midst of unwholesome surroundings and degraded companions
he had remained a good man, with high ideals and loftiness of
aim. In the stone-breaking yard or in the prison-cell at Dart-
1 O'Brien's LiJè of Parnell, i. 185. 2 Annual Register, p. 34.
27 6
THE LAl\D LEAGUE
moor, he often thought of Ireland and its wrongs; and when
he was once more free his first anxiety was to strike at Irish
landlordism and British misgovernment. 1
The time was not unfavourable for a new forward move-
ment. Famine was coming, the landlords were evicting, the
Government callous. Already the ablest of the American
Fenians, John Devoy, an ex- prisoner like Davitt himself,
was anxious for an alliance betv;een the Fenians and the
Parliamentarians. As long as the latter were under the
leadership of Butt there was no hope for Ireland in Parlia-
ment, and the Fenians turned from constitutional agitation
with contempt. But with Parnell it was different. His
militant attitude, his evident capacity to lead, his hatred
of England, captivated thousands of Fenians both at home
and abroad, and \\on them over to parliamentary methods.
On the other hand, Devoy hoped for little from Fenianism
until the farmers joined, and he wanted an alliance between
revolutionists and Parliamentarians, on the basis of the
destruction of landlordism, leading up to Irish independence.
This came to be called the New Departure. It highly
commended itself to Davitt, and when he landed in America
in August 1878, he and Devoy won over to their views large
numbers of the Clan-na-Gael. They could not, however,
succeed with the Supreme Council of the I.R.D. Influenc
d
by Kickham, it would have nothing to do with constitutional
movements. Kickham was a man of much literary capacity,
pure-minded and unselfish, but with little ability for practical
politics. He ought to have seen that the American Fenians
were powerless owing to the enforcement of neutrality laws
by the United States; that the home Fenians could only
break out into futile rebellion; and that to expect them
with revolvers and guns to overcome the might of England
was as reasonable as to expect that a modern fortress could
be captured with bows and arrows. Yet he clung to the
old worn-out methods, which were powerless either to do
good to Ireland or harm to England. A t the meeting of
1 New Ireland, pp. 431-2 ; Davitt's Lea'Z/es from a Pn"son Diary.
TIlE
EW DEPARTURE
277
the Supreme Council in Paris at which both Devoy and
Davitt attended-both being members-he had his way, and
no alliance wa') to be entered into with the Parliamentarians,
though individual memb.::rs might join the open movement
if they pleased. l
Nor did Parnell seem to regard the new departure ,,-ith
special favour. In October 1878 the Clan-na-Gael leaders
were willing to join him if he dropped the demand for
Federal Home Rule in favour of a general declaration
d
manding- self-government; if he vigorously agitated the
Land question on the basis of a peasant proprietary, excluded
sectarian issues from his platforms, and helped all struggling
nationalities within the British Empire. 2 He was in favour
of most of the items in this programme, and he liked the
Fenians and wanted their assistance. He would not, how-
ever, have any formal alliance with them, and at no time was
he willing to become a Fenian. But though Kickham on
the on
hand and Parnell on the other held aloof, the new
departure was becoming a reality. Devoy in America was
an active propagandist; Davitt was equally so at home,
and events were so shaping themselves that Irish farmers
were compelled to agitate, and a beginning was made for
the final destruction of Irish landlordism.
The fir.:;t public meeting was held on the 19th of April
1879, at Irishtown in l\Iayo. The parish priest of the place,
Canon Burke, was also a small landlord. His father, within
living memory, had doubled the rents of the several holdings,
with the re::;ult that when bad times came arrears accumulated.
Canon Burke was a kindly and a not ungenerous man, but he
had the landlord's notions about landlord rights, and he refused
either to forgive the arrear,> or reduce the rents, and threatened
tli
tenants with eviction. Respect for his office made it
difficult to rouse public opinion against him, and as local
m
n were unwilling to take action, Davitt was appealed to,
and he, after consulting with some friends in Claremorris,
resolved to hold a public meeting. The necessary organi7a-
1 O'Brien's Parlle/I, i. 163-7, 176-7. 2 Ibid. 168-9.
27 8
THE LAND LE.-\G UE
tion ,vas in the hands of lVIr. John O'Kane, rv1r. r. '\iV. Nally,
IV1r. John Walsh, 1\1r. J. P. Quinn, and others, and both local
leaders and speakers were in nearly every case Fenians; so
also were many of those who formed the audience of 7 000 .
Sons of farmers, some employed in shops, some on their
father's farms, they hated landlordism and longed for its
destruction. Being Fenians, they were opponents of the
clergy and had no dread of Canon Burke. Their example
inspired the farmers, who were not Fenians, with courage; and
if the former supplied the greater part of the audience who
attended tbese meetings, it was the Fenians who supplied the
organizing capacity and discipline, the enthusiasm and courage
so necessary to carry a popular movement to success. Davitt
himself; Mr. Thomas Brennan, a commercial clerk in Dublin
with considerable ability as a speaker; IV1r. O'Connor Power,
M.P., more eloquent still; 1\1r. John Ferguson of Glasgow, and
1\1:r. James Daly of Castlebar were the principal speakers.
They demanded the abolition of landlordism and the estab-
lishment of a peasant proprietary, denounced rack-renting
and eviction with special vehemence, anù were answered back
by the thousands round the platform with the cry of" Down
with landlordism-the land for the people!" One result
of the meeting was that Canon Burke ceased his threats
of eviction and gave an abatement of 2 5 per cent in the
rents. And this led to other meetings where similar eloquence
and enthusiasm were displayed. 1
Mr. Parnell noted these events but refused to attend any
meetings. For one thing, the priests were hostile, and he
wanted no quarrel with the priests. But when Mr. Lowther
in the House of Commons denied even the existence of Irish
distress, Parnell delayed no longer and crossed over to Ireland
to attend the Westport meeting on the 8th of June. And
now the popular movement was attacked from an unexpected
quarter, the assailant being none other than John 11acHale,
Archbishop of Tuam. He was then nearly ninety years of
age, feeble in body and in mind, entirely controlled by his
1 Davitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. 147-5 I.
PARNELL JOINS DAVITT
279
nephe\v, the Very Rev. Dr. :MacHale, a man with no popular
sympathies. To the latter, and not to the great popular
champion, was attributed the letter signed" John, Archbishop
of Tuam. 1J It attacked the ne\v movement as that of a few
designing men who sought only to promote their personal
interests, a movement tending to impiety and disorder in
Church and in society. They were ungenerous words from
the man whom O'Connell had styled the Lion of the Fold
of J ulah, who next to O'Connell was the greatest popular
champion of his time. But the letter did not deter Parnell
nor spoil the meeting. Even a larger number assembled than
at Irishtown, and 8000 men cheered long and loud when
Parnell advised them not to submit to eviction, but to "keep
a firm gri p of their homesteads. JJ 1
In the next month Parnell found himself again in
opposition to the clergy. A vacancy occurred in the
representation of Ennis, and 1\1r. vVilliam O'Brien, a Catholic
\Vhig, a place-hunter, and afterwards a judge, had the support
of the Bishop and priests. Parnell put forward a 1\1r. J. L.
Finnigan, an advanced Home Ruler, and the latter was
placed at the head of the poll. But Parnell disliked
opposing the clergy, and when the Royal University was
passing through the I louse of Commons he favoured the
Catholic bishops' demand for a Catholic University, and
expressed his entire disapproval of the Bill as failing to
satisfy their demand. 2
Davitt was mcanwhile holding meetings, and the cry of
"Down with landlordism JJ \\ as raised from many a platform.
And when Parliament rose Parnell at once returned to Ireland,
and during the months of August, Septembcr and October
attended meetings Sunday after Sunday, and was listened
to by thousands, anxious to hear what he had to say.
His oft-repeated advice to the farmers was to combinc, to
ask for a reduction of rent when necessary, and when the
reduction was refused to pay no rent. As for cxterminating
1 Davitt's Fall if Feudalism, pp. 153-5.
2 O'Brien's Lifc of Pantel', i. 19 I -2.
280
THE LAND LEAGUE
the people, he assured them no Government would attempt it;
let them band themselves together and they were invincible. 1
Davitt in August had held a County Convention in Castle-
bar, and founded the
ational Land League of 1\'layo to protect
tenants and fight landlordism; and he had been urging Parnell
to turn this into a national organization, with a central body
in Dublin and branches throughout the land. But Parnell
hesitated, believing that the central body would be held
responsible for the conduct of the branches, and that it would
be impossible to effectually restrain the reckless spirits of which
some of these branches might be composed. 2 Final1y, how-
ever, he gave way, and on the 2 I st of October the National
League of 1\1ayo was turned into the Irish National Land
League. l\h. Parnell had invited the attendance of representa-
tive public men, who met at the Imperial Hotel, Dublin, and
there a central body "Tas formed charged with the conduct of
the agitation. The declared objects of the Land League were
to reduce rack-rents and promote peasant proprietary; its
methods were to be organization of the farmers, and protection
of those threatened with eviction or actually evicted for unjust
rents. Mr. Parnell was elected President of the League;
Messrs. A. J. Kettle, Davitt and Brennan, Secretaries; and
Messrs. Biggar and Sullivan, M.P:s, and Egan, Treasurers. [t
was resolved that an appeal should be made to the Irish race
for funds to sustain the new movement, and that 1\lr. Parnell
should proceed to America and make the appeal in person.
By that time the suspicion with which the clergy at first
regarded the agitation had partially disappeared, and of the
fifty-three members of the Central Committee of the League no
less than thirteen were priests. 8
In November Messrs. Davitt, Daly and Killeen, B.L., \\Tere
prosecuted for speeches delivered at Gurteen in Sligo County,
and IV!r. Brennan for a strong speech made near Balla. But
the Government despaired of a conviction and the prosecutions
were dropped, with consequent loss of prestige to the Govern-
1 Annual Re,gister, pp. 94-95. 2 O'Brien's Lift of Parnell, i. I9I.
3 Davitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. 170-73.
PARXELL I
A:l.fERICA
281
ment itself, and a consequent increase of influence and strength
to the League. 1\1r. Parnell delayed his departure for America
le3t it mi:.:;ht be said that he was afraid of being prosecuted.
He even attended the meeting in Balla and congratulated Mr.
Brennan on his speech,l and he attended the trial in Slig-o, and
it was not till the end of December that he left Ireland.
Accompanied by 1\lr. John Dillon, he landed at New York
in the first week in January. By that time the reality of the
-distress, especially in Connaught, could not be ignored even
by the Government, and the Lord-Lieutenant's wife, the
Duchess of l\iarlborou 6 h, formed a committee to collect food
.and clothing for the starving people. The Lord l\layor of
Dublin, 1\lr. Gray, l\I.P., formed the 1\Iansion House Committee
for the same purpose; and in America the New York Herald
.also formed a committee, and invited l\Ir. Parnell's co-opera-
tion. But he refused. He \\ras determined that no funds
subscribed should go, as in 1847, into the pockets of the
landlords. He appealed for help not to subsidize but to
destroy landlordism, the fruitful parent of so many famines;
he app
aled to the Irish in America to unite among them-
selves and with their brethren at home for the old land,
.and he appealed for American sympathy against English
misgovernment. 2
He was received with enthusiasm. Governors of States,
mayors of cities, bishops, judges, senators, members of Congress,
-eminent professional men, distinguished military officers,
merchants and newspaper editors, crowded to his platforms.
At New York he addressed 8000 persons, with a judge in the
-chair. At Newark a detachment of the Ninth Regiment
escorted him throu!zh the streets. At Philadelphia 1\lr. Childs,
the eJitor of the Public Ledger, handed him a subscription of
one thousand dol!ar:5. At Boston the l\1:ayor was in the chair,
and the great orator, Wendell PhilIips, was one of the speakers.
At I ndianopolis the Governor of the State met him at the
railway station. At Toledo he was received with a military
:<:;alutc of twenty-one guns. At Buffalo a'1d Chicago he received
1 A1Znual Register, pp. 100-101. 2 Ibid., 1880, pr- 3-4.
282
TIlE LAND LEAGUE
the freedom of the city. At \Vashington he was invited to
address the Hou
e of Representatives, an honour never before
tendered to a stranger except to General Lafayette and
Kossuth. The House suspended its regular session to hear
him vigorously dcnounce Irish landlordism. At Toronto and
l\lontreal in Canada his welcome was enthusiastic, and at thc
latter place he was styled U the uncrowncd king." In two
months he visited sixty-t \vo cities, and travelled nearly I 1,000
miles, and received in all, partly for political purposes but
principally for the relief of distress, a sum of .l 50,000. II e
also founded thc American Land Lcague, with its central body
and its branches like the home organization, with John Devoy
as one of its treasurers, and in its councils cordially acting
together both constitutionalist and Clan-na-GaeI. 1 Leaving
Dillon to carryon the work of the League, Parnell tLen
crossed to Ireland. A dissolution of Parliament had been
sprung upon the country, and it was this which suddcnly cnded
his triumphal pro
ress through America and caused his sudden
return home. He arrived at Queenstown on the 2 I st of l\Iarch,
nearly a fortnight after Lord Beaconsfield had announced the
dissolution in a lettcr addressed to the Duke of l\1arlborough.
At the opening of Parliament in February, r-.1r. Shaw, who
succeeded Butt as Home Rule leader, proposed an amendment
to the Address, calling for comprehensive measures of relief,
and also for legislation on the tenure of land, the neglect
of the latter being the true cause of the constantly recurring
disaffection and distress in Ireland. The Government, how-
ever, opposed and defeated the amendment, though it was
proved by the official returns of the Registrar-General that
the state of Ireland ,'"as serious. These figures, in fact,
" staggered many who had previously been disposed to believe
that the Irish distress had no serious foundation except in the
imaginations of Home Rulers and anti-rent agitators." 2 All
the Government did was to pass a Relief of Distress Act, under
which a sum of .l 1,000,000 was voted from the Church
1 Davitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. '93-21 I ; O'Brien's Life of Parnell,
i. 204-7. 2 Al171ual RegÙter, p. 10.
THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1880
28 3
Surplus Fund to Irish landlords and sanitary authorities to
spend on drainage and reclamation of lands. Paid out for
labour to the tenants, it came back to the landlord as rent,
while the tenant starved. l I n the next month, with a callous-
ness rarely equalled, Lcrd Beaconsfield appealed to the country
on an anti-Irish cry. The Irish demand for Home Rule he
characterised as a danger scarcely less disastrous than pestilence
and famine, and those Liberals who favoured such a policy
were labouring for the disintegration of the United Kingdom,
having already" attempted and failed to enfeeble our Colonies
by their policy of decomposition." 2
Lord Beaconsfield's opponents, however, did not allow the
electoral battle to be confined to the subject of Ireland, and the
whole Tory policy was vigorously impeached. As far back as
187 6 1\1r. Gladstone had come forth from the retirement of hi:,;
library to denounce before the world the horrors perpetrated in
Bulgaria under Turkish rule, where rape and robbery were the
common acts of civil and military officials, and Government
was an organized massacre. Though the public mind of
England was profoundly stirred, Lord Beaconsfield continued
to support Turkey, and 011 her behalf had well-nigh plunged
the country into war. 3 But the seed sown by 1\'fr. Gladstone
ripened in good time, and when the dissolution came, besides
their support of the Turks, the Tories had provided abundant
material for attack. "At home," said 1\lr. Gladstone, "they
have neglected legislation, aggravated the public distress,
augmented the public expenditure, and plunged the finances
into a series of deficits unexampled in modern times." And
abroad they had aggrandised Russia, lured Turkey to her ruin,
replaced the Christian population of 1\1:acedonia under a
debasing yoke, II and from day to day, under a Ministry
called, as if in mockery, Conservative, the nation is perplexed
with fear of change." 4 The answer of the nation to this
formidable indictment was to bring in a verdict of guilty, and
1 Annual Register, pp. 9-12; O'Brien's Parnell, i. 208-9.
Annual Register, pp. 32-33. 3 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 156-77.
4 Annual Rt:f:ister, pp. 34-35.
28 4
THE LAi\D LEAGUE
when the General Election was o\'er only 240 Tories had been
returned to Parliament. Of the remainder 347 \vere Liberals
and 65 Irish Home Rulers. l
In IVIr. Parnell's absence the Irish members had advised
the Irish in England to vote for the Liberals, and it "as
calculated that they turned the scale in forty constituencies.
1\1r. Parnell would have preferred to support the Tories,
believing that Lord Beaconsfield would have plunged the
Empire into some grievous difficulty from which benefit
would accrue to Ireland. I n Ireland his anxiLty was to
strike at the \Vhigs and \Vhig Home Rulers. Travelling
by special train, he visited many constituencies and was thus
able to do the work of many. And his success was con-
siderable. In IVlayo he turned out the moderate Home Ruler,
::\lr. Browne; in Roscommon, the \Vhig O'Connor Don; in
Cork City, the two sitting members; in Cork County he all
but succeeded in ousting 1\'1r. Shaw. He was himself elccted
for 1\1cath, Mayo and Cork City; 1\lr. Dillon was elected for
Tipperary; 1\lr. Sexton for Sligo; 1\lr. T. P. O'Connor for
Galway City; 1\lr. O'Kelly for Roscommon; 1\lr. T. D.
Sullivan for \Vestmeath; Mr. John Barry for \Vexford.
'1essrs. Biggar and Justin 1\lacCarthy were re-elected, and
so was 1\1r. Gray, the Lord Mayor of Dublin. 2 Many
of those elected were young and new to Parliament, and not
a few were destined to acquire fame. rvrr. T. D. Sullivan was
the author of well-known songs and ballads, and though not
so eloquent as his brother Alexander, was a useful member
and an honest man. Mr. Justin :MacCarthy was a cultured
Cork man, whose History of Our O'Zf'n Times was even then
knO\\-n and admired throughout the English-speaking world.
Mr. Gray, the owner of the Freeman's Journal, was son of Sir
John Gray, and had even more than his father's ability. In
honesty and courage 1\1r. John Dillon resembled his father, the
Young Irclander and rebel of 1848. 1\1.1'. T. P. O'Connor was
a brilliant journalist, eloquent both with voice and pen. Mr.
Sexton, hitherto unknown, gave evidence during his election
1 l'Iorley's Gladçtone, ii. :216-20. 2 Nr,(' Ireland. pp. 447-9.
THE NEW IRISH PARTY
28 5
contest of great oratorical powers. lVIr. O'Kelly's life was
full of adventure and romance. A Fenian and a soldier of
the Foreign Legion of France, he had fought in Mexico and
in Cuba, and had been an inmate of a IV1exican as well as
of a Spanish prison. Except 1\lr. Gray, all these favoured
1\1r. Parnell's advanced policy, and when the Home Rule party
met to elect its Chairman, 1\Ir. Parnell was elected by 23
votes, only 18 votes being cast for his opponent Mr. Shaw. 1
Had the whole 65 members returned as Home Rulers
acted loyally together much might have been done under
such a vigorous leader as Mr. Parnell. But it was calculated
that four of the 65 could scarcely be called Home Rulers
at all; 2 many more were not sincere and refused even to
attend the meeting at which Mr. Shaw was deposed; and
1\lr. Shaw's supporters, refusing to abide by the decision
arrived at, remained in the House of Commons on the
Government side, while the Parnellites crossed over to the
Opposition side in pursuance of their avowed policy of
Independent Opposition.
It was no doubt well that the Tories had been driven
from office, that 1\lr. Gladstone, the friend of Ireland, was
Premier, that three of his colleagues were such friends of
liberty and justice as 1\lr. Bright, Mr. Chamberlain and 1\lr.
Forster; and it was an augury of better things that the
expiring Coercion Act was not to be renewed. Yet it was
plain that the Government were not about to embark on any
Irish land legislation; nor did the Queen's Speech, though
dealing with Turkey and I ndia and South Africa, promise
anything to Ireland but an extension of the borough franchise
and a possible measure for the relief of distress. 3 And mean-
time 500,000 persons \\ere on the books of the Irish Relief
Committees; rents were not and could not be paid, with a
consequent large increase of evictions; and at Land League
meetings held all over the land landlordism was vigorously
denounced, and language of menace used towards the evictors
.
1 Parnell M07 / ollent, pp. 175-96. 2 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 220.
3 A nnual Register, pp. 65- 6 6.
286
TIlE LAND LEAGUE
and towards any Government which would be wicked enough
to sustain them 1
This was the condition of things in June, when Mr.
O'Connor Power brought in a Bill to stay evictions by
compelling the landlord in every case to compensate for
disturbance. The Chief Secretary, Mr. Forster, instead of
opposing, took the matter in hand himself, and brought in
a Compensation for Disturbance Bill on the part of the
Government. It did not go far, and only entitled an evicted
tenant to compensation when he could show that his inability
to pay rent was not due to idleness or want of thrift. It
passed the House of Commons but was ignominiously thrown
out by the Lords. Mr. Parnell suggested that the Bill should
be reintroduced and as part of the Appropriation Bill sent
again to the Lords. But 1'lr. Forster refused to do this, and
the Irish farmers, left to the mercy of the evictors, had to
fall back on agitation and organization as their only resource. 2
When Parliament rose in A ugust, Mr. Parnell crossed
over to Ireland and attended a series of meetings. He ,,"as
not an orator, but he could say always what he wanted to
say, and the thousands who listened to him had no difficulty
in understanding what he wished them to do. Aiming then
at the destruction of landlordism and the establishment of
a peasant proprietary, he advised them to unite, to combine,
to be loyal to each other, to refuse to pay unjust rents or
submit to eviction, to have nothing to do with farms from
which others had been evicted. "What are you to do," he
said at Ennis in September, "to a tenant who bids for a
farm from which his neighbour has been evicted?" " Shoot
him," said a voice from the crowd. "I think," said :Mr.
Parnell, "I heard somebody say, 'Shoot him,' but I wish to
point out to you a very much better way. When a man
takes a farm from which another has been evicted you must
show him on the roadside when you meet him, you must
show him in the streets of the town, you must show him at
1 Parnell Jlfovement, pp. 197-9.
Annual Register, pp. 79-88, 104; O'Brien's Parnell, i. 23 0 -33.
BOYCOTTING
28 7
the shop countcr, in the fair and in the market-place, and
even in the house of worship, by leaving him severely alone.
by putting him into a moral Coventry, by isolating him from
his kind as if he was a leper of old; you must show him your
detestation of the crime he has committed, and you may
depend upon it that there will be no man so full of avarice,
so lost to sham
as to dare the public opinion of all right-
thinking men and to transgress your unwritten code of
laws." 1
Before the month was out this advice was acted upon
in the case of Captain Boycott in Mayo, who dwelt near
Ballinrobe, on the picturesque shores of Lough 1\1ask. As
agent to the Earl of Erne, he refused to accept the rents
offered by the tenants, standing out for the full amounts
due, and then issuing processes of ejectment. The tenants
retaliated by attacking the process-server and driving him
into the shelter of Lough l\'1ask I-louse. But further, partly
by persuasion, principally by terror and threats, they got
Captain Boycott's servants and labourers to leave him. No
one would save his crops, no one would drive his car, the
smith would not shoe his horses, the laundress would not
wash for him, the grocer would not supply him with goods;
even the post-boy was warned not to deliver his letters. The
Ulster Orangemen came to the rescue, and fifty ot them,
escorted by po1ice and military with two field -pieces, came
to Lough Mask. They saved the Captain's crops, valued at
..l350, but at an estimated cost to the State and to the Orange
Society of .{ 3500; and when they left Lough Mask House
became vacant, for Captain Boycott fled to England. The
genial and witty parish priest of the Lough Mask district,
Father John O'Malley, suggested to his friend 1\1r. Redpath,
an American journalist, perplexed for a suitable word, that
boycott was a better word than ostracise, the lattcr being too
difficult to be understood by the people. The hint was taken,
the word used in this sense gradually gained currency and
became incorporated in the English language, and of all
1 O'Brien's Life of Parnell, i. 236-7 ; Annual Register, pp. 108-10.
zSS
THE LAND LEAGUE
the weapons used by the Land League none was more
dreaded by landlords and their friends than the terrible weapon
of boycotting. l
All this time the Land League was spreading all over
Ireland and even in Great Britain, while Ï\Ir. Davitt was
extending it in America,2 public meetings were being held
every Sunday; the receipts at the central branch were coming
in by hundreds and thousands of pounds, the police and
process servers had been openly defied in the early part of
the year in the wild and desolate regions of Carraroe, and
since then many collisions had occurreù behveen people and
police. 3 And there were agrarian outrages too. In Mayo
a bailiff named Fccrick had been shot, and a landlord named
Lewin fired at; in \Vexford a landlord's son had been shot
dead, and in Galway Lord Ï\Iontmorris had met a similar fate.
All this had occurred before Parnell's Ennis speech and could
not, therefore, be attributed to any advice he gave; but none the
less these outrages came from the strained relation') between
landlord and tenant, and from the excitement which prevailed. 4
Mr. Forster was perplexed. He had visited Ireland in the
terrible year of 1846, and what he then saw made an indelible
impression on his mind. With the generous love of the
Quaker for his fellow-men, he re1ieved suffering and induced
others to relieve, and he wished to give permanent relief to the
J rish people. 5 And when he took office as Chief Secretary in
1880, his desire was to do good to Ireland. 6 The Irish
members expected much from him, and were grievously
disappointed that he had made no attempt to overawe the
House of Lords after the rejection of the Disturbance Bi1l, stilI
more so at his sending police and military to aid in the \,'ork
of eviction; and when he announced in Parliament that he
had caused buckshot to be served out to the police instead of
1 Annual Register, pp. I I 8-2 I ; Davitt, pp. 274-9.
2 Davitt, pp. 247-55. 3 Ibid. 21 3-3 0 .
4 Ibid. 261-3, 268-9 i. Annual Register, p. 110.
5 \Vemyss Reid's Life of Forster, i. 169, 172-203.
i Ibid. 235- 6 .
THE CHIEF SECRETARY, 1\1R. FORSTER
28 9
the more dangerous b3.11 cartridge, an Irish member hurled at
him across the floor of the House the epithet, Buckshot
Forster. l But angry as the Irish members might be, the
English newspapers and Tory orators were more so. They
as')ailed Forster as condoning illegality, leaving murder unde-
tected, and allowing incitements to murder to go unpunished.
Gradually he was thus driven down the abyss, and in the
beginning of November 1'1essrs. Parnell, Biggar, Dillon, T. D.
Sullivan and Sexton, and nine other prominent Leaguers were
prosecuted for conspiracy to incite the tenants not to pay
their rents, and in consequence to injure the landlords. The
trial lasted from the end of Dccember to the end of January,
and resulted in a disagreement, one juror declaring that ten
jurymen were for acquitta1. 2 To :Mr. Forster the result was
no surprise. He was not sanguine of obtaining a conviction,
and satisfied that the ordinary law was unable to grapple with
the Land League, was already pleading for coercion. The
Lord - Lieutenant, Lord Cowper, vigorously supported his
demand. But 1\lr. Gladstone was unwilling to acquiesce. 1\lr.
Bright declared that for the state of Ireland force was no
remedy, and 11r. Chamberlain's vicws were similar. 3 Forster,
however, had supporters within the Cabinet, and was persuasive
and persistent, and in addition threatened to resign. 4 At last
the IVlinistry yielded, and when Parliament opened on the 6th
of January the Queen's Speech announced that an Irish Land
Bill would be introduced, but that it would be preceded by a
Coercion BilP
I n the debatc on the Address, Mr. Parnell made a carefully-
prepared and very able speech. Condemning outrages and
deprecating violence of language, he claimed that the Land
League agitation was a purely constitutional movement.
There had been, he admitted, some strong speeches made by
thoughtless and irresponsible orators, but outrages had not
1 Davitt, p. 265. 2 Ibid. 286-93 ; Annual Regz's/er, pp. 112- 1 3, 115-16.
3 Parnell lIfovement, p. 206.
4 'Vemyss Reid, ii. 256-73 i O'Brien's Parne/l, i. 25 8 -62.
5 Annual Register, pp. 5- 6 .
VOL. III
83
29 0
THE LAND LEAGUE
always followed, and the very few which took place had been
mischievously exaggerated by the English Press. He claimed
for the people the right to organize and meet and demand
reforms, and he warned the Government that coercion would
increase rather than lessen their difficulties. Speaking without
passion, and supported by statistics, he made such an impression
that an Irish Tory member described the speech as one of the
most adroit, intelligent and sagacious that he had eyer heard
delivered in the House of Commons. 1
But Mr. Forster was not convinced, and when the debate
on the Address was concluded, he introduced his Coercion Bill.
I t was called a Bill for the Protection of Person and Property
in Ireland, was to last until the end of September 1882, and
enabled the Lord-Lieutenant to arrest and detain in prison
anyone whom he reasonably suspected of unlawful acts. Mr.
Forster was an eloquent speaker, and in describing the condition
of Ireland it was a lurid picture which he drew. N olhing was
omitted that could strengthen his case. Ireland was seething
with lawlessness; agrarian outrages for the year were the
highest on record; terror and intimidation were everywhere;
houses and haystacks were burned; men taken from their beds
at night and carded, perhaps maimed or murdered; and if they
themselves were uninjured, at least their cattle were houghed or
killed. No man was safe, and the law-abiding were shaking
with fear. If a man worked for one who was boycotted, if he
paid his rent against the wishes of his fellow-tenants, if he took
an evicted farm, if he gave evidence against an accused person,
or being a juryman convicted,-if he did any of these things
he was marked for vengeance. The planners of these outrages
were well known to the police; they were the 1Ilau'vais sujets,
the village tyrants of their districts; and Mr. Forster was
convinced that when they were safely under lock and key the
law-abiding citizen might sleep in peace. He ended by saying
that to bring in any Coercion Bill was the most painful duty
of his life, and that if he had thought such a duty would have
devolved on him he \\"ould never have taken the office of Irish
1 Hansard: cclvii. 195-203, 25 I.
FORSTER'S COERCION BILL
29 1
Secretary.l On the Irish benches there was no sympathetic
response, and for five nights the Irish members debated and
obstructed. At length, on the 2nd of February, after a
continuous sitting of forty-one hours, the Speaker intervened.
He described the speeches made as irrelevant, and the motions
for adjournment a') dilatory and obstructive, and stopping all
further discussion he put the question, and the first reading
was carried by an enormous majority.2
Challenged as to why he acted in this high-handed fashion,
the Speaker replied that he acted on his own responsibility and
from a sense of duty to the House, and the House by an
enormous majority sustained him. But the Irish members
were not to b
silenced with impunity, and in criticizing the
Speaker's conduct many speeches were made and much time
wasted. 3 In these circumstances rvlr. Gladstone got the assent
of the House to new and drastic rules of procedure, the effect
of which was to make the Speaker an autocrat. At any stage
of a measure he was empowered to summarily stop all dis-
cussion and put the question, provided that there wcre 300
members at least present, that a Minister movcd for urgency,
and was sustained by a majority of three to one. 4 The new
rul2s were manifestly aimed at the Irish members, and were
not passed without some passionate scenes. On one occasion
the whole party of thirty-six were suspended for the sitting. 5
When they resumed attendance their obstructive tactics were
renewed, and in spite of the new rules the Protection of Person
and Property Bill had not passed its final stages until the 28th
of February. No Coercion Bill for Ireland has ever been
delayed in the House of Lords, and on the 2nd of 1'vlarch it
received the Royal Assent. It was soon supplemented by an
Arms Act,6 making it penal to carry arms in any district
proclaimed by the Lord- Lieutenant. The enormous powers
given by these Acts IVlr. Forster proceeded to use, and before
the end of l\iarch more than one prison was filled with the
1 Hansard, cclvii. 1209-35. 2 Ibid. 2033-4; Morley's Gladstone, ii. 29 2 -3.
S Hansard, cclviii. 7-43. 4 Ibid. 155-6.
Ibid. 69-88. ð Ibid. cc1ix. 1481.
29 2
THE LA1\D LEAGUE
" village tyrants and dissolute ruffians JJ which he believed \\ ere
keeping Ireland in disorder. 1\1r. Davitt's tickct-of-Ieaye had
also been cancellcd in the end of February, and when the first
of the Coercion Acts was passed he \\ as already in Portland
Prison.
With a sigh of relief Mr. Gladstone turned from the drealY
work of repression to the work of reform, and on the 7th of
April he introduced his Land Bill. A Commission-the
Besborough Commission appointed in the previous year-had
just recommended drastic changes in the land laws, and
certainly 1\ir. Gladstone's Bill was a great stcp in advance.
And it was certain also that it was a concession to agitation,
and even to violence. Mr. Gladstone himself declared long
after that "without the Land League the Act of I 88 I would
not now be on the Statute Book." 1 And an Ulstcr Liberal
was assured by the Irish Attorney-General, Mr. Law, that no
less than twenty-two Bills had been drafted by the :l\Iinistry,
each an improvement on its predecessor; that" as lawlessness
and outrage increased in Ireland, the Bill was broadened until
it reached its final dimensions." 2 The Bill set up Land Courts
to fix rents between landlord and tenant, giving the lattcr a
judicial lease at the judicial rent fixed, giving him also free
sale; and, further, the Bill facilitatcd land purchase. 3 This
was a reyolution rather than a reform. 1\1r. A. 1\1. Sullivan has
recorded that as he listened to f\Ir. Gladstone's speech intro-
ducing the Bill his mind went back to the days of Sharman
Crawford and Lucas and Moore; he felt like o\'e who, after
the cruel trials and privations of the desert, had at length got a
glimpse of the Promised Land. 4
Yet on the Irish benches the Bill was coldly received. The
enforcement of Coercion had embittercd the Irish members
against the Government. They spoke of Forster as if he were
Cromwell, and Gladstone they hated because he sustained
Forster; and any measure of reform coming from such men
they would have receivcd with suspicion and without gratitude.
1 O'Brien's Pantel!, i. 293. 2 Ibid. 299.
3 Hansard, cclx. 890-926. 4 Ne'Zl! Ireland, p. 457.
GLADSTONE'S LAND BILL
293
An Irish National Convention left Parnell free to accept or
reject the BiIJ, and in fact Parnell did not vote for it on the
second or third reading. l He found fault with it because it
left the arrears due since the bad years of 1878-9 untouched,
because it did nothing for leaseholders, or for the relief of con-
gestion in the poverty-stricken districts of the \Vest; and he
had no hope that the Land Courts would be fair to the tenants. 2
But though Mr. Parnell did all this he wanted the Bill, and in
reality was playing a deep game. To welcome the measure
might ha\Te encouraged the Government to accept Tory amend-
ments in Committee; to find fault induced the Government to
accept amendments from the Irish members. :\1any of these
amendments were moved by 1\lr. Parnell; others by 1\lr. Charles
Russell-afterwards Lord Russell of Killowen; but the best
work was done on the Irish side by a young man of twenty-five,
1\1r. T. 1\1. Healy, l\I. P. for \Vexford. Not even 11r. Gladstone
had mastered more thoroughly the whole details of this most
complicated measure. In 1880 11r. Healy acted as Parnell's
private Secretary; in 188 I he was prosecuted by Forster, and
the same year was elccted to Parliament, where, though he
spoke often, his ability did not gain rapid reco
nition. But
when the Land Bill emerged from Committee his fame was
assured, and he has since shown himself to be one of the most
brilliant Irishmen who ever entered the British Parliament. s
On the 30th of July the Land Bill was read a third time. In
the House of Lords there was the usual whittling down of every
concession to Ireland. Negotiations between the two Houses
followed, ending in compromise and agreement, and on the 22nd
of A ugust the Bill received the Royal Assent. 4
A fierce struggle was meanwhile carried on in Ireland. In
spite of Forster's assurances not to use the Coercion Act except
against dissolute ruffians and village tyrants, those imprisoned
were usually men of unimpeachable character, the most trusted
1 O'Brien's Parnell, i. 294; Hansard, cclxi. 928.
2 Hansard, cclxi. 883-97.
S O'Connor's Pantell flfovement, pp. 208-12 ; Annual Register (copy of
original Land Bill and of Act passed). 4 Hansard, cclxi.-cclxv.
294
TIlE LAND LEAGUE
and respected men in their districts. Mr. Dillon was sent to
K.ilmainham in :May, and a fortnight later Father Sheehy of
Kilmallock The police were freely placed at the service of
evicting landlords, and more than once collisions between
people and police occurred. I n one of these a woman was
killed in Mayo, and in Sligo two men, while the police also
suffered at the hands of the infuriated mob. Many districts
were proclaimed, and over these magistrates armed with
extraordinary powers swaggered like Turkish pashas. In
Kilmallock a hot-headed bravo named Clifford Lloyd, in his
capacity of resident magistrate, drove peaceful citizens off the
streets with his stick, sentenced women at his residence to
terms of imprisonment, and had girls prosecuted because one
of them called a policemen "Clifford Lloyd's pet." These
things were repeatedly brought before Parliament, but each
time Forster defended both magistrates and police.} The
struggle, however, was telling on him, and in June he wished
to resign, sorrowfully bewailing that now hc could never do
hat he wished to have done for Ireland. 2
In the middle of August there was a gleam of hope.
Outrages decreased in July and again in the first half of
August. s Mr. Gladstone favoured the relaxation of coercion.
11r. Dillon had already been released owing to ill-health, and
11r. Gladstone wished for the release of Father Sheehy, thinking
it would give the Land Act a bettcr chance of fair play with
the people. But Mr. Forster was still wedded to coercion, and
wanted first of all to break up the Land League and weaken
Parnell's hold on the people. 4 This task was not so easy. In
September a great National Convention was held in Dublin to
discuss the whole Irish situation, and lasted for three days. Mr.
Parnell adviscd that there should be no rush to the new Land
Courts, that only certain test cases should be submitted under
the direction of the Land League. A rush to the Courts, he
thought, would mean imperfect consideration of cases and small
} lïde Hansard, cclxii.-cclxv.; T. P. O'Connor's Parnellllfovemmt, pp.
229-3 0 . 2 Reid's Forster, ii. 323-4.
S Hansard, cclxv. 252. 4 Reid's Forster, ii. 334-7.
TIlE PARNELLITES AXD THE LIBERALS
295
reductions. This advice \\"as accepted by the Convention. 1
Both Forster and Gladstone became angry. Forster had long
entertained something like personal animosity towards Parnell ;
Gladstone believed him to be mischievously interfering, standing
between the living and the dead, " not, like Aaron, to stay but
to spread the plague"; and in this same speech he told him
in menacing tones that the resources of cidlization were not
yet exhausted. 2 This speech was delivered at Leeds on the 7 th
of October, and on the loth of the same month Parnell replied to
it at \Vexford. He defied Gladstone to trample on the rights of
the Irish nation, with no moral force behind him, and in language
of scorn and passion described him as a masquerading knight-
errant ready to champion every nation but Ireland. 3 Three days
later Parnell was lodged in Kilmainham Prison; and when
Gladstone announced the fact at a public meeting in London,
his audience sprang to their feet and cheered" as if it had been
the news of a signal victory gained by England over a hated
and formidable enemy." 4 Dillon, Sexton, and O'Kelly,
I.P.'s,
were also lodged in Kilmainham. They struck back by issuing
a manifesto advising the people to pay no rent. But the
manifesto was assailed by Dr. Croke, Archbishop of Cashel,
one of the greatest friends of the League, and it was dis
vowed
by the priests, and in reality fell flat. A week later, Forster, on
his own responsibility, declared the Land League an unlawful
association, the meetings of which would be forcibly suppressed.
The same day the Land Courts were first opened and were
thronged with tenants seeking a judicial rent. For the moment
the popular movement was submerged. Forster was triumphant,
and Parnell was impotent behind prison bars.!>
J list at this date a noted figure passed away in the person
of John l\1acHale, Archbishop of Tuam. He died in November,
being then ninety years old. As a public man he had partly
outlived his fame, and his condemnation of the Land League
in its earlier stages was a shock to many. In his old age he
was given as his coadjutor a prelate whom he disliked, and
1 O'Brien's Parnell, i. 305-6.
3 O'Br\cn's Parnell, i. 308-13.
2 Anl1ual Rc/:ister, p. 213; Reid, ii. 35 2 .
4 Reid, ii. 355-6. 5 Ibid. 357-9.
29 6
TIlE LAXD LEAGUE
against whose appointment he publicly protested, and these
things embittered his last days.
Had he lived a few months longer he would have seen
stirring times. Coercion was uncontrolled. Forster, given a
free hand, was as absolute as the Czar of Russia. Police,
military, magistrates, law officers were at his command. And
he was not sparing in the use of his power. He filled the jails.
He dispersed League meetings, raided League offices, confiscated
League property, prohibited the sale and circulation of the
League organ, United Ireland. Six special magistrates \\ ith
extraordinary powers were each given a district, and each with
authority to do just what he pleased. They arrested, they
prosecuted, they imprisoned, aided the evictor, batoned and
bludgeoned the people, and a County I nspector issued a circular
to the police authorizing them to shoot at sight anyone whom
they suspected of an intention to commit murder. l And yet
Ireland was not pacified. In place of the suppressed Land
League a Ladies' Land League was formed. It was attacked
by Cardinal IVI'Cabe, Archbishop of Dublin, but vigorously
defended by Dr. Croke. These ladies carried on the work of
their imprisoned brothers, and in most cases were indeed far
more violent of speech. A few were imprisoned, but even Mr.
Forster shrank from the wholesale imprisonment of women, and
the Ladies' Land League continued their work. United lrela'lld
was circulated in spite of magistrates aud police. l\Ien
imprisoned had their crops saved by friendly neighbours, and
were elected to representative positions by popular votes.
And IVIr. Parnell and Mr. Dillon were voted the freedom of
Dublin, Cork and other cities. Nor were outrages lessened,
but increased. Parnell had predicted that his place would be
taken by Captain Moonlight. Forster feared that secret
societies would become active. Both expectations were realized.
In the darkness of night bands of Moonlighters went abroad,
fired into houses, terrorized landlords, bailiffs and grabbers,
houghed their cattle, wounded or perhaps murdered themselves.
In November Forster thought that the best thing for Ireland
1 T. P. O'Connor, p. 246.
COERCION IN IRELAND
297
and himself would be his replacement by some one" not tarred
by the Coercion brush," and as the old year went out his modest
wish was that the new year might be a less bad year than the
last. l He had, indeed, no rcason to be sanguine. For in 188 I
the number of agrarian outrages was the highest since 18 79. 2
In the first quarter of 1881 there was one murder; in the first
quarter of I 882 there were six; and for l\1arch I 882 the
number of agrarian outrages was greater than for the preceding
month of Octol>er, when the Land League was suppressed.
Lord Cowp
r sorrowfully admitted that the police had led the
Government astray, and that when they saiù they knew the
planners of outrages they had been mistaken. 3
One last effort Forster made to retrieve his already damaged
reputation, and in ì\larch 1882 he went through the distnrbed
districts of Limerick, Clare and Galway; and in such stormy
-centres as TulIa anù Athenry appealed in person to the people.
Let them cease to countenance outrages and the prison doors
would be soon thrown open. But the people listened to him
with impatience; and while their trusted leaders wcre in prison
.and their liberties trampled under foot, they were not to be
<:ajoled. 4 Mr. Gladstone made a personal appeal to Cardinal
Newman, asking him to use his influence with the Pope so
that pressure might be brought to bear on the Irish priests.
The Premier evidently thought it useless to appeal to the Irish
bishops. The spectacle was indeed a strange one to see the
.author of Vaticallislll thus appealing for aid to the Pope.
But Cardinal Newman replied somewhat coldly that while the
Pope could do everything on a question of faith or morals, his
intervention could do little on a purely political question. 5
\Vhat, then, was to be done? Forster's remedy was more drastic
.coercion, more prosecutions, more imprisonments, more military
and police, more magistrates like Clifford Lloyd. 6 But it was
quite plain that coercion had failed, and it was certainly not
plain that more coercion would succeed. Besides, even England
1 Reid's Forster, ii. 364-7 I, 3 80 .
3 O'Brien's Parnell, i. 33 0 .
.5 Morley's Gladstollc, ii. 3 02 -3.
2 Annual Register, p. 1882.
4 Reid, ii. 39 0 -4 0 6.
6 Reid, ii. 4 15-20.
29 0
TIlE L\ND LEAGUE
was getting tired of Forster. Englishmen resl ed law and do
not like coercion, which is the negation of ordinary law, aDd,
above an, they did not like coercion which was a failure.
The section among the Liberals which ah'..ays opposed coercion
gained new adherents, and in the Press and on platforms Forster
was assailed from his own side. He was assailed also by
prominent Tories who condemned the continued imprison-
ment of so many prominent men, and who expressed their
readiness to outbid the Liberals on the Land question by
voting for peasant proprietary. 1 t seemed as if the Tories
were to be the champions of freedom and the I iberals the
champions of repression. l
J list then (in April) Parnell was liberated on parole to attend
his nephew's funeral at Paris. Passing through London, he
saw 1\1r. MacCarthy and Captain O'Shea, the latter a \Yhig
Home Ruler; and through these he intimated to
1 r.
Gladstone and Mr. Chamberlain, that if the arrears question
was settled by Government he and his friends would \vithdraw
the No-rent l\tIanifesto, and gradually slow down the agitation.
The offer was eagerly accepted. Gladstone and Chamberlain p
in opposition to Forster, obtained the support of the Cabinet;
Parnell, Dillon, O'Kelly and Davitt were liberated; and Forster
and Cowper resigned, and were replaced by Lord Spencer and
Lord Frederick Cavendish. This \vas the result of what came
to be called the Kilmainham Treaty.2 The transformation was
indeed complete. Coercion was in the dust, the prisoners free,.
the harassed tenant to be relieved from the burden of arrears,.
while the whole nation burst into a shout of joy. Nor was
there any suspicion that the cloudless sky was so soon to be
darkened by the wicked work of the assassin.
1 Reid, ii. 383-5 ; O'Brien's Parnell, i. 33 2 -4.
2 Reid, ii. 425-54; O'Brien's Parnell, i. 33 6 -49.
CHAPTER XIII
TIle CoercÙmist Régime
MANY Fenians like Davitt joined the Land League when it
was formed. 1\Iany others refused to do so, having no faith in
constitutional agitation. These were not necessarily in favour
of violence or outrage, and only hoped for an opportunity to
join in some op
n war against England. A third class were
those with objects, half agrarian, half national, who believed
that any weapon might be used in fighting the Government or
the landlords. In secret conspiracy, in violence, in murder if
necessary, they put their faith. In the country districts they
swelled the ranks of the IVloonlighters. In Dublin there was a
special Secret Society called the Invincibles. Of national, or
ven agrarian, objects they appear to have had no definite idea.
Their ambition wa,> "to make history" by murdering those
who tyrannized over I reland, and of these Forster, the Chief
Secretary, and 1\lr. Burke, the Under Secretary, were the chief.
The latter was an old official with landlord proclivities, a
strong man who ruled Forster as well as Ireland. But the
plans of the Invinciblcs often miscarried, and so frequent and
so marvellous were the escapes of Forster that it seemed as if
Providence itself had intervened on his behalf.l
l\Ir. Burke was less fortunate. On the 6th of 1Iay the
new Viceroy, Lord Spencer, and the new Chief Secretary, Lord
Frederick Cavendish, entered Dublin in state; and when the
State ceremonies were over and evening had come, both, as well
as 'Mr. Burke, made their way to the Phænix Park. Lord
Cavendish was specially unfortunate. Had he accepted Lord
Spencer's invitation to drive with him, he would have escaped
1 Reid, ii. 4 66 -9.
299
.3 00
THE COERCIOKIST RÉGDIE
the doom which overtook him. Had Lord Spencer 110t taken
an unusual route to the Park, he would have passed \"here the
subsequent tragedy took place, and ha'"e prevented it. Finally,
had Lord Cavendish not been with Burke, no harm would have
befallen him; for, when the whole ghastly tale was unfolded, it
appeared that it was Burke the assassins wanted, and that they
did not even know who Cavendish was. At seven in the
evening, in sight of the Viceregal Lodge, in the full light of
day, both Burke and Cavendish were set upon and cut to
pieces with knives. l
:Mr. Davitt has vividly described what fonowed. On the
6th of l\1ay Parnell, Dillon and O'Ke11y, l\1.P.'s, went flom
London to Portland Prison, and Davitt, once more flee,
returned with them to London. He noted that Pamen was
specialIy jubilant. Forster was reaten and disgraced. Glad-
stone had abandoned Coercion, and was to legislate on the
Arrears question; CH?n the Tories had dec1aled for land
purchase. ,I \Ve are on the eve," he said, U of scmething like
Home Rule." He was specially pleased ,dth Lord Frederick
Cavendish, U one of the most modest men in the Houfe, and a
thorough supporter of the new policy." Just as the reunited
friends were spending a pleasant e,'ening in the \Vestminster
Palace Hotel, a telegram \,"as handed in announcing that the
Chief Secretary and Under Secretary had becn mmdered in
the Phænix Park, and that the assassins had escaped. Stunned
by the blow, Parnell wished to retire from public life; there
was no use, he thought, asking the countIy to make such
sacrifices as it had been making if assassins were thus to undo
a11 that had been done. He called on Sir Charles Dilhe, \"ho
noted that he was U pale, careworn, altogether unstrung."
Parnell proposed to Gladstone to retire from public life alto-
gether; but Gladstone disapproved, thinking that if Parnell
went, no restraining influence would remain in Ireland, and no
repressive act would avail to put down outrages. 2
1 AnJlual Register, p. 1882; O'Brien's Parnell, i. 353-5.
2 Davitt, pp. 355-9; Morley's Gladstone, ii. 307-10; O'Brien's Parnell,
i. 353-8.
TIlE PIHEXIX P.\RK MURDERS
3 01
A manifesto was then issued by Parnell, Davitt and Dillon
deploring the murder as the worst that had stained the annals
of Ireland for fifty years, and declaring that nothing could wipe
away the stain but bringing the assassins to justice. All over
Ireland, and among the Irish abroad, the same feeling was
shown. There was not so much sympathy with Burke, so long
the enemy of Irish popular movements; but shame was felt
th:lt a kind-hearted English gentleman, who had come as the
messenger of peace, should be thus wantonly and wickedly
struck down.
In England there was no serious effort made to connect
Parnell or the Land League with the murders. And if
Gladstone had had his way the milder and wiser policy of recon-
ciliation and peace would have been continued. But it was im-
possible in face of enraged public opinion in England. [n some
places Irishmen were assailed simply because they were Irish;
in many places they were dismissed from their employments.
It was felt that a determined effort should be made to put
down the Irish secret societies, and that until this was done
neither England nor Ireland could be at peace. This was the
state of things when the House of Commons met on the 8th of
:\Iay. Only four days before Parnell was the victor of the hour.
Gladstone, his assailant of October 188 I, was now his friend
anll even champion; Forster was discredited and disgraced, a
failure in the eyes of the whole Empire. The latter was
speaking when Parnell, fresh from Kilmainham, entered the
1 louse and was received by his followers with rapturous cheers.
Bitterly Forster assailed him and the Government which had
entered into any arrangement with him. Going back to the
days of Henry VI1., he likened Parnell to the great Earl of
Kildare whom all Ireland could not rule, and who in consequence
was charged to rule Ireland by the King. "In like manner if
all England cannot go\'ern the hon. member for Cork, let us
acknowledge that he is the greatest power in I reland to-
day." 1 It was the hour of Parnell's triumph and of Forster's
defeat.
1 Hansard, cclxix.
3 02
THE COERCIOXIST KÉGIME
The Phænix Park murder effected a disastrous change}
and on the 8th of May Parnell appeared in the House of
Commons, careworn and depressed. \Yith unwonted feeling
he lamented the murders, begging the Government nc,t to
again turn to coercion. But the Government was in reality
unable to resist the tide of English rage. There was a howl
for repressive laws, and on the I I th of l\iay Sir \Yilliam
Harcourt introduced the Crimes Bill, the most drastic Coercion
Bill brought into Parliament for half a century.l For murder,
treason, attacking dwelling-houses, crimes of aggra,"ated violence,
trial by jury was to give way to trial by a Commission of
Judges. I n proclaimed districts the police might make
domiciliary visits either by night or day, and arrest those out
after dark. Newspapers cOlJld be seized, meetings proclaimed
and dispersed. The summary jurisdiction of magistrates was
enormously increased. Finally, Courts of Secret Inquiry could
be set up, recalling the Star-Chamber Courts of Charles 1. The
Act was to last for three years. 2 Hampered by the state of
public opinion in Parliament and outside, the Irish members
had no chance of defeating the measure, yet they fought it
with vigour and persistence. But ,,,hen the whole party were
suspended, some of them even being absent at the time, further
resistance was seen to be useless. They withdrew, protesting
against their treatment, and throwing upon the Government
the whole responsibility for a "Bill which has been urged
through the House by a course of violence and subterfuge, and
which, ,,"hen passed into law, will be devoid of moral force, and
will be no constitutional Act of Parliament." The Crimes Bill
rapidly passed through its remaining stages, and soon received
the Royal Assent. s
At the same time the Government introduced an Arrears
Bill which also passed into law. It applied only to tenants
under L 30, and to those who could satisfy a legal tribunal that
they were unable to pay all the arrears of rent they owed. In
such cases, if they paid the rent for 188 I and one year of the
1 O'Brien's Pamcll, i. 35 8 -9. 2 An11ual Register, p. 65.
B Ibid. 78-88, 94-110.
THE NATIONAL LEAGUE
3 0 3
Q,rr
ars due, the State, out of the Church Surplus Fund, paid
another year of the arrears, and the remainder was wiped out.
Thus did the Government carry out its side of the Kilmainham
Treaty. 1\11'. Parnell on his side suppressed the Ladies' Land
League by refusing to give additional funds. He refused to
countenance Davitt's scheme of land nationalization. And, in
opposition to Dillon, he expressed his determination to "slow
down the agitation." Tired of violence, he wanted the country to
settle down to a moderate and purely constitutional movement. 1
But the militant spirits among the popular leaders wanted
to resist the evictors and the Crimes Act by a militant associa-
tion such as the Land League, and under pressure from these
Parnell's hands were forced. A National Conference was then
held in Dublin on the 17th of October, and the Irish National
League was formed. The chief planks in its programme were
Home Rule, peasant proprietary, local self-government, the
extension of the franchise, the encouragement of Irish labour
and industïÌal interests. 1\Iodelled on the Land League, the
National League had 1\lr. P drnell as its President, had its
central committee and central offices in Dublin, and branches
throughout the land. And in turn it extended to England and
America, and even to Austratia. The League had also its
official press organ-United Ireland-edited by one of the
ablest of journalists, 1\1r. \Villiam O'Brien. 2
l\leanwhile, in addition to the Phænix Park murders, many
other murders have to be recorded for the year 1882. Early
in the year the Huddys, Lord Ardilaun's bailiffs, were murdered,
and thcir bodies thrown into Lough 1\Iask, and an informer
named Bailey was murdcred in the streets of Dublin. In
April a 1\1r. Smyth of \Vestmeath was shot dead. In June
Mr. Walter Burke and his military escort were shot dead in
the county of Galway, and in the same county and month
Lord Clanricarde's agent was also murdered; nor was anyone
ever brought to justice for these crimes. s But the mos':
1 O'Brien's Parnell, i. 3 6 4-6.
2 Ða\.itt's Fall 0/ Feudalism, pp. 3 68 -79.
3 A1l11l1al Regis/er, pp. r83-4, 192.
3 0 4
THE COERCION 1ST RÉGIME
atrocious of all these murders "ras that of the J oyces of
l\Iaamtrasna, in the remote district of Joyce country on the
borders of rvIayo and Galway. This murder took place in
August. Suspected of knowing all about the murder of the
Huddys and of being likely to tell what they knew, the
whole Joyce family were attacked by a band of armed and
disguised men, and Joyce, his mother, wife, son and daughter
were cruelly murdered. Another son was left for dead,
but as if by a miracle survived. 1 In November Judge
Lawson was attacked in the streets of DubJin, as was a
l\Ir. Field and some detectives, one of the detectives being
killed. 2 For the whole year the number of murders was
twenty - six, the total number of agrarian outrages of all
kinds being higher than for the two preceding years taken
together. s
\Vith the new year came quieter times, and when Parlia-
ment met in February, the Queen's Speech noted with pleasure
that there \vas an improvement in the social condition of
Ireland, that agrarian crimes had diminished, and that the laws.
had been everywhere upheld. 4 The Chief Secretary at that
date was 1\lr. George Trevelyan, but the real ruler of Ireland
was Lorù Spencer, who, unlike 1\Ir. Trevelyan, had a seat in the
Cabinet. He was a strong man, of great courage and resolu-
tion, and under his directions the Crimes Act was rigorously
enforced. Planners of outrages ,,'ere perseveringly tracked
and severely punished, meetings were proclaimed, newspapers.
suppressed, police anù magistrates urged 011 to do their duty.
And as if the Crimes Act were not enough, an old statute of
Edward III. was dug up from mediæval times. Under its.
provisions 1\1r. Davitt and 1\1r. Healy were prosecuted for
speeches they made. They might have escaped imprisonment
haù they given bail; but they refused, and were sentenced to
six months' imprisonment. 1\lr. Biggar was also prosecuted for
having attacked Lord Spencer in one of his speeches, but
the prosecution was dropped. And a prosecution of \Villiam,
1 A 111zual Rq{ister, p. 194.
3 O'Brien's Payne/f, i. 373.
Ibid. 197.
1 A mUlal Register, pr. I 3- I 4.
PARNELL AND FORSTER
3 0 5
O'Brien for some seditious writing in Ullited Ireland only
resulted in a disagreement of the jury.1
An attempt was also made to damage 1\1r. Parnell. In
February the Phænix Park murderers were put on trial.
Millions of men strained their ears to listen to the evidence,
which was indeed startling enough, especially when the most
prominent of the Invincibles, lVIr. Carey, turned informer. As
a result of his evidence five men were hanged, two sentenced
to penal servitude for life, and several others to various periods
of imprisonment. Carey himself was pardoned, but a few
months later was shot dead by an Invincible agent on board a
steamer bound for Capetown. "One result of the trials," says
the Anllual Register, "was to fully justify the Government in
any action which had resulted in the substitution of a new
Chief Secretary for 11r. Forster. . . . It reads like the grimmest
of satires upon his term of office to know that at a time when
the jails were choking with the number of 1\1r. Forster's
suspects; when according to his own belief he had every
dangerous man in the island under lock and key, his own life
was in incessant danger at the hands of men of whose existence
he was guilelessly unaware." 2
All this, no doubt, only deepened 11r. Forster's animosity
towards Parnell and towards Ireland, and when it appeared
from the evidence that Carey had been on friendly terms with
some Irish members, and that the assassins' knives had been
for a short time deposited at the National League Office in
London, the ex-Chief Secretary turned upon 1\1r. Parnell in the
House of Commons. He did not indeed charge him with
encouraging murder, but he did charge him with not having
condemned it, or used his influence to put murder down. And
he charged generally that crime had dogged the footsteps of
the League. In a crowded House, crowded in every part, with
the Prince of \Vales and Cardinal 1\ianning in the galleries,
1\lr. Parnell rose to reply. But he disdained to be judged by
the House of Commons or by English public opinion. He was
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 1-2; Annual Register, pp. 189-92.
2 P. 197.
y OL III
90
3 06
THE COERCION 1ST RÉGIME
responsible only to the Irish people, who alone had a right to
judge him. As for Forster, he treated him with scorn as a dis-
credited politician who had forfeited all claim to sit in judgment
on any sensible or serious public man. He suggested, indeed,
that while the Crimes Act was being enforced Forster ought
to be in Ireland to aid Lord Spencer in sending men to the
gallcws, in holding secret inquiries, in wringing taxes from a
starving peasantry to pay for outrages which they had not
committed and with which they did not sympathize. 1
In England this reply was considered unsatisfactory, but in
Ireland it only augmented Mr. Parnell's power. In January
Mr. O'Brien was returned M.P. for Mallow, his opponent being
Mr. Nash, the new Solicitor-General, whom he defeated by
nearly two to one. In July l\1r. Healy, lately imprisoned, was
returned triumphantly for the county of :Monaghan, hitherto a
Whig stronghold. And a series of successful Nationalist
meetings were then held throughout Ulster in spite of Orange
threats and Orange revolvers. 2 Finally, Mr. Parnell got a
National testimonial. It had been set on foot to payoff a
mortgage of ;6 13,000 on his property. An Irish Whig
Catholic M.P., Mr. Errington, then at Rome with credentials
from the British Foreign Office, did what damage he could
against Parnell and his friends, with the result that a Papal
Rescript was issued condemning the Parnell testimonial. The
Pope had little sympathy with Irish popular movements and
was anxious to be friendly with England, which, after all, was
eminently fair to Catholics throughout the world. Hence the
Rescript. It did not, however, injure but rather served the
Parnell testimonial, and when the lists closed in the end of
1883, the large sum of ;637,000 had been subscribed. s
All that year and during the next Mr. Parnell's position
was one of difficulty. Lord Spencer's rigorous enforcement of
Coercion rendered it hazardous to hold meetings or make
strong speeches. Mr. Parnell left the fight in Ireland to his
lieutenants, notably to Mr. O'Brien, who, with a courage and
determination equal to Lord Spencer's own, struck back at the
1 Annual Register, pp. 3 8 -4 8 . 2 Ibid. 203-4,206-7. 3 Ibid. 207-8.
PARNELL'S DIFFICULTIES
3 0 7
forces of Coercion. Every illegality committed, every encroach-
ment on popular rights was mercilessly exposed in United
Ireland, and in 1884 Mr. O'Brien was able to have several
prominent officials convicted of hideous and unnatural crimes,
with consequent loss of prestige to the Government to which
they belonged. In America the National League was largely
in the hands of revolutionists, and while Parnell himself was
not a member of the Clan-na-Gael, the fact that he was associ-
ated with them told against him in England. Lastly, new and
drastic rules of Parliamentary procedure adopted in the autumn
session of 1882 seriously hampered his power in Parliament,
for these rules applied to the whole field of Parliamentary
action, and while materially augmenting the powers of the
Speaker and Chairman of Committee, correspondingly curtailed
the rights of private members and of minorities. l
Yet it was certain that as time passed Mr. Parnell's power
and influence were increasing, and that the Liberal Coercionist
Government was growing weaker. The meetings held in
Ulster, following the l\10naghan election, did something to
weaken the power of landlord ascendancy and Orange bigotry,
and were a suitable and useful preparation for the Nationalist
victories subsequently won. 2 The Irish leader had indeed
his troubles with the American extremists, and he was specially
wroth with those who organized dynamite outrages in England.
Nevertheless he kept the extremists on his side, because he had
no regard for English opinion, and refused, at the bidding of
Englishmen, to condemn those who preferred to love Ireland,
no matter how mischievous might be their policy or how cruel
or criminal their methods. s The priests he kept with him
because, in spite of the fact that revolutionists were aiding him,
the priests knew that he was no revolutionist himself but a con-
stitutional leader. And they liked him all the better because
English intrigue was so busy against him in Rome, English
intrigue being also busy against themselves. 4 There were a
1 Annual Register, 1882, pp. 26-29, 3 6 -4 0 .
2 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 21-22.
JI Annnal Regt"!iter, 1885, pp. 17-18 4 O'Brien'sParne!l, ii. 23- 2 7.
3 08
THE COERCIONIST RÉGIME
few English Liberals too, men like Mr. Cowen and Mr.
Labouchere, who helped Parnell. They hated Coercion, and
were disgusted at what was being done in Ireland under a
Liberal Government, and in their disgust they cast aside party
allegiance for the sake of popular rights, and frequently voted
with the Parnellites.
The Government policy in Egypt was still more disastrous
to the Liberals. The defeats of Hicks Pasha and General Baker
(February 1884), and the vacillation and indecision which led
to the appointment, and finally to the sacrifice of General
Gordon, supplied the Tories with a favourite and popular
subject of attack. In these attacks both Parnellites and Tories
fought side by side, their common object being to defeat the
Liberal Government. And in 1884 they nearly succeeded.
The vote of censure in February was only defeated by a
majority of 19 in a House of more than 600 members; and
three months later the Government majority was but 28, when
a further vote of censure was moved. 1
With one small section of the Tories the relations of the
Parnellites were especially cordial. This was the Fourth Party,
consisting of only four members-Lord R. Churchill, Mr. A. J.
Balfour, Mr. Gorst and Sir H. \V olff-all men of first-class
ability. They had no separate party organization and no
elected leader, though Lord R. Churchill generally obtained
recognition as such. He was one of the most fascinating
figures in English public life-bold, outspoken, fearless; a hater
of shams; an aristocrat with popular sympathies; a Tory by
family ties and traditions. but much more of a Liberal than
many of the Liberals themselves. He called himself a Tory
Democrat. He disapproved of the old Tory programme
consisting of Coercion for Ireland and foreign war; despised
the accepted Tory leaders, whom he irreverently called the
"old gang," and wanted men who would bring themselves in
touch with popular needs and compete with their Liberal
opponents for popular support. 2
1 Annual Register, 1884, pp. 33-44, 65
70.
2 Churchill's Life, i. 234-5, 29 6 -3 0 1.
LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL
3 0 9
Disliking Coercion, he supported Forster's Coercion Bill of
188 I (( with reluctance and disgust," and he frequently and
vigorously attacked what he considered Forster's abuse of
Coercion. 1 The favour he thus attained in the eyes of the
Parnellites was further augmented by his supporting the demand
in 1884 of an inquiry into the case of the l\laamtrasna
murderers. One of the four men executed was declared to be
innocent by the remaining three, and he vehemently declared his
own innocence on the scaffold. F or arraigning the Government
for its conduct in the matter, Mr. O'Brien had been prosecuted
in January 1883. But the voice of protest and complaint was
only silenced for a time, and in the summer of 1884 one of
the informers, a man named Casey, told the Archbishop of
Tuam, Dr. MacEvilly, that Myles Joyce was innocent, and that
his own evidence accusing Joyce had been wrung from him
under a threat to have his life sacrificed if he did not swear
away the life of poor Joyce. Dr. MacEvilly, who then
demanded an inquiry, had special claims on the Government.
The son of a farmer, he had no popular sympathies, and had
opposed the Land League and National League, and disliked
priests who were members of either organization. \Vith less
culture than Dr. Troy, he \vas an equally strong supporter of
the Government, and had got offices for some of his friends.
And yet Lord Spencer would not accede to his request and
have the Maamtrasna case reopened. \Vhen it was brought
in the autumn session before Parliament, Lord R. Churchill
supported the Parnellites and voted with them in the
minority.2
He also supported them when the Franchise Bill was
introduced establishing household suffrage throughout the
United Kingdom. Some of the less advanced of the Liberals
would have been glad to leave Ireland out. But 1\lr. Gladstone
would not create a fresh Irish grievance, and Mr. Trevelyan,
the Chief Secretary, would instantly resign office if the Bill
were not extended to Ireland. The great majority of the
Tories disliked the measure for any portion of the United
1 Churchill's Life, i. 201, 209. 2 Ammal Register, pp. 23 6 -7.
3 10
THE COERCIONIST RÉGIME
Kingdom, and at first it was thrown out in the House of Lords.
And it only passed when the Liberals consented to introduce
at once a Redistribution of Seats Bill. With no respect for
party traditions or party discipline, Lord R. Churchill supported
the Franchise Bill, even when unaccompanied by a Redistribu-
tion Bill. He supported its second reading in opposition to
the nominal Tory leader, Sir Stafford Northcote. He opposed
Mr. Broderick's amendment excepting Ireland. .hnd when rvIr.
\V. H. Smith, another Tory IVLP., a successful shopkeeper who
had acquired wealth by selling books, sneered at Irish poverty
and proposed the giving of votes to Irish mud-cabins, Lord R.
Churchill vigorously assailed him, and very effectually disposed
of the mud-cabin argument. 1
This was the state of things early in 1885. The Franchise
Bill was then law, and household suffrage had been extended to
Ireland. The Redistribution Bill had also become law, leaving,
in spite of many protests from English members, the number
of Irish seats undiminished. The Crimes Act would expire in
August, and Irish members wanted to know if it was to be
renewed. On the Franchise and Redistribution Bills they had
acted with the Liberals. But if the Crimes Act was to be renewed,
all the indications were that Lord Randolph Churchill and Mr.
Parnell would unite their strength with the other enemies of
the Government and perhaps hurl Mr. Gladstone from power.
Lord R. Churchill's influence was then considerable. He
commanded the attention and attracted the support of the
masses as no other Tory did; and his popularity in the country
had its effect in Parliament. The older and more staid of the
party regarded him with suspicion and distrust; but the more
militant and aggressive, the young men who looked to the
future with confidence, men with initiative and ambition were
ready to follow where he led. And in any arrangements for
the future which the Tory leaders might make, these young
men and their brilliant leader could not be ignored. Mr.
Parnell on his side, in his own party and in his own country,
was supreme. No one dared oppose his nominee at elections;
1 Annual Register, p. 125 ; Churchill's Life, i. 344-6.
MR. PAR
ELL'S PARTY
3 11
and with the extension of the franchise it was well known that
his strength in Parliament would be enormously increased. Of
late years his attendance in the House of Commons had been
irregular and intermittent. But the Irish Party work had
nevertheless been well done, for the party numbered among
its members men who would have made their mark in any
deliberative assembly; men in many respects far abler than
1\1r. Parnell himsel[ In 1885 1\1r. Sexton's great powers were
matured. He was then recognized as the greatest orator in
Parliament after ::\Ir. Gladstone; a ready and powerful debater,
an expert in finance and figures, with unlimited capacity for
Parliamentary work. The reputation earned by Mr. Healy on
the Land Act of 188 I had since been maintained and increased.
He had been called to the Bar and had already acquired a
large practice. But he managed somehow to attend on all
important occasions in Parliament, and always intervened with
advantage in debate. He had enormous capacity for work,
mastered details with extraordinary swiftness, and in the
usually dull routine work of drafting clauses and amending
Bills he never tired. I n debate he seized at once on the weak
points in his opponent's case; his readiness of reply was
remarkable; and the antagonist who provoked him received
a scathing chastisement not easily forgotten. Mr. Arthur
O'Connor was cool, clear, unimpassioned, always master of his
subject, a most dangerous man to attack. Mr. T. P. O'Connor
was more brilliant, effective as a writer as well as a speaker,
indeed one of the readiest and most effective speakers in
Parliament. Mr. William O'Brien shone brightest as a
militant and fearless journalist; but he had the gift of oratory
greater perhaps than any of his colleagues, and on the platform
could sway an I rish crowd as he willed. There were others in
the Irish ranks less generously endowed than these, yet capable
of doing useful work either in Parliament or outside it. All
were eager as Mr. Parnell was to make an end of the Liberal
Government. Nor was anything required but a suitable
opportunity to have Irish and Tory coalesce. 1
1 Parnell JIO'L/{'I}lcnt.
3 IZ
THE COERCIONIST RÉGIME
The opportunity soon came. The reckless extravagance
of an Egyptian Khedive had so involved Egypt in financial
difficulties that her foreign Cl editors had been compelled to
interfere in her internal affairs. England, being the most
deeply concerned, undertook to organize the Egyptian army,
to superintend the administration of justice, to watch over the
raising and spending of the taxes. But Mr. Gladstone's
Government had no desire that England should remain in
permanent occupation of the country, still less to extend or
maintain Egyptian influence in the Soudan. Their anxiety
was to restore order and tranquillity to Egypt, and have that
country confine its efforts to its own territory; and for this
purpose General Gordon was despatched in January 1884 to
Khartoum. His instructions when leaving England were to
take back to Egypt the Egyptian garrisons at Khartoum and
in other Soudanese towns, leaving the Soudan to work out its
own salvation as best it could. Urgency was necessary, for
the Mahdi, claiming to have a religious mission, had placed
himself at the head of the whole strength of Moslem fanaticism,
and Khartoum was seriously threatened by him. Gordon was
an able man, but a bad selection for such a mission. He was
a man of imagination, of impulse, of religious zeal, a crusader
better suited for the days of Richard Cæur de Lion than for
the nineteenth century. Disobeying his orders, he remained
at Khartoum instead of evacuating it; prepared to (( smash
the l\Iahdi " instead of leaving the Soudan to its fate; waited
at Khartoum till the waves of Moslem fury were already
beating against its walls, and then he could only appeal to
England for relie( A relieving expedition was sent, tardily
and with reluctance indeed, but when Khartoum was sighted it
was already in the Mahdi's hands, and Gordon was slain. 1
The Tories were not slow to take advantage of this
calamity. Gordon, half saint, half mystic, had become a
national hero. His absolute unselfishness, his splendid courage,
his contempt of danger which would have appalled other men,
his confidence in God and ceaseless walking in the presence of
1 Life of Granville, ii. 381-402.
Lawrence.
Stereoscopic.
JUSTIX McCARTHY
l\lICH.\I
L DA \TIT
J.1I101t '" r ry.
T. P. O'CO
NOR
La\\rt:llc
THlHI.\S SEXrON
........
')
,
I_awrence.
I_awrence
\\ I LLIA:\1 O'HRI EX
T. :\1. HEALY
TORIES AND P ARNELLITES COALESCE
3 1 3
the Un
een, had captivated the popular imagination; and
when it was found that Khartoum had fallen and that Gordon
had perished, the tempest of the people's wrath was turned
.a6"ainst the Government. Their irresolution, their change of
purpose, their tardiness of preparation, their want of vigour
were all fiercely and passionately condemned. Even the
Queen did not hesitate to criticize and to condemn; and when
(in February) the Tories proposed a vote of censure, it was
defeated only by 14 votes. The Parnellites voted with the
Tories; they cared nothing for Egypt and nothing for the
Soudan. But Ireland was still under the Crimes Act, and it
was said that the Crimes Act was about to be renewed. On
the other hand, Lord R. Churchill had assured Mr. Parnell that
the Tories would have nothing to do with Coercion, and if they
had he would oppose them. For this reason both Tories and
Parnellites went into the lobby against the Government. 1
Three months later they again assailed the l\linistry on the
Consolidated Fund Bill, but again they were defeated, this
time by a majority of 3 a votes. 2
In June the attack was renewed, and on this occasion-it
was the 8th of June-the combination of Tories and Parnellites
brou 6 ht down their great opponent, l\h. Gladstone. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Childers, in his budget for
the year had increased the duty on spirits and beer. From
the Tory side, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach proposed an amend-
ment, which was a direct negative, and Mr. Gladstone declared
that by the vote to be given the Government would stand or
fall. In the previous month Lord Carlingford, on the part of
the l\linistry, stated in the House of Lords that it was proposed
to renew the Crimes Act. s This finally determined the
Parnellites to throw in their lot with the Tories. The conse-
quence was that on the amendment of Sir Michael Hicks-
Beach, l\1r. Parnell and all his followers went into the Tory
lobby, and the Liberals were beaten by I 2 votes, 264 being in
the majority and 252 on the other side. 4 There was the
1 Annual Register, pp. 29-3 6 . 2 Hansard, ccxcviii. 274.
3 Ibid. 568. 4 Ibid. 142 I-I 5 I I.
3 1 4
THE COERCIONIST RÉGIME
wildest jubilation among the victors. Lord R. Churchill was
especially demonstrative, and, jumping on his seat, waved his
hat and cheered wildly like a schoolboy at play. Mr. Gladstone
at once resigned, and after a short interval Lord Salisbury
became Prime Minister; Lord R. Churchill, Secretary for India;
and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Chancellor of the Exchequer
and Leader of the House of Commons. Thus fell the Liberal
Government, which had employed Forster and sustained Lord
Spencer, which had suppressed free speech in Ireland, imprisoned
without trial, and sent not a few innocent Irishmen to the
dungeon and to the scaffold. And the Irish members of
Parliament were specially pleased that it was their votes which
had given the Coercionist Government its death-blow.
CHAPTER XIV
Gladstone and Home Rule
THE substitution of a Tory for a Liberal Government suited
Mr. Parnell well. Lord Randolph Churchill was his friend
and the enemy of Coercion, and it soon appeared that the Irish
policy of the young Lord had the approval of his colleagues.
In the House of Lords the Viceroy, Lord Carnarvon, defined,
with the authority of the Premier, the attitude of the Govern-
ment towards Ireland. Deprecating Coercion except to meet
exceptional agrarian crime, he noted that there was no such
exceptional crime then. There was therefore no need to renew
the Crimes Act even in part. He preferred to trust the Irish
people, and believed that his trust in them would not be
misplaced. l \Vhen he went to Ireland he walked the streets
of Dublin unaccompanied by a single policeman, in striking
contrast to Lord Spencer, who never went abroad without a
strong armed escort. The Government also granted an inquiry
into the case of those convicted for the Maamtrasna murders. 2
I t was nothing more than a fresh review of the evidence of the
Lord-Lieutenant, and resulted in an approval of the verdict
given by the jury. But even this inquiry gave satisfaction in
Ireland, and was fiercely assailed in the House of Commons by
the late Liberal Home Secretary, Sir William Harcourt. Lord
Randolph Churchill replied to him in language of scathing
severity. He contrasted the calm tone and temper shown by
Mr. Parnell, who had demanded the inquiry, with the language
of vehemence and passion used by the Liberal spokesman;
repudiated the notion that the Tory Government assumed
1 Hansard, ccxcviii. 1658-62.
2 ibid. ccxcix. 1065-1150.
3 1 5
3 16
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
responsibility for the blunders of their predecessors; and
declared that for himself he had no confidence in Lord Spencer
and no approval for his Irish administration.
The delighted Parnellites received this speech with
enthusiasm, and were well satisfied with Lord Carnan'on.
And their satisfaction was all the greater because the Tory
Go\'ernment were just then engaged in passing a Land Purchase
Act for Ireland. Introduced into the House of Lords by the
Irish Lord Chancellor, Lord Ashbourne, it carne to be called
the Ashbourne Act, and provided a sum of ;(; 5,000,000 for
advances to tenants who wished to purchase their holdings.
For the first time the whole of the purchase money was
granted, to be paid back-interest and principal-at 4 per cent
within a period of forty-nine years. 1 \Vith the approval of
Liberals and Tories, the Bill rapidly passed through its several
stages, and proved to be a real boon to Ireland, the pioneer of
many other Land Purchase Acts.
Shortly after its passage in the middle of August, the last
session of the Parliament elected in I 880 came to an end.
By an arrangement between the Liberal and Tory leaders, the
dissolution was fixed for the following November. The Tory
Government, indeed, was spoken of as a Government of care-
takers, merely holding office till the result of the pending
General Election was known. \\That that result might be
largely depended on
ilr. Parnell, and politicians of all shades
watched him keenly. The Irish voters in Great Britain were
organized, and in many cases could turn the scale between
Liberal and Tory at the polls. They would be guided by
Parnell, and there were certainly strong reasons why he should
advise them to vote with the Tories. Under the influence of
Lord Churchill they had dropped Coercion and passed a Land
Purchase Act, and they might go much further under the
same influence. But there was more than this. In the end of
July, Lord Carnarvon and :Mr. Parnell met in private and
exchanged views about Home Rule. The controversy which
subsequently arose disclosed some points of difference between
1 Hansard, ccxcix. 1040-49.
PARNELL AND LORD CARNARVON
317
the parties to the interview as to what passed between them.
But there could be and was no denial of the fact that Lord
Carnarvon sought an interview with IVlr. Justin :MacCarthy, to
whom he declared that he was in favour of Home Rule for
Ireland on Colonial lines, though he believed he would have
some difficulty in getting the members of the Cabinet to agree
with him. It is of little importance that in his subsequent
interview with Mr. Parnell, in an untenanted house in London,
he made it clear that he spoke only for himself and was
entering into no treaty or bargain. He did not and could not
say that he was authorized by the Ministry to promise Home
Rule; but he was the Irish Viceroy, and not likely to hold
such an interview without some authority; and in point of fact
he did consult Lord Salisbury beforehand, and reported to him
the result of the interview. Nor was there any material
difference between Lord Carnarvon and :Mr. Parnell on the
main question of Home Rule. Both agreed that Ireland should
have a central legislative body, U a Parliament in name and in
fact," with full control over purely local matters, with power even
to protect Irish industries against English and foreign competi-
tion. I \Vith Lord Carnarvon these were no novel convictions.
He had filled the office of Colonial Secretary, and had been
struck with the success of self-government in the Colonies-
their contentment, their prosperity, their loyalty. Since 1874
he had at intervals discussed Irish Home Rule with Sir Charles
Gavan Duffy; and in February 1885 he had sent to the
National Review an article of Duffy's appealing to the Tories
to take up the Irish question and settle it. Under pressure
from Duffy and of the Irish Undcr Secretary, Sir Robert
Hamilton, a determined Home Ruler, Carnarvon's Home Rule
convictions were strengthened, and after his interview with
Parnell he urged his own views on the Cabinet. He failed to
convince them. Not that they had any special dread of the
danger of Home Rule to the Empire; but they feared that
taking it up might injure them at the polls. Thcy would lose
more in Great Britain than they would gain in Ireland. It
I O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 51- 57.
3 18
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
does not appear that Parnell knew of the refusal of the Cabinet;
he only knew that Carnarvon was a convinced Home Ruler,
and would probably carry his colleagues with him if the Tories
were returned to power, and especially if they were returned by
I rish votes.
From the Liberals he could hardly expect so much. In
July, at a banquet given to Lord Spencer, Mr. John Bright
denounced the Irish members of Parliament as disloyal to the
Crown and hostile to Great Britain, and charged them with
being in sympathy with criminals and murderers. l The speech
was cheered by the Liberal members present, and was fully
endorsed by Lord Hartington. It is true that the Radical
leaders, IVlr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Dilke, had absented
themselves from the Spencer Banquet, that both had been
opponents of Coercion, and that Mr. Chamberlain had vigorously
denounced Dublin Castle as an anachronism, and the condition
of Ireland under a bureaucratic system of government as that
of Poland under Russian or Venice under Austrian rule. But
he would go no further than setting up representative County
Government, supplemented by a central National Council.
This Council was to be mainly elective and wholly executive,
with power only to make by-laws, and at every turn was to be
hampered, controlled, criticized by the British Parliament.
\Vhen this scheme was brought before the Liberal Cabinet early
in 1885 it was rejected, though it was supported by Gladstone,
and would have then been accepted by Parnell. 2 The demands
of the latter rose since his interview with Lord Carnarvon.
He would no longer be satisfied with a mere National Council
without legislative power. And for this reason he dis-
countenanced a proposed public visit to Ireland of Chamberlain
and Dilke in the autumn.
As for Mr. Gladstone, he was vague. If he declared for
Home Rule before the General Election he would certainly lose
the support of Lord Hartington and the Whigs, and also
perhaps of 1\1r. Chamberlain; and great as his personal
popularity in the country was, such a defection would be
1 Hansard, ccc. 250-305. 2 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 135-7.
PARNELL AND THE LIBERALS
3 1 9
disastrous. On the other hand, he thought there was some
secret understanding between the Tories and Parnellites, and
he disliked having the Tories more liberal than the Liberals,
and wished to compete with them for Irish support.
This was the state of things when Parnell, on the 24th of
August, in a speech at Dublin, opened the electoral campaign.
No man could speak plainer when he wished, and he wished
to make it clear both to Tories and Liberals on what terms
Irish votes could be obtained. The time had come, he said,
when the Irish platform was to be reduced to a single plank,
and that was an Irish Parliament with an Irish executive
dependent on it. All other questions were subsidiary to this,
indeed had better remain for settlement in an Irish Parlia-
ment. I
The Irish National Press applauded the speech; the
British Press of all shades vigorously condemned it; and Lord
Hartington, on the 29th of the same month, told Parnell that
he had gone too far and that all England would unite to
defeat "so foolish and mischievous a proposa1." 2 l\fr.
Chamberlain (at Warrington, 8th September) was not less
emphatic. "If these," he said," are the terms on which 1\fr.
Parnell's support is to be obtained, I will not enter into the
compact. . . . If this claim were conceded, we might as well
for ever abandon the hope of maintaining a United Kingdom,
and we should establish within thirty miles of our shores a
new foreign country, animated from outside with unfriendly
intentions towards ourselves." Unlike Lord Hartington, how-
ever, 1\fr. Chamberlain favoured giving to Ireland as generous
a measure of self-government as he would give to England or
Scotland. 3 Lord Randolph Churchill, unwilling to concede
Home Rule, but equally unwilling to offend his Irish friends,
said nothing definite. 4 For the same reason Lord Salisbury,
at Newport, on the 7th of October, was studiously vague. He
thought the first policy of a Tory Government with regard to
Ireland" must undoubtedly be to maintain the integrity of the
I AnnzealRe,rjister, pp. 143-4. 2 Ibid. 146-7. 3 Ibid. 152.
.. Ibid. 150-5 I.
3 20
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
Empire. U But he did not say he was opposed to Home Rule
in any shape; he did not attack 1\1 r. Parnell for the demands
he was making; he defended the abandonment of the Crimes
Act; and he spoke lightly of boycotting as U depending on the
passing humour of the population." 1 Alone among prominent
men, Mr. John Morley advocated Home Rule " as in Canada,"
and thought the time was come when Ireland could no longer
be governed either by hndlords or priests. 2
Mr. Gladstone was slow to speak. He had, in fact, been
unwell, and had taken a voyage to Norway for the benefit of
his health. s But he had been thinking about Ireland even in
Norwegian waters; he disliked Lord Hartington's attack on
Parnell, while disapproving of Parnell's proposals; and he was
convinced that the question of Home Rule had now come
within the region of practical politics, and must at least be
examined in the hope of finding some solution. In this frame
of mind he issued on the 16th of September a long manifesto to
the electors. It covered much ground. U The \Vhigs," said
Mr. :Morley, U found it vague, the Radicals cautious, the Tories
crafty, but everybody admitted that it tended to heal feuds." 4
When he touched the Irish question he neither agreed with
Parnell nor condemned him. "In my opinion)" he said, "not
now for the first time delh"ered, the limit is clear within which
any desires of I reland, constitutionally ascertained, may, and
beyond which they cannot, receive the assent of Parliament.
To maintain the supremacy of the Crown) the unity of the
Empire) and all the authority of Parliament necessary for the
conservation of that unity, is the first duty of every represent-
ative of the people. Subject to this governing principle, every
grant to portions of the country of enlarged powers is, in my
view, not a source of danger but a means of averting it, and
i:;; in the nature of a new guarantee for increased cohesion.
happiness and strength." And on the question of the
maintenance of the Union, he added: U I believe history and
posterity will consign to disgrace the name and memory of
1 A l111ltal Register, p. 168.
S Morley's Cladstolle, ÍÍ. 457-8.
2 Ibid. 154.
4 Ibid. 460.
GLADSTONE'S POSITION
3 21
every man, be he who he may, and on whichever side of the
Channel he may dwell, that, having the power to aid in an
equitable settlement between Ireland and Great Britain, shall
use that power not to aid but to prevent or to retard it. If
the duty of working for this end cannot be doubted, then I
trust that, on thc one hand, Ireland will remember that she is
subject to the authority of reason and justice, and cannot
always plead the wrongs of other days in bar of submission to
them; and that the two sister kingdoms, aware of thcir over-
whelming strength, will dismiss every fear except that of
doing wrong, and will make yet another effort to complcte
a reconciling work which has already done so much to redccm
the past, and which, when completed, will yet morc redound
to the honour of our legislation and our race." 1
The conviction that Mr. Gladstone was nearing Home Rule
wa" intensified when his special friend, 1\1.r. Childers, the ex-
Chancellor of the Exchequer, declared on the 12th of October
at Pontefract that he would himself be willing to give Ireland
Home Rule. lIe would leave her to legislate for hersel
with
control of police and the judiciary, reserving Imperial rights
over foreign policy, military organization, external trade, thc
Post Office, the currency, coinage, the N atio
al Debt and the
Court of Ultimate Appea1. 2 Importance was attached to this
speech because of Mr. Childers's personal relations with 1\lr.
Gladstone, and in point. of fact 1\1r. Gladstone had been
consulted beforehand, and told his friend that he had a
"decided sympathy \\"ith the general scope and spirit of your
proposed declaration about Ireland." S In public he did not go
so far. He was friendly, but vague, ready to grant Ireland the
fullest measure of local government, but not ready to declare
openly for Home Rule, still less to formulate any Home
Rule scheme. 1\ir. Parnell was disappointed. He knew how
far Lord Carnarvon would go, and wanted to see if Gladstone
and the Liberals would go further. For he was quite prepared
to throw his influence on the side which gave the largest
1 Annual Register, pp. I 57-8. 2 Ibid. 17 I.
3 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 475- 6 .
Yor. In
91
3 22
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
concessions. But Gladstone was not to be dra\\ln. He had to
keep his party together, and instead of formulating a Home
Rule scheme, he pleaded on the platform for such a majority
as would enable the Liberals to settle the Irish question
independent of the Irish members. This was just what :Mr.
Parnell was determined he should not have. Further, he
satisfied himself that with the opposition of Lord Hartington,
and probably also of l\1r. Chamberlain, the Liberal leader
would not be able to go so far as the Tories. In this belief
1\1r. Parnell issued a manifesto advising the Irish ,,-oters in
Great Britain to support the Tories at the polls.
Certainly the language of this manifesto lacked nothing in
vigour. The I rish voters were asked to vote everywhere against
cc the men who coerced Ireland, deluged Egypt with blood,
menaced religious liberty in the school, the freedom of speech
in Parliament, and promised to the country generally a repetition
of the crimes and follies of the last Liberal Administration.
The specious demand for a majority against the Irish Party is
an appeal for power to crush all Anti-Radical members in
Parliament first; then to propose to Ireland some scheme
doomed to failure, because of its unsuitability to the wants of
the Irish people; and finally to force down a halting measure
of self-government upon the Irish people, by the same methods
of wholesale imprisonment by which durability was sought for
the impracticable Land Act of 188 I." 1
The exciting contest on which so much depended was
soon over. The Tories numbered just 249, the Liberals 335,
the Home Rulers 86. Neither of the two great English
parties was satisfied. The Tories hoped, by the aid of the
Irish vote, to have such a number as would enable them to
form a Government. The Liberals, having passed a great
measure of enfranchisement, expected that the newly en-
franchised would have flocked to their standards, and that
a sweeping Liberal victory and the an but annihilation of
the Tories would be the result. The Irish alone had done
well. In Munster, Leinster and Connaught they had literally
1 Annual Register, pp. 180-8 I.
THE GENERAL ELECTION
3 2 3
swept the board. Trinity College continued to return Tories;
but Trinity College had no representative capacity, and its
verdict carried no weight. Everywhere else in Leinster the
Tories went down. In several instances the Home Rulers
had been returned unopposed, their opponents being afraid to
provoke a contest. \Vhere contests had taken place the
Home Rulers outnumbered their opponents by more than
ten to one. In South Mayo the numbers were 4900 to
75; in \Vest Mayo 4790 to 131; in East Kerry 3 169 to
30; in many other cases the disparity between Home Rulers
and Anti-Home Rulers was nearly as great. Nor was this
all. Even in Ulster, hitherto the stronghold of landlord
ascendancy and religious bigotry, the Home Rulers had a
majority. Of its 33 members, 17 were pledged supporters
of Parnell; Derry and West Belfast had all but been
captured. 1\Ir. Healy had been returned for South Derry;
>Mr. William O'Brien for South Tyrone. This result was all
the more remarkable in face of the notorious jerrymandering
of many seats. Under the new arrangement of single-member
constituencies, set up by the Redistribution Act, commissioners
had been appointed to fix the boundaries, and they had often
done so in a partizan fashion, so as to defeat the Home
Rulers. And yet Ulster had gone over to Parnell, and a
majority of its members had agreed, as had all others elected
on the Home Rule ticket, to sit, act and vote with the Irish
Party; the violation of this pledge entailing instant resignation
as a punishment.
In all, 85 out of the 103 Irish members were followers
of 1\lr. Parnell. Mr. T. P. O'Connor had also been returned
for the Scotland Road division of Liverpool, thus making the
Parnellites 86. There were 18 Irish Tories, but not one
single Liberal had been elected in Ireland. Equally significant
was the fact that 22 of the Home Rulers elected had been
imprisoned by Mr. Forster. l
In the meantime one noted event had taken place in
Ireland, not connected with the General Election, but of
I Parnell Jfo7'cl1:mt. pp. 27 2 -3.
.)24
GLADSTONE AND HOl\IE RULE
sufficient importance to excite national interest. r n February,
Cardinal MacCabe, the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, died.
He had been the nominee of Cardinal Cullen, and was quite
as much out of sympathy with Irish popular movements.
Two names were specially mentioned for the high office
which he had filled-Dr. \Valsh, the President of Maynooth
College, and Dr. :l\Ioran, the Archbishop of Sydney. Dr.
\Valsh was well known to hold popular views and to be
possessed of a manly and fearless spirit. Dr. l\Im-an, who
was a nephew of Cardinal Cullen, was believed to share his
uncle's views on public questions, and was therefore favoured
by the British influence at Rome. lVIr. Errington, a sort of
unofficial British envoy at the Vatican, was specially busy
in the work of intrigue, and assured Lord Granville in l\Iay
that he was keeping " the Vatican in humour," 1 and was
evidently hoping to keep Dr. \Valsh out, though the latter
was the almost unanimous selection of the priests of Dublin.
For months the Archbishopric remained undecided. A change
of Government brought no change; for the Tories, quite as
much as the Liberals, were anxious that British influence
should prevail. But in August Mr. \Villiam O'Brien somehow
got possession of Mr. Errington's letter of l\lay to Lord
Granville, and published it in U1zited Ire/and. The result was
that intrigues ceased, and forthwith Dr. \Valsh was appointed
Archbishop of Dublin. That his learning and ability were
enormous-far greater than that of any who had ever filled
the See of Dublin-was well known. But the extraordinary
outburst of enthusiasm that hailed his appointment was due
not so much to this as to the fact that he had to combat
British intrigue. Nor did the English Government do justice
to his opponent when they supposed him to be an enemy to
Irish national aspirations. He has, on the contrary, shown
himself to be a pronounced advocate of Home Rule. And
in the field of Irish historical research Dr. l\Ioran has done
work that will endure. Altogether he is a commanding
figure in the Catholic Church, an Irish-born Cardinal who
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 27.
DR.
IAC HALE
Archbishop of TlIam
DR. HEAL\
.\rchbi
hop of TlIam
,
r,
1,'
Lawrence.
.........
.
.
,,'
,
,
,
,
,
DR. WALSH
Archbishop of DlILlin
,.
t
.....
..
".
\.. ......
,.. .
elt 1l1..:d;
r.
\
DR CROKE
.\rchbishop of Ca"hel
,
La\\rence.
'\
\
Laurence.
(--' /;
l tJ?AcR,..
J ..,,)'
THE TORIES AXD COERCION
3 2 5
has brought to a far-off land the highest qualities of scholar-
ship and religious zeal.
In August Dr. \Valsh returned from Rome to Ireland
as Archbishop; before the end of December the General
Election was over, and when the new year dawned the air
was thick with rumours as to what the immediate future
would bring. It was evident that the Tories could not
continue in office. At the head of a strong party it is
probable that Lord Churchill and his colleagues would have
brought in a Home Rule measure acceptable to the Irish
party. But being only 250 in number, they were not strong
enough to discard the Orangemen, and the Orangemen would
never consent to Home Rule. "I have done my best for
you," said Lord Churchill to the Irish leaders, "and have
failed; and now, of course, I'll do my best against you." 1
\Vhat that meant soon appeared. Lord Carnarvon and the
Chief Secretary resigned and were replaced by Lord London-
derry, the descendant of Castlereagh, and by 1\.lr. \V. H.
Smith, one of the most anti-Irish of the Tories. Concurrently
with these changes there wcre many Tory speeches describing
Ireland as in a state of lawlessness; and in January, when
Parliament openeJ, the Queen's Speech declared emphatically
against Home Rule and called for further powers of repression.
A little later a Bill was promised to suppress the National
League. 2 A Govcrnment with such a policy was not to be
maintained in office by Irish votes, and when 1\.lr. Jesse
Collings moved an amendment to the Address in favour of
small holdings for agricultural labourers he was supported by
Liberals and Irish. A few \Vhigs, led by Lord Hartington
and r..'Ir. Goschen, voted with the Tories, but the Liberals and
Irish carried the day, anJ by 329 t::> 259 yotes the Tories
were driven from office. s
,Mr. Gladstone then became Prime Minister. His subse-
quent attitude on the Irish question was often described by
his opponents as unworthy of him. It was said that his
1 Parllell JlovelllClzt, p. 274. 2 Allllual Register, pp. 12, 25.
3 Ibid. 32.
3 26
GLADSTONE Ai\D HOME RULE
acceptance of Home Rule was due to his anxiety to return
to office, that his conversion was not the result of conviction,
and was as sudden as that of Saul of Tarsus. But this is an
unfair statement of the case. As far back as 1882 he favoured
local government for Ireland, pointing out to Mr. Forster that
"until we have seriously responsible bodies to deal with us
in Ireland, every plan we frame comes to Irishmen as an
English plan, and as such is probably condemned." 1 For
the time 1\lr. Forster's obstinacy blocked the path of reform,
and the Phænix Park murders turned the public mind from
concession to coercion. But 1\1r. Gladstone eagerly waited for
the calm which was to follow the storm, and in 1\Iay 1885 he
proposed for Ireland a" central Board of Local Government
on something of an elective basis," 2 a plan which had the
merit of being acceptable both to :Mr. Parnell and 1\lr.
Chamberlain. It was not, however, acceptable to all 1\1r.
Gladstone's colleagues in the Cabinet, and was therefore
dropped. The proposed scheme was not the same as setting
up an Irish Parliament, but it might in time develop into such;
and Mr. Gladstone was certain that the rejection of the smaller
measure would lead only to larger demands being made by
Ireland. Carefully guarding himself against acceptance or
rejection of such possible demands, he waited for the result
of the General Election. Hitherto Horne Rule had been asked
by a minority of Irish members-an active and able minority
no doubt, but yet a minority. It stood on a different footing
when it was asked by fi",'e-sixths of the Irish representatives.
As a constitutional leader l\11r. Gladstone saw that a crisis
had come, that Home Rule had become a living reality in
the field of practical politics, and could no longer be ignored.
That he was not anxious for power or personal triumph was
evident from the fact that he desired the Tories would settle
the question, promising them his support. Lord Salisbury
could then ignore the Orangemen. Mr. Gladstone could
ignore the Whigs, and a moderate measure of Home Rule
could be passed, acceptable to all reasonable I rishmen, though
1 Morley's Gladslon
, ii. 298. 2 Ibid. 43 I.
GLADSTONE IN OFFICE
3 2 7
not necessarily acceptable to the extreme Irish demand.
The Tory leaders, however, rejected these proposals, and
then, and only then, did Mr. Gladstone drive the Tories out,
and accepted office with the object of settling the Irish
question on lines acceptable to Mr. Parnell. 1
His task was one of extreme difficulty. Lord Hartington
would have no Home Rule, would not even consider the
question with the object of discovering some solution; 2 and
though on Mr. Collings's amendment his strength was but
eighteen, it would probably be greater as an opponent of Home
Rule. Mr. Goschen shared Lord Hartington's views, as did
the eminent Liberal lawyer, Sir Henry James. :Mr. Chamberlain
was willing to go further than these, but unwilling to set up an
Irish legislative assembly. \\'ith the instinct of the trader he
could only deal with hard facts, and rather as a shopkeeper than
as a statesman. Businesslike, unsympathetic, unimaginative,
he took no account of sentiment, of tradition, of national pride.
The associations in the mind of Ireland with her lost Parliament,
the wit of Curran, the statesmanship of Flood, the eloquence of
Plunkett, the genius of Grattan appealed to him not at all.
\Vith the haughty exclusiveness of an Imperialist, he 'would
only concede a Board or Counçil with power to deal with roads
and bridges and water and gas, and professed to see danger to
his own country in conceding an Irish Parliament, though its
powers should be limited and circumscribed and it should be
entirely subordinate to the Imperial Parliament. He was
willing, however, to examine the Irish question, and took office,
though he was not sanguine that Mr. Parnell's demand could
be conceded without sacrificing the unity of the Empire. s
Mr. Trevelyan also took office, but like 1fr. Chamberlain
was hesitating and timorous. But Lord Granville, Lord Ripon,
Lord Rosebery, Lord Aberdeen, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman and
Sir William Harcourt took office without hesitation and without
making conditions. So also did the great lawyer, Sir Charles
Russell. And Lord Spencer pronounced unequivocally for Home
1 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 499-500; Churchill's Lift, ii. 29-3 I.
2 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 533-4. 3 Ibid. 534-5.
3 28
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
Rule. He had administered coercion in Ireland with vlgour
and without fear, but experience had taught him that its use
was at best but temporary, and that generous concessions were
a surer and safer remedy for Irish ills.! In the new Cabinet
also was 11r. John 110rley, who took the office of Chief
Secretary for I reland. As journalist and author he was already
well known, and though not long in Parliament had already
made his mark as a speaker. His speeches were characterized
by that literary charm which marks his writings, and on the
platform and in Parliament his finished sentences fell pleasantly
on the ear. Manly, outspoken, courageous, a man of deep
thought and strong conviction, he thought out political problems
for himself, and arrived at his own conclusions; and while the
Tories were yet in office he declared boldly for Home Rule.
Such were the men who formed 1\lr. Gladstone's Cabinet, and
who, during the months of Februaryand March, endeavoured to
elaborate a Home Rule Bill and a Land Purchase Bill for
Ireland. 2
\\'hile this work was proceeding, Mr. \V. E. Forster died,
and thus disappeared one determined enemy of Home Rule.
There was a deep pathos in such an ending to such a career.
X 0 other Chief Secretary in modern times had so deeply
roused Irish passion. The memory of Buckshot Forster was
execrated little less than that of Cromwell. J ails filled, free
speech denied, newspapers and meetings suppressed, con-
stitutional rights denied-these were the fruits of his rule.
And while the innocent was often punished. murder was
unpunished, and the murderers were free and even unknown.
Ignoring the healing effects of concession on a disturbed
Ireland, his cry was for more coercion. He wanted the Crimes
Act renewed in I 885, and was reluctant about conceding Mr.
Chamberlain's Central Board,3 and when Mr. Gladstone went
beyond this in 1886, Forster held up his hands in horror, for
now surely the dismemberment of the Empire was at hand. 4
1 Morley's Gladstolle, ii. 537.
2 All11ual Register, pp. 36-37; 1\1orley's Glads/ol1e, ii. 537.
S Reid's Life if ròrs/cr, ii. 508. 4 Ibid. 553-4.
THE HO
IE RCLE BILL
3 2 9
_"-nd yet the man's heart was kind and he really loved Ireland.
In I 847 he had helped the starving Irish peasants, and in
::\Iarch 1886 one of the last acts of his life was to send a sub-
scription to Ireland to relieve distress on the desolate island of
I nnisboffin. 1
On the 8th of April 1\1r. Gladstone introduced his Home
Rule Bill amid scenes such as had rarely been witnessed at
\Vestminster. At break of day members hurried to the House
of Commons to secure seats; at eleven o'clock scarcely a single
seat was vacant; and when 1\lr. Gladstone entered the House
after four o'clock many members, unable to get other accom-
modation, occupied chairs on the floor of the House. Outside
in the lobbies knots gathered to discuss the political situation
and speculate as to what the immediate future would reveal.
The galleries were all filled. Peers, peeresses, prelates, princes
of the blood, ambassadors of foreign powers, rank and station
and beauty and learning looked down with eagerness on the
historic scene. As :\Ir. Gladstone entered he was greeted
with enthusiastic cheers from the Liberal and Irish benches.
He rose at half-past four, and for three hours and a half he
unfolded his scheme. The extent of ground to be covered, the
vast interests involved, the complexity of detail called rather
for exposition than for eloquence; and 1\1r. Gladstone could of
all men clearly expound. But eloquence and argument also
were not wanting. The long march of historic events, the
centuries of oppression on the one hand and of suffering on
the other, the confiscations and plantations which make up so
much of Irish history, and which tell of Ireland's martyrdom and
of England's shame, were all familiar to the orator, and stirred
him to eloquent outbursts. His exquisite voice, flexible in the
highest degree, rose in declamation or sank in appeal as he
denounced the infamy of the Act of Union, or pleaded for
justice and fair-play for a long-tried and sorely-oppressed land.
Reminding his hearers that the Union had been followed by
coercion rather than by equal laws, he recalled how even con-
.cessions being too long delayed had been robbed of grace and
1 Lift, ji. 559.
33 0
GLADSTONE AND HOME H.CLE
healing effect. England, he said, had taken no account of
Irish ideas, Irish feelings, Irish prejudices; her wants and wishes
had not been consulted by Parliament; and law had always been
suspected by Ireland because it had come clothed in a foreign
garb. He could see no alternati\'e to Home Rule but drastic
coercion; no incongruity in conceding to Ireland the demands
of five-sixths of her representatives; no national danger but
rather national security in the extension and enlargement of
local powers; and nothing in his proposals inconsistent with
the unity of the Empire or the supremacy of the Imperial
Parliament. He instanced the cases of Austria and Hungary,
of Norway and Sweden, and of many of the British colonies
to show that Home Rule had worked well, and he believed
that in Ireland also similar happy results would follow. New
powers and responsibilities would bring steadiness and sobriety
and contentment; loyalty would replace disloyalty and dis-
content; old wounds would be healed; the !;trife of centuries
would be closed, and bitter memories would be for ever
exorcised,1
The proposed Irish Assembly would consist of two orders.
The lower order, consisting of 206 members, would be
elected for five years on the existing Parliamentary franchise.
The upper order, consisting of 103 members-28 representatiye
Irish peers and 75 others, with a property qualification of :L 200
a year-would be elected for ten years hy those rated at :L 25
a year. Both orders would ordinarily sit and vote together; but
they might deliberate separately, and if while doing so they dis-
agreed as to any Bill, a temporary veto was the result. Irish
members would no longer sit at \Vestminster. The Viceroy
representing the Sovereign would not be a party man, ceasing
to hold office with the party who appointed him. He could
assent to and veto Bills, and summon and dissolve Parliament;
nor could the I rish Parliament curtail his powers. The Irish
executive would be responsible to the Irish Parliament, and
judges would be appointed for life as in England. Heserved
to the Imperial Parliament were the imposition and collection
1 Hansard, ccciv.
THE HOME RULE BILL
33 1
of customs and excise duties, all questions of peace and war,
foreign relations, trade, navigation and copyright, and control
over the sea and land forces and national defences. Nor
could the Irish Parliament endow any religion or impose any
incapacity because of religious belief, nor could it have control
over thc police until some years had elapsed. Revising the
fiscal arrangement settled in 18 I 7, Ireland's contribution to the
Imperial Exchequer would henceforth be one-fifteenth; this
arrangement to last for thirty years, after which it might be
revised. The I rish Government would also take over all loans
due to the British Treasury which had been advanced for Irish
purposcs, but was to be handed over the balance of the Irish
Church Surplus. l
Supplementary to the Home Rule Bill was the Irish Land
Purchase Bill, which IV!r. Gladstone introduced on the 16th of
April. The House of Lords, being a House of landlords and
always specially partial to Irish landlordism, would nevcr assent
to Home Rule if Irish landlords were to be left to the mercy
of an Irish Parliament. But if the Irish landlords were bought
out at a high figure the Lords' assent to Home Rule would be
the more readily obtained. This was Mr. Gladstone's hope,
and it was for this reason he brought in his Land Purchase
Bill. It provided for the buying out by the State of all land-
lords who wished to sell. The price, which was to be fixed by
the Land Courts, was estimated at twenty years' purchase of
the net rent, and would be advanced by the British Treasury
and repayable by the tenants-principal and interest-in
forty-nine years, at 4 per cent of the purchase money. A
British official, called a Receiver-General, was to be appointed,
whose duty it would be to transmit the rent-charge and all
other items of revenue payable from Ireland to the British
Treasury. But he would be merely an executive officer, and
would have no power to levy any tax. 2
Both the Home Rule and Land Purchase Bills passed their
1 Parnell fifovement, pp. 275-80; Pamphlet by Sydney Buxton, Mr.
Gladstone's Irish Bills.
2 Parnell fifovement, pp. 280-82; Hansard, ccciv. 1778-1810.
33 2
GLADSTONE AND HO:
IE RULE
first reading without a division; but neither was received with
enthusiasm and neither escaped hostile criticism. IV! r. Parnell,
whom 1\lr. Gladstone had so fiercely denounced in 188 I, had
special reasons for being elated, but even he was cautious and
critical. He disliked the Land Purchase Bill ; he disliked the
provisions about the control of the police; he \\ anted power
to protect Irish industries; and he fought hard with Mr.
Gladstone before the Home Rule Bill was introduced to have
the contribution from Ireland to the Imperial Exchequer fixed
at a twentieth rather than a fifteenth, firmly convinced that the
latter was too high. He hoped that on these points conces-
sions would be made in Committee, and it was at least possible
that if such were to be refused he would wreck the BilJ.l
The Orangemen were specially enraged, protesting against
the infamy of handing over the loyal Protestants of Ireland to
rebels and traitors. 2 The better to rouse them to fury, Lord
Randolph Churchill went to Belfast, and in language of reckless
violence urged on the Ulstermen to resist, predicting that if
ever IVIr. Gladstone's Home Rule Bill became la \v, "Dlster
would fight and Ulster would be right." These fiery incite-
ments applied to such inflammable material helped to stir up
disorder and riots in Belfast, resulting in the loss of many lives.
A Government note-taker was sent to report the noble Lord's
speeches, which Mr. Morley described as full of contingent
sedition; S and when the late ally of the Irish Party found that
even a Tory lord could not defy the law with impunity he fled
to England. He was on safer ground in the House of
Commons, and described the Home Rule Bill as a mass of
contradictions and absurdities. 4 Sir 1\-1. Hicks-Beach believed
that the EiIl would in no way be a final settlement. 5 Lord
Salisbury was equally strong, declaring that there was no
middle term between government at \Vestminster and inde-
pendent and entirely separate government at Dublin.(j And
1 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 546.
2 Hansard, ccciv.: Speeches of Colonel \Varing, Johnson, etc.
3 Hansard, ccciv. 1268; Churchill's Life, ii. 60- 6 5.
4 An1lual Register, p. I 12. 5 Ibid. I 18. 6 Ibid. 13 2 .
TIlE OPPOSITION TO IIO
IE RULE
333
the Tory newspapers, from the Times down, approved of and
adopted the language of Lord Salisbury. But it was from the
Liberal ranks that the most damaging criticisms came. That
Lord Hartington and l\1r. Goschen should oppose Home Rule
was to be expected, and it excited no surprise when they
appeared on the same platform with Lord Salisbury and 1\lr.
"V. H. Smith in opposition to 1\lr. Gladstone's Bill. And both
vigorously denounced it on its first reading in the House of
Commons. l 1\lr. Trevelyan and lVIr. Chamberlain were on
different ground. They had taken office under 1\lr. Gladstone.
They were not indeed enthusiastic supporters, and as they failed
in the Cabinet to mould 1\1r. Gladstone's scheme in accordance
with their own views, they resigned. They resigned before the
Home Rule Bill was introduced, and on its first reading they
vigorously assailed it. lVlr. Trevelyan, who spoke first,
objected to have the police, even for a time, independent of
the Irish Government; he objected to the financial provisions;
he objected to the attempted distinction between local and
Imperial questions; and he objected to any scheme for buying
out the Irish landlords. He was in favour of a large and
generous measure of local government for Ireland, but he
stopped short at a legislative assembly, which would give
supreme power to 1\Ir. Parnell and his followers. 1\lr.
Chamberlain was an abler debater than Mr. Trevelyan and a
far less scrupulous politician. He too was in favour of a large
measure of local government for Ireland, he was even in
favour of Federation, but he would not accept 1\Ir. Gladstone's
scheme. He objected to the exclusion of the Irish members
from the Imperial Parliament; it would place them in a
degrading position. He objected to the proposed fiscal arrange-
ments. He objected to laying a heavy burden on the British
taxpayer for the purpose of bribing Irish landlords. He
believed that 1\lr. Gladstone's measure would only lead to
further agitations and ill-feeling; and he declared his readiness
to vote for total separation rather than vote for such a BilLs
1 Annual Register, pp. 131-3. 2 Hansard, ccciv. 110 4-24.
s Ibid. 1182-1207.
334
GLADSTONE AND HOME RULE
Had 1\1r. Gladstone consulted Mr. Chamberlain more
frequently, had he deferred more to his views, had he rated his
abilities higher, and, giving him the post of Chancellor of the
Exchequer, made him the heir-apparent to the Liberal Premier-
ship, it may be that the younger man's aversion to Home Rule
would have been overcome and his opposition changed into
support. But 1\1r. Gladstone disliked some of Mr. Chamberlain's
Radical schemes and his manner of putting them before the
public; he did not rate his abilities as of the first order, and
seems never to have regarded him as a possible Liberal
Premier. 1\lr. Chamberlain, conscious of great powers, must
have felt hurt at all this; nor did anyone assail both of 11r.
Gladstone's Bills with such vehemence and passion. On the
first reading of the Home Rule Bill his criticism was scathing
and severe, and on the Land Purchase Bill he indulged in
similar criticism. And passing from Parliament to the
platform, he used every artifice of an unscrupulous politician to
prejudice the public mind. Prodigal of prophecy, he foretold
that l'v1r. Gladstone's Home Rule Bill would lead to constant
friction, to further agitation, to ultimate separation. It would
set up, within thirty miles of the shores of Great Britain, an
independent and hostile nation. And he said this in spite of
the fact that Army and Navy, l'v1ilitia and Volunteers were still
to be exclusively under the control of the British Parliament.
Though in favour of Land Purchase, and convinced, as his
subsequent conduct proved, that it involved no danger to the
State and imposed no burden on the British taxpayer, he
predicted that the Irish tenants would repudiate their bargain
and strike against the payment of rents; and thus would the
hard-earned money of British workmen be squandered on thrift-
less Irish landlords and dishonest I rish tenants. U \V orkmen of
England and Scotland," he said, " where is your remedy? You
will be Irish landlords; you will have to evict the tenants;
you will have to collect your rents at the point of the bayonet;
and I refuse to be a party to such contingencies." 1
1 Annual Register, pp. 158-60; O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 136; Hansard.
cccvi.
FRIE
DS A
D FOES
335
Lesser men among the Liberals, such as Mr. Courtney and
!'vIr. Caine, followed the lead of 1\lr. Chamberlain, though they
were not so eloquent in speech nor unscrupulous in attack. l
On more than one platform also Lord Hartington repeated the
arguments he had used in the House of Commons; and Mr.
Goschen, on the same side, surprised both friends and foes by
the fire with which he spoke. 2 But though these speeches
were not without effect and the Land Purchase Bill was every-
where coldly received, the Libf'ral associations throughout
Great Britain were unwi1ling to desert IV1r. Gladstone's army,
even when l\1r. Chamberlain sounded the bugle-call. s 1Vluch
of this, no doubt, was due to the great personality of 1\Ir.
Gladstone; much to the fact that Irish opinion all over the
world favoured his measures and even welcomed them with
gratitude; much to the able speeches made by Sir Wi1liam
Harcourt and otlwrs in the Hou')e of Commons. And many
were convinced by the thoughtful and reasoned arguments of
Mr. Morley on public platforms; still more perhaps by the
public speeches of Lord Spencer. His high character, his
stainless honour, his manifest patriotism, his zeal for the public
interest') were everywhere recognized. Nor could the masses
fail to be impressed when such a man, with his recent experi-
ences in Ireland, declared that there was no alternative to Home
Rule but Coercion, that he could see nothing in Mr. Gladstone's
Bill involving separation or dismemberment, and that Home
Rule, and that only, would bring contentment and peace. 4
1\1r. Gladstone's position was still further strengthened when
he foreshadowed the abandonment of the Land Bill, warning
the Irish landlords that the sands in the hour-glass were
running out. And he declared further that his Home Rule
Bill was not a cast-iron measure. It was open to amendment.
Let his followers but vote for the second reading, and he would
postpone the question until autumn, and then he would recast
and reintroduce the Bil1. 5
1 AIl111/al Register, p. 161. 2 Ibid. 157-8, 168-9. :3 Ibid. 16 5- 6 .
4, Ibid. J 51-4 j Fitzmaurice's Life of Lord Granville, ii. 484-5.
5
Iorley"s Gladstone, ii. 572-4; Annual Register, pp. 194- 6 .
33 6
GLADSTOKE AND HOME RULE
One great Englishman, i\1r. John Bright, had hitherto kept
silent, and men were specially anxious to know what 'were his
views. The friend and comrade of Cobden, the eloquent
advocate of every popular measure, the champion of freedom
in every land, he commanded the passionate attachment of the
English masses. And in Ireland his name was held dear.
Her miseries and wrongs had touched his heart, her oppress:on
by a stronger power had roused his anger; he was her friend
in dark days, when few Englishmen were her friends, and it
\vould be strange if he deserted her now ,,,hen his old friend
Mr. Gladstone, was opening to her the gates of freedom. But
there are some men whose love of freedom grows cold with
the advance of age, and signs were not wanting that 1\.lr.
Bright was one of these. Forgetting apparently that the Irish
members were freely elected by Ireland and represented her
views, he had conceived an unreasoning dislike for them, and
had no better names for them than rebels and traitors. He
could not believe them loyal, honourable or truthful, and told
Mr. Gladstone, in the middle of 1\.iay, that his policy of surrender
to them would be disastrous both to Ireland and to Great
Britain. He did not, however, favour 1\.lr. Chamberlain's
scheme of Federation; and he was utterly opposed to the
Land Purchase Bill. l A fortnight later, in spite of his deep
personal attachment to 1\.lr. Gladstone and his desire to agree
with him, his views remained the same. He did not, indeed
think that an Irish Parliament would favour religious pelse-
cution, or separation, or a policy of public plunder; and he
heartily approved of the clause in the Home Rule Bill exclud-
ing the Irish members from \Yestminster. And yet he \,"as
opposed to the Home Rule and to the Land Purchase Bills.
Out of respect for Mr. Gladstone he had hitherto held his
tongue, but a few days later he declared publicly against his
old friend. This was welcome news for 1\.lr. Chamberlain, for
it meant that Home Rule had received its death-blow. 2
1 Morley, ii. 567-9.
2 0' Brien's Parnell, ii. 146- 52. See also the Cornltill fifaga::ine for
October 1908, and Tnt/It, 14th October of the same year.
THE SECOND READING DEB \TE
337
The second reading debate was then proceeding. It was
opened by 1\1r. Gladstone in a speech, argumentativc and
conciliatory, in which he laid special emphasis on the fact that
the only alternative to llome Rule was Coercion. l A little
latcr this policy was boldly avowed outsidc Parliament by
Lord Salisbury, who likened the Irish to Hottentots, and whose
prescription for Ireland was twenty years of resolute govern-
ment, meaning twenty years of continuous coercion. Meantime
Lord Hartington had moved the rejection of the Home Rule
Bill, having been followed on the same side by Sir Henry
James, 1\1 r. Goschen and l\I r. Trevelyan, and by some of the
Ulster members, the latter shrieking wildly that they were
being betrayed. 2 On the other side important speeches werc
made by l\Ir. Bryce, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman, Sir Charles
Russell and l\Ir. l\IorIcy; while from the Irish benches l\Ir.
\Villiam O'Brien spoke with admirable temper and convincing
force. s And 1\lr. Stansfield made damaging use of Lord
Salisbury's Hottentot speech, describing it as "cxcelling in
calculated recklessncss the wildest speech ever uttered by
Nationalist or Orangeman." 4
The long debate often dragged wearily, until the night
of the I st of June, when l\1r. Chamberlain spoke. Know-
ing the popularity of 1\lr. Gladstone throughout the country,
he was careful to make no attack on him; and knowing
the feeling among the Liberal electors in favour of IIome
Rule, he declared his agreement with the principle, but not
with 1\1r. Gladstone's scheme. ] Ie carefully avoided any
reference to the alternative policy of Coercion, and seized
on all the weak points of l\ir. Gladstone's whole Irish
policy with the skill and dexterity of a practised hand. 5
Hc was answered from the Liberal benches by Sir \\ï1Jiam
Harcourt, and from the Irish by lY1r. T. 1\1. Healy, l\Ir.
Dillon, Mr. T. P. O'Connor and Mr. Sexton. The speech
of the lattcr was second only to l\1'r. Gladstone's, fully equal
Hansard, cccv. ? Ibid. CCCY.-cccvi.
IbId. cccv. 622-32. 4 Ibid. I 178-9.
5 Ibid. cccYi. 675-7 00 .
VOl.. III
92
33 8
GLADSTO:NE AND HOME RULE
to 1\lr. Chamberlain's in debating power, and far beyond it
in sustained eloquence. l
On the 7th of June, the last night of the memorable debate,
1\Ir. Parnell spoke, making what l\1r. 1\Iorley described as a
masterly speech-" not the mere dialectic of a party debate,
but the utterance of a statesman. . . . As he dealt with Ulster,
with finance, with the supremacy of Parliament, with the loyal
minority, with the settlement of education in an Irish legislature
-soberly, steadily, deliberately, with that full, familiar, deep
insight into the facts of a country which is only possible to a
man who belongs to it and has passed his life in it-the efîect
of Mr. Parnell's speech was to make eyen able disputants on
either side look little better than amateurs." 2 This is remark-
able testimony to l\1r. Parnell's powers from so competent a
critic, but whoever pel uses the speech ,,,ill readily admit its
justice.
Sir M. Hicks-Beach wound up the debate for the Opposi-
tion, following 1\1r. Cowen, who made an extremely eloquent
speech for the Bill; and then l\fr. Gladstone rose, just as the
clock tolled the midnight hour. His speech was worthy of
the occasion and of the man. A voiding petty recrimination
and personal attack, it was marked by cogent reasoning, by
persuasive argument, by solemn appea1. The interests of 1\\"0
nations long divided were at stake, the opportunity to close
ancient feuds had come, and 1\1r. Gladstone, recalling the past
and peering into the future, spoke less as an advocate than as
a statesman. \\ïth his opponents he dealt not ungenerously.
l\1r. Chamberlain alone he treated with mocking contempt.
That gentleman had avowed that he did not fear a dissolution;
and l\lr. Gladstone declared that he was not surprised, for 1\lr.
Chamberlain had carefully trimmed his sails to catch every
passing breeze. If his audience at an election favoured the
H()me Rule Bill then before Parliament, he could say that he
had voted in favour of its principle. If they declared against
it, he could point to his vote on the second reading. If
they wanted a larger Bill, he could say he had declared for
1 Hansard, cccvi. 70 0 -731. 2 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 557.
..
Elhott & Fry
W" E. FORSTER
Stereoscopic.
lORD SPENCER
.
Flliott ""= Fn..
LORD R_\
LJOLPH CHCRCHILL
IIH<:d.
JOSEPH CHA:\Il:ERLAI::-I
Elliott & Fr
LORD MORLEY John l\Iorley'
B.IC;;";1 \')a
SIR WILLlA;\1 \. H.\RCOl"RT
THE SECOND READING DEBATE-GOVERN
fENT DEFEAT 339
Federation. If his audience thought the Bill went too far, he
could say that the last of his own plans was for " four pro-
vincial circuits controlled from London."
Leaving r..fr. Chamberlain and all his changing schemes,
!\Ir. Gladstone took higher ground, closing with a peroration
worthy of his palmiest days. "Ireland," he said, "stands at
your bar expectant, hopeful, almost suppliant. Her words are
the words of truth and soberness. She asks a blessed oblivion
of the past, and in that oblivion our interest is deeper even
than hers. You have been asked to-night to abide by the
traditions of which we are the heirs. What traditions? By the
Irish traditions? Go into the length and breadth of the world,
ransack the literature of all countries, find if you can a single
voice, a single book, in which the conduct of England towards
Ireland is anywhere treated except with profound and bitter
condemnation. Are these the traditions by which we are
exhorted to stand? No, they are a sad exception to the glory
of our country. They are a broad and black spot upon the
pages of its history, and what we want to do is to stand by
the traditions of which we are the heirs in all matters except
our relations with Ireland, and to make our relations with
Ireland to conform to the other traditions of our country. So
we treat our traditions, so we hail the demand of Ireland for
what I call a blessed oblivion of the past. She asks also a
boon for the future, and that boon for the future, unless we are
much mistaken, will be a boon to us in respect of honour, no
less than a boon to her in respect of happiness, prosperity and
peace. Such, sir, is her prayer. Think, I beseech you; think
well, think wisely, think not for the moment but for the years
that are to come, before you reject this Bill." 1
The eloquent appeal was in vain. The curious combina-
tion of Tories and \Vhigs, of Birmingham Radicals and Ulster
Orangemen, held firmly together, and only 3 I 3 voted for the
Bill while 343 voted against it, thus having an adverse majority
of 30. For the moment Mr. Chamberlain was triumphant,
and the Home Rule banner was in the dust.
1 Morley, ii. 579-80; Hansard, cccvi.
CHAPTER XV
Tlze Unionist Government
AFTER the defeat of the Home Rule Bill some members of
Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet favoured resignation rather than
dissolution. Their opponents would then be compelled to
disclose their policy, and if they had nothing to offer as
an alternative to Home Rule but Coercion, the alliance between
Tories and dissentient Liberals would be short-lived. Hut
Mr. Gladstone, who favoured dissolution, stated that he knew
of no instance in which a Government defeated on a great
national question failed to appeal from Parliament to the
people. And if the Horne Rule Government now deviated
from well-established precedent, it would be said that they
feared to face the people, and had themselves lost confidence
in Home Rule. 1\1r. Gladstone's arguments were convincing
as his authority was overwhelming, and Parliament was
dissolved in the last week of J une. 1
The fight which followed was a fight of giants. Nor did
Mr. Gladstone ever appear so great. Faced by powerful foes,
deserted by friends who had long fought by his side, weighed
down by the burden of seventy-six years, this wonderful old
man, inspired by confidence and conviction, entered the lists
with the courage and enthusiasm of youth. He had, it is
true, many grounds for hope. The alternative Tory policy of
Coercion was not popular. On the other hand, the prospect
of a final settlement of the eternal Irish question, which had
perplexed so many Parliaments and ruined so many l\1inisters,
1 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 581-2.
34 0
THE GENERAL ELECTIO
OF 1886
34 1
had its attraction for the electors; 1 and 1\lr. Gladstone could
point to the fact that his Home Rule Bill was accepted by
five-sixths of the Irish representatives and by the organs of
Irish opinion throughout the world. The Irish vote in Great
Britain would also be an important factor in the struggle, and
as it had turned the scales in many constituencies in the
previous year in favour of the Tories, it would now turn the
scales for the Liberals.
lVlr. Gladstone was further encouraged by the votes of
confidence from so many Liberal associations, and was assured
by 1\lr. Schnadhorst, the chief Liberal organizer, that the
electors were in advance of their representatives, and that a
General Election would mean victory for Home Rule. IV1r.
Gladstone had also confidence in himself, in his eloquence,
hi:; powers of persuasion, in the enthusiasm which he inspired;
believing that if his opponents had with them "class and the
dependents of class," the people's hearts were with him. 2
Yet the strength of his opponents was indeed great, well
calculated to strike even a great orator and statesman with
dismay. " You have power," said Mr. Gladstone, "you have
wealth, you have rank, you have station, you have organiza-
tion, you have the place of power." 3 Nor did this formidable
combination neglect any weapon which could be effectively
employed. Argument, appeal, national pride, ancient prejudice,
class hatred, selfish interests, social ostracism were all requisi-
tioned. Home Rulers were blackballed in clubs and avoided
in the streets. Great magnates ceased to ask them to their
country-houses or include them in their dinner-parties. They
were shunned in the racing-paddock and in the hunting-field.
-\ lady specially asked that she should not be placed at dinner
next to Lord Granville, who, being a Home Ruler, was a
traitor to his country. And the occupant of a suburban villa
could not believe that any of his neighbours were Home
1 Lift of Granville, ii. 469. "The bribe to me, and I suspect to
Great Britain, which would have most effect, would be to get rid of the
Irish members from the House of Commons, into which they are intro-
ducing dry rot" (Granville to Lord Spencer, Dec. 1885).
2 Hansard, ccc\'i. 12 39. 3 Ibid.
34 2
THE UJ\"IOJ\"IST GOVERNMENT
Rulers, because, if so, they could not be gentlemen. 1 The
Press attacked ]\;Ir. Gladstone and his Home Rule policy with
bitterness. The pulpit rang with denunciations of the man
who had destroyed the Irish Church and who was now bent
on destroying the British Empire. The General Assembly
of the Irish Presbyterian Church and the General Synod of
the Protestant Church joined hands in protesting against a
Parliament at Dublin manned by rebels and traitors. Irish
officials with big salaries and little work used all the influence
they could command against the new policy. Ulster Orange-
men breathed threats of civil war. Lord Randolph Churchill
described the Home Rule Bill as one that might have come
from Bedlam or Colney Hatch. 2 Mr. Bright openly proclaimed
his opposition, and, blinded by prejudice against the Irish
members, became the champion of Ulster bigotry. Lord Hart-
ington put the \-Vhig case without, howe\Oer, being offensive to
his great opponent. As for Mr. Chamberlain, his objections
and alternative schemes followed each other with bewildering
rapidity. And for the minor combatants no statement was
too extravagant to make. Visions of popery enthroned on
high, of an Ulster ablaze, of an Ireland in revolt against
England \vere conjured up; and one Unionist orator claimed
!'vIr. Gladstone's authority for the statement that the State
purchase of the Irish landlords would add between three
and four hundred millions to the National Debt. 3 The
Unionist combination indeed was a strange one: the \Vhig
and the Tory democrat, the Orangeman and the Radical, the
Primrose dame and the Irish Presbyterian, the parson and
the publican, the artisan from the slums of Birmingham and
the plutocrat from Park Lane.
Like
apoleon after Leipsic, 1\I1r. Gladstone had to lament
the desertion of some of his comrades-in-arms. But not a
few of the old comrades were with him still. Harcourt's
debating power was of the greatest value; Morley was
convincing, for he spoke out of deep convicti.on; Campbell-
1 Fitzmaurice's Life of Lord Granville, ii. 494-5.
2 An/wal Regisler, ppo 239-40. 3 The Pal1lell .J.
I{J7leJllcJ1t, pp. 2 8 4-7.
THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1886
343
Bannerman was courageous; Bryce's knowledge of constitu-
tional questions was profound; Spencer, driven from Coercion
by bitter experience of its futility, carried great weight with
the electors. But Gladstone himself, like Agamemnon, ,,'as
king of men. H is length of years, the splendour of his
public services, the acknowledged supremacy of his talents,
his incomparable eloquence, his world-wide knowledge raised
him above his contemporaries, and beside him every man
looked small. Men thronged.J9 see him and hear him as
something to be remembered in after years; they listened
to him when they turned with contempt from the ablest
of his contemporaries; they were fascinated by the man
whom they considered, and with justice, the greatest ornament
of their race. As he passed through the streets of Edinburgh
or Glasgow, of Manchester or Liverpool, his progress was that
of a conqueror. N or had he any difficulty in dealing with
the arguments of his opponents. In answer to the charge
of Catholic bigotry, he pointed to Ireland under a Protestant
leader, and reminded his hearers that every Irish Parliamentary
leader had been a Protestant except O'ConnelL To the
demand that Ulster should have a separate legislative assembly,
he pointed out that the ablest and the most trusted of the
Ulster leaders, l\1ajor Saunderson, made no such claim. The
objection that an Irish Parliament might endow the Catholic
religion he met by pointing out that such was specially pro-
hibited in his Home Rule Bill. He recalled how the Union
was p:lssed and what evils had followed, contrasting the
poverty and discontent after 1800 with the progress and
prosperity under Grattan's Parliament. He dealt effectj,'ely
with :\ir. Chamberlain's changing plans, his Federation Scheme,
his Canadian Home Rule, his Provincial Councils, with his
croaking prophecies and perverted history; and he often
reminded his audience that the Tory alternative to Home
Rule was twenty years of Coercion. 1 Finally, he refused to
call the Liberal deserters Liberal Unionists, as they ,,'ished,
1 Sþeeches at Edinburgh alld Glasg07v - pamphlets published by
National Press Agency.
344
THE UNIONIST GOVERNMENT
but called them instead Dissentient Liberals, though the
name Liberal Unionist was the more usual one used by the
public.
To meet the objections of those who were genuine Home
Rulers but who objected to his Home Rule Bill, Mr. Gladstone
was willing to concede something. But he obstinately clung
to the clause excluding the Irish members from Westminster,
and tInts gave his critics some reason to say that Imperial
unity was sacrificed. He also clung to the Land Bill. or at
least showed no readiness to drop it, though it was disliked
on every side. And there is no doubt that his obstinacy
on these points lost him votes. There were Liberal voters
also chagrined with the Irish for having so recently allied
themselves with Tories and attacked the Liberals. And there
were Liberal voters who thought that Home Rule was sprung
upon them, who had not therefore time to understand the
question, and who were not prepared to vote for it till they
did. It was these timid and unconvinced voters who lost
the election, for Mr. Gladstone was defeated chiefly by
Liberals who abstained from voting. N or was the defeat
very decisive if we regard the number of votes polled rather
than the number of members returned. In the constituencies
contested the Unionist vote was 1.3 r6,327, the Liberal
1,238,342, a difference of less than 80,000 out of more
than 2,500,000 votes polled. Had the electoral system
provided for proportional representation, the number of
Unionists returned for these seats would be 209 against
198 Home Rulers, whereas the actual figures were 256
Union ists to I 5 I on the opposite side. I n I reland the
numbers remained the same. Two of the ablest of the
Irish party were defeated-1\1r. Healy in South Derry, and
IVlr. O'Brien for South Tyrone-but these losses were counter-
balanced by the return of Mr. Justin IVlacCarthy for the City
üf Derry and of Mr. Sexton for West Belfast. \Vhen the
last returns had come in the Tories numbered 3 16, the
Liberal Unionists ï 4, thus giving a majority of I 10 against
Home Rule. 11r. Chamberlain's adherents were not more
THE TORIES AGAIN IN OFFICE
345
than 12, the remainder of the Liberal Unionists following
the lead of Lord Hartington. 1
lr. Parnell urged the defeated 1\iinisters to cling to office
on the ground that though Home Rule had been defeated,
Liberalism rather than Conservatism had triumphed. But
when Parliament met it was certain that an ach.erse vote on
the Irish question would be taken, and then Ministers would
have to go. And further, for the Home Rulers to ding- to
office, after having appealed to the country on a definite policy,
and having been defeated, would be unprecedented. 2 Resigna-
tion was therefore resolved on, and when Parliament met in
August, Lord Salisbury was again Premier; Sir 1\1. Hicks-
Beach, Chief Secretary for Ireland ; Lord Londonderry, Lord-
Lieutenant; Lord Randolph Churchill, Chancellor of the
Exchequer and Leader of the House of Commons. Lord
Salisbury had urged Hartington to form a Ministryexdusively
of Liberal Unionists, or partly of Liberal Unionists and partly
of Tories, and in either case had promised to support him.
But the \Vhig Leader thought he could best defeat Home
Rule by remaining out of office, and Mr. Chamberlain agreed
with him, and was content that henceforth Lord Hartington
.,hould be his leader. a This was a strange turn of events,
remembering that but a shol t time before 1\lr. Chamberlain had
called Lord Hartington Rip Van \Vinkle, and Sir Stafford
orthcote, the Conservative leader, had called 1\ir. Chamberlain
Jack Cade.
\Vhat was to be the Irish policy of the new Government?
It could not be Coercion in face of the denunciation of Coercion
by so many Unionist candidates during the elections. It could
not be Land Purchase in face of the attacks made on :\1r.
Gladstone's Bill. It was not likely to be any large scheme of
local government, for Lord Hartington had as little zeal in
that direction as the most reactionary Tory. And it soon
1 Annual Register, p. 255; O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 157; Morley's
Cladstone, ii. 585-6 ; O'Connor's Parnellllfovemmt, p. 28 7.
2 1\lorley, ii. 5 8 7.
3 Life of Churchill, ii. 124-6; Jeyes' Chamberlain, i. 235-6; A1ll/ual
Register, p. 257.
34 6
THE UNIOI':IST GOVER
l\IEL\T
appeared that there was to be no measure of Land Reform.
Irish affairs were then in a critical condition. So far only
9 0 ,000 agricultural tenants had been able to go into the Land
Courts to avail themselves of the Act of 1881. Nearly as
many more, mostly in arrears and therefore at the landlords'
mercy, had settled out of Court, and at much less reduction
than they would have obtained had they gone into Court.
The remainder, numbering nearly 500,000, were in the same
position as if the Act of 188 I had never been passed. 1 The
prices of agricultural produce had recently fallen from 3 0
to 40 per cent, and a political economist of great weight,
Sir James Caird, had declared publicly that from more than
five-sixths of the Irish agriculturist holdings all economic rent
had for the present disappeared. 2 In these circumstances
Mr. Parnell, in September, introduced an amending Land Bill,
prO\"iding that leaseholders, specially excluded from the Act of
188 I, should now be admitted to its benefits; that judicial
rents fixed before 1885 should be revised in the Land Courts.
and that all evictions and ejectment processes should be stayed
on payment of half the rent and arrears due, and until the
inability of the tenant to pay was investigated in the Courts.
l\Ir. Gladstone and the bulk of the Liberals supported the Bill.
But the Government opposed it, denying 1fr. Parnell's figures,
and sceptical as to any fall in prices; and the Chief Secretary
described Mr. Parnell's Bill as II an act of gr05s injustice and
confiscation to the landlords of Ireland." 3 He could not, how-
ever, deny that the Irish tenants were not paying their rents,
nor that the landlords were evicting them; nor could he deny
that Kerry was overrun with l\loonlighters and stained by
crime, and that there was danger of other counties in a short
time being similarly disturbed. All the Government did was
to appoint a commission, under Lord Cowper as chairman, to
inquire into the working of the Irish Land Acts, and another
to inquire into the question of Irish industrial development, and
further to promise Ireland a measure of local government
1 T. M. Healy in Contemþorary Re1'Ù''W, January J 887.
2 Allllltal Rc,l{islcr, pp. 135-7. 3 Ibid. 27 8 - 8 3.
TIlE TORIES Aì\D IRELAKD
30
similar to those which were to be given to England and
Scotland. Lord Randolph Churchill declared that in dealing
with the three countries in this matter the Government policy
was to be marked by " equality, similarity and simultaneity." 1
The Government were determined, above all, to maintain the
Union and resist Home Rule, and Sir R. Hamilton, the Home
Rule Under-Secretary for Ireland, was removed from his
position. 2 At the same time, anxious to stay evictions and
prevent a recrudescence of agrarian agitation, the Government
sent General Buller to Kerry. He was armed with extra-
ordinary powers, and was soon interviewing Moonlighters and
evicted tenants, and threatening landlords who were unreason-
able and wanted to evict that they could not rely on having the
forces of the Crown. This was called pressure within the law.
But men like the Marquis of Clanricarde refused to submit to
any such pressure, and the Government, charged with claiming
a power of dispensing from the law, repudiated making any
such claim, and henceforth Clanricarde and his fellow-landlords
had police and military placed at their disposal. s
This was the state of things in October, but it was sure to
be worse when the November rents became due, for then there
would be more rents to be paid and more tenants unable to
pay. Still :Vlr. Parnell was for peace and patience. At the
worst Lord Cowper's Commission would soon report, and it,>
report could not be ignored by the Government. 1\1r. Parnell
had set his heart on getting Home Rule. Scotland by three
to two had declared for it, \Vales by five to one, and England,
he believed, would come round in time. But if agitation and
outrage commenced in Ireland, the Liberals would be em-
barrassed, the Liberal Unionists repelled, and in England the
cry for Home Rule would be drowned in the much louder cry
for Coercion. Parnell wanted the Unionists to proceed to
legislation. Lord Randolph Churchill's programme of agri-
cultural allotments and reduction of railway rates and taxation
would be sure to irritate the old-fashioned Tories; his ideas on
1 Churchill's Life, ii. 138-40, 163-5.
2 A1111ual R(:gi.r/t'r, p. 293. S ibid. 294, 3 IT.
34 8
THE UNIONIST GOYER:Kl\IENT
local government were much nearer the ideas of Mr. Chamberlain
than those of Lord Hartington or Lord Salisbury, and 1\lr.
Parnell's hopes were that in these legislative proposals lay the
germs of serious differences, and that probably the Union of
the Unionists would soon be dissolved. But some of 1\1r.
Parnell's chief lieutenants were not willing to be patient. They
were not willing to wait on the convenience of a Unionist
Government, and stand aside while Irish tenants were driven
from their homes. Nor indeed did they wish that the Unionists
could claim the credit of settling the Irish Land question. And
hence, in the end of October, the "Plan of Campaign" was
formulated. Mr. Harrington, the Secretary of the National
League and member for \Vestmeath, was its author; its two
chief advocates were Messrs. Dillon and O'Brien. l
It was not a No-Rent movement, nor was it intended to be
put in force when landlords were reasonable and tenants able
to pay. But when the rents were obviously too high, and such
as could not be paid in full, the tenants adopting the Plan were
to meet and agree on the reduction they were to demand from
their landlord. If he refused their demand they paid him
nothing, elected a managing committee from among them-
selves-the priest being a member if willing to act-paid the
reduced rent to this committee, and then fought the landlord
with the money thus lodged. This \\ as called the Estate Fund,
and was to be supplemented by grants from the 1\ ational
League Funds. No tenant adopting the Plan was to make
terms with the landlord, except with the consent of his feIlows,
nor hold any communication with him, and each individual
should always abide by the decision of the majority. Campaign
tenants who were evicted were to be supported out of the
Estate Fund. In addition to this, every obstacle was to be
thrown in the way of evicting landlords. No evicted farm was
to be taken, no stock seized for rent to be purchased, and if in
asserting his legal rights the landlord broke the law, he was to
be brought into Court to answer for his misdeeds. 2
1 Healy, vVhy Ireland is 110t Free, p. 18.
2 A nnt/al Register, pp. 3 I 2- 15.
THE PLAS OF CA:\IP.\IGN
349
Mr. Parnell was th;::n scriously unwell-so unwcll that
when Mr. O'Brien went to London to consult him he was
unable to see him. He subsequently complained that he had
not been consulted, and it was indeed strange that the party,
as a whole, had not been taken into counsel before so grave a
step was taken. From the beginning 1\1r. Parnell was opposed
to the Plan. For one thing, he considered it a violation of the
Kilmainham Treaty, under which, on obtaining Liberal support,
he was to slow down the agitation. l In public, 1\'lr. Morley
thought it best to express no opinion, but in private he told
:\lr. Parnell that the effect of the Plan in England was" wholly
bad." 2 1\lr. Gladstone's opinion coincided with that of lVIr.
:i\Iorley, but he blamed the Government even more than he
blamed .Messrs. Dillon anù O'Brien. 3 1\lr. Davitt, at the
solicitation of 1\Ir. Parnell, had nothing to do with the Plan,
and evidently did not approve of it. 4 As for the Tories and
Liberal Unionists, they fiercely assailed it and its authors;
h.)wever much they might differ on other subjects, on this they
were at one. But while the Plan haù, from the Irish point of
view, the unfortunate effect of closing the Unionist ranks, it
cannot be denied that it proved a powerful weapon on the
tenants' side, and had in the great majority of cases in which
it wac; adopted the effect of bringing the landlords to reason.
And it is certain also that many exacting landlords, fearing
the Pldn might be adopted by their tenants, hauled down their
flag of defiance. The Government, finding thcir landlord
friends were heing worsted and their enemies triumphant,
struck back, and in December 1\1essrs. Dillon and O'Brien
were prosecuted. 1\lr. Dillon gave bail, but continued his
Campaign operations. 5 In the new year as in the old the fight
went on; the landlords shrieked for Coercion; the cry was
taken up in England, and grew in volume; and when Parlia-
ment opened in February, the Queen's Speech announced that
a Coercion Bill would be introduced.
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 170-74.
2 A ll1llla! Register, p. 297; Life of Gladstone, ii. 6 I O.
3 J ife of Gladstone, ii. 6 I 1-12. 4 Fall of Feudalism, pp. 514-20.
5 A1l1l1lal Register, p. 3 I 9.
35 0
THE UNIONIST GOVERNMENT
But meanwhile the Unionist Government had passed
through a severe ordeal. In the last days of the year, without
consultation with his political or personal friends, Lord
Randolph Churchill resigned his position as Chancellor of the
Exchequer. He found fault with the Army and N'a'T
estimates; but the fact was he was out of touch with his
colleagues on many matters of policy, being much more of a
Radical than a Tory. By sheer audacity and force of
character he had led his party far towards Liberal reforms,
and had no doubt they would continue to submit themselves
to his guidance. He believed himself necessary to the life of
the Government, and tendered his resignation, confident that
it would not be accepted and that henceforth his position
would be stronger than ever. But Lord Salisbury and his
colleagues had had enough of Liberal programmes, and had
long enough submitted to a Radical in the garb of a Tory.
1\luch, therefore, to Lord Randolph's astonishment, Lord
Salisbury accepted his resignation. l\h. Goschen from the
Liberal- Unionist side became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and
1\1r. \V. H. Smith became Leader of the House of Commons. l
To Mr. Chamberlain this turn of affairs was not welcome.
A Unionist Government without Lord Randolph Churchill, he
thought, was not likely to hold together, and at best would be
more Tory than Liberal, and therefore less deserving of his
support. In this frame of mind he spoke at Birmingham,
eulogizing the retiring Minister, and at the same time expressing
his own anxiety for the reunion of the Liberal party. He
could not see why the divided Liberals should continue their
quarrels. 1\1r. Gladstone had formally abandoned his Irish
Land Purchase Bill, which had prm'ed a stumbling-block to
many; 2 and as for himself, he fully agreed with his late
colleagues as to the urgency of English and Scotch reforms.
He was, further, in favour of a large measure of local govern-
ment for Ireland, and of settling the Irish Land question without,
however, burdening the British taxpayer, and he urged that
1 A/lillhrl Ri'gistcr, pp. 304-5 ; Churchill's Life, ii. 23 0 -4 0 , 43-48.
Ali/lLl.:! Regis/L'r, pp. 272-4.
THE ROUND TABLE CONFERENCE
35 1
Home Rule might wait a little, at least until it was better
understood. Nor could he see why a few representative
Liberals from both sides, sitting round a table in friendly
conference, could not bridge over the differences which kept
them asunder.
One of the most prominent and influential of the Radical
members, l\1r. Labouchere, scoffed at 11r. Chamberlain's
overtures as worthless and insincere. 1 But l\Ir. Gladstone
thought them worth considering, and in January what came
_ to be called The Round Table Conference held its first
sitting at the house of Sir \Villiam Harcourt. 11r. Chamberlain
and Sir George (lately Mr.) Tre\'elyan were on one side, Sir
\Villiam Harcourt and 111'. l\lorley on the other, with Lord
Herschell, the late Liberal Lord Chancellor, in the chair.
Lord Hartington was not represented, nor did he approve of
the Conference at all. Several meetings were held, much good
feeling displayed, many difficulties got over, many points of
argument arrived at, and it seemed as if warring brothers were
to lay their enmities aside and clasp hands in unity and peace.
But suddenly and unexpectedly 1\lr. Chamberlain wrote an
article in a Baptist newspaper attacking the Irish members of
Parliament. He protested against the Scotch crofter, the
English agricultural labourer, and the Welsh Dissenter being
neglected for three millions of disloyal Irishmen, and because
eighty delegates representing the policy and receiving the pay
of the Chicago Convention wcre determined to obstruct all
business until their demands had been conceded. 2 This was
war rather than peace, and the Conference broke up never to
meet again. A few months later Sir George Trevelyan
abandoned Unionism and came back to his old friends. But
Mr. Chamberlain drifted further and further away from
Liberalism, and when the Unionists brought in a Coercion
Bill for Ireland he was found among its supporters and its
champions.
It was introduced in the end of l\larch. Earlier in the
month Sir 1\1. IIicks- Beach had resigned the office of Chief
1 Anllual Rc:;istcr, pp. 304-5. 2
lorley's Gladstone, ii. 607-8.
35 2
THE UNIONIST GOYERNMENT
Secretary owing to ill-health. His place was taken by Mr.
Arthur Balfour, nephew of Lord Salisbury, and it \\"as the new
Chief Secretary who took charge of the Coercion Bill. IVl1-.
Balfour had been a member of the Fourth Party, and as such
haù first come into notice. I Ie was a young man, scholarly,.
cultured, an author, a philosopher, somewhat of a sceptic, of
agreeable manners and fine literary tastes. He was not the
stamp of man whom the public would expect to play success-
fully the rôle of a militant politician. But ,Mr. Balfour soon
showed uncxpected capacity for political work. His cOUlage,.
his resource, his readiness of reply, the quickness with which
he seized upon the weak points in his opponents' case, the skill
with \\"hich he extricated himself out of difficulties or defended
an untenable position, astonished both friend and foe. Yet
gredt as his powers were, they were
.everely taxed to defend
the Coercion Dill and ensure its passage through Parliament.
Since the Union it was the eighty-seventh Cocrcion Bill, and
Mr. Gladstone described it as the worst of them all. Like its
predecessors, it gave the Lord-Lieutenant power to proclaim
associations, to suppress newspapers, to disperse meetings by
force, to quartcr extra police in proclaimcd districts at the
expense of the inhabitants. But, in addition, it enormously
increased the summary jurisdiction of resident magistrates; it
provided for the arrest of accused persons in England, and for
their trial in London if necessary; and the Act was to be
perpetual. It required no small courage to carry such a
measure in face of such critics as the Irish Party and 1\lr.
Gladstone, or to justify it to Unionist members who but twelve
months before had indignantly repudiated Coercion as an
alternative to Home Rule. l But 1\1r. Balfour undertook the
task. Relying on the returns made by the Irish Constabulary,
the charges of Irish judges at Assizes, on strong articles in
Nationalist newspapers, on the violent speeches of irresponsible
orators, he drcw a lurid picture of Ireland. Terror of the
National League was everywhere. The law of the land was
paralyzcd. Mcn were afraid to give cviùencc in Law Courts,.
1 Parnell ,1f07/clIlent, pp. :286-7.
BALFOUR'S COERCIO
BILL
353
afraid to act as jurors, afraid to give a verdict according to
their oaths. Men were cruelly boycotted for doing what the
law allowed; nearly 1000 persons were under police protection;
and all this was done by the National League and the
Nationalist Party, supported by dynamite and dagger and
American gold. l
Asked for particulars as to persons under the ban of the
National League, Mr. Balfour was not communicative, taking
shelter under the plea of official secrecy. \Vhen he did give
particulars he was frequently exposed. He described how a
Catholic farmer named Clarke, who had obtained money under
false pretences, had escaped conviction at the hands of a jury
of Catholic farmers, though the cas"::: was proved against him.
But the fact was that Clarke was neither a Catholic nor a
farmer. He described how a man named Hogan, accused of
an outrage on a girl, had been similarly acquitted. But it \Vas
found that the girl herself was a consenting party, and there-
fore the jury refused to convict. A third case was that of a
,Moonlighter from Kerry, also acquitted. But Mr. Harrington,
who had acted as counsel in the case, was able to say that the
judge disbelieved the charge and directed the acquittal of the
prisoner. 1\lr. Balfour gave the names of two branches of the
League which had passed resolutions calling for the boycotting
of all those who refused to join the League. From 1\1r.
Parnell and from :1\1r. Harrington came the reply that one of
the branches had been dissolved by the Central Branch, and in
the other case the local committee had been called on to
resign. As to the charges of judges, no one who knew
anything about Ireland attached any importance to them.
Promotion to the Irish bench comes as a reward for political
services, and the promoted lawyer is as much a partisan on the
bench as he had been at the Bar. 2
These exposures were damaging, and so also was the
report of Lord Cowper's Commission, which found that there
had been a considerable fall in agricultural prices. 3 Sir
1 Annual Register, pp. 88-93. 2 Parnell Jfove11lent, pp. 29 1 -4.
3 Annual Re,f;lster, p. 94.
VOL. In
93
354
THE U
IONIST GOVERN
IENT
Redvers Buller, who gave evidence, swore that in Ireland the
law was on the side of the rich. Further, it was notorious
that wherever the Plan of Campaign had been adopted there
was no agrarian crime; and all through the winter and spring
Sir 11. Hicks - Beach had been bringing pressure to bear on
landlords. Yet the arguments founded on all these facts, even
when put forth with all the authority and eloquence of Mr.
Gladstone, failed to make any impression on the Unionists.
They swallowed the pledges they had made the previous year
against Coercion and voted for the closure, so as to facilitate
the passage of Mr. Balfour's Bill. Liberals and Irish opposed
the measure with determination; but the unsparing use of the
closure, backed up by obedient majorities, maùe all opposition
futile, and at last Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Parnell and their
followers left the House of Commons. The Bill was then
rushed through, and in the end of July became law. 1
Many Unionists declared that theycould not support Coercion
if a Land Bill were not also introduced; and to satisfy these,
and carry out the recommendations of Lord Cowper's Com-
mission, a Land Bill was introduced, and in August be-
came law. Under pressure from 11r. Chamberlain and Lord
Randolph Churchill, it was improved in its passage through the
House of Commons, and in its final shape it admitted lease-
holders to the benefits of the 188 I Land Act, and provided
for a revision of judicial rents. Had all this been done twelve
months before, Mr. Parnell would have been satisfied, and there
would have been no Plan of Campaign, and need have been
no Coercion Act. But concessions to Ireland ha\-e always
been too late, and this one, accompanied by a drastic Coercion
Act, was received with no gratitude in Ireland.
The year 1887 was a year of Jubilee in England. The
Queen was then fifty years on her throne. The vast extent of
territory which she inherited had been still further increased
during her reign. In Australia and in America were self-
governing and prosperous colonies, their institutions modelled
on those of England, their loyalty to her strengthened by the
I Annual Register, pp. 96-99, 105, 109 tI !i('q
THE QUEEN'S JUBILEE
355
freedom which they enjoyed. A mighty and ever-growing
empire in Africa, and in Asia the teeming millions of India,
alike owned England's sway. Her army scattered over the
earth manned her fortresses, her navy ruled the seas, and in
every trading port ships were found with the English flag at
their mast-heads. Not often in human history were there such
scene
as were presented in the streets of London and in
vVestminster Abbey on the 2 I st of June. Seated in the famous
church to give thanks to God for the length of her reign, the
Queen was surrounded by a crowd of princes of her own blood.
Kings had come from afar to do her honour, from the various
countries of Europe, from Persia and China and Japan; dusky
princes there were from India arrayed in glittering jewels,
o:ncers in varied uniforms, judges in scarlet and ermine,
ambassadors in brilliant attire, peers in their robes, ladies with
fla
hing diamonds, all these were gathered together. The houses
and streets along the route from Buckingham Palace were a
m:lSS of decorations; and when darkness came, the illuminations
everywhere turned night into day in this the richest capital of
the universe. And in great cities far away the fêtes and gaiety
of London were imitated. 1 Ireland alone took no part in
these celebrations, but, sullen and discontented, kept sorrowfully
apart. Her prosperity had not grown with the prosperity of
England; her liberties had not been extended like those of so
many British Colonies; a Coercion Act was then passing
through Parliament giving to Ireland a new supply of scourges
and chains; and Ireland had not therefore any Jubilee offering
to make but her poverty and her tears.
In August the Irish National League was proclaimed under
the new Coercion Act, and the struggle between :1\1r. Balfour
and the Irish leaders began. It was long and bitter. Every
National League branch in the country was forthwith attacked.
Its meetings were broken up by police, its rooms or offices
invaded, its papers and books seized, and the newspapers which
published its resolutions were prosecuted and their editors
1 Annual Register, pr. J 38-42; l\facCarthy's History of GlIr Own
Times, iii. 333-6; Timts Report.
35 6
THE U:\IONIST GOVEl{N
lENT
imprisoned. Resident magistrates filled with landlord pI ejudice
inflicted severe sentences on those who attended public meetings;
nor was any distinction made between them and ordinary
prisoners; and members of Parliament and newspaper editors
were obliged to mix with thieves, to wear the same dress and
do the same work and eat the same food. Police and military
were drafted round the country at great public expense, and
such was the reckless audacity of some of their officers that a
certain Captain Plunkett ordered his men "not to hesitate to
shoot." The result "vas many collisions bet""een people and
police, and consequent loss of life. At Y oughal a young man
was stabbed to drath by a policeman; at Fennoy the police beat
a man to death; at Tipperary a man was shot by a policeman
who was believed to be intoxicated; at Timolcague the police
fired on a crowd, killing a man; at Gweedore a police-inspector
was killed; and a head constable was killed in Clare.] A small
boy was imprisoned for smiling sarcastically at a policeman;
another for whistling U Harvey Duff"; a third for cheering for Mr.
Gladstone; and a little girl of twelve was sent to jail for being
one of a crowd of persons who obstructed the sheriff's officers
when seizing sheep in the interests of a neighbouring landlord. 2
At Mitchelstown events occurred \\ hich attracted world-
wide attention. A public meeting consisting of several
thousands was held in the Square of the town on the 9th of
September 1887, and was addressed by several members of
Parliament, English as well as Irish. 1\1 r. DilJon was among
the latter. A Government reporter, under police protection,
was sent to take down the speeches, and had he come in due
time all would have been weB, for there had hitherto been no
objection to the presence of such a reporter. But he came
when the meeting was in progress, accompanied by about
twenty policemen, who attemped to force a passage through
the dense crowd. This being found impossible, the reporter
retired, and soon reappeared accompanied by a greatly increased
force of police. Confident in their strength and in their arms)
these police handled the crowd roughly; the crowd retorted
1 Allllual Register, p. 200. 2 Davitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. 523- 6 .
THE COERCION STRUGGLE IN IRELAND
357
with their sticks; the police fled to the barracks, and no sooner
had they got within shelter than they opened fire on the people,
killing three men. The enraged thousands rushed on the
barracks and would have wrecked it, and probably sacrificed
the lives of the police, had not 1\'1r. Dillon and the priests
present intervened. A coroner's inquest returned a verdict of
wilful murder against the county inspector and three of the
policemen; and from the evidence given, it was quite plain
that the police were entirely to blame. But no action was
taken by the Government. In England 1\'Ir. Gladstone attacked
bdth police and Government with vigour. 1\'Ir. Balfour replied
with sneers and sarcasm, and emphatically denied that the
police were in any way to blame. 1
This indeed was his usual custom. He could give no
credit for honesty or good intentions to his opponents; they
w
rc law-breakers and must be put down. On the other hand,
no Government official, high or low, could do wrong. The
judge who, forgetting the ermine he wore, spoke like a Crown
prosecutor was impartial. The magistrate who inflicted a
savage sentence on a member of Parliament was merely doing
his duty. The police-officer who gave a reckless order resulting
in riot and bloodshed was a conscientious official. The police-
man who used his baton freely on the heads of inoffensive
people was zealous to do his work, and deserved the favourable
notice of his superior officers. Finally, the Attorney-General,
a Catholic himself, who refused to believe Catholics on their
oaths, and allowed none to serve on juries, was in high favour
with Mr. Balfour. Bishops, priests, and representative laymen
united in protesting against this insult done to their religion,
but they protested in vain. 2 Jury-packing continued, and the
Attorney-General in question, whose name was Peter O'Bricn,
was nicknamed in Nationalist newspapers" Peter the Packer."
NIr. Balfour retorted by praising 1\'1r. O'Brien, and when a
vacancy arose Qn the judicial bench, the unpopular law officer
became Lord Chief Justice of Ireland.
1 Annual Register, pp. 19 8 - 200 .
2 Dr. Counsel's Pamþhlet on .fury-þacking. Dublin, 1887.
35 8
THE UNIONIST GOVERNMENT
Yet this unsparing use of Coercion and the unstinted praise
of all its most unscrupulous agents did not still the Irish storm;
and Mr. Balfour, fceling baffled and worsted in the struggle,
besought the aid of His Holiness the Pope. Two priests
had already been imprisoned, Canon Kcllcr of Y oughal and
Father Ryan of Tipperary. Others attended public meetings
and madc speeches, and were in sympathy \\Tith the National
League, and in some cases with thc Plan of Campaign.
Shocked at such conduct, the British Go\"crnment askcd the
Pope to interfere and compel these Christian ministers to desist
from encouraging disorder and il1egality. But the Popc, not
willing to act precipitately, dcspatched a high ccclesiastic-
Monsignor Persico-to Ireland to inquire on the spot. From
the first Monsignor Persico was regarded by the Irish
Nationalists with distrust. The distrust was deepencd when
he was seen visiting the houses of Catholics who were landlords
and Unionists. And when in April 1888 a Papal Rescript
was published condcmning the Plan of Campaign and boy-
cotting, there was strong language used at Irish public meetings
against Pope and Papal Envoy. The days of O'Connell and
the V cto wcre recalled. Mr. Parnell described the Rescript as
an attempt by the Pope to control the political situation in
Ireland by right of his supreme spiritual authority. The Irish
Catholic members of Parliament, while freely acknowledging
the Pope's right to their obedience in spiritual matters, repudi-
ateù him as a political guide. A nd they pointed out the
insufficiency of the reasons given in the Rescript. I twas
declared that tenants entered freely into contracts with their
landlords; that the Land Courts were open to them; that
funds collected under the Plan of Campaign had been extorted
from the tenants; that boycotting was against charity and
justice. Mr. Dillon and others answered that it was notorious
that contracts between landlords and tenants were not free, but
that tenants were at the landlords' mercy; that Courts manned
by landlords and agents were not impartial tribunals, and in
any case were useless to tenants burdened with arrears;
that in no case had the Plan been forced on tenants; and if
PAPAL RESCRIPT AGAINST THE PLAN OF CAMPAIGN 359
boycotting and intimidation were not unknown in the Irish
agrarian movement, it was the only way in which poverty-
stricken tenants could defend themselves. What irritated the
Irish Catholics most was that the Pope seemed to ha\"e
ignored the information obtained from the Irish Bishops. And
it annoyed them to see the Orange orators, who so often cursed
the Pope, now praise him and point the finger of scorn at
these wicked Catholic politicians who received and deserved
the censure of the Head of their Church. 1
To Monsignor Persico grave injustice was done. His
private letters have since been made public, and show him to
have had profound admiration for the Irish Catholics, and to
have been completely in sympathy with Irish National aspira-
tions; and he felt pained that he should be considered an
enemy to Ireland. 2 Not then by him, but probably by some
high-placed Englishman-speaking in the name of his Govern-
ment-had Ireland been attacked. The Pope had great admira-
tion for England, whose fair-play towards Catholics was in such
striking contrast to that of the so-called Catholic Government
of France. He was an old diplomatist and an able one, and if
he could accede to the wishes of the British representatives, it
would surely be of service to the millions of Catholics scattered
throughout the British Empire. And he felt he could d0 this
without injury to Ireland, for it was not the Irish National
movement but its excesses he condemned. Nor could it be
denied that in isolated cases intimidation and boycotting had
been needlessly used. Ev
n as a means of bringing about
reform, it is at least doubtful if the Plan of Campaign was the
best weapon that could be devised. A plan under which the
tenants would contribute to an insurance fund, enabling them
to fight the landlords and sustain the evicted, and expose to
the world the iniquities of landlordism, would have probably
succeeded as well; and such a plan would have broken no law
and invited no moral reprobation. But the Plan of Campaign,
initiated by individuals and not by the :t\ational Party, could
1 Annual Rt'gister, pp. 235- 6 .
2 Letters published in United Irishman.
3 60
TIlE UNIO
IST GOVERNMENT
not attain and did not attain the strength of a K ational move-
ment, and was publicJy disavowed by Mr. ParnelJ.l It brought
on the Jubilee Coercion Act, embarrassed Mr. Gladstone and
the English Liberals, and cemented the Union of his political
opponents. Caused by the refusal of a Tory Government to
do justice in 1886, it was in part justified by the Land Act of
the following year. But nothing could excuse the folly of
putting it in force, in the case of a prosperous town, \\.ith the
consequent ruin which followed. 2 Certainly the Plan had its
victories, and in 1888 its terms wcre accepted on no less than
thirty-seven estates; which means that the landlords had been
reduced to reason and the tenants had been protected from
injustice. 3 These victories were duly published. But the defeats
Ðf the Plan were also apparent; in the imprisonment of so many
members of Parliament and others; in the number of eyictcd
tenants who for twenty years weighed like lead on the Irish
National movement; in the brokcn hearts of so many who died
in po\'erty and exile; in the ruined houses of Woodford and
Luggacurran and in the grass-grown streets of Tipperary.
In the midst of much talk about the Plan of Campaign,
álnd of its good and evil effccts, the Coercion struggle in Ire-
land went steadily on. Newspapers ".cre suppressed, editors
imprisoned, meetings proclaimed, meetings held in spite of
proclamations, conflicts between people and police, members of
Parliament of such standing and character as Messrs. Dillon,
O'Brien and T. D. Sullivan thrown into jaiV and a well-
known and much-respected Munsterman, 1\1r. John 1\1andeville,
tortured in prison until he died. 5 One result of all this was
that the Liberals and Irish Nationalists came closer together.
Prominent English politicians like Lord Ripon and 1\lr. l\lorley
came to I reland and made speeches; 1\1 r. Labouchere \\ as
present at lVlitchelstown when the three men were shot by the
police; 1\lr. Shaw Lefevre, :l\1.P., visited \Voodford; Mr. Blunt
1 Annual Register, I 888, pp. 109- I O.
2 Davitt, pp. 521-2. 3 Annual Register, p. 235.
4 Ibid., 1887, p. 201 ; T. D. Sullivan's Recollcc.io1tS of Troubled Times
in Irish Politics, pp. 236-4 t.
5 Annual Register, 1888, pp. 23 8 -9.
CO
TI
ULD COERCION
3 61
spent two months in an Irish prison; and lVIr. Conybeare,
M.P., three months. Deputations from Liberal Associations
saw evictions and Coercion trials; and English reporters wrote
in the newspapers, and from personal knowledge, of the grinding
injustice of Irish landlords and of the miseries of the Irish
poor. N or was any speaker at English elections listened to
with greater respect than Irish members of Parliament, and
none received a heartier greeting. The arguments of Lord
HJ.rtin6'ton and IV1r. Goschen, IVIr. Chamberlain and l\lr.
Balfo!lr were answered by such able men as Sir \Villiam
Harcourt, :Mr. lVIorley and Sir George Trevelyan. But 1\lr.
Gladstone was active and effective above them alL He
watched the debates in Parliament, he wrote articles for
reviews, he received deputations, he spoke to thousands from
platforms, and everywhere Ireland was his theme. He dwelt
with special empha"is on the character of lVIr. Balfour's coercion
regIme. He denounced the conduct of the police and military
at Ennis; 1 and he bade his audience remember Mitchelstown ; 2
and the cry was taken up and re-echoed from a hundred
platforms. He complained that within little more than a year
fro:n the passing of the Coercion Act, 2 lout of the 85 Irish
Nationalist members had been imprisoned, and that they had
been treated like felons-" a shameful, an inhuman, a brutal
proceeding." 3 He spoke with scathing severity of the way in
which Mr. l\Iandeville had been done to death, and boldly
asserted that the Irish prisons were no better than those of
Naples in the days of King Bomba. 4
To all these charges lVIr. Balfour made no serious reply;
all he could say was that 1\1:r. Gladstone himself had passed
Coercion Acts, and that the Jubilee Coercion Act was not
more severe. 5 His speeches were those of a sophist rather
than of a statesman. He had no anxiety' to remove the
causes of Irish discontent, no apology for all his severity, no
1 Annual Register, 1887, pp. 169-70. 2 Ibid., 1887, pp. 159- 6 1.
3 Ibid., 1888, pp. 155, 15 8 .
4 Ibid., 1888, pp. 155-60,163; Morley, ii. 618- 2 3_
.5 A1lJlual Registt?r, 1887, pp. 174-5, 185-6; 1888, pp. 119- 22 .
3 62
THE U::\IO
IST GOVER
;\lENT
word of censure for over-zealous subordinates, no expression of
regret for the death of :Mr. Mandeville. He appeared to be
satisfieù, and to think his work done if in Parliament or on the
platform he gained over lVIr. Gladstone some barren dialectical
victory. In the session of 1888 his Government extended the
Ashbourne Act by voting an additional sum of .{ 5,000,000 ;
but beyond this nothing was to be done. Anti-Irish prejudice
in England was of ancient growth and not easily removed, but
IV'lr. Balfour's speeches were not satisfying the public, and by
the end of 1888 the Unionists had begun to lose ground.
Public opinion was still further influenced by events which
occurred early in the new year; and from the end of 1889 Mr.
Gladstone could claim, with truth, that he had with him the
flowing tide.
A t the election of I 886 a recently formed Association p
the Irish Loyal and Patriotic Union, had been especially
active. Freely sustained by wealth and privilege on both
sides of the Channel, by class and the dependents of class p
it appealed to bigotry and race hatred, to ascendancy and
distrust of the people, and had for its main end and object
to defeat 1\lr. Gladstone's policy of Home Rule. Its Secretary
was a young Irish barrister named Houston, \\"ho certainly
showed no lack of zeal in the work set him to do. During
the year 1886, from the printing press under his control, he
had published and circulated over eleven millions of leaHets.
Most of these were issued at election times. There were also
pamphlets, "murder maps," showing the connexion between
the Land League and National League and crimes of the
worst kind; extracts from Nationalist speeches; and there were
100,000 wall-posters issued. 1 Mr. Houston had also sent
fifty-five speakers to England and Wales. They were not
scrupulous as to the statements they made, and freely attacked
the Irish members of Parliament as they grossly exaggerated
every outrage in Ireland, and painted in vivid colours the
sufferings of loyal and law-abiding Irishmen at the hands of
lawless leagues. In this work of defamation NIr. Houston
1 Davitt's Fall 0/ Fetldalism, pp. 500-501.
HOUSTON AND PIGOTT
3 6 3
found a zealous co-operator in the London Times. I ts great
and far-reaching influence, its enormous literary capacity had
ever been thrown into the scale against Ireland. It had
attacked O'Connell, it had attacked John MacHale, it had
called the Irish priests surpliced ruffians, it had gloated over
the decimation of the Irish masses by famine and emigration,
and now it assailed Parnell and the movement with which
he was identified with a vigour and venom which recalled
the days of O'Connell. l
Yet the joint efforts of the Irish Loyal and Patriotic
Union-the I.L.P.U. as it was called for brevity-and the
Times were not so successful at the General Elections of 1886
as they would have wished. The shifting of 100,000 votes
would have meant a great Home Rule victory instead of a
great defeat. Time was on the side of Mr. Gladstone, and
it looked as if, under the magic of his eloquence, the next
election would reverse the verdict of its predecessor. But
if Parnell and his party could be shown to be criminals and
traitors, in league with assassins and approving of murder,
English prejudice would be roused, and all 1\1 r. Gladstone's
eloquence would be in vain. vVith this object Houston sought
the aid of a disreputable Irishman named Richard Pigott.
He was needy and unprincipled, the former proprietor of
two Fenian newspapers, the Irishman and The Flag of Inland.
Houston had been a Dublin reporter, and must have well
known of Pigott's lack of principle and money. Nor had
he any difficulty in getting him for the sum of ;[60 to write
in 1885 a pamphlet called Parnelli.sm Un 11lasked. 2 But
it contained nothing new-nothing but those vague charges
against the Irish leaders which had been already repeated
many times on Unionist platforms in Great Britain. \Vhat
was required was documentary evidence, such as would bring
home the guilt of crime to Mr. Parnell and his friends, and
blast their reputations before the world. If Pigott could get
such documents ac; these he would be well paid, and while
1 Russell's Sþeech at Parnell Commission, pp. 5- 8 .
2 Da7'lïfs Sþ!:ech at "Times" C011l111i c .<;ion, p. 331.
3 6 4
THE U
IO:NIST GOYERNME
T
searching for them he would have a guinea a day and
travelling expenses. To a man steeped in debt this was as
fooù to the hungry, as water to the man dying of thirst.
Pigott undertook to procure the required documents, and
for a time spent the time pleasantly travelling from Ireland
to Paris, from Paris to Lausanne, and putting up at the best
hotels as he travelled. In the end of 1886 he had his first
batch of letters, and in 1888 he had procured two further
batches. 1 Houston bought them all, and then sold them for
í, 2500 to the Times.
Relying on the first batch of letters, the Times then
proceeded to publish a series of articles in the spring of
1887 under the heading" Parnellism and Crime." On the
18th of April, the very day on which the second reading
of the Coercion Bill "'as to be taken, it went further, and
pu blished what became afterwards known as the Facsimile
Letter. I t was as follo\\ s :-
15.'5/ 81 .
DEAR SIR-lam not surprised at your friend's anger, but he
and you should know that to denounce the murders was the only
course open to us. To do that promptly was our best policy. But
you can tell him and all others concerned that though I regret the
accident to Lord F. Cavendish, I can't lefuse to admit that Burke
got no more than his deserts.- Yours very truly,
CHAS. S. PARNELL. 2
The date given was but nine days after the Phænix
Park murders, and the meaning was that 1\1 r. Parnell was
apologizing to some confederate for having denounced the
murders as he had done. If the letter was genuine, Parnell
was both a criminal and a hypocrite. In the Liberal camp
there was a feeling of dismay. It was well known that
Parnell did not love England; he had certainly met Fenians
and got subscriptions from them and had some old Fenians
in his party; and might it not be that the letter was genuine?
I t was, further, almost impossible that a great journal like the
Times, the first newspaper in the world, would be so duped.
1 Russell's Sþeecll, pp. 530-33. 2 Annual Register, pp. 99-100.
" PARNELLISM AND CRIME"
3 6 5
In the House of Commons Mr. Parnell, of course, denied
having written the letter or having any sympathy with the
contents. Many plainly disbelieved him. He was told to
take proceedings against the Times, but he knew the pre-
judice against him in London, and an adverse verdict
would have ruined himself and his movement; while if he
had the case tried in Dublin, a verdict in his favour would
be discounted in England. For these reasons he watched
and waited. And meantime Lord Salisbury described his
language of denial in the House of Commons as marked
by callousness, "perhaps even by tolerance of murder"; at
the same time denouncing :\Ir_ Gladstone for associating with
such a man. Lesser men adopted this truculent language.
The Times continued its articles on "Parnellism and Crime,"
and fresh letters were bought from Houston and duly
appeared. Thinking that he too was aggrieved by the
publication of the Times, Mr. F. H. O'Donnell, ex-lVLP.,
took an action for libel, but the Times pleaded that there
was no intention to asperse l\Ir. O'Donnell's character, and
a verdict for the defendants was obtained. I t was not,
however, said that the Irish members were guiltless, and in
point of fact the Times continued to assail them. 1
At last Mr. Parnell's patience was exhausted, and in July
1888 he demanded a Select Committee of the House of
Commons to examine into the authenticity of the Facsimile
Letter. Instead of this the Government passed an Act
constituting a Commission of three Judges to inquire into,
the "charges and allegations" contained in "Parnellism and
Crime." The judges appointed were political partisans; they
were to inquire into the whole Irish movement, unlimited as
to time; and to take into account what had been the character
of Irish government as causing discontent, and therefore pre-
disposing to crime, was placed beyond the scope of the
inquiry. Further, the whole matter of the Commission ".as
settled only after 1fr. \Valter, the proprietor of the Times,
1 Vide especiaIIy Times for the month of June; T. D. Sullivan, ppÞ
247-8, 251-4.
3 66
THE UNIONIST GOVERNl\IENT
and Iv1r. Smith, the Tory leader in the House of Commons,
had consulted together, and in the inquiry itself the A ttorney-
General was leading counsel for the Times. N or was there
any desire when the Commission opened its doors in September
to come to the letters bought from Pigott. On the contrary,
the object seemed to be to make fresh charges against the
Irish leader, to fish up from the turbid waters of the past
ten years everything that 'could be fished. As Sir Charles
Russell, 1\1r. Parnell's leading counsel, said, the design was
to draw up an indictment against a nation. l
Day after day an eJ1dless procession of witnesses appeared
-priests, peasants, bishops, secretaries of leagues, policemen,
magistrates, Crown officials, landlords with a grievance, agents
and bailiffs to support their landlords. Peasants came from
the hills of Kerry, from the wilds of Connemara, from the
mountains of Donegal; and shopkeepers came from the cities
and towns; policemen came to whisper into the ears of the
Times' lawyers secrets that they knew; police magistrates
to tell of the disreputable politicians who had been or were
still the curse of Ireland. The Times' solicitors were allowed
to scour the Irish jails and tempt prisoners with money and
promises of freedom; and an informer, who had bEen a
member of an American Secret Society, and at the same
time in the pay of the British Government, had his story
to tell.
Not till February 1889 did Pigott step on to the witness's
table, and then under the searching cross-examination of the
great Irish lawyer, the whole squalid conspiracy of defamation
was laid bare. Contradicting himself, perjuring himself at
every turn, sinking deeper and deeper as he proceeded, tIle
wretched agent of Houston, the beads of perspiration standing
on his forehead, was indeed a pitiable object. He was at last
run to earth. For two days he stood the awful torture, but
when his name was called on the third day he did not appear.
Confessing that he was the forger of all the letters sold to
Houston, he fled the country, and shot himself dead on the
1 Russell's Sþcech, p. 4.
PIGOTT'S FORGERIES
3 6 7
following day in a hotel at Madrid. His career was one
of infamy. As far back as 188 I he had got money from
Mr. Forster because he had attacked the Land League, and
at the same time asked money of Mr. Egan, the League
Treasurer, promising to defend the League; and he had
obtained money from Dr. \Valsh when President of Maynooth
College. After he had forged the Facsimile Letter, but before
it appeared, he wrote to Dr. \Valsh, then Archbishop of
Dublin, warning him that Parnell was to be attacked and
that he (Pigott) could save him. The wretched creature had
no sense of moral rectitude, and in everything he did he
'Sought for money. And yet Houston and the Times were
not less but perh:1.ps were even more to blame. Houston
got the letters, and blindly accepted Pigott's story that he had
got them from a man with a black bag, that the first batch
ame from one Murphy and the second batch from Tom Brown.
With a lawyer's astuteness, however, he destroyed all private
letters received from Pigott; and he gave the Times no
guarantee that the letters delivered to them were genuine.
The Times, however, had asked no questions, and had greedily
accepted the letters, paying for them the sum of .l2 500, so eager
were they to blast the character of their political opponents. l
For some months longer the inquiry lasted. Mr. Parnell
and many others were examined, and Sir Charles Russell made
a great speech lasting for seven days, speaking, as he said, not
only as an advocate, but also for the land of his birth. Then,
early in 1890, the Judges issued their report. They found
that the Irish leaders had not incited, approved of, or condoned
murder, nor consorted with Invincibles; but that they had not
'Sufficiently discountenanced disorder and outrage, and that they
-had even preached intimidation. As if, indeed, the British
Parliament had ever conceded anything to Ireland except as the
result of disorder and violence. 2 The more disreputable of the
Unionists professed to discover in these findings a damaging
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 197-234 ; l\lorley, ii. 638-50; Russell's Sþuch
before Commission; Davitt's Sþeech before Commissio1l; T. D. Sullivan, pp.
257-62, 271. 2 Annual Register, pp. 35-39.
3 68
THE UNIONIST GOVERNl\IE
T
condemnation of the Irish leaders. But the authenticity of tl C"
Facsimile Letter was considel ed the important question, ar:d
inside and out!'ide Parliament the discovery of Pigott's forgel ies.
was regarded by every fair-minded man as a great victOl y for
Home Rule. The Times was glad to settle a lite1 action taken
by the Irish Leader by the payment of .l5000,1 and in I SEg.
and 1890 Parnell was the helo of the hour. In the Hcu
e of
Commons, after the exposure of Pigott, he was greeted by the
whole Liberal party with enthusiasm, the members wéiving their
hats. 2 At dinner at the Eighty Club, "hen he and Lord
Spencer publicly shook hands, the m( mbers cheered again and
again, and ",hen he rose to speak they all sprang to their feet
waving their napkins above their heads.
At St. James's Hall, on the same platform with Mr. Morley,.
he was received "with tremendous enthusia
m." 8 In] uly l
e-
received the freedom of the City of Edinburgh. 4 In I\oH:mter
he was the central figure at a great Liberal meeting at 1'\ ottil1g-
ham. The following month he was IVIr. Gladstone's guest at
Hawarden, whence he drove to a great meeting at Liverpool.5-
And in the new year his popularity Icmained. The change
in public opinion had indeed come, ard was reflected in the-
steady diminution of the Government majority in Parliament
and in their continued losses at by-elections. In I 88ï, ,d
en an
amendment to the Address wac;; moved on the Irish question,
the Unionist majority was 106. In the next year it fell to
88; in 1889 to 79; and in 1890 to 67. 6 Nothing in the
latter year was wanting but a General Election to ensure the
return of Mr. Gladstone to power, and with that event the
triumph of Home Rule. But once again the fates wele
unpropitious to Ireland; her bright hopes were not to be
realized, and from out the mists and shadows of the immediate
future it was defeat rather than victory that loomed.
1 An1lual Register, 1890, p. 26.
a Ibid. 74.
5 Ibid. 256-60.
2 Ibid., 1889, p. 32.
4 Ibid. 161-4.
6 Ibid., 1890, p. 40.
CHAPTER XVI
The Fall of Parnell
IN the exciting times immediately preceding and immediately
following the Phænix Park murders, Mr. Parnell and 1\Ir.
Chamberlain were often in accord on public questions. Both
opposed flogging in the army; both disliked Forster and his
Coercion régime in Ireland; and both, in 1885, agreed that
there should be further concessions to Ireland. Political
sympathy often brought them together in social intercourse,
anù Mr. Chamberlain had therefore many opportunities of
estimating the character of the Irish leader. He was, he said,
a good business man, a really great man, and especialIy a great
Parliamentarian. But he thought him unsocial, rather dull and
uninteresting, with no small talk and poor conversational powers. 1
His estimate was correct. 1\1r. Parnell had little taste for social
intercourse; he was of a rather thoughtful and retiring dis-
position. He exercised, however, a certain amount of influence
over mJ.ny women with whom he was brought into contact; he
was not a misogynist; and-unfortunately for himself and for
lreland-he had other overmastering passions than ambition
and pride. His own sister records that, while a young man at
Cambridge, he was responsible for the ruin of a trusting girl
who lived with her father on the banks of the Cam. 2 At a
letter period he was fascinated by an American girl, to whom
he proposed marriage; but the lady, at first accepting, finally
rejected his suit,S and subsequently he never at any time
till 189 I seriously contemplated marriage.
VOl. III
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 131-2.
jl Mrs. Dickenson's A Patrio/'.}' fllistake.
3 Davitt's j'àll 0/ Feudalism, pp. 20 7-8.
6:)
94-
37 C
THE FALL OF PARNELL
Unfortunately, however, he contracted an illicit attachment
which had a blighting influence on his career. The lady, who
belonged to a distinguished English family, was the wife of an
Irishman, Captain O'Shea. In 1880 O'Shea was elected l\f.P.
for Clare, and was one of those who voted for :1\1r. Parnell as
chairman of the Irish Party in preference to Mr. Shaw.
Parnell and O'Shea were thus brought together, and thus it
was that the former met :1\1:rs. O'Shea. :l\1astered by a fatal
fascination, both fell, and in the years subsequent to 1881 the
life of each was a life of sin.
There is deep pathos in the words of Mr. John Parnell as
he describes the change which came over his brother. vVearied
by
xacting public affairs, the Irish leader was wont to rush
back from London to Avondale. He loved his beautiful
\Vicklow home, and in the woods and fields around he shot
and fished and rode and talked to the workmen and was happy.
Then there was a change. Round Mrs. O'Shea he hc\"ered as
the moth does round the candle, and to her home at Eltham
he bent his way instead of crossing the sea. And he forgot
his duty to Ireland as he forgot Avondale. This is not denied
by his able and sympathetic biographer, always anxious as he
is to shield 1\lr. Parnell's memory from reproach. lIe confesses
"frankly and fully" that during the years 1 882-1 884 "there
were weeks and months which he (Parnell) could ha\'e spent in
Ireland, to the immense advantage of the National movement,
but for his unfortunate attachment." 1 The struggle in Ireland
was then fierce and bitter, and 1\:1 r. Parnell's presence and
assistance on many occasions would have given fresh courage
to the harassed combatants on the Nationalist side. In Parlia-
ment also his constant attendance would have done much.
His fighting powers were great, and had he watched and waited
in Parliament and struck home at the critical moment, as he
alone knew how, the Coercionist Government of 1\1r. Gladstone
would have ended long before the summer of 1885.
As early as 1881 Captain O'Shea's suspicions were aroused.
R
turning from London to his home at Eltham 5 he found Mr.
1 O'Brien's Parndl, Ii. 165.
PARNELL AND TI-IE O'SHEAS
3ï 1
Parnell there, and was so enraged that he sent him a challenge.
But
Irs. O'Shea's protestations of innocence dispelled her
husband's suspicions, and the old cordial relations between the
two Irishmen w
re resumed. l I n the next year O'Shea \\"as
prominent in the negotiations which ended in the Kilmainham
Treaty. As a close personal friend of 1\lr. Chamberlain, he was
able to obtain permission to see 1\lr. Parnell in prison. He
had interviews with 11:r. Forster, and he corresponded with
both Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Chamberlain, the result of all
being the political ruin of Forster and the liberation of Parnell.
Beyond his share in these events O'Shea's public services were
not important. He was but a nominal Home Ruler, unwilling
to take the Irish Party pledge, and when the General Electiçm of
1885 came, he disappeared from Parliament. In the next year
he reappeared. Mr. T. P. O'Connor had been returned for a
division of Liverpool as well as for Galway City, and having
elected to sit for LiverpQol, Galway became vacant. A capable
and stronglysupporteò local candidate came forward in the person
of rvlr. Lynch. But 11:r. Parnell insistcd on having Captain
O'Shea. 1\1r. Biggar and 1\lr. Healy, however, refused to acquiesce
in this selection, and went to Galway to support Lynch. They
were behind the scenes, and knew that giving Galway to O'Shea
was the price paid for 1\lrs. O'Shea's virtue, and they thought
the price paid too high. For Captain O'Shea was not the
stamp of man that an Irish Nationalist constituency would care
to have as its representative. But Parnell was determined.
He came to Galway accompanied by 11r. O'Connor and 11r.
Sexton; told the people that the rejection of O.Shea would
mean the loss of Home Rule; and told
1r. Biggar and 1Ir.
Healy that he would fight it out at all costs, even if the people
of Galway kicked him through the streets. The horror of
dissension on the very eve of the introduction of Gladstone's
Home Rule Bill silenced opposition. IVlr. Biggar was unyield-
ing, but 1\1r. Healy yielded; Mr. Lynch also withdrew, and
Captain O'Shea became M.P. for Galway. His gratitude
consisted in following the lead of 11r. Chamberlain, and in
1 O'Brien's Parndl, ii. 162-3.
37 2
THE FALL OF PARXELL
refusing to vote for the second reading of the Home Rule
BilJ.l At the General Election of 1886 he was not a candi-
date for any Irish constituency, and did not again sit in Parlia-
ment; but in the years that followed he continued to intrigue
with Mr. Chamberlain, and finally effected the ruin of Home
Rule.
1\Ieanwhile Mr. Parnell continued his relations with Mrs.
O'Shea. To be near her he took a house at Eltham; for her
sake he neglected his public duties. He seldom appeared in
Parliament. In the hard-fought struggle with l\1r. Balfour in
Ireland he took no part. He found fault with the Plan of
Campaign, though he took no pains to devise any better means
for protecting the tenants. He grew jealous of l\'lr. Dillon and
lVIt-. O'Brien, and thought they wished to supplant him; but he
forgot that they were left without his guidance, and owed their
commanding position to his neglect. Holding aloof from his
party, his movements stealthy, his residence unknO\\-n, his
leadership gradually became a nullity, and in times of stress and
difficulty his followers wére left to shift for themselves.
The explanation of all this came at last. In December
1889 Captain O'Shea filed a petition for divorce, alleging his
wife's adultery with 1\lr. Parnell. There were adjournments
and delays, and not until November of the following year did
the case come on. Then the story of Parnell's hidden life was
disclosed to an astonished world. It was a shameful story-a
story of duplicity and treachery, of the betrayal of friendship,
of the violation of vows, of the desecration of home, of the
sundering of sacred tics. Not a single gleam of heroism or
romance lighted up, eyen for a moment, the dreary record of
unquenchable lust. ^ man of mature years, a lady well past
her prime, had forgotten everything but their own lawless 100'e.
Deaf to the call of duty, to the voice of patriotism, to the
stern commands of moral obligation, the trusted leader had
betrayed his trust; and turning his back on Ireland, sought the
unhallowed embraces of one whom even the clinging love of
1 Fall of FeudalÙIIl, pp. 501-3; O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 122-8; T. D.
Sullivan, pp. 191 -6.
1'.\IC\'t:LL"S POSITIO
AFTER THE DIYORCE 373
children was unable to hold back. There was not and could
not be any defence in the Divorce COllrt, and on the 17th of
November a decree of dissolution of marriage was issued.
In Ireland both party and people were bewildered. Mr.
Parnell's services were great. He had compelled the British
Parliament to listen and to concede; he had wrung from it a
Land Act, an Arrears Act, a Franchise Act; and now a great
En
lish party, headed by the greatest statesman of modern
times, was pledged to giye back to Ireland her ParlIament.
The man who had humbled the London Times in the dust was
one of whom the whole r rish race was proud, and in gratitude
for what he had done, Irishmen were ready to sustain him even
in spite of his moral delinquencies. If they threw him aside
di\Tision and discord would arise. Parnell was the clamp that
held discordant elements together. Peasant and priest, artisan
and merchant, Constitutionalist and Fenian had joined hands
under his rule, and now if he were repudiated Ireland would
become a prey to strife. It would be as if the winds of
Æolus were let loose. Old antagonisms would be revived, and
the reign of faction would begin. Thus reasoned millions of
lri"hmen at home and abroad, who knew the blessings of
union, and knew wilat Ireland had suffered from dissension in
the past. And there wele millions also who believed that
Parnell was innocent, and that the divorce case was only a
new attempt to blast his reputation. O'Shea was known to
be 3.n intriguer in close touch with Chamberlain and the Times,
Ireland's bitterest enemies, and from these plotters the charges
in the Divorce Court came. And if Parnell offered no
defence, it was because he was biding his time. He was
waiting till his proofs were ready, and then he would over-
whelm his enemies as he had overwhelmed Pigott and the
Times. The Irish Party had no such illusions as these, for
they were painfully conscious of Parnell's guilt. But they
dreaded what would follow if his guiding hand were removed;
they were only politicians with no authority to decide moral
questions, and as politicians they thought it best to stand by
their old leader. Hence it was that at a great meeting in the
374
THE FALL OF PAR
ELL
Leinster Hall, Dublin, they renewed their allegiance to Mr.
Parnell.
In the previous September
1essrs. Dillon and O'Brien had
been prosecuted at Tipperary for inciting Mr. Smith Barry's
tenants not to pay rent. They left the country for France,
whence they went to America, and in their absence were tried
and sentenced to six months' imprisonment. l Mr. Harrington,
I\lr. T. P. O'Connor and Mr. T. D. Sullivan soon joined them
in America; and in November all these gentlemen were
engaged on behalf of the Irish Party, addressing meetings and
obtaining liberal donations for the Irish National cause. Like
their brethren at home they resolved to stand by Parnell, and
telegraphed to the Leinster Hall meeting that they did so U in
the profound conviction that Parnell's statesmanship and
matchless qualities as a leader are essential to the safety of our
cause." 1\1r. T. D. Sullivan alone refused to sign the telegram,
the reading of which evoked loud cheers in the Leinster Hall.
Mr. MacCarthy, at the same meeting, could see no reason why
Parnell should not continue to lead the Irish Party and the Irish
people to victory. Mr. Healy declared that they were not going
to surrender the great chief who had led them so long and so
successfully; and he warned off all interfering meddlers by
requesting that they were not to speak to the man at the
wheel. The Freeman's Journal approved of and adopted this
language, and to the National League offices in Dublin
resolutions of confidence in Parnell from all parts of Ireland
came pouring in. 2
Across the Channel, however, ominous growls were heard.
As might have been expected, the Times gloated over the
disgrace of its great antagonist. The Standard scoffed at the
notion that such a man should continue to lead any party.s
The Daily Telegraph declared it was in no mood to exult in
the disgrace of "a political adversary whose abilities and
prowcss it was impossible not to respect," but that Parnell
1 Annual Register, pp. 273-5.
2 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 239-46; T. D. Sullivan, pp. 281-2.
3 Annual Register, p. 232.
PAR
ELL AND IllS CRITICS
375
should retire, at least for a time. l The lesser lights among the
Unionist organs followed the lead of the London journals-
some with the dignity anJ self-restraint of the Daily Teleg-rapk,
anJ other:; with the vindictive animosity of the Times. On the
Liberal side there was greater reluctance to interfere. It was
recognized that the Irish had the best right to choose their
own leader. But English Dissenters and Scotch Presbyterians
had also the right to say that they would no longer co-operate
with Parnell. Intolerant of Catholicity the Nonconformists
are, but they deeply reverence the sanctity of marriage and
the purity of dO:TI
stic life; and they were shocked at Mr.
P arnell's utter disregard of all moral restraint. Mr. Stead
emphatically declared th1.t he should go if Home Rule was
to be saved. The Rev. Mr. Price Hughes, a distinguished
Dissenting clergyman, was even more emphatic and more
severe.
\t a meeting of the
atÏ::mal Liberal Federation on the
2 I st of November the views of Mr. Hughes and Mr. Stead were
adopted, and Mr. Morley and Sir William I Iarcourt, who were
present, had to report to Mr. Gladstone that Parnell's leader-
ship had become imp:Jssible.
Mr. Davitt, taking the same
view as Mr. Stead, called on Parnell to make a sacrifice in
return for the many sacrifices the Irish people had made for
him. He asked no more than this: that he should efface
himself for a brief period from public life. s
1\lr. Parnell remained tranquil and unmoved in presence of
the gathering storm. He seems to have thought that the
Divorce Court proceedings had no concern for the public; it
wa
a purely personal matter in no way affecting his public
position. 1\ir. Davitt, before the case was tried, had asked
him if the charges were true, and Mr. Parnell, while clearly
re..:;entin
being questioned in the matter, assured him that all
would be we11. 4 The very day on which the decree of divorce
wa;; pronounced Parnell issued his usual summons to the Irish
Party for the approaching session of Parliament. And he laid
special stress upon the necessity for the attendance of every
1 Morley, ii. 670.
s Annual R
fis/
r, p. 234.
2 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 246-7.
4 Fall of Feudalism, pp. 636-7.
37 6
THE FALL OF PARNELL
man upon the opening day," as it is unquestionable that the
coming session will be one of combat from first to last, and
that great issues depend upon its course." I The next day the
}<rælllan's journal had a paragraph, evidently inspired by Mr.
Parnell, announcing that he had no intention of retiring from
his position permanently or temporarily.2 His resolution to
hold on was no doubt strengthened by the loud professions of
devotion uttered at the Leinster Hall meeting, and perhaps
still more by the rancorous rhetoric of so many British
Nonconformist orators, denouncing his conduct in unmeasured
terms, and demanding his instant dismissal from public life.
N or had he any explanation to give or any apology to offer
on the 2 sth of November, when the Irish Party with but one
dissentient elccted him as usual their sessional chairman. 3
1\leanwhile, however, Mr. Gladstone had taken decisive
action. From the first his views were those of the Daily
Telegraph-that Parnell should retire, at least for a time.4, He
recognized the difficulties of the Irish people, seeing that
Parnell's services to Ireland were so great. And he saw that
the Divorce Court revelations had shocked the moral sense of
Great Britain, though he refused himself to speak on the moral
question. He was a politician, and his duty was to watch and
wait and note the trend of public opinion. 1\or did he say a
word publicly for days. But when from a hundred platforms
and from many hundreds of pulpits Parnell had been attacked,
when the Liberal Federation had declared against him and
Liberal candidates refused to face the electors in co-operation
with such a man, when every post brought letters of protest
and denunciation, Gladstone could no longer hesitate.
Returning to London on the 24th of November, he saw Mr.
Justin MacCarthy; l\ir. Parnell had consulted him and even
offered to resign his seat after the Phænix Park murders; and
Gladstone now expected some message from him, seeing that
they were both working for Ireland, and in joint command of
the Home Rule army. But Mr. l\IacCarthy knew nothing of
1 Davitt, p. 63 8 .
:: T. D. Sulli\"an, p. 285.
2 O'Brien, ii. 240.
4 Morley, ii. 670.
GL.\DSTO
E"S LETTER
377
Parnell's intentions. The following day the Irish Party were
to elect their sessional chairman, and Mr. Gladstone asked Mr.
:\IacCarthy to warn 1\1r. Parnell of his (Gladstone's) views, that
is, "if he should not find that l'vlr. Parnell contemplated
spontaneous action"; and further he asked Mr. I\IacCarthy as
a last resort to inform the Irish Party. 1\1r. Gladstone also
addressed a letter to Mr. I\lorley asking him to communicate
with Parnell. But the latter could not be found. The fact
was, he had already resolved on his course and deliberately
kept away. At the last moment, just as the Irish Party
meeting was about being held, 1\lr. MacCarthy saw him and gave
him G!aJstone's message. Parnell, however, declared he would
not retire, and a few minutes later he was unanimously elected
sessional chairman. \Vith a negligence which, in the light of
subsequent events, might almost be called a crime, Mr.
1IacCarthy had not told the party of his interview with 11r.
Gladstone, and they elected Parnell ignorant of what had been
taking place b
hind the scenes.
On his side, though he had made every effort, I\lr. Morley
had been unable to see Mr. Parnell; nor did he see him till the
meeting of the Irish Party had taken place. He then read
him 1\Ir. Gladstone's letter. But he found him obdurate. He
expected, he said, to be attacked by Gladstone, and he thought
it right that Gladstone's letter should be published-Ie it would
set him right with his party JJ; but for himself, having been
already elected chairman by the Irish Party, he would not
retire even for a single day. If he retired at all he would
retire for good. Mr. Morley urged in the kindest and gentlest
manner, and as a personal friend, that a different course was
best; but Parnell was not to be moved. Then, and only then,
when remonstrance and entreaty and argument and appeal
were s
en to be in vain, it was decided by Mr. Gladstone to
publish his letter. Those who were prompted by faction rather
than by patriotism, by personal attachment rather than by
principle, described the letter as English dictation. The terms
of the letter are the best contradiction to this absurd and
mischievous accusation. There was nothing to wound !\lr.
37 8
THE FALL OF PARl\ELL
Parnell's feelings, nothing by way of command. It was only
the sentinel's cry from the watch-tower that all was not well,
the pilot's warning that the ship was being hurried on the rocks.
The letter was never meant to be made public if only Mr.
Parnell had had the good sense and the patriotism to take it
in the friendly spirit in which it was written.. It recorded :M r.
Gladstone's conviction that "notwithstanding the splendid
services rendered by Mr. Parnell to his country, his con-
tinuance at the present moment in the leadership would be
productive of consequences disastrous in the highest degree to
the cause of Ireland." It would render Mr. Gladstone's reten-
tion of the Liberal leadership, Ie based as it has be
n mainly
upon the promotion of the Irish cause, almost a nullity." 1
The publication of this letter on the evening of the 25th
filled the Irish Party with dismay. Had the existence of such
a letter been known in time it would certainly have affected
their decision in reference to the election to the chair. It was
now plain that Parnell's leadership would mean the breaking
up of the Liberal Alliance, on which the hopes of Home Rule
depended; it was equally plain that Parnell had known of
Gladstone's wishes and had deliberately disregarded them;
that, therefore, he would continue in the leadership as long
as he could; and that in fighting the battle out, as he evidently
intended, his election to the chair had greatly strengthened his
position. Th
situation, however, must be faced. A mistake
of the worst kind had been made. But if a man finds that he
has taken the wrong road, it is only a fool who will refuse to
turn back. In obedience, then, to a requisition signed by several
of the party, Mr. Parnell summoned a meeting on the 29th.
The meeting was held in the House of Commons, in Com-
mittee Room No. IS, and this room soon became the centre
of attraction for the political world, the proceedings of Parlia-
ment then sitting being in comparison completely ignored.
Differences of opinion at once manifested themselves. Some
wanted Parnell to retire without delay; others advised him
to stick to his guns and stand no dictation from an English
1 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 670-8 I.
THE IRISH LEADERSHIP
379
Party leader. Parnell himself sat silent and listened. Quick
to see that a majority of the party were against him, he wanted
time to influence public opinion outside, and adjourned the
meeting to 1\10nday the 1st of December. l In the interval
:Mr. Davitt published an Appeal to the Irisk Race to repudiate
a leadcr who had. not the patriotism to efface himself for his
country's good. Messrs. Dillon, O'Brien and T. P. O'Connor
cabled from America that they could no longer support a
leader bent on destroying every chance of Home Rule. Dr.
Crokc, Archbishop of Cashel, and Dr. \Valsh, Archbishop of
Dublin, who had vainly advised his retirement in private, now
spoke out publicly. The former declared that if Parnell
remained the elections would be lost, the Irish Party damaged,
and the public conscience outraged. And Dr. Walsh declared
that the party that retained him as a lcader U could no longer
count upon the support, the co-operation and the confidence
of the Bishops of Ireland." These two distinguished prelates
merely anticipated the pronouncement of the whole episcopacy
which soon followed, and in which Parnell was denounced as
one who had attained U a scandalous pre-eminence in guilt and
shame. JJ
Any other man would have bent before the storm, but
there was no limit to Parnell's selfi_shness and pride. As he . )t.
could not rule he would ruin the (IriSh
and on the 29th
of November the newspapers contained a manif<;?to from him
U To the People of Ireland." Charging a majority of his party
with having their integrity and indcpendence sapped by Liberal
wire-pullers, he felt constrained to appeal from them to the
people. Then he proceeded to divulge the substance of the
private interviews he had had with 1\lr. Gladstone and 1\lr.
:Morley in thc previous year, with reference to the next Home
Rule Bill. The Irish members, he said, were to be retained
at \Vestminster, but reduced in number to 32; the British
1 O'Brien's ParnÛl, ii. 25 6 .
2 Annual Register, p. 276; Stead's Article in Rf!vie'w 0/ Rf!,IÍf!'Zl'S,
December 1890; T. O. Sullivan's Recollectjons, pp. 298-9; copy of
Bishops' Resolutions.
3 80
TIlE FALL OF PARNELL
Parliament would make no serious effort to settle thc Irish
Land question, nor would the power to do so be given to the
proposed Irish Parliament; the appointment of Irish juùges
would be reserved to the Imperial authority, and so also would
the control of the Irish police, though the maintenance of the
latter was to bc from Irish funds. He told of 1\lr. lY10rley's
despair of being able to do anything for the Plan of Campaign
tenants. Finally, he told how Mr. 1\lorley had suggested that
1\f r. Parnell himself should, in the next Homc Rule Government,
fill the office of Chief Secretary for Ireland, while one of the
Irish National members should become one of the chief law
officers of the Crown. 1\1r. Parnell was virtuously indignant at
the iniquity of such a proposal, for his anxiety always had
been to keep his party independent. " I do not believe," he
said in conclusion, "that any action of thc Irish people in
supporting me will endanger the Home Rule cause, or postpone
the establishment of an Irish Parliament; but even if the
danger with which we are threatened by the Liberal Party of
to-day were to be realized, I believe that the Irish people
throughout the world would agree with me that postponement
would be preferable to a compromise of our national rights by
the acceptance of a measure which would not realize the
aspirations of our race." 1\ir. Justin 1\IacCarthy saw this mani-
fcsto on the night of the 28th, and implored Mr. Parnell not
to publish it; but his remonstrances were unavailing, and on
the following day it appeared. It was a discreditable document
written by a desperate man; by a man whose heart had been
hardened by long-continued sin. 1
The attack on his Parliamentary colleagues came with
specially bad grace from one who for years had notoriously
neglected his Parliamentary duties ; and the charge that their
inùependence had been sapped was grossly unjust when applicd
to a party many of whom were poor, but not one of whom
had accepted or solicited any Government office. Equally
unjust and untrue were his accusations against 1\1r. Gladstone
and 1\lr. 1\lorley. 1\lr. Gladsto"ne denicd that he made the
1 O'Brien's Panzcll, ii. 258-66.
THE IRISH LEADERSHIP
3 8r
statements attributed to him," or anything resembling them."
\Vhat took place was a mere friendly interchange of views.
"The conversation between us," he said, "was strictly confi-
dential, and in my judgment, and, as I understood, in that of
Mr. Parnell, to publish even a true account is to break the
seal of confidenc
which alone renders political co-operation
possible." 1\1r. Morley's denials were equally prompt and
emphatic. l Nor was it forgotten that immediately after his
interview with Mr. Gladstone in December 18 8 9 7\lr. Parnell
hall gone to Liverpool, where at a great public meeting he had
lauded
lr. Gladstone to the skies. Calling him "our grand
old leader," he bade his own countrymen rejoice," for we are
on the safe path for our legitimate freedom and our future
prosperity." 2 If Gladstone was betraying Ireland this was
not the language to use; and the man who did use it, and
twehre months later denounced Gladstone whom he had praised,
was not one to be trusted or believed.
These events rent the Irish Party in two. Against 1\1 r.
Parnell were arrayed its ablest men, those who had gone
through the storm and stress of battle, and could point to
important work done for Ireland. On the othcr hand, in the
minority which clung to him, there was not a single man of
first-cla-,s ability except 1\lr. John Redmond. Some were
landlords who viewed with disfavour the recent rapid curtail-
ment of landlord rights, and who in their hearts did not regret
the break- up of a party which, when united, had been so
powerful an instrument for reform. Others were Fenians
imperfectly weaned from physical force weapons to constitu-
tional action, and whose dominating idea was hatred of
England. A good proportion were men of no political
capacity, destitute alike of experience or foresight, men unable
to distinguish between principles and catch-cries. Finally, a
few of the more able, such as 1\1r. Redmond and 1\1 r. Harrington,
allowcd their feelings to direct their course, and forgot thdr
duty to Ireland in their personal attachment to 1\lr. Parnell.
These \\'ould have eagerly welcomed his voluntary retirement.
1 An1lual Regisler, pp. 2.}.0-42.
:'\IorJey. ii. 687 note.
3 82
THE FALL OF PARNELL
Even the majority had no desire to humiliate him. Grateful
for his past services, they wished to treat him tenderly; jealous
of his fame, they endeavoured to save him from himself. They
appealed to him for the sake of Ireland; for the sake of the
evicted tenants who would be left without homes and without
hope. If only he would retire for six months they would lca\"e
the chair vacant for his return; and meantime he could lcayc
the management of the party to a committee, every membcr
of which could be appointed by himself. It was all in vain.
Nothing could move him; nothing could serve to neutralize
the effect of that fatal witchery which had darkened his intellect
and completely dominated his wilLI
In the long debates in Committee Room No. 15, the
speaking on both sides was often of a high order. 1\1 r. Parnell
was in the chair, but he made little pretence of being impartial.
He regarded the fight as a matter of life and death, and during
these days showed infinite dexterity and resource. In oratory
and debating power he was no match for such brilliant men as
Mr. Sexton and IVT r. Healy. But in using his position in the
chair to help his friends, in discovering expedients for prolong-
ing the debates and delaying a final decision, he often defeated
their best efforts. From his own conduct, which was the cause
of all the trouble that had arisen, he cleverly diverted attention
to the conduct of the Liberal leaders, to the inconsistencies of
members of the Irish Party, to the character of the next Home
Rule Bill. He taunted his opponents with having first elected
him and then turned on him at the bidding of an English
statesman. He charged 1\1r. Healy with ingratitude, seeing
that it was he himself who had first discovered Mr. Healy's
genius and given him the opportunity of advancing in the world.
He expressed his readiness to retire if only adequate assurances
regarding the next Home Rule Bill could be got from the
Liberal leaders. He professed entire disinterestedness, main-
taining that his responsibility was to the Irish people, and his
anxiety only about Ireland. At last, after days of wearisome
and exhausting delay, when every expedient had been tried by
I Davitt's Fa '/ {If Fcudalism, p. 643.
THE KILKENNY ELECTION
3 8 3
:YIr. Parnell, and when he stubbornly refused to take a yote,
the majority of the party left Room No. 15. Retiring to an
adjoining room, they elected Mr. MacCarthy sessional chairman,
giving him a committee of the chief members as an Advisory
Council. They were in all 45; counting the American
delezates they were 50; the remainder, over 30 in number,
clung to 1\1:r. Parnell. He maintained that he was still chair-
man, not having been formally deposed; and he flung at his
opponents the epithet of Seceders. 1
The battle was then transferred to Ireland, where an
opportunity had just arisen for testing the strength of the
opposing hosts. Before the split a vacancy had occurred in
the repr
sentation of North Kilkenny, and with 1\1r. Parnell's
a?proval, the candidate selected wa
Sir John Pope Hennessy,
a di:::ìtinguishcd Corkman who had filled the position of Governor
of the l\1:auritius and also of Hong Kong. As a Catholic he
refused to follow Parnell after his condemnation by the Bishops,
though he was still willing to stand as the Anti-Parnellite
candidate. lVIr. Parnell, who had declared that he would hunt
the Seceders from public life, put up as his candidate 1\lr.
Vincent Scully, a popular Tipperary landlord, and on the loth
of D,xember arrived in Dublin to support his nominee. He
had little doubt that he would be victorious, and undoubtedly
the force
on his side were formidable. The Freeman's Journal
threw its enormous influence into the scale in his favour, and
d;ly after day bitterly and unscrupulously attacked his opponents.
Its ev<:ning and w
eldy editions, circulating in every town and
villag
in the land, were on the same side. United Ireland,
established by Nationalist funds, l\Ir. Parnell also captured.
Accompanied by a boisterous mob he broke into the offices,
crowbar in hand, nor was any attempt made to stop him by
the police. All Dublin was with him. 1\lr. Healy and 1\1r.
Sexton, on landing at Kingstown from England, were watched
and in imminent danger, and as they walked the streets of
Dublin they carried their lives in their hands. The National
If
1 The U Parnell Split," from the Timu, 189 I ; The Story oJ Room
Fiftem, by Don:!l Sul1tvan, M.P.
3 8 4
THE FALL OF PAIU,ELL
League, controlled by the Parnellite !Vir. Harrington, was also
obedient to the duly-elected chairman of the Irish Party. And
when .1\1r. Parnell addressed a meeting at the Rotunda, his
reception by an enormous crowd was a scene of wild enthusiasm.
He told his immense audiencc that what Dublin said to-day.
Ireland would say to-morrow; and as he passed southward to
Cork, on his way to Kilkenny, he was met at cvery wayside
sta tion by ch
ering crowds. l 1 -I is main reliance ,\ as on the
Fenians. They had little love for him while he was chief of
a great constitutional party, for he had won over many from
their ranks to constitutional ways. But when he was bent on
substituting division for unity, and so discrediting all Parlia-
mentary effort, they flocked to him and fought his battlcs.
And in Kilkenny and elsewhere they organized his meetings.
and intimidated his opponents. The soldiers of Napoleon,
when entering on a new campaign, laughed at the idea of
defeat, and at Kilkenny an equal confidence was shown by the
supporters of IVIr. Parnell. The editor of the Freeman's Jour1lal
boasted to an Anti-Parnellite that they had the Chief, the funds
the press, " and we will knock hell out of you." 2
The Chief was indeed worth much. His activity and
vigour were astonishing. He passcd from one end of the
constituency to the other like a whirlwind, smiting his.
opponents as he passed. He attacked Pope Hennessy; he
called Healy a scoundrel and a traitor, Davitt a jackdaw
Dillon a peacock, and others th
scum of creation. a The
Fræmall's Journal reported all his speeches fully, and supported
him by every lying tale which it could invent. United Irela1ld,
under its Parnellite management, published a cartoon of Davitt
receiving a bag of gold from perfidious Albion, while Erin,
stricken with grief, shaded her eyes rather than look on at this.
deed of shame. The landlords and agents everywhere gayc
their good wishes to Parnell, and on the same side were the
bailiffs and grabbers; the roliceman who was wont freely to
1 O'Brien, ii. 290-8 ; A1'1lllal Register, p. 276.
2 Healy, IVhy be/and is not Frct', p. 31.
3 Healy, p. 34.
THE BOULOGNE NEGOTIATIONS
3 8 5
use his baton; the publican who wanted more elections and
more faction fights so that his whisky and porter would be the
more liberally consumed; and the public sinner who had perhaps
felt the chastising hand of the Church and wished to be
revenged upon the priest. On the other hand, Davitt and
Healy fought well, and with the intimate knowledge they
possessed they were able to expose the false statements of
their opponents. The priests called on the people to forsake
an impenitent adulterer, and to vindicate the good name of
Ireland, and rescue their country from one who was bent on
hurrying it to destruction. And a little paper, Tile Insupþressible,
published at the Natioll office, combated the best efforts of the
Freeman and United Ireland. \Vhen the poll was declared,
2527 had voted for Hennessy, and only 1367 for his opponent. l
Nor did the Parnellite candidate at Sligo in April fare much
better, though the majority in this second contest was not so
sweeping 2 as at Kilkenny.
After the events of Committee Room No. 15, Mr. Healy
had at no time any faith in negotiating with Mr. Parnell. He
believed the b
st course was to fight him. If it did not
bring him to reason, at least resolute opposition and continued
defeat would thin the ranks of his adherents. lVlr. Dillon and
l\Ir. O'Brien did not take this view. They were specially
responsible for the Plan of Campaign tenants, and knew that
disunion would mean these tenants' ruin; and for this reason
among others lVIr. O'Brien started for Europe in December,
hoping by a personal interview with Mr. Parnell to effect a
settlement. As there was a warrant out for his arrest, he could
not touch British territory. He therefore went to France, and
at Boulogne had several interviews with 1\lr. Parnell. l\Ir.
O'Brien is of a sanguine temperament, and at that time must
have had a large amount of faith in his own capacity if he
thought he could change Parnell. His proposals were indeed
strange. The Irish Bishops were to retract their condemnation
of Parnell, Mr. Gladstone to withdraw his letter to l\lorley, Mr.
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 299-309; Healy, p. 34.
2 Annual Register, p. 240.
VOL. III
95
3 86
THE FALL OF PARNELL
MacCarthy to retire from the chair and be succeeded by Mr.
Dillon, and Mr. Parnell to remain President of the National
League. Mr. Parnell was an eminently practical man, and
knew well that these proposals were impracticable. He was,
however, though unwilling to yield to Mr. Dillon, quite willing
to retire from the chair in favour of l\lr. O'Brien. But in this
case Mr. O'Brien must get satisfactory assurances on the Irish
question from Mr. Gladstone; the decision as to the assurances
being satisfactory to remain with Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Parnell
himself. In January Mr. Dillon came from America to aid
his friend, Mr. O'Brien, and ultimately he was selected as Mr.
Parnell's successor. But the latter was dissatisfied with the
assurances got from the Liberal leaders by Mr. MacCarthy and
:Mr. Sexton,! and, after dragging along for more than six
weeks, the Boulogne negotiations ended in failure. Messrs.
Dillon and O'Brien then returned to Ireland to serve their six
months' imprisonment in Galway Jail.
In entering prison both gentlemen wrote public letters.
l\1r. O'Brien stated that a satisfactory settlement had been
shipwrecked by a mere contest about words and phrases. But
he did not say who was to blame, nor on which side his
sympathies lay in the struggle between Parnell and his
opponents. Mr. Dillon was equally vague. He spoke, how-
ever, with great severity of the vindictive and brutal manner
in which Mr. Parnell had been assailed, presumably by l\1r.
Healy. And he recorded his conviction that a satisfactory
arrangement could have been arrived at had not powerful
influences on both sides intervened. Both gentlemen were
clearly anxious for peace, and had laboured to bring it about.
But the fact was that they were overmatched by Mr. Parnell.
His biographer records how he regarded Mr. O'Brien's going to
Hawarden and negotiating with 1\1r. Gladstone as a grim joke.
1 Annual Register, p. 238. Mr. Gladstone promised to have the Land
question settled by the Imperial Parliament simultaneously with the passing
of a Home Rule Bill or within a limited period, or failing this, to give the
Irish Parliament power to settle it; the police were to come under control
of the Irish authority within five years.
IRELAND IN PARLIA:\lEKT
3 8 7
Nor is there any reason to doubt that his object was to spread
confusion among his opponents; to have IVlessrs. Dillon and
O'Brien quarrel with IVlr. Healy, and perhaps quarrel with one
another; and in addition to have the Anti-Parnellites quarrel
with the English Liberals. l
\Vhile election contests were being fought in Ireland and
peace negotiations were in progress at Boulogne, Parliament
was sitting. The Unionist promises at the General Election of
1886 that their alternative to Home Rule \yould be justice to
Ireland and equal laws with those of Great Britain, had hitherto
taken the. shape of Coercion, and of some vague but unfulfilled
promises of reform in the Queen's Speeches. But the collapse
of the Times' forgeries and the loss of so many by-elections
warned them not to rely entirely on Coercion; and in the winter
session of I 890 measures were taken to cope with the recent
failure of the potato crop; money was voted for the building
of Irish railways; and an Irish Land Purchase Bill and a
Congested Districts Bill were introduced. Both these latter
measures passed in the session of 189 I. Under the Land
Purchase Act a sum of i 30,000,000 was voted to enable the
tenants to buy their holdings, the money to be repaid-principal
and interest-by annual instalments extending over a period of
forty-nine years. To provide against any possible repudiations
on the part of the tenants there was a Guarantee Fund, made up
of moneys voted from the General Taxation Fund for local
purposes. The Bill was objected to by the Liberals because
these local grants were hypothecated without the consent of
any of the local authorities. And the Liberals recalled with
damaging effect the Unionist attack on Land Purchase in
I 886. Nevertheless the Bill passed rapidly through all its
stages, and without serious amendment either in Lords or
Commons. 2 Under the second Act a Congested Districts
Board was set up, not under the control of Dublin Castle, and
yet nominated rather than elected. Provided with an annual
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 311-27; Healy, pp. 33-42; A1l1lltal Register,
pp. 25- 2 8, 237- 8 .
2 Annual Register
I890
pp. 254-5; 1891, pp. 105-9, 143-4.
3 88
THE FALL OF PARNELL
income, it was to deal with the congested districts in the \Yest,
to improve the breed of live-stock, to teach the peasants better
methods of tillage, to improve their dwellings, to help them to
drain and fence, to give a helping hand to struggling local
industries, to acquire untenanted land to which the pOOler
tenants might be migrated, and thus would congestion be
relieved. In spite of the fact that the members of the Board
were unpaid and had but a limited income, valuable work has been
done. For this three members of the Board 1 deserve special
thanks. Sir Horace Plunkett was an expert on economic
questions, and, though a landlord, had popular sympathies. Dr.
O'Donnell, the Bishop of Raphoe, had the deep love for the
people that always characterized his ancestors, the ancient
chiefs of Tyrconnell, and to high intellectual culture united a
thoroughly practical mind. No one knew better than Father
Denis O'Hara, P.P., the conditions of the poor in the congested
districts of IVlayo. Gifted with abilities of the highest order,
genial, unassuming, gentle and kind, his zeal for the people had
no taint of selfishness or vanity. He knew exactly what they
wanted and how their condition might best be improved, and
pe spared neither time nor labour on their behalf. In character
and intellect there is no higher type of Irish priest, and if the
Congested Districts Board became popular, it was chiefly
because it had among its members two such men as Father
O'Hara and Dr. O'Donnell.
In Parliament Mr. Parnell supported the measures of the
Government. On the Land Purchase Bill he voted against the
Liberals,2 and on more than one occasion crossed swords with
the Liberal leaders and with the Anti-Parnellites, especially
with :Mr. Healy.3 But his chief anxiety was about Irish public
opinion, and week after week he crossed over from England to
hold Sunday meetings in Ireland. His speeches at these
meetings were always in the same strain. The Liberals he
1 The members were appointed by the Liberal Government, for the
Act did not come into operation till the Tories were turned out at the
General Election of 1892.
2 Annual Register, 1890. 3 Ibid., 1891, p. 107.
PARNELL'S CAMPAIGN
3 8 9
called wolves, and Gladstone he called a "grand old spider."
He heaped abuse on the Anti-Parnellite members, whom he
described as sold to an English party and betraying Ireland in
Parliament. He taunted the Bishops with holding back till
Gladstone had spoken, and with following the lead of the Non-
conformists. He appealed to the Fenians everywhere, and at
every meeting he was supported by their cheers and by their
sticks. Strong in the possession of the only National organiza-
tion, he was provided with agents in every village and town.
Backed strongly by the Freeman's Jou.rnal and U1lited Irelalld,
he had means of influencing public opinion which his opponents
did not possess. Yet as time passed he was distinctly losing
ground. The defeat at Kilkenny was a bad beginning and
greatly depressed the spirits of his supporters, who were still
further disheartened by the loss of Sligo. The reckless charges
against the Liberals and Anti-Parnellites were contradicted by
obvious facts; and the insulting epithets flung at the great
name of Gladstone were in every way unworthy of Parnell, and
disgusted his best friends. l As for the charges against the
Bishops, the delay was at the worst prompted only by tender-
ness for Parnell and out of gratitude for his past services. Dr.
\Valsh, Archbishop of Dublin, had been solemnly assured by
Mr. Davitt that Parnell \Vas innocent, and had been given
this assurance on the authority of Parnell himself. \Vhen it
appeared that the Archbishop had been deceived, because
Davitt, his informant, had been deceived, it was no easy matter
to get the Bishops together. Three of them were in Rome and
had to be communicated with; even those at home lived far
apart, and some far from Dublin; and it is certain that had
they come together at once and condemned Parnell, they would
have been attacked as eager for his destruction, because they
were jealous of his power. 2
As to the National League, its power rapidly diminished,
especially after March 189 I, when a great National Conven-
tion was held in Dublin, and the National Federation, with
the hearty good wishes of bishops and priests, was formed. s
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 335-6. \I Annual Register, p. 24 2 . 3 Ibid. 239.
39 0
THE FALL OF PARNELL
Nor did the Freeman's Journal continue Parnellite. A new
Nationalist organ, Tile National Press, was founded by public
subscription, and so vigorously assailed the Freeman that
diminished circulation was the result. l\11r. Parnell married
1\1rs. O'Shea in June, and this was given by the chief share-
holders in the Freeman as the cause of its change of front.
But whatever truth there may have been in this, it is certain
that Mr. Parnell's marriage lost him the support of tens of
thousands of the farmers. Until then they obstinately refused
to believe him guilty; but for a Catholic who believes in the
indissolubility of Christian marriage, the union of Parnell with
the wife of a living man was certain proof of his guilt. As to
the Fenians, they were and remained his enthusiastic supporters.
But most of them were young and had no votes, and no amount
of cheering and violence unaccompanied by voting power will
carry contested elections. And now other events besides
these enumerated served to dishearten Parnell. His candidate
for the vacant seat at Carlow was disastrously beaten, and more
than this, Messrs. Dillon and O'Brien, on their release from
prison, declared definitely and emphatically against him. Mr.
O'Brien went so far as to excuse the violence with which
Parnell had hitherto been fought, by declaring that it was
impossible to fight him with sugar-sticks.
In spite of all these things Parnell refused to yield. In
place of the Freeman's Journal, which had deserted him, he
established the Irisft Daily Independent. He strove to give
courage and confidence to his friends by holding a National
League Convention/ and he still professed to be confident of
final victory. But this confidence he probably did not feel.
The weekly meetings were continued, but they were followed
only by lessened enthusiasm and continued defeats. At last.
under the strain of disappointment and excitement, and travelling
in all sorts of weather, his health began to fail. I t had not
been good for some years before this date. In 189 I it got
worse. In the end of September, cold and exposure brought
on an attack of rheumatism, and on the 7th of October his
1 Annual Register, p. 244.
DEATH OF PARNELL
39 1
stormy career was closed. He died at Brighton, and on the
following Sunday, the I I th of October, his remains arrived in
Ireland and were borne through the streets of Dublin to their
last resting-place in Glasnevin. Rarely has such a numerously-
attended funeral been seen. Crowds came from all parts of
the country by special trains, the calculations being that fully
200,000 persons either followed the hearse or were spectators
along the route. 1 Yet it was not a national funeral, and in
spite of the enormous crowds and the genuine sorrow, the end
of Parnell was a tragedy, with scarce a parallel in Irish history,
so many of the pages of which are blotted by tears. Dying
one year earlier, the whole Irish race would have wept at his
open grave. But the events of the last year had alienated
from him the affections of millions, for it was realized that if,
like 1\10ses, he had led his people in sight of the promised land,
unlike 1\10ses, he had endeavoured to lead them back again into
the desert. \;Vith his own hands he had deliberately pulled
down the pillars of the temple he had reared. Yet with all
his faults he looms large among the greatest of r reland's sons.
It would be as vain to deny him greatness as it \vould to
belittle the Amazon or the Mississippi, or to deny that Mont
Blanc towers high among its fellows. I n patience and fore-
sight, in tenacity of purpose and strength of will, we must, to
find his equal, go back to Hugh O'Neill or Brian Boru. If we
are estimating the qualities which go to make a great con-
stitutional leader, a great orator and debater, who could move
millions of men and with equal readiness rouse or calm their
passions, we must declare Parnell immeasurably inferior to
O'Connell. But in appreciation of facts, in adjusting means
to the desired end, in choosing the best time and place to
attack his enemies, and in selecting suitable instruments for the
work he had to do, even O'Connell must yield him the premier
place. Not yet, less than a quarter of a century after his
death, can full justice be done to him; for the faults of his
later years, and the national evils which they caused, are vividly
and bitterly remembered still. But when the last Irish landlord
1 A mmal Register.
39 2
THE FALL OF PARNELL
has disappeared, and with him the multiplied evils of Irish
landlordism; when brighter and better days have come for an
afflicted land that has long sat within the shadows, Irishmen
will then think of the man who struck such vigorous blows on
their behalf; and while a grateful and generous nation will
remember the services of Parnell, his faults and his failings will
be forgotten.
CHAPTER XVII
Paynellites and Anti-Paynellites
SELDO:\I has dissension wrought such havoc in Ireland as in
the year preceding the death of Parnell. Within that period
the Irish Party was broken up; the great organization of the
National League fell into ruin; the Irish abroad, who had
subscribed so generously to the National cause, ceased to
subscribe further, disgusted with the Irish at home. Every
city and town and village was torn by discord; even families
ranged themselves on opposite sides-brother fighting against
brother, father against son. Local leaders, long tried by
sacrifice and long trusted, fell into disfavour, and instead
of being cheered were hooted and groaned. Priests who had
stood by the people in dark days \\-ere attacked and some-
times stoned; their words unheeded when spoken from the
pulpit or from the platform; their churches made scenes of
disorder by men who turned their backs on the sacrifice of
the mass, cheering excitedly for Parnell. Such was the sense
of impotence among those but lately full of hope and courage,
that the Campaign tenants of Smith Barry hastened to make
terms with their landlords, and leaving the mushroom town
in which they dwelt, they returned to the houses in Tipperary
which they had so recklessly abandoned. 1 Grieved at the
dreary outlook, growing every day still more drear, Dr.
Walsh, the Archbishop of Dublin, appealed to the people
in a public letter to close up their ranks. "I am deeply
convinced," he said, "that the continuance of this ruinous
conflict, even for a little longer, must be absolutely detrimental
to every hope of the establishment of Home Rule for Ireland,
1 Annual Register, p. 243.
393
394
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARKELLITES
at all events within the present century. To me it is one
of the most obvious truths of the present deplorable situation
that the fitness of our people for Home Rule, and indeed
for constitutional government of any kind, is on its trial,
and that so far the evidence of that fitness is somewhat
less clear than it ought to be." These weighty words were
disregarded by those who ought to have paused and listened.
N or had Parnell any more suitable reply than to describe
the Archbishop's appeal as child's talk, and the greatest
nonsense. 1
With the death of the unfortunate leader it was hoped
that wiser counsels would prevail among his followers.
Hitherto the conduct of the Parnellite members of Parliament
had been open to the severest censure. They had joined
with Mr. Parnell in calumniating everyone who presumed to
differ from them; they had assailed the clergy with virulence
and without restraint; they had repeated Mr. Parnell's
charges-false as they knew them to be-against their late
colleagues in Parliament; they had agreed with him in calling
the Liberals wolves and Mr. Gladstone" a grand old spider";
and they had encouraged Mr. Parnell to persevere in his
reckless course, which ended for him so disastrously. Had
they tried to hold him back; had they advised and remon-
strated, and when advice and remonstrance were found useless,
had they sternly told him, as Mr. Sexton did, that even hi's
services to Ireland did not entitle him to effect Ireland's
ruin; had they, when all else failed, refused to follow him,
they would probably have saved him from himself. He was
reckless; but, reckless as he was, he could have made no
fight if deserted by all his Parliamentary colleagues, and
must have yielded to necessity, no matter how reluctant he
was to yield to reason. A little foresight, a little courage,
some consideration for poor Ireland and her cause were all
that were required, and the fame and even life of a great
leader would have been saved as he rushed recklessly down
the abyss. One of the ablest of the Parnellites, and one of
1 A.nnual Register, pp. 243-4.
IRISH PARTIES AFTER PARNELL'S DEATH 395
the most respected, declared he could not desert Parnell
because to do so would be to submit to English dictation;
it would be to destroy the unity of the Irish Party and the
Irish race; it would be an act of national dishonour. Lastly,
he believed Parnell ,,"ould win. l I t is hard to believe that
the parrot cry of English dictation, though it might have
deceived men of shallow understanding, could have seriously
influenced a man of l\ir. Clancy's ability. N or could it be
an act of national dishonour for a religious and moral race
to have deserted a man who had grievously and shamelessly
sinned, and yet who refused to admit that he had sinned at
all, and who scoffed at the notion of making any atonement
for what he had done.
I t was perhaps the last of Mr. Clancy's reasons, the belief,
namely, that Parnell would win, which must have influenced
most of the Parnellites. Fascinated by his extraordinary
qualities, they thought him invincible, and were satisfied that
his triumph over all his opponents would be but a matter
of time. But when the grave was opened to receive him the
time had surely come to pause. In three separate contested
elections the Parnellites had already been beaten, and this
under the leadership, active and brilliant, of Parnell himself.
\Nhen Parnell was gone, what chance was there that the
fortunes of the party might be retrieved? l\len of ability
there were among his colleagues, but not one with the prestige
of his services, none with his capacity to conduct a campaign,
none with his grim tenacity and iron will. And yet with
a reckless and criminal folly not often equalled they rejected
all offers of reconciliation with their late colleagues. The vast
majority of the Anti-Parnellites would have given them as
genuine a welcome back as the father in the Gospel gave
to his prodigal son. The bitter things said would have
been soon forgotten, the evil passions roused would have
subsided; the nation would have generously forgiven in the
joy of once more seeing unity in the national ranks. But
the Parnellites had not the humility to acknowledge any
1 Mr. J. J. Clancy, :\1.P., in Contemþorary Review, :\brch 189 1 .
39 6
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
error, nor the public spirit to r
trace their steps, nor the
generosity to shake hands with old colleagues over a great
man's open grave. Bitterness in their hearts and blasphemies
on their lips, they declared that Parnell had been done to
death by Irishmen who had deserted him, and that they
would not consort with murderers. Feeling ran so high
that the Anti-Parnellite members of Parliament dared not
attend the dead leader's funeral. 1\1r. Dillon was attacked
in the streets of Dublin by men who shouted, "Down with
Dillon the murderer." 1 Other prominent men were treated
with similar brutality. Nor did the Parnellite members of
Parliament delay in issuing a collective manifesto repudiating
and denouncing the men "who, in obedience to foreign
dictation, have loaded with calumny and hounded to death
the foremost man of the Irish race." 2 With such men, of
course, they could not coalesce, and resolving to continue
the fight, they elected Mr. John Redmond their leader. He
began badly, however, for having resigned his seat in \Vexford
to contest Parnell's seat in Cork, he was defeated. A few
weeks later he was consoled. Mr. Power, M.P. for the City
of \Vaterford, died, and Mr. Redmond, who was opposed by
l\fr. Davitt as Anti-Parnellite candidate, was returned by a
substantial majority.3 At the close of the year, therefore, as
at the beginning, discord ruled in Ireland, and the outlook
did not brighten with the dawn of the new year.
The fact was that there was serious dissension among
the Anti - Parnellites, and that party, instead of attracting
the Parnellites, threatened to split in two. The trouble was
caused by the conflicting views of l\ir. Healy and Mr. Dillon.
1 T. D. Sullivan, pp. 314-17.
2 Annual Rt.f{ister, p. 246; T. D. Sullivan's Recollections, pp. 3 I 8- I 9.
United Ireland wrote: "Shake bands over his grave. Nay, poor fools;
poor, wretched, creeping, wriggling reptiles; rather than do this thing we
should prefer to give Ireland to the Saxon, once and for all, unreservedly,
unblushingly, in the light of day; we should prefer to sell her to the Saxon
like honest brokers, strike our bargain in the market-place, and leave it to
other men and other times to vindicate our country."
3 Annual Register, p. 247.
MR. DILLON' AND MR. HEAL\
397
Both were able and determined and not easily restrained; and
1\1r. :MacCarthy, unlike Mr. Parnell, was quite unable to keep
them in check. Had Mr. Sexton been appointed chairman
instead of Mr. MacCarthy it might have been better. Even
the ablest among the Anti-Parnellites could not have denied
his fitness for the position, looking to Parliamentary experience
and ability. As an orator and debater he was second only
to 1\1r. Gladstone; nor was he ever found unequal to the
occasion when suddenly called upon to address the House
of Commons. A further recommendation in his favour was
that he had not abused 1\1r. Parnell. He had patiently and
with dignity borne with the abuse heaped upon him by the
fallen leader, but he had been unwilling to strike back; and
in the campaign in Ireland he had taken no part. He had,
in fact, effaced himself, and while the country stood badly
in need of his leadership, he would not lead. The result
was that the hardest fighting had to be done by rvlr. Healy;
and while Dillon and O'Brien were in prison, it was Healy
who led the Anti - Parnellite forces. He led them with
conspicuous ability, for his fighting qualities were not inferior
to those of Parnell, and Healy had the advantage of being
in the right, while Parnell was just as clearly in the wrong.
It is highly probable that the Parnellites would have won
at Kilkenny and Sligo and Carlow had they not had to
encounter 1\1r. Healy. He took a leading part in the founding
of the National Press and of the National Federation; and
in the trying months after the split, Mr. Healy, without a
thought of himself or of his interests, met every opponent
and faced every danger. Fascinated by his splendid abilities,
the younger clergy were all on his side, as were the ablest men
in the Parliamentary party; the Catholic Bishops were grateful
for the way in which he had championed their teaching; and
the local leaders, despairing of converting the Parnellites, were
delighted with a leader who could fight so well. Not a few
thought then and subsequently that he would have been the
best selection for the leadership. Parnell, who had no love
for him, declared that he had "the best political head" of all
39 8
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
the Irish Parliamentarians. 1 No lawyer since O'Connell was
readier-witted in the Law Courts, no man in the House of
Commons was listened to with greater interest; for he was
always master of his subject, and had always something fresh
to say. He could obstruct as skilfully as Parnell, while his
capacity for the practical work of legislation was far beyond
that of Parnell. To draft a Bill or a clause he had no equal
in his own party, and in the years he was in Parliament there
was no measure dealing with Ireland which he did not amend
and improve. Like Parnell he could be silent ,,,hen silence
was better than speech; he was patient and tenacious, and
always looked for practical results. These great qualities
were marred by serious defects. His temper was hot, his
tongue was bitter, his sarcasm scathing, he said things which
rankled and were not forgotten; nor was there any of their
opponents with ,,,hom the Parnellites "vere so enraged. If,
therefore, some thought 1\11'. Healy the most capable man
to lead, many others convinced themselves that under his
leadership unity and peace would be impossible.
Mr. Dillon was among the latter class. The relations
between the two men had not been cordial, and each did the
other injustice. :1\11'. Healy greatly underrated Dillon's abilities,
which are very far above the ordinary; while 1\11'. Dillon dwelt
too much on Healy's selfishness and ambition. The fact was
that lVIr. Healy seems to have never had any desire to be Irish
leader. lVlr. Dillon, however, thought he had, and whether he
had or not, he thought that too much power was in his hands.
lIe considered Mr. Healy's policy of combat to be exasperating
to the Parnellites and fatal to all hope of unity; and he con-
siùered that his continued reliance on the dergy would arouse
the slumbering bigotry of British Nonconformity, and thus
gravely injure the cause of Home Rule. As an alternative
Mr. Dillon's own programme was to win over the Parnellites
by kindness and conciliation, to end the ruinous newspaper
war between the Freeman's journal and the National Press,
and to substitute some strong man, perhaps himself, for lVIr.
1 O'Brien's Parnell, ii. 334.
MR. DILLON A
D MR. HEALY
399
l\LlcCarthy as chairman of the Irish Party. Though by no
means anti-clerical, l\Ir. Dillon had at no time hesitated to
criticize the Catholic clergy if he thought their action open to
criticism; he had openly assailed the Bishop of Limerick; and
a party under his lead, and which included Parnellites as well
as Anti-Parnellites, would certainly not be open to the accusa-
tion of being a clerical party. \Vith the newspapers l\1r. Dillon's
difficulties were not great. l\Ir. Gray, the leading Freeman
shareholder, was quite willing to abjure Parnellism and join
with the Natiollal Press, if only under the new arrangement the
Parnellites were not to be marked out for destruction, if l\Ir.
Healy's policy of the "tomahawk and the sweeping brush"
were to be abandoned. But the National Press shareholders,
whether l\fr. Healy liked it or not, insisted that on the new
Board of Directors they should be adequately represented.
On this question much was said and written. l\1essrs. Healy,
l\Iurphyand Dickson had been Directors of the Natiollal Press,
and under the new arrangement became Directors of the Free-
man and National Press. They offered a seat on the Board to
Mr. Dillon, making him also chairman, but he declined unless
seats were also given to 'Messrs. Sexton and O'Brien, on the
grounds that otherwise his views would not be represented
sufficiently in the columns of the Freeman and National Press,
and that l\lr. Healy would be the dictator of its language and
its policy.1 Ultimately it was agreed that when the legal
difficulties regarding the amalgamation of the newspapers had
been finally got over-and this took some time-Mr. Dillon
and Mr. Sexton and another nominated by Mr. :MacCarthy were
to be appointed Directors, so that in this matter l\fr. Dillon
had his way.2 His friends insisted on nominating him for the
Chair against lVir. MacCarthy, though he was not successful. s
But he was able to have the Committee of the party appoint
himself, l\lr. Sexton and Mr. MacCarthy Treasurers and
Trustees of the party funds, and in this way Mr. Healy was left
out in the cold. N or did l\Ir. Dillon succeed in winning over
the Parnellites. On his release from prison (July 189 I), their
1 Healy, pp. 60-64. 2 Ibid. 67-7 I. S Ibid. 55.
4 00
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARKELLITES
language was so violent that he declared against ever opening
negotiations with them; and their language was still more
violent at the death of Parnell. Later on l\1r. Dillon again
became hopeful, and in February 1892 he opened up negotia-
tions with the Parnellites only to be again repulsed; and he
was equally unsuccessful in the following June. On this latter
occasion difficulties came from his own side; for lVIr. Dillon
was willing to hand over a large number of seats to the Par-
nellites, but the Anti-Parnellites as a whole refused to support
him in this. 1 And yet it is impossible to withhold sympathy
for 1\1:r. Dillon, for unity would have been cheaply purchased
at the sacrifice of a few seats to the Parnellites.
While these disputes went on between rival newspapers
and rival politicians, Parliament sat, and an Irish Local Govern-
ment Bill was introduced by Mr. Balfour in the session of
1892. l\1eagre, halting and stingy, the measure was altogether
different from the Acts recently passed for England and Scotland.
The County and Barony Councils to be set up would be partly
elective and partly nominated, and seriously hampered in the
exercise of their powers. Evidently assuming that they would
be corrupt bodies, Mr. Balfour, to check their prospective extra-
vagance, inserted a clause giving pm' er to any twenty cess-payers
to arraign the Council before two Judges. I n case of guilt being
established to the satisfaction of these Judges, the Council
could be dissolved and be replaced by one constituted by the
Lord-Lieutenant. Alone among prominent public men, 1\1r.
Chamberlain praised this pitiful Bill; e'"en Mr. Bdfour himself
felt no enthusiasm for it. By the Irish Party and the Liberal
leaders it was fiercely assailed. Mr. Sexton attacked it as an
insult to the Irish people, an affront both to Parliament and to
the nation; Mr. Gladstone called it a miserable Bill ; and lV1 r.
Healy described the provision for enabJing a body of cess-
payers to arraign and even dissolve the Council as the" put
'em in the dock clause." 2 In spite of all this adverse criticism
the Bill passed its second reading by a substantial majority
I t was, however, abandoned by the Government in June; and
1 T. D. Sullivan, p. 323- 2 Davitt's Fall of Feadalism, p. 664.
GENERAL ELECTION OF 1892
4 01
the Unionists, after six years of office, had to confess that they
had done nothing to redeem their pledges of 1886. 1
Then in July came the General Election. The ability and
influence of Mr. Gladstone had kept Home Rule to the front,
and it was on that question that the issue would be decided.
Two years before there was no doubt as to the direction in
which the tide was flowing. The fall of Parnell and the
unhappy events which followed were for a time a formidable
obstacle; but in 1892 the obstacle had ceased to be effective,
and there was no doubt that with Gladstone was the flowing
tide. And this was the case in spite of the determined efforts
of Unionist writers and orators. Professor Dicey was eloquent
in defence of the Union and in giving expression to the
protest of Ulster. He doubted if Gladstone would have such
a majority as would carry a Home Rule Bill in the House of
Commons, but if he should, the Unionists as a last resort
should fall back on the House of Lords. For he thought it
intolerable that the loyal Protestants of Ulster should be placed
under the rule of men found guilty of intimidation, conspiracy
and crime; and playing the rôle of prophet of evil, he declared
that Home Rule in Ireland would mean civil war in Ulster. 2
Lord Salisbury not only predicted that civil war would comet
but plainly intimated that it ought to come, and would be
amply justified. He did not believe in the unrestricted power
of the British Parliament; and if it insisted on setting up an
Irish Parliament, he was confident that the Ulstermen had not
lost "their sturdy love of freedom or their detestation of
arbitrary power." S l\1r. Chamberlain was equally solicitous
about the maintenance of Ulster Protestant ascendancy, and
equally clear as to the right of Ulster to rebel. 4 And the
Ulster Unionists held a great Convention at Belfast in June.
in which strong language was used and strong resolutions
passed. " We record," they said, "our determination to have
nothing to do with a Parliament certain to be controlled by
1 Annual Register, pp. 21-26, 85-91, 105.
2 Articles in Contemþorary Review, April and July 1892.
3 Amtual Register, p. 70. 4 Ibt"d. 53, 93.
VOL. III 96
4 02
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
men responsible for the crime and outrage of the Land League,
the dishonesty of the Plan of Campaign, and the cruelties of
boycotting, many of whom have shown themselves the ready
instruments of clerical domination; and we declare to the
people of Great Britain our conviction that the attempt to set
up such a Parliament in Ireland will inevitably result in
disorder, violence and bloodshed such as has not been
experienced in this century, and announce our resolve to take
no part in the election or proceedings of such a Parliament,
the authority of which, should it ever be constituted, we
shall be forced to repudiate."] All this, however, did not
produce the desired effect on public opinion. The prophecies
of Lord Salisbury and Mr. Chamberlain were discounted
by the arguments of the Liberal leaders; and everyone
knew that the threats of Ulster were nothing but sound and
fury.
The quarrels among the Irish Nationalists were more dis-
heartening to the Irish at home and abroad, and certainly
discouraged the friends of Ireland in Great Britain. Why the
minority could not agree with the majority nobody not blinded
by faction could understand. Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites
were equally in favour of Home Rule, and should have been
equally ready to strengthen Mr. Gladstone's hands. Instead
of this the Parnellites uttered nothing but threats against their
late colleagues, and had nothing but insults for 1\1r. Gladstone.
They maintained that Irish National opinion was all on their
side, and so confident were they that they contested almost
every Nationalist seat. The more reckless of them boasted
that they would win 50 seats, which would mean the annihila-
tion of their opponents; the more cautious of them counted on
a gain of 20 seats. In either case they would have a majority
over the Anti- Parnellites, and to bring about this result they
spared no form of intimidation and violence. But it was
disaster rather than victory that attended their efforts, and
when the elections were over 72 Anti-Parnellites and but 9
Parnellites had been returned. Five Nationalist seats had
1 Note to Professor Dicey's article of July 1892.
GENERAL ELECTION OF 18 9 2
4 0 3
been lost to the Unionists, these including the loss of Derry
City and West Belfast.
The results in Great Britain were disappointing. Immedi-
ately before the General Election the enormous Unionist
majority of 1886 had dwindled down to 66; and according
to the results of the by-elections there should have been after
the elections a Home Rule majority of 120. The PallilIall
Gazette expected a majority of 94; the Times expected 48;
Mr. Gladstone expected 100. Instead of this there was but a
majority of 40, counting ParneIIites, on the Home Rule side.
There were thus 355 Home Rulers-2 74 Liberals and 8 I
Nationalists; while the Unionists numbered 3 I 5, of whom 269
were Conservatives and 46 Liberal Unionists. For the Home
Rulers one of the most disagreeable facts was that Birmingham
went solid for Mr. Chamberlain, the ablest and most relentless
of their opponents. And it was also of ill omen that both Mr.
Morley at Newcastle and Mr. Gladstone at Midlothian were
returned by greatly reduced majorities. If, on the one hand,
there was a collapse of ParneIIism, on the other hand the
triumph of Birmingham was equally shown. And the House
of Lords would be sure to note that the Unionists had a
majority of 7 I in England, and of I 5 in Great Britain, and
that if Home Rule obtained a majority in the House of
Commons it would necessarily be by Irish votes. 1
Mr. Gladstone was deeply mortified. He counted on
having at his command such a majority as would strike terror
into the House of Lords, and compel its acquiescence, as in
the case of the disestablishment of the Irish Church. I twas
probable that some timid British voters had been frightened
by the bogie of an Ulster civil war, and that others had been
cajoled by Mr. Chamberlain. But Mr. Gladstone himself laid
the blame on Irish dissension. " Until the schism arose," he
said to Mr. Morley, ,( we had every prospect of a majority
approaching those of 1868 and 1880. With the death of
Mr. Parnell it was supposed that it must perforce close. But
1 Annual Register, pp. 1 17-22; Morley's Gladstone, ii. 731-4; Mr.
Stead in Contemþorary Review for August 1892.
4 0 4
PARNELLITES AND AKTI-PARNELLITES
the expectation has been disappointed. The existence and
working of it have to no small extent puzzled and bewildered
the English people. They cannot comprehend how a quarrel,
to them utterly unintelligible, should be allowed to divide the
host in the face of the enemy; and their unity and zeal have
been deadened in proportion. Herein we see the main cause
why our majority is not more than double what it actually
numbers, and the difference between these two scales of majority,
as I apprehend, is the difference between power to carry the
Bill as the Church and Land Bills were carried into law
and the default of such power." 1 There were, in fact, many
Liberals who thought that Mr. Gladstone should not take
office at all, and if he did that he should not introduce a Home
Rule Bill, which might not pass the House of Commons and
would be certain of defeat in the House of Lords. But J\1r.
Gladstone had devoted the closing years of his great career to
Ireland, and had already satisfied the Irish leaders, Messrs.
J\'IacCarthy, Dillon, Healy and Sexton,2 that a Home Rule Bill
would be introduced. When, therefore, Parliament met in
August a vote of censure was moved from the Liberal side and
carried; the Unionists resigned, and ]\-1r. Gladstone became
Prime Minister for the fourth and last time. s ]\'lr. l\Iorley
again became Chief Secretary for Ireland, Sir William Harcourt
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Cabinet included also
Lords Spencer, Herschell and Roscbery, and 1\lr. Campbell-
Bannerman. One notable addition was made in the person of
Mr. Asquith, a brilliant young lawyer, who became Home
Secretary. Without much delay a new Home Rule Bill was
elaborated, and on the 13th February following it was intro-
duced by IVlr. Gladstone. 4
For two hours and a quarter the great statesman spoke in
a House filled to overflowing, every seat occupied, every gallery
full; and he spoke with an eloquence and a convincing force
marvellous in one of his years. 5 His Bill, like that of 1886,.
1 Morley, ii. 734.
s Ibid. 12 7-37.
2 Annual Register, p. 109.
4 Morley's G/adstolze, ii. 736-7.
5 Annual Register, pp. 31-35.
THE SECOXD HO)IE RULE BILL
4 0 5
provided for the establishment of an Irish Parliament with an
executive dependent on it. Provision was also made to safe-
guard Imperial unity, equality between the different nations
making up the United Kingdom, the equitable repartition of
Imperial burdens, and protection of minorities; and the
settlement was to be, if not final, at least U a real and continu-
ing settlement." But while the Bills of 1886 and 1893 thus
agreed in principle, they differed somewhat in matters of detail.
Instead of two orders sitting together, the new Bill set up a
Legislative Council of 48 elected by those rated at
20
or upwards, and a Legislative Assembly elected by existing
voters-these two Houses to sit separately. The Legislative
Council was specially representative of property, and therefore
meant to guard against hasty or ill-considered legislation. But
though it might delay, it could not prevent the passing of Bills,
and if the Assembly sent up a Bill a second time, after an
interval of two years, or after a General Election, the Council
could not reject, and must then sit with the Assembly, a
majority of both Houses being sufficient for passing the
measure so presented. The Council would be elected for ei 6 ht
years, the Assembly for five years. The Viceroy would be
an Imperial officer appointed for six years, having power to
assent to Bills or to exercise a veto, exercise of the latter right,
however, being subject to previous consultation with the Irish
Cabinet.
In all purely Irish matters the Irish Parliament would be
supreme; but it could endow no religious belief, nor impose
restrictions on the profession of any religion, or of none. And
it could not touch such questions as peace or war, the army,
navy or national defence, the Crown, regency, Viceroyalty,
titles and dignities; nor could it interfere with coinage, or
with questions of external trade. These were reserved to the
Imperial Parliament, the supremacy of which was specially
asserted in the Preamble of the Bill. And if the Irish
Parliament outstepped the limits of its powers, the Judicial
Committee of the English Privy Council, on the initiation of
the Irish Viceroy or the English Home Secretary, might declare
4 06
P ARNELLITES AND ANTI - P ARNELLITES
that such legislation was u.ltra vires, and therefore must be
vetoed as such. For a period of six years Irish Judges would
be appointed by the Imperial authority, after which they would
be appointed by the Irish executive, holding office in this case
as in the former by an irrevocable tenure. The Irish police
also would be under Imperial control until a new civil force
was enrolled, and this must be done at furthest within a period
of six years. The new police force would be under Irish
control; but special provision was made as to the pensions of
the retiring policemen; and the same sort of provisions were
made as to the pensions of retiring judges and civil servants.
For three years the Land question was to remain for settlement
to the Imperial Parliament, after which if not settled it would
pass to the I rish Parliament.
Unlike the measure of 1886, the Bill provided for the
retention of the Irish members at Westminster. They were,
however, to be reduced to 80; nor were they to vote on
purely English or Scotch questions, nor on any tax not levied
in Ireland, nor on any appropriation of money except for
Imperial services. A schedule of such services was given.
The question of the retention or exclusion of Irish members
bristled with difficulties, and Mr. Gladstone stated them very
fairly and without prejudice. He would leave the matter an
open one, satisfied with whatever decision might be come to
by Parliament. 1
On behalf of the Tories Sir Edward Clarke found fault
with the proposed arrangement, declaring it to be beyond the
wit of man to completely separate local from J mperial questions. 2
Colonel Saunderson was more vehement in his condemnation,
complaining that the proposed Irish Parliament would have
"the power of plunder without the fear of judgment." S On
the other hand, Mr. Sexton, speaking on behalf of the Anti-
Parnellites, welcomed the Bill as better than that of 1886,
though he found grave fault with the financial provisions, which
he thought less equitable than those of the former Bill.. There
1 Hansard, cccIxiv. pp. 12 4 1 -75. 2 Ibid. 1286.
3 Ibid. 133 1 . 4 Ibid. 13 2 7.
THE SECO
D READING DEBATE
4 0 7
was to be no great Imperial officer as provided in 1886 to
collect the revenue and transmit the balance to the Irish
exchequer after the fixed Imperial contribution from Ireland
had been paid. Under the new arrangement the customs alone
were reserved for collection by Imperial officers, and would be
deemed sufficient as Ireland's contribution to the Imperial
Exchequer. All the other items of revenue were to be collected
by Irish officers and expended under the control of the Irish
executive authority. Mr. Gladstone estimated, after giving the
several items of the Irish Budget, that Ireland would have a
balance of .:6500,000 with which to start the work of Irish
government. But Mr. Sexton denied the accuracy of these
figures. Mr. Redmond's condemnation was more emphatic.
From him much was expected by the Unionists. They hoped
he would play the game of faction, criticize adversely anything
and everything proposed by Mr. Gladstone, and make demands
which he knew well could not be conceded. As he did not do
this their chagrin was great. He spoke with great eloquence
and power, and though he found fault with the financial
provisions, with the power of veto given to the English Privy
Council, and with the right of the Imperial Parliament to
legislate even on purely Irish questions concurrently with the
Irish Parliament, he spoke in no carping spirit. He spoke,
indeed, throughout as a patriot and a statesman. He spoke
with an enthusiasm which was natural of the great work done
by Parnell, but he also paid an eloquent tribute to the great
Enghshman who had devoted to the cause of Ireland the
glorious sunset of his days.l
After four nights' debate the Bill was read a first time
without a division, on the 20th of February. N early two
months later, on the 6th of April, Mr. Gladstone moved the
second reading, and then the big guns on both sides of the
House were brought into action. Often indeed the speaking
was wearisome, but often also it was on a high level. The
Annual Register (p. 39) notes that there seemed to be a secret
understanding among the Unionists as to the line to be taken.
1 Hansard, ccclxiv. 14 6 3- 80 .
4 08
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
The Tories were to resent the treatment meted out to the
British taxpayer. The Liberal Unionists were to lay special
stress on the danger to the security and prestige of the United
Kingdom. The Ulstermen were to protest against the
threatened ruin of their province. Certainly there was much
said about Ulster. Belfast had become the Mecca of Unionism.
Thither went Mr. Balfour in April and Lord Salisbury in May,
both to rouse the militant bigotry of Ulster Orangeism. 1 1\1 r.
Chamberlain, Sir Henry James and the Duke of Devonshire
also visited the same city, and with the same object as the Tory
leaders. And in the House of Commons the voice of Ulster
bigotry was self-assertive and loud. Mr. MacCartney and Sir
Edward Harland protested against the threatened ruin of a
prosperous and progressive province. 2 Mr. Dunbar Barton
spoke of armed resistance, and seems to have contemplated a
sentence of penal servitude for himsel(3 1\1 r. T. \V. Russell was
not behindhand in strong language. As for Colonel Saunderson,
there was no limit to the extravagance of his oratory. He
declared that Ulster would certainly fight rather than be
subject to a Parliament controlled by Dr. \Valsh, the Catholic
Archbishop of Dublin; nor would a loyal and high-spirited
province bear to be governed by disloyal and dishonest men.
And he predicted all sorts of evils in addition to armed
insurrection - confusion in the law courts, impotence in the
executive, smuggling along the coast. 4
From the Irish benches these objections were met by 1\1:r.
Blake, NIr. Redmond, Mr. Davitt and 1\1r. Sexton. Mr. Blake's
was a calmly-reasoned speech made by one who had held high
office in Canada, and had therefore practical experience of the
beneficent effects of Home Rule. 5 Mr. Redmond welcomed
the Bill, while solemnly protesting against its financial pro-
visions. 6 Mr. Davitt's speech was specially noteworthy, and
made a deep impression on the House. The rebel and Fenian,
under the influence of Mr. Gladstone's conciliatory policy, had
1 Annual Register, pp. 3 0 5-7.
3 Ibid.
5 Hansard, iii. 4 0 7- 2 3.
2 Hansard.
4 Hansard, iv. 856 et seq.
6 Ibid. 234-5 2 .
THE SECOND READING DEBATE
4 0 9
turned to constitutional ways. The prisoner of Dartmoor, who
had spent so many years of his life in the loneliness and priva-
tion of an English prison cell, spoke without a trace of bitterness.
Forgiving and forgetting all he had suffered, he welcomed the
Bill, with all its safeguards and restrictions, as a final settle-
ment between two nations long estranged. 1 In pointing to
the fact that the Catholic Corporation of Dublin had s
nt its
Protestant Lord Mayor to Parliament with a petition in favour
of 1\lr. Gladstone's Bill, Mr. Sexton could retort on Colonel
Saunderson that the claim of Ulster was not for freedom or
equality, but for domination and ascendancy. For it was well
known that the Belfast Corporation was a bigoted body,
which would admit no Catholic to its employment or its
honours. Nor had 1\lr. Sexton any difficulty in exposing Mr.
Chamberlain's financial inaccuracies. Like Mr. Redmond and
Mr. Davitt, he accepted the Bill, and believed it would put an
end to the strife of ages. 2
In moving the second reading, Mr. Gladstone specially
emphasized the fact that under existing conditions the British
Parliament was unable to do its work. He pointed out that
Ireland had been discontented ever since the Union; and on
the other hand, that in every British colony the grant of self-
government had always brought loyalty and contentment in its
train. s Sir M. Hicks-Beach, who followed him, indulged much
in prophecy. The Bill did not safeguard British supremacy;
it would lead to fresh demands from a discontented and an
unsatisfied Ireland; it would allow the Irish members to still
dominate the Parliament of \Vestminster, even while masters
of the Parliament at Dublin. The Bill, he said, "is not a
union; it is not a federation; it is not colonial self-government;
it is a bastard combination of the three." 4 Mr. Chamberlain
was more vehement in his condemnation and less scrupulous.
He objected to everything in the Bill-the safeguards for
Imperial supremacy and the rights of minorities, the financial
arrangements, the veto, and above all he objected to give
1 Hansard, iv. 42-62. 2 Ibid. 7 8 5- 82 4.
S Ibid. iii. 1597-1620. 4 Ibid. 1620-4 2 .
4 10
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
Ireland over to the Irish Nationalist leaders, whom he abhorred
and denounced. 1 On the same side, and with a good deal of l
exaggeration, Lord Randolph Churchill spoke, as did Mr.
Goschen and Sir Henry James. Mr. Goschen was clever and
argumentative, and speaking as a financial expert, severely and
skilfully criticized the financial arrangements in the Bil1. 2 And
Sir Henry James made much of the fact that Mr. Parnell
had accepted as a final settlement the Bill of 1886, and yet
four years later had attacked both the Bill and its author. s
From the Liberal benches an answer came from 1\1r.
Morley. His speech was able and eloquent as became one
whose diction was always so select, and who was so much a
master of the subject. Both Mr. Chamberlain and Lord
Randolph Churchill he handled severely, and the Duke of
Devonshire's recent appeal to the past in his Belfast speech
he described as "an incoherent and ignorant perversion of
history." 4 But a still more brilliant speech from the Liberal
benches was that of Mr. Asquith, the Home Secretary. Clothed
in highly felicitous language, it was argumentative and con-
vincing, and produced a marked effect on all who heard it.
If the I rish people were so black as they had been painted by
the Unionists, they deserved instead of Home Rule to be
disfranchised. Yet they were given the franchise in 1885,
and Mr. Chamberlain in that year was prepared to give rhem
local government, which differed little from Home Rule. :Mr.
Asquith scoffed at the notion that Imperial supremacy was
insufficiently safeguarded in the Bill; and he understood by
supremacy" not the power or practice of meddling or peddling
interference with the details of Irish legislation or administration,
but a real power which might be used in grave emergencies"
should such arise. "It is," he said, II taxing our credulity to
ask us to believe that a power which has expressly reserved
to itself under the Bill the executive authority, which has
complete and absolute control of the whole of the military and
naval forces of the Crown, which can call upon the officers of
1 Hansard, vii. 1830-57.
3 Ibid. 9 12 -39.
2 Ibid. iv. 4 62 - 8 3.
4 Ibid. 62 9-57.
THE SECOND READING DEBATE
4 11
the Irish executive to carry out its decrees, and which, in case
of default by them, can appoint officers of its own for the
purpose-it is taxing our credulity to ask us to believe that a
power so endowed and equipped will not be able to enforce to
the last extent every power it possesses." 1
On the 2 I st of April, the twelfth night of the debate, Mr.
Balfour summed up for the Opposition. A keen debater, he made
his points with the skill of the practised dialectician. Denying
that the Union had failed or that coercion had failed, he denied
that either Imperial supremacy or the interests of Ulster were
sufficiently safeguarded in the Bill, and he denied that the
police and civil servants were being treated with justice. He
predicted that Irish discontent would not be allayed; that
there would be fresh demands made in the future, seeing that
the Irish Parliament was prohibited from dealing with religion
and education and trade; that there would be confusion and
civil war; and he warned the Irish Nationalists of the folly of
cutting off their country-a poor country-from access to
British credit. 2 Then came the final scene, when :Mr. Gladstone
rose in a full House just as the clock tolled the hour of mid-
night. Summing up all that his opponents had said, he
described it as consisting of bold assertion, persistent exaggera-
tion, constant misconstruction, copious, arbitrary and boundless
prophecy; and he gave examples of how these various weapons
had been used. He declared himself quite satisfied with the
speeches of the Irish leaders, considering them as sufficient
acceptance of the measure on the part of the I rish people. He
was specially pleased with the speech of Mr. Redmond. But,
on the other hand, he had strong language of condemnation for
the speeches made by Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Henry James-
speeches in which distrust of Ireland, hatred of her leaders, and
incitement to Ulster bigotry were but too apparent. 3 When
the division was taken, 347 voted for the Bill and 304 against
it. Mr. Gladstone had therefore triumphed, and the verdict of
I 886 was reversed.
But the Bill had many dangers yet to face, and in Committee
1 Hansard, iv. 335-61. 2 Ibid. 9 6 8-97. 3 Ibid. 992-1006.
4 12
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
only the greatest care could avert disaster. The Committee
stage began on the 4th of May. The Unionists declared their
determination to kill the Bill, and for this purpose had recourse
to every form of obstruction. Amendments were moved, long
speeches made, every clause and every line was fought oyer;
and such was the slow progress made that after twenty-eight
nights only four clauses had been passed. To economize time
the Irish leaders said little. But Mr. Balfour and others on his
side said much, Mr. Chamberlain most of all. With tireless
energy and sleepless vigilance he watched and delayed
progress, satisfied if he could only wear down l\1r. Gladstone.
A motion was at last passed to have the Bill closured by
compartments, and only thus was the Committee stage got
through. In general the Liberals and K ationalists held well
together, but there were times when the forces of the Opposition
all but prevailed. On the 30th of l\lay a Unionist amendment
was defeated only by 2 I votes; the 6th clause had but a
majority of 15 ; and the 9th clause only 14. 1 On this latter
clause Unionists and Parnellites coalesced. But the combina-
tion did not endure, and on the 30th of August the third reading
of the Bill was carried by a majority of 34. Though yoting
with the majority, Mr. Redmond made an injudicious speech,
which delighted the enemies of Home Rule and àisheartened
its friends. He declared the Bill was worse than when it had
entered Committee; that no man in his senses could regard it
as a satisfactory settlement of Ireland's claims; that the word
"provisional" was stamped in red ink across every page. 2
In the House of Lords the Bill was treated with scant
courtesy. On the second reading its rejection was moved by
the Duke of Devonshire, and in a house of 4 60 only 4 I voted
for the Bil1. s Thus was the representative assembly of the
nation flouted by a body non-representatÏ've and reactionary.
Two other important measures had also occupied the attention
of Parliament in the session of 189 3-the Employers' Liability
1 Hansard, vii. 1031, 1192.
2 Annual Register, p. 92 ; T. D. Sullivan, pp. 34 1 - 2 .
8 Annual Register, p. 22 S.
BILLS REJECTED BY THE LORDS
4 1 3
Bill and the Parish Councils Bill. Both were sent up to the
Lords, and there they were amended out of all recognition.
All remonstrance from the House of Commons was unavailing
in the case of the Employers' Liability Bill, and the Government
in consequence abandoned it. To a small extent the Lords
yielded on the Parish Councils Bill, and that Bill became law,
not, however, without strong language in the House of Commons.
1\lr. Gladstone was specially indignant at seeing the hard
labours of the longest session on record thus nullified in a few
hours by the prejudice and obstinancy of a non-representative
body. After the rejection of the Home Rule Bill he spoke out
at Edinburgh, telling his audience that a determined nation
could not be thwarted by a phalanx of 500 peers who bore
high - sounding titles and sat in a gilded chamber. And he
promised that in the next session Home Rule would again
appear above the waves amid which it had for the moment
seemed to founder. l The Lords' treatment of the Employers'
Liability Bill and the Parish Councils Bill still further intensified
:Mr. Gladstone's indignation against the Peers, and his last speech
in Parliament was an attack on them. The question, he
said, was" whether the judgment of the House of Lords is to
annihilate the whole work of the House of Commons. The
issue which is raised between a deliberative assem bly elected by
the votes of six millions of people, and a deliberative assembly
occupied by many men of virtue, by many men of talent, of
course with considerable diversities and varieties, is a controversy
which, when once raised, must go forward to an issue." 2
The fact was that Mr. Gladstone was satisfied that the
House of Lords must be fought, and that a suitable opportunity
to fight the Peers had come. He was then very old, his hearing
was bad, his sight was dim and he was threatened with total
blindness, and any other man would have sought for repose,
weighed down as he was with the infirmities of age. Eut his
mental faculties were still unimpaired, as was shown by the
skill with which he had piloted the Home Rule Bill through
the House of Commons; and the appeal of a man who had
1 Annual Register, pp. 228-9. 2 Ibid. for 1894, p. 54.
4 1 4
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
spent sixty years in the public service would have been hard to
resist. Some of Mr. Gladstone's colleagues were with him, but
others had little enthusiasm for Home Rule, and wanted no
dissolution and no crusade against the House of Lords. In
consequence the old warrior resolved to retire from the field.
In February 1894 he made his last speech in the House of
Commons, then resigned the Premiership, and soon after
resigned his seat in Parliament. Lord Rosebery succeeded
him as Prime Minister, and Home Rule, which was to have
appeared above the waves, remained submerged. 1
The outlook in Ireland grew dark. The violence of the
Parnellites at the General Election in 1892, their attacks on
meetings, their liberal use of sticks and stones and insults was
not easily forgotten. On the other hand, some of the more
thoughtless and younger clergy, especially in Meath, had gone
far beyond the limits of prudence or fair-play, with the result
that the two members elected for Meath had been unseated on
petition. The recollection of these things remained, and
though ParneIlite and Anti-ParneIlite members fought together
on the Home Rule Bill, they refused to coalesce. N or did the
Anti-Parnellites themselves put their house in order. The
directorate of the Freeman's Journal continued to furnish
subject for debate and disunion. A majority of the Irish
members decided that the party as such should no longer
interfere in the affairs of that newspaper. Mr. Sexton,
however, did not agree, and threatened to retire from public
life if this resolution were not rescinded. Rescinded it was, for
the country could not lose the services of such a man with the
Home Rule Bill in Committee; but the decisions of the party
were thus discredited and the affairs of a Dublin newspaper
were still left for further debate. 2 Mr. Dillon continued to
think that Mr. Healy aimed at too much power. Mr. Healy
retorted that Mr. Dillon was a political boss, controlling
the party funds, controlling the Freeman's Journal, rigging con-
ventions for the selection of Parliamentary candidates. Nor
could Mr. Dillon deny that he was one of the National Treasurers
1 Morley's Gladstone, ii. 744-5. 2 Healy, pp. 80-8 I.
DISSENSION IN IRELAND
4 1 5
and that 11r. Healy was not. And l\1r. Dillon's conduct at a
convention at Castlebar in the end of July 1893 was violently
assailed. In defiance of the usage that no member should
preside at a convention in his own county, he presided at
Castlebar. In spite of the fact that he had at the beginning of
the meeting taken no exception to the composition of the con-
vention and no pains to test the credentials of the delegates,
he dissolved the meeting after it had sat for some time, on the
plea that it was irregularly constituted, and undoubtedly some
had been admitted who had no right to be there. Then he
adjourned the meeting to Westport, where the nominee of the
party rather than the local nominee was selected. The
selected candidate, Dr. Ambrose, was a sturdy Nationalist, and
an honest man, just as his opponent, Colonel Blake, was, and
it may be that had Dr. Ambrose's claim been adequately put
forward at Castlebar he might have been adopted there. Mr.
Dillon, always distrustful of landlords, was evidently reluctant
to have the local candidate, and thus left himself open to 11r.
Healy's accusation that he was rigging conventions for the
advancement of his own personal ambition. 1 A few months
later 1\lr. Healy was turned off the directorate of the Freema1z's
Journal. Disgusted at the turn of affairs, 1\lr. Murrogh, one
of the members for Cork and a liberal subscriber to Nationalist
funds, resigned his seat, as did :Mr. John Barry, M.P. for Wexford,
an old and tried Nationalist; large numbers of the clergy and
local leaders withdrew from the movement altogether; and
the National Federation had to count on fewer working
branches and a lessened income. 2
It was probably the apathy and indifference which had
followed in the wake of dissension which caused the Nationalist
leaders to neglect their obvious duty when Mr. Gladstone
resigned. Had the choice of his successor been left to the
Liberal members they would probably have fixed on Sir
William Harcourt; and he ought to have been acceptable in
Ireland, for he had fought the Home Rule battle for years
with conspicuous energy and ability. Mr. Gladstone himself
1 Healy, pp. 83- 8 6. 2 Ibid. 101.
4 16
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
wished to ha\'e Lord Spencer, a staunch Home Ruler. But
the Queen, who had little love for Ireland and none at all for
Home Rule, selected Lord Rosebery. As a Liberal he was a
very mild type indeed. In November 1885 Lord Randolph
Churchill suggested that the \Vhigs should be won over from
Home Rule, that in a composite Cabinet Hartington should
get the Indian Secretaryship, Goschen the Home Office, and
Rosebery the Scotch Office. 1 This, however, was not done
and though Rosebery did not secede with Hartington and
Goschen in the following year, he gave little help to !\Ir.
Gladstone in the years of stress and battte which followed.
By the Unionists 2 he was welcomed to the Premiership as one
U who had done nothing to imperil British prestige abroad or
to show his sympathy with Home Rule at home." As the
biographer and apologist of Pitt, he had no disapproval for
Pitt's Union policy, and disagreed with 11r. Gladstone's con-
demnation of the basenes
and blackguardism of the Union.
And on the second reading of the Home Rule Bill in the
Lords he declared that though he was a witness, he ""as not
an enthusiastic witness in fa\'our of Home Rule. "\Vith me at
any rate Home Rule is not a fanaticism, nor a question of
sentiment, scarcely even a question of history." S
The Irish Party had, of course, no right to dictate to the
Liberals as to the selection of a Liberal leader. But if Mr.
Gladstone in November 1890 had a right to point out that
Parnell's continuance in the Irish leadership would wreck
Home Rule, the Irish Party in 1894 had an equal right to
point out that they could not support a Liberal Premier who
had no desire to advance the cause of Home RuJe. Had
Parnell lived it is more than likely that he would haye
chastised Lord Rosebery by promptly turning him out of
office. Mr. ParneJI's successors, however, were not so exacting.
Mr. T. P. O'Connor described Rosebery's speech in the Lords
as just the sort that would favourably impress the House of
1 Churchill's Life, ii. 6-private letter to Salisbury.
2 Annual Rexistcr, p. 60.
S Hansard; Lucy's Diary of the Home Rule Parliament, pp. 3 I 9- 20 .
LORD ROSEBERY AKD HOME RULE
4 1 7
Lords and the British public, and professed to be satisfied
with it himselU l\Ir. Davitt preferred Lord Rosebery to Sir
\Villiam Harcourt. l\'1r. Dillon at Clonmel (11th February
1894) deprecated suspecting the Liberal leaders, suspicion
being U the mark of a timid and cowardly nature." The
Freeman's Journal, however, wisely suggested that assurances
should be sought by the Irish leaders, and l\'1r. Healy urged
the same in a letter to l\Ir. l\lacCarthy. The latter wrote to
Lord Rosebery, but was not vouchsafed either an interview or
a reply, and a few days later the new Premier publicly declared
that before II Home Rule is conceded by the Imperial Par-
liament, England, as the predominant partner, will have to be
convinced of its justice." 2 Frightened at the flutter created
by these words in the minds of the Irish Nationalists, Lord
Rosebery, on the 17th of l\Iarch, in a speech at Edinburgh,
partly retraced his steps. !VIr. John Dillon, who was present,
hastened to say to his countrymen in the Scotch capital that
for himself he was satisfied with the speech; he was deeply
and firmly convinced that in Lord Rosebery Ireland had
an honest and an honourable champion, who would be false to
no pledge given by that great man whose place he had stepped
into so courageously. Nor could Mr. Dillon be blamed for his
estimate of Lord Ro.sebery, when Lord Rosebery's words are
remembered. 3 Others of the party, however, remained sceptical
and suspicious. N or could it be denied that Mr. Redmond
1 Sketches in the House, pp. 277-8. 2 Healy, pp. 90-91.
3 Annual Rq[ister, pp. 77-79. "On the first night of the session,"
said Lord Rosebery, "I had occasion to deal with the Irish question . . .
and my critics admit that I dealt with it with almost too much perspicacity.
But unfortunately the interpretation that they put on my words was not
that which I put upon them in my intention. \\That I said was that if we
wanted to carry Home Rule we must carry ccnviction to the heart of Eng,
land, and by these words I stand. They are a truism, a platitude in the
sense in which I uttered them; but in the sense in which they have been
interpreted they bear a meaning which I as a Scotsman should be the ñrst
to repudiate. Are we really to believe that in all the great measures
which affect the United Kingdom we are to wait the predominant vote of
England? . . . We do not propose to sit on the banks of the stream of
time and watch that stream pass by until it shall run dry in an English
Y OJ.. III 97
4 18
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES
accurately summed up the situation in April 1894 as one in
which Ireland was almost face to face with the ruin of the
Home Rule cause, (( in a position of disunion, squalid and
humiliating personal altercations, and petty vanities." I
Unfortunately for Ireland, the personal altercations con-
tinued. 1\1r. Arthur O'Connor, one of the ablest of the
Irish Party, was turned out of his position as Secretary.
1\1r. Healy, at a convention in Liverpool (in May 1894),
evidently referring to Mr. Dillon, protested that he did not
machine conventions, nor draft resolutions for branches, nor
go through the length and breadth of the land attacking his
colleagues. 1\1r. Davitt at the same time and place retorted
that no man would be allowed to wreck the movement under
the pretext of combating "bossism," which was simply a
manufactured bogey.2 A few months later it was rumoured
that Parnellites and Dillonites were about to unite to crush
1\1r. Healy. But Mr. Redmond repudiated any such alliance
and attacked both 1\1r. Dillon and 1\1r. Sexton; while 1\1r.
Harrington attacked Mr. O'Brien, avowing on the latter's
authority that the situation could have been saved at Boulogne
in 189 I had not Dillon been ambitious to succeed Parnell in
the chair. s Meantime the Nationalist coffers were empty,
and subscriptions to the party funds were readily received from
leading English Liberals. Owing to protests from Mr. T. D.
Sullivan and others, these subscriptions were very properly
returned; for a party sustained by British gold would have no
claim to be called independent!
Legislation during this period there was none. Faced by
a strong opposition led by such able debaters as Mr. Balfour
and Mr. Chamberlain, discredited by their losses at by-
elections, almost unrepresented in the House of Lords, the
Government was impotent. A Registration Bill and a Welsh
majority? . . . I must point out that if I had meant that an English
majority was necessary to the passing of Home Rule I should have been
uttering what on the face of it is an absurdity" (Times, March 19, 18 94).
I Annual Register, p. 206.
Ibid. 207-8.
SHealy, pp. 111-12. ' Ibid. 103-6, 109-10.
END OF THE LIBERAL GOVERNMENT
4 1 9
Disestablishment Bill were introduced in 1894, but neither
became law; nor did the Welsh Bill when reintroduced in the
following year; 1 nor did an Irish Evicted Tenants Bill or
an Irish Land Bill, though the former reached the Lords and
the latter passed its second reading without a division. 2 The
Unionist vote of censure in February 1895 was defeated by
only 14 votes. s Confident of victory, they clamoured for a
General Election, and stopped all legislation. Nothing was
done for Ireland except the appointment of some popular
magistrates and of a Commission to investigate what were the
financial relations between Ireland and Great Britain. The
Parnellites, like the Unionists, wanted a dissolution; but the
Anti-Parnellites continued to support the Government in
passing Bills which it was well known the Lords would reject.
This was called the policy of " filling up the cup" against the
Lords. As for the agitation against the Upper House, it
was never taken seriously, for nobody believed that Lord
Rosebery wanted the abolition or even the reform of the
House of Lords. In June the Government were defeated and
resigned office. Lord Salisbury again became Premier, Mr.
Balfour Leader in the Commons, Mr. Chamberlain Colonial
Secretary. In July there was a dissolution, and when the
last elections were over it was found that 4 I I Unionists, 177
Liberals, 70 Nationalists and 12 Parnellites had been returned.
This gave the Unionists a majority of 152, the largest obtained
at any election since 1832.4 Even such prominent men as Sir
\Villiam Harcourt and Mr. John Morley had been defeated.
Ireland was again disheartened, and the Home Rule cause was
in the dust.
1 Annual Register for 1894, pp. 87-88, 104; for 1895, p. 88.
S Ibid. for 1894, p. 124; for 1895, p. 99. 3 Ibid. 34.
Ibid. 153-8.
CHAPT ER XVIII
Years of Strife
IN the autumn of 1895 Liberal politicians were busily engaged
in trying to account for the disasters of the recent election.
They owed their defeat to vVelsh Disestablishment, to local
veto, to the opposition of Beer and Bible, or, as others put it,
to Gin and Gospel; they were beaten on Home Rule and on the
question of the House of Lords; they had lost because they
no longer fought under Gladstone. 1 Beaten they certainly
were, and a Government with a majority of 152 was not likely
to be soon displaced from power. One result of the change
was that Home Rule had disappeared. The Liberal Unionists
had come back in renewed strength; their leaders, Devonshire,
Chamberlain, Goschen and James, had taken office, and these
were far more Anti-Irish than the Tories themselves. Not
even the Ulster Orangemen had attacked so severely the
Nationalist leaders as Mr. Chamberlain. From a Government
in which he held a commanding position the Irish had little
to hope. This was evident when the new Ministers met the
House of Commons in August. Though the assembling of
Parliament was merely to wind up the business of the year and
its sittings were not prolonged, many subjects were neverthe-
less touched upon: the evicted tenants and agricultural depres-
sion, Egypt and Uganda, the atrocities in Armenia and the
massacres in China. But of Home Rule there was nothing,
except a declaration from the Government that it would be
firmly opposed. There was no promise even of Local Govern-
ment for Ireland. But the Chief Secretary, Mr. Gerald
Balfour, promised that an Irish Land Bill would be introduced
1 A ll1Utal Re,gisler, pp. 182 - 6.
420
CONFLICTI
G VIEWS OF MR. DILLON AND
lR. HEALY 4 21
in the next session. No further measures apparently were to
be introduced, and it was disheartening for the Home Rulers
to find that Lord Rosebery again repeated his" predominant
partner" speech, declaring in the House of Lords that Ireland
could not get or expect Home Rule until England was convinced
of its justice. 1 Nor did Lord Rosebery stand alone. The late
Home Rule Lord-Lieutenant, Lord Crewe, had no hesitation in
saying that he "thought the importance of Home Rule had
been greatly exaggerated." He added that the continuance of
Irish dissension was having a most injurious effect on British
public opinion. 2
The serious, even fatal character of these dissensions
compelled Mr. 1\IacCarthy to say in a public speech that if unity
was not restored" Irishmen must give up any idea of Home
Rule for the present generation." 3 And yet the yedr 1895
came and went without any unity being reached. The
Parnellites, stubbornly resisting all invitations, would have
nothing to do with a party numbering among its leaders such
men as Mr. Dillon," whose shallow and selfish ambition was,
with Mr. Sexton's conceit, mainly responsible for the Parnell
tragedy." 4 Instead of peace these Parnellites professed war,
and at the General Election they fought the Anti-Parnellites
with great determination, and having captured from them three
seats, emerged from the contest stronger and more determined
than ever.
The Anti-Parnellites won Derry City from the Tories, and
were therefore 70 after the General Election, compared
with 72 at the dissolution. But though their numbers
remained practically unchanged, their strength was seriously
impaired by internal divisions. As in 1892, the trouble came
chiefly from the rivalries of Mr. Healy and Mr. Dillon. 1\lr.
Dillon's friends declared that nothing could satisfy lVIr. Healy,
that he was bent on ruining the party, dominated by a spirit of
faction which nothing could exorcise. Mr. Healy's friends, on
the other hand, blamed Mr. Dillon, who was intriguing for the
1 Allnual Register, pp. 16 4'.74. 2 Ibid. 201.
4 Indeþendellt, February 2, 18 95.
3 Ibid. 202.
4 22
YEARS OF STRIFE
chair and wished to crush Mr. Healy, believing him to be the
chief obstacle to his ambition. This, however, is not an accurate
presentment of the case. Incompatible in temper, with different
points of view and different intellectual gifts, no doubt personal
antipathy was largely responsible for keeping them apart. But
they were separated also on matters of policy, especially as
to the management of the National Party and the general con-
duct of the National movement. Mr. Dillon seems to have
had a dread of anything like clerical predominance, believing
that such would injure the Irish cause in Great Britain, and
this partly, at least, explains his anxiety to win over the
Parnellites. As in Parnell's time, he wanted to have the clergy
on the one hand and the Fenians on the other acting together.
Mr. Healy had lost all hope of conciliating the Parnellites,
and wanted to fight them and beat them. He was satisfied
that this could be done by the aid of the priests, who as a body
were quite as patriotic as the Parnellites or Fenians. And
he felt it was bad policy to lose the support of the priests,
knowing well that no national movement could succeed without
them. Mr. Healy's view also was that conventions for the
selection of Parliamentary candidates should be thoroughly
representative, and should be left free from needless interference
on the part of members of Parliament. Mr. Dillon favoured
the system in existence under Parnell, when conventions were
indeed representative, yet were controlled by the Parliamentary
managers. It had, on the whole, worked well, and in freeing
men from local influences had made a homogeneous party
animated rather by national than by local patriotism. But it
engendered not a few complaints, and had introduced men into
the party who were undesirable and incompetent-men who
brought little credit to the party and were of little advantage
to the public service. Mr. Healy would have the party funds
to some extent controlled from outside; Mr. Dillon would have
them controlled by the party itself, and necessarily 1 also by a
few within the party. A National Convention ought to have
been called, Mr. Healy thought, before the General Election, so
1 Freeman, N av. 5, 1894.
THE IRISH ELECTIO
S OF 1895
4 2 3
as to formulate a National policy. Mr. Dillon preferred to
have the conduct of the General Election delegated to a small
Committee within the party, from which 11r. Healy and his
friends were excluded. 1 Finally, Mr. Healy was willing to
accept concessions from the Tories just as he would from
the Liberals. 1V1r. Dillon looked askance at the Tories, and
in the Liberals placed his hopes. l\'1r. Dillon's strength lay in
the fact that most of the experienced men of the party, as well
as a sman majority of the whole members, shared his views.
But 1\1:r. Healy also had powerful support within the party,
and his objections as to the character of the conventions, the
interference of the party in such conventions, and the control
of the National funds were shared by large numbers among
the constituents. So able a man, they thought, was worth con-
ciliating. Had his objections been fairly met, and had he in
spite of this persevered in a policy of faction, his supporters
would have dwindled and he could have been easily crushed.
But no serious attempt was made to meet his objections, anù it
was this, in addition to his vast ability, which made him so strong.
At the General Election the divergent views of Mr. Dillon
and Mr. Healy came into violent conflict, and were responsible
for some painful scenes. In Kilkenny City the candidate
selected, who was favourable to 1\1r. Healy, got no assistance
from the Electoral Committee of the party, and the seat was
lost to the Parnellites. East \Nicklow was also lost owing to
the same cause. 2 At the Convention in South Monaghan, Mr.
Dillon attended and insisted on his right to take the chair.
The delegates, or a majority of them, insisted on having a
local priest, Canon Hoey, one of the most respected and patriotic
priests in Ulster, and as Mr. Dillon refused to yield, he was
assailed with cries of (( No dictation," ((
0 bossism," (( A free
convention." Ultimately, after a display of passion and
disorder which were certainly not the heralds of unity and
peace, a compromise was agreed to, and Dean Birmingham was
voted to the chair. 3 Mr. Dillon also proceeded to Donegal
and presided at the Convention there, hoping, says Mr. Healy,
1 Healy, p. 1 16. 2 Ibid. 120. S Ibid. 1 19.
4 2 4
YEARS OF STRIFE
to oust from their seats Mr. Arthur O'Connor and l\'Ir. T. D.
Sullivan.
In Mayo the chairman was Mr. Edward Blake. In three
divisions there was no interference from the party and no
contest. But in North Mayo there was trouble with the late
Healyite sitting member, Mr. Crilly. His record in the practical
work of legislation was not specially brilliant, and his con-
stituents were not particularly anxious for the retention of his
services. A few weeks before the Convention, the Bishop of
Killala, Dr. Conmy, and his priests had occasion to send their
subscriptions to the Irish Party fund, and were quite ready to
accept any suggestions as to the choice of their future member.
But their subscriptions were not even acknowledged, and
not a word was conveyed to them that Mr. Crilly ought to be
replaced by a better man. On the day of the Convention,
therefore, the North Mayo delegates, lay and cleric, came to
Castlebar to support their late sitting member. IVlr. Blake was
an impartial chairman, and all would have proceeded smoothly
but for the intervention of Mr. William O'Brien. He was then
member for Cork City, and an old personal friend of Mr.
Dillon. They had stood together on many a platform, had
faced together many a danger, had shared together the priva-
tions of imprisonment, and the first book rvrr. O'Brien wrote he
dedicated to his dear old friend, "in memory of anxious years
and glorious hopes." As an ardent follower of Mr. Dillon he
had said many things of Mr. Healy that were hard and bitter;
yet he had to bow to public opinion in Cork and accept Mr.
Healy's brother Maurice as his Parliamentary colleague. But
he would strike elsewhere, and travelling from Cork by a night
train, he reached Castlebar in time for the Convention, and
attacked Mr. Crilly as a follower and supporter of Mr. T. M.
Healy, and as such unworthy to be the representative of North
:l\'Iayo. There are few men equal to Mr. O'Brien as a platform
orator. His fiery energy, his rapid eloquence, his vehemence
and earnestness of tone and gesture are all-powerful with an
I rish crowd, and on this occasion his energy was at fever heat,
his words came forth like the lava tide. Not in Ireland was
THE IRISH ELECTIONS OF 1895
4 2 5
there a more public-spirited or more patriotic body of priests
than the priests of Killala, and at the Convention they
represented their Bishop, who was as public-spirited and as
patriotic as themselves. Yet, under the influence of IVIr.
0' Brien's excited rhetoric, they were hissed and hooted, and
as they and the lay delegates from North Mayo left the Con-
vention hall in solemn protest, the hooting and groaning con-
tinued. As for Mr. Crilly, he was not even heard, and was, of
course, rejected. Mr. O'Brien was more than satisfied, and glee-
fully declared that" they had sent that day a message of unity
and discipline that would ring throughout the world." 1 But
the North ,Mayo delegates were determined men. As a protest
against clamour and violence and dictation, they would have
nothing to do with the nominee of the Convention, and Mr.
Crilly in due course became l\1.P. for North Mayo.
vVhat took place at Omagh attracted even more attention
than what took place at Castlebar. lVIr. Dillon was in the
chair, the Convention having been called to select candidates
for South, Mid and East Tyrone. No delegates were present
or had been invited from North Tyrone. Asked why this was
so, Mr. Dillon was not very explicit in his answer. But Mr.
Healy, who was present, gave the reason. There was, he said,
a secret treaty with the Liberals by which, in consideration
of a sum of
200 a year for registration purposes, North
Tyrone was to be considered a Liberal seat. This treaty
had been made through Mr. Blake, acting on the part of the
Parliamentary Committee, but without consultation with the
party; and it had been made when North Tyrone, by
Nationalist money and Nationalist effort in the work of
registration, was already a Nationalist seat. The sensation
-created by this disclosure was great and did much harm to the
Home Rule cause throughout Great Britain. Charged with
once again playing the game of faction, and even with treason
to the National cause, Mr. Healy replied that he had no other
time or place to make his protest, and that in making it
before a private meeting of Tyrone delegates he had no
1 Healy, p. I 17.
4 26
YEARS OF STRIFE
intention of making it public, and thought that privacy had
been sufficiently secured. Recalling the case of Dungarvan in
1846, when O'Connell, against the protests of the Young
Irelanders, had given a Repeal seat to a Whig place-hunter, and
recalling the evils which followed, Mr. Healy avowed that his
intention was to rescue the National movement in 1895 from
the reproaches and disaster which the affair at Dungarvan
had brought upon O'Connell and RepeaP Not many will be
found to defend the time selected for the disclosure by Mr.
Healy, just in the middle of a General Election. But it is
not easy to defend the bargain he condemned. It ought not
to have been made with any British party, least of all with
a party under the leadership of Lord Rosebery. The Irish
Party, at all events, were not prepared to approve of it, or to
condemn Mr. Healy, and when the usual ballot took place for
the members of the Parliamentary Committee, he was, jointly
with Mr. Dillon, placed at the head of the poll. Shortly after,
however, he interfered in the South Kerry election, because, as
he said, the Convention had been called irregularly and in the
interests of Mr. Dillon. For this offence, following on the
Omagh disclosures, he was before the close of the year
expelled from the Committee of the Irish Party, from the
executive of the Irish National League of Great Britain, and
from the executive of the Irish National Federation. 2
In the beginning of 1896 Mr. MacCarthy retired from the
Chairmanship of the party. A literary man with a taste for
politics, he was much at home in the House of Commons and
liked the life there. But though possessed of courage and
capacity, he was reluctant to assert himself, and was quite
unable to suppress the rivalries and jealousies with which his
party was rent and torn. He did not, however, take a
despairing view of the future, and in the letter in which he
announced his retirement he said that, after all, these rivalries
were merely personal, and would not and did not (( affect the
vote of a single Irish Nationalist in the House of Commons
when any Irish interest was concerned. II 3
1 Healy, pp. 122-6. 2 Ibid. 133-5. S Ibid. 141.
THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE IRISH PARTY 4 2 7
All eyes were then turned on !'vIr. Sexton. He had taken
no part in hunting down Healy, and in consequence had given
little offence. In Parliament he could more than hold his own
even against Chamberlain and Balfour, and now that Gladstone
was gone he was its greatest orator. Interpreting the voice of
the country, the Irish Party elected him unanimously to the
vacant chair. But the difficulty was with :Mr. Sexton himself;
for he had ceased attending Parliament, and had announced in
July 1895 that he would not return to it. "So far as con-
cerns genuine service to the country," he said, " I am convinced
that at present I may just as well be out of Parliament as
in it. vVhy should I deliberately associate myself with evils
beyond my control, and incur responsibility for consequences
which I may foresee, but have no competence to avert?" The
unanimous vote of the whole party, it was thought, would
change his views, for it would be hard to resist such a call
when made for the sake of Ireland. To smooth his path still
more, 1\1:r. Hcaly wrote him the following letter :-
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
14th Feb. 1896.
DEAR SEXTON-It has been suggested to me by some colleagues
with whom I have been in close communication that a friendly note
from me might have the effect of dissuading you from finally declining
the honour which all of us recently united to pay you. I gladly
comply with their wish, because the moments of difference between us
are as nothing in contrast with the long years of comradeship through
which we have worked side by side.
The knowledge of the further perplexities which would take root in
the party if you persist in your attitude should, I would urge, outweigh
entirely the very natural desire for rest which your unstinted and
unremitting labours have brought upon you. Moreover, with your
acceptance of the Chairmanship I believe harmony would be restored
in our ranks, and the country with renewed confidence would cheerfully
rally to the support of its representatives in the struggle against Toryism
which is before us. If my withdrawal from the party would purchase
your acceptance, it is needless to say what pleasure it would afford me
to consult at the same time the national interests and my private
convenience.
On the other hand, if, as I assume, the assurance of hearty and
4 28
YEARS OF STRIFE
friendly co-operation would be more acceptable to you, it gives me
great pleasure to say that amongst those for whom I may be allowed
to speak there exists only one feeling, namely, a desire to make your
tenure of the chair agreeable as well as honourable to you, well
knowing the capacity and genius you bring to the service of the
movement.
'Vhile I write to you under a sense of public obligation in view of
the circumstances of the country, it is gratifying also to make this
communication as a tribute to yourself in faint acknowledgment of the
brilliant services to the common cause to which I have been so long a
witness. I shall take the liberty of publishing this letter in the press,
in the hope that it may interpose an additional difficulty in your way
to making a further refusal.- Faithfully yours,
T. M. HEALY'!
Those who believed !'vIr. Healy an incurable factionist did
not hesitate to say that he wrote in mockery and in insincerity.
But all fair-minded Irishmen believed that he was earnest and
sincere. !'vir. Sexton, however, was obdurate. He had already
declined the honour offered to him by the party, and now
he repeated his refusal to !'vIr. Healy in a not too gracious
reply. The country felt annoyed and surprised. Nor was it
easy to understand why a man of such gifts should prefer an
obscure position in Dublin to a proud position in a great
assembly, where his talents, while serving the country he loved,
would have attracted the admiration of the world.
Then !'vir. Di110n was elected to the chair. His election was
not unanimous; but in returning thanks he declared he would
be no majority Chairman, but the Chairman of the whole party,
and that under his Chairmanship every man in the party would
get fair_play.2 These were honest words and were honestly
intended, and yet many who voted for Dillon must have asked
themselves was he, after all, the best selection they could have
made. His personal character indeed was above reproach. He
had inherited his father's best qualities-his sympathy for the
poor, his hatred of oppression, his deep love of country, his
courage, his self- sacrifice. Everyone knew that John DilJon
had been in prison for Ireland, and that, had Ireland demanded
1 Healy, pp. 146-7. 2 Ibid. T 47.
l\IR. DILLON ELECTED CHAIRMAN'
4 2 9
or required it, he would just as readily have mounted the scaffold.
Nor could his bitterest enemy deny his right to be called, as
he often was, Honest John Dillon. But he could be all this
and not be the best selection for the chair of tèe 1 rish Party in
18 9 6 . For one thing, the Parnellites would not serve under
him; and cordial co-operation with IVIr. Healy and his friends
was not to be expected after the events of the last few years.
Indeed, 1\1r. Dillon was quite unable to conciliate opposition.
Like Parnell, he had the Committee of the party abolished and
ruled alone. But Parnell delegated a good deal of work to
others, keeping out of sight himself. Dillon was more reluctant
to part with any power except to a favoured few who were his
special friends. He controlled the National funds, he very largely
controlled the Freeman's Journal, he attended conventions, he
made speeches week after week, almost day after day, and
after his election to the chair he spoke of opposition to himself
with great severity. This was not the best way to attract
adherents or win over opponents. Many suggested that a
National Convention should be called, whose voice, speaking in
the name of Ireland, should be heard and its mandate obeyed,
and that thus would union come. But 1\1r. Dillon was averse,
and one of his chief supporters, 1\1r. T. P. O'Connor, declared
that such a gathering .would be nothing better than a Donny-
brook Fair. Gradually, however, IVIr. Dillon's objections to a
Convention disappeared; but instead of a National Convention
of Irishmen at home, he would have a Convention of the Irish
race. The Irish abroad, as well as those at home, had liberally
subscribed to National funds, and Mr. Dillon naturally thought
that all had a right to be called in and to say what was best
for Ireland's future. 1
This Convention met in Dublin on the 1st of September
1896. It was a large gathering, mustering in all 2500
delegates. They came over many seas and from many lands
-from the teeming cities of Great Britain; from N ew York
and Philadelphia and Boston and distant Montana; from the
populous centres of Canada; from Nova Scotia and Newfound-
1 Healy, pp. 162-3.
43 0
YEARS OF STRIFE
land; from the great self-governing British Colonies washed by
the waters of Southern seas; from Cape Colony and Griqualand
\Vest; from Kimberley, the diamond city of the English; and
from Johannesburg, the golden city of the Boers. Priests,
professional men, merchants, journalists, seasoned politicians,
they differed in many things, but all agreed in their love for
Ireland and lifted up their voices in the cause of unity and
peace at home. They were not able to understand so well as
the home delegates the disputes and wrangles between Irish
politicians, and it was in every sense regrettable that no effort
was made to have these home delegates fully representative of
Nationalist Ireland. In 1200 Irish parishes there were but
490 branches of the National Federation,! and many of these
branches were moribund in 1896. One of Mr. Dillon's
strongest supporters, !'vIr. M'Hugh, M.P., called public attention
to the fact that such an organization could not of itself repre-
sent Nationalist Ireland or effect a reunion of Nationalist
forces. " If the Convention was so constituted that only one
party out of two, or two parties out of three, were prepared to
accept its decisions, then its proceedings could not secure the
re-establishment of unity." And he suggested that other bodies
outside the Federation should be represented. But Mr. Dillon
disagreed with him, and when the Convention opened its doors
neither the followers of Mr. Redmond nor those of Mr. Healy
were present. 2
During the three days its sittings lasted, Dr. O'Donnell,
Bishop of Raphoe, presided, and in opening the proceedings
he spoke eloquently, as he always does. Able speeches were
also made by Mr. Dillon, Mr. Blake, Mr. O'Brien and Mr. T. P.
O'Connor, and by many of the delegates, home and foreign.
But while much was said on questions of National policy, on
agrarian, industrial and educational reform, and on Home Rule,
there was no serious attempt made to bridge over the chasm
which yawned between contending Nationalists. Father Flynn,
a Waterford priest, proposed to appoint a committee of
arbitration of the home and foreign delegates to draw up a set
1 Healy, p. 136. 2 Ibid. 143-4.
CO
VENTION OF THE IRISH RACE
43 1
of rules forming a common platform upon which all Irish
Nationalists might stand united. And Father Phillips, an
American priest, reminding his audience that men have opinions
and that these opinions are sometimes honestly expressed,
deprecated harsh measures and was quite sure that more flies
were caught by molasses than by vinegar.
But the voices raised for concord and peace were feeble and
faint, and were drowned in the shriller notes of defiance and
war. Mr. T. P. O'Connor poured ridicule on Father Flynn's
suggestions. Father Phillip's views were treated with scant
courtesy. Mr. O'Brien taunted Mr. Healy and his friends
with having failed to face the music, and therefore having
allowed judgment to go by default. Mr. Blake would have
nothing to do with interference from outside in the management
of the party funds. Mr. Dillon would allow no man in the
party to flout his authority, and if any man did, no matter
how great his abilities might be-this was evidently meant for
Mr. Healy-he would ask him to withdraw from the party
altogether. And a resolution was passed calling upon the
Irish Party to take such steps as they found necessary for the
establishment of unity and discipline in their own ranks. l
Mr. Dillon interpreted this resolution as a mandate to
crush all opponents. During the following winter he made
many speeches throughout Ireland and Great Britain, all in the
same strain. He claimed to be a patient man, a long-suffering
man, a man who kept his temper no matter how much he was
provoked, a man who worked by conciliation and kindness for
unity and peace. But in the midst of these peaceful protesta-
tions he sternly insisted on discipline being enforced. He
spoke as the duly-elected Chairman of the Irish Party rather
than as an individual; he spoke as the representative of the
party, its head, its accredited champion, clothed with its full
authority, and therefore entitled to respect and obedience
from every member of the party, even from those who differed
from him and disliked him. These gentlemen must leave
1 Davitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. 677-81 j Healy, pp. 164-70; Freeman's
Journal.
43 2
YEARS OF STRIFE
the party-he had no objection if they set up a party for
themselves, he preferred to see them do so to being dis-
loyal. Against l\Ir. Healy he was specially bitter, and more
than once he held meetings to denounce him in Mr. Healy's
constituency of North Louth. Neither from Mr. Healy nor
from any other member must criticism be directed towards the
party. "We in the Irish Party," he said, "can't stand
criticism." Mr. O'Brien went quite as far as Mr. Dillon, and,
like him, was specially enraged against ]\ifr. Healy. So much
was this the case that when Mr. O'Brien begged the Archbishop
of Dublin to arbitrate between contending Nationalists, he
excluded !'vIr. Healy. The country would deal with him, which
meant that he must be driven from public life. \\,Then the
party met in the beginning of 1897, new and stringent rules
were adopted, making it penal for any member of the party to
oppose !'vIr. Dillon in the House of Commons, and imposing new
and onerous conditions on those who wanted sustenance from
the party funds.
Yet these measures of coercion did not establish unity or
promote peace. Mr. Knox, one of the most brilliant of the
younger members of the party, defined this resolution as
imposing a new constitution on the party, and, being formally
expelled, had his action approved by his constituents at
Derry. Mr. Healy equally flouted the resolutions passed as
ultra vz"res, and declared that the powers conferred on the
Chairman were such as had never been given to a chairman
before, and that" the invention or enforcement of additional
obligations is subversive of the constitution of the party, and an
invasion of public and individual rights." Nearly twenty of
the members refused to accept the conditions imposed on them
as a qualification for payment from the party funds, and for
these a sum of money was obtained by public subscription.
The priests kept off Mr. Dillon's platforms. The Archbishop
of Cashel replied to an invitation to attend one of these meet-
ings by simply saying that he was in favour of every National
movement. The Archbishop of Dublin met 1\lr. O'Brien's
appeal to arbitrate between Parnellites and Dillonites by a
MR. BALFOUR'S LA
D PURCHASE ACT
433
refusal. He thought a union which would leave out Mr. Healy
"would stand, to say the least of it, in a position of somewhat
unstable equilibrium." Cardinal Logue objected to the meet-
ings held in Louth and Armagh to denounce Mr. Healy; "he
did not want his Archdiocese turned into a bear-garden by
cùntending factions." Mr. Dillon's opponents, pointing to his
speeches, asked were they not right in calling him a boss, and
had not their prediction of his Chairmanship been fulfilled?
Even Mr. Dillon's friends were not quite easy in their minds.
In 18 92 he had ridiculed the notion that there could be
absolute unanimity in the Irish Party. To entertain such a
n ')tion would be to assume that the party was a party without
brains.! This speech was certainly more worthy of a con-
stitutionalleader and of Mr. Dillon than his speeches in 18 9 6
and 18 97. In no constitutional party can cast-iron unity be
obtained, and any party which claim;; to be above criticism is
almo
t certainly below it N or could anyone shut his eyes to
the fact that in 1897 and 1898 the party was utterly dis-
organized and utterly worthless as a weapon of reform.2
In these circumstances Ireland had little to expect from the
Imp
rial Parliament, and yet such is the wayward course of
destiny that it was during this period of strife and confusion
that some great remedial measures were obtained. In 18 9 6
1\lr. Gèrald Balfour, the Chief Secretary, introduced the Land
Bill which he had promised in the previous year. I n spite of
the obvious purpose of the Act of 188 I, as expressed in the
Healy clause, tenants were still rented on their improvements.
Many classes of tenants were altogether excluded from the
benefits of that Act, and the Act of 189 I, with its clogging
limitations and conditions, had not much stimulated land
purchase. The Bill of 1896 was intended to remedy these
defects, to admit to the benefits of the Act of 188 I tenants
hitherto excluded, to protect tenants' improvements and to
stimulate land purchase. s The Bill also was intended to give
1 Healy, p. 74.
2 Ibid. 171-82; MacCarthy, The Story of an Irishman, pp. 374-6.
:I Hansard, 4th series, vol. xli. p. 630 (Mr. Morley's Speech).
VOl.. III 98
-434
VEARS OF STRIFE
relief to tenants who had already purchased. It extended the
period of payment from forty-nine to seventy years, providing
that at the end of each decade there should be a reduction of
the yearly instalment, regard being had to the fact that at each
such period the principal due was less, and instalments due
in lieu of principal and interest should be therefore lessened.
Decadal reductions of nearly 20 per cent were thus obtained.
1\1r. Dillon's attitude towards the Bill was not friendly.
Always distrustful of Irish landlords, he said that the Bill fell
far short of what the times demanded. I t was, besides, com-
plicated and intricate, and would afford a profitable field for
litigation. He therefore denounced it as "a rotten sham and
fraudulent Bill," and he assailed 1\:1r. Redmond because the
latter welcomed the Bill instead of attacking it N or did it
dispose him to be friendly when he saw that Mr. Healy shared
!'vIr. Redmond's view. Still he would endeavour to amend it,
and had a Committee of the party appointed to draw up
amendments. On this Committee 1\'lr. Healy's name was
placed. He had, however, not been consulted beforehand, and
had no intention of serving. He had, he said, been recently
expelled from the Committee of the party, and he was at a loss
to know why this unsolicited honour should now be paid him.
U I am happy to think that a Committee otherwise composed
of so many able men does not require my assistance, and my
recollection of the subject from former years remains sufficiently
distinct to enable me to hope that I shall not require theirs." 1
As a matter of fact the amendments of the Party Committee
were not fortunate enough to be accepted in Committee. Mr.
Healy and his brother were more successful, and owing to them
and to 1\1r. Redmond, the Bill was considerably amended and
improved. As usual, the House of Lords, being a House of
landlords, struck out some of these amendments. \Vhen the
Lords' amendments were agreed to in the Commons, Mr. Dillon
protested, declaring that in its final shape the Bill was worse
than when first introduced. Mr. Davitt went further, and
opposed it at every stage, as an amalgam of fraud and hypocrisy.
1 Healy, p. 154, 22nd April.
THE OVER-TAXATION OF IRELAND
435
But the Government was not in a yielding mood. When 1\lr.
Balfour was introducing the Bill, he plainly intimated that if it
were opposed by the representatives of the Irish tenants it
would be instantly dropped. At a later stage Mr. Chamberlain
made it clear that the Bill was meant to be non-contentious,
and if Mr. Dillon's description of it was endorsed by all his
friends it would be abandoned. Compelled then to accept or
reject, Mr. Dillon accepted and the Bill passed, though Mr.
Dillon was plainly right that it could not be regarded as a final
settlement.!
In the following year the unusual spectacle was seen of
Orangemen and Nationalists, Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites
combining on an Irish question. In 1894 a Royal Commission
had been appointed to inquire into the financial relations
between Great Britain and Ireland and their relative taxable
capacity.2 Presided over by Mr. Childers, lately Chancellor of
the Exchequer, and including among its members such able
financiers as !'vIr. Sexton and the O'Connor Don, many
witnesses were examined, mostly high officials whose position
and experience enabled them to speak with authority on
financial matters. 3 Briefly, the tale that these officers had to
tell was that Ireland was being robbed by Great Britain, that
the fiscal clauses of the Act of Union were grossly unjust, and
that the injustice then perpetrated had continued and increased.
Under an Irish Parliament, bad and corrupt as it had been,
taxation was light and the National Debt smal1. 4
Since the Union all that had been changed. The cost of
suppressing the rebellion of 1798 and of passing the Union was
placed on Ireland; its taxation and debt was therefore increased
and continued to increase, until in 18 I 7 it ceased to have its
separate Chancellor of the Exchequer, its separate National
Debt, and its separate Annual Budget. 5 Fiscal unity, however,
was not even then established between the two countries.
Regard was had to England's growing wealth and to Ireland's
1 Hansard, 4th series, vols. xli. xliii. xliv.
2 J..ough, England's Wealth, Ireland's Poverty, pp. 9-10.
SLough, p. 5. t Ibid. 203. :; Ibid. 14.
43 6
YEARS OF STRIFE
increasing poverty. When Sir Robert Peel imposed the
income tax he had not extended it to Ireland. 1 In 1853,
however, !'vIr. Gladstone had extended it, and leaving out some
. smaller items of taxation, fiscal unity became an accomplished
fact. Since then successive Chancellors have been careful to
study the special needs of Great Britain and have ignored the
special needs of Ireland. 2 A high tax, for instance, has been
imposed on spirits, which is an Irish industry; a light tax on
beer, which is more usually drunk across the Channel. s Tea
and tobacco,4 much used in Ireland, had also been heavily
taxed; and while the wealth of Ireland had decreased and her
population had been reduced by millions, a police force had
been maintained out of all proportion to the population, and a
civil service the most expensive in Europe. 5
With the knowledge of all these things the Royal Com-
mission found:
I. That for the purposes of this inquiry Great Britain and
Ireland should be considered as separate entities.
2. That the Act of Union imposed on Ireland a burden she
was unable to bear.
3. That the increased taxation put upon Ireland between
1853 and 1860 was not justified.
4. That identity of rates of taxation does not necessarily
involve equality of burden.
5. That though the actual revenue of Ireland compared to
that of Great Britain was one eleventh, its taxable
capacity was no more than a twentieth,6 and as a
consequence that Ireland was being overtaxed to the
amount of more than .[3,000,000 a year.
Here was common ground for all I rishmen, and with the
vicw of taking joint action in Parliament a conference of all
Irish representatives was summoned. The issuing circular was
signed by Messrs. Healy and Redmond, by Mr. Horace
Plunkett, the Unionist M.P. for South Dublin, and by Colonel
1 Lough, p. 45. 2 Ibid. 7 2 .
5 Ibid. 85.
S Ibid. 50- 5 I. 4 Ibid. 43-44.
6 Davitt, p. 690; Lough.
IRISH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT
437
Saunderson, the Orange leader. Mr. Dillon at first held aloof,
but he subsequently attended the conference, though he refused
to support the resolution which it was proposed to move in the
House of Commons. This was: (( That the findings of the
Royal Commission on the financial relations between Great
Britain and Ireland disclose a disproportion between the
taxation of Ireland and its taxable capacity as compared with
the other parts of the kingdom, which is inconsistent with the
spirit of the Act of Union and demands the immediate
attention of Parliament." Mr. Dillon's alternative resolution
was moved in the House of Commons by Mr. Blake. I twas,
however, opposed by all the Unionists, and was defeated by an
overwhelming majority.l Several public meetings were sub-
sequently held in Ireland, but they came to nothing, and the
unjust taxation of Ireland continued.
But if the Government, strong in its majority, could set
Irish agitation and Irish unity at defiance, and so make no
serious attempt to readjust the fiscal burdens of Ireland and
Great Britain, they could at least do something in relief of
local taxation. Mr. Knox, IVLP. for Derry, in 1896, moved
that such relief should be given by extending the Agricultural
Rating Act to Ireland, and thus relieve local rates as had
been already done in England and Scotland. His motion was
defeated, but it was renewed next year, on which occasion it
was supported by the Irish Unionists. Again he was defeated.
But a state of things which placed the Irish farmer at such
a disadvantage compared with his British brother, and this
in the face of the recent Report of the Financial Relations
Commi
sion, was too much even for Unionist newspapers, and
the unyielding attitude of the Government was condemned.
I nspired, it was said, by l\Ir. Chamberlain, :Ministers retraced
their steps. It was agreed to give
7 50,000 a year in relief
of local rates; and this grant was accompanied by a Local
Government Bill which passed into law in the session of 1898.
This measure effected a revolutionary change in the system of
county and district government. Hitherto non -representative
1 Annual Register, 1897, p. 105.
43 8
YEARS OF STRIFE
bodies called Grand Juries managed county affairs-the repairs
of roads and bridges, of county hospitals, asylums, court-houses
and industrial schools. They had the appointment of all
county officers, the duty of providing guarantees for tramways
or railways when such required guarantees, and they had the
power to levy and collect taxes for all these purposes. As
Justices of the Peace they sat as ex officios at the Boards of
Guardians, and in this way often exercised a controlling
influence in the administration of poor relief. They had besides
the duty of considering all criminal cases as a preliminary to
having such cases tried at the County Assizes. Appointed by
the High Sheriff, almost invariably a landlord, they were
themselves landlords, with all the prejudices of the landlord
class; and whenever landlord privileges were assailed by
agitation or violence, they were prodigal of resolutions demand-
ing coercion laws. Under the Local Government Act they
were still allowed to meet at Assizes and consider criminal
cases. But their fiscal and administrative powers were trans-
ferred to popularly elected bodies. For the county the new
body was the County Council, for the Unions the new body
was the District Council. The franchise was to be the same
as the Parliamentary franchise, and for membership everyone
of full age and of mental capacity, even women, was eligible.
The only persons excepted were clergymen, the exclusion being
due to the Parnellites, this, no doubt, in revenge for the
opposition they had encountered at elections from the priests. 1
To induce the representatives of the Irish landlords to
acquiesce in the loss of their enormous powers, half the sum of
750,000 voted for relief of local taxation was to be given to
the landlords. They had hitherto paid half the poor rates, and
by this grant were entirely relieved. The other half of the
sum named went in relief of county cess, and was so far a boon
to tenants who had hitherto been compelled to pay the whole
of the county cess. The Bill met with a favourable reception
from all sides. Mr. Healy and 1V1r. Redmond praised it, Mr.
1 A Guide to Irish Local Government, by Muldoon and M'Sweeney.
Dublin, 1898.
MR. HORACE PLUNKETT
439
Dillon acknowledged that it would effect a far-reaching
revolution in the conditions of Irish local government and
Irish local life. The Irish Unionists acquiesced because they
were relieved from the payment of poor rates. They swallowed
the disagreeable dose when mixed with such a soothing
draught. l In such circumstances the Bill passed with little
opposition, and for the first time power passed from non-
representative and often corrupt bodies into the hands of the
people.
In the next year was passed an "Act for establishing a
Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland
and for other purposes connected therewith." This concession
was chiefly due to Mr. Horace Plunkett, M.P. He was a
Protestant without a trace of bigotry; an admirer of Ulster
energy and enterprise, but abhorring Orange intolerance; a
landlord, but an indulgent one; a Unionist who gave credit to
Home Rulers for good intentions; loyal to England, but
condemning her oppression of Ireland in the past. Familiar
with agricultural conditions on both sides of the Atlantic, he
saw that Ireland-a purely agricultural country-was hope-
lessly outclassed in competition with other nations. Without
looking to Government for aid, he thought that Irishmen might
do much to help themselves. Outside the noisy arena of
political combat, and laying aside for the moment their political
and religious prejudices, he could not see why Irish farmers
could not come together in association and combination.
They could talk over their difficulties; they could combine to
obtain better and cheaper manures and machinery and more
favourable transport facilities; they could look for more suit-
able markets for their agricultural produce. But a landlord
and a Unionist talking to National farmers was a voice crying
in the wilderness, and it was not until 1894 that the Irish
Agricultural Organization Society (LA.O.S.) was established.
Its progress was rapid, and by the end of 1898 there were
branches in every county in Ireland. Some of these were
agricultural societies, a greater number were dairy societies,
1 Annual Register, p. 69.
,HO
YEARS OF STRIFE
others were poultry or home industries societies, and in not a
few cases there were agricultural banks. 1 At the central
branch Catholic priests and Unionist peers, landlords and
farmers worked cordially, and in the country districts Catholic
and Protestant clergymen were frequently present at the same
meetings.
At the close of 1895 1V1r. Plunkett thought the time had
come to appeal to the Government. For the time Home Rule
had ceased to be a living issue; but Mr. Plunkett believed
there would be no difficulty in obtaining from Government the
establishment of an Agricultural Board such as already existed
in England, if only the Irish members would put forth a united
and definite demand. With this object he invited all the
Irish members and a few other prominent men to a conference
at the close of the session of 1895' I t was hence cal1ed the
Recess Committee. The Anti - Parnellites held aloof, :Mr.
:i\IacCarthy declaring that the object of 1\lr. Plunkett was to
wean the people from Home Rule. Mr. Redmond, hO\\"ever,
and his party joined in, as did many Unionists. 1\lr. T. P.
Gill, once a Parnellite M.P., and an exceedingly able man,
acted as secretary, and to obtain information he travelled
through France and Denmark. Other valuable reports came
from \Vurtemberg, Belgium and Bavaria. Finally, I\1:r. Plunkett
presented the Report of the Recess Committee in the autumn
of 1896. He was careful to point out that he and his
colleagues relied on individual and combined effort rather than
on State aid. "In asking," he said, "for the latter \ve have
throughout attached the utmost importance to its being granted
in such a manner as to evoke and supplement the former; and
if at the outset we appear to give undue prominence to the
capabilities of State initiation, it must be remembered that
we are dealing with economic conditions which have been
artificially produced, and may therefore require exceptional
treatment of a temporary nature to bring about a permanent
remedy." 2 1\1r. Balfour's reply was sympathetic, but nothing
1 Annual Register, p. 20 9.
2 Reþort of the Recess Committee, edited by T. P. Gill.
THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP
44 1
was done till 1899, when the Act setting up an Agricultural
Board, with a revenue of nearly ;[ 170,000 a year, became law.
These concessions were the more remarkable when the
weakness of the Opposition is considered. Lord Rosebery had
proved an unfortunate selection as leader of the Liberals-a
man without any deep conviction or any fixity of purpose.
Finding himself unable to excite enthusiasm or command
sufficient support, and that he appeared to divide the energies
and try the faith of Liberals, he resigned the leadership in
October 1896.1 Without any formal recognition, Sir \Villiam
Harcourt became leader; but he also had to complain that
he was not given the undivided support of the party. In fact,
Lord Rosebery's friends distrusted him and held aloof from
him, and would have evidently preferred to follow some one
else, now that Lord Rosebery was gone. In these circum-
stances Sir William Harcourt wished to abandon a position
which he could not creditably fill. "I cannot," he said, " and
I shall not consent to be a candidate for any contested
position." He considcred that a party rent by sectional dis-
putes and personal interests could do nothing, and that a
disputed leadership beset by distracted sections and com-
plicating interests is an impossible situation. 2 Thus in the last
days of 1898 the Liberal Party was again without a leader.
Meantime the old warrior who had so often led the Liberal
hosts to victory had disappeared from the scene. Hating
oppression to the last, he was enraged at the awful massacres
of the Armenians by the Turks, and flinging aside the burden
of years, he came forth from his books to arraign the Turks
before mankind. His regret was that he was no longer able
to assail them as he had formerly when they had been guilty
of the Bulgarian atrocities. His last speech was at Liverpool
in the end of 1896, a really marvellous performance for one on
the threshold of his eighty-seventh year. During the next
twelve months his vital energies grew weaker and weaker, and
in May 1898 the end camc. When it was announced,
messages of condolence came from every part of the civilized
1 Annual Register, p. 19 0 . 2 Ibid. 19 1 -3.
44 2
YEARS OF STRIFE
world. A grave in Westminster Abbey was in due course
provided to receive the remains of the illustrious dead, and in
Parliament eloquent tributes were paid by the party leaders to
the memory of one who had shed lustre upon the English name,
and even upon the human race. l Mr. Dillon, on the part of
the Irish members, spoke with feeling and with eloquence, and
from every part of Ireland there was a responsive echo to his
words. For the great statesman was loved and honoured in
the cabins of the Irish poor. More than any other Englishman.
living or dead, he had laboured on their behalf. He had freed
them from the oppressions of an alien Church and from the
grinding tyranny of a hated land system, and he had endeavoured
to bring back to them their lost Parliament; and when they
remembered these things they poured benedictions upon his
name. 2
At that date the Irish Party had fallen low in public
esteem. Its unity and usefulness were gone. Individual
members by their ability might make an impression in the
House of Commons, but the party as such was absolutely
powerless. In Ireland the public refused to subscribe to its
maintenance, and little assistance came from across the
Atlantic. Mr. Dillon did his best, but too much time was
spent in denunciation of Mr. Healy, on whom the blame for
everything was thrown. There was no real attempt, however,
to meet the objections which Mr. Healy made. At last, Mr.
Dillon realized that under his leadership unity was impossible,
and in 1898 he suggested a conference of Parnellites and
Anti-Parnellites. He even resigned the chair, professing his
willingness to serve under a Parnellite chairman, a noble act of
self-effacement and patriotism. But no Parnellite attended the
conference except Mr. O'Kelly, though 1\1r. Harrington had
already been working to bring about Union. Mr. Healy also
was not averse, so long as IVIr. Dillon was not in the chair.
And Mr. O'Brien started the United League in 1898. an
organization which was meant to take the place both of the
National Federation and of what remained of the National
1 Morley, ii. 760-73.
2 Review of Rn,iews, June 1898.
"
'"
;,
j
"....:::...
....
, -
..
....
... .....
-
\:-
.
... ....
,.' ...
..
.
. ...
C1
z
::>
::::)
:.J
-/
-
7.
:;
-.
.
z
::>
...J
...J
25
z
::r::
o
-..
PARNELLITES AND ANTI-PARNELLITES COALESCE 443
League. Spreading into other counties, the new organization
spoke out for harmony among the leaders, and threatened with
extinction those who still clung to the course of faction. These
concurring causes were fruitful of good, and in 1900, after ten
years of wasting war, all parties came together: Mr. Dillon
ceased to be Chairman, and Mr. Redmond, the Parnellite leader,
took his place, and unity became an accomplished fact.
CHAPTER XIX
The New Century
WHEN the old century went out the British Empire. was at
war with the two Boer republics of South Africa, the Orange
River Free State and the Transvaal. Partly Dutch, partly
German) partly French Huguenots) these Boers had settled in
Cape Colony in the seventeenth century, and in 181 5 came for
the first time under British rule. Being slave - owners) and
resenting bitterly the emancipation of their slaves in 18 34,
thousands of them (1834-7) trekked from Cape Colony
northwards, settling in the territory which extends from the
Orange River to the Limpopo) and finally forming two
independent republics. They were a fighting race, fighting
,,"ith the natives whom they dispossessed, fighting with the
Zulus, fighting with the British, fighting among themselves.
In 1 8 77 the Transvaal was annexed by England; in 1880
the Boers rose in rebellion and defeated the British at l\1:ajuba
Hill. The following year Mr. Gladstone gave back the
Transvaal its independence, subject only to a shadowy British
suzerainty, which became still more shadowy after the London
Convention of 1884. The discovery of the Rand gold-fields
brought thousands of miners, mostly British, to the Transvaal)
and then fresh troubles began. The new O\vners - the
Uitlanders, as they were called-had brought energy and
capital, and soon made the Transvaal rich. But they could
get no political rights, no votes, no share in the government;
and at every turn they were hampered and harassed by
corrupt officials, by insolent policemen, by excessive taxes, by
Government concessions and monopolies. But the autocratic
Transvaal chief, President Kruger, was unyielding. He dis-
444
THE IRISH FA YOUR THE BOERS
445
liked the British. He had formerly trekked from Cape Colony,
and now he was again hemmed in by those from whom
he had fled. Eastward was the small Portuguese territory
of Lorenzo Marques, but south and south-east were the British
Colonies of the Cape and Natal, while west was the British
possession of Bechuanaland, and north the British flag had just
been hoisted in the land of the l\1atabele. Kruger angrily
declared he and his burghers were shut up in a kraal. The
British authorities took sides with the Uitlanders, and as
negotiations failed, war broke out in the end of I 899.
Large numbers of Irish Nationalists both inside and
outside Parliament sympathized with the Boers. The sight of
a small nation of farmers entering into a struggle with the
mighty British Empire was one which appealed to the imagina-
tion. Every lover of freedom found it hard to repress his
admiration at the gallant stand which these farmers made; nor
was there scarce a parallel in history for the valour with which
they encountered veteran troops, the skill with which they
outmanæuvred experienced generals, and the victories which
they gained even when vastly outnumbered by their foes.
But with all their fine qualities these Boers were narrow-
minded and illiberal, excessively cruel to their coloured
servants, fanatically attached to their own creed, and fanatically
intolerant of other creeds. As for Catholics, they regarded
them as did the Scotch Covenanters of the seventeenth century,
and had they taken possession of Cape Town the Catholics
there dreaded the utter ruin of their Church. And yet the
Boer leaders were regarded as heroes in Ireland, and the news
of every Boer victory hailed with enthusiasm. Deeply
humiliated because of the disasters which had overtaken their
arms, the English bitterly resented the conduct of the Irish.
The Unionists pointed to these manifestations of hatred to-
wards England, and used them as an argument against Home
Rule; and at the General Election in October 1900 the Liberals
were taunted with being the allies of traitors who cheered
England's enemies and longed for the dismemberment of the
British Empire. Nor can there be any doubt that voters
44 6
THE NEW CENTURY
were thus influenced and votes lost to the friends of Home
Rule.
On their side the Liberals retorted that the Unionists,
though many years in office, had done nothing to redeem the
promises they had formerly made at the polls. They had
done nothing to give better houses to the working classes in
towns, and nothing to lighten the burden of poverty and old
age by giving pensions to the aged poor. The Liberals also
complained that the Unionists had dissolved on a worn-out
register. But these accusations were made in vain. The
Unionists had selected their time well, when the disasters of
the early part of the war were forgotten in the news of Lord
Roberts' recent victories. In the autumn of 1900 it was
believed in England-erroneously, as it proved-that the war
was over; and the fact that the Boers had been beaten, that
Majuba had been avenged, and that in consequence the richest
gold-fields in the world would soon be a British possession, was
highly agreeable to British pride as well as to British greed.
The Unionists were therefore returned with an enormous
majority. Their total strength was 402; their opponents
being but 268, of these 186 being Liberals and 82 Nationalists.
This meant no change in Ireland. South Dublin and a
division of Dublin City had been wrested from the Unionists,
but the latter had won Derry City and Galway.l
With Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites acting together the
Nationalists ought to have done better. The explanation is
that the spirit of faction still survived. Mr. William O'Brien
was then the most potent man among the popular leaders.
His organization, the United Irish League, by advocating
compulsory purchase, had readily obtained recruits among the
farmers, and had already extended so much that it became the
dominant factor at elections, and it had powerfully, even
decisively, operated in bringing Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites
together. But while Mr. O'Brien welcomed the adhesion of
Mr. Redmond, he wanted no co-operation with Mr. Healy. At
League meetings Mr. Healy's friends were spoken of as public
1 Annual Register, pp. 194-2 I I.
DEATH OF QUEEN VICTORIA
447
enemies, and when Mr. Healy refused to attend the National
Convention in June, he was fiercely assailed. His friends were
hunted down at the General Election, and driven from the seats
they had filled, and Mr. Healy himself was also attacked in
North Louth by Mr. O'Brien in person. His constituents,
however, were resolved not to part with their brilliant member,
and Mr. Healy was returned. But when the General Election
was over, a National Convention was again summoned and met
in December, and one of its first acts was to attack :Mr.
Healy. His expulsion from the party was proposed by :Mr.
O'Brien himself in a speech of great eloquence and great
bitterness. The motion was supported by Mr. Dillon, and
though opposed strongly, even vehemently, by Mr. Harrington,
it was carried. Mr. Redmond, who filled the chair, disapproved
of what was being done, wishing for a real union among all
Irish Nationalists, but he bowed to the declared will of the
Convention, and I\Ir. Healy was driven from the party.l
In April 1900 the Queen paid a visit to Ireland. It was
said she wanted, in doing so, to mark her appreciation of the
conduct of the Irish soldiers in the war, who in every battle in
which they were engaged had shown the traditional valour of
their race. In January of the next year the Queen died.
During her reign, in its length unprecedented in British history,
the Empire had advanced enormously in trade and commerce,
in extent of possessions, in population and in wealth. The
standard of comfort among the masses had become higher,
popular liberties had been so extended that the people had
become the masters in the land, and though other nations had
grown great and other empires risen, England was still the
unquestioned mistress of the sea. The people respected their
Sovereign because of the pride she took in her world-wide
Empire, because of her devotion to her public duties, because of
her tact and good sense, and her respect for constitutional
forms. They respected her because of the order and decorum
maintained at her Court, because of the purity of her domestic
life. And though she died with the burden of more than
1 Freeman's Journal.
44 8
THE NEW CENTURY
eighty years upon her, at an age long past the usually allotted
span, the grief of the nation was profound. The pomp of the
funeral procession and of the funeral service, and the tributes in
Parliament, were clothed with a certain air of formality, because
they were usual and prescribed. But there \\ as grief which no
State formality called forth, from the cities and towns and
villages, from the people of Canada and A ustralia and India,
from the Maoris of New Zealand and from the islands in the
Southern seas. l Ireland alone stood sullenly apart. As sne
had in the Jubilee year of 1887 no share in the nation's joy,
she had now no share in the nation's sorrow. For it was
remembered that the dead Queen cared little for Ireland and
had no sympathy with Irish popular demands. She regretted
the Disestablishment of the Irish Church, she disliked the
various Land Acts, she abhorred Home Rule; and ,,-hile she
was the friend of DisraeJi whom Ireland detested, she disliked
Gladstone whom Ireland loyed.
This refusal to weep when England wept, this continued
sympathy with Boer victories and continued rejoicing at British
defeats, did not help Ireland in Parliament, and in 1900 there
was no mention of Ireland in the Queen's Sp
ech. Nor ""as
there in the Royal Speech of the following rear, excert some
vague promise that a measure might be introduced U for
regulating sale by landlords to occupying tenants in Ireland." 2
.1\1:r. Redmond, however, wanted compulsory purchase, and
moved an amendment to the Address asking for such. He
was supported by 1'Ir. T. \N. Russell and by many of the
Liberals, with the result, which was not unhopeful, that 140
voted with him against 235 on the side of the Government. s
l\Tr. William O'Brien was not so well supported on his motion
censuring the harsh enforcement of the Coercion Act. 4 Nor
did this motion check the Irish Executive in its attacks on the
United Irish League. Public speeches were carefully noted.
public meetings watched by the police and sometimes broken
up, and in the years 190 I and 1902 forty- two prominent
1 Annual Register, pp. 8-20; Times, Jan. 23.
3 Ibid. for 1902, PP. 36-37.
2 Ammal Register, p. 24-
4 Ibid. 3 8 -39.
THE IRIS II PARTY IN P.\RLIAl\IENT
449
persons were sent to prison for political offences. Eleven of
these were members of Parliament, two were ex-members,
several others were newspaper editors, and one was a lady-
the owner of the TVateiford Star. 1 In 19 02 the King's
Speech was silent about Ireland, and again Mr. Redmond
moved an amendment advocating compulsory purchase, and
condemning the enforcement of Coercion. The Government
indeed admitted that there was no serious crime in Ireland, but
there were conspiracies against the payment of rent and there
was boycotting, and to meet such cases the weapons of Coercion
had been used. As to compulsory sale, the Chief Secretary
would have none of it ; but he was willing to promote measures
for the encouragement of agriculture, industry, and education,
in the honest belief that such work was good and was worth
doing. 2 In the division :1\1r. Redmond was, of course, defeated;
but it was satisfactory for him to note that he had the support
of Sir H. Campbell- Bannerman and 1\lr. Morley and of 70
Liberals. Better results than this could not be expected as
long as the Irish Nationalists continued to shout for the Boer
leaders at public meetings, and to cheer Boer victories even in
the House of Commons. These cheers did the Boers no good
and received from them no recognition, nor did they do
England any harm. But they outraged English opinion and
irritated those whom the Irish members, if they wanted an,.thing-
for their country, were bound to persuade. 1\1r. Dillon rebuked
such tactless outbursts of impotent disaffection. But harm was
done nevertheless. 3 Lord Rosebery was angry and vowed he
would not consent to have a Parliament at Dublin. Mr.
Asquith was not so emphatic, but his views were substantially
the same. E\-en so staunch and tried a friend of Ireland as
1\lr. 1\1 orley, while still faithful to Home Rule, deplored" the
bad feeling and want of decency JJ of these Irish members who
laughed and jeered at the capture and humiliation of a British
Genera1. 4 One noted enemy of Ireland disappeared from the
scene during the year in the person of Lord Salisbury, who
1 Davitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. 7 00 -70 I.
3 ibid. for 1902, p. 86.
VOL. III
2 Annual Re,![ister, pp. 27-3 0 .
4 Ibid. 91-9 2 .
99
....5 0
THE NEW CENTURY
resigned the Premiership and was succeeded by Mr. Arthur
Balfour. And the Irish Secretary brought in a Land Purchase
Bill, which was not, however, persevered with, though it met
with a favourable reception from the Irish members. l Beyond
this Ireland's interest in the Parliamentary history of the year
was little, and 1902 like 190 I might be regarded as a barren
year.
At that date the outlook was not bright. The Land
Courts were blocked, and thousands, unable to get their cases
taken up, were compelled to pay rents which were too high. In
spite of the Land })urchase Acts of 189 I and 1896, land
purchase was proceeding slowly. And meantime the strongest,
the healthiest, the most enterprising among the young Irish
peasants were flying from Ireland, leaving the weaker behind.
The poorhouses were well filled, and in every county, even with
a diminishing population, the asylums ,,-ere being enlarged.
There was discontent and disaffection all over the land. The
farmer was unable to get his rent fixed, and even when he did
he had but a lease of fifteen years, at the end of which the rent
was to be again fixed. And in order to get a still greater
reduction than formerly he let his land become deteriorated
as he approached the end of the judicial term. The tenant
who had not bought his holding, because he and his landlord
could not agree as to the price, was envious of his neighbour
who had already become a peasant proprietor, and who, with a
great reduction in his yearly payments, was becoming the owner
of his holding. Yet the extreme men belonging to the different
parties in Ireland had nothing to propose but to continue their
quarrels. The landlords, unable either to learn or forget, still
wept over their vanished power, and clinging tenaciously to
what was left to them, refused to sell their properties except at
a prohibitive price; and at the least sign of agitation among
their tenants they raised the old cry for Coercion. The tenants'
representatives, grudging the landlords anything but the price
of their tickets to England, wished that agitation should continue.
As for the Orangemen, even the farmers, they were reluctant
1 Annual Register, pp. 102-3.
TIlE LAND CO
FERENCE
45 1
to join hands with their Catholic feHow-tenants, and readily
listened to interested orators who talked of the Boyne and
Aughrim and of \Villiam of Orange.
But there were moderate men as well as extreme men.
There were landlords like Lord Dunraven who disliked Home
Rule, but disliked Dublin Castle just as much, and who, believing
that land purchase was the only solution of Irish Land questions,
wished that it should go on more rapidly. There were tenants'
representatives who did not wish for the ruin of the landlords,
but wanted them to remain in Ireland, ha\'Ìng disposed of
their properties. And there were Orangemen who thronged to
hear 1\11'. T. \V. Russell and cheered him when he advocated
compulsory sale.
Noting all these things, a young Galway landlord, Captain
Shawe Taylor, in the end of 1902 addressed a letter to repre-
sentative men of the different parties, inviting them to a
conference on the Land question-the hope being that by
mutual concession and compromise a solution might be found.
By many of the landlords the invitation was coldly received,
while Mr. Redmond described it as a " white flag" hung out by
the landlords. But the moderates on both sides asserted
themselves. Their hands were strengthened by a statement of
the Chief Secretary that it was impossible for any Government
to settle the Irish Land question; it must be settled by the
parties interested, and then the Government would as far as
possible give effect to the settlement arrived at. Any such
settlement necessarily involved holding a conference. It was
held in the end of December 1902, under the chairmanship of
Lord Dunraven. The other landlord representatives were Lord
Mayo, Colonel Poe, and Colonel Everard. The tenants were
represented by l\1essrs. Redmond, Harrington, \ViJliam O'Brien,
and T. W. Russell; Captain Shawe Taylor acted as Secretary.l
Reason and compromise soon showed themselves in the
deliberations which followed. Recognizing that the days of
their ascendancy were over, the landlords agreed that dual
ownership ought to be abolished, and that until it was there
1 Annual Register, pp. 247-9.
45 2
THE NEW CENTURY
would be no peace in Ireland. The tenants' representatives
agreed that the landlords ought to get a price for their land
which would leave them their net second term incomes. This
could be done by lowering the rate of interest on the purchase
money, and by spreading out the payments over a long term of
years. This would postpone the day at which the tenant
would be complete owner of his holding, and it would involve
giving a higher price, but not necessarily a higher annual
payment; and, after all, the immediate reduction with the
prospect of ultimate ownership was all that the tenant sought.
It was agreed, further, at the conference that when the
landlord insisted on a higher price than the tenant was willing
to give, the State should step in and bridge over the difference
between the contracting parties. \Vith great advantage the
State might thus vote even a large sum, for the settlement of
the Land question would effect a considerable saving in public
expenditure. The Land Commission Courts and the Land
Judges Court cost between them annually a sum of more than
;[3 00 ,000. 1 In addition to this, an enormous police force was
maintained chiefly for the purpose of keeping landlords and
tenants from coming to blows; and it was notorious that the
crime and outrage which sometimes stained the annals of the
country had their origin in agrarian disputes. The recommen-
dations of the Land Conference were agreed to unanimously,
and were welcomed by the Government, and in the following
February a Land Purchase Bill, partly based on these recom-
mendations, was introduced.
At that date the Chief Secretary for Ireland was 1\1r.
George Wyndham. He was an Englishman and a Tory
pledged irrevocably against Home Rule, and as such in little
favour with Irish Nationalists. Their aversion to him was all
the greater because he had acted as Sccretary to l\Ir. Arthur
Balfour during the exciting times of the Plan of Campaign
war, and especially because he was known to be in complete
sympathy with the vicws of his chief as to the iniquity of the
Plan and as to the necessity for putting down its advocates.
1 Dunraven, The Outlook in Irela1zd, p. 62.
MR. WYNDHAM
453
Worst of all, since he became Chief Secretary himself, Mr.
VV yndham had put the Coercion Act in force and thrown
many of the popular leaders into prison. Yet it was difficult
to dislike him. Genial, warm-hearted, witty and kind, an
author, a poet, an eloquent speaker, he is an aristocrat with
democratic instincts, a man who, in spite of his birth and
surroundings, feels for the people and is ready to do battle on
their behalf. On the affections of Irishmen he has special
claims, for he is the grandson of Pamela FitzGerald, and there-
fore great-grandson of Lord Edward, one of Ireland's best-
beloved sons. And Mr. Wyndham is proud of his Irish blood,
and has never concealed his partiality for Ireland, nor his
desire to do something on her behal[l He viewed the
assembling of the Land Conference with the greatest sympathy,
and was well pleased that its proceedings were so harmonious,
and its conclusions arrived at with unanimity. Nor can there
be any doubt that he wished to carry out its recommendations
in their entirety, and would have done so had he been able to
obtain the consent of his colleagues in the Cabinet.
His Bill contemplated the total abolition of Irish landlordism
and the final settlement of the Irish Land question, and for this
purpose a sum of [; I 00,000,000 was to be advanced by the
State to enable the tenants to buy. In addition there was to
be a bonus of [; 12,000,000 given to the landlords who sold,
this being an inducement to them to sell. If, therefore, the
tenant agreed to buy his holding at [; I 00, the landlord received
L I 12, the extra amount being the bonus of 12 per cent. The
Land Conference agreed that the landlord should get such a
sum as, when invested at 3 per cent, would bring him his net
income from second term rents, this being calculated at 90 per
cent of the total. Mr. Wyndham undertook to provide him
with this, the money to be advanced to the tenant to be re-
payable in sixty-eight years at 31- per cent. The landlord was
to be paid not in land stock, but in cash, the cash to be raised by
a Government flotation of stock, and the loss on flotation, if
any, to be made good out of the yearly agricultural grant.
1 Review of Reviews, April 1903.
454
THE NEW CENTURY
The Bill provided that, as a result of his bargain, judicial
tenants were not to get on first term rents less than 20 per
cent nor more than 40 per cent, and on second term rents not
less than 10 per cent nor more than 30 per cen t. This was
ca1led buying within the zones, and in such cases there was
no need for inspection by the Estates Commission officials.
Obviously the intention was to avoid delay in transferring the
land from landlord to tenant, and this was done by the
omission of inspection. And equa1ly plain was the intention
to raise the price in the landlord's favour by limiting the
reduction given to the tenant, and by lowering the rate of
interest from 4 per cent to 3t per cent. The landlord was
also saved the trouble and expense of proving title, for this
was done by the Estates Commissioners created by the Bill
when passed.
Never before had such a favourable reception been given to
any measure dealing with the thorny subject of Irish land. The
Irish leader, 11r. John Redmond, described it as "the greatest
measure of land purchase reform ever seriously offered to the
Irish people, and that it is intended to contain, and may quite
easily be made to contain, all the elements of a settlement of
the Irish agrarian difficulty and the ending of the Irish land
war, the permanent unity of all classes in Ireland, and the
laying broad and sure of the foundations of social peace." 1
1\1r. T. W. Russell supported it because it represented the
passing of Irish landlordism, "the beginning of the end of as
tragic a story as the history of any civilized country presents." 2
1\lr. Dillon saw that the Chief Secretary was desirous of
.
signalizing his tenure of office {{ by solving the question which
has proved too hard a nut to crack for many of his prede-
cessors." 3 Mr. \Villiam O'Brien spoke in the same strain as
did 1\1r. Redmond and 1\1r. Dillon. Mr. Healy regarded it as
marking" a reversal of a long period of dismal oppression and
awful woe, of a breach of treaty faith committed two centuries
ago, but having to this day left a living effect. This Bill will
change more than Ireland, it will change England too, and
1 Hansard, cxxi. 1208. 2 Ibid. 1266. 3 Ibid. 13 0 4.
THE LAr\D ACT OF 19 0 3
55
with that change I hope to see a brighter light in the eyes of
dark Rosaleen." 1 The opposition leaders were not unfriendly,
and when Mr. Wyndham summed up the second reading
debate in a speech of singular eloquence, 443 voted with him,
while only 26 went into the lobby against the Bill. 2
In the minority were men who were reluctant to pledge
British credit for such men as the Irish landlords, though the
plea that Irish tenants might repudiate their bargains was not
seriously put forth in face of the punctuality with which former
tenant-purchasers had paid their instalments. On the other
hand, the tenants' representatives objected to many things in
the Bill, and in Committee 1Iessrs. Redmond, Dillon, Healy,
William O'Brien, and T. \V. Russell fought hard to have it
amend
d. They objected that it did nothing for the evicted
tenants or for the labourers. They objected to the zones as
meant to unduly inflate the price of Irish land. They objected
to give the landlords a 3 per cent security instead of the
uncertain security even of his second term rents. They
objected to the abolition of the decadal reductions. They
objected to have one-fourth of the tenants compelled to buy
when three-fourths agreed to buy. They objected to the
omission of inspection, the effect of whi
h would be that
neither the interests of the tenants nor the State were suffi-
ciently safeguarded. They objected that non-judicial tenants
should not have their rents first reduced before negotiating a
purchase. They objected to have 1Ir. \Vrench, the landlord
Commissioner, secured in his position, while the other Com-
missioners, I\lr. Bailey and IVlr. Finucane, were' to hold office
"during pleasure." 3 And Mr. Russell vehemently protested
against the proposed rent-charge payable to the State even
after the sixty - eight years during which the terminable
annuity was payable. Finally, larger powers, and especially
compulsory powers for acquiring land, were demanded for the
Congested Districts Board.
1 Hansard, cxxii. 66. 2 Ibid. 148.
3 This provision was altered by the Evicted Tenants Act of 1907, undel'"
which :\Ir. Bailey and Mr. Finucane were given a judicial tenure.
45 6
THE NEW CENTURY
Though these objections were urged with great ability, Mr.
\Vyndham on some points was unyielding. He would do
nothing for the labourers, nor would he give compulsory powcrs
to the Congested Districts Board, and he insisted on not having
any decadal reductions, nor would he abolish the zones. But
he consented to abolish the perpetual rent charge; he admitted
non-judicial tenants to the benefits of the Bill; he consented
to do something real for the evicted tenants; and he placed
all the Estates Commissioners beyond the reach of arbitrary
dismissa1,l Through all the stages of the Bill his tact, his
care, his patience, his conciliatory manner, his complete mastery
of all the details of the measure, were beyond all praise, and
merited encomiums from all quarters of the House. Almost
with unanimity the third reading was passed. I n the Lords
some minor amendments were inserted, a
ld in part agreed to
in the House of Commons, and at last the Bill was turned into
an Act of Parliament. 2 It was not a perfect piece of legisla-
tion, but it was an enormous advance on anything which had
preceded it, and was rightly described by Mr. T. \V. Russell as
H the greatest measure passed for Ireland since the Union." 3
The landlords had certainly fared well. In most cases
their estates were mortgaged at a high rate of interest. The
extinction of these mortgages was calculated to be equal to
two years' purchase money, the bonus equal to three years, the
taking over the law costs by the Estates Commission was equal
to another year. It was an enormous advantage to get cash
instead of land stock, which within the previous years had
sunk well below par. And a most advantageous provision for
the landlord was that he could sell all his estate and then buy
back his residence and demesne on easy terms. This was
considered equal to two years' purchase. 4 Seeing, then, on the
one hand the many inducements the landlord had to sell, and
on the other the feverish anxiety of the tenant to be done with
1 Hansard, cxxii. cniii. cxxiv. cxxv., especially cxxv. 1322-9 - Mr.
Redmond's Speech.
2 Annual Register, pp. 181-2. 3 Hansard, cxxv. 1349.
4 Dayitt's Fall of Feudalism, pp. 710-12 ; see copy of the Act.
THE IRISH LEADERS AND LAND PURCHASE 457
landlordism and to become the owner of his farm, it was little
wonder that bargains were quickly entered into and that land
purchase proceeded rapidly.
I t proceeded too rapidly for the taste of some of the
tenants' representatives. 1\Ir. Dillon, for instance, had always
looked askance at the Land Conference, and thought that Lord
Dunraven and his friends were getting too much. He could
not see why land which for the previous twenty years had been
bought at 17 years' purchase, and often less, could now be
worth 24 years' purchase, and even 27 years' purchase, and
this without adding the bonus and other advantages. These
latter were calculated to equal 6 years' purchase, so that the
result of vVyndham's Act was to raise the price of land from
17 or 18 years' purchase to 30 years' or more. Mr. Davitt's
views coincided with those of 11r. Dillon. Mr. Sexton was
also on the same side, and with his great financial ability had
no difficulty in proving, in the pages of the Freeman's Jounlal,
that the tenants who were buying under Wyndham's Act at
the extravagant prices ruling were making a bad bargain. 1
Ir. \Villiam O'Brien, on the other hand, had gladly entered
into the Land Conference and gladly signed its recommenda-
tions. He welcomed the Act of 1903, and wanted it carried
out as rapidly as possible, so that landlordism should disappear.
He knew well that under former Purchase Acts a lower rate of
purchase prevailed. But the landlords who sold were those
who were plunged in financial difficulties and had no option
but to sell. These needy and embarrassed landlords were now
sold out, and the landlords who remained were in most cases
solvent and had no interest in selling unless very tempting
inducements were held out to them. And 1\Ir. O'Brien did not
grudge to give them a high price, seeing that the tenants got
the money at such a low rate of interest that, while giving an
increased number of years' purchase, there was no corresponding
increase in the amount of their own terminable annuities.
IV1r. O'Brien, indeed, became so indignant with the Freeman's
Journal and its friends, that as a protest he resigned his seat in
1 Davitt, pp. 7 0 9- 10 .
45 8
THE NEW CE
TURY
Parliament in January [904. But his constituents at Cork
were not willing to lose his services, and they re-elected him,
thus showing that they approved of his conduct, as they
disapproved of those who belittled the Land Conference and
the legislation to which it gave rise. N or did the tenants in
other parts of I reI and differ from the Cork men ; and in spite
of the arguments and figures of the Freeman's Journal, bargains
were made every day; and within the first year from the
passing of 1\lr. \Vyndham's Act land was sold amounting to
L I 5,000,000. 1 The loans sanctioned, it is true, did not
amount to more than a third of this amount; but greater
rapidity was to be expected when the initial difficulties of a
new department were surmounted; and the prospect was that
in a few years the Land question, which had perplexed so many
statesmen, would be finally settled.
But if compromise and conciliation had in this matter done
so much, it might surely be tried in other directions, and in
1903 the landlords of the Land Conference Committee formed
themselves into the Irish Reform Association. As Unionists
they would not interfere with the Act of Union, and therefore
they looked with disfavour on Home Rule. They could not
indeed deny that Ireland had decayed since the Union, but
they denied that this decay was a necessary consequence of
the Union. 2 It was due to unjust taxation imposed on Ireland
in direct opposition to Union promises and Union engage-
ments; to an anomalous. system of centralized government,
which was wasteful and extravagant, taking no account of
popular representation and popular wishes; to the fact that the
English people did not yet appreciate Ireland's needs, and
that the British Parliament was unable to attend fully to Irish
business. As a remedy they proposed a devolution to Ireland
of a larger measure of local government than she possessed. s
They wanted to have set up an Irish Financial Council, partly
elected, partly nominated, the business of which would
1 AltnUal Rtgister, p. 240.
2 Lord Dunraven's The Outlook in Ireland, p. 141.
a Dunraven, pp. 272-82.
DEVOLUTION-SIR A. MACDONNELL
459
be to propose and submit the annual estimates for J reland
to the British Parliament. Given Irish revenue, less a fixed
contribution for Imperial purposes, the Council would supervise
and control every item of Irish expenditure; it would effect
economies, check extravagance, promote efficiency in Irish
government. In addition it was proposed to have a statutory
body m::tùe up of Irish peers and Irish members of Parliament,
as well as members of the Financial Council, this body to have
the power of private Bill legislation, and such other powers as
might be deleg:lted to it from time to time by the British Parlia-
ment. Lord Dunraven anù his colleagues wanted to see land
purchase rapidly carried out; they wanted something done for
the better housing of labourers; they wanted the whole sys-
tem of education to be remodelled; and they admitted that in
the matter of higher education the Catholics' suffered grave
inj ustice. 1
This was Devolution. It fell far short of Mr. Gladstone's
I Iome Rule, but nevertheless aimed at fundamental changes in
Irish government, and went far beyond the emphatic negative
of extreme Unionism. In Ireland its most noted exponent
was Lord Dunraven. But it had friends in England too. It
was widely believed that the King, in so far as he could express
approval of any political association, was in its favour. It was
well known that he was not unfriendly to Irish popular
demands, and this accounts for the favourable reception he
received in Ireland in 1903 and again in 1904. The Irish
Viceroy, Lord Dudley, was certainly in accord with Lord
Dunraven, and so was Mr. Balfour, and there could be little
doubt. as to the attitude of 1\1r. \Vyndham. In the end of
1902 he appointed Sir Antony MacDonnell Under-Secretary
for Ireland. Sir Antony was an Irish Catholic who had
greatly distinguished himself in the Indian Civil Service, and
had just retired after having spent nearly forty years in India.
To l\ir. 'Vyndham's offer of the Irish post he answered that
he was "attracted by the chance of doing some good for
Ireland." But a man who had ruled millions of men in India,
1 Dunraven, pp. 233-4.
4 60
THE :r\EW CENTURY
who was a member of the Indian Council, and might if he
wished be Governor of Bombay, was not willing to be the
mere head of an Irish department. And he told IVlr. \Vyndham
that he was an Irish Catholic and a Liberal, and "'as not going
to lay aside his religious or political convictions, nor could he
accept a mere secretarial position. If he went to Ireland as
Under-Secretary, he should be Mr. Wyndham's colleague rather
than his subordinate; he should have adequate opportunities
of influencing the policy and acts of the Irish Administration.
CI In Ireland," he said, " my aim would be the maintenance of
order, the solution of the Land question on the basis of
voluntary sale, the fixing of rents where sales may not take
place on some self-acting principle whereby local inquiries
would be obviated; the co-ordination, control, and direction of
Boards and other administrative agencies; the settlement of
the Education question in the general spirit of Mr. Balfour's
views; and the general promotion of material improvement
and administrative conciliation." :Mr. Wyndham accepted Sir
Antony's conditions, and so did Mr. Balfour, and one of the
first results of the new departure in Unionist policy was the
Land Purchase Act of 1903.1
The Orange landlords had no objection to a Purchase Act
which filled their pockets with hard cash and unduly inflated
the price of Irish land. But when it was proposed further to
take counsel with Catholic Bishops and concede their claims in
the matter of University education, they took instant and
yiolent alarm. Long accustomed to monopoly and privilege,
to domination rather than equality, they wanted no Hercules to
cleanse the Augean stable of Dublin Castle; and all through
1904 their language about Sir Antony MacDonnell was that
of bitter denunciation. A Papist Under-Secretary, they said,
in league with Papists, was the ruler of Ireland, and under a
Conservative Government loyal Orangemen were betrayed. As
for Lord Dunraven and his colleagues of the Reform Associa-
tion, they were but Home Rulers in disguise, traitors within
the fortress ready to throw open the gates to the besiegers.
1 Dunraven, pp. 288-9 0 .
GENERAL ELECTION OF 19 06
4 61
On the platform and in the press, in speeches and in writing,
in resolutions and leading articles, the party of ascendancy
indulged alternately in lamentation and defiance. Mr.
vVyndham's courage failed him, and wishing to allay the storm.
he was careful to announce that he disapproved of Lord
Dunraven's programme. l Mr. Balfour was equally scared by
the roll of the Orange drum, and hastened to find refuge in
denial and retreat. But Sir Antony MacDonnell remained
unmoved. He is a man who has never known fear, and he
had Drummond's contempt for Orange insolence and Orange
bigotry, for Orange threats and Orange bravado, knowing well
that Orange courage was no better than that of Bob Acres.
His resignation would have eased the situation for :J\1:r.
\V yndham, and would, no doubt, have been welcomed by Mr.
Balfour. But Sir Antony had in no way violated the
conditions under which he took office, and was in no humour
to surrender to unreasoning clamour. In these circumstances
Mr. vVyndham resolved to efface himself, and early in 1905
resigned the office of Chief Secretary.2 His successor was !'vIr.
\Valter Long, a man who knew little about Ireland, but was
well known to have no sympathy with devolution or indeed
with any reform. He was therefore welcomed as a friend of
reactionary landlords and Orange lodges, and continued to
hold office to the end of the existing Parliament.
Then came the General Electio:'1 of 1906. The Unionists
had then spent nearly twenty years in office. Home Rule was
responsible for their victory of 1886, Liberal divisions for that
of 1895, and in 1900 they had triumphed because the country
believed the war was over. But it continued for two years
more, and involved the loss of many thousands of lives and
the expenditure of .i 250,000,000, and the conquered territory
was filled with ruined townships and blackened farm-houses.
with the wailing of widows and orphans, and the muttered
curses against England of beaten and disaffected Boers.
Many now thought that these horrors might have been avoided,
and even President Kruger's obstinacy overcome, if :J\Ir.
1 Annual Register, pp. 242-3. 2 Rcvic'Zi' (If Rn'Ù7US, :\larch 1905.
4 62
THE NEW CENTURY
Chamberlain had been less imperious and aggressive. And
surely it was his duty before going to war to see that the
British Empire was prepared. Yet a Royal Commission found
in August 1903 that the Government was hopelessly un-
prepared when war broke out. The Generals sent to Africa
got no definite instructions, the ammunition supplied was
defective, the rifles unsuitable, the uniforms of the \Hong colour,
and the disasters and mishaps which occurred showed plainly
that the Generals selected were not equal to their commands. l
At the critical moment 1\1r. Chamberlain turned public atten-
tion from these things by resigning his seat in the Cabinet
in September 1903, the better to advocate Tariff Reform.
IVlaintaining that Free Trade was a mistake, he proposed that
taxes should be imposed on foreign imported manufactures, and
that corn and bacon should be taxed; while, as a result of
closer commercial relations with the Colonies, colonial imports
might be admitted as heretofore. 2 But the English voter
wanted cheap food and would have neither protective taxation
nor preferential tariffs, and the Liberal leaders took the field
against 1\1:r. Chamberlain. A good section of the Unionists,
under the Duke of Devonshire, clung to Free Trade, and
founded the Free Food League. 8 All through 1904 and 1905
the battle was waged. Other matters which militated against
the Government were their Licensing Bill, giving compensation
for licences extinguished,4 and the admission of Chinese to
work in the Transvaal mines. 5 The tide turned early in 1904
and continued at all the by-elections of that and the following
year; and whcn the General Election came, in January 1906,
the Unionists were overwhelmed. Counting Tories and
Liberal Unionists, only 158 of them were returned, 1\lr.
Balfour himself being among those who fell on the field of
battle.
In Ireland there was rejoicing. \-Vest Belfast had been
captured from the Tories, and shortly after the General Elcction
both 1\1r. O'Brien and Mr. Healy, who had been outside the
1 A 1tnual Register, pp. 1 89-9 I. 2 Ibid. for 1903, pp. 197-200, 206- 12.
3 Ibid. 228-9. .( Did. for 1904, p. 188. 6 Ibid. 47.
THE LIBERALS IN OFFICE
4 6 3
party) came back to the fold) and henceforth the whole
Nationalist strength of 83 members was at the service of
Ireland. It was matter for congratulation also that the new
Premier was Sir Henry Campbell-Bannermatl, a man who had
never wavered in his Home Rule convictions. And there were
such staunch Home Rulers in the new Cabinet as l\Ir. Morley)
1\lr. Lloyd-George) l\Ir. Bryce) Mr. Birrell)and Lords Tweedmouth
anù Loreburn. On the other hand the Liberal Imperialists
were largely represented. Sir Edward Grey was made Foreign
Secretary) l\lr. Haldane Secretary for vVar) 1\lr. Asquith
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Cabinet offices were also
given to Sir Henry Fowler and Lord Crewe. All these were
politicians of the type of Lord Rosebery) and cared little for
Home Rule. The new Lord-Lieutenant was Lord Aberdeen)
so favourably known already in Ireland. The new Chief
Secretary was 1\'1r. Bryce, a great scholar) a great linguist, a
great traveller, an author of repute) an expert on questions of
constitutional law, and thoroughly sound on the question of
Home Rule. For the moment, however) this latter question
had receded into the background. It had not been made an
issue at the General Election) and therefore all hope of having
a Home Rule Bill introduced in the immediate future must be
ab::mdoned. For the Irish Nationalists) even with the aid of
the Unionists, were powerless against the enormous numbers
on the Liberal side. But there were other Irish questions
claiming urgent attention. There was) for instance) a difficulty
in financing sales under \Vyndham)s Act) and there were the
questions of congestion, of the evicted tenants) and of University
education. Nothing was done) however) in the session of
1906) and early in 1907 Mr. Bryce left Ireland to take up the
position of British Ambassador at \Vashington.
In 1904 1\1 r. Stead suggested that 1\1r. T. \iV. Russell
should be appointed Chief Secretary for Ireland)1 and in 1907
he would bave been an admirable selection. Mr. Russell is a
Scotchman born) but has lived since his boyhood in Ireland)
and, like many others who have come over) he has become
1 Review of RnJie'Zi/s) February 1904.
4 6 4
THE KEW CEKTURY
"more Irish than the Irish thcmselycs." Not born in the
purple, he has not had a University tt aining, but has instead
graduated in the university of the worId. Gifted with great
natural ability, he has always been fond of books, and by
industry, perseverance, sobriety, and thrift has been able to
educate himself and win his way to position and influence. As
Secretary to the Irish Temperance Association, he had for
many years to exercise largely both his voice and pen, and
with such effect that \\ hen he entered Parliament in 1885 he
\\ as eyen then a ready and powerful debater. In the years
fol1owing he was often heard on public questions in Parliament,
on the platform, and in the pages of reviews. He was then a
Liberal- Unionist, and in Lord Salisbury's Gü\-ernment of 18 95
was given the (ffice of Secretary to the Local Go\-ernment
Board. But Mr. Russell is not a mere time-sener, and in
spite of Lord Salisbury's fro\\ ns he championed Ulster tenants
against Ulster landlords, and in consequence was deprived of
office in 1900. After that date he continued to advocate
compulsory sale. He had a large share in the Land Conference
and in vVyndham's Act; he favoured the grant of a Catholic
University, the reinstatement of the evicted tenants, and better
houses for labourers ; and he grew to dislike mOt e and more
the bureaucratic government of Dublin Castle. "'Yhile retain-
ing the grit and tenacity of the Scotchman, 1\1r. Russell has
acquired the Irishman's warmth of heart and kindly nature.
His eye kindles as he denounces Irish landlord iniquity, and
his voice grows husky as he talks of the struggling artisan or
labourer in his humble cottage, or of the rack-rented tenant
driven from his fields. By r 907 Mr. Russell had grown to be
one of the most powerful men on the Liberal side of the House
of Commons, one of the greatest Parliamentarians of his time.
His great talents, his courage, his resource, his thorough
knowledge of Ireland and her needs, eminently fitted him for
the post of Chief Secretary. But he had to be satisfied with
the lesser position of Vice-President of the Agricultural Board
in succession to Sir Horace Plunkett, while the higher position
of Chief Secretary fell to an Englishman, Mr. Birrell.
Stereoscopic.
ARTHL'R J.UIES BALFOUR
Beresford.
GEORGE WYXDHAl\!
\
,
,
T. W. RUSSELL
Elliott & rry.
Elhott & Fry
AL'GL'Sl1NE BIRRELL
MR. BIRRELL
4 6 5
Until he became a Cabinet Minister in 1906, Mr. Birrell
was best known as an author. There is surely no finer
specimen of high-class literary gossip than his delightful
essays.l Passing rapidly from Milton and Johnson to Carlyle
and 1\Iatthew Arnold, from Swift and Bolingbroke to De
Quincey and Newman, and back again to Richardson and Pope
and Burke, he seems familiar with everything written by these
authors, and indeed with everything written by the great
masters in English literature. vVithout a trace of pedantry,
we can see that his knowledge is encyclopædic, that he has
not only read, but read with care, that his literary judgments,
though not pretending to profundity, are never arbitrary, and
will survive the assaults of even seasoned critics, and that from
the first page to the last there is not a dull line. Incidentally
we learn that he is a Nonconformist and does not like the
Catholic Church, though he has unbounded admiration for
Newman. Besides being a literary man of eminence, 1\lr.
Birrell was also a lawyer of experience, and he had also made
some brilliant speeches both on the platform and in Parliament.
But as to his being a successful minister, IvIr. Stead, in 1906,
regarded him as "the darkest of dark horses." It soon
appeared that the dark horse could go far, that the literary
man and lawyer was a statesman as well; and in I 906 his
conduct of the English Education Bill was beyond all praise.
That it did not become an Act was due to the House of Lords
and not to him, and such was the ability he showed that the
Premier selected him to succeed 1\1r. Bryce.
His new position, the grave of many reputations, must have
been accepted by him with misgiving, for the difficulties which
confronted him were many. The Town Tenants Act passed
in 1906 was but a small measure and did not satisfy the town
tenants, because it did not sufficiently safeguard their interests.
The e\Tict
d tenants and the labourers clamoured for legislation.
Dublin Castle and all it represented in Irish Government still
remained. The University question remained unsettled. The
land sales effected under \Yyndham's Act of 1903 were not yet
1 Birrell's Essays, London, 1899, 2 vols.
VOl. III
100
4 66
THE NEW CENTURY
carried through, for the landlord could not get his money nor
the tenant his land. The Congested Districts Board had done
much to help local industries, and to erect piers, and harbours,
and fishing-stations along the coast; but so far it had merely
nibbled at the big and complex problem of migration in the
West. Nor was it easy for any Board or any official to solve
any such problem and at the same time satisfy public opinion,
seeing the attack that was made in Parliament in 19 0 7 on Mr.
Commissioner Bailey. Under the Land Purchase Act of 19 0 3,
1\1r. Wrench was intended to represent the landlords' interest,
and in this rcspect he had nevcr been remiss. Mr. Finucane
was expected to regard land transactions from the tenants'
point of view. The third Commissioner, Mr. Bailey, was
expccted to hold the balance between the two. In reality he
had been appointed originally as an Assistant Land Com-
missioner by the Tories, and could not be said at any time to
be unduly severe on the landlords in his decisions. Modest,
retiring, and unassuming, he is a man of enormous ability, with
a fine judicial mind, a perfect master of all the intricacies of
Irish land legislation, a man whose capacity and zeal in the
public scrvice only a bittcr partisan could call in question.
The Report he wrote on the happy results of land purchase
previous to 19 0 3 is a most valuable State document, in which
he carefully points out the punctuality with which the tenants
paid their annuities, the improvements they effectcd on their
lands by way of fencing, draining, building, and tillage, the
sobriety and thrift which followed extravagance and want of
care for the morrow. 1 This Report was of material assistance
to Mr. Wyndham, and ensured Mr. Bailey's promotion under
1\'lr. Wyndham's Act. Since thcn Mr. Bailey had been careful
in all land sales to see that the tenant did not agree to terms
which would have been ruinous for himself and for the State,
and he had done nothing more. But this was not enough for
unreasoning landlords and their unreasoning friends, and Mr.
1 "Report of Mr. \V. F. Bailey of an Inquiry into the Present Condi-
tion of Tenant Purchasers under the Land Purchase Acts" (ordered by
the House of Commons to be printed, 25th March 19 0 3).
THE SINN FEINERS
4 6 7
Moore, M.P., an Ulster representative, attacked Mr. Bailey in
Parliament. The latter was ably defended by his friend, Mr.
T. \V. Russell, who was able to produce some letters written by
lYlr. lYloore, in which that gentleman reminded Mr. Bailey that
he owed his appointment to the Tories, and that he had failed
to do the landlords' work, and therefore when the Tories got back
to office they would know how to mark their disapprobation of
his conduct. In other words, they had already marked out
l\lr. Bailey for vengeance. 1\1r. Birrell, who agreed with Mr.
Russell in condemning Mr. Moore and in defending Mr. Bailey,
had thus early in his official career as Chief Secretary an
opportunity of appreciating the character of Irish landlordism
in its extreme form, and how great were the difficulties of
satisfying its insatiable demands. l
Nor was this all. The Irish Nationalists themselves were
not in agreement. Mr. Dillon objected to have the loss
involved in the flotation of Irish land stock thrown on Irish
revenue, and he would prefer to see the tenants wait rather
than enter into the ruinous bargains they were making with
these landlords; and the great majority of the Irish party
agreed with lYlr. Dillon. 1\lr. O'Brien was in a greater hurry
to end the land war, and wanted to see the tenants purchase
even though the price paid was high. Both agreed that there
was need for fresh land legislation. l\:Ir. Dillon would have
this brought about by threatening the landlords with a renewal
of agitation. 1\lr. O'Brien's plan was to confer with the land-
lords as in I go 3, for no Government could reject a united
demand, and the House of Lords would be sure to yield.
These differences gave strength to those who had no faith in
Parliamentary action, and in Ig05 the Sinn Fein party was
formed. As its name implies-for Sinn Fein is Irish for Our-
selves-it aimed at National Independence, believing that the
British Government was Ireland's greatest enemy, and that the
British Parliament had no right to legislate for Ireland, having
formally renounced such a right in 1783. Inculcating national
self-reliance and self-respect, the Sinn Feiners would have Irish
1 Annual R<.:gister.
4 68
THE NEW CENTURY
history studied in every college and school, the Irish language,
folk-lore, dances, songs, and sports revived, the people consume
less drink and tobacco, and favour Irish manufactures rather
than those which came from England or abroad. As for the
Irish members of Parliament, they could, with delegates from
the County and other Councils, sit in Dublin as a National
Council, whose business it would be "to take within its purview
every question of National interest." The Council could not
legislate, but it could pass resolutions which would be adopted
and acted upon by the local Councils and obeyed throughout
the land. I t is not easy to see how this policy could be
carried out successfully in a country where there are, and
always have been, SO" many divisions, and in spite of the
opposition of a great Empire. But it had been done in
Hungary, and many thought it could be done in Ireland, and in
consequence the Sinn Feiners grew strong,l and in I g07 were
a source of uneasiness and alarm to the Irish Party. They
added also to th. Birrell's difficulties, as did in a much greater
degree those tenants who lived in congested districts and were
crying out for more and better land. In I g06 a Royal
Commission had been appointed to investigate the condition of
the congested districts, the working of the Congested Districts
Board, and its relations with the Estates Commission and the
Agricultural Department, and what changes, if any, in the
functions of these various bodies ought to be made. Voluminous
evidence was taken all through I g07, and not until I g08 was
the Report of the Commission issued. But meantime the
impatient farmers would not be restrained, and knowing of old
that the best way to change a law in Ireland is to break it,
they made war on the graziers by driving the cattle and sheep
off the grazing farms. The landlords howled for coercion, the
Irish members called for land legislation. But lVIr. Birrell
would have no coercion, satisfied that the ordinary law was
sufficient; and he would have no Land Bill until he had the
Congested Commission Report. In the interval he bethought
himself of Sir Antony MacDonnell's programme of a "co-
1 Irish Year-Book for 19 0 9, pp. 35 6 -9.
DUBLIN CAS'fLE GOVERNl\1E
T
4 6 9
ordination, control, and direction of Boards and other admin-
istrative agencies," 1 and in the session of 1907 he brought in
his I rish Councils Bill.
This was Lord Dunraven's policy of Devolution, and was,
of course, an attack on Dublin Castle. Nor could any defence
be made of that ancient institution. A den of infamy, a sink
of corruption, the nurse of traitors, the refuge of renegades,
were but a few of the terms which Irishmen have angrily
hissed out at the very mention of Dublin Castle. Within its
grimy walls what plots have been hatched against Irish liberty,
what dark deeds have been done, what wicked men have
ruled! The kidnapped chiefs of Tyrconnell and Tyrone were
prisoners in its keep; the Cromwellians held counsel there
when they were driving the Irish into slavery; and Castlereagh
and Clare when they were goading the men of 1798 into
rebellion. From its doors honesty and public spirit were
driven; within its walls virtue died; and while it welcomed
the spy and the informer, it sent the patriot to the scaffold.
Not in Europe is there a system of Government like that
controlled and directed by Dublin Castle. A number of un-
representative Boards, usually inefficient, and manned by chiefs
who care nothing for Ireland-this is Irish administration.
The Chief Secretary controls everything-police, magistrates,
law officers, prisons, lunatics, land, education, local government.
He is head of all these Boards, which so often overlap and
collide, and Mr. Birrell recently declared that as President of
one Department he was constantly in conflict with himself as
President of another Department. 2 Usually the Chief Secretary
is an Englishman and knows nothing of I reland. The U nder-
Secretary, who does, is a permanent official, and has enormous
power. As 11r. O'Brien puts it, he is "the man at the whee]," II
controlling everything from the rural policeman to the Inspector-
General, from the Court bailiff to the Attorney-General. A
strong man like Drummond can do much good or he can do
much harm, and usually the Under-Secretary is an enemy of
1 Dunraven, p. 289.
2 Barry O'Brien's Dublin Castle, p. 24.
a P. 33.
47 0
THE NEW CENTURY
the people. And hence the Castle opposed every reform from
Emancipation to Disestablishment, from the Commutation of
Tithes to Gladstone's Land Act. l
It was to reform this system of government, which was a
satire on representative institutions, an anachronism in the
twentieth century, that Mr. Birrell brought in his Irish Councils
Bill. He proposed to set up an Irish Council of 107 members,
84 elected and 23 nominated, one of the latter being the
Under-Secretary. The elected members would sit in many
cases for Parliamentary divisions, be elected by Parliamentary
voters, and sit for three years. As an administrative but not
a legislative body, they would take over the powers of the
National and Intermediate Boards, the Local Government
Board, reformatories and industrial schools, the Congested
Districts and Agricultural Boards, and also some minor
departments, such as the National Library and Royal Academy
of :Music; and they would have for all these purposes an
income of nearly four millions and a quarter. Their resolutions
would not be effective till approved by the Lord-Lieutenant,
who might impose his veto and in some cases substitute
resolutions of his own. 2 It was said that the Bill owed its
origin to Sir Antony MacDonne1J, and that in its first shape
all the members were nominated with Sir Antony himself
presiding. Ireland would thus have, said one critic, an Indian
Council with an Indian satrap in the chair. Mr. Birrell
showed no great enthusiasm for these proposals, which were
certainly meagre and grudging. The Irish leaders, :Mr.
Redmond and Mr. Dillon, while in vain pressing for a larger
measure, did not reject the one offered. But a National
Convention in Dublin in May rejected it with scorn, and the
Bill was accordingly dropped. And yet thoughtful men may
ask was this action wise? The Bill was not offered as Home
Rule, or as a substitute for it; it would probably have been
amended, and with these amendments would have worked well.
The County and District Councils, set up by the Act of 1898,
had on the whole satisfactorily discharged their duties; and if
1 O'Brien, p. 101.
Copy of the Bill.
LORD DU
RAVE
'"
SIR HOR.\CE PIX"\',TJT
,
Lafayette.
Elliott & f'ry
LORD l\IACDO
ELL
(Sir Antony :'.lacdonne\l1
Ru...s
l1.
Chancellor.
CAPr. SHo\\\"E TAYLOR
DEATH OF MR. DAVITT
47 1
the National Council was equally successful, its powers would
be certainly enlarged and its income increased, until at last
perhaps Home Rule would be reached. The Convention,
however, did not think the Bill worth taking. The result has
b
en that no better Bill has since been introduced, and in
March 1908 Mr. Asquith and Mr. Birrell, speaking for the
Liberal Government, would give no promise that Home Rule
would be a living issue at the next General Election. l
At the Convention a resolution was passed expressing regret
at the death of Mr. Michael Davitt. He died in the summer
of 1906. Fenian, Land Leaguer, labour leader, newspaper
writer, popular orator and member of Parliament, his had
been a stormy and eventful career. The peasant's son who
had lost his right arm as a boy, and thus maimed had to
earn a living in a strange land, and who amid these difficulties
had educated himself, until he was a fluent speaker and could
write articles in high-class reviews, was no common man. Like
many self-made men, he was often arrogant and dogmatic, and
on the Education question, which he imperfectly understood, his
attitude and language towards the Bishops of his own Church
were often offensive. But there could be no doubt about his
honesty and earnestness; and the patience with which he bore
suffering3 in prison which would have broken another's spirit
was not more remarkable than the generosity with which he
forgave his foes. He lies buried in his own native Straide,
under the shadow of a ruined Dominican Abbey. Nearly
sixty years before he had been driven forth from the peaceful
valley where he had played with childish glee. He had struck
back with effect in his manhood, and as the shades of night
thickened round him he had the satisfaction of knowing that
Irish landlordism was doomed. It was Davitt's work in this
direction which was best appreciated, and which caused his
death to be so much regretted by the Irish race throughout
the world.
In the summer and autumn of 1907 the Congested Board
Commission continued its sittings, and evidence was supplied
1 Freeman's.lournal, March 3 1 ,19 0 8.
47 2
THE NEW CENTURY
in plenty that if people were to live by the land congestion
must be relieved. Nor were the poorer districts in the extreme
west the only ones which cried out for legislation. A way to
the east, by the banks of the Shannon, within sight of historic
Clanmacnoise, lies the parish of Moore. Its parish priest, the
Rev. T. J. Reidy, had to tell the Commissioners that 300 out
Ðf the 400 tenants in his parish were valued at less than 1; I 0
a year, and 100 at less than I; 5. And within the parish
were two men holding between them 4000 acres of land over
which cattle and sheep roamed, and not an acre were they
willing to give the tenants. In such circumstances it was
difficult to keep the people in restraint, and in many districts
{:attle-driving went on. It was, of course, a milder form of
lawlessness than the agrarian crimes of other days, but it was
nevertheless a violation of law, and if Sir Antony MacDonnell
had had his way he would have given the cattle-drivers short
shrift. Mr. T. W. Russell favoured milder measures. At
Athenry in Galway a large farm belonging to the Agricultural
Department was coveted by the landless townsmen ; a house
was burned, the meadows spiked, and threats uttered that the
Department would be driven out of the district. Mr. Russell
came from Dublin and talked to the people and their priest,
and found that while the townsmen could get neither milk nor
vegetables because of the want of land, there was a large
grazing farm just outside the ruined walls of the historic little
town. Using his influence, he had the town bought out and
the grazing farm divided among the townsmen, and then peace
succeeded war. Mr. Birrell was not in a position to adopt
lVlr. Russell's policy in other districts. But he evidently pre-
ferred it to the U nder-Secretary's, and instead of coercion
resolved to rely on the ordinary law. Further, he was able
in the session of 1907 to have an Evicted Tenants Bill passed,
and he only waited for the Report of the Congested Commission
to have an amending Land Bill introduced.
So far Mr. Birrell could not boast of his legislative record,
for he had failed to pass the English Education Bill of 19 06
and the Irish Councils Bill of the following year. But in
MR. BIRRELL'S UNIVERSITY BILL
-l73
1908 he succeeded in passing the Irish Universities Bill. No
other problem had been found so difficult of solution by
English statesmen as this of higher education in Ireland. It
had baffled Peel and Gladstone, it had not been solved by the
establishment of the Royal University, and it had daunted Mr.
Balfour, who had often freely admitted that something should
be done. 1 The abolition of religious tests in Trinity College
as far back as 1873 left that institution still Protestant. Its
Prov03t was still a Protestant clergyman; within its walls were
a Protestant Divinity School and a Protestant place of worship;
the whole atm')sphere of the place was redolent of Protestantism,
and of its 1000 students only 100 were Catholics. 2 The
Queen's College, Belfast, had developed into a Presbyterian
University College, and the Colleges of Cork and Galway were
but godless colleges. Catholics might indeed get degrees
from th
Royal University by passing an examination; but
they wer
denied the higher intellectual training, the continued
contact with men of learning, the friendly rivalries of the
class-room and the cricket field, the cultured intercourse
inseparable from real University life. To discover a remedy
for this state of things a Viceregal Commission, under the
pre3idency of Lord Robertson, was appointed in 190 I, and
furnished its Report in 1903. As Trinity College was not
included in the scope of the inquiry, the Commissioners had no
recommendations to make in its regard. They recommended,
however, that the Royal University should be turned into a
teaching federal University, with the three Queen's Colleges
and a new College in Dublin as constituent colleges. The
College in Dublin would be for the Catholics, well endowed
and equipped, such as might enter into rivalry with Trinity
College on something like equal terms. 3
This Report was not followed up by legislation, and in
19 0 4 Lord Dunraven proposed in the newspapers that Dublin
University should become the one National University of
1 Dr. \VaIsh's The Irish University Question, p. 194.
2 Dunrayen's Outlook in Ireland, p. 125 ; Fry Commission Reþort.
3 Rob/'r/s(ln Commission Reþort.
474
THE NEW CENTURY
Dublin, with Trinity College, a College for Catholics at Dublin,
and the three Queen's Colleges as constituent Colleges. In
none of these Colleges would there be any religious tests. To
these proposals Mr. Wyndham and Sir Antony MacDonnell
were friendly, and the Catholics not unfriendly. Against them
Trinity College set its face, and such was the influence it
could command that the Government did nothing. vVhen the
Liberals came into office a new Commission was appointed
under an English Judge, Sir Edward Fry, this time to enquire
into the condition of Trinity College. In 1907 the Com-
missioners issued their Report. All agreed that Trinity
College was no place for Catholics and could not be reformed
to suit them, not even if, as Trinity College itself suggested, a
Catholic Church was erected within its walls. A minority of
Commissioners adopted the Robertson Commission Report;
but a majority, led by Chief Baron Pallas, followed in the
footsteps of Lord Dunraven, making Dublin University with
five constituent Colleges a National University. Mr. Bryce,
the Chief Secretary, favoured this latter proposal, and promised
to give it legislative form at an early date. Dr. \\r alsh, the
Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, also approved, as did most of
the influential Catholic laymen, believing it would be well for
the Catholics to be associated with so ancicnt and famous a
seat of learning, and would help perhaps to softcn sectarian
rancour. But Dr. Healy, Archbishop of Tuam, and a majority
of the Catholic Bishops, had no desire to be associated with
an institution which had always been a centre and stronghold
of religious bigotry. Trinity College itself was vehemently
opposed to join eithcr with Presb)'terian or Catholic; and
when :rvlr. Birrell came to I reland he found that the friends of
Trinity College would be strong enough and determined enough
to defeat Mr. Bryce's proposals. He also found that Belfast
was anxious for a Presbyterian University.
Leaving, then, Trinity College to hug its privileges and
enjoy its ill-gotten gains in sullen isolation, voluntarily removed
outside the current of National life, Mr. Birrell in his Bill set
up two Universities, the National in Dublin with the Queen's
MR. BIRRELL'S UNIVERSITY BILL
475
Colleges of Cork and Galway and a new College at Dublin as
constituent Colleges, and Belfast University with the single
College at Belfast. The Royal University was to disappear.
Galway College was given an income of ;/; 12,000 a year;
Cork ;/;20,000; the new College at Dublin ;/;32,000; an
additional ;/;10,000 went to the National University, and a
sum of ;/; 150,000 for buildings. Belfast College got;/; 28,000 ;
Belfast University;/; J 0,000, with ;/;60,000 for buildings. The
pecuniary provision in the case of Dublin was thus totally
inadequate. In neither University were there to be any
religious tests, and in this respect they were no better than
the godless colleges of Peel. But the Senators of the National
University and the governing bodies of the Colleges at Dublin,
Cork, and Gal way are in the main Catholic; and it is this
which generates a Catholic atmosphere and has made them
acceptable to Catholics. Similarly the ruling authority at
Belfast is in the main Presbyterian. This solution of the
University difficulty, which was favoured by Mr. Dillon, and
indeed followed the lines already sketched by him in one of
his public speeches, was certainly the easiest, and lVlr. Birrell
was heartily congratulated. Mr. Balfour for the Opposition,
Mr. Redmond and 1\lr. Dillon for the Irish Nationalists, Sir
Edward Carson for Trinity College, were all ready with their
approval. But there was opposition from a small section of
British Nonconformists, always ready to exclude from education
every religion but their own, and from the Ulster Orangemen,
with whom bigotry is an inherited instinct and hatred of
Catholicism a battle-cry. The Bill, however, passed its second
reading by 344 to 3 I votes.
I n Committee the same opposition fought hard to destroy
the Bil1, and it was at that stage that Mr. Birrell deserved all the
praise he received. That he was a strong man h
had already
shown by his resistance to the Unionist cry for coercion; that
he was an eloquent speaker had been shown on the platform
and in Parliament; and the dullest could not fail to appreciate
his brilliant wit and his readiness of reply. But in the dull
routine work of Committee all his powers were called forth.
47 6
THE NEW CENTURY
Patient with bore and bigot, with Ulster Orangeman and
British Nonconformist, he was suave or stern, plausible or
sarcastic as the occasion demanded; ready to yield some small
point for the sake of peace and progress, but hard as adamant
when some vital principle of the Bill was assailed. No other
Englishman would have steered the Bill so safely, no other
pilot would have saved the vessel from being driven on the
rocks. Mr. Birrell had the courage to advance where Mr.
Balfour fell back; he succeeded where even Gladstone failed ;
and if he never did anything else for Ireland but this, he
.deserves a lasting place in her memory.
CHAPTER XX
Literary and Industrial Movements
WRITING of Ireland about 1770, and writing of what he knew
from personal knowledge, Sir Jonah Barrington has left us a
lively description of the Irish country gentleman of that day.
His family mansion was large, the outcome of many plans, (C an
uncouth mass warring with every rule of symmetry in
architecture." Its interior was in keeping with its ungraceful
exterior. Some of the rooms were wainscotted, some were
not wainscotted at all. Fishing-rods, powder-flasks, firearms
decorated the hall. In the rooms the furniture was scanty; on
the walls hung a few racing prints; there were a few small
shaving-glasses for the men, a few mirrors for the ladies, and in
the kitchen the m3.id-servants had nothing but a tub of water
to reflcct thcir charms. As for the library, it had neithcr chairs
nor tables, and on its shelves the books were scanty: the
Journals of the House of Commons, Clarendon's History, the
works of Swift and Berkeley, the History of the Bible, a few
novels, a few numbers of the Guardian and of the Spectator, a
few books dealing with gardening and with the horse-and
that was all. Caring nothing for painting or music or books,
the country gentleman knew much of horses and dogs, rode
and shot and fished, fought duels, attended races and cock-
fights, was rudely and riotously hospitable, and drank unlimited
quantities of claret and (C rum sherbet," with the usual result of
being afflicted with the gout. His bright blue cloak wrapped
around him, he often \\ alked abroad in his ill-kept garden, or
sat indoors in the midst of cobwebs and dirt to decide disputes
between his tenants or receive rents from them. Being a
Protestant and sometimes a bigot, he despised them as Papists
477
78 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
and treated them as slaves, though he agreed with them in
hating the tithe-proctor, and was willing to protect them from
every oppression but his own. 1
There were, however, exceptions, and there is no difficulty in
admitting that Barrington's statements are too general and that
his pictures are overdrawn. Young, who visited Ireland about
the same time, was less given to exaggeration, and is therefore
more reliable. He noted indeed the wretched condition of the
tenantry, the insolence of too many of the landlords, the large
number of absentees,2 the low state of tillage. 3 But he also
noted that excessive drinking was not so common as formerly,
that duelling was less, that the roads were good, that within the
la<;t twenty-five years trade had greatly increased,4 that the
older country houses were being replaced by new ones built in
b
tter taste; and. he was specially pleased with the fine
residences of Lord Powerscourt in \Vicklow, of Lord Bangor in
Down, and of Sir Capel rvlolyneux in Armagh. 5 In spite of
premiums given by the Royal Dublin Society, the silk
manufacture languished; but the linen manufacture was all
over Ulster and was spreading into Connaught. 6 Among the
cities and towns Galway had decayed; 7 Waterford, however,
had the finest quay that Young had seen; 8 and Limerick, with
its 32,000 inhabitants, had its hackney chaises and Sedan
chairs, its plays and concerts; 9 while Cork, with its 67,000
inhabitants, exported yearly in beef and butter, in hides and
woollen yarn, and other articles, goods valued at more than a
million pounds. 10 Belfast was as yet only a small town; but
Dublin, with more than 150,000 inhabitants, was the second
city in the Empire. Its streets, it is true, were ill-kept, its
government inefficient, its magistrates corrupt, its prisons dens
of infamy, its street brawls frequentY But, on the other hand,
signs of wealth and culture abounded. Music was cultivated,
1 Barrington's Personal Sketches, pp. 1-7; Lecky, i. 28 9-91.
2 Young's TourinIreland,ii. 115- 1 7. s P.22.
4 Vol. ii. 151-4,253-5. 5 Vol. i. 101, 124, 143.
ð Vol. i. 2 I 7 ; vol. ii. 137. 7 Lecky's Ireland, i. 35 0 .
B Vol. i. 408. 9 Vol. i. 295. 10 Vol. i. 333.
11 The Sham Squire, xvi. 70-83.
PROSPERITY UNDER GRATTAN'S PARLIAMENT 479
theatres p
tronized, newspapers published, booksellers thriving,
Dublin University famous, and the House of Parliament in
College Green would have adorned the first city in Europe.
The town houses of the nobility and gentry were built and
furnished with taste. Young was specially pleased with the
fine house of the Duke of Leinster; at Lord CharIemont's he
saw pictures by Rembrandt and Titian; 1 and in Lord Moira's
house was a fine picture-gallery. Carriages were common in
the streets; there was a constant round of parties, dinners,
suppers, and balls, and in the houses of the higher classes
everything was characterized by good taste. 2
The abolition of the commercial restraints, the relaxation of
the penal code, the concession of legislative independence, fol-
lowed two years Jater by the passage of Foster's Corn Law, all
concurred in effecting great changes. Sectarian rancour was
appreciably diminished, rents were paid with greater punctuality,
taxes were light though the Government was corrupt; and in
the writings of Ledwich and Vallancey, of Archdall and Charles
O'Connor, something like an Irish literary revival appeared.
The greater area of land broken up and the improved system
of tillage increased the amount of agricultural produce, and
gave additional employment to the labouring poor. A system
of bounties judiciously employed rapidly stimulated industrial
enterprise. Not only the linen manufacture, but also the
woollen, silk, cotton, and glass manufactures grew prosperous.
Dublin, more than ever the centre of the wealthy and cultured
classes, increased in splendour and beauty. In fin
ly-built
houses rich furniture was to be seen, the paintings of the old
masters hung upon the walls, and the carriages and horses
which thronged the North Circular Road resembled the bustle
and opulence seen in Hyde Park. Grattan and Plunkett, and
Bushe and Ponsonby were then heard in Parliament, and
Curran in the law courts which his wit and eloquence so
much adorned. Theatres, concert-halls, clubs, newspapers, rich
shops, well-dressed inhabitants in the streets, were so many
evidences of prosperity; and it is the testimony of Lord Clare,
1 Vol. i. 18-20. 2 Lecky, i. 32 2 -9.
480 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
and therefore of a bitter enemy, that in the years preceding the
Union, Ireland advanced more rapidly in wealth than any other
country in Europe. l
Had the events of 1798 and 1800 not taken place, it is
probable that warring classes and creeds would have been
brought together, that a type of Irishman \vould have been
soon evolved, who, though loyal to England, would have sought
in Ireland his inspiration and his ideals. But the horrors of
the Rebellion, and the treachery and corruption which accom-
panied the Act of Union, not only stayed the progress of
reconciliation and appeasement, but perpetuated and intensified
class hatred and sectarian rancour. A small minority, fresh
from pillage and murder, and backed by England in what they
did, regarded the rest of their countrymen as enemies and
slaves. These latter, maddened by tyranny which they were
powerless to destroy, were animated by the bitterest hostility
to England. Relegated to the cabins of the poor, the Iri
h
language continued to be despised by the educated and
privileged classes, whose ambition was to speak and write like
Englishmen, to ape English manners, and copy English modes
of thought. They were more English than the Engli
h them-
selves. The National spirit, however, fostered on the fields of
Wexford or among the Presbyterians of Belfast, found expression
in the poems and ballads of Dr. Drennan and his friends, in such
pieces as " Mary Le :More" or the" \Vake of \Villiam Orr." 2
The extinction of the Irish Parliament, the symbol of
Ireland's distinctive existence as a nation, was not calculated to
strengthen or even to maintain the National spirit, and after the
Union a period of stagnation and decay supeITened. N or had
O'Connell any difficulty in showing to the British Parliament
in 1834 that the Union had proved a curse to Ireland, resulting
in increased indebtedness and increased taxation, in increasing
absenteeism as well as the absolute power of tyrannical and
grasping landlords, and in consequent increase of the misery
and sufferings of the poor. Less wine, less silk, less tobacco
1 Leek)', ii. 496- 5 00; Lord Cloneurry's Personal Recollectiolls, pp. 2 16-8 I.
2 Literary Remains of the United Jrishll/eJ1, i.-iii. 47.
LITERARY REVIVAL AFTER 1800
4 81
were consumed, and even less meat, though the number of
cattle exported to England was greater. The bustle and
energy of so many cities and towns had been diminished,
manufactures had everywhere decayed, and if we want to know
the wretched condition of the millions of the peasants, we have
it adequately described in the pages of the French De
Beaumont or the German Kohl, or in the sober pages of
the Devon Commission Report, all these being published some
years subsequent to the speech of O'Connell. 1
In the midst of such conditions it would be hard to expect
any marked intellectual activity, still less anything like an
Irish literary revival. Yet there were some Irish writers of
the period who drew their inspiration from the land in which
they were born. In 1808 a Gaelic Society was established at
Dublin for the development of the "history, literary and
ecclesiastical, of their Island." One of its members, \Villiam
Halliday, wrote an Irish Grammar; Edward O'Reilly, another
member, compiled an Irish Dictionary; Father Denis Taafe
wrote a History of Ireland. But the most remarkable member
of the Gaelic Society was Dr. John Lanigan (1758- 1828).
Born in Cashel, educated at Rome, and then professor at the
Unh-ersity of Pavia, he returned to Ireland and was for years
librarian of the Royal Dublin Society. His great work is an
Ecclesiastical History of Ireland in four volumes. 2 \Vritten
by a Catholic priest and from the Catholic point of view it is
the product of enormous research, of great industry, of extensive
historicallcarning. Lanigan has prejudices, but is not a bigot;
he is sometimes intolerant, but it is of inaccuracy and pre-
sumptuous dulness; he is always well informed, always ready
with his authorities, and never afraid to champion any cause or
opinion which he believes right. On a much lower scale both
in ability and learning were men like MacSweeney and Barrett
and Raftery, who wrote both tales and poems. They wrote on
peasants for the peasantry, and in the Irish language which
1 O'Connell's Sþeech, April 1834; Kohl's Ireland; De Beaumont,
L'Irlande.
2 Fitzpatrick's bish 1Yils and 1Yorlhies, pp. 126 II seq.
VOL. III 101
482 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL
tOVEMENTS
the peasantry understood, and some portion of what they wrote
has survived. 1
Carleton (1794- 1869), who wrote in English, had infinitely
more genius than any of these three. The son of a mother
who knew little English, but loved to sing, as she did with
feeling, old Irish songs, and of a father who had to the full the
peasant's simple faith and the peasant's credulity, Carleton was
thus enabled to describe the peasantry from within. The
school which he first attended was a hedge-school, built of sods,
with only a hole in the roof for a chimney and only a few large
stones for the pupils' seats. When he attended mass he had
to kneel in the open air-only a few stones served for an altar,
this being covered; the people knelt in the open on bundles of
straw which they had brought for the purpose from home. 2
\Vhen he proposed to become a priest, he had, in accordance
with the custom of the time, to go to Munster as a poor scholar. s
He soon returned and never became a priest, though in his
journey south he acquired knowledge and experience which in
after years served him well. Cradled in misery and oppression
he was often made to feel that he belonged to a subject race
and to a despised creed, and he remembered all that he had
felt and seen. Careless, good-looking, a great dancer, a good
athlete, a favourite with the girls, his habits were unsettled, his
care for the future little. He went everywhere and mixed
with all classes of the people, and when it is added that he
changed his religion and died a Protestant, it will be seen that
his experiences were entirely beyond the common. 4 In his
writings there is no need for the play of the imagination, for he
records his actual experiences, and in his pages the life and
character of the Irish peasantry stand completely revealed,
their weaknesses and their strength, their wit and humour, their
generosity and kindliness of nature, their joys and their sorrows,
their laughter and their tears. The dance and the fair, the
pattern and the pilgrimage, the wedding and the wake, the
1 Hyde's Literary History, pp. 605-6.
2 O'Donoghue's Carleton, i. 4-1 I, 19-21, 36-37.
8 Ibid. 65-7 2 . 4 JUd. 81-107.
CARLETON'S CONTEMPORARIES
4 8 3
fiddler and gossip and sanachie, the poor scholar, the priest
and the parson, the landlord and the tithe-proctor, the grasping
agent and the cheating attorney, all these flit through his pages,
and are described by a master-hand. l
In the Tales of tIle O'Hara Family the Banims, John
(1798-1842) and Michael (1796-1848), have also described
Irish peasant life. They belonged to the middle class and
had not, therefore, the intimate knowledge of the poorer classes
which Carleton had, nor are their pictures so complete as his,
though their pages abound in descriptions which are both
powerful and true. 2 Miss Edgeworth (1767-1849) holds a
higher place among novelists than either Carleton or the
Banims, and has acquired a more extensive and more enduring
fame. But she is less Irish than they. She writes from the
landlords' point of view. She writes as belonging to the ruling
class and to the favoured creed, as an Anglo-Irishwoman of the
Pale, not indeed approving of landlord tyranny or landlord
injustice, and not without sympathy for the oppressed; yet
without any deep or passionate resentment for the \'Orongs
inflicted on them, and without any vehement desire for change. s
Lady Morgan (1777-1859) was more Irish. She was a
Protestant with strong Catholic sympathies, and in her kindly
treatment of the ancient race-the O'Donnells, the O'Flahertys,
and the O'Briens-her desire was to show the extent and
injustice of Catholic disabilities and thus further the cause of
Catholic Emancipation. 4 Nor was her purpose unrecognized,
and O'Connell once gratefully acknowledged the help which
she had given. 5 Nor must Gerald Griffin (1803-40) be omitted,
whose fine novel, the Collegians, has rarely been equalled for
its delineation of Irish character, delineation which was so
sympathetic and so true.
1 See especially Traits and Stories of the IriSh Peasantry, Fardarougha
lite .lrfiser, Valmtine MacClutchy, as well as O'Donoghue's Life, which
latter includes Carleton's A ttfobiograþhy.
2 Tales of the 0' Ham Family, 3 vols., London, 182 5.
8 See Castle Rack-rmt, and the Absentee especially; also The Life and
Letters of ilfaria Edgewortlz, ed. A. J. C. Hare, London, 1894.
4 Fitzpatrick's Lady .!if organ, pp. 22-30. 5 Ibid. 253.
484 LITERAR Y AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
Better known than any of the Irish ,vriters cf his day, and
of more enduring fame, was the poet Thomas 1\1 oore (I 775-
1852). In prose he wrote a History of Ireland, ,yhich at no
time had any special value, and has now become entirely
obsolete. He wrote the .Afemoirs of Captain Rock, which throws
much light on the state of Ireland in the years immediately
preceding Emancipation, and he wrote biographies of Lord
Edward Fitzgerald, of Byron, and of Sheridan, the last of
which, as a biography, stands deservedly high. But it is as a
poet he is best known. He wrote much-songs, ballads, tales,
satires, and one noted production, Lalla Rookll, in which he
describes with much felicity and truth the life of the East with
all its glamour and its glow. Not on all these, howeyer, tut
on his Iris/t fi,lelodies does his fame chiefly rest, and it is ,vith
the M e/odz"es his name will be for ever associated. Born in
Dublin and educated in Trinity College, he was little in touch
with the masses of his countrymen. He went early to England
and lived and died there, and it was in English drawing-rooms
he sang his songs and won applause. And yet he is essentially
Irish-his wit, his humour, his pathos, his sympathy with
suffering, his hatred of oppression are all Irish. His favourite
themes are Irish-some noted event in Irish history, some hero
of the centuries that are gone, some beautiful legend, some lake
or river or valley, some grey old ruin to which the ivy clings.
He is not the poet of passion, but of emotion. He moves to
sorrow, to pity, to pride, to vain regret, as he describes the
battles that were lost, the hopes that were unfulfilled, the
heroism that was unavailing, the plans that came to nought)
the treachery that triumphed, the proud defiance which was but
the herald of defeat. The words of Moore are often beautiful
and are always the expressions of Irish feeling and Irish
thought. But it is because the airs to which they are wedded
are so touching and plaintive that the llfelodies appeal so
strongly to an Irish heart. They tell the Irishman at home
and the Irish exile beyond the sea of sorrow and defeat, and
they draw the tear from his eye because they speak to him
with the voice of an oppressed land.
THE YOUNG IRELANDERS
4 8 5
The poetry of the Young Irelanders is inferior to that of
:ì\1oore, for none of them had his peculiar gifts, and Davis, the
brightest of them all, was swept away before his talents had
matured. Had he lived to old age, and confined himself
entirely or even chiefly to literary work, he would probably have
done great things both in poetry and in prose. But he would
not have shone in the special field in which Moore is supreme.
He was no mere drawing-room poet, no sweet singer who
excited the emotions of his auditors and won their applause.
His object was not to amuse or even to please, but to inform,
and in everything he wrote there is evidence of a high purpose
and a stern resolve. He refused to contemplate Erin always
in tears, always moaning over the past, uttering vain regrets or
equally vain threats of defiance. He wanted her to forget that
she was in rags and in chains, to cultivate National pride and
National self-reliance, to face the future with gathered strength
and that confidence which is the forerunner of victory. Hence
we find in his songs no note of de<;pair or of depression, but
rather those of courage and hope; no lingering on fields of
defeat, but rather the defence of Cremona and the charge at
Fontenoy. A combination of all Irishmen, a blending of
orange and green he knew would be invincible, and there-
fore he wanted Irishmen of all creeds to cease looking
across the Channel, but to look at home and take a
pride and an interest in thcir own land, in its language,
its history, its antiquities, its art, its scenery, its music, and
above all in its people. His influence over his contem-
poraries was great, and in the writings of the Young Ire-
landers the characteristics of Davis appear-his generous
toleration towards all Irishmen, his breadth of view, his fer-
vent devotion to Ireland, his scorn of her betrayers, his
indignation against those who cast contumely on her name.
In this spirit wrote Magee and Duffy, John O'Hagan and
D. F. 1/l'Carthy, Barry and Denny Lane, and 1\lr. Ingram
with his noble lyric, U \Vho fears to speak of '98." D'Alton
Williams has a few songs, in every line of which is the crash
of battle, and some of Lady Wilde's pieces are a challenge
4 86 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
to Ireland's foes, and on Ireland's betrayers she pours
concentrated scorn. l
Mangan owed less to Davis than the other writers of the
Nation, and was less under his influence. He was a strange
wayward genius-morbid, melancholic, sensitive, and retiring-
with poetic gifts greater than those of Davis himself. Jilted
by the only woman he ever loved, he had recourse to opium and
alcohol for consolation; but instead of being consoled his
misery was intensified. He revelled in what was dismal and
desolate, in grief for which earth had no soothing balm, in
sorrow too deep-seated to be cured; he walked the streets
in tattered garments, his head filled with learning, his heart
heavy as lead, his outlook black as night; and he died
wasted and worn, leaving behind him, according to a com-
petent critic (Lionel Johnston), something U greater than
anything that Ireland has yet produced in English verse." 2
There is some truth in the judgment passed on the Young
Irelanders: that they were not poets, but inspired journalists.!
They wrote for the day, often to influence the public opinion
of the passing hour, and had not time for that study and
thought and care essential for literary work which is to li,"e.
Yet they were much more than the ordinary journalists, and
some at least of what 1'Iangan and Davis wrote deserves a
permanent place in literature. What the others could do
appeared more fully in after years. In Magee's History of
Ireland the author gave evidence of possessing the historic
sense, and writes readably and impartially. Mitchel had
greater literary capacity, but his History, and indeed everything
he wrote, is disfigured by prejudice and partiality, by a want
of calmness in his judgments, by a fierce hatred of England.
Neither Father Meehan nor Mr. J. C. O'Callaghan wrote
eloquently, but both were fine historical scholars and men of
1 The Sþirit of tlte Nation; D'Alton William's Poems; Poems of
Sþeranza (Lady Wilde); D. F. M'Carthy's Book of Irish Ballads, Dublin,
1846; Duffy's Young Ireland.
2 O'Donoghue's edition of Mangan's 1Yorks.
S Gwyn's To-day and To-morrow in Ireland, p. 93.
O'CONNELL AND THE LITERARY REVIVAL 487
extensive learning, and what they wrote is invaluable to every
student of Irish history.l Gavan Duffy has written much,
covering, indeed, the whole of his long public life, and what he
has written no historian of Ireland can disregard. He is
perhaps somewhat unduly partial to his colleagues of the
Young Ireland Party, and betrays a tendency to magnify their
achievements. But on the whole he writes as an honest and
fair-minded man, with much of the calmness of the historian
and the grace of one with marked literary tastes-as a man
having an extensive knowledge both of books and men. Mr.
D. O. Madden was one of Davis's special friends, and has left
us pictures of the men of his time equal at least to the lively
sketches of the younger Curran,2 though inferior to the finished
pictures of Sheil. He is not, however, impartial or unprejudiced,
and is entirely out of sympathy with the political principles and
public conduct of O'Connell, though he does justice to his
extraordinary powers. s
On his side O'Connell viewed with little sympathy all this
intellectual activity. He could speak the Irish language
fluently, but had no desire to have it preserved and no anxiety
to see it used generally by the people. He knew little of
Irish history and less about Irish antiquities, nor was he a man
of extensive reading. He was a great political leader, a
lawyer of unrivalled skill, a Parliamentary debater of the first
rank, a man whose public services had so enthroned him in
the hearts of the people that he wielded over them nothing
less than despotic power. Long accustomed to deference and
even servility, he resented the independent tone of the Young
Irelanders, for he would have them his followers but not his
critics. He had, besides, been badly treated by Irish literary
men. Moore had no love for him; l\1aginn was Irish, but
wrote with contempt of O'Connell and repeal; and Mahony,
following in the wake of Maginn, had his pages strewn with
sneers at the great Irishman who had done so much for
1 See O'Callaghan's The Irish Brigade, The Green Book, and his
valuable notes to l1Iacariae Exddiunz.
2 W. H. Curran's Sketches of the Irish Bar.
S Ireland and its Rulen
88 LITERAR Y AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEME
TS
Ireland. Carleton had unbounded admiration for O'Connell
personally, but abhorred his policy of repea1,l As for men like
Maxwell and Lefanu and Lever, they could not be expected to
be friendly, as they were on the side of his political opponents. 2
For these reasons O'Connell did not share the enthusiasm of
Davis for Irish history and Irish biography. If he had done
so, the Irish literary revival which had taken place would
have made much greater progress; and, no doubt, with the
strengthening of the National character thus effected, with the
increased dignity and self-reliance called into existence, an
industrial revival also would have come.
All hope of any such revival was destroyed by the awful
events which followed the deaths of Davis and O'Connell.
Davis died in 1845, and O'Connell in 18 47; the famine
swept a\vay a fourth of the people; the abortive insurrection
of 1848 created depression and gloom such as had not
been seen since 1798; the landlords grew insolent and
evicted, and within a few years the whole country was dotted
over with deserted villages and ruined homes. Industries
still further decayed, poverty increased, and public spirit
declined. \Vith the Young J relanders dead or in exile, or
recreant to their former opinions, National literature might
be regarded as dead. Carleton wrote no more novels like
Valentine M'Clutcll)l, nor Lefanu any like his Cock and AncHor.
Lover (1797- I 868) published some sweet songs, plaintive and
sad, but his two best known novels, Rory O'jlJore and Handy
Andy, continued to be extensively read, and in Great Britain
and America were regarded as faithful pictures of I rish life,
though in reality they were mischievous caricatures. Lever
(1806-7 2 ) sinned grievously in the same direction. Reckless,
extravagant, nomadic in his habits, he was much abroad and
wrote much of foreign persons and foreign scenes. Exaggera-
tion is natural to him, and when he describes men and things
in his own country he goes far. His landlords and officers
are as extravagant and as convivial as himself - garr.bling,
horse-racing, whiskey-drinking duellists. His priests, without
1 Carleton's Life, ii. 275. 2 Duffy's Davt"s, pp. 14 1 , 282.
IRISH HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES
4 8 9
piety or learning, or any serious conception of their duties, are
given over to superstition and gluttony. His peasantry,
clothed in razs and tatters, are only slaves and buffoons. 1 Far
different is the kindly and sympathetic treatment of priest and
peasant in the two fine novels of Kickham, KnocknagoLV and
Sally Cavanag/t; and it is regrettable that for many years no
other such novels appeared.
In Irish history and antiquities. the field is not so barren,
and under the auspices of the Celtic, Archæological, and Ossianic
Societies much valuable editing ,,,as done by O'Donovan and
Reeves. by O'Callaghan and Hardiman, by Dr. Todd of Trinity
College, and Dr. Kelly of l'vIaynooth. It is to O'Donovan
(1809-61) we owe the monumental and masterly edition of
the Four lVI asters, as we owe at an earlier date to George
Petrie (1789- 1866) the valuable contributions on the Round
To'wers and on the Ancient Architecture of Ireland. Petrie had
indeed every necessary qualification for the task he undertook-
knowledge, zeal, judgment, the patience and industry and care
of a thorough and impartial investigator. As for O'Donovan,
to a sound knowledge of the Irish language he added an
extensive acquaintance with all the details of Irish history, and
a familiarity with Irish historical topography which has never
been equalled. O'Curry (1796- 1862) was the greatest Celtic
scholar of his day, a man whose modesty prevented him from
passing dogmatic judgments on Irish historical events, but \\ ho
was unwearied in getting together historical material, so that
others more competent might judge. Hardiman (1800- 55)
and John D'Alton (1792-1867) were specially skilled in local
history, and are always accurate and reliable; Lord Dunraven's
domain ,vas Irish architecture; Sir \Villiam Wilde (1815 -76) was
.an antiquarian, but in no sense a historian; Mr. Prendergast's
activity was confined to the seventeenth century, and
in this period he has done original and invaluable work; and
O'Callaghan, Todd, Reeves, and Dr. Kelly were at their best in
translating and annotating the historical work of others. 1\1 ore
1 Vìde Fitzpatrick's Life of Charles Lover, 2 vols., London, 18 I 9, and
Bayle Berm.rd's Life if Lover, 2 vols., London, 1874.
490 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
versatile than any of these was Sir Samuel Ferguson (1810-86).
As a lawyer he attained to eminence in his profession. As
Deputy-Keeper of the Irish Records, he showed that his had
been an admirable selection, and that none more competent
for the office could have been found. l He was President of
the Royal Irish Academy. He was an antiquarian who care-
fully groped his way through the buried past, and then wrote
learnedly on mounds and raths and Ogham writing, on
cromlechs and pillar stones. 2 But it is as a poet he wished to
acquire fame, and it is as a poet he has acquired it. He was not
in sympathy with the Young Irelanders, though he numbered
several of them among his close personal friends. s His
gifts recalled those of D'Arcy Magee, for both knew much of
their country's story, and it is over the broad field of Irish
history and Irish legend that Ferguson loved to roam. His
elegy on Davis was" the most Celtic in structure and spirit"
of all those laid on the dead patriot's tomb.
He wrote
satire in felicitous verse. He wrote lyrics, which, though in
English, are Irish in spirit and in form. He wrote bardic tales
with the genius and sympathy of an ancient bard. And as he
wandered back through the ages, he lighted upon some legendary
or historic event which he lifted to epic dignity. His ambition
was to raise the native elements of Irish story to a dignified
level; 6 and no one who reads what he has written will be
disposed to say that he has failed.
During the last quarter of the century the most fruitful
workers in the domain of I rish history and archæology were
Cardinal Moran, Dr. Healy, Archbishop of Tuam; Father
Murphy and Dr. M'Carthy, Dr. Joyce and Standish H.
O'Grady, Gilbert and Fitzpatrick, Richey, and Bagwell, and
Lecky; and in poetry Ferguson found no unworthy successors
in Allingham (I 824-89) and Aubrey de Vere. Like him both
drew much of their inspiration from Ireland, and like him both
were familiar with its story and its scenery, its legends and its
lore. 0 With considerable aptitude for historical research,
1 Lady Ferguson's Sir S. Ferguson, ii. 332-7. 2 Ibid. 46-47.
S Ibid. i. 139. 4 Ibid. 134-6. !í Ibid. 36. 6 Ibid. 251-2.
IRISH HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES
49 1
Cardinal Moran has gone over the whole field of Irish Church
history, producing many books with which no Irish historian
can dispense. Dr. Healy is as familiar as the Cardinal with
the sources of Irish history, ecclesiastical and civil, and an
equally enthusiastic historical student, and he is a more
eloquent and attractive writer. With a knowledge of ancient
Irish architecture, which is profound, and a genius for historical
topography little inferior to that of O'Donovan, he has visited
every district in Ireland, and therefore describes what he has
seen; and his vivid pictures of Arran and Armagh, of Bangor
and Clonmacnoise, have not been and are not likely to be
surpassed. Father Murphy and Dr. MacCarthy are best as
editors. Mr. S. H. O'Grady has been declared by a competent
critic to approach nearest to O'Donovan. l Dr Joyce has to his
account a good deal of Irish history impartially told, and his
book on the social condition of ancient Ireland has popularized
and extended the materials left us by O'Curry. As for
\Vhitley Stokes, his reputation as a profound scholar is world-
wide, and in the field of Celtic philology he stands unequalled.
Gilbert delighted to make his way through State documents, to
discover what had hitherto lain concealed, to arrange and piece
together historical fragments, and then set forth lucidly what
he had done, so that the historian might \\"eave a connected
narrative. Fitzpatrick equally loved research, but it was
chiefly into the lives and characters of public men, and not
infrequently his discoveries have proved of great historical
value. Richey and BagwelJ have written from the landlord
and conservative standpoint, but both are painstaking and are
never consciously unfair. Lecky stands on a higher level, and
is one of the greatest historians of the age; fair-minded and
full, his aim to discover the truth, he is unwearied in its pursuit,
pronounces his judgments with judicial impartiality, writes
often in a strain of lofty eloquence, and is never wearisome or
dull, and has left us A History of Ireland in the Eighteenth
Century which for the period covered stands unrivalJed.
For some years before his death O'Curry had been
1 Lady Ferguson, ii. 88.
492 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
Professor of Irish History and Archæology in the Catholic
University. That institution owed its origin to the Catholic
bishops. Trinity College was Protestant, the Queen's Colleges
were godless colleges, and Dr. MacHale and many of his
colleagues suggested, as the only way of meeting Catholic
requirements, the establishment of a University under Catholic
control
relying on Catholic support, with Catholic students in
its class halls and Catholic professors in the various chairs.
As far back as 1847 the Congregation of the Propaganda had
urged the Irish bishops to aim at setting up a Catho1ic Univer-
sity, giving them as a model the University of Louvain. 1 Dr.
MacHale, and those who like him had opposed the Queen's
Colleges, welcomed the suggestion and were ready to act on
it; and at the Synod of Thurles in I 850 the Queen's
Colleges, having been formally condemned as intrinsicaJIy
dangerous to faith and morals, it was resolved that every effort
should be made to meet the views of the Propaganda by the
establishment of a Catholic U niversity.2 Some time elapsed
before the necessary brief was obtained from Rome and
the necessary funds in Ireland, and not until I 85 3 did the
Catholic University open its doors. Its site was in St.
Stephen's Green, Dublin, its first Rector, John Henry Newman.
Professors to the different chairs were soon after appointed,
and work was c.:>mmenced in the following year.
But there were difficulties from the beginning which boded
ill for the new institution, and gave no promise of that success
which has followed the fortunes of the great establishment at
Louvain. Between Dr. l\lac I I ale and Dr. Cullen serious
differences arose. The latter wanted the affairs of the
University to be managed by a small committee of the bishops,
while Dr. MacHale wanted the control to be in the hands of
the whole Episcopal body. And Dr. MacHale complained of
the appointments made to the various chairs, and of not being
furnished with details of the expenditure. Finally he dis-
approved of the appointment of Dr. Newman. He did not
1 Decrees of the Synod of Thurles, Appendix iv.
2 Decrees of the Synod (Chapter, "De Colegiis Reginae ").
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY
493
deny that the great oratorian had intellectual capacity of the
highest order and that his moral character was above reproach,
and he knew that having lived so long in Oxford he was
familiar with the life and spirit of a great University. But
though :'J'e\vman loved Ireland, and especially because of her
noble fidelity to the ancient faith, he was an Englishman with
English ideas. Dr. l\IacHale wanted an Irishman with Irish
ideas. He wanted to have the University develop on Irish
lines; to have the whole atmosphere of the place distinctì,'ely
Irish; to have the Irish language efficiently taught, and Irbh
history a prominent place in the curriculum; to have Irish
song and story made familiar, Irish art cultivated, and Irish
heroes venerated within its walls. Thus, by professors Irish in
sympathy and in feeling, students would be trained and sent
forth who would exhibit the highest capabilities of the Irish
character, and by whom the best traditions of their race would
be rivalled and recalled. 1 \Vith much of this :K e\vman had no
sympathy. Among his list of nominations to the professors'
chairs were several educatcd at Oxford and Cambridge. He
had no provision made for the teaching of the I rish language.
And instead of having an Irish National University, he
preferred one which would be rather cosmopolitan in its
character-a centre in which all subjects would be taught to
seekers after knowledge no matter whence they came. Dr.
Cullen favoured Newman's views, and the want of harmony
betw
n two such eminent ecclesiastics as Dr. Cullen and Dr.
:l\1ac Hale resulted in lessened enthusiasm for the University on
the part of the public, and consequent lessened pecuniary
support The professorial staîf was incomplete; there was no
provision made for the students' residence or for tutorial
superintendence, and there could not, therefore, be that inter-
communion of thought so necessary to University life. The
obstinate refusal of the Government to grant a charter was the
heaviest blow of all. Unable any longer to row against the
stream Newman resigned in 1857. After that date the
University struggled painfully on until in 1882 it was handed
1 O'Reilly's Life of Jfac.l-Iale, i. 487-525.
494 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
over to the] esuits, and by them was galvanized into actidty.
The conscientious Catholics meanwhile were shut out from
higher education. Those who were less conscientious went to
the Queen's Colleges in spite of Episcopal prohibition, and not
a few also made their way to Trinity College
The latter institution in 1893 celebrated its tercentenary.
For four days the celebrations continued. As many as seventy-
five Universities and other learned bodies were represented, and
students and learned men came from many lands. There
were balls and banquets and garden parties; there was a
religious celebration in St. Patrick's Cathedral, attended by the
guests in their many-coloured academic costumes; there was a
tercentenary ode and the conferring of honorary degrees; and
in many speeches the past glories of Trinit:y College were
recalled. 1 And, undoubtedly, the list of great men who had
passed through its halls since the days of Usher and \Vare
was a long one. I t could claim Molyneux and Swift and
Goldsmith. The great men who shed lustre on I reland in the
closing years of the eighteenth century were among its
students-Grattan and Flood, and Plunkett and Bushe, and
Curran and many more. O'Connell did not belong to it, but
Sheil and l\Ioore did, as did Davis and Ferguson; and among
its professors were Ingram and Isaac Butt. And if we
enumerate all those who won distinction in the Church, at the
Bar, in the army and navy and diplomatic services, the list
might be indefinitely prolonged. 2 These men, however, served
England and her empire, and had little sympathy with Ireland,
and hence from the tercentenary celebrations the masses and
their representatives held aloof. For Trinity College in the
nineteenth century, as in the sixteenth, was a Protestant
institution in a Catholic land, an enemy of popular progress, a
citadel of ascendancy and class privilege; and if Wolfe Tone
and Emmett and Davis had been among its students, they found
but few sympathizers within its walls. It had given no help
to O'Connell; and in the subsequent contests, in the struggle
1 MacNeill Dixon, History of Trinity College, pp. 282-4.
Dixon's Introduction.
TERCENTENARY OF TRINITY COLLEGE
495
for Parliamentary and municipal reform, in the fight for
educational equality, and in the long fierce agrarian struggle,
the voice of Trinity College had always been lifted up to
drown the voice of freedom. Irish Catholics remembered with
bitterness that this rich institution with its splendid buildings,
its magnificent library, its complete University equipment, had
always been aggressively Protestant, though it derived its
princely revenue from the plunder of Catholic lands. And
Irish Nationalists remembered with bitterness that the Parlia-
mentary representatives of Trinity College had always been
place-hunting lawyers; that its students had always been ready
to groan a popular procession or cheer an unpopular Viceroy.
And in the great Home Rule struggle one of its professors,
Dr. Ingram, had the hardihood to enter the lists against 1fr.
Gladstone, and had undertaken the impossible task of justifying
the vile manner by which the Union had been passed. And
yet Irishmen, who would lay aside relig'ous and political
prejudices, and regard only academic attainments, could not but
admit that Trinity College reflected honour on Ireland, If it had
done little in the field of original research, and if the number
of its really great men was small in proportion to the number
of its students and the amount of its revenues, at least there
was no age in which some great men did not belong to it.
Usher and Berkeley, Swift and Burke, were intellectual giants,
men whose fame was of all time; and if in 1893 it was true
that Trinity College could boast of none such as these, it was
equally true that l\1ahaffy and Salmon, and Dowden and
Lecky, were men who would have brought honour to the first
University in the world.
Two years after this date came the centenary of l\Iaynooth
College. The Pope sent an autograph letter of congratulation,
and among the visitors were archbishops and bishops from all
parts of Ireland, as well as from England and from abroad,
the heads of many foreign colleges, and many hundreds of
priests. The balls and banquets and garden parties, the
ladies' dresses and the many - coloured academic costumes
which were seen at Trinity College were not at :Maynooth,
49 6 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
for l\faynooth is not a University but a great ecclesiastical
seminary. But there were IT.eetings and speeches and religious
celebrations, and an eloquent sermon by a former l\laynooth
student, Dr. Healy of Clonfert, and besides these public
functions there were many hearty greetings between former
comrades, who clasped hands once more after the lapse of
years. Many a priest who had lcng wrestled with the world
and its cares was glad to see again the familiar face of his
Alma Mater, its fields and walks and grey old walls, the
c!oisters in which he had walked so often, the c1ass-hall in
which he had sat, the room he once occupied. A nd he sighed
as he realized the hayoc which had been wrought by time, the
o'd Professors and Superiors gone, his fellow-students scattered
far and wide, some working in holy Ireland itself and some in
far-off lands, and not a few of the dear old friends whom he
had loyed silent for ever in their graves.
Within the walls of Maynooth there has always been plenty
of talent, and yet the numcer of Maynooth men who have
become authors is but smalL Busily engaged at class work).
the Professors have little leisure for literary \\Iork, and when
they have written it is on pUlely professional sub]ects. The
I rish Bishops have often more leisure, but few of them haye
had literary tastes. And the priests throughcut the country
who may have time and literary tastes have almost insuperable
difficulties to surmount. The Irish pubJishers ha,'e little initia-
tive or enterprise, and the priest in some obscure country' Wage
knows nothing of London publishers, and not infrequently also
at home he has to encounter discouragement. But if he does
not write books he buys them, and there is no movement for the
uplifting of the people-literary, artistic, industrial-in which he
does not share. The priests helped O'Connell in the struggle
for Emancipation and in the struggle for the Repeal. They
were in the ranks of Young Ireland and shared its enthu-
siasm for Irish National ideals, and in the Gaelic movement of
later times no class of Irishmen have taken so prominent a
part.
In 1843 there were 3,000,000 persons in Ireland still
THE GAELIC REVIVAL
497
speaking Irish as their mother-tongue. l By famine and emi-
gration their ranks in the next few years were woefully thinned.
On the altar steps and in the homes of the people Irish gradually
grew into disuse, and in the National schools children were
punished for speaking it. Alone among the Catholic Bishops
Dr. MacHale laboured for its preservation, had it taught in
the Primary Schools of his Diocese and in his Diocesan College,
and compelled all his priests to learn it at l\laynooth and use
it in speaking to the people. No organized effort was made
till 1876, when the Society for the Preservation of the Irish
Language was founded. But this Society, confining itself to
publishing some small text- books, never attained national
proportions, and in 1879 a more virile one was formed, the
Gaelic Union, which in a short time started the Gaelic j OZlrllal.
The years that followed were years of fierce po1itical struggle,
which absorbed the best energies of the Irish race in every land.
Amid the din and stress of battie no mere literary movement
could have aroused national enthusiasm, and only after the
fall of Parnell was a beginning made by the establishment in
1893 of the Gaelic Lea
ue. I t owed its origin to the more
militant spirits of the Gaelic Union, mostly young men, and
differing much both in politics and in creed.
At that date the best known among them was Father Eugene
O'Growney, a man of singularly lovable character. l\lodest,
unassuming, and retiring, he was without a trace of vanity or
self-conceit. Ill-natured critics, jealous no doubt of his well-
earned fame, have sometimes pointed to the fact that in
l\Iaynooth his academic honours were few. But they forgot
that even Burke and Swift had the same story to tell; that to
obtain such honours requires the constant treading and retread-
ing the same narrow patch of ground,2 and to many this is
an unendurable weariness; and they ignore the fact that
O'Growney's health in College had always been poor, and
study and sickness go ill together. Besides this, his enthusiasm
for I rish was such that he left himself little time for other
studies. Born in Meath, where it was little spoken, he knew
1 Kohl's TOllr, p. 207. 2 Morley's Edmund Burke.
VOL. III 102
-498 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
nothing of it till he entered College, and there he took up its
study and laboured with unwearied industry. He loved to
frequent the College Library and copy its I rish manuscripts,
and to discuss with I rish-speaking students questions of pro-
nunciation and dialect; and when the vacation came he went
to Kerry and Cork, and Donegal and the Arran Isles, to learn
the language where it was pure. 1-1is great ability soon made
him proficient, and while yet a student he wrote Irish tales
and stories and translations for the Gaelic J oU1'1wl. I n I 889
he became Professor of Irish at Maynooth, and inspired many
of his students with some of his own enthusia
m. A delicate
constitution could not stand the strain of all his work, and
he was compelled to seek health a nd strength beneath summer
skies. He died at Los Angelos in 1894, away on the distant
slopes of the Pacific, and as his body was borne back to Ireland
across the American continent the whole Irish race came out
to do him honour. H is simplicity, his earnestness, his en-
thusiasm had attracted the esteem and affection of millions;
and those who, like the present writer, were number
d among
his intimate friends feel the better for having known such a
man, and will ah\"ays cherish his memory.
The work which he had so much at heart was carried on
in his declining years, as it has teen since, by his colleagues of
the Gaelic League, and notably by its President, Dr. Douglas
Hyde. Though a Protestant and educated at Trinity College,
Dr. Hyde is thoroughly imbued with the Irish national spirit.
He is a man of considerable ability, with a special aptitude for
languages, and has done much propagandist work. He has
travelled through all parts of Ireland, talked the old language
with the people, and taken from their lips old stories and
songs, and has thus been able to write much on Irish legends
and folk-lore. Less prominent but scarcely less enthusiastic
in the movement have been Mr. I\1ac:i\eiIl, Father Dineen,
and Dr. O'Hickey, Father John O'Reilly, and several others.
They set before themselves the task of restoring to I re-
land her rightful heritage from the past in language, in
story, in legend, in music, and in song; and when it is
THE GAELIC REVIVAL
499
remem bered how far the process of Anglicization had gone,
it was a task from which even Hercules might have re-
coiled. The Irish language had indeed fallen low. The
landed gentry despised it, the professional classes and the
merchants in towns were all unfriendly to it, the priest ceased
to use it in his sermons, and the schoolmaster shunned it in
the school; and when the peasant spoke it, it was to the
donkey he belaboured on the roadside or to the cattle he drove
through the fields. It was English poetry which was admired,
English novels and English newspapers which were read,
English dress which was worn, and English fashions copied.
The names of Patrick and Bridget, and Brendan and Columba,
had given place to George and Arthur, and Mabel and 11aud.
Irish history was tabooed as a series of faction fights. The
country fiddler and piper were no longer heard, and the cross-
road dance no longer seen. And the change had not benefited
Ireland. Her manufactures had decayed, energy, and enterprise
and initiative had become less, national dignity and self-respect
were but empty names, and Irish rural life had become so dull
that thousands were every year flying to foreign lands.
In 190 I there were but 2 1,000 persons in Ireland who
spoke Irish only. The Gaelic Leaguers did not want to have
all I rishmen such as these, for they wanted English to be
retained for the country's material needs. It would be madness
to discard so great a language-the language of a world-wide
Empire. But they wanted the Irish people to be a bilingual
people, to speak their own old tongue, to dance Irish jigs and
reels, to cultivate Irish music and encourage Irish art, to study
their history with all its lights and shades. They were en-
couraged by what they had seen done by Greeks and Slavs,
and Poles and Magyars, and Welsh, and they believed that
what these had done to revive their language and distinctive
national characteristics could be done in Ireland. 1 As usual,
Trinity College was on the anti-National side. Dr. lVlahaffy
thought that to revive the Irish language would be a retrograde
step-a return to the Tower of Babel. His colleague, Professor
1 Dubois, p. 437.
5 00 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
Atkinson, declared that Irish was not good enough for a patois;
and neither in the Primary nor Intermediate system of education
was Irish given any substantial encouragement. 1 The shoneens
everywhere, that is, the Irishmen who ape England and its
ways, predicted failure-for everything Irish was sure to fail.
l\fany others, while indulging in loud talk against England,
would do nothing but pass resolutions. And the number of
the apathetic was legion.
But Dr. Hyde and his colleagues struggled on, and with a
patience, an energy, a determination to succeed not usually
associated with Irishmen. Success at last came. In 1906
there were nearly 100,000 children learning Irish in the
National Schools, and nearly 3000 presented themselves for
examination in that subject at the Intermediate examinations
of the preceding year. By that time Irish and Irish history
could be taught in the National Schools within school hours, a
concession very difficult to obtain. 2 There were nearly 1000
branches of the Gaelic League; there were Gaelic festivals
where Irish stories were told, Irish jigs and reels danced, and
Irish songs sung, and there was the yearly National Festival
(the Ardh-Fheis), where these things were done on a national
scale. Irish concerts were often organized, I rish lectures given,
and there was an I rish newspaper, the Claideanzh Solius, the
recognized organ of the Gaelic Leaguers. Wisely avoiding
politics, the Gaelic League has attracted men of various classes
and creeds - priests, parsons, lawyers, doctors, journalists,
members of Parliament. Dr. Hyde himself is a Protestant, Mr.
Stephen Gwynn, l\I.P., author and poet, is also a Protestant,
Lord Castletown is a peer of the realm, Mr. Gibson is heir to
Lord Ashbourne, Rev. Mr. Hannay is a literary parson in
the west of Ireland, Colonel Moore a distinguished army
officer. I n America the Gaelic League has many branches,
and when in recent years Dr. Hyde went to America he
brought home with him after a short lecturing tour the sum of
;l 10,000 for the spread of the organization at home. Sub-
scriptions have come from Australia and from the Argentine
1 Dubois, pp. 4 1 4- 1 7. 2 Ibid. 417-19.
LITERARY REVIVAL IN ENGLISH
5 01
Republic, and in London an Irish Texts Society bas been
formed. Under its auspices a Dictionary has been brought
out by Father Dineen, and Irish texts have been edited by
capable Irish scholars. For works written in Irish the time is
not yet ripe, and though many smaller works have been
published, some of which have met with a ready sale, as yet no
original Irish book of permanent value has appeared.
In English, however, there has been a literary revival
largely due to the spirit evoked by the Gaelic movement. In
Dublin there is a National Literary Society at which papers
are read on national subjects. In London there is a similar
Society, under the auspices of which some valuable monographs
have been published on such men as Davis, Sarsfield, Owen
Roe O'Neill, and Dr. Doyle. Mr. Graves, himself a poet, has
brought out an Irish song-book; Mr. Standish O'Grady has
written historical fiction dealing with Elizabethan times, and
Dr. Hyde has told the story of early Gaelic literature. Besides
his book on Dr. Doyle, 1\11'. IYlichael l\IacDonagh has dealt
with O'ConnelU IVIr. D. J. O'Donoghue has done much in
the field of literary biography, and Mr. Larminie has dealt
with vVest of Ireland folk-lore. Ethna Carbery and l\Ioira
O'Neill are both sweet singers from Ulster. T. D. Sullivan is
responsible for some lyrics which have won world-wide fame.
Dr. Sheehan deals with the Irish priest's life and in that field
is supreme. Miss Lawless is Anglo-Irish rather than Irish; Miss
Barlow is happy in describing the Irish peasantry; and Lady
Gregory's attachment is for Pagan Ireland. She has also had
a large share in establishing an Irish Literary Theatre, in
which several plays written by Lady Gregory herself and some
of her literary friends have been produced. But neither of
these plays has any striking merit, and so far nothing great
has b
en done on the stage. 111'. George Russell has not
written plays, but is a poet of undoubted gifts. He is not
easily understood, and is more of a mystic than any of his
contemporaries. Without caring to describe the scenery of his
country or its ruins, or to grow enthusiastic about the great
1 See also his Viceroy's Post-Ba,[{.
502 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOYEMENTS
events of its history, yet he is Irish to the core. Vague,
indefinite, idealistic, he is pantheistic in his philosophy and
pagan in his belief, one to whom Pagan Ireland rather than
Christian Ireland appeals. l Mr. Yeates, however, is the most
famous of the group, the high - priest of the Irish Literary
Theatre. He has written plays and poems and a little prose,
and often expresses beautiful thoughts in beautiful language.
Vague and dreamy, he has gone to Irish pagan mythology
for his themes, to the fairy palace and the enchanted castle, to
the goddesses and legendary heroes, to Maebh and Oisin and
Cuchullain. He is not a Christian, apparently, and has
declared that the Christian's code of morals is not fór him; and
he cares little for the concrete parts of Irish history. To the
solid earth on which he stands, to the sights and scenes around
him, he prefers the palace of the fairy and the land of the
ever young, and not infrequently he is so misty and indefinite
that he eludes the ordinary intelligence. 2 He has his admirers,
and they are not few, but he can never become a national poet,
nor be the head of a great literary movement; for the people
are not likely to accept as a leader or as a literary prophet one
who lives for ever with fairies and dreams, and who clings to a
philosophy and a religion (if they can be called such) which he
himself is unable to explain. s
It has been observed by 1V1. Dubois -1 that there is no case
in European history in which a national renaissance has not
been accompanied or followed by an economic one, and when
the Gaelic movement began such an economic 1 enaissance was
badly required in Ireland. Half a century after Kane had
written of its mineral wealth and industrial possibilities 5 the
coalfields of Armagh and Tyrone, and the copper and lead
deposits of Wicklow, \Vexford, and \Vaterford, were still unde-
veloped. The coal-mines at Castlecomer and the iron mines
at Arigna suffered from inadequate transport facilities. Irish
1 To-day and To-morrow in Ireland, pp. 29-3 0 .
2 Irish Ideals, pp. 94, 99, 101.
B Nor/Il American Review, October 1902, article by Fiona MacLeod.
4 Contemþorary Ireland, p. 404.
ð See Kane's Industrial Resources of Ireland.
,
WILLIA:\I CARLETO
10' \
\
f I) \
'\
JA:\IES CL\REXCE ;\I.\M;.\
.----.;:
I awrence.
W. B. YEATS
"
....
-
\ I
THO:\L\S 1\IOORE
../
FATHER FTf
EXE O'GROWXEY
DR. JJOl-CLAS IIYJ,E
..
IND USTRIAL REVIV.-\L
5 0 3
peat was used only for fuel. Irish fisheries yielded wealth
to Frenchmen and l\1anxmen, but not to I rishmen. The
waters of so many noble rivers, each capable of generating
enormous electric power and of turning a thousand mill-wheels,
rushed idly to the sea. In Ulster, indeed, the linen manu-
facture flourished, Dublin contained the greatest brewery in
the world, at Dublin and Cork were thriving distilleries, and
at Belfast were enormous and prosperous shipbuilding yards;
but these stoo:::1 out like so many oases in the dreary desert of
indu-;trial decay. As for agriculture, it had not passed beyond
primitive conditions, and in consequence the soil did not give
half the yield which it might give. Newspapers and public
men complained that British capital was not directed towards
Ireland, ignoring the fact that millions of Irish money were
invested abroad and millions more lying unproductive in the
Savings Banks at home.
By co-operation and self-help, by improved methods of
tillage and improved breeds of stock, by imparting better
technical training. and by a more careful study of the
requirements of the markets at home and abroad, much has
been done by the Agricultural Department and by the Con-
gested Board. The land yields more, stock are more market-
able, the Irish fÌ:;heries have ceased to be monopolized by
Manx and French, there has been a distinct revival in the
Irish butter, poultry, and egg trade. Homespuns are produced
along the western seaboard and carpets in Donegal, the
woollen manufactures have made progress in Munster, and
there is an increasing demand for Irish lace. 1 Not a little of
the credit for this revival, partial and incomplete though it be,
i:; due to Sir Horace Plunkett, who deserves well of Ireland.
He would, however, have deserved better if he had not attacked
the Catholic clergy and their religion. Premising that Catho-
licity, from its too great reliance on authority, blights initiative
and self-reliance, and is unfavourable to the growth of industrial
habits, he points to Ulster, Protestant and prosperous, and to
the Catholic provinces, poor and unprogressive; he charges the
1 Irish Rural Life, pp. 129, I 5
-4, I 57.
504 LITERARY AND INDUSTRIAL MOVEMENTS
priests with not doing enough to promote temperance and
thrift, and he blames them for building expensive churches in
the midst of poverty-stricken congregations, and for filling
these churches with the meretricious products of foreign art,
while they neglect the art which is of native growth. l These
charges have been effectively ans\vered in a singularly able
book by a singularly able man, Dr. O'Riordan, Rector of the
Irish College at Rome, a man whose extensive scholarship
recalls the days of \Vadding and Colgan and Lynch. Dr.
O'Riordan shows conclusively that Ulster is not so prosperous
as Sir II. Plunkett would have us believe; that Belgium,
prosperous and Catholic, refutes the charge that Catholicity is
opposed to industrial habits; that Catholics have had to build
new churches, having been plundered by Protestants of those
they once had. And he shows that the priests wete Sir Horace
Plunkett's best helpers, and in no schools has so much been done
for technical training as in the convent schools. 2
I t was in the pages of the Dublin Leader that Dr.
O'Riordan's book first appeared in serial form, and to that
journal and its genial editor, Mr. Moran, the Irish revival owes
much. No one will easily take Mr. 1Ioran for anything but
an Irishman. His buoyant spirits, his hearty laugh, his love
of a joke, his quick perception of a humorous situation, are as
Irish as the Lakes of Killarney or the mountains of Connemara.
Knowing the Irish language himself, he wants it studied by
Irishmen, and he wants a literary revival, though he has little
sympathy with the dreams and fairies of Mr. Yeates. For 1fr.
Moran is as practical as Thomas Davis, and sees that what
Ireland wants most of all is men with confidence in themselves
and in their country.s He loves not those who b]ame the
Government for everything, and who spend their time passing
resolutions but will do nothing themselves; and on the Irish-
man who apes England and its ways, and despises his own
country, he makes unsparing war. In an age of commercial
1 Ireland in the New Century, chap. iv.
2 Catholicity and Progress in Ireland, pp. 14, 42, 208.27, 410-20.
3 Irish Ideals, pp. 3 8 -39.
THE LEADER
505
journalism the paper which would refuse English and only
insert I rish advertisements would be regarded as a strange
novelty. Yet Mr. Moran has done this, and with the happy
result that, while his paper prospers, a valuable and much-
needed stimulus has been given to Irish enterprise.
r
CHAPTER XXI
The b-ish Abroad
THE English made permanent settlements in North America,
early in the seventeenth century, at Virginia and at Plymouth,
and William Penn established a colony in Pennsylvania in
1682. The Irish, however, were slow to follow where the
English led, and not till I 677 was there an I rish Quaker
colony at Salem, in New Jersey, and a still larger colony, also
Quakers, settled at Philadelphia. 1 Before the century closed
an Irish Catholic gentleman named Carroll settled in l\1ary-
land. Early in the eighteenth century the stream of Irish
emigration flowed wcstward with great volume, and for many
year;; a yearly average of 3000 Irish, mostly Presbyterians
from Ulster, landed on American soi1. 2 During that period
the Irish Catholics went for the most part to France. Not
all, however, for we find in the middle of thc eighteenth cen-
tury that there were M'Duffys, M'DowelIs, and l\1'Gruddcrs
in Virginia, an O'Hara at Pittsburg, and at Burlington no
less than 100 Dublin men landed from a single ship.B
Excessive rents and excessive tithes drove away thousands of
Irish, both Catholic and Presbyterian, in the years preceding
the War of American Independence, and by that time the
Irish had grown numerous, and in many cases wealthy, in the
Carolinas, Maryland, Georgia, and Virginia, in the New England
States, and even in far-away Kentucky and Tennessee.. They
were among the most resolute opponents of English tyranny,
and when war broke out their valour was conspicuous both on
sea and land. They fought at Lexington and Bunker HilI ;
1 O'Hanlon's In.sh-Americtlll History, pp. 57, 63. 2 Ibid. 7 0 .
:i Ibid. 82-84, 100-101. 4 Ibid. 104-9, 137-9.
5 06
IRISH IN THE Uì\ITED STATES
5 0 7
the Irish-American Brigade of Pennsylvania were among the
best troops which \Vashington led ; and on sea Jack Barry was
one of England's most dreaded foes. l No less than nine of
those who signed the Declaration of Independence were Irish
or of Irish descent; 2 at a critical period of the war twenty-
three Irishmen subscribed half a million dollars; S and when the
war was over to no soldiers was \Vashington more grateful than
to the Irish. 4 In 177 I and 1772 the number of Irish emigrants
to America was 17,350, and in one fortnight in the following
year it was 3500.5 They were so numerous at the opening of
the war that they completely dominated the State of Pennsyl-
vania, and in 1785 it was given in evidence before a Committee
of the British House of Commons that "half of the rebel
Continental army were from Ireland." 6
To a country which owed so much to Irish valour, which
imposed no restrictions on account of religion,7 and in which
the rack-renting landlord and the grasping tithe-proctor were
unknown, it might have been expected that there would have
been a sudden influx of Irish emigrants in the years following
the war. But careful research has discovered that for the ten
years from 1784 to 1794 the average number of immigrants
from all foreign countries was not more than 4000 a year,
and necessarily but a portion, and probably a small portion, of
these was from I reland. s The reason is not far to seek.
These were the years following the removal of the commercial
restrictions and the acquisition of legislative independence, the
years during which Irish agriculture was prosperous and the
Irish manufacturing industry advanced with giant strides; and
Irishmen had no desire to cross the sea as long as there was
prosperity at home. Then came the long war with France,
during which Irishmen thought it dangerous to cross the
ocean in vessels flying the British flag. When the war was
1 ü'Hanlon, pp. 159- 60 , 168-72, 187-9 2 . 2 Ibid. 19 6 - 208 .
3 Ibid. 26 I. 4 Maguire's The Irish in America, pp. 354-5.
5 Bagenal's The American Irish, p. 6. 6 Ibid. 9, 13.
7 ü'Hanlon, Appendix 3-Constitution of the United States-" Con-
gress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the exercise thereof." 8 Bagenal, pp. 25- 26 .
5 08
THE IRISH ABROAD
ended amid the smoke of Waterloo, the tide once more began
to flow; and it has been calculated that from 18 I 9 to 1855
nearly two millions left Ireland for the United States. Another
estimate is that from 1820 to 1872 the number was three
millions. But both figures are obviously too low, and do not
sufficiently take count of the number of Irish who left British
ports, and are therefore put down as natives of Great Britain. l
But besides those who went to the United States, many
Irishmen crossed the Atlantic to settle in Quebec, in New
Brunswick and Nova Scotia, in Prince Edward Island and
NewfoundLmd. In Nova Scotia there is much greater cold in
winter and much greater heat in summer than in Ireland; but
the climate is not unhealthy, and in agriculture, in the fisheries,
and in the mines many who came from Ireland found wealth.
Sobriety, industry, and perseverance enabled them to succeed;
the day-labourer soon became a farmer or prosperous merchant,
and in half a century the Irish grew to be a great factor in
the life of Nova Scotia. Its capital in 18 I 6 contained but
1500 Catholics, with a few others scattered over the colony, but
in 1866 the Catholics of the colony numbered I I 5,000, of
whom no less than 40,000 were Irish. 2 The Irish were then a
majority of the inhabitants of Halifax, owning some of its
largest shops; and of the 2000 Irish voters in the city all or
nearly all owned f, 50 of real estate. s In Prince Edward
Island a somewhat similar state of things prevailed. Industry,
sobriety, and thrift had there also enabled the Irish day-
labourer to acquire some of the rich land, and so to acquire not
only a competency, but sometimes wealth. 1\'11'. Maguire found
an Irishman, the Hon. D. Brennan, one of the shrewdest and
ablest of the island merchants; and in an Irish settlement
which he visited he found men who had come without a
sixpence in possession of good-sized, well-tilled, well-stocked
farms, comfortable houses, and every evidence of prosperity.
As for the Irish girls, he gives the testimony of a Scotch
Bishop, that there U could not be a more modest, chaste, and
well-conducted class; a case of scandal is of the very rarest
1 Bagenal, pp. 26- 2 9. 2 Maguire, pp. I 1-12. 3 Ibid. 3-5, 20.
EMIGRATION DURIN"G THE FAMINE
5 0 9
occurrence among them." 1 In St. John, the capital of New
Brunswick, the Irish in 1866 owned fully half the property
and wealth. 2 In 1874 the Catholics of Newfoundland numbered
a third of the entire population of the colony, all descendants
of Irish emigrants, and in 190 I the proportion was still
maintained. s Nor had the Irish been less successful along the
St. Lawrence. In 1866 the Irish Catholic working men in
Quebec had 1:80,000 lodged in the Savings Bank, and there
were cases where individual Irishmen had made fortunes of
1: 5 0,000, though they had come out without a shilling. 4 Nor
were there less than 30,000 Irish Catholics in the city of
l\Iontrea1. 5
In the terrible exodus of the famine years Irish emigrants
did not go to Newfoundland, and few of these went to Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick, or Prince Edward Island. But
hundreds of thousands directed their course to Canada, and of
these the fate was sad in the extreme. Borne in saiHng
vessels-old, unseaworthy, and slow-the ten or twelve weeks
of the voyage was a time of horror. Flying from hunger, they
had an insufficient supply of food on board; flying from fever,
they had typhus among the passengers and were soon stricken
down themselves; and without medicine, nursing, or medical
attendance, sickness was but the prelude to death, followed by
burial at sea. From stem to stern of the vessel pestilence was
lord of all, and night and day the sounds that met the ear were
the incoherent mutterings of the delirious, the faint moans of
the dying, and the pitiful wailing for the dead. Deaths were
necessarily frequent, and the cases were not a few where a
family of twelve left Ireland and only one reached the end of
his journey. And when the mouth of the St. Lawrence was
reached there was a fresh catalogue of horrors. Fearful of
admitting typhus-stricken patients, the Canadian Government
had made Grosse Isle a quarantine station, and there all
vessels were examined and all still in fever detained. But
the accommodation provided was altogether insufficient, and the
1 Maguire, pp. 32-33, 45. 2 IbM. 77.
3 Ellcycloþædia Brz"tannica. 4 Maguire, p. 93. 5 Ibid. 97.
5 10
THE IRISH ABROAD
rude fever-sheds were soon filled to overflowing. Inside were
patients in delirium, outside in the open were men and women
lying half-naked and helpless, with none to give them food or
drink. The daily death-roll was at least 100, and often
reached to twice that amount. In Grosse Isle alone as many as
ten thousand, or perhaps twelve thousand, were buried, nearly
half of these being unknown; 1 and along the St. Lawrence the
horrors of Grosse Isle were renewed. At Quebec as many as
I 100 were lying at the same time in the fever-sheds, and
within one small railed -in area 600 Irish emigrants were
interred. At Kingston the deaths were so many that coffins
could not be supplied, and in one large pit 1900 uncoffined
Irish were laid. 2 The priests who ministered, the nuns \\'ho
nursed were struck down; often whole families were
wept
away, and sometimes father and mother died leaving helpless
children too young to understand their loss. The Irish
already in Canada helped some of these orphans; others were
adopted by Protestants and brought up as such; and many
were cared for by French Canadians. a In the year that
followed other Irish came, happily without having to enter the
fever- sheds or the nameless graves. In every walk of life
they prospered-as farmers and traders, as lawyers, doctors, and
engineers; and in the higher offices of State more than one
Irishman held office as :Minister of the Crown.
But the greater number of the Irish who traversed the
Atlantic made their way to the United States. Like those
who entered the St. Lawrence, they travelled in fever-stricken
vessels, and when cast ashore at New York became inmates
of fever hospitals. On the voyage they had breathed a
pestilential atmosphere, and had seen sickness and death
around them; and many a blushing and beautiful Irish girl,
hitherto stainless as the lily, had been assailed in mid-ocean by
some sailor or ship's officer and had become a victim to his
lawless lust! What those who entered the fever hospitals
suffered may be gathered from the fact that in one room but
50 feet square there were found 100 persons sick and dying,
1 Maguire, pp. 134-8. 2 Ibid. 149-53. s Ibid. 144,150. 40 ibid. 180-4.
CONDITION OF THE IRISH AMERICANS
5 11
among them being the bodies of two who had died five days
previously and since then had been left unburied. 1 Nor were
the troubles of those who braved the fever on shipboard or 011
land over when they landed safely and in health on American
soil. In the streets of the city they were set upon and
robbed; they were overcharged by dishonest lodging-house
keepers; they were sold bogus tickets by fraudulent agents of
bankrupt passenger companies; and not infrequently the
innocent girl was enticed into the abodes of the fallen to lead a
life of dishonour. 2 At length, in 1855, an official landing-place
was established at New York, and there all vessels discharged
their passengers; and all passengers had expert advice to aid
them in getting safely to their destination. s
1\lr. Maguire laments that so many of the Irish clung to the
cities instead of going west, where land could have been easily
acquired. In some cases no doubt they had not the means to
go west. In many cases when they had they preferred the
society of the towns, the public-house, the theatre, the political
meeting, to the loneliness of rural life. They lived amid sur-
roundings which to them were new and strange, and little in
keeping with the life they had previously led. For they lived
in the tenement houses of N ew York, in basements and cellars,
in rooms ill-lighted, ill-ventilated, and cold, where typhus,
measles, consumption, and other deadly diseases had become
chronic, and where infantile mortality had reached such
alarming proportions that tens of thousands were yearly
swept away before they reached the end of their first year.
Of such physical conditions moral degradation was the
natural concomitant. The husband frequented the public-
house rather than the noisome den which served him for a
home, the wife became slatternly and careless; the daughter,
seeing the sights she saw where a whole family slept in a
single room, grew up without a sense of decency; the son
mingled with vicious boys in alleys and cellars; and the
children of the Irish boy and girl too often found their way
to the brothel, the asylum, and the jail.. Fortunately, not all
1 Maguire, p. 186. 2 Ibid. 188, 192. :3 Ibid. 2G8. · Ibid. 223-33.
5 12
THE IRISH ABROAD
the Irish emigrants who remained in the cities thus trod the
road to ruin, for some rose superior to their surroundings and
by industry and sobriety acquired wealth. Many also, when
they had saved a little, left the cities; and in 1870 there was
not a State or territory of tne American Republic in which
Irishmen had not secured a foothold. They were w
ak in
Florida and North Carolina and in Arizona, and in New
Mexico still weaker; but in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania
they were in great strength, and the State of N ew York they
could almost call their own. l As early as 1825 there were
Irish settlers in California-miners, farmers, stock-raisers; and
when gold was discovered, the Irish were prominent among the
new-comers. They played no inconsiderable part in tne early
history of San Francisco, and progressed so rapidly in that city
that in time they were a fourth of its inhabitants and possessed
a fourth of its wealth. 2
These Irish emigrants thus scattered over the U nitcd
States were mostly Catholics, and as such were confronted
with special difficulties. Ahhough the Catholic Assembly of
Maryland in 1649 passed an Act giving freedom of religion
to all, and N ew York under a Catholic 1\layor followcd.
in 1683, the lead of l\Iaryland,8 the Protestants in 1699
refused all toleration to Catholics in N ew York. Up to
1775 the 5 th of November was called Pope Day, and on
that day every good Protestant burned the Pope in effigy;
and in the Eastern States the Catholics were denied the rights
of citizenship, excepting only Pennsylvania, IVlaryland, Virginia,
and Delaware. 4 \Vashington prohibited the Pope Day celebra-
tion in his army, and in 1790 gratefully acknowledged the
aid given by Catholic France. 5 By that date there were
nearly 16,000 Catholics in l\1aryland alone, and in 1808
there was a Catholic Archbishop of Baltimore, John Carroll,
a man of Irish descent. The first Catholic Bishop of Richmond
was Irish, as were also the second Bishop of Boston, the two first
1 Bagenal, pp. 3 0 -33. 2 Maguire, pp. 264-78.
B Shea's CathoHc History of the United States, pp. I, 70, 91-92.
4 Ibid. ii. 160. 5 Ibid. 351.
CATHOLICS PERSECUTED
5 1 3
Bishops of N ew York, and the two first Bishops of Philadelphia;
and the first Bishop of Charlestown was Dr. England from
Cork, so remarkable for his eloquence and zea1. l At the first
Council of Baltimore in 1833 there were ten bishops, and at
that date there were 300 priests in the United States. At the
second Council in 1852 there were six archbishops and twenty-
six bishops, while the number of priests throughout the United
States had risen to 1385.2 Many of the Irish no doubt had
lost their faith, but, on the other hand, not a few had made
heroic efforts to preserve it.
It was contrary to the Declaration of Independence that
any religion should be persecuted, and the services of Irish
Catholics in the Revolutionary war and in that of 18 [ 2
ought to have protected them from attack. But the spirit
of bigotry is not easily exorcised, and not a few in the United
States viewed the progress of Catholicity with dismay. Fed
by calumnies from Great Britain, Protestant ascendency in
America became insolent and aggressive, and in many
directions a No Popery cry was heard. a In 1839 a Catholic
Convent was attacked at Baltimore, and was saved from
destruction only by the intervention of armed troops.4 At
Charlestown, in the diocese of Boston, the Ursuline Convent
was burned to the ground, the nuns and pupils driven forth,
the coffins in the graveyard torn up, even the consecrated
hosts taken from the sacred vessel and scattered about. 5 In
1844 a Protestant Association was formed at Philadelphia to
save America from the abominations of Popery; and while a
Catholic Church was being burned down by infuriated bigots,
a band played the Orange air, "The Boyne \Vater." 6 Ten
years later the No Popery cry was again clamorously raised,
and the secret society of the Know-Nothings came into
existence. It was ostensibly to protect American institu-
tions, but in reality it was to have a monopoly of everything
for Protestants. One of its articles provided that no political
office should be given to any except a native-born Protestant,
I Shea, iii. 3 06 - 2 9.
4 Ibid. 44 8 -9.
VOL. III
2 Maguire, pp. 44 2 -3.
Ibid. 474-82.
3 Shea, iii. 4 20 - 2 1.
6 Maguire, p. 433.
103
5 1 4
THE IRISH ABROAD
who, moreover, must not have married a Catholic. And Know-
Nothings who were in positions of influence were bound by
oath to "remove all foreigners and Roman Catholics from
office," nor were they in any case to appoint such. l The
better class of American Protestants, who respected American
institutions and venerated the memory of Washington, shrank
from association with such a movement; but it is nevertheless
true that in many parts of America, and by many classes,
Catholics were regarded with aversion, and that of all
Catholics the Irish were the most hated and despised. 2
Much of this prejudice disappeared in the war of Secession.
That such a war was bound to come could haye been easily
foreseen, with such conflicting views between the Northern and
Southern States. The Northerns regarded all men as equal,
and looked askance at such an institution as slavery in a land
of freedom. The Southerns, in good part descended from
old French and English families, had inherited aristocratic
tendencies, and still clinging to class privilege and social
grades, thought it quite right that the master should be a
freeman and the servant a slave. In the North it was held
that as slaves were persons their liberty as such should be
guaranteed by law. Down South, in the tobacco and cotton
fields of Virginia or Alabama, it was strenuously maintained
that slaves were property, and therefore that slavery must not
only be tolerated but protected. And thus while the Democrats
of the South wanted a law protecting slavery, the Republicans
of the North wanted a law prohibiting it as out of keeping with
American institutions. The Southerns also maintained that
each State was supreme within its own borders, and could
freely secede from as it had freely joined the United States.
The Northern maintained that the concession of any such
power to individual States would be to strike a fatal blow at
National unity. As neither side would give way, eleven of the
Southern States seceded,set up a Southern Confederacy,organized
an army and navy, and in April 186 I attacked and captured
Fort Sumter, near Charlestown, then garrisoned by United
1 Maguire, pp. 44 6 -7. 2 INd. 450.
IRISH IN THE CIVIL WAR
5 1 5
States' troops. And thus began a great struggle which called
nearly two millions of armed men into the field, in which
at least 600,000 lives were lost, and which cost nearly
1,600,000,000.
The Irish were more numerous in the Northern than in the
Southern States, and were not slow to range themselves on the
side of National Union. But there were Irishmen in the
Southern States, who, though disliking secession and hating
slavery, thought that to their own State their allegiance was
due first of all. They resented having that State coerced by
the Government at vVashington, and believed that the supreme
sovereignty of each individual State was the very foundation of
civil liberty. Therefore there were Irish soldiers on both sides,
and more than once they met in actual conflict; and from the
first battle to the last they maintained the traditional val our of
their race. Among the ablest of the Southern generals were
Hill and Early and J'vI'Gowan, all of Irish descent; while
Cleyburne, bravest and best-beloved of all by the soldiers, was
born in Cork. Ever remarkable for vigilance and activity, for
coolness in action and headlong valour in a charge, he fell in
1864 at the head of his troops, and by the whole army none
was more regretted than he. l As for the Irish rank and file
their commanders readily admitted that they were the best of
all soldiers-cheerful, cleanly, courageous, enduring privations
without a murmur, and ready to attack any position and face
any danger.
On the Northern side it was calculated that 150,000 Irish
fought. Generals Carey, Griffin, and Butler were of Irish
descent, and so also was General Sheridan, the most brilliant
cavalry officer of his age. His services were especially note-
worthy. He had a prominent part in the bloody battle of
Murfreesboro in Tennessee; he ably seconded the efforts of
Grant at Missionary Ridge and in the battles of the Wilderness;
and towards the close of the war he carried Five Forks,
captured all the Confederate cavalry, and was with Grant at the
1 O'Hanlon's Irish - American History, pp. 402-3; Maguire, pp.
5 81 -5, 643-9; Fitzhugh Lee's General Lee, pp. 351-2.
5 16
THE IRISH ABROAD
surrender of Lee. l Yet it was in the purely Irish regiments,
in Corcoran's 69th regiment or in the Irish Brigade under
:Meagher, that the finest heroism of the war was displared.
Corcoran's regiment embodied in the early part of the war was
Irish and Catholic to a man, numbering about 1800 men. At
the first battle of Bull Run they behaved with conspicuous
gallantry. Their Commander - Colonel Corcoran was taken
prisoner, and when released in the following year, he organized
Corcoran's Legion, and until he was killed by a fall from his
horse in I 863, he did good service with the Army of the
Potomac. 2 But meanwhile General Meagher, the brilliant
Young Ireland orator of 1848 who had taken command of
the Irish Brigade, had done much and was destined to do still
more in the days to come. In J'vlay 1862 the Northerns
under M'Clellan took possession of Norfolk and the mouth of
the James River, pushed their gunboats up the river, captured
Mechanicsville on land, and hoped to have the Confederate
capital, Richmond, soon effectually invested both by land and
sea. But their plans were foiled by the energy and celerity of
the Southerns
whose batteries on the river drove back the
advancing gunboats, and who, under the able leadership of
General Johnston, were no less successful on land. On the
last day of J'vlay Johnston was severely wounded, his place
being taken by General Lee, a far abler man. For some
weeks there was a lull, but in the middle of June large rein-
forcements had been sent to M'Clellan, and Stonewall Jackson,
little inferior to Lee himself, had come up with his army to
the assistance of Lee. In the terrible seven days' battle, or
rather series of battles round Richmond, the advantage remained
with the Southerns, for l\1'Clellan was compelled to raise the
siege of Richmond and retire with heavy loss beyond the
Rappahannock and the Potomac. During these days and
nights of retreat, Meagher and the Irish Brigade covered them-
selves with glory. Their duty was to cover the retreat, and in
consequence they were un wearingly engaged. They held the
1 O'Hanlon, pp. 449-50, 520,535,61 1,615 ; General P. H. Sheridan's
Persol1all
fe111oirs. 2 ü'Hanlon, p. 38 I.
BATTLE OF FREDERICKSBURG
5 1 7
bridge over the Chickahominy while their comrades safely
passed over; they charged the pursuing Southerns up to the
very mouth of their guns, and when at last IVI'CleIlan could
breathe in safety beyond the James River, many a gallant
Irishman had faIlen. 1
In August Stonewall Jackson inflicted a severe defeat on
the N ortherns at the second battle of Bull Run, and then, in
conjunction with Lee, he crossed the Potomac into Maryland
and threatened \Vashington. 2 But at the hard-fought battle of
Antietam in the following month the advantage was with
l\I'Clellan, and Lee recrossed the Potomac into Virginia.
Meagher having been wounded in the battle, his place was
taken by another Irishman, Colonel Burke, whose coolness and
bravery in action extorted the special admiration of the Compte
de Paris. 3 The attenuated ranks of the Irish were soon filled
by fresh arrivals, and at Fredericksburg in December, again
under l\feagher, they performed prodigies of valour. IVI'CleIlan
had then been superseded, his place being given to General
Burnside, who had under him an army of 150,000 men. Lee
had but 80,000, but the advantage of position was with him;
he had strongly entrenched himself, and on every commanding
position powerful batteries had been placed. The attack was
made by the N ortherns from the left bank of the Rappahannock.
Lee held the town of Fredericksburg, which was on the right,
but offered no great resistance to the enemy's crossing of the
river or to their capturing of the town. I t was not there he
had determined to make his stand, but on the heights at the
rear, one of which, 1Ylarye's Hill, was the key of his position.
It was approached by a ravine, and across the ascending hill
Lee had placed two stone breastworks behind which his riflemen
were placed. The approach through the ravine was also swept
by powerful batteries. Had Burnside properly reconnoitered
the position he would have seen that it was impossible of cap-
ture by a frontal attack. Yet he determined to attack it and
assigned the duty to the Irish Brigade. They must have known
1 O'Hanlon, pp. 410-19; General Lee, pp. 15 1 - 6 4.
2 General Lee, 188-202. 3 O'Han)on, pp. 445- 6 .
5 18
THE IRISH ABROAD
that they were marching to destruction, but, as true soldiers,
they never hesitated for a moment when ordered to advance.
\Vhat followed is well described by a Confederate General,
who was an eye-witness. "In our immediate front," he says,
"one could walk on the dead for hundreds of yards. We
were pained to see the noble fellows coming up in steady
columns to be mowed down by our lines of solid flames of fire
from our entrenched position behind the rock wall and the
terrible fire from the Washington artillery, commanding every
inch of approach. The Irish Brigade would receive our well-
directed fire, steady and firm, and when great gaps were cut
through their ranks by the artillery, would reform under the
incessant fire, come again, sink down and rise again, trample
the dead and wounded under foot, and press the stone wall of
liquid fire, then recede a few feet, and come again like an
avalanche into the very jaws of death, until strength and
endurance failed, having been forced back by shell and the
deadly Minie ball that no human being could withstand." Not
less flattering is the testimony of the Times correspondent.
" Never at Fontenoy, at Albuera, or at Waterloo was more
undoubted courage displayed by the sons of Erin than during
the six frantic dashes which they directed against the almost
impregnable position of their foe. The bodies which lie in
dense masses within forty yards of the muzzles of Colonel
Walton's guns are the best evidence of what manner of men
they were who pressed on to death with the dauntlessness of a
race which has gained glory on a thousand battle-fields, and
never more richly deserved than at the foot of Marye's Heights
on the 13th of December 1862." The slaughter was terrible,
and when night came, out of the 1200 Irishmen who made
the attack, only 200 remained. 1 It was such things as these
that spread confusion among the Know-Nothings, and caused
every true American to see that I rish Catholics were good
citizens and gallant soldiers ready to shed their blood in defence
of American liberty.
1 O'Banlan, pp. 459-60; Bagenal, p. 139; Maguire, pp. 578-9; Lee,
pp. 222-3 2 .
PRIESTS AND NUNS IN THE WAR
5 1 9
But in addition there was the devotion and self-sacrifice of
priests and nuns during the war. From press and platform
and pulpit the most shocking calumnies had been circulated
about both. They were intriguing, self-seeking, avaricious,
wicked, and vile, hating those who professed a different faith,
strangers on American soil, giving their allegiance to a foreign
power. A No- Popery bigot, anxious to travel by a steamer,
objected to travel in the same cabin with a Catholic priest, and
threatened if put into the same cabin to fling the priest into
the sea. There were Protestants who believed that to kill a
Catholic priest or burn down a Catholic church would be
doing a most acceptable service to God; and a Tennessee
alderman considered it U doing an honour to the Deity to
take his double-barrelled gun and shoot any Catholic he might
meet." Priests were often treated with disrespect, and nuns, as
'they walked the streets, were sometimes insulted, and not a
few honest Protestants regarded them with aversion and even
terror. Amid the smoke of battle and in the hospital \\Tards
much of this bitter feeling passed away, for the priest poured
words of consolation into the ear of the dying while the shells
hissed and the bullets whizzed around him. And round the
ambulance waggons, in the hospitals, and in the prisons, the
nuns came and went, whispering words of consolation and
hope, walking with noiseless tread and touching with an
angel's hand. Like the :Master whom they served, they went
about doing good, seeking no earthly reward, heeding no
insult, making no distinction of party or creed, and knowing
that it was expected of a Christian to extend mercy and
charity to all. Their looks full of compassion, their hearts
filled with pity, their only anxiety was to relieve suffering, to
soothe the fevered brow, to moisten the lips that were dry, to
staunch the gaping wound. They procured rations for the
hungry soldiers and medicine for him who was ill, and, casting
aside their natural timidity, they boldly arraigned the doctor
who neglected his duty. Under the influence of these sights
and scenes the heart of the infidel and bigot was softened, the
look of aversion gave way to one of veneration and gratitude,
5 20
THE IRISH ABROAD
and often, as the last moment came creeping on, the light of
faith dawned in a soul hitherto darkened by unbelief How
many conversions were thus effected? how many, grateful to
the sister, were willing to believe what she believed? how
many poured benedictions upon her name? how many sent
their letters of thanks and their presents from every State and
city of the great republic? After the war, insulting priests or
nuns became a rare occurrence. On the contrary, as the sister
passed she was saluted with respect; when she entered the
steamer or railroad car the soldier, maimed and battle-scarred,
rose and eagerly proffered her his seat, and as he recounted to
his fellow-passengers what he had seen in the military hospitals
or military prisons his voice shook with emotion and his eyes
filled with tears. After the war the Irish Catholic was no
longer regarded as an alien, but as a good citizen and a gallant
soldier, attached to the land of his adoption, and ready to die
in its defence. l
Owing to the wisdom and magnanimity of the conquerors
in the great struggle the wounds inflicted on the conquered soon
healed, and the bitter memories of defeat were effaced. But
even a rich country found the cost of the war to press heavily,
and the too rapid construction of railways left millions of
money for a time unproductive, and led to the financial crisis
of 187 3. Yet the resources of the country were so vast that
recovery was rapid. In addition to the gold-mines of Cali-
fornia others were discovered at Colorado, silver was found in
Nevada, inexhaustible petroleum wells in Pennsylvania, and
the coal deposits covered an area six times as extensive as
Ireland. But, further, there was the resource, the inventive-
ness, the boundless energy of the people. (( The country
whose population has been developing within 280 years
already owned one-third of the world's mining, one-fourth of
its manufactures, one-fifth of its agriculture, and at least one-
sixth of the world's wealth is already concentrated in the strip
of territory in Central North America which has the name of
the United States." 2 This described the condition of things
1 l\laguire, pp. 44 8 - 8 7. 2 Encycloþædia Britannica, article" United States.'")
A
IERICA AFTER THE WAR
5 21
in 1880. In the year that followed the same rate of progress
was maintained, and in the year 1900 the value of the mining
products alone was equal to ;[200,000,000. From 1850 to
18 97 the population of the New England States had almost
doubled, that of the l\1iddle States had trebled, that of the
Southern States almost trebled, that of the Prairie States
quadrupled, and the progress of the Pacific States was de-
scdbed as marvellous. The total population, which in 1860
was but 3 1,000,000, in 1900 had reached 76,000,000.1
The Irish had their own share in producing these marvellous
results. From 1860 the yearly number of Irish immigrants
was never below 60,000, and some years was nearly twice that
amount; from 1820 to 1870 the yearly average was 44,000,
and the av'crage since then has at least been 30,000.2 Too
many of these remained in the Eastcrn cities, and in the
unhcalthy atmosphere of the city tenement they fell victims
to drink and disease. Not a few, however, prospered, and
in the second generation they rose to the highest positions.
Those who went \Vest did splendid work as pioneers. They
cleared the woods, drained the swamps, made the roads, and
turned the prairie into grain-producing fields. Often it was
Irish hands that built the railroad and spanned the river, and
laid the telegraph wire, and drove the train and the tram-car,
that went down the mining-shaft, or drove the herd of cattle
over the prairie; and not infrequently the Irishman sat in the
judge's seat, or in the editor's chair, or, as a great advocate,
pleaded before an American jury with all the moving eloquence
of his race. I n the Catholic Church they were especially
prominent. II I f we turn," said Dr. Spalding, " to explain this
re birth of Catholicism among the English-speaking peoples,
we must at once admit that the Irish race is the providential
instrument through which God has wrought this marvellous
revival. They have given to Catholicism in the country a
1 El1c)'doþædia Brita111zica.; North American Review, May, June,
July, and September I897-artic1es by Mr. MulhaH, the well-known
statistician.
2 Ellc)'cloþædia Britan1lica, article" Ireland."
5 22
THE IRISH ABROAD
vigour and cohesiveness which enable it to assimilate the most
heterogeneous elements, and without which it is not at all
certain that the vast majority of Catholics emigrating hither
from other lands would not have been lost to the Church." 1
The money which the Irish labourer or the Irish servant-
girl earned so hard was given ungrudgingly to build church
or orphanage or school, and all over the land Irish priests
ministered to the people of their own blood. The first Bishop
of Pittsburg was a Cork man, Michael O'Connor; the second
Bishop of Savannah was John Barry of Wexford ; the Arch-
bishop of Cincinnati was the Irishman Purcell, and in St.
Louis \Vas an Irish Archbishop named Kenrick; in New York
a M'Cluskey succeeded a Hughes, and in Chicago diocese the
Irishman Duggan succeeded the Irishman Antony O'Regan.2.
At the present day (1909) a Gibbons, raised to the purple
of a Roman Cardinal, rules at Baltimore; a Ryan, most
eloquent of archbishops, rules at Philadelphia; and an
O'Riordan wields the archbishop's crozier by the waters of the
Pacific. Under these and other archbishops and bishops
there are thousands of Irish nuns labouring with the piety of
St. Bridget, and Irish priests zealous as St. Columbanus or St.
Columba. At the head of the Catholic University of Wash-
ington the Irishman, Dr. Conaty, was succeeded by another
Irishman, Dr. O'Connell, to be succeeded in turn by a well-
known historical scholar with the unmistakably Irish name of
Shahan. In the editor's chair of one of the most influential
of American newspapers there lately sat the genial Irishman p
Rev. T. E. Judge, D.D., cut off all too soon, just as his splendid
intellectual powers had reached their prime. And in the city
by the Golden Gate one of the stoutest champions of the
Catholic Church is the famous Gahvayman, Rev. P. C. Yorke,
D.D. With a gift of oratory which places him on a level with
the most eloquent of living Irishmen, either in the old world
or in the new, and with intellectual capacity and an extent of
knowledge which would adorn the highest position in the
American Church, he has for truth and justice the zeal of
1 BagenaI, pp. 64-5. 2 Shea, vol. iv.
THE IRISH IN AUSTRALIA
5 2 3
Savonarola, and for injustice the sæ'l'a Ùldignati'o of Swift.
The venal official trembles before him as the trenchant
assailant of corruption; the grasping capitalist fears him as
the acknowledged champion of the toiler; the traducer of
Ireland fears him, for his wrath is terrible when his native land
is unjustly assailed; and when a clique of men on the Pacific
sea-board, forming themselves into the Anti-Popery Society,
revived the slanders of Know-N othingism, Dr. Yorke poured
upon them such a lava tide of scorn that they retired from the
contest beaten and disgraced. \Vith such zeal and ability as
this employed in the service of the Catholic Church and of
Ireland, it is little wonder that the Church has grown and
prospered in the \Vest of the Atlantic, as it is little wonder
that the United States has come to be known as the Greater
Ireland beyond the sea.
Concurrently with the outward flow to America during the
century there was also a stream of emigration from Ireland to
Australia, though not so broad and deep as that which flowed
"Vest. But the earliest who went to Australia were in-
voluntary exiles, for it was then a penal settlement, and thither
were sent the rebels of 1798, the Threshers and Ribbonmen
of a later date, and the Young Irelanders of 1848. Cruel
beyond measure was their fate. Many of them were men of
education, pure of life and noble of character, with unselfish
aims and lofty ideals, whose only crime was that they loved
their country well and had sacrificed their liberty in its
defence. Yet on the long voyage to the Southern Sea they
were on shipboard herded with the vilest of the vile, with the
desperadoes of English cities, the off-scourings of British
prisons. At table, in sleeping-room, and exercise-yard they
had to associate with the reprieved murderer, the wife-beater,
the swindler, the successful forger, and the unsuccessful
assassin-men in whose mouths there was always an obscene
word, and to whom virtue was a matter for ridicule. 1 And
1 See Marcus Clarke's For the Term of his Natural Life, which
gives a terrible picture of convict life on shipboard and on land. He is
a writer of fiction, but in this book he writes of "events which have
actually occurred."
5 2 4
THE IRISH ABROAD
often some petty tyrant, armed with Government authority and
animated by racial and religious prejudice, treated the Irish
political prisoners with far greater severity than the vilest
criminal on board.
The same injustice was continued on land, and when the
convicts were cast ashore at Sydney or in Van Dieman's Land,
the British bully, who had to his account a hideous catalogue
of crimes, was treated with leniency while the Irishman was
watched and thwarted at every turn. The magistrate or
military Governor, knowing that the Irishman had plotted
sedition at home, assumed that he was still anxious to plot
sedition abroad, and at heart was disloyal to British rule; and
in his case the privileges were fewer than in other cases, the
survei1lance more strict, and the punishment more severe. In
spite of his previous good conduct Holt, the \Vicklow insurgent
leader, on mere suspicion of being concerned in some meditated
outbreak among the prisoners, was deported from Sydney to
Norfolk Island, ,,,,here the roughest ,york and the most brutal
treatment was his share. An Irish lad of twenty, named Paddy
Galvin, because he refused to reveal where some pikes were
supposed to be concealed, was given 300 lashes. After the first
hundred his shoulder-blades were laid bare, the second hundred
reduced the middle of his back to pulp, and the last hundred
he received on the calves of his legs. Another Irishman named
Fitzgerald also received 300 lashes, and Holt, who was present
and who had seen the horrors of 1798 in Ireland, declared
that he had never seen a more revolting scene. Two men did
the flogging, and with as much regularity as two threshers in a
barn. " The day was windy, and I protest that though I was
at least fifteen yards to leeward, the blood and flesh blew in my
face as the executioners shook it off from their cats." 1
These Irishmen were mostly Catholics, and as such had
known what it was to belong to a despised creed. But the
era of penal legislation was over in Ireland, and at home the
Irish Catholics were free to practise their religion. I n the
penal settlements of Sydney and Van Diemen's Land they
1 Holt's l'YfCIIlOirs, ii. I 18-22.
TIlE IRISH 11'\ AUSTRALIA
5 2 5
were again face to face with the evil past. Only the Protestant
religion would be tolerated, and when Sunday came, the
Catholics must go to the Protestant church or be flogged; and
many a flogging did the poor Catholic convicts thus receive.
Among the first batch from Ireland were three priests wrong-
fully punished, as was afterwards discovered, for complicity in
the rebellion of 1798. These were Father O'Neil of Y oughal,
Father Dixon of Wexford, and Father Harold of Dublin.
Father O'Neil was soon sent back to Ireland by the Govern-
ment. The other two were for a time allowed to say mass,
but the permission was soon withdrawn, and both were sent
back to Ireland, leaving the Catholics again no minister of their
own faith, and no option but to attend the Protestant service. 1
In 1817 an Irish priest who knew the Irish language and often
preached in it volunteered for Sydney. But neither his religion
nor his language would be allowed in a penal settlement where
speaking a word of Irish was punished with fifty lashes, and he
too was sent away.2
But the sky cannot be always dark and the storm must
cease to blow, and at last there came the sunshine and the calm.
In 1820 two Cork priests, Father Therry and Connolly, arrived
in Sydney and were permitted by the authorities to minister to
their co-religionists. 3 In 1836, chiefly owing to the repre-
sentations of the Governor, Sir Richard Bourke, the vexatious
monopoly of Protestantism ceased, and an Act was passed
giving complete religious toleration to all creeds. At that
date New South vVales had for some years a Legislative
Council, partly elective and partly nominated by the Crown,
but in 1856 this gave way to a freely elected Parliament and
a Government responsible to the people. Meanwhil
also,
owing to constant agitation both at Sydney and in Van
Diemen's Land, transportation of convicts to Australia ceased.
Among those who thus agitated not a few were free immigrants
from Ireland. In the ten years from 1842 to 1852 a yearly
average of 2500 Irish had come; in the next ten years the
average rose to I 1,500; in the next ten years it was 8000;
1 Hogan, pp. 226-3 1 . 2 Ibid. 233- 6 . 3 Ibid. 23 6 - 8 .
5 26
THE IRISH ABROAD
and from 187 I to 1880 it was 6000. Since then there has
been a falling off, the highest in anyone year being 1005-
for the year 1899.1 Nor have the Irish been behindhand in
developing Australian resources, in building up Australian
cities, and in shaping Australian destinies, whether they first
came to Australia as convicts or as freemen. As in America
too many of them remained in the cities, and some of these
fared ill. But others prospered as artizans, as shopkeepers, as
contractors, and not a few, wisely investing their savings in
building-ground, rapidly acquired wealth. For those who went
into the rural districts nothing was required but sobriety and
thrift. The Glenveigh tenants, thrown upon the roadside in
Donegal, were in 1863 reported to be doing well in Victoria.
And Father Dunne, who brought as many as 6000 evicted
from Munster, and got land for them from the Queensland
Government, saw them exchange comfort and contentment
abroad for discontent and poverty at home. 2
Among the educated classes the success of the Irish has
been remarkable, and in medicine and engineering, in art
and science, in literature and law, an Irishman has often held
the premier place. Three Irishmen in succession have been
Governors of New South \Vales, two Irishmen have been
Premiers, another has been Chief- Justice, another A ttorney-
General, while another has held the foremost place at the Bar.
In South Australia also three Irishmen in succession have fillcd
the position of Governor. Another was Lieutenant-Governor of
Queensland. In Victoria three Irishmen have been Premiers,
two have been Speakers, two have been Chief- Justices. 3
It was an Irishman, Peter Lalor, who led the revolt of the
miners at Ballarat against the capricious tyranny of a Governor.
He died in 1889 as the Hon. Peter Lalor, Speaker of the
Legislative Assembly, his funeral being attended by the Governor
of Victoria and the members of the Victorian Ministry.4
In every colony the Irish have been the mainstay of the
1 El1C)'cloþædia Britannica, article" Ireland."
2 Hogan, pp. 15ï-63. 3 Ibid. 3 02 - 2 7.
4 Ibid. 70-77, Davitt's Life and Progress in Australia, p. 157.
\
C"\'RIJl:\AL l\lOR.\N
:\IO
SIG:\UR SHAHA:\
'\
La wrence.
C,\l<.DINAL GIBnOXS
DR. YORKF
Taher.
THE IRISH IN AUSTRALIA
5 2 7
Catholic Church; indeed if the Irish were taken away the
Catholic Church would be non-existent on Australian soil. It
is the Irish who have built the churches and orphanages and
schools, as it is they who have supplied the nuns and bishops
and priests. At Sydney a noted Irishman rules as Cardinal
Archbishop, a scholar to whom every student of Irish history
owes much. At Melbourne one Irish-born Archbishop has been
succeeded by another. At Adelaide the Archbishop 0' Reilly
hails from Kilkenny; at Hobart the Archbishop Delaney
hails from Galway; and :Murray and Lanigan, and Moore and
Doyle and Murphy are the names-unmistakably Irish-
which other Australian bishops bear. 1 Loyal to their several
colonies the Irish are, because they are under a free Govern-
ment and can prosper and thrive ; and they are loyal to the
Church of their fathers, and are characteristically generous in
its support. And not less loyal they are to the little island far
away in the Northern sea. In every city and town there is a
St. Patrick's Hall, or an Irish Hall, or a Hibernian Hall where
the children of I reland love to meet; where the lecture on
Ireland arouses enthusiasm, where the delegate arrived from
Ireland is sure of a warm welcome, and where, when the songs
of Ireland are sung, there is a thrill through the Irish heart and
a tear in the Irish eye. In the streets of Melbourne a party
of freshly-arrived Irish immigrants were seen to open a little
box they had brought with them containing just one green sod
of Irish earth. The sight caused an old woman among the
older settlers to cross herself devoutly, and the eyes of the
others glistened with tears. 2 And away at the mining settle-
ment of Charters Towers, two thousand miles beyond Sydney,
Mr. Davitt, on entering a convent, was charmed to hear the
pu pils sing " The Wearing of the Green" and "Come back to
Erin." 3 Taught by Irish nuns, these children thus learned to
love the land of their fathers, though they had never seen and
probably never would see its shores.
In other lands also Irishmen have found a home, in South
Africa, and in the Argentine Republic, and nearer home the
1 Catholic Directories. 2 Hogan, pp. 147- 8 . 3 Davitt, p. 126.
5 28
THE HUSH ABRO.'\'D
number of Irish is large in the cities and towns of Great
Britain. In the present generation an Irish Protestant has
been Lord Chancellor of England and an Irish Catholic Lord
Chief- Justice, and Irishmen have been and are among the
brightest ornaments of the English Bar. An Irish Commander-
in-Chief has been succeeded by another Irishman, neither of
them, unlike \Vellington, ashamed of his Irish blood; and in
the navy and diplomatic service, and in the higher posts of the
Civil Service, Irishmen have served England well. Throughout
England and Scotland there are clergymen and doctors, Irish
still to their heart's core, who are honoured by the town or city
in which they live; and not un frequently it has happened
that the poor Irish working-man who settled in England has
prospered, perhaps reached a prominent position in his adopted
town. But there is the other side to the picture too. How
many Irishmen coming to Great Britain poor remain poor all
their days! how many go down in the struggle! how many
become waifs and wastrels in the cities and towns! how many
lose the faith which their ancestors held so dear! how many
have to endure hardships and privations worse even than misery
and a mud-cabin at home! And every patriotic Irishman
would wish to end that annual exodus to the harvest fields of
England. Treated on train and steamer like so many cattle,
these migratory labourers have often to live in England in
cattle-sheds and barns. Tolerated rather than encouraged,
they are looked down upon as belonging to an alien race and
creed; and as they are met with at an English railway station,
toil-worn, travel-stained, and poor, they are pathetic figures
with the wistful look of the Irish exile in their eyes. But it is
the United States above all which is draining Ireland of its
life- blood. Those who go to Australia or South Africa, to
Canada or the Argentine Republic, are but few; and of those
who go to Great Britain the greater number go but to return.
But to the United States there is a steady and continuous
stream of more than 30,000 a year. It is this terrible drain,
which nothing seems able to stem, which is responsible for the
continued diminution of the population, so that Ireland, which
EFFECTS OF E:\IIGRATION
5 2 9
in 186 I had nearly six millions of people, has now less than four
millions and a half.l \Vorse than all, more than three-fourths
of those who go are between the ages of fifteen and thirty-
five. It is the strong and healthy and enterprising who go, the
persons with initiative and ambition, leaving behind them the
weak of body and mind. Of those who reach America healthy
and strong some indeed succeed, but others go down in the
struggle, wasted by exhausting labour, by keen competition.
by difficult climatic conditions. A small portion, especially
the girls, come back to Ireland, but how woefully changed!
Still young, the elasticity has left their step, the light has gone
from their eye, the roses have faded from their cheeks; and
the beautiful girl who left Ireland but a few years before has
returned prematurely old, perhaps to die, or it may be to get
married at home and become the mother of unhealthy children.
And thus the exodus to America is responsible not merely for
the diminution, but also for the deterioration of the race. How
to induce the people to remain at home is a question which
demands the most serious thought of our public men; for it is
evident that if the present exodus continues unchecked, the
I rish race in Ireland is doomed.
1 Catholic Directories.
VOL. III
104
Abbeyknockrnoy, i. 284, 332
Abbots of the sixth century, i. 58;
lay abbots, 176; position of, 5 17
Abbott, opposes Catholic Relief Bill
of Grattan (18 I 3), iii. 123
Abductions, ii. 477
Abercromby, General, iii. 56-7
Aberdeen, Lord, opposes the Eccle-
siastical Titles Bill, iii. 225; Lord-
Lieutenant (1906), 463
Abingdon, Lord, iii. 3
Acts of Parliament relating to Ire-
land: Algerine, iii. 130; Arms,
iii. 1 19, 177, 291; Arrears,
i. 302; Ballot, iii. 260; Catholic
Relief, of 1778, ii. 550, 554, iii.
13; Church Temporalities, iii. 148;
Coercion, iii. 92, 129, 147, 148,
210, 220, 263, 289-9 I, 35 1 -4;
Compensation, iii. 106; Confirm-
ing Articles of Limerick, ii. 468-9 ;
Congested Districts, iii. 387;
Convention, iii. 3 I, 122, repealed,
:2 74; Corporation, repealed, iii.
133; Crimes, iii. 302; Dublin
Castle, iii. 14; Encumbered
Estates, iii. 22 I ; of Explanation,
ii. 372-4; Gunpowder, iii. 3 I ; of
Habeas Corpus, ii. 532 ; extended
(17 8 1) to Ireland, 552; of In-
demnity (1796), iii. 36; Insurrec-
tion, iii. 36, 42, 1 19; Intermediate
Education, iii. 271 ; Labour Rate,
iit. 196-7, 199; Land Purchase,
iii. 317,387,433-5,453-6; Local
Government, iii. 437; Mutiny, ii.
55 2 , 554 ; N'ational Education, iii.
150; of Oblivion and Indemnity,
ii. 199; Octennial, ii. 547; Out-
door Relief, iii. 200; Outlawries,
ii. 468; Poor Law, iii. 156; to
INDEX
prevent further growth of Popery,
ii. 47 I ; to prohibit exportation of
woollen cloths, ii. 469 ;- Rate-in-
Aid, iii. 2 I I; of Recognition, ii.
465; Relief of Distress, iii. 282;
Renunciation, iii. 3; Resumption,
ii. 469 ; Riot (1783), iii. 13; for
Satisfaction of Adventurers, ii.348;
of Settlement, ii. 370-7 I, 377-8,
391, 406 ; for Settling of Ireland,
ii. 344; Soup Kitchen, iii. 199 ;
of Supremacy, i. 5 19, ii. 14, 87,
45 6 ; Test, ii. 381,471,480, 540,
55 0 , repealed, iii. 133; Tithe
Composition, iii. 148 ; Toleration,
ii. 480; Town Tenants (1906),
iii. 465; Treason Felony, iii. 2 10;
Uniformity, ii. 13, 456
Adamnan, St., his account of the
battle of Cuildrevne (or Cuil-
Dreimhne), i. 63; quoted, 66;
life, labours, and character, 72-4,
10 5 ; favours Boru tribute, 92;
shrine carried away by Danes, I I 1
Adamnan sLaw, i. 73, 104
Addington, Prime Minister, iii. 109-10
Adrian IV., i 236, 244
Adrian's Bull, question of its authen-
ticity, i. 237-43; first published
at Waterford, 254; and at Dublin,
275
Adventurers for Irish Land, ii. 342-4,
3 6 7
Aedh Guaire of Hy-l\Iany, i. 94
- :i\IacAinmire, Ardri, i. 97
- of Tirowen and l\lalachy I I., i.
137
- Oirnidhe, devastates Leinster,
i. 214
Aenat:hs, i. 28
Aengus, the Culdee, educated at
53 1
53 2
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Tallaght, i. 75; his piety and
mortifications, 77-8
Aengus, King of Cashel, converted by
St. Patrick, i. 5 I
Agar, Archbishop of Dublin (Earl of
Normanton), character, etc., iii. 50
Agard, laments the failure of the
Reformation in Ireland, i. 529
Agrarian outrages, iii. 288, 290,
294, 29 6 -7, 3 0 3, 3 0 4
Agricola, his description of Ireland,
i. 3 ; proposes its conquest, 12
Agriculture, in pre-Christian times,
i. 39; state of, in the eighteenth
century, iii. 479, 5 0 3
Aidan of Lindisfarne, i. 79
- King of the Dal: iadans, i. 97-9
Aileach, palace of, i. 5 I, 96; demo-
lished, I 58
Aires, social position of, i. 3 I
Albemarle, Duke of, i. 406
- Earl of, ii. 469
Alberoni (Spanish Minister), ii. 499
Albinus, of Pavia, i. 90
Alcuin, probably educated at Clon-
macnoise, i. 7 I, 172
Aldfrid, King of Northumbria, i. 73;
educated at Lismore, 75
Alexander ilL, Letter of, i. 239;
held to be a forgery, 245 ; pub-
lished at \Vaterford, 254
Allen, Archbishop of Dublin, Lord
Chancellor, i. 467, 524; murdered
by Silken Thomas, i. 473
- Dr., ii. 91
- Lord Chancellor, ii. 6, 8
- Master of the Rolls, i. 468
Altmunster, i. 90
Amator, consecrates St. Patrick, i. 45
Ambrose, Dr., iii. 4 15
- :\liss, ii. 486
America, the Irish in, iii. 506-23
American Civil War, the Irish in the,
iii. 5 14- 20
Amrud, Danish chief, i. 145-6
Anastasius, Papal librarian, i. 179
Ancient Britons (\Yelsh Regiment),
iii. 42, 57, 7 2
- Irish Church, its doctrines, i.
84-7
Anglesey, l\Iarquis of, iii. 132, 137 j
Viceroy, 144; recalled, 149
Annaghdown, monastery of, i. 6 I j
See of,S 17
Annals of Loch Cé cited, i. 3 I 3,
316, 357, 394, 5 I 1,5 2 7; ii. 118
- of Clonmacnoise, describes
the Fomorians, i. 7; its account
of Danish oppressions, I 14; on
wars between English settlers, 3 I 8 ;
condemns Edward Bruce, 357
- of the Four Masters, quoted,
i. 124,159,165,183,200,264,
273, 28 3, 3 1 3, 357, 4 11 , 4 2 5,
4 2 9, 446, 5 I I ; ii. 179; account
of the work, 520-2 I
- of Tighernach, i. 5 17
- of Ulster, i. 5 18
Anne, Queen (1702-14), ii. 470
Anselm, St., on the abuses in the
Irish Church, i. 183
Anti-Corn Law League, iii. 194
- Parnellites. See Parnellites
- Union Association, iii. 145
Antrim, Lord, ii. 394
- Marquis of, ii. 273, 295, 29 8
- planted with colonists (1572),
ii. 65
Arbitration, Courts of, iii. 178
Archbishops of Dublin (Anglo-Nor-
man), their character, i. 326-3 I
Archer, Father, ii. 166
Ardagh Chalice, description of, i. 202
Ardes, Plantation of, ii. 65
Ardh-Fheis, iii. 500
Ardri, his position, i. 24,26; struggles
for the office, 92
Arian heresy, i. 86
Armada, Spanish, referred to, ii. 488
Annagh, made the principal See of
Ireland, i. 52 j school of, 57;
plundered by the Danes, I I I,
114, 121, 122, 17 3--t; by Irish,
182; by Philip of \Vorcester,
262; given the Primacy, 190,
332 ; number of Saxon students
at, 172; lay abbots of, 176, 185;
nationality of its Primates, 327
Arms and Armour, in fourteenth
century, i. 352; in fifteenth, 436;
at battle of Knockdoe, 448;
armour prohibited by Statute of
Kilkenny, 382
Armstrong, Captain, iii. 52
- Sir Thomas, ii. 303
Arran Islands, i. 8, 59; ii. 339, 354
Arrears Bill (1881), iii. 302
Ashbourne, Lord, and his Land
Purchase Act, iii. 317,362
Ashby, Captain, ii. 263
Ashe, Protestant Bishop of Clogher,
Ashton, ii. 392 [ii. 482
Askeaton Castle, ii. 94, 96
Askin, Sir Charles, defeats the rebels
at Kilcomney Hill, iii. 71
Asquith, Mr., Home Secretary, iii.
404; supports Gladstone's Home
Rule Bill, 410, 449; Chancellor
of the Excheque
463
Assemblies in Ancient Ireland, i. 27-8
Aston, Sir Arthur, ii. 307-8
Atharee Trinitarians, cruel treatment
of, i. 528
Athboy, assembly of, i. 169
Athcliath, fortress of, i. 1 16
Athenry, captured by the Earl of
Kildare, i. 449; ii. 7 8 , 79, 137-8,
271 ; iii. 472
Athlone, surrendered by Lord Dillon
(1650), ii. 332; besieged by
General Douglas ( 1 690), 425;
taken by Ginkle (1691),442-5
- Black Books of, ii. 358
Attacotti, i. 22, 36
Augsburg Confession, i. 536
Augustine, St., Canons Regular of,
i. 334
Australia, the Irish in, iii. 523-9
INDEX
533
Avignon, Popes at, i. 514
Axtell, Colonel, ii. 318, 328
Aylmer, Chief-] ustice, i. 524
Bacal ]esu. (crozier of St. Patrick),
i. 185 j burnt, 526
Bacon, Lord, i. 436
Bagenal, Marshal, ii. 116-17, 120-
24,127-8,129,134,136,141-3
Bagnal, Colonel, ii. 290
Bagwell, his list of Bishops who took
the Oath of Supremacy, i. 525
Bailey, Mr., Landlord Commissioner,
iii. 455, 4 66
Baker, Colonel, ii. 399-400
Bale, Bishop of Ossory, ii. 15- 16, J 9
Balfour, A. J., a member of the
Fourth Party, iii. 309; becomes
Chief Secretary and takes charge
of the Coercion Bill, 352 j his
Land Bill, 354 j National League
proclaimed, 355; the Coercion
struggle, 355-8 j Papal Rescript
condemning Plan of Campaign
and boycotting, 358; continued
Coercion, 360-62 j his Local
Government Bin (1892), 400 j
opposes Home Rule Bill, 4] 1 j
Leader in the Commons, 419 ; be-
comes Premier, 450; defeatcd in
General Election of 1906, 462 ;
approves of University Bill, 475
- Gerald, Chief Secretary, iii.
420; his Land Bill ( 18 9 6 ), 433
Banygorry, Conference at, i. 400
Ballymore, ii. 442
Ballyneety, ii. 428-9
Ballyshannon, captured by O'Neill,
i.4 60
Baltinglass, Lord, ii. 97-9, 108
Bangor, Church and School of, i. 74;
sacked by Danes, 1 1 I, 174, 186
Banim, John and Michael, authors,
iii. 483
Bannow, Anglo-Normans landed at,
Barbados, Irish in, ii. 356 [i. 223
534
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Bardic Schools, i. 69, 100, 174
Bards, their position and duties, i.
3 I, 69, 98; their insolence, 99;
reform of the order, 100; en-
couraged war, 181 ; proscribed by
Statute of Kilkenny, 384; their
general characteristics, ii. 507-8
Barkley, Sir John, ii. 17 I
Barnewell, Patrick, ii. 255
- Sir Nicholas, ii. 253
- son of Lord Trimleston, ii. I 39,
Barrington, M.P., iii. 87 [140
- Sir Jonah, iii. 53; his descrip-
tion of the Irish country gentleman
(177 0 ), 477
Barry, General, ii. 263, 265
- Lord, ii. 97, 158, 161
Basilea, sister of Strongbow, i. 252
Battles and Fights: Achadh-ur, i.
246 ; Affane (15 6 5), ii. 55 ; Allen
(722, 7 I 7), i. 106, 2 14; Ardee
(943, 10 75), i. 12 3, 155, 157;
Arklow (1798), iii. 67-8; Athenry
(1249, 1318,1316), i. 3 0 5, 3 1 4,
351-53; Aughrim (1691), ii. 187,
446-5 I; Ballaghmoon, i. 120;
Ballylahin (1317), i. 351; Bally-
rooe (I3 I 7), i. 276, 35 I ; Bally-
shannon (Donegal) (836, 1247),
i. I 15, 308; Ballyshannon (Kil-
dare) (737), i. 106; Ballysodare
(I 199), i. 28 I ; Balrothery (850),
i. 116; BaItinglass (1316), i. 350;
"Battle of the Connors" (I 180),
i. 277; Bealach Leachta (978),
i. 133; Bellahoe (1539), i. 501 ;
Benburb (1646), ii. 285-9; Boyne,
the (1690), ii. 416-22; Callan (Kil-
kenny) (1407), i. 407-8; Cashel
(1176), i. 255 ; Cenn Fuat (916),
i. 122; Clontarf(1014), i. 143-8;
Clontibret ( I 595), ii. 131 ; Connor
(1315), i. 349; Crebh Tulcha
(1004), i. 138; Croom (1599), ii.
94,151; Cuildrevne(561), i. 63,
97 ; Curlews, the (1600), ii. 15 2 - 6 ;
Dalaraidh (1177), i. 266; Down-
patrick (I 177, 1260),i. 266,313;
Dromore (1689), ii. 396; Drum-
cliff (1257), i. 308; Drumfluich
(1597), ii. 14 0 ; Dunbolg (598), i.
100; Dungan Hill (1649),ii. 293;
Dungannon (I 199), i. 271 ; Dun-
Ceithern (628), i. 101; Dysert
O'Dea (13 I 8), i. 365 ; Farragh, i.
115; Faughart (1318), i. 356;
Finglas, i. 233; Fontenoy(1745),
ii. 48 I, 500-503; Gavra, i. 2 I ;
Geashill, i. 16; Glenflesk (1564),
ii.47; Glenmalure (1276), i. 316,
ii. 98; Glenmama (999), i. 125,
135; Greencastle (1260), i. 314;
By-Kinsella (827), i. I I I ; Kells
(Kilkenny) (1398), i. 403; Kells
(Meath) (1315), i. 349; Kiladerry
(866), i. I 17; Kilcomney Hill
(1798), iii. 71; Killechin (1414),
i. 409; Kilmainham (1408), i.
409; Kilmallock, ii. 170; Kilmas-
hoge (918 ?), i. 122; Kilmore
(869),i.117, 123; Kilrush( 16 4 2 ),
ii. 255; Kilworth (1643), ii. 27 I ;
Kinsale (160 I), ii. 175-9; Knocka-
110SS (1649), ii. 294; Knockdoe
(1504), i. 449; Knockvoe (15 22 ),
i. 460; Letterluin (I 166), i. 169 ;
Liscarroll (1642), ii. 264; Lough
Derg (836), i. I 15; Lough Foyle
(867), i. I 17; Lough Swilly
(1567), ii. 49; Maghera ( 12 4 1 ),
i. 308 ; Moan more (I 152), i. 166,
2 I 5 ;
lonabrahir, i. 452 ; Mourne
Abbey, i. 457; 1\1oy (1585), ii.
112-13; Moylena (906), i. 119,
126; Moyrath (637), i. 102;
Moytura, i. 8; Muine Brecain
(951), i. 123; New Ross (1798),
iii. 65-6; Ne w to w n-Butler(1688),
ii. 407-8; Old Ross (1643), ii.
268; Oulart Hill (1798), iii. 62 ;
Pass of Plumes (1599), ii. I 50 ;
PiItown (I4 6 2), i. 424; Races of
INDEX
Castle bar, iii. 76; Rathallen, i.
1 16; Rathmines (1649), ii. 3 0 3 ;
Rock of Cashel (1649), ii. 293-4;
Rosbach, ii. 504; Ross (1110), i.
162 ; Scarrifhollis (I 649), ii. 3 2 5 ;
Shanagolden (827 ?), i. 1 I I ;
Shrule (1570), ii. 77; Sliabh Crut
(1061), i. 154; Sliabh Mis, i. 16;
Spanciel Hill (1559), ii. 28;
Springfield (1579), ii. 93; Stoke
(1487), i. 436; Sulcoit (968), i.
130; Tailteann, i. 16; Three
Rocks (1798), iii. 63; Thurles
(1174), i. 252, 289; Tobar Gle-
thrach (9 I 5), i. 122; Tyrell's
Pass, ii. 140; Vinegar Hill (179 8 ),
iii. 70 ; Yellow Ford, ii. 14 2 -4
Beare, O'Sullivan, ii. 17 6
Bede, his reference to the Scots, i.
23; to Columba, 67 ; and to the
hospitality of the Irish monastic
schools, 69; his character of
Adamnan, 73-4; of Aidan of
Lindisfarne, 79; condemns the
Northumbrian invasion oflreland,
10 3; describes the Irish Church
buildings, 204
Bedell, Bishop of Kilmore, ii. 25 0 ,
523-4
Bedford, Duke of (Viceroy), ii. 54 6 ;
iii. 1 I 8- I 9
Beggars, proposals for dealing with,
ii. 479-80
Belfast, captured by the Earl of
Kildare, i. 45 2; agitates for re-
form, iii. 26-7; disturbances in,
31 ; opposes Home Rule, 333
- College and University, grants
to, iii. 475
Belgae and the Firbolg, i. 1 I
Bellacong river, i. 299
Belling, Sir R., ii. 258, 266, 277- 8
Bellingham, Sir Edward (Viceroy),
ii. 3-7, !4- 1 5
Bells, ancient Irish, i. 201
Beltaine, feast of, i. 53
535
Benedictines, i. 334
Benignus, St., i. 49
Bentinck, Lord George, iii. 195, 200
Berach, St., crozier, i. 201
Berchin, St., prophecy of, ii. 14 2 -3
Beresford, John and Claudius, iii.
4 8 -5 0
- and Pitt, iii. 22-3
Berkeley, Bishop of Cloyne, ii. 479.
482-3; his character, 54 I
Berkley, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 377
Bernard, St., his account of the early
Irish Church, i. 184-6; joins the
Cistercians, 335; founds Clair-
vaux, 335-6
Berta, invades Ireland, i. 10 3
Berwick, Duke of, ii. 4 00 , 405 ; at
the Boyne, 418-21 ; 4 26 ,434-5,
43 8 ; taken prisoner at Neerwin-
den, 494
Bessborough Commission, iii. 292
Biggar, Joseph Gillis, his antecedents,
iii. 265; his obstruction tactics,
265-6; prosecuted, 289, 3 0 4, 37 1
Bingham, George, ii. 13 2
- Sir Richard, President of
Connaught, ii. 106; his cruel
conduct, II I -14, 117-19, 122,
126, 132; dismissed, J 37; his
restoration and death, 150
Birmingham, " the treacherous
Baron," i. 3 I 7
- Earl of Louth, i. 355, 3 60
- Lord of Athenry, i. 35 I-53
Birminghams, i. 3 6 9-7 0 , 393
Birrell, A., Chief Secretary (19 06 ),
iii. 464; general estimate, 4 6 5 ;
defends Mr. Bailey, 467; his
difficult position, 467-8 ; his Irish
Councils Bill, 469-70; Evicted
Tenants Bill, 472; Irish Univer-
sity Bill, 473-6
Biscuits, Ford of the, ii. 127
Bishops, Catholic, position of, i. 57 ;
appointment of, 325-7, 517; ii.
12, 2 I, 87; their petition for
53 6
HISTORY OF IRELAND
seminaries, III. 32 j in America,
5 12- I 3; in Australia, 526-7
Bishops, Protestant, ii. 4 82 -3
Bissets, the, i. 347
Blacar, Danish leader, i. 12 3
"Black Monday," i. 289
- Rents," i. 376, 397,4 16 ,4 1 7,
4 2 7,43 2 ,4 8 5,488; abolished, 49 5
Blackfeet (secret society), iii. 147
Blake, James, poisons O'Donnel, ii.
- Mr., iii. 408, 4 15, 424 [188
Blinding, punishment of, i. 160;
instances, 162, 167
Bobbio, monastery of, i. 82
Bodkin, Archbishop ofTuam, i. 5 2 5 j
ii. 6
Boer \Var, iii. 444-5, 461-2
Boffin Island, ii. 339, 354
Bohun, Humphrey, i. 248
Boisseleau, General, ii. 4 I 3, 426-7,
43 1
Boleyn, Anne, i. 464, 520, 53 6
- Mary, i. 464
- Sir Thomas, i. 464
Bolton, Sir R., ii. 53 0
Bonaght, i. 35 j abolished, ii. 199
Boniface, St., i. 84
Bonner, Bishop of London, ii. 13, 18
Book of Armagh, i. 138; Articles, ii.
87; Common Prayer, ii. 13, 16, 59,
86; Durrow, i. 72, 200 ; Howth, i.
266, 273, 444,449; Kells, i. 72,
197-9; Leccan, i. 5 17; Leinster,
i. 92, 18 3; Rights, i. 3 2 -3, 35
Bookey, Lieutenant, iii. 62
BorJase, Sir John, ii. 250
Borough, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 13 8 ,14 0
Boru tribute, origin and amount of, i.
19-20; cause of strife, 92, 100, 106,
2 I 4; renounced by Finnachta,
10 5 ; reimposed by Brian, 139
Bothachs, i. 32
Boulogne, negotiations with Parnell
at, iii. 385
Boulter, Archbishop of Armagh, n.
4 8 4; his character, 539-4 1
Bouvet, Admiral, iii. 40
Boycott, Captain, iii. 287
Boycotting, recommended by Parnell,
iii. 286-7; origin of the word, 28 7;
condemned by Papal Rescript, 35 8
Boyle, Abbey of, i. 282; burnt, ii, 29
- Protestant Primate, ii. 39 I
Brabazon, Sir \Villiam, i. 523, 524,
ii. 7, 106
Brady, Protestant Bishop of Meath,
ii. 88
Bramhall, Archbishop, ii. 3 6 5
Branduff, King of Leinster, i. 100
Brehon Laws, revived by St. Patrick,
i. 53; abolished, ii. I I I
Brehons, their position and duties, i.
Brendan of Birr, St., i. 60 [28-3 0
Brendon of Clonfert, St. (the Navi-
gator), his career, i. 60-1, 76
Brennan, Thomas, iii. 278, 280
Brereton, Sir William, i. 475, 504
Brett, Sergeant, iii. 249
Brian Born, early life, i. 127 ; wars
with the Danes, 129; defeated by
Malachy, 124; but becomes his
ally, 134; they defeat the Danes
and enter Dublin, 135; becomes
Ardri, 136-8; his government,
139; Danes and Leinstermen rise
against him, 140 - 44; battle of
Clontarf, 145-7; his death, 147;
encouraged learning, 180
- Boru's harp, i. 139
Bridget, St., life and labours, i. 61-
62 ; consults her guardian angel
about Ireland, 487; her relics
scattered, 526
Bright, John, his views on Ireland,
iii. 250, 289; denounces Irish
members, 3 I 8; opposes Home
Rule, 336, 342
Britons, i. 54, 79-80
Brodir of Man, i. 143, 147
Broghill, Lord (Earl of Ossory), ii.
3 00 , 314- 1 5, 3 1 7,3 1 9- 20 , 33 2 ,
347, 3 6 3-4
Bromley, Sir \Villiam, ii. 249
Brotherhood of St. George, i. 427
Brougham, Lord, iii. 225
Broughton, Sir Thomas, i. 435
Browne, Archbishop of Dublin,
accuses Lord Leonard Gray, i.
503; approves of Henry's divorce,
52 1-3; his career in Ireland,
525-37 j ii.8, 13, 15,17,19- 20 ,5 22
- Count, ii. 505
Bruce, Edward, invited to come to
Ireland, lands and is proclaimed
King, i. 346; his successes, 347-9;
crowned King, 350 j surrender of
Carrickfergus, 353; arrival of
Robert Bruce, 353; besieges
Dublin, 353; and Limerick, 354;
retreats and reaches Dundalk,
355; battle of Faughart and
death of Edward Bruce, 356;
effects of his invasion, 357-8
- Robert, i. 353-5
Brude, King of the Picts, converted
by St. Columba, i. 66
Brughaidh, office of, i. 3 I
Brunehault and St. Columbanus, i.
Brunswick Clubs, iii. 136 [81-2
Bryan, Sir Francis, ii. 7
Bryce, Mr., supports Gladstone's
Home Rule Bill, iii. 338; Chief
Secretary, but goes to \Vashing-
ton as British Ambassador, 463 ;
his views on University Refonn,
474; otherwise mentioned, 444
Buchanan, i. I 7
Buckingham, Duke of, ii. 376-7
- Earl of (Viceroy), ii. 553
- ::\Iarquis of (Viceroy), iii. I Z ;
resigns, 16
Buildings, ancient Irish, i. 39, 203,265
Buller, General, iii. 34 8 , 454
Burdett, Sir Francis, iii. 132
Burgh, Hussey, !\I.P., ii. 551
Burgundy, Duchess of, i. 435, 443
Burke, Under-Secretary, murdered
in Phænix Park, iii. 30 I
INDEX
531
Burke, Canon, iii. 277
- Colonel \Valter, ii. 448-50,498
- Edmund, favours the Catholic
cause, iii. 18 j his views on the
education of Catholic priests, 32-3
- Richard, ii. 4, 10
Burkes, ii. 78, I 12-13, 122, 132, 133,
Burleigh, Lord, ii. 2 I 5 [167-8, 207
Burnell, ii. 83-4
Butler, Archbishop of Cashel, i. 525 ;
- Colonel, ii. 401 [ii. 6
- Sir Edmond, ii. 56,59,61,310
- Lord James, i. 4 6 7,474, 479,
524
- Sir James, i. 42 I, 440, 444
- Sir James (son of Piers), J.
4 6 5, 467 ; ii. 52
- Sir John, i. 423
- Sir Piers (Earl of Ormond and
Ossory), i. 440, 444, 454, 465 ; ii.
- MacRichard, i. 424 [52
- Hon. Simon, iii. 29, 3 I
- Sir Theobald, ii. 472
- Thomas, Earl of Ormond, ii.
- Sir Walter, ii. 318 [24, 53
Butlers, i. 317, 318, 347, 4 1 7, 4 2 3,
444; ii. 137
Butt, Isaac, opposed to Repeal, iii.
175 ; and the Irish Church Bill,
255; his career at the Bar, 257-8;
M.P. for Limerick, and Home
Ruler, 259; his political difficul-
ties, 262; opposed to obstruction,
269-70, 271-2 j his death, 272
Byrne, Garrett, iii. 7 2 , 74
Caesar, his knowledge of Ireland, i.
2; on Druidism, 27 j cited, 40
Caillemot, Huguenot General at the
Royne, ii. 421-2
Caiseal, i. 39
Cambrensis Eversus, i. 193
Camden, his opinion as to Hibernia,
i. 4 j and the !\I ilesians, 17
- Lord (Viceroy), iii. 3 2 , 33-4,
4 1 ,47, 5 1 ,73
53 8
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Campbell-Bannerman, Henry, sup-
ports Home Rule, iii. 337, 342 ;
supports Redmond's amendment
to the King's Speech (1892),
449; premier (19 06 ), 463
Campion, quoted, i. 47 I
Canning, favours Catholic claims, iii.
I 23, I 28, I 32
Canons, Premonstre, i. 334
- of St. Victor, i. 334
Capel, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 466-7
Carew, Sir G., President of Munster,
ii. 162, 165, 167-8, 185, 199,220
- Sir John, i. 381
- Sir Peter, ii. 60-61, 98
Carey, Sir George, ii. I 57
- the Informer, iii. 305
Carhampton, Lord, iii. 35, 49
Carleton, author, iii. 482
Carlisle, Earl of (Viceroy), ii. 553-4
- Lord (Viceroy), iii. 243-4
Carlow, i. 38 I
Carl us, Danish chief, i. 1-\.5
Carlyle, Thomas, on Cromwell's
Government, ii. 362; on Crom-
well and the I rish Bishops, 3 I 6- I 7
Carnarvon, Lord (Viceroy), iii. 3 I 6
Carnfree, mound of, i. 297
Carri ckfergus, i. 347, 35 3; ii. 66,
72, 74
Carrickshock, disturbance at, iii. 147
Carrigfoyle, Castle of, ii. 96
Carrigogunnell, Castle of, i. 497
Carroll, Anthony, ii. 436, 45 I
- John, Archbishop of Baltimore,
iii. 5 I 2
- King of Dublin, i. 120-2 I
Carteret, Lord (Viceroy), and the
Drapier's Letters, ii. 538-9
Carthage, St., i. 74-5, 77
Carthaginians, i. 2
Carthusians, i. 522
Cashel, i. 127, 130, 159, 190; cap-
tured by Mountgarret, ii. 254;
sacked by Inchiquin, 293-4
Cassiterides, or Tin Islands, i. I, 2, 3
Castleconnell, Lord, ii. 374
Castlehaven, Lord, imprisoned, ii.
255; attacks Vavasour at Kil-
worth, 27 I; entrusted with the
army of the Supreme Council,
277; pursues Inchiquin, 283;
opposed to Cromwell, 301, 3 I 7-1 8,
33 2 ; proscribed, 345; otherwise
mentioned, 234, 279, 295
Castlereagh, Lord, early career, iii.
50; Chief Secretary, 50; views on
Union, 8 I; character and conduct,
86; plan of Union, 98-100; other-
wise mentioned, 107, 123, 126
Cataldl1s, St., i. 84
Cathach, or Battle-Book, i. 97, 200
Cathal of Connaught, i. 138
Cathaldus, Bishop of Tarentum, 1.
75, 84
Catherine of Aragon, i. 520
Catholic Association, iii. 129 - 3 I,
13 8 ; suppressed, 158
- Hierarchy, restored in Eng-
land, iii. 224
Catholics persecuted, ii. 102-3, 201,
223- 6 , 37 8 , 380-82, 456-80
Catinat, French General, ii. 493-5
Cattle-driving, iii. 468, 472
Caulfield, Lord, ii. 346
Cavendish, Lord Frederick, Irish
Chief Secretary, murdered, iii. 301
Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, and Shane
O'N eill, ii. 38-9; favours Ormond,
56; advises the Queen to make
terms with Tyrone, 193; preju-
diced against the Catholics, 201,
2 I 2; dealings with Tyrone, 205-8 ;
his policy in Ulster, 215- 16
Cdles, their position, i. 3 I
Celestine, St., and St. Patrick, i. 45
Celestius, i. 85
Celsus, Archbishop of Armagh, i. 164
Cennfaeladh, warrior and poet, i. 71
Chamberlain, Joseph, his views on
Coercion, iii. 289; and Home
Rule, 3 I 8-19, 327; resigns and
attacks Gladstone's Home Rule
Bill, 333-4, 337,34 2 ; the Round
Table Conference, 350-5 I; Bal-
four's Land Bill, 354; favours
Balfour's Local Government Bill,
400; his views regarding Ulster,
40 I; supported by Birmingham
(1892),403; opposed to Glad-
stone's Home Rule Bill, 409 ; be-
comes Colonial Secretary (1895),
4 I 9; resigns his seat to advocate
Tariff Reform, 462
Charlemont, Earl of, ii. 553; iii. 4, 5, 7
Charles I. (1625 - 49), marries a
Catholic, ii. 227 ; makes promises
to Catholics, 228; governs with-
out a parliament, 238; his" Com-
mission" to Sir Phelim ü)N eill,
245; his position in Ireland, 269-
75 ; his concessions to the Catho-
lics, 280-82; his duplicity, 288
- I I. ( I 660-8 5), proposes coming
to Ireland, ii. 30 I ; makes terms
with the Scots and repudiates the
Catholics, 327; his reign, 363-8..J.;
dies a Catholic, 385; treatment
of the Catholics under, 462
- V., i. 477
- the Bald and Scotus Erigena,
i. 179
Charter Schools, ii. 540-4 I ; iii. 149
Charters of Denization, i. 367
Chesterfield, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 486
Chichester, Sir Arthur(Lord), ii. 189-
90, 201,203-7,217-22, 224, 246
Childers, Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, iii. 3 I 3; favourable to
Home Rule, 32 I, 435
Christian, Bishop of Lismore, i. 247,
"Chronicon Scotorum," i. 183 l32 I
Church, abuses and irregularities in
the, i. 183-4,515-19
Churches, construction of early, i.
20 4-5, 244
Churchill, Lord, captures Cork and
Kinsale, ii. 432
INDEX
539
Churchill, Lord Randolph,his peculiar
position, iii. 308; supports the
Parnellites, 309- I 0 ; Secretary for
India, 3 I 4; unwilling to concede
Home Rule, 3 I 9 ; goes to Belfast
and opposes Home Rule, 332,
342; Chancellor of the Exchequer
and Leader under Salisbury, 345;
his political programme, 347;
resigns, 350; improves Balfour's
Land Bill, 354; against Glad-
stone's Home Rule Bill, 4 10
Cian of Desmond, i. ISO, IS [
Ciaran, St., i. 7 I, 94
Cimbaeth, i. 19
Cinel, explained, i. 26
Cinel-Eoghain, i. I 19, 268
Cistercians, Order of, introduced
into Ireland, i. 19 1 , 335-7
Clairvaux, i. 335-6
Clan system, its constitution, i. 25 ;
tribute paid by clans, 32 ; defects
of the system, 33-5, 342 ; number
of warring clans, 492 ; abolished,
508- I 0
Clancarty, Earl of, ii. 48, 59,7 I, 95-7
Clancy, Mr., adheres to Parnell, iii.
Clan-na-Gael, iii. 277 [395
Clanricarde, Earls of, ii. 32, 62, 77-8,
112, 113, 139, 161-2, 164, 17 1 .
I 79, 2 14, 2 3 2
- Marquis of, ii. 246, 255,262-3,
265, 26 7, 271, 2 8 3, 29 1 , 295,
3 01 , 33 0 -3 I, 337-9, 345
Clare, Irish transplanted to, ii. 348-9
- Lord, iii. 50, 73; his views
on Union, 8 I, 89, 103 j close of
his career, I I 2
Clarence, Duke of (Viceroy), i. 380-
87
Clarendon, I st Earl of, on the mas-
sacre of Drogheda, ii. 309; on
the Act of Settlement, 369-7 I
- 2nd Earl of, his Irish Gm"ern-
ment, ii. 388-90
Clarke, Sir Edward, iii. 406
54 0
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Claudian, on the wars between the
Ancient Irish and Romans, i. 23
Clearances, the Great, iii. 2 18-20
Clemens a'1d Albinus, i. 90
Clemt:nts, Lord, iii. 178
Clergy in battle, i. 2 I 4
Clifford, Sir Conyers, President of
Connaught, ii. 138, 152-6
Clonard, School of, i. 60, 1 74 ; ii. 22
Clonenagh, School of, i. 75
Clonfert, school and monastery of,
i. 61, 75, 283
Clonmacnoise, school and monastery
of, founded, i. 60, 94; its pre-
eminence, 7 1 -7 2 ; thrice plundered
by F eidhlimidh, King of Cashel,
I 13; by Danes and native chiefs,
I 14, 1 22, 1 74, 1 82; by De
Burgo, 283; visited in 1515 by
Papal Commissary, 5 18; plun-
dered, ii. 22
Clonmel, Archbp. Browne preaches
at, and converts two archbishops
and eight bishops, i. 524-5 ; siege
of, ii. 319-21
- Lord, iii. 54
Clontarf, proposed meeting of Re-
pealers at, iii. 179-80
Clynn (annalist), condemns Edward
Bruce, i. 357; describes the pesti-
lence of the fourteenth century, 377
Coarbs, their position in the Church,
Cobden, Richard, iii. 194 [i. 185
Cockburn, General, his" step-ladder,"
Cole, Colonel, iii. 92 [iii. 48
- Sir \Villiam, ii. 25 1
Colgan, Rev. John, ii. 519-2 I
Colgu of Clonmacnoise, i. 7 I, 172
Colleges for education of Irish priests
in France and Spain, ii. 5 I 1- 12
Collings, Jesse, iii. 326
Colman, St., of Lindisfarne and
Mayo, i. 76, 89
Columba, St., early career, i. 63; re-
sponsible for battle of Cuildre\'ne,
63, 96; leaves Ireland and lands
at lona, 63-4 ; missionary labours,
65-6; life in lona, 6
7; visits to
Ireland and death, 68; curses
Tara, 96; supposed to have
written the Book of Kells, 197;
prophecies used by De Courcy,
267 ; remains desecrated, 526
Columbanus, St., i. 74; his mis-
sionary career, i. 80-82
- of Ghent, i. 177
Columbine, Colonel, ii. 437
Comgall, St., i. 74, I I I, I 74
Commercial Restraints, ii. 550-52
Commissioners of Trust, ii. 30 I, 3 17,
326-8
Comyn, Bishop of \Vaterford, i. 525
- John, Archbishop of Dublin, i.
3 26 -7
Conal, Prior of, i. 407
Conall, King of the Dalriad Scots,
receives Columba, i. 64
Conciliation Hall, iii. 183, 199
Concubinage of the clergy, i. 5 19
Confederation of Kilkenny, ii. 257-75
" Confession" of St. Patrick, i. 54
Cong, Cross of, i. 200, 202-3
Cong Abbey, i. 168, 278, 281
Congal, slain at the battle of :\loyrath,
Congalach (Airdri), i. 123 [i. 102
Congested Board Commission, iii.
4 68 , 471- 2
- Districts Bill, iii. 388
Conleth, St., i. 57, 62
Conmaicne, tribe of, i. 162
Conn of the HundredBattles, i. 20, I 26
Connaught,Composition of,ii.1 10-13
- King of, his revenue, i. 32
- Province of, assigned to
Roderick O'Connor, i. 274; dis-
turbed state of, 278-83, 296-304,
3 1 3-14, 360-65, 39 0 -94, 429;
pays tribute to O'Donnell of
Tirconnel, 466; independent of
England, 488; attempted planta-
tion of, by Strafford, ii. 23 1-2 ;
under Bingham, 110-14; under
theCromwellians, 357-60; wasted
in 1690, 438-9
Conry, Florence, Archbishop of
Tuam, ii. 188, 207, 5 II
Constantine, Donation of, a forgery,
i. 240
Convention, Catholic, at Dublin, iii.
19-20; at Dungannon, 29
Conway, Lord, ii. 259-60
Cooke, Under - Secretary, iii. 49;
his pamphlet on the Union, 83
Coote, Sir c., his terrible cruelties, ii.
251-2, 254; killed near Trim, 25 6
- (Earl of Mountrath), his career
in Ireland, ii. 262, 273, 282-3,
2 8 9, 29 8 -3 02 , 3 II, 3 15, 3 2 4-5,
33 2 , 3 60 , 3 6 3-5
Corcoran, Colonel, iii. 5 16
Corcran, i. I 52
Cork, city of, i. 277, 443, 485; 11.
76, 197- 8 , 432
- Earl of, ii. 232, 300
Cormac, Bishop and King of Cashel,
defeats the Ardri at Moylena, i.
I 19; slain at Ballyshannon, 120 ;
author of Corlllaès Glossary, 177
- MacArt, history of, i. 20; his
dress described, 38
- MacCuilenan, i. I 19, 177
Cormac Cas, i. 1 27
Cormac's Chapel described, i. 205
Corn Laws repealed, iii. 194-5
Cornwallis, Lord (Viceroy), iii. 73 ;
favours Union, 8 I ; his speech in
Parliament, 85; his position, 93,
107, 108
Corry, Isaac, iii. 82, 87, 101
Cosby, Colonel, ii. 155
Cosbys, the, ii. 137
Coshery, i. 35, 320; abolished,ii. 199
Costello, Colonel, ii. 379
Costigans, the, ii. 379
Counties formed, i. 29 I
County Assemblies, i. 292
Court of Claims, ii. 3 68 , 373
- \Vards, ii. 23 2 , 375
INDEX
54 1
Covenanters, the Scottish, ii. 239
Cowley, describes the progress of
the Reformation, i. 529
Cowper, Lord (Lord-Lieutenant), iii.
289, 297 ; resigns, 29 8 , 34 6 , 353
Cox, on Art MacMurrogh, i. 400;
list of Black Rents paid, 432 ; on
the capture of Maynooth, 477
Coyne, Bishop of Limerick, i. 525
- and Li,"ery, i. 371, .po, 427,
441,443,458,485,488
Cranley, Archbishop of Dublin
(Viceroy), i. 4 I 0
Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury,
i. 520; ii. 12
Cranoges, or Lake-dwellings, i. 39
Crawford, Sharman, iii. 172, 178,
18 4,216,220
Creagh, Dr., Bishop of Cork, ii. 435,
- historical writer, ii. 5 I 7 [ 457
Creaghts, i. 383
Cremona, siege of, ii. 496-7
Crilly, Mr., iii. 424
Crimes Bill, iii. 302
Cristede, Henry, i. 401-2
Croft, Sir James (Viceroy), ii. 8-9, 34
Croke, Archbishop of Cashel, iii. 295,
Crom Cruach, i. 27, 50, 53 [379
Cromer, Archbishop of Armagh,
appointed Lord Chancellor, i.
467; remonstrates wÍth Silken
Thomas, 463; opposes the King's
spiritual supremacy, 522
Cromwell, Henry, ii. 359
- Oliver, military talents, ii. 304 ;
hypocrisy, 305 j Lord-Lieutenant
in Ireland, 306; his army, 306;
captures Drogheda, 307; and
Wexford, 3 I I ; in Munster, 3 I 2-
14; controversy with Catholic
Bishops, 3 15- 16; captures Kil-
kenny, 3 I 8; besieges Clonmel,
3 19- 20; leaves Ireland, 32 I ;
Adventurer for Irish land, 343;
failure of Irish policy, 360-6 I
- Thomas, i. 499, 5 21 , 5 22
-
54 2
HISTORV OF IRELAND
Cromwellian Settlement, ii. 34 1-61
Crook (near 'Vaterford), John landed
Croziers, i. 200-201 [at, i. 286
Cruach Patrick, i. 5 I
Cruciferii or Crutched Friars, i. 334
Cuchulain, i. 70
Cuirllltig, assembly of, i. 29
Culdees, i. 75
Cullen, Archbishop of Dublin, his
policy, iii. 230, 235 ; differs with
Dr. MacHale regarding the
Catholic University, 492
Cullens wood, i. 288
Cumasach bell, i. 201
Cumberland, Duke of, ii. 501-3
CUlIlhdachs (sacred shrines), i. 200
Cummian of Bobbio, i. 90
- of Clonfert, i. 76, 88, 90
Cunningham, Colonel, ii. 397
Cttrachs, i. 40
Curran, Father, of , Vex ford, iii. 70
- John Philpot, iii. 15, 3 I
Curtis, Dr., Archbishop of Armagh,
Curwen, Hugh, ii. 15 [iii. 137
Cusack, Richard, Marshal of France,
ii. 504
- Sir Thomas, Lord Chancellor,
ii. 9- 12 , 54
Cyclopean buildings, i. 203
Dagda, i. 38
Daguilla, Don John, Spanish
General, ii. 172-6, 179, 180-82
Dat, Assembly of, i. 28
Dalcassian kings, i. 1:2 6-48
Dallan, Forgaill, poet, i. 7I
Dalriada, i. 93
Dalriadans, i. 64-5, 93
D' Alton, John, author, iii. 489
- Maurice, i. 403, 486
Daly, Judge, ii. 435, 438
Danann, or Tuatha-de-Danann, 1.
8, II
Danes or N orthmen, character, i.
107 -9, I 73; depredations, I 10- I I,
182; successes, I 13- I 4; oppres-
sive rule, I IS; quarrel among
themselves, 116-17; found Dublin,
I 17; settle in Normandy, 1 18 ;
government at Limerick, 122; de-
feated by :;\'lalachy, who captures
Dublin, 124; wars with Mahon,
Kingof1\Iunster, 128-31; and with
Brian Boru, 133- 5; become Chris-
tians, 161; engaged in commerce,
181 ; plunder churches, 182; con-
nection with Round Towers, 2 10 ;
driven from Dublin, 239; granted
'Vaterford by Henry II., 248; in
armies of King 'Yilliam, ii. 437
D'Arcy of Platten, i. 436
- Sir J. (Viceroy), i. 3 6 7,37 1,373
D' Artois, J enico, i. 4 0 4, 409
Dathi, succeeds Niall as Ardri, i.
48, S4
Ð' A vaux, French Minister, ii. 4 I 8
Davies, Sir John, Attorney-General,
i. 375, 382; ii. 199, 204-6, 2 I 6-
17, 222-3, 234
Davis, Thomas, on the Round
Towers, i. 2 I I ; joins the Repeal
Association, iii. 173, 184; scene
with O'Connell, 186; estimate
and death, 18 7, 485
Davitt, Michael, early career, iii. 275;
in America, 276; holds meeting
at Irishtown, 278; founds Land
League, 280; prosecuted, 280;
imprisoned, 292; liberated, 298;
prosecuted and imprisoned again,
304; disapproves of Plan of Cam-
paign,349; advice to Parnell, 375;
defeated at 'Vaterford election,
396; otherwise mentioned, 379,
3 8 4, 4 08 , 434, 457; estimate
and death, 471
De Bermingham, Meyler, i. 289
De Braose, William, i. 289-90
De Burgo (or Burke), Earl of Clan-
rickard, i. 447, 45 2 , 5 0 7, 5 10
- Lord Deputy of Connaught,
- Edmond, i. 363-4 [i. 395
De Burgo, Richard, Lord of Con-
naught, i. 297, 300, 301, 305, 310
- Richard,EarlofUlster(theRed
Earl), i. 316-18,347-9,354,358-9
- \Valter, i. 306, 312-13
- \Valter (died 1332), i. 362
- \Villiam, i. 36 1-2
- \Villiam Fitzadelm, i. 246,
254, 256, 260, 281-3
- \Villiam, Earl of Ulster (the
Brown Earl), i. 362
De Burgos, i. 3 I 7- I 8 ; genealogy
of the, 363
De Clare, i. 3 15, 3 I 8, 365
De Cogan, Milo, at the capture of
Dublin, i. 230; governor of the
city, 233; defeats the Danes, 235;
governor of Limerick, 2 53; invades
Connaught, 275-6; killed, 277
De Courc)', John, obtains Ulster
from Henry I I., i. 249; described
by Giraldus, 265 ; invades Ulster,
265-9; deposed from Viceroyalty,
269 ; subsequent career, 269-70;
invades Connaught, 278 - 9 ;
plunders churches, 332 ; death,
27 2 -3
De Culwick, Sir John, i. 356
De Gandevill, Hugh, i. 248
De Gene\"ille, i. 3 I 6, 369
De Grey, Bishop of Norwich, i. 295
De la Croix, French Foreign
Minister, iii. 39
De Lacy, Hugh, the elder, sent to
treat with Roderick O'Connor, i.
246; first Viceroy, 248, 261; dis-
pute with O'Rorke, 250; receives
kingdom of 11eath, 249,258; pro-
ceedings, 258-60; unjustly blamed
by Henry I I., 264; death, 264
- Hugh, the younger, made Vice-
roy, i. 269; deposed, intrigues
against De Courcy and is made
Earl of Ulster, 271-2; his sub-
sequent career, 289-90 ; otherwise
mentioned, 281, 284
INDEX
543
De Lacy, \Valter, i. 289-90,296,310
De Lacys, i. 35 0 , 356
De Londres, Henry, Archbishop of
Dublin, his career, numerous
offices, etc., i. 329-31
De Marisco, Jeffrey, opposes the
De Lacys at Thurles, i. 289;
Viceroy, 298, 305; otherwise
mentioned, 30 I, 3 I 0
De Maupas, Sir John, encounters
Edward Bruce at Faughart, i. 356
De Prendergast, Maurice, i. 223,
226, 234
De Quincy, son-in-law of Strongbow,
i. 251
De Rosen, Marshal, French Com-
mander at Derry, ii. 402-3, 4 I 8
De \Vindsor (Viceroy), i. 398
De \Vinter, Dutch Admiral, his
defeat and capture, iii. 45
De \Vilt. ii. 410
Deasy, Captain, iii. 249
Declaration of Indulgence, issued by
James 11., ii. 387 ; for the Settle-
ment of Ireland, 367; against
Transubstantiation, 465
"Defenders," iii. 25-26; their de-
mands, 30 ; their proceedings and
defeat by the Peep-of-Day Boys, 35
"Degenerate English," i. 486
Deisi, visited by St. Patrick, i. 5 I ;
paid tribute to Brian Boru, 133;
attack Ossory, I 19, 121; at
Clontarf, 142
Delaney, Dr., ii. 542
Delbna, tribe of, i. 130
Delvin, Lord, i. 464; ii. 102, 207
Dempseys, the, ii. 82
Denman, Lord, Chief Justice, iii. 182
Derbfine, i. 25
Derry, monastery and church of, i.
63, 182
captured by Sir Cahir
O'Doherty, ii. 2 10; siege of, in
168 9, 394-404
Dervorgille, i. 2 16. I 7
544
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Desmond, Earls of, i. 368-74, 377,
3 8 9, 395, 4 0 3, 4 0 7, 4 1 7, 4 20 ,
4 2 ..J.-5, 43 0 ,434,443, 451-2, 457,
459, 4 61 , 477- 8 ,4 86 ,4 8 9, 49 1 ,
496, 5 06 , 53 I ; ii. 52, 266, 272
- Earl of, in 1548, ii. 4-6
- Garrett, Earl of (died I 583),
ii. 51-9, 70-80, 9 2 , 94-5, 97, 1 0 4
- James, Earl of (the Sugane
Earl), ii. 149, 167-9
- Sir James, ii. 92, 99-100
- John, ii. 93, 94, 100
- province of, assigned to
Eoghan, son of Oilioll Olum,
i. 127 ; given to MacCarthy, 165 ;
part of, given to Robert Fitz-
Stephen, 278; its wars, 153, 306,
3 12 , 3 1 4
Devolution, iii. 458-9
Devon Commission, iii. 217-18, 238
Devoy, John, iii. 276
Diarmuid (Ardri), his quarrels with
the clergy, i. 94-7
Dicey, Professor, defends the Union,
iii. 40 I
Dichu and St. Patrick, i. 48 [176
Dicuil, the geographer, i. 7 1-2, 78,
Digby, Sir Kenelm, ii. 280, 282, 288
- Protestant Bishop of Dromore,
ii. 482
Dillon, Sir ].(Lord), ii. 29 1,299,302,
303,315,318,332,341,451
- John, M. P. for East Mayo,
prosecuted, 289; sent to Kil-
mainham, 294; liberated, 298;
answers Chamberlain in Parlia-
ment, 337; advocates Plan of
Campaign, 348; prosecuted, 349 ;
at Mitchelstown, 356; defends the
Plan, 358-9; imprisoned, 360; in
France and America, 374; deserts
Parnell, 379, 3 8 5, 39 0 ; attacked
in streets of Dublin, 396; dissen-
sions with Healy, 396-400, 4 I 4-
I 5; favours Land Act of 19 0 3,
454, 457; views on Irish Councils
Bill of 1907, 470; approves of
U ni versities Bill of 1908, 475
Dillon, John Dlake, joins the Repeal
Association, iii. 172; escapes to
America, 2 I 1 ; returns and starts
the National Association, 242
Dinneen, Father, author of an Irish
dictionary, iii. 50 I
Diocesan Episcopacy, i. 190
Dioceses, number of, in twelfth
century, i. 191
Diodorus Siculus and Ancient
Ireland, i. 4
Dionysius the Areopagite, his works
translated by Scotus Erigena, i.
179
Discord among the native chiefs, its
causes, i. 92, 341, 491, 508-9
Disraeli, Benj. (Lord Beaconsfield),
iii. 195, 251-2, 26 I, 282, 283
Dixon, Captain, iii. 69
Doctrines held by the early Irish
Church, i. 86
Doherty, Chief Justice, iii. I..J.4
Domhnall (Ardri), his reign, i. 101-2
- Claen, i. 133
- Great Steward of Mar, i. 143,
144- 5
- King of Leinster, i. I 23-4
- of Desmond, i. 15 0 - 1 , 153
Donation of Constantine, i. 240
Donatus, scholar and poet, i. I 77
Donnybrook Fair, i. 288
Donogh Magillapatrick, King of
Ossory. i. 224, 226, 233-4, 255
Donovan of Hy Fighdhente, i. 130,
13 2 , 133
Dopping, Bishop of Meath, ii. 464
Dorrington, Lord, ii. 432, 451
Douglas, General, ii. 4 I 7, 4 2 5, 439
Dowcra, Sir Henry, ii. 162-5, 188-9,
198, 202-3
Dowdall, Archbishop of Armagh, ii.
14- 1 5,20-21
Downshire, Lord, iii. 100
Dowth, sepulchral monument, i. II
Doyle, Dr., Bishop of Kildare, iii.
129, 131, 135, 147, 15 6 ; esti-
mate and death, 15 1-2
Drapier's Letters, ii. 537-9
Drennan, Dr., poet, iii. 29, 52
Dress, Irish, in Pagan times, i. 38 ;
declared illegal by statute, 384,
427; worn by English settlers, 488
Drinking in Ireland, ii. 542-3; iii.
477, 478
Drogheda, Parliaments at, i. 425,
44 I; described by Sir Henry
Sidney, ii. 73; besieged by the
Catholics, 252-3; siege raised,
256; captured by Cromwell,
307-9; surrendered to \Villiam
111.,424; assizes (1794), iii. 51
Druids and Druidism, account of,
i. 27; oyercome by St. Patrick,
49-5 0 , 53
Druim Ceat, Convention of, i. 97 ;
attended by St. Columba, 68
Drummond, Under- Secretary, his
character and vigorous policy, iii.
157,159-62; his death, 162-3
Drury, Sir WiIliam. ii. 7 I, 79, 92-3
Dubh-gall's Bridge, i. 145, 146
Dubh-galls and Finn-galls, i. 109,
Dubhthach, i. 50, 6 I [I 16, 121
Dublin, founded by Danes, i. I 17 ;
taken possession of by Carroll,
King of Ossory, 120; Danes ex-
pelled from, 121; captured by
Malachy, 124; by Brian Boru,
135; extent of, in the eleventh
century, 144; Turlogh O'Connor
appoints his son king of, 164;
Danish bishop of, 182; taken by
Strongbow, 230; Danes driven
from, 233 ; Henry II. spends the
winter in, 247 ; its privileges and
wealth in the thirteenth century,
287-8; besieged by Bruce, 353-4;
Richard I I. at, 400; captured by
Silken Thomas, 472 ; failure ofthe
Reformation in, 529; neglect of
VOL. III
INDEX
545
Hugh 0' Neill to capture, ii. 145 ;
siege of, by Ormond, 302; dis-
turbances in, iii. 24- 5; opposed to
Union, 165; agitates for Repeal,
175-6; Convention (1896) at, 429;
Young's account of, 478-9
Dublin Castle government, iii. 469
Dudley, Lord (Viceroy), iii. 459
Duelling Club for political purposes,
iii. 101
- in Ireland, ii. 543; iii. 478
Duff, Adam, burnt as a heretic, i.
- General, iii. 61, 70 [515
Duffy, Charles Gavan, joins Repeal
Association, iii. 172- 3; prosecuted,
180-81 ; prosecuted again, but ac-
quitted, 2 I I ; l\I.P. for New Ross,
274; resigns and goes to Aus-
tralia, 233; otherwise mentioned,
3 1 7,4 8 7
Dumbarton, probable birthplace of
St. Patrick, i. 42
Dun, official residence of the early
Irish kings, i. 26, 39
Dunamaise, Castle of, i. 366
Dun-Angus, fort of, i. 8, 203
Dunanore, massacre of, ii. 99
Dunboy, Castle of, ii. 182- 5
Dunboyne, Lady, ii. 374
Dundalk, Edward Bruce crowned
at, i. 350; pays tribute to O'N eill,
i. 395,416; Schomberg encamps
at, 415-16
Dundas, General, iii. 6 I, 70
Dundonald, i. 228
Dungal, i. 74,172,177
Dungannon, Baron of, i. 507; ii.98,
10 5
Dunkellin, Lord (Earl of Clan-
ricarde), ii. 161, 162, 17I
Dunleavy of Uladh, i. 168-9
Dunraven, Lord, Chairman of the
Land Conference, iii. 45 I; ad.
vocates Devolution, 459; his
University proposals, 473
Duns Scotus, ii. 509-10
10 5
54 6
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Durrow, monastery of, i. 63, 72, I 13,
26 4
D'Usson, General, ii. 445, 45 I
Dutch Blue Guards of \Villiam ilL,
ii. 4 I 7
- Expedition (1797), failure of,
iii. 45
Dympna, St., his crozier, i. 20 I
"Earl's Beeves," ii. 5 I
Easter, dispute as to mode of com-
puting, i. 73, 85, 87-90, 172, 188
Eaver, Captain, ii. 478
Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, iii. 225
Edgecombe, Sir R., i. 437- 8 , 439
Edgeworth, Maria, authoress, iii. 483
Edict of
antes, revoked, ii. 388
Education, proposed reform of Orde,
iii. I I; Stanley's scheme, 149;
Queen's Colleges, 185. See also
Schools
Edward I., i. 343
- 11., i. 338, 366-8
- I I I. desires the extension of
English law to Irish natives, i.
367 ; determines to go to Ireland,
37 I; censures Irish officials, 37 2 ;
dismisses from officeall Irish-born,
373 ; aided by Anglo-Irish in his
French wars, 374
- IV. and the Earl of Desmond,
i. 425-6
- VI. (1547-53), his reign, ii.
1-17
Edwin, King of Northumbria, i. 79
Egan, Boetius, Catholic Bishop of
Ross, ii. 3 I 9
Egfrid of N orthumbria, invades
Ireland, i. 103
Egypt and Ireland, i. 9
Eithne the Fair, i. 50
Elizabeth, Queen(I 558-I603),reign,
ii. 37- I 94; state of Ireland, I 9 5-6;
persecution of the Catholics, 457-8
Emancipation, Catholic, induce-
ments by Pitt, iii. 108; who puts
the blame on the King, 108; peti-
tion to Parliament (1805) rejected
by Pitt, I 18 ; King opposes con-
cessions, I 18; further petitions,
I 19- 20; Catholic Relief Bill
favoured, I 23; various petItIOns
rejected, 124; hopes revived, 126;
Plunkett's Relief Bill and others,
[28, 130, [32; granted, 137-8
Emania, palace of, i. I 9
Emigration from Ireland, ii. 48 [ ;
assistance asked, iii. 199; during
and after the famine, 208-9, 2 [2 ;
from 1849 to 1856, 236; 506-15,
5 2 [, 523, 5 28
Emmet, Robert, his career, iii. I 13- 17
- Thomas Addis, joins United
Irishmen, iii. 37; connection with
Wolfe Tone, 38-9,54; in America,
74
Employers' Liability Bill (1893),
iii. 4 I 2- I 3
Encumbered Estates Act, iii. 22 I
Enda, St., of Arran, i. 58-9
English language to be taught, ii. 87
- law in Ireland, introduced by
Henry 11., i. 291; natives ask
for, 343, 367 ; opposed by Anglo-
Irish lords, 368; extended over
the whole country, ii. 199-200
Enniscorthy, captured by the rebels
(1798), iii. 63; by General J ohn-
son, 70
Enniskillen, in arms (1688), ii. 393
Enslgnmen, ii. 366, 3 6 7, 374
Eochaidh (Ardri), divides Ireland
into five provinces, i. [9
- of Uladh, i. [37, 138
Eoghan or Owen Mór, i. 126
Eoghanachts, i. [27
Episcopal Protestant Church estab-
lished in Ireland, ii. 365; dis-
established, iii. 256
Erasmus Smith, ii. 352; Schools,
iii. 235
Eric (a fine), i. 29, 320
Erigena, John Scotus, i. 178-80
Errington, :Mr., iii. 306, 324
Esker-Riada, i. 126
Esmond, Lieutenant, iii. 61
Essex, Earl of, attempts to plant
Ulster, ii. 65-9; Lord-Lieutenant,
149,157
- Earl of, Viceroy in reign of
Charles I I., ii. 378-9
Eusebius of St. Gall, i. 177
Eustace, Sir Maurice, ii. 365, 367
Eva
Iac1\1urrogh marries Strong-
bow, i. 229
Evictions, in 1847, iii. 208; in 1849,
2 18-20, 237 ; from 1850 to 1870,
239-4 1 ; in 1877-78-79, 273
Ewer, Colonel, ii. 308
Falkland Deputy, ii. 226
Famine, caused by war, etc., iii. 189;
by failure of potato crop, 190-9 I ;
"the blight," I 9 I - 2, 195 - 6 ;
Government measures for relief,
196-201; aid from America, 201;
terrible sufferings of the people,
20 I - 4; evictions, emigration,
208-9; disaffection, 209- I I ; effects
on character of the people, 2 I 2- I 3
Fanchea, St., i. 58, 62
Farrell, General, ii. 302, 3 I 2
Fasting to recover debt, i. 30
Fawcett, General, iii. 63
Feidelm the Ruddy, i. 50
Feidhlimidh, King of Cashel,
plunders Clonmacnoise, i. I 13
Feis of Tara, i. 18, 20,28,73,94, 103
Fenianism, its beginning, iii. 244; or-
ganised by Stephens, 245; leaders,
246; in America and Ireland, 247;
arrest of leaders and dislocation of
their plans, 248; Manchester mar-
tyrs, 249-50; Clerkenwell explo-
sion, 250; New Departure, 276 f.
Fenians, their exploits, etc., i. 20-2 I
Fennell, Major, ii. 295, 319-20,335,
346
INDEX
547
Fergal and the Boru tribute, i. 105-6
Ferguson, Lady, describes the battle
of Clontarf, i. 144
- Sir SamueJ, iii. 490
Ferns, Bishop of, ii. 330, 331
- Castle of, i. 495
- monastery, i. 2 18
Festus Avienus, calls Ireland the
Sacred Isle, i. 2, 4
Fiacc of Sletty, i. 42, 5 I
Fiacre, St., i. 83
Fiadh-mac-Aengussa, Synod of, i.
18 3
Fidh-Inis, ancient name for Ireland,
Fifth Lateran Council, i. 5 19 [i. 5
Finbarr, St., Gospel of, i. 132
Fine, its organisation, etc., i. 24-5
Fingal, extent of, i. 472
- Lord, iii. I I 7, I 19, 122
Finglas, Patrick, describes Ireland
in 1534, i. 487-8
Finian, St., of Clonard, i. 59-60
- St., of MoviIle, his quarrel
with St. Columba, i. 96-7
Finnachta (Ardri), i. 103 ; abolishes
the Boru tribute, 105
Finn-galls, i. 109, I 16, 12 I
Finn MacCumhal, i. 20
Finucane, 1\1r., tenants' Commis-
sioner, iii. 455, 466
Firbolg, origin of name, i. 8; re-
marks regarding them, 9-1 I
Fitton, Sir Edward, ii. 61, 77-8
FitzAdelm, \Villiam. See De Burgo
FitzBernard, Robert, i. 248
FitzGerald, Bishop of Clonfert, ii.
- Garret, i. 426 [482
- George Robert, iii. 4- 5
- Lord Edward, joins the United
Irishmen, iii. 38; Commander-
in-Chief of rebel forces, 55 ; char-
acter, 55 ; arrest and death, 59-60
- Gerald, i. 480-83
- Gerald, Earl of Kildare, ii. 4,
23
- James, of Desmond, ii. 92, 100
54 8
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Fitzgerald, Sir James, i. 464
- John, of Desmond, ii. 92,
97- I 00
- J udkin, iii. 58
- :Maurice, arrives in Ireland,
i. 227 ; with Strongbow at Dublin,
233; assists De Lacy in the
government of Dublin, 248
- Maurice (Viceroy), inteñeres
in wars of Connaught, i. 303-10 ;
defeated by the l\IacCarthys, 3 14;
at war with Earl of Ulster (the
Red Earl), 3 16- I 8
- Sir Maurice, ii. 55-6
- Prime Sergeant, iii. 84, 133
- Thomas, aids Lambert Simnel,
i. 433
- Thomas (" Silken" Thomas),
appointed Lord Deputy, i. 469-70;
in rebellion, 47 I ; murders Arch-
bishop Allen, 473; fails to save
Maynooth, 477; his submission
to Lord Gray, 478; his sufferings
and death in the Tower of London,
479-80; cost of his rebellion, 490
- Vesey, and the Clare election,
iii.133- 6
Fitzgibbon, John, Attorney-General,
iii. 12 ; his character, 13 ; his Riot
Act, 13 ; made Lord Chancellor,
16; opposes Catholic concession,
18, 19, 20, 31-2, 34; made Earl
of Clare, 34; his policy, 4 2 , 54
FitzHenry, l\leyler, i. 223, 253,
59,
27 1 , 28 9
FitzHerbert, Chief Secretary, iii. 12
Fitzmaurice, James, ii. 59- 6 2, 90-93
Fitzpatrick of Ossory, ii. 24
FitzRalph, Archbishop of Armagh,
called St. Richard by the Re-
formers, i. 5 [6- I 7
Fitzsimons, Archbishop of Dublin,
i. 440
- Father, his controversy with
Usher, ii. 524
Fitzstephen, Robert, imprisoned in
\Yales, i. 2 I 7 ; arrives in Ireland,
22 I ; gets grant of \Yexford, 222;
negotiates with Roderick O'Con-
nor, 225 ; besieged in \Vexford,
23 I ; imprisoned by Henry II.,
245- 6 ; mentioned otherwise, 275
FitzThomas, John, ii. 169
Fitzwilliam, Sir \Villiam, Deputy, ii.
117,119,120, [24,126
- Lord, Lord - Lieutenant, ap-
pointment and recall, iii. 21-3
Five Bloods, the, i. 258
Flaherty, Abbot, of Scattery Island,
i. 120
Flaith-fine, i. 24-5; his house, 39
Flann, poet, i. 182-3
- Sinna (Ardri), i. I 17, 119, 121
Fleming, Richard, i. 260
Flood, Henry, M.P. for Kilkenny,
ii. 546; leader of the Opposition,
547; compared with Grattan,
548; 550, 553; his view of the
reforms of 1782, iii. 2; his Re-
form Bill, 5-7; opposes Orde's
Propositions, 10; his death, I 5
Florence of \Vorcester, i. 7 I, 176
Florus and Prudentius and Scotus
Erigena, i. 179
Flynn, Father, iii. 430
Fomorians, story of the, 1. 7-8;
remarks, 9
Forbes, Lord, ii. 26 3-4, 343
Forster, Chief Secretary, iii. 286,
288; his difficult position, 289;
his Coercion Bill, 290-92 ; declares
Land League unlawful, 295; coer-
cive measures, 296 ; resigns, 298;
attacks Parnell, 305; death, 328-9
Foster, his Corn Law, iii. 7-8, 24;
opposes Union, 84, 89, 101
Fosterage, system of, i. 30
Four Masters. See Annals
Fox, on the Regency question, lll.
Franchise Bill, iii. 310 [15-16
- parliamentary and municipal,
given to Catholics, iii. 20
Francis I. of France intends to
invade Ireland, i. 461
Franciscans, ii. 45 8-9
Fraser, Captain, iii. 43
Frederick the Great, on Irish soldiers,
ii. 504
Free Food League, iii. 462
French, Bishop of Ferns, denounced
by :i\Iarquis of Clanricarde, ii. 330-
3 1 ; his literary works, 514-15
- Lord, iii. 177
- Revolution, effects of, in Ire-
land, iii. 18, 19, 26
Frido]in, St., i. 83
Fry, Sir Edward, iii. 474
Fuath-na-Gaill, Castle of, ii. 47
Fltdir, i. 32
Fulda, monastery of, i. 182
Fursey, St., i. 83
Gaelic League, iii. 497 - 500; Re-
vival, iii. 497-502; Society of
Dublin, iii. 481 ; Union, iii. 497
Galgacus and the Picts, i. 65
Gall, St., i. 74, 83
,Galloping Hogan acts as Sarsfield's
guide, ii. 428
Gallowglasses, i. 35
Ga]moy, General, at the Boyne, ii.
418-19, 4 2 2; at Aughrim, 450
Galway city, taken from the
O'Flahertys by De Burgo, i. 302 ;
captured by the Earl of Kildare,
449; Lord Leonard Gray at, 502,
525; described by Sir Henry
Sidney, ii. 78; attacked by Red
Hugh O'Connell, 138; its loyalty,
255, 3 00 ; captured by Ludlow,
338 ; harshly treated by Coote,
360; captured by Ginkle, 451
- Earl of (de Ruvigny), ii. 442,
448-5 I, 467-8
- Lord (son of Clanricarde), at
Aughrim, ii. 45 1
Gardiner, Bishop of \Vinchester, ii.
13, 18
INDEX
549
Gardiner, supports tariff reform
Garth, i. 440-41 [( 1 784), iii. 7
Gasquet, quoted, i. 473, 493, 5 22 ;
ii. 13
Gavelock, Hugh, ii. 123
Gelfine, i. 25
Geoghegan, Anthony, Prior of Conal,
ii. 336-7
George I I I., becomes insane, iii.
15- 16; his attitude towards the
Catholics, 109, 1 18 ; permanently
insane, 122 ; his death, 126
- IV., visits Ireland, iii. 127;
his character, 127; grants emanci-
pation, 137; his death, 143
Geraldine League, i. 482
Geraldines. See FitzGerald, also
Earls of Desmond and Kildare
Germanus, St., i. 45
Germany, the Church in, need for
reform, i. 5 1 4, 519
Giant's Causeway, referred to, i. 9
Gibbon, quoted, i. 13, 22, 23,42,222
- Archbishop of Cashel, ii. 457
Gildas, the historian, i. 57, 59, 65
Gill, T. P., iii. 440
Gillapatrick of Ossory, imprisoned
by Brian Boru, i. 134; his son
(Donogh), 151
Gillebert, Bishop of Limerick, on
the irregularities in the Irish
Church, i. 184
Ginkle, General under King \Villiam,
his various movements, ii. 417,
4 2 7, 439-4 1 , 44 2 -54
Ginnell, Mr. L., on Adrian's Bull,
i. 238
Giraldus Cambrensis, describes the
Fomorians, i. 7; on the Book of
Kells, 72; came to Ireland with
King John, 192, 262; abuse of
the Irish, 193; testimony in favour
of Adrian's Bull, 238; character of
Diarmuid Mac Murrogh,
16, 225;
character of Henry I I., 243; of
Strongbow, 256; of the first Anglo-
55 0
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Norman invaders, 256-7,333; of
Fitzadelm de Burgo, 260; of John
de Courcy, 265 ; otherwise men-
tioned, 245, 250, 276 ; his char-
acter as an historian, ii. 5 16
Gladstone, W. E., Colonial Secretary
under Peel, iii. 194; estimate of
his character and career, 253;
his Disestablishment Bill and its
provisions, 254; carried, 255-6;
his Land Act, 256; opposed to
Home Rule, 260; his Ballot Act
and University Bill, 260 - 61 ;
resigns leadership, 263 ; premier
again, 285 ; his Land Hill, 292-3;
favours relaxation of Coercion, 294;
attacks Parnell, 295; Franchise
Bill, 309; defeated and resigns,
3 14; views on Home Rule, 3 I 8-
2 I; Prime l\Iinister again, 3 2 5 ;
introduces Home Rule and Land
Purchase Bills, 329 - 3 I; op-
position to Home Rule, 332-6;
second reading debate, 337-9;
Bill lost, 339; dissolution and
defeat at General Election (1886),
340-46; supports Parnell's Land
Bil], 346; against the Plan of
Campaign, 348 ; the Round Table
Conference, 35 I; opposed to
Coercion, 354, 36 I ; his relations
with Parnell, 368, 376-8, 38 I,
3 8 9; General Election and its
results ( I 892 ), 40 I - 4; Prime
Minister for fourth and last time,
4 0 5 ; new Home Rule Bill intro-
duced, 405 ; its provisions, 405-6;
debates in parliament, 407 - I I ;
. third reading carried, 4 12; thrown
out by the Lords, 4 I 2; resigns
premiership and seat, last speech
in the House, 4 I 4; succeeded
by Rosebery, 414; death, 44 I
Glamorgan, Lord, ii. 274-5,280-83,
288, 292-3
Glastonbury, i. 177
Glenconkeine, ii. 192, 2 17
Glendalough, school of, i. 75, 77;
often plundered by the Danes,
113, 121, 182
Gloucester, Earl of, i. 399, 405
Glynnes or Glens of Antrim, ii. 74
Goderich, Lord, iii. 132
Godred, King of Man, aids the Irish
against Strongbow, i. 23 I; his
daughter marries De Courcy, 269
Gall, Firbolg Chief, i. 126
Gordon, General, iii. 308, 3 I 2
Gormanstown, Lord, ii. 253, 264,
269; iii. 120
Gormfhlaeth, i. 136, 140-4 I, 143-4,
187
Goschen, Mr., opposed to Home
Rule, iii. 3 2 7, 333,335 ; becomes
Chancellor of the Exchequer, 350;
criticises Gladstone's second Home
Rule Bill, 410
Gospel of St. Finbar, i. 132
Gosselin, quoted, i. 24 I
Gossipred, i. 383, 420, 46 I
Goths, i. 107
Gottschalk, his doctrines on pre-
destination attacked by Scotus
Erigena, i. 178
Gough, Sir J åmes, ii. 222
Gowan, Hunter, iii. 62
Grace, Colonel, ii. 445
Grace's Annals, quoted, i. 357
Graces, The, ii. 228-3 I
Grafton, Duke of, attacks the
Catholics, ii. 482; and \Vood's
halfpence, 473, 538
Grand Juries, their duties, etc., iii.
43 8
Granuaile or Grace O'Malley, ii. I 13
Grattan, Henry, M. P. for Charle-
mont, compared with Flood, ii.
548; on commercial restraints,
550-5 I ; on legislative independ-
ence, 552-4; on the reforms of
1782, iii. 2 ; quarrels with Flood,
6; supports Orde's Propositions,
10; advocates commutation of
tithes, 14; on the Regency
question, 16; advocates parlia-
mentary reform and Catholic
Emancipation, 20 - 22, 30; his
views on the education of the
priests, 32; his Catholic Relief
Bill, 34 ; denounces Orange out-
rages, 36; urges Catholic Emanci-
pation, 4 I ; defeated in English
parliament, 43-4 ; withdraws and
refuses to stand for Dublin, 44 ;
explanation of Irish disaffection,
47 ; enraged at the bishops on the
Union question, 96, 104; return
to parliament and speech, 97-8 ;
duel with Corry, 102; view as to
the legality of the Union, 105;
first appearance in the Imperial
parliament, I 18; presents petitions
from the Catholics, I 19-20, 124;
estimate and death, 124; other-
,,,,ise mentioned, 479
Gray, Lord Leonard, Viceroy, re-
ceives the submission of Silken
Thomas, i. 478; and arrests his
five uncles, 479; fails to capture
the young Earl of Kildare, 481-
2 ; his operations against O'Brien
and O'Connor, 495, 502 ; his last
years, 503-4; otherwise mentioned,
52 5- 6 , 535
- Mr., Lord Mayor of Dublin,
iii. 28 4, 399
Great Councils, i. 292
Gregory, Lady, authoress, iii. 501
Grellin, St., i. 200-201
Grenville, iii. I 18
Grey, Sir Edward, iii. 462
- Sir John, iii. 251
- Lord Deputy (1477), i. 4 2 7
- Lord, premier, iii. 143-4, 15 1
- de \Vilton, Lord (Viceroy), ii.
97-102
Griffin, Gerald, novelist, iii. 483
Grouchy, General, iii. 39-40
INDEX
55 1
Guiscard, defended the Pope, i. 221
Gwynn, Stephen, M.P., author and
poet, iii. 500
Habeas Corpus Act extended to
Ireland (1781), ii. 552; sus-
pended, iii. 42, 25 1
Hackett, Bishop of Down, ii. 482
Halfdene, Danish Chief killed at
Dublin, i. 120-2 I
Halliday, on the posItIOn of
Gormfhlaeth, i. 143
Hamilco, Carthaginian navigator, i. 2
Hamilton, General Richard, makes
overtures to \Villiam IlL, ii. 395-
6 ; at Derry, 403 ; at the Boyne,
4 I 8-22
- Sir R., Irish Under-Secretary,
iii. 317,348
Hanmer, quoted, i. 185, 273
Harcourt, Sir \Villiam, introt:uces
the Crimes Bill, iii. 302; on the
Maamtrasna inquiry, 3 I 5; in
favour of Home Rule, 3 2 7, 335,
337; Chancellor of Exchequer,
404; position in 189 6 , 44 1
Hardiman, quoted, i. 385
Hardinge, Chief Secretary, iii. 145
Hardwicke, Lord (Earl Grey),
Viceroy, iii. 1 I I, 1 19
Harold Fairhair, King of Norway, i.
117- 1 8
Harrington, Sir Henry, ii. 15 1
- Sir John, ii. 203
_ M.P. for \Vestmeath, estab-
lishes the Plan of Campaign, iii.
34 8 ; exposes Mr. Balfour's mis-
statements, 3; 3; his efforts in
America, 374; his atti tude
towards Parnell, 381, 3 8 4
Harris's "Hibernica," i. 404; on
James 11., 4 21
Hart, Captain, and Sir Cahir
O'Doherty, ii. 210
Hartington, Marquis of, favours Co-
ercion, iii. 263; at the Spencer
55:?
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Banquet, 3 I 8; opposed to Home
Rule, 3 1 9, 333, 335,337,342;
his position in 1886, 345 ; moves
the rejection of the Home Rule
Bill in the House of Lords, 4 I 2
llarvey, Beuchamp Bagenal, iii. 64,
73
Healy, Dr., quoted, i. 27, 64, 75,
81 ; on Irish Students in France,
ii. 512; iii. 474,491
- T. M., M.P. for Wexford, his
amendments on Gladstone's Land
Bill, iii. 293; prosecuted and im-
prisoned, 304 ; returned for :i\Ion-
aghan, 306; ability, 31 1 ; returned
for South Derry, 323; supports
Gladstone's Home Rule Bill, 337;
defeated in the election of 1886,
344; yields to Parnell in the
Galway Election, 371; supports
Parnell, 374; then deserts him,
382 ; his safety imperilled, 383 ;
leader of Anti-Parnellites, 397-
400; quarrels with Dillon, 4 I 4' 1 5,
421 -43 ; attacked by the National
Convention, 447; approves of
\Vyndham's Land Bill, 454;
result of election of 1906, 462
Heber and Heremon, i. 16
Helcis, Bishop of Angoulême, I.
177
Hennessy, Sir John Pope, iÍ1. 383
Henry IL, interview with Diarmuid
l\Iac Murrogh, i. 2 18 ; jealousy of
Strongbow, 231-2; of Raymond
Ie Gros, 255; of Hugh De Lacy,
26 1,264; of S1. Laurence O'Toole,
3 2 3; obtains Bull from Adrian IV.,
236 ; and Letter from Alexander
ilL, 239; arrival and success in
Ireland, 245-8; obliged to leave
Ireland, 248; troubles in his ab-
sence, 250; treaty with Roderick
O'Connor, 254 ; names John, Lord
of Ireland, 262; his rebellious
sons, 285 ; convokes Irish Parlia- I
ment, 292; character, 243; death,
26 9; his Irish Parliament, 29 2 -4
Henry II I., grants Connaught to
Richard De Burgo, i. 298; con-
demns De Burgo, 305; dis-
pleased with De Londres, Arch-
bishop of Dublin, 331 ; wishes to
extend English law to the native
Irish, 343
- IV., appoints his son Viceroy,
i. 407
- V., asked by English Settlers
to place their condition before the
Pope, i. 4 I 5
- VL, makes peace between
Irish officials, i. 415
- VI!., disliked by Anglo-Irish,
i. 434-42; appoints Earl of
Kildare to "rule all Ireland," 444
- VII!., character, i. 45 I, 536;
summons Earl of Kildare to Ire-
land, 468 ; commends the loyalty
of Dublin, 474; enraged with the
Geraldines, 478-9; displeased with
Leonard Gray, 498; his knowledge
ofIreland,4 8 8-9; hispolicy, 490-9 I,
5 10-1 I ; "Defender of the Faith,"
5 20 ; his spiritual supremacy, 523,
533 ; despoils the monasteries and
churches, 527; the Reformation
under, ii. 1:2
Henshaw, Captain, ii. 120
Hepenstall, Lieutenant, "the walking
gallows," iii. 58
Herbert, Captain Francis, i. 495
Herenachs, their position in the
Church, i. 185-6
Heretics, burning of, i. 5 1 5 - 1 6
Herodotus cited, i. IO 5
Hervey, Lord, Bishop of Derry, iii.
4, 5
Hewson, Colonel, ii. 317-18, 328
Heytesbury, Lord (Viceroy), iii. 193
Hibernia, remarks on the name, i. 4
Hicks-Beach, Sir Michael, Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, iii. 3 14;
opposed to Home Rule, 332, 338 ;
Chief Secretary for Ireland, 345 ;
resigns, 35 I; his objections to
Home Rule, 409
High Crosses, i. 208-9
Hobblers, i. 386
Hoche, his expedition (1795), iii.
39; his death, 46
Home Rule, beginning of the move-
ment, iii. 257; its progress, 259,
262; the Home Rule League,
259 ; Butt's policy regarding the
movement, 262, 270 ; meets with
no favour in Parliament, 263. See
also tmder Gladstone, Parnell, etc.
Honoratus, St., and St. Patrick, i. 45
Honorius I. and the Pascal dispute,
i. 88
Hostages, importance of, i. 92
Hotham, Lord John, i. 345, 355
Houghing cattle, ii. 478-9
- soldiers, iii. 24
Houses in early times described, i.
38; in Ulster, ii. 215
Houston and the Loyal and Patriotic
Union, iii. 362
Howth (St. Lawrence), and the
supposed plot to take Dublin
Castle, ii. 207-8
I lugony (or Ugaine) the Great, i. 19
H umber's expedition, iii. 75-6
H ume, on the name Scotia, i. 23
Hunter, General, iii. 73
Hurley, Bishop of Emly, i. 525
Hurlings, play of, prohibited, i. 384
Huss, John, i. 514
Hussey Burgh, Prime Sergeant, ii.
55 1-2
- Dr., his efforts in connection
with the founding of Maynooth
College, iii. 33
Hutchinson, HeIy, ii. 547, 551 ; iii.
I I
Hyde, Dr. Douglas, on the Irish
Bards, ii. 508 j iii. 498, 500
By Nials, i. 156
I
DEX
553
Iar/Ùte, i. 25
Iceland, visited by Irish missionaries,
i. 78
Idols, i. 50,526,538
Idrone, seized by Art :\Iacl\1unogh,
i. 397
lema, name used by Strabo and
Claudian, i. 4
Illumination of MSS., i. 72; skill of
the Irish in the art, 195-7
Images, treatment of, by the Re-
formers, i. 526, 538
ImokiHy, the Seneschal of, ii. 97,
100 ; barony, 348
Inchigoill, church of, its date, i. 205
Inchiquin, Lord, defeats the Catholics
at Liscarroll, ii. 264; distress in
1\1 unster, 27 1-2; wastes Munster,
282; sacks Cashel, 293-4 ; joins
Onnond, 299; captures Drogheda
and Dundalk, 302; defeated at
Glascarrig, 3 I 2; proscribed by
the Puritans, 345 j otherwise
mentioned, 139, 3 19, 460
Informers, their character and con-
duct, iii. 5 1-4
Ingoldsby, Colonel, ii. 333
Inis-Elga, ancient name of Ireland,
i. 5
Illnfine, i. 25
Innisboffin, Island of, i. 89
Inniscaltra, church of, i. I 14 j burned,
154; restored by Brian Boru,
180, 206
Innisfail, origin of the name, i. 5
Innishowen, i. 316
Invincible Armada, referred to, ii.
Invincibles, The, iii. 299 [I 19
lona, Island and monastery of, de-
scribed, i. 64; life at, in the da) s of
St. Columba, 66-7 ; its abbots, 78;
monastery attacked and burned
by the Danes, 110
I reland, knowledge of, possessed by
ancient writers, i. 4 j ancient names
of, 4-5 ; earliest inhabitants, 6- 12
554
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Ireton, son-in-law to Cromwell, his
career in Ireland,ii. 306, 312,317,
hin, i. 4 [331-6
Irish abroad, the, iii. 506-529þassim
Irish Brigade, the, iii. 226
I rlandia, i. 5
Ivar of Limerick, son of Regnar
Lodbrog, i. 120, 130, 131, 133
Jackson, Rev. \Villiam, and Cockayne,
i ii. 38
J ames I. (1603-25 ), expec.tations
entertained at accession, ii. 196 ;
religious views, 200-20 I ; attacks
O'Neill and O'Donnell, 209;
advisers, 2 12; creates rotten
boroughs, 221-3; death, 226-7
- I I., his character, ii. 385 -6 ;
leaves England for France, 388 ;
arrives in Ireland, 404; holds a
Parliament, 405; at the Boyne,
4 I 6-22; returns to France, 423 ;
his death, 470
- IV. of Scotland, his intention
of invading Ireland, i. 459
Jamestown, Bishops' meeting at, ii.
3 2 7-8 ; captured by Sarsfield, 4 I 3
J arlath, St., founds the School of
Tuam, i. 75
Jerome, St., on the ancient Irish, i. 35
- of Prague, i. 5 14
Jervis, Admiral, defeats the Spanish
fleet, iii. 45
Jesuits, introduced into Ireland, ii.
14; their zeal and activity, 458,
523; to be banished under the
Emancipation Bill, iii. 138
Jocelin, i. 4 2 , 333
John, King of England, appointed
Lord of J reland, i. 262; first visit
to Ireland, 262-4; rebels against
his father, 285; second visit to
Ireland, 286; state of the country,
287-90; introduces English law,
29 I ; his government, 294
- XXI!., Pope, i. 344-5
John of Salisbury and Adrian IV.,
- the Dane, i. 234 [i. 236
Johnson, General, at New Ross, iii.
65-6 ; at Vinegar Hill, 70
Jones, General, ii. 29 2 -3, 295, 298-
3 00 , 302, 307-10, 313
- Paul, ii. 549
Josephus, i. 14
Joyce, Dr., quoted, i. 533; 11l. 491
J oyces, the, murdered, iii. 304
Judges, Irish, their independence
established, ii. 554
Justin, on the Scythians, i. 14
Kavanagh, Domhnall, i. 225, 396
- Gerald, i. 4 I 3
- Murtagh, i. 413
Kavanaghs, i. 499, 506; ii. 4, 27,.
62, 126, 146, 161, 298
Kearns, Father, iii. 72
Keating, quoted, i. 6, 7, 15, 16, 17,
21,114,115; hiswork,ii. 513-14
Keller, Canon, iii. 358
Kells, monastery of, i. 72, I 82 ;
synod of, 191 ; Book of, 197
Kelly, Colonel, Fenian leader, iii. 249
- Daniel, ii. 104
- Dr., and Adrian's Bull, i. 245
- John, of Kilfian, commands
the rebels at New Ross, iii. 65,
66; executed, 73
Kendal, Duchess of, ii. 535
Kenmare, Lord, iii. I 7, 18; favours
Union, 82
Keogh of Dublin, iii. 18, 20, 29
-- \Villiam, l\1.P. for Athlone,
his character, iii. :227-8; Irish
Solicitor-General, 229 ; Attorney-
General, 234; Judge, 249, 259
Keough, Captain, governor of \Yex-
ford, iii. 69, 73
Kerns, i. 35. 3 86
Kettler, Alice, executed for witch-
craft, i. 5 I 6
Kevin, St., i. 75, 77
Kickham, Charles, member of Fenian
Society, iii. 245, 247; arrested,
248; opposed to New Departure,
276, 277
Kildare, church and school of, 1.
57, 62 ; plundered, I 13
- Dowager Countess, i. 453
- Earls of, i. 368,369, 372,374,
378,403,408,422,424,426,427,
428,434-55,457-70,480-83; ii.
Kilian, St., i. 83 [102
Kilkenny, Richard II. at, i. 399-403;
held by Ormond against Art Mac-
Murrogh, 407; progress of Refor-
mati on at, 5 29; election,iii. 188,3 8 3
- Articles of, ii. 338-9
-- Confederation of, ii. 257-75
- Statute of, i. 379-87; ii. 223
Killaloe, Castle of, i. 306
- church of, i. 176, 180, 206
Kilmacduagh, church of, i. 205
Kilmainham, Prior of, i. 409, 4 I 0,
4 2 7, 4 28 , 43 2 , 435, 43 8
- Treaty of, iii. 298
Kilsandle, Castle of, i. 270
Kilwarden, Lord, iii. I 14
Kincora, palace of, i. 136, 139, 154,
157, 16 4
King, Archbishop of Dublin, ii. 483,
King's County, ii. 25 [4 8 5
Kings, early Irish, position, power,
etc., i. 26; quarrels and disputes, 92
Kinsale, favoured the pretender
Simnel, i. 437 ; siege and battle of,
ii. 175-9; taken by Churchill, 43 2
Kirke, General, ii. 402-3,427,439-40
Knighthood, Order of, in England,
i. 222
Knockmoy, Abbey of,i. 284; spoiled,
Knox, George, iii. 87 [332
- M.P. for Derry, iii. 43 2 , 437
Kyan, Edmond, at battle of Ark-
low, iii. 68
Labouchere, Mr., iii. 35 I, 360
Lacy, Peter, Austrian Field-Marshal,
ii. 505
INDEX
555
Lacy, Peter, Russian Field-Marshal,
ii. 505
- Pierce, attacks the Undertakers
in Munster, ii. 146; in arms
against Carew, 167 ; who refuses
to pardon him, 170; killed, 172
Ladies' Land League, iii. 296, 3 0 4
Laeghaire (Ardri), i. 48-9; embraces
the new faith, 50; harasses the
Britons, 54 ; his death, 55
Lake, General, his proceedings in
Ulster, iii. 42-3; succeeds Aber-
cromby, 57 ; outrages committed
by his troops, 57; at Vinegar
Hill, 70; his acts of cruelty, 73
Lally-Tollendal, Count, at Fontenoy,
ii. 502 ; his death, 506
Lalor, Henry, ii. 81
- James Fintan, iii. 244
- Peter, iii. 526
Lambert, Sir Oliver, ii. 189
Lancaster, Duke of, i. 408-9
Land Bills ( 1 829-34-36-37), rejected,
iii. 216; Napier's, 228; for [855-
58-60, 235; Gladstone's ( 18 7 2 ),
256, 263,293-4; Land Purchase
Bill, 331, 346; Balfour's, 354,4 1 9
Land Conference (1902), iii. 45 1-2
Land League, iii. 273
Landlords, their oppressive conduct,
iii. 212, 214-16, 218-20, 237,
239-4 2 , 45 0
Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury,
i. 1 5 5, 1 8 3
Language, Irish, iii. 480, 496-501
Lanier, Sir John, ii. 4 2 9, 439
Lanigan, quoted, i. 62, 64, 90, 180,
184, 186; as an historian, iii. 481
Lateran Council, Fifth (15 12), i. 5 [9
Lauzun, Count, French General at
the Boyne, ii. 4 I 7 -23; opinion of
the fortifications of Limerick, 4 2 5 ;
leaves Limerick for Galway, 426 ;
his return to France, 433-4
Lay Abbots, i. 176, 185
Leap Castle, i. 453
55 6
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Leath Chuin and Leath Mhogha, i.
126, 134
Lecky, cited, iii. 32, 8 I ; estimate
of, as an historian, 49 I
Ledwich, cited, i. 41, 84, 173, 188
Leicester, Earl of, Elizabeth's
favourite, ii. 120
- Earl of, Irish Viceroy, ii. 266
Leinster, Duke of, ii. 546, 550
- :\Iarquis of (Thomas Stukely),
ii. 90-9 I
- province of, troubles from the
Boru tribute, i. 19, 100, 105; sub-
ject to Brian Boru, 134; conquered
by Roderick O'Connor, 2 18 ; pos-
sessed by Strongbow, 231 ; ruled
by Art MacMurrogh, 409; entirely
subject to England, 500
Leix, Plantation, ii. 6, 8, 25, 75
Leslie, Earl of Leven, ii. 239, 261
" Letter from Coventry," ii. 39 I
Levellers, ii. 305
Lever, Charles, novelist, iii. 488
Leverus, Bishop of Kildare, i. 480-
83
Levison, Admiral, ii. 175-6
Lewins, his negotiations for foreign
aid, iii. 44- 5
Ley, Sir James, ii. 2 I 7
Leyburne, Father, negotiates with
Confederate Catholics, ii. 260,292
Liafail, or Stone of Destiny, its
history, i. 5
Lichfield House Compact, iii. 15-1-;
its results, 157; dissolved, 163-4
Limerick, city of, Danes established
at, i. I I I, 122; captured by
Mahon of Thomond, 131; by
Raymond Ie Gros, 253-6; by
O'Brien of Thomond, 389, 430;
by Earl of Kildare, 452 ; by Lord
Leonard Gray, 496; besieged by
Bruce, 354; paid Black Rent to
O'Brien of Ara, 485 ; Reformers'
efforts at, 528; captured by Con-
federate Catholics, ii. 263; rejoic-
ings at, for the victory of Benburb,
287; refuses to admit Ormond,
326 ; siege and capture by Ireton.
331-5 ; besieged by \Villiam 111.,
4 2 5-3 I; besieged by Ginkle, 4 52-3
Limerick, Treaty of, ii. 453-4, 46 1-6
Lincoln, Earl of, i. 435
Lindisfarne, monastery and diocese
of, i. 79, 204
Linen, exportation of, forbidden, ii.
480; Act for encouraging the
manufacture of, 534; in Ulster,
iii. 47 8 , 503
Lingard, cited, i. 4, 399, 433
Lis, the flaith's house, i. 39
Lismore, school and monastery of, i.
60, 74; plundered by Danes, I I I
Littleton, Chief Secretary, iii. 149-5 I
Liverpool, Lord, iii. 123, 131
Livinius, St., i. 84
Lixnawe, Lord, ii. 97, 170, 183
Lloyd, Clifford, resident magistrate,
iii. 294
- Colonel, ii. 4 I 3
Lloyd-George, iii. 463
Loch Cé, fortress of, captured, i. 303
Loftus, Archbishop of Dublin, ii.
102, II 6, 157, 458
- General, iii. 66-7, 70
Lollards, i. 402, 406, 5 13
Londonderry, Lord, Lord- Lieuten-
ant, iii. 326, 346
Long, \Valter, Chief Secretary, iii.
461
Lorraine, Duke of, aids the Con-
federate Catholics, ii. 329-3 I
Lough Gur, i. 496
Loughrea Commissioners, ii. 358
National Assembly at, ii. 328
Louis XIV., warned James II. of
\Villiam's designs, ii. 404-5
- XV., at Fontenoy, Ii. 500-502
- XVII I., presents a flag to the
Irish Brigade, ii. 504
Louvain, Irish Colleges at, ii. 5 I I,
5 I 8- I 9
Louvois, French \Var l\Iinister, ii. 4 I 7
Lovel, Lord, i. 435
Lover, Samuel, noyelist, iii. 488
Lowther, James, Chief Secretary,
iii. 274, 278
Luby, Thomas Clarke, iii. 245-6,
248
Lucas, Dr., M.P., on legislative
rights, ii. 544
- Frederick, joins the Repeal
Association, iii. 183; editor of
the Tablet, 223; returned for
Meath, 224; goes to Rome, 23 2 ;
his death, 233
Lucy, Sir Anthony, i. 370
Ludlow, Edmond, comes with Crom-
well to Ireland, ii. 306; captures
Galway, 337 - 8; opposes the
Restoration, 363
Lughaidh, Ardri, i. 93
Lundy, Colonel, Governor of Derry,
ii. 394-7
Lusk Round Tower, i. 208
Luther, Martin, i. 5 17
Luttrel, Henry, ii. 426,435, 448,453
Luxeuil, monastery of, i. 80, 8 I
Lynch, John, referred to, i. 193;
his opinion as to the authenticity
of Adrian's Bull, 239, 245; con-
futes Cambrensis, ii. 5 15-16
Maamtrasna murders, iii. 3 0 9, 3 I 5
MacAlpine, Kenneth, of Scotland,
i. 340
MacArt, Brian, ii. 192
Macartens, ii. I I
Mac Baron, Cormac, ii. 2 I I
MacBriody (O'Brien's poet), ii. [52
M'Cabe, Cardinal, Archbishop of
Dublin, iii. 296, 325
MacC
rten, Bishop of Clo&]1er, i. 5 1
- 1. 419
MacCarthy of Carbry, i. 456, 500;
ii 6 I
- Cormac, i. 207 ; ii. 185-6
- Donal, ii. 158
INDEX
557
MacCarthy, Diarmuid, King of
Desmond, i. 246, 25 I, 277, 3 06 -7
- Lady Eleanor, i. 48 I
- Florence, ii. 158, 16 7- 8 , 173
- Justin, M.P., iii. 284; inter-
view with Lord Carnaryon, 3 I 7 ;
returned (1886) for Derry, 344;
adheres to Parnell, 374; Glad-
stone's letter, 376-7; advice to
Parnell regarding his manifesto,
380; elected chainnan of Irish
Party, 383; Boulognenegotiations,
385-6; promised a Heme Rule Bill
by Gladstone, 404; on effects of
disunion, 42 I; retires (1896)
from the chairmanship, 4 2 6
- More, ii. 9, 10, 4 8 , 59
MacCarthys, i. [64, 286, 3 I 2, 3 I 4,
430,452; ii. 149, 18;-6
MacCoghlan, i. 3 I 7
l\IacCoghlins, ii. 4, 27-8
MacCracken, rebel leader, iii. 7 I
l\IacCuill, i. 52
l\IacDennot, Cathal, i. 281
MacDermotts, the, of l\Ioylurg, i.
281,284,286,351,361,391,
446, 466; ii. [I, 29, 117, 13 2 ,
138,152,155,156,189
MacDevitts, ii. 17 I, 209- I 0
MacDonnell, Colkitto, ii. 294
- Sir Antony, appointment as
U nder- Secretary, iii. 460; de-
nounced by Orangemen, 460-6 I,
474
- Randall\JacSorley, ii. 190,207
- Sorley Boy, ii. 39, 49, 66-8, 7 2
MacDonnells, ii. 8, 34, 35, 49, 12 3,
143, 19 0 , 20 7, 497
- of Antrim, i. 452
MacDunleavy,i. 253,266-7,268,27 0
MacEvilly, Dr., iii. 309
Mac Firbis, i. 5 I 7 ; ii. 5 2 5
MacGeraghtyofRoscommon, i. 297-8
MacGillemory, Reginald, i. 246
l\1acGuire of Fermanagh, wrote the
Allnals of Ulster, i. 5 [ 7
55 8
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Macha, the goddess, i. 19, 70
- wife of Cimbaeth, i. 19
MacHale, Dr., Archbishop of Tuam,
estimate of, iii. 152-3; views on
Public Relief, 156; his advice to
O'Connell, 163, 170; opinion of
Queen's Colleges, 186; describes
people of Killala during famine
of 183 I, 191; on Ecclesiastical
Titles Bill, 226; relations with Dr.
Cullen, 232; attacks Land League,
27 8 -9; death, 295 ; views on the
Catholic University, 492-3
Mackay, Captain, iii. 250
- General, at siege of Athlone,
ii. 442-5 ; at Aughrim 448-5 I
MacLiag, quoted, i. 122, 133, 140,
180; his writings, 183
MacMahon, Brian, betrays O'Neill
and O'Donnell, ii. 178
- Colonel, ii. 255
- Heber, Bishop of Clog her, ii.
- Hugh Roe, ii. 119 [323-5
- Manus, ii. 347
Mac:\lahons, the, i. 401, 419, 421,
445, 45 I, 5 01 ; ii. 5, 9, 107,
119-20,123-4,126,129-30,172,
2.B, 244, 347
Mac:\lannus, Terence Bellew, iii. 247
MacMurrogh, Art, the elder, i. 397-8
- Art, i. 398-4 I I
- Diarmuid, King of Leinster,
early career and character, i. 2 I 5 ;
conduct towards the Abbess of
Kildare and Dervorgille, 2 I 6-17 ;
escapes to England and seeks aid
from Henry II., 2 I 8-1 9; Anglo-
Normans, 220-22; first arrival of
them under Fitzstephen, 223;
Wexford captured, 223; Ossory
attacked and laid waste, 224-6;
negotiates with Roderick O'Con-
nor, 227; Strongbow arrives and
captures Waterford, 166, 229;
fall of Dublin and death of Diar-
muid, 230; possessions bequeathed
to his daughter Eva and Strong-
bow, 396
Macl\Iurrogh, Domhnall Kavanagh,
i. 396
- Domhnall1IacArt, i. 37 0 , 397
- Domhnall Reveagh, i. 4 I 3
- Donogh, i. 4 I 3
-- Eya, i. 229
- l\1alachy. i. 405
- Maurice, i. 397
lac:\Iurroghs, the, i. 316, 381, 39 6 ,
4 88 , 495, 5 00 , 5 0 5-6; ii. 62
MacNamara, l\Iajor, iii. 133
l\IacNamaras, the, i. 142, 366, 3 8 9,
445, 5 0 7
l\1acNevin, Dr., joins the United
Irishmen, iii. 37; negotiates for
foreign aid, 44-5, 53, 54, 74
MacNight, Dr., iii. 222
1JacPherson, on Ossian, i. 20
l\-IacQuillans, i. 510; ii. I I, 34
11acRannells, i. 364, 393,430; ii. 29
MacRory, Owny, ii. 146, 15 0
MacSheehys, ii. 56
MacSorley, Randal, ii. 190
MacSweenys, i. 460; ii. 1 16, 153,
164, 189
MacTurkill, Hasculf, last Danish
ruler of Dublin, i. 2 I 7 ; his death,
234-5
MacWilliam Burkes, ii. I I, 79, 136,
13 8 , 14 2 , I 52-3. See De Burgos
Madden, D.O., author, iii. 487
Maelmorra, King of Leinster, at
Kincora, i. 125, 135, 140-41;
falls at Clontarf, 146
Maelmura, poet, i. 177
Maelnambo, Diarmuid, i. 154
Maelruan, St., i. 75
Maeve, Queen of Connaught, i. 70
Magee, Q'Arcy, quoted, i. 402, 403 ;
iii. 486
Magennis of Iveagh, i. 415-16, 4 I 9,
44 1 ,5 01 ,5 0 7; ii. 5,9, I I, 73,107,
123
- Sir Conn, ii. 245
Mageoghegan, i. 4 0 3,4 20 , 409,499-
500; ii. 107
- the historian, i. 15 ; ii. 526
- Richard, ii. 18 3- 5
l\Iagh-Adhair, i. 134
l\Iagillapatrick of Ossory, i. 151,
160, 224, 24 6 , 45 8 , 49 6 , 499,
5 00 , 5 06 , 53 0
Magnus, King of Norway, i. 159
Magraiden, Augustin, i. 5 17
Maguire, the Annalist, i. 5 I 7
- Connor Roe, ii. 220, 234
- John Francis, iii. 224,235,242
- Lord, ii. 245, 345- 6
Maguires, ii. 31, 120, 126-7, 129-
30, 134, 13
143, 159, 20 4,
207-8, 2 I 2, 2 I 3, 220, 243
Mahaffy, Dr., iii. 499
Mahon, King of Munster, i. 128;
his proceedings against the Danes,
129-3 I ; murdered, 132
Mahony,CountofCastile,ii. 496-7,505
Malachy I., King of Meath, defeats
Turgesius and Danes, i. I I 5- I 6
- I I., his successful career, i.
123- 5 ; defeats Brian Boru, 134,
136; becomes reconciled, 137;
defeated, 14 I, 142; at Clontarf,
146; becomes Ardri, I 5 I ; defeats
the Danes and burns Dublin, I 52 ;
his death, I 52 ; his wives, 187
- St., i. 74; his career, 184-90
Malbie, " Colonel of Connaught," ii.
78-9, 94, 106
Malmesbury, Lord, iii. 4 I, 45
Malone, Rev. 5., i. 238
Manchester Martyrs, iii. 249-50
Mandeville, John, iii. 360
l\Iandevilles, the, i. 362
Mangan, poet, iii. 486
Manners, Lord Chancellor, iii. I 19
Mant, quoted, i. 522
Mantle, the Irish, i. 384
Marcellus of St. Gall, i. 177
Marianus Scotus of Fulda, i. 182
- of Ratisbon, i. 182
INDEX
559
Markham, Sir Griffin, ii. 154, 15 6
Marlborough, Duchess of, iii. 28 I
Marlborough's Chronicle, i. 408
Marriages, irregular in the Irish
Church, i. 186-7, 320; between
Catholics and Protestants, ii. 47 I,
473; legalised, iii. 18
Marshall, Richard, i. 310-1 I
- William, i. 271, 296, 300-301
Martin, St., Bishop of Tours, i. 42-4
Marven, Captain, ii. 242, 246
Mary,Queen(1553- 8 ),reign,ii.18-3 0
- wife of James I I., assists Irish
exiles, ii. 498-9
Mass, prescribed, ii. 12, 13, 15;
prohibited by Elizabeth, 59, 86;
by Cromwell, 3 I 6, 460; publicly
allowed by James 11.,387,390,484
Massacre of 1641, ii. 246
Massingham, ii. 5 1 5
Massy, General, iii. 249
Matthew, Father, temperance ad-
vocate, iii. 176
- Paris, and Irish Parliaments, i.
293
Maumont, General, ii. 397, 4 00
l\1axwell,Dr., Rector of Tynan, ii. 248
- Colonel, iii. 63
- General, i1. 435, 443- 5,
493
May, Archbishop of Armagh (Vice-
roy), i. 422
Mayart, Sergeant, ii. 530
Maynooth, Castle of, i. 306, 476-7
- College, ii. 521 ; founding of,
iii. 33; grant increased, 185;
stopped, 254; tercentenary of,
495- 6
Mayo, school and dioceseof,i. 76,5 I 7
Meagher, Thomas Francis, iii. 199,
2 10, 2 I I
Meath, partitioned by Turlogh
O'Connor, i. 164; granted to
Hugh de Lacy, 258-9; paid
Black Rent to O'Connor of
Offaly, 485
5 60
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Meehan, Father, ii. 5 18
Ielbourne, Lord, iii. 151, 164
l\Iellifont, monastery of, i. 19 1 , 336,
33 8
Mendicant Orders, i. 516
Merlin's prophecy, i. 267
Metal work, ancient Irish, i. 38, 199
1\1 igdonians, the, i. 6
MiIchu and St. Patrick, i. 43, 48
1\1ilesians, story of the, i. 15; re-
marks on, 16- 17 ; their kings, 18
Milesius, i. 14, 16, 17
1\1ills in ancient Ireland, i. 39
Milner, Dr., iii. 120
Mining, in early times, i. 38; coal
and iron, iii. 502-3
Mitchel, John, historian, 1lI. 198,
2 10; banished, 2 I I ; mentioned,
4 86
Mitchelstown, disturbance at, iii. 356
Mochua, St., i. 57
Moctha, St., i. 57
Molaise, St., and St. Columba, i.
63; shrine of, 200
Moling, St., Bishop of Ferns, i. 105
1\1011oy, King of Desmond, i. 130-32;
becomes King of
Iunster, but is
defeated and slain, 133
Molyneux and Irish Parliaments, i.
293
- \ViIliam, :\I.P., ii. 469, 531-2
Monaghan, siege of, ii. 130-3 I
Monasterboice, Cross of, described,
i.208
Monasteries, in early times, i. 69,
71-4, 76, 171, 174; constantly
plundered by the Danes, I 14,
173-4; attacked and suppressed
by Henry VIIL, 493, 527; their
merits, 537 ; ii. 22
Monasticism, rise of, i. 57- 8
Monk, General, ii. 27 1,298, 302, 3 I I
Monks, i. 58, 68-9, 7 6 , 174, 183
Monroe, General, captures N ewry,
ii. 259; inactivity of, 260-61;
captures Belfast, 272; strong in
Ulster, 277,282-3; his plans, 284;
defeated at Benburb, 287 ; sent a
prisoner to London, 298 ; returns
to Ireland, 301; defeated by Coote
at Lisburn, 3 15; refuses to join
l\IacMahon, 323; otherwise men-
tioned, 289, 292, 295
Monroe, George, ii. 284, 286
Montalembert, quoted, i. 80
Montgomery, Bishop of Derry, ii.
20 4-5,210
-Lord, ii.259-6I,272, 287, 301,
Mooney, Father, ii. 5 18- I 9 [3 I 5
:Moonlighters, iii. 296, 346, 347
Moore, Sir Garrett, ii. 122, 193,
208, 272
- George Henry, :\I.P., iii. 224,
233-4, 235, 24 2
- M.P., iii. 467
- Roger, ii. 237, 244, 253-60
- Thomas, poet, iii. 484
Moran, Cardinal, quoted, i. 41, 45 ;
iii. 49 I
- Dr., Archbishop of Sydney, i.
- journalist, iii. 504 [326
;\1 organ, Lady, authoress, iii. 483
Moriarty, ii. 104
Morley, John, on Cromwell's hypo-
crisy, ii. 305; advocates Home
Rule, iii. 320; Chief Secretary
for Ireland (I 886), 328; supports
Gladstone, 335, 337; disapproves
of Plan of Campaign, 349; visits
Ireland, 360; advice to Parnell,
377; denies statements in Par-
nell's manifesto, 381 ; :\'I. P. for N ew-
castle(r 892), 403; Chief Secretary
for Ireland, 404; supports Glad-
stone's Home Rule Bill, 410;
and 1\lr. Redmond's amendment
(1902), 449; in office again, 463
Morpeth, Lord, Chief Secretary, iii.
155,161,162
Morris, Sir John (Viceroy), i. 375
- Rev. \V. B., quoted, i. 44, 46
Mortimer, Roger, the elder, i.349, 35 5
Mortimer, Roger, the younger, i.
394, 399, 4 02 -3
l\Ioryson, Fynes, ii. 197, 525
Mosheim, quoted, i. 179
Mount-Alexander, Lord, ii. 393
l\Iountcashel, Lord, ii. 405, 407-8,
4 I 8, 494, 498-9
Mountgarret, son-in-law of the Earl
of Tyrone, ii. 149, 20 7, 254, 258,
265, 267-8, 287-8, 3 82
Mountjoy, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 89,
160-63; iii. 66
- who lived in the reign of James
I I., ii. 394, 4 0 5
Mountmaurice, Hervey de, i. 223,
228,234,25 1
Mountmorris, Lord, ii. 232
Mowbray, Earl of Nottingham, 1.
399-4 00
Moylan, Dr., Bishop of Cork, favours
Union, iii. 94-5
Moylena, synod of, i. 88
Moyry Pass, ii. 163,172
M uirchertach of the Leather Cloaks,
i. 123, 187
Mulgrave, Lord (Viceroy), iii. 155
l\1ullaghmast, massacre of, ii. 8 1-2
Municipal Reform Bill, iii. I 55
Munster, state of, i. 306, 366; laid
waste, ii. 100- 10 I j planted, 108-
10; condition of, 146-9, 166-76
Murphy, Father John, heads rebellion
in Wexford, iii. 62; rebel successes
and defeats, 63-64 ; defeated, 68 ;
captured and hanged, 72
- Father l\1ichael, killed at
Arklow, iii. 68
Murray, Captain, ii. 397
Music, cultivated in early times, I.
3 6 - 8 ; Irish skill in, 193- 5
Muskerry, i. 130
- Lord, captures Limerick, ii.
263; a relation of Ormond, 267 ;
defeats English at Kilworth, 271 ;
captures Bunratty, 283; negotiates
a peace with Onnond, 287-8; com-
VOL. III
INDEX
5 61
plains of Ormond's treachery, 292 ;
superseded by Taafe, 293; a
Commissioner of Trust, 299; ac-
quitted by the Cromwellian High
Court of Justice, 346
Nagle, Attorney-General, ii. 39 1,4 I 4
Names, ancient, of Ireland, i. 4, 5
Nangle, Adam, i. 37 0 , 397
- Bishop of Clonfert, i. 5 2 5, 534
Nantwich, Irish Catholics defeated
at, by Fairfax, ii. 273
Napier, Attorney-General, his Land
Bill, iii. 228
Nation, The (newspaper), established,
iii. 174; its ability and influence,
174,179,186
National Convention, held at Dublin
(1891), iii. 4
- Federation, iii. 389
- Guards, iii. 20
- Land League, founded by
Davitt, iii. 280; advocated by
Parnell, 281-3; meetings, 285-7;
boycotting, 287; progress of, in
Great Britain and America, 288 ;
defended as constitutional by
Parnell, 289; Forster's Coercion
Bill, 290; condemned by Dr.
MacHale, 278-9
- League, iii. 303; proclaimed,
355, 3 8 9
- Library, iii. 184
Navigation Laws, iii. 9, II, 200
N eagh, Lough, i. 6
Needham, General, at battle of Ark-
low, iii. 68; at Vinegar Hill, 70
Neilson, Samuel, iii. 27, 29; estab-
lishes the Northern Star, 29; his
connection with 'Volfe Tone, 39
N emedians, their legendary history,
etc., i. 6-9
Nemthur, a supposed birth-place of
St. Patrick, i. 42
Nennius, i. 52 [i. 256
Nesta and the first N orman invaders,
106
5 62
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Netterville, ii. 83-4
New Grange, sepulchral monument
of, i. I I
::-\ cwman, Cardinal, iii. 298; Rector
of the Catholic University, 49 2 -3
ew Ross, i. 344, 399; battlp. of,
iii. 65-6
Xiall, Glundubh (Ardri), i. 121-2
- of the Nine Hostages, reign
and exploits, i. 21-2; expedition
into Britain, carries offSt. Patrick,
43; assassinated in Gaul, 48
- son of Feniursa, legendary
history of, i. 14- 1 5
)J igellus, i. 185
Ninian, St., i. 78
oendrum, school of, i. 57
Nominees, condition of, under
Charles I I., ii. 367
Norbury, Lord, murder of, iii. 161
Norfolk, Duke of, i. 464, 479; ii. 12
N onnans, history sketched, i. 220- 2 3 ;
the Church under their rule, 243 ;
national characteristics, 3 2 3;
clergy, 32..J.-31; lords, 331-3; out
of sympathy with Irish, 333; favour
Cistercian Order, 335-9
N orthmen. See Danes
Norris, Captain, ii. 68, 7 2
- Sir John, ii. 106, 13 1 , 133,
135- 8
- Sir Thomas, ii. 109, 131, 14 6 ,
15 1
N orthumbria, converted by Irish
monks, i. 79
N osegelt, i. 1 I 5
Nottingham, Robert of, Mayor of
Dublin, i. 353-4
Nugent, General, iii. 71
- John, ii. 169
- Judge, ii. 39 1
Nuns, i. 61-2
Oakboys, their proceedings, ii. 543
Oath of Abjuration, ii. 460,47 I, 54 0
- of Allegiance, ii. 453, 4 6 3,4 8 7
Oath of Supremacy, ii. 14, 223-4
O'Boyle, i. 460
O'Brien of Ara, i. 485 ; ii. 10, 6 I
- Bishop of Emly, put to death,
- Brian, i. 365-6 [ii. 335
- Brian Roe, i. 307
- Connor, i. 164, 166, 307
- Diarmuid, i. 163
- Domhnall (died 1194), i. 227,
233-4,246,252,255,263,278-80
- Donogh (son of Brian Boru),
i. 144, 149-54
- Donogh Carbry, i. 298, 300,
303, 3 06
- Donogh (Ossory's son-in-law),
i. 477, 49 6 -7, 5 0 7
_ Donogh, executed by Perrott, ii.
_ Mahon, ii. 1 12 [106
- Manus, ii. 429
_ ::\laurice (Earl of Thomond),
i. 477, 480-82, 494- 8 , 5 02 , 5 06 -7,
5 II, 53 1 - 2
_ Murrogh (son of Brian Boru),
i. 14 I, 145- 6 , 149
- Murtagh (King of Munster),
i. 155, 157- 60 , 162-3
- Murtagh, i. 365-6
- Peter, Lord Chief-Justice, 111.
357
_ Smith, 1\'1. P. for Clare, resigns
Commission of the Peace, iii. 178 ;
motion in Parliament refused, 179;
efforts in fa \" our of Repeal, 183; sets
up I rish Confederation, 199; at-
tempted insurrection and failure,
2 10- 1 I; assails Phænix Society,
- Tadhg, i. 430 [245
_ Tadhg (son of Brian Boru), i.
149,153, 16 7
- Turlogh (grandson of Brian
Bom), i. 149, 154-5
- Turlogh (King of Thomond),
i. 166-7
- William, edits United Ireland,
iii. 303; prosecuted, 305; re-
turned M.P. for Mallow, 3 06 ;
power as a speaker, 3 I I ; returned
for South Tyrone, 323; publishes
Errington's letter to Lord Gran-
ville, 324; supports Gladstone's
Home Rule Bill, 337 ; defeated in
election of 1886, 344; adyocates
"Plan of Campaign," 348 - 9 ;
imprisoned, 360; escapes to
America, 374; deserts Parnell,
379; interviews with Parnell at
Boulogne, 385-6; declares against
Parnell, 390; at CastIebar Conven-
tion, 424-5 ; opposition to Healy,
446-7 ; censure of Coercion Act,
448; supports Wyndham's Land
Act, 45.+, 457 ; mentioned, 462
O'Briens, the, of Thomond, i. 246,
307,312,315,389,430,452,
459, 4 8 5, 49 1 -92; ii. 10, 27-8,
62, 72, 76-7, 106
- Bridge, i. 497-8, 502
O'Byrne, Felim, ii. 166; spoliation
of, 230, 235
- Fiach
facHugh, troublesome
in County Dublin, ii. 75 ; submits,
8 I ; rebels and defeats Lord Grey,
97-8; again submits, 100; aids
Hugh O'Donnell to escape, 121 ;
becomes troublesome, 137; his
wife burned and himself slain, I 37 ;
otherwise mentioned, 105, 107, 126
- Murrogh, i. 218
O'Byrnes, the, i. 288, 350, 366,
37 0 ,3 81 , 4 0 7,4 16 ,49 6 , 5 0 5- 6 ;
ii. 10,75,151,161,266,298
O'Cahan, Donall, ii. 2 I I
- :\1ajor-General, ii. 325
- Rory, ii. 164, 202, 205
O'Cahans, the, ii. 44, 107, 123,
19 0 , 202-3,205, 21 I, 216
O'Caharney, i. 26-+
O'Callaghan, J. c., author, iii. 486
O'Cannannan, Rory, i. 308
O'Carrolls, the, of Ely, i. 153, 176,
366,370,376,407,452- 5 3,45 6 ,45 8 ,
464,467,497-500,502; ii.4,26,80
INDEX
5 6 3
O'Carrolls, the, of Oriel, i. 169, 246,
253, 26 9, 270
O'Clery (annalist), ii. 5 19-2 I
- (poet), ii. 142-3
O'Coigley, iii. 56
O'Coirin, Bishop of Killaloe, i. 525
O'Connell, Daniel, opposes Union
in first public speech, iii. 96 ; early
career, 12 1-2; opposes the Veto,
124; founds Catholic Association
(1823), 129 ; which is suppressed
by Government, 130; new Catholic
Association, 130 - 3 I ; Clare Elec-
tion, 133-6; Catholic Relief Bill
passed and Catholic Association
suppressed, 138; takes seat as
member for Clare, 139; power and
popularity, 140-42; O'Connell's
Rent, 142; advocates repeal of
Union, 143, 16 5 - 9; political
changes of I 830, 143; relations
with Anglesey, 144- 5; various
associations established and sup-
pressed, I 45, I 67 ; arrested and
tried, 145-6; supports \Vhigs in
Parliament, 146; tithe war, 147;
opposes Coercion Act of Stanley,
148 ; his difficult position, 153 ; the
Lichfield House Compact, 154;
Tithe Bill, Municipal Reform,
and Poor Law Acts, passed, 155,
157 ; founds the Loyal National
Repeal Association, I 7 I; meets
with opposition, 17 1-2; Davis,
Dillon, and Duffy, 172-4; Lord
Mayor of Dublin, 174; advocates
Repeal, 175; progress of the move-
ment, I 75-6; Clontarf meeting,
180; prosecuted for conspiracy,
fined and imprisoned, 180 - 8 I ;
judgment reversed, 182; Concilia-
tion Hall, 183; quarrels with
Young Irelanders, 184-6; col1apse
of Repeal Association, I 88 ; pro-
posals regarding the famine, 192;
supports the Government, 197;
5 6 4
HISTORY OF IRELAND
closing years, 204-5; estimate and
death, 206-7; attitude towards
literature, 487-8
O'Connell, John, iii. 184, 230
O'Connolly, Government informer
in 164 I, ii. 245
O'Connor, Arthur, joins the United
Irishmen, iii. 37 ; imprisoned, 43;
informed against by his brother,
53; sent to France for aid, 55 ;
arrested, tried, and acquitted, 56 ;
a French General, 74
- Arthur, M.P., iii. 3 I I, 418
- Brian, i. 499; ii. 2, 3, 5, 23, 24
- Cahir, i. 499
- Cathal, i. 165
- Cathal Carragh, i. 279-82
- Cathal Crovderg, i. 279-85,
286, 290
- Dr. Charles, his OpInIOn on
the Round Towers, i. 21 I ; ii. 526
- Connor, i. 164
- Connor Mainmoy, 1. 275-8,
- Charles, iii. 17 [ 279
- Dermott, ii. 168-9
- Domhnall, i. 162
- Don, the, iii. 435
- Felim (died 1265), i. 301-306,
3 12 - 1 3
- Felim (died 1316), i. 348-52
- Fergus, M.P., iii. 168
- Hugh (son of Crovderg), i.
29 6 -3 01
- Hugh (son of Felim), i. 313
- :\Ianus, i. 299, 3 0 3, 3 I 3
- :\1orrogh, i. 275-6
- Roderick (Ardri), plunders
Tirowen and Munster, i. 168; aids
O'Rorke against Diarmuid, 2 I 7-
18; negotiates with MacMurrogh,
i. 226-7; dealings with Strongbow,
230-33; submission to Henry 11.,
246; enters:\leathand expels Eng-
lish colonists, 253, 259; position
after Treaty of Windsor, 274; quar-
rels with sons and death, 278-80
O'Connor, Roe, i. 39 2 , 447- 8 , 459
- Rory, i. 153, 155, 157, 162
- Rory, cousin of Felim, i. 349,
35 I, 3 60
- T. P., elected M.P. for Galway
city, iii. 284; ability as a speaker,
3 I I ; supports Gladstone's Home
Rule Bill, 337; returned for Liver-
pool, 371; in America, 374; deserts
Parnell, 379
- Turlogh, the Great, i. I 5 I -160,
202, 2 I 7
- Turlogh, i. 36 I, 364
- Turlogh O'Connor Don, i. 392-
93, 447
- (author), cited, i. 282
O'Connors, the, of Connaught, i.
274-84,296-306,312-13,348-52,
360-65, 3 8 I, 3 8 9-94, 4 2 9, 446;
ii. II, 12, 29, 132, 138, 152,
15 6 , [89
- the, ofOffaly, i. 317,370,409,
413,41
418,428,43
440,448-
49, 45 6 , 45 8 , 4 62 -4, 4 6 7, 47 6 -7,
4 8 5, 495, 49 8 -9, 5 02 , 5 0 4, 5 0 7,
5 I I, 53 0 ; ii. 2, 3, 5, 23-6, 28, 72,
80, 105-6, 126, 161
O'Curry, cited, i. 27,28,36; noticed,
iii. 489, 492
O'Daly, Aengus (poet), ii. 508
O'De
Conno
i. 365
O'Dempsey, i. 25 I, 372, 42 I
O'Ðevanny, Bishop of Derry, ii. 223
Odin, i. [09
O'Doherty, Sir Cahir, ii. 170-7 I,
209-10, 216
O'Dohertys, i. 270,460, 510; ii. 119
O'Donnell, Bealdearg, prophecy
concerning, ii. 438-9; goes O\'er
to the English, 452
- Caffir, ii. 40
- Calvagh, ii. 36, 40
- Dr., Bishop of Raphoe, iii.
3 88 , 43 0
- Domhnall Oge, i. 315-16
- F. H., ex-M.P., iii. 365
O'Donnell, Godfrey, i. 307-9
- Sir Hugh, ii. [14
- Red Hugh, kidnapped by
Perrott, ii. I 15- I 6; escapes from
prison, 120-2 I ; becomes chief of
Tirconnell, 122; in rebellion,
126 - 30 ; invades Connaught,
13 2 - 3; relieves Ballyshannon,
139; at battle of Yellow Ford,
142-4; plunders Clanricarde and
Thomond, I 52; wins battle of
the Curlews, 153-6; appoints the
O'Doherty chieftain, 170-71;
march to Munster, 174; at Kin-
sale, 177-8; dies in Spain, 187-8
- Manus, sent to devastate
Tirowen, i. 460; marries Lady
Eleanor MacCarthy, 48 I - 3 ;
hostilities with Gray, 500-1;
submits and becomes Earl of
Tirconnell, 506-7 ; activity, 5 10;
apostasy, 531, 533; ii. 3 1 , 3 6
- Nial Garve, lays waste \\" est
Mayo, ii. 152; turns traitor,
164- 5; invested in Donegal,
I 7 I - 2; captures Ballyshannon,
188; his ambitious designs, 198,
2 10; arrested and sent to the
Tower in London, 2 I I ; otherwise
mentioned, 156, 204, 209, 2 16
- Rory, Earl of Tirconnell, suc-
ceeds Red Hugh as Commander,
ii. 188-9; his quarrel with Nial
Garve, 198; submits and becomes
Earl of Tirconnell, 199; leaves
Ireland, 208; dies at Rome, 2 I 2
- M.P. for Galway, iii. 274
O'Donnells of Corcobascin, i. 133
- of Tirconnell, i. 286, 307,
3 1 5, 359, 394, 4 01 , 4 16 , 43 1 ,
44 1 , 446-8, 45 2 , 455, 459- 61 ,
4 6 5, 4 8 9; ii. 4, 3 6 -7, 4 0 -4 1 , 47,
49, 63, 10 4, 193, 19 8
O'Donovan, author, iii. 489
O'Dowd, Father, i. 104
O'Dowda, i. 299, 352
INDEX
5 6 5
O'Doyn, i. 499
O'Driscolls, ii. 176, 182
O'Dwyers, ii. 10, 334, 33 8
O'Faelain, Chief of the Deisi, i. 225,
24 6
O'Farrell, General, ii. 302, 3 I 2,
3 2 3, 3 2 5, 339
O'Farrells, i. 361, 410, 4 20 , 4 2 9,
446; ii. I I, 27, 63, 235- 6 , 245
Offaly, i. 499. 5 0 4; plantation of,
ii. 6, 8, 25, 75
O'Fihely, Archbishop of Tuam, ii. 509
O'Flaherty, Edmond, iii. 229, 234
- Roderick, ii. 525-6
-author, i. 7,15,17, [8
O'Flahertys, i. 161, 166,281,283,
299; ii. 78,93, 107, 118
O'Flynn, Cumee, i. 267, 268, 270
- poet, i. 177
O'Gallagher, i. 460, 5 10; ii. I [9
O'Gara, Farrell, ii. 520
Ogham, writing, i. 36
O'Growney, Father Eugene, 111.
497- 8
Ogygia, ancient name of Ireland, i. 5
O'Hagan, Thomas, iii. 183
- Turlogh, ii. 122
O'Hagans, ii. 245
O'Hanlon, Art, ii. 380
- Redmond, ii. 380
O'Hanlons, i. 401, 44 1 , 444-5, 448;
ii. 5,9, 12 3, 17 2 , 19 0 , 245
O'Hara, Father Denis, iii. 389
- General, ii. 440
O'Hartigan (poet), i. 177
O'Hely, Bishop of Mayo, ii. 102, 457
O'Heynes, i. 142, 145, 14 6 , 303
O'Higgins (poet), i. 4 I 0
O'HurIey, Archbishop of Cashel, ii.
102-3,457,5[1
Oilioll Olum, i. 127
O'Kelly, 1\1. P. for Roscommon, 111.
284- 5; imprisoned. 295; liberateò,
298; attends the Confercnce of
Anti-Parndlites, 442
- Tadhg, i. 352
5 66
HISTORY OF IRELAND
O'Kelly, William of Hy-Many invites
the poets to a Christmas gather-
ing, i. 365
O'Kellys of Hy-l\lany, i. 142, 161,
106,277, 391, 393, 447-8; ii. I I,
O'Kennedys, ii. 10 [29
Olaf, King of Dublin, i. I 17, 120, 12 I,
Old castle, Sir John, i. 5 13 [124
Olden, Rev. T., i. 188
O'Leary, John, iii. 245-6, 247-8
Ollamh Fodhla, i. 18
Ollamhs, i. 30
O'Loughlin, Aedh, I. 157, 167,
168-9
- Ardgar, i. I 57
- Conn (poet), i. 152, 182
- Domhnall,i. 157,158-60,162,
- Domhnall, i. 306-8 [164, 165
- Murtagh, i. 268
- Solicitor-General, iii. 145, 155
O'Maddens, ii. 27, 78
O'Mahony (" Mahony's fairesses "),
O'Malley, Grace, ii. I 13 [ii. 478
O.MaIleys, ii. 78
O'Malone (annalist), i. 183
O'Mellaghlin, Art, i. 3 I 7
- Carbry, i. 3 I 7
- Connor, i. 156, 160
- Murrogh, i. 163
- Murtagh, i. 160
O'Mellaghlins, tke, of Meath, i. 155-
56,158,160,162,164,166,258,
295, 37 6 ; ii. 4
O'Meyey, i. 264
O'Molloys, the, i. 499; ll. 26, 107
O'More, Brian, ii. 1.+6
- Owney, ii. 126, 137
- Rory Oge, ii. 75, 80
O'Mores, the, of Leix, i. 226, 350,
3 66 , 376, 4 12 , 45 6 , 45 8 , 47 6 -7,
495, 499, 5 02 , 5 I I, 530; ii. 2,
3, 5, 24
O'Muldory, Flaherty, i. 270, 278
O'Mulrony, Lord of Fermanagh, i.
O'Neill, Art, ii. 121, 130 [269
- Sir Art, ii. 164
O'Neill, Brian O'Neill of Clanaboy,
attempted plantation of his terri-
tory, ii. 65 ; ruined by Essex, 67
- coadjutor-bishop of Limerick,
his cruel treatment by the Re-
formers, i. 528-9
- Conn (First Earl of Tyrone),
his wife, i. 439; his submission
to Earl of Surrey, 455; at war
with O'Donnell, 459-62, 465-6;
joins first Geraldine League, 482 ;
paid Black Rent by Louth, 485 ;
dubious position, 495; defeated by
Gray, 50 I ; submits and is made
Earl of Tirowen, 507 ; recognises
Henry VI I I. as head of Church,
53 I, 533; position, and disputes
with sons, ii. 31-3; death, 37-41
- Cormac, ii. 127, 192,216
- Daniel, ii. 260, 3 15; refuses
the command of the Catholic army
of Ulster, ii. 322-3
- DomhnaIl, his remonstrance
to Pope John XXI!., i. 33 8 , 344;
invites Edward Bruce to be King,
345- 6 ; co-operates with Bruce,
34 8 , 355- 6 ; his death, 359
- Flaherty, i. 14 I, 152, 156-7
- Gordon, Colonel, son of Sir
Phelim, ii. 439, 498
- Henry, i. 439
- Henry (son of Shane O'Neill),
ii. 12 I
- Sir Henry, ii. 216
- H ugh, Earl of Tyrone, aids
Pelham and Ormond in Munster,
ii. 95 ; and Lord Grey, 98; with
Perrott in Ulster, 107 ; his educa-
tion in England, I 14; favourite of
Queen Elizabeth, 1 15 ; aids O'Don-
nell to escape from prison, 120-22 ;
agreement with the Queen, 123-4;
the Queen wishes for his arrest at
Dublin, but he escapes, 127-8 ; in
rebellion, 129-30; defeats English
at Clontibret, 13 I; negotiations
for peace, 133-6; defeats Lord
Borough, 140; further negotia-
tions, 141; wins battle of the
Yellow Ford, 142-4; reasons for
not attacking Dublin, 145; ap-
points an Earl of Desmond, 149;
meets Earl of Essex, I 56; corre-
sponds with King of Spain, 15 8 ;
makes a journey to :\Iunster, 15 8 -
59; attacked by Mountjoy, 163; at
Kinsale, 177-9; last stand, 18 9-
9 2 ; submission, 193-4; in London,
19 8 -9 ; difficulties in Ulster, 202-
4; leaves Ireland, 208; dies at
Rome, 2 1 3
O'Neill, Hugh, i. 270-1, 281, 3 12 -
13
_ Hugh, Major-General, ii. 3 1 5,
3 1 9- 2 3,333- 6
_ Matthew, Baron of Dun-
gannon, ii. 3 2 -4, 37
_ Sir Neil, at the Boyne, ii. 4 20
_ Owen Roe, defends Arras for
Spain, ii. 260; arrives in Ireland,
and takes command of Catholic
annyin Ulster, 260-61; defeated by
Stewart near Clones, 272; quarrels
with Sir Phelim O'N eill, 279; wins
battle of Benburb, 283-6; calls his
army the Catholic army, 28 9;
quarrels with Preston, 291-3; at
Trim, 294; enemies in Ireland,
295-6; makes terms with the
Puritans, 302; makes terms with
Ormond, 3 I I ; death, 3 I 2
_ Sir Phelim, joins the rebellion
of 1641 and captures Dungannon
and Charlemont Castles, ii. 243-
5 ; object in rising, 249-5 0 ; be-
sieges Drogheda, 256; defeated
near Raphoe, 259; quarrels with
Owen Roe, 279 ; gives no quarter
at Benburb, 287; deserts Owen
Roe, 295; surrenders to Puritans,
32 5; convicted and executed, 345-7
- Shane, his career, ii. 32-50;
INDEX
5 6 7
attainted, 63; otherwise men-
tioned, 123, 13 0 , 134
O'N eill, Turlogh Lynnagh, takes
charge of Tyrone in absence of
Shane O'N eill, ii. 42; kills the Earl
of Tyrone, 44; distrusted and
revolts, 63-4; his relations with
Essex, 66-8; and with Sidney,
73-4; position in Ulster, 80 ;
submits to Perrott, 107 ; relations
with him, 114, 117 ; at war with
Earl of Tyrone, 123-4 ; death, 127
O'Neills of Clanaboy, i. 359, 4 8 5 ;
ii. 9, 27, 33-4, 66-8, 107
_ of Tirowen, i. 287, 295-7, 3 12 -
13,315-16,358-9,394,401, 4 1 6,
421, 430, 44 6 , 4 8 9; ii. 9, 3 1 ,
114, 126
O'Nolans, i. 366, 370,372, 4 08 ,499
O'Quinns, ii. 245
Orange, Prince of, ii. 409-10. See
also William I I I.
- Society, its formation, iii. 35 ;
outrageous conduct, 36, 15 8 ,
160 ; suppressed, 15 8
Orde, Commercial Propositions, iii.
9- 11 ; education scheme, 1 1-12
Ordericus Vitalis, quoted, i. 3 2 5
Orders of Irish Saints, i. 76
O'Regan, Teague, ii. 415, 45 1 - 2
O'Reilly, Maelmorra, the "Queen's
O'Reilly," ii. 142
- the, i. 401, 419, 501, 5 06 -7
O'Reillys, ii. II, 74, I 14, 13 0 , 25 0 ,
253
O'Riordan, Dr., iii. 504
Ormond, Earls of, i. 3 68 , 37 8 , 39 6 ,
407, 414-18, 4 20 - 22 , 440, 454,
458,462-65,491,503,521,529-30
- Earl of (died 1614), ii. 53-7,
61,94-5,128,14 0 -4 1 ,161-2, 16 5-7
_ Sir James. See Butler
_ Marquis of (first Duke of), de-
feats the Catholics at Kilrush, ii.
255 ; hatred of Catholics, 267-8 ;
defeats Preston, 268, 274; sur-
5 68
HISTORY OF IRELAND
renders Dublin to the Puritans,
29 2 ; returns to Ireland and makes
terms with Confederate Catholics,
296; defeated at Rathmines, 3 0 3;
makes terms with Owen Roe
O'
eill, 3 I 1-12; refused admis-
sion to Limerick, 326; denounced
by Bishops, 327; retires to France,
328 ; outlawed by Cromwellians,
345; appointed Viceroy byCharles
11., 365, 372; dismissed from
office, 377; again appointed,
379; again dismissed, 383-4
O'Rorkes, i. 141,155,161,166,
216- 1 7, 2..J.6, 249-50, 393; ii. 1 I,
79, 118- 1 9, 12 5, 13 2 , 13 6 , 139,
153, 155- 6 , 189, 193-4, 262
O'Rourke, Franciscan priest, ii. 102
Orr, William, executed, iii. 43
Orrery, Lord, ii. 542-3
O'Shea, Captain, iii. 370-73
Ossian, i. 20-2 I
Ossory, Earl of (Sir Piers Butler),
Lord Deputy, i. 465-8, 496-8, 5 21
- province, i. 224-7, 234, 5 I 5
O'Sullivan Beare, ii. 176, 182-7.
- Donal, ii. 182, 186
- member of the PhænixSociety,
iii. 2..J.5
O'Toole, Laurence, Archbishop of
Dublin, negotiates as to surrender
of Dublin, i. 230; at Synod of
Cashel, 247; ambassador to Henry
11.,254; sketch ofcareer,J21-23;
otherwise mentioned, 325
- Turlogh, i. 510
O'Tooles, i. 225, 227, 288, 350, 366,
370,376,403-13,416,453, 505,
5 0 6; ii. 4, 9, 10, 121, 161, 230
Overy, i. 422-23
Oviedo, Archbishop of Dublin, ii. 15 8
Owen of Tirowen, i. 48; entertains
St. Patrick, 5 I
Pagan, classical literature, i. 5 19
- Ireland, literature of, i. 36
Palatinates, i. 369
Pale, the, i. 3 8 3, 398, 414-15,416,
4 20 , 4 2 5- 6 , 4 28 , 445, 4 8 4-5,
529; ii. 9, 10, 7 2 , 83
- the, Catholic Lords o
ii. 253-5
Palladius, i. 48
Pallas, Chief Baron, iii. 474
Palmerston, Lord, iii. 234
Pander, the, quoted, i. 485-7, 5 18
Paparo, Cardinal, i. 192, 242
Paresse betrays l\Iaynooth, i. 477
Parish Councils Bill, iii. 4 I 3
Parleys, i. 292
Parliaments, Irish, i. 292-94, 3 2 9,
373, 382-87, 4 18 , 4 20 , 422-24,
4 26 , 428, 442, 506, 522; under
Elizabeth, ii. 82-3, 86, 107-8;
multiplication of boroughs in, by
J ames I., 22 1-3; under Strafford,
230-31 ; abolished by Cromwell,
revived by Charles I I., 365 ; com-
position of, under James I I., 405;
repeals the Act of Settlement, 4 0 6 ;
under \Villiam II 1.,465-70; penal
enactments, 470-74 ; not of native
origin, but introduced from Eng-
land, 528; powers o
529-3 I; com-
pared with English Parliament,
53 2 -3; privileges of members, 534;
Opposition in, 545-6; independ-
ence o
552-4; Grattan's Parlia-
ment, iii. 1-23; petition for Union,
iii. 78
Parne!), Charles Stewart, family con-
nections and antecedents, iii. 266-7;
joins Home Rule League, his ob-
struction policy, 267-70; president
of Home Rule Confederation, 270-
7 I ; unwilling to join Fenians, 277 ;
joins Davitt, 278; elected president
of Land League, 280; reception in
America, 281-2; success at elec-
tions, 284; recommends boycot-
ting, 286; prosecuted, 289; de-
fends Land League, 289-90; atti-
tude towards Gladstone's Land
Bill, 293; advice on it, 294; in
Kilmainham, 295 ; no-rent mani-
festo, 295; voted freedom of
Dublin, Cork, etc., 296 ; Kilmain-
ham Treaty, 298; Phænix Park
murders, 300-302, 305; suppresses
Ladies' Land League, 303 ; presi-
dent of National League, 303;
testimonial, 306; difficulties,j06-7;
aided by Lord R. Churchill, 308-
10; ToriesandParnelIitescoalesce,
312- 13; interview with Lord Car-
narvon, 316- 1 7 ; manifesto, 3 22 ;
General Election and its results,
323 ; opinion of Gladstone's Land
Purchase Bill, 332; speech on
second reading of Home Rule BiB,
338 ; advice to defeated ministers,
345; Land Bill, 346; opposed to
Plan of Campaign, 348-9; opinion
of Papal Rescript v. Plan of Cam-
paign, 358, 360; Pigott forgeries,
363-8 ; popularity, 368 ; estimate
by Chamberlain, 369; story of
downfall, 370-73; position after
divorce of Mrs. O'Shea, 373; de-
nounced in England, but resolves
to hold on, 375-6; Gladstone's
letter, 376-8; Irish leadership,
378; manifesto, 379-80; split in
Irish Party, 383; Kilkennyelec-
tion, 383- 5; Boulogne negotia-
tions, 385-6; attacks opponents,
385, 388-9; marries Mrs. O'Shea,
390; estimate and death, 390-92
Parnell, Sir John, Chancellor of Ex-
chequer, opposes Union, iii. 84;
dismissed, 87
Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites, iii.
393-443 þassilll
Parsons, Sir Laurence, iii. 34, 4 1 ,
87, 88, 97
- Sir \ViBiam, ii. 235, 245, 250-
52, 27 0
Parthalon, legendary account of, i. 6
Pascal dispute. See Easter
IKDEX
5 6 9
Pass of Plumes, ii. 150
Patrick, monk of Glastonbury, i. 4 1 ,
177
- St., birth and early life, i. 41-43;
a slave in Ireland, 43; escape,
education abroad, and second com-
ing to Ireland, 43-5 ; proceeds to
Gaul, thence to Rome, and finally
arrives in Ireland, 45-6; Stokes'
objections to traditional account,
46; undertakes to convert Irish,
48; overcomes Druids, 4 8 -5 0 ;
missionary labours and success
over paganism, 50-53; closing
years and death, 54; describes
generosity of Irish, 175; bell,
201 ; relics scattered, i. 526
Paulet, Sir George, and Sir Cahir
O'Doherty, ii. 209-10
Paulinus, i. 79
Payne, Bishop of Meath, i. 443
Peasantry, their condition before and
after the Union, iii. 214, 218-20
Peel, Sir Robert, Chief Secretary
(1812), relations with O'Connell,
etc., iii. 123; declares for Emanci-
pation, 137 ; changes in Ministry,
164 ; views on Repeal movement,
177 ; measures of redress ( 18 45),
185; and for relieving famine,
1 93-4; Corn Laws repealed, 1 94 ;
other measures to meet distress,
19 6
Peclites, iii. 228
Peep of Day Boys, 111. 25; defeat
the Defenders at The Diamond
and form the Orange Society, 35
Peers, I rish, created after the Union,
iii. 107
Pelagianism in the Irish Church, i.
85-6, 17 2
Pelham, Judge, ii. 199
- Sir William (Viceroy), ii. 93-7
Pembridge, Sir Richard, i. 494
Pembroke, Earl of (Viceroy), ii. 482
Penal Laws, ii. 457-87
57 0
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Penda defeats Edwin, King of
Northumbria, i. 79
Pensions, excessive amount of, ii.
54 6 -9; iii. 24
Percival, Chancellor of Exchequer,
iii. 119, 123
Perrin, Attorney-General, iii. 145, ( 55
Perrott, Sir J., President of IVlunster,
his dealings with Fitz-Maurice, ii.
61-2 ; his career as Deputy, 10 5-
17; in the Tower, 129
Perry, rebel leader, iii. 72
Persico, :\Ionsignor, iii. 35 8 -9
Pery, Sexton, iii. 82
Pestilence of the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries, i. 354, 377
Petrie, G., on the Round Towers, i.
208- II ; as archæologist, iii. 489
Petty, Sir W., estimate of numbers
massacred in 1641, ii. 246; survey
and award, 353; sent to London
as agent for Settlers, 369; Court
of Clai
and its innocents, 371 ;
estimate of Irishshippedoffto \Vest
Indies, 490; favours V nion, iii. 77
PhaIlic theory of the Round Towers,
i. 212
Philip II. of Spain, ii. 488-9, 511
- I I I. of Spain, sends aid to
Ireland, ii. 158
- of Worcester, made Viceroy,
i. 262, 332
Phillips, Father, iii. 43 I
Phænicians, the, i. I
Phænix Literary Society, iii. 244-5
- Park murders, iii. 300-303
Picts, the, i. 22; converted by St.
Columba, 65. 78
Piers, Captain, ii. 50
Pigott, Richard, his forged letters,
iii. 363-7
Pilgrimages to Rome, i. 189; pil-
grimages and holy wells forbidden,
ii. 471
Pinkerton, quoted, i. 74
Pirates on the Irish coast, ii. 4
Pitt, reciprocity scheme (Orde's Pro-
positions), iii. 9- 10; on Regency
question, [5-16; view of Irish
affairs, 51; in favour of V nion, 80,
85; carries V nion Resolution, 89;'
position towards the Catholics,
10 7-10; close of career, 1 [0-1 1
Place BiJI (, 793), iii. 92
Plan of Campaign, iii. 349, 359-60
Plat, Danish Chief, at Clontarf, i. 144
Plein-Pattoigi, treaty of, i. 134
Pliny, his knowledge of Ireland, i. 2
Ploughing, Irish mode of, ii. 2 1 5
Plunkett, Sir Alexander, i. 428
- Attorney-General, iii. 87, '23,
- Captain, iii. 356 [I 28-9
- Sir Horace, iii. 388, 436, 439-
4 I, 503
- Sir Nicholas, ii. 329, 3 6 9-7 0
- Oliver, Archbishop of Armagh,
ii. 382-3,461,517
Pluralities, in the Irish Church, i.
5 1 7,5[9
Plutarch, i. 5
Pole, Cardinal, and the Geraldines
i. 483; ii. 23
Ponsonby, George, his Reform Bill,
iii. 21; advises concession, 44;
opposed to Vnion, 87, 88, 102 ;
made Lord Chancellor, I I 8 ;
leads the Opposition, I 19
Pope, the, power in :\Iiddle Ages, i.
240-4' ; supremacy, 51 [-12
Porter, Bishop of Raphoe, ii. 482
Portland, Duke of (Viceroy), ii. 554 ;
iii. 8-9; Home Secretary, 2 I ;
advocates concession, 47; Prime
Minister, I 19
- Lord, President of Munster,
ii. 272
Portmore, ii. 140-4 I, 144, 163, 199
Potato, introduced into Ireland,
iii. 190; failure of the crop (1845),
1 9 I; effect of the "blig h t,"
enquiries as to its cause, etc., 192;.
partial failures, 273
Power, Arnold, i. 3 6 9, 374
- Dr., M.P., iii. 227
- O'Connor, M.P., iii. 274; Bill
against evictions, 286
- Richard, M.P., iii. 396
Poyning, Sir Edward, i. 441-43
Poyning's Law, i. 442 ; ii. 108, 529
Pragmatic Sanction, ii. 499
Prayer Book of Henry V II I., ii. 12
Precincts in Ulster, ii. 2 19
Precursor's Society, iii. 170
Prendergast, Maurice de, i. 223,
226, 234 [395, 4 80
Presbyterians, ii. 25, 24 1 - 2 , 375-6,
Preston, General, arrives with sup-
plies, ii. 264-5 ; his defeat at New
Ross, 268-9 ; defeats and success,
27 I ; quarrels with Castlehaven,
279; aided by Papal Nuncio,
284; various proceedings, 289-95;
otherwise mentioned, 30 I, 337
Priests, ordered to quit Ireland
(1564), ii. 87; persecuted (1579-
80), 102-3; no mercy from Carew,
170; contrasted with Protestant
clergy by Spenser, 195-6; perse-
cuted by James 1., 201, 226,459;
and by Cromwell, 354, 460-61;
under William I I I., 468; one
allowed in each parish by Act of
17 0 7, 471; proposed castration
of, 473; sufferings and constancy
through eighteenth century, 484-5;
educated abroad, 5 I I - I 3; differ-
ent views as to their education,
iii. 32-3 ; their patriotism, 496;
charges against them refuted, 504
Prisoners, treatment of, by Henry
VII I., i. 480
Pri,'y Council (Irish), i. 293
Proctors of the Clergy, i. 292, 496,
Prosperous, iii. 6 I [523
Ptolemy, his map of Ireland, i. 3
Purcell, General, ii. 335-6, 435
Purgatory, St. Patrick's, ii. 228
Puritans, ii. 24 1 - 2 , 459
INDEX
57 1
Quadruple Alliance, ii. 499
Quarantotti, Cardinal, approves the
Veto, iii. 124
Quartodecimans, i. 87
Queen Victoria, her Jubilee, iii. 354-
55 ; visit to Ireland, iii. 447 ; her
death, 447-8
Queen's Colleges, iii. 185-6, 236,
274, 473
Queen's County, ii. 25
Querns, or hand-mills, i. 39
Quin (or Coyne), Bishop of Limerick,
i. 525
Rahan, monastery of, i. 74
Railways in Ireland, proposed, Ill.
16 1-2
Raleigh, Sir Walter, ii. 98; receives.
a grant ofland in Cork and \Vater-
ford, I 09
Ramsay, Brigadier-General, ii. 400
Ranelagh, Lord, President of Con-
naught, i. 264-5, 273
Rapparees, ii. 418,436-7,455
Ratcliffe, Sir Alexander, ii. I 54- 5
- Sir George, ii. 242
Rathbreasail, synod of, i. 190
Rathlin Island, i. 16 1,3 4 I ; possessed
by Scots, ii. 34; massacre at, 68
Rathmullen, church of, plundered,
Raths, i. 39 [ii. 132
Ratisbon, Irish monastery of, i. 182
Ray, Secretary of Repeal Associa-
tion, iii. 175, 181
Raymond Ie Gros, lands in Ireland,
i. 228 ; assists Strongbow to cap-
ture \Vaterford, 229; defeats
Roderick O'Connor at Finglas,
233; sent to explain matters to.
King Henry, 234; his energetic
measures, 251; dissatisfied with
Strongbow and leaves Ireland in
disgust, 252; returns and marries
Strongbow's sister, 252 ; captures
Limerick, 253; further proceed-
ings, 255 ; his death, 256
57 2
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Reade, Sir John, ii. 255
Rebellion, Geraldine, ii. 59 - 62 ;
Desmond's, 86- 103; Tyrone's,
126-41 ; of 1641,233-56, 341
Redchair, i. I 32
Redesdale, Lord Chancellor, iii. I 17
Redmond, John, adheres to Parnell,
iii. 381; leader of Parnellites and
M.P. for \Vaterford, 396; supports
Gladstone's Home Rule Bill, 407,
408,411,412; quarrels with Dillon
and Sexton, 4 I 8; favours Balfour's
Land Purchase Bill, 434; Chair-
manofIrish Party, 443; hisamend-
ments to the King's Speech, 44 8 -9;
supports \Vyndham's Land Bill,
454; favours Birrell's Councils
and University Bills, 47 0 , 475
Ree\.es, Dr., quoted, i. 63, 67
Reform Bill of 1840, iii. 15 6
Reformation in Ireland, \Vycliffe
and the Lollards, i. 5 I 3; the
Church in Germany, 5 14; Ireland
unaffected, 5 15 ; abuses in Irish
Church, 5 17; Luther, 5 19; Henry
VIII. and Act of Supremacy,
5 20 - 26; monasteries attacked,
5 2 7-9; the Reformation within the
Pale, 529; apostasy of Chiefs,
5 2 9- 33; character of Reformers,
534- 6 ; robbery of church property,
537-9; ii. 22-3 ; failure of, in Ire-
land, 87-8, 195- 6
Regan, Maurice, i. 220, 225, 230,
Regency Bill, iii. 90, 9 I [258
Regium Donum, ii. 480
Regnal, Danish leader, i. I 2 I, 124
Regnar Lodbrog and Turgesius, i.
Reidy, Father, iii. 472 [111-13
Relief Bill, Catholic, rejected, iii.
34, 12 3, 128-9, 130
Remonstrance of Domhnall O'Neill,
i. 338, 344
- of Peter \Valsh, ii. 376
Rent, how paid, ii. 2 I 5
Repeal agitation, iii. 165-88, 199
Repeal Breakfasts (Secret Society),
iii. 14 5
Revenue of the Irish Government, i.
39 8 ,4 1 7 ; ii. 533
Reynolds, the Informer, iii. 52, 56
Rheinhart, French Consul at Ham-
Rhodanus, St., i. 94 [burg, iii. 44
Rhymers, Irish, outlawed, i. 4 2 6
Ribbonmen, iii. 126,137,147,159
Rice, Judge, ii. 391, 40;
- Spring, M.P., iii. 169
Richard I., i. 243, 269, 27 I
- 11., first coming to Ireland, i.
397-4 0 2; second coming, 403-6
- 111., his popularity in Ireland,
i. 433-4
Richmond, Countess of, i. 451
- Duke ûf, iii. 1 19
Rinnuccini, Papal Nuncio, his pro-
ceedings in Ireland, ii. 27 8 - 8 4,
28 7-9 1 , 293, 295-7
Ripperda, Spanish Minister, ii. 499
Roads in ancient Ireland, i. 39
Roberts, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 377
Robertson, Lord, President of Uni.
versity Commissioners, iii. 473
Roche, David, ii. 3 1 9
- Father, iii. 70, 71, 72
Rochester, Earl of (Viceroy), ii.
Rochford, Lord, iii. 78 [384-8
Roden, Lord, iii. 16 I, 177
Roe, O'Connor, ii. 1 17-18
Rokeby (Viceroy), i. 377-8
Rollo, Duke of N onnandy, i. I 18
Romanesque, Irish, architecture, i.
Romayne, M.P., iii. 26 4 r 206-7
Rome and the early Irish Church,
i. 52, 84, 188
Roscommon, Castle of, i. 3 I 5, 452
Rosebery, Lord, succeeds Gladstone
as Prime Minister, iii. 4 I 4 ; his
position as to Home Rule, 4 I 6 ;
resigns, 441; offended at the
Nationalists, 449
Rossa, Jeremiah O'Donovan, iii.
245, 24 8
Rothe, Bishop of Ossory, ii. 5 14- I 5
Round Table Conference, iii. 350
- Towers, i. 173 ; various theories
regarding them discussed, 209- 13
Rowan, Hamilton, joins the United
Irish Society, iii. 29; prosecuted
for libel, but escapes, 3 I ; meets
with \Volfe Tone, 39
Royal University, iii. 274,279, 473
Rumold, St., i. 90
Rupert, Prince, ii. 30 I -2, 3 I 4
Russell, Charles (LOJd Russell of
Killowen), amends Gladstone's
Land Bill, iii. 293; in office
under Gladstone, 327; supports
Home Rule, 337 ; his defence of
Parnell, 366-7
- George, playwriter and poet,
iii. 501-2
- Lord John, iii. 178, 194, 19 6 ,
228
- Thomas, iii. 27; his connec-
tion with \Volfe Tone, 38;
arrested and executed, I 16
- T. \V., opposed to Gladstone's
Home Rule Bill, iii. 408 ; supports
Redmond's amendment (190 I),
448; advocates compulsory sale of
land, 45 I ; supports \Vyndham's
Land Bill, 454; political career,
463-4; defends Mr. Bailey, 467 ;
Evicted Tenants Bill, 472
- Sir \Villiam (Viceroy), ii. 124,
1 2 9, 133-5, 13 8
Rutland, (Duke of, Yiceroy), iii. 12,
25; favours Union, 78
Ryan, Father, iii. 357
Ryswick, Peace of, ii. 47 0 , 494
Sacrifices, human, in pagan Ire-
land, i. 27
Sadleir, James, iii. 235
- John, iii. '227, '229, 234
St. Amund (Viceroy), i. 378
St. John, SirOliver(\ïceroy), ii. 224-5
St. Lawrence, Sir Armoric, i. 266
IN"DEX
573
St. Leger, Sir A. (Viceroy), i. 49 8 ,
504; ii. 2-3, 7-8, 13, IS, 2 I, 22,24
- Sir \Varham, President of
Munster, unjustly censured, ii.
56; appointed Provost-Marshal,
94; an undertaker in Cork, 109;
encounter with Maguire, 159;
his cruelties, 254
St Ruth, General, ii. 441,50
St. Thomas, compared with Duns
Scotus, ii. 509
Salisbury, Lord, Prime Minister,
iii. 3 I 4; his views on Home
Rule, 319-20, 332-3, 337; again
Premier, 345, 4 1 9; resigns, 450
Samhan, Feast of, i. 53
Sanders, Bishop of Leighlin, i. 525
- Dr., Papal Nuncio, ii. 9 1 , 94,
Sarsfield Clubs, iii. 2 10 [103
- Earl of Lucan, comes with
J ames 11. from France, ii. 4 0 5 ;
clears Connaught of \\ïlliamites,
4 13 ; at the Boyne, 4 I 8-22 ; char-
acter o
426; destroys \Villiamites'
guns at Limerick, 428; made Earl
ofLucan, 435 ; aided by Rapparees,
437; Governor of Conn aught,
438-40; at Aughrim, 448-5 I ; at
Limerick, 452-4; death, 494
Satire, poetic, i. 29, 4 10
Saul, first Church of St. Patrick at,
i. 48, 54
Saunderson, Colonel, opposed to
Home Rule, iii. 406, 408; on the
taxation of Ireland, 436
Saurin, Attorney-General, iii. 119
Savage, Sir Arthur, ii. 154
Savages, the, of Down, i. 359, 395,
43 I, 501
Saxe,
larshal, ii. 300-303
Scarampi, Father Peter, ii. 276, 279
Scattery Island, i. 131, 133
Schomberg, Marshal, ii. 4 I 1-12
Schools, first Christian, i. 57, 69;
subjects taught in secular, i. 69;
Irish schools, iii. I I, 49,235, 271
574
HISTORY OF IRELAND
Schwanz-:\Iartin, i. 436
Scota, daughter of Pharaoh, i. 4, 14,
Scotia, i. 5, 22, 23 [16
Scots, i. 22, 23, 340; ii. 33-5, 47-
49, 64, 66-8, 72, 106-7, I 12-13
Scott, Sir Edward, Governor of
Kinsale, ii. 432
Scottish Union compared with the
Irish, iii. 103
Scotus
larianus of Fulda, i. 182
- Marianus of Ratisbon, i. 182
Scribes, i. 57, 195
Scriptorium, i. 195
Scrope, Sir S., i. 407-8
Scullabogue, massacre at, iii. 69
Scully, Vincent, iii. 383
Sculpture, Irish, character of, i. 205-
Scythians, the, i. 13, 16 [209
Secret service under Pitt, examples
of, iii. 52-3
Sees, Irish, number of, i. 190
Segrave, his encounter with O'Neill,
Senchan (poet), i. 7 I [ii. 131
Sept, constitution of, i. 2;
Settlers, English, adopt Irish man-
ners and customs, i. 362-75, 383-
84; their conduct declared illegal,
4 1 8,4 26 , 4..J.I, 488
Sexton, l\I. P. for Sligo, iii. 284; pro-
secuted, 289; in Kilmainham, 295;
power as a speaker, 31 1,338,397;
returned for \Vest Belfast (I 886 ),
344; at Galway election, 371 ; in
dangerfrom Parnellites, 383; sup-
ports second Home Rule Bill, 406-
7,409; Freeman'sJournaldispute,
414; declines chairmanship of
Irish Party, 427-8; member of
Royal Commission ( 18 9..J.), 435 ;
opinion of \Vyndham's Act, 457
Shaftesbury, Lord, ii. 381-3
Shaw, succeeds Butt as Home Rule
leader, iii. 282, 285
Sheehy, Father Nicholas, of Clog-
heen, ii. 544
- Father. of Kilmallock, iii. 294
Sheil, Richard Lalor, favours Veto,
iii. 128; founds Catholic Associa-
tion with O'Connell, 129, 131;
efforts to repeal Corporation and
Test Acts, 134; mentioned, 168
Sheridan, attacks Orde's Resolutions,
iii. 10; opposed to Union, 89
- Dr., iii. 122
Shrines, i. 200
Shrule, massacre of, ii. 255
Sidney, Sir Henry (Viceroy), ii. 38,
4 8 , 57- 8 ,61, 73-85, 87-8
Sigurd, Earl of Orkney, i. 143;
slain at Clontarf, 146
Silk manufacture in Ireland, iii. 478
Simnel Lambert, i. 434-6
Simons, Richard, i. 434, 436
Sinn Fein party, their aims, iii. 467
Sirr, Major, iii. 48, 60; arrests
Emmet, 115
Sitric of Dublin, i. 12 I, 122, 136, 143,
Six Articles, the, i. 536 [149, 161
Skalds, Scandinavian, i. 109
Skeffington, Sir \V., i. 4 6 5-7, 475-9,
Skellig Island, i. 1 10 [489
Skerret, Colonel, iii. 68
Skurlock, ii. 83-4
Slaves in Ireland in early times, i. 32
Slevin, Chief Bard, i. 137
Sligo, i. 308, 459, 460
- O'Connor, ii. 118, 151, 152,
161, 171, 189
Smith, Adam, his views on Union,
- Thomas, ii. 65 [iii. 78
- \V. H., on the Franchise Bill,
iii. 310; Chief Secretary, 325;
opposes Home Rule, 333 ;
Leader of the Commons, 350
Smuggling, ii. 477-8
Society Schools, iii. 149
Solms, Count, ii. 412
Somerset, Duke of, ii. 2, 4, 12
Soyer, M., iii. 201
Spain and Ireland, relations between,
ii. 95-9,119,124,127,158,165,
172-6, 488-90
Spanish succession, I rish soldiers
engaged in the war of the, ii. 495
Spencer, Lord (Viceroy), iii. 299;
enforces the Crimes Act, 304;
declares for Home Rule, 327,
343 ; otherwise mentioned, 3 18
.spenser, Edmund, Secretary to the
Viceroy, ii. 98; receives a grant
of land, 109 j his policy for deal-
ing with the Irish, 147-8 j his
opinion of the Irish bards, 507 j
otherwise mentioned, 35 I, 5 2 1
Spithead mutiny, iii. 45
'Spottiswoode Gang," iii. 163
Squireens or middlemen, ii. 475-8
Stafford, Captain, ii. 3 I I
tanley, Chief Secretary, iii. 144-6;
his Coercion Bill, 148, I 5 I, 167 j
recalled and made Colonial
Secretary, 149; his efforts for
primary education, 149-50
- (\ïceroy), i. 410
Staples, Bishop of Meath, i. 434- 5 j
ii. 17, 20
Steelboys (secret society), ii. 543
Stephens, James, founds the Phænix
Society, iii. 245, 247 j escapes
from prison, 248
Stewart, Sir Robert, ii. 298
- Sir William, ii. 259, 272, 284 I
Stilicho, i. 22, 23
Stokes, Miss :\1., i. 84
- \Vhitley, i. 42, 46-7 ; lll. 491
Stone churches, i. 204
- Primate, ii. 487, 546
Story, Rev. George, cited, 11. 4 17,
447, 45 I, 455, 4 6 3
Stowe :\Iissal, i. 200
Strabo, i. 2, 4
Strafford, Earl of (Lord \Ventworth),
his career as Deputy, ii. 228-4 I ;
otherwise mentioned, 266, 272
Strongbow (Earl of Pembroke), his
ancestry and character, i. 2 I 8- I 9 j
promises to assist MacMurrogh,
2 19 j lands at \Vaterford and
INDEX
575
captures it, 229 j enters Dublin,
230; difficulties with Henry II.,
defeats the Irish at Finglas, leaves
Dublin and proposes to attack
Ossory, 233 ; returns to England,
234; returns to Ireland with Henry
11., 245 ; receives Leinster, 249;
appointed Viceroy, 25 I j his diffi-
culties, 25 I-53 j death, 256
Stukely, Thomas, ii. 90-9 I
Sugden, Sir Edward, Lord Chan-
cellor, iii. I 7 I, 178
Suibhne (Ardri), i. 101
- (poet), i. 71, 176
Sullivan, A. :\1., iii. 257, 292
- T. D., M.P. for "-est ::\Ieath,
iii. 284; prosecuted, 289 j im-
prisoned, 360; in America, 37
j
as a poet, 501
Supremacy, Act of, i. 52 I, 524
- Oath of, i. 52 I, 524, 528, 530-
33; ii. 4 8 7
Supreme Council of the Confederate
Catholics, ii. 258, 265-7, 272-7,
279-80, 28 I, 283, 287-96
Surrey, Earl of, i. 455-7
Sussex, Earl of (Viceroy), ii. 24,
28-9, 35 ; his dealings with Shane
O'Neill, 41-5 j his pliancy, 456-7 j
otherwise mentioned, 56
Swift, Dean, advocates severity
against beggars, ii. 479; opinion
of the Irish Protestant Bishops,
482; character, 536; writes the
Drapier's Letters, 537-9; popu-
larity, 541-2; otherwise mentioned,
5 26 .
Swordsmen, ii. 354
Sydney, Lord (Viceroy), ii. 465-6
Synge, Dean, on the Treaty of
Limerick, ii. 465
Synods, held by St. Patrick, i. 52 j
Old Leighlin (630), Moylena(633),
i. 88; \Yhitby (660), 89; Fiadh-
mac-Aengussa (I I 15), 183; Rath-
breasail (I I 18), 190; Cashel
57 6
HISTORY OF IRELAND
(I 13-1., 1172), Innispatrick (I 148),
Kells (1152), Brigh-mac- Tadhg
( I I 58), Clane (I I 62), I 90-9 1 , 247 ;
\Vaterford (I 175), 254; Dublin
(1177),275; ( 121 7), 331; Rouen
(1119),33 1 ; Dundalk, 516;
Kilkenny (1642), ii. 257 ; Thurles
( 18 5 0 ), iii. 492
Synott, Colonel, governor of \Vex-
ford, ii. 310, 329
Taafe, Lord, succeeds Muskerry, ii.
293; supports Ormond, 301; at
battle of Rathmines, 303 ; returns
to Connaught, 3 I 5 ; negotiations
with Duke of Lorraine, 329
Tacitus, cited, i. 3-4, 12, 35, 40, 65,
3 12
Tailteann, assembly of, i. 28,164,169
Tain-bo-Chuailgne, i. 70
Talbot, Archbishop of Dublin, i.
4 I 4- 15
- Brigadier, at siege of Limerick,
ii. 43 I
- Colonel. See Tirconnell, Duke
of
- Sir John (Earl of Shrewsbury),
Viceroy, i. 410 ; defeats O'More of
Leix, 4 I 2; and l\IagennisofI veagh,
by whom he is defeated in turn,
4 15; proceedings as Viceroy, 4 18 ;
defeats the O'Donnells, 43 I
- Peter, alleged to have been
nominated by the Pope as Lord
Chancellor of Ireland, ii. 38 I; im-
prisoned, 382; his opinion of
Keating's History, 5 I 4; and of
Colgan, 520; as an author, 5 17
- Richard, 3rd Earl of Tirconnell,
ii. 504-5
- Sir Robert, ii. 290
Tallaght, monastery of, i. 75
Tandy, Napper, iii. 29, 3 I, 39, 76
Tanis!, i. 26
Tams/ry, i. 507, 508; abolition of,
ii. 10, 27
Tanner, Bishop of Cork, ii. 457
Tara, brooch, i. 201
- Feis, i. 18,20,28,73,94,103
- Palace, cursed and becomes
deserted, i. 94-6
- Psalter, i. 19
- Repeal meeting at, iii. 176, 179
Tariff Reform, advocated by
Chamberlain, iii. 462
Tariffs, question of, iii. 7-9
Taxation of Ireland, Royal Com-
mission regarding, iii. 435
Taylor, Captain Shawe, iii. 45 I
- Jeremy, Bishop of Down, ii.
3 6 5 ; his intolerance, 375
- Thomas, ii. 183, 185
Temple, Sir John, ii. 246-7
- Sir \Villiam, ii. 369
Tenant Defence Society, iii. 222-4,
229
Tenants, their grievances, iii. 236-
4 2 , 450-55. See Landlords
Terryalts (secret society), iii. 147
Test Bill, ii. 47 I
Tetteau, General, ii. 439
Tetzel, i. 5 19
Theobald of the Ships, iii. 138, 152,.
153, 156, 161
Thierry, King of Burgundy, i. 81-82
Thomond, Earls of, ii. 6 I, 79, 161 -2,
164-5, 214, 263, 282
- province of, i. 128, I 5 3, 166,
3 0 6, 3 I 2, 3 15, 3 6 5, 3 8 9-9 0 , 43 0 ,
Thor, i. 10 9 [495
Thorsten the Red, i. 120
Three Orders of Saints, i. 76
Threshers, the, iii. I 19
Th
le, Ultima, i. 23, 78
Tichhorne, Sir Henry, Governor of
Drogheda, ii. 256; supersedes
Parsons as Lord Justice, 270
Tighernach (chronicler), i. 18, 183
Times newspaper, iii. 236, 239,
248, 334, 3 6 3- 8 , 373
Tiptoft, Earl of \Yorcester (\Ticeroy),
i. 424-5
Tirconnell and Tirowen, origin of
names, i. 48; wars of, i. 156,
166, 270, 307-8, 3 1 5- 16 , 394,
43 I, 459- 60
Tirconnell, Duchess of, her reply to
James II. after the Boyne, ii. 423;
charges Irish with cowardice,
426
- Duke of (Colonel R. Talbot),
gets commission appointed to re-
vise the Act of Settlement, ii. 377;
arrested and set free, 381-2; Com-
mander-in-Chief in Ireland, 389 ;
Viceroy, 390-97; at the Boyne,
4 I 8; at Limerick, 425; goes to Gal-
\\ay, 426; relations with Lauzun,
433-4; disagrees with Sarsfield,
438; quarrels with St. Ruth, 44 I,
444-; his death, 45:2
- 3rd Earl of (Richard Talbot),
iii. 504-5
Tirrey, Bishop of Cork, i. 52 5, 535
Tithes, payment of, i. 191, 320;
tithe-farmers, ii. 475; commuta-
tion of, advocated by Grattan, iii.
q; the tithe war, 147-8; Peel's
Commutation Bill, 154-5 ; refusal
to pay, 159
Tlachta, meeting of 0' Rorke and De
Lacey at, i. 250
TOlflJllrach, assembly of, i. 26
Toler, Solicitor-General, iii. 44, 49
Tom the Devil, iii. 57
Tomar of Limerick, i. 122, 124
Tomar's \Vood, i. 144, 147
Tomgraney, its bell-tower built by
Brian Boru, i. 180
Tone, Theobald \Y olfe, iii. 20; his
character, 27; founds the Society
of United Irishmen, 28; his politi-
cal views, 28-9; leaves Ireland,
38; goes to France and accom-
panies Hoche's expedition, 39;
his capture and execution, 76
Tonsure, Irish form of, i. 84
Tories, ii. 357, 379-80
VOL. III
INDEX
577
Torrington, Lord, Governor of
Limerick, ii. 432
Tory Island, ii. 132
TowJ1shend, Lord (Viceroy), ii
547- 8
Transubstantiation, i. 536
Trant, Sir P., ii. 420
Treoit, oratory of, burned, i. 175
Trevelyan, Sir George, Chief Secre-
tary, iii. 304, 327; resigns and
attacks Gladstone's Home Rule
Bill, 333, 337; at the Round
Table Conference, 351
Trian, Saxon, i. 172
Tribute, forms of, i. 32
Trim, Parliament held at, i. 418, 428
Trimleston, Lord, ii. 359
Trinitarian monasteries, i. 528
Trinity College, ii. 225, 521 - 3; 111.
32,473-4; its tercentenary, 494-5
Troy, Dr., Archbishop of Dublin,
attitude towards the Government,
iii. 17,32; favoursUnion,82,94-6;
obtains Papal Rescript in favour
of the \-eto, 124; death, 129
Tuam, Arch bishops of, i. 5 I 7, 525 ;
ii. 275, 279; iii. 4 8 , 9 6
- Cross of, i. 168, 208
- school of, i. ï 5
Tuathll, i. 25
Tuatha-de-Danann, story of the, I.
8; remarks, 1 1-12
Tuathal, story of, i. 19
- the Ardri, i. 93
Tunstal, Bishop of Durham, ii. 13
Turgesius, the Viking, career of, i.
II 1-15
Turlogh, King of Thomond, i. ï 5
- Round Tower, i. 2 10
Tyrell, Captain, at "Tyrell's Pass,"
ii. 140; enters Munster, ii. 146;
wounded, 184; flees into O'Car-
roll's country, 186
Ufford, Sir R. (Viceroy), Irish policy,
i. 343; harsh measures, 374-5
10 7
57 8
HISTORV OF IRELAND
U gaine, history of, i. 19
Uisneach, assembly of, i. 28
Uladh, ravaged, i. I 57, I 69
Ulster, province of, invaded by De
Courcy, i. 265-6; wasted by the
Scots invasion of Edward Bruce,
341,358; and by the wars be-
tween the O'N eills and O'Donnells,
358-60,394,430-32; in the hands
of Irish chiefs (1534),488; state
of, 501; desolation of, ii. 33,
19 1 - 2 , 244; plantation of, 65-9,
2 14-32, 234-5; disturbances in,
iii. 25, 41-3; order restored, 46
Undertakers in Munster, ii. 108-10,
146-9; in Ulster, 218-19; in
Parliament, 545, 553
Union, at first unpopular, iii. 79-80;
advocated by Pitt and his sup-
porters, 80; advantages set forth,
83; anti-Unionists, 84; Viceroy's
address, 85; Lord Castlereagh,
86-7 ; the question debated, 87-8 ;
debates in English Parliament, 89;
means taken to obtain a Unionist
majority, 9 1-3 ; position of Corn-
wallis and the Catholics, 93-6; last
session of Irish Parliament and
return of Grattan, 96-8; majority
obtained, 98; Castlereagh's plans,
99; efforts of Government and
Opposition, 100- 102; Union
passes, 102-3; Scottish and Irish
Unions compared, 103; Grattan's
views, 104-5; proved a failure,
125 ; its repeal demanded, I
6 ;
state of country after, 480
United Irishmen, Society of. founded,
iii. 28; objects, 28-30; demands,
30; rapid increase and organisa-
tion, 37 ; outrages, 4 I, 46; pre-
parationforstruggle, 47; treachery,
53; numbers and leaders, 54; a
day fixed for rising,s 9 ; plans,s 9 ;
death of Lord Edward FitzGerald,
60; collapse of rebellion, 6 I
United League, iii. 442, 44 6 , 448
University Bill, of 1873, iii. 260-61 ;
of 187
274; of 1908,473
- Catholic, established (I 853),
iii. 492-4
Usher, Archbishop, cited, i. 76, 88,
178, 188-9, 211 ; his intolerance,
ii. 225-6, 227, 229, 459; his
reputation for learning, 524-5
Vallancey, his theory of the Round
Towers, i. 2 I I
Vandeleur, Major, iii. 65
Vaudois, the, ii. 493
Vaughan, Sir \V., killed at Rath-
mines, ii. 303
Vavasour, Sir Charles, ii. 27 I
Venables, Puritan leader, ii. 324
Verner, Colonel, iii. I 59-6 I
Vestry cess, iii. 147-8
Veto proposed on appointment of
Catholic bishops, iii. I 19- 20 ;
agitation revived, 124, 128, 129
Viceroy, election of, statuteregarding,
i. 291-92 ; his subordinates, 294
Vikings, i. I 17-18
Vinegar Hill, battle of, iii. 70
Virgilius, St., i. 84, 9 0
Vivian, Cardinal, i. 266, 275- 6
V olunteers, rapid spread of the
movement, ii. 550; their demands,
551, 553; take up parliamentary
reform, iii. 4-7, 18, 19; join the
Peep-of-Day Boys, 25; Volunteer
Association of Belfast, 26
\Vaagen, Dr., i. 199
\Vace, Master, i. 236
\Vadding, Rev. Luke, ii. 295; career,
5 I I - 12 ; his literary works, 5 18
- Peter, ii. 5 I 8
\Valcot, Puritan officer, ii. 379
\Valker, Rev. George, at siege of
Derry, ii. 399-400; death, 422
\Valler, Sir Hardress, ii. 363
\Vallop, Lord Justice, ii. 102, 133-4
\Valpole, Colonel, his defeat and
death at Tubberneering, iii. 67
- Sir Robert, ii. 538
Walsh, Dr., Archbishop of Dublin,
his appointment, iii. 324-5; refuses
to support Parnell, 379; his appeal
to Parnellites and anti-Parnellites,
393; on University Reform, 474
- Bishop of Meath, ii. 88
- Justice, ii. 7 I
- Rev. Peter, his Remonstrance
and its reception, ii. 376-7; his
political and literary career, 516-
17
\Valsingham, secretary, ii. I 18
\Vanderforde, Sir Christopher, 11.
24 0
\Var of the Austrian Succession, ii.
499-5 00
- of the Spanish Succession, ii.
- cries, i. 375, 44 1 [495- 6
\Varbeck, Perkin, i. 443-4
\Vard, Hugh, ii. 519-:20
\Vare, quoted, i. 4, 29 1 , 293, 477,
ii. I ; his writings, 525
\Varner, i. 483
\Vanen, Admiral, iii. 76
\Vars of the Roses, i. 493
\Varwick, Earl of, i. 434; ii. I
- the Kingmaker, i. 493
\Vater, l\layor of Cork, i. 443
\Vaterford City, Strongbow and Eva
:i\IacMurrogh married at, i. 229;
taken by Henry 11., 250; granted
to Danes, 249; Richard I I. lands
at, 399, 404; loyalty to England,
437 ; outburst of Catholicism on
death of Elizabeth, ii. 197; cap-
tured by \Villiam 111., 424
Wauchope, Archbishop of Armagh,
ii. 14
\Vellesley, Sir Arthur (Duke of
\Vellington), Chief Secretary, iii.
I 19; opposed to Emancipation,
13 2 , 137, 143
- Lord, becomes Viceroy and
INDEX
579
favours Emancipation, 128; rc-
signs, 132 ; reappointed, 149,
150-5 I
\Vest Indies, Irish in the, ii. 490
\Vestmoreland, Earl of (Viceroy),
iii. I 7
\Vestwood, examination of the Book
of Kells, i. 197, 199
\Vexford City, captured by Anglo-
Normans, i. 223; retaken by
Irish, 233; pays Black Rent to
Art Madlurrogh, 432; captured
by Cromwell, ii. 3 I 0-1 I ; outrages
in, iii. 6 I -2 ; massacre of prisoners
at, 69-70; surrenders to General
:\Ioore, 7 I
\Vhateley, Dr., iii. I 56, 235
\Vhig Club demand parliamentary
reform, iii. 17, 26, 27
\Vhitby, synod at, to discuss the
Easter difficulty, i. 89
\Vhite Book of the Exchequer, i. 449
\Yhiteboys, their doings in :l\Iunster,
ii. 543-4; iii. 13, 25
- Dr., ii. 197
- Father Stephen, i. :2 39; his
writings, ii. 5 16
\Vhitefeet (secret society), iii. 147
\\'ild Geese, the, in the service of
France, ii. 492, 5 I 2-1 3
\Yilde, Sir \Villiam, on the Firbolg,
i. 10; iii. 489
\Vilfrid, Archbishop of York, i. 89
\Vilibrod, St., apostle of the Frisians,
i. 84
\Villiam II I., invited to England, ii.
388; attitude towards the Catholics,
395; struggle with France, 410-
I I ; lands at Carrickfergus, 4 I 5 ;
campaign in Ireland, 416-432;
treaty of Limerick, 453-4; gran ts
to friends declared void by Parlia-
mcnt, 469; death, 470
- IV., iii. 144
- the Conqueror, i. 222, 236,324
- of ::\Ialmesbury, quoted, i. 243
5 80
HISTORY OF IRELAr\D
\Villiams, Captain, his defence of
Portmore, ii. 14 1
\Villis, Captain, ii. I 2
\Villoughby, Captain, ii. 262-3
Wilmot, Sir Charles, ii. 183, 185, 186
\Viltshire, Earl of, i. 4 2
\Vindsor, Treaty of, i. 254, 274
Winter, Admiral, ii. 95, 9 8
\Viseman, Cardinal, iii. 224, 23 2
\Vitchcraft, i. 516
\V odehouse, Captain, ii. 1 13
\V ogan, Colonel, ii. 31 1
'Volfe, David, S.J., ii. 45 8
\Volsely, Colonel, ii. 415, 437
'Yolsey, Cardinal, and Kildare, i. 455,
457,4 62 - 6 4; otherwise mentioned,
4 6 5, 4 8 9
\V olves, ii. 356
\Vomen, their status in early times,
i. 35; forbidden to take part in
battle, 73, 1 0 4
Wood's Halfpence, ii. 535- 8
\Voodville, Elizabeth, i. 4 2 5
\V oollen manufactures in Ireland
ruined, ii. 469; smuggling of
woollen goods, 477
Workhouses, iii. 156
\Vorsae, quoted, i. 172-3
'Vrench, Landlord Commissioner,
iii. 455, 466
\Vyatt, i. 440
\Vycliffe, i. 5 I 3- 1 4
\Vyndham, George, Chief Secretary,
iii. 452; Land Act, 453-6; resigns,
461 ; on University Reform, 474
Yeates,
Ir., play-writer and poet,
iii. 502
Yelverton, moves repeal.of Poyning's
Act, ii. 553; becomes Chief
Baron, iii. 12, 82
York, James, Duke of, ii. 3ï7, 3 81 ,
384. See James II.
- Richard, Duke of,
Y ou
hal, ii. 7 6 , 95
Young I relanders, their
Repeal, iii. 172, 184,
as authors, 485-6
Young, his description of Ireland in
the eighteenth century, iii. 47 8
i.4 1 8-21,
[4 20 , 44 1
efforts for
186, 187;
Zouch, Lord, his daughter married
to Gerald, son of the Earl of
Kildare, i. 445
D'Alton, E. A. DA
) ..
AUTHOR .J3
]::8 tOf'TT of Irela.nd vol.6
TITLE
.J'A:ton,
JA
jlf)
.DY
vol.6
TTistC.....Y of Ir
2.. n-i
.1,
,
..,
.1
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11