The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-11-18
IRELAND'S WRONGS.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CASE.

llGULAND ~ W lGO1NODs
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CASE.
Father Burke's Reply to Mr.. Froude'i
First Lecture-rhe Bnglish Histort-
ans Gualtfcations-Ear Stages OF
tho Controversy.
The New York papers represent the lecture
of Father Burke at the Academy Of Music, 10
that city, Tuesday evening, IN answer to Mr
Froude's series of lectures on Ireland, as
grand triumph, both In eloquence, argument
and proof of historical statements In which
he made Issue with the English historl an.
HE BEGAN
his lecture by saying 1t was strange fact that
the old battle that had been raging for seven
hundred years should be continued 80 lar
away from the old land. The question he Wat
about to discuss had been disputed at many 9
council board, and In many U parliament, and
on many hard-lought-feld, and it was not
decided yet--The question between England
and Ireland. Mr.. Froude had frankly stated
that he had come here to deal with this Irish
question from an English standpoint, and, like
q true man, he had made out the best case he
could for his own country. He had asked the
American public to agree with him that the
Irish had. indeed, been badly treated, but that
they had only
GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED.
It is true, said he, that we English have rob-
bed and misgoverned and persecuted them;
but then they would have been worse OF If
we had let them alone. If that excuse were
valid not criminal to-day In Jail could be
justly kept In custody. Since the Conquest
MIR. Froude claimed that English legislation,
II 1t had not been always tender, had been In
intention at least benefcent, while the Irish
had never understood their own interest or
knew what was best for them. He had also
said that what had been the tate of the Irish
In the past would be their lot 10 the future.
When Mr.. Froude came here many persons had
asked what was his motive. Some had sup
posed him an emissary of the English Govern
ment, which had begun to fear The rising in-
1uence In this country OF the eight millions of
Irlshmen now among US. According t0 suoh
persons Eogland wanted now TO check Amerl.
can sympathy for their Irish fellow citizens,
and therefore sent here learned man, Wild
an extraordinary talent for arranging facts 40
as to make them show whatever he wished,
which in this case was mainly what an imprac-
ticaole, accursed race the Irish were. Others
said England was every year growing weaker,
and she was plainly 10 the last stages Of ma
tlonal decay. She had lost her great ally In
France; + or army was very weak her navy
was inferior to that OF at least one other
power, and her people were dscontented.
Therefore, said these people, England wanted
to form Rl American alliance. Yet, again,
others had said that Ar. Froude had come
here on the Invitation Of q small seGL Of sec-
tarlan blgots. He (Burke), however, pro,
tested that he never had given these sugkes-
tions o moments attention. He was willing
to give Mr.. Froude credit for
THE HIGHEST MOTIVES,
and he believed him Incapable of anything
base or mean or sordld. His own motives
(Mr. Burke's) might, perhaps, s.sc se ::::::san-
Just as Mr.. Ffodds had been suspscted Of
being an agent Of the British Government, SO
he might, perhaps, be accused of being simply
an emssary of revolution. But ne cam. to.
night to vindicste the honor OF Ireland In her
history; he came to show that at no time
should the mother be left without a defender
In one of the sons she had borne. Mr.. Froude
was unfit to discuss Irish afrairs, because he
confessed that he bad no hope for the future
OF ireland, and had given up the task Of and.
ing remedy for the present evils and grlev-
ances as bad job. He had said Ia an article
he had written, net many years ago. that the
end would probably be. that the Irish would
either have t6 be banIshed or c0erced. such
q man ought not to come TO- America to cast
the
HOROSCOPE OF IRELAND's FUTURE.
Another cause why he was unfit to discuss
the future of ireland, was that he desplsrd
Irishmen. This was the sin OF nearly every
Englshmau. He had known gentle, amlable
Englshmen who would not wlllully do wrong
to any one, and yet he had seen such men In
for the Irish race. His desire 10 stating this
was not to stir up ill.will, but simply because
1t was the secret OF the antlpathy that now
existed between the two peoples. Mr. Froude,
who was himself Incapable OF an ungenerous
sentiment towards anyene or abont anything,
was standing example OF this feeling. Not
many years ago he had told Scotcnmen that
the Reformation and John Knox were the
Influences that had made the Scotch character
80 grand and noble,' and in the same speech,
by way Of apology for speaking OF
Scotchmen at all, ne had stated that
no man could understand people unless he
was himself one of them. But this learned
gentleman had made no such apology In
speaking OF the Irish. He boldly took up hls
subject aud held Irlahmen up as an immoral,
lawiess race, Without one word OF excuse to
the Irish In America. ia one OF his books he
had said, "They may be good at the voting
booths, but were Of no good with the rifle"
He had compared the Irish to pack Of hounds,
to whom freedom would only result In their
tearing each other TO pieces. floally, Mr..
Frouds was unfit to treat Irish history because
of his hatred and detestation Of the Roman
Catholic Church. He had held her responsible
for the massacre Of g., Bartholomew. and for
almost every other murder that mad been COM
mitted. Coming down to
Mr.. FRoUDE's FIRST LECTURE, y
he had this to say, that, In following him, he
had for the first time realized what 1t was to
follow will oil the wlsp through q marsh. NJ,
Proude had attempted to justify the Norman
Invasion by drawing terrible picture of the
state Of Ireland before that conquest. He had
said that there was then 10 Ireland neither
morally, religion nor government, and that,
therefore, the Pope had sent the English as
q sort of policeman to restore law and order.
he had said that every family then governed
itself according to its own notion Of Right aud
wrong. But what did be mean by family :
Not the family as 1t was understood at the
present day, but the sect or tribe, all whose
members had q common name, aud which
owned large extents OF land, and sometimes
whole counties. A family then meant nation,
governed by one chieftain, independent, and
acknowledging no other sovereignty. There
were hve great families In Ireland, and under
these there were smaller san.ss sarss or families &C.
kn0Wledatn" Tie sovereignty of these royal