The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1878-01-06
TIE HOME RULE C1U8RTHE WY 10
IMPORTANT AND SUGGESTIVE LETTER FROM
JUSTIN M'cARrHY.
To tho Editor Of the Dublin Nathan,

| DS0r 6H-ln your article Of SatQrda,
last on the national conference you observ,
that the conference will have to decide
| among other things, "whether the etruggl,
for Ireiand's rights in tho next and futur,
sessions of Parliament is to be q reality o.
| only series of sham battfes." May suR
gest that the conference ought to take int
consideration likewise the expediency o.
adopting some course of action outside the
! walls OF Parliament which may help to q
success within them.
You will never win Home Rule by any
manner Of action within the walls of Par.
! Lament. The House of Commons, "a Nj
Br1ght said yeaTs ago, has done many lust
| things, but has never done any thing merely
because it was jass. The Home Rule mem
bers may divide and debate forever, may
make convert here and . convert there
in Parliament; but they will never by any
mere agitation within the precinets Of the
House of Commons add twenty votes to
their present numbers. They mast convert
the English public and then the English
public will convert the English Parliament
Perhaps some of your readers may think
am talking of inpossibilities when 1 speak
OF converting the English public, /. on the
contrary, am convinced the thing can be
done, and that it is the only way In which
We who deeire Home Rule shall ever see
anything but disappointment come of our
desire. You n3sr not judge of the English
people merely by the London press. No
one knows better than / do how capable
making sacrifices for principle and con-
fronting public opinion; but the general
tendency OF the metropolitan press un-
doubtediy is to become more and more
Lopdonish, and less concerned ID follow
or foreeee the gradual working of any new
principle or idea among the great macs of
the people all over the country. London,
and especially its upper and middle classes,
form clientele large enough for the daily
papers. There ia little need to lock ont.
aide the metropolis for circulation or for
opinions. Journalists in London naturally
take their tone from 'fsociety" and the
clubs, or from the city and the Stock
Exchange. The people who read the great
daiiy papers never see the newspapers
which are published in hundreds of thou.
ssnds every Saturday OF Sunday morning
FOR the special instruction of the artizsn
class and the poor generally. A complete
revolution in thought might be going on
among millions of the English people with
put finding the faintest reflection in any of
me great London papers. Look at that
vast organization the Trades' Union, SO
powerful for good, 30 capable of enormous !
BARN, spending its hundreds of thousands.
directing and drilling labor every there, |
growing day by day stronger and more
and with almost limitlees posi- |
oliit,es OF development-what does il owe |
TO the recognized journalism of the me-
Nothing. 1t was ignored for
years, then discouraged, very often de-
nounce0. 1t grew up in darkness and |
silence. The Parliament aud the press
knew nothing about it while it was growing, |
The truth is that Parliament is every |
FEAR becoming less and less important to
The political life of England. 1t is more
md more mere instrument or recording
agency for movements carried on ous Of
1oors. few impassioDed speeches from
Nj. Gladstone last year paralyEed, 1 am
glad TO cay, the influence of tho Govern
nent and Gil their Parliamentary majority.
The debates of the House of Commons are
hardly reported now in the daily papers of
CREST popular circulation. The speeches
If ministers and a few other men of impor-
.ance are reported but the conductors of |.
The newspapers know very well that the
public at large care nothing about the or
iinary debates. 1t is not, therefore, because
Parliament aud the press may declare
against Home Rule that the English public
1t large should be supposed to be unap-
proachable by argument on the subject.
The average Engishmsn is always open to
argument. He ia, when you approach him
'airly, singularly free from prejudice. We
have not as yet, 80 far as l am aware,
given ourselves much trouble to ask his
opinion of Home Rule or to explain to him
"H-S oSSO
which he reads that there are q gang of
noisy, vulgar, believing miscreants in the
House of Commons called Home Rulers,
whose only business or pleasure in life,
when they are not wrangling among them
selves, is TO annoy respectable Euglish
gentlemen by keeping them out of their
beds all night. He is given to understand
hat they themselves do not believe one
word they say about Irish grievances, aud
hat Ireland is never happy unless she is
making herself miserable. If the effort
we're made to convince the general EngIsh
public, outside the limits of "society, )" that
The Home Rule members of Parliament are
'eally expressing the deep and earnest
belief of the vast majority of the Irish peo-
pie, a better thing would be done for the
,anse of Home Rule than by years of mere
agitation. Once the Eng
ieh public thought the demand for Homo
Rule was serious aud national, they would
consider it seriously. They would zee how
much there is in it that is reasonable, and
hat concerns tue practical interests of Eng
orr ~ lob oE