New-York tribune., 1900-04-01
ENGLAND AND IRELAND,
AN IRISH HISTORIAN STATES SOME THINGS
IRIsHMEN SHOULD REMEMBER.
To the Editor of The Tribune.

writes letter concerning the Queens visit to ire
land, which have read with much interest It is
needless to that with most Of that letter am
in hearty agreement. especially with the Just
warmth which he displays about the cruel wrongs
inflicted upon the Irish masses in the past There
are. however. some points with which, as an his
torian. cannot agree. The bull of Adrian " is
not forgery. Such a belief now rests upon
scholarship, but upon patriotic ecclesiastic
prejudice. Mr. OFsrrell. of course, cannot be ex-
pected to know what fine he is wronging
when he thinks John of Salisbury to have been
capable of forgery. Moreover. l do not quite un-
derstand what part of the Treaty of Limerick is
now unfuflled. Surely that treaty included no
Home Rule clause. And William of Holland
an Englishman? Or did he, matter of his
torical fact reign England by the consent of the
majority of the English people? Did the Para-
ment which placed him the throne fairly rep
resent the feeling of the English people? I have
always understood that for fifty years after the
Revolution the majority of the English people
hered to the Stuarts. This would not of course
free the English people from legal responsibility for
the things done by their Government. but would
free them from large share OF the moral re-
sponsib,lity. The adherents of the Stuarts always
sympathized with Ireland
Again was the Treaty of Limerick broken by the
English Parliament by the Irish Parliament?
The historical truth. in fact appears to be that
the wrongs and cruelties of the past. especially
since the Revolution. perpetrated by Eng
land upon Ireland but by one portion of the Irish
nation upon the other-by the governing class upon
their downtrodden fellow countrymen
In truth. the term Irish people" is usually en-
ployed in a double Justin Mccarthy makes
an observation concerning the English Chartists OF
1SiS which is much in point here. He says in THE
History of Our Own Times:
1t is somewhat curious to observe how It was as
we NAV cali the geoa orn TAIN IL tnat what
niation of these islands constitutes exclusively the
the of land the proprietors of factories the
ministers of the different denomina tions, the
the bar. the army the navy the medical profession
regard to any proposed consttutionai changes. was
or the English people"
The same assumption is often made by Ir,shmen
and they talk of the Irish people" as if there
could be people without such classes to con-
sttute it, Now, is 1t not historical fact that the
worst crueities committed in Ireland especially the
famine. have been perpetrated by these classes of
the Irish people upon their poorer fellow country
men? The terrible atrocities of 9S were the work
of the Irish Parliament and Of the Irish Executive
in adopting a policy which highly dspleasing
TO the enlightened mind of Pitt. OF course, Eng
land has heavy share of responsibility for up
holding those classes against the rebeions Of the
men whom they shamefully mlsgoverned.
But England also deserves some share of credit
for having effected many reforms in Ireland in
spite of the fercest resistance from those classes.
In 1898 the franchise extended to the Irish
Catholic peasantry by the Irish Parliament, only
when the English Government brought the whole
influence of the Crown TO bear; and, say the
truth, II was necessary to employ corrupt nf1u-
ence' for the attainment of this salutary end.
need not cite instances in recent times of the
fierce resistance and the bitter resentment which
England has excited among those classes by such
reforms the dsestablshment OF the Protestant
Church. I will only point out that we have had
two Irish Prime Ministers of Britain in the present
century. and both hostile to the Irish
masses than any English statesman. Wellington,
when Canning became Prime Minister, broke up
the party because Canning favored the Irish Cath
olics; and two years later; when he had succeeded
Canning he could not be brought to see the neces;
sty of CATHOLIC emancipation till it was Impressed
as Prime Minister did less for the Irish masses
and showed less respect for Irish national senti-
contribution to the solution of the most serious
ant right is landlords wrong
Now, this class or party of Irishmen has done
generals Ambassadors. Governors-General of col
Of s o 6 1f
of C9mmons and Prime Minister'S It's ,;o numbers IN 2s
land and overwhelming preponderance of the
rank, the property. the professions, the trained in
give it weight with the English people out Of
posed to- to Home Rule It has threatened rebellion
should that measure be passed Lord WolSeele,y 5el,
he would resign his commission to head the re-
be9n It's threats Of rebellion are at least as for
But let us assume that the Unionist irish would
iii He viii say to to Himself IF excite the hatred of
eminent Of the Nationaiist irish they win become
bitterly anti English. To stand well with their
up nti-English cry: they will appeal to the
old sentiment of hostility in the of the people.
for whose sake l have estranged the Unonist Irish?
Or shall | not have the whole undivided population
of Ireland animated by some policy hostile to Eng
land?"
Now if we look calmly at the question from this
point Of view. we see that our work as Home
must convert Unonist fellow countrymen or
must prove to English statesmen that they can
he
rely loyalty. Let us remember that the
English had little experience in the past.
When they dsestablshed their own Church the
Episcopaans out of revenge, joined in the cry for
Home Rule until they were frightened out of the
movement by the Land League English statesmen
naturally If they exasperate the Unionists
by forcing Home Rule on them. the Unionists may
raise cry or join in cry for the repeal of the
union and perhaps separation
mi not accepting the National Council with control
Of the land and education, which Chamberlain was
willing to concede; the l believe that
if had agreed to that we might have pressed
him readjustment of the financial relations.
We should then have been further on In 1895 than
now after a lapse of fourteen years; and
| will only add that to woes in the past.
though no fair minded expect that
them without acknowledgment of the fact
that only the Liberals. but even the Unionst
the English people expressed his sorrow for them
and his desire TO do ell In his power to redress i
no candid Irishman doubts his goodwill for
Ireland
As to Queen victoria's visit it surely is sound
policy to encourage her to go to Ireland and even
to set uD a royal residence there. The Irish land
lords will never dwell at home. among their own
people, until II is made fashionable Tor thern TO 40
so and that only be done by encouraging the
to there Surely it is illogical to blame
the Queen for not visiting Ireland and yet treat
her with "sullen silence when she goes there and
surely it is unfair to blame her personally for
q personally