The Irish standard., 1905-05-13

Government should be for the good
of the governed, and whenever rulers
wilfully and persistently postpone the
good of their subjects either to the
interests of foreign states or to alb
stract theories Of religion or politics,
the people have right to throw of
the yoke. These are principles which
ed upon to be any longer questioned.
The destiny of nation ought to be
determined, not by the opinions of
other nations, but by the opinion of
the nation itself. To decide whether
they are we'll governed or not, or
rather whether the degree of extor-
tion corruption and cruelty to which
they are subject is sufficient to justify
armed insurrection, is for the people
who live under that government, not
for those who are exempt from its
oppression"
That was British press teaching at
a period when British coercion law
was in force in Ireland and when
Irishman were in British jails for act
ing with regard to their own country
on the principles thus preached by
the Times to Italian revolutionists.
Was there ever such hypocrisy? What
was rebellion" in Ireland, to be pun.
ished by jails and transportation, was
patriotism in Italy, applauded and en-
couraged by the press of England.
But as between the cases of Italy
and Ireland there was an important
difference, placing the position of the
latter on such stronger ground. The
Italians were in reality rebels be-
cause they were in revolt whether
justitiably or not against Italian rule
| in Italy, which, as such-rule of Italy
by Italians-was legitimate authority
entitled to claim and to force obedi-
ence. Not so, however, in Ireland.
English rule there is not legitimate
authority. 1t has no moral basis of
| right to Irish loyalty or allegiance.
Mr.. Gladstone, one of the greatest of
statesmen, is on record as having so
| declared in a conversation with Mr..
Barry o'Brien, who thus toldithe story
| a few months ago in one of his open
letters to the Lord Lieutenant of Ire
land:
Il knew the late Mr.. Gladstone. He
devoted himself earnestly to the cause
of Ireland in the latter years of his
life; but he knew little of Irish his
tory He was frank, he was courage
Gus; he would not deny the fact. He
once said to me: L am bound to say
that l did not know as much about
| the way the Union was carried when
| took up Home Rule as l came to
know afterward. If l had known so
much I would have been more earnest
and extreme. The union with ireland
has no moral force. 1t has the force
of law, no doubt, but it rests on no
moral basis. That is the line which
| should always take were 1 an Irish
man. That is the line which, as an
Englishman, take now.''
That is the line which, of course,
all patriotic Irishman take, too that
British rule in Ireland has no moral
standing, from which it follows equal
ly, of course, that Irishmen would be
fully warranted in an endeavor to
overthrow it by armed revolt, the only
qualifying consideration being, as Mr..
Redmond said, reasonable chance
of success" With that, armed revolt
against England in Ireland would have
every justification and every claim to
the sanction and approval of civilized
mankind. 1t was we'll that Mr.. Red.
mond, declaring that to be his own
sentiment, thus gave the English in
their House of Commons plainly to
understand that it also continues to
be the national sentiment of the Irish
people.