The united opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1881-1970, 1922-01-20
De VALERA.

John Devoy in the Gaelic American)
The writer of this article has
known and dealt at close range with
every Irish leader for the past half
century, but he has never met one so
impractic able, self-willed, stubborn
and incapable of winning other men
to his views, or of conciliating honest
differences of opinion, as De Valera.
De Valera is absolutely impossible.
He has no real strength of character
and no convictions except an over
weening self-confdence, which is
founded neither on achievement nor
power of persuasion His position is:
Il want this thing done and you
must not ask me why. The Irish
people have selected ME as far as
their spokesman and that is enough"
This attitude on the part of a man
with wide experience of public affairs
would be bad enough but in the case
of man with no experience at all
and no training it is simply intoler-
able.
The writer has known James
Stephens, John OMahony, the Scan
Ian Brothers, P w Dunno, William R
Roberts, and all the leaders of
Fenianism on both sides of the At
lantic; the Land League and par
liamentary leaders from Charles
Stewart Parnell and Michael Davitt
to John Dillon and John Redmond; he
had intimate acquaintance with Pad
raic Pearse, Thomas ] Clarke, Sean
MacDermott and the other men Of
Easter Week, and he has seen enough
of Sir Horace Plunkett to be able to
make a fair estimate of his qualities
of leadership. Every leader has some
faults, if only the defects of his
qualities, and none of the men men,
toned was infallible, or even claim
; ed to be. But all of them were
gentlemen, courteous in their treat
| ment of colleagues and associates
and never putting on the insutfer-
able airs of superiority and author
: itv that characterize De Valera, es-
, pecially since he landed in America
: and got the great ovations-organiz-
/ ed for him by the men against whom
: he has waged an ignoble and vindic.
: tive warfare for the past year-and
which turned his head None of the
l men mentioned-not one of them
} ever showed the utter intractability
? and insistence on his own views
D which he seldom attempts to state
I distinctly or convincingly, which De
4 Valera showed during the whole Oh
his American tour. One could argue
e a point of difference with all Of
: them, but nobody in America evel
o did that with De Valera. He wa
= the Infallible Pope of Irish Politics
y the Court of Last Resort, from whose
), decision there was no appeal.
e While Stephens and Parnell wer'
f pictorial and strong-willed, they al
WAYS had intimate knowledge o
y facts, but were glad to accept in
l. formation from those who knew tn
', fact better. Nobody could ever d
e that with De Valera, and he wa
It most stubbornly insistent on matter
II of which his knowledge was elthe
= scant or wholly non-existent. Steph
n ems and Parneil quickly recognized
e man of force and character, an
d never failed to utilize him. ID
If Valera while in America showed re
Re sentiment at and jealousy of superlo
i ability, and surrounded himself wit
l. a group of imcompetents, nincon
poops and adventures, who made u
c. for lack of ability by initiating the
re leaders arrogance and presumptio
Ie No such staggering, bumptious set
al blatherskites has ever before appea
j. ed in Irish affairs.
Ak Former Irish leaders failed large
OF because the situation had got beyo1
p them, because, in fact, the time hi
n not come. De Valera had failed b
X cause he was never fit to grapp
n with the problem. The others foug
no for an object they believed in; ]
or Valera never believed in the ri
nm Republic, and only used it as an
al strument to bring about compromi
0o with England. Every day the re
ID. Republicans of Ireland continue
OF accept that kind of man as th'
leader will be day worse tn
IN wasted. Success under any circu
an stances and under any leader is
IN most difficult problem at prese
no With De Valera they are inviti
as and insuring utter and absolute ia