IRELAND

IN THE NEW CENTURY

BY THE RIGHT HON. 

SIR HORACE PLUNKETT, K. C. V. O. , F. R. S. 

LONDON

JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W. 

1904

_Printed by_ BROWNE AND NOLAN, LTD. , _Dublin_

TO THE MEMORY OF

W. E. H. LECKY, I DEDICATE ALL IN THIS BOOKTHAT IS WORTHY OF THE FRIENDSHIPWITH WHICH HE HONOURED ME, AND OF THE COUNSEL WHICH HE GAVE MEFOR MY GUIDANCE IN IRISH PUBLIC LIFE. 

PREFACE

Those who have known Ireland for the last dozen years cannot have failedto notice the advent of a wholly new spirit, clearly based uponconstructive thought, and expressing itself in a wide range of freshpractical activities. The movement for the organisation of agricultureand rural credit on co-operative lines, efforts of various kinds torevive old or initiate new industries, and, lastly, the creation of adepartment of Government to foster all that was healthy in the voluntaryeffort of the people to build up the economic side of their life, areeach interesting in themselves. When taken together, and in conjunctionwith the literary and artistic movements, and viewed in their relationto history, politics, religion, education, and the other past andpresent influences operating upon the Irish mind and character, thesemovements appear to me to be worthy of the most thoughtful considerationby all who are responsible for, or desire the well-being of the Irishpeople. 

I should not, however, in days when my whole time and energies belong tothe public service, have undertaken the task of writing a book on asubject so complex and apparently so inseparable from heatedcontroversy, were I not convinced that the expression of certainthoughts which have come to me from practical contact with Irishproblems, was the best contribution I could make to the work on which Iwas engaged. I wished, if I could, to bring into clearer light theessential unity of the various progressive movements in Ireland, and todo something towards promoting a greater definiteness of aim and method, and a better understanding of each other's work, among those who are invarious ways striving for the upbuilding of a worthy national life inIreland. 

So far the task, if difficult, was congenial and free fromembarrassment. Unhappily, it had been borne in upon me, in the course ofa long study of Irish life, that our failure to rise to ouropportunities and to give practical evidence of the intellectualqualities with which the race is admittedly gifted, was due to certaindefects of character, not ethically grave, but economically paralysing. I need hardly say I refer to the lack of moral courage, initiative, independence and self-reliance--defects which, however they may beaccounted for, it is the first duty of modern Ireland to recognise andovercome. I believe in the new movements in Ireland, principally becausethey seem to me to exert a stimulating influence upon our moral fibre. 

Holding such an opinion, I had to decide between preserving a discreetsilence and speaking my full mind. The former course would, it appearedto me, be a poor example of the moral courage which I hold to beIreland's sorest need. Moreover, while I am full of hope for the futureof my country, its present condition does not, in my view, admit of anydelay in arriving at the truth as to the essential principles whichshould guide all who wish to take a part, however humble, in the work ofnational regeneration. 

I desire to state definitely that I have not written in anyrepresentative capacity except where I say so explicitly. I write on myown responsibility, with the full knowledge that there is much in thebook with which many of those with whom I work do not agree. 

_December_, 1903. 

CONTENTS

PART I. 

_THEORETICAL. _

CHAPTER I

THE ENGLISH MISUNDERSTANDING. 

 Fidelity of the Irish to the National Ideal Disregard of Material Advantage in its Pursuit Home Rule Movement under Gladstone The Anti-Climax under Lord Rosebery The Logic of Events and the Dawn of the Practical The Mutual Misunderstanding of England and Ireland The Dunraven Conference produces a Revolution in English Thought about Ireland The Actual Change Examined Future Misunderstanding best averted by considering Nature of Anti-English Feeling Illustration from Irish-American Life Importance of Sentiment in Ireland--English Habit of Ignoring Historical Grievances Still Operative The Commercial Restrictions--Remaining Effects of Irish Land Tenure--Lord Dufferin on Defects of Land Laws--Their Effect on Agriculture Right Attitude towards Historic Grievances Plea for Broader and more Philosophic View of Irish Question Simple Explanations and Panaceas Deprecated A Many-Sided Human Problem

CHAPTER II. 

THE IRISH QUESTION IN IRELAND. 

 Misunderstanding of the Irish People by the English and by Themselves Anomalies of Irish Life The New Movement--Position of Nationalists and Unionists in it North and South The Question of Rural Life Economic Side of the Question Grazing versus Tillage Peasant Organisation to be Supplemented by State-Aid Uneconomic Holdings too Prevalent Remedies Proposed Salvation not by Agriculture Alone Rural Industries and the Irish Home Reasons for Arrested Development of Home Life Inter-Dependence of the Sentimental and Practical in Ireland Outlines of Succeeding Chapters

CHAPTER III. 

THE INFLUENCE OF POLITICS UPON THE IRISH MIND. 

 Legislation as a Substitute for Work Political Shortcomings of Unionism and Nationalism Compared Action of the Unionist Party Reviewed Two Main Causes of its Lack of Success The Contribution of Ulster The Nationalist Party Are Irishmen Good Politicians? The Irish and the Scotch-Irish in America America's Interest in the Problem Part Played by English Government in Producing Modern Irish Disabilities Causes of the Growth of National Feeling Retardation of Political Education by the One-Man System And by Politicians of To-Day Defence of Nationalist Policy on Ground of Tactics Considered The Forces opposed to Home Rule--How Dealt with Local Government--How it might have been utilised After Home Rule? Beginnings of Political Education The Irish Parliamentary Party

CHAPTER IV. 

THE INFLUENCE OF RELIGION UPON SECULAR LIFE IN IRELAND. 

 Influences of Religion in Ireland What is Toleration? Protestantism in Irish Life Roman Catholicism and Economics Power of the Roman Catholic Clergy Has it been Abused? Church Building and Monastic Establishments Clerical Education Responsibility of the Clergy for Irish Character The Church and Temperance The Inculcation of Chastity The Priest in Politics New Movement among the Roman Catholic Clergy Duty and Interest of Protestantism What each Creed has to Learn from the other

CHAPTER V. 

A PRACTICAL VIEW OF IRISH EDUCATION. 

 English Government and Education The Kildare Street Society Scheme of Thomas Wyse Early Attempts at Practical Education Recent Reports on Irish Systems The Policy of the Department of Agriculture The Example of Denmark University Education for Roman Catholics Maynooth and its Limitations Trinity College Its Lack of Influence on the Irish Mind A Democratic University Called for National and Economic in its Aims Views of Roman Catholic Ecclesiastics The Two Irelands Lord Chesterfield on Education and Character

CHAPTER VI. 

THROUGH THOUGHT TO ACTION. 

 A Word to my Critics The Gaelic League Compared with the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society Objects and Constitution of the League Filling the Gap in Irish Education Patriotism and Industry Nationality and Nationalism A Possible Danger Extravagances in the Movement The Gaelic League and the Rural Home Meeting with Harold Frederic His Pessimistic Views on the Celt A New Solution of the Problem--Organised Self-Help English and Irish Industrial Qualities Special Value of the Associative Qualities Conclusion of Part I. 

 * * * * *

PART II. 

_PRACTICAL. _

CHAPTER VII. 

THE NEW MOVEMENT; ITS FOUNDATION ON SELF-HELP. 

 Distrust of Novel Schemes often well justified The Story of the New Movement Necessitated by Foreign Competition Production and Distribution Causes of Continental Superiority Objects for which Combination is Desirable How to Organise the Industrial Army Help from England Doubts and Difficulties Some Favouring Conditions The Beginning of the Work--Co-operative Creameries The Social Problem Early Efforts and Experiences Foundation of the I. A. O. S. Its Present Position Agricultural Banks The Brightening of Home Life Staff of the Society Philanthropy and Business Enquiries from Abroad Moral and Social Effects of the New Movement Unknown Leaders

CHAPTER VIII. 

THE RECESS COMMITTEE. 

 After Six Years Opportunity for State-Aid Combination of Political and Industrial Leadership A Letter to the Press Mr. Justin McCarthy's Reply Mr. Redmond's Reply Formation of the Committee Investigations on the Continent Recommendations of the Committee Position of the Nationalist Members of the Committee Chief Reliance on Local Effort Public Opinion on the New Proposals Adoption of the Bill to give effect to them Mr. Gerald Balfour's Policy Industrial Home Rule

CHAPTER IX. 

A NEW DEPARTURE IN IRISH ADMINISTRATION. 

 Functions and Constitution of the New Department How it is Financed The Representative Element in its Constitution The Right to Vote Supplies Consultative Committee on Education The Department Linked with the Local Government System Successful Co-operation with Local Government Bodies And with Voluntary Societies The New Department and the Congested Districts Board The Reception of the Department by the Country Some Typical Callers A Wrong Impression Anticipated

CHAPTER X. 

GOVERNMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. 

 Summary of Previous Chapter The Attitude of the People towards the Department Method of Co-operation with Local Bodies State-Aid, Direct and Indirect The Department and the Large Towns The Department's Plans for Developing Agriculture The Industrial Problem and Education The Difficulty of Finding Trained Teachers How Surmounted Difficulties of Agricultural Education Decision to Adopt Itinerant Instruction Double Purpose of this Instruction Relation of the Department with Secondary Schools Importance of Domestic Economy Teaching Provision of Teachers in Domestic Economy Miscellaneous Industries Competition of the Factory The Department's Fabian Policy Justified Its Support by the Country Improvement of Live-Stock Best Method of giving Object Lessons in Agriculture Sea Fisheries Continental Tours for Irish Teachers Cork Exhibition of 1902 Things and Ideas Concluding Words

INDEX

PART I. 

_THEORETICAL_. 

 "It is hard to say where history ends, and where religion and politics begin; for history, religion and politics grow on one stem in Ireland, an eternal trefoil. "--_Lady Gregory_. 

CHAPTER I. 

THE ENGLISH MISUNDERSTANDING. 

Whatever may be the ultimate verdict of history upon the long struggleof the majority of the Irish people for self-government, the picture ofa small country with large aspirations giving of its best unstintinglyto the world, while gaining for itself little beyond sympathy, willappeal to the imagination of future ages long after the Irish Question, as we know it, has been buried. It may then, perhaps, be seen that theaspirations came to nought because they were opposed to the manifestdestiny of the race, and that it should never have been expected ordesired that the Dark Rosaleen should 'reign and reign alone. 'Nevertheless, the fidelity and fortitude with which the national idealhad been pursued would command admiration, even if the ideal itself wereto be altogether abandoned, or if it were to be ultimately realised in amanner which showed that the methods by which its attainment had beensought were the cause of its long postponement. Whatever the future mayhave in store for the remnant of the Irish people at home, the continuedpursuit of a separate national existence by a nation which is rapidlydisappearing from the land of all its hopes, and the cherishing ofthese hopes, not only by those who stay but also by those who go, willstand as a monument to human constancy. 

The picture will be all the more remarkable when emphasised by acontrast which the historian will not fail to draw. Across a narrowstreak of sea another people, during the same period, increased andmultiplied and prospered mightily, spread their laws and institutions, and achieved in every portion of the globe material success which theycan call their own. Yet, although Irishmen have done much to win thatsuccess for the English people to enjoy, and are to-day foremost inmaintaining the great empire which their brain and muscle were everready to augment, Ireland makes no claim for herself in respect of theachievement. It is to her but a proof of what her sons will do for herin the coming time; it does not bring her nearer to her heart's desire. 

Although the nineteenth century, with all its marvellous contributionsto human progress, left Ireland with her hopes unfulfilled; although itssun went down upon the British people with their greatest failure stillstaring them in the face, its last decade witnessed at first a change inthe attitude of England towards Ireland, and afterwards a profoundrevolution in the thoughts of Ireland about herself. The strangest andmost interesting feature of these developments was that in practicalEngland the Irish Question became the great political issue, while insentimental Ireland there set in a reaction from politics and aninclination to the practical. The twentieth century has already broughtto birth the new Ireland upon whose problems I shall write. If the humaninterest of these problems is to be realized, if their significance isnot to be as wholly misunderstood as that of every other Irish movementwhich has perplexed the statesmen who have managed our affairs, theymust be studied in their relation to the English and Irish events of theperiod in which the new Ireland was conceived. 

In 1885 Gladstone, appealing to an electorate with a large accession ofnewly enfranchised voters, transferred the struggle over the IrishQuestion from Ireland to Great Britain. The position taken up by theaverage English Home Ruler was, it will be remembered, simple andintelligible. The Irish had stated in the proper constitutional way whatthey wanted, and that, in the first flush of a victorious democracy, when counting heads irrespective of contents was the popular method ofarriving at political truth, was assumed to be precisely what they oughtto have. A long but inconclusive contest ensued. At times it looked asif the Liberal-Irish alliance might snatch a victory for their policy. But when Gladstone was forced to break with the Irish Leader, andParnellism without Parnell became obviously impossible, the Englishrealised that the working of representative institutions in Ireland hadproduced not a democracy but a dictatorship, and they began to attach alesser significance to the verdict of the Irish polls. Their faith indemocracy was unimpaired, but, in their opinion, the Irish had not yetrisen to its dignity. So most English Radicals came round to a viewwhich they had always reprobated when advanced by the EnglishConservatives, and political inferiority was added to the other moraland intellectual defects which made the Irish an inferior race!

The anti-climax to the Gladstone crusade was reached when Lord Roseberyin 1894 took over the premiership from the greatest English advocate ofthe Irish cause. The position of the new leader was very simple. Ineffect, he told the Irish Nationalists that the English party he wasabout to lead had done its best for them. They must now regardthemselves as partners in the United Kingdom, with the British as thepredominant partner. Until the predominant partner could be brought totake the Irish view of the partnership, the relations between them mustremain substantially as they were. And not only must the concession ofHome Rule await the conversion of the British electorate, but before thedemand could be effectively preferred, another leader must rise up amongthe Irish; and he, for all Lord Rosebery knew, was at the moment beingwheeled in a perambulator. This apparently cynical avowal of the newpremier's own attitude towards Home Rule accurately stated the facts ofthe situation, and fairly reflected the mind of the British electorate, after Irish obstruction had given them an opportunity of studying thebearing of the Irish Question on English politics. 

If the logic of events was thus making for the removal of Home Rule fromthe region of practical politics in England, an even more momentouschange was taking place in Ireland. Whilst the Home Rule controversy wasat its height in the 'eighties and early 'nineties, some Irishgrievances were incidentally dealt with--not always under the bestimpulses or in the best way. The concentration of all the availablethought and energy of Irish public men upon an appeal to the passionsand prejudices of English parties had led to the further postponement ofall Irish endeavour to deal rationally and practically with her ownproblems at home. But during the welter of contention which prevailedafter the fall of Parnell, there grew up in Ireland a wholly new spirit, born of the bitter lesson which was at last being learned. The Irishstill clung undaunted to their political ideal, but its pursuit to theexclusion of all other national aims had received a wholesome check. Thought upon the problems of national progress broadened and deepened, in a manner little understood by those who knew Ireland from without, and, indeed, by many of those accounted wise among the observers fromwithin. Was the realisation of a distinctive national existence, manybegan to ask themselves, to be for ever dependent upon the fortunes of apolitical campaign? In any scheme of a reconstructed national life towhich the Irish would give of their best, there must bedistinctiveness--that much every man who is in touch with Irish life isfully aware of--but the question of existence must not be altogetherignored. At the rate the people were leaving the sinking ship, the IrishQuestion would be settled in the not distant future by the disappearanceof the Irish. Had we not better look around and see how other countrieswith more or less analogous conditions fared? Could we not--Unionistsand Nationalists alike--do something towards material progress withoutabandoning our ideals? Could we not learn something from a study of whatour people were doing abroad? One seemed to hear the voice of BishopBerkeley, the biting pertinence of whose _Queries_ is ever fresh, askingfrom the grave in which he had been laid to rest nearly a century and ahalf ago 'whether it would not be more reasonable to mend our state thancomplain of it; and how far this may be in our own power?'

These questionings, though not generally heard on the platform or evenin the street, were none the less working in the depths of the Irishmind, and found expression not so much in words as in deeds. Yet thoughthe downfall of Parnell released many minds from the obsession ofpolitics, the influence of that event was of a negative character, andit took time to produce a beneficial effect. That fruitful last decadeof the nineteenth century saw the foundation of what will some day berecognised as a new philosophy of Irish progress. Certain new principleswere then promulgated in Ireland, and gradually found acceptance; andupon those principles a new movement was built. It is partly, indeed, toexpound and justify some, at any rate, of the principles and to give anintelligible account of the practical achievement and futurepossibilities of this movement that I write these pages. 

For English readers, to whom this introductory chapter is chieflyaddressed, I may here reiterate the opinion, which I have always heldand often expressed, that there is no real conflict of interest betweenthe two peoples and the two countries, and that the mutualmisunderstanding which we may now hope to see removed is due to a widedifference of temperament and mental outlook. The English mind has neverunderstood the Irish mind--least of all during the period of the 'Unionof Hearts. ' It is equally true that the Irish have largely misunderstoodboth the English character and their own responsibility. The result hasbeen that their leaders, despite the brilliant capacity they have shownin presenting the unhappy case of their country to the rest of theworld, have rarely presented it in the right way to the English people. There have been many occasions during the last quarter of a century whena calm, well-reasoned statement of the economic disadvantages underwhich Ireland labours would, I am convinced, have successfully appealedto British public opinion. It could have been shown that the developmentof Ireland--the development not only of the resources of her soil but ofthe far greater wealth which lies in the latent capacities of herpeople--was demanded quite as much in the interest of one country as inthat of the other. 

Here, indeed, is an untilled field for those to whom the Irish Questionis yet a living one. If I could think that each country fully realisedits own responsibility in the matter, if I could think that thelong-continued misunderstanding was at an end, nothing would induce meto trouble the waters at this auspicious hour, when a better feelingtowards Ireland prevails in Great Britain, and when the Irish people arefully appreciative of the obviously sincere desire of England to begenerous to Ireland. But an examination of the events upon which theprevailing optimism is based will show that, unhappily, misunderstanding, though of another sort, still exists, and that Irelandis as much as ever a riddle to the English mind. 

Now this new optimism in the English view of Ireland seems to be based, not upon a recognition of the development of what I have ventured todignify with the title of a new philosophy of Irish progress, but upon abelief that the spirit of moderation and conciliation displayed by somany Irishmen in connection with the Land Act is due to the fact that myincomprehensible countrymen have, under a sudden emotion, put awaychildish things and learned to behave like grown-up Englishmen. Throughout the press comments upon the Dunraven Conference and in publicspeeches both inside and outside Parliament there has run a sense that asort of portent, a transformation scene, a sudden and magicalalteration in the whole spirit and outlook of the Irish people, has cometo pass. 

I feel some hesitation in asking the reader to believe that a great andlasting revolution in Irish thought has been brought about in such amoment in the life of a people as twelve short years. But a lessernumber of months seemed to the English mind adequate for theaccomplishment of the change. And what a change it was that theyconceived! To them, less than a year ago, the Irish Question was notmerely unsolved, but in its essential features appeared unaltered. Afterseven centuries of experimental statecraft--so varied that the Englishcould not believe any expedient had yet to be tried--the vast majorityof the Irish people regarded the Government as alien, disputed thevalidity of its laws, and felt no responsibility for administration, norespect for the legislature, or for those who executed its decrees. Andthis in a country forming an integral part of the United Kingdom, wherethe fundamental basis of government is assumed to be the consent of thegoverned! Nor were any hopes entertained that the cloud would quicklypass. During the Boer war the prophets of evil, in predicting thecalamity which was to fall upon the British Empire, took as their textthe failure of English government in Ireland. When they wanted to paintin the darkest colours the coming heritage of woe, they wrote upon thewall, 'Another Ireland in South Africa'; and if any exception was takento the appropriateness of the phrase, it was certainly not on theground that Ireland had ceased to be a warning to British statesmen. 

I believe, quite as strongly as the most optimistic Englishman, thatthere has been a great change from this state of things in Irishsentiment, and my explanation of that change, if less dramatic than thetransformation theory, affords more solid ground for optimism. Thischange in the sentiment of Irishmen towards England is due, not to asudden emotion of the incomprehensible Celt, but really to theopinion--rapidly growing for the last dozen years--that great as is theresponsibility of England for the state of Ireland, still greater is theresponsibility of Irishmen. The conviction has been more and more bornein upon the Irish mind that the most important part of the work ofregenerating Ireland must necessarily be done by Irishmen in Ireland. The result has been that many Irishmen, both Unionists and Nationalists, without in any way abandoning their opposition to, or support of, theattempt to solve the political problem from without, have beentrying--not without success--to solve some part of the Irish Questionfrom within. The Report of the Recess Committee, on which I shall dwelllater, was the first great fruit of this movement, and the DunravenTreaty, which paved the way for Mr. Wyndham's Land Act, was a furtherfruit, and not the result of an inexplicable transformation scene. 

The reason why I dwell on the true nature of the undoubted change inthe Irish situation is not in order to exaggerate the importance of thepart played by the new movement in bringing it about, nor to detractfrom the importance of Parliamentary action, but because a mistaken viewof the change would inevitably postpone the firm establishment of animproved mutual understanding between the two countries, which I regardas an essential of Irish progress. I confess that my apprehension of anew misunderstanding was aroused by the debates on the Land Bill in theHouse of Commons. As regards the spirit of conciliation and moderationdisplayed by the Irish, and the sincere desire exhibited by the Britishto heal the chief Irish economic sore, the speeches were, if notepoch-making, at any rate epoch-marking; but they showed little sense ofperspective or proportion in viewing the Irish Question, and littlegrasp or appreciation of the large social and economic problems whichthe Land Act will bring to the front. Temporary phenomena andlegislative machinery have been endowed with an importance they do notpossess, and miracles, it is supposed, are about to be worked in Irelandby processes which, whatever rich good may be in them, have never workedmiracles, though they have not seldom excited very similar enthusiasmsin the economic history of other European lands. 

I agree, then, with most Englishmen in thinking, though for a differentreason, that the passing of the Land Act marked a new era in Ireland. They regard it as productive of, or co-incident in time with, the dawnof the practical in Ireland. I antedate that event by some dozen years, and regard the Land Act rather as marking a new era, because it removesthe great obstacle which obscured the dawn of the practical for so many, and hindered it for all. 

Whatever may have been the expectations upon which this great measurewas based, I, in common with most Irish observers, watched its progresswith unfeigned delight. The vast majority regarded the hundred millionsof credit and the twelve millions of 'bonus' as a generous concession toIreland; and I sympathised with those who deprecated the mischievoussuggestion, not infrequently heard in English political circles, thatthis munificence was the 'price of peace. ' On one point all were agreed:the Bill could never have become law had not Mr. Wyndham handled theParliamentary situation with masterly tact, temper, and ability. To himis chiefly due the credit for the fact that the Land Question, in itsold form at any rate, no longer blocks the way, and that the largeproblems which remain to be solved, and, above all, the spirit in whichthey will have to be approached by those who wish the existing peace tobe the forerunner of material and social progress, can be freely andfrankly discussed. 

It is true, as I have said, that Ireland is becoming more and morepractical, and that England is becoming more anxious than ever to do hersubstantial justice. But still the manner of the doing will continue tobe as important as the thing which is done. Of the Irish qualities noneis stronger than the craving to be understood. If the English had onlyknown this secret we should have been the most easily governed people inthe world. For it is characteristic of the conduct of our most importantaffairs that we care too little about the substance and too much aboutthe shadow. It is for this reason that I have discussed the real natureof one phase of Irish sentiment which has been largely misunderstood, and it is for the same reason that I propose to preface my examinationof the Irish Question with some reference to the cause and nature of theanti-English sentiment, for the long continuance of which I can find noother explanation than the failure of the English to see into the Irishmind. 

I am well acquainted with this sentiment because, in my practical workin Ireland, it has ever been the main current of the stream againstwhich I have had to swim. Years spent in the United States had made mefamiliar with its full and true significance, for there it can bestudied in an atmosphere not dominated by any present Irishcontroversies or struggles. I have found this sentiment of hatred deeplyrooted in the minds of Irishmen who had themselves never known Ireland, who had no connection, other than a sentimental one, with that country, who were living quiet business lives in the United States, but who wereever ready to testify with their dollars, and genuinely believed thatthey only lacked opportunity to demonstrate in a more enterprising way, their "undying hatred of the English name. "[1]

With such men I have reasoned, and sometimes not in vain, upon theinjustice and unreason of their attitude. I have not attempted tocontrovert the main facts of Ireland's grievances, which they frequentlytold me they had gleaned from Froude and Lecky. I used to deprecate theunqualified application of modern standards to the policies of otherdays, and to protest against the injustice of punishing one set ofpersons for the misdoings of another set of persons, who have long sincepassed beyond the reach of any earthly tribunal. I have given them myreasons for believing that, even if such a course were morallyadmissible, the wit of man could not devise any means of inflicting ablow upon England which would not react injuriously with tenfold forceupon Ireland. I have gone on to show that the sentiment itself, largelythe accident of untoward circumstances, is alien to the character andtemperament of the Irish people. In short, I have urged that the policyof revenge is un-Christian and unintelligent, and, that, as the Irishpeople are neither irreligious nor stupid, it is un-Irish. I wellremember taking up this position in conversation with some very advancedIrish-Americans in the Far West and the reply which one of them made. "Wal, " said my half-persuaded friend, "mebbe you're right. I have twosons, whom I have raised in the expectation that they will one daystrike a blow for old Ireland. Mebbe they won't. I'm too old to change. "

I have chosen this incident from a long series of similar reminiscencesof my study of Irish life, to illustrate an attitude of mind, thehistorical explanation of which would seem to the practical Englishmanas academic as a psychological exposition of the effect of a red ragupon a bull. The English are not much to be blamed for resenting thesurvival of the feeling, but it appears to me to argue a singular lackof political imagination that they should still fail to appreciate thereality, the significance, and the abiding force of a sentiment whichhas so far successfully resisted the influence of those governingqualities which have played a foremost part in the civilisation of themodern world. The _Spectator_ some time ago came out bluntly with atruth which an Irishman may, I presume, quote without offence from sohigh an English authority:--"The one blunder of average Englishmen inconsidering foreign questions is that with white men they make toolittle allowance for sentiment, and with coloured men they make none atall. "[2] I am afraid it must be added that 'average Englishmen' makeexactly the same blunder in under-estimating the force of sentiment whenconsidering Irish questions, with the not unnatural consequence thatthe Irish regard them as foreigners, and that, as those foreignershappen to govern them, the sentiment of nationality becomes politicaland anti-English. 

There is one reason why this sentiment is not allowed to die whichshould always be remembered by those who wish to grasp the innerworkings of the Irish mind. Briefly stated, the view prevails in Irelandthat in dealing with questions affecting our material well-being, thegovernment of our country by the English was, in the past, characterisedby an unenlightened self-interest. Thoughtful Englishmen admit thischarge, but they say that the past referred to is beyond living memoryand should now be buried. The Irish mind replies that the life of anation is not to be measured by the life of individuals, and that awrong inflicted by a Government upon a community entitles those whoinherit the consequences of the injury to claim reparation at the handsof those who inherit the government. With this attitude on the part ofthe Irish mind I am not only most heartily in sympathy, but I find everyEnglishman who understands the situation equally so. In the laterportions of this book it will be shown that practical recognition, in nosmall measure, has been given by England to the righteousness of thispart of the Irish case, and that if the effect thus produced has notfound as full an outward expression as might have been expected, theIrish people have at any rate responded to the new treatment in a mannerwhich must, in no distant future, bring about a better understanding. 

The only historical causes of our present discontents to which I neednow particularly refer, are the commercial restrictions and the landsystem of the past, which stand out from the long list of Irishgrievances as those for which their victims were the least responsible. No one can be more anxious than I am that we should cease to be for everseeking in the past excuses for our present failures. But it isessential to a correct estimation of Irish agricultural and industrialpossibilities that we should notice the true bearings of thesehistorical grievances upon existing conditions. 

In this connection there arises a question which is very pertinent tothe present inquiry and which must therefore be considered. I have seenit argued by English economists that the industrial revolution whichtook place at the end of the eighteenth and commencement of thenineteenth century would in any case have destroyed, by force of opencompetition, industries which, it is admitted, were previouslylegislated away. They point out that the change from the order of smallscattered home industries to the factory system would have suitedneither the temperament nor the industrial habits of the Irish. Theytell us that with the industrial revolution the juxtaposition of coaland iron became an all-important factor in the problem, and they recallhow the north and west of England captured the industrial supremacy fromthe south and east. Incidentally they point out that the people of theEnglish counties which suffered by these economic causes bracedthemselves to meet the changes, and it is suggested that if the peopleof Ireland had shown the same resourcefulness, they, too, might haveweathered the storm. And, finally, we are reminded that England, by herstupid Irish policy, punished her own supporters, and even herself, quite as much as the 'mere Irish. '

Much of this may be true, but this line of argument only shows thatthese English economists do not thoroughly understand the real grievancewhich the Irish people still harbour against the English for pastmisgovernment. The commercial restraints sapped the industrial instinctof the people--an evil which was intensified in the case of theCatholics by the working of the penal laws. When these legislativerestrictions upon industry had been removed, the Irish, not beingtrained in industrial habits, were unable to adapt themselves to thealtered conditions produced by the Industrial Revolution, as did thepeople in England. And as for commerce, the restrictions, which had aslittle moral sanction as the penal laws, and which invested smugglingwith a halo of patriotism, had prevented the development of commercialmorality, without which there can be no commercial success. It is not, therefore, the destruction of specific industries, or even the sweepingof our commerce from the seas, about which most complaint is now made. The real grievance lies in the fact that something had been taken fromour industrial character which could not be remedied by the mere removalof the restrictions. Not only had the tree been stripped, but the rootshad been destroyed. If ever there was a case where President Kruger's'moral and intellectual damages' might fairly be claimed by an injurednation, it is to be found in the industrial and commercial history ofIreland during the period of the building up of England's commercialsupremacy. 

The English mind quite failed, until the very end of the nineteenthcentury, to grasp the real needs of the situation which had thus beencreated in Ireland The industrial revolution, as I have indicated, foundthe Irish people fettered by an industrial past for which theythemselves were not chiefly responsible. They needed exceptionaltreatment of a kind which was not conceded. They were, instead, stillfurther handicapped, towards the middle of the century, by the adoptionof Free Trade, which was imposed upon them when they were not onlyunable to take advantage of its benefits, but were so situated as tosuffer to the utmost from its inconveniences. 

I am convinced that the long-continued misunderstanding of theconditions and needs of this country, the withholding, for so long, ofnecessary concessions, was due not to heartlessness or contempt so muchas to a lack of imagination, a defect for which the English cannot beblamed. They had, to use a modern term, 'standardised' their qualities, and it was impossible to get out of their minds the belief that adivergence, in another race, from their standard of character wassynonymous with inferiority. This attitude is not yet a thing of thepast, but it is fast disappearing; and thoughtful Englishmen nowrecognise the righteousness of the claim for reparation, and are willingliberally to apply any stimulus to our industrial life which may placeus, so far as this is possible, on the level we might have occupied hadwe been left to work out our own economic salvation. Unfortunately, allEnglishmen are not thoughtful, and hence I emphasise the fact thatEngland is largely responsible for our industrial defects, and must nothesitate to face the financial results of that responsibility. 

When we pass from the domain of commerce, where we have seen thatcircumstances reduced to the minimum Ireland's participation in theindustrial supremacy of England, and come to examine the historicaldevelopment of Irish agrarian life, we find a situation closely relatedto, and indeed, largely created by, that which we have been discussing. 'Debarred from every other trade and industry, ' wrote the late LordDufferin, 'the entire nation flung itself back upon the land, with asfatal an impulse as when a river, whose current is suddenly impeded, rolls back and drowns the valley which it once fertilised. ' Theenergies, the hopes, nay, the very existence of the race, became thusintimately bound up with agriculture. This industry, their last resortand sole dependence, had to be conducted by a people who in every otheravocation had been unfitted for material success. And this industry, too, was crippled from without, for a system of land tenure had beenimposed upon Ireland that was probably the most effective that couldhave been devised for the purpose of perpetuating and accentuating everydisability to which other causes had given rise. 

The Irish land system suffered from the same ills as we all know thepolitical institutions to have suffered from--a partial and intermittentconquest. Land holding in Ireland remained largely based on the tribalsystem of open fields and common tillage for nearly eight hundred yearsafter collective ownership had begun to pass away in England. The suddenimposition upon the Irish, early in the seventeenth century, of a landsystem which was no part of the natural development of the country, ignored, though it could not destroy, the old feeling of communisticownership, and, when this vanished, it did not vanish as it did incountries where more normal conditions prevailed. It did not perish likea piece of outworn tissue pushed off by a new growth from within: on thecontrary, it was arbitrarily cut away while yet fresh and vital, withthe result that where a bud should have been there was a scar. 

This sudden change in the system of land-holding was followed by acentury of reprisals and confiscations, and what war began the lawcontinued. The Celtic race, for the most part impoverished in mind andestate by the penal laws, became rooted to the soil, for, as we haveseen, they had, on account of the repression of industries, noalternative occupation, and so became, in fact, if not in law, _adscripti glebae_. Upon the productiveness of their labour thelandlord depended for his revenues, but he did little to develop thatproductiveness, and the system which was introduced did everything tolessen it. [3] The wound produced by the original confiscation of theland was kept from healing by the way in which the tenants' improvementswere somewhat similarly treated. I do not mean that they weresystematically confiscated--the Devon and Bessborough Commissions, aswell as Gladstone, bore witness to the contrary--but the right and theoccasional exercise of the right to confiscate operated in the same way. In the Irish tenant's mind dispossession was nine-tenths of the law. 

An enlightened system of land tenure might have made prosperity andcontentment the lot of the native race, and, perhaps, have renderedpossible such a solution of the Irish problem as was effected betweenEngland and Scotland two centuries ago. What was chiefly required foragrarian peace was a recognition of that sense of partnership in theland--a relic of the tribal days--to which the Irish mind tenaciouslyadhered. But, like most English concessions, it was not granted untiltoo late, and then granted in the wrong way. The natural result wasthat, when at last the recognition of partnership was enacted, it becamea lever for a demand for complete ownership. But this was the aftermath, for in the meantime, from the seed sown by English blundering, Ireland--native population and English garrison alike--had reaped theawful harvest of the Irish famine, which was followed by a long darkwinter of discontent. Upon the England that sowed the wind there wasvisited a whirlwind of hostility from the Irish race scatteredthroughout the globe. 

It would be altogether outside the scope or purpose of this chapter topresent a complete history of the remedial legislation applied to Irishland tenure. That history, however, illustrates so vividly the Englishmisunderstanding, that a short survey of one phase of it may help topoint the moral. The English intellect at long last began to grasp theagrarian, though not the industrial side of the wrong that had been doneto Ireland, and the English conscience was moved; there came the era ofconcessions to which I have alluded, and for over a quarter of a centuryattempts, often generous, if not very discriminating, were made to dealwith the situation. In 1870, dispossession was made very costly to thelandlord. In 1881, it became impossible, except on the tenant's default, and the partnership was fully recognised, the tenant's share being madehis own to sell, and being preserved for his profitable use by a rightto have the rent payable to his sleeping partner, the landlord, fixed bya judicial tribunal. These rights were the famous three F's--fixity oftenure, free sale, and fair rent--of the Magna Charta of the Irishpeasant. If these concessions had only been made in time, they wouldprobably have led to a strengthening of the economic position andcharacter of the Irish tenantry, which would have enabled them to takefull advantage of their new status, and meet any condition which mightarise; and it is just possible that the system might have worked well, even at the eleventh hour, had it been launched on a rising market. Unhappily, it fell upon evil days. The prosperous times of Irishagriculture, which culminated a few years before the passing of the'Tenants' Charter, ' were followed by a serious reaction, the result ofcauses which, though long operative, were only then beginning to makethemselves felt, and some of which, though the fact was not thengenerally recognised, were destined to be of no temporary character. Theagricultural depression which has continued ever since was due, as isnow well known, to foreign competition, or, in other words, to theopening up of vast areas in the Far West to the plough and herd, and thebringing of the products of distant countries into the home markets inever-increasing quantity, in ever fresher condition, and at anever-decreasing cost of transportation. Great changes were taking placein the market which the Irish farmer supplied, and no two men couldagree as to the relative influence of the new factors of the problem, oras to their probable duration. 

Whatever may be said in disparagement of the great experiment commencedin 1881, there can be no doubt that it enormously improved the legalposition of the Irish tenantry, and I, for one, regard it as anecessary contribution to the events whose logic was finally to bringabout the abolition of dual ownership. But what a curious instance ofthe irony of fate is afforded by this genuine attempt to heal an Irishsore, what a commentary it is upon the English misunderstanding of theIrish mind! Mr. Gladstone found the land system intolerable to oneparty; he made it intolerable to the other also. For half a century_laissez-faire_ was pedantically applied to Irish agriculture, thensuddenly the other extreme was adopted; nothing was left alone, andpolitical economy was sent on its famous planetary excursion. 

When Mr. Gladstone was attempting to settle the land question on thebasis of dual ownership, the seed of a new kind of singleownership--peasant proprietorship--was sown through the influence ofJohn Bright. The operations of the land purchase clauses in the ChurchDisestablishment Act of 1869, and the Land Acts of 1870 and 1881, wereenormously extended by the Land Purchase Acts introduced by theConservative Party in 1885 and in 1891, and the success which attendedthese Acts accentuated the defects and sealed the fate of dualownership, which all parties recently united to destroy. In other words, Parliament has been undoing a generation's legislative work upon theIrish land question. 

This is all I need say about that stage of the Irish agrarian situationat which we have now arrived. What I wish my readers to bear in mind isthat the effect of a bad system of land tenure upon the other aspects ofthe Irish Question reaches much further back than the struggles, agitations, and reforms in connection with Irish land which thisgeneration has witnessed. The same may be said with regard to the othereconomic grievances. No one can be more anxious than I am to fasten themind of my countrymen upon the practical things of to-day, and to weantheir sad souls from idle regrets over the sorrows of the past. If Irevive these dead issues, it is because I have learned that no man canmove the Irish mind to action unless he can see its point of view, whichis largely retrospective. I cannot ignore the fact that the attitude ofmind which causes the Irish people to put too much faith in legislativecures for economic ills is mainly due to the belief that their ancestorswere the victims of a long series of laws by which every industry thatmight have made the country prosperous was jealously repressed orruthlessly destroyed. Those who are not too much appalled by thequantity to examine into the quality of popular oratory in Ireland arefamiliar with the subordination of present economic issues to the drearyreiteration of this old tale of woe. Personally I have always held thatto foster resentment in respect of these old wrongs is as stupid as wasthe policy which gave them birth; and, even if it were possible todistribute the blame among our ancestors, I am sure we should doourselves much harm, and no living soul any good, in the reckoning. Inmy view, Anglo-Irish history is for Englishmen to remember, for Irishmento forget. 

I may now conclude my appeal to outside observers for a broader and morephilosophic view of my country and my countrymen with a suggestion bornof my own early mistakes, and with a word of warning which is called forby my later observation of the mistakes of others. The difficulty of theoutside observer in understanding the Irish Question is, no doubt, largely due to the fact that those in intimate touch with the actualconditions are so dominated by vehement and passionate conviction thatreason is not only at a discount but is fatal to the acquisition ofpopular influence. Of course the power of knowledge and thought, thoughkept in the background, is not really eliminated. But it is in thecircumstances not unnatural that most of us should fall into the errorof attributing to the influence of prominent individuals ororganisations the events and conditions which the superficial observerregards as the creation of the hour, but which are in reality theoutcome of a slow and continuous process of evolution. I remember as aboy being captivated by that charming corrective to this view ofhistorical development, Buckle's _History of Civilization_, which inrecent years has often recurred to my mind, despite the fact that manyof his theories are now somewhat discredited. Buckle, if I rememberright, almost eliminates the personal factor in the life of nations. According to his theory, it would not have made much difference tomodern civilisation if Napoleon had happened, as was so near being thecase, to be born a British instead of a French subject. It would alsohave followed that if O'Connell had limited his activities to hisprofessional work, or if Parnell had chanced to hate Ireland as bitterlyas he hated England, we should have been, politically, very much wherewe are to-day. The student of Irish affairs should, of course, avoid theextreme views of historical causation; but in the search for the truthhe will, I think, be well advised to attach less significance to theinfluence of prominent personality than is the practice of the ordinaryobserver in Ireland. 

The warning I have to offer, I think, will be justified by a reflectionupon the history of the panaceas which we have been offered, and uponour present state. To those of my British readers who honestly desire tounderstand the Irish Question, I would say, let them eschew the sweepinggeneralisations by which Irish intelligence is commonly outraged. I maypass by the explanation which rests upon the cheap attribution of racialinferiority with the simple reply that our inferior race has much of thesuperior blood in its veins; yet the Irish problem is just as acute indistricts where the English blood predominates as where the people are'mere Irish. ' If this view be disputed, the matter is not worth arguingabout, because we cannot be born again. But there are three other commonexplanations of the Irish difficulty, any one of which taken by itselfonly leads away from the truth. I refer, I need hardly say, to thefamiliar assertions that the origin of the evil is political, that it isreligious, or that it is neither one nor the other, but economic. InIrish history, no doubt, we may find, under any of these heads, causeenough for much of our present wrong-goings. But I am profoundlyconvinced that each of the simple explanations to which I have justalluded--the racial, the political, the religious, the economic--isbased upon reasoning from imperfect knowledge of the facts of Irishlife. The cause and cure of Irish ills are not chiefly political, broaden or narrow our conception of politics as we will; they are notchiefly religious, whatever be the effect of Roman Catholic influenceupon the practical side of the people's life; they are not chieflyeconomic, be the actual poverty of the people and the potential wealthof the country what they may. The Irish Question is a broad and deeplyinteresting human problem which has baffled generation after generationof a great and virile race, who complacently attribute their incapacityto master it to Irish perversity, and pass on, leaving it unsolved byAnglo-Saxons, and therefore insoluble!

FOOTNOTES:

[1] My own experience confirms Mr. Lecky's view of the chief cause ofthis extraordinary feeling. "It is probable, " he writes, "that the truesource of the savage hatred of England that animates great bodies ofIrishmen on either side of the Atlantic has very little real connectionwith the penal laws, or the rebellion, or the Union. It is far more dueto the great clearances and the vast unaided emigrations that followedthe famine. "--_Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland_, Vol. II. , p, 177. 

[2] _Spectator_, 6th September, 1902. 

[3] The title to the greater part of Irish land is based onconfiscation. This is true of many other countries, but what wasexceptional in the Irish confiscations was that the grantees for themost part did not settle on the lands themselves, drive away thedispossessed, or come to any rational working agreement with them. 

CHAPTER II. 

THE IRISH QUESTION IN IRELAND. 

Whilst attributing the long continued failure of English rule in Irelandlargely to a misunderstanding of the Irish mind, I have givenEngland--at least modern England--credit for good intentions towards us. I now come to the case of the misunderstood, and shall from henceforthbe concerned with the immeasurably greater responsibility of the Irishpeople themselves for their own welfare. The most characteristic, and byfar the most hopeful feature of the change in the Anglo-Irish situationwhich took place in the last decade of the nineteenth century, and uponthe meaning of which I dwelt in the preceding chapter, is the growingsense amongst us that the English misunderstanding of Ireland is of farless importance, and perhaps less inexcusable, than our ownmisunderstanding of ourselves. 

When I first came into practical touch with the extraordinarily complexproblems of Irish life, nothing impressed me so much as the universalbelief among my countrymen that Providence had endowed them withcapacities of a high order, and their country with resources ofunbounded richness, but that both the capacities and the resourcesremained undeveloped owing to the stupidity--or worse--of British rule. It was asserted, and generally taken for granted, that the exiles ofErin sprang to the front in every walk of life throughout the world, inevery country but their own--though I notice that in quite recent timesendeavours have been made to cool the emigration fever by painting thefortunes of the Irish in America in the darkest colours. To suggest thatthere was any use in trying at home to make the best of things as theywere was indicative of a leaning towards British rule; and to attempt togive practical effect to such a heresy was to draw a red herring acrossthe path of true Nationalism. 

It is not easy to account for the long continuance of this attitude ofthe Irish mind towards Irish problems, which seems unworthy of thenative intelligence of the people. The truth probably is that while wehave not allowed our intellectual gifts to decay, they have been oflittle use to us because we have neglected the second part of the oldScholastic rule of life, and have failed to develop the moral qualitiesin which we are deficient. Hence we have developed our criticalfaculties, not, unhappily, along constructive lines. We have beenthroughout alive to the muddling of our affairs by the English, and haveaccurately gauged the incapacity of our governors to appreciate ourneeds and possibilities. But we recognised their incapacity more readilythan our own deficiencies, and we estimated the failure of the Englishfar more justly than we apportioned the responsibility between ourrulers and ourselves. The sense of the duty and dignity of labour hasbeen lost in the contemplation of circumstances over which it wasassumed that we have no control. 

It is a peculiarity of destructive criticism that, unlike charity, itgenerally begins and ends abroad; and those who cultivate the gentle artare seldom given to morbid introspection. Our prodigious ignorance aboutourselves has not been blissful. Mistaking self-assertion forself-knowledge, we have presented the pathetic spectacle of a peoplecasting the blame for their shortcomings on another people, yet bearingthe consequences themselves. The national habit of living in the pastseems to give us a present without achievement, a future without hope. The conclusion was long ago forced upon me that whatever may have beentrue of the past, the chief responsibility for the remoulding of ournational life rests now with ourselves, and that in the last analysisthe problem of Irish ineffectiveness at home is in the main a problem ofcharacter--and of Irish character. 

I am quite aware that such a diagnosis of our mind disease--from whichIreland is, in my belief, slowly but surely recovering--will not passunchallenged, but I would ask any reader who dissents from this view totake a glance at the picture of our national life as it might unfolditself to an unprejudiced but sympathetic outsider who came to Irelandnot on a political tour but with a sincere desire to get at the truth ofthe Irish Question, and to inquire into the conditions about which allthe controversy continues to rage. 

This hypothetical traveller would discover that our resources are buthalf developed, and yet hundreds of thousands of our workers have gone, and are still going, to produce wealth where it is less urgently needed. The remnant of the race who still cling to the old country are not onlynumerically weak, but in many other ways they show the physical andmoral effects of the drain which emigration has made on the youth, strength, and energy of the community. Our four and a quarter millionsof people, mainly agricultural, have, speaking generally, a very lowstandard of comfort, which they like to attribute to some five or sixmillions sterling paid as agricultural rent, and three millions ofalleged over-taxation. They face the situation bravely--and, incidentally, swell the over-taxation--with the help of the thirteen orfourteen millions worth of alcoholic stimulants which they annuallyconsume. The still larger consumption in Great Britain may seem to lendat least a respectability to this apparent over-indulgence, but it looksodd. The people are endowed with intellectual capacities of a highorder. They have literary gifts and an artistic sense. Yet, with a fewbrilliant exceptions, they contribute nothing to invention and createnothing in literature or in art. One would say that there must besomething wrong with the education of the country; and most peopledeclare that it is too literary, though the Census returns show thatthere are still large numbers who escape the tyranny of books. Thepeople have an extraordinary belief in political remedies for economicills; and their political leaders, who are not as a rule themselvesactively engaged in business life, tell the people, pointing to ruinedmills and unused water power, that the country once had diversifiedindustries, and that if they were allowed to apply their panacea, Ireland would quickly rebuild her industrial life. If our hypotheticaltraveller were to ask whether there are no other leaders in the countrybesides the eloquent gentlemen who proclaim her helplessness, he wouldbe told that among the professional classes, the landlords, and thecaptains of industry, are to be found as competent popular advisers asare possessed by any other country of similar economic standing. Butthese men take only a dilettante part in politics, and no value is seton industrial, commercial or professional success in the choice ofpublic men. Can it be that to the Irish mind politics are, what BulwerLytton declared love to be, "the business of the idle, and the idlenessof the busy"?

These, though only a few of the strange ironies of Irish life, are soparadoxical and so anomalous that they are not unnaturally attributed tothe intrusion of an alien and unfriendly power; and this furnishes thereason why everything which goes wrong is used to nourish theanti-English sentiment. At the same time they give emphasis to thegrowing doubt as to the wisdom of those to whom the Irish Questionpresents itself only as a single and simple issue--namely, whether thelaws which are to put all these things right shall be made at St. Stephen's by the collective wisdom of the United Kingdom, aided by thevoice of Ireland--which is adequately represented--or whether these lawsshall be made by Irishmen alone in a Parliament in College Green. 

It is obviously necessary that, in presenting a comprehensive scheme fordealing with the conditions I have roughly indicated. I should make somereference to the attitude towards Home Rule of both the Nationalists andthe Unionists who have joined in work which, whatever be itsirregularity from the standpoint of party discipline as enforced inIreland, has succeeded in some degree in directing the energies of ourcountrymen to the development of the resources of our country. Many ofmy fellow-workers were Nationalists who, while stoutly adhering to theprime necessity for constitutional changes, took the broad view, whichwas unpopular among the Irish Party, that much could be done, even underpresent conditions, to build up our national life on its social, intellectual, and economic sides. The well-known constitutional changeswhich were advocated in the political party to which they belonged wouldthen, they believed, be more effectively demanded by Ireland, and morereadily conceded by England. Unionists who worked with me were similarlyaffected by the changing mental outlook of the country. They, too, hadto break loose from the traditions of an Irish party, for they felt thatthe exclusively political opposition to Home Rule was not lessdemoralising than the exclusively political pursuit of Home Rule. Justas the Nationalists who joined the movement believed that all progressmust make for self-government, so my Unionist fellow-workers believedit would ultimately strengthen the Union. Each view was thoroughly soundfrom the standpoint of those who held it, and could be regarded withrespect by those who did not. We were all convinced that the way toachieve what is best for Ireland was to develop what is best inIrishmen. And it was the conviction that this can be done by Irishmen inIreland that brought together those whose thought and work supplieswhatever there may be of interest in this book. 

If I have fairly stated the attitude towards each other of the workersto whose coming together must be attributed as much of the change in theIrish situation as is due to Irish initiation, it will be seen that whathad so long kept them apart in public affairs, outside politics, was adifference of opinion, not so much as to the conditions to be dealtwith, nor, indeed, as to the end to be sought, but rather as to themeans most effective for the attainment of that end. I naturally regardthe view which I am putting forward as being broader than that which hashitherto prevailed. Some Nationalists may, however, contend that it isessential to progress that the thoughts and energies of the nationshould be focussed upon a single movement, and not dissipated in thepursuit of a multiplicity of ideals. I quite admit the importance ofconcentration. But I strongly hold that any movement which is closelyrelated to the main currents of the people's life and subservient totheir urgent economic necessities, and which gives free play to theintellectual qualities, while strengthening the moral or industrialcharacter, cannot be held to conflict with any national programme ofwork, without raising a strong presumption that there is something wrongwith the programme. The exclusively political remedy I shall discuss inthe next chapter, but here I propose to consider some of the problemswhich the new movement seeks to solve without waiting for the politicalmillenium. 

It is a commonplace that there are two Irelands, differing in race, increed, in political aspiration, and in what I regard as a more potentfactor than all the others put together--economic interest andindustrial pursuit. In the mutual misunderstanding of these twoIrelands, still more than in the misunderstanding of Ireland by England, is to be found the chief cause of the still unsettled state of the IrishQuestion. I shall not seek to apportion the blame between the twosections of the population; but as the mists clear away and we can beginto construct a united and contented Ireland, it is not only legitimate, but helpful in the extreme, to assign to the two sections of ourwealth-producers their respective parts in repairing the fortunes oftheir country. In such a discussion of future developments chiefprominence must necessarily be given to the problems affecting the lifeof the majority of the people, who depend directly on the land, andconduct the industry which produces by far the greater portion of thewealth of the country. It is, of course, essential to the prosperity ofthe whole community that the North should pursue and further developits own industrial and commercial life. That section of the communityhas also, no doubt, economic and educational problems to face, but theseare much the same problems as those of industrial communities in otherparts of the United Kingdom[4]; and if they do not receive, vitallyimportant as is their solution to the welfare of Ireland, any largeshare of attention in this book, it is because they are no part of whatis ordinarily understood by the Irish Question. 

Nevertheless, the interest of the manufacturing population of Ulster inthe welfare of the Roman Catholic agricultural majority is not merelythat of an onlooker, nor even that of the other parts of the UnitedKingdom, but something more. It is obvious that the internal trade ofthe country depends mainly upon the demand of the rural population forthe output of the manufacturing towns, and that this demand must dependon the volume of agricultural production. I think the importance ofdeveloping the home market has not been sufficiently appreciated, evenby Belfast. The best contribution the Ulster Protestant population canmake to the solution of this question is to do what they can to bringabout cordial co-operation between the two great sections of thewealth-producers of Ireland. They should, I would suggest, learn to takea broader and more patriotic view of the problems of the Roman Catholicand agricultural majority, upon the true nature of which I hope to beable to throw some new light. My purpose will be doubly served if Ihave, to some extent, brought home to the minds of my Northern friendsthat there is in Ireland an unsettled question in which they are largelyconcerned, a rightly unsatisfied people by helping whom they can besthelp themselves. 

The Irish Question is, then, in that aspect which must be to Irishmen ofparamount importance, the problem of a national existence, chiefly anagricultural existence, in Ireland. To outside observers it is thequestion of rural life, a question which is assuming a social andeconomic importance and interest of the most intense character, not onlyfor Ireland North and South, but for almost the whole civilised world. It is becoming increasingly difficult in many parts of the world to keepthe people on the land, owing to the enormously improved industrialopportunities and enhanced social and intellectual advantages of urbanlife. The problem can be better examined in Ireland than elsewhere, forwith us it can, to a large extent, be isolated, since we have littlehighly developed town life. Our rural exodus takes our people, for themost part, not into Irish or even into British towns, but into those ofthe United States. What is migration in other countries is emigrationwith us, and the mind of the country, brooding over the drearystatistics of this perennial drain, naturally and longingly turns toschemes for the rehabilitation of rural life--the only life it knows. 

We cannot exercise much direct influence upon the desire to emigratebeyond spreading knowledge as to the real conditions of life in America, for which home life in Ireland is often ignorantly bartered. [5] Wecannot isolate the phenomenon of emigration and find a cure for it apartfrom the rest of the Irish Question. We must recognise that emigrationis but the chief symptom of a low national vitality, and that the firstresult of our efforts to stay the tide may increase the outflow. Wecannot fit the people to stay without fitting them to go. Before we cankeep the people at home we have got to construct a national life with, in the first place, a secure basis of physical comfort and decency. Thislife must have a character, a dignity, an outlook of its own. Acomfortable Boeotia will never develop into a real Hibernia Pacata. Thestandard of living may in some ways be lower than the English standard:in some ways it may be higher. But even if statesmanship and all theforces of philanthropy and patriotism combined can construct a contentedrural Ireland for the people, it can only be maintained by the people. It will have to accord with the national sentiment and be distinctivelyIrish. It is this national aspiration, and the remarkable promise of themovements making for its fruition, which give to the work of Irishsocial and economic reform the fascination which those who do not knowthe Ireland of to-day cannot understand. This work of reform must, ofcourse, be primarily economic, but economic remedies cannot be appliedto Irish ills without the spiritual aids which are required to move toaction the latent forces of Irish reason and emotion. 

 * * * * *

The task which we have to face is, then, a two-sided one, but itseconomic and its purely practical aspects first demand consideration. Many even of the agrarian aspects of the question have, so far, beensomewhat neglected in Ireland owing to a cause which is not far to seek. It has often been asserted that the Irish Question is, at bottom, theLand Question. There is a great deal of truth in this view, but almostall those who hold it have fallen into the grave error of tacitlyidentifying the land question with the tenure question--an error whichvitiates a great deal of current theorising about Ireland. It was, indeed, inevitable that Irish agriculturists, with such an economichistory behind them as I have outlined in the previous chapter, shouldhave concentrated their attention during the latter half of thenineteenth century upon obtaining a legislative cure for the illsproduced by legislation, to the comparative neglect of those equallydifficult, if less obvious economic questions, which have been broughtinto special prominence by the agricultural depression of the lastquarter of a century. Now, however, that the Land Act of 1903 has beenpassed and the solution of the tenure question is in sight, we inIreland are more free to direct our attention to what is at present themost important aspect of the agrarian situation--the necessity fordetermining the social and economic conditions essential to thewell-being of the peasant proprietary, which, though it is to be startedwith as bright an outlook as the law can give, must stand or fall by itsown inherent merits or defects. Not only are we now free to giveadequate consideration to this question, but it is also imperative thatwe should do so, for whilst I am hopeful that the Land Act will settlethe question of tenure, it will obviously not merely leave the otherproblems of agricultural existence--problems some of which are notunknown in other parts of the United Kingdom--still unsolved, but willalso increase the necessity for their solution, and will, moreover, bring in its train complex difficulties of its own. 

The main features of the depressing outlook of rural life in the UnitedKingdom are well known. The land steadily passes from under the ploughand is given over to stock raising. As the kine increase the men decay. In Ireland the rural exodus takes, as I have already said, the shape, mainly, not of migration to Irish urban centres, but rather the uglierform of an emigration which not only depletes our population but drainsit of the very elements which can least be spared. 

The reason generally given for the widespread resort to the lotus-eatingoccupation of opening and shutting gates, in preference to tilling thesoil, is that in the existing state of agricultural organisation, andwhile urban life is ever drawing away labour from the fields, thesubstitution of pasturage for tillage is the readiest way to meet theruinous competition of Eastern Europe, the Western Hemisphere, andAustralasia. Yet upon the economic merits of this process I have heardthe most diverse opinions stated with equal conviction by men thoroughlywell informed as to the conditions. One of the largest graziers inIreland recently gave me a picture of what he considered to be an idealeconomic state for the country. If two more Belfasts could beestablished on the east coast, and the rest of the country divided intofive hundred acre farms, grazing being adopted wherever permanent grasswould grow, the limits of Irish productivity would be reached. On theother hand, Dr. O'Donnell, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Raphoe, who maybe taken as an authoritative exponent of the trend of popular thought inthe country, not long ago advocated ploughing the grazing lands ofLeinster right up to the slopes of Tara. [6] Moreover, many theories havebeen advanced to show that the decline of tillage, whatever be itscause, involves an enormous waste of national resources. But ofpractical suggestion, making for a remedy, there is very littleforthcoming. 

The solution of all such problems largely depends upon certaindevelopments which, for many reasons, I regard as absolutely essentialto the success of the new agrarian order. One of these developments isthe spread of agricultural co-operation through voluntary associations. Without this agency of social and economic progress, small landholdersin Ireland will be but a body of isolated units, having all thedrawbacks of individualism, and none of its virtues, unorganised andsingularly ill-equipped for that great international struggle of ourtime, which we know as agricultural competition. Moreover, there isanother equally important, if less obvious, consideration which rendersurgent the organisation of our rural communities. From Russia, with itshalf-communistic Mir to France with its modern village commune, there isno country in Europe except the United Kingdom where the peasantland-holders have not some form of corporate existence. In Ireland thetransition from landlordism to a peasant proprietary not only does notcreate any corporate existence among the occupying peasantry but ratherdeprives them of the slight social coherence which they formerlypossessed as tenants of the same landlord. The estate office has itsuses as well as its disadvantages, and the landlord or agent is by nomeans without his value as a business adviser to those from whom hecollects the rent. 

The organisation of the peasantry by an extension of voluntaryassociations, which is a condition precedent of social and economicprogress, will not, however, suffice to enable them to face and solvethe problems with which they are confronted, and whose solution has nowbecome a matter of very serious concern to the British taxpayer. Thecondition of our agrarian life clearly indicates the necessity forsupplementing voluntary effort with a sound system of State aid toagriculture and industry--a necessity fully recognised by thegovernments of every progressive continental country and of our owncolonies. An altogether hopeful beginning of combined self-help andState assistance has been already made. Those who have been studyingthese problems, and practically preparing the way for the proper care ofa peasant proprietary, have overcome the chief obstacles which lay intheir path. They have gained popular acceptance for the principle thatState aid should not be resorted to until organised voluntary effort hasfirst been set in motion, and that any departure from this principlewould be an unwarrantable interference with the business of the people, a fatal blow to private enterprise. [7]

The task before the people, and before the State, of placing the newagrarian order upon a permanent basis of decency and comfort is no lightone. Indeed, I doubt whether Parliament realises one-tenth of theproblems which the latest land legislation--by far the best we have yethad--leaves unsolved. This becomes only too clear the moment we considerseriously the fundamental question of the relation of population to areain rural Ireland, or, in other words, when we inquire how many peoplethe agricultural land will support under existing circumstances, orunder any attainable improvement of the conditions in our rural life. Roughly speaking, the surface area of the island is 20, 000, 000 acres, ofwhich 5, 000, 000 are described in the official returns as 'barrenmountain, bog and waste. ' This leaves us with some 15, 000, 000 acresavailable for agriculture and grazing, which area is now divided intosome 500, 000 holdings. Thus we have an average of thirty acres in extentfor the Irish agricultural holding. But, unhappily, the returns showthat some 200, 000 of these holdings are from one to fifteen acres inextent. Nor do the mere figures show the case at its worst. For ithappens that the small holdings in Ireland, unlike those on theContinent, are generally on the poorest land, and the majority of themcannot come within any of the definitions of an 'economic holding. '

These 200, 000 holdings, the homes of nearly a million persons, threatento prove the greatest danger to the future of agricultural Ireland. Asthe majority of them, as at present constituted, do not provide thephysical basis of a decent standard of living, the question arises, howare they to be improved? Putting aside emigration, which at one periodwas necessary and ought to have been aided and controlled by the State, but which is now no longer a statesman's remedy, there is obviously nosolution except by the migration of a portion of the occupiers, and theutilisation of the vacated holdings in order to enable the peasants whoremain to prosper--much as a forest is thinned to promote the growth oftrees. In typical congested districts this operation will have to becarried out on a much larger scale than is generally realised, for aconsiderable majority of families will have to be removed, in order toallow a sufficient margin for the provision of adequate holdings forthose who remain. In some cases, there are large grazing tracts in closeproximity to the congested area which might be utilised for there-settlement, but where this is not so and the occupiers of the vacatedholdings have to migrate a considerable distance, the problem becomesfar more difficult. I need not dwell upon the administrativedifficulties of the operation, which are not light. I may assume, also, that there will be no difficulty in obtaining suitable land somewhere. Ido not myself attach much weight to the unwillingness of the people toleave their old holdings for better ones, or to the alleged objection ofthe clergy to allow their parishioners to go to another parish. Moreserious is the possible opposition of those who live in the vicinity ofthe unoccupied land about to be distributed, and who feel that they havethe first claim upon the State in any scheme for its redistribution withthe help of public credit. Mr. Parnell promoted a company with the soleobject of practically demonstrating how this problem could be solved. Alarge capital was raised, and a large estate purchased; but the companydid not effect the migration of a single family. Still these are minorconsiderations compared with the larger one, to which I must brieflyrefer. 

Under the Land Act of 1903 much has been done to facilitate the transferof peasants to new farms, but it is obvious that land cannot be handedover as a gift from the State to the families which migrate. They willbecome debtors for the value of the land itself, less perhaps a smallsum which may be credited to them in respect of the tenant's interest inthe holdings they have abandoned. This deduction will, however, be lostin the expenditure required upon houses, buildings, fences, and otherimprovements which would have to be effected before the land could beprofitably occupied. Speaking generally they will have no money oragricultural implements, and their live stock will in many cases bemortgaged to the local shopkeeper who has always financed them. It willbe necessary for the future welfare of the country to give them landwhich admits of cultivation upon the ordinary principles of modernagriculture; but without working capital, and bringing with them neitherthe skill nor the habits necessary for the successful conduct of theirindustry under the new conditions, it will be no easy task to place themin a position to discharge their obligations to the State. It is allvery easy to talk about the obvious necessity of giving more land tocultivators who have not enough to live upon; and there is, no doubt, apoetic justice in the Utopian agrarianism which dangles before the eyesof the Connaught peasantry the alternative of Heaven or Leinster. Butwhen we come down to practical economics, and face the task of giving toa certain number of human beings, in an extremely backward industrialcondition, the opportunity of placing themselves and their families on abasis of permanent well-being, it will be evident that, so far, at anyrate, as this particular community is concerned, the mere provision ofan economic holding is after all but a part of an economic existence. 

I have touched upon this question of migration from uneconomic toeconomic holdings because it signally illustrates the importance of thehuman, in contradistinction to the merely material considerationsinvolved in the solution of the many-sided Irish Question. I must nowreturn to the wider question of the relation of population to area inrural Ireland, as it affects the general scheme of agricultural andindustrial development. 

It is obvious that there must be a limit to the number of individualsthat the land can support. Allowing an average of five members for eachfamily, and allowing for a considerable number of landless labourers, itseems that the land at present directly supports about 2, 500, 000persons--a view which, I may add, is fully borne out by the figures ofthe recent census; and it is hard to see how a population living byagriculture can be much increased beyond this number. Even if all theland in Ireland were available for re-distribution in equal shares, thehigher standard of comfort to which it is essential that the conditionof our people should be raised would forbid the existence of much morethan half a million peasant proprietors. [8] Hence the evergreen query, 'What shall we do with our boys?' remains to be answered; for while theabolition of dual ownership will enable the present generation to bringup their children according to a higher standard of living, the changewill not of itself provide a career for the children when they have beenbrought up. The next generation will have to face this problem:--theaverage farm can support only one of the children and his family, whatis to become of the others? The law forbids sub-division for twogenerations, and after that, _ex hypothesi_, the then prevailingconditions of life will also prevent such partition. A few of the nextgeneration may become agricultural labourers, but this involvesdescending to the lowest standard of living of to-day, and in any casethe demand for agricultural labourers is not capable of much extensionin a country of small peasant proprietors. 

Against this view I know it is pointed out that in the earlier part ofthe nineteenth century the agricultural population of Ireland was aslarge as is the total population of to-day; but we know the sequel. Instances are also cited of peasant proprietaries in foreign countrieswhich maintain a high standard of living upon small, sometimesdiminutive, and highly-rented holdings. We must remember, however, thatin these foreign countries State intervention has undoubtedly done muchto render possible a prosperous peasant proprietary by, for example, thedissemination of useful information, admirable systems of technicaleducation in agriculture, cheap and expeditious transport, and evenState attention to the distribution of agricultural produce in distantmarkets. Again, in many of these countries rural life is balanced by ahighly industrial town life, as, for instance, in the case of Belgium;or is itself highly industrialised by the existence of rural industries, as in the case of Switzerland; while in one notable instance--that ofWürttemberg--both these conditions prevail. 

The true lesson to be drawn from these foreign analogies is that not byagriculture alone is Ireland to be saved. The solution of the ruralproblem embraces many spheres of national activity. It involves, as Ihave already said, the further development of manufactures in Irishtowns. One of the best ways to stimulate our industries is to developthe home market by means of an increased agricultural production, and ahigher standard of comfort among the peasant producers. We shall thusbe, so to speak, operating on consumption as well as on production, andso increasing the home demand for Irish manufactures. Perhaps moreurgent than the creation or extension of manufactures on a larger scaleis the development of industries subsidiary to agriculture in thecountry. This is generally admitted, and most people have a fairknowledge of the wide and varied range of peasant industries in allEuropean countries where a prosperous peasantry exists. Nor is theremuch difficulty in agreeing upon the main conditions to be satisfied inthe selection of the industries to meet the requirements of our case. The men and boys require employment in the winter months, or they willnot stay, and the rural industries promoted should, as far as possible, be those which allow of intermittent attention. The female members ofthe family must have profitable and congenial employment. Thehandicrafts to be promoted must be those which will give scope to thenative genius and aesthetic sense. But unless we can thus supply thedemand of the peasant-industry market with products of merit ordistinctiveness, we shall fail in competition with the hereditary skilland old established trade of peasant proprietors which have solved thispart of the problem generations ago. This involves the vigorousapplication of a class of instruction of which something will be saidin the proper place. 

So far the rural industry problem, and the direction in which itssolution is to be found, are fairly clear. But there is one disadvantagewith which we have to reckon, and which for many other reasons besidesthe one I am now immediately concerned with, we must seek to remove. Acommunity does not naturally or easily produce for export that for whichit has itself no use, taste, or desire. Whatever latent capacity forartistic handicrafts the Irish peasant may possess, it is very rarelythat one finds any spontaneous attempt to give outward expression to theinward aesthetic sense. And this brings me to a strange aspect of Irishlife to which I have often wished, on the proper occasion, to drawpublic attention. The matter arises now in the form of a peculiardifficulty which lies in the path of those who endeavour to solve theproblem of rural life in Ireland, and which, in my belief, hasprofoundly affected the fortunes of the race both at home and abroad. 

To a sympathetic insight there is a singular and significant void in theIrish conception of a home--I mean the lack of appreciation for thecomforts of a home, which might never have been apparent to me had itnot obtruded itself in the form of a hindrance to social and economicprogress. [9] In the Irish love of home, as in the larger nationalaspirations, the ideal has but a meagre material basis, its appeal beingessentially to the social and intellectual instincts. It is not thephysical environment and comfort of an orderly home that enchain andattract minds still dominated, more or less unconsciously, by theassociations and common interests of the primitive clan, but rather thesense of human neighbourhood and kinship which the individual finds inthe community. Indeed the Irish peasant scarcely seems to have a home inthe sense in which an Englishman understands the word. If he love theplace of his habitation he does not endeavour to improve or to adorn it, or indeed to make it in any sense a reflection of his own mind andtaste. He treats life as if he were a mere sojourner upon earth whosetrue home is somewhere else, a fact often attributed to his intensefaith in the unseen, but which I regard as not merely due to this cause, but also, and in a large measure, as the natural outcome of historicalconditions, to which I shall presently refer. 

What the Irishman is really attached to in Ireland is not a home but asocial order. The pleasant amenities, the courtesies, the leisureliness, the associations of religion, and the familiar faces of the neighbours, whose ways and minds are like his and very unlike those of any otherpeople; these are the things to which he clings in Ireland and which heremembers in exile. And the rawness and eagerness of America, the lustof the eye and the pride of life that meet him, though with no welcomingaspect, at every turn, the sense of being harshly appraised by newstandards of the nature of which he has but the dimmest conception, hishelplessness in the fierce current of industrial life in which he isplunged, the climatic extremes of heat and cold, the early hours and fewholidays: all these experiences act as a rude shock upon theill-balanced refinement of the Irish immigrant. Not seldom, he or sheloses heart and hope and returns to Ireland mentally and physically awreck, a sad disillusionment to those who had been comforted in theagony of the leave-taking by the assurance that to emigrate was tosucceed. 

The peculiar Irish conception of a home has probably a good deal to dowith the history of the Irish in the United States. It is well knownthat whatever measure of success the Irish emigrant has there achievedis pre-eminently in the American city, and not where, according to allthe usual commonplaces about the Irish race, they ought to havesucceeded, in American rural life. There they were afforded, and therethey missed, the greatest opportunity which ever fell to the lot of apeople agriculturally inclined. During the days of the great emigrationsfrom Ireland, a veritable Promised Land, rich beyond the dreams ofagricultural avarice, was gradually opened up between the Alleghaniesand the Rocky Mountains, which the Irish had only to occupy in order topossess. Making all allowances for the depressing influences which hadbeen brought to bear upon the spirit of enterprise, and for theirimpoverished condition, I am convinced that a prime cause of the failureof almost every effort to settle them upon the land was the fact thatthe tenement house, with all its domestic abominations, provided thesocial order which they brought with them from Ireland, and the lack ofwhich on the western prairie no immediate or prospective physicalcomfort could make good. 

Recently a daughter of a small farmer in County Galway with a family too'long' for the means of subsistence available, was offered a comfortablehome on a farm owned by some better-off relatives, only thirty milesaway, though probably twenty miles beyond the limits of her utmostperegrinations. She elected in preference to go to New York, and beingasked her reason by a friend of mine, replied in so many words, 'becauseit is nearer. ' She felt she would be less of a stranger in a New Yorktenement house, among her relatives and friends who had alreadyemigrated, than in another part of County Galway. Educational science inIreland has always ignored the life history of the subject with which itdealt. In no respect has this neglect been so unconsciously cruel as inits failure to implant in the Irish mind that appreciation of thematerial aspects of the home which the people so badly need both inIreland and in America If the Irishman abroad became 'a rootlesscolonist of alien earth, ' the lot of the Irishman in Ireland has beennot less melancholy. Sadness there is, indeed, in the story of 'thesea-divided Gael, ' but, to me, it is incomparably less pathetic thantheir homelessness at home. 

There are, as I have said, historic reasons for the Celtic view of hometo which my personal observation and experience has induced me to devoteso much space. The Irish people have never had the opportunity ofdeveloping that strong and salutary individualism which, amongst otherthings, imperiously demands, as a condition of its growth, a home thatshall be a man's castle as well as his abiding place. In this, as in somuch else, a healthy evolution was constantly thwarted by the clash oftwo peoples and two civilisations. The Irish had hardly emerged from thenomad pastoral stage, when the first of that series of invasions, whichhad all the ferocity, without the finality of conquest, made settledlife impossible over the greater part of the island. An old chroniclethrows some vivid light upon the way in which the idea of home lifepresented itself to the mind of the clan chiefs as late as the days ofthe Tudors. "Con O'Neal, " we are told, "was so right Irish that hecursed all his posterity in case they either learnt English, sowed wheator built them houses; lest the first should breed conversation, thesecond commerce, and with the last they should speed as the crow thatbuildeth her nest to be beaten out by the hawk. "[10] The penal laws, again, acted as a disintegrant of the home and the family; and, finally, the paralysing effect of the abuses of a system of land tenure, under which evidences of thrift and comfort might at any time becomedetermining factors in the calculation of rent, completed a series ofcauses which, in unison or isolation, were calculated to destroy at itssource the growth of a wholesome domesticity. These causes happily, nolonger exist, and powerful forces are arising to overcome the defectsand disadvantages which they have bequeathed to us; and I have littledoubt that it will be possible to deal successfully with this obstaclewhich adds so peculiar a feature to the problem of rural life inIreland. 

If I have dwelt at what may appear to be a disproportionate length uponthe Irishman's peculiar conception of a home, it is because thisdifficulty, which Irish social and economic reformers still encounter, and with which they must deal sympathetically if they are to succeed inthe work of national regeneration, strikingly illustrates the two-sidedcharacter of the Irish Question and the never-to-be-forgotteninter-dependence of the sentimental and the practical in Ireland. Iadmit that this condition which adds to the interest of the problem, andperhaps makes it more amenable to rapid solution, is an indication of aweakness of moral fibre to which must be largely attributed our failureto be master of our circumstances. Indeed, as I come into closer touchwith the efforts which are now being made to raise the materialcondition of the people, the more convinced I become, much as mypractical training has made me resist the conviction, that the IrishQuestion is, in its most difficult and most important aspects, theproblem of the Irish mind, and that the solution of this problem is tobe found in the strengthening of Irish character. 

With this enunciation of the main proposition of my book, I may nowindicate the order in which I shall endeavour to establish its truth. Ihave said enough to show that I do not ignore the historical causes ofour present state; but with so many facts with which we can dealconfronting us, I propose to review the chief living influences to whichthe Irish mind and character are still subjected. These influences fallnaturally into three distinct categories and will be treated in thethree succeeding chapters. The first will show the effect upon the Irishmind of its obsession by politics. The next will deal with the influenceof religious systems upon the secular life of the people. I shall thenshow how education, which should not only have been the most potent ofall the three influences in bringing our national life into line withthe progress of the age, but should also have modified the operation ofthe other two causes, has aggravated rather than cured the malady. 

Whatever impression I may succeed in making upon others, I may herestate that, as the result of observation and reflection, the conclusionhas been forced upon me that the Irish mind is suffering fromconsiderable functional derangement, but not, so far as I can discern, from any organic disease. This is the basis of my optimism. I shallsubmit in another chapter, which will conclude the first, the criticalpart of my book, certain new principles of treatment which are indicatedby the diagnosis; and I would ask the reader, before he rejects theopinions which are there expressed, to persevere through the narrativecontained in the second part of the book. There he will find in processof solution some of the problems which I have indicated, and theprinciples for which a theoretical approval has been asked, in practicaloperation, and already passing out of the experimental stage. The storyof the Self-help Movement will strike the note of Ireland's economichopes. The action of the Recess Committee will be explained, and theconcession of their demand by the establishment of a 'Department ofAgriculture and other rural industries and for Technical Instruction forIreland, ' will be described. This will complete the story of a quiet, unostentatious movement which will some day be seen to have made thelast decade of the nineteenth century a fit prelude to a futurecommensurate with the potentialities of the Irish people. 

FOOTNOTES:

[4] I speak from personal knowledge when I say that the leaders of Irishindustry and commerce are fully alive to the practical considerationwhich they have now to devote to the new conditions by which they aresurrounded. They recognise that the intensified foreign competitionwhich harasses them is due chiefly to German education and Americanenterprise. They are deep in the consideration of the form whichtechnical education should take to meet their peculiar needs; and I amconfident that Ulster will make a sound and useful contribution to thesolution of the commercial and industrial problems which confront themanufacturers of the United Kingdom. 

[5] That such a knowledge is still required, though the need is becomingless urgent, is shown by an incident which illustrates the pathos of theIrish exodus. A poor woman once asked me to help her son to emigrate toAmerica, and I agreed to pay his passage. Early in the negotiations, finding that she was somewhat vague as to her boy's prospects, I askedher whether he wanted to go to North or South America. This detail sheseemed to consider immaterial. "Ach, glory be to God, I lave that to yerhonner. Why wouldn't I?" Had I shipped him to Peru she would have beenquite satisfied. Why wouldn't she?

[6] Yet another view which seems to uproot most agrarian ideas inIreland has been put forward by Dr. O'Gara in _The Green Republic_(Fisher Unwin, 1902). His main conclusion is that the present disastrousstate of our rural economy is due to our treating land as an object ofproperty and not of industry. He advocates the cultivation of the landby syndicates holding farms of 20, 000 acres and tilling them by thelavish application of modern machinery as the only way to meet Americancompetition. His book is able and suggestive, but it is perhaps, a workof supererogation to discuss a theory the whole moral of which is theexpediency of absolutely divorcing the functions of the proprietor andthe manager of land at a time when the consensus of opinion in Irelandis in favour of uniting them, and in view of the fact that under the newLand Act the future of the country seems inevitably to lie for a longtime in the hands of a peasant proprietary. 

[7] The reader may wonder why I touch so lightly upon a fact of suchprofound significance as the Irishman's acceptance of self-help as acondition precedent of State aid in the development of agriculture andindustry. But such a cursory treatment, in the early chapters, of thisand of other equally important aspects of the Irish situation isnecessitated by the plan I have adopted. I am attempting to give in thefirst part of the book a philosophic insight into the chief Irishproblems, and then, in the second part of the book, to present the factswhich appear to me to illustrate these problems in process of solution. 

[8] The best expert agricultural opinion tells me that under presentconditions a family cannot live in any decent standard of comfort--suchas I hope to see prevail in Ireland--on less than 30 acres of Irishland, taking the bad land with the good. 

[9] It is, of course, unnecessary for me to dwell upon the part playedby the home in the standard of living, especially amongst a ruralcommunity. But it may not be irrelevant to note that M. Desmolins, who, in his remarkable book, _A quoi tient la superiorité des Anglo-saxons_?hands over the future of civilisation to the Anglo-Saxons, ascribes tothe English rural home much of the success of the race. 

[10] Speed's Chronicle, quoted in _Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, _1611-14, p. Xix. 

CHAPTER III. 

THE INFLUENCE OF POLITICS UPON THE IRISH MIND. 

Among the humours of the Home Rule struggle, the story was current inEngland that a peasant in Connemara ceased planting his potatoes whenthe news of the introduction of the Home Rule Bill in 1886 seemed tobring the millenium into the region of practical politics. Those whoused the story were not slow to suggest that, had the Bill become law, the failure of spontaneous generation in the Connemara potato patchmight have been typical of much analogous disillusionment elsewhere. Even to those who are familiar with our history, the faith of the Irishpeople in the potentialities of government, which this little taleillustrates by caricature, will give cause for reflection of another andmore serious kind. The moral to be drawn by Irish politicians is that wein Ireland have yet to free ourselves from one of the worst legacies ofpast misgovernment, the belief that any legislation or any legislaturecan provide an escape from the physical and mental toil imposed throughour first parents upon all nations for all time. 

'The more business in politics, and the less politics in business, thebetter for both, ' is a maxim which I brought home from the Far West andventured to advocate publicly some years ago. Being still of the samemind, I regret that I am compelled to introduce a whole chapter ofpolitics into this book, which is a study of Irish affairs mainly from asocial and economic point of view. But to ignore, either in thediagnosis or in the treatment of the 'mind diseased, ' the politicalobsession of our national life would be about as wise as to discuss andplan a Polar expedition without taking account of the climaticconditions to be encountered. 

In such an examination of Irish politics as thus becomes necessary Ishall have to devote the greater part of my criticism to the influenceof the Nationalist party upon the Irish mind. But it will be seen thatthis course is not taken with a view to making party capital for my ownside. As I read Irish history, neither party need expect very muchcredit for more than good intentions. Whichever proves to be right inits main contention, each will have to bear its share of theresponsibility for the long continuance of the barren controversy. Eachhas neglected to concern itself with the settlement of vitally importantquestions the consideration of which need not have been postponedbecause the constitutional question still remained in dispute. Therefore, though I seem to throw upon the Nationalist party the chiefblame for our present political backwardness, and, so far as politicsaffect other spheres of national activity, for our industrialdepression, candour compels me to admit that Irish Unionism has failedto recognise its obligation--an obligation recognised by the Unionistparty in Great Britain--to supplement opposition to Home Rule with apositive and progressive policy which could have been expected tocommend itself to the majority of the Irish people--the Irish of theIrish Question. 

To my own party in Ireland then, I would first direct the reader'sattention. I have already referred to the deplorable effects producedupon national life by the exclusion of representatives of the landlordand the industrial classes from positions of leadership and trust overfour-fifths of the country. I cannot conceive of a prosperous Ireland inwhich the influence of these leaders is restricted within its presentbounds. It has been so restricted because the Irish Unionist party hasfailed to produce a policy which could attract, at any rate, moderatemen from the other side, and we have, therefore, to consider why we haveso failed. Until this is done, we shall continue to share the blame forthe miserable state of our political life which, at the end of thenineteenth century, appeared to have made but little advance from thetime when Bishop Berkeley asked 'Whether our parties are not a burlesqueupon politics. '

The Irish Unionist party is supposed to unite all who, like the author, are opposed to the plunge into what is called Home Rule. But itspropagandist activities in Ireland are confined to preaching thedoctrine of the _status quo_, and preaching it only to its own side. From the beginning the party has been intimately connected with thelandlord class; yet even upon the land question it has thrown but fewgleams of the constructive thought which that question so urgentlydemanded, and which it might have been expected to apply to it. Now andagain an individual tries to broaden the basis of Irish Unionism and tobring himself into touch with the life of the people. But the nearer hegets to the people the farther he gets from the Irish Unionist leaders. The lot of such an individual is not a happy one: he is regarded as amere intruder who does not know the rules of the game, and he is treatedby the leading players on both sides like a dog in a tennis court. 

Two main causes appear to me to account for the failure of the IrishUnionist party to make itself an effective force in Irish national life. The great misunderstanding to which I have attributed the unhappy stateof Anglo-Irish relations kept the country in a condition of turmoilwhich enabled the Unionist party to declare itself the party of law andorder. Adopting Lord Salisbury's famous prescription, 'twenty years ofresolute government, ' they made it what its author would have been thelast man to consider it, a sufficient justification for a purelynegative and repressive policy. Such an attitude was open to somewhatobvious objections. No one will dispute the proposition that thegovernment of Ireland, or of any other country, should be resolute, buttwenty years of resolute government, in the narrow sense in which itcame to be interpreted, needed for its success, what cannot be had underparty government, twenty years of consistency. It may be better to befeared than to be loved, but Machiavelli would have been the first toadmit that his principle did not apply where the Government which soughtto establish fear had to reckon with an Opposition which was makingcapital out of love. Moreover, the suggestion that the Irish Question isnot a matter of policy but of police, while by no means withoutinfluential adherents, is altogether vicious. You cannot physicallyintimidate Irishmen, and the last thing you want to do is morally tointimidate a people whose greatest need at the moment is moral courage. 

The second cause which determined the character of Irish Unionism wasthe linking of the agrarian with the political question; the one being, in effect, a practical, the other a sentimental issue. The same thinghappened in the Nationalist party; but on their side it was intentionaland led to an immense accession of strength, while on the Unionist sideit made for weakness. If the influence of Irish Unionists was to be evenmaintained, it was of vital importance that the interest of a classshould not be allowed to dominate the policy of the party. But theorganisation which ought to have rallied every force that Ireland couldcontribute to the cause of imperial unity came to be too closelyidentified with the landlord class. That class is admittedly essentialto the construction of any real national life. But there is anotherelement equally essential, to which the political leaders of IrishUnionism have not given the prominence which is its due. The IrishQuestion has been so successfully narrowed down to two simple policies, one positive but vague, the other negative but definite, that to suggestthat there are three distinct forces--three distinct interests--to betaken into account seems like confusing the issue. It is a fact, nevertheless, that a very important element on the Unionist side, theindustrial element, has been practically left out of the calculation byboth sides. Yet the only expression of real political thought which Ihave observed in Ireland, since I have been in touch with Irish life, has emanated from the Ulster Liberal-Unionist Association, whose weightypronouncements, published from time to time, are worthy of deepconsideration by all interested in the welfare of Ireland. 

It will be remembered that when the Home Rule controversy was at itsheight, the chief strength of the Irish opposition to Mr. Gladstone'spolicy, and the consideration which most weighed with the Britishelectorate, lay in the business objection of the industrial populationof Ulster; though on the platform religious and political arguments weremore often heard. The intensely practical nature of the objection whichcame from the commercial and industrial classes of the North who opposedHome Rule was never properly recognised in Ireland. It was, and is stillunanswered. Briefly stated, the position taken up by their spokesmen wasas follows:--'We have come, ' they said in effect, 'into Ireland, and notthe richest portion of the island, and have gradually built up anindustry and commerce with which we are able to hold our own incompetition with the most progressive nations in the world. Our successhas been achieved under a system and a polity in which we believe. Itsnon-interference with the business of the people gave play to thatself-reliance with which we strove to emulate the industrial qualitiesof the people of Great Britain. It is now proposed to place themanufactures and commerce of the country at the mercy of a majoritywhich will have no real concern in the interests vitally affected, andwho have no knowledge of the science of government. The mere shadow ofthese changes has so depressed the stocks which represent theaccumulations of our past enterprise and labour that we are alreadycommercially poorer than we were. '[11]

My sole criticism of those leaders of commerce and industry in Belfast, who, whenever they turn their attention from their variouspre-occupations, import into Irish politics the valuable qualities whichthey display in the conduct of their private affairs, is that they donot go further and take the necessary steps to give practical effect totheir views outside the ranks of their immediate associates andfollowers. Had the industrial section made its voice heard in thecouncils of the Irish Unionist party, the Government which that partysupports might have had less advice and assistance in the maintenance oflaw and order, but it would have had invaluable aid in its constructivepolicy. For the lack of the wise guidance which our captains of industryshould have provided, Irish Unionism has, by too close adherence to thetraditions of the landlord section, been the creed of a social casterather than a policy in Ireland. The result has been injurious alike forthe landlords, the leaders of industry, and the people. The policy ofthe Unionist party in Ireland has been to uphold the Union by forcerather than by a reconciliation of the people to it. It has held alooffrom the masses, who, bereft of the guidance of their natural leaders, have clung the more closely to the chiefs of the Nationalist party; andthese in their turn have not, as I shall show presently, risen to theirresponsibility, but have retarded rather than advanced the march ofdemocracy in Ireland. If there is to be any future for Unionism inIreland, there must be a combination of the best thought of the countryaristocracy and that of the captains of industry. Then, and not tillthen, shall we Unionists as a party exercise a healthful and stimulatinginfluence on the thought and action of the people. 

I cannot, therefore, escape from the conclusion that whilst the Irishsection of the party to which I belong is, in my opinion, right on themain political question, its influence is now for the most partnegative. Hence I direct attention mainly to the Home Rule party, as themore forceful element in Irish political life; and if it receives themore criticism it is because it is more closely in touch with thepeople, and because any reform in its principles or methods would moregenerally and more rapidly prove beneficial to the country than wouldany change in Unionist policy. 

In examining the policy of the Nationalist party my chief concern willbe to arrive at a correct estimate of the effect which is produced uponthe thought and action of the Irish people by the methods employed forthe attainment of Home Rule. I propose to show that these methods havebeen in the past, and must, so long as they are employed, continue to beinjurious to the political and industrial character of the people, andconsequently a barrier to progress. I know that most of the Nationalistleaders justify the employment of these methods on the ground that, intheir opinion, the constitutional reforms they advocate are a conditionprecedent to industrial progress. I believe, on the contrary, and Ishall give my reasons for believing, that their tactics have been notonly a hindrance to industrial progress, but destructive even to theulterior purpose they were intended to fulfil. 

It is commonly believed--a belief very naturally fostered by theirleaders--that, if there is one thing the Irish do understand, it ispolitics. Politics is a term obviously capable of wide interpretation, and I fear that those who say that my countrymen are pre-eminentlypoliticians use the term in a sense more applicable to the conceptionsof Mr. Richard Croker than of Aristotle. In intellectual capacity fordiscrimination upon political issues the average Irish elector is, Ibelieve, far superior to the average English elector. But there is asyet something wanting in the character of our people which seems toprohibit the exercise by them of any independent political thought and, consequently, of any effective or permanent political influence. 

The assumption that Irishmen are singularly good politicians seems tostand seriously in the way of their becoming so; and yet it is a matterof the greatest importance that they should become good politicians in areal sense, for in no country would sound political thought exercise amore beneficial influence upon the life of the people than in Ireland. Indeed I would go further and give it as my strong conviction that, properly developed and freed from the narrowing influences of the partysquabbles by which it has been warped and sterilised, the politicalthought of the Irish people would contribute a factor of vitalimportance to the life of the British empire. But at the moment I amdealing only with the influence of politics on Irish social and economiclife. 

I am aware that any political deficiencies which the Irish may displayat home, are commonly attributed to the political system which has beenimposed upon Ireland from without. If you want to see Irish genius inits highest political manifestation, it must be studied, we are told, inthe United States, the widest and freest arena which has ever beenoffered to the race. This view is not in accordance with the facts as Ihave observed them. These facts are somewhat obscured by the natural, but misleading habit of reckoning to the account of Ireland at largeachievements really due to the Scotch-Irish, who helped to colonisePennsylvania, and who undoubtedly played a dominant part in developingthe characteristic features of the American political system. TheScotch-Irish, however, do not belong to the Ireland of the IrishQuestion Descended, largely, as their names so often testify, from theearly Irish colonists of western Scotland, they came back as a distinctrace, dissociating themselves from the Irish Celts by refusing to adopttheir national traditions, or intermarry with them, and both here and inAmerica disclaiming the appellation of Irish. [12]

Leaving, then, out of consideration the political achievements of theScotch-Irish, it appears to me that the part played in politics by theIrish in America does not testify to any high political genius. Theyhave shown there an extraordinary aptitude for political organisation, which, if it had been guided by anything approaching to politicalthought, would have placed them in a far higher position in Americanpublic life than that which they now occupy. But the fact is that itwould be much easier to find evidence of high political capacity andsuccess in the history of the Irish in British colonies; and the reasonfor this fact is not only very germane to the purpose of this book, buthas a strong practical interest for Americans as well. Irishmen whenthey go to America find themselves united by a bond which does not andcould not exist in the Colonies--though it does exist in Ireland--thebond of anti-English feeling, and by the hope of giving practical effectto this feeling through the policy of their adopted country. Imbued withthis common sentiment, and influenced by their inherited clannishness, the Irish in America readily lend themselves to the system of politicalgroups, a system which the 'boss' for his own ends seeks to perpetuate. The result is a sort of political paradox--it has made the Irish inAmerica both stronger and weaker than they ought to be. They sufferpolitically from the defects of their political qualities: they arestrong as a voting machine, but the secret of their collective strengthis also the secret of their individual weakness. This organisation intogroups is much commoner among the Irish than among other Americanimmigrants, for the anti-English feeling with which so many of the Irishland in America is carefully kept alive by the 'boss, ' whose sedulousfostering of the instinctive clannishness and inherited leader-followinghabits of the Irish saps their independence of thought and prevents themfrom ceasing to be mere political agents and developing a citizenshipwhich would furnish its due quota of statesmen to the service of theRepublic. They lack in the United States just what they lack at home, the capacity, or at any rate the inclination, to use their undoubtedabilities in a large and foreseeing manner, and so are becoming less andless powerful as a force in American politics. 

The fallacious views about the nature and sphere of politics, which theIrish bring with them from Ireland, and which are perpetuated inAmerica, have the effect not only of debarring the Irish from realpolitical progress, but also, as at home, from gaining success inindustrial pursuits which their talents would otherwise win for them. They succeed as journalists owing to their quick intelligence andversatility, and as contractors mainly owing to their capacity fororganising gangs of workmen--a faculty which seems to be the only goodthing resulting from their political education. They are as brilliantsoldiers in the service of the United States as they are in that ofBritain--more it would be impossible to say--and they have producedtypes of daring, endurance, and shrewdness like the 'Silver Kings' ofNevada which testify to the exceptional powers always developed by theIrish in exceptional circumstances. But in the humdrum business ofeveryday life in the United States they suffer from defects which arethe outcome of their devotion to mistaken political ideals and of theirsubordination of industry to politics, which are not always purelyAmerican, but are often influenced by considerations of the country oftheir birth. On the whole, a quarter of a century of not unsympatheticobservation of the Irish in the United States has convinced me that theposition they occupy there is not one which either they or the Americanpeople can look on with entire satisfaction. The Irish immigrants arefelt to belong to a kind of _imperium in imperio_, and to carry intoAmerican politics ideas which are not American, and which might easilybecome an embarrassment if not a danger to America. Hence the powerfulinterest which America shares with England, though of course in a lessdegree, in understanding and helping to settle the complex difficultycalled the Irish Question. The Irish remember Ireland long after theyhave left it. They are not in the same position as the German or Englishimmigrants who have no cause at home which they wish to forward. Everyecho in the States of political or social disturbance in Ireland rousesthe immigrant and he becomes an Irishman once more, and not a citizen ofthe country of his adoption. His views and votes on internationalquestions, in so far as they affect these Islands, are thus oftendictated more by a passionate sympathy for and remembrance of the landhe no longer lives in, than by any right understanding of the interestsof the new country in which he and his children must live. 

The only reason why I have examined the assumption that Irishmen displaymarked political capacity in the United States is to make it clear thatthe political deficiencies they manifest at home are to be attributedmainly to defects of character, and to a conception of politics forwhich modern English government is very slightly responsible. I admitthat English government in the past had no small share in producing theresults we deplore to-day, but the motives and manner of its actionhave, it seems to me, been very imperfectly understood. 

The fact is that the difficulties of English government in Ireland, until a complete military conquest had been effected, were of apeculiarly complex character. Before the English could impose uponIreland their own political organisation--and the idea that any othersystem could work better among the Irish never entered the Englishmind--it was obviously necessary that the very antithesis of thatorganisation, the clan system, should be abolished. But there weremilitary and financial objections to carrying out this policy. Irishcampaigns were very costly, and England was in those days by no meanswealthy. English armies in Ireland, after a short period spent indesultory warfare with light armed kernes in the fever-stricken Munsterforests, began to melt away. For many generations, therefore, England, adopting a policy of _divide et impera_, set clan against clan. Lateron, statecraft may be said to have supervened upon military tactics. Itconsisted of attempts made by alternate threats and bribes to induce thechiefs to transform the clan organisation by the acceptance of Englishinstitutions. But any systematic endeavours to complete thetransformation were soon rendered abortive by being coupled with hugeconfiscations of land. The policy of converting the members of the clansinto freeholders was subordinated to the policy of planting Britishcolonists. After this there was no question of fusion of races orinstitutions. Plantations on a large scale, self-supporting, self-protecting, became the policy alike of the soldier and thestatesman. 

The inevitable result of these methods was that it was not until acomparatively late date that a political conception of an Irish nationfirst began to emerge out of the congeries of clans. In the State Papersof the sixteenth century the clans are frequently spoken of as'nations. ' Even as late as the eighteenth century a Gaelic poet, in atypical lament, thus identifies his country with the fortunes of hergreat families:--

 The O'Doherty is not holding sway, nor his noble race; The O'Moores are not strong, that once were brave-- O'Flaherty is not in power, nor his kinsfolk; And sooth to say, the O'Briens have long since become English. 

 Of O'Rourke there is no mention--my sharp wounding! Nor yet of O'Donnell in Erin; The Geraldines they are without vigour--without a nod, And the Burkes, the Barrys, the Walshes of the slender ships. [13]

The modern political idea of Irish nationality at length asserted itselfas the result of three main causes. The bond of a common grievanceagainst the English foe was created by the gradual abandonment of thepolicy of setting clan against clan in favour of impartial confiscationof land from friendly as well as from hostile chiefs. Secondly, when theEnglish had destroyed the natural leaders, the clan chiefs, andattempted to proselytise their adherents, the political leadershiplargely passed to the Roman Catholic Church, which very naturallydefended the religion common to the members of all the clans, by tryingto unite them against the English enemy. Nationality, in this sense, ofcourse applied only to Celtic Roman Catholic Ireland. The first realidea of a United Ireland arose out of the third cause, the religiousgrievances of the Protestant dissenters and the commercial grievances ofthe Protestant manufacturers and artisans in the eighteenth century, whosuffered under a common disability with the Roman Catholics, and many ofwhom came in the end to make common cause with them. But even long afterthis conception had become firmly established, the local representativeinstitutions corresponding to those which formed the political trainingof the English in law and administration either did not exist in Irelandor were altogether in the hands of a small aristocracy, mostly ofnon-Irish origin, and wholly non-Catholic. O'Connell's great work infreeing Roman Catholic Ireland from the domination of the Protestantoligarchy showed the people the power of combination, but his methodscan hardly be said to have fostered political thought. The efforts inthis direction of men like Gavan Duffy, Davis, and Lucas wereneutralised by the Famine, the after effects of which also did much tothwart Butt's attempts to develop serious public opinion amongst apeople whose political education had been so long delayed. The prospectof any early fruition of such efforts vanished with the revolutionaryagrarian propaganda, and independent thinking--so necessary in themodern democratic state--never replaced the old leader-following habitwhich continued until the climax was reached under Parnell. 

The political backwardness of the Irish people revealed itselfcharacteristically when, in 1884, the English and Irish democracies weresimultaneously endowed with a greatly extended franchise. In theory thisconcession should have developed political thought in the people andshould have enhanced their sense of political responsibility. In Englandno doubt this theory was proved by the event to be based on fact; but inIreland it was otherwise. Parnell was at the zenith of his power. TheIrish had the man, what mattered the principles? The new suffragessimply became the figures upon the cheques handed over to the Chief byeach constituency, with the request that he would fill in the name ofthe payee. On one or two occasions a constituency did protest againstthe payee, but all that was required to settle the matter was a personalvisit from the Chief. Generally speaking, the electorate were quitedocile, and instances were not wanting of men discovering that they hadfound favour with electors to whom their faces and even their names werepreviously unknown. 

No doubt, the one-man system had a tactical value, of which the Englishthemselves were ever ready to make use. "If all Ireland cannot rule thisman, then let this man rule all Ireland, " said Henry VII. Of the Earl ofKildare; and the echo of these words was heard when the KilmainhamTreaty was negotiated with the last man who wore the mantle of thechief. But whatever may be said for the one-man system as a means ofpolitical organisation, it lacked every element of political education. It left the people weaker, if possible, and less capable than it foundthem; and assuredly it was no fit training for Home Rule. WhileParnell's genius was in the ascendant, all was well--outwardly. When atragic and painful disclosure brought about a crisis in his fate, itwill hardly be contended by the most devoted admirer of the Irish peoplethat the situation was met with even moderate ability and foresight. Butthe logic of events began to take effect. The decade of dissension whichfollowed the fall of Parnell will, perhaps, some day be recognised as amost fruitful epoch in modern Irish history. The reaction from theone-man system set in as soon as the one man had passed away. Theindependence which Parnell's former lieutenants began to assert when thelaurels faded upon the brow of the uncrowned King communicated itself tosome extent to the rank and file. The mere weighing of the merits ofseveral possible successors led to some wholesome questioning as to themerits of the policies, such as they were, which they respectivelyrepresented The critical spirit which was now called forth, did not, atfirst, go very far; but it was at least constructive and marked adistinct advance towards real political thought. I believe the day willcome, and come soon, when Nationalist leaders themselves will recognisethat while bemoaning faction and dissension and preaching the cause of'unity' they often mistook the wheat for the tares. They will, I feelsure, come to realise that the passing of the dictatorship, which tooutward appearances left the people as "sheep without a shepherd, whenthe snow shuts out the sky, " in fact turned the thoughts of Ireland insome measure away from England into her own bosom, and gave birth thereto the idea of a national life to which the Irish people of all classes, creeds, and politics could contribute of their best. 

I sometimes wonder whether the leaders of the Nationalist party reallyunderstand the full effect of their tactics upon the political characterof the Irish people, and whether their vision is not as much obscured bya too near, as is the vision of the Unionist leaders by a too distant, view of the people's life. Everyone who seeks to provide practicalopportunities for Irish intellect to express-itself worthily in activelife--and this, I take it, is part of what the Nationalist leaders wishto achieve--meets with the same difficulty. The lack of initiative andshrinking from responsibility, the moral timidity in glaring contrastwith the physical courage--which has its worst manifestation in theintense dread of public opinion, especially when the unknown terrors ofeditorial power lurk behind an unfavourable mention 'on the paper, 'are, no doubt, qualities inherited from a primitive social state inwhich the individual was nothing and the community everything. Thesedefects were intensified in past generations by British statecraft, which seemed unable to appreciate or use the higher instincts of therace; they remain to-day a prominent factor in the great human problemknown as the Irish Question--a factor to which, in my belief, may beattributed the greatest of its difficulties. 

It is quite clear that education should have been the remedy for thedefects of character upon which I am forced to dwell so much; and Icannot absolve any body of Irishmen, possessed of actual or potentialinfluence, of failure to recognise this truth. But here I am dealingonly with the political leaders, and trying to bring home to them theresponsibility which their power imposes upon them, not only for thepolitical development but also for the industrial progress of theirfollowers. They ought to have known that the weakness of character whichrenders the task of political leadership in Ireland comparatively easyis in reality the quicksand of Irish life, and that neitherself-government nor any other institution can be enduringly built uponit. 

The leaders of the Nationalist party are, of course, entitled to holdthat, in existing political conditions, any non-political movementtowards national advancement, which in its nature cannot be linked, asthe land question was linked, to the Home Rule movement constitutes anunwarrantable sacrifice of ends to means. And so holding, they arefurther entitled to subject any proposal to elevate popular thought, orto direct popular activities, to a strict censorship as to its remote aswell as to its immediate effect upon the electorate. I know, too, thatit is held by some thinking Nationalists who take no active part inpolitics that the politicians are justified on tactical grounds in thisexclusive pursuit of their political aims, and in the methods by whichthey pursue them. They consider the present system of government tooradically wrong to mend, and they can undoubtedly point to agrarianlegislation as evidence of the effectiveness of the means they employ togain their end. 

This view of things has sunk very deep into the Irish mind. The policyof 'giving trouble' to the Government is looked upon as the one road toreform and is believed in so fervently that, except for religion, whichsometimes conflicts with it, there is scarcely any capacity left forbelief in anything else. I am far from denying that the past offers muchjustification for the belief that nothing can be gained by Ireland fromEngland except through violent agitation. Until recently, I admit, Ireland's opportunity had to wait for England's difficulty. But, aspractised in the present day, I believe this doctrine to be mischievousand false. For one thing, there is a new England to deal with. TheEngland which, certainly not in deference to violent agitation, established the Congested Districts Board, gave Local Government toIreland, and accepted the recommendations of the Recess Committee forfar-reaching administrative changes, as well as those of the LandConference which involved great financial concessions, is not theEngland of fifty years ago, still less the England of the eighteenthcentury. Moreover, in riveting the mind of the country on what is to beobtained from England, this doctrine of 'giving trouble, ' the wholegospel of the agitator, has blinded the Irish people to the many thingswhich Ireland can do for herself. Whatever may be said of what is called'agitation' in Ireland as an engine for extorting legislation from theImperial Parliament, it is unquestionably bad for the much greater endof building up Irish character and developing Irish industry andcommerce. 'Agitation, ' as Thomas Davis said, 'is one means of redress, but it leads to much disorganisation, great unhappiness, wounds upon thesoul of a country which sometimes are worse than the thinning of apeople by war. '[14] If Irish politicians had at all realised this truth, it is difficult to believe that the popular movement of the last quarterof a century would not have been conducted in a manner far lessinjurious to the soul of Ireland and equally or more effective forlegislative reform as well as all other material interests. 

Now, modern Nationalism in Ireland is open to damaging criticism notonly from my Unionist point of view, which was also, in many respects, the view of so strong a Nationalist as Thomas Davis; it is also open tograve objection from the point of view of the effectiveness of thetactics employed for the attainment of its end--the winning of HomeRule. 

Before examining the effect of these tactics I may point out that thisconception of Nationalist policy, even if justifiable from a practicalpoint of view, does not relieve the leaders from the obligation ofgiving some assurance that they are ready with a consistent scheme ofre-construction, and are prepared to build when the ground has beencleared. In this connection I might make a good deal of Unionistcapital, and some points in support of my condemnation of the politicalabsorption of the Irish mind, out of the total failure of theNationalist party to solve certain all-important constitutional andfinancial problems which months of Parliamentary debate in 1893 tendedrather to obscure than to elucidate. I am, however, willing forargument's sake to postpone all such questions, vital as they are, tothe time when they can be practically dealt with. I am ready to assumethat the wit of man can devise a settlement of many points which seemedinsoluble in Mr. Gladstone's day. But even granting all this, I think itcan easily be shown that the means which the political thoughtavailable on the Nationalist side has evolved for the attainment oftheir end, and which _ex hypothesi_ are only to be justified on tacticalgrounds, are the least likely to succeed; and that, consequently, theyshould be abandoned in favour of a constructive policy which, to say theleast, would not be less effective towards advancing the Home Rulecause, if that cause be sound, and which would at the same time help theadvancement of Ireland in other than political directions. 

Tactics form but a part of generalship, and half the success ofgeneralship lies in making a correct estimate of the opposing forces. This is as true of political as it is of military operations. Now, ofwhat do the forces opposed to Home Rule consist? The Unionists, it maybe admitted, are numerically but a small minority of the population ofIreland--probably not more than one-fourth. But what do they represent?First, there are the landed gentry. Let us again make a concession forthe sake of argument and accept the view that this class so wantonlykept itself aloof from the life of the majority of the people that theNationalists could not be expected to count them among the elements of aHome Rule Ireland. I note, in passing, with extreme gratification thatat the recent Land Conference it was declared by the tenants'representatives that it was desirable, in the interests of Ireland, thatthe present owners of land should not be expatriated, and thatinducements should be afforded to selling owners to continue to residein the country. 

But I may ignore this as I wish here to recall attention to that otherelement, which was, as I have already said, the real force which turnedthe British democracy against Home Rule--I mean the commercial andindustrial community in Belfast and other hives of industry in thenorth-east corner of the country, and in scattered localities elsewhere. I have already admitted that the political importance of the industrialelement was not appreciated in Irish Unionist circles. No lessremarkable is the way in which it has been ignored by the Nationalists. The question which the Nationalists had to answer in 1886 and 1893, andwhich they have to answer to-day, is this:--In the Ireland of theirconception is the Unionist part of Ulster to be coerced or persuaded tocome under the new regime? To those who adopt the former alternative myreply is simply that, if England is to do the coercion, the idea ispolitically absurd. If we were left to fight it out among ourselves, itis physically absurd. The task of the Empire in South Africa was lightcompared with that which the Nationalists would have on hands. I amaware that, at the time when we were all talking at concert pitch on theIrish Question, a good deal was said about dying in the last ditch bymen who at the threat of any real trouble would be found more discreetlyperched upon the first fence. But those who know the temper and fightingqualities of the working-men opponents of Home Rule in the North areunder no illusion as to the account they would give of themselves ifcalled upon to defend the cause of Protestantism, liberty, and imperialunity as they understand it. Let us, however, dismiss this alternativeand give Nationalists credit for the desire to persuade the industrialNorth to come in by showing it that it will be to its advantage to joincordially in the building up of a united Ireland under a separatelegislature. 

The difficulties in the way of producing this conviction are veryobvious. The North has prospered under the Act of Union--why should itbe ready to enter upon a new 'variety of untried being'? What that stateof being will be like, it naturally gauges from the forces which areworking for Home Rule at present. Looking at these simply from theindustrial standpoint and leaving out of account all the powerfulelements of religious and race prejudice, the man of the North sees twosalient facts which have dominated all the political activity of theNationalist campaign. One is a voluble and aggressive disloyalty, notmerely to 'England' and to the present system of government, but to theCrown which represents the unity of the three kingdoms, and the other isthe introduction of politics into business in the very virulent anddestructive form known as boycotting. 

Now, hostility to the Crown, if it means anything, means a struggle forseparation as soon as Home Rule has given to the Irish people the powerto organise and arm. And (still keeping to the sternly practical pointof view) that would, for the time being at least, spell absolute ruin tothe industrial North. The practice of boycotting, again, is the veryantithesis of industry--it creates an atmosphere in which industry andenterprise simply cannot live. The North has seen this practice condonedas a desperate remedy for a desperate ill, but it has seen it continuedlong after the ill had passed away, used as a weapon by one Nationalistsection against another, and revived when anything like a reallyoppressive or arbitrary eviction had become impossible. There seems tohave been in Nationalist circles, since the time of O'Connell, butlittle appreciation of the deadly character of this social curse; andthe prospect of a Government which would tolerate it naturally fills themind of the Northern commercial man with alarm and aversion. 

Again, the democratisation of local government which gave theNationalist leaders a unique opportunity of showing the value, has butserved to demonstrate the ineffectiveness, of their political tactics. North of Ireland opinion was deeply interested in this reform, andappreciated its far-reaching importance. Elsewhere, I think it will besafe to say, people generally were indifferent to it until it came, andthe leaders seemed to see in it only a weapon to be used for politicalpurposes. To the great vista of useful and patriotic work opened out bythe Act of 1898, to the impression that a proper use of that Act mightmake on Northern opinion, they were blind. It is true that the Councilswhen left to themselves did admirably, and fully justified the trustreposed in them. But at the inauguration of local government it wasnaturally not the work of the Councils but the attitude of the partyleaders which appeared to stamp the reception of the Act by the Irishpeople. 

It is true, of course, that many thoughtful men among the Nationalistparty repudiate the idea that the methods of to-day would be continuedin a self-governed Ireland. I fail to see any reason why they shouldnot. Under any system of limited Home Rule questions would arise whichwould afford much the same sort of justification for the employment ofsuch methods, and they could hardly be worse for the welfare of thecountry then than they are now. There is abundant need and abundant workin the present day for thoughtful and far-seeing men in a partyconstitutionally so strong as that of the Irish Nationalists. If thoseamong them who possess, or at any rate can make effective use ofqualities of constructive statesmanship are as few as the history ofrecent years would lead us to suppose, what assurance can UlsterUnionists feel that such men would spring up spontaneously in an Irelandunder Home Rule? I admit, indeed, that a considerable measure of suchassurance might be derived from the attitude of the leaders of the partyat and since the Land Conference. But this adoption of statesmanlikemethods which cannot be too widely understood or too warmly commended isa matter of very recent history; and though we may hope that the successattending it will help materially in the political education of theIrish people, that will not, by itself, undo the effect of a quarter ofa century of political agitation governed by ideas the very reverse ofthose which are now happily beginning to find favour. 

I have thought it necessary to examine at some length the defence on theground of tactics which is often made for Nationalist politics, becauseit is the only defence ever made by those apologists who admit thedisturbing influence upon our economic and social life of Nationalistmethods. A broader and saner view of political tactics than prevailedten years ago is now possible, for circumstances are becoming friendlyand helpful to the development of political thought. Though the UnitedIrish League apparently restored 'unity' to the ranks of theNationalists, the country is, I believe, getting restless under thepolitical bondage, and is seething with a wholesome discontent. In thisvery matter of political education, the stir of corporate life, thesense of corporate responsibility which in every parish of Ireland arenow being fostered by the reformed system of local government, must maketheir influence felt in wider spheres. Even now I believe that the fieldis ready for the work of those who would bid the old leader-followinghabit, the product partly of the dead clan system, partly of dyingnational animosities, depart as a thing that has had its day, and whowould endeavour to train up a race of free, self-reliant, andindependent citizens in a free state. 

In this work the very men whose mistaken conception of a united IrelandI have criticised will, I doubt not, take a leading part. In manyrespects, and these not the least important, no one could desire abetter instrument for the achievement of great reforms than the Irishparty. They are far beyond any similar group of English members inrhetorical skill and quickness of intelligence and decision, qualitieswhich no doubt belong to the mechanism rather than the soul of politics, but which the practical worker in public life will not despise. But evenwhen tried by a higher standard the Irish members need not fear thejudgment of history. They have often, in my opinion, misconceived thetrue interests of their country, but they have been faithful to thoseinterests as they understood them, and have proved themselves notablysuperior to sordid personal aims. These gifts and virtues are notcommon, but still rarer is it to see such gifts and virtues cursed withthe doom of futility. The influence of the Irish political leaders hasneither advanced the nation's march through the wilderness nor taughtthe people how they are to dispense with manna from above when theyreach the Promised Land. With all their brilliancy, they have thrown butlittle helpful light on any Irish problem. In this want of political andeconomic foresight Irish Nationalist politicians, with some exceptionswhom it would be invidious to name, have fallen lamentably short of whatmight be expected of Irish intellect. For the eight years during which Irepresented an Irish constituency I always felt that an Irish night inthe House of Commons was one of the strangest and most pathetic ofspectacles. There were the veterans of the Irish party hardened by ahundred fights, ranging from Venezuela to the Soudan in search ofbattlefields, making allies of every kind of foreign potentate, fromPresident Cleveland to the Mahdi, from Mr. Kruger to the Akhoom of Swat, but looking with suspicion on every symptom of an independent nationalmovement in Ireland; masters of the language of hate and scorn, yetmocked by inevitable and eternal failure; winners of victories that turnto dust and ashes; devoted to their country, yet, from ignorance of thereal source of its malady, ever widening the gaping wound through whichits life-blood flows. While I recall these scenes, there rises before mymind the picture vividly drawn by Miss Lawless of their prototypes, the'Wild Geese, ' who carried their swords into foreign service after thefinal defeat of the Stuarts:--

 War-battered dogs are we, Fighters in every clime, Fillers of trench and of grave, Mockers, bemocked by Time; War-dogs, hungry and grey, Gnawing a naked bone, Fighting in every clime Every cause but our own. [15]

Irishmen have been long in realising that the days of the 'Wild Geese'are over, and that there are battles for Ireland to be fought and won inIreland--battles in which England is not the enemy she was in the daysof Fontenoy, but a friend and helper. But there will be little gain inreplacing the traditional conception of England as the inexorable foe bythe more modern conception, which threatened to become traditional inits turn, of England as the source of all prosperity and her favour asthe condition of all progress in Ireland. In the recent Land ConferenceI recognise something more valuable even than the financial andlegislative results which flowed from it, for it showed that theconception of reliance upon Irishmen in Ireland, not under some futureand problematical conditions, but here and now, for the solution ofIrish questions, is gaining ground among us. If this conception oncetakes firm hold, as I think it is beginning to do, of the Nationalistparty in Ireland, much of the criticism of this chapter will lose itsmeaning. The mere substitution of a positive Irish policy for a negativeanti-English policy will elevate the whole range of Nationalistpolitical activity in and out of Ireland. And I am certain that if theultimate goal of Nationalist politics be desirable, and continue to bedesired, it will not be rendered more difficult, but on the contraryvery much easier of attainment if those who seek it take possession ofthe great field of work which, without waiting for any concessions fromWestminster, is offered by the Ireland of to-day. 

FOOTNOTES:

[11] This view of the case was powerfully stated by the deputation fromthe Belfast Chamber of Commerce which waited on Mr. Gladstone in thespring of 1893. They pointed out _inter alia_ that the members of thedeputation were poorer by thousands of pounds owing to the fall in Irishstocks consequent upon the introduction of the Home Rule Bill in thatyear. 

[12] The term 'Scotch-Irish' does not mean an amalgam of Scotch andIrish, but a race of Scottish immigrants who settled in north-eastIreland. I may point out that in these criticisms of Irish-Americanpolitics I refer, of course, mainly to the Irish-born immigrants and notto the Irish, Scotch-Irish or other, who are American-born. Nobody canhave a higher appreciation than I of the great part played by theAmerican-Irish once they have assimilated the full spirit of Americaninstitutions. 

[13] _Poems of Egan O'Rahilly. _ Edited, with translation, by the Rev. P. S. Dinneen, M. A. , for the Irish Texts Society, p. 11. O'Rahilly'scharge against Cromwell is that he "gave plenty to the man with theflail, " but beggared the great lords, p. 167. 

[14] _Prose Writings of Thomas Davis_, p. 284. 'The writers of _TheNation_, ' wrote Davis in another place, 'have never concealed thedefects or flattered the good qualities of their countrymen. They havetold them in good faith that they wanted many an attribute of a freepeople, _and that the true way to command happiness and liberty was bylearning the arts and practising the culture that fitted men for theirenjoyment'_ (p. 176). The thing that especially distinguished Davisamong Nationalist politicians was the essentially constructive mindwhich he brought to bear on Irish questions, as illustrated in thepassage I have italicised. It is, I am afraid, the part of his legacy ofthought which has been least regarded by his admirers. 

[15] _With the Wild Geese_. Poems by the Hon. Emily Lawless. I havenever read a better portrayal of the historic Irish sentiment than isset forth in this little volume. By the way, there is a preface by Mr. Stopford Brooke, which is singularly interesting and informing. 

CHAPTER IV. 

THE INFLUENCE OF RELIGION UPON SECULAR LIFE IN IRELAND. 

In the preceding chapter I attempted to estimate the influence of ourpolitical leaders as a potential and as an actual force. I come now tothe second great influence upon the thought and action of the Irishpeople, the influence of religion, especially the power exercised by thepriests and by the unrivalled organisation of the Roman Catholic Church. I do not share the pessimism which sees in this potent influence nothingbut the shackles of mediævalism restraining its adherents from fallinginto line with the progress of the age. I shall, indeed, have to admitmuch of what is charged against the clerical leaders of popular thoughtin Ireland, but I shall be able to show, I hope, that these leaders arelargely the product of a situation which they themselves did not create, and that not only are they as susceptible as are the political leadersto the influences of progressive movements, but that they can be morereadily induced to take part in their promotion. In no other country inthe world, probably, is religion so dominant an element in the dailylife of the people as in Ireland, and certainly nowhere else has theminister of religion so wide and undisputed an authority. It is obvious, therefore, that, however foreign such a theme may _prima facie_ appearto the scope and aim of the present volume, I have no choice but toanalyse frankly and as fully as my personal experience justifies, what Iconceive to be the true nature, the salutary limits, and the actualscope of clerical influence in this country. 

But before I can discuss what I may call the religious situation, thereis one fundamental question--a question which will appear somewhatstrange to anyone not in touch with Irish life--which I must, with aview to a general agreement on essentials, submit to some of myco-religionists. In all seriousness I would ask, whether in theiropinion the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland is to be tolerated. If theanswer be in the negative, I can only reply that any efforts to stampout the Roman Catholic faith would fail as they did in the past; and thepractical minds among those I am now addressing must admit that intoleration alone is to be found the solution of that part of the Irishdifficulty which is due to sectarian animosities. 

This brings us face to face with the question, What is religioustoleration--I do not mean as a pious sentiment which we are allconscious of ourselves possessing in a truer sense than that in which itis possessed by others, but rather toleration as an essential of theliberty which we Protestants enjoy under the British Constitution, andboast that all other creeds equally enjoy? Perhaps I had better statesimply how I answer this question in my own mind. Toleration by theIrish minority, in regard to the religious faith and ecclesiasticalsystem of the Irish majority, implies that we admit the right of Rome tosay what Roman Catholics shall believe and what outward forms they shallobserve, and that they shall not suffer before the State for thesebeliefs and observances. I do not think exception can be taken to thestatement that toleration in this narrow sense cannot be refusedconsistently with the fundamental principles of British government. 

Now, however, comes a less obvious, but, as I think, no less essentialcondition of toleration in the sense above indicated. The Roman CatholicHierarchy claim the right to exercise such supervision and control overthe education of their flock as will enable them to safe-guard faith andmorals as preached and practised by their Church. I concede this secondclaim as a necessary corollary of the first. Having lived most of mylife among Roman Catholics--two branches of my own family belonging tothat religion--I am aware that this control is an essential part of thewhole fabric of Roman Catholicism. Whether the basis of authority uponwhich that system is founded be in its origin divine or human is besidethe point. If we profess to tolerate the faith and religious system ofthe majority of our countrymen we must at least concede the conditionsessential to the maintenance of both the one and the other, unless ourtolerance is to be a sham. 

So far all liberal-minded Protestants, who know what Roman Catholicismis, will be with me; and for the main purposes of the argument containedin this chapter it is not necessary to interpret toleration in any widersense than that which I have indicated. Many Protestants, among whom Iam one, do, it is true, make a further concession to the claim of ourRoman Catholic fellow-countrymen. We would give them in Irelandfacilities for higher education which we would not give them in England, and we would advocate liberal endowment by the State to this end. Butthis attitude is, I admit, based upon something more than tolerance, andthose who would withhold this concession need not be accused of bigotryor intolerance for so doing. They may be, and often are, actuated by themost liberal motives, by a perfectly legitimate conception ofeducational principles, or by other considerations which are neither ofa narrow nor sectarian character. 

I need hardly say that in criticising religious systems and theirministers I have not the faintest intention of entering on thediscussion of doctrinal issues. I am, of course, here concerned withonly those aspects of the religious situation which bear directly onsecular life. I am endeavouring, it must be remembered, to arrive at acomprehensive and accurate appreciation of the chief influences whichmould the character, guide the thought, and, therefore, direct theaction of the Irish people as citizens of this world and of their owncountry. From this standpoint let us try to make a dispassionate surveyof Protestantism and Roman Catholicism in Ireland, and see whereintheir votaries fulfil, or fail to fulfil, their mission in advancing ourcommon civilisation. Let us examine, in a word, not merely the directinfluence which the creed of each of the two sections of Irishmenproduces on the industrial character of its adherents, but also itsindirect effects upon the mutual relations and regard for each other ofProtestants and Roman Catholics. 

Protestantism has its stronghold in the great industrial centres of theNorth and among the Presbyterian farmers of five or six Ulster counties. These communities, it is significant to note, have developed theessentially strenuous qualities which, no doubt, they brought fromEngland and Scotland. In city life their thrift, industry, andenterprise, unsurpassed in the United Kingdom, have built up aworld-wide commerce. In rural life they have drawn the largest yieldfrom relatively infertile soil. Such, in brief, is the achievement ofUlster Protestantism in the realm of industry. It is a story of which, when a united Ireland becomes more than a dream, all Irishmen will beproud. 

But there is, unhappily, another side to the picture. This industriallife, otherwise so worthily cultivated, is disturbed by manifestationsof religious bigotry which sadly tarnish the glory of the really heroicdeeds they are intended to commemorate. It is impossible for any closeobserver of these deplorable exhibitions to avoid the conclusion thatthe embers of the old fires are too often fanned by men who areactuated by motives, which, when not other than religious, are certainlybased upon an unworthy conception of religion. I am quite aware that itis only a small and decreasing minority of my co-religionists who areopen to the charge of intolerance, and that the geographical limits ofthe July orgy are now strictly circumscribed. But this bigotry is sonotorious, as for instance in the exclusion of Roman Catholics from manyresponsible positions, that it unquestionably reacts most unfavourablyupon the general relations between the two creeds throughout the wholeof Ireland. The existence of such a spirit of suspicion and hatred, fromwhatever motive it emanates, is bound to retard our progress as a peopletowards the development of a healthy and balanced national life. 

Many causes have recently contributed to the unhappy continuance ofsectarian animosities in Ireland. The Ritualistic movement and thestruggle over the Education Bill in England, the renewed controversy onthe University Question in Ireland, instances of bigotry towardsProtestants displayed by County, District, and Urban Councils in thethree southern provinces of Ireland, the formation of the CatholicAssociation, the question of the form of the King's oath, and, moreremotely, the protest against clericalism in such Roman Catholiccountries as France and Austria, have one and all helped to keep alivethe flame of anti-Roman feeling among Irish Protestants. [16]

There are, happily, other influences now at work in a contrarydirection. Among the industrial leaders a better spirit prevails. Awell-known Ulster manufacturer told me recently that only a few yearsago, when an applicant for employment appeared at certain Northernfactories, which my friend named, the first question always put was, 'Are you a Protestant or Roman Catholic?' Now, he said, it is not what aman believes, but what he can do, which is considered when engagingworkers. And outside the cities there are most gratifying signs ofbetter relations between the two creeds. We are on the eve of thecreation of a peasant proprietary, involving the rehabilitation of rurallife, and one essential condition of the successful inauguration of thenew agrarian order is the elimination of anything approaching tosectarian bitterness in communities which will require every advantagederivable from joint deliberation and common effort to enable them tohold their own against foreign competition. I recall a trivial butsignificant incident in the course of my Irish work which left a deepimpression on my mind. After attending a meeting of farmers in a verybackward district in the extreme west of Mayo, I arrived one winter'sevening at the Roman Catholic priest's house. Before the meeting I hadbeen promised a cup of tea, which, after a long, cold drive, was morethan acceptable. When I presented myself at the priest's house, what wasmy astonishment at finding the Protestant clergyman presiding over asteaming urn and a plate of home-made cakes, having been requested to dothe honours by his fellow-minister, who had been called away to a sickbed. A cycle of homilies on the virtue of tolerance could add nothing tothe simple lesson which these two clergymen gave to the adherents ofboth their creeds. I felt as I went on my way that night that I had hada glimpse into the kind of future for Ireland towards which myfellow-workers are striving. 

It is, however, with the religion of the majority of the Irish peopleand with its influence upon the industrial character of its adherentsthat I am chiefly concerned. Roman Catholicism strikes an outsider asbeing in some of its tendencies non-economic, if not actuallyanti-economic. These tendencies have, of course, much fuller play whenthey act on a people whose education has (through no fault of their own)been retarded or stunted. The fact is not in dispute, but the difficultyarises when we come to apportion the blame between ignorance on the partof the people and a somewhat one-sided religious zeal on the part oflarge numbers of their clergy. I do not seek to do so with any precisionhere. I am simply adverting to what has appeared to me, in the course ofmy experience in Ireland, to be a defect in the industrial character ofRoman Catholics which, however caused, seems to me to have beenintensified by their religion. The reliance of that religion onauthority, its repression of individuality, and its complete shifting ofwhat I may call the moral centre of gravity to a future existence--tomention no other characteristics--appear to me calculated, unlesssupplemented by other influences, to check the growth of the qualitiesof initiative and self-reliance, especially amongst a people whose lackof education unfits them for resisting the influence of what may presentitself to such minds as a kind of fatalism with resignation as itsparamount virtue. 

It is true that one cannot expect of any church or religion, as acondition of its acceptance, that it will furnish an economic theory;and it is also true that Roman Catholicism has, at different periods ofhistory, advantageously affected economic conditions, even if it did notact from distinctively economic motives--for example, by its directinfluence in the suppression of slavery[17] and its creation of themediæval craft guilds. It may, too, be admitted that during the MiddleAges, when Roman Catholicism was freer than now to manifest itsinfluence in many directions, owing to its practically unchallengedsupremacy, it favoured, when it did not originate, many forms of soundeconomic activity, and was, to say the least, abreast of the time in itsconception of the working of economic causes. But from the time whenthe Reformation, by its demand for what we Protestants conceive to be asimpler Christianity, drove Roman Catholicism back, if I may use theexpression, on its first line of defence, and constrained it to look toits distinctively spiritual heritage, down to the present day, it hasseemed to stand strangely aloof from any contact with industrial andeconomic issues. When we consider that in this period Adam Smith livedand died, the industrial revolution was effected, and the world-marketopened, it is not surprising that we do not find Roman Catholiccountries in the van of economic progress, or even the Roman Catholicelement in Protestant countries, as a rule, abreast of theirfellow-countrymen. It would, however, be an error to ignore some notableexceptions to this generalisation. In Belgium, in France, in parts ofGermany and Austria, and in the north of Italy economic thought ismaking headway amongst Roman Catholics, and the solution of socialproblems is being advanced by Roman Catholic laymen and clergymen. Evenin these countries, however, much remains to be done. The revolution inthe industrial order, and its consequences, such as the concentration ofimmense populations within restricted areas, have brought with themsocial and moral evils that must be met with new weapons. In theinterests of religion itself, principles first expounded to a Syriancommunity with the most elementary physical needs and the simplest ofavocations, have to be taught in their application to the conditions ofthe most complex social organisation and economic life. Taking peopleas we find them, it may be said with truth that their lives must bewholesome before they can be holy, and while a voluntary asceticism mayhave its justification, it behoves a Church to see that its members, while fully acknowledging the claims of another life, should develop thequalities which make for well-being in this life. In fact, I believethat the influence of Christianity upon social progress will be bestmaintained by co-ordinating these spiritual and economic ideals in aphilosophy of life broader and truer than any to which the nations haveyet attained. 

What I have just been saying with regard to Roman Catholicism generally, in relation to economic doctrines and industrial progress, applies, ofcourse, with a hundred fold pertinence to the case of Ireland. Betweenthe enactment of the first Penal Laws and the date of Roman CatholicEmancipation, Irish Roman Catholics were, to put it mildly, affordedscant opportunity, in their own country, of developing economic virtuesor achieving industrial success. Ruthlessly deprived of education, arethey to be blamed if they did not use the newly acquired facilities tothe best advantage? With their religion looked on as the badge of legaland social inferiority, was it any wonder that priests and people alike, while clinging with unexampled fidelity to their creed, remainedaltogether cut off from the current of material prosperity? Excluded, asthey were, not merely from social and political privileges, but from themost ordinary civil rights, denied altogether the right of ownership ofreal property, and restricted in the possession of personalty, is itany wonder that they are not to-day in the van of industrial andcommercial progress? Nay, more, was it to have been expected that thecharacter of a people so persecuted and ostracised should have come outof the ordeal of centuries with its adaptability and elasticityunimpaired? That would have been impossible. Those who are intimate withthe Roman Catholic people of Ireland, and at the same time familiar withtheir history, will recognise in their character and mental outlook manyan inheritance of that epoch of serfdom. I speak, of course, of themass, for I am not unmindful of many exceptions to this generalisation. 

But I must now pass on to a more definite consideration of the presentaction and attitude of the Irish Roman Catholic clergy towards theeconomic, educational, and other issues discussed in this book. Thereasons which render such a consideration necessary are obvious. Even ifwe include Ulster, three quarters of the Irish people are RomanCatholics, while, excluding the Northern province, quite nine-tenths ofthe population belong to that religion. Again, the three thousandclergymen of that denomination exercise an influence over their flocksnot merely in regard to religious matters, but in almost every phase oftheir lives and conduct, which is, in its extent and character, quiteunique, even, I should say, amongst Roman Catholic communities. To aProtestant, this authority seems to be carried very far beyond what thelegitimate influence of any clergy over the lay members of theircongregation should be. We are, however, dealing with a national lifeexplicable only by reference to a very exceptional and gloomy history ofreligious persecution. What I may call the secular shortcomings of theRoman Catholics in Ireland cannot be fairly judged except as the resultsof a series of enactments by which they were successively denied almostall means of succeeding as citizens of this world. 

From such study as I have been able to give to the history of theirChurch, I have come to the conclusion that the immense power of theIrish Roman Catholic clergy has been singularly little abused. I thinkit must be admitted that they have not exhibited in any marked degreebigotry towards Protestants. They have not put obstacles in the way ofthe Roman Catholic majority choosing Protestants for political leaders, and it is significant that refugees, such as the Palatines, fromCatholic persecutions in Europe, found at different times a home amongstthe Roman Catholic people of Ireland. My own experience, too, if I mayagain refer to that, distinctly proves that it is no disadvantage to aman to be a Protestant in Irish political life, and that whereopposition is shown to him by Roman Catholics it is almost invariably onpolitical, social, or agrarian, but not on religious grounds. 

A charge of another kind has of late been often brought against theRoman Catholic clergy, which has a direct bearing upon the economicaspect of this question. Although, as I read Irish history, the RomanCatholic priesthood have, in the main, used their authority withpersonal disinterestedness, if not always with prudence or discretion, their undoubted zeal for religion has, on occasion, assumed forms whichenlightened Roman Catholics, including high dignitaries of that Church, think unjustifiable on economic grounds, and discourage even from areligious standpoint. Excessive and extravagant church-building in theheart and at the expense of poor communities is a recent and notoriousexample of this misdirected zeal. It has been, I believe, too oftenforgotten that the best monument of any clergyman's influence andearnestness must always be found in the moral character and thespiritual fibre of his flock, and not in the marbles and mosaics of agaudy edifice. And without doubt a good many motives which have but aremote connection with religion are, unfortunately, at work in thechurch-building movement. It may, however, to some extent, be regardedas an extreme re-action from the penal times, when the hunted _soggarth_had to celebrate the Mass in cabins and caves on the mountain side--are-action the converse of which was witnessed in Protestant England whenPuritanism rose up against Anglicanism in the seventeenth century. Thisexpenditure, however, has been incurred; and, no one, I take it, wouldadvocate the demolition of existing religious edifices on the groundthat their erection had been unduly costly! The moral is for the presentand the future, and applies not merely to economy in new buildings, butalso in the decoration of existing churches. [18]

But it is not alone extravagant church building which in a country sobackward as Ireland, shocks the economic sense. The multiplication--ininverse ratio to a declining population--of costly and elaboratemonastic and conventual institutions, involving what in the aggregatemust be an enormous annual expenditure for maintenance, is difficult toreconcile with the known conditions of the country. Most of theseinstitutions, it is true, carry on educational work, often, as in thecase of the Christian Brothers and some colleges and convents, of anexcellent kind. Many of them render great services to the poor, andespecially to the sick poor. But, none the less, it seems to me, theirgrowth in number and size is anomalous. I cannot believe that so largean addition to the 'unproductive' classes is economically sound, and Ihave no doubt at all that the competition with lay teachers of celibates'living in community' is excessive and educationally injurious. Stronglyas I hold the importance of religion in education, I personally do notthink that teachers who have renounced the world and withdrawn fromcontact with its stress and strain are the best moulders of thecharacters of youths who will have to come into direct conflict with thetrials and temptations of life. But here again we must accept thesituation and work with the instruments ready to hand. The practical andstatesmanlike action for all those concerned is to endeavour to renderthese institutions as efficient educational agencies as may be possible. They owe their existence largely to the gaps in the educational systemof this country which religious and political strife have produced andmaintained, and they deserve the utmost credit for endeavouring tosupply missing steps in our educational ladder. [19] If they now fullyrespond to the spirit of the new movements and meet the demand fortechnical education by the employment of the most approved methods andequipment, and by the thorough training on sound lines of their staffs, it is impossible that their influence on the young generation should notbe as salutary as it will be wide-reaching. 

But, after all, these criticisms are, for the purposes of my argument, of minor relevance and importance. The real matter in which the directand personal responsibility of the Roman Catholic clergy seems to me tobe involved, is the character and _morale_ of the people of thiscountry. No reader of this book will accuse me of attaching too littleweight to the influence of historical causes on the present state, social, economic and political, of Ireland, but even when I have givenfull consideration to all such influences I still think that, with theirunquestioned authority in religion, and their almost equally undisputedinfluence in education, the Roman Catholic clergy cannot be exoneratedfrom some responsibility in regard to Irish character as we find itto-day. Are they, I would ask, satisfied with that character? I cannotthink so. The impartial observer will, I fear, find amongst a majorityof our people a striking absence of self-reliance and moral courage; anentire lack of serious thought on public questions; a listlessness andapathy in regard to economic improvement which amount to a form offatalism; and, in backward districts, a survival of superstition, whichsaps all strength of will and purpose--and all this, too, amongst apeople singularly gifted by nature with good qualities of mind andheart. 

Nor can the Roman Catholic clergy altogether console themselves with thethought that religious faith, even when free from superstition, isstrong in the breasts of the people. So long, no doubt, as Irish RomanCatholics remain at home, in a country of sharply defined religiousclasses, and with a social environment and a public opinion sopreponderatingly stamped with their creed, open defections from RomanCatholicism are rare. But we have only to look at the extent of the'leakage' from Roman Catholicism amongst the Irish emigrants in theUnited States and in Great Britain, to realise how largely emotional andformal must be the religion of those who lapse so quickly in anon-Catholic atmosphere. [20]

It is not, of course, to the causes of the defections from a creed towhich I do not subscribe that my criticism is directed. I refer to thematter only in order to emphasise the large share of responsibilitywhich belongs to the Roman Catholic clergy for what I strongly believeto be the chief part in the work of national regeneration, the partcompared with which all legislative, administrative, educational orindustrial achievements are of minor importance. Holding, as I do, thatthe building of character is the condition precedent to material, socialand intellectual advancement, indeed to all national progress, I may, perhaps, as a lay citizen, more properly criticise, from this point ofview, what I conceive to be the great defect in the methods of clericalinfluence. For this purpose no better illustration could be affordedthan a brief analysis of the results of the efforts made by the RomanCatholic clergy to inculcate temperance. 

Among temperance advocates--the most earnest of all reformers--the RomanCatholic clergy have an honourable record. An Irish priest was thegreatest, and, for a brief spell, the most successful temperance apostleof the last century, and statistics, it is only fair to say, show thatwe Irish drink rather less than people in other parts of the UnitedKingdom. But the real question is whether we more often drink tointoxication, and police statistics as well as common experience seem todisclose that we do. Many a temperate man drinks more in his life thanmany a village drunkard. Again, the test of the average consumption ofman, woman and child is somewhat misleading, especially in Irelandwhere, owing to the excessive emigration of adults, there is adisproportionately large number of very young and old. Moreover, weIrish drink more in proportion to our means than the English, Scotch, and Welsh, whose consumption is absolutely larger. Anyone who attemptsto deal practically with the problems of industrial development inIreland realises what a terribly depressing influence the drink evilexercises upon the industrial capacity of the people. 'Ireland sober isIreland free, ' is nearer the truth, than much that is thought and mostof what is said about liberty in this country. 

Now, the drink habit in Ireland differs from that of the other parts ofthe United Kingdom. The Irishman is, in my belief, physiologically lesssubject to the craving for alcohol than the Englishman, a fact which ispartially attributable, I should say, to the less animal dietary towhich he is accustomed. By far the greater proportion of the drinkingwhich retards our progress is of a festive character. It takes place atfairs and markets, sometimes, even yet, at 'wakes, ' those ghastlyparodies on the blessed consolation of religion in bereavement. It isintensified by the almost universal sale of liquor in the country shops'for consumption on the premises, ' an evil the demoralising effects ofwhich are an hundredfold greater than those of the 'grocer's licences'which temperance reformers so strenuously denounce. It is an evil indefence of which nothing can be said, but it has somehow escaped theeffective censure of the Church. 

The indiscriminate granting of licences in Ireland, which has resultedin the provision of liquor shops in a proportion to the populationlarger than is found in any other country, is in itself due mainly tothe moral cowardice of magistrates, who do not care to incur localunpopularity by refusing licences for which there is no pretence of anyneed beyond that of the applicant and his relatives. Not long ago themagistrates of Ireland met in Dublin in order to inaugurate commonaction in dealing with this scandal. Appropriate resolutions werepassed, and much good has already resulted from the meeting, but had theunvarnished truth been admissible, the first and indeed the onlynecessary resolution should have run, "Resolved that in future we becollectively as brave as we have been individually timid, and that wetake heart of grace and carry away from this meeting sufficient strengthto do, in the exercise of our functions as the licensing authority, whatwe have always known to be our plain duty to our country and our God. "No such resolution was proposed, for though patriotism is becoming realin Ireland, it is not yet very robust. 

I do not think it unfair to insist upon the large responsibility of theclergy for the state of public opinion in this matter, to which the fewfacts I have cited bear testimony. But I attribute their failure to dealwith a moral evil of which they are fully cognisant to the fact thatthey do not recognise the chief defect in the character of the people, and to a misunderstanding of the means by which that character can bestrengthened. There are, however, exceptions to this general statement. It is of happy augury for the future of Ireland that many of the clergyare now leading a temperance movement which shows a real knowledge ofthe _causa causans_ of Irish intemperance. The Anti-Treating League, asit is called, administers a novel pledge which must have been conceivedin a very understanding mind. Those enlisted undertake neither to treatnor to be treated. They may drink, so far as the pledge is concerned, asmuch as they like; but they must drink at their own expense; and othersmust not drink at their expense. The good nature and sociability ofIrishmen, too often the mere result of inability to say 'no, ' need notbe sacrificed. But even if they were, the loss of these social graceswould be far more than compensated by a self-respect and seriousness oflife out of which something permanent might be built. Still, even thisLeague makes no direct appeal to character, and so acts rather as a curefor than as a preventive of our moral weakness. 

The methods by which clerical influence is wielded in the inculcation ofchastity may be criticised from exactly the same standpoint as that fromwhich I have found it necessary to deal with the question of temperance. Here the success of the Irish priesthood is, considering the conditionsof peasant life, and the fire of the Celtic temperament, absolutelyunique. No one can deny that almost the entire credit of this moralachievement belongs to the Roman Catholic clergy. It may be said thatthe practice of a virtue, even if the motive be of an emotional kind, becomes a habit, and that habit proverbially develops into a secondnature. With this view of moral evolution I am in entire accord; but Iwould ask whether the evolution has not reached a stage where a gradualrelaxation of the disciplinary measures by which chastity is insuredmight be safely allowed without any danger of lowering the high standardof continence which is general in Ireland and which of course it is ofsupreme importance to maintain. 

There are, however, many parishes where in this matter the strictestdiscipline is rigorously enforced Amusements, not necessarily or evenoften vicious, are objected to as being fraught with dangers which wouldnever occur to any but the rigidly ascetic or the puritanical mind. Inmany parishes the Sunday cyclist will observe the strange phenomenon ofa normally light-hearted peasantry marshalled in male and female groupsalong the road, eyeing one another in dull wonderment across theforbidden space through the long summer day. This kind of discipline, unless when really necessary, is open to the objection that iteliminates from the education of life, especially during the formativeyears, an essential of culture--the mutual understanding of the sexes. The evil of grafting upon secular life a quasi-monasticism which, notbeing voluntary, has no real effect upon the character, may perhapsinvolve moral consequences little dreamed of by the spiritual guardiansof the people. A study of the pathology of the emotions might throwdoubt upon the safety of enforced asceticism when unaccompanied by thetraining which the Church wisely prescribes for those who take the vowof celibacy. But of my own knowledge I can speak only of another aspectof the effect upon our national life of the restrictions to which Irefer. No Irishmen are more sincerely desirous of staying the tide ofemigration than the Roman Catholic clergy, and while, wisely as I think, they do not dream of a wealthy Ireland, they earnestly work for thephysical and material as well as the spiritual well-being of theirflocks. And yet no man can get into the confidence of the emigratingclasses without being told by them that the exodus is largely due to afeeling that the clergy are, no doubt from an excellent motive, takingjoy--innocent joy--from the social side of the home life. 

To go more fully into these subjects might carry me beyond the properlimits of lay criticism. But, clearly, large questions of clericaltraining must suggest themselves to those to whom their discussionproperly belongs--whether, for example, there is not in the instanceswhich I have cited evidence of a failure to understand that mereauthority in the regions of moral conduct cannot have any abidingeffect, except in the rarest combination of circumstances, and with avery primitive people. Do not many of these clergy ignore the vastdifference between the ephemeral nature of moral compulsion and theenduring force of a real moral training?

I have dealt with the exercise of clerical influence in these matters asbeing, at any rate in relation to the subject matter of this book, farmore important than the evil commonly described as "The Priest inPolitics. " That evil is, in my opinion, greatly misrepresented. Thecases of priests who take an improper part in politics are cited withoutreference to the vastly greater number who take no part at all, exceptwhen genuinely assured that a definite moral issue is at stake. I alsohave in my mind the question of how we should have fared if the controlof the different Irish agitations had been confined to laymen, and ifthe clergy had not consistently condemned secret associations. Butwhatever may be said in defence of the priest in politics in the past, there are the strongest grounds for deprecating a continuance of theirpolitical activity in the future. As I gauge the several forces nowoperating in Ireland, I am convinced that if an anti-clerical movementsimilar to that which other Roman Catholic countries have witnessed, were to succeed in discrediting the priesthood and lowering them inpublic estimation, it would be followed by a moral, social, andpolitical degradation which would blight, or at least postpone, ourhopes of a national regeneration. From this point of view I hold thatthose clergymen who are predominantly politicians endanger the moralinfluence which it is their solemn duty to uphold. I believe however, that the over-active part hitherto taken in politics by the priests islargely the outcome of the way in which Roman Catholics were treated inthe past, and that this undesirable feature in Irish life will yield, and is already yielding to the removal of the evils to which it owed itsorigin and in some measure its justification. [21]

One has only to turn to the spirit and temper of such representativeRoman Catholics as Archbishop Healy and Dr. Kelly, Bishop of Ross--totheir words and to their deeds--in order to catch the inspiration of anew movement amongst our Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen at oncereligious and patriotic. And if my optimism ever wavers, I have but tothink of the noble work that many priests are to my own knowledgedoing, often in remote and obscure parishes, in the teeth of innumerableobstacles. I call to mind at such times, as pioneers in a greatawakening, men like the eminent Jesuit, Father Thomas Finlay, FatherHegarty of Erris, Father O'Donovan of Loughrea, and many others--menwith whom I have worked and taken counsel, and who represent, I believe, an ever increasing number of their fellow priests. [22]

My position, then, towards the influence of the Roman Catholicclergy--and this influence is a matter of vital importance to theunderstanding of Irish problems--- may now be clearly defined. Whilerecognising to the full that large numbers of the Irish Roman Catholicclergy have in the past exercised undue influence in purely politicalquestions, and, in many other matters, social, educational, andeconomic, have not, as I see things, been on the side of progress, Ihold that their influence is now, more than ever before, essential forimproving the condition of the most backward section of the population. Therefore I feel it to be both the duty and the strong interest of myProtestant fellow-countrymen to think much less of the religiousdifferences which divide them from Roman Catholics, and much more oftheir common citizenship and their common cause. I also hold with equalstrength and sincerity to the belief, which I have already expressed, that the shortcomings of the Roman Catholic clergy are largely to beaccounted for, not by any innate tendency on their part towardsobscurantism, but by the sad history of Ireland in the past. I wouldappeal to those of my co-religionists who think otherwise to suspendtheir judgment for a time. That Roman Catholicism is firmly establishedin Ireland is a fact of the situation which they must admit, and as thisinvolves the continued powerful influence of the priesthood upon thecharacter of the people, it is surely good policy by liberality and fairdealing, especially in the matter of education, to turn this influencetowards the upbuilding of our national life. 

To sum up the influence of religion and religious controversy inIreland, as it presents itself from the only standpoint from which Ihave approached the matter in this chapter, namely, that of material, social, and intellectual progress, I find that while the Protestantshave given, and continue to give, a fine example of thrift and industryto the rest of the nation, the attitude of a section of them towards themajority of their fellow-countrymen has been a bigoted and unintelligentone. On the other hand, I have learned from practical experience amongstthe Roman Catholic people of Ireland that, while more free from bigotry, in the sense in which that word is usually applied, they are apathetic, thriftless, and almost non-industrial, and that they especially requirethe exercise of strengthening influences on their moral fibre. I havedealt with their shortcomings at much greater length than with those ofProtestants, because they have much more bearing on the subject matterof this book. North and South have each virtues which the other lacks;each has much to learn from the other; but the home of the strictlycivic virtues and efficiencies is in Protestant Ireland. The work of thefuture in Ireland will be to break down in social intercourse thebarriers of creed as well as those of race, politics, and class, andthus to promote the fruitful contact of North and South, and theconcentration of both on the welfare of their common country. In thecase of those of us, of whatever religious belief, who look to a futurefor our country commensurate with the promise of her undevelopedresources both of intellect and soil, it is of the essence of our hopethat the qualities which are in great measure accountable for the actualeconomic and educational backwardness of so many of ourfellow-countrymen, and for the intolerance of too many who are notbackward in either respect, are not purely racial or sectarian, but arethe transitory growth of days and deeds which we must all try to forgetif our work for Ireland is to endure. 

FOOTNOTES:

[16] The reproach which is brought upon Irish Christianity mainly by theextravagances of a section of my co-religionists, to which I have beenobliged to refer, came home to me not long ago in a very forcible way. Ihappened to remark to a friend that it was a disgrace to Christianitythat Mussulman soldiery were employed at the Holy Sepulchre to keep thepeace between the Latin and Greek Christians. He reminded me that theprosperous and progressive municipality of Belfast, with a populationeminently industrious, and predominantly Protestant, has to be policedby an Imperial force in order to restrain two sections of IrishChristians from assaulting each other in the name of religion. 

[17] '_Pro salute animae meae_' was, I am reminded, the considerationusually expressed in the old charters of manumission. 

[18] One of the unfortunate effects of this passion for building costlychurches is the importation of quantities of foreign art-work in theshape of woodcarvings, stained glass, mosaics, and metal work. To goodforeign art, indeed, one could not, within certain limits, object. Itmight prove a valuable example and stimulus. But the articles which haveactually been imported, in the impulse to get everything finished assoon as possible, generally consist of the stock pieces produced in aspirit of mere commercialism in the workshops of Continental firms whichmake it their business to cater for a public who do not know thedifference between good art and bad. Much of the decoration ofecclesiastical buildings, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, mightfittingly be postponed until religion in Ireland has got into closerrelation with the native artistic sense and industrial spirit nowbeginning to seek creative expression. 

[19] The following extract from a statement of the Most Rev. Dr. O'Dea, the newly elected Bishop of Clonfert, is pertinent:--'There is anothercause also--i. E. In addition to the absence of university education forRoman Catholic laymen--which has hindered the employment of the laity inthe past. Till very recently, the secondary Catholic schools received noassistance whatever from the State, and their endowment from privatesources was utterly inadequate to supply suitable remuneration for layteachers. It is evident that a celibate clergy _can_ live on a lowerwage than the laity, and they are now charged with having monopolizedthe schools, because they chose to work for a minimum allowance ratherthan suffer the country to remain without any secondary educationwhatever. Two causes, then, operated in the past, and in a large measurestill operate, to exclude the laity from the secondary schools, --first, these schools were so poverty-stricken that they could not afford to paylay teachers at such a rate as would attract them to the teachingprofession, and, next, the Catholic laity as a body were uneducated, and, therefore, unfit to teach in the schools. '--_Maynooth and theUniversity Question_, p. 109 (footnote). 

[20] See, _inter alia_, an article "Ireland and America, " by Rev. Mr. Shinnors, O. M. , in the _Irish Ecclesiastical Record_, February, 1902. 'Has the Church, ' asks Father Shinnors, 'increased her membership in theratio that the population of the United States has increased? No. Thereare many converts, but there are many more apostates. Large numberslapse into indifferentism and irreligion. There should be in Americaabout 20, 000, 000 Catholics; there are scarcely 10, 000, 000. There arereasons to fear that the great majority of the apostates are of Irishextraction, and not a few of them of Irish birth. '

[21] This view seems to be taken by the most influential spokesmen ofthe Roman Catholic Hierarchy. See Evidence, _Royal Commission onUniversity Education in Ireland_, vol. Iii. , p. 238, Questions 8702-6. 

[22] I may mention that of the co-operative societies organised by theIrish Agricultural Organisation Society there are no fewer than 331societies of which the local priests are the Chairmen, while to my ownknowledge during the summer and autumn of 1902, as many as 50, 000persons from all parts of Ireland were personally conducted over theexhibit of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction atthe Cork Exhibition by their local clergy. The educational purpose ofthese visits is explained in Chap. X. Again, in a great number of casesthe village libraries which have been recently started in Ireland withthe assistance of the Department (the books consisting largely ofindustrial, economic, and technical works on agriculture), have beenorganised and assisted by the Roman Catholic clergy. 

CHAPTER V. 

A PRACTICAL VIEW OF IRISH EDUCATION. 

A little learning, we are told, is a dangerous thing; and in theirdealings with Irish education the English should have discovered thatthis danger is accentuated when the little learning is combined withmuch native wit. In the days when religious persecution wasuniversal--only, be it remembered, a few generations ago--it was thepolicy of England to avert this danger by prohibiting, as far aspossible, the acquisition by Irish Roman Catholics of any learning atall. After the Union, Englishmen began to feel their responsibility forthe state of Ireland, a state of poverty and distress which culminatedin the Famine. Knowledge was then no longer withheld: indeed the Englishsincerely desired to dispel our darkness and enable us to share in thewisdom, and so in the prosperity, of the predominant partner. In theirattempts to educate us they dealt with what they saw on the surface, andmoulded their educational principles upon what they knew; but they didnot know Ireland. Even if we excuse them for paying scant attention towhat they were told by Irishmen, they should have given more heed to thereports of their own Royal Commissions. 

We have so far seen that the Irish mind has been in regard toeconomics, politics, and even some phases of religious influence, a mindwarped and diseased, deprived of good nutrition and fed on fancies orfictions, out of which no genuine growth, industrial or other, waspossible. The one thing that might have strengthened and saved a peoplewith such a political, social, and religious history, and such racialcharacteristics, was an educational system which would have had specialregard to that history, and which would have been a just expression ofthe better mind of the people whom it was intended to serve. 

Now this is exactly what was denied to Ireland. Not merely has alleducational legislation come from England, in the sense of being basedon English models and thought out by Englishmen largely out of touch andsympathy with the peculiar needs of Ireland, but whenever there has beengenuine native thought on Irish educational problems, it has been eitherignored altogether or distorted till its value and significance werelost. And in this matter we can claim for Ireland that there was in thecountry during the first half of the nineteenth century, when Englandwas trying her best to provide us with a sound English education, acomparatively advanced stage of home-grown Irish thought upon theeducational needs of the people. Take, for example, the Society forPromoting Elementary Education among the Irish Poor, know as the KildareStreet Society, which was founded as early as the year 1811. The firstresolution passed by this body, which was composed of prominent Dublincitizens of all religious beliefs, was set out as follows:--

 (1. ) Resolved--That promoting the education of the poor of Ireland is a grand object which every Irishman anxious for the welfare and prosperity of his country ought to have in view as the basis upon which the morals and true happiness of the country can be best secured. 

This Society, it is true, did not see or foresee that any system ofmixed religious education was doomed to failure in Ireland, but theytook a wide view of the place of education in a nation's development, and the character of the education which their schools actuallydispensed was admirable. This hopeful and enterprising educationalmovement is described by Mr. Lecky in a passage from which I take a fewextracts:--

 The "Kildare Street Society" which received an endowment from Government, and directed National education from 1812 to 1831, was not proselytising, and it was for some time largely patronized by Roman Catholics. It is certainly by no means deserving of the contempt which some writers have bestowed on it, and if measured by the spirit of the time in which it was founded it will appear both liberal and useful. .. . The object of the schools was stated to be united education, "taking common Christian ground for the foundation, and excluding all sectarian distinctions from every part of the arrangement;" "drawing the attention of both denominations to the many leading truths of Christianity in which they agree. " To carry out this principle it was a fundamental rule that the Bible must be read without note or comment in all the schools. It might be read either in the Authorized or in the Douay version. .. . In 1825 there were 1, 490 schools connected with the Society, containing about 100, 000 pupils. The improvements introduced into education by Bell, Lancaster, and Pestalozzi were largely adopted. Great attention was paid to needlework. .. . A great number of useful publications were printed by the Society, and we have the high authority of Dr. Doyle for stating that he never found anything objectionable [to Catholics] in them. [23]

Take, again, as an evidence of the progressive spirit of the Irishthinkers on education, the remarkable scheme of national educationwhich, after the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Act, wasformulated by Mr. Thomas Wyse, of Waterford. In addition to elementaryschools, Mr. Wyse proposed to establish in every county, 'an academy forthe education of the middle class of society in those departments ofknowledge most necessary to those classes, and over those a College ineach of the four provinces, managed by a Committee representative of theinterests of the several counties of the provinces. ' 'It is a matter ofimportance, ' wrote Mr. Wyse, 'for the simple and efficient working ofthe whole system of national education, that each part should as much aspossible be brought into co-operation and accord with the others. ' Heforesaw, too, that one of the needs of the Irish temperament was atraining in science which would cultivate the habits of 'education, observation, and reasoning, ' and he pointed out that the peculiarmanufactures, trades, and occupations of the several localities woulddetermine the course of studies. Mr. Wyse's memorandum on education led, as is well known, to the creation of the Board of National Education, but, to quote Dr. Starkie, [24] the present Resident Commissioner of theBoard, 'the more important part of the scheme, dealing with a universityand secondary education, was shelved, in spite of Mr. Wyse's warningsthat it was imprudent, dangerous, and pernicious to the social conditionof the country, and to its future tranquillity, that so muchencouragement should be given to the education of the lower classes, without at the same time due provision being made for the education ofthe middle and upper classes. '

As still another evidence of the sound thought on educational problemswhich came from Irishmen who knew the actual conditions of their owncountry and people, the case of the agricultural instructionadministered by the National Board is pertinent. The late Sir PatrickKeenan has told us that landlords and others who on political andreligious grounds distrusted the National system, turned to this featureof the operations of the National Board with the greatest fervour. Ascheme of itinerant instruction in agriculture, which had a curiousresemblance to that which the Department of Agriculture is noworganising, was developed, and was likely to have worked with thegreatest advantage to the country at large. Sir Patrick Keenan, whoknew Ireland and the Irish people well, speaks of this part of thescheme as 'the most fruitful experiment in the material interests of thecountry that was ever attempted. It was, ' he adds, 'through the agencyof this corps of practical instructors that green cropping as asystematic feature in farming was introduced into the South and West, and even into the central parts of Ireland. ' But all the hopes thusraised went down, not before any intrinsic difficulties in the schemeitself, or before any adverse opinion to it in Ireland, but before theopposition of the Liverpool Financial Reform Association, who had theirown views as to the limits of State interference with agriculture. Theseexamples, drawn from different stages of Irish educational history, might easily be multiplied, but they will serve as typical instances ofthat want of recognition by English statesmen of Irish thought on Irishproblems, and that ignoring of Irish sentiment--as distinguished fromIrish sentimentality--which I insist is the basal element in themisunderstandings of Irish problems. 

I now come to a brief consideration of some facts of the presenteducational situation, and I shall indicate, for those readers who arenot familiar with current events in Ireland, the significant evolution, or revolution, through which Irish education is passing. Within the lasteight years we have had in Ireland three very remarkable reports--inthemselves symptoms of a widespread unrest and dissatisfaction--on theeducational systems of the country. I allude to the reports of twoViceregal Commissions, one on Manual and Practical Instruction in ourPrimary Schools, and the other on our Intermediate Education; and to therecent report by a Royal Commission on University Education. Thesereports cover the three grades of our educational system, and each ofthem contains a strong denunciation and a scathing criticism of theexisting provision and methods of instruction in elementary, secondary, and university education (outside Dublin University), respectively. Oneand all showed that the education to be had in our primary and secondaryschools, as well as in the examining body known as the Royal University, had little regard to the industrial or economic conditions of thecountry. We find, for example, agriculture taught out of a text book inthe primary schools, with the result that the _gamins_ of the Belfaststreets secured the highest marks in the subject. In the Intermediatesystem are to be found anomalies of a similar kind, which could not longhave survived if there had been a living opinion on educational mattersin Ireland. No careful reader of the evidence given before theCommissions can fail to see that under our educational system theschools were practically bribed to fall in with a stereotyped course ofstudies which left scant room for elasticity and adaptation to localneeds; that the teacher was, to all intents and purposes, deprived ofhealthy initiative; and that the Irish parents must as a body have beenin the dark as to the bearing of their children's studies on theirprobable careers in life. A deep and wholesome impression was made inIreland by the exposure of the intrinsic evils of a system calculated inmy opinion to turn our youth into a generation of second-rate clerks, with a distinct distaste for any industrial or productive occupation inwhich such qualities as initiative, self-reliance, or judgment werecalled for. 

I am told by competent authorities that there is not a singleeducational principle laid down in either the report on ManualInstruction or on Intermediate Education, which was not known andapplied at least half a century ago in continental countries. In fact, in the Recess Committee investigations, as any reader of the report ofthat body can see for himself, the Committee, guided by foreignexperience, foreshadowed practically every reform now being put intooperation. It is better, of course, that we should reform late thannever, but it is well to bear in mind also, so far as the problems ofthis book are concerned, how far the education of the country has fallenshort of any sound standard, and how little could have been expectedfrom the working of our system. The curve of Irish illiteracy has indeedfallen continuously with each succeeding census, but true education asopposed to mere instruction has languished sadly. 

Together with my friends and fellow-workers in the self-help movement, Ibelieve that the problem of Irish education, like all other Irishproblems, must be reconsidered from the standpoint of its relation tothe practical affairs and everyday life of the people of Ireland. Theneeds and opportunities of the industrial struggle must, in fact, mouldinto shape our educational policy and programmes. We are convinced thatthere is little hope of any real solution of the more general problem ofnational education, unless and until those in direct contact with thespecific industries of the country succeed in bringing to the notice ofthose engaged in the framing of our educational system the kind anddegree of the defects in the industrial character of our people whichdebar them from successful competition with other countries. Educationin Ireland has been too long a thing apart from the economic realitiesof the country--with what result we know. In the work of the Departmentof Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland, an attempt isbeing made to establish a vital relation between industrial educationand industrial life. It is desired to try, at this critical stage of ourdevelopment, the experiment--I call it an experiment only because itdoes not seem to have been tried before in Ireland--of directing ourinstruction with a conscious and careful regard to the probable futurecareers of those we are educating. 

This attempt touches, of course, only one department of the wholeeducational problem, much of which it would be quite outside my presentpurpose to discuss. But I must guard against the supposition that in ourinsistence upon the importance of the practical side of education weare under any doubt as to the great importance of the literary side. Myfriends and I have been deeply impressed by the educational experienceof Denmark, where the people, who are as much dependent on agricultureas are the Irish, have brought it by means of organisation to a moregenuine success than it has attained anywhere else in Europe. Yet aninquirer will at once discover that it is to the "High Schools" foundedby Bishop Grundtvig, and not to the agricultural schools, which are alsoexcellent, that the extraordinary national progress is mainly due. Afriend of mine who was studying the Danish system of State aid toagriculture, found this to be the opinion of the Danes of all classes, and was astounded at the achievements of the associations of farmers, not only in the manufacture of butter, but in a far more difficultundertaking, the manufacture of bacon in large factories equipped withall the most modern machinery and appliances which science had devisedfor the production of the finished article. He at first concluded thatthis success in a highly technical industry by bodies of farmersindicated a very perfect system of technical education. But he soonfound another cause. As one of the leading educators and agriculturistsof the country put it to him: 'It's not technical instruction, it's thehumanities. ' I would like to add that it is also, if I may coin a term, the 'nationalities, ' for nothing is more evident to the student ofDanish education or, I might add, of the excellent system of theChristian Brothers in Ireland, than that one of the secrets of theirsuccess is to be found in their national basis and their foundationupon the history and literature of the country. 

To sum up the educational situation in Ireland, it is not too much tosay that all our forms of education, technical and general, hang loose. We lack a body of trained teachers; we have no alert and informed publicopinion on education and its function in regard to life; and there is noproper provision for research work in all branches, a deficiency, which, I am told by those who have given deep thought and long study to theseproblems, inevitably reacts most disastrously on the general educationalsystem of the country. This state of things appears not unnatural whenwe remember that the Penal Laws were not repealed till almost the closeof the eighteenth century, and that a large majority of the Irish peoplehad not full and free access to even primary and secondary educationuntil the passing of the Emancipation Act in 1829. At the present day, the absence of any provision for higher education of which RomanCatholics will avail themselves is not merely an enormous loss initself, but it reacts most adversely upon the whole educationalmachinery, and consequently upon the whole public life and thought ofthat section of the nation. 

One of the very first things I had to learn when I came into directtouch with educational problems, was that the education of a countrycannot be divided into water-tight compartments, and each partlegislated for or discussed solely on its merits and without referenceto the other parts. I see now very clearly that the educational systemof a country is an organic whole, the working of any part of whichnecessarily has an influence on the working of the rest. I had alwayslooked upon the lower, secondary, and higher grades as the first, second, and third storeys of the educational house, and I am not quitesure that I attached sufficient importance to the staircase. My view hasnow changed, and I find myself regarding the University as a foundationand support of the primary and secondary school. 

It was not on purely pedagogic grounds that I added to my otherpolitical irregularities the earnest advocacy of such a provision forhigher education as Roman Catholics will avail themselves of. This greatneed was revealed to me in my study of the Irish mind and of thedirection in which it could look for its higher development. My beliefis based on practical experience; my point of view is that of theeconomist. When the new economic mission in Ireland began now fourteenyears ago, we had to undertake, in addition to our practical programme, a kind of University extension work with the important omission of theUniversity. We had to bring home to adult farmers whose generaleducation was singularly poor, though their native intelligence was keenand receptive, a large number of general ideas bearing on the productiveand distributive side of their industry. Our chief obstacles arose fromthe lack of trained economic thought among all classes, and especiallyamong those to whom the majority looked for guidance. The air was thickwith economic fallacies or half-truths. We were, it is true, successfulbeyond our expectations in planting in apparently uncongenial soil soundeconomic principles. But our success was mainly due, as I shall showlater, to our having used the associative instincts of the Irish peasantto help out the working of our theories; and we became convinced that ifa tithe of our priests, public men, national school teachers, andmembers of our local bodies had received a university education, weshould have made much more rapid progress. 

I hardly know how to describe the mental atmosphere in which we wereworking. It would be no libel upon the public opinion upon which wesought to make an impression to say that it really allowed no questionto be discussed on its merits. Public opinion on social and economicquestions is changing now, but I cannot associate the change with anyinfluence emanating from institutions of higher education. In othercountries, so far as my investigations have extended, the universitiesdo guide economic thought and have a distinct though wholly unofficialfunction as a court of appeal upon questions relating to the materialprogress of the communities amongst which they are situated. Of suchinstitutions there are in Ireland only two which could be expected todirect in any large way the thought of the country upon economic andother important national questions--Maynooth, and Trinity College, Dublin. Whether in their widely different spheres of influence these twoinstitutions could, under conditions other than those prevailing, haveso met the requirements of the country as to have obviated what is atpresent an urgent necessity for a complete reorganisation of highereducation need not be discussed; but it is essential to my argument thatI should set forth clearly the results of my own observation upon theirinfluence, or rather lack of influence, upon the people among whom Ihave worked. 

The influence of Maynooth, actual and potential, can hardly beexaggerated, but it is exercised indirectly upon the secular thought ofthe country. It is not its function to make a direct impression. It isin fact only a professional--I had almost said a technical--school. Ittrains its students, most admirably I am told, in theology, philosophy, and the studies subsidiary to these sciences, but always, for the vastmajority of its students, with a distinctly practical and definitemissionary end in view. There is, I believe, an arts course of modestscope, designed rather to meet the deficiencies of students whosegeneral education has been neglected than to serve as anything in thenature of a university arts course. I am quite aware of the value of asound training in mental science if given in connection with a fulluniversity course, but I am equally convinced that the Maynootheducation, on the whole, is no substitute for a university course, andthat while its chief end of turning out a large number of trainedpriests has been fulfilled, it has not given, and could not be expectedto have given, that broader and more humane culture which only auniversity, as distinguished from a professional school, can adequatelyprovide. 

Moreover, under the Maynooth system young clerics are constantly calledupon to take a part in the life of a lay community, towards which, whenthey entered college, they were in no position of responsibility, andupon which, so far as secular matters are concerned, when they emergefrom their theological training, they are no better adapted to exercisea helpful influence. In my experience of priests I have met with many inwhom I recognised a sincere desire to attend to the material and socialwell-being of their flocks, but who certainly had not that breadth ofview and understanding of human nature which perhaps contact with thelaity during the years in which they were passing from discipline toauthority might have given to them. However this may be, it is clear andit is admitted that education as opposed to professional training of ahigh order is still, generally speaking, a want among the priests ofIreland, and I look forward to no greater boon from a University orUniversity College for Roman Catholics than its influence, direct andindirect, on a body of men whose prestige and authority are necessarilyso unique. 

It is, therefore, to Trinity College, or the University of Dublin, thatone would naturally turn as to a great centre of thought in Ireland forhelp in the theoretic aspects, at least, of the practical problems uponwhose successful solution our national well-being depends. Judged bythe not unimportant test of the men it has supplied to the service ofthe State and country during its three centuries of educationalactivity, by the part it took in one of the brightest epochs of thesethree centuries--the days when it gave Grattan to Grattan's Parliament, by the work and reputation of the _alumni_ it could muster to-day withinand without its walls, our venerable seat of learning need not fearcomparison with any similar institutions in Great Britain. It may also, of course, be said that many men who have passed through Trinity Collegehave impressed the thought of Ireland, and, indeed, of the world, in oneway or another--such men as, to take two very different examples, Burkeand Thomas Davis--but on some of the very best spirits amongst these menTrinity College and its atmosphere have exerted influence rather byrepulsion than by attraction; and certainly their characteristics oftemper or thought have not been of a kind which those best acquaintedwith the atmosphere of Trinity College associate with that institution. Still nothing can detract from the credit of having educated such men. But these tests and standards are, for my present purpose, irrelevant. Iam not writing a book on Irish educational history, or even a record ofpresent-day Irish educational achievement. I am rather trying, from thestandpoint of a practical worker for national progress, to measure thereality and strength of the educational and other influences which areactually and actively operating on the character and intellect of themajority of the Irish people, moulding their thought and directingtheir action towards the upbuilding of our national life. 

From this point of view I am bound to say that Trinity College, so faras I have seen, has had but little influence upon the minds or the livesof the people. Nor can I find that at any period of the extraordinarilyinteresting economic and social revolution, which has been in progressin Ireland since the great catastrophe of the Famine period, DublinUniversity has departed from its academic isolation and its aloofnessfrom the great national problems that were being worked out. The moreone thinks of it, indeed, and the more one realises the opportunities ofan institution like Trinity College in a country like Ireland, the moreone must recognise how small, in recent times, has been its positiveinfluence on the mind of the country, and how little it has contributedtowards the solution of any of those problems, educational, economic, orsocial, that were clamant for solution, and which in any other countrywould have naturally secured the attention of men who ought to have beenleaders of thought. 

Whatever the causes, and many may be assigned, this unfortunate lack ofinfluence on the part of Trinity College, has always seemed to me astrong supplementary argument for the creation of another University orUniversity College on a more popular basis, to which the Roman Catholicpeople of Ireland would have recourse. From the fact that Maynooth byits constitution could never have developed into a great nationalUniversity, [25] and that Trinity College has never, as a matter of fact, done so, and has thus, in my opinion, missed a unique opportunity, ithas come about that Ireland has been without any great centre of thoughtwhose influence would have tended to leaven the mass of mentalinactivity or random-thinking so prevalent in Ireland, and would havecreated a body of educated public opinion sufficiently informed andpotent to secure the study and discussion on their merits of questionsof vital interest to the country. The demoralising atmosphere ofpartisanship which hangs over Ireland would, I am convinced, graduallygive way before an organised system of education with a thoroughlydemocratic University at its head, which would diffuse amongst thepeople at large a sense of the value of a balanced judgment on, and atrue appreciation of, the real forces with which Ireland has to deal inbuilding up her fortunes. 

To discuss the merits of the different solutions which have beenproposed for the vexed problem of higher education in Ireland would bebeyond the scope of this book. The question will have to be faced, andall I need do here is to state the conditions which the solution willhave to fulfil if it is to deal with the aspects of the Irish Questionwith which the new movement is practically concerned. What is mostneeded is a University that will reach down to the rural population, much in the same way as the Scottish Universities do, and a lower scaleof fees will be required than Trinity College, with its diminishedrevenues, could establish. Already I can see that the work of the newDepartment, acting in conjunction with local bodies, urban and rural, throughout the country, will provide a considerable number ofscholarships, bursaries, and exhibitions for young men who are beingprepared to take part in the very real, but rather hazily understood, industrial revival which is imminent. Leaving sectarian controversiesout of the question, the type of institution which is required in orderto provide adequately for the classes now left outside the influence ofhigher education is an institution pre-eminently national in its aims, and one intimately associated with the new movements making for thedevelopment of our national resources. 

Unfortunately, however, in Ireland, and indeed in England too, there isa tendency to regard educational institutions almost solely as they willaffect religion. At least it is difficult to arouse any serious interestin them except from this point of view. I welcome, therefore, thestriking answers given to the queries of Lord Robertson, Chairman of theUniversity Commission, by Dr. O'Dwyer, the Roman Catholic Bishop ofLimerick, who boldly and wisely placed the question before the countryin the light in which cleric and layman should alike regard it:--

 _The Chairman_. --(413): "I suppose you believe a Catholic University, such as you propose, will strengthen Roman Catholicism in Ireland?"--"It is not easy to answer that; not so easy as it looks. " (414):--"But it won't weaken it, or you would not be here?"--"It would educate Catholics in Ireland very largely, and, of course, a religious denomination composed of a body of educated men is stronger than a religious denomination composed of ignorant men. In that sense it would strengthen Roman Catholicism. " (415):--"Is there any sense in which it won't?"--"As far as religion is concerned, I do not know how a University would work out. If you ask me now whether I think that that University in a certain number of years would become a centre of thought, strengthening the Catholic faith in Ireland, I cannot tell you. It is a leap in the dark. " (416):--"But it is in the hope that it will strengthen your own Church that you propose it?"--"No, it is not, by any means. We are Bishops, but we are Irishmen, also, and we want to serve our country. "[26]

Equally significant were the statements of Dr. O'Dea, the officialspokesman of Maynooth, when he said, I regard the interest of the laity in the settlement of the University Question as supreme. The clergy are but a small, however important, part of the nation, and the laity have never had an institution of higher education comparable to Maynooth in magnitude or resources. I recognise, therefore, that the educational grievances of the laity are much more pressing than those of the clergy . .. It is generally admitted that Irish priests hold a position of exceptional influence, due to historical causes, the intensely religious character of the people, and the want of Catholic laymen qualified by education and position for social and political leadership. What Bishop Berkeley said of them in 1749, in his letter, _A Word to the Wise_, still holds true, 'That no set of men on earth have it in their power to do good on easier terms, with more advantage to others, and less pains or loss to themselves. ' It would be folly to expect that in a mixed community the State should do anything to strengthen or perpetuate this power; but this result will certainly not follow from the more liberal education of the clergy, provided equal advantages are extended to the laity. On the contrary, I am convinced that if the void in the lay leadership of the country be filled up by higher education of the better classes among the Catholic laity, the power of the priests, so far as it is abnormal or unnecessary will pass away; and, further, if I believed, with many who are opposed to the better education of the priesthood, that their power is based on falsehood or superstition, I would unhesitatingly advocate the spread of higher education among the laity and clergy alike, as the best means of effectually sapping and disintegrating it. [27]

I had for long indulged a hope that a university of the type whichIreland requires would have been the outcome of a great nationaleducational movement emanating from Trinity College, which might, atthis auspicious hour, have surpassed all the proud achievements of itsthree hundred years. That hope was dispelled when the cry of 'Hands offTrinity' was applied to the profane hands of the Royal Commission. Perhaps that attitude may be reconsidered yet. There is one hopefulsentiment which is often heard coming from that institution. An opinionhas been strongly expressed that nothing ought to be done to separate insecular life two sections of Irishmen who happen to belong to differentcreeds. Whatever may be the logical outcome of the position taken uptowards the University problem by those who give expression to thispious opinion, I do not for a moment doubt their sincerity. But I oftenthink that too much importance is attached to the danger of building newwalls, and that there is too little appreciation of the wide and deepfoundation of the already existing walls between the two sections ofIrishmen who are so unhappily kept apart. In dealing with this, as withall large Irish problems, it had better be frankly recognised that thereare in the country two races, two creeds, and, what is too littleconsidered, two separate spheres of economic interest and pursuit. Socially two separate classes have naturally, nay inevitably, arisen outof these distinctions. One class has superior advantages in many ways ofgreat importance. The other class is far more numerous, produces far thegreater proportion of the nation's wealth, and is, therefore, from thenational point of view, of greater importance. But both are necessary. Both must be adequately provided for in the supreme matter of highereducation. Above all, the two classes must be educated to regardthemselves as united by the bond of a common country--a sentiment which, if genuine, would treat differences arising from whatever cause, not asa difficulty in the way of national progress, but rather as affording avariety of opportunities for national expansion. 

I do not concern myself as to the exact form which the new institutionor institutions which are to give us the absolutely essential advantageof higher education should take. If in view of the difference in therequirements to which I have alluded, and the complicated pedagogic andadministrative considerations which have to be taken into account, schemes of co-education of Protestants and Roman Catholics are difficultof immediate accomplishment, let that ideal be postponed. The two creedscan meet in the playground now: they can meet everywhere in after life. Ireland will bring them together soon enough if Ireland is given achance, and when the time is ripe for their coming together in highereducation they will come together. If the time is not now ripe for thisideal there is no justification for postponing educational reform untilthe relations between the two creeds have been elevated to a planewhich, in my opinion, they will never reach except through the aid ofthat culture which a widely diffused higher education alone can afford. 

 * * * * *

When I was beginning to write this chapter I chanced to pick up the_Chesterfield Letters_. I opened the book at the two hundredth epistle, and, curiously enough, almost the first sentence which caught my eyeran: 'Education more than nature is the cause of that difference you seein the character of men. ' I felt myself at first in strong disagreementwith this aphorism. But when I came to reflect how much the nature ofone generation must be the outcome of the education of those which wentbefore it, I gradually came to see the truth in Lord Chesterfield'swords. I must leave it to experts to define the exact steps which oughtto be taken to make the general education of this country capable ofcultivating the judgment, strengthening the will, and so of building upthe character. But every day, every thought, I give to the problems ofIrish progress convinces me more firmly that this is the real task ofeducational reform, a task that must be accomplished before we can proveto those who brand us with racial inferiority that, in Ireland, it wasnot nature that has been unkind in causing the difference we find in thecharacter of men. 

FOOTNOTES:

[23] _Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland_, II. , 122-4. 

[24] _Recent Reforms in Irish Education_, p. 7. 

[25] It was not authorised to give degrees to lay students; and even theadmission of lay students to an Arts course was prohibited byGovernment, lest Catholic students should be drawn away from TrinityCollege. See Cornwallis Correspondence, III. , 366-8. 

[26] Appendix to First Report, p. 37. 

[27] Appendix to Third Report, pp. 283, 296. 

CHAPTER VI. 

THROUGH THOUGHT TO ACTION. 

I have now completed my survey of the main conditions which, in myopinion, must be taken into account by anyone who would understand theIrish mind, and still more by those who seek to work with it inrebuilding the fortunes of the country. The task has been one of greatdifficulty, as it was necessary to tell, not only the truth--for thateven an official person may be excused--but also the whole truth, which, unless made compulsory by the kissing of the book, is regarded as agratuitous kissing of the rod. From the frying pan of political dispute, I have passed into the fire of sectarian controversy. I have nothesitated to poach on the preserves of historians and economists, andhave even bearded the pedagogues in their dens. Before my stock ofmetaphors is exhausted, let me say that I have one hope of escape fromthe cross-fire of denunciation which independent speaking about Irelandis apt to provoke. I once witnessed a football match between twovillages, one of which favoured a political party called by the name ofa leader, with an 'ism' added to indicate a policy, the other adoptingthe same name, still further elongated by the prefix 'anti. ' When Iarrived on the scene the game had begun in deadly earnest, but I noticedthe ball lying unmolested in another quarter of the field. In Irishpublic life I have often had reason to envy that ball, and perhaps nowits lot may be mine, while the game goes on and the critics payattention to each other. 

To my friendly critics a word of explanation is due. The opinions towhich I have given expression are based upon personal observation andexperience extending over a quarter of a century during which I havebeen in close touch with Irish life at home, and not unfamiliar with itabroad. I have referred to history only when I could not otherwiseaccount for social and economic conditions with which I came intocontact, or with which I desired practically to deal. Whether lookingback over the dreary wastes of Anglo-Irish history, or studying the menand things of to-day, I came to conclusions which differed widely fromwhat I had been taught to believe by those whose theories of Irishdevelopment had not been subjected to any practical test. Deeply as Ihave felt for the past sufferings of the Irish people and their heritageof disability and distress, I could not bring myself to believe that, where misgovernment had continued so long, and in such an immensevariety of circumstances and conditions, the governors could have beenalone to blame. I envied those leaders of popular thought whoseconfidence in themselves and in their followers was shaken by no suchreflections. But the more I listened to them the more the conviction wasborne in upon me that they were seeking to build an impossible futureupon an imaginary past. 

Those who know Ireland from within are aware that Irish thought uponIrish problems has been undergoing a silent, and therefore too lightlyregarded revolution. The surface of Irish life, often so inexplicablyruffled, and sometimes so inexplicably calm, has just now become smoothto a degree which has led to hasty conclusions as to the real cause andthe inward significance of the change. To chime in with the thoughtlessoptimism of the hour will do no good; but a real understanding of theforces which have created the existing situation will reveal anunprecedented opportunity for those who would give to the Irish mindthat full and free development which has been so long and, as I havetried to show, so unnaturally delayed. 

Among these new forces in Irish life there is one which has been greatlymisunderstood; and yet to its influence during the last few years muchof the 'transformation scene' in the drama of the Irish Question isreally due. It deserves more than a passing notice here, because, whileits aims as formulated appear somewhat restricted, it unquestionablytends in practice towards that national object of paramount importance, the strengthening of character. I refer to the movement known as theGaelic Revival. Of this movement I am myself but an outside observer, having been forced to devote nearly all my time and energies to avariety of attempts which aim at the doing in the industrial sphere ofvery much the same work as that which the Gaelic movement attempts inthe intellectual sphere--the rehabilitation of Ireland from within. Butin the course of my work of agricultural and industrial development Inaturally came across this new intellectual force and found that when itbegan to take effect, so far from diverting the minds of the peasantryfrom the practical affairs of life, it made them distinctly moreamenable to the teaching of the dry economic doctrine of which I was anapostle. The reason for this is plain enough to me now, though, like allmy theories about Ireland, the truth came to me from observation andpractical experience rather than as the result of philosophicspeculation. For the co-operative movement depended for its success upona two-fold achievement. In order to get it started at all, itsprinciples and working details had to be grasped by the Irish peasantmind and commended to his intelligence. Its further development and itshopes of permanence depend upon the strengthening of character, which, Imust repeat, is the foundation of all Irish progress. 

The Irish Agricultural Organisation Society[28] exerts its influence--anow established and rapidly-growing influence--mainly through the mediumof associations. The Gaelic movement, on the other hand, acts moredirectly upon the individual, and the two forces are therefore in asense complementary to each other. Both will be seen to be playing animportant part--I should say a necessary part--in the reconstruction ofour national life. At any rate, I feel that it is necessary to myargument that I should explain to those who are as ill-informed aboutthe Gaelic revival as I was myself until its practical usefulness wasdemonstrated to me, what exactly seems to be the most important outcomeof the work of that movement. 

The Gaelic League, which defines its objects as 'The preservation ofIrish as the national language of Ireland and the extension of its useas a spoken tongue; the study and publication of existing Irishliterature and the cultivation of a modern literature in Irish, ' wasformed in 1893. Like the Agricultural Organisation Society, the GaelicLeague is declared by its constitution to be 'strictly non-political andnon-sectarian, ' and, like it, has been the object of much suspicion, because severance from politics in Ireland has always seemed to thepolitician the most active form of enmity. Its constitution, too, issomewhat similar, being democratically guided in its policy by theelected representatives of its affiliated branches. It is interesting tonote that the funds with which it carries on an extensive propaganda aremainly supplied from the small contributions of the poor. It publishestwo periodicals, one weekly and another monthly. It administers anincome of some £6, 000 a year, not reckoning what is spent by localbranches, and has a paid staff of eleven officers, a secretary, treasurer, and nine organisers, together with a large number ofvoluntary workers. It resembled the agricultural movement also in thefact that it made very little headway during the first few years of itsexistence. But it had a nucleus of workers with new ideas for theintellectual regeneration of Ireland. In face of much apathy theypersisted with their propaganda, and they have at last succeeded inmaking their ideas understood. So much is evident from therapidly-increasing number of affiliated branches of the League, which inMarch, 1903, amounted to 600, almost treble the number registered twoyears before. But even this does not convey any idea of the influencewhich the movement exerts. Within the past year the teaching of theIrish language has been introduced into no less than 1, 300 NationalSchools. In 1900 the number of schools in which Irish was taught wasonly about 140. The statement that our people do not read books isgenerally accepted as true, yet the sale of the League publicationsduring one year reached nearly a quarter of a million copies. Theseresults cannot be left unconsidered by anybody who wishes to understandthe psychology of the Irish mind. The movement can truly claim to haveeffected the conversion of a large amount of intellectual apathy intogenuine intellectual activity. 

The declared objects of the League--- the popularising of the nationallanguage and literature--do not convey, perhaps, an adequate conceptionof its actual work, or of the causes of its popularity. It seeks todevelop the intellectual, moral, and social life of the Irish peoplefrom within, and it is doing excellent work in the cause of temperance. Its president, Dr. Douglas Hyde, in his evidence given before theUniversity Commission, [29] pointed out that the success of the Leaguewas due to its meeting the people half way; that it educated them bygiving them something which they could appreciate and assimilate; andthat it afforded a proof that people who would not respond to alieneducational systems, will respond with eagerness to something they cancall their own. The national factor in Ireland has been studiouslyeliminated from national education, and Ireland is perhaps the onlycountry in Europe where it was part of the settled policy of those, whohad the guidance of education to ignore the literature, history, arts, and traditions of the people. It was a fatal policy, for it obviouslytended to stamp their native country in the eyes of Irishmen with thebadge of inferiority and to extinguish the sense of healthy self-respectwhich comes from the consciousness of high national ancestry andtraditions. This policy, rigidly adhered to for many years, almostextinguished native culture among Irishmen, but it did not succeed inmaking another form of culture acceptable to them. It dulled theintelligence of the people, impaired their interest in their ownsurroundings, stimulated emigration by teaching them to look on othercountries as more agreeable places to live in, and made Ireland almost asocial desert. Men and women without culture or knowledge of literatureor of music have succeeded a former generation who were passionatelyinterested in these things, an interest which extended down even to thewayside cabin. The loss of these elevating influences in Irish societyprobably accounts for much of the arid nature of Irish controversies, while the reaction against their suppression has given rise to thosedisplays of rhetorical patriotism for which the Irish language has foundthe expressive term _raimeis_, and which (thanks largely to the Gaelicmovement) most people now listen to with a painful and half-ashamedsense of their unreality. 

The Gaelic movement has brought to the surface sentiments and thoughtswhich had been developed in Gaelic Ireland through hundreds of years, and which no repression had been able to obliterate altogether, butwhich still remained as a latent spiritual inheritance in the mind. Andnow this stream, which has long run underground, has again emerged evenstronger than before, because an element of national self-consciousnesshas been added at its re-emergence. A passionate conviction is gainingground that if Irish traditions, literature, language, art, music, andculture are allowed to disappear, it will mean the disappearance of therace; and that the education of the country must be nationalised if oursocial, intellectual, or even our economic position is to be permanentlyimproved. 

With this view of the Gaelic movement my own thoughts are in completeaccord. It is undeniable that the pride in country justly felt byEnglishmen, a pride developed by education and a knowledge of theirhistory, has had much to do with the industrial pre-eminence of England;for the pioneers of its commerce have been often actuated as much bypatriotic motives as by the desire for gain. The education of the Irishpeople has ignored the need for any such historical basis for pride orlove of country, and, for my part, I feel sure that the Gaelic League isacting wisely in seeking to arouse such a sentiment, and to found itmainly upon the ages of Ireland's story when Ireland was most Irish. 

It is this expansion of the sentiment of nationality outside the domainof party politics--the distinction, so to speak, between nationality andnationalism--which is the chief characteristic of the Gaelic movement. Nationality had come to have no meaning other than a political one, anybroader national sentiment having had little or nothing to feed upon. During the last century the spirit of nationality has found no unworthyexpression in literature, in the writings of Ferguson, Standish O'Gradyand Yeats, which, however, have not been even remotely comparable inpopularity with the political journalism in prose and rhyme in which theage has been so fruitful. It has never expressed itself in the arts, andnot only has Ireland no representative names in the higher regions ofart, but the national deficiency has been felt in every department ofindustry into which design enters, and where nationalart-characteristics have a commercial value. The national customs, culture, and recreations which made the country a pleasant place to livein, have almost disappeared, and with them one of the strongest tieswhich bind people to the country of their birth. The Gaelic revival, asI understand it, is an attempt to supply these deficiencies, to give toIrish people a culture of their own; and I believe that by awakening thefeelings of pride, self-respect, and love of country, based onknowledge, every department of Irish life will be invigorated. 

Thus it is that the elevating influence upon the individual is exerted. Politics have never awakened initiative among the mass of the people, because there was no programme of action for the individual. Perhaps itis as well for Ireland that such should have been the case, for, as ithas been shown, we have had little of the political thought which shouldbe at the back of political action. Political action under presentconditions must necessarily be deputed to a few representatives, andafter the vote is given or the cheering at a meeting has ceased, theindividual can do nothing but wait, and his lethargy tends to becomestill deeper. In the Gaelic revival there is a programme of work for theindividual; his mind is engaged, thought begets energy, and this energyvitalises every part of his nature. This makes for the strengthening ofcharacter, and so far from any harm being done to the practicalmovement, to which I have so often referred, the testimony of myfellow-workers, as well as my own observation, is unanimous in affirmingthat the influence of the branches of the Gaelic League is distinctlyuseful whenever it is sought to move the people to industrial orcommercial activity. 

Many of my political friends cannot believe--and I am afraid thatnothing that I can say will make them believe--that the movement is notnecessarily, in the political sense, separatist in its sentiment. Thisimpression is, in my opinion, founded on a complete misunderstanding ofAnglo-Irish history. Those who look askance at the rise of the Gaelicmovement ignore the important fact that there has never been anyessential opposition between the English connection and Irishnationality. The Elizabethan chiefs of the sixteenth and the Gaelicpoets of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when the relationsbetween the two countries were far worse than they are to-day, knewnothing of this opposition. The true sentiment of nationality is apriceless heritage of every small nation which has done great things, and had it not largely perished in Ireland, separatist sentiment, theoffspring, not of Irish nationality, but of Irish political nationalism, could hardly have survived until to-day. 

But undoubtedly we strike here on a danger to the Gaelic movement, sofar at least as that movement is bound up with the future of the GaelicLeague; a danger which cannot be left out of account in any estimate ofthis new force in Irish life. The continuance of the League as abeneficent force, or indeed a force at all, seems to me, as in the caseof the co-operative organisation to which I have compared it, to bevitally dependent on a scrupulous observance of that part of itsconstitution which keeps the door open to Irishmen of every creed orpolitical party. Only thus can the League remain a truly national body, and attract from all classes Irishmen who are capable of forwarding itstrue policy. I do not think there is much danger of a spirit ofsectarian exclusiveness developing itself in a body mainly composed ofRoman Catholics whose President is a Protestant. But it cannot be deniedthat there has been an occasional tendency to interpret the 'nopolitics' clause of the constitution in a manner which seems hardly fairto Unionists or even to constitutional Home Rulers who may have joinedthe organisation on the strength of its declaration of politicalneutrality. If this is not a mere transitory phenomenon its effect willbe serious. As a political body the League would immediately sink intoinsignificance and probably disappear amid a crowd of contendingfactions. It would certainly cease to fulfil its great function ofcreating a nationality of the thought and spirit, in which all Irishmenwho wish to be anything else than English colonists might aspire toshare. Its early successes in bringing together men of differentpolitical views were remarkable. At the very outset of its career itenlisted the support of so militant a politician as the late Rev. R. R. Kane, who declared that though a Unionist and an Orangeman he had nodesire to forget that he was an O'Cahan. On this basis it is difficultto set a limit to the fruitfulness of the work which this organisationmight do for Ireland, and I cannot regard any who would depart from theletter and spirit of its constitution as sincere, or if sincere as wise, friends of the movement with which they are associated. 

Of minor importance are certain extravagances in the conduct of themovement which time and practical experience can hardly fail to correct. I have borne witness to the value of the cultivation of the languageeven from my own practical standpoint, but I cannot think that to signcheques in Irish, and get angry when those who cannot understand willnot honour them, is a good way of demonstrating that value. I should, speaking generally, regard it as a mistake, supposing it werepracticable, to substitute Irish for English in the conduct of business. If any large development of the trade in pampooties, turf and potheenbetween the Aran Islands and the mainland were in contemplation, thisattempt might be justified. But on behalf of those Philistines whoattach paramount importance to the development of Irish industry, tradeand commerce on a large and comprehensive scale, I should regret acourse which, from a business point of view, would be about as wise asthe advocacy of distinctive Irish currency, weights and measures. And Iprotest more strongly against the reasons which have been given to mefor this policy. I have been told that, in order to generate sufficiententhusiasm, a young movement of the kind must adopt a rigorousdiscipline and an aggressive policy. Not only are we thus confrontedwith a false issue, but by giving countenance to the outward acceptanceof what the better sense rejects, these over-zealous leaguers areadministering to the Irish character the very poison which all Irishmovements should combine to eliminate from the national life. 

The position which I have given to the Gaelic Revival among the newinfluences at work and making for progress in Ireland will hardly beunderstood by those who have never embraced the idea of combining allsuch forces in a constructive and comprehensive scheme of nationaladvancement. One instance of the potential utility of the Gaelic Leaguewill appeal to those of my readers who attach as much importance as I doto the improvement of the peasant home. Concerted action to this end isbeing planned while I write. It is proposed to take a few districtswhere the peasants are members of one of the new co-operative societies, and where the clergy have taken a keen interest in the economic andsocial advancement of the members of the Society, but where the cottagesare in the normal condition. The new Department will lend the servicesof its domestic economy teachers. The Organisation Society, the clergy, and the Department thus working together will, I hope, be able to getthe people of the selected districts to effect an improvement in theirdomestic surroundings which will act as an invaluable example for otherdistricts to follow. But in order that this much needed contribution tothe well-being of the peasant proprietary, upon which all our thoughtsare just now concentrated, may be assisted with the enthusiasm whichbelongs in Ireland to a consciously national effort, it is hoped thatcommon action with the Gaelic League may be possible, so that this forcealso may be enlisted in the solution of this part of our centralproblem, the rehabilitation of rural life in Ireland. 

It is, however, on more general grounds that I have, albeit as anoutside observer, watched with some anxiety and much gratification theprogress of the Gaelic Revival. In the historical evolution of the Irishmind we find certain qualities atrophied, so to speak, by disuse; and tothis cause I attribute the past failures of the race in practical lifeat home. I have shown how politics, religion, and our systems ofeducation have all, in their respective influences upon the people, missed to a large extent, the effect upon character which they shouldhave made it their paramount duty to produce. Nevertheless, whenever theintellect of the people is appealed to by those who know its past, arecuperative power is manifested which shows that its vitality has notbeen irredeemably impaired. It is because I believe that, on the whole, a right appeal has been made by the Gaelic League that I have bornetestimony to its patriotic endeavours. 

The question of the Gaelic Revival seems to be really a form of theeternal question of the interdependence of the practical and the idealin Ireland. Their true relation to each other is one of the hardestlessons the student of our problems has to learn. I recall an incidentin the course of my own studies which I will here recount, as it appearsto me to furnish an admirable illustration of this difficulty as itpresented itself to a very interesting mind. During the years coveringthe rise and fall of Parnell, when interest in the Irish Question was atits zenith, the newspapers of the United States kept in London a corpsof very able correspondents, who watched and reported to theirtransatlantic readers every move in the Home Rule campaign. An Americanpublic, by no means limited to the American-Irish, devoured every morselof this intelligence with an avidity which could not have been surpassedif the United States had been engaged in a war with Great Britain. Amongthese correspondents perhaps the most brilliant was the late HaroldFrederic. Not many months before he died I received a letter from him, in which he said that, although we were unknown to each other, hethought, from some public utterances of mine, that we must have manyviews in common. He had often intended to get an introduction to me, andnow suggested that we should 'waive things and meet. ' We met and spentan evening together, which left some deep impressions on my mind. Hetold me that the Irish Question possessed for him a fascination forwhich he could give no rational explanation. He had absolutely no tie ofblood or material interest with Ireland, and his friendship for it hadbrought him the only quarrels in which he had ever been engaged. 

What chiefly interested me in Harold Frederic's philosophy of the IrishQuestion was that he had arrived at a diagnosis of the Irish mind notsubstantially different from my own. Since that evening I have comeacross a passage in one of his novels, which clothes in delightfullanguage his view of the chaotic psychology of the Celt:

 There, in Ireland, you get a strange mixture of elementary early peoples, walled off from the outer world by the four seas, and free to work out their own racial amalgam on their own lines. They brought with them at the outset a great inheritance of Eastern mysticism. Others lost it, but the Irish, all alone on their island, kept it alive and brooded on it, and rooted their whole spiritual side in it. Their religion is full of it; their blood is full of it. .. . The Ireland of two thousand years ago is incarnated in her. They are the merriest people and the saddest, the most turbulent and the most docile, the most talented and the most unproductive, the most practical and the most visionary, the most devout and the most pagan. These impossible contradictions war ceaselessly in their blood. [30]

In our conversation what struck me most was the influence which politicshad exercised even on his philosophic mind, notwithstanding a lowestimate of our political leaders. In one of a series of three notablearticles upon the Irish Question, which appeared anonymously in the_Fortnightly Review_[31] in the winter of 1893-4, and of which he toldme he was the writer, he had given a character sketch of what he called'The Rhetoricians. ' Their performances since the Union were summarisedin the phrase 'a century of unremitting gabble, ' and he regarded it as asad commentary on Irish life that such brilliant talents so largely ranto waste in destructive criticism. 

I naturally turned the conversation on to my own line of thought, anddiscussed the practical conclusions to which his studies had led him. Itried to elicit from him exactly what he had in his mind when, in one ofthe articles to which I have referred, he advocated 'a reconstruction ofIreland on distinctive national lines. ' I hoped to find that hispsychological study of my countrymen would enable him to throw somelight upon the means by which play could be given at home to the latentcapacities of the race. I found that he was in entire accord with myview, that the chief difficulty in the way of constructive statesmanshipwas the defect in the Irish character about which I have said so much. Iwas prepared for that conclusion, for I had already seen the lack ofinitiative admirably appreciated in the following illuminating sentenceof his:--'The Celt will help someone else to do the thing that other hasin mind, and will help him with great zeal and devotion; but he will notstart to do the thing he himself has thought of. '[32] But I wasdisappointed when he bade me his first and last good-bye that I had notconvinced him that there was any way out of the Irish difficulty otherthan political changes, for which, at the same time, he appeared tothink the people singularly unfitted. 

The fact is we had arrived at the point where the student of Irish lifeusually finds himself in a _cul de sac_. If he has accurately observedthe conditions, he is face to face with a problem which appears to be inits nature insoluble. For at every turn he finds things being done wrongwhich might so easily be done right, only that nobody is concerned thatthey should be done right. And what is worse, when he has learned, inthe course of his investigations, to discount the picturesqueexplanation of our unsuccess in practical life which in Ireland veilsthe unpleasant truth, he will find that the people are quite aware oftheir defects, although they attribute them to causes beyond their powerto remove. Then, too, the sympathetic inquirer is shocked by the lack ofseriousness in it all. With all their past griefs and their highaspirations, the Irish people seem to be play-acting before the world. The inquirer does not, perhaps, reflect that, if play-acting beinconsistent with the deepest emotions, and with the pursuit of highideals, then he condemns a little over one half of the human race. [33]He probably comes to the main conclusion adopted in these pages, andrealises that the Irish Question is a problem of character. And as Irishcharacter is the product of Irish history, which cannot be re-enacted, he leaves the problem there. Harold Frederic left it there, and there ithas been taken up by those whose endeavour forms the story which I haveto tell. 

I now come to the principles which, it appears to me, must underlie thesolution of this problem. The narrative contained in the second part ofthis book is a record of the efforts made during the last decade of thenineteenth and the first two years of the twentieth century by a small, but now rapidly augmenting group of Irishmen, to pluck the brand ofIrish intellect from the burning of the Irish Question. The problembefore us was, my readers will now understand, how to make headway inview of the weakness of character to which I have had to attribute theparalysis of our activities in the past. We were quite aware that ourprogress would at first be slow. But as we were satisfied that thedefects of character which stood in the way of economic advancement weredue to causes which need no longer be operative, and that the intellectof the people was unimpaired, we faced the problem with confidence. 

The practical form which our work took was the launching upon Irish lifeof a movement of organised self-help, and the subsequent grafting uponthis movement of a system of State-aid to the agriculture and industriesof the country. I need not here further elaborate this programme, forthe steps by which it has been and is being adopted will be presentlydescribed in detail. But there is one aspect of the new movement inIreland which must be understood by those who would grasp the truesignificance and the human interest of an evolution in our nationallife, the only recent parallel for which, as far as I am aware, is to befound in Japan: though to my mind the conscious attempt of the Irishpeople to develop a civilisation of their own is far more interestingthan the recent efforts of the Japanese to westernise theirinstitutions. 

The problem of mind and character with which we had to deal in Irelandpresented this central and somewhat discouraging fact. In practical lifethe Irish had failed where the English had succeeded, and this wasattributed to the lack of certain English qualities which have beenundoubtedly essential to success in commerce and in industry from thedays of the industrial revolution until a comparatively recent date. Itwas the individualism of the English economic system during this periodwhich made these qualities indispensable. The lack of these qualities inIrishmen to-day may be admitted, and the cause of the deficiency hasbeen adequately explained. But those who regard the Irish situation asindustrially hopeless probably ignore the fact that there are otherqualities, of great and growing importance under modern economicconditions, which can be developed in Irishmen and may form the basis ofan industrial system. I refer to the range of qualities which come intoplay rather in association than in the individual, and to which the term'associative' is applied. [34] So that although much disparagingcriticism of Irish character is based upon the survival in the Celt ofthe tribal instincts, it is gratifying to be able to show that even fromthe practical English point of view, our preference for thinking andworking in groups may not be altogether a _damnosa hereditas_. If, owingto our deficiency in the individualistic qualities of the English, wecannot at this stage hope to produce many types of the 'economic man' ofthe economists, we think we see our way to provide, as a substitute, theeconomic association. If the association succeeds, and by virtue of itsfinancial success becomes permanent, a great change will, in ouropinion, be produced on the character of its members. The reflex actionupon the individual mind of the habit of doing, in association withothers, things which were formerly left undone, or badly done, may berelied upon to have a tonic effect upon the character of the individual. This is, I suppose, the secret of discipline, which, though apparentlyeliminating volition, seems in weak characters to strengthen the will. 

There is, too, as we have learned, in the association a strangeinfluence which develops qualities and capacities that one would notexpect on a mere consideration of the character of its members. Thispsychological phenomenon has been admirably and most entertaininglydiscussed by the French psychologist, Le Bon, [35] who, in the attractivepursuit of paradox, almost goes to the length of the proposition thatthe association inherently possesses qualities the opposite of thosepossessed by its members. My own experience--and I have hadopportunities of observing hundreds of associations formed by my friendsupon the principles above laid down--does not carry me quite so far. But, unquestionably, the association in Ireland does often become anentity as distinct from the individualities of which it is composed, asis a new chemical compound from its constituent elements. 

Associations of the kind we had in our minds, which were to be primarilyfor purely business purposes, were bound to have many collateraleffects. They would open up outside of politics and religion, but not inconflict with either, a sphere of action where an independence new tothe country would have to be exercised. In Ireland public opinion isunder an obsession which, whether political, religious, historical, orall three combined, is probably unique among civilised peoples. Untilthe last few years, for example, it was our habit--one which immenselyweakened the influence of Ireland in the Imperial Parliament--to formextravagant estimates of men, exalting and abasing them with irrationalcaprice, not according to their qualities so much as by their attitudetowards the passion of the hour. The ups and downs of the reputations ofLord Spencer and Mr. Arthur Balfour in Ireland are a sufficientillustration of our disregard of the old Latin proverb which tells usthat no man ever became suddenly altogether bad. Even now public opinionis too prone to attach excessive value to projects of vague andvisionary development, and to underrate the importance of seriousthought and quiet work, which can be the only solid foundation of ournational progress. In these new associations--humble indeed in theirorigin, but destined to play a large part in the people'slives--projects, professing to be fraught with economic benefit, have tobe judged by the cruel precision of audited balance sheets, and theworth of men is measured by the solid contribution they have made to thewelfare of the community. 

 * * * * *

I have now accomplished one long stage of my journey towards theconclusion of this discussion of the needs of modern Ireland. Were I tostop here, probably most of those who had been induced to open yetanother book upon the Irish Question would accuse me, and not withoutjustice, of being responsible for a barren graft upon a barrencontroversy. I fear no such criticism, whatever other shortcomings maybe detected, from those who have the patience to read on. For when Ipass from my own reflections to record the work to which many thousandsof my countrymen have addressed themselves in building up the Ireland ofthe twentieth century, I shall have a story to tell which must inspirehope in all who can be persuaded that Ireland in the past has not oftenbeen treated fairly and has never been understood. I have shown--and itwas necessary to show, if a repetition of misunderstanding was to beavoided--that the Irish people themselves are gravely responsible forthe ills of their country, and that the forces which have mainlygoverned their action hitherto are rapidly bringing about theirdisappearance as a distinct nationality. But I shall now have to tell ofthe widespread and growing adoption of certain new principles of actionwhich I believe to be consonant with the genius and traditions of therace, and the acceptance of which seems to me vitally necessary if theIrish people are to play a worthy part in the future history of theworld. That part is a far greater one than they could ever hope to playas an independent and separate State, yet their success in playing itmust closely depend upon their remaining a distinct nationality, in thesense so clearly and wisely indicated by his Majesty when, in his replyto the address of the Belfast Corporation, he spoke of the 'nationalcharacteristics and ideals' which he desired his kingdoms to cherish inthe midst of their imperial unity. [36] The great experiment which I amabout to relate is, in its own province, one of the many applicationswhich we see around us of the conception here put forward. And I believethat a few more years of quiet work by those who are taking part in thismovement, with its appeal to Irish intellect, and its reliance uponIrish patriotism, is all that is needed to prove that by developing theindustrial qualities of the Celt on associative lines we can in politicsas well as in economics, add strength to the Irish character withoutmaking it less Irish or less attractive than of old. 

FOOTNOTES:

[28] This body is fully described in the next chapter. 

[29] See Appendix to Third Report, p. 311. 

[30] _The Damnation of Theron Ware_. This was the title of the book Iread in the United States. I am told he published it in England underthe title of _Illuminations_--a nice discrimination!

[31] They appeared under the signature of 'X. ' in Nov. And Dec. , 1893, and Jan. , 1894. 

[32] _Fortnightly Review_, Jan. 1894, pp. 11, 12. 

[33] The difficulties of the writer who is not a writer are great. Isent this chapter to two literary friends, one of whom, with the help ofa globe, disputed my accuracy in a learned ethnological disquisitionwith which he favoured me. The other warned me to be even more obscureand sent me the following verses, addressed by 'Cynicus' (J. K. Stephen)to Shakespeare, "You wrote a line too much, my sage, Of seers the first, the first ofsayers; For only half the world's a stage, And only all the womenplayers. "

[34] These qualities, as will be explained later, happen to have aspecial economic value in the farming industry, and so are available forthe elevation of rural life, with whose problems we are now so deeplyconcerned in Ireland. Their applicability to urban life need not bediscussed here. But my study of the co-operative movement in England hasconvinced me that, if the English had the associative instincts of theIrish, that movement would play a part in English life more commensuratewith its numerical strength and the volume of its commercialtransactions, than can be claimed for it so far. 

[35] _La Psychologie de la Foule_. 

[36] July 27th, 1903, --His Majesty thus confirmed the striking utteranceof imperial policy contained in Lord Dudley's speech to the IncorporatedLaw Society, on the 20th of November, 1902. His Excellency, afterprotesting against the conception of empire as a 'huge regiment' inwhich each nation was to lose its individuality, said--"Lastingstrength, lasting loyalty, are not to be secured by any attempt to forceinto one system or to remould into one type those specialcharacteristics which are the outcome of a nation's history and of herreligious and social conditions, but rather by a full recognition of thefact that these very characteristics form an essential part of anation's life; and that under wise guidance and under sympathetictreatment they will enable her to provide her own contribution and toplay her own special part in the life of the empire to which shebelongs. "

PART II. 

_PRACTICAL_. 

"For a country so attractive and a people so gifted we cherish thewarmest regard, and it is, therefore, with supreme satisfaction that Ihave during our stay so often heard the hope expressed that a brighterday is dawning upon Ireland. I shall eagerly await the fulfilment ofthis hope. Its realisation will, under Divine Providence, depend largelyupon the steady development of self-reliance and co-operation, uponbetter and more practical education, upon the growth of industrial andcommercial enterprise, and upon that increase of mutual toleration andrespect which the responsibility my Irish people now enjoy in the publicadministration of their local affairs is well-fitted toteach. "--_Message of the King to the Irish People_, 1st August, 1903. 

CHAPTER VII. 

THE NEW MOVEMENT: ITS FOUNDATION ON SELF-HELP. 

The movement for the reorganisation of Irish agricultural and industriallife, to which I have already frequently referred, must now be describedin practical operation. Before I do this, however, there are two linesof criticism which the very mention of a new movement may suggest, andwhich I must anticipate. Every year has its tale of new movements, launched by estimable persons whose philanthropic zeal is not balancedby the judgment required to discriminate between schemes which possessthe elements of permanence, and those which depend upon the enthusiasmor financial support of their promoters, and are in their natureephemeral. There is, consequently, a widespread and well justifiedmistrust of novel schemes for the industrial regeneration of Ireland. Iconfess to having had my ingenuity severely taxed on some occasions tofind a sympathetic circumlocution wherewith to show cause for decliningto join a new movement, my real reason being an inward conviction thatnothing except resolutions would be moved. In the complex problem ofbuilding up the economic and social life of a people with such ahistory as ours, we must resist the temptation to multiply schemeswhich, however well intended, are but devices for enabling individualsto devolve their responsibilities upon the community or upon theGovernment, and which owe their bubble reputation and brief popularityto this unconscious humouring of our chief national defect. On thecontrary, we must seek to instil into the mind of each individual thetoo little recognised importance of his own contribution to the sum ofnational achievement. The building of character must be our paramountobject, as it is the condition precedent of all social and economicreform in Ireland. To explain the principles by the observance of whichthe agency of the association may be utilised as an economic force, while at the same time the industrial character of the individual may bedeveloped, was one of the chief aims I had in view in the foregoinganalysis of the Irish mind and character, as they have emerged fromhistory and are stunted in their growth by present influences. The factsabout to be recited will, I hope, suffice to prove that the reformer inIreland, if he has a true insight into the great human problem withwhich he is dealing, may find in the association not only a healthystimulus to national activities, but also a means whereby the assistanceof the State may be so invoked and applied that it will concentrate, andnot dissipate, the energies of the people. 

The other criticism which I think it necessary to anticipate would, ifignored, leave room for a wrong impression as to much of the work whichis being done both on the self-help and on the State-aid sides of thenew movement. Education, it will be said, is the only real solvent tothe range of problems discussed in this book, most other agencies ofsocial and economic reform being of doubtful efficacy and, if they tendto postpone educational effort, positively harmful. There is much truthin this view. But it must be remembered that the backward condition ofour economic life is due mainly to the fact that our educational systemshave had little regard to our history or economic circumstances. Wemust, therefore, at this stage in our national development give toeducation a much wider interpretation than that which is usually appliedto the term. We cannot wait for a generation to grow up which has beengiven an education calculated to fit it for the modern economicstruggle, even if there were any probability that the necessary reformswould soon be carried against the prejudices which are aroused by anyproposal to train the minds, or even the hands and eyes, of the risinggeneration. In the meantime much of the work, both voluntary andState-aided, now initiated in Ireland, must consist of educating adultsto introduce into their business concerns the more advanced economic andscientific methods which the superior education of our rivals inagriculture and industry abroad has enabled them to adopt, and which myexperience of Irish work convinces me our people would have adopted longago if they had had similar educational advantages. And I would furtherpoint out that there is no better way of promoting the reform ofeducation in the ordinary, the pedagogic, sense, than by bringing tobear upon the minds of parents those educational influences which arecalculated to convince them of the advantage of improved practicaleducation for their children. So to the economist and to theeducationist alike I would submit that the new work of economic andsocial reform should be judged as a whole, and not prejudged by thathypercriticism of details which ignores the fact that the conditionswith which it is attempted to deal are wholly unprecedented. I am quitecontent that the movement which I am about to describe should beultimately known and judged by its fruits. Meanwhile, I think that tothe intelligent critic it will sufficiently justify its existence if itcontinues to exist. 

 * * * * *

The story of the new movement, which must now be told, begins in theyear 1889, when a few Irishmen, the writer of these pages among them, set themselves the task of bringing home to the rural population ofIreland the fact that their prosperity was in their own hands much morethan they were generally led to believe. I have already pointed out thatin order to direct the Irish mind towards practical affairs and in ordereffectively to arouse and apply the latent capacities of the Irishpeople to their chief industry, agriculture, we must rely uponassociative, as distinct from individual effort; or, in other words, wemust get the people to do their business together rather thanseparately as the English do. Fortunately for us, it happened that thiscourse, which was clearly indicated by the character and temperament ofthe people, was equally prescribed by economic considerations. Thepopulation and wealth of Ireland are, I need hardly say, sopredominantly agricultural that the welfare of the country must dependupon the welfare of the farming classes. It is notorious that theindustry by which these classes live has for the last quarter of acentury become less and less profitable. It is also recognised that theprime cause of agricultural depression, foreign competition, is notlikely to be removed, while that from the colonies is likely toincrease. The extraordinary development of rapid and cheap transit, together with recently invented processes of preservation, have enabledthe more favoured producers in the newly developed countries of bothhemispheres successfully to enter into competition in the Britishmarkets with the farmers of these islands. The agricultural producers inother European countries, although to some extent protected by tariffs, have had to face similar conditions; but in most of these countries, though not in the United Kingdom, the farmers have so changed theirmethods, to meet the altered circumstances, that they seem to havegained by improvement at home as much as they have lost by competitionfrom abroad Thus our farmers find themselves harassed first by thecheaper production from vast tracts of virgin soil in the uttermostparts of the earth, and secondly by a nearer and keener competitionfrom the better organised and better educated producers of theContinent. 

While the opening up of what the economists call the 'world market, ' hasnecessitated, as a condition of successful competition, improved methodsof production for, and carriage to, the market, a third and less obviousforce has effected an important change in the method of distribution inthe market. The swarming populations, which the factory system hasbrought together in industrial centres, have to be supplied with food bya system of distribution which must above all things be expeditious. This requirement can only be met by the regular consignment of food inlarge quantities, of such uniform quality that the sample can be reliedupon to be truly indicative of the quality of the bulk. Thus the rapiddistribution of produce in the markets becomes as important a factor inagricultural economy as improved methods of production or cheap andexpeditious carriage. 

Now this new market condition is being met in two ways. In the UnitedStates, and, in a less marked degree, at home, an army of middlemenbetween the producer and the consumer attends to this business for ashare of the profits accruing from it, whilst in many parts of theContinent the farmers themselves attend, partially at any rate, to thebusiness side of their industry instead of paying others to do it allfor them. I say all, for middlemen are necessary at the distributiveend: but it is absolutely essential, in a country like Ireland, that atthe producing end the farmers should be so organised that theythemselves can manage the first stages of distribution, and exercisesome control over the middlemen who do the rest. The foreignagricultural producers have long been alive to this necessity, for theirsuperior education enabled them to grasp the economic situation and evento realise that the matter is not one of acute political controversy. 

Here, then, was a definite practical problem to the solution of whichthe promoters of the new movement could apply their principle ofco-operative effort. The more we studied the question the more apparentit became that the enormous advantage which the Continental farmers hadover the Irish farmers, both in production and in distribution, was dueto superior organisation combined with better education. State-aid hadno doubt done a great deal abroad, but in every case it was manifestthat it had been preceded, or at least accompanied, by the organisedvoluntary effort without which the interference of the Government withthe business of the people is simply demoralising. 

Generally speaking, the task before us in Ireland was the adaptation tothe special circumstances of our country of methods successfully pursuedby communities similarly situated in foreign countries. We had to urgeupon farmers that combination was just as necessary to their economicsalvation as it was recognised to be by their own class, and by thoseengaged in other industries, elsewhere. They must combine, so we urgedon them, for example, to buy their agricultural requirements at thecheapest rate and of the best quality in order to produce moreefficiently and more economically; they must combine to avail themselvesof improved appliances beyond the reach of individual producers, whetherit be by the erection of creameries, for which there was urgent need, orof cheese factories and jam factories which might come later; or inordinary farm operations, to secure the use of the latest agriculturalmachinery and the most suitable pure-bred stock; they must combine--notto abolish middle profits in distribution, whether those of the carryingcompanies or those of the dealers in agricultural produce--but to keepthose profits within reasonable limits, and to collect in bulk andregularise consignments so that they could be carried and marketed at amoderate cost; they must combine, as we afterwards learned, for thepurpose of creating, by mutual support, the credit required to bring inthe fresh working capital which each new development of their industrywould demand and justify. In short, whenever and wherever theindividuals in a farming community could be brought to see that theymight advantageously substitute associated for isolated production ordistribution, they must be taught to form themselves into associationsin order to reap the anticipated advantages. 

This brief statement of our general aims will furnish a rough idea ofthe economic propaganda which we initiated, and if I give a fewillustrations of the practical application of the new principle to thefarming industry, I shall have done all that will be required to leaveon the reader's mind a true though perhaps an incomplete impression ofthe character and scope of the self-help side of the new movement. Ishall first give a sketch of the unrecorded struggles of its pioneers, because these struggles prove to those engaged in social and economicwork in Ireland that, in the wholly abnormal condition of our nationallife, no project which is theoretically sound need be rejected becauseeverybody says it is impracticable. The work of the morrow will largelyconsist of the impossible of to-day. If this adds to the difficulty, italso adds to the fun. 

When we arrived at the conclusion that the introduction of the principleof agricultural co-operation was a vital necessity, the first practicalquestion which had to be decided was how the industrial army, which wasto do battle for Ireland's position in the world market, should beorganised and disciplined for the task. It is evident that before a bodyof men who have never worked together can form a successful commercialcombination, they must be provided with a constitution and set of rulesand regulations for the conduct of their business. These must be soskilfully contrived that they will harmonise all the interests involved. And when an arrangement has been come to which is, not only in fact butalso obviously, equitable, it remains as part of the process oforganisation to teach the participants in the new project the meaning, and to imbue them with the spirit, of the joint enterprise into whichthey have been persuaded to enter with perhaps no very clearunderstanding of all that is involved. There were in Ireland noprecedents to guide us and no examples to follow, but the co-operativemovement in England appeared to furnish most of the principles involvedand a perfect machinery for their application. [37] So Lord Monteagle andMr. R. A. Anderson, my first two associates in the New Movement, joinedme as regular attendants at the annual Co-operative congresses. We wereassiduous seekers after information at the head-quarters of theCo-operative Union in Manchester. We had the good fortune to fall inwith Vansittart Neale, and Tom Hughes, both of whom have passed away, and with Mr. Holyoake, who, with the exception of Mr. Ludlow, is now thesole survivor of that noble group of practical philanthropists, theChristian Socialists. Mr. J. C. Gray, who succeeded Mr. Vansittart Nealeas the General Secretary of the Co-operative Union, gave us invaluablehelp and continues to do so to this day. The leaders of the Englishmovement sympathised with our efforts. The Union paid us the complimentof constituting our first converts its Irish Section. Liberal supportwas given out of the central English funds towards the cost of themissionary work which was to spread co-operative light in the sisterisle. We can never forget the generosity of the workingmen in England ingiving their aid to the Irish farmers, especially when it is rememberedthat they had no sanguine anticipations for the success of our effortsand no prospect of advantages to themselves if we did succeed. 

It must be admitted that the outlook was not altogether rosy. Agricultural co-operation had never succeeded in England, where itseemed to be accepted as one of the disappointing limitations of theco-operative movement that it did not apply to rural communities inthese islands. There were also in Ireland the peculiar difficultiesarising from ceaseless political and agrarian agitation. It wasnaturally asked--did Irish farmers possess the qualities out of whichco-operators are made? Had they commercial experience or businesseducation? Had they business capacity? Would they display thatconfidence in each other which is essential to successful association, or indeed that confidence in themselves without which there can be nobusiness enterprise? Could they ever be induced to form themselves intosocieties, and to adopt, and loyally adhere to those rules andregulations by which alone equitable distribution of the responsibilityand profit among the participants in the joint undertaking can beassured, and harmony and successful working be rendered possible? Then, our best-informed Irish critics assured us that voluntary associationfor humdrum business purposes, devoid of some religious or politicalincentive, was alien to the Celtic temperament and that we should wearourselves out crying in the wilderness. We were told that Irishmen canconspire but cannot combine. Economists assured us that even if wesucceeded in getting farmers to embark on the projected enterprises, financial disaster would be the inevitable result of our attempts tosubstitute in industrial undertakings, ever becoming more technical andrequiring more and more commercial knowledge and experience, democraticmanagement for one-man control. 

On the other hand there were some favouring conditions, the importanceof which our studies of the human problems already discussed will havemade my readers realise. Isolated, the Irish farmer is conservative, sceptical of innovations, a believer in routine and tradition. In unionwith his fellows, he is progressive, open to ideas, and wonderfully keenat grasping the essential features of any new proposal for hisadvancement. He was, then, himself eminently a subject for co-operativetreatment, and his circumstances were equally so. The smallness of hisholding, the lack of capital, and the backwardness of his methods madehim helpless in competition with his rivals abroad. The process oforganisation was also, to some extent, facilitated by the insight thepeople had been given by the Land League into the power of combination, and by the education they had received in the conduct of meetings. Itwas a great advantage that there was a machinery ready at hand forgetting people together, and a procedure fully understood for givingexpression to the sense of the meeting. On the other hand, thedomination of a powerful central body, which was held to be essential tothe success of the political and agrarian movement, had exercised aninfluence which added enormously to the difficulty of getting the peopleto act on their own initiative. 

Though the economic conditions of the Irish farmer clearly indicated aneed for the application of co-operative effort to all branches of hisindustry, it was necessary at the beginning to embrace a more limitedaim. It happened at the time we commenced our Irish work that one branchof farming, the dairying industry, presented features admirably adaptedto our methods. This industry was, so to speak, ripe for its industrialdevelopment, for its change from a home to a factory industry. Newmachinery, costly but highly efficient, had enabled the factory product, notably that of Denmark and Sweden, to compete successfully with thehome-made article, both in quality and cost of production. Here, it willbe observed, was an opportunity for an experiment in co-operativeproduction, under modern industrial conditions, which would put theassociative qualities of the Irish farmer to a test which the Britishartisan had not stood quite as well as the founders of the co-operativemovement had anticipated. To add to the interest of the situation, capitalists had seized upon the material advantages which the abundantsupply of Irish milk afforded, and the green pastures of the "GoldenVein" were studded with snow white creameries which proclaimed thetransfer of this great Irish industry from the tiller of the soil to theman of commerce. The new-comers secured the milk of the district bygiving the farmer much more for his milk than it was worth to him, solong as he pursued the old methods of home manufacture. This inducedfarmers to go out of the butter-making business. After a while the pricewas reduced, and the proprietor, finding it necessary to give thesuppliers only what they could make out of their milk without his modernequipment, realised profits altogether out of proportion to his share ofthe capital embarked or the labour involved in the production of thebutter. 

The economic position was ideal for our purpose, and we had nodifficulty in explaining it to the farmers themselves. The socialproblem was the real difficulty. To all suggestions of co-operativeaction they at first opposed a hopeless _non possumus_. Their objectionsmay be summed up thus:--They had never combined for any businesspurpose. How could they trust the Committee they were asked to electfrom amongst themselves to expend their money and conduct theirbusiness? It was all very well for the proprietor with his amplecapital, free hand, and business experience, to work with complicatedmachinery and to consign his butter out of the reach of the local butterbuyer, and to save the waste and delay of the local butter market. Butthey knew nothing of the business and would only make fools ofthemselves. The promoters--they were not putting anything into thescheme--how much did they intend to take out?[38]

There was nothing in this attitude of mind which we had not fullyanticipated. We were confident that, as we were on sound economicground, no matter what difficulties might confront us it was only aquestion of time for the attainment of our ends. All that was requiredwas that we should keep pegging away. My own experience was notencouraging at first. I was, and am, a poor speaker, and in Ireland aman who cannot express his thoughts with facility, whether he has gotthem or not, accentuates the difficulties under which a prophet laboursin his own country. I made up for my deficiencies in the first essentialof Irish public life by engaging a very eloquent political speaker, thelate Mr. Mulhallen Marum, M. P. , to stump the country. He gave to thepropaganda a relish which my prosaic economics altogether lacked. Thenationalist band sometimes came out to meet him. We all know theefficiency of the drum in politics and religion, but it seemed to me alittle out of place in economics. However, he created an excellentimpression, but unhappily he died of heart disease before he hadattended more than three or four meetings. This was a severe blow to us, and we toiled away under some temporary discouragement. My own diaryrecords attendance at fifty meetings before a single society hadresulted therefrom. It was weary work for a long time. These gatheringswere miserable affairs compared with those which greeted our politicalspeakers. On one occasion the agricultural community was represented bythe Dispensary Doctor, the Schoolmaster, and the Sergeant of Police. Sometimes, in spite of copious advertising of the meeting, the prosaicnature of the objects had got abroad, and nobody met. 

Mr. Anderson, who sometimes accompanied me and sometimes went his roundsalone, had similar experiences. I may quote a passage from some of hisreminiscences, recently published in the _Irish Homestead_, the organ ofthe co-operative movement in Ireland. 

 It was hard and thankless work. There was the apathy of the people and the active opposition of the Press and the politicians. It would be hard to say now whether the abuse of the Conservative _Cork Constitution_ or that of the Nationalist _Eagle_, of Skibbereen, was the louder. We were "killing the calves, " we were "forcing the young women to emigrate, " we were "destroying the industry. " Mr. Plunkett was described as a "monster in human shape, " and was adjured to "cease his hellish work. " I was described as his "Man Friday" and as "Rough-rider Anderson. " Once, when I thought I had planted a Creamery within the precincts of the town of Rathkeale, my co-operative apple-cart was upset by a local solicitor who, having elicited the fact that our movement recognised neither political nor religious differences--that the Unionist-Protestant cow was as dear to us as her Nationalist-Catholic sister--gravely informed me that our programme would not suit Rathkeale. "Rathkeale, " said he, pompously, "is a Nationalist town--Nationalist to the backbone--and every pound of butter made in this Creamery must be made on Nationalist principles, or it shan't be made at all. " This sentiment was applauded loudly, and the proceedings terminated. 

On another occasion a similar project was abandoned because the flow ofwater to the disused mill which it was proposed to convert into acreamery, passed through a conduit lined with cement originallypurchased from a man who now occupied a farm from which another had beenevicted. To some minds these little complications would have spelledfailure. To my associates they but accentuated the need for the movementwhich they had so laboriously thought out, and the very nature of thedifficulties confirmed them in their belief that the economic doctrinethey were preaching was adapted to meet the requirements of the case. And so the event proved. 

In the year 1894 the movement had gathered volume to such anextent--although the societies then numbered but one for every twentythat are in existence to-day--that it became beyond the power of a fewindividuals to direct its further progress. In April of that year ameeting was held in Dublin to inaugurate the Irish AgriculturalOrganisation Society, Ltd. (now commonly known as the I. A. O. S. ), whichwas to be the analogue of the Co-operative Union in England. In thefirst instance it was to consist of philanthropic persons, but itsconstitution provided for the inclusion in its membership of thesocieties which had already been created and those which it would itselfcreate as time went on. It had, and has to-day, a thoroughlyrepresentative Committee. I was elected the first President, a positionwhich I held until I entered official life, when Lord Monteagle, apractical philanthropist if ever there was one, became my successor. Father Finlay, who joined the movement in 1892, and who has devoted theextraordinary influence which he possesses over the rural population ofIreland to the dissemination of our economic principles, becameVice-President. Both he and Lord Monteagle have been annually re-electedever since. 

The growth of the movement in the last nine years under the fosteringcare of the I. A. O. S. Is highly satisfactory. By the autumn of this year(1903) considerably over eight hundred societies had been established, and the number is ever growing; of these 360 were dairy, and 140agricultural societies, nearly 200 agricultural banks, 50 homeindustries societies, 40 poultry societies, while there were 40 otherswith miscellaneous objects. The membership may be estimated--I amwriting towards the end of the Society's statistical year--at about80, 000, representing some 400, 000 persons. The combined trade turnoverof these societies during the present year will reach approximately£2, 000, 000, a figure the meaning of which can only be appreciated whenit is remembered that the great majority of the associated farmers arein so small a way of business that in England they would hardly beclassed as farmers at all. 

These societies consist, as has been explained, of groups of farmers whohave been taught by organisers that certain branches of their businesscan be more profitably conducted in association than by individualsacting separately. The principle of agricultural co-operation with itseconomic advantages will, as time goes on, be further extended by thecombined action of societies. With this end in view federations areconstantly being formed with a constitution similar to that of thesocieties, the only difference being that the members of the federationare not individuals but societies, the government of the central bodybeing carried on by delegates from its constituent associations. The twolargest of these federations, one for the sale of butter, and anotherfor the combined purchase by societies of their agriculturalrequirements, have been working successfully for several years. Federations, too, are being formed, as societies find that theirbusiness can be conducted more economically, for example, in dairying bycentralising the manufacture of butter, or in the egg export trade bythe alliance of many districts to enable large contracts to beundertaken. In the near future a further development of federation willbe required to complete a scheme now under consideration for the mutualinsurance of live stock. Such a scheme involves the existence of twoprime conditions, a local organisation for the purpose of effectivesupervision, and the spreading of the risk over a large area. 

In all such enterprises and economic changes the Organisation Society iseither the initiator, or is called in for advice, and its continuedexistence in a purely advisory capacity as a link between the societieswhere concerted action is required, will be necessary even when theorganisation of farmers into societies is completed. The economic lifeof rural communities is in continual need of adjustment. Now it is aninvention like a steam separator which revolutionises an industry. Atanother time the crisis created by a change in the tariff of a foreigncountry forces the producer either to find a new outlet for his wares, or to abandon a hitherto profitable employment. A striking instance ofthe value of organisation and connection with a central advisory bodyoccurred in 1887, when swine fever broke out in Denmark, and the exportsof live swine fell from 230, 000 in one year to 16, 000 in the next. Theorganisation of the farmers, however, enabled them easily to consulttogether how best to meet the emergency, and their decision to startco-operative bacon-curing factories was the foundation of their presentgreat export trade in manufactured bacon. 

I must not overburden with details a narrative intended for readers towhom I merely wish to give a deeper and wider understanding of Irishlife than most of them probably possess. But there is just one form ofagricultural co-operation to which I can usefully devote a fewparagraphs, because it throws much light upon the associative qualitiesof the people and also upon the educational and social value of themovement. I refer to the Agricultural Banks, more properly called CreditAssociations, which have been organised upon the Raiffeisen system. Before the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society was formed we hadread of these institutions, and of the marvellously beneficial effectthey had produced upon the most depressed rural communities abroad. Butonly in the last few years have we fully realised that they are evenmore required and are likely to do more good in Ireland than in anyother country; for on the psychological side of our work we formerly butdimly saw things which we now see clearly. 

The exact purpose of these organisations is to create credit as a meansof introducing capital into the agricultural industry. They perform theapparent miracle of giving solvency to a community composed almostentirely of insolvent individuals. The constitution of these bodies, which can, of course, be described only in broad outline here, issomewhat startling. They have no subscribed capital, but every member isliable for the entire debts of the association. Consequently theassociation takes good care to admit men of approved character andcapacity only. It starts by borrowing a sum of money on the joint andseveral security of its members. A member wishing to borrow from theassociation is not required to give tangible security, but must bringtwo sureties. He fills up an application form which states, among otherthings, what he wants the money for. The rules provide--and this is thesalient feature of the system--that a loan shall be made for aproductive purpose only, that is, a purpose which, in the judgment ofthe other members of the association as represented by a committeedemocratically elected from among themselves, will enable the borrowerto repay the loan out of the results of the use made of the money lent. 

Raiffeisen held, and our experience in Ireland has fully confirmed hisopinion, that in the poorest communities there is a perfectly safe basisof security in the honesty and industry of its members. This security isnot valuable to the ordinary commercial lender, such as the local jointstock bank. Even if such lenders had the intimate knowledge possessed bythe committee of one of these associations as to the character andcapacity of the borrower, they would not be able to satisfy themselvesthat the loan was required for a really productive purpose, nor wouldthey be able to see that it was properly applied to the stipulatedobject. One of the rules of the co-operative banks provides for theexpulsion of a member who does not apply the money to the agreedproductive purpose. But although these "Banks" are almost invariablysituated in very poor districts, there has been no necessity to put thisrule in force in a single instance. Social influences seem to be quitesufficient to secure obedience to the association's laws. 

Another advantage conferred by the association is that the term forwhich money is advanced is a matter of agreement between the borrowerand the bank. The hard and fast term of three months which prevails inIreland for small loans is unsuited to the requirements of theagricultural industry--as for instance, when a man borrows money to sowa crop, and has to repay it before harvest. The society borrows at fouror five per cent, and lends at five or six per cent. In some cases theCongested Districts Board or the Department of Agriculture have madeloans to these banks at three per cent. This enables the societies tolend at the popular rate of one penny for the use of one pound for amonth. The expenses of administration are very small. As the credit ofthese associations develops, they will become a depository for thesavings of the community, to the great advantage of both lender andborrower. The latter generally makes an enormous profit out of theseloans, which have accordingly gained the name of 'the lucky money, ' andwe find, in practice, that he always repays the association and almostinvariably with punctuality. 

The sketch I have given of the agricultural banks will, perhaps, besufficient to show what an immense educational and economic benefit theyare likely to confer when they are widely extended throughout Ireland, as I hope they will be in the near future. Under this system, which, toquote the report of the Indian Famine Commission, 1901, 'separates theworking bees from the drones, ' the industrious men of the community whohad no clear idea before of the meaning or functions of capital orcredit, and who were generally unable to get capital into their industryexcept at exorbitant rates of interest and upon unsuitable terms, arenow able to get, not always, indeed, all the money they want, but allthe money they can well employ for the improvement of their industry. There is no fear of rash investment of capital in enterprises believedto be, but not in reality productive--the committee take good care ofthat. The whole community is taught the difference between borrowing tospend and borrowing to make. You have the collective wisdom of the bestmen in the association helping the borrower to decide whether he oughtto borrow or not, and then assisting him, if only from motives ofself-interest, to make the loan fulfil the purpose for which it wasmade. I was delighted to find when I was making an enquiry into theworking of the system that, whereas the debt-laden peasants had formerlyconcealed their indebtedness, of which they were ashamed, those who werein debt to the new banks were proud of the fact, as it was the besttestimonial to their character for honesty and industry. [39]

One other sphere of activity worked by the co-operative associationsneeds a passing notice. The desire that, together with materialamelioration, there should be a corresponding intellectual advancementand a greater beauty in life has prompted many of the farmers' societiesto use their organisation for higher ends. A considerable number of themhave started Village Libraries, and by an admirable selection of bookshave brought to their members, not only the means of educatingthemselves in the more difficult technical problems of their industry, but also a means of access to that enchanted world of Irish thoughtwhich inspires the Gaelic Revival to which I have already referred. Social gatherings of every kind, dances, lectures, concerts, and suchlike entertainments, which have the two-fold effect of brightening rurallife and increasing the attachment of the members to their society, arebecoming a common feature in the movement, and this more human aspecthas attracted to it the attention of many who do not understand itseconomic side. We have gratifying evidence from many of the clergy thatthe movement thus developed has kept at home young people who wouldotherwise have fled from the continued hardship and intellectualemptiness of rural life at home. 

These results are in no small measure due to the zeal and devotion ofthe governing body and staff of the I. A. O. S. The general policy of thesociety is guided by a committee of twenty-four members, one-half ofwhom are elected by the individual subscribers and the other half by theaffiliated societies. It is representative in the best sense andinfluential accordingly. The success of the Committee is no doubt mainlydue to the wisdom which they have displayed in the selection of thestaff. In the most important post, that of Secretary, they have kept onmy chief fellow-worker in the early struggle, Mr. R. A. Anderson, who hasdevoted himself to the cause with all the energy of a nature at onceenthusiastic, unselfish, and practical, and who has succeeded ininspiring his staff of organisers and experts with his own spirit. Amongthese, two deserve special mention, Mr. George W. Russell, one of theAssistant Secretaries, who has, under the _nom de plume_ "A. E. , "attained fame for a poetry of rare distinction of thought and diction, and Mr. P. J. Hannon, the other Assistant Secretary, who has provedhimself a splendid propagandist. Each of these gentlemen has brought tothe movement a zeal and ability which could only come of a devotion tohigh ideals of patriotism, curiously combined with a shrewd practicalinstinct for carrying on varied and responsible business undertakings. 

With the growing work the staff has been repeatedly augmented to enablethe central society to keep pace with the demand made by groups offarmers to be initiated into the principles of co-operativeorganisation and the details of its application to the particularbranches of farming carried on in their several districts. At the sametime the societies which have been established need, during theirearlier years, and with each extension of their operations, constantadvice and supervision. Hence skilled organisers have to be kept to formco-operative dairy societies, inspect creameries, and give technicaladvice upon the manufacture and sale of butter, the care of machinery, the adequacy of the water supply, the drainage system, and many similartechnical questions. Others are employed to start poultry societies, which when organised have still to be instructed by a Danish expert inthe proper method of packing, selecting, and grading the eggs forexport. In tillage districts there is a constant demand for organisersof purely agricultural societies, which aim at the joint purchase ofseeds and manures, of implements and other farm requisites, and at thebetter disposal of produce; while the growing importance of an improvedsystem of agricultural credit keeps four organisers of agriculturalbanks constantly at work Home industries, bee-keeping, and horticulture, may be added to the objects for which societies have been formed andwhich require separate expert organisers. And in addition to all thiswork, the central association has found it necessary to keep a staff ofaccountants, versed in the principles of co-operative organisation, toinstruct these miscellaneous societies in simple and efficient systemsof bookkeeping, and in the general principles of conducting business. To complete the description of the propagandist activities of thecentral body, there is a ceaseless flow of leaflets and circularscontaining advice and direction to bodies of farmers who, for the firsttime in their lives, have combined for business purposes; while a littleweekly paper, the _Irish Homestead_, acts as the organ of the movement, promotes the exchange of ideas between societies scattered throughoutthe country, furnishes useful information upon all matters connectedwith their business operations, and keeps constantly before theassociated farmers the economic principles which must be observed, and, above all, the spirit in which the work must be approached, if themovement is to fulfil its mission. [40]

One of the difficulties incidental to a movement of this kind, which, for the reasons already set forth, had to be rapidly and widelyextended, was the enormous cost to its supporters. It is needless to saythat such a staff as I have described could not be kept continuouslytravelling by rail and road for so many years without the provision of alarge fund. These officers must obviously be men with exceptionalqualifications, if they are not only to impress the thought of theiragricultural audiences, but also to move them to action, and to sustainthe newly organised societies through the initial difficulties of theirunfamiliar enterprise. Such men are not to be found idle, and if theypreach this gospel, they are entitled to live by it. They are not by anymeans overpaid, but their salaries in the aggregate amount to a largeannual sum. Before the creation of the Department of Agriculture andTechnical Instruction in 1900 large sums were spent by the I. A. O. S. Notonly in its proper work of organisation, but also in giving technicalinstruction, which was found to be essential to commercial success. Whenthe Society was relieved of this educational work many of its supporterswithdrew their subscriptions under the impression that there was now nolonger any need for its continued existence. But so far from theSociety's usefulness having ceased, it has now become more importantthan ever that the doctrine of organised self-help, which must be thefoundation of any sound Irish economic policy, should be insisted uponand put into practical operation as widely as possible. All those whoare devoting their lives to the firm establishment of this self-helpmovement among the chief wealth-producers of the country are agreed thatno better educational work can be done at the moment than that which isbringing about so salutary a change in the economic attitude of theIrish mind. 

It is not to be wondered at that the greater part of the necessary fundsshould have been drawn from a very limited circle of public-spirited mencapable of grasping the significance of a movement the practical effectof which would appear to be permanent only to those who had a deepinsight into Irish problems. [41] The difficulty of a successful appealto a wider public has been the impossibility of giving in brief form anadequate explanation, such as that which it is hoped these pages willafford, of the part the movement was to play in Irish life. We wereasked whether our scheme was business or philanthropy. If philanthropy, it would probably do more harm than good. If business, why was it notself-supporting? I remember hearing the movement ridiculed in the Houseof Commons by a prominent Irish member on the ground that the accountsof the I. A. O. S. Showed that £20, 000 (£40, 000 would be nearer the marknow) had been put into the 'business, ' and that this large capital hadbeen entirely lost! When we proved that agricultural co-operationbrought a large profit to the members of the societies we formed, it wassuggested that a small part of this profit would give us all we requiredfor our organising work. So it will in time, but if instead of merelyrefusing financial assistance to our converts, we were, on the otherhand, to demand it from them, we certainly should not lessen thedifficulty of launching our movement among the farmers of Ireland. Someof our critics denounced the expenditure of so much money for which, intheir opinion, there was nothing to show, and said that the time hadcome to stop this 'spoon-feeding. ' When those for whose exclusivebenefit the costly work had been undertaken learned that all we had tooffer was the cold advice that they should help themselves, they notinfrequently raised a wholly different objection to our economicdoctrine. Spoonfeeding they might have tolerated, but there was nothingin the spoon! The movement has survived all these criticisms. The lackof moral and of financial support which retarded its progress in theearly years, has been so far surmounted The movement may now, I think, appeal for further help as one that has justified its existence. Theopinion that it has done so is not held only by those who are engaged inpromoting it, nor by Irish observers alone. The efforts of the Irishfarmers so to reorganise their industry that they may hopefully approachthe solution of the problems of rural life are being watched byeconomists and administrators abroad. Enquirers have come to Irelandduring the last two years from Germany, France, Canada, the UnitedStates, India, South Africa, Cyprus and the West Indies, having beendrawn here by the desire to understand the combination of economic andhuman reform. It was not alone the economic advantages of the movementwhich interested them, but the way in which the organisation at the sametime acted upon the character and awoke those forces of self-help andcomradeship in which lies the surety of any enduring nationalprosperity. A native governor from a famine district in the MadrasPresidency, who, perhaps, better than any one realised the importanceof these human factors, because the lethargy of his own people hadforced it on his notice, said, when he was referred to the Department ofAgriculture and Technical Instruction for information, "Oh, don't speakto me about Government Departments. They are the same all over theworld. I come here to learn what the Irish people are doing to helpthemselves and how you awaken the will and the initiative. " I hope toshow later that State assistance properly applied is not necessarilydemoralising but very much the reverse. It is consoling, too, to ournational pride, long wounded by contemptuous references to ourindustrial incapacity as compared with our neighbours, to find that ourlatest efforts are regarded by them as worthy of imitation. From theother side of the Channel no less than five County Councils have sentdeputations of farmers to Ireland to study the progress of the movement, and already an English Organisation Society, expressly modelled upon itsIrish namesake, has been established and is endeavouring to carry outthe same work. 

It is not surprising that the facts which I have cited should beinteresting to the honest inquirer. A summary of actual achievement willshow that this movement has spread all over Ireland, that its principleof organised self-help has been universally accepted, and that nothingbut time and the necessary funds are required by its promoters to giveit, within the range of its applicability, general effect. It is noexaggeration to say that there has been set in motion and carriedbeyond the experimental stage a revolution in agricultural methods whichwill enable our farmers to compete with their rivals abroad, both inproduction and in distribution, under far more favourable conditionsthan before. Alike in its material and in its moral achievements thismovement has provided an effective means whereby the peasant proprietaryabout to be created will be able to face and solve the vital problemsbefore it, problems for which no improvement in land tenure, no rentreductions actual or prospective, could otherwise provide an adequatesolution. Furthermore, nothing could be more evident to any closeobserver of Irish life than the fact that had it not been for the newspirit which the workers in this movement, mostly humble unknown men, had generated, the attitude of the Irish democracy towards England'slatest concession to Ireland would have been very different from what itis. In the last dozen years hundreds and thousands of meetings have beenheld to discuss matters of business importance to our rural communities. At these meetings landlord and tenant-farmer have often met each otherfor the first time on a footing of friendly equality, as fellow-membersof co-operative societies. It is significant that all through thenegotiations which culminated in the Dunraven Treaty, landlords who hadcome into the life of the people in connection with the co-operativemovement took a prominent part in favour of conciliation. 

I would further give it as my opinion, whatever it may be worth, thatthe movement has exercised a profound influence in those departments ofour national life where, as I have shown in previous chapters, newforces must be not only recognised but accepted as essential to nationalwell-being, if we are to cherish what is good and free ourselves fromwhat is bad in the historical evolution of our national life. In thedomain of politics it is hard to estimate even the political value ofthe exclusion of politics from deliberations and activities where theyhave no proper place. In our religious life, where intolerance hasperpetuated anti-industrial tendencies, the new movement is seen to bebringing together for business purposes men who had previously nodealings with each other, but who have now learned that the doctrine ofself-help by mutual help involves no danger to faith and no sacrifice ofhope, while it engenders a genuinely Christian interpretation ofcharity. [42]

I cannot conclude the story of this movement without paying a brieftribute of respect and gratitude to those true patriots who have bornethe daily burden of the work. I hope the picture I have given of theiraims and achievements will lead to a just appreciation of their servicesto their country. By these men and women applause or even recognitionwas not expected or desired: they knew that it was to those who had theadvantages of leisure, and what the world calls position, that thecredit for their work would be given. But it is of national importancethat altruistic service should be understood and given freedom ofexpansion. I have, therefore, presented as faithfully as I could theorigin and development of one of the least understood, but in myopinion, most fruitful movements which has ever been undertaken by abody of social and economic reformers. As Irish leaders they havepreferred to remain obscure, conscious that the most damaging criticismwhich could be applied to their work would be that it depended on theirown personal qualities or acts for its permanent utility. But mostassuredly the real conquerors of the world are those who found uponhuman character their hopes of human progress. 

FOOTNOTES:

[37] The story of the conversion of some of the tenants on the Vandeleurestate into a co-operative community in 1831 by Mr. E. T. Craig, aScotchman who took up the agency of the property, told in the _Historyof Ralahine_ (London, Trübner & Co. , 1893) is worth reading. Theexperiment, most hopeful as far as it went, was only two years inexistence when the landlord gambled away his property at cards in aDublin club and the Utopia was sold up. But in the co-operative worldMr. Craig, who died as recently as 1894, is revered as the author of themost advanced experiment in the realisation of co-operative ideals. Theeconomic significance of the narrative is obviously not important, and Idoubt whether joint ownership of land, except for the purpose of commongrazing, is a practical ideal. The ready response, however, of the Irishpeasants to Mr. Craig's enthusiasm and the way in which they took up theidea form an interesting study of the Irish character. 

[38] The late Canon Bagot had done good service in explaining the valueof the new machinery; but unhappily the vital importance of co-operativeorganisation was not then understood. He formed some joint stockcompanies with the result that, having no co-operative spirit to offsettheir commercial inexperience, they all proved, instead of co-operativesuccesses, competitive failures. This fact added to our earlydifficulties. 

[39] It should be noted that this form of association for creditpurposes, owing to its peculiar constitution, applies only to a grade ofthe community whose members all live on about the same scale and that afairly low one. It is obvious that unlimited liability would lose itsefficacy in developing the sense of responsibility if some members ofthe association were so substantial that its creditors would make themprimarily responsible in the event of failure. The fact, however, thatthe scheme has worked with unvarying success among the poorest of thepoor, and the most Irish of the Irish, renders it as good anillustration as can be found of what may be done by sympathetic andintelligent treatment of Irish economic problems. Mr. Henry W. Wolff, the foremost authority on People's Banks in these islands, and Mr. R. A. Yerburgh, M. P. , a generous subscriber to the Irish AgriculturalOrganisation Society, have taken great interest in this part of themovement and have rendered much assistance. 

[40] Those who wish to go more fully into the details of theco-operative agricultural movement in Ireland should write to theSecretary Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, 22 Lincoln-place, Dublin. The publications of the Society are somewhat voluminous, and theinquirer should intimate any particular branches of the subject in whichhe is especially interested. Those wishing to keep _au courant_ with thefurther development of the movement would do well to take in the _IrishHomestead_, post free _6s. 6d. _ per annum. 

[41] The chief donors belong to the class of philanthropists who do notcare to advertise their beneficence. I, therefore, respect their wishesand withhold their names. 

[42] I recall an occasion when the Vice-President of the I. A. O. S. (aNationalist in politics and a Jesuit priest), who has been ever ready tolend a hand as volunteer organiser when the prior claims of hisreligious and educational duties allowed, found himself before anaudience which he was informed, when he came to the meeting, consistedmainly of Orangemen. He began his address by referring to the new andsomewhat strange environment into which he had drifted. He did not, however, see why this circumstance should lead to any misunderstandingbetween himself and his audience. He had never been able to understandwhat a battle fought upon a famous Irish river two centuries ago had gotto do with the practical issues of to-day which he had come to discuss. The dispute in question was, after all, between a Scotchman and aDutchman, and if it had not yet been decided, they might be left tosettle it themselves--that is if too great a gulf did not separate them. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

THE RECESS COMMITTEE. 

The new movement, six years after its initiation, had succeeded beyondthe most sanguine expectations of its promoters. All over the countrythe idea of self-help was taking firm hold of the imagination of thepeople. 

Co-operation had got, so to speak, into the air to such an extent that, whereas at the beginning, as I well remember, our chief difficulty hadbeen to popularise a principle to which one section of the community wasstrongly opposed, and in which no section believed, it was now no longernecessary to explain or support the theory, but only to show how itcould be advantageously applied to some branch of the farmer's industry. It was not, strange to say, the economic advantage which had chieflyappealed to the quick intelligence of the Irish farmer, but rather thenovel sensation that he was thinking for himself, and that whileimproving his own condition he was working for others. This attitude wasessential to the success of the movement, because had it not been for avein of altruism, the "strong" farmers would have held aloof, and thesmall men would have been discouraged by the abstention of thebetter-off and presumably more enlightened of their class. 

Perhaps, too, we owed something to the recognition on the part of theworking farmers of Ireland that they were showing a capacity to grasp anidea which had so far failed to penetrate the bucolic intelligence ofthe predominant partner. Whatever the causes to which the success of themovement was attributable, those who were responsible for its promotionfelt in the year 1895 that it had reached a stage in its developmentwhen it was but a question of time to complete the projected revolutionin the farming industry, the substitution of combined for isolatedmethods of production and distribution. It was then further brought hometo them that the principle of self-help was destined to obtain generalacceptance in rural Ireland, and that the time had come when a soundsystem of State aid to agriculture might be fruitfully grafted on tothis native growth of local effort and self-reliance. 

From time to time our public men had included in the list of Irishgrievances the fact that England enjoyed a Board of Agriculture whileIreland had no similar institution. As a matter of fact a mere replicaof the English Board would not have fulfilled a tithe of the objects wehad in view. That much at least we knew, but beyond that our informationwas vague. What, having regard to Irish rural conditions, should be thecharacter and constitution of any Department called into being toadminister the aid required? Here indeed was a vital and difficultproblem. Even those of us who had given the closest thought to thematter did not know exactly what was wanted; nor, if we had known ourown minds, could we have formulated our demand in such a way as to haveobtained a backing from representative public bodies, associations, andindividuals sufficient to secure its concession. Instead, therefore, ofagitating in the conventional manner we determined to try to direct thebest thought of the country to the problem in hand, with a view tosatisfying the Government, and also ourselves, as to what was wanted. Wehad confidence that a demand presented to Parliament, based upon calmand deliberate debate among the most competent of Irishmen, would beconceded. The story of this agitation, its initiation, its conduct, andits final success will, I am sure, be of interest to all who feel anyconcern for the welfare of Ireland. 

I have accepted the common characterisation of the Irish as aleader-following people. When we come to analyse the human material outof which a strong national life may be constructed, we find that thereare in Ireland--in this connection I exclude the influence of theclergy, with which I have dealt specifically in another chapter--twoelements of leadership, the political and the industrial. The politicalleaders are seen to enjoy an influence over the great majority of thepeople which is probably as powerful as that of any political leaders inancient or modern times; but as a class they certainly do not take aprominent, or even an active part in business life. This fact is notintroduced with any controversial purpose, and I freely acknowledge canbe interpreted in a sense altogether creditable to the Nationalistmembers. The other element of leadership contains all that is prominentin industrial and commercial life, and few countries could producebetter types of such leaders than can be found in the northern capitalof the country. But, unhappily, these men are debarred from allinfluence upon the thought and action of the great majority of thepeople, who are under the domination of the political leaders. This isone of the strange anomalies of Irish life to which I have alreadyreferred. Its recognition, and the desire to utilise the knowledge ofbusiness men as well as politicians, took practical effect in theformation of the Recess Committee. 

The idea underlying this project was the combination of these two forcesof leadership--the force with political influence and that of provedindustrial and commercial capacity--in order to concentrate publicopinion, which was believed to be inclining in this direction, on thematerial needs of the country. The General Election of 1895 had, byuniversal admission, postponed, for some years at any rate, anypossibility of Home Rule, and the cessation of the bitter feelingsaroused when Home Rule seemed imminent provided the opportunity for anappeal to the Irish people in behalf of the views which I haveadumbrated. The appeal took the form of a letter, dated August 27th, 1895, by the author to the Irish Press, under the quite sincere, ifsomewhat grandiloquent, title, "A proposal affecting the general welfareof Ireland. "

The letter set out the general scope and purpose of the scheme. After aconfession of the writer's continued opposition to Home Rule, theadmission was made that if the average Irish elector, who is moreintelligent than the average British elector, were also as prosperous, as industrious, and as well educated, his continued demand, in theproper constitutional way, for Home Rule would very likely result in theexperiment being one day tried. On the other hand, the opinion wasexpressed that if the material conditions of the great body of ourcountrymen were advanced, if they were encouraged in industrialenterprise, and were provided with practical education in proportion totheir natural intelligence, they would see that a political developmenton lines similar to those adopted in England was, considering thenecessary relations between the two countries, best for Ireland; andthen they would cease to desire what is ordinarily understood as HomeRule. A basis for united action between politicians on both sides of theIrish controversy was then suggested. Finding ourselves still opposedupon the main question, but all anxious to promote the welfare of thecountry, and confident that, as this was advanced, our respectivepolicies would be confirmed, it would appear, it was suggested, to bealike good patriotism and good policy to work for the material andsocial advancement of the people. Why then, it was asked, should anyIrishman hesitate to enter at once upon that united action between menof both parties which alone, under existing conditions, could enableeither party to do any real and lasting good to the country?

The letter proceeded to indicate economic legislation which, thoughsorely needed by Ireland, was hopelessly unattainable unless it could beremoved from the region of controversy. The _modus co-operandi_suggested was as follows:--a committee sitting in the Parliamentaryrecess, whence it came to be known as the Recess Committee, was to beformed, consisting in the first instance, of Irish Members of Parliamentnominated by the leaders of the different sections. These nominees wereto invite to join them any Irishmen whose capacity, knowledge, orexperience might be of service to the Committee, irrespective of thepolitical party or religious persuasion to which they might belong. Theday had come, the letter went on to say, when "we Unionists, withoutabating one jot of our Unionism, and Nationalists, without abating onejot of their Nationalism, can each show our faith in the cause for whichwe have fought so bitterly and so long, by sinking our party differencesfor our country's good, and leaving our respective policies for thejustification of time. "

Needless to say, few were sanguine enough to hope that such a committeewould ever be brought together. If that were accomplished someprophesied that its members would but emulate the fame of the Kilkennycats. A severe blow was dealt to the project at the outset by therefusal of Mr. Justin McCarthy, who then spoke for the largest sectionof the Nationalist representatives, to have anything to do with it. Hisreply to the letter must be given in full:--

 MY DEAR MR. PLUNKETT, I am sure I need not say that any effort to promote the general welfare of Ireland has my fullest sympathy. I readily acknowledge and entirely believe in the sincerity and good purpose of your effort, but I cannot see my way to associate myself with it. Your frank avowal in your letter of August 27th is the expression of a belief that if your policy could be successfully carried out the Irish people "would cease to desire Home Rule. " Now, I do not believe that anything in the way of material improvement conferred by the Parliament at Westminster, or by Dublin Castle, could extinguish the national desire for Home Rule. Still, I do not feel that I could possibly take part in any organisation which had for its object the seeking of a substitute for that which I believe to be Ireland's greatest need--Home Rule. 

 Yours very truly, JUSTIN MCCARTHY. 

 73, Eaton-terrace, S. W. , October 22nd, 1895. 

I had not much hope that I could influence Mr. McCarthy's decision; butit was so serious an obstacle to further action that I made one moreappeal. I wrote to my respected and courteous correspondent, pointingout the misconception of my proposal, which had arisen from the use madeof the six words quoted by him, which were hardly intelligible withoutthe context. I asked him to reconsider his refusal to join in theproposal for promoting the material improvement of our country, onaccount of a contingency which he confidently declared could not arise. But in those days economic seed fell upon stony political ground. 

The position was rendered still more difficult by the action of ColonelSaunderson, the leader of the Irish Unionist party, who wrote to thenewspapers declaring that he would not sit on a Committee with Mr. JohnRedmond. On the other hand, Mr. Redmond, speaking then for the"Independent" party, consisting of less than a dozen members, butcontaining some men who agreed with Mr. Field's admission in the Houseof Commons that "man cannot live on politics alone, " joined theCommittee and acted throughout in a manner which was broad, statesmanlike, conciliatory, and as generous as it was courageous. Hisletter of acceptance ran as follows:--

 DEAR MR. PLUNKETT, I received your letter, in which you ask me to co-operate with you in bringing together a small Committee of Members of Parliament to discuss certain measures to be proposed next Session for the benefit of Ireland. While I cannot take as sanguine a view as you do of the benefits likely to flow from such a proceeding, I am unwilling to take the responsibility of declining to aid in any effort to promote useful legislation for Ireland. 

 I will, under the circumstances, co-operate with you in bringing such a Committee as you suggest together. Very truly yours, J. E. REDMOND. 

 October 21st, 1895. 

Before these decisions were officially announced the idea had "caughton. " Public bodies throughout the country endorsed the scheme. Theparliamentarians, who formed the nucleus of the Committee, cametogether and invited prominent men from all quarters to join them. Acommittee which, though informal and self-appointed, might fairly claimto be representative in every material respect, was thus constituted onthe lines laid down. 

Truly, it was a strange council over which I had the honour to preside. All shades of politics were there--Lords Mayo and Monteagle, Mr. Daneand Sir Thomas Lea (Tories and Liberal Unionist Peers and Members ofParliament) sitting down beside Mr. John Redmond and his parliamentaryfollowers. It was found possible, in framing proposals fraught withmoral, social, and educational results, to secure the cordial agreementof the late Rev. Dr. Kane, Grand Master of the Belfast Orangemen, and ofthe eminent Jesuit educationist, Father Thomas Finlay, of the RoyalUniversity. The O'Conor Don, the able Chairman of the FinancialRelations Commission, and Mr. John Ross, M. P. , now one of His Majesty'sJudges, both Unionists, were balanced by the Lord Mayor of Dublin, andMr. T. C. Harrington, M. P. , who now occupies that post, bothNationalists. The late Sir John Arnott fitly represented the commercialenterprise of the South, while such men as Mr. Thomas Sinclair, universally regarded as one of the wisest of Irish public men, SirWilliam Ewart, head of the leading linen concern in the North, SirDaniel Dixon, now Lord Mayor of Belfast, Sir James Musgrave, Chairman ofthe Belfast Harbour Board, and Mr. Thomas Andrews, a well-knownflax-spinner and Chairman of the Belfast and County Down Railway, wouldbe universally accepted as the highest authorities upon the needs of thebusiness community which has made Ulster famous in the industrial world. Mr. T. P. Gill, besides undertaking investigation of the utmost valueinto State aid to agriculture in France and Denmark, acted as Hon. Secretary to the Committee, of which he was a member. 

The story of our deliberations and ultimate conclusions cannot be setforth here except in the barest outline. We instituted an inquiry intothe means by which the Government could best promote the development ofour agricultural and industrial resources, and despatched commissionersto countries of Europe whose conditions and progress might afford somelessons for Ireland. Most of this work was done for us by the lateeminent statistician, Mr. Michael Mulhall. Our funds did not admit of aninquiry in the United States or the Colonies. However, we obtainedinvaluable information as to the methods by which countries which wereour chief rivals in agricultural and industrial production have beenenabled to compete successfully with our producers even in our ownmarkets. Our commissioners were instructed in each case to collect thefacts necessary to enable us to differentiate between the parts playedrespectively by State aid and the efforts of the people themselves inproducing these results. With this information before us, after long andearnest deliberation we came to a unanimous agreement upon the mainfacts of the situation with which we had to deal, and upon therecommendations for remedial legislation which we should make to theGovernment. 

The substance of our recommendations was that a Department of Governmentshould be specially created, with a minister directly responsible toParliament at its head. The central body was to be assisted by aConsultative Council representative of the interests concerned. TheDepartment was to be adequately endowed from the Imperial Treasury, andwas to administer State aid to agriculture and industries in Irelandupon principles which were fully described. The proposal to amalgamateagriculture and industries under one Department was adopted largely onaccount of the opinion expressed by M. Tisserand, late Director-Generalof Agriculture in France, one of the highest authorities in Europe uponthe administration of State aid to agriculture. [43] The creation of anew minister directly responsible to Parliament was considered anecessary provision. Ireland is governed by a number of Boards, all, with the exception of the Board of Works (which is really a branch ofthe Treasury), responsible to the Chief Secretary--practically a wholecabinet under one hat--who is supposed to be responsible for them toParliament and to the Lord Lieutenant. The bearers of this burden aregenerally men of great ability. But no Chief Secretary could possiblytake under his wing yet another department with the entirely new andimportant functions now to be discharged. What these functions were tobe need not here be described, as the Department thus 'agitated' for hasnow been three years at work and will form the subject of the next twochapters. 

On August 1st, 1896, less than a year from the issue of the invitationto the political leaders, the Report was forwarded to the ChiefSecretary to the Lord Lieutenant for Ireland, with a covering letter, setting out the considerations upon which the Committee relied for thejustification of its course of action. Attention was drawn to the termsof the original proposal, its exceptional nature and essentialinformality, the political conditions which appeared to make itopportune, the spirit in which it was responded to by those who wereinvited to join, and the degree of public approval which had beenaccorded to our action. We were able to claim for the Committee that itwas thoroughly representative of those agricultural and industrialinterests, North and South, with which the Report was concerned. 

There were two special features in the brief history of this uniquecoming together of Irishmen which will strike any man familiar with theconditions of Irish public life. The first was the way in which thebusiness element, consisting of men already deeply engaged in theirvarious callings--and, indeed, selected for that very reason--devotedtime and labour to the service of their country. Still more significantwas the fact that the political element on the Committee should havecome to an absolutely unanimous agreement upon a policy which, thoughnot intended to influence the trend of politics, was yet bound to havefar-reaching consequences upon the political thought of the country, andupon the positions of parties and leaders. It was thought only fair tothe Nationalist members of the Committee that every precaution should betaken to prevent their being placed in a false position. 'To avoid anypossible misconception, ' the covering letter ran, 'as to the attitude ofthose members of the Committee who are not supporters of the presentGovernment, it is right here to state that, while under existingpolitical conditions they agreed in recommending a certain course to theGovernment, they wish it to be understood that their politicalprinciples remain unaltered, and that, were it immediately possible, they would prefer that the suggested reforms should be preceded by theconstitutional changes of which they are the well-known advocates. '

It is interesting to note that the Committee claimed favourableconsideration for their proposals on the ground that they sought to actas 'a channel of communication between the Irish Government and Irishpublic opinion. ' Little interest, they pointed out, had been hithertoaroused in those economic problems for which the Report suggested somesolution. They expressed the hope that their action would do somethingto remedy this defect, especially in view of the importance whichforeign Governments had found it necessary to attach to public opinionin working out their various systems of State aid to agriculture andindustries. At the same time the Committee emphasised, in the coveringletter, their reliance on individual and combined effort rather than onState aid. They were able to point out that, in asking for the latter, they had throughout attached the utmost importance to its being grantedin such a manner as to evoke and supplement, and in no way be asubstitute for self-help. If they appeared to give undue prominence tothe capabilities of State initiation, it was to be remembered that theywere dealing with economic conditions which had been artificiallyproduced, and which, therefore, might require exceptional treatment of atemporary nature to bring about a permanent remedy. 

I fear those most intimately connected with the above occurrences willregard this chapter as a very inadequate description of events sounprecedented and so full of hope for the future. My purpose is, however, to limit myself, in dealing with the past, to such details asare necessary to enable the reader to understand the present facts ofIrish life, and to build upon them his own conclusions as to the mosthopeful line of future development. I shall, therefore, pass rapidly inreview the events which led to the fruition of the labours of the RecessCommittee. 

Public opinion in favour of the new proposals grew rapidly. Before theend of the year (1896) a deputation, representing all the leadingagricultural and industrial interests of the country, waited upon theIrish Government, in order to press upon them the urgent need for thenew department. The Lord Lieutenant, after describing the gathering as'one of the most notable deputations which had ever come to lay its casebefore the Irish Government, ' and noting the 'remarkable growth ofpublic opinion' in favour of the policy they were advocating, expressedhis heartfelt sympathy with the case which had been presented, and hisearnest desire--which was well known--to proceed with legislation forthe agricultural and industrial development of the country at theearliest moment. The demand made upon the Government was, argumentatively, already irresistible. But economic agitation of thiskind takes time to acquire dynamic force. Mr. Gerald Balfour introduceda Bill the following year, but it had to be withdrawn to leave the wayclear for the other great Irish measure which revolutionised localgovernment. The unconventional agitation went on upon the originallines, appealing to that latent public opinion which we were striving todevelop. In 1899 another Bill was introduced, and, owing to its masterlyhandling by the Chief Secretary in the House of Commons, ably secondedby the strong support given by Lord Cadogan, who was in the Cabinet, itbecame law. 

I cannot conclude this chapter without a word upon the extraordinarymisunderstanding of Mr. Gerald Balfour's policy to which the obscuringatmosphere surrounding all Irish questions gave rise. In one respectthat policy was a new departure of the utmost importance. He provedhimself ready to take a measure from Ireland and carry it through, instead of insisting upon a purely English scheme which he could callhis own. These pre-digested foods had already done much to destroy ourpolitical digestion, and it was time we were given something to grow, tocook, and to assimilate for ourselves. It will be seen, too, in the nextchapter, that he had realised the potentiality for good of the newforces in Irish life to which he gave play in his two great linkedActs--one of them popularising local government, and the other creatinga new Department which was to bring the government and the peopletogether in an attempt to develop the resources of the country. Yet hiseminently sane and far-seeing policy was regarded in many quarters as asacrifice of Unionist interests in Ireland. Its real effect was to endowUnionism with a positive as well as a negative policy. But all reformersknow that the further ahead they look, the longer they have to wait fortheir justification. Meanwhile, we may leave out of consideration thedivision of honour or of blame for what has been done. The only matterof historic interest is to arrive at a correct measure of the progressmade. 

The new movement had thus completed the first and second stages of itsmission. The idea of self-help had become a growing reality, and uponthis foundation an edifice of State aid had been erected. When aNationalist member met a Tory member of the Recess Committee he laughedover the success with which they had wheedled a measure of industrialHome Rule out of a Unionist Government. None the less they cordiallyagreed that the people would rise to their economic responsibility. Thepromoters of the movement had faith that this new departure in Englishgovernment would be more than justified by the English test, and that inthe new sphere of administration the government would be accorded, without prejudice, of course, to the ultimate views either of Unionistsor Home Rulers, not only the consent, but the whole-hearted co-operationof the governed. 

FOOTNOTES:

[43] The memorandum which he kindly contributed to the Recess Committeewas copied into the Annual Report of the United States Department ofAgriculture for 1896. 

CHAPTER IX. 

A NEW DEPARTURE IN IRISH ADMINISTRATION. 

To the average English Member of Parliament, the passing of an Act "forestablishing a Department of Agriculture and other Industries andTechnical Instruction in Ireland and for other purposes connectedtherewith, " probably signified little more than the removal of anotherIrish grievance, which might not be imaginary, by the concession toIreland of an equivalent to the Board of Agriculture in England. Inreality the difference between the two institutions is as wide as thedifference between the two islands. The chief interest of the newDepartment consists in the free play which it gives to the pent-upforces of a re-awakening life. A new institution is at best but a newopportunity, but the Department starts with the unique advantage that, unlike most Irish institutions, it is one which we Irishmen plannedourselves and for which we have worked. For this reason the opportunityis one to which we may hope to rise. 

Before I can convey any clear impression of the part which theDepartment is, I believe, destined to play on the stage of Irish publiclife, it will be necessary for me to give a somewhat detaileddescription of its functions and constitution. The subject is perhapsdull and technical; but readers cannot understand the Ireland of to-dayunless they have in their minds not only an accurate conception of thenew moral forces in Irish life and of the movements to which theseforces have given rise, but also a knowledge of the administrativemachinery and methods by which the people and the Government are now, for the first time since the Union, working together towards thebuilding up of the Ireland of to-morrow. 

The Department consists of the President (who is the Chief Secretary forthe time being) and the Vice-President. The staff is composed of aSecretary, two Assistant Secretaries (one in respect of Agriculture andone in respect of Technical Instruction), as well as certain heads ofBranches and a number of inspectors, instructors, officers and servants. The Recess Committee, it will be remembered, had laid stress upon theimportance of having at the head of the Department a new Minister whoshould be directly responsible to Parliament; and, accordingly, it wasarranged that the Vice-President should be its direct Ministerial head. The Act provided that the Department should be assisted in its work by aCouncil of Agriculture and two Boards, and also by a ConsultativeCommittee to advise upon educational questions. But before discussingthe constitution of these bodies, it is necessary to explain the natureof the task assigned to the new Department which began work in April, 1900. It was created to fulfil two main purposes. In the first place, it was to consolidate in one authority certain inter-related functionsof government in connection with the business concerns of the peoplewhich, until the creation of the Department, were scattered over somehalf-dozen Boards, and to place these functions under the direct controland responsibility of the new Minister. The second purpose was toprovide means by which the Government and the people might work togetherin developing the resources of the country so far as State interventioncould be legitimately applied to this end. 

To accomplish the first object, two distinct Government departments, theVeterinary Department of the Privy Council and the Office of theInspectors of Irish Fisheries, were merged in the new Department. Theimportance to the economic life of the country of having the laws forsafeguarding our flocks and herds from disease, our crops from insectpests, our farmers from fraud in the supply of fertilisers and feedingstuffs and in the adulteration of foods (which compete with theirproducts), administered by a Department generally concerned for thefarming industry need not be laboured. Similarly, it was well that thelaws for the protection of both sea and inland fisheries should beadministered by the authority whose function it was to develop theseindustries. There was also transferred from South Kensington theadministration of the Science and Arts grants and the grant in aid oftechnical instruction, together with the control of several nationalinstitutions, the most important being the Royal College of Science andthe Metropolitan School of Art; for they, in a sense, would stand at thehead of much of the new work which would be required for thecontemplated agricultural and industrial developments. The AlbertInstitute at Glasnevin and the Munster Institute in Cork, bothinstitutions for teaching practical agriculture, were, as a matter ofcourse, handed over from the Board of National Education. 

The desirability of bringing order and simplicity into these branches ofadministration, where co-related action was not provided for before, wasobvious. A few years ago, to take a somewhat extreme case, when avirulent attack of potato disease broke out which demanded prompt andactive Governmental intervention, the task of instructing farmers how tospray their potatoes was shared by no fewer than six official orsemi-official bodies. The consolidation of administration effected bythe Act, in addition to being a real step towards efficiency andeconomy, relieved the Chief Secretary of an immense amount of detailedwork to which he could not possibly give adequate personal attention, and made it possible for him to devote a greater share of his time tothe larger problems of general Irish legislation and finance. 

The newly created powers of the Department, which were added to andco-ordinated with the various pre-existing functions of the severaldepartments whose consolidation I have mentioned above, fairly fulfilledthe recommendation of the Recess Committee that the Department shouldhave 'a wide reference and a free hand. ' These powers include theaiding, improving, and developing of agriculture in all its branches;horticulture, forestry, home and cottage industries; sea and inlandfisheries; the aiding and facilitating of the transit of produce; andthe organisation of a system of education in science and art, and intechnology as applied to these various subjects. The provision oftechnical instruction suitable to the needs of the few manufacturingcentres in Ireland was included, but need not be dealt with in anydetail in these pages, since, as I have said before, the questionsconnected therewith are more or less common to all such centres and haveno specially Irish significance. 

For all the administrative functions transferred to the new Departmentmoneys are, as before, annually voted by Parliament. Towards thefulfilment of the second purpose mentioned above--the development of theresources of the country upon the principles of the Recess Committee--anannual income of £166, 000, which was derived in about equal parts fromIrish and imperial sources, and is called the Department's Endowment, together with a capital sum of about £200, 000, were provided. 

It will be seen that a very wide sphere of usefulness was thus openedout for the new Department in two distinct ways. The consolidation, under one authority, of many scattered but co-related functions wasclearly a move in the right direction. Upon this part of itsrecommendations the Recess Committee had no difficulty in coming to aquick decision. But the real importance of their Report lay in thedirection of the new work which was to be assigned to the Department. Under the new order of things, if the Department, acting with as well asfor the people, succeeds in doing well what legitimately may and oughtto be done by the Government towards the development of the resources ofthe country, and, at the same time, as far as possible confines itsinterference to helping the Irish people to help themselves, a whollynew spirit will be imported into the industrial life of the nation. 

The very nature of the work which the Department was called intoexistence to accomplish made it absolutely essential that it should keepin touch with the classes whom its work would most immediately affect, and without whose active co-operation no lasting good could be achieved. The machinery for this purpose was provided by the establishment of aCouncil of Agriculture and two Boards, one of the latter being concernedwith agriculture, rural industries, and inland fisheries, the other withtechnical instruction. These representative bodies, whose constitutionis interesting as a new departure in administration, were adapted fromsimilar continental councils which have been found by experience, inthose foreign countries which are Ireland's economic rivals, to be themost valuable of all means whereby the administration keeps in touchwith the agricultural and industrial classes, and becomes trulyresponsive to their needs and wishes. 

The Council of Agriculture consists of two members appointed by eachCounty Council (Cork being regarded as two counties and returning fourmembers), making in all sixty-eight persons. The Department also appointone half this number of persons, observing in their nomination the sameprovincial proportions as obtained in the appointments by the popularbodies. This adds thirty-four members, and makes in all one hundred andtwo Councillors, in addition to the President and Vice-President of theDepartment, who are _ex-officio_ members. Thus, if all the membersattended a Council meeting, the Vice-President would find himselfpresiding over a body as truly representative of the interests concernedas could be brought together, consisting, by a strange coincidence, ofexactly the same number as the Irish representatives in Parliament. 

The Council, which is appointed for a term of three years, the firstterm dating from the 1st April, 1900, has a two-fold function. It is, inthe first place, a deliberative assembly which must be convened by theDepartment at least once a year. The domain over which its deliberationsmay travel is certainly not restricted, as the Act defines its functionas that of "discussing matters of public interest in connection with anyof the purposes of this Act. " The view Mr. Gerald Balfour took was thatnothing but the new spirit he laboured to evoke would make his machinework. Although he gave the Vice-President statutory powers to makerules for the proper ordering of the Council debates, I have been wellcontent to rely upon the usual privileges of a chairman. I haveestimated beforehand the time required for the discussion of matters ofinquiry: the speakers have condensed their speeches accordingly, thebusiness has been expeditiously transacted, and in the mere exchange ofideas invaluable assistance has been given to the Department. 

The second function of the Council is exercised only at its firstmeeting, and consequently but once in three years. At this firsttriennial meeting it becomes an Electoral College. It divides itselfinto four Provincial Committees, each of which elects two members torepresent its province on the Agricultural Board and one member torepresent it on the Board of Technical Instruction. The AgriculturalBoard, which controls a sum of over £100, 000 a year, consists of twelvemembers, and as eight out of the twelve are elected by the fourProvincial Committees--the remaining four being appointed by theDepartment, one from each province--it will be seen that the Council ofAgriculture exercises an influence upon the administration commensuratewith its own representative character. The Board of TechnicalInstruction, consisting of twenty-one members, together with thePresident and Vice-President of the Department, has a less simpleconstitution, owing to the fact that it is concerned with the morecomplex life of the urban districts of the country. As I have said, theCouncil of Agriculture elects only four members--one for each province. The Department appoints four others; each of the County Boroughs ofDublin and Belfast appoints three members; the remaining four CountyBoroughs appoint one member each; a joint Committee of the Councils ofthe large urban districts surrounding Dublin appoint one member; onemember is appointed by the Commissioners of National Education, and onemember by the Intermediate Board of Education. 

The two Boards have to advise upon all matters submitted to them by theDepartment in connection, in the one case, with agriculture and otherrural industries and inland fisheries, and, in the other case, inconnection with Technical Instruction. The advisory powers of the Boardsare very real, for the expenditure of all moneys out of the Endowmentfunds is subject to their concurrence. Hence, while they have notspecific administrative powers and apparently have only the right ofveto, it is obvious that, if they wished, they might largely force theirown views upon the Department by refusing to sanction the expenditure ofmoney upon any of the Department's proposals, until these were somodified as practically to be their own proposals. It is, therefore, clear that the machinery can only work harmoniously and efficiently solong as it is moved by a right spirit. Above all it is necessary thatthe central administrative body should gain such a measure of popularconfidence as to enable it, without loss of influence, to resistproposals for expenditure upon schemes which might ensure greatpopularity at the moment, but would do permanent harm to the industrialcharacter we are all trying to build up. I need not fear contradictionat the hands of a single member of either Board when I say that up tothe present perfect harmony has reigned throughout. The utmostconsideration has been shown by the Boards for the difficulties whichthe Department have to overcome; and I think I may add that due regardhas been paid by the administrative authority to the representativecharacter and the legitimate wishes of the bodies which advise andlargely control it. 

The other statutory body attached to the Department has a significanceand potential importance in strange contrast to the humble place itoccupies in the statute book. The Agriculture and Technical Instruction(Ireland) Act, 1899, has, like many other Acts, a part entitled'Miscellaneous, ' in which the draughtsman's skill has attended tomultifarious practical details, and made provision for all manner ofcontingencies, many of which the layman might never have thought of orforeseen. Travelling expenses for Council, Boards, and Committees, casual vacancies thereon, a short title for the Act, and a seal for theDepartment, definitions, which show how little we know of our ownlanguage, and a host of kindred matters are included. In this miscellanyappears the following little clause:--

 For the purpose of co-ordinating educational administration there shall be established a Consultative Committee consisting of the following members:--

 (a. ) The Vice-President of the Department, who shall be chairman thereof;

 (b. ) One person to be appointed by the Commissioners of National Education;

 (c. ) One person to be appointed by the Intermediate Education Board;

 (d. ) One person to be appointed by the Agricultural Board; and

 (e. ) One person to be appointed by the Board of Technical Instruction. 

Now the real value of this clause, and in this I think it shows aconsumate statesmanship, lies not in what it says, but in what itsuggests. The Committee, it will be observed, has an immensely importantfunction, but no power beyond such authority as its representativecharacter may afford. Any attempt to deal with a large educationalproblem by a clause in a measure of this kind would have alarmed thewhole force of unco-ordinated pedagogy, and perhaps have wrecked theBill. The clause as it stands is in harmony with the whole spirit of thenew movement and of the legislation provided for its advancement. TheCommittee may be very useful in suggesting improvements in educationaladministration which will prevent unnecessary overlapping and lead toco-operation between the systems concerned. Indeed it has already madesuggestions of far-reaching importance, which have been acted upon bythe educational authorities represented upon it. As I have said in anearlier chapter when discussing Irish education from the practicalpoint of view, I have great faith in the efficacy of the economic factorin educational controversy, and this Committee is certainly in aposition to watch and pronounce on any defects in our educational systemwhich the new efforts to deal practically with our industrial andcommercial problems may disclose. 

There remains to be explained only one feature of the new administrativemachinery, and it is a very important one. The Recess Committee hadrecommended the adaptation to Ireland of a type of central institutionwhich it had found in successful operation on the Continent wherever ithad pursued its investigations. So far as schemes applicable to thewhole country were concerned, the central Department, assuming that itgained the confidence of the Council and Boards, might easily justifyits existence. But the greater part of its work, the Recess Committeesaw, would relate to special localities, and could not succeed withoutthe cordial co-operation of the people immediately concerned. This factbrought Mr. Gerald Balfour face to face with a problem which the RecessCommittee could not solve in its day, because, when it sat, there stillexisted the old grand jury system, though its early abolition had beenpromised. It was extremely fortunate that to the same minister fell thetask of framing both the Act of 1898, which revolutionised localgovernment, and the Act of 1899, now under review. The success withwhich these two Acts were linked together by the provisions of thelatter forms an interesting lesson in constructive statesmanship. Timewill, I believe, thoroughly discredit the hostile criticism whichwithheld its due mead of praise from the most fruitful policy which anyadministration had up to that time ever devised for the bettergovernment of Ireland. 

The local authorities created by the Act of 1898 provided the machineryfor enabling the representatives of the people to decide themselves, toa large extent, upon the nature of the particular measures to be adoptedin each locality and to carry out the schemes when formulated. The Actcreating the new Department empowered the council of any county or ofany urban district, or any two or more public bodies jointly, to appointcommittees, composed partly of members of the local bodies and partly ofco-opted persons, for the purpose of carrying out such of theDepartment's schemes as are of local, and not of general importance. True to the underlying principle of the new movement--the principle ofself-reliance and local effort--the Act lays it down that 'theDepartment shall not, in the absence of any special considerations, apply or approve of the application of money . .. To schemes in respectof which aid is not given out of money provided by local authorities orfrom other local sources. ' To meet this requirement the localauthorities are given the power of raising a limited rate for thepurposes of the Act. By these two simple provisions for localadministration and local combination, the people of each district weremade voluntarily contributory both in effort and in money, towards thenew practical developments, and given an interest in, andresponsibility for their success. It was of the utmost importance thatthese new local authorities should be practically interested in thebusiness concerns of the country which the Department was to serve. Mr. Gerald Balfour himself, in introducing the Local Government Bill, hadshown that he was under no illusion as to the possible disappointment towhich his great democratic experiment might at first give rise. Heanticipated that it would "work through failure to success. " To put itplainly, the new bodies might devote a great deal of attention topolitics and very little to business. I am told by those best qualifiedto form an opinion (some of my informants having been, to say the least, sceptical as to the wisdom of the experiment), that notwithstanding someextravagances in particular instances, it can already be statedpositively that local government in Ireland, taken as a whole, has notsuffered in efficiency by the revolution which it has undergone. This isthe opinion of officials of the Local Government Board, [44] and refersmainly to the transaction of the fiscal business of the new localauthorities. From a different point of observation I shall presentlybear witness to a display of administrative capacity on the part of themany statutory committees, appointed by County, Borough, and DistrictCouncils to co-operate with the Department, which is most creditable tothe thought and feeling of the people. 

It would be quite unfair to a large body of farmers in Ireland if, indescribing the administrative machinery for carrying out an economicpolicy based upon self-help and dependent for its success upon theconciliatory spirit abroad in the country, I were to ignore the partplayed by the large number of co-operative associations, theorganisation, work and multiplication of which have been described in aformer chapter. The Recess Committee, in their enquiries, found that, inthe countries whose competition Ireland feels most keenly, Departmentsof Agriculture had come to recognise it as an axiom of their policy thatwithout organisation for economic purposes amongst the agriculturalclasses, State aid to agriculture must be largely ineffectual, and evenmischievous. Such Departments devote a considerable part of theirefforts to promoting agricultural organisation. Short a time as thisDepartment has been in existence it has had some striking evidence ofthe justice of these views. As will be seen from the First Annual Reportof the Department, it was only where the farmers were organised inproperly representative societies that many of the lessons theDepartment had to teach could effectually reach the farming classes, orthat many of the agricultural experiments intended for their guidancecould be profitably carried out. Although these experiment schemes wereissued to the County Councils and the agricultural public generally, itwas only the farmers organised in societies who were really in aposition to take part in them. Some of these experiments, indeed, couldnot be carried out at all except through such societies. 

Both for the sake of efficiency in its educational work, and of economyin administration, the Department would be obliged to lay stress on thevalue of organisation. [45] But there are other reasons for its doing so:industrial, moral, and social. In an able critique upon Bodley's_France_ Madame Darmesteter, writing in the _Contemporary Review_, July, 1898, points out that even so well informed an observer of French lifeas the author of that remarkable book failed to appreciate the steadyinginfluence exercised upon the French body politic by the network ofvoluntary associations, the _syndicats agricoles_, which are theanalogues and, to some extent, the prototypes, in France of ouragricultural societies in Ireland. The late Mr. Hanbury, during his toobrief career as President of the Board of Agriculture, frequently dweltupon the importance of organising similar associations in England as anecessary step in the development of the new agricultural policy whichhe foreshadowed. His successor, Lord Onslow, has fully endorsed hisviews, and in his speeches is to be found the same appreciation of theexemplary self-reliance of the Irish farmers. I have already referred tothe keen interest which both agricultural reformers and English andWelsh County Councils have been taking in the unexpectedly progressiveefforts of the Irish farmers to reorganise their industry and placethemselves in a position to take advantage of State assistance. Ibelieve that our farmers are going to the root of things, and that dueweight should be given to the silent force of organised self-help bythose who would estimate the degree in which the aims and sanguineanticipations of the new movement in Ireland are likely to be realised. 

And it is not only for its foundation upon self-reliance that the latestdevelopment of Irish Government will have a living interest foreconomists and students of political philosophy. They will see in thefacts under review a rapid and altogether healthy evolution of the Irishpolicy so honourably associated with the name of Mr. Arthur Balfour. HisChief Secretaryship, when all its storm and stress have been forgotten, will be remembered for the opening up of the desolate, poverty-strickenwestern seaboard by light railways, and for the creation of theCongested Districts Board. The latter institution has gained so wideand, as I think, well merited popularity, that many thought itsextension to other parts of Ireland would have been a simpler and safermethod of procedure than that actually recommended by the RecessCommittee, and adopted by Mr. Gerald Balfour. The Land Act of 1891applied a treatment to the problem of the congested districts--a problemof economic depression and industrial backwardness, differing rather indegree than in kind from the economic problem of the greater part ofrural Ireland--as simple as it was new. A large capital sum of Irishmoneys was handed over to an unpaid commission consisting of Irishmenwho were acquainted with the local circumstances, and who were in aposition to give their services to a public philanthropic purpose. Theywere given the widest discretion in the expenditure of the interest ofthis capital sum, and from time to time their income has been augmentedfrom annually voted moneys. They were restricted only to measurescalculated permanently to improve the condition of the people, asdistinct from measures affording temporary relief. 

I agree with those who hold that Mr. Arthur Balfour's plan was the bestthat could be adopted at the moment. But events have marched rapidlysince 1891, and wholly new possibilities in the sphere of Irish economiclegislation and administration have been revealed. A new Irish mind hasnow to be taken into account, and to be made part of any ameliorativeIrish policy. Hence it was not only possible, but desirable, toadminister State help more democratically in 1899 than in 1891. Thepolicy of the Congested Districts Board was a notable advance upon theinaction of the State in the pre-famine times, and upon the system ofdoles and somewhat objectless relief works of the latter half of thenineteenth century; but the policy of the new departure now under reviewwas no less notable a departure from the paternalism of the CongestedDistricts Board. When that body was called into existence it was thoughtnecessary to rely on persons nominated by the Government. When theDepartment was created eight years later it was found possible, owing tothe broadening of the basis of local government and to the moral andsocial effect of the new movement, to rely largely on the advice andassistance of persons selected by the people themselves. 

The two departments are in constant consultation as to the co-ordinationof their work, so as to avoid conflict of administrative system andsociological principle in adjoining districts; and much has already beendone in this direction. My own experience has not only made me a firmbeliever in the principle of self-help, but I carry my belief to theextreme length of holding that the poorer a community is the moreessential is it to throw it as much as possible on its own resources, inorder to develop self-reliance. I recognise, however, the undesirabilityof too sudden changes of system in these matters. Meanwhile, I may addin this connection that the Wyndham Land Act enormously increases theimportance of the Congested Districts Board in regard to its mainfunction--that of dealing directly with congestion, by the purchase andresettlement of estates, the migration of families, and the enlargementof holdings. [46]

I have now said enough about the aims and objects, the constitution andpowers, and the relations with other Governmental institutions, of thenew Department, to enable the reader to form a fairly accurate estimateof its general character, scope and purpose. From what it is I shallpass in the next chapter to what it does, and there I must describe itseveryday work in some detail. But I wish I could also give the reader anadequate picture of the surge of activities raised by the first plungeof the Department into Irish life and thought. After a time the torrentof business made channels for itself and went on in a more orderlyfashion; practical ideas and promising openings were sifted out at anearly stage of their approach to the Department from those which wereneither one nor the other; time was economised, work distributed, andthe functions of demand and supply in relation to the Department's workthroughout Ireland were brought into proper adjustment with each other. Yet, even at first, to a sympathetic and understanding view, the wasteof time and thought involved in dealing with impossible projects anddispelling false hopes was compensated for by the evidence forced uponus that the Irish people had no notion of regarding the Department as analien institution with which they need concern themselves but little, however much it might concern itself with them. They were never for amoment in doubt as to its real meaning and purpose. They meant to makeit their own and to utilise it in the uplifting of their country. Nodescription of the machinery of the institution could explain the realplace which it took in the life of the country from the very beginning. But perhaps it may give the reader a more living interest in this partof the story, and a more living picture of the situation, if I try toconvey to his mind some of the impressions left on my own, by myexperiences during the period immediately following the projection ofthis new phenomenon into Irish consciousness. 

When in Upper Merrion-street, Dublin, opposite to the Land Commission, big brass plates appeared upon the doors of a row of houses announcingthat there was domiciled the Department of Agriculture and TechnicalInstruction, the average man in the street might have been expected tomurmur, 'Another Castle Board, ' and pass on. It was not long, however, before our visiting list became somewhat embarrassing. We have since gotdown, as I have said, to a more humdrum, though no less interesting, official life inside the Department. But let the reader imagine himselfto have been concealed behind a screen in my office on a day when someevent, like the Dublin Horse Show, brought crowds in from the country tothe Irish capital. Such an experience would certainly have given him anew understanding of some then neglected men and things. While I wasopening the morning's letters and dealing with "Files" marked "urgent, "he would see nothing to distinguish my day's work from that of otherministers, who act as a link between the permanent officials of aspending Department and the Government of the day. But presently astream of callers would set in, and he would begin to realise that theminister is, in this case, a human link of another kind--a link betweenthe people and the Government. A courteous and discreet PrivateSecretary, having attended to those who have come to the wrongdepartment, and to those who are satisfied with an interview with him orwith the officer who would have to attend to their particular business, brings into my not august presence a procession of all sorts andconditions of men. Some know me personally, some bring letters ofintroduction or want to see me on questions of policy. Others--for thesethe human link is most needed--must see the ultimate source ofresponsibility, which, in Ireland, whether it be head of a family or ofa Department, is reduced from the abstract to the concrete by thepregnant pronoun 'himself. ' I cannot reveal confidences, but I may givea few typical instances of, let us say, callers who might have called. 

First comes a visitor, who turns out to be a 'man with an idea, ' justhome from an unpronounceable address in Scandinavia. He has come to tellme that we have in Ireland a perfect gold mine, if we only knew it--inextent never was there such a gold field--no illusory pockets--goodpayable stuff in sight for centuries to come--and so on for fiveprecious minutes, which seem like half a day, during which I haverealised that he is an inventor, and that it is no good asking him tocome to the point. But I keep my eye riveted on his leather bag which isfilled to bursting point, and manifest an intelligent interest andburning curiosity. The suggestion works, and out of the bag come blackbars and balls, samples of fabrics ranging from sack-cloth to finelinen, buttons, combs, papers for packing and for polite correspondence, bottles of queer black fluid, and a host of other miscellaneous wares. Irealise that the particular solution of the Irish Question which isabout to be unfolded is the utilisation of our bogs. Well, this _is_one of the problems with which we have to deal. It is physicallypossible to make almost anything out of this Irish asset, from mosslitter to billiard balls, and though one would not think it, aeons ofenergy have been stored in these inert looking wastes by the apparentlyunsympathetic sun, energy which some think may, before long, beconverted into electricity to work all the smokeless factories which therising generation are to see. Indeed, the vista of possibilities isendless, the only serious problem that remains to be solved being 'howto make it pay, ' and upon that aspect of the question, unhappily, myvisitor had no light to throw. 

The next visitor, who brings with him a son and a daughter, is himselfthe product of an Irish bog in the wildest of the wilds. His ParishPriest had sent him to me. A little awkwardness, which is soondispelled, and the point is reached. This fine specimen of the 'bone andsinew' has had a hard struggle to bring up his 'long family'; but, witha capable wife, who makes the most of the _res angusta domi_--of thepig, the poultry, and even of the butter from the little black cows onthe mountain--he has risen to the extent of his opportunities. Thechildren are all doing something. Lace and crochet come out of thecabin, the yarn from the wool of the 'mountainy' sheep, carded and spunat home, is feeding the latest type of hosiery knitting machine and thehereditary handloom. The story of this man's life which was written tome by the priest cannot find space here. The immediate object of hisvisit is to get his eldest daughter trained as a poultry instructress totake part in some of the 'County Schemes' under the Department, and toobtain for his eldest son, who has distinguished himself under thetuition of the Christian Brothers, a travelling scholarship. For this hehas been recommended by his teachers. They had marked this bright boyout as an ideal agricultural instructor, and if I could give the readerall the particulars of the case it would be a rare illustration of thelatent human resources we mean to develop in the Ireland that is to be. I explain that the young man must pass a qualifying examination, but amglad to be able to admit that the circumstances of his life, which wouldhave to be taken into account in deciding between the qualified, are inhis case of a kind likely to secure favourable consideration. 

And now enters a sporting friend of mine, a 'practical angler, ' whocomes with a very familiar tale of woe. The state of the salmonfisheries is deplorable: if the Department does not fulfil its obviousduties there will not be a salmon in Ireland outside a museum in tenyears more. He has lived for forty-five years on the banks of a salmonriver, and he knows that I don't fish. But this much the conversationreveals: his own knowledge of the subject is confined to the piece ofriver he happens to own, the gossip he hears at his club, and the ideasof the particular poacher he employs as his gillie. His suggested remedyis the abolition of all netting. But I have to tell him that only theday before I had a deputation from the net fishermen in the estuary ofthis very river, whose bitter complaint was that this 'poor man'sindustry' was being destroyed by the mackerel and herring nets round thecoast, and--I thought my friend would have a fit--by the way in whichthe gentlemen on the upper waters neglect their duty of protecting thespawning fish! Some belonging to the lower water interest carried theirscepticism as to the efficacy of artificial propagation to the length ofbelieving that hatcheries are partially responsible for the decrease. Asso often happens, the opposing interests, disagreeing on all else, findthat best of peacemakers, a common enemy, in the Government. TheDepartment is responsible--for two opposite reasons, it is true, butsomehow they seem to confirm each other. We must labour to find someother common ground, starting from the recognition that the salmonfisheries are a national asset which must be made to subserve thegeneral public interest. I assure my friend that when all parties maketheir proper contribution in effort and in cash, the Department will notbe backward in doing their part. 

At the end of this interview a messenger brings a telegram for 'himself'from a stockowner in a remote district. [47] 'My pigs, ' runs one of themost businesslike communications I ever received, 'are all spotted. What shall I do?' I send it to the Veterinary Branch, which, with theBoard of Agriculture in England, is engaged in a scheme for staying theravages of swine fever, a scheme into which the late Mr. Hanbury threwhimself with his characteristic energy. The problem is of immenseimportance, and the difficulty is not mainly quadrupedal. Unless thepolice 'spot' the spotted pigs, we too often hear nothing about them. Iam sure it must be daily brought home to the English Board, as it is tothe Irish Department, that an enormous addition might be made to thewealth of the country if our veterinary officers were intelligently andactively aided, in their difficult duties for the protection of ourflocks and herds, by those most immediately concerned. 

So far it has been an interesting morning bright with the activities outof which the future is to be made. The element of hope has predominated, but now comes a visitor who wishes to see me upon the one part of myduties and responsibilities which is distasteful to me--the exercise ofpatronage. He has been unloaded upon me by an influential person, uponwhom he has more legitimate claims than upon the Department. He hasprepared the way for a favourable reception by getting his friends towrite to my friends, many of whom have already fulfilled a promise tointerview me in his behalf. His mother and two maiden aunts have writtenletters which have drawn from my poor Private Secretary, who has to readthem all, the dry quotation, 'there's such a thing as being so good asto be good for nothing. ' The young hopeful quickly puts an end to myspeculations as to the exact capacity in which he means to serve theDepartment by applying for an inspectorship. I ask him what he proposesto inspect, and the sum and substance of his reply is that he is notparticular, but would not mind beginning at a moderate salary, say £200a year. As for his qualifications, they are a sadly minus quantity, hisblighted career having included failure for the army, and a clerkship ina bank, which only lasted a week when he proved to be deficient in thesecond and dangerous in the third of the three R's. His case reminds meof a story of my ranching days, which the exercise of patronage has sooften recalled to my mind that I must out with it. Riding into camp oneevening, I turned my horse loose and got some supper, which was a vilelycooked meal even for a cow camp. Recognising in the cook a cowboy I hadformerly employed, I said to him, 'You were a way up cow hand, but ascook you are no account. Why did you give up riding and take to cooking?What are your qualifications as a cook any way?' 'Qualifications!' hereplied, 'why, don't you know I've got varicose veins?' My caller'squalifications are of an equally negative description, though not of aphysical kind. He is one of the young Micawbers, to whom the Departmentfrom its first inception has been the something which was to turn up. Hehad, of course, testimonials which in any other country would havecommanded success by their terms and the position of the signatories, but which in Ireland only illustrate the charity with which we condoneour moral cowardice under the name of good nature. I am glad when thisinterview closes. 

One more type--a Nationalist Member of Parliament! He does not oftendarken the door of a Government office--they all have the samestructural defect, no front stairs--he never has asked and never thoughthe would ask anything from the Government. But he is interested in somepoor fishermen of County Clare who pursue their calling under crueldisadvantages for want of the protection from the Atlantic rollers whicha small breakwater would afford. It is true that they were the worstconstituents he had--- went against him in 'The Split, '--but if I sawhow they lived, and so on. I knew all about the case. A breakwater to beof any use would cost a very large sum, and the local authority, thoughsympathetic, did not see their way to contribute their proportion, andwithout a local contribution, I explained, the Department could not, consistently with its principles, unless in most exceptional--Here hebreaks in: 'Oh! that red tape. You're as bad as the rest--exceptional, indeed! Why, everything is exceptional in my constituency. I am a bitthat way myself. But, seriously, the condition of these poor peoplewould move even a Government official. Besides, you remember the night Imade thirteen speeches on the Naval Estimates--the Government wanted alittle matter of twenty millions--and you met me in the Lobby and toldme you wished to go to bed, and asked me what I really wanted, and--Iam always reasonable--I said I would pass the whole Naval Programme if Igot the Government to give them a boat-slip at Ballyduck. --"Done!" yousaid, and we both went home. --I believe you knew that I had gotconstituency matters mixed up, that Ballyduck was inland, and that itwas Ballycrow that I meant to say. --But you won't deny that you areunder a moral obligation. '

Well, I would go into the matter again very carefully--for I thought wemight help these fishermen in some other way--and write to him. Heleaves me; and, while outside the door he travels over the main pointswith my Private Secretary, the lights and shades in the picture whichthis strange personality has left on my mind throw me back behind thepractical things of to-day. In Parliament facing the Sassanach, inIreland facing their police, he has for years--the best years of hislife--displayed the same love of fighting for fighting's sake. In theriots he has provoked, and they are not a few, he is ever regardless ofhis own skin, and would be truly miserable if he inflicted any seriousbodily harm on a human being--even a landlord. It is impossible not tolike this very human anachronism, who, within the limitations imposed bythe convenience of a citizenship to which he unwillingly belongs, doesbattle

 For Faith, and Fame, and Honour, and the ruined hearths of Clare. 

The reader may take all this as fiction. I am sure no one will annoy meby trying on any of the caps I have displayed on the counter of myshop. What I do fear is that the picture of some of my duties which Ihave given may have made a wrong impression of the Department's workupon the reader's mind. He may have come to the conclusion that, contrary to all the principles laid down, an attempt was being made todo for the people things which the new movement was to induce the peopleto do for themselves. The Department may appear to be using its officialposition and Government funds to constitute itself a sort of UniversalProvidence, exercising an authority and a discretion over matters uponwhich in any progressive community the people must decide forthemselves. However near to the appearances such an impression might be, nothing could be further from the facts. If I have helped the reader tounravel the tangled skein of our national life, if I have sufficientlyrevealed the mind of the new movement to show that there is in it 'ascheme of things entire, ' it should be quite clear that the deliberateintentions both of Mr. Gerald Balfour and of those Irishmen whom he tookinto his confidence are being fulfilled in letter and in spirit. It onlyremains for me to attempt an adequate description of the work of theDepartment created by that Chief Secretary, and, above all, of the wayin which the people themselves are playing the part which hisstatesmanship assigned to them. 

FOOTNOTES:

[44] See Report of the Local Government Board, 1901-2. 

[45] See Annual General Report of the Department 1900-1901, pp. 25-27. 

[46] _Cf. Ante_, pp. 46-49. 

[47] No fiction about this, nor about the following letter to theSecretary:--

'The Scratatory, Vitny Dept. 

'Honord Sir, 'I want to let ye know the terible state we're in now. Al the pigs abouthere is dyin in showers. Send down a Vit at oncet. '

CHAPTER X. 

GOVERNMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. 

In the preceding chapter I attempted to give to the reader a roughimpression of the general purpose and miscellaneous functions of the newDepartment. I described in some detail the constitution and powers ofthe Council of Agriculture--a sort of Business Parliament--whichcriticises our doings and elects representatives on our Boards; and ofthe two Boards which, in addition to their advisory functions, possessthe power of the purse. I laid special stress upon the important partthese instruments of the popular will were intended to play as a linkbetween the people and the Department. I gave a similar description andexplanation of the Committees of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, appointed by local representative bodies, by means of which the peoplewere brought into touch with the local as distinct from the centralwork, and made responsible for its success. The details were necessarilydull; and so also must be those which will now be required in order toindicate the general nature and scope of the work for the accomplishmentof which all this machinery was designed. Yet I am not without hopethat even the general reader may find a deep human interest in thepractical endeavour of the humbler classes of my fellow-countrymen toreconstruct their national life upon the solid foundation of honestwork. 

The Department has at the time of writing been in existence for threeyears, the term of office, it will be remembered, of the Council ofAgriculture and of the two Boards. It would be unreasonable to expect inso short a time any great achievement; but the understanding critic willattach importance rather to the spirit in which the work was approachedthan to the actual amount of work which was accomplished. He may saythat no true estimate of its value can be formed until the enthusiasmaroused by its novelty has had time to wear off. Those of us who knowthe real character of the work are quite satisfied that the interestwhich it aroused during the period in which the people had yet to graspits meaning and utility is not likely to become less real as the blossomfades and the fruit begins to swell. The attitude of the Irish peopletowards the Department and its work has not been that of a child towardsa new toy, but of a full-grown man towards a piece of his life's work, upon which he feels that he entered all too late. Indeed, so quicklyhave the people grasped the significance of the new opportunities formaterial advancement now placed within their reach, that the Departmenthas had to carry out, and to assist the statutory local committees incarrying out, a number and variety of schemes which, at any rate, provedthat public opinion did not regard it as a transitory experiment; butas a much-needed institution which, if properly utilised, might do muchto make up for lost time, and which, in any case, had come to stay. Theamount of the work which we were thus constrained to undertake wassomewhat embarrassing; but so general and so genuine was the desire tomake a start that we have done our best to keep pace with the localdemands for immediate action. The staff of the Department caught thespirit in which the task had been set by the country, and showed a keenanxiety to get to work; and I am glad to have an opportunity ofacknowledging that both the indoor and outdoor support it has receivedleaves the Department without excuse if it has not already justified itsexistence. 

I shall deal as mercifully as I can with my readers in helping themtowards an understanding of what has been actually done in the threeyears under review. I am aware that if I were to attempt a descriptionof all the schemes which the variety of local needs suggested, and inthe execution of which the assistance of the many-sided Department wassought and obtained, I should lose the patient readers, who have notalready fainted by the way, in a jungle where they could not see thewood for the trees. These things can be studied by thoseinterested, --and they I hope, in Ireland at any rate, are not few--inthe Annual Reports and other official publications of the Department. For the general reader I must try to indicate in broad outline thenature and scope of that side of the new movement which seeks tosupplement organised self-help and open the way for individualenterprise by a well considered measure of State assistance. I shall bemore than satisfied if I succeed in giving him a clear insight into themanner in which the delicate task of making State interference with thebusiness of the people not only harmless but beneficial has been setabout. It is obvious that the fulfilment of this object must depend uponthe soundness of the economic policy pursued, and upon the establishmentand maintenance of mutual confidence between the central authority andthe popular representative bodies through which the people utilise thenew facilities afforded by the State. 

I think the best way of giving the information which is required for anunderstanding of our somewhat complicated scheme for agricultural andindustrial development under democratic control is first to explain theline of demarcation which we have drawn between the respective functionsof the Department and the people's committees throughout the country;and then I must give a rapid description of some of the most importantfeatures of the Department's policy and programme. I shall add asufficiency of detail from the actual work accomplished in theseorganising and experimental years, to illustrate both the difficultieswhich are incidental to such a policy, and the manner in which thesedifficulties may be surmounted. 

When it became manifest that both the country and the Department wereanxious to drive ahead, the first thing to do was to lay down a _modusoperandi_ which would assign to the local and central bodies theirproper shares in the work and responsibilities and secure some degree oforder and uniformity in administration. This was quickly done, and theplan adopted works smoothly. The Department gives the local committeegeneral information as to the kind of purpose to which it can legallyand properly apply the funds jointly contributed from the rates and thecentral exchequer. The committee, after full consideration of theconditions, needs and industrial environment of the community for whichit acts, selects certain definite projects which it considers mostapplicable to its district, allocates the amount required to eachproject, and sends the scheme to the Department for its approval. Whenthe scheme is formally approved, it becomes the official scheme in thelocality for the current year; and the local committee has to carry itout. 

Although harmony now usually exists between the local and centralauthorities to the advantage and comfort of both, a considerable amountof friction was inevitable until they got to understand each other. Theoccasional over-riding of local desires by the 'autocratic' Department, which in the first rush of its work had to act in a somewhat peremptoryfashion, was, no doubt, irritating. Now, however, it is generallyrecognised that the central body, having not only the advice of itsexperts and access to information from similar Departments in othercountries to guide it, but also being in a position to profit by theexchange of ideas which is constantly going on between it and all thelocal committees in Ireland, is in a position of special advantage fordeciding as to the bearing of local schemes upon national interests, andsometimes even as to their soundness from a purely local point of view. 

Passing now from the conditions under which the Department's work isdone, we come to review some typical portions of the work itself so faras it has proceeded. This falls naturally, both as regards that which isdone by the central authority for the country at large and that which islocally administered, into two divisions. The first consists of directaid to agriculture and other rural industries, and to sea and inlandfisheries. The second consists of indirect aid given to these objects, and also to town manufactures and commerce, through education--a termwhich must be interpreted in its widest sense. Needless to say, directaids, being tangible and immediately beneficial, are the more popular: abull, a boat, or a hand-loom is more readily appreciated than a lecture, a leaflet, or an idea. Yet in the Department we all realise--and, whatis more important, the people are coming to realise--that by far themost important work we have to do is that which belongs to the sphere ofeducation, especially education which has a distinctly practical aim. Tothis branch of the subject I shall, therefore, first direct the reader'sattention. 

It must be remembered that, for reasons fully set out in the earlierportions of the book, I am treating the Irish Question as being, in itsmost important economic and social aspects, the problem of rural life. The Department's scheme of technical instruction, therefore, need nothere be detailed in its application to the needs of our fewmanufacturing towns, but only in its application to agriculture and thesubsidiary industries. I do not suggest that the questions relating tothe revival of industry in our large manufacturing centres andprovincial towns are not of the first importance. The local authoritiesin these places have eagerly come into the movement, and the Departmenthas already taken part in founding, in our cities and larger towns, comprehensive schemes of technical education, as to the outcome of whichwe have every reason to be hopeful. Not only that, but it is highlynecessary for the Department to consider these schemes in close relationto its work upon the more specially rural problems, for, as I have saidelsewhere, [48] the interdependence of town and country, and theestablishment of proper relations between their systems of industry andeducation, is a prime factor in Irish prosperity. But the rural problem, as I have so often reiterated, is the core of the Irish Question; and todeal at all adequately with technical education, so far as we carry iton upon lines common both to Great Britain and Ireland, would lead ustoo far afield on the present occasion. I must, therefore, contentmyself with indicating my reasons for leaving it rather on one side, andpass on to a brief description of the Department's educational work inrespect of its two-fold aim of developing agriculture and the subsidiaryindustries. 

In the case of agriculture our task is perfectly plain. We know prettywell what we want to do, for we are dealing with an existing industry, and with known conditions. The productivity of the soil, the demand ofthe market, the means of transport from the one to the other, are alleasily ascertainable. What most needs to be provided in Ireland is amuch higher technical skill, a more advanced scientific and commercialknowledge, as applied to agricultural production and distribution. [49]This, in our belief, depends, more than upon any other agency, upon thesoundness of the education which is provided to develop the capacitiesof those in charge of these operations. Our chief difficulty is that ofco-ordinating our teaching of technical agriculture with the generaleducational systems of the country--a difficulty which the othereducational authorities are all united with us in seeking to remove. 

When, on the other hand, education--again, I believe, the chief agencyfor the purpose--is considered as a means for the creation of newindustries, we come face to face with a wholly different problem. Wehave no longer an industry which we are seeking to foster and developgoing on under our eyes, steadying us in our theorising, and in ourexperimenting upon the mind of the worker, by bringing us into closetouch with the actual conditions of his work. Our chief aim must be todevelop his adaptability for the ever-changing and, we hope, improvingeconomic industrial conditions amidst which he will have to work. Butunless we can satisfy parents that the schemes of development in whichtheir children are being educated to take their place have an assuredprospect of practical realisation, they will naturally prefer aninferior teaching which seems to them to offer a better prospect of animmediate wage or salary. The teachers in the secondary schools of thecountry, who, so far, have shown a desire to assist us in giving anindustrial and commercial direction to our educational policy, wouldalso in that event have to meet the wishes of the parents; and thuseducation would fall back into the old rut with its cramming, itsexaminations and result fees--all leading to the multiplication ofclerks and professional men, and preventing us from turning the thoughtsand energies of the people towards productive occupations. 

The natural trend of our educational policy will now be clear. Leavingout of account large towns, where our problem is, as I have said, thesame as that which confronts the industrial classes in the manufacturingcentres of Great Britain, we are chiefly concerned with the applicationof science to the cultivation of the soil and the improvement of livestock, and of business principles to the commercial side of farming;with the teaching of dairying, horticulture, apiculture, and what hasbeen called farm-yard lore, outside the rural home, and with domesticeconomy inside. On the industrial as distinct from the agricultural sideof the work in rural localities, technical instruction must be directedtowards the development of subsidiary rural industries. 

We early came to the conclusion that we could not expect to find asystem which we could simply transplant from some other country. Thesystem adopted in Great Britain, where each county or group of countiesmaintains an agricultural college and an experimental farm, and manymore elaborate systems on the continent, were all found on examinationto be inapplicable to our own rural conditions, unsuitable to thenational character, and unrelated to the history of our agriculture. Many of these schemes might have turned out a few highly qualifiedauthorities on the theory of agriculture, and even good practicaldirectors for those who farm on a large scale. But we are dealing with acountry with great possibilities from an agricultural point of view, butwhere, nevertheless, agriculture in many parts is in a very backwardcondition, and where it is probably safe to say that three-fifths of thefarms are crowded on one-fourth of the land. We are dealing with acommunity with whom the systems of elementary, secondary and highereducation have not tended to prepare the student for agriculturalpursuits. A system of agricultural and domestic education suited to thewants of those who are to farm the land must recognise and foster thenew spirit of self-help and hope which is springing up in the country, and must be made so interesting as to become a serious rival to the racemeeting and the public-house. The daily drudgery of farm work must becounteracted by the ambition to possess the best stock, the neatesthomestead and fences, the cleanest and the best tilled fields. Theunsolved problem of agricultural education is to devise a system whichwill reach down to the small working farmers who form the great bulk ofthe wealth producers of Ireland, to give them new hope, a new interest, new knowledge and, I might add, a new industrial character. 

We were met at the outset by the difficulty which would apply to anysystem--that of finding trained teachers. This deficiency was felt intwo directions--first, in the secondary school, in which the preliminaryscientific studies should be undertaken, which are necessary to enable alad to profit by more advanced instruction later on; and, secondly, inthe special training of technical agriculture. It would not have beendesirable to overcome these difficulties by any very extensiveimportation of teachers from without. I certainly hold the occasionalimportation of teachers with outside experience to be most desirable, but these should not form more than a leaven of the pedagogic lump; forit is a serious hindrance when to the task of familiarising studentswith a new system of education there is added that of familiarising alarge body of teachers with the intellectual, social and economicconditions of the people among whom they are to work. 

The manner in which the teacher difficulty was surmounted may be brieflystated, first, as regards the school, and, secondly, as regards theteaching of agriculture. Those already engaged in the teachingprofession could not be relegated again to the _status pupillaris_. There was only one way in which they could assist us to overcome thedifficulty, and that involved a great sacrifice on their part, thesacrifice of their well-earned vacation, but a sacrifice which theywillingly made. The teachers most urgently needed were those ofpractical science, with knowledge of experimental work; and about fivehundred teachers from secondary schools, in order to qualify themselves, have attended summer courses specially organised by the Department atseveral centres in Ireland, while about four hundred have availedthemselves of special summer courses in such subjects as drawing, manualinstruction, domestic economy, building construction, wood-carving andmodelling. 

For the provision of a future supply of thoroughly trained teachers ofscience and of technology, including agriculture, the Royal College ofScience has been re-organised. Although this institution was broughtunder the new conditions little more than three years ago, it will beseen that no time has been lost when I state that the first batch of menwho have received a three years' course of training under the newprogramme are already at work under County Committees. For the trainingof these teachers, scholarships had to be provided, and new professorsand teachers, particularly in agriculture, had to be appointed. 

In regard to agricultural instruction we had to begin by carefullyconsidering what, among many alternative plans, should be our immediateas well as our more remote aims. The Department's officers had studiedContinental systems, and some of them had taken part in establishingsystems of agricultural education in Great Britain. But it was not untilthe summer of 1901 that we had sufficiently studied the question inIreland itself, with direct reference to the history, the environment, and the ideals of the people, to justify us in initiating a policy orformulating a definite programme for its execution. [50] The main objectwas to secure for the youth of the present generation who will later beconcerned with agriculture, sound and thorough instruction in itsprinciples and practice. Everyone who has given any thought to thesubject knows how difficult it is to teach technical agriculture unlessprovision has been made in the general education of the country forinstruction in those fundamental principles of science which, recognisedor unrecognised, lie at the root of, and profoundly influenceagricultural practice. This foundation, as I have shown, is now beinglaid in Ireland. In our scheme the boy who has managed to avail himselfof a two or three years' course of practical science in one of thesecondary schools is then prepared to take full advantage of courses oftechnology, and will have to make up his mind as to the career he is tofollow. We are now considering the case of a boy who is going to becomea farmer, the class to which we chiefly look for the future well-beingof Ireland. It is necessary that he should be taught the practical aswell as the technical side of agriculture. The practical work he canlearn upon his father's farm during spring and summer, and the technicalby continuing his studies during the winter months in a school ofagriculture. The establishment of such winter schools is incontemplation. But, in the meanwhile, to bring home to farmers theadvantages of a first-class agricultural education for their sons, andat the same time to teach these farmers the more practical applicationof science to agriculture, the Department decided on a preliminaryperiod of Itinerant Instruction. 

The teacher difficulty, experienced on all sides of our work, wasprobably felt more acutely in regard to the specialised teachers ofagriculture than in any other connection. Here it was necessary to takethe young men brought up upon farms and possessed of the normalqualifications of the Irish practical farmer. We then had to make theminto teachers by adding to their inherited and home-manufacturedcapacities a scientific training. In the training of agriculturalteachers the Albert Institute, Glasnevin, has been utilised by theDepartment. This school has also been re-organised to meet the newprogramme, and it will probably form in future a link between the winterschools of agriculture and the Royal College of Science in the trainingof our agricultural teachers. 

Partly by these methods, partly by the temporary engagement of lecturerson special subjects, and partly by the appointment of trained teachersfrom England or Scotland, the system of itinerant instruction has beenbrought into operation as fully as could be expected in the time. Already half the County Committees have been provided with Countyinstructors, while the remainder have nearly all drafted schemes andallocated funds for a similar purpose, ready to go to work as soon asmore teachers have been trained. 

The Itinerant Instruction scheme, it may be pointed out, besides oneobvious, has another less immediately recognisable purpose. The directbusiness of the itinerant instructor is, by the aid of experimentalplots, simple lectures, and demonstrations, to teach the farmers of hisdistrict as much as they can take in without the scientific preparationin which, as adults who have grown up under the old system of education, they are still lacking. But he does more than that. He not only conductsa school for adults, but in the very process of instruction henecessarily makes them aware of the vital necessity of a school for theyoung; and they begin, as parents, to understand and to desire the kindof instruction in the schools of the country which will prepare theirchildren to take more advantage of the advanced teaching in agriculturethan they themselves can ever hope to do. 

This preparation is provided for as follows. To the Department, as hasalready been explained, was handed over the administration of theScience and Art Grants formerly administered by South Kensington. TheDepartment accordingly drew up a programme of experimental science anddrawing, carrying capitation grants, for day secondary schools. TheIntermediate Education Board, acting on the suggestion of theConsultative Committee for Co-ordinating Education, [51] adopted thisprogramme and at the same time undertook to accept the reports of theDepartment's inspectors as the basis of their awards in the new"subject. " These steps insured the rapid and general introduction ofthis practical teaching in secondary schools, and, owing particularly tothe spirit in which their authorities and teaching staffs accepted theinnovation, the work has been carried out with the happiest results. 

I now come to the subjects grouped together under the classification of'domestic economy. ' These differ only in detail in their application totown and country. To these subjects the Department attaches greatimportance. In the industrial life of manufacturing towns I am persuadedthat far too little thought has been given to this element of industrialefficiency. From a purely economic point of view a saving in theworker's income due to superior housewifery is equivalent to an increasein his earnings; but, morally, the superior thrift is, of course, immensely more important. "Without economy, " says Dr. Johnson, "none canbe rich, and with it few can be poor, " and the education which onlyincreases the productiveness of labour and neglects the principles ofwise spending will place us at a disadvantage in the great industrialstruggle. When we come to consider domestic economy as an agency forimproving the conditions of the peasant home, not only by thrift, but byincreasing the general attractiveness of home life, the introduction ofa sound system of domestic economy teaching becomes not only important, but vital. 

The establishment of such a system and the task of making it operativeand effective in the country is beset with difficulties. The teacherdifficulty confronts us again, and also that of making pupils and theirparents understand that there are other objects in domestic trainingthan that of qualifying for domestic service. A corps of instructressesin domestic economy is, however, already abroad throughout the country, nearly all the County Councils having already appointed them. Some ofthese teachers, who have made the best contributions towards the as yetonly partially determined question of the ultimate aim and presentpossibilities of a course of instruction in hygiene, laundry work, cookery, the management of children, sewing, and so forth, have told methat the demand in rural districts seems to be chiefly for the class ofinstruction which may lead to success in town life. I have heard of aclass of girls in a Connaught village who would not be content withknowing the accomplishments of a farmer's wife until they had learnedhow to make asparagus soup and cook sweetbreads. No doubt they had readof the way things are done in the kitchens of the great. This tendencyshould never be encouraged, but neither can it always be inflexiblyrepressed without endangering the main objects of the class. 

Women teachers of poultry-keeping, dairying, domestic science andkindred subjects are trained at the Munster Institute, Cork, and theSchool of Domestic Economy, Kildare Street, Dublin, both of which havebeen equipped to meet the needs of the new programme. The want ofteachers, and not any lack of interest on the part of the country, hasalone prevented all the counties from adopting schemes for encouragingimprovement in all these branches of work. I may add that more than onehundred and fifty of these qualified teachers are now at work underCounty Committees. 

I have already, in this chapter, indicated that outside large industrialcentres, our educational policy is, broadly speaking, twofold. We seek, in the first place, through our programme in Experimental Science andits allied subjects, now so generally adopted by secondary schools inIreland, to give that fundamental training in science and scientificmethod which, most thinkers are agreed, constitutes a conditionprecedent to sound specialised teaching of agriculture as well as otherforms of industry. We seek further, by methods less academic incharacter--for example, by itinerant instruction which is of valuechiefly to those with whom 'school' is a thing of the past--to teach notonly improved agricultural methods but also simple industries, and topromote the cultivation of industrial habits which are as essential tothe success of farming as to that of every other occupation. Classes inmanual work of various kinds--woodwork, carpentry, applied drawing andbuilding construction, lace and crochet making, needlework, dressmakingand embroidery, sprigging, hosiery and other such subjects, have beennumerously and steadily attended. 

I do not ignore the argument that such home industries must in time giveway before the competition of highly-organised factory industries. Thesimple answer is that it is desirable, and indeed necessary, to employthe energy now running to waste in our rural districts--energy whichcannot in the nature of things be employed in highly-organisedindustries. To the small farmer and his family, time is a realisable, though too often unrealised, asset, and it is part of our aim to aid thefamily income by employing their waste time. Even if we can only causethem to do at home what they now pay someone else to do, we shall notonly have improved their budget but shall have contributed to theelevation of the standard of home life, and thus, in no small measure, to the solution of the difficult problem of rural life in Ireland. 

I think the reader will now understand the general character of theproblem with which we were confronted and the means by which itssolution is being sought. Our policy was not one which was likely tocommend itself to the "man in the street. " Indeed, to be quite candid, it was a little disappointing even to myself that I could notimmortalise my appointment by erecting monuments both to my constructiveability and to my educational zeal in the shape of stately edifices atconvenient railway centres, preferably along the tourist routes. We havehad to stand the fire of the critic fresh from his holiday on theContinent where he had seen agricultural and technological institutions, magnificently housed and lavishly equipped, fitting generations of youngmen and young women for competition with our less fortunate countrymen. It is hard to prevail in argument against the man who has gone and seenfor himself. It is useless to point out to the man with a kodak that theCorinthian façade and the marble columns of the _aula maxima_ whicharoused his patriotic envy are but a small part of the educationalstructure which he saw and thought he understood. If he would read thehistory of the systems and trace the successive stages by which the needfor these great institutions was established, he would have a littlemore sympathy with the difficulties of the Department, a little morepatience with its Fabian policy. 

I must not, however, utter a word which suggests that the Department hasany ground of complaint against the country for the spirit in which ithas been met; especially as there was one factor to be taken intoaccount which made it difficult for public opinion to approve of ourpolicy. As I have already explained, a large capital sum of a littleover £200, 000 was handed over to the Department at its creation. Duringthe first year, what with the organisation of the staff, the thinkingout of a policy on every side of the Department's work, the constitutionof the statutory committees to administer its local schemes in town andcountry, the agreement, after long discussion, between the central bodyand these committees upon the local schemes, and all the otherpreparatory steps which had to be taken before money could wisely beapplied, it is obvious that the Department could not have spent itsincome. In the second year, and even the third year, savings wereeffected, and the original capital sum has been largely increased. Whatmore natural than that in a poor country a spending Department which wasbackward in spending should appear to be lacking in enterprise, if notin administrative capacity? But whether the policy was right or wrong ithas unquestionably been approved by the best thought in the country, afact which throws a very interesting light upon the constitutionalaspects of the Department. At each successive stage the policy wasdiscussed at the Council of Agriculture and its practical operation wasdependent upon the consent of the Boards which have the power of thepurse. A Vice-President who had not these bodies at his back would bepowerless, in fact would have to resign. Thoughtless criticism has nowand again condemned not only the parsimonious action of the Department, but the invertebrate conduct of the Council of Agriculture and theBoards in tolerating it. The time will soon come when the servicerendered to their country by the members of the first Council andBoards, who gave their representative backing to a slow but sureeducational policy, and scorned to seek popularity in showy projects andlocal doles, will be gratefully remembered to them. 

Already we have had some gratifying evidences that the country is withus in the paramount importance we attach to education as the real needof the hour. Most readers will be surprised to hear that in the shorttime the Department has been at work it has aided in the equipment ofnearly two hundred science laboratories and of about fifty manualinstruction workshops, while the many-sided programme involved in themovement as a whole is in operation in some four hundred schoolsattended by thirty-six thousand pupils. 

Nothing can be more gratifying than the unanimous testimony of theofficers of the Department to the increasing practical intelligence andreasonableness of the numerous Committees responsible for the localadministration of the schemes which the Department has to approve of andsupervise. The demand for visible money's worth has largely given placeto a genuine desire for schemes having a practical educational value forthe industry of the district. County Clare is not generally consideredthe most advanced part of Ireland, nor can Kilrush be very far distantfrom 'the back of Godspeed'; yet even from that storm-battered outpostof Irish ideas I was memorialised a year ago to induce the CountyCouncil to pay less attention to the improvement of cattle and more tothe technical education of the peasantry. 

Under the heading of direct aids to agriculture, rural industries, andsea and inland fisheries, there is much important and useful work whichthe Department has set in motion, partly by the use of its funds andpartly by suggestion and the organisation of local effort. The mostobvious, popular and easily understood schemes were those directed tothe improvement of live stock. The Department exercised its supervisionand control with the help of advisory committees composed of the bestexperts it could get to volunteer advice upon the various classes oflive stock. It is unnecessary to give any details of these schemes. TheDepartment profited by the experience of, and received considerableassistance from the Royal Dublin Society, which had for many yearsadministered a Government grant for the improvement of horses andcattle. The broad principle adopted by the Department was that itsefforts and its available resources should be devoted rather toimproving the quality, than to increasing the quantity, of the stock inthe country, the latter function being regarded as belonging to theregion of private enterprise. 

It is impossible to over-estimate the importance to the country ofhaving a widespread interest aroused and discussion stimulated onproblems of breeding which affect a trade of vast importance to theeconomic standing of the country--a trade which now reaches in hornedcattle alone an annual export of nearly three quarters of a millionanimals. All manner of practical discussions were set on foot, rangingfrom the production of the ideal, the general purposes cow, to thatcontroversy which competes, in the virulence with which it is waged, with the political, the educational, and the fiscal questions--thequestion whether the hackney strain will bring a new era of prosperityto Ireland, or whether it will irretrievably destroy the reputation ofthe Irish hunter. The discussion of these problems has been accompaniedby much practical work which, in due time, cannot fail to produce aconsiderable improvement upon the breed of different classes of livestock. In one year over one thousand sires have been selected by theexperts of the Department for admission to the stock improvementschemes. Probably an equal number of breeding animals offered forinspection have been rejected. Many a _cause celèbre_ has notunnaturally arisen over the decisions of the equestrian tribunal, andthere have not been wanting threats that the attention of Parliamentshould be called to the gross partiality of the Department which hascast a reflection upon the form of stallion A or upon the constitutionalsoundness of stallion B. On the whole, as far as I can gather, the bestauthorities in the country are agreed that since the Department hasbeen at work there has been established a higher standard of excellencein the bucolic mind as regards that vastly important national asset, ourflocks and herds. 

Again for details I must refer the reader to official documents. Therehe will find as much information as he can digest about the vast varietyof agricultural activities which originate sometimes with theDepartment's officers or with its _Journal_ and leaflets, thecirculation of which has no longer to be stimulated from our Statisticsand Intelligence bureau, and sometimes emanate from the localcommittees, whose growing interest in the work naturally leads to thediscovery of fresh needs and hitherto unthought of possibilities ofagricultural and industrial improvement. I may, however, indicate a fewof the subjects which have been gone into even in these years while thenew Department has been trying so far as it might, without sacrifice ofefficiency and sound economic principle, to keep pace with the feverishanxiety of a genuinely interested people to get to work upon schemeswhich they believe to be practical, sound, and of permanent utility. 

A question which has troubled administrators of State aid to everyprogressive agricultural community, and which each country must settlefor itself, is by what form of object lesson in ordinary agricultureintelligent local interest can best be aroused We have advocated widelydiffused small experimental plots, and they have done much good. Probably the most useful of our crop improvement schemes have beenthose which have demonstrated the profitableness of artificial manures, the use of which has been enormously increased. The profits derivable inmany parts of Ireland from the cultivation of early potatoes has beendemonstrated in the most convincing manner. To what may be called theindustrial crops, notably flax and barley, a great deal of time andthought has been applied and much information disseminated andillustrated by practical experiments. In many quarters interest has beenaroused in the possibilities of profitable tobacco culture. Manynegative and some positive results have been attained by the Departmentin the as yet incomplete experiments upon this crop. Much has beenlearned about the functions of central and local agricultural and smallindustry shows, those occasional aids to the year's work whichdisseminate knowledge and stimulate interest and friendly rivalry amongthe different producers. The reduction in the death-rate among youngstock, due to preventible causes such as white scour and blackleg, iswell worthy of the attention of those who wish to study the morepractical work of the Department. 

The branch of the Department's work which deals with the Sea-fisheriescan only be very briefly touched on. It falls into two main heads whichmay roughly be termed the administrative and the scientific; the latter, of course, having economic developments as its ultimate object. Theissue of loans to fishermen for the purchase of boats and gear, contributing to the cost of fishery slips and piers, circulatingtelegraphic intelligence, the making of by-laws for the regulation ofthe fisheries, the patrolling of the Irish fishing grounds to preventillegalities, and the attempts which are being made to develop thevaluable Irish oyster fishery by the introduction, with modificationssuited to our own seaboard, of a system of culture comparable to thosewhich are pursued with success in France and Norway, may be mentioned asfalling under the more directly economic branch of our activities. Irishoysters are already attaining considerable celebrity, owing to thedistance of our oyster beds from contaminating influences; and it ishoped that when the Department's experiments are complete the Irishoyster will be made subject to direct control for all its life, until itis despatched to market. Attention is also being given to the relativevalue of seed oysters, other than native, for relaying on Irish beds. 

On the more directly scientific side, the Department has undertaken thesurvey of the trawling grounds around the coast to obtain an exactknowledge of the movements of the marketable fish at different times oftheir life, so that we may be guided in making by-laws and regulationsby a full knowledge of the times and places at which protection isnecessary. The biological and physical conditions of the western seasare also being studied in special reference to the mackerel fishery, with the object of correlating certain readily observable phenomena withthe movements of the fish, and so of predicting the probable success ofa fishery in a particular season. The routine observations of theDepartment's fishery cruiser have been so arranged as to synchronisewith those of other nations, in order to assist the international schemeof investigation now in progress, wherever its objects and those of theDepartment are the same. While these various practical projects havebeen in operation, we have done our best to keep abreast of the times bysending missions to other countries, consisting of an expert accompaniedby practical Irishmen who would bring home information which wasapplicable to the conditions of our own country. The first batch ofitinerant instructors in agriculture, whose training for the importantwork of laying the foundations for our whole scheme of agriculturalinstruction I have referred to, were taken on a continental tour by theProfessor of Agriculture at the Royal College of Science, in order togive special advantages to a portion of our outdoor staff upon thesuccess of whose work the rate of our progress in agriculturaldevelopment might largely depend. And not only have we in our firstthree years gleaned as much information as possible by sending qualifiedIrishmen to study abroad the industries in which we were particularlyinterested, but we also took steps to give the mass of our people athome an opportunity of studying these industries for themselves. Withthe somewhat unique experiment carried out for this object, I willconclude the story of the new Department's activities in its earlyyears. 

The part we took at the Cork Exhibition of 1902 was well understood inIreland, but not perhaps elsewhere. We secured a large space both in themain Industrial Hall and in the grounds, and gave an illustration not ofwhat Ireland had done, but of what, in our opinion, the country mightachieve in the way of agricultural and industrial development in thenear future. Exhibiting on the one hand our available resources in theway of raw material, we gave, on the other hand, demonstrations of alarge number of industries in actual operation. These exhibits, importedwith their workers, machinery and tools, from several European countriesand from Great Britain, all belonged to some class of industry which, inour belief, was capable of successful development in Ireland. In theindoor part of the exhibit there was nothing very original, exceptperhaps in its close relation to the work of a government department. But what attracted by far the greatest interest and attention was aseries of object lessons in many phases of farm activities, where, inour opinion, great and immediate improvements might be made. Here wereto be seen varieties of crops under various systems of treatment, demonstrations of sheep-dipping, calf-rearing on different foods, illustrations of the different breeds of fowl and systems of poultrymanagement, model buildings and gardens for farmer and labourer; whilein separate buildings the drying and pressing of fruit and vegetables, the manufacture of butter and cheese, and a very comprehensive forestryexhibit enabled our visitors to combine profitable suggestion with, if Imay judge from my frequent opportunities of observing the sightseers inwhom I was particularly interested, the keenest enjoyment. 

We kept at the Exhibition, for six months, a staff of competent experts, whose instructions were to give to all-comers this simple lesson. Theywere to bring home to our people that, here in Ireland before their veryeyes, there were industries being carried on by foreigners, byEnglishmen, by Scotchmen, and in some instances by Irishmen, but in allcases by men and women who had no advantage over our workers except thatthey had the technical training which it was the desire of theDepartment to give to the workers of Ireland. The officials of theDepartment entered into the spirit of this scheme enthusiastically andcheerfully, some of them, in addition to their ordinary work, turningthe office into a tourist agency for these busy months. With thegenerous help of the railway companies they organised parties offarmers, artisans, school teachers, members of the statutory committees, and, in fact, of all to whom it was of importance to give this objectlesson upon the relations between practical education and the promotionof industry. Nearly 100, 000 persons were thus moved to Cork and backbefore the Exhibition closed--an achievement largely due to theassistance given by the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society and theclergy throughout the country. 

This experiment, both in its conception and in its results, was perhapsunique. There were not wanting critics of the new Department who stoodaghast at so large an expenditure upon temporary edifices and a passingshow; but those who are in touch with its educational work know thatthis novel application of State assistance fulfilled its purpose. Ithelped substantially to generate a belief in, and stimulate a demandfor, technical instruction which it will take us many years adequatelyto supply. 

An American visitor who, as I afterwards learned, takes an active partin the discussion of the rural problems of his own country, disembarkedat Queenstown in order to 'take in' the Cork Exhibition. In his rushthrough Dublin he 'took in' the Department and the writer. 'Mr. Vice-President, ' he said, before the hand-shaking was completed, 'I havevisited all the great Expositions held in my time. I have been to theCork Exposition. I often saw more things, but never more ideas. '

With this characteristically rapid appreciation of a movement whichseeks to turn Irish thought to action, my strange visitor vanished assuddenly as he came. 

 * * * * *

Those whose sympathy with Ireland has induced them to persevere throughthe mass of details with which this story of small beginnings is piecedtogether may wonder why the bearing of hopeful efforts for bringingprosperity and contentment to Ireland upon the mental attitude ofmillions of Irishmen scattered throughout the British Empire and theUnited States, and so upon the lives of the countries in which they havemade their homes, is apparently ignored. I fully recognise the vastimportance of the subject. A book dealing comprehensively with theactual and potential influence of Irish intellect upon English politicsat home, and upon the politics of the United States, a carefullyreasoned estimate of the part which Irish intellect is qualified, andwhich I firmly believe it is destined, to play wherever the civilisationof the world is to be under the control of the English-speakingpeoples--more especially where these peoples govern races which speakother tongues and see through other eyes--a clear and strikingexposition of the true relation between the small affairs of the smallisland and that greater Ireland which takes its inspiration from thesorrows, the passions, the endeavours, and the hopes of those who stickto the old home--such a book would possess a deep human interest, andwould make a high and wide appeal. Nevertheless, I feel that at thepresent time the most urgent need, from every point of view on which Ihave touched, is to focus the thought available for the Irish Questionupon the definite work of a reconstruction of Irish life. 

Such is the purpose of this book. I do not wish to attach anyexaggerated importance to the scheme of social and economic reform ofwhich I have attempted to give a faithful account; nor is it in theirpractical achievement, be it great or small, that the initiators andorganisers of the new movement take most pride. What these Irishmen areproud of is the manner in which the people have responded to theirefforts to bring Irish sentiment into an intimate and helpful relationwith Irish economic problems. They had to reckon with that greatest ofhindrances to the spirit of enterprise, a rooted belief in thepotentiality of government to bring material prosperity to our doors. AsI have pointed out, the practical demonstration which Ireland hadreceived of the power of government to inflict lasting economic injurygave rise to this belief; and I have noted the present influences towhich it seems to owe its continuance until to-day. I believe that, ifany enduring interest attaches to the story which I have told, it willconsist in the successive steps by which this initial difficulty hasbeen overcome. 

Let me summarise in a few words what has been, so far, actuallyaccomplished. Those who did the work of which I have written firstlaunched upon Irish life a scheme of organised self-help which, perhapsmore by good luck than design, proved to be in accordance with theinherited instincts of the people, and, therefore, moved them to action. Next they called for, and in due season obtained, a department ofgovernment with adequate powers and means to aid in developing theresources of the country, so far as this end could be attained withouttransgressing the limits of beneficial State interference with thebusiness of the people. In its constitution this department was solinked with the representative institutions of the country that thepeople soon began to feel that they largely controlled its policy andwere responsible for its success. Meanwhile, the progress of economicthought in the country had made such rapid strides that, in theadministration of State assistance, the principle of self-help could berigidly insisted upon and was willingly submitted to. The result is thata situation has been created which is as gratifying as it may appear tobe paradoxical. Within the scope and sphere of the movement the Irishpeople are now, without any sacrifice of industrial character, combiningreliance upon government with reliance upon themselves. 

That a movement thus conceived should so rapidly have overcome itsinitial difficulties and should, I might almost add, have passed beyondthe experimental stage, will suggest to any thoughtful reader that aboveand beyond the removal by legislation of obstacles to progress--and muchhas been accomplished in this way of recent years--there must have beennew, positive influences at work upon the national mind. These will befound in the growing recognition of the fact that the path of progresslies along distinctively Irish lines, and that otherwise it will not betrodden by the Irish people. Much good in the same direction has beendone, too, by the generous and authoritative admission by England thatthe future development of Ireland should be assisted and promoted 'witha full and constant regard to the special traditions of thecountry. '[52] But after all, while these concessions to Irishsentiment, vitally important though they be, may speed us on our road tonational regeneration, they will not take us far. It remains for usIrishmen to realise--and the chief value of all the work I havedescribed consists in the degree in which it forces us to realise--theresponsibility which now rests with ourselves. We have been too long aprey to that deep delusion, which, because the ills of the country welove were in past days largely caused from without, bids us look to thesame source for their cure. The true remedies are to be soughtelsewhere; for, however disastrous may have been the past, the injurywas moral rather than material, and the opportunity has now arrived forthe patient building up again of Irish character in those qualitieswhich win in the modern struggle for existence. The field for that greatwork is clear of at least the worst of its many historic encumbrances. Ireland must be re-created from within. The main work must be done inIreland, and the centre of interest must be Ireland. When Irishmenrealise this truth, the splendid human power of their country, so muchof which now runs idly or disastrously to waste, will be utilised; andwe may then look with confidence for the foundation of a fabric of Irishprosperity, framed in constructive thought, and laid enduringly in humancharacter. 

THE END. 

FOOTNOTES:

[48] Pages 38, 39. 

[49] It must be borne in mind that the Department is not officiallyconcerned with the question of the economic distribution of landreferred to on pp. 46-49. 

[50] For a full description of the Department's scheme of agriculturaleducation I may refer to a _Memorandum on Agricultural Education inIreland, _ written by the author and published by the Department, July, 1901. 

[51] See _ante_, pp. 236-238. 

[52] Speech of the Lord Lieutenant to the Incorporated Law Society, November 20th, 1902. See also p. 170. 

INDEX

A. E. (George W. Russell) 200Agitation as a policy, 82, 83Agricultural Board, 228, 234, _seq_. 269Agriculture:-- Agricultural Holdings:-- Improvement of, 46 _seq_. Transfer of peasants to new farms, 48 _seq_. Agricultural Organisation: Denmark, 131 Department of Agriculture and farmers' societies, 211 England, Mr. Hanbury's and Lord Onslow's views, 242 Irish Agricultural Organisation Society (see that title) Societies 44, 45 Co-operation (see that title). Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction (see that title) Depression in, 179 Education in relation to, 126, 264 _seq_. 269 Exodus of Rural Population, 39 State-Aid, 45, 211 Tillage, decrease of, 42Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, 224, 227, 236, 238Albert Institute, Glasnevin, 230, 271Altruism, appeal to in co-operation, 210America, Irish in: 72 Causes of their success and failure, 55 _seq_. Irish in American politics, 70 _seq_. Loss of religion in, 111Anderson, R. A. :-- Co-operative movement, 184, 190 Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, 200Andrews, Mr. Thomas:-- Recess Committee, 219Anti-English Sentiment:-- Irish in America and, 72 Nature and cause, 13Anti-Treating League, 114Arnott, Sir John:-- Recess Committee, 218Art, modern ecclesiastical art in Ireland, 108Association, economic, value of, 167Associative qualities of the Irish, 166

Bacon Curing:-- Denmark, 131, 194Bagot, Canon:-- Creamery movement, 189Balfour, Arthur:--168 Irish policy, 243, 244Balfour, Gerald:--243, 256 Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, 225, 233 Local Government Act, 224, 238, 240 Policy of explained, 225 Recess Committee Proposals; Bill, 224Banks, agricultural credit, 195 _seq. _Barley Experiments of the Department of Agriculture, 282Belfast Chamber of Commerce and Home Rule, 67Berkeley, Bishop:-- Irish priests, 141 On "Mending our state, " 6 "Parties" and "politics, " 63Bessborough Commission, tenants improvements, &c. 22Board of National Education, 126Board of Technical Instruction, 228, 234 _seq_. 257Bodley's _France_, Madame Darmesteter's review, 242Boer war and the Irish attitude, 9Bogs, utilisation of, 249Boycotting, 87Bright, John:-- Peasant proprietorship, 25Brooke, Stopford, 92Buckle, personal factor in history, 27Bulwer Lytton, 34Burke, 137Butt, Isaac, 78Butter, Danish, 131

Cadogan, Lord, 224Catholic Association, 99Catholic Emancipation Act, 104, 125, 132Catholic University (see University Question). Celtic Race, Harold Frederic's opinion, 161 _seq_. Character:-- Associative qualities of the Irish, 166 Education and character, 144 Gaelic Revival, effect of on national character, 148, 155 Industrial character, 18 Irish inefficiency a problem of character, 32 Irish question a problem of character, 32, 59, 164 Lack of initiative in Irish character, 163 Moral timidity of Irish character, 64, 65, 80, 81 Prosperity of Ireland, to be founded on character, 291 Roman Catholicism and Irish character, 101-105, 110Chesterfield, Lord:-- Education as the cause of difference in the character of men, 144Christian Brothers' Schools, 131Christian Socialists, 184Church-building in Ireland, . 107Church Disestablishment Act, 1869, --Land Purchase Clauses, 25Clan-System in Ireland, 75Clergy, Roman Catholic:-- Action and attitude towards questions of the day 105 Authority, 96, 105 _seq_. Moral influence, 115, 116 Political influence, 117 Temperance reform, 112, 114College of Science and Department of Agriculture, 229Colonies, history of the Irish in, 72 _seq_. Commercial Restrictions--effect of on Irish industrial character, 17 _seq_. Con O'Neal forbids his posterity to build houses, etc. , 57Congested Districts Board:-- Agricultural banks, loans to 197 Department of Agriculture and, 245 Land Act (1903) and, 245 Success of, 243, 244Convents and Monasteries, increase of, 108Co-operative Movement:-- Agricultural Banks, 195 _seq_. Agricultural depression, cause of, 179 Altruism, appeal to, 210 Anderson, R. A. , 184, 190, 200 Associative qualities of Irish, 166, 178, 186 Beginnings, 178 Combination, necessity of, 181 Co-operative Union, Manchester, 184 Craig, Mr. E. T. , and the Vandeleur Estate, 184 Creameries, 187 _seq_. Denmark, 131, 194 Educating adults, 177 English co-operation, 166, 184 Finlay, Father Thomas, 119, 192, 218 Gaelic Revival and, 149 _seq_. Gray, Mr. T. C. , 184 Holyoake, Mr. , 184 Hughes, Mr. Tom, 184 Irish Agricultural Organisation Society (see that title). _Irish Homestead_, 190, 202 Ludlow, Mr. , 184 Marum, Mr. Mulhallen, 189 Middlemen, 180 Monteagle, Lord, 184 Moral effects, 207, 208 Neale, Mr. Vansittart, 184 Necessity of co-operation for small landholders, 44 _seq_. Production and distribution problems, 179, 180 Roman Catholic clergy and, 119 State-aid side, 45, 165 Success, causes of 210, 211 Vandeleur estate community, 184 Village libraries, 199 Wolff, Mr. Henry W. , 199 Yerburgh, Mr. , 199Cork:-- Exhibition, Department's Exhibit, 119, 285 _seq_. Craig, Mr. E. T. -- Co-operative Movement 184Creameries, co-operative, beginnings, 187 _seq_. Crop improvement schemes of the Department, 282Council of Agriculture, 228, 232 _seq_. 257

Dairying Industry--Co-operation and, 187 _seq_. Dane, Mr. :-- Recess Committee, 218Darmesteter, Madame, _Syndicats agricoles_, 242Davis, Thomas:--137 Political Methods, 77, 83Denmark:-- Co-operation in, 131, 194 High Schools, 131Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction:-- 60 Agriculture and Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, 224, 227, 236, 238 Agricultural Board, 228, 234 _seq. _ 257 Agricultural education, 236, 237, 264 _seq. _ 269, 272 Agricultural Organisation, 241 Albert Institute, Glasnevin, 230, 271 Balfour, Gerald, 225, 233 Board of Technical Instruction, 228, 234 _seq. _ 257 College of Science and, 229 Congested Districts Board and Department, 245 Consultative Committee for Co-ordinating Education, 236, 237, 272 Constitution, etc. , 228 Co-operative movement and the benefits of organisation, 241 Cork Exhibition exhibit, 119, 285 _seq. _ Council of Agriculture, 228, 232 _seq. _ 257 Crop improvement schemes 282 Domestic economy teaching, 272 Early days' experiences, 217 _seq. _ Educational policy, 236, 237, 272, 274 Educational work, 262 Endowment, etc. , 231 Home Industries, 275 Industrial education and industrial life, 130 Intermediate Education Board and, 235, 237 Itinerant instruction, 126, 270 Irish Agricultural Organisation Society and, 203 Live Stock Schemes, 279 Local Committees, 261 Local Government Act and work of Department, 239 Metropolitan School of Art 230 Munster Institute, Cork, and, 230, 274 Parliamentary representation, 220, 228 Powers, 229 _seq. _ Provincial Committees, 234 Purposes, 228 Recess Committee's Recommendations, 220 Royal Dublin Society and, 279 Rural life improvement, 159 Sea Fisheries, 282 Staff, 228 Teachers, 267 Technical instruction, 130, 228, 234, _seq. _, 257, 263, 267, 279 Work already accomplished, 278 _seq. _Desmolins, M. :-- English love of home, 53Devon Commission, tenants' improvements, 22Dineen, Rev. P. S. :-- Editor O'Rahilly's poems, 76Dixon, Sir Daniel:-- Recess Committee, 218Domestic economy teaching, 272Drink Evil:-- Anti-Treating League, 114 Causes, 112 Roman Catholic Clergy's influence, 112, 114Dudley, Lord, 170, 290Dufferin, Lord:-- Effect of commercial restrictions in Ireland, 20Duffy, Sir C. G. 77Dunraven Conference, 8, 10, 207

Economic system in England, individualism of, 166Economic thought:-- Influence of Roman Catholicism, 101 _seq_. Lack of in Ireland, 133 _seq_. Education:-- Agricultural instruction, 126 264 _seq_. 269 Board of National Education, 126 Christian Brothers, 131 Commissioners of National Education, 235 Consultative Committee for co-ordinating Education, 236, 237, 272 Continental methods, 129 Defects of present system, 128 Denmark High Schools, 131 Department of Agriculture's policy and work, 236, 237, 262, 272, 274 Economic, 130, 133 Education Bill, 99 English education in Ireland, 122 Influence of on national life, 59 Industrial, 130, 264 Intermediate Education system, 128, 235, 237 Irish education schemes, 123 _seq_. Itinerant instruction, 126, 270 Keenan, Sir Patrick, 126 Kildare Street Society, 123 Literary Education, 131 Lord Chesterfield on Education 144 Manual and Practical Instruction in Primary Schools, Commission, 128, 129 Maynooth, influence of, 134-136, 138, 139 Monastic and Conventual institutions, 108 National factor in national education, 152, 153 Practical, 129 _seq_. Reports of Commissions, 127 Roman Catholics, higher education, 97, 132, 133 Royal University, 128 Technical instruction, 228, 231 _seq_. , 257, 263 Trinity College, influence of, 134, 136 _seq_. University:-- Place of the University in education, 133 Royal Commission on University Education, 128 Wyse's Scheme, 125Education Bill, 99Emigration, causes of, etc. , 40, 116England:-- Anti-English sentiment in Ireland, 13, 72 Co-operation in, 166, 184, 192, 206, 242 Economic system, individualism of, 166 Misunderstanding of Irish question, 7 _seq_. Ewart, Sir William:-- Recess Committee, 218Experimental Plots of the Department, 281

Ferguson, Sir Samuel:-- National sentiment, 154Field, Mr. William, 217Finlay, Father Thomas:-- 119, 208 Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, 192 Recess Committee 218Fisheries--Department of Agriculture, development scheme, 282 _seq_Flax improvement Schemes, 282_Fortnightly Review_:-- Harold Frederic on Irish Question, 162France, _syndicats agricoles_, 242Franchise extension in 1885, effects of on Irish political thought, 78Frederic, Harold:-- Views on Irish question, 161 _seq_. Free Trade, effect of in Ireland, 19

Gaelic Revival:-- 148 _seq_. Appeal to the individual 155 Co-operative movement and, 149 _seq_. Gaelic League, aims and objects, 150 Hyde, Douglas, 151 Irish language as a commercial medium, 158 National factor in education, importance of, 153 Politics and the Gaelic revival, 156, 187 Rural life, rehabilitation, 159Gill, Mr. T. P. :-- Recess Committee, 219Gladstone:-- 85 Belfast Chamber of Commerce, Home Rule deputation, 67 Home Rule, attitude towards, 3, 66, 67 Tenants' improvements, 22Glasnevin, Albert Institute, 230, 271Grattan, 137Gray, Mr. J. C. :-- Co-operative movement, 181Grazing, increase of, 42Grundtvig, Bishop, 131

Hanbury, Mr. :-- 251 Agricultural Societies, necessity of, 242 Suppression of Swine Fever, 252Hannon, Mr. P. J. --I. A. O. S. 200Harrington, Mr. T. C. :-- Recess Committee 218Healy, Archbishop, work for Ireland, 118Hegarty, Father, work for Ireland, 119Historical Grievances, 14, 17, 59, 104, _seq_. 120, 147Holdings, small, problem of, 46Holyoake, Mr. :-- Co-operative Movement, 184Domestic Economy Teaching, 272Home: Improvement of, 159 Irish Conception of, 53 Irish, "homelessness at home, " cause of 57, 58Home Industries, 192, 275Home Rule:--Bill 1886, 61 Gladstone's attitude to the question 3 Nationalist tactics as a means of attaining 84 Rosebery, Lord, attitude to the question, 4 Ulster and Home Rule, 66, 86. _seq_. Unionist attitude towards, 35Hughes, Tom, Co-operative Movement, 184Hyde, Douglas, 151

Individualism of English economic system, 166Industrial character of the Irish, effect of commercial restrictions, 18Industrial leadership, and political leadership, 212Industry:-- Commercial Restrictions, 16-20 Education and Industrial Life, 130 Free Trade, effect of, 19 Gaelic League and, 135 Home Rule and, 87 Peasant Industries 52 Protestantism and Industry 100 Roman Catholicism and Industry. 100, 103 _seq_. State-Aid 45Initiative, lack of in Irish character, 163Intermediate Education 128, 235, 237Irish Agricultural Organisation Society:-- 149 Agricultural Banks, 195 _seq. _ Agricultural Organisation:-- Denmark, 131 Department of Agriculture and Farmers' Societies, 241 England, Mr. Hanbury's view, 242 Onslow, Lord, opinion, 242 Welsh Co. Councils, and, 242 Anderson, R. A. , 200 Central body, necessity for 194 Cork Exhibition, tours organised by, 286 Department of Agriculture and, 203 Federations, principal, 193 Finlay, Father Thomas, 119, 192, 208, 218 Funds, 202 _seq_. Gaelic revival and the co-operative movement, 149 _seq. _ Hannon, Mr. P. J. , 200 Inauguration, 191 _Irish, Homestead_, 190, 202 Monteagle, Lord, 192 Roman Catholic clergy and the movement, 119 Rural life social movements, 159, 199 Russell, George W. (A. E. ), 200 Societies, number, etc. 192 Staff, &c. 200 Village libraries, 199_Irish Homestead_, 190, 202Irish language as a commercial medium, 158"Irish night" in House of Commons, 2Irish Question:-- Anomalies, 33 Character, a problem of, 32, 59, 164 Emigration, 40 English misunderstanding, 7 _seq. _ Frederic, Harold, diagnosis by, 161 _seq_. Gaelic Revival and, 148 Historical grievances, 16 _seq_. Home Rule (see that title) Human problem, 2 Land Act marks a new era in, 11 Land system (see that title). Our ignorance about ourselves 32 Parnell's death, effect of, 5 Political remedies, Irish belief in, 33 Rural life, problem, 39, 57, 263 Sentiment, force of, 15 Ulster's attitude important, 38Itinerant Instructors, 126, 127, 271, 284

Johnson, Dr. , on "economy, " 278

Kane, Rev. R. R. :-- 157 Recess Committee, 218Keenan, Sir Patrick:-- Itinerant instructors, 126, 127Kelly, Dr. (Bishop of Ross):-- Work for Ireland, 118Kildare Street School of Domestic Economy 274Kildare Street Society, 123-125

Land Acts:-- 1870, 23; 1881, 23, 24; 1891, Congested Districts, 243 1903:-- 10, 11, 42, 48, 245 Marks a new era in Ireland, 11 Transfer of peasants to new farms, 48Land Conference:-- 93 Landed gentry not to be expatriated, 85 Nationalist leaders' attitude, 89Land Purchase Acts, 25Land Question and Tenure Question, 41, 42Land system:-- 17 Causes of failure in Irish land system, 21 Dual ownership 25 Land Acts: 1870, 23; 1881, 23, 24; 1891, 243; 1903, 10, 11, 42, 48, 246. Land Purchase Acts, 25 Legislation, 23 _seq_. Peasant proprietorship, germs of, 25 Tenure question, 41, 42Lawless, Emily:-- "With the Wild Geese, " 92Le Bon, "La Psychologie De la Foule, " 167Lea, Sir Thomas:-- Recess Committee, 218Leadership in Ireland, political and industrial, 212Lecky, Mr. :-- Irish grievances, 14 Kildare Street Society, 124Live stock improvement schemes, 279Liverpool Financial Reform Association, 127Local Government:-- 83 Balfour, Mr. Gerald, 224, 238, 240 Department of Agriculture and local effort, Educative effect of, 90 Nationalist leaders' attitude 88 Success in working, 88, 240Lucas, Mr. , 77Ludlow, Mr. :-- Co-operative movement, 184

McCarthy, Mr. Justin:-- Recess Committee, 215Manchester, Co-operative Union 181Manual and Practical Instruction in Primary Schools' Commission, 128, 129Manures, Artificial-- Department of Agriculture's encouragement in the use of, 282Marum, Mr. Mulhallen--Co-operative Movement 189Maynooth, influence of, 134 136, 138, 139Mayo, Lord:-- Recess Committee, 218_Memorandum on Agricultural Education_ 269Metropolitan School of Art, 230Middlemen, 180Monasteries and Convents, increase of, 108Monteagle, Lord:-- Co-operative movement, 184 I. A. O. S. President, 192 Recess Committee 218Moral timidity of Irish character, 65, 80, 81Morals:-- Roman Catholic Clergy's influence on, 115, 116Mulhall, Mr. Michael:-- Recess Committee, 219Munster Institute, Cork, 230, 274Musgrave, Sir James:-- Recess Committee, 219

National Education Board, Agricultural Teaching, 126Nationalist Party:-- Home Rule, 35, 84 Land Conference and, 89 Local Government and, 88 Policy, 69 Qualifications of leaders, 90, 91 Recess Committee and, 222 Responsibility of leaders, 81 Tactics:-- 84 _seq. _ Effect of on Irish political character, 80Nationality:-- Education and nationality, 152 _seq. _ Expansion of, outside party politics, 154 Modern conception of Irish nationality, 76Neale, Vansittart:-- Co-operative movement, 184O'Connell, 77O'Conor Don:-- Recess Committee, 218O'Dea, Dr. :-- University Commission, statements, 109, 141O'Donnell, Dr. :-- Ploughing up of grazing lands, 43O'Donovan, Father, 119O'Dwyer, Dr. :-- Evidence before University Commission, 140O'Gara, Dr. :-- On the cultivation of the land, 43O'Grady, Standish, 154Onslow, Lord:-- Agricultural organisation, benefit of, 242O'Rahilly, Egan:-- Lament for the Irish clans, 27Oyster Culture, 283

Parnell:-- 48, 78 Downfall, effect on national idea and aims, 5, 79, 80Peasant industries, necessity for, 52Peasant Proprietary:-- Agricultural organisation, necessity of, 44 _seq_. Bright, John, and, 25 Peasant industries, necessity of, 52 Problem of next generation, 50, 51Penal laws, effect of, 104, 132Plantation system, 76Politics:-- Agitation as a policy, 82, 83 America, Irish in politics in, 70 _seq, _ Gaelic revival and politics, 156, 157 Irishmen as politicians, . 69 _seq. _ "Irish night" in House of Commons, 92 Nationalist leaders' effect on Irish political character, 80 Obsession of the Irish mind by politics, 59, 61 _seq_. "One-man" system, 79 Political leadership and industrial leadership, 212 Political remedies, Irish belief in, 33 Political "wilderness, " 91 "Priest in politics, " 117 Separation, 87 Ulster Liberal Unionist Association, 66 Unionists (Irish):-- Industrial element and, 67, 68 Influence in Irish life, 63 _seq. _Population. -- Relation of population to area, 49Potato culture improvement schemes, 282Production and distribution, problems, 179, 180Protestantism:-- Duty of, 119 Ulster, 98, 99

Raiffeisen System of banking, 195-198Railways--Light railway system, 243_Raimeis_, 153Recess Committee:-- 83, 210 _seq. _ 238, 241 Cadogan, Lord, and, 224, 225 Constitution proposed, 215 Finlay, Father Thomas, 218 Gill, Mr. T. P. 219 Ideas leading to its formation, 213 M'Carthy, Mr. Justin, letter, 215 Members, 218 Mulhall, Mr. Michael, 219 Nationalist members, 222 Recommendations, 220 Redmond, Mr. John, and, 217 Report, 10, 129, 221 Results, 223 _seq. _ State-aid question, 223 Tisserand's memorandum, 220Redmond, Mr. John:-- Recess Committee, 217Religion:-- Influence of on Irish life, 59, 94 _seq. _ Protestantism, 98, 99, 119 Roman Catholic Church (see that title). Sectarian animosities, 98, 99 Toleration, meaning of word, 95Ritualistic movement, 99Robertson, Lord:-- University Commission, 140Roman Catholic Church:-- Church-building and increase of monasteries, etc. , 107, 108, 109 Clergy:-- Action and attitude towards questions of the day, 105 _seq_. Authority of, 98, 105 _seq. _ Co-operative movement, 119 Moral influence, 115, 116 Political influence, 77, 117 Temperance reform, 112, 114 Economic conditions, influence on 101 _seq. _ Effect on Irish character, 101-105, 110 Higher education of Roman Catholics, 97, 132Rosebery, Lord:-- Attitude towards Home Rule, 4Ross, Mr. John:-- Recess Committee, 218Royal College of Science, 229, 268, 270Royal Commission on University Education, 118, 128, 140Royal Dublin Society, Aid to Department of Agriculture, 279Royal University education, defects in, 128Rural life:-- Emigration, causes of, 40, 116 Gaelic revival's influence on, 159 Industries, 52, 262, 266 Problem of, 39, 51, 263 Rehabilitation, 159, 199Russell, George W. (A. E. ), 200

Salisbury, Lord:-- "Twenty years of resolute government, " 61Saunderson, Colonel:-- Recess Committee, 217Scotch-Irish in America, 71Sea Fisheries--Department of Agriculture's improvement schemes, 282Self-help movement (see Co-operative movement). Sentiment:-- Anti-English, cause of, 13 _seq_. Force of in Irish question, 15, 127Separation, Home Rule and, 87Shinnors, Rev. Mr. :-- Irish in America, 111Sinclair, Thomas:-- Recess Committee, 218Social order, Irish attachment to, 54_Spectator_:--English non-allowance for sentiment, 15_Speed's Chronicle_:-- Con O'Neal, etc. 57Spencer, Lord, 168Starkie, Dr. :-- Mr. Wyse's education scheme, 126State-aid:-- 45, 211, 219, 220, 223Stephen, J. K. ("Cynicus") 164Stopford Brooke, 92Swine fever, 251

Technical Instruction, 130, 228, 234 _seq_. 257, 263, 267, 279Temperance Reform, 112 _seq_. Tenure question and land question, 41Tillage, decrease of, 42Tisserand, M. :-- Recess Committee memorandum, 220Tobacco culture, 282Trinity College, influence of, 134, 136 _seq. _Two Irelands, 37

Ulster:-- Attitude towards the rest of Ireland, 38 Home Rule, objections to, 66, 86, 87Ulster Liberal Unionist Association, political thought in, 66Unionist (Irish) Party:-- Industrial element in Irish life and, 67, 68, 86 Influence in Irish life, 63_seq. _ Policy, 68 Ulster and Home Rule, 66, 86 _seq. _United Ireland, first real conception of, 77United Irish League, 90University Question:-- 99, 109 Catholic University:-- O'Dea, Dr. , on, 141 O'Dwyer, Dr. , on, 140 Hyde, Dr. , evidence before Commission, 151 Maynooth, influence of, 134, 136, 138, 139 Place of the University in education, 133 Trinity College, influence of, 134, 136 _seq. _ University reform necessary, 138

Vandeleur Estate, co-operative community, 184Village libraries, 119, 199

Wolff, Mr. Henry W. :-- People's banks, 199Wyndham, Mr. :-- Land Act. 1903, 10, 12Wyse, Mr. Thomas:-- Scheme of Irish education, 125

Yeats, W. B. 154Yerburgh, Mr. R. A. :-- Agricultural banks, 199