Ireland as it is, and as it would be under Home RuleBuckley, Robert John
History
Ireland as it is, and as it would be under Home Rule
Buckley, Robert John
Home rule -- Ireland; Ireland -- Politics and government -- 1837-1901; Irish question
"Have Englishmen forgotten the previous history of the men she is now
on the point of entrusting with her future? Are Englishmen
unacquainted with the traditional hatred of the Irish malcontents? Do
they not know the aspirations of the Catholic clergy, and are they
ignorant of their immense influence with the masses? Surely they are,
or they would rise in their might and instantly trample out the
present agitation, which has for its aim and end, not the benefit of
Ireland, not the pacification of the people, who are perfectly
peaceful if left alone, not the convenience of Ireland in matters
which should be managed by local self-government, but the absolute
independence of the country, the creation of a national army, and the
affiliation of Ireland with some foreign Power hostile to England,
such as either America or France, as occasion might serve. America is
largely in the hands of the Irish electorate, and American politicians
would not be particularly scrupulous how they purchased Irish support.
No need to point out the embarrassing complications likely to result
from giving large powers to men who are essentially inimical to
England. You can do justice without putting your own head on the
block. It has been my business to analyse the bill, in conjunction
with other lawyers, Home Rule and otherwise in political colour, and
we are all agreed that the so-called safeguards amount to nothing, and
it would be incomparably safer for England to throw over the country
altogether. Because that is what it must ultimately come to, and we
think it would be better to avoid the inevitable agitation, the
terrible difficulties foreshadowed by the measure, difficulties which
would assuredly lead to the reconquest or the attempted reconquest of
the country.
"Gladstonians say this is an absurd idea, that Ireland could offer no
resistance worth mentioning, that the British arms would prove
instantly victorious over any show of resistance. But would you have
Ireland alone to reckon with? Once give her the prestige of a spurious
independence, once give to your enemies control over the resources of
the country, and you would find the task of reconquest much more
arduous than you think. The fact that England's distress would be
Ireland's opportunity has been so often insisted upon, both by
Unionists and the Nationalists themselves, that I need say nothing on
this point, which, besides, is so obvious as to be in itself a
sufficient answer to the Home Rule agitation under present
circumstances. But even supposing that you had no Eastern and European
difficulty--and we know not from one moment to another when war may
break out--supposing you only had Ireland to reconquer, do you think
this an agreeable prospect? Do you think that reconquest would settle
the Irish question? Do you believe that the shooting of a few hundred
patriots by the British Grenadiers would further what they call the
Union of Hearts?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account