Ireland -- Politics and government; Political parties -- Ireland -- History; Sinn Fein
But whatever individual Irish Members of Parliament may have thought of
the Bill, the Party was as a whole committed to it. No one in Ireland knew
what negotiations, barterings, and bargains preceded the actual drafting
of the measure: what the difficulties and objections were which had to be
met by Mr. Redmond: in how far he had offered concessions, in how far they
had been forced upon him. They only knew that he was prepared to support
the resulting Bill and that the resulting Bill was less than they had been
led to expect. There was little open discussion of principles, criticism
was not relished or welcomed. The Party had done its best for the country
and the country was now called upon to back the Party. A bargain had been
made by the representatives of the Irish people and the Irish people were
expected to stand by the consequences. Under other circumstances this
appeal would have been accepted, but it was no answer to the complaint
that the Irish representatives had not been empowered to abandon in
express words every national claim that went beyond those satisfied by the
provisions of the Home Rule Bill. This was the kernel of the dispute
between the Party and the Nationalists who opposed them. It seemed as if
by the deliberate renunciation of any desire or intention to claim for
Ireland anything more than the status of a dependency of Great Britain,
deprived forever (so far as an act of legislation could deprive her) of
her immemorial claim to be an independent nation, the Party had betrayed
the national demand and sold the national honour. But the Party did not
see (or betrayed no sign of having seen) the relevance of the criticism;
and certainly they miscalculated the strength of the opposition which was
gathering in the country. In the face of Ulster's attitude, they
confidently expected the whole country to rally to their support. And,
after all, what could, or would, the dissentients do about it? Sinn Fein
continued loudly to proclaim its policy of opposition to the use of
force. It was all very well to say "Sinn Fein is the policy of to-morrow.
If Ireland be again deceived as to Home Rule, she has no other policy to
fall back upon"; but the same article (December, 1912) contained the
words: "The great offence of Sinn Fein indeed in the eyes of its opponents
is that it does not urge an untrained and unequipped country to futile
insurrection." If Sinn Fein then would only talk, and the only place to
talk to the purpose was the House of Commons, what was there to prevent
Home Rule from being an accomplished fact "in the not far distant future?"
Ulster supplied the answer, not for itself only, but for the rest of
Ireland.
THE VOLUNTEER MOVEMENT.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account