[TO THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR1
SIR,—To me, as an Irish Presbyterian, this talk of the impossibility of religious intolerance in Ireland, particularly
when it comes from Lord Dunraven, who is, tant que soit, a Limerick man, and from Mr. John Redmond, who is a Wex- ford man, is incomprehensible. For if Wexford gave the worst, Limerick has given the latest instances of this intoler- ance. The Irish peasantry are tolerant from their good-nature alone, and probably no people more appreciate the exhorta- tion to live and let live. But they, too, have done strange things under fanatical influences. Of what crime were the victims of the massacres of the Scullabogue barn and of Wexford Bridge accused except that of being Protestants or of a Protestant creed ? For at Scullabogue there were women among the slain, and at least one infant was piked and thrown back into the flames. It may be said that this was so long ago that I might as well argue for existing facts from the Marian persecutions or St. Bartholomew. In my boyhood several eye-witnesses of these atrocities were living, as were many people who had received the news of them, just as we ourselves received the news of the Sepoy massacres fifty-nine years later. The horror they excited was still fresh, and served to keep alive the intolerance which, in those days, was more marked in the Protestant ascendency than in the Roman Catholic majority who are now having their turn.
Only six years ago Limerick was the scene of a cruel per- secution of the Jews, preached by a local priest from his pulpit, and under the eyes of the bishop, Dr. O'Dwyer, whom we regard as the typical Ultramontane prelate of Ireland. Just before this Limerick was distinguished by the persecution of Mr. Long, a Protestant missionary. Mr. Long may have given provocation, but the treatment of him, disclosed in the proceedings as having lasted for many months, assuredly gave no indication of religious tolerance. Shortly before this case, occurred that of the Rev. Mr. Hallowes at Arklow, which is on the edge of Mr. Redmond's county, Wexford. In all these cases the persecutions were effectual because they were the work of the majority, just as the attitude of the Protestant ascendency was maintained when it was in power because it held the power.
And how do Lord Dunraven and Mr. Redmond explain the plight of the Protestant citizens of Dublin ? They pay half the rates, but have been practically deprived of all civic status by the Roman Catholic majority. Only a few weeks ago Dr. M'Walter, who is an eminent citizen and now an alderman, appealed to his colleagues in the Corporation, both at meeting and in the press, to elect at least one Protestant at the recent election to offices under the Corporation, if only to show their tolerance and their fitness for Home Rule. Practical though this appeal was, it was disregarded.
The nobility and landed gentry do not enter into this question, nor the Gallios among the professional classes. Apart from them, and from the good-natured attitude of the peasantry, I have never known anything like religious tolerance in Ireland. In '98, my people, then much imbued with the principles of the French Revolution as interpreted by Dr. Priestley and others in England, thought the time had come for sinking religious differences, and, calling themselves " *United Irish- men," went out in rebellion with the Roman Catholics. The news of Scullabogue and Wexford Bridge disillusioned them, and secured their submission more effectually than did the forces of the Crown. The old religious rancour returned, and I see little sign of its subsidence. It was naturally more con- spicuous on the Protestant side for many years after these events, but, as I said, the Roman Catholics are having their turn. They were much praised for their magnanimity in showing no exultation when the Irish Church was disestab- lished. That measure to them was a negative one, since it left their historic buildings and graveyards, to say nothing of the lands, in the hands of the spoiler. To aloofness has succeeded aggressiveness, and the establishment of local self- government has given the local bodies throughout the south and west the opportunity for showing their attitude, and that professedly and openly they follow the example which the Dublin Corporation had silently set. An instance of a different kind is the sudden application of the dormant " Ne Tonere " decree. We believe that this could not have been done without the advice of the Irish clergy.
English Home Rulers, like your correspondent " Nemo" (Spectator of April 1st), apparently do not think it worth while to ask why we Irish Dissenters, who joined the Roman Catholics in rebellion in '98, are so averse from Home Rule now, Our reasoned answer is that the South African example is no example to us. The people concerned there are all Protestants, and are compelled to unity because of the black population which so greatly outnumbers them. We wish to remain under the British Parliament, in which we are so much more than fully represented, because it has shown an earnest desire to remove our grievances, and has removed the worst of them; and, since 1903, with a liberality which would be far beyond the resources of any Irish government. We know that an Irish government would be desperately poor, and, as we are the most prosperous section of the community, we think it likely that we shall be looked to to make up the inevitable deficit, while we shall have as little voice in the administration as we have now in the Dublin Corporation. But the chief reason in our hearts, which it is useless for us to explain to the merely philosophical or to doctrinaires, is that we do not want to be under the others, as we must be when votes govern the matter. We are attached to them as our fellow country- men, and we wish to live in friendliness with them, and do not want to be either over or under them. We fear the prospect of power in the hands of the priest-ridden. And many of us fear still more the Jacobinical methods of those who profess to be emancipated. And we cannot yet forget '98.—I am, Sir, &c.,
W. B. 0.
Previous page
