MR. DILLON'S AUSTRALIAN TOUR. T HE difficulties encountered by the leaders
of the Irish movement whenever any attempt is made by them to explain how their funds are expended, are just now very much in evidence. In America, the public inquiries connected with the murder of Dr. Cronin, who, it can hardly be doubted, was " executed " by order of the Vehm- gerieht of the Clan-na-Gael, seem likely to place the chiefs of the American-Irish in the dilemma of auditing their accounts in public, or of falling under the suspicion of embezzlement. In Australia, Mr. Dillon and his fellow political travellers are met by a very awkward demand for a full explanation of the manner in which they purpose to dispose of the money which they are now endeavouring to collect in Victoria and the other Colonies of the Pacific. The results of the controversy in which Mr. Parnell's lieutenant became engaged with the two foremost organs of public opinion in Melbourne—the Argus and the Age— are of no small interest to Unionists in general, as they show clearly not only the attitude taken up by the most enlightened newspapers—one holding moderate and the other advanced opinions—in Victoria, but the ground of defence which the Nationalists choose to assume upon the question whether they ought or ought not to produce a statement of how the League funds are paid away. The Age, in an article which appeared on the day pre- ceding the first great meeting of the Nationalists held in Melbourne, thus dealt with the objects of the appeal :— " Nobody," it says, "disputes their right to collect money for what they believe to be a deserving cause; but to justify themselves to the public to whom they appeal they must show—first, that the cause is a deserving one ; and next, that the money which they collect is devoted to the pur- pose for which it was given.' After placing the Unionists' arguments in a very clear and statesmanlike way, the Age goes on :—" We challenge Mr. Dillon to produce evidence such as would satisfy the commonest business man in his audience that the funds of the Association which he asks them to contribute to have always and invariably been expended as the subscribers are required to believe Why the accounts should not be regularly audited and regularly published we cannot understand; but they are not. Now and then the Secretary of the League gives the world a glimpse of the darkness that sits round about its treasury ; but, except it is to assure a generous public that the evicted tenants get the largest shara of it, and that the rest is expended in the preparation of literature on the Home- rule Question, and the maintenance of the officers, staff, and travelling delegates. little is known in detail, and that little is decidedly misleading." After such a challenge, supplemented as it was with figures to show that while in 1887 the general fund of the League was £35,764, only £7,000 went to the evicted tenants, leaving £20,090 unaccounted for in detail, it was impossible for Mr. Dillon to refuse some sort of explanation. Accordingly, the following answer was vouchsafed to the pressing interrogatories of the Age—an answer which, if closely examined, may be seen to have no inconsiderable signifi- cance :—" They were prepared," said Mr. Dillon, "to publish what was done with the money to the whole world —at all events, to everybody who had a right to ask for it—the moment when its publication would not hand them over to the British Government as conspirators and traitors. Until then he must continue to keep the accounts in a secret office, because if the place were known to the British Government it would be broken open and the books would be seized. He pledged his honour to the people of Australia that the money they had contributed would be used for no other object than the support of people who had been evicted for following the counsel of the Irish leaders." If this does not mean that the funds of the League are devoted to objects which, however morally justifiable, are acknowledged by the Nationalist leaders to savour of "conspiracy and treason," it is difficult to see what it does 'mean. A perfectly constitutional movement, such as we are often told the Parnellite movement is, would not require to have its workings protected by any such apology as that offered by Mr. Dillon. In reality, it is every day becoming more and more obvious that the Irish Home-rulers are trying to take advantage of two perfectly different, and, indeed, conflicting lines of defence. A body of men may work for a certain set of political aims by one of two methods, the revolutionary or the constitutional. If they adopt the former, they no doubt have a claim to use secret-service money to any extent they choose, and to protect themselves in its use. If, however, they elect to employ constitutional methods, such a choice excludes revolutionary tactics, and they cannot consistently claim to treat their opponents as enemies against whom conspiracy and treason may be used. Mr. Dillon's reasons for not saying how the Land League money is spent may be perfectly sound and per- fectly bond fide ; but if they are, they entirely overthrow the contention that the Parnellite movement has from first to last been conducted solely on constitutional lines. Another of the objections made to Mr. Dillon's Australian propaganda deserves to be noticed. The Argus very pertinently asks in regard to the appeals for money : Why is it necessary to come to Australia to raise funds for the League ?—"A section of the English people, headed by Mr. Gladstone, has adopted the view that Home-rule is advisable for Ireland. The party has its fair proportion of wealth and intelligence, and, of course, if it were con- vinced that there were Irish victims to English oppression, it would raise the money required for the relief of the sufferers in a month, or a week, or a day. But these English allies are very far from doing anything of the sort. Apparently even they do not believe the stories in question The appeal is from people in England who must know the facts to people at a distance who cannot ; from people who cannot easily be duped to those who can be. When the parties in England and Scotland which are patronising Mr. Parnell take to subscribing to these funds, there may be some justification for an Australian appeal— and then it will be unnecessary." Surely there is a great deal of solid sense in this criticism. Whenever England has really been stirred on some great political question, there has never been any difficulty in procuring funds. When the country was much poorer than it is now, the Greek, Polish, Hungarian, and Italian national movements all drew large supplies from England. Again, in the Corn- Law agitation, vast sums were easily raised for political purposes. No doubt it is said that all the wealthy classes are against Home-rule ; but this, in fact, is nothing but a fashion of speech. Not only are there great numbers of immensely wealthy Gladstonians, but the rank and file of the party contains at least two hundred thousand men who, if they were greatly moved, could give £5 apiece without any privation. If the heart of the party were once touched, it would be a matter of no difficulty whatever to raise £500,000 in three months' time. What, then, we may well ask, is the reason that the Parnellites do not attempt to get the money they require in England ? The temptation to do so is great, for half-a-million invested in the names of Mr. Parnell, Mr. Dillon, and Mr. O'Brien would give the League an enormous extra amount of strength and security. We imagine that the attempt is not made for two reasons,—firstly, because the Parnellites see that the mass of the Gladstonians do not really like either them or their cause, and there- fore they do not dare to run the risks of a fiasco ; and secondly, because they know that if English people were to give money, they would demand a rigid account of the way in which it was expended. The necessity for rendering such an account would, however, make the money practically valueless, for it would mean no expenditure on the secret service which is the essence of all revolutionary action. The Parnellites, therefore, prefer to pick up money in America and Australia, where no questions are asked, to making an appeal to England. Probably they are, from their own point of view, perfectly justified. Their decision, however, and the reasons on which it is based, cannot be left out of sight in estimating the real intentions of the Nationalist Party.
Previous page
