RECOLLECTIONS OF FENIANS AND FENIANISM.*
MR. JOHN O'LEARY is an Irish gentleman, who in his boyhood came under the influence of the writings of Thomas Davis; was imprisoned before he was out of his teens for complicity in an attempt to liberate Smith O'Brien and the other Young Irelanders from Clonmel Gaol ; and from that time onwards lived in an atmosphere of conspiracy, till in 1865 he, with some other Fenians, was tried for high treason and sentenced to twenty years' penal servitude. He had for nearly two years been editor of the Irish People, a paper founded expressly to propagate Fenianism. After five years' imprisonment as an ordinary convict he was liberated but exiled; in 1880 he was permitted to return to Ireland, and became at once the centre of a group of young men, all more or less literary, all interested in Nationalism, but mostly standing a good deal aloof from the Land League and its representatives. Mr. O'Leary represented a very different ideal of Irish Nationalism; and though he is, by theory at all events, a good hater, he had probably no enemies,—certainly none among Irish Unionists. In those days he had to denounce dynamite repeatedly, and did so with a vehemence which left nothing to be desired. O'Donovan Bosse had been among the convicted Fenians; and there is a good deal of reference to him in these volumes. Mr. O'Leary's view—too charitable, one fears—is that Rossa has become mad. At all events, the object of Fenianism should in common justice be clearly distinguished from the senseless crimes of the dynamiters, and from the too easily defined objects of the agrarian movement, which comes in for few civilities in these volumes. So far as the Land League aimed at establishing the independence of Ireland by " con- stitutional " methods, Mr. O'Leary contemptuously describes it as " windbagism." So far as it was a combination against the payment of just debts, he disapproves it, not unnaturally, • Recoiled ion, of Fabians and Fenianinn. By John O'Leary. 2 yob. London Downey and (Jo.
being himself a landlord. In this capacity he was concerned in the famous battle over Tipperary. Mr. Smith Barry had to be crushed, as an enemy to Ireland; but it happened that Mr. John O'Leary also was entitled to some rents from the boycotted town, and it was found quite as unpatriotic to pay him as Mr. Smith Barry. Irish people have shown long memories for injury, bat they are not so good at remembering their champions. Not long ago one of Mr. Smith O'Brien's sons was shot at in the South of Ireland.
Many things, therefore, have contributed to embitter the judgments which in this book are passed upon many persons and policies. Fenianism has had so much of an underground existence that it can scarcely be said to merit a history, and none is attempted by Mr. O'Leary. But the spirit and the objects of Fenianism are stated by him with unmistakable clearness; indeed the second volume is largely taken up by a summary and review of such matters as appeared in the Irish People. The spirit of Fenianism is simply hatred of England. Good Irishmen, in Mr. O'Leary's sense of the phrase, are delighted whenever England suffers any reverse in any quarter of the world. The object of Fenianism is to organise secretly a body of men pledged to take up arms against England at a summons from some central authority. It is now clear to everybody, though Mr. O'Leary once thought otherwise, that successful rebellion is only possible if help can be obtained from some Power at war with England. In short, the policy of Fenianism is precisely the policy of Wolfe Tone. But it has nothing to do with murder, boycotting, cattle-houghing, or non-payment of rent. To bloodshed Mr. O'Leary has no objection, so long as the blood is shed in open warfare; nothing could be more opposed to his creed than O'Connell's phrase that the fullest liberty for Ireland would be too dearly purchased with one drop of the blood of her citizens. One can only deplore that such views as Mr. O'Leary's should be held by a British subject ; but no one who ever met the man would doubt his willingness to stake his life for them, and it is well that politicians of all classes should be made to realise that the spirit of rebellion is still present in Ireland. If this book really expresses what is felt by any considerable section of Irishmen, it must be out of the question to grant Ireland any considerable autonomy. Here is a kind of test-question for those who believe in the union of hearts—Would you allow a volunteer force to be enrolled in Ireland? In the event of a European war into which England was dragged, that question would undoubtedly have to be answered. There is one point, at all events, upon which the Fenians threaten us with a groundless terror. The Army, says Mr. O'Leary, was full of Fenians ; it was easier to make a Fenian of a soldier than of any other man ; and upon this fact be builds a great deal. But he does not realise, one thinks, the paralysing effect of the disciplined habit upon mutineers. In the first place, anywhere out of Ireland Irish soldiers would fight as they have always fought. A regiment of Fenians would probably meet Americans just as cheerfully as Russians. In Ireland, against rebels, the odds would be that the habit of discipline would keep them straight ; but, even if they mutinied, mutineers have never made a good fight of it. Take the crucial instance of the Nore in 1797. The Fleet was full of disaffected Irish; the time was critical, for the French expedition destined for Ireland lay in the Texel ; the sailors were incensed by real grievances, yet they submitted at a time when they held practically all the trump cards. If men enter into two organisations with opposing obligations, they will obey that one which appeals most strongly to them, and that will certainly be the duty of military obedience, which has become almost automatic by constant habit. It is not among men who bind themselves by an oath to be false to their salt that one would look for anything more than merely instinctive action. It is disagreeable to dwell upon these points where one differs very emphatically from Mr. O'Leary. But they are three. First, we believe that he exaggerates the amount of race hatred at present existing. Secondly, we think that he is not serving his country by applauding this animosity. These are points on which we might very well agree to differ. But thirdly, we do not like his attitude about tampering with soldiers. Admitting that a man may justifiably be a Fenian, he cannot justifiably be both a Fenian and a soldier. Mr. O'Leary practically states that he asked men, or connived at their being asked, to do what he most assuredly would never have done himself.
It is pleasant to pass to what one likes to talk about. The book has a curious rambling style, which is nevertheless easy to read ; it has always the interest of displaying its writer's personality. Many passages have a sardonic humour that is atot very familiar in the writings of Irish revolutionists. Here. for instance, is the reward of the patriot. "The rebel can reckon upon nothing in life; he is sure to be calumniated, he is likely to be robbed, and may even be murdered ; but let him once go out of life, and he is sure of a fine funeral." There is something of the same ironic tone in his comment -upon the public reception which he got in 1859 when he went 'to America on a secret mission. The passages which relate to 'the internecine war between Fenianism and the Roman Church, though unduly long, have a historical value. That formidable organisation will always seek to dictate in Ireland; and any movement which originates without its sanc- tion and independently of its control will always be bitterly opposed by it. It opposed the Young Irelanders, it opposed the Fenians ; only when a strong man like Mr. Parnell gets such a leverage on the people that he is stronger than 'the Church, will the force of Rome be thrown partially on his side. Yet the priests were delighted to shake af Parnell's yoke ; so delighted at the chance that they did not 'atop to count the cost. At present the Roman Catholic Church is the one political force in Ireland on the Nationalist side ; Fenianism moves obscurely in the background. What, -one would agk Mr. O'Leary, would you do with the Roman power if Fenianism obtained its object, and Ireland were separated from England ? Beyond separation, Fenianism has no programme ; none, at least, is to be gleaned from this book. If Mr. O'Leary wants to establish a democracy, he is a most singular democrat. A Republic of the old oligarchical type is the only place in which one could fancy him at ease ; bat a Republic or a democracy in which the influence of Rome should preponderate would be one of the most intolerable 'hybrids that ever existed. Mr. O'Leary himself would cer- tainly be excommunicated and probably banished before a year was out.
De mortuis nil nisi bonum is a saying that finds no favour with Mr. O'Leary ; and except about the recently dead, speech, we hold, should be free. But there comes a time in men's lives when Nature forces them into the rank of spectators; when *they are watchers of the contest, not actors, and the spectacle which most occupies them is the one which memory provides. It is ebb-tide with them ; and they are apt to feel, as Mr. O'Leary puts it, that they are living in a graveyard. These, or rather the dead, claim our consideration. They have struck their stroke, won or lost their battle ; and of depart- ing combatants, above all if they be losers, no word should be spoken but in charity. The men who were sentenced in 1865 had no cause for complaint ; they knew the rules of the game when they played at conspiracy ; but the offence for which they were sentenced had nothing sordid. And no one can read these volumes in a fair temper without recognising through all their bitter partisanship that knightly spirit by which Mr. O'Leary's countrymen have in the service of Great Britain won honour for their country under every star in heaven.
Previous page
