We are well aware that Mr. Gwynn is himself a
very humane man, and no doubt feels as much pain as we do over the hideous atrocities of which we have given one or two
examples,—examples which, unhappily, could be multiplied literally by hundreds were we to take the records of the last twenty-five years. It is strange, however, that he does not realise that his attempt to defend cattle-driving as humane must have the result of encouraging crime of the kind which he tells us, and no doubt quite sincerely, that he abhors. His attempt to shift a portion of the guilt of cattle-maiming on to the police is ludicrous, and can only be described as a desperate effort to escape from a position the weakness of which he cannot altogether conceal from himself. As far as we know, no evidence has been produced to support his allegation ; but even if a single case, or two or three cases, could be proved, it would not alter the terrible fact that diabolical cruelty to animals has dogged the steps of the Nationalist movement, and that such outrages have received encouragement either through the silence of the Nationalist leaders, or else through such words as those we have quoted from Mr. Dillon's speech. Mr. Dillon is, no doubt, also a humane man in private life, but that does not clear him from the disgrace of being willing to reap the political advantages that can be derived from cattle- maiming and cattle-driving. We confess that we very greatly prefer the attitude of those who say boldly that they do not care whether the cattle suffer or not so long as an effective blow is dealt in the land war, to the sophistical pleas made use of by Mr. Gwynn when he endeavours to show that no suffering is inflicted on the animals, or when he indulges in mock-heroic platitudes about poisoned bullets.
Previous page
