HISTORICAL GRIEVANCES.
The English, it must be admitted, are no amiable masters. Never, in any
quarter of the globe, were they able to command the goodwill of the
nations submitted to their rule, nor did they fascinate them by those
brilliant qualities that often go a long way towards forgiveness of
possible injuries. “Take yourself off there, that I may take your place,”
seems always to have been the last word of their policy. Pure and simple
extermination of autochthon races; such is their surest way to supremacy.
One has seen it successively in America, on the Australian continent, in
Tasmania, in New Zealand, where the native tribes hardly exist now more
than as a memory. On the other hand, if the vanquished races were too
numerous or too sturdy and prolific to be easily suppressed, as in India
or Ireland, reconciliation never took place; conquest ever remained a
doubtful and precarious fact.
In Ireland, the question was made more complex by two elements
that visibly took a predominant part in the relations between the
conquerors and the conquered. In the first place, the island of Erin,
having remained outside the pale of the Roman world and of barbaric
invasions, possessed an indigenous and original civilization that made
her peculiarly refractory to the establishment of the feudal system.
Secondly, her very remoteness and her insular character inclined the
immigrants to establish themselves there regretfully, to consider her
always as a colony and a place of exile, where they only resided against
their will. For the first four hundred years of their occupation they
confined themselves to the eastern coast within the inclosed territory
(varying with the fortune of war) that they called the _Pale_ or
palisade, and outside which the Irish preserved their manners, their
laws, and their own customs.
In spite of this barrier, it happened in the course of time that the
English colonists got pervaded by those customs and felt their contagion.
At once the British Parliament had recourse to drastic laws in order to
open a new abyss between the two races, and keep the mastery they had
over the Irish. Such is the special object of an edict of Edward III.,
known under the name of _Edict of Kilkenny_, and by which it is reputed
high treason for any Englishman established in Ireland to have married
an Irish-woman, to have legitimised an Irish child, or have held him in
baptism, to have taken an Irish Christian name, to have worn the Irish
dress, to have spoken the Erse tongue, to have let his moustache grow,
or to have ridden saddleless, as was the Irish fashion; above all, to
have submitted to the Brehon Code. Those divers crimes were punished by
confiscation of property, and perpetual imprisonment of the offender.
* * * * *
Such laws were a powerful obstacle to fusion, raised by the intruder
himself. One sees at once the difference between, for instance, such a
system and that established by the Norman invasion in Great Britain.
Here the conqueror found a race made supple by Roman occupation and
Danish rule; he established himself, by strength of arm, on the soil,
covered it with strongholds, and everywhere substituted himself to the
dispossessed masters; he at once implanted within his new dominions the
French tongue, the feudal system, the powerful hierarchy that constituted
its strength; he remained standing, iron-covered and in arms, over the
prostrate bodies of the population in bondage, and repressed with such
a high hand any attempt at rebellion, that the very idea of resistance
must of necessity die out soon. On the other hand, having transplanted
himself, and without any idea of return, in this new sphere, he
immediately submitted to its influence; he incorporated himself with the
ambient race to such a degree as soon to forget his own origin, and come
after two or three generations to consider himself as purely of English
breed.
In Ireland, on the contrary, not only was the conqueror reduced by the
imperfect state of his conquest to remain on the defensive, confined
within the Pale on the eastern shore, within reach, so to say, of the
mother country; not only could not he dream for a long time of obliging
populations that escaped all action on his part to obey his manners and
his laws; not only did he systematically keep those populations at arm’s
length and avoided mixing with them; but periodical laws and edicts
constantly came to remind them, on pain of terrible punishment, that he
belonged to another race, and must guard with jealous care the integrity
of its autonomy. Without any intercourse with the more distant tribes, he
was at constant war with those of the borders of the Pale.
And war was, at this period even still more than in our own days, mere
rapine, raised to the dignity of a system. The English did not scruple to
make incursions on their neighbour’s lands, to take away harvest, cattle,
and women, after which they returned to their fortified territory.
They did even worse: having heard of the ancient custom by which the
Irish formerly accorded fire and candle light to their national militia
or Fenians, the English revived it to their own profit; they quartered on
the peasantry in their neighbourhood during all the winter, a soldier,
who took his seat round the domestic hearth, shared the meals of the
family, took possession of the best bed—nay, did not disdain to cast
the eye of favour on the wife or daughter—and not the less remained
a stranger, a foe, at the same time that he was a forced guest and a
spy—for he was forbidden to speak the language, to adopt the dress,
to imitate the manners of his victims.... The horror of that burden
coming anew every year had once led to the suppression of the Fenian
militia. How much more terrible was such servitude, enforced by the
enemy! Constant were the rebellions, and always repressed with calculated
barbarity—they only served as a pretext for new exactions.
* * * * *
Still, in spite of all, a certain contagion of habits took place between
the contiguous races. A few native chiefs insensibly began to imitate the
manners of the English. The English were not long in discovering a way to
reconcile them—by appealing to their basest impulses.
Until then, the Irish had had no knowledge of individual property.
With them land was, like the sky or the air they breathed, the common
inheritance of those who occupied it. The members of a clan, indeed,
paid the chieftain a tax or annual duty, but they did not conceive it
as possible that this leader could look on himself as the master of the
social fund to which they, like him, had a hereditary right. At the
most they expected their harvest or cattle to be seized, in case of
non-payment of the tax. There never had been an eviction of the tenant,
as there had been no sale or transfer of the land by him occupied.
Individual appropriation, as resulting from the feudal system, was such a
new idea to the Irish that they were at first unable to grasp it.
“What interest can you have in making your clan give up their land to the
English, since you get it back in return for your homage?” would ask some
of the native chieftains of those of their countrymen nearer the pale
who had taken for some time to performing that commercial transaction.
The neophytes of feudal law would then explain that in case of extension
of the English conquest, their possession of the land would be guaranteed
by the fact of the new title. What they took great care should not be
discovered by the clan, was that they gave what did not belong to them,
and sold the collective property of their followers, to receive it
afterwards at the hands of the English as personal property.... This was
seen clearly later on, when they began to sell it or raise mortgages
on it. But that, the dawn of a gigantic fraud, nobody in Ireland could
so much as suspect. The fraudulent origin of individual appropriation
is nevertheless, even to our own day, the true root of the desperate
resistance that the Irish tenant invariably opposes to eviction. Be it
tradition, be it “cellular memory,” he is conscious of his primordial and
superior right to that glebe once stolen from his forefathers.
* * * * *
Stolen! if only it had been stolen once for all!... But to repeat
Fitzgibbon’s (Lord Clare) saying, there is not in the whole of Ireland
one field that has not been _at least three times_ unjustly taken from
its legitimate possessors. And that spoliation was always accompanied by
the most aggravating circumstances.
It was indeed with Henry VIII. and Elizabeth that the true efforts of
England to achieve the conquest of Erin were made, and from that time, to
the antagonism of the two races, to the conflict of interests, was added
religious hatred. Between puritanical England and Catholic Ireland began
a duel to the death, into which each generation in turn has thrown itself
for three centuries. Oppression begets rebellion, and rebellion expires
drowned in blood. We have no intention of repeating that history in these
pages; its details are to be found everywhere. Let us only recall its
essential features.
Towards the year 1565, Queen Elizabeth undertook the “plantation” of
Ireland on a large scale, and set about it by the elementary process
of dispossessing the owners of the soil in order to present Englishmen
with their lands. The whole country rose, under the command of John
Desmond, who called the Spaniards to his aid. Upon which England sent to
Ireland, together with Sydney, Sussex, and Walter Raleigh, armies whose
instructions were “the extermination of the Rebels.”
“At Christmas,” wrote one of the English Generals, Sir Nicolas Malby,
in the year 1576, “I entered Connaught, and soon finding that by mercy
I should only succeed in having my throat cut, I preferred to adopt a
different tactic. I therefore threw myself in the mountains with the
settled determination of destroying these people by sword and fire,
sparing neither the old nor the children. _I burnt down all their
harvests and all their houses, and I put to the sword all that fell
within my hands...._ This occurred in the country of Shane Burke. I did
the same thing in that of Ullick Burke.”
The other English Generals vied in ardour with this butcher; so much so
that at the end of a few years of indiscriminate hangings, massacres,
burnings of house and land, the whole of Munster was laid waste like a
desert; a few wretches only were left to wander over it like ghosts,
and they came voluntarily to offer their throat to the knife of Queen
Elizabeth’s soldiers. The Virgin Queen then resolved to repeople that
desert; she made proclamation that all the lands of the Desmonds were
confiscated (more than 500,000 acres) and she offered them gratuitously
to whosoever would “plant” them with the help of English labour. The
grantees were to pay no duty to the Crown until six years had passed, and
that duty was always to be of the lightest. In spite of these advantages
colonization did not make much progress. The English at last understood
that they must either give it up, or resign themselves to having the
ground cultivated by the despoiled Irish who had survived the massacres.
H ow could those wretched people have done otherwise than nourish the
hope of revenge?
That revenge was attempted in Ulster at the death of Elizabeth. It ended
in new disasters, new tortures, new confiscations. The counties of
Tyrone, Derry, Donegal, Armagh, Fermanagh, and Cavan,—in all about three
million acres,—were then seized by the Crown and distributed in lots to
Scotch settlers.
* * * * *
In the year 1641, under the reign of Charles I., a few Irishmen having
emigrated to the continent, and having been initiated to modern military
tactics in the ranks of the French army, attempted to liberate their
country. They provoked a rising, succeeded in holding in check during
eight years all the British forces, and in 1649 compelled the King of
England to grant them by formal treaty the conditions they themselves
dictated. But a few days later the head of Charles fell on the scaffold,
and Cromwell in person, escorted by his son, by Ireton and Ludlow, made
it his business to come and annul the treaty of Kilkenny.
“For Jesus!... No quarter!...” Such was the battle-cry he gave to his
Roundheads. Drogheda, then Wexford were taken by storm; men, women,
and children were exterminated; Galway fell in 1652. The populations,
exhausted by a war and famine of ten years’ duration, surrendered
themselves to his mercy, and laid down their arms. Cromwell had only now
to reap the fruits of his victory by making Ireland pay for it.
His first idea was to complete the extermination of the native race,
in order to replace it by English colonists. But even his gloomy soul
recoiled before the only means that at once and for ever could put an
end to “the Irish gangrene.” He adopted a middle course, of much less
radical efficacy. This middle course consisted in transporting, or, as
they called it at the time _transplanting_ all the Irish into the region
bounded by the Shannon, there to be penned up like men infested with
the plague, while all the rest of the territory was allotted to English
families.
The enterprise was conducted with truly puritanical method and rigour.
Thousands of Irish were shipped as slaves to the West Indies, thousands
of others were imprisoned in Connaught, under pain of death for whoever
should cross its limits. All the land, carefully parcelled out, was
divided by lot between the soldiers of Cromwell, upon agreement that they
should consider themselves bound to expend their pay for three years on
the improvement of it. But those fields, to yield up their value, had to
be cultivated, and the English labourer declined to become a voluntary
exile in order to cultivate them. Little by little the native peasantry
came back to their old homes with the tenacity peculiar to their class,
they founded families and reconstituted the Irish nation under the ten or
twelve thousand landlords imposed over them by fraud and violence. Forty
years after Cromwell’s death, these landlords had even forgotten how to
speak the English language.
* * * * *
Restoration was not destined to heal any of those cruel wounds. Charles
II. took little heed of Ireland, which he deemed too far off, and besides
he thought it good policy not to disturb the new occupants in their
possessions. He barely deemed it necessary to establish in Dublin a Court
of Revision that sat only one year, examined no more than seven hundred
cases out of a total of above three thousand that were submitted to it,
and ordered the restitution of hardly a sixth part of the confiscated
land.
After the Revolution of 1688, nevertheless, the Irish only embraced with
more ardour the cause of James II. when he landed in Ireland with a
handful of men. Even after his defeat at the Boyne, they so successfully
resisted William of Orange that he was compelled in 1691 to grant to
them, by the treaty of Limerick, the free exercise of their religion
and the political privileges that could help them to preserve it. But,
like so many other charters, that one was soon to be violated. All the
Irish Jacobites were compelled to expatriate themselves (numbers of them
took service in France; more than fifty thousand Irishmen died under
the _fleur-de-lis_ during the first half of the eighteenth century);
four thousand others were evicted from one million of acres that
William distributed among his followers. Soon to this already terrible
repression were to be added all the rigours of the Penal Code, that code
that proclaimed it a duty to spy, and a meritorious act to betray the
Irishman at his hearth; that code of which Burke could say: “Never did
the ingenious perversity of man put forth a machine more perfect, more
thoughtfully elaborated, more calculated to oppress, to impoverish, to
degrade a people, to lower in them human nature itself.”
Under the network of that nameless despotism which attacked man in his
dearest privileges, the rights of conscience, the sanctity of home,—under
the weight of a legislation that in a manner forbade her the use of water
and fire, that closed all careers before her, after having wrenched her
last furrow from her keeping,—the Irish nation persisted in living and
multiplying. Was it any wonder that in the depth of her collective soul
she cherished dreams of revenge and justice?
The American Emancipation and the French Revolution appeared to her
as the dawn of regeneration. Alas! once again the glorious effort of
1798,—the rebellion in arms, victory itself, were only to end in a
complete wreck. As if Fate owed one more stroke of irony to this martyred
nation, it was an Irish Parliament that by its own vote in 1800 abdicated
the hardly recovered national independence. Pitt bought it wholesale for
the price of 1,200,000 guineas.
* * * * *
It was not enough, however, to have taken from the Irishman his blood,
his land, his religious faith, and his liberty: they must still prevent
his prospering in commerce or industry. Political interest was here in
accordance with avarice in giving this advice to the victor.
Charles II. began by forbidding Ireland to export meat, butter, and
cheese to England. At that time of slow maritime intercourse, no idea
could be entertained of sending them to any other market. The Irish had
to fall back on wool, which they exported to France and Spain. That was
sufficient to arouse the jealousy of their pitiless masters. The export
of wool, be it as raw material or in woven stuffs, was forbidden the
Irish on pain of confiscation and fines.
The effect of this harsh measure was two-fold: it prevented the abhorred
Irish prospering; it secured to the English merchant the monopoly of
Irish wool, which he could henceforth buy at his own price (generally at
a quarter of the current price), and sell again at a lesser rate than
all his competitors. It only remained for Ireland to make smugglers of
all her fishermen; they crammed all the caverns on her coasts with wool,
and during the winter, in spite of excisemen, they exchanged it for the
wines and spirits of France and Spain. By the same occasion they exported
soldiers and imported Catholic priests. Thus did Ireland keep losing her
vital strength, by the constant departure of the most vigorous amongst
her sons, at the same time that she inoculated in her blood two equally
fatal poisons—alcohol and fanaticism.
On the other hand, the Puritan weavers of Ulster were ruined like the
wool-farmers. They emigrated to America, and England found no bitterer
foes than their sons during the War of Independence.
Some of the Irish tried to fall back on other industries, as the weaving
of linen or ship-building. At once England interfered with an iron hand
by establishing the most ruinous prohibitive duties on Irish linens,
while at the same time her cotton fabrics came pouring over the country.
To make doubly sure, England, by a special law, formally interdicted
ship-building in Ireland as well as any direct trade with any foreign
market whatsoever.
One feels a sort of shame for the human kind in having to record
such consistent acts of systematic cruelty. The violence of military
retaliation, the sacking of towns or the massacre of vanquished foes,
may be explained by the heat of combat, and are found in the annals of
all countries. An economical compression exercised during ten or twelve
generations on one nation by another nation of Shylocks is, happily, a
fact without any parallel in history.
From the beginning of the 18th century all industrial enterprise had thus
been unmercifully forbidden to Ireland. All the factories were closed,
the working population had been reduced to field labour, emigration or
street-begging. This population therefore weighed still more heavily
on the soil, still exaggerating its tendencies to subdivision; which
tendencies, already a curse for Ireland, were to cause in the future new
ferments of hatred and misery. All the attempts that Ireland made to
free herself from those iron shackles were pitilessly repressed. She saw
herself deprived of her right to commercial activity, as she had been of
national conscience, of land, and religious or political freedom. And
it is after having thus for centuries systematically trained the Irish
to poverty, idleness, and drink, that England, crowning her work with
calumny, dares to bring forward their vices as an excuse for herself!
* * * * *
These things are far from us already. But it would be erring greatly to
imagine that in the eyes of the Irish they bear an antiquated character.
Oral tradition, seconded by an indigenous literature, keeps the wound
open and green. Yonder wretched beggar, dying of hunger and want upon
the glebe once possessed by his ancestors, knows that they ruled where
he now serves, bears their name with a touching pride, and sadly toils
for others in a field that he believes to belong to himself. He is not
ignorant of the way in which it was taken from him, at what date, and
in what manner the event took place. How could he consider its present
possessors otherwise than as his most cruel enemies?
Let us imagine the French _émigrés_ brought back violently on the lands
taken from them by the nation, and reduced to support their family by
tilling their fields with their own hands. Let us suppose them compelled
every year to pay an exorbitant rent to the usurper. Let us blot out
from history’s page the milliard indemnity given to the _émigrés_
and the amnesty passed over those things by five or six successive
revolutions. Let us lastly add to these deadly rancours the weight of a
religious persecution of three centuries, of the undisguised contempt
of the victor, and of the most shocking political inequality.... Let
that _émigré_, in a word, not only have lost caste, be spoliated and a
serf, but also be a pariah, a kind of pestilent member of the community:
then we shall gather some idea of the state of mind of the Irish people
towards England; we shall understand that in truth the only mistake
committed by Cromwell and the others in their system of colonization was
to have not carried it to its full length, to have not exterminated all
by fire or sword, and to have left a single son of Erin alive.
* * * * *
As a contrast to England and Ireland, let us place a historical fact
of the same order, that of France with Corsica. Here also we find an
insular race of markedly distinct character, of different language,
different manners and traditions, the habit of independence and the
clan-spirit,—all that can foster and serve resistance to annexation.
But here the conquering nation is France, and she is a kind mother. She
does not come, fire and sword in hand, to ravage the harvests of the
vanquished, to take his land, to impose on him, together with a new
faith, exceptional laws, and a brand of infamy. On the contrary, to them
she opens her arms, she offers her wealth and her love. From the first
day she admits Corsicans to the provincial parliaments, and twenty years
later she receives their deputies in the Assemblée Nationale. From the
first hour they feel they are Frenchmen, the equals of those born in the
Ile de France. There are for them neither special taxes, nor political
inferiority, nor rigours of any sort. Never was an inch of ground taken
from them to be given to the continental families. Never were they
treated like serfs to be trodden down without mercy. If there be an
exception made, it is in their favour; as, for instance, the reduction
of one half of all duties on imports; the free trade in tobacco; the
enormous proportion of Corsicans admitted to all Government offices.
But what a difference, too, in the results!... In less than a hundred
years, the fusion between the two races is so perfect, the assimilation
so complete, that one could not find to-day one man in Corsica to wish
for a separation. Nay, rather, against such an enterprise, if any one
were found to attempt it, all Corsica would rise in arms.
If Great Britain had so willed it, Ireland might easily have become to
her what Corsica is to us. Only, for the last seven hundred years, Great
Britain has lacked what alone could have made that miracle possible,—a
mother’s heart and love.